The Sociohistorical Approach Founder of the Approach L. S. VYGOTSKY 1896 – 1934

The Sociohistorical Approach

Founder of the Approach

L. S. VYGOTSKY

 1896 – 1934

Lev Semenovich Vygotsky

Vygotsky

QUESTION:

WHAT SEPARATES US FROM OTHER ANIMALS?

VygotskyEPISTEMOLOGICAL AND OTHER DISTINCTIONS:

  kinds of spontaneous culturalknowledge commonsense societal

natural  sources of direct experience mediatedknowledge immediate conscious no yesreflective direction bottom up top downof dev inductive deductive

data driven theory driven

VygotskyTEMPERATURE TASKS

spontaneous cultural   

Are these data good for Vygotsky? Bad for Vygotsky? Neutral for Vygotsky?

WHAT DEVELOPS?

 INDIVIDUAL LEVEL

  WORD MEANINGS

 CULTURAL LEVEL

  WORLD VIEWS

  SPURRED ON BY TECHNOLOGICAL CHANGES (PRINTING MACHINE, COMPUTERS)

MECHANISMS OF DEVELOPMENT 

SOCIAL INTERACTION 

SMALL “S”CONVERSATIONS BETWEEN PEOPLEDISCOURSE ANALYSIS

 LARGE “S”

SOCIETAL TECHNOLOGIES AS CONCEPTSCALENDAR AS AN EXAMPLE

Dan Sperber

Dan SperberCultural Evolution and Epidemiology

COMPARISON OF ROLE OF SOCIAL INTERACTION:VYGOTSKY’S THEORY AND PIAGET’S

PIAGET

SOCIAL INTERACTION CAN PRODUCE DISEQUILIBRIUM  

PLACE OF CULTURE AND SOCIAL INTERACTION QUITE NEGLIGIBLE

VYGOTSKYMETAPHORS: ACQUISITION AND

PARTICIPATION (SFARD)

VYGOTSKY IS PARTICIPATION PIAGET IS ACQUISITION

VYGOTSKYZONE OF PROXIMAL DEVELOPMENT

 SPATIAL METAPHOR

DISTANCE BETWEEN ACTUAL AND POTENTIAL KNOWLEDGE 

X potential knowledgeZPD X potential ZPD

   X actual knowledge X actual

Two children with the same actual knowledge travel different distances to their potential knowledge; therefore different ZPDs

VYGOTSKYDYNAMIC ASSESSMENT

CONVENTIONAL: TEACH – LEARN – TEST

VYGOTSKY: TEST/TEACH/LEARN

VYGOTSKYSCAFFOLDING

EXAMPLE: MY USING ADVANCED ORGANIZERS IN CLASS, SUCH AS THE DEEP STRUCTURE QUESTIONS AND MAP OF THE FIELD

VYGOTSKYRELATIONS BETWEEN LEARNING

AND DEVELOPMENTFORMER GOES BEYOND LATTER

TEACHING WITH SCAFFOLDING CAUSES LEARNING

LEARNING GOES BEYOND POTENTIAL KNOWLEDGE, WHICH IS THE DEVELOPMENTAL LEVEL

COMPARING PIAGET AND VYGOTSKY

PIAGET CLAIMS THAT DEVELOPMENT SETS THE LIMITS ON LEARNING

VYGOTSKY CLAIMS THAT LEARNING GOES BEYOND DEVELOPMENT AND DRWS IT IN ITS WAKE

VYGOTSKY – TRUE CONCEPT

TRUE CONCEPT CONCEPT THAT RESULTS FROM THE

AMALGAM OF NATURAL AND SOCIETAL KNOWLEDGE

TRUE CONCEPTS ENRICH SOCIETAL KNOWLEDGE BY

GROUNDING IT IN DIRECT EXPERIENCE ENRICH NATURAL KNOWLEDGE BY MAKING IT

MORE GENERAL

TRUE CONCEPTS

EXAMPLES: CONFLICT – TEMPERATURE

ANALOGY - ARITHMETIC

AVERAGE

TEMPERATURE

ARITHMETIC AVERAGE

DEVELOPMENTAL CONSTRAINTS

WHERE ARE THERE DEVELOPMENTAL CONSTRAINTS ON LEARNING? 

CULTURAL/HISTORICAL CONSTRAINTS

Cultural periods in history (middle ages, enlightenment) had different worldviews than modern (post-industrial, information age)

INDIVIDUAL CONSTRAINTS

Vygotsky did not write about this very much

TOOLSMATERIAL

mediate between subject and physical environment

PSYCHOLOGICAL mediates between individual and himself

and between individual and others

NOTATIONS AS TECHNOLOGIES

NOTATIONS AS TECHNOLOGIES (OLSON, FERREIRO, LEVIN, TOLCHINSKY-LANDSMANN, RAVID, TUFTE)

 PURPOSE: FREEZE THE CHANGING

WORLD

NOTATIONS “USES”:

1. CAN BE CARRIED FROM PLACE TO PLACE 2. CAN BE USED ACROSS TIME (NOVELS FROM THE

MIDDLE AGES)

     ENABLES:

1. REFLECTION ON THE NOTATED SYSTEM 2. SELF-REGULATION 3. REGULATION OF OTHERS’ THINKING AND

BEHAVIORS

NOTATIONAL SYSTEMSExamples:

  WRITING – NOTATES SPOKEN WORD (UR - 4,500 YRS)

  DANCE NOTATION – NOA ESHKOL  CARTOGRAPHY  NUMERICAL SYSTEM  MUSICAL NOTATION  MIDDLE AGES – DORIT TANAY

CLASS ACTIVITIES

  JEANNE BAMBERGER (MIT) TASK

CONSTRUCT NOTATIONS FOR A RHYTHM

  ANALYZE INSTRUCTIONS