Vygotsky's Sociocultural Theory of

Cognitive Development
By Saul Mcleod, PhD | Updated August 18, 2022,

Article Content

The work of Lev Vygotsky (1934) has become the foundation of

much research and theory in cognitive development over the
past several decades, particularly of what has become known as
sociocultural theory.

Vygotsky's sociocultural theory views human development as a socially mediated

process in which children acquire their cultural values, beliefs, and problem-
solving strategies through collaborative dialogues with more knowledgeable
members of society. Vygotsky's theory is comprised of concepts such as culture-
specific tools, private speech, and the Zone of Proximal Development.

Vygotsky's theories stress the fundamental role of social interaction in the

development of cognition (Vygotsky, 1978), as he believed strongly that
community plays a central role in the process of "making meaning."

Unlike Piaget's notion that childrens' development must necessarily precede their
learning, Vygotsky argued, "learning is a necessary and universal aspect of the
process of developing culturally organized, specifically human psychological
function" (1978, p. 90).  In other words, social learning tends to precede (i.e.,
come before) development.

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS

What is Vygotsky's theory?

How is Vygotsky's theory applied in teaching and learning?

 What is Vygotsky's best known concept?

Vygotsky has developed a sociocultural approach to cognitive development. He

developed his theories at around the same time as Jean Piaget was starting to
develop his ideas (1920's and 30's), but he died at the age of 38, and so his
theories are incomplete - although some of his writings are still being translated
from Russian.

Like Piaget, Vygotsky could be described as a constructivist, in

that he was
interested in knowledge acquisition as a cumulative
event - with new experiences
and understandings incorporated
into existing cognitive frameworks. However,
whilst Piaget’s
theory is structural (arguing that development is governed by
physiological stages), Vygotsky denies the existence of any
guiding framework
independent of culture and context.

No single principle (such as Piaget's equilibration) can account for development.

Individual development cannot be understood without reference to the social
and cultural context within which it is embedded. Higher mental processes in the
individual have their origin in social processes.

Vygotsky's Ideas
Vygotsky's theory focuses on the role of culture in the development of mental
abilities e.g. speech and reasoning in children.
According to Vygotsky, adults in society foster children’s cognitive development
by engaging them in challenging and meaningful activities. Adults convey to
children the way their culture interprets and responds to the world.
They show the meaning they attach to objects, events and experiences. They
provide the child with what to think (the knowledge) and how to think (the
processes, the tools to think with).
The interactions with others significantly increases not only the quantity of
information and the number of skills a child develops, it also affects the
development of higher order mental functions such as formal reasoning.
Vygotsky
argued that higher mental abilities could only develop through the interaction
with more advanced others.
Vygotsky proposed that children are born with elementary mental abilities such
as memory and perception and that higher mental functions develop from these
through the influence of social interactions.
 Vygotsky agreed with Piaget that the development of cognitive abilities takes
place in stages and he also agreed broadly with the description of the stages
however he viewed cognitive development as a social process where children
learn from experienced adults.
Vygotsky stated that language has two functions. Inner speech is used for
mental reasoning and external speech is used to converse with others. These
operations occur separately. Indeed, before the age of two, a child employs
words socially; they possess no internal language. Once thought and language
merge, however, the social language is internalized and assists the child with
their reasoning. Thus, the social environment is ingrained within the child’s
learning.

Vygotsky's theory differs from that of Piaget

in a number of important ways:

1: Vygotsky places more emphasis on culture affecting cognitive

development.

This contradicts Piaget's view of universal stages and content of development

(Vygotsky does not refer to stages in the way that Piaget does).

Hence Vygotsky assumes cognitive development varies across cultures, whereas

Piaget states cognitive development is mostly universal across cultures.
 2: Vygotsky places considerably more emphasis on social factors
contributing to cognitive development.

(i) Vygotsky states the importance of cultural and social context for learning.
Cognitive development stems from social interactions from guided learning within
the zone of proximal development as children and their partner's co-construct
knowledge. In contrast, Piaget maintains that cognitive development stems
largely from independent explorations in which children construct knowledge of
their own.

(ii) For Vygotsky, the environment in which children grow up will influence how
they think and what they think about.

3: Vygotsky places more (and different) emphasis on the role of

language in cognitive development.

According to Piaget, language depends on thought for its development (i.e.,

thought comes before language). For Vygotsky, thought and language are
initially separate systems from the beginning of life, merging at around three
years of age, producing verbal thought (inner speech).

For Vygotsky, cognitive development results from an internalization of language.

4: According to Vygotsky adults are an important source of

cognitive development.

Adults transmit their culture's tools of intellectual adaptation that children

internalize. In contrast, Piaget emphasizes the importance of peers, as peer
interaction promotes social perspective taking.

Effects of Culture: - Tools of intellectual

adaptation
Vygotsky claimed that infants are born with the basic abilities for intellectual
development called 'elementary mental functions' (Piaget focuses on motor
reflexes and sensory abilities).

Elementary mental functions include –

o Attention

o Sensation

o Perception

o Memory

Eventually, through interaction within the sociocultural environment, these are

developed into more sophisticated and effective mental processes which Vygotsky
refers to as 'higher mental functions.'

Each culture provides its children tools of intellectual adaptation that allow
them to use the basic mental functions more effectively/adaptively.

Tools of intellectual adaptation is Vygotsky’s term for methods

of thinking and problem-solving strategies that children
internalize through social interactions with the more
knowledgeable members of society.

For example, memory in young children this is limited by biological factors.

However, culture determines the type of memory strategy we develop.  For
example, in western culture, children learn note-taking to aid memory, but in
pre-literate societies, other strategies must be developed, such as tying knots
in a string to remember, or carrying pebbles, or repetition of the names of
ancestors until large numbers can be repeated.

Vygotsky, therefore, sees cognitive functions, even those carried out alone, as
affected by the beliefs, values, and tools of intellectual adaptation of the
culture in which a person develops and therefore socio-culturally determined.
The tools of intellectual adaptation, therefore, vary from culture to culture - as
in the memory example.

Social Influences on Cognitive Development

Like Piaget, Vygotsky believes that young children are curious and actively
involved in their own learning and the discovery and development of new
understandings/schema.  However, Vygotsky placed more emphasis on social
contributions to the process of development, whereas Piaget emphasized self-
initiated discovery.

According to Vygotsky (1978), much important learning by the child occurs

through social interaction with a skillful tutor. The tutor may model behaviors
and/or provide verbal instructions for the child. Vygotsky refers to this as
cooperative or collaborative dialogue. The child seeks to understand the actions
or instructions provided by the tutor (often the parent or teacher) then
internalizes the information, using it to guide or regulate their own performance.

Shaffer (1996) gives the example of a young girl who is given her first jigsaw.
Alone, she performs poorly in attempting to solve the puzzle. The father then
sits with her and describes or demonstrates some basic strategies, such as
finding all the corner/edge pieces and provides a couple of pieces for the child
to put together herself and offers encouragement when she does so.

As the child becomes more competent, the father allows the child to work more
independently. According to Vygotsky, this type of social interaction involving
cooperative or collaborative dialogue promotes cognitive development.

In order to gain an understanding of Vygotsky's theories on cognitive

development, one must understand two of the main principles of Vygotsky's work:
the More Knowledgeable Other (MKO) and the Zone of Proximal Development
(ZPD).

More Knowledgeable Other

The more knowledgeable other (MKO) is somewhat self-explanatory; it refers to
someone who has a better understanding or a higher ability level than the
learner, with respect to a particular task, process, or concept.

Although the implication is that the MKO is a teacher or an older adult, this is
not necessarily the case. Many times, a child's peers or an adult's children may
be the individuals with more knowledge or experience.

For example, who is more likely to know more about the newest teenage music
groups, how to win at the most recent PlayStation game, or how to correctly
perform the newest dance craze - a child or their parents?
In fact, the MKO need not be a person at all. Some companies, to support
employees in their learning process, are now using electronic performance
support systems. 

Electronic tutors have also been used in educational settings to facilitate and
guide students through the learning process. The key to MKOs is that they
must have (or be programmed with) more knowledge about the topic being
learned than the learner does.

Zone of Proximal Development

The concept of the more knowledgeable other is integrally related to the
second important principle of Vygotsky's work, the Zone of Proximal Development.

This is an important concept that relates to the difference between what a

child can achieve independently and what a child can achieve with guidance and
encouragement from a skilled partner.

Vygotsky consequently focuses much more closely on social interaction as an aid

to learning; arguing that, left alone, children will develop - but not to their full
potential. He refers to the gap between actual and potential learning as the
Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) - and argues that it is only through
collaboration with adults and other learners that this gap can be bridged.
The Zone of Proximal Development is the gap between the level of actual
development, what the child can do on his own and the level of potential
development, what a child can do with the assistance of more advanced and
competent individuals. Social interaction, therefore, supports the child’s
cognitive development in the ZPD, leading to a higher level of reasoning.

For example, the child could not solve the jigsaw puzzle (in the example above)
by itself and would have taken a long time to do so (if at all), but was able to
solve it following interaction with the father, and has developed competence at
this skill that will be applied to future jigsaws.

ZPD is the zone where instruction is the most beneficial as it is when the task is
just beyond the individual’s capabilities. To learn we must be presented with
tasks that are just out of our ability range. Challenging tasks promote the
maximum cognitive growth.

As a result of shared dialogues with more knowledgeable others, who provide

hints and instructions as well as encouragement, the child is able to internalize
the ‘how to do it’ part of the task as part of their inner or private speech.
This can then be used by the child on later occasions when they tackle a similar
task on their own.

Vygotsky (1978) sees the Zone of Proximal Development as the area where the
most sensitive instruction or guidance should be given - allowing the child to
develop skills they will then use on their own - developing higher mental
functions.

Vygotsky also views interaction with peers as an effective way of developing

skills and strategies.  He suggests that teachers use cooperative learning
exercises where less competent children develop with help from more skillful peers
- within the zone of proximal development.

Evidence for Vygotsky and the ZPD

Freund (1990) conducted a study in which children had to decide which items of
furniture should be placed in particular areas of a dolls house.

Some children were allowed to play with their mother in a similar situation before
they attempted it alone (zone of proximal development) while others were allowed
to work on this by themselves (Piaget's discovery learning). 

Freund found that those who had previously worked with their mother (ZPD)
showed the greatest improvement compared with their first attempt at the
task.  The conclusion being that guided learning within the ZPD led to greater
understanding/performance than working alone (discovery learning).

Vygotsky and Language

Vygotsky believed that language develops from social interactions, for
communication purposes. Vygotsky viewed language as man’s greatest tool, a
means for communicating with the outside world.

According to Vygotsky (1962) language plays two critical roles in cognitive

development:

1: It is the main means by which adults transmit information to children.

2: Language itself becomes a very powerful tool of intellectual adaptation.

Vygotsky (1987) differentiates between three forms of language: social speech

which is external communication used to talk to others (typical from the age of
two); private speech (typical from the age of three) which is directed to the
self and serves an intellectual function; and finally private speech goes
underground, diminishing in audibility as it takes on a self-regulating function
and is transformed into silent inner speech (typical from the age of seven).

For Vygotsky, thought and language are initially separate systems from the
beginning of life, merging at around three years of age. At this point speech
and thought become interdependent: thought becomes verbal, speech becomes
representational. When this happens, children's monologues internalized to
become inner speech. The internalization of language is important as it drives
cognitive development.

'Inner speech is not the interiour aspect of external speech - it

is a function in itself. It still remains speech, i.e., thought
connected with words. But while in external speech thought is
embodied in words, in inner speech words dies as they bring
forth thought. Inner speech is to a large extent thinking in
pure meanings.'
— (Vygotsky, 1962: p. 149)

Vygotsky (1987) was the first psychologist to document the importance of

private speech. He considered private speech as the transition point between
social and inner speech, the moment in development where language and
thought unite to constitute verbal thinking.

Thus private speech, in Vygotsky's view, was the earliest manifestation of inner
speech. Indeed, private speech is more similar (in its form and function) to inner
speech than social speech.

Private speech is 'typically defined, in contrast to social speech,

as speech addressed to the self (not to others) for the
purpose of self-regulation (rather than communication).'
— (Diaz, 1992, p.62)
Unlike inner speech which is covert (i.e., hidden), private speech is overt. In
contrast to Piaget’s (1959) notion of private speech representing a
developmental dead-end, Vygotsky (1934, 1987) viewed private speech as: 'A
revolution in development which is triggered when preverbal thought and
preintellectual language come together to create fundamentally new forms of
mental functioning.' (Fernyhough & Fradley, 2005: p. 1)

In addition to disagreeing on the functional significance of private speech,

Vygotsky and Piaget also offered opposing views on the developmental course of
private speech and the environmental circumstances in which it occurs most
often (Berk & Garvin, 1984).

Through private speech, children begin to collaborate with themselves in the

same way a more knowledgeable other (e.g., adults) collaborate with them in the
achievement of a given function.

Vygotsky sees "private speech" as a means for children to plan activities and
strategies and therefore aid their development. Private speech is the use of
language for self-regulation of behavior. Language is, therefore, an accelerator
to thinking/understanding (Jerome Bruner also views language in this way).
Vygotsky believed that children who engaged in large amounts of private speech
are more socially competent than children who do not use it extensively.
Vygotsky (1987) notes that private speech does not merely accompany a child’s
activity but acts as a tool used by the developing child to facilitate cognitive
processes, such as overcoming task obstacles, enhancing imagination, thinking,
and conscious awareness.

Children use private speech most often during intermediate difficulty tasks
because they are attempting to self-regulate by verbally planning and
organizing their thoughts (Winsler et al., 2007).

The frequency and content of private speech are then correlated with behavior
or performance. For example, private speech appears to be functionally related
to cognitive performance: It appears at times of difficulty with a task.

For example, tasks related to executive function (Fernyhough & Fradley, 2005),
problem-solving tasks (Behrend et al., 1992), schoolwork in both language (Berk
& Landau, 1993), and mathematics (Ostad & Sorensen, 2007).

Berk (1986) provided empirical support for the notion of private speech. She
found that most private speech exhibited by children serves to describe or
guide the child's actions.

Berk also discovered than child engaged in private speech more often when
working alone on challenging tasks and also when their teacher was not
immediately available to help them. Furthermore, Berk also found that private
speech develops similarly in all children regardless of cultural background.

Vygotsky (1987) proposed that private speech is a product of an individual’s

social environment. This hypothesis is supported by the fact that there exist
high positive correlations between rates of social interaction and private speech
in children.

Children raised in cognitively and linguistically stimulating environments

(situations more frequently observed in higher socioeconomic status families)
start using and internalizing private speech faster than children from less
privileged backgrounds. Indeed, children raised in environments characterized by
low verbal and social exchanges exhibit delays in private speech development.

Childrens’ use of private speech diminishes as they grow older and follows a
curvilinear trend. This is due to changes in ontogenetic development whereby
children are able to internalize language (through inner speech) in order to
self-regulate their behavior (Vygotsky, 1987).
For example, research has shown that childrens’ private speech usually peaks at
3–4 years of age, decreases at 6–7 years of age, and gradually fades out to
be mostly internalized by age 10 (Diaz, 1992).

Vygotsky proposed that private speech diminishes and disappears with age not
because it becomes socialized, as Piaget suggested, but rather because it goes
underground to constitute inner speech or verbal thought” (Frauenglass & Diaz,
1985).

Applying Vygotsky's Theory to the Classroom

Vygotsky's approach to child development is a form of social constructivism,
based on the idea that cognitive functions are the products of social
interactions.

Vygotsky emphasized the collaborative nature of learning by the construction of

knowledge through social negotiation.
He rejected the assumption made by
Piaget that it was possible to separate learning from its social context.

Vygotsky
believed everything is learned on two levels.
First, through interaction
with others, and then integrated into the individual’s mental structure.

Every function in the child’s cultural development appears twice:

first, on the social level, and later,
on the individual level; first,
between people (interpsychological) and then inside the child
(intrapsychological). This applies equally to voluntary attention,
to logical memory, and to the
formation of concepts. All the
higher functions originate as actual relationships between
individuals.
— (Vygotsky, 1978, p.57)

Teaching styles based on constructivism

mark a conscious effort to move from
‘traditional, objectivist models didactic, memory-oriented transmission models’
(Cannella & Reiff, 1994) to a more student-centred approach.

Traditionally, schools have not promoted environments in which the students play
an active role in their own education as well as their peers'. Vygotsky's theory,
however, requires the teacher and students to play untraditional roles as they
collaborate with each other.
Instead of a teacher dictating her meaning to students for future recitation, a
teacher should collaborate with her students in order to create meaning in ways
that students can make their own (Hausfather, 1996).

For example, a pupil and teacher begin a task with different

levels of skill and understanding. As each adjusts to the
perspective of the other, the teacher has to translate their
own insights in a way that is within the grasp of the pupil, and
the pupil develops more complete understanding of a task or
concept.

The pupil is able to internalize the 'how to do it' part of a task

as part of their private or inner speech dialog. Vygotsky
referred to this process as intersubjectivity.

ZPD
Because Vygotsky asserts that cognitive change occurs within the zone of
proximal development, instruction would be designed to reach a developmental
level that is just above the student's current developmental level.

Vygotsky proclaims, "learning which is oriented toward developmental levels that

have already been reached is ineffective from the view point of the child's
overall development. It does not aim for a new stage of the developmental
process but rather lags behind this process" (Vygotsky, 1978).

Appropriation is necessary for cognitive development within the zone of proximal

development. Individuals participating in peer collaboration or guided teacher
instruction must share the same focus in order to access the zone of proximal
development.

"Joint attention and shared problem solving is needed to create a process of

cognitive, social, and emotional interchange" (Hausfather,1996).

Furthermore, it is essential that the partners be on different developmental

levels and the higher level partner be aware of the lower's level. If this does not
occur, or if one partner dominates, the interaction is less successful (Driscoll,
1994; Hausfather, 1996).

Vygotsky's theories also feed into the current interest in collaborative learning,
suggesting that group members should have different levels of ability so more
advanced peers can help less advanced members operate within their ZPD.

Scaffolding and reciprocal teaching are effective strategies to

access the zone of proximal development.

Reciprocal Teaching
A contemporary educational application of Vygotsky's theory is "reciprocal
teaching," used to improve students' ability to learn from text. In this method,
teachers and students collaborate in learning and practicing four key skills:
summarizing, questioning, clarifying, and predicting. The teacher's role in the
process is reduced over time.

Reciprocal teaching allows for the creation of a dialogue between students and
teachers. This two way communication becomes an instructional strategy by
encouraging students to go beyond answering questions and engage in the
discourse (Driscoll, 1994; Hausfather, 1996).

A study conducted by Brown and Palincsar (1989), demonstrated the Vygotskian

approach with reciprocal teaching methods in their successful program to teach
reading strategies. The teacher and students alternated turns leading small
group discussions on a reading. After modeling four reading strategies, students
began to assume the teaching role.

Results of this study showed significant gains over other instructional

strategies (Driscoll, 1994; Hausfather,1996). Cognitively Guided Instruction is
another strategy to implement Vygotsky's theory. This strategy involves the
teacher and students exploring math problems and then sharing their different
problem solving strategies in an open dialogue (Hausfather,1996).

The physical classroom, based on Vygotsky's theory, would provide clustered

desks or tables and work space for peer instruction, collaboration, and small
group instruction. Learning becomes a reciprocal experience for the students
and teacher.

Like the environment, the instructional design of material to be learned would

be structured to promote and encourage student interaction and collaboration.
Thus the classroom becomes a community of learning.

Scaffolding
Also, Vygotsky theory of cognitive development on learners is relevant to
instructional concepts such as "scaffolding" and "apprenticeship," in which a
teacher or more advanced peer helps to structure or arrange a task so that a
novice can work on it successfully.

A teacher's
role is to identify each
individual’s current level of development and
provide them with
opportunities to cross their ZPD.

A crucial element in this process is the use of what later became

known as
scaffolding; the way in which the teacher provides
students with frameworks
and experiences which encourage them
to extend their existing schemata and
incorporate new skills,
competences and understandings.

Scaffolding describes the conditions that support the child’s learning, to move
from what they already know to new knowledge and abilities.

Scaffolding requires the teacher to provide students the opportunity to extend

their current skills and knowledge.

During scaffolding the support offered by a adult (or more knowledgeable other)
gradually decreases as the child becomes more skilled in the task. As the adult
withdraws their help, the child assumes more of the strategic planning and
eventually gains competence to master similar problems without the aid of a
teacher or more knowledgeable peer.

It is important to note that this

is more than simply instruction; learning
experiences must be
presented in such a way as to actively challenge existing
mental
structures and provide frameworks fo

Five ways in which an adult can “scaffold” a child’s learning:

1. Engaging the child’s interest
2. Maintaining the child’s interest in the task e.g. avoiding distraction and
providing clear instructions on how to start the task.
3. Keeping the child’s frustration under control e.g. by supportive interactions,
adapt instructions according where the child is struggling
4. Emphasising the important features of the task
5. Demonstrating the task: showing the child how to do the task in simple, clear
steps.

As the child progresses through the ZPD, the level of scaffolding necessary
declines from 5 to 1.

The teacher must engage students' interest, simplify tasks so they are
manageable, and motivate students to pursue the instructional goal. In addition,
the teacher must look for discrepancies between students' efforts and the
solution, control for frustration and risk, and model an idealized version of the
act (Hausfather, 1996).

Challenges to Traditional Teaching Methods

Vygotsky's social development theory challenges traditional teaching methods.
Historically, schools have been organized around recitation teaching. The
teacher disseminates knowledge to be memorized by the students, who in turn
recite the information back to the teacher (Hausfather,1996). However, the
studies described above offer empirical evidence that learning based on the
social development theory facilitates cognitive development over other
instructional strategies.

The structure of our schools do not reflect the rapid changes our society is
experiencing. The introduction and integration of computer technology in society
has tremendously increased the opportunities for social interaction.

Therefore, the social context for learning is transforming as well. Whereas

collaboration and peer instruction was once only possible in shared physical
space, learning relationships can now be formed from distances through
cyberspace.

Computer technology is a cultural tool that students can use to mediate and
internalize their learning. Recent research suggests changing the learning
contexts with technology is a powerful learning activity (Crawford, 1996). If
schools continue to resist structural change, students will be ill prepared for
the world they will live.

Critical Evaluation
Vygotsky's work has not received the same level of intense scrutiny that Piaget's
has, partly due to the time-consuming process of translating Vygotsky's work
from Russian. Also, Vygotsky's sociocultural perspective does not provide as many
specific hypotheses to test as did Piaget's theory, making refutation difficult, if
not impossible.

Perhaps the main criticism of Vygotsky's work concerns the assumption that it is
relevant to all cultures. Rogoff (1990) dismisses the idea that Vygotsky's ideas
are culturally universal and instead states the concept of scaffolding - which is
heavily dependent on verbal instruction - may not be equally useful in all
cultures for all types of learning. Indeed, in some instances, observation and
practice may be more effective ways of learning certain skills.

There is much emphasis on social interaction and culture but many other aspects
for development are neglected such as the importance of emotional factors e.g.
the joys of success and the disappointments and frustration of failure, these
acts as motivation for learning.

Vygotsky overemphasised socio-cultural factors at the expense of biological

influences on cognitive development, this theory cannot explain why cross-
cultural studies show that the stages of development (except the formal
operational stage) occur in the same order in all cultures suggesting that
cognitive development is a product of a biological process of maturation.

Vygotky’s theory has been applied successfully to education. Scaffolding has

shown to be an effective way of teaching (Freund, 1990) and based on this
theory teachers are trained to guide children from they can do to the next
step in their learning through careful scaffolding. Collaborative work is also used
in the classroom, mixing children of different level of ability to make use of
reciprocal / peer teaching.

Download this article as a PDF

Fact Checking

Content is rigorously reviewed by a team of qualified and experienced fact

checkers. Fact checkers review articles for factual accuracy, relevance, and
timeliness. We rely on the most current and reputable sources, which are cited in
the text and listed at the bottom of each article. Content is fact checked
after it has been edited and before publication.

About the Author

Saul Mcleod, PhD, is

a qualified psychology teacher with over 17 years'
experience of working in further and higher education. He has been published in
psychology journals including Clinical Psychology, Social and Personal
Relationships, and Social Psychology.
Cite this Article (APA Style)

Mcleod, S. (2022, May 05). Vygotsky's Sociocultural Theory of Cognitive

Development. Simply Psychology. www.simplypsychology.org/vygotsky.html

References

Behrend, D.A., Rosengren, K.S., & Perlmutter, M. (1992). The relation between
private speech and parental interactive style. In R.M. Diaz & L.E. Berk (Eds.),
Private speech: From social interaction to self-regulation (pp. 85–100). Hillsdale,
NJ: Erlbaum.

Berk, L. E. (1986). Relationship of elementary school children's private speech to

behavioral accompaniment to task, attention, and task performance.
Developmental Psychology, 22(5), 671.

Berk, L. & Garvin, R. (1984). Development of private speech among low-income

Appalachian children. Developmental Psychology, 20(2), 271-286.

Berk, L. E., & Landau, S. (1993). Private speech of learning-disabled and normally
achieving
children in classroom academic and laboratory contexts. Child
Development, 64, 556–571.

Cannella, G. S., & Reiff, J. C. (1994). Individual constructivist teacher education:

Teachers as empowered learners. Teacher education quarterly, 27-38.

Crawford, K. (1996) Vygotskian approaches to human development in the

information era. Educational Studies in Mathematics, (31),43-62.

Diaz, R. M., & Berk, L. E. (1992). Private speech: From social interaction to self-
regulation.
Lawrence Erlbaum.

Driscoll, M. P. (1994). Psychology of Learning for Instruction. Needham, Ma: Allyn

&& Bacon.

Frauenglass, M. & Diaz, R. (1985). Self-regulatory functions of children's private

speech: A
critical analysis of recent challenges to Vygotsky's theory.
Developmental Psychology,
21(2), 357-364.

Fernyhough, C., & Fradley, E. (2005). Private speech on an executive task:

Relations with task difficulty and task performance. Cognitive Development, 20,
103–120.
Freund, L. S. (1990). Maternal regulation of children's problem-solving behavior
and its impact on children's performance. Child Development, 61, 113-126.

Hausfather, S. J. (1996). Vygotsky and Schooling: Creating a Social Contest for

learning. Action in Teacher Education, (18),1-10.

Ostad, S. A., & Sorensen, P. M. (2007). Private speech and strategy-use

patterns: Bidirectional
comparisons of children with and without mathematical
difficulties in a developmental perspective. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 40,
2–14.

Piaget, J. (1959). The language and thought of the child (Vol. 5). Psychology
Press.

Rogoff, B. (1990). Apprenticeships in thinking. New York: Oxford University Press.

Saettler, P. (1990). The Evolution of American Educational Technology.

Egnlewood, Co: Libraries Unlimited.

Schaffer, R. (1996). Social development. Oxford: Blackwell.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1962). Thought and language. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological

processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1987). Thinking and speech. In R.W. Rieber & A.S. Carton
(Eds.),
The collected works of L.S. Vygotsky, Volume 1: Problems of general
psychology
(pp. 39–285). New York: Plenum Press. (Original work published
1934.)

Winsler, A., Abar, B., Feder, M. A., Schunn, C. D., & Rubio, D. A. (2007). Private
speech and executive functioning among high-functioning children with autistic
spectrum disorders. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 37, 1617-
1635.

Wertsch, J. V., Sohmer, R. (1995). Vygotsky on learning and development. Human

Development, (38), 332-37.

Further Information

Educational Implications of Vygotsky's ZPD

Interaction between Learning and Development (Vygotsky Book Chapter)

Zone of Proximal Development

Piaget's Stages of Development

Constructivism

Jerome Bruner

Bronfenbrenner's Ecological Systems Theory

Cultural-Historical Activity Theory

Journal Article on Private Speech

Vygotsky's Theory of Cognitive Development

Vygotsky and Piaget

Home About Privacy Policy Contact Us

Lev Vygotsky's Sociocultural Theory