Advertisement

Gender Effects of Tutoring on Reading and Math Skills in a Randomized Controlled Trial with Foster Children of Primary-School Age

  • Robyn A. Marquis
  • Robert J. Flynn
Chapter
Part of the Children’s Well-Being: Indicators and Research book series (CHIR, volume 22)

Abstract

The present study investigated the gender effects of tutoring, using the sample and data from a previously conducted randomized controlled trial (RCT) that had been based on a sample of 64 foster children (36 girls and 28 boys) of primary-school age in Ontario, Canada (Flynn, Marquis, Paquet, Peeke, & Aubry, 2012). The intervention had consisted of Direct-Instruction, one-to-one tutoring, delivered by the children’s caregivers (foster parents). The RCT had found that the tutoring program was relatively effective in improving reading and math skills in the sample as a whole, without addressing the issue of whether the girls and boys had made average gains in reading and math of similar or different size. The present research examined this question of possible gender effects as well as several other questions of a practice-related nature, including the impact of implementation fidelity on the effectiveness of the tutoring program and the children’s and caregivers’ perception of the tutoring.

Keywords

Foster-children primary-school tutoring RCT gender 

References

  1. Baye, A., Lake, C., Inns, A., & Slavin, R. (2017, August). Effective reading programs for secondary students. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University, Center for Research and Reform in Education. Google Scholar
  2. Brännström, L., Vinnerljung, B., Forsman, H., & Alquist, Y. B. (2017). Children placed in out-of-home care as midlife adults: Are they still disadvantaged or have they caught up with their peers? Child Maltreatment, 22, 205–214.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1077559517701855. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  4. Evans, R., Brown, R., Rees, G., & Smith, P. (2017). Systematic review of educational interventions for looked-after children and young people: Recommendations for intervention development and evaluation. British Educational Research Journal, 43(1), 68–94.  https://doi.org/10.1002/berj.3252 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Flynn, R. J., Marquis, R. A., Paquet, M. P., Peeke, L. M., & Aubry, T. D. (2012). Effects of individual direct-instruction tutoring on foster children’s academic skills: A randomized trial. Children and Youth Services Review, 34, 1183–1189.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2012.01.036 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Flynn, R. J., Miller, M., Greenberg, B., Michael, E., & Vincent, C. (2018, October 2–5). Pre-school to postsecondary educational outcomes of young people in care in Ontario (Canada). Paper presented in J. Sebba (Ed.), Symposium on educational outcomes for children and young people in out-of-home care, EUSARF 2018, Porto, Portugal.Google Scholar
  7. Forsman, H., Brännström, L., Vinnerljung, B., & Hjern, A. (2016). Does poor school performance cause later psychosocial problems among children in foster care? Evidence from national longitudinal registry data. Child Abuse & Neglect, 57, 61–71.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2016.06.006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Forsman, H., & Vinnerljung, B. (2012). Interventions aiming to improve school achievements of children in out-of-home care: A scoping review. Children and Youth Services Review, 34, 1084–1091.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2012.01.037 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Harper, J., & Schmidt, F. (2016). Effectiveness of a group-based academic tutoring program for children in foster care: A randomized controlled trial. Children and Youth Services Review, 67, 238–246.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2016.06.009 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hartley, B. L., & Sutton, R. M. (2013). A stereotype threat account of boys’ academic underachievement. Child Development, 84(5), 1716–1733.  https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12079 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hickey, A. J., & Flynn, R. J. (in press). Effectiveness of a one-to-one tutoring program on the math and reading skills of children in foster care: A randomized controlled trial. Oxford Review of Education. Google Scholar
  12. Hickey, A. J., & Flynn, R. J. (2018). How much tutoring is enough? A randomized trial of 15 vs. 25 weeks of direct instruction one-to-one tutoring for children in care. Manuscript submitted for publication.Google Scholar
  13. Hsieh, H. F., & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15, 1277–1288.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732305276687 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Inns, A., Lake, C., Pellegrini, M., & Slavin, R. (2018). Effective programs for struggling readers: A best-evidence synthesis. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Society for Research on Educational Effectiveness, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  15. Jackson, S. (2007). Progress at last? Adoption and Fostering, 31, 3–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kirk, C. M., Lewis, R. K., Brown, K., Nilsen, C., & Colvin, D. Q. (2012). The gender gap in educational expectations among youth in the foster care system. Children and Youth Services Review, 34, 1683–1688.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2012.04.026 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lipsey, M. W., Puzio, K., Yun, C., Hebert, M. A., Steinka-Fry, K., Cole, M. W., Roberts, M., Anthony, K. S., & Busick, M. D. (2012). Translating the statistical representation of the effects of education interventions into more readily interpretable forms. Washington, DC: National Center for Special Education Research, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.Google Scholar
  18. Maloney, M. (1998). Teach your children well: A solution to some of North America’s educational problems. Belleville, ON: QLC Educational Services.Google Scholar
  19. Männistö, I. I., & Pittimaa, R. A. (2018). A review of interventions to support the educational attainments of children and adolescents in foster care. Adoption & Fostering, 42, 266–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Marquis, R. (2011). The gender effects of a foster parent-delivered tutoring program on foster children’s academic skills and mental health: A randomized field trial. Unpublished doctoral thesis, School of Psychology, University of Ottawa. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/10393/24324.  https://doi.org/10.20381/ruor-3093
  21. Miller, M., Vincent, C., & Flynn, R. (2009). Looking after children in Ontario: Good parenting, good outcomes. Ontario provincial report (year seven) (Report for 10-15 Year Olds). Ottawa, ON: Centre for Research on Educational and Community Services, University of Ottawa.Google Scholar
  22. Pellegrini, M., Inns, A., & Slavin, R. (2018). Effective programs in elementary mathematics: A best-evidence synthesis. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Society for Research on Educational Effectiveness, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  23. Ritter, G. W., Barnett, J. H., Denny, G. S., & Albin, G. R. (2009). The effectiveness of volunteer tutoring programs for elementary and middle school students: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 79, 3–38.  https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654308325690 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Rubin, D. (2005). Causal inference using potential outcomes. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 100, 322–331.  https://doi.org/10.1198/016214504000001880 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Slavin, R. E., Lake, C., Davis, S., & Madden, N. A. (2011). Effective programs for struggling readers: A best-evidence synthesis. Educational Research Review, 6, 1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Trout, A. L., Hagaman, J., Casey, K., Reid, R., & Epstein, M. H. (2008). The academic status of children and youth in out-of-home care: A review of the literature. Children and Youth Services Review, 30, 979–994.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Vinnerljung, B., Tideman, E., Sallnäs, M., & Forsman, H. (2014). Paired reading for foster children: Results from a Swedish replication of an English literacy intervention. Adoption & Fostering, 38, 361–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. What Works Clearinghouse. (2008). In Institute of Educational Sciences (Ed.), Procedures and standards handbook (version 2.0). Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  29. Wilkinson, G. S., & Robertson, G. J. (2006). Wide-range achievement test-fourth edition. Lutz, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Robyn A. Marquis
    • 1
  • Robert J. Flynn
    • 2
  1. 1.Psychologist in Private PracticeOntarioCanada
  2. 2.School of PsychologyUniversity of OttawaOntarioCanada

Personalised recommendations