A journey to learner autonomy and self efficacy via technology-mediated scaffolding

ICERI 2021, 8th - 9th Nov 2021
A journey to learner autonomy and
self-efficacy via technology-mediated
scaffolding
Presented by Oma Eguara
Lancaster University, UK
o.eguara@lancaster.ac.uk
1

Acknowledgements
This research was undertaken as part of the PhD in e-Research and
Technology Enhanced Learning in the Department of Educational
Research at Lancaster University. With gratitude I acknowledge the
contributions of my tutors, academic staff, peers, School X leadership,
the participants and their parents in supporting the development of this
study.
Oma Eguara o.eguara@lancaster.ac.uk
2

Presentation Outline
 Background
 Key concepts
 Methodology
 Findings
 Discussion
 Conclusion
 Reflections
 Feedback
3

Background
 Context: Adult-dependent pupils
 Rationale: Nearing end of primary education, SATs
approaching, need to achieve targets and be ready for
SATs plus life beyond primary education
 Research question: How can connectivist pedagogy be
used to wean adult-dependent pupils off adult support and
develop autonomous learners?
4

Key concepts
 Scaffolding - the use of temporary and contingent support to promote learning
 Connectivism - learning in and through connections made with other users and
resources (i.e. nodes in a learning network), mediated by technology and
socialisation
 Pedagogy - the repeated patterns or sets of teaching and learning practices that
shape the interaction between teachers and learners (Peterson et al., 2018)
 Learner autonomy – learner taking charge of their own learning
 Self-efficacy – one’s beliefs about their ability to accomplish things
5

Technology-mediated scaffolding
6

Methodology
 Qualitative research – to gain deeper understanding through
participants’ perspectives
 Action research – “a small-scale intervention in the functioning of the
real world and a close examination of the effects of such an intervention”
(Cohen & Manion, 1994, p.186 [39])
 Design - Bassey’s 8-step Action Research Model, Steps 1 - 4 (Bassey,
1998 [41])
 Methods – Observation, informal conversation, field notes, focus group
 Data analysis – Thematic analysis (Attride-Sterling, 2001 [43])
7

Small scale intervention
 Pupils chose writing targets – spelling, correct use of capital letters and full stops
 Modelling use of MS Word spelling & grammar check – two explicit sessions,
direct teaching
 Proofreading activity – 30 mins, to produce final draft, spell-checked, correct
punctuation; proceed as deemed fit.
 Metacognition – Teacher questioning to draw out learning and help make learning
visible; observation of learning behaviours, field notes
 Informal 1-2-1 conversation – What are their experiences?
 Focus group – Semi-structured questions
 Bassey’s steps 1 – 4 (See Section 2.1 of paper)
8

Theme frequency
9

Data analysis: Coding
10

Data analysis: Coding
11

Findings
From dependent behaviours to behaviours indicative of
autonomy
 Before and after the intervention
 Dominant themes in the data
 Autonomy across ability levels
12

Discussion
Features supporting behaviours indicative of autonomy
(SISM)
 Safe space
 Instant feedback
 Self-efficacy
 Metacognition
13

Answering the research question:
How can connectivist pedagogy be used to wean adult-dependent
pupils off adult support and develop autonomous learners?
Connectivist pedagogy can be used to integrate technology, to:
 Serve as non-human MKO in place of teachers/adults
 Help reduce learners’ cognitive load, freeing working memory
 Make feedback more timely and more efficient
 Give learners a taste of success which can increase self-efficacy
and motivate autonomy
14

Conclusion
 The role of pedagogy and teachers’ pedagogical knowledge
 Technology as MKO
 Scaffolding - temporary & contingent support, NOT
permanent pedagogy
 The call to emancipatory pedagogies (i.e. those that
empower the learner (See Freire, 2018 [28])
15

Reflections 1
A. Are there learners in your setting with a history of adult-dependence?
Are the same learners always requesting/being given adult-support?
Do they genuinely need it or is it now learned behaviour/teacher habit?
B. Even where adult support must be provided, can your learners take small
steps towards autonomy in some things? How can you support this?
C. In your practice, is scaffolding contingent and temporary?
How do you ‘fade’ scaffolding? How do you know when to ‘fade’ it?
(Gonzalez-DeHass & Willems, 2013 [12]; Karimi et al., 2020 [10])
16

Reflections 2
D. Explore the concepts of entity (or fixed) view of ability vs. incremental view
(Dweck et al., 2004 [46). What are the implications for your practice and the
way you assign support?
E. What are emancipatory pedagogies? Who are they emancipating, what from
and why? How can this be applied to your practice? (See Freire, 2018 [28])
F. Be aware of misconceptions about autonomy.
Sometimes, asking for help is exercising autonomy!
17

Thank you, feedback & connection welcome
 I am discussing these reflections (Slides 16 & 17) and more in blog posts at
www.EguaraExchange.com. Please join me in conversation on this
platform where I share insights from my teacher researcher journey.
 Please send any feedback and questions on this paper to me at
o.eguara@lancaster.ac.uk
 You are welcome to connect with me on LinkedIn and Twitter, both
@omaeguara.
18

A journey to learner autonomy and self efficacy via technology-mediated scaffolding

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to A journey to learner autonomy and self efficacy via technology-mediated scaffolding

Similar to A journey to learner autonomy and self efficacy via technology-mediated scaffolding (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

A journey to learner autonomy and self efficacy via technology-mediated scaffolding