Educators seem to enjoy the tussle of how to define the different elements of instruction. This could be rooted in their historical-cultural background. This could also be rooted in the need to be heard. Whatever the case, it can become confusing to individuals trying to find a solid definition of a term. Hopefully this post will help you to better understand scaffolding in relation to instruction. I have presented six definitions of scaffolding in relation to instruction, the first five definitions assisted in the development of the sixth. Each definition reflects Vygotsky’s 1929 cultural-historical theory of psychological development in relation to scaffolding.
The first definition of scaffolding is “support given by a teacher to a student when performing a task that the student might otherwise not be able to accomplish” (van de Pol, Volman, & Beishuizen, 2010). In the same article van de Pol, Volman, and Beishuizen describe scaffolding as a process that includes contingency, fading, and transfer of responsibility. “Contingency is the tailored, adjusted, and differentiated responses or support that a teacher gives to a student during instruction. Fading is the gradual withdrawal of the scaffolding or contingency support. Transfer of responsibility is the completion of the fading stage, when students can independently process the task” (Ray, 2017, p. 26).
The second and third definition of scaffolding were found in an article titled, Scaffolding Students’ Comprehension of Text. The second definition is “what teachers say and do to enable children to complete complex mental tasks they could not complete without assistance (Pearson & Fielding, 1991, p. 842.” The third definition is “a temporary supportive structure that teachers create to assist a student or a group of students to accomplish a task that they could not complete alone (Graces, Watts, & Graves, 1994, P. 44)” (Clark & Graves, 2005, p. 571). In the same article Clark and Graves discuss scaffolding as a process of gradual release of responsibility that includes three key components: a) all teacher—modeling and instruction, b) joint responsibility—guided practice, and c) all student—practice and application. The article also states that scaffolding allows the teacher to “chunk” the assignment into smaller manageable parts while maintaining the integrity of the whole.
The fourth definition of scaffolding is “a ‘process’ that enables a child or novice to solve a problem, carry out a task or achieve a goal which would be beyond his unassisted efforts” (Wood, Bruner, & Ross, 1976, p. 90). In the same article Wood, Bruner, and Ross describe the scaffolding process to have six key functions or strategies within the process:
1. recruitment – creating engagement of the learner
2. reduction in degrees of freedom – simplifying or narrowing the process
3. direction of maintenance – motivating student towards the goal
4. marking critical features – noting the relevant components of the task, like a rubric and interpreting discrepancies of correct and incorrect production
5. frustration control – providing assistance that creates a learning environment of less stress to the learner
6. demonstration – modeling task for student to emulate
To reach independence or have ownership of a task, Wood and his colleagues believed that students must have some ideas of how to solve the task before they can systematically solve or produce the task themselves.
The fifth definition of scaffolding is found in Vygotsky’s (1929) cultural-historical theory of psychological development, particularly in relation to cognitive development and the zone of proximal development. Vygotsky emphasized several components of scaffolding. The first component is collaboration between teacher or person of higher cognitive ability and the student to solve an issue or complete a task (Vygotsky, 1935). Vygotsky believed that interaction between the student and the teacher must involve a process of removing the scaffolds in order to allow the student to complete the assessed skill using his or her own abilities (as cited in Gredler, 2009). The second component is constantly asking the student to explain the task, these responses help students develop the ability to ask questions and explain concepts. The third component is constantly modeling and explaining tasks, teacher modeling of the ideal form should change to match the current maturation level of students (Vygotsky, 1934/2002). Vygotsky believed that instruction, in the form of teacher modeling, should take place just beyond the tasks that a student can accomplish on their own. The fourth component is assessment to find ideal instruction point or the zone of proximal development. Vygotsky proposed four strategies that teachers could use to scaffold assessment of student capabilities, which included (a) demonstrate how to complete a task and observe the student mirror this demonstration, (b) start a task and ask the student to complete the task, (c) ask the student to complete a task in collaboration with a higher functioning student, and (d) demonstrate metacognition in solving the task (Gredler, 2009). Vygotsky believed that each student has a unique ideal learning level that is based on past interactions of adults, peers, culture, and natural environment and biological factors.
With the previous in mind, a sixth definition of instructional scaffolding was developed “a supportive instructional structure that teachers use to provide the appropriate mechanisms for a student to complete a task that is beyond their unassisted abilities” (Ray, 2017, p. 14).
References
Clark, K., & Graves, M. (2005). Scaffolding students’ comprehension of text. The Reading Teacher, 58(6), 570-580. https://www.jstor.org/journal/readingteacher
Gredler, M. (2009). Learning and Instruction Theory into Practice. Upper Saddle Creek, New Jersey: Pearson Education, Inc.
Ray, J. (2017). Tiered 2 interventions for students in grades 1-3 identified as at risk in reading.
(Doctoral dissertation, Walden University). Retrieved from
https://scholarworks.waldenu.edu/dissertations/3826/
van de Pol, J., Volman, M., & Beishuizen, J. (2010). Scaffolding in teacher-student interaction: A decade of research. Education Psychology Review, 22, 271-296. doi:10.1007/s10648-010-9127-6.
Vygotsky, L. (1929). The problem of the cultural development of the child II. Journal of Genetic Psychology, 36, 415-434. Vygotsky Reader, Blackwell. Retrieved from https://www.marxists.org/archive/vygotsky/works/1929/cultural_development.htm
Vygotsky, L. (1934/2002). Thought and Language. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Vygotsky, L. S., & Kozulin, A. (1935/2011). The dynamics of the schoolchild’s mental development in relation to teaching and learning. Journal of Cognitive Education and Psychology, 10(2), 198-211. http://ia-cep.org/journal/jcep
Wood, D., Bruner, J. S., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Child Psychology & Psychiatry & Allied Disciplines, 17(2), 89–100.
