Conversational maxims and scaffolded learning in children with learning disabilities: is the flying buttress a better...

In our commentary on Stone's (this issue) article on the metaphor of "scaffolding," we propose (somewhat tongue-in-cheek) the "flying buttress" as an improvement. Unlike a scaffold, the buttress symbolizes a nontemporary architectural device that begins as a support to building new knowledge on an existing foundation, but then itself becomes an integral and evolving part of the new structure. We then analyze scaffolded instruction as a kind of conversation that depends on rather sophisticated shared assumptions about the agenda and the rules underlying the process of the conversation, including an understanding of when these rules are suspended. We present evidence that some children with language/learning disabilities may not benefit from scaffolded instruction because they (a) follow a different agenda during instructional discourse (e.g., to camouflage their lack of comprehension); and (b) overrely on the default Gricean Maxims that cooperative speakers always make an effort to be informative, truthful, relevant, and clear.