1.
Introduction
The
use of private tutoring has of late become the hallmark of many education
markets worldwide, particularly in East Asia (Holloway
& Pimlott‐Wilson, 2020; Ristow, 2019). At present, mainstream
public systems of education have been the main, and in many cases the only,
providers of schooling. In many countries, pre-college education is free of charge and, in many more, schooling is mandatory. Recently,
however, other analogous educational options have become available. Indeed,
operating concurrently with public forms of education, private (or
supplementary) tutoring, sometimes referred to as shadow education (Bray, 2007,
2013; Bray & Hajar, 2022), is another mode of education on offer.
In
Qatar, private tutoring is prohibited and individuals and establishments operating without the proper licenses and approvals from
the state’s regulatory authority are considered in breach of Law 23 of
2015, which aims at regulating the provision of educational services in the
country. Failure to comply with the relevant
legislation – by offering private tutoring outside of the Ministry of
Education’s oversight – entails a serious risk
of facing very hefty penalties. Cognisant of the value of tutoring under
adequate circumstances, the Ministry of Education and Higher Education in Qatar
condoned a number of private tuition providers, including Geometric Centre,
Global Academy Education Centre, Kumon Centre, London Academy and Oxford
Learning Centre. Approved by Qatar’s authorities, these establishments have, to
varying degrees, been in operation for nearly two decades, offering supplementary
classes, particularly in core subjects such as mathematics, science and
English.
Although
private tutoring is officially banned in Qatar,
it remains a burgeoning and lucrative enterprise in the country.
According to the widely used English language newspaper, The Peninsula,
the Ministry of Education and Higher Education placed a ban on the practice,
cracking down on private tutors who violate the relevant laws and regulations
by offering private tutoring services (Mohamed,
2017). Nonetheless, the fact of the
matter is that private tutoring within Qatar is in high demand by many students
and their families. Demonstrably, the nature, scope and value of private
tutoring differ from one country to another (Bray
& Hajar, 2022; Entrich, 2020b; Zhang & Bray, 2020). This study
sought to unveil what shapes parents’ decision to hire a private tutor for
their children. In so doing, the aim was to also extend
the existing literature by offering a Middle Eastern, Arab perspective on
private tutoring in Qatar, a country that has not been addressed in studies
carried out in Western contexts.
The rest of this current paper is structured as follows: the
section below provides an overview of the relevant literature on private
tutoring, focusing on key drivers of private tutoring usage. Section Three
outlines the methodology employed in conducting the present research, including
a description of the research design, the study’s participants, and data
collection procedures. This section also explains the steps followed in
analysing data and the mode of analysis used. Results
of the study are presented in section Four,
while the discussion of the findings
is provided in section Five. Finally, section Six concludes the study and provides some
relevant recommendations.
2.
Literature Review
Research
reveals different understandings of what private tutoring entails (Ghosh &
Bray, 2020; Marshall & Fukao, 2019).
For example, Guill and Bos (2014) and Kirby (2016) note that private
tutoring refers to additional or supplementary instruction
offered outside official (mainstream) school classes in exchange for financial
remuneration. For Brehm and Silova (2014), private tutoring is no
more than “simply a continuation of government school classes” (p. 107).
Previous work by Bray (2013), and Kirby (2016) has shown that private tutoring
is generally provided on a remuneration basis after regular school classes,
including afternoon, evening, and/or during weekend and holiday times (Shih
& Yi, 2014).
Another
perspective is provided by Lambert and Spinath (2014), who argue that private
tutoring involves students that “were mainly doing homework, prepared for exams
or repeated the current curriculum or both”. For Yung and Bray (2017), three
main traits delineate private tutoring: it is (a) a private free-based, (b)
supplementary, and (c) academic instruction. The first – ‘privateness’ –
designates instruction offered in return for a fee. The second –
‘supplementation’ – points to extra instruction that supplements public
schooling and occurs outside of regular school hours. The third – ‘academic
subjects’ – covers academic disciplines and thus excludes subjects studied for
purposes of leisure or personal development, including art, music, sports, etc.
Documented
research on the usage and spread of private tutoring across the globe shows
heightened interest in this phenomenon and this is indicative of a blend of
educational, economic, and socio-cultural influences (Bray, 2021; Hultberg, Calonge,
& Choi, 2021; Tan, 2022). Driven by
countless micro– and macro–influences (Guill
& Lintorf , 2019; Liu & Bray,
2020), private tutoring has far-reaching implications of relevance to students
and their parents, Qatar’s system of education, and society at large. Research
conducted by Bray and Hajar (2022) and Guill,
Lüdtke, and Schwanenberg (2020) identifies
macro-level as well as micro-level factors. Macro-level factors include
characteristics of the system of education and job market needs (Alam & Zhu, 2022; Sieverding, Krafft &
Elbadawy, 2019; Yung, 2019), competition for elite institutions of
higher education (Tan, 2017; Zhang & Bray,
2018; Zhang & Yamato, 2018), and the cultural values and perceptions
of education in society (Gupta, 2022; Tan, 2022). By contrast, micro-level
factors encompass student attributes, such as gender, grade level, school
attendance and satisfaction, etc. (Chih-Hao,
2019; Entrich, 2020a; Sellami & Le Trung, 2020).
Rocha
and Hamed (2018) conducted a study of students’ private (paid) supplementary
tutoring after school hours in mainstream schools in the United Arab Emirates.
Their study, which involved students in Grades 5, 9, 10, and 12 in public
(government-funded) and private schools, focused specifically on math, science,
Arabic, and English. A total of 3,929 parents (1,959 Emiratis and 1,970 non-Emiratis)
from 58 schools across the country’s seven emirates participated in the study.
The researchers found that alongside gender, family income, and location
(Emirate), nationality is a salient determinant that shapes students’ use of
private tutoring. For example, they found higher usage of private tutoring
amongst Emirati students compared to their expatriate counterparts. Thus, in
Grade 9, 27% of Emirati students reported using private tutoring, as compared
to 16% non-Emirati. With regard to Grade 10, 34% of Emirati students indicated
they use private tutoring, compared to 16% non-Emiratis.
2.1 Problem Statement
Amid
official and public concerns over the widespread use of private tutoring in
Qatar, parents are under pressure to hire a private tutor for their child and
thus enhance her/his chances of meeting school expectations. This research
explores the individual, household, and contextual factors that drive families
living in Qatar to hire private tutors. Building on insights from previous
research, this study sought to unpack the background and contextual factors
shaping private tutoring usage in Qatar. We anticipated there to be an
association between participation in private tutoring, parents’
characteristics, household characteristics and environmental (school-related)
factors. Two specific questions guided this research:
a) What
factors influence parents’ participation in private tutoring in Qatar?
b) Are
there any significant relationships between parents’ individual, household and school-related
factors, and their participation in private tutoring?
3.
Methodology
3.1 Study design and sampling
This study’s survey data originated from
the Qatar Education Study (QES) 2019, a nation-wide survey carried out by the
Social and Economic Survey Research Institute (SESRI) in November 2019. The QES
2019 consisted of four survey questionnaires that involved preparatory (grades
8 and 9) and high (grades 11 and 12) school students and their parents. For the
purpose of this current study, only the data for parents was analyzed and
discussed in this article. Using information obtained from the Ministry of
Education and Higher Education, a sampling frame of the QES 2019 was prepared
by SESRI, using a list of all public and private schools operating in Qatar.
The survey involved a two-stage stratified sample, with schools being the
primary sampling units (PSUs) stratified according to the school system, school
gender (boy, girl, or co-ed), and grades for a total of 10 strata. PSUs were
then sampled with a probability proportional to size with the measure of size
being enrollment totals for each stratum and with the allocation of the number
of schools to sample per stratum being based on the total enrollment for that
stratum, allowing for a self-weighting sample.
To ensure the parent proportion in each
stratum was similar between the frame and the sample, a proportionate sample
allocation was utilised. The sample size of this survey was 34 schools.
Classrooms were the secondary sampling units (SSUs): two classrooms were
randomly sampled from each school and all students within the sampled classroom
were surveyed along with their parents. In analysing this study’s data, this
sample design was taken into consideration. In particular, a weighting variable
was developed to clarify the different selection probabilities of participants
as well as possible non-responses. With the number of completions mentioned
above, the maximum sampling error for a percentage is +/-2.6 percentage points
for the survey. The calculation of this error was computed taking into
consideration the design effects associated with stratification, weighting, and
clustering.
After getting approval from Qatar
University’s Internal Review Board (IRB), official letters were given to the
relevant schools, requesting permission to distribute the survey at their
premises. Accordingly, consent forms were sent to students and their parents,
confirming that taking part in the study was voluntary and that responses would
be strictly confidential. Upon receipt of the signed consent forms, parent
questionnaires were given to students to take home and return when completed.
The latter were instructed to inform their parents about the importance of
completing the survey within one week.
The study involved 1,142 parents of
students enrolled in 8th, 9th, 11th and 12th
grades, with a response rate of approximately 69%. We excluded observations
with missing cases for the outcome variable, that is, participation in private
tutoring. Overall, 1,117 cases were complete for the outcome variable. To
address missing data in some of the response variables, we used Stata
statistical multiple imputation employing chained equations technique (Little, Carpenter, & Lee, 2022). We then
used Stata’s “MI” and the “SVY” commands, with the “subpop” option to estimate
means and proportions that accounted for multiple-imputation estimates and the
complex design features of QES and for the focus on household groups
participating and not participating in private tutoring. Table 1 below provides
summary statistics for the parents that participated in the QES 2019 survey.
Of
the 1,117 parents who completed the questionnaires, 355 reported participating
in private tutoring. Overall, 51% of Qatari parents in the sample indicated
that they participated in private tutoring, compared to only 28% of the
expatriates. The mean age for the respondents in both groups is 45 years. A
large majority of the parents in the sample had at least attained secondary
education or higher and were employed.
Table
1:
Descriptive Statistics for the Sample
|
|
Participants
|
95% CI
|
Non-participants
|
95% CI
|
|
|
(n = 355)
|
|
(n = 762)
|
|
|
Gender
|
|
|
|
|
|
Male
|
59.19%
|
0.50 – 0.68
|
63.32%
|
0.57 – 0.70
|
|
Female
|
40.81%
|
0.32 – 0.50
|
36.68%
|
0.30 – 0.43
|
|
Nationality
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non
Qatari
|
61.50%
|
0.47 – 0.76
|
81.09%
|
0.74 – 0.88
|
|
Qatari
|
38.50%
|
0.24 – 0.53
|
18.91%
|
0.12 – 0.26
|
|
Age
|
45.22
|
44.26 – 46.18
|
45.13
|
44.38 – 45.88
|
|
Father’s
education
|
|
|
|
|
|
Below
secondary
|
10.00%
|
0.23 – 0.32
|
12.99%
|
0.10 – 0.16
|
|
Secondary
or post-secondary
|
40.63%
|
0.23 – 0.32
|
33.50%
|
0.28 – 0.39
|
|
Bachelor’s
degree or more
|
49.37%
|
0.23 – 0.32
|
53.51%
|
0.47 – 0.60
|
|
Mother’s
education
|
|
|
|
|
|
Below
secondary
|
15.02%
|
0.09 – 0.21
|
19.84%
|
0.15 – 0.25
|
|
Secondary
or post-secondary
|
39.37%
|
0.31 – 0.48
|
31.27%
|
0.26 – 0.37
|
|
Bachelor’s
degree or more
|
45.60%
|
0.37 – 0.54
|
48.90%
|
0.42 – 0.55
|
|
Parent
employment
|
|
|
|
|
|
No
|
26.44%
|
0.20 – 0.33
|
27.37%
|
0.23 – 0.32
|
|
Yes
|
73.56%
|
0.67 – 0.80
|
72.63%
|
0.68 – 0.77
|
|
Absenteeism
|
|
|
|
|
|
No
|
80.27%
|
0.73 – 0.88
|
87.31%
|
0.84 – 0.91
|
|
Yes
|
19.73%
|
0.12 – 0.27
|
12.69%
|
0.09 – 0.16
|
|
Additional
cost of education
|
|
|
|
|
|
QAR0
– 999
|
26.39%
|
0.21 – 0.32
|
25.88%
|
0.22 – 0.29
|
|
QAR1000
– 4999
|
40.08%
|
0.34 – 0.46
|
49.05%
|
0.45 – 0.53
|
|
QAR5000
– 9999
|
20.03%
|
0.15 – 0.26
|
14.58%
|
0.11 – 0.18
|
|
QAR10000
or more
|
13.50%
|
0.10 – 0.17
|
10.49%
|
0.07 – 0.14
|
|
Grade
|
|
|
|
|
|
8
|
29.08%
|
0.14 – 0.44
|
35.36%
|
0.21 – 0.50
|
|
9
|
29.70%
|
0.14 – 0.46
|
25.53%
|
0.12 – 0.39
|
|
11
|
22.73%
|
0.09 – 0.36
|
25.17%
|
0.11 – 0.39
|
|
12
|
18.49%
|
0.06 – 0.31
|
13.94%
|
0.04 – 0.24
|
|
School
type
|
|
|
|
|
|
Government
|
36.35%
|
0.16 – 0.57
|
33.13%
|
0.18 – 0.48
|
|
Other
|
63.65%
|
0.43 – 0.84
|
66.87%
|
0.52 – 0.82
|
3.2 Instrumentation
Paper-and-pencil interviewing (PAPI) was
used to collect data from the parent survey. Prior to implementing the survey,
each Qatar Education Study (QES) interviewer had participated in training
workshops that covered the essentials of survey administration, Computer Assisted Telephone Interviewing
(CATI), and the necessary protocols for conducting survey instruments. The
survey includes questions on parents’ demographic profile, students’
performance, and parental involvement in the education of their child.
3.3 Measures
The
use of private tutoring is the main dependent variable for
this study’s statistical analysis. In the questionnaire, parents were asked:
“Does your child use private tutoring?” Responses were treated in the model as
a dichotomous variable (Yes=1, No=0).
School
grade was used in the model to check whether there is a
statistically significant difference in participation in private tutoring in
terms of students’ school grade. Four school grades were used for analysis:
grades 8 and 9 (preparatory schools) and grades 11 and 12 (high school).
School type
was employed as an administrative variable obtained from the sampling frame and
has four categories: 1) government; 2) international; 3) community; and 4)
Arabic private. Only the first two school types were used for statistical
analysis because of the low number of cases in the last two. These categories
were coded as 1=Government and 0=International. This variable was used to see
if there is a difference in participation in private tutoring depending on the
school (public or another type) the child attends. Other school types include
international, community, and private Arabic schools.
Demographic
variables were examined as predictors of parental use of private tutoring;
these include gender, age, nationality, employment status, and the highest
level of education.
Nationality: This
was used in the model as a dichotomous variable (Qatari=1, non-Qatari=0).
Parents were split between Qataris (38.50%) and non-Qataris (61.50%).
Gender: This was reported
in the model as a dichotomous variable (female=1, male=0). Parents were split
between male (59%) and female (41%).
Age: In the
questionnaire, parents were asked to indicate their date of birth.
Employment Status:
Parents were also asked about their current employment status and were
instructed to choose one answer from a list of seven options: 1) Full-time
employee; 2) Part-time employee; 3) Housewife; 4) Unemployed, seeking a job; 5)
Unemployed, not seeking a job; 6) Retired; and 7) Unable to work. The list also
included an “Other” option (with an open-ended, “please specify” space) and an
“I do not know” option.
Highest Level of Education:
In the questionnaire, parents were asked to indicate their highest
level of education: 1) Never attended school; 2) Elementary; 3)
Preparatory; 4) Vocational; 5) Secondary; 6) Post-secondary (Diploma); 7)
Bachelor’s degree; 8) Master’s degree; and 9) Ph.D. The list also comprised an
“Other” option (with an open-ended, “please specify” space) and an “I do not
know” option.
Child Absenteeism: Elsewhere
in the questionnaire, parents were asked: “In a typical week, how many days on
average does your child miss school (absent from school)?” Parents were
required to select one answer from a list of six options: 1) Never; 2) One day;
3) Two days; 4) Three days; 5) Four days; and 6) All week. The list further
included an “Other” option (with an open-ended, “please specify” space) and an
“I do not know” option.
Cost of Education-Related Activities:
Parents were also asked: “Apart from the school tuition, private tutoring
charges and other expenses at school, how much on average (in Qatari Riyals) do
you spend per term on your child’s education-related activities (such as
stationary, costumes for school events, etc.)?” Six response options were
provided, including 1) None; 2) Less than QR 1,000; 3) QR 1,000 –
Less than QR 5,000; 4) QR 5,000 – Less than QR 10,000; 5) QR 10,000 – Less than
QR 15,000; and 6) QR 15,000 or more.
An
“Other” option was also included, together with an open-ended, “please specify”
space and an “I do not know” option.
3.4 Mode of analysis
Given
that the dependent variable in this study is a binary variable, that is, to
participate or to not participate in private tutoring, we used the binary
probit model to analyze the determinants of private tutoring decisions.
Additionally, we included a set of independent variables drawn from the
relevant literature. The binary probit model enables the estimation of a
conditional or response probability with respect to a set of explanatory
variables. The structural model expressing participation in private tutoring is
as follows:
=
the respondent’s latent measure of satisfaction or utility derived from private
tutoring,
=
a vector of explanatory variables,
=
a vector of estimated coefficients,
e
= a random error term.
Assuming
that the random error term has a normal distribution, the maximum likelihood
estimation method is used to estimate coefficients following the binary probit
model as follows:
=
the standard normal distribution function.
We
transformed the coefficients of the binary probit model to generate the
marginal effects, that is, the effects that explanatory variables have on the
probability of participating in private tutoring. As is shown in Table 2 below,
only marginal effects of the four different specifications are presented. The
marginal effects of the binary probit can be expressed as follows:
=
𝛽)
Column
1 in Table 2 demonstrates marginal effects for all explanatory variables. All
analyses were conducted using Stata.
Table
2:
Estimated Marginal Effects of the Probit Model
|
|
(1)
|
(2)
|
(3)
|
(4)
|
|
Variables
|
Marginal
effects
|
Marginal
effects
|
Marginal
effects
|
Marginal
effects
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
nationality
|
0.263***
|
0.265***
|
0.260***
|
0.266***
|
|
|
(0.0374)
|
(0.0376)
|
(0.0377)
|
(0.0379)
|
|
male
|
-0.0356
|
-0.0303
|
-0.0304
|
-0.0225
|
|
|
(0.0350)
|
(0.0358)
|
(0.0357)
|
(0.0374)
|
|
employedhh
|
0.0381
|
0.0388
|
0.0292
|
0.0287
|
|
|
(0.0420)
|
(0.0421)
|
(0.0420)
|
(0.0424)
|
|
age
|
-2.64e-05
|
-0.000322
|
0.000195
|
-0.000393
|
|
|
(0.00244)
|
(0.00240)
|
(0.00244)
|
(0.00238)
|
|
1.costaddedu
|
0.0467
|
0.0458
|
0.0472
|
0.0457
|
|
|
(0.0333)
|
(0.0333)
|
(0.0332)
|
(0.0332)
|
|
3.costaddedu
|
0.0809*
|
0.0837*
|
0.0786
|
0.0843*
|
|
|
(0.0452)
|
(0.0447)
|
(0.0474)
|
(0.0469)
|
|
4.costaddedu
|
0.0781
|
0.0757
|
0.0789
|
0.0751
|
|
|
(0.0485)
|
(0.0488)
|
(0.0488)
|
(0.0487)
|
|
absenteeism
|
0.101**
|
0.101**
|
0.102**
|
0.102**
|
|
|
(0.0456)
|
(0.0452)
|
(0.0462)
|
(0.0451)
|
|
2.maleedu
|
0.0526
|
|
0.0812
|
|
|
|
(0.0545)
|
|
(0.0538)
|
|
|
3.maleedu
|
0.0369
|
|
0.0400
|
|
|
|
(0.0539)
|
|
(0.0491)
|
|
|
2.femaleedu
|
0.0798
|
0.0962*
|
|
|
|
|
(0.0577)
|
(0.0560)
|
|
|
|
3.femaleedu
|
0.00102
|
0.0125
|
|
|
|
|
(0.0470)
|
(0.0428)
|
|
|
|
2.grader
|
0.0734
|
0.0748
|
0.0803*
|
0.0856*
|
|
|
(0.0449)
|
(0.0450)
|
(0.0437)
|
(0.0438)
|
|
3.grader
|
0.0272
|
0.0277
|
0.0305
|
0.0334
|
|
|
(0.0763)
|
(0.0762)
|
(0.0778)
|
(0.0784)
|
|
4.grader
|
0.106
|
0.108
|
0.106
|
0.110
|
|
|
(0.0923)
|
(0.0916)
|
(0.0928)
|
(0.0919)
|
|
intschool
|
0.136**
|
0.136**
|
0.132*
|
0.130*
|
|
|
(0.0652)
|
(0.0654)
|
(0.0668)
|
(0.0677)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Observations
|
1,117
|
1,117
|
1,117
|
1,117
|
Standard errors in
parentheses
*** p<0.01, **
p<0.05, * p<0.1
4.
Results
Our
study’s results show that nationality is positively associated with the use of
private tutoring, for Qatari parents appear to be 26% more likely to avail
private tutoring in comparison to their non-Qatari counterparts. This result
holds across all four specifications in the model (see Table 2). Results
further show that the age of the parent is statistically insignificant with a
positive sign, which shows that parental age does not affect the use of private
tutoring.
Contrary
to our expectations, however, although the employment status of the parent is
positively associated with private tutoring usage, no statistically significant
results were observed. While participation in private tutoring is a costly
exercise, employment and family earnings are likely to increase participation
in private tutoring. However, in this study, our results suggest that the
employment status of the father or mother is not associated with participation
in private tutoring.
Parents’
education level appears to be associated with their participation in private
tutoring. We tested for the effect of father’s and mother’s education level
using different specifications, as is shown in Table 2 above. In the full model
– i.e. column 1 – both the father’s and the mother’s levels of education are
included in the model. The results show that neither of the two categorical
variables is statistically significant. To avoid multicollinearity, the
associations of the education level and the dependent variable were tested in a
series of separate equations. The second specification revealed a statistically
significant association between mother’s education and the use of private
tutoring. On the contrary, no association was detected between the father’s
level of education and participation in private tutoring. Additionally, moving
from less than secondary schooling to secondary or post-secondary level of
education is associated with a 10% increase in the likelihood of participation
in private tutoring.
The
likelihood of participating in private tutoring is also strongly and positively
associated with students’ absenteeism. Enrollment in an international private
school is associated with a 13% likelihood of participating in private
tutoring. This finding is in line with Marshall
and Fukao (2019) who argue that private tutoring influences full-time
schooling. In this case, our results may suggest that students participate in
private tutoring to either catch up with other students or to avail specific
benefits of private tutoring such as individualized learning.
Attending
an international private school appears to be positively and statistically
correlated with private tutoring usage. The results show that parents whose
children are enrolled in an international private school are 13% more likely to
hire a private tutor. In general, because participation in public education is
affordable, compared to private schools, attending international private
schools increases household expenditure on education. Given that the budget
restrains household spending, a question that begs itself is: do these findings
suggest that parents facing the high costs of international private school fees
can afford the additional costs of supplementary private tutoring? Here, it
needs to be noted that some households in Qatar receive education subsidies
from their employers, implying that they receive assistance in paying the full
cost of education.
5.
Discussion
This
section provides a discussion of the results derived from our study and delves
further into salient factors that emerged as significantly correlated to
parental use of private tutoring. The present study’s
results are best viewed through the prism of political
science theorist Albert Hirschman’s
(1970) exit, voice, and loyalty, which help to gain a better understanding of the
role of private tutoring in Qatar. Hirschman’s argument
serves to explain some of this study’s findings, for the basic options available to an individual are either “exit” (i.e.,
using a different provider) or “voice” (i.e., participation). His theory
posits that in a school setting, parents can use either an exit or a voice
strategy to induce organizational improvement.
In
this study, parents’ use of private tutoring can be viewed as an exit strategy
because they are opting out of using voice (i.e., expressing their concerns to
school leadership) to improve the quality of education. Some households perhaps use exit as a strategy to complement
regular mainstream education or compensate for lack of individualised attention
in the classroom. Alternatively, households may exercise their
voice as an expression of discontent with the quality of education their
children receive in regular mainstream schools.
5.1 Mother’s education
The
results presented above reveal that parents’ education level, particularly the
mother’s, is an important factor that shapes
private tutoring usage in Qatar. These results are consistent with research
findings
confirming
a strong relationship between the parent’s level of education and the likelihood they will hire a private tutor for
their child (Liu, 2019; Otto & Karbach, 2019). While there is no
correlation between the father’s education and the demand for private tutoring,
the mother’s level of education is associated with the use of a private tutor.
This could be interpreted as implying that highly educated mothers in Qatar are
perhaps in full time employment and thus have little time to follow up with their
child’s school and to advocate for higher standards of schooling.
Therefore, private tutoring may be perceived as a useful tool
that educated Qatari mothers employ to counterbalance their
inability to attend to their child’s educational needs and engage more
actively with her/his schooling.
These
findings further echo past and recent work done by Hefnawi and Jeynes (2022), who suggest that
parental participation in the child’s schooling in Arab societies is very
limited. More specifically, other studies such as Barnes
and others’ (2016) note that parents’ busy schedules and time
constraints can affect and even impede their involvement in their children’s
education. Indeed, there is evidence to suggest that parents may seek to
compensate for their lack of engagement by investing significant amounts of
time and money in private tutoring, which they may regard as an alternate form
of involvement (Otto & Karbach,
2019; Urhahne, 2019).
5.2 Students’ grade level
Our
study’s results further suggest that parents with a child in
upper grades at school are more likely to invest in private tutoring in
Qatar, compared to those with children in lower grade levels.
In line with findings of studies conducted by Bray (2021) and
Kim and Jung (2019), it may be argued that private
tutoring is most common among students in the final stages of secondary school, perhaps signifying that the use of private
tutor among upper grade students who are about to exit high school is
indicative of their willingness to perform well in high stakes standardised
exams. Another interpretation is that parents’ use of a private
tutor and their investment in their child’s educational journey at this
critical juncture could be attributed to a desire to enhance their college-going
child’s chances of success in securing a place at an elite, more
selective college or university (Exley,
2020; Yung, 2019). Available research has shown that
expecting or planning to enroll in a prominent institution of higher education
is a salient determinant factor that influences parents’ decision to hire a
private tutor (Zhang, 2020).
5.3 Cost of education-related activities
5.4 School type
Looking
at the type of school attended, the results concluded from our
study indicate that parents with children in private schools
tend to participate in private tutoring more than those with children in public
or other schools do. Could investment in private tutoring be a measure taken by
parents to meet the academic standards and requirements of their child’s school
in Qatar? While no documented research is available to confirm this claim,
anecdotal evidence points to the pressure from peers and school demands as factors
that influence families’ use of a private tutor. International schools in
Qatar, and the larger Arabian Gulf region for that matter, are generally viewed
as competitive and demanding, and often hold parents partly accountable for
their children’s education. These schools also have a rigorous reputation,
which likely contributes to their success in attracting highly motivated
students. Moreover, as is stated above, parents may hire a private tutor to
further their child’s chances of success and to secure a
seat in selective and elite institutions of higher education
(Exley, 2020; Yung, 2019).
5.5 School absenteeism
The
child’s school absenteeism also emerged
as an important factor that shapes parental use of private tutoring. This
finding could be taken to mean that the child’s absences from school may have
driven parents to seek a private tutor outside their child’s school in order to
counterbalance the classes their child misses. Results from a previous
large-scale study conducted by the Social and Economic Survey Research
Institute (SESRI) in 2015 in Qatar showed a strong correlation between higher
rates of participation in private tutoring and student failure to attend school
(SESRI, 2016). This result is also consistent with findings from other
documented research confirming that concerns over the child’s academic
performance at school influence parental decisions to hire a private tutor to
provide instruction for their child (Guill,
Lüdtke, & Köller, 2020; Seo, 2018).
At
the same time, one could further argue that taking private tutoring may prompt
students to miss classes when seen as a leverage that allows them to catch up
and make up for missed classes. Recent research by Bhorkar and Bray (2018) and
Zhang and
Bray (2017) reveals that tutoring outside formal schooling undermines
students’ regular school attendance because it encourages them to miss classes
if they feel there is a substitute to their teacher. Findings from a study
conducted by Guill and Bos (2014) reveal that bored
and unmotivated students are also likely to skip school as long as they have
access to a private tutor.
Viewed
through Hirschman’s exit, voice, and loyalty framework, it may be argued that
parents resort to private tutoring as an “exit” strategy. Combined, our study’s
findings could be understood as implying parents’ perceived dissatisfaction
with the quality of formal education, coupled with the perceived advantages
conferred by pursuing private tutoring as a form of educational support for
their children. Similarly, parents’ decisions to hire private tutors may
signify their use of “voice” to communicate their concerns about mainstream
education delivery and assert the need for improvement to address the academic
needs of their children. Looking closely at our findings in their totality
reveals that a segment of parents do not participate in the private tutoring
frenzy. Hirschman's “loyalty” concept helps to clarify why these parents are
committed to their main education provider in Qatar, that is, the Ministry of
Education and Higher Education. Qatari parents’ preference of public schools in
Qatar may account for their loyalty and the value they attach to their own and
their childrens’ identity as Muslims and Arabs.
6.
Conclusion
Over
the years, Qatar has striven to reform its education sector to empower
stakeholder voice through decentralization and a market-driven approach to the
provision of schooling. However, the outcomes of recent reforms have not been
very successful in terms of enhancing the quality of formal
(mainstream) education. Mounting evidence points to increasing
parental reliance on private tutors to engage with school improvement through
voice. Even with this drive to rely on private tutors, there is still a
mismatch between students’ literacy and numeracy, research and critical
understanding, and university expectations. Could these findings
suggest decreasing trust in Qatar’s public education and does this drive
people’s perceived need for tutors? Future research is required to explore this
important area.
At
a time when Qatar strives to overhaul its K-12 and higher education, efforts
taken by successive governments continue to be weakened by the presence of a
prevalent illegal ‘shadow education’ that is sustained by a far-flung desire
for private tutors. As in many other world regions, Qatar is home to
unregulated private tutors that engage in private, non-contractual tutoring, often in
students’ and, to a lesser extent, tutors’ homes (SESRI, 2016). Our study does not yield any evidence that confirms
private tutoring usage does or doesn’t contribute to a student’s improved
educational attainment. Previous research has examined how families turn
to private tutoring when mainstream public education does not meet their
expectations, but the findings remain
inconclusive.
The
implications of this present study are two-fold: policy-level issues for the
government of Qatar and potential directions for future research locally,
regionally or internationally. The study’s findings may inform educational policy
and decision-making. Within the context of Qatar, we observed an important
trend among households to use a private tutor based on a perceived advantage
conferred by the use of tutoring outside mainstream schooling. The onus,
therefore, rests on decision makers to devise
and implement policies regulating the use
of private tutoring while also assisting and encouraging schools and
stakeholders to place more emphasis on the quality of formal education. At the
same time, school children and their parents should also be encouraged to
valorize mainstream education delivery. The findings can also be useful for
researchers in other countries who may be interested in exploring the topic, to
learn more about the dynamics that affect this phenomenon in non-Western
settings.
Existing
research has shown that private tutoring can improve students’ academic
performance (Sun et al., 2020; Zhang et al.,
2021) and may facilitate student access to higher education institutions
(Hajar & Abenova, 2021). ,
this research has largely ignored salient differences that exist between
students who take private tuition and other students. One of the limitations of
this study is its sole focus on parental views. Including students’ opinions on
the topic would provide an alternative and more informed perspective. Future
research is needed to investigate in more detail the personal attitudes and
motivations and other relevant context-specific influences likely to shape
private tutoring usage, especially in other countries of the MENA region.
Future work is also needed to broaden the focus to incorporate a wide spectrum
of students enrolled in all types of schools in Qatar and not simply Qatari
students. Overall, private tutoring remains under-researched, particularly
regarding related students’ and parents’ personal motivations and other
context-specific factors.
References
Alam, M. B., & Zhu, Z. (2022).
Private tutoring in Bangladesh: Evolution, expansion, and policy
responses. International Journal of Comparative Education and
Development, 24(1), 20-36.
Barnes, J. K., Guin, A., Allen, K., & Jolly, C. (2016).
Engaging parents in early childhood education: Perspectives of childcare
providers. Family and Consumer Sciences Research Journal, 44(4),
360-374. https://doi.org/10.1111/fcsr.12164
Bhorkar, S., & Bray, M. (2018). The expansion and roles
of private tutoring in India: From supplementation to supplantation. International
Journal of Educational Development, 62, 148-156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2018.03.003
Bray, M.
(2007). The shadow education system: Private tutoring and its implications
for planners (2nd ed.). UNESCO, International Institute for
Educational Planning.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/44839572_The_Shadow_education_system_private_tutoring_and_its_implications_for_planners
–––. (2011). The challenge of shadow education:
Private tutoring and its implications for policy makers in the European Union.
European Commission. http://www.nesse.fr/nesse/activities/reports/activities/reports/the-challenge-of-shadow-education-1
–––. (2021). Shadow education in
Europe: Growing prevalence, underlying forces, and policy implications. ECNU
Review of Education, 4(3), 442-475. DOI: 10.1177/2096531119890142
Bray, M., & Hajar, A.
(2022). Shadow education in the Middle East: Private supplementary
tutoring and its policy implications. Taylor & Francis.
Brehm,
W. C., & Silova, I. (2014). Hidden privatization of public education in
Cambodia: Equity implications of private tutoring. Journal for Educational
Research Online, 6(1), 94–116. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/264971897_Hidden_privatization_of_public_education_in_Cambodia_Equity_implications_of_private_tutoring
Chih-Hao, C. (2019). Effects of private tutoring on English
performance: Evidence from senior high students in Taiwan. International
Journal of Educational Development, 68, 80-87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2019.05.003
Choudhury, P. K. (2019). Parental choice for schools in the
changing context of the state and market in India. In S. Babu (Ed.), Education and the public sphere (pp.
109-129). London: Routledge.
Entrich, S. R. (2020a). Gender-and SES-specific disparities
in shadow education: Compensation for boys, status upgrade for girls? Evidence
from the German Life Study. Orbis Scholae, 14(2),
13-38.
–––. (2020b). Worldwide shadow education and social
inequality: Explaining differences in the socioeconomic gap in access to shadow
education across 63 societies. International Journal of Comparative
Sociology, 61(6), 441-475. https://doi.org/10.1177/00207152209878
Exley, S. (2020). Selective schooling and its relationship to
private tutoring: The case of South Korea. Comparative Education, 56(2),
218-235.
https://doi.org/10.1080/03050068.2019.1687230
Erickson, H. (2017). How do parents choose schools, and what
schools do they choose? A literature review of private school choice programs
in the United States. Journal of School Choice, 11(4),
491-506. DOI:10.1080/15582159.2017.1395618
Ghosh, P., & Bray, M. (2020). School systems as breeding
grounds for shadow education: Factors contributing to private supplementary
tutoring in West Bengal, India. European Journal of Education, 55(3),
342-360. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12412
Golkowska, K. (2014). Arab women in the Gulf and the
narrative of change: The case of Qatar. International Studies: Interdisciplinary
Political and Cultural Journal (IS), 16(1), 51-64.
–––. (2017). Qatari women navigating gendered space. Social
Sciences, 6(4), 123.
Guill, K., &
Bos, W. (2014). Effectiveness of private tutoring in mathematics with regard to
subjective and objective indicators of academic achievement. Evidence from a
German secondary school sample. Journal for Educational Research Online,
6(1), 34–67. https://doi.org/10.25656/01:8840
Guill,
K., & Lintorf, K. (2019). Private tutoring when stakes are high: Insights
from the transition from primary to secondary school in Germany. International
Journal of Educational Development, 65, 172-182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2018.08.001
Guill,
K., Lüdtke, O., & Köller, O. (2020). Assessing the instructional quality of
private tutoring and its effects on student outcomes: Analyses from the German
National Educational Panel Study. British Journal of Educational
Psychology, 90(2), 282-300. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjep.12281
Guill,
K., Lüdtke, O., & Schwanenberg, J. (2020). A two‐level study of
predictors of private tutoring attendance at the beginning of secondary
schooling in Germany: The role of individual learning support in the
classroom. British Educational Research Journal, 46(2),
437-457. https://doi.org/10.1002/berj.3586
Gupta,
A. (2022). Social legitimacy of private tutoring: An investigation of
institutional and affective educational practices in India. Discourse: Studies
in the Cultural Politics of Education, 43(4), 571-584. https://doi.org/10.1080/01596306.2020.1868978
Hajar,
A., & Abenova, S. (2021). The role of private tutoring in admission to
higher education: Evidence from a highly selective university in
Kazakhstan. Hungarian Educational Research Journal, 11(2),
124-142. https://doi.org/10.1556/063.2021.00001
Hefnawi,
A., & Jeynes, W. (2022). Parental involvement in the UAE and in other
moderate Arab states. In W.
Jeynes (Ed.), Relational aspects of
parental involvement to support educational outcomes: Parental communication,
expectations, and participation for student success (pp. 139-158). New York: Routledge.
Hirschman,
A. O. (1970). Exit, voice, and loyalty: Responses to decline in firms,
organizations, and states. Harvard University Press.
Holloway, S. L., & Pimlott‐Wilson, H. (2020).
Marketising private tuition: Representations of tutors’ competence,
entrepreneurial opportunities and service legitimation in home tutoring
business manuals. British Educational Research Journal, 46(1),
205-221. https://doi.org/10.1002/berj.3575
Holmes
Erickson, H. (2017). How do parents choose schools, and what schools do they
choose? A literature review of private school choice programs in the United
States. Journal of School Choice, 11(4), 491–506.
https://doi.org/10.1080/15582159.2017.1395618
Hultberg, P. T., Calonge, D. S.,
& Choi, T. (2021). Costs and benefits of private tutoring programs: The
South Korean case. International Journal of Social Economics, 48(6),
862-877. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSE-12-2019-0722
Kemerer, J. L. (2021). Parent Rights,
School Choice, and Equality of Opportunity. In School Choice Tradeoffs (pp.
98-133). University of Texas Press.
Kim, Y. C., & Jung, J. H.
(2019). Shadow education as worldwide curriculum studies. Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
Kirby, P. (2016). Shadow Schooling: Private tuition and
social mobility in the UK. The Sutton Trust. https://www.suttontrust.com/our-research/shadowschooling-private-tuition-social-mobility/
Lambert,
K., & Spinath, B. (2014). Do we need a special intervention program for
children with mathematical learning disabilities or is private tutoring
sufficient? Journal for Educational Research Online, 6(1),
68–93. https://www.pedocs.de/volltexte/2014/8841/pdf/JERO_2014_1_Lambert_Spinath_Do_we_need_a_special_intervention_program.pdf
Lee, S. S. (2021). A precarious balancing act: globalization,
political legitimacy, and higher education expansion in Qatar and the UAE. Contemporary
Arab Affairs, 14(1), 113-133.
Little, R. J., Carpenter, J. R., & Lee, K. J. (2022). A
comparison of three popular methods for handling missing data: Complete-case
analysis, inverse probability weighting, and multiple imputation. Sociological
Methods & Research, 1-31. https://doi.org/10.1177/00491241221113873
Liu, J. (2019). A structural equation modeling analysis of
parental factors underlying the demand for private supplementary tutoring in
China. ECNU Review of Education, 2(1), 7-24. DOI:10.1177/2096531119840856
Liu, J., & Bray, M. (2020). Evolving micro-level
processes of demand for private supplementary tutoring: Patterns and
implications at primary and lower secondary levels in China. Educational
Studies, 46(2), 170-187. https://doi.org/10.1080/03055698.2018.1555452
Marshall, J. H., & Fukao, T. (2019). Shadow education and
inequality in lower secondary schooling in Cambodia: Understanding the dynamics
of private tutoring participation and provision. Comparative Education
Review, 63(1), 98-120.
McGann J.G. (2019) Qatar: An overview.
In J. McGann (Eds.), Think tanks, foreign policy and the emerging powers (pp. 377-381).
Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60312-4_26
Mohamed, S. (2017, January 24). Ministry gets tough against private tutors:
Common summer vacation for all schools. The Peninsula. https://www.thepeninsulaqatar.com/article/24/01/2017/Ministry-gets-tough-against-private-tutors-Common-summer-vacation-for-all-schools
Mousumi, M. A.,
& Kusakabe, T. (2017). The dilemmas of school choice: Do parents really
‘choose’ low-fee private schools in Delhi, India? Compare: A Journal of
Comparative and International Education, 49(2), 230-248. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057925.2017.1401451
Otto,
B., & Karbach, J. (2019). The effects of private tutoring on students’
perception of their parents’ academic involvement and the quality of their
parent-child relationship. Educational Psychology, 39(7),
923-940. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2019.1610725
Ristow, B. (2019). Mobilizing resistance against the shadow
economies of global private tutoring. In Neoliberalism and Academic
Repression (pp. 107-122). Brill. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004415539_008
Rocha, V., & Hamed, D. S. (2018). Parents’
perspectives on paid private tutoring in the United Arab Emirates. Regional
center for Educational Planning.
https://rcepunesco.ae/en/KnowledgeCorner/ReportsandStudies/ReportsandStudies/july-26-2018.pdf
Sellami,
A. & Le Trung, K. (2020). Predictors of parental use of private
tutoring in Qatar. International Journal of Humanities Education, 18(2), 17-36. DOI: 10.18848/2327-0063/CGP/v18i02/17-36
Seo, E. H. (2018). Private tutoring and academic achievement:
Self-study as a mediator. Social Behavior and Personality: An international
journal, 46(5), 823-830. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.6689
SESRI
(the Social and Economic Survey Research Institute). (2016). Qatar Education
Study 2015: Students’ motivation and parental participation. Qatar:
SESRI, Qatar University.
http://sesri.qu.edu.qa/static_file/qu/research/SESRI/documents/Publications/16/Students'%20Motivation%20and%20Parental%20Participation%20Report%20AR.pdf
Shih, Y. P., & Yi, C. C. (2014). Cultivating the
difference: Social class, parental values, cultural capital and children's
after-school activities in Taiwan. Journal of Comparative Family
Studies, 45(1), 55-75. https://doi.org/10.3138/jcfs.45.1.55
Sieverding, M., Krafft, C., & Elbadawy, A. (2019). An
exploration of the drivers of private tutoring in Egypt. Comparative
Education Review, 63(4), 562-590.
Sun, L., Shafiq, M. N., McClure, M., & Guo, S. (2020).
Are there educational and psychological benefits from private supplementary
tutoring in Mainland China? Evidence from the China Education Panel Survey,
2013–15. International Journal of Educational Development, 72,
102144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2019.102144
Tan, C. (2017). Private supplementary tutoring and
parentocracy in Singapore. Interchange, 48(4), 315-329. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10780-017-9303-4
–––. (2022). Private tutoring and the subjective
rationalities of parents: The experiences in South Korea and Singapore. Asian
Education and Development Studies, 11(3),
464-474. https://doi.org/10.1108/AEDS-08-2020-0183
Urhahne,
D. (2019). Teacher influences and parental involvement. Educational Psychology, 39(7),
859-861. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2019.1642630
Yung, K. W. (2019). Exploring the L2 selves of senior
secondary students in English private tutoring in Hong Kong. System, 80,
120-133.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2018.11.003
Yung,
K. W., & Bray, M. (2017). Shadow education: Features, expansion and
implications. In T. K. C. Tse & M. Lee (Eds.), Making sense of education
in post-handover Hong Kong: Achievements and challenges (pp. 95-111).
Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315694375
Zhang, W. (2020). Shadow education in the service of tiger
parenting: Strategies used by middle‐class families in China. European
Journal of Education, 55(3), 388-404.
Zhang, W., & Bray, M. (2017). Micro-neoliberalism in
China: Public-private interactions at the confluence of mainstream and shadow
education. Journal of Education Policy, 32(1), 63-81. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680939.2016.1219769
–––. (2018). Equalising schooling, unequalising private
supplementary tutoring: Access and tracking through shadow education in China. Oxford
Review of Education, 44(2), 221-238. https://doi.org/10.1080/03054985.2017.1389710
–––. (2020). Comparative research on shadow education:
Achievements, challenges, and the agenda ahead. European Journal of
Education, 55(3), 322-341. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12413
Zhang, W., & Yamato, Y. (2018). Shadow education in East
Asia: Entrenched but evolving private supplementary tutoring. In K.J. Kennedy
& J.C. Lee (Eds.), Routledge international handbook of
schools and schooling in Asia (pp. 323-332). London: Routledge.
Zhang, Y., Dang, Y., He, Y., Ma, X., & Wang, L. (2021).
Is private supplementary tutoring effective? A longitudinally detailed analysis
of private tutoring quality in China. Asia Pacific Education Review, 22,
239-259. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-021-09671-3
Final ddeclarations:
-
The author/s
declare that he/she/they got the required voluntary human participants consent
to participate in the study as well as the necessary institutional approvals.
-
The datasets generated and/or analyzed during the current
study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
تصريحات
ختامية:
-
يصرح
المؤلف/المؤلفون
بالحصول على
موافقة
الأشخاص
المتطوعين
للمشاركة في الدراسة
وعلى
الموافقات
المؤسسية
اللازمة.
-
تتوفر
البيانات
الناتجة و/أو
المحلَّلة
المتصلة بهذه
الدراسة من
المؤلف
المراسل عند
الطلب.
Journal
of 
مجلة
العلوم
التربوية