Vygotsky’s influence

1. Vygotsky’sinfluence • Not everyone was convinced that children “go it alone” in their quest for advanced cognitive abilities • Deep in the heart of the repressive Soviet Union, Lev Vigostsky looked beyond a child’s solitary interactions with his/her environment

2. The zone of proximal development • Each generation profits from the experience of adults and older peers • With the help of an encouraging adult, children can do more than what they could do by themselves • The gap between what a child can do alone, and what they can do with help is the zone of proximal development

3. Examples of that gentle nudge • Did you learn how to tie your shoes by yourself? • Ride a bike? • Seven year old street merchants. • Adults use scaffolding to temporarily help a child reason at a higher level. • Their instructions become “self-talk” that we use when necessary.

4. Lev’s legacy • Dead from tuberculosis at 37, Vigotsky’s ideas were buried by the Soviet authorities • Resurrected by loyal students, his approach has slowly spread and expanded, world-wide • A child’s personal story • The rise of collaborative learning

5. What do babies need? • At first, we thought that mothers primary purpose was to provide nourishment • We were wrong • Harlow gave infant rhesus monkeys a stark choice: • Nourishment or contact comfort • It wasn’t even close

6. Long-lasting deficits • Denied comfort and contact: • the monkeys could not socialize worse yet, they rejected their own young • Only letting them watch younger monkeys play and then slow assimilation helped • Someone must teach us to care and love.

7. Developing moral reasoning • How do we come to understand what is right or wrong? • Lawrence Kohlberg first viewed moral reasoning as a slow process, not just as an end product • He proposed that some of us pass through six stages within three levels, although many don’t make it all the way

8. Moral dilemmas • Kohlberg built and supported his theory through his analysis of how people, of many ages, responded to moral dilemmas: situations in which characters are forced to make difficult decisions by choosing between competing values

9. Heinz’ agonizing choice • Did Heinz do the right thing? • Kohlberg didn’t care whether his study’s participants agreed with Heinz or not. • He was interested in their explanations foragreeing or disagreeing with Heinz

10. The first level • Preconventional “He was wrong because if he’s caught, he might go to jail.” “He was right because he loves and needs his wife.” • Decisions are based on the likelihood of punishment or reward.

11. Conventional morality Public Opinion • “He better steal it or people will think he doesn’t love his wife, or is afraid.” • “He shouldn’t take it or people will think he is a thief.” Law and Order • “He can’t steal it – it’s against the law.” • “He better live up to his duty to her.”

12. Postconventional #1 The Social Contract Laws serve the common good. They can be flexible in certain, unique circumstances. Most people in our society would agree that this is an exception.

13. Universal ethical principles • “The life of Heinz’ wife, and anyone else’s for that matter, is more important than the druggist’s money.” • Principles such as justice and fairness are more important than laws which arbitrarily strike against such essential, absolute values.

14. examples • Antigone Sophocles lays it all out for us, 2500 years ago • The Emancipation Proclamation Lincoln throws aside tradition and takes a big risk to finally do what’s right

15. Sure sounds good, but … • Some of us recognize what’s the right thing to do, but still don’t • It’s hard to take big risks, or certain punishment, for the sake of others

16. Is there another way to look at this? • Kohlberg only used males in this study • Would the results have been different for females? • Carol Gilligan thinks so • Females have a caring rather than a justice perspective • “How will this choice affect others?” • But research shows no distinction

17. attachment • The emotional bond that forms between a child and its primary caretaker(s) • A crucial stage in development • Best measured through the Strange Situation - an innovative experimental design in which the infant is exposed to a series of departures and appearances of the caretaker and a stranger

18. The strange situation • Mary Ainsworth’s work • Begins with Mom (caretaker) and 12-18 month old child in room with lots of toys • Then a stranger enters • Mom leaves • Mom returns • Both leave • Stranger, then mom return

19. What to look for • The infant is watched carefully through a one-way mirror • Great attention is placed on the child’s reaction's to mom’s departure and return • Of equal importance is the child’s willingness to explore the toy-filled environment • Is mom used as a “base” for discovery?

20. The four attachment styles • Secure – willing to leave mom to explore the room, kept an eye on her, and occasionally, returned to her, wary but not too upset by stranger’s appearance, upset at mom’s departure, when she returned noticeably happy and easily soothed • Approximately 65% of children • Temperament can hinder soothing

21. A great start • Mothers of these children: 1) interacted lovingly and warmly 2) encouraged exploration 3) were sensitive to the child’s needs 4) communicated often and appropriately These patterns effect all subsequent relations

22. Insecure attachment • Avoidant style – children did not “touch base” during hesitant periods of exploration and seemed to care little about the stranger or mom’s comings and goings Mom’s were observed to be unresponsive, cold, and often rejecting 15% in North America

23. Another insecure style • Ambivalent – babies cling to mom and are unwilling to explore, the stranger bothered them, they became very upset when mom left, hard to soothe on her return, demanding mom’s attention while pushing her away • Moms were inconsistent and interacted with the baby in an inappropriate manner • 10%

24. It gets worse • Disorganized-disoriented – some babies didn’t know what to do when mom returned, approaching her while looking away, they seemed afraid, confused, and sad • Observation showed these moms to be abusive and/or neglectful • Less than 10%

25. Attachment overview • Can form with someone besides mom • Stressed importance of comfort, stimulation, and consistency • Most insecure attachments are within the normal variability of behavior • But they pose challenges for future emotional relationsships

26. Parenting styles • Emerged through the work of Diana Baumrind • Discovered the importance of two separate continuums Warmth/Support & Control/Structure • Four styles were revealed

27. authoritarian • Plenty, probably too much, structure • Little warmth • Parents are excessively demanding, controlling, and unreasoning • “Do what I say because I say so!” • Children are often aggressive, fearful, with low self-esteem and initiative

28. permissive • Plenty of affection • Little or no structure or demands • Parents place no limits, shower children with gifts, affection and privileges • “Please clean your room?” but no consequences • Irresponsible, aggressive, “spoiled”

29. neglectful • No structure, no warmth • Parents are uninvolved, self-centered, indifferent to child’s needs • “A breeding ground for antisocial behavior.” • Down-played in more recent discussions

30. authoritative • Loads of affection and structure • Set high standards and monitor actions while highly involved • Consistent, loving, and willing to explain and listen • Grant freedom as it is earned

31. Authoritative ii • Children are self-reliant, self-controlled, secure, popular, curious • Warmth emerges as #1 characteristic • Easy for me to say, hard to do • Wide-spread ripples • But does the child’s temperament really decide whether any style will work? • And, do peers override?