Sustained small-group help in reading, writing and maths for pupils falling behind

The problem and who is affected

In 2025/26 (provisional), 55% of Year 6 pupils in Portsmouth's state-funded schools met the expected standard in reading, writing and maths, against 63% in England. Among disadvantaged pupils it was 43% (England 48%); among other pupils 64% (England 70%). So both groups trail their England peers. Portsmouth also has more disadvantaged pupils: 44% of its Year 6 cohort, against 33% nationally. The national tutoring subsidy ended after 2023/24.

Who is affected: Primary pupils, especially those assessed as falling behind and those in the Department for Education's disadvantaged group. About 1,030 of Portsmouth's 2,362 Year 6 pupils in 2025/26 were disadvantaged. Teachers and teaching assistants who would deliver sessions are also affected.

What this would change

Aim: Raise the share of Portsmouth pupils, especially disadvantaged pupils, who reach the expected standard in reading, writing and maths by the end of primary school, using an approach with reasonable evidence that schools can keep going year after year.

What success would mean: More disadvantaged and other pupils reaching the expected standard, moving towards their England peers over several years; pupils who receive small-group help making measurable progress on school assessments; and the programme still running after three years. No numeric target is proposed because none has been agreed or evidenced locally.

Schools that opt in would run small-group sessions of two to five pupils, about three times a week, for pupils identified through their own assessments as falling behind in reading, writing or maths. Sessions would be led by trained teachers or teaching assistants and linked to class teaching. The council and the Portsmouth Education Partnership would coordinate shared training, common assessment and a citywide evaluation, and help schools plan funding over several years rather than one. Pupils would be chosen by their own needs, not by the ward they live in.

Proposed lead: Portsmouth Education Partnership, with schools and academy trusts deciding whether to take part (a proposal, not an agreed role). Partners: Primary schools and academy trusts in Portsmouth, Portsmouth City Council education service, English and maths hubs serving the area, including the Solent Maths Hub, Education Endowment Foundation and its research school network (for evidence and evaluation advice), Parents and carers.

Powers: Schools and academy trusts decide how to use their budgets and pupil premium and how to organise teaching; the council cannot direct academies. The council and the Portsmouth Education Partnership can convene, train and coordinate (pep-strategy). Parental consent rules for withdrawing pupils from lessons were not checked; schools would need to follow their own policies and inform parents.

Options

• Current approach: Each school decides alone. Schools continue to choose their own catch-up support from pupil premium and core budgets, with citywide priorities on early language, literacy and maths set by the education partnership. There is no shared citywide tutoring programme or evaluation since the national tutoring subsidy closed.
• Proposed response: Coordinated, multi-year small-group tuition. Schools that opt in run structured small-group sessions for pupils assessed as falling behind, with shared training, common assessment and a citywide evaluation, planned over at least three school years.
• Alternative: Invest in whole-class teaching and early reading. Use the money for teacher training, phonics and early language through national hubs, which reaches all pupils but gives less targeted help to those furthest behind.
• Alternative: One-to-one tuition for the pupils furthest behind. More intensive for each pupil, but the Education Endowment Foundation reports small groups are more cost-effective, so fewer pupils could be reached for the same money.
• Alternative: Target schools by ward deprivation. Direct help to schools in the most deprived wards. Not recommended on its own: where a pupil lives does not show their own needs, and many pupils who are behind live elsewhere.

Further appraisal could change the choice because the gap in Portsmouth is not only about disadvantage: other pupils are also below their England peers. That may favour whole-school teaching improvements alongside targeted groups. School capacity, staff time, existing interventions and the cost per pupil are not yet known, and the evidence summarised by the Education Endowment Foundation is rated moderate, with a large share of studies not independently evaluated.

Delivery plan

A first practical step: The Portsmouth Education Partnership's literacy and maths groups could add a short survey of current small-group provision to their existing work. This needs no new funding and would show whether a shared programme adds anything to what schools already do.

Costs and funding

One-off costs

Not costed. Training, setting up common assessment and evaluation design would be one-off costs; no estimate has been made.

Recurring costs

Not costed. The Education Endowment Foundation rates small-group tuition as low cost, mostly recurring staff salaries. It reported that subsidised tutoring through the national programme cost an average of £70 to £100 per pupil for a 15-hour block in 2020 to 2021; that is a dated national figure, not a Portsmouth estimate.

Capital or revenue

Revenue only.

Funding status

No dedicated funding. The national tutoring subsidy closed after the 2023/24 school year. Schools could use pupil premium or core budgets, but those already pay for other support.

Affordability

Uncertain. The cost depends on the number of pupils, group size, who teaches and staff cover. Schools face competing pressures, and a shared programme would need multi-year funding to avoid stopping after one year.

Costing still needed

Count eligible pupils by school; estimate staff hours per pupil; price teacher and teaching assistant time; cost training, cover and evaluation; compare with current spending on catch-up support.

Benefits, risks and trade-offs

Possible benefits: If results match the Education Endowment Foundation average, pupils receiving small-group help could make around four months' extra progress over a year, more in reading than maths. Better reading and maths by age 11 supports later learning. A shared evaluation would show what works in Portsmouth's schools.

Risks:

• Pupils taken out of lessons can miss other teaching unless sessions are carefully timed.
• Funding may stop after a year while the gap persists, which would waste training and break continuity.
• Quality may vary between schools, reducing impact; evidence shows staff training matters.
• The evidence base is moderate and many studies were run by organisations connected to the programmes, so effects may be smaller in practice.
• Teaching assistant and teacher time is limited, and using it for tuition may reduce other support.

Who could gain or lose: Targeting by individual assessment would reach pupils falling behind wherever they live. Disadvantaged pupils, who are a larger share of Portsmouth's cohort, could gain most. Schools with more pupils behind would need more resources, so funding rules matter. Pupils with special educational needs may need different support and should not be excluded by design.

Capacity: Delivery depends on staff time in each school, trained teaching assistants and cover. Schools already run their own interventions; the partnership's capacity to coordinate and evaluate has not been assessed.

How to judge progress

Reassess when: Reassess after revised 2025/26 key stage 2 results are published (December 2026), after the first full school year of any programme, or if national funding for tutoring or targeted support changes.

Where things stand

What is known:

• Portsmouth's key stage 2 results are below England for both disadvantaged and other pupils.
• Portsmouth has a higher share of disadvantaged Year 6 pupils than England.
• The Education Endowment Foundation summarises small-group tuition as moderate impact for low cost based on moderate evidence, with an average of four months' extra progress.
• The National Tutoring Programme closed after the 2023/24 school year.
• The Portsmouth Education Strategy 2023 to 2026 already prioritises early language and literacy, maths and attendance.

What is not known:

• How much small-group tuition Portsmouth schools already provide and how it is funded.
• Cost per pupil for a Portsmouth programme.
• Whether schools have staff capacity to run sessions three times a week.
• How results differ by school; school-level 2025/26 figures are due with the December revised release.
• What will replace the Portsmouth Education Strategy after 2026.

Decisions needed:

• Whether the education partnership wants a shared programme or prefers school-by-school approaches.
• How pupils would be identified and how parents would be informed.
• How a multi-year programme would be funded.
• Who would evaluate the programme and how results would be published.

Existing work:

• Portsmouth Education Strategy 2023 to 2026 (year 3 plan for 2025/26): priorities include early communication, language and literacy, a step change in maths (Solent Maths Hub) and attendance: In its final year; web page updated 19 February 2026 (as of 2026-02-19).
• National Tutoring Programme: Closed; 2023/24 was the final funded year (as of 2025-03-25).
• National reading measures in the schools white paper: National Year of Reading 2026, expanded reading training, and an announced statutory reading test in Year 8: Announced national policy; the Year 8 test is not yet in force (as of 2026-02-23).

UK Facts context: The disadvantage gap in England (National picture; schools and local partners decide local catch-up support.) · Attainment in England (National results context.)

Next review: When the Department for Education publishes revised 2025/26 key stage 2 results (due December 2026), or when the Portsmouth Education Partnership publishes its next education strategy.. Evidence last checked 2026-11-02.

Sources

Where earlier ideas went

• pupil-premium (earlier ten suggestions): restored. Restored as its own action, literacy-numeracy: sustained structured small-group tuition is the candidate option; the warning that one-year funding undermines it is kept under risks; Education Endowment Foundation evidence is cited exactly. Not carried forward: Targeting by ward (Charles Dickens, Paulsgrove) dropped as the selection method because ward residence does not identify individual need; ward child-poverty figures (35.9%, 27.5%) from a Public Health Needs Summary linked only to the council homepage were not verified; 'National Tutoring Programme' removed as a funding route because it closed; 'Education Endowment Foundation partnership funding' not verified; 'low millions per year' cost dropped as unsourced; the KS4 ward-level success measure replaced by key stage 2 measures because ward-level school results would involve small numbers and the intervention is aimed at primary pupils.
• school-support-plan (earlier 12-point plan): kept. Linked through the shared issue school-support; this new action covers attainment, while school-support-plan covers special educational needs and absence.