Use Templates and Tools That Allow for Scaffolding¶

Strategy · All strategies
Evidence · 4 claims (4 for) · 13 studies (5 causal, 3 quant-synthesis, 3 review, 1 associational, 1 qualitative), q2–q4 · 1 of 13 report an effect size

Description¶

This strategy provides learners with structured supports — planning templates, graphic organizers, sentence frames, and structured tools — that externalize the organization of a complex task such as writing. The supports reduce the cognitive demands of managing structure and content simultaneously, and are progressively faded as learners internalize the underlying organizational schema.

Design Implications¶

Templates work by offloading the structural demands of a task so working memory can be devoted to content and reasoning Chunking reduces the load imposed on working memory. [+M]. Their effectiveness depends on contingent support: scaffolds calibrated to current learner performance improve learning, while support that is too heavy or too light does not Scaffolding that is contingent on learner performance improves learning outcomes. [+S]. Critically, scaffolds must be faded — responsibility for structuring the task must transfer to the learner, and templates that are never removed can become a crutch that blocks independent performance Fading support promotes transfer of responsibility from scaffold to learner. [+M].

Context¶

Requirements¶

• Templates and organizers matched to the genre or task structure (e.g., argument frames, story maps, lab-report templates)
• Explicit instruction in how and why to use each tool, not just distribution of the tool (Provide Guidance)
• A plan for fading: moving from full templates to partial frames to independent composition
• Ongoing feedback on how learners are using the structure (Provide Feedback)

Constraints¶

• Overly rigid templates can produce formulaic writing and discourage authentic voice; learners may satisfy the template without engaging the underlying rhetorical purpose [-M]
• If scaffolds are never faded, learners remain dependent on external structure and fail to transfer organizational skills to unsupported tasks Fading support promotes transfer of responsibility from scaffold to learner. [-M]
• Learners with strong prior knowledge of a genre may find templates redundant and demotivating [~M]
• Tools without explicit instruction in their purpose are often used mechanically or ignored [-M]

Implementation Variability¶

• Genre-specific templates (persuasive essay frames, lab reports, source-analysis grids) versus generic organizers
• Digital tools with embedded prompts (e.g., sentence starters, checklist sidebars) versus paper-based organizers
• Partial templates with deliberate gaps, requiring learners to generate the structural elements themselves as an intermediate fading step
• Collaborative completion of templates before individual use, shifting from co-construction to independence

Target Learners¶

• Novice writers and reluctant writers who lack internalized organizational schemas Scaffolding that is contingent on learner performance improves learning outcomes. [+S]
• Learners with limited working memory capacity for whom managing structure and content simultaneously is overwhelming Chunking reduces the load imposed on working memory. [+M]
• Less beneficial for proficient writers in the same genre, for whom templates impose unnecessary structure [~M]

Target Learning Goals¶

• Procedural knowledge of task and genre structure (how a genre is organized)
• Planning and revision skills in writing
• Gradual internalization of self-regulated composing strategies

Instructions¶

1. Model completing the template on a shared example, thinking aloud about each structural decision (Provide Guidance)
2. Have learners complete the same template on a parallel task (Practice)
3. Provide feedback specifically on structural and organizational choices, not just content (Provide Feedback)
4. Fade the scaffold: move to partial templates, then to planning independently, then to full Whole-Task Performance without the tool
5. Ask learners to self-explain how the template's structure served the task's purpose, supporting internalization of the schema Self-explanation improves conceptual understanding. [+M]

Related Strategies¶

• Modeling and Think-Alouds — demonstrating template use makes the reasoning behind the structure visible
• Gradual Release of Responsibility — the fading sequence (I do → we do → you do) is the mechanism by which templates build independence
• Self-Regulated Strategy Development — SRSD embeds planning templates within explicit strategy instruction and self-monitoring
• Provide templates and publicly posted talk moves to scaffold discussion and lower cognitive load

Examples¶

• SRSD (Self-Regulated Strategy Development) — Graham and Harris's extensively validated approach uses mnemonic planning templates (e.g., POW+TREE for persuasive writing) that are explicitly taught, modeled, and faded as students internalize the strategy (https://srsdonline.ca)
• The Writing Revolution (Hochman & Wexler) — sentence-level templates and scaffolds (because-but-so frames, appositive templates) that build from sentence construction to full compositions (https://www.thewritingrevolution.org)
• Google Docs outline templates / graphic organizer tools such as Popplet and Inspiration — digital organizers that let learners rearrange and restructure ideas, supporting planning before drafting

Key Sources¶

• Graham, S., & Perin, D. (2007). A meta-analysis of writing instruction for adolescent students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99(3), 445–476. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.99.3.445
• Graham, S., & Sandmel, K. (2011). The process writing approach: A meta-analysis. The Journal of Educational Research, 104(6), 396–407. doi:10.1080/00220671.2010.488703
• Wood, D., Bruner, J. S., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 17(2), 89–100. doi:10.1111/j.1469-7610.1976.tb00381.x
• Rosenshine, B., & Meister, C. (1992). The use of scaffolds for teaching higher-level cognitive strategies. Educational Leadership, 49(7), 26–33.
• Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.