We present findings from a pilot project aimed at creating community-based opportunities for one-to-one tutoring in STEM subjects, in the aftermath of the global pandemic. Based in a post-industrial Scottish village, the project resides in a local church hall, with tutoring undertaken by volunteers. This is participatory action research (Chevalier & Buckles, 2013), purposed towards understanding how a sustainable and community-based STEM tutoring model might be developed, with potential for instigating similar projects in local communities.

Background

Research across Europe has established a link between school closure and the exacerbation of existing inequality in school outcomes (Blaskó, Costa, & Schnepf, 2022). In some nation contexts, e.g. Germany (Freundl, Lergetporer & Zierow, 2021) and England (Major & May, 2020), national tutoring programmes are intended to offer redress, with low levels of translation into practice. In some contexts, e.g. Serbia (Kubíček, 2020), the capacity for tutoring may have reduced for excluded groups. Emerging research suggests that teachers prefer having input around how any additional tutoring resource is allocated (Nelson, Lynch & Sharp, 2021) and highlights the importance of schools’ relationship with tutoring projects (EEF, 2022).  

We note that in the European context, research into tutoring of school pupils mostly focuses on the negative impact on schools when affluent families purchase private tutoring (e.g.  Bray, 2011, Hajar, 2020) also known as ‘shadow education’. In contrast, our project seeks to increase community capacity for volunteer tutoring that might strengthen a school’s educational endeavours, with the aim of benefiting the STEM learning of children from excluded groups. Pivotal to our approach is the role of a volunteer who liaises between the school, the tutee’s family, the tutees and their volunteer tutors.

This participatory action research was undertaken over two phases, in a six month period. The first phase investigated development of tutees’ STEM identity i.e. the extent to which they saw STEM as something they could enjoy, be good at and have a career in (Kim, Sinatra & Seyranian, 2018). We explored this through administering brief surveys at the end of each tutoring session, and a series of informal interviews with both tutor and tutee present. We anticipated that the potential for the children to feel at home with STEM might rest upon tutoring experiences where their identity was nurtured (Talafian et al., 2019), implying a significant role for the tutor. The second phase of the pilot therefore, additionally, focused upon the relationship between the tutor and tutee with an accompanying translation towards ethnographic research methods.

We acknowledged that the theorising of the teacher student relationship is often conceptualised in idealised terms (e.g. Todd, 2014; Hoveid & Finne, 2014), perhaps underplaying the challenges posed where young people are experiencing adversity in life or education and where trust and hope may be fragile.  In response, our project incorporated two strands of conceptual influence. Firstly, recent Scottish Government interest in ‘trauma informed approaches’ to engagement with excluded groups (Scottish Government, 2022) led to initial training being offered to the project’s volunteer tutors. Secondly, we were influenced by Biesta’s (2015) conceptualisation of education as inherently weak in terms of predictability of outcomes and where risk-taking is unavoidable. In this vein, we revisited Buber’s (2020) I and thou, as an inspirational tool for reflection upon ethnographic data gathered in the second phase of the pilot.  

Our research questions are:

What are the significant factors in creating a sustainable community-based volunteer STEM tutoring programme for care experienced children?

How does tutoring affect tutees’ STEM identities?

What is significant about the character of the relationship between tutor and tutee?

How might volunteer tutors be prepared and supported for the tutoring role?

The project is a partnership between the University and the Church of Scotland (CoS), who agreed free use of halls and recruitment and police checking of volunteer tutors. Although tuition takes place in church buildings, it is given and received by those of all faiths and none and all genders, ethnicities and sexual orientation, in line with CrossReach (CoS SSC, 2023), the CoS’s national social care provider. For the purposes of the pilot, the partnership recruited four volunteer tutors, with backgrounds in software development, cyber security and mathematics teaching. A volunteer organiser was recruited and liaised with a local High School which recommended tutees all resident within a small village community associated with multiple deprivation (Scottish Government, 2020). Researchers took the role of warden, sitting within the hall, alongside multiple tutor/tutee pairs, which the space accommodated. The Participatory Action Research approach overlaps with community learning approaches to youth work in Scotland (e.g. Furlong, 1997) where dialogue between young people and workers is integral to planning and evaluating community-based learning projects. The aim was to establish a collaborative approach, involving reflection in and on action with young people, self and researchers. This included critical examination about the learning and teaching taking place, with the aim of supporting volunteer tutor practitioners so that they might make a positive difference. The action research reflection process necessitated evaluation to be embedded from the start, and a dynamic opportunity for practitioner development through shared professional reflections in and on action. During the first phase of the six-month pilot, tutor and tutee, together, completed a short reflection task after each session. The tasks were the starting point for monthly recorded dialogues around the development of self-efficacy and identity in STEM, with a focus on the role of relationships and trust. Reflection upon this first phase identified the potential significance of the character of the tutor tutee relationship which became a central focus for the second phase of the pilot, where ethnographic research methods were employed. This included extensive use of field notes, which were reflected upon, with researchers in dialogue with each other and conceptualisations of the potential for the teacher/student relation (Todd, 2014; Buber, 2020). At the close of the pilot, all tutees engaged in a final dialogue, with tutors participating in a dialogic focus group.

Regarding significant factors necessary to the sustainability of community-based STEM tutoring programmes, rootedness within an already established and stable community has proven key. As well as offering a structure of provision of halls and a pool for volunteer recruitment, the CoS offered stability. For example, volunteers remained committed to the tutor relationship with no end date planned for tutoring. CoS also offered tutoring in close proximity to the where the young people belonged, though none were church members. This has raised questions about the characteristics and features of organisations offering stability and rootedness in communities, that might also offer solid foundations for sustainable tutoring projects. We would concur that development of STEM identities is a process of nurture, where the tutor relationship may be of sustenance. During the pilot, tutees developed more adventurous plans for their STEM journeys, both in learning and potential career choices. These preliminary findings imply potential importance attached to the tutors’ vocation or employment, where the tutor with a STEM vocation may serve different role to tutors whose primary skills are teaching related. This in turn would have implications for how volunteers might be better prepared and supported for a tutoring role. From early stages of the pilot, accumulating data further convinced us that the quality and characteristics of the relationship between tutor and tutee was of key importance to beneficial and sustainable and STEM tutoring. This was also a key theme identified by tutors during the final focus group. We are inclined to further research this educational relationship, which has recently been of lesser interest to European researchers. We therefore seek to critically re-engage with foundational conceptualisations, notably those of Rousseau (White, 2014) and Buber (2020), in our next phase, in the anticipation that these will inspire critical reflection of the project as it evolves.

Biesta, G. (2015) The Beautiful Risk of Education, New York: Taylor & Francis Buber, M. (2020) I and Thou (Scribner Classics) Translated by Smith, R. Scribner Book Company Adoption UK https://www.adoptionuk.org/ Bray, TM. The Challenge of Shadow Education: Private Tutoring and its Implications for Policy Makers in the European Union. Luxembourg: European Commission. 2011 Chevalier, J., and Buckles, D. (2013) Participatory Action Research: Theory and Methods for Engaged Inquiry. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge Church of Scotland Social Care Council (2023) CrossReach https://www.crossreach.org.uk/ CLD Standards Council, 2022 https://www.i-develop-cld.org.uk/course/view.php?id=23 EEF (2022) Making a difference with effective tutoring, https://d2tic4wvo1iusb.cloudfront.net/documents/pages/Tutoring_Guide_2022_V1.2.pdf?v=1668439120 Education Scotland (2022) A National Model for Professional Learning (education.gov.scot) Furlong, A. (1997). Evaluating Youth Work with Vulnerable Young People. Glasgow: The Scottish Council for Research in Education. Hajar, A. (2020) The Association Between Private Tutoring and Access to Grammar Schools: Voices of Year 6 pupils and Teachers in South-East England, British Educational Research Journal Vol. 46, No. 3, pp. 459–479. Hoveid, M & Finne, A (2014) ‘You Have to Give of Yourself’: Care and Love in Pedagogical Relations, Journal of Philosophy of Education, Vol. 48, No. 2. Kubíček, A (2020) Social Aspects of Covid-19 Pandemic in Informal Roma Settlements: Specific Challenges and Solutions in Yearbook Human Rights Protection the Right To Human Dignity, Republic of Serbia: Institute of Criminological and Sociological Research. Blaskó, Z., Costa, P. da, & Schnepf, S. V. (2022). Learning Losses and Educational Inequalities in Europe: Mapping the Potential Consequences of the COVID-19 crisis. Journal of European Social Policy, 32(4), 361–375. Freundl, V., Lergetporer, P. & Zierow, L. (2021) Germany’s Education Policy During the COVID-19 crisis. Z Politikwiss 31, 109–116. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41358-021-00262-7 Major, L., & May, S. (2020) Covid-19 and social mobility CEP COVID-19 ANALYSIS Centre for Economic Performance Nelson,J., Lynch, S., & Sharp, C. (2021) Recovery During a Pandemic: the Ongoing Impacts of Covid-19 on Schools Serving Deprived Communities, Slough:NFER. Scottish Government (2022) Trauma Informed Practice: A Toolkit for Scotland, https://www.gov.scot/binaries/content/documents/govscot/publications/advice-and-guidance/2021/03/trauma-informed-practice-toolkit-scotland/documents/trauma-informed-practice-toolkit-scotland/trauma-informed-practice-toolkit-scotland/govscot%3Adocument/trauma-informed-practice-toolkit-scotland.pdf Talafian, H., Moy, M.K., Woodard, M.A. and Foster, A.N. (2019), STEM Identity Exploration through an Immersive Learning Environment, Journal for STEM Education Research, Vol. 2, pp. 105-127. Todd, S. (2014) Between Body and Spirit: The Liminality of Pedagogical Relationships, Journal of Philosophy of Education, Vol. 48, No. 2, pp231-245 White, R. (2008) Rousseau and the Education of Compassion, Journal of Philosophy of Education, Vol 42, No. 1