This study investigated the benefits and challenges of intergenerational tutoring in a post-pandemic context. We explored how the benefits of intergenerational tutoring vary among subgroups of volunteers—first-time tutors, male tutors, tutors who are caregivers, and tutors with moderate or severe loneliness. Older adult tutors (N = 319) were surveyed before and after the 2021–2022 school year, and the data were analyzed with structural equation multivariate regression and thematic analysis. Results indicated that while public health measures like mask-wearing posed challenges for some tutors, there were positive outcomes for tutors, especially first-time tutors, who experienced more health and well-being benefits, and tutors who are caregivers, who experienced improved civic attitudes towards public education. These results can help programs attract subgroups of volunteers who are likely to benefit the most, as well as attend to the unique challenges of pandemic-related policies.
AyalonL.ChasteenA.DiehlM.LevyB. R.NeupertS. D.RothermundK.Tesch-RömerC.WahlH.-W. (2021). Aging in times of the COVID-19 pandemic: Avoiding ageism and fostering intergenerational solidarity. Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 76(2), e49–e52. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gbaa051
2.
BarbosaM. R.CampinhoA.SilvaG. (2021). “Give and receive”: The impact of an intergenerational program on institutionalized children and older adults. Journal of Intergenerational Relationships, 19(3), 283–304. https://doi.org/10.1080/15350770.2020.1742844
BruceP.PesutB.DunlopR.PuurveenG.DugglebyW. (2021). (Dis)Connecting through COVID-19: Experiences of older persons in the context of a volunteer–client relationship. Canadian Journal on Aging/La Revue Canadienne Du Vieillissement, 40(4), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0714980821000404
6.
BrunesA.B HansenM.HeirT. (2019). Loneliness among adults with visual impairment: Prevalence, associated factors, and relationship to life satisfaction. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 17(1), 24. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-019-1096-y
7.
BuF.SteptoeA.MakH. W.FancourtD. (2021). Time use and mental health in UK adults during an 11-week COVID-19 lockdown: A panel analysis. The British Journal of Psychiatry: The Journal of Mental Science, 219(4), 551–556. https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.2021.44
8.
BurrJ. A.ChoiN. G.MutchlerJ. E.CaroF. G. (2005). Caregiving and volunteering: Are private and public helping behaviors linked?Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 60(5), S247–S256. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/60.5.S247
9.
BuurenS. vanGroothuis-OudshoornK. (2011). mice: Multivariate imputation by chained equations in R. Journal of Statistical Software, 45(3), 1–67. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v045.i03
10.
ChatterjeeP.YatnattiS. K. (2020). Intergenerational digital engagement: A way to prevent social isolation during the COVID‐19 crisis. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 68(7), 1394–1395. https://doi.org/10.1111/jgs.16563
11.
ChatziG.Di GessaG.NazrooJ. (2020). Changes in older people’s experiences of providing care and of volunteering during the COVID-19 pandemic. In (ELSA COVID-19 substudy—rapid reports ). English longitudinal study of ageing (ELSA). [Report]. English Longitudinal Study of Ageing (ELSA). https://www.elsa-project.ac.uk/covid-19
12.
DederichsK. (2023). Volunteering in the United Kingdom during the COVID-19 pandemic: Who started and who quit?Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 52(5), 1458–1474. https://doi.org/10.1177/08997640221122814
13.
DeVoreS.WinchellB.RoweJ. M. (2016). Intergenerational programming for young children and older adults: An overview of needs, approaches, and outcomes in the United States. Childhood Education, 92(3), 216–225. https://doi.org/10.1080/00094056.2016.1180895
14.
DiStefanoC.MorganG. B. (2014). A comparison of diagonal weighted least squares robust estimation techniques for ordinal data. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 21(3), 425–438. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705511.2014.915373
15.
EndersC. K. (2022). Applied missing data analysis (2nd ed.). Guilford Publications.
16.
ErnstM.NiedererD.WernerA. M.CzajaS. J.MiktonC.OngA. D.RosenT.BrählerE.BeutelM. E. (2022). Loneliness before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review with meta-analysis. American Psychologist, 77(5), 660–677. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0001005
17.
FriedL. P.CarlsonM. C.FreedmanM.FrickK. D.GlassT. A.HillJ.McGillS.RebokG. W.SeemanT.TielschJ.WasikB. A.ZegerS. (2004). A social model for health promotion for an aging population: Initial evidence on the Experience Corps model. Journal of Urban Health: Bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine, 81(1), 64–78. https://doi.org/10.1093/jurban/jth094
18.
FriedL. P.CarlsonM. C.McGillS.SeemanT.XueQ.-L.FrickK.TanE.TannerE. K.BarronJ.FrangakisC.PiferiR.MartinezI.GruenewaldT.MartinB. K.Berry-VaughnL.StewartJ.DickersinK.WillgingP. R.RebokG. W. (2013). Experience Corps: A dual trial to promote the health of older adults and children’s academic success. Contemporary Clinical Trials, 36(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cct.2013.05.003
19.
GaggioliA.MorgantiL.BonfiglioS.ScarattiC.CipressoP.SerinoS.RivaG. (2014). Intergenerational group reminiscence: A potentially effective intervention to enhance elderly psychosocial wellbeing and to improve children’s perception of aging. Educational Gerontology, 40(7), 486–498. https://doi.org/10.1080/03601277.2013.844042
20.
GiraudeauC.BaillyN. (2019). Intergenerational programs: What can school-age children and older people expect from them? A systematic review. European Journal of Ageing, 16(3), 363–376. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10433-018-00497-4
21.
GrahamJ. W.OlchowskiA. E.GilreathT. D. (2007). How many imputations are really needed? Some practical clarifications of multiple imputation theory. Prevention Science: The Official Journal of the Society for Prevention Research, 8(3), 206–213. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-007-0070-9
22.
GreenfieldJ. C.Morrow-HowellN.TeufelJ. (2012). Do caregivers benefit more from educational and volunteer activities than their noncaregiving peers?Journal of Gerontological Social Work, 55(8), 738–744. https://doi.org/10.1080/01634372.2012.718314
23.
HaysR. D.BjornerJ. B.RevickiD. A.SpritzerK. L.CellaD. (2009). Development of physical and mental health summary scores from the patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS) global items. Quality of Life Research: An International Journal of Quality of Life Aspects of Treatment, Care and Rehabilitation, 18(7), 873–880. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-009-9496-9
24.
HoffmanJ. A.HermelbrachtJ.BurrJ.VolpeR. J.BrieschA. M.CoddingR. S.MutchlerJ.MillerE. A. (2023). “I don’t know who gets more out of it, the children or us tutors”: The online intergenerational tutoring program. Journal of Intergenerational Relationships, 22(2), 238–242. https://doi.org/10.1080/15350770.2023.2203143
25.
HongS. I.Morrow-HowellN. (2010). Health outcomes of experience Corps: A high-commitment volunteer program. Social Science & Medicine, 71(2), 414–420. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2010.04.009
26.
JarrottS. E.LeedahlS. N.ShovaliT. E.De FriesC.DelPoA.EstusE.GangjiC.HascheL.JurisJ.MacInnesR.SchilzM.ScrivanoR. M.StewardA.TaylorC.WalkerA. (2022). Intergenerational programming during the pandemic: Transformation during (constantly) changing times. Journal of Social Issues, 78(4), 1038–1065. https://doi.org/10.1111/josi.12530
KrzeczkowskaA.SpaldingD. M.McGeownW. J.GowA. J.CarlsonM. C.NichollsL. A. B. (2021). A systematic review of the impacts of intergenerational engagement on older adults’ cognitive, social, and health outcomes. Ageing Research Reviews, 71, Article 101400. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arr.2021.101400
LeiP.-W.WuQ. (2007). Introduction to structural equation modeling: Issues and practical considerations. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 26(3), 33–43. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3992.2007.00099.x
31.
LittleR. J. A. (1988). A test of missing completely at random for multivariate data with missing values. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 83(404), 1198–1202. https://doi.org/10.2307/2290157
32.
MahoneyN.WilsonN. J.BuchananA.MilbournB.HoeyC.CordierR. (2020). Older male mentors: Outcomes and perspectives of an intergenerational mentoring program for young adult males with intellectual disability. Health Promotion Journal of Australia: Official Journal of Australian Association of Health Promotion Professionals, 31(1), 16–25. https://doi.org/10.1002/hpja.250
33.
MakH. W.FancourtD. (2022). Predictors of engaging in voluntary work during the COVID-19 pandemic: Analyses of data from 31,890 adults in the UK. Perspectives in Public Health, 142(5), 287–296. https://doi.org/10.1177/1757913921994146
34.
MardiaK. V. (1970). Measures of multivariate skewness and kurtosis with applications. Biometrika, 57(3), 519–530. https://doi.org/10.2307/2334770
35.
MilesM. B.HubermanA. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed., p. 338). Sage Publications, Inc. xiv.
36.
Morrow-HowellN.HongS.-I.TangF. (2009). Who benefits from volunteering? Variations in perceived benefits. The Gerontologist, 49(1), 91–102. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/gnp007
37.
Morrow-HowellN.LeeY. S.McCraryS.McBrideA. (2014). Volunteering as a pathway to productive and social engagement among older adults. Health Education & Behavior: The Official Publication of the Society for Public Health Education, 41(1 Suppl), 84S–90S. https://doi.org/10.1177/1090198114540463
38.
Oasis Institute. (2021). Demographics report 2021 (p. 1). Oasis Institute.
39.
O’CathainA.MurphyE.NichollJ. (2010). Three techniques for integrating data in mixed methods studies. BMJ, 341(7783), c4587. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.c4587
SerratR.Chacur-KissK.VillarF.Peiró-MilianI. (2023). For the sake of myself, my colleagues and my community: Exploring the benefits of political participation in later life. Journal of Gerontological Social Work, 66(7), 908–923. https://doi.org/10.1080/01634372.2023.2191129
43.
SerratR.VillarF.WarburtonJ.PetriwskyjA. (2017). Generativity and political participation in old age: A mixed method study of Spanish elders involved in political organisations. Journal of Adult Development, 24(3), 163–176. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10804-016-9255-4
44.
ShiD.DiStefanoC.Maydeu-OlivaresA.LeeT. (2022). Evaluating SEM model fit with small degrees of freedom. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 57(2–3), 179–207. https://doi.org/10.1080/00273171.2020.1868965
45.
SieberS. D. (1974). Toward a theory of role accumulation. American Sociological Review, 39(4), 567–578. https://doi.org/10.2307/2094422
46.
StrandK. A.FrancisS. L.MargrettJ. A.FrankeW. D.PetersonM. J. (2014). Community-based exergaming program increases physical activity and perceived wellness in older adults. Journal of Aging and Physical Activity, 22(3), 364–371. https://doi.org/10.1123/JAPA.2012-0302
47.
StraussS. (2021). Multiple engagement: The relationship between informal care-giving and formal volunteering among Europe’s 50+ population. Ageing and Society, 41(7), 1562–1586. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0144686X19001764
48.
SunP. C.Morrow-HowellN.PawloskiE. (2023). Pandemic pivots for older volunteers: Online tutoring and pen pal programs. Journal of Gerontological Social Work, 66(4), 548–566. https://doi.org/10.1080/01634372.2022.2128134
49.
TaberK. S. (2018). The use of cronbach’s alpha when developing and reporting research instruments in science education. Research in Science Education, 48(6), 1273–1296. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-016-9602-2
50.
TanE. J.XueQ.-L.LiT.CarlsonM. C.FriedL. P. (2006). Volunteering: A physical activity intervention for older adults-the experience Corps program in baltimore. Journal of Urban Health: Bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine, 83(5), 954–969. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11524-006-9060-7
51.
TeaterB. (2016). Intergenerational programs to promote active aging: The experiences and perspectives of older adults. Activities, Adaptation & Aging, 40(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/01924788.2016.1127041
52.
WeilJ. (2017). Qualitative methods. In Research design in aging and social gerontology: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods (1st ed., pp. 49–80). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315450162
53.
WhiteI. R.RoystonP.WoodA. M. (2011). Multiple imputation using chained equations: Issues and guidance for practice. Statistics in Medicine, 30(4), 377–399. https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.4067
54.
WisdomJ. P.CavaleriM. A.OnwuegbuzieA. J.GreenC. A. (2012). Methodological reporting in qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods health services research articles. Health Services Research, 47(2), 721–745. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6773.2011.01344.x
55.
YoungT. L.JankeM. C. (2013). Perceived benefits and concerns of older adults in a community intergenerational program: Does race matter?Activities, Adaptation & Aging, 37(2), 121–140. https://doi.org/10.1080/01924788.2013.784852
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
