This guy knows what he's talking about. I agree entirely with this fellow regarding the influence of society in the growth of a child. One Mr. Piaget doesn't really look into society at all, but I think it plays an incredible role. Vygotsky has three main assumptions:
- Children move along a developmental trajectory.
Kids aren't just aimlessly wandering about and doing things for the heck of it, they are learning in a very particular and unique way. This is a useful assumption for a future teacher, because there can be some prediction as to what comes up next. Obviously, the predictions won't be perfectly accurate, but a teacher can plan a long range lesson plan more effectively with this in mind.
- Cognitive skills are structured by language.
At first I felt that I completely disagreed with this assumption, but the more I tried to find evidence to disprove this point, the more I found I agreed with it. I think that children are thinking far before they speak, though. I don't think that the ability to speak and understand words just hits kids out of nowhere. There is a long process, and they are very responsive to language before they can speak properly or even at all. I have a good friend that has been blessed with a beautiful baby boy. This boy, Gabe, was being changed by his mom. She was pleasantly talking to herself, or so she thought, and she said that he needed to roll over in order to fit his arm into his sleeve. The boy responded with the exact motion she was speaking about. This happened several times over the course of the change, and it is evidence of thought before verbal language. Even when kids begin to "speak", they understand a great deal of what is said to them, and they respond well to it. In my effort to refute this assumption, I thought about children who are deaf or mute. Mute children can still understand and communicate, and sign language is a very beneficial thing to teach your young child. Before they speak, they can communicate with their parents. I have spoken to many parents, and they could communicate effectively with their children from very young ages. Instead of having a fussing child that you didn't understand, the child could tell you what they wanted or disliked.
- The importance of social relations and culture.
![]() |
| Figure 1 |
I am behind Vygotsky on this one. Culture directly affects the development of children. Our society is telling kids that they need to be rich, pretty and successful. There is less and less common decency in the world, I feel. You can hardly turn the radio on with out some person trying to get as much money out of you as they can. "You need botox, a pedicure, a haircut, a tan, because you deserve it". The person from this ad doesn't care about the happiness of it's customers. What they want is money. They want women to be unhappy with themselves so that they'll feel as if they need their product. Little girls are dressing more and more like floozies, and there is a company that is modeling this for them. In figure 1, you will see what I'm talking about. A distorted image of beauty is being handed down to our nations girls. Figure 1 shows what this kind of beauty is:
- unrealistically full lips
- seductive glances
- copious amounts of makeup
- little shirts
-short skirts
- high heeled shoes
- visible mid-drift
- perfect hair
These dolls can be so bad for the self esteem of little girls. They look at unrealistic beauty like that, and they become unhappy with themselves. Companies are sacrificing the happiness and self esteem of little girls everywhere in order to make a quick buck. I definitely think that products like this will have far reaching consequences.
Vygotsky also believed in a thing called the zone of proximal development. This was a space inside which learning occurs. The role of the teacher is to "scaffold". The teacher in the ideal situation gives the students goals that are just beyond their reach. The teacher then builds them a "scaffold" of knowledge, instruction and encouragement to help the children reach those goals. Interestingly enough, I have just had the great displeasure of meeting a teacher here at the college who doesn't believe in this nonsense. He gives us goals that are beyond our reach, but he doesn't go out of his way to equip us to do well. He is cold, unapproachable, and I disagree with so many of his teaching strategies that I can hardly stand it. It hurts me to think that I've got to spend the rest of my semester with such a teacher. But I guess you learn well when you are able to contrast the good and the bad.
