Vygotsky would be most likely to recommend extreme diversity in grouping for learning. Within a student's zone of proximal development it is necessary to have someone who is older, or at least more cognitively advanced in order to help the student to reach the next level in cognitive development. This scaffolding can also be achieved through individual differences. For example, a "jock" may be able to help a studious individual to advance their development in the areas that the "jock" is most familiar with (physical fitness,health, etc.) Of course the studious individual needs to have some background information, possibly through spontaneous natural experience, about the subject that can be scaffolded by the jock and lead to a more cognitive understanding of the subject. For example, the studious individual may have tossed a football before, and watched a football game without much knowledge of what was going on. This individual could learn from the jock about the rules of the game, the physics of the sport, etc., and can eventually develop the ability to actually be able to play football. The tables could be turned, and the studious individual can provide scaffolding through tutoring in algebra, until the jock develops the ability to solve the equations on his own. Vygotsky would agree that the diversity among individuals allows for differing levels of abilities in different tasks, and these differences allow for one person to provide scaffolding to another person based on their background abilities. I think that Vygotsky would consider ability level to be the most important diversity, because you need someone who is more cognitively advanced in a certain area to help another person to develop a skill. He would think that the other areas of diversity (age, culture) are important as well, because they provide different backgrounds, which ultimately creates different ability levels. Vygotsky would think that the individuals in The Breakfast Club could help each other learn about their different background abilities, and ultimately develop new cognitive abilities in those areas.
I agree with your opinion of Vygotsky's theory. Not only is scaffolding good for adult mentors to child students, it is good for any type of diversity in a group that is trying to learn something outside of their usual realm of activity. The scaffolding would be good for both parties and they could also help each other with tips to help internalize the process of what they are learning. I had this type of example in a way because in my post I addressed how PE teachers help give younger students cues to internalize certain activities and/or movements that eventually fade as they do them more.
ReplyDeleteI also agree with your choice of Vygotsky's theory. I also enjoyed your comparison of the jock and the studious individual and how not only could they teach one another of their specific backgrounds, but how scaffolding plays a huge role in this type of diversity. Diversity in this particular situation is very prominent and backs up Vygotsky's reasoning very well. Diversity is most definitely needed in group learning.
ReplyDeleteI chose to make a comparison to Piaget, but I really like yours. From the reading, it definitely made it seem like the more developed person in a Vygotskian model was a teacher or mentor, but I like extending it to peers as well. As long as there is a difference in development, there is always space to bridge a gap and provide scaffolding to push another's ZPD. With this definition of Vygotskian learning, diversity is not only beneficial to learning, but in actuality it is a necessity. Without any differences, there would be no gap to bridge, and therefore no need for learning.
ReplyDelete