Developing a strong tutor pipeline requires more than just recruitment — it demands intentional strategies grounded in research to ensure tutors are prepared, supported, and equipped to deliver meaningful results for students. This section supports Element 1:Tutor of the Tutoring Quality Standards and is organized into three areas:
- 3.1 Recruiting and Selecting Tutors: This section focuses on identifying tutor types, designing equitable recruitment strategies, and creating competency-based selection processes.
- 3.2 Providing Preservice Training for Tutors: This section addresses onboarding new tutors, building preservice training content, and preparing tutors to support diverse learners through Special Education, English Language Learner instruction, and data use.
- 3.3 Delivering Coaching and Feedback for Tutors: This section covers in-service training, tutor oversight structures, tutoring observations, and coaching models that promote tutor success.
Research Insights
Research provides the following guidance to create effective tutoring programs:
3.1 Recruiting and Selecting Tutors
- A diverse range of tutors — including paraprofessionals, community members, college students, and classroom teachers — can significantly improve student outcomes with proper training and ongoing support.
- Teachers tend to be the most effective tutors, but AmeriCorps members and paraprofessionals can be just as effective as teachers in one-on-one or small-group settings with appropriate support or instructional materials.
- Paid, trained tutors consistently outperform unpaid, untrained volunteers, but structured volunteer programs can still be effective.
- College students can serve as near-peer role models and are particularly effective when engaged through federal work-study and teacher preparation programs.
- Successful programs often require tutors to pass a subject-related exam as part of the selection process to ensure content mastery.
- Monetary incentives significantly increase the likelihood of college students applying for tutoring roles, making financial benefits a more effective recruitment strategy than emphasizing social or career benefits.
- Positive messaging about the teaching profession can influence tutors’ perceptions and future career interests, though it may also negatively impact their confidence in applying for full-time teaching positions.
- Highly skilled tutors, such as experienced teachers, can effectively tutor up to three students. Novice tutors, paraprofessionals, and volunteers are most successful when tutoring in one-on-one or two-on-one settings.
- Paraprofessionals and volunteers may be best suited for one-on-one tutoring, as they may lack the behavior management and instructional skills required for larger groups.
3.2 Providing Preservice Training for Tutors
- Programs that employ service fellows and volunteers (e.g., Reading Partners) require extensive preservice training, often spanning multiple weeks, along with continued support.
- Embedding structured tutoring experiences within educator preparation programs enhances teacher candidates’ instructional knowledge and early literacy teaching skills.
3.3 Delivering Coaching and Feedback for Tutors
- Direct observation of tutoring sessions often reveals lower fidelity to instructional models than self-reported data, highlighting the need for external coaching and oversight to ensure consistent implementation.
- Tutors who receive personalized 1:1 instructional coaching demonstrate higher retention rates. However, research indicates that while coaching improves tutor persistence, its impact on student reading scores is modest.
- Providing tutors with an online community of practice can increase their sense of belonging and self-efficacy, though participation rates may vary.
- Additional training on providing structured, specific feedback for student participation has increased engagement and instructional effectiveness.
Read the Full Research
Hoffman, J. V., Svrcek, N., Lammert, C., Daly-Lesch, A., Steinitz, E., Greeter, E., & DeJulio, S.. (2019). A research review of literacy tutoring and mentoring in initial teacher preparation: Toward practices that can transform teaching. Journal of Literacy Research, 51(2), 233–251. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086296X19833292
Jacob, R. T., Smith, T. J., Willard, J. A., & Rifkin, R. E. (2014). Reading Partners: The implementation and effectiveness of a one-on-one tutoring program delivered by community volunteers [Policy brief]. MDRC. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED546647.pdf
Kraft, M. A., Schueler, B.E., & Falken, G. (2024). What impacts should we expect from tutoring at scale? Exploring meta-analytic generalizability (EdWorkingPaper No. 24-1031). Retrieved from Annenberg Institute at Brown University. https://doi.org/10.26300/zygj-m525
Loeb, S., Pollard, C., Robinson, C. D., & White, S. (2024, May). Research in progress to better understand high-impact tutoring: The effects of individualized tutor coaching on tutor and student outcomes. NSSA 2024 Conference, Stanford University. https://studentsupportaccelerator.org/sites/default/files/NSSA%20Conference%20Research%20In%20Progress.%20May%202024.pdf
Loeb, S., Pollard, C., Robinson, C. D., & Zhou, H. (2024, May). Research in progress to better understand high-impact tutoring: A positive messaging intervention to improve the tutor-to-teacher pipeline. NSSA 2024 Conference, Stanford University. https://studentsupportaccelerator.org/sites/default/files/NSSA%20Conference%20Research%20In%20Progress.%20May%202024.pdf
Loeb, S., Robinson, C. D., Devers, E., Strouse, E., & Ribeiro, A. (2024, May). Research in progress to better understand high-impact tutoring: Enhancing student engagement in virtual tutoring sessions: A randomized control trial of a tutoring intervention. NSSA 2024 Conference, Stanford University. https://studentsupportaccelerator.org/sites/default/files/NSSA%20Conference%20Research%20In%20Progress.%20May%202024.pdf
Nickow, A., Oreopoulos, P., & Quan, V. (2020). The impressive effects of tutoring on PreK-12 learning: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the experimental evidence (NBER Working Paper No. 27476). National Bureau of Economic Research. https://doi.org/10.3386/w27476
Parker, D. C., Nelson, P. M., Zaslofsky, A. F., Kanive, R., Foegen, A., Kaiser, P., & Heisted, D. (2019). Evaluation of a math intervention program implemented with community support. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 12(3), 391–412. https://doi.org/10.1080/19345747.2019.1571653
Robinson, C. D., Meyer, K., Bailey-Fakhoury, C., Zandieh, A., & Loeb, S. (2024, June). Answering the call: How changes to the salience of job characteristics affect college students' decisions (EdWorkingPaper No. 24-956). Annenberg Institute at Brown University. https://doi.org/10.26300/3gr7-1476
Robinson, C. D., Pollard, C., Bennett, E., & Loeb, S. (2024, May). Research in progress to better understand high-impact tutoring: A year in the life: The evolution of tutors' perspectives and the impact of providing tutors with a community of practice. NSSA 2024 Conference, Stanford University. https://studentsupportaccelerator.org/sites/default/files/NSSA%20Conference%20Research%20In%20Progress.%20May%202024.pdf
Wu, S., Kang, J., Borders, C., & Courtad, C. A. (2024). Research in progress to better understand high-impact tutoring: Self-report and observational measures of implementation fidelity in high-impact tutoring. NSSA 2024 Conference, Stanford University. https://studentsupportaccelerator.org/sites/default/files/NSSA%20Conference%20Research%20In%20Progress.%20May%202024.pdf