Understanding Vygotsky’s Sociocultural Perspective on Teaching and Learning

Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory emphasizing on the importance of social interaction in

children’ cognitive development has become the foundation of much research and theory

since the 1970s. Understanding the key ideas of his theory could provide educators with

critical insights into their teaching practices to ensure that all the learning needs would be

met, and efforts are made towards the optimal learning outcomes. In this essay, it first

explains the main factors that Vygotsky believed of how children develop their cognitive skills.

The major components of the theory include internalization, social interaction, language as a

cultural tool and the concept of Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD). Implications in

classroom practices are proposed based on these perceptions afterward. Additionally, the

needs of students from the Aboriginal background are also considered and suggestions for

the educators are advised accordingly. Finally, it discusses the strengths and limitations of

Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory.

Vygotsky’s concepts of children’s cognitive capability implied the necessity of discussing

children’s cognitive development under a sociocultural context. According to Vygotsky,

human’s mental abilities can be categorized as lower mental functions and higher mental

functions (Vygotsky, 1978). Lower mental function refers to those capacities which are

present from the time of birth. The senses and memory, as examples, are within the scope of

lower mental functions. In general, infants are all born with these capabilities in spite of the

individual differences which is more biologically determined and cannot be controlled by the

infant himself/herself to a large extent (Green & Piel 2009). In contrast, the higher mental

functions such as thinking and language involve more abstract perceptions and operate in the

1
brain. According to Duchesne and Mcmaugh (2016), these abilities are often used to regulate

lower mental functions to think and solve problems in relation to relevant experiences and

events. Higher mental functions are promoted through social interactions while lower mental

functions are unrelated to sociocultural influence (Duchesne and Mcmaugh 2016; Green &

Piel 2009).

The transmission from the innate and natural way of behaviour to a more sophisticated and

abstract mental process occurs through interaction within the sociocultural environment

(Gredler & Shields 2008). In other words, the higher level cognitive process is not simply

acquired as children gradually grows to psychophysiological maturity. As Vygotsky (1978)

suggested that ‘every function in a child’s cultural development appears twice: first on the

social level and later on the individual level; first between people (interpsychological) and

then inside the child (intrapsychological)’. It means that children’s cognitive growth begins in

interacting with others through observing and participating in social activities, and then

transforms and internalises to a higher level of thinking. This process of transmission is

referred to as “internalization” and that is the way children form deeper understandings as

well as refine and mature their thinking (Woolfolk & Margetts 2015). The sociocultural

environment in which children were brought up occupies an important role in children’s

cognitive development.

Much important learning by the child takes place through social interactions with parents or

caregivers, educators, peers and the more knowledgeable other (MKO) (Vygotsky 1978).

Vygotsky (1978) believes that young children are all curious and actively involved in all types

of learning experiences and expand their understanding by exploring the world. Children take

every opportunity to obtain social guidance in a number of daily activities including getting

2
dressed, crossing the street, learning a sporting activity and so on because cognitive

development occurs on the social level before internalisation. However, the guidance that

adults or peers provided is not merely the unilateral output of knowledge. The type of social

interaction is more of a cooperative or collaborative mode of co-construction where the

cognitive process is promoted most effectively (Duchesne & Mcmaugh 2016). For instance,

when first given Lego blocks, a child may not have much idea of how these toys should be

manipulated and would meet difficulties in combining them. An adult’s support with explicitly

demonstrating or explaining would be beneficial. When the adult observed the child’s

becoming more competent, more independent work would be allowed.

As illustrated by O'Donnell et al. (2016), like travellers in a strange place who need and want

a trusted guide, children facing with challenging tasks are desire and will also benefit from an

MKO’s assistance. The MKO is someone who has a better understanding or more competent

than the leaner in a certain realm and the MKO is not necessarily a teacher or an adult. A

child’s peers or an adult’s children could also be the person who has more knowledge or

experience concerning a particular topic. For example, a child’s peers are more familiar with

the most fashionable teenage music or video games. The emphasis on the role of social

interactions in children’s cognitive development lies in the core of Vygotsky’s sociocultural

theory. The co-constructing of cooperative communication helps children to develop a higher

level of thinking and make meaning of the world (Woolfolk & Margetts 2015).

Vygotsky (1978) declared that sociocognitive development occurs not only at the level of

“face-to-face, one-on-one interaction” with the MKO but also through cultural history and

technologies which are known as cultural tools (O’Donnell et al. 2016). For example, children’s

memory is primarily limited by biological factors. However, the memory strategies in different

3
cultural context could shape the development. People used to take notes to support memory.

But in contemporary society, advanced information and communications technology (ICT) has

provided efficient and convenient methods which allow children to use the primal functions

adaptively. Cultural tools could be anything through which culture is passed on such as

algebraic symbols, works of art, writings and so on among with language is in the most critical

position in cognitive growth (Duchesne & Mcmaugh 2016).

According to Vygotsky, language as a bridge connecting speech to thought serves both social

interactions and intellectual adaptation (Duchesne & Mcmaugh 2016). Vygotsky identified

that there are three different forms of language which are external speech, private speech

and silent inner speech (Green & Piel 2009). Social speech as a mean of social contact enables

children to actively communicate with other people in obtaining knowledge. Children’s

private speech shows the sign of their experiencing the process of internalization from which

drives cognitive development (Woolfolk & Margetts 2015). Inner speech is regarded to a large

extent as pure meaning with the minimum syntactic and phonetic elements (Green & Piel

2009). It is through the increasing competencies of language that facilitate children’s

transforming the external communication into part of internal thinking.

Vygotsky emphasises the importance of children’s private speech because it indicates the

earliest manifestation of inner speech which can be regarded as a significant milestone in

children’s cognitive development (Duchesne & Mcmaugh 2016). Private speech is more often

seen among young children when they are dealing with difficult tasks (Duchesne & Mcmaugh

2016; Green & Piel 2009). Children mutter to themselves for self-guidance or self-direction

while trying to understand and solve problems (Vygotsky, cited in O’Donnell et al. 2016). The

more sophisticated thinking children establish the less private speech is likely to appear

4
(Duchesne & Mcmaugh 2016). As a result, an implication for early childhood educators is that

children’s private speech should be noticed as a sign that they might need help and allowing

private speech in learning experiences could assist children’s working on problem-solving.

Another important concept of Vygotsky’s theory is the Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD).

As Vygotsky defined, between a child’s independent performance and what the child can

achieve with the guidance of the MKO there is a distance (Green & Piel 2009). The distance is

called the ZPD. Vygotsky argued that finding out and adapting instructions within children’s

ZPD should be the main focus as ZPD is the critical area where child’s cognitive development

can achieve the best optimization (Duchesne & Mcmaugh 2016; O’Donnell et al. 2016). For

example, a child is struggling with learning to read. Through the educator’s working with the

student by providing reading strategies such as sounding out words, the child is able to learn

to read. This is a learning experience in that child’s ZPD and thus it can succeed.

Understanding the ZPD can inform educators to employ different strategies to maximise the

learning outcome one of which is the notion of scaffolding proposed by Bruner building on

Vygotsky’s ideas (Duchesne & Mcmaugh 2016). Scaffolding refers to the activities or

instructions of the MKO which provide children with the assistance based on their existing

knowledge and these supports will be gradually removed until the child can complete the

tasks independently. Woolfolk & Margetts (2015) clarified that rather than a one-way

conversation, scaffolding involves exchanging knowledge throughout the whole learning

experiences which allow the MKO adjusting instructional strategies constantly to meet the

learner’s changing need (Duchesne & Mcmaugh 2016, O’Donnell et al. 2016). Therefore, not

only the MKO but also the learner are active participants of the conversation as they work

5
collaboratively and co-construct the learning which also contributes to both of their cognitive

development (Duchesne & Mcmaugh 2016).

Drawing on Vygotsky’s theory of sociocultural perspectives, classroom applications can be

designed to cater to children’s developmental need. One of the practical strategies is the

adoption of reciprocal teaching where students are guided and encouraged to ask questions

to lead their leaning for was introduced to facilitate students’ reading comprehension skills

in the first place (Pilonieta & Medina 2009). With a group of students, the teacher

demonstrates the strategies of predicting, questioning, summarising and clarifying and

gradually shift the responsibilities to students to ask questions amongst peers to make sense

of the literature (Duchesne & Mcmaugh 2016). According to Vygotsky, cognitive growths

occur during the process of social interactions (Green & Piel 2009). The exchanging roles and

knowledge between the teacher and the students in this approach ensures the students and

the teachers’ co-constructing the learning experience and allows both participants benefit

from activities and achieve cognitive development at the same time. The idea of reciprocal

teaching is also aligned with Vygotsky’s principles of scaffolding and ZPD. The explicit

modelling by the teachers helps the students in fostering their abilities in applying different

strategies in constructing the meaning and the assistance from the educators will be phased

out until the students are expected to take the full responsibilities by raising their own

questions. Furthermore, the modelling and teaching content should have been carefully

organized by the teacher with the intention to take both levels of ZPD into consideration. It

also allows the educators to constantly adjusted the strategies according to the discussion

and conversation during the process to the optimal learning outcomes.

6
Another implication for the teachers on classroom practices of Vygotsky’s principles is to

appreciate the value of sociodramatic play in educational settings. Interactions with others

based on the understanding and practising social norms and the emphasis on the use of

language are the two primary elements that make sociodramatic play a critical position in

children’s learning experiences (Gupta 2009). Abundant evidence has shown the significance

of sociodramatic play in children’s cognitive development. In the sociodramatic play, children

pretend they are different characters and act out various imaginary scenarios to cope with

social problems of all kinds such as going to the grocery stores or receiving and posting mails

or parcels through the post office. Engaging in this type of play provides children with

adequate opportunities in being exposed to and practicing social norms while interacting with

adults or peer through which, as proposed by Vygotsky, the emphasis on the imaginary

situations will gradually turn into the “dominance of rules” (Wood & Attfield 2005). In

addition, massive use of language facilitates the improvement of language competencies

while children acting out certain pretended. For example, when pretending to be doctors and

patients, children use their external speech enables them to communicate with other players

in the game and co-construct the play experience through discussion or negotiation to accept

or create the rules. Their private speech, as well as inner speech help them in structuring their

thinking and deepen their understanding of the social situation (Elias & Berk 2002). Thus,

embedding learning intentions in the sociodramatic play themes boost children’s cognitive

and social development which also provides children with great opportunities to be more

competent in the language.

Understanding Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory is of great benefit in helping educators to

support indigenous students’ learning. Students from Aboriginal and Torres Strait Island

backgrounds are more likely to speak Aboriginal English which is different from Standard

7
Australian English in mainstream schools in Australia (Warren & Devries 2009). In this sense,

indigenous students are disadvantaged in terms of language competences comparing to their

peers whose speaks standard English as their first language. As Vygotsky considered, language

serves as a crucial cultural tool that conveys meaning and inherits the culture. Aboriginal

English reflects the culture and identity of Aboriginal people that should be respected and

valued (Duchesne & Mcmaugh 2016; Warren and Devries 2009). Educators need to be aware

that Aboriginal English is a separate dialect of English and should not think of it as an

erroneous use of English (Duchesne & Mcmaugh 2016). Moreover, educators could help to

bridge the gap by explicitly teaching the differences between Aboriginal English and Standard

Australian English so that students can make sense of both languages.

Vygotsky views children as active learners through their social interactions with others.

However, the rules of interaction might be different in Aboriginal culture than those in the

western context. As illustrated by O'Toole (2014), listening skills are awarded in traditional

Aboriginal culture while in mainstream western culture it is more likely to appreciate

communication skills. Another example given by Duchesne & Mcmaugh (2016) stated that

asking the teacher questions is disrespectful in some Aboriginal culture because teachers are

regarded as authorities and could not be challenged. Under this circumstance, activities such

as group discussion or student-teacher communication might not be as engaging to Aboriginal

students as to other students. Recognition of Aboriginal style of learning requires educators

to adjust the teaching strategies to create an atmosphere where everyone feels secure and

respected. Furthermore, it is important for educators to notice the knowledge that Aboriginal

Students bring to the classroom. Learning experiences building on what they already know

would increase their engagement in classroom activities. As Vygotsky believed that the

community plays a central role in the process of children’s cognitive development as well as

8
in fostering their style of thinking and learning, get involved in the family group of Aboriginal

students could help the educator to build a more close and trusting relationship with the

students on helping because most Aboriginal children are more likely being parented by both

their biological family and extended family (Duchesne & Mcmaugh 2016).

There are two strengths in Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory. First, Vygotsky emphasized that

cognitive growths occur when children are participating in social activities and

communicating with other members in a cultural context. This idea underlies a wide range of

teaching strategies such as cooperative-based learning and collaborative learning which

allows abundant opportunities for children to work together and learn from more capable

peers (Duchesne & Mcmaugh 2016). The second aspect of Vygotsky’s theoretical contribution

is the concept of the ZPD. The understanding of the ZPD is valuable in designing teaching

strategies and preparing lessons as it is more effective and likely to lead to better outcomes

(Clapper & Cornell 2015).

Limitations of Vygotsky’s theory should also not be overlooked meanwhile. One is that

Vygotsky might have overemphasized the importance of language in young people’s

developmental process (Rogoff, cited in Duchesne & Mcmaugh 2016). Rogoff further

discussed that language is not the only tool to convey meanings or culture especially in those

societies which learning are more primarily appears in observation (Duchesne & Mcmaugh

2016). This could restrict the studying of cognitive perspectives in a cross-cultural

circumstance. Another is that Vygotsky’s theory was developed in the context of 1920s to

1930s’ Soviet Russia dominated by Marxist-Leninist ideology. The differences between the

imperialistic political philosophy and the Western educational system have sparked extensive

controversy among researchers worldwide.

9
Despite these limitations, Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory shows how children’s mental

functioning is related to the cultural and social context. The fundamental of the theory lies in

the importance of social interaction in children’s growing to obtain a higher level of cognitive

skills as well as learning to achieve better performance. Language that consists of external

social speech, private speech or internal inner speech plays a crucial part in the transition

from speech to thought as well as in cultural inheritance. For Educators, planning learning

tasks within children’s ZPD is an applicable strategy since it contributes to the maximized

engagement and improves children’s cognitive development. Providing adequate scaffolding,

children will be able to complete challenging tasks which they find difficult to deal with

independently. Furthermore, educators could employ reciprocal teaching strategies and

embed learning in sociodramatic play to facilitate children’s learning. Vygotsky’s sociocultural

theory also has implication for inclusive education for Indigenous students. The richness of

the theoretical foundation of Vygotsky’s work offers enormous opportunities for educators

to adopt various strategies that cater for students from diverse background. Understanding

and then applying the theory to teaching practices is an effective approach that embraces

and builds on children’s ways of learning.

10
References

Clapper, TC & Cornell, IG 2015, 'Cooperative-Based Learning and the Zone of Proximal
Development', Simulation & Gaming, vol. 46, no. 2, pp. 148-158.

Duchesne, S & Mcmaugh, A 2016, Educational psychology for learning and teaching, 5th edn,
Cengage Learning Australia, South Melbourne, Victoria.

Elias, CL & Berk, LE 2002, 'Self-Regulation in Young Children: Is There a Role for Sociodramatic
Play?', Early Childhood Research Quarterly, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 216-38.

Gredler, ME & Shields, CC 2008, Vygotsky's legacy a foundation for research and practice,
Guilford Press, New York.

Green, M & Piel, JA 2009, Theories of human development: a comparative approach, 2nd edn,
Allyn & Bacon, Boston.

Gupta, A 2009, 'Vygotskian perspectives on using dramatic play to enhance children's

development and balance creativity with structure in the early childhood classroom', Early
Child Development and Care, vol. 179, no. 8, pp. 1041-1054.

O'Donnell, AM, Dobozy, E, Bartlett, B, Nagal, M, Spooner-Lane, R and Youssff-Shalala, A 2016,

Educational psychology, 2nd edn, Wiley, New York.

O'Toole, S 2014, 'Indigenous learning styles: common themes from around the
world', Training and Development, vol. 41, no. 2, pp. 8-10.

Pilonieta, P & Medina, AL 2009, 'Reciprocal Teaching for the Primary Grades: "We Can Do It,
too!"', Reading Teacher, vol. 63, no. 2, pp. 120-129.

Van Hoorn, JL, Monighan-Nourot, P, Scales, B & Alward, KR 2015], Play at the center of the
curriculum, 6th edn, Pearson, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey.

Vygotsky, LS 1978, Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes,

Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.

Warren, E & Devries, E 2009, 'Young Australian Indigenous students' engagement with
numeracy: actions that assist to bridge the gap', Australian journal of education, vol. 53, no.
2, pp. 159-175.

Wood, E & Attfield, J 2005, Play, Learning and the Early Childhood Curriculum, 2nd Edition,
Paul Chapman Publishing, London.

Woolfolk, A & Margetts, K 2015, Educational Psychology, P.Ed Australia, Melbourne.

11