One positive aha moment for me was realizing how much adults and peers influence learning. We do not learn in isolation, and the guidance, support, and interactions we receive from others shape not only what we learn but how we approach challenges. This idea comes to life in the Circle of Friends approach, where children support one another and feel included. Watching students work together, help each other, and grow as a community highlighted how learning becomes richer and more meaningful when it is social. It reminded me that as an educator, creating opportunities for collaboration and guidance is just as important as the lessons themselves.

1)Learning should be an active process

- instead of sharing and telling my students what he could do when he got angry (and felt like hitting his friend), I should ask him to suggest ways to help himself. In this way, he would be able to explore, create and make connections.

2)Zones of Proximal Development

- peers could also support him in areas that he was not yet proficient in, self-control

3)More Knowledgeable Other

-he could learn from peers' experience when encountering difficult social issues within the school

Vygotsky believed that cognitive development is heavily influenced by social interaction. He argued that children learn through their interactions with more knowledgeable individuals (e.g., parents, teachers, peers). His concept of scaffolding refers to the support given by adults or peers to help a child complete a task they cannot do independently.

Piaget, on the other hand, emphasized individual exploration and discovery. He believed that children develop cognitively through interacting with their environment, but he did not place as much emphasis on social interaction as Vygotsky. Piaget focused on self-initiated activities as the primary mechanism for cognitive development.

I think that these two developmental concepts actually intertwined when we apply in our teaching pedagogy as SENOs for our SEN students. We can be there to scaffold our students’ learning and development once they have master the skill sets we learn to let them be independent in exploring the world on their own eventually (phasing out the helping part).

Lesson plans are great tools for us as SENOs to decipher what skills/concepts we want to teach SEN students. By deliberately putting in constructivist principles, it helps to unpack what the students are actually benefiting from the lesson itself -> scaffolding happens within the lesson -> social interactions occur between the student(s) and SENO -> allowing the students to have autonomy to explore the environment they are in.

Next, when we compared Piaget’s theory with Vygotsky’s, it highlighted the value of critical thinking, as we were encouraged to reflect on both perspectives. Our learning was also then scaffolded through structured group activities, as we were assigned roles numbered 1 to 5. This was an example of active learning, as we were given opportunities to explore, and student-centred learning, where guidance was provided to ensure everyone could participate and contribute.

Watching the Class Act video brought the abstract ideas of Vygotsky into a real-world application, showing how his principles are used in authentic classroom contexts. Discussing the video and later evaluating lesson plans in smaller groups gave us opportunities for active learning and collaboration, as we worked together to apply theory to practice. And as always, the session ended with opportunities to reflect on what we had learnt, helping us consolidate our understanding and connect it to our own experiences.

I agree with both their viewpoints, that a child learns through his environment as he goes through the development stages, while incorporating V's belief that language and social interactions would allow a child to expand on his knowledge through a more knowledgeable person.

I also enjoyed reading different people's learning on the past mistakes they have made, and how they grew from that. Learning does not stop. We are still learning through and from meeting new people and working with them.

My aha moment is watching the video on the middle school teacher's effort and love for the children to build on not only their functional skills for their future, but also the opportunities given for the staff and peers in the school to get to know the children with needs better. As Singapore is moving towards an inclusive society, it made me think about how big our gap is currently. On our part, how can us SENO create a ZPD for the staff and students in mainstream schools so that they are able to take more steps forward in building a safe and inclusive environment?

From today's sessions, blending both of their ideas could make for a powerful pedagogy method in the classroom.

Piaget: Learning is mostly an individual journey, moving through natural stages at your own pace.

Vygotsky: Learning is a social process, powered by guidance, language, and culture.

My aha moment came when I realized that we don’t have to choose between Piaget and Vygotsky ,we can actually bring their ideas together. By applying Vygotsky’s concepts like the Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) and scaffolding, alongside Piaget’s four stages of development, we can create a more complete way of understanding and supporting how students learn in a classroom.

Vygotsky’s theory says that children learn through social interactions and language. Children can learn things beyond what they know but only with a knowledgeable other. This is why our role as educators are important because we are the knowledgeable other and we want to keep stretching our students beyond what they already do.

That’s also why it’s important to set the scaffolding for them as a guide so they can easily learn new things. For this, we need instructional scaffolding strategies such as “I do, You do, We do”.

Before we teach new things we also need to assess the student’s own stage of developement and prior knowledge. With this as the base, we can tailor our lesson plan to them. During our lesson plan, we have to add in social interaction, which we can do by thinking out loud and having conversations. We also need to add in a physical element and give them hands-on activities to allow them to apply what they learnt to ‘real-world’ context. All of these factors are part of the constructivist principles. Using these principles, we encourage students to be active learners who can think critically and reflect on their own learning.  

Being able to apply the constructivist principles while discussing on the video on Class Act and our lesson plan allowed me to see how we could better structure our sessions to support the students’ learning through encouraging active process of learning with our assessment of the student’s stages of development and providing instructional scaffolding.

The discussion with our peers on the value of mistakes made me reflect how we may require to feel safe to be more vulnerable, to be able to account to our mistakes. Our society may not be so forgiving of mistakes at this juncture, and yet we have to start somewhere and not lose the meaning of making mistakes - as a form of learning for us. Particularly for our students with SEN who may make more mistakes, I hope to be able to create this safe environment where they can be more open about making mistakes and be willing to try. It is more about how we view/perceive mistakes and not the mistake itself.

My “aha” moment came when Dr. Liz provided us with tea-time snacks. We’re now in Week 3, and she’s been doing this consistently each week. Without even realizing it at first, I found myself looking forward to her class and feeling more motivated to participate. The inclusion of class activities and group work also makes the sessions more engaging. Since it’s an afternoon class, a time when many of us tend to feel sleepy, these elements really help keep us focused and involved.

A key idea in Vygotsky’s theory is the Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD). This is the range of tasks that a child cannot do alone but can achieve with help from others. This shows how important support and guidance are in helping children move forward in their learning.

I also learned about scaffolding, which means giving children the right kind of support until they can do the task by themselves. The five scaffolding strategies are: starting with the end product, making expectations clear, showing our thinking, structuring conversations, and teaching key vocabulary first. These strategies give children the step-by-step help they need to succeed.

1. In order to encourage students to value mistakes as an opportunity for learning, we need to create an environment where mistakes are viewed positively. For example, we can make a mistake on purpose in class and allow the students to correct us. How we respond can be an example of how we as educators 'recover' from our own mistakes.

2. Providing opportunities for learning in authentic environments allow students to better apply their learning and grow from their experience. The video on the Coffee Cart really struck me on how learning in a school should not be limited to the classrooms. Providing a safe learning environment for the students where they are guided on the different roles, with opportunities to practise in realistic settings (e.g. interacting with teachers as customers) allow the students to be grow and increase their confidence in generalising their learning beyond the school environment.

3. As educators, we need to be able to know our students' prior knowledge and abilities in order to design effective learning activities that are within their Zones of Proximal Development.

For example, when we were discussing Vygotsky’s theory within our group, the sharing allowed us to interact and exchange ideas, helping me deepen my understanding of the topic discussed. When I heard a POV which differed from mine, it made me pause and think, reconsider my own idea, and develop a new perspective of my own.  The class sharing also allows me to learn from others’ experiences, enhancing my ZPD moments.. Ah HA~!

Thinking back, I realise some parents like myself unknowingly apply Piaget’s and Vygotsky’s theories in our daily interactions with our young children.

My habits of reading to them before bedtime, spending quality time playing and interacting with them, taking them outdoors to explore, and our countless trips to the science and art museums, where they could explore and engage in various games and activities, were ways of naturally incorporating principles of learning through social interactions, active learning, scaffolding and discovery learning. Though these were done without my prior knowledge of Piaget and Vygotsky’s principles, I could see how these learning experiences had helped my children's growth in many aspects, particularly in terms of social interaction and self-confidence.

Another point that stood out to me was the idea that the MKO can also take the form of technology—a concept that feels especially relevant today. Tools like ChatGPT are now widely used for research, problem-solving, and even tutoring. However, I wonder if technology can truly fulfil the role of the MKO. 🤔 In Vygotsky's framework, learning is always dialogic, requiring dynamic interactions between individuals. This, I argue, is something that technology, in its current form, cannot fully replicate.

Overall, reflecting on Vygotsky’s work has made me think deeply about my practice. His emphasis on social interaction in learning has made me realise that there is great value in adopting the role of a "guide on the side" (as opposed to being the "sage on the stage"). Moving forward, I would love to create opportunities for my students to engage in collaborative learning, where they build understanding through interaction and shared experiences, rather than passively receiving information ☺︎

The point on how culture, society, organization - i.e. the environment — affects how we view mistakes.  I really like the example of how, if in a classroom setting we can establish a “norm” that making mistake is okay, and that pointing out others’ mistakes (even that of the teacher’s) is okay too!  I guess the concept of making mistake not only frightens us, the concept of correcting other’s is also frightening! 

I am glad that the article and class sharing got us on the road on re-learning the concept of mistakes.

Another was about the More Knowledge Other (MKO).  We learned that MKO aren’t just parents and teachers, one’s peers, technology and society can be MKO’s too. This reminded me of the time during my stint school when I saw one of the SENO engaged the assistance of one of the student’s classmate to take on the role of guiding (now I know its “MKO”!). Back then I did wonder why did we not teach the child directly, but through his peers. Now I realised I was stuck in the thinking that one learns best from professionals/adults.

After this session I see that sometimes what a student need can be provided by a peer, which may be even more effective — especially if a rapport has already been established and that it maybe less intimidating for the student too! 

Vygotsky believed that our cognitive development is shaped by culture and communication, whereas Piaget focused on individual cognitive growth. Piaget viewed learning as progressing through different stages based on experiences, while Vygotsky emphasized the importance of collaboration. Together, these ideas contributed to the development of the constructivist approach to learning.

Firstly, he emphasised that learning i) takes place in the context of a social environment and ii) requires support from a more knowledgeable other. This implies that cognitive development is an active and interactive process. In workplaces, we have mentors to guide junior colleagues. All of us had a mentor during our contract school. We were exposed to real-world applications and experience-based learning about the role. It helped to develop and expand one’s zone of proximal development while having scaffolding in place. This helps one to advance more readily than performing independently.

Secondly, Vygotsky touched on language and speech development. In younger children, it is advised to limit screen time. Screen time greatly limits interaction and sensorimotor feedback to the child. Development in the child can therefore be impeded. Lack of interaction could affect meaning-making for the child, and all these affect their growth.

Thirdly, the lesson I could relate to the coffee cart video, particularly during the scene of collecting goods from the bakery. It requires courage and tenacity for these children to brave themselves to go out from school, travel, meet the bakery, get the order collection, verify, and return. It is a brazen act that many children of that age would shy from.

I also found the practical applications of going through the lesson plans very helpful as it provided an opportunity for us to look even more carefully into the purpose of our teaching and the takeaways we want the students to have.

It was also very interesting to be able to compare both Piaget's views and Vygotsky's views. I feel that either doesnt exist and influence in isolation and there are multiple ways both views can come together to shape the way we provide to the child's holistic functioning.