Improving Educational Outcomes for Disadvantaged Children 

 

The Fair Education Alliance is a coalition of 300 member organisations tackling educational inequity. We unite behind a shared vision: no child’s success is limited by their socioeconomic background.  Our members represent the voices of young people, charities and social enterprises, research organisations and think tanks, businesses and foundations, unions, universities and schools. Together, our members provide direct support to millions of young people annually, across every local authority in England, as well as indirect support such as funding, training and campaigning.    

We share the Committee’s concern about the growing gap between children from low-income households and others. Each year, we publish a snapshot of these gaps, which are already present at age five, and which only compound into gaps in education, employment and training in young adulthood. You can find our most recent summary of this data in our Priorities for a New Government1. 

 

 

1. The complex nature of the disadvantage gap 

Beyond the school system 

At age five, children from low-income households are 4.8 months behind their wealthier peers in meeting early learning goals. This is the widest gap since 2014. The picture is even starker for children receiving SEN support, who are 12.4 months behind, and this gap has only widened over the past ten years, including during the pandemic. We are now seeing the extent to which the pandemic has deepened education inequality for the youngest children, as the disadvantage gap has increased from 4.2 months in 2019, pre-pandemic.2  

We also know that this relationship between poverty and SEN – particularly social, emotional and mental health needs (SEMH) -- continues through school and impacts children’s school experience.  Children and young people who struggle with SEMH are more likely to be absent from school3 and to have behavioural issues which can lead to suspensions4 and exclusions. Pupils from low-income households are also over twice as likely to be persistently absent5 (10% of school missed), over three times as likely to be severely absent (more than 50% of school missed), over four times more likely to be suspended and five times more likely to be permanently excluded than their wealthier peers6. Children with SEND have had the greatest increase absence post-pandemic indicating acute challenges adjusting after an extended period at home7. 

Therefore, addressing the disadvantage gap requires working beyond the school system from birth, by delivering the best early education and care for every child, and a joined-up system to meet the rising need of families.  

 

The best early education and care for every child 

Whether a child spends the first years of their life at home, at a nursery, or with a childminder, the evidence is clear that their early development has a significant impact on their life outcomes. Without support for every child to develop in the early years, the gap that exists at the end of reception is unlikely to close and will continue to put lower-income children at a disadvantage at the very start of their schooling. 400 Providers closed their doors last year (at a higher rate in deprived neighbourhoods), primarily due to insufficient income or staffing8. This inequity is compounded by the staggering lack of provision for children with special education needs and disabilities (SEND). Over 80% of local authorities don’t have enough childcare for children with SEND.9  

 

Further, the home learning environment influences outcomes at five over and above factors such as socioeconomic status, maternal education, and family income.10 Early childhood is a period of rapid physical and mental growth and change, and this period offers the greatest opportunities for learning and development. Yet, families from lower socioeconomic backgrounds are less likely to access enrichment opportunities in a child’s first year, particularly those types of activities intended to improve parent-child communication and interaction.11 

   

To address this, we must: 

• Build a workforce that can deliver high quality early years provision. 

• Make high quality early childhood education and care accessible and affordable for every family, including those whose children have special educational needs. 

• Increase strategic focus on learning from birth in the home.  

 

  A joined-up system that meets rising needs 

Education can be a great lever for social justice, but schools must be a part of a system of support around families. As early intervention services have been stripped back, we’ve seen the cost and severity of crisis-point need grow.12 With local authority resources declining, schools and trusts are spending a growing proportion of their budgets fighting the hidden costs of poverty – children are coming to school hungry, cold, and tired, leaving them less able to concentrate. 72% of all teachers, and 82% of those in Educational Improvement Areas, said that they are helping pupils more with non-academic matters than they did five years ago, including support with mental health, buying key supplies, or signposting families to support.13 Schools are now the most common location for food banks.14 We know that the disadvantage gap is greatest for children who have been in poverty longest (12.2 months at the end of primary, and 22.7 months at the end of secondary).15 

Whilst increased funding for schools is urgently needed, we must also develop a long-term sustainable strategy to support children and address root causes so schools can focus on educating, rather than tackling the symptoms of poverty alone.  

To address this, we must: 

• Build long-term strategies for adequately funding and delivering services that support families in need.  

• Enable early identification and support for children with SEND through funding, guidance, and collaboration across services. 

• Adopt a joined-up approach at national and local levels, including shared outcomes and the scaling up of Family Hubs or another single point of contact for children and families. 

• Ensure there is sufficient funding, from early years to post-16, targeted toward lessening the impacts of poverty on educational outcomes. 

 

Within the school system 

Despite the breadth of the causes of the disadvantage gap, there is much we can do within schools to create a fairer education system. Notably, the gap between children from low-income households and others grows rather than shrinks throughout the journey through school, standing at 10.3 months at the end of primary – the widest since 2012. By the time young people are taking their GCSEs, the gap between young people from low-income households and others is 19 months.5                              

After school, young people from disadvantaged backgrounds are 8.2% more likely to be NEET15 (not in education, employment or training) than others. The widest gap exists between young people from Gypsy Roma Traveller (GRT) communities - who are 32% more likely to be NEET than their peers. Students from low-income backgrounds are 20.2% less likely to attend university than their wealthier peers (according to the most recent data from 2021/22) 17, although for more prestigious universities this gap is only 9.3%18.  

To address these gaps within the school system, we must tackle underlying issues in our workforce, and in the suitability of our system to cater to a range of needs.                   

 

A strong and supported workforce 

Teachers, leaders and support staff are foundational to delivering a great education for every child. Schools and colleges continue to face severe recruitment and retention issues for teaching and support staff, particularly in schools serving the highest proportion of pupils from low-income households. There is a direct correlation between poorer Ofsted judgments and high rates of students eligible for free school meals or with low prior attainment and 60% of education staff disagreed that inspections take into account the level of deprivation within a school or college community.16 We know that schools serving students with complex needs are often going above and beyond to fill gaps left by other underfunded services, as discussed in the final section of this document. This work not only heightens the stress and workload of teachers serving some of the poorest communities; it’s not currently valued by our system, creating further barriers to recruitment and retention for the most challenged schools. The employment landscape has also changed dramatically in the last decade, making careers in other industries more flexible and attractive, and if our schools are going to truly reflect the communities they serve, we must see a cultural shift to build a more diverse and inclusive workforce.  

To address this, we must: 

• Fund schools to pay staff fairly. 

• Reduce workload and stress through an accountability system that values inclusion and rewards the complex work of serving low-income communities.   

• Build a more diverse workforce – including parents and people of different races and backgrounds -- through inclusive practice. 

 

An education system that prepares every young person to thrive in work and life.  

An increasing number of families feel that their relationship with school has broken down, and that schools care more about data than the individual needs and challenges of their children.17 Too many young people also have a negative school experience, where they are left with a poor conception of their own abilities. The education system should strengthen the wellbeing of children and young people by giving them a sense of belonging and opportunities to develop their passions; unfortunately, that’s not currently the case.18 Poor mental health and wellbeing are strongly correlated with behavioural issues, including those that lead to suspensions and exclusions.19 

Young people want their views and contributions to matter, but they don’t currently feel listened to by the systems that serve them20, particularly when it comes to the root causes of their behaviour21. We know that social, emotional, and mental health needs are contributing to heightened absence rates, especially amongst disadvantaged pupils22. Surely, it does not come as a surprise that students are alienated by a system in which they feel unsupported and disregarded 

Not only are we failing to provide all children with the education they need to thrive when there, but we are in the midst of an attendance crisis where children are not coming to school at all. We must make a credible commitment to families – especially families of children facing the greatest challenges – that engagement with school is in the best interests of their children, so we can stop school absence from driving a wedge into the existing disadvantage gap. 

To address this, we must: 

• Work with experts toward a school experience that develops essential skills and physical and emotional health alongside academic and foundational skills. 

• Collect, across agencies, comprehensive data on the wellbeing of young people, so local governments, schools, the third sector, and funding bodies can better understand where investment is needed. 

• Commit to uphold children's right to participate by establishing processes to meaningfully engage young people from all backgrounds in decisions affecting them and their education.   

 

 

2. A specific evidence-backed solution: high-quality tutoring 

While it is important that we reform our systems to tackle the root causes of the disadvantage gap in education, we must also do all we can to give every child in education now the opportunities they deserve.  Achieving good grades in English and maths at GCSE level is usually a requirement for progressing to further study and employment, so is essential to closing the gaps in destinations and employment described above.  

 

Every year, around 200,000 sixteen-year-olds do not achieve a standard pass (grade 4 or above) in GCSE English and maths. These qualifications are essential for progression to higher levels of education and into employment. Most young people who do not achieve a full level 2 qualification (at least five ‘good’ GCSEs) at 15 never progress beyond level 2 qualifications - this is holding our economy back.23 

 

For individuals. there is a wealth of evidence that literacy and numeracy skills yield high wage returns for both men and women.24 Missing a standard pass in GCSE maths by just one grade will lead to a loss of £73,062 in earnings over a person’s lifetime. For GCSE English, this is £47,355.12.25 This leads to a range of adverse outcomes including those related to health and life-expectancy. Missing a standard pass at GCSE disproportionately affects young people from disadvantaged backgrounds26. This means young people (and later adults) from disadvantaged backgrounds are also disproportionately affected by the adverse outcomes associated with lacking these gateway qualifications. This is a significant barrier to both opportunity and social mobility in England.27 

 

That is why it is important to intervene early and then continue to attend to the needs of disadvantaged pupils, straight through 16-19 education. Improving the attainment of pupils facing disadvantage benefits not only the individual but society as a whole.  The FEA’s Tuition Advocacy Working Group comprises a group of third-sector tuition providers targeting pupils from low-income backgrounds. This group was key in advocating for the establishment of the National Tutoring Programme (NTP), and then for the improvement of it, including through greater focus on the children most in need. The end of the NTP, and shortcomings in the contracting and delivery of that programme, have not changed the fact that high-quality tutoring is a much needed and impactful intervention. 

  

The Impact of Tutoring  

Tutoring works to improve grades. It is tailored to individual needs to help pupils grasp concepts that previously eluded them.  Unfortunately, due to its high cost, tutoring is often out of reach to pupils facing disadvantage.  The private tutoring industry is also unregulated and can be variable in quality.  

Impact on attainment 

There is extensive evidence that tutoring is one of the most effective ways to accelerate academic progress. A randomised controlled trial (RCT), commissioned by the Education Endowment Foundation (EEF), found that Year 6 pupils who received 12 hours of tuition from Tutor Trust made three months additional progress when compared to their peers. The EEF also noted that the cost of implementation to achieve these results was low.28 
 
In 2023, the Department for Education (DfE) commissioned the National Foundation for Educational Research (NFER) to evaluate the effectiveness of the National Tutoring Programme (NTP) in its third year. It found that tutoring in 2021-22 delivered at least a month’s additional progress over the course of the academic year for maths and for English. It highlighted overwhelming satisfaction from school leaders on the NTP. They strongly believe it has a positive impact on pupils’ attainment (78%), confidence (78%), and ability to catch up with peers (76%)29.  

Public First estimates that the NTP will lead to, or has already led to, a total of 390 thousand grade improvement due to tuition provided by the NTP in the academic years 2021/22 and 2022/237. In total 2.96 million students received an average of 11 hours of tutoring, and 12.1% of students who received tuition have improved, or are expected to improve, by a grade8. This means that for every £1 million spent on the NTP over 580 students experience a grade improvement.  

English tuition is responsible for 176 thousand grade improvements, or 46% of the total. This is higher than the 40% of tuition provided in this subject, which is explained by the higher average grade improvement made of English tuition. Although maths tuition at both key stages is more common than English, KS2 English provides the highest number of grade improvements. For every £1 million spent on KS2 English, an estimated 850 students improve their GCSE grade.30  

Wider impacts 

Aside from its benefits for catching up on lost learning, tutoring can also support the post pandemic crisis of pupil mental health and attendance. Teachers reported that tutoring led to increased confidence, better pupil engagement in the classroom and reduced anxiety. This is backed up by 85% of parents who said tutoring had positively impacted their child’s confidence, with 68% saying it had improved attendance.31 

Impact on earnings  

The additional discounted lifetime earnings resulting from tuition provided in 2021/22 and 2022/23 is estimated at £4.34 billion. The funding during this period is estimated as £660 million which leads to a benefit cost ratio of 6.58. The average cost of providing 11 hours of tuition for each student was £223 for an average return of £1,470.32  

Impact on the Exchequer  

Public First estimates of the total additional tax collected by the Exchequer due to the increase in earnings is: £775 million in income tax; £554 million in national insurance, and an estimated £499 million in value added tax through additional consumer spending. This is a total gain to the Exchequer of approximately £1.83 billion, which more than covers the £660 million cost of the programme.33  

 

The National Tutoring Programme and the current state 

The NFER found that the main reason for senior leaders not continuing to offer tuition in their schools upon conclusion of the National Tutoring Programme (NTP) is because of lack of funding. They also reported that 61% of school leaders surveyed agreed that the NTP had a positive impact on attainment and 56% agreed that it had helped reduce the attainment gap. Dissatisfaction with the NTP was found to be related to funding (a perception it was not enough to meet pupil needs and/or that schools had to top-up to receive the funding) and what were deemed to be complicated reporting requirements.34 

The current environment is very precarious for tutoring charities. During the first years of the NTP, the costs of tutoring providers were covered by a £54 contribution from schools (of which the NTP made a contribution of 75% in year one and 50% by its final year); the other 50% of our costs were covered philanthropically. The end of the NTP has meant that schools and philanthropy have had to cover these costs alone. 

Despite tutoring being so effective, there are very few schools who can afford (or choose) to use pupil premium on tutoring for their disadvantaged pupils. Providers find themselves increasingly having to subsidise an increasing proportion of the cost of the programmes with funding from grants and corporate donations, which is not a sustainable long-term position. Many schools are stopping tutoring altogether. 

 

Against this backdrop, it is clear why so many private providers have stopped offering school-based tuition as there is no financial incentive. One of the objectives of the NTP was to create a sustainable long-term tuition sector, however current funding arrangements for tuition make this impossible. 

Further, many of these challenges are exacerbated within further education, where funding issues substantially hamper achievement in GCSE re-sits and therefore the further narrowing of the disadvantage gap. College spending is around 10% lower per student in 2024/25 than in 2010/11. Colleges are not exempt from paying VAT (like schools are) and funding for disadvantaged young people nose dives by over one-third at 16, in part because Pupil Premium funding comes to an end at that point (which is why, in addition to funded tutoring, a 16-19 Student Premium should also be instituted).35   

 

For all of these reasons, we are calling for the re-introduction of funding for all young people aged 5-19 in receipt of Pupil Premium or equivalent, and who are behind in English or maths, to be offered a high-quality tutoring provision to help close that gap.