CONTEXTS - CHAPTER 7

spinast who-is-at HUGSE1.HARVARD.EDU
Mon, 30 Oct 1995 20:35:02 -0400 (EDT)

Well, folks, here's my summary of chapter 7. I look forward
to your comments.

A review of "Deconstruction in the Zone of Proximal
Development" by Bonnie E. Litowitz. In Ellice A.Forman,
Norris Minick, and C. Addison Stone (Eds.) Contexts for
Learning: Sociocultural Dynamics in Children's Development
(1993). NY: Oxford University Press, pp. 184-196.

by Stephanie Urso Spina
Harvard University Graduate School of Education

In chapter 7, Bonnie Litowitz explores "What motivates
the child and the adult to perform as Vygotsky, and others
following him, have proposed?" The focus of her essay is
that performance and interaction in the ZPD need to be
expanded to examine concomitant development of one's sense
of self.

After presenting the now familiar model of Vygotsky's
ZPD, Litowitz describes three characteristics of the
process of moving from novice to expert within that zone.

1. cutural knowledge is transferred not from one person
(adult) to another (child) but from two persons
(the dyad) to one (the child).
2. the transmission is accomplished through semiotic
means
3. the nonknower demonstrates equality in the dyad by
becoming equally responsible for solving problems
and accomplishing tasks.

To Litowitz, the issue of responsibility is paramount,
indicating not "a mere transfer of cultural knowledge" but "a
shift in one's role vis-a-vis another person with respect to
that knowledge." This shift in role relations is key to the
author's argument. Her examples of "resistance as identification"
and "becoming responsible" are illuminating and true-to-life.
They will be readily appreciated by anyone familiar with
children's penchant (at least in this culture) to not perform
according to the adult's agenda. The child's establishment of autonomy
is an important feature of self-development and raises important
questions -- and insights -- about the way the ZPD does and doesn't work.

Litowitz introduces psychological concepts of identification
and resistance to explain the move from repricocity to
responsibility and the motivation for learning in the ZPD.
She briefly reviews contributions by Lacan, Freud, Erikson,
Bakhtin, Kaye, and others to show how the novice identifies
with the expert through various psychological means. Litowitz
then turns to Vygotsky's use of the semiotic role of speech in
internalization and the implications of this for issues of self
-- thereby avoiding the danger of the ZPD approaching a
"neobehaviorist shaping of behavior." She stresses the child's
progression from the use of her name or "me" for self-reference
to the use of "I" as an indication of social relations and self-
identification, giving evidence of the child's move from object
for the other to subject.

After citing work by Goodnow and others on the adultocentric
view of the zone, the author offers arguments from Winnicott to
underscore her point. However, comparing Winnicott's "potential
space" to VygotskyUs ZPD, the author sees a difference in the
two models, claiming that only Winnicott connects fantasy and
illusion to the use of symbols and creativity. This reviewer
would disagree.

While the use of fantasy, as Litowitz says, may be
"inexplicably underappreciated in Vygotsky's theory of learning,"
it is given expression in "The Psychology of Art" (c.1922/1971),
a volume often (and sadly) overlooked by many. It is here that
he explicitly addresses daydreaming, imagination, and fantasy.
Although it is beyond the scope of this article to delve further
into this, it should be said that this book does have important
implications for anyone dealing with these aspects of Vygotsky's theories,
and bears mentioning. This reviewer would have also liked more attention
paid to related issues of the significance of play and peer interaction,
which was sacrificed to what may be an overemphasis on the adult-
as-expert.

However, this is not meant to detract from the contributions
of Litowitz's chapter. She raises some interesting questions and
offers intriguing suggestions in response to them. Her explanation
of the role of affect in semiotic mediation within the ZPD gives
added dimension to our understanding of learning, development and
transformation. It bears further attention.