The Relationship between Biology and the Environment in the Process of Development - Essay Example

? Psychology Comparison of the Views Held by Vygotsky, Bronfenbrenner, and Cole on Culture as a Context for Development of the Number Institution/ University Instructor’s Name Tutorial Section Date of Submission Comparison of the Views Held by Vygotsky, Bronfenbrenner, and Cole on Culture as a Context for Development Introduction “Individual development can be considered as the outcome of interactions between a biological organism and environmental influences” state Berry, Poortinga, Breugelmans et al (2011, p.36). In the contemporary study of Psychology, differentiating between ‘nature’ and ‘nurture’ is an outdated distinction. At the same time, however the cultural component of behaviour which includes environmental and experiential factors, together with the biological constituent, form the major aspect underlying the differences between various approaches to ontogenetic development in the psychological literature. Besides maturational theories, traditional learning theory, and theories relating to the interaction between the organism and the environment, there are theories in which ontogenetic development is perceived as following essentially different progressions resulting from differences in the cultural environment in which the individual is growing up (Berry et al, 2011, p.36). The psychologists Lev Semenovich Vygotsky (1896-1934), Urie Bronfenbrenner (1917-2005), and Michael Cole (1938-) considered culture as an important constituent in development, and had individual approaches to the theory. Thesis Statement: The purpose of this paper is to compare and contrast the views held by Vygotsky, Bronfenbrenner, and Cole on culture as a context for development. Vygotsky’s Theory of Development as Related to Culture One of the influences on Vygotsky’s (1978) concept of development was Marx’s theory of society, also known as historical materialism. According to Marx, human nature including consciousness and behaviour undergo changes with historical changes in society and material life. Vygotsky elaborated Marx’s perspective on Engel’s concept of human labour and use of tools as the means by which man changes nature and consequently transforms himself. Vygotsky’s explanation of tool is based on Engel’s conceptualisation of the tool as involving a specific human activity in which specialisation of the hand plays an important part, and denotes the transforming reaction of man on nature. It represents the final, essential distinction between man and other animals because man masters the tool and creates changes to serve his ends. This notion of mediation in human-environmental interaction is also extended to the use of signs such as language, writing, and number systems that are developed by society over the course of human history. Tool systems and sign systems change with the form of society and the level of its cultural development. Vygotsky’s approach was that the internalization of the culturally produced sign systems results in behavioural changes, and forms the connection between early and later forms of individual development. “Thus, for Vygotsky in the tradition of Marx and Engels, the mechanism of individual developmental change is rooted in society and culture” (Vygotsky, 1978, p.7). For example, children are able to internalize the adaptive social means provided by society at large. Vygotsky believed that one of the essential aspects of development is children’s growing aptitude for controlling and directing their own behaviour. This increasing mastery is facilitated by “the development of new psychological forms and functions and by the use of signs and tools in this process” (Vygotsky, 1978, p.126). With increasing age, children extend the boundaries of their knowledge by combining and internalising into their own consciousness socially elaborate symbols such as social values, beliefs, cumulative knowledge of one’s culture, and scientifically expanded concepts of reality. Vygotsky’s socio-cultural theory gave rise to contextualists who are theorists in developmental psychology focusing specifically on materialised cultural knowledge. According to their approach, “an important aspect of human culture is the collection of material culture artefacts which surround us” (Berry et al, 2011, p.36), for example houses, cars, computers, books, and other material assets. Hence, culture is not only that which is learnt socially, but also includes the use of cultural artefacts often created by earlier generations. Further, according to Vygotsky’s approach, every aspect of the child’s cultural development appears twice, first on the social level between people, known as interpsychological; and later on the internal, individual level, termed as intrapsychological. Since actual relations between individuals give rise to the higher functions, social origins are related to later mental functioning. Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Systems Theory Encompasses Cultural Factors According to Bronfenbrenner’s (1979) ecological systems theory, he defined contexts of development as nested, or each fitting into the next. “The developing child is embedded within four of these spheres ranging from the immediate setting to the broad culture” (Berry et al, 2011, p.37). The innermost or microsystem consists of the immediate family; the mesosystem consists of the family as a microsystem along with other interrelated microsystems like the classroom, school, neighbourhood, or child care centre. The exosystem pertains to more distant contexts having impacts on the microsystems and mesosystems related to the child, for example the parental economic situation. The last sphere is the macrosystem, which is the remotest layer of the ecological system, consisting of cultural norms, socialisation goals, and values. These different spheres interact with each other, and have an impact on the development of the child. Bronfenbrenner (1979, p.6) states that “the developmental importance of ecological transitions derives from the fact that they almost invariably involve a change in role”. That is, the expectations regarding behaviour associated with each position an individual holds in society. Within a particular society or social group, the structure and components of the micro-, meso-, and exosystems have a tendency to be similar as though they have been created “from the same master model and the systems function in similar ways” (Bronfenbrenner, 1979, p.8). On the other hand, the constituent systems of different social groups may vary significantly. Cole’s Cultural Mediation Approach to Development In Cole’s view, “the biological organism and the environment do not interact directly, but through a third mediating factor, namely culture” (Berry, 2011, p.38). Besides the differentiation between organism and environment, Cole (1998) also distinguishes between the natural environment and culture. Cole’s concept of development encompasses many levels or time scales, a physical scale, phylogenetic scale, culture-historical scale in which social traditions emerge and then disappear, an ontogenetic scale, and a micro-genetic scale. The last concept represents the present condition of human experience. The interactions between these various levels are necessary for a comprehensive understanding of ontogenetic development, which takes place through complex social interactions over time. states Cole (1998, p.xiv). The evidence indicates that Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory gave rise to contextualists with their perspectives regarding material culture artefacts. One such contextualist is Cole (1998, p.xiv), who states that “artefacts are the fundamental constituents of culture”. Cognitive development and growth of the human mind must be properly seen as a coevolution of human activities and artefacts. Several tools and symbols include the spoken word, the social institutions in which individuals participate, and the man-made physical objects used; taken as an aggregate, they create ‘alternative worlds’. Through the course of historical time, in the development of a human culture, “cultural mediation produces a mode of developmental change in which the activities of prior generations are cumulated in the present as the specifically human part of the environment” (Cole, 1998, p.xiv). Thus, the social world impacts on the individual not only through people who interact directly, but also through the social practices and physical objects that unseen people have created in the individual’s environment such as books, subway stations, maps, and other articles and facilities. Human behaviour is culturally mediated. Vygotsky’s perspective of new cognitive skills being culture-specific rather than universal because of great differences in beliefs, values and intellectual tools across cultures, was contradicted by Cole (1998), that the distinctions between literates and non-literates is not as extensive as believed. “Despite his criticism of the broad sweep of earlier authors, Cole maintains a position of cultural mediation” (Berry, 2011, p.38). In relation to contextualists, Pellegrini and Nathan (2010, p.125) state that “the two most prominent examples of contextualist theories are those of Vygotsky and Bronfenbrenner”. Both psychologists address development as an interaction among activities, inherent qualities, and the transforming contexts within which those activities take place. One of the strengths of Vygotsky’s theory of development is his emphasis on the concept of understanding all practices and interactions only within their cultural and historical context. Contrastingly, Bronfenbrenner placed as the core of his theory the routine everyday interactions that become increasingly complex over the course of time. His argument was that they got modified simultaneously by individual characteristics, by the context in which the activity occurred, and by passage of time. However, some weaknesses have been identified in both Vygotsky’s and Bronfenbrenner’s theories, from a contextualist approach. Vygotsky, because of prevailing 1920s Soviet Union ideologies, “could view development only in terms of a progression towards a single, optimal goal” (Pellegrini and Nathan, 2010, p.125). Further, Vygotsky did not examine the role of an individual in changing their own context. Bronfenbrenner was clear about the ways in which individuals change proximal processes, but addressed the issue of culture inadequately. Neither psychologist clearly defined the methodology to be used for gathering data. Conclusion This paper has compared and contrasted the approaches of Vygotsky, Bronfenbrenner and Cole on culture as a context for development. Vygotsky’s (1978) socio-cultural theory of development which focuses on how cultural transmission takes place, is reflected in the psychologist’s views on anthropological and sociological studies. He emphasised that these fields were closely associated with observation and experiment; and a combination of these factors accounted for the progress of human consciousness and intellect. According to Bronfenbrenner’s approach, in order to understand children’s development, it is essential to observe transactions in everyday natural settings. This idea forms the core of the contextualised cognition school with its analysis of behaviour in context supported by Cole (1998). Cole’s cultural-historical approach to the study of the mind, requires that in the study of human development, it is essential to make the study of surrounding social practices an essential aspect of the investigation. Similarly, in order to change the pattern of a human being’s activities, the surrounding environment in which these activities are carried out, has to be addressed. Cole’s approach to artefacts as the fundamental elements of culture is in alignment with the contextual approach which emerges from Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory. References Berry, J.W., Y.H. Poortinga, S.M. Breugelmans, A. Chasiotis and D.L. Sam. (2011). Cross- cultural psychology: Research and applications. Edition 3. London: Cambridge University Press. Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and design. The United States of America: Harvard University Press. Cole, M. (1998). Cultural psychology: A once and future discipline. The United States of America: Harvard University Press. Pellegrini, A.D. and Nathan, P.E. (2010). The Oxford handbook of the development of play. London: Oxford University Press. Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. The United States of America: Harvard University Press. Read More