This study examined prospective teachers' lived experiences of assisting peers with instructional technology issues. The study built upon one of ISTE's (2003) essential conditions for integrating technology in education: technical assistance for using technology. Through a review of relevant literature, an argument was made for the study based on a lack of understanding around peer technical assistance with prospective teachers in teacher education programs. This study used social network analysis (Reeves, 2008; Kleinberg, 1998) to find the participants who offer instructional technology assistance to many of their peers. By combining technology and superhub, the word "technohub" was used as a label for the participant population. The study identified the following research question: "What is a technohub's lived experience of assisting peers with instructional technology issues in teacher education courses?" A theoretical framework provided a starting point to explore technohubs' lived experiences by combining the current tensions in teacher education, teacher and technology leadership, and sociocultural and social theories of how people learn. To address the research question, the study drew from transcendental (Husserl, 1913/1982; Moustakas, 1994) and hermeneutic (Heidegger, 1927/1962; van Manen, 1997) strands of phenomenology to create a Neo-Vygotskian methodological orientation. Semi-structured interviews and observations provided data that spoke to technohubs' experiences. Phenomenological thematic analysis was used to find six essential themes of the experience of assisting peers with instructional technology issues. Research outcomes included a discussion of the six themes and a peer-reporting technohub questionnaire. Implications of the findings suggest that teacher education programs: (1) embrace a collaborative nature and environment that emphasizes inquiry and wonderings; (2) provide prospective teachers with opportunities to "play" with emerging technologies and tools; (3) embrace leadership development as an important part of a teacher education program; (4) promote field-based experiences with student-centered models of instructional technology; (5) change how to reward and identify successful technology leadership; (6) create a coherent community throughout a teacher education program; and (7) strongly link theory to practice. Limitations are discussed with an emphasis on the timing of the study and collection of the data. Finally, future avenues of research are presented with a look to additional outlets for the findings. [The dissertation citations contained here are published with the permission of ProQuest LLC. Further reproduction is prohibited without permission. Copies of dissertations may be obtained by Telephone (800) 1-800-521-0600. Web page: http://www.proquest.com/en-US/products/dissertations/individuals.shtml.]