Take A Learner To Lunch Cathy Boerner LTM 611

"We become ourselves through others" - Lev S. Vygotsky

Asking the question of how we learn is a fascinating concept. After all, learning is all about asking questions. To ask the question "How do we learn?" is almost like choosing to perform in a play written about your life. In both cases, you are examining a fundamental concept by using as a tool, the concept itself. There seems to be a countless number of ways in which we learn, and it seems impossible to come up with a short and concise theory that encompasses every aspect of how we learn. As I read various theorists concepts of learning and development, I find myself whole-heartedly agreeing in the midst of every paragraph, nodding and voraciously underlining every sentence as I read it. I would like to be a teaching a classroom full of children in a few years, and it is gratifying to find myself so enthralled in the idea of learning. Not just the 'howto's' of learning, but also the concept of "why do these 'how-to's' work?". What is the best way to learn? Is there any basic principle of learning that can be applied to humans as a collective? After reading a range of similar and not so similar theorists who research and write on this subject, I've found that they're all valid theories. For now, I don't think I can find one specific theory that encompasses what I believe to be an ideal way of learning. For now, It seems more useful to be in a continuous quest for theories, all the while reflecting on how each new theory I learn relates to previous theorist's concepts. Two theorists dealing with learning and development that I find particularly relevant are Lev. S. Vygotsky, and Albert Bandura. In particular I am interested in their concepts of

childhood learning. Both theorists along with a third, Jean Piaget, deal with the concept of how social interaction directly relates with the process of cognitive development. (Tudge, 61) For the use of this essay, I will concentrate on Vygotsky and Bandura, both of which agree with the power of peers and adults as the guiding force and progression of cognitive development. (Graham, Chapter 3) Both these theorists emphasize social learning as the key process of development. Whereas, Piaget posits childhood development as an individual, self-guided process, in which children are on a solo journey of experimentation and discovery. (Graham, Chapter 3) I find Vygotsky's and Bandura's acknowledgments of social force more appealing and relevant as I discuss my own research with choosing questions to ask, then selecting and interviewing a learner in the midst of childhood, to answer these questions for me. In this essay, I will refer to the specific questions I chose to ask and explain my practical as well as theoretical reasons for choosing them. For instance, "What did I find out about how this learner learns?" Also, "What do Bandura's and Vygotsky's theories tell me about my subject's answers?" Upon reflection of these findings, I will describe my understanding of how my learner's answers reflect what I have learned about these theorists' ideas on cognitive development and social interaction. Finally, I will discuss how this experience has effected my ideas on how I would like to teach children of this age, and if I have found new issues to consider that I have yet to understand as a result. The subject I chose is Izzy, a ten-year-old fifth grader who goes to a private Jewish school. Izzy is a lively, and expressive young girl who lives with her family in Mequon, Wisconsin. She has two parents who work in advertising, and two older twin brothers, aged fifteen. Besides going to school, Izzy has an active extra curricular life. She practices various sports and arts, and seems to have a tight circle of girl friends her age. In conversation, it is clear

that Izzy's aim is to make jokes and create laughter any chance she can get. As a result it becomes easy to engage in this laughter and to lose sight of the task at hand, which is to ask Izzy some questions about her school life. I chose Izzy as a subject, because on occasion I am a nanny for Izzy and her family. I already know her enough to have the facts of her background, as well as the frameworks that have built Izzy's life thus far. With this knowledge, I was able to narrow my concentration on what kind of questions and subsequent answers I would find useful regarding my understanding of social cognition, as discussed by Vygotsky and Bandura. I began with a basic question that I believed would set the tone of the interview. "How do you think your teachers would describe you to your parents, and do your parents describe you the same way?" Izzy's response was very quick and positive. She emphasized how both her teachers and her parents would agree that she is energetic and approaches learning with a sense of eagerness. She also went on to say "I am impatient when I don't know the answer." So far, I think Izzy demonstrates a natural inclination towards healthy, ideal behavior for a child relating to her demography. It is important to acknowledge her background because I firmly believe the environment a child lives in is a fundamental basis for consideration. In this case, Izzy comes from an affluent family, and lives accordingly in a prosperous area of Wisconsin. She goes to school with children of her same background. Naturally one could draw vast contrasts between Izzy and a subject her age and gender, but who, for instance, arrives by bus at a Milwaukee public school, perhaps lives with one parent, and has very few, if any, friends her age. I think Vygotsky would agree, believing "development...is assisted by others (adults or peers) more competent in the skills and technologies available to the culture." (Tudge, 62) Vygotsky's theory strongly focuses on the correlation between learning, and the environmental issues that surround

the learner. (Graham, Chapter 3) To understand interpersonal interactions, we need to make reference to the historical and cultural forms of both school (teacher) and family. (Bandura) Bandura writes in accordance, recognizing "the impact of the broader sociocultural context on development" adding, "diversity in social practices produces substantial individual differences in the capabilities that are cultivated and those that remain underdeveloped." (Tudge, 61) I think recognizing how Izzy is learning in a classroom with children similar to her should be the first thing factored in to analyzing her responses to my questions. I believe one needs to continue to be aware of the diversity of child learners and their normative answers in relation to their backgrounds and current environments. I went on to ask Izzy, "Why do you think you go to school?" Izzy was again, quick and well spoken: "To get a good education. To learn, and when I grow up, so I'm smart." Encouraging her to go on, I asked "What do you think the reason is, to learn the subjects you are learning?" Izzy responded with, "To get a good job. Because you never know what you're gonna be when you grow up...you have to do things in all subjects to prepare you." At first, I was surprised with her mature response. Was she really thinking that far into the future already? Did she really understand how the subjects she is learning, such as science and spelling, are going to help her prepare for obtaining a good job? Since then, I've been thinking about what I was like when I was ten. An instance that comes to mind is a time I was on the playground at school, listening to my friend talk about the presidential election coming up. She was declaring her political position and was making fun of the candidate that she didn't like. I respected her and didn't say anything because I didn't know what her insults meant. I played

along in other ways though, nodding and behaving as if I did understand. I decided since I didn't know who the presidential candidates were and therefore didn't have an opinion, which would have allowed me to agree with what she was saying. It was a form of mimicry that I was using a lot at that age. I now realize that Izzy's answers possibly reflect this mimicry as well. At ten, Izzy appears to be reaching a new level of cognitive development similar to me at ten; she may have been playing out what she perceives was the right way to answer my question. At this age she might be observing her parents and any of the other numerous peers, mentors, and adults in her life, as they notify her either implicitly or explicitly, about how getting a good job is the primary goal in life. Just like me at ten, Izzy might now be repeating this verbal behavior, inputting the words she hears in direct relation to "why there is school" and "why there are specific subjects" and saving them in her head for when she will need to talk about this subject. After I had mimicked a certain behavior or language long enough, I would eventually forget that it all began by hearing and seeing it from someone else first. I was going through a step-by- step process. First I was recognizing someone else's behavior, then I believed it to be of a higher level of my current comprehension, and then I was trying out the behavior. This all happened before I learned cognitively what it was I was saying. This experience strongly reflects much of what both Vygotsky and Bandura present on the prevalence of social interaction in regards to cognitive development. Vygotsky demonstrates this occurrence with his "Zone of Proximal Development", a linear model of development beginning with what isn't known on one end, and what is known on the other end. In the middle is the 'zone'; the space in between where we have yet to learn what is to be known. (Graham, Chapter 3) According to Vygotsky, there is always someone leading you through the zone, whether it be a peer, teacher, or any other adult or mentor. It is the leader that

has the ability that the learner does not yet have. (Graham, Chapter 3) For Vygotsky, "instruction is only useful when it moves ahead of development." As for Bandura, the concept of mimicry is a main focus. We learn through observation, imitation, and modeling. Most human behavior is learned observationally through modeling: from observing others, one forms an idea of how new behaviors are performed, and on later occasions this coded information serves as a guide for action. (Bandura). Izzy is no doubt, a smart girl. In terms of Bandura, this would mean she is very good at modeling new behaviors. At the same time, she isn't passively imitating these models, she is cognitively active in this social process. (Graham, Chapter 3) In another question, I asked Izzy "Do you learn more when you work alone, or with your classmates?" Izzy replied, "When I work with my classmates. When I work with my classmates, I feel not as frustrated because I like people to help me more than my teacher, because sometimes my teacher won't help, and when I work alone I get really frustrated, really easily." I then asked, "Do you prefer a large group or a small one?" Izzy briefly explained a Take A Learner To Lunch medium group is the best because "when it's too big, it's hard to control." In a later question, I got a similar response about how Izzy prefers having her classmates help her rather than having her teacher assist her. After asking, "How do you feel when you have helped a classmate?" Izzy said: "I feel respected because I know that they can trust me. I don't help everybody in my class, mostly the girls." I responded with the next question, "How do you feel when a classmate has helped you 7

with a problem?" "I feel glad because it helps me to get the answer easier, and I prefer that over asking the teacher for help." "Why do you think that is?" "I feel more comfortable around my friends than my teachers. My friends would give me the answer quicker than the teacher. I kinda get nervous if I take too long to answer a question if my teacher is helping, and if I'm in an accelerated class, I'm afraid she'll take me down a notch if I don't know something." On several occasions, Izzy makes references to not wanting interaction with her teacher while doing a task that demonstrates her abilities, such as homework, or an in-class project. It appears that once a task is at hand, Izzy doesn't want further instruction from her teacher, because she anticipates it will slow down her process of functioning at a pace she prefers to go at. She probably feels that she knows the basic principles of the task at hand. Therefore, when she needs help it is for something that has perhaps presented her with a temporary confusion. If she could Take A Learner To Lunch 8

simply be guided by another peer through just this one part of the task that confuses her, she will be able to quickly return to her normal level of functioning. Vygotsky posits that "instruction is only useful when it moves ahead of development. When it does, it impels or wakens a whole series of functions that are in a stage of maturation, lying in the zone of proximal development." (Tudge, 67) Take for example, an instance where a child is in class doing a math assignment. The questions all cover a level of math that she has an acquired ability to solve. The first few questions are easy for her, but then comes a question that

abruptly stops her process. In this instance, it is a story problem using percentages and fractions. She knows how to read and apply both. If she raises her hand for the teacher to come to her with assistance and the child tells her that she is confused, the teacher is likely to start with a brief overview of how to apply percentages and fractions. At this point, the child doesn't want an overview, just a rephrasing of the question. She is likely not to tell the teacher this, or even if she does, the teacher might continue with the overview anyway. This would in turn, make the child grow impatient or distracted. Or she may worry that her teacher will think she has less understanding of the subject than she really does. If she had asked a peer for assistance instead, the outcome is likely to not include an overview of fractions and percentages. Her peer might have better insight to knowing just what the child is confused about. In this case, it was the phrasing of the story question that halted her problem solving process. Perhaps her peer also recognized that the question was confusingly phrased, but after a second read this student was able to understand what was being asked. This would make it very easy for the peer to assist the child with the question because they were both Take A Learner To Lunch already on the same wave-length. The peer who is already at the 'knowing' end of proximal development would be able to show the most direct path of knowing to the child who was in the 'zone'. Something else that appears to play a role in this scenario is Bandura's Self-Efficacy Theory of childhood development. (Bandura) The basic principle of this theory is that children are more prone to willingly function in activities to the extent that they believe themselves to be competent at those activities. It seems basic enough, but it is still a topic which is compelling to explore further. Bandura states that "there is a marked difference between possessing knowledge 9

and skills and being able to use them well under taxing conditions. Personal accomplishments require not only skills but self-beliefs of efficacy to use them well. " (Bandura, 119) In Izzy's case, it appears that receiving help from her peers enables Izzy to maintain a level of self-efficacy that can allow her to continue functioning at what she perceives to be a high level of ability. If she involves her teacher with her solo work on assignments, she might become too concerned with what her teacher might evaluate as weakness or a less than desirable level of ability. This might be cause for a lowered level of efficacy due to her weakened attitude. It seems evident that she isn't as concerned with what opinions her peers might form if she were to ask them for help. Therefore, this allows for a consistent perceived level of ability. This theory of self efficacy is further demonstrated in another question I asked Izzy; "What subject do you try the hardest in? And why do you think that is?" Izzy responded, "I think I try hardest in Social Studies because it's kinda challenging and it makes me want to think harder and get good grades. My teacher...she's okay...yeah, she's a good Take A Learner To Lunch teacher." In relation to self-efficacy, Bandura writes on the subject "Conception of Ability". (Bandura,120) He explains this as the relation between how children construe ability and the effects their interpretations have on cognitive development. "Some children regard ability as an acquirable skill that can be increased by gaining knowledge and competencies...[such children] seek challenges that provide opportunities to expand their knowledge and competencies." (Bandura, 120) Izzy demonstrates this sort of attitude towards ability with many of her responses to my questions. She is not afraid to be asked questions she doesn't immediately know the 10

answers to. She doesn't like to be proved wrong, but this stubbornness demonstrates a high level of self-efficacy as well. Izzy continually wants to take on new and challenging activities that implore a new set of skills. In contrast to Izzy's conception of ability, Bandura considers another type of learner who approaches ability with a different interpretation. "Other children view ability as an inherent capacity. For them, performance is diagnostic of their inherent intellectual capacities." He goes on to explain the sort of task these learners prefer; "tasks that minimize errors and reveal their proficiency at the expense of expanding their knowledge and competencies." I can't help but consider that the latter of these two attitudes towards ability seems to be more prevalent in adults. It seems as kids, we set out to take on every challenge, every new concept that comes our way. As we get older, we settle into the activities that exercise what we already know, and seek out less of what we have yet to know: activities that make us risk demonstrating our lack of ability for the skills needed to perform. Take A Learner To Lunch 11

This makes me think of piano playing, something I have been practicing for more than 20 years, on and off. I was what you might call a tenacious piano player when I was a child. I had stubby fingers that refused to reach certain notes, I was rhythmically impaired, and I preferred a staggered pounding over a gentle rhythm. My parents weren't very good at hiding their less than enthusiastic attitude toward my practicing. I began to practice only the hour after school, before my parents got home so that I could pound without being scolded. Sometimes to test my parents patience, I would continue playing after they arrived home. This never had a good outcome. The only person who delighted in my piano playing was my hard-of-hearing grandma. As it turns out, that was enough positive reinforcement for me to keep going. That, and my undying need to

tackle this instrument that did not want to compromise with me. I had heard that there are some people who are just "naturally good" at piano. I knew that wasn't ever going to be me, but I enjoyed entertaining the idea that I would eventually obtain the skills needed to at least play the piano decently. What happened was, by the time I actually got good at piano I was still considering myself to be an ungifted player. I had managed to acquire a level of skill without realizing that I wasn't a bad piano player anymore. A year ago, I was given a piano and I began to sit and play again. After years of not practicing, nothing much had changed. My love of pounding on the piano returned quickly, and I'm still probably better than I'll allow myself to think. While considering the workings of social interaction in cognitive development and relating them to my interview with Izzy, I discovered that perhaps regardless of the positive or negative outcome, our peers, mentors, and parents, play a long-term role in a child's development on all levels of consciousness. From the tacit ways in which they are led by their parents, to the implicit Take A Learner To Lunch ways in which their peers form their attitudes towards learning, it is unavoidable for a child's development to be effected by the people around them. It is why, as a future teacher, I need to remain aware that I'm not the only one guiding my students through their stages of knowing. If I can continue to understand learning through a child's perspective, the way my interview with Izzy did, I should only be able to continually gain insight towards the many ways in which a student's development is molded and contorted through the vessel that is our collective social realm. 12

Take A Learner To Lunch

Vygotsky and Bandura: Two Theorist's Ideas On Social Cognition Theory in Relation to Interviewing A Child Learner Cathy Boerner Alverno College

Take A Learner To Lunch

13

References Bandura, Albert. (1993) Perceived Self-Efficacy in Cognitive Development and Functioning. Educational Psychologist 28(2), 117-148 Graham, Sandra. (2009) Unpublished: The Chicken, the Egg, and the Brain Chapter 3 Tudge, J. & Winterhoff, P. (1993). Vygotsky, Piaget and Bandura: Perspectives on the relations between the social world and cognitive development. Human Development 36: 61-81.