Available via license: CC BY-NC-ND 4.0
Content may be subject to copyright.
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=ries20
Irish Educational Studies
ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ries20
Paired Reading as a method of reading
intervention in Irish primary schools: an
evaluation
Laura Lee & Marcin Szczerbinski
To cite this article: Laura Lee & Marcin Szczerbinski (2021): Paired Reading as a method
of reading intervention in Irish primary schools: an evaluation, Irish Educational Studies, DOI:
10.1080/03323315.2021.1927797
To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/03323315.2021.1927797
© 2021 The Author(s). Published by Informa
UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis
Group
Published online: 31 May 2021.
Submit your article to this journal
View related articles
View Crossmark data
Paired Reading as a method of reading intervention in Irish primary
schools: an evaluation
Laura Lee *and Marcin Szczerbinski
School of Applied Psychology, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland
(Received 2 April 2019; accepted 4 May 2021)
The use of individual tutoring as a method of educational instruction has been
prevalent for several decades. One popular tutoring practice is Paired Reading,
a reading support technique specifically designed for non-professionals. The
accessible nature of Paired Reading makes it an attractive option for schools
who wish to capitalise on support offered by community members. This paper
reports a multi-faceted evaluation of a Paired Reading programme with
primary school children experiencing reading fluency and comprehension
difficulties as tutees and university students as volunteer tutors. Tutees engaged
in one-on-one reading support sessions with tutors for either 5 or 8 weeks, with
each session including 20 min of reading. Although there was no evidence to
suggest that Paired Reading improved tutee’s reading performance, feedback
from tutees and tutors indicated the programme was an extremely positive
experience. School staff also welcomed the subjective benefits of the
programme. Parents of Paired Reading tutees reported a range of positive
observed changes in the reading behaviours and attitudes of their children. This
study builds on and contributes to work in the reading support literature,
highlighting Paired Reading as a wide-ranging experience offering both tutees
and tutors a variety of benefits spanning academic, social, and leisure domains.
Keywords: Reading fluency; reading comprehension; Paired Reading; reading
intervention; tutoring
Introduction
The use of individual tutoring as a method of educational instruction has been
popular worldwide for several decades. Practices incorporating tutoring have been
shown to be effective for improving performance on a variety of educational out-
comes (e.g. Cohen, Kulik, and Kulik 1982; Ritter et al. 2009; Wasik and Slavin
1993), and have been recognised as a way of efficiently using scarce resources in edu-
cational settings. According to Topping (1998), tutoring practices are characterised
by a high focus on curriculum content, and specific role-taking (i.e. someone is a
tutor while the other(s) act(s) as tutee(s)). Tutoring projects usually have specific
© 2021 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-
NoDerivatives License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distri-
bution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, and is not altered, transformed, or
built upon in any way.
*Corresponding author. Email: l.lee@ucc.ie
Irish Educational Studies, 2021
https://doi.org/10.1080/03323315.2021.1927797
procedures for interaction between tutor and tutee, in which both parties have been
trained.
Many forms of tutoring practices exist, with many kinds of tutors (peers, parents,
community volunteers, or university students). One particularly popular tutoring
practice is Paired Reading, a form of additional reading support which has been
the focus of extensive evaluation in recent decades (e.g. Brooks 2016,2013;Lavan
and Talcott 2020; Shah-Wundenberg, Wyse, and Chaplain 2012; Topping 1990).
Paired Reading is a reading support technique specifically designed for non-pro-
fessionals, making it an attractive option for schools and other educational bodies
who may wish to capitalise on support offered by local community members.
Paired Reading
Paired Reading is a formalised process entailing a specific and structured technique
(see Topping 2003), aligning it with the definition of tutoring provided above. In
Paired Reading, a tutee and tutor read together, with the aim of improving tutee
reading ability. A Paired Reading session begins with Reading Together, where the
tutee and tutor read aloud in unison. The tutor modulates their reading pace to
match that of the tutee and provides a good model of competent reading. It is impor-
tant that the text chosen for reading is slightly above the independent readability level
of the tutee, but not above that of the tutor. The process of Reading Together con-
tinues until the tutee feels confident enough to read aloud independently. The pair
agree on a signal for the tutor to stop Reading Together, at which point the tutee
reads aloud independently. The tutor corrects all mistakes if they occur (by pointing
to the word and saying it aloud), after allowing four seconds for tutee self-correction.
If a mistake goes uncorrected by the tutee, the pair returns to Reading Together.
Praise is given regularly by the tutor, especially for good reading of difficult words,
getting all the words in a sentence right, and self-corrections. Tutors are encouraged
to not only sound pleased, but to look pleased.
Paired Reading is thus a straightforward process that accentuates flow, context,
and meaning-making. The approach is not centred on the active teaching of words
but instead provides opportunities for readers to see reading strategies modelled,
with appropriate encouragement and praise. The practice allows readers to read
more complex texts in a supportive environment before being required to employ
reading strategies and critical thinking independently (Doughtery Stahl 2012). It is
thought that Paired Reading allows a child to read texts at a higher level of difficulty
than they normally could (in line with Vygotsky’s(1978) idea of the zone of proximal
development). Several design elements of the Paired Reading process echo the work
of Willingham (2015), who describes the three key elements for reading enthusiasm –
decoding, comprehension, and motivation. He suggests that reading in 20 min inter-
vals, allowing students choice in selecting what to read, facilitating a sense of commu-
nity through reading with an adult, and focusing on reading for pleasure are all
important factors in supporting reading enthusiasm.
Paired Reading effectiveness
Paired Reading has been evaluated extensively, and has been shown to improve
reading performance in a variety of settings, including controlled research settings,
2L. Lee and M. Szczerbinski
and more naturalistic large-scale field trials (e.g. see Topping et al. 2012; Topping
et al. 2011). Topping (1990) evaluated 155 Paired Reading projects across 71
schools, both primary and secondary. Pre–post effect sizes for reading accuracy
were 0.87 and for comprehension, were 0.77. The mean pre–post test gain in
reading accuracy was 6.97 months of reading age. This was more than three times
what might ‘normally’be expected, if an approximately ‘normal’expectation may
be assumed to be a gain of one month of reading age in one chronological month.
The pre–post test gain for reading comprehension was 9.23 months, an increase of
more than four times ‘normal’gains. Importantly, while the practice of Paired
Reading can be beneficial for improving reading performance, it has few, if any, nega-
tive effects (Topping 2014). Paired Reading practice has also been found to be effec-
tive on subjective levels, including tutee gains in reading motivation, self-esteem, and
improved relationships between tutor and tutee (Monteiro 2013; Lam et al. 2013).
Paired Reading can also be beneficial for tutors (e.g. improved parent–child relation-
ships and self-efficacy reported by parent tutors in Lam et al. (2013)).
Furthermore, the low resource burden of Paired Reading means that it is generally
attractive to schools. A meta-analysis by Leung, Marsh, and Cravem (2005) found
that short (<30 min) sessions, which occurred at least 3 times a week, displayed
larger effect sizes for academic achievement in comparison to other arrangements
(although it should be noted that this result refers to peer tutoring for academic
achievement outcomes). However, recommendations for intervention duration and
intensity are mixed, and others (e.g. Topping et al. 2012) found no relationship
between intensity of tutoring and progress in attainment.
In the Irish context. The Department of Education and Skills (2019)have
endorsed Paired Reading as an effective approach to the teaching of reading. The
approach also corresponds to the Reading Association of Ireland’s belief that inter-
ventions should be responsive to the needs of the learners and be active and engaging
(Reading Association of Ireland 2011). Research in Ireland has provided further
support for the effectiveness of Paired Reading. For example, Nugent (2001) found
Paired Reading to be effective with children attending a special school for children
with mild general learning difficulties, while Lohan and King (2016) found the
approach can be effective with those with social, emotional and behavioural difficul-
ties. Similarly, O Riordan (2013) documented how Paired Reading not only improved
reading skill, but also reader self-esteem.
Suas Paired Reading literacy support
Existing research has supported the use of Paired Reading as a method of additional
reading instruction. This is important, as literacy support is continually needed
around the world, with Ireland being no exception to this trend. Literacy has been
identified as an urgent priority for the Irish education system (see the National Strat-
egy to Improve Literacy and Numeracy among Children and Young People [2011–
2020]). Several national organisations are working to respond to the call for action
issued by this strategy. Suas Educational Development (the word ‘suas’means ‘up’
in Irish) is one such body, who provide children from disadvantaged communities in
Ireland with educational support. One method of support that the Suas Literacy
Support programme provides is Paired Reading. The decision to offer Paired
Reading is grounded in the ample research base supporting the practice’s effectiveness
Irish Educational Studies 3
in improving academic achievement, as well as subjective gains reported in the lit-
erature by tutors and tutees (both outlined above). The Suas Paired Reading pro-
gramme operates on a voluntary basis whereby university volunteer tutors are
recruited and trained to work with primary/secondary students in weekly Paired
Reading sessions. The Suas Paired Reading programme is thus classified as a com-
munity-supported literacy intervention. Research examining the effectiveness of
tutoring programmes that use non-professional adult volunteer tutors is relatively
scant in comparison to that which has examined the use of peers or parents as
tutors. Existing research has, however, indicated that participation in tutoring pro-
grammes utilising non-professional adult volunteers as tutors can have a positive
effect on tutee achievement. In their meta-analysis of 21 studies examining the effec-
tiveness of volunteer tutoring programmes for elementary and middle school stu-
dents, Ritter et al. (2009) found that programmes did not have to use a particular
type of tutor to have positive effects on reading and math outcomes, nor did the pro-
grammes have to be highly structured. The use of university students as tutors in the
research reported here is thus justified. Indeed, university students may offer unique
strengthsastutorse.g.veryhighliteracylevels,interestinandwillingnesstospeak
about higher level education, time available to devote to tutoring, and the ability to
act as positive role models for tutees.
Suas have undertaken a number of evaluations of their support programmes. In
2018/19, the organisation supported 1273 children with one-to-one reading and
maths mentoring in disadvantaged schools. The average reading age of children
across the Paired Reading projects in 2018/19 increased by 4 months over the 2-
month duration of the project. 65% of children reporting reading more often, 52%
of children felt happier to read aloud, and 85% of children agreed they were better
at reading (Suas Annual Report, 2019).
The current study
This research aimed to conduct a multi-faceted evaluation of the Suas Paired Reading
programme as a method of reading support for primary school children experiencing
reading difficulties. Although many studies investigate the effect of Paired Reading on
reading outcomes or subjective outcomes, this research aimed to take a more holistic
approach to ‘improvement’. It examined not only reading performance, but self-
reported and observed behaviours and attitudes of tutees. The research also aimed
to capture the experience of the tutees and tutors as they engaged in the programme.
The research questions were:
(1) How effective is Paired Reading for improving reading outcomes among older
primary school children?
(2) Are there any changes in the self-reported reading behaviours and attitudes of
the tutees over time?
(3) Do parents and teachers observe any changes in Paired Reading tutee reading
behaviours and attitudes?
(4) What is the experience of the tutees and tutors participating in Paired
Reading?
4L. Lee and M. Szczerbinski
Method
Participants
Tuteeswere 96 primary school children within the 3rd to 6th classes (age range: 8 years,
2 months –13 years, 5 months). Participants were recruited from four schools in Cork
city, Ireland. All schools held DEIS (Delivering Equality of Opportunity in Schools)
status, which is applied to schools where a significant proportion of the school popu-
lation is from a disadvantaged community. Teachers were asked to nominate tutees
who they felt needed additional reading instruction, particularly in terms of reading
fluency and reading comprehension. Due to the nature of Paired Reading practice
(with its focus on modelling, encouragement, and praise as opposed systematic teach-
ing of word decoding skills), teachers wereasked to nominate those children who, while
in need of reading support, were not extremely weak in word recognition ability.
Although 96 children were invited to participate in Paired Reading, complete data
for only 77 of those children were available for analysis, as some parents did not
consent to their children participating in the assessments, and some children were
absent from school on days when the assessments took place.
Paired Reading tutors were 192 undergraduate students within University College
Cork. Most tutors studied within the College of Arts, Celtic Studies, and Social
Sciences.
Teachers and parents of Paired Reading tutees also provided reports on changes
they had observed in tutee reading behaviours and attitudes.
Design
The study employed a crossover design (see Figure 1) whereby Paired Reading tutees
were split into two groups; an ‘early Paired Reading’group (participated in school
Figure 1. Characteristics of early and late participation Paired Reading groups.
Irish Educational Studies 5
term 1) and a ‘late Paired Reading’group (participated in school term 2). Allocation
of tutees to either the early or late participation groups was organised by class tea-
chers, who were eager to organise the allocation of children togroups themselves. Tea-
chers were advised to divide students of differing abilities across the two groups as
evenly as they could. Specifically, teachers were advised not to group the weakest chil-
dren in the early participation group as this was noted as a potential trend. A refer-
ence group was also drawn from the same classes as children engaging in Paired
Reading. Children were included in the reference group if their standard scores on
at least two of the three literacy measures described below fell within one standard
deviation of the mean, ensuring that those children were performing at an average
level.
Intervention procedure
Extensive advertising for student volunteers was completed at the start of the academic
year within University College Cork. Volunteers attended a training evening which
covered issues such as the rationale behind the Literacy Support programme, child pro-
tection, and building the tutee-tutor relationship. Volunteers were briefed on the history
of Paired Reading as a practice and the potential benefits of the practice were outlined.
Volunteers were taught the practice of Paired Reading through means of an oral presen-
tation and video demonstration. The tutors were instructed to apply the exact procedure
recommended by Topping (2003) as described in the previous section, including Reading
Together and Reading Alone routines. Tutors received information packs with all the
training materials in printed format. Representatives from each participating school
also attended the training evening and met with tutors, giving them a sense of the
school environment they would be working in. It should be noted that tutor’streatment
fidelity was not formally evaluated. Extensive observation would need to take place in
person or through the use of audio/visual recordings to facilitate such an evaluation.
These resources were unfortunately not available in the context of this study.
The Paired Reading sessions took place twice weekly, with each session lasting for
20 min. Extra time was included in theschedule for tutors and tutees togreet each other
and, where appropriate, to choose their reading material. Each tutor read separately
with two tutees during their time on school grounds (tutors were on school grounds
for a total of one hour). The early Paired Reading group participated in sessions for
a total duration of eight weeks. The late Paired Reading group participated in sessions
for a total duration of five weeks. This shortened duration was a result of unavoidable
logistical and timetabling issues, mainly to do with the amount of time it took volun-
teers to be vetted. The amount of sessions available to children was decided upon fol-
lowing consultation between Suas and the participating schools. The decision was
based on the number of tutors available, and school timetabling considerations. The
tutors were bussed to the schools where the Paired Reading sessions took place
(usually in a library or sports hall), supervised by a school staff member.
Measures and assessment procedure
Cork Test of Reading Speed
All paired Reading tutees and the reference group completed a group assessment –the
Cork Test of Reading Speed (Szczerbinski 2011)–at the three time points. The first
6L. Lee and M. Szczerbinski
assessment took place before either group began Paired Reading sessions. The second
occurred after the early participation group had finished Paired Reading, and before
the late participation group started Paired Reading. The final assessment was com-
pleted after the late participation group had finished Paired Reading. The test was
group administered in class. It consisted of the following measures. For each, the
outcome was the number of correct choices made in the time allotted:
Word recognition
Participants were presented with 35 rows, each containing one real word and two
pseudo-words. Their task was to locate the real word in each row and to underline
it. They were given 45 s to complete as many rows as possible. Participants completed
two trials of this task and a composite score created (maximum available score = 70).
Each trial contained different stimuli. Test–retest reliability (based on the correlation
between scores at T1 and T2) was 0.90.
Sentence verification
Participants were presented with 30 short sentences, designed to measure reading
fluency at the sentence level. Their task was to decide if each sentence was true or
false. Participants had 45 s to verify as many sentences as they could. Participants
completed two trials of this task and a composite score created (maximum avail-
able score = 60). Each trial contained different stimuli. Test–retest reliability was
0.87.
Reading comprehension
Participants were presented with four short texts (average length of 125 words). Two
of the texts were narrative and two expository. Within each text there were several
word pairs printed in bold. The participant’s task was to decide which word in each
pair made sense within the context of the story and to underline it. Participants were
giventwominutestoreadasmuchofthetextsastheycould.Participantscompleted
two trials of this task (each containing two stories) and a composite score was
created. The four texts used in the reading comprehension task changed at every
assessment occasion as this task was thought to be susceptible to practice effects
(maximum available score: T1 = 56; T2 = 52; T3 = 51). Test–retest reliability was
0.93.
Additional measures
Tutee attitudes towards reading scale
At each of the three time points, tutees were asked to complete a short questionnaire.
It consisted of 11 items which were intended as brief, simple indicators of tutee
reading behaviours and attitudes towards reading. Two of the items (‘I think I am
a good reader’and ‘I am getting better at reading’) were taken from the Reader
Self-Perception Scale (Henk and Melnick 1995), while the remaining items were
self-developed.
Irish Educational Studies 7
Tutee questionnaire
A short questionnaire for Paired Reading tutees was devised which they completed
once, at the end of their Paired Reading sessions. One question was asked about
tutee’s enjoyment of the project (‘Yes/No’response format), and one open-ended
question concerning aspects of the sessions they liked and did not like was asked.
Tutees were also asked about their attitudes towards reading (drawing a smiling,
happy, or indifferent face to indicate their agreement or disagreement to three state-
ments about reading).
Teacher questionnaire
A questionnaire was administered to the teachers of Paired Reading tutees. Teachers
completed the questionnaire for each child once, at the point when children had fin-
ished all of their Paired Reading sessions. All the items bar one were taken from Top-
ping’s(1990) doctoral thesis where a similar evaluation was conducted. It consisted of
nine items, and was intended to explore if teachers felt that participation in Paired
Reading had produced positive effects in children which affected their reading in
the classroom. Questions were asked about attitudes to reading, oral reading skills,
and reading comprehension. For each item respondents could choose one of three
options: ‘Ye s ’,‘No’,or‘No change’.
Parent questionnaire
A questionnaire was also administered to the parents of Paired Reading tutees.
Parents completed the questionnaire for their child once, at the point when the
child had finished all of their Paired Reading sessions. Again, all items bar one in
the parent questionnaire were taken from Topping’s(1990) doctoral study. It con-
tained six items, and was intended to explore if parents felt that participation in
Paired Reading had produced positive effects in their child which had affected the
child’s reading in the home. Questions were asked about the amount and variety of
reading at home, and attitudes to reading. Questions pertaining to oral reading
skills and comprehension were not given to parents as, given the older age of children,
it was not assumed that children would read aloud for their parents. For each item
respondents could choose: ‘Ye s ’,‘No’,or‘No change’.
Tutor questionnaire
An online questionnaire was completed by tutors which they completed once, at the
end of their Paired Reading sessions. It sought to assess any changes in attitudes or
skills the tutors experienced, and to allow tutors to comment on their experience.
It consisted of 27 questions; seven open-ended questions and 20 questions which
were answered using a 5-point Likert scale (responses ranged from ‘Strongly Agree’
to ‘Strongly Disagree’).
Staff members responsible for overseeing Paired Reading questionnaire
School staff members responsible for overseeing Paired Reading were also asked by
Suas to comment on their experiences of the programme. The online questionnaire
8L. Lee and M. Szczerbinski
consisted of 10 questions; four open-ended questions and six questions answered
using a 5-point Likert scale.
Results
Paired reading attendance
Information on the attendance rates of tutees in the early participation group is avail-
able for three of the four participating schools, and is presented in Table 1.
Information on the attendance rates of participants in the late participation group
is available for three of the four participating schools, and is presented in Table 2.
Data preparation and analysis
As the distribution of gender and class was not exactly equal across groups (see
Figure 1), two Chi-Square Tests for Independence were performed to examine
Table 1. Attendance rates of tutees in the early participation group.
Number of tutees attending
School A (offering 16
sessions)
School B (offering 15
sessions)
School C (offering 15
sessions)
All available
sessions
791
All but 1 session 5 2 1
13 sessions - - 3
12 sessions - - 2
10 sessions - - 3
8 sessions - - 1
7 sessions - - 1
Note:Data for one tutee is missing for School B.
Table 2. Attendance rates of tutees in the late participation group.
Number of tutees attending
School B (offering 8
sessions)
School C (offering 9
sessions)
School D (offering 9
sessions)
All available
sessions
425
All but 1 session 2 3 7
7 sessions - 5 -
6 sessions 4 - -
5 sessions 2 - -
4 sessions - 1 -
3 sessions - 1 -
Irish Educational Studies 9
whether that imbalance was statistically significant. The results indicated no signifi-
cant association between gender and group (χ
2
(2) = 0.75, p= 0.69, Cramer’sV=
0.07), or class and group (χ
2
(6) = 3.00, p= 0.81, Cramer’sV= 0.10). Thus, gender
and class were not controlled for in subsequent analyses.
During the assessments, it was apparent that some children were frequently gues-
sing their answers. This is problematic, as blind guessing may result in inflated scores.
A correction for guessing formula (as cited in Diamond and Evans 1973) was applied
to the data obtained from the Cork Test of Reading Speed to remedy this problem.
Within this formula, the corrected score =Number of correct answers−
Number of incorrect answers
Number of answer options −1
. The formula returns an accuracy score corrected
for the rate of guessing. It has been argued that the use of this correction increases
both the reliability (Mattson 1965) and validity (Lord 1963) of the test being used.
Descriptive statistical analyses were first conducted on the corrected data, fol-
lowed by a series of 3×3 mixed between-within subjects analyses of variance
(ANOVA), with a within-subject factor of Time (T1, T2, T3), and a between-subjects
factor of Group (reference vs. early playing vs. late playing group). In this context, it is
the interaction effect that is of greatest interest, as a significant interaction effect is
expected if changes across time are different among the groups i.e. there is an effect
of the intervention.
As separate ANOVAs were conducted, a more stringent alpha value was utilised
to reduce the risk of Type 1 error. With three independent variables, the conventional
alpha value of 0.05 was divided by 3, resulting in a value of 0.02. Where significant
main effects were observed, post-hoc Bonferroni adjusted multiple comparisons
were conducted.
Figure 2. Mean Scores of Three Groups across Three Time Points on the Word Recognition
Task. Error bars represent 95% confidence intervals.
10 L. Lee and M. Szczerbinski
The effect of Paired Reading on literacy outcomes
Descriptive statistics for each of the outcome measures are available in Figures 2–4.
Descriptively, scores for all three groups increased over time on the word recog-
nition and sentence verification tasks. Performance on the reading comprehension
Figure 3. Mean Scores of Three Groups across Three Time Points on the Sentence Verifica-
tion Task. Error bars represent 95% confidence intervals.
Figure 4. Mean Scores of Three Groups across Three Time Points on the Comprehension
Task. Error bars represent 95% confidence intervals.
Irish Educational Studies 11
task was the exception, as scores for all three groups increased from T1 to T2, but
decreased from T2 to T3.
Across all tasks, there were no statistically significant interaction effects, indicating
no obvious effect of the intervention on performance (thiswas also the case when the tra-
ditional alpha level of 0.05 was used). Substantial main effects of Time were observed
across all measures, with performance improving significantly from one assessment
point to the next (see Tabl e 3 ). The one exception to this trend was the reading compre-
hension task, where performance improvedsignificantly from T1 to T2 but then dropped
again, with T3 performance being significantly worse than both T1 and T2.
Across the word recognition, sentence verification, and reading comprehension
measures, significant main effects of Group were also observed (see Tabl e 4). Post-
hoc comparisons revealed that the reference group outperformed both Paired
Reading groups, although the latter two did not differ significantly.
Tutee reading behaviours and attitudes towards reading
Of most interest here were the responses from both Paired Reading groups, before and
after their participation in Paired Reading. Descriptively, there were marginal positive
changes in responses to a number of items across time, for both Paired Reading
groups. To systematically investigate differences in questionnaire responses across the
three time points, a series of Friedman tests were conducted for the early and late
Paired Reading groups, as well as the reference group. An adjusted alpha level was
used for the Friedman tests, to reduce the potential for Type 1 error. An adjusted alpha
level of 0.007 was utilised (0.05 divided by 7, the number of hypotheses tested within
each group). Results indicated no statistically significant differences in any of the
responses of either the early or late Paired Reading groups across the three time points.
Parent and teacher feedback
Parental feedback was very positive, with parents reporting a variety of positive
changes in children’s attitudes towards reading and reading behaviours. According
Table 3. Mixed between-within subject analysis of variance: main effect for time summary.
Outcome Wilks Lambda Fdf pn
2
p
Word recognition .46 84.74 2146 <.0005 .54
Sentence verification .59 50.99 2147 <.0005 .41
Reading comprehension .59 49.36 2144 <.0005 .41
Table 4. Mixed between-within subject analysis of variance: main effect for group summary.
Outcome Fdf pn
2
p
Word recognition 24.77 2147 <.0005 .25
Sentence verification 25.66 2148 <.0005 .26
Reading comprehension 31.50 2145 <.0005 .30
12 L. Lee and M. Szczerbinski
to parents (n= 56), 73% of children were reading more at home and 63% were reading
different kinds of books at home. Eighty-four percent were displaying more confi-
dence in reading, while 68% were more willing to read. Seventy-seven percent
showed more interest in reading, and 71% exhibited more pleasure in reading.
Teacher feedback was less positive than parental feedback (although it should be
noted that most questions given to parents and teachers differed). According to tea-
chers (n= 63), 57% of students were displaying more confidence in reading, 43% were
more willing to read, and 52% showed greater pleasure in reading. Thirty-four
percent were showing greater reading comprehension, while 37% read with improved
reading accuracy. Between 22% and 25% were displaying greater speed, expressive-
ness, and pacing in their reading.
Tutee feedback: closed response items
Ninety six percent of tutees reported enjoying the Paired Reading sessions. Since par-
ticipating in Paired Reading, 81% believed they were better at reading, 69% claimed
to be reading more often, and 58% were happy to read out loud. The majority of
tutees thus reported positive changes in their reading since participating in Paired
Reading.
Tutee feedback: open response items
Tutees were asked to write down three things they liked about Paired Reading, and
three that they did not like. These data were subjected to Thematic Analysis. The
analysis followed the procedure for thematic analysis as described in detail by
Braun and Clarke (2006), and was conducted by the first author. Analysis began
with verbatim transcription of the data. Active reading and re-reading of the data fol-
lowed, searching for initial patterns. Initial responses to the text were noted at this
stage. Initial responses were translated into initial codes which identified an interest-
ing feature of the data. As much of the text as possible was coded.
The next phase involved a consideration of the relationship between codes. Codes
were grouped together to form overarching themes. A review and refinement of the
themes followed, ensuring that data within the themes fitted together meaningfully.
Finally, themes were named and a narrative account for each produced.
The analysis resulted in the creation of several themes, presented below. Quotes
from tutees have been transcribed verbatim. Data from 69 Paired Reading partici-
pants (39 from Term 1, and 30 from Term 2) were available for analysis.
Data from the online questionnaire distributed to school staff members respon-
sible for overseeing Paired Reading are also included in the analysis below. Although
these data come from different sources, it is thought that the inclusion of both sets of
responses generates a clearer sense of how Paired Reading was incorporated into
school life, and illustrates how the intervention was responded to by staff and stu-
dents alike. Quotes from school staff have been included verbatim.
The social aspect
Reading as a shared experience. The manner in which tutees spoke about Paired
Reading indicated that, for them, it was an enjoyable social event. Tutees viewed
Irish Educational Studies 13
their interactions with their tutors as positive, and comments on tutee-tutor interaction
were frequent. The novelty of meeting new people through Paired Reading was
acknowledged, as was the enjoyment gained from sharing reading with another person.
Things I liked: I liked reading with new people. (Boy, 3rd class)
Informal, opportunistic conversations with school staff members echoed this point.
Many teachers and principals commented on how the benefits of Paired Reading
extended beyond potential reading improvements to include the creation of a positive
social environment for tutees and tutors. A recurring theme in conversations with
staff members centred on the fact that tutors had provided highly positive role
models for participants, showing dedication and interest in both education and indi-
vidual tutees. Also, for many tutees, interaction with tutors was their first introduc-
tion to third-level education. The subjective benefits of Paired Reading are echoed
in the following quote from a Vice-Principal who provided written feedback to Suas:
There are many qualitativebenefits for the children participating. Role models –life-long
learning, demystifying college –UCC, enjoyment of books and increased motivation to
read for leisure. Overheard child saying ‘I want to go to UCC.’Children looking forward
to it –has become a highlight in the school week.
Assistance as a positive experience. Tutees were keen to acknowledge how much they
enjoyed receiving personal assistance from their tutors. Several tutees specifically
mentioned their tutors by name, and seemed to relish the personal attention and
support they received.
Things I liked: If I got a word wrong they would help me get it write. (Girl, 6th class)
The positive nature of assistance was also noted in the feedback provided by teachers
to Suas. For example, one teacher states:
The boys don’t veryoften get a chance to read alone with an adult at school, so we found
this the most beneficial …All of the boys enjoyed the experience. They love the one to
one attention and they like to work with a ‘new’person.
Positive reinforcement. Elements of positive reinforcement also seemed to be at play
within the tutee-tutor dynamic. Tutors were instructed in their training sessions to
provide children with appropriate praise and encouragement. This emphasis within
the sessions was recognised and appreciated by the tutees.
Things I liked: When they said I did a good job. (Girl, 4th class)
Reading as an activity
Just reading. Being afforded the space and time to read was a treat for many children,
with several tutees content with the simple act of ‘just reading’Indeed, this is what we
may expect from children who have come to enjoy reading as a hobby. Several chil-
dren described the experience of reading as ‘fun’, accompanying such descriptions
with smiling faces.
14 L. Lee and M. Szczerbinski
Things I liked: I liked about suas is that to you could read. (Boy, 5th class)
Materials. The activity of reading is of course closely tied to what one is reading. How
much enjoyment participants experienced in the sessions seemed largely linked to the
materials they were provided with. Many children referenced specific books or
authors when speaking about aspects of the sessions they had enjoyed:
Things I liked: Reading the book of space. (Boy, 3rd class)
The novelty associatedwith reading a variety of materials, some new, also appears as a
source of enjoyment for the tutees:
Things I liked: I read lots of nice books.(Girl, 6th class)
Ownership
Tutee independence. A sense of ownership in Paired Reading, and enjoyment associ-
ated therewith, was voiced by a number of tutees. For example, the fact that the ses-
sions afforded children a space in which they could read out loud was deemed
enjoyable. The fact that all reading was conducted in a supportive, encouraging
environment may have contributed to a sense of comfort for the tutees:
Things I liked: I loved reading out loud.(Girl, 4th class)
Tutees also spoke of the enjoyment they experienced having the freedom to read inde-
pendently of their tutor:
Things I liked: Reading on my own. (Girl, 5
th
class)
Indeed, some tutees noted that they did not enjoy the process of reading together with
their tutors, preferring independent reading. The balance between reading together
and independent reading is obviously dependent on the ability of the child, both in
terms of reading skill and confidence to signal for independent reading. These tutee state-
ments raise the question of how well some children are able to navigate this relationship
with their tutor, and how this relationship should be managed by the tutor.
Material selection. Tutees appreciated the fact that they had choice in terms of
their reading materials. Both the capacity to choose books of personal interest and
to continue exploration of another book once finished with the first were documented
by tutees:
Things I liked: Reading the things I liked. (Boy, 4th class)
Learning
Engagement in the learning process. Tutees were aware that Paired Reading was a
space in which learning happened and seemed happy to be engaged in the learning
process. Tutees stated that they enjoyed progressing in the mechanics of reading
Irish Educational Studies 15
(e.g. learning new words) but that they also enjoyed engaging in new topics explored
in their reading materials:
Things I liked: I liked when I got to learn more words. (Girl, 4th class)
Things I liked: I learned new things. (Boy, 4th class)
Tutees also evidenced awareness of the emphasis placed on reading comprehension in
Paired Reading:
Things I liked: Explaining things. (Girl, 3rd class)
On the other hand, there were also a small number of instances where tutees felt they
did not have appropriate mastery over their reading material.
Things I did not like: Not understanding. (Boy, 4th class)
As this feedback was gathered after all of the Paired Reading sessions had fin-
ished, it is not clear whether this child’s lack of understanding was apparent during
the sessions. If it had been, alternative texts more fitting to the child’s ability
should have been offered.
Programme implementation
The design of the Paired Reading programme was such that tutees had two reading
sessions a week, each involving a different tutor. These same two tutors were then
assigned to work with the tutees every week over the course of the programme.
However, logistical issues sometimes meant that tutees read with different tutors
over the duration of the programme (e.g. in instances where tutors were unwell and
a replacement tutor took over). Comments below indicate that tutees were
unhappy about tutor inconsistency, although it is unclear which aspect of inconsis-
tency (tutors changing because of programme design or tutors changing because of
unavoidable circumstances) they are referring to:
Things I did not like: When don’t have the same helper. (Boy, 3rd class)
Tutees also felt that the Paired Reading sessions were too short and voiced a desire
for longer reading sessions:
Things I did not like: It was to fast. (Girl, 3rd class)
Tutor Feedback
Paired Reading tutors completed a questionnaire which included a variety of closed
and open-ended questions. Tutors reported very positive experiences, indicating that
their tutoring practice had resulted in a range of personal and professional skill
improvements. For example, 99% of tutors reported growth in self-confidence,
100% reported improved tutoring abilities, 97% reported improved communication
skills, 97% found tutoring to be a positive experience, and 100% felt inspired to
16 L. Lee and M. Szczerbinski
volunteer again. Within the questionnaire, tutors were also given the opportunity to
share any stories or observations about particular tutees who they believed had bene-
fited from Paired Reading. Eighteen tutors chose to share such stories (a selection of
these stories is available in Appendix 1). Also included is a selection of comments
taken from the ‘Any other comments?’section of the questionnaires, where eight
tutors responded.
The stories provided by tutors were overwhelmingly positive, and highlighted the
positive changes tutors witnessed in tutees over the course of the Paired Reading pro-
gramme. Several tutors commented on how much they had personally enjoyed tutor-
ing, and voiced a desire to continue volunteer work. One tutor reported a negative
comment, describing how the tutee had struggled to engage with the books available
to him in Paired Reading.
Discussion
The aim of this research was to evaluate Paired Reading as a method of additional
reading support for primary children experiencing reading difficulties. The evaluation
was multi-faceted and included an examination of tutee reading performance, tutee
reading behaviours and attitudes towards reading, parent and teacher observations
of tutee reading attitudes and behaviours, and both tutee and tutor’s experiences of
participation in the Paired Reading programme. When evaluated across this
number of levels, it is possible to appreciate the programme for its successes, and
to identify its shortcomings.
Evaluations of tutee reading performance were disappointing, and there was no
evidence to suggest that the Paired Reading programme was effective for improving
reading outcomes. Similarly, there were no statistically significant changes in tutee
self-reported reading behaviours and attitudes across the period of intervention. Con-
sidering the brief duration (8 or 5 weeks) and low intensity (two 20 min sessions per
week) of the Paired Reading programme, these findings are perhaps unsurprising.
Indeed, previous research has suggested that the effects of interventions which
focus on skills such as reading fluency and reading comprehension may take some
time to emerge (Gunn et al. 2002). Here, feedback from tutors and tutees suggested
that a number of tutees may have experienced greater interest in reading after parti-
cipating in Paired Reading. This greater interest may ultimately translate into a larger
volume of reading, and increased reading practice. Delayed post-testing would be
needed to detect such effects. Furthermore, children in need of additional reading
support may learn at slower rates than their typically performing peers, and may
also have histories of academic failure. Such children may need more intensive
instruction. This is particularly important for interventions such as Paired
Reading, where students may learn more gradually through a modelling-based learn-
ing approach. Although research has produced mixed findings surrounding the level
of intensity required by literacy interventions, it is likely that more intensive support
than was offered here is required.
Both parents and teachers reported observing a range of positive changes in
Paired Reading tutees. Feedback from parents was particularly positive, and a
majority of parents reported that their children were reading more at home, were
reading different kinds of books, and were displaying increased confidence, willing-
ness, interest, and pleasure in reading. Feedback from teachers was less positive
Irish Educational Studies 17
than that from parents, and across most items, teachers reported that they saw no
change in Paired Reading tutees. Teachers did, however, report that over 50% of
Paired Reading tutees were showing more confidence and interest in reading after
their participation in the programme. Although teacher feedback was somewhat dis-
appointing, it is useful to remember Topping’s(2014) observation that although
Paired Reading may not always result in academic improvement, it has few, if any,
negative effects.
Feedback from tutees regarding their experience of Paired Reading was overwhel-
mingly positive, and served to highlight the subjective benefits of tutoring pro-
grammes such as Paired Reading. Tutees reported enjoying their time spent with
tutors, and relished in the one-to-one attention received. Tutors also found Paired
Reading to be a predominantly positive experience. Tutors reported experiencing
growth in a range of personal and professional skills, including self-confidence, tutor-
ing skills, communication skills, and commitment to volunteering.
The subjective benefits of the Paired Reading programme are perhaps best
attested to by the decision of three of the four participating schools to continue
with the programme in the following year, despite tutee’s disappointing perform-
ance on reading measures. Paired Reading was embraced as more than just an
opportunity for reading practice; it was an experience entailing academic, interper-
sonal, and attitudinal benefits for tutees. From the point of view of remediation, the
road to fluent reading skills is long. If the amount of reading activities a child
engages in is critical, educators are challenged to design a training environment
that is easy to implement day-to-day and which is deemed motivating by children.
Furthermore, successful interventions require teams working to ensure user fidelity
to the intervention, opportunities to create social learning environments, and strong
commitment from those operating at the crux of the intervention. It appears that
the challenge from a school’s point of view is not to create some exceptional inter-
vention, but rather to incorporate a simple practice into the school day which can
operate consistently and systematically given the time, personnel, and space restric-
tions present within the school. From this point of view, a practice like Paired
Reading, which has the potential to benefit both tutees and tutors, may be a
highly promising intervention. Qualitative feedback from tutors indicated that
many children experienced attitudinal changes towards reading, and on a broader
level, education. It is argued that these changes occurred not merely as a result of
direct exposure to reading, but exposure to reading in a context that was positive
and encouraging, and enabled discussion and reflection between tutor and tutee.
If increasing a child’s exposure to text is paramount on the road to skilled
reading (Share and Stanovich 1995; Stanovich and West 1989), it is argued that
such exposure should occur within a context that is highly social, and teaches the
child to consider reading in a positive light where the benefits and pleasures of
reading become apparent.
Limitations
This research was a small-scale evaluation of a community based intervention pro-
gramme. Sample sizes were small, and the results of reading performance reported
here may be a reflection of low statistical power. Also, as previously mentioned,
the duration of the programme was short, and tutees received only two 20-minute
18 L. Lee and M. Szczerbinski
Paired Reading sessions per week. Tutees may simply not have had enough exposure
to the practice to evidence objective benefits.
Furthermore, the evaluation reported here was lacking in-process data, and lack
of insight into tutor fidelity is a serious limitation. We cannot know if the tutors fol-
lowed the procedure outlined in their training (Topping 2003), and cannot know for
sure if the non-significant results reported here are a result of poor tutor fidelity, or a
genuine lack of effect. To collect process data, extensive observation would need to
take place in person or through the use of audio/visual recordings. Future research
should strongly consider these options.
Finally, much of the data were self-reported by participants. Common issues with
self-report measures include lack of honesty, image management, lack of introspective
ability, lack of understanding, and response bias. It is impossible to know whether
such issues were present in this study, but the results reported here may have been
influenced by such factors.
Concluding comments
When the Suas Paired Reading programme was evaluated purely in terms of measur-
able reading performance, we saw disappointing results. However, when the bigger
picture was examined, and the multitude of potential benefits are considered, it is
possible to appreciate the programme for its successes. To conclude, the advantages
of Paired Reading (Topping 2014) and the associated positive outcomes evidenced
in this evaluation are reiterated:
.Children are given a space in which to pursue their own interests in reading
material and the sessions increase the amount of reading practice a child
receives. This was illustrated through tutor reports which stated that
tutees had started to bring books home with them and were reading in
the evening.
.Paired Reading gives children a flexible amount of support to read their chosen
book. Unrecognisable words are provided to children in a supportive and timely
manner, and children are frequently praised. Furthermore, expressive and
appropriately paced reading is modelled by the tutor. Much evidence of this
support was seen as tutees spoke positively of the instruction and support
they received from their tutors.
.Children have a sense of control in the reading situation. Again, evidence for
this is apparent in tutee questionnaire feedback when a sense of ownership in
the Paired Reading experience is voiced by tutees.
.Reading comprehension is an important focus within Paired Reading, and the
practice provides readers with a sense of continuity in reading practice. The
focus on reading comprehension within the practice was commented upon
by tutees who enjoyed discussing the meaning of their reading material.
Tutor feedback also reiterated the progress made by tutees in their
understanding.
.Paired Reading provides the child with individual attention. This aspect of the
programme was well received by tutees and school staff members alike who
commented on the enjoyment that one-to-one attention brought the tutees.
Irish Educational Studies 19
.Overall, Paired Reading provides an uncomplicated, enjoyable way of assisting
children. It avoids children getting confused, worried or frustrated about
reading. The overall satisfaction that children displayed with the Paired
Reading programme is testament to this idea.
The significance of the fact that Paired Reading is a simple, reasonably inexpen-
sive, and flexible method of additional reading support cannot be overstated. The
Paired Reading programme reported here ultimately functioned as a positive collab-
oration between a university and local school children, and allowed the schools to
make efficient use of available support. Within the participating schools, Paired
Reading was accepted as a wide-ranging experience, which offered its participants,
both tutees and tutors, a variety of benefits spanning academic, social, and leisure
domains.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
Notes on contributor
Dr. Laura Lee is the Research Manager in the Centre for the Integration of Research, Teaching
and Learning (CIRTL) at University College Cork. This research was conducted as part of her
PhD in Applied Psychology. Dr. Marcin Szczerbinski is a lecturer in psychology, University
College Cork.
ORCID
Laura Lee http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9475-7033
Marcin Szczerbinski http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0273-2056
References
Braun, V., and V. Clarke. 2006.“Using Thematic Analysis in Psychology.”Qualitative Research
3 (2): 77–101.
Brooks, G. 2013.What Works for Children and Young People with Literacy Difficulties? The
Effectiveness of Intervention Schemes. 4th ed. Bracknell: The Dyslexia-SpLD Trust.
Brooks, G. 2016.What Works for Children and Young People with Literacy Difficulties? The
Effectiveness of Intervention Schemes. 5th ed. The Dyslexia-SpLD Trust.
Cohen, P. A., J. A. Kulik, and C. L. C. Kulik. 1982.“Educational Outcomes of Tutoring: A
Meta-Analysis of Findings.”American Educational Research Journal 19 (2): 237–248.
Department of Education and Skills. 2019.Effective Interventions for Struggling Readers: A
Good Practice Guide for Teachers. 2nd ed. Department of Education and Skills.
Diamond, J., and W. Evans. 1973.“The Correction for Guessing.”Review of Educational
Research 4 (2): 181–191.
Doughtery Stahl, K. A. 2012.“Complex Text or Frustration Level Text: Using Shared Reading
to Bridge the Difference.”The Reading Teacher 66 (1): 47–51.
Gunn, B., K. Smolkowski, A. Biglan, and C. Black. 2002.“Supplemental Instruction in
Decoding Skills for Hispanic and non-Hispanic Students in Early Elementary School: A
Follow-up.”The Journal of Special Education 36 (2): 69–79.
Henk, W., and S. Melnick. 1995.“The Reader Self-Perception Scale (RSPS): A New Tool for
Measuring How Children Feel About Themselves as Readers.”The Reading Teacher 48 (6):
470–482.
20 L. Lee and M. Szczerbinski
Lam, S. F., K. Chow-Yeung, B. P. H. Wong, K. Kiu Lau, and S. In Tse. 2013.“Involving
Parents in Paired Reading with Preschoolers: Results from a Randomized Controlled
Trial.”Contemporary Educational Psychology 38: 126–135.
Lavan, G., and J. Talcott. 2020.Brooks’s What Works for Literacy Difficulties? The
Effectiveness of Intervention Schemes. 6th ed. The School Psychology Service Ltd.
Leung, C. K. C., H. W. Marsh, and R. G. Cravem. 2005.“Are Peer Tutoring Programmes
Effective in Promoting Academic Achievement and Self-Concept in Educational Settings:
A Meta-Analytical Review.”Association for active Educational Researchers Annual
Conference, Cairns, Australia.
Lohan, A., and F. King. 2016.“A Cross-Age Peer-Tutoring Programme Targeting the Literacy
Experiences of Pupils with Social, Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties (SEBD) and
Pupils with Low Levels of Literacy Achievement.”Unpublished paper.
Lord, F. M. 1963.“Formula Scoring and Validity.”Educational and Psychological
Measurement 23: 663–672.
Mattson, D. 1965.“The Effects of Guessing on the Standard Error of Measurement and the
Reliability of Test Scores.”Educational and Psychological Measurement 25: 727–730.
Monteiro, V. 2013.“Promoting Reading Motivation by Reading Together.”Reading
Psychology, 34 (4): 301-335.
Nugent, M. 2001.“Raising Reading Standards- the Reading Partners Approach, Cross age
Tutoring in a Special School.”British Journal of Special Education 28 (2): 71–79.
O Riordan, J. 2013.“An Investigation Into the Effectiveness of a six Week Paired Reading
Intervention, Using Cross age Peer Tutors, on a Student’s Reading Development.”
Journal of the Irish Learning Support Association 36: 66–89.
Reading Association of Ireland. 2011.AResponse by Reading Association of Ireland to the
Department of Education and Skills Document –Better Literacy and Numeracy for
Children and Young People: A Draft Plan to Improve Literacy and Numeracy in Schools.
Dublin: Reading Association of Ireland.
Ritter, G. W., J. H. Barnett, G. S. Denny, and G. R. Albin. 2009.“The Effectiveness of
Volunteer Tutoring Programmes for Elementary and Middle School Students: A Meta-
Analysis.”Review of Educational Research 79 (1): 3–38.
Shah-Wundenberg, M., D. Wyse, and R. Chaplain. 2012.“Parents Helping Their Children
Learn to Read: The Effectiveness of Paired Reading and Hearing Reading in a
Developing Country Context.”Journal of Early Childhood Literacy 13 (4): 471–500.
Share, D. L., and K. E. Stanovich. 1995.“Cognitive Processes in Early Reading Development:
Accommodating Individual Differences in a Model of Acquisition.”Issues in Education 1:
1–57.
Stanovich, K. E., and R. West. 1989.“Exposure to Print and Orthographic Processing.”
Reading Research Quarterly 26: 402–429.
Suas Annual Report 2019. 2019.https://www.suas.ie/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Suas-
Annual-Final-Report-2019.pdf.
Szczerbinski, M. 2011.“Group Reading Test-ENG.”Unpublished manuscript, University
College Cork.
Topping, K. J. 1990.“Outcome Evaluation of the Kirklees Paired Reading Project.”PhD diss.
White Rose Etheses Online database.
Topping, K. J. 1998.“Commentary: Effective Tutoring in America Reads: A Reply to Wasik.”
The Reading Teacher 52 (1): 42–50.
Topping, K. J. 2003.“Paired Reading with Peers and Parents.”Oideas 50: 103–124.
Topping, K. J. 2014.“Paired Reading and Related Methods for Improving Fluency.”
International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education 7(1): 57–70.
Topping, K. J., D. Miller, A. Thurston, K. McGavock, and N. Conlin. 2011.“Peer Tutoring in
Reading in Scotland: Thinking Big.”Literacy 45 (1): 3–9.
Topping, K. J., A. Thurston, K. McGavock, and N. Conlin. 2012.“Outcomes and Process in
Reading Tutoring.”Educational Research 54 (3): 239–258.
Vygotsky, L. S. 1978.Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Irish Educational Studies 21
Wasik, B. A., and R. A. Slavin. 1993.“Preventing Early Reading Failure with one-to-one
Tutoring: A Review of Five Great Programmes.”Reading Research Quarterly 28 (2):
179–200.
Willingham, D. T. 2015.Raising Kids Who Read: What Parents and Teachers Can Do.
San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
Appendix 1. Quotes from tutors regarding their Paired Reading experience
Quotes from tutors have been included verbatim. Names of tutees have been changed to protect
confidentiality.
I was paired with a fourth class girl who came on leaps and bounds with this programme.
At the start she couldn’t remember the title of the book but by the end she was bringing
books home with her.
I was working with a 9 year old child all term. English was his second language, and his
first was Polish. He found it so difficult to pronounce words that had silent letter in them,
but i realised by the end of the term, he was pronouncing words like knife, calm and
island with no bother. It made me very happy.
Brian had a big transformation from start to finish. He grew in confidence and strength
each week and it was really fulfilling to know that you helped contribute to that change.
It was great to work with individual children and to see and track the progression in these
children. The confidence building in the children is great to see too.
From my experience, I noticed a difference in the child I was working with from when we
started to when we finished. The child, at first, had no interest in reading or continuing
into third level education. Towards the end the child had told me that they were reading a
couple of pages a night and their attitude for third level education had changed and that
they hope to go to college someday.
It would be fantastic if you could make it [tutoring] a mandatory part of some courses, as
I feel it would be of equal benefit to third level students as it is for primary school
children.
I will definitely be signing up again for the third time now if my timetable allows. Such a
worthwhile experience
Thank you so much for giving me the opportunity to partake in this programme. It has
inspired me to help others and join more voluntary groups. I will definitely do it again.
22 L. Lee and M. Szczerbinski
