Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Background

Existing research suggests that one of the challenges for teachers in persisting with innovative inquiry curricula is their difficulty scaffolding students’ transitions into technology-supported and open-ended activities. The question of whether students can effectively scaffold one another's transitions has not been previously investigated, in part, we argue, because of a predominant focus in collaborative learning research on short-term tasks and perfunctory “helping” behaviors.

Purpose

This article addresses the nature and role of students’ collaborations in learning-through-design, a technology-rich science inquiry curriculum. Within this environment, we examined emergent collaborative patterns among students, the affordances of those patterns for effective learning, and students’ reflections on their interactions. We paid particular attention to how students with varying degrees of previous experience in this curricular approach collaborated with one another.

Setting

This study took place at a university-affiliated elementary school in a West Coast urban area.

Population

Two mixed-grade classes of fourth- and fifth-grade students (n = 63) and their science teacher participated in this study. Fifth-grade students in one class had extensive experiences with learning through design during the previous year.

Practice

For 10 weeks during the fall, students in both classes learned about marine biology. During this time, they also worked in teams to create marine simulations using Logo Microworlds programming and multimedia software.

Research Design/Data Collection and Analysis

Design-based research guided the creation of the curriculum and examination of its effectiveness. Ethnographic methods, grounded theory, hermeneutics, and discourse analysis were used to collect and analyze video of student collaborations and interviews. Analysis of variance was conducted using the coded results from student interviews to determine significant differences among groups.

Results

We found that experienced fifth-graders took on many socializing functions, effectively apprenticing younger students into the practices of learning-through-design. Interviews revealed that both fourth-grade and fifth-grade students were highly reflective about their respective collaborative roles and that experienced students benefited as much as, if not more so, than inexperienced students from this arrangement.

Conclusions

Given experienced students’ strategic, effective, and thoughtful ongoing collaborations with their fourth-grade counterparts, we introduce and propose the term peer pedagogy to describe these interactions. This term and our constituent results have implications for existing research and practice with collaborative learning and project-based technology-integrated curricula, as well as for theory and scholarship on children's roles within learning communities.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Barab

, and Duffy

T. M.

(2000). From practice fields to communities of practice. In Jonassen

, and Land

(Eds.), Theoretical foundations of learning environments (pp. 25—55). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Barron

(2000). Achieving coordination in collaborative problem-solving groups. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 9, 403—436.

Barron

(2003). When smart groups fail. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12, 307—359.

Blumenfeld

, Soloway

, Marx

, Krajcik

, Guzdial

, and Palincsar

(1991). Motivating project-based learning: Sustaining the doing, supporting the learning. Educational Psychologist, 26, 369—398.

Brown

, and Campione

(1994). Guided discovery in a community of learners. In and and McGilly

(Ed.), Classroom lessons: Integrating cognitive theory and classroom practice (pp. 229—272). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Ching

C. C.

, Kafai

Y. B.

, and Marshall

(2000). Spaces for change: Gender and technology access in collaborative software design projects. Journal for Science Education and Technology, 9, 45—56.

Cohen

E. G.

(1994). Restructuring the classroom: Conditions for productive small groups. Review of Educational Research, 64, 1—35.

Collins

, Brown

J. S.

, and Newman

(1989). Cognitive apprenticeship: Teaching the crafts of reading, writing, and mathematics. In and and Resnick

(Ed.), Knowing, learning, and instruction: Essays in honor of Robert Glaser (pp. 453—494). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Cuban

(1986). Teachers and machines: The classroom use of technology since 1920. New York: Teachers College Press.

10.

Cuban

(2001). Oversold and underused: Computers in the classroom. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

11.

Erickson

(1992). Ethnographic microanalysis of interaction. In Le Compte

, Millroy

, and Preissle

(Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research in education (pp. 210—224). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

12.

Edelson

, Pea

, and Gomez

(1996). Constructivism in the collaboratory. In and and Wilson

(Ed), Constructivist learning environments: Case studies in instructional design (pp. 151—164). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology.

13.

Harel

(1991). Children designers. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

14.

Harel

, and Papert

(1990). Software design as a learning environment. Interactive Learning Environments, 1, 1—32.

15.

Hay

, and Barab

(2001). Constructivism in practice: A comparison and contrast of apprenticeship and constructionist learning environments. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 10, 281—322.

16.

Hmelo

C. E.

, Holton

D. L.

, and Kolodner

J. L.

(2000). Designing to learn about complex systems. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 9, 247—298.

17.

Hodges

D. C.

(1998). Participation as dis-identification with/in a community of practice. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 5, 272—290.

18.

Hutchins

(1996). Learning to navigate. In Chaiklin

, and Lave

(Eds.), Understanding practice: Perspectives on activity and context (pp. 35—63). New York: Cambridge University Press.

19.

Kafai

Y. B.

(1995). Minds in play: Computer game design as a context for children's learning. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

20.

Kafai

Y. B.

(2005). The classroom as living laboratory: Design-based research for understanding, comparing, and evaluating learning science through design. Educational Technology, 45, 28—33.

21.

Kafai

Y. B.

, and Ching

C. C.

(2001). Affordances of collaborative software design planning for elementary students’ science talk. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 10, 323—363.

22.

Kafai

Y. B.

, Ching

C. C.

, and Marshall

(1997). Children as designers of educational multimedia software. Computers and Education, 29, 117—126.

23.

King

L. H.

(1993). High and low achievers’ perceptions of cooperative learning in two small groups. Elementary School Journal, 93, 399—416.

24.

Kolodner

, Camp

, Crismond

, Fasse

, Gray

, and Holbrook

. (2003). Problem-based learning meets case-based reasoning in the middle-school science classroom: Putting Learning by Design™ into practice. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12, 495—457.

25.

Kolodner

, Hmelo

, and Narayanan

(1996). Problem-based learning meets case-based reasoning. In Edelson

D.C.

, and Domoshek

E.A.

(Eds.), Proceedings of ICLS 96 (pp. 300—307). Charlottesville, VA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education.

26.

Kolodner

, and Nagel

(1999). The design discussion area: A collaborative learning tool in support of learning from problem-solving and design activities. In Hoadley

, and Roschelle

(Eds.), Computer support for collaborative learning: Designing new media for a new millennium (pp. 300—307). San Francisco: UNext.com.

27.

Lave

(1996). The practice of learning. In Chaiklin

, and Lave

(Eds.), Understanding practice: Perspectives on activity and context (pp. 3—32). New York: Cambridge University Press.

28.

Lave

, and Wenger

(1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. New York: Cambridge University Press.

29.

Laverty

(2003). Hermeneutic phenomenology and phenomenology: A comparison of historical and methodological considerations. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 2(3). Retrieved August 1, 2004, from http://www.ualberta.ca/∼iiqm/backissues/2_3final/html/laverty.html

30.

Linehan

, and McCarthy

(2001) Reviewing the community of practice metaphor: An analysis of control relations in an elementary school classroom. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 8, 129—147.

31.

Marshall

(2000). Planning in context: A situated view of children's management of science projects. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California Los Angeles.

32.

Mintrop

(2001). Educating students to teach in a constructivist way: Can it all be done? Teachers College Record, 103, 207—239.

33.

National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1989). Curriculum and evaluation standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.

34.

National Research Council. (1995). National Science Education Standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

35.

Perkins

(1986). Knowledge as design. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

36.

Richmond

, and Kurth

L. A.

(1999). Moving from outside to inside: High school students’ use of apprenticeships as vehicles for entering the culture and practice of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36, 677—697.

37.

Reiser

(2004). Scaffolding complex learning: The mechanisms of structuring and problematizing student work. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13, 273—304.

38.

Ritchie

, and Rigano

(1996). Laboratory apprenticeship through a student research project. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33, 799—815.

39.

Rogoff

(1993). Observing sociocultural activity on three planes: Participatory appropriation, guided participation, and apprenticeship. In Wertsch

, del Rio

, and Alvarez

(Eds.), Sociocultural studies of mind (pp. 139—164). Boston: Cambridge University Press.

40.

Roth

W. M.

(1995). Inventors, copycats, and everyone else: The emergence of shared resources and practices as defining aspects of classroom communities. Science Education, 79, 475—502.

41.

Scardemalia

, Bereiter

, and Steinbach

(1984). Teachability of reflective processes in written composition. Cognitive Science, 8, 173—190.

42.

Schön

(1986). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York: Basic Books.

43.

Songer

(1996). Exploring learning opportunities in coordinated network-enhanced classrooms. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 5, 297—327.

44.

Strauss

, and Corbin

(1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

45.

Swing

S. R.

, and Peterson

P. L.

(1982). The relationship of student ability and small-group interaction to student achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 19, 259—274.

46.

Webb

(1980). A process-outcome analysis of learning in group and individual settings. Educational Psychologist, 15, 69—83.

47.

Webb

(1989). Peer interaction and learning in small groups. International Journal of Educational Research, 13, 21—40.

48.

Webb

, Neimer

, Chizhik

, and Sugrue

(1998). Equity issues in collaborative group assessment: Group composition and performance. American Educational Research Journal, 35, 607—651.

49.

Webb

, and Palincsar

(1996). Group processes in the classroom. In Berliner

, and Calfee

(Eds.) Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 841—873). New York: Macmillan.

50.

Wenger

(1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. New York: Cambridge University Press.

51.

Zhao

, and Frank

K. A.

(2003). Factors affecting technology uses in schools: An ecological perspective. American Educational Research Journal, 40, 807—840.

Peer Pedagogy: Student Collaboration and Reflection in a Learning-Through-Design Project

Abstract

Background

Purpose

Setting

Population

Practice

Research Design/Data Collection and Analysis

Results

Conclusions

Get full access to this article

References