May 2025 Research Rundown
By Madie Spartz
For May’s Research Rundown—our curated list of recent, relevant research we think is worth adding to the education equity conversation—we are highlighting articles from one of my favorite resources: EdWorkingPapers from the Annenberg Institute at Brown University. Every month, Annenberg highlights new research on critical topics across all areas of education. This month we look at:
- Evidence-based strategies to improve teacher effectiveness
- How to increase access to opt-in resources for students
- An experimental analysis of in-person vs. remote tutoring
Expanding Access to Highly-Effective Educators for All Students: A Review of Recent Evidence
Annenberg Institute at Brown University, April 2025
This literature review provides a birds eye view of the robust research on teacher effectiveness and retention. Though a highly-studied topic, the factors that contribute to effective teaching are often studied individually, without considering how they interact with each other. The authors of this paper view them as a large ecosystem, and they identify six main components that enable teachers to be most effective: 1) match & fit, 2) professional environments, 3) collaboration & social capital, 4) coaching, mentoring, & personalization, 5) instructional materials, and 6) principals.
Match and fit refers to teachers’ values and priorities matching that of their school, but also to their students: for example, same-race teachers have positive effects for students of color. Regarding professional environments, strong leadership and collaborative culture enhances performance and retention. This relates to the third area, collaboration and social capital, which refers to school environments where teachers work together and see education as their collective responsibility. Coaching, mentoring, and personalization is also part of this, as research has consistently shown that high-quality mentoring, induction programs, and other forms of feedback and coaching improve teacher quality. High-quality instructional materials are necessary but not sufficient–-without proper training for educators, a good curriculum on its own isn’t effective. Finally, principals are critically important for teacher success and retention, as they create the culture of the school environment.
Why This Matters in Minnesota
Minnesota has invested heavily in teacher preparation and effectiveness, but like the authors warn against, we have often done so in silos. For example, Minnesota has put millions of dollars into increasing the number of teachers of color, but those investments generally stop at “match and fit,” rather than extending to “professional environments” or “coaching and mentorship.” Many statewide policies aimed at teachers operate this way. As the article suggests, this is far from ideal, but public school systems are incredibly large ecosystems– addressing all of these areas simultaneously would require massive systems-level change. However, to ensure all students have access to excellent teachers, lawmakers may need to start thinking system-wide rather than stopping with piecemeal improvements.
The inequity of opt-in educational resources and an intervention to increase equitable access
Annenberg Institute at Brown University, April 2025
This study examines the effectiveness of an opt-in tutoring resource aimed at struggling students. The researchers looked at low-income high school students in California who had access to free, on-demand virtual tutoring through their school district. Using a randomized control trial, they assigned one group to receive communications encouraging them to use the program. The communications were sent to both students and their parents in an effort to determine behavioral nudges aimed at which group, if any, increased tutoring participation.
The authors found while the overall take-up of the program was low, at just 19% of students, receiving personalized communication increased participation by 46%. Student communication alone did not have a significant effect on participation rates, but when combined with parent communication, those students were more likely to opt-in to academic help. The increase was especially pronounced for academically struggling students, for whom participation increased 122%. While these findings are promising, overall just one-quarter of struggling students chose to opt-in even once. The authors conclude that targeted intervention is necessary for opt-in services, and integrating tutoring into the school day and existing curriculum is more likely to improve educational outcomes and close gaps.
Why This Matters in Minnesota
Despite the lingering effects of pandemic school interruptions on student attainment and the robust evidence that tutoring is one of the best tools to increase academic achievement, Minnesota has not invested widely in tutoring at the statewide level. Some school districts may have chosen to spend pandemic relief funds this way, but as the authors of the present study point out, for tutoring services to have meaningful impact, large-scale and targeted implementation of tutoring is necessary to move the needle on achievement gaps, pandemic-related or otherwise. And even while COVID-19 seems to fade from institutional memory and the education policy conversation more broadly, it’s never too late for lawmakers to make targeted investments in proven strategies at boosting student achievement.
Experimental Evidence on the Impact of Tutoring Format and Tutors: Findings from an Early Literacy Tutoring Program
Annenberg Institute at Brown University, April 2025
This study looks at the effectiveness of in-person vs. remote tutoring, as well as differences between individual tutors. The authors found no significant difference in literacy gains between students who used in-person vs. remote tutoring. They did find meaningful differences between tutors, suggesting that tutor quality is more important in determining student achievement than modality. While they didn’t identify differences in academic achievement for students choosing the virtual option, the authors did note that in-person tutoring students had higher attendance and their tutors reported closer relationships with them.
Prior research has shown mixed results regarding the efficacy of online tutoring vs. in-person tutoring. The authors caution against drawing strong conclusions from that body of work because differences between in-person vs. remote tutoring achievement could be attributed to differences in tutor skill or curriculum quality. This study aims to solve that problem by examining the same group of tutors using the same curriculum in both settings; therefore, any differences in achievement can be attributed to the modality in which they receive tutoring.
Why This Matters in Minnesota
Minnesota has not made widespread investments in tutoring, despite the robust evidence that it improves student achievement and can reduce disparities between student groups. This study is important because it suggests that virtual tutoring, which may be more cost-effective to implement, as well as able to reach students across geographic regions, can be as effective as in-person tutoring if the tutors themselves are well-trained and using curriculum aligned to student learning needs. Further research on this issue is needed, and it’s important that Minnesota policymakers and district leaders consider the full body of evidence before investing in any one tutoring program. What is clear, however, is that high-quality tutoring is one of the few resources that can definitively improve outcomes for students, and that’s always worth the investment.