Vygotsky's Sociocultural Theory - Literature review Example

Literature review of Vygotsky’s theory 1. Introduction Understanding how individuals develop throughout their life stages from infancy, adolescence, adulthood to old age has generated varied theories. Much focus has been directed at understanding cognitive development and among theorists known for their efforts in this subject includes theorists such as Jean Piaget, Erik Erickson and Sigmund Freud. These theories and others have offered varied explanations on cognitive development, and Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory quite profound. The significance of this theory is its emphasis on the social milieu, and suggests that social cultural aspects are essential in developing elementary natural processes (Vygotsky, 1978). Apparently, the sociocultural factors are very essential to the process of development. Vygotsky argues for the exceptionality of the social milieu. Further he reckons the cultural setting as the main determining factor growth of the advanced forms of human mental activity including intentional memory, voluntary attention, planning, logical thought as well as problem solving (1978). The most important thing however is his exceptional work in the conception of Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD), which is perceived as a substantial contribution to the learning process and the field of education. This chapter provides a theoretical review of Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory and its emphasis on three major aspects: the importance of language, the importance of culture tools and the importance of social interaction. 2.1 The role of language The role language plays in cognition and learning is fundamental. Language allows children to solve problems by relying on it to communicate with others in sharing experiences and more importantly in solving problems. According to Vygotsky (1978), children are able to address their practical tasks with the aid of their speech, eyes as well as hands. This means that Vygotsky believed that language is an extension of thought and intellect and a means for an individual to interrelate with their environment. Furthermore, Vygotsky argues that the most crucial moment in time in the intellectual development process that yields pure human forms of abstract as well as concrete intelligence takes place when two entirely different development lines including practical activity and speech converge (1978). This view defines intelligence as the ability for a child to gain from instruction with language playing a significant developmental function. This means that language is an instrument for supporting understanding and an instrument for learning. Primarily, according to Vygotsky, language becomes the vehicle for educational advancement and is crucial for acquiring and understanding knowledge (1978). From Vygotsky’s (1979) theory, an individual is able to learn their world through knowledge communicated to them through language during their early stages of infancy. As a child develops, they first are reliant on their caregivers who most of the times are parents to guide them as they communicate using the medium of language. Using language, the parents allows the child to develop by instructing and directing the child on what to do, what not to do and on how to do it. In this case, the caregivers pass on the knowledge of their culture to the child through the medium of language (Wood, 1998). Language entails a number of different types which include; Sign language: Vygotsky had always viewed the sign language as restrictive in some aspects. However, he later found out that it plays a role especially to the deaf students in education. At an early stage children start by interpreting imitating signs and later they interpret them. This is a very important aspect in language development (Vygotsky’s1979). Speech: It is apparent that language starts as an external tool to the child which is used for social interaction. Speech is usually in two forms, the inner speech and external speech. In form, inner speech is not comparable to external speech. According to Vygotsky’s (1979), external speech entails conversion of thoughts into words whereas inner speech is the turning of speech into inward thoughts. Symbols: Symbolization comprises of objects that had previously not been conceptualized. These are objects that could have otherwise not existed apart in the context of social interactions wherein symbolization occurs. Language hardly symbolizes an object or situation already in existence. Nevertheless it makes it possible the being or the appearance of the object or situation, for it is a part of the process whereby that object or situation is generated (Vygotsky’s 1979). Stages of language Vygotsky watched as well as listened to children performing different tasks. From this he reckoned that the development of language follows three stages. It develops from social or external speech to egocentric speech and later to inner speech. According to him, right from its inception, external speech plays a vitally important role in the learning development of a child. Vygotsky found out that small children always speak to be heard or get a response or make meaning in their world. This means that the childrens’ initial attempts to speak are not utterances of trial and error but meaningful attempts at social interaction and communication. The second stage of language is the Ego- centric speech. This is the first means through which children adapts to reality (Vygotsky, 1962). The Ego- centric speech entails a specific amount of unconscious language behavior. The speech is basically for oneself and it has no concern for influencing others (Vygotsky, 1962). The third and last stage of language is inner speech. The inner speech makes it possible for humans to plan as well as control their activity. The speech comes from a previous involvement in verbal social interaction (Wertsch, 1995). Therefore, the first true perception of reality for our students is inner speech. Due to the fact that it has an interactive nature, it better serves our students if it has had an opportunity to develop socially. In classroom terms, the language of a student first develops socially and then individually. 2.2 The role of culture tools A cultural tool is a term that has been defined differently by different scholars. According to Schaffer (1996), cultural tool is a term used to refer to the artifacts created by individuals under culture specific and historical environments as such people carry with them the attributes of the culture in question in aiding them in problem solving. (Vygotsky (1978), defined the term as a means to attaining things in the universe which are assimilated during the development process and passed on to the consequent generations. Research indicates that cultural tools are either psychological in nature for instance language or physical in nature for instance a hammer. Vygotsky (1978) believes that humans have been made human by their inventive utilization of tools as it is a means of attaining things in the universe. For instance, a physical example of a cultural tool is a hammer. A hammer is a means of hitting the sharp objects such as nails into surfaces. Apparently, the form as well as function is as a consequent of the generations of development and adaptation of culture (Vygotsky, 1978). Besides, the meaning and utilization of the hammer is not an obvious thing especially to a person who has never needed to hit nails into a surface or who has not seen a hammer before. Such information can also be transmitted culturally. Each of the generations can acquire a hammer and use it in new ways or according to their needs. This is a process referred to by Vygotsky as appropriation (1978). However, not all the cultural tools are physical objects. Cultural tools further entail ways of thinking and doing things (Vygotsky, 1978). For instance, one of the most vitally important cultural tools used by individuals is language. This is an example of a psychological cultural tools which has similar characteristics as those attributed to the physical example given above which include appropriation, adaptation, transmission as well as long term cultural development. Ways of thinking are appropriated by children through social interaction (Vygotsky, 1978). According to Schaffer (1996), children appropriate ways of thinking through constructing them on their own. The theories of Vygotsky emphasis was on the significant role played by social interaction in the development of cognition since he strongly believed that community had a stake in the procedure of making meaning (1978). Cognitive development occurs in the social context and is supported by the psychological cultural tool language. Additionally, Vygotsky also developed a social cultural approach to cognitive development. According to him, all cognitive functions are influenced by beliefs, tools of intellectual adaptation of the culture and values in which an individual develops therefore socio-culturally determined (Vygotsky, 1978). In conclusion, it is evident that cultural tools vary across cultures due to the varying cultural beliefs. Besides, they are subject to alterations as they are imparted within and across generations and every generation modify the cultural tools with the view of making them effective and efficient. 2.3 The role of social interaction Vygotsky argues that all the important cognitive activities acquire shape in the matrix of social history. Moreover, they are seen to form the products of social historical development (Vygotsky, 1978). This is a clear indication, that the cognitive patterns and skills of thinking are not mainly determined by the innate factors but are the products of the activities that are practiced in a social setting of culture in which a person is brought up. Similarly, a child’s or an individual’s way of thinking is influenced by the history of the society where the individual has been brought up as well as the history of the particular individual. In the cognitive development, language is a fundamental tool as it determines how this particular child will learn the art of thinking as the thoughts are later transmitted to the child by the mode of words. As cited by Lantolf(2000), Vygotsky argues that the sociocultural environment gives the child a number of demands and tasks as well as involves the child to his world via the tools. At the early stages of development a child is entirely dependent on its parents or other people who give instructions to the child on what to do and how to do it as well as what not to do. Here the parents act as the representatives of culture and the channel via which the culture is transferred to the child do actualize the instructions mainly through language. According to Wertsch 1995, Vygotsky states that a child gains knowledge through its constant interaction with individuals as its initial step (interpsychological plane), and then later integrates as well as internalizes this knowledge by adding his personal value to it (intrapsychological plane) (Wertsch 1995). Evidently, this transition from social to personal property is not a mere copy, but a transformation of what had been learnt through interaction, into personal values (Wertsch 1995). Therefore learning takes place not through social interaction but in interaction. 3. THE EXAMINATION OF EMPIRICAL LITERATURE 3.1 Language Learning language was initially explained by product approaches advocated by behaviorist theories that relate teaching language to linguistic form, isolated linguistic skills and habit development (Simister, 2004). Product approaches suggest language comprises of parts that should be learnt and mastered independently in a graded form where the role of the leaner is to obtain and follow the instructions of the teacher (Turuk, 2008). On the other hand, learning language is explained by process approaches which informs Vygotsky’s theory which gives greater consideration to cognitive aspect of learning and recognizes the inputs brought in by the learner in the learning process. It is apparent that English language is comprised of distinct parts that should be that ought to be mastered and learned distinctively in a graded way(Turuk, 2008). The role of the learner is to receive and follow the instructions from the teachers for instance in the audio-lingual approach. According to studies some process approaches of teaching English introduced views stressing the cognitive feature of learning as well as acknowledging the contributions of the learner to the learning context. According to this approaches English language should be taught to students through what is called systematic thinking skills(Turuk, 2008). As a result, such teaching strategies as generating ideas, planning, drafting and setting goals became part of the second language acquisition classroom especially within the field of writing. Additionally, the social facet of teaching second language became a significant part of second language classroom literature, as was directed by Genre Approach(Badger & White, 2000). According to past researchers, language must be made acceptable and accessible to teachers as a practical tool for teaching (Badger & White, 2000). Therefore, the theoretical foundation of Genre Approach is resolutely based on the systemic purposeful model which refers to the theory of genre as theory of language use, description of relationship amid the context in which language occurs as well as the actual language being used (Gee 1997). According to Gee (1997), when teaching the actual language, the emphasis must be placed on social uses of language based on context, which aligns with Vygotsky’s notion of the function of language as a social instrument of communicating. 3.2 Culture tools According to Vygotsky (1978) imitative learning, instructed learning and collaborative learning are the three different ways in which persons can pass culture tools to others. Imitative learning occurs when a learner attempts to copy or imitate another person. Instructed learning encompasses a learner remembering the lecturer’s instructions and employing the same for self-regulation, whilst collaborative learning entails a group of students attempting to understand one another and work jointly in order to learn a certain skill (Tomasello, et al., 1993). There are numerous cultural tools which when acquired; will enhance the mental capability of a learner in addition to refining their thoughts and behaviours (Lantolf, 2000). Through interactions from knowledgeable peers and teachers, students learn to use cultural tools. The utilization of these cultural tools enhances an individual’s mental function such as attention, perceptions, sensation and memory and multifaceted mental processes which are self regulated, intended and mediated by language (Vygotsky, 1962). For the purpose of this assignment, Facebook will be used as the cultural tool. This is an efficient cultural tool that facilitates language development and has the ability to enhance L2 student’s mental capabilities and refines their thoughts and behaviour hence, fostering credibility of teachers involved in modern student culture as argued by Garrison &Kanuka (2004). Besides, Facebook offers a constructive language outcomes and immediate individualized opportunities for interactions amongst students, their peers and tutors, and these interactions according to Lantolf (2000) allows for language development. According to Ertmer (2005), use of high tech technologies in teaching such as Facebook enhances constructivist practices where learners of English as second language have to collaborate. Studies carried out by Mazer et al. (2007) suggest Facebook as a great tool for interactions particularly in promoting positive impact on learner-to-learner and learner to tutor relations. More significantly, Facebook as a language-learning tool allows learners to identify similarities with peers and teacher’s personal interest that results in more comfortable learning and communication outcomes. Vygotsky puts forth that individuals employ cultural tools which develop from a culture. Originally, these tools are developed to serve exclusively serve as social functions, techniques of interacting and communicating needs. The internalization of these social tools according to Vygotsky (1978), results to greater thinking skills. 3.3 Social interactions According to Vygotsky (1978) social interaction plays an essential function in language acquisition and cognitive development. He affirms that development follows social learning and giving an example with cultural development of a child, Vygotsky puts forth that each function in the development appears two times, on the social level (interpsychological) and individual level (intrapsychological) (1978). Social interaction finds it roots from the Social Interactionist Theory. This is a theory of language acquisition techniques in which an array of its forms encompassing visual, written and spoken as a social tool entailing a multifaceted system of rules and symbols on the issue of development and language acquisition. The Interactionist theory categorizes that language acquisition is influenced by a variety of factors. Vygotsky asserts that in all levels of learning (including university level, high school level) social interaction is very important as it plays a key role in the acquisition of language (1978). He proposed the ZPD (zone of proximal development) in which students can create a novel language via ‘socially mediated interaction’. In Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory, social interactions results to bit by bit modifications in the behaviour and thoughts of individuals but this differ significantly from one culture to the other (Woolfolk, 1998). In general, Vygotsky asserts that language development depends on social interactions with tools and individuals provided by the culture. His theory links cognition and social environment. Learners will obtain ways of behaving and thinking by interacting with a person who has more knowledge. Social interaction according to Vygotsky results to continuing modifications in an individual behaviours and thoughts. Traditionally, most schools held instructionist or transmissionist theory in which a lecturer or a teacher conveys information to the learners. On the contrary, social interactions according to Vygotskys support learning whereby learners play an important and active role in the learning process. Thus, the roles of learners and teachers are shifted. The tutor assists in promoting meaning construction in learners through collaboration, making learning to turn into a reciprocal experience for the learners and the teacher. Ellis (2000) indicates that learning occurs in interactions and not through interactions where learners initially thrive in doing a new task through the help of others, they then internalize the task to ensure they can perform it on their own. Therefore, interactions which effectively mediate learning are those that learners scaffold the new tasks Gibbons, (2002). Conclusion This paper has comprised of a theoretical review of Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory and its emphasis on three major aspects: the importance of language, the importance of culture tools and the importance of social interaction. Apparently, sociocultural factors are very essential to the process of development. Vygotsky reckons the cultural setting as the main determining factor growth of the advanced forms of human mental activity including intentional memory, voluntary attention, planning, logical thought as well as problem solving. All cognitive functions are influenced by beliefs, tools of intellectual adaptation of the culture and values in which an individual develops therefore socio-culturally determined. Moreover, the sociocultural environment gives the child a number of demands and tasks as well as involves the child to his world vial the tools. In conclusion when teaching the actual language, the emphasis must be placed on social uses of language based on context, which aligns with Vygotsky’s notion of the function of language as a social instrument of communicating. References Badger, R. & White, G., (2000).A Process genre approach to teaching writing.ELT journal, 54(2), 153-160 Berk, Laura E. &Winsler, A. (1995).Scaffolding Children's Learning: Vygotsky and Early Childhood Education. Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children. Berk, Laura E. (1994).Child Development Third Edition. Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Bodrova, Elena, and Leong, Deborah J. 1996.Tools of the Mind: The Vygotskian Approach to Early Childhood Education. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Merrill. Bodrova, Elena, and Leong, Deborah J. 2001.Tools of the Mind: A Case Study of Implementing the Vygotskian Approach in American Early Childhood and Primary Classrooms. Geneva, Switzerland: International Bureau of Education, United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. Crawford, K. (1996). Vygotskian approaches to human development in the information era. Educational Studies in Mathematics, (31) 43-62. Driscoll, M. P. (1994). Psychology of Learning for Instruction. Needham, MA: Allyn& Bacon. Ellis, R., (2000). Task-based research and language pedagogy.Language Teaching. Ertmer, P.A. (2005). Teacher pedagogical beliefs: The final frontiers in our quest for technology integration? Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(4), 25-39. Garrison, R., &Kanuka, H. (2004). Blended learning: Uncovering its transformative potential in higher education. Internet and Higher Education, 7, 95-105. Gass, S.M., &Selinker, L. (2008).Second Language Acquisition.New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Gee, S., (1997). Teaching writing: a genre-based approach. In: Fulcher, G., ed. Writing in English language classroom. Hertfordshire: Prentice Hall Europe ELT. Georgina, D.A, & Olson, M.R. (2008). Integration of technology in higher education: A review of faculty self-perceptions. The Internet and Higher Education, 11, 1-8. Gibbons, P., 2002. Scaffolding language, scaffolding learning teaching second language learners in the mainstream classroom. NH: Heinemann, Portsmouth Horowitz, D. (1986). Process not product: less than meets the eye. TESOL Quarterly, 20 (1), 445-462 Kinginger, C. (2001). "i + 1 different from ZPD".Foreign Language Annals Vol. 34, No. 5: 417-425. Kozulin, A., 2002. Socio-cultural theory and the mediated learning experience. School psychology International, Sage Publications Kramsch, C.J. (1985). Classroom interaction and discourse options.Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 7(2), 169-183. Krashen, S. D.  (1988). Second Language Acquisition and Second Language Learning.  London: Prentice-Hall International. Krashen, S. D. (1987). Principles and Practice in Second Language Acquisition.  London: Prentice-Hall International. Kumaravadivelu, B., 2006. TESOL methods: changing tracks, challenging trends. TESOL Quarterly, 40 (1), 59-81 Lantolf, J. P. & Thorne, S. L. (2007).Sociocultural Theory and Second Language Acquisition.In. B. van Patten & J. Williams (eds.), Explaining Second Language Acquisition (pp. 201-224). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Lantolf, J.P., (2000). Introducing socio-cultural theory.In: Lantolf, J. P., ed. Sociocultural theory and second language learning. Oxford University Press, 1-26 Leont'ev, A. (1977). Activity, Consciousness, and Personality. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Leu, W. &Kinzer, D.  (1995). Effective Teaching of Reading: K 8, second edition. New York: Prentice Hall. Lin, M., and Mackay, C., (2004).Thinking through modern foreign languages. UK: Cambridge Luria, A. R. (1976).  Cognitive Development: Its Cultural and Social Foundations.  Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Mazer, J.P., Murphy, R.E., & Simmonds, CJ. (2007). I’ll see you on “Facebook”: The effects of computer-mediated teacher self-disclosure on student motivation, affective learning, and classroom climate. Communication Education, 56(1), 1-17. Moll, L. C. (1994).Vygotsky and Education: Instructional implications and applications of socio historical psychology. New York: Cambridge University Press. Murray Thomas, R.  (1993). Comparing Theories of Child Development, Third Edition. Belmont, California: Wadsworth Publishing Company. Newman, D., Griffin, P. and Cole, M. (1989).The Construction Zone: Working for Cognitive Change in School. Cambridge, Eng.: Cambridge University Press. Palincsar, Annemarie Sullivan, and Brown, Ann L. (1984).Reciprocal Teaching of Comprehension Fostering and Monitoring Activities.Cognition and Instruction 1 (2):117 - 175. Shayer, M., 2002. Not just Piaget, not just Vygotsky, and certainly not Vygotsky as an alternative to Piaget. In: Shayer, M., ed. Learning intelligence, cognitive acceleration across the curriculum from 5 to 15 years. UK: Open University Press Simister, J., 2004. To think or not to think: a preliminary investigation into the effects of teaching thinking. Improving Schools, Sage Publications, 7 (3), 243-254 Tharp, Roland G., and Gallimore, Ronald. 1988. Rousing Minds to Life: Teaching, Learning and Schooling in Social Context. New York: Cambridge University Press. Turuk, M.C. (2008). THE RELEVANCE AND IMPLICATIONS OF VYGOTSKY’S SOCIOCULTURAL THEORY IN THE SECOND LANGUAGE CLASSROOM.ARECLS, Vol.5, 244-262 Accessible from http://research.ncl.ac.uk/ARECLS/volume_5/turuk_vol5.pdf Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes, ed. James V. Wertsch. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Vygotsky, L.S. (1962). Thought and Language. Cambridge MA: MIT Press. Vygotsky, L. S. (1993). The Collected Works of L. S. Vygotsky, Vols. 1 and 2. New York: Plenum Press. Wertsch, James V. &Sohmer, Richard.(1995). Vygotsky on learning and development.Human Development. (38 ) 332-37. Wertsch, James V., ed. (1984). Culture, Communication and Cognition: Vygotskian Perspectives. New York: Cambridge University Press. Williams, M. & Burden, R. (1997).Psychology for language teachers, a social constructivist approach. UK: Cambridge University Press Wood, D. (1998). How Children Think and Learn: The Social Contexts of Cognitive Development, 2nd edition. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers Woolfolk, A E. (1998). Educational Psychology Seventh Edition. Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Read More