Processes and consequences of peer collaboration: a Vygotskian analysis

pretested to discover each child's "rule " for predicting the movement of a mathematical balance beam. Children then worked alone, with a partner who used the same rule, with a partner who was more competent, or with a partner who was less competent. If partners ' predictions differed, the dyad members were asked to discuss and reach agreement, but were not given feedback. All children were subsequently given 2 individual posttests. The results revealed that regression in thinking was as likely a consequence as improvement, both proving stable. Benefits accrued primarily to those whose partner was more competent, but understanding of the outcomes of collaboration required attending both to the nature ofthe rules (whether they allowed consistent or inconsistent prediction) and the shared understanding attained during the paired session. Under wbat circumstances can pairs of ment as most likely to result from interaction children belp eacb otber improve tbeir when there is a difference in perspectives thinking while working together on a task? between peers (as opposed to adult-child Can working collaboratively adversely affect dyads) that gives rise to arguments be-children's thinking? Does it matter whether tween them (sociocognitive conflict). Ac-they have the same initial understanding of cording to Piaget (1959, 1977), children wh