Why is Scaffolding Important To The Problem Solving Approach

1
Why is Scaffolding Important To The Problem
Solving Approach? The Implications of Competing
Conceptual Frameworks for the Success of
Collaborative Learning Groups Adrien Nicholas,
Peer Leader, City College of New York

Experiment Observation
The Implications of Competing Conceptual
Frameworks for the Success of Collaborative
Learning Groups
Introduction

• Concerns with Problem-Solving Learning Cases
  Studies
• The success of the Problem-Solving Learning
  workshop is based on the tutor. The desired role
  of the tutor in PBL must be quite different in
  nature to that of a tutor in a didactic system.
  The scaffolding effect is more prevalent where
  another student leads the workshop.
• Two essential roles of the PBL tutor
• facilitation of the learning process via
  prompting, and
• assisting in group processes to ensure that
  they maintain focus.
• PROs
• PBL provides students with the chance to work
  with others and build communication skills, group
  interaction skills. Both Piaget and Vygotskys
  learning model allows for cognitive development.
  The goal is that students gain the knowledge
  rather than in which way the interactions
  determine how they obtain it. It is these
  interactions which help to develop the skills
  that will benefit students the most in today's
  work force. These benefits are shared within the
  entire group
• from the student leader, who gains the skills
  required to chair and lead a group of persons to
  perform a specific task (for example solving a
  problem)
• to the students who gain confidence to question
  and evaluate defined solutions to problems,
  which allows for better retention of the
  material.
• Provides situations for students to teach each
  other. When students explain and teach concepts
  to each other, retention of these concepts
  improves.
• Explaining also helps students connect their
  prior knowledge with the new information.

• I understand the material, I just cant solve
  the problem.
• This is a typical sentiment echoed throughout
  mathematical/science based courses.
• During the chemistry workshop of 13th November
  (2003), I recorded some of the comments made by
  the students to a detailed questionnaire and also
  asked
• Would you like someone other than a student to
  be in charge of the workshop?
• Observations Included
• The majority of the group appeared to be
  Algorithmic Problem Solvers while others have
  developed a Conceptual Understanding.
• All students preferred having another student
  facilitate the lecture, some reasons given
• The leader would be more understanding and
  patient
• The leader would be able to explain and
  assimilate the information better than someone
  with greater knowledge of the subject.
• Vygotsky accounted for this in his theory of the
  zone of proximal development. The student leader
  is closer to the student (learner) than is a
  professor in terms of depth of knowledge of the
  course material. Therefore the workshop leader is
  able to foresee areas where confusion may arise.
• A solution in this event is to limit the number
  of new concepts introduced. Keep the language
  used simple so that the student can gain a clear
  knowledge of the clear concepts.
• Other Comments Included
• 4/10 students suggested that more problems be
  done on the blackboard.
• 8/10 students desired more questions
• 10/10 students felt able to attempt previous
  material covered as a group, and were pleased
  with their performance during workshop. All felt
  that they should and can do better on the lecture
  tests.

This poster presents a preliminary hypothesis
that students enlisted in courses using
problem-team (peer) based learning (PBL)
environment would gain more knowledge and skills
where another student facilitated a class.

• The expected intentions of using scaffolding are
• an increased retention of information
• the development of an integrated
• (rather than discipline-bound) knowledge base
• an encouragement towards lifelong learning
• an increase in overall motivation.
• Moreover other results have been observed
• formation of friendships
• gain in confidence among the members of the group
• However failure also occurs if the tutor
  teaches/facilitates algorithmically rather than
  conceptually. Research has indicated that
  students performance in algorithmic
  problem-solving has little connection to their
  conceptual understanding of chemistry. In other
  words, these studies revealed that most students
  are able to solve algorithmic problems but lack
  the understanding of chemistry necessary for
  solving conceptual questions.

The problem-team based approach is the
alternative model to the conventional approach
where students appear to learn problem-solving
primarily through a process of reflective
introspection, while they practice solving
problems and getting assistance from example
problem solutions (probable sources classroom
blackboard or text book examples). The process of
scaffolding is at the heart of the learning
environment, since it allows for the support of
all learning types whether or not they be
cognitively based. Scaffolding would be the
delivery system by which students would gain both
skills and information necessary for the course
and beyond. Scaffolding promotes the goal of
student independence. However this does not drive
the student to be selfish, but rather to gain
independence he/she gains the responsibility of
aiding his/her weaker colleague in the group.
Conclusion
This poster was designed to highlight areas where
students would benefit from the use of
scaffolding, and situations where scaffolding
would be futile if the exchange and evaluation of
the information gained was poor. It is hoped that
testing at both workshop and lecture level would
include both conceptual and algorithmic-based
questions.
Review of Literature
The idea of scaffolding is for the teacher to
take control only when needed and to hand over
the responsibility to the students whenever they
are ready. Through interactions with the
supportive teacher, the students are guided to
perform at an increasingly challenging level. In
response, the teacher gradually fades into the
background and acts as a sympathetic coach,
leaving the students to handle their own
learning. The teacher is always monitoring the
discussions, however, and is ready to take
control again when understanding fails. The zone
of proximal development is the distance between
the actual developmental level as determined by
independent problem solving and the level of
potential development as determined through
problem solving under adult guidance, or in
collaboration with more capable peers" (Vygotsky,
1978,p. 86). In other words, for every student,
there is a range of difficulty he or she is ready
to tackle, from what the student knows and can do
on his or her own to what can only be done with
help. Another way of thinking about it is that
the 'ZPD' denotes the space between actual
knowledge and potential knowledge. Awareness of a
student's ZPD helps a teacher gauge the tasks the
student is ready for, the kind of performance to
expect, and the kinds of tasks that will help the
child reach his or her potential. Piagets work
in cognitive development held that cognitive
conflictthe state in which an individual holds
beliefs or perceptions that are contradictory and
require resolutionis necessary for the
development of logical thought as children
progress from a purely egocentric worldview to
one that allows for the comprehension and
utilization of causal principles and deductive
reasoning. He found that cognitive conflict can
be maximized through the shock of our thought
coming into contact with that of others (Piaget,
1928, p. 204).
Algorithmic Problem Solving and Conceptual
Understanding of.. http//nr.stic.gov.tw/ejournal/
ProceedingD/v11n1/20-38.pdf Pros and Cons to
PBL http//www.ac.wwu.edu/dsisto/pbl/pros-cons.
htm Cooperative Learning Marios Nikita
http//condor.admin.ccny.cuny.edu/eg9306/
marios20research20paper.htm The Implications
of Competing Conceptual Frameworks for the
Success of Collaborative Learning GroupsDavid
Feldon, University of Southern California
http//www.usc.edu/dept/education/TheSource/issue
_2003_spring/feldon.htm Downloaded 21/11/2003
References