Critical Analysis of Lev Vygotsky’s Social Constructive Theory of Learning

Lev Vygotsky’s Social Constructive theory of learning: Zone of Proximal Development and Scaffolding and their Classroom Application

Constructivism is a learning theory explaining how humans acquire knowledge and learn. It holds that humans construct their own knowledge from the experiences they have and that the meaning is influenced by the interaction of prior knowledge and new events (Elliot et al., 2000, p. 256). Constructivism may be categorised into two broad types namely Cognitive Constructivism from the basis of Jean Piaget’s cognitivism and Social Constructivism based on the work of Lev Vygotsky ( ). Cognitive constructivism holds that learning is individualistic which is relative to stages of cognitive development and cognitive development takes place with biological maturation and environmental interaction. ( ). On the other hand, social constructivism states that learning is collaborative and develops when an individual interacts with the culture and society ( ). Social constructivism, the work of Lev Vygotsky has become foundational to many researchers and educationists. Thus, this paper is presenting the theory of social constructivism including its origin, development, major concepts such as zone of proximal development and scaffolding, its principles and classroom application. (Duchesne, MNcMaugh, Bochner and Krause, Ed Psychology, 2013)

Vygotsky’s personal background, his social and intellectual context seemed to have shaped his theoretical views of development and learning. Born in Russia in 1896, Vygotsky was taught by a private tutor whose pedagogical approach of teaching him by engaging in extended critical inquiry must have influenced his thoughts of Vygotsky on social and cultural influence on learning (Verenikina, 2010). His theory emerged when psychologists and behavioural scientists were claiming that learning and development is an individual phenomena influenced by external motivation/stimuli and one’s stages of cognitive development. It became obvious that individuals possessed a natural way of learning. This individualistic theory received criticism with the emergence of “non-individualistic learning models” and the failure of individualistic theories. During such period Vygotsky suggested the importance of sociocultural elements in creating situations for children’s development and learning. Therefore, in his theory, he pointed out the significant roles of parents, peers, teachers and the community in shaping the interaction between the children and environment (Kozulin, Gindis, Ageyev, and Miller, 2003). As such his idea became influential in shaping the process of learning in Russia, the United States and Europe (Kozulin, Gindis, Ageyev, and Miller, 2003). His theory explains cognitive development and learning as social and cultural phenomena which are collaborative rather than individualistic unlike the theory of Piaget. He developed his ideas in many areas including child development theory and educational psychology. His works are related to the relationship between language and thoughts, and concept formation in daily lives and in an academic setting.

Vygotsky’s theoretical framework developed through three major phases in his analytic units and explanatory principles written between 1924 to 1934 (Minick, 2005, p. 32). His first analytic unit from 1925 to 1930 focused on mediating agents such as a sign, particularly the language used as a tool to shape individual behaviour which he called an “instrumental act” (Minick, 2005, p.32). During this phase, Vygotsky’s analysis was based on the theory of the stimulus-response approach in learning and behaviour. However, he argued that historically developed signs such as language forms stimulus that can influence behaviour. For that matter, such signs are used in mediating behaviour which is beyond the simple understanding of the stimulus-response phenomenon. He saw that the function of signs is to communicate that can shape behaviour through social interaction (Minick, 2005). The second development happened in 1930 where his focused shifted to the “psychological system”. He argued that the use of words as sign-stimulus forms a new “functional relationship between memory and speech” (Minick, 2005, p.33). In the third phase between 1933 to 1934, Vygotsky came up with an “explanatory principle” (p.33). His understanding of psychological development shifted from memory and speech to social interaction that an induvial participates in. He explained that psychological development occurs in relation to one’s actions and interactions in a social context.

Central to his work, Vygotsky introduced various terms that are crucial in understanding his theory in education. Some of them include mediation, higher mental function and psychological tools. According to Minick (2005, pp 35-36), Vygotsky viewed human mental function as a transition from a lower form of mental development to a higher form. The lower form of mental development is characterised by inherited, unmediated, involuntary and isolated. While higher mental function is acquired and mediated socially, particularly by speech, voluntary and exists as a link in a system to function broadly rather than as a single unit. Thus, Vygotsky provides that higher mental functions are social that can be developed in sociocultural settings through learning and they are subsequently organised and internalized (Minick, 2005, p. 37). It is evident from this explanation that the roles of more knowledgeable others such as parents, caregivers and teachers are crucial in developing higher mental functions of children by mediating thoughts using language and interaction. Another fundamental concept in Vygotsky’s theory is psychological tools. They are the “symbolic cultural artefacts—signs, symbols, texts, formulae, and most fundamentally, language—that enable humans to master psychological functions such as memory, perception, and attention in ways appropriate to one’s culture (Kozulin, 2001, p.1). Kozulin (2001), further argues that one of the cornerstones of Vygotsky’s theory is the idea of psychological tools, which allows the researchers, psychologists and educationists to examine cognitive development, classroom learning and multicultural differences. It may be interpreted that the concept of psychological tools would facilitate classroom teachers and education policymakers to design curricula and learning activities that develop higher mental functions by incorporating the psychological tools.

Zone of Proximal Development

Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) as defined by Vygotsky is “the distance between the actual developmental level as determined by independent problem solving and the level of potential development as determined through problem-solving under adult guidance or in collaboration with more capable peers” (Schunk, 2012). The ZPD portrays the possible amount of learning by a student when proper instructional conditions are provided. According to Kozulin et al (2003, pp.3-4), although ZPD has gained popularity in the western world in the theory of education, it is poorly understood. It is because, ZPD is used in three different contexts; in the psychological developmental context, in applied context particularly in classroom assessment and learning and in everyday context as “space” the coincidence of theoretical concept and empirical concepts. It may be argued that understanding the ZPD in all contexts is essential but for educators, it may be essential to understand the implication of ZPD in an applied context.

The main reason for their introduction of the notion of the ZPD by Vygotsky was due to his dissatisfaction with two practical issues in educational psychology (Turuk, 2008). The first issue is assessing the child on intellectual abilities and the second is the evaluation of the instructional practices. He believes that testing should not be based only on the current level of a child’s achievement but it is more important to include the child’s potential development as well (Verenikina, 2010). He claimed that the actual level of development which is considered as the level of independent performance does not sufficiently describe development. It rather indicates “what is already developed or achieved, it is a ‘yesterday of development’. The level of assisted performance indicates what a person can achieve in future, what is developing (potential level, ‘tomorrow of development’, what a person ‘can be’)” (Verenikina, 2010). According to Cole & Cole (2001, cited by Verenikina, 2010), the term ‘proximal’ means ‘nearby’, indicating that the assistance provided goes slightly beyond learners' current competence complementing and building on their existing abilities. It is largely a test of a student’s developmental readiness or intellectual level in a specific domain, and it shows how learning and development are related (Schunk, 2012).

In the ZPD, a teacher and a learner work together on a task that the learner could not perform independently because of the difficulty level. Also, it reflects the idea of collective activity, where according to Bruner (1984, cited by Schunk, 2012), those who know more or are more skilled share that knowledge and skill to accomplish a task with those who know less. According to Rogoff (1986, cited by Shunk, 2012), a good deal of guided participation is required when working in the ZPD and learners bring their own understandings of social interactions and construct meanings by integrating those understandings with their experiences in the context.

“For example assume that a teacher (Trudy) and a child (Laura) will work on a task (making a picture of mom, dad, and Laura doing something together at home). Laura brings to the task her understanding of what the people and the home look like and of the types of things they might work on, combined with her knowledge of how to draw and make pictures. Trudy brings the same understanding plus knowledge of the conditions necessary to work on various tasks. Suppose they decide to make a picture of the three working in the yard. Laura might draw a picture of dad cutting grass, mom trimming shrubs, and Laura raking the lawn. If Laura were to draw herself in front of dad, Trudy would explain that Laura must be behind dad to rake up the grass left behind by dad’s cutting. During the interaction, Laura modifies her beliefs about working in the yard based on her current understanding and on the new knowledge she constructs.” (Schunk, 2012).

Social Constructive Theory – Vygotsky’s approach

Vygotsky stated that the “human mind is constructed through a subject’s interactions with the world and is an attribute of the relationship between subject and object” (Verenikina, 2010). He finds a significant role in humans’ understanding of the world and of themselves. These roles are attributed as ‘tools’ (Turuk, 2008). Furthermore, Vygotsky advocates that humans do not act directly on the physical world without the intermediary of tools. These tools can be any artefacts, whether symbolic or signs, created by a human under specific cultural and historical conditions carrying with them the characteristics of the culture in question (Turuk, 2008).

Save your time!
We can take care of your essay

• Proper editing and formatting
• Free revision, title page, and bibliography
• Flexible prices and money-back guarantee

Place Order

Hence he argues that mental processes could only be understood if we understand the tools and signs that mediate them (Verenikina, 2010).

According to Vygotsky, a child is completely dependent on other people during the early stages as the sociocultural environment keeps on presenting the child with a variety of tasks and demands, engaging the child in his world (Turuk, 2008). Especially these people could be the parents who instruct the child on what to do, how to do it, as well as what not to do, initiating the child’s action. Parents, as representatives of the culture and the conduit through which the culture passes into the child, actualise these instructions primarily through language. Vygotsky further explains that children appropriate these cultural and social heritages by acquiring knowledge through contacts and interactions with people as the first step – referred to as the inner psychological plane, and then later assimilate and internalise this knowledge adding their own personal value to it – referred as intrapsychological plane (Turuk, 2008). This transition from social to personal property is not considered as a mere copy rather it is a transformation of what had been learnt through interaction, into personal values. In addition, Vygotsky claims that in schools also students are not copying the teachers’ capabilities but transforming what teachers offer them during the processes of appropriation (Turuk, 2008).

Vygotsky emphasised that children and adults are both active agents in the process of a child’s development. Cole & Cole (2001, as cited by Verenikina, 2010) mentions that the development, in this case, is co-constructed. When applied to teaching it means that both the teacher and a student are seen as active agents in children’s learning. The teacher's intervention in children's learning is necessary, but it is the quality of the teacher-learner interaction, which is seen as crucial in that learning (Tharp & Gallimore, 1998 cited by Verenikina, 2010).

The theory emphasizes the importance of what the learner brings to any learning situation as an active meaning-maker and problem-solver (Turuk, 2008). It acknowledges the dynamic nature of the interplay between teachers, learners and tasks and provides a view of learning as arising from interactions with others. Ellis (2000, as cited by Maturuk, 2008) states that Vygotsky’s theory assumes that learning arises not through interaction, but in interaction. Learners first succeed in performing a new task with the help of another person and then internalise this task so that they can perform it on their own. In this way, social interaction is advocated to mediate learning. According to Ellis, the theory goes further to say interactions that successfully mediate learning are those in which the learners scaffold the new tasks (Turuk, 2008). Table 1.1 below identifies the key points of the theory.

Key points in Vygotsky’s theory

• Social interactions are critical; knowledge is co-constructed between two or more people.
• Self-regulation is developed through internalization (developing an internal representation) of actions and mental operations that occur in social interactions.
• Human development occurs through the cultural transmission of tools (language, symbols).
• Language is the most critical tool. Language develops from social speech to private speech to covert (inner) speech.
• The zone of proximal development (ZPD) is the difference between what children can do on their own and what they can do with assistance from others. Interactions with adults and peers in the ZPD promote cognitive development.

Source: (Meece, 2002 cited by Schunk, 2012)

According to Vygotsky, ‘good learning’ occurs in the Zone of Proximal Development where he distinguishes between the children’s actual and potential levels of development.

Educational Applications of Social Constructivists Theory

Karpov & Haywood (1998) and Moll (2001) believe that Vygotsky’s ideas lend themselves to many educational applications marking the field of self-regulation as strongly influenced (Schunk, 2012). One of the applications reflecting Vygotsky’s theory is reciprocal teaching. It involves interactive dialogues between the teacher and a small group of students. At first, the teacher models the activities. After that teacher and students take turns being the teacher. During reading comprehension, if students learn to ask questions, then to determine their level of understanding, the teacher can include a question-asking strategy in the instructional sequence. Since students gradually develop skills, reciprocal teaching comprises the principle of social interaction and ZPD of the Vygotskian perspective (Schunk, 2012).

Peer collaboration is another area where Vygotsky’s ideas fit. Bruner (1984), and Ratner et al., (2002) states that it reflects the notion of collective activity (Schunk, 2012). The shared social interactions when peers work on tasks cooperatively serve an instructional function. This method is mainly used in learning mathematics, science, and language arts which attests to the recognized impact of the social environment during learning.

Another application of Vygotsky’s theory is apprenticeships as they occur in cultural institutions like schools and agencies which helps in transforming learners’ cognitive development. On the job, apprentices operate within a ZPD as mainly their works depend on tasks beyond their capabilities. Apprentices develop a shared understanding of important processes by working with experts and integrating this with their current understandings (Schunk, 2012).

1. Educational psychology: for learning and teaching
   1. Author: Duchesne, MNcMaugh, Bochner and Krause
   2. Additional Person Name: Duchesne, Sue,
   3. Pages: 1 online resource (640 pages)
   4. Chapter Number: 2
   5. Resource Notes:
   6. Description based upon print version of record.
   7. Publication Date:
   8. ©2013
   9. Edition: 4th ed.
   10. ISBN: 9780170218610
   11. OCLC Number: (MiAaPQ)EBC1990988
   12. Place of publication: South Melbourne, Victoria, Australia :
   13. Publisher: Cengage Learning Australia Pty Limited,
2. Liu, C., & Chen, C. (2010). Evolution Of Constructivism. Contemporary Issues In Education Research, 3(4), 63-66.
3. Schunk, D. (2012). Learning Theories An Educational Perspective (6th ed.). Boston: Pearson Education, Inc.
4. Turuk, M. (2008). The Relevnavce and Implications of Vygotsky's Sociocultural Theory in the Second Language Classroom. ARECLS, 5, 244-262.
5. Verenikina, I. (2010). Vygotsky in Twenty-First-Century Research . Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications