The Guardian view on tutors for all: easier said than done

The best thing about the news that the government is to fund a catch-up programme of tutoring in England, to compensate for learning lost due to the pandemic, is the proof it offers that ministers recognise the problem. Something must be done to make up for the months of missed schooling if some children’s life chances are not to be permanently harmed. Since pupils were sent home in March, it has been obvious that the impact would fall unequally, with poorer children suffering more than those from better-off backgrounds because of vast disparities between resources (physical space, technology, parental education) at home.

So it is good news too that the catch-up spend is to be targeted. Already, evidence suggests that pupils in the most disadvantaged areas are least likely to have engaged with remote learning, while private school pupils have received more online teaching than anyone else.

But if the problem is clear, the solution is less so. Tutoring has been shown to be effective in boosting the results of low-income pupils. If spent wisely, a pandemic premium to top up their education could be an effective intervention. But delivering such a scheme will be an immense organisational feat.

That is because calculating learning loss, and timetabling extra classes, is not a back-of-an-envelope job. Already, schools are wrestling with all manner of logistical challenges. There is no guarantee that lessons will be back to normal in the autumn (a parallel debate is taking place in Scotland, where Nicola Sturgeon has faced criticism). While schools, teachers and families have undoubtedly done their best in difficult circumstances, the pandemic has thrown a harsh light on the English system’s weakness. Successive governments, both Labour and Conservative, have weakened local accountability to the point where many headteachers have had nowhere to turn during the greatest crisis of their careers.

From the delayed lockdown, to the lack of personal protective equipment and testing, to the now-abandoned tracing app, at every stage of this pandemic ministers have been shown up as poor planners. If they are serious about repairing the damage to education, they must now be patient.

Building the right programme will take time. England’s tutoring industry, which is estimated to be worth £2bn a year, is barely regulated. If substantial taxpayer funds are to be spent on one-to-one or small-group coaching, this must be done properly. That means giving schools time to work out what is needed, while deciding which providers (including the schools themselves) are best placed to deliver this.

It would make sense to put in place measures for three years, not one. A second wave of infections remains a possibility. Even without it, many children will need time to get back into the swing of school life. Those returning to their final year of school will require special consideration. But for the rest it is more important to get the recovery plan right than to rush.