Researcher

Intensive tutoring is supposed to be one of the most effective routes to raise student achievement. But it doesn’t always work out that way.

While meta-analyses of studies on high-dosage tutoring programs find big, positive impacts on learning, it’s often challenging for districts to implement these time- and labor-intensive initiatives in practice. Recent studies of post-pandemic tutoring programs have shown smaller-than-expected gains, or even no student improvement at all.

Could a lighter touch tutoring program be easier for schools to maintain, and still move the needle on student achievement? One new study suggests yes.

The paper comes from researchers at the National Student Support Accelerator, a program of the SCALE Initiative at Stanford University that studies high-impact tutoring. They tested a tutoring intervention called Chapter One, in which part-time tutors delivered 5-10 minute lessons throughout the school day, while students were still in their regular classrooms.

High-impact tutoring (HIT), or high-dosage tutoring, is widely endorsed by educational leaders, advocates, and researchers to help improve outcomes for students. HIT is defined by several key components, all of which have been employed by Read Alliance since its inception (and long before the terminology of “high-impact tutoring” or “high-dosage tutoring” was defined and in use):

• Frequent (3+ times per week)
• Small group size (no more than four students per tutor, with one-to-one tutoring as the preferred model)
• Targeted instruction focused on specific skills or learning gaps, and designed to complement classroom instruction
• Led by trained instructors who receive ongoing support and oversight
• Consistent tutor-student relationship that fosters a strong connection over time

These components are largely attributed to Stanford University’s National Student Support Accelerator (NSSA), in which Read Alliance (READ) is listed as a vetted provider which means the READ model meets their standards for excellence widely recognized as the “stamp of approval” for HIT programming.

What is the most important variable in high-impact tutoring?

The humans in the school building.

Not the platform. Not the model. Not the contract.

The human who makes sure a student gets to their session. The human who notices when the student isn’t progressing and asks why. The human who, on a Wednesday morning when everything else is pulling at them, still notices the quiet grimace of a student who doesn’t understand, and offers another way in.

In late 2024, Susanna Loeb, one of the nation’s leading researchers on tutoring, had doubts about the future of a field she’s worked hard to advance. 

Over $120 billion in federal COVID relief funds were expiring, leaving school leaders and tutoring providers uncertain whether programs would continue. The incoming administration was focused on slashing Department of Education spending, not issuing new grants. 

“We didn’t know if this administration would put anything into education,” said Loeb, a Stanford University professor who studies tutoring programs. “We were worried that all of the experimentation that had been going on and that access to tutoring would drop precipitously.” 

Susanna Loeb is named to the 2026 RHSU Edu-Scholar Public Influence Rankings, ranking the 200 university-based scholars in the United States who had the biggest impact on educational practice and policy last year.

The most recent of these, from researchers at Stanford University’s SCALE Initiative, examined math and reading tutoring programs in a large, urban district during the 2022-23 and 2023-24 school years. Neither led to overall gains in academic achievement.

But when researchers dug deeper into the data, they identified implementation problems that could be driving these null effects.

The findings add to a growing body of evidence around tutoring in a post-COVID landscape that suggests the effectiveness of a program hinges on the nitty-gritty details of how it is run—how often students meet with their tutors, for instance, or whether lessons are tailored to their specific needs.

Studying these implementation details could help school systems build more effective tutoring initiatives in the long run, said Elizabeth Huffaker, an assistant professor of educational leadership and policy at the University of Florida, and the lead author on the SCALE paper.

As U.S. public schools emerged from the COVID-19 pandemic, longtime education policy wonk Liz Cohen saw that in many places, educators were finally taking tutoring seriously. 

For a year and a half in 2023 and 2024, Cohen traversed the country, interviewing educators, researchers and policymakers and observing tutoring sessions in seven states and the District of Columbia. 

Now the vice president of policy for the education group 50CAN, Cohen shares her findings in a new book, out today from Harvard Education Press: The Future of Tutoring: Lessons from 10,000 School District Tutoring Initiatives.

As education researchers, we hear directly from district leaders about the realities they and their teams face every day. Leading a school district means weighing competing priorities and managing resources, while finding space for new ideas that promise to strengthen teaching and learning.

Each of these efforts has value and reflects a commitment to improvement. Yet amid the churn of initiatives, it’s worth remembering the strategies that have been proven to work time and again.

Tutoring is one of those strategies. Far from a passing trend that fades after a year, high-impact tutoring is a unicorn in the oft-changing tides of education reform: it is both a centuries-old, pedagogically sound and educator-approved way to teach children, and it’s an approach proven by hundreds of rigorous studies over decades.