Scaffolding Explorations and p.s. A Possible Non-Spontaneous Concept Example

I agree with Michael's comment on the reading that scaffolding is expert driven and ZPD is socially driven.  While the close of the article is careful to address the reader's skepticism regarding the block assembly tasks being produced by the children as simple mimicry, I wasn't really convinced.  When reading the article, I kept going back to the feeling that the children were in a way being guided toward simple mimicry as opposed to a greater understanding of the shape and function of the blocks comprising the pyramid.

I will say that from my experience with some other interventions, scaffolding does not always function in this same fashion.  One language and literacy intervention designed for young children that I know pretty well isn't as systematic or nuanced as the tutoring described in the Wood article.

My previous understanding of scaffolding, particularly in a group setting, which of course differs from the setting described in the article, was that the teacher employs different strategies to elicit involvement and growth from all children in the classroom depending on their skill level in a particular domain.  Various high support (for children who are struggling with a concept) and low support (to challenge children who have mastered a concept) strategies are employed during lessons.  An overview of the high and low support strategies from the intervention are listed below:

High Support (when a task is too hard):

  • Eliciting
  • Co-participating
  • Reducing Choices


Low Support (when a task is too easy):

  • Reasoning
  • Generalizing
  • Predicting

Are these considered scaffolding strategies, or is the researcher using scaffolding in a way that some could interpret as incorrect? 

They seem like scaffolding strategies, but they lend themselves to a preexisting understanding not only of where children's skills are, but also a certain level of creativity to employ that I think was lacking in the Wood article.

With that being said, I think they are still quite different from ZPD, which has the socio-cultural layers of accumulated everyday experiences and concepts.  I have always felt that teaching is an art, but the nuance of incorporating where children are, not just in terms of their skills, but their everyday experiences and concepts is in some ways reframing my understanding of good pedagogy.  I'm beginning to think more and more that play needs to be the central hub of learning and in-school activities.  The teachers job is to then connect spokes from the hub of play to the wheel of scientific concepts.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

ZPD vs. Scaffolding

Reading Wood et al.'s (1976) original article in which they introduce the metaphor of "scaffolding" really makes clear how different this is from ZPD.  There is no collaboration (perhaps a better word is co-operation) between the expert and the child... the expert guides the child's actions through controlling their immediate problem-solving experience. The model of scaffolding assumes that the expert is, in a sense, all-knowing in relation to the problem and is not an active participant in the actions of problem-solving.  Vygotsky's theory really seems to require a much more dynamic social interaction or series of social interactions. I also question to what extent a tutor operating in this way can engage with a child's everyday and scientific concepts in a meaningful way. Having read Smagorinsky's (2018) article once more, it is hard not to be convinced of his position. He confirmed with Anna Stetsenko at CUNY (who earned her PhD in Psychology at Mosco...
Read more

Can scientific concepts be taught as everyday concepts? My middle school physics teacher

Image
I began reading the chapter on the development of scientific concepts and it was interesting to see how Vygotsky differentiates between scientific and everyday concepts. Scientific concepts are simply learned or received in completed form (most commonly introduced as a term along with its definition) which in turn leads to understanding, learning, and comprehension. Whereas, everyday concepts do not have a formal definition, need not be universal but still helps us understand the functioning of the society and the world in which we live. When reflecting on all this, I was reminded of a middle school physics teacher I had (Sadly, we had her only for one year), who would not introduce new concepts as 'words' and definitions but instead, would begin class with a demonstration. One of which is depicted below. I so vividly remember her explaining inertia through this method:                                 ...
Read more

Learning from teaching vs Impactful experiences from child’s play

I remember very little about my past schooling and I am not sure if it is because I have this belief that we should spend little time reminiscing on the past and looking towards the future or is it that my classroom experiences were all “traditional” and are not stored in my active memory. The latter would seem applicable as I really do remember more key events from my “play times” but very few from the formal school settings. Lev S. Vygotsky states: “In play a child is always above his average age, above his daily behavior; in play it is as though he were a head taller than himself. As in the focus of a magnifying glass, play contains all developmental tendencies in a condensed form; in play it is as though the child were trying to jump above the level of his normal behavior” (1967, 16). The interpretation of the above quote can and has taken many forms but I do not agree that children learn more from play and interactions with their peers than in a formal environment. My ...
Read more