Assignment 1 external for DLC by Matthias John Perkins

1. Introduction
From what I have learnt so far as a student teacher, but also from a personal standpoint, I
would say that my ideas and ideals in regard to good teaching fit under the constructivist
umbrella of theories (Woolfolk and Margets 2013, p. 322), with no single theory standing
out for me (unlike Edward 2005 and de Vries 2004). I very much believe in the idea that
children need to construct their own learning, participate in shaping this learning and feel
safe and secure, both emotionally and physically while doing so. To be able to do this
effectively as a teacher it is essential to understand the various theories both from a
developmental perspective and from a productive perspective how is teaching most
effective.
While the course on Development, Learning and Cognition (DLC) has helped me fit my ideas
and beliefs into a theoretical framework, at the same time it is important to realise that
none of these theories is a silver bullet and one has to pick and choose the useful elements
carefully, and depending on the situation to which they are being applied. Following on
from this I am also aware that, as a student teacher, I am still very much in the process of
learning, which hopefully will continue well into my retirement, and my ideas are likely to
change and adapt over time. Having said this, the learning is likely to be more in the form of
refinement, as my core values are likely to remain unchanged.
For my analysis I have chosen to analyse the lesson plan Dream Bedroom (see Appendix
1), aimed at year 4/5, using Vygotskys Sociocultural Theory as outlined by Woolfolk and
Margetts (2013, pp. 95-102, also Bodrova and Leong 1996, pp. 27-32), but being aware that
the interpretation of the theory is subjective and culturally dependent (see Daniels 2010, p.
674), and Banduras Social Learning Theory as outlined by Woolfolk and Margetts (2013, pp.
315-321). These two theories have some important crossovers, particularly related to the
respective ideas of play and observational learning and thus provide an interesting relatable
comparison when analysing the lesson plan. Vygotskys emphasis on the important role of
social interactions is a base element of a constructivist approach to teaching, as is Banduras
idea of modelling not only learning related processes, but, maybe more importantly for the
teacher, behaviour. Understanding these two theories has an enormous impact on teaching
in a constructivist way, but also in being able to provide a safe and secure learning
environment while doing so.
The respective two big ideas I will be using to analyse the lesson plan are Vygotskys idea of
the Zone of Proximal Development (ZDP), i.e. the area between what a child already knows
and what is beyond its ability to know even if assisted (Berk 1996, p. 227). The other
Vygotskian idea I will apply is the use of Cultural Tools (CT), defining such things as language
1

and symbols, but also a calculator, measuring tape, or scientific theory (Woolfolk and
Margets 2013, p. 96) . For Banduras theory I will be concentrating on the ideas of SelfEfficacy (SE), describing the personal beliefs about our capabilities in carrying out specific
tasks (Bandura 1994, Schunk 1991, p. 208) and Observational Learning (OL), which is of
particular interest to teachers in that they function as direct models to the students, be this
from a behavioural point of view, or actions such as problem solving, use of equipment and
other things (Woolfolk and Margets 2013, p. 320).

2. Analysis
In the following the lesson plan is analysed from the point of view of the two major theories
by concentrating on their respective two big ideas. The discussion primarily focuses on the
content of pages 3-6 in the plan which can be found as Appendix 1 at the end of this paper.
2.1 According to Vygotskys Social Development Theory
2.1.1 Zone of Proximal Development
Much of the initial tasks of the lesson plan are carried out at home independently, therefore
there is no teacher to provide scaffolding assisting the students in their learning that lies
outside of their independent competency, either by an adult or someone competent in the
task, such as a peer (Verenikina 2008, pp. 163-165 and Woolfolk and Margets 2013, pp. 9899). While this is an important part of learning within the ZDP, it is not the only way this
learning can occur.
Let us first look at the other indicators for the ZDP. There is the language chosen, such as If
you cant do this dont worry just draw your bedroom as accurately as possible.(Appendix
1, p. 3), this is a clear indicator that most of the tasks might be beyond the independent
capabilities of the students. There are many further instances where the plan states that a
task might not be accomplishable as requested, but that it can still be carried out with less
accuracy. The emphasis seems to lie on actually attempting it. This leads us onto the second
indicator, the use of make-believe play.
Vygotsky thought that make-believe play is an essential part of development and by children
using make-believe a ZDP could be created (Verenikina 2008, Vygotsky 1978, p. 102,).
Although the use of this term is aimed at younger children in preschool (Leong and Bodrova
2012, p. 29), Vygotsky does see play as developing towards a more complex form with age
(Berk 1998 and Vygotsky 1978, pp. 103-104). The choice and premise of the lesson plan
clearly encourages a mature form of make-believe play. The teacher provides the students
with a whole scenario which they are asked to act out, from measuring their room, choosing
furniture, working out the amount of paint needed and how much it will cost, choosing a
carpet and dealing with the financial aspects of this renovation. By providing this scenario
and asking the students to act it out, leading them along a specific path, the teacher is
creating a ZDP for the students without his presence. The students are encouraged to
2

function beyond their actual level. They are carrying out tasks normally reserved for adults,
and which they might have seen their parents carry out previously.
With only this theoretical lesson plan it is not possible to say what skills exactly the students
might, or might not, have prior carrying out the task. Depending on prior learning various
simple additions to the plan can ensure that learning occurs in even greater measure. By
having one or two lessons in which the tasks described are practiced and the teacher is
present to provide scaffolding. Further, the learning outcomes are maximised by providing
many different interlinked tasks which lead up to each other. This leads us to the use of the
Cultural Tools within the scenario.
2.1.2 Cultural Tools
Cultural tools are seen as essential for cognitive development by Vygotsky (Daniels 2011, pp.
676-679, Woolfolk and Margets 2013, pp. 96-98). While there are three (Woolfolk and
Margets 2013), at first glance the lesson plan only seriously addresses two of these
physical tools and symbolic/psychological tools, or tools of the mind (Bodrova and Leong
1996). However, one could argue that the greater concept of the scenario set by the lesson
plan of redecorating the bedroom, including the financial aspects and the final digital
creation of the room and the use of Google Sketch-Up, a virtual modelling programme,
might qualify as conceptual tools also. If we look further, there can be little doubt that the
final point of the lesson plan (Appendix 1, p. 6), the greater idea of sustainability falls into
this category. Following this interpretation then all three forms of CT are being utilised and
combined within this lesson plan.
Having said this, we need to look at the physical and psychological/symbolic tools that are
present. Firstly the physical tools; a variety of these are required to carry out the full
scenario that the teacher is giving the students. The plan explicitly requires the students to
use scaled instruments (Appendix 1, p. 3), but also a calculator and a computer. The
scaled instruments are likely to be a ruler and tape measure, used to measure the room as
well as transferring this onto paper. The psychological/symbolic tools in use are manifold.
Firstly, of course, is the language used to convey and explain the task to the students; at the
same time the subject, the various strands of mathematics, is another such tool, as is the
plan of the room drawn on paper, the use of an Excel spreadsheet although this has some
crossover with the physical tools.
If we now add to this the use of conceptual tools, as discussed above, all categories of
cultural tools are present. In this regard the use of Google Sketch-Up is particularly
resourceful as one might argue that it combines the use of physical,
psychological/symbolical and conceptual tools in one, but this depends on how tightly one
defines the virtual world (Woolfolk and Margets 2013, p. 96). Be this as it may, by utilising
such a wide array of tools it is likely that higher order cognitive processes will take place for
the students, thus maximising learning outcomes. Following Vygotskys theory then, this

lesson plan provides a wealth of both learning opportunities, while maximising the effect of
the learning outcomes.

2.2 According to Banduras Social Learning Theory

2.2.1 Observational Learning
The reason for choosing observational learning as one of the big ideas of Banduras theory
might seem odd, considering that the vast majority of the activities are carried out by the
students at home independently. However, it can be inferred that the modelling of the
activities has already taken place, as the plan suggests some expectance that the
independent tasks are carried out successfully. This would not be possible without the
students prior knowledge of the tasks involved. To reach this element of OL, of which there
are four attention, retention, reproduction and motivation and reinforcement (Bandura
1974, p. 864; Woolfolk and Margets 2013, p. 318), it can be assumed that the element of
modelling/attention by the teacher of measuring and calculations and retention of the
modelled activities by the students have already taken place. The plan indicates that this
task is at the stage of reproduction, in which the students are encouraged to reproduce the
previously observed tasks.
Under this premise the element of OL that can be further evaluated within the lesson plan is
that of reproduction and motivation. When an observer reaches the element of
reproduction they need not yet be, and are unlikely to be, capable of carrying the task out
easily and fully without assistance. This requires much practice and assistance of the task
(Bandura 1974; Woolfolk and Margets 2013). That the teacher expects the pupils to carry
out the tasks independently and at home would suggest that multiple instances of
reproduction have already taken place in the classroom. At the same time the
encouragement given in the plan that they should only do what they are capable of suggests
that the teacher is aware that not all students might be able to carry out the tasks fully
independently yet. In this respect it might be useful to get students to work in pairs or small
groups, ensuring that at least one in each group is fully competent in the skills required, or
that they are matched to complement each other where they are competent in different
parts of the task. This is because it has been shown that peer-modelling is a highly effective
form of observational learning, possibly due to the similarity in personal attributes (Schunk
and Hanson 1985, in particular pp. 319-321) and it would increase the chance for positive
learning outcomes.
Finally the point of motivation and reinforcement. To provide motivation in learning the
skills necessary for the task, the teacher might have said in class that they were building up
to this fun activity in which they get to redesign the room the way they would like. Also, the
use of the Google Sketch-Up activity towards the end of the lesson plan can be interpreted
as a reward for carrying out the work for the preceding tasks.
4

2.2.2 Self-Efficacy
The most important underlying factor on which this lesson plan is built is the idea of SE
(Bandura 1977 and 1994). It links directly into the previous section, particularly regarding
motivation and also into the success of the entire lesson plan. It has to be clear that the
personal belief or confidence someone holds in regard to their competency in carrying out
the task, SE, is not the same as self-esteem or even general confidence (Pajares 1997, p. 15).
It is task specific, so in the case of this lesson plan there are many different and independent
instances of SE and having SE relating to one of the tasks does not mean it exists for
another.
The lesson plan would require the students to have self-efficacy in measuring, converting
units, addition, subtraction, multiplication, use of a calculator, drawing a plan and cutting
out scaled models of items, among many others. As the students are working independently
at home, and if the teacher did not prepare the students adequately for the tasks in class,
there is a chance that they might struggle with some of the tasks considerably. This could
provide negative reinforcement (Bandura 1994, p. 71) and actually achieve the opposite of
what the teacher might be aiming for as an outcome.
Without the teachers presence while these tasks are carried out, there is no opportunity for
an intervention in the form of assistance or encouragement to prevent such a possibly
cascading effect. However, as mentioned previously, it can be inferred that the teacher
would not set such tasks unless (s)he is confident that the students have the SE to cope
with the tasks. There are also some safeguards in the form of the language chosen, making
sure that students do not feel they have failed if they are unable to complete the more
complex version of the tasks, such as calculating the perimeter, or scaling units.
By the same token as possible negative effects on learning outcomes, if the students
succeed in the tasks, be this the more complex or more simple version thereof, it will have a
genuinely positive effect on their SE in carrying out those tasks, as they are doing this
independently although peer-success also builds self-efficacy (Bandura 1994, p. 81). This
then might lead to a cascading positive effect with excellent prospects for the desired
learning outcomes.
3. Conclusion
As the above analysis shows, the lesson plan addresses nearly all of the key points of the big
ideas of both Vygotskys and Banduras theories. In relation to Vygotsky it can be argued
that the plan is clearly aimed at the Zone of Proximal Development, where the use of a
mature version of make-believe play is used to replace the lack of direct scaffolding by the
teacher, while utilising the full spectrum of Cultural Tools. In this regard it is interesting to
note that in Vygotskys theory, while three cultural tools are clearly defined by Woolfolk and
Margets (2013), in practice the lines between these can be blurred and some tools might
actually fall into multiple categories.

In relation to Bandura the use of Observational Learning has to be inferred, or to be more

precise, previous elements of the Observational Learning cycle have to be inferred. The
motivational aspects only are inferred in part, as the penultimate task, the use of Google
Sketch-Up, clearly must be seen as a reward. The whole premise of the lesson plan relies
heavily on the idea of Self-Efficacy, again preparation for the task must be inferred, or else
the lesson could have an adverse effect on learning and Self-Efficacy.
For both theories adequate preparation for the tasks is essential to provide a successful as
well as safe and secure learning experience for the students and to ensure that the learning
outcomes are achieved. The only other aspect that might deserve consideration is the use of
peer-models in regards to Observational Learning.
What this analysis has shown is that it is perfectly possible to create a lesson plan which
addresses important elements of differing theories without contradiction and how such
theories in fact can complement and feed into each other. Not only does the plan deliver a
series of interlinked tasks that should be both engaging and enjoyable for students, but also
have the potential to provide very positive learning outcomes for the students. From my
perspective as a student teacher this will certainly influence my future planning of lessons
and I will add this excellent lesson plan to my teaching resources for future use.
4. Word Count: c. 2600
5. References and Bibliography

Bandura, A., 1974, Behavior Theory and the Models of Man, American Psychologist, 29
(12), pp. 859-869.
Bandura, A., 1977, Self-efficacy: Toward a Unifying Theory of Behavioral Change,
Psychological Review, 84 (2), pp. 191-215.
Bandura, A., 1994, Self-Efficacy, in R. S. Ramachandran (ed.), Encyclopedia of Human
Behaviour, 4, pp. 71-81.
Berk, L. E., 1998, Vygotskys theory: the importance of make believe play, in L.E. Berk
(ed.), Landscapes of development, Wadsworth, California.
Bodrova, E. and Leong, D. J., 1996, Tools of the mind: the Vygotskian approach to early
childhood education, Merrill, Englewood Cliffs, N. J.
Daniels, H., 2010, Vygotsky and Psychology., in U. Goswami (ed.), The Wiley-Blackwell
Handbook of Childhood Cognitive Development, 2nd edition, Blackwell Publishing, Online
publication, pp. 673-696.

De Vries, R., 2004, What is constructivist about constructivist education?, The

Constructivist, 15 (1), pp. 1-26.
Edwards, S., 2005, Constructivism does not happen in the individual: sociocultural theory
and early childhood education, Early Child Development and Care, 175 (1), pp. 37-47.
Leong, D. J. and Bodrova, E., 2012, Assessing and Scaffolding Make Believe Play, Young
Children, Jan., pp. 28-34.
Pajares, F., 1997, Current directions in self-efficacy research, in M. L. Maehr and P. R.
Pintrich (eds.), Advances in Motivation and Achievement, 10, JAI Press, Greenwhich, CT.
Schunk, D. H., 1991, Self-Efficacy and Academic Motivation, Educational Psychologist, 26
(3 and 4), pp. 207-231.
Schunk, D. H. and Hanson, A. R., 1985, Peer Models: Influence on Childrens Self-Efficacy
and Achievement, Journal of Educational Psychology, 3, pp. 313-322.
Verenikina, I., 2008, Scaffolding and learning: its role in nurturing new learners, in P. Kell,
W. Vialle, D. Konza and G. Vogl (eds.), Learning and the learner: exploring learning for new
times, Faculty of Education, University of Wollongong, pp. 161-180.
Vygotsky, L. S., 1978, The role of play in development, Mind in society: the development of
higher psychological processes, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, pp. 92-104.
Woolfolk, A. and Margetts, K., 2013, Educational psychology, 3rd edition, Australasian
edition, Pearson Education, Frenchs Forest, NSW.

Appendix 1

Topic / Broad Outcome

Dream Bedroom

Year Level/s - 4/5

Proficiency Strands
Understanding, Fluency, Problem Solving and Reasoning.

Content Strands and Sub-Strands

Number and Algebra

Measurement and Geometry

Statistics and Probability

Number and place value

Using units of measurement

Chance

Fractions and decimals

Shape

Data representation and interpretation

Money and financial mathematics

Location and transformation

Patterns and algebra

Geometric reasoning

General Capabilities:

General Capabilities Focus:

Numeracy

Students recognise the interconnected nature of mathematical knowledge,

learning areas and the wider world.
Students select and apply numerical, measurement, concepts and skills to
real-world situations.

Literacy

Information and Communication Technology (ICT) Competence

Create with ICT: Using ICT to generate ideas, plans, processes and products
to create solutions to challenges or learning tasks.

Critical and Creative Thinking

Ethical Behaviour
Personal and Social Competence
Intercultural Understanding

Cross Curriculum Priorities:

Curriculum Links:

Formal / Informal Assesment:

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander histories and cultures

Technology

Observations

Asia and Australias engagement with Asia

Anecdotal notes

Sustainability

Work samples

Resources:

Content Descriptors

Use scaled instruments to measure and

compare lengths.

Compare objects using familiar metric

units of area and volume.

Solve problems involving purchases and

the calculation of change to the nearest
five cents with and without digital
technologies.

Lesson Ideas

Measure your bedroom and draw a birds-eye view. Include the measurements on your
drawing. Try to do it to scale if you can. For example make 1 metre equal 5 centimetres.
So if one of your walls equalled 5 metres, on your diagram it would be 25 centimetres
long. If you cant do this dont worry just draw your bedroom as accurately as possible.

If you can, work out the perimeter and the area of the bedroom. If you can perimeter in
millimetres, centimetres and metres please do so. Finally if you can convert square
metres to square centimetres and square millimetres have a go at that too.

Choose appropriate units of

3

measurement for length and area.

Calculate the perimeter and area of

rectangles using familiar metric units.

Create simple financial plans.

Copy the drawing you did on the last page and include the furniture you have in the
room now. Include your measurements. So measure the wardrobe and bedside tables
etc. Try to keep it as accurate as possible so if your wardrobe takes up half the wall you
need to make it take up half the wall in your drawing.

Work out the area of your bedroom. If you can, put the area of your bedroom into
metres and centimetres. Please show all your working.

Buy 10 items for your dream bedroom. To purchase an item you need to cut out a
picture of it and glue it into your book. You also need to keep a table of how much
money you have spent. You have an unlimited budget so spend as much as you want.
After you have bought your items you need to put them into the scale drawing of your
bedroom. Be as accurate as you can, for example you cannot put a queen-sized bed into
your bedroom if it would not fit. Record all purchases on an Excel spreadsheet.

It is time to paint your bedroom. This is quite difficult so you will need to follow the step
by step instructions.

First find out the area of each of the walls and the ceiling.

Then you need to work out the total area of the walls and ceiling.

Then you need to double this number because you need to apply two coats of
paint.

Then work out how much paint you need. One litre of paint will paint
approximately 14 square metres.

The paint you will be using is a Premium Maxi Wash, 4 litres will cost you $55.95.
So how much will it cost you to paint the bedroom?

Your dream bedroom requires new carpet. To work out how much it will cost to carpet
your bedroom you need to work out the area of your bedroom in metres squared. Then
you need to work out which carpet you would like. I have chosen four carpets from a
Carpet Choice brochure.

Antrium

$36.90 per square metre

Kildare

$43.40 per square metre

Marble falls

$37.95 per square metre

Chamonix

$53.30 per square metre

The cost of laying the carpet is an additional $250. Have a try at working out the cost of
5

carpeting your bedroom by yourself. If you need help just ask. Please show all working
and you will need to use a calculator.

`Your bank has called, they are very sorry but you didnt have that much money after all.
In fact they want you to pay back all the money you spent. But there is another problem.
You will only receive
50 % of the amount you paid when you sell the products back (not including carpet and
paint). However you will get 75 % of the money you paid for TVs, DVD players and game
consoles. How much money can you raise in the sell off? How much money do you still
owe?

Use Google sketch-up to design your dream bedroom.

Look at how so many modern appliances are dumped even though they work. How can
we become more resourceful?