Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Konzeption und Evaluation von Tutor-Trainings zur Förderung der intrinsischen Motivation der Tutoren und der Autonomieförderung ihrer Tutees im Cross-age Tutoring

Conception and Evaluation of Tutor-Trainings to Promote Tutors’ Intrinsic Motivation, and Tutees’ Autonomy in Cross-age Tutoring

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Zeitschrift für Didaktik der Naturwissenschaften Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Zusammenfassung

Es besteht erheblicher Forschungsbedarf hinsichtlich der Konzeption von Tutor-Trainings in Bezug auf die Qualität der Interaktion im Tutoring. In einer ersten Trainingsvariante lernen die Tutoren, die Autonomie ihrer Tutees im Tutoring zu unterstützen. Die zweite Trainingsvariante beinhaltet die gleichen Elemente zur Autonomieförderung der Tutees, zusätzlich jedoch eine Komponente zur Förderung der intrinsischen Motivation der Tutoren, die auf videogestütztem Peer-Modeling basiert.

Die zentrale Fragestellung der Studie ist, ob die intrinsische Motivation der Tutoren und gleichzeitig die Autonomie ihrer Tutees gefördert werden kann.

Als unabhängige Variable dient die Art des Trainings. Abhängige Variablen sind die intrinsische Motivation der Tutoren, die videobasiert eingeschätzte Autonomieunterstützung durch die Tutoren sowie das Autonomieerleben der Tutees. Im Cross-age Tutoring erwarben 616 Tutees der 3. Jahrgangsstufe mithilfe von 219 Tutoren der 8. Jahrgangsstufe von Hauptschulen Kenntnisse der elementaren Elektrizitätslehre.

Entsprechend der Anlage des Trainings mit Motivationsförderung der Tutoren ist deren intrinsische Motivation sowohl während des Trainings als auch während des Tutorings höher als im Vergleichstraining.

In Bezug auf die hochinferent eingeschätzte Autonomieunterstützung durch die Tutoren wurde der Vorsprung des Trainings mit motivationaler Förderung der Tutoren gegenüber der Kontrollbedingung signifikant. Die Tutees von trainierten Tutoren berichten im Vergleich zur Kontrollbedingung ohne Training der Tutoren ein höheres Autonomieerleben.

Die Ergebnisse legen nahe, Tutor-Trainings mittels videogestütztem Peer-Modeling motivationsfördernd zu konzipieren, und dadurch gleichzeitig das Erreichen der vorgesehenen kognitiven Trainingsziele zu befördern.

Abstract

Many tutors show deficits in adequately helping their tutees. One of the more significant issues is that they unnecessarily restrict tutees’ opportunities for autonomous learning. To address this problem, two types of tutor training were developed that both should promote tutees’ autonomy. In addition to the first type of training (”A training“), the second type of training (”AM training“) encompasses a component based on peer-modeling to foster tutors’ intrinsic motivation.

We addressed the research question if these training characteristics lead to the intended outcome. The type of training serves as independent variable. Dependent variables are the tutors’ intrinsic motivation (both while training and tutoring), the video based estimation of tutees’ autonomy support by the tutors, and the tutees’ experience of autonomy.

In the cross-age tutoring, 616 third class tutees assisted by 219 eighth class tutors from high schools worked on basic aspects of electric circuits.

As expected, students in the AM training condition reported higher intrinsic motivation than students in the A training condition both while training and while tutoring.

Video analysis shows that students who passed the AM training acted more autonomy supportive than untrained tutors. Furthermore, tutees that were assisted by trained tutors felt more autonomous than students with untrained tutors.

In essence, these results indicate the successful implementation of autonomy supportive training particularly when incorporating a component to foster tutors’ intrinsic motivation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Abb. 1

Literatur

  • Allen, V. L. (1983). Impact of the role of tutor on behavior and self-perceptions. In J. M. Levine (Hrsg.), Teacher and student perceptions: implications for learning (S. 367–389). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allen, V. L., & Feldman, R. S. (1976). Studies on the role of tutor. In V. L. Allen (Hrsg.), Children as teachers. Theory and research on tutoring (S. 113–129). New York: Academic Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (1989). Social cognitive theory. In R. Vasta (Hrsg.), Six theories of child development Annals of child development, (Bd. 6, S. 1–60). Greenwich: JAI Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benware, C. A., & Deci, E. L. (1984). Quality of learning with an active versus passive motivational set. American Educational Research Journal, 21, 755–765.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berghmans, I., Michiels, L., Salmon, S., Dochy, F., & Struyven, K. (2014). Directive versus facilitative peer tutoring? A view on students’ appraisal, reported learning gains and experiences within two differently-tutored learning environments. Learning Environments Research, 17, 437–459.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berghmans, I., Neckebroeck, F., Dochy, F., & Struyven, K. (2013). A typology of approaches to peer tutoring. Unraveling peer tutors’ behavioural strategies. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 28, 703–723.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bliese, P. D., & Hanges, P. J. (2004). Being both to liberal and too conservative: the perils of treating grouped data as though they were independent. Organizational Research Methods, 7, 400–417.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buchs, C., Butera, F., & Mugny, G. (2004). Resource interdependence, student interactions and performance in cooperative learning. Educational Psychology, 24(3), 291–314.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bünger, S., & Raufelder, D. (2014). Moderiert die soziale Kompetenz adoleszenter Schüler den Zusammenhang zwischen ihren schulischen Peer-Beziehungen und ihrer Motivation? Diskurs Kindheits- und Jugendforschung, 9(3), 339–353. http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-409679. Zugegriffen: 14. März 2017.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Charlop-Christy, M. H., Le, L., & Freeman, K. A. (2000). A comparison of video modeling with in vivo modeling for teaching children with autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 30, 537–552.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chi, M. T. H. (2009). Active-constructive-interactive: a conceptual framework for differentiating learning activities. Topics in Cognitive Science, 1, 73–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chi, M. T. H., Siler, S. A., & Jeong, H. (2004). Can tutors monitor students understanding accurately? Cognition and Instruction, 22, 363–387.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chi, M. T. H., Siler, S. A., Jeong, H., Yamauchi, T., & Hausmann, R. G. (2001). Learning from human tutoring. Cognitive Science, 25, 471–533.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chi, M. T. H., & Wylie, R. (2014). The ICAP framework: linking cognitive engagement to active learning outcomes. Educational Psychologist, 49, 219–243.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cromley, J. G., & Azevedo, R. (2005). What do reading tutors do? A naturalistic study of more and less experienced tutors in reading. Discourse Processes, 40, 83–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1993). Die Selbstbestimmungstheorie der Motivation und ihre Bedeutung für die Pädagogik. Zeitschrift für Pädagogik, 39(2), 223–238.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2003). Intrinsic motivation inventory. http://selfdeterminationtheory.org/intrinsic-motivation-inventory/. Zugegriffen: 10. Mai 2017.

    Google Scholar 

  • DeCoster, J. (2002). Using ANOVA to examine data from groups and dyads. http://www.stat-help.com/notes.html. Zugegriffen: 14. März 2017.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Smet, M., Van Keer, H., De Wever, B., & Valcke, M. (2010). Cross-age peer tutors in asynchronous discussion groups: exploring the impact of three types of tutor training on patterns in tutor support and on tutor characteristics. Computers & Education, 54, 1167–1181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Earley, P. C., & Kanfer, R. (1985). The influence of component participation and role models on goal acceptance, goal satisfaction, and performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 36, 378–390.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eccles, J. S., & Wigfield, A. (2002). Motivational beliefs, values, and goals. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 109–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frenzel, A. C., Goetz, T., Lüdtke, O., & Pekrun, R. (2009). Emotional transmission in the classroom: exploring the relationship between teacher and student enjoyment. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101, 705–716.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frey, A., Taskinen, P., Schütte, K., Prenzel, M., Artelt, C., Baumert, J. et al. (2009). PISA 2006 Skalenhandbuch. Dokumentation der Erhebungsinstrumente. Münster: Waxmann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fresko, B. (1997). Attitudinal change among university student tutors. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 27, 1277–1301.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fuchs, L., Fuchs, D., Bentz, J., Phillips, N., & Hamlett, C. (1994). The nature of student interactions during peer tutoring with and without prior training and experience. American Educational Research Journal, 31, 75–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Hamlett, C., Phillips, N., Karns, K., & Dutka, S. (1997). Enhancing students’ helping behavior during peer-mediated instruction with conceptual mathematical explanations. Elementary School Journal, 97, 223–249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glauert, E. B. (2009). How young children understand electric circuits: prediction, explanation and exploration. International Journal of Science Education, 31, 1025–1047.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graesser, A. C., & Person, N. K. (1994). Question asking during tutoring. American Educational Research Journal, 31, 104–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grolnick, W. S., & Ryan, R. M. (1987). Autonomy in children’s learning: an experimental and individual difference investigation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 890–898.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hartinger, A. (2005). Verschiedene Formen der Öffnung von Unterricht und ihre Auswirkung auf das Selbstbestimmungsempfinden von Grundschulkindern. Zeitschrift für Pädagogik, 51, 397–414.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herppich, S., Wittwer, J., Nückles, M., & Renkl, A. (2013). Benefits for processes cause decrements in outcomes: training improves tutors’ interactivity at the expense of assessment accuracy. In M. Knauff, M. Pauen, N. Sebanz & I. Wachsmuth (Hrsg.), Proceedings of the 35th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (S. 2530–2535). Austin: Cognitive Science Society.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hulleman, C. S., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2009). Promoting interest and performance in high school science classes. Science, 326, 1410–1412.

  • King, A. (1999). Discourse patterns for mediating peer learning. In A. O’Donnell & A. King (Hrsg.), Cognitive perspectives on peer learning (S. 3–37). Mahwah: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knigge, M., & Hannover, B. (2011). Collective school-type identity: predicting students’ motivation beyond academic self-concept. International Journal of Psychology, 46, 191–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Korner, M., & Hopf, M. (2017). Zur Evaluation von Cross-Age Peer Tutoring im Physikunterricht. Physik und Didaktik in Schule und Hochschule, 1/16, 1–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krapp, A. (2002). Structural and dynamic aspects of interest development: theoretical considerations from an ontogenetic perspective. Learning and Instruction, 12, 383–409.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krapp, A., & Ryan, R. M. (2002). Selbstwirksamkeit und Lernmotivation. In M. Jerusalem & D. Hopf (Hrsg.), Zeitschrift für Pädagogik 44. Beiheft: Selbstwirksamkeit und Motivationsprozesse in Bildungsinstitutionen. (S. 54–82).

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu, X., & McKeough, A. (2005). Developmental growth in students’ concept of energy: analysis of selected items from the TIMSS database. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42, 493–517.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mahling, M. (2016). Lesepraxis von Kindern und Jugendlichen. Berlin: De Gruyter.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, M. (1993). Situational interest: Its multifaceted structure in the secondary school mathematics classroom. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85, 424–436.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muckenfuß, H., & Walz, A. (1997). Neue Wege im Elektrik-Unterricht. Köln: Aulis Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olsen, D. G. (1999). Constructivist principles of learning and teaching methods. Education, 120, 347–355.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osborne, R. (1983). Towards modifying children’s ideas about electric current. Research in Science & Technological Education, 1, 73–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pant, H. A., Stanat, P., Schroeders, U., Roppelt, A., Siegle, T., & Pöhlmann, C. (2013). IQB-Ländervergleich 2012. Mathematische und naturwissenschaftliche Kompetenzen am Ende der Sekundarstufe I. Münster: Waxmann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paterson, P. O., & Elliott, L. N. (2006). Struggling reader to struggling reader: high school students’ responses to a cross-age tutoring program. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 49, 378–389.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Person, N. K., & Graesser, A. G. (1999). Evolution of discourse during cross-age tutoring. In A. M. O’Donnell & A. King (Hrsg.), Cognitive perspectives on peer learning (S. 69–86). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rachel, A. (2013). Auswirkungen instruktionaler Hilfen bei der Einführung des (Ferro‑)Magnetismus. Eine Vergleichsstudie in der Primar- und Sekundarstufe. Berlin: Logos.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reeve, J., & Jang, H. (2006). What teachers say and do to support students’ autonomy during a learning activity. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98, 209–218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Renkl, A. (1995). Learning for later teaching: an exploration of mediational links between teaching expectancy and learning results. Learning and Instruction, 5, 21–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, D. R., Schofield, J. W., & Steers-Wentzell, K. L. (2005). Peer and cross-age tutoring in math: outcomes and their design implications. Educational Psychology Review, 17, 327–361.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roscoe, R. D., & Chi, M. T. H. (2007). Understanding tutor learning: knowledge-building and knowledge-telling in peer tutors’ explanations and questions. Review of Educational Research, 77, 534–574.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rowe, M. B. (1986). Wait-time: slowing down may be a way of speeding up! Journal of Teacher Education, 37, 43–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55, 68–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salas, E., & Cannon-Bowers, J. (2001). The science of training: a decade of progress. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 471–499.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scharfenberg, F.-J., & Bogner, F. X. (2013). Instructional efficiency of tutoring in an outreach gene technology laboratory. Research in Science Education, 43, 1267–1288.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scharfenberg, F.-J., & Bogner, F. X. (2014). Outreach science education: evidence-based studies in a gene technology lab. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 10, 329–341.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, H. G., van der Arend, A., Moust, J. H., Kokx, I., & Boon, L. (1993). Influence of tutors’ subject-matter expertise on student effort and achievement in problem-based learning. Academic Medicine, 68(10), 784–791. doi:10.1097/00001888-199310000-00018.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schunk, D. H. (1987). Peer models and children’s behavioral change. Review of Educational Research, 57, 149–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schunk, D. H., & Zimmerman, B. J. (2007). Influencing children’s self-efficacy and self-regulation of reading and writing through modeling. Reading and Writing Quarterly, 23, 7–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shenderovich, Y., Thurston, A., & Miller, S. (2016). Cross-age tutoring in kindergarten and elementary school settings: a systematic review and meta-analysis. International Journal of Educational Research, 76, 190–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stefanou, C. R., Perencevich, K. C., DiCintio, M., & Turner, J. C. (2004). Supporting autonomy in the classroom: ways teachers encourage student decision making and ownership. Educational Psychologist, 39, 97–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stork, E., & Wiesner, H. (1981). Schülervorstellungen zur Elektrizitätslehre und Sachunterricht. Sachunterricht und Mathematik in der Primarstufe, 9, 218–230.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stroet, K., Opdenakker, M.-C., & Minnaert, A. (2015). Need supportive teaching in practice: a narrative analysis in schools with contrasting educational approaches. Social Psychology of Education, 18, 585–613.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Topping, K. J. (2001). Peer assisted learning – a practical guide for teachers. Newton: Brookline Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Topping, K. J. (2005). Trends in peer learning. Educational Psychology, 25, 631–645.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Topping, K. J., Campbell, J., Douglas, W., & Smith, A. (2003). Cross-age tutoring in mathematics with seven- and 11-year-olds: influence on mathematical vocabulary, strategic dialogue and self-concept. Educational Research, 45, 287–308.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vansteenkiste, M., et al. (2012). Identifying configurations of perceived teacher autonomy support and structure: associations with self-regulated learning, motivation and problem behavior. Learning and Instruction, 22, 431–439.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Webb, N. M. (1989). Peer interaction and learning in small groups. International Journal of Educational Research, 13, 21–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Webb, N. M. (1991). Task-related verbal interaction and mathematics learning in small groups. Journal of Research in Mathematics Education, 22, 366–389.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wild, T. C., Enzle, M. E., & Hawkins, W. L. (1992). Effects of perceived extrinsic versus intrinsic teacher motivation on student reactions to skill acquisition. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 18, 245–251.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Windt, A., Scheuer, R., & Melle, I. (2014). Naturwissenschaftliches Experimentieren im Elementarbereich – Evaluation unterschiedlich stark angeleiteter Lernsituationen. Zeitschrift für Didaktik der Naturwissenschaften, 20, 69–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wittmann, G. (2005). Schülerinnen und Schüler individuell fördern – Voraussetzungen und Möglichkeiten. Mathematik Lehren, 131, 4–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wittwer, J., Nückles, M., Landmann, N., & Renkl, A. (2010). Can tutors be supported in giving effective explanations? Journal of Educational Psychology, 102, 74–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wittwer, J., & Renkl, A. (2008). Why instructional explanations often do not work: a framework for understanding the effectiveness of instructional explanations. Educational Psychologist, 43, 49–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Danksagung

Wir danken den an der Studie beteiligten Lehrkräften und ihren Klassen.

Förderung

Wir danken der Deutschen Forschungsgemeinschaft für die finanzielle Unterstützung (BE 2652/3-1).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Fachbereich Physik, Universität Osnabrück, Barbarastraße 7, 49076, Osnabrück, Deutschland

    Roland Berger & Marion Müller

  2. Institut für Psychologie, Universität Kassel, Holländische Straße 36–38, 34109, Kassel, Deutschland

    Martin Hänze

Authors
  1. Roland Berger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Marion Müller
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Martin Hänze
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Roland Berger.

Anhang

Anhang

 

Abb. 2
figure 2

Arbeitsblatt am Beispiel des Experiments „Essig-Batterie“

Full size image
Abb. 3
figure 3

Beispielaufgabe aus dem „Quiz“ zur Verständnissicherung

Full size image
Abb. 4
figure 4

Demonstration unterschiedlicher Hilfetechniken im Rollenspiel

Full size image

Verwendete Skalen

Skala zur Erfassung der intrinsischen Motivation der Tutoren

  1. 1.

    „Das Arbeiten hat mir Spaß gemacht.“

  2. 2.

    „Die Zeit verging wie im Flug.“

  3. 3.

    „Den behandelten Stoff finde ich sehr interessant.“

  4. 4.

    „Ich würde gerne noch mehr über das Thema erfahren.“

Items zur hochinferenten Erfassung der Autonomieunterstützung durch die Tutoren

  1. 1.

    „Der Tutor lenkt stark die Arbeit der Gruppe.“ (invertiert)

  2. 2.

    „Der Tutor lenkt stark die Kommunikation in der Gruppe.“ (invertiert)

  3. 3.

    „Der Tutor ist nur ein/e Beobachter/Ansprechperson bei der Gruppenarbeit der Tutees.“

  4. 4.

    „Die Tutees machen nichts ohne einen Anstoß des Tutors.“ (invertiert)

Skala zur Erfassung des Autonomieerlebens der Tutees

  1. 1.

    „Ich konnte selbst entscheiden, was ich tue.“

  2. 2.

    „Ich durfte selbstständig arbeiten.“

  3. 3.

    „Ich konnte mitbestimmen was wir machen.“

Tab. 4 Testaufgabe zur Verständnisprüfung für die Tutoren im Hinblick auf das Tutoring
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Berger, R., Müller, M. & Hänze, M. Konzeption und Evaluation von Tutor-Trainings zur Förderung der intrinsischen Motivation der Tutoren und der Autonomieförderung ihrer Tutees im Cross-age Tutoring. ZfDN 23, 225–239 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40573-017-0066-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40573-017-0066-3

Schlüsselwörter

Keywords

Search

Navigation