This longitudinal study investigated the effects of time spent in academic instruction and time engaged on elementary students' academic achievement gains. Three groups were compared over grades as follows: (a) an at-risk experimental group of low-socioeconomic status (SES) students for whom teachers implemented classwide peer tutoring (CWPT) beginning with the second semester of first grade continuing through Grade 3; (h) an equivalent at-risk control group; and (c) a non-risk comparison group of students of average- to high-SES. In both the control and comparison groups, teachers employed conventional instructional practices over Grades 1 through 3. Results indicated significant group differences in the time spent in academic instruction, engagement, and gains on the subtests of the Metropolitan Achievement Test that favored the experimental and comparison groups over the control group. Implications include the effectiveness of CWPT for at-risk students and the continuing vulnerability of at-risk students whose daily instructional programs provide less instructional time and foster lower levels of active academic engagement.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BeckerW. C. (1977). Teaching reading and language to the disadvantaged: What we have learned from field research. Harvard Educational Review, 47, 518–543.
2.
BeckerW. C., & GerstenR. (1982). A follow-up of follow through: The later effects of the direct instruction model on children in fifth and sixth grades. American Educational Research Journal, 19, 75–92.
3.
BerlinerD. C. (1988). The half-full glass: A review of research on teaching. In MeyenE. L.VergasonG. A., & WhelanR. J. (Eds.), Effective instructional strategies for exceptional children (pp. 7–31). Denver, CO; Love Publishing.
4.
BloomB. S. (1984). The 2 sigma problem: The search for methods of group instruction as effective as one-to-one tutoring. Educational Researcher, 13, 4–16.
5.
BrophyJ. E. (1979). Teacher behavior and its effects. Journal of Educational Psychology, 71, 733–750.
6.
BrophyJ. E. (1986). Teacher influences on student achievement. American Psychologist, 41, 1069–1077.
7.
CarrollJ. B. (1963). A model of school learning. Teachers College Record, 64, 723–733.
8.
CarrollJ. B. (1985). The model of school learning: Progress of an idea. In FisherC. W. & BerlinerD. (Eds.), Perspectives on instructional time (pp. 29–58). New York: Longman.
9.
CartaJ. J.GreenwoodC. R.DinwiddieG.KohlerF. W., & DelquadriJ. (1987). The Juniper Gardens Classwide Peer Tutoring Programs for Spelling, Math, and Reading. Kansas City, KS: The Juniper Gardens Children's Project, Bureau of Child Research, University of Kansas.
10.
DelquadriJ.GreenwoodC. R.StrettonK., & HallR. V. (1983). The peer tutoring game: A classroom procedure for increasing opportunity to respond and spelling performance. Education and Treatment of Children, 6, 225–239.
DenhamC., & LiebermanA. (Eds.). (1980). Time to learn. Washington, DC: National Institute of Education.
13.
DixonW. J. (Ed.). (1988). BMDP statistical software manual (Vol. 1). Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
14.
Elementary mathematics. (1983). Menlo Park, CA: Addison-Wesley.
15.
Final report on the national assessment of Chapter One. (1987). Washington, DC: Office of Research, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education.
16.
GerstenR.KeatingT., & BeckerW. C. (1988). The continued impact of direct instruction. Education and Treatment of Children, 11, 318–327.
17.
GettingerM. (1985). Time allocated and time spent relative to time needed for learning as determinants of achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 77, 3–11.
18.
GoodT. L., & GrouwsD. A. (1979). The Missouri mathematics effectiveness project: An experimental study in fourth-grade classrooms. Journal of Educational Psychology, 71, 355–362.
19.
GreenwoodC. R.CartaJ. J., & HallR. V. (1988). The use of peer tutoring strategies in classroom management and instruction. School Psychology Review, 17, 258–275.
20.
GreenwoodC. R., & DelquadriJ. (1988). Code for Instructional Structure and Student Academic Response (CISSAR). In HersenM. & BellackA. S. (Eds.), Dictionary of behavioral assessment (pp. 120–122). New York: Pergamon.
21.
GreenwoodC. R.DelquadriJ., & CartaJ. J. (1988). Classwide peer tutoring (CWPT). Delray Beach, FL: Education Achievement Systems.
22.
GreenwoodC. R.DelquadriJ., & HallR. V. (1984). Opportunity to respond and student academic performance. In HerwardW.HeronT.HillD., & Trap-PorterJ. (Eds.), Behavior analysis in education (pp. 58–88). Columbus, OH: Charles E. Merrill.
23.
GreenwoodC. R.DelquadriJ., & HallR. V. (1989). Longitudinal effects of classwide peer tutoring. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 371–383.
24.
GreenwoodC. R.DelquadriJ. C.StanleyS.SassoG.WhortonD., & SchulteD. (1981). Allocating opportunity to learn as a basis for academic remediation: A developing model for teaching. Monograph in Behavioral Disorders, Summer, 22–32.
25.
GreenwoodC. R.DinwiddieG.BaileyV.CartaJ. J.DorseyD.KohlerF.NelsonC.RotholzD., & SchulteD. (1987). Field replication of classwide peer tutoring. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 20, 151–160.
26.
GreenwoodC. R.DinwiddieG.TerryB.WadeL.StanleyS.ThibadeauS., & DelquadriJ. (1984). Teacher- versus peer-mediated instruction: An eco-behavioral analysis of achievement outcomes. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 17, 521–538.
27.
HallR. V.DelquadriJ.GreenwoodC. R., & ThurstonL. (1982). The importance of opportunity to respond to children's academic success. In EdgarE.HaringN.JenkinsJ., & PiousC. (Eds.), Serving young handicapped children: Issues and research (pp. 107–140). Baltimore: University Park Press.
28.
HartmannD. P., & WoodsD. D. (1982). Observational methods. In BellackA. S.HersenM., & KazdinA. E. (Eds.), International handbook of behavior modification and therapy (pp. 109–138). New York: Plenum.
29.
HBJ spelling. (1983). New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
HollenbeckA. R. (1978). Problems of reliability in observational research. In SackettG. P. (Ed.), Observing behavior: Data collection methods (Vol. 2, pp. 79–98). Baltimore: University Park Press.
32.
HummellT. J., & SligoJ. R. (1971). Empirical comparisons of univariate and multivariate analysis of variance procedures. Psychological Bulletin, 76, 49–57.
33.
Macmillan series R. (1980). New York: Macmillan.
34.
MaheadyL., & HarperG. (1987). A classwide peer tutoring program to improve the spelling performance of low-income, third-, and fourth-grade students. Education and Treatment of Children, 10, 120–133.
35.
MaheadyL.SaccaM. K., & HarperG. F. (1988). Classwide peer tutoring program on the academic performance of mildly handicapped students. Exceptional Children, 55, 52–59.
36.
MeyerL. A. (1984). Long-term academic effects of the direct instruction project follow through. The Elementary School Journal, 84, 380–394.
37.
OtisA. S., & LennonR. T. (1979). Otis-Lennon School Abilities Test-Primary 1. New York: The Psychological Corp.
38.
PowellJ.MartindaleA., & KulpS. (1975). An evaluation of time-sample measures of behavior. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 8, 463–470.
39.
PrescottG. A.BalowI. H.HoganT. P., & FarrR. C. (1978). Metropolitan Achievement Tests. New York: The Psychological Corp.
40.
RosenshineB., & BerlinerD. C. (1978). Academic engaged time. British Journal of Teacher Education, 4, 3–16.
41.
RosenshineB., & StevensR. (1986). Teaching functions. In WittrockM. C. (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 376–391). New York: Macmillan.
42.
StallingsJ. A., & StipekD. (1986). Research on early childhood and elementary school teaching programs. In WittrockM. C. (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 727–753). New York: Macmillan.
43.
StanleyS. O., & GreenwoodC. R. (1981). Code for Instructional Structure and Student Academic Response (CISSAR): Observer's manual. Kansas City, KS: Juniper Gardens Children's Project, Bureau of Child Research, University of Kansas.
44.
StanleyS. O., & GreenwoodC. R. (1983). Assessing opportunity to respond in classroom environments: How much opportunity to respond does the minority, disadvantaged student receive in school?Exceptional Children, 49, 370–373.
45.
WalbergH. J. (1986). Synthesis of research on teaching. In WittrockM. C. (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 214–229). New York: Macmillan.
