Principles and practical grouping for the use of drill and practice programs

A previous paper showed that young children performed better when working as individuals rather than in pairs on a drill and practice program. This paper reports an analysis of behaviour and talk for individuals and single sex pairs using a computer-based drill and practice activity to explain differences in performance. Results indicated that individuals were more likely to be task-focused and to complete tasks successfully than children working in pairs. Differences were found in off-task activity, behaviours and type of talk. Grouping and verbal interaction are discussed in relation to the type of task/program that children are asked to undertake, and how both task and peer presence may constrain the child's task focus and performance when reinforcing pre-existing knowledge.

[1]  P. Kutnick,et al.  Groupwork and computers: Task type and children's performance , 1996 .

[2]  B. Fletcher,et al.  Group and Individual Learning of Junior School Children on a Microcomputer‐based Task: social or cognitive facilitation? , 1985 .

[3]  Peter Kutnick,et al.  Computer‐based problem‐solving: the effects of group composition and social skills on a cognitive, joint action task , 1997 .

[4]  Dale H. Schunk,et al.  Strategy training and attributional feedback with learning disabled students. , 1986 .

[5]  David Messer,et al.  Effects of experience on microcomputer use in primary schools: results of a second survey , 1988 .

[6]  Jean Underwood,et al.  Gender differences and effects of co‐operation in a computer‐based language task , 1994 .

[7]  M. Galton,et al.  Inside the Primary Classroom: 20 Years On , 1999 .

[8]  Neil Mercer,et al.  Computers and Reasoning Through Talk in the Classroom , 1996 .

[9]  Erica McAteer,et al.  Software style and interaction around the microcomputer , 1993 .

[10]  Eunice Fisher,et al.  Distinctive features of pupil‐pupil classroom talk and their relationship to learning: How discursive exploration might be encouraged , 1993 .

[11]  David Messer,et al.  A Survey of Microcomputer Use and Provision in Primary Schools , 1986 .

[12]  Paul Light.  Collaborative learning with computers , 1993 .

[13]  C. O'Malley,et al.  Collaborative Learning between Peers , 1996 .

[14]  Alan Pritchard.  Should children work in groups with a computer? , 1993, Br. J. Educ. Technol..

[15]  N. Webb.  Peer interaction and learning in small groups , 1989 .

[16]  Philip C. Abrami,et al.  The effects of group size and exposure time on microcomputer learning , 1992 .

[17]  Neil Mercer,et al.  The quality of talk in children's joint activity at the computer , 1994 .

[18]  N. Hastings,et al.  Tasks and Tables: The Effects of Seating Arrangements on Task Engagement in Primary Classrooms. , 1995 .

[19]  Anita Jackson,et al.  When talking doesn't help: An investigation of microcomputer-based group problem solving , 1992 .

[20]  Anthony Anderson,et al.  The effect of software type on the quality of talk , 1999, J. Comput. Assist. Learn..

[21]  Celia Hoyles,et al.  Patterns of discussion between pupil pairs in computer and non‐computer environments , 1991 .

[22]  Gregory C. Sales,et al.  Pair versus individual work on the acquisition of concepts in a computer-based in structional lesson , 1987 .

[23]  Deanne Boydell.  PUPIL BEHAVIOUR IN JUNIOR CLASSROOMS , 1975 .

[24]  D. Messer,et al.  Pairing and gender effects on children’s computer-based learning , 1992 .

[25]  Martyn Wild,et al.  Investigating verbal interactions when primary chidren use computers , 1996 .

[26]  C. Crook.  Computers and the Collaborative Experience of Learning , 1996 .

[27]  R. Cummings.  Small-Group Discussions and the Microcomputer. , 1985 .

[28]  Paul Light,et al.  Interaction, gender, and performance on a computer-based problem solving task , 1992 .