No achievement difference between staff- and peer-tutored groups in the first curriculum year¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 1995 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? In the first curriculum year, pairwise contrasts revealed no significant achievement difference between peer- and staff-tutored groups, contrary to the overall trend. → Schmidt 1995

Evidence¶

Schmidt 1995¶

Schmidt, H., van der Arend, A., Kokx, I. & Boon, L. (1995). Peer versus staff tutoring in problem-based learning. Instructional Science 22: 279-285. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00891781

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Pairwise contrast follow-up to the main ANOVA of tutorial-group achievement in the field experiment. The article reports the "differences in year 1 and 4 are nonsignificant", qualifying the overall staff-tutor advantage.

"Pairwise contrasts analyses revealed that differences in year 1 and 4 are nonsignificant."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Prior field experiments found no achievement differences between staff- and student-tutored groups — a broader claim this one bears on
• Student tutors are rated as more cognitively congruent than staff tutors in problem-based tutorial groups — related
• First-year students do not attach great importance to the tutor's domain specific expertise, which may explain why staff tutors' extra expertise does not yield achievement advantages — related
• Students taught by rigorously selected and well trained student tutors show no significant achievement differences from students taught by staff tutors in first-year PBL courses — a broader claim this one bears on
• Staff-tutored tutorial groups achieve slightly but significantly higher marks than peer-tutored groups in problem-based learning — reports the opposite