Running Head: CROSS-AGE PEER TUTORING: IMPACT ON TUTORS’ READING 1

Cross-Age Peer Tutoring: Impact on Tutors’ Reading Confidence and Performance

Mariah Brashar

ED 626 Classroom Research

University of Alaska, Southeast

CROSS-AGE PEER TUTORING: IMPACT ON TUTORS’ READING 2

Abstract

This paper offers information about the effectiveness of a peer tutoring program in a

Southcentral Alaska Elementary school. This student tutoring study was undertaken with the

intention of improving the reading confidence and skills of students who were reading below

grade level. The researcher posited that students would benefit from the opportunity to read

materials at their own level with younger peers who could authentically benefit from and enjoy

reading those materials. This program consisted of three fourth grade students who were reading

significantly below grade level who were partnered with three first grade students who were

reading on grade level. These six students read together three times a week for three weeks.

Older students were trained as tutors and their progress was measured by increases in reading

fluency, improvements in attitudes towards reading, and increases in reading confidence.

Students’ progress in these areas was monitored using observational data, student tutor

interviews, and AIMS web fluency reading passages. The results indicated that peer tutoring had

a moderate positive effect for all three student tutors in all measured areas. The researcher

concluded that a lengthier study involving a larger number of students would likely also yield

positive results.
CROSS-AGE PEER TUTORING: IMPACT ON TUTORS’ READING 3

Introduction

Reading is the most important skill elementary students learn. Students’ ability to read

and comprehend material informs their ability to succeed not only in language arts, but in all

academic areas. Unfortunately, by the intermediate grades, many students have fallen far behind

grade-level reading expectations. Students’ inabilities to successfully access written materials

compound the typical challenges that they might face in all academic fields. Academic

difficulties also influence student behavior. Students who are unable to access material cannot

efficiently engage with classroom activities and are often bored, distracted, and even disruptive.

While peer tutoring has often been used to improve outcomes for tutees, little research

has been done on the benefits for tutors. This peer tutoring case study attempts to provide

information on the benefits of such a program for student tutors.

The students involved in this study read significantly below grade level and experienced

difficulty in other academic and social areas as a result of this deficiency. These students had few

authentic chances to independently engage with reading material at their own reading level in the

classroom. The researcher attempted to determine if, given more chances to engage with on-level

materials in acceptable social situations, students’ reading abilities would improve.

This research was designed to measure changes in student tutor reading fluency,

confidence, and attitude.

Literature Review

Cross-age peer tutoring is a widely used and widely studied technique that aims to

improve students’ performance in a variety of academic and social-emotional areas. Researchers

have found peer tutoring to be beneficial for learning new skills, supporting traditional learning,
CROSS-AGE PEER TUTORING: IMPACT ON TUTORS’ READING 4

and improving students’ self-esteem (Almassaad & Alotaibi, 2012). Cross-age peer tutoring

occurs when students of different ages are paired together for the benefit of one or both parties.

Established research in the field of cross-age peer tutoring has used a wide variety of

methods. While some studies employed qualitative observations and student surveys and

interviews (Almassaad & Alotaibi, 2012), others utilized a more quantitative approach, including

standardized testing results and progress monitoring (Rodriguez, 2013). Most research was

relatively limited in scope, lasting an average of 10 weeks or less (Bowman-Perrot et al., 2013).

Student academic and behavioral performance and improvements were the focus of this

research. This literature review focused on three themes within the study of cross-age peer

tutoring: student attitudes, behavior, and opinions; student benefits; and tutor training.

Student Attitudes, Behavior, and Opinions

Examination of the available literature and research on the effects of cross-age peer

tutoring revealed several distinct and repeated themes. The effect of peer tutoring on student

attitudes, behavior, and opinions has been widely studied. Student tutors and tutees involved in

peer tutoring viewed the process positively, regardless of their ability level (Almassaad &

Alotaibi, 2012). Specifically, students with Autism Spectrum Disorder benefited from the

process and were better able to reach Individual Educational Plan (IEP) goals for acceptable

behavior within the school setting (Gillies, 2012). Other research suggested that, while tutees

made academic gains, tutors’ attitudes underwent a positive transformation, even when the scope

of the research was brief (Udaka, 2009).

Student Benefits

Another commonly studied theme within the canon of research on peer tutoring focused

on benefits across ability level and age. Most, though not all, of the research on cross-age peer
CROSS-AGE PEER TUTORING: IMPACT ON TUTORS’ READING 5

tutoring was centered around the benefit to younger students in tutoring relationships (Almassaad

& Alotaibi, 2012). Research showed that peer tutoring programs in elementary schools were

associated with improved critical thinking, interpersonal, and conflict resolution skills for both

parties (Gensemer, 2000). Student tutees and tutors both reported improvements in self-esteem

and more positive attitudes toward the subject in which the peer tutoring relationship was

centered (Udaka, 2009).

Student academic improvement was often moderately large, with students in peer tutoring

relationships having made noticeably greater gains in math and reading than controls (Bowman-

Perrot, Davis, Vannest, Greenwood, & Parker, 2013). Some research indicated that peer tutoring

programs may even double or triple students’ reading fluency levels (Rodriguez, 2013). Cross-

age peer tutoring was most often arranged so there was at least a 3-5 year gap between students’

ages, which facilitated the most auspicious development of the tutee/tutor relationship

(Gensemet, 2000). Larger age gaps were associated with greater gains (Bowman-Perrot et al.,

2013). Several studies suggested that shorter interventions were more effective for increasing

student progress (Rodriguez, 2013).

Cooperation, while necessary for human success and survival, has not been widely

emphasized in school (Bennet, 1991). When cooperative work models, of which peer tutoring is

one, have been used, they were beneficial for all genders, skills levels, and ages (Bennet, 1991),

as well as for teacher efficacy (Cardenas, 2017). While some studies have shown that older age-

groups benefited more significantly from peer tutoring (Bowman-Perrot et al., 2013), others

suggested that the key to peer tutoring success lay more within the method’s implementation

than within any one age or ability structure (Cardenas, 2017). Tutor training, organization and
CROSS-AGE PEER TUTORING: IMPACT ON TUTORS’ READING 6

planning of lessons, and teachers’ scheduled time for training and preparing were key to program

success (Cardenas, 2017).

Interestingly, benefits were more limited within the scope of a longer intervention

(Rodriguez, 2013). Most studies of peer tutoring focused on an approximately 8-hour

intervention, usually between 30-45 minutes per week (Bowman-Perrot et al., 2013). The data

suggested that shorter, more flexible interventions, like the focus of this research, were more

effective for increasing student learning.

The benefits to tutor performance and behavior of cross-age peer tutoring were generally

studied in conjunction with peer-tutoring’s other benefits. Research has found that peer tutoring

of nine- and ten-year-old children in spelling was as beneficial for the tutor as it was for the tutee

(Dineen, Clark, & Risley, 1977). Tutors in peer tutoring relationships were often selected due to

superior academic abilities. However, in cases where tutors were selected based on low-

academic achievement and interest, tutors’ interest and achievement in reading and writing was

shown to improve (Leland & Fitzpatrick, 1994).

Tutor Training

As Cardenas (2017) noted, the research widely indicated that improvements in student

performance were dependent largely on program efficacy. One key element within peer tutoring

programs was tutor training. Depending on the scope of a peer tutoring relationship, tutor

training was simple or complex, brief or ongoing (Gaustad, 1992). Training tutors to use a

“pause, prompt, and praise” teaching strategy was particularly effective (Gensemer, 2000). Peer

tutors also showed more positive results when they were supported throughout the process,

whether through ongoing training or by some other method (Kapil & Melini, 2018).
CROSS-AGE PEER TUTORING: IMPACT ON TUTORS’ READING 7

The evidence reviewed for this study clearly showed that cross-age peer tutoring was

beneficial for student performance. Both student tutors and tutees experienced improvements in

attitudes, behavior, and performance (Almassad & Alotaibi, 2012). Benefits were seen across age

and ability levels (Bennet, 1991), although students appear to have experienced more profound

increases over shorter periods of time (Rodriguez, 2013). Tutors benefited from the experience

of tutoring another student, both by increased self-confidence and academic improvement

(Dineen et al., 1977). In order for students to experience maximum gains, a peer tutoring

program involved tutor training and ongoing support (Gaustad, 1992). Tutor training that

included a method in which student tutors are taught to pause, prompt, and praise tutees showed

the most promise for student gain (Gensemer, 2000).

The focus of this research was to determine how low-achieving fourth-grade readers

would improve in attitude and performance when paired with first graders for a three-week

intervention. In light of research, student tutors were trained and monitored for improvement

through interview and progress monitoring. Since most research in this area focused on tutee

gains or the relationship between tutor and tutee gains, this research was needed to supply

information on the academic and behavioral benefits to tutors independent of their tutees.

Theoretical Framework and Research Questions

Peer tutoring was supported by three main educational and developmental theories. The

first of these was Albert Bandura’s Social Cognitive Theory (1989), which states that learning

occurs in a social context. The theory highlights the importance of social interactions and their

ability to reinforce learning and behavior. The theory explains how a person’s behavior is

influenced by reciprocal determinism, or the fluid interplay between a person’s actions and the

results of those actions on his or her environment and future behavior. Thus, the positive
CROSS-AGE PEER TUTORING: IMPACT ON TUTORS’ READING 8

reinforcement within a peer-tutoring relationship can encourage students to behave in a more

positive way towards reading, according to Social Cognitive Theory. The theory also states that

the modeling of desirable behaviors by competent role models can improve behavior.

Another theory that supported the benefits of peer tutoring was Lev Vygotsky’s Social

Constructivist Theory, as explained in Rieber and Robinson (2004), which holds that the learner

is an active constructor of information. Since learners’ experiences and prior knowledge help

them to construct new information, it follows that peer tutoring would provide learners with an

opportunity to generate new knowledge within an egalitarian environment in which tutee and

tutor are on equal footing.

The third theory that was important when considering peer tutoring was Ainsworth and

Bowlby’s Attachment Theory (1991). Attachment theory discusses the need for individuals to

form secure attachments, or intimate reciprocal bonds, both in infancy and in later life. Secure

relationships have been associated with feelings of high self-worth. Social validation (being

accepted by one’s peer group) also promotes self-esteem and improves motivation for continued

participation in the activities rewarded by positive social interactions (Ainsworth & Bowlby,

1991). This peer tutoring program was intended to provide an opportunity for struggling readers

to have positive social interactions centered around reading, thereby improving their self-esteem

in relation to reading and also their motivation to continue reading.

The focus of this research was to determine whether low-achieving fourth-grade readers

would improve in attitude and performance when paired with first graders for a three-week

intervention.

Since most of the research reviewed was focused on tutee gains or the relationship

between tutor and tutee gains, this research was needed to supply information on the academic
CROSS-AGE PEER TUTORING: IMPACT ON TUTORS’ READING 9

and behavioral benefits to tutors independent of their tutees. To determine how tutors are

impacted, the researcher asked the following question: How does cross-age peer tutoring

between Alaskan fourth and first graders impact the reading-related confidence and fluency of

low-achieving fourth grade students?

Research Design

In this study on the effects of cross-age peer tutoring on low-performing readers, I took a

qualitative inquiry approach examining a real-world situation, without manipulating it.

A case study was undertaken to determine the effects of cross-age peer tutoring on the reading

confidence and performance of low-fluency readers in a fourth-grade classroom in Southcentral

Alaska.

This research addressed the difficulty that low readers face in the classroom: trouble with

confidence, an inability to successfully access reading materials within the context of the

classroom, and the resulting frustration and discouragement that often leads low-achieving

readers to disengage from or fail to become engaged with reading-based classroom activities.

This study was grounded on the assumption that low-fluency readers would benefit if given

opportunities to experience positive interactions with literature at their own level. Such positive

interactions are often inhibited by the teacher-student dynamic, as students feel pressure to

perform within the construct of the classroom (Bandura, 1989).

This research was based on Social Cognitive theory and followed an action research

design. Social Cognitive theory states that learning occurs in a social context (Bandura, 1989).

The social surroundings of a student inform his ability to learn, in both positive and negative

ways. For the purposes of this research, student tutors received one-time training in tutoring

techniques and were provided with a younger partner with whom they read over the course of the
CROSS-AGE PEER TUTORING: IMPACT ON TUTORS’ READING 10

study. Students tutors were tested for fluency, interviewed about attitudes towards reading, and

observed while working with their tutees.

The focus of this research was to determine whether low-achieving fourth-grade readers

would improve in attitude and performance when paired with first graders for a three-week

intervention. Students met with reading buddies three times weekly for 30 minutes, and student

tutors met once weekly with the instructor for progress monitoring and interviews. Student

tutors’ reading fluency was monitored before, during, and after the intervention. Student tutors

were also interviewed about their attitudes about reading and confidence in their reading abilities

before, during, and after the intervention.

Participants

The participants in this study were three fourth grade Special Education students,

Heather, Eric, and Julian (pseudonyms). They were selected for this study because they had been

identified as significantly below level in reading based on their scores drawn from the Measures

of Academic Progress (MAP) standardized assessment which was delivered to all students within

the school district. All three students had Individual Education Plan (IEP) goals to increase their

reading fluency and comprehension. Peer tutee participants were three first grade students. Peer

tutees were selected based on interest in being partnered with a reading buddy and average or

below average first-grade reading fluency, according to MAP scores. Student tutees were

substituted from a group of six total participants based on absences during the research period.

Student tutors read with the same partner throughout the research, except in the case of an

absence-necessitated substitution.

Training
CROSS-AGE PEER TUTORING: IMPACT ON TUTORS’ READING 11

Student tutors received one 20-minute training during the first week of the intervention

period. Student training focused on methods for choosing books together, and teaching tutors to

assist their tutees with reading difficult words. The instructor met with the three tutors as a group

and conducted the training by instructing the students on four ways of collaboratively choosing

books (discussion, interest, pre-reading, and appropriate difficulty level) and one method of

assisting fellow readers: pause (wait for the tutee to have time to figure a word out on his or her

own), prompt (give the tutee a helpful hint), and praise (let the tutee know that he or she did well

when he or she successfully identifies a word). The instructor and the student tutors worked as

partners and practiced choosing books and reading together, using the strategies taught. A

training plan is included (see Appendix A).

Training Protocol.

 Date of training: March 4

 Time of training: 2:20 – 2:40 pm

 Trainer: Mariah Brashar, Researcher

 Place of training: Classroom

Observations

Observations occurred during the regularly scheduled What I Need (WIN) time for first

graders (between 2:40-3:20 pm). Time was devoted to picking up first graders from their

classroom, selecting books, and reading; 15 minutes were devoted to student reading.

Observations focused on displays of interest in reading materials, time on task, and

positive peer interactions between student tutors and tutees. Displays of interest noted were: tutor

comments about the reading material, discussion of the reading material, and verbal connections

made with prior knowledge (as when a student tutor mentioned he or she was reminded of
CROSS-AGE PEER TUTORING: IMPACT ON TUTORS’ READING 12

something else). Time on task was monitored in three-minute increments depending on whether

or not the student tutor was reading or attending to the reading material. Positive peer

interactions noted were: compliments the tutor gives the tutee, effective prompting (the tutor

successfully assisting the tutee with a difficult word), tutor or tutee smiling or laughing. An

observational chart and code are included (see Appendix B).

Observation Protocol.

 Dates of observation: March 5 – March 9, March 24 - March 29

 Time of observation: 2:40 – 3:20 pm Tuesdays, Wednesdays, Thursdays

 Observer: Mariah Brashar, Researcher

 Place of observation: Classroom

Interviews

Student interviews focused on student tutors’ attitudes towards reading as a rewarding

activity, reading confidence, and interest in materials read during peer tutoring. Student tutors

participated in three one-on-one, informal, semi-structured interviews consisting of fifteen

questions. The interviews took place at the beginning, middle, and end of the intervention period.

Interviews took place in an empty classroom, where the rest of the intervention was conducted.

This place was chosen because it was empty and thus provided privacy and a quiet atmosphere.

Interview notes were completed directly following interviews. A sample (questions flexed

depending on respondent answers) interview is included (see Appendix C).

Interview Protocol.

 Dates of Interviews: March 4, 5, 18, 22, 28, 29

 Time of interview: 2:40 – 3:20 pm

 Interviewer: Mariah Brashar, Researcher

CROSS-AGE PEER TUTORING: IMPACT ON TUTORS’ READING 13

 Place of interview: Classroom

Progress Monitoring Data

Pre- and post- fluency reading assessment data were collected using AIMS Web fluency

reading passages before, during, and after the intervention. This data was used to show increases

or decreases in student reading fluency over the period of time of the intervention. Reading speed

was monitored.

Progress Monitoring Protocol.

 Dates of Monitoring: March 4, March 18, March 29

 Time of monitoring: 2:40 – 3:20 pm

 Monitor: Mariah Brashar, Researcher

 Place of monitoring: Classroom

Analysis
Internal validity in this study was accomplished through triangulation, the analysis of

multiple sources of qualitative data (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). A narrative analysis of

interviews, observations, and reading fluency changes was conducted.

This study took place over three weeks, with a one week break between week one and

week two. Student tutors received one 20-minute training period at 2:20 on March 4th. Student

tutors were trained on how to choose books with their partner and how to employ the pause,

prompt, and praise strategy. Student tutors were monitored for reading fluency using AIMS Web

fluency passages on March 4th, 18th, and 29th at 2:40 pm. Student tutors participated in three, one-

on-one, informal, semi-structured interviews consisting of fifteen questions on March 4, 5, 18,

22, 25, 28, 29 between 2:40 and 3:20 pm. Student tutors met with designated first grade peer

tutees on Tuesdays, Wednesdays, and Thursdays between March 4 and March 29 from 2:40 -

3:20 and read together with their partner for no less than 15 minutes. While student tutors read
CROSS-AGE PEER TUTORING: IMPACT ON TUTORS’ READING 14

with their partners, the researcher observed their interactions and noted tutors’ displays of

interest, time on task, and positive peer interactions. Interview and observational notes were

completed during and immediately following the interview and observation to which they

pertained.

Results and Data Analysis

The focus of this research was to determine whether low-achieving fourth-grade readers

would improve in attitude and performance when paired as reading tutors with first graders for a

three-week intervention. The results of this case study showed some variation between the

participants but indicated a moderate positive relationship between the peer tutoring program and

improvements in student tutor attitudes towards reading, student tutor reading confidence, and

student tutor reading ability.

The study began with a tutor training in which the three tutors and the researcher

participated. The training focused on helping the tutors assist their tutees with reading and on

showing tutors ways to successfully choose appropriate books with their tutees. The three student

tutors responded cooperatively both in the small group environment and to the suggested

methods. They spent the 20-minute training period working with each other and the researcher to

use key phrases to help determine books in which a partner might be interested. They also

practiced pausing, prompting, and praising one another while reading difficult words.

Throughout the intervention, student tutors repeatedly referred back to the training, particularly

using the phrase “what looks interesting to you?” when choosing books.

Three themes were identified from student interviews and observational data and are

presented from week to week and supported by quotes from student tutor interviews, analysis of

the frequency of positive interactions between student tutors and tutees, the frequency of student
CROSS-AGE PEER TUTORING: IMPACT ON TUTORS’ READING 15

tutor displays of interest in reading materials, student tutor time on task during peer tutoring

sessions, and student tutor reading fluency scores.

Student tutors’ positive peer interactions, their displays of interest in reading material,

and their reading fluency peaked during the second week. Tutors’ time spent on task varied

slightly from week to week, but engagement in the program remained consistently high.

Despite a dip in all areas measured by reading fluency monitoring and the observational chart

(excepting time on task) during the third week, average overall levels improved slightly over the

course of this research. An overview of data collected throughout the research from

observational logs is presented in Figure 1.

100 93
91
90 86
Average Number of Times Observed

80
70
60
51.3
50 44.6 45

40
30
20
9 8.3
10 4.5 4
0.7 2
0
Week 1 Week 2 Week 3

Displays of Interest Positive Peer Interactions

Time on Task (Percent) Reading Fluency (average words per minute)

Figure 1. Whole group student tutor averages for displays of interest, positive peer interactions,

time on task, and reading fluency scores.

Student Attitudes Towards Reading

The first theme identified from the data was that student attitudes towards reading focus

around reading in school and for the purposes of schoolwork. Over the course of the study,
CROSS-AGE PEER TUTORING: IMPACT ON TUTORS’ READING 16

students mentioned reading for a specific purpose within the school environment more

frequently. As the research progressed, students became more comfortable answering research

questions.

Interviews. During this research, student tutors repeatedly referred to the utility of reading

when answering interview questions. While the research group spent its time reading books

based on interest, student tutors did not appear to view their participation or adults’ engagement

with reading as something done for pleasure or entertainment.

Week 1.

 Adults read “because you are teachers and you read papers and stuff to kids.” Heather

 Adults read “because you like to read to the whole class because it helps teachers get

their brains smarter and students follow along.” Eric

Week 2.

 Adults read “so that they can learn new words.” Julian

 Adults read “so that they can get smarter and get into college” Eric

Week 3.

 Adults “like reading to kids so that kids can learn.” Heather

 Adults read “so that they can teach kids.” Julian

Observational Data. Student tutors’ interest levels in reading materials were observed based

on the number of times they made comments about reading materials, had discussions of reading

materials with their partners, and the connections student tutors made between their own lives

and the reading materials. While student tutors did not verbally indicate their personal interest in

reading materials to the researcher during interviews, it was plain from analysis of the increase in

the number of student tutor displays of interest (comments, discussions, and connections) that
CROSS-AGE PEER TUTORING: IMPACT ON TUTORS’ READING 17

students were personally interested and engaged by certain reading materials, particularly books

with unusual structures such as lift-a-flap books and books that included removable inserts. Two

books that particularly engaged students were Bugs and Slugs, by Judy Tatchell (2004), a lift-a-

flap book, and The Jolly Postman, or Other People’s Letters, by Janet and Allan Ahberg (1986),

a book that includes several inserted and removable “letters”, which were both presented in the

second week of the intervention period. Over the course of this research, the number of times

student tutors commented on, discussed, or drew connections between materials and their own

lives increased. Increases were most notable during the second week, but the students showed

greater interest in both the second and the third week than the first. These increases can be seen

in Figure 2.

Week 1 Week 2 Week 3

STUDENT TUTOR AVERAGE 0.6 6 3.6

J U L I A N 0.3 5 6
STUDENT

HEATHER 0.7 6 2

ERIC 0.7 7 3

AVERAGE NUMBER OF DOI BY WEEK

CROSS-AGE PEER TUTORING: IMPACT ON TUTORS’ READING 18

Figure 2. Student tutors’ displays of interest (D.O.I.) in reading material by week.

Student Reading Confidence

The second theme identified was that student reading confidence was relatively high,

although students noted feeling nervous about reading aloud and bored with in-class material (a

sign that they were not able to engage with the material). Student tutors’ ability to read quickly

and accurately influenced the number of positive peer interactions student tutors had with their

tutees, which logically follows as peer interactions were largely instances of student tutors’

assisting their tutees in reading (which they were only able to do if they could read the material

themselves). All student tutors increased the number of words they read accurately per minute

(fluency) in their second week. Eric and Julian decreased slightly from their Week 1 score in the

third week. Heather’s fluency score decreased in Week 3 but remained above her Week 1 score.

I posited that increased reading fluency would improve student tutors’ attitudes towards reading,

which it appeared to do in Week 2 for all student tutors. This trend continued into Week 3 for

Heather.

Interviews. Over the course of the study, students reported more feelings of happiness and

pride in their reading skill in the second week than they did in the first or third. I was pleased and

surprised to observe the overall positivity of these three students, despite the challenges that they

had faced for years as below-level readers. Their resiliency was nothing short of inspiring. The

student tutors were often bored and frustrated, but their self-image was not so damaged by their

experiences that they could not value their own achievements.

Week 1.

 When I think of reading I feel “nervous. I think I am kind of a good reader.” Julian
CROSS-AGE PEER TUTORING: IMPACT ON TUTORS’ READING 19

 When I read to myself I feel “bored because it’s not exciting and all you get to do is

read.” Eric

Week 2.

 When I think of reading I feel “loud and proud, I don’t know [if I am a good reader], I

think I am maybe like a 10/20 [in the middle].” Heather

 When I think of reading “I feel good. I am kind of a good reader. I like to read.” Julian

Week 3.

 When I think of reading I feel “Comfortable and calm, I think I am a good reader.”

Heather

 When I think of reading “I feel excited, but also frustrated and angry. I think I am a good

reader because I can learn the words [that I don’t know].” Eric

Observational Data. Student tutors’ reading confidence likely affected their ability to be

effective tutors. Throughout the research period, students’ abilities to positively interact with

their tutees through effective tutoring and pro-social displays (such as smiling and laughing)

increased. Student tutors’ most frequent positive interaction with their tutees was successful

prompting. Other frequent interactions included smiling, laughing and praise. While increases in

positive peer interactions were not entirely linear, there was a notably positive trend, especially

when comparing Week 1 to the subsequent weeks of the intervention. These increases can be

seen in Figure 3.
CROSS-AGE PEER TUTORING: IMPACT ON TUTORS’ READING 20

Week 1 Week 2 Week 3

STUDENT TUTOR AVERAGE 2.1 8.7 8.7

JULIAN 1 5 5
STUDENT

HEATHER 2.3 10 13

ERIC 3 11 8

AVERAGE NUMBER OF P.P.I. BY WEEK

Figure 3. Student tutors’ positive peer interactions (P.P.I.) with tutees by week.

Student Tutor Reading Fluency (AIMS Web). In addition to interview responses and

observations on positive peer interactions, reading fluency data supports the idea that student

reading confidence might be related to students’ reading ability. Over the course of this research,

Eric and Julian did not increase their reading fluency. In fact, their scores lowered slightly

between Weeks 1 and 3. However, all three student tutors increased in fluency in Week 2.

Heather made a ten-word-per minute increase from Week 1 to Week 3. Her Week 2 reading

fluency score was even more impressive, a fifteen-word gain. Because of Heather’s notable

fluency improvement, the overall average for reading fluency was slightly higher at the

conclusion of the intervention. These improvements and changes can be seen in Figure 4.
CROSS-AGE PEER TUTORING: IMPACT ON TUTORS’ READING 21

60

50
Words Per Minute

40

30
53 56
52 51.3 49
44 44.6 46 47 45
20 39
37

10

0
Week 1 Week 2 Week 3
Student Tutors' Fluency Performance by Week

Julian Heather Eric Student Tutor Fluency Average

Figure 4. Student tutor AIMS Web reading fluency scores (words read per minute) by week.

Reluctance to Read Aloud

The third theme identified in this study was students’ reluctance to read aloud. Although the

student tutors all reported being hesitant to read aloud during interviews throughout the study,

they remained primarily on task during the intervention period. Despite practicing reading aloud,

student attitudes towards reading aloud did not appear to improve.

Interview. During the research period, students repeatedly referred to their fear of being

made fun of or laughed at for making reading errors. Students worried about how their slowness

might affect the rest of the class and how being corrected might reflect on their social status and

situation within their classroom. The most frequently used word in interview responses to

questions about reading aloud was “nervous.” Students also regularly used the words “shy” and

“scared.” It is important to note that these students are not frequently asked to read aloud in a

whole-class setting.
CROSS-AGE PEER TUTORING: IMPACT ON TUTORS’ READING 22

Week 1.

 When I am asked to read aloud I feel “nervous because I could get stuck and people

might laugh at me.” Heather

 When I am asked to read aloud I feel “nervous because sometimes I’m scared of reading,

because people might laugh at me when they have to wait [for me to figure out a word].”

Eric

Week 2.

 When I am asked to read aloud I feel “scared, nervous, and shy and I don’t like it when

teachers have to help me.” Eric

 When I am asked to read aloud I feel “nervous that I might mess up.” Julian

Week 3.

 When I am asked to read aloud “I feel nervous because I could get stuck.” Heather

 When I am asked to read aloud “I feel nervous, shy, [and] pretty scared because I don’t

like [to read aloud].” Eric

Observational Data. While students may have felt nervous about reading aloud, they did not

appear to be distracted by those feelings during the intervention periods associated with this

research. Students were able to remain on task for a minimum average of 87 percent of the time.

This indicates that while they felt uncomfortable reading aloud in a whole-group setting, they

were less uncomfortable in a smaller group. It also may show that these below-level readers were

more emotionally comfortable reading to peers below their own reading level. The time that

students spent on task was also affected by their tutee and his or her attendance to the subject and

material at hand. Julian’s partner was the least attentive of the three student tutees that regularly

attended intervention periods. Julian was the most reserved of the student tutors involved in the
CROSS-AGE PEER TUTORING: IMPACT ON TUTORS’ READING 23

study and generally responded well to his more outgoing, although less focused, partner.

However, as in Week 2, at times this partnership struggled to stay on task. Student tutors’ time

on task can be seen in Figure 5.

Week 1 Week 2 Week 3

STUDENT TUTOR AVERAGE TIME ON TASK 90 87 93

ERIC 90 100 100

STUDENT

HEATHER 100 100 80

JULIAN 80 60 100

AVERAGE TIME ON TASK (PERCENT) BY WEEK

Figure 5. Student tutors’ percent time on task by week.

Discussion

This research explored how three low-achieving fourth-grade readers’ attitudes and

performance would change when they were paired with first graders for a three-week

intervention. Like much of the current research on peer mentoring, I used both a qualitative

approach (Almassaad & Alotaibi, 2012) by observing student tutors’ behaviors and interviewing

them before, during, and after the intervention, and some quantitative measures (Rodriguez,

2013) such as progress monitoring. The three students were determined to be far below grade

level (all scoring at a second grade or lower reading level) and had been struggling with the

challenges associated with reading below level throughout the second and third grades.
CROSS-AGE PEER TUTORING: IMPACT ON TUTORS’ READING 24

Despite this, all three students reported positive feelings about their own reading ability

during every interview, showing a level of resiliency that I did not expect. This apparent

resiliency did not translate to reported improvements in reading confidence over the course of the

study. While other research has indicated that student tutoring programs increased self-esteem

towards the subject studied during the tutoring period (Udaka, 2009), my research did not

indicate that there was any notable improvement in student tutors’ feelings about their own

reading abilities, according to interview responses. Since this change, or lack thereof, was

reported using an interview, I suspected that students might have been hesitant to share their

deeper feelings about their abilities. Some method of self-reporting, perhaps through survey,

could have shown more authentic levels of confidence over the course of the intervention.

While the intervention appeared to be ineffectual at influencing gains in self-confidence,

students did appear to make gains in other areas. The research plan consisted of a training period,

which studies have shown was a key to student tutoring program success (Cardenas, 2017). Like

other studies, this study indicated that training tutors to use a “pause, prompt, and praise”

teaching strategy was particularly effective (Gensemer, 2000). One of the most numerous

positive interactions that was observed during this study consisted of student tutors effectively

employing this strategy. As the study progressed, student tutors became more effective tutors,

prompting and praising their tutees more often. A longer, more ongoing and organized method of

tutor training would likely have benefited the students even more. However, due to the limited

scope of this study, that was not practical.

This research’s scope, consisting of only a three-week period, was restrictive. However,

most research reviewed in this area was fairly short term, lasting in general less than 10 weeks

(Bowman-Perrot et al., 2013). Interestingly, a short intervention period potentially had benefits.
CROSS-AGE PEER TUTORING: IMPACT ON TUTORS’ READING 25

The first and second week of this study showed a larger percentage of student improvement than

the third week, and other studies have shown that shorter interventions were more effective for

increasing student progress (Rodriguez, 2013). However, the apparent improvements during the

second week of this research may have been positively influenced by the week-long break

between Week 1 and 2. Perhaps that break enabled the students to return to school with a fresh

attitude and a renewed ability to focus. I assumed the break would complicate the study, but my

mistaken assumption was that it would cause the students’ progress to slow, not to quicken.

However, student tutors’ reading fluency improved by an average of six words per

minute between the first and second weeks. This marked improvement was consistent with

current research, which has found that student academic improvement was often moderately

large, with students in peer tutoring relationships having made noticeably greater gains in

reading than controls (Bowman-Perrot, et al., 2013).

The short intervention period (despite its possible benefits) was a limitation of this study.

It is difficult to determine why certain variations in the data occurred during different weeks of

the research period without a longer period of time to analyze, which would give more context to

extraneous events that may have influenced the data. The decrease in student reading

performance in the third week, for example, may have been influenced by state testing. During

the third week, student tutors spent 3-4 hours engaged in standardized testing during the

mornings of the interventions. Students were visibly mentally and physically fatigued. They lay

their heads down on desks, asked to sleep instead of read, and commented on their exhaustion.

A further limitation of this study was the likelihood that student tutors became familiar

with research questions. Since questions remained the same or very similar from week to week,

this familiarity may have influenced student answers. The interview method was illuminating in
CROSS-AGE PEER TUTORING: IMPACT ON TUTORS’ READING 26

many ways, often giving me insight into how the students thought about reading as an activity:

notably how focused all three tutors were on the utility of reading rather than the enjoyment of

reading. However, because of the nature of the teacher-student relationship and power dynamic,

where one person (the teacher) holds the majority of the power and authority in almost every

situation, I often wondered if students were reluctant to share their authentic feelings with me out

of a desire to tell me what they thought I wanted to hear. I felt that a method of self-reporting

would have added clarity to this research. Despite these limitations, the findings of this research

indicate that peer mentoring was a positive influence on these students. These findings could be

used for a more extensive classroom study on peer tutoring.

Conclusions and Next Steps

This research began with these questions: how can I help struggling readers gain

confidence in reading within the classroom setting? More specifically, how does cross-age peer

tutoring between Alaskan fourth and first graders impact the reading-related confidence and

fluency of low-achieving fourth grade students? By pairing three students who were reading

significantly below level with first-grade partners for reading practice, I hoped to instill in them a

sense of their own abilities and a sense of their potential for growth. I also hoped to improve

their reading fluency.

There was some change effected during the period of my research. Over the course of the

intervention period, I found that students’ reading abilities (as measured by words read per

minute) improved modestly with this practice. Their attitudes towards reading also changed

modestly, as one can see from observational data on students’ displays of interest in reading

materials. Additionally, their confidence also improved modestly, with notable increases in their

abilities to assist, as well as their successes with assisting their tutees throughout the intervention.
CROSS-AGE PEER TUTORING: IMPACT ON TUTORS’ READING 27

Interested educators might appreciate that peer tutoring allows students to interact with

one another without adult intervention, freeing up more teacher time for small group or

individual activities. Students also get a chance to be in a role of authority, which can bring out

an assertive side of them that lays dormant in the typical construct of the classroom. Distracted

students may be more able to focus in small-group settings where they play a role of authority.

Information on the benefits of peer tutoring are available in many forms. The results of

this study might be helpful to other teachers at this school, especially as a response to questions

and concerns about helping struggling readers. The methods used and information gathered

might be useful to teachers who are considering implementing a similar plan within their

classrooms, either on a small scale like the scale of this study or on a larger scale.

The data collected during this intervention can be used to justify the continuation of a

peer tutoring program. It may also be used to encourage this practice in other contexts

throughout the school, especially within the special education department.

The questions that started this research are not yet fully answered. A longer study with

more participants might garner a broader data set that could potentially be more easily

generalized to other students and situations. Some of the benefits of peer tutoring discovered

during this research went beyond the scope of my questions into the realm of benefits to

classroom management, inter-personal skills, and school community building. Questions and

research addressing change in attitudes towards these three areas during a peer tutoring program

may be illuminating.

Despite the modest nature of the results of this study, the benefits of peer tutoring seem to

justify its continuation. I believe that many students would benefit from engaging with younger
CROSS-AGE PEER TUTORING: IMPACT ON TUTORS’ READING 28

students as mentors, in reading and in other subject areas. This is a program that I plan to

continue and expand as a permanent part of my teaching practice.

CROSS-AGE PEER TUTORING: IMPACT ON TUTORS’ READING 29

References

Ahberg, A. & Ahberg, J. (1986). The jolly postman or other people’s letters.

Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Ainsworth, M. D. S. & Bowlby, J. (1991). An ethnological approach to personality development.

American Psychologist 46 (4), 333-341. Retrieved from

https://www.scribd.com/document/155382490/Ainsworth-Bowlby-1991

Almassaad, A. & Alotaibi, K. (2012). The attitudes and opinions of tutees and tutors

towards using cross-age online tutoring. Psychology Research 2 (4), 247-259. Retrieved

from https://files.erid.ed.gov/fulltext/ED535721.pdf

Bandura, A. (1989). Social cognitive theory. In R. Vasta (Ed.) Annals of Child Development.

Vol. 6. Six Theories Of Child Development (1-60). Greenwich: JAI Press.

Retrieved from https://www.uky.edu/~eushe2/Bandura/Bandura1989ACD.pdf

Bennet, N. (1991). Cooperative learning in classrooms: processes and outcomes. Journal of

Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 32(4), 581–594. Retrieved from

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/44960911

Bowman-Perrott, L., Davis, H. S., Vannest, K., Williams, L., Greenwood, C. & Parker, R.

(2013). Academic benefits of peer tutoring: a meta-analytic review of single-case

research. School Psychology Review, 42 (1), 39–55. Retrieved from

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/267392499_Academic_Benefits_of_Peer_Tu

toring_A_Meta-Analytic_Review_of_Single-Case_Research

Cardenas, L. (2017). It is a win-win for both: cross-age peer tutoring. Capstone Projects and

Master's Theses, 159. Retrieved from

https://digitalcommons.csumb.edu/caps_thes_all/159
CROSS-AGE PEER TUTORING: IMPACT ON TUTORS’ READING 30

Dineen, J., Clark, H., & Risley, T. (1977). Peer tutoring among elementary students:

educational benefits to the tutor. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 10, 231‐ 238.

Retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1311174/

Gaustad, J. (1992). Tutoring for at-risk students. Oregon School Study Council Bulletin, 36 (3),

3-74. Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED353642

Gensemer, P. (2000). Effectiveness of cross‐age and peer mentoring programs.

Information Analysis, 30, 1‐15.
Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED438267

Gillies, A. E. (2012). A multi-perspective exploration of a cross-age tutoring initiative: an

analysis of the responses of all students. Graduate Theses and Dissertations, 4324.

Retrieved from http://scholarcommons.usf.edu/etd/4324

Kapil, Y. & Malini J. S. (2018). Peer tutoring an instructional strategy: a systematic

approach. Scholarly Research Journal for Humanity Science & English Language, 6

(27), 7792-7798. Retrieved from oaji.net/pdf.html?n=2017/1201-1534934536.pdf

Leland, C., & Fitzpatrick, R. (1994). Cross‐age interaction builds enthusiasm for reading and

writing. The Reading Teacher, 47, 292‐301. Retrieved from

https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ477303

Merriam, S. & Tisdell, E. (2016) Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation

4thed. Jossey-Bass. San Francisco, CA.

National Library of New Zealand. (2019). Helping students choose books for reading

pleasure. Retrieved from https://natlib.govt.nz/schools/reading-engagement/strategies-to-

engage-students-as-readers/helping-students-choose-books-for-reading-pleasure

Rieber, R. W. & Robinson, D. K. (Eds.). (2004). The essential Vygotsky. New York: Plenum

Publishers.
CROSS-AGE PEER TUTORING: IMPACT ON TUTORS’ READING 31

Rodriguez, A. I. (2013). Effects of a cross-age peer tutoring program on reading performance of

Hispanic Title I second and third grade students. All Theses and Dissertations, 3908.

Retrieved from https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/etd/3908

Tatchell, J. (2004). Bugs and slugs. Tulsa, OK: Usborne.

Udaka, I. J. (2009). Cross-age peer tutoring in dialogic reading: effects on the language

development of young children. Open Access Dissertations, 127. Retrieved from

https://scholarworks.umass.edu/open_access_dissertations/127
CROSS-AGE PEER TUTORING: IMPACT ON TUTORS’ READING 32

Appendix A

Tutor Training

Tutor Trainee Name(s):

Instructor Name: Mariah Brashar Date/Time of Training:

1. Methods for choosing book together:

Discuss: How can you choose a book that you and your first-grade buddy will both find

interesting?

Strategies:

The Goldilocks strategy — is this book too easy, too hard, or, just right? (National Library of

New Zealand, 2019)

The five-finger rule — identifying the number of difficult words on a page, so the reader can

evaluate if the text is at the right level. (National Library of New Zealand, 2019)

I PICK: I look at a book, Purpose, Interest, Comprehend, Know all the words. (National Library

of New Zealand, 2019)

Questions to ask yourself and your first-grade buddy when choosing a book together:

Does the title of the book sound interesting?

Read the blurb, does it sound interesting?

Do the pictures look interesting?

Is it something you might know something about or already be interested in from other stuff you

know?

Do you know anything about the author?

Has he or she written other books you liked?

Read the first page or two, is it easy enough to read, too hard? Too easy?
CROSS-AGE PEER TUTORING: IMPACT ON TUTORS’ READING 33

2. Methods for helping your first-grade buddy read (pause, prompt, praise):

When your buddy doesn’t know a word, don’t just tell him or her as soon as you figure it out:

pause. Give him or her time to think, then if he or she doesn’t figure it out after you’ve paused,

give them a hint, like the first letter sound or any other prompt. When your buddy figures out a

hard word, make sure you tell him or her how well he or she did! Give lots of praise, it makes

everyone feel better about reading.

Practice methods with peer tutors:

Partner tutors with each other and with the instructor and practice methods for choosing books

together and pause prompt, praise.

 CROSS-AGE PEER TUTORING: IMPACT ON TUTORS’ READING 34

Appendix B

Observation Chart

Tutor: Observer: Mariah Brashar Date/Time:

Minute 1-3 Minute 4-6 Minute 7-9 Minute 10-12 Minute 13-15

Displays of
Interest

Time on
Task

Positive
Peer
Interactions

Observational Code:
Displays of interest:
C: Comments (this is interesting, funny, etc.)
D: Discussion (What does that mean? How did that happen? Etc. Including responses)
P: Prior knowledge (mentions something he/she knows that connects with topic)
Time on Task:
Y: Yes, reading or discussing read material
N: No, not reading or attending to reading material
Positive Peer Interactions:
CP: Complement (Praise, good job, etc.)
EP: Effective prompt (starts with, sounds like, leads to correct identification of word)
S: Smiling
L: Laughing
CROSS-AGE PEER TUTORING: IMPACT ON TUTORS’ READING 35

Appendix C

Sample Interview

Interview Subject: Interviewer: Mariah Brashar Date/Time:

Attitudes towards reading:

1. Do you enjoy reading in school? How about at home?

2. What do you like about reading? Dislike?

3. Why do you think people, like adults, enjoy reading? Do your parents read at home?

4. When you read, what makes you enjoy it? If you don’t enjoy it, what makes you not enjoy it?

5. What is your favorite thing to read about? Why?

Level of reading confidence:

6. When you think of reading, how does it make you feel?

7. Do you think you are a good reader? Why do you think so?

8. How do you feel when you’re asked to read aloud?

9. When you’re reading to yourself, do you feel frustrated, happy, interested, bored? If so, why?

If not, how do you feel?

10. Would you rather read to yourself or read aloud? Why?

Interest in reading materials:

11. What is the last book you read? Why did you read this book?

12. Was this book interesting? If so, how? If not, why not?

13. Did this book remind you of anything in your own life? If so, what? If not, did it remind you

of anything else you’ve read?

14. Would you recommend this book to someone else? Why or why not?

15. When you pick your next book to read, how will you do it?