The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Triadic scaffolds: Tools for teaching english language learners with computers
Open accessAbstract
Active communication with others is key to human learning.This straightforward premise currently undergirds much theory and research in student learning in general, and in second language and literacy learning in particular.Both of these academic areas have long acknowledged communication's central role in successful learning with the exact intricacies of instructional conversations and the forms these take having been the focus of close analysis (Cazden, 1988;Gee, 2001;Nystrand, Gamoran, Kachur, & Prendergast, 1997; Tharp & Galimore, 1991;van Lier, 2000).In this examination of computer-supported classroom discourse, specific forms of instructional conversation employed by a veteran elementary teacher of beginning-level English language learners (ELLs) are examined.The focal teacher orchestrates instructional conversations around computers with children whose immediate needs are to learn the English language, specifically the "language of school" and the concomitant social complexities implied in order to participate in mainstream instructional activity.With these goals shaping language and literacy activity, their ESOL (English for speakers of other languages) teacher makes use of the computer to capture, motivate, and anchor learner attention to, and render comprehensible the target language they hear and see on and around the computer screen.The anatomy of the activity she orchestrates around the computer and the language she uses to support it --labeled here as triadic scaffolds --are the focus of analysis.Forms and functions of triadic discourse (teacher, learner, computer) are examined for their potential unique role in second language and literacy instruction.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Finally, Mertzman (2008), Oh (2005), Meskill (2005), and Reigosa and Jimenez-Aleixandre (2007) included the successfulness of scaffolding in their definition of scaffolding, that is, scaffolding that does not work cannot-according to these authorsbe termed scaffolding.”
From Scaffolding in Teacher–Student Interaction: A Decade of Research (2010) · cites this paper as Meskill (2005)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
THE ROLE OF TUTORING IN PROBLEM SOLVING *
Wood, D., Bruner, J. S., & Ross, G. (1976) · Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry · doi:10.1111/j.1469-7610.1976.tb00381.x · Cited by 8,851 · cited 3×
“Scaffolding in the Wood, Bruner, and Ross (1976) sense describes verbal moves on the part of an instructor that, while initially controlled by her, gradually guides responsibility over to the learner.”
BackgroundInfluentialBruner, J. (1996) · doi:10.4159/9780674251083 · Cited by 6,231
Research works printed but not linked: 36
- August, D., & Hakuta, K. (1998). Educating language-minority children. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
- Berg, S., Benz, C., Lasley, T., & Raisch, C. (1998). Exemplary technology use in elementary classrooms. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 31(2),111-122.
- Bloom, D. (2001). How children learn the meanings of words. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
- Burns, M., Griffin, P., & Snow, C. (1999). Starting out right: A guide to promoting children's reading success. The National Research Council. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
- Cummins, J., & Sayers, D. (1997). Brave new schools: Challenging cultural illiteracy. New York: St. Martin's Press.
- Delpit, L. (1995). Other people's children: Cultural conflict in the classroom. New York: The New Press.
- Elliot, A., & Hall, N. (1997). The impact of self-regulatory teaching strategies on "at-risk" preschoolers' mathematical learning in a computer-mediated environment. Journal of Computing in Childhood Education, 8(2), 187-198.
- Esling, J. (1991). Researching the effects of networking: Evaluating the spoken and written discourse generated by working with CALL. In P. Dunkel (Ed.), Computer-assisted language learning and testing: Research issues and practices (pp. 111-131). New York: Newbury House.
- Gaskins, I., Rauch, S., Gensemer, E., Cunicelli, E., O'Hara, C., Six, L., & Scott, T. (1997). Scaffolding the development of intelligence among children who are delayed in learning to read. In K. Hogan & M. Pressley (Eds.), Scaffolding student learning: Instructional approaches and issues (pp. 43-73). Cambridge, MA: Brookline Press.
- Gebhard, M. (1999). Debates in SLA studies: Redefining classroom SLA as an institutional phenomenon. TESOL Quarterly, 33(3), 544-557.
- Gee, J. (1990). Social linguistics and literacies: Ideology in discourses. Bristol, PA: Taylor & Francis.
- Gee, J. (2000). Discourse and sociocultural studies in reading. In M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research: Volume III (pp. 195-207).
- Gee, J. (2001). Reading as situated language: A sociocognitive perspective. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 44(1), 714-725.
- Heath, S. (1983). Ways with words. New York: Cambridge University Press.
- Heath, S. (1990). The fourth vision: Literate language at work. In A. Lundsford, H. Moglen, & J. Slevin (Eds.), The right to literacy (pp. 289-306). New York: The Modern Language Association of America.
- Johnson, D. (1991). Second language and content learning with computers: Research in the role of social factors. In P. Dunkel (Ed.), Computer-assisted language learning and testing: Research issues and practices (pp. 61-83). New York: Newbury House.
- Kumpulainen, K. (1996). The nature of peer interaction in the social context created by the use of word processors. Learning and Instruction, 6(3), 243-261.
- Lankshear, C., & Knobel, M. (2003). New literacies: Changing knowledge and classroom learning. Philadelphia: Open University Press.
- Lantolf, J. (2001). Introducing sociocultural theory. In J. Lantolf (Ed.), Sociocultural theory ands language learning (pp. 1-26). New York: Oxford University Press.
- Lemke, J. (1995). Textual politics: Discourse and social Dynamics. Bristol, PA: Taylor & Francis.
- Meskill, C., Mossop, J., & Bates, R. (2000a). Electronic texts in ESOL classrooms. TESOL Quarterly, 34(3), 585-592.
- Meskill, C., Mossop, J., & Bates, R. (2000b). Bilingualism, cognitive flexibility, and electronic texts. Bilingual Research Journal, 23(2/3), 235-246.
- Michaels, S. (1981). "Sharing time": Children's narrative styles and differential access to literacy. Language in Society, 10(4), 423-442.
- Newman, D. (1997). Functional environments for microcomputers in education. In M. Cole, Y. Engestrom, & O. Vasquez (Eds.), Mind, culture, and activity: Seminal papers from the Laboratory of Comparative Human Cognition (pp. 279-291). NY: Cambridge University Press.
- Nystrand, M., with A. Gamoran, R. Kachur, & C. Prendergast. (1997). Opening dialogue: Understanding the dynamics of language and learning in the English classroom. New York: Teachers College Press.
- Schleppegrell, M. (2001) Linguistic features of the language of schooling. Linguistics and Education, 12(4), 431-459.
- Schmidt, R. (1995). Consciousness and foreign language learning: A tutorial on the role of attention and awareness in learning. In R. Schmidt (Ed.), Attention and awareness in foreign language learning (Technical Report 9; pp. 1-63). Honolulu: University of Hawai'i.
- Sharp, D., Bransford, J., Goldman, S., Risko, V., Kinzer, C., & Vye, N. (1995). Dynamic visual support for story comprehension and mental model building by young, at-risk children. Educational Technology Research and Development, 43(4), 25-42.
- Short, D., & Sherris, A. (2004). Teacher views and practices on the integration of language and content. Paper presented at the 2004 Conference of the American Association of Applied Linguistics (AAAL)
- Snow, C. (1992). Perspectives on second-language development: Implications for bilingual education. Educational Researcher, 21(2), 16-19.
- Soto, L. (1997). Language, culture, and power: Bilingual families and the struggle for quality education. Albany: State University of New York Press.
- Valdés, G. (2004). The failure to educate immigrant children. In O. Ana (Ed.), Tongue-tied: The lives of multilingual children in public education (pp. 111-117). New York: Rowman & Littlefield.
- In J. Lantolf (Ed.), Sociocultural theory and second language learning (pp. 245-259). New York: Oxford University Press.
- Wegerif, R., & Mercer, N. (1996). Computers and reasoning through talk in the classroom. Language and Education, 10(1), 47-64.
- Wilkinson, L., & Silliman, E. (2000). Classroom language and literacy learning. In Kamil, Mosenthal, Peason, & Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research: Volume III (pp. x-x). Mawah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Retrieved January 2, 2004, from http://www.readingonline.org/articles/handbook/ wilkinson/
- Wootton, A. (1997). Interaction and the development of mind. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Scaffolding in Teacher–Student Interaction: A Decade of Research
van de Pol, J., Volman, M., & Beishuizen, J. (2010) · Educational Psychology Review · doi:10.1007/s10648-010-9127-6 · Cited by 1,873
“The goal of most of the descriptive studies was to explore, describe, examine, analyze, and identify types of, or develop an understanding of scaffolding, mainly in the domain of literacy (e.g., Cole 2006; Lee 2001; McIntyre 2007; Meskill 2005).”
NEW TRENDS IN USING TECHNOLOGY IN THE LANGUAGE CURRICULUM
Blake, R. (2007) · Annual Review of Applied Linguistics · doi:10.1017/s0267190508070049 · Cited by 91
“Studies such as Darhower (2007), Meskill (2006), Warschauer and De Florio-Hansen (2003), Kramsch, A’Ness, and Lam (2000), and Wildner-Bassett (2005) provide a good example of a sociocultural approach to literacy by focusing on how individuals construct their bilingual identity in response to…”
BackgroundOral Interaction Around Computers in the Project-Oriented CALL Classroom
Jeon-Ellis, G., Debski, R., & Wigglesworth, G. (2005) · Language learning & technology · doi:10.64152/10125/44035 · Cited by 67
“(p. 190; emphasis in original) Thus, the description of L2 learning has recently expanded its scope to include "contexts of use" (Meskill, 2005), including perspectives on collaborative relationships, interaction with tasks, and interaction with other tools the learners might utilize.”
BackgroundWriting to learn via text chat: Task implementation and focus on form
Nik, A., Adams, R., & Newton, J. (2012) · Journal of Second Language Writing · doi:10.1016/j.jslw.2011.12.001 · Cited by 60
Task complexity effects on the complexity and accuracy of writing via text chat
Adams, R., Alwi, N. A. N. M., & Newton, J. (2015) · Journal of Second Language Writing · doi:10.1016/j.jslw.2015.06.002 · Cited by 56
Does Computer Use Promote the Mathematical Proficiency of Ell Students?
Kim, S., & Chang, M. (2010) · Journal of Educational Computing Research · doi:10.2190/ec.42.3.c · Cited by 40
“Similar effects were noted when Meskill (2005) analyzed how one veteran elementary teacher employed computers to help ELL students in learning academic language and social skills.”
BackgroundCoconstructing Learning: The Dynamic Nature of Foreign Language Pedagogy in a CMC Environment
Deusen-Scholl, N. V., Frei, C., & Dixon, E. M. (2013) · CALICO Journal · doi:10.1558/cj.v22i3.657-678 · Cited by 29
“Meskill (2005, p. 48) notes that “computer screens can serve to anchor attention to forms and functions in immediate, highly tangible, and communicatively authentic ways” and discusses the notion of computersupported instructional scaffolding as a tool for language learning.”
BackgroundChapter 3. Prior knowledge and second language task production in text chat
Adams, R., & Alwi, N. A. N. M. (2014) · Task-based language teaching · doi:10.1075/tblt.6.03ada · Cited by 26
Interactional Scaffolding for Reading Comprehension
Reynolds, D. (2017) · Literacy Research Theory Method and Practice · doi:10.1177/2381336917718820 · Cited by 43
Technologies for Teaching and Learning L2 Speaking
Blake, R. J. (2017) · Wiley eBooks · doi:10.1002/9781118914069.ch8 · Cited by 36
Bonk, C. J., & Khoo, E. (2014) · doi:10.59668/698 · Cited by 106
Digital Storytelling for 21st Century Learning: A Study on Pre-Service Teachers’ Perception
Dalim, S. F., Azliza, N. Z. M., Ibrahim, N., Zulkipli, Z. A., & Yusof, M. M. M. (2019) · doi:10.24191/ajue.v15i3.7801 · Cited by 17
“While the access to personal computers, digital video cameras, video authoring software, digital pictures, World Wide Web (WWW), creating stories digitally and sharing them with wider audience seems to be possible for majority of people in the last decade (Meskill, 2005), but nowadays, the integration of technology in…”
BackgroundWriting from and with Community Knowledge
Ghiso, M. P., Martínez-Álvarez, P., & Dernikos, B. P. (2014) · IGI Global eBooks · doi:10.4018/978-1-4666-6042-7.ch003 · Cited by 5
More than tools: Emergence of meaning through technology enriched interactions in classrooms
Kim, H. Y. (2020) · International Journal of Educational Research · doi:10.1016/j.ijer.2020.101543 · Cited by 13
The effectiveness of computer-based EFL instruction among primary school students in Israel
Shamir, H., & Johnson, E. (2012) · doi:10.1080/09523987.2012.662624 · Cited by 12
“While numerous studies have examined the effectiveness of software-based EFL instruction (see Andrews et al., 2007; Diao & Sweller, 2007; Meskill, 2005; Neri, Mich, Gerosa, & Giuliani, 2008; Slavin & Cheung, 2005; Yanguas, 2009), very few of these studies have taken place in such a complex and…”
BackgroundThe Influence of Instructional Syntax to Engage EFL Students in Online Learning Environment
Darmawansah, D., & Indartono, S. (2019) · IJELTAL (Indonesian Journal of English Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics) · doi:10.21093/ijeltal.v4i1.337 · Cited by 10
“The use of inquiry as part of the pedagogical approach is most relevant to the previous study which stated that particular syntax used in the online learning would bring better engagement to both parties (Meskill, 2005).”
Louie, B., Pughe, B. G., Kuo, A., & Björling, E. A. (2018) · Professional Development in Education · doi:10.1080/19415257.2018.1506353 · Cited by 8
“With the EL population anticipated to double by 2050, most schools are likely to serve ELs in the coming years (Meskill 2005).”
BackgroundPrebianca, G. V. V., Vieira, M. F. V., & Finardi, K. (2014) · Signum Estudos da Linguagem · doi:10.5433/2237-4876.2014v17n1p181 · Cited by 8
Mediating digital screens with very young emerging bilinguals
Meskill, C., Sadykova, G., & Kayumova, A. R. (2020) · Bilingual Research Journal · doi:10.1080/15235882.2020.1743383 · Cited by 10
“Interaction around digital screens has further been found to be essential to support, validate, and empower children and thereby to extend their learning (Meskill, 2005).”
BackgroundSelf-citationMeskill, C., Nilsen, J., & Oliveira, A. W. (2019) · AERA Open · doi:10.1177/2332858419850488 · Cited by 7
“schools, teacher mediation of content through multiple perceptual modalities has been well established as supportive to the development of language/content (August, Artzi, & Mazrum, 2010; Calderón et al., 2005; Carels, 1981; Case, 2002; Church, Ayman-Nolley, & Mahootian, 2010; Cummins, 2014; Meskill, 2005; Meskill et…”
BackgroundSelf-citationShamshiri, F., Esfahani, F. R., & Hosseini, S. E. (2023) · Language Testing in Asia · doi:10.1186/s40468-023-00259-9 · Cited by 8
“Considering the sort of interaction among learners, instructors, and computer in the current study, it can be stated that there exist a kind of triadic interaction or triadic scaffold (Meskill, 2005).”
BackgroundInfluentialVocabulary Transfer from Reading to Writing: A Comparison of Essay Writing and Synchronous CMC
Kim, S.-Y., & Kim, K.-S. (2022) · Teaching English as a Second or Foreign Language--TESL-EJ · doi:10.55593/ej.26101a8 · Cited by 4
Gutteridge, R. G. (2009) · doi:10.51415/10321/496 · Cited by 4
“61 (Smith; 2005). This is represented in Figure 3.4, which draws on Carlsson‟s (2003) multi- method data collection.”
InfluentialConversation Cloud: A videoconferencing learning ecology for Thai undergraduate EFL learners
Palungtepin, M. (2021) · System (Linköping) · doi:10.1016/j.system.2021.102648 · Cited by 3
O uso de softwares educacionais como ferramentas mediacionais e de inclusão tecnológica
Prebianca, G. V. V., dos Santos, V. P., Momm, C. F., da Silva, L. F., & Nehring, H. (2013) · doi:10.20396/etd.v15i3.1267 · Cited by 3
Use of Interactive Online Games in Teaching English as a Foreign Language
Kim, H. K. (2010) · Advances in game-based learning book series · doi:10.4018/978-1-61520-713-8.ch008 · Cited by 2
Rodríguez, J. C. (2006) · doi:10.31274/rtd-180813-16465 · Cited by 3
“In this issue, the contribution by Meskill and Athony’s (2005) is probably the most relevant to this study.”
BackgroundInfluentialConverging the Curriculum Designer’s Intentions into a Foreign Language Classroom
Tanaka-Ellis, N. (2017) · Journal of Arts and Humanities · doi:10.18533/journal.v6i7.1208 · Cited by 2
Prebianca, G. V. V., dos Santos, V. P., & Finardi, K. (2014) · doi:10.1590/s0102-44502014000100006 · Cited by 2
Factors Affecting Learner Collaboration in 3D Virtual Worlds
Kozlova, I. (2018) · Advances in linguistics and communication studies · doi:10.4018/978-1-5225-7286-2.ch002 · Cited by 4
Meeting the Challenges of English Learners by Pairing Science and Language Educators
Meskill, C., & Oliveira, A. W. (2019) · Research in Science Education · doi:10.1007/s11165-019-9837-9 · Cited by 22
Self-citationMeksophawannagul, M. (2023) · English Language Teaching · doi:10.5539/elt.v17n1p97 · Cited by 2
Sadykova, G., Vafina, A., & Kayumova, A. (2019) · EDULEARN19 Proceedings · doi:10.21125/edulearn.2019.0596 · Cited by 1
“The data collection and analysis involved the use of triadic scaffold protocol [2], a valid instrument that enables to focus on the interaction of the child, the teacher, and the digital learning object (online program, electronic resource).”
MethodTransforming ESL Teaching Modalities Using Technological Tools
Angouti, S., & Jahangiri, K. (2019) · English Language and Literature Studies · doi:10.5539/ells.v9n1p134
Editorial Introduction / Introduction editorial
Huot, D., & Parks, S. (2005) · Canadian Modern Language Review/ La Revue canadienne des langues vivantes · doi:10.1353/cml.2005.0043
“…Appel, 1994), les chercheurs travaillant dans le domaine des TIC sont de plus en plus nombreux à situer leur recherche dans le cadre de la théorie socioculturelle vygotskyenne et néo-vygotskyenne (Cummins, 2005 ; Meskill, 2005 ; Parks, Huot, Hamers et Lemonnier, 2003, à paraître ; Thorne, 2003 ).”
Background
Metadata
- Authors
- Meskill, C.
- Affiliations
- State University of New York (US)
- Corresponding author
- Meskill, Carla
- ORCID
- Meskill, Carla
- Venue
- Language Learning & Technology
- Published
- 2005-01-01
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 46-59
- ISSN
- 1094-3501 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2147374306
- Cited by
- 55
- References
- 45
- Citations by year
- 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 4 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 4
- FWCI
- 26.72
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Language learning & technology (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- ScholarSpace (University of Hawaii at Manoa) (submittedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
- Language learning & technology (cc-by-nc-nd)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
- Social Sciences › Linguistics and Language › Multilingual Education and Policy
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
- Keywords
- English language learners, instructional conversations, second language acquisition, literacy education, teacher discourse, primary education, computer-assisted instruction
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
