Educational Outcomes of Tutoring: A Meta-analysis of Findings
Abstract
A meta-analysis of findings from 65 independent evaluations of school tutoring programs showed that these programs have positive effects on the academic performance and attitudes of those who receive tutoring. Tutored students outperformed control students on examinations, and they also developed positive attitudes toward the subject matter covered in the tutorial programs. The meta-analysis also showed that tutoring programs have positive effects on children who serve as tutors. Like the children they helped, the tutors gained a better understanding of and developed more positive attitudes toward the subject matter covered in the tutorial program. Participation in tutoring programs had little or no effect, however, on the self-esteem of tutors and tutees.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Personal tutoring improves student learning outcomes.
“Personal tutoring improves student learning outcomes (Cohen et al. 1982, Bowman-Perrott et al. 2013).”
From AI Meets the Classroom: When Do Large Language Models Harm Learning? (2024) · cites this paper as Cohen et al. 1982
Cites
Primary, Secondary, and Meta-Analysis of Research
GLASS, G. V. (1976) · Educational Researcher · doi:10.3102/0013189x005010003 · Cited by 4,890 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Interventions shown to aid executive function development in children 4 to 12 years old
Diamond, A., & Lee, K. (2011) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1204529 · Cited by 2,901 · see citing works
The 2 Sigma Problem: The Search for Methods of Group Instruction as Effective as One-to-One Tutoring
BLOOM, B. S. (1984) · Educational Researcher · doi:10.3102/0013189x013006004 · Cited by 2,734 · see citing works
VanLEHN, K. (2011) · Educational Psychologist · doi:10.1080/00461520.2011.611369 · Cited by 2,323 · see citing works
Lipsey, M. W., & Wilson, D. B. (1993) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.48.12.1181 · Cited by 2,033 · see citing works
Why Peer Discussion Improves Student Performance on In-Class Concept Questions
Smith, M. K., Wood, W. B., Adams, W. K., Wieman, C., Knight, J. K., Guild, N., & Su, T. T. (2009) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1165919 · Cited by 956 · see citing works
Baker, R. S. J. D., D'Mello, S. K., Rodrigo, M. M. T., & Graesser, A. C. (2010) · International Journal of Human-Computer Studies · doi:10.1016/j.ijhcs.2009.12.003 · Cited by 936 · see citing works
Effectiveness of Intelligent Tutoring Systems: A Meta-Analytic Review
Kulik, J. A., & Fletcher, J. D. (2016) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/0034654315581420 · Cited by 930 · see citing works
Self-citationChi, M. T. H., Siler, S. A., Jeong, H., Yamauchi, T., & Hausmann, R. G. (2001) · Cognitive Science · doi:10.1207/s15516709cog2504_1 · Cited by 855 · see citing works
Question Asking During Tutoring
Graesser, A. C., & Person, N. K. (1994) · American Educational Research Journal · doi:10.3102/00028312031001104 · Cited by 900 · see citing works
The evolutionary basis of risky adolescent behavior: Implications for science, policy, and practice.
Ellis, B. J., Del Giudice, M., Dishion, T. J., Figueredo, A. J., Gray, P., Griskevicius, V., Hawley, P. H., Jacobs, W. J., James, J., Volk, A. A., et al. (2012) · Developmental Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0026220 · Cited by 745 · see citing works
AutoTutor: an intelligent tutoring system with mixed-initiative dialogue.
Graesser, A. C., Chipman, P., Haynes, B. C., & Olney, A. (2005) · IEEE Transactions on Education · doi:10.1109/te.2005.856149 · Cited by 750 · see citing works
Social cues in multimedia learning: role of speaker’s voice
Mayer, R. E., Sobko, K., & Mautone, P. D. (2003) · Journal of Educational Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-0663.95.2.419 · Cited by 429 · see citing works
Learning in One-to-One Laptop Environments: A Meta-Analysis and Research Synthesis
Zheng, B., Warschauer, M., Lin, C.-H., & Chang, C. (2016) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/0034654316628645 · Cited by 312 · see citing works
Morris, R. R., Schueller, S. M., & Picard, R. W. (2015) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/jmir.4167 · Cited by 206 · see citing works
GRAESSER, A., & McNAMARA, D. (2010) · Educational Psychologist · doi:10.1080/00461520.2010.515933 · Cited by 153 · see citing works
Learning-by-Teaching Without Audience Presence or Interaction: When and Why Does it Work?
Lachner, A., Hoogerheide, V., van Gog, T., & Renkl, A. (2022) · Educational Psychology Review · doi:10.1007/s10648-021-09643-4 · Cited by 77 · see citing works
El Saadawi, G. M., Tseytlin, E., Legowski, E., Jukic, D., Castine, M., Fine, J., Gormley, R., & Crowley, R. S. (2008) · Advances in Health Sciences Education · doi:10.1007/s10459-007-9081-3 · Cited by 48 · see citing works
“Can I Trust You With This?” Investigating Middle School Students’ Use of Learning Supports
Brion-Meisels, G. (2015) · Urban Education · doi:10.1177/0042085914525788 · Cited by 20 · see citing works
Group creativity in children and adolescents
Oztop, P., & Gummerum, M. (2020) · Cognitive Development · doi:10.1016/j.cogdev.2020.100923 · Cited by 13 · see citing works
AI Meets the Classroom: When Do Large Language Models Harm Learning?
Lehmann, M., Cornelius, P. B., & Sting, F. J. (2024) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2409.09047 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
- Authors
- Cohen, P. A., Kulik, J. A., & Kulik, C.-L. C.
- Affiliations
- Dartmouth College (US)
- University of Michigan (US)
- Venue
- American Educational Research Journal
- Published
- 1982-01
- Volume
- 19
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 237-248
- ISSN
- 0002-8312 (ISSN-L)
- 1935-1011
- OpenAlex
- W2117076205
- Cited by
- 1,138
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 13 · 2025: 25 · 2024: 26 · 2023: 26 · 2022: 32 · 2021: 38 · 2020: 38 · 2019: 40 · 2018: 42 · 2017: 38 · 2016: 42 · 2015: 42 · 2014: 62 · 2013: 39 · 2012: 38
- FWCI
- 3.98
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- American Educational Research Journal (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Demography › Global Educational Reforms and Inequalities
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Intelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning
- Keywords
- tutoring programs, academic performance, student attitudes toward learning, self-esteem, educational outcomes
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
