34

The Cognitive Apprenticeship Model

in Educational Practice
Vanessa P. Dennen and Kerry J. Burner
Florida State University, Tallahassee, Florida

CONTENTS
Introduction .....................................................................................................................................................................426
Cognitive Apprenticeship Defined ..................................................................................................................................427
Instructional Strategies and Models Associated with Cognitive Apprenticeship.................................................427
Concepts Associated with Cognitive Apprenticeship ...........................................................................................427
Situatedness ..................................................................................................................................................427
Legitimate Peripheral Participation .............................................................................................................428
Guided Participation ....................................................................................................................................428
Community of Practice..........................................................................................................................................428
Research on Cognitive Apprenticeship...........................................................................................................................429
Studying the Enactment of Cognitive Apprenticeship..........................................................................................429
Cognitive Apprenticeship in Multimedia Environments ............................................................................. 429
Cognitive Apprenticeship in Higher Education...........................................................................................429
Cognitive Apprenticeship in K–12 Education.............................................................................................430
Research on Mentoring ...................................................................................................................................................430
Formal Mentoring Programs .................................................................................................................................430
Mentoring Strategies..............................................................................................................................................431
Research on Scaffolding .................................................................................................................................................432
Distributed Scaffolding and ZPD ..........................................................................................................................432
Teacher-Provided Scaffolding Strategies...............................................................................................................433
Software-Based Scaffolding ..................................................................................................................................433
Scaffolding and Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning...................................................................434
Research on Community of Practice ..............................................................................................................................435
Cognitive Apprenticeship and Newcomer Adjustment .........................................................................................435
Research on Identity Development .......................................................................................................................435
Research on Community Interactions ...................................................................................................................436
Summary of Cognitive Apprenticeship Research...........................................................................................................436
Future Steps in Research and Practice ...........................................................................................................................436
References .......................................................................................................................................................................437

425
Vanessa P. Dennen and Kerry J. Burner

ABSTRACT Scaffolding: Support that is provided to assist learners

in reaching skill levels beyond their current abili-
Cognitive apprenticeship is a process by which learn- ties; essential to scaffolding is fading the support
ers learn from a more experienced person by way of inversely to the learners’ acquisition of the skill
cognitive and metacognitive skills and processes. This that is being supported.
chapter explores the elements of cognitive apprentice- Situatedness: The context or constellation of influen-
ship, first offering definitions and a historical context, tial events and elements that govern and shape
then moving into a review of research. The research human life.
review is organized with a three-part focus: on studies Zone of proximal development (ZPD): A term coined
that investigate a holistic approaches to educational by Vygotsky to describe the space between a
applications of the process of cognitive apprenticeship; learner’s current skill level and the next skill level
on studies that investigate portions of the process, such that the learner cannot reach without assistance.
as scaffolding or mentoring; and on studies that inves-
tigate cognitive apprenticeship activities within com-
munities of practice. Discussion about the intersection
of technology and cognitive apprenticeship research is INTRODUCTION
imbedded within each of the three areas of focus, Long before education was a field studied in universi-
reflecting the steady increase of systematically ties—indeed, long before universities even existed—
designed, computer-mediated instruction that is based people were learning via apprenticeship. Most simply
in social learning theories, especially cognitive appren- put, it is a process through which a more experienced
ticeship theories. Empirical studies have confirmed person assists a less experienced one, providing sup-
much of what theories have suggested: (1) that the port and examples, so the less experienced person
cognitive apprenticeship model is an accurate descrip- gains new knowledge and skills. Apprenticeship is the
tion of how learning occurs, and (2) that the instruc- process through which a parent may teach a child how
tional strategies that have been extracted from these to tie her shoes and the process through which a person
observations of everyday life can be designed into may learn to become a chef or a tailor. In the first
more formal learning contexts with positive effect. The example, one would not expect the child to see a dem-
chapter concludes with a call for more systematic and onstration and be able to tie a shoe with no assistance
integrated program of studies working toward the on the first try. Similarly, it seems logical that a new
development of guiding principles to support instruc- chef starts out with simpler tasks, such as chopping
tional design, teaching, and learning based on the cog- ingredients or garnishing plates, and works his way up
nitive apprenticeship model. to preparing entire dishes and meals. Often larger skills
are broken into smaller ones, and supports are provided
KEYWORDS so that tasks that are given to the apprenticing learner
are within the reach of the learner’s current ability level
Apprenticeship: A process through which a more expe- or zone of proximal development (ZPD) (Vygotsky,
rienced person assists a less experienced one by 1978). Also critical to apprenticeship is that tasks must
way of demonstration, support, and examples. be representative of authentic skills and not merely
Articulation: In cognitive apprenticeship, verbalizing classroom-type exercises.
the results of reflective acts. Apprenticeship programs have been formalized in
Coaching: In cognitive apprenticeship, assisting and many vocational education programs; for example, to
supporting learners’ cognitive activities. become a journeyman electrician, one must work
Cognitive apprenticeship: An apprenticeship process through various levels of apprenticeship. The educa-
that utilizes cognitive and metacognitve skills and tional value of apprenticeship, however, is not limited
processes to guide learning. to the learning psychomotor skills or vocational trades.
Community of practice: A group of people bound by Apprenticeships can just as readily support cognitive
participation in an activity common to them all; and metacognitive learning processes and may appear
may be formal or informal. in both formal and informal learning environments.
Exploration: In cognitive apprenticeship, forming and This chapter first provides a brief description of con-
testing a personal hypothesis in pursuit of learning. cepts related to the cognitive apprenticeship model,
Modeling: In cognitive apprenticeship, demonstrating followed by a description of the instructional strategies
thought processes. that comprise this model. Finally, it presents a summary
Reflection: In cognitive apprenticeship, self-analysis of recent research related to the use of cognitive appren-
and self-assessment. ticeship and its component instructional strategies.

426
 The Cognitive Apprenticeship Model in Educational Practice

COGNITIVE APPRENTICESHIP Collins and colleagues’ (1989) model generally is

DEFINED considered the foundational one, but other slightly dif-
ferent versions have been proposed. Gallimore and
The concept of a cognitive apprenticeship—defined as Tharp (1990) identified six forms of scaffolded assis-
“learning through guided experience on cognitive and tance: (1) instructing, (2) questioning, (3) modeling, (4)
metacognitive, rather than physical, skills and pro- feeding back, (5) cognitive structuring, and (6) contin-
cesses” by Collins et al. (1989, p. 456)—has its roots gency management. Enkenberg (2001) added scaffold-
in social learning theories. One cannot engage in a ing and explanation as key strategies. LeGrand Brandt
cognitive apprenticeship alone, but rather it is depen- et al. (1993) presented a sequential model of modeling
dent on expert demonstration (modeling) and guidance (both behavioral and cognitive), approximating, fading,
(coaching) in the initial phases of learning. Learners self-directed learning, and generalizing. Liu (2005),
are challenged with tasks slightly more difficult than who used a cognitive apprenticeship approach to sup-
they can accomplish on their own and must rely on port preservice education, offers instructional designers
assistance from and collaboration with others to a three-phase Web-based CA model with a dynamic
achieve these tasks. In other words, learners must work relationship between the initial modeling–observing
with more experienced others and with time move from phase and the second scaffolding–practice phase, which
a position of observation to one of active practice. The then is followed by the guiding–generalizing phase.
learning tasks in cognitive apprenticeship are holistic The similarities across these models are their reliance
in nature (see Chapter 35 on whole-task models in this on instructional strategies that provide learner guidance
Handbook) and increase in complexity and diversity and engage learners in different types of practice until
over time as the learner becomes more experienced. A the guidance is no longer needed.
major advantage of learning by cognitive apprentice-
ship as opposed to traditional classroom-based meth- Concepts Associated with
ods is the opportunity to see the subtle, tacit elements Cognitive Apprenticeship
of expert practice that may not otherwise be explicated
in a lecture or knowledge-dissemination format. Four key concepts commonly discussed in the cognitive
apprenticeship literature are (1) situatedness, (2) legit-
Instructional Strategies and Models imate peripheral participation, (3) guided participation,
Associated with Cognitive Apprenticeship and (4) membership in a community of practice.

Although cognitive apprenticeships readily occur on Situatedness

their own, without intervention, certain instructional
strategies are hallmarks of the theory and can be pur- Situated learning is active learning that takes place via
posely implemented to support learning. Intentional one’s participation in an authentic task or setting (Lave
teaching and learning through cognitive apprenticeship and Wenger, 1991). Context, or situatedness, reflects
require making tacit processes visible to learners so they the ways in which cultural, historical, and institutional
can observe and then practice them (Collins et al., 1989). factors influence the actions of our everyday lives
The basic model consists of the following strategies: (Brown et al., 1989; Rogoff, 1990; Wertsch, 1998).
Learning that occurs within the context of application
• Modeling—Demonstrating the thinking pro- is considered more likely to result in improved prac-
cess tice; for example, would you prefer to receive medical
• Coaching—Assisting and supporting student treatment from someone who has classroom training
cognitive activities as needed (includes scaf- only or someone who has trained on actual patients in
folding) a clinical setting? As Brown et al. (1998, p. 230) indi-
• Reflection—Self-analysis and assessment cated, “The central issue in learning is becoming a
• Articulation—Verbalizing the results of practitioner, not learning about practice.” Current edu-
reflection cational systems, particularly universities, have been
• Exploration—Formation and testing of one’s criticized for separating learning from practice, result-
own hypotheses ing in an education that does not sufficiently prepare
students for job performance (Enkenberg, 2001); in
Note that these strategies refer to the teacher’s or other words, these systems are criticized when they
expert’s actions; the learners in cognitive apprentice- lack situatedness and fail to engage learners in authen-
ships (CAs) are engaged in acts of observation, prac- tic practices with cultural tools and natural perfor-
tice, and reflection. mance conditions.

427
Vanessa P. Dennen and Kerry J. Burner

Legitimate Peripheral Participation Community of Practice

In cognitive apprenticeship, a newcomer who prima- Although learning organizations and institutions have
rily observes is considered a legitimate peripheral par- sought to implement elements of cognitive apprentice-
ticipant. In essence, this label validates observation as ships in formal learning situations, cognitive appren-
a learning activity. It would be unreasonable to expect ticeships often naturally occur within a community of
a newcomer to be a full participant in an activity. One practice (CoP). A community of practice is a group of
must learn not only the whole tasks to be accomplished people—either formally or informally bound—who
and their assessment criteria but also the smaller tasks engage in and identify themselves with a common
that comprise them. An apprentice can gain initial practice. Examples of a CoP might be educators within
experience through observing a holistic process from a given school district or members of a professional
the periphery. Once the big picture is understood, par- organization for clarinetists. What brings these people
ticipation can shift from peripheral to active, with the together as a CoP are three critical elements:
learner completing smaller, component parts of the
larger task while receiving iterations of feedback from • Mutual engagement—A shared task or inter-
someone who is more experienced. At this point, the est and a resulting identity
learner is no longer a legitimate peripheral participant, • Joint enterprise—A common set of commu-
but instead is inbound, beginning to identify more with nity standards and expectations
insiders of the community’s practice. • Shared repertoire—A common vocabulary
that differentiates the CoP from others
Guided Participation Wenger (1998) suggested the following trajectories as
Guided participation is the social element of cognitive a model of how membership within a community of
apprenticeship. Often the guidance is provided tacitly, practice occurs:
as one naturally participates in everyday life (Rogoff,
• Peripheral—One who may not become an
1990); there is an inherently situated component to
insider to the community but who neverthe-
guided participation. Guided participation, to be suc-
less takes part in community events (e.g.,
cessful, must take place within a learner’s zone of
parents who volunteer in the classroom)
proximal development (ZPD). The ZPD, as originally
• Inbound—A person who is becoming a fully
defined by Vygotsky (1978), is a dynamic region that
participating member of the community
is just beyond the learner’s current ability level; the
(e.g., a student teacher or brand new teacher)
ZPD of a learner gaining new skills and understanding
• Insider—A person who has become a fully
moves with that learner’s development. This space
participating member of a community (e.g.,
between actual and potential performance is assessed
a teacher)
through social interaction between the learner and
• Boundary—A person who is not a fully par-
someone who is more experienced—potentially a
ticipating member of the community but
teacher, parent, or even an advanced peer. Tharp and
who participates by bringing a different set
Gallimore (1988) used a four-stage model to describe
of skills or services to the community (e.g.,
the dynamic and recursive process through which
a technology specialist)
learners work within their ZPDs and come to internal-
• Outbound—A person who is preparing to
ize knowledge, only to begin again with newly defined
leave the community (e.g., a teacher who is
ZPDs. Rogoff (1990, p. 16) noted that cultural learning
moving to an administrative position or pre-
and development, in addition to individual cognitive
paring to retire)
development, occur as a result of teaching and learning
in the ZPD: Although one may enter a community on one tra-
Interactions in the zone of proximal development are the
jectory point and move to other points (e.g., inbound
crucible of development and of culture, in that they allow to insider and eventually to outbound), such a path is
children to participate in activities that would be impos- not mandated. Learning need not occur through the
sible for them alone, using cultural tools that themselves interactions of participants on different levels of the
must be adapted to the specific practical activities at hand. trajectory; for example, teacher professional develop-
ment may occur through peer reciprocal teaching
This observation again stresses the situated nature and (Glazer and Hannafin, 2006). Movement through the
social interconnectedness of learning through cogni- trajectories is fluid in many contexts, although some
tive apprenticeship. communities may have formal levels of membership

428
 The Cognitive Apprenticeship Model in Educational Practice

that are aligned with these labels. The utility of the Cognitive Apprenticeship
labels is that they support understanding of the differ- in Multimedia Environments
ent ways in which people might participate in a CoP
or a cognitive apprenticeship. One dominant belief is that multimedia and Web-based
environments can be programmed to support cognitive
apprenticeship processes. Many such environments
RESEARCH ON COGNITIVE focus on one or two strategies related to cognitive
APPRENTICESHIP apprenticeship and are discussed later in this chapter,
but a few look at how to address the entire CA model.
The body of research on cognitive apprenticeship has Wang and Bonk (2005) proposed using the CA model
been growing steadily and in many ways overlaps with as the basis for constructing a groupware environment.
research on other constructivist learning theories and Seel and Schenk (2003) used a CA model that
methods. For this chapter, we sought to include recent sequences activities in the same order as Collins et al.
reports of empirical research on cognitive apprentice- (1989), with an interest in developing a multimedia-
ship. Theoretical works or ones merely describing based system to support model-based learning. Their
instructional projects, software, or elements of practice formative evaluation of five replication studies showed
have not been included here. We have separated the that CA may be effective as a guide for the design of
research into studies focusing on (1) the whole CA multimedia learning environments, with scaffolding
model as enacted in instructional settings, (2) individ- being the weakest spot. Their findings substantiated
ual instructional strategies associated with CA (men- earlier studies on integrating CA and multimedia
toring, scaffolding), and (3) cognitive apprenticeship (Casey, 1996) on computer-based coaching (Lajoie
within communities of practice. We note, however, that and Lesgold, 1989). Generally, addressing individual
this separation is somewhat artificial given the inter- learner needs in a programmed environment has
relatedness of concepts and strategies. Additionally, proven challenging to do but promising for supporting
we have limited this review to studies with a primary learning; thus, researchers and developers continue to
focus on cognitive apprenticeship and related strate- work on ways of implementing elements of cognitive
gies. Studies on trade and vocational apprenticeships apprenticeship in multimedia environments.
were not included because they tend to focus on issues
other than cognitive problem-solving skills. Similarly, Cognitive Apprenticeship in Higher Education
studies that merely mention instructional strategies
related to CA but do not focus explicitly on how those Many of the studies of cognitive apprenticeship in
strategies relate to CA were not included. In excluding higher education are focused on teacher education pro-
such studies, this chapter is not an exhaustive one, but grams. Two studies in particular exemplify the types
it is representative of the types of research being done. of research being conducted on CA in the field of
teacher education: de Jager et al. (2002) and Liu (2005)
Studying the Enactment each looked at CA and teacher training. In the first,
of Cognitive Apprenticeship participants were trained in CA and in the second
participants were trained using a CA approach.
Studies examining cognitive apprenticeship have Targeting the instructional design behavior of mid-
researched both the parts and the whole. The parts are dle grade in-service teachers, de Jager and colleagues
generally understood to be the instructional phases (2002) showed that, simply put, teacher training results
outlined by Collins et al. (1989), whereas the whole in a change in teacher teaching behaviors. Specifically,
consists of the process of these events occurring at a their study offered teachers training in a CA approach
specific time and place with unique individuals co- or a directed instruction approach to reading compre-
constructing the series of apprenticeship moments. hension then compared their behaviors with a control
These studies attempt to identify the critical elements group of teachers who used the established curricular
of the CA episodes across settings and with varied approach. Both experimental groups showed a change
populations. Cognitive apprenticeship is especially in teaching behaviors, according to their treatment
appealing to designers of Web-based learning environ- group; however, the authors concluded that changing
ments who are embracing a more constructivist to a CA instructional approach is no more or less
approach to learning and instruction. Similarly, CA has difficult than changing to a direct instruction
begun to find a home in both K–12 education and approach. Because both approaches were founded in
teacher education programs, both of which have been constructivist theory, the authors further concluded
researched contexts. that their study shows that it is possible to “translate

429
Vanessa P. Dennen and Kerry J. Burner

new theoretical insights in learning and instruction into in a new career or environment. Mentoring programs
regular school practices” (de Jager et al., 2002, p. 841). and tips on how to create and engage in them are fairly
Cognitive apprenticeship environments also may common, with published empirical reviews of them
be used to help train preservice teachers. Liu (2005) being much less common. The study of such programs
studied the effects of a Web-based CA learning envi- and their effectiveness may well occur more often than
ronment in preservice teaching education. Compared is published, via internal or informal evaluations.
with a traditional classroom approach, the Web-based Additionally, studies have been conducted to examine
CA approach resulted in better performance and atti- different mentoring practices or strategies as well as
tudes toward instructional planning. the use of technologies to support mentoring.
Others have looked at using the CA model in fields
such as instructional technology (Darabi, 2005), nurs- Formal Mentoring Programs
ing (Cope et al., 2000), chemistry (Stewart and
Lagowski, 2003), and engineering. Also studied is how The results of a review of ten evaluations of youth
CA impacts higher education teaching practices in mentoring programs (Jekielek et al., 2002) found that
general. Hendricks (2001) conducted an experimental their impact was felt in multiple areas, including aca-
study to determine whether CA was more likely to demic achievement (in terms of attendance, attitudes,
result in transferable knowledge than traditional and continuing education, although not necessarily
instruction and found that the treatment group had grades); health and safety (in terms of preventing and
greater post-test gains but did not perform significantly reducing negative behaviors); and social and emotional
better on a transfer activity two weeks later. development. Productive mentoring practices were
found to be structure, regular meetings, mentor train-
Cognitive Apprenticeship in K–12 Education ing and preparation, and a focus on the mentees’ needs
rather than the mentors’ expectations.
Teachers are being trained in and via CA learning Lucas (2001) studied an after-school mentoring
environments and are conversely creating CA learning program for sixth-grade students. Mentors were col-
environments for their students. How do the students lege undergraduates who were enrolled in a for-credit
perceive these environments and do they benefit from course, and mentee participants were volunteers who
them? Tsai (2005) developed and validated a question- were promised support for academic achievement.
naire that was then used to determine student attitudes Lucas found that the relationship between mentor and
toward a computer-based science instruction; one of mentee is heavily based on individual factors, includ-
the scales asked about cognitive apprenticeship. ing personal preferences, prior experiences, and goals
Among other things, students who took the survey and expectations; essentially, the nature of the experi-
indicated that they preferred learning environments ence transcends any traditional definition or training
that connected concepts and reality. Considering stu- that may take place and is heavily shaped by the indi-
dent epistemological beliefs and learning preferences, viduals who are involved in it. Lucas also found a
Tsai pointed out, can be a useful and fundamental step much greater desire to engage in mentor–mentee inter-
when designing an instructional environment for a spe- action when it was focused around an activity that the
cific group of learners. Teong (2003) did not use infor- mentee could not successfully complete alone.
mation about learners’ preferences in the intervention Langer (2001), in his study of the nature of man-
for his study; instead, the study examined the effect of datory mentoring at SUNY Empire State College
metacognitive training using a word-problem-solving (ESC), found a gap between his results and the pre-
strategy, CRIME, on the experimental group’s work dominant views in the theoretical literature about men-
with a CA-based instructional software, WordMath. toring. Although the literature base tends to place a
The experimental group, which received metacognitive heavy emphasis on the close interpersonal relation-
training, outperformed the other students in word- ships developed between mentors and mentees, Langer
problem-solving skills in terms of both timing and in contrast observed a process that was almost exclu-
quality of decisions. sively focused on goal attainment. What Langer and
ESC are referring to as mentoring might better fit the
definition of coaching, which is more task focused than
RESEARCH ON MENTORING relationship focused.
Billet (2000) studied the learning process of men-
The word mentoring often brings to mind formal pro- tees in a formal workplace mentoring program over a
grams in which a more experienced practitioner is six-month period. This prolonged engagement allowed
paired with a less experienced one to provide guidance him to identify learning sources and strategies that

430
 The Cognitive Apprenticeship Model in Educational Practice

were influential on the mentees’ development. Mentors and felt that the computer-mediated forum was an
were trained in workshops that introduced guided appropriate outlet. The quality of student reflection
learning strategies such as questioning, modeling, and was not as high as it might be, and further work is
coaching and helped them to identify ways in which needed to develop better scaffolding and mentoring
these strategies might be used in their workplace. strategies for use in online environments.
Engagement in everyday work was found to have the
greatest influence on mentee development, supporting Mentoring Strategies
the concept of situated cognition, and Billet suggests
that the guided learning strategies were used to enhance Integrative teaching is one mentor strategy that may be
this engagement. Questioning, modeling, and coaching used. In this strategy, the mentor combines theory and
were perceived as most useful. Less used strategies, practice in their explanation to the mentee. Hayward et
such as diagrams and analogies, were less valued. al. (2001) found that most mentors provided far more
Young and Perrewé (2000) looked at career and information than the mentees had requested. A common
social support factors and their effects on participant strategy, used by one third of the mentors, was expert
perceptions of the success of a mentoring relationship, push, in which a mentor did not directly answer the
finding that mentors’ expectations generally were met mentee’s question but instead returned questions
when a protégé (mentee) was involved in career sup- intended to help the mentee find the correct answer.
port behavior. Conversely, protégés tended to measure In a qualitative study examining the effects of elec-
the success of their mentoring relationship in terms of tronic peer mentoring in a university physical therapy
the amount of social support they received. Young and class, it was found that both mentors and mentees
Perrewé hypothesized that this difference in perception learned through the process of reflection and articula-
may be due to the mentors’ established status, which tion (Hayward et al., 2001). Mentees benefited from
may have them focused on successes directly related the mentors’ stories and experiences which made the
to the mentoring goal (career enhancement), while learning more concrete and authentic, and the mentors
their more novice protégés may not yet be able to reinforced concepts already learned by connecting the-
predict the impact of particular career-related behav- ory to practice. Also studying mentoring in a university
iors but will look for encouragement and friendship as setting, Beck (2004) found that linking a writing
indicators that they are performing as expected. course to an engineering department’s course could
Bonnett et al. (2006) studied 20 mentor–protégé help students better learn how to write lab reports. In
pairings of research scientists and university-level this instance, the writing instructor provided mentor-
biology students who used an electronic mentoring ship that carried over to the engineering curriculum.
program. The more effective pairs were found to have Peers also may serve as mentors to each other, with
been more prolific and structured in their posting and learners in some instances identifying on their own
to have focused more on topics than relationship man- both their knowledge gap (given their learning goals)
agement issues. and peers who can help them attain their learning
Hudson et al. (2005) created and validated an goals. Engaging in study groups and asking for peer
instrument based on the literature in primary science assistance is a common practice in many educational
teaching by selecting five factors that seemed related settings, as students realize that their peers can often
to mentoring effectiveness (personal attributes, system supply the learning assistance that they need. Loong
requirements, pedagogical knowledge, modeling, and (1998) studied the peer apprenticeship that developed
feedback). This instrument, called Mentoring for between two students engaged in a computer-mediated
Effective Primary Science Teaching (MEPST), is mathematical task. Initially, the students had different
intended to assess mentee perceptions of their mentors approaches and worked rather independently, with one
for their intern or practicum experiences. student focused on mathematical rules and the other
The Internet has encouraged the exploration of focused more on concepts. Over time, however, the
mentoring in environments where mentors and learners rule-focused student noticed that the concept-focused
are not colocated. A series of studies investigated the student’s expertise was needed, and he assigned him-
effects of online mentoring of preservice teachers in a self to this peer in an apprentice role.
project called Conference on the Web (COW), which Pear and Crone-Todd (2002) examined ways of
spanned multiple years and involved collaborations using computers to provide feedback to college-level
from faculty and preservice teachers at other schools students in a manner consistent with the tenets of social
and universities internationally (Bonk et al., 2000, constructivism in a course that used a teaching system
2001a,b). Post-class surveys and interviews indicated referred to as a computer-aided personalized system
that the students valued the mentoring they received of instruction (CAPSI). Drawing on the concept of

431
Vanessa P. Dennen and Kerry J. Burner

scaffolding, course material was arranged in manage- students’ written work followed the models given as
able units. A peer–tutor model was developed in which a scaffold but did not extend in any substantial way
more advanced learners provided feedback to their beyond the scaffold. The authors concluded that,
classmates in an open-ended question practice test although scaffolding had a clear effect, it did not help
environment. Although the findings of this study show achieve all of the instructional goals; this finding may
that the method works to help ensure that students represent an inherent issue with scaffolding (particu-
receive a high amount of feedback while keeping the larly a scaffold for performance), or it may be indica-
process manageable on instructors, it neglects to com- tive of a scaffold that did not fully meet the learners’
ment on the impact of this intervention on the learning needs.
process for either the students who received the feed-
back or the peer tutors who provided it. Distributed Scaffolding and ZPD
A big challenge for classroom teachers is having to
RESEARCH ON SCAFFOLDING teach learners who all have different zones of proximal
development. Within a class, the ZPD for many stu-
Research on scaffolding has focused on how much is dents may be similar, but there likely are some students
needed, what type is needed, and how to best provide whose zone is quite different. Some researchers have
it to both individuals and groups. The term scaffold begun to examine how scaffolding can be flexibly
appears in many studies, but it is not always well designed to meet the needs of diverse students, recog-
applied. Pea (2004) argued that the term has become nizing that scaffolding should provide that extra sup-
a bit overused, to the point where it has lost its true port learners need to successfully complete a just out-
meaning and significance. He traces the term back to of-reach task.
its origins, first published in an article by Wood et al. Savery (1998) found evidence that learners do not
(1976), which rather tightly tied it back to the concept all need the same amount of scaffolding. He noted that
of zone of proximal development. A scaffold was instructors in a business writing course made use of
intended to be a tool to help children do something all six of Gallimore and Tharp’s (1990) forms of scaf-
they could not do without assistance. Within this con- folded assistance, although each occurred in different
cept is the notion that the scaffold, when no longer amounts based on student need. Instructing, question-
needed (the ZPD has shifted with learning), could be ing, modeling, and cognitive structuring were part of
faded. Pea (2004) rightly noted that in much of the the teachers’ interaction with the students. Feeding
published research we have shifted from discussing back occurred through grades and comments on
scaffold with fading to a different interpretation: scaf- assignments. Finally, contingency management was
fold for performance. In particular, Pea raised the issue largely unspoken, although it had been designed into
that many so-called software-based scaffolds really are the course itself that students would face repercussions
intended as performance supports that may never be for unproductive behavior.
removed from the learner; however, it is possible that Puntambekar and Kolodner (2005) studied stu-
some of the so-called scaffold-for-performance studies dents learning science by design. They used a design
represent situations in which fading might be possible diary with learners as a scaffold for their design-related
but was outside the scope of the study. activities. Their findings showed that one form of scaf-
Good descriptions of fading can be found in the folding may not be sufficient to meet all learners’
literature on reciprocal teaching (Brown and Palincsar, needs at all times, and thus recommended the concept
1989; Palincsar and Brown, 1984; Palincsar et al., of distributed scaffolding. The basic concept behind
1993; Rosenshine and Meister, 1994). Fading was distributed scaffolding is that offering more support
studied explicitly by Roehler and Cantlon (1997). They and more types of it results in a greater chance of
examined the use of scaffolds in two social construc- effectively scaffolding the learning process for each
tivist classrooms, exploring the types and characteris- student in a meaningful way.
tics of scaffolding in learning conversations taking Building on this idea that scaffolds need not be
place during elementary-school language instruction. limited to one kind per instructional intervention,
Over time, students took more responsibility for learn- Tabak (2004) discussed how distributed scaffolding
ing in this environment, and the amount of scaffolding can be synergistic in nature; for example, students
used by the instructor faded. Bean and Patel Stevens might use software programs with built-in scaffolds
(2002) obtained somewhat contradictory results. In but also rely on just-in-time scaffolding from their
their study of how scaffolding affects the reflection instructors. The two forms of scaffolds together are a
process for teacher education students, they found that more powerful learning support than either on its own.

432
 The Cognitive Apprenticeship Model in Educational Practice

Teacher-Provided Scaffolding Strategies ied how mothers scaffolded their preschool children’s
performance on problem-solving tasks and then mea-
Discourse-based scaffolding is one form of coaching sured the children’s self-regulatory abilities in the kin-
that teachers tend to implicitly rely on in classroom dergarten classroom. They found that more highly edu-
settings as they respond to learning needs. To study cated mothers were more likely to scaffold their
discourse-based scaffolding, researchers typically children’s work and engage children in metacognitive
examine the interactions that occur between teachers discourse, and in turn these behaviors resulted in chil-
and learners and how they support the learning process dren who exhibited higher rates of task persistence and
on different types of projects. Teacher scaffolding may behavior control in the classroom.
seem like a silent activity and thus not be immediately
observed, but it is a constant for good teachers (Mas- Software-Based Scaffolding
ters and Yelland, 2002). Through quiet monitoring,
teachers are able to enter a group and ask questions or Software-based scaffolding has been a developing
propose options at just the right time and withdraw topic of interest as educational software becomes
such supports when they are no longer needed. increasingly sophisticated. Reiser (2004) suggests that
Determining student needs is a driving force for software-based scaffolding serves two major purposes.
this research. Rasku-Puttonen et al. (2003) found that First, it can be used to help provide structure to the
students need extensive scaffolding when working on learning task, guiding them through the major stages
long-term problem-based learning activities, as well as or tasks and prompting them at appropriate times. Sec-
ample opportunity for reflection. Teacher flexibility in ond, it can be used to create a problem space in which
response to learner self-regulation also was considered learners must explore the content. These two types of
important. Tabak and Baumgartner (2004) examined scaffolds may work harmoniously or may conflict with
differences in the effectiveness of teacher modeling each other. Software-based scaffolds must be designed
dependent on whether the teacher and students have a in consideration of various tradeoffs such as level of
symmetric (partnerlike) or asymmetric (mentorlike) generality, learner control, and learner choice, with an
relationship. Symmetric and asymmetric relationships attempt to support learners without stifling or over-
result in different discourse structures and impact mas- directing them.
tery of cultural tools. They recommend a partner role Shabo et al. (1997) designed scaffolding into
for teachers helping to develop students identified as Graphica, a computer-based environment focused on
people who can work with scientific concepts. Meyer graphics learning. Graphica provides scaffolds that are
and Turner (2002) found that nonscaffolding class- built into learning exercises in the form of resources
room discourse (e.g., direct instruction or focus on (hints, descriptions of expert processes), coaching
objectives questions) is not as effective as scaffolded (computer-based critiques of student work that are
discourse at helping students become self-regulated available on demand), and articulation (a newsgroup,
math learners. the one form of human–human interaction built into
Another way in which students may need scaffold- the program). In a formative evaluation of Graphica,
ing assistance is task structuring (Tharp, 1993), which they found that many students were unsure of how to
may include activities such as “chunking, sequencing, use its various components to support their learning
detailing, reviewing, or any other means to structure processes. The practice exercises and visualization
the task and its components so as to fit it into the components were popular, but scaffolds such as the
learner’s zone of proximal development” (Sugar and expert analyses and hints were not heavily used. The
Bonk, 1998, p. 142). Supporting this theory, Dennen challenge for users of Graphica and similar programs
(2000) found that scaffolds in the form of chunking is that they must have sufficient metacognitive devel-
and sequencing tasks helped motivate students and opment to identify their own learning needs, and their
enabled them to focus more on the content-based learning goals must be inline with the goals designed
learning goals than on project management elements into the system.
of the assignment. Although this study looked at a one- Picking up on this issue of metacognitive develop-
time project and thus fading did not occur, in the con- ment, Graesser et al. (2005) designed computer-based
text of a larger classroom effort one might fade such learning environments to support inquiry and metacog-
scaffolds during successive projects. nition. They have been able to develop pedagogical
Scaffolding is not limited to classroom situations; agents that both model self-explanation and coach stu-
early interactions with one’s parents ideally provide dents in metacognitive strategies, demonstrating that
scaffolding as a child is guided through new experi- the computer is a viable tool for supporting develop-
ences (Rogoff, 1990). Neitzel and Stright (2003) stud- ment of deeper levels of metacognitive thinking and

433
Vanessa P. Dennen and Kerry J. Burner

when explanatory reasoning is involved. Land and mance. Learner-centered strategies are important here
Zembal-Saul (2003) similarly found that software- (Bonk and Dennen, 2007), as we move from informa-
based scaffolds are a useful support to articulation and tion transmission models of learning which tradition-
reflection processes. ally involve flat interactions with static content in an
Davis and Linn (2000) and Davis (2003) studied online environment. Scaffolding has been considered
the use of prompts to scaffold the reflection process essential to the development of deep asynchronous
for middle-school science students working within a discussion (Oliver and Herrington, 2000); however, in
computer-based system known as the Knowledge Inte- an online context the metaphor of scaffolding is not
gration Environment (KIE), developed by Bell et al. only appealing but also elusive and problematic
(1995). This system supports the scientific process by (McLoughlin, 2002). Why is scaffolding in an online
prompting students through related activities, such as environment so challenging? In part because it raises
identifying the needed evidence to support claims and the question of whether or not traditional roles of
determining whether presented evidence is adequate. teacher and learner will be relied upon. McLoughlin
Davis and Linn (2000) found in two related studies suggested a variety of technology interventions that
that reflective prompts in KIE promoted knowledge rely on scaffolding, including Computer-Supported
integration in students working on science projects. Intentional Learning Environments (CSILEs), which
They suggested that the reflective articulation that is are collaborative learning spaces in which the teacher
involved in responding to self-monitoring prompts is a facilitator and the student is tasked with commu-
helps students better self-assess their understanding nicating and creating knowledge objects (Scardamalia
and thus engages them in knowledge integration. and Bereiter, 1994); intelligent tutoring systems
In Davis’ 2003 study, students working in pairs (ITSs), which help break down and manage specific
received either generic prompts asking students to tasks; and goal-based scenarios (GBSs), which engage
share their thoughts at that point in the activity or students in authentic tasks and provide computer-based
directed prompts. Learners who received the generic resources and scaffolding in the form of task assistance
prompts were more likely to develop a coherent under- and hints as needed (Schank et al., 1999). Other recent
standing of the overall project in which they were studies building on the CSILE foundation have looked
participating than those who received the more heavily at how Knowledge Forum, a program that offers
scaffolded or controlled direct prompts. Learner auton- knowledge-building scaffolds, impacts student learn-
omy was also a factor, with autonomous learners dem- ing (Bereiter and Scardamalia, 2003; Lax et al., 2004;
onstrating the greatest comprehension benefits from Nason and Woodruff, 2003; Oshima et al., 2003). Stud-
the generic prompts. ies in this area often use a design-based research
It is possible that the directed prompts, which were method (see Chapter 54 in this Handbook).
prescripted and programmed into the KIE, were too Oshima and Oshima (2001) studied ways to
limiting or narrow for these learners or did not chal- improve learning for novices through the use of dis-
lenge them enough. It will thus be interesting to see course scaffolding; specifically, the WebCSILE tool
the results of recent research interests in scripting for was used to support their interactions. A comparative
online discourse (Choi et al., 2005; Jonassen and analysis of two groups’ discourse showed that,
Remidez, 2005; Makitalo et al., 2005). Also, comput- although students with a comprehension-oriented
ers are unable to adjust to learners’ unique needs in as objective discussed content at the metacognitive level,
subtle and personalized of a manner as a teacher might, those with a synthesis-oriented one did not. Further,
making it difficult for a program to sufficiently and the quality of writing did not improve in the group that
consistently identify each learner’s zone of proximal also had a page of writing tips and a schedule as
development (Ainsworth et al., 1998). This research additional support. The researchers felt that the support
also indirectly supports the calls of Tabak (2004) and in fact may have in some ways limited the interactions
Puntambekar and Kolodner (2005) for the use of dis- that took place. Learners in the second group used the
tributed scaffolding. provided scaffolding as a directive for what to do and
followed its suggestions quite literally, like a task list.
Scaffolding and Computer-Supported Guzdial and Turns (2000) recommend the use of
Collaborative Learning anchors, or topics that students wish to discuss to stim-
ulate interest and motivation. Using a Collaborative and
Scaffolding might be provided by human interactants Multimedia Interactive Learning Environment (CaMILE),
mediated by computers. This form of scaffolding dif- they compared anchored discussion to the use of a
fers from software-based supports in that a live person newsgroup tool lacking CaMILE’s management, facil-
uses computer-based tools to assist another’s perfor- itation and anchoring features, hypothesizing that the

434
 The Cognitive Apprenticeship Model in Educational Practice

anchored threads would be more effective (defined as ences occurring prior to and immediately upon the
having broad participation and being on-topic) than the hiring on 194 new employees at an educational insti-
unanchored ones. In an initial study, which looked at tution. They found that two factors—realism of pre-
participation across multiple classes, findings indicated entry knowledge and agent helpfulness—had a positive
that discussion threads in CaMILE were longer than impact on job outcomes as measured through role clar-
those in the newsgroup, with low variability of length ity, satisfaction, and commitment to the organization.
in the newsgroups but high variability in CaMILE. No Slaughter and Zickar (2006) found that role under-
significant difference were observed between the two standing, as indicated by the two variables of role con-
tools in terms of the number of active participants. A flict and role ambiguity, impacts how newcomers
second study focused on discussion within a single become involved in organizational activities. They con-
class. Findings in this study indicated that the students cluded that the behavior of community insiders influ-
who used CaMILE participated more extensively than ences the attitudes of the newcomers, thus it matters
their newsgroup counterparts and that teacher partici- with whom one interacts upon entry into a community.
pation was greater in the number of messages but less Their study was conducted within a university depart-
in the percentage of messages. ment, and they also found that graduate student activi-
ties or lack thereof in a department also may be indic-
ative of different community alignments; in other words,
RESEARCH ON COMMUNITY some students may engage in activities that would show
OF PRACTICE their commitment to their anticipated career more so
than to their department, knowing that commitment to
Cognitive apprenticeships are a natural occurrence the department will not necessarily have career rewards.
within communities of practice, and the CoP model, In a study of a community of writers at an urban
as pioneered by Etienne Wenger (Wenger, 1998; nonprofit organization, Beaufort (2000) explored the
Wenger et al., 2002), has been promoted as a way to roles the writers played and how new writers were
support professional learning during the last decade. integrated into the community following an appren-
This movement toward thinking about professions as ticeship model. Fifteen roles were observed in this
communities of practice has very much paralleled the example, ranging from observer, reader/researcher,
rethinking of organizational knowledge and develop- and clerical assistant on the novice end up to author,
ment of knowledge management strategies. Of partic- inventor, and coach on the expert end. New or less
ular interest to many researchers has been the experi- experienced writers learned the process through taking
ence of new employees as they get socialized into an on roles such as the clerical assistant (a role reserved
organization. In other words, are new employees learn- for new members), which allowed for extended obser-
ing and assimilating by observing the practices of their vation of the expert writers at work. The results suggest
more experienced peers? This research on people on that learning writing through a social process with
peripheral and inbound trajectories helps examine how authentic tasks is effective, and the researcher stated
prior learning and initial learning within an organiza- that a similar model may be useful in school settings,
tion tend to shape one’s experience and overall path where writing has traditionally been an individual,
within a community. general-skills learning activity.

Cognitive Apprenticeship Research on Identity Development

and Newcomer Adjustment
Identity development—whether or not one immedi-
Socialization was found to be important to newcomer ately relates to a particular community of practice—
adjustment by Kammeyer-Mueller and Wanberg also has been of interest to researchers. Identity issues
(2003). This study, situated within the organizational were raised by Klein and colleagues (2006), as those
development discourse on proximal and distal indica- who more readily understood the organization and
tors of newcomer adjustment, collected data from new- were better able to identify their own role within it;
comers at seven different organizations four times dur- however, communities of practice do not inherently
ing a 12-month period. In addition to socialization, transmit a sense of identity to those who are peripheral
both pre-entry knowledge and proactive personality or on an inbound path. Davis (2006) found that the
were shown to be related to positive adjustment. professional relationships one builds with others in the
Also concerned with this critical point in one’s CoP and particularly with those in a supervisory capac-
membership in a community of practice, Klein et al. ity will impact trajectory and identity development
(2006) examined the impact of socialization experi- among occupational therapists. Cope et al. (2000)

435
Vanessa P. Dennen and Kerry J. Burner

found that the nursing community of practice readily SUMMARY OF COGNITIVE

accepted student members into the community, but APPRENTICESHIP RESEARCH
their professional acceptance was dependent on dis-
played competence. Thus, it seems that identity and As can be seen in this review of theory and research
acceptance are related, but other factors may be on the cognitive apprenticeship model, the professional
involved in becoming a successful practicing member dialog spans diverse fields of study, learner groups, and
of a profession. settings. Empirical studies have confirmed much of
Varelas et al. (2005) studied the relationship what theories have suggested: (1) that the cognitive
between identifying oneself as a scientist and as a apprenticeship model is an accurate description of how
science teacher in a population of new teachers. They learning occurs naturally as part of everyday life and
found that these new teachers were identifying as sci- social interactions, and (2) that the instructional strat-
entists when engaging students in science learning egies that have been extracted from these observations
activities and that they were drawing upon instruc- of everyday life can be designed into more formal
tional strategies, such as mentoring, modeling, and learning contexts with positive effect. On the whole,
articulation, that are part of the cognitive apprentice- however, the research is still fragmented, with bits and
ship model. As time passed, these teachers identified pieces situated in different subfields of educational
more as science teachers and tried to create a commu- research (e.g., teacher education, multimedia-based
nity of scientists in their classrooms. education, adult education). Although many of the
studies point back to Collins et al. (1989) as a frame-
work, few refer to each other. In part this may be due
Research on Community Interactions to the recency of this work and publication cycles.
Communities of practice also are often mentioned in
relation to teachers and their professional develop- FUTURE STEPS IN
ment. New teachers tend to learn much from their RESEARCH AND PRACTICE
interactions with more experienced teachers, including
how to engage in teaching-related discourse (Smith, Two areas in which future research on cognitive
2005); however, Smith found that, despite learning apprenticeships may be particularly valuable are the
taking place, relationships between parties on different design of communities of practice and technology-
trajectories may not always be tension-free because of based learning programs. The growing popularity of
different personal needs and objectives. situated learning and the desire to create learning com-
Distributed scaffolding (also discussed in the Scaf- munities to support professional development and
folding Research section) is one way of addressing the organizational knowledge management have spurred
different needs of a group of learners, but one also the intentional design of communities of practice.
might bring the learners together as a community with Questions remain about how these communities are
a common goal, all working jointly within a ZPD. best designed and implemented or if they even can be
Goos et al. (2002) looked at how a collaborative ZPD purposely created as opposed to naturally evolved.
might be developed among learners working on The potential impact of computer technologies on
inquiry-based projects in a math community. They cognitive apprenticeships has been explored with two
coded learners’ interactions as reading, understanding, main purposes in mind: using computers to provide
analysis, exploration, planning, implementation, or learning support and using computers to support learn-
verification (for examples of the coding scheme, see ing-focused discourse. In the case of the former, the
Artzt and Armour-Thomas, 1992; Schoenfeld, 1992), challenges to researchers and developers are twofold:
as well as by metacognitive act. Their findings indicate (1) to develop guiding principles of providing com-
that the social interactions of learners working together puter-supported cognitive apprenticeships that will
can lead to a collaborative ZPD. work across proprietary software products, and (2) to
Research on communities of practice need not be develop programs that are sufficiently able to address
limited to work or school settings. Merriam et al. learners’ individual needs and provide appropriate sup-
(2003) studied how informal learning takes place via ports at the right moments. In the latter example, the
social interactions in a community of practicing literature on distance learning and online discourse,
witches. Through talking to representatives of different although not explicitly focused on cognitive appren-
covens, they found that membership in these groups ticeship, may provide a good start for examining how
very much fit Wenger’s (1998) community of practice to engage in modeling and coaching and how to
trajectory and that both formal and informal situated encourage articulation, reflection, and exploration in
learning was prevalent. computer-mediated learning environments.

436
 The Cognitive Apprenticeship Model in Educational Practice

Finally, as research on the cognitive apprenticeship Brown, J. S. (1998). Internet technology in support of the con-
model matures, it would be helpful to see a more cept of ‘communities-of-practice’: the case of Xerox.
Account. Manage. Inform. Technol., 8, 227–236.
systematic and integrated program of studies working
Brown, J. S., Collins, A., and Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cog-
toward the development of guiding principles to sup- nition and the culture of learning. Educ. Res., 18(1), 32–42.*
port instructional design, teaching, and learning based Casey, C. (1996). Incorporating cognitive apprenticeship in
on this model. multi-media. Educ. Technol. Res. Dev., 44(1), 71–84.
Choi, I., Land, S. M., and Turgeon, A. J. (2005). Scaffolding
peer-questioning strategies to facilitate metacognition during
REFERENCES online small group discussion. Instruct. Sci., 33, 483–511.
Collins, A., Brown, J. S., and Newman, S. E. (1989). Cognitive
Ainsworth, S., Wood, D., and O’Malley, C. (1998). There is
apprenticeship: teaching the craft of reading, writing, and
more than one way to solve a problem: evaluating a learning
mathematics. In Knowing, Learning, and Instruction: Essays
environment that supports the development of children’s
in Honor of Robert Glaser, edited by L. B. Resnick, pp.
multiplication skills. Learn. Instruct., 8(2), 141–157.
453–494. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.*
Artzt, A. F. and Armour-Thomas, E. (1992). Development of a
Cope, P., Cuthbertson, P., and Stoddart, B. (2000). Situated
cognitive-metacognitive framework for the study of interac-
learning in the practice placement. J. Adv. Nurs., 31(4),
tions in the mathematics classroom. Educ. Stud. Math., 41,
1–29. 850–856.
Bean, T. W. and Patel Stevens, L. (2002). Scaffolding reflection Darabi, A. A. (2005). Application of cognitive apprenticeship
for preservice and inservice teachers. Reflect. Pract., 3(2), model to a graduate course in performance systems analysis:
205–218. a case study. Educ. Technol. Res. Dev., 53(1), 49–61.
Beaufort, A. (2000). Learning the trade: a social apprenticeship Davis, E. A. (2003). Prompting middle school science students
model for gaining writing expertise. Written Commun., for productive reflection: generic and directed prompts. J.
17(2), 185–223. Learn. Sci., 12(1), 91–142.
Beck, A. (2004). Collaborative teaching, genre analysis, and Davis, E. A. and Linn, M. C. (2000). Scaffolding students’
cognitive apprenticeship: engineering a linked writing knowledge integration: prompts for reflection in KIE. Int. J.
course. Teaching English Two-Year Coll., 31(4), 388–398. Sci. Educ., 22(8), 819–837.*
Bell, P., Davis, E. A., and Linn, M. C. (1995). The Knowledge Davis, J. (2006). The importance of community of practice in
Integration Environment: Theory and Design. Paper pre- identity development. Internet J. Allied Health Sci. Pract.,
sented at the Computer Supported Collaborative Learning 4(3), 1–8.
Conference (CSCL’95), October 17–20, Bloomington, IN. de Jager, B., Reezigt, G. J., and Creemers, B. P. M. (2002). The
Bereiter, C. and Scardamalia, M. (2003). Learning to work effects of teacher training on new instructional behaviour in
creatively with knowledge. In Powerful Learning Environ- reading comprehension. Teaching Teacher Educ., 18(7),
ments: Unravelling Basic Components and Dimensions, 831–842.
edited by E. De Corte, L. Verschaffel, N. Entwistle, and Dennen, V. P. (2000). Task structuring for online problem-based
J. van Merriënboer, pp. 55–68. New York, Pergamon learning. Educ. Technol. Soc., 3(3), 330–336.
Press.* Elliott, M. J., Stewart, K. K., and Lagowski, J. J. (2002). Teach-
Billet, S. (2000). Guided learning at work. J. Workplace Learn., ing Future Scientists Laboratory Chemistry Using Cognitive
12(7), 272–285. Apprenticeship Theory. Paper presented at the National
Bonk, C. J. and Dennen, V. P. (2007). Pedagogical frameworks Meeting of the American Chemical Society (ACS’02), April
for Web-based distance education. In Handbook of Distance 7–11, Orlando, FL.
Education, 2nd ed., edited by M. G. Moore, pp. 233–246. Enkenberg, J. (2001). Instructional design and emerging teach-
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. ing models in higher education. Comput. Hum. Behav.,
Bonk, C. J., Hara, N., Dennen, V. P., Malikowski, S., and Sup- 17(5–6), 495–506.
plee, L. (2000). We’re in TITLE to dream: envisioning a Gallimore, R. and Tharp, R. (1990). Teaching mind in society:
community of practice, ‘The Intraplanetary Teacher Learn- teaching, schooling, and literate discourse. In Vygotsky and
ing Exchange.’ CyberPsychol. Behav., 3(1), 25–39. Education: Instructional Implications and Applications of
Bonk, C. J., Angeli, C., Malikowski, S., and Supplee, L. Sociohistorical Psychology, edited by L. C. Moll, pp.
(2001a). Holy COW: Scaffolding case-based ‘Conferencing 175–205. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.*
on the Web’ with preservice teachers. Educ. Dist., 15(8) Glazer, E. M. and Hannafin, M. J. (2006). The collaborative
(http://www.usdla.org/html/journal/AUG01_Issue/article01. apprenticeship model: situated professional development
html). within school settings. Teaching Teacher Educ., 22(2),
Bonk, C. J., Daytner, K., Daytner, G., Dennen, V. P., and 179–193.
Malikowski, S. (2001b). Using Web-based cases to enhance, Goos, M., Galbraith, P., and Renshaw, P. (2002). Socially medi-
extend, and transform preservice teacher training: two years ated metacognition: creating collaborative zones of proximal
in review. Comput. Schools, 18(1), 189–211. development in small group problem solving. Educ. Stud.
Bonnett, C., Wildemuth, B. M., and Sonnenwald, D. H. (2006). Math., 49, 193–223.
Interactivity between protégés and scientists in an electronic Graesser, A. C., McNamara, D. S., and VanLehn, K. (2005).
mentoring programInstruct. Sci., 34, 21–61. Scaffolding deep comprehension strategies through
Brown, A. L. and Palincsar, A. S. (1989). Guided, cooperative Point&Query, AutoTutor, and iStart. Educ. Psychol., 40(4),
learning and individual knowledge acquisition. In Knowing, 225–234.
Learning, and Instruction: Essays in Honor of Robert Gla- Guzdial, M. and Turns, J. (2000). Effective discussion through
ser, edited by L. B. Resnick, pp. 393–451. Hillsdale, NJ: a computer-mediated anchored forum. J. Learn. Sci., 9(4),
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.* 437–469.

437
Vanessa P. Dennen and Kerry J. Burner

Hayward, L. M., DiMarco, R., Blackmer, B., Canali, A., Wong, McLoughlin, C. (2002). Learn. support in distance and net-
K., and O’Brien, M. (2001). Curriculum-based electronic worked learning environments: ten dimensions for success-
peer mentoring: an instructional strategy for integrative ful design. Dist. Educ., 23(2), 149–162.
learning. J. Phys. Ther. Educ., 15(4), 14–25. Merriam, S. B., Courtenay, B., and Baumgartner, L. (2003). On
Hendricks, C. C. (2001). Teaching causal reasoning through becoming a witch: learning in a marginalized community of
cognitive apprenticeship: what are results from situated practice. Adult Educ. Q., 53(3), 170–188.
learning? J. Educ. Res., 94(5), 302–311. Meyer, D. K. and Turner, J. C. (2002). Using instructional
Hudson, P., Skamp, K., and Brooks, L. (2005). Development discourse analysis to study the scaffolding of student self-
of an instrument: mentoring for effective primary science regulation. Educ. Psychol., 37(1), 17–25.
teaching. Sci. Educ., 89(4), 657–674. Nason, R. and Woodruff, E. (2003). Fostering authentic, sus-
Jekielek, S. M., Moore, K. A., Hair, E. C., and Scarupa, H. J. tained, and progressive mathematical knowledge-building
(2002). Mentoring: A Promising Strategy for Youth Devel- activity in computer-supported collaborative learning
opment [research brief]. Washington, D.C.: Child Trends. (CSCL) communities. J. Comput. Math. Sci. Teaching,
Jonassen, D. and Remidez, J. (2005). Mapping alternate dis- 22(4), 345–363.
course structures onto computer conferences. Int. J. Knowl. Neitzel, C. and Stright, A. D. (2003). Mothers’ scaffolding of
Learn., 1(1/2), 113–129.* children’s problem solving: establishing a foundation of aca-
Kammeyer-Mueller, J. D. and Wanberg, C. R. (2003). Unwrap- demic self-regulatory compliance.J. Family Psychol., 17(1),
ping the organizational entry process: disentangling multiple 147–159.
antecedents and their pathways to adjustment. J. Appl. Psy- Oliver, R. and Herrington, J. (2000). Using situated learning as
chol., 88(5), 779–794. a design strategy for Web-based learning. In Instructional
Klein, H. J., Fan, J., and Preacher, K. J. (2006). The effects of and Cognitive Aspects of Web-Based Education, edited by
early socialization experiences on content mastery and out- B. Abbey, pp. 178–191. Hershey, PA: Idea Publishing Group.
comes: a mediational approach. J. Vocat. Behav., 68, 96–115. Oshima, J. and Oshima, R. (2001). Next step in design exper-
Lajoie, S. P. and Lesgold, A. (1989). Apprenticeship training in iments with networked collaborative learning environments:
the workplace: computer-coached practice environment as a instructional interventions in the curriculum. In CSCL 2:
new form of apprenticeship. Machine-Mediated Learn., 3, Carrying Forward the Conversation, edited by T.
7–28. Koschmann, R. Hall, and N. Miyake, pp. 99–109. Mahwah,
Land, S. and Zembal-Saul, C. (2003). Scaffolding reflection and NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
articulation of scientific explanations in a data-rich, project- Oshima, J., Oshima, R., Inagaki, S., Takenaka, M., Nakayama,
based learning environment: an investigation of progress H., Yamaguchi, E., and Murayama, I. (2003). Teachers and
portfolio. Educ. Technol. Res. Dev., 51(4), 65–84. researchers as a design team: changes in their relationship
Langer, A. M. (2001). Confronting theory: the practice of men- through the design experiment approach with a CSCL tech-
toring non-traditional students at Empire State College. nology. Educ. Commun. Inform., 3(1), 105–127.
Mentor. Tutor., 9(1), 49–62. Palincsar, A. S. and Brown, A. L. (1984). Reciprocal teaching
Lave, J. and Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Learning: Legitimate of comprehension-fostering and monitoring activities. Cogn.
Peripheral Participation. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge Uni- Instruct., 1, 117–175.
versity Press.* Palincsar, A. S., Brown, A. L., and Campione, J. C. (1993).
Lax, L. R., Taylor, I., Wilson-Pauwels, L., and Scardamalia, M. First-grade dialogue for knowledge acquisition and use. In
(2004). Dynamic curriculum design in biomedical commu- Contexts for Learning, edited by E. A. Forman, N. Minick
nications: integrating a knowledge building approach and a and C. A. Stone, pp. 43–57. New York: Oxford University
Knowledge Forum® learning environment in a medical legal Press.
visualization course. J. Biocommun., 30(1) (http://www.jbio- Pea, R. D. (2004). The social and technological dimensions of
communication.org/30–1/BMC.html). scaffolding and related theoretical concepts for learning,
LeGrand Brandt, B., Farmer, J. A., and Buckmaster, A. (1993). education, and human activity. J. Learn. Sci., 13(3),
A cognitive apprenticeship approach to helping adults learn. 423–451.
In New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, Pear, J. J. and Crone-Todd, D. E. (2002). A social constructivist
edited by D. Flannery, pp. 69–78. San Francisco, CA: Jos- approach to computer-mediated instruction. Comput. Educ.,
sey-Bass. 38(1–3), 221–231.
Liu, T. C. (2005). Web-based cognitive apprenticeship model Puntambekar, S. and Kolodner, J. L. (2005). Toward implement-
for improving pre-service teachers’ performances and atti- ing distributed scaffolding: helping students learn science
tudes towards instructional planning: design and field exper- from design. J. Res. Sci. Teach., 42(2), 185–217.
iment. Educ. Technol. Soc., 8(2), 136–149. Rasku-Puttonen, H., Etelapelto, A., Arvaja, M., and Hakkinen,
Loong, D. H. W. (1998). Epistemological change through peer P. (2003). Is successful scaffolding an illusion? Shifting
apprenticeship learning: From rule-based to idea-based social patterns of responsibility and control in teacher-student
constructivism. Int. J. Comput. Math. Learn., 3(1), 45–80. interaction during a long-term learning project. Instruct. Sci.,
Lucas, K. F. (2001). The social construction of mentoring roles. 31, 377–393.
Mentor. Tutor., 9(1), 23–47. Reiser, B. J. (2004). Scaffolding complex learning: the mecha-
Makitalo, K., Weinberger, A., Hakkinen, P., Jarvela, S., and nisms of structuring and problematizing student work. J.
Fischer, F. (2005). Epistemic cooperation scripts in online Learn. Sci., 13(3), 273–304.
learning environments: fostering learning by reducing uncer- Roehler, L. R. and Cantlon, D. J. (1997). Scaffolding: a pow-
tainty in discourse? Comput. Hum. Behav., 21, 603–622. erful tool in social constructivist classrooms. In Scaffolding
Masters, J. and Yelland, N. (2002). Teacher scaffolding: an Student Learning: Instructional Approaches and Issues,
exploration of exemplary practice. Educ. Inform. Technol., edited by K. Hogan and M. Pressley, pp. 6–42. Cambridge,
7(4), 313–321. MA: Brookline.

438
 The Cognitive Apprenticeship Model in Educational Practice

Rogoff, B. (1990). Apprenticeship in Thinking: Cognitive Tabak, I. (2004). Synergy: A complement to emerging patterns
Development in the Social Context. New York: Oxford Uni- of distributed scaffolding. J. Learn. Sci., 13(3), 305–335.
versity Press.* Tabak, I. and Baumgartner, E. (2004). The teacher as partner:
Rosenshine, B. and Meister, C. (1994). Reciprocal teaching: a exploring participant structures, symmetry, and identity
review of the research. Re. Educ. Res., 64(4), 479–487. work in scaffolding. Cogn. Instruct., 22(4), 393–429.
Savery, J. R. (1998). Fostering ownership for learning with Teong, S. K. (2003). The effect of metacognitive training on
computer-supported collaborative writing in an undergrad- mathematical word-problem solving. J. Comput. Assist.
uate business communication course. In Electronic Collab- Learn., 19(1), 46–55.
orators: Learner-Centered Technologies for Literacy, Tharp, R. (1993). Institutional and social context of educational
Apprenticeship, and Discourse, edited by C. J. Bonk and reform: practice and reform. In Contexts for Learning:
K. S. King, pp. 103–127. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Sociocultural Dynamics in Children’s Development, edited
Associates. by E. A. Forman, N. Minnick, and C. A. Stone, pp. 269–282.
Scardamalia, M. and Bereiter, C. (1994). Computer support for Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
knowledge-building communities. J. Learn. Sci., 3(3), Tharp, R. and Gallimore, R. (1988). Rousing Minds to Life:
265–283.* Teaching, Learning and Schooling in Social Context. Cam-
Schank, R. C., Berman, T., and McPherson, J. (1999). Learn. bridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.*
by doing. In Instructional Design Theories and Models: A Tsai, C. C. (2005). Preferences toward internet-based learning
New Paradigm of Instructional Theory, edited by C. M. environments: high school students’ perspectives for science
Reigeluth, pp. 161–181. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum learning. J. Educ. Technol. Soc., 8(2), 203–213.
Associates.* Varelas, M., House, R., and Wenzel, S. (2005). Beginning teach-
Schoenfeld, A. H. (1992). Learn. to think mathematically: prob- ers immersed into science: scientist and science teacher iden-
lem solving, metacognition and sense making in mathemat- tities. Sci. Educ., 89(3), 492–516.
ics. In Handbook of Research on Mathematics Teaching and Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of
Learning, edited by D. A. Grouws, pp. 334–370. New York: Higher Psychological Processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
Macmillan. University Press.*
Shabo, A., Guzdial, M., and Stasko, J. (1997). An apprentice- Wang, F. K. and Bonk, C. J. (2005). A design framework for
ship-based multimedia courseware for computer graphics electronic cognitive apprenticeship. J. Asynchr. Learn. Netw.,
studies provided on the World Wide Web. Computers and 5(2) (http://www.sloan-c.org/publications/jaln/v5n2/v5n2_
Education, 29(2/3), 103–116. wang.asp).
Seel, N. M. and Schenk, K. (2003). An evaluation report of Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of Practice: Learning, Mean-
multimedia environments as cognitive learning tools. Eval. ing, and Identity. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University
Prog. Plan., 26(2), 215–224. Press.*
Slaughter, J. E. and Zickar, M. J. (2006). A new look at the role Wenger, E., McDermott, R., and Snyder, W. M. (2002). Culti-
of insiders in the newcomer socialization process. Group vating Communities of Practice: A Guide to Managing
Org. Manage., 31(2), 264–290. Knowledge. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Smith, E. R. (2005). Learning to talk like a teacher: participation Wertsch, J. V. (1998). Mind as Action. Oxford: Oxford Univer-
and negotiation in co-planning discourse. Commun. Educ., sity Press.*
54(1), 52–71. Wood, D., Bruner, J., and Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring
Stewart, K. K. and Lagowski, J. J. (2003). Cognitive appren- in problem solving. J. Child Psychol. Psychiatry, 17,
ticeship theory and graduate chemistry education. J. Chem. 89–100.
Educ., 80(12), 1362–1367. Young, A. M. and Perrewé, P. L. (2000). What did you expect?
Sugar, W. A. and Bonk, C. J. (1998). Student role play in the An examination of career-related support and social support
World Forum: analyses of an Arctic Adventure learning among mentors and protégés. J. Manage., 26(4), 611–632.
apprenticeship. In Electronic Collaborators: Learner-Cen-
tered Technologies for Literacy, Apprenticeship, and Dis-
course, edited by C. J. Bonk and K. S. King, pp. 131–155.
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. * Indicates a core reference.

439