With the advent of inclusive education, the role of mainstream teachers has dramatically changed due to an increasingly diverse student population. In particular, the inclusion of students with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) calls for innovative instructional strategies and constant support, so that they receive an adequate and complete educational experience (Cervantes, Lieberman, Magnesio, & Wood, 2013; Mackiewicz, Wood, Cooke, & Mazzotti, 2011). Various inclusive arrangements have evolved recently holding the potential of aiding teachers to meet the diverse needs of their students in mainstream classrooms, such as peer tutoring. Iserbyt, Elen and Behets (2010, 40) define peer tutoring as “the system of instruction in which students work in pairs to support each other’s learning”. Peer tutoring is a cooperative instructional strategy which is considered suitable to enhance the inclusion of students with SEND in mainstream classrooms while, at the same time, fosters the development of an inclusive ethos in schools (Temple & Lynnes, 2008; Wang, Bettini, & Cheyney, 2013). During peer tutoring procedures, students work collaboratively in communities of learning. The diverse academic background of students is not considered as an obstacle to their collaboration, while diversity in this type of learning communities is prized along with a feeling of shared responsibility (Villa, Thousand, & Nevin, 2010).

Relevant studies in the field have predominantly utilized experimental designs with inconclusive findings concerning the efficacy of peer tutoring on students’ academic and social development. The majority of these studies have been conducted in the USA and they have shown moderate to average positive effects (Brigham, Scruggs, & Mastropieri, 2011; Scruggs, Mastropieri, & Marshak, 2012). Two randomised controlled trials (EEF, 2018a; EEF, 2018b) conducted in the United Kingdom failed to detect a positive effect of peer tutoring on students’ attainment. The authors in both studies raised questions with regard to the contextual factors that affect it. The above findings call for further investigation taking into consideration that peer tutoring in considered an inclusive approach for all students by many authors (e.g. Hughes & Fredrick, 2006; Jones, 2007)

Through exploring new roles for researchers and teachers, the aim of this study was to enhance teachers’ capacity in developing peer tutoring programmes and to improve students’ academic and social skills. Despite the prevalent model in Greece of offering support to students with SEND in resource rooms, we collaborated with teachers to bring the resources within the mainstream classrooms and to offer them the opportunity to adopt innovative student-centred collaborative instructional strategies. Hence, the research questions guiding our fieldwork were: 1) How can peer tutoring contribute to the students’ development of academic and social skills?; 2) How all the participants contributed through their active involvement to the development of the peer tutoring programme?; 3) How have teachers’ and students’ views, beliefs, feelings and practices been shaped following their involvement in a peer tutoring programme?; and 4) How has peer tutoring affected teachers’ and researchers’ learning towards the inclusion of students with and without SEND?.

In this collaborative action research (CAR) project, three researchers and six primary teachers in two Greek mainstream schools co-developed and co-implemented a peer tutoring programme in the content area of literacy for 130 students (9-12 years old) eleven of whom were students with SEND. The teachers in partnership with the researchers posed the problem under investigation through questioning their own practices and beliefs and worked together to analyse collaboratively the research problem (Ebersohn, Beukes, & Ferreira, 2012). Along with the teachers, we discussed and concluded that focus group discussions, semi-structured interviews, participant observations and diaries would help in keeping record of the evidence we needed to document teachers’ and researchers’ learning, students’ academic and social skills, and to develop our planning and actions. Both teachers and researchers collected and analysed data and equally contributed in the decision-making. Following McNiff and Whitehead’s (2010) recommendations, the implemented CAR project consisted of three cycles. The first cycle included reflective dialogues with the teachers on the demands of the inclusion of students with SEND and on various inclusive instructional strategies. At the end of our discussion, we decided to evaluate the effectiveness of peer tutoring as an inclusive strategy. Because teachers were not familiar with this method, they asked for training. At the end of the training, we co-decided how to organize and implement peer tutoring in their classrooms, considering the needs of their students. The second cycle of the CAR project included the implementation of the peer tutoring programme for two weeks in each classroom based on the different modes (reciprocal or fixed-role) of peer tutoring that each teacher selected. We observed each peer tutoring session in the classes by fully participating in the delivery of the programme. Both teachers and researchers conducted observations simultaneously. At the end of this two-week period, we conducted interviews with each of the participating teachers in order to examine how they experienced the implementation of the programme and to take shared decisions about the next cycle of our project. The third cycle of the CAR project included the implementation of peer tutoring, after certain modifications had been agreed with the teachers, for a six-week period. As above, we conducted observations in each class. At the end of this period, we conducted interviews with the teachers, while both the teachers and the researchers conducted interviews with the participating students to examine their views and attitudes towards peer tutoring.

Overall, the participating teachers expressed positive feelings towards the peer tutoring programme and its impact on students’ academic and social development. They argued that both students with and without SEND had benefitted socially. However, they claimed that students with SEND benefitted to a greater extent in both the academic and social domain than their peers without SEND. All teachers agreed that peer tutoring had helped them in their teaching routine and, specifically, in supporting effectively students with SEND, meeting their academic and social needs, individualising their instruction, and managing disruptive behaviour. They further considered peer tutoring easy in its implementation and an instructional approach which can foster the inclusion of students with SEND in their classrooms. The students enjoyed their involvement in the peer tutoring programme. Most of them were satisfied with the way they have collaborated with their peers. They argued in their interviews that peer tutoring was beneficial for them and their peers. Specifically, students without SEND claimed that the programme developed both the academic and social skills of their peers with SEND and that they enjoyed collaborating with them. Surprisingly, many of them claimed that they had not developed their own academic skills as they have thought they would. The students with SEND claimed that they had become better friends with their peers without SEND and that learning was easier during peer tutoring. Students who were not friends prior to the implementation of the programme said that this changed after programme’s completion. Teachers learned to collaborate with the researchers in creating an inclusive environment for all students through on-going and in-service support. They learned to participate in the decision-making especially when they do not agree with the researchers’ theoretical underpinnings. Teachers and researchers understood the complexities surrounding the effective implementation of inclusion of all students.

Brigham, F. J., Scruggs, T. E., & Mastropieri, M. A. (2011). Science education and students with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 26(4), 223-232. Cervantes, C. M., Lieberman, L. J., Magnesio, B., & Wood, J. (2013). Peer tutoring: Meeting the demands of inclusion in physical education today. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance, 84(3), 43-48. Ebersohn, L., Beukes J., & Ferreira, R. (2012). An attractive choice: Education researchers’ use of participatory methodology. South African Journal of Higher Education, 26(3), 455-471. EEF. (2018a). Peer tutoring in secondary schools. (accessed January 23, 2021, from (https://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/projects-and-evaluation/projects/peer-tutoring-in-secondary-schools/). EEF. (2018b). Shared maths. (accessed January 23, 2021, from (https://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/projects-and-evaluation/projects/shared-maths/?utm_source=site&utm_medium=search&utm_campaign=site_search&search_term=peer%20tutoring). Hughes, T.A., & Fredrick, L.D. (2006). Teaching vocabulary with students with learning disabilities using classwide peer tutoring and constant time delay. Journal of Behavioral Education, 15(1), 1-23. Iserbyt, P., Elen, J., & Behets, D. (2010). Instructional guidance in reciprocal peer tutoring with task cards. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 29(1), 38-53. Jones, V. (2007). ‘I felt like I did something good’-the impact on mainstream pupils of a peer tutoring programme for children with autism. British Journal of Special Education, 34(1), 3-9. Mackiewicz, S. M., Wood, C. L., Cooke, N. L., & Mazzotti, V. L. (2011). Effects of peer tutoring with audio prompting on vocabulary acquisition for struggling readers. Remedial and Special Education, 32(4), 345-354. McNiff, J., & Whitehead, J. (2010). You and Your Action Research Project. London: Routledge. Scruggs, T. E., Mastropieri, M. A., & Marshak, L. (2012). Peer‐mediated instruction in inclusive secondary social studies learning: Direct and indirect learning effects. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 27(1), 12-20. Temple, V. A., & Lynnes, M. D. (2008). Peer tutoring for inclusion. ACHPER Australia Healthy Lifestyles Journal, 55(2/3), 11-21. Villa, R. A., Thousand, J. S., & Nevin, A. I. (2010). Collaborating with students in instruction and decision making: The untapped resource. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. Wang, J., Bettini E., & Cheyney, K. (2013). Students with emotional and behavioral disorders as peer tutors: A valued role. Beyond Behavior, 23(1), 12-22.