References

DeVries, R. (2000). Vygotsky, Piaget, and Education: A reciprocal assimilation of theories and educational practices. New Ideas in Psychology, 18(2), 187–213. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0732-118X(00)00008-8

Dhillon, P. S., Molaei, S., Li, J., Golub, M., Zheng, S., & Robert, L. P. (2024). Shaping Human-AI Collaboration: Varied Scaffolding Levels in Co-writing with Language Models. Proceedings of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1145/3613904.3642134

Dongyu, Z., Fanyu, B., & Wanyi, D. (2013). Sociocultural Theory Applied to Second Language Learning: Collaborative Learning with Reference to the Chinese Context. International Education Studies, 6(9), 165–174. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1068687 

Eun, B (2017). The zone of proximal development as an overarching concept: A framework for synthesizing Vygotsky’s theories, Educational Philosophy and Theory, 51:1, 18-30. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00131857.2017.1421941  

Fani, T., & Ghaemi, F. (2011). Implications of Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) in Teacher Education: ZPTD and Self-scaffolding. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 29, 1549–1554. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.11.396

Fodor, J. (1972). Some reflections on L.S. Vygotsky’s thought and language. Cognition, 1(1), 83–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(72)90046-7

Gajdamaschko, N. (2015). Vygotsky’s Sociocultural Theory. In J. D. Wright (Ed.), International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences (Second Edition) (pp. 329–334). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.23203-0

Lourenço, O. (2012). Piaget and Vygotsky: Many resemblances, and a crucial difference. New Ideas in Psychology, 30(3), 281–295. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.newideapsych.2011.12.006

John-Steiner, V., & Mahn, H. (1996). Sociocultural approaches to learning and development: A Vygotskian

        framework.Educational Psychologist, 31, 191-206.

Mahn, H., & John-Steiner, V. (2012). Vygotsky and Sociocultural Approaches to Teaching and Learning [Dataset]. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118133880.hop207006

MINICK, N. (2005). The development of Vygotsky’s thought: An introduction to Thinking and Speech. In An Introduction to Vygotsky (2nd ed.). Routledge.

Molenaar, P., & Raijmakers, M. (2000). A causal interpretation of Piaget’s theory of cognitive development: Reflections on the relationship between epigenesis and nonlinear dynamics. New Ideas in Psychology, 18, 41–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0732-118X(99)00036-7

Nordlof, J. (2014). Vygotsky, Scaffolding, and the Role of Theory in Writing Center Work. The Writing Center Journal, 34(1), 45–64. https://www.jstor.org/stable/43444147

Sætra, H. S. (2022). Scaffolding Human Champions: AI as a More Competent Other. Human Arenas. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42087-022-00304-8 

Schrader, D. E. (2015). Constructivism and learning in the age of social media: Changing minds and learning communities. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 2015(144), 23-35. 

Schreiber, L. M., & Valle, B. E. (2013). Social Constructivist Teaching Strategies in the Small Group Classroom. Small Group Research, 44(4), 395–411. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046496413488422 

Shvarts, A., & Bakker, A. (2019). The early history of the scaffolding metaphor: Bernstein, Luria, Vygotsky, and before. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 26(1), 4–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/10749039.2019.1574306

Smagorinsky, P. (2018). Deconflating the ZPD and instructional scaffolding: Retranslating and reconceiving the zone of proximal development

              as the zone of next development. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 16, 70–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lcsi.2017.10.009