skip to main content
10.1145/3689535.3689558acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesukicerConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article
Open access

A Peer-Led Approach to Tutor Training: Implementation and Outcomes

Published: 06 November 2024 Publication History

Abstract

Student tutors are critical to Computer Science (CS) programmes; as teachers, assessors, and mentors, they exert significant influence over student learning. However, in the majority of cases, tutors receive little to no training. While they possess sufficient domain knowledge, they less commonly have instructional experience or pedagogical knowledge. This results in a range of capabilities and professionalism across the tutor body, accentuated by high turnover rates, leading to inequitable support of students. In an effort to improve the overall quality of teaching, our institution looks to address tutor preparedness, growing both skills and self-efficacy; tutor investment, encouraging tutors to see their impact and recognise teaching as a valuable skill to develop; and tutor community, fostering a support network to facilitate the transmission of advice and institutional knowledge. Our answer to these goals is the introduction of a new tutor training course with three distinctive characteristics: it is theory-forward, peer-instructed, and seminar-style. This paper details the design and implementation of the course. Through interviews we explore its impact on the first two cohorts of student tutors, and its efficacy – particularly of its defining aspects – in addressing the above goals. We highlight the challenge of showing the relevance of education theory and of providing authentic practical experience in a controlled environment. Further discussion contrasts reported improvements with the difficulty of creating content to cater to tutors teaching at different levels and of retaining students under a voluntary training model. We conclude with our reflections on improvements to future offerings.

References

[1]
Richard Bale and Hannah Moran. 2020. Reflections on Peer Facilitation of Graduate Teaching Assistant Training. Journal of Perspectives in Applied Academic Practice 8, 1 (Sept. 2020), 157–162. https://doi.org/10.14297/jpaap.v8i1.419 Number: 1.
[2]
J. Bradford. 2023. Exploring Practices and Development of Teaching Assistants in Computing Education. Master’s thesis. University of Glasgow.
[3]
Catherine Crouch, Adam P Fagen, J Paul Callan, and Eric Mazur. 2004. Classroom demonstrations: Learning tools or entertainment?American journal of physics 72, 6 (2004), 835–838.
[4]
Quintin Cutts. 2024. Orienting learners and teachers in introductory programming classes: the ABC Framework. In Proceedings of the 8th Conference on Computing Education Practice(CEP ’24). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1145/3633053.3633063
[5]
Quintin Cutts, Emily Cutts, Stephen Draper, Patrick O’Donnell, and Peter Saffrey. 2010. Manipulating mindset to positively influence introductory programming performance. In Proceedings of the 41st ACM technical symposium on Computer science education. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 431–435.
[6]
Matteo Di Benedetti, Sarah Plumb, and Stephen B. M. Beck. 2023. Effective use of peer teaching and self-reflection for the pedagogical training of graduate teaching assistants in engineering. European Journal of Engineering Education 48, 1 (Jan. 2023), 59–74. https://doi.org/10.1080/03043797.2022.2054313 Publisher: Taylor & Francis _eprint: https://doi.org/10.1080/03043797.2022.2054313.
[7]
Benedict Du Boulay. 2013. Some difficulties of learning to program. In Studying the novice programmer. Psychology Press, New York, NY, USA, 283–299.
[8]
Rodrigo Duran, Albina Zavgorodniaia, and Juha Sorva. 2022. Cognitive load theory in computing education research: A review. ACM Transactions on Computing Education (TOCE) 22, 4 (2022), 1–27.
[9]
Joe Feldman. 2019. Beyond standards-based grading: Why equity must be part of grading reform. Phi Delta Kappan 100, 8 (May 2019), 52–55. https://doi.org/10.1177/0031721719846890 Publisher: SAGE Publications Inc.
[10]
Sally Fincher, Johan Jeuring, Craig S Miller, Peter Donaldson, Benedict Du Boulay, Matthias Hauswirth, Arto Hellas, Felienne Hermans, Colleen Lewis, Andreas Mühling, 2020. Notional machines in computing education: The education of attention., 21–50 pages.
[11]
Cindy E Hmelo and Mark Guzdial. 1996. Of black and glass boxes: Scaffolding for doing and learning.
[12]
Kathryn Hollar, Virleen Carlson, and Patricia Spencer. 2000. 1+1=3: Unanticipated Benefits of a Co-Facilitation Model for Training Teaching Assistants. Journal of Graduate Teaching Assistant Development 7, 3 (2000), 173–81. Publisher: New Forums Press, Inc ERIC Number: EJ621650.
[13]
Victor Huang and Armando Fox. 2023. A Climate-First Approach to Training Student Teaching Assistants. In Proceedings of the 54th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education V. 1 (, Toronto ON, Canada,) (SIGCSE 2023). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 423–429. https://doi.org/10.1145/3545945.3569826
[14]
Matthew C Jadud. 2006. Methods and tools for exploring novice compilation behaviour. In Proceedings of the second international workshop on Computing education research. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 73–84.
[15]
Paul Kirschner, John Sweller, and Richard E Clark. 2006. Why unguided learning does not work: An analysis of the failure of discovery learning, problem-based learning, experiential learning and inquiry-based learning. Educational psychologist 41, 2 (2006), 75–86.
[16]
Sophia Krause-Levy, Rachel S. Lim, Ismael Villegas Molina, Yingjun Cao, and Leo Porter. 2022. An Exploration of Student-Tutor Interactions in Computing. In Proceedings of the 27th ACM Conference on on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education Vol. 1(ITiCSE ’22). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 435–441. https://doi.org/10.1145/3502718.3524786
[17]
Jean Lave and Etienne Wenger. 1991. Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
[18]
Lauren Margulieux, Paul Denny, Kathryn Cunningham, Michael Deutsch, and Benjamin R. Shapiro. 2021. When Wrong is Right: The Instructional Power of Multiple Conceptions. In Proceedings of the 17th ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research(ICER 2021). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 184–197. https://doi.org/10.1145/3446871.3469750
[19]
Felix Muzny and Michael D Shah. 2023. Teaching Assistant Training: An Adjustable Curriculum for Computing Disciplines. In Proceedings of the 54th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education V. 1. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 430–436.
[20]
Emma Riese and Viggo Kann. 2020. Teaching assistants’ experiences of tutoring and assessing in computer science education. In 2020 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE) (Uppsala). IEEE, IEEE Press, 1–9.
[21]
Emma Riese, Madeleine Lorås, Martin Ukrop, and Tomáš Effenberger. 2021. Challenges faced by teaching assistants in computer science education across europe. In Proceedings of the 26th ACM Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education V. 1. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 547–553.
[22]
Kazi Rouf. 2012. Moving towards democratic classrooms for the students at the University of Toronto. International Journal of Research Studies in Educational Technology 1, 2 (June 2012), 3–15. https://www.learntechlib.org/p/49794/ Publisher: Consortia Academia Publishing.
[23]
Carsten Schulte. 2008. Block Model: an educational model of program comprehension as a tool for a scholarly approach to teaching. In Proceedings of the Fourth international Workshop on Computing Education Research(ICER ’08). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 149–160. https://doi.org/10.1145/1404520.1404535
[24]
Kristin Stephen-Martinez. [n. d.]. CSEdPodcast by Kristin Stephens-Martinez. https://csedpodcast.org/
[25]
Ben Stephenson, Andrew Kuipers, Rosa Karimi Adl, and Flora Stephenson. 2014. Teaching assistant in residence: A novel peer mentorship program for less experienced teaching assistants. Journal of Computing Sciences in Colleges 29, 4 (2014), 183–190.

Index Terms

  1. A Peer-Led Approach to Tutor Training: Implementation and Outcomes
            Index terms have been assigned to the content through auto-classification.

            Recommendations

            Comments

            Information & Contributors

            Information

            Published In

            cover image ACM Other conferences
            UKICER '24: Proceedings of the 2024 Conference on United Kingdom & Ireland Computing Education Research
            September 2024
            87 pages
            ISBN:9798400711770
            DOI:10.1145/3689535
            This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution International 4.0 License.

            Publisher

            Association for Computing Machinery

            New York, NY, United States

            Publication History

            Published: 06 November 2024

            Check for updates

            Author Tags

            1. peer teaching
            2. self-efficacy
            3. tutor training

            Qualifiers

            • Research-article
            • Research
            • Refereed limited

            Conference

            UKICER 2024

            Contributors

            Other Metrics

            Bibliometrics & Citations

            Bibliometrics

            Article Metrics

            • 0
              Total Citations
            • 84
              Total Downloads
            • Downloads (Last 12 months)84
            • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)30
            Reflects downloads up to 20 Jan 2025

            Other Metrics

            Citations

            View Options

            View options

            PDF

            View or Download as a PDF file.

            PDF

            eReader

            View online with eReader.

            eReader

            HTML Format

            View this article in HTML Format.

            HTML Format

            Login options

            Media

            Figures

            Other

            Tables

            Share

            Share

            Share this Publication link

            Share on social media