Vygotskys Theory of Teaching as It Applies to ESL and EFL - Essay Example

Vygotsky’s Theory of Teaching as it applies to ESL and EFL What is the best way to learn? This is a question that has been asked throughout the ages since the concept of formal education first emerged. However, the answers have often been different based upon the individual theorist’s understanding of how the human mind works. One of the theorists significantly affecting the way in which we view education and learning is Lev Semenovich Vygotsky (1896-1934). He was a Russian psychologist interested in studying child development, eventually founding a new approach to education, today known as a ‘social constructivist’ approach. This concept is based on the idea that “cultural inheritance is carried in the meanings of artifacts and practices. Resources of knowledge and skill brought to a situation depend upon the past participation of the individual within the culture. Resources are dependent upon culture, also the stage of human development” (Golbfarb, 2000). In discovering how people learn and develop, Vygotsky suggested that children develop and gain control of their thought processes through the use of artifacts, one of the most important being the artifact of language, becoming increasingly able to incorporate their potential into inherent ability through zones of proximal development. This development takes place through various means, one of the most important being creative imitation of others. A second important means through which children develop control over their mental processes is through play and interaction with others. These theories have significant impacts upon how best to instruct students attempting to learn a second language and attain some degree of mastery. To understand how this might be so, it is necessary to understand the importance of language in formulating thought and definition which is itself essential in bridging zones of proximal development (ZPD) to formulate true and lasting learning and development. One of the fundamental building blocks to Vygotsky’s theory is contained in the concept that individuals are only able to gain control over their naturally biologically endowed brains through the power of social and cultural means. “Thus, there is a tension, or as Vygotsky characterized it, ‘a drama’, between our natural inheritance and our sociocultural inheritance, and it is in this drama that we develop” (Lantolf, 2003: 350). The primary means of this mediation between the biological and the social or cultural is through the media of symbolic artifacts. In other words, humans understand the world around them only as well as it can be formulated in terms of psychological symbolic tools, the strongest of which is language. Heavily influenced by Shpet, Vygotsky adopted the concept of the word and language as energeia rather than ergon – active rather than static. According to Shpet (1996), “language is ‘activity of the spirit’ and ‘the immanent work of the soul’. It is at the foundation of the very nature of being human … Language is a social thing and a psychophysiological process, but it also exists as an idea. Language can be viewed not only as substance, but as subject, not only as a thing, product or result of production, but as production process” (77-78). The importance of learning a new language, then, is not only learning how to communicate with other individuals in their own tongue, but also how to connect with them on an ideological level, comprehending the specific concepts that drive a group of people toward a common or opposing goals. This complexity of language in helping people understand the new social or cultural group is particularly difficult in becoming a master of the language as the individual finds it necessary to understand rules of the language that transcend the official forms of grammar and syntax such as dialogic overtones and hidden dialogical messages. The concept of a dialogic overtone refers to the tendency for a living language existing as energeia to take on new meanings for old terms. One relatively recent example of this type of language structure is provided by J.V. Wertsch (2006) in the way in which the George W. Bush Presidential campaign of 2004 utilized the term ‘flip-flop’ to refer to his opponent, John Kerry’s, tendency to change his position regarding whether America should go to war in Iraq. Although the dictionary definition of the term indicates a specific type of open-toed sandal, all Americans paying even the slightest attention to the news during this period in time came to automatically associate the term with an individual who could not sustain a single focused plan for the country. This example demonstrates part of the problem encountered when one attempts to learn a new language as different terms such as flip-flop may remain grammatically correct in a particular communication but because of recent or long-lasting dialogic overtones within the culture, the meaning becomes skewed or completely altered in interpretation when in practical use. Another aspect of language that makes learning a new one difficult is the concept of a hidden dialogic, in which individuals in their writing and speaking, may often respond to a generalized discourse existing within the greater community even when the opposite element of this discourse is not present (Wertsch, 2006). An example of this can also be found in the generalized dialogue of the American public regarding the reasons the country invaded Iraq and whether this was a justifiable decision. To take part in the conversation, one must first be aware of the issue and the types of additional issues that have been raised in relation to it. This often involves much greater involvement with the language than the typical language class has to offer and exists on adult levels as well as the level of children to various degrees. However, dialogic overtones and hidden dialogical messages are issues that confront the advanced language learner more than the early learner as it is determined what should or should not be said based not on grammar and syntax but instead upon these underlying cultural messages. Language learning is also contingent upon the concept of internalization, which is the process by which children and others take what they’ve been taught and convert it into something that is personally meaningful to them and, in turn, begins to define them as well. “With regard to second-language learning, internalization is the process through which learners construct a mental representation of what was at one point physically present (acoustic or visual) in external form. This representation, in turn, enables them to free themselves of the sensory properties of a specific concrete situation” (Lantolf, 2003: 351). The process has been identified as beginning with first learning the concrete symbols of the new language group, which are the words themselves, then using them in private speech (which is a form of speech much like mumbling under the breath or referred to as ‘talking to oneself’) and finally converting the new language to inner speech which “because of its formal and semantic condensation, would be ‘incomprehensible to a listener” (Dance, 1994: 200). Because it is the precursor to inner speech, which itself reflects an individual’s development, analysis of private speech has been found to provide important clues as to the learner’s development in a new language. Within the classroom, private speech has been found to be used much more often than previously thought. According to one study reported on in Lantolf’s research, children will practice their responses to a teacher’s question through private speech for four primary reasons: “1) positively reinforcing one’s answer; 2) saving face, by avoiding calling out a possible incorrect answer …; 3) making sense of the question asked by the teacher; 4) getting practice in using the language” (Lantolf, 2003: 356). Language focused private speech is identified in another study (Saville-Troike cited in Lantolf, 2003) as concentrating on “repetition of others’ utterances, recall and practice, creation of novel forms, expansion and substitution practice and rehearsal for interpersonal communication” (357). This mumbled private speech reveals how much different learning of a first language is from the acquisition of a second language. “According to Vygotsky, native and foreign language learning ‘move in opposite directions.’ The child uses the grammatical and phonetic features of the native language with ease but does so without conscious awareness. On the other hand, the school child intentionally sets out to learn the foreign language and is very much aware of its grammatical and phonetic properties, but, unlike with the native language, is unable to use the language easily until much later in the learning process” (Lantolf, 2003: 367). Analysis of private speech has revealed that imitation is the process by which internalization begins. “According to James Mark Baldwin, North American predecessor of Vygotsky, internalization and imitation are the key processes through which social control carried out by others ‘gradually becomes reconstructed by the person oneself’” (Valsiner cited in Lantolf, 2003: 353). There have been two basic types of imitation identified. Imitative suggestion is the faithful replication of the model and cannot move beyond what the model has provided while persistent imitation reconstructs the model in new ways. This is an important concept in Vygotsky’s theory because it suggests that while individuals may imitate the sounds they hear while learning a new language, they are also capable of reconstructing these sounds in new ways to create new meaning. After imitation, particularly persistent imitation in which creativity is involved, play is identified by Vygotsky as a means for children to have fun while pushing their current boundaries and thus expand their development in new ways. Three types of language play are identified including social play which is interactional with other children, social contact play in which the child plays essentially alone but in close proximity to other children and solitary play in which the child is truly playing alone. Thus, play is identified as opening up a zone of proximal development (ZPD). A zone of proximal development is an area where the present and future interface as the child develops and language proficiency is gained. However, this zone doesn’t close as the child becomes more familiar with language. Instead, “play can take place at all levels of language proficiency” (Cook, 2000: 204). The factors at work through these areas of play are also accessed in the learning process when children are encouraged to work in specialized communities of learning, as presented by researcher Ann Brown (1997). According to Ann Brown, in the traditional educational setting, “students acquire facts that they cannot access and use appropriately; their knowledge is said to be inert or welded to its original occasion of use” (399). Brown’s concentration on what she terms metacognition relates back to Vygotsky’s concepts of persistent imitation in that children are encouraged to “achieve agency and reflection by introducing them to learning strategies that lead to transfer, or the flexible, appropriate, and even creative use of knowledge. Ideally, understanding leads to generative, inventive, and experimental use of knowledge as well as the ability to reflect on ones own activity” (Brown, 1997: 399). Brown’s study reveals how externalizing information by questioning, clarifying, summarizing and / or predicting the information presented helps students regardless of age translate what they have learned into usable, memorable information thanks to the power of language. This reinforces Vygotsky’s concepts of the importance of play in learning. Vygotsky’s concepts regarding the importance of language to the learning and development process have proven to be instrumental in developing more efficient and appropriate means of teaching ESL or EFL classes. While imitation is important, the type of imitation is more important than simple rote learning. Teachers should encourage private speech within the classroom recognizing that this is the first stage to students’ conception of a new language. At the same time, play emerges as an essential element in encouraging children to experiment with their new language and integrated communication begins to reveal those elements of language such as hidden dialogical messages and dialogic overtones that can lead to a child’s mastery of the language. References Brown, Ann L. (April 1997). “Transforming Schools into Communities of Thinking and Learning About Serious Matters.” American Psychologist. Vol. 52, N. 4, pp. 399-413. Cook, G. (2000). Language Play, Language Learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Dance, F.E.X. (1994). “Hearing Voices.” Intrapersonal Communication: Different Voices, Different Minds. D.R. Vocate (Ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Goldfarb, Mary Ellen. (2000). “The Educational Theory of Lev Semenovich Vygotsky (1896-1934).” Available October 7, 2007 from Lantolf, J.P. (2003). “Intrapersonal Communication and Internalization in the Second Language Classroom.” Vygotsky’s Educational Theory in Cultural Context. A. Kozulin, B. Gindis, V.S. Ageyev & S.M. Miller (Eds.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Shpet, G.G. (1996). “Vnutrennyaya forma slova.” Psikhologiya Sotsial’nogo Bytiya. Izbrannye Sotsiologicheskie Trudy. T.D. Martsinkovskaya (Ed.). Voronezh: Modek, pp. 49-260. (originally published in 1927). Cited in Wertsch, J.V. (2006). “Generalized Collective Dialogue and Advanced Foreign Language Capacities.” Contribution of Halliday and Vygotsky. H. Byrnes (Ed.). London: Continuum. Valsiner, J. (2000). Culture and Human Development: An Introduction. London: Sage. Wertsch, J.V. (2006). “Generalized Collective Dialogue and Advanced Foreign Language Capacities.” Contribution of Halliday and Vygotsky. H. Byrnes (Ed.). London: Continuum. Read More