LEV VYGOTSKY'S SOCIOCULTURAL THEORY OF COGNITIVE DEVELOPMENT

 

Lev Vygotsky was born November 17, 1896, in Orsha, a city in the western region of the Russian Empire.

He attended Moscow State University, where he graduated with a degree in law in 1917. Vygotsky studied a range of topics while at university, including sociology, linguistics, psychology, and philosophy. However, his formal work in psychology did not begin until 1924 when he attended the Institute of Psychology in Moscow.

The work of Lev Vygotsky (1934) has become the foundation of much research and theory in cognitive development over the past several decades, particularly of what has become known as sociocultural theory.

Vygotsky's sociocultural theory views human development as a socially mediated process in which children acquire their cultural values, beliefs, and problem-solving strategies through collaborative dialogues with more knowledgeable members of society. Vygotsky's theory is comprised of concepts such as culture-specific tools, private speech, and the Zone of Proximal Development.

Social Influences on Cognitive Development

Like Piaget, Vygotsky believes that young children are curious and actively involved in their own learning and the discovery and development of new understandings/schema.  However, Vygotsky placed more emphasis on social contributions to the process of development, whereas Piaget emphasized self-initiated discovery.

According to Vygotsky (1978), much important learning by the child occurs through social interaction with a skillful tutor. The tutor may model behaviors and/or provide verbal instructions for the child. Vygotsky refers to this as cooperative or collaborative dialogue. The child seeks to understand the actions or instructions provided by the tutor (often the parent or teacher) then internalizes the information, using it to guide or regulate their own performance.

Shaffer (1996) gives the example of a young girl who is given her first jigsaw. Alone, she performs poorly in attempting to solve the puzzle. The father then sits with her and describes or demonstrates some basic strategies, such as finding all the corner/edge pieces and provides a couple of pieces for the child to put together herself and offers encouragement when she does so.

As the child becomes more competent, the father allows the child to work more independently. According to Vygotsky, this type of social interaction involving cooperative or collaborative dialogue promotes cognitive development.

In order to gain an understanding of Vygotsky's theories on cognitive development, one must understand two of the main principles of Vygotsky's work: the More Knowledgeable Other (MKO) and the Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD).

More Knowledgeable Other

The more knowledgeable other (MKO) is somewhat self-explanatory; it refers to someone who has a better understanding or a higher ability level than the learner, with respect to a particular task, process, or concept.

Although the implication is that the MKO is a teacher or an older adult, this is not necessarily the case. Many times, a child's peers or an adult's children may be the individuals with more knowledge or experience.

For example, who is more likely to know more about the newest teenage music groups, how to win at the most recent PlayStation game, or how to correctly perform the newest dance craze - a child or their parents?

In fact, the MKO need not be a person at all. Some companies, to support employees in their learning process, are now using electronic performance support systems. 

Electronic tutors have also been used in educational settings to facilitate and guide students through the learning process. The key to MKOs is that they must have (or be programmed with) more knowledge about the topic being learned than the learner does.

Zone of Proximal Development

The concept of the More Knowledgeable Other is integrally related to the second important principle of Vygotsky's work, the Zone of Proximal Development.

This is an important concept that relates to the difference between what a child can achieve independently and what a child can achieve with guidance and encouragement from a skilled partner.

Vygotsky's zone of proximal development

For example, the child could not solve the jigsaw puzzle (in the example above) by itself and would have taken a long time to do so (if at all), but was able to solve it following interaction with the father, and has developed competence at this skill that will be applied to future jigsaws.

Vygotsky (1978) sees the Zone of Proximal Development as the area where the most sensitive instruction or guidance should be given - allowing the child to develop skills they will then use on their own - developing higher mental functions.

Vygotsky also views interaction with peers as an effective way of developing skills and strategies.  He suggests that teachers use cooperative learning exercises where less competent children develop with help from more skillful peers - within the zone of proximal development.

Effects of Culture: - Tools of intellectual adaptation

Vygotsky claimed that infants are born with the basic abilities for intellectual development called 'elementary mental functions' (Piaget focuses on motor reflexes and sensory abilities).

Elementary mental functions include –

Attention

o Sensation

Perception

Memory

 

Eventually, through interaction within the sociocultural environment, these are developed into more sophisticated and effective mental processes which Vygotsky refers to as 'higher mental functions.'

Each culture provides its children tools of intellectual adaptation that allow them to use the basic mental functions more effectively/adaptively.

Tools of intellectual adaptation is Vygotsky’s term for methods of thinking and problem-solving strategies that children internalize through social interactions with the more knowledgeable members of society.

For example, memory in young children this is limited by biological factors. However, culture determines the type of memory strategy we develop.  For example, in western culture, children learn note-taking to aid memory, but in pre-literate societies, other strategies must be developed, such as tying knots in a string to remember, or carrying pebbles, or repetition of the names of ancestors until large numbers can be repeated.

Vygotsky, therefore, sees cognitive functions, even those carried out alone, as affected by the beliefs, values, and tools of intellectual adaptation of the culture in which a person develops and therefore socio-culturally determined. The tools of intellectual adaptation, therefore, vary from culture to culture - as in the memory example.

Vygotsky and Language

Vygotsky believed that language develops from social interactions, for communication purposes. Vygotsky viewed language as man’s greatest tool, a means for communicating with the outside world.

According to Vygotsky (1962) language plays two critical roles in cognitive development:

1: It is the main means by which adults transmit information to children.

2: Language itself becomes a very powerful tool of intellectual adaptation.

Vygotsky (1987) differentiates between three forms of language: social speech which is external communication used to talk to others (typical from the age of two); private speech (typical from the age of three) which is directed to the self and serves an intellectual function; and finally private speech goes underground, diminishing in audibility as it takes on a self-regulating function and is transformed into silent inner speech (typical from the age of seven).

For Vygotsky, thought and language are initially separate systems from the beginning of life, merging at around three years of age. At this point speech and thought become interdependent: thought becomes verbal, speech becomes representational. When this happens, children's monologues internalized to become inner speech. The internalization of language is important as it drives cognitive development.

Piaget's and Vygotsky's views on private speech

How Vygotsky Impacts Learning

Many psychologists, including Piaget and Bandura, have assessed the cultural influences on learning, however, only Vygotsky claims that they are inherently woven together. He felt that studies should be analyzing the individual within the society and not the individual itself. Only then could you observe the level of growth, as it is social interaction itself that promotes mental development. While morals, values, and thoughts are believed to be influenced by society, the process of learning is not seen as something that is mimicked. Vygotsky outlined that interactions with others created growth by making connections between concepts. To summarize, Vygotsky’s views on cognitive development can be grouped into four main points, outlined as follows:

§  the relationship between the student and the teacher is central to learning;

§  society and culture influence the attitudes and beliefs of a student towards learning and education;

§  language is the primary tool used in the development of learning in children, including the transfer of sociocultural influences; and

§  students benefit greatly in programs that are student-led, as they can use the social interaction to grow towards their potential level of development.

Curriculum – Learning goals and curriculum outlines should be designed around social interaction between students and tasks.

Instruction – The idea of scaffolding is the basis of instruction. Students can achieve their learning potential with guided instruction from their teacher. The teacher constantly reassesses the levels of achievement of the student and creates the next task as a building block to the goal. As an added benefit, the student also learns problem-solving skills from performing leveled tasks on their own.

Assessment – Evaluations are catered to each student based on their zone of proximal development. As teachers strive to see the potential level of cognitive development in all students, assessments must cover a range of abilities. Some students may achieve a higher level with support from their teacher than others.

 

Vygotsky-vs-Piaget