Author: Dr. Jill Duncan
University of Newcastle/Royal Institute for Deaf
and Blind Children
Parramatta, Australia
Date submitted to deafed.net –
September 6, 2006
To contact the author for permission
to use this PowerPoint, please e-mail:
[email protected]
To use this PowerPoint presentation
in its entirety, please give credit to the
author.
VYGOTSKY AND AUDITORYVERBAL THERAPY
Jill Duncan, PhD, Cert AVT
[email protected]
Renwick Centre for
Professional Education and Research
Royal Institute for Deaf and Blind Children and the
University of Newcastle
www.auditory-verbal.org.au
INTRODUCTION
Ideally in daily practice auditoryverbal therapists work within a theory
of human learning and development
Theory serves as a guide for making
moment-to-moment decisions in
clinical practice ( Schneider &
Watkins, 1996)
INTRODUCTION
The goal here is to put forward a
particular social interactionist theory
– Vygotsky’s
The end result will facilitate an
improved ability to help the child
move toward independent
performance
BIOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION
Lev Vygotsky lived in Russia more than 100
years ago during a turbulent, revolutionary
time
Although trained in law and the arts, he
worked as a psychologist for 10 years
(1924-1934), and during that time he
accomplished enormous achievements
He wrote 200 pieces of literature, founded a
scientific school of thought and laid the
foundation for several new directions in the
field of psychology (Vygodskya, 1999)
BIOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION
Soon after Vygotsky’s untimely death, the
Stalinist regime had his work banned
For 20 years his widow and two daughters
kept Vygotsky’s manuscripts hidden under
their beds in their tiny apartment in
Moscow
The first collection of Vygotsky’s works were
published in 1956 by his daughter
(Vygodskya, 1999)
BIOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION
• Vygotsky’s early
professional career
focused on special
education in Moscow
• He has wrote on deaf
education and one of
his daughters went
on to become a
teacher of the deaf
(Vygodskya, 1999)
THEORETICAL FOUNDATION
• Constructivism in education is based
on notions from cognitive and social
psychology
• The former is grounded in the work of
Piaget (1954, 1955, 1970) and
accentuates cognitive developmental
and individual construction of
knowledge (Kaufman, 2004)
THEORETICAL FOUNDATION
The latter (social constructivism)
emphasizes social construction of
knowledge and is generally attributed
to the work of Vygotsky (1962, 1978)
(cited in Kaufman, 2004)
THEORETICAL FOUNDATION
• Constructivist pedagogy is the most
influential theory in the field of education
today (Baily & Pransky, 2005)
• Constructivism is a popular educational
theory that is actually composed of two
distinct branches of thought –
–Social construction-Vygotsky
–Cognitive construction-Piaget (Baily &
Pransky, 2005)
THEORETICAL FOUNDATION
Vygotsky believed that children’s
thinking and meaning-making is
socially constructed and emerges out of
their social interactions and their
environment
Children’s learning is facilitated by
parents, peers, teachers, and others in
their lives (Kaufman, 2004)
THEORETICAL FOUNDATION
Vygotsky’s main theories focused on
context, culture, and language
Vygotsky’s most well known theory is
called “Cultural-Historical Activity
Theory” (cultural transmission of
knowledge) (Gindis, 1999)
THEORETICAL FOUNDATION
Cultural transmission of knowledge is
a psychological theory in which the
human being is the subject of socialcultural, rather than biologicalnatural processes
Vygotsky is considered the “founder of
cultural psychology” (Gindis, 1999)
THEORETICAL FOUNDATION
In special education, Vygotsky often wrote
of “compensatory strategies” whereby the
objective of intervention was enhancing the
“mightiness of the mind”
This included • abstract reasoning
• logical memory
• problem solving
• goal directed behaviours (Gindis, 1999)
THEORETICAL FOUNDATION
Fundamental to understanding
Vygotsky’s theories and/or constructs
is the understanding that Vygotsky
viewed language as the force that
drives cognitive development because
language mediates the child’s
participation in his intellectual and
social environment (Owens, 1996)
KEY THEORETICAL
CONSTRUCTS
• Two key theoretical constructs
associated with Vygotskyian thinking
are–
Zone of Proximal Development
–
Scaffolding (Although not originally
used by Vygotsky, it refers to
Vygotsky’s notion of the socialcultural interaction between a more
skilled learner and a less skilled
learner) (Berk & Winsler,1995)
ZONE OF PROXIMAL
DEVELOPMENT
Vygotsky defines the Zone of Proximal
Development as “the area of
immature, but maturing
(psychological) process” and first used
the term in the context of assessing
cognitive development (Vygotsky,
1962)
ZONE OF PROXIMAL
DEVELOPMENT
• The Zone of Proximal Development
embodies the learners readiness to
learn
• It is the distance between the learner’s
actual developmental level and the level
of their potential development
(Kaufman, 2004)
ZONE OF PROXIMAL
DEVELOPMENT
• A child does not "have" a Zone of
Proximal Development – it is not a
feature of the child
• Rather a zone is created whenever
children interact with more-capable
others in particular activities (Tharp &
Gallimore, 1988)
ZONE OF PROXIMAL
DEVELOPMENT
• For a Zone of Proximal Development
to be created, there must be a joint
activity that creates a context for
student and expert interaction
• The expert may then use multiple
instructional strategies (Tharp &
Gallimore, 1988)
ZONE OF PROXIMAL
DEVELOPMENT
The learner’s potential for learning
guides the design of problem-solving
tasks and determines the level and
range of scaffolding the learners
require for accommodating the
learning task (Kaufman, 2004)
ZONE OF PROXIMAL
DEVELOPMENT
In using the Zone of Proximal
Development, adults structure activities
so that the child functions between the
baseline and ceiling of capacity
The Zone of Proximal Development is the
difference between a child’s actual
developmental level and current potential
development
SCAFFOLDING
• Scaffolding (Wood, Bruner & Ross, 1976)
is a metaphor that translates into a
model of learning through gradual
increments as a result of an interactive
process
• In essence, it implies a process of
collaboration between teacher and
student learners – ideally between a
single learner in a one-on-one tutoring
relationship (Lefrancois, 2001)
SCAFFOLDING
In general, scaffolding is providing
support through many mechanisms
including • directions
• guidance
• demonstrations
• explanations
• provision of models
• explanations of objective
SCAFFOLDING
External Scaffolding supports learners’
acquisition of knowledge by the teacher• breaking down information into
comprehensible components
• modelling
• coaching
• providing feedback
• appropriating responsibility for learning to
learners (Kaufman, 2004)
SCAFFOLDING
Internal scaffolding engages the
learner in reflection and self-monitoring
to enhance acquisition of concepts
(Kaufman, 2004)
The notion of internal scaffolding is not
dissimilar to metacognition and metalinguistics
SCAFFOLDING
• Most good teachers already use
scaffolding techniques, so what's new?
–Vygotsky's concept of Zone of
Proximal Development - what learners
are capable of with the help of adults
or peers
• Therefore teachers and other adults
arrange for children to engage in
activities that lie within this zone
SCAFFOLDING
• To the extent that the environment
requires the child to perform at a level
slightly in advance of their current
developmental level, progress will be
enhanced
SCAFFOLDING
• By using the Zone of Proximal
Development the child’s performance
under the adult guidance is at a higher
level than they are capable of
independently
• The goal is for the adult to use minimal
direction with maximal responsibility left
to the child (Kaufman, 2004)
• Eventually the assistance of the adult is
dropped because the skill is internalised
by the child (Schneider & Watkins, 1996)
SCAFFOLDING
Educational Implications
• By keeping tasks in a child’s Zone of
Proximal Development or slightly
above their level of independent
functioning, adults can “rouse to life”
the cognitive processes that are just
emerging in a rudimentary form (Tharp
& Allimore, 1988)
SCAFFOLDING
Educational Implications
• At the prelinguistic level, the child's
attention is what must primarily be
negotiated (Rommetveit, 1979); at a
later age negotiations can involve the
nature of the activity and the ways to
operate within it
SCAFFOLDING
Educational Implications
• Teachers too are learners in this context. They
observe and identify the students' Zone of
Proximal Development; design appropriate,
authentic, and meaningful learning modules;
and provide instructional support and
scaffolding to propel students to construction
of higher levels of understanding (Kaufman,
2004)
SCAFFOLDING
Educational Implications
• In striving to promote autonomy,
creativity and engagement, teachers'
choice of scripts can powerfully motivate
or block such endeavours (Stigler &
Hiebert, 1999)
SCAFFOLDING
Educational Implications
• Demands that are beyond children's
capacities (in other words that are
beyond their Zone of Proximal
Development) are ineffective in
promoting growth
• Similarly demands that are too simple
are wasteful (Demetrion, 1999)
SCAFFOLDING
Educational Implications
• A discerning teacher is capable of
determining the critical edge of a student's
learning capacity for self-directed learning
at any given time and can decide when
assistance is needed to facilitate further
learning (Demetrion, 1999)
SCAFFOLDING
Adult-child Collaboration
• The adult's contribution cannot be
examined in isolation; it must be seen in
relation to the child's contribution
• The nature of the child's ongoing behaviour
demands moment-by-moment decisions on
the part of the adult as the optimal kind of
input to be provided at any particular point
(Demetrion, 1999)
SCAFFOLDING
Adult-child Collaboration
• The notion of sensitivity implies that
the adult's guidance supports what the
child can already do
• Being highly sensitive to the children's
verbal cues and signals in performing,
means that they are able to respond
promptly and appropriately to childinitiated activities and behaviours
SCAFFOLDING
Adult-child Collaboration
• The more skilled the child is in
performing the task, independently, the
less frequently the adults provide
guidance
• A good therapist needs to follow a
moving Zone of Proximal Development
SCAFFOLDING
Adult-child Collaboration
• Scaffolding is a useful umbrella term
to describe a wide range of adult
actions
• There is need for continuous revision
of action in response to the child's
ongoing activity (Schaffer, 1996)
SCAFFOLDING
Adult-child Collaboration
• The term scaffolding is a metaphor but it
does not explain the problem of
internalisation i.e. how a child become selfregulating after a period of other-regulation
• It does not help one to understand the
processes responsible for mental
reorganisation which underlies that
independence (Schaffer, 1996)
EVIDENCE BASED AUDITORYVERABL INTERVENTION
Skilled auditory-verbal therapists
observe and identify a student’s Zone of
Proximal Development, design
appropriate authentic and meaningful
learning tasks, and provide instructional
support and scaffolding to facilitate the
construction of higher levels of
understanding
EVIDENCE BASED AUDITORYVERBAL INTERVENTION
Evidence based auditory-verbal
intervention is the use of best
evidence in making decisions about
individual children and students in
planing therapy, in conducting
therapy and in deciding placement
options
EVIDENCE BASED AUDITORYVERBAL INTERVENTION
• Vygotsky (1962) believed that
decisions regarding intervention
and/or interactions should be both
qualitative and quantitative in nature
• Effective auditory-verbal therapists
use a combination of informal
observation(s) as well as standardised
assessments
EVIDENCE BASED AUDITORYVERBAL INTERVENTION
Evidenced based auditory-verbal
intervention demands ongoing
functional and informal diagnostic
therapy and observation as well as
comprehensive standardised
assessment of linguistic, auditory,
speech and cognitive skills
development
FRAMEWORK FOR
APPLYING VYGOTSKY
STEP ONE
• Obtain comprehensive child/student/family
information
STEP TWO
• Observe child in a variety of communicative
contexts
STEP THREE
• Conduct initial therapy to establish baseline
of contextualised functional communication
FRAMEWORK FOR
APPLYING VYGOTSKY
STEP FOUR
• Complete qualitative data analysis
STEP FIVE
• Complete standardised assessments
STEP SIX
• Establish Zone of Proximal Development
(basal and ceiling) and use this information
to set goals
FRAMEWORK FOR
APPLYING VYGOTSKY
STEP SEVEN
• Plan therapy based on set goals using the
information obtained through establishing
the Zone of Proximal Development
STEP EIGHT
• Conduct therapy and use a range of
scaffolding techniques to work within the
Zone of Proximal Development
FRAMEWORK FOR
APPLYING VYGOTSKY
STEP NINE
• Modify therapy based on ongoing diagnostic
observations of the child’s behaviour
STEP TEN
• Repeat the cycle as often as necessary and at
every step be sure to provide parent
education to assist the parents in
recognising how to best scaffold the child’s
learning
THE CHALLENGE
Understanding Zygotsky’s Vision
–Determining and working within the
“Zone of Proximal Development”
–The “power” of explicit, meaningful
scaffolded instruction
–Scaffolded instruction can optimise
learning
THE CHALLENGE
Understanding Zygotsky’s Vision
“One must keep in mind that any child with a
disability is first of all a child…From a
psychological and pedagogical points of view,
one must treat the child with a disability in the
same way as a normal one” (Vygotsky, 1995,
p.4)
“A disability in and of itself is not a tragedy. It
is only an occasion to provoke a tragedy”
(Vygotsky, 1995, np)
(Cited by Vygotsky’s daughter in Vygodskaya, 1999)
REFERENCES – One
Baily, F., & Pransky, K., (2005). Are “other people’s children”
constructivist learners too? Theory into Practice, 44(1), 19-26.
Berk, L., & Winsler, A. (1995). Scaffolding children’s learning:
Vygotsky and early childhood education. Washington. D.C.:
National Association for the Education of Young Children.
Demetrion, G. (1999). A scaffolding paradigm: Small group
tutoring at the Bob Steele Reading Centre 1990-1995. Career
and Technical Education, 9(1), 46-66.
Gindis, B. (1999). Vygotsky’s vision: Reshaping the practice of
special education for the 21st century. Remedial and Special
Education, 20 (6), 333-340.
Kaufman, D. (2004). Constructivist issues in language learning
and teaching. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 24, pp.
303-319. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lefrancois, G. (2001). Lifespan of children. Canada: Wadsworth.
Owens, R. (1996). Language development (4th ed). Boston: Alyn
and Bacon.
Rommetveit, R. (1979). On architecture of intersubjectivity. In R.
Rommetveit and R. Blaker (Eds.) Studies of language, thought
and verbal communication. London: Academic Press.
REFERENCES - Two
Schaffer, H.R. (1996). Joint involvement episodes as context for
development. In H. Daniels, An introduction to Vygotsky (pp 251280). London: Routledge.
Schneider, P., & Watkins, R. (1996). Applying Vygotskian
developmental theory to language intervention. Language, Speech
and Hearing Services in Schools, 27, 157-170.
Stigler, J., & Hiebert, J., (1999). The teaching gap: best ideas from the
world’s teachers for improving education in the classroom. New York:
Free Press.
Tharp, R., & Gallimore, R. (1988). Rousing minds to life. Cambridge,
MA: Cambridge University Press.
Vigodskaya, G. (1999). Yygotsky and problems of special education.
Remedial and special education, 20 (6), 330-332.
Vygotsky, L. (1962). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in science: The development of higher
psychological processes. M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner, & E.
Sourberman, Eds. & Trans. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
Press.
Vygotsky, L. (1995). Problemy defectology [Problems of defectology].
Moscow: Prosvecshenie Press.
Wood, D., Bruner, J., & Ross, G., (1976). The role of tutoring in
problem-solving. Journal of Child Psychology & Psychiatry, 17, 89100.