Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

An Analysis of the Observable Behaviors of Undergraduate drop-in Mathematics Tutors

  • Published:
International Journal of Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Despite the prevalence of undergraduate drop-in mathematics tutoring, little is known about the behaviors of this specific group of tutors. This study serves as a starting place for identifying their behaviors by addressing the research question: what observable behaviors do undergraduate drop-in mathematics tutors exhibit as they interact with students? We analyzed 31 transcripts of tutoring sessions using inductive coding, finding 83 observable behaviors. We discovered that tutors used behaviors aimed at engaging students, while primarily retaining control of the decision making and problem-solving process. Although tutors asked students to contribute to the mathematics, they often asked a less demanding question before the student had a chance to respond to the initial question. Our findings reveal the existence of opportunities for student learning in tutoring sessions as well as potential areas of growth for tutors. We present questions for future research that arose from analysis of the data and discuss how our results may be used in tutor training.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

(adapted from White & Mesa, 2014)

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ader, S., & Carlson, M. (2021). Decentering framework: A characterization of graduate student instructors’ actions to understand and act on student thinking. Mathematical Thinking and Learning 24(2), 9-122. DOI:10.1080/10986065.2020.1844608

  • Anderson, L. W., Krathwohl, D. R., Airasian, P. W., Cruishank, K. A., Mayer, R. E., Pintrich, P. R., & Wittrock, M. C. (2001). Taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. New York: Longman

    Google Scholar 

  • Bentz, J. L., & Fuchs, L. S. (1996). Improving peers’ helping behavior to students with learning disabilities during mathematics peer tutoring. Learning Disability Quarterly, 19(4), 202–215

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bloom, B. S., Englehart, M. D., Furst, W. J., Hill, W. H., & Krathwohl, D. R. (1956). The taxonomy of educational objectives, the classification of educational goals, handbook I: Cognitive domain. New York: David McKay Company, Inc

    Google Scholar 

  • Bressoud, D., Mesa, V., & Rasmussen, C. (2015). Insights and Recommendations from the MAA National Study of College Calculus. MAA Press

  • Byerley, C., Campbell, T., & Rickard, B. (2018). Evaluation of impact of Calculus Center on student achievement. In Weinburg, Rasmussen, Rabin, Wawro, & Brown, Eds. Proceedings of the Twenty-First Annual Conference on Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education. San Diego, CA

  • Byerley, C., Moore-Russo, D., James, C., Johns, C., Rickard, B., & Mills, M. (2019). Defining the varied structures of tutoring centers: Laying a foundation for future research. Proceedings of the Twenty-second Annual Conference on Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education, Oklahoma City, OK

  • Byerley, C., James, C., Moore-Russo, D., Rickard, B., Mills, M., Heasom, W., & Moritz, D. (2020). Characteristics and evaluation of ten tutoring centers. Proceedings of the Twenty-third Annual Conference on Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education. Boston, MA

  • Cade, W. L., Copeland, J. L., Person, N. K., & D’Mello, S. K. (2008). Dialogue modes in expert tutoring. In International conference on intelligent tutoring systems (pp. 470–479). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Carino, P. (2003). Power and authority in peer tutoring. In M. Pemberton, & J. Kinkead (Eds.), The Center Will Hold: Critical Perspectives on Writing Center Scholarship (pp. 96–113). Utah State University Press

  • Chi, M. T., Siler, S. A., Jeong, H., Yamauchi, T., & Hausmann, R. G. (2001). Learning from human tutoring. Cognitive Science, 25, 471–533

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fox, B. A. (1991). Cognitive and interactional aspects of correction in tutoring. In P. Goodyear (Ed.), Teaching knowledge and intelligent tutoring (pp. 149–172). Norwood, NJ: Ablex

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, S., Eddy, S. L., McDonough, M., Smith, M. K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., & Wenderoth, M. P. (2014). Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(23), 8410–8415

  • Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Hamlett, C. L., Phillips, N. B., Karns, K., & Dutka, S. (1997). Enhancing students’ helping behavior during peer-mediated instruction with conceptual mathematical explanations. The Elementary School Journal, 97(3), 223–249

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glaser, A. L., & Strauss, B. G. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago: Aldine Publications

    Google Scholar 

  • Graesser, A. C., & Person, N. K. (1994). Question asking during tutoring. American Educational Research Journal, 31(1), 104–137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graesser, A. C., Person, N. K., & Magliano, J. P. (1995). Collaborative dialogue patterns in naturalistic one-on-one tutoring. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 9, 495–522

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hiebert, J., & Lefevre, P. (1986). Conceptual and procedural knowledge in mathematics: An introductory analysis. In J. Hiebert (Ed.), Conceptual and Procedural Knowledge: The Case of Mathematics (pp. 1–28). Routledge

  • Hume, G., Michael, J., Rovick, A., & Evens, M. (1996). Hinting as a tactic in one-on-one tutoring. The Journal of Learning Sciences, 5(1), 23–47

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jacobs, V. R., Lamb, L. L., & Philipp, R. A. (2010). Professional noticing of children’s mathematical thinking. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 41(2), 169–202

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johns, C. (2019). Tutor behaviors in undergraduate mathematics drop-in tutoring. [Doctoral dissertation, The Ohio State University]. ProQuest Dissertations Publishing

  • Johnson, E., & Hansen, K. (2015). Academic and social supports. In D. Bressoud, V. Mesa, & C. Rasumussen (Eds.), Insights and Recommendations from the MAA National Study of College Calculus (pp. 69–82). MAA Press

  • Lepper, M. R., Drake, M. F., & O’Donnell-Johnson, T. (1997). Scaffolding techniques of expert human tutors. In K. Hogan, & G. M. Pressley (Eds.), Scaffolding student learning: Instructional approaches and issues (pp. 108–144). Brookline Books

  • Lepper, M. R., & Woolverton, M. (2002). The wisdom of practice: Lessons learned from the study of highly effective tutors. In J. Aronson (Ed.), Improving academic achievement: Impact of psychological factors on education (pp. 135–158). San Diego, CA: Academic Press

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • McArthur, D., Stasz, C., & Zmuidzinas, M. (1990). Tutoring techniques in algebra. Cognition and Instruction, 7(3), 197–244

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merrill, D. C., Reiser, B. J., Ranney, M., & Trafton, J. G. (1992). Effective tutoring techniques: A comparison of human tutors and intelligent tutoring systems. The Journal of Learning Sciences, 2(3), 277–305

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mills, M., Johns, C., & Ryals, M. (2019). Peer tutors attending to student mathematical thinking. Proceedings of the 22nd Annual Conference on Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education, (pp. 250–257). Oklahoma City, OK

  • Mills, M., Rickard, B., & Guest, B. (2020). Survey of mathematics tutoring centers in the USA.International Journal of Mathematical Science and Technology,1–21

  • National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM). (2014). Principles to Action. Reston, VA: NCTM

  • Pintrich, P. R. (2000). The role of goal orientation in self-regulated learning. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 451–502). Academic Press

  • Putnam, R. T. (1987). Structuring and adjusting content for students: A study of live and simulated tutoring of addition. American Educational Research Journal, 24(1), 13–48

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rickard, B., & Mills, M. (2018). The effect of attending tutoring on course grades in Calculus I. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 49(3), 341–354

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rittle-Johnson, B., & Alibali, M. W. (1999). Conceptual and procedural knowledge of mathematics: Does one lead to the other? Journal of Educational Psychology, 91(1), 175–189

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schoenfeld, A. H. (1979). Explicit heuristic training as a variable in problem-solving performance. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 10(3), 173

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schoenfeld, A. H. (1985). Mathematical problem solving. Orlando, FL: Academic Press, INC

    Google Scholar 

  • Schoenfeld, A. H. (1992). Learning to think mathematically: Problem solving, metacognition, and sense making in mathematics. In D. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook for Research on Mathematics Teaching and Learning (pp. 334–370). New York, NY: Macmillan

    Google Scholar 

  • Schoenfeld, A. H., Gamoran, M., Kessel, C., & Leonard, M. (1992). Towards a comprehensive model of human tutoring in a complex subject matter domains. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 11(4), 293–319

    Google Scholar 

  • Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research. Sage publications

  • Tallman, M., & Carlson, M. (2016). A characterization of calculus I final exams in U.S. colleges and universities. International Journal of Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education, 2, 105–133

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teuscher, D., Moore, K. C., & Carlson, M. P. (2016). Decentering: A construct to analyze and explain teacher actions as they relate to student thinking. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 19, 433–456

  • Theobald, E. J., Hill, M. J., Tran, E., Agrawal, S., Arroyo, E. N., Behling, S., & Freeman, S. (2020). Active learning narrows achievement gaps for underrepresented students in undergraduate science, technology, engineering, and math. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(12), 6476–6483

  • 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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Es, E. A., & Sherin, M. G. (2008). Mathematics teachers’ “learning to notice” in the context of a video club. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24, 244–276

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Es, E., & Sherin, M. (2002). Learning to notice: Scaffolding new teachers’ interpretations of classroom interactions. Journal of Information Technology, 10(4), 571–596

    Google Scholar 

  • VanLehn, K., Siler, S., Murray, C., Yamauchi, T., & Baggett, W. S. (2003). Why do only some events cause learning during human tutoring? Cognition and Instruction, 21(3), 209–249

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • White & Mesa, White, N., & Mesa, V. (2014). (2014). Describing cognitive orientation of Calculus I tasks across different types of coursework. ZDM., 46(4). 675–690

  • Zimmerman, B. J. (1998). Developing self-fulfilling cycles of academic regulation: An analysis of exemplary instructional models. In D. H. Schunk, & B. J. Zimmerman (Eds.), Self-regulated learning: From teaching to self-reflective practice (pp. 1–19). New York: NY: The Guilford Press

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Mathematics Department, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA

    Carolyn Johns

  2. Mathematics Department, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK, USA

    Melissa Mills

  3. Center for Applied Math, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, USA

    Megan Ryals

Authors
  1. Carolyn Johns
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Melissa Mills
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Megan Ryals
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Melissa Mills.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest Statement:

The authors certify that they have NO affiliations with or involvement in any organization or entity with any financial interest or non-financial interest in the subject matter or materials discussed in this manuscript.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic Supplementary Material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary Material 1

Supplementary Material 2

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Johns, C., Mills, M. & Ryals, M. An Analysis of the Observable Behaviors of Undergraduate drop-in Mathematics Tutors. Int. J. Res. Undergrad. Math. Ed. 9, 350–374 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40753-022-00197-6

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40753-022-00197-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation