Afterword
From WikEd
The authors of this afterword, Vera John-Steiner and Ellen Souberman, declare it is their main effort in this portion of the collection to highlight Vygotsky’s major theoretical assumptions with a particular attention toward those with which through their experience might prove to be a resource for contemporary psychology. The three areas, assumptions or assertions that follow include concepts of development, educational implications and Vygotsky’s historical-cultural approach to understanding development. Vygotsky’s assertions indicates that development was not a slow accumulation of change, as held by some predecessors and contemporaries, but rather, “a complex dialectical process… intertwining of external and internal factor and adaptive process.” He demonstrates this through an inductive process of experimentation yet in communication his ideas and finding he sets the juxtaposition of other major research available in his day. His inductive theory development is not therefore, without due consideration of the body of knowledge in the field but an elaboration or extension of the field and grounding of the field of developmental psychology.
Contents |
[edit] Concepts of Development
Vygotsky differs from other psychologist of his day but clarifies his own position and critiques other ideas through comparison and testing results. He departs from the historical prevalence of behaviorist seeing it as an inadequate explanation of higher forms of human development. Rather Vygotsky utilized an approach might be expressed as an act of “telescoping change” or looking into the future of the development of a child viewing development as an interactive process between the child and their world. He identified use of auxiliary stimuli as a means of active engagement in the environment to effect development and change as conditions and context change. This he described as a part of a dialectical process between the individual and society. He saw this interaction as a function of the part and the whole or the elementary and the higher structures of human development. Another key point of Vygotsky’s view of development is in the assertion that rather than higher psychological functions being superimposed on elementary processes such as adding to these process as one might add a second story to a building, they represent “new psychological systems” which are changeable dependent on the task before a child and though external none the less are representative of and dependent on the internal individual process of development. This dynamic relationship between internal and external of the individual departed from stage theory of development such as Piaget in which children pass through specific stages at specific times. Vygotsky saw this process as representative of the variables of an individual’s social history. Vygotsky explicates these dimensions of development through an exploration on social facilitation of development through children at play and further through the use of signs and tools. These auxiliary tools, signs and play are socially mediated within the context or the child’s environment and include the social history of the child separating the human experience from that of the animal as a demonstration that, “higher mental functions are socially formed and culturally transmitted (126).” Through signs or language Vygotsky argues that a child is able to internalize influences in their world and develop self control mediating one’s activity. We might say further that there is the dynamic interplay between part and whole in that in turn the child influences the culture.
[edit] Question:
- What is the evidence of this social influence in today’s child development?
- How does culture and society influence development in our information rich world?
- What messages do our children discern from media?
- How do we differ from other societies in making sense of our world when confronted by others?
[edit] Educational Implications
The authors assert one aspect of improvement of the human condition is gained as men and women labor however, improvement of the in the light of Vygotsky’s studies illustrates that this is also effected by a capacity to, and that learning consist of at least in part of as we, “learn from the past, imagine and plan for the future” (129) this is demonstrated in the studies of children at play and the exercise of imagination. As children engage in play they fill imaginary adult roles through their imagination trough this activity they “begin to acquire the motivation, skill and attitudes necessary for their social participation“assisted in this transitory development by their peers and adults. These children play in the boundaries of socially constructed roles with acceptable behavior (rules) that are associated with he specific play activity. In this environment children are provided and opportunity for intellectual development through the imaginary constructs of play. This demonstrates a capacity through assistance to achieve a greater level of development and an intellectual opportunity. The parallel lines of play and school instruction both create a distance between the accomplished development at the displayed assisted development or a “zone of proximal development (130). “ This “zone of proximal development” represents a space where opportunity is available based on the potential capacity of the individual child which may be advantaged through the social process of collaboration as well as teaching constructed on the social, experience and cultural setting of the learner.
[edit] Question
- What is the place of society and culture today in education?
- How does the concept of the “zone of proximal development” influence how we teach and interact in educational environment both formally and informally?
[edit] Historical-Cultural approach
Because humans are able to explicate and share individual understanding of their shared experience Vygotsky contended that the distinction between humans and the capability of animals is found in the ability to utilize their social history to envision the abstract and elaborate culturally governing principles of learning and development.
In a sense we might conclude that what was contributes to what is while what is, is an interpreter of what was and predictor of what may be.
[edit] Questions:
- How does globalization influence the implications of the historical-cultural approach to development and learning?
[edit] Further Questions & Comments:
- What do these principles have to say to adult development, adult learning issue of life long learning as well as professional development if anything?
- Is this connection of social history to cultural and individual development is a pivotal issue in understanding the development, learning and psychology in the variegated fabric of today world. If so what are we to do with it?
