Table 1 summarises the characteristics of this expanded conception of the zone of proximal development.
At this time when confidence in public schooling is at a low ebb, there is both a need and an opportunity to make radical changes in the way in which it is organized. In this context, as increasing numbers of educators are recognizing, Vygotsky’s genetic theory of learning and development can provide a starting point for rethinking the principles on which education should be based. And in that rethinking, the concept of the zone of proximal development has a central role to play. For, far from being simply a new and better pedagogical method, the zpd offers an insightful and theoretically coherent way of thinking about the complex nature of the transformations that are involved in learning and of the multiple ways in which learning can be assisted. However, as was pointed out at the outset, it is a central tenet of Vygotsky’s theory that theories, like all other artifacts, are the products of the particular conditions in which they are created; if they are to be useful in other times and places, therefore, they must be treated, not as repositories of truth that are fixed and immutable but as helpful tools for thinking with, which can themselves be improved in the process. It thus follows that, if Vygotsky’s theory is to provide the guidance that many believe it should, we should treat his ideas as a source of assistance in our zones of proximal development. We should certainly read his texts and try to understand what he had to say; but, in appropriating his ideas and putting them to use, we should also be willing to transform those ideas so that they can be of greatest use to us in meeting the demands of our own situations.
Table 1. Characteristics of an Expanded Conception of the Zone of Proximal Development
1. The zpd may apply in any situation in which, while participating in an activity, individuals are in the process of developing mastery of a practice or understanding of a topic.
2. The zpd is not a context-independent attribute of an individual; rather it is constructed in the interaction between participants in the course of their joint engagement in a particular activity.
3. To teach in the zpd is to be responsive to the learner’s current goals and stage of development and to provide guidance and assistance that enables him/her to achieve those goals and, at the same time, to increase his/her potential for future participation.
4. To learn in the zpd does not require that there be a designated teacher; whenever people collaborate in an activity, each can assist the others, and each can learn from the contributions of the others.
5. Some activities have as one of their outcomes the production of an artifact, which may be used as a tool in a subsequent activity. Representations – in e.g. art, drama, spoken or written text – of what has been done or understood are artifacts of this kind; engaging with them can provide an occasion for learning in the zpd.
6. Learning in the zpd involves all aspects of the learner and leads to the development of identity as well as of skills and knowledge. For this reason, the affective quality of the interaction between the participants is critical. Learning will be most successful when it is mediated by interaction that expresses mutual respect, trust and concern.
7. Learning in the zpd involves multiple transformations: of the participants’ potential for future action and of the cognitive structures in terms of which it is organized; of the tools and practices that mediate the activity; and of the social world in which that activity takes place.
8. Development does not have any predetermined end, or telos; although it is characterized by increasing complexity of organization, this does not, in itself, constitute progress. What is considered to be progress depends on the dominant values in particular times and places, which are both contested and constantly changing. The zpd is thus a site of conflict and contradiction as well as of unanimity; the transformations it engenders lead to diversity of outcome which may radically change as well as reproduce existing practices and values.
References
Allal, L. and Ducrey, G.P. (1996) Assessment of or in the zone of proximal development. Paper presented at the IInd Conference for Sociocultural Research, Geneva, 11-15 September, 1996.
Brown, A.L. and Campione, J.C. (1994) Guided discovery in a community of learners. In K.McGilly (Ed.) Classroom lessons: Integrating cognitive theory and classroom practice. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press/Bradford Books.
Bruner, J.S. (1996) Celebrating divergence: Piaget and Vygotsky. Paper presented at the IInd Conference for Sociocultural Research, and The Growing Mind, Geneva, 15 September, 1996.
Campione, J.C. and Brown, A.L (1987) Linking dynamic assessment with school achievement. In C.S. Lidz (Ed.) Dynamic assessment: An interactional approach to evaluating learning potential (pp.82-115). New York: Guilford Press.
Chang-Wells, G.L. and Wells, G. (in press) Modes of discourse for living, learning and teaching. In S. Hollingsworth (Ed.) International Action Research and Educational Reform. Philadelphia: Falmer Press.
Cobb, P. , Wood, T. and Yackel, E. (1990) Classrooms as learning environments for teachers and researchers. In R.B. Davis, C.A. Maher & N. Noddings (Eds.) Constructivist views on the teaching and learning of mathematics (pp. 125-146). Journal for Research in Mathematics Education Monograph No.4 Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
Cole, M. (1985) The zone of proximal development: where culture and cognition create each other. In J.V. Wertsch (Ed.) Culture, communication and cognition: Vygotskian perspectives (pp.146-161). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cole, M. (1996) A cultural-historical approach to the sciences of theartificial. Paper presented at the IInd Conference for Sociocultural Research, Geneva, 11-15 September, 1996.
Engestr m, Y. (1996) Development as breaking away and opening up: A challenge to Vygotsky and Piaget. Paper presented at the IInd Conference for Sociocultural Research, and The Growing Mind, Geneva, 15 September, 1996.
Englert, C. S. (1992) Writing instruction from a sociocultural perspective: The holistic, dialogic, and social enterprise of writing. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 25 (3): 153-172.
Feuerstein, R. (1979) The dynamic assessment of retarded performers: The Learning Potential Assessment Device, theory, instruments, and techniques. Baltimore: University Park Press.
Forman, E.A. and McPhail, J. (1993) Vygotskian perspectives on children’s collaborative problem-solving activities. In E.A. Forman, N. Minick and C.A. Stone (Eds.) Contexts for Learning. New York : Oxford University Press.
Gallas, K. (1994) The languages of learning: How children talk, write, dance, draw and sing their understanding of the world. New York: Teachers College Press.
Gardner, H. (1983) Multiple intelligences: the theory in practice. New York: Basic Books.
Gee, J.P. (1992) The social mind: Language, ideology, and social practice. New York: Bergin & Garvey.
Habermas, J. (1971) Knowledge and human interests. Boston: Beacon.
Hedegaard, M. (1990) How instruction influences children’s concepts of evolution. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 3: 11-24.
Lantolf, J. P. and Appel, G. (1994): Theoretical framework: An introduction to Vygotskian approaches to second language research. In J.P. Lantolf and G. Appel (Eds.) Vygotskian approaches to second language research. Norwood, NJ: Ablex , pp. 1-31.
Lave, J and Wenger, E. (1991) Situated Learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Leont ev, A.N. (1978) Activity, consciousness and personality. Englewood Cliifs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Leont’ev, A.N. (1981) The problem of activity in psychology. In Wertsch, J.V. (Ed.) The concept of activity in Soviet Psychology. Armonk, NY: Sharpe.
Lemke, J.L. (1988) Genres, semantics and classroom education. Linguistics and Education, 1: 81-99.
Lemke, J.L. (1995) Textual politics: Discourse and social dynamics. Bristol, PA: Taylor & Francis.
Litowitz, B. E. (1993) Deconstruction in the zone of proximal development. In E.A. Forman, N. Minick and C.A. Stone (Eds.) Contexts for Learning. New York : Oxford University Press.
Lotman, Y.M. (1988) Text within a text. Soviet Psychology, 26 (3): 32-51.
Luria, A.R. (1976) Cognitive development: Its cultural and social foundations. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Mercer, N. (1995) The guided construction of knowledge. Clevedon, U.K. Multilingual Matters.
Minick, N. (1987) The development of Vygotsky s thought: An introduction. In R.W. Rieber and A.S. Carton (Eds.), The collected works of L.S. Vygotsky, Volume 1: Problems of general psychology, New York: Plenum.
Palincsar, A. S. and Brown, A.L. (1984) Reciprocal teaching of comprehension fostering and comprehension monitoring. Cognition and Instruction, 1 (2): 117-175.
Pontecorvo, C. and Girardet, H. (1993) Arguing and reasoning in understanding historical topics. Cognition and Instruction, 11: 189-196.
Rogoff, B. (1990) Apprenticeship in thinking: Cognitive development in social context. New York: Oxford University Press.
Rogoff, B. (1994) Developing understanding of the idea of communities of learners. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 1 (4): 209-229.
Rosaldo, M.Z. (1984) Toward an anthropology of self and feeling. In R.A. Shweder & R.A. LeVine (Eds.) Culture theory: Essays on mind, self, and emotion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Scardamalia, M. and Bereiter, C. (1991) Higher levels of agency for children in knowledge-building: A challenge for the design of new knowledge media. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 1 (1): 37-68.
Schneuwly, B. and Bain, D. (1993) M canismes de r gulation des activit s textuelles: strat gies d’intervention dans les s quences didactiques. In L. Allal, D. Bain and P. Perrenoud (Eds) Evaluation formative et didactique du fran ais (pp. 219-238). Neuch tel: Delachaux et Niestl .
Scribner, S. (1985) Vygotsky’s uses of history. In J.V. Wertsch (Ed.) Culture, communication and cognition: Vygotskian perspectives (pp.119-145). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sharan, S. and Sharan, Y. (1992) Expanding cooperative learning through group investigation. New York: Teachers College Press.
Smagorinsky, P. (1995) Constructing meaning in the disciplines: Reconceptualizing writing across the curriculum as composing across the curriculum. American Journal of Education, 103: 160-184
Tharp, R., and Gallimore, R. (1988) Rousing minds to life : teaching and learning in social contexts. New York : Cambridge University Press.
Tudge, J. (1993) Vygotsky, the zone of proximal development, and peer collaboration: Implications for classroom prac