Only the 200740F high-use group showed a significantly higher rate of good academic standing compared to non-visitors¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associationalr2·q2
Currency · newest study 2010 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person · overdue for a recheck since 2013: local conditions change quickly
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? Good standing was significantly higher for 200740F students visiting >10 times versus no visits (z=2.85, p=.0022), but not for the 200740X cohort or for the <10-visit comparison. → Cooper 2010
Evidence¶
Cooper 2010¶
Cooper, E. (2010). Tutoring Center Effectiveness: The Effect of Drop-In Tutoring. Journal of College Reading and Learning, 40(2). https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ887303 doi:10.1080/10790195.2010.10850328
q2 · i? · associational · r2
Proportion comparisons across visit categories for both cohorts at 200840. Table 5 prints z=2.85, p=.0022 for the significant 200740F No Visit v. >10 Visits contrast; Table 6 prints p=.0853 and p=.1003 for the 200740X contrasts, which "approach significance" but do not reach p=.05.
"the relative rate of students in good standing is likewise encouraging on paper , but only the rate of good standing for the 200740F students who visited the TC >10 times is significant when compared to students who did not visit the TC."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Tutoring center visits showed a delayed significant correlation with cumulative GPA in subsequent quarters — related
- Freshmen who visited the tutoring center more than 10 times per quarter had statistically higher persistence rates than students who did not visit — related
- Retention programs interpreted as meeting all three SDT needs show higher persistence and standing — related
- Tutoring center visits usually showed no significant difference in individual course performance, and sometimes tutored students performed worse — related
- Students who use the ePSRL Management System meet the course completion deadline at a significantly higher rate than non-users — related
- Teacher home visits slightly improved student attendance in the following school year (95.28% vs 94.93%; ES = +0.02 in the Evidence for ESSA summary) — related
- High-use tutoring center visitors had significantly higher cumulative GPA than non-visitors, with the main difference between >10-visit and no-visit groups — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
tutoring-good-standing-significant-only-one-cohort |
title |
Only the 200740F high-use group showed a significantly higher rate of good academic standing compared to non-visitors |
description |
Only the 200740F high-use group showed a significantly higher rate of good academic standing compared to non-visitors |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
mixed |
newest_evidence |
2010 |
recheck_by |
2013 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-09-27 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — cooper-2010 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.