Are you in the zone?

I read with interest this week’s lecture material on scaffolding, and in particular, Vygotsky’s (1978) Zone of Proximal Development. The type of IMU I will be responsible for designing falls in line with Vygotsky’s “actual development level” and “potential development level” suggestions. The following phrase is especially relevant for my particular IMU’s audience: “The zone of proximal development (ZPD) can also be described as the area between what a learner can do by himself and that which can be attained with the help of a ‘more knowledgeable other’ adult or peer. The ‘more knowledgeable other’, or MKO, shares knowledge with the student to bridge the gap between what is known and what is not known.” (Lipscomb, Swanson & West, 2004). While my IMU will provide instruction and assessment online, a practical assessment will be conducted by a MKO; in this case, our chiropractic clinic interns and floor doctors. Therefore, this online module needs to contain appropriate scaffolding leading to learner success during a practical examination, although, the learner may be referred back to the online module for review. Modeling and explanation scaffolds have already been identified for use in this module. The needs analysis should provide further insight into other scaffolding methods that may be incorporated.

Boettcher (2007), describes ten core principles for designing effective learning environments:

• Principle #1: Every Structured Learning Experience Has Four Elements with the Learner at the Center

• Principle #2: Every Learning Experience Includes the Environment in which the Learner Interacts

• Principle #3: We Shape Our Tools and Our Tools Shape Us

• Principle #4: Faculty are the Directors of the Learning Experience

• Principle #5: Learners Bring Their Own Personalized Knowledge, Skills, and Attitudes to the Learning Experience

• Principle #6: Every Learner Has a Zone of Proximal Development That Defines the Space That a Learner is Ready to Develop into Useful Knowledge

• Principle #7: Concepts are Not Words; Concepts are Organized and Intricate Knowledge Clusters

• Principle #8: All Learners Do Not Need to Learn All Course Content; All Learners Do Need to Learn the Core Concepts

• Principle #9: Different Instruction is Required for Different Learning Outcomes

• Principle #10: Everything Else Being Equal, More Time-on-Task Equals More Learning

The first principle, Every Structured Learning Experience Has Four Elements with the Learner at the Center, mentions the simple LeMKE framework: Learner, the Mentor/faculty member, the Knowledge, and the Environment. The third element of the framework, knowledge, relates to the content, or the problem that is the focus of the instructional experience. According to Boettcher (2007), the knowledge component is the answer to the question, "What is the knowledge, what is the skill, what is the attitude that the instructional event is intended to facilitate in the student?" As I’ve been working on the needs analysis, I kept returning to those questions to maintain focus.

Principle 6: Every Learner Has a Zone of Proximal Development That Defines the Space That a Learner is Ready to Develop into Useful Knowledge
This principle brings us back to Vygotsky's ZPD. As Boettcher’s (2007) mentions, this principle calls for encouraging learner feedback and demonstration earlier and more consistently. This is key in helping to determine conceptual progress of the learner. Also mentioned in the explanation of this principle is what we’re being exposed to and experiencing now by utilizing team blogs – we’re posting blog entries, getting and giving feedback by posting and reading comments, etc., all designed to encourage our development by helping us reflect on our understanding. While the IMU I’m developing won’t be assessing by means of written reflection such as blogs, it will rely on feedback from mentors and peers through the use of practical exam sessions.


Boettcher, J. (2007). Ten core principles for designing effective learning environments: Insights from Brain Research and Pedagogical Theory. Innovate, 3(3). Retrieved February 5, 2007, from http://www.innovateonline.info/index.php?view=article&id=54

Lipscomb, L., Swanson, J., West, A. (2004). Scaffolding. In M. Orey (Ed.), Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. Retrieved February 3, 2007, http://www.coe.uga.edu/epltt/scaffolding.htm

Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.