Date of Conferral
Without academic intervention, such as tutoring, at-risk students may not pass their courses. This study examined differences between the final grades of at-risk students and tutoring methods, such as self-determined tutoring, academic advisor scheduled tutoring, group tutoring, one-to-one tutoring, peer tutoring, and professional tutoring. This study drew from cognitive learning theory and humanistic theory for its conceptual framework. A quantitative, ex post facto research design was used. Archived data supplied by the Registrar's Office and the Academic Enrichment Coordinator included records of 95 male and female students conditionally enrolled at Methodist University in the Academic Enrichment Program during the 2007 to 2009 academic years. The results of an independent samples t test determined there was a significant difference between final grades of students who had self-determined tutoring compared to those who had academic advisor determined tutoring. Results of a one-way analysis of variance determined there were significant differences in final grades of students who received group tutoring compared to one-to-one tutoring and peer tutoring compared to professional tutoring. The preliminary results raised questions of the importance of tutor status in a group or one-to-one setting. A post hoc analysis using a paired-samples t test revealed a statistically significant difference in final grades of students in group settings but not in one-to-one settings. The results of this study offer the potential for positive social change to those in higher education by advancing the understanding of how to support and provide intervention programs, such as tutoring for at-risk students, in order to reduce their risk of academic failure during college.