Menon, Shakya, & Kumar (2005) stated that scaffolding structures can support the learning process by engaging the learner. They can help young children solve problems, accomplish tasks and meet set targets (Puntambekar & Hubscher, 2005). Puntambekar & Hubscher (2005) also emphasized that this support can be easily removed when it is no longer required by the learner.
“A worked–out example includes problem formulation, solution steps and final solution” (Schworm & Renkl, 2006 p.427). A worked-out example is the full scaffolding level. It is made up of layers of partial scaffolding (fading levels) often referred to as solution steps. The gradual removal of these layers is referred to as fading. The lesser the fading levels, the closer the learner is to the problem formulation. According to Renkl, Atkinson, Maier Uwe H., & Staley (2002) “Research has shown that it is effective to combine example study/ worked-out example and problem solving in the initial acquisition of cognitive skills” (p.293). Gradually transiting from worked-out example to problem help prevent working memory (WM) overload during the learning process.
Ashby, Ell, Valentin, & Casale (2005) described WM as “the ability to maintain and manipulate limited amounts of information during brief periods of cognitive activity” (p.1728). “It is heavily used in reasoning and problem-solving, and because of this, is often associated with a wide variety of cognitive tasks” (Ashby et al., 2005 p.83). According to Holmes, Gathercole, & Dunning (2009), it has been proposed that low WM capacity hinders learning in young children by recurring WM overload from learning activities. Gathercole & Alloway (2007) stated that WM capacity increases with the age of the child. “Young children typically have very small capacities that increase gradually until the teenage years, when adult capacities are reached that are more than double that of 4-year-old children” (Gathercole & Alloway, 2007 p.7).
Figure 19 The changes in working memory capacity with age (Gathercole & Alloway, 2007 p.8).
“The changes in working memory capacity with age for an average child are shown by the solid line. Scores of a child with a low working memory capacity are represented by the broken line”
(Gathercole & Alloway, 2007 p.8)
The switch from worked-out example to problem formulation is often abrupt (all-or-nothing) and thus burdensome for young children. “There should be a smooth transition from modelling (complete example) over coached problem solving (incomplete example) to independent problem solving” (Renkl et al., 2002 p.298). According to Renkl et al. (2002), the implementation is as follows
“
1. First, a complete example is presented (model).
2. Second, an example is given in which one single solution step is omitted (coached problem solving).
3. Then the number of blanks is increased step-by-step until just the problem formulation is left, i.e. a problem-to-be-solved (independent problem solving)” (p.298).
In (Renkl et al., 2000), a fading condition is described as one in which the problem-solving demands on the learner gradually increases. This according to Pol, Volman, & Beishuizen (2010) is because there is a gradual withdrawal of the learning support. When and how the learning support should be withdrawn should be dependent on the target learners’ Zones of Proximal Development (ZPDs).
3.6 ‘Elaboration’ in the Alien Chef game – The fading mechanism
There is the ‘worked example’ at the start where the substances that make up each of the order placed by the guests are revealed. In addition, there is also the ‘gentle guidance’ in the form of clues, hints and feedbacks. The substances are gradually concealed (the gradual removal mode) as the number of attempts increases until all the substances are concealed. The ‘guidance’ is also continuously reduced as the number of attempts increases. It is expected that by the time all the substances are concealed
and the ‘guidance’ completely removed, the player should be able to play the game without assistance – including knowing how the Chef operates and the content of each order.
The elaborated feedbacks in the game are gradually removed (gradual removal mode) as the number of attempts increases.
Full Scaffolding: On attempt 1, all the feedbacks are present.
Partial scaffolding 1: On attempt 2, feedbacks 1 and 2 (see figure 11) containing the backstory and expected to give the rationale for gameplay is removed.
Partial scaffolding 2: On attempt 3, feedbacks 3, 4, 5 (see figure 12) expected to guide the player in the garden – pointing to the right fruit are then removed.
No scaffolding: On attempt 4, the rest of the elaborated feedbacks (this is including feedbacks expected to guide the player in the food preparation and guest zone) are removed except for the try again. The verifications are not removed.
For the all-or-nothing mode
Full Scaffolding: On attempt 1, all the feedbacks are present.
No scaffolding: On attempt 2, the rest of the elaborated feedbacks (this is including feedbacks expected to guide the player in the food preparation and guest zone) are removed except for the try again. The verifications are not removed.
No scaffolding: On attempt 3, the rest of the elaborated feedbacks (this is including feedbacks expected to guide the player in the food preparation and guest zone) are removed except for the try again. The verifications are not removed.
No scaffolding: On attempt 4, the rest of the elaborated feedbacks (this is including feedbacks expected to guide the player in the food preparation and guest zone) are removed except for the try again. The verifications are not removed.
For the ‘no scaffolding’ mode:
There was no scaffolding in all four attempts; not even the worked example presented first in the all- or-nothing mode.