Vygotsky felt that a child’s potential level of development can be measured by determining the difference between the unaided achieved level of the child and the assisted level of accomplishment through guided support or ‘scaffolding’. Vygotsky named this hypothesis the Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD). The ZPD is defined as “…the distance between the actual development levels as determined by independent problem solving and the level of potential development as determined through problem solving under adult guidance or in collaboration with more capable peers.” (Vygotsky, 1978 cited in Reiman, 1999, p.600). The ZPD is the child’s immediate potential development. A child’s ZPD can be created through play and adult or peer scaffolding.
Children gain mental tools in their ZPD during symbolic play. These tools are an vital source of independent psychological growth. Play is a critical component of a child’s development as their intellectual growth is often bolstered by this fantasy fun.
Within the Vygotskian framework, internalisation is the “…process of appropriation or learning to the point at which the tools are mental and their use is not visible to others.” (Bodrova & Leong, 1996, p.160). Internalisation occurs when a concept, skill, or strategy is automatized.
Vygotsky studied how play stimulates self-regulation skills in children. Children must conform to the implicit rules of the play situation, and therefore this supports self-regulatory skills in a child. Through this, the child can perform in the upper levels of their ZPD.
It is evident that children’s “ greatest achievements are possible in play, achievements that tomorrow will become their basis level of real action and morality.” (Vygotsky, 1987 cited in Newman & Holzman, 1993, p.99) Make-believe play incorporates equally cognitive, social, and emotional development in a condensed structure and is itself a principal source of development. Children, who play in the bounds of their ZPD, will translate what they have learnt into real life and in doing so increase their knowledge of the world around them.
Before Vygotsky’s revolutionary hypothesis, it was Jean Piaget who was the innovative psychologist in this field of child development. Piaget theorized that developmental milestones are a direct result of children’s actions on their physical world. This involved the identification of challenging situations and the development of problem solving skills, so that they eventually meld with their external reality. Piaget’s theory, works through a series of direct interactions between the child and its environment. This evolutionary process involves adaptation, assimilation and accommodation. Piaget notes that organization is the final stage in this developmental process.
Piaget perceived play as a method which children use to develop their cognitive abilities and to practice their emergently cultivated capabilities. Piaget also perceived play as a child’s adaptation to the world around them (their paradigm) through application of assimilation. Fitting in new ideas, objects and situations into their existing thought patterns or schema. Piaget asserted “…in play, assimilation predominates over accommodation and therefore, play does not significantly promote the child’s cognitive development.” (Vialle, Lysaght, & Verenikina, 2002, p.41)
Piaget’s theory includes the concept of compensation or child coping mechanisms through play, which Piaget did not acknowledge to be part of substantial development. In this regard children are simply redefining an unpleasant situation.
Piaget claimed that there are three stages in the development of play; imitative or purposeful play, imaginary play, and play with rules. Each stage linking with a stage in Piaget’s theory of child development, practice play connecting with the sensorimotor phase, symbolic play relating to the preoperational phase, and conventional play linking to the concrete operational phase. Vygotsky disagreed with Piaget about there being stages in play development, however he assented that play stimulates the development of abstract thought. (Berk, 2000).
Through make-believe play children can distance themselves from real situations and objects. This enables them to develop mental representations and imaginary objects thus advancing their intellectual capabilities. Vygotsky posited that make-believe play is imbedded in social and cultural guidelines, thus children must follow the certain rules predetermined by real life situations in which the child will eventually become part of.
Vygotsky’s theory allows for much more individual variation within child development. Piaget tends to underestimate the abilities of children and is constrained by the idea that intelligence is context specific. Piaget’s theory naively suggests that children learn independently, while Vygotsky believes children learn in a socio-cultural context with clear adult guidance.
According to Vygotsky, dramatic play benefits children in all developmental areas. Play that stimulates development contains four key elements, expressive symbols, sustained over a long period of time, multifaceted interconnected ideas, and behaviours. As children engage in fantasy play, they relive experiences by symbolically imitating what they observe around them.
“Many studies reveal that make-believe play strengthens a wide variety of mental abilities, including memory, logical reasoning, language and literacy, imagination, creativity, and the ability to reflect on one’s own thinking and take another’s perspective.” (Dias & Harris, 1990; Ervin-Tripp, 1991; Kavanaugh & Engel, 1998; Newman, 1990 cited in Berk, 2000, p.237) Concurring with Vygotsky, by entering the child’s paradigm of fantasy play we can appreciate the value of dramatic play for young children and how important it is to provide opportunities for children to participate in all kinds of make-believe play.
When children pretend and play out imaginary scenes, they are still conscious of reality and the implications of their actions in real life. Make-believe play allows children to expand their knowledge without fear and children are then able to create emotion on demand to comply with the play. As play becomes more advanced it becomes more and more detached from reality, as children begin to utilize abstract thought as a component of their ZPD. In addition, as the development increases the child’s self view in the fantasy alters. It no longer needs to be egocentric, but now the child can view themselves as both recipient and agent. (Berk, 2000)
According to Leong and Bodrova (2001), providing children with the opportunity of fantasy play and multi-purpose props can further develop children’s imagination and creativity. Unlike Piaget, Vygotsky’s ZPD is bi-directional which allows for internal reflection or metacognition. This view allows children to learn through self-correction. Self-correction may be without adult guidance. This is in direct opposition to Piaget whose theory of assimilation, which revolves around trying to make new situations fit pre-existing ideas, in make-believe play.
While there is natural symbiosis between Piaget and Vygotsky’s ideas, it is Vygotsky who offers a more flexible theory of make-believe play in children’s cognitive and socio-emotional development. Vygotsky formulated and hypothesized that children are able to work beyond their individual level of development with scaffolding and adult or peer guidance. Both Vygotsky and Piaget believed through play children can discover the world, formulate opinions and impart some meaning to their ever-changing view of the world. Although Piaget’ ideas regarding child development were revolutionary, it is Vygotsky who is more important in the field of child psychology. Vygotsky’s creations of the ZPD and concept of internalisation have transformed modern ways of thinking.
