Peer scaffolding techniques and approaches in preschool children’s multiliteracy practices with iPads
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article presents findings from a 4-month qualitative intrinsic case study that examined 25 preschool children’s early multiliteracy experiences and technology uses within the context of their homes and classroom. First, to find out about the different forms of technology and literacy practices the children participated in within their homes and classroom, we surveyed 13 parents and the two classroom teachers. Next, we conducted regular in-class observations, interviewed seven children about their digital experiences, and analyzed digital artifacts created on the iPads. Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory of learning grounded our interpretation of the classroom events and artifacts regarding multiliteracy practices. We gave special attention to the role of adult and peer scaffolding. This article briefly outlines the process of teacher scaffolding and discusses in detail the instances of peer scaffolding that emerged. Of importance were two video series that demonstrated a more capable peer using various strategies and approaches to scaffold her peers in creating digital literacy texts. Based on the data, we argue that more capable peers can be important sources for scaffolding young children’s multiliteracy experiences in preschool classroom contexts. The findings from this study offer teachers and educational researchers insights into how young children may be engaged in and scaffolded by both teachers and peers in their multiliteracy practices prior to formal schooling.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".