Across Europe, secondary education systems face persistent challenges related to learning loss among pupils (i.e., students in secondary education) and increasing workload among teachers (OECD, 2021). These challenges have intensified in recent years, particularly in the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic, and have renewed attention to interventions that provide additional support within classrooms (Carlana, 2021; European Commission, 2022; OECD, 2022). While many European education systems have invested in such measures to address learning gaps and alleviate pressure on teachers, robust empirical evidence on the effectiveness of these interventions remains limited (Carlana, 2021; European Commission, 2022; OECD, 2022). This has increased interest in interventions that improve pupil learning under conditions of teacher shortages, high workload, and limited differentiation.

The proposed presentation focuses on StudentinzetopSchool, an intervention in the Netherlands in which student assistants—higher education students not enrolled in teacher education programmes—support secondary school teachers after completing a compulsory three-hour training provided by academic teacher training programmes. These student assistants work within classrooms and provide support for the teacher, for example by working with individual pupils or small groups, or by other  supporting classroom-related tasks. Importantly, these student assistants do not replace teachers, but function as supplementary support aimed at increasing instructional capacity within existing school structures. The intervention has a dual objective: its primary aim is to improve pupils’ learning outcomes, while a secondary objective is to reduce teachers’ perceived workload by redistributing tasks.

The primary research question guiding the study is: What is the effect of student assistants’ support for teachers on pupils’ learning outcomes in secondary schools? In addition, the study includes exploratory analyses examining (a) whether teachers’ perceived workload changes during the intervention period, and (b) how variation in implementation-related conditions—such as task agreements, and the preparation of student assistants—may help explain differences in observed outcomes. By combining a focus on pupil outcomes with attention to teachers’ professional experiences and implementation processes, the study contributes to European discussions on evidence-informed educational interventions and professional support structures in schools.

The theoretical framework draws on two complementary theoretical perspectives. First, research on tutoring and small-group instruction demonstrates that targeted instructional support can substantially improve pupil achievement, particularly when instruction is responsive to learners’ needs (Begeny et al., 2018; Nickow et al., 2020). This body of research highlights the potential of additional instructional capacity to facilitate differentiation and provide more individualised support, which is often difficult to achieve in traditional whole-class settings. It has been shown in different contexts that small-group tutoring can be as effective as one-on-one tutoring. Also, satisfactory results have been reported with small-group tutoring by student assistants . (Elbaum et al., 2000; Invernizzi et al., 1996; Wyatt & Chapman-DeSousa, 2017).

Second, studies on the deployment of additional personnel in classrooms suggest that such support may influence teachers’ workload and professional experience, while emphasising the importance of clear task allocation and role differentiation (Blatchford et al., 2008). Prior research indicates that when roles and responsibilities are insufficiently defined, the deployment of additional personnel does not automatically lead to reduced workload or improved instructional quality, and may place additional demands on teachers’ coordination and supervision (Blatchford et al., 2008).

Together, these perspectives highlight that both pupil outcomes and teachers’ workload are shaped not only by the presence of additional support, but also by how this support is organised in school practice. Accordingly, the theoretical framework focuses on implementation-related conditions—such as clear task agreements, the preparation of student assistants, and alignment between student assistants’ expertise and classroom needs—as key factors for understanding variation in outcomes (Devecchi & Rouse, 2010; Jackson et al., 2021).

The study employed a mixed-methods design, combining a randomized controlled trial (RCT) with qualitative process data. This design enabled a rigorous assessment of the intervention’s effects on pupils’ learning outcomes, while also providing exploratory insights into implementation processes and perceived mechanisms underlying these effects (Fraenkel & Wallen, 2003; Schweizer et al, 2016). QUANTITATIVE DESIGN. The study is centred on a randomized controlled trial (RCT) conducted in 18 secondary schools in the Netherlands. The design made use of parallel classes (two classes taught by the same teacher at the same grade level), which were randomly assigned to the intervention or control condition: one class formed the experimental group and received support from student assistants, while a comparable class served as the control group. For ethical reasons, the control group also received support from a student assistant after the intervention period. The intervention involved student assistants (higher education students not enrolled in teacher education programmes) who supported teachers for approximately four hours per week over a ten-week period. Student assistants provided instructional and organisational support, such as small-group tutoring, individual pupil support, and assistance with classroom-related tasks. They did not replace teachers but functioned as additional support. The primary outcome measure was pupils’ learning outcomes, operationalised as grades in the subject in which the intervention took place (e.g., mathematics, languages, history, or natural science subjects such as physics, chemistry, and biology). Grades from the school year prior to the intervention served as a baseline measure. Post-intervention grades were collected during and shortly after the intervention period. The analytic sample consisted of 1,777 pupils from intervention and control classes. Teachers’ perceived workload was measured using self-report questionnaires administered before and after the intervention period. In the absence of a control group, analyses of workload were treated as exploratory. QUALITATIVE METHODS. In addition to the quantitative data, qualitative focus groups were conducted with teachers, pupils, and student assistants. These focus groups explored participants’ experiences with the intervention, perceived effects, and conditions influencing successful implementation. Particular attention was paid to task division, collaboration between teachers and student assistants, and the subjective experiences of participants. ANALYTICAL APPROACH. Quantitative analyses focused primarily on estimating the intervention’s effect on pupils’ learning outcomes using pre–post comparisons between intervention and control classes, within a multilevel framework. Exploratory analyses examined associations between implementation characteristics and perceived outcomes. Qualitative data were analysed thematically to contextualise and interpret the quantitative findings.

This study provides robust evidence on the effects of deploying higher education students as student assistants to support teachers in secondary schools. Using a randomized controlled trial, the findings demonstrate a statistically significant positive effect of the intervention on pupils’ learning outcomes, with a small-to-moderate effect size. Importantly, these effects were achieved within the relatively short intervention period (10 weeks, 4 hours per week), indicating that student assistants can effectively contribute to pupils’ academic progress. In addition to these confirmatory findings, exploratory analyses suggest a reduction in teachers’ perceived workload during the intervention period. Exploratory findings indicate that the extent to which workload is reduced depends on contextual and implementation-related conditions. In particular, clear task agreements between teachers and student assistants, adequate guidance of student assistants, and alignment between student assistants’ subject expertise and classroom needs appear to be critical for successful implementation. Beyond immediate effects on pupils and teachers, the findings also point to potential longer-term implications related to professional orientation. Participation in the intervention appears to shape student assistants’ perceptions of the teaching profession, providing them with a more informed and realistic view of working as a teacher in secondary education. This suggests that such interventions may not only address short-term capacity challenges, but also contribute to future teacher recruitment. By combining quantitative and qualitative methods, the study enables a clear interpretation of intervention effects while providing context-sensitive insights into how and under which conditions these effects occur, contributing to European discussions on evidence-informed educational policy and practice. It highlights the potential of student support interventions as a feasible, low-cost strategy to enhance learning outcomes while supporting teachers facing increasing workload. At the same time, it underscores the importance of careful implementation to ensure that additional support translates into improvements in pupils’ learning outcomes and teachers’ professional practice.

Begeny, J. C., Levy, R. A., & Field, S. A. (2018). Using small-group instruction to improve students' reading fluency: An evaluation of the existing research. Journal of Applied School Psychology, 34(1), 36-64. Blatchford, P., Bassett, P., Brown, P., Martin, C., Russell, A., Webster, R., Babayiçit, S., & Haywood N. (2008). Deployment and impact of support staff in schools and the impact of the national agreement: results from strand 2 wave 1 - 2005/06. Institute of Education, University of London. Carlana, M., & La Ferrara, E. (2021). Apart but Connected: Online Tutoring and Student Outcomes during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Devecchi, C., & Rouse, M. (2010). An exploration of the features of effective collaboration between Fraenkel, J.R., & Wallen, N.E. (2003). How to Design and Evaluate Research in Education. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. Elbaum, B., Vaughn, S., Tejero Hughes, M., & Watson Moody, S. (2000). How effective are one-to-one tutoring programs in reading for elementary students at risk for reading failure? A meta-analysis of the intervention research. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(4), 605. European Commission: Directorate-General for Education, Youth, Sport and Culture, Education and training monitor 2022 – Comparative report, Publications Office of the European Union, 2022. Fraenkel, J.R., & Wallen, N.E. (2003). How to Design and Evaluate Research in Education. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. lnvernizzi, M., Juel, C., & Rosemary, C. A. (1996). A community volunteer tutorial that works. The Reading Teacher, 50(4), 304-311. Jackson, C., Sharma, U., Odier-Guedj, D., & Deppeler, J. (2021). Teachers’ Perceptions of Their Work with Teacher Assistants: A Systematic Literature Review. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 46(11). Nickow, A., Oreopoupos, P., & Quan, V. (2020). The impressive effects of tutoring in PreK-12 learning: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the experimental evidence. NBER Working Series, 27476. OECD. (2021). Teachers getting the best out of their student: From primary to upper secondary education. Paris: TALIS, OECD Publishing. OECD et al. (2022). From Learning Recovery to Education Transformation: Insights and Reflections from the 4th Survey of National Education Responses to COVID-19 School Closures, UNICEF, New York Schweizer, M. L., Braun, B. I., & Milstone, A. M. (2016). Research methods in healthcare epidemiology and antimicrobial stewardship—quasi-experimental designs. Infection control & hospital epidemiology, 37(10), 1135-1140. Wyatt, T., & Chapman-DeSousa, B. (2017). Teaching as interaction: Challenges in transitioning teachers' instruction to small groups. Early Childhood Education Journal, 45(1), 61-70.