Scaffolding

Dr John Mahoney
Learning Design
12
 m
UKPSF Dimensions

Design and plan learning activities and/or programmes of study

Appropriate methods for teaching, learning and assessing in the subject area in the subject area and at the level of the academic programme

What can I do?

Impact
5
Quality
5
  • Build up learning from basic to advanced knowledge, and don't let students go down the wrong path
  • Give students feedback about how they're going as they're learning
  • Provide examples of how to do practical tasks
  • Partner with students to develop scaffolded learning activities

What is this about?

Scaffolded learning in higher education refers to the use of instructional techniques that provide support and guidance to the learner as they progress through a learning task or activity. Scaffolding can take many forms, but two common examples are adding and fading. Adding involves providing additional support and guidance to the learner as they progress through a learning task, such as breaking a task down into smaller steps or providing additional resources or examples. Fading involves gradually reducing the level of support and guidance provided to the learner as they become more confident and independent in their learning, allowing them to take more ownership of the task. The goal of scaffolded learning is to help students learn more effectively by providing them with the right level of support and guidance at the right time.

What's the evidence say?

There are several large studies on scaffolding with a variety of finding:

  1. Scaffolding interventions significantly improved critical thinking in students (➕➕➕). Research on the effectiveness of instructional interventions in increasing critical thinking skills in students has found that regardless of the study design, such interventions have had a positive impact relative to the comparison group (➕➕➕). However, the effect sizes from these studies have high levels of heterogeneity, so these findings should be interpreted with caution. Among the various research designs, the True Experimental design was found to be the most robust (➕➕➕). Additionally, the study found that regardless of the type of measurement used, instructional interventions have had a significant impact on critical thinking skills, but the effect size varied depending on the measure used. All measurement tools had high levels of heterogeneity, so these findings should be interpreted with caution. Furthermore, the study found that regardless of the method of effect size extraction used, instructional interventions have had a significant impact on critical thinking skills, but the effect size varied depending on the method used (➕➕ to ➕➕➕). All methods of extraction had high levels of heterogeneity, so these findings should be interpreted with caution. The study also found that instructional materials designed to increase critical thinking ability were particularly well-suited for children (ages 6-15y) (➕➕➕➕) and adult learners in non-school settings (➕➕➕). Promising results in post-graduates (➕➕➕➕➕) were undermined by a lack of effect sizes (k=4). In terms of interventional approaches, all approaches were found to have improved critical thinking skills in students relative to the comparison group, but the effect size varied depending on the approach used 1.
    ‍
  2. Scaffolding led to strong pre-post gains in assessment within-subjects, regardless of the knowledge being tested in STEM subjects (➕➕➕➕➕). Scaffolding learning materials have been found to be particularly well suited to STEM college/university-level students (within-subjects) (➕➕➕➕➕). However, the effectiveness of scaffolding did not appear to extend to other levels of education. Additionally, scaffolding learning materials have been found to be particularly well suited to traditional/'mainstream' STEM students (within-subjects) (➕➕➕➕➕) and results for those with learning disabilities seem promising (➕➕➕➕➕). However, the latter was understudied (k<5), along with English language learners (k=3) and under-represented groups (k=3). Furthermore, scaffolding learning materials were found to be particularly well suited to a problem-solving instructional approach within STEM students (➕➕➕➕➕). All other instructional approaches were understudied (k<5) and thus require more research. The study also found that scaffolding learning materials were particularly well suited within students of Mathematics (➕➕➕➕➕). Other STEM disciplines were either understudied (Tech: k=3; Engineering: k=3) or well-studied but with a lower 95% Credibility Interval crossing 0 2.
    ‍
  3. Scaffolded learning significantly benefitted online learning achievement in undergraduate and postgraduate students (➕➕➕➕➕). Scaffolded learning has been found to significantly increase online learning achievement, irrespective of whether the outcome was affective-related (➕➕➕➕➕), cognitive-related (➕➕➕➕➕), or meta-cognitive-related (➕➕➕➕➕). However, it seemed to be particularly effective in relation to the latter meta-cognitive outcomes. Additionally, scaffolded learning was found to be effective regardless of the source of the scaffolding, whether it was computer-based (➕➕➕➕➕), instructor-based (➕➕➕➕➕), or peer-based (➕➕➕➕➕). Results were particularly promising for peer-based scaffolding, but more research is needed in this area. The study also found that scaffolded learning significantly increased online learning achievement in both experimental (➕➕➕➕➕) and quasi-experimental research designs (➕➕➕➕). The large effect size in experimental designs is promising given these types of designs typically have higher internal validity relative to quasi-experimental and non-experimental research designs. However, there was a marked difference in the effectiveness of scaffolded learning between USA-based studies (➕➕➕➕➕) and non-USA-based studies (➕➕➕➕➕). Scaffolded learning was found to significantly increase online learning achievement, regardless of the study discipline, with positive effects reported in Education (➕➕➕➕➕), Communications (➕➕➕➕➕), Computing (➕➕➕➕➕), Science (➕➕➕➕), and Language and Literature (➕➕➕➕). Scaffolded approaches to learning were particularly well suited to the disciplines of Education, Communications, and Computing 3.
    ‍
  4. Students who used computer-based scaffolding within the context of problem-based learning showed better learning performance than those who did not (➕➕➕). Scaffolded approaches in higher education have been found to be particularly effective in benefiting higher order thinking skills in the context of problem-based learning, compared to no scaffolding. Meta-cognitive (➕➕➕) and strategic (➕➕➕) types of computer-based scaffolding were found to be particularly effective. Additionally, all types of scaffolding customisation, specifically fading (➕➕➕➕) and adding (➕➕➕➕), were beneficial to learning with regards to problem-based scenarios. Furthermore, all scaffolding strategies, except question prompts (➕), were found to be beneficial to learning with regards to problem-based scenarios. The study also found that computer-based scaffolding was particularly beneficial to improve students' analysis ability (➕➕➕➕) in relation to solving problems. Positive effects were also found for improvements in synthesising (➕) and evaluation (➕) abilities. The study also revealed that computer-based scaffolding was particularly beneficial to improve students' higher order thinking skills in Engineering (g=0.53), Mathematics (➕➕➕➕), and to a lesser extent in Technology (➕➕➕). However, it is worth noting that the explicit number of effect sizes in this analysis were not specified, so it is unclear how well-studied this aspect was 4.

What's the underlying theory?

There are several theories that help explain the effects of scaffolding on student outcomes in higher education. These include constructivist theory, which suggests that people learn best when they are actively engaged in constructing their own understanding of new concepts; social learning theory, which emphasises the importance of social interactions and relationships in learning; and self-determination theory, which suggests that people are more motivated and engaged when they feel a sense of autonomy and control over their own learning. Taking the former theory further, constructivist theory is a psychological theory that suggests that people learn best when they are actively engaged in constructing their own understanding of new concepts. According to the theory, learning is an active process in which the learner builds new knowledge and meaning based on their prior experiences and knowledge. In the context of higher education, constructivist approaches to teaching and learning involve providing opportunities for students to explore, discover, and create their own understanding of new concepts, rather than simply presenting them with information to be memorized. By providing opportunities for active engagement and constructive learning, educators can facilitate more meaningful and effective learning for their students.

Where does the evidence come from?

We can be very confident that scaffolding learning helps students learn. There are four meta-analyses that inform this summary, all of which are well-designed. The paper 2 which is the reason for the ➕➕➕➕➕ rating lost a rating point for possible risk of bias in its primary studies, but regained this because the main effect size was so large. The other papers were also well-conducted, with only a small number of issues regarding quality across them.

‍

References

1 Abrami, P. C., Bernard, R. M., Borokhovski, E., Wade, A., Surkes, M. A., Tamim, R., & Zhang, D. (2008). Instructional interventions affecting critical thinking skills and dispositions: A stage 1 meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 78(4), 1102-1134.

2 Belland, B. R., Walker, A. E., & Kim, N. J. (2017). A Bayesian network meta-analysis to synthesize the influence of contexts of scaffolding use on cognitive outcomes in STEM education. Review of Educational Research, 87(6), 1042-1081.

3 Doo, M. Y., Bonk, C., & Heo, H. (2020). A Meta-Analysis of Scaffolding Effects in Online Learning in Higher Education. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 21(3), 60-80.

4 Kim, N. J., Belland, B. R., & Walker, A. E. (2018). Effectiveness of computer-based scaffolding in the context of problem-based learning for STEM education: Bayesian meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 30(2), 397-429.

Additional Resources

Tiruneh, D. T., Verburgh, A., & Elen, J. (2014). Effectiveness of critical thinking instruction in higher education: A systematic review of intervention studies. Higher Education Studies, 4(1), 1-17.

Dr John Mahoney

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

Browse popular summaries

Learning Environments

Technology

Using a small amount of technology in the classroom enhances learning, but be careful not to overdo it.

Dr John Mahoney
Learning Design

Simulation

Providing students with opportunities to practice clinical skills can enhance deep learning.

Dr John Mahoney
Designing Presentations

Signalling

You know what's most important right now - show learners too.

Dr Michael Noetel
Learning Environments

Service-learning and Community engagement

Helping those who are less fortunate makes for better students and better people.

Dr John Mahoney
This is some text inside of a div block.

Self-regulatory learning

Learning HOW to learn improves academic achievement.

Dr Michael Noetel
Learning Design

Learning styles

Tailoring your teaching to the preferred learning style of the student does not increase learning.

Dr Michael Noetel