Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Robert Jeens
Yonsei University
Author Note
Robert Jeens,
Correspondence regarding this article should be addressed to Robert Jeens, College English
jeensy@yonsei.ac.kr
LEV VYGOTSKY AND SECOND LANGUAGE LEARNING 2
Abstract
This paper examines the psychological theories of Lev Vygotsky as they have been applied to
Vygotsky introduced, particularly the social context of learning, the importance of language
as a tool for development, the zone of proximal development and the importance of a more
knowledgeable other. It then moves on to how these theories should be applied to education,
specifically, the role of the teacher in the classroom, the importance of imitation, scaffolding
and the evaluation of the zone of proximal development. Lastly, it looks at how Vygotskys
theories and techniques have been found effective in the field of second-language teaching
with reference to private and inner speech and teacher-led and mutual scaffolding in the
Lev Vygotsky was a Russian psychologist who was active in the early 20th Century. He
theorized in many fields beyond this papers purview, but had a great deal to say about the
role of language in human development and the implications of this for education. There is
much controversy about his work. He wrote a great deal and held different positions upon
several issues before he died at the young age of 37 in 1934 and left unfinished manuscripts
and thoughts, which his successors have chosen to interpret in different ways. Also, his works
have been translated and so his messages have differed depending upon the translations used.
Lastly, he was a Marxist intellectual, navigating the academic world of the Stalinist Soviet
Union, a fact which has discomfited many. Nevertheless, his insights into human
development and the implications of this for education in general and language education in
particular have become very influential since the 1980s and seem very relevant in the context
of second language education in the early part of the twenty-first century.This article will take
a general look at his theories of child development and the role language plays in it, discuss
how these theories have been applied to education generally, and then narrow further to
discuss the research that has been done into his theories with regard to second language
1. Vygotskys Theories
Vygotskys central point is that a childs development only takes place in a social
until it is internalized.His work contrasts with that of Piaget, who claimed that children reach
certain developmental stages through intrapersonal development, so that they are then ready
for a higher state of learning. Vygotsky claimed that it is interpersonal learning that propels
LEV VYGOTSKY AND SECOND LANGUAGE LEARNING 4
development. Every function in the childs 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). (Vygotsky, 1978, p. 57) For Vygotsky,
thinking processes become more complex, abstract, logical and nuanced. Because these
developmental stages are reached through a process of a childactively interacting with the
outside world, sociocultural forces are crucial to shaping a childs learning and development,
so that parents, teachers, peers and the larger community all shape how he or she will interact
with his or her environment. For example, two children of the same age, one in an upper-class
British boarding school and the other working in the coal mines near Newcastle, will have
very difference paths of development, as will those from other similarly divergent cultures.
There are limits to human development because of our biology, but we cannot reach them
without social interaction so that concepts or skills are shared interpersonally and are then
development as inextricably linked. While children have a pre-language stage, once they
this more complex use of language spurs their development. And for human beings, the
interaction between thought and language makes meaning; therefore, we can only understand
the world around us through the intermediary (Vygotsky called it a psychological tool) of
language.Language is the critical human ability that enables us to think and talk about things
not just grounded in physical reality but also to philosophize and conjecture about abstract
notions that go beyond our immediate reality. It follows that our thoughts are influenced by
LEV VYGOTSKY AND SECOND LANGUAGE LEARNING 5
the language we speak. The specific words and grammar of our language help shape our
outlook (Steiner, 2007). An example might be the word rice. In English, we have one word,
rice, whereas in Korean, there are three: byeo (rice in the field), sal (uncooked rice) and bab
(cooked rice), illustrating the relative importance of that crop in our different cultures.
Learning a new language entails incorporating the new outlook of that language
Another point with relation to language: Vygotsky delineated three types of speech:
inner, private and outer. Inner speech is nonverbal speech which is focused inward, as we talk
to ourselves. Private speech is verbal, but also directed inward and is more common in
children. Outer speech is communicative language. All are crucial to our development, and
Vygotsky observed that complex tasks or concepts require more complex inner or private
speech to master, as we discuss with ourselves how we will successfully complete them.For
example, a child completing a puzzle may say, Hmm, where? Lets seeMaybe here. No?
What about and so on.Therefore, we talk ourselves into development (Lantolf, 2003, p.
352).
[T]he distance between the actual developmental level as determined through independent
problem solving and the level of potential development as determined through problem
solving under adult guidance or in collaboration with more capable peers (Vygotsky, 1978, p.
86).There are a few important points to make about this. First, the zone of proximal
development is not simply about tasks that a child can do with adult assistance: those tasks
are simply representative of the development stage of a child and, rather than just learning a
set of skills, must be directed towards that development (Chaiklin, 2003). Next, Vygotsky
saw the zone of proximal development as a way to measure a childs potential level of
cognitive development, what a child is capable of rather than what the child already knows.
LEV VYGOTSKY AND SECOND LANGUAGE LEARNING 6
Teaching should be oriented not towards the yesterday, but towards the tomorrow of child
development (Vygotsky, 1993, pp. 251-252).Another very important point is that effective
instruction only takes place within the zone of proximal development: if a student does not
need assistance to complete a task, no learning has taken place and if a student is unable to
complete a task even with assistance, no learning can occur. Finally, the zone of proximal
development is open to divergent paths. It is not a single line of development, but multiple
possible paths depending on the learner, teachers, culture and other factors (Chaiklin, 2003;
Unlike those who see a learner as able to develop on his or her own, Vygotsky
stresses the role of a more knowledgeable other. This other (a teacher, more knowledgeable
peer, parent) is the person who collaborates with a child, within the zone of proximal
development, through a series of organized learning activities, to guide the child to a higher
stage of development. Children develop through unstructured activities and play with their
peers, but these alone are not enough. This marks a break from the pure progressivists, who
see students as being able to control their own learning, even to the subjects they take or the
aspects of the subjects they study. Vygotsky believes that students should be allowed to study
what they want as much as possible, but more knowledgeable others have an important role
When it comes to the roles of teachers and learners, Vygotsky made some contradictory
statements that can be somewhat reconciled in the end. [D]irect instruction in concepts is
impossible. nothing but a mindless learning of words. Such knowledge turns out to be
LEV VYGOTSKY AND SECOND LANGUAGE LEARNING 7
traditional teaching. In this view, Vygotsky urges teachers to collaborate with students rather
than dictate to them. Teachers should create a community of learners in which all the
participants learn from each other. Also, teachers must tailor instruction to the individual
student, creating activities that appeal to their individual drives and lie within their individual
zones of development. On the other hand,he saw the teacher as the leader in the classroom
and his opinion changed over time to embrace some direct instruction of particular kinds. It
has been recognized by his followers that a teacher has a limited amount of time and
resources to engage a large class, can engage more than one student at a time, and can
intervene at certain critical points in the learning or developmental process with some effect
rather than spending 1/30 of every hour with one of all 30 students in a class (Daniels, 2007).
Imitation, for Vygotsky, is a valid instructional tool. It is part of the process through
audio-linguists, but intentional and self-selective behavior on the part of the learner(Lantolf
and Appel, 1994).I heard a good example in a restaurant a few days ago. A one-year-old child
was upset and yelled, Anjima. (A grammatically incorrect rendering of Dont do it.) His
father, hearing it, said, Hajima? (Dont do it?) and the baby said Eung (Yes). One minute
later, the baby was again upset and roaredHa-ji-ma! The baby had successfully internalized
the language through imitation.Imitation can also be very creative, as the learners apply what
they have imitated to other situations. For example, a student might have been unable to solve
a math problem, but when the teacher solves it on the blackboard, comprehends, and then is
encompasses the different methods a more knowledgeable othercan use to move a student
LEV VYGOTSKY AND SECOND LANGUAGE LEARNING 8
through the zone of proximal development. A complex task, higher than the students actual,
unassisted level is given to the student, and the students role is supported and simplified to
produce a successful outcome. Gradually, as the student improves, the support is withdrawn
until the learner can complete the task unassisted. Some of the rules that have been worked
out for successful scaffolding are these. Scaffolding can only take place within a learners
zone of proximal development. It must be collaborative (the student works with others),
interactive (both sides are dynamically giving and taking) and contingent (the plan can
change depending upon the circumstances). This often takes place in face-to-face interactions
with students, either one-on-one, in small groups or in full-class discussions and often
involves just helping students through a reasoning process by engaging in strategies such as
asking leading questions, finishing a students thoughts, beginning a solution for a student
and letting them finish it, or defining unknown terms (Kozulin, 2003).
So far, the stress has been on the role of the teacher in the scaffolding process, but
there is also collective scaffolding or mutual scaffolding in which groups of peers work
together in a supportive arrangement to mutually produce a result that none of them could
have alone.The key to this is creating a community of learners in which students will support
each other to maintain pursuit of the successful completion of a task. In this case, a classroom
questioning and criticism are used among the learners, so that they support and negotiate their
Vygotsky worked out a completely new method for evaluation; he set out to measure
future success than a standardized I.Q. test, as two children might have the same I.Q. but
prediction, and scientific basis for practical prescription (Vygotsky, 1998, p. 205).As
opposed to traditional static assessment, this has been labelled dynamic assessment, in
which the assessor must actively collaborate with the student to bring the student to his or her
full potential. In brief, we ask the child to solve problems that are beyond his mental age [as
measured by independent performance] with some kind of cooperation and determine how far
the potential for intellectual cooperation can be stretched for the given child (Vygotsky, 1998,
p. 202). In order to produce the best possible result, learners are given feedback and
scaffolding. The key question becomes how much and what kind of help a learner needs to
complete a task.
Lidz and Gindis (2003) describe two standard types of dynamic assessment:
sandwich and cake. In a sandwich dynamic assessment, the examinees are given a
pretest, equivalent to a static test. Then they receive instruction in the skills or principles of
the problem solution outlined in the pretest. Finally, there is a posttest, generally an alternate
form of the pretest. A cake dynamic assessment is more complex and involved but also
more precise. It requires one-on-one interaction between an examinee and examiner. The
examinee tries to solve an item. If correct, he or she moves on to the next item on the test.
However, if the examinee is not successful a series of hints, designed to make the solution
successively more explicit, are provided by the examiner. If this does not work, the examiner
models the problem solution and then presents the next item. The type of and amount of help
an examinee needs to complete the tasks is what is measured. Unfortunately, they do not
share a common schema to show the evaluation. For example, a person could have an I.Q. of
100, or a student might receive 89% on a test. How is a learners performance on a dynamic
relation to others?
LEV VYGOTSKY AND SECOND LANGUAGE LEARNING 10
Vygotsky was primarily concerned with the interaction of first language development and
cognitive development in children, but his followers have applied his theories widely in
second language learning as well,studying the use of inner and private speech and utilizing
scaffolding as successful techniques for adults learning the skill of a second language and not
just children undergoing cognitive development (Storch, 2002). This has led to some
controversy, but also quite a large amount of good research and teaching.
Although some claim that Vygotsky advocated a purely dialogic approach to second
language teaching, in line with how he believed the first language was acquired, this is not
be taught grammar and vocabulary, translate poetry and prose and then engage in
conversation practice. He believed that students first need general principles and then
activities that allow them to test these principles and ground them in concrete reality
(Langford, 2005). Generally, Vygotskys conceptualized the learning of native and foreign
languages as moving in opposite directions.A child easily uses a native language but
language learner consciously learns that languages grammar and lexis but cannot use them
fluently and without conscious awareness until much later, if ever(Lantolf, 2003).
Vygotskys theories on the role of inner speech have been largely confirmed and
expanded with relation to second language learning. De Guerro (1994) defines inner speech
as the medium for the formation, expression, and development of verbal thought and has
found that, in the classroom, second language learners often mentally practice what they will
say before they say it: as well, they mentally practice new words and pronunciation, answer
LEV VYGOTSKY AND SECOND LANGUAGE LEARNING 11
questions in their mind, and use inner speech for the memorization of new items. As
Vygotsky observed, inner speech increases with the difficulty of the task given to learners in
their second language.Lantolf (2003) pointed out that inner speech is especially useful for
beginning to intermediate second language learners. In addition to the uses above, they use
inner speech for self-questioning, self-corrections, the repetition of others utterances and
So inner speech is used to work out what learners want to say before they say it, but
it is also used to socially involve learners in supposedly passive classroom activities. Lantolf
(2003) found that, when participating in a whole-class activity answering questions about an
L2 listening, students used inner speech in the following ways: 1) to positively reinforce their
answers, 2) to avoid calling out a possibly incorrect answer, 3) to make sense of aquestion
asked by the teacher, and 4) to get practice in using the language.Even regular grammar
used inner speech before answering to both self-correct and imitate teacher corrections. When
students were silently listening in to a dialogue between other students and the teacher or
doing individual seat work, through inner speech, they were still socially interacting with
each other and the teacher. All of this essentially reinforces Vygotskys beliefs in the efficacy
Walqui (2006) has identified six types of scaffolding that are particularly useful for
second language learners, particularly those trying to engage in complex academic tasks in a
given clear examples of what is requested of them for imitation. For example, they might be
given an example paragraph before they write their own or an activity could be modelled
LEV VYGOTSKY AND SECOND LANGUAGE LEARNING 12
before they undertake it in pairs. 2) Bridging: students build on previous knowledge and
knowledge. This can be done very specifically or more generally, depending upon the need,
reading into a context. Students often have a great deal of difficulty reading textbooks
because information is often presented in isolated bits in very difficult language. Teachers can
for text in order to make it more accessible. 4) Schema building: help students to find the
main ideas in a reading or listening before trying to find the details. Various ways of doing
this include discussing pictures, sub-headings and graphs or charts in a text as a way to
preview or review it. Or the students might be asked to transform textual information into a
graphic organizer. Basically, the idea is to help students make connections and process new
information. 5) Re-presenting: this involves having students move information from one
genre to another. For example, students may read a passage about a historical era but then be
asked to write and perform a short skit about that era. Or they take information from a text
using an organizer (schema building) but then have to re-present that information in a
paragraph in their own words. 6) The last scaffolding technique is developing metacognition.
This is the ability to monitor ones current level of understanding, decide when it is not
adequate, and apply an appropriate learning strategy. These strategies can and should be
Gibbons (2003) also looked at how teachers can scaffold through students zones of
proximal development to help them develop more the formal, academic language required of
them in school. The subjects were 60 grade 5 science students, 92% of whom were ESL
learners, in two classrooms in Australia. The students were required to do experiments, orally
LEV VYGOTSKY AND SECOND LANGUAGE LEARNING 13
report their results to the class and then write a report. This sequence required the students to
more academic, less context-dependent and more challenging context. The study focused
specifically on the scaffolding the teacher provided at the oral report stage, to move the
students to the higher register required for writing a successful report. She found this
scaffolding to consist of the teacher modeling and focusing on key lexis or grammar, either
through explanations or interactions with the students, and by directing students attention to
commonalities between the group reports, to help them find generalizations. These highly
then recaps, re-represents or re-contextualizes the dialogue using more complex, academic
language. The same grammatical construction is used, to give the new lexis a context and
signal equivalence between the old and new lexis. 2) Signaling learners to reformulate
involves a teacher asking a student for clarification to elicit more information and accuracy
from a student. Keys to making this technique successful are precise and contingent teacher
interventions that stretch language learners to the outer limits of their capabilities so that
they can take responsibility for making more comprehensible output to the audience (Gibbon,
2003, p. 262). 3) When a teacher indicates a need for reformulation, he simply tells the
student to use more appropriate/academic language, which has already been modelled, and
then leaves it to the student to do it. 4)Recontextualizing personal knowledge is teacher talk
that includes both subject-specific language and the subject itself, so that a teacher discusses
the relationship between them. The key concept to making all of these different scaffolding
methods successful, Gibbon says, is contingency. The teacher must validate student
LEV VYGOTSKY AND SECOND LANGUAGE LEARNING 14
utterances and build on them, and judge the need for and quality of assistance needed by a
student from moment to moment. This conscious collaboration between the students and
Mutual scaffolding has been shown to work in very complex ways among groups
or pairs of L2 learners (Donato, 1994). Swain and Lapkin (1998) followed students doing a
jigsaw task that had them use a set of numbered pictures, of which each student had half, who
used them to write a paragraph together. They were extremely active in mediating language,
instructing and modeling for each other. The dialogue between them took place in both L1
and L2 and provided new language forms in the L2, so that the end product (the paragraph)
was the product of two learners, in which each learned from the other. However, the results
can be very divergent depending upon the desire/ability/other factors of students to use these
strategies. The same study found considerable variation according to the pairs participating in
the activity. The main pair spent 23 minutes on task, but the class average was ten minutes
and one group did the work in four. There was also a great variation in the amount of
communication between the students, especially for confirmation of language patterns. One
group spent 17 minutes on task and only spoke about form twice. Two conclusions were
reached: for this type of mutual scaffolding activity to be successful requires motivated and
trained students as well as a teacher skilled in bringing these sorts of activities to a successful
conclusion and, in the end, the students need final teacher feedback on whether their co-
Storch (2002) further refined and reinforcedDonatos and Swain and Lapkins studies
by defining four patterns of interaction between second language learners doing pair work:
two efficiently create learning. She found that mutuality,the level of engagementwith each
LEV VYGOTSKY AND SECOND LANGUAGE LEARNING 15
others contributionsrich in reciprocal feedback and sharing of ideas (Storch, 2002, p. 127)
characterized by low mutuality and high equality. These relationships were characterized by
exasperation and anger, with both students offering opinions and neither accepting those of
the other. There was little knowledge transfer and many missed opportunities for learning. 2)
In dominant/passive interactions, there was low mutuality and high equality. Generally, one
student dominated the other, while the other rarely was rarely asked for or ventured opinions.
Again, there was little knowledge transfer and many missed opportunities. 3) Collaborative
interactions were characterized by high mutuality and high equality, so that the partners
considered and debated each others opinions and incorporated both into their work. 4) In
expert/novice interactions, there is high mutuality and low equality, so that even though one
partner is dominant, that dominant partner actively seeks the novices opinion and seeks to
include that person in the activity. In the last two patterns, collaborative and expert/novice,
members constructed knowledge together and this was successfully appropriated, internalized
and subsequently utilized by these partners. Two major teaching points come out of these
findings, besides the idealization of the types of pair work. First, the patterns of relationships
between partners were found to be stable over the course of a semester, so teachers need to be
aware of the type of interactions going on in the classroom and change partners if less
effective patterns emerge. Also, as found in other studies, above, even in the effective
partnerships, students sometimes reached incorrect conclusions and so there is a need for
Some final thoughts about Vygostky and his relevance for teaching second languages.
First, it needs repeating that Vygotsky conceived of the zone of proximal development and
scaffolding activities as ways to help children reach higher levels of mental development
LEV VYGOTSKY AND SECOND LANGUAGE LEARNING 16
rather than as simply helping students to complete tasks to increase their knowledge or skills
in particular areas, and that is probably exactly what is happening in much adult foreign
language teaching. To be effective, Vygotsky believed that the over-arching goal is the former
rather than the latter. And, while he equated an increasing ability to use complex language in
a childs first language as analogous to mental development, it is unclear that this same
effective, teaching must be done in the zone of proximal development and scaffolding needs
assessment challenges traditional notions of static testing. Should we measure what the
students know now or their potential capability? If so, how can we report those findings?
Fourth, his theories and the research about them emphasize the role of the teacher in helping
learners reach their potential rather than just unstructured individual learning opportunities.
And we have seen how some very traditional techniques can involve the student in social
learning. Lastly, pair and group work are very useful and lead to real learning but the students
need motivation and training for these techniques to be successful. Overall, successful
scaffolding requires teachers very skilled at interacting with their students at crucial times to
support their learning, just enough to be successful, and at putting together and supporting
References
and Instruction.In Kozulin, A., Gindis, B., Ageyev, V.S.,& Miller, S.M. (Eds.),
University Press.
Daniels, H. (2007).Pedagogy. In Daniels, H., Cole, M., &Wertsch, J.V. (Eds.),The Cambridge
de Guerrero, M.C.M. (1994).Form and Functions of Inner Speech in Adult Second Language
Del Rio, P. and Alvarez, A. (2007).Inside and Outside the Zone of Proximal Development: An
Gibbons, P. (2003). Mediating Language Learning: Teacher Interactions With ESL Students
Kozulin, A. (2003). Psychological Tools and Mediated Learning.In Kozulin, A., Gindis, B.,
Ageyev, V.S. & Miller, S.M. (Eds.), Vygotskys Educational Theory in Cultural
Psychology Press.
Language Classroom.In Kozulin, A., Gindis, B., Ageyev, V.S. & Miller, S.M.
Publishing.
inChildren.In Kozulin, A., Gindis, B., Ageyev, V.S. & Miller, S.M. (Eds.), Vygotskys
Press.
Vygotsky. Daniels, H., Cole, M., &Wertsch, J. New York: Cambridge University Press.
136- 154.
Storch, N. (2002). Patterns of Interaction in ESL Pair Work.Language Learning, 52 (1) 119-
158.
Swain, M. and Lapkin, S. (1998). Interaction and Second Language Learning: Two
Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
defectology (R.Rieber& A. Carton, Eds., J. Knox & Stevens, Trans.). New York:
Plenum.
Vygotsky, L.S. (1998). Thecollected works of L.S. Vygotsky, Vol 5 (Rieber, R.W. & Hall,
180.