Peer tutoring in writing: A school systems approach

This digest found in

What else did the study find?

Writing output
Tutees substantially increased their writing output during the intervention, in comparison with the control group students. These gains were generally maintained at follow-up (four weeks after the programme had ended). There was little change in the writing output of the control group throughout the study. Although there was no same-age control for the tutors' group, their writing output increased in most cases during intervention and follow-up. Importantly, participation didn't appear to have a detrimental effect on their writing output.

Punctuation and spelling
Both tutors and tutees showed clear positive gains in accuracy of both spelling and punctuation, with tutees showing the largest gains. These rates of improvement were largely sustained during follow up, and were in marked contrast with the control group students. While some of the tutors were already successful in these fields, others demonstrated large gains in punctuation skills during and after the intervention.

Enjoyability and clarity
Ratings for both enjoyability and clarity of the tutors' and tutees' writing increased during intervention and follow-up. The increase in enjoyability of the tutees' writing from baseline to intervention was particularly marked. This contrasted with the control group, which exhibited little change throughout the intervention.

Teacher attitudes
Teachers rated the intervention at six out of a possible seven for usefulness. They would recommend the programme to other teachers and would continue to use it within the school.

Tutor attitudes
Most tutors felt they had helped tutees produce longer, more interesting and more accurate writing, and that the intervention would help them both in planning their own writing and in understanding how others learn.

Your path: Home > Welcome to The Research Informed Practice Site (TRIPS) > Themes > Assessment for Learning > Peer tutoring in writing: A school systems approach > What else did the study find?
Research Home Themes \| Find digests \| About the digests resources glossary researchers contact TRIPS Introduction What is peer tutoring? The main findings of the study What else did the study find? What were the aim and the design of this study? What does an inclusive 'process writing' approach consist of? What training did the peer tutors receive? What are the implications of the study? Where can I find out more? Send us your feedback Collated digests To find out more about collated digests click here Get Word Reader Peer tutoring in writing: A school systems approach This digest found in Assessment for Learning English Send to a friend Word doc 60KB Printer friendly Collate for later What else did the study find? Writing output Tutees substantially increased their writing output during the intervention, in comparison with the control group students. These gains were generally maintained at follow-up (four weeks after the programme had ended). There was little change in the writing output of the control group throughout the study. Although there was no same-age control for the tutors' group, their writing output increased in most cases during intervention and follow-up. Importantly, participation didn't appear to have a detrimental effect on their writing output. Punctuation and spelling Both tutors and tutees showed clear positive gains in accuracy of both spelling and punctuation, with tutees showing the largest gains. These rates of improvement were largely sustained during follow up, and were in marked contrast with the control group students. While some of the tutors were already successful in these fields, others demonstrated large gains in punctuation skills during and after the intervention. Enjoyability and clarity Ratings for both enjoyability and clarity of the tutors' and tutees' writing increased during intervention and follow-up. The increase in enjoyability of the tutees' writing from baseline to intervention was particularly marked. This contrasted with the control group, which exhibited little change throughout the intervention. Teacher attitudes Teachers rated the intervention at six out of a possible seven for usefulness. They would recommend the programme to other teachers and would continue to use it within the school. Tutor attitudes Most tutors felt they had helped tutees produce longer, more interesting and more accurate writing, and that the intervention would help them both in planning their own writing and in understanding how others learn.