澳洲作業代寫:互動式腳手架

澳洲作業代寫:互動式腳手架

互動式腳手架也可以幫助學習者和作者在他們的案例研究分析了互動式腳手架的好處。對兩名學生之間的40個教學互動方面進行了微觀遺傳學研究。可以確定的是,一個同伴會給另一個同伴某種形式的指示或一個小的教訓。他們會互相糾正在某些情況下,他們也會表現出對大陸的反應和心理分化。他們對彼此都很敏感,因爲一個學生理解另一個學生因爲不止一次地被糾正而感到沮喪。一種形式的情感介入被注意到。作者指出,“在整個互動過程中觀察到的一個重要特徵是讀者和作者之間主體間性的建立和維持。這種共同關注和意圖的狀態不僅是通過讀者的努力而實現的,而且是通過作者的良好性格”(Guerrero & Villamil, 2000,第65頁)。因此,可以觀察到通過相互腳手架學習的意圖。

澳洲作業代寫:互動式腳手架

然而,作者也注意到了更多。他們發現專家同伴腳手架和同等腳手架的優勢是不同的,這意味着相對於做腳手架的人來說有效率。因此,在第二語言學習者的理解發展中,支架式教學顯得尤爲重要。作者還批評這是在其他情況下應該用不同方式解釋的東西。例如,他們的結論表明,當學習者在學習能力或聽力能力方面處於同一水平時,他們的效能可能沒有相對差異。如果所有的學習者在聽力理解能力上都處於同一水平,他們也可以通過互動式小組活動互相幫助,提高自己的能力和水平。這就意味着,外語教師需要爲學習者提供更多的互動機會,併爲他們的同伴提供支持”(Safa & Rozatti, 2017,第456頁)。研究還發現,在第二語言學習者的學習發展框架中,同伴教學法更受青睞。類似於Michell & Sharpe(2005)作品中所提出的情境多模態教學腳手架形式將有助於創建更好的教室指令。Safa & Rozatti(2017)與Michell & Sharpe(2005)的研究進行了對比分析,結果顯示,在ZPD發展中,幫助學生的機會更大。

澳洲作業代寫:互動式腳手架

Mutual scaffolding could also be of help for learners and the authors in their case study analysed the benefits of mutual scaffolding. Forty didactic interaction aspects between two students were studied micro genetically. It was identified that one peer would give another some form of an instruction or a mini lesson. They would correct each other and in some cases also showed continent responsivity and psychological differentiation. They were sensitive to one another as one student understood the frustration of another at being corrected more than once. A form of affective involvement was noticed. The authors state, “An important feature that was observed throughout the interaction was the establishment and maintenance of intersubjectivity between reader and writer. This state of shared focus and intention on the part of both was achieved not only through the reader’s efforts t already mentioned but also by the writer’s good disposition” (Guerrero & Villamil, 2000, p. 65). An intention to learn by mutual scaffolding could hence be observed here.

澳洲作業代寫:互動式腳手架

However, the authors also noticed something more. They found the superiority of the expert peer scaffolding and coequal scaffolding was different, meaning there were efficiencies relative to the person doing the scaffolding. In comprehension development for second language learners, scaffolding was hence considered to be of primary importance. The author also critiques this as something that should be interpreted differently in other scenarios. For instance, their conclusion suggests that when learners are at the same level when it comes to their learning capabilities or their listening capabilities, then there might not be relative differences in efficacy. “If all the learners are at the same level of listening comprehension ability, they can also assist each other and improve their ability and proficiency level through interactive group works. It implies that EFL teachers need to provide their learners with more opportunities to interact and offer scaffolded assistance to their peers” (Safa & Rozatti, 2017, p. 456). The work also identified that peer-peer didactics were more preferable when it comes to scaffolding for learning development in second language earners. Contextual multimodal form of instructional scaffolding like the one presented in the work of Michell & Sharpe (2005) would help in creating better class room instructions. The scaffolded assistance presented by Safa & Rozatti (2017) when analysed in context with that of Michell & Sharpe (2005) work actually reveals better opportunities for aiding students in ZPD development.