The notion of scaffolding first introduced by Wood, Bruner and Ross (1976) was not just about completing tasks; it included processes relating to “perceptual components (e.g., highlighting task features); cognitive components (e.g., reducing degrees of freedom); and affective components (e.g., controlling frustration)” (Stone, 1998a, p. 345). Wood et al.’s (1976) scaffolding metaphor emerged from research in which they observed the instructional practices used by a tutor working with a pre- schooler as they completed a puzzle task (using 21 blocks of various sizes and shapes to create a 3 D pyramid). They observed that the tutor scaffolded instructions to help the child complete the task. These scaffolds were classified in three ways: providing directed assistance; presenting a verbal error prompt, which required the child to rethink the task; and a straightforward direct verbal instruction given to encourage further construction of the puzzle.
Wood et al. (1976) were initially interested in how instructional strategies and interactive relationships occurring between an adult and child could result in improved understanding and skill learning. While they regarded young children as natural problem-solvers they recognised that learning could be assisted, fostered and improved by specific interactions with more skilful experts. They acknowledged that “more often than not, it involves a kind of ‘scaffolding 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” (1976, p. 90). This description, widely cited in the literature, defines scaffolding as the process of helping children achieve something that they could not do on their own. The notion links with Vygotsky’s ZPD: the development of a child’s cognitive processing through interactions with others which challenge them beyond their capability, yet provide appropriate supports for successful learning.
121
To discuss the characteristics of Wood, Bruner and Ross’s (1976) metaphor of scaffolding based on research in early education and cognitive theories, I focus on the task, the expert’s actions, and the learner’s response. Scaffolding is recognised as a three-way process. Each of the elements is part of a dynamic and interactive relationship; all the components must work in unison to synthesise as a “meeting of minds” between students and teacher.
The task
Task design is crucial for successful pedagogical scaffolding and learning. Tasks for the learner, Wood et al. (1976) claimed, should be designed with several objectives in mind. Tasks need to be entertaining, interesting, “feature rich in the sense of possessing a variety of relevant components” (p. 91), and multifaceted to allow cognitive growth.
The task is designed with the learners in mind, challenging enough to encourage learning but not so challenging as to create frustration. It should be “sufficiently complex to ensure that his [or her] behaviour over time could develop and change…. But the task had not to be so difficult as to lie completely beyond the capability of any of the children” (p. 91). Furthermore, Wood et al. (1976) insisted that tasks should be designed to incorporate constraints or reduction in degrees of freedom. Constraints enable the learner to focus on key aspects of the learning embedded in the task and ensure that learning is manageable. Constraints might be in the form of providing fewer alternatives or a decrease in the size of the task so that the feedback can be regulated.
The expert or teacher’s actions
The work of the expert tutor or teacher is complex and multidimensional. It is the teacher who is responsible for shaping the learning. Wood, Bruner and Ross (1976) recognised that recruitment of the child’s interest
122
to maintain their engagement is one of the key functions of the tutor. Keeping young learners focused “in the field” (p. 98) and motivated is always challenging. Wood et al. (1976) argued that this can be achieved by setting up an “atmosphere of approval and encouragement so that the children seemed eager to complete their constructions” (p. 93). Students must demonstrate an interest and “buy in” to the learning situation. Interestingly, discussions on scaffolding in more recent research often don’t address the impact of the affective dimensions.
Another key function of the expert tutor identified by Wood et al. (1976) is referred to as “direct maintenance … in pursuit of a particular objective” (p. 98). A focus on goal-oriented learning (more recently regarded as learning criteria or learning intentions) ensures the students’ engagement in the task has purpose and direction. This necessitates the expert prioritising the learning purpose or goal.
The researchers maintain that the child’s progress must be consistently monitored. The expert intervenes only when the child is not able to complete the task on his or her own. A key understanding is that the teacher’s scaffolding is not fixed; rather, there is an expectation of adjusting, and “controlling those elements of the task that are initially beyond the learner’s capacity, thus permitting him/her to concentrate upon and complete only those elements within his /her range of competence” (Wood, et al., 1976, p. 90). Teaching adjusts to the child’s response, which “thus [determines] the tutor’s next level of instruction” (p. 92). Scaffolding is viewed as an iterative and interactive process. Wood, Bruner and Ross (1976) observed that tutors marked critical features, to accentuate certain features of the task. “Marking provides information about the discrepancy between what the child has produced and what he [the tutor] would recognize as a correct production” (p. 98).
123
Observing the student and having knowledge of the learning progression is crucial if the teacher is to make decisions regarding which elements of the task to emphasise.
Scaffolding also enables the expert to demonstrate or model solutions to a task. This involves more than just performing the task. “It often involves an ‘idealisation’ of the act to be performed and it may involve completion or even explication of a solution partly executed by the tutee himself ”(Wood, et al., 1976, p. 98). Modelling is a key part of the scaffolding process as students are shown how to perform tasks. Ultimately, the purpose of the teacher’s scaffolded instruction is to support the student with new learning.
The learner’s response
As noted, discussion on the learner’s responses or interactions refers to the individual. The expectation is that scaffolding by an expert initiates change. Change in the child’s performance and in the child’s cognitive and conceptual understanding of the task must be evident. This is what distinguishes scaffolding from other forms of educational support.
Wood et al. (1976) maintained that for learning to happen the student must have some comprehension of the task involved. They argued that the learner would not benefit from assistance unless comprehension of the solution preceded production. “That is to say, the learner must be able to recognise a solution to a particular class of problems before he is himself able to produce the steps leading to it without assistance” (Wood, et al., 1976, p. 90). The reason given for a student’s comprehension to precede production is that without it there can be no effective feedback from the teacher or a deepening understanding for the student. The child must enter the interaction with some understanding of what is to be achieved.
124
Furthermore, it was recognised that learning involves “a hierarchical program in which the component skills are combined into higher skills by appropriate orchestration to meet new, more complex task requirements” (Bruner cited in Wood, et al., 1976, p. 89). A student’s learning is regarded as a reciprocal process where lower order and higher order skills are supported and influence each other and work towards achieving a particular end.
The task – the expert – the learner
Scaffolding was therefore recognised as complex and interactive, and involved dynamic relationships between the expert, the task and the learner which enhanced deeper learning. Wood et al. (1976) explained these knowledge processes by stating that:
The effective tutor must have at least two theoretical models to which he must attend. One is a theory of the task or problem and how it may be completed. The other is a theory of the performance characteristics of his tutee. Without both of these, he can neither generate feedback nor devise situations in which his feedback will be more appropriate for this tutee in this task at this point in task mastery. The actual pattern of effective instruction, then, will be both task and tutee dependent, the requirements of the tutorial being generated by the interaction of the tutor’s two theories. (p. 97)
The effectiveness of the interaction, these researchers maintained, depends not only on the expert’s pedagogical content knowledge, which recognises the learning content inherent in completing the task, but also on the expert’s knowledge of the learner - their skills, understandings and comprehension (or lack of) at the point of interaction – as these together will enable the expert to respond with sensitivity to the individual’s learning situation and task completion.
The scaffolding metaphor as proposed by Wood, Bruner and Ross (1976) represented an instructional process in which learners are carefully scaffolded to achieve understandings that they could not manage on
125
their own. These characteristics have been described according to three key components (task, expert and learner). The potential of the metaphor initiated extensive research over the next decades from a range of disciplines. As a result, the scaffolding metaphor has been reviewed, challenged, elaborated and affirmed over time through varying research interpretations.