When does the child transit from one stage to another?

The article talks about four psychological stages for cultural development as primitive psychology, native psychology, external cultural method, and ingrowing or internal stage. The first stage is often determined by the child's capacity in memory or interest according to the experiment in the article. The child reaches the second stage with the assistance of the mnemotechnical method. The article pointed out that the child will move to the second stage when he met with difficulties after trials. Does it mean that most of the children can automatically transit to this stage when they find it difficult to memorize things or they will need external assistance in order to reach the stage? From my understanding, I think a teacher may need to intervene in the development with some introduction of a cultural mnemotechnical method to help students to reach the second stage. It could also be possible that the kid can figure it out after trials and observing how others memorize stuff, but it often takes a longer time.

It seems like the kid cannot skip the second stage to reach the third stage, where the memorizing technique has been replaced by a complicated external activity. The kid will be able to so when his "psychological experience is rich". I find the statement unclear. I am not sure how rich is the "rich". Does it mean that the kid needs to have accumulated trial and error experience and wait until a specific moment that triggers him to use the external activity? I also don't know when they can make it "ingrowing". Will the repetition of the technique in third stage helps with internalization?

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

ZPD vs. Scaffolding

Reading Wood et al.'s (1976) original article in which they introduce the metaphor of "scaffolding" really makes clear how different this is from ZPD.  There is no collaboration (perhaps a better word is co-operation) between the expert and the child... the expert guides the child's actions through controlling their immediate problem-solving experience. The model of scaffolding assumes that the expert is, in a sense, all-knowing in relation to the problem and is not an active participant in the actions of problem-solving.  Vygotsky's theory really seems to require a much more dynamic social interaction or series of social interactions. I also question to what extent a tutor operating in this way can engage with a child's everyday and scientific concepts in a meaningful way. Having read Smagorinsky's (2018) article once more, it is hard not to be convinced of his position. He confirmed with Anna Stetsenko at CUNY (who earned her PhD in Psychology at Mosco...
Read more

Can scientific concepts be taught as everyday concepts? My middle school physics teacher

Image
I began reading the chapter on the development of scientific concepts and it was interesting to see how Vygotsky differentiates between scientific and everyday concepts. Scientific concepts are simply learned or received in completed form (most commonly introduced as a term along with its definition) which in turn leads to understanding, learning, and comprehension. Whereas, everyday concepts do not have a formal definition, need not be universal but still helps us understand the functioning of the society and the world in which we live. When reflecting on all this, I was reminded of a middle school physics teacher I had (Sadly, we had her only for one year), who would not introduce new concepts as 'words' and definitions but instead, would begin class with a demonstration. One of which is depicted below. I so vividly remember her explaining inertia through this method:                                 ...
Read more

Learning from teaching vs Impactful experiences from child’s play

I remember very little about my past schooling and I am not sure if it is because I have this belief that we should spend little time reminiscing on the past and looking towards the future or is it that my classroom experiences were all “traditional” and are not stored in my active memory. The latter would seem applicable as I really do remember more key events from my “play times” but very few from the formal school settings. Lev S. Vygotsky states: “In play a child is always above his average age, above his daily behavior; in play it is as though he were a head taller than himself. As in the focus of a magnifying glass, play contains all developmental tendencies in a condensed form; in play it is as though the child were trying to jump above the level of his normal behavior” (1967, 16). The interpretation of the above quote can and has taken many forms but I do not agree that children learn more from play and interactions with their peers than in a formal environment. My ...
Read more