Running Head: THE POTENTIAL OF ACTIVE, INTERACTIVE LEARNING IN HIGH SCHOOL 1

Vygotskys Sociocultural Theory: The potential uses of active, interactive learning in a high school setting Amanda Mullen (10014938) Submitted: November 28, 2013 EDUC 425: Dr. Kevin Alderson

THE POTENTIAL OF INTERACTIVE LEARNING IN THE CLASSROOM Currently, many teaching techniques exist, utilizing a variety of methodologies and

theories to address the learning needs of students. Specifically, many modern teachers attempt to allow students to create their own knowledge by providing them with a series of activities and lessons that stimulate their own cognition. Lev Vygotsky theorized that children best learn when they collaborate with their classmates and environment to discuss and solve problems (Woolfolk et al., 2012). This idea is known as Vygotskys Sociocultural Theory, and encompasses many modern practices utilized in the contemporary classroom (Henson, 2003). In the case of one high school, teachers used a variety of techniques in their instructional practices, which stemmed from the sociocultural theory. In particular, one English teacher utilized this theory to create a formative lesson series that allowed the students to build upon subsets of knowledge in order to complete a final assignment. Additionally, a grade ten classroom was structured in such a way that encouraged a gradual development of student based knowledge, by encouraging inter-student involvement. Both of these examples are referenced to highlight the potential uses of Vygotskys sociocultural theory in the development of a learner-centered classroom. As a future high school science teacher I hope to utilize the sociocultural theory to encourage students to develop their own knowledge, learn cooperation, and become responsible for their own discoveries. In one particular grade eleven English classroom I witnessed a teacher utilizing an unfamiliar teaching technique referred to as formative assessment. This technique employs a series of non-graded assignments to stimulate students to actively both accumulate and create their own knowledge. According to Sadler (1981), providing students with work in a noncompulsory setting encourages students to become more adventurous in their methods without fear of reprimand. This was something I observed in the classroom. Specifically, the teacher focused on encouraging students to write in new ways, which did not necessarily follow their natural thought patterns. These smaller assignments allowed students to develop their

THE POTENTIAL OF INTERACTIVE LEARNING IN THE CLASSROOM

understanding of inter-disciplinary facts, which could later be associated for the understanding of key broad concepts. This methodology was specifically utilized for the examination of the film V for Vendetta. The students watched the film and were then provided with a series of small assignments that addressed the characters, plot and other various components of the film. These small assignments were worked on in groups of four during class time, and were examined for progress by the instructor, but not assigned a grade. After these small group assignments were completed, the students worked on a final assessment, which encompassed all of the smaller assignment information. The smaller assignments were returned to the students with comments regarding what needed to be improved upon, and what was done well. This allowed students to focus on their previous difficulties in their final assignment to improve the quality of their work, and hopefully obtain a better grade than they may have received without receiving intermittent feedback. The final component was scored and went towards the students final grades. Similarly, group participation was a core foundation for the structure of the grade ten classrooms I observed. The structure of the grade 10 classes was such that English and Social Studies were paired, while Science and Math formed a second paired class. This approach was utilized to encourage the development of inter-disciplinary knowledge and understanding. Classes were taught in such a way that students were able to learn to relate the information of one knowledge base to another. Each classroom consisted of approximately seventy students and two teachers; one teacher for each disciplinary component. The teachers collaborated in order to generate assignments and lectures, which encompassed multiple facets of the two subjects. In a one particular Science/Math classroom the majority of class time was dedicated to the completion of various worksheets and assignments, which had questions relating to both disciplinary components. These assignments were completed individually, but the students were

THE POTENTIAL OF INTERACTIVE LEARNING IN THE CLASSROOM

encouraged to work with their peers in order to address any questions they had. The teachers also facilitated the students understanding by walking around the classroom and helping those in need. In both classrooms a peer oriented teaching approach was utilized to encourage students to actively work on their projects by talking through potential solutions with their group members (Henson, 2003). Vygotsky theorized that students could only learn when they were engaged with their environment, peers, and teachers. He believed that students learned higher order functions not only by utilizing their own cognitive thoughts, but also by integrating the cognitive developments of those surrounding them (Woolfolk et al., 2012). Although the teachers did provide some lecture material, the majority of class learning took place as students developed their own skills. In the case of the English classroom, the teachers provision of comments on the smaller assignments allowed the teacher to dynamically assess student development, rather than only revealing abilities through an examination for a grade. This process allowed the teacher to better gauge further required instruction. Additionally, by providing students the ability to complete most of their work in a group setting, the teachers allowed students to cooperatively learn. This focus created an active learning setting, which encouraged students with higher understanding to assist those who may have a more difficult time comprehending the information. This activity is referred to as scaffolding. According to Vygotsky, at any point in development there are problems that a student is on the verge of being able to solve. During a particular class there are problems a student would be unable to complete on their own, but could grasp with peer collaboration or teacher instruction (Woolfolk et al., 2012). Vygotsky referred to this region of potential understanding as the Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD). Scaffolding is a term coined by Jerome Bruner that describes the process by which a more advanced student or teacher, assists

THE POTENTIAL OF INTERACTIVE LEARNING IN THE CLASSROOM the students development of understanding in the ZPD (Woolfolk et al., 2012). In a classroom

setting focused on encouraging active learning and group collaboration students are able to work with their peers and receive assistance regarding their understanding of the subject matter. The limited lecture component of both classrooms further enhanced the necessity for students to collaborate and engage with their own learning. Limiting the amount of direct instruction forced students to engage with their environment and peers, rather than solely basing their learning off of information provided by their teacher. Both of these specific classroom examples highlight the potential benefits of Vygotskys sociocultural theory. Vygotskys suggestion that students learn best when they are interacting with multiple facets was highlighted in both of these classes. By providing a great deal of course work focused on the development of substantial understanding, and limiting the amount of knowledge spoon-fed to the students, teachers were able to inspire students to take their accumulation of knowledge into their own hands. Although this is a positive notion there are several issues that could arise when teachers utilize Vygotskys Sociocultural Theory as the backbone of their pedagogy. Firstly, some students may be capable of quickly developing, or already have, a deep understanding of the material without needing to complete a large number of assignment questions. Therefore, students that have a ZPD beyond that of the assigned group work will have less benefit because the instruction will be less advanced than the students development (Matusov & Hayes, 2000). The hope they will engage and assist those students struggling was something I observed only sporadically in the classrooms. Secondly, this methodology may allow students with severe struggles to slip through the cracks. With limited lecture time, some students may not be able to grasp enough information to work on their own, and may not be able to access the necessary supplemental knowledge through

THE POTENTIAL OF INTERACTIVE LEARNING IN THE CLASSROOM the assignments and peer discussion. Additionally, Vygotskys theory suggests learners will not

be penalized if a more advanced person attempts to facilitate learning beyond the students ZPD. However, moving beyond a students capabilities may result in the learner blindly integrating the new information rather than actually developing a complete understanding (Matusov & Hayes, 2000). This could be even more problematic when students have limited access to teachers, and are focused more on working with their peers, who may not have a full understanding. Finally, there is limited evidence that providing students with partial information and encouraging them to actively create their own understanding actually works. My observations were not sufficiently long as to allow me to make any assessment in this regard. According to Kirschner et al., students will create a more complete and accurate understanding when provided with all of the information (2010). Otherwise, there is the possibility that students will integrate their interpretation of the information in inappropriate ways, and potentially ingrain incorrect knowledge (Kirschner et al., 2010). Therefore, Vygotskys suggestion that peer learning is superior to teachers directly teaching could cause problems, as the students are expected to extrapolate the necessary information with their peers, who may not possess the correct knowledge (Matusov & Hayes, 2000). Despite the potential limitations noted above, Vygotskys sociocultural theory does have many positive facets that I personally would like to integrate into my future science classrooms. Specifically, I would like to encourage open group dialogue and cooperative learning. Regarding the sciences it is often difficult to encourage creativity regarding the material. However, I believe that by allowing students to share their opinions and interpretations, they will be more likely to develop their own unique approaches to learning, and to provide their peers with new ideas. As previously discussed, the formative assessment method could be utilized in the sciences by providing students with the opportunity to work on specific problem sets to receive feedback, but

THE POTENTIAL OF INTERACTIVE LEARNING IN THE CLASSROOM not a grade. This would eliminate a lot of the fear that is typically associated with assessment. Fear has been found to be a major hindrance to student success and understanding. When

classrooms have an intimidating, directive culture students are often less likely to participate and present their own opinions (Friesen and Jardine, 2009). By providing students with the opportunity to develop their methods and ideas without reprimand or immediate grading, it is likely that they would have greater success regarding the development of their understanding. Additionally, I would like to utilize the formative assessments to specifically gauge student understanding regarding conceptual materials. This information could then be used to either provide further instruction or additional materials to aid the learning process. This would also avoid the unfortunate situation where the teacher realizes that the students are struggling only after giving them a formal, cumulative assessment. Although I believe that encouraging active learning in a group setting can aid in understanding, I would like to place an increased emphasis on lecturing than I witnessed in both observations. This is because watching an expert complete a given task often scaffolds students (Woolfolk et al., 2012). However, instead of simply lecturing on the conceptual information, I hope to provide ample examples the students can imitate in order to develop an understanding of the materials. In this way I hope to scaffold my students development, and over time lessen my assistance, by encouraging my students to work with their peers on various projects and assignments. By providing students with multiple instructional types, I believe that students will be more likely to properly integrate knowledge and information. Overall, as a future educator I hope to create a classroom culture without fear that encourages students to develop their knowledge base through both lecture and cooperative learning. By providing ample time to communicate and collaborate with classmates, students will likely develop increased interpersonal skills that can be applied to all facets of life.

THE POTENTIAL OF INTERACTIVE LEARNING IN THE CLASSROOM Additionally, by encouraging interactive learning students will learn to be responsible for the development of their own understanding and interpretations, rather than becoming completely dependent on teacher-provided information. Both of these skills, combined with the acquisition of knowledge can potentially help create well-rounded students who are able to integrate information from a variety of sources into a solid knowledge base.

THE POTENTIAL OF INTERACTIVE LEARNING IN THE CLASSROOM References Friesen, S. & Jardine, D.(2009). 21st century learning and learners. Retrieved from

http://education.alberta.ca/media/1087278/wncp%2021st%20cent%20learning%20(2).pd Henson, K.T., (2003). Foundations for learner-centered education: a knowledge base. Education, 124:1. Kirshner, P.A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R.E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: an analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experimental, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41:2, 75-86. Matusov, E., Hayes, R. (2000). Sociocultural critique of Piaget and Vygotsky. New Ideas in Psychology, 18:2-3, 215-239. Sadler, Royse. (1981). Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional Science, 18:2, 119-144. Woolfolk, A.E., Winne, P.H., & Perry, N.E. (2012). Educational Psychology (Fifth Canadian Edition). Toronto: Pearson Canada Inc.