No abstract

Undergraduate mathematics tutoring centres are prevalent in many countries; however, there is limited research-based evidence on effective organizational structures for these centres. In this study, we consider two research questions. First, how can the quantitative and qualitative data from 10 mathematics tutoring centres be organized for research purposes? Second, what hypotheses do expert mathematics tutoring centre leaders generate about characteristics of effective centres given data from a sample of ten centres? We collected quantitative data from over 26,000 students taking mathematics courses at ten institutions. Data collected included college entrance exam scores, high school grade point average, number of student visits to the centre per eligible student and course letter grade. We used exploratory data analysis to look for relationships between visits to the tutoring centre, student grades and other variables. Qualitative centre characteristics that were considered include: specialist–generalist tutoring system, tutoring capacity, physical layout, relationships between tutors and mathematics instructors and extent of tutor training. We used the Delphi process to generate testable hypotheses from the data, such as the following: (1) The more courses a tutor is responsible for tutoring the more likely it is that the tutor will struggle to answer student questions, when the difficulty level of the courses is roughly the same. (2) Centres with more specialized tutor models have more visits per student than centres with generalized tutor models. The preceding two hypotheses, along with the other generated hypotheses, have been identified by the experts participating in this study as plausible based on professional experience, exploratory data analysis and inferences based on prior research on tutoring. This study has not rigorously shown the validity of these hypotheses; rather it lays the groundwork for future investigations to determine what combination of features characterize an effective tutoring centre.

Evaluation has become a common, and even an expected, practice across undergraduate mathematics tutoring centres in the USA, UK and other countries. However, these evaluation efforts could benefit greatly from leveraging organizational theory research. In this study, we situate mathematics tutoring centres as non-profit organizations (NPOs) to consider how an organization performance assessment framework can be adapted to study mathematics tutoring centre data and characteristics. We use qualitative and quantitative data, collected from six mathematics tutoring centres and adapt Lee & Nowell’s (2015, Am. J. Eval., 36, 299–319) NPO performance framework to situate our study. Using thematic analysis, the research team underwent iterative cycles of data collection and analysis to code for alignment with Lee and Nowell’s framework. By adapting Lee and Nowell’s framework to mathematics centres, each of the six centres was given a more relevant lens to consider its performance. Regardless of the university setting, previous evaluations for centres have focused primarily on outputs (e.g., number of visits), behavioural change outcomes (e.g., correlating visits to grades) and client satisfaction outcomes (e.g., student surveys) that ignore the particular context of a centre. However, Lee and Nowell’s framework takes into account additional performance indicators that provide a more nuanced understanding of a centre’s performance by bringing to light the interplay among its various dimensions. Lee and Nowell’s framework allows centres to look beyond outputs and outcomes to understand why these outputs and outcomes come to be. The use of this adapted performance framework, for the six mathematics centres in this study, allows an interpretation on a variety of dimensions using relevant data while indicating possible areas for change for each centre.