QUESTIONS AND ESSAY PLANS
1. (a) Describe Vygotsky’s theory of cognitive development. (10 marks)
(b) Discuss how this theory has been applied to education (15 marks)
Part (a)
Paragraph 1
Set the scene by saying that Vygotsky paid special attention to social factors in the
child’s cognitive development—the role of culture and the role of others.
Paragraphs 2 and 3
Explain the important principles of the theory. One paragraph on ZPD and one on
the significance of language (leaving scaffolding for part (b).
Part (b)
Paragraph 4
Outline very briefly (i.e. simply mention) the basic principles that have enable the
theory to be applied to education—ideas of active learning, tutoring and scaffolding
all of which tie together—tutors must work within the ZPD range and provide
appropriate support. Explain that Bruner took up Vygotsky’s ideas and applied them
to education, so some of the ideas come from him.
Paragraph 5
Describe the principles of scaffolding put forward by Granott (2005) to explain the
most effective use of this technique in education.
Paragraph 6
Evaluate scaffolding with respect to findings on it use (Wood et al., 1976; Moss,
1992). Only use those that apply to education (not the ones on its unconscious use
by parents as they are not really relevant).
Paragraph 7
Evaluate the use of peer tutoring with reference to findings (Barnier, 1987; Van
Keer, 2004; Ellis, 1997).
Paragraph 8
Mention the limitations of scaffolding and peer tutoring—that the learner may not
be engaged; that it may annoy them and put them off learning; that they may prefer
to work independently and discover things for themselves.
2. Describe and evaluate research into moral understanding. (25 marks)
This is not an easy question since it is concerned with research studies rather than
theories, so you need to consider carefully what to include. Do not be tempted to
veer away from the question and start to describe and evaluate theories without
placing them in the context of research.
Paragraph 1
Start by outlining the type of research done by Kohlberg—the use of moral dilemma
stories. (Do not write extensively about Heinz but mention the circumstances
briefly.) Say that the idea was to study the development of moral thinking so
children of various ages were given the dilemma. In the original research this was
boys; some of the research was longitudinal and some of it cross-sectional.
Paragraph 2
Kohlberg devised a rating scale to place people on different levels of morality, in one
of six stages. However, there was no guarantee that there was agreement amongst
the raters as to which level the responses corresponded, so there were problems
with inter-rater reliability. This inevitably means that it is difficult to establish the
validity of using dilemma stories (remember that reliability and validity are not the
same but that you cannot have validity without reliability). Walker et al. (1987)
found from their research that people often fell between stages and they added a
further three stages to Kohlberg’s original six.
Paragraph 3
Kohlberg has been criticised for mainly using males so his theory does not
necessarily generalise to females (note that the theory is being criticised only into
relation to the research). Gilligan used men and women and, from her research,
concluded that men and women use different criteria by which to judge whether or
not behaviour is moral.
Paragraph 4
The use of rather artificial dilemma stories has been criticised because they tell us
little about how people react to real life situations. Gilligan’s research used real-life
moral dilemmas, mainly those actually experienced by the participants (such as
whether to abort an unwanted child) so these studies have far greater ecological
validity. They tell us not only how people think about moral issues but how they
behave. Artificial dilemma stories are not very useful in predicting how will actually
behave in a situation.
Paragraph 5
Eisenberg’s research was similar to Kohlberg’s in that she used artificial dilemma
stories so it has the same problems in this respect. Nevertheless, it made an
important contribution to research on moral understanding in that it investigated a
different aspect of it, that of pro-social behaviour, an aspect of morality that had
been rather ignored before.
Paragraph 6
Consider cross cultural research. It has also been used to establish how universal
are the stages of moral development. It has shown that early stages of moral
reasoning are similar across cultures, indicating that it is not greatly influenced by
cultural values but after that the stages do vary, perhaps because there are
important cultural influences such as individualism and collectivism.
Paragraph 7
Conclude by saying that the relationship between moral reasoning and behaviour is
not strong perhaps because of the use of techniques that access opinions, attitudes
and values rather than behaviour. Sum up the advantages and disadvantages of such
an approach.
3. (a) Describe what is meant by the mirror neuron system (5 marks)
(b) Describe and evaluate research studies into the mirror neuron system. (20
marks)
Part (a)
Paragraph 1
One paragraph is sufficient for part (a) as it is only 5 marks and all AO1. Describe
the location of the mirror neuron system in the brain, what activates it and its
suggested function.
Part (b)
Paragraphs 2 and 3
Cover the findings of the research with respect to monkeys and typically developing
(i.e. Non autistic) people (Umilta et al., 2001; Dinstein et al., 2007; Iacoboni et al.,
2005, Philip et al., 1997). There is some evaluation in the summaries of these
findings (see A2 Level Psychology page ???) so include these as well.
Paragraph 4
Now discuss the fact that this system may be different in autistic brains. Try to
remember at least two of the research studies: Dinstein et al., 2008 is particularly
useful as it provides evaluation because it questions the role of the mirror neuron
system in accounting for the autistic condition.
Paragraph 5
Now consider the evidence for the contention that the mirror neuron system plays
an important role in social cognition—this is mainly the evidence already presented
but you need to refer back to it in order to emphasise how it supports this point.
Paragraph 6
Outline the limitations of the research—that a lot of research has been done on
monkeys so generalisation is a problem; that the imaging at present is not very
precise; that it is reductionist and does not therefore take personality into account;
that its relationship to autism is as yet unclear.
Paragraph 7
If time, conclude with comments from the section on ‘So What Does This Mean?’
mentioning that the work on the mirror neuron system has offered insight into the
biological systems underlying perspective taking but research is still in its infancy
and at present offers exciting hypotheses but few firm conclusions. Simply looking
at the mirror neuron system is inevitably reductionist and it is likely that factors
other than biology will always play some part in our perception of other people.