Psychology of education

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

1.1  Background of Problem

At the heart of Vygotsky’s theory lies the understanding of human cognition and learning as social and cultural rather than individual phenomena. The theories of Vygotsky are central to any serious discussion of children’s learning processes. Vygotsky argued that children do not develop in isolation, rather that learning takes place when the child is interacting with the social environment. It is the responsibility of the teacher to establish an interactive instructional situation in the classroom, where the child is an active learner and the teacher uses their knowledge to guide learning. He explored relationships between language and thought, instruction and development, everyday and academic concept formation, and a host of others.

 Vygotsky wrote in the Soviet Union during the 1920s and the 1930s. However, his work published recently in the Western world in the 1960s. Since then, his writings became very influential. Vygotsky’s research reveals that, even so, heredity is not a sufficient condition and that a contribution from the social environment in the form of a quite specific type of teaching process is also needed.Vygotsky was a Piage’s admirer. Although he agrees with Piaget that cognitive development occurs gradually and is characterized by the style of thinking is different, but Vygotsky disagreed with Piaget's view that children explore the world alone and form a picture of his own reality.

In this paper will be explained more about Vygotsky’s theory of cognitive development.

1.2  Formulation of Problem

1.    How about Vygotsky’s concepts of cognitive development?

2.    How about current perspectives on Vygotsky’s theory?

3.    How the application of Vygotsky’s theory?

1.3  The Purposes

1.      To know about Vygotsky’s concepts of cognitive development

2.      To know about current perspectives on Vygotsky’s theory

3.      To know the application of Vygotsky’s theory

 CHAPTER II

DISCUSSION

2.1    Vygotsky’s Concept of Cognitive Development

Vygotsky believed that the adults in society foster children’s cognitive development in an intentional and somewhat systematic manner. They continually engage children in meaningful and challenging activities and help them perform those activities successfully. Because Vygotsky emphasized the importance of society and culture for promoting cognitive growth, his theory is sometimes referred to as the sociocultural perspective. The following major assumptions provide a summary of this perspective:

a.       Genetic law of development

Every function in the child’s cultural development appears twice: first, on the social level, and later, on the individual level; first between people (interpsychological), and then inside the child (intrapsychological). This applies equally to voluntary attention, to logical memory, and to the formation of concepts. All the higher functions originate as actual relations between human individuals. The general genetic law of cultural development introduces the notion of some form of relationship between something which is defined as social and something which is defined as individual. This theory argued that social environment as primer factor to formulate child’s cognitive development.

According Vygotsky function of mental that higher in human being will appear and come from their social life, while the function of  intramental formed through the acquisition and internalization of a person against the social process, and meaning or construction of knowledge will be formed through the internalization process. Firstly, child participated in particular social activity without understand the meaning. Understanding will appear through internalization process, but internalization here is transformative means that give changing and developing[1].

Vygotsky saw change in mental functioning not as the result of a linear process, but rather as the result of quantitative changes leading to qualitative transformations. In these transformations, formerly distinct processes became unified. Vygotsky grounded this approach in the material world, starting his analysis with the changes that occurred when humans began to control and use nature to meet their needs.[2]

b.      Zones of Proximal Development

The zone of proximal development of the child is the distance between his actual development, determined with the help of independently solved tasks, and the level of potential development of the child, determined with the help of tasks solved by the child under the guidance of adults and in cooperation with his more intelligent partners.[3]

The concept of zone of proximal development as the theoretical attempt to understand the operation of contradiction between internal possibilities and external needs that constitutes the driving force of development. The concept of Zone of Proximal Development was created by Vygotsky as a metaphor to assist in explaining the way in which social and participatory learning takes place.

The common conception of the zone of proximal development presupposes an interaction on a task between a more competent person and a less competent person, such that the less competent person becomes independently proficient at what was initially a jointly accomplished task. Within this general conception, three main aspects are often highlighted or emphasized (though not necessarily all three by a single researcher). For the sake of discussion, these three aspects together represent an ideal type that will be called the common interpretation of the zone of proximal development. The first aspect focuses on the idea that a person is able to perform a certain number of tasks alone but in collaboration can perform a greater number of tasks. The second aspect emphasizes how an adult/teacher/more competent person should interact with a child. The third aspect focuses on properties of the learner, including notions of a learner’s potential and/or readiness to learn.[4]

Moll (1990) argued that a close reading of Mind in Society reveals the Development of the ZPD concept from the method of double stimulation that emphasized the child’s active engagement in finding new means to solve problems. Using words to create a specific plan, the child achieves a much broader range of activity, applying as tools not only those objects that lie near at hand, but searching for and preparing such stimuli as can be useful in the solution of the task, and planning future actions. (Vygotsky, 1978, p. 26)

The search for a method of studying psychological change, which was arguably Vygotsky’s central concern, was stated as follows: The search for method becomes one of the most important problems of the entire enterprise of understanding the uniquely human forms of psychological activity. In this case the method is simultaneously prerequisite and product, the tool and result of the study. (Vygotsky, 1978, p. 65)

c.       Mediation

In Vygotsky’s view, the conceptual isolation of consciousness and behavior that had been initiated by the subjectivists and extended by the behaviorists had led to a fundamental misconceptualization of both consciousness and behavior. To achieve a truly unified psychological science, he insisted that a new system of concepts and theories would have to be developed which would overcome the conceptual isolation of behavior and consciousness that was so fundamental to existing theoretical frameworks. Vygotsky’s explanation of the origin of the higher mental functions included two components. First, he argued that the higher mental functions rely on the mediation of behavior by signs and sign systems, the most important of which is speech. Vygotsky saw signs as a special type of stimuli that are used as “psychological tools,” tools that are “directed towards the mastery or control of behavioral processes.[5]

Vygotsky described psychological tools as devices for mastering mental processes. They were seen as artificial and of social rather than organic or individual origin. He gave the following examples of psychological tools: ‘language; various systems for counting; mnemonic techniques; algebraic symbol systems; works of art; writing; schemes, diagrams, maps and mechanical drawings; all sorts of conventional signs (Vygotsky, 1960/1981, pp. 136–7).

The very idea of mediation carries with it a number of significant implications concerning pedagogic control. In that the concept denies the possibility of total determinism through external forces it is associated with an intellectual baggage which is potentially highly charged, especially in the political context in which these ideas were originally promulgated. In the extract reprinted below it is clear that Vygotsky was arguing that humans master themselves through external symbolic, cultural systems rather than being subjugated by and in them. Vygotsky (1978) discussed a number of examples of early psychological tools such as tying knots. He suggested that when a knot is tied in a handkerchief as a reminder it acts as an external aspect of remembering.

The process of memorizing is reconstructed through the transformation of an external object as a reminder of something. He contrasts the act of memorizing before and after the knot is used as a psychological tool. Vygotsky also argues that the ways in which tools and signs are used vary as function of context and the child’s own development. He refers to the ‘natural history of the sign’ as a way of emphasizing that, in the course of development, the psychological function that may be fulfilled by signs may also develop and change. Thus, speech may have several functions (e.g. labeling and planning). In the early stages of development, Vygotsky suggests that speech may assume an important labeling function in that it enables the child to identify a particular object, to single it out and distinguish it from others. He argues that increasing sophistication in the use of language allows the child to become progressively more independent of the sensory field (Vygotsky, 1978, p. 32).

According to practice, in C. Asri Budiningsih, (2005: 103), that there are two types of mediation:

·         Metacognitive mediation of interpersonal communication to use a tool for self regulation (self regulation), which includes: self-planning, self-monitoring, self checking, and self-Evaluating. Older adults or peers who are competent to use these tools to help children, then children internalize the tools for self regulation.

·         Cognitive mediation, namely the use of cognitive tools (in the form of spontaneous concepts or scientific concepts) to solve the problems associated with certain knowledge (subject-domain problem). More assured they were correct scientific concept of the concept of spontaneous, in which the concept is internalized students (as mediator) in solving the problem. Scientific concepts can be either declarative knowledge (inadequate) and procedural knowledge in the form of method or strategy that is more adequate to solve the problem. Solving process more meaningful for the way he is combine the concepts and procedures through demonstration and practice.

2.2 Current Perspectives on Vygotsky’s Theory

Vygotsky focused more on the processes through which children develop than on the characteristics that children of particular ages are likely to exhibit. Furthermore, his descriptions of such processes were often imprecise and lacking in detail. Nevertheless, many contemporary theorist and practitioners have made considerable use of Vygotsky’s idea.[6]

a.       Guided Participation

Older family members often allow young children to perform household tasks (cooking, cleaning, pinting, and so on) while providing guidance about how to do these tasks appropriately. Teachers, too, often introduce students to adult tasks within a structured and supportive context. For instance, they might ask students to conduct laboratory experiments, write letter to government officials, or search the internet for specific information, while always providing the support the students need to accomplish such tasks successfully. When we assist our student as they perform adultlike activities, we engage them in guided participation in the world of adults (Radziszewa & Rogoff, 1990, 1991) As we guide them, we should also use some of the language that adults frequently use in such context; for example, when students conduct scientific experiments, we should use words such as hypothesis, evidence, and theory as we help them evaluate their procedures and results (Perkins, 1992)           

b.      Scaffolding

Theorists have given considerable thought to the kinds of assistance that can help children complete challenging tasks. The term of scaffolding is often used here. Adults and other more competent individuals provide some form of guidance or structure that enables children to perform tasks in their zone of proximal development. In much the same way, and adult guiding a child through a new task may provide an initial scaffold to support the child’s early efforts. As teacher we can provide variety of support mechanism to help students master tasks; here are some examples:

·         Work with students to develop a plan for dealing with a new task

·         Demonstrate the proper performance of the tasks in a way that students can easily imitate

·         Divide a complex task into several smaller, simple task

·         Provide structure or guidelines about how the task should be accomplished

·         Provide a calculator, computer software or other technology that makes some aspects of their task easier

·         Ask questions that get student thinking in appropriate ways about the task

·         Keep student’s attention focused on the relevant aspects of the task

·         Keep student’s motivation to complete the task

·         Remind students what their goals is in performing the task

·         Give frequent feedback about how students are progressing

As students develop increasing competence, we can gradually withdraw some of these support mechanism, eventually allowing students to perform the task independently. In a manner of speaking, when we remove such scaffolding, we allow and encourage students to stand on their own two feet.      

c.       Apprenticeships

The cognitive apprenticeship approach proposes that learners should engage in meaningful learning and problem solving whilst working with authentic problems. In an apprenticeship a learner works intensively with an expert to accomplish complex tasks that he or she cannot do independently. The expert provides considerable structure and guidance throughout the process, gradually removing scaffolding and giving the learner more responsibility as competence increases. Throughout an apprenticeship a student often learns not only how to perform a task but also how to think about a task; such is sometimes called a cognitive apprenticeship. Although apprenticeships can differ widely from one context to another, they typically have some or all of these features:

·      Modeling. The teacher carries out the task, simultaneously thinking aloud about the process, while the student observes and listens

·      Coaching. As the student performs the task, the teacher gives frequent suggestions, hints, and feedback

·      Scaffolding. The teacher provides various forms of support for the student, perhaps by simplifying the task, breaking it into smaller and more manageable components or providing less complicated equipment

·      Articulation. The student explains what he or she is doing and why, allowing the teacher to examine the student’s knowledge, reasoning, and problem solving strategies

·      Reflection. The teacher asks the student to compare his or her performance with that of experts, or perhaps with an ideal model of how the task should be done

·      Increasing complexity and diversity of tasks. As the student gains greater proficiency, the teacher presents more complex, challenging, and varied tasks to complete

·       Exploration. The teacher encourages the student to frame questions and problems on his or her own and thereby to expand and refine acquired skills

Apprenticeships are clearly labor intensive as such their use in the classroom is not always practical or logistically feasible. Apprenticeships frequently take place in natural settings for example in a studio, workshop, or place of employment and involve real life tasks.    

d.      Peer Interaction

Peer interaction is a term that embodies the concept of students as active learners and participants in all aspects of schooling. It recognizes that students represent a significant resource that often is untapped in schools today. Peer interaction involves a variety of practices and strategies that utilize students as instructors, advocates, and decision makers (Snell & Janey, 2000; Villa & Thousand,1996). The benefits of peer involvement in these areas have been well-documented as follows:

•  The use of peer tutor and partner learning systems have been demonstrated to be a cost-effective way for teachers to increase the amount of individualized instructional attention available to their students (Armstrong, Stahlbrand, Conlon, & Pierson, 1979; Villa & Thousand, 1988).
•  Peers as instructors have been noted to be more effective than adults because they tend to use more age-appropriate vocabulary and examples, are more directive than adults, and are more familiar with potential frustrations (Good & Brophy, 1987; Thousand & McNeil, 1990).
• Effective peer support systems do not occur spontaneously or in isolation. As with any effective strategy, active planning, support, and facilitation are required to maximize this resource.
• The outcomes of successful peer collaboration can be social as well as academic. Peer collaboration builds relationships between students and results in a more caring community of learners.

This section provides an overview of strategies and approaches that can be used to facilitate peer collaboration and promote positive classroom environments.

2.3 The Application of Vygotsky’s Theory

The concept of Vygotsky about reconstruction of knowledge in social setting if it is applied in learning context, a teacher should pay attention about those things. The teacher’s task is twofold. First, in the history lesson, the teacher stimulates the students to connect their knowledge, partly acquired beyond. Secondary education, with the academic concepts to be learned formally at school. And, second, the teacher has to prevent an academic concept from remaining an empty shell for the student, that is, a concept that is not experienced or understood and can only be learned by rote. Experience teaches us that such undigested knowledge is of no use to students and rapidly evaporates. Teachers must learn how to guide their students in sequences of assignments aiming at using everyday knowledge as a means to absorb and own academic concepts. In our teacher education courses, we devote ample discussion time to these tasks of the history teacher. Basic to these tasks is a learning-psychological starting point, combined with our interpretation of historical consciousness. A teacher should provide some kinds and level of helps that can give facility the student in order they can solve some problems that is faced by them. In the word of cognitive psychology, these helps is known as cognitive scaffolding. Those helps can be described in the form of giving examples, guidance or orientation of doing, program or space, the steps or procedures of doing assignment etc.

The guidance or help from the adult person or a friend who more competent and very effective to increase the productivities of learning. Those helps must suitable with the context of sociocultural or student’s characteristic. The guidance by adult person or peer who is more competent benefit to understand the semiotic tool like language, sign and symbols. The student or children experience the internalization process and then these tools has function as mediator for the next psychology processes of the student themselves. So, the forms learning of cooperative-collaborative and the learning of contextual is very appropriate applied.

By the conception of the readiness to learn, so the understanding about the characteristic of student that relate with sociocultural and the first capability as footing in learning is needed more to look the articulation, so it can be produced soft equipment of learning that really challenge but it is still productive and creative

CHAPTER III

CLOSING

3.1  Conclusion

Vygotsky’s basic assumptions are emphasized the importance of society and culture for promoting cognitive growth, his theory is sometimes referred to as the sociocultural perspective. The following major assumptions provide a summary of some perspectives such as: genetic law of development, zone of proximal development, and mediation.

Current perspectives on Vygotsky’s theory focused more on the processes through which children develop than on the characteristics that children of particular ages are likely to exhibit. Furthermore, his descriptions of such processes were often imprecise and lacking in detail. Nevertheless, many contemporary theorist and practitioners have made considerable use of Vygotsky’s idea such as: guided participation, scaffolding, apprenticeships, and peer interaction.

The application of Vygotsky’s theory in social setting if it is applied in learning context, a teacher should pay attention about those things. In every planning and implementation in learning the attention of teacher must be concentrated to the group of student who can not solve some problems of learning by themselves that they who only can solve problems of learning with help. A teacher should provide some kinds and level of helps that can give facility the student in order they can solve some problems that is faced by them.

3.2  Suggestion

From some explanations about Vygotsky’s theory of cognitive development, the compiler suggests to all of readers in order they can know about the basic assumptions and also the application of Vygotsky’s theory. The compiler also suggests to all of readers in order use this paper as good reference in the future.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Kozulin, Alex, 2003, Vygotsky’s Educational Theory in Cultural Context, United States of America: Cambridge University Press

Budiningsih, Asri, 2005, Belajar dan Pembelajaran, Bandung: Rineka Cipta

M. Reynolds W, 2003, Educational Psychology, Canada

 Shayer, Michael, 2003, Not just Piaget; not just Vygotsky, and certainly not Vygotsky as alternative to Piaget, King’s College, University of London

 Daniels Harry, 1996, An Introduction to Vygotsky, USA

Ellis, Ormfod, 2003, Educational Psychology, Colombus

---

[1] C.Asri Budiningsih, Belajar dan Pembelajaran, p.100

[2] William M. Reynolds, Educational Psychology, p.152

[3] Michael Shayer, Not just Piaget; not just Vygotsky, and certainly not Vygotsky as alternative to Piaget, p.470

[4] Alex Kozulin, Vygotsky’s Educational Theory in Cultural Context, p.41

[5] Harry Daniels, An Introduction to Vygotsky, p.30

[6] Jeanne Ellis Ormfod, Educational Psychology, p.39