Have you ever felt like your students were producing less than you thought they should? I have. I remember when I was delivering a lesson and something came up like “they are moving towards CEFR B1, they should already know this!”. It was until I did some research on its descriptors that I knew that I had unreal expectations and that I did not know where my students were and where they would go.
If we take oral production into consideration, the extended version of the CEFR looks at three macro-functions: interpersonal, transactional and evaluative. According to the document (2020, p. 71), each macro-function has a different scale:
- Interpersonal: Conversation
- Evaluative: Informal discussion (with friends); Formal discussion (meetings), Goal-oriented collaboration
- Transactional: Information exchange, Obtaining goods and services, Interviewing and being interviewed, and Using telecommunications
For instance, considering the learners I was about talking about, the scale concerned with conversations mentions that these learners (2020, p. 74):
- Can establish social contact (e.g. greetings and farewells, introductions, giving thanks).
- Can generally understand clear, standard language on familiar matters directed at them, provided they can ask for repetition or reformulation from time to time.
- Can participate in short conversations in routine contexts on topics of interest.
- Can express how they feel in simple terms, and express thanks.
- Can ask for a favour (e.g. to borrow something), can offer a favour, and can respond if someone asks them to do a favour for them.
Conversation is understood as the establishment and maintenance of personal relationships (2020, p. 73).
By knowing where my students were and where they would go made me rethink the way I was planning lessons. Considering we are moving learners towards a greater level of proficiency, we fall into the concept of Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD). According to Vygotsky (1978, p. 86), it is the distance between the actual developmental level as determined by independent problem solving and the level of potential development as determined through problem solving under adult guidance or in collaboration with more capable peers.
How can we get students to perform more challenging tasks so they can move towards the next level? We need to look at the concept of scaffolding. According to Wood, Bruner and Ross (1976, p. 90), this scaffolding consists essentially of the adult controlling those elements of the task that are initially beyond the learners capacity, thus permitting him to concentrate upon and complete only those elements that are within his range of competence.
By its nature, scaffolding is a pedagogy of potential. It shifts the educational focus from a fixed measure of what a student currently knows to a dynamic assessment of what they are capable of achieving with guidance. The practice of scaffolding, therefore, is not merely about improving test scores; it is about cultivating a learner’s capacity for development and fostering the skills necessary for lifelong learning.
Effective scaffolding is not a one-size-fits-all approach. It requires a diverse toolkit of strategies that can be adapted to a learners individual needs and the specific demands of the task. Scaffolding for language development can take a wide variety of different forms, such as peer support, use of first language, written prompts such as substitution tables or writing frames. Websites such as The Bell Foundation or Edutopia offer a comprehensive list of scaffolding strategies and you may find the links at the references area.
I would like to look at what scaffolding is not. Lets see some situations that might be observed in a regular classroom and explore why they are not considered scaffolding.
- The teacher starts the lesson by presenting a complex mathematical problem and tells students to work in groups to solve it: Presenting a complex task without any pre-teaching, guided practice, or breaking it down into smaller, manageable steps can overwhelm students. Effective scaffolding involves providing support before students are expected to perform independently.
- After explaining a grammar rule (e.g., passive voice), the teacher immediately gives students a task to write a descriptive paragraph using the passive voice extensively, without any intermediate controlled practice: Moving directly from explanation to a complex productive task without guided, controlled practice (like fill-in-the-blanks or sentence transformation) is too large a jump. Students need opportunities to internalize the rule in a simpler context before applying it in free production.
- Students are struggling to understand a complex concept. The teacher says, “Dont worry, just keep trying until you get it.”: While encouragement is good, simply telling students to keep trying without providing alternative strategies, clarification, or additional resources is not effective scaffolding. Scaffolding requires providing specific support.
- The teacher asks the whole group, “What did you do last weekend?” and then immediately calls on students to answer, one after another (no wait time): Immediately calling on students without giving them time to process the question, formulate an answer, or activate relevant vocabulary can lead to anxiety and silence. Effective scaffolding for speaking involves providing wait time, opportunities for rehearsal (e.g., “Think for 30 seconds, then tell your partner”), or specific sentence frames.
- The teacher plays an audio recording of a short dialogue once and then immediately asks students detailed comprehension questions about it: Listening comprehension can be challenging. Playing an audio recording just once and then testing detailed recall is rarely effective. Scaffolding for listening involves multiple listenings (e.g., first for gist, second for specific details), providing graphic organizers to fill in while listening, or pre-teaching difficult names/places.
- When students appear bored or disengaged with a task, the teacher responds by saying, “You just need to pay more attention.”: Blaming students for disengagement without considering the tasks suitability, level of challenge, or relevance is not scaffolding. Effective scaffolding involves adjusting the task, providing more support, varying activities, or finding ways to increase student engagement.
To conclude, the ultimate goal of this process is for the learners to eventually perform tasks and solve problems without much help. Scaffolding is an important tool to lead students to success and it should be a principle of design. Designing scaffolded lessons is something that may shift our lessons from testing to teaching.
References:
COUNCIL OF EUROPE. Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, teaching, assessment Companion volume. Strasbourg: Council of Europe Publishing, 2020. Disponivel em: https://rm.coe.int/common-european-framework-of-reference-for-languages-learning-teaching/16809ea0d4. Accessed on: 22 Aug. 2025.
THE BELL FOUNDATION. Scaffolding. In: The Bell Foundation. [S. l.], 2025. Available at: https://www.bell-foundation.org.uk/resources/great-ideas/scaffolding/. Accessed on: 22 Aug. 2025.
FINLEY, Todd. Powerful Scaffolding Strategies to Support Learning. Edutopia, 4 Feb. 2025. Available at: https://www.edutopia.org/article/powerful-scaffolding-strategies-support-learning/. Accessed on: 22 Aug. 2025.
VYGOTSKY, L. S. Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Edited by Michael Cole et al. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1978.
WOOD, D.; BRUNER, J. S.; ROSS, G. The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, v. 17, n. 2, p. 89-100, 1976. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228039919_The_Role_of_Tutoring_in_Problem_Solving. Accessed on: 22 Aug. 2025.
Jonas Ishikawa e um eterno aprendiz que atua na area da educacao ha mais de 8 anos. Ja foi professor de ingles e hoje atua como formador de formadores de professores.
