The research site was a literacy program organized and funded by undergraduate students at a Canadian university. This study focuses exclusively on the approximately 40 tutors involved each year in their one-on-one literacy program. This organization was chosen for study because of its active and well-established one-on-one tutoring program and because its tutors and organizers are drawn from a relatively homogeneous population of university students, allowing for comparison of their beliefs and behaviour. The researcher was known to the organization as a former tutor with its program (1995-1996) as well as with a similar program on another campus (1993-1994). The study was conducted in 1997-1998 with the cooperation of the organizing teams for both years.

The research was conducted using case-study methodology, since this methodology permits in-depth investigation of a particular phenomenon within a specific site. The case study method (Merriam, 1990) is useful in constructing theory when there is no existing theory "to provide an adequate or appropriate explanation" (Merriam, 1990, p. 59). The research findings cannot be generalized to other tutors or organizations, but it is hoped that this study will raise questions and provoke further research into volunteer tutor beliefs and behaviour.

Data were gathered during semi-structured interviews with eighteen tutors who were entering the program and being trained (4 individuals), those who had tutored for several months (10 individuals), and those who were learner-tutor coordinators (generally with a years' tutoring experience) (4 individuals). Participants in the first two groups were randomly selected, while in the last group all four learner-tutor coordinators agreed to participate. Although Seidman (1991) recommends purposeful selection in qualitative research, random selection was used where possible to avoid bias from the organization toward tutors known to them and to protect participant anonymity.

Interviews ranged in length from 45 minutes to one and a half hours. All interviews were based on the same set of questions (See Appendix), although the order in which they were presented varied. The four beliefs were mainly derived from the following tow questions:

1. If you had to write a letter to the minister of adult education about adult learners and literacy, what would you say?

2. Many adult educators don't think volunteer tutors have enough training to be able to tutor adults effectively in literacy, and that volunteers should only be used as teacher's aides. How would you respond?

All interviews were conducted, taped and transcribed by the researcher. Data analysis followed Glaser and Strauss' (1967) four-stage constant comparative method. Coding methods were influenced by Miles and Huberman's (1994) descriptive coding and Strauss and Corbin's (1990) method of open coding. Preliminary categories were established by the interview questions and more detailed categories emerged as patterns surfaced within the data.