# data[].attributes.body
Vgotsky defined the zone of proximal development (ZPD) as“the distance between the actual developmental level as determined through independent problem solving and the level of potential development as determined through problem solving under adult guidance or in collaboration with more capable peers” (John-Steiner & Mahn, 1996).  In other words, the ZPD is the distance between what a learner can do with help and what a learner can do without help. The help can be from people, adults and children with varying expertise as well as texts, artifacts, media (videos) and equipment intended to support learning (John-Steiner & Mahn, 1996). Vgotsky believed that examining only what a student knows and determining that as intelligence was not as important as examining a student’s ability to problem-solve with and without help. Neo-Vgotskians expanded this concept to help define learning as distributed, interactive, contextual and the result of the learners’ participation in a community of practice (John-Steiner & Mahn, 1996). Educational programs were developed and implemented based off of this concept of learning (John-Steiner & Mahn, 1996). Vgotsky believed that learning and development were different so
teachers must continually lead students beyond their current skill and
knowledge levels and work within the zone of proximal development (Vgotsky and
the Neo-Vgotskians Powerpoint). These theorists did studies in schools examining whether structured dialogues foster a learning community or whether “reciprocal teaching”, where the student and teachers would share turns leading discussions, was effective (John-Steiner & Mahn, 1996). The studies showed that collaborative learning
is effective in fostering a learning community. - Kailey S.

An example of using the ZPD is when a person is learning to
dance. They will do what the music makes them feel but they will seek help from
others by looking around and incorporating certain movements into their own
dance moves. - Kailey S.

Very good explanation and a helpful example, Kailey. This is probably one of Vygotsky's best known concepts and all of you will, no doubt, run into it a great deal as you progress in your classes.

I think it is important to note that the zone of proximal development is a repetitive process that is continually evolving and changing (Bailey, Spring 2015).  As one's learning and development continue to evolve, their ZPD will continue to expand as well.  I have been taught, and now think of, ZPD as circles within circles.  The largest outside circle is what one cannot do, the smaller circle inside of that is what one can do with guidance (the ZPD!), and the smallest circle inside of that is what one can do independently.  I believe that ZPD can be used in teaching, especially when it comes to planning and creating appropriate lessons or activities for students.  I think it is ideal to be teaching within the ZPD or what students can do with support and scaffolding. To go too far beyond that would cause anxiety or frustration while giving students something they can do without challenge would lead to boredom.  -Claire

Vygotsky characterized the zone of proximal development, the distinction between what a learner can manage without helping and what he or she can do with the help, which means, it is difficult for the student to do his/her, but they can be done with the guidance and encouragement from the expertise. Help can be taken from people, adult and children, expertise, book videos, computer environment, and scientific
equipment (John-Steiner & Mahn, 1996).  In other words, the zone of proximal development is an area of learning that happens when a student is helped by a teacher or peer. "learning evoke is a variety of internal development process forms
that have the capacity to work just when the child is connecting with
individuals in his surroundings incorporation with his peer", he believes
that learning and development are different, so teacher should look at what are
they capable at, learning is an essential part and universal aspect of the
process of development which is culturally organized and psychological functioned
(John-Steiner & Mahn, 1996). The concept of ZPD is which define, “the
distance between the actual development levels, as determined students are able to complete a task within a group before others are able to complete it on their own (John-Steiner & Mahn, 1996).

According to the social cultural theorists, the concept of ZPD, emphasizing conceptualizes learning as distributed, interactive, contextual, and participation in community of practice (John-Steiner & Mahn, 1996). -  Sumaiya.

Kailey, Claire, and Sumi, we certainly have a well elaborated understanding of this concept from your very thorough explanations.  I am wondering if in this week, you and/or some of your classmates might want to try to continue this by doing some synthesizing and integrating of some of the other concepts that we have been discussing here.  For example, how do concepts like MKO and LKO connect with the ZPD?  How about scaffolding (Claire mentions this; how exactly does it work in the ZPD)? The role of language? Kailey gave us a great example in dancing; what, very specifically, might the ZPD look like in a classroom? What is the role of formative assessment in the ZPD (and is it an accident that we didn't regularly use the term, "formative assessment" in education until Vygotsky's work began to influence us)?

# data[].attributes.body
Brown, Collins and Duguid explain for us that knowledge is part of the community of practice-- the social organizations like a French class or a sports team or a musical group, or any organization with a common goal, like a group of architects and their assistants working in an architectural firm. The community of practice has specific kinds of knowledge and beliefs and values and ways of using tools--either physical tools or mental tools, like math formulas or knowledge of how to write an argumentative essay. This knowledge is shared by the MKOs (experts) with the LKOs (cognitive apprentices) in the group as they work together to accomplish common goals. The experts in the communities of practice have the most knowledge and the apprentices probably have the least knowledge, but as the apprentices work with the "old timers" or experts, they take on, or appropriate, the ways in which the group works--like whether you have to raise your hand to answer a question in French class or can just speak out or whether the musical group is committed to a lot of community service and pro bono work or not. Thus, knowledge in a vital community is embedded in the activity and ways of doing things in the group. Of course, in a good community of practice that wants to protect the group from "fossilization" of knowledge, the ideas of the apprentices, especially those who have been in the group a while, are welcomed and new ways of thinking and doing evolve. Also, knowledge is not owned by any one person, but rather it is distributed among the group members who must collaborate and share ideas in order for the best work of the group to be done. Knowledge is also distributed among the books, the documents, even in the tools that must be used a particular way, that are used by the group. (NMB)

I agree that knowledge is not owned by any one person, it cannot be. All of the ideas are shared and distributed amongst everyone. But I have a question (not really sure if it can even be answered), has does knowledge begin? -Nicole G.

# data[].attributes.body
More Knowledgeable Others do not necessarily have to be adults:

# data[].attributes.headline
(Vygotsky's contribution to )Formative assessment (Think about ZPD--it might help)

# data[].attributes.subject
(Vygotsky's contribution to )Formative assessment (Think about ZPD--it might help)

# data[].attributes.body
It occurs to me that you may not have encountered the concept of formative assessment yet, so let me answer this one for you: First, formative assessment is the process of monitoring how well students are learning what you are teaching. It might be a simple exit slip at the end of class or a concept map or a set of guiding questions that you ask students to collaboratively or (ideally) individually complete so that both you and they can tell how well they are learning and where they may need extra "minilessons"--either individually, in a small group or as a whole class. Very often formative assessments are not graded (though they could be). The idea of formative assessments gained great popularity when we started to think about teaching as working within the ZPDs of our students. After we guide learning within a student's ZPD with scaffolding and as we start to gradually release responsibility to students for their own learning so that they can do alone what they have been doing with our guidance, it is important to do the monitoring that is formative assessment so that we know if students need more or less scaffolding or whether or not they are ready for us to release even more responsibility to them for their own learning. In other words, formative assessment allows us to see how well students are progressing within their ZPDs and whether they are ready for us to move what is the upper limit of their ZPD further forward to a new goal. (NMB)

I have a question… Formative assessment is everywhere in the classroom and is used a lot to determine what a student has learned or not learned. I know that formative assessments can be used for RtI's. From your statement above, I tie together ZPD with RtI. In order to move up into the upper limit of the students ZPD, the teacher must find out whether or not they have mastered the material already taught or if RtI is needed in order to master the material taught and then they can move up to the upper limit in their ZPD. Can these two be related?

-Nicole G.

Great question, Nicole. RTI is an appropriate connection here. (For those who are unfamiliar with this term, this is a remedial program for students whose test results indicate that they are not learning enough from core instructional practices to place them as meeting a somewhat arbitrary learning goal for their grade level). Ideally, RTI is nothing more than good teaching within a student's ZPD. The "research-based practices" recommended for RTI programs are just the scaffolding that good teachers provide as they work with students within their ZPDs. And yes, you have correctly realized why teachers providing instruction within the RTI program give a lot of formative assessments. They need to know whether the students are making good progress toward the benchmarks set by the standard-based curriculum. The tricky part is determining whether or not the benchmark and the upper limit of the student's ZPD are aligned. If they are not, you are going to find many frustrated teachers and very disengaged/unhappy/angry students.

# data[].attributes.headline
For Week 10 :  Make one addition on this page and then one or more on the wiki

# data[].attributes.subject
For Week 10 :  Make one addition on this page and then one or more on the wiki

# data[].attributes.body
Link to the wiki page: https://nmbaileywiki.wikispaces.com/Sociocultural+Discussion+Page

# data[].attributes.headline
Lave's concept of "Just Plain Folk" (JPF)

# data[].attributes.subject
Lave's concept of "Just Plain Folk" (JPF)

# data[].attributes.body
Lave’s concept of “Just Plain Folks” (JPF) points out the difference between the activities and culture students encounter in school vs outside of school (Brown et al., p. 35). According to Lave, JPF and practitioners learn through enculturation and apprenticeship while students who focus on well defined problems. As we have read about situatedness, the context in which learning takes place is crucial (Bailey, Spring 2015). The context that JPF use to construct meaning is within the problem itself. We see this in the example of the dieter trying to determine ¾ of a ⅔ cup of cottage cheese (Brown et. al., p. 35). The dieter ultimately solved the problem pouring out the cottage cheese in a ⅔ cup and then dividing it on a cutting board. The problem was therefore solved using the physical environment. A student on the other hand is required to remember specific math problem solving operations and solve the problem in their head. In other words,  the JPF solves the problem within a real world context whereas the student has to solve the problem within a conceptual context. -Matt Gadziala

Based on both Lave’s theories and Brown, Collin, and Duguid’s analysis of Just Plain Folk, I conceptualized the text as a persuasive article outlining the determents of education’s influence on the imaginative mind. Brown et al. argue that schools inaccurately prepare students for real-life applications of theories, concepts, and background knowledge. While schools rely on well-defined problems and specific procedural solutions, most often, practitioners and JFPs rely on innovation, as referenced by the Weight Watch example. “The dieter's solution path was extremely expedient and drew on the sort of inventiveness that characterizes the activity of both JPFs and practitioners. It reflected the nature of the activity, the resources available, and the sort of resolution required in a way that problem solving that relies on abstracted knowledge cannot” (Brown, Collins, & Duguid, 1989). As such, Brown et al. are staunch supporters of activity/application-driven instruction as well as instructional opportunities for innovation. In school, I was a huge fan of any teacher who could relate what we were learning about to real-world applications. As a student, I have a hard time trying to understand a concept without first knowing how the new information can be useful outside the classroom. Moreover, I think that it is important for teachers to demonstrate that there is no clear-cut way of solving a problem. Think of all the modern inventions that we rely on today. Where would we be today without computers, electricity, and numerous innovative medical devices? If the people who have invented these objects were forced to apply their problem-solving skills in a specific manner, I would hazard a guess that a good majority of modern inventions would not exist today. It’s important for the education field to realize the significance of imagination and encourage its continual development, as well as critical thinking and analytical skills. (Bridget S.)

Yes, good, Matt and Bridget, especially your discussion of process in learning. One additional point to be made here: The situated cognition theorists are also making the point that when we give students "neat and tidy" problems to solve (for example, math problems that always come out evenly or problems in social studies or in literature that have neat resolutions), we are not giving authentic work to students since it is more likely that we will encounter in real life "ill-defined" problems--things that need to be grappled with and that don't always come out neatly. Thus, they are encouraging teachers to give more authentic work that JPF would do rather than made up "busy work" that is easily graded, but not very typical of what we would find in real life. (NMB)

In Brown, Collins, and Duguid (1989), the concept of “Just plain folk” he point out that, the  breach between learning and use, which is captured by the folk categories "know what" and "know how," may well be a product of the structure and practices of our education system (Brown et al, p. 32). He suggested the most idea in school activity exist in a culture of its own is central to understanding many of difficulties of learning in school. According to Lave's, he analyze difference between activities and culture meaning and purpose what students realize from outside. , Just Plain Folks (JPFs), in their regular exercises, take in the same path as practitioners That is, they follow up on circumstances keeping in mind the end goal to determine rising issues through arranged significance and socially built comprehension.

Lave's work (1989) gives a decent sample of a JPF occupied with authentic activity utilizing the connection as a part of which an issue developed to help discover a determination. The case originates from an investigation of a Weight Watchers class; whose participants were preparing their carefully regulated meals under instruction the dieter's solution path was extremely expedient and drew on the sort of inventiveness that characterizes the activity of both JPFs and practitioners. It reflected the nature of the activity, the resources available, and the sort of resolution required in a way that a problem -solving that relies on abstracted knowledge cannot (Brown et al, p. 32).

And I agree with Bridget, it is not really easy to solve a problem for a teacher, and yes now a days, we dependent on technology. Who have invented all this technology, they drive to apply their critical thinking aptitude in a particular way. Then again, however educating looks to energize critical thinking, it dismisses the vast majority of the imaginative heuristics that students bring to the classroom. As opposed to sending such imagination to great impact, schools have a tendency dismiss it out of hand. (Brown, Collins, and Duguid 1989). (Sumaiya)

Good points here, Sumi, especially your last one which once again shows us another reason why we need to “know our students.”  We need to watch how they solve problems and allow them to find what works as long as it is not mere guessing or interferes with new learning. (NMB)

# data[].attributes.body
Schoenfeld came up with the idea of teaching of problem solving. He "deliberately attempts to generate mathematical practice and to show college students how to think mathematically about the world, how to see the world through mathematicians' eyes, and thus, how to use the mathematician's tools" (Brown et. all, p. 37). Schoenfeld focuses on the strategy of problems rather than the subject matter; he wants to teach the students how to solve situations with problem solving, to look at issues with a mathematical mindset. The class that he taught focuses on the magic square and the mathematical nature of it. The class found out about the mathematical nature of the magic square and they also discovered that other strategies - working forwards from an initial solution, using systematic generating procedures, and having more than one way to solve a problem (p. 38). Schoenfeld points out that he does not tell the students the strategies, they discover them on their own by doing them. The system works by doing and practicing - all done by the students.

The students are the ones doing the work and figuring it all out. They come up with their own problem solving skills in order to complete the task at hand and to learn how to use it in the future to other tasks.

-Nicole G.

Yes, good, Nicole. You stopped just a little too soon: We should add here that in doing this, the students "become part of the culture of problem-solving mathematicians. And, in enculturating through this activity, they acquire some of the culture's tools--a shared vocabulary and the means to discuss reflect upon, evaluate..." etc. (p. 38) So the students become part of the community of practice that is practicing mathematicians. (NMB)

As Nicole and Dr. Bailey previously stated problem-based learning seeks to create a learning culture. It is noted that the class worked collectively through a
number of strategies (Brown et. all, p. 37). It is through this learning culture and problem-based learning that students engage in challenging problems and collaboratively work towards a solution. I took note when the article stated that, “Schoenfeld is consistently careful to emphasize that all such strategies are illustrated in action, developed by the class, not declared by the teacher” (Brown et. all, p. 38). This is purely a student-centered strategy that
allows the students to not only have a say in the learning culture that is developed, but to also have a say in the way problems are solved. While the article applies this to mathematics I feel that problem-based learning can be effective in any content area. The basic priciples of problem-based learning such as acquiring tools like content specific vocabulary can be applied to subjects such as Social Studies, Science, and Language.
-Matt H

I love this model of learning, Matt, though it does take longer than teacher-centered methods which makes it unpopular in this time of standardized testing and canned curricula (I have hopes that the latter is a quickly passing “phase.”) I also want to add that we need to heed Vygotsky’s insistence, that a MKO needs to help structure, prompt, and coach in Problem Based Learning classrooms.  The role of the teacher is great in this methodology—not minimal as some of its critics think. (NMB)

# data[].attributes.headline
LEARNING (according to situated cognition theories)

# data[].attributes.subject
LEARNING (according to situated cognition theories)

# data[].attributes.body
As Dr. Bailey notes, “real learning takes place only when situated in ‘real-world’ activities (e.g., authentic activity; problem-based projects) and usually in collaboration with others” (Bailey, Spring 2015). Learning is most effectively defined through its relation to knowledge. According to the situational cognitive theories knowledge is conceptual (Brown et al., p.33). Knowledge is thought of as tools and people who use tools actively rather than just acquire them, by contrast, build an increasingly rich implicit understanding of the world in which they use the tools and of the tools themselves (Brown et al., p.33). Through this understanding of knowledge the situational cognitive theorists viewed learning as an active and continuous life long process resulting from the learner acting in various situations. Activity, concept, and culture are all interdependent and all three are apart of learning (Brown et al., p.33). Learning is most effectively fostered through enculturation and authentic activities that are deeply informative and engaging (Brown et al., p.34). –Matt H

The article, "Situated Cognition and the Culture of Learning" explains the idea of situated knowledge and learning which is reminiscent of Vygotsky and his theory of learning as a social act. The idea, learning and enculturation is one that resonated with me. Throughout my experience as a student and professional, I have "enculturated" myself in order to succeed to the best of my ability. "[Enculturation is] what people do in learning to speak, read, and write, or becoming school chidlren, office workers, researchers, and so on, from an early age" (Brown, Collins and Duguid, pg. 34). When learning a new language in high school, I participated in my school's exchange program and visited Spain for two weeks. During this trip, each student individually stayed with a host family who spoke little to no English. It was terrifying, yet exhilarating. Towards the end of those two weeks, I swear I was dreaming in Spanish. This is an example of "in situ" which is defined as having the opportunity to observe behaviors of a culture and starting to imitate its jargon, behavior, and "act in accordance with its norms" (pg. 34). Full immersion, especially when tackling a new language, is the best way to learn. I found this to be true when I accepted my first job post graduation. The position was characterized as "learn as you go". I spent portions of the day observing team members, and then had the opportunity to apply what I had just learned on my own, individual project. Learning conceptually is imperative to achieving comprehension and meaningful learning. It allows the student to take what they have learned and apply it to the "real world" which is the purpose of schooling, to develop a person's ability to perform and contribute in a democratic society. Enculturation is an authentic way of learning something. It relates to the idea that situated learning is similar to that of using a tool. You may not know how to use it the first time, but you learn by doing and the next time you encounter this particular tool, it will be easy for you to use it again, and perhaps you will find a new way of using it. A new concept will grow each time it is revisited because of new situations in which it is presented, the learner could interpret it a different way, or they have new personal knowledge to add to their existing knowledge.
While reading this article, I thought about college Math majors. They are so inherently smart to be able to dedicate their studies to such a difficult concept and yet, they generally graduate and end up in a position where they are solely using math (correct me if I'm wrong). For example, becoming a professor or a math teacher. It's different than if a student were to graduate with a Business degree or an International Studies degree. With something as broad as that, they could have endless opportunities for a job (not to say that a Business or IS degree is better than a Math degree!) I am having trouble communicating what I am trying to say... perhaps NMB could provoke thought on this idea? - Caroline Pierce
Caroline, your example of your "learn as you go" employment position appears to be an excellent example of situated learning. You talk about learning to use tools by using them--hopefully by watching first and then using them under someone's supervision --and then as you gain more expertise, on your own. The thing I would like to add to what you say and also to what Matt says above you is not to forget that when we appropriate and internalize ways of using tools and doing tasks, we are also most likely appropriating and internalizing values, beliefs, and ways of being as well. Perhaps someone can pick this up here, and talk about another example of "learning by doing" in which a person becomes transformed in the learning process? Also, instead of thinking about how math majors take what they learn and use it in the real world--as you mention above--I wonder if you or someone else could instead think of "real world" applications of math through which people could learn math as they perform the work of mathematicians? That would be what situated cognition theorists would be interested in knowing. Anyone? (NMB)

Brown et al.'s arguments regarding education bring up several related, yet modern issues regarding the importance of earning a degree. There is general push for college students to enter a degree that will ultimately earn them a position upon graduation, hence a large number of students focus on education, business, and medicine. However, upon graduation, many students are finding it difficult to land an entry-level job. If I am correctly interpreting what Caroline stated, when is it better to have a more well-rounded, dabble in a little bit of everything education versus a highly specialized, field-specific degree? At what point in time does the cost of an advanced education outweigh the chances of employment and related job benefits? In addition, what is the point in spending the money to earn a generalized degree when many employers (at least at the entry level) incorporate training programs “to teach you everything you need to know about the job”? (Bridget S.)
Yes Bridget, that is basically what I was trying to say. I was trying to tie it in to the reading but I do not think I was successful! - Caroline Pierce

From Brown et. al. regarding learning, I got that learning is heavily dependent on context. Real learning seems to take place, as Matt H. said, in a more real world context. We can see this from the example where the dieter uses cutting board to solve a problem instead of in his head (Brown et. al. p. 35). Another example is that at Cornell University they have a hotel and restaurant that is run by students at the hotel school. Instead of learning in the classroom, students are learning about how a hotel runs by running the hotel themselves. Students in turn learn about the culture of running a hotel. That culture or knowledge specific to the situation is what Vygotsky equates to tools. Much like how a chef uses a rolling pin to cook or a mechanic uses a wrench, certain tools are uses for certain jobs. Excellent examples here, Bridget. This is what the situated cognition theorists meant when they talk about cognitive apprenticeship and distributed knowledge that is embedded in the people, the tools and the activities of the community of practice. (NMB)

To add to Caroline's comment, while some majors may seem very specialized, I think the knowledge or culture of that major could be applicable to other areas. For instance, studying history could be very specialized if the focus is just on history. People with history majors however sometimes go on to occupations not directly related to history. Studying history teaches the importance of checking sources, investigating, analyzing, and writing which could be useful in other professions aside from historian. -Matt Gadziala

Good examples of how knowledge gets distributed beyond the community of practice where it originated, Matt G. So one may appropriate the knowledge and internalize understandings from one community of practice and take it to another community of practice, right? This is, no doubt, one way that communities of practice take on different characteristics, change and grow. (NMB)

The best way to learn is hands-on; drive right on into to what you want to learn and be fully immersed in it. In a lot of my classes everything is "hands-on" learning; this is what is taught to me to teach in my classroom some day. I fully agree with it. I am in the classroom everyday and I see first hand how when kids are doing hands-on activities how they are more engaged and how they actually remember the information that was being taught. This can be achieved by enculturation and authentic activities (Brown et al, p. 33-34).

To add onto Matt's comment in return to Caroline's, I agree that some majors are extremely specialized, but we need these specialized majors in order to 'work' in the world. We need people who have more knowledge than others areas (like math) who can come and distribute their knowledge to others. -Nicole G.

# data[].attributes.body
Here, I'm only defining authentic activity and touching on why it is important in relation to learning-through-enculturation (there's still a lot to say).

In Brown, Collins, and Duguid (1989), the concept of authenticity is absolutely central to the sociocultural theory of cognition and learning that is advanced by the authors. Specifically, their ideas hinge on the "distinction between authentic and school activity" (Brown et al., p. 34).

Brown et al. (1989) define the term "authentic activity" (p. 34) as "the ordinary practices of the culture" (p. 34). This definition, however, is deceptively simple, especially when thinking about authentic activity in the field of education. Indeed, Brown et al. ask for us to understand "academic disciplines … as communities or cultures" (Brown et al., 1989, p. 33). As such, when Brown et al. talk about "the ordinary practices of the culture" (Brown et al., 1989, p. 34), I think they are referring to ordinary practices as they have been defined -- as they have been "socially constructed through negotiations among present and past members" (Brown et al., 1989, p. 34) -- within a particular discipline, domain, or content-area. Authentic activity, then, refers to activities which are "coherent, meaningful, and purposeful" (Brown et al., 1989, p. 34) within a given domain. Or, in simpler terms, authentic activities in the classroom are ones which would be considered ordinary, conventional, or standard practice within a given domain.

Authentic activity is important, in the eyes of Brown et al. (1989), insofar as it relates to another of their ideas, that "learning is … a process of enculturation" (p. 33). In order to learn math, for instance, the student must enculturate (so to speak) into the culture of math: that is, they must come to think and act like mathematicians, they must "adopt the behaviour and belief systems" (Brown et al., 1989, p. 33) which are part of the culture of math. Authentic activity, then, can be seen as being at the very root of the learning-through-enculturation process: authentic activities ask students to think and act according to the ordinary practices of math (or any other culture); to think and act in accordance with mathematicians is indicative of enculturation into the culture of math; and enculturation into the culture of math is the driving-force behind learning math. It is for this reason, I think, that Brown et al. explicitly state that "authentic activity (is) a central component of learning" (Brown et al., 1989, p. 37).

-- Andrew

This is a really important point, Andrew, because it has influenced greatly the ways in which teachers (at least those subscribing to best practices) are now teaching in the various disciplines. Thus, you will probably learn in your methods classes that no matter what subject we teach, we should decide what and how to teach by referring to the ways in which those in our field (e.g., mathematicians, historians, etc.) think, act, talk, write, value, view the world, etc. I wonder if you or any of your classmates would like to add here examples of what this might mean for the specific ways in which particular subjects could (should?) be taught? (NMB)

According toBrown, Collins, and Duguid (1989), authentic activities are seen as being critically important to the construction of knowledge. Authenticities are most defined as the ordinary practices of the culture (Brown et al, p. 32). Authenticity is field of education; Classroom activity very much takes place within the culture of schools, although it is attributed to the culture of readers, writers, mathematicians, historians, economists, geographers, English, or music, which is overshadowed by the culture of schools.  Students are not immersed in a society; they are subjected to hybrid activities which restrict their chances to gain from the connection of real action. Activities are authentic, if they are simply the ordinary practices of the culture.  When authentic activities are transferred to the classroom, their context is inevitably transmuted; they become classroom tasks and part of the school culture.

Authentic activity is a pedagogical methodology that permits students to investigate, examine, and definitively build ideas and connections in settings that include genuine issues and project that are relevant to the learner (Brown, Collins, and Duguid, 1989).Students must be able to realize that their achievements stretch beyond the walls of the classroom.  They bring to the classroom experiences, knowledge, beliefs, and curiosities and authentic learning provides a means of bridging those elements with classroom learning.  Students no longer simply learn rote facts in abstract or artificial situations, but they experience and use information in ways that are grounded in reality (Brown, Collins, and Duguid, 1989). (Sumaiya)

Good, Sumi. So whenever possible, teachers should try to bring into the classroom real problems and real issues--like getting students to write letters to the editor after studying an issue that affects their community, perhaps? Thus, they learn to read closely for details, analyze an issue (perhaps a math lesson could even be tied in here as well as a history lesson?), write persuasively, etc.--all while doing a real world task. (NMB)

Hi Dr. Bailey, I wasn't sure if I should respond to your question here in Padlet or on our Wiki page -- if it needs to be moved, let me know and I'll move this to the Wiki. Having come from a history background, I can say with some confidence that what Historians do bears little resemblance to what students do in elementary- and secondary-level History classes. In order to make early History instruction more “authentic” (Brown et al., p. 34), I would argue that two things in particular need doing: on one hand, early instruction in History needs to acknowledge the subjective nature of the discipline; and on the other hand, elementary and high-school History teachers must place greater emphasis on the use of primary sources.

THIS IS EXACTLY THE THINKING THAT IS BEHIND THE U.S. COMMON CORE STANDARDS, ANDREW. IF YOU LOOK AT THE STANDARDS, YOU WILL A GREAT DEAL OF EMPHASIS UPON PRIMARY SOURCES. CONTRARY TO WHAT MANY THINK, THESE STANDARDS WERE, IN MANY PLACES, CREATED WITH ATTENTION TO CURRENT THEORY. (NMB)

First of all, History at the elementary and (to a lesser extent) secondary levels tends to approach the discipline as if it is a collection of facts about the past – in other words, at the early academic levels, History is treated as a discipline which can be known objectively. Elementary and secondary level History teachers might, for example, teach their students that World War 2 happened for a handful of concrete reasons (that is, they teach students that World War 2 had objective causes which can be known with certainty). In post-secondary and professional History, however, it is widely recognized that the past cannot be known objectively. Today, the majority of Historians acknowledge that they are not in the business of knowing what did happen in the past – rather, Historians are story-tellers about the past, individuals who interpret the past and suggest what might have happened. And so while the elementary and secondary level History student might learn the “one true” account of why World War 2 happened, professional Historians recognize that there are very many possible explanations for why World War 2 might have happened. Early education in History, then, can be made more authentic by teaching students that there are always multiple versions of what happened in the past, and that none of them is absolutely true or correct. With regards to World War 2, for example, they must be taught that different Historians offer different accounts of why the war occurred, and that none of them should be taken as the one true explanation.

YES, AND TO TAKE THIS JUST A BIT FURTHER, WE SHOULD TEACH CHILDREN FROM A YOUNG AGE AND ADOLESCENTS TO BE HISTORIANS--TO TELL THEIR OWN STORIES AND SEE HOW THEY ARE THE SAME AND DIFFERENT TOLD BY OTHERS. THIS IS HOW THEY WILL UNDERSTAND THE "WHAT" AND THE "WHY" OF THE STUDY OF HISTORY. (NMB) Next, early History education occurs primarily through secondary sources. Students at the elementary and secondary levels tend to learn history through textbooks and lectures. So, for instance, the early History student would learn about World War 2 by reading a textbook (a secondary source) about World War 2. Although secondary sources are important to professional Historians, it is the primary source that is at the heart of the discipline. The principle work of professional Historians is to interpret primary sources and use them as the basis for telling stories about the past. The professional Historian does not learn about World War 2 by reading secondary sources – rather, they analyze hundreds of primary sources (diary entries, speeches, contemporary books and articles, etc.) in order to offer interpretations of the war. As such, early History instruction can be made more authentic by having students engage more with primary sources than with secondary sources. Primary sources, after all, are the real bread and butter of professional History. Really, this is only scratching the surface, as there exists a massive gulf between early History instruction and professional History. For example, a big part of what Historians do is criticize and review each other’s work, a practice which I never experienced at the early levels of education. Moreover, early History instruction is especially concerned with political, military, and social approaches to History, while professional History has gravitated towards cultural history (an approach to History which, for the most part, I never encountered until the University level). Indeed, there is much to be done if elementary and secondary History education is to become more authentic.
-- Andrew

YES, ALL GOOD POINTS, ANDREW. YOU WILL HAVE FAR LESS DIFFICULTY THAN SOME IN ALIGNING WITH THE CCSS WHEN CREATING YOUR LESSONS. EVEN MORE IMPORTANT, YOU WILL BE TRULY TEACHING DISCIPLINARY LITERACY WITH ITS EMPHASIS UPON AUTHENTICITY, AND I WOULD VENTURE TO SAY THAT MANY OF YOUR STUDENTS WILL FIND IT AS FASCINATING AS YOU DO. (NMB)

Andrew made a great post about what authenticity is.  I especially like the points presented about “enculturation” and how the students must envision themselves as an expert in that subject area, so to speak. In other words, they shouldn’t just go through the motions, but really jump in with two feet and place themselves in the middle of the culture of the subject by adopting the appropriate behaviours and belief systems.

I AM SO GLAD TO SEE THE EMPHASIS UPON NOT ONLY ACTIVITY BUT ALSO BELIEFS (AND VALUES) HERE, KAILEY. THIS IS IMPORTANT FOR AS WE LIVE AND WORK WITH OTHERS IN THE COMMUNITIES OF PRACTICE THAT WE JOIN AND BECOME ENCULTURATED INTO, WE TAKE ON (APPROPRIATE AND INTERNALIZE) THEIR WAYS OF THINKING AND VALUING AND BELIEVING. THUS AS YOU TAKE COURSES IN TEACHER ED (JOIN THIS COMMUNITY OF PRACTICE) YOU WILL TAKE ON VALUES AND BELIEFS ABOUT STUDENTS, CURRICULUM, WHAT KNOWLEDGE IS, ETC. (NMB)

The problem that Brown et al. identify is how school is not authentic and how it is “not fully productive of useful learning” (Brown et al. 1989. p34). Brown et al. place a large emphasis on the reality that school activity tends to be hybrid and not entirely authentic. This means that it is “implicitly framed by one culture but explicitly attributed to another (Brown et al. 1989. p34). In other words, the activities within the school are more inferior and not as effective and are replacing those activities that could allow the students to be more productive. If there is no authenticity within school activities and within the classroom, then the success that a student achieves within a subject is only valuable within that subject and is not applicable to situations outside of the child’s education. As Brown et al. explain, “success within this culture often has little bearing on performance elsewhere (Brown et al. 1989. p34). Before reading Brown et al.’s ideas in this article, I never viewed the word “authenticity” the way I do now. I feel it has a broader meaning to me now, especially in the way of education and how we should view the student’s attitudes on learning.

- Kailey S.

I'M SO GLAD TO HEAR ABOUT THIS "AHA" MOMENT, KAILEY. GOOD REFLECTION HERE. (NMB)

# data[].attributes.body
There’s a lot to say about this topic, so I will keep it short, that way it allows some of you to comment and elaborate some more.

Essentially, cognitive apprenticeship “attempts to promote learning within the nexus of activity, tool, and culture” (Brown, Collins, & Duguid, 1989, p.40). Basically, it assumes that people learn from one another through observation, modeling, and imitation. Thinking and reflection have to be done “out loud.” The student (or apprentice) observes the processes by which a teacher (or expert) thinks and practices her/his skill. By doing so, it allows students (or apprentices) to learn more on their own. The cognitive side of it highlights that techniques reach beyond the physical skills to cognitive skills that are associated with traditional schooling. Medical and law students have no doubt learned by completing an apprenticeship, but they have a lot of cognitive content.

Brown et al. (1989) give two really good examples about learning through cognitive apprenticeship (someone can elaborate on these examples if they want). Both teachers use different approaches, but both of their approaches promote characteristics of cognitive apprenticeship. For instance, in mathematics, we’ve all had to compute problems, and most of the time they were straight out of a textbook. At least, that’s how it was for me. I was never thrown into a real-world situation (in the classroom). Brown et al. (1989) explain that most pre-graduate students don’t see their professors engage in mathematical practice, but they are expected to understand that practice. Students should actively take part in a lesson through practice. Looking at mathematics again, students, along with their teacher, should: talk about the subject, explain concepts, collaborate with one another, and enjoy the personality interactions. In real life, mathematicians collaborate – they share ideas, experiences, etc. So by implicating this culture into the classroom, it feels more natural; and it can be fun. Students can experience the world of mathematics in a different, a way that might make more sense. “Cognitive apprenticeship methods try to enculturate students into authentic practices through activity and social interaction” (Brown et al.,1989, p.37).

-Amanda B.

You got us started really well here, Amanda, with both an extended definition and excellent example from the field of math. I wonder if your classmates can continue, as you have invited them to do, by perhaps 1. adding even more to your definition, 2. drawing some comparisons to Vygotsky's ideas and/or 3. giving more specific examples or nonexamples? (NMB)

I would like to add to Amanda's definition of cognitive apprenticeship by incorporating that "cognitive apprenticeship is a model of instruction that works to make thinking visible" (Collins, Brown, & Holum, 1991, p. 1). Collins et. al (1991) explain that learners in traditional apprenticeship methods are able to see the processes of work, it is observable, for example piecing together a garment in sewing , cabinet making the learning of a tangible activity (Collins et al., 1991). In cognitive apprenticeship, the authors state that the" teacher's thinking must be made visible to students and also the student's thinking must be made visible to the teacher" by exposing these processes in the open " students can observe, enact, and practice ...with the help from the teacher and from other students" (Collins et al., 1991, p. 3). The authors of this article even though they compare the process of learning by the traditional apprenticeship method to that of cognitive apprenticeship makes the point very clear that cognitive apprenticeship involves cognitive and meta-cognitive thinking ( Collins et al., 1991). This means that students have to be involved in thinking and also reflect on their thinking. These skills are modeled at first by teachers in strategies like "think a louds" where teachers may verbally talk through the strategies used to understand what is being read, teachers then scaffold and coach students and then through a process of collaboration and social interaction, "ideas are exchanged and modified and belief systems developed and appropriated through conversation and narratives (Brown, Collins, & Duguid, 1989, p.40). Students in this process learn the skills necessary to transfer what they learn in authentic activities, the authors present that "the challenge is to present a range of tasks, varying from systematic to diverse, and to encourage students to reflect on and articulate the elements that are common across tasks" ( Collins et al., 1991, p. 3). The implication is that students should be able to apply these cognitive and metacognitive skills in the school environment and within the real world environment. Also when they are faced with new problems should be able to use these skills developed to solve them.

I also think that cognitive apprenticeship is somewhat to related to Piaget's theory that deals with the stages of cognitive development, in this theory we see where students in certain developmental stages have the ability to learn abstract concepts when teachers use concrete objects, I would say in cognitive apprenticeship teachers model for students how to use abstract concepts in concrete authentic activities; real world applications that students may see the relevance or usefulness of the application. I think for all humans we have the ability to continuously learn but especially when we see the practicality or visible useful application for the information that we have learned. This translates for students the information that is learned in school they should see the practicality and usefulness in their day to day lives also the information that is learned outside of the school environment should also be useful within the school environment.

Tricia L.

Excellent, important points here, Tricia for helping us all to know how to apply this theoretical knowledge that we are reading. I especially like the connection to Piaget (NMB).

Another such non example that I think frequents education quite often can be found within the field of writing. Very often students are simply taught grammar rules, conventions, and what the writing process entails, given a prompt, and expected to write. In my own experience, I would fall into the 5 paragraph trap and simply churn out paper after paper. As a student, I never saw any of my teachers actually write something akin to what they were asking me to do. How often to teachers get up in front of their students and actually write something for them? Like the pre-graduate students Brown, Collins, and Duguid (1989) describe, students rarely actually see the process of writing take place. They never see their teacher brainstorming, planning, writing, and revising a piece of work; they never see anyone else struggle to write a well developed and thought out composition. Too often classrooms are places of an "I say, you do" mentality rather than the "I do, we do, you do" one encompassed in apprenticeships. -Claire

Excellent nonexample and example, Claire, to help us to better understand how a teacher can practically apply the concept of "authenticity." In your example, then, the teacher is the expert and by working together with her/him, students can become enculturated into the ways in which writers practice their craft and the values that they internalize as they do. (NMB)

# data[].attributes.body
According to the theory of situated learning, an expert is a more knowledgeable member of the community (Situated learning powerpoint). This expert can guide the learner through his learning trajectory by means of different types of participation within a community of practice (Situated learning powerpoint).

In the article Cognitive Apprenticeship: Making Thinking Visible by Collins, Brown and Holum, the authors describe what is essential to expert practice: cognitive strategies which "integrate skills and knowledge in order to accomplish meaningful tasks." (p. 2) By "expertise" is meant "the practice of solving problems and carrying out tasks in a domain." (p. 16)

An expert is found in the traditional apprentice-master relationship: the expert (master) shows the apprentice how to perform a task; observes the apprentice as he does parts of the task; and gradually lets the apprentice do more and more of the task until he can perform the entire task on his own. (p. 2) Experts are also found in the cognitive apprentice-master relationship: for example, to improve one's active reading or listening skills, a student can observe the (manifested) thought processes the expert (master) employs in reading or listening, and imitate these skills with the expert's guidance. (p. 3) According to the authors, some type of apprenticeship is necessary in order to achieve expertise in a domain. (p. 3)

In the reciprocal teaching reading task described in the article, the teacher "models expert strategies" that the students will then employ in turn. (p. 6) In reciprocal teaching, the students take on the roles of both producer and critic, which allows them to develop their metacognitive skills. This produces expertise in learners, since the knowledge they gain is thus made explicit and, "freed from its contextual binding", can be applied in other contexts. (p. 6) Overt modeling of expert processes can also be done for other practices, such as writing or mathematical problem-solving. (pp 6-11) This modeling has the benefit of showing learners that experts' processes are not necessarily "smooth and easy" (p. 8); that experts also experience difficulties in their work, which is then seen as normal rather than a sign that one is bad at an activity. (p. 11)

Finally, a teacher is not always the "expert" in the classroom. (p. 17) Students should be encouraged to become experts themselves, and to challenge the results experts have come up with. (p. 17)
--Parissa
Yes, good job here, Parissa. So if we were looking at a community of practice using a model of circles of ever increasing size, the expert would be sitting in the middle and through legitimate peripheral participation, apprentices would make their way slowly into that middle circle (See my description of Legitimate Peripheral Participation, below). I especially like your last point. We teachers should be always on the lookout for the expertise our students bring with them to our classrooms and give them a chance to teach as the MKO. (NMB)

# data[].attributes.body
Legitimate peripheral participation is merely the trajectory or path that an individual (cognitive apprentice) takes when moving through the community of practice, acquiring the concepts and other knowledge as well as the values, beliefs, ways of doing and being that makes him/her a member of the community and--eventually--one of the experts of the community. For example, you are all right now on the beginning of the trajectory to becoming licensed teachers (joining a community of practice that is professional teaching). When you got accepted to our program, you were "legitimately" allowed to take classes at Canisius (thus, working with experts, conversing with them and other apprentices on a wiki or a padlet or on D2L or in a classroom). Maybe you were even allowed to observe in some public school classrooms, talking to and observing the experts who are the teachers in those classrooms. You will take more classes and do more hours in the field where you will be given responsibility for, perhaps, tutoring one or two students or teaching one lesson under the supervision of experts. In your pre-student teaching you will work closely with a cooperating teacher in a school and with your professor from Canisius (more experts who will model, give feedback etc.). As you acquire more expertise, you will student teach observed by and coached by experts (notice the gradual release of responsibility in this model). You will get your license which will allow you to continue to work with mentors, this time as you enter another community of practice which is the school that employs you. Eventually, you will become the expert who supervises, mentors, coaches, etc. (NMB)

# data[].attributes.headline
Tools of the Mind (from the perspective of Vygotsky, Bruner, and/or situated cognition

# data[].attributes.subject
Tools of the Mind (from the perspective of Vygotsky, Bruner, and/or situated cognition

# data[].attributes.body
Tools of the mind are the processes and tools that we use to solve problems, do our work, get something accomplished, etc. For example, story structure, mathematical equations, heuristics for solving a problem, analytical thinking (like comparing/contrasting or giving examples), organizing in a hierarchical pattern (like big to small or major to minor), and spatial mapping are all tools of the mind. (NMB)

Dr. Bailey I really appreciate your practical examples used to explain Tools of the Mind, I can see the concept of internalization in effect here as well. John-Steiner and Mahn (1996) viewed" internalization as an individual and a social process" (p.197). From your examples, I view these as self controlled or individual thinking at a high level where we can decide what tools we may need to solve any problems that we may face, we have these tools in our mental tool kits, to use appropriately as we see necessary. These authors also state internalization "involves sustained social and individual endeavors...leads to the creation of new knowledge (John-Steiner & Mahn, 1996, p. 197). We have to constantly challenge our students to apply, evaluate and synthesize the information that they encounter. ( Tricia L)

Good job here, Tricia in seeing that internalization is the development of thinking as well as "new knowledge" about how to be. And yes, as we appropriate tool use, we are able to internalize efficient thinking processes as you point out. Like you, James Gee talks about cultural knowledge as "tool kits" that are ways of thinking, doing and being. Acquiring these tool kits is exactly what Vygotsky meant when he was talking about internalization and transformation. That is, as we internalize we become somebody and something new (a story teller, a comedian, a voter, a "good" student, etc.).

I really like how Tricia used the term 'mental tool kits'. That is exactly what it is, we have mental tool kits with all these tools and have to use them appropriately. As a teacher, we have to teach the students which tools to use and when to use them. We even have to figure out ourselves which tools are needed and when. -Nicole G.

# data[].attributes.headline
(from the socioculturalists) Lifelong learning

# data[].attributes.subject
(from the socioculturalists) Lifelong learning

# data[].attributes.body
Instructor's note: While lifelong learning is not a new concept, it has become a popular phenomenon as Vygotsky's ideas have permeated our culture. Why do you think that is? In other words, can you connect any of Vygotsky's ideas with this one? Okay, since no one picked this up for Week 2, let me provide information that might help some of you pick this up for Week 3 of our Sociocultural conversations here: It might help to consider Vygotsky's emphasis upon the role of the ZPD in learning (where does the ZPD end?) (NMB)

As previously noted situational cognitive theorists view learning as a lifelong process of acting out situations (Brown et al., p.33). Dr. Bailey pointed out that in regards to the socioculturalists, they have a different take on learning especially in relation
to Vygotsky and his idea of the Zone of Proximal Development. Vgotsky defined
the Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) as“the distance between the actual developmental level as determined through independent problem solving and the level of potential development as determined through problem solving under adult guidance or in collaboration with more capable peers” (John-Steiner & Mahn, p.198).  The socioculturists expand on Vygotsky’s definition by including adults and children with various levels of expertice, but it can also include artifacts such as books and scientific equipment (John-Steiner & Mahn, p.198) Vygotsky’s traditional definition focused soley on children and their growth under the guidence of adults. This revamped definition includes adults within the Zone of Proximal Development essentially definining people as lifelong learners who are continuously developing. –Matt H

You got us off to a good start on an answer to my question, Matt. Most especially, you have focused on the ZPD as the basis of your answer (an excellent place to look for the answer). I hope you or someone else will add more here to even more precisely explain why, after Vygotsky gave us a model of the ZPD, we have realized that learning is a lifelong process?

# data[].attributes.headline
Principles/Concepts from Bruner and their educational implications

# data[].attributes.subject
Principles/Concepts from Bruner and their educational implications

# data[].attributes.body
edit: I think I interpreted this question differently than what may have been intended. Sorry about that!

In Jones and Reeves' (2006) article on Bruner's influence on the field of education, they identify four of Bruner's theories as having implications with regards toon matters of curriculum and pedagogy: "The Spiral Curriculum" (p. 59); "Discovery Learning" (p. 59); Bruner's ideas with regards to "Modes of Representation and the Importance of Learner Analysis" (p. 59); and his inclination towards "cultural psychology" (p. 60).

Bruner's theory of a "spiral curriculum" (Jones & Reeves, 2006, p. 59) is one that has influenced the field of education "for fifty years" (p. 59). In this theory, Bruner offers a vision for the way curriculum instruction should be sequenced. Specifically, it argues that "foundational concepts and principles should be taught first followed by specific cases" (Jones & Reeves, 2006, p. 59) -- in other words, basics must be taught first, and then more specific information can be laid on top of that foundation. Bruner supposed that this sequence of instruction "would enable learners to clarify connections between concepts encountered earlier and later" (Jones & Reeves, 2006, p. 59), especially when basic knowledge was continually and constantly revisited. Indeed, Bruner's spiral curriculum continues to "(influence) instructional design at the curriculum, module, and lesson levels for both face-to-face and online instruction" (Jones & Reeves, 2006, p. 59).

Next, Bruner is the individual behind the concept of "discovery learning" (Jones & Reeves, 2006, p. 59), an idea which still has currency within education today, and one which has come up (without reference to Bruner) in a number of this semester's readings and discussions. In discovery learning, students learn through doing and participating, and, through this style of learning, students "ascertain regularities and relationships in the environment and achieve learning that they are more likely to retain, having 'discovered' it themselves" (Jones & Reeves, 2006, p. 59). Jones & Reeves (2006) argue that Bruner's idea of discovery learning has been misunderstood and distorted over time. Indeed, while his ideas envisioned discovery learning as "a carefully planned (and) structured" (Jones & Reeves, 2006, p. 59) endeavour, many practitioners of discovery learning have mistakenly taken Bruner's theory as a call for an unstructured and entirely-'open' classroom. These misunderstandings are said to have provoked a backlash and a return to traditional methods of teaching. Nonetheless, discovery learning is far from extinct -- indeed, "designers of interactive learning environments continue to see its value" (Jones & Reeves, 2006, p. 59).

Finally, Jones and Reeves (2006) attribute to Bruner the theory "that humans understand and represent the world" (p. 59) through multiple means. More specifically, there are three ways in which humans understand and represent the world: "enactively (via motor responses), iconicly (via percepts and images), and symbolically (via symbol systems such as language" (Jones & Reeves, 2006, p. 59). As such, Bruner's theory suggests that learning can be facilitated by carefully observing the student, determining the means by which the student learns best (that is, their "dominant modes of representation" [Jones & Reeves, 2006, p. 59]), and providing instruction through that means. The teacher who recognizes the importance of multiple means of representation, then, will understand that "graphics, video, sound, text, and interactions are equally important" (Jones & Reeves, 2006, p. 59) tools for instruction. As I noted in the Padlet-square in which we discuss modes of representation, I feel this particular aspect of Bruner's theory has had major influence on the UDL framework (which calls for instruction through multiple means of representation).

Finally, Bruner's theories recognize the importance of culture, and, as such, they are at the basis of many of today's sociocultural constructivist educational practices. Although Bruner began his work as a cognitivist, Jones & Reeves (2006) claim that he became disenfranchised with the cognitive perspective for two reasons: because the cognitive paradigm privileged a computational understanding of learning over the all-important concept of meaning-making; and that it disregarded the matter of culture. Indeed, Bruner was very concerned with culture, and he believed that the goal of education was "to teach and develop culture-creation skills such as discovery, invention, negotiation, and sharing" (Jones & Reeves, 2006, p. 60). Furthermore, Bruner's theory was culturally relative. That is, he recognized that "different cultures emphasize the use of certain tools or concepts over others" (Jones & Reeves, 2006, p. 60), and so what is learned within a given culture will depend on the parameters of that culture. Jones & Reeves write that these ideas have inspired a number of ideas in education today, ranging from the tendency to encourage "collaboration among students to produce and share representations of their understandings of the world" (p. 60), to more specific practices such as "computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL)" (p. 60).

-- Andrew

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In the section above, I used the Jones & Reeves (2006) text to identify and describe most influential theories, and I also discussed some ways they are used in today's field of education. In this new section, I'd just like to make some remarks about certain things that interested me as I was writing about the Jones & Reeves piece.

First of all, I was struck by the fact that Jones & Reeves (2006) attribute the "spiral curriculum" (p. 59) to Bruner. I understand that he likely coined the term 'spiral curriculum', and I can readily accept the fact that he was perhaps the first to explain and elaborate on this method of sequencing a curriculum. I recognize that my thinking could be coloured by the fact that the ideas associated with spiral curriculums have become orthodox, but still, I cannot help but wonder if a 'foundations-first' approach to education wasn't in place long before Bruner? That is, can it possibly be true that, until Bruner, instruction did not start by addressing the basics of a content-area? And, if Bruner truly was the originator of these ideas, then what exactly was the previous approach to curriculum sequencing?

The next thing I wanted to mention was with regards to "discovery learning" (Jones & Reeves, 2006, p. 59). As I mentioned in my description of this theory, Bruner felt that discovery learning needed to be a carefully guided and highly structured. Interestingly, in a previous week's discussion of Daniel Willingham's (Willingham, 2006) work, I actually criticized Willingham precisely on the basis that he advocated for a very tightly-structured mode of discovery learning. I suppose I owe Willingham (wherever he is) an apology -- as it turns out, he was simply keeping true to the spirit and intention of Bruner's theory!

Finally (and this is where things get very interesting, in my opinion), I wanted to say some words about Jones & Reeve's (2006) notion that discovery learning has been "erroneously translated" (p. 59) and "(misinterpreted)" (p. 59). Given the fact that Bruner was so interested in sociocultural "meaning-making" (Jones & Reeves, 2006, p. 60), is it even possible that 'erroneous translation' and 'misinterpretation' can exist? Is it not more in line with the spirit of Bruner to suggest that those who supposedly 'misinterpreted' his ideas simply made different meaning out of his words? Here, I'm approaching an idea that I attribute to Roland Barthes ("Death of the Author," 1967) and Michel Foucault ("What is an Author," 1969): specifically, these two pieces suggest that the meaning of a text is not determined by the author, but by the readers. If we follow that train of thought, I do not think Jones & Reeve's (who are interested in 'meaning-making') are justified in claiming that Bruner was misinterpreted -- rather, I think a different meaning of Bruner emerged (*a different meaning was made* of Bruner) amongst a certain set of teachers.

Why is the above so interesting to me? Ultimately, I think it suggests that Vygotsky and the Vygotskians are *not* the paradigm that will dominate our careers (Bailey, 2015). I feel that this contradiction -- paying lip-service to 'meaning-making', on one hand, and clinging to the belief that Brunel's theories are fixed, discrete, and definable, on the other hand -- belies the fact that the Vygotskians have not yet fully grappled with postmodernism. And, if that is the case, I think it is only a matter of time before a new, postmodern theory of education emerges. When that happens, I expect that postmodernism will change everything (as it has done to every other field which has allowed it entry). But that, I think, goes beyond our present discussion... unless someone wants to talk about it!

-- Andrew

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------As always, you are very thoughtful and very thorough, Andrew. I want to add just a little history to offer another interpretation of Jones and Reeve--and Willingham, for that matter (As Vygotsky would say, historical thinking is important in meaning making). When I read the claim of Jones and Reeve that Bruner has been "misinterpreted" what I think about is the "free-for-all" that resulted in some classrooms, particularly in the late 1980s and 1990s, where teachers were claiming to be "constructivists" and asking their students to do "discovery learning." What happened (and, sadly, still does in some places--though I suspect that the move toward greater accountability by teachers is putting an end to this) is that teachers who did not really know much about constructivist theories merely set their students loose to "explore," "ask their own questions," and "find their own answers." Then they sat at their desks to read or do crossword puzzles (or went to smoke in the teachers' room--yes, believe it or not, I remember when teachers just left their classes for periods of time). They thought they were applying theory by letting students find their own answers without scaffolding (that is, without teaching them how to ask good questions, how to find good answers, how to employ strategies for higher level thinking, etc.) Some classrooms were crazy and teachers tried to justify what they were doing by saying that they were "applying constructivist theory." This is how many people came to distrust both discovery learning and constructivist teaching in general (I also remember when telling people you were a constructivist teacher was definitely not highly regarded). Thus, it took longer than it might have for constructivism to become a mainstream source of ideas for classroom instruction. The fact that it did as more and more people became familiar with its tenets, I think, points to the strength of those tenets. If one looks at Bruner (especially, with his notion of scaffolding) and at Vygotsky (with, especially, his complex notion of the ZPD), we would have to draw at least some conclusions about their intentions in regard to discovery learning and constructivist teaching in general that are very different from those made by the "free-for-all" teachers. My reading of Jones and Reeve and of Willingham is colored by the fact that I suspect that they are remembering those times in the early days of constructivist teaching, as I am when I read the word, "misinterpretation" (Jones and reeve) or recommendations for structure (Wiilingham).

As for your comments about postmodernism--I do see some occasional research coming out in which educational researchers are attempting to apply postmodern ideas to educational practice, though not a lot yet. I am by no means an expert on postmodernism, but I do not see postmodernism and Vygotskian ideas as antithetical. For example, I think of Vygotsky's ideas about the shifting identities of the MKO and the LKO as being in line with postmodern thinking, as well as his ideas about 1. the importance of history and culture for determining epistemological understandings and curriculum, and 2. of looking to what individual students bring to the process of learning in order to structure instruction within individual ZPDs. The idea that learning is context-dependent and also the relativism that seems apparent in Vygotsky's ideas also appear to me to be in line with postmodernism. Finally, socioculturally inspired lessons in multiliteracies and new literacies, with their emphases on multiple genres and texts--especially visual texts--and often framed by some of Vygotsky's ideas of semiotic mediation, also strike me as not unlike postmodern ideas. (NMB)

# data[].attributes.headline
(from the socioculturalists) Cognitive Pluralism

# data[].attributes.subject
(from the socioculturalists) Cognitive Pluralism

# data[].attributes.body
Socioculturalists know the importance of semiotic mediation, but they also know that interpretations of signs can differ from person to person. Cognitive pluralism, according the socioculturalists, is that different people have different views and because of that they have reason to form different beliefs, have different thoughts, and have different desires. Yes, the idea is that these different views come from different cultural activity--as you say next--but, also that they are "packaged" in different representational forms (like dancing, painting, etc.), not just writing. (NMB). Culture has a lot to do with cognitive pluralism. In the article they brought up parenting and how some children are with the parents at all times, being carried, strapped to the hip type of of children and they get to view the world in a completely different way than the children who are in a crib or playpen all day (John-Steiner & Mahn, 1996).

Socioculturalists realize that there are differ views on semiotic means, "pluralistic rather than monistic theory" and that is how they came up with cognitive pluralistic cognitive (John-Steiner & Mahn, 1996). This interests the teachers who work with children who have special needs and work in a multicultural classroom.

-Nicole G.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Nice job of explaining cognitive pluralism, Nicole!

It seems that this concept of cognitive pluralism has also informed the ideas of Bruner (at least as they are described to us by Jones & Reeves [2006]). Bruner's is said to be a theory of "cultural psychology" (Jones & Reeves, 2006, p. 60). In this theory, Bruner argues that the goal of education "should be to teach and develop culture-creation skills" (Jones & Reeves, 2006, p. 60), and he acknowledges that fact that "different cultures emphasize the use of certain tools or concepts over others" (Jones & Reeves, 2006, p. 60). Bruner, in other words, recognizes that students will learn different tools and concepts depending on the characteristics of their particular culture.

That, to me, is a kind of culture-induced cognitive pluralism. John-Steiner and Mahn (1996) described cognitive pluralism as "a pluralistic rather than a monistic theory of semiotic mediation" (p. 193), one which is not limited to just language but also takes into account the semiotic functions of "drawings, musical notes, and scientific diagrams" (p. 193). So, insofar as Bruner's theory acknowledges the fact that different cultures equip learners with different kinds of tools, it seems to me that he is also recognizing that language is not the only, universal semiotic mediator -- while one culture might chiefly be concerned with the language, another might prioritize a very different semiotic mediator. As such, I feel that Bruner (although he doesn't seem to use the term explicitly) would agree with the notion that there exists cognitive pluralism within diverse or multi-cultural populations.

-- Andrew

Good job here, Nicole and Andrew. This concept of cognitive pluralism (derived from Vygotsky's ideas about semiotic mediation, but named by John-Steiner) is used by William Kist and other New Literacies researchers/teachers as support for their use of multimodal tools in their lessons. Thus, you will find teachers having students not only write "compositions" to express their ideas but also paint, draw, make digital videos, etc. and also study different media sources for their messages about modern life. (NMB)

Cognitive pluralism represents the relationship of language to thought, and different desire. “Semiotic mediation is a key to all aspects of knowledge construction” (John-Steiner & Mahn, 1996, p.192), human beings are collapse with information. Semiotic mechanisms mediate social and individual working and unite the outer and inner. Initially, there are numerous semiotic means. language is an essential one; Second, semiotic means are in light of social practices or cultural practice, for example, these demonstration of representation are installed in social practice and depend on semiotic means.“Ecology, cultural, and family organization play a role in patterning experience and events in the creation of knowledge” (John-Steiner & Mahn, 1996, p.192). Finally, pluralistic rather than monistic theory of semiotic mediation. These interest who work in multicultural settings and with youngsters who have special needs?

Evidence of cognitive pluralism incorporates words, drawing scientific diagram, and mathematical notation systems, diagrams, and maps. The use of diverse cognitive approaches are illustrated by the accounts of experienced thinkers. (John-Steiner & Mahn, 1996). (Sumaiya)

# data[].attributes.headline
(from Bruner) Modes of Representation (Also, can someone contrast with Piaget's stage theory?)

# data[].attributes.subject
(from Bruner) Modes of Representation (Also, can someone contrast with Piaget's stage theory?)

# data[].attributes.body
Modes of representation:
Bruner's three modes of representation are enactive (physical movement), iconic (images and perceptions) and symbolic (language and other symbol systems) (Jones and Reeves, p. 59). Bruner believes that intellectual development progresses through these three stages in the order given: first enactive, then iconic, and finally symbolic (Jones and Reeves, p. 59).

The implication of this theory is that teachers should involve all three modes in their instruction in order to reach students at their own level of development (Jones and Reeves, p. 59). Smith and Ragan suggest that students' developmental stages be carefully gauged in order to insure instruction is delivered in a suitable manner (Jones and Reeves, p. 59). At the same time, instruction should be geared towards moving students along in their developmental process towards higher intellectual stages (Jones and Reeves, p. 59).
An example of this kind of instruction in teaching French pronominal verbs to 9th graders: using gestures (pointing to self, pointing to others, which makes sense for the meaning of two types of pronominal verb, reflexive verbs and reciprocal verbs, respectively) to activate the enactive mode; photos or video of a storyline involving the verbs to activate the iconic mode; and of course use of the linguistic structures themselves in the modes of listening, speaking, reading and writing to activate the symbolic mode (using listening and reading first in order to also engage perception prior to production). At the same time, as the unit proceeds, we would move away from the enactive and the iconic in order to help move students towards using the linguistic structures alone, which would help students to move up developmentally and to obtain the symbolic mode as their dominant mode of representation. Nice examples here, Parissa. (NMB)
-- Parissa

Contrast with Piaget's stage theory:
Unlike Piagetian stage theory, Bruner's progression is age-independent (Jones and Reeves, p. 59). Piaget's stages progress from sensorimotor to preoperational to concrete operational to formal operational. Because the sensorimotor stage is concerned with behaviour (Piaget chart) and physical movement (Woolfolk p 39), there is some overlap with Bruner's enactive stage. However, the sensorimotor stage is also concerned with perceptions (Piaget chart), which in Bruner is the focus of the later iconic stage.
The preoperational stage is concerned with the acquisition and use of language and therefore of symbolic thought (being able to represent things not immediately available to the senses) (Piaget chart). Piaget categorizes intellectual development into two still higher stages, while for Bruner symbolic thinking using language and other symbol systems describes the highest level of thinking available (though it may implicitly or explicitly include elements from Piaget's higher categories as well).

Piaget's stages are entered into and completed prior to entry into the next level (though Piaget notes that transitions between stages can be lengthy, and that children in one stage can show characteristics of another stage in various situations (Woolfolk pp38-39)). By contrast, each of Bruner's stages are described as being at a certain time "dominant" in a given learner (Jones and Reeves, p. 59). This and the fact of Bruner's modes being age-independent suggest that while a given mode may be dominant for a certain thinker, he will still be able to think through the other modes of representation (eg, an iconic 15 year-old thinker will also be able to think symbolically, but perhaps not as often or as well). Yes, this is important, Parissa. I am not sure who came first, but like Bruner, some of the neo-Piagetians also concluded from their research on developmental stages that perhaps someone who reaches the formal operations stage for some tasks like thinking about abstract ideas and doing combinatorial thinking when studying something like literature may not show signs of full formal operations when studying other topics, like physics. In other words, experience, interest, and formal schooling can make more of a difference in reaching developmental stages than Piaget originally thought. (NMB)

For Bruner, instruction should help move students into higher modes of representation, while Piaget considered it dangerous to try to move children into a higher stage before they had completed the stage they were in (Piaget powerpoint 2). Piaget's stages also include ideas about personal perspective (eg egocentricity), the identification of basic physical properties of the universe (eg object permanence) and the use of logic (Woolfolk pp 40-43) that are not addressed in Bruner's modes.
-- Parissa

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Something I wanted to add, just in passing, is a connection between Bruner and what we have been learning in our program. I can think of at least three classes in which we've addressed Universal Design for Learning (UDL) -- indeed, UDL seems to favoured, emphasized, and encouraged across our program. One of the major principles set-out by the UDL framework is instructing students through the use of multiple means of representation (see the Iris Peabody module on UDL, available at http://iris.peabody.vanderbilt.edu/module/udl/). As such, when I read Jones & Reeves' (2006) overview of Bruner (in particular their section on "Modes of Representation and the Importance of Learner Analysis" [Jones & Reeves, 2006, p. 59]), I could not help but feel that all of us have become familiar with Bruner's work without being cognizant of that fact!-- Andrew

Modes of representations:

Yes, I agree with you Andrew, we can relate to between Bruner and universal Design for learning.

According to Bruner’s, he argues that basic, “internal human capability and culturally

invented technology interact to allow the acquisition of knowledge about the environment” (Jones and Reeves p. 59). Bruner’s define that human understand and represent the world in three ways: enactively (via motor response), iconicly (via precepts and images), and symbolically (via symbol system such as language).  Bruner’s suggested that, development model is not dependent on age, human move from the enactive stage to the iconic stage and then finally to the symbolic stage (Jones and Reeves p. 59).

The significance of this hypothesis is that innovation should to be utilized to displays issues (presents problems) teacher should utilize all three modes of representation to build up the students. level, for instance, push them (students) use computer i.e. the mind,  critical thinking for higher level, use graphic organizers, video, sounds text and group discussion (Jones and Reeves p. 59).“Learning comes from the interaction between the two and can be best being accomplished when students are asked to answer real, authentic question and authentic problems of a culture” (ppt) As Parissa previously stated, students development stage be deliberately gauged keeping in mind the end goal to guarantee a guideline is conveyed in suitable way, and direction should be gauged towards moving student’s higher intelligent stages (Jones and Reeves, p, 59).

Contrast with Piaget’s stage theory:

Contrast between Piaget’s and Bruner’s:

Piaget’s define concept of Equilibration was unique to his theory, the actual change in thinking take place, The thought that a human being would use assimilation and accommodation are balancing processes that help children make sense of something from their environment (Woolfolk p. 38) on the other hand, Bruner's concept of curriculum was his balancing process and the acquisition of knowledge about the environment (Jones and Reeves p. 59)

Secondly, the four stages of development of Piaget’s: sensorymotor to preopretional (object permanent and causes and effect. Language skill develop rapidly, symbolic thinking, geocentricism, egocentric speech) and concrete operational to formal operation (multiple classification, conservation, deductive reasoning. Concepts are the abstracts). While Piaget’s forth stage ends at the end of childhood. (Piaget’s chart) Bruner’s stated that, diverse representations or modes of transference of learning or knowledge, while children go through all the three way during childhood, the enactive mode of learning happens by controlling of items and things (objects), the iconic mode item represents to by visual pictures, and lastly the typical mode are utilization of language and number (ppt). - Sumaiya

# data[].attributes.headline
(from the socioculturalists)  Learning by doing (Also, can someone contrast with Piaget's idea of learning by doing?)

# data[].attributes.subject
(from the socioculturalists)  Learning by doing (Also, can someone contrast with Piaget's idea of learning by doing?)

# data[].attributes.body
The socioculturalists learning by doing had a lot to do with peer interaction. They believed that when children are first starting out an new activity it is best that they depend on someone with more experience than them. Eventually, they will learn how to do from the other person and be able to do it all by themselves (John-Steiner & Mahn, 1996). This idea of learning by doing is not structured at all, the child simply observes and interacts with someone who is more experienced in order to figure it out. There is not really own "discovery" in the matter like with Bruner. Bruner's idea of learning is that the teacher made a "carefully planned structured environment encompassing activities such as focusing on problem solving, presenting contrasting events that cause cognitive conflict, providing guided practice, and encouraging reflection" (Jones & Reeves, 2006). When students are able to "discover" things and learn things by themselves it makes them feel confident and therefore more likely to retain the information and be able to call back to it in the future. Children are all about doing things by themselves; this gives them the opportunity to think they are learning/doing it all on their own, but in fact the teacher strategically chose the activities in a way that s/he knew would benefit the students.

-Nicole G.

The socio-culturist learning by doing, Bruner believe that, when students discover it by themselves, it increases the responsibility to learn on their own and motivation to learn more. He emphasized the social nature of learning, according to Bruner, important outcomes of learning include the concepts, categories, and problem-solving procedures invented previously by the culture, presenting contrasting events that cause cognitive conflict, providing guide practice and encouraging reflection (Jones & reeves, 2006). Through such activities, learners ascertain regularities and relationship in the environment and achieve learning that they are more likely to retain, having “discovered” it themselves (Jones & reeves, 2006). On other hand, the power of Vygotsky’s ideas lies in his explanation of the dynamic independent of social and individual process (John-Steiner & Mahn, 1996, p. 192). When beginning activity in the classroom, learner depends on others with more experience. “Over time they take on increasing responsibility for their own learning and participating in joint activity” (John-Steiner & Mahn, 1996, p. 192). (Sumaiya)

Good, Nicole and Sumi.  Once again, though we must hasten to add that the way that this methodology is presented makes it seem as if the teacher’s role is minimal.  It is just the opposite—the teacher must carefully structure activities so that students can “discover” what is correct and then carefully monitor that they do (remember how Willingham cautioned that discovery learning can also lead to “incorrect” discoveries and prompt misconceptions).  (NMB)

# data[].attributes.headline
(from Bruner) Role of culture in education

# data[].attributes.subject
(from Bruner) Role of culture in education

# data[].attributes.body
According to Bruner, culture is a critical aspect of education (Jones & Reeves, 2006). When students have the opportunity to view different cultures, they have the ability to observe varying representations of how to understand the world (Jone & Reeves, 2006). While several cultures share similarities, each has their own distinctive concepts and use of varying tools and equipment. As such, the application of these differences results in a variety of solutions that one culture may not have originally thought of. Bruner states “that different cultures emphasize the use of certain tools or concepts over others and that education should equip learners with the tools needed to operate and solve problems within their cultures” (Jones & Reeves, 2006). Clearly, Bruner feels that the presence of culture in education offers students the ability to collaborate with one another, and to develop important skills such as discovery, invention, and negotiation. With the development of these skills, students acquire the necessary traits for academic success and beyond.

(Bridget S.)

I really do agree with your point here Bridget about Bruner's view of culture as being an important factor in education, the authors state that his view was that the "object of education should be to teach and develop culture creation skills" (Jones & Reeves, 2006, p. 60), this integrates learning with social interaction and also this focus on culture develops competency skills (Jones & Reeves, 2006). I also think that Bruner's view about culture was also a precursor of what educators refer to as meaningful learning. When students are taught to develop culture- creation skills that"equip learners with the tools needed to operate and solve problems within their culture [their daily experiences]" (Jones & Reeves, 2006, p.60), they will be engaged in the learning as they see the benefits that they may derive from it.

(Tricia L.)

For my Classmates: How do you think Bruner’s view of culture in education has influenced curriculum development in schools today?

(Bridget S.)

.

Bridget, I think that Bruner's view of culture has really influenced curriculum today unless it is just a coincidence. Now more than ever, there has been such a large focus on helping ELLs and understanding other cultures so we can help students and relate to them in the education system. There has been such an emphasis throughout this teaching program so far on helping everyone and catering to everyone's needs, especially those with disabilities or those from other cultures who may need help adjusting socially and academically. I like Bruner's thought on "joint culture creation", which was explained as considering learning as a communal activity which results in the group making their own, new culture that incorporates all different cultural morals, values and beliefs (Jones & Reeves, 2006). If you think about it, this is what happens in classrooms if the teacher is sensitive to and knowledgeable about diversity and cultural backgrounds. If in one student's culture, it is rude to point then the teacher may ban pointing in that class, while if another's culture involves bowing to say hello, the teacher may bow at the student as a sign of respect and cultural understanding. While the bowing and lack of pointing may not be the teacher's or other students' culture, they have in a sense created a new culture among the class, which is a wonderful concept. I think that Bruner's thoughts on key components of education (discovery, invention, negotiation and sharing) have impacted today's curriculum development as teaching is a lot less black and white (teacher lecturing, students memorizing and regurgitating facts). It includes a lot more grey area now that encompasses Bruner's ideals of discovery (new information, of oneself), sharing (ideas/cultural backgrounds), invention (new ways to connect and relate to material) and negotiation (there is usually more than one right way, especially within responses and expressing understanding).

- Kailey S

Bridget, to address your posed question, I think that Bruner's view on the importance of culture in education has had enormous impact on education and classroom structures. As Kailey pointed out above one aspect in regards to ELL's, living in a culturally diverse world, and wanting to have more inclusive classrooms, it's hard to dismiss the students who come from different cultural backgrounds than our very own. Often these students are pushed out and left to fall through the cracks, often labelled as troubled kids. Therefore, teachers should do their best to be culturally responsive - taking initiative to understand the culture of which their students are coming from and to be sensitive to them and their learning styles. Fostering a classroom environment that is culturally accepting and sensitive to other cultures, helps the students learn in a communal setting that is inviting and motivating - as the students teach one another about who they are, and where their beliefs, practices come from. This is definitely something I wish to foster in my classroom as we all have something important to contribute, and learn from another. (Sr. Nadia)

I agree with your comments above, Kailey and Sr. Nadia with respects to Bridget's question about the curriculum today becoming more sensitive to diverse cultures in the classroom. From Bailey's notes, we read that as a result of Bruner, the "goal of education is to teach understanding that connects prior knowledge of the learner" (Spring,2015), this prior knowledge would be mostly from the students' experiences that may be as a result of their culture. It is important to note that the students need to make a connection to the broader conceptual knowledge of "school" culture, the school's culture however according to Bruner, is that of "the majority culture that is reflected in the school culture"(Bailey, Spring 2015). If the school's culture is one of acceptance and respect of others cultures and the value they bring to the class room, then this results in a partnership of cognitive development.

Tricia

Good discussion here, Bridget, Tricia, Kailey, Sr. Nadia. It is important to note Bruner's important point that the school culture (often reflecting middle class, majority ideas) too often ignores the cultural ideas that students bring with them to school. This has led to many important ideas about inclusion in classrooms of ways of thinking and doing from students' home life. I know that you are learning about this in your other classes, and now you know where many of these ideas have come from. I would be remiss, however, if I did not bring in here the ideas of Lisa Delpit, an African American writer and theorist, who insists that teachers-- while respecting the cultural ideas and ways of being that students bring with them to school-- MUST teach students about "the culture of power" and help them to learn the thinking and communicating skills they will need to take their place in that culture of power. (NMB)

# data[].attributes.body
In order to decipher how Bruner views the role of a teacher, it is important to first examine Bruner’s views on learning. He believed that “age is not a barrier to learning and with appropriate instruction, the basic ideas of any subject could be taught to anybody at any age” (Jones & Reeves, 2006). Bruner believes that learning occurs in stages, like Piaget, except the stages are not dependent on age or reasoning skills. Bruner thinks of learning in terms of his representation theory, which states that “humans understand and represent the world in three ways: enactively (via motor responses), iconicly (via percepts and images) and symbolicly (via symbol systems such as language” (Jones & Reeves, 2006). While keeping in mind Bruner’s representation theory, he would view the role of a teacher as one who understands these levels, and while teaching material appropriate to the learner’s developmental level, the teacher should push the learner to achieve more and use higher levels of thinking. He believes that the teacher should use different technologies (e.g. graphics, video, sound, text, interactions) that appeal to all three modes of representation and provide a learning experience that caters to learners’ dominant modes of representation (Jones & Reeves, 2006). - Kailey S.
This seems to go together well with John-Steiner's ideas about cognitive pluralism, doesn't it, Kailey and others? (NMB)
Bruner created the term discovery learning, which he viewed as “requiring a carefully planned structured environment encompassing activities such as focusing on problem solving, presenting contrasting events that cause cognitive conflict, providing guided practice, and encouraging reflection” (Jones & Reeves, 2006). According to Bruner, the role of a teacher in implementing the theory of discovery learning would be to use these activities in the classroom, which would make it easier for the students to retain the information that they learned because they “discovered” the material themselves instead of having to memorize This part sounds like Piaget, doesn't it? (NMB) facts (Jones & Reeves, 2006). These activities that promote discovery learning are “most appropriate when learners have some related prior knowledge and when learners are properly scaffolded and coached in the environment” (Jones & Reeves, 2006). - Kailey S. And this latter part sounds like Vygotsky, doesn't it? (NMB)

Later on in Bruner’s career in the 1980’s, he started to shift his views of learning toward using culture as a valuable concept in learning. “He recognized culture as a significant factor in learning and considered learning as a communal activity that results in “joint culture creation” (Jones & Reeves, 2006). Bruner stated that “different cultures emphasize the use of certain tools or concepts over others and that education should equip learners with the tools needed to operate and solve problems within their culture” (Jones & Reeves, 2006). The role of a teacher when considering this cultural concept of Bruner’s would be to be aware of the diversity in your classroom and use it to your advantage. The different cultures represented in your classroom should be included in your lessons and let the students be interactive. Create a collaborative and social learning environment that gives the students opportunities to learn about different cultures as well as use their own knowledge of their culture to problem-solve and make their own conclusions. - Kailey S.

Question for my peers:

1. Another concept that Bruner viewed as important is animated conversations. What would the role of the teacher be with regards to this concept? - Kailey S.

I think that the teacher plays a critical role in the direction and continuation of animated conversations. In fact, Bruner argues that teachers are the first individuals to encourage animated conversation through their ability to match the subject matter with the developmental level of the learner (Bailey, Spring 2015). When teachers facilitate animated conversation, they are promoting their students to continue their learning and growth. Teachers encourage animated conversation when they activate their students’ prior knowledge and utilize representations to illustrate their learning (Bailey, Spring 2015). Nevertheless, while teachers are the main facilitators of animated conversation, I also think that Bruner would state that animated conversation can be started by almost anyone, particularly individuals of different cultures. Bruner argues that learning is a “communal activity,” and thus, involves several individuals (Jones & Reeves, 2006). Therefore, I think that anyone who is able to teach another individual in any way can be a facilitator of animated conversation.

(Bridget S.)

I agree with has been said above, and wonder if Bruner would have had a stance that since learning is a communal activity as Bridget has pointed out, that each individual having much to contribute, in some degree would act as a facilitator? This would make sense, wouldn't it, Sr. Nadia, since the roles of MKO and LKO could (and should) be passed around the group, right, so that the expertise of everyone is utilized. As we get to the concept of distributed cognition when we talk about situated learning theories, this will become even more clear. (NMB)

I believe that the role of the teacher within the classroom is to facilitate student learning and help motivate students to do such on their own. For Bruner, learning came from the interaction between prior knowledge and conceptual knowledge and accomplished when students learn to ask themselves, one another, real authentic questions (Bailey, Sprint, 2015). Yes, here we definitely see influences of cognitive theories as well as of Vygotsky, don't we, Sr. Nadia? (NMB)

The role of the teacher is to model for students how to think for themselves and engage in animated conversations that help them to develop thinking and critical problem solving skills. However, once students have mastered this ability, the role of the teacher changes from a guide to a fellow traveler that helps students along the way if the need presents itself. (Sr. Nadia) Yes, I think that both Bruner and Vygotsky would approve of your image here--learning as a collaborative construction of knowledge, yes? (NMB)

# data[].attributes.headline
(from Vygotsky, though the name comes from Bruner): Scaffolding

# data[].attributes.subject
(from Vygotsky, though the name comes from Bruner): Scaffolding

# data[].attributes.body
Meece introduces guided participation and scaffolding together. Adult guidance is imperative for a child to reach intellectual development. Guided participation is defined as "the mutual involvement between children and their social partners in collective activities" (Meece, 2002, p. 161). The intended goal is to ensure that role of responsibility is transferred from adult to child. This is achieved in three phases,

o Choosing and structuring activities to fit the skills and interests of children

o Supporting and monitoring children’s participation in activities

o Adjusting level of support provided as children begin to perform the activity independently (Meece, 2002, p. 161).

Scaffolding is similar to guided participation because it "refers to the process by which adults provide support to a child who is learning to master a task or problem" (Meece, 2002, p. 161). Both scaffolding and guided participation remind me of the process of private speech (see Egocentric Speech in the Padlet Glossary). Scaffolding has many forms from modeling , explicit instructions, breaking the problem into steps, partial group collaboration on a problem, asking persuasive questions, and providing construction feedback to the student. As with guided participation, the intended goal is "gradually pass more and more control of the activity to the child. By relinquishing control, the teacher enables the child to engage in independent and self-regulated learning" (Meece, 2002, p. 162).

There are six elements to scaffolding: recruitment, demonstrating solutions, simplifying the task, maintaining participation, providing feedback, controlling frustration. - Caroline Pierce (I thought one of my classmates would like to expand further)

Scaffolding (and guided participation) are way in which to support children and help them to function within their zone of proximal development. Scaffolding is a concept introduced by Jerome Bruner and his associated based on Vygotsky's work (Meece, 2002). When an adult scaffolds, they "perform or direct those elements of the task that are beyond the child's ability" (Meece, 2002, p. 161). Scaffolding can be verbal , such as providing verbal reminders or giving feedback, or physical, such as guiding a child's hand during a task (Meech, 2002, p. 161). Researchers have identified 6 important elements of the scaffolding process: recruitment, demonstrating solutions, simplifying the task, maintaining participation, providing feedback, and controlling frustration. Recruitment involves eliciting a child's interest in accomplishing the goal of the task. Demonstrating solutions is modeling a "more appropriate form of a solution then was originally performed by the child" (Meech, 2002, p. 163). Simplifying the task is accomplished by breaking the task into smaller more manageable parts that the child can complete on his or her own. The fourth element, maintaining participation, occurs wen the adult gives the student encouragement and keeps them focused on the task. When providing feedback, the adult identifies discrepancies between what the student is doing and what is being asked of them. Finally, controlling frustration involves helping the student control frustration and risk while finding solutions. -Claire

Good explanations here, Caroline and Claire. Just a couple of additions: Vygotsky(and Bruner) would say that scaffolding must be provided by a MKO who is often an adult, but doesn't have to be. This is a good place for me to put in a plug for multi-age collaborations. I always suggest to teachers to make friends with teachers from another grade level and see if your students can do some work together. Some of the most joyful learning that I have seen happen is when older students "coach" younger students and when younger students share and explain what they have made or learned with older students. This is a wonderful way to turn your Less Knowledgeable Others (LKO) to More Knowledgeable others (MKO). Have your weaker readers from 3rd grade practice reading aloud and then go to 1st grade to read and discuss the same book with some students there. Have your high school students who may struggle to read/write about a novel or a book from their history class put together a lesson to teach to middle schoolers. Similar things could be done in math and science. You will inspire the MKOs to "prepare" better than they might ever study for a traditional test. (NMB)

# data[].attributes.headline
(from the socioculturalists, especially Palinscar and Brown)  Reciprocal Teaching

# data[].attributes.subject
(from the socioculturalists, especially Palinscar and Brown)  Reciprocal Teaching

# data[].attributes.body
Adults play a crucial role in children's intellectual development by guiding and supporting them so that they can function at their zone of proximal development (Meece,2002). Reciprocal teaching offers this support, where the adult or teachers lead the child in discussion , ask questions "collaborative learning dialogue" this teaching model "was originally designed to help poor readers acquire comprehension skills" (Meece, 2002, p. 162). The structure of the program proceeds where the discussion in the group allows "less competent students to perform above their ........level of competence or at their zone of proximal development" the student does not gets frustrated at this level because "the teacher provides scaffolded support and also "pushes [the student to] deeper understanding" (Meece,2002, p. 163); this process allows students to build comprehension skills as they are cognitively challenged. The student actively express and construct their understanding of the material covered in the group discussion, once this is demonstrated the teacher allows the student to lead the discussion (Meece, 2002).

This model of teaching even though it was developed to teach comprehension skills has " allowed students to better monitor and regulate their comprehension in other learning situations as well" (Meece, 2002, p. 163).

(Tricia L)

As Tricia so eloquently stated adults play a major role in fostering a child’s intellectual development by guiding, modeling, and supporting their development. One effective strategy that will help foster a child’s intellectual development is Reciprocal Teaching. According to “Reciprocal Teaching of Comprehension-Fostering and Comprehension-Monitoring Activities” by Annemarie Palinscar and Ann Brown, reciprocal teaching is only effective if the four tasks are modeled correctly. This article is where
Palinscar and Brown first introduced reciprocal teaching. Reciprocal teaching refers to an instructional activity in which students become the teacher in small group
reading sessions. Teachers model, then help students learn to guide group discussions using four strategies: summarizing, question generating, clarifying, and
predicting. Once students have learned the strategies, they take turns assuming
the role of teacher in leading a dialogue about what has been read (Brown & Palinscar, 1984, p.117).

Their study compared two instructional strategies that were focused on improving the comprehension skills of seventh grade students who had poor comprehension skills. When the skill of reciprocal teaching is properly modeled it can lead to significant
improvement in summarizing and questioning and it can also lead to significant
progress on tests of comprehension (Brown & Palinscar, 1984, p.117). This
goes hand in hand with Tricia’s thought that adults foster the development of
children by modeling proper behavior. If strategies are properly modeled they
can be very successful in improving skills such as reading comprehension in
children. The study also pointed out that the skills remained and were
effective for up to 8 weeks after the modeling (Brown & Palinscar, 1984,
p.118). -Matt H

# data[].attributes.headline
(from Bruner) Discovery Learning (What is Piaget's influence; what is Vygotsky's influence?)

# data[].attributes.subject
(from Bruner) Discovery Learning (What is Piaget's influence; what is Vygotsky's influence?)

# data[].attributes.body
Bruner defined discovery learning as structured learning environment where the student and teacher, "focus on problem solving, present contrasting events that cause cognitive conflict, provide guided practice, and encourage reflection" (Jones, Reeves, 2006, p. 59). The idea is that children will comprehend what they are learning because they have discovered it on their own. It allows the students to experiment and explore the new information they are learning.

Piaget's influence: aimed to provide real world experiences for students to build knowledge from. In doing so, students are discovering contrasting views and developing their own ideas regarding a topic. Piaget also insisted on hands-on learning. In the Formal Operations stage, students are encouraged to develop different possibilities and outcomes and to also take peer comments in to consideration - this encourages reflection. Okay, good, Caroline, but don't forget the emphasis upon what Jones & Reeve call "cognitive conflict." Remember that Piaget thought that one of the best--if not the best--conditions for prompting learning was cognitive dissonance (NMB).

Vygotsky's influence: the idea of guided participation, modeling what needs to be done and encouraging the students to do it on their own, which leads to self regulation and reflection. Collaborative learning plays a significant role in Vygotsky's theory. Discovery learning is a great tool to incorporate collaboration among students. With proper teacher instruction and structure, the students can problem solve together, present contrasting ideas, and reflect on what they've learned together. Thinking aloud is another influence to discovery learning because the student is partaking in a conversation, whether that be with a teacher, peer, or internally, in order to discover and learn. - Caroline Pierce

# data[].attributes.body
My question for the class:
So often commonplace theories such as Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal
development are developed in response to other theories. Do any of you know any
other prominent educational or psychological theories that were created in
response to other theories? -Matt H.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi Matt, That's a really interesting question! In the first place, I'd offer the general answer that theory is always responding to other theory. Ideas don't occur within vacuums -- thinkers read about, make sense of, and are influenced by all kinds of theory before they offer theory of their own. As such, I think you can always draw a line from the past to the present (or vice versa) which connects theorists in terms of who they are "responding" to. For example, here is one line of "theoretical responses" that might be drawn: Hegel responds to Kant; Marx responds to Hegel; Gramsci responds to Marx; Althusser responds to Gramsci; and Zizek responds to Althusser. To be more specific, I suppose Bourdieu is someone who thinks about education and psychology (although those aren't his main concern). Much like Vygotsky, Bourdieu is responding to the tendency of sociologists to create a Cartesian dichotomy between 'structure' and 'agency' (structure/agency). With regards to education, Bourdieu felt that the individual's agency (their 'free will', in a sense) is structured by education , and that, at the same time, the individual's agency structures education (by acting according to their [structured] free-will, people come to reify or change [that is, they have an effect on the structure of] the educational system). In the same light, Bourdieu suggests that the way we think (that is, our psychologies) are structured by culture, and that culture is structured by human psychologies. Bourdieu's theories of education and psychology, then, is a response to all of those previous theorists (Durkheim, Marx, etc.) who viewed 'structure and agency' as a one-or-the-other problem. -- Andrew

# data[].attributes.body
After I answered Andrew's question (Question 4, below this one), Matt H., I came to your question, and so I moved it up here with the other questions because I think that one answer to your question could come from the same part of the article to which I referred Andrew. It is the point that John-Steiner and Mahn make on p. 192, Column 1. Vygotsky was reacting to the "two predominant schools in the field [of psychology]": one that "focused on internal or subjective experience, and [the second was] behaviorist approaches which focused on the external..."

Perhaps your classmates will have other examples. Anyone....? (NMB)

# data[].attributes.headline
Question 4 (on Vygotsky's "dialectical method")

# data[].attributes.subject
Question 4 (on Vygotsky's "dialectical method")

# data[].attributes.body
In John-Steiner and Mahn's (1996) overview of Vygotskian theory, they place great emphasis on the fact that this theory has a "dialectical method" (p. 195) at its core. It is such an important part of his theory, in fact, that John-Steiner and Mahn dedicate an entire sub-section of their work to the matter of Vygotsky's "dialectical method" (p. 195).

I've seen the concept of dialectical theory a number of times over the course of my university education (especially in terms of Marx and the concept of dialectical materialism). Truth be told, though, I have always been somewhat confused by the concept! As such, I was wondering if we could talk about it a bit during the coming weeks.

I do understand the basics of dialectics. I think about it in terms of Socratic dialogues: Socrates invents two characters who each have a different perspective on a given philosophical problem; the two characters discuss and debate the problem in question; and, at the end, they come to a resolution of the problem in a way that incorporates both of their ideas. This is dialectics in action, as far as I understand the concept -- two opposing views are synthesized in order to arrive at a greater 'truth' (greater precisely because it considers opposing perspectives). I suppose this is what John-Steiner and Mahn (1996) are getting at when they describe dialectics as a method which "surmounts dichotomies" (p. 195) and results in the "the unification of contradictions" (p. 195).

But what, precisely, are the contradictions which Vygotsky is unifying? What dichotomies is he surmounting? John-Steiner and Mahn (1996) suggest that Vygotsky's concept of "verbal thought" (p. 195) is reached through applying the dialectical method to the thought/speech binary. But is that the full extent of the dialectical method in Vygotsky's theory?

Is there a single, core dialectic which underpins Vygotsky's ideas (is his whole theory based on this "verbal thought" dialectic)? Or, are there multiple instances of dialectics at work in Vygotsky's theory? If so, can anyone identify some of them? What concepts does Vygotsky unify and what dichotomies does he overcome?

-- Andrew

# data[].attributes.headline
Answer to Question 4 (Vygotsky's "dialectical method")

# data[].attributes.subject
Answer to Question 4 (Vygotsky's "dialectical method")

# data[].attributes.body
You asked an important question and in trying to get to your own answer, you explained dialectics better than I ever could, Andrew. As for the dialectic which interested him: The "opposing views" around which Vygotsky formulated his theory is the internal, subjective vs. the external, objective continuum. In explaining Vygotsky's reaction to the "crisis in psychology," on p. 192, column 1, John-Steiner and Mahn say, "Vygotsky conceptualized development as the transformation of socially shared activities into internalized processes. In this way he rejected the Cartesian dichotomy between the internal and the external." At the beginning of the same paragraph, the authors talk about Vygotsky's idea of the "dynamic interdependence of social and individual processes." Thus, we arrive at the somewhat paradoxical statement that I quoted at the beginning of this week's PPt: "Through others, we become ourselves." For Vygotsky, there could be no individual development without social interaction. Every concept or principle that we will borrow from Vygotsky (and the Neo-Vygotskians, like John-Steiner and Mahn) to inspire us to create methods for our classrooms will owe its formulation to this idea. (NMB)

# data[].attributes.body
Question 1: From Parissa: I'm just wondering- on the Vygotsky powerpoint when you write "With development, egocentric speech turns into external or social speech (for communication) and internal speech (or thinking)", do you mean that internal speech IS thinking for Vygotsky, or simply used for thinking?

# data[].attributes.body
1. My answer to Parissa's Question 1 (NMB):

I'm glad that you asked...  Vygotsky thought that learning to think was sort of a 3-step process (my term, not his).  He said that all thinking happens on two planes--first intermental and then intramental.  The step from one to the other is this egocentric speech where we "rehearse" what we hear others say and do.  I always think of the example of a little kid learning to tie his shoes whose mother has told him, "Make the right loop over the left," and you can hear him saying that to himself in a low voice as he struggles (usually with his tongue out) to make his little hands manipulate the shoelaces.  Eventually he does this without saying it to himself, but he thinks it through each time he does it until he can do it quite automatically without conscious thought. Teaching his own child years later how to tie shoes, he says, "Make the right loop over the left." His egocentric speech has become thought and also social speech--something he "knows."  It should also be noted that the Vygotskian principles of appropriation and internalization are at work here. So to answer your question, for Vygotsky internalized speech (and/or actions/ways of being) becomes thinking. Another way to say this is that appropriated language/actions/thinking/ways of being become internalized thought, and this is how we become who we are--which, not accidentally, is a lot like the people with whom we live and work.

# data[].attributes.body
Question 2: Education in the article from John-Steiner and Mahn suggest that Education must be thought of in terms; not of transmission of knowledge but transaction and transformation, they also referred to transaction again with respect to the classroom as one of the processes that are in complex interplay. The authors have laid out exactly what transformation, transmission and construction is but I do not understand the transaction process in the context of Education. What exactly are they referring to?

Tricia

# data[].attributes.body
I’m going to take a crack at your question Tricia. It is a bit confusing because they do not elaborate on it a lot, but from what I understand, the transaction part of teaching depends on:

- External and internal factors.  These can include culture, religious institutions, peer groups, socioeconomic status, availability of technology, books, etc.

- Qualities and characteristics of teachers and students.  Teachers and students will have their own beliefs, knowledge, personality, communication skills, etc.

- Classroom processes. I think what Steiner & Mahn (1996) mean by classroom processes is the way teachers and students behave in the classroom, or the relationship between teacher and student. I’m sure there are other variables as well. It might also include the way students are assessed. Am I on the right track Dr.Bailey?

You are definitely on the right track, Amanda! I especially like your chart, below.

For Tricia, Amanda, and Everyone: When the socioculturalists talk about transaction, they are talking about the learner bringing his/her background knowledge to a learning experience (that's why the elements that Amanda listed above are important). If exposed to conducive learning processes (like those listed on the right side of Amanda's chart below), the learner will take on ideas from the learning experience (including the ideas of the other learners in the experience) which combine with his/her background knowledge to form new meaning for the learner. This transactional process then changes the original knowledge (thus transforming it--and them). This is an especially popular theory in reading education where we learn that readers bring what they know to a story or piece of nonfiction and transact with the text to derive an integrated meaning that is greater than the meaning that they had originally as well as greater than just the meaning in the text. Louise Rosenblatt who is one of the proponents of this transactional view of reading says that the same text can mean different things to different people at different times or even to the same person at different times. (I think about hating a book that my friend "just loves." Also, think about reading your favorite book as a child and then reading it again someday to your own children. Will it be the same text? Probably not because of this transactional process.) The same kind of transactional process is at work in all learning situations, according to the socioculturalists. In order to bring about this transaction in learners, teachers will need to enact the teaching practices listed on the right side of Amanda's chart, below. You can also see why a class that is heavily into transmission (see left side of the chart) is not conducive for this kind of transaction and transformation to occur. This is not to say that all classes that transmit are bad. A good learner, actually, could probably engage in transaction in a lecture class. It is just more likely that you will get ALL learners to engage in transaction if you guide them skillfully in good, collaborative activities where they must interact with more knowledgeable others in some way. (NMB)

I found something on the Internet that can be of help. It was retrieved from https://books.google.ca/books?id=NcZb51MfxlUC&pg=PA15&lpg=PA15&dq=what+is+transaction+model+for+education&source=bl&ots=MaRdhU0_Cf&sig=UC6Pl2gdCFDe1MkrHSmFdNDV55A&hl=en&sa=X&ei=asv8VJGdCPGwsAS9poFQ&ved=0CCYQ6AEwATgK#v=onepage&q&f=true

The table below was found on pg. 16; and starting on pg.17, the transaction model is explained in more detail. - Amanda B

# data[].attributes.body
Question for Prof Bailey: What do you mean in your response to Question 1 below by intermental thought (as a precursor to egocentric speech)? I can see some elements in the John-Steiner and Mahn text that point to what this might be: "It is at points of negotiation of meaning in conversation that learning and development occur, as each learner's individual psychological processes mediate (and at the same time are mediated by) the constitutive intermental processes of the group" (p. 197) but this process involves conversation, which the young child is presumably not capable of yet. We also have "Thinking embedded in collaborative practical activity must to a significant degree take the form of talk, gesture, use of artifacts, or some other publicly accessible mediational instrumentality; otherwise mutual formation of ideas would be rendered impossible. Collaborative thinking opens up access to direct data on thought processes." (p. 201) Perhaps then with young children, an adult's use of gestures with the child would constitute the Vygotskian intermental thought? The text also mentions "...the supportive engagement of Mayan mothers with their children as an example of the nonverbal guidance adults give children" (p. 192), which can be seen as an example illustrating the previous quote. Is this kind of gestural interaction then what is meant by intermental thought for interactions involving young children?

--Parissa

# data[].attributes.body
Yes, to all of your answers to your own questions in Question 3, Parissa. I like to think of a very literal parsing of the words. Thus, for "intermental," Vygotsky meant "between minds." However, that communication might be communicated through gestures, words, symbols, etc. By "intramental" Vygotsky meant "within minds," that internal processing we commonly refer to as thinking. So, he often said that all thinking happens on two planes, first on the intermental (between minds) and then on the intramental (within minds).

Since you brought up the idea of parents and their gestures, you might be interested in the little news story that I have linked here. (NMB)

I actually see (and participate) in this kind of interaction a lot! I work at a daycare in the 1 1/2 - 2 year old room, so a lot of the children are just starting to develop language. They do a lot of pointing and gesturing at objects or other people in order to ask what or who it is. They like to go around the table at lunchtime and point to each individual child and ask who everybody is. Some of them also use different gestures for words. For example a couple of the students use the sign language gesture for more if they want us to continue to sing or dance or if they want more food. They've recently started to articulate the word with the gesture as well! We've started working on getting one little boy to use the word please more at his mother's request. He will make a gesture for the word but will only say the word occasionally. I've also seen some of them make gestures for things like hats (patting the top of their head). I just thought it was a cool connection! -Claire

Great example from "real life," Claire. What a good example of Vygotskian principles at work. Can you say more here for this week and explain exactly why Vygotsky would approve of this practice that you and the other teachers are using with these very young children? Use some of the concepts that he would use to explain, if you can. (NMB)

# data[].attributes.body
One contrast is that for Piagetians, egocentric speech behaviour is evidence of egocentric thinking (David Elkind in the film Piaget's Developmental Theory: an Overview). He narrates, "He found that young children were egocentric in their thinking, and failed to take the point of view of the other person, in either their language or their thought. Young children, for example, often talk at, rather than to, another child." (Piaget's Developmental Theory: an Overview) At the same time in the film, we see a child talking at other children while they are playing. For Vygotskians, this same visible phenomenon would be interpreted differently: this speech is used to "solve problems or plan activity" (Vygotsky and the Neo Vygotskians powerpoint), and is not evidence of thought, but a precursor to thought, "a preintellectual period of speech" (John-Steiner and Mahn, p. 195).

-- Parissa

Vygotsky's constructivist theory on language opposes Jean Piaget's language acquitional theory.Maybe we should say "acquisition theory." (NMB) Piaget believed that children build their knowledge on language based on complex processes of assimilation, and the needs of the child's inherent abilities to adapt to stimulations. Vygotsky on the other hand, stresses that within the social nature of language learning, the environment within which the child is raised plays the key role in building language knowledge.   -Sr. Nadia

Vygotsky also offered an alternative to Piaget's constructivism - where Piaget felt that human beings make sense of the world by means of the mental processes (external). Development precedes learning. Whereby Vygotsky felt that knowledge is actually the internalization of social activity, where the external world models the mind. So learning precedes development. Excellent answer here and a very important distinction, Sr. Nadia. (NMB) - Sr. Nadia

Another contrast, is the Vygotsky focused on the mechanisms of development whereas Piaget stressed distinguishable developmental stages.   - Sr. Nadia

In response to Sr. Nadia's mention about how Piaget and Vygotsky differ in their developmental stages. I found this interesting after learning about Vygotsky's theory of placing more importance on cultural impacts rather than dividing students in to cognitive stages like Piaget does. Vygotsky's theory is much more applicable to current education standards. I found Vygotsky to be similar to Schema theory because social surroundings (a child's scheme) play such an important role in cognitive development. Yes, good connection and helpful addition to Sr. Nadia's point, Caroline. The whole idea of transaction is dependent upon the idea that the child brings knowledge with him/her to a learning situation (which could be anywhere and any time, right?) Can you see what an impact this has had on how we think about educating students, especially students who come from homes where the language and content of school is not available. Since our schools have been becoming increasingly diverse, you can see the appeal of Vygotsky's theories for guiding instructional thinking. (NMB)

-Caroline Pierce

Vygotsky initially suggested intellectual development that can be seen just in term of cultural historical contexts children’s experience. Piaget defined that a child’s intellect or cognitive ability progress through different stages. Learning is not possible until the learner is developmentally ready to get the information. This is a very important point, Sumi. It was the basis for "kindergarten readiness tests" for many years. (Perhaps you or your classmates took a kindergarten readiness test?). Now, with the growing influence of Vygotsky and Bruner (who said that the schools should be ready for the student, not the other way around), we don't see kindergarten readiness tests as a condition of entering school very often anymore. (NMB)

Vygotsky believes that development depends on the sign system as the individual grows up with the symbols that cultures creates to help people think, communicates and solve problems, for example, a culture's language and writing system. (John-Steiner & Mahn, 1996). Piaget’s define the language acquisition theory, stages of development, Sensorimotor, Preoperational, Concrete operational and Formal operational. Piaget believes that, Sensorimotor (birth to 2 years), concept of object permanence and gradual progress. Second stage he defines as Preoperational (2-7 years) ability to use as symbols to represents an object in the world, thinking remains egocentric. The third stage would be concrete operational (7-11 years), abstract thinking is not possible (but remember that now we know that this is not as definite as Piaget thought. Some abstract thinking can be seen in concrete operational children, especially if concrete methods are used to help them to understand abstract ideas -NMB), and improvement inability to think logically, and identity, compensation, and reversibility. Final stage of Piaget development would be formal operational (11 years to adulthood), abstract and purely symbolic thinking if possible. (Woolfolk, 2008). –Sumaiya.

Good summary of Piaget's stages here, Sumi. Perhaps for the present week, you (or one of your classmates) might want to talk about Bruner's stages of development? (NMB)

According to John-Steiner and Mahn Vygotsky criticized theories such as Piaget’s idea that “maturation is viewed as a precondition of learning, but never the result of
it” (John-Steiner& Mahn, 1996). Vygotky argued that maturation is a result
of learning and that learning “awakens a variety of internal developmental
processes” (John-Steiner& Mahn, 1996). Essentially, Vygotsky set out to
prove that theories such as Piaget’s that felt development was not a result of
learning were wrong. Vygotsky did note that, “learning was not development,
however properly organized learning results in mental development and sets in
motion a variety of developmental processes” (John-Steiner & Mahn). Vygotsky
would further elaborate on these ideas through his theory on the Zone of
proximal development that is more clearly defined in one of the sections below.-Matt H.

I work at a school that currently utilizes the Reggio Emilia approach in their Beginners through Prep II classes (ages 3-6). The Reggio Emilia is fascinating, if you haven't read about it I suggest you do. The Reggio Emilia approach reminds of Vygotsky's theory in that it is also a sociocultural educational theory. The students work together on many projects and use each other to for constructive criticism and support. The theory states that children have "100 languages" which basically means that children express themselves in many different ways. The Reggio teachers provide these early learners with a variety of ways of thinking, constructing ideas, writing, and play. For example, the other day the students Prep I students (age 4-5) were required to create a road using pattern (1 blue piece of paper, 1 yellow piece of paper, etc.) The idea was to have the students create a city. We sat in a circle and talked about the things we see on the street. Students yelled out, "bridges! Cars! Houses! Stores! Cats! Dogs! Signs! Stop lights! People! Trees! Water!" We then had the students talk among themselves and choose what they wanted to create. They were given deconstructed cardboard boxes, paper, markers, scissors, and tape, and were told to be as creative as they wanted. After the activity concluded, we had then draw a picture of what they envisioned the town should look like once it is finished. Seeing the students collaborate together was truly amazing. Their ideas were inspiring, including both conventional and extraordinary. For example, they included Wegmans, but used slides instead of stairs for the exit.A pitfall with the Reggio Approach is that it calls on the teacher to "learn with the students", or to be confused with the students as they are learning. My description and example is a brief summary of a larger theory. I'm sure Dr. Bailey has a much more in depth description of the Emilio approach. Dr. Bailey, what do you think of this approach? Have you seen it in action? - Caroline Pierce

I'm glad that you brought this up, Caroline! The Reggio Emilia approach actually seems more aligned with Piaget's work than Vygotsky's, though the emphasis upon social interaction and collaboration that you saw in this project may be more Vygotskian. Notice,however, how Piagetian it is in many ways, especially with the emphasis upon discovery learning. In your example of creating the city (what a great learning activity), the teachers are the guides/facilitators who provide material and guidance, but the students are the "little scientists" who work out their ideas in order to solve the problem (and eliminate the cognitive dissonance created by the problem). Notice too, how at the end, the assignment was to draw the big picture of the city. You don't say, but I wondered if the teachers led the students in a "debriefing" where the students were encouraged to talk about what they learned from making a city plan--what is hard for city planners and what skills they need to create good cities. This is what Piaget would recommend--that students work out their own understandings so that assimilation and accommodation will come about for each one of them (Remember he thought that cognitive development was largely an individual process). Notice how inductive a process this is--much like the teacher's classwork in the 7th grade math class where students were learning negative numbers through manipulation of the bingo chips and then coming together with the teacher to articulate the "rules" and equations that seemed to be governing their process. You call the role of the teachers in the city planning a "pitfall." To those of us who learned with behavioral methods and have come to see the role of the teacher as authority and knowledge dispenser, this does seem strange, but Piaget would have applauded the fact that the teachers stepped back and let the learners take the lead, even to the point of sharing cognitive dissonance with the children. After all, Piaget said, it is the drive to resolve the confusion of cognitive dissonance and restore equilibrium that will lead to real learning (assimilation and accommodation).

The way that you describe the collaboration of the students may be more Vygotskian than Piagetian. Both Vygotsky and Piaget advocated for learner interaction. Remember, though, that Piaget saw young children as largely egocentric. Therefore, he would advocate for children to interact mainly to overcome this egocentricism so that they could realize that there were other ways than their own to look at the world. Vygotsky, as you and your classmates are discovering and summarizing here on this Padlet page, had very different reasons to encourage social interaction. As you think about the interaction of students that was encouraged in this build-a-city project, do you think that the teachers' purposes were more Piagetian or Vygotskian? Perhaps for this week, you can add a little more here to answer that question. (NMB)

After reading the Bruner article about discovery learning, I immediately thought of the Reggio Emilia approach, as well as the example I provided. Although building the city seemed to be unstructured, it was actually very structured. Discovery learning is focusing on problem solving, presenting contrasting events that cause cognitive conflict, providing guided practice, and encouraging reflection (Jones and Reeves, 2006, p. 59). Before the activity began, the teacher prompted students with what goes in to making a city. They started barking out ideas to the teacher, she then quieted them and said "I want you to tell your neighbor, talk amongst yourselves about what you want to build, I am just going to sit here and listen." The students then began chatting with each other on what they wanted to build, a lot students realized they all had similar ideas, so they formed groups to work collaboratively on different aspects of the town. This is an example of Piaget and the idea that children will eventually shed this egocentrism to work collaboratively. The project was ongoing, so I am interested to return to the school and learn the results of the project! - Caroline Pierce So interesting to hear more about this and to see you revise your thinking as you learned about Bruner, Caroline. You will have to tell us more about this very interesting project.
Bruner's stages of development (Modes of Representation)- Bruner believed that kids have an innate capacity that able's them to make sense of the world via their cognitive abilities and active interaction. (Similarly to Piaget)- Bruner argued that social factors, particularly language are important for cognitive growth, underpinning the concept of ‘scaffolding’. (Similar to Vygotsky, differing from Piaget)- Bruner was also concerned with how knowledge is represented and organised viadifferent modes of representation.- Bruner suggested that different ways of representation (thinking) were important at different ages:* Piaget emphasized that children develop sequentially through different stages of development.Enactive Mode (1month - 18 months) - Corresponds with Piaget's sensorimotor stageIconic Mode (develops from 18 months +) - - information is stored as sensory info.Symbolic Mode (6-7 years onward)- Representation of the world is principally through language, but also other symbolic systems such as number and music (Jones & Reeves, 2006) (Sr. Nadia)
I'm so glad to see that you connected Bruner's ideas about enactive and iconic and symbolic learning to this great example that Caroline brought us, Sr. Nadia. These are very appropriate connections. Notice how the students in this class that Caroline observed were constructing knowledge together by using enactive and iconic modes, especially. (NMB)

# data[].attributes.headline
(from Bruner, Wk 9)  "Animated Conversations"

# data[].attributes.subject
(from Bruner, Wk 9)  "Animated Conversations"

# data[].attributes.body
Animated is having life, vigor, or spirit. Someone who is having an animated conversation is lively and is showing their feelings. Relatively, Bruner thought that “a curriculum is like an animated conversation on a topic that can never be fully defined, although one can set limits upon it” (Takaya, 2013, p.44). Animated conversation not only includes animation in the broader sense of things (i.e. pictures, videos, props, etc.), it includes conversations plus show-and-tell in which one must all apply on his/her own. For example, all of us become involved in animated conversations about teaching and learning activities in various subject areas. There is not the curriculum; there are many different types of curriculum. A curriculum encompasses numerous objects, but it can be broadly defined as the lessons and academic content taught in a course or school. So, today’s teachers have learning goals to set and learners are suppose to reach these goals by following a route. Bruner’s idea of the curriculum as an “animated conversation” may not quite fit the notion of today’s education and curriculum. Or it may indeed fit, but it would be difficult to produce this type of curriculum. According to Takaya (2013), Bruner addressed changes in the way we could use curriculum, not the content or structure of the curriculum itself.

In addition, seeing curriculum as “animated conversation” begins with real questions and real problems (Bailey, Spring 2015). “To answer or solve them, [one] needs both the valuable knowledge and skills of a culture and the remembering, thinking, and hypothesizing of the learner” (Bailey, Spring 2015). Jones & Reeves (2006) explain how Bruner emphasized “that the objective of education should be to teach and develop culture-creation skills such as discovery, invention, negotiation, and sharing” (p.60). For example: while watching a biography about Descartes, Derick asks “what is the doubling of the cube?” The teacher can encourage that Derick do some research on his own and share his findings with the classroom the next day. His sharing sparked an animated conversation where students learned how the volume of a cube can be doubled: 1) it first arose in ancient Greece in relation to statue building, and 2) it is a problem of geometrical construction. Students can then think and make suggestions about different geometrical constructions on how to double the volume of a cube and then test their hypothesis. Students then acquire real-world application.  Good example for secondary classrooms, Amanda. Notice how the students' question gives rise to the discovery project which gives rise to more animated discussion. Caroline's example of the city planning that she observed was another great example of teaching through the use of animated conversation. Remember that Vygotsky tells us that language is the primary tool and sign. Using language to prompt questions and to collaboratively formulate answers (in whatever mode and method you want to do this) is good teaching, according to the socioculturalists.(NMB)

Takaya, K. (2013). Jerome Bruner: Developing a Sense of the Possible. New York City: Springer Science & Business Media.

How can a curriculum be used to bring an “animated conversation” in the classroom? What do teachers need to know in order to support learning through “animated conversation?”

-Amanda

I agree with all of the aspects of Animated Conversations that you covered Amanda. Bruner’s idea of “Animated Conversations” goes hand in hand with his stance on the role of teachers and his idea of spiral curriculum. Good connections, Matt. (NMB)
The role of the teacher and the spiral curriculum are each facilitated by
Animated Conversations. Bruner felt that curriculum should be an Animated
Conversation that begins with real questions and real problems (Bailey, Spring
2015). To answer or solve the questions and problems teachers need to relay both the valuable knowledge and skills of a culture and take into account the remembering, thinking, and hypothesizing of the learner (Bailey, Spring 2015). The teacher does this by re-defining the subject matter to match the developmental level of the learner’s internal cognitive structure (Bailey, Spring 2015). The conversations must be presented at a level that is appropriate to the developmental level of the students. The
aspect of spiral curriculum also calls upon the teacher to first introduce
foundational concepts and principles, then follow those up with specific cases
that apply to the developmental level of the students (Jones and Reeves, p.59).
Essentially the teacher relays content and curriculum through this Animated
Conversation that seeks to engage the students in solving questions and
problems. Yes. Notice how far this is from lecturing or transmission. It is the teacher and the students working together that creates the energy (animated quality) in the room and can lead to real learning--for both the students and the teacher (NMB)
-Matt H

My Question for
the class:

As an aspiring history teacher I can think of
many ways to use Animated Conversations in a social studies classroom. Please
share some examples of how you would use Animated Conversations in your
classroom. State the grade level and the concentration of the class. Thanks! How about you, Matt? Can you give us one example from your area? (NMB)

One example I can think of is the discussion that we had in my class I was teaching for my pre-student teaching seminar. I was teaching a lesson segment on the rise of dictators. I began the lesson
segment by asking this question: Since all of you know a little bit about all of the bad things these dictators did, how could these bad men get to their positions of power? What this was essentially doing was to get the students to think about what they already knew and make connections as to what the environment was like at the time of the dictators’ rise to power. In previous lessons the
students were taught about Stalin’s rise to power and the rise of communism. The purpose of this question was to get the students to make connections and begin to realize that certain factors allow so called “bad men” to get positions of power. History is such a great subject to have animated
conversations because of all of the similarities and repeating cycles over time. As teachers we can use this to our advantage. This is especially true with the spiral curriculum and animated conversations. We can introduce foundational concepts and principles such as economic and social factors constituting a shift in power and then use animated conversations to discuss specific cases
and then the students can draw on their background knowledge to make
connections and formulate arguments such as comparing the conditions of Hitler’s
rise to power to that of Stalin’s. –Matt H

# data[].attributes.body
Leontiev, Vygotsky’s colleague, used the term appropriation to describe the process of internalization (use of psychological tools). He wrote “children cannot and need not reinvent the artifacts that have taken millennia to evolve in order to appropriate such objects into their own system of activity” (Steiner & Mahn, 1996, p.193). Thus, individuals are actively engaged in the community by access of psychological tools.

Steiner & Mahn (1996) describe Vygotsky’s analysis in his book “Thought and Language”: the functional relationship between speaking and thinking is an example of the general process of development in which social tools are appropriated and transformed into individual tools of thinking and problem solving. Thus, the relationship between language and thought illustrates the process of appropriation. The movement from social to individual tools requires an individual to be actively engaged in social interactions (e.g. a child uses speech and gestures to identify, classify, elaborate, explain, and regulate attention). Later, by the social use of language, the child can reflect and transform experience. The use of speech as a means of making sense of experiences is a step towards intellectual functioning.

This distinction between appropriation and internalization is really important, Amanda; good explanation. Maybe for next week, you or your classmates could think of a couple of classroom examples of appropriation and internalization?? (NMB)

Appropriation is necessary for cognitive development within the zone of proximal development (Steiner & Mahn, 1996). This means that individuals participating in guided teacher instruction for example, must share the same focus in order to access the zone of proximal development. The zone of proximal development is defined as “the distance between what the child is capable of thinking and doing on her/his own and what she/he can do with assistance from a more knowledgeable other (Bailey, Spring 2015). Collaboration and shared problem solving is needed for social, emotional, and cognitive interchange.

-Amanda B

# data[].attributes.body
One commonality is the noticing of and commenting on the egocentric speech behaviour of children. According to Vygotsky, egocentric speech is early speech that is not used for communication (Vygotsky and the Neo Vygotskians powerpoint). Piagetians also note this egocentricity of speech: "Young children, for example, often talk at, rather than to, another child." (David Elkind in the film Piaget's Developmental Theory: an Overview)

--Parissa

I find the concept of egocentrism interesting. I completely agree that most children at the preschool age are egocentric, yet in my experience working with pre-k and kindergarten aged students, I have witnessed many actual conversations. For example, I witnessed two students having a conversation during snack time and the third student wanted to join. Student 3 started talking while Student 1 and 2 were already in a conversation, so they ignored him. Student 3 then stopped and tried a different approach. He gently rested his hand on Student 1 and said, "Excuse me Oliver...." then the three students continued in a conversation together. These students are aged 4-5. Is this an example of non egocentric behavior? This is the BEST example, Caroline! I can just see this sweet little boy who has obviously appropriated (maybe even internalized) good manners :-). What we see here might be what the Neo-Piagetians have shown, which is that Piaget's stages are not as closely aligned with age as he originally thought. Here, your students were obviously moving out of preoperational egocentricism, especially Student 3. All three students seem to be beyond the stage where they might be talking on the phone to Grandma and answering her questions by nodding their heads, thinking that she could see them (an example of full egocentrism). Also, Piaget's idea that interaction with others could help to prompt development past egocentricismmight be in evidence here. (NMB)

On the contrary, when I was playing Candyland with a 5 year old girl, she constantly cheated, trying to hide the fact from me, because she wanted to win the game. Throughout our time together, she would make up rules for each game because she wanted to ensure that she would win.

-Caroline Pierce

This is another good example. Piaget might have explained this in two ways. This five-year-old is still in the preoperational stage and she may not fully understand what it means to cheat. She is hiding her cheating, but that may be more because she knows that you hold power and can take a win away from her for reasons that she doesn't fully understand. And while she knows some basic ideas about right and wrong, her egocentrism may make her project her thoughts and wishes about winning onto you. In other words, she thinks that she should win and you should think that too. This, of course, would make your application of rules that make her lose even more confusing. It would be interesting to know what the age suggestion on the Candyland box says. We can certainly understand better where some of the "Age 7 and up" suggestions come from, can't we? Also, perhaps Piaget would see this girl making up her own rules for the game and see this as progress toward the next stage of development in which children learn to classify and conserve. (NMB)

# data[].attributes.headline
Egocentric Speech (What Meece calls "Private Speech)

# data[].attributes.subject
Egocentric Speech (What Meece calls "Private Speech)

# data[].attributes.body
According to Vygotsky's theory, egocentric speech is early speech that is used to "solve problems or plan activity" (Vygotsky and the Neo Vygotskians powerpoint). Egocentric speech refers to "a preintellectual period of speech" (John-Steiner and Mahn, p. 195), and would thus seem not to be an expression of thought. As development continues, egocentric speech splits off into two branches, external/social speech which is used for communication, and internal speech, which becomes thinking (or at least one type of thinking) (Vygotsky and the Neo Vygotskians powerpoint; Bailey response to question 1, Padlet).
Egocentric speech is a bridge between two types of thinking, "first intermental and then intramental" (Bailey response to question1, Padlet).

Egocentric speech involves " 'rehears[ing]' what we hear others say and do" (Bailey response to question 1, Padlet). Bailey gives the example of a child whose mother has given him verbal instructions on how to tie his shoelaces, and who rehearses out loud the steps involved in tying his shoelaces while actually tying them (Bailey response to question 1, Padlet). This illustrates the notion that egocentric speech is used to "solve problems or plan activity", as noted above.
Please see the Comparisons and Contrasts boxes for ways in which Vygotsky's and Piaget's notions of egocentric speech converge and diverge.

--Parissa

I prefer Meece's term, Private Speech, to Egocentric Speech. Piaget and Vygotsky both introduced these ideas, yet they differed from each other. Piaget argues that during this stage, children focus solely on themselves. He viewed egocentric speech as a form of immaturity, because the child is seen as unable to interact with his/her peers. On the contrary, in Meece's article, he coins the term Private Speech as an educational principle that can help students learn, and can even limit a child's misbehavior.

Private speech "is the means by which children guide their own thinking and behavior" (Meece, 2002, pg. 160). Meece views private speech as a "self-regulatory function". This overt form of inner speech is one reason why children are categorized as being so adorably honest, they say whatever comes to their mind! In the Meece article, private speech is praised as a comprehensive tool for students to self-learn difficult concepts. For example, when solving a tough math problem, evidence shows that students received higher grades when they "talked the problem out" with a teacher, or to themselves. To this day, when I am having trouble understanding difficult concepts (I've done this many times during my reading for this class) I read aloud to myself to let the words sink in. As the child matures, this overt speech transforms to covert, inner speech (Meece, 2002). The Meece article recognizes a program called Cognitive Behavior Modification which makes great use of self-regulatory speech to help children stop impulses, control their frustration levels, and promote inner reflection (Meece, 2002). It begins with cognitive modeling by the teacher, followed by overt guidance, or having the child talk aloud to himself, then using these modeled strategies, the child is encouraged to complete the task on their own, which is categorized as covert self-instruction (Meece, 2002). During this process, the cognitive modeling is key for a child to understand what is expected of them. When the teacher performs what is expected explicitly, it increases the child's opportunity for comprehension.

- Caroline Pierce

Good, Caroline. As you point out, when guided well by MKOs, (e.g, parents, teachers) this private speech can help students to regulate both their behaviors and their thinking. See my example of learning to tie shoes in my answer to Parissa's Question 1, above. I am also glad that you pointed out that you still use private speech to help you to focus when you read. One is never too old for using private speech: Adolescents and adults use private speech to regulate behaviors and thinking sometimes too. I know I use it when I am driving in heavy traffic and have to really talk my way through the maze of cars and road hazards. (NMB)

# data[].attributes.body
John-Steiner & Mahn state that human development relies on and is dependent on the transmitted experiences of others, this they stated is supported by Vygotsky's genetic law of development (1996). This gradual release of responsibility is described as "when beginning an activity, learners depend on others with more experience...over time they take on increasing responsibility for their own learning" (John- Steiner & Mahn, 1996, p. 192), this process is referred to as guided participation. The authors state that as "learners participate in a wide variety of of joint activities that provide the opportunity for synthesizing...the novice [learner] acquires useful strategies and crucial knowledge" (John-Steiner & Mahn, 1996, p. 192), learners in the classroom or elsewhere for that matter, become skilled and can then participate in the coconstruction of knowledge. We are able to see this gradual release of responsibility in the classroom. This gradual release of responsibility goes through a series of four stages as described by Bailey, these are reliance on others, collaboration with others, monitored self reliance and then internalization (Spring 2015). Reliance on others is described as when the students watch the teachers, teachers provide lots of opportunities modeling the concepts of an instruction, the students are able to observe, then through collaboration, students are given opportunities to participate and work together with their peers, through these repeated and varied experiences that offers the students support and challenge, which then leads to the progression of monitored self reliance (Bailey, Spring 2015). Monitored self reliance is where students do and teachers watch, offering scaffolds that may still be required by the student( Bailey, Spring 2015), we then see the students progress where they do tasks alone, they become "skilled practitioners in the specific cognitive activities" (John-Steiner & Mahn, 1996, p. 192).

Tricia

Yes, good, Tricia. You and your classmates may have come across this sociocultural idea framed like this progression of classroom activity:

"I (Teacher) do; You (Student) watch.

We do together.

You do; I watch." (NMB)

# data[].attributes.body
As per Vygotskian theory, although tools and signs are often interconnected, they are highly distinctive methods of determining meaning (Whittaker, 2008). A tool is an object which facilitates change within nature and thus is an external influence (Whittaker, 2008). Contrarily, a sign is an internalized symbol that that does not lead to direct change in nature, but rather refers to mastery of oneself (Whittaker, 2008).  For instance, using the example of the Metro map in Whittaker’s article, upon her arrival to D.C, the map was a tool (2008). It helped Whittaker get from point A to point B, and directed her in her ability to navigate throughout the city. The map was a tool because it was an external influence that changed how Ms. Whittaker interacted with the city. However, at the end of the article, the map was also considered a sign, or a symbol (Whittaker, 2008). At this point, Ms. Whittaker no longer needed the map as a navigational tool, and instead the map came to symbolize her ability to live on her own, and independently function in the hustle-and-bustle of big city life (2008). - Bridget S.

Similarly, language could also be referred to as a sign, or a symbol of a person’s ability to express their thoughts, feelings, and emotions. In this case, writing utensils, such as a pen, pencil, or keyboard, would be the tools, as they provide us with the external ability to interact with society. Thus, despite their interconnectedness, tools and signs are separate entities, each with distinct meanings. - Bridget S.

Bridget did a great job explaining the article about Vgotsky’s model of Signs and Tools by Whittaker. I’d like to extend her definition. According to Vgotsky, learning is not merely a matter of children “growing up” and maturing but it’s how we come to see and act upon the world in terms of tools and signs (Whittaker, 2008). This model is important because if we are able to differentiate between a sign and tool and understand how they are significant in making sophisticated meaning around the world, then we can use them in our everyday life to change ourselves, learn and see symbols in a new capacity. As teachers, it is important, because if we regard our students as being successful only by their destination and whether they have reached the end goal, we are not truly tapping into their strengths and abilities and are not allowing them to create meaning within their learning processes. As teachers, if we use Vgotsky’s model of Signs and Tools in the classroom, we would view the children’s learning as a place of experience and not as a place of destination (Whittaker, 2008). The focus would be on which tools the students use to learn and how we can guide them to transform these tools into signs to master their inner self with regards to learning and identity. Upon further reflection, I found that if we wanted to really define his model, it comes down to three different ways that Signs and Tools can be compared and contrasted:

1. Signs and tools are different in the ways that they orient human behaviour. (A sign is internally oriented and a tool is externally oriented.)

2. A sign is the mastery of oneself while a tool is the aim of a human’s activity mastering of, and triumphing over nature (Whittaker, 2008).

3. They are similar in that they are both ways of creating meaning in the world around us.

- Kailey S.
Both Bridget and Kailey did an excellent job as explaining tools and signs. I really like how Kailey termed, "if we regard our students as being successful only by their destination and whether they have reached the end goal". Being in a classroom everyday (and especially at this time of the year) the topic of state tests come up and begin being said everyday to the students. One of the teachers I work with has said to teach to the skill not to the end goal (the end goal being the state test, one of the destinations). If the student masters the skill then that is excellent. State tests mean very little and most students do not care about them. But students being able to learn the skill and actually understand it is key.
As teachers, we have to use tools that will help the student develop the skill, help the student master the task at hand. As teachers, we have to think about what are the things that are really sticking with the student - the signs. Different students will have different signs, it all depends on the student. But we have to make sure that all the students are reading all the signs and the signs that come ahead (Whittaker, 2008). We cannot teach to the destination, but teach experiences that can serve the students at signs later on in life. -Nicole Goyette

For my classmates: What other examples of tools and signs can you think of? How are they interconnected? - Bridget S.

Another tool that I could think about Bridget, is music. We could see this especially with music that was used in silent films. Music pieces were used as tools throughout the films to signal various emotional cues about what the actors were portraying to the audience, feelings such as romance, happiness, fear, internal conflict, fight scenes or scenes when something horrific was about to happen. Whittaker (2008) explains that for Vygotsky, tools function as way for us to externally exhibit our thoughts, she then said that "I came to understand how my use of various tools...had allowed me to act on the world to do something I needed to do" (p.29), so music is used as a tool to elicit certain emotion. Today we find it most popular for music to be paired with singing, another form of oral language. Music and songs may move from tools of expression to signs or symbols for us, the song that reminds you of your wedding becoming a symbol of love and family, a girls getaway weekend a symbol of friendship, a particular summer song, symbolizes just chilling on the beach with a great book, Whittaker describes signs or symbols as internally oriented, where the tool is re- imagined by various listeners in new ways, she suggested that in her case with regards to the Metro map, "the map became a sign for me...at first the map merely served as a means to help me find my way in s strange new city...it also became a means by which I was able to imagine myself in the world in a new way" (p.30). Whittaker now saw the map as a symbol of how self sufficient she was along with independence.--Tricia

An example of a tool would be a child’s toy. This is an externally oriented tool that can become a resource for thinking for young minds. A toy opens up the opportunity for imaginative play and allows the practice of manners, conversation, rules, friendship etc. This tool can allow the child to act on the world to do something that the child needs to do. Maybe the child will imitate an activity with the toy (like playing a game) that the child saw at school but was left out of, for example.Even if the child plays with others as well as the toy, the toy can be seen as a tool that places value on the experience. The experiences gave meaning to the child’s world. As the child grows up, it is possible that the tool may transform into a sign, something to look back on and see how it helped and guided the child to where he is today. The sign (toy) could be similar to that of the sign (map) described by Whittaker. It initially was a tool and was merely a means to act on the world but somewhere along the way, it became a sign and the person changed along with it. - Kailey S.

Kailey and Tricia, these are both excellent, original examples. Through them, we can definitely see the practical use of tools and also the transformative power of signs. (NMB)

These are great examples and explanations of tools and their relationship to the individual to affect change. Upon reflection, it seems that anything can be a tool, and a symbol - maybe not simultaneously, but it is depended on the individuals perspective of the article (tool) at that particular moment in time. For instance, as a child learning to ride a bicycle I used training wheels and view them as tools to assist me in being able to ride independently. However, after having mastered riding a bicycle without training wheels, my attitude about such training wheels changed. They symbolized growth and independence. Just as Whittaker (2008) expressed about the metro map, her view of the map changed from a tool to a symbol of what once was. Personally, I feel that it would be encouraging for us prospective teachers to consider and contemplate the ways in which we present instructional material to our students. If their perception is other than a tool to help them succeed and interact in the world, and more of a symbol of boring and endless work, their participation and engagement with the material is greatly affected.  Sr. Nadia

This is an excellent point, Sr. Nadia, and a call to action for teachers to really think about whether or not you are offering tools to students because only then can you provide potential signs for their transformation to more knowlegeable others. (NMB)

So what are some ways that we (future teachers) can motivate our students to see learning new material and instructional practices as tools? Is there anything you can think of from your childhood in the realm of academia that you once perceived to be a tool? Upon reflection, has your view changed? If so, is this now a symbol?

Sr. Nadia

The five of you have done a very good job of collaboratively building this precisely elaborated explanation of tools and signs. Vygotsky would be proud of the way that you built upon each others' ideas and comments to create something bigger than any one of your answers. (NMB)

# data[].attributes.headline
(Role of) History and Culture (Remember that Vygotsky called his theory a cultural-historical theory)

# data[].attributes.subject
(Role of) History and Culture (Remember that Vygotsky called his theory a cultural-historical theory)

# data[].attributes.body
Since "historical conditions are constantly changing, resulting in changed contexts and opportunities for learning" (Steiner & Mahn, 1996, p.194), Vygotskian ideas support the notion of a close relationship between historical processes and culture.

Steiner & Mahn (1996) point out how cultural values and complex social relationships shape interdependence within the process of the co-construction knowledge. Seeing that ones construction of knowledge is a process dependent on social and cultural interactions, over history, it can be said then that it is necessary to seek out and understand different cultural practices, as knowledge then becomes "relative to different cultural needs" (Bailey, Spring, 2015). Culture is the prime determinant of cognitive development. - Sr. Nadia

Hi Sr. Nadia,

I am curious about your final statement, that "culture is the prime determinant of cognitive development." Do you think this is true in light of Vygotsky's emphasis on "dialectical methods" (p. 159)? If dialectics resolve either-or problems such that we arrive at a-bit-of-both solutions, is it possible for there to be such a thing as a "prime determinant" within Vygotskian theory?

I feel like there is a lot of 'fuzziness' at play in our readings about Vygotsky so far. For example, John-Steiner and Mahn (1996) cite Vygotsky who says that "all higher psychological functions are internalized relationships of the social kind…" (Vygotsky on p. 192) -- that statement makes it seem like our psychologies are, as you said, primarily constituted by sociocultural factors. Later, they cite (and agree with) Penuel and Wertsch (1995) who write that "sociocultural processes on the one hand and individual functioning on the other [exist] in a dynamic, irreducible tension rather than a static notion of social determination" (p. 196) -- I don't know about you, but I feel like that statement is somewhat contradictory in relation to Vygotsky's!

It's almost as if Vygotsky had one set of ideas but the Neo-Vygotskians have taken a slightly different path -- could it be that Vygotsky felt that culture was a prime determinant while the Neo-Vygotskians have taken a more 'balanced' position? Actually, this wouldn't surprise me given my understanding of how the Marxist paradigm has developed: Marx himself felt that the means of production (the 'base') was the prime determinant of culture (the 'superstructure'); Post-Marxists like Gramsci, however, argued that there was no prime determinant, and that base and superstructure were continually shaping each other. I wonder if something similar isn't at work with Vygotsky and the Neo-Vygotskians, especially given that their theory is rooted in Marxist thought (Bailey, 2015)?

-- Andrew

Great questions, Andrew, but I am wondering if it would help if you were to add onto Vygotsky's statement above, by thinking about his idea that those "internalized relationships of the social kind" come about through transactional processes?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Vygotsky’s cultural-historical theory applies dialectical synthesis. He specified cultural signs and symbols as psychological tools that humans created in order to progress toward complex thinking. For an individual in society, the task is to appropriate the symbol of one’s culture to develop reasoning. For example, Whittaker states that learning “was tied to my sociocultural world where, in the context of a specific activity, tools became resources for my thinking” (p.29, 2008). According to Vygotskian theory, knowledge is cultural: “particularly knowledge of how to use a culture’s psychological tools to manipulate the environment consciously and systematically” (Bailey, Spring, 2015). This is clear in the description of Whittaker’s use of the metro map as a sign and symbol.

Vygotsky used genetic analysis to focus on the interconnectedness of origins and history of phenomena (Steiner & Mahn, 1996). He believed the historical study of behavior forms the base of theoretical study. He emphasized the need to concentrate on the process of development rather than the product of development (Steiner & Mahn, 1996).  This can be referred to as higher cognitive functions, which requires self-mastery. Vygotsky studied the role of speech in children; through speech, children acquire views that reflect reality in a more adequate way. Higher cognitive function requires the child’s mastery of the external materials of cultural reasoning, which become internal mechanisms of thinking. Because schools differ in different cultures, children living in different cultures will generally think differently. “Human development and learning originate and grow out of social and cultural interaction” (Bailey, Spring, 2015). Thus, these interactions involve people, cultural artifacts (e.g. books, toys), and cultural practices in which a child engages in (e.g. classroom, home, playground). These children construct knowledge, skills, and attitudes.

Essentially, the history and culture in which a child grows up determine much more than what that child knows or likes – it determines which tools the child will learn and how these tools will shape the child’s mind. Yes! This is helpful, Amanda. (NMB)

-Amanda B

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sr. Nadia and Amanda have both raised a number of excellent points with regards to Vygotsky’s cultural-historical theory.  Perhaps, however, I can contribute one or two additional ideas.

Something worth mentioning, I think, is that Vygotsky’s attention to historical and (socio)cultural matters is one of the things which sets him apart from Piaget (the theory which he displaces, to a certain extent [Bailey, 2015]).  Indeed, Piaget can be thought of (to an extent, at least) as a biological determinist, and his is a “universalistic theory of development” (p. 197) which supposes that all children at all times develop in exactly the same way (in accordance with natural biological progression).  Vygotsky’s theories of learning and development, on the other hand, are “contextualized” (p. 197) – Vygotsky and his disciples consider “the ways in which learning and teaching take place under different cultural circumstances and in different historical contexts”(p. 197).  And because he feels that "historical [and cultural] conditions are constantly changing" (p. 194) in ways which change the "contexts and opportunities for learning" (p. 194), Vygotsky seems to see no value in "universal schema" (p. 194) -- like Piagets -- which try to explain development in a decontextualized way.

Good, Andrew. This can help us to see that while Piaget might be helpful to us as we plan instruction, we need to look especially to Vygotsky to think about and plan for the cultural diversity in our classrooms. (NMB)

Another thing that hasn't been discussed is what Vygotsky's cultural-historical theory actually means to us as teachers. It seems to me that Vygotsky's theory asks us to pay careful attention to the cultural-historical backgrounds of our students. How children think, learn, and develop is very much related to the culture in which thinking, learning, and development occurs (Bailey, 2015). As such, Vygotsky's theory implies the need for teachers to take a "culturally sensitive approach" in the classroom (p. 198). John-Stein and Mahn (1996) illustrated this point in an extremely interesting way when they mentioned research which compared students of Hawaiian and Navajo descent (p. 197). Students from these divergent cultural-historical backgrounds behave, think, and learn in markedly different ways (as a result of their backgrounds). It follows, then, that we need to teach these students in different ways, ones which take into account the way their minds have been shaped by the parameters of their distinct cultures. Yes! This is so important to bring up. (NMB)

A third (and final) thing I wanted to bring up is that Vygotsky's attention to history and culture has implications for those of us who are interested in reform (a matter which is briefly discussed at the very end of John-Stein and Mahn's [1996] work [p. 204]). According to John-Stein and Mahn, Vygotskian theory sees there to be a "dynamic interdependence [between] social and individual processes" (p. 192). To me (and please correct me if I am wrong), this implies a two way relationship between the child and their culture: yes, culture informs and shapes the child; but at the same time, the child acts on and shapes the culture. Vygotskian theory, then, implies that the reform-minded teacher should teach their students in ways which will facilitate (what the teacher perceives to be) productive cultural change. For instance, say we have a concern for gender issues within our culture: keeping in mind the Vygotskian idea that our students will one day act on and shape their broader cultures, it seems to me that the concerned-teacher must foster in their students the type of learning and development which will lead these students to challenge and reject oppressive gender roles within their cultures.

-- Andrew

Hmmm...very interesting, Andrew. I hope that some of your classmates will comment on this provocative point for one of their postings this week. (NMB)

# data[].attributes.body
Vygotsky describes internalization as “a process that occurs simultaneously in social practice and in the human brain/mind” (John-Steiner & Mahn, 1996).  Essentially, internalization is the process of incorporating and mastering societal actions, values, and beliefs within oneself. More simply put, internalization can be further defined as the ability of ‘knowing how’ as a result of society. For example, when learning to pour a glass of milk or ride a bike, a child will initially mimic the actions of their mentors (typically the parents). The child will eventually learn to master these skills, which were once above his skill level, as a function of both his own ability and that of social interaction. Similarly, when learning to speak, a child will imitate the actions of his parents or older siblings. Eventually, the child will ‘know’ what each sound/word means as a result of the teachings from these interactions. Therefore, as per Vygotsky, “the development of the mind of the child is both independent and social at the same time and is the result of a long process of developmental events” (John-Steiner & Mahn, 1996).     ~Bridget S.

For my classmates: How does Vygotsky’s definition of internalization influence his theory regarding language and thought development? Do you think that his explanation is plausible, or does it need additional refining? ~Bridget S.

Bridget, I do agree with your definition of Internalization
as “a process that occurs
simultaneously in social practice and in the human brain/mind”
(John-Steiner& Mahn, 1996).  In regards to your question I feel that
Vygotsky’s definition of internalization has major implications on his theory
regarding language and thought development. What I feel Vygotsky’s views of
internalization focus on are the social consequences of internalization and
from these social consequences come more developed and refined language and
thought skills. This is noted from some of the examples you pointed out such as
the children learning to ride a bike by first watching, then mimicking, and
eventually mastering the skill. As John-Steiner and Mahn point out, “In working
with, through and beyond what they have appropriated in a social participation
and then internalized, individuals coconstruct new knowledge” (John-Steiner&
Mahn, 1996).  It would be helpful if you put a page number with your quotations, Matt (and everyone) so that people could look at the part where you chose your quotation and perhaps continue the conversation. (NMB) This essentially means that through social interactions such
as mimicking and observing, children then internalize what they see and then
act it out to eventually master the skill. Where I feel the definition of
Internalization is lacking is in noting the cognitive processes of
internalization. The definition does a great job in noting the social
ramifications and how “Internalization is simultaneously an individual and a
social process” (John-Steiner& Mahn, 1996) however, the definiton lacks in
highlighting the individual process and the cognitive processes that go along
with it. -Matt H.

My question
for the class:

The reading by John-Steiner and Mahn highlight the social components of
internalization and how internalization is simultaneously an individual and social
process. However there is little there in terms of the indivdual process of
internalization. What are some cognitive processes that allow for an individual
to internalize? Or What are some components of the individual aspect of internalization?  -Matt H

Let me help to answer your question and also add to your point above it a little: Remember, first, that Vygotsky didn't think in terms of cognition in the ways that the schema theorists--or even Piaget--think about cognition. Vygotsky thought that thought develops though a transactional process which combines the social and the internal (the latter, I suppose, we could call the cognitive). In other words, what we have in our heads and what we experience through our interactions with others must come together in order for us to "get smarter." You use a great example, above, Matt, when you talk about kids learning to ride a bike. And you are essentially right when you say, "children then internalize what they see and then
act it out to eventually master the skill." However, it is more complicated than just learning a skill, though learning a skill could be part of the process of "getting smarter": A step on the way to internalization is appropriation. I appropriate when I take on what someone else is saying, doing, believing, valuing, being, etc.--sometimes without fully understanding what it is that I am saying or doing. Think about little kids (or adolescents) who repeat things, like prejudiced statements, swear words, or even terms of endearment, that they learn by hearing someone else say them (or they repeat actions like riding a bike or riding a bike in a certain way; they may even "take on" someone else's beliefs about why we ride bikes--fun, physical fitness, be cool, etc.). Even adults "take on" or appropriate speech patterns or dress styles of those that they frequently hang out with. I think, especially, of verbal memes that come in and out of style (e.g., "Far out, man" or "Dude..." or "I pledge allegiance to the flag...") . We appropriate these words, even, sometimes, the ideas behind them as mediating signs and tools that enable us to "be" in our social world and to interact with the people there to learn, get jobs done, find pleasure, etc. When the words, actions, ways of being that I have appropriated actually do mediate meaning and change (transform) who I am so that I actually take on the meaning of the words, beliefs, values, then I have internalized them. For example, I have become a bike rider. Or, if I live with Quakers, it is likely that I would gradually appropriate words, actions, ways of seeing the world that those around me use/live by, etc.. If the words, actions, ways of being, ways of valuing, etc. actually become part of who I am, what I value and think so that I actually use them to think about other things or act upon them, then I have internalized them. Using Bridget's example above, it may not just be the way that I pour the milk that I have internalized from my parents, but also the fact that I think milk is good for my health or that I think that milk is drunk with chocolate chip cookies but not with tostadas. (NMB)

# data[].attributes.headline
(The role of) Language in learning and development

# data[].attributes.subject
(The role of) Language in learning and development

# data[].attributes.body
Language acquisition is another type of social development. According to Vygotsky's theory, the process of learning reading and writing is a collaborative community effort. Rather than teaching reading and then writing, Vygotsky argues that they are dependent on each other. This reminds me of a Phonics article I read arguing encoding is a better approach to learning words then decoding. With encoding, the learner constructs the word and its meaning rather than trying to decipher a word that is given to them.

Vygotsky's theory emphasizes the importance of learning in social contexts. Although early learners may not always be conversational with adults, they still interact with them on many levels. For example, helping around the house, or working together in different contexts (grocery shopping, running errands). During this time together, the early learner picks up strategies and new knowledge from the caregiver. Language acquisition happens at home and in the classroom. Steiner and Mahn include a four step process including: transmission, construction, transaction, and transformation "in a continuing, complex interplay" (p. 192).

These principles are similar to the three dimensions of change in mental functioning: "intellectualization of mental functions, bringing them under conscious and voluntary control; decontextualization, being able to detach a concept from the context in which is was first encountered; and a movement toward integration and systemization" (p. 203). These principles outline how a learner acquires new information, comprehends that information, and then applies it to their surrounding world.

Speech plays a significant role in understanding Vygotsky's theory because it is the main way adults interact with young children. The literacy acquisition of the child first starts with gestures and signals, they then transfer this to paper by writing scribbles. This is the beginning stages of their writing development as Vygotsky said, "it is the initial visual sign that contains the child's future writing as an acorn contains a future oak" (p. 203). The child then places importance on objects using gestures, which integrates Vygotsky's idea of play in the development of children (Bailey, Spring, 2015). These beginning signs of play lead to the child "acting out roles in imaginative play, or creating representations" (p. 203). When a student engages in this type of learning at home, they bring to school with them a completely different perspective that a teacher can integrate in to her learning objectives, ensuring that the students learn from each other (Steiner, Mahn, 1996). When the early learners engage in conversations, or Basic Interpersonal Communication Skills, they are relating to each other on a social level which can then affect their Cognitive Academic Language Proficiency.

Steiner and Mahn also touch on the importance of creating a culturally diverse learning environment. "Such difference in langauge use in ethnicially mixed classes often result in differential access to literacy experiences" (Steiner, Mahn, 1996, pg. 203). In theme with Vygotsky's sociocultural theory, the need to incorporate culture differences in to education is very important. Steiner and Mahn cite the use of "dialogue journals" that allow ESL learners to internalize and construct their own experiences in an expressive way. - Caroline Pierce

Good, Caroline. Vygotsky calls language the ultimate tool and sign. Perhaps for this week, one of your classmates will build on what you have said here to explain why. (NMB)

# data[].attributes.body
Steiner and Mahn introduced guided participation by stating that "when beginning an activity, learners depend on others with more experience" (p. 192). Guided participation is a principle of learning and development. Throughout our studies, we have learned of many approaches in developing learners. Shared reading and providing instruction and modeling how to complete an objective, are both examples of guided participation. This is a principle that learners use at all stages of development. I still rely on "others with more experience" when learning about a new subject. - Caroline Pierce

I like your connection to "guided participation," Caroline. After reading about Bruner, perhaps you or one of your classmates might want to add to this.

After reading the Meece article, I discovered that peer interactions plays an important role in learning and development of a student. Piggy backing off of the idea that "when beginning an activity, learners depend on others with more experience" (Steiner, Mahn, 1996, p. 192). Vygotsky argued a child's development is enhanced through collaboration with peers. Pairing a more advanced student with a struggling student can help the struggling student achieve higher comprehension. It is important that the teacher scaffold instruction and provide a structure for which the students are to work together. This is because the students must come together and mutually agree on the procedures they used and the result of the problem. This reminds me of sports, which is argued to help develop students on and off the field. Participation in organized sports leads to collaboration, respect, and teamwork. The coach begins practice by modeling what he wants the team to do. Then, the team partakes in "drills" which are intended to hone the new skill. Often times, the coach will split the team in to two groups to perform a scrimmage. Often times, the coach would ask a skilled team member to demonstrate how to perform a drill. This is when the advanced players can demonstrate to the less advanced players how to perform different "moves". The intended result is for the coach to transfer his or her skills to the teammates in order to win the games. The coach is developing skilled team members, and the team members are learning from the coach and each other. - Caroline Pierce Great example, Caroline. YOu can see how effective group work in a classroom can be if we form our groups carefully, right? Another thing to think about is that this is another reason to know your students well because if you know at least some strengths for each student, then everybody gets to be the MKO at least once in a while, right? (NMB)

Learning and development:

Human development begins with reliance on guardians. Learning and development were in based on  the idea that human activities occur in social setting or cultural context, intervened by language and other image frameworks or symbol system, and can be best comprehended when researched in their historical development (John-Steiner and Mahn, p.191). Vygotsky added to a rich, multifaceted hypothesis through which he examined a scope of subject including the psychology of art, language and thoughts, and learning and development, including an attention to the training of students with special needs. (John-Steiner and Mahn, p.192).

Caroline, I like that you relate guided principle and shared reading:  “guided participation is a principle of learning and development”. This standard characterizes social collaboration. Students are relays on others with more experience. Rogoff proposed that, "this methodology as guided participation, in her cross-cultural studies." For e.g. Mayan Mother's with their youngsters as a case of the nonverbal guidance, an adult give children.- Sumaiya

Yes, Sumi, you bring up a couple of good points here, especially the point that guided participation can be both verbal or nonverbal. (NMB)

# data[].attributes.headline
More Knowledgeable Other (MKO) and Less Knowledgeable Other (LKO)

# data[].attributes.subject
More Knowledgeable Other (MKO) and Less Knowledgeable Other (LKO)

# data[].attributes.body
According to Steiner and Mahn (1996), "the development of the individual relies on the vast pool of transmitted experiences of others" thus touching on Vygotsky's belief in the vital role of social interactions in human development (p. 192). In the process of learning, then, the less knowledgeable other (the learner) depends on the more knowledgeable other for assistance. The process of "guided participation" is a perfect example to use to highlight these two roles in the learning process (Steiner & Mahn, 1996, p. 192). In guided participation, "learners depend on others with more experience" when beginning an activity, and "take on increasing responsibility for their own learning and participate on joint activity" over time (Steiner & Mahn, 1996, p. 192). Therefore, in terms of social interactions, learning occurs when a LKO is supported and scaffolded by a MKO. -Claire

Good Claire. Perhaps for this week, you or one of your classmates might want to comment about who the MKO and the LKO might be in a classroom. Also, can anyone see a connection to the ZPD? Can anyone see a connection to collaborative activities like discussion groups, Book Clubs, or team projects? (NMB)

In the classroom, I think the MKO can be the teacher or another student. The LKO then is the student that may be struggling with content or who has not yet mastered it. Through scaffolding, guidance, and reciprocal teaching (Meece, 2002), students continue to develop their cognitive skills. All of the support given to students helps them progress in their zone of proximal development. As the MKO supports the LKO in tasks slightly beyond their independent level, they internalize and develop the skills to complete the tasks on their own. It is through these supports that LKO are able to advance within their ZPD. -Claire

I agree with Claire that the MKO can be the teacher or another student and the LKO is the student who is struggling with the content. I can see a connection to the ZPD in that the MKO can help the LKO reach their higher limit ZPD. That is, whatever context the LKO is struggling with the MKO will help them master it and therefore be able to move up to the higher limit ZPD.

In discussion groups, Books clubs, or team projects there is always someone who is the MKO and the LKO - there is nothing wrong with this! So, in these types of groups there is the MKO who is helping the LKO - in some aspects the MKO does not stay the MKO the whole time per say. Depending on the content knowledge and what the group is discussing depends on who the MKO could be. -Nicole G.

# data[].attributes.body
Mediation means that humans purposefully introduce tools between themselves and their environment in hopes of modifying it and obtaining benefits. Mediation is a central view in Vygotsky's view of cognitive development (and it compliments the behaviorists views). Vygotsky believed that by using activity mediators, we humans are thus able to modify our environments and our ways of interacting with the world. (Steiner & Mahn, 1996). There are two phenomena that mark the relationship between humans and their environment: 1) the use of tools within social organized activity, and 2) use of language as a cultural form of mediation. This means that humans use different forms of language (signs) as mediators between their environment and their mind. Therefore, mediation --> intelligence --> higher mental processes. -Sr. Nadia

Hmmm...some more good, independent thinking, Sr. Nadia, that makes me think of another question: What do you think that Vygotsky (and probably the other socioculturalists) thought intelligence is? (NMB)

# data[].attributes.body
Social Interaction is a huge thing for children to be apart of, especially in the classroom. John-Steiner and Mayer state that "human development starts with dependence on caregivers [parents]" (192), this is entirely true, but children need other children to learn certain things. Children interacting in school with other children gives them skills that they can develop by observing other children. When a child begins learning something new, seeing someone else who already has skill in that task teaches the child how to do it - the children are learning from each other (192). Rogoff named this process as "guided participation". The process consists of transmission, construction, transaction, construction, transaction, and transformation in a continuing, in-depth interplay (192). There is a constant interplay between children and this needs to happen. -Nicole Goyette

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Nicole has made some excellent points here. One thing I'd like to point out is that, in the abstract of their article, John-Steiner and Mahn (1996) identify "three central tenets of a Vygotskian framework" (p. 191). The first of those tenets is that "individual development" (p. 191) stems from "social sources" (p. 191). Logically, then, it follows that if we hope for our students' cognitions to develop (and I think it is a given that all of us do want that), it is crucial that we encourage social interaction.

Something that stands out in this regard is the matter of language. John-Steiner and Mahn (1996) point out the fact that "the acquisition of language" (p. 192) is rooted in "social (sources) of development" (p. 192). Language, of course, is a crucial "semiotic mechanism" (p. 192), one which "(mediates) social and individual functioning and (connects) the external and the internal, the social and the individual" (p. 192). Through language, we are able to "(internalize) … external dialogue" (Vygotsky on p. 193) and we are also able to 'externalize' (so to speak) our thoughts -- in other word, through language we are able to take-in and act-on the world around us. Without social interaction, we would not be able to develop this incredibly important tool.

-- Andrew

Andrew briefly touched on an idea which Meece introduces in his article. He stated that "development involves a complex interaction of genetic and environment influences" (Meece, 2002, p. 159). This is very true. Meece questions how Vygotsky's sociocultural theory and asks, where does cognitive process come in to play? He mentions that cognitive processes enable social transformations which is reminiscent of Piaget. The example he provided was excellent in explaining this idea, "what cognitive changes enable the child to move from an assisted reader to an independent reader?" (Meece, 2002, p. 159). when a student graduates from an assisted reader to an independent reader, he notes that memory and attention processes are what account for this maturation, as well as help from home (reading to the child)/peers (social interactions).

- Caroline Pierce

I'm glad that you brought in this part of Meece's chapter--the part about limitations in Vygotsky's theories. Giving an example to make a point, Meece says that while Vygotsky can help us to see that social interaction can assist students in learning to read, Vygotsky does not talk about what happens cognitively to the student, and therefore, we don't know exactly what cognitive processes can help students move from "assisted reader to independent reader." Thus, Meece says, we must look to other theories (such as IP and schema theories that explain attention and memory processes) for this. This is a great argument for teachers to use theoretical diversity in thinking about their practice, right? (NMB)

# data[].attributes.body
Bruner’s development of spiral curriculum is powerful: in teaching any subject, Bruner thought “foundational concepts and principles should be taught first followed by specific cases” (Jones & Reeves, 2006, p.59). In addition, a concept or action should be revisited repeated until the child has mastered it and then the teacher can build upon it until the child has grasped the full idea. Bruner hypothesized that a child can learn and understand even the most complex material, if he/she was properly instructed (Jones & Reeves, 2006).

Mathematics curricula can be seen as a ‘spiral’ approach: specifically in elementary, students cover the same topics each year, but these topics become more advanced as the years go on. A student who learns it for the first time may not remember it the following year. But the expectation after four years of revisiting, we expect the child to have mastered the basic concept. The illustrated figure is a helpful example of the spiral approach. We can see every passing year; more advanced topics are added to the basic notion of division and fraction. The new learning has a relationship with the old learning and is put in context with the old information. Jones & Reeves (2006) explain that a spiral curriculum has been a popular choice by instructional designers in that they “sequence content first by basic, foundational knowledge, then proceed to specific cases which gain in complexity and contain exceptions to the guiding principles of the subject” (p.59).  I think what’s really great about the spiral curriculum is the ease into transition from simple ideas to complex ideas. It’s beneficial because information is reinforced and solidified each time a student revisits the concept. Spiral curriculum requires students to remember and activate past knowledge and build upon that past knowledge with new material.

- Amanda B.

You do a tremendous
job of highlighting what Spiral Curriculum really is. Like its name, Bruner’s
Spiral Curriculum notes that curricula should be taught and sequenced like that
of a spiral. Think of a tornado, you start with the foundational concepts and
principles at the bottom and they are taken up over time and reinforced by
specific cases then once they reach the top the skills become more concrete. In
other words, “In teaching any subject, foundational concepts and principles
should be taught first followed by specific cases. This enables learners to
clarify connections between concepts encountered earlier and later and thus
remedy the problem of transfer” (Jones and Reeves, p.59). Teaching a spiral
curriculum allows the students to use what they have learned in previous
classes, be it the current year or previous years, to make connections and
allow for a more seamless transfer of knowledge. The spiral curriculum should
repeatedly revisit the basic concepts until the student has demonstrated a
complete grasp of the concept (Jones and Reeves, p. 59). It is important to
note that curriculum can be taught to anyone it just must be represented appropriately
based on the developmental level of the students (Jones and Reeves, p. 59). I
really like the fact that you pointed out background knowledge. Background
knowledge is a key tool that teachers can use to promote learning. Not only
does Bruner discuss it in his ideas of spiral curriculum, but also Vygotsky and
Piaget each feel that in one way or another background knowledge influences the
learning process. –Matt H

Excellent explanation here, Amanda and Matt, and you both point out not only how the spiral curriculum works, but also the many benefits of the spiral curriculum. I am really glad that Matt added the part about the representational systems because that is definitely important for making sure that the foundational knowledge is taught correctly (and may explain why students sometimes don't get the basics, even though they were "taught"). One thing that is problematic to me, though, is teachers of any of the levels above first or second grade who see students who need remediation and think that this merely means "just keep drilling the basics." This concerns me because I have seen far too many high school students who are so turned off about school because for them it is merely workbook pages that drill and drill those basics. How could teachers resolve the need to spiral with the need for students to have a solid understanding of "the basics" (especially those in upper grades, but really any grade that relies on background knowledge) ? (NMB)

Question for the
class:

Although Bruner states that Spiral Curriculum
can be used in any subject, however most of the research and literature
examines it in a Math context. What are some ways that Spiral Curriculum can be
used in a social studies, science or language context? –Matt H

Matt - to answer your question (or maybe put another question on top of it).

After reading about spiral curriculum and reading what Amanda and you have posted, I somewhat link the Common Core with spiral curriculum. I do not know if this is correct or not..?

In the common core the fundamental concepts are taught first and then they are followed by the specific lessons. Each concept is revisited each year, just in a more complex way way. The students have to use prior knowledge in order to continue their learning and learn to the best of their ability. -Nicole G.

# data[].attributes.body
These are processes that describes how children learn, John-Steiner & Mahn describe that these processes influence each other and are interdependent, authors pointed out that Vygotsky thought of these two concepts as parts of a single process (1996). Scientific concepts refers to concepts that are introduced and learned inside the classroom with teacher giving explicit instruction done in a systematic manner whereas spontaneous concepts are learning done out of the classroom in the child's everyday life experiences (John-Steiner & Mahn, 1996). The authors thought it very important to point out what effective teaching is which takes into account the inter- relatedness of these two concepts, they point out that it is " analyzing how students learn, as well as acknowledging and attempting to understand the culturally conditioned knowledge [students] bring to the classroom" John-Steiner & Mahn, 1996, p. 202) , I think that the acknowledgement and attempt to understand a students culture and cultural references are great confidence builders for those students that will likely lead them to succeed in school. It is also important to note that from research that was examined looking at Mexican American students, it was found that knowledge from their households was very instrumental in bringing about innovative practices ( John-Steiner & Mann, 1996). John-Steiner & Mahn (1996), describes that this research showed a "reciprocal relation existed between everyday knowledge used to understand school material and classroom activities [are] used to help students understand social reality" (p. 202). These two processes are therefore very interconnected and are not existing mutually exclusive of the other.------ Tricia

Yes, Tricia, as I pointed out in my note to Andrew in the block on Historical-Cultural theory, this part of Vygotsky's thinking is especially relevant to us today because we will all, probably, have culturally diverse classrooms. (NMB)