+6 Months, 145 Studies: But Not If It's Just 'Kids Teaching Kids'

"Kids teaching kids, doesn't need much structure" is the staffroom version of peer tutoring — and it's not what's earning the Toolkit's plus six months, one of the highest figures this show has quoted. An intervention lead and a class teacher running an informal reading-buddy rota work out what actually separates a real structured programme from a laminated timetable: cross-age pairing, tutor training, and a defined end date.

What's covered:

• The Number: +6 months, 145 studies, high evidence security marked down to 3 padlocks (non-independent evaluation caveat)

• Why "kids teaching kids" alone doesn't earn the effect — structure, tutor training and teaching aids are what generate it

• Cross-age pairing under a three-year gap, not matched by attainment, beats same-age same-ability pairing

• Dosage: a defined four-to-ten-week block, most days — not an indefinite weekly rota

• Try it today: swap one pair for a cross-age pairing and write a three-question prompt card for the tutor

Actions for consideration:

• Swap one current pair on any informal peer-support rota for a cross-age pairing, under a three-year gap.

• Write a short prompt card (2–3 sentence starters) so tutors are guided to explain, not just give the answer.

• Put an end date on any peer-tutoring arrangement — four to ten weeks — rather than running it indefinitely by default.

• Don't describe an informal reading-buddy rota as "peer tutoring" without the structure that earns the Toolkit's figure — be precise about what's actually running.

Sources:

EEF Teaching & Learning Toolkit — Peer tutoring: https://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/education-evidence/teaching-learning-toolkit/peer-tutoring

Printable one-pager for this episode: theeducationcommute.co.uk

Disclosure: Both voices on this show are synthesised (NotebookLM, Google); the research, reading and editorial judgement are done by a serving practitioner.

Strand: Teachers