Abstracts - Earli

with withdrawing from social interactions. Initially, having a limited understanding of the Englishlanguage was recounted as resulting in "self-imposed withdrawing", usually temporarily, until thestudent developed English for social communication. In contrast, disruptions to the self, such asexperiences of discrimination, are better accounted in terms of "other-imposed withdrawing", andwere described as having long term impact in cultural adjustment and associated trajectories. Thepossible connections between these two forms of withdrawing and Wenger’s distinction between"marginalities of competence" and "marginalities of experience" will be discussed. Withdrawingfrom social interactions that are crucial to their development in British schools is a manifestationof students’ agency, but also a manifestation of schooling practices that do not make it easier forthem to incorporate their past histories.Social interaction dynamics in supporting learning of students with special needsMarja Vauras, University of Turku, FinlandPekka Salonen, University of Turku, FinlandRiita Kinnunen, University of Turku, FinlandThe aim of this presentation is to discuss the demands for learning environments in instructingstruggling learners and to highlight the ‘social’ in instructional practise. In line with currentresearch, our studies have shown that some students show strong resistance to instruction. Longterm,stabilised motivational and emotional vulnerability as well as social and self-regulatoryincompetence severely interfere with students’ ability to benefit from instruction. There is still aneed for deeper analyses of transactional instruction and student scaffolding, both in inclusive andspecial needs education. Our recent studies with learning disadvantaged (LD) students, empiricallyconfirmed the earlier conclusions about how the training of cognitive strategies, construction ofmetacognition, restructuring of socio-emotional coping, motivational strategies, and socialcompetence must be co-ordinated with respect to promoting self-regulation and transfer oftraining. It is argued that LD students need carefully designed, flexible and adaptive supportenvironments to dismantle their maladaptive beliefs and interpretations, to strengthen theiracademic and social competence, and to bridge the wide competence gap between themselves andtheir peers. This demand has ever more put the social interaction in a spotlight in understandingthe power of instruction and the design of learning environments. Surprisingly little, though, isknown of the interpersonal patterns or group dynamics shaping the participants’ transactions inlearning settings, and recurrent interaction patterns, which may prove highly favourable ordamaging in scaffolding LD students – or highly damaging. Gradually, these interactions build updistinct developmental trajectories as well as socio-cognitive and motivational-emotionaldevelopmental paths and outcomes. Better understanding of transaction and group processes inactual learning may importantly help us to design sensitive, flexible, responsive and adaptivelearning and support environments for LD students. The research striving to fulfil this goal facessevere methodological challenges, both in research design and in analysis.– 583 –