WIXLIB

Hanover Research September 2014linking them “to [the campus learning center] and to each other through [a roundtable] orto a similar campus structure that would promote communication on a scheduled basis.”14Several of the institutions reviewed for this report have moved toward a more centralizedmodel of tutoring services in recent years, including Bowling Green State University, CentralWashington University, and Saginaw Valley State University.Bowling Green State University provides an example of an institution that has recentlymoved to consolidate its learning assistance services in a centralized hub. In 2009, as part ofa broader strategic planning process, the University undertook a review of its tutoringservices, which at the time “consisted of three units . . . each with separate organizationaland operational structures,” including a writing center, a study skills center, and a math andstatistics tutoring center. All three were overseen by an assistant vice president under thevice president for enrollment management. 15 Driven by several considerations, theUniversity elected to consolidate these units in a single entity, the Learning Commons, witha single director who would report to the vice president for enrollment management. Theseconsiderations included:16 Accessibility: The separate learning centers “were in separate locations . . . alllacking a psycho‐social environment that encouraged engagement.” By movingthese services to one location, Bowling Green State sought to create a “single,accessible location for one‐stop support and supplemental intervention.” Cost‐Effectiveness: Consolidation would allow for more efficient management and a“less‐cost‐per‐student model,” both by reducing overhead and creating economiesof scale, but also by allowing for unified planning to meet challenges such asincreased service demands. Accountability: Finally, a centralized organization would allow for consistenttracking of student usage and outcomes, versus the fragmented approaches of theindependent units, which used “variable measures and methodologies.”For instance, cost‐savings were achieved through the elimination of several positions as theold tutoring centers were consolidated and former employees either took early retirementor moved to new positions within the University. In turn, these savings allowed for anexpansion of services, as funds were “internally reallocated” to create positions for a full‐time director and a tutor coordinator, who would “expand the number and variety ofsubjects offered.”17 This “subject‐area tutoring” essentially constitutes a fourth functionthat exists alongside the three original services of study skills, writing, and math support.18To improve accountability, Bowling Green State’s new Learning Commons addresses “one ofthe problems with having decentralized tutoring centers,” namely the “lack of consistent,14Landsberger, J. “Learning by Design: An Interview with Frank Christ.” Op. cit., p. 7.“HLC Quality Initiative Report: A Learning Commons.” Bowling Green State University. August 31, 2012. p. itReport.pdf16Ibid., pp. 3‐4.17Ibid., p. 5.18Ibid., p. 4.15 2014 Hanover Research Academy Administration Practice7

Hanover Research September 2014accurate, and appropriate data.”19 As part of the reorganization, the University purchasedAccudemia, a “web‐based academic center management system” that tracks student visitsand other metrics.20 The software allows Bowling Green State to see, for instance, howmany upperclassmen use the tutoring services; which majors account for the most studentsseeking tutoring; and whether students with high GPAs use the services in addition to thosewho are struggling. Ultimately, the University should be able to “pre‐allocate personnel inanticipation of projected demands for future semesters.”21USING THE LIBRARY AS A SITE FOR TUTORING SERVICESIn order to improve the accessibility of its learning assistance services, Bowling Green Statealso took a step that appears to have become increasingly common in recent years, namelyplacing tutoring and related services in the library. Hosting academic tutoring in the libraryis a common approach,22 and while not all of the institutions reviewed for this report followthis practice, a considerable number do, including multiple institutions that have recentlyrelocated tutoring to the library as part of broader reorganization, such as: Bridgewater State University: At Bridgewater State, the Academic AchievementCenter, which hosts multiple support services, including tutoring, is housed in “9,000square feet on the ground floor of the library.” This space was established in 2001 toreplace a more fragmented arrangement that “provid[ed] little opportunity forcollaboration and discussion between the personnel who provided the services.”23 Central Washington University: In early 2013, Central Washington Universityrelocated its writing center, math center, and tutoring program to a commonlocation in the first floor of the main library in order to provide “comprehensiveacademic support services . . . in one location.”24 Now known as the LearningCommons,25 the Central Washington programs have seen an increase in utilizationsince moving to the library, at least partly because of their increased “visibility andeasier access.”26 Saginaw Valley State University: Saginaw Valley State created its current Center forAcademic Achievement in 2012, “when separate tutoring services were consolidated19Ibid., p. 6.“Accudemia – Academic Center Management in the Cloud.” Engineerica. http://www.engineerica.com/accudemia21“HLC Quality Initiative Report: A Learning Commons.” Bowling Green State University. Op. cit., pp. 6‐10.22Landsberger, J. “Learning by Design: An Interview with Frank Christ.” Op. cit., p. 7.23Bukowiecki, E. et al. “A Center for Academic Achievement: How Innovative Collaborations Between Faculty andLearning Center Administrators Build Model Credit‐Bearing, First‐Year Courses with Embedded Support for At‐RiskStudents.” International Journal of Learning. 2008. pp. article 1004&context elem ed fac24“CWU Provides Better Access to Student Support Programs.” Central Washington University. January 4, access‐student‐support‐programs25“Welcome to the Learning Commons.” Central Washington University. s and Activities Fee Committee – Minutes.” Central Washington University. April 9, 2014. p. nutes%20April%209,%202014.pdf20 2014 Hanover Research Academy Administration Practice8

Hanover Research September 2014into one physical location in the main campus library.”27 Prior to this move, thetutoring services had been “spread out across campus in distinct centers, which wasconfusing to students”; consolidation in the library was expected to “improveaccess.”28 The University Writing Center continues to operate independently of theother tutoring services,29 but was also relocated to the main library, “making thisbuilding a center of student learning support.”30 Western Washington University: In 2011, Western Washington created a LearningCommons in the main campus library,31 which “brings together resources andprograms to advance teaching and learning,” including the Tutoring Center and theWriting Center.32 Although these units remain administratively independent,33 the“more visible location” in the library contributed to “an increase of over 35 percentin the number of drop‐in tutoring visits” in the first two years.34 Usage has continuedto increase since then.35Bowling Green State followed a model similar to these institutions. The new, consolidatedLearning Commons unit was housed on the first floor of the main library, to “encourageincreased activity in a space on campus with a strong academic climate.”36 It was hoped thatthe location of the Learning Commons in the library would promote “an increase in traffic”to the library, as well as “increased use of the Learning Commons by students who visit thelibrary.” This decision appears to have been successful; in its first year of hosting theLearning Commons, the library gate count increased by 23 percent.37 To facilitate thesharing of space by the two units, the Learning Commons and the library drafted amemorandum of understanding, outlining agreements on how patrons would use therespective spaces, how materials and other resources would be shared, and otheradministrative issues.38STAFFING OF TUTORING SERVICESMost institutions use some combination of peer tutors and professional staff to providelearning assistance services. However, the frontline tutors in most cases are likely to be27“A Self‐Study Report.” Saginaw Valley State University. 2013. p. tudyFINAL021014.pdf28Ibid., p. 121.29See “The Writing Center at Zahnow Library.” Saginaw Valley State University. http://www.svsu.edu/writingcenter/30“A Self‐Study Report.” Saginaw Valley State University. Op. cit., p. 98.31“Strategic Planning Matrix: 2013‐2015 Resource Plan.” Western Washington University. p. infrastructure.pdf32“Learning Commons.” Western Washington University. http://library.wwu.edu/learning commons33See [1] “Western Libraries Organizational Chart.” Western Washington University. February 27, .edu/files/lib org chart current.pdf[2] “Academic and Career Development Services.” Western Washington University. http://www.wwu.edu/acds/34“Strategic Planning Matrix: 2013‐2015 Resource Plan.” Western Washington University. Op. cit.35“Budget Proposal Narrative – Division: Enrollment and Student Services.” Western Washington University. January10, 2014. p. 4. tudentsuccessTOPOST.pdf36“HLC Quality Initiative Report: A Learning Commons.” Bowling Green State University. Op. cit., pp. 3‐4.37Ibid., p. 14.38Ibid., p. 15. 2014 Hanover Research Academy Administration Practice9

Hanover Research September 2014students, whether undergraduates or graduate assistants.39 Saginaw Valley State University,for instance, uses some professional tutors and “select faculty members” to providetutoring,40 but “most tutoring . . . is delivered through the model – common throughout theacademy – of peer‐tutoring.”41Despite this reliance on peers to serve as tutors,some number of professional staff areMost academic tutoring is likely to be“essential,” both to coordinate services and toperformed by other students,oversee the student staff, including thewhether fellow undergraduates orprovision of “ongoing mentoring andgraduate assistants.development” for the peer tutors themselves.42As Saginaw Valley State, for instance,professional faculty and staff run the tutoring and writing centers and “hire, train, evaluate,and provide development opportunities for qualified student tutors.”43SELECTING AND TRAINING PEER TUTORSThe selection of peer tutors follows a fairly similar pattern at most institutions. The typicalprocedure is to advertise openings for tutors and ask students to complete a basicapplication; referrals from faculty may be also be solicited. One of the main qualifications isoften completion (with a grade of B or higher) of the course for which the student will betutoring. Applicants may also be interviewed or asked to conduct a mock tutoring session.44The tutor application form for Saginaw Valley State University, reproduced in Figure 1,shows a characteristic example of such requirements.For peer tutors, some form of training is necessary, as these students are “neitherprofessional educators nor student development specialists.”45 Most of the institutionsreviewed for this report require tutors to undergo training.46 Perhaps the most widelyrecognized peer tutor training program is the College Reading and Learning Association’s(CRLA) International Tutor Training Program Certification, which has been in place since1989 and is “widely used across the country to set professional standards and to verifycollege tutoring program credentials.”47 The CRLA grants certification to programs, ratherthan individuals;48 in turn, a certified program can train individual tutors and certify them at39Dvorak, J. “Managing Tutoring Aspects of the Learning Assistance Center.” Op. cit., p. 45.“A Self‐Study Report.” Saginaw Valley State University. Op. cit., p. 91.41Ibid., p. 88.42Wilson, W. and Arendale, D. “Peer Educators in Learning Assistance Programs: Best Practices for New Programs.”New Directions for Student Services. Spring 2011. pp. 43, 46. http://eric.ed.gov/?id EJ92104643“A Self‐Study Report.” Saginaw Valley State University. Op. cit., p. 88.44Dvorak, J. “Managing Tutoring Aspects of the Learning Assistance Center.” Op. cit., p. 46.45Wilson, W. and Arendale, D. “Peer Educators in Learning Assistance Programs.” Op. cit., p. 44.46E.g., “Tutoring Training Program.” Montclair State University. essment/tutoring/training‐program/47Dvorak, J. “Managing Tutoring Aspects of the Learning Assistance Center.” Op. cit., p. 47.48“International Tutor Training Program Certification.” College Reading and Learning Association.http://www.crla.net/ittpc/index.htm40 2014 Hanover Research Academy Administration Practice10

Hanover Research September 2014three levels: Level 1 (Regular Tutor); Level 2 (Advanced Tutor); or Level 3 (Master Tutor).49CRLA tutor certification is relatively common among the institutions reviewed for thisreport, such as Rowan University, 50 South Dakota State University, 51 and CentralConnecticut State University.52 Typically, programs require their tutors to attain Level 1certification, and may offer Level 2 or Level 3 certification as an option for those who wishto pursue it.53 Not all programs carry the higher levels of certification, however; of the morethan 1,000 U.S. programs with Level 1 certification, just 348 carry Levels 2 and 3 as well.54SUPPLEMENTAL INSTRUCTIONVarious models exist for structuring peer tutoring, but “the largest of the nationalpostsecondary peer learning models” is supplemental instruction. 55 Supplementalinstruction is used by many of the institutions reviewed for this report, including EasternIllinois University,56 Florida Gulf Coast University,57 or Montclair State University,58 amongothers.This model, developed at the University of Missouri‐Kansas City, uses peer tutors to leadregular review sessions for students in “historically difficult” courses.59 As one descriptionputs it, supplemental instruction “does not identify high‐risk students, but rather identifieshigh‐risk courses,” such as those with high rates of low grades (e.g., D, F) or withdrawal.60The peer tutors, or “SI leaders,” are selected from among those who have previouslyperformed well in the course. These tutors participate in the course again, this time as“model students” who attend all class sessions, take notes, and then meet with currentstudents in “regularly‐scheduled, informal review sessions [to] compare notes, discussreadings, develop organizational tools, and predict test items.”6149“Frequently Asked Questions.” College Reading and Learning Association. http://www.crla.net/ittpc/faqs.htm“Certification & Qualifications.” Rowan /tutoring/qualifications/51“Tutor Certification.” South Dakota State 2.pdf52“Tutoring Center Report – Academic Year 2012/2013.” Central Connecticut State University. p. 1.http://web.ccsu.edu/tlc/about/files/Tutoring Center Report YE12‐13.pdf53E.g., [1] Reikowski, E. “Freshly Re‐Accredited Tutoring Center Offers Academic Aid to Students.” Oakland University.November 21, 2012. http://www.oakland.edu/view news.aspx?nid 9412&archived 1[2] “CRLA Certification.” Buffalo State College. “Current CRLA ITTPC‐Certified Tutor Training Programs.” College Reading and Learning Association.http://www.crla.net/ittpc/current certifications.htm55Wilson, W. and Arendale, D. “Peer Educators in Learning Assistance Programs.” Op. cit., p. 43.56“Supplemental Instruction Program.” Eastern Illinois linstruction.php57“Supplemental Instruction.” Florida Gulf Coast University. http://www.fgcu.edu/CAA/si.html58“Supplemental Instruction.” Montclair State University. ruction/59“Overview of Supplemental Instruction.” University of Missouri‐Kansas �Welcome to Supplemental Instruction.” Southern Illinois Univer

the range of tutoring services available and can refer students to them as appropriate. Tutoring can be effective in a drop‐in or appointment‐based setting. Some institutions encourage students to participate in regular, recurring tutoring sessions,