Open main menu
Home
Random
Recent changes
Special pages
Community portal
Preferences
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Incubator escapee wiki
Search
User menu
Talk
Dark mode
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Editing
Instructional scaffolding
(section)
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
===Scaffolding mediated by technology=== When students who are not physically present in the classroom receive instruction, instructors need to adapt to the environment and their scaffolding needs to be adjusted to fit the new learning medium. It can be challenging to find a way to adjust the verbal and visual elements of scaffolding to construct a successful interactive and collaborative learning environment for distance learning. The recent spread of technology used in education has opened up the learning environment to include AI-based methods, [[hypermedia]], [[hypertext]], [[collaborative learning]] environments, and web-based learning environments. This challenges traditional learning design conceptions of scaffolding for educators.<ref name="Hannafin, M. 1999">{{Cite journal |last1=Hannafin |first1=M. |last2=Hill |first2=J. |last3=Land |first3=S. |date=1997 |title=Student-centered learning and interactive multimedia: Status, issues, and implication |url=https://www.proquest.com/docview/233037032 |journal=Contemporary Education |volume=68 |issue=2 |pages=94β99 |issn=0010-7476 |oclc=424884285 |id={{ProQuest|233037032}} |via=[[ProQuest]]}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last=Pea |first=R. D. |date=2004 |title=The social and technological dimensions of scaffolding and related theoretical concepts for learning, education, and human activity |url=http://telearn.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00190619 |journal=[[Journal of the Learning Sciences]] |volume=13 |issue=3 |pages=423β451|doi=10.1207/s15327809jls1303_6 |s2cid=10481973 }}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last=Reiser |first=B. |date=2004 |title=Scaffolding complex learning: The mechanisms of structuring and problematizing student work |url=https://www.sesp.northwestern.edu/docs/publications/78857602544049eb20ee68.pdf |journal=[[Journal of the Learning Sciences]] |volume=13930 |pages=273β304 |doi=10.4324/9780203764411-2 |isbn=9780203764411}}</ref> A 2014 review<ref name=":7" /> of the types of scaffolding used in online learning identified four main types of scaffolding: * conceptual scaffolding: helps students decide what to consider in learning and guide them to key concepts * procedural scaffolding: helps students use appropriate tools and resources effectively * strategic scaffolding: helps students find alternative strategies and methods to solve complex problems * metacognitive scaffolding: prompts students to think about what they are learning throughout the process and assists students reflecting on what they have learnt (self-assessment). This is the most common research area and is thought to not only promote [[higher-order thinking]] but also students' ability to plan ahead. Reingold, Rimor and Kalay have listed seven mechanisms of metacognitive scaffolding that encourage students' metacognition in learning.<ref name=":8">{{Cite journal |last1=Reingold |first1=R. |last2=Rimor |first2=R. |last3=Kalay |first3=A. |date=Summer 2008 |title=Instructor's scaffolding in support of student's metacognition through a teacher education online course: a case study |url=https://www.ncolr.org/jiol/issues/pdf/7.2.4.pdf |journal=Journal of Interactive Online Learning |volume=7 |issue=2 |pages=139β151 |oclc=7006892174}}</ref> These four types are structures that appropriately support students' learning in online environments.<ref>{{Cite book |last1=Hannafin |first1=M. J. |title=Instructional design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory |last2=Land |first2=S. |last3=Oliver |first3=K. |publisher=Lawrence Erlbaum |year=1999 |isbn=9780805828597 |editor-last=Reigeluth |editor-first=C.M. |location=Mahwah, NJ |pages=115β140 |chapter=Open learning environments: Foundations, methods and models}}</ref> Other scaffolding approaches that were addressed by the researchers included: technical support, content support, argumentation template, questioning and modelling. These terms were rarely used, and it was argued that these areas had unclear structure to guide students, especially in online learning, and were inadequately justified. As technology changes, so does the form of support provided to online learners. Instructors have the challenge of adapting scaffolding techniques to this new medium, but also the advantage of using new web-based tools such as wikis and blogs as platforms to support and discuss with students. ====Benefits in online learning environments==== As the research in this area progresses, studies are showing that when students learn about complex topics with computer-based learning environments (CBLEs) without scaffolding they demonstrated poor ability to regulate their learning, and failure to gain a conceptual understanding of the topic.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Hill |first1=J. |last2=Hannafin |first2=M. |date=1997 |title=Cognitive strategies and learning from the World Wide Web |journal=Educational Technology Research & Development |volume=45 |issue=4 |pages=37β64 |doi=10.1007/BF02299682 |s2cid=61122897 |issn=1042-1629 |oclc=5649874254}}</ref> As a result, researchers have recently begun to emphasize the importance of embedded conceptual, procedural, strategic, and metacognitive scaffolding in CBLEs.<ref name="Hannafin, M. 1999"/><ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Hadwin |first1=A. F. |last2=Wozney |first2=L. |last3=Pantin |first3=O. |date=2005 |title=Scaffolding the appropriation of self-regulatory activity: A socio-cultural analysis of changes in teacher-student discourse about a graduate research portfolio |journal=Instructional Science |volume=33 |issue=5β6 |pages=413β450 |doi=10.1007/s11251-005-1274-7 |s2cid=62714710 |issn=0020-4277 |oclc=425116632}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last=Baylor |first=A. L. |date=2002 |title=Agent-based learning environments for investigating teaching and learning |url=https://amybaylor.com/Articles/2002JECR.pdf |journal=Journal of Educational Computing Research |volume=26 |issue=3 |pages=249β270|doi=10.2190/PH2K-6P09-K8EC-KRDK |s2cid=62243288 }}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Puntambekar |first1=S. |last2=Hubscher |first2=R. |date=2005 |title=Tools for scaffolding students in a complex learning environment: What have we gained and what have we missed? |url=http://hubscher.org/roland/courses/hf765/readings/EP_puntambekar_hubscher_2005.pdf |journal=Educational Psychologist |volume=40 |issue=1 |pages=1β12|doi=10.1207/s15326985ep4001_1 |s2cid=39373429 }}</ref> In addition to the four scaffolding guidelines outlined, recent research has shown: * scaffolding can help in group discussions. In a 2012 study,<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Huang |first1=H. |last2=Wu |first2=C. |last3=Chen |first3=N. |date=2012 |title=The effectiveness of using procedural scaffolding in a paper-plus-smartphone collaborative learning context |journal=Computers & Education |volume=59 |issue=2 |pages=250β259 |doi=10.1016/j.compedu.2012.01.015}}</ref> a significant increase in active participation and meaningful negotiations was found within the scaffolded groups as opposed to the non-scaffolded group. * metacognitive scaffolding can be used to encourage students in reflecting and help build a sense of a community among learners.<ref name=":8" /> Specifically, Reingold, Rimor and Kalay recommend using metacognitive scaffolding to support students working on a common task. They believe this can support learners to experience their work as part of a community of learners.<ref name=":8" /> Online classes do not require movement need to a different city or long distances in order to attend the program of one's choice. Online learning allows a flexible schedule. Assessments are completed at the learner's pace. It makes it easier for introverted students to ask questions or drop their ideas, which boost their confidence.<ref name="r199">{{cite web | last=Mozafaripour | first=Sara | title=16 Advantages to Learning Online | website=University of St. Augustine for Health Sciences | date=2020-06-30 | url=https://www.usa.edu/blog/benefits-of-online-learning/ | access-date=2024-06-26}}</ref> Online education is cost-effective and reduces travel expenses for both the learning institution and students. It improves technology literacy for teachers and students.<ref name="r435">{{cite web | last=Jaiswal | first=Priya | title=Revolution of Online Education: Advantages And Disadvantages | website=India TV News | date=2020-12-23 | url=https://www.indiatvnews.com/education/news-online-education-advantages-and-disadvantages-online-learning-online-clases-revolution-673353 | access-date=2024-06-26}}</ref> ==== Downfalls in online learning environments ==== An online learning environment warrants many factors for scaffolding to be successful; this includes basic knowledge of the use of technology, social interactions and reliance on students' individual motivation and initiative for learning.Β Collaboration is key to instructional scaffolding and can be lost without proper guidance from an instructor creating and initiating an online social space.<ref name=":0">{{Cite journal|last1=Cho|first1=Moon-Heum|last2=Cho|first2=YoonJung|date=April 2014|title=Instructor scaffolding for interaction and students' academic engagement in online learning: Mediating role of perceived online class goal structures|journal=The Internet and Higher Education|volume=21|pages=25β30|doi=10.1016/j.iheduc.2013.10.008|s2cid=144273353 }}</ref> Β The instructor's role in creating a social space for online interaction has been found to increase students' confidence in understanding the content and goals of the course.Β If an instructor does not create this space, a student misses out on critical thinking, evaluating material and collaborating with fellow students to foster learning.Β Even with instructors implementing a positive social space online, a research study found that students' perceptions of incompetence to other classmates is not affected by positive online social spaces, but this was found to be less of a problem in face to face courses.<ref name=":0" /> Β Due to the distance learning that encompasses an online environment, [[Self-regulation theory|self-regulation]] is essential for scaffolding to be effective; a study has shown that procrastinators are at a disadvantage in online distance learning and are not able to be scaffolded in the same degree as if there was an in-person instructor.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Tuckman |first=Bruce |date=Summer 2005 |title=Relations of academic procrastination, rationalizations, and performance in a web course with deadlines |journal=[[Psychological Reports]] |volume=96 |issue=4 |pages=1015β1021 |doi=10.2466/pr0.96.3c.1015-1021 |pmid=16173372|s2cid=35744706 }}</ref> Β According to the National Centre for Biotechnology Information research paper, teacher-student interactions are not what they used to be. Social relationships among teachers and their students are weakened due to online learning. Teachers tend to have low expectations from their students during online classes, which leads to low participation. Online education increases the risk of anxiety disorder, clinical depression, apathy, learned helplessness, and burnout. Learners without access to a laptop and the internet are often left out of the online learning world. Online learning courses do not provide enough verbal interaction, which makes it difficult for teachers to measure student engagement and learning outcomes. Students with disabilities often require special software to access educational resources online.<ref name="t149">{{cite web | last=Winograd | first=George | title=Top Advantages And Disadvantages of Online Learning of 2024 | website=Mission Graduate | date=2024-06-22 | url=https://missiongraduatenm.org/disadvantages-of-online-learning/ | access-date=2024-06-26}}</ref> Students who had more desire to master the content than to receive higher grades were more successful in the online courses.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Cho|first1=Moon-Heum|last2=Shen|first2=Demei|date=Summer 2013|title=Self-regulation in online learning|journal=Distance Education|volume=34|issue=3|pages=290β301|doi=10.1080/01587919.2013.835770|s2cid=144928828}}</ref>Β A study by Artino and Stephens<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Artino|first1=Anthony|last2=Stephens|first2=Jason|date=December 2009|title=Academic motivation and self-regulation: A comparative analysis of undergraduate and graduate students learning online|journal=The Internet and Higher Education|volume=12|issue=3β4|pages=146β151|doi=10.1016/j.iheduc.2009.02.001}}</ref> found that graduate students were more motivated in online courses than undergraduate students but suggests that academic level may contribute to the amount of technological support needed for positive learning outcomes, finding that undergraduate students needed less support than graduate students when navigating an online course.
Edit summary
(Briefly describe your changes)
By publishing changes, you agree to the
Terms of Use
, and you irrevocably agree to release your contribution under the
CC BY-SA 4.0 License
and the
GFDL
. You agree that a hyperlink or URL is sufficient attribution under the Creative Commons license.
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)