TerpGenius+Formative+Research+&+Proposal

media type="custom" key="23967812" by Team Giga – Patrick Campbell, Joe Stout, Olivia Outlaw, and Nathan Yang

toc =Abstract= When students decide to major in Computer Science, they will have to pass many challenging classes. If they want help in a particular class, finding a tutor can become a chore and just adds on to the stress they are already dealing with in these classes. There are resources that can help with the tutor matching process, but they do not actively inform both the tutor and the tutee that there is a match for them available. We would like to integrate these resources into one application in which both the tutor and the tutee can visit a website, find a good match for themselves, and contact that match through the website. We will conduct interviews and surveys to get our target users’ thoughts on what they think of this solution. This will benefit Computer Science students who want to find a tutor because they need help, and also assist Computer Science students who want to tutor because they might not have time for a job. Tutoring would be a quick way to earn money.

=Introduction= It is no secret that Computer Science classes can be very difficult. And not just the classes in the department but also some of the required courses in other departments as well like Mathematics. A lot of times students will declare this major with a legitimate interest in the field but just have a hard time picking up the material and end up switching to another major. On the other end of the spectrum, there are students that are actively looking for people to tutor. Whether their reason is for earning money or wanting to assist their peers, they are looking for students that are struggling to grasp the material. While there are many opportunities for students to get help, they are either not well-advertised or just not a good tutoring system. Students can either request to become a tutor or request a tutee by emailing the Undergraduate Office of Computer Science. The flaw in this system is that the database of tutors and tutees has to be manually modified all the time which makes the system prone to mistakes in the matchmaking process. Our system’s database will automatically update if a profile is added or deleted. There are also many tutor-matching websites out there, but many of them are not geared specifically towards UMD students. Moreover, some require tutors and tutees to reach out to each other. Our system will match the students together and from there the students will decide if they want to pursue their match or not.

If there was a way for the student that is looking for help and the student that is looking to do the helping to easily find each other, then it can make an impact on both of them. This is exactly what we plan to do, and we will accomplish this by making a website that allows both tutors and tutees to create a profile that specifies what they are looking for and choose their best match by looking at factors like reviews, hourly rates, and possibly even hobbies. We decided to include a section on hobbies in the user’s profile to further enhance the tutoring experience. This can help break the ice between the tutor and the tutee which in the long run can possibly create a bond between the two. The tutees' profiles will have their name, classes they are looking to be tutored in, price range they are willing to pay, hobbies, and possibly a few other pieces of information. Tutors will generally have the same information with reviews from past tutees included. The user will find a daily, updated list of the closest matches based on their preferences. If they proceed with a match, then contact information will be exchanged, and they can go from there.

=Background / Review of Past Work=

Current Tutoring System in the Computer Science Department
The Computer Science department at the University of Maryland lacks an online tutoring system that automatically matches tutors with tutees. Since 2012, undergraduate students seeking private tutoring lessons in CMSC courses have to email ugrad@cs.umd.edu with the following information:
 * Name
 * UID
 * Email
 * Phone number
 * Course(s) in need of help

An Undergraduate Office staff member searches an excel spreadsheet for a student that signed up to tutor for the same class. Once a match has been found, the staff member emails the tutee with the tutor’s contact information. It is then up to the tutor and tutee to arrange a payment plan. An example of the tutor database is shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1: An example of the tutor database that the Undergraduate Office maintains using an excel spreadsheet.

The tutor database does not keep track of when students graduate. Consequently, entries in the spreadsheet become outdated. A staff member has to manually remove tutors that (1) have moved on to a full time job; (2) no longer interested in tutoring; or (3) are not responding to emails.

The process of becoming a tutor in the Computer Science department is similar to requesting a private tutoring session. A student has to email ugrad@cs.umd.edu with the following information as shown in Figures 2 and 3:
 * Name
 * UID
 * Email
 * Phone number
 * Course(s) interested in tutoring

The student has to earn an A- or better in the Computer Science course. The cutoff was lowered from an A to A- when the University Senate passed plus/minus grading in Fall 2012 [10]. The Undergraduate Office will contact tutors via email when students are in need of a tutor for a specific CMSC course. Figure 2: An email from Savannah Renehan in 2012, requesting contact information from undergraduate students who are interested in becoming tutors.

Figure 3: An email from Savannah Renehan in 2013, requesting contact information from undergraduate students who are interested in becoming tutors.

Figure 4: An email from the Undergraduate Office in 2012, requesting a student that is interested in tutoring for CMSC131.

Figure 5: An email from the Undergraduate Office in 2012, stating that no additional tutors are needed for CMSC131.

As shown in Figures 1-5, all tutoring is coordinated via e-mail. The department does not have a system that allows students to sign up as tutees, tutors, or both. Staff members have to manually look up a prospective tutor’s transcript to make sure that an A- was earned in the CMSC course that he or she wishes to tutor. A system could be designed to automatically verify a student’s grades. Above all, the Undergraduate Office has to maintain a list of active tutors and match tutors with tutees by hand. Their workflow is tedious as shown in Figure 6.

Figure 6: A physical data flow diagram illustrating the processes behind the Undergraduate Office’s current tutoring system.

WyzAnt Tutoring
Figure 7: Home page of WyzAnt

WyzAnt, shown in Figure 7, is a website that allows people to find tutors in a general area. You may register as a tutor or a student and search for a tutor based on area of expertise, location, price, and rating. Each tutor has a profile including a picture, rating, location, short description, number of hours tutored, travel policy, background check icon, and testimonials. There is also a form on the tutor page that allows people inquire tutoring services. WyzAnt included an interesting feature on a tutor's profile: the average response time. Overall, this website focuses on many areas of tutoring but nothing as specific as courses at a university. Most of the options are expensive, and most of the tutors listed are graduate students. Our website aims for a younger audience, so tutors have a better connection with tutees and spend less money by matching with other students or graduate students [6].

Tutorspree
Figure 8: Home page of Tutorspree.

The home page of Tutorspree, as shown in Figure 8, focuses on a simpler user interface than WyzAnt. Tutorspree focuses on appealing to tutors. The tutor section has pictures, location, schooling, short description, and subjects taught. After choosing a tutor, you see a map of their location, an in-depth description about the subjects they offer tutoring in, and a button to request tutor information. There is no information about ratings, testimonials or pricing. Our website will have filtering options for all these other aspects of the tutor’s profile, allowing tutors to pick the best student for them or to match them correctly. We also want students to be able to sign up rather than apply. This website has a strict application process in order to become a tutor [9].

Course Hero
Figure 9: Home page of CourseHero

Course Hero, shown in Figure 9, is more focused on study materials rather than offering tutoring. However, it does have an application section for tutors. This is more of a question and answer system, that allows users to ask questions and have tutors respond to them. The user then picks the best answer and reviews the answer given by the tutor. You are unable to see the answers given unless you are registered. There is a fee for registration as well as a fee for asking the tutors a question. While this provides a rapid response, it’s not a comprehensive tutoring experience as we are trying to create with TerpGenius. There is a profile for certain tutors that you can request answers from specifically, but again this is focused on answers to particular questions and not a face to face tutoring experience [1].

Craigslist
Figure 10: Main page of "Lessons & Tutoring" section on Craigslist.

Craigslist, shown in Figure 10, is another tutoring resource for either tutors or tutees that functions more like a message board. This is similar to a message board posted on campus, but accessible from anywhere you have a computer. There is no rating system, no way to have testimonials unless the tutor posts that information, usually no pricing, and only an email address to contact them by. This does not help the tutor gain credibility through their services, and could be doing them a disservice. With our website we would have ratings and testimonials that would encourage a student to choose a tutor, as well as pricing information so that tutors are pricing competitively. The tutor profiles and matching services are also a huge advantage our site would have over Craigslist or other message board style websites [4].

Tutor.com
Figure 11: Home page of Tutor.com

Tutor.com, shown in Figure 11, is a website that has tutors on call for internet tutoring help. They have a subscription fee model for the tutoring and use an ‘online classroom’ to provide the tutoring. The tutors need to apply and are selected by the website staff to help the students. Our website focuses on the personal tutor-tutee relationship and believe the most effective tutoring is face to face. We also want students to be able to select their tutors rather than pay a subscription and be assigned a tutor. This way tutors and tutees can be matched based on teaching and learning styles for a more effective tutoring experience. Tutors.com also has a set list of subjects that end at high school level courses. We would like our website to focus on university communities and courses that would not be covered by this resource [5].

Club Z!
A website devoted to matching you with one of their qualified tutors, Club Z! offers in-home tutoring on most subjects. Figure 12: Home page of ClubZ!

Club Z! is a website that allows parents to be matched up with a screened tutor for their child. Nearly every subject is offered and is available for pre-k through adult students. The credibility of their tutors is the main selling point; they must possess educational degrees as well as prior tutoring experience and go through a thorough background check. Students are matched based on factors such as personality, learning preferences, and academic strengths as well as weaknesses.

The website offers a guarantee that the tutor they select will be a great match, however the only action they take if you do not like the tutor is by matching you with another. Not much of a guarantee really. Their tutors specialize in test preparation and a few other academic subjects, however there is no option available for any sort of computer science course so someone looking for help in that subject would be forced to look somewhere else. With our service we intend to cater to UMD students who wish to take courses relevant to computer science.

The primary method of contacting the site is through their phone line and by setting up a free consultation. (see Figure 12) They also offer a method of sending them a message through their website telling them that you are interested. There is no real way to find your own tutor or contact them directly without going through a non-tutor associate and that is what we hope to change with our project. If you are a tutor looking for work, you must first possess the necessary qualities Club Z is looking for such as a teaching degree, and you must also pass their background check before you have any chance at being a tutor for them. The system we hope to implement would not be as rigid for prospective tutors, their performance would be dictated by their rating and they would not be hidden to the tutee throughout the process [7].

Tutor Hunt
TutorHunt is a web service that originally started in the UK and has recently expanded to the US. Figure 13: Home page page of TutorHunt.

A tutor-searching website that allows students to browse and search for tutors in their area and vice versa. Either party is able to make a viewable profile with relevant information, short bios, and even upload photos to a gallery. With the click of a button one can contact a tutor to arrange a meeting or to become a fan, displaying gratitude for good tutoring. Some nice features include the ability to search for tutors by location as well as by subject, being able to browse tutors without having an account, and broad subjects such as IT with sub-tiered classes like computer graphics or C++. It is also very intuitive to get going from their main page; you are either going to want a tutor or a student so both “Join Now” buttons are presented and clearly defined as shown in Figure 13.

While exploring the site I ran into a few bugs; many links lead to 404 errors and I was unable to view the tutors available in Maryland. Another large issue with the site is the fact that hardly anyone in the US is actually using it. The US version is fairly new and having been created in the UK it is very likely there are more registered users there. Compared to the US, the UK is a smaller concentrated region which leads to more users from the UK looking for tutors near them. When a service such as this is available nationwide the potential user base is far greater, however the range is so large that it is unlikely you will find someone in your local area so people look elsewhere. Our service would address this issue by being centralized to UMD only, so the potential user base is more likely to find a tutor near them, and so they have more incentive to sign up. One is more likely to make an account to a social media site if they don’t consider it to be barren.

The other main issue with the site is the lack of feedback for the tutor. Currently the only way for a student to give recognition to their tutor for a job well done is to become a fan of theirs or add them to their list of favorites. Not everyone will feel required to do this and adding a person to a list of your “favorites” may seem like a more committed act to some, adding to the reluctance of giving the tutor feedback online. By altering this feedback system to a more classic Youtube approach, our service would allow a student user to give their tutor a rating such as 5 out of 5. This is a quick and less committed action and could leave to more tutors being rated and receiving feedback for their efforts [8].

InstaEDU
Get quick and easy tutoring from real people currently online. Figure 14: Home page of InstaEDU.

Right as the page loads one can already see that this is a great looking website. Collecting ideas off of popular websites, InstaEDU has simplistic yet eye catching design seen in Figure 14. The goal of the website is to create a service that can allow someone who is stuck on perhaps a single homework problem a way to talk it out or get an explanation without leaving their computer. A large collection of tutors who are often online means that there shouldn't be much wait time if you want an answer then and there. There are also options to get 2 hour lessons as well as weekly tutoring sessions with the same person.

Nice things about the site are that it is very easy to browse the tutors without logging into an account and you can even see whether or not they are currently online. A thumbs up / thumbs down rating system is a simple way for users to reward excellent tutoring as well as punish poor service, giving a new user a good feel for a tutor’s effectiveness. And if you are in a hurry, there is a button at the top of the page that lets you fill out 3 fields to create an incomplete account purely for the sake of asking a question. (see Figure 15) This is a very accessible feature [3].

Figure 15: Page to fill out in order to find an available tutor. However, online tutoring is not for everyone. Discussing subject matter from a book or other physical writing would prove difficult without having to say / write the entire thing out. Any missing hardware is going to severely limit the effectiveness of a tutoring session; without a scanner you cannot show the tutor a select problem on a page, without a mic you are limited to typing everything out to them, and without a webcam you cannot show them models or diagrams. Also the idea of a virtual whiteboard is novel, however drawing anything with a mouse is frustrating and tiresome and very few people actually posses a drawing tablet.

Tutor Matching Service
Looks like piazza, finds you tutors. Figure 16: Tutor matching service home page.

To me this site most closely resembled Piazza.com, from its page layout to its user profiles. The site gets you started by having you type out what school you go to, what subject you want, or which specific tutor you are looking for, making this a quick resource to pick up. (see Figure 16) There is also an entire sub-site which caters to parents letting them add credit to student accounts and more information on how they can get the most out of the website. What sets this service apart from the others is their transparent business model and dedication to student satisfaction. Here are a few points on how this website works [11]:
 * Tutors sign up for free and set their own rates. They can choose to meet in person or online.
 * Prices as low as $10 or even free. Site is only supported by 10% booking fee.
 * Students are required to rate their tutor on knowledge of material and presentation after every session.
 * After booking a tutor the student has 2 days to cancel and get their money back. The tutors must agree to this condition so therefore only those who are competent will use the service.

Indeed, this website encompasses many qualities that we would like to see in our own implementation. The main advantage that our service would have over tutormatchingservice.com is people. When I search for tutors near College Park, not only did I not get any hits, there was only a single tutor represented in all of Maryland. My only guess as to why this is would be that this may be a competitor website to the University of Maryland, or possibly that this was started at another university and has not yet caught on over here. This brings up a similar fault that tutorhunt.com (Figure 13) has; encompassing users from all across America sounds good at first but you are less likely to be near someone in your local area.

Tutor Bungalow
A questionable tutoring marketplace claiming to remove the middle man. Figure 17: Tutor Bungalow home page.

This website is a good example of a poorly implemented tutor-service that we are trying to improve upon. Once the site has been explored a little it becomes obvious that it has more fluff to it than substance. It’s use of CSS and stock imagery are pleasing to the eye (see Figure 17), but I was only able to find one discernible feature. It has a search bar where you can enter the course you’re looking for and a place for your zip code. This “feature” would prove useless to any University of Maryland student however because not a single tutor was found for the 10 classes I tried, even 40 miles away. Figure 18: Photos seen on the Tutor Bungalow There is no way to browse tutors, students, administrators, any human beings at all other than the stock photos littering every other page (see Figure 18). The lack of a browsing feature makes me question whether or not anyone else in the world actually uses this website, and I think most other students would be asking the same question. Their business model is seedy as well; they claim to eliminate the middle man by having the tutors charge their own fees, however a “non-featured” tutor requires a student to pay the site $20 for the first hour. Rather than removing the middle man they just gave him a separate job altogether [2].

=Target Users= Our target users are male and female university students between the age of 17-26 who need a tutor or who want to tutor others. Our design allows the students that strictly want to tutor others, students looking for a tutor, and students to assume tutor and tutee. While we will eventually like to expand our audience scope, we want to focus initially on the University of Maryland Computer Science undergraduate and graduate students. This will allow us to have a comprehensive list of courses and focus our launch in an area we are all familiar with. We would also like teaching assistants from different sections be able to search for tutors by course so they can recommend them to students who need them (for example the student cannot make the office hours provided by the teaching assistant). This leaves our primary users to be tutors, tutees, and tutors who are also tutees for different courses. Our secondary users are teaching assistants, professors, or parents of a student in need of a tutor.

For the semester project, we narrowed down our primary users to two groups:
 * 1) Undergraduate students in UMD Computer Science that would like to tutor CMSC courses;
 * 2) Undergraduate students in UMD Computer Science that would like private tutoring sessions for specific CMSC courses.

=Formative User Research=

Introduction to method
For our first method we decided to conduct interviews with our target users. To do this we came up with 10 questions to ask them and not only did we write down their answers, but also any other thoughts they voiced while answering the question (if any). By doing this method, we are able to hear from the users themselves exactly what they want and do not want in a tutor pairing system. Conducting interviews not only helps us come up with ideas for the design of our solution, but it also helps us to try to think in the mindset of our users. We tried to make some questions open-ended so they have room to state their thoughts and feelings toward why they chose the answer.

Participants
As shown in Table 1, our participants for this interview were all Computer Science majors, both male and female, and they ranged from being undergraduate sophomores to graduate students. Some participants were asked to participate in an interview at a meeting for the Association of Women in Computing (AWC) and other participants were randomly picked computer science majors. The reason the AWC members were asked to participate is because they encourage the underclassmen in the club to seek help from the upperclassmen and the upperclassmen are encouraged to give the help. Every Thursday they hold a meeting for this purpose called Code, Question, Cvetch (CQK) which is time set aside for anyone in the club to seek help from upperclassmen. Since there are people in this club either looking to be tutors or looking to be tutees, we figured this was a good place to start. The reason we decided to randomly pick the other participants is because we wanted to hear from people who have the same options for getting help (and looking to help) as the general population of UMD computer science majors, which is either office hours or emails/flyers. This helps us gather information about what the average UMD computer science student thinks about the current ways of giving/receiving help with a class. Table 1: Participant table for the interviews
 * ** Person ID ** || ** Interview Length (mins.) ** || ** Major ** || ** Gender ** || ** Year ** || ** Tutor/Tutee ** ||
 * 1 || 10 || Computer Science || Female || Senior || Neither ||
 * 2 || 5 || Computer Science || Female || Senior || Tutor ||
 * 3 || 5 || Computer Science || Female || Sophomore || Tutor ||
 * 4 || 5 || Computer Science || Female || Senior || Both ||
 * 5 || 3 || Computer Science || Female || Graduate Student || Tutor ||
 * 6 || 15 || Computer Science || Female || Graduate Student || Tutor ||
 * 7 || 7 || Computer Science || Female || Senior || Tutee ||
 * 8 || 5 || Computer Science || Male || Senior || Tutor ||
 * 9 || 5 || Computer Science || Male || Senior || Tutor ||
 * 10 || 10 || Computer Science || Male || Graduate Student || Both ||
 * 11 || 5 || Computer Science || Male || Senior || Tutee ||

Procedure
Some of the interviews were conducted right after an AOL resume workshop. They were back to back and each took no more than five minutes. We just walked up to people that did not look busy and asked them to help us out with an interview. We also went to the undergrad lounge and asked people there too. Those interviews also took around five minutes. The interviews that took longer than five minutes were due to the interviewee trying to do multiple things at once and our interview was one of them. The initial questions that were not a part of the interview that we asked were “what major and year are you?” so that we could record the demographic information. There were a combination of both questions that required a one word answer and open-ended questions. The question “are you interested in being tutored or being a tutor?” is an example of a question that just required a one word answer. The question “do you know of any other tutor pairing systems on the UMD campus? If so, what issues do find with it?” is an example of an open-ended question we asked our participants.

Data and Analytical Method
For the interviews, we collected data by writing down the participants’ responses to the questions as they were speaking. We wrote down everything they said in between questions even if it contradicted with their final answer. We synthesized the data by posting the interview questions and answers on a shared google doc, that way each of us could look at the data and post whatever thoughts we had on the doc.

Introduction to Method
We used surveys as the second formative research method because they are effective at collecting data from a wide range of people with different backgrounds. Survey research is also inexpensive to conduct. A majority of the surveys were filled out online, so it only required a Google account to create a form, and the Internet was the medium used to send out invitations to the survey. We used websites such as Facebook, Reddit, and Piazza to ask friends to take the survey. Email was also used to distribute the surveys to undergraduate students at the University of Maryland, College Park. The other surveys were conducted using paper and pen.

Participants
Each team member sent out links to the online survey to friends and members of on-campus organizations. We did not limit the participants to only Computer Science students. There are many students that have taken Computer Science courses but are from different majors. The only constraint is that they have to be an undergraduate student at the University of Maryland, College Park. The paper surveys were handed out to CMSC131 students since Nathan is an undergraduate TA for that course. CMSC131 students may be interested in an online tutoring system as Java may be the first programming language that they are learning. Table 2 depicts the demographics of the survey respondents.

Table 2: Participant table for the surveys
 * ** Survey ID ** || ** Age ** || ** Gender ** || ** Class Level ** || ** Major ** ||
 * 1 || 18 || Male || Freshman || Computer Science ||
 * 2 || 21 || Male || Senior || Computer Science ||
 * 3 || 21 || Male || Senior || Computer Engineering ||
 * 4 || 21 || Male || Senior || Electrical Engineering ||
 * 5 || 19 || Female || Sophomore || Computer Science ||
 * 6 || 22 || Male || Senior || Computer Science ||
 * 7 || 22 || Male || Senior || Electrical Engineering ||
 * 8 || 20 || Male || Junior || Computer Engineering ||
 * 9 || 21 || Male || Senior || Computer Science ||
 * 10 || 22 || Female || Graduated in Spring 2013 || Aerospace Engineering ||
 * 11 || 20 || Male || Junior || Computer Science ||
 * 12 || 21 || Male || Senior || Computer Engineering ||
 * 13 || 20 || Female || Junior || Mathematics ||
 * 14 || 20 || Female || Junior || Computer Science ||
 * 15 || 19 || Male || Junior || Physics ||
 * 16 || 22 || Female || Graduated in Spring 2013 || Computer Engineering ||
 * 17 || 21 || Male || Senior || Electrical Engineering ||
 * 18 || 22 || Male || Senior || Aerospace Engineering ||
 * 19 || 19 || Male || Sophomore || Computer Science ||
 * 20 || 20 || Male || Junior || Computer Engineering ||
 * 21 || 19 || Male || Junior || Mathematics ||
 * 22 || 22 || Male || Senior || Mathematics ||
 * 23 || 21 || Male || Senior || Computer Science ||
 * 24 || 21 || Male || Senior || Physics ||
 * 25 || 18 || Male || Freshman || Computer Science ||
 * 26 || 21 || Female || Junior || Biology ||
 * 27 || 18 || Female || Sophomore || Computer Science ||
 * 28 || 19 || Male || Junior || Computer Science ||
 * 29 || 19 || Female || Freshman || Computer Science ||
 * 30 || 20 || Male || Junior || Computer Science ||
 * 31 || 20 || Male || Junior || Computer Science ||
 * 32 || 17 || Male || Freshman || Computer Science ||
 * 33 || 19 || Male || Sophomore || Computer Science ||
 * 34 || 18 || Female || Freshman || Computer Science ||
 * 35 || 20 || Male || Junior || Computer Science ||
 * 36 || 20 || Male || Junior || Biology ||
 * 37 || 21 || Female || Junior || Computer Science ||
 * 38 || 22 || Male || Senior || Computer Science ||
 * 39 || 24 || Male || Super Senior || Computer Science ||
 * 40 || 21 || Male || Senior || Computer Science ||

media type="custom" key="23968750" Figure 19: The distribution of class level among the survey respondents.

media type="custom" key="23968756" Figure 20: The distribution of gender among the survey respondents.

media type="custom" key="23968760" Figure 21: The distribution of college major among the survey respondents.

media type="custom" key="23968858"

Figure 22: Age distribution among the survey respondents.

Figures 20 and 21 reveal that the majority of the survey respondents were male, undergraduate Computer Science students. Most were juniors and seniors between the age of 18-23 (see Figures 19, and 22). Approximately 30% of the surveys were taken by students who majored outside of Computer Science (see Figure 21).

Procedure
The majority of the surveys were conducted online. Joe posted a link on Piazza asking fellow CMSC434 students to take the survey. Nathan started a Reddit thread under /r/UMD with a link to the Google form. Patrick sent out an email to all of his fraternity members asking them to complete the survey. All of the team members used Facebook and email contacts to disperse the survey link. The paper surveys were handed out in Nathan’s CMSC131 discussion section. They were collected at the end of the lab period and manually entered into the Google form. We collectively spent around 2-3 hours conducting the survey research.

Some examples of the survey questions include:
 * Are you satisfied with the tutoring options provided on campus?
 * Have you studied under a tutor before?
 * How do you find tutors?
 * Would you use an online tutoring system that helps you find tutors for specific CS courses?
 * Would you use an online tutoring system to advertise your tutoring service (paid or unpaid)?
 * Would you use a tutoring system that offers free tutoring?
 * If you had to pay for a tutor, what would be a reasonable hourly rate?
 * If you were to become a tutor, how much would you charge per hour?
 * What features would you like in an online tutoring system that helps you find tutors or advertise your tutoring service?

Data and Analytical Method
Before collecting data, the group brainstormed a series of questions that would best capture where, when, how, and why undergraduate students seek tutoring support. Most of the questions can be answered with a simple “Yes” or “No.” We only included two short answer questions to avoid having respondents close out of the survey due to its length. Google forms helped us collect data from the surveys. Only results from the paper survey had to be manually entered into the Google form.

Google forms helped us synthesize the survey results into one comma-separated values (CSV) file. To better visualize the data rather than looking at a table with a series of responses, we used Highcharts to transform the data into different types of charts ranging from pie charts to bar charts. The generated charts helped us identify trends and behaviors among undergraduate students as it pertains to tutoring.

=Formative User Research Results=

Interests by Role
media type="custom" key="23969244" Figure 23: A breakdown of roles that interview respondents are interested in: tutor, tutee, or neither.

The chart in Figure 23 gives us a rough idea on what most of our users would want to do. It looks like generally more people would rather tutor than be tutored. From this we gather that it is probably going to be easier to find matches for tutees than tutors. We can use this information to try to modify our matching algorithm so that finding matches for tutors can be just as easy as finding matches for tutees no matter how different the numbers are.

Wanted Features
media type="custom" key="23969282" Figure 24: The primary features that interview respondents want in an online tutoring system.

Figure 24 tells us the main features our target users would look for in a tutor pairing system. From this we can develop new ideas towards our project design to try to align what they want with what our overall goal is. The more of what they want that we give them, the more likely our target users would prefer our solution over others.

Type of Help Preferred
media type="custom" key="23969334" Figure 25: The type of help that interview respondents prefer for their CMSC courses.

Figure 25 lets us know that right now our users would rather go to office hours than use a tutor. In the interviews some of our participants elaborated on this and told us that the reason they would prefer office hours is because it is more convenient for them. What this tells us is that because searching for a tutor can be a hassle, they settle for the option that gives them less of a hassle. So we need to make sure our final product makes it as hassle-free for the users as possible.

Satisfaction of Tutoring Options on Campus
media type="custom" key="23969424"

Figure 26: Range of satisfaction of tutoring options on campus among survey respondents.

Surprisingly, Figure 26 revealed that most survey respondents were not aware of tutoring options on campus. The campus may not have instructed students on how to get additional help outside of office hours. Of the subset that was aware of tutoring options on campus, the majority were satisfied with existing solutions. This reveals that our online tutoring system needs to be well advertised throughout campus. We can get in touch with the Office of Admissions to see if they can help publicize TerpGenius. It would also be helpful to have the Computer Science department sponsor the tutoring system to help get word out. We also have to make sure that our online tutoring system is better than existing campus solutions in terms of convenience, ease of use, and other metrics.

Finding Tutors
media type="custom" key="23969540" Figure 27: Methods that survey respondents utilize to find tutors.

A majority of the survey respondents had never searched for a tutor before, as shown in Figure 27. Perhaps they were able to get all of the help they needed from office hours. In combination with Figure 26, it could also mean that they did not know that tutoring options existed on campus. Of the respondents that did search for a tutor in the past, most used word of mouth, school flyers, or search engines. The online tutoring system has to effectively match tutees and tutors in order to spread its brand. School flyers could also be useful. We could pass out flyers about the tutoring website in large lecture halls. Search engine optimization can also be used to boost TerpGenius's rankings on popular search engines such as Google, Yahoo, and Bing.

Free Tutoring
media type="custom" key="23969602" Figure 28: A breakdown of whether or not survey respondents would use a tutoring system that offers complimentary tutoring.

We discovered that most survey respondents would actually use an online tutoring system if it offered free tutoring (see Figure 28). This could help differentiate TerpGenius from other commercial websites. Existing solutions either offer paid tutoring or tutoring from a volunteer center but not both. TerpGenius can offer the freedom for users to pick volunteer tutors or paid tutors, depending on their budget. media type="custom" key="23967994"

Desired Features
The survey respondents provided many useful ideas that we can include in our prototype of TerpGenius. They provided the following list of features based on the question " What features would you like in an online tutoring system that helps you find tutors or advertise your tutoring service?":
 * Ease of use, clean navigation
 * Live chat
 * Scheduling appointments
 * Distance between tutor and tutee
 * Ratings, reviews, and comments for both tutors and tutees
 * Display tutors by CMSC course, availability, fees, level of strengths in subjects and programming languages, previous experience
 * Auto-scheduling, matching based on tutor and tutees' schedules
 * Tutees have to explain what exactly they want to work on and not expect the tutors to do everything for them
 * Personality tests to match tutors and tutees who share similar learning styles
 * Free trial to test the online tutoring system
 * Online payment system
 * Tutors with connections with professors
 * Display list of courses that tutor took including professor name and letter grade

=Conclusion= Our results from the interviews show us that more people seem to want to be the tutor than be the tutee with the right incentive. We also found that when it comes to features, our target users seem to really like the idea of having a tutor review system to shed a little light on the history of that tutor. Knowing the history of the tutor seemed to be a very important to most participants so getting the review system should be at the top of the list of features or project will have. We also found that more people prefer to go to office hours than find a tutor. This is most likely because when people think of finding a tutor they think of having to do research in order to find the right tutor. If they were presented with a much easier way in finding a tutor, they might change their mind. The survey results revealed that many undergraduate students do not search for tutors since they are not aware of the options that exist on campus. TerpGenius could help fill this void by showing students how easy it is to match up with a tutor or tutee online. With an online tutoring system, they no longer have to email ugrad@cs.umd.edu and wait several days just to get the contact information of a tutor or tutee. TerpGenius can serve as a more efficient method of finding or giving help in the Computer Science department.

The background research we performed on the many tutor matching websites shows that they simply do not provide the personal college level experience that TerpGenius will provide. There were many that had similar tutor reviewing systems and testimonials, but never specific class tutoring, competitive pricing models, and worked on the premise of students helping other students. A majority of the tutors will have taken the courses they are tutoring for, not just have a general knowledge of computer science like the tutors on these websites. The matching system will take the guesswork out of finding a compatible tutor for someone using TerpGenius. They will be able to find a dependable, reviewed tutor with expertise in the information they are struggling with at a price they are willing to pay. Our project will provide the best tutoring resource on campus for those in need.

=References=
 * 1) "Course Hero | Study Guides, Lecture Notes, Flashcards, Practice Exams, Lecture Videos | The best way to expand your education ." // Course Hero | Study Guides, Lecture Notes, Flashcards, Practice Exams, Lecture Videos | The best way to expand your education // . Retrieved October 1, 2013, from @http://www.coursehero.com/tutors/
 * 2) In Home Tutoring - Private Lessons - Local Tutors | Tutor Bungalow. (n.d.). In Home Tutoring - Private Lessons - Local Tutors | Tutor Bungalow. Retrieved October 1, 2013, from http://www.tutorbungalow.com/
 * 3) InstaEDU | Online Tutors | Homework Help On-demand. (n.d.). InstaEDU | Online Tutors | Homework Help On-demand. Retrieved October 1, 2013, from http://instaedu.com/
 * 4) "Maryland Lessons and Tutoring." // Craigslist // . N.p., n.d. Web. 30 Sept. 2013. <@http://washingtondc.craigslist.org/mld/lss/>.
 * 5) Online Tutoring, Homework Help and Test Prep in Math, Science, and English - Tutor.com. (n.d.). // Online Tutoring, Homework Help and Test Prep in Math, Science, and English - Tutor.com // . Retrieved October 1, 2013, from @http://www.tutor.com/
 * 6) Tutoring, Wyzant. "Find a Private Tutor." // Wyzant // . N.p., n.d. Web. 30 Sept. 2013. <@http://www.wyzant.com/>.
 * 7) Tutoring & Tutor Services | Club Z! Private, In-Home, One on One Tutors. (n.d.). // Tutoring & Tutor Services | Club Z! Private, In-Home, One on One Tutors // . Retrieved October 1, 2013, from http://clubztutoring.com/
 * 8) Tutor Hunt - Find Private Tutors | Home Tutors. (n.d.). // Tutor Hunt - Find Private Tutors | Home Tutors // . Retrieved October 1, 2013, from http://us.tutorhunt.com/
 * 9) Tutorspree - Find great private tutors. (n.d.). // Tutorspree - Find great private tutors // . Retrieved October 1, 2013, from @http://www.tutorspree.com/
 * 10) University of Maryland | Testudo | Plus/Minus Grading. (n.d.). // TESTUDO | Office of the Registrar // . Retrieved September 30, 2013, from @http://www.testudo.umd.edu/plusminusimplementation.html
 * 11) Use, C. o. (n.d.). Home. Home. Retrieved October 1, 2013, from http://www.tutormatchingservice.com/

=Appendix A. Original Elevator Pitch and Amendments=

Problem Background/Motivation
On college campuses, there are many students seeking tutoring help, but not enough tutors to fill that demand. As a result, tutoring programs have to either limit walk-in hours or change one-on-one sessions to one-on-many sessions [2].

Particular Problem to Solve
Students need to find tutors that fit their needs, budget, and schedules. However, official tutoring positions are limited due to budget restraints [2], and private tutoring services are hard to advertise.

Taste of Past Solutions
The official UMD tutoring site provides links to other tutoring sites (like the Office of Multi-Ethnic Student Education) for each major [3].Those list walk-in hours and do not guarantee tutor availability. A previous CMSC434 app focuses on tutor ratings, much like teacher rating sites [1].

Proposed Solution and How It’s Different from Past Attempts
My solution is an app that stores tutors/tutees and displays any matches between the two, based upon the subject matter, tutoring rate, study location, and dates of availability.Unlike past solutions, this service is for one-on-one sessions, fits schedule/budget needs, focuses on a good match algorithm, and includes an in-app messaging service for online tutoring.

Target Users
UMD student tutors benefit because more people will be looking at a central location for a tutor, rather than getting the few students who walk by the tutor’s flyers. UMD tutees will benefit because they can find better tutor matches through the search filters.

Evaluation Plan
We will first design a lo-fidelity mockup of the mobile (or web)app. We will then survey students about how useful the product is, and whether they would add anything to it. We will then have lo-fidelity user-testing, and end the semester with more testing after making any changes to user feedback.

Amendments
The proposal has not seen much change in terms of the overall goal and who the target users are. However, the motivation has changed because we are not just aiming for getting enough tutors for tutees. As Figure 23 shows, there are a lot of people interested in tutoring (maybe even more than people looking for tutors). Our motivation is solving the problem of tutors and tutees not being able to easily find each other and not only finding each other but also finding the best match that suits their needs and preferences. Also, there are some implications of a mobile app in this pitch and we as a group decided to go with a website.

=Appendix B. Brainstorming= Below is a series of photographs depicting the brainstorming session that took place on Tuesday, September 17 in CMSC434.

Figure 29: Let the brainstorming session begin!

Figure 30: Joe makes an unusual face at the camera while Nathan discusses some ideas.

Figure 31: Joe discusses ideas with Patrick, while Nathan brainstorms with Olivia (the camerawoman).

Figure 32: Joe references some of the implementation ideas on the brainstorming board.

Figure 33: Patrick analyzes the ideas on the brainstorming board.

Figure 34: A list of technologies that were brainstormed to create the website.

Figure 35: A list of project names were brainstormed at the bottom. The top displays a list of technologies that could be used to prototype the website.

Figure 36: A list of features that we came up with for TerpGenius.

Figure 37: We added some examples of social networking websites.

Figure 38: The team came up with more project names.

Figure 39: The final list of technologies and project names.

Figure 40: Patrick comes up with a brand new idea while Joe listens.

=Appendix C. Raw Data from the Interviews=



=Appendix D. Raw Data from the Surveys=