PEER TUTORING: A Big Kid/Little Kid Learning Collaboration
We have both long been advocates of incorporating a Logo (computer program) instructional component into an integrated elementary curriculum. It seemed a natural extension of our instructional priorities to collaborate on an "action research" project ("action research" is a research model that encourages and enables educators to study both their teaching methods and the result of that teaching on student learning) We decided to focus on peer tutoring involving second through fourth grade special needs students at Green Street School and sixth graders at Oak Grove. It seemed to us that an "action research" cycle was an appropriate structure for investigating the idea that we wished to pursue. We subsequently began the process of planning and carrying out our investigation of Big Kid / Little Kid Logo partnerships.

We were interested in finding out what benefits our students might realize through collaborative Logo work, as well as what obstacles and challenges might stymie the students' collaborative success. The planning for this investigation included discussions of the individual strengths and limitations of our participating students. The final pairings for partners were determined following lengthy discussions aimed at matching personalities, project preferences, and developmental considerations.

After six weeks we met to review how the project was developing and to consider any changes in format that might prove constructive. Based upon observations made by the sixth graders, we reduced the length of project time per session to a 30 minute minimum. The sixth graders had observed that the younger students' attention began to wane after about the midway point of a 60 minute session. During the second half of the investigation's sessions, partners were free to work beyond 30 minutes on projects, but could save their project work for the day at that midpoint and play a Logo text adventure game for the time remaining in each session if they so chose. These games typically pose a problem to the player: e.g. saving the realm from an evil Werewolf who has it in his clutches, and challenge the player to muster the resources necessary to overcome the evil antagonist.

Following the work of our students during this project gave us a wealth of information to consider. We made discoveries and confirmed long held notions about how and why our students learn about Logo programming in particular and Mathematics in general. Most notable among these, perhaps, was the realization of the power of cross-grade collaboration itself. The level of enthusiasm generated by this collaboration with students from another class and grade was amazing. Students who rarely displayed any enthusiasm for academic work pleaded with us to reschedule schoolwide cultural arts performances in order that their Logo Ranger session might be spared cancellation for a week.

The discoveries were not limited to motivational observations, however. Each pair of students proved to be unique in the particulars of their working dynamics. Adam and Peter worked well together because each offered something that the other appreciated immense ly. Adam was a willing audience for Peter's tendency to show off his advanced programming skill. Adam's easy going personality enabled him to sit back and watch at times when a more assertive student might have needed to take a more active role. Peter opened whole new realms of Logo possibility for Adam by demonstrating how to animate and by explaining (numerous times) why procedures are a good idea.

Jennifer and Annie experienced many opportunities to resolve conflicts. This was due in large part to Annie's assertive personality, which often failed to take notice of Jennifer's helpful suggestions for solving programming problems. However, despite the frequent squabbles, their graphic design projects were gratifyingly impressive to both of them.

One of our initial hopes was that Jack's students would expand the boundaries of their Logo knowledge at least in part as a function of the work they had done with their Logo Ranger partners. Reflecting upon the post project Logo knowledge which was evident in Jack's students' work, we found that all of the students showed substantial growth in their Logo knowledge.

Over the course of the investigation Jim observed changes in his Logo Rangers. They all improved their understandings of the content through their efforts to teach it to the younger students. They also gained valuable negotiating and cooperative skills while pursuing the fulfillment of their partners' project ideas.

As is nearly always the case, this action research project gave us much food for thought, and raised more questions than it provided answers. The enthusiasm for learning that it generated in both classrooms was the clearest indicator of the success of the investigation. But in the ever swirling maelstrom of curriculum and methodology, the opportunity to pose a question or two, observe ourselves and our students in the pursuit of learning objectives, and reflect upon what we have seen and heard provided a wonderfully sheltered harbor. It was indeed a great pleasure for us to drop anchor there for a while and take stock of where we have been, as well as where next to point the bows of our classroom ships on the wide seas of learning.