In this article, we provide a process description of scaffolding in music lessons based on the scaffolding model of Van Geert and Steenbeek (2005). Scaffolding is a form of socially mediated learning in which teacher and student constantly adapt their behavior to one another in order to reach a goal. To illustrate this process, data from video-observations of two teacher-student dyads in Suzuki string lessons were analyzed to see how well this data fits the Van Geert and Steenbeek model. Results show the dynamic connection between amount of instruction and instruction type on the one hand and performance level of the student on the other hand. Results also show that the process of socially mediated learning takes the form of an increasing overlap between student and teacher actions, i.e. an increase of the joint action over time.
ChowV. T.KasariC. (1999). Task-related interactions among teachers and exceptional, at-risk, and typical learners in inclusive classrooms. Remedial and Special Education, 20(4), 226–232. Doi: 10.1177/074193259902000406.
4.
CreechA.HallamS. (2003). Parent–teacher–pupil interactions in instrumental music tuition: A literature review. British Journal of Music Education, 20(1), 29–44. Doi: 10.1017/S0265051702005272.
5.
DennenV. P. (2004). Cognitive apprenticeship in educational practice: Research on scaffolding, modeling, mentoring, and coaching as instructional strategies. In JonassenD. H. (Ed.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (2nd ed., Vol. 31, pp. 813–828). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
6.
DukeR. (1999). Teacher and student behavior in Suzuki string lessons: Results from the International Research Symposium on Talent Education. Journal of Research in Music Education, 47(4), 293. Doi: 10.2307/3345485.
7.
EricssonK. A. (2000). Expertise in interpreting: An expert-performance perspective. Interpreting, 5(2), 189–222. Doi: 10.1075/intp.5.2.08eri.
8.
KreitmannE. (1998). Teaching from the balance point: A guide for Suzuki parents, teachers and students. Western Springs, IL: Western Springs School of Talent Education.
9.
KupersE.van DijkM.McPhersonG.van GeertP. (in press). A mixed methods approach to studying co-regulation of student autonomy through teacher-student interactions in music lessons. Psychology of Music.
10.
LehmannA. C.SlobodaJ. A.WoodyR. H. (2007). Psychology for musicians: Understanding and acquiring the skills. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
11.
LewisM. (2005). The importance of dynamic systems approaches for understanding development. Developmental Review, 25(3–4), 247–251.
12.
PentimontiJ. M.JusticeL. M. (2009). Teachers’ use of scaffolding strategies during read alouds in the preschool classroom. Early Childhood Education Journal, 37(4), 241–248. Doi: 10.1007/s10643-009-0348-6.
13.
PrattM. W.GreenD.MacVicarJ.BountrogianniM. (1992). The mathematical parent: Parental scaffolding, parenting style, and learning outcomes in long-division mathematics homework. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 13(1), 17–34. Doi: 10.1016/0193-3973(92)90003-Z.
14.
RostvallA.-L.WestT. (2003). Analysis of interaction and learning in instrumental teaching. Music Education Research, 5(3), 213–226. Doi: 10.1080/1461380032000126319.
15.
RostvallA.WestT. (2005). Theoretical and methodological perspectives on designing video studies of interaction. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 4(4), 1–19.
16.
Rubie-DaviesC. M. (2007). Classroom interactions: Exploring the practices of high- and low-expectation teachers. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 77, 289–306. Doi: 10.1348/000709906X10.
17.
SteenbeekH.JansenL.van GeertP. (2012). Scaffolding dynamics and the emergence of problematic learning trajectories. Learning and Individual Differences, 22(1), 64–75.
18.
SuzukiS. (1969). Nurtured by love. New York: Alfred Publishing Co, Inc.
19.
ThelenE.SmithL. B. (1994). A dynamic systems approach to the development of cognition and action. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
20.
Van de PolJ. V.VolmanM.BeishuizenJ. (2009). Patterns of contingent teaching in teacher–student interaction. Learning and Instruction, 21(1), 46–57. Doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.10.004.
21.
Van de PolJ.VolmanM.BeishuizenJ. (2010). Scaffolding in teacher–student interaction: A decade of research. Educational Psychology Review, 22(3), 271–296. Doi: 10.1007/s10648-010-9127-6.
22.
Van GeertP. (1998). A dynamic systems model of basic developmental mechanisms: Piaget, Vygostky, and beyond. Psychological Review, 105(4), 634, 677.
23.
Van GeertP.SteenbeekH. (2005). The dynamics of scaffolding. New Ideas in Psychology, 23(3), 115–128. Doi: 10.1016/j.newideapsych.2006.05.003.
24.
VygotskyL. S. (1978). Mind in society: Development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
25.
WestT.RostvallA.-L. (2003). A study of interaction and learning in instrumental teaching. International Journal of Music Education, 40(1), 16–27. Doi: 10.1177/025576140304000103.
26.
WoodD.BrunerJ. S.RossG. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 17(1), 89–100.
27.
YarbroughC.PriceH. E. (1989). Sequential patterns of instruction in music. Journal of Research in Music Education, 37(3), 179. Doi: 10.2307/3344668.
