Article

Journal of Special Education Technology

2017, Vol. 32(1) 36-46
Active Collaborative Learning Through ª The Author(s) 2016
Reprints and permission:
sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
Remote Tutoring: A Case Study With DOI: 10.1177/0162643416681162
journals.sagepub.com/home/jst
Students Who Are Deaf or Hard of Hearing

Austin U. Gehret1, Lisa B. Elliot2, and Jonathan H. C. MacDonald3

Abstract
An exploratory case study approach was used to describe remote tutoring in biochemistry and general chemistry with students who
are deaf or hard of hearing (D/HH). Data collected for analysis were based on the observations of the participant tutor. The research
questions guiding this study included (1) How is active learning accomplished in synchronous, remote tutoring for chemistry and
biochemistry with students who are D/HH? and (2) Why might active learning be important to include in synchronous, remote
tutoring for this student population? Findings included that (a) students approached remote tutoring with the same questions and
materials they brought to in-person tutoring and (b) the degree to which tutoring materials could be imbedded into a remote session
influenced the session’s efficiency and the ability of students to actively participate in remote tutoring.

Keywords
remote tutoring, deaf, hard of hearing, Google Hangouts, chemistry, biochemistry

Higher education is increasingly leveraging technology to United Kingdom to provide synchronous, online tutoring with
provide greater access to learning (Halverson & Collins, higher level mathematics was evaluated by students as easy to
2009), and this has been most visible through the rise in adop- use and supportive of group problem-solving (Lissaman,
tion of massive open online courses (MOOC; Daradoumis, Pomerai, & Tripconey, 2009). Engineering and computer
Bassi, Xhafa, & Caballe, 2013). Though widespread, MOOCs science students working in remote laboratories in Hanover,
focus more on universal distribution of information and less Germany, received synchronous, remote mentoring without a
on the educational needs of the individual (Daradoumis et al., significant impact on student motivation or task success
2013). In contrast, in-person tutoring is an academic staple (Bohne, Faltin, & Wagner, 2004). Remote tutoring has even
designed to assist in the individual needs of the learner and been leveraged in test preparation. Middle school teachers in
has a proven record of positively impacting academic perfor- the Worcester Massachusetts School District used the online
mance (Cohen, Kulik, & Kulik, 1982), particularly with expe- intelligent tutoring system ASSISTment to assess student prog-
rienced tutors (Herppich, Wittwer, Nückles, & Renkl, 2014). ress toward state examination standards (Anozie & Junker,
It comes as little surprise that online tutoring platforms have 2007). What these studies did not offer was any examination
started to emerge (Young, 2016) that combine traditional of the features that made the tutoring successful or dynamic for
tutoring with current technologies. the stakeholders. Furthermore, none of these studies detailed
any special features the platforms may have had for students
with particular learning or communication needs, such as stu-
Online Tutoring Research dents who are deaf or hard of hearing (D/HH).
Many current online tutoring services are entrepreneurial
(Young, 2016). As such, research in this area tends to focus 1
on user perceptions (Whetstone, Clark, & Flake, 2014) or stu- Department of Science and Mathematics, National Technical Institute for the
Deaf, Rochester Institute of Technology, Rochester, NY, USA
dent achievement with various platforms (Clark & Whetstone, 2
Office of the Associate Dean of Research, National Technical Institute for the
2014; Vasquez & Slocum, 2012). These tutoring enterprises Deaf, Rochester Institute of Technology, Rochester, NY, USA
3
address many academic disciplines and are used around the British Columbia Provincial School for the Deaf, Burnaby, British Columbia,
world. For example, a U.K. distance-learning institution Canada
offered online tutoring to supplement learning in the huma-
Corresponding Author:
nities. When students were surveyed, researchers found no Austin U. Gehret, Department of Science and Mathematics, National Technical
difference in student perceptions of course quality (Richardson, Institute for the Deaf, 52 Lomb Memorial Dr., Rochester, NY 14623, USA.
2009). Elluminate, a web-based software package piloted in the Email: augnts@rit.edu
Gehret et al. 37

Online Tutoring for Students Who Are D/HH Active Learning

Bryant (2011) conducted a pilot study with students who are A description of synchronous, remote tutoring exchanges with
D/HH to measure the efficacy of web-conferencing systems students who are D/HH should be tempered by the fact that ben-
Adobe1 Connect Pro 7™ and IdeaTools™ Video Hangouts eficial practices may not be readily transferrable due in no small
chat to provide remote tutoring in English. While both sys- part to the range of educational and communication backgrounds
tems had persistent technical issues related to video quality, that exist for this student population. Students mainstreamed with
each system included multiple channels that circumvented hearing peers at the secondary-level experience a variety of facil-
communication breakdown. This highlights the value of using itating or detracting factors to their academic success (Reed, Antia,
an online tutoring platform with flexible communication & Kreimeyer, 2008). Even at residential institutions, teachers spe-
modalities when remote tutoring this student population. cializing in deaf education are challenged to satisfy an extensive
Furthermore, several students who had never taken advantage list of knowledge and skills standards put forth in their initial
of in-person tutoring elected to participate in remote tutoring preparation programs (Easterbrooks, 2008). Combined with these
(Bryant, 2011). This finding underscores the tendency of this academic factors, the communication preferences and needs of
student population to embrace web-based technologies. Con- this student population (Stinson, Liu, Saur, & Long, 1996) further
tributing factors to this phenomenon may include the ability complicate predictions of postsecondary academic success (Con-
of these technologies to enhance both access to academic vertino, Marschark, Sapere, Sarchet, & Zupan, 2009).
content (Lang & Steely, 2003) and to the quality of social An analysis of synchronous, remote tutoring exchanges with
interactions (Blom, Marschark, Vervloed, & Knoors, 2014). this student population might instead be well served through
Thus, limited research with this student population suggests the lens of active learning. The heightened focus on assessment
students who are D/HH can benefit from various forms of has pressured educators to become more innovative in how
online learning. they teach with a de-emphasis on traditional lecture and
increased emphasis on active learning (Miller, 2014). Synchro-
nous online environments invite active learning and should
Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics be viewed more as learning laboratories than lecture halls
Online Tutoring for Students Who Are D/HH (Finkelstein, 2006). The technology and diverse tools available
within an online learning environment align more closely with
A fundamental problem for students who are D/HH is that at
a ‘‘learning by doing’’ view of education (Halverson & Collins,
the postsecondary level, a ‘‘participation gap’’ in STEM has
2009). Several studies incorporating social media as a compo-
existed for years (Jenkins, 2009; Komesaroff, 2005). STEM
nent of online learning invoke constructivist learning theories
careers remain a high priority in the United States (U.S.
and the significance of students’ active involvement in those
Department of Education, n.d.), and workers who are
environments to describe the learning process (Wankel & Bles-
D/HH typically earn 31% more than those employed in
singer, 2012). Students who are D/HH, like their peers who are
other occupations (Walter, 2010). However, these jobs
hearing, reflect more favorably upon in-person tutoring experi-
require an appropriate STEM education which is a persistent
ences that are interactive and collaborative (Lang, Biser, Mous-
challenge for students who are D/HH. Contributing barriers
ley, Orlando, & Porter, 2004; Orlando, Gramly, & Hoke, 1997).
include (a) a lack of support for STEM education at the
elementary, middle, or high school level; (b) an overempha-
sis on literacy and language skills in early education; (c) a
lack of exposure to STEM careers; (d) a lack of access Purpose of This Study
services for STEM internships, classroom interpreters, and
This study describes synchronous, remote STEM tutoring in
captioning specialists familiar with STEM vocabulary; and
biochemistry and general chemistry with students who are
(e) a lack of a peer network for socialization and mentoring
D/HH. While student comprehension improves in these disci-
(Foster, 2009; Walter, 2009). In STEM fields, approxi-
plines when active learning experiences are incorporated
mately 23% of all college students who are D/HH graduated
(Dougherty et al., 1995; Minderhout & Loertscher, 2007), the
with bachelor’s degrees and between 1997 and 2006, and
guidance of a tutor should remain a critical component to active
the pipeline shrank considerably at the graduate level: Only
learning as knowledge acquisition can suffer in its absence
about 0.2% of new STEM PhDs were D/HH (Hoffer, Hess,
(Kirschner, Sweller, & Clark, 2006). Thus, the research ques-
Welch, & Williams, 2007).
tions guiding this study as follows:
Elliot et al. (2013) described efforts to provide synchronous,
remote tutoring in STEM to students who are D/HH. They
Research Question 1: How is active learning accomplished
found that the anticipated technical challenges of remote tutor-
in synchronous, remote tutoring for chemistry and biochem-
ing could be mitigated if using wired Internet connections (no
istry with students who are D/HH?
Wi-Fi) and good lighting conditions. Students and tutors alike
reflected favorably on the ease of scheduling that remote tutor- Research Question 2: Why might active learning be impor-
ing provided, but an analysis of the specific tutoring exchanges tant to include in synchronous, remote tutoring for this stu-
that took place was not explored. dent population?
38 Journal of Special Education Technology 32(1)

Table 1. Demographics of Student Participants.

College
Experience Number of Preferred
Student Program of Study Course Supported Term/Academic Year (Terms) Sessions Communication Style

A Biochemistry Biochemistry: Nucleic Acids Springa (2011–2012) 14 5 American sign language

B Biology Biochemistry: Conformation and Falla (2012–2013) 9 4 Simultaneous
dynamics communication
Biochemistry: Metabolism Wintera (2012–2013) 10 2
C Chemical engineering General and analytical chemistry III Springa (2012–2013) 2 1 American sign language
D Laboratory science General and analytical chemistry III Springa (2012–2013) 8 2 Oral communication
technology
E Biomedical sciences General and analytical chemistry III Springa (2012–2013) 2 2 Simultaneous
communication
F Laboratory science General and analytical chemistry I Fallb (2013–2014) 9 3 Simultaneous
technology communication
G Biotechnology General and analytical chemistry II Springb (2013–2014) 6 4 Oral communication
a
Term occurred under an academic quarter calendar. bTerm occurred under an academic semester calendar.

Method tutoring sessions were conducted on a one-to-one faculty-to-

student ratio and typically occurred middle to late in the aca-
Participants demic term.
All tutoring provided in this study supported chemistry or bio-
chemistry courses taught by faculty who are hearing and who
do not know sign language. Participants in this study were
Procedure and Materials
enrolled in these chemistry or biochemistry classes over the The Google Hangouts (Google, 2016d) platform was chosen, in
course of six academic terms spanning a little more than 2 years part, for its potential to accommodate diverse communication
(see Table 1). The tutor’s primary responsibility was to support modalities through a range of synchronous functions including
all students who are D/HH enrolled in these courses (approx- video, audio, and text-based discussions that are each common
imately 180 students) over this same time frame. to many synchronous support platforms (Kear, Chetwynd,
Williams, & Donelan, 2012; MacDonald, 2006; Tsuei, 2014).
Students. Seven female students enrolled in baccalaureate bio- Remote sessions were all appointment based and scheduled
chemistry and chemistry courses participated in this study. One through e-mail or using Google Calendar (Google, 2016a). The
student participated twice for two different courses during two faculty member conducted all sessions using an iMac with
different academic marking periods (see Table 1). Students built-in iSight camera, a wired Internet connection, and the
were eligible to participate in the study if they were D/HH and Google Chrome web browser (Google, 2016b). Students used
enrolled in an STEM major. Students were not required to have a variety of personal laptops (PC and Mac), Chromebooks, and
a specific means of preferred communication (see Table 1). either wired or wireless Internet connections and remote ses-
sions ranged in length from 30 to 90 min. The faculty member
Tutor. The faculty member was hearing, formally trained in used either a personal office whiteboard with the aid of the
biochemistry, fluent in sign language, and experienced in con- iSight camera or the online whiteboard application, Concept-
ducting in-person tutoring with students who are D/HH. The board (2016). Features used within Google Hangouts included
tutor was knowledgeable with the content reviewed in remote chatting, drawing, microphones, and screen sharing (Google,
sessions and communicated in all sessions using simultaneous 2016d). Google Drive (Google, 2016c) was used for uploading
communication (signing and speech at the same time). The and sharing documents between student and tutor.
faculty member was recruited by project staff to participate
in the project with the support of the department chair and had Research Design
no prior experience with remote tutoring.
The case study methodology was selected for this study as it
met the three criteria defined by Yin (2009): (a) The focus of
Settings the study is to answer ‘‘how’’ and ‘‘why’’ questions, (b) the
The tutor conducted all remote-tutoring sessions from his cam- behavior of the students was not manipulated by the tutor, and
pus office. Students participated in remote tutoring sessions (c) because we wanted to explore the context of the online
from a variety of locations including nearby offices, student tutoring conditions in depth as a contemporary phenomenon.
lounges and public areas across campus, and on- or off-campus Additionally, the study was designed as an exploratory case
housing. Most tutoring sessions occurred in the evening or study because the tutoring situations did not have a clear, single
during working hours as student schedules allowed. All remote set of outcomes (Baxter & Jack, 2008).
Gehret et al. 39

Results
Without prior remote tutoring experience, the tutor intended
to model remote sessions as much as possible to in-person
tutoring. To that end, if a remote session was able to flow
with comparable pace of instruction to in-person tutoring, it
was categorized as ‘‘efficient.’’ Students approached remote
tutoring as they would in-person tutoring by electing to focus
each session around specific course assessments (homework
assignments, journal articles, class problems). The ability of
the Google Hangouts platform to allow collaboration on those
assessments between tutor and student resulted in synchro-
nous, remote tutoring with either ‘‘integrated’’ or ‘‘periph-
eral’’ materials.

Remote Tutoring With Integrated Materials

Previous work with students who are D/HH indicated that
engagement within a remote tutoring platform, often achieved
by active learning exercises such as homework, was critical for
success with remote tutoring (Baker, 2010; Bryant, 2011). In
this study, particular features of the web-conferencing platform
did allow for active student participation. Each feature had the
ability to ‘‘integrate’’ materials into the session, so that they
were accessible to both parties. Integrated materials included
document sharing, online homework programs, and online Figure 1. An ‘‘integrated’’ remote tutoring session focused on general
whiteboard applications. chemistry homework. The student could display their progress to the
tutor by screen sharing the online homework webpage. The tutor was
visible to the student the entire session.
Document sharing. A key feature of the remote tutoring platform
was its ability to imbed files uploaded online (Google, 2016c)
to remote sessions. Student A sought remote tutoring for an in these sessions related to drawing organic molecules; Student
independent study in biochemistry focused on the structure and G additionally requested session time to practice calculations on
function of nucleic acids (DNA, RNA). The course instructor aqueous equilibria and thermodynamics. The online homework
permitted the student and tutor to collaborate on take-home platform in this study was very sensitive to subtle drawing and
exams based on research articles related to the discovery of calculation mistakes. Students who are D/HH would often over-
catalytic RNA (Cech, 1990), the identification of DNA as look these subtle errors and become frustrated with the home-
genetic material (Avery, Macleod, & McCarty, 1944), and work program. An application in the web-conferencing platform
RNA interference (Fire et al., 1998). Exam questions focused allowed the students to screen share their homework progress to
on empirical evidence authors used to formulate their conclu- the tutor in real time. When this function was enabled, the stu-
sions; as such, the student was tasked with scouring through dent’s homework progress was displayed to the tutor in place of
mounds of biochemistry jargon to identify key findings. By their video feed (see Figure 1). At the same time, the tutor’s
uploading the articles ahead of time, the tutor could share the video feed was still visible to the student. Because each student
articles with the student during the session allowing both par- used voice with or without signing (see Table 1), communica-
ties to perform simultaneous key word searches. By virtue of tion with the hearing tutor could be maintained under these
this collaboration, reviewing journal articles proceeded with circumstances. By directly observing the students’ work in real
greater efficiency in synchronous, remote tutoring compared time, the tutor intervened immediately when observing a draw-
to in-person tutoring. Furthermore, as document sharing made ing or calculation mistake. This real-time feedback is near
the articles accessible to both parties, the student was placed in impossible to replicate in-person because the tutor observes the
an active role for these sessions. student and their work asynchronously. As a result, these remote
sessions were noticeably more efficient. Additionally, the stu-
Online homework programs. In-person tutoring for general chem- dents maintained an active role in these sessions because they
istry with students who are D/HH was heavily focused were manipulating the homework module in the tutor’s ‘‘pres-
around online homework. Students D, E, and G all received ence’’ while receiving synchronous, remote tutoring.
remote tutoring for the online homework program Student D was a commuter student who had off-campus
MasteringChemistry™ (Pearson, 2016) in support of general work responsibilities that routinely prohibited her from attend-
chemistry courses (see Table 1). The topic of interest discussed ing in-person tutoring. However, the student was able to take
40 Journal of Special Education Technology 32(1)

advantage of remote tutoring from her off-campus residence. in-person tutoring. For in-person tutoring, the tutor would
Because this student was off campus, she was dependent on a describe a topic first and then supplement that explanation
wireless Internet connection that provided poor visual resolu- by directing the student’s attention to the lecture notes sec-
tion with the video channel. Yet, the screen-sharing function tion on that topic. To replicate this practice in remote ses-
still permitted the tutor to efficiently collaborate with the stu- sions, the tutor elected to display the printed notes to the
dent on her online homework. Despite the video quality, the student by projecting them in front of the computer’s cam-
student requested a second remote session for the following day era (see Figure 2). As time had to be allowed for proper
to receive additional assistance. positioning and focusing of the material in the camera’s
field, this practice became far more time consuming com-
Online whiteboard applications. The use of whiteboards has been pared to in-person tutoring. In these situations with Students
shown to be an advantageous academic practice for students A and B, the remote tutoring platform was inefficient at
who are D/HH (Marchetti, Foster, Long, & Stinson, 2012). mirroring the tutor’s practices for reviewing biochemistry
Visually articulating STEM concepts with this student popula- lecture notes. Furthermore, the video quality of the remote
tion has also been shown to be beneficial (Stinson, Elliot, & session was dependent on the Internet connection used by
Easton, 2014). To take advantage of these benefits, an online the students and often limited video feed resolution. Con-
whiteboard was incorporated to some remote sessions using the versations focused on defining complex scientific language
Conceptboard# application (2016), a stylus, and an iPad (for and concepts new to the student required optimal video
both parties). Students F and G each received remote tutoring resolution for the student to acquire this knowledge. To
using an online whiteboard for general chemistry (see Table 1). guard against student misinterpretation of signed informa-
Student F requested practice drawing Lewis chemical struc- tion or projected materials, text-based discussions, a feature
tures and Student G requested practice with acid/base equilibria of the platform, were liberally employed to help with these
problems. Both topics require a deliberate, stepwise approach technical terms (see Figure 2).
to a solution that the tutor would normally illustrate using
traditional whiteboards for in-person tutoring. The instructor Office whiteboard. With Student A, the tutor made a single
guided the students through the steps to solve their respective attempt to illustrate a biochemical concept, DNA replica-
problems, and then the students repeated the procedure using tion, using a native drawing application in the platform.
the online whiteboard with the tutor intervening as necessary. Though syncing issues were not prevalent, illustration using
The online whiteboard successfully provided active participa- a desktop mouse was even more challenging than a stylus
tion for the student; however, the efficiency of these remote and consumed half of the remote session. For subsequent
sessions was noticeably reduced. Decreased efficiency was a sessions, the tutor elected to illustrate biochemical concepts
result of the online whiteboard having intermittent syncing using his office whiteboard. In order to achieve this, the
issues with the stylus. Additionally, the application would iSight camera was repositioned to ensure both he and the
occasionally crash. Based on these factors, the potential ben- whiteboard were in the camera’s field (see Figure 3).
efit for active learning that an integrated tool could provide Though this camera arrangement provided the most efficient
was offset by the decrease in efficiency it also brought to the manner in which to illustrate biochemical concepts, the con-
remote session. tinual repositioning disrupted the flow of the sessions con-
tributing to their overall inefficiency.
Student B participated in the most remote sessions of any
Remote Tutoring With Peripheral Materials
student in the project (see Table 1), and each of her sessions
In contrast to the active learning opportunities available to were supplemented with the use of an office whiteboard and
supplement learning in general chemistry, most of the bio- printed lecture notes. Thus, this student was passively, rather
chemistry courses tutored in this study were lecture driven and than actively, acquiring all of the content during these remote
without formative assessments between exams. Students A and sessions. Despite gaining the most experience with the plat-
B approached these sessions, as was common for in-person form, the student elected not to continue with remote tutoring
tutoring, with a need for explanation or clarification on a range for biochemistry support. Student B’s reliance on peripheral
of advanced concepts (e.g., DNA replication, thermodynamics tools in her sessions made her heavily dependent on visually
of metabolic reactions, derivation of the Michaelis–Menten receiving most information rather than actively participating in
model of enzyme kinetics). The tutor approached communicat- her learning.
ing these concepts, as he would during in-person tutoring, by
using note-taker lecture notes and a whiteboard as visual aids to
support what was spoken and signed. However, the use of tools
remained peripheral to the platform in that only the tutor had
Discussion
direct access to either. The current study was focused at analyzing synchronous,
remote tutoring with students who are D/HH. In an effort to
Projecting printed lecture notes. Incorporating physical lecture describe the interactions taking place in these sessions, two
notes to a remote session was far more cumbersome than for research questions guided this study:
Gehret et al. 41

Figure 2. Visual aids incorporated into concept-driven biochemistry tutoring sessions in Google Hangouts. A copy of note-taker notes for
students who are deaf/hard of hearing was used to aid in the explanation of glycolysis.

Research Question 1: How is active learning accomplished Why Might Active Learning be Important to Include for
in synchronous, remote tutoring for chemistry and biochem- This Student Population?
istry with students who are D/HH?
The favorable perception students who are D/HH retain for in-
Research Question 2: Why might active learning be impor- person tutoring with active learning (Lang et al., 2004; Orlando
tant to include in synchronous, remote tutoring for this stu- et al., 1997) likely extends to synchronous, remote tutoring
dent population? because students approached both formats similarly. The effi-
ciency of sessions and a student’s dependence on visual com-
How Is Active Learning Accomplished? munication might contribute specifically to their perceptions of
remote tutoring.
Based on the experiences of the tutor in this study, students
who are D/HH were more actively involved in the learning
process when they were able to collaborate as part of the Session efficiency. Because students who are D/HH approached
remote session. In this study, collaboration was achieved synchronous, remote tutoring as they would in-person tutoring,
when educational materials were imbedded into a session and they likely harbored the expectation the remote tutoring should
accessible to both the tutor and student. Students assumed an proceed as efficiently as in-person tutoring. When the tutor
active, participatory role with their learning by completing made use of materials peripheral to the web-conferencing soft-
some task (e.g., homework assignments, practice problems, ware (printed lecture notes, office whiteboards), the remote
exam questions, etc.) in addition to receiving instruction from sessions were noticeably less efficient. Student B who partici-
the tutor. On the other hand, remote tutoring lacking oppor- pated in the most remote sessions (see Table 1) was also
tunities for collaboration (e.g., projecting an office white- entirely reliant on peripheral tools for learning. It is possible
board or printed lecture notes) relegated the student to the that the peripheral materials reduced efficiency of these ses-
role of passive observer. sions to the detriment of effectively conveying information and
42 Journal of Special Education Technology 32(1)

Figure 3. Office whiteboards were incorporated into Google Hangouts. The tutor made use of an office whiteboard for a remote tutoring
biochemistry session to elaborate on the topic of enzyme kinetics. Signing was used in combination with the Hangouts chat feature to maintain
seamless communication.

that this inefficiency contributed to the student’s negative per- The tutor’s choice of whiteboard also impacted the effi-
ception of remote tutoring. ciency of synchronous, remote tutoring. Online whiteboards
On the other hand, remote tutoring with materials integrated were tested in sessions with Students F and G during the third
with the platform (uploaded course documents, screen-shared year of the study. As these whiteboards were integrated in the
online homework) allowed sessions to progress comparably or remote platform, they held potential for active learning oppor-
more efficiently than in-person tutoring. The case with Student tunities. This potential was limited though by technical issues
D supported this observation. Despite poor video quality, col- with the software and the tutor’s ability to write efficiently with
laboration with online homework was efficiently completed, the stylus. The transition from a traditional to online white-
and the student was eager to continue remote tutoring. The board for illustration purposes has been shown to be nontrivial
documented benefits of active learning in chemistry and bio- given the inherent loss in dexterity (O’Hanlon, 2007) and that
chemistry (Dougherty et al., 1995; Minderhout & Loertscher, clearly impacted these sessions too. At the same time, the
2007) appear to enhance the experience of remote tutoring for alternative use of traditional whiteboards required the tutor to
students who are D/HH too. The efficiency of remote tutoring constantly reposition throughout a session. Thus, the efficiency
with imbedded materials not only creates learning environ- traditional whiteboards provided the tutor were mitigated to an
ments supportive of constructivist learning theories (Bonk & extent by the physical constraints of the remote session. In
Cunningham, 1998; Lang et al., 2004) but also appears to choosing how to implement whiteboards with synchronous,
enhance the ‘‘observability’’ (Rogers, 1995) of remote tutor- remote tutoring to students who are D/HH, efficiency should
ing’s effectiveness for students who are D/HH. be an important consideration.
Gehret et al. 43

Student dependence on visual communication. Remote sessions and through multiple modalities at the discretion of the student.
lacking active learning components forced students to depend Though these functions, as Finkelstein states, are the most
on the visual communication channel to acquire all knowledge. challenging to quantify for their impact on learning, they would
In sessions with active learning activities, students worked appear to be vital to any remote tutoring platform to help with
directly on course materials, were actively involved in devel- the ‘‘transitioning’’ students need to undertake when asked to
oping knowledge, and were thus less dependent on visual view a web-conferencing application as an education tool and
communication with the tutor to acquire all information. not simply for social media purposes (Rubrico, 2012; Simoes &
Web-based distance education has already been shown to add Gouveia, 2012; Truong & Zanzucchi, 2012). Support was an
distress to students when technical and communication issues obvious function all students sought who took part in the study;
arise (Hara, 2000). This issue is likely compounded with stu- however, the degree of support received appears to have cor-
dents who are D/HH as video speed can negatively impact sign related to some degree with the level of collaboration involved.
language comprehension for different skill levels (Hooper, As Finkelstein states, collaboration is a key element for a suc-
Miller, Rose, & Veletsianos, 2007). Thus, in addition to the cessful synchronous online learning environment that balances
fact that synchronous environments encourage active learning the roles of its participants. When collaborating, actual time
(Finkelstein, 2006), active learning in these environments spent on task is reduced. This was clearly evident in our study
might additionally provide a break from the demands of based on the efficiency of topic coverage for collaborative
visually processing instruction for this student population, a sessions. Furthermore, the support received is critical for
practice common to mainstream classroom learning retaining and motivating learners (Finkelstein, 2006). Thus,
(Marschark et al., 2005). based on the findings in this study, collaboration should be
regarded as central function of any remote tutoring platform
targeted for supporting students who are D/HH.
Implications for Practice In conclusion, synchronous, remote tutoring in STEM holds
In identifying a web-conferencing platform to provide remote promise for academically engaging students who are D/HH.
tutoring to this student population, consideration should be The best platforms for serving this population should have a
given to the communication channels available within that plat- solid infrastructure for integrating various educational materi-
form. On occasions in this study when video quality became als to maximize active learning opportunities. Additionally,
compromised, the platform could circumvent this issue with platforms with multiple channels for communication are best
additional communication tools including built-in microphone served to mitigate unanticipated technical issues. Under the
features and text-based discussions. The ability of students to tutelage of an experienced tutor using the remote platform,
exercise choice in their means of communication is a strong each of these features can be leveraged when most appropriate
draw to a remote tutoring program (Baker, 2010; Bryant, 2011) to accommodate the various educational needs of individual
and students exercised those options throughout this study too. learners. In doing so, synchronous, remote tutoring holds great
Students also exercised choice in the materials they chose to potential as a resource in the online educational toolkit.
utilize during remote tutoring including online homework, lec-
ture notes, course worksheets, and research articles. A web- Declaration of Conflicting Interests
conferencing platform that has the resources for integrating The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to
these materials holds significant value but will likely be under- the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
utilized by a tutor inexperienced with the platform. Ostensibly,
the tutor conducting a remote session is an expert in technology Funding
(McPherson & Nunes, 2004). However, the notion that any The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for
faculty member can serve as a remote tutor in their content the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This
area should be tempered by the fact that serving this role places research was supported by the National Science Foundation Grant
them in a position outside of their comfort level (Bryant, 2011) HRD-1127955 (Awarded to Lisa B. Elliot, PI). Any opinions, find-
and is best supported with prior training in the platform of ings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material
choice (Doukakis et al., 2013). The faculty tutor in this study are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the
was able to leverage various tools to enhance student partici- National Science Foundation.
pation, and positively impact session efficiency, but only after
gaining experience with the platform. References
Finkelstein (2006) highlights five major functions served by Anozie, N. O., & Junker, B. W. (2007). Investigating the utility of a
synchronous online interactions: instruction, collaboration, conjunctive model in Q-matrix assessment using monthly student
support, socialization and informal exchange, and extended records in an online tutoring system. Presented at the Annual
outreach. While extended outreach falls outside of formal Meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education
instruction and therefore not applicable to this study, instruc- (NCME), Chicago, IL.
tion was conducted both actively and passively through a Avery, O. T., Macleod, C. M., & McCarty, M. (1944). Studies on the
variety of tools used by the tutor in all remote sessions. Socia- chemical nature of the substance inducing transformation of pneu-
lization and informal exchange were ongoing in all sessions mococcal types: Induction of transformation by a desoxyribonucleic
44 Journal of Special Education Technology 32(1)

acid fraction isolated from pneumococcus type III. The Journal of (ITHET), Antalya, Turkey. Retrieved from http://ieeexplore.ieee.
Experimental Medicine, 79, 137–158. org/xpl/articleDetails.jsp?arnumber¼6671052
Baker, S. (2010). Remote tutoring of deaf and hard of hearing students Easterbrooks, S. R. (2008). Knowledge and skills for teachers of indi-
using web-based and video-based technologies. Journal for Deaf viduals who are deaf or hard of hearing: Initial set revalidation.
Educational Technology, 1, 17–23. Communication Disorders Quarterly, 30, 12–36. doi:10.1177/
Baxter, P., & Jack, S. (2008). Qualitative case study methodology: 1525740108324043
Study design and implementation for novice researchers. The Qua- Elliot, L. B., Rubin, B., DeCaro, J. J., Clymer, E. W., Earp, K., & Fish,
litative Report, 13, 544–559. M. D. (2013). Creating a virtual academic community for STEM
Blom, H., Marschark, M., Vervloed, M. P. J., & Knoors, H. (2014). students. Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education, 5,
Finding friends online: Online activities by deaf students and their 173–188. doi:10.1108/JARHE-11-2012-0051
well-being. PLOS ONE, 9, e88351. doi:10.1371/journal.pone. Finkelstein, J. E. (2006). Learning in real time: Synchronous teaching
0088351 and learning online. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Bohne, A., Faltin, N., & Wagner, B. (2004). Synchronous tele-tutorial Fire, A., Xu, S., Montgomery, M. K., Kostas, S. A., Driver, S. E., &
support in a remote laboratory for process control. In W. Aung (Ed.), Mello, C. C. (1998). Potent and specific genetic interference by
Innovations 2004: World innovations in engineering education and double-stranded RNA in Caenorhabditis elegans. Nature, 391,
research innovations (pp. 317–329). Potomac, MD: iNEER. 806–811. doi:10.1038/35888
Bonk, C. J., & Cunningham, D. J. (1998). Searching for learner- Foster, S. (2009). Thematic notes from the PEPNet focus groups.
centered, constructivist, and sociocultural components of colla- NTID Center on Access Technology. Retrieved from http://
borative educational learning tools. In C. J. Bonk & K. S. King www.ntid.rit.edu/sites/default/files/cat/fosterReport.pdf
(Eds.), Electronic collaborators: Learner-centered technologies Google. (2016a). Google Calendar. Retrieved March 21, 2016, from
for literacy, apprenticeship, and discourse (pp. 25–50). Mahwah, https://www.google.com/calendar
NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Google. (2016b). Google Chrome. Retrieved March 21, 2016, from
Bryant, L. (2011). Remote tutoring: A choice for deaf college students: https://www.google.com/chrome/browser/
An action research study. Doctoral dissertation. Retrieved from Google. (2016c). Google Drive. Retrieved March 21, 2016, from
http://hdl.handle.net/1802/16913 https://www.google.com/intl/en/drive/
Cech, T. R. (1990). Nobel lecture. Self-splicing and enzymatic activity Google. (2016d). Google Hangouts. Retrieved March 16, 2016, from
of an intervening sequence RNA from Tetrahymena. Bioscience https://hangouts.google.com
Reports, 10, 239–261. Halverson, R., & Collins, A. (2009). Rethinking education in the age
Clark, A. K., & Whetstone, P. (2014). The impact of an online tutoring of technology: The digital revolution and schooling in America.
program on mathematics achievement. The Journal of Educational New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Research, 107, 462–466. doi:10.1080/00220671.2013.833075 Hara, N. (2000). Student distress in a web-based distance education
Cohen, P. A., Kulik, J. A., & Kulik, C.-L. C. (1982). Educational course. Information, Communication & Society, 3, 557–579. doi:
outcomes of tutoring: A meta-analysis of findings. American 10.1080/13691180010002297
Educational Research Journal, 19, 237–248. doi:10.3102/ Herppich, S., Wittwer, J., Nückles, M., & Renkl, A. (2014). Addres-
00028312019002237 sing knowledge deficits in tutoring and the role of teaching expe-
Conceptboard. (2016). Conceptboard. Retrieved March 21, 2016, rience: Benefits for learning and summative assessment. Journal of
from http://conceptboard.com/ Educational Psychology, 106, 934–945. doi:10.1037/a0036076
Convertino, C. M., Marschark, M., Sapere, P., Sarchet, T., & Zupan, Hoffer, T. B., Hess, M., Welch, V., & Williams, K. (2007). Doctorate
M. (2009). Predicting academic success among deaf college stu- recipients from United States universities, summary report 2006.
dents. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 14, 324–343. Retrieved from University of Chicago, National Opinion Research
doi:10.1093/deafed/enp005 Center website: http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/doctorates/pdf/
Daradoumis, T., Bassi, R., Xhafa, F., & Caballe, S. (2013). A review sed2006.pdf
on massive e-learning (MOOC) design, delivery and assessment. Hooper, S., Miller, C., Rose, S., & Veletsianos, G. (2007). The effects
In F. Xhafa, L. Barolli, D. Nace, S. Vinticinque, & A. Bui (Eds.), of digital video quality on learner comprehension in an American
2013 Eighth International Conference on P2P, Parallel, Grid, Sign Language assessment environment. Sign Language Studies, 8,
Cloud and Internet Computing (3PGCIC) (pp. 208–213). doi:10. 42–58. doi:10.1353/sls.2007.0029
1109/3PGCIC.2013.37 Jenkins, H. (2009). Confronting the challenges of participatory cul-
Dougherty, R. C., Bowen, C. W., Berger, T., Rees, W., Mellon, E. K., ture: Media education for the 21st century. Cambridge, MA: MIT
& Pulliam, E. (1995). Cooperative learning and enhanced commu- Press.
nication: Effects on student performance, retention, and attitudes in Kear, K., Chetwynd, F., Williams, J., & Donelan, H. (2012). Web
general chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 72, 793–797. conferencing for synchronous online tutorials: Perspectives of
doi:10.1021/ed072p793 tutors using a new medium. Computers & Education, 58,
Doukakis, S., Koutroumpa, C., Despi, O., Raffa, E., Chira, T., & 953–963. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2011.10.015
Michalopoulou, G. (2013, October). A case study of e-tutors’ train- Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal
ing program. Presented at the 2013 International Conference on guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the
Information Technology Based Higher Education and Training failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential,
Gehret et al. 45

and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41, 75–86. Rubrico, J. G. U. (2012). Computer-aided learning and task-based
doi:10.1207/s15326985ep4102_1 learning: Engaging learners in contextualizing grammar. In L. A.
Komesaroff, L. (2005). Category politics: Deaf students’ inclusion Wankel & P. Blessinger (Eds.), Cutting-edge technologies in
in the ‘‘hearing university.’’ International Journal of Inclusive higher education: Vol. 6B. Increasing student engagement and
Education, 9, 389–403. doi:10.1080/13603110500138301 retention using social technologies (pp. 179–209). Retrieved from
Lang, H. G., Biser, E., Mousley, K., Orlando, R., & Porter, J. (2004). http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/pdfplus/10.1108/S2044-
Tutoring deaf students in higher education: A comparison of bacca- 9968(2012)000006B009
laureate and sub-baccalaureate student perceptions. Journal of Deaf Simoes, L., & Gouveia, L. B. (2012). Influence of psychological vari-
Studies and Deaf Education, 9, 189–201. doi:10.1093/deafed/enh020 ables on the academic use of Facebook. In L. A. Wankel & P.
Lang, H. G., & Steely, D. (2003). Web-based science instruction for Blessinger (Eds), Cutting-edge technologies in higher education:
deaf students: What research says to the teacher. Instructional Vol. 6B. Increasing student engagement and retention using social
Science, 31, 277–298. doi:10.1023/A:1024681909409 technologies (pp. 121–158). Retrieved from http://www.emeraldin
Lissaman, R., Pomerai, S. de, & Tripconey, S. (2009). Using live, sight.com/doi/full/10.1108/S2044-9968(2012)000006B007
online tutoring to inspire post 16 students to engage with higher Stinson, M. S., Elliot, L. B., & Easton, D. (2014). Deaf/hard-of-
level mathematics. Teaching Mathematics and Its Applications, hearing and other postsecondary learners’ retention of STEM con-
28, 216–221. doi:10.1093/teamat/hrp028 tent with tablet computer-based notes. Journal of Deaf Studies and
MacDonald, J. (2006). Blended learning and online tutoring: A good Deaf Education, 19, 251–269. doi:10.1093/deafed/ent049
practice guide. Aldershot, England: Gower. Stinson, M., Liu, Y., Saur, R., & Long, G. (1996). Deaf college stu-
Marchetti, C., Foster, S., Long, G., & Stinson, M. (2012). Crossing the dents’ perceptions of communication in mainstream classes. Jour-
communication barrier: Facilitating communication in mixed nal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 1, 40–51.
groups of deaf and hearing students. Journal of Postsecondary Truong, M., & Zanzucchi, A. (2012). Going beyond the traditional
Education and Disability, 25, 51–63. essay: How new technologies are transforming student engage-
Marschark, M., Pelz, J. B., Convertino, C., Sapere, P., Arndt, M. E., & ment with writing outcomes. In L. A. Wankel & P. Blessinger
Seewagen, R. (2005). Classroom interpreting and visual informa- (Eds.), Cutting-edge technologies in higher education: Vol. 6B.
tion processing in mainstream education for deaf students: Live or Increasing student engagement and retention using social technol-
Memorex 1 ? American Educational Research Journal, 42, ogies (pp. 263–288). Retrieved from http://www.emeraldinsight.
727–761. com/doi/full/10.1108/S2044-9968(2012)000006B012
McPherson, M., & Nunes, M. B. (2004). The role of tutors as a integral Tsuei, M. (2014). Mathematics synchronous peer tutoring system for
part of online learning support. European Journal of Open, Dis- students with learning disabilities. Journal of Educational Tech-
tance and E-learning, 7(1). nology & Society, 17, 115–127.
Miller, M. D. (2014). Minds online: Teaching effectively with U.S. Department of Education. (n.d.). Science, technology, engineer-
technology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. ing and math: Education for global leadership. Retrieved March 3,
Minderhout, V., & Loertscher, J. (2007). Lecture-free biochemistry. 2016, from http://www.ed.gov/stem
Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, 35, 172–180. doi: Vasquez, E., & Slocum, T. A. (2012). Evaluation of synchronous
10.1002/bmb.39 online tutoring for students at risk of reading failure. Exceptional
O’Hanlon, C. (2007). Board certified. T.H.E. Journal, 34, 30–34. Children, 78, 221–235. doi:10.1177/001440291207800205
Orlando, R., Gramly, M. E., & Hoke, J. (1997). Tutoring deaf and hard Walter, G. G. (2009). Testing the concept of a virtual alliance for
of hearing students: A report of the National Task Force on Quality postsecondary level STEM students who are deaf and hard-of-
of Services in the Postsecondary Education of Deaf and Hard of hearing: Summary of PEPNet focus groups. NTID Center on
Hearing Students. PEPNet2. Retrieved from http://www.pepnet. Access Technology. Retrieved from http://www.ntid.rit.edu/sites/
org/sites/default/files/48Tutoring Deaf and Hard of Hearing Stu default/files/cat/walterReport.pdf
dents.pdf Walter, G. G. (2010). Deaf and hard-of-hearing students in transi-
Pearson. (2016). MasteringChemistry. Retrieved March 21, 2016, tion: Demographics with an emphasis on STEM education. NTID
from http://www.pearsonmylabandmastering.com/northamerica/ Center on Access Technology. Retrieved from http://www.ntid.
masteringchemistry/ rit.edu/sites/default/files/cat/Transition demographic report 6-1-
Reed, S., Antia, S. D., & Kreimeyer, K. H. (2008). Academic status 10.pdf
of deaf and hard-of-hearing students in public schools: Student, Wankel, L. A., & Blessinger, P. (2012). New vistas in higher
home, and service facilitators and detractors. Journal of Deaf education: An introduction to using social technologies. In
Studies and Deaf Education, 13, 485–502. doi:10.1093/deafed/ L. A. Wankel & P. Blessinger (Eds.), Cutting-edge technolo-
enn006 gies in higher education: Vol. 6B. Increasing student engage-
Richardson, J. T. E. (2009). Face-to-face versus online tutoring ment and retention using social technologies (pp. 3–16).
support in humanities courses in distance education. Arts and Bingley, UK: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
Humanities in Higher Education, 8, 69–85. doi:10.1177/ Whetstone, P., Clark, A., & Flake, M. W. (2014). Teacher perceptions
1474022208098303 of an online tutoring program for elementary mathematics. Educa-
Rogers, E. M. (1995). Diffusion of innovations (4th ed.). New York, tional Media International, 51(1), 79–90. https://doi.org/10.1080/
NY: Free Press. 09523987.2013.863552.
46 Journal of Special Education Technology 32(1)

Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods. Los who are D/HH. He advises students who are D/HH in indepen-
Angeles, CA: Sage. dent biochemistry research.
Young, J. R. (2016, February 9). Boom in online tutoring means another
cost for many students. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Lisa B. Elliot is research associate professor at Rochester Insti-
Retrieved from http://chronicle.com/article/Boom-in-Online-Tutor tute of Technology. Her research involves the intersection of
ing-Means/235236 technology and education, particularly around education issues
related to students who are D/HH.
Jonathan H. C. MacDonald is a teacher at British Columbia
Author Biographies
School for the Deaf. He is an alumnus from the Master of
Austin U. Gehret is an assistant professor at Rochester Insti- Science in Secondary Education of Students who are Deaf
tute of Technology. He provides direct instruction in biotech- or Hard of Hearing program at Rochester Institute of
nology and tutoring in chemistry and biochemistry to students Technology.