1. Sex Matters:
The Effect of Gender Differences in Peer Tutoring
Jayden Goodwin, Matthew Rich, and Joyce Adams, Ph.D
Conclusion
Gender Research
Gender DifferencesIntroduction
Figure 1
Figure 2 Figure 3
Figure 4
With the rising attention on gender differences, much
research has been done on the behavioral differences between
men and women. However, this research mainly focuses on the
gender disparity in academic achievement, resulting in a lack of
current literature evaluating how the differences in gender
behaviors can be applied in a tutoring field. Because men and
women are different, it is important to find whether these
differences have an effect on male and female tutoring
techniques and how effective these techniques are in same-sex
or mixed-pair tutoring sessions. Through an evaluation of the
current literature on gender behavioral patterns and tutoring
styles, this study will show that students have a slight advantage
in same-sex paired tutoring sessions than in mixed-paired
sessions due to an emphasis on gender-specific tutoring styles.
Research indicates that working with same-sex tutors on average results in
a higher GPA for the student. House and Wohlt (1989) first found this
relationship after pairing 333 educationally disadvantaged college students in
introductory math and science courses with either same-sex or opposite-sex
tutors (see Figure 1). To demonstrate that these findings hold true for other
subjects, House and Wohlt (1990) did a similar study with students in social
science, humanities, and business courses and found the same relationship.
Tutors may be better equipped to work with same-sex students than with
students of the opposite sex.
This relationship is not always readily apparent, however. Rheinheimer
(2000) found that the statically significant difference in grade outcome was
best explained by the superior performance of the female students, not by
whether they had a male for female tutor (see Figure 2). The complexity of
the tutor-tutee relationship was further illustrated in Topping and Whiteley’s
(1993) study of elementary tutoring outcomes in Great Britain, where they
found that only male tutee outcomes reached statistical significance (see
Figure 3). These studies serve to moderate House and Wohlt’s claims and
show that further research is necessary to explain these somewhat
contradictory findings.
Gender Tutoring Styles
Masculine Style
• Direct
• Assertive
• Analytical
Feminine Style
• Sociable
• Flexible
• Self-Expressive
The advantage of students working with same-sex tutors
could be due to a number of differences that exist between
genders in regard to tutoring style. Males have been shown to
want to
• establish dominance
• use imperatives
• talk less in sessions
• have a more open body language
(Tannen, 1990; Thonus, 1996).
Females, on the other hand, tend to
• focus on building rapport
• favor first and second person models
• talk more in sessions
• have a more reserved body language
(Zumwalt, 1994; Thonus, 1996).
We refer to these differing styles as the Masculine Style and
Feminine Style, respectively (see Figure 4). It appears that, on
average, male students are more comfortable with the
Masculine Style of tutoring while female students respond
better to the Feminine Style.
Despite a few conflicting studies, same-sex tutoring does appear to give a
slight academic advantage to the student. This advantage is probably due to
the student responding well to the tutor’s gender-specific style of tutoring.
Therefore, rather than solely relying on same-sex tutoring, both male and
female tutors should be trained in the opposite gender’s tutoring style and
use these styles appropriately with male and female students. Although this
literature review is limited to the few studies that exist on gender-based
tutoring, it presents an evidence-based theory on tutoring styles that should
be investigated further. Hopefully by applying the Masculine and Feminine
Styles in tutoring sessions, tutors will be able to better connect with their
students, regardless of gender.
Conflicting Studies
Landmark Studies