Scaffolding Moves by Learners in Online Interactions
محورهای موضوعی : Research Paper
Patrisius Djiwandono
1
(
English Department, Universitas Ma Chung, Indonesia
)
کلید واژه: collaboration, scaffolding, grammar, moves, online instructions,
چکیده مقاله :
Learners can collaborate with each other to achieve a lesson objective. In the collaboration, they can provide each other with guidance in order to identify mistakes and improve their achievements. With the rise of online instructions, this small-scale exploratory study aimed to see how proficient learners guided their less proficient classmates in correcting the grammatical accuracy of sentences. Twenty three learners who were taking a blended-learning grammar class were assigned to post brief essays on Edmodo and the more able learners were instructed to help their weaker classmates find and correct the errors in their essays. A total of 18 essays and 15 lines of comments were generated in their online interactions. A coding was done to identify the moves of the learners as they gave and received peer corrections. The results indicated that the more able learners made seven types of moves for guiding their classmates, with only three sequences incorporating a relatively complete scaffolding moves. The weak learners, however, hardly responded to their more proficient classmates. Reluctance to prolong the discussion in online setting and the difficulties in dealing with detailed grammatical items in such setting may have been responsible for this low rate of responses.
Abramenka, V. (2015). Students’ motivations and barriers to online education. Unpublished Master’s thesis. Grand Valley State University. Retrieved 28 July 2017 from http://scholarworks.gvsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1775&context=theses
Banna, J., Lin, M.G., Stewart, M., & Fialkowski, M. K. (2015). Interaction matters, strategies to promote engaged learning in online introductory nutrition course. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 11(2), 249-261.
Cross, C., & Oppenheim, C. (2006). A genre analysis of scientific abstracts. Journal of Documentation 62(4), pp. 428-446.
Daniel, H. (2016). Vygotsky and pedagogy. Oxon: Routledge.
Ding, H. (2007). Genre analysis of personal statement, Analysis of moves in application essays to medical and dental schools. English for Specific Purposes (2),368 – 392.
Dow, M. J. (2008). Implications of social presence for online learning: a case study of MLS students. Journal of Education and Library for Social Science, 49(4), pp. 231 – 242.
Farooq, O., & Matteson, M. (2016). Opportunities and challenges for students in an online seminar-style course in LIS education: A Qualitative Case Study. Journal of Education for Library and Information Science, 57(4), 271-282.
Fisher, D., & Frey, N. (2010). Guided instruction: how to develop confident and successful learners. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Fu, T., & Nassaji, H. (2016). Corrective feedback, learner uptake, and feedback perception in a Chinese as a foreign language classroom. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 6(1), pp. 159 – 181.
Gagne, N., & Parks, S. (2013). Cooperative learning tasks in a Grade 6 intensive ESL class: Role of scaffolding. Language Teaching Research 17(2): 188-209.
Gibbons, P. (2014). Scaffolding language, scaffolding learning: teaching English language learners in the mainstream. London: Heinneman
Hennessy, S., Rojas-Drummond, S., Highama, R., Márquez, A.M., Mainea, F., Rios, R. M., García-Carrión, R., Torreblanca, O., & Barreraa, M. J., (2016). Developing a coding scheme for analysing classroom dialogue across educational contexts. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 9, 16–44.
Huang, Y. (2014). Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ithindi, E. T. 2013. Using discussion forums to mediate learning in higher education: a literature review through an activity theory lens. Journal of Language and Communication, 7(2), pp. 1 – 11.
Kern, R., Ware, P., & Warschauer, M. (2004). Crossing frontiers: New directions in online pedagogy and research. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 24, pp. 243 – 260.
Kim, Y and McDonough, K. (2008). The effect of interlocutor proficiency on the collaborative dialogue between Korean as a second language learners. Language Teaching Research, 12(2), pp. 211 – 234.
Koole, T., & Elbers, E. 2014. Responsiveness in teacher explanations, a conversation analytical perspective on scaffolding. Linguistics and Education, 26, 57 – 69.
Krussel, L., Springer, G. T., &Edwards, B. 2004. The teacher's discourse moves: a framework for analyzing discourse in mathematics classrooms. School Science and Mathematics 104.7, pp. 307-314.
Lata, P., & Luhach, S. 2016. Redefining pedagogy by using technical scaffolding for teaching advanced ESL. In Pixel (Ed.). Conference proceedings ICT for language learning (9th ed). Florence, Italy, 17 – 18 November 2016, pp. 191 - 195.
Marcail, D. E., Caballero, R. D. B., Rendal, J. B., & Patrimonio, G. A. (2015). “I am offline”: measuring barriers to open online learning in the Philippines. Information Technologies and Learning Tools 45, 1, pp. 28 – 39.
Marzec-Stawiarska, M. (2015). Wikis and new perspectives for collaborative writing. In Piasecka, L., Adams-Tukiendorf, M., & Wilk, P. (Eds). New media and perennial problems in foreign language learning and teaching. Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.
Mirzaei, A., Hashemian, M, & Safari, F. (2016). Exploring rhetorical-discourse moves in Hassan Rouhani’s inaugural speech: A eulogy for moderation. International Journal of Society, Culture & Language, 4(2), pp. 39-54.
Muilenburg, L. Y., & Berge, Z. L. (2005). Student barriers to online learning: a factor analytic study. Distance Education 26, 1, 29 – 48.
Nelson, K. S., & McGee, L. (2013). Scaffolding children’s reading during guided reading in intervention programs. In Ortlieb, E., & Cheek, E. H. (eds.). School-based interventions for struggling readers K-8 (Literacy Research, Practice and Evaluation, Volume 3). Emerald Group Publishing Limited, pp.61 - 78
Philip, J., & Tognini, R. (2009). Language acquisition in foreign language contexts and the differential benefits of interaction. IRAL, International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching 47(3), pp. 245-266.
Safa, M. A., & Rozati, F. 2017. The impact of scaffolding and nonscaffolding strategies on the EFL learners' listening comprehension development. The Journal of Educational Research, 110(5), pp. 447-456
Schmidt, R. (2001). Attention. In Robinson, P. (ed). Cognition and second language instruction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 3 - 32.
Sticher, A. (2009). Scaffolding in the EFL classroom. Norderstedt: GRIN Verlag.
Swales, J. M. (2004) The manuscript version of chapter seven of research genres: Explorations and application. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Taledinejad, M.R., & Akhgar, F. (2015). The impact of teacher scaffolding on Iranian intermediate EFL learner's listening comprehension achievement. Theory and Practice in Language Studies 5(5), pp. 1101 – 1112.
Thurmond, V., & Warmbach, K. (2004). Understanding interactions in distance education, A review of the literature. Technology & Distance Learning, 1(1).
Wood, D., Bruner, J. S., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring and problem solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry 17, pp. 89 – 100.
Ziegler, N. (2016). Taking technology to task: Technology-mediated TBLT, performance of production. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 36, pp. 136-163.
