The National Tutoring Programme Year 2: Implementation and Process Evaluation

This DfE report summarises the findings from the implementation and process evaluation of the second year of the National Tutoring programme (2021-22). The programme is an important part of the Government’s Covid-19 recovery response, offering tuition support to disadvantaged pupils who have been hit hardest by the disruption.

The National Tutoring Programme (NTP) is a part of the Government’s Covid-19 recovery response, supporting schools to respond to the disruption to education caused by the pandemic and subsequent school closures. It offers targeted tuition support to disadvantaged pupils who have been hit hardest by this disruption.

The programme has three routes of support - Tuition Partners (TP), Academic Mentors (AM) and School-Led Tutoring (SLT). For each route of support, there was an expectation that each pupil would receive 15 hours of tutoring. Schools were encouraged to focus on English, maths and science, but at secondary level schools could broaden this to offer tutoring in humanities and modern foreign languages.

The report focuses on: reasons for participation in the NTP; its implementation (particularly School-Led Tutoring (SLT) which was new in 2021-22); the impact of the NTP on workloads; the effect of the NTP on pupil premium spending on tutoring; satisfaction with the programme; and perceptions of its impact.

Key Findings:

• Most school leaders and teachers were generally positive about all three NTP routes, although favoured the SLT route because they valued control and autonomy over delivery of tutoring.
• Most senior leaders involved in each of the individual routes perceived the NTP was having a positive impact on pupils’ attainment, self-confidence and them catching up with their peers.
• The majority who were participating in the NTP were satisfied with the quality of tuition across all three routes, yet a minority had found it difficult to access provision and lacked confidence in being able to obtain high-quality tutoring.
• Some schools were not participating in the NTP because they felt the subsidies were insufficient, but could be encouraged to participate in the future if subsidies were increased.
• Most senior leaders had experienced an increase in their workload, particularly due to the management and administration time required to deliver tutoring.
• Schools were most likely to be participating in the SLT route. They liked the autonomy over delivery and being able to use their own internal staff as tutors. If they were not using the SLT grant, it was most often because of concerns over internal staff capacity to be able to provide tutoring, plus some concerns about level of the subsidy.
• TP was most often used because schools welcomed the 70% subsidy, combined with having concerns over own staff capacity to provide tutoring.
• Schools with AMs liked that they could work closely with the school so that provision could be tailored to suit the needs of the pupils.
• If they were not involved in TP or AM, it was most often because they preferred to use their own staff; some had concerns about the quality of the provision for those routes.
• Among those not involved in the NTP routes in 2021-22, the main factor which would encourage future participation across the routes was an increase in subsidies, which are in fact being reduced in 2022-23.
• More than 9 out of 10 senior leaders reported that their school was prioritising pupils eligible for pupil premium for SLT. Around 8 out of 10 prioritised those who had fallen furthest behind.
• Staff used assessments and gap analysis to guide pupil selection, but also took into consideration pupils' willingness to attend and engage with NTP tutoring.
• Most schools reported prioritising maths and English as the focus of their tutoring. There was also a focus on preparing pupils for key assessments (KS2 SATs and KS4 GCSEs).
• Primary schools were more likely to provide SLT during lesson times than secondary schools, while secondary schools were more likely to be providing SLT after school.
• Senior leaders considered what pupils may miss while attending tutoring sessions and how the timing might influence their ability and willingness to attend and engage with the sessions.
• The interview evidence suggests that communication between tutors and teachers was determined by: pre-existing relationships; the experience and skills of the tutor; the schools’ expectations for alignment of tutoring with classroom teaching and learning; and the capacity of teachers.
• Pupils had largely positive perceptions of the SLT tutoring and particularly on the attitude and supportive approach of the tutors they have worked with.
• Senior leaders primarily chose to use internal staff as their SLT-funded tutor(s), though some senior leaders used a combination of internal and external tutors. Secondary schools were more likely than primary school to use external tutors.
• Almost two-thirds of senior leaders used qualified teachers employed by the school to deliver SLT, with over a third using external qualified teachers. Fewer, but still around two-fifths, used TAs employed by the school.
• Primary schools had, on average, approximately 5 SLT tutors compared to approximately 13 tutors for secondary schools.
• An average maximum tutor/pupil of 1:4 was reported.
• Perceptions among school staff of the effectiveness of the SLT training were broadly positive, although there was some suggestion among interviewees that the training was unnecessary (as opposed to being poor quality) for experienced qualified teachers or experienced TAs. Senior leaders wanted autonomy on whether their tutors needed to complete the training.
• For some interviewees, the time commitment required for the training was perceived as a barrier to recruiting tutors.
• More than three-fifths (63%) of survey respondents were satisfied with the NTP
• overall.
• The majority of respondents involved in any of the NTP routes were satisfied overall, but satisfaction was highest for the SLT and for non-NTP tutoring.
• Senior leaders from primary schools were more likely to be satisfied with the TP route and its different components than those in secondary schools. This tended to be driven by those in primary schools being more likely to be ‘very satisfied’. These differences did not emerge for other NTP routes.
• Two-thirds (66%) of senior leaders were confident or very confident that their school could access high-quality tutoring when needed, while 14% were unconfident or very unconfident. Over one-third (39%) of the senior leaders felt more confident that their school can access high quality tutoring than they felt was the case before the pandemic, while 10% felt less confident.
• The majority of senior leaders and teachers across all routes perceived the NTP to have had a positive impact on pupils’ attainment, self-confidence and ability to catch up with their peers.
• The majority of senior leaders across all routes perceived the NTP to have had a positive impact on schools, in terms of reducing the attainment gap for disadvantaged pupils and tutoring being well aligned to the curriculum and
• learning needs of pupils.
• The greatest impact on pupils and schools was perceived to be associated with the SLT route. Although the smallest impact was perceived to be associated with the TP route, views were still positive.
• The majority of classroom teachers across all routes perceived the NTP to have a positive impact on meeting the teaching and learning needs of their pupils. The majority also said they regularly liaised with tutors to discuss pupils’ needs and progress.
• A relatively small proportion of teachers reported having to spend time with pupils to help them catch up with lessons missed during tutoring.

<--- The article continues for users subscribed and signed in. --->