Download ppt - Collaborative Learning:

Collaborative Collaborative Learning:Learning:

Collaborative Collaborative Learning:Learning:

A case study of the efficacy of a A case study of the efficacy of a Peer Tutoring ProgrammePeer Tutoring Programme

By Chong-Ng Swee KuanBy Chong-Ng Swee Kuan

Introduction

A mixed-method approach was undertaken to determine how Year 6 students who volunteered to be peer tutors and their respective peer tutees perceived the variables that determined the efficacy of the Economics peer tutoring programme.

Phase 1

Quantitative findings

Both peer tutors and tutees completed survey questionaires that served to capture information of their

• performance for internal school examinations

• perceptions on attributes of a successful tutor

• ratings on specific features of the programme

• ratings on the reasons why peer tutees were weak in the subject

• the tutors’ perceptions of self-efficacy as a tutor

Phase 2

Qualitative findings 5 successful peer tutors whose tutees

showed the highest effect size were identified to participate in a guided focus group interview.

This examined • how the learning strategies used by

successful tutors helped both peer tutors and their peer tutees remained on task,

• the contributing factors to a high level of engagement in learning for the successful peer tutors and their peer tutees and

• the self-efficacy beliefs of the peer tutors.

Literature Review

As early as 1984, Bloom’s article on The 2 Sigma Problem: The search for

methods of group instruction as effective as one-to-one tutoring.

This study reported how tutorial instruction based on one-to-one tutoring compared to conventional and mastery learning.

Observable outcomes:• students who “learned the subject matter with

a good tutor for each student (or for two or three students simultaneously)” produced effect sizes of the order of 2 standard deviations above the control group who received conventional instruction in “a class with 30 students per teacher”.

• Those who were taught using Mastery Learning performed at one deviation above the control group (Bloom, 1984, p. 4).

One measure of peer tutoring effect

Effect Size (ES) was defined as “the difference between the means of two groups divided by the standard deviation of the control group” (Glass, 1976 in Cohen et al., 1982, p. 240).

Effects of instructional program

A Swing and Peterson study (1982) showed that with just “two sessions of instructional program” for both fifth grade peer tutors and peer tutees (for Maths), there were increased frequency in exchanges of explanations (between peer tutors and tutees) and they also performed more checks on each other than the control groups.

Effects of interactive mediated rehearsal routine

Another research study by Fuchs, Fuchs, Bentz, Phillips & Hamlett (1994) showed how an “interactive, mediated verbal rehearsal routine” had positive effect resulting in enhanced interactions between tutors and tutees.

• In this case, the peer-tutors in the experimental group were taught the routine to ask “a series of questions that tutee could learn and use to guide himself or herself to the problem’s solution” (Fuchs et al., 1994, p. 81).

Effects of peer tutor’s ability on the quality of

explanations

• Fuchs, Fuchs, Karns, Hamlett, Dutka and Katzaroff (1996) examined the quality and effectiveness of peer tutors’ explanations by analysing how Higher Achievement peer tutors and Average Achievement peer tutors differed.

• High Achievement peer tutors were more likely to rephrase problems with explanations that bridge procedural to conceptual explanation.

• Is there a role for an interactive mediated rehearsal routine to improve the efficacy of peer tutors? The guided focus group interview also seek to confirm if successful tutors have identified a routine for checking how well their tutees have learnt new content matter.

Zone of proximity development

• Vygotsky defined the zone of proximity development as “the distance between the actual developmental level as determined by independent problem solving and the level of potential development as determined through problem solving under adult guidance or in collaboration with more capable peers” (Goldstein, 2000, p. 649).

• Scenario 1 Teacher successfully request students to

elaborate on their ideas, redirect discussion and rework the students’ contributions so that they are integrated into the discussion.

• Scenario 2 The able peer tutor emulates the above

process and helps the tutee moves towards his potential development by providing collaboration as a more capable peer.

Scaffolding…

Pata et al., (2006) investigated the effect of scaffolding.

Helpful scaffolding provides support and external structure just sufficient enough to enable students’ productive participation.

Content scaffolding hinting, prompting, summarizing.

Process scaffolding tutor’s/student’s instructions and tutor’s feedback

How peer tutors learn from their effort

• Roscoe and Chi (2007) identified six studies that combined peer tutor learning data and process data.

• All six of them were for same-age, fixed-role peer tutors ranging from elementary schools all the way to undergraduate peer tutoring (Roscoe & Chi, 2007, p. 543).

• All six studies showed that effective peer tutoring could be traced to effective use of explaining, questioning, assessment and feedback.

• The peer tutor needs to comprehend and synthesize the material in order to generate accurate explanation.

• The higher the level of preparation, the more peer tutors will recognize any possible knowledge gaps and misconceptions the peer tutee has.

• In programmes where keeping a journal or log has been mandatory, the peer tutors have gained from

keeping a record of explanations generated for self and for peer tutee.

• A possible scaffolding dialogue for peer tutor to guide a discussion.

• sequential procedure tutor asks a question, tutee answers the question, tutor gives feedback, tutor and tutee elaborate upon the tutee’s answer, followed by tutor’s evaluation of the revised

answer.

Self-efficacy beliefs of peer tutors

• Attribution theory emphasised the inter-personal context between peer tutor and a peer tutee such that the successful peer tutor is then ‘a significant other’.

• Peer tutor’s self-regulation and self-management becomes a positive influence on the peer tutee.

Gundlach, et al. 2003

• Tutors high in self efficacy would generate and test alternative courses of action when they do not meet with initial success.

• The concept of self-efficacy is the peer tutor’s notion of his/her belief in his/her capacity to achieve a desired outcome.

A successful peer tutor achieves

• substantive connectivensss by getting the core subject matter across to the tutee

• interpersonal connectiveness by influencing the tutee relationally as a good role model

• instructional connectiveness by choosing the appropriate instruction for the learning need

Participants and Setting

• After Block Test 1 peer tutoring programme was implemented to help weaker students.

• Peer tutors were students who had done well for BT1 and had volunteered their time for the role as peer tutors on a weekly basis.

• A ten week period from mid March to end of May 2009

Criterion for this study• At least 50% attendance over the period• Valid survey responses: 9 peer tutors and their 9 peer tutees

Determining the experimental-control

• The experimental control is another student in the same class as the peer tutee who scored the same raw score at Block Test 1.

• If this is a non-occurrence, then the search would be extended to another class taught by the same economics tutor. (Hence subject tutor would remain a constant)

Measurement of effect size for peer tutee

Effect Size of each peer tutee = Score of peer tutee for Block

Test 2 – Score of experimental-control for Block Test 2

Measurement of Effect Size for peer tutoring programme

Effect Size for the peer tutoring programme =

(mean score for peer tutees at Block Test 2 –Mean score for experimental control group for Block Test 2) / standard deviation of experimental control group at Block Test 1

Effect size for top 9 tutees in this case study

Tutee & Expt-control(BT1)

Tutee

(BT2)

Expt Control (BT2)

For n=9

Standard Deviation= 6.43

Mean =51.78

Mean =46.11

Mean= 38.22

Effect size of the peer programme based on top 9 tutees=1.22 standard deviation

Effect size for top 5 tutees in this case study

Tutee & Expt-control(BT1)

Tutee

(BT2)

Expt Control (BT2)

For n= 5

Standard Deviation= 4.9

Mean =52

Mean =51

Mean= 39.6

Effect size of the peer tutoring programme based on top 5 tutees =2.49 standard deviation

Phase 1

Quantitative Method using survey questionaires to collect data

Research Qn 1

What are the attributes of a successful peer tutor as perceived by

a) peer tutors? b) peer tutees?

i) A successful peer tutors builds on what a tutee has learnt/done in the previous session __________

None Some Most All the time

Peer tutors - 33.3% 33.3% 33.3%

Peer tutees 11.1% 33.3% 55.6% -

ii) A successful peer tutor is able to explain the relevant concepts clearly ________

Peer tutors - 11.1% 44.4% 44.4%

Peer tutees - 11.1% 77.8% 11.1%


iii) When a tutee appears to be struggling over a problem in the assignment, a successful peer tutor prompts his/her tutee _______

Peer tutors - 44.4% 33.3% 22.2%

Peer tutees 11.1% 22.2% 55.6% 11.1%


iv) A successful peer tutor takes the trouble to prepare for each session _______

Peer tutors - - 55.6% 44.4%

Peer tutees - 22.2% 77.8% -


v) A successful peer tutor takes the opportunity to acknowledge that he/she has learnt something new whenever it happened _____

Peer tutors - 11.1% 66.7% 22.2%

Peer tutees 11.1% 11.1% 77.8% -


High High

High High Low

Highi) sequencing ii) clear iii) prompting

explanation

iv) Tutor v) Tutor

preparation learning

Tutee learning and Effect size

Accounting for high tutee learning

Research Qn 2

Rating the importance of specific features in enhancing efficacy of peer tutoring programme in general by


Ratings by peer tutors and peer tutees

Ratings by peer tutors peer tutees

i) No. of tutee per tutor 4th 4th tiedii) Venue for peer tutoring 5th 4th iii) Frequency of sessions 2nd 3rd iv) Duration of session 3rd 2nd v) Specific learning objectives as decided by peer tutor and tutee 1st 1st

Enhancing efficacy of the programme

Ideal number of tutee/s per tutor 1.4 1.7Ideal number of session per week 1.0 1.4Ideal duration in hour/s per session 1.7 1.5

Answers from peer tutors peer tutees

Research Qn 3

Perceived reasons why tutees are weak in the subject as rated by


Items Ratings by tutors by tutees

Lack of foundation knowledge 2nd 1st

Lack of discipline to focus 4th 3rd

Lack of interest in subject 5th 4th

Lack of confidence to tackle subject independently 1st 4th

Poor time management in general 3rd 2nd

Reasons why peer tutee is weak in Economics

Research Qn 4

What are the tutors’ perceptions of self-efficacy as a tutor?

i) I have confidence in my ability to do my job as a peer tutor _______


- 22.2% 55.6% 22.2%

ii) There are some tasks required of a peer tutor that I cannot do well ________.

None Some Most All the time - 100% - -

iii) I perform badly as a peer tutor, due to my lack of ability _______


33.3% 66.7% - -

iv) I have all the skills needed to perform my task as a peer tutor very well __________


- 22.2% 66.7% 11.1%

v) I am an expert in my role as a peer tutor _______

None Some Most All the time11.1% 44.4% 44.4% -

Phase 2

Qualitative Method using a thematic approach to review the findings from the focus group interview

Research Qn 5

How the learning strategies used by the five top peer tutors helped both peer tutors and their peer tutees remained engaged on task?

Research Qn 6

What were the contributing factors to efficacy of the five top peer tutors as successful tutors?

iv.Motivation

of peer tutors and

peer tutees

ii. Collabor-ation

iii. Convergent expectations of tutors and tutees

Content: Review

Concepts& clarify misconcept-ions

Skills:Discuss

Approaches &

Compile Essays

i.Scaffolding

Mastery Learning

Tutors and tutees engagement in

learning

Interpersonal Connectiveness &Instructional Connectiveness

resulting in high Effect Size for peer tutee

Tutors’ self efficacy beliefs

Summary showing the connections that lead to high Effect Size

Outcome from the focus group interview:Strategies used by the 5 tutors

• Clarifications of doubts• Consistent reviews of concepts• Effort of peer tutors to help their

tutees worked conscientiously on skills required for essays

• Discussions and writing out essay structures

• Peer tutors reported high motivation level of their peer tutees

• Peer tutors reported frustration when they and their peer tutees were unable to meet for peer tutoring due to constraints

Specific examples

i) Tutor E shared essays she compiled with her tutee

ii) Tutor C was certain that his tutees’ grades for economics improved since the peer tutees became more confident of themselves and also they were asking “deeper” questions

Evidence of personal connectiveness and instructional connectiveness

i) the level of scaffolding by peer tutorsii) the extent of collaboration (Tutor E took extra time to prepare if the

questions the tutee wished to clarify were not from recent lectures and tutorials)

(Where help is needed by the peer tutor, Tutor E said she would draw upon her “friends” and then her tutor. Tutor E Tutor D and Tutor B also indicated peer discussion would be their first preference)

iii) Convergent expectations of peer tutors and peer tutees

iv) Motivation level of peer tutors and their peer tutees

Significance of findings from this case study

To offer some forms of training to all potential peer tutors so that efficacy level of tutors would be more uniform

To consider some forms of “mediated strategic learning” instructions to meet the need for peer tutees to see the relevance in the application of the concept for each topic

To train peer tutors for scaffolding Simplify scaffolding so that they

are generic steps that are suitable for handling discussion of essay questions

To encourage peer tutors to be consistent in their preparation before tutoring sessions.

Thank you.

Please e-mail [email protected] for related enquiries.