Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Nonprofessional mathematics tutoring for low-achieving students in secondary schools: A case study

  • Published:
Educational Studies in Mathematics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article discusses the possibility of using nonprofessional tutoring as means for advancing low achievers in secondary school mathematics. In comparison with professional, paraprofessional, and peer tutoring, nonprofessional tutoring may seem less beneficial and, at first glance, inadequate. The described case study shows that nonprofessional tutors may contribute to students' understanding and achievements, and thus, they can serve as an important assisting resource for mathematics teachers, especially in disadvantaged communities. In the study, young adults volunteered to tutor low-achieving students in an urban secondary school. Results showed a considerable mean gain in students' grades. It is suggested that affective factors, as well as the instruction given to tutors by a specialized counselor, have played a major role in maintaining successful tutoring.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The name is the Hebrew acronym for Improving Mathematics Learning.

  2. The eight given statements were: Enthusiastic; Interested; Indifferent; Glad I don't have to do this anymore; Repulsed; Want to learn more; Sorry I didn't study more properly; Pleased with my success.

  3. The other seven given factors were: Selecting students motivated to learn; Tutor's level of investment in preparing tutoring sessions; Appropriate physical conditions; Tutor's ability to solve problems turning up during sessions; The LR's ability to coordinate tutoring activities in collaboration with the school's staff; Cooperation of the mathematics teachers and school staff; The LR's ability to supervise tutors and handle problems.

References

  • Arcavi, A., Hadas, N., & Dreyfus, T. (1994). Engineering curriculum tasks on the basis of theoretical and empirical findings. In J. P. da Ponta & J. F. Matos (Eds.), Proceedings of the 18th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, vol 2 (pp. 280–287). Lisbon: University of Lisbon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baker, S., Russell, G., & Dae-Sik, L. (2002). A synthesis of emperical research on teaching mathematics to low-achieving students. Elementary School Journal, 103(1), 51–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Balfanz, R., Ruby, A., & Mac Iver, D. (2002). Essential components and next steps for comprehensive whole school reform in high poverty middle schools. In S. Stringfield & D. Land (Eds.), NSSE Yearbook 2002: Educating at risk students (pp. 128–147). Chicago, IL: National Society for the Study of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ben-Yehuda, M., Lavy, I., Lynchevski, L., & Sfard, A. (2005). Doing wrong with words: What bars students' access to arithmetical discourses. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 36(3), 176–247.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bloom, B. S. (1984). The search for methods of group instruction as effective as one-to-one tutoring. Educational Leadership, 41, 4–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boaler, J. (1997). Setting, social class and survival of the quickest. British Educational Research Journal, 23(5), 575–595.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bottge, B. A., & Hasselbring, T. S. (1993). A comparison of two approaches for teaching complex, authentic mathematics problems to adolescents in remedial math classes. Exceptional Children, 59, 556–566.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brophy, J. (1996). Teaching problem students. New York: The Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chazan, D. (1996). Algebra for all students? Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 15, 455–477.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chazan, D. (2000). Beyond formulas in mathematics and teaching: Dynamics of the high school algebra classroom. New York: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fitzgerald, J. (2001). Can minimally trained college student volunteers help young at-risk children to read better? Reading Research Quarterly, 36(1), 28–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gaustad, J. (1992). Tutoring for at-risk students. Eugene, OR: Oregon School Study Council.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaustad, J. (1993). Peer and cross-age tutoring. ERIC Digest, 79.

  • Hogan, D. M., & Tudge, J. R. H. (1999). Implications of Vygotsky's theory for peer learning. In A. M. O’Donnell & A. King (Eds.), Cognitive perspectives on peer learning (pp. 39–65). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Israeli Central Bureau of Statistics. (2001). Characterization and classification of local authorities by the socio-economic level of the population. Jerusalem: CBS Publications. (in Hebrew).

    Google Scholar 

  • Israeli Ministry of Education. (2006). Matriculation Exams Data 2005. http://cms.education.gov.il/EducationCMS/Units/Exams/Netunim/tashsah/ (in Hebrew).

  • Karsenty, R. (2004). Mathematical self-schema: A framework for analyzing adult's retrospection on high school mathematics. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 23(3), 325–349.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karsenty, R., & Arcavi, A. (2003). Learning and thinking characteristics of low achievers in mathematics. Report submitted to the Israeli Ministry of Education. Science Teaching Department, Weizmann Institute of Science. (In Hebrew).

  • Karsenty, R., Arcavi, A., & Hadas, N. (2007). Exploring informal products of low achievers in mathematics. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 26, 156–177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leblanc, J. F., Lietze, A. R., & Emenkar, C. E. (1995). A tutorial program: Collaboration between preservice and inservice teachers. School Science and Mathematics, 95, 175–177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lumpkins, B., Parker, F., & Hall, H. (1991). Instructional equity for low achievers in elementary school mathematics. Journal of Educational Research, 84(3), 135–139.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, D. B. (2000). Mathematics success and failure among African American Youth: The roles of sociohistorical context, community forces, school influence, and individual agency. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, S. P., Harris, C. A., Strawser, S., Jones, W. P., & Mercer, C. D. (1998). Teaching multiplication to second graders in inclusive settings. Focus on Learning Problems in Mathematics, 20(4), 50–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mor, F., & Mendelson, I. (2006). Talking with youth at-risk: An educational psycho-social perspective. Jerusalem: Ashalim. (In Hebrew).

    Google Scholar 

  • Morris, A. (1995). Meaningful instruction in fractions: Implementing a theory in a low achieving mathematics classroom. Focus on Learning Problems in Mathematics, 17(3), 16–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moses, R. P., & Cobb, C. E. (2001). Math literacy and civil rights. Boston: Beacon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nesselrodt, P. S., & Alger, C. L. (2005). Extending opportunity to learn for students placed at risk. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 10(2), 207–224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oakes, J. (1990). Multiplying inequalities: The effects of race, class, and tracking on opportunities to learn math and science. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.

    Google Scholar 

  • Secada, W. G. (1992). Race, ethnicity, social class, language, and achievements in mathematics. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 623–660). New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15, 4–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shulman, V., & Armitage, D. (2005). Project discovery: An urban middle school reform effort. Education and Urban Society, 37(4), 371–397.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slavin, R. E. (2002). Educational psychology: Theory and practice. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swanson, D. M. (2006). Power and poverty—whose, where, and why?: School mathematics, context and the social construction of “disadvantage”. In J. Novotná, H. Moraová, M. Krátká & N. Stehlíková (Eds.), Proceedings of the 30th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, vol 3 (pp. 409–416). Prague: Charles University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tate, W. F. (1997). Race-ethnicity, SES, gender and language proficiency trends in mathematics achievement: An update. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 28, 652–679.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tingley, J. (2001). Volunteer programs: When good intentions aren't enough. Educational Leadership, 58, 53–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Topping, K. (1996). Reaching where adults cannot: Peer education and peer counselling. Educational Psychology in Practice, 11(4), 23–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Topping, K., & Ehly, S. (1998). Introduction to peer-assisted learning. In K. Topping & S. Ehly (Eds.), Peer-assisted learning (pp. 1–23). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vogelwiesche, U., Grob, A., & Winkler, B. (2006). Improving computer skills of socially disadvantaged adolescents: Same-age versus cross-age tutoring. Learning and Instruction, 16, 241–255.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wasik, B. A., & Slavin, R. E. (1993). Preventing early reading failure with one-to-one tutoring: A review of five programs. Reading Research Quarterly, 28(2), 178–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wertsch, J. V. (1985). Vygotsky and the social formation of mind. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Woodward, J., Baxter, J., & Robinson, R. (1999). Rules and reasons: Decimal instruction for academically low-achieving students. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 14(1), 15–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zohar, A., Degani, A., & Vaaknin, E. (2001). Teachers' beliefs about low achieving students and higher order thinking. Teaching and Teachers' Education, 17, 469–485.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The SHLAV project is a joint initiative of the Davidson Institute of Science Education and the Science Teaching Department of the Weizmann Institute of Science. I would like to thank the project team and the school staff for their valuable ideas and their assistance. Special thanks to Prof. Abraham Arcavi, whose perceptive comments on earlier drafts helped to improve this paper. I also wish to convey my appreciation and gratitude to the nine young tutors, who had put their hearts and energies into the program and made this study possible.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Davidson Institute of Science Education, Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovot, Israel

    Ronnie Karsenty

Authors
  1. Ronnie Karsenty
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ronnie Karsenty.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Karsenty, R. Nonprofessional mathematics tutoring for low-achieving students in secondary schools: A case study. Educ Stud Math 74, 1–21 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-009-9223-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-009-9223-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation