4 Sociocultural Theory

At the end of this chapter, you will be able to:

• Identify key elements of sociocultural theory
• Explain strategies utilized to implement sociocultural theory
• Summarize the criticisms of sociocultural theory and educational implications
• Explain how equity is impacted by sociocultural theory
• Identify classroom strategies to support the use of sociocultural theory
• Select strategies to support student success utilizing sociocultural theory
• Develop a plan to implement the use of sociocultural theory

Image 4.1

SCENARIO:
Alessandra was a newly arrived student from Mexico with limited English skills. Fortunately, her fifth grade teacher Mr. Brown had some experience with English Language Learners (ELLs). His own wife was a non-native English speaker from Argentina and he worked with migrant students during the summer. The first thing Mr Brown did was to pair her with another student Angie who also spoke Spanish. He allowed them to speak Spanish together as Alessandra was getting used to the US classroom. The science text was going to be far too challenging for Alessandra, so Mr. Brown assigned the girls a project where they had to make flashcards in Spanish and English for all of the different vocabulary words. He also found a video to help Alessandra understand the basic concepts. These different kinds of support helped Alessandra to grasp the concepts and participate in the lesson more effectively. These supports are also called “scaffolding,” as they help the learner reach higher levels.

In this chapter, you will read about how learning is a dynamic social process that is dependent on the interaction of the teacher and the learner. It is vital that the teacher understands and creates an appropriate  level of challenge for the learner, known as the Zone of Proximal Development (Vygotsky).

Video 4.1: Vygotsky’s Developmental Theory

Image 4.2

Introduction

Lev Semyonovich Vygotsky (1896-1934) was born in Russia. Although he graduated with a law degree from Moscow University, in 1925, he began a research project that focused on the psychology of art. Shortly thereafter, he pursued a career as a psychologist and worked with Alexander Luria and Alexei Leontiev. Together, they began the Vygotskian approach to psychology. After his death, Vygotsky’s ideas were repudiated by the government, but his ideas were kept alive by his students. When the Cold War ended in the 1960s, Vygotsky’s works were introduced to the western world. One of the most influential theories in the field of education is the Zone of Proximal Development. Vygotsky is best known for being an educational psychologist with a sociocultural theory. Sociocultural theory suggests that social interaction leads to continuous step-by-step changes in children’s thought and behavior that can vary greatly from culture to culture (Woolfolk, 1998).

Basically, Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory suggests that development depends on interaction with people and the tools that the culture provides to help form their own view of the world.

Figure 4.3

Cognitive Development and the Social World

The social world as defined by Vygotsky considers not only the interpersonal interactions between, say, a student and teacher, or student and peer, but also the broader sociocultural and historical influences on learning and the learning environment. The underlying themes of Vygotsky’s theory on cognitive development have thus often been summarized as:

• the significance of culture,
• the role of a principal proponent of culture: language,
• the student’s relationship with and development within this sociocultural world.

In this context, culture is viewed as socially accepted behaviors, attitudes, and beliefs, and is constructed through human societal products such as institutions, symbol systems, and tools such as language. Culture in this sense is a dynamic outcome of historical events and developments, and thus products of human development.

Vygotsky emphasized that culture itself will influence human mental functioning and behavior, and thus a complex integrated relationship between the cultural environment and personal development. In other words, humans are not only producing culture, but are also products of culture themselves.

The cultural influences on childhood development can be exemplified through the elementary and higher mental notions of Vygotsky. The former describes innate functions or characteristics of a young child such as responding to a mother’s voice and crying for a need.

In the course of development, perhaps through operant conditioning, imitation, perception or some limited cognitive evaluation, elementary functions are gradually transformed into higher mental functions such as problem solving, logic, and propositional and hypothetical thinking. Vygotsky believed that this transformation is strongly influenced by culture.

Culture results in language and other symbolism which perhaps define non-primitive consciousness (see below), and create the social processes and pressures (motives) for adopting the patterns of behavior and attitudes which are characteristic of that culture.

Image 4.4

Vygotsky believed that language makes thought possible and is thus the basis of consciousness. Without language his view was that human development could not exceed that of primitive sense and perception functions, characteristic of lower forms of mammalian life. Language was also seen as the tool of culture which enables social interaction, and thus the direction of behavior and attitudes, and indeed the propagation and development of culture itself. The specific and early relationship of language and cognition can be identified through three key stages in the development of speech: social, egocentric, and inner speech (Vygotsky, 1986):

• Social or external speech dominates the first stage of language development, and is a means by which young children (typically up to the age of 3) express emotions or simple thoughts. The speech is principally used for control of behavior of others, but also acts as a means of conveying early social influences such as parental tolerances of behavior. Such influences inevitably lead to the restructuring of thoughts, and thus cognition.
• Egocentric speech occurs between the ages of 3 and 7 and describes an intermediate stage of language development between external speech and inner thoughts (see below). In this stage, the child will often talk to him or herself in an effort to control their own behavior or justify actions or approaches to a task.
• With maturity, egocentric speech becomes inner speech (self-talk), which has also been referred to as the stream of consciousness by James (1890). Vygotsky believed that inner speech enables individuals to direct and organize thought, and thus an important proponent of higher mental functioning. Hence, the set of arbitrary and conventional symbols which are used to convey meaning, but which are culturally determined in form and interpretation, become a part of the individual’s cognitive being.

Closely related to the formation of inner speech is the concept of internalization. This involves the internal acceptance (perhaps with individual modification or interpretation) of social (external) values, beliefs, attitudes or standards, as one’s own. In this sense, the psychological make-up of the individual is altered through internalization, and provides a dynamic mechanism by which the inter-social becomes the intra-social. However, such mental adoption processes should not be confused with processes such as introjection or socialization. Introjection describes internalization in which there is little active participation by the individual; c.f. operant learning, and indeed some forms of hypnosis. In contrast, socialization describes a pseudo-internalization process in which apparent beliefs arise from a need to conform to society rather than any actual commitment. Internalization as viewed by Vygotsky therefore, represents a genuine, participative, and constructed process, but nevertheless determined by sociocultural influences.

As indicated above, the outcome of internalization is that interpersonal or personal-cultural influences become transformed into intrapersonal characteristics. Thus, every function in the child’s cognitive development, such as attention, logic or concept formation, appears twice: first on the social level and then on the individual level (Vygotsky, 1978).

Image 4.5

An important implication of the above ideas is that there is much opportunity through the school system to influence the cognitive development of children. For example, through language, the presentation and interpretation of history and current affairs, and the attitudes, beliefs and values of teachers (or significant others), the thought patterns and beliefs of students may be shaped. Unlike Piaget, who believed that children construct their own ideas of the world, Vygotsky’s ideas suggest that student-teacher and student-peer relationships are of prime importance of generating and facilitating new ideas, perspectives, and cognitive strategies. Furthermore, the student apprentice can be seen to be active within their learning environments, attempting to construct understanding where possible, and possibly contribute to or affirm with the adopted culture. In turn, this aspect of human development inevitably has influence on the environment itself, and thus a dialectic process in which learning and development is affected by the social world, and the social world changed through learning and development (Tudge & Winterhoff, 1993). In a similar way, Vygotsky has argued that natural (i.e. biological) and cultural development coincide and merge to form a dynamic and integrated sociobiological influence on personality (Vygotsky, 1986).

     Image 4.6

A second important implication of Vygotsky’s views is that rather than deriving explanations of a student’s psychological activity (e.g. intelligence and motivation) from the student’s characteristics, attention should be given to student behavior and performance when engaged in a social situation. Vygotsky postulated the notion of a zone of proximal development (ZPD) which defines the difference between the child’s independent learning accomplishments, and accomplishments under the guidance of a person who is more competent at the specific task at hand. Vygotsky particularly viewed adults, rather than peers, as key in this relationship, perhaps because adults are more likely to be truly competent in the task, and thus less likely to cause regression rather than progression in the collaboration (Tudge & Winterhoff, 1993). The maximization of potential was then viewed as a social process, which challenges the traditional notions of intelligence testing with psychometric tests. For example, emphasis is given to the potential of the student and its social contextualization, rather than current cognitive abilities measured independent of a social context.

However, this notion of potential does not necessarily imply an intelligence level, since the ZPD is a dynamic assessment which may be complicated through the various student-specific influences of the social learning environment. Past experiences (prior knowledge), personality attributes, locus of control, and self-esteem for example, may all have possible influences on the efficacy of learning through social interaction. Likewise, as a further complexity, the ZPD is not a well-defined space, but created in the course of the social interaction (Tudge & Winterhoff, 1993). Nevertheless, the notion of the ZPD gives importance to the student-centered basis of education, and suggests that the individual progression towards an overall learning outcome will be dictated by the guided and subjective accomplishments of intermediate (proximal) outcomes.

   Image 4.7

Educational Implications

Although the social influences on cognitive development have been considered by other researchers, such as Piaget and Bandura, Vygotsky emphasized that individual development is inherently integrated with cultural, historical, and interpersonal factors. Furthermore, Vygotsky viewed the individual in the social context as the unit of analysis in development, rather than the sole individual.

Some general implications of Vygotsky’s ideas on the social influences on cognitive development have been mentioned above, and can be summarized as:

• the central role of the teacher-student relationship in learning;

• the inherent cultural and immediate-social influences upon the student’s attitudes and beliefs towards, for example, learning, schooling, and the education philosophy;

• the importance and power of language as a primary tool for the transference of sociocultural influences upon the child; and

• the benefits of student-centered teaching, whereby the student can efficiently progress within their potential towards a learning outcome; i.e. constructing knowledge through social interaction or co-constructivism. (Tudge & Winterhoff, 1993)

Further specific educational implications of the above points arise when considering practical teaching within schools. For example, given a child with particular personality traits and temperament, how should a teacher instigate a teaching objective which is congruent with Vygotskian ideas? The ZPD describes what a student can accomplish with the help of competent support, therefore it describes the actual task that can be effectively supported by the teacher.

Image 4.8

Although this may seem a rather circular argument, the implication here is that teachers need to continuously evaluate how effectively a student is progressing in a learning activity and respond accordingly with modified tasks or intermediary learning objectives.

In other words, students should be given frequent opportunities to express understanding, and learning tasks fine-tuned by the teacher to address individual capabilities. Such teacher support, which is graduated and task-apportioned based on student needs, has been commonly referred to as scaffolding, which symbolizes strong initial teacher support which is gradually reduced as the student approaches the desired learning outcome. In specific, scaffolding may range from very detailed and explicit tuition, such as the explanation of procedures and demonstrations, to the facilitation or organization of activities for student self-tuition. Scaffolding has also been interpreted as a mechanism by which sequential ZPD’s are used to achieve a learning outcome beyond a child’s immediate (starting) potential, and thus the specific learning activities change as the student competence towards the ultimate task grows (Biggs & Moore, 1993). The notion of ZPD also suggests that effective teaching should not only be within the proximate potential of the individual, but should perhaps be at the upper-level of the ZPD so as to maintain the student interest in the activity. 

Video 4.2: Scaffolding

But how are the above teaching implications of ZPD different from what experienced teachers naturally do? As stated earlier, the social interaction aspect is a key emphasis in the learning process, and therefore the student needs to be active in the learning interaction, and in collaboration with the teacher. Where teaching logistics dictate large classes, small group work should be encouraged whereby peer-support and improved teacher interaction can be maintained. However, as mentioned earlier, overt reliance on peer-support could cause regression in some cases, and requires careful evaluation and support by the teacher. Furthermore, in an educational context, a teacher is likely to prove the best role model, i.e. the best conveyer of culturally esteemed factors pertaining to education; see also the discussions of Biggs and Moore (1993) on modeling in learning.

Video 4.3: Zone of Proximal Development

Criticisms of Sociocultural Theory

The writings of Vygotsky have been widely-criticized both during his lifetime and after his death. Vygotsky relied on observation and testing.

Social interaction is central to Vygotsky. However, he did not say what types of social interaction are best for learning.

Vygotsky’s theories rely a lot on cultural influences. Vygotsky states that minimal language acquisition and cognitive development come from biological factors. However, some psychologists dismiss the idea that cultural influences play a dominant role in the development of language. Some children take years to learn basic skills despite plenty of social support. In some cases, children are unable to grasp certain concepts until they reach a certain developmental stage. This lends credence to Piaget’s view of cognitive development occurring in stages and children not being unable to learn some concepts until they reach a certain stage.

Perhaps the main criticism of Vygotsky’s work concerns the assumption that it is relevant to all cultures. Rogoff (1990) dismisses the idea that Vygotsky’s ideas are culturally universal and instead states the concept of scaffolding-which is heavily dependent on verbal instruction-may not be equally useful in all cultures for all types of learning. Indeed, in some instances, observation and practice may be more effective ways of learning certain skills.

In addition, Vygotsky was criticized for the concept of the “zone of proximal development,” referred to as “one of the most used and least understood constructs to appear in contemporary educational literature” (Palinscar, 1998, p. 370) and “used as little more than a fashionable alternative to Piagetian terminology or the concept of IQ for describing individual differences in attainment or potential” (Faukner, Littleton, & Woodhead, 2013, p. 114).

Conclusion

The influence of the social world on cognitive development has been considered through the views of Vygotsky. The dynamic relationships between culture, history, interpersonal interactions and psychological development have been described, and the important role of language as a common and conducting medium discussed. One specific educational application of such ideas is through the ZPD, which emphasizes the importance of the social aspect of learning, and particularly the student-centered and co-constructivist basis of learning in which the individual’s potential within the social context is addressed.

Chapter Discussion Questions:

• Explain the benefits of using community building activities to support student success?
• How would you summarize the zone of proximal development and scaffolding?
• How would you use sociocultural theory to support your students?
• How is equity related to sociocultural theory?
  

ATTRIBUTES

Image 4.1 Three children tinker with small objects. CC BY-SA 2.0; Bakken Museum via Minneapolis2040

Image 4.2 “Lev-Semyonovich-Vygotsky-1896-1934” by Wikimeida Commons

Image 4.3 “This work” is in the Public Domain, CC0

Image 4.4 “Woman Reading A Book To The Children” by Yan Krukov is licensed under CC BY 4.0

Image 4.5 “Syrian primary school children ” by Russell Watkins/ Dept for Intl Development is licensed under
CC BY 4.0

Image 4.6 “Children learn to read using the CLE method” by Alyce Henson is licensed under CC BY 4.0

Image 4.7 “Zone of Proximal Development” by Jonathon Hey, University of Edinburgh is in the Public Domain

Image 4.8 “Zone of Proximal Development” by wikipedia is in the Public Domain

FILMS

“Vygotsky’s Developmental Theory” by youtube is in the Public Domain

“Teaching Matters : Scaffolding” by wikipedia is in the Public Domain

“Zone of Proximal Development” by is in the Public Domain

REFERENCES

Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Morristown, NJ: General Learning Press. Biggs, J. B., & Moore, P. J. (1993).
Process of learning (3rd ed.). London: Prentice Hall.

Faukner, D., Littleton, K., & Woodhead, M. (Eds.). (2013). Learning relationships in the classroom. New York, NY: Routledge.

James, W., (1950, originally published 1890). The principles of psychology. New York, NY: Dover.

Lefrancois, G. R. (1999). Psychology for teaching (10th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Thomson Learning.

Palinscar, A. S. (1998). Keeping the metaphor of scaffolding fresh: A response to C. Addison Stone’s The metaphor of scaffolding: Its utility for the field of learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 31, 370-373.

Piaget, J. (1959). The language and thought of the child (3rd ed.). London, UK: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

Rogoff, B. (1990). Apprenticeship in thinking: Cognitive development in the social context. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Tomasello, M., Kruger A. C., & Ratner, H. H. (1993). Cultural learning. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 16(1), 495-552.

Tudge, J. R. H., & Winterhoff, P. A. (1993). Vygotsky, Piaget, and Bandura: Perspectives on the relations between the social world and cognitive development. Human Development, 36, 61.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1986, edited and translated by A. Kozulin). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Wood, D. (1998). How children think and learn (2nd ed.). London, UK: Blackwell.

ADDITIONAL READING

Credible Articles on the Internet

Carol, S., & Princess, C. (n.d.). Lev Vygotsky. Retrieved from: http://cadres.pepperdine.edu/omcadre6/BookProject/vygotsky.htm

Cole, M., & Wertsch, J. (1996). Beyond the individual-social antimony in discussions of Piaget and Vygotsky.
Retrieved from http://www.massey.ac.nz/~alock/virtual/colevyg.htm

Dahms, M., Geonnotti, K., Passalacqua, D., Schilk, J. N., Wetzel, A., & Zulkowsky, M. (2008). The educational theory of Lev Vygotsky: An analysis. In G. Clabaugh (Ed.), The educational theory of Lev Vygotsky: A multidimensional analysis.
Retrieved from http://www.newfoundations.com/GALLERY/Vygotsky.html

Gallagher, C. (1999). Lev Semyonovich Vygotsky. Retrieved from: http://www.muskingum.edu/~psych/psycweb/history/vygotsky.htm

McCloud, S. (2009). Lev Vygotsky. Retrieved from http://www.simplypsychology.org/vygotsky.html

Offord, L. (2005). The Mozart of psychology: Lev Semenovich Vygotsky. Retrieved from http://vygotsky.afraid.org/

Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory. (2016). Retrieved from: https://oli.cmu.edu/jcourse/workbook/activity/page?context=df3e72f10a0001dc49e717888ad145d1

Peer-Reviewed Journal Articles

Abdi, A. A. (2000). Dialogic inquiry: Towards a sociocultural practice and theory of education. McGill Journal of Education, 35(1), 91-94.

Byrnes, H., Lantolf, J. P., & Thorne, S. L. T. (2008). Sociocultural theory and the genesis of second language development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 30(3), 394-396.

De Leon, L. (2012). Model of models: Preservice teachers in a Vygotskian scaffold. The Educational Forum, 76(2), 144157.

Gindis, B. (1999). Vygotsky’s vision: Reshaping the practice of special education for the 21st century.
Remedial and Special Education, 20(6), 333.

Jaramillo, J. A. (1996). Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory and contributions to the development of constructivist curricula.
Education, 117(1), 133-140.

Lantolf, J. P. (2006). Sociocultural theory and L2: State of the art. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28(1), 67-109. Mahn, H. (1999). Vygotsky’s methodological contribution to sociocultural theory. Remedial and Special Education, 20 (6), 341.

Shabani, K., Khatib, M., & Ebadi, S. (2010). Vygotsky’s zone of proximal development: Instructional implications and teachers’ professional development. English Language Teaching, 3 (4), 237-248.

Books at Dalton State College Library

Dixon-Krauss, L. (1996). Vygotsky in the classroom: Mediated literacy instruction and assessment. [Washington, DC]: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, Education Resources Information Center.

Kozulin, A. (1990). Vygotsky’s psychology: A biography of ideas. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Maddux, C. D., Johnson, D. L., & Willis, J. W. (1997). Educational computing: Learning with tomorrow’s technologies. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Smidt, S. (2009). Introducing Vygotsky: A guide for practitioners and students in early years education. New York, NY: Routledge.

Videos and Tutorials

Vygotsky’s developmental theory: An introduction. (1994). Retrieved from  Films on Demand database. Vygotsky’s developmental theory: Child constructs knowledge. (1994). Retrieved from Films on Demand database.