A Factorial Study of Tutoring Versus Classroom Instruction

Tutoring is one of the oldest variables in educational theory. Long before Emile, possibly before Plato, it was hypothesized to be superior to other instructional methods and class sizes. Despite this venerable history, tutoring as an educational variable has largely escaped empirical scrutiny in this century, due perhaps to its seeming impracticality. Despite practical constraints, however, supplementary or remedial tutoring is being increasingly employed within contemporary school systems with severely academically deficient children. Furthermore, the practicality of individual instruction has been increased in recent years by the advent of increased leisure time coupled with the realization that teacher training and experience do not appear to affect the amount children learn (Popham, 1971; Moody and Bausell, 1971). If teacher training and experience are not requisite for successful teaching, then it would appear that non-professional manpower might be tapped for tutoring services. Several programs, in fact, have been instituted in which non-professional tutoring plus classroom instruction have been compared to classroom instruction alone (e.g. Ellson, Harris, and Barber, 1968; Tannenbaum, 1968). Tutoring plus classroom instruction generally leads to increased (reading) achievement, although not always (Niedermeyer and Ellis, 1970). Unfortunately, since total instructional time is not controlled, this line of research does little to answer the theoretically and practically important question: does tutoring result in greater student achievement than does classroom instruction?