Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
This article was downloaded by: [Eindhoven Technical University]On: 22 November 2014, At: 06:23Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH,UK
Computers in the Schools:Interdisciplinary Journal ofPractice, Theory, and AppliedResearchPublication details, including instructions forauthors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wcis20
Students and Support forTechnology in the ElementaryClassroomDavid M. Marcovitz a , M. Khalid Hamza b & Vicky R.Farrow ca Technology in the Educational Environment,Education Department , Loyola College in Maryland ,4501 N. Charles Street, Baltimore, MD, 21210, USAb Department of Educational Technology &Research , Florida Atlantic University , 2912 CollegeAvenue, Davie, FL, 33314, USAc Professional Pedagogy Department , LamarUniversity , Education Building, P.O. Box 10034,Beaumont, TX, 77710, USAPublished online: 11 Oct 2008.
To cite this article: David M. Marcovitz , M. Khalid Hamza & Vicky R. Farrow (2000)Students and Support for Technology in the Elementary Classroom, Computers in theSchools: Interdisciplinary Journal of Practice, Theory, and Applied Research, 16:3-4,213-225, DOI: 10.1300/J025v16n03_09
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J025v16n03_09
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all theinformation (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform.However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness,or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and viewsexpressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, andare not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of theContent should not be relied upon and should be independently verified withprimary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for anylosses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages,and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly orindirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of theContent.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes.Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan,sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone isexpressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found athttp://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Ein
dhov
en T
echn
ical
Uni
vers
ity]
at 0
6:23
22
Nov
embe
r 20
14
David M. MarcovitzM. Khalid HamzaVicky R. Farrow
Students and Supportfor Technologyin the Elementary Classroom
SUMMARY. This paper explores the roles of students supportingtechnology in elementary classrooms. Students’ primary role in theclassroom is not to support teachers, but with technology, teachers takeadvantage of support in many forms. This paper classifies the ways inwhich students were found to support technology in the classroom,taking advantage of their expertise to help the teacher and other stu-dents. In some cases, students’ efforts provided positive benefits to theteacher and other students, and in other cases, the students’ effortscaused more problems than they solved. [Article copies available for a feefrom The Haworth Document Delivery Service: 1-800-342-9678. E-mail address:<[email protected]> Website: <http://www.HaworthPress.com>]
DAVID M. MARCOVITZ is Coordinator of Technology in the Educational Environ-ment, Education Department, Loyola College in Maryland, 4501 N. Charles Street,Baltimore, MD 21210. E-mail: [email protected]. KHALID HAMZA is Assistant Professor, Department of Educational Technolo-gy & Research, Florida Atlantic University, 2912 College Avenue, Davie, FL 33314.E-mail: [email protected] R. FARROW is Assistant Professor, Professional Pedagogy Department,Lamar University, Education Building, P.O. Box 10034, Beaumont, TX 77710.E-mail: [email protected]
[Haworth co-indexing entry note]: ‘‘Students and Support for Technology in the Elementary Classroom.’’Marcovitz, David M., M. Khalid Hamza, and Vicky R. Farrow. Co-published simultaneously in Computers inthe Schools (The Haworth Press, Inc.) Vol. 16, No. 3/4, 2000, pp. 213-225; and: Integration of Technologyinto the Classroom: Case Studies (ed: D. LaMont Johnson, Cleborne D. Maddux, and Leping Liu) TheHaworth Press, Inc., 2000, pp. 213-225. Single or multiple copies of this article are available for a fee fromThe Haworth Document Delivery Service [1-800-342-9678, 9:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. (EST). E-mail address:[email protected]].
� 2000 by The Haworth Press, Inc. All rights reserved. 213
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Ein
dhov
en T
echn
ical
Uni
vers
ity]
at 0
6:23
22
Nov
embe
r 20
14
Integration of Technology into the Classroom: Case Studies214
KEYWORDS. Support for technology, ethnography, student roles
Support for technology in schools comes from a variety of sources.One area that is often overlooked is the support that teachers get fromtheir students. While students’ primary purpose is not to give supportto teachers, students do support teachers in a variety of ways that canbe beneficial to both teachers and students.
Some support that students give is small help, such as answering aquestion for another student or the teacher, who is stuck in a program.However, students can give more extensive help when they are pairedup with other students for the express purpose of helping them.
When the computer is used in a laboratory setting, the teachercannot be with every student; and, when the computer is in the class-room as one activity among several (such as for science centers), theteacher cannot direct all the activities at the same time. Knowledge-able students can fill the gap in informal ways, such as answeringquestions as they arise, and in more formal ways, such as being as-signed to teach other students.
While students helping other students can be useful to both thestudent being helped and the helper, it can be problematic as well.Students do not always know how to give adequate help to their peers.Sometimes the helper just wants to play with the computer, ignoringthe needs of the other students, and sometimes the helper does thework himself while the one being helped just sits and watches. Stu-dents are always close at hand, but they are not always there to behelpers, and they do not always know how to help.
The case study presented here looked at a public elementary schoolin the Midwest. It focused on three teachers for parts of two schoolyears (all of the names in this paper are pseudonyms to protect partici-pant anonymity):
1. Sarah–a teacher who has been using computers in her classroomfor a few years
2. Cindy–a teacher who has been using computers in her classroomfor nearly a year
3. Jennifer–a teacher who has just started using computers in herclassroom this year
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Ein
dhov
en T
echn
ical
Uni
vers
ity]
at 0
6:23
22
Nov
embe
r 20
14
Research 215
While these three teachers do not cover the entire range of computeruse in schools, this variation provided understanding of support fromthe perspectives of three teachers who seem to be at different places onHall and Hord’s (1987) levels of use and stages of concern scales. Inaddition to the three primary participants, other classes in the schoolwere observed and other teachers were interviewed informally (in-cluding Nora, a third- and fourth-grade teacher).
All three of the teachers taught both third and fourth grades. Jen-nifer taught only fourth grade during the first school year of thestudy, and she taught only third grade during the second school yearof the study. Sarah and Cindy taught mixed third- and fourth-gradeclasses.
Each of the three classrooms had one color Macintosh LC II or LCIII computer, and all the computers were attached to the school’s localarea network, which has Internet access.
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY:ETHNOGRAPHY, CASE STUDYAND SITUATED-EVALUATION
This paper is based on a larger study that combined methods ofethnography, case study, and situated-evaluation, incorporating inter-pretations of the experiences of the participants to build an under-standing of what was observed and how it relates to support forinnovation. In parts of two school years, the investigator spent severalhours each week at an elementary school observing classes, talkinginformally to teachers, interviewing teachers, and attending schooland district technology committee meetings. The study was an explo-ration of the culture of the school, how technology fit into that cul-ture, and how various members of the school supported technology.
The qualitative methodology was shaped by situated-evaluation(Bruce, 1993). In situated-evaluation, innovations are viewed as partof existing situations. Instead of viewing the innovation, or support inthe case of this study, as a separate entity, it was viewed as a part of theexisting social system.
In reality, the innovation is but one small addition to a complexsocial system. Instead of seeing it as the primary instrument of
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Ein
dhov
en T
echn
ical
Uni
vers
ity]
at 0
6:23
22
Nov
embe
r 20
14
Integration of Technology into the Classroom: Case Studies216
change, it is better to see it as a tool that is incorporated intoongoing processes of change. (Bruce, 1993, p. 17)
Situated-evaluation is an important way to look at support becauseit helps us understand why support does not always meet its objec-tives. A situated-evaluation approach might find that the support wasinadequate because the designers of the support did not account for thecontexts and constraints of the situation, or it might bring about abetter understanding of how the situation and the support interact toprovide different, not necessarily better or worse, support than whatwas originally intended.
RESEARCH PROCEDURES
In this ethnographic study, new models for support and innovationwere developed by looking closely at support for technology and theuse of technology in three third- and fourth-grade classes. Most of thetime was spent with these three classes and their teachers: Sarah,Jennifer, and Cindy. Data were collected from four sources: interviewsof teachers, informal conversations, observations of classes, and ob-servations of meetings.
Interviews provided the opportunity to discuss some of the issues indetail. Each of the main participants was interviewed once at thebeginning of the study to understand her situation and at least oncemore as topics came up that required more in-depth discussion thaninformal conversations allowed. Informal conversations allowed theopportunity to discuss issues as they arose, keep informed aboutevents, and maintain an ongoing relationship with the informants.These took place regularly throughout the study, often during recess orother class breaks. Observation of classes provided the opportunity toobserve the teachers’ issues and needs in action and observe studentsin their various roles. Each of the classes of the three main participantswere observed on average once per week. Other classes using thecomputer laboratory were also observed. Meetings on the school anddistrict level allowed the opportunity to observe teachers interactingwith one another, discussing their needs, and in some cases, actingupon their needs. All the sources of data also provided the opportunityto observe students in their various roles.
Detailed notes were taken during observations. These notes wereexpanded each day. Notes were analyzed and coded for emergent
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Ein
dhov
en T
echn
ical
Uni
vers
ity]
at 0
6:23
22
Nov
embe
r 20
14
Research 217
themes and patterns. The importance of student support emerged fromthis analysis, and this led to the categories of student support describedbelow.
CATEGORIES OF STUDENT SUPPORT
The multiple observations of students giving support were com-bined into the following categories: playing, sharing, reading, smallhelp, becoming expert, teaching, other. Reading, small help, andteaching involve direct support from a student to either a student or ateacher. Sharing and becoming expert involve indirect support thatstudents give. Playing includes times that the elementary studentsoffered support in order to play.
Playing
Elementary students spend a lot of time playing, and many of themlike to play on the computer. Often the help they offer is an attempt toplay rather than to help.
After a couple of minutes, the [Macintosh] LC III group quit, andJason got onto the LC III and started playing with the EcoExplor-er. He played with the simulator trying to keep the plant alive fora couple of minutes. Then he went to the song compositionsection. He couldn’t figure out how to make a song. He needed todrag the sounds from a menu on the left into his workspace onthe right for them to be added to his composition. He was justclicking on them (not dragging them) so the sound would play,but it was not added to the composition.
Frank came over and said, ‘‘Let’s play the game.’’ Jason stillwanted to make a song. ‘‘How do you make a song?’’ Frank said,‘‘I’ll show you,’’ and he took the mouse and said, ‘‘after we playthe game.’’
Frank went to the rainforest game. Jason still wanted to make asong. They fought for the mouse, and Frank won. He started thegame. After a minute, Jason got into the game and didn’t com-plain about wanting to make a song. In the game, you have toanswer some questions, more or less related to the rainforest(e.g., unscramble a word like ‘‘ecology,’’ answer a multiple-
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Ein
dhov
en T
echn
ical
Uni
vers
ity]
at 0
6:23
22
Nov
embe
r 20
14
Integration of Technology into the Classroom: Case Studies218
choice question about where most of the nutrients are in therainforest, or choose the correct numbered vine that will take youwhere you want to go–I think this was just a matter of guessing).After one or two questions, Jason was into the game, and Frankgave him the mouse to answer a question. (Fieldnotes, Cindy’sclassroom, May 11, 1993)
The computer was new to many students, and it was an attractive toy.This was not discouraged because the games (such as EcoExplorer,MathBlaster, Where in the World Is Carmen Sandiego?, InnerBodyWorks, and The Incredible Machine) were selected for their presumededucational value. However, in the context of students helping stu-dents, playing could be a problem when one student was looking forhelp, and the helper was looking to play with the computer.
The computer also served as a great source of distraction to manystudents. Marcus was a good example of this.
Marcus came over several times. He tried to help them withseveral things. Cindy [the teacher] called him away to do spell-ing, but he stayed by the computer to give them more advice.Cindy called him again, ‘‘Marcus, this is the third time.’’ He wentwith her. But Cindy went back to her desk for a minute, andMarcus went back to the computer. (Fieldnotes, Cindy’s class-room, February 28, 1994)
Marcus, in particular, liked to avoid his other classwork by going overto the computer and trying to help other students.
Sharing
Sometimes students offer support by sharing their experiences withthe rest of the class as in the following example.
Sarah [the teacher] had all the kids gather in a circle. She saidthat one of the kids (Ken) had run into some problems, and shewanted to talk about it and show what he did to solve the prob-lem. He had created his stack, but he wasn’t able to get a newcard or a new stack or a new field. He described the problem;Sarah explained what he was saying. Sally (a volunteer withSarah’s after-school class) showed them how to get around the
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Ein
dhov
en T
echn
ical
Uni
vers
ity]
at 0
6:23
22
Nov
embe
r 20
14
Research 219
problem. She had them start HyperCard through the HyperCardapplication, and then select Open Stack to open Ken’s stack.Then they could script. If they just double-clicked on Ken’sstack, they could not script. They suspected the problem hadsomething to do with HyperCard Player, but they weren’t sure.(Fieldnotes, Sarah’s after-school program, October 26, 1993)
One of Sarah’s students had run into a problem that she thought othersmight encounter. After they solved the problem, Sarah had the studentshare the solution with the class. Whether it was the teacher, thevolunteer, or the student who solved the problem was unclear, but thestudent was actively involved with presenting the solution.
This was part of Sarah’s after-school class in which she workedwith third-grade students on a HyperCard project. Overall, no one hada lot of experience with HyperCard, so the class spent a lot of timeexploring and learning about it. In this exploratory environment, shar-ing was important–including students sharing with each other and theteacher, and the teacher sharing with the students.
Reading
Many of the computer activities involved a great deal of reading. Asthird- and/or fourth-grade teachers, Sarah, Cindy, and Jennifer hadstudents at a variety of levels of reading, including some who had agreat deal of trouble reading instructions on the computer.
At 10:06 a.m., Sarah started talking to the class about OregonTrail. She assigned partners to some of the slower readers. (Field-notes, Sarah’s class at the university computer laboratory, Sep-tember 23, 1993)
Cindy said they were about ready to get started, and the kidsstarted to head to the computers. She stopped them and wasmildly upset. When they settled back into their seats, she re-viewed how to get to the tutorial, and she assigned partners tosome of the slower readers. (Fieldnotes, Cindy’s class at theuniversity computer laboratory, September 30, 1993)
At 9:29 a.m., she reviewed how to get to Microsoft Word. Sheasked people to work with others if they had trouble reading. She
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Ein
dhov
en T
echn
ical
Uni
vers
ity]
at 0
6:23
22
Nov
embe
r 20
14
Integration of Technology into the Classroom: Case Studies220
made sure some kids had partners. (Fieldnotes, Cindy’s class atthe university computer laboratory, October 5, 1993)
In some situations, the teacher or another adult (volunteer, studentteacher) helped some of the slower students with the reading, but thiscan be draining on the adults’ time. As in these examples, someteachers have found that pairing slower readers with faster readersallows the adults to spend more time with other problems. Theseexamples are from laboratory situations, but this kind of support canbe very effective in the classroom as well. Often the teacher is workingwith a group of students and cannot spend the time to work with astudent on the computer.
Small Help
Small help refers to the small ways that students help other studentsor the teacher, usually by answering a question or showing how to dosomething on the computer. Students working on the computer willoften get stuck with a problem. Other students are always around,some of whom might know the solution to the problem.
One student didn’t know how to change the names in the party[in the game Oregon Trail]. The volunteer did not know either.The parent said, ‘‘She made it turn red. How did she do that?’’ Akid at the next computer showed them how to do it. (Fieldnotes,Nora’s class at the university computer laboratory, September 28,1993)
By 11:07 a.m., about half the kids were in Oregon Trail. Manykids gave other kids pointers in Oregon Trail, but Cindy nevershowed the game to the class at all. She was too busy checkingall the paragraphs [they had just typed] and helping the kids save.(Fieldnotes, Cindy’s class at the university computer laboratory,October 5, 1993)
One of the options for erasing [in KidPix] is the firecracker.Jennifer tried to show them this option, but she couldn’t get it towork. She clicked on the eraser on the left, and then she clickedon the firecracker on the bottom, but nothing happened. Shedidn’t realize that once she selected the firecracker tool, she had
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Ein
dhov
en T
echn
ical
Uni
vers
ity]
at 0
6:23
22
Nov
embe
r 20
14
Research 221
to click on the screen to get it to erase. One of the kids pointedthis out to her, and she said ‘‘Oh, yeah,’’ and then showed it tothe rest of the class. (Fieldnotes, Jennifer’s class at the universitycomputer laboratory, October 20, 1993)
Often students become experts or at least knowledgeable helpers andcan answer small questions. Although none were observed in theseclasses, many times students become technical experts, answeringquestions about configuring software and setting up equipment (mat-ters beyond help with how to play an educational game). Students withexpertise at all levels can be very helpful due to their proximity; theyare very close to the situation where help is needed and, in some cases,even closer than the teacher.
Small help has its drawbacks as well. Elementary students are oftenmore interested in playing than helping, and they might use offers ofsmall help to get onto the computer. An additional drawback is thatchildren are not trained as helpers or teachers, and when they are giventhe opportunity, they often give the answer or do the work for some-one rather than giving hints or explaining how it should be done.
Brad came over and said that he had won the game. He asked ifthey had. They said they were close. They asked him where theantidote was. He wouldn’t tell them. He gave them hints. Theytried again to find it and couldn’t. Finally, Brad agreed to do it forthem, and they let him sit down (at first they just wanted him totell them). (Fieldnotes, Cindy’s classroom, May 11, 1993)
They were having a lot of trouble solving the first puzzle. Theywent to get help from Tim. Tim came over and did the puzzle forthem. (Fieldnotes, Cindy’s classroom, February 28, 1994)
Small help can be beneficial when the students answer simple ques-tions and help others to get past roadblocks, but it can be a problemwhen they do the work for other students.
Becoming Expert
During the 1993-94 school year, Sarah worked with several stu-dents in an after-school program to train them how to use HyperCard.The students she trained were third-graders from her class and
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Ein
dhov
en T
echn
ical
Uni
vers
ity]
at 0
6:23
22
Nov
embe
r 20
14
Integration of Technology into the Classroom: Case Studies222
Cindy’s class. The goal of the program was for these students tobecome proficient enough in HyperCard so they could train othersthe following year. The class was limited to third-graders becauseboth Cindy and Sarah’s classes were combined third- and fourth-grades. The following year, the graduates of the program would stillbe in Cindy and Sarah’s classes, and they could teach the otherfourth-graders and third-graders who would be around the followingyear.
Sarah made an investment in her students and the use of HyperCardas an integral part of her curriculum. Many of the other types ofsupport that students offered were almost ‘‘free’’ to the teachers, re-quiring little or no effort on their part beyond creating an environmentin which students were free to help others. Having the students be-come experts required a significant investment in time on Sarah’s part.Sarah had been inspired by other projects in her classroom and discus-sions with others about the effectiveness of HyperCard in her pro-gram. She lacked the expertise in HyperCard and a core of experts tohelp in her class. Sarah got connected with Sally, a university student,to help her for a short time, but she needed a continuing core ofexperts. She created this core from her students.
Creating the core of experts was a difficult task, especially afterSally did not return to help in the spring, and progress was slow.
Sarah was talking to Sally about getting the kids to be moreindependent. Sally seemed optimistic and positive about theirprogress. Sarah seemed impatient; ‘‘I’m anxious to get themindependent.’’ Sarah said she was happy with the way Jimmywas able to help the other kids. She thought that soon Ken andsome of the others would be up to a level where they could helpthe other kids. Sally said she was pleased with the progress.Sarah said she was frustrated. (Fieldnotes, discussion with Sarahand Sally after Sarah’s after-school program, October 26, 1993)
Sarah knew that next year she would need the help that she could onlyget from a core of expert students in her class to fully integrate Hyper-Card into her curriculum.
Teaching
After becoming experts, students were enlisted to teach other stu-dents. HyperCard is a fairly complex program that requires a great
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Ein
dhov
en T
echn
ical
Uni
vers
ity]
at 0
6:23
22
Nov
embe
r 20
14
Research 223
deal of training, but other programs require a smaller amount of train-ing, and students could easily learn the program and be used to trainother students. Cindy did this with The Incredible Machine, a gamethat explores the construction of simple machines.
I have a child in my room who bought it for home, and two ofSarah’s children came in and trained two of mine, and then wewent from there, ‘cause she did it first. And then we matched upkids who now taught everybody in the class. We had a lot ofcollaboration and peer work. (Cindy, interview, May 2, 1994)
As with small help, Cindy took advantage of the proximity of otherexperts: her students. She might not have had the time to teach all herstudents how to use The Incredible Machine without the help of herstudents. Having a core of experts, at close proximity, to teach othersis difficult without using students for support. This support can bebeneficial to the students being taught, to the students doing the teaching,and to the teacher.
Other
The categories of student support listed above were the most promi-nent ones observed, but students helped in a variety of other lessspecific ways. Teachers used, as a means of support, the ability ofstudents to learn the technology on their own. While they might havebeen inclined to teach, they did not always have the time to teach andinstead counted on the students to learn by exploring.
She said that the kids feel real confident with this. She said thatthe kids are not afraid to ‘‘let’s just plug it in.’’ (Fieldnotes,discussion with Sarah about Lego Logo, January 26, 1994)
This helped the teachers spend time on other things and not worryabout the students learning the technology.
She said she is not worried about support for Lego Logo. Shesaid the kids are doing well and can mostly learn it themselves.Though she admitted that it might get complicated. (Fieldnotes,discussion with Sarah about Lego Logo, February 15, 1994)
Teachers got support by learning with the students.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Ein
dhov
en T
echn
ical
Uni
vers
ity]
at 0
6:23
22
Nov
embe
r 20
14
Integration of Technology into the Classroom: Case Studies224
At 10:49 a.m., two boys (who I think had played before) started afull game [of SimAnt]. Cindy asked if she could sit with them.‘‘You see, I’m learning along with you guys.’’ (Fieldnotes, Cindy’sclass at the university computer laboratory, September 30, 1993)
In earlier categories, students gave support by answering questions(small help) and teaching other students. Teachers also got supportfrom knowing that students who could answer questions were around,whether or not they actually did anything.
At 10:20 a.m., she started talking about Oregon Trail. She askedhow many had played before. Nine raised their hands. She saidthat they could ask the kids who had played before or [the studentteacher] or herself for help. (Fieldnotes, Virginia’s class at theuniversity computer laboratory, October 7, 1993)
All of these other forms of support relied on the proximity ofstudents, mostly to be where the teacher was not or could not be.
DISCUSSION
In terms of support received by the teacher, the most significantcategories of support are becoming expert, teaching, and other. Thesewere most significant because the teachers were able to change theircurricula in ways that might not have otherwise been possible.
In becoming expert, the teacher was relying on the proximity of acore of experts. The knowledge and support of these experts would berelevant because she was determining what that knowledge and sup-port would be; the support was not added on later but was an integralpart of the development of the curriculum.
Teaching was the logical step after becoming expert and part of theprocess of developing the curriculum. Student support was necessaryto implement the teachers’ ideas.
The other category was significant because it relied on the studentsto be helpers. The actual support given was not necessarily anythingmore than small help, but the reliance of the teacher on that helpmade it most important.
The reading category can be critical to the students who havetrouble reading. Without this kind of support, the teacher or other
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Ein
dhov
en T
echn
ical
Uni
vers
ity]
at 0
6:23
22
Nov
embe
r 20
14
Research 225
adults would have to spend more time with the poor readers, or theissue of equity among students could become a major problem for theteacher. Allowing students to help each other with reading allows allstudents access to the computer.
Small help is the most common form of support. Except in the caseswhere the teacher relies upon it, this kind of support does not have amajor impact on the classroom. It is helpful and, because it is socommon, it appears to be the most significant, but the students givingthis kind of support are often not credible helpers and not relevant tothe needs of the teacher or the student being helped. Playing can beviewed as small help taken to the least relevant extreme, where onestudent is offering support merely for the opportunity to play.
The instances of sharing observed were not significant in and ofthemselves, but they helped to create an atmosphere that encouragedhelping others.
Proximity is the key to student support in the classroom becausestudents are always present. This is most significant when some stu-dents form a core of experts, always available to help, but it is stillimportant in lesser ways, such as small help.
Proximity and a feeling of credibility toward the student allow theteacher more flexibility to create student support (by creating expertsand developing a situation where students can teach others) to do whatshe feels is relevant (such as HyperCard in Sarah’s class). The studentsupport is relevant because it is created by the teacher to be relevant.When students have their own agendas (such as playing and wantingto do things for others), their support becomes less relevant and thusless supportive.
As teachers view students as credible supporters/experts, the sup-port and the curriculum can be expanded beyond simple things. Smallhelp is useful, but Cindy’s addition of The Incredible Machine wasmore useful and made possible by her relying on her students. Sarahtook it one step further by relying on her students to help her imple-ment a major addition to her curriculum with HyperCard.
REFERENCES
Bruce, B. (1993). Innovation and social change. In B. C. Bruce, J. K. Peyton, & T.Batson (Eds.), Network-based classrooms: Promises and realities (pp. 9-32). NewYork: Cambridge University Press.
Hall, G., & Hord, S. (1987). Change in schools: Facilitating the process. New York:State University of New York Press.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Ein
dhov
en T
echn
ical
Uni
vers
ity]
at 0
6:23
22
Nov
embe
r 20
14
