Conjointly, Vygotsky stipulated the importance of the teacher’s role in planning activities and lessons that should not only, include items that can be undertaken independently but also those that are ahead of development and lie in the ZPD. These are required for a developmentally relevant curriculum (Karpov & Haywood, 1998). Besides, good education should be directed at working on the developing functions and less on the developed functions (Shayer, 2002). Nevertheless, this claim does not imply that anything can be included in the curriculum, but only those that fall within the ZPD. Each developmental stage is known to have its own appropriate method of instruction. As a matter of fact, the age period of the students need to be taken into
…show more content…
Special education was the primary source of empirical data Vygotsky used for support. At the time, given the incongruence between Vygotsky’s innovative beliefs and contemporary American special education, it seemed difficult for the professionals to read and agree to Vygotsky’s texts. Vygotsky (1983) argued that a physical handicap does not hinder only the individual’s way of reacting to the world but mostly, his interactions. Even if, blindness or deafness involves biological factors, the social consequences of having those disabilities are huge and the teacher should be able to cater for them as well. According to Vygotsky (1995), special educators should thrive to alter the negative societal attitudes towards impaired individuals and identify the disability in a child as strength, instead of a weakness. Nevertheless, the application of the ZPD to special education remains nearly inexistent. This surely must be due to the higher amount of individual differences amongst handicapped individuals as numerous variables should be taken into account before making assumptions. However, from this view, a qualitative differentiation can be made between mentally retarded children and children from poor families who are academically neglected, temporally-delayed or bilingual. According to the results in psychological tests, both groups seem to be performing in a similar backward fashion as those tests assess the current level of development (Sattler, 1992). Comparatively, they diverge drastically in their potential to gain from social assistance (Lubovsky, 1990; Rubinshtein, 1979). Further, validity remains an issue with the use of the ZPD on children with disabilities and therefore, should be further researched on its advantages and limitations (Gindis, 1999). Vygotsky stipulated that special education activities and programs should incorporate the
Special education was the primary source of empirical data Vygotsky used for support. At the time, given the incongruence between Vygotsky’s innovative beliefs and contemporary American special education, it seemed difficult for the professionals to read and agree to Vygotsky’s texts. Vygotsky (1983) argued that a physical handicap does not hinder only the individual’s way of reacting to the world but mostly, his interactions. Even if, blindness or deafness involves biological factors, the social consequences of having those disabilities are huge and the teacher should be able to cater for them as well. According to Vygotsky (1995), special educators should thrive to alter the negative societal attitudes towards impaired individuals and identify the disability in a child as strength, instead of a weakness. Nevertheless, the application of the ZPD to special education remains nearly inexistent. This surely must be due to the higher amount of individual differences amongst handicapped individuals as numerous variables should be taken into account before making assumptions. However, from this view, a qualitative differentiation can be made between mentally retarded children and children from poor families who are academically neglected, temporally-delayed or bilingual. According to the results in psychological tests, both groups seem to be performing in a similar backward fashion as those tests assess the current level of development (Sattler, 1992). Comparatively, they diverge drastically in their potential to gain from social assistance (Lubovsky, 1990; Rubinshtein, 1979). Further, validity remains an issue with the use of the ZPD on children with disabilities and therefore, should be further researched on its advantages and limitations (Gindis, 1999). Vygotsky stipulated that special education activities and programs should incorporate the