The authors describe a project at the Center for Educational Resources (CERES) at Montana State University (MSU) and supported by NASA which capitalizes on the wealth of real data available through NASA. The goal was to create classroom-ready lessons and materials to help teachers adopt national science standards. The CERES cooperative group activities use a modified “jigsaw” method in which students are in an expert group that has a defined role, and each group shares information they have learned with the rest of the class. The authors describe three specific webquests which were developed by the CERES project, MoonQuest, MarsQuest and MountainQuest, the team assignments for each webquest, and explain how NASA data is used to support the National Science Education Standards, allowing students to “do” science.

Bombelli, J. (1999). Pathways to a new way of learning and a new way of teaching. T.H.E. Journal, 27(3), 72-76.

The author describes a program which involved approximately 110 ninth and tenth grade students in New Jersey. The Pathways program is structured to simulate a working environment where four teams of six students work together in a project-based environment. Working together in four different “suites” arranged throughout the rooms, the teams collaboratively solve problems, test solutions and then present results. The group’s authentic task has them using desktop publishing software, AutoCAD and word processing tools. The author reports that this collaborative, project-based curriculum has brought about significant, positive changes in the students who take part, including an eagerness to learn, increased self-confidence, appreciation of peers and a team spirit. He believes that the students are learning by listening to each other and working together to solve problems, skills which will benefit them in the working world.

Brucklacher, B., & Gimbert, B. (1999). Role-playing software and WebQuests– What’s possible with cooperative learning and computers. Computers in the Schools, 15(2), 37-48.

The authors review the research literature about cooperative learning and technology to describe ways that teachers can effectively connect technology use to pedagogical strategies that support learning. They specifically describe role-playing software such as Tom Snyder’s Decisions, Decisions, which is designed for cooperative learning, and web pages built on the WebQuest model which can augment these programs. They believe current economic frameworks dictate the necessity for teaching students collaborative skills such as mediating, compromising, modeling and sharing task ownership, as well as the importance of technological proficiency. However, they caution that simply having pairs or small groups at the computer does not create cooperative learning; tasks and individual and group roles must be structured to ensure accountability. Included in the Appendix is a sample WebQuest based on two Tom Snyder programs: Decisions, Decisions: Prejudice and The Great Solar System Rescue.

Bull, G., Bull, G., Heinecke, W., Walker, R., Blasi, L. & Willis, J. (1999). Collaborative education. Learning & Leading with Technology, 26(5), 48-52.

The authors question the typical distance education model, with its one-to-many model of education. They believe its one-way flow of information from instructor to students is inappropriate in the K-12 classroom, and does not address the potential of collaborative and interactive education. They discuss the value of creating a collaborative environment using a number of tools from inexpensive to moderate cost. These tools allow two-way communication in the form of whiteboards, audio, video, and discussion groups.

Cooper, S. M. (2002). Classroom choices for enabling peer learning. Theory into Practice, 41(1), 53-59.

Cooper reports on research supporting the use of peer learning in the classroom. She relates how three decades of research siince the 1973 Cooper report attest to the benefits of using peer learning as an instructional tool from preK to graduate school, including greater conceptual and procedural gains, the accomodation of a range of learning styles, greater enjoyment of the learning task, and the encouragement of a stronger persistence in learning. The teacher’s role is vital, Cooper believes, and include: devloper of an educational program, model of the expert learner, coordinator of activities, Socratic interlocutor and mentor, and evaluator. She includes specific examples of areas where students gain from the use of peer learning opportunities, including group writing projects and authentic problem-solving experiences. These ideas have applicability in any classroom, including the one in which technology is integrated.

De Lisi, R. (2002). From marbles to instant messenger: Implications of Piaget's ideas about peer learning. Theory into Practice,41(1), 5-12.

De Lisi uses Piaget’s theories about students’ learning and applies it to learning in today’s classroom. He argues for using a peer learning model so that students can gain a deeper understanding of content, sharpen academic skills and learn how to manage interactions with classmates. According to Piaget’s research, peer learning forces a student to question his opinions and realize any errors of understanding. De Lisi acknowledges the difficulty of creating the proper, respectful environment for peer learning and that a teacher must continually monitor students’ attitudes about peer learning to maintain a healthy attitude toward it. The technology De Lisi mentions is AOL Instant Messenger, which allows students to interact over the Internet.

Dutt-Doner, K., Wilmer, M., Stevens, C., & Hartmann, L. (2000). Actively engaging learners in interdisciplinary curriculum through the integration of technology. Computers in the Schools, 16(3-4), 151-166.

The authors implemented an interdisciplinary, technology-based group research project based on the WebQuest model with their middle school students. They designed the WebQuest through a grant and meant to target their state’s science and technology standards. They hoped to find that the students would become more interested in their own learning, would better understand and practice research skills, be able to retrieve current information from the Internet, and be better able to discriminate between reliable and unreliable sources. They worked with two classrooms of seventh through eighth grade students over the course of four to six weeks. Each student in a group had a specific role and worked cooperatively to prepare a presentation on the topic of global warming. The authors found that in contrast to prior students who learned the content in a more traditional fashion, these students learned more about global warming, understood the real-life implications of global warming better, obtained more current data from the Internet, and worked well together to create their PowerPoint presentations.

Goldsworthy, R. (2000). Collaborative classrooms. Learning & Leading with Technology, 27(4), 6-8,17.

Goldsworthy is a technology coordinator who believes that the Internet is a rich communications resource for teachers of K-12. He gives examples of collaborative activities and projects which learners may participate in through the Internet, as well as four key elements of successful collaborative projects teachers need to know. In addition to fostering an increased motivation to write well to peers via email, the collaborative projects allow within-group and across-group collaboartion which fosters intrapersonal and interpersonal understanding. The author also believes that learning to work as a team is an important goal of educators in today’s business climate. The types of collaborative projects the author lists include emailing another class on a joint project, keypals, cross-classroom projects, working with a mentor, asking questions of an expert, and publishing student work on the World Wide Web. He also lists some collaborative group strategies, including jigsaw, roundrobin, think-pair-share, numbered heads, turn to your neighbor, role assignment and Phillips 66.

Hamm, M. & Adams, D. (2002). Collaborative inquiry: Working toward shared goals. Kappa Delta Pi Record, 38(3), 115-118.

The authors begin by describing the benefits of collaborative inquiry as a means to enhancing questioning, learning and investigation through the sharing of ideas and individual strengths. According to the authors, students should learn in association with others; however, teachers must teach students the skills necessary to work successfully in a group. The first steps, they believe, is defining teacher and student responsibilities. The also list some rules that should be followed during collaborative work. They stress that group roles and individual responsibilities must be defined and arranged clearly. They conclude by mentioning the place of technology within collaborative learning environment, and state that electronic media is a powerful way tool for teams of students.

12.

Marr, P.M. (2000). Grouping students at the computer to enhance the study of British literature. English Journal, 90(2), 120-125.

Marr, a teacher of British literature, was aprehensive about incorporating technology into her classroom. She already used group learning in non-computer related activities, and knew that she could not get a computer for each student anyway. Marr used PowerPoint with her students, who were placed in mixed-ability groups of three, and asked them to create a presentation on a different theme. She found, through the use of observations, informal interviews and a survey, that her students were enthusiastic and positive about the experience, were more motivated to learn the content, had increased self-confidence, experienced positive socialization, and believed that the group project enabled them to learn more. She found it motivating and plans to use technology again with students. The survey included with the article would be helpful for assessing students’ attitudes about the use of technology and peer learning.

Mayer, R.E., Schustack, M.W., & Blanton, W.E. (1999). What do children learn from using computers in an informal, collaborative setting? Educational Technology, 39(2), 27-31.

The authors’ goal was to find out what children learn from using educational computing software in an informal social setting organized around educational technology. They studied three different after-school and out-of-school settings where children worked with peers and adult volunteers to learn to use educational software programs. The children were compared to students with comparable characteristics who had not participated in the after-school club. The students who had collaborative experience with educational technology showed improved content knowledge about computers, improved strategies for comprehending written instructions, improved strategies for devising problem-solving plans and some improved basic academic skills.

Schacter, J. (2000). Does individual tutoring produce optimal learning? American Educational Research Journal, 37(3), 801-829.

Schacter wanted to test whether one-to-one, adult-student tutoring was the most effecting method of instruction. Bloom’s efforts in the eighties did not yield any conclusive results about the superiority of any of teaching method. Schacter conducted his research within a computer-supported collaborative learning environment with elementary students. He found that the children in the study learned as well from each other as from an individual tutor when they had access to online content, online collaborative tools, and a large group of same-age peers. It is very difficult for a teacher to have one-on-one interaction with every student, and teachers could learn from this study that creating collaborative online projects for groups of students would be as beneficial academically for their students as working with each student individually.

16.

Svensson, A. (2000). Computers in schools: Socially isolating or a tool to promote collaboration? Journal of Educational Computing Research, 22(4), 437-453.

Svensson studied groups of second-grade students using technology to see what kinds of interactions the students engaged in. The teaching methods varied among the activities. Svensson wanted to see whether communication between studens during computer-related activities was different from communication during other school activities. She found that the students interacted considerably more during computer activities when compared with other activities that were studied, with seven interactions per minute in front of the computer compared to two to three per minute in other activities. The computer interaction was more method-related interaction during computer activities; children talked about how or what they need to do to solve a problem. The interaction was collaborative-oriented and positive, and did not depend on whether a student was in control of the mouse or not.