“It’s important that they get on with each other”: How do parents choose shadow education for their child?

• In Event: Education, Community and the Private Sphere

Proposal

Introduction
Shadow education (an umbrella term for various forms of private supplementary tutoring) is a global phenomenon with serious implications for mainstream schooling as well as educational inequalities. Much of the scholarly literature so far has focused on macro or meso-level determinants of shadow education existence and has solicited data from tutors, students or teachers. However, parents are the main decision-makers in relation to the procurement of private tutoring for their children, and yet their role remains under-researched.
The present paper is part of a larger qualitative study that explores why and how Czech parents make decisions about private tutoring (i.e., before, during and after the termination of private tutoring) for their children. After parents make the initial decision to procure private tutoring, they decide about the nature of this service. The present paper explores this part of their decision-making process and aims to answer the following research question:
After the initial decision to buy private tutoring for their children is made, how do parents decide about private tutoring types, providers, intensities or timetables and which factors influence their decision in which ways?
The findings are theoretically framed in a consumer choice theories stressing both the rationality and emotionality of parents in their decision-making process, given the wider familial, school or broader community context in which their decisions are made.

Methodology
The study is part of a larger project that employs grounded theory approach to bring a better understanding of parental rationales for buying shadow education, thus, it approaches the research problem qualitatively and is grounded in an interpretivist and constructivist paradigm. The main study informants were parents (mothers, fathers or legal guardians) of lower secondary schoolchildren (about 11- to 15-year-olds) who decided to procure private tutoring of any kind for their child in the recent past or who were currently considering doing so. The sampling strived to achieve theoretical saturation by keeping the principle of maximum variation in mind. It consisted of 55 informants from larger cities as well as smaller towns across the country, with tertiary education as well as with upper secondary education at most. It also covered various types of tutoring (remedial, enrichment or exam preparation). The recruitment of participants was done through social networks (especially Facebook), through advertisements in schools and also through personal contacts of the research team. Parents were also recruited through the snowball technique. The primary data collection method were semi-structured interviews, which were conducted both in person and online. The data collection period started in February 2022. All interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed. The interview transcriptions were coded using open and axial coding, both deductive and inductive analytical approaches were used as researchers rely both on preliminary codes and also develop new codes in the analytical process. The constant comparison approach was used to analyze the collected data.

Preliminary findings
The preferred way of finding a tutor by parents was through personal networks and recommendations. Parents choose this method first, and only if it fails, they turn to internet search, social media or advertisements. The personal network recommendation often led parents not to collect any further information about the tutor, and often they were ready to give up any other expectations towards the tutor for their child (e.g., initially were looking for a tutor with a university degree, but a when a tutor with lower-degree was recommended, they did not take the education level into account). Largely, they also relied on a possibility of later corrections of their decision (i.e., to replace the tutor), though it was associated with additional time costs. Parents with low social capital or in regions with low supply of providers tended more often to use internet search and social networks such as Facebook to find a suitable tutor. Some parents employed resource-heavy methods for assessing and evaluating the shadow education provider, such as preliminary interviews with tutors (including themselves and their child), demanding the provision of first fee-free test-lessons and carefully comparing several providers to choose the one they considered best for their child.
More than anything else, parents expected the tutor to get on well with their child, and were trying to choose the tutor that would suit the character(istics) of their child. Thus, many parents considered the gender and age, but also the way the tutor was able to explain the subject, important for a good match. Feedback about the quality of instruction was sought from the child, some parents attended the first lesson to see how it is organized. Surprisingly, student results and their improvement were taken into account only to some extent and rather on an emotional basis, rather than rigorously, when parents assessed the tutoring quality. Parents with lower budgets opted for cheaper tutoring, which often turned out as being perceived of lower quality. These parents often rationalized their decision by claiming that at least some tutoring, although of low quality, is better than no tutoring.

Author

• Vít Šťastný, The Institute for Research and Development of Education, Faculty of Education, Charles University in