Jessica Paola Campoverde Villamar

Reflection

To be honest, I do not like to read, and until now I have always say that theories

are not important to know how to teach. I have wondered myself, what do the theorists

come with those ideas? I have not seen a connection between my teaching and the

theory, but through studying Vygotsky I found that it makes sense. It is like he took my

activities and ideas and put them in words. Vygotsky gave many helpful strategies and

ways to see the learning process, that I apply but I did not know.

Reading about Vygotsky has shown me the importance of following the correct

process in the moment of learning something new, that memorizing is not learning.

(Woolfolk, 2016) “Vygotsky’s belief that learning pulls development to higher

levels and more advanced thinking means that other people, including teachers,

play a significant role in cognitive development.” (p. 61) Learning is a process, there

are steps, and we cannot jump those steps, otherwise, the learning will not be correctly

achieved.

Vygotsky’s idea of social sources of individual thinking is true. This idea

establishes that: “Every function in a child’s cultural development appears twice:

First, on the social level and later on the individual level; first between people and

then inside the child.” (Vygotsky, 1978, in Woolfolk, 2016) Normally we think that

this applies only to children, and the examples are just with them, but I consider that

adults can also give an example of this. In my case, I work with adults, and I have

realized that when we learn a new topic, for example, the use of “Objet Direct et

Indirect”, in French; at the beginning they start repeating the rules, correcting each other

and comparing information but then when they have learned the topic, their brain works

naturally and there is no need to repeat the rules anymore, they are already inside

(intrapsychological).
Jessica Paola Campoverde Villamar

Another statement developed by Vygotsky is the role of the language and the

private speech that for me is linked with the social level and the individual level. Piaget

and Vygotsky used the same name but they had opposite definitions. For Vygotsky the

private speech (Woolfolk, 2016) “rather than being a sign of cognitive immaturity,

these mutterings play an important role in cognitive development because they

move children in stages toward self-regulation: the ability to plan, monitor, and

guide your thinking and problem solving.” (p. 59) when I first read that I did not

understand, but then I understood that it refers to the role of society or groups in the

development of a person. For example, in my French literature class, I like to discuss

with my students, to ask for their opinion and make them contradict, so we will learn

from each other.

Among all the topics Vygotsky developed there is also the importance of social

interaction. According to him this concept states that “children’s cognitive

development is fostered by interactions with people who are more capable or

advanced in their thinking” (Woolfolk, 2016, p. 58) people could say that this idea is

just like the social level, so we ask: What is the difference between this two statements?

After reading more about this, I got the conclusion that social interaction is how we

interact with others, and more special how these people can help me to understand

(teachers, parents, classmates, MKO). On the other hand, the social level is related to

the individual level and the breach between the two of them, how the learning goes from

a social environment to an individual (inner thinking).

One of the most important theories is the Zone of Proximal Development or

(ZPD) which is explained as “The difference between actual level of development as

determined by independent problem solving and the higher level of potential

development as determined through problem solving under guidance or in

collaboration with more capable peers.” (Vygotsky in Verenikina, 2003, p. 1) this

definition is a little confusing, but in other words, it is the difference between what you

cannot do and what you can do with the help of someone or something else. For

example, if we are going to learn how to dance the samba; at the beginning, we have no

idea how to do it, but after the first class the teacher realizes that half of the group

learned all the steps, but the rest did not. So, for the next class perhaps the teacher will

mix up the students, through this decision the ones how learned the steps will master

them and the other ones will learn them, we can find a more individual activity, focused

on the ZPD of each student, they will learn and progress on their rhythm.

It is important to remember that all these statements developed by Vygotsky had

just “the goal to create a psychology adequate for the investigation of

consciousness”. (Verenikina, 2003, p. 1) There are no theories, just ideas that can

complement and make theories better. Now all these definitions are amazing, but as an

Ecuadorian teacher, I found difficult to follow all these recommendations, because our

educational system is standardized and Vygotsky wanted to make learning individual.

There is still one question to answer: How can we apply all these wonderful ideas, in an

educational system like ours? I will keep studying to get that answer.
Jessica Paola Campoverde Villamar

References

Verenikina, I. (2003) Vygotsky’s Socio-Cultural Theory and the Zone of Proximal

Development. Expanding the Horizon. Information Systems and Activity Theory.

Wollongong: University of Wollongong Press. (p. 4-14) Retrieved from:

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/8d41/6f331b56cc328c19a7a1858ad32b1a6eb3c

7.pdf

Woolfolk, A. (2016). Educational Psychology (13th Edition) .Pearson. Retrieved from:

https://www.pearson.com/content/dam/one-dot-com/one-dot-com/us/en/higher-

ed/en/products-services/course-products/woolfolk-13e-info/pdf/0134013522.pdf

(pages 56-62).