Helping students to get better grades in mathematics at the elementary level

Hafiz Muhammad Ather Khan, Naheed Khursheed, Hafiz Shehzad Ali


The current study is conducted to explore the learning potential of students at the elementary level by using the scaffolding technique. The study aimed to measure the efficiency of the scaffolding teaching method provided to the students at the elementary level. As it was an experimental study, so, no population was defined. The sample was selected from Gov. Girls Higher Secondary SchoolModel Town A, Bahawalpur, Punjab, Pakistan. All 6th classes of this school were included to analyze the effect of scaffolding as an intervention. Retention of learning after 3 months, the provision of scaffolding in comparison to the traditional method was assessed. After the posttest, there was a retention test as the final test from all four groups. Solomon's four-group design was used for this experiment in which there were 40 students in each group and 160 total participants. In the current study, Pretest, posttest, and after 3months retention test was conducted as research tools. To analyze the data, SPSS version 20 one-sample t-test were used to analyze the data. The Data revealed that scaffolding was proved to be a better strategy compared to the control group. Even the results of retention of learning skills were higher than the control group. Students showed good understanding, remembering, and better-solving processes in experimental groups. Study recommended that scaffolding teaching needs a highly structured supervised environment and may be conducted in controlled conditions. It is recommended that in teacher education, the prospective teachers may be prepared in the principles, procedures, and rules of scaffolding. A due consideration may be given to teaching strategies in all teacher education programs in the country as it is an innovative and progressive way of teaching.

Full Text:



Anghileri, J. (2006). Scaffolding practices that enhance mathematics

learning. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 9, 33–52.

Azevedo, R., &Hadwin, A. F. (2005). Scaffolding self-regulated learning and metacognition—Implications for the design of computer-based scaffolds. Instructional Science, 33, 367–379.

Ball, D. L., & Bass, H. (2003). Toward a practice-based theory of mathematical knowledge for teaching. In B. Davis & E. Simmt (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2002 annual meeting of the Canadian Mathematics Education Study Group (pp. 3–14). CMESG/GDEDM.

Belland, B. R., Walker, A. E., Olsen, M. W., & Leary, H. (2015). A pilot meta-analysis of computer-based scaffolding in STEM education. Educational Technology & Society, 18(1), 183–197.

Blood, P. R. (1995) Pakistan: A Country Study. Washington, D.C.: Federal Research Division, Library of Congress.

Boaler, J. (2016). Mathematical mindset: Unleashing students potential through creative math, inspiring messages and innovative teaching. Jossey-Bass

Brinkerhoff, J. &Glazewski, K. (2004). Support of expert and novice teachers within a technology enhanced problem-based learning unit: A case study. International Journal of Learning Technology 1, 219–230.

Charles-Ogan, G. (2019). Mathematics as a tool for achieving the vision 20:2020 goal of national transformation. .International Journal of Education, Learning and Development.3(8), 57-61.

Clare, V. B. (2012). Scaffolding Students Opportunities to Learn Mathematicsthrough Social Interactions.Mathematics Education Research Group ofAustralasia. Publishes online August, 23, 2012.

Djwantoro, H. (2010). The Use of Scaffolding Approach to Enhance Students’ Engagement in Learning Structural Analysis. Journal of International EducationStudies.3(1),135-140.

Dweck, C. (2018). Mindsets and math/science achievement. Carnegie Corporation of New York, Institute for Advanced Study, Commission on Mathematics and Science Education.

Esquinca, A. (2011). Bilingual college writers’ collaborative writing of word problems. Linguistics and Education, 22(2), 150–167.

Ezeh, S.I. &Ugwuanyi, C.C. (2013). Transformation of mathematics education programme. A step towards the attainment of vision 20:2020 Abacus. Journal of Mathematical Association of Nigeria, 38(1), 75-82/

Gibbons, P. (2002). Scaffolding language, scaffolding learning: Teaching second language learners in the mainstream classroom. Heinemann.

Gonzalez, G., &DeJarnette, A. F. (2015). Teachers’ and students’ negotiation moves when teachers scaffold group work. Cognition and Instruction, 33(1), 1–45.

Govt. of Pakistan. (2017). National Education Policy. Ministry of Education.

Govt. of Pakistan. (2019). A comprehensive report on education. Ministry of Education.

Holton, D & Clarke, D (2006).Scaffolding and metacognition. International Journalof Mathematical Education on Science and Technology, 37(1), 127-143.

Holton, D., & Clarke, D. (2006). Scaffolding and metacognition. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 37(2), 127–143.

Jumaat, Nural, Farhana&Zaidation, T. (2014).Instructional Scaffolding in online Learning Environment: Meta-analysis. Presented at the 2014 InternationalConference on Teaching and Learning in Computing and Engineering

Makar, K., Bakker, A., & Ben-Zvi, D. (2015). Scaffolding norms of

argumentation-based inquiry in a primary mathematics classroom. ZDM Mathematics Education, 47(7), 37-46.

Obioma, U. A. (2011).Re-Branding the Strategies for Teaching Mathematics: The Case of Scaffolding. Proceeding of September 2011 Annual NationalConference.1-7.and Attitudes. Comprehensive Journal of EducationalResearch. 10, 9-19.

Pea, R. D. (2004). The social and technological dimensions of scaffolding and related theoretical concepts for learning, education, and human activity. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(3), 423–451.

Pedersen, S. (2003). Motivational orientation in a problem-based learning environment. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 14, 51–77.

Pfister, M., Moser Opitz, E., & Pauli, C. (2015). Scaffolding for mathematics teaching in inclusive primary classrooms: A video study. ZDM Mathematics Education, 47(7), 56-68.

Reingold R. (2008). Instructors scaffolding in support of students metacognitionthrough a teacher education online course: a case study Journal of Interactiveonline Learning, 7(2),139-151, 2008.

Reiser, B.J. (2004). Scaffolding complex learning: The mechanisms of structuring and problematizing student work. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13, 273–304.

Remalyn, Q. C (2013). Scaffolding Strategy is Teaching Mathematics its Effect onStudents Performance

Salkin, N.J (2008). Encyclopedia of educational psychology. SAGE publication.

Simons, K. & Klein, J (2007). The impact of scaffolding and student achievementlevels in a problem based learning environment instructional science.International Journal of Instruction 35(1), 41-72.

Smagorinsky, P. (2007). Vygotsky and the social dynamic of classrooms. EnglishJournal, 97(2), 61-66.

Smit, J., & Van Eerde, H. A. A. (2013). What counts as evidence for the long-term conversation of whole-class scaffolding? Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 2(1), 22–31.

Suleman Q., &Gul, R. (2015) Factors Affecting Quality of Primary Education in Kohat Division, Pakistan. Research on Humanities and Social Sciences, 5(7), 64-77.

Sunday, Y.,Akamu.M.A.&Fajemidagba,M.O.(2014). Effects of Target-Task Mode of teaching on Students’ Performance in Geometrical Construction. Abacus. Journal of Mathematical Association of Nigeria, 39(1),33-42.

Tan, O.S. Parson, R.D, Hinson S.L &Bardo, B.D. (2013). Educational Psychology aPractitioner Research Approach. Thomson.

Visnovska, J., & Cobb, P. (2015). Learning about whole-class scaffolding from a teacher professional development study. ZDM Mathematics Education, 47(7), 24-37.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.



  • There are currently no refbacks.

Maintained by: Software Section, Directorate of ICT