Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2015 Summer;14(2):ar16.
doi: 10.1187/cbe.14-08-0120.

Helping struggling students in introductory biology: a peer-tutoring approach that improves performance, perception, and retention

Zachary Batz  1 , Brian J Olsen  2 , Jonathan Dumont  1 , Farahad Dastoor  2 , Michelle K Smith  3
Affiliations

Helping struggling students in introductory biology: a peer-tutoring approach that improves performance, perception, and retention

Zachary Batz et al. CBE Life Sci Educ. 2015 Summer.

Abstract

The high attrition rate among science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) majors has long been an area of concern for institutions and educational researchers. The transition from introductory to advanced courses has been identified as a particularly "leaky" point along the STEM pipeline, and students who struggle early in an introductory STEM course are predominantly at risk. Peer-tutoring programs offered to all students in a course have been widely found to help STEM students during this critical transition, but hiring a sufficient number of tutors may not be an option for some institutions. As an alternative, this study examines the viability of an optional peer-tutoring program offered to students who are struggling in a large-enrollment, introductory biology course. Struggling students who regularly attended peer tutoring increased exam performance, expert-like perceptions of biology, and course persistence relative to their struggling peers who were not attending the peer-tutoring sessions. The results of this study provide information to instructors who want to design targeted academic assistance for students who are struggling in introductory courses.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Flowchart of group membership in the study.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
Comparison of exam performance among groups. (A) Mean preintervention exam 1 performance. One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) F(2, 681) = 638.6; brackets with asterisks indicate significant two-tailed differences between groups, Tukey post hoc test, p < 0.05. (B) Mean intervention performance for exams 2–5. One-way ANOVA F(2, 681) = 120.2, p < 0.001; brackets with asterisks mark significant two-tailed differences between groups, Tukey post hoc test, p < 0.05. Bars indicate SE.
Figure 3.
Figure 3.
Student CLASS-Bio scores at the beginning and end of the semester. (A) Mean scores overall on CLASS-Bio pretest by group. One-way ANOVA F(2, 555) = 26.7, p < 0.001; brackets with asterisks mark significant two-tailed differences between groups, Tukey post hoc test, p < 0.05. (B) Mean scores on CLASS-Bio posttest overall by group. One-way ANOVA F(2, 641) = 44.0, p < 0.001; brackets with asterisks mark significant two-tailed differences between groups, Tukey post hoc test, p < 0.05. (C) Mean shifts in CLASS-Bio overall score for individual students from pretest to posttest. The significant two-tailed shift is marked with an asterisk, paired t-test, p < 0.05. Bars indicate SE.
Figure 4.
Figure 4.
Raw average exam grades throughout the semester by group. Bars indicate SE. The dashed black line indicates the start of the intervention period.
Figure 5.
Figure 5.
Reasons struggling students give for declining peer tutoring. Some students gave more than one reason in their response and therefore received more than one code.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. American Association for the Advancement of Science (2011) Vision and Change in Undergraduate Biology Education: A Call to Action. Washington, DC:
    1. Bloom BS, Englehard MD, Furst EJ, Hill WH, Krathwohl DR. Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The Classification of Educational Goals: Handbook I, Cognitive Domain. New York: David McKay; 1956.
    1. Born WK, Revelle W, Pinto LH. Improving biology performance with workshop groups. J Sci Educ Tech. 2002;11:347–365.
    1. Chasteen SV, Pepper RE, Caballero MD, Pollock SJ, Perkins KK. Colorado Upper-Division Electrostatics diagnostic: a conceptual assessment for the junior level. Phys Rev Spec Top Phys Educ Res. 2012;8:020108.
    1. Chen X, Soldner M. STEM Attrition: College Students’ Paths into and out of STEM Fields. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics; 2013.

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources