Fading distributed scaffolds: the importance of complementarity between teacher and material scaffolds

Designing learning environments with distributed scaffolding—support distributed across different instructional tools, activities, and the teacher—can help support students’ different needs, but a critical question is how the design incorporates the hallmark feature of responsive support. While most material scaffolds in instructional tools are inherently static, teachers can complement support provided in material scaffolds by providing responsive assistance and mediating students’ interactions within their environment to both support and challenge students. Our study explores the interplay between support embedded in instructional materials and scaffolding provided by teachers. We focused on how teachers’ scaffolding complemented the fading material scaffolds in a paper-and-pencil tool and how this combination of support impacted students’ learning of science practices and content. Differences in teachers’ responsive versus static scaffolding moves corresponded with differences in students’ performance as material scaffolds faded in support. One teacher complemented support provided by the material scaffolds by frequently monitoring students’ understanding and providing additional support as needed, even when material scaffolds faded; her students maintained a high level of performance throughout the unit. In contrast, the other teacher tended to extend the static kind of scaffolding found in the instructional materials rather than adapt support to his students’ needs as material scaffolds faded; his students showed a significant decrease in performance over time. Our findings show that the complementarity between responsive scaffolding moves from the teacher and scaffolding embedded in instructional materials is important for effectively supporting the wide range of students’ needs in the classroom.

[1]  S. Puntambekar,et al.  Tools for Scaffolding Students in a Complex Learning Environment: What Have We Gained and What Have We Missed? , 2005 .

[2]  J. Bruner,et al.  The role of tutoring in problem solving. , 1976, Journal of child psychology and psychiatry, and allied disciplines.

[3]  Roger Azevedo,et al.  Adaptive Human Scaffolding Facilitates Adolescents’ Self-regulated Learning with Hypermedia , 2005 .

[4]  R. Sternberg.  What Is an “Expert Student?” , 2003 .

[5]  Peg A Ertmer,et al.  Goals and Strategies of a Problem Based Learning Facilitator , 2012 .

[6]  Ann L. Brown,et al.  Reciprocal Teaching of Comprehension-Fostering and Comprehension-Monitoring Activities , 1984 .

[7]  Thomas Brush,et al.  Scaffolding critical reasoning about history and social issues in multimedia-supported learning environments , 2002 .

[8]  Brian J. Reiser,et al.  Complementary roles of software-based scaffolding and teacher-student interactions in inquiry learning , 1997, CSCL.

[9]  Iris Tabak,et al.  The Teacher as Partner: Exploring Participant Structures, Symmetry, and Identity Work in Scaffolding , 2004 .

[10]  F. Oort,et al.  Teacher Scaffolding in Small-Group Work: An Intervention Study , 2014 .

[11]  E. Forman,et al.  Discursive strategies that foster an epistemic community for argument in a biology classroom , 2017 .

[12]  Alex Kozulin,et al.  Mediated learning experience and psychological tools: Vygotsky's and Feuerstein's perspectives in a study of student learning , 1995 .

[13]  Zacharias C. Zacharia,et al.  How Much Guidance Students Need When Designing Experiments in a Computer-Supported Inquiry Learning Environment , 2018 .

[14]  Ricki Goldman,et al.  Conducting Video Research in the Learning Sciences: Guidance on Selection, Analysis, Technology, and Ethics , 2010 .

[15]  Kenneth Epstein,et al.  Intelligent instructional systems: teachers and computer-based intelligent tutoring systems , 1990 .

[16]  J. Kolodner,et al.  Toward implementing distributed scaffolding: Helping students learn science from design , 2005 .

[17]  Rosemary Luckin,et al.  Re-Designing Learning Contexts: Technology-Rich, Learner-Centred Ecologies , 2010 .

[18]  Pierre Dillenbourg,et al.  Design for classroom orchestration , 2013, Comput. Educ..

[19]  Michael J. Hannafin,et al.  Scaffolding 6th graders’ problem solving in technology-enhanced science classrooms: a qualitative case study , 2011 .

[20]  Iris Tabak,et al.  Synergy: A Complement to Emerging Patterns of Distributed Scaffolding , 2004, The Journal of the Learning Sciences.

[21]  Michelle Taub,et al.  Are Pedagogical Agents' External Regulation Effective in Fostering Learning with Intelligent Tutoring Systems? , 2016, ITS.

[22]  Joseph Krajcik,et al.  A Scaffolding Design Framework for Software to Support Science Inquiry , 2004, The Journal of the Learning Sciences.

[23]  Brian J. Reiser,et al.  The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences: Scaffolding , 2014 .

[24]  Arthur Bakker,et al.  A conceptualisation of whole‐class scaffolding , 2013 .

[25]  Brian J. Reiser,et al.  Scaffolding Complex Learning: The Mechanisms of Structuring and Problematizing Student Work , 2004, The Journal of the Learning Sciences.

[26]  Christine Chin.  Teacher questioning in science classrooms: Approaches that stimulate productive thinking , 2006 .

[27]  M. Volman,et al.  Scaffolding in Teacher–Student Interaction: A Decade of Research , 2010 .

[28]  Susanne P. Lajoie.  Extending the Scaffolding Metaphor , 2005 .

[29]  E. Elbers,et al.  Responsiveness in teacher explanations: A conversation analytical perspective on scaffolding , 2014 .

[30]  Brian R. Belland,et al.  Distributed Cognition as a Lens to Understand the Effects of Scaffolds: The Role of Transfer of Responsibility , 2011 .

[31]  S. Puntambekar,et al.  Comparing Classroom Enactments of an Inquiry Curriculum: Lessons Learned From Two Teachers , 2007 .

[32]  Janet Ward Schofield,et al.  Teachers, Computer Tutors, and Teaching: The Artificially Intelligent Tutor as an Agent for Classroom Change , 1994 .

[33]  B. Belland,et al.  Scaffolding argumentation about water quality: a mixed-method study in a rural middle school , 2015, Educational Technology Research and Development.

[34]  Brian R. Belland,et al.  Portraits of middle school students constructing evidence-based arguments during problem-based learning: the impact of computer-based scaffolds , 2010 .

[35]  H. Mehan,et al.  Learning Lessons, Social Organization in the Classroom , 1979 .

[36]  H. Borko,et al.  Video as a Tool for Fostering Productive Discussions in Mathematics Professional Development. , 2008 .

[37]  Patrick Jermann,et al.  Classroom orchestration: The third circle of usability , 2011, CSCL.

[38]  Douglas B. Clark,et al.  WISE design for knowledge integration , 2003 .

[39]  Peter Maurer,et al.  The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences , 2022 .

[40]  L. S. Vygotskiĭ,et al.  Mind in society : the development of higher psychological processes , 1978 .

[41]  Design-Based Research: An Emerging Paradigm for Educational Inquiry , 2003 .

[42]  Rosemary Luckin.  Knowledge construction in the zone of collaboration: scaffolding the learner to productive interactivity , 1998 .

[43]  Joseph Krajcik,et al.  Synergy Between Teacher Practices and Curricular Scaffolds to Support Students in Using Domain-Specific and Domain-General Knowledge in Writing Arguments to Explain Phenomena , 2009 .

[44]  Michelle Taub,et al.  Can the use of cognitive and metacognitive self-regulated learning strategies be predicted by learners' levels of prior knowledge in hypermedia-learning environments? , 2014, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[45]  Joseph Krajcik,et al.  Supporting Students' Construction of Scientific Explanations by Fading Scaffolds in Instructional Materials , 2006 .

[46]  Roy,et al.  The Social and Technological Dimensions of Scaffolding and Related Theoretical Concepts for Learning , Education , and Human Activity , 2004 .

[47]  Rose Luckin,et al.  Ecolab: the development and evaluation of a Vygotskian design framework , 1999 .

[48]  Susan M. Land,et al.  A conceptual framework for scaffolding III-structured problem-solving processes using question prompts and peer interactions , 2004 .

[49]  Steven E. Stemler,et al.  An Overview of Content Analysis. , 2001 .

[50]  Lindy L. Johnson,et al.  Distributed Scaffolding in a Service-Learning Course , 2015 .

[51]  Annelies Raes,et al.  Scaffolding information problem solving in web-based collaborative inquiry learning , 2012, Comput. Educ..

[52]  C. Westby,et al.  Reciprocal Teaching , 2020, Word of Mouth.

[53]  Susanne P. Lajoie,et al.  Constructing knowledge in the context of BioWorld , 2001 .

[54]  Sarah J. Fick,et al.  Characterizing Teachers' Verbal Scaffolds to Guide Elementary Students' Creation of Scientific Explanations. , 2013 .

[55]  Roger Azevedo,et al.  Adaptive Content and Process Scaffolding: A key to facilitating students' self-regulated learning with hypermedia , 2011 .

[56]  Iris Tabak,et al.  BGuILE: Stragtegic and conceptual scaffolds for scientific inquiry in biology classrooms , 2001 .

[57]  J. Remillard.  Examining Key Concepts in Research on Teachers’ Use of Mathematics Curricula , 2005 .

[58]  Janet L. Kolodner,et al.  Problem-Based Learning Meets Case-Based Reasoning in the Middle-School Science Classroom: Putting Learning by Design(tm) Into Practice , 2003 .