Cross-age tutoring produces a small-to-moderate positive effect on academic outcomes for both tutors and tutees¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (3 entries) · quant-synthesis r3 · q3 · i1 small
Currency · newest study 2025 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i1 The overall weighted mean effect size of cross-age tutoring on academic outcomes is g = 0.34 (95% CI [0.19, 0.48]). → Chang 2025 q3 i1 Tutees benefit at g = 0.33 and tutors at g = 0.39. → Chang 2025 (2)

Evidence¶

Chang 2025¶

Chang, A., Mauer, E., Wanzek, J., Kim, S., Scammacca, N., & Swanson, E. (2025). Examining the academic effects of cross-age tutoring: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 37, 19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-025-09997-z

q3 · i1 · quant-synthesis · r3

Meta-analysis of 32 studies using robust variance estimation with Hedges' g. The pooled estimate was "0.34 (SE = 0.07) from 147 effect sizes across 31 studies" with significant heterogeneity (I² = 75.26).

"The overall weighted mean effect size was 0.34 (SE = 0.07) from 147 effect sizes across 31 studies, indicating a significant positive effect of cross-age tutoring interventions on academic outcomes (95% CI [0.19, 0.48], p < 0.001)."

Chang 2025 (2)¶

Chang, A., Mauer, E., Wanzek, J., Kim, S., Scammacca, N., & Swanson, E. (2025). Examining the academic effects of cross-age tutoring: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 37, 19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-025-09997-z

q3 · i1 · quant-synthesis · r3

Separate meta-analysis for tutees from 117 effect sizes across 28 studies. The printed effect size for tutees was g = 0.33, quoted as "0.33, (SE = 0.08, 95% CI [0.15, 0.50], p = 0.001)" with high heterogeneity (I² = 78.87).

"The pooled random effects estimate of the effect of cross-age tutoring intervention on tutees' academic outcome was 0.33, (SE = 0.08, 95% CI [0.15, 0.50], p = 0.001) indicating that interventions positively impacted tutees."

Chang 2025 (3)¶

Chang, A., Mauer, E., Wanzek, J., Kim, S., Scammacca, N., & Swanson, E. (2025). Examining the academic effects of cross-age tutoring: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 37, 19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-025-09997-z

q3 · i1 · quant-synthesis · r3

Separate meta-analysis for tutors from 30 effect sizes across 14 studies. The printed effect size for tutors was g = 0.39, quoted as "0.39 (SE = 0.07, 95% CI [0.23, 0.55], p < 0.001)" with moderate heterogeneity (I² = 36.76).

"For tutors, 30 effect sizes were reported from 14 studies. The pooled random effects estimate was 0.39 (SE = 0.07, 95% CI [0.23, 0.55], p < 0.001), indicating a moderate benefit for tutors."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Cross-age tutoring effects on tutees do not significantly differ by number of sessions, tutor type, tutee risk type, or subject area — related
• Removing outliers does not meaningfully change cross-age tutoring meta-analysis results — related
• Peer-assisted learning interventions improve achievement for elementary students — a broader claim this one bears on
• Peer Tutoring Improves Achievement — a broader claim this one bears on
• Publication bias evidence is mixed: marginal asymmetry for tutees but no missing studies, and no bias for tutors — related
• The review reports that college tutors who espoused a malleable view of intelligence to their tutees improved their own academic performance, with benefits for tutees as well — related
• Tutoring is highly effective, and hiring older peers as tutors supports learning gains for both older and younger students — a broader claim this one bears on