Benefits of Academic Tutoring and Socio-Emotional Support for Children With Disabilities: Lessons Learned During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Abstract

This qualitative study aimed to explore the outcomes of tutoring and socio-emotional support for children with disabilities, implemented during the COVID-19 pandemic. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 20 parents of children with disabilities. The tutoring sessions improved children's academic achievement, emotional well-being, attitudes towards learning, learning motivation, and interest in learning. They also positively influenced children's social relations and peer interactions. Parents emphasized the importance of tailored plans and education. Results highlight the importance of using individualized support for children with disabilities, whether for remedial or non-remedial purposes, to ensure their holistic development. Practical implications and research recommendations are included.

Keywords

children with disabilities tutoring academic achievements socio-emotional well-being individualized support

Introduction

The disruption of formal education worldwide caused by the COVID-19 pandemic disproportionately affected vulnerable groups, resulting in substantial learning losses (Kuhfeld et al., 2020). According to experts, these learning losses will have significant long-term effects on these groups’ educational progress and well-being; consequently, they call for additional support for these groups to mitigate these effects (e.g., Aurini & Davis, 2021; Goudeau et al., 2021; Hyseni Duraku & Nagavci, 2021; O’Connor et al., 2020; Skar et al., 2021). Studies focused on education and the pandemic have reported, without exception, that children with disabilities experienced uncertainty and declining social and professional support in developing countries (e.g., Hyseni Duraku & Hoxha, 2021; Hyseni Duraku & Nagavci, 2022; Mehmeti, 2021), as well as developed countries (e.g., Asbury et al., 2021). Parents took over the primary responsibility for their children's education and care, adding to the families’ overall pandemic-related challenges (e.g., Alhuzimi, 2021; Budhrani et al., 2021; Manning et al., 2020; Tandon, 2020).

This educational disruption for children with disabilities was especially evident in countries like Kosovo, which had little or no experience with remote learning and wherein teachers lacked the professional and technical skills necessary to support children with disabilities in remote and online learning settings (Goudeau et al., 2021; Gunathilaka et al., 2022; Hyseni Duraku, 2021; School Education Gateway, 2020; United Nations Children's Fund, 2020). Furthermore, numerous parents of children with disabilities were affected by socioeconomic challenges related to the pandemic and, thus, could not provide them with adequate support during the remote learning phase (Hyseni Duraku & Nagavci, 2021). Studies on education during the pandemic period have reported socioeconomic disparities between other groups and children with disabilities, such as limited access to the Internet and technology (Ochieng & Waithanji Ngware, 2022; Robinson et al., 2020; UNESCO Institute for Statistics database, 2020), and the lack of parental digital skills (Kelmendi et al., 2020). Children with disabilities were probably less likely to access and use online tools proficiently as they might need other assistive technology (e.g., García & Weiss, 2020; Jones et al., 2009; Ochieng & Waithanji Ngware, 2022), or even more time and support to adjust to this learning format (Hyseni Duraku & Nagavci, 2021). The instructional design and planning crucial for ensuring effective online learning were notably absent during the period of “emergency remote teaching” related to the pandemic (Hodges et al., 2020; Mehmeti, 2021; Siziba, 2022). This resulted in many inadequacies in remote learning implementation, especially regarding inclusiveness and quality (Hyseni Duraku & Nagavci, 2021; Kosovo Pedagogical Institute, 2020; Mehmeti, 2021).

During the pandemic, Kosovo lost an estimated 25–40% of school time, and remote and online learning failed to include and engage thousands of children of low socioeconomic status and those with disabilities (Mehmeti, 2021). This loss is concerning, given that children with disabilities are also often excluded from traditional learning environments, and many often lack a personal teacher/assistant to assist them with academic tasks (e.g., Hyseni Duraku, 2021; UNICEF, 2020). During the lockdowns in Kosovo, lessons for elementary school students were broadcasted on national television and uploaded on online platforms created by the Kosovo Ministry of Education, Science, Technology and Innovation (2020). However, these were neither interactive nor tailored to the needs of children with disabilities (Hyseni Duraku & Nagavci, 2021). Schools used platforms such as Google Classroom, Viber, and Zoom for instruction, communication, monitoring, and evaluation of students. However, the effectiveness of these learning measures was hampered by the lack of adequate information, communication, and technology infrastructure, digital competence, support time, and collaboration among teachers and parents (Hyseni Duraku & Nagavci, 2021; Kosovo Pedagogical Institute, 2020; Mehmeti, 2021).

A platform called “Inclusive Education”, focused exclusively on children with disabilities and learning difficulties, was also launched during the pandemic. The platform includes learning activities based on the Kosovar curriculum, didactic materials, and other audio-visual materials. The platform also provides supporting materials on disability and on children social, emotional, and physio-physical development. It is designed to assist parents, teachers, and personal teachers/assistants of children with disabilities. Nonetheless, the lack of professional support and personal teachers, inadequacy of support for the individual needs of children with disabilities regarding remote learning, and the exclusion of children with disabilities from online activities during the COVID-19 pandemic increased parents’ fears for their children's socio-developmental regression and academic achievements (Hyseni Duraku & Nagavci, 2021).

Aiming to prevent the potential exacerbation of inequalities during the COVID-19 pandemic and provide emergency education and socio-emotional support to children with disabilities, a group of youth initiated the “In Your Shoes” Project. Their efforts were supported by a number of partners, namely The UNICEF Innovations Lab, the Japanese Embassy in Kosovo, the Peer Education Network, HANDIKOS Kosovo, and the University of Prishtina Department of Psychology. The project provided one-to-one online academic tutoring and socio-emotional support for children with disabilities during the pandemic. Children with disabilities aged 5–14 years from different regions of Kosovo benefited from these tutoring sessions.

Undergraduates in the Department of Psychology at the University of Prishtina, Hasan Prishtina, conducted the tutoring sessions in the “In Your Shoes” Project as part of their semester internship. The psychology students worked in pairs, with third-year students as the head tutors leading the sessions with the child, and first- and second-year students providing support in planning, monitoring, and evaluation. Mental health and inclusive education professionals trained the student tutors prior to conducting the tutoring, while the university's psychology professors and an external mentor (i.e., a psychologist with expertise in pedagogy and inclusive education) supervised the students’ work. The university also provided students with support materials, including a template for planning and evaluating the children's individual needs. The students collaborated with the children's parents and teachers to identify the children's needs, determine the modality and schedule for the tutoring, and align the tutoring with the educational curriculum. The planning involved providing tutoring to support the children in the following areas: (1) specific subject-related knowledge (courses); (2) social and emotional dimensions; (3) and language and communication. The tutoring sessions lasted two months (between November and December 2020), with each university student engaged for an average of 50 h, of which 30 were spent in tutoring sessions with a child. The tutoring sessions varied from two to five times a week and from 40 min to 2 h, depending on the child's needs. The tutors conducted most tutoring sessions using Google Meet or Zoom, as well as in-person sessions whenever possible.

The “In Your Shoes” Project has already shown positive results, such as improving paraprofessionals’ and psychology students’ attitudes towards children with disabilities and providing what the parents considered appropriate and much-needed support (Duraku & Nagavci, 2022). This study, which focuses on the perspective of the parents of children with disabilities who partook in the tutoring sessions, had a three-fold aim. First, it aimed to conduct an in-depth and comprehensive examination of the effectiveness of the project in enhancing the socio-emotional well-being and positive social interactions of the children. Second, it attempted to explore the project's effectiveness in improving the children's learning and academic achievements. Third, this study investigated the importance of the tutoring and individualized plans from the perspective of the parents of the children with disability who attended the tutoring sessions.

Although children with disabilities and their peers are back in regular schools in most countries, including Kosovo, this study's findings and other lessons learned from dealing with the COVID-19 pandemic can help education institutions develop alternative tutoring programs for promoting short- and long-term educational and socio-emotional support for children with disabilities. One-on-one tutoring can improve the efficiency and equity of student learning outcomes by supplementing classroom-based education, especially in the context of lost educational ground (Nickow et al., 2020). Furthermore, support initiatives such as the “In Your Shoes” Project, which are focused on disadvantaged groups and aim at overcoming the educational shortcomings caused by significant disruptions (e.g., those caused by the pandemic) in learning, may provide insights for educators. Specifically, the evidence on this project may help stakeholders develop programs that increase education inclusiveness and quality, as well as establish mechanisms for ensuring better future responses to events like the pandemic.

In addition, despite the fact that only a few studies have examined the outcomes of out-of-school-time programs for children from low-income families (e.g., Durlak et al., 2010; Lynch et al., 2022), there is a lack of research measuring the outcomes of tutoring as an individualized support for children with disabilities. Hence, the current study findings can be used as a guide for policymakers and other relevant actors contemplating personalized programs for children with disabilities as a means of enhancing educational practices.

Methodology

Research Approach

This study employed a qualitative approach to delve into parents’ perspectives regarding the effectiveness of academic tutoring and socio-emotional support for children with disabilities. A qualitative approach allows first-hand information about different people's and communities’ experiences and perspectives, focusing on psychological and social impacts (Jowett, 2020).

Participants

This study included 20 parents of children with disabilities aged 5–14 years (M = 12, SD = 2.4; N = 20: 10 girls and 10 boys) who benefited from the “In Your Shoes” tutoring program. Of these, 18 were mothers, and 13 worked outside the home. The parents were from different regions of Kosovo as follows: Prishtina, Gjakova, Ferizaj, and Prizren. The disabilities of the children who partook in the tutoring sessions included delays in language and communication development, autism spectrum disorder, and other unspecified physical and intellectual disabilities. Children were part of the regular education system.

Procedure and Interviews

We collected the data using semi-structured interviews. The interview questions were designed with an exploratory approach oriented towards understanding the parents’ perspective on the effectiveness of tutoring and socio-emotional support on their children. As aforementioned in the study aims, the investigation centered on three focal points as follows: (1) exploring the effectiveness of the tutoring in improving the children's socio-emotional well-being; (2) evaluating the effectiveness of the tutoring in improving the children's learning and academic achievements; and (3) understanding the parents’ perspective on the importance of tutoring and the need for individualized plans after the pandemic.

The interviewers were preservice psychology students with experience in psychology and education, and prior knowledge and skills related to conducting interviews and adhering to ethical principles. We purposefully selected the parents from the list of parents whose children participated regularly in the tutoring program. Prior to conducting the interviews, ethical approval from the Ethical Committee at the University of Prishtina, Faculty of Philosophy was obtained. We informed the participants about the study's purpose, the interview format, the ethical principles, the areas we would explore, and received their informed consent before scheduling the interviews. We assured them that participation was voluntary and that they could withdraw anytime. We held the interviews online via Google Meet (because of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic) from 15–30 December 2020. Each interview lasted up to 35 min.

Data Processing

We used content analysis to categorize the interview data based on the frequency of the various concepts identified, and structured them to align with the study's purpose and topics of interest. Initially, each author conducted an individual exploration and analysis, followed by a comparative assessment of the identified codes and themes for final analyses. Our thematic coding had a 91% agreement rate. From the interview data analyzed, we also selected specific quotes (in the form of descriptive memos), which were derived from the participants’ responses, and integrated them into the results section to enrich the interpretations of the data analyzed.

Results

Tutoring Outcomes: Academic Improvements

Almost all participant parents (N = 18/20) reported that the tutoring positively influenced their children's academic achievement in the following areas: literacy, speaking, and Albanian language; English language; math; and art.

In discussing the children's improvements in literacy, speaking, and Albanian language, the parents noted improvements in their children's pronunciation, vocabulary, sentence formation, use of descriptive words to describe various situations and express their thoughts, and ability to read short text excerpts.

My child is now able to read and write more. (Parent #9)

His writing is better now. I can say that 50% of his writing has changed now. He knows how to spell [and] use punctuation marks, [like] where to put an exclamation mark, a comma, [and] question marks. (Parent #13)

He expresses himself more easily, is more carefree, and has started to read better. He had some difficulties earlier. (Parent #19)

The parents also reported improvements in other areas. Many mentioned improvements in their children's learning of English language, grammar, and ability to search for learning materials independently. Some reported that their children had a better understanding of fractions and became better at performing calculations. Parents also mentioned improvements in their children's drawings.

He no longer has a problem with writing, reading, and translating many words into English, which he did not know before. He no longer has problems with fractions, an area in maths in which he was stagnating. (Parent #9)

I see clear improvements in maths, particularly in adding and subtracting numbers. (Parent #7)

[My child] is better at language, especially English. (Parent #19)

Some parents reported improvements in more than one academic area. Specifically, the following were the combinations of improvements they reported: Albanian and English language; English language and math; and Albanian language and math.

Tutoring Outcomes: Children's Socio-Emotional Well-Being

Fifteen parents said that the tutoring had positively affected their children's overall mood, and that they had shown more positive feelings.

During the sessions, he was very calm, and after the sessions, he was quite happy because he could easily understand what you taught. (Parent #9)

My child was very excited for the sessions. She tried to be attentive during it, and upon its ending, she was very relaxed and went back to practice the lessons.… she was motivated. (Parent #6)

He has often told us how these sessions with you are like learning with a friend because [regular] teachers are very strict. (Parent #3)

Tutoring Outcomes: Learning Attitudes

Fourteen parents reported that the tutoring program had positively influenced their children's attitudes towards learning, and motivation and interest in learning. They said that the children were more attentive and self-confident, showed more self-initiative towards learning, demonstrated independence, and felt secure and supported.

She always prepared before the sessions and was very attentive during the sessions. (Parent #11)

She's scheduling her activities by herself; doing things that she did not do before…and there is great interest from her now. (Parent #12)

He's more committed to the lessons now. (Parent #17)

She has had an exceptional time with you and was very happy during the sessions. She could hardly wait for the sessions to begin, and she had fun. (Parent #4)

She was eager to log in and start the work with you. (Parent #7)

Tutoring Outcomes: Social Relations and Communication

Twelve parents reported positive impacts of the tutoring on their children's behavior and social relationships, noting that the children felt more comfortable communicating with people and overcame their fears of attending online classes.

My child is no longer embarrassed to talk to people who are not family. (Parent #9)

My child is no longer scared to attend meetings on Zoom. This was a problem in the early days of the pandemic. My child never attended lessons on Zoom. (Parent #12)

My child is a very closed person, shy even, even when he needs to ask for something. He's now more talkative with his friends and others, and [more] open. (Parent #20)

Parents’ Perspectives on Tutoring and Individualized Support After the Pandemic

All the parents said that, after the pandemic, they planned to continue with some form of tutoring tailored to their children's needs and seek more support from the regular teachers in regular school.

[The tutoring programme was] very versatile to the child's needs [and] the improvements are apparent. (Parent #20)

It seemed fun, but was also effective because learning took place. (Parent #7)

There has been good cooperation in planning, and an understanding in conducting, the sessions for a best fit to the child.… There have been many benefits [and] the impacts have definitely been positive. (Parent #19)

[I’ll be looking for] more activities of this format, as the regular learning hours at school or online are short, and a large number of students in one class leaves little time for children to learn sufficiently. (Parent #3)

Discussion

The current study reported that parents of children with disabilities considered tutoring an effective intervention for addressing the diversity in the student population and the children's wide-ranging needs. The parents noted improvements in the children's academic performance. Our findings align with those of previous studies that concluded that various tutoring programs substantially and positively impact learning outcomes (e.g., Cooper et al., 2000; Lynch et al., 2022; Nickow et al., 2020).

Parents in this study also said that the tutoring was related to the children experiencing a generally improved mood, a positive attitude towards learning, and improved social relations and communication. Once more, the findings concur with those of past research, which focused on the association between well-being and improved learning engagement and focus (e.g., Boekaerts & Corno, 2005; Zapata-Lamana et al., 2021; Yu et al., 2017). Thus, the study's findings support the notion that extended learning opportunities embedded within a supportive and positive environment aimed at meeting the students’ needs, addressing learning barriers, and utilizing productive instructional strategies, may contribute to child development in general, including child academic, psychological, and socio-emotional outcomes (Darling-Hammond et al., 2020). The results suggest that these benefits result from an interrelation of factors that were enabled by the tutoring program, including the children-centered teaching and organization, the “teaching at the right level” (i.e., the differentiated and individualized teaching provided was at the “right” level for the children; Nickow et al., 2020, p. 7), and the collaboration between the children's families and other organizational structures (e.g., university).

The one-on-one tutoring allowed levels of active participation not possible in regular and online classes with many students. Thus, the findings suggest that active learning (Durlak et al., 2010) and class sizes (Krueger, 2003) that enable an environment where children can practice what they learn are factors that may strengthen learning. The tutors in the current study assessed the children's needs through collaboration with teachers and parents, and developed individual working plans accordingly. Interventions designs concordant with the needs of the interventions’ targets have been suggested to ensure more positive outcomes (Hoppey et al., 2018). Additionally, the tutors included activities that the parents of the current study described as “fun.” Such measures have also been reported previously to motivate children to learn independently and enhance their self-regulation skills (Boekaerts & Corno, 2005; Darling-Hammond et al., 2020).

Practical Implications

Student-centered methods for children with disabilities offer better opportunities for interactive learning, monitoring, and progress evaluation (e.g., MacKinnon & Williams, 2006; Varnhagen & Digdon, 2002), and should be routinely incorporated to improve their academic and social skills and mental well-being (McConnell et al., 2015; Reynolds et al., 2007; Seligman & Darling, 2008). Our findings suggest that complementing regular school with additional one-on-one tutoring and support to regular schooling for children with disabilities could help the school and the teachers offer tailed assistance. This approach could address gaps in learning caused by relying solely on traditional schooling method for children with disabilities, and ensure a more holistic approach towards promoting child development.

Studies show that, across cultures, parental engagement (Cooper & Smalls, 2010; Kim, 2020) supports the academic achievement of children with disabilities in traditional and online learning environments (Smith et al., 2016; Turnbull et al., 2015; Woofter, 2019), and significantly affects the success of tutoring programs (Cooper et al., 2000). There might be more awareness regarding parental involvement on child learning because of the COVID-19 pandemic (Budhrani et al., 2021; Ulster University, 2020), and schools should capitalize on this momentum to review their organizational policies to promote regular parental involvement (Darling-Hammond et al., 2020; Douglass, 2011; Hoover-Dempsey et al., 2005; Lara & Saracostti, 2019; Lynch & Kim, 2017), collaborate on individual working plans (Ng & Kwan, 2020), and enhance parental knowledge and skills to improve the support that parents give for their children with disabilities (Musabelliu et al., 2018). According to Morse and Bell (2018), in addition to parents’ belief that their child's needs are not being met by the school, parents’ desire to be more involved in their children's education was the main factor influencing a large share of families to decide to home-school their children with disabilities.

Creating a positive and inclusive school culture that values all members requires a collaborative multi-tier support system that provides integrated and coordinated access to development opportunities for its staff, children, and families—through internal or external structures (Darling-Hammond et al., 2020; Ng & Kwan, 2020). Internal and external school support staff (e.g., psycho-social professionals, paraprofessionals or university graduates, instructional aides, and school counselors) can play a crucial role in offering supplementary individualized support to students directly or indirectly through teacher support (Hoopey et al., 2018; Millward et al., 2002). Therefore, schools and universities may integrate their efforts towards creating an infrastructure that allows for individualized support for children with disabilities with the provision of an appropriate environment for professional development among teachers and support staff.

Additionally, as noted in the results of the current study, tutoring programs led by trained undergraduate students can have multiple positive outcomes for the beneficiaries. Similar results have also been found in previous studies led by trained volunteers and university students, revealing that such programs can lead to significant academic and nonacademic outcomes among participating students (i.e., in math and literacy achievement; development of an academic mindset; positive attitudes and behaviors towards learning; and social behaviors) (Durlak et al., 2010; Elbaum et al., 2000; Kim & Quinn, 2013; Lynch et al., 2022; Nickow et al., 2020).

While such programs include various activities (e.g., from more teacher-focused instructions to child-centered learning), one-on-one tutoring was reported to have the strongest effects on outcomes (Lauer et al., 2006). Therefore, universities should continue to offer opportunities for professionals and paraprofessionals (e.g., psychologists, social workers, speech therapists, and educators) through internships or specific curriculum programs related to tutoring and working with children with disabilities. Furthermore, while schools utilize such opportunities for delivering supplementary and complementary individualized support for children who might be lagging behind, these programs can be effective in enhancing overall teaching and support quality, as well as reducing the burden of teachers who might already be overloaded (Cai, 2005; Mesa, 2004).

Finally, while there has been an increase in remote education and learning activities because of their convenience, their effectiveness depends on many factors, including access and proficiency in technology (e.g., Irvin et al., 2010; Lynch & Kim, 2017). As tutoring is individual and more flexible, schools and families may collaborate to establish agreement on the specific tutoring modes that they may prefer based on the demographic characteristics of the family, the individual characteristics of the child, and the specific activities to be conducted. Such efforts at reaching agreement may help ensure the delivery of an optimal program for the child, the family, and the school. Overall, tutoring programs can be provided separately or integrated into the existing educational paradigm for building inclusive classrooms.

Limitations and Directions for Future Research

Our data were specific to a single two-month tutoring program implemented in Kosovo (“In Your Shoes”), and while the study describes some of the organizational and pedagogical processes, the findings of the study should be considered in light of a few limitations. The study reports on the benefits of the tutoring as perceived by parents, and the students that interviewed the parents were the same students who tutored the children with disabilities, which might have led to a parental bias. Furthermore, the current study explores the effectiveness of the tutoring program in a single group, and after the tutoring implementation. Future studies may complement the findings by conducting research with pre- and post-intervention quantified outcomes, and with independent interviewers. In addition, they could compare tutoring programs with different operational boundaries (i.e., the scope of direct and indirect effects), tutoring approaches (e.g., one-on-one versus combination of individualized support within a small group), family and child characteristics (e.g., age, disability type, socioeconomic status, and family engagement level), educational systems (e.g., public versus private), and levels (e.g., pre-K, primary, secondary, and post-secondary). Longitudinal investigations should also be considered, as they will allow for assessing the long-term impact of tutoring sessions for children with disabilities and the factors influencing their effectiveness.

Conclusion

The current study reports on the benefits of one-on-one tutoring for children with disabilities from the perspective of their parents. According to the results, the tutoring contributed to the following aspects in children with disabilities: academic improvements in literacy, English language, math, and arts; improving attitudes toward learning and socio-emotional well-being. Furthermore, the parents expressed the necessity for a closer collaboration with their children's regular schools, and for individualized support for their children similar to what was provided in the tutoring program. The current tutoring project was implemented in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, which disproportionately influenced marginalized groups. In so doing, the project allowed schools, the university, and civil organizations in the field of disability and child rights to come together under a common goal: supporting children with disabilities. While out-of-school-time projects and related studies have been conducted to tackle issues pertaining to socioeconomic differences, the current study focused on tutoring and children with disabilities. The study findings showcase that schools might utilize tutoring programs either for remedial (e.g., overcoming lost ground due to events similar the pandemic or simply practicing the learning material) or non-remedial objectives (e.g., preparing students for upcoming coursework).

Its findings indicate that individual working plans based on the students’ needs, focused on holistically tending to the children, with trained tutors (in the current case, psychology undergraduates), and that encompass a close collaboration with the children's families may enhance the benefits of tutoring. Thus, the current study findings may inform future decision-making on educational policies and practices by demonstrating the benefits of tutoring programs for children with disabilities. Future researchers are urged to employ experimental methods and assess tutoring parameters and effects to complement our findings.

Footnotes

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank those involved in the project and the study for their valuable contributions: the stakeholders who supported implementing the “In Your Shoes” tutoring program group, UNICEF Innovations Lab, the Japanese Embassy in Kosovo, Peer Education Network, HANDIKOS Kosovo, and Department of Psychology at the University of Prishtina, “Hasan Prishtina.” We would also like to thank the students who served as tutors and interviewers and the children with disabilities and their families who participated.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all participants in the study.

Data Availability

The datasets generated and/or analyzed in this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

ORCID iD

Mirjeta Nagavci

Author Biographies

Zamira Hyseni Duraku is an associate professor at the Department of Psychology at the University of Prishtina “Hasan Prishtina.” Her research interests include multilevel factors that influence the quality of education and wellbeing of Kosovar citizens, from preschool to higher education. Within the past several years, she has been continuously engaged in researching and identifying factors that influence the mental health and wellbeing of Kosovar citizens, including children, youth, parents, and teachers. Her research interests also include assessing the impact of the interaction between mental health and academic factors that influence the quality of education in Kosovo.

Mirjeta Nagavci is a PhD student at the Faculty of Education, University of Ljubljana. Her research interest lays at the interrelation between the wider environment, such as society, culture and ecology, and youth education and wellbeing. Her work is centered on equity, inclusiveness, and pedagogy.

References

Alhuzimi

(2021). Stress and emotional wellbeing of parents due to change in routine for children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) at home during COVID-19 pandemic in Saudi Arabia. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 108, 103822. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2020.103822

Asbury

Fox

Deniz

Code

Toseeb

(2021). How is COVID-19 affecting the mental health of children with special educational needs and disabilities and their families? Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 51(5), 1772–1780.

Aurini

Davies

(2021). COVID-19 school closures and educational achievement gaps in Canada: Lessons from Ontario summer learning research. Canadian Review of Sociology/Revue Canadienne de Sociologie, 58(2), 165–185. https://doi.org/10.1111/cars.12334

Boekaerts

Corno

(2005). Self-regulation in the classroom: A perspective on assessment and intervention. Applied psychology, 54(2), 199–231.

Budhrani

Martin

Malabanan

Espiritu

J. L.

(2021). How did parents balance it all? Work-from-home parents’ engagement in academic and support roles during remote learning. Journal of Online Learning Research, 7(2), 153–184.

Cai

(2005). US and Chinese teachers’ constructing, knowing, and evaluating representations to teach mathematics. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 7(2), 135–169. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327833mtl0702_3

Cooper

Charlton

Valentine

J. C.

Muhlenbruck

Borman

G. D.

(2000). Making the most of summer school: A meta-analytic and narrative review. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 65(1), i–127. https://www.jstor.org/stable/3181549 .

Cooper

S. M.

Smalls

(2010). Culturally distinctive and academic socialization: Direct and interactive relationships with African American adolescents’ academic adjustment. Journal of Youth Adolescence, 39, 199–212. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-009-9404-1

Darling-Hammond

Flook

Cook-Harvey

Barron

Osher

(2020). Implications for educational practice of the science of learning and development. Applied Developmental Science, 24(2), 97–140. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888691.2018.1537791

10.

Douglass

(2011). Improving family engagement: The organizational context and its influence on partnering with parents in formal child care settings. Early Childhood Research & Practice, 13(2), N2. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ956369.pdf .

11.

Duraku

Z. H.

Nagavci

(2022). Building upon service-learning in higher education: Lessons learned and future recommendations. European Journal of Sustainable Development, 11(1), 175–190.

12.

Durlak

J. A.

Weissberg

R. P.

Pachan

(2010). A meta-analysis of after-school programs that seek to promote personal and social skills in children and adolescents. American Journal of Community Psychology, 45, 294–309. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10464-010-9300-6

13.

Elbaum

Vaughn

Hughes

M. T.

Moody

S. W.

(2000). How effective are one-to-one tutoring programs in reading for elementary students at risk for reading failure? A meta-analysis of the intervention research. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(4), 605–619. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.92.4.605

14.

García

Weiss

(2020). COVID-19 and student performance, equity, and U.S. education policy: Lessons from pre-pandemic research to inform relief, recovery, and rebuilding. Economic Policy Institute. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED610971.pdf.

15.

Goudeau

Sanrey

Stanczak

Manstead

Darnon

(2021). Why lockdown and distance learning during the COVID-19 pandemic are likely to increase the social class achievement gap. Nature Human Behaviour, 5(10), 1273–1281. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-021-01212-7

16.

Gunathilaka

Wickramasinghe

R. S.

Jais

(2022). COVID-19 and the adaptive role of educators: The impact of digital literacy and psychological well-being on education—A PLS-SEM approach. International Journal of Educational Reform, 31(4), 397–421. https://doi.org/10.1177/10567879221113546

17.

Hodges

C. B.

Moore

Lockee

B. B.

Trust

Bond

M. A.

(2020). The difference between emergency remote teaching and online learning. Educause Review, 27, 1–12. http://hdl.handle.net/10919/104648 .

18.

Hoover-Dempsey

K. V.

Sandler

H. M.

(2005). Final performance report for OERI Grant #R305T010673: The social context of parental involvement: A path to enhanced achievement. http://hdl.handle.net/1803/7595.

19.

Hoppey

Black

W. R.

Mickelson

M. A.

(2018). The evolution of inclusive practice in two elementary schools: Reforming teacher purpose, instructional capacity, and data-informed practice. International Journal of Educational Reform, 27(1), 22–45. https://doi.org/10.1177/105678791802700102open_in_new

20.

Hyseni Duraku

(2021). Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on education and wellbeing: Implications for practice and lessons for the future. University of Prishtina “Hasan Prishtina” Faculty of Philosophy, Department of Psychology. ISBN: 978-9951-00-293-6.

21.

Hyseni Duraku

Hoxha

(2021). The impact of COVID-19 on education and on the well-being of teachers, parents, and students: Challenges related to remote (online) learning and opportunities for advancing the quality of education. In Hyseni Duraku

(Ed.), Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on education and wellbeing: Implications for practice and lessons for the future (pp. 17–45). University of Prishtina.

22.

Hyseni Duraku

Nagavci

(2021). The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the education of children with disabilities. In Hyseni Duraku

(Ed.), Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on education and wellbeing: Implications for practice and lessons for the future (pp. 91–121). University of Prishtina.

23.

Irvin

M. J.

Hannum

W. H.

De La Varre

Farmer

T. W.

(2010). Barriers to distance education in rural schools. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 11(2).

24.

Jones

Johnson-Yale

Millermaier

Pérez

F. S.

(2009). US college students’ internet use: Race, gender, and digital divides. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 14(2), 244–264. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2009.01439.x

25.

Jowett

(2020). Carrying out qualitative research under lockdown—Practical and ethical considerations. Impact of Social Science Blog. https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2020/04/20/carrying-out-qualitative-research-under-lockdown-practical-and-ethical-considerations/.

26.

Kelmendi

Gresham

Iqbal

A. S.

(2020). Regular economic report for the western Balkans: Assessment of the impact of COVID-19 on education and the response of countries. The World Bank. https://pubdocs.worldbank.org/en/550271590827524462/RER-Education-COVID-ALB.pdf (In Albanian).

27.

Kim

J. S.

Quinn

D. M.

(2013). The effects of summer reading on low-income children’s literacy achievement from kindergarten to grade 8: A meta-analysis of classroom and home interventions. Review of Educational Research, 83(3), 386–431. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654313483906

28.

Kim

S. W.

(2020). Meta-analysis of parental involvement and achievement in east Asian countries. Education and Urban Society, 52(2), 312–337. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013124519842654

29.

Kosovo Pedagogical Institute (2020). Distance learning: E-learning in pre-university education in Kosovo in the circumstances created by the COVID-19 pandemic. Kosovo Pedagogical Institute. https://ipkmasht.rks-gov.net/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/Mesimi-ne-distance-E-mesimi-ne-arsimin-parauniversitar-ne-Kosove-ne-rrethanat-e-krijuara-nga-pandemia-covid-–-19-2020.pdf. (In Albanian).

30.

Krueger

A. B.

(2003). Economic considerations and class size. The Economic Journal, 113(485), F34–F63. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0297.00098

31.

Kuhfeld

Soland

Tarasawa

Johnson

Ruzek

Liu

(2020). Projecting the potential impact of COVID-19 school closures on academic achievement. Educational Researcher, 49(8), 549–565. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X209659

32.

Lara

Saracostti

(2019). Effect of parental involvement on children’s academic achievement in Chile. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 1464. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01464

33.

Lauer

P. A.

Akiba

Wilkerson

S. B.

Apthorp

H. S.

Snow

Martin-Glenn

M. L.

(2006). Out-of-school-time programs: A meta-analysis of effects for at-risk students. Review of Educational Research, 76(2), 275–313. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543076002275

34.

Lynch

Mancenido

(2022). The impact of summer programs on student mathematics achievement: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research.93 275 315 https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543221105543

35.

Lynch

Kim

J. S.

(2017). Effects of a summer mathematics intervention for low-income children: A randomized experiment. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 39(1), 31–53.

36.

MacKinnon

Williams

(2006). Models for integrating technology in higher education. Journal of College Science Teaching, 35(7), 22.

37.

Manning

Billian

Matson

Allen

Soares

(2020). Perceptions of families of individuals with autism spectrum disorder during the COVID-19 crisis. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 51, 2920–2928. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-020-04760-5

38.

McConnell

Savage

Sobsey

Uditsky

(2015). Benefit-finding or finding benefits? The positive impact of having a disabled child. Disability and Society, 30(1), 29–45. https://doi.org/ttps://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2014.984803

39.

Mehmeti

(2021). The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on pre-university education in Kosovo. Kosovo Education Center. http://www.kec-ks.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/Ndikimi-i-COVID19-ne-Arsimin-Parauniversitar-ENG.pdf .

40.

Mesa

(2004). Characterizing practices associated with functions in middle school textbooks: An empirical approach. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 56(2), 255–286. https://www.jstor.org/stable/4150284 . https://doi.org/10.1023/B:EDUC.0000040409.63571.56

41.

Millward

Baynes

Dyson

Riddell

Banks

Kane

Wilson

(2002). Individualised educational programmes. Part I: A literature review. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, 2(3). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-3802.2002.00170.x

42.

Ministry of Education, Science, Technology and Infrastructure (2020). MES general guide for organizing education in the school year 2020–2021 in the conditions of the COVID pandemic 19. Ministry of Education, Science, Technology, and Innovation. https://masht.rks-gov.net/udhezues-i-pergjithshem-per-organizimin-e-mesimit-ne-vitin-shkollor-2020-2021-ne-kushtet-dhe-rrethanat-e-krijuara-nga-pandemia-covid-19-2/ (In Albanian).

43.

Morse

M. L.

Bell

S. M.

(2018). Homeschooling: A growing school choice option for meeting special educational needs. International Journal of Educational Reform, 27(2), 156–172. https://doi.org/10.1177/105678791802700203

44.

Musabelliu

Wiener

Rogers

(2018). Parental involvement in the learning of adolescents with and without ADHD. School Psychology International, 39(3), 234–250. https://doi.org/10.1177/0143034318766374

45.

S. W.

Kwan

Y. W.

(2020). Inclusive education teachers—Strategies of working collaboratively with parents of children with special educational needs in Macau. International Journal of Educational Reform, 29(2), 191–207. https://doi.org/10.1177/1056787919886579

46.

Nickow

Oreopoulos

Quan

(2020). The impressive effects of tutoring on pre-K–12 learning: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the experimental evidence. National Bureau of Economic Research, (4). https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w27476/w27476.pdf .

47.

Ochieng

V. O.

Waithanji Ngware

(2022). Adoption of education technologies for learning during COVID-19 pandemic: The experiences of marginalized and vulnerable learner populations in Kenya. International Journal of Educational Reform, 32(4), 464–487. https://doi.org/10.1177/10567879221076081

48.

O’Connor

D. B.

Aggleton

J. P.

Chakrabarti

Cooper

C. L.

Creswell

Dunsmuir

Fiske

S. T.

Gathercole

Gough

Ireland

J. L.

Jones

M. V.

Jowett

Kagan

Karanika-Murray

Kaye

L. K.

Humari

Lewandowsky

Lightman

Malpass

Armitage

C. J.

(2020). Research priorities for the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond: A call to action for psychological science. British Journal of Psychology, 111(4), 603–629. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjop.12468

49.

Reynolds

A. J.

Temple

J. A.

S. R.

Robertson

D. L.

Mersky

J. P.

Topitzes

J. W.

Niles

M. D.

(2007). Effects of a school-based, early childhood intervention on adult health and well-being: A 19-year follow-up of low-income families. Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, 161(8), 730–739. https://doi.org/10.1001/archpedi.161.8.730

50.

Robinson

Schulz

Blank

Ragnedda

Ono

Hogan

Khilnani

(2020). Digital inequalities 2.0: Legacy inequalities in the information age. First Monday, 25(7).

51.

School Education Gateway (2020). Survey on online and distance learning—Results. School Education Gateway. https://www.schooleducationgateway.eu/en/pub/viewpoints/surveys/survey-on-online-teaching.htm.

52.

Seligman

Darling

R. B.

(2008). Ordinary families, special children: A system approach to childhood disability. Guilford Press.

53.

Siziba

L. P.

(2022). An introspection into instructional challenges at a university in Zimbabwe during the COVID-19 lockdown. International Journal of Educational Reform, 105678792211248. https://doi.org/10.1177/10567879221124879

54.

Skar

G. B. U.

Graham

Huebner

(2021). Learning loss during the COVID-19 pandemic and the impact of emergency remote instruction on first grade students’ writing: A natural experiment. Journal of Educational Psychology, 114(7), 1553–1566. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000701

55.

Smith

S. J.

Burdette

P. J.

Cheatham

G. A.

Harvey

S. P.

(2016). Parental role and support for online learning of students with disabilities: A paradigm shift. Journal of Special Education Leadership, 29(2), 101–112.

56.

Tandon

(2020). The COVID-19 pandemic: Personal reflections on editorial responsibility. Asian Journal of Psychiatry, 50, 102100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajp.2020.102100

57.

Turnbull

A. P.

Turnbull

Erwin

E. J.

Soodak

L. C.

Shogren

K. A.

(2015). Families, professionals, and exceptionality: Positive outcomes through partnerships and trust. Pearson.

58.

Ulster University (2020). Northern Ireland parent surveys: Experiences of supporting children’s home learning during COVID-19. UNESCO Centre, School of Education, Ulster University. https://www.ulster.ac.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0009/597969/UU-School-survey-Report-web.pdf .

59.

UNESCO Institute for Statistics database (2020). COVID-19: A global crisis for teaching and learning. UIS UNESCO. https://teachertaskforce.org/sites/default/files/2020-04/COVID19_PDF_2PAGES_EN.pdf .

60.

United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) (2020). Living the pandemic as a newborn, adolescent, and youth: Assessment of the impact of COVID-19 on children and women in Kosovo. UNICEF. https://www.unicef.org/kosovoprogramme/media/1956/file/Living%20the%20Pandemic%20as%20a%20Newborn,%20Adolescent%20and%20Youth%20Report.pdf.

61.

Varnhagen

C. K.

Digdon

(2002). Helping students read reports of empirical research. Teaching of Psychology, 29(2), 160–164. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15328023TOP2902_14

62.

Woofter

(2019). Book review: Building equity: Policies and practices to empower all learners. American Journal of Qualitative Research, 3(1), 136–139. https://doi.org/10.29333/ajqr/5815

63.

Shek

D. T. L.

Zhu

(2017). The influence of personal well-being on learning achievement in university students over time: Mediating or moderating effects of internal and external university engagement. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 2287. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.02287

64.

Zapata-Lamana

Sanhueza-Campos

Stuardo-Álvarez

Ibarra-Mora

Mardones-Contreras

Reyes-Molina

Cigarroa

(2021). Anxiety, low self-esteem and a low happiness index are associated with poor school performance in Chilean adolescents: A cross-sectional analysis. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(21), 11685. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph182111685