Return to: Homepage, Publications, or Newsletters

Table of Contents

• Scaffolding in the Zone of Proximal Development
• Professional Development Opportunities at NAEYC Annual Conference

Scaffolding in the Zone of Proximal Development

Elena Bodrova, Ph.D. and Deborah J. Leong, Ph.D.

Some of the most often asked questions about the Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) are "How do I know what is within this child's ZPD?" and "How do I know what is the right assistance, how do I know when to withdraw it?" We hope that this article will address these questions directly and provide some ideas about how to make use of the ZPD as adults teach children.

The ZPD is the Vygotskian concept that defines the space between the child's level of independent performance and the child's level of maximally assisted performance {figure 1} (Bodrova & Leong, 1996; Vygotsky, 1978). Skills that are fully developed exist at the level of independent performance, and those skills that are on the edge of emergence are located within the ZPD. As the child masters a new task, what he could do with assistance yesterday is what he can do independently today. Vygotskians believe that at any given moment there are things that lie outside of the child's ZPD; thus, no matter what assistance is given, the child will not be able to learn them. When teachers aim only at the independent level of performance, the result is that children practice only what they already know. Over the long term, solely providing activities for this independent level leads to boredom. On the other hand, if the teacher aims consistently too high or outside of the ZPD, this can lead to frustration and to the child giving up because "if s too hard." Vygotskians believe that aiming within the ZPD challenges the child, but also provides the support to insure successful learning.

Knowing What Lies Within A Child's ZPD

In any given classroom, there are two types of ZPD-one is the ZPD for the class as a whole, and the other is the ZPD for individuals within the class. The ZPD for a class is generally approximated by the teacher from her past experience at a specific grade level, the expectations set by the grade-level curriculum, and any standards that may have been developed., Communication with teachers from the previous grades can also help the teacher to aim at the appropriate class ZPD. The class ZPD sets the sequence in which the various skills/concepts/ strategies are presented, as well as defines the types of activities to be used. As the teacher gets to know the children and learns what they can do as a group, the approximated ZPD becomes more accurate and exact.

Within each classroom ZPD, however, there are many individual ZPD identifying each of these areas is where teachers have the most trouble. There may be differences between the ZPD's of two children, but any given child may also have a different ZPD for different activities. For example, Joann's ZPD in math may differ from her ZPD in reading. We recognize that determining the ZPD's for each individual child is an overwhelming task, but at the same time, when we work within each child's ZPD, we waste less time, see more progress, and have children who are challenged without being frustrated (Berk & Winsler, 1995; Tharp & Gallimore, 1988).

Individual ZPD's can be approximated by using initial assessments that teachers do at the beginning of the year, information collected during the previous year, or the child's reaction to activities designed for the class ZPD. The word approximated is very important because the teacher must form a tentative idea about what the ZPD is, and this idea must then be verified by interaction with that child or observation of the child.

Once an approximation has been made, the teacher can vary the context to find the boundaries of the ZPD. By "varying the context," we mean observing the child using the skill alone, with peers of the same and different levels of expertise, with different materials, or with the teacher. For example, sometimes a child who is reluctant to read aloud to a teacher will show her most mature skills while reading to a younger child. We are not advocating developing tests for each context, but we do advocate for the classroom having enough variety in the contexts, which are used to teach the child, to enable the teacher to examine the ZPD. Having too few child-directed activities, or a limited number of opportunities for peers to cooperate during learning, is just as limiting as having too few teacher-guided experiences. In both cases some of the children will not be able to demonstrate the maximum they are capable of doing.

Even with a variety of learning contexts, teachers must be vigilant and watch for those demonstrations of learning which do occur. We have found that sometimes we tend to see these moments as "anomalies" or times when we say, "She never does that," instead of asking ourselves, "What were the things in this context that better facilitated the learning than what we do normally?" A child, for example, who has a hard time staying on task spends an hour at the computer working hard. What is it about the computer that makes it much easier for this child? What are the things from that context that we can use to support him?

Vygotskians believe that the teacher must be very sensitive to the child's actions and reactions in the learning process, and make adjustments to teaching based on this information. When children show a great deal of frustration, parrot responses, and don't seem to progress even after changing contexts several times, then what is being taught may lie outside the ZPD. Teachers need to listen and trust their knowledge and experience with each child. Barreling ahead, ignoring this information will not lead to learning. On the other hand, teachers don't need to be afraid if their approximation of the child's ZPD was incorrect. Sensitive probing of the ZPD's boundaries does not harm a child's development, but failing to adjust teaching does. Once we have an approximation of the child's ZPD, then the next task is discovering how to provide support that will help the child to learn.

Knowing What Is The Right Assistance

The right assistance is not only what helps the child in the short run, but also what builds the skill/concept of the future. For example, when a child makes an error, the teacher can give the correct answer; in the short run this response will probably result in a completed student assignment. Or, the teacher can give the child a strategy that requires several attempts before the child can "get it." For Vygotskians it is the strategy that is the appropriate assistance, even though the child may make several more erroneous attempts before she can really use it. Another example of assistance is pairing a child with another child who is much more capable and who actually takes over the situation, allowing the learner few opportunities to make mistakes. The learner might feel good that he was able to produce a successful project, but Vygotskians believe that such assistance will not guarantee a transfer of skills. To determine what is the right assistance, the teacher must reflect on what the child is supposed to learn. Is the goal to answer correctly this time, or is it to learn the skill well enough to perform it independently in the future?

Assistance must be provided in such a way that the child is actively involved. To learn, the child can not just respond, but must actively construct and make meaning. To illustrate what this means, think of the learning task as a pie with "shares" for each of the participants. In the best case the child has a large share in the interaction, whether he is being supported by the teacher, a peer, or the group {figure 2}. In a firstgrade class, the children are reading a big book, and the teacher wants the children to say the repeating refrain of the story from memory. Jason always says the refrain first. For him the share of the learning task is disproportionate {figure 3}. In the same class Penny seems to always say the refrain with the rest of the children; in reality, she looks at the children around her, and only after they have said the refrain does she repeat the last word. She looks engaged, and her mouth is moving, but if the teacher were to listen attentively, he would see that Penny is not really very active. Her share of the learning task is also disproportionate {figure 4}. Although she does learn something from this context, Penny would learn much faster in a setting where she is more active and where she doesn't let the other children act for her. The assistance in this case is not appropriate for her.

Assistance can be provided by many sources. It helps to consider the entire context as assisting the child rather than a specific person providing such assistance. Some children do better in the whole group context, where other children model what to do, than when they are required to do the same task on their own. For others, especially preschoolers and young kindergartners, play may be the context which best supports their learning (Berk, 1994). Pretending to read to a stuffed animal or counting pretend cookies may help support the acquisition of letters and numbers better than more "academic" settings.

Assistance should be planned in such a way that it can gradually be withdrawn over time, as the child is able to perform independently. When a group of children is having trouble taking turns, the teacher must provide assistance so that the children will eventually be able to monitor turn-taking to the group's satisfaction on their own. If the teacher just tells the children, "You go first, you go second . . ." and so on, the children will not be able to monitor themselves without her, when she leaves or withdraws assistance. If she teaches them a rhyme or how to pull straws to determine who goes first, the children can then use the rhyme or straws to decide on their own. The teacher plans this assistance and makes the straws or rhyme available in order for her to be able to turn over responsibility to the children.

Knowing When To Provide And When To Withdraw Assistance

The concept of scaffolding introduced by Wood, Bruner, and Ross (1976) is the answer to our last question

about when is the right time to give assistance and how it should be withdrawn. When a building is constructed, a scaffold with the size and shape of the future building is created. In the initial stages, the contractor provides more scaffolding than in later stages, when the walls are established and the foundation is secure. If the scaffolding is removed too early, the building will suffer. If the scaffolding is not removed, the contractor will not be able to construct another building.

In teaching, teachers provide more support at the beginning stages of skill/concept formation. If the support is removed too early, the child may have incomplete or incorrect understandings. If the supports are left too long, the child will not be encouraged to move on to new learning.

Builders are in a better position to concretely experience what happens when scaffolding is not removed appropriately-the building falls down. For teachers, it is much more difficult to think about how to support learning, a process that can only be inferred from the child's performance. For this reason we have found it helpful to think about providing and removing scaffolding in terms of changing the size of the "shares" of the task, in which the learner and the person(s) providing the scaffolding are involved. To illustrate this idea, think about an expert/ novice learning context. The expert is a more knowledgeable person and can be the teacher or a peer. The novice is the learner or child. In the initial stages of learning, the task is divided somewhat unequally {figure 5}. As can be seen, the expert has more than half of the responsibility for the task, but the learner/novice must also be actively involved in order to learn. Remember that the goal is for the learner to acquire the strategy, not to just parrot the correct answer after the expert. It is the expert' s role to make sure that the learner is acquiring the new skills.

Then, as the learner becomes more competent, the expert begins to withdraw support. The task itself is not changed, but the distribution of the "shares" representing the amount of responsibility has. The expert withdraws assistance, and the learner must fill in the missing pieces {figure 6}.

Finally, when the learner has mastered the skill/concept/strategy, the expert no longer plays a role in the task-it is the learner alone {figure 7}.

A simple example of this scaffolding can be found in Mr. Nick's classroom, where children are making macaroni necklaces. At the beginning, Mr. Nick has to guide both of Marissa's hands, pushing the string through the piece of macaroni, as he explains, "You hold it like this so the string won't fall out." As the child becomes more competent, the teacher sets the macaroni in her hand in the correct way, but Marissa is the one who pushes the string through. Finally when she seems to have mastered the stringing, Mr. Nick no longer offers help, but just comments on the finished product. The task -- making the necklace -- doesn't change, but the distribution of activity does.

We have found the concepts of ZPD and scaffolding to be helpful to teachers, as they address the many individual needs of children in their classrooms. By using these concepts as tools, teachers can challenge children in appropriate ways and help them to enjoy learning.

---

References

Berk, L. E. Vygotsky's Theory: The Importance of Make-Believe Play. YOUNG CHILDREN, 50 (1): 30-39,1994.

Berk, L. E. & Winsler, A. Scaffolding Children's teaming. Vygotsky and Early Childhood Education. NAEYC RESEARCH AND PRACTICE SERIES (7). Washington, DO National Association for the Education of Young Children, 1995.

Bodrova, E. & Leong, D. J. Tools of the Minch The Vygotskian Approach to Early Childhood Education. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Merrill/Prentice Hall, 1996.

Bodrova, E. & Leong, D. J. Vygotsky's Zone of Proximal Development OF PRIMARY INTEREST, 2 (4):1-3,1995.

Tharp, R. G. & Gallimore, R. Rousing Minds to Life: Teaching, Learning, and Schooling in Social Context. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988.

Vygotsky, L. S. Mind and Society- The Development of Higher Mental Function. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1978.

Wood, D., Bruner, J. C., & Ross, G. The Role of Tutoring in Problem Solving. JOURNAL OF CHILD PSYCHOLOGY AND PSYCHIATRY, 17: 89-100,1976.

---

Dr. Elena Bodrova is Visiting Professor, Department of Psychology, and Dr. Deborah Leong is Professor of Psychology, at Metropolitan State College in Denver. Acknowledged experts about Vygotsky's educational theories, they continue to study, teach, and write about the implementation of his theory in classroom practice. Their article, Vygotsky's Zone of Proximal Development, published in the Fall 1995 issue of OF PRIMARY INTEREST, provides a basic definition of the ZPD; identifies its dynamics, variations, and fin-tits; and discusses its use in the classroom. Drs. Bodrova and Leong have written this article expressly for OF PRIMARY INTEREST and retain the copyright. They may be contacted at Department of Psychology, Metropolitan State College, Campus Box 54, P. 0. Box 173362, Denver, Colorado 80217-3362, (303) 556-3205.

---

Resources About Vygotsky

Berk, L. E. & Winsler, A. Scaffolding Children's Learning. Vygotsky and Early Childhood Education. NAEYC RESEARCH AND PRACTICE SERIES (7). Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children, 1995,

Bodrova, E. & Leong, D. J. Tools of the Mind: The Vygotskian Approach to Early Childhood Education. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey. Merrill/Prentice Hall, 1996

---

Professional Development Opportunities
at NAEYC Annual Conference

At the National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC) 1996 Annual Conference in Dallas, one-hour sessions are designated in various categories or tracks. Sessions are listed in the conference program under a track heading which indicates their dominant theme. Among the 41 tracks from which participants can choose are ones dealing with Assessment/Portfolios/Observation, Child Development, Curriculum, Exceptional Children, Kindergarten/Primary, Mixed/Multi-Age, Multiple Intelligences, and Public Schools.

In addition to the one-hour sessions in the Kindergarten/Primary track, there are several networking, preconference, seminar, and evening presentations which have been planned by members of NAEYC's Primary Grades Interest Group and by members of the National All Day Kindergarten Network. These special sessions include the following:

• The Child-Centered Primary School: Turning Developmental Theory Into Classroom Practice - a visit to a local elementary school in Dallas, designated as a "blue ribbon" school by the U.S. Department of Education, where there will be an opportunity for participants to engage in focused classroom observations and dialogue with members of the school staff; on Wednesday, 20 November, 8:00 AM to 12:30 PM

• Learning Planning and Brain Research: Creating a Positive Environment for the Success of All Children - an interactive session, demonstrating the significance of current brain in which participants will look at how the brain functions, teaching strategies, and meaningful content (developmentally appropriate curriculum) in developing positive learning environments for the success of all children; on Wednesday, 20 November, 2:00 to 4:00 PM

• Accreditation for the Primary Grades - a seminar focusing on challenges as well as supports for the accreditation of programs for children in the primary grades, in which participants will make recommendations to schools, programs, and to NAEYC for future steps in the expansion of an accreditation system; on Thursday, 21 November, 11:00 AM to 1:00 PM

• Meaningful Learning in the Primary Grades: Connecting Curriculum and Assessment - a session providing an opportunity for participants to hear and discuss issues, strategies, and models related to the critical connection of curriculum and assessment, in implementing developmentally appropriate practice; on Thursday, 21 November, 7:00 to 9:00 PM

• Understanding and Implementing the All-Day Kindergarten: A Case Study Approach - a seminar in which participants will address continuing topics and dilemmas related to the implementation of an all-day program for five-year-olds, ranging from curriculum areas to parental concerns, assessment to advocacy; on Friday, 22 November, 8:30 to 10:30 AM.

Reservations are necessary for the visit to the primary program on Wednesday, and may be obtained by contacting Frank Fielden (Colorado) at 303-866-6674 (voice) or 303-866-6662 (fax). Participants do not need to preregister for any other presentation. Other representatives of NAEYCs Primary Grades Interest Group and the National All Day Kindergarten Network, who may be contacted for information, are: Ken Counselman (New York) 914-257-2867, Sue Cruikshank (Connecticut) 203-834-1251, Anita McClanahan (Oregon) 503-378-5585, ext. 665, and Susan Nall (Illinois) 618-692-3082.

---

             

This page last updated: December 13, 2007