A comparison of the relative effectiveness of proctoring and peer tutoring procedures

Traditional university modes of instruction have been shown to be less effective than. both PSI and peer tutoring procedures. The present study compared the relative effectiveness of proctors and peer tutors in a PSI type course. Twelve subjects were randomly assigned to the experimental conditions....

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Newkirk, Juhlin Mary
Format: Others
Published: Scholarly Commons 1975
Subjects:
Online Access:https://scholarlycommons.pacific.edu/uop_etds/1879
https://scholarlycommons.pacific.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2878&context=uop_etds
id ndltd-pacific.edu-oai-scholarlycommons.pacific.edu-uop_etds-2878
record_format oai_dc
spelling ndltd-pacific.edu-oai-scholarlycommons.pacific.edu-uop_etds-28782021-08-24T05:14:00Z A comparison of the relative effectiveness of proctoring and peer tutoring procedures Newkirk, Juhlin Mary Traditional university modes of instruction have been shown to be less effective than. both PSI and peer tutoring procedures. The present study compared the relative effectiveness of proctors and peer tutors in a PSI type course. Twelve subjects were randomly assigned to the experimental conditions. The within-subject variable was the order of exposure to the teaching. Methods (being proctored, being tutored, or tutoring) and the. between-subject variables were type of teaching method (proctor-ed or peer tutored) and the number of the trial (first or .second test under the assigned teaching condition). An analysis of variance split plot 3.22 of the number of correct answers on the first test of each unit yielded a significant main effect for teaching method; F(1,9) = 17.24, p < .01; and a significant interaction for Teaching Method x Order of Exposure to Teaching Conditions; F(2, 9) = 4.31, p < .05. Analysis of the number of tests taken to reach criterion yielded significant main effects for teaching method; F(1,9) = 7.44, p < .05; and for order of exposure to teaching conditions; F(2,9) = 4.88 p < .05. The results indicate that proctoring resulted in better student performance than did peer tutoring on both measure of course performance. Other methods for easing the application of PSI type procedures to large courses or situations where proctors are unavailable should examined. 1975-01-01T08:00:00Z text application/pdf https://scholarlycommons.pacific.edu/uop_etds/1879 https://scholarlycommons.pacific.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2878&amp;context=uop_etds University of the Pacific Theses and Dissertations Scholarly Commons College teaching Individualized instruction Tutors and tutoring Education
collection NDLTD
format Others
sources NDLTD
topic College teaching
Individualized instruction
Tutors and tutoring
Education
spellingShingle College teaching
Individualized instruction
Tutors and tutoring
Education
Newkirk, Juhlin Mary
A comparison of the relative effectiveness of proctoring and peer tutoring procedures
description Traditional university modes of instruction have been shown to be less effective than. both PSI and peer tutoring procedures. The present study compared the relative effectiveness of proctors and peer tutors in a PSI type course. Twelve subjects were randomly assigned to the experimental conditions. The within-subject variable was the order of exposure to the teaching. Methods (being proctored, being tutored, or tutoring) and the. between-subject variables were type of teaching method (proctor-ed or peer tutored) and the number of the trial (first or .second test under the assigned teaching condition). An analysis of variance split plot 3.22 of the number of correct answers on the first test of each unit yielded a significant main effect for teaching method; F(1,9) = 17.24, p < .01; and a significant interaction for Teaching Method x Order of Exposure to Teaching Conditions; F(2, 9) = 4.31, p < .05. Analysis of the number of tests taken to reach criterion yielded significant main effects for teaching method; F(1,9) = 7.44, p < .05; and for order of exposure to teaching conditions; F(2,9) = 4.88 p < .05. The results indicate that proctoring resulted in better student performance than did peer tutoring on both measure of course performance. Other methods for easing the application of PSI type procedures to large courses or situations where proctors are unavailable should examined.
author Newkirk, Juhlin Mary
author_facet Newkirk, Juhlin Mary
author_sort Newkirk, Juhlin Mary
title A comparison of the relative effectiveness of proctoring and peer tutoring procedures
title_short A comparison of the relative effectiveness of proctoring and peer tutoring procedures
title_full A comparison of the relative effectiveness of proctoring and peer tutoring procedures
title_fullStr A comparison of the relative effectiveness of proctoring and peer tutoring procedures
title_full_unstemmed A comparison of the relative effectiveness of proctoring and peer tutoring procedures
title_sort comparison of the relative effectiveness of proctoring and peer tutoring procedures
publisher Scholarly Commons
publishDate 1975
url https://scholarlycommons.pacific.edu/uop_etds/1879
https://scholarlycommons.pacific.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2878&amp;context=uop_etds
work_keys_str_mv AT newkirkjuhlinmary acomparisonoftherelativeeffectivenessofproctoringandpeertutoringprocedures
AT newkirkjuhlinmary comparisonoftherelativeeffectivenessofproctoringandpeertutoringprocedures
_version_ 1719471837518233600