National Tutoring Programme 2021-11-01
2021-11-01
TAGS
Response quality
Questions & Answers
Q1
Partial Answer
▸
Context
Concern about educational attainment in northern England, noting low enrolment and limited funding.
What recent assessment has been made of the effectiveness of the national tutoring programme in improving the educational attainment of pupils in the north of England? Only 240,000 enrolled on the national tutoring programme in its first year; it only has a third of the recommended funding and per pupil funding won't reach 2010 levels for another three years. Can we see evidence that the Government's proposals are working?
The national tutoring programme reached 308,000 pupils in 2020-21 and it's expanding to offer high quality tuition for up to 2 million pupils. Provisional figures show that 3,822 schools have engaged with the programme through delivery partners; 475 academic mentors are placed in disadvantaged areas; all schools share £579m for local tutoring.
▸
Assessment & feedback
Did not provide evidence or granular information on reaching disadvantaged children
Response accuracy
Q2
Partial Answer
▸
Context
Concern about paperwork burden on smaller primary schools when accessing the scheme.
The headteacher of Burnopfield Primary School was concerned at the amount of paperwork involved in accessing the scheme. Will the Secretary of State look at the bureaucracy to ensure that the national tutoring programme can reach as many children as possible?
I am grateful for the feedback and will look again with the Minister for School Standards to see if there is any bureaucracy that gets in the way. We will get rid of it.
▸
Assessment & feedback
Did not commit to removing specific bureaucratic barriers identified by schools
Response accuracy
Q3
Partial Answer
▸
Context
Concern about the performance of the national tutoring programme, noting that nearly 2 million young people will have left school without support by the end of the programme period.
By the end of the national tutoring programme period, nearly 2 million young people will have left school without support. Meanwhile, Randstad has faced criticism for over-complicated bureaucracy and delayed tutoring. Is the Secretary of State satisfied with Randstad's performance?
I am never satisfied until we have delivered; it is about outcomes and delivering for disadvantaged people. I will present independent evaluation results to this House.
▸
Assessment & feedback
Did not commit to a specific assessment or response regarding Randstad's performance
Response accuracy
Q4
Partial Answer
▸
Context
Concern about the insufficient investment in education recovery, noting a significant gap in educational attainment.
The national tutoring programme is only reaching one in 16 pupils this year; there's an 18-month GCSE attainment gap and it's widening. The Government failed to use the Budget opportunity for education recovery investment as recommended by experts. Why won't the Secretary of State match Labour's ambition?
All I would remind the hon. Lady is that England is doing well under a Conservative Government; she should shed tribal politics, look at the evidence and focus on delivering real outcomes.
▸
Assessment & feedback
Changed subject entirely to political performance without addressing educational investment or ambition
Response accuracy
Q5
Partial Answer
▸
Context
Concern about the effectiveness of the national tutoring programme, noting low enrolment and limited funding.
The national tutoring programme reached 308,000 pupils in 2020-21 but only had a third of recommended funding; per pupil funding won't reach 2010 levels for another three years. Can we see evidence that the Government's proposals are working?
Independent evaluation of the programme's impact on pupils' educational attainment in all regions, including the north, will be published. The latest figures show that 3,822 schools have engaged with the programme through delivery partners and 475 academic mentors placed in disadvantaged areas; all schools share £579m for local tutoring.
▸
Assessment & feedback
Did not provide granular information on reaching disadvantaged children
Response accuracy