The Role of Traditional and Virtual Scaffolding in Developing Speaking Ability of Iranian EFL Learners


  •  Seyyed Hassan Mirahmadi    
  •  Sayyed Mohammad Alavi    

Abstract

The present study attempted to investigate the effect of the four scaffolding techniques, namely Hard, Soft (Saye & Brush, 2002), Reciprocal (Holton & Clarke, 2006), and Virtual (Yelland & Masters, 2007), on the speaking ability of the Iranian EFL language learners and their fluency, lexicon, grammar and pronunciation. To this end, the four scaffolding techniques were classified into the two groups of Traditional (Hard, Soft and Reciprocal) and technology-mediated (Virtual). 120 Maritime students at Kharg Azad University (IAU-Kharg) were selected as participants based on convenience sampling. At the onset, an Oxford Placement Test was given to the students to place them in the same proficiency level, Intermediate. 10 students were found as outliers who remained as intact members of the groups throughout the study. Eventually, the 110 homogeneous students were randomly assigned to the four scaffolding groups. A pretest of speaking ability was run to the students prior to the scaffolding treatments lasting for 8 weeks (16 sessions). After the treatments, the students completed a posttest of speaking. Having analyzed the data through SPSS software, it was found that under the influence of the four scaffoldings, not only did the Iranian EFL students outperformed in the posttest of speaking, but they also showed a significant improvement in their fluency, grammar, lexicon, and pronunciation. Thus, the findings of this current study extended earlier understandings of scaffolding in an EFL environment and will contribute to the advancement of future courses in terms of their scaffolding pedagogical aspects.



This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
  • ISSN(Print): 1923-869X
  • ISSN(Online): 1923-8703
  • Started: 2011
  • Frequency: bimonthly

Journal Metrics

Google-based Impact Factor (2021): 1.43

h-index (July 2022): 45

i10-index (July 2022): 283

h5-index (2017-2021): 25

h5-median (2017-2021): 37

Learn more

Contact