Abstract
The social cultural theory and concept of zone of proximal development (ZPD) of Lev Vygotsky are often referred to as the theoretical underpinnings of scaffolding (Stone, J Learn Disabil 31: 344–364, 1998; Davis 2003; Pea, J Learn Sci 13(3): 423–451, 2004). Under Vygotsky’s influence, an in-depth empirical study was done on scaffolding processes by Wood, Brunner, and Ross. Wood and co-workers (J Child Psychol Psychiatry 17(2): 89–100, 1976) coined the term “scaffolding” to describe the support a learner received to achieve specific goals that would otherwise be beyond his or her independent reach. Since the introduction of this metaphor 35 years ago, it has been widely used and adapted for educational contexts. This construct has been applied frequently, practiced broadly, and generalized by educators and researchers for classroom practices and studies. Since then, the term “scaffolding” has also been redefined and reinterpreted in various ways, but the main idea of it being a form of support for learners attempting to achieve specific learning goals under a wide range of learning environments remains unchanged. This paper presents a recent study in Singapore on the use of scaffolds in a school science laboratory setting. It will examine research studies on the various support strategies, materials, and tools used in various learning environments and goals that may also be appropriately used in the learning of school science, especially while learners are engaged in performing science experimental tasks in a laboratory setting. The paper will include a sharing of the various laboratory-based scaffolding structures used in the study to help students do and learn science through hands-on experimental tasks. The recommendations on how students’ competencies in school experimental science can be enhanced through scaffolds (and the gradual weaning of these) will be useful to science teachers, educators, and educational researchers looking at ways to improve students’ achievements in school science.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Anghileri, J. (2006). Scaffolding practices that enhance mathematics learning. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 9, 33–52.
Au, S. K. (2009, October). Scaffolding chemistry laboratory. Paper presented at International Conference of East-Asian Science Education 2009, Taipei.
Au, S. K., & Tan, K. S. (2010, January). Scaffolding chemistry laboratory: Student views of the scaffolds provided in practical work. Proceedings of the sixth international conference on Science, Mathematics and Technology 2010, Hualien.
Byrnes, B. (2001). Cognitive development and learning in instructional context (2nd ed.). Allyn/Bacon: Needham Heights, M. A.
Chen, C.-H., & Bradshaw, A. C. (2007). The effect of web-based question prompts on scaffolding knowledge integration and ill-structured problem solving. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 39(4), 359–375.
Davis, E. A. (2003). Prompting middle school science students for productive reflection: Generic and directed prompts. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(1), 91–142.
Davis, E. A., & Linn, M. C. (2000). Scaffolding students’ knowledge integration: Prompts for reflection in KIE. International Journal of Science Education, 22(8), 819–837.
Hammond, J., & Gibbons, P. (2006). What is scaffolding? Teachers’ voices 8: Explicitly supporting reading and writing in the classroom (pp. 8–16). Sydney: National Centre for English Language Teaching and Research, Macquarie University.
Hobsbaum, A., Peters, S., & Sylva, K. (1996). Scaffolding in reading recovery. Oxford Review of Education, 22(1), 17–35.
Hogan, K., & Pressley, M. (Eds.). (1997). Scaffolding student learning: Instructional approaches and issues (Advances in learning & teaching, pp. 74–107). Cambridge, MA: Brookline Books.
Holbrook, J., & Kolodner, J. L. (2000). Scaffolding the development of an inquiry-based (science) classroom. In B. Fishman, & S. O’Connor-Divelbiss (Eds.), Fourth international conference of the learning sciences (pp. 221–227). Mahwah: Erlbaum.
Krajcik, J., Blumenfeld, P. C., Marx, R. W., Bass, K. M., Fredericks, J., & Soloway, E. (1998). Inquiry in project-based science classrooms: Initial attempts by middle school students. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 7, 313–350.
Lajoie, S. P. (2005). Extending the scaffolding metaphor. Instructional Science, 33, 541–557.
Li, D. D., & Lim, C. P. (2008). Scaffolding online historical inquiry tasks: A case study of two secondary school classrooms. Computers & Education, 50, 1394–1410.
Lin, T. –C., Hsu, Y. –S., Lin, S. –S., Changlai, M. –L., Yang, K. –Y., & Lai, T. –L. (2012). A review of empirical evidence on scaffolding for science education. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 10, 437–455.
Maybin, J., Mercer, N., & Stierer, B. (1992). ‘Scaffolding’ learning in the classroom. In K. Norman (Ed.), Thinking voices: The work of the national curriculum project. London: Hodder and Stoughton for the National Curriculum Council.
Mercer, N. (1994). Neo-Vygotskian theory and classroom education. In B. Steirer & J. Maybin (Eds.), Language, literacy and learning in educational practice. Clevedon/Avon: Multilingual Matters.
Meyer, D. K. (1993). What is scaffolded instruction? Definitions, distinguishing features, and misnomers. In D. J. Leu & C. K. Kinzer (Eds.), Examining central issues in literacy research, theory, and practice (pp. 41–53). Chicago: National Reading Conference.
Palincsar, A. S. (1998). Keeping the metaphor of scaffolding fresh—A response to C. Addison Stone’s “The metaphor of scaffolding: Its utility for the field of learning disabilities”. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 31, 370–373.
Pea, R. D. (2004). Commentary: The social and technological dimensions of scaffolding and related theoretical concepts for learning, education, and human activity. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(3), 423–451.
Puntambekar, S., & Hubscher, R. (2005). Tools for scaffolding students in a complex learning environment: What have we gained and what have we missed? Educational Psychologist, 40(1), 1–12.
Puntambekar, S., & Kolodner, J. L. (1998). Distributed scaffolding: Helping students learn in a learning by design environment. In A. S. Bruckman, M. Guzdial, J. L. Kolodner, & A. Ram (Eds.), Proceedings of the third international conference of the learning sciences (ICLS ‘98) (pp. 35–41). Atlanta: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education.
Puntambekar, S., & Kolodner, J. L. (2005). Toward implementing distributed scaffolding: Helping students learn science from design. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(2), 185–217.
Quintana, C., Reiser, B. J., Davis, E. A., Krajcik, J. S., Fretz, E., Duncan, R., et al. (2004). A scaffolding design framework for software to support science inquiry. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(3), 337–386.
Raes, A., Schellens, T., Wever, B. D., & Vanderhoven, E. (2012). Scaffolding information problem solving in web-based collaborative inquiry. Computers & Education, 59(1), 1–13. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2011.11.010.
Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1985). Research on written composition. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 778–803). New York: Mac Millan.
Sherin, B., Reiser, B. J., & Edelson, D. (2004). Scaffolding analysis: Extending the scaffolding metaphor to learning artifacts. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(3), 38–421.
Simons, K. D., & Klein, J. D. (2007). The impact of scaffolding and student achievement levels in a problem-based learning environment. Instructional Science, 35(1), 42–72.
Stone, C. A. (1993). What’s missing in the metaphor of scaffolding? In E. A. Forman, N. Minick, & C. A. Stone (Eds.), Contexts for learning: Sociocultural dynamics in children’s development (pp. 169–183). New York: Oxford University Press.
Stone, C. A. (1998). The metaphor of scaffolding: Its utility for the field of learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 31, 344–364.
Tabak, I. (2004). Synergy: A compliment to emerging patterns of distributed scaffolding. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(3), 305–335.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Interaction between learning and development (M. Lopez-Morillas, Trans.). In M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner, & E. Souberman (Eds.), Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes (pp. 79–91). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Woelders, A. (2007). “It makes you think more when you watch things”: Scaffolding for historical inquiry using film in the middle school classroom (The social studies). Washington, DC: Heldref Publications.
Wood, D., Bruner, J. S., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Child Psychology & Psychiatry & Allied Disciplines, 17(2), 89–100.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Kheng, A.S., Siang, T.K. (2014). Laboratory-Based Scaffolding Strategies for Learning School Science. In: Zhang, B., Fulmer, G., Liu, X., Hu, W., Peng, S., Wei, B. (eds) International Conference on Science Education 2012 Proceedings. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-54365-4_15
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-54365-4_15
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-54364-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-54365-4
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawEducation (R0)