You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.

www.HFRP.org

The Harvard Family Research Project separated from the Harvard Graduate School of Education to become the Global Family Research Project as of January 1, 2017. It is no longer affiliated with Harvard University.

Terms of Use ▼

Program Description

Overview Quest for Excellence (QFE) is a community-based agency composed of local citizens and administered by several clergymen in Monroe, Alabama. QFE collaborated with the Monroe City Schools and a local university with the aim to assist the public school system to meet the academic and social needs of at-risk children. This assistance was primarily provided through after school tutoring in the specific areas of reading and math.
Start Date 1995
Scope local
Type after school
Location urban
Setting community-based organization
Participants elementary through high school students
Number of Sites/Grantees two to eight (varied by year)
Number Served 290 per year (1996–1999)
Components After school academic tutoring in reading and math in small groups twice a week for approximately one hour each time.
Funding Level not available
Funding Sources not available


Evaluation

Overview Data on grade point averages and standardized test scores were initially acquired and analyzed on 290 tutored students in eight Monroe City schools. Analysis of the impact of academic tutoring was based on changes in the students' averages and test scores over the course of four years. Five tutoring-related variables were identified for assessment purposes: number of hours each student was tutored, type of tutoring program, cost of tutoring a student per hour, and absences from scheduled tutoring sessions. Due to technical difficulties in the data collection methods, the evaluation process was modified during each of the four years and resulted in an increasingly smaller sample size. By the end of the four years, only a total of 40 students from two of the eight original Monroe City schools were evaluated. All school names used in the report and in the following profile are fictitious.
Evaluators Dennis C. Zuelke and J. Gordon Nelson, Jacksonville State University
Evaluations Profiled The Effect of a Community Agency's After-School Tutoring Program on Reading and Math GPA Gains for At-Risk Tutored Students
Evaluations Planned One follow-up assessment was completed for one of the high schools in 1999–2000, but Quest for Excellence had by this time removed itself from the tutoring program.
Report Availability Nelson, J. Gordon, Z., Dennis C. (2001). The effect of a community agency's after-school tutoring program on reading and math GPA gains for at-risk tutored students. Education, 121, 4.


Contacts

Evaluation Dennis C. Zuelke, Ph.D.
Jacksonville State University
700 Pelham Rd.
Jacksonville, AL 36265
Tel: 256-782-5182
Email: dzuelke@jsucc.jsu.edu		 J. Gordon Nelson, Ph.D.
Jacksonville State University
700 Pelham Rd.
Jacksonville, AL 36265
Tel: 256-782-5724
Email: gnelson@jsucc.jsu.edu
Program unavailable since program no longer in existence
Profile Updated January 20, 2003

Evaluation: The Effect of a Community Agency's After-School Tutoring Program on Reading and Math GPA Gains for At-Risk Tutored Students


Evaluation Description

Evaluation Purpose To assess the impact of after school tutoring on the academic performance for at-risk students in eight of the Monroe City schools. For the purpose of this study, academic performance was measured primarily in terms of grade point averages rather than standardized test scores because the aim of after school tutoring was to improve the classroom performance of at-risk students.
Evaluation Design Non-Experimental: Data were collected from sites over four years. In the two years, 1995–1996 and 1996–1997, the academic performance data of 290 tutored students in eight Monroe City Schools were analyzed. In 1997–1998, academic performance data were collected and analyzed from 212 students at four schools. In 1998–1999, academic performance data from 40 students at two schools were collected and analyzed. Single order correlations and other descriptive statistics were employed in the data analysis.
Data Collection Methods The assessors gave each school a template on which were the variables for which quantitative data needed to be collected for each tutored student. An operational or measurable definition for each variable was on the template to guide the data collector in each school. Once the data were collected and recorded for each student, the paper or computer disk spreadsheet was then delivered by QFE to the assessors in the spring of each year. The assessors then analyzed the data.

Secondary Sources/Data Review: Each of the eight schools was asked to do its own data collecting and to submit the grades and test scores of the students in the sample. However, during the first year, the information came in different formats and was occasionally unusable because they were inappropriate or incomplete. Starting with the second year, 1996–1997, a universal computer spreadsheet software was developed and used to enable an uniform method of data collection.

In addition, five tutoring-related variables were identified for assessment purposes: number of hours each student was tutored, type of tutoring program (extended day, enrichment, remedial, and combination), cost of tutoring a student per hour (used only in 1995–1996 because of a lack of accuracy in obtaining this variable on a per tutored student basis), and absence from tutoring (used in 1997–1998 and 1998–1999 to capture the effect of a tutored student who is not absent from school, but does not come to the day's after-school tutoring session).
Data Collection Timeframe Data were collected in the spring of each year.


Findings:
Formative/Process Findings

Activity Implementation One-on-one teacher-to-student tutoring had not occurred. Small group or even small class instruction had occurred with an after school teacher working with several students at the same time.
Program-School Linkages Most after school tutors, who were also classroom teachers themselves, did not coordinate with the students' regular teachers regarding the topics that should be covered in the tutoring sessions.

After 1999, the tutoring program considered moving from the Monroe school sites to the Quest for Excellence building in downtown Monroe. Logistics of transportation and communication with regular school staff would have to have been worked out at the time of the evaluation. However, QFE ended the program in 1999–2000, and this plan did not materialize.
Staffing/Training The after school teachers, most of whom were full-time classroom teachers during the day, were paid $10 per hour for tutoring.


Summative/Outcome Findings

Academic During 1995–1996, effects of tutoring were minimal, inconsistent, and overall did not indicate that tutored students improved their GPAs in math or reading.

During 1996–1997, five of the eight schools had negative reading gain scores. One school had positive math gain scores. Four schools had negative math gain scores. Overall, for all schools, reading and math GPA gains were negative.

During 1997–1998, only four schools involving 212 at-risk tutored students were evaluated. All four schools continued to show negative GPA gains in reading and math. None of the tutoring variables were highly correlated with reading or math GPA gain across all four schools. One school, Dogwood, did show a high positive correlation between hours tutored per student and GPA gain in reading and math. The GPA gain in reading was significant at the p<.001 level and in math at the p<.05 level. None of the tutoring-related variables were highly correlated at the p<.05 level for the remaining three schools.

During 1998–1999, the evaluation sample consisted only of 40 students. The 33 tutored students at Dogwood Elementary School and the seven tutored students at Lemon Tree High School declined in their reading GPA by almost 2.5 points and also achieved no gain in their math GPA.

During 1998–1999, as hours per tutored student increased, math GPA gain declined (p<.10). As absences from tutoring sessions increased per tutored student, math GPA gain increased (p<.10). These two tutoring variables correlated in the opposite expected direction.

After four continuous assessment years for two of the schools, the small high school had a math GPA decline of 4.71 while the elementary school had a 1.16 GPA gain in math. Both schools had declines in reading GPA of 2.00 and 4.43, respectively.

 

© 2016 Presidents and Fellows of Harvard College
Published by Harvard Family Research Project