Useful tutoring feedback distinguishes three things: what the session covered, what the learner demonstrated and what they should do next. “We did fractions and it went well” reports activity and mood; it does not tell the learner or parent what changed.

Give feedback to the learner first

Before the session ends, ask the learner to retrieve the main idea and judge the evidence with you:

  1. What was today's learning job?
  2. What did you initially try?
  3. What changed after teaching or practice?
  4. What could you do on the fresh check without help?
  5. What is the next independent action?

Then give feedback that is specific enough to use:

You now select evidence that supports your inference. On the fresh paragraph, you still needed a prompt to explain the writer's choice. Next, annotate one paragraph and write that explanation without the prompt card.

The learner should not discover your judgement only through a separate message to their parent.

Use a three-line session update

Where an update is agreed, keep it proportionate:

  • Covered: the precise topic or task.
  • Evidence: what the learner attempted before and after support.
  • Next action: one practice/retrieval task and the future check.

Example:

Covered: factorising simple quadratics. Evidence: Mia initially guessed factor pairs; after using the product-and-sum check, she completed two examples and one fresh example independently. Next: complete the agreed short set and explain the check on the first question; we will revisit it next session.

Avoid a running character report. Comments such as “excellent student” or “not trying hard enough” are neither diagnostic nor actionable.

Separate session notes from progress reviews

Session updatePeriodic review
What was taught todayProgress against the agreed target
Immediate independent checkPattern across spaced checks and school work
One next actionContinue, adapt, pause or stop decision
Concise and frequent if agreedLess frequent and evidence-rich

Agree the review cadence at the start. More messages do not automatically mean better communication; the useful question is whether the evidence supports a decision.

Keep claims within the evidence

Do not infer an examination grade from a single worksheet, predict a guaranteed improvement or suggest tutoring alone caused a school result. Instead report:

  • task conditions and amount of support;
  • performance on a comparable fresh attempt;
  • retention after a gap, where checked;
  • transfer into school work or formal assessment, where available;
  • learner confidence as self-report, not proof of mastery.

The DfE tutoring review highlights the value of curriculum alignment and feedback from pupils and parents. The EEF guidance is written for classroom teaching, but its emphasis on principles, timing and how learners use feedback is relevant when adapted carefully to one-to-one work.

Protect privacy and boundaries

Use the agreed adult/provider route, keep only necessary records and follow the relevant safeguarding and data policies. Do not create informal private contact with a child to make updates easier. If the learner shares a safeguarding concern, follow the agreed procedure rather than promising confidentiality.

Build the update from the evidence in how to identify learning gaps. Use how to know if tutoring is working to align the periodic review with the family, and when to change or stop tutoring when evidence calls for a decision.

Match feedback to the recipient

Learner

Needs a usable account of:

  • the learning goal;
  • what the attempt showed;
  • the decision that improved;
  • what to do independently next;
  • how to ask for help.

Parent/carer

Needs a proportionate account of:

  • what was covered;
  • observable evidence and support level;
  • agreed practice or school question;
  • whether the goal/review changes;
  • practical or safeguarding matters through the agreed route.

Tutor record

Needs enough detail to plan:

  • task conditions;
  • prompts or representations used;
  • learner response;
  • fresh check;
  • hypothesis and next check.

Do not send every internal teaching note to the parent or keep unnecessary personal data.

Work through a weak and strong update

Weak:

Great session. We covered algebra and Jamie worked really hard.

Stronger:

Covered: selecting a method for simultaneous equations. Evidence: Jamie initially used substitution for every example; after comparing method conditions, Jamie selected elimination independently on two fresh questions and needed one general prompt on a mixed third item. Next: complete the agreed three-question mixed set and explain the method choice; we will check it next session.

The stronger version remains cautious: it does not claim the whole topic is secure.

Give corrective feedback without taking over

Use:

  1. learner self-assessment;
  2. precise evidence from the attempt;
  3. one question or cue;
  4. learner revision;
  5. fresh independent application.

Example:

You selected relevant evidence. Read your explanation and tell me where it connects the writer's choice to your interpretation.

This points to the missing relationship without supplying the finished sentence.

Handle disagreement

If parent, learner and tutor see progress differently:

  • return to the agreed baseline and fresh work;
  • compare task conditions and support;
  • distinguish confidence/self-report from performance;
  • ask what evidence each person expected;
  • adjust the goal or review method if necessary.

Do not resolve disagreement by making a stronger grade prediction.

Copyable three-line update plus review

Covered:
Evidence, including support:
Next independent action/check:

At periodic review, add:

Baseline comparison:
Retention/transfer:
Learner view:
School evidence:
Continue/change/connect/stop decision:

Sources

  1. Department for Education — Independent review of tutoring, phase 2 (2026-07-23)
  2. Education Endowment Foundation — Teacher Feedback to Improve Pupil Learning (2026-07-23)

Keep reading