El museo como espacio Normalizador.

The concept of scaffolding as a practice within the ZPD did not originate with Vygotsky, although Pea (2004) suggests the notion was foreshadowed in his concept of the ZPD. Wood, Bruner, and Ross (1976) introduced the term as they described the assistance afforded by a tutor for a learner, particularly through such principles as keeping the learner on task and gradually withdrawing support as the learner becomes more independent.

Scaffolding is now widely recommended as a pedagogical practice, particularly for tertiary education, in the context of the FYHE. At times, as Pea (2004) explains, “It has

become unclear in its significance” (p. 423) and been applied rather loosely, to describe any type of assistance, including web-based support or lists of instructions provided by an expert for a novice (Lantolf & Thorne, 2007; Wilson & Devereux, 2014).

Devlin et al. (2012) provide a broad explanation of the concept of scaffolded learning in the context of the FYHE, particularly noting its purpose of contributing towards learner independence:

The term ‘scaffolded learning’ takes its name from the idea of a support

structure that is gradually removed as the central entity becomes strong enough to stand on its own. (p. 41)

Note that they use the word “tailored”, indicating the need for careful design:

Scaffolded learning refers to learning that is tailored to meet student needs, helps students reach their learning goals and provides the necessary degree of support to assist students in their learning. (p. 41)

Scaffolding that is not a good fit for a learner, for which a ZPD is too wide, is not likely to be effective; it may have disastrous results for non-confident learners. Navarre Cleary (2012) describes an instance of such non-tailored support provided for adult learners in an introductory writing course for returning adult students at a US university:

Sam’s assignment did attempt to scaffold her writing with a series of questions asking her to identify a learning experience, describe it, reflect upon it, and

77

generalize about it. The question designed to help her generalize asked about the

“theories, ideas, concepts, or principles” informing her experience. Her teacher

told her to “write a full paragraph. This is where you have to talk about the theory behind dance.” However, Sam had no idea what was meant by “theory”: “I don’t even know what those theories are. I don’t even know what they’re talking about.” (p. 367)

This example exemplifies important principles concerning scaffolding and non- traditional students. Navarre Cleary (2012, p. 367) explains that scaffolding was provided for Sam through the assignment instructions with clear commands to

“identify”, “describe”, “reflect”, and “generalise”. However, it seems that in this

instance, the instructor’s theory of the learner was possibly generic; the language of the scaffolding denoted situated concepts Sam had not yet met: “I don’t even know what

they’re talking about”. Rather than supporting her learning, the intended scaffolding emphasised to Sam that she did not fit in an academic environment. Her anxiety about

writing, which had already caused “mouth sores” and “muscle spasms”, increased. She

dropped out of college before the end of her first semester. In the study group in this research, it would be important to ensure that scaffolding afforded for participants was at an appropriate level.

Concerning course design, van Lier (2007, p. 61) advocates designing scaffolding on three time scales in order to provide a framework through which students may achieve mastery:

x Macro: planning (a syllabus, a chain of tasks, a project, etc.) over a long term period

x Meso: planning the steps of a particular activity or task

x Micro: moment-to-moment interactional work

These levels would be incorporated into study group design. On the macro level of the content and structure of the study group I would be providing carefully designed, cumulative activities so that participants and I would be working in the ZPD. On the meso level, steps would be designed within each activity. On the micro, the informal or

78

prompting that seemed appropriate at the time (van Lier, 2007; Wilson & Devereux, 2014).

Wood et al. (1976) suggest roles for a tutor (or, we could say, an MCP) in scaffolding:

x Acting as a “verbal prodder” (p. 95)

x Providing “direct interventions” into the process (p. 96)

x Modelling by means of “demonstrations, directions, corrections” or “explicit

guidance” (p. 96) x Confirming (p. 96)

x Directing by “marking critical features” (p. 96)

As with establishing the ZPD, so with scaffolding, it is important to understand the needs of learners. Wood et al. (1976) stress the importance of this understanding in

order to construct the scaffolding at an appropriate level. They write of tutors “being able to generate hypotheses about the learner’s hypotheses” (p. 97) in order to tailor the

learning experience: “the tutor’s theory of the learner is so crucial to the transactional

nature of tutoring” (p. 96).

Other forms of scaffolding operating in the study group would be collective scaffolding and the co-construction of texts. Collective scaffolding is a perspective which recognises that in a collaborative situation in which learners support each other the group itself may provide the scaffolding and the mediation usually provided by the MCP (Donato, 1994). Co-construction may involve a group of learners, or learners together with an MCP (Wingate, 2016), working together to write a text.

Key scaffolding principles applicable to the study group therefore, were:

x Activities would be planned to develop incrementally over the macro time period of a semester.

x Tasks would be broken into teachable steps for the meso level.

x Activities would be designed at an appropriate distance from participants’

knowledge and skills, initially as indicated by reconnaissance through literature, to be within the ZPD of the group. Activities would be modified if emerging data suggested the ZPD had been estimated incorrectly.

79

I envisaged that the main forms of scaffolding in study group activities would be questioning, verbal prodding, and modelling. Students would be able to access other forms of scaffolding for their writing from the generic supports provided by the university. Most participants would also be enrolled in the major writing intervention, the academic writing course (2.3.1); in addition, they would be able to access the more permanent forms of support provided by their disciplines in study guides, or available on the university website or from Student Learning.