Vygotsky: Mind in Society
I created this critical commentary for my graduate theories of human development class at the University of Rochester. The professor asked us to read Chapters 1, 5 and 6 from "Mind in Society" by Vygotsky (1978), which discusses the role of the teacher in learning and his concept of "Zone of Proximal Development" (ZPD). My critical commentary is below.
Vygotsky: Mind in Society
This week I read Vygotsky's 'Mind in Society' (Chapters 1, 5, and 6). The writings revealed a clarity of thought and fresh perspectives for the developmental tradition, subtly tinged with the youthful bravado and revolutionary zeal of his Russian socialist background.
In Chapter 6, Vygotsky introduces the notion of the 'Zone of Proximal Development' (ZPD). This contrasts with standardized tests that assess a child’s static individual abilities. ZPD, conversely, introduces the dimension of time to measure potential abilities and the dimension of the collective or other, when a child is aided, say by an adult or a teacher. Vygotsky believes combining ZPD with actual development levels offers a more comprehensive understanding of a child’s growth. For instance, if two children show similar skills independently, but one outperforms with assistance from the adult or teacher (via the ZPD), it indicates a higher potential for future development in the latter.
When reflecting on standardized tests like the SAT or GRE, I can see how they measure intellectual ability at a specific moment, not accounting for future collaborative development potential as Vygotsky suggests.
From my reading of Vygotsky, an essential theme emerges: he advocates for a shift from measuring isolated abilities to assessing processes that encompass multiple facets and their causal evolution over time. Drawing heavily on socialist theory, particularly from Hegel and Marx, Vygotsky emphasizes the collective process for a holistic view of reality, diverging from Piaget's Kantian individual-centric approach. This leads Vygotsky to propose assessing both individual capabilities and collaborative skills, underlining that children’s abilities are amplified when their capacity for collaboration is considered.
I agree that collaboration is core to the human condition and a requirement for flourishing. Yet, I remain cautious about Vygotsky's staunch emphasis on Hegelian and Marxist perspectives and in turn the emphasis Hegel and Marx place on collective processes potentially overshadowing individual sovereignty. Marx’s strict dialectical materialism and his deterministic atheistic viewpoints may have unforeseen cascade effects. Nonetheless, the application of these philosophical frameworks in Vygotsky's work undoubtedly enriches the field, offering new dimensions and perspectives in line with other significant thinkers.
Vygotsky looks at the relationship between learning and development, referencing Koffka's support for classical education, which posits that learning classical material hones the mind, making skills transferable. Contrasting this, Thorndike argues that learning is task-specific and skills acquired in one domain don’t necessarily apply to another. Vygotsky's view is nuanced: he acknowledges learning's transferability, yet disagrees with Koffka’s simplicity, emphasizing a complex relationship where learning precedes, yet intricately interacts with, development.
My personal experience echoes Vygotsky's theories. About five years ago, I started reading extensively and soon formed a book club. In these weekly discussions, I noticed a significant enhancement in my comprehension and analytical skills. Collaborating with others on complex topics often clarified concepts I couldn't grasp alone, amplifying my learning. This process aligns with Vygotsky's concept of the Zone of Proximal Development, where collaborative efforts catalyzed my learning beyond individual study.
Reflecting on whether learning ignites intellectual processes, my personal journey also affirms this. As a naturally curious child with limited resources at home, school was where my passion for learning truly awakened. The lack of books and guidance at home contrasted sharply with the rich, stimulating environment school provided. Post high school, financial necessities drove me, interrupting my learning journey. It's only now, later in life, that I've been able to rekindle this pursuit of knowledge. Significantly, as a child, it was my teachers who truly sparked my intellectual growth, offering guidance and opportunities not available at home, and playing a pivotal role in my development.
Western ways of organizing thought undoubtedly have bias. Western educational methods, despite their biases, likely evolved from well-intentioned efforts to find effective learning strategies. Adopting Vygotsky's perspective of viewing development as a process allows us to see Western pedagogy as an evolving system, one shaped by its historical and cultural context. From a dialectical materialist standpoint, we have only one possible future, that is for these biases to become extinct as newer, more inclusive biases develop to replace the old as cultures synthesize towards absolute telos.
