o High attendance students did not perform significantly better than medium attendance students. o Attending more than 6 sessions did not lead to further grade improvement.
Improvement Trends( Predicted vs. Final Grade)
• Medium attendance students showed the best improvement in final grades compared to predictions.
• High attendance students showed little to no improvement, and in some cases, their final grades were lower than expected.
• Low attendance students had the smallest improvement, indicating that a lack of engagement with tutoring had a negative impact.
T-Test( Attended vs. Not Attended)
• T-Statistic: 1.43
• P-Value: 0.188 o Interpretation: No statistically significant difference in final grades between students who attended tutoring and those who didn’ t. o Conclusion: Simply attending more sessions did not guarantee better grades.
Correlation Analysis
• Spearman Correlation( Sessions Attended vs. Final Grade):-0.095 o Interpretation: A very weak negative correlation. o Conclusion: More tutoring sessions did not strongly correlate with better grades. o Some students who attended fewer sessions performed just as well as those who attended many.
Overall Summary
• Attending 4-6 sessions was the optimal range for improvement— students in this range showed the most grade improvement.
• Attending more than 6 sessions did not significantly improve final grades and in some cases led to lower-than-expected performance.
• Simply attending tutoring was not enough to improve performance— other factors like engagement, study habits, and individual learning styles likely played a role.
• Students with lower initial predicted grades benefited the most from tutoring, showing the highest improvement.