Ouriel Hassan 7/10/13 Educational Psychology Dr.

Schnall Reaction Paper #1 In reflecting back on the first weeks of our course in educational psychology, I feel that a strong trend is developing. With each reading we added another layer of understanding our students development, and their capacity for deep thought. Piaget was instrumental in our understanding of child development. He explained that this development happens in stages with clearly defined capacities. As a teacher I started to think back to some of my students in 3rd grade, and began theorizing which stage of development each reached, and possibly passed. This theme of adding another layer of understanding has brought us to Vygotsky, and his theory of the zone of proximal development. I am most fascinated by the way Vygotskys theory can be applied to Judaic studies. As discussed in class lecture and in the Slavin text, Vygotsky proposed that societies develop signs to help people learn. We learn that an A can make the ahh (as in the word water), aye, and ah (as in the word at) sounds, and this symbol becomes incorporated and internalized into the childs learning by self regulation. It then becomes apparent through childrens private speech, whereby they talk themselves through problems they are solving. I noticed my son doing this when he would build Legos in his room. I just put in the door, so now I need to get the brown pieces for the roof, Id hear him say. Although private speech is believed to largely fade away as children grow and mature, Ive found myself using these same techniques when shopping at the market with a groceries list. I need to get the eggs, butter, and milk last because theyre at the end of

the marketand Im in the baking aisle nowso I will get the flour, oil, and sugar. However, the main thrust of Vygotskys theory is the Zone of Proximal Development. Basically, students learn when they are presented with content and instruction that is just outside of their skill level. If the lesson is too easy, and the student can accomplish all the tasks without any support, then the lesson is not in the zone of proximal development. Similarly, if the lesson is so difficult for the student, that they require help from the teacher to accomplish each task, then again the lesson is outside of the zone of proximal development. If the lesson stretches the students ability to do a given task unaided, or with minimal help, then the student will learn because that lesson is within the ZPD. With ZPD in mind we can begin to formulate strategies to properly evaluate and assess our students, and then create lessons and activities to stretch their abilities. This form of lesson design has been referred to as differentiated instruction. Judaic studies teachers can trace the origins of DI back to King Solomon in the book of Proverbs chapter 24 verse 6 where he says: " " . Roughly this means that we should educate a child according to his abilities (or his preferred way). Although these ideas have been around the education world for a few millennia, the DI movement is believed to have taken root in the 1970s. With the advent of Howard Gardners theories on multiple intelligence, teachers really began to see the individual child and his abilities. It is no coincidence that Vygotskys theories also began to be published and translated into English in the 1970s. Even with the field of education making a progressive shift toward child centered learning, these effects would unfortunately not take root for many years in Judaic studies classroom. Reflecting back on my own education, I have distinct memories of my Rebbe

teaching the class from his gemara at the front of the room. I believe he taught to the middle of the class ability. This left the more advanced kids bored, and the slower kids, like me, completely lost in the lesson. I remember another Rebbe teaching to the lowest common denominator in Chumash class, leaving most of us bored and completely disengaged. When I became a Judaic studies teacher, I resolved to never perpetuate this style of instruction. Vygotskys theory mandates that we build scaffolding in our Chumash worksheets to accommodate and challenge the various levels of students in our class. When designing a lesson, we must think about what activities will stretch each student, on their level, to learn a new skill, and what modifications to those lessons are needed to accommodate those with diverse learning needs. As these theories become more widely accepted and part of a standard curriculum in graduate schools of education, we can hope to see a shift in students engagement and achievement in all areas of their learning.