Research Article

Classroom observations of a cross-age peer tutoring mathematics program in elementary and middle schools

Elba Barahona 1 , Yolanda N. Padrón 2 * , Hersh C. Waxman 2
More Detail
1 Department of Teacher Education and Administration, University of North Texas, Denton, TX, USA2 School of Education and Human Development, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, USA* Corresponding Author
European Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 11(3), July 2023, 515-532, https://doi.org/10.30935/scimath/12983
Published Online: 23 February 2023, Published: 01 July 2023
OPEN ACCESS   2101 Views   1437 Downloads
Download Full Text (PDF)

ABSTRACT

A growing body of research has shown the positive effects of peer tutoring on students’ academic achievement, self-concept, attitude, social, and behavioral outcomes. There is, however, a paucity of research that focuses on peer-tutoring interventions for Hispanic students. The current study examined classroom practices, as well as program teachers’ and students’ behaviors within a cross-age peer-tutoring program implemented in elementary and middle schools that serve predominantly Hispanic students. Classroom observations were used to investigate the implementation of the peer-tutoring program. The results indicated that the program’s strengths included the development of positive emotions and relationships among students and a classroom environment that fostered warm and supportive relationships. The findings also indicated several weaknesses in the implementation of the program. Practitioners can use the findings to improve the effectiveness of future peer-tutoring programs in mathematics.
Keywords: peer tutoring, mathematics education, Hispanic students, classroom observations

CITATION (APA)

Barahona, E., Padrón, Y. N., & Waxman, H. C. (2023). Classroom observations of a cross-age peer tutoring mathematics program in elementary and middle schools. European Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 11(3), 515-532. https://doi.org/10.30935/scimath/12983

REFERENCES

  1. Alegre, F., Moliner, L., Maroto, A., & Lorenzo-Valentin, G. (2020). Academic achievement and peer tutoring in mathematics: A comparison between primary and secondary education. SAGE Open, 10(2), 215824402092929. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244020929295
  2. Alford, B., Rollins, K., Stillisano, J., & Waxman, H. C. (2013). Observing classroom instruction in schools implementing the international baccalaureate programme. Current Issues in Education, 16(2), 1-15.
  3. Bar-Eli, N., & Raviv, A. (1982). Underachievers as tutors. The Journal of Educational Research, 75(3), 139-143. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.1982.10885370
  4. Cohen, J. (1986). Theoretical considerations of peer tutoring. Psychology in the Schools, 23(2), 175-186. https://doi.org/10.1002/1520-6807(198604)23:2<175::AID-PITS2310230211>3.0.CO;2-H
  5. Cohen, P. A., Kulik, J. A., & Kulik, C.-L. C. (1982). Educational outcomes of tutoring: A meta-analysis of findings. American Educational Research Journal, 19(2), 237-248. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312019002237
  6. Cole, M. W. (2014). Speaking to read: Meta-analysis of peer-mediated learning for English language learners. Journal of Literacy Research, 46(3), 358-382. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086296x14552179
  7. Collier, V. P., & Thomas W. P. (2011). Educating English learners for a transformed world. Fuente Press.
  8. Damon, W., & Phelps, E. (1989). Strategic uses of peer learning in children’s education. In T. J. Berndt, & G. W. Ladd (Eds.), Peer relationships in child development (pp. 135-157). John Wiley & Sons.
  9. Dietrichson, J., Filges, T., Seerup, J. K., Klokker, R. H., Viinholt, B. C. A., Bøg, M., & Eiberg, M. (2021). Targeted school-based interventions for improving reading and mathematics for students with or at risk of academic difficulties in grades K-6: A systematic review. Campbell Systematic Reviews, 17(2), e1152. https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.1152
  10. Freeman-Green, S. M., O’Brien, C., Wood, C. L., & Hitt, S. B. (2015). Effects of the SOLVE strategy on the mathematical problem-solving skills of secondary students with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 30(2), 76-90. https://doi.org/10.1111/ldrp.12054
  11. Ginsburg-Block, M. D., Rohrbeck, C. A., & Fantuzzo, J. W. (2006). A meta-analytic review of social, self-concept, and behavioral outcomes of peer-assisted learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98(4), 732-749. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.98.4.732
  12. Greenfield, S. D., & McNeil, M. E. (1987). The effects of an intensive tutor training component in a peer tutoring program. Pointer (Washington, D.C.), 31, 31-36.
  13. Greenwood, C. R., Terry, B., Arreaga-Mayer, C., & Finney, R. (1992). The classwide peer tutoring program: Implementation factors moderating students’ achievement. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 25(1), 101-116. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.1992.25-101
  14. Heller, L. R., & Fantuzzo, J. W. (1993). Reciprocal peer tutoring and parent partnership: Does parent involvement make a difference? School Psychology Review, 22(3), 517-534. https://doi.org/10.1080/02796015.1993.12085670
  15. Hohn, R. L., & Frey, B. (2002). Heuristic training and performance in elementary mathematical problem solving. Journal of Educational Research, 95(6), 374-380. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220670209596612
  16. Learning Together. (2014). Fall 2014: Peer-to-peer tutoring training. http://www.learningtogether.com/
  17. Learning Together. (2015). Math together. http://www.learningtogether.com/math-together
  18. Made, A. F., Hasan, A., Burgess, S., Tuttle, D., & Soetaert, N. (2019). The effect of peer tutoring in reducing achievement gaps: A success story. Journal of Computing Sciences in Colleges, 35(1), 57-65.
  19. Menesses, K. F., & Gresham, F. M. (2009). Relative efficacy of reciprocal and nonreciprocal peer tutoring for students at-risk for academic failure. School Psychology Quarterly, 24(4), 266-275. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018174
  20. Moliner, L., & Alegre, F. (2020). Peer tutoring effects on students’ mathematics anxiety: A middle school experience. Frontiers in Psychology, 11. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01610
  21. Moliner, L., & Alegre, F. (2022). Peer tutoring in middle school mathematics: Academic and psychological effects and moderators. Educational Psychology, 42(8), 1027-1044. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2022.2112148
  22. National Training Network. (2016). SOLVE videos. http://www.ntnmath.com/video%20index/SOLVE/SOLVE.html
  23. NCTM. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. https://www.nctm.org/Standards-and-Positions/Principles-and-Standards/
  24. NCTM. (2011). Technology in teaching and learning mathematics. http://www.nctm.org/Standards-and-Positions/Positionhttp://www.nctm.org/Standards-and-Positions/Position-Statements/Technology-in-Teaching-and-Learning-MathematicsStatements/Technology-in-Teaching-and-Learning-Mathematics.
  25. Padrón, Y. N., Waxman, H. C., & Rivera, H. H. (2002). Educating Hispanic students: Obstacles and avenues to improved academic achievement. Educational practice report No. 8. Center for Research on Education, Diversity & Excellence. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED470554
  26. Padrón, Y. N., Waxman, H. C., Lee, Y.-H., Lin, M.-F., & Michko, G. M. (2012). Classroom observations of teaching and learning with technology in urban elementary school mathematics classrooms serving English language learners. International Journal of Instructional Media, 39(1), 45-54.
  27. Pellegrini, M., Lake, C., Neitzel, A., & Slavin, R. E. (2021). Effective programs in elementary mathematics: A meta-analysis. AERA Open, 7, 233285842098621. https://doi.org/10.1177/2332858420986211
  28. Robinson, D. R., Schofield, J., & Steers-Wentzell, K. L. (2005). Peer and cross-age tutoring in math: Outcomes and their design implications. Educational Psychology Review, 17(4), 327-362. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-005-8137-2
  29. Rohrbeck, C. A., Ginsburg-Block, M., Fantuzzo, J. W., & Miller, T. R. (2003). Peer-assisted learning interventions with elementary school students: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(2), 240-257. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.95.2.240
  30. Ross, S. M., & Smith L. J. (1996). Classroom observation measure observer’s manual. University of Memphis, Center for Research in Educational Policy. http://edit.educ.ttu.edu/site/jcheon/manual/SOM_manual.pdf
  31. Sharpley, A. M., Irvine, J. W., & Sharpley C. F. (1983). An examination of the effectiveness of a cross-age tutoring program in mathematics for elementary school children. American Educational Research Journal, 20(1), 103-111. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312020001103
  32. The Crisis in the Education of Latino Students. (2017). NEA. http://www.nea.org/home/17404.htm
  33. Thurston, A., Roseth, C., Chiang, T.-H., Burns, V., & Topping, K. J. (2020). The influence of social relationships on outcomes in mathematics when using peer tutoring in elementary school. International Journal of Educational Research Open, 1, 100004. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedro.2020.100004
  34. ‌Topping, K., Campbell, J., Douglas, W., & Smith, A. (2003). Cross-age peer tutoring in mathematics with seven- and 11-year-olds: Influence on mathematical vocabulary, strategic dialogue and self-concept. Educational Research, 45(3), 287-308. https://doi.org/10.1080/0013188032000137274
  35. US Department of Education. (2019a). Digest of education statistics 2019 55th edition (review of digest of education statistics 2019 55th edition). US Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics. https://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2021009
  36. US Department of Education. (2019b). NAPE report card: 2019 NAEP mathematics assessment (Review of NAPE report card: Mathematics assessment). US Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics. https://www.nationsreportcard.gov/highlights/mathematics/2019/
  37. US Department of Education. (2020). Enrollment and percentage distribution of enrollment in public elementary and secondary schools, by race/ethnicity and region: Selected years, fall 1995 through fall 2029. US Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics. https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d20/tables/dt20_203.50.asp
  38. US Department of Education. (2022). The nation’s report card: National assessment of educational progress (NAEP), 2020 and 2022 long-term trend (LTT) reading and mathematics assessments (NAEP long-term trend assessment results: Reading and mathematics). US Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics. https://www.nationsreportcard.gov/highlights/ltt/2022/
  39. Valle, M. S., Waxman, H. C., Diaz, Z., & Padrón, Y. N. (2013). Classroom instruction and the mathematics achievement of non-English learners and English learners. The Journal of Educational Research, 106(3), 173-182. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2012.687789
  40. Waxman, H. C., Padrón, Y. N., & García, A. (2007). Educational issues and effective practices for Hispanic students. In S. J. Paik, & H. J. Walberg (Eds.), Narrowing the achievement gap. Issues in children’s and families’ lives. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/0-387-44611-7_8
  41. Waxman, H. C., Suarez, M. I., & Padrón, Y. N. (2020). Classroom and school factors that promote educational success for Latino students. In S. J. Paik, S. M. Kula, J. Gonzalez, & V. Gonzalez (Eds.). High-achieving Latino students: Successful pathways toward college and beyond (pp. 217-230). Information Age Publishing Inc.
  42. Wepner, G. (1985). Successful math remediation: training peer tutors. College Teaching, 33(4), 165-167. https://doi.org/10.1080/87567555.1985.10532313
  43. Yeh, S. (2010). The cost effectiveness of 22 approaches for raising student achievement. Journal of Education Finance, 36(1), 38-75. https://doi.org/10.1353/jef.0.0029
  44. Zendler, A., & Greiner, H. (2020). The effect of two instructional methods on learning outcome in chemistry education: The experiment method and computer simulation. Education for Chemical Engineers, 30, 9-19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ece.2019.09.001