Encyclopedia of Mathematics Education

2020 Edition
| Editors: Stephen Lerman

Learning Environments in Mathematics Education

  • Tak-Wai ChanEmail author
  • Siu Cheung Kong
  • Hercy N. H. Cheng
Reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-15789-0_88
  • 4 Downloads

Computer Scaffolded Learning

Scaffolding refers to adults helping a child in a process of tutorial interactions (Wood et al. 1976). The original definition can be generalized as capable people helping a novice, for instance, parents, tutors, or capable peers. However, when the novice who is scaffolded becomes capable, the scaffolds should fade in order to pass control back to the student.

In terms of Vygotsky’s theory (1978), capable people as a form of scaffolding can help students to develop their potentials that they cannot reach alone, which is well known as the zone of proximal development. In other words, although low-ability students lack enough prior knowledge, they can complete a task if supported appropriately. Furthermore, Bloom (1984) found that if students were taught one-to-one by a human tutor, they could perform two standard deviations better than those taught in a conventional classroom. The finding suggested that capable people could effectively scaffold low-ability...

Keywords

Scaffolding Computer scaffolded learning Computer-supported collaborative learning Mathematical communication 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Alexander PA, Jetton TL (2000) Learning from text: a multidimensional and developmental perspective. In: Kamil ML, Mosenthal PB, Pearson PD, Barr R (eds) Handbook of reading research, vol III. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, pp 285–310Google Scholar
  2. Andriessen J (2006) Arguing to learn. In: Sawyer RK (ed) The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences. Cambridge University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  3. Aydin H, Monaghan J (2011) Bridging the divide – seeing mathematics in the world through dynamic geometry. Teach Math Appl 30(1):1–9Google Scholar
  4. Baroody AJ (2000) Does mathematics instruction for three-to five-year-olds really make sense? Young Child 55(4):61–67Google Scholar
  5. Bloom BS (1984) The 2 sigma problem: the search for methods of group instruction as effective as one-on-one tutoring. Educ Res 13:4–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brown CA, Borko H (1992) Becoming a mathematics teacher. In: Grouws DA (ed) Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning. Macmillan, New York, pp 209–239Google Scholar
  7. Chi MTH, van Lehn KA (1991) The content of physics self-explanations. J Learn Sci 1(1):69–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chi MTH, Bassok M, Lewis MW, Reimann P, Glaser R (1989) Self-explanations: how students study and use examples in learning to solve problems. Cogn Sci 13:145–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chi MTH, de Leeuw N, Chiu MH, Lavancher C (1994) Eliciting self-explanations improves understanding. Cogn Sci 18:439–477Google Scholar
  10. Ching E, Chen CT, Chou CY, Deng YC, Chan TW (2005) P3T: a system to support preparing and performing peer tutoring. In: Looi CK, McCalla G, Bredeweg B, Breuker J (eds) Artificial intelligence in education: supporting learning through intelligent and socially informed technology. IOS Press, Amsterdam, pp 768–770Google Scholar
  11. Cohan PA, Kulik JA, Kulik CC (1982) Educational outcomes of tutoring: a meta-analysis of findings. Am Educ Res J 19(2):237–248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dochy F, Segers M, Buehl M (1999) The relation between assessment practices and outcomes of studies: the case of research on prior knowledge. Rev Educ Res 69(2):147–188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. English LD (ed) (1997) Mathematical reasoning: analogies, metaphors and images. Lawrence Erlbaum & Associates, MahwahGoogle Scholar
  14. Ginsburg HP, Inoue N, Seo K-H (1999) Young children doing mathematics: observations of everyday activities. In: Copley JV (ed) Mathematics in the early years. NCTM, Reston, pp 88–99Google Scholar
  15. Hiebert J (1992) Reflection and communication: cognitive considerations in school mathematics reform. In: Secada WG (ed) International journal of educational research, vol 17. Pergamon Press, Oxford, pp 439–456Google Scholar
  16. Hohenwarter J, Hohenwarter M, Lavicza Z (2009) Introducing dynamic mathematics software to secondary school teachers: the case of GeoGebra. J Comput Math Sci Teach 28(2):135–146Google Scholar
  17. Kilpatrick J, Swafford J, Findell B (eds) (2001) Adding it up: helping children learn mathematics. National Academies Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  18. Kospentaris G, Spyrou P, Lappas D (2011) Exploring students’ strategies in area conservation geometrical tasks. Educ Stud Math 77(1):105–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Mazur E (1997) Peer instruction: a user’s manual. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle RiverGoogle Scholar
  20. Naidoo N, Naidoo R (2007) Using blended learning to facilitate the mathematical thought processes of primary school learners in a computer laboratory: a case study in calculating simple areas. J Coll Teach Learn 4(7):79–94Google Scholar
  21. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (1991) Professional standards for teaching mathematics. NCTM, RestonGoogle Scholar
  22. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (2000) Principles and standards for school mathematics. NCTM, RestonGoogle Scholar
  23. Quintana C, Krajcik J, Soloway E (2002) A case study to distill structural scaffolding guidelines for scaffolded software environments. Comput Hum Interface (CHI 2002) 4(1):81–88Google Scholar
  24. Rohrbeck CA, Ginsburg-Block MD, Fantuzzo JW, Miller TR (2003) Peer-assisted learning interventions with elementary school students: a meta-analytic review. J Educ Psychol 95(2):240–257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Rubenstein RN, Thompson DR (2002) Understanding and supporting children’s mathematical vocabulary development. Teach Child Math 9(2):107–112Google Scholar
  26. Saye JW, Brush T (2002) Scaffolding critical reasoning about history and social issues in multimedia-supported learning environments. Educ Technol Res Dev 50(3):77–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Sharma P, Hannafin MJ (2007) Scaffold in technology-enhanced learning environments. Interact Learn Environ 15(1):27–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Silver EA, Smith MS (1996) Building discourse communities in mathematics classrooms: a worthwhile but challenging journey. In: Elliott PC (ed) 1996 yearbook: communication in mathematics, K-12 and beyond. NCTM, Reston, pp 20–28Google Scholar
  29. Taylor M, Pountney D, Malabar I (2007) Animation as an aid for the teaching of mathematical concepts. J Further High Educ 31(3):249–261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Toulmin SE (1958) The uses of argument. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  31. Uesaka Y, Manalo E (2007) Peer instruction as a way of promoting spontaneous use of diagrams when solving math word problems. In: McNamara D, Trafton J (eds) Proceedings of the 29th annual cognitive science society. Cognitive Science Society, Austin, pp 672–677Google Scholar
  32. Uesaka Y, Manalo E (2011) The effects of peer communication with diagrams on students’ math word problem solving processes and outcomes. In: Carlson L, Hoelscher C, Shipley T (eds) Proceedings of the 33rd annual conference of the cognitive science society. Cognitive Science Society, Austin, pp 312–317Google Scholar
  33. Vygotsky LS (1978) Mind in society: the development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  34. Whitin P, Whitin DJ (2003) Developing mathematical understanding along the yellow brick road. Young Child 58(1):36–40Google Scholar
  35. Wood D, Wood H (1996) Vygotsky, tutoring and learning. Oxf Rev Educ 22:5–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Wood P, Bruner J, Ross G (1976) The role of tutoring in problem solving. J Child Psychol Psychiatry 17:89–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Yu PWD, Tawfeeq DA (2011) Can a kite be a triangle? Bidirectional discourse and student inquiry in a middle school interactive geometric lesson. N Engl Math J 43:7–20Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tak-Wai Chan
    • 1
    Email author
  • Siu Cheung Kong
    • 2
  • Hercy N. H. Cheng
    • 1
  1. 1.Graduate Institute of Network Learning TechnologyNational Central UniversityJhongli CityRepublic of China
  2. 2.Department of Mathematics and Information TechnologyThe Hong Kong Institute of EducationHong KongPeople’s Republic of China