Effects of Scaffolding on English Language Learners’ Self-Efficacy

Effects of Scaffolding on English Language Learners’ Self-Efficacy

Eunice Kerubo Ayiera

Jaramogi Oginga Odinga University of Science and Technology

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.917PSY0004

Received: 22 February 2025; Accepted: 27 February 2025; Published: 02 March 2025

ABSTRACT

Purpose: The study investigated the effects of scaffolding on English language learners’ self-efficacy

Methodology: The study adopted sequential explanatory design within the mixed methods approach involving 364 students, and 10 teachers picked out through purposive sampling from 4 secondary schools in Kenyenya Sub- County, Kenya. Quantitative data was collected using Solomon-four non-equivalent quasi experimental group design followed by qualitative data collection by interview technique. Instruments of data collection were pre-post questionnaires adapted from Gaumer and Noonan (2018), and interview schedules. Internal validity of the questionnaires was investigated using Kaiser-Meyer-Oklin (KMO Index) and Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity, while the validity of the experiment was ensured by the use of 2 intervention and 2 control groups. Moreover, split half and Cronbach’s Alpha techniques were utilized to test the reliability of the pre-post questionnaires. Quantitative data was analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics of frequency percentages, mean, standard deviation and t-test analysis using the SPSS package version 26.0 while qualitative data was analyzed using the thematic framework.

Results: From the pre-post questionnaire results, the post-test self-efficacy mean scores among the experimental groups were higher than those of the control groups. Additionally, the paired samples t-test showed a statistically significant effect of scaffolding learning on self-efficacy. From qualitative data, the study established that scaffolding led to an improvement in self-efficacy

Conclusion: The study concluded that scaffolding was an appropriate language learning technique as it was very effective in boosting the learners’ self-efficacy.

Key words: scaffolding, self-efficacy, learning process, teaching technique

INTRODUCTION

Language learning, just like language acquisition is a process, hence, the learning of English language should be process-based (Sarikas, 2020). According to Vygotsky (1978), children learn language through social interactions with more knowledgeable peers and adults, through scaffolding (Wood, Bruner and Ross, 1976). The scaffolding process involves a more knowledgeable person demonstrating to learners how to tackle a learning task and later allowing the learners to do the rest on their own while the more skilled person offers support where necessary (West, Swanson and Lipscomb, 2019). Scaffolding enhances self-efficacy, a personal judgment of how well one can execute courses of action required to deal with prospective situations (Bandura, 1994). According to Bandura (1994), self-efficacy beliefs determine how people feel, think, motivate themselves and behave. These feelings produce personal accomplishments; reduce stress and lower vulnerability to depression (Bandura, 1994).

Scaffolding learning process has been a solution out of many language learning challenges across the globe through the enhancement of language learners’ self-efficacy. For instance, Guo, Wang and Martin (2023) examined the effect of blended learning-based scaffolding on self-efficacy in China and reported that both the scaffolding method and language proficiency significantly moderated the efficacy scores. Similarly, scaffolding learning which involved teacher support in writing activities by learners improved writing self-regulation, producing higher self-efficacy among Canadian Grade 5 learners (Falardeau, Guay, Dubois and Pellitier, 2024). Furthermore, scaffolds such as accomplishing the problem, getting help from peers, confirming answers, teaching others and consulting with a teacher boosted higher initial self-efficacy in language acquisition significantly among students in the USA, (Aikens and Kulack 2023). For this reason, group work should be structured to facilitate collaborative discussions and help-seeking behaviours may be beneficial for building self-efficacy in low self-efficacy students.  Dorigo, (2023) also suggested that scaffolding methods could improve language learners’ reading efficacy in Philippines as teacher support made learners’ ability to read comprehension improve significantly. However, according to Hasan and Arab (2023), scaffolding had a varying effect on ESL learner’ improvement for both lower and higher ability participants where lower ability students in the scaffolding group gained more in terms of reading comprehension efficacy and growth compared to higher ability students. Thus, scaffolding learning pedagogy is instrumental in boosting learners’ self-efficacy to learn all the language skills as well as application of the skills in a variety of contexts

In Kenya, the Ministry of Education (MoE) in collaboration with the Kenya Institute of Curriculum Development (KICD) came up with the Competence Based Curriculum (CBC) Framework in 2017. In the process of developing the CBC, the concepts of scaffolding and the Zone of Proximal Development raised by Vygotsky’s Social-Cultural Development theory were found to be useful in designing the pedagogical shifts that teachers would be trained in, to facilitate adoption of the CBC in basic education (KICD, 2017). However, scaffolding learning is minimally utilized in English language classrooms given the bulky content and large classrooms [Maiko, (2018), Muriithi and Njuk (2021)]. Furthermore, Omuna and Syomwene (2020) noted that the performance of English in KCSE had remained poor between 2013 and 2018 due to teachers’ failure to adopt appropriate instructional approaches. This was echoed by, Muriithi and Njuk (2021) who pointed out that teaching strategies play a major role in influencing learners’ performance. The study advocated for student-centered approach so as to give the learner time to participate in class and improve the learners’ ability to recall (Muriithi and Njuk 2021). A great percentage of teachers (50%) preferred discussion method which ensured every learner got involved while 25% preferred lecture method. However, the application of discussion method faced challenges since the number of students was large leading to adoption of teacher centered methods such as lecture method as opposed to discussion and other learner centered methods.

The challenges were replicated in Kenyenya Sub-County, Kenya, where Maiko (2018) reported teacher centered methods being utilized in English lessons more than learner centered method, thus interfering with the psychological well-being of the students.  A greater majority, 55% of teachers employed lecture method, 15% discussion while 35% used other methods to teach English. The lecture method adopted by a majority of the teachers made students remain passive and receptive and not in control of their learning.  However, even if the teachers employed these methods, 50% of the teachers admitted that learner centered methods such as scaffolding could make learners develop a positive attitude towards English as a subject as well as build self-efficacy, which in turn would make the students perform better in exams.  Further, 30% of teachers conceded that teacher centered methods encourage laziness and negatively affect students’ performance (Maiko, 2018).  For students to perform better, they must believe in their own abilities and be confident that they can discover new ideas, learn the language skills on their own and apply them in a variety of contexts with minimal or no support at all. The study therefore investigated the psychological effect of scaffolding, a learner centered pedagogy on English Language learner’s self-efficacy

Statement of the Problem

Learning of language skills calls for learners’ full participation in the learning process. Students who own the learning process through active interaction with teachers and peers believe in their abilities to acquire language skills and apply them in a variety of communicative contexts. Scaffolding is the most appropriate language learning process which allows students to be active participants as the students acquire and apply language skills.  The process of scaffolding learning is fully learner centered as it is more beneficial to the student than to the teacher. However, in Kenya, studies have shown that English is not acquired but taught, since teachers employ teacher centered techniques to teach English. The lecture method is utilized by 55% of teachers, while 35 % use question and answer techniques to teach English, yet these techniques make English lessons fully teacher centered. In the process, students may lose their self-efficacy as they expect the teacher to learn on their behalf. At the same time the learners may fail to be part of the learning process as they remain passive and non-interactive. The use of teacher centered methods to teach English, negatively affects learners’ self-efficacy as they feel inadequate to apply the language skills. Moreover, scaffolding learning is minimally utilized in teaching English, hence, its effects on English learners’ self-efficacy are unknown, making it difficult to adopt the process in English learning. It is for this reason that the present study sought to investigate the effects of scaffolding on English language learners’ self-efficacy, to make it possible for the adoption of the scaffolding process in teaching English.

Study Hypotheses

The following hypotheses were tested:

1. Ho: there is no statistically significant effect of scaffolding on English language learners’ self-efficacy

2. Ha: there is a statistically significant effect of scaffolding on English language learners; self-efficacy

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study adopted sequential explanatory design within the mixed methods approach (Creswell, 2014). The sequential explanatory design involved the collection and analysis of quantitative data first followed by the collection and analysis of qualitative. Quantitative data was collected using Solomon-four quasi experimental technique and qualitative data was collected using interview method. Both results were interpreted together.

 Participants

Participants were 364 form Three students and 10 teachers of English who were purposively sampled from 4 Secondary schools in Kenyenya Sub-County, Kenya.  With regard to Solomon-four quasi-experimental group design which requires that participants should be in their naturally occurring environments, participants were picked out and subjected to experimental conditions in their natural classrooms. Moreover, Solomon-four experimental design requires four groups, 2 experimental groups and 2 control groups, therefore, each of the four schools was randomly assigned either to an experimental group or to a control group. 10 teachers and 10 students were purposively picked out to participate in interviews.

Data Collection Instruments

The present study collected quantitative data using pretest and posttest questionnaires and qualitative data using interview schedules.

Questionnaires

The questionnaire measured self-efficacy on a 5-point Likert scale response. The items on self-efficacy were adapted from studies by Gaumer and Noonan (2018), and Abdul and Muhammed, (2007).

The internal validity of the questionnaires was investigated by subjecting the students’ survey data to suitability tests using Kaiser-Meyer-Oklin measure of sampling adequacy (KMO Index) and Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity. KMO index for self-efficacy questionnaire was .842 > 0.6 and Bartlett’s Test for Sphericity was significant (p=0.000 < 0.001), Reliability was tested using Cronbach’s Alpha with a= .896.

Interview Schedules

The interview schedule was constructed at the end of quantitative data collection and analysis through pre-post survey as well as Solomon four group experiment. This is because the interview was meant to confirm, support or explain quantitative data findings at the end of the experiment. In addition, interviews collected the respondents’ feeling as they got the opportunity to express what would not be included in the questionnaires. Therefore, the questions on the interview schedule were based on the findings of quantitative data. There were 6 guiding questions on the interview schedule on self-efficacy. The questions only acted as guidelines since the researcher did a lot of probing of the respondents.

DATA COLLECTION PRODURES

Quantitative Phase

Quantitative data was collected using the Solomon-four quasi experimental group design. Quasi experimental design was appropriate for this study because the researcher used participants in their naturally occurring groups which constituted the schools and the already existing classes. This means that sampling and assignment of subjects to the various study groups (experimental and control groups) was non-random (Jones and Bartlett, 2000).

Solomon-four group design involved the researcher randomly assigning participants to four groups; two experimental groups that underwent the prescribed treatment of scaffolding learning technique and two control groups which were not taught using scaffolding but served as the benchmarking point for comparison (Levy and Ellis, 2011). The researcher sampled the four groups and then went ahead to label them as Experimental group 1, Control group 1, Experimental group 2 and Control group 2. Two groups; Experimental group 1 and Control group 1 were pre-tested while the other two groups (experimental group 2 and control group 2) did not receive the pre-test. However, experimental group 2 received the intervention. Finally, all the four groups were post-tested (Sandler and Huck, 2015). Pre-test and post-test data from the four groups were then compared.

Qualitative Phase

Qualitative data was collected using the interview technique. The interview method was appropriate for the study because the study touches on human psychological variables of self-efficacy hence the respondents were expected to give their views, feelings and experiences that would not be captured by the pre-test and post-test questionnaires. Hence it explored understanding, perceptions and constructions on things that participants had some kind of personal stake in (Braun and Clarke, 2013). Thus, teachers and students were able to give their experience on scaffolding and its effects on learner self-efficacy. Moreover, interview data allowed the researcher to confirm, support and explain the findings of the experiment (Creswell, 2014). Finally, the interview technique allowed teachers and learners to comment on the effects of scaffolding learning on the learner’s subject interest. The respondents explained, supported as well as confirmed the statistically significant results that were obtained in Solomon-four experimental design.

RESULTS

Comparison of Learners’ Level of Self-Efficacy before and after Scaffolding Learning

This section sought to compare the students’ efficacy levels, as measured before and after scaffolding intervention. Students in experimental group 1 and control group 1 filled in self-efficacy pre-test questionnaires. After this, two experimental groups labelled experimental group 1 and 2 were subjected to scaffolding learning for 8 weeks while those in control groups 1 and 2 were taught English in the normal way. At the end of the intervention period, all the students filled in the post-test questionnaires and the post test scores were computed and compared with pre-test scores to find out whether scaffolding learning had had an effect on learners’ self-efficacy. The results were presented in Figure 1.

Figure 1:  Students’ Level of Students’ Self-Efficacy

Figure 1 shows that the self-efficacy ratings among the students were evidently lower during the pretest stage and higher during the posttest stage as evidenced by experimental group 1 students’ self-efficacy rating which improved from a composite mean of 2.96 during the pretest to 3.50 at the posttest stage, similar to experimental group 2 posttest at 3,46. On the other hand, for control group 1, there was a negligible change in self-efficacy rating from a mean of 2.99 at the pretest stage to 3.04 at posttest stage while control group 2 attained a mean of 3.03. These findings indicate that students who were taken through scaffolding learning technique had higher posttest self-efficacy mean scores than their counterparts who were only taken through normal teaching/learning techniques, clearly suggesting that scaffolding learning technique had more positive influence on learners’ self-efficacy than the normal teaching techniques.

The responses were converted into continuous scale data by computing the mean response in each item. The results of the posttest were obtained and compared with the results of the pretest and tabulated on Table 1. Sequentially, interviews were carried and the data compared and collaborated.

Table 1: Comparison of Pre-test and Posttest Self-efficacy mean scores

Table 1 shows that the learners’ belief in their capacity to handle challenges ahead of them and complete a task successfully significantly improved among experimental group 1 and experimental group2 learners while control group 1 and control group 2 learners improved negligibly in terms of self-efficacy rating.

Participants were asked to indicate whether they were able to competently learn on their own, and experimental group 1 who had received a pretest improved from a mean of 3.2 to a posttest mean of 3.8 and while experimental group 2 which received the intervention only attained a posttest mean of 3.7. Similarly, the ability of the learners to arrange for the help of their teachers whenever they needed improved from a mean of 2.90 to 3.50 for experiment group 1 while experimental group 2 got a mean of 3.6. However, the control groups did not improve, in fact there was a drop for control group 1 from a mean rate of 3.0 to 2.8 while control group 2 got a posttest mean of 3.1. Considering the results, the study found out that scaffolding teaching improved the ability of the learners to seek for the help of their teachers when they needed.

Interviews were carried out on the learners’ self-efficacy in learning on their own and the following extracts were obtained from the participants’ responses:

Since we adopted the new technique, I noted a difference in the way our students are doing their personal studies…we see the students very busy studying on their own which I think has made them to seek clarification here and there. I can say that as the learners are studying on their own, they are more active in coming for further clarification and guidance. SE2bT6)

The assertion was supported as follows:

When I adopted your new method, I started seeing a difference in them because they mostly do their studies without being pushed…they are more comfortable learning on their own. If they need assistance, they freely send one of them or they come to me at individual level and I assist them (SE2bT7)

Similar remarks were given as follows:

There is a way our teacher has been guiding us in having our personal studies and I have discovered that I can do my studies on my own. After studying a topic for instance and try to do a question and take it for marking, (SE2bL9)

From the extracts belonging to Self-efficacy theme, the study confirmed an improvement in learners to learn on their own. Learners can successfully have their studies with minimal help from the teachers. The learners’ competence had been tested by the fact that they score better in tests after having studied on their own, as much as the learners admit that they cannot do totally without a teacher. Moreover, the learners freely seek the assistance of their teachers in terms of clarification of issues or confirmation of new information or answers, the more the learners are doing their own studies independently, the more they seek the teachers’ help which increases their competence in learning. This implies that scaffolding method improved the learners’ competence to learn on their own.

Additionally, the study required participants to indicate their ability to read and understand test books in English where experimental group 1 improved their mean rating from 2.9 to 3.80 as experimental group 2 scored 3.81. Control group 1 improved negligibly from 2.9 to 3.1 while control group 2 which had not been pretested got a mean of 3.1. When asked about ability to keep things unforgotten, the posttest results showed an improvement in mean rating from the pretest results of 3.0 to 3.4 both control group 1 and 2. The results suggest that scaffolding learning improved learners’ belief that they could read, understand and keep things unforgotten.

Interviews were also carried out and the following extracts obtained:

… I am able to read and understand because when I do not understand, I discuss with my peers who are better than me in English and literature. Also, when I have got guidance from my teacher on how to break a text and the procedure of analysis, I find it easy to understand. If I have read and understood them, I am able to answer tests well, because I remember what I have learned. This is unlike in the past when we could l read many topics or even a whole text without analysis, then understanding was difficult. (SE5bL8)

The next respondent asserted that:

There is a way our teacher guides us to do what we know and we do the rest with her. So when I read I make sure that I understand the notes before doing an exercise. I start with the simple exercises. So I think I can understand when reading English grammar, writing and literature. The one I do not understand, I ask my group members or the teacher. So, I can understand most things. SE5bL6)

And another one said:

My students seem to have improved when it comes to reading and understanding English because they started performing better in tests. So, in this case they are utilizing the new method well. (SE5bT8)

The extracts in Self-Efficacy theme confirm that after the application of scaffolding teaching, learners improved in their ability to read and understand English as a subject was well as keeping things unforgotten. The learners were learning within their Zone of Proximal Development. I addition, the learners admitted to breaking the material into smaller chunks as well as collaborating with their peers. These techniques made the learners understand what they read. Moreover, from the excerpts, it is evident that the learners are keeping whatever they read unforgotten since they are performing better in the tests that follow. This shows that scaffolding learning improved the self-efficacy of learners in reading and understanding English as a subject.

 In addition, the ability of the learners to set higher goals in their studies was also compared and experimental group 1 improved from a mean rating of 3.40 to 4.04 while experimental group 2 recorded a mean of 4.10. but control groups did not record any significant difference as control group 1 had a pretest mean of 3.3 and a posttest mean of 3.4 similar to that of control group 2. On the same note, the respondents’ belief that when they want to accomplish something difficult, they focus on their progress instead of feeling discouraged improved from a mean of 3.0 to 3.5 after exposure to the scaffolding learning technique whereas the mean of the control group dropped from 3.3 to 3.1 both for control group 1 and 2. In addition, the level of confidence that they would achieve the goals that they set for themselves rose for experimental groups from a mean of 2.9 to 3.4 and 3.3 for experimental group 2, while for control groups the pretest mean rose negligibly from 2.7 to 2.9 and 2.8 for control group 2.  Thus, the scaffolding method made learners more able to set their study goals.

The study went ahead to interview respondents on the learners’ self-efficacy in setting, focusing on and achieving their goals and the following information was obtained.

I set goals which are the targets that I want to achieve every term. We set marks and grades. Initially our teacher used to tell us to set higher targets but in most cases I could not achieve themhowevermuch I tried. But now I have decided to set targets that I can achieve. I am working had to achieve my set target because it is not very high. SE14bL9)

Another respondent added some remarks:

We always encourage learners to set achievable targets or goals… but if we continue with the new method, I am hopeful that they will achieve. Actually, even their performance in tests is improving meaning they can easily achieve their set targets. (SE14bT7)

The extracts coded SE4bL9 and SE14bT7 in the theme of Self-efficacy express that the learners would set achievable goals, meaning that the learners started working within their Zone of Proximal Development, unlike when they could set very high targets beyond their level. Moreover, the learners could achieve their targets or goals since they worked towards them and are performing better. This is a clear indication that the learners who went through scaffolding learning have the belief in their ability to set and achieve set goals, hence quantitative findings are confirmed.

Participants were additionally asked about their efficacy in completing assignments.  Learners in intervention groups improved in their belief in their ability to complete their homework without any help from guidebooks or previous notes from a mean of 2.70 to 3.45 for experimental group 1 and 3.40 for experimental group 2.  Control groups attained a pretest and posttest mean rating of 2.8 across all tests.

Interviews were carried out on the learners’ ability to complete homework, and the following data was recorded:

Our teacher started giving us enough time to do our studies hence I complete my homework easily…I do not have to rely on my notes so much. …when we do homework together, we finish quickly without referring to the dictionary or the notes. (SE5bL9)

Another respondent gave a similar assertion:

My students could finish homework early enough. Unlike earlier when we could push them to finish their homework, now they are completing in time, (SE5bT7)

The extracts labeled SE5bL9 and SE5bT7 belong to Self-efficacy theme and explain the quantitative findings. Evidently, the learners’ self-efficacy in finishing their homework without the help of reference materials improved because the learners had enough time to do their work in addition to having group work. During group work the learners could get support from superior others who are their peers, deemed better in English as a subject. This clearly shows that scaffolding method improved the learners’ ability to clear their homework in time.

Moreover, the learners’ ability to compensate for lost lessons for some reasons improved significantly; this was shown by the fact that before the exposure to the treatment, learners’ ability to compensate loss of a class was rated at 2.90 but after exposure to the scaffolding technique the rating improved to a mean of 3.60 and 3.50 for experimental group 2. On the contrary, the control groups dropped from a pretest mean of 3.1 to 3.0 and 2.9 for control group 1 and 2 respectively.

Further, interview respondents were probed on the learners’ belief in their ability to compensate for lost lessons and recorded the following data:

When I missed a lesson, because I was sick, I found out from my group members what they learned and I tried to learn on my own. What I didn’t understand, my group members taught me and later I went to see the teacher who marked for me the assignment she had marked for the others. (SE8bL8)

According to the respondent, if a lesson is missed, the superior peers would help compensate for the lesson. The learner could first learn from known to unknown, then the unknown could be clarified by the superior others, for this reason the learner has found it easier to compensate for a missed lesson, hence higher self-efficacy.

Another area was the learners’ belief in their ability to deal with unexpected problems improved from 2.6 to 3.00 and 3.20 for experimental groups and 2.6 to 2.7 for both control group 1 and control group 2. The difference, though small among the experimental groups, it was higher than that of the control groups. Similarly, the learners’ belief in their ability to solve difficult problems if they tried hard enough increased from a mean of 3.0 to 3.30 for both experimental groups 1 and 2. However, for the control groups, the mean rating dropped from 3.2 to 2.9 for both control groups 1 and 2 while their belief in the ability to find several solutions increased from 3.1 to 3.7 for experimental group 1 and 3.5 for experimental group 2. However, for the control groups there was a small increase from 2.9 to 3.2 for control group 1 while control group 2 maintained a mean of 2.9. Thus, scaffolding had a positive effect.

The study interviewed some respondents who had this to say:

A problem that I did not expect can be difficult to solve but I can try my best. Such problems can be in form of a difficult question. When I get a difficult question, we try to solve it in groups and if we don’t manage, we go to our teacher to assist us. … We had to divide ourselves into groups and finally we came up with answers. It would have been difficult for me as an individual to solve such. (SE7bL6)

Similar remarks were given by another respondent:

Most of my learners are not very good at dealing with unexpected or difficult problems. It is for this reason that we put them into groups. … This is the area where the new method is more applicable. They are better though, compared to when we use the other teaching methods. (SE7bT9)

From the excepts coded SE7bL6 and SE7bT9 in the theme of Self-efficacy, the study found that learners tried their best to deal with unexpected and difficult problems and evidently, the learners did not manage to do it at individual level but relied on their groups. However, in finding several solutions the learners performed better since each member of the group members could come up with a different solution and at the end they achieved a variety. Learners thus applied cooperative learning, one of the scaffolding learning techniques. Clearly, the learners scored better meaning that their self-efficacy improved compared to when conventional methods were being used.

Additionally, the learners’ ability to answer questions improved after going through scaffolding technique. This was shown by the fact that during pretest their ability answer the essay type questions and to score well in short answer type questions received a mean rating of 2.90 each but at posttest the mean improved to 3.40 and 3.50, respectively. However, the control group improved negligibly from 2.7 to 2.9 for both control group I and 2. Similarly, the learners’ belief in their ability to answer short answer questions improved from a mean of 2.9 to 3.5 for experimental group 1 and 3.4 for experimental group 2. On the contrary, the control groups maintained a mean of 2.9 throughout. The findings show that scaffolding enhanced learners’ ability to answer both essay and short answer questions.

During interview, the following data was obtained:

Compared to last time, I am able to write a better assay. This is because we have enough time to read the set books and do research on themes… In fact, when it comes to essay writing therefore, I am scoring better. Even in the short answer question we are doing the same. Grammar and close test questions are difficult for me but I have learned to start with the easy ones, then the difficult ones we do as a group. I belief if I continue like that, my performance is going to improve (SE11bL8).

Similar sentiments were given thus:

My students utilized this method well and there is some improvement, though small. Generally, there is some improvement in answering all types of questions; both essay and short answer questions. (SE11b and 12bT9)

From the extracts which belong to the theme of Self-efficacy, it is clearly evident that the learners improved in their belief that they could answer both essay type and short-answer questions. The respondents went ahead to explain that the belief had been supported by the scaffolding method of group work, working within the ZPD as well as getting support from the superior others who included the more knowledgeable peers and the teachers. The more knowledgeable peers read and criticize the work of the less capable ones, in addition to supporting each other during research and reading while the teachers give question answering techniques as well as the guidelines towards the analysis of set books. From this the study established that the scaffolding method increased the learners’ efficacy in answering essay and short answer questions. The findings agree with the social cultural theory and the Zone of Proximal Development by Vygotsky (1978) and Scaffolding metaphor by Wood, Bruner and Ross (1976) that learning is mediated by scaffolding by more knowledgeable others to enable learners learn within their ZPD in order to achieve their learning goals.

EXPERIMENTAL FINDINGS ON THE EFFECT OF SCAFFOLDING ON SELF-EFFICACY

The hypotheses that were tested were:

H₀: There is no statistically significant effect of scaffolding on English language learners’ self-efficacy.

Ha: there is a statistically significant effect of scaffolding on English language learners’ self-efficacy.

The hypothesis was tested using paired samples t-test as tabulated on Table 2

Table 2: Paired Samples Test- Solution with the Four Control Group Design: self-efficacy

From the results on Table 2, a paired sample t-test for Pair 2 suggests that there was no statistically significant difference in learner’s self-efficacy ratings between pretest and posttest values in Control Group1 Pretest and Control Group1 Post-test, t (77) = -.075, p=.940 (ns). On the other hand, test results for Pair 1 confirm that there is statistically significant difference between pretest and post-test scores of the Experiment group 1, t (102) = -17.3, p<.001 at 0.01 significance level. The results clearly indicate that there is a statistically significant effect of scaffolding strategies on the learners’ self-efficacy.

Additionally, from the test in Pair 3 it was concluded that the randomization process was effective during sampling of the experiment and control groups because there is no statistically significant difference between experimental Group1 Pretest and control Group1 Pretest [t (77) =.39, P=.700].

However, test in Pair 4 confirms no statistically significant difference between Experimental Group-1 pretest and Control Group-2 post-test, [t (77) =.40, P=.689]. On the other hand, test on pair 5 proves that there is a statistically significant difference between Experimental Group-2 post-test and Control Group2 post-test (without pretest) at 1% level [t (50) =.11.97, P<.001]. The results in pair 5 are attributed to the effect of the scaffolding method on the learners in experimental group 2. The findings show that pre-testing did not interfere with the results. On the other hand, the result of the test in Pair 6; t (100) =2.14, P=0.35 and pair 7; t (50) =.89, P=.373, and pair 8, [t(50)= .89, p= .373] suggests that external factors had not been included in the study. Considering the t-test analyses, it is evident that scaffolding learning method had a statistically significant effect on the English Learners’ self-efficacy.

Considering the t-test analyses, it is evident that scaffolding learning method had a statistically significanteffect on the English Learners’ self-efficacy. Therefore, the null hypothesis which states that: “There is no statistically significant effect of scaffolding on English learners’ self-efficacy” was rejected.

DISCUSSION

The study sought to determine the effects of scaffolding on the English learners’ self-efficacy, and this was possible through collection of both quantitative and qualitative data.

From descriptive statistics the study found out that experimental groups recorded a higher posttest mean scores (3.5 and 3.46 respectively by experimental groups 1 and 2) than the control groups (3.04 and 3.03 respectively by control group 1 and 2). Considering the pretested groups, experimental group 1 improved significantly with a higher mean difference between pre-test and post-test (0.54) whereas control group 1 increased dismally with an insignificant pre-post mean score difference (0.05).  The difference between the intervention and control groups indicated that learners who were subjected to scaffolding method significantly improved in their self-efficacy

The results from the paired sample t-tests showed that scaffolding had a statistically significant effect on learners’ self-efficacy: the paired sample t-test between experimental group 2 posttest and control group 2 post-test showed a statistically significant mean score difference [t (50) =.11.97, P<.001] suggesting that scaffolding positively affected the self-efficacy of experimental group 2 participants. Moreover, the pretest did not affect the results as confirmed by the use of two experimental and two control groups. However, there is a statistically significant difference between control group 1 pretest and experimental group 2 posttest, [t(50)= .89, p= .373],  hence from the results, extraneous and confounding variables were not included in the study. Therefore, scaffolding had a statistically significant effect on the learners’ self-efficacy.

Qualitative data results indicate that before the application of scaffolding learning method, learners; self-efficacy was low. However, after going through scaffolding technique, the respondents agreed that the learners had improved significantly on self-efficacy beliefs. Thus, scaffolding boosted the learners’ self-efficacy to learn English as a subject.

CONCLUSION

Scaffolding method made learners in the experimental groups to obtain higher scores in the posttest than in the pretest, since the learners who were not taught using scaffolding almost maintained similar scores both in the pretest and the posttest. Additionally, from qualitative data the study concluded that the increase in the learners’ ability to learn on their own was attributed to scaffolding. This is because the learners who were taken through scaffolding technique could learn on their own successfully though with support from their teachers and superior peers while their counterparts who were taught using the conventional methods could not learn on their own. Moreover, considering the findings from the experiment, the study concluded that there was a statistically significant effect of scaffolding on the learners’ self-efficacy. This is because the extraneous variables were well controlled, hence only scaffolding had a statistically significant effect on the self-efficacy of learners. The study therefore concluded that scaffolding can effectively be used to enhance self-efficacy of learners of English.

REFERENCES

1. Aikens, M., & Kulacki, A. (2023). Identifying group work experiences that increase students’ self-efficacy for quantitative biology. Available on https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.22-04-0076.
2. Bandura, A. (1994). Self-efficacy. In V.S Ramachaudran (ed). Encyclopedia of Human Behavior, 4, 71-81
3. Bwenvu, G. (2023). Students’ self-efficacy and academic performance at Makerere University. Makerere Journal of Higher Education, 12(1), 101-117. https://dx.doi.org/10.4314/majohe.vl2il.7
4. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2013). Successful qualitative research. A practical guide for beginners. SAGE Publications, London.
5. Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approach (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
6. Dimogu, T. (2017). Effects of Two Instructional Methods on Self-efficacy, Attitude to and Performance in Economics among Selected Secondary Schools Students in Abuja, Nigeria. URI: http://ir.unilag.edu.ng:8080/xmlui/handle/123456789/3192
7. Dorigo, J.P (2023). Reading comprehension skills through scaffolding strategies of Grade 7 students. East African Journal of education, Humanities and Literature, 6(9), 390-401. DOI:10.36349/easjehl. 2023.v06i09.002
8. Fakhrou, A., & Habib, L.H. (2022). The relationship between academic self-efficacy and academic achievement in students of department of special education. International Journal of Higher Education, 11(2), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.5430/ijhe.vl1n2pl
9. Falardeu, E., Guay, F., Dubois, P., & Pelletier, D. (2024). Effects of teacher implemented explicit writing self-efficacy and writing performance on 5th grade students. Journal of Writing Research 16(1), 1-38
10. Gaumer, E. & Noonan, P.M. (2018). Self-efficacy formative questionnaire. The skills that matter. Teaching Intrapersonal and Interpersonal Competencies in any Classroom. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781506376349
11. Guo, Y., Wang, Y. & Martin, J. L. O. (2023). The impact of blended learning-based scaffolding techniques on learner self-efficacy and willingness to communicate. Porta Linguarum Revista Interuniversitaria de Didactica de las Lenguas.Extranjeras, 40(2), 253-273. DOI:10.30827/portalin.vi40.27016
12. Hasan, U., & Arab Z.Z. (2023). Gauging the efficacy of scaffolding techniques in teaching and improving the comprehension skills of ESL learners. IOSR Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences. 28(2), 11-16
13. Jones & Bertlett. (2000). Nurse’s Drug Handbook. Sudbury, MA, Jones and Bertlett Publishers
14. Kenya Institute of Curriculum Development (2017). Basic Education Framework. Nairobi. Kenya Literature Bureau.
15. Kenya Institute of Education (2012). Secondary Education English Syllabus. Volume 2. Nairobi. Government Printers
16. Levy, Y., & Ellis, T.J. (2011). A guide for novice researchers on experimental and quasi-experimental studies in information systems research. Interdisciplinary Journal of Information, Knowledge and Management, 6(1), 151-161
17. Maiko, R.B. (2018). Strategies employed in teaching integrated English and their influence on performance among secondary school students in Kenyenya Sub-County, Kisii County [Published MED Thesis, Kenyatta University] http://ir-library.ku.ac.ke/handle/123456789/18656
18. Mason, M. (2010). Sample size and saturation in PhD studies using qualitative interviews. Forum: qualitative Research. 11(3), SArt.8, http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:bnb:de:0114-fqs100387.
19. Muriithi, G. &Njuk, G. (2021). Language teaching approaches in Kenyan secondary schools. International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Sciences, 5(3), 545-554
20. Namubiru, B.J. (2019). Active learning, student self-efficacy and academic performance among adolescents in Secondary Schools in Kampala District. European Journal of Education Studies, 7(3), 135-144. URI: http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12281/7822
21. Omuna, M.O., & Syomwene, A.K. (2020). Influence of instructional approaches on students’ achievement in grammar in public secondary schools in Kenya. International Journal of Education Research, 8, 115-132
22. Oso, W. Y., & Onen, D. (2011). Writing Research Proposal and Report: A Handbook for Beginning Researchers, Rsvd edn. Nairobi-Kenya: The Jomo Kenyatta Foundation.
23. Sarikas, C. (2020). Vygotsky Scaffolding: What it is and how to Use it: https//blog.prepscholar.com
24. Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in Society. The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press
25. Wood, D.J., Bruner, J. S., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Child Psychiatry and Psychology, 17(2), 89-100
26. Yantraprakorn, P., Darasawang, P., & Wiriyakarun, P. (2018). Enhancing Self-efficacy Through Scaffolding: https//www.researchgate.net