Vygotsky+(10s)

In Soviet Russia, signs internalize **YOU!**

"The most essential difference between sign and tool, and the basis for the real divergence of the two lines, is the different ways that they orient human behavior." "The tool's function is to serve as the conductor of human influence on the object of activity; it is externally oriented; it must lead to changes in objects. It is a means by which human external activity is aimed at mastering and triumphing over, nature.  The sign, on the other hand, changes nothing in the object of a psychological operation.  It is a means of internal activity aimed at mastering oneself; the sign is internally oriented." The tools can help us store signs, and signs can help us use tools. The externalized form can be seen by others, used by others. Whereas the internalization is personal, only helpful to the person that internalizes it. The internalization of a tool is a sign. BUT a tool and a sign are completely different things, one doesn't necessarily lead to another. The tool would be the card. The sign would be understanding how to use the tool.**
 * Signs - A picture. Imagery.  Helpful tools to be able to memorize and store information.


 * Zone of Proximal Development - **

Humans are incredibly complex creatures which have many confounding factors based on our social tendencies. Issues relating to the mind and development are incredibly hard to quantify without looking at culture and society at large.

I mention this because I feel this position differs significantly from Vygotsky, who speaks of how the act of memorization changes as a child grows in contrast to Piaget's idea of discrete 'stages' that define what a child is capable of understanding.

"The internalization of socially rooted and historically developed activities is the distinguishing feature of human psychology." (p. 57)

What fascinates me is that the signs that we use to memorize things many times have nothing to do with the object to be memorized. I also found it interesting that in his studies, whether the sign was related to the fact or not made no difference in the ability to memorize the fact.

Vygotsky focuses on tools and signs involved with mediated behavior. The central characteristic of elementary functions is that they are totally and directly determined by stimulation from environment. For higher functions, the central feature is self-generated stimulation, that is, the creating and use of artificial stumuli which become the immediate causes of behavior (pg. 39).

The cognitive ability of abstraction is unique to humans and provides us the opportunity to create signs.

So now my questions...would Vygotsky side with Brown and his theory because Brown and the situated theorists also use the environment/tools to support their learning theory or would he side with the conceptual theorists with having facts and making connections to these facts or would he be on his own with no connection to the rest of the theorists?

Also, the student and the "authentic activity" must be placed within an environment that nurtures the culture of learning and the lesson to be taught. It also, to my mind, runs counter to cognitive apprenticeship.

If the way that students learn is so greatly influenced by the activities of their society, then it's no wonder that so many kids today have a negative view of school. Kids hear from the time they are very young from TV, older siblings, maybe even parents, about how homework is hard, bad, and not fun.

If children are all in various stages when you finally get them in your classroom, who are you supposed to direct your teaching to? Also, where does this leave children who are from different cultural backgrounds?