For Vygotsky to know means “grasping the very structure of the process, learning to understand the laws according to which external signs must be used” (p.72) This is the result of a developmental process in which the child uses external stimuli at first and then “an operation that initially represents an external activity is reconstructed and begins to occur internally” (p. 56-57). The podcast made more clear to me that according to this theory thinking starts through language. There is an external dialogue of the person with other people at first, then the person starts talking with herself and when this talking happens silently in the mind there is thinking. It is like if to make real connections in our mind we need words and external dialogues with other people that shape our mind. He talks about the importance of relationships saying ” all the higher functions originate as actual relations between human individuals” (p.57). Anyway, I still have the feeling that I did not grasp completely this theory, I am not sure that I understood it well. I found very interesting his distinction between “elementary functions” and “higher functions” and also the discussion about the method. I loved his idea of observing the process instead of something that already ended. I read that Vygotsky was influenced by Marx and I am interested in understanding better the connection between Marx’s theory and Vygotsky’s theory. Education in Italy was influenced by Vygotsky and it is different compared to the USA. In Italy, the classroom is the same during the year and teachers come and go compared to the individualistic approach in the USA where students change classroom. The consequence of this is that learning in Italy is lived more as associated with classmates, while in the USA sometimes students don’t know each other’s names in a class. In Italy, if I did not understand something or I was absent I asked a classmate, while here I have a feeling that the reference point is the teacher, learning happens between the student and the teacher. Also, usually teachers in Italy would talk about “how the classroom goes” instead of the individual students. I wonder if this is a way to apply Vigotsky’s theory. I am interested in understanding how this theory works in all the details of the classroom work.
Vygotsky: Rossella
2 comments
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Hello Rosella, excellent response to the reading. You hit on an important consideration with how language is related to thinking, and that was something we discussed in class. I still wonder how language and thinking progress over time in the Vygostky theory of learning and what examples he could offer specifically. I like that you emphasize the importance of the historical context Vygotsky’s work is situated in- if Marx and his contemporaries played such an influence, it is important to factor them in as well when trying to break down what is a dense, challenging piece of material. I also think you raise a critical comparison between US and Italian education- are there other influences that have led to the difference in education, and what other specific examples have you seen in your educational experiences in Italy that scream Vygotsky?
I really enjoyed reading your response. I also had a lot of difficulty understanding this theory completely. I am sure our talk today will clear things up, but it is going to be difficult for me to talk through it! I think it is interesting that the classrooms in Italy stays the same, but teachers come and go. This really reminds me of the podcast we listened to, specifically the classroom of deaf students that invented their own signs. They were able to communicate better with each other, and I think your example of keeping the classroom the same is aligned with this. They aren’t inventing their own language of course, but I think social norms and some language dialects play a role in the similarity here.