Review_Author: Kristin Kight
Book_Author: Vygotsky, L. S.
Book_Title: Mind in Society
Reference: 1978, Cambrige Ma, Harvard Univ. Press
Date: 3/8/00
Time: 5:21:42 PM
Remote Name: 128.175.52.154
Mind in Society Book Review 3/8/00 K. S. Kight
Mind in Society: The development of higher psychological processes is a translated collection of L. S. Vygotsky's theoretical works published in 1978, some forty-four years after his death. The collection are divided in to two parts; the first being focused on his basic theory and research, and the second discussing the implications he saw for education arising from his studies. Although the book is brief, fewer than one hundred-fifty pages, it is in no way light reading. Instead one finds oneself rereading small sections and seeing greater depth each time. The language and style are clear and relatively simple, making it more accessible than theoretical works generally appear, and this is certainly helped by the omission of lengthy citations in the text. Vygotsky's ideas are provocative, challenging the simplistic features of other formulations on learning and development, simultaneously insisting on an analysis that accepts the complexity of the human mind, and taking a straightforward approach to studying it. To read this work and feel successful in grasping at least a first level comprehension of it, the reader needs an acquaintance with the historical context of Vygotsky's life and the philosophical roots on which he draws beyond the field of cognitive development. The barest of sketches is offered here to facilitate the reader's interaction with the outline of Vygotsky's ideas that follows. Vygotsky's working life took place against the backdrop and of the early Soviet Union. These were both exciting and dangerous times, in which ideas were far more in public debate than usual. Considerable energy was directed toward explanation of phenomena, from any number of fields, that matched derivations of Marxian thought. More specifically, for readers of Mind in Society, it is important to know that what was being undertaken in that place and in those times, was the fastest and most far-reaching modernization of a state that had ever been attempted. For the study of human development in general, there was an urgent echo from the mobilization of (then) Soviet peoples toward the goal of preeminence. The relationship of instruction to development was much more than an academic question. Perhaps the term that most needs clarifying for the American reader of Mind in Society, is "dialectical materialism." Very briefly, this draws on two ideas: First, the dialectic is understood to be the dynamic of change taking place as, for example the child encounters and imitates the adults around her and ultimately develops into an adult herself, contributing to the development of children. This, and any other single example one might provide is inadequate to define what Hegel, the acknowledged "father" of this concept, meant by aufheben, the term he used for the dialectic. It's purpose here is to provide a rough idea of how the dialectic notion of change inherent in reality works. Second, materialism comes into play because it was Feuerbach's analysis that "...the entire Hegelian system was an unconscious attempt to divert human attention from the real problems of existence."(Ingersoll, p. 122) This attempt was made by keeping the discussion abstract. Marx agreed with Feuerbach on this point, insisting that the dialectic be discussed in terms of real human conditions and projections of their possible solutions. Lenin took this a step further, applying Marx's ideas to the specific situation of Russia in the early twentieth century. This brings us back to Vygotsky and his thinking on the complex relationship of learner, environment, and teacher. Mind in Society begins with Vygotsky's essay on the role of tool and symbol in child development. Here he asks questions directed at understanding what separates human development from that of apes, and then at understanding the dynamic at work in human children's development. Essentially he concludes that the main difference between humans and primates is the facility of speech as it is interwoven with the development of problem solving. The use of speech as a tool, and symbol as an extension of working memory sets humans apart form Apes and Vygotsky's analysis apart from others in that he sees the two as synergistically linked in development of the child making meaning of his world. Vygotsky does not see development as even, or stage-like. Rather, he sees their development taking place in a social interaction between the child and herself through emotional speech, as well as with adults or more capable peers to acquire new competencies. Gradually the child becomes more independent and expert at one kind of activity and no longer using speech or interaction to accomplish it, then taking on new challenges along side and as extensions of the accomplishment of the former one, interacting and speaking as before. Development for Vygotsky is both biological and socio-cultural in origin, "...the history of child behavior is born from these the interweaving of these two lines." (Vygotsky, p. 46) The influence of Marxian thought is most clearly visible in chapters four and five where Vygotsky discusses the processes by which the higher psychological functions are internalized, and then studied. "The internalization of socially rooted and historically developed activities is the distinguishing feature of human psychology..."(Vygotsky, p. 56) and acomplished by "...transforming an interpersonal process into an intrapersonal one..."(Vygotsky, p. 47) through a dialectical movement from unsuccessful attempts, through assisted ones to success, and expertise. This view of development necessitates a methodology that focuses on processes rather than objects. Again, the importance of complex exchanges and lengthy, uneven timelines for development connect with marxian conceptions of the historical and economic development of humanity. The second part of Mind in Society concerns the educational implications of Vygotsky's theoretical work, and has provided the basis for lots of research in education since its publication long after his death. His conceptoion of a zone of proximal development (ZPD) has been the most generative of pedagogical innovation. The ZPD is the developmental distance between what a learner can do by herself, and what s/he can do only with the help of an expert. Development happens as the more competent of the pair assists the learner in attempting, and carrying out the process being learned, slowly fading the help as the learner gains expertise. Vygotsky’s critique of Piaget centers on the view that development must precede learning. Vygotsky sees the two in synergistic (dialectic) terms. His critique of the behaviorists is that they fail to take the child into account as an actor in his own development, changing his environment as he is changed by interaction with it. The Gestaltists fail in Vygotsky’s view because they miss the interwoven character of learning and development, preferring to see the one as a subset of the other. This review presents only the most superficial skim of Mind in Society. This is a book that needs a deep reading, or two, or many more than that. I recommend it highly, especially to anyone involved in educational research and practice. It is a central text for such work these days.
1. Ingersoll, David E. & Matthews, Richard K. The Philosophic Roots of Modern Ideology: Liberalism, Communism, and Fascism, 2nd edition 1991, Englewood Cliffs NJ. Prentice Hall