Communications of Mathematical Education (한국수학교육학회지시리즈E:수학교육논문집)

Korean Society of Mathematical Education (한국수학교육학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Comparing Two Peer Tutoring Methods in the Mathematics Classroom: Design and Implementation Research

고등학교 수학 교실의 또래교수 설계 및 실행 비교 연구

  • Received : 2020.03.12
  • Accepted : 2020.05.14
  • Published : 2020.05.15
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The study investigates how two different methods of peer tutoring impact academic achievement and student affect in a high school mathematics class. The two methods include the one-on-one non-reciprocal peer tutoring and the one-on-four interactive peer-tutoring method. We looked into students' cognitive gains and their affect toward mathematics after students had experienced peer tutoring for six weeks. Further, we analyzed student responses in a survey about peer tutoring activities. A finding is that the two methods produced no statistically significant difference in both cognitive gains and student affect toward mathematics. As students expressed views about their peer tutoring experiences, their comments, however, revealed the multifaceted aspects of peer tutoring in the classroom setting. In turn, this supports the use of diverse peer tutoring methods especially when the teacher makes incremental changes in teaching practices to improve student learning. Findings also indicate that appropriate peer tutoring experiences have the potential to create intellectually safe learning environments with high student engagement. This underscores the benefit of designing and implementing diverse peer tutoring methods that are effective in engaging students in learning and increasing the opportunity to learn and create knowledge with peers.

본 연구는 또래 교수(peer teaching) 설계 방식이 고등학생들의 학업 성취도와 정의적 영역에 미치는 영향을 확인하여 학교 현장에서 또래 교수 활성화 가능성을 탐색하고자 한다. 이를 위해 동질성이 확보된 고등학교 1학년 학생들을 일대일 비상호적 또래 교수 활동을 실행하는 집단과 일대사 상호적 또래 교수 활동을 실행하는 집단으로 나누어 구성하였다. 그리고 각 집단에서 6주 동안 또래 교수 활동을 실행하고 사후 학업 성취도 검사, 정의적 영역 검사 및 또래교수 활동에 관한 설문을 실시한 후 활동 결과를 확인하였다. 이후 다시 6주 동안 각 집단의 또래 교수 활동을 교차하여 진행한 후 두 활동을 비교하는 설문을 실시하였다. 연구 결과는 다음과 같다. 첫째, 또래 교수의 설계 방법의 차이가 학생들의 학업 성취도와 정의적 영역에서 유의미한 차이를 발생시키지 않았다. 둘째, 학생들은 또래 교수에 대해 긍정적으로 인식했으며, 각각의 또래 교수 활동의 설계 방법의 장점들에 대해서는 주목할 만한 인식의 차이를 드러내었다. 이는 또래교수 설계를 통해 기존의 교실 구조를 크게 변화시키지 않고 개인의 특성을 고려한 맞춤형 교육이 가능하다는 점을 시사한다.

Keywords

References

  1. Ko, H.., Lee, H., Lee, H., Lee, E., Baek., S., Kim, H., ... Ee, J. (2015). A research on the actual condition and improvement of mathematics learning. KOFAC Research Report.
  2. Kim, G. (2015). A case study on grouping in peer tutoring discourse. Journal of the Korean School Mathematics Society, 18(3), 281-309.
  3. Kim, D., Kim, W., An, B., Yoo, J., Lee, D., Choi, K., ... Hwang, W. (2017). Communicational approach to teaching. Seoul:Kyowoo.
  4. Kim, M., Lee, K., Lee, M., & Sung, C. (2013). The change of cognitive structure of peer teachers and learners through peer learning - focused on figures. Education of Primary School Mathematics, 16(2), 107-122. https://doi.org/10.7468/jksmec.2013.16.2.107
  5. Kim, S., & Han, S. (2003). A study on the effective teaching method for the underachievers of mathematics in the middle school. The Journal of the smeieccu, 24(1), 1-31.
  6. Do, S. (2002). The effects of the group patterns of peer tutoring on the academic achievement and learning attitude. Master's Thesis, Busan National University.
  7. Ryu S. (1999). A study on the role of social interaction of Piaget and Vygotsky in mathematics education. The Research of Science.Mathematics Education, 22, 109-131.
  8. Park, S., Kim, M., & Ju, M. (2010). A study on affective characteristics toward mathematics. KICE(RRI 2010-9).
  9. Park, H. (2007). The effect of reciprocal peer tutoring to mathematical achievement and self-efficacy in the under achiever class of the middle school. Master's thesis, Ewha Womans University.
  10. Bae, K., & Park, M. (2016). An analysis on the peer mentoring effects on students' mathematical character and mathematics achievements in mathematics lessons. Education of Primary School Mathematics, 16(4), 261-276.
  11. Baek, J., & Kwon, H. (2007). The impact of peer tutoring teaching method in various kinds of groups on high school studetns's learning achievement and learning attitude in mathematics. Journal of the Korean School Mathematics, 10(4), 487-504.
  12. So, Y. (2010). Does peer tutoring enhance task interests in mathematics? -The effects of grouping format of peer tutoring, peer support, and competition. The Journal of Vocational Education Research, 29(4), 55-71.
  13. Son, S., Seo, Y., Lee, J., & Moon, J. (2011). Evidence-based practices for teaching factual, conceptual, procedural knowledge in elementary mathematics. The Journal of Elementary Education, 24(3), 217-245.
  14. Sohn, Y., & Kim, S. (2005). The effect of grouping format of peer tutoring on achievement and interest. The Korean Journal of Educational Psychology, 19(3), 595-613.
  15. Song, E., Kang W., & Paik, S. (2008). An analysis on communications in peer tutoring elementary school mathematics. The Journal of Korea elementary education, 18(2), 35-50. https://doi.org/10.20972/kjee.18.2.200801.35
  16. Shin, S., Hwang, H., Kim, S., & Sung, K.(1992). Research on mathematics educational evaluation system for pursuing the nature of education: Development of mathematics evaluational tool. Korea Educational Development Institute.
  17. Yoo, G., & Kim, S. (2010). Effects of peer tutoring on fractional computation and self-esteem of math underachievers. Special Education Research, 9(2), 31-49. https://doi.org/10.18541/ser.2010.06.9.2.31
  18. Lee, E. (2003). Literature review on the effectiveness of peer-related teaching in elementary inclusive classrooms. The Journal of Special Children Education, 5(2), 63-80.
  19. Lee, K., Rim, H., Park, I., Seo, M., & Kim, B. (2016). A study on development of the survey items for affective domain in mathematics of NAEA. The Journal of Curriculum and Evaluation, 19(4), 45-70. https://doi.org/10.29221/jce.2016.19.4.45
  20. Lee, J. (2014). The effect of reciprocal peer tutoring on high school students' affective characteristics and achievement in mathematics. Master's thesis, Dankook University.
  21. Lee, H., & Ko, H. (2015). The effect of cooperative learning and peer tutoring program on cognitive domain and affective domain: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Research in Mathematics, 25(1), 113-137.
  22. Jung, M., & Kwon, S. (2011). A study on the effects of the peer tutoring on mathematical inclination and mathematical communication ability of peer tutors. School Mathematics, 13(1), 127-153.
  23. Cha, J., Choi, S., & Kim, D. (2015). Effects of a peer tutoring method on mathematical problem solving and class satisfaction. Journal of the Korean School Mathematics Society, 18(2), 203-221.
  24. Choi, K., & Han, H. (2013). A study on the effects of the reciprocal peer tutoring in high school students' affective characteristics of mathematics. The Mathematical Education, 52(3), 423-442. https://doi.org/10.7468/mathedu.2013.52.3.423
  25. Choi, K., & Hwang, W. (2014). Effects of reflective journal writing to mathematics self-efficacy in reciprocal peer tutoring, The Mathematical Education, 53(1), 1-24. https://doi.org/10.7468/mathedu.2014.53.1.1
  26. Choi, Y., & Son, H. (2017). Action research of peer tutoring to improve children's academic achievement and peer relationships. Teacher Education Research, 56(1), 43-62. https://doi.org/10.15812/ter.56.1.201703.43
  27. Bierman, K. L., & Furman, W. (1981). Effects of role and assignment rationale on attitudes formed during peer tutoring. Journal of Educational Psychology, 73(1), 33-40. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.73.1.33
  28. Bowman-Perrott, L., deMarin, S., Mahadevan, L., & Etchells, M. (2016). Assessing the academic, social, and language production outcomes of English language learners engaged in peer tutoring: A systematic review. Education & Treatment of Children, 39(3), 359-388. https://doi.org/10.1353/etc.2016.0016
  29. Cotton, K. (1988). Peer tutoring: Lake Washington high school, Benjamin Rush elementary school. Effective Practices in Place: Snapshot, 5(11), 296-413.
  30. Choudhury, I. (2002), Use of reciprocal peer tutoring technique in an environmental control systems course at an undergraduate level. Journal of Construction Education, 7(3), 137-142.
  31. Dufrene, B. A., Noell, G. H., Gilbertson, D. N., & Duhon, G. J. (2005). Monitoring implementation of reciprocal peer tutoring: Identifying and intervening with students who do not maintain accurate implementation. School Psychology Review, 34, 74-86.
  32. Fantuzzo, J. W., King, J. A., & Heller, L. R. (1992). Effects of reciprocal peer tutoring on mathematics and school adjustment: A component analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(3), 331-339. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.84.3.331
  33. Gaustad, J. (1993). Peer and cross-age tutoring. ERIC Digest, 79, 354-608.
  34. Greenwood, C. R., Delquadri J. C., & Hall, R. V. (1989). Longitudinal effects of class-wide peer tutoring. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 371-383. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.81.3.371
  35. Goodlad, S., & Hirst, B. (1989). Peer tutoring: A guide to learning by teaching. London: Kogan Page.
  36. Jenkins, E. W. (1994), Public understanding of science and science education for action. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 26(6), 601-611. https://doi.org/10.1080/0022027940260602
  37. Spolsky, B. (1998). Sociolingustics. New York: Oxford University Press.
  38. Topping, K. (1998). The peer tutoring handbook: Promotion co-operative learning. Cambridge, MA:Brookline Books.
  39. Topping, K. (2001). Peer assisted learning: A practical guide for teachers. Cambridge, MA: Brookline Books.
  40. Utley, C. A., Mortweet, S., Vanscoyoc, G., & Charles, R. (1997), Peer-mediated instruction and interventions. Focus on Exceptional Children, 29(5), 1-23.
  41. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. In Cole, M., John-Steiner, V., Scribner, S., & Souberman. (Eds.). Cambridge: Havard University Press.
  42. Warger, C. L. (1991). Peer tutoring: When working together is better than working alone. Research & Resources on Special Education, 30, 345-459.
  43. Webb, M. (1987). Peer helping relationships in urban schools. Equity and Choice, 4(3), 289-949.
  44. Winfred, F. H. (1997). Learning: A survey of psychological interpretations (6th ed.) . New York: Longman.