





















































Peer Tutoring and Scaffolding Principle for Inclusive Teaching


Elementa
Intersections between Philosophy, Epistemology 
and Empirical Perspectives

1 
(2021) 

1-2

Pierpaolo Limone
Editorial 7

First Section

Slavoj Žižek
The Vagaries of the Superego 13

Ricardo Espinoza Lolas
Nature and Pandemic 33

Paolo Ponzio
Mask and Otherness between Recognition and Concealment: 47 
Notes on the Self and the You

Daniela Savino
“Liquid” Identity and Otherness in the Phenomenon 61 
of Religious Alienation: The Loss of Critical Thinking 
and the “Barter” of the Self in the System of Communion

Francesca R. Recchia Luciani
The Sexistential Vulnerability of Bodies in Contact 85 
in the Philosophy of Jean-Luc Nancy

Elementa. Intersections between Philosophy, Epistemology and Empirical Perspectives – 1 (2021) 1-2 
https://www.ledonline.it/elementa

5

https://www.ledonline.it/elementa


Elementa. Intersections between Philosophy, Epistemology and Empirical Perspectives

Second Section

Martina Rossi
Universal Design for Learning and Inclusive Teaching: 103 
Future Perspectives

Marco Ceccarelli
A Historical Account on Italian Mechanism Models 115

Giusi Antonia Toto - Alessia Scarinci
Cyberfeminism: A Relationship between Cyberspace, 135 
Technology, and the Internet

Luigi Traetta - Federica Doronzo
Super-Ego after Freud: A Lesson not to Be Forgotten 153

Federica Doronzo - Gianvito Calabrese
Functioning of Declarative Memory: Intersection 163 
between Neuropsychology and Mathematics

Giuliana Nardacchione - Guendalina Peconio
Peer Tutoring and Scaffolding Principle for Inclusive Teaching 181

Elementa. Intersections between Philosophy, Epistemology and Empirical Perspectives – 1 (2021) 1-2 
https://www.ledonline.it/elementa

6

https://www.ledonline.it/elementa


Elementa. Intersections between Philosophy, Epistemology and Empirical Perspectives – 1 (2021) 1-2 
https://www.ledonline.it/elementa

181

Peer Tutoring and Scaffolding 
Principle for Inclusive Teaching 1

Giuliana Nardacchione - Guendalina Peconio
Learning Science hub, Università degli Studi di Foggia (Italy)

doi: https://dx.doi.org/10.7358/elem-2021-0102-nape
guendalina.peconio@unifg.it
giuliana.nardacchione@unifg.it

Abstract

This paper aims to investigate the theoretical references that the literature offers with 
respect to the principle of scaffolding and to the methodology of Peer Tutoring from 
an inclusive perspective. The principle of scaffolding, in fact, has its roots in the first 
definitions by Vygotskij (1978a) who defines it as the social support provided to the 
student during the completion of a learning task to solve a problem or achieve a goal. 
Subsequently, this principle has been declined in an inclusive perspective with respect 
to classroom management and with respect to new transmedia learning environments. 
The reference literature was reviewed to highlight the learning outcomes related to the 
principle of cognitive, metacognitive and emotional scaffolding. In addition, from the 
point of view of classroom management from an inclusive perspective, a declination that 
is effective refers to Peer Tutoring. This methodology aims to promote mutual interac-
tions mediated by peers in order to optimize individual functioning and promote the 
holistic development of the parties involved. Therefore, the Peer Tutoring methodology 
was highlighted with reference to both the theoretical and practical components of the 
studies investigated. 

Keywords: metacognitive scaffolding; peer tutoring; peer tutoring higher education; 
scaffolding. 

1 For the purposes of academic recognition, contributions are attributed as follows: 
paragraph 1, 2 and 3 to Guendalina Peconio; paragraph 4 and 5 to Giuliana Nardacchione; 
and the introduction and the conclusion is the result of a shared work. 

https://www.ledonline.it/elementa
https://dx.doi.org/10.7358/elem-2021-0102-nape


Giuliana Nardacchione - Guendalina Peconio

Elementa. Intersections between Philosophy, Epistemology and Empirical Perspectives – 1 (2021) 1-2 
https://www.ledonline.it/elementa

182

Introduction

Scaffolding supports the learning of individuals and, specifically, students 
in the early stages; reducing effort and providing opportunities for respon-
sibility, in individuals, in performing a task automatically (Slavin, 2019). 
This principle is, therefore, useful, to improve cognitive effects in learning; 
another key aspect refers to the ability of self-regulation that affects this 
improvement (Shirmohammadi & Salehi, 2017). 

Shelfolding can be promoted through direct mediation in the 
dialogue between student and teacher; in order to promote this approach 
however, it is necessary for teachers to design learning activities and use 
support materials that place students in their Zone of Proximal Develop-
ment (Taber, 2018). In this sense, the social support that is provided to the 
student while performing a task has been explored, not only in face-to-face 
interaction, but also computationally, during Information and Commu-
nication Technology (ICT) mediated learning in order to better under-
stand how to support students in a new technology mediated environment 
(Alexander, Bresciani, & Eppler, 2015).

In fact, the concept of scaffolding has been applied in the design of 
computational scenarios and is a steadily growing strand of research. As a 
result, hypermedia and web-based learning environments that foster learning 
and self-regulatory processes are innumerable (Zhang & Quintana, 2012).

It is necessary to examine the resources of Information and Commu-
nication Technologies (ICTs), which have in their genetic makeup the 
potential to accommodate different languages, encourage social relation-
ships and foster the elaboration of knowledge and knowledge, in a contex-
tual manner (Limone, 2021). 

Peer interaction in the learning process can promote the development 
of positive behaviors, self-confidence, and social-relational skills, all of 
which have a significant impact on the teacher’s actions toward students 
and among students themselves (Thurston et al., 2012). 

Such processes of exchange and sharing require the activation of 
dynamics of social interdependence capable of promoting the assimilation 
of learning and the accommodation of new ideas, leading to the devel-
opment of other cognitive understandings as a result of post-interactive 
metacognitive reflection (Casey & Fernandez-Rio, 2019). 

The principle of co-construction of meaning, which is related to 
learning in collaborative settings, is in line with Vygotsky’s sociocultural 
theory, which focuses on the assumption that action is socially mediated 
and cannot be separated from the environment in which it is performed 
(Vygotsky, 1978b). 

https://www.ledonline.it/elementa


Peer Tutoring and Scaffolding Principle for Inclusive Teaching

Elementa. Intersections between Philosophy, Epistemology and Empirical Perspectives – 1 (2021) 1-2 
https://www.ledonline.it/elementa

183

1. Scaffolding: implications for learning processes

The principle of scaffolding refers to the support that an adult can provide 
to a child in order to promote and meet the child’s learning goals (Wu & 
Pedersen, 2011). This concept was defined with reference to Vygotsky’s 
sociocultural theory of learning and, in particular, based on the Zone of 
Proximal Development. 

In learning contexts, it is well known that teachers should promote 
effective scaffolding that, alongside the structuring of valid learning activi-
ties, is able to support students. Such scaffolding, in learning environ-
ments, also refers not only to cognitive aspects but also to metacognitive 
and emotional aspects. 

Devescovi (2003), analyzing scaffolding, classifies the five steps that 
Bruner, in turn, identifies as necessary for adults to promote scaffolding. 
Specifically, the following points are referred to:
1. recruitment: attracting attention and interest to motivate him to get 

involved;
2. reducing degrees of freedom: simplify the task as much as possible by 

reducing it to the minimum necessary steps;
3. guidance and encouragement: keep motivation high so that they can 

reach the goal on their own;
4. indication of critical points: highlight the salient aspects of the task so 

that the individual is aware of the discrepancies between what they have 
produced and what they should produce in order to achieve the objec-
tive;

5. demonstration: elaborate on the various attempts that have been made 
to solve the problem; subsequently, the student will elaborate on the 
model proposed by the adult and refine their own.

Belland (2014) has, in addition, declined the three characteristics of 
scaffolding:
• contingency: assessment of pupils’ abilities with reference to precise 

tasks, so that the teacher can promote scaffolding;
• intersubjectivity: sharing of events, at a collective level, within which 

students can exchange ideas and experiment with problem-solving;
• transfer of responsibility: responsibility is manifested through the support 

provided by scaffolding and is linked to the principle of independence in 
learning. 

In order to optimize the principle of scaffolding, it is good to deepen, 
in terms of knowledge, first of all, the skills and competencies of the 
student. This knowledge allows, in fact, to operate and implement strate-
gies closely related to the development of the relative Zone of Proximal 

https://www.ledonline.it/elementa


Giuliana Nardacchione - Guendalina Peconio

Elementa. Intersections between Philosophy, Epistemology and Empirical Perspectives – 1 (2021) 1-2 
https://www.ledonline.it/elementa

184

Development. Moreover, such empowerment is promoted in a commu-
nity context and aims to promote the development and consolidation of 
student autonomy. Teachers aiming to scaffold learning must, therefore, 
design learning activities and support materials that will situate students in 
their Zone of Proximal Development. 

Park et al. (2020) point out different ways to reinforce in the learning 
context; one can, in fact, model and explain more complex procedures, 
simplify a task, prevent pupils from experiencing feelings of frustration, 
and provide students with functional examples of strategies. 

Some strategies related to the scaffolding principle emerge from 
some studies in this regard: Verawati (in Rokhmat et al., 2017) highlights 
the decomposition of the main task into several tasks in order to increase 
problem-solving ability in pupils. Wilson and Devereux (2014) emphasized 
the importance of design in breaking down into subtasks, highlighting the 
need for these tasks to be sequenced and structured so that they can lead to 
the completion of the main task. 

It is, moreover, highlighted the need for appropriate scaffolding design 
in order to improve the consistency of student representation (Maries, Lin, 
& Singh, 2017). In this regard, explanatory examples appear to be: the 
use of digital technologies (Van de Pol, Volman, & Beishuizen, 2010), 
questions posed by the teacher (Meyer & Turner, 2002), and learning 
curriculum materials (Grossman & Thompson, 2008). 

The use of learning protocols, prepared based on Scaffolding strate-
gies, increased students’ levels of knowledge of the strategies. In fact, Lajoie 
(2005) defines Scaffolding as an interaction between tools, guides, and 
strategies useful in supporting students in regulating learning. This refers 
to cognitive, emotional, metacognitive, and motivational processes (Ter 
Beek et al., 2019). 

Specifically, when scaffolds support metacognitive processes the 
following tasks are favored: planning, monitoring, self-assessment, and 
control of cognitive processes (López-Vargas, Ibáñez-Ibáñez, & Racines-
Prada, 2017). 

In addition, Molenaar (2010) states that metacognitive scaffolds aim 
to promote the management and regulation of cognitive processes; specifi-
cally, this provides support in:
• planning activities to achieve learning goals;
• monitoring progress on learning activities;
• evaluate the results in order to modify, if necessary, the task planning and 

adjust the related learning strategies. 
This has also been confirmed by Hederich-Martinez, López-Vargas 

and Camargo-Uribe (2016), the authors highlight that these processes 

https://www.ledonline.it/elementa


Peer Tutoring and Scaffolding Principle for Inclusive Teaching

Elementa. Intersections between Philosophy, Epistemology and Empirical Perspectives – 1 (2021) 1-2 
https://www.ledonline.it/elementa

185

allow students to make decisions and implement more effective and func-
tional strategies to achieve the desired learning. 

Another component, closely, intertwined with the principle of scaf-
folding is the emotional component. Schukajlow and Rakoczy (2016) 
point out that “emotions for outcomes are powerful variables that can 
be influenced in instructional settings and in turn affect motivation and 
performance”. Emotions can, in fact, promote or hinder learning processes. 
Studies highlight, in fact, the implication of the emotional component, 
in learning processes, already in the early stages of development: research 
in this direction has found that good emotional regulation, in children, 
is correlated with good school performance (Djambazova-Popordanoska, 
2016). In addition, emotional competence promotes the manifestation of 
prosocial behaviors, which, in turn, correlate with academic success (Tren-
tacosta & Izzard, 2007). 

The knowledge and in-depth study of this component helps to plan 
educational curricula that take into account the importance that emotional 
scaffolding has in promoting a positive climate in the classroom context; in 
managing students’ arousal levels; and in keeping students’ interest active 
and high (Huertas-Bustos, López-Vargas, & Sanabria-Rodríguez, 2018). 
Some declinations of emotional scaffolding relate to variables such as social 
context and friendship relationships (Reindle, Tulis, & Dresel, 2018), 
other approaches focus more on academic emotions such as: boredom, 
anxiety, enjoyment, interest and correlate these emotions with academic 
achievement and pre-determined goals (Pekrun et al., 2002). 

2. Scaffolding and metacognitive strategies in digital 
learning environments

It has previously been highlighted that scaffolding is an effective instruc-
tional strategy because it supports students’ engagement with learning and, 
as a result, improves their achievement (Belland et al., 2017). The research 
first focused on the principle of Scaffolding as an instructional strategy 
in traditional learning contexts, subsequently, it placed a focus on digital 
learning environments. 

In fact, scaffolding has been applied in the design of hypermedia and 
transmedia learning environments: in order to foster learning and self-
regulation processes (Zhang & Quintana, 2012). 

In particular, some studies have investigated the possible associa-
tions between students’ metacognition and relative cognitive styles. This 
comparison has been made taking into account the development and 

https://www.ledonline.it/elementa


Giuliana Nardacchione - Guendalina Peconio

Elementa. Intersections between Philosophy, Epistemology and Empirical Perspectives – 1 (2021) 1-2 
https://www.ledonline.it/elementa

186

enhancement performed by metacognitive scaffolding in computational 
environments (Doo, Bonk, & Heo, 2020). These scenarios aim to promote 
cognitive skill enhancement as a response to individual student differences 
and improved learning outcomes (Huertas et al., 2017). It is also interesting 
to explore the potential of incorporating various types of computational 
Scaffolding during Information and Communication Technology (ICT) 
mediated learning to assess and manage the difficulties students face when 
adjusting their cognition during learning processes (Hederich-Martinez, 
López-Vargas, & Camargo-Uribe, 2016). The meta-analysis conducted by 
Doo et al. (2020) shows that scaffolding in a digital learning environment 
has a large and statistically significant effect with respect to learning goals. 
In addition, the analysis about the metacognitive, affective, and cognitive 
domain showed that the metacognitive domain produces a larger effect, 
thus, metacognitive scaffolding appears to be more effective than the 
other types of scaffolding. The study shows that scaffolding is, in addi-
tion, provided by digital tools; which are found to be highly functional. An 
example of exclusively digital scaffolding is Jill Watson: the first artificially 
intelligent teaching assistant (Maderer, 2017). Jill was highly valued during 
the course because she was perceived by students as kind and timely in 
providing answers; at the end of the semester, students discovered that Jill 
was a chatbot invented by their professor. This event provides an example 
of how scaffolding, in higher education, can promote the facilitation of 
learning and teaching, using Artificial Intelligence as a valuable support. 

Engaging students in peer feedback, via digital tools, helps students 
reflect on their own opinions, peer opinions, and build meaningful 
knowledge (Fu & Hwang, 2018). The metacognitive model is being 
studied in the field of ICT applied to learning and education; in this 
perspective, it emerges that students with high metacognitive abilities show 
better learning outcomes and attitudes (Moos & Azevedo, 2008). In addi-
tion, strategies designed through metacognitive scaffolding can effectively 
support students with deficits in metacognitive skills and thus promote 
their effective learning (Kim & Hannafin, 2011). 

However, such perspectives are little examined in the literature in 
higher education. Indeed, Brown (2020) points out that student popula-
tions are increasingly differentiated, implying the need for personalization 
of learning. By increasing online teaching, in higher education, the need 
for research on ad hoc scaffolding focused, exclusively, on online teaching 
in higher education increases accordingly. 

https://www.ledonline.it/elementa


Peer Tutoring and Scaffolding Principle for Inclusive Teaching

Elementa. Intersections between Philosophy, Epistemology and Empirical Perspectives – 1 (2021) 1-2 
https://www.ledonline.it/elementa

187

3. Inclusive scaffolding

Inclusive education is a process that provides learning opportunities for 
all students and is, even today, a major challenge for the education system 
(Baldiris et al., 2016). One of the strategies on which inclusive education is 
based is the principle of scaffolding, this concept has been declined previ-
ously and refers to the support that is provided to individuals during the 
early stages of learning. The purpose is to reduce effort and provide an 
opportunity for accountability where individuals are unable to operate 
independently (Slavin, 2019). 

In this sense, scaffolding assumes a key role, in academic settings, for 
students with learning disabilities; indeed, this strategy improves the afore-
mentioned outcomes and there are several studies to support it (Khodeir, 
Wanas, & Elazhary, 2018). 

In one study, Widajati et al. (2019) investigate the learning outcomes 
of students with intellectual disabilities; the study involves two groups of 
students compared: in one group, students are supported by the scaffold 
and audio motion visual multimedia; in the other group, other students 
are supported by the same tool but not by the scaffold. It was found that 
students also supported by the scaffold achieve better learning outcomes 
than the unsupported group. Thus, in the construction of knowledge, 
students with difficulties are facilitated by the support and guidance of 
more experienced students in achieving increasingly optimal results (Ghazi, 
Amsyaruddin, & Irdamurni, 2018). 

Zulfiana (2020) elaborates on the collaborative contextual method of 
scaffolding as a method aimed at providing support, by inclusive teachers, to 
students with special educational needs. This research refers to the analysis 
of the scaffolding process in this context: the study shows that classroom 
management, from an inclusive perspective, depends on various factors such 
as teachers’ expertise, school facilities, and individual characteristics of each 
student. In addition, the research shows that teachers’ scaffolding encour-
ages students to achieve goals, in different forms, such as repetition, demon-
stration or providing special hours to enrich the material. The importance of 
teacher competence in managing the inclusive classroom is therefore high-
lighted: teachers have an indispensable role in providing all students with the 
same learning opportunities. In this regard, it is necessary that teachers have 
the appropriate training to ensure the use of different supportive approaches 
for all students with or without Special Educational Needs. 

It is appropriate, in these dynamics, to integrate a variety of method-
ologies to increase the possibility of valuing the individual characteristics of 
students and also enhance the metacognitive sphere, that is, the aspects in 

https://www.ledonline.it/elementa


Giuliana Nardacchione - Guendalina Peconio

Elementa. Intersections between Philosophy, Epistemology and Empirical Perspectives – 1 (2021) 1-2 
https://www.ledonline.it/elementa

188

reference to knowing how to be and knowing how to learn through aware-
ness about what one is doing and why one is doing it (Melero Rodríguez, 
Caon, & Brichese, 2019). 

One approach to promote the development of learning, social, and 
metacognition skills is Peer Tutoring. This methodology involves the heter-
ogeneous collaboration of peers to achieve a learning goal and enhance the 
cognitive, metacognitive, and emotional spheres. 

4. Inclusive dynamics of Peer Tutoring

Within Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory of human learning, social interac-
tion plays a fundamental role in the development of cognition and the 
refinement of social-relational skills. Each function in the child’s cultural 
development appears twice: first, at the social level and, later, at the indi-
vidual level; first between people in an interpsychological dynamic and, 
later, within the child itself in an intrapsychological dynamic. 

Vygotsky’s cognitive theory has significantly influenced the theo-
retical and practical dimensions of education worldwide: knowledge and 
understanding are dynamically created by the person receiving external 
information (instead of inactively absorbing it) within relational contexts 
and co-construction of meanings (Vygotsky, 1978b). 

Theoretical perspectives such as Vygotsky’s zone of proximal devel-
opment (Vygotsky, 1978a), Lave and Wenger’s situated learning (Lave & 
Wenger, 2005), and Kelley’s (1968) social interdependence theory recog-
nize that peer interactions awaken students’ potential, clarify their position 
relative to classmates, and help them create community. 

Social interdependence theory integrates elements of individual and 
group performance, considering:
• the structuring of common goals;
• the establishment of positive interdependence and accountability among 

the parties involved in the teaching-learning process;
• the metacognitive reflection on performance in terms of learning gains. 

The aforementioned theoretical foundations have prompted research 
to analyze and explore the social-relational dimension in formal settings. 

Studies conducted have highlighted the positive effect of student-
student interaction on increasing motivation and learning within inclusive 
classrooms that are able to support the holistic development of students 
with a Special Educational Needs (Topping et al., 2012). 

An “inclusive classroom” is defined as a type of context in which 
students with Special Educational Needs (e.g., students with visual impair-

https://www.ledonline.it/elementa


Peer Tutoring and Scaffolding Principle for Inclusive Teaching

Elementa. Intersections between Philosophy, Epistemology and Empirical Perspectives – 1 (2021) 1-2 
https://www.ledonline.it/elementa

189

ments, hearing disabilities, physical disabilities, as well as students who are 
slow in learning or even gifted) are co-present, who constructively and syner-
gistically confront and mix with neurotypical students to learn together in 
collaborative learning dynamics (Casey & Fernandez-Rio, 2019). 

In this context, Peer Tutoring is classified as a type of cooperative 
learning in which students become learning partners and the teacher acts as 
a facilitator (Miquel & Duran, 2017). 

This methodology fits within a conceptual framework that incorpo-
rates teacher-imparted instruction within peer-mediated reciprocal interac-
tions, the ultimate goal of which involves optimizing personal functioning 
and holistic development of the parties involved. 

In this way, each student is encouraged to respect and treat their 
classmates as worthy neighbors (Weiss, Muckenthaler, & Kiel, 2020). This 
gives them the opportunity to create a space that can break through any 
architectural barriers and prejudices (Okilwa & Shelby, 2010). 

The interaction and sharing of information among the students 
generate an exchange of knowledge and effective strategies for problem 
solving and even positive attitudes (Falchikov, 2001); it promotes an active 
involvement of the students who work together within a space of sharing 
and negotiation of meanings in which one of the students assumes the role 
of tutor and the other the role of tutee. These two figures confront each 
other in a sort of “cognitive challenge” and enact a post-interactive restruc-
turing of the intervention bestowed by the tutor (Thurston et al., 2012). 

Both the tutor and the tutee must try to perform their roles as effec-
tively as possible. This creates a social interdependence between the parties: 
the individual successes of the tutor and tutee are linked by common 
goals and gains and mutual interdependence. Without tutors and tutees 
performing their tasks according to prescribed patterns for interaction, 
neither can benefit from the interaction itself: tutors help tutees with 
Special Educational Needs structure their knowledge within their zone of 
proximal development to enhance their comprehension skills and cognitive 
development, and simultaneously, tutors develop a range of cross-cutting 
skills as a result of the tutoring experience (Topping et al., 2011). 

In this regard, several studies have shown that Peer Tutoring can be 
a particularly beneficial tool for students in areas of high social disadvan-
tage and those with Special Educational Needs. In fact, Peer Tutoring can 
contribute to the inclusion of the student with Special Educational Needs 
and promote the development of his or her ability to respond to the activi-
ties proposed in the classroom, promoting his or her effective and concrete 
participation resulting in academic and social improvements (Casey & 
Fernandez-Rio, 2019). 

https://www.ledonline.it/elementa


Giuliana Nardacchione - Guendalina Peconio

Elementa. Intersections between Philosophy, Epistemology and Empirical Perspectives – 1 (2021) 1-2 
https://www.ledonline.it/elementa

190

Recent research conducted in nine schools in Indonesia and specifi-
cally in the regency of East Sumba found that Peer Tutoring has a significant 
impact not only on the development of purely academic skills, but also and 
more importantly on the formation and character change of students and 
indirectly of the teacher, who becomes more capable and flexible in organ-
izing and managing inclusive learning in a more functional way (Manubey, 
Batlolona, & Leasa, 2021). 

Teaching character to students is as important as teaching academic 
knowledge and skills. This assumption prompted the aforementioned 
research in activating inclusive learning implementation plans for character 
building based on Peer Tutoring. Analysis of the data revealed an increase 
in patience, trust, and mutual respect: students involved in the research 
became more friendly, respectful, patient, helpful, and responsible towards 
students with Special Educational Needs (Slavin, 2015). 

Speaking of Special Educational Needs, an interesting, 2004 research 
study at the Open University in Israel offered Peer Tutoring for students 
with Specific Learning Disorders in higher education settings (Vogel, 
Fresko, & Wertheim, 2007). 

Students with Specific Learning Disorders face a variety of difficul-
ties during their school and college journey. A summary of the difficulties 
encountered (Skinner & Lindstrom, 2003) includes:
• deficits in study skills, such as preparation, note-taking, and listening 

comprehension;
• problems with organizational skills;
• difficulties with social responsiveness;
• deficits in specific academic areas (reading, writing, numeracy, text compre-

hension);
• low self-esteem. 

The explicit purpose of this Peer Tutoring project included providing 
concrete help for students with a Learning Disorder and, in addition, 
sought to understand the tutoring process from the perspective of both 
tutors and tutees in the following areas:
• student needs;
• focus of tutoring activities;
• difficulty of tutoring activities;
• similar study experiences;
• satisfaction with the project. 

Students with Learning Disorder reported memory problems and 
difficulty with sustained concentration. However, they also reported 
greater proficiency in using adaptive techniques and compensatory strate-
gies that were more effective and functional than those used prior to the 

https://www.ledonline.it/elementa


Peer Tutoring and Scaffolding Principle for Inclusive Teaching

Elementa. Intersections between Philosophy, Epistemology and Empirical Perspectives – 1 (2021) 1-2 
https://www.ledonline.it/elementa

191

university period and following the tutoring experience (Blake & Rust, 
2002). 

Concurrently, the results of additional studies show that Peer Tutoring 
not only provides good social interaction outcomes through acceptance and 
respect for “differences”, but also appears to be a more effective teaching-
learning practice than conventional teaching methods because it fosters 
greater student participation and engagement (Mehwish & Aalyia, 2015; 
Thurston, Cockerill, & Chiang, 2021). 

5. Online Peer Tutoring in higher education

Given the obvious potential for student-student interactions in face-to-face 
classrooms, the lack of student-student interaction in online modes may 
be a legitimate concern for faculty and collegiate administrators. However, 
a growing body of recent research has focused on positive interactions in 
fully online and blended courses, with important implications in distance 
education (Brown, 2001; Meyer, 2004), including, for example, the pres-
ence of positive correlations between students’ social behavior and persis-
tence in college. 

Most studies of online interactions mediated by the Peer Tutoring 
methodology analyze asynchronous and synchronous communicative 
dynamics; they are capable of triggering fruitful dialogue among students 
in distance learning courses (Hou & Wu, 2011) and building a commu-
nity of tutors and tutees across geographic barriers (Jegede, 2002). 

As an example, based on the assumption that educational tech-
nology is a powerful tool that can help manage, organize, and disseminate 
knowledge while empowering students in the learning process, a 2013 
study designed a web-based tutoring system called OPAL (Online Peer-
Assisted Learning), whose goal was to coordinate effective dyadic peer 
tutoring for large courses. Specifically, such a tutoring system was piloted 
in an undergraduate blended organic chemistry course of 250 students 
in the Department of Chemistry at the University of Illinois (Evans & 
Moore, 2013). From a research perspective, the focus was on evaluating 
the distance interaction between students and how that relationship trans-
lated into significant learning gains and improved problem-solving skills. 
Research findings indicated that Online Peer Tutoring had a positive effect 
on student-student interaction and student learning with respect to digital 
problem solving (Bonk, Wisher, & Lee, 2004). 

Over the past decade, a growing number of empirical studies have 
been published that consider the task and role of facilitators and/or media-

https://www.ledonline.it/elementa


Giuliana Nardacchione - Guendalina Peconio

Elementa. Intersections between Philosophy, Epistemology and Empirical Perspectives – 1 (2021) 1-2 
https://www.ledonline.it/elementa

192

tors in the context of Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL) 
(Garrison, Anderson, & Archer, 2000; Salmon, 2000; Lazonder, Wilhelm, 
& Ootes, 2003; Bonk, Wisher, & Lee, 2004; Rickard, 2004). 

In a 2008 study, peer tutors took on the role of mediator in a CSCL 
environment. In the aforementioned study, Peer Tutoring was imple-
mented in a higher education setting in which students enrolled in the 
Department of Education at Ghen University in Belgium acted as online 
tutors to support freshmen in the asynchronous discussion of authentic 
problem solving (De Smet, Van Keer, & Valckle, 2008). 

The present study aimed to obtain information about tutors’ behavior 
in asynchronous discussion groups. Tutors’ interventions were studied 
by means of an analysis scheme based on Salmon’s E-Moderation model 
(Salmon, 2000). 

In general, this model provides for the figure of a specialized tutor, 
called “E-Tutor” or “E-Moderator”, who has a fundamental role in the 
learning process, within which technology is placed as the most functional 
means to achieve certain training objectives. 

The tutor must assume a capacity of guidance and moderation and 
can present the following profiles or subtypes: “motivator”, “informer”, 
“knowledge builder” or “facilitator”. 

The E-Moderator, then, performs technical support and modera-
tion activities that Salmon traces through the five phases of his learning/
teaching model (Fig. 1):
1. Access and motivation: the tutor set up the environment, facilitates access, 

welcomes, encourages, and reassures; systematically monitors and controls 
the learning process; and provides emotional support to the tutee.

2. Online socialization: parties involved define their online identities to 
initiate a process of socialization and interaction. The tutor facilitates rela-
tionships, encourages participation, and presides over communication.

3. Information exchange: the tutor provides and receives information, 
develops strategies to manage information flow, suggests strategies for 
guidance, and stimulates constructive exchange of new information 
through discussion.

4. Knowledge construction: the tutor facilitates the process of knowledge 
development, orients the reflections and discussions, solicits the partici-
pation of the trainees, does not provide solutions, but helps to broaden 
their own and others’ point of view by appreciating different perspec-
tives in order to co-construct knowledge.

5. Development: the tutor refines the skills of argumentation and modera-
tion, encourages metacognitive reflection on the learning process and 
the development of critical thinking. 

https://www.ledonline.it/elementa


Peer Tutoring and Scaffolding Principle for Inclusive Teaching

Elementa. Intersections between Philosophy, Epistemology and Empirical Perspectives – 1 (2021) 1-2 
https://www.ledonline.it/elementa

193

Figure 1. – Five-step model for E-Moderating from Salmon (2000). 

This model aims for a guided exchange activity that, in the fifth phase, 
results in self-regulated contributions from students. 

Throughout the various stages of the model, interactions developed 
during the conducted study that promoted the development of higher-
order cognition, which allowed students to develop as independent thinkers 
during online discussions (Falchikov, 2001). 

Conclusions

In the present article, some studies have been reviewed in order to better 
define the principle of scaffolding and the methodology of Peer Tutoring 
as a promotion of learning support in educational and academic dynamics. 
It has emerged that the principle of scaffolding is an approach that, even 
today, has strong scientific implications. 

https://www.ledonline.it/elementa


Giuliana Nardacchione - Guendalina Peconio

Elementa. Intersections between Philosophy, Epistemology and Empirical Perspectives – 1 (2021) 1-2 
https://www.ledonline.it/elementa

194

In fact, although its roots in its definition in Vygotsky (1978b) is, 
today, a theoretical cornerstone that is declined through the new learning 
environments. 

In particular, it has emerged how scaffolding is fundamental in the 
design and promotion of metacognitive skills in students who experience 
instruction in computational scenarios (Hederich-Martinez, López-Vargas, 
& Camargo-Uribe, 2016). 

Moreover, this principle also assumes a key role in the management of 
the classroom and, in particular, the inclusion of all students: an important 
declination is, in fact, assumed by Peer Tutoring. The additional values and 
benefits of social interaction promoted by Peer Tutoring practices in educa-
tion are also evident in the university context (Hrastinski, 2008). 

From the analysis of the aforementioned studies, there is a need for 
future research to investigate in more detail the distinct and mixed effects 
of contextual circumstances on tutor performance in inclusive higher 
education settings and to better understand the impact of inter-individual 
differences on the behavior enacted by tutors and tutees. In addition, 
it may be of interest to examine the relationship between the behavior 
exhibited during tutoring and the quality of tutors’ contributions in 
synchronous and asynchronous online discussion groups (Falchikov, 
2001). 

It is necessary to implement a profound redefinition of methodo-
logical proposals, curricular frameworks and educational objectives within 
a transmedia educational system. The conscious acquisition of digital 
languages and tools can, therefore, represent a real opportunity to promote 
educational innovation and a transformation of cultural paradigms 
(Limone, 2021). 

References

Alexander, E., Bresciani, S., & Eppler, M. J. (2015). Knowledge scaffolding visu-
alizations: A guiding framework. Knowledge Management & E-Learning: An 
International Journal, 7(2), 179-198. 

Baldiris, S., Zervas, P., Fabregat, R., & Sampson, D. G. (2016). A teacher profes-
sional development program for designing inclusive learning experiences. 
Educational Technology & Society, 19(1), 17-27. 

Belland, B. R. (2014). Scaffolding: Definition, current debates, and future direc-
tions. In M. Spector, M. D. Merrill, J. Elen, & M. J. Bishop (Eds.), 
Handbook of research on educational communications and technology 
(pp. 505-518). Springer, New York.

https://www.ledonline.it/elementa


Peer Tutoring and Scaffolding Principle for Inclusive Teaching

Elementa. Intersections between Philosophy, Epistemology and Empirical Perspectives – 1 (2021) 1-2 
https://www.ledonline.it/elementa

195

Belland, B. R., Walker, A. E., Kim, N. J., & Lefler, M. (2017). Synthesizing results 
from empirical research on computer-based scaffolding in STEM educa-
tion: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 87(2), 309-344. 

Blake, T. R., & Rust, J. O. (2002). Self-esteemand self-efficacy of college students 
with disabilities. College Student Journal, 36, 214-222. 

Bonk, C. J., Wisher, R. A., & Lee, J.-Y. (2004). Moderating learner-centred 
e-learning: Problems and solutions, benefits and implications. In 
T.  S.  Roberts (Ed.), Online collaborative learning: Theory and practice 
(pp. 54-85). Idea Group Publishing.

Brown, P. S., Cohn, A. G., Hart, G., & Dimitrova, V. (2020). Contingent scaf-
folding for system safety analysis. In International Conference on artificial 
intelligence in education (pp. 395-399). Springer, Cham. 

Brown, R. (2001). The process of community-building in distance learning classes. 
Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 5(2), 18-35. 

Casey, A., & Fernandez-Rio, J. (2019). Cooperative learning and the affective 
domain. Journal of Phyical Education Recreation & Dance, 90(3), 12-17. 

De Smet, M., Van Keer, H., & Valcke, M. (2008). Blending asynchronous discus-
sion groups and peer tutoring in higher education: An exploratory study 
of online peer tutoring behaviour. Computers & Education, 50(1), 207-223. 

Devescovi, A., Marchione, D., Capobianco, M., & Bentrovato, S. (2003). Psicolo-
gia del bambino in età prescolare. Edizioni Kappa. 

Djambazova-Popordanoska, S. (2016). Implications of emotion regulation on 
young children’s emotional wellbeing and educational achievement. Educa-
tional Review, 68(4), 497-515. 

Doo, M. Y., Bonk, C., & Heo, H. (2020). A meta-analysis of scaffolding effects 
in online learning in higher education. International Review of Research in 
Open and Distributed Learning, 21(3), 60-80. 

Evans, M. J., & Moore, J. (2013). Peer tutoring with the aid of the Internet. 
British Journal of Educational Technology, 44(1), 144-146. 

Falchikov, N. (2001), Learning together: Peer tutoring in higher education. Rout-
ledge Falmer. 

Fu, Q. K., & Hwang, G. J. (2018). Trends in mobile technology-supported 
collaborative learning: A systematic review of journal publications from 
2007 to 2016. Computers & Education, 119(1), 129-143.

Garrison, R. D., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-
based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The 
Internet and Higher Education, 2(2-3), 87-105. 

Ghazi, R. H., Amsyaruddin, A., & Irdamurni, I. (2018). Video Tutorial untuk 
Meningkatkan Keterampilan Memasang Kampas Rem bagi Anak Tunagra-
hita Ringan. Jurnal Pendidikan Kebutuhan Khusus, 2(1), 7-12.

https://www.ledonline.it/elementa


Giuliana Nardacchione - Guendalina Peconio

Elementa. Intersections between Philosophy, Epistemology and Empirical Perspectives – 1 (2021) 1-2 
https://www.ledonline.it/elementa

196

Grossman, P., & Thompson, C. (2008). Learning from curriculum materials: Scaf-
folds for new teachers? Teaching and Teacher Education, 24(8), 2014-2026. 

Hederich-Martínez, C., López-Vargas, O., & Camargo-Uribe, A. (2016). Effects 
of the use of a flexible metacognitive scaffolding on self-regulated learning 
during virtual education. International Journal of Technology Enhanced 
Learning, 8(3-4), 199-216. 

Hou, H.-T., & Wu, S.-Y. (2011). Analyzing the social knowledge construc-
tion behavioral patterns of an online synchronous collaborative discus-
sion instructional activity using an instant messaging tool: A case study. 
Computers & Education, 57(2), 1459-1468. 

Hrastinski, S. (2008). The potential of synchronous communication to enhance 
participation in online discussions: A case study of two e-learning courses. 
Information & Management, 45(7), 499-506. 

Huertas, A., López, O., & Sanabria, L. (2017). Influence of a metacognitive scaf-
folding for information search in b-learning courses on learning achieve-
ment and its relationship with cognitive and learning style. Journal of 
Educational Computing Research, 55(2), 147-171.

Huertas-Bustos, A., López-Vargas, O., & Sanabria-Rodríguez, L. (2018). Effect of 
a metacognitive scaffolding on information web search. Electronic Journal 
of e-Learning, 16(2), 91-106. 

Jegede, O. J. (2002). Facilitating and sustaining interest through an on-line 
distance peer-tutoring system in a cooperative learning environment. In 
V. Phillips, B. Elwert, L. Hitch, & C. Yager (Eds.), Motivating and retaining 
adult learners online (pp. 1-151). GetEducated.com, LLC. 

Kelley, H. (1968). Interpersonal accommodation. American Psychologist, 23(6), 
399-410. 

Khodeir, N., Wanas, N., & Elazhary, H. (2018). Constraint-based student model-
ling in probability story problems with scaffolding techniques. Interna-
tional Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET), 13(1), 178-205. 

Kim, M. C., & Hannafin, M. J. (2011). Scaffolding problem solving in tech-
nology-enhanced learning environments (TELEs): Bridging research and 
theory with practice. Computers & Education, 56(2), 403-417. 

Lajoie, S. P. (2005). Extending the scaffolding metaphor. Instructional Science, 
3(5), 541-557. 

Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (2005). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participa-
tion. Cambridge University Press. 

Lazonder, A. W., Wilhelm, P., & Ootes, S. A. W. (2003). Using sentence openers 
to foster student interaction in computer-mediated learning environment. 
Computers & Education, 41(3), 291-308. 

Lee, Y. F., Lin, C. J., Hwang, G. J., Fu, Q. K., & Tseng, W. H. (2021). Effects 
of a mobile-based progressive peer-feedback scaffolding strategy on 

https://www.ledonline.it/elementa


Peer Tutoring and Scaffolding Principle for Inclusive Teaching

Elementa. Intersections between Philosophy, Epistemology and Empirical Perspectives – 1 (2021) 1-2 
https://www.ledonline.it/elementa

197

students’ creative thinking performance, metacognitive awareness, 
and learning attitude. Interactive Learning Environments, 1-17. doi: 
10.1080/10494820.2021.1916763

Limone, P. (2021). Ambienti di apprendimento e progettazione didattica. Proposte 
per un sistema educativo transmediale. Carocci. 

López-Vargas, O., Ibáñez-Ibáñez, J., & Racines-Prada, O. (2017). Students’ meta-
cognition and cognitive style and their effect on cognitive load and learning 
achievement. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 20(3), 145-157. 

Maderer, J. (2017). Jill Watson, Round Three, Georgia Tech course prepares for third 
semester with virtual teaching assistants. Georgia Tech News Center.

Manubey, J., Batlolona, J. B., & Leasa, M. (2021). Peer tutoring analysis in inclu-
sive classes using character education approach. Journal of Education and 
Learning, 15(2), 303-311. 

Maries, A., Lin, S. Y., & Singh, C. (2017). Challenges in designing appropriate 
scaffolding to improve students’ representational consistency: The case of 
a Gauss’s law problem. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 13(2), 
020103. 

Mehwish, H., & Aalyia, Y. (2015). Significance of scaffolding and peer tutoring in 
the light of Vygotsky’s theory of Zone of Proximal Development. Interna-
tional Journal of Languages, Literature and Linguistics, 1(3), 170-173. 

Melero Rodríguez, C. A., Caon, F., & Brichese, A. (2019). Educazione linguistica 
accessibile e inclusiva. Promuovere apprendimento linguistico efficace per 
studenti stranieri e studenti con DSA. EL.LE, 7(3), 341-366. 

Meyer, D. K., & Turner, J. C. (2002). Using instructional discourse analysis to 
study the scaffolding of student self-regulation. Educational Psychologist, 
37(1), 17-25. 

Meyer, K. A. (2004). Evaluating online discussions: Four different frames of 
analysis. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 8(2), 101-114. 

Miquel, E., & Duran, D. (2017). Peer learning network: Implementing and 
sustaining cooperative learning by teacher collaboration. Journal of Educa-
tion Teaching, 43(3), 349-360. 

Molenaar, I., Van Boxtel, C. A., & Sleegers, P. J. (2010). The effects of scaffolding 
metacognitive activities in small groups. Computers in Human Behavior, 
26(6), 1727-1738. 

Moos, D. C., & Azevedo, R. (2008). Monitoring, planning, and self-efficacy 
during learning with hypermedia: The impact of conceptual scaffolds. 
Computers in Human Behavior, 24(4), 1686-1706. 

Okilwa, N. S., & Shelby, L. (2010). The effects of peer tutoring on academic 
performance of students with disabilities in grades 6 through 12: A 
synthesis of the literature. Remedial Special Education, 31(6), 450-463. 

https://www.ledonline.it/elementa


Giuliana Nardacchione - Guendalina Peconio

Elementa. Intersections between Philosophy, Epistemology and Empirical Perspectives – 1 (2021) 1-2 
https://www.ledonline.it/elementa

198

Park, M. H., Tiwari, A., & Neumann, J. W. (2020). Emotional scaffolding in early 
childhood education. Educational Studies, 46(5), 570-589. 

Pekrun, R., Goetz, T., Titz, W., & Perry, R. P. (2002). Academic emotions in 
students’ self-regulated learning and achievement: A program of qualitative 
and quantitative research. Educational Psychologist, 37(2), 91-105. 

Reindle, M., Tulis, M., & Dresel, M. (2018). Associations between friends, 
academic emotions and achievement: Individual differences in enjoyment 
and boredom. Learning and Individual Differences, 62, 164-173. 

Rickard, K. (2004). E-mentoring and pedagogy: A useful nexus for evaluating 
online mentoring programs for small business? Mentoring and Tutoring, 12, 
383-401. 

Rokhmat, J., Marzuki, M., Hikmawati, H., & Verawati, N. N. S. P. (2017). The 
scaffolding causalitic-thinking approach to increase the problem-solving 
ability of students on fluids. Science, Engineering, Education, and Develop-
ment Studies (SEEDS): Conference Series 1(1). https://dx.doi.org/10.20961/
seeds.v1i1.20276

Salmon, G. (2000). E-Moderating: The key to teaching and learning online. Kogan Page.
Schukajlow, S., & Rakoczy, K. (2016). The power of emotions: Can enjoyment 

and bore dom explain the impact of individual preconditions and teaching 
methods on interest and performance in mathematics? Learning and 
Instruction, 44, 117-127. 

Shirmohammadi, M., & Salehi, M. (2017). Comparative effect of scaffolding 
instruction and self-regulated learning on ESP learners’ reading compre-
hension. Studies, 5(4), 203-213. 

Skinner, M. E., & Lindstrom, B. D. (2003). Bridging the gap between high 
schooland college: Strategies for the successful transition of students with 
learning disabilities. Preventing School Failure, 47, 132-138. 

Slavin, R. E. (2015). Cooperative learning in elementary schools. International 
Journal of Primary, Elementary and Early Years Education, 43(1), 5-14. 

Slavin, R. E. (2019). Educational psychology: Theory and practice. Pearson.
Taber, K. S. (2018). Scaffolding learning: Principles for effective teaching and 

the design of classroom resources. In M. Abend (Ed.), Effective teaching 
and learning: Perspectives, strategies and implementation (pp. 1-43). Nova 
Science Publishers. 

Ter Beek, M., Opdenakker, M. C., Spijkerboer, A. W., Brummer, L., 
Ozinga, H. W., & Strijbos, J. W. (2019). Scaffolding expository history 
text reading: Effects on adolescents’ comprehension, self-regulation, and 
motivation. Learning and Individual Differences, 74. 

Thurston, A., Burns, V., Topping, K. J., & Thurston, M. J. (2012). Social effects 
of peer tutoring in elementary schools. Paper presented at 2012 AERA 
annual Meeting, Vancouver, Canada.

https://www.ledonline.it/elementa


Peer Tutoring and Scaffolding Principle for Inclusive Teaching

Elementa. Intersections between Philosophy, Epistemology and Empirical Perspectives – 1 (2021) 1-2 
https://www.ledonline.it/elementa

199

Thurston, A., Cockerill, M., & Chiang, T.-H. (2021). Assessing the differential 
effects of peer tutoring for tutors and tutees. Education Sciences, 11(3). 

Topping, K. J., Miller, D., Thurston, A., McGavock, K., & Conlin, N. (2011). 
Peer tutoring in reading in Scotland: Thinking big, Literacy, 45(1), 3-9. 

Topping, K. J., Thurston, A., McGavock, K., & Conlin, N. (2012). Outcomes 
and process in reading tutoring. Educational Research, 54, 239-258. 

Trentacosta, C. J., & Izzard, C. E. (2007). Kindergarden children’s emotion 
competance as predictor of their academic competance in first grade. 
Emotion, 7(1), 77-88. 

Van de Pol, J., Volman, M., & Beishuizen, J. (2010). Scaffolding in teacher–
student interaction: A decade of research. Educational Psychology Review, 
22(3), 271-296. 

Vogel, G., Fresko, B., & Wertheim, C. (2007). Peer tutoring for college students 
with learning disabilities: Perceptions of tutors and tutees. Journal of 
Learning Disabilities, 40(6), 485-493. 

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978a). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological 
processes. Harvard University Press. 

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978b). Socio-cultural theory. Mind in Society, 6, 52-58. 
Weiss, S., Muckenthaler, M., & Kiel, E. (2020). Students with emotional and 

behavioral problems in inclusive classes: A critical incident analysis. 
Journal of Emotional and Behaviour Disorder, 1-36. doi: https://doi.
org/10.1177/1063426620967286

Widajati, W., Purbaningrum, E., Mahmudah, S., Ainin, I. K., Dewi, L., & 
Rianto, E. (2019). Scaffolding task analysis and multimedia in develop-
ment life skill intellectual disability student. In 3rd international Conference 
on special education – ICSE, 2019. Atlantis Press. 

Wilson, K., & Devereux, L. (2014). Scaffolding theory: High challenge, high 
support in Academic Language and Learning (ALL) contexts. Journal of 
Academic Language and Learning, 8(3), A91-A100. 

Wu, H. L., & Pedersen, S. (2011). Integrating computer- and teacher-based scaf-
folds in science inquiry. Computers & Education, 57(4), 2352-2363. 

Zhang, M., & Quintana, C. (2012). Scaffolding strategies for supporting middle 
school students’ online inquiry processes. Computers & Education, 58(1), 
181-196. 

Zulfiana, U., & Suen, M. W. (2020). An analysis of a scaffolding collaborative 
contextualmethod of inclusive teacher toward the students with special 
needs in elementary school. In 5th ASEAN Conference on psychology, coun-
selling, and humanities – ACPCH, 2019 (pp. 153-159). Atlantis Press. 

https://www.ledonline.it/elementa


Giuliana Nardacchione - Guendalina Peconio

Elementa. Intersections between Philosophy, Epistemology and Empirical Perspectives – 1 (2021) 1-2 
https://www.ledonline.it/elementa

200

Riassunto

Il presente lavoro mira ad indagare i riferimenti teorici che la letteratura offre rispetto al 
principio di scaffolding e alla metodologia del Peer Tutoring declinati in ottica inclusiva. 
Il principio di scaffolding affonda, infatti, le sue radici alle prime definizioni ad opera di 
Vygotskij (1978a) che va a definire lo stesso come il supporto sociale fornito allo studente 
durante il completamento di un compito di apprendimento per risolvere un problema o 
per raggiungere un obiettivo. Successivamente, tale principio è stato declinato in ottica 
inclusiva rispetto alla gestione della classe e rispetto ai nuovi ambienti di apprendimento 
transmediali. Una declinazione che risulta essere efficace fa riferimento al Peer Tutoring. 
Tale metodologia mira a promuovere le interazioni reciproche mediate dai pari al fine 
di ottimizzare il funzionamento individuale e promuovere lo sviluppo olistico delle parti 
coinvolte.

Copyright (©) 2021 Giuliana Nardacchione, Guendalina Peconio 
Editorial format and graphical layout: copyright (©) LED Edizioni Universitarie

 This work is licensed under a Creative Commons 
Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

How to cite this paper:
Nardacchione, G., & Peconio, G. (2021). Peer tutoring and scaffolding principle for 
inclusive teaching. Elementa. Intersections between Philosophy, Epistemology and Empirical 
Perspectives, 1(1-2), 181-200. doi: https://dx.doi.org/10.7358/elem-2021-0102-nape

https://www.ledonline.it/elementa
https://dx.doi.org/10.7358/elem-2021-0102-nape

	Elementa_1-2021-1-2_00b_Sommario.pdf
	Editorial
	Pierpaolo Limone

	First Section
	The Vagaries of the Superego
	Slavoj Žižek
	Nature and Pandemic

	Ricardo Espinoza Lolas
	Mask and Otherness
between Recognition and Concealment: Notes on the Self and the You

	Paolo Ponzio
	“Liquid” Identity and Otherness
in the Phenomenon of Religious
Alienation: The Loss of Critical
Thinking and the “Barter” of the Self in the System of Communion

	Daniela Savino
	The Sexistential Vulnerability of Bodies in Contact in the Philosophy
of Jean-Luc Nancy

	Francesca R. Recchia Luciani

	Second Section
	Universal Design for Learning
and Inclusive Teaching: Future
Perspectives
	Martina Rossi
	A Historical Account on Italian
Mechanism Models

	Marco Ceccarelli
	Cyberfeminism: A Relationship
between Cyberspace, Technology,
and the Internet

	Giusi Antonia Toto 1 - Alessia Scarinci 2
	Super-Ego after Freud: A Lesson
not to Be Forgotten

	Luigi Traetta 1 - Federica Doronzo 2
	Functioning of Declarative Memory: Intersection between Neuropsychology and Mathematics

	Federica Doronzo 1 - Gianvito Calabrese 2
	Peer Tutoring and Scaffolding
Principle for Inclusive Teaching

	Giuliana Nardacchione - Guendalina Peconio



