“All or nothing,” Chloe said. “By having a bigger group, we increase the chances that students at similar ranges of ability connect, even if it’s not a precisely one-to-one match. Say, one student might have to connect with three others in order to be completely covered, and each of those might need one or two others outside of the already existing group.”
“We’re trying to do for a classroom,” Katherine said, “what hypertext did for the written word. We’re creating a ‘web of learning’, sort of.”
“Won’t that just slow them all down?” Phillip asked.
“Not necessarily,” Daniel replied. “The control group has taught us that in the cases where there is positive synchronization, the rate of learning accelerates dramatically for both participants.”
“All right,” Phillip said. “So, in order to make sure you have as many kids completely covered as possible, you need as many kids as possible,” he said.
“Yeah,” Katherine said. “The last Gateway report says that we might be able to make do with a minimum class size of fourteen.”
“The problem arises when you take a look at the number of kids we have committed to the project,” Chloe said, sliding a page over to Phillip. “We’re one short.”
“Four flat refusals and one non-responder,” Phillip said. “We’ve tried convincing the ‘no way’s?”

Did you enjoy this post? Why not leave a comment below and continue the conversation, or subscribe to my feed and get articles like this delivered automatically to your feed reader.


No comments yet.

Leave a comment