When I first learned that "sandbox" is the term used for a private online space where a Web site gets developed and tweaked before publication, I loved the implication that there is a spirit of childlike play to the backend of web creation. But at the moment I'm more intrigued by the contrast between the terms "scaffolding"
and "wireframing"
for the process of structuring a learning or development process. Scaffolding, the awkward and often ugly external supports used to allow for building something interior to that scaffolded structure, has an inherent temporariness and inelegance about it. A wireframe, by contrast, is a sleek, skinny, and strong but flexible internal structure, carefully designed to support whatever gets built around it. A wireframe is never removed – it may become completely obscured by the elegant structure built around it, but a savvy observer can always discover its skeletal traces.
The scaffolding of most lessons for English language learners is so bulky and awkward that it obscures what is supposed to be developing within, and little attention is given by teachers to developing a systematic process for its gradual removal. Those who have been taught to write paragraphs that each begin with a stock listing term – "First, .... In addition, .... Finally,..." – seldom get the instructions on how to approach organization in any other way. The structure is imposed as a rigid one, and the writer seldom manages an escape. They are often unaware that they have been imprisoned, for they have been carefully taught that they are learning to do it the "right" way.
So how will a wireframe retain its flexibility? Only when the learner knows what they're doing from the beginning, and understands the process by which elements are added to structure, how they join together, and has practice in altering and refining both the wireframe itself and everything it is eventually asked to support. Perhaps I am stretching the analogies beyond their carrying capacity, but I am still attracted to this analysis.
