DOCUMENT RESUME ED 354 855 IR 015 944 AUTHOR Reilly, Brian TITLE The Negotiations of Group Authorship among Second Graders Using Multimedia Composing Software. Apple Classrooms of Tomorrow. INSTITUTION Apple Computer, Inc., Cupertino, CA. REPORT NO ACOT-R-14 PUB DATE 92 NOTE 19p. PUB TYPE Information Analyses (070) Reports Descriptive (141) EDRS PRICE MFO1 /PCO1 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS *Computer Assisted Instruction; Computer Software; *Cooperation; Cooperative Learning; Educational Research; Elementary School Students; Ethnography; Grade 2; Group Dynamics; Grouping (Instructional Purposes); *Hypermedia; Primary Education; Production Techniques; Qualitative Research; School Business Relationship IDENTIFIERS *Apple Classrooms of Tomorrow; *Multimedia Materials ABSTRACT Beginning with a review of relevant literature on learning and computers, this report focuses on a group of five second graders in the process of creating a multimedia presentation for their class. Using "StoryShow," software that combines images, sound, and text, the students took on a variety of production roles. Each one contributed at least one image and sound element to the final composition. Each task the students performed--manipulating hardware or software, choosing images from books or directing other students--was essential to the overall success of the composition, but the role of director, taken on by one girl in the group, became the key to its completion. The success of this episode was facilitated, in part, by the teacher's interpretation of how the software might be used, and a classroom environment that supported the kinds of independent and collaborative activities that the software encouraged. The research method employed in this study is micro-ethnographic; and the objectives were to understand classroom learning activities from the point of view of the participants, to describe how innovative educational tools move from design to actual use, and to show how that knowledge may be applied to future designs. (Contains 15 references.) (Author/ALF) *********************************************************************** Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made from the original document. *********************************************************************** OE EVOCATION U.S. DEPARTMENT me Randmrcn and rmarrosent Once or Edocalionsi INFORMATION EDUCATORS& RESOURCES CENTER (ERIC) as Dees raOroslucM1 o This documt-1 nits or ononizstion received Iron+ the person Oricimeting It to improve been mede 0 Minot changes have APPLE CLASSROOMS OF TOMORROW reproduction ouslitY ills docu- t stated Points of ioevii or opinions °nickel nt represe ment do not necSsardy OERI oomoon or pesos The Negotiations of Group Authorship Among Second Graders Using Multimedia Composing Software "PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE THIS MATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTED BY Mary A.C. Fallon TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)." BEST COPY AVAILABLE Author Brian Reilly University of California at Berkeley ACOT Report *14 Apple Computer, Inc. 20525 Marian Avenue Cuperdno, CA95014 The Study frt. This study focuses on five 2nd graders creating a Begun in 1985, Apple Classrooms of Tomorrow (ACOT)SM is a research and multimedia presentation development collaboration among public schools, universities, research agen- with 'StoryShow,' a software cies and Apple Computer, Inc. ACOT explores, develops and demonstrates the application for combining powerful uses of technologies in teaching and learning. In all ACOT endeavors, images, sound and text. instruction and assessment are as integral to learning as technology. Supporting a constructivist approach to learning, technology is used as knowledge-building tools. As students collaborate, create media-rich composi- tions and use simulations and models, researchers investigate four aspects of learning: tasks, interactions, situations and tools. The research is formative. The Each task performed findings guide ACOT staff and teachers as they refine their approach to learning, was essential but the teaching and professional development. ACOT teachers and students often use director's role became the most advanced technologies available, including experimental technologies, pivotal to completion of the assignment. to help us envision the future and improve the educational process. ACOT views technology as a necessary and catalytic part of the effort required to firndamental restructure America's education system. We hope that by sharing our results with parents, educators, policy makers, and technology developers the lesson; of ACOT will contribute to the advancement of educa- tional reform. Technology changes the kinds of text children interact with Abstract and the kinds of interactions Beginning with a review of relevant literature on learning and computers, this report children have with text when focuses on a group of five second graders in the process of creating a multimedia presenta- it is widely used in reading tion for their class. Using software that combines images, sound and text, the students took and writing. on a variety of production roles. Each one contributed at least one image and sound element to the final composition. Each task the students performedmanipulating hardware or soft- ware, choosing images from books or directing other studentswas essential to the overall success of the composition, but the role of director, taken on by one girl in the group, became the key to its completion. The success of this episode was facilitated, in part, by the teacher's interpretation of how Research literature the software might be used, and a classroom environment that supported the kinds of inde- shows that technology is pendent and collaborative activities that the software encouraged. interpreted according: the relationships that alrt 'y :ntroduction existed among teachers and According to Vygotsky (1978), the tools that we use to manipulate signs in the form of students before technology language or other symbol systems mediate our interactions with the won] and restructure was introduced. our mental activity. In human societies, people perform numerous tasks with the aid of tools as simple as hammers and saws or as complex as writing systems. As people use these tools, they bring changes to both the world around them and to the psychological processes and representations that underlie the activities (Vygotsky, 1978; Martin & Scribner, 1988). Technology when widely used for children's reading and writing activities is chang- ing the kinds of interactions children have with text, as well as the kinds of texts with which they interact. New computer-based tools combine text, sound, image and video in various as in videodiscs and video games ways providing new methods for creating texts. In this report, we see how a multimedia composition tool designed specifically for children was used by a group of five students in a second grade classroom. Multimedia Compasing/1 APPIE CLASSROOMS OF TOMORROW 3 Innovations and Classrooms How each individual child uses a computer will always Any technology is conceived, developed and employed in a particular sodal context, and be closely connected to the the influence it has depends greatly upon how it is used in a given environment. Putting a social relationships existing computer in a classroom is not likely to lead to changes in learning unless the computer- in the classroom. based activities relate closely to the kinds of activities already taking place in that classroom. In Mehan's (1989) study of the use of single microcomputers in four classrooms, he describes how the technology was used in very different ways by each teacher, leading to dif- ferent changes in classroom activity. Mehan argues that the social structure of the classroom is the key element in understanding how technology will be used. Although particular uses of Children who play video technology may encourage participation, the most important factor is not the computer and games and waich television, the software, but what is done with them. have an intertextual world Similar condusions are drawn by Hawkins (1987) in an analysis of Logo use by teachers that stretches beyond the and students, by Genishi (1988) who examined the use of Logo in a kindergarten classroom, book, to include particular and by Cochran-Smith (1991) in a review of word processing research with children. This characters and stories as research supports the assertion that technology is interpreted according to the relationships well as particular ways of that exist in the classroom prior to the presence of the technology. interacting with texts. Writing and Technology Most research on writing with computers has concentrated on cognitive processes in isolation from particular writing contexts (Cochran-Smith, Paris & Kahn, 1991), while research on reading and technology has focussed on Computer-Assisted Instruction, such as reading improvement software (Balajthy, 1989). Neither of these approaches seems ade- Collaborative tools can help quate when attempting to explain how a particular technology is integrated into the culture people produce something of a classroom. The kinds of changes that may occur are not likely to be captured if the focus together that no one person of research is only on individuals and does not attempt to understand the classroom environ- could produce working ment. The manner in which an individual child makes use of a computer will always be close- alone. ly connected to the presence of other children and teachers, for it is the sodal relationships which exist in the classroom that will help us understand how and why things happen, whether or not they involve technology. As Cochran-Smith et al. (1991) state in their study of word processing and elementary students: Learning to write with computers and learning to teach writing with computers are How tools are designed will qualitatively different experiences from learning with pencil and paper (p. 1) influence the ways students can collaborate. According to Cochran-Smith. word processing can lead to the lice of new social arrange- ments involving collaboration and coaching, which in turn shape the theones and practices of writing in the classroom. Although there is little evidence that the quality of student writing changes when word processors are available, their study indicates that children may spend more time writing, and produce texts that are slightly longer than those created using pen and paper. What is not dear from the study is whether students who have continuous access to computers use them differently than students who may use computers once a week in a computer lab, or who have a single computer available in their classroom. Literacy Lemke (1989) has described literacy as knowledge about a world of texts, and making connections between them, both to understand and to be understood. Schooling can be seen as learning to master texts deemed important by a particular society. Barthes (1974) views text as just a set of potential meanings which are only realized through the reader-text interaction. This interaction is complex and greatly influenced. as Lemke notes, by other text with which a reader is familiar. For children accustomed to video games and television, their intertextual world stretches beyond the book to indude particular characters and stories as APPLE CLASSROOMS OF TOMORROW tfultimedia Composingi2 4 The opportunity to record well as particular ways of interacting with texts. and analyze ,be public Barthes.differentiates between "readerly" and -svriterly texts". The writeriy text gives the thoughts and writing reader more room to maneuver, and the reader is more actively involved in creating mean- activities of students is an ing. With readerly text, in contrast, the reader is left to accept or reject what is presented. and advantage brought on by meaning is often overly-determined by the writer. collaborative writing. This distribution of power and control between text and reader, and the role it plays in how meaning is arrived at, seems a key point in understanding the reading and writing of children who are accustomed to different kinds of texts, such as video games, which may be seen as very "writerly." A child interacting with a video game has a large amount of control over what happens as the game progresses. When the same children create or read text, simi- lar options may not always be available. When they are, as in the case of multimedia technolo- Tools facilitating gies and computers, children may find the kinds of interactions possible a more natural collaborative composing extension of video games than books or other activities available to them. could be improved if Computer Supported Cooperative Work designers understand what kinds of collaborations are In a review of tools for collaboration, Michael Schrage (1990) makes a distinction between increasing communication and increasing collaboration, and emphasizes that differ- valuable and how software ent tools are needed for collaboration. Schrage defines collaboration as shared discovery or design relates to use. shared creation, and shows that the need for collaboration is great when people deal with complex problems or when people with different areas of expertise need to work together. Collaborative tools can help people produce something together that no one person. could produce working alone. How tools are designed will influence the kinds of collaboration they encourage. The desk, according to Schrage, is designed for the individual working alone. The same could be StoryShow was conceived said for most computer software, which usually assumes one user with one keyboard and to help children construct one mouse working on one computer. Tools for collaboration can help people develop what stories that incorporate Schrage calls a "shared space." The shared space can be generated by people separated by images and written and oral language. However time and distance, but it is through the use of the shared space that a collaboration will be shaped. Language is the primary way in which this shared understanding is developed, for as this study indicates that is Schrage points out, language is the primary tool for collaboration. not necessarily how the software will be used. While not primarily focused on the collaborative aspects of software design, several stud- ies of word processing among children have considered how the use of computers for writing encourages collaborative writing. Heap (1989) points out that collaborative activity makes pri- students have to negotiate the use of the computer, and vate cognitive processes public development of a tat, through language. For research purposes, the opportunity to record and analyze the public thoughts and writing activities of students is an advantage brought on by collaborative writing. Dickinson's study (1986) on the use of a computer for writing in a The software used a slide first-second grade dassroom focussed on the social structure that arose as the computer was show metaphor. Each slide used, and examined the planning, self-monitoring and response to writing that occurred as a can consist of an image, text and sounds. result. In this case the computer was integrated into the pre -e dsting writing curriculum and treated as another tool for writing by the teacher, but its use led to more opportunities for chil- dren to talk among themselves than was possible when they wrote with pencil and paper. Both Dickinson and Heap looked at classrooms with one computer, and with word processing software designed with a single user in mind. In both cases, the cooperative aspects of com- posing are defined socially, and are not primary features of the writing tools in use. Students collaborated because they chose to work together and because there was a shortage of tools. Neither of these studies provides a definition of collaborative text. Is a story written by one child with help from a computer assistant collaborative in the same way that a story joint- ly composed by two students is? Certainly collaboration in writing can exist at a number of levels, but if better tools to facilitate collaborative composing are to be designed, there needs to be an understanding of what kinds of collaboration are valuable, and how software/tool Multimedia Compasing3 APPLE CLASSROOMS OF TOMORROW 5 This analysis discusses design relates to use in classrooms. how students allocated In this report we examine the use of StoryShow, a multimedia composing tool con- composing tasks and how ceived to help young children construct stories that incorporate images, and written and oral the social interactions that language. It was designed for use by two students, although in this case it involved more, occurred when the software with particular features designed to encourage collaborative composing, editing, and the was used fit into the class' sharing of tasks. The primary questions for this study are: overall social structure. It also discusses the How does each child get to play the role of author? relationship between How does the sharing of tasks reflect the social structure already existing in the software design, intended classroom? use and actual use. How does the intended use of the software differ from how it is actually used in the classroom? Method The research method employed in this study is miao.ethnographic. The overall goal of the larger ACOT study, of which this report is one part, is to understand classroom learning Students weren't assigned activities from the point of view of the participants, to describe how innovative educational specific tasks by the teacher. tools move from design to actual use, and to show how that knowledge may be applied to future designs. Setting This study took place in a second grade classroom in the Silicon Valley areaof California as part of longterm research conducted by the Apple Classrooms of Tomorrow project of Apple Computes; Inc. The second grade teacher chose to participate in the fieldtesting of Multiple technologies in the room allowed each students StolyShow, which had previously been in use in the first and fourth grade classrooms of this to play several roles. ACOT school. The teacher in this classroom, Ms. Boston, had been teaching for 29 years, induding the previous three years as an ACOT teacher. She had become accustomed to teaching with tech- nology, and had made some adjustments because of it, but she was not as eager to use new software and hardware as some other teachers in the school and preferred to have assistance when trying out new technologies. Donnie controlled the mouse The school population is drawn largely from middle to upper solo-economic families, pointing device for most with many parents taking a strong interest in their child's schooling. In Ms. Boston's class events du -ing the there were 27 students, approximately 70 percent An4o and 30 percent Asian. The five stu- dents participating in this study were chosen by the teacher, and the activities were conduct- composing process. However technical control didn t ed during the natural course of events in the classroom. translate into content The classroom itself was unique in terms of the amount of technology available to stu- control. dents and teacher: eight Macintosh® computers, three scanners, a laser printer, and a MacRecordet In addition, there were 16 Apple II GS computers, eight dot-matrix printers and two video cassette recorders with color monitors. Another Macintosh, connected to a videodisc player, was shared with another classroom. Students used the computers for writing in journals, composing stories or drawing or creating animation. Computers were not used for playing games in the classroom. Over the course of a day, students were likely to use a computer for a total of about one hour. Reading and writing activities were integrated in Ms. Boston's classroom. Children often read a particular type of story as a group, an additional story on their own, then wrote their own story on the same topic. The open atmosphere in the classroom allowed students to move around relatively freely, so collaboration of various kinds was likely to take place throughout the day. Collaboration might involve one student assisting another with a com- puter task, or with spelling, or could be a group activity with students reading aloud or acting out parts of a story Multimedia Composing/4 APPLE CLASSROOMS OF TOMORROW -Description of multimedia composing tooi Julie was recognized by the other students as the The primary activity observed and recorded in this study was the use of the multimedia activity's leader and she composing software StoryShow, during one morning session in Ms. Boston's classroom. The dominated content. software was developed at Apple Computer, Inc. for several months before it was introduced Students turned to her for in classrooms. StoryShow was conceived to help children construct stories that incorporate decision-making. images and written and oral language. As this study indicates, that is not necessarily how it will be used in classrooms. StorySbuy is presently designed to run on Macintosh computers with color monitors, integrating video capture, scanning, sound input, and text. The video, image scanning, and an 8 sound elements are provided through additional devices attached to the Macintosh mm video camera connected to the Macintosh using a video capture board, an Apple flatbed Rick controlled the scanner for images in books or drawn by hand on paper, and a MacRecorder for sound input. - microphone, even when it Fadi of these devices can be accessed directly from StoryShow via a mouse dick' The soft- wasn't in use. However, ware uses the metaphor of a slide show, with each slide potentially consisting of an image, microphone control had text, and sound The resulting multimedia tea can be played back on the screen as a series of little impact on content or images, sounds, and tea, and it can be saved to a videotape which can then be replayed on a participation. When she video cassette recorder at home or in school. needed it, Julie physically Initial testing was conducted informally on pairs of six and seven year old children. This took control of the was done early in the design and programming phase of the project to ensure the program microphone from Rick. was not too complex for the target audience. Additional testing continued with first and fourth graders in volunteer classrooms, and was ongoing during the time of this study. The final slide show produced by the group is evidence of the cooperative nature of the composing process, but it masks the way students arrived at the final text. StoryShow uses a slide show metaphor to combine text, im ,ges and sound. .Data Coilection The data for this study were collected over a five-week period and consisted of field notes from observations of classroom activity, videotapes of students working in the class- room and using StoryShow, a video taped trace of what students produced on the computer screen, the computer files of their work, and a taped interview with the teacher. The students in Ms. Boston's class were initially introduced to StoryShow in a 60 minute demonstration. Several children participated directly, and the entire class chose pictures and sound that went into the final tat. The following week a group of six children built a multi- media composition using StoryShow. The students' next use of StoryShow, and the one reported in this study, occurred on a day when the classroom was being used as the background for a local television show about to a computer keyboard that brazes the rnanipulation A "mouse," Ban input device supple matte tea and images. The mouse indudes a bunawhich when pressed ordiduzd," causes an anion to cccur on the sates. Multimedia Composing/5 APPLE CLASSROOMS OF TOMORROW 7 BEST COPY AVAILARE Even in the cases where computers and education. Students were assigned to StoryShow to illustrate the kinds of sounds or images were activities students carried out with computers. Filming for the television show lasted about 35 supplied by someone other minutes, with some disruptions, and StoryShow activity then continued for an additional 90 than Julie, the "director:" she minutes. often had the final say as to The student work group consisted initially of two boys, Rick and Donnie, and two girls, what image was used and Julie and Amber. A third girl, Mary, joined the group near the end of the activity. All students which sounds accompanied in this group are AngloAmerican with the exception of Donnie, who is Asian-American. which images. During data collection I participated as a technical assistant to the children, correcting problems that came up during their use of the software. I tried to refrain from providing assistance on content questions entirely, and kept my technical help to the minimum neces- sary to allow the children to use the software. Data Preparation The boys showed more The videotapes of children working at the computer and the trace of their interactions interest in controlling the with the software were reviewed and categorized by the events, participant structures and hardware than in actually contentproduced. I defined an event as bounded by the start of any activity designed to add choosing what went into the a new element to the composition, and the completion or abandonment of that activity. I composition. Their language focused on who was operating each of the two main control devices (mouse, microphone), implied a link between who provided the content during the given event, and who made the final decision on con- device control and actual tent for that event. For content, I considered the use of the three elements available in each production that didn't exist. image, sound, and text. slide The goal of this analysis was to understand how the students allocated composing tasks as they used the software, to understand how the social interactions that occurr ed while stu- dents used the software fit into the social structure of the classroom, and to consider the rela- tionship between the design and intended use of the software, and how it was actually used by students. Composing Episode Participant structures were examined in two ways software control (use of the mouse), and content control (who selects what goes into the composition and who decides what actually gets saved as part of the final product.) The students were not assigned specific tasks by the teacher, but the presence of multiple technologies allowed each of the students to play various roles. In this case, both boys gravitated towards the computer while one of the girls, Julie, took control of the content. Donnie controlled the mouse during 37 of the 44 total events I identified in the compos- ing process, but this technical control did not translate into control over content or turntak- ing. Content was dominated by Julie. who initiated actions that started 18 new events. and decided whether or not a particular sound or image would be saved for 38 of the 44 events (often sharing the decision with others.) Julie was recognized by the other students as the leader of this activity, as they often turned to her when a decision had to be made. This was consistent with other activities in the classroom, and Julie's skill as a leader was noted by Ms. Boston both during the time the group worked with StoryShow and in an interview. During most of the composing process, Rick maintained control of the microphone. even when it was not in use. Control of the microphone had little impact on content or participation. and when she needed it, Julie physically took control of the microphone from Rick. The final slide show produced by the group gives evidence of the cooperative nature of the composing process, but through the presence of multiple authors, it tends to mask the way in which students arrived at the final text. 8 APPLE CLASSROOMS OF TOMORROW Multimedia Composing/6 As students progressed Even in the cases where sound or image input was supplied by someone other than through the composition, Julie, she often had the final say as to what image was used or what sound went with the more and more time was image. For Mary and Rick, Julie provided assistance in selecting an image and coached them spent pre-editing. Images cn the exact content of their sounds by speaking the words herself and having the other and sounds we, rehearsed child repeat them before attempting to record the final sound. While this might seem an as and oriented cats 'v before of dominating the content, in each case, Rick and Mary were not quite sure what to say or recording or capturing. what to put in, and Julie's actions could be seen as those of a more able peer providing the scaffolding necessary for the other children to successfully complete the task. The following example illustrates the composing process used by this group. (In each of this example, I am identified as the "Assistant'). In the first example we see how the students have structured the process themselves. They have chosen to create a series of slides using books about rabbits they have read in class. Colored icons represented Composing ,Exampte Proauczion 4.:/ first slide actions controlling the software. In conversations, Speaker What Is said Related Actions students referred more to the colors than the actions. Donnie: Come on get some pictures. Where's the books? Donnie using mouse Julie and Amber get books and hold them in front of the camera Julie: There it is. I want to hold it up (To Amber). Julie takes book Assistant: What do you guys want to do? While ccmposing with Julie: Do the many rabbit stories of Julie sets book down StorySbow was clearly an Mrs. Boston's class. extension of the usual Donnie: Get closer, get close. reading and writing activities, it also required Julia: No, why don't we hold up, why don't we hold students to manage a variety up all of the books in front of the camera? Julie backs away from of new roles. camera Julie: (To Rick and Donnie) OK you guys grab a book. Donnie: I'm not, I'm taking pictures. Donnie still controls mouse Julie: Grab a book! (emphatically) Amber gets a book Rick: And I am making sounds Both boys here show more interest in having control of the hardware than in actually choosing what goes into the composition. Their language "I'm taking pictures," and "I am making sounds" imply a link between control of the devices to create the pictures and sounds and the actual production ("making') of them that didn't really exist. ('Mrs. Fllis' is the school's computer coordinator). Speaker What Is said Related Actions Julie: Grab two if you want to. Julie: (To Rick and Donnie) Here, take two. Julie hands them books Julie: Let's all get in front of the picture. All of these in front. Everyone holds up books. Julie has organized the group to take the picture. Multimedia Cornposingrr APPLE CLASSROOMS OF TOMORROW 9 Speaker What is said Taking a picture involved Related Actions positioning a selected image Julie: Uh oh, I have three. in front of a video camera and pointing to the correct Rick: Let's call this the introduction. icon on the computer screen. Julie: Hey no you guys...(unintelligible) The software froze the image momentarily giving students Rick and Donnie are holding their books up and they are blocking everything else an opportunity to quickly Julie and evaluate it. Amber. Rick! Julie: Can you hold this one? Rick: It won't get, it won't fit. Julie: Well, we all put in. Donnie stands up. The software was designed to Julie: Donnie, your face is in the way. (laughing) save images automatically, Julie: Donnie, put the other one, the Peter Rabbit book in the front. but offered a choice of saving or re-recording sound. Donnie: How am I gonna take a picture though? Julie: Let me see? Assistant: Who's gonna click the mouse? Donnie: I will. Image editing generally took Julie: Mrs. Ellis. Julie leaves place before it was captured. Julie: Mrs. Ellis. could you, could you, could you? Points to computer Images once in the computer were rarely rejected or Rick: All right, do it. re-taken. Julie: Donnie, put up both of them. Mrs. Ellis's gonna do it. Donnie: I can hardly do this. Julie: Donnie, put up both of them. Put 'em together. David: Ali. what's this? This is crazy David wanders over David was not part of the group but happened to walk over to that part of the classroom as they were working. Speaker What is said Related Actions Julie: Are they both in the picture? Rick: No. Mrs. Ellis: There. Standing next to computer Donnie: Take a picture. Mrs. Ellis: Ready? Julie: No, wait. Can you see all the books? 10 Multimedia Composing/8 APPLE CLASSROOMS OF TOMORROW