What an interesting and dense book. I am now on my second reading. Did I mention that it was dense? While I appreciate the difficulty in translating from the original Russian, I have a feeling that even if my Russian were still passable, I had a Russian Grandfather, I would still be struggling. It is a fascinating set of … assumptions about how children develop. I can understand the idea of language as a tool, or how pointing at first is a child reaching out and only later develops into actual pointing. A realization that a physical act can become something symbolic. Or how a child's mind begins to replace objects with symbols.
What I most appreciate though is the manner in which Dr. V. managed to break down the thought process into the most basic of components. The comparison to animal behavior, well, at least that of the great apes, really highlighted the difficulty in actually being able to differentiate the minute differences between animal and human behavior. It is an extraordinary look at how the mind works, how we move from the physical to the symbolic world … and just how dense this book is. Even after reading it a second time I have to admit that I am a bit fuzzy minded.
However, it also shows that the third design principle can be applied here. The simple steps towards understanding, of moving from the physical to the symbolic stage of tools is something that appeals to the workings of my mind. I know that I handicap myself by jumping from A-B -->Q, but after reading this I think I can work on that.
In my class I have taken to discussing the Reasons we Do what we Do in class with my students. By actually sitting down and thinking about the work I ask them to complete, and getting them to move from the concrete (doing the work because it was assigned) to the symbolic use of the work as a tool (understanding the reasoning behind the assignment and how it can be used in other classes and situations) has been immensely rewarding to both me and my kids. We have had a number of very intense discussions about the use of skimming and scanning, or the reasoning behind answering certain questions in the order in which we do (The students answer Reading Check questions before they take book notes and for that matter, before they have actually read a section of the chapter). Students have actually had AHA moments where they have actually said … "AHA. I get it now."
While I am sure this isn't a world breaking idea, it has turned on a lightbulb for both me and those I am working with in school, and that alone makes it worth the ride through NVA traffic every Thursday.
Good learning designs engage students in social play
activities at the edge of their knowledge and
understanding using symbolic tools to develop and
internalize meaningful thought . [Learning Principle #3]
Like you I had difficulty plodding through the first part of the book. I think that from the class discussions I got that "symbols" are a type of tool, as is "speech". The tools were used to accomplish some work that would later become internalized. It sounds like you are saying here that work is the tool? Not sure I'm seeing Vygotsky's methodology in that vein?
ReplyDeleteTrue that play is a social activity where students get to use their tools and internalize the results into new generative and meaningful thought.
I too had a lot of difficulty grasping the true nature of the reading. It was not until I sat in class and had it explained to me in a more meaningful manner that I was able to fully grasp what Vygotsky was getting at. I had that AHA moment on Wednesday night. It was just like what your students went through when you had your discussion with them. I had no connection to the content. Because of this, I was not able to internalize it. Once it was explained to me in a way that gave it meaning, I was able to synthesize it.
ReplyDeleteI don't know about you, but I need a night's sleep for the lessons of the class to sink in. During class I essentially feel like a moron.
ReplyDelete