While recognizing that instructional scaffolding in a whole-class context can engage students’ learning as they move through individual zone of proximal developments (ZPDs), in this chapter, we argue that instructional scaffolding also can collectively engage a class through a shared ZPD when participant structures and discourse practices provide for coparticipation and alter traditional notions of teacher support and shared responsibility. A case study of a chemistry classroom is presented to substantiate this argument and illustrate how instructional scaffolding can be used as a support for collective engagement.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ApplebeeA. N., & LangerJ. A. (1983). Instructional scaffolding: Reading and writing as natural language activities. Language Arts, 60, 168–175.
2.
BlumenfeldP. C. (1992). Classroom learning and motivation: Clarifying and expanding goal theory. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 272–281.
3.
CazdenC. B. (1988). Classroom discourse: The language of teaching and learning. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
4.
CorneliusL. L., & HerrenkohlL. R. (2004). Power in the classroom: How the classroom environment shapes students’ relationships with each other and with concepts. Cognition and Instruction, 22, 467–498.
5.
DoleJ. W., DuffyG. G., RoehlerL. R., & PearsonP. D. (1991). Moving from the old to the new: Research on reading comprehension instruction. Review of Educational Research, 61(2), 239–264.
6.
EngleR. A., & ConantF. R. (2002). Guiding principles for fostering productive disciplinary engagement: Explaining an emergent argument in a community of learners’ classroom. Cognition and Instruction, 20, 399–483.
7.
EricksonF. (1986). Qualitative methods in research on teaching. In WittrockM. C. (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (pp. 119–161). New York, NY: Macmillan.
8.
FredricksJ. A., BlumenfeldP. C, & ParisA. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept: State of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74, 59–119. doi:10.3102/00346543074001059
9.
GlaserB. G., & StraussA. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. New York, NY: Aldine de Gruyter.
10.
GranottN. (2005). Scaffolding dynamically toward change: Previous and new perspectives. New Ideas in Psychology, 23, 140–151.
11.
GreenJ., & WallatC. (1981). Mapping instructional conversations: A sociolinguistic ethnography. In GreenJ. & WallatC. (Eds.), Ethnography and language in educational settings. (pp. 161–205). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
KellyG. J., & CrawfordT. (1997). An ethnographic investigation of the discourse processes of school science. Science Education, 81(5), 533–559.
14.
LemkeJ. L. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning, and values. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
15.
McCaslinM., & HickeyD. T. (2001). Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: A Vygoskian view. In ZimmermanB. J. & SchunkD. H. (Eds.), Self-regulated learning and academic achievement (2nd ed., pp. 227–252). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
16.
MehanH. (1985). The structure of classroom discourse. In van DijkT. (Ed.), Handbook of discourse analysis (Vol. 3, pp. 119–131). London, England: Academic Press.
17.
MeyerD. K. (1993). What is scaffolded instruction? Definitions, distinguishing features, and misnomers. KinzerC. J. & LeuD. J. (Eds.), Forty-second yearbook of the National Reading Conference (pp. 41–53). Chicago, IL: National Reading Conference.
18.
MeyerD. K., & TurnerJ. C. (2002). Using instructional discourse analysis to study the scaffolding of student self-regulation. Educational Psychologist, 37, 17–25.
19.
NewmanD., GriffinP., & ColeM. (1989). The construction zone: Working for cognitive change in school. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
20.
PalincsarA. S. (1986). The role of dialogue in providing scaffolded instruction. Educational Psychologist, 21(1&2), 73–98.
21.
PalincsarA. S., & BrownA. L. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-fostering and comprehension-monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction, 1, 117–175.
22.
PatrickH., TurnerJ. C., MeyerD. K., & MidgleyC. (2003). How teachers establish psychological environments during the first days of school: Inviting engagement or avoidance?Teachers College Record, 105, 1521–1558.
23.
PhilipsS. (1972). Participant structures and communicative competence: Warm Springs children in community and classroom. In CazdenC. B., JohnV. P., & HymesD. (Eds.), Functions of language in the classroom (pp. 370–394). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
24.
PolmanJ. L. (2004). Dialogic activity structures for project-based learning environments. Cognition and Instruction, 22(4), 431–466.
25.
RogoffB. (1990). Apprenticeship in thinking: Cognitive development in social context. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
26.
RosiekJ. (2003). Emotional scaffolding: An exploration of the teacher knowledge at the intersection of student emotion and the subject matter. Journal of Teacher Education, 54, 399–412.
27.
SmithenryD. W. (2009a, April). Enacting whole-class inquiries: An analysis of an expert chemistry teacher's interaction patterns. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA.
28.
SmithenryD. W. (2009b). Integrating guided inquiry into a traditional chemistry curricular framework. International Journal of Science Education, 32(13), 1689–1714.
29.
SmithenryD. W., & Gallagher-BolosJ. A. (2009). Whole-class inquiry: Creating student-centered science communities. Arlington, VA: NSTA Press.
30.
SmithenryD. W., & PatchenT. (2011, April). Diversifying science teaching practices without diminishing achievement. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
31.
StakeR. E. (2005). Qualitative case studies. In DenzinN. K. & LincolnY. S. (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (pp. 443–466). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
32.
TabakI., & BaumgartnerE. (2004). The teacher as partner: Exploring participant structures, symmetry, and identity work in scaffolding. Cognition and Instruction, 22(4), 393–429.
33.
TharpR. G., & GallimoreR. (1991). The instructional conversation: Teaching and learning in social activity. National Center for Research on Cultural Diversity and Second Language Learning. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED341254)
34.
TharpR. G., & GallimoreR. (1998). Rousing minds to life: Teaching, learning, and schooling in social context. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
35.
TurnerJ. C., & MeyerD. K. (2009). Understanding motivation in mathematics: What is happening in classrooms? In WigfieldA. & WentzelK. (Eds.), Handbook of motivation at school (pp. 527–552). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
36.
TurnerJ. C., MeyerD. K., CoxK. E., LoganC., DiCintioM., & ThomasC. (1998) Creating contexts for involvement in mathematics. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 730–745.
37.
TurnerJ. C., MeyerD. K., MidgleyC., & PatrickH. (2003). Teacher discourse and students’ affect and achievement-related behaviors in two high mastery/high performance classrooms. Elementary School Journal, 103, 357–382.
38.
TurnerJ. C., MidgleyC., MeyerD. K., GheenM., AndermanE., KangY., & PatrickH. (2002). The classroom environment and students’ reports of avoidance strategies in mathematics: A multi-method study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 88–106.
39.
VygotskyL. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes (ColeM., John-SteinerV., ScribnerS., & SoubermanE., Eds.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
40.
WertschJ. V. (1985). Vygotsky and the social formation of mind. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
41.
WoodD., BrunerJ. S., & RossG (1976). The role of tutoring in problem-solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 17, 89–100.
42.
YowellC. M., & SmylieM. A. (1999). Self-regulation in democratic communities. Elementary School Journal, 99, 469–490.
