Implementation of the TPI procedure reached only one tutor-trainee pair out of nine potential tutors, though participants assessed it positively¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · designr2·q2
Currency · newest study 2015 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q2 i? In the implementation case study with UNPA Master's Degree tutors using Mahara, out of 9 potential tutors only one tutor-trainee researcher pair could be formed, yet the two participants who put the procedure into practice assessed it highly positively. → Darder 2015
q2 i? The authors attribute participant loss to lack of motivation, skills and vision, or shortage of time and resources, noting change in the academic environment may be seen as additional and unnecessary work. → Darder 2015 (2)
Evidence¶
Darder 2015¶
Darder, A.; Pérez Garcias, A. (2015). Online tutoring procedure for research project supervision: management, organization and key elements. New Approaches in Educational Research 4(2). https://doi.org/10.7821/naer.2015.4.110
q2 · i? · design · r2
Implementation case study in which tutors and their students organized the virtual tutoring environment in Mahara; information was collected through an observation card and a questionnaire. The two implementers called it "an excellent piece of work which guides, clarifies, and specifies a suitable itinerary".
"It is worth highlighting that, out of 9 potential tutors, it was only possible to have a tutor-trainee researcher pair."
Darder 2015 (2)¶
Darder, A.; Pérez Garcias, A. (2015). Online tutoring procedure for research project supervision: management, organization and key elements. New Approaches in Educational Research 4(2). https://doi.org/10.7821/naer.2015.4.110
q2 · i? · design · r2
Authors' interpretation (type e) offered in the conclusions to explain low participation, hedged with "probably" and attributed partly to cited literature (Tejedor et al., 2009; Rodríguez, 2011). No data analysis supports it.
"probably the lack of the motivation, the skills and the vision required, or the shortage of time and resources (Tejedor, García -Valcárcel, & Prada, 2009) for the project resulted in the loss of participants"
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Research project supervision styles can be differentiated by degree of supervisory control and degree of support, yielding five distinct styles — related
- Tutors and trainee researchers most value supportive attitude, mastery of the research field, and accessibility in a research project supervisor — related
- The student-tutor relationship alone is judged insufficient: peer mixing and virtual communities are needed to counter isolation in online research supervision — related
- Small additions of research-specific procedures can shift a study out of exempt review — related
- External feedback from supervisors, tutors, and peers supports students' completion and accuracy of self-assessment, with high achievers more likely to use tutor feedback — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
tpi-implementation-low-participation-positive-assessment |
title |
Implementation of the TPI procedure reached only one tutor-trainee pair out of nine potential tutors, though participants assessed it positively |
description |
Implementation of the TPI procedure reached only one tutor-trainee pair out of nine potential tutors, though participants assessed it positively |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
weak |
newest_evidence |
2015 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-09-26 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
2 — darder-2015, darder-2015-2 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.