Bray (1999), in his review of studies on private tutoring, concludes that tests have resulted in a boom for the private tutoring industry.
As his tutor concluded, Rogers "has a genuine interest in and a feeling for architecture, but sorely lacks the intellectual equipment to translate these feelings into sound building.
However, Topping (1996) reviewed a number of studies on the effectiveness of cross-year, small-group tutoring and concluded that "much of the research is not of the highest quality, but good quality studies … do clearly demonstrate improved academic achievement" (p. 327).
Finally, the tutor provided concluding structured feedback which was followed by a time of group discussion and debriefing [ 17, 37].
Still, a brash young high-school tutor named Stanley Kaplan concluded, based on the feedback he was getting from his pupils, that the claim was a crock.
First and foremost, they concluded, tutors provide immediate feedback: they let students know whether what they're doing is right or wrong.
Their first draft was about the tutoring program, until Waldman concluded that it was too "spinachy".
An investigation was conducted, it continued, through "on-site interviews with school officials, biology teachers, tutors and students," and concluded that "many students were exposed to the content of the test".
The results of this study contradict the findings of Gijselaers (1997) who concluded that tutors' behaviors were not stable over time.
Although a significant effect on the PBL process was not identified for cognitive congruence and subject-matter expertise, the impact for each of the independent variables on students' achievement mirror the findings made by Schmidt and Moust (1995), which concluded that these tutor-related behaviours are all determinants of learning in a PBL curricula.
A review of the educational impact of portfolios concluded that "improved student-tutor relationships" was one of the main benefits, together with increased self-awareness and engagement in reflection [ 55].
