Despite the density of Vygotsky’s writings, I really relate to his discoveries and ideas (once I understood them, of course!). As a German teacher, even with students aged 12-14, so much of what I do in class looks a lot like preschool or Kindergarten: Telling stories (like the one I told based on this Pixar short), teaching the German equivalent to “1, 2, Buckle my Shoe” (1, 2, Polizei) to help students learn their numbers and practice pronunciation through rhyming, or giving students hand gestures to help them remember their vocabulary.
Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) is also very closely linked to Stephen Krashen’s Input Hypothesis. This fantastic presentation from ESOL in Higher Ed’s website does a fantastic job of analyzing Piaget, Vygotsky, and Krashen’s ideas and comparing and contrasting them to each other.
Krashen explains his theory through a simple formula of i + 1. The i represents what a student already knows or can understand (cognates, for example), whereas the +1 stands for “a little bit more.” This “little bit” usually means new vocabulary, new structures (like tense) or a known word used in a new way which changes its meaning. These new concepts are embedded within language that students already understand. Students use their i to negotiate and construct meaning around the unfamiliar +1.
It’s important to note, however, that without a society in which to learn or use it, language would be completely useless. Vygotsky’s emphasis on socialization is also essential in language acquisition. One cannot learn a language in isolation, and even if given an instructor from whom to learn, one is prone to misunderstandings and misconceptions if one only interacts with that sole instructor. It takes multiple exposures in various scenarios from all sorts of people in order to fully construct the meanings of certain words or ideas (such as the concept of “roundness,” for example).
In short, symbols and society are essential tools in my classroom. Without them, my students would not learn a lick of German. It would be impossible for them the link German words to the objects or concepts they represent. It would be impossible for me to communicate with them in any comprehensible sense without symbols, images, gestures, etc. My students would not be able to grow in their language without a society in which to practice, or a zone in which they can use their previous knowledge to discover new meanings and patterns.
Hi Laura! I love your thoughts on ZPD and I like Krashen's theory the i+1. Your right our students need to learn a new language the way they learned their first language. Through social interaction and communication with others. If they don't experience real world conversations then whats the point of using or learning the language in the first place?
ReplyDeleteHey Laura! I had never heard of Krashen's Theory of i+1, but I love how you connected his findings into what we learned about Vygotsky. I also love that you use videos and nursery rhymes to help make a background connection with your students so they have some previous knowledge before leaning new vocabulary words. I was one of those that learned a foreign language in isolation (direct instruction in a classroom). It was very difficult to not have any connections to make with the vocabulary. While I still can recall some vocabulary, it is only because those words were ones I could make personal connections too.
ReplyDeleteI think the connection between language and society is important. I also think that can be connected to all learning. Besides basic survival skills, what is learning without the society that it's based in? What's the point in counting money if there's no where to spend it? or reading poetry if no one is writing it? What good is knowing Earth's geography if you live on Mars?
ReplyDelete