The effect of sustained vs. faded scaffolding on students’ argumentation in ill-structured problem solving
Abstract
Research suggests that scaffolding is an important element when gaining problem-solving skills. However, very little research has investigated the role of fading and explored its implications in the context of deep learning. To address this gap, we investigated the effects of fading question prompts on argumentation as learners were given two fading schedules, (1) sustained scaffold schedule, and (2) faded scaffold schedule. We employed three different measurements of argumentation quality to triangulate the results. When using the rubric assessment method, we found no significant differences between the two conditions in argumentation quality. However, when using learning analytics to examine the conceptual linkages of students’ knowledge structure, we found that students in the sustained scaffolding condition performed significantly better than the students in the faded condition. The results indicated that (a) scaffolds should not be faded before students have acquired the necessary problem-solving processes and (b) that novices might need a fuller set of scaffolds for a longer period to support their problem-solving performance. Implications for theory and methods are discussed.
Publication Title
Computers in Human Behavior
Recommended Citation
Tawfik, A., Law, V., Ge, X., Xing, W., & Kim, K. (2018). The effect of sustained vs. faded scaffolding on students’ argumentation in ill-structured problem solving. Computers in Human Behavior, 87, 436-449. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.01.035
