Last week, the Centre for Market Reform of Education (CMRE) hosted a round table meeting to discuss the feasibility of setting up a UK professional association for private tutors, and to explore the case for wider consultation on self-regulation of the industry. Internationally, such bodies do exist, such as in the US (National Tutoring Association/ American Tutoring Association) and in Australia (Australian Tutoring Association), so the idea of one for the UK is not so surprising.
Representatives from about a dozen of the UK’s leading tuition agencies were invited to the discussion in Westminster, as well as Lord Lucas (editor of the Good Schools Guide) and a smattering of others including myself, representing The Tutor Pages (see below for a full list of attendees).
Despite the burgeoning size of the UK’s private tuition industry, it was the first time the industry’s leading players have met in this way, and so was a rather remarkable event.
The main purpose of the meeting was to discuss the feasibility of setting up an association or institute of private tutors, an idea which the CMRE is clearly in favour of. But would such a body be both practicable and beneficial to all concerned – private tutors, tuition agencies and the general public? There are clearly a large number of issues and vested interests.
Rather than running a tuition agency, I am the director of an online publication which accepts advertising from private tutors. My perspective is therefore unusual, and my main concern at the meeting was that independent private tutors – thousands of whom work independently of tuition agencies – have a voice. Could a tutor association accommodate their needs, instead of becoming a kind of trade body/ club for the tuition agencies? I have expressed skepticism before about the feasibility, let alone usefulness, of an association of private tutors – but the meeting I attended last Thursday changed my mind on a couple of points.
Here’s my current assessment of the arguments.
Inclusiveness vs Standards
Clearly, an association of private tutors needs to be delimited in various ways. James Croft, Director of CMRE, was helpful in suggesting that the proposed association might cover only a) private one-to-one tuition in the home b) academic-only core-curriculum subjects and c) school-age tuition, perhaps only up to 18 years. This was a good start, since private tuition can encompass a huge variety of activities such as adult language tuition, musical instrument tuition and tuition for professional qualifications.
Chris Lenton‘s input was then invaluable, since he has been extensively involved in both setting up professional bodies and in analysing the challenges they currently face (see, for example, his recent report on 44 of the UK’s leading professional associations). Chris informed us it would be feasible for one professional body to accommodate both individual private membership and membership options for organisations such as agencies. From my perspective, this was encouraging because it suggested that independent freelancers could benefit.
It was then that the thorny issue of standards arose. There is an inherent tension between, on the one hand, trying to get the tuition industry as a whole on board, and on the other maintaining standards of some kind. Every tuition agency has their own method of maintaining standards, for example by stipulating minimum qualifications for tutors, conducting face-to-face interviews, monitoring tutors’ performance and providing training. During the discussion it started to become clear, however, that agreement on standards for membership of tuition agencies may be nigh on impossible. As a very simple example, one agency representative pointed out that one of the best tutors on his books was a school leaver – with no degree, and no teaching qualifications.
And as for individual tutor members – would there be any way of maintaining standards among these freelancers? Perhaps the organisation could verify the tutor’s qualifications and references on joining, and help them to obtain CRB certificates. However, such measures do not in themselves identify good tutors. As I mentioned at the time, although an association can put up a barrier to entry, it would be impossible to expel a tutor except in the case of gross misconduct. In other words, an association of this kind has no way of monitoring or regulating the quality of tuition that a tutor provides.
Useful?
This brings me to the heart of the issue. On the one hand, an association of tutors would imply to members of the public that its members are professionals, offering a professional service. But this would be rather misleading, because the organisation itself would have no mechanism to regulate or ensure quality. There may be partial solutions to this problem – for example, a public feedback system on the lines of Tripadvisor – but such systems are controversial, especially when tutoring depends so much on rapport between individuals. Even the ‘best’ tutor will not suit every child.
One thought is that a tutor’s credibility could somehow be linked to the number of CPD (Continuing Professional Development) training modules he or she completes during membership of the association. These could be undertaken both on- or off-line. As far as I am concerned, the potential for offering such training is the best argument for forming an association of private tutors in the first place, since training opportunities in one-to-one tuition are currently few and far between.
From my perspective, the case for forming an association on other grounds is currently weak. For example, CMRE’s suggestion that the private tuition industry needs to self-regulate because it currently remains vulnerable to unwelcome government intervention is contradicted by the current government’s lack of interest in regulation. And, as I have explained above, claims that a tutoring association might help the public to access a higher standards of private tuition are on shaky ground when such an organisation is unlikely to have any regulatory powers. In the light of this, the further claim that a professional body could help tutors access government work opportunities (such as within the state school system, or through the kind of voucher initiative championed by Nick Clegg) begins to look implausible, despite this being a major motive for the CMRE’s involvement.
I do believe there is a reasonable chance that an association of private tutors will get off the ground, but this is mainly because (at the risk of both sounding cynical and mixing my metaphors) tuition agencies may see it as a useful bandwagon to jump on and may be afraid of missing the boat in shaping the debate. But aside from the training and networking opportunities it may provide individual tutors (which may be worthwhile and substantial), I am yet to be convinced that a professional association would be of much benefit to tutors, students or their parents.
List of Attendees
Charles Bonas (Bonas MacFarlane), Woody Webster/ Oliver Eccles (Bright Young Things), Thomas Maher (British Home Tutors), Matthew Goldie-Scot (Carfax Private Tutors), Kate Shand (Enjoy Education), Mylène Curtis (Fleet Tutors) Julie Harrison (Harrison Allen), Jake Hall/ Edward Sibley (Holland Park Tuition), Will Orr-Ewing/ Josh Pull (Keystone Tutors), Lucy Cawkwell/ Shirley Hesry (Osborne Cawkwell Educational Consultants), Eddie Banner (Select Tutors), Nathaniel McCullagh/ Katie Haigh (Simply Learning Tuition), Rupert Syme (The Tutors’ Group), Adam Caller (Tutors International), Amelia Peterson (Freelance Tutor), Henry Fagg (The Tutor Pages), Stephen Beeley/ Alex Beeley (Knowledge Seekers), Ralph Lucas (The Good Schools Guide), Jonn Elledge (Education Investor), Chris Lenton (Wild Search), James Croft/ Relve Spread (The Centre for Market Reform of Education)
Henry, thanks for this initial feedback. I’m encouraged that we addressed some of the concerns you’ve expressed in the past concerning the need for definition of the profile of who might be included, and in particular that both private tutoring management providers and individuals could conceivably be included.
I’m somewhat discouraged, however, by the way you’ve expressed the tension between inclusivity and standards. I made the point at the round table that the way to approach this is as an investment in improving standards across the industry. This is a process. I think initially a new association should be as inclusive as possible, and should look to provide basic assurances on safeguarding and seeking subscription to a code of conduct. Training, routes towards accreditation, and any CPD requirements for membership would be developed as a next step, and as with other such bodies, you’d expect a tiered membership structure to evolve.
As far as your question about whether it would have ‘teeth’ goes, I do think a TripAdvisor type public feedback system is worthy of further consideration. It would need clear guidelines for those wishing to leave feedback and moderation to prevent the kind of situations that you describe arising.
On the question of regulation, my starting point was that there was no immediate cause for alarm because the present government clearly have no intention to regulate. My point was that increasing government interest in what private tutors might bring to the table means that the issue isn’t going away. The formation of a professional body would give the industry a platform to be involved in the shaping of what that would look like if/when intervention moved up the agenda.
Your conclusion is a bit disappointing! I was at pains to stress that the main reason for investment in professional standards and the status of tutoring is for the sake of improving tutoring outcomes. A key area of benefit for students and tutors alike would be the provision of training and opportunities for sharing good practice. That alone is surely reason enough to get involved. I hope if we do proceed with the consultation that you will encourage tutors with whom you have contact to do so.
Can I play ‘devil’s advocate’?
All the Private Tutors that I know personally are over the age of 55! (Some WELL over!) They all have extensive knowledge and skills in their particular subjects and/or areas of expertise. I don’t think CPD is relevant to them!
Most have ‘retired’ and are not looking for a career in Private Tutoring.
I think I am the only one who relies on Tutoring for a living (Also my passion!) and even I am past retirement age! I can’t believe I just said that!
I also work in the hospitality industry and have suffered much at the hands of the industry’s professional bodies with their star ratings and such like. 15 years ago we all “Joined the Club” in order to advertise and authenticate our accommodation offerings but the costs crept up and up and up. The demands crept up and up and up – and we wondered who we were working for – them or us! They became so out of touch with ordinary, good people and focussed on the easier tick box system of rating. OK if you are a hotel but not OK when you welcome people, lovingly, into your own home. So, a great many of us pulled out of the system and haven’t lost one penny in income, or status, or bookings and now it doesn’t cost us any grief, or money either. Win – win!
Trip Advisor has put some people out of business! There are cranks out there!
Bit like tutoring. It might all morph into a tick-box mentality that is OK if you are a school, education establishment or even a private tutoring establishment, but not OK for the retired teacher who still desires to use their considerable skills in helping a few children for a few hours a week. Let’s not forget that this, for most probably, is only for a few hours a week.
This is only a snapshot of my particular small area and I know it doesn’t apply to all.
Many thanks to both James and Janet for their comments.
Janet – I was on the point of asking you if you’d like to respond, since I knew you’d have some very valid points to make!
We may consult further with tutors on this issue, so watch this space.
As an experienced Private Tutor in Maths and the Physical Sciences (STEM), I know that parents often find it difficult to contact suitable tutors – anything we can do to make our professional services more widely known (and celebrated) will be useful.
I do, however, always encourage parents to approach their children’s schools directly before embarking on any tutor-contract: the school ought to be aware whenever parents are very concerned when the school-provided tuition and support seems to be failing for any reason.
I think Janet’s worries are mine, too.
James said:
“the main reason for investment in professional standards and the status of tutoring is for the sake of improving tutoring outcomes”
This sounds lovely but throws up a lot of really fundamental questions:
Which outcomes will be measured, and who decides on that? Who measures them? How do they do it? How is the process validated?
Who will be investing? What will be invested in, and what research exists to tie it to the outcomes that are to be improved? You mention “provision of training and opportunities”, but in what? Who is deemed competent to provide it?
My concern is that the answer really looks like this:
Tutors who want to work regularly will be forced to join the association. Members’ fees (effectively taxes) pay for training, to be delivered by private providers on a demand basis without strong research support. Formal credentialling and tiering will mean those courses become effectively mandatory for tutors. The costs, which will presumably mostly have to be bourne by the agencies, will be passed on to us in the form of reduced fees / increased commission, so that we all end up doing more work for less money. Meanwhile, a cheap online rating system provides an uncritical illusion of transparency, placing us in constant fear that a disgruntled parent might leave a negative review and effectively put us out of business for good.
I’d rather be happy than right, so I’d be delighted to see some different answers to those questions.
May I suggest, in response to Janet’s comments, that experienced tutors like herself would be of immense value to the industry via an organisation, such as a professional body,perhaps in the form of mentoring, sharing best practice, contributing to professional body development (if interested) and so on. It need only encroach on one’s time as much as one would want, and potentially work on a different membership type. I am not a tutor myself, but I imagine experience like Janet’s and her colleagues could be invaluable to newer tutors. In my experience as a new school governor, I am very grateful to have an (unofficial) mentor who was formerly on my board, among others. She has retired – but has been asked by the Local Authority to keep sharing her best practice through training sessions to a generation of new and practising governors. This keeps that successful know-how experience available, importantly passing it on to increase the effectiveness of governors – the benefit of which is passed on, in the end, to the school children. There needs to be a focal point like an organisation, however, to facilitate this kind of collaboration and share information.
I agree with the many concerns expressed here, particularly those of Janet and Rich. I am not of retirement age and do rely on tutoring to make my living and work free-lance rather than through an agency. I am all for anything that actually enhances the student experience of learning but I’m not sure how you can monitor tutors without resulting in tick boxes (a system that I do not think works well in schools) or the spiraling of costs detailed by Janet and Rich.
By the way, there is already a UK Association of Tutors that has been in existence since the 1950s. It vets its members very carefully and offers an annual training day. Has anyone from this organisation been involved in your discussions? I think they may have some very useful input. See http://www.tutor.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=55&Itemid=62
I found this a very interesting blog. I run a Kip McGrath Education Centre and am not yet over 50!
In order to run a Kip centre I have to be a qualified teacher and hold a valid CRB. I am also registered with Ofsted. I have many qualifications and memberships of professional bodies other than in teaching. I have chartered status of the British Computer Society, am a fellow of another and member of a couple more. One of those is the Institute for Learning. So I think I’ve a fair bit of experience of professional bodies.
I wonder if we need to create a new one? Would it not be worth consulting with the Institute for Learning to see if they could expand slightly to cover tuition? They already have a mechanism for validating CPD and vetting applicants.
What parents need is a way of clearly knowing what the tutor is offering them. Is that person safe to be with their child and are they qualified to do what they are saying they can do?
The Government doesn’t appear to want to go down the route of regulation so a professional body would seem like a reasonable alternative, but lets not spend years and money reinventing the wheel.
I also run a tutoring centre and am not over 50 – I love my job and chose to do this instead of classroom teaching, despite fulfilling leadership roles in schools and at Regional level. The reasons I became a tutor are based in my passion for teaching. I would assume that many tutors become tutors due to their love of helping and working with young people. In many cases, tutors do have a wealth of content knowledge of the subjects they tutor, as well as the teaching skills to support students from a wide variety of backgrounds to go forward in the subject and achieve great learning outcomes. I am not sure how a professional body would vet tutors, except maybe by using a similar standard to those teachers have to abide by, e.g. a minimum amount of suitable and regulated professional development per year, Working with Children’s Police Clearances, minimum qualification standards e.g. at least four years tertiary study etc. At this stage, anybody willing to promote themselves as a ‘tutor’ can do so without any consequence, and as a result we see a very big divide between the quality of tutoring offered by e.g. those running ‘homework clubs’ as opposed to those working according to a structured program with scaffolded activities and a tailored tutoring program which will suit the individual child. I think tutoring is a specialized field, and would be in favour of some form of regulation. It would also mean that parents would be better informed about what the different tutors can actually offer their child, and what their money will be spent on.
To improve tuition standards the employers (that is, the parents) of the tutors need to have more knowledge about what makes an effective tutor (enthusiasm for their job + communication skills + subject knowledge) and have a role in regulating this.
I’ve given plenty of lessons where the parents are simply not involved, and this does not breed an environment in which tutors are motivated to improve in the same way as person with a supervisor would be motivated to improve in their job (else they’d get the sack).
I’d be happy to discuss with parents what factors influence the effectiveness of student’s learning (the private tutor, the school teacher, the parents and the child themselves), and if the role of the private tutor could be widely agreed upon by a committee board and perhaps even documentation made available to give to parents, that would give a person like me at least a framework to work with.