Effects of Peer Tutoring on the Mathematics
Achievement of Fifth Grade Students
with Academic Learning Disabilities
Angela Mahan
Valdosta State University
An action research project submitted in partial
fulfillment of the requirements of the Education Specialist Degree
in Exemplary Teaching at Valdosta State University.
ABSTRACT: The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of peer
tutoring on achievement in mathematics among fifth grade students (N=14) with
learning disabilities. The intervention took place during small group instructional
time for 30 minutes a day over a six week time period. Within the experimental
class there were seven students who received peer tutoring by being paired with
students of above grade-level ability. Participants in the comparison class
consisted of class (N = 7) received only traditional teacher-directed instruction.
Results were determined using STAR mathematics tests, pretests/posttests,
student questionnaires, interviews, behavioral observations. Results indicated
significant improvements in students’ attitudes and opinions; however academic
achievement in mathematics increased only slightly with the use of the peer
tutoring intervention. Peer tutoring was an overall useful strategy to promote
active engagement in the learning process and potentially increase academic
achievement among fifth grade students with learning disabilities.
Introduction
One of the most pertinent issues in education today is the widening achievement gap
between students with academic learning disabilities and regular education students. Certain
programs such as peer tutoring, should be in place in order to improve the academic achievement
of those individuals so they do not fall further behind. According to the Georgia Governor’s
Office of Student Achievement, mathematics is a problem area among students with learning
disabilities at schools such as the research site. Though only 8% of students without learning
disabilities did not meet expectations on the 2007-2008 Mathematics Criterion Referenced
Competency Test (CRCT), an alarming 65% of students with learning disabilities did not meet
state expectations (Governor’s Office of Student Achievement, 2009).
Review of Literature
According to Harper and Maheady (2007), peer instruction is an effective strategy for
children with learning disabilities that actively engages students. In their meta-analysis,
Kroesnbergen and Van Luit (2003) referenced on a study that was performed by Beirne-Smith in
1
Novus Scientia Vol. I No. 2
1991 which showed that 30 peer tutored students with learning disabilities performed higher on
pretests and posttests.
Research by Shamir and Lazerovitz (2007) on a peer-mediation intervention scaffolding
for self-regulated learning among children with learning disabilities focused on cross-age
tutoring. Their research showed that the experimental group showed higher test scores and
greater improvement than the control group. “With support from their peers, students with
special needs can succeed in the general classroom.” (Mastropieri, Scruggs, & Berkeley, 2007, p.
54) In their meta-analysis entitled Peers Helping Peers, Mastropieri et al. (2007) evaluated three
effective methods for improving student learning in the elementary school setting: peer
assistance, cooperative learning, and class-wide peer tutoring. McDuffie, Mastropieri, and
Scruggs (2009) suggested that students with disabilities fall further behind as they progress past
elementary school.
Most students who have learning difficulties struggle in reading and are more likely to
experience feelings of failure, behavior difficulties, and lack of confidence which are causes of
decreased academic achievement (Burns, 2006). Burns’ research on Poise, Prompt, and Praise
(2006) supports the theory that with proper training, peer tutoring can be used as a successful
intervention to help students with learning difficulties in reading. Hughes and Fredrick (2006)
conducted a mixed study to examine the implementation of class-wide peer tutoring among
students with and without learning disabilities in high school language arts classes. After seven
weeks of daily peer tutoring, the majority of students with learning disabilities demonstrated
mastery of the vocabulary which was taught.
A meta-analysis conducted by Robinson, Schofield, and Steers-Wentzell (2005) focused
on peer tutoring and cross-age tutoring in math. Recent research has supported the idea that
tutoring has an overall positive effect on academic performance in mathematics. “Peer and
cross-age tutoring had a positive impact on a variety of math proficiencies, including arithmetic
computation, conceptual understanding, and problem solving skills.” (Robinson et al., 2005)
Overall, these researchers found that both peer and cross-age tutoring created behavior and
attitudes that lead to academic success. This action research study was conducted to expand the
knowledge base of peer tutoring by examining effects on students with learning disabilities.
Research Questions
Research question 1. How does peer tutoring affect the mathematics achievement of
fifth grade students with learning disabilities?
Research question 2. What is the interest in the peer tutoring intervention of students
who receive peer-tutored instruction and how does it compare to the interest in the peer tutoring
intervention of students participating in traditional instruction?
Research question 3. How does the behavior of students who participate in peer
tutoring differ from the behavior of students receiving only traditional teacher-directed
instruction?
Definition of Variables
Peer tutoring. Peer tutoring was defined as the use of small group instruction by
students who were paired based on their mathematical ability. Students with higher
mathematical ability were the tutors and students with learning disabilities were the tutees.
Mathematics achievement. Mathematics achievement was measured by the use of
pretests and posttests given for an algebra math unit, as well as the STAR math test (computerbased assessment) given at the beginning and conclusion of the study.
2
Novus Scientia Vol. I No. 2
Student interest. For the purposes of this study, student interest in peer tutoring was
defined as the attitude toward peer tutoring measured through questionnaires (see Appendices B
& C) and student interviews (see Appendix D).
Student behavior. Behavior was defined as overt student actions during instruction.
Student behavior accompanied by each type of instruction was measured by using a classroom
checklist of observations during the study. Specific behaviors measured were amount of time
on-task, attention/concentration, if they seemed withdrawn, and/or disruptive.
Methods
The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of peer tutoring on the mathematical
performance of at-risk students with learning disabilities by comparing one group of fifth grade
special education students who were tutored by their advanced peers, to another group of fifth
grade Special Education students who only received traditional teacher-directed instruction.
Setting and Participants
The research site is located in the northeastern part of Georgia, in a small town. Peer
tutors were seven regular education students who scored at least 830 on the Mathematics portion
of the CRCT in 2008-2009. The experimental group of tutees consisted of seven students with
learning disabilities. Tutors and tutees were paired according to ability levels based on their
CRCT scores and remained with the same partner for the duration of the study. The comparison
group consisted of the same number of special education students (N = 7) with the same
demographics.
Intervention
The role the regular education math teacher (researcher) in this study was to provide the
tutors with activities which were directly related to the mathematics curriculum for fifth grade
and to provide guidance. The training consisted of three 30-minute sessions with the tutors in
which they learned how to work with their peer and what strategies helped them explain
processes to the tutees. The role of the co-teacher (observer) in both of these inclusion classes
was to assist instruction during whole group math time. Both the teacher (researcher) and the coteacher (observer) assisted in collecting affective behavioral data for this study using a behavior
checklist created by the researcher.
The experimental group received instruction from their peers, while students in the
comparison group only received teacher-directed instruction during small group mathematics
time. The peer tutoring sessions were conducted daily during a 30 minute block of mathematics
small group instructional and remediation time, over a six week time period. The same Georgia
Performance Standard (GPS) was taught in both classes, Algebra M5A1, which states that
students will be able to represent and interpret the relationships between quantities algebraically.
Materials used to teach both classes remained the same and included such things as textbooks,
hands-on geometric manipulatives, overhead LCD projector, and practice workbooks.
Data Collection Techniques
The data collection instruments used consisted of computer-based STAR math tests,
pretest/post tests, questionnaires, interviews, and observation behavior checklists. These
instruments provided observable and measureable data in the form of academic student
performance, student attitudes and feelings toward peer tutoring, and student behavior.
Results
3
Novus Scientia Vol. I No. 2
STAR math tests were used to determine grade-level equivalency of mathematical skills
of the participants. The test was given at the beginning and the conclusion of the study to
measure mathematical growth in grade equivalency.
Table 1
Comparison of STAR Math Test Mean Increases
Mean Increase
SD
t-value
p
Peer Tutored Group
0.90
0.75
1.26
0.26
Comparison Group
0.51
0.29
*p < .05, **p < .01
The mean increases between the first STAR Math test and the last STAR Math test are
reported in Table 1. The mean increase from the peer tutored group (M = 0.90, SD = 0.75)
provided evidence that peer tutoring did produce academic achievement gains in mathematics
grade-level equivalency among students with learning disabilities and the comparison group also
had an increase in mean scores. However, the difference in the mean increase from the peer
tutored group was lower (M = 0.51, SD = 0.29). A paired t-test for means was conducted (t =
1.26, p = 0.26) which revealed no significance.
Cohen’s d was used to calculate the effect size of the peer tutoring intervention on the
mean gains of the STAR tests that were given to both groups. The mean increase of the STAR
math test given to the peer tutored group of students was 0.90, with a standard deviation of 0.75.
The results of the peer tutoring intervention among students with learning disabilities (d = 0.74)
had a huge effect and indicated that an average student in the experimental group would be
expected to outscore approximately 76% of the students in the comparison group.
To determine the effectiveness of peer tutoring during small group instruction, an algebra
unit pretest was administered to the treatment group and comparison group at the beginning and
conclusion of the study for comparison and data analysis purposes.
Table 2
Comparison of Pretest/Posttest Mean Increases
Mean Increase
SD
t-value
p
Peer Tutored Group
23.86
8.86
2.11
0.08
Comparison Group
13.43
7.81
*p < .05, **p < .01
The mean increases between the pretest and the posttest are reported in Table 2. The
mean increase of the pretest to the posttest of the peer tutored group (M = 23.86, SD = 8.86) was
greater than the mean increase of the scores among the comparison group (M = 13.43, SD =
7.81). This provided evidence that the peer tutoring unit was effective in producing academic
gains in math among students with learning disabilities during the intervention period. A paired
t-test for means was conducted (t = 2.11, p = 0.08) which revealed no significance.
Cohen’s d was also calculated to determine the effect size of the peer tutoring
intervention on the mean gains of the pretest and posttest scores between both groups. The mean
increase of the peer tutored students’ posttest scores (M = 23.86) was compared to the mean
increase of the comparison groups’ posttest scores (M = 13.43). The effect size was calculated by
determining the difference between the comparison group and the intervention group, then
4
Novus Scientia Vol. I No. 2
dividing by the standard deviation. Comparison of the test score gains showed a very large
effect (d = 1.35) of the peer tutoring intervention among students with learning disabilities and
indicated that an average student in the experimental group would be expected to outscore
approximately 78% of the students in the comparison group.
Student questionnaires were given to both groups of students involved in the study at the
conclusion of the intervention to assess their attitudes toward peer tutoring in mathematics and
traditional mathematics instruction. Table 3 shows the results from the five Likert statements that
were given to both groups of participants.
Table 3
Questionnaire Results
Statements
Mean
SD
1. I believe being taught by my peers helps me to understand and learn better.
3.8
1.70
2. I think I will pass the Math CRCT this year because I got help from my peers.
2.8
1.57
3. I enjoy being taught math lessons by my peers rather than my teacher.
3.3
1.60
4. I like being taught by my peers in math during small group time because it is fun.
4.2
1.57
3.8
1.6
1. I believe being taught by my teacher helps me to understand and learn better.
4.4
.76
2. I think I will pass the Math CRCT this year because I got help from my teacher.
4.0
.69
3. I enjoy being taught math lessons by my teacher rather than being helped from my peers
4.2
.76
4. I like being taught by my teacher in math during small group time.
2.8
.82
5. I would like to continue being tutored in math by my teacher in the future.
3.4
Peer Tutored Students
5. I would like to continue being tutored in math by my peers in the future.
Traditional Students
.76
The most significant result from these surveys indicated that peer tutored students believe
it is fun (Question 4) to be taught math by their peers, however students who did not receive the
intervention revealed that they did not like being taught by their teacher indicated by a lower
mean score. However, when asked if they think being taught by their peer would help them pass
the Mathematics portion of the CRCT (Question 2), the peer tutored students responded that they
“didn’t really think so”. In contrast, the students who did not receive the peer tutoring
intervention revealed that they thought they would pass the math portion of the CRCT with help
from their teacher as indicated by a higher mean score.
In order to gain a deeper understanding of the thoughts and feelings of the participants in
regard to peer tutoring, interviews were conducted with each of the tutees involved in the study.
Some of the questions given by the interviewer involved the peer tutoring process, activities
conducted, math strategies, comparison, enjoyment, and the students’ overall perspective.
Several themes that emerged from the interview process, which included understanding peer
tutoring, how it affected the learning of math, attitudes towards peer tutoring, and
thoughts/perceptions about peer tutoring.
Peer tutored students indicated they enjoy being taught math concepts from their peers;
however they do have some issues concerning peer tutoring. Results indicated they think they
might be cheating because their classmates help them with the answers. The main consensus
among the students was that their peers teach them in different ways and they explain things
5
Novus Scientia Vol. I No. 2
better. They think that their peers can show them different ways of finding the answers, but the
teachers are the best at teaching them math.
A behavior observation checklist (see Appendix E) was completed weekly during the
intervention for both groups of students. The researcher and co-teacher observed behaviors such
as time on-task, participation, activity level, and interest that the students exhibited indicated by
questions 1-5 on the behavior observation checklist. There was an evident relationship between
the peer tutor students’ attention or concentration and their time on-task. Students in the peer
tutored group started off less hyper and more withdrawn, which changed as weeks passed. The
amount of disruption and the noise level also increased throughout the intervention with the
treatment group.
There was a significant difference in behaviors between the peer tutored group and the
comparison group over the six week study. Hyperactivity and attentiveness were higher, while
disruption and on-task behavior was lower among the group of students who receive teacherdirected mathematics instruction. This indicated the students were less disruptive, on-task, and
paid more attention while the teacher was instructing, then did the students who were taught
mathematics by their peers in a small group setting.
Discussion
Conclusions
According to the results from the STAR math tests given, the peer tutoring intervention
had no significant impact on learning mathematics content among students with learning
disabilities. However, the experimental group did show significant learning gains with statistical
significance according to the results from the mean increase between the pretest and posttest.
The effect of the intervention using the Cohen’s d formula indicated a large effect (d = 0.74)
among the difference in STAR math tests and a very large effect (d = 1.35) among the
pretest/posttest gains. According to the questionnaires and interviews given to the students who
participated in the study, peer tutoring had an overall positive effect. The students who received
the peer tutoring intervention commented that they enjoyed being taught math by their peers, but
thought that the teacher is still better at helping them learn the concepts. The results from the
behavior observation data collection instrument indicated that the students were on-task, more
attentive, and less disruptive with teacher-directed instruction than peer-tutored instruction.
However, the students seemed to be less withdrawn and more engaged in the peer tutored group
within the experimental class.
The results of this action research project indicate that both groups of students improved.
However, the experimental class showed slightly higher gains, including the special education
students who participated in the peer tutoring intervention. Although there were increases shown
in the academic subject area of mathematics, more research needs to be done in order to prove
that peer tutoring has a positive effect on students who have learning disabilities. The peer
tutoring intervention helped students make some academic learning gains in mathematics;
however this was only slightly more effective than regular instruction in the comparison class
and not enough to make the conclusion that the intervention was the source of the improvement.
Significance/Impact on Student Learning
Attitudes and interest of the participants improved in the experimental class; however the
behavior of the students was disruptive and off-task at times. Achievement results indicated no
statistical significance on mathematics grade-equivalency scores among the treatment group;
however the difference in pretest and posttest scores was significant with the experimental group.
Student learning might increase due to positive attitudes and behaviors; however more research
6
Novus Scientia Vol. I No. 2
is needed to study the effects of peer tutoring on the achievement of students with learning
disabilities. Peer tutoring as an intervention has been shown to have a slight effect on students
with learning disabilities in the area of mathematics and academic learning gains from this
research. The overall effects were positive in relation to attitudes and interests of students
toward the intervention; however, measuring the effects of peer tutoring among a different grade
level or subject area might yield different results.
Factors that Influenced Implementation
The time period was short and more time was needed in order to measure two or three
math units pretest and posttest scores, instead of just scores from one. Benchmark tests were
given for three consecutive days during week five, which caused students to be more active and
disruptive in the afternoon. There was also a four day holiday, which caused two of the
intervention weeks to have only four days instead of five for implementation. In addition, the
approaching Mathematics CRCT required the review of all content learned throughout the year,
in addition to the algebra unit taught. These schedule changes might have impacted test scores.
Implications and Limitations
The implications of this research in relation to the school and district will be beneficial
because other teachers will be able to use the data in order to implement peer tutoring in their
classrooms. The district might decide to have training for teachers to include using this
intervention as an alternate teaching strategy and measuring achievement data such as STAR
tests to see if there are learning gains present among the student population as a whole.
Some limitations should be discussed regarding the results of this research study. The
short length of the research study was a limitation and a longitudinal study would have been
appropriate for producing more accurate results. The students with learning disabilities in the
experimental class had higher achievement ability than the special education students in the
comparison class. Further research geared toward students with learning disabilities receiving
peer tutoring as an intervention is needed to validate the conclusions related to the results of the
data in this study.
7
Novus Scientia Vol. I No. 2
References
Burns, E. (2006). Pause, prompt and praise - peer tutored for pupils with learning difficulties.
British Journal of Special Education, 33(2), 62-67.
Governor’s Office of Student Achievement, 2007-2008 Report Card (2008) Retrieved from
http://reportcard2008.gaosa.org/(S(jh142qr2122z3v45u0jcrtic))/k12/reports.aspX?ID=60
6:107&TestKey=C*5&TestType=qcc
Harper, G., & Maheady, L. (2007). Peer-mediated teaching and students with learning
disabilities. Intervention in School & Clinic, 43(2), 101-107.
Hughes, T., & Fredrick, L. (2006). Teaching vocabulary with students with learning disabilities
using classwide peer tutoring and constant time delay. Journal of Behavioral Education,
15(1), 1-23, doi:10.1007/s10864-005-9003-5
Kroesbergen, E., & Van Luit, J. (2003). Mathematics interventions for children with special
educational needs. Remedial & Special Education, 24(2), 97.
Mastropieri, M., Scruggs, T., & Berkeley, S. (2007). Peers helping peers. Educational
Leadership, 64(5), 54-58.
McDuffie, K., Mastropieri, M., & Scruggs, T. (2009). Differential effects of peer tutoring in cotaught and non-co-taught classes: results for content learning and student-teacher
interactions. Exceptional Children, 75(4), 493-510.
Renaissance Learning, (2007). STAR Math: Use of a Progress Monitoring System to
Enable Teachers to Differentiate Mathematics Instruction. Retrieved from
http://research. renlearn.com/research/129.asp
Robinson, D., Schofield, J., & Steers-Wentzell, K. (2005). Peer and cross-age tutoring in math:
outcomes and their design implications. Educational Psychology Review, 17(4), 327-362,
doi:10.1007/s10648-005-8137-2
Shamir, A., & Lazerovitz, T. (2007). Peer mediation intervention for scaffolding self-regulated
learning among children with learning disabilities. European Journal of Special Needs
Education, 22(3), 255-273, doi:10.1080/08856250701430786
8
Novus Scientia Vol. I No. 2
Appendix A
Algebra Unit Pretest and Posttest Assessment
Name:_____________________________________________
Date:________________________
1. What is the value of the expression below when x = 3?
4x+1
A. 7
B. 8
C. 12
D. 13
2. At a fair, tickets for adults cost $6. Tickets for students cost $3. Which expression could be
used to calculate the total cost for any number of adult (a) and student (s) tickets?
A. 6a + 3s
B. 3a + 6s
C. 8 + (as)
D. 8 + (a + s)
3. A company makes t = 4.5x number of toys. How many toys (t) does the company make if x =
126?
A. 28
B. 36
C. 130.5
D. 567
4. A square has four sides that are x feet in length. What is the correct algebraic expression to
find the perimeter?
A. 4 + x
B. 4x
C. 4 ÷ x
D. 4 - x
5. Every day Nelson sells one pie and any number of cookies. He sells the pie for $8.00 and the
cookies for $0.75 each.
9
Novus Scientia Vol. I No. 2
Which formula could Nelson use to determine his total sales for one day for selling one cake and
any number of cookies (c)?
A. Total sales = 8 + 0.75c
B. Total sales = 8c + 0.75
C. Total sales = 8.75 + c
D. Total sales = 8.75c
6. 4x = 17
For this equation, x = ; x = 4.25; or x = 4 . All of these values can be substituted for x because
A. an algebraic formula works for decimals, fractions or whole numbers.
B. an algebraic formula can be rewritten in more than one way.
C. 4 is a rational number.
D. is a positive number.
7. Lloyd owns a shoe store. For every shoe he sells, Lloyd earns $8.50. Lloyd gives 10% of all
his earnings to charity and keeps the rest. Which formula could Lloyd use to determine how
much money he keeps (k) for any amount of shoes (s) he sells?
A. k = (8.5s) ÷ 0.1
B. k = (8.5s) ÷ 0.9
C. k = (8.5s) × 0.9
D. k = (8.5s) × 0.1
8. . If C represents a number, which of the following means "5 less than a number"?
A. C – 5
B. C × 5
C. C ÷ 5
D. C + 5
9. What is the value of 6n(n – 1) + 4, when n = 3?
A. 44
B. 40
C. 36
D. 19
10. Which best describes the location of point X on the number line shown below?
10
Novus Scientia Vol. I No. 2
A. 36
B. 37
C. 39
D. 40
11. If N represents a number, which of the following means "10 divided by a number"?
A. 10 - N
B. 10 +N
C. 10 x N
D. 10 / N
12. Which number sentence is true for all pairs of values shown in the table below?
INPUT
A
15
25
10
30
OUTPUT
B
3
5
2
6
A. A + B = 12
B. A – B = 20
C. A ÷ 5 = B
D. A = B × 3
13. If the scale is balanced, which number sentence does it best represent?
Stars = w
Blocks = 1
A. 5w = 30
B. w + 5 = 30
11
Novus Scientia Vol. I No. 2
C. 5 – w = 30
D. w ÷ 5 = 30
14. If a=2 and b=3 what is the value of 5a + 7b?
A. 30
B. 3
C. 31
D. 11
15. 2y – 8 =
Solve the equation for y, if y = 12
A. 24
B. 16
C. 14
D. 12
ANSWER KEY
12
Novus Scientia Vol. I No. 2
1. D) 13
2. A) 6a + 3s
3. D) 567
4. B) 4x
5. A) Total sales = 8 + 0.75c
6. B) an algebraic formula can be rewritten in more than one way.
7. C) k = (8.5s) × 0.9
8. A) C – 5
9. B) 40
10. C) 39
11. D) 10 / N
12. C) A ÷ 5 = B
13. A) 5w = 30
14. C) 31
15. B) 16
Appendix B
Peer Tutoring Questionnaire
13
Novus Scientia Vol. I No. 2
Students, no one will know who completed this form so please be honest with your
answers and DO NOT put your name on this form.
Peer tutoring is when one of your classmates helps you with assignments, explains things
to you, or shows you how to do something. These questions are about how you feel about being
helped by your peers in your class during math time.
Please circle one choice for each question. Choose your answers according to this scale:
1 – really don’t think so, 2 – kind of don’t think so, 3 – neither, 4 – kind of think so, 5 – really
think so
1. I believe being taught by my peers helps me to understand and learn math better.
1
2
3
4
5
2. I think I will pass the Math CRCT this year because I got help from my peers.
1
2
3
4
5
3. I enjoy being taught math lessons by my peers rather than my teacher.
1
2
3
4
5
4. I like being taught by my peers in math during small group time because it is fun.
1
2
3
4
5
5. I would like to continue being tutored in math by my peers in the future.
1
2
3
4
5
Appendix C
Comparison Group Questionnaire
Students, no one will know who completed this form so please be honest with your
answers and DO NOT put your name on this form.
Please circle one choice for each question. Choose your answers according to this scale:
1 – really don’t think so, 2 – kind of don’t think so, 3 – neither, 4 – kind of think so, 5 – really
think so
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
I believe being taught by my teacher in math class helps me to understand and learn
math better.
1
2
3
4
5
I think I will pass the Math CRCT this year because I got help from my teacher.
1
2
3
4
5
I enjoy being taught math lessons by teacher rather than being helped from my
peers.
.
1
2
3
4
5
I like being tutored by my teacher in math during small group time.
1
2
3
4
5
I would like to continue being tutored in math by my teacher in the future.
1
2
3
4
5
Appendix D
Interview Protocol
14
Novus Scientia Vol. I No. 2
Project: Peer Tutoring in Math
Time of Interview:
Date:
Place:
Interviewer: Researcher
Position of the Interviewer: Mathematics Teacher
Interviewee:
Position of the Interviewee: Student
Description of Study: The purpose of this study is to examine the effects of peer tutoring on the
students’ academic performance in math. The individuals being interviewed are participants in
the experimental peer tutoring group. They will be asked a series of ten questions pertaining to
their experiences, feelings, attitudes, and beliefs. The data obtained will be confidential and the
names of each student will be replaced with an alphabetical letter. The interview should take
approximately 15 minutes to complete. Each interviewee and their parent has completed and
signed a consent form.
Questions:
1. What do you think peer tutoring is?
2. What kind of activities do you and your tutor do during math?
3. Explain to me how peer tutoring is helping you learn math?
4. Explain ways that peer tutoring might not be good for learning math?
5. How is peer tutoring different from the teacher helping you learn?
1. How you think peer tutoring will help you become a better math student?
7. What are some examples of peer tutoring might not be good for you?
8. What are some things you enjoy about being tutored by your peers?
9. What are some things you do not like about being tutored by your peers?
10. If you had a choice to be taught math by your peer, your teacher, or both, which would
you choose?
Explain why.
Appendix E
15
Novus Scientia Vol. I No. 2
Behavior Observation Checklist
List any specific positive behaviors that the students display during peer tutoring:
*
*
*
1. Amount of time on-task during 30 minute instruction
2. Were discussions relevant to the learning or off- topic?
3. Did the tutee seem interested in the lesson or distracted?
4. How attentive was the tutee during the lesson?
5. Did the tutor seem frustrated or willing to teach?
What was the overall behavior of the tutor & tutee?
Check the frequency in which the following negative behaviors of the tutee are observed during
peer tutoring:
16
Novus Scientia Vol. I No. 2
Almost Never
Occasionally
Frequently
Almost Never
Occasionally
Frequently
Hyperactive:
Out of seat………………………………………………………….
Constant movement in desk………………………………………..
Can’t remain in line to and from classes…………………………...
Constant verbal behavior…………………………………………..
Has nervous muscle twitches, eye-blinking, nail-biting, etc. ……..
Withdrawn
Listless, tired……………………………………………………….
Seems generally unhappy………………………………………….
Stares blankly into space…………………………………………...
Rarely asks for assistance even when work is too difficult………..
Does not attempt work…………………………………………….
Apprehensive about committing self to a response………………..
Weeps or cries without provocation……………………………….
Avoids calling attention to self…………………………………….
Poor Attention/Concentration
Does not follow oral lessons……………………………………….
Does not follow lessons on board or visual materials……………..
Rarely completes any assignments………………………………...
Daydreams…………………………………………………………
Demands individual explanation of assignments………………….
Easily distracted from task by ordinary classroom stimuli (minor
movement, noises)…………………………………………………
Disruptive
Demands attention of any sort from teacher and peers…………….
Doesn’t follow class or school rules (quiet, on time, etc)………….
Interrupts lessons by antics (verbal or physical)…………………...
17
Novus Scientia Vol. I No. 2