Integrating psychological theories to create educational practices

So I thought I'd start off my blogging by posting a paper I wrote last semester for my theories of development course, the foundational class for my Masters program. It's the only required course for ALL students and it's taught by the head of the program (who is also my don).

To give you some background:

It's a semester long seminar and we cover pretty much all of the developmental psychologists. We start with behaviorism (Watson and Thorndike and then Skinner), move into psychoanalysis (Frued, Erikson as well as object relations theory - Mahler, Winnicott, Chodorow; and attachment theory - Bowlby), and progress into cognitive developmental theory (Piaget, Donaldson, Werner, Vygotsky). She wraps up the semester by looking at critiques of developmentalism, new directions and "updated" version of the theories (of psychoanalysis and cognitive development), and discusses some educational implications. She concludes with a class on play - her particular topic of interest.

Now, you'll notice as I went through, I named some of the major theorists who are foundational to the theories attached (i.e. Frued and Erikson are THE psychoanalists; Skinner is THE behaviorist, Piaget is THE Cognitive Development, etc). My inclusion of them isn't just to reference who developed the theory - it's because we actually read their writings, in the original form (unless it's in another language, in which case, we read a translation of their work). We also read some secondary sources, but we started our discussion with the primary sources. The reasoning behind that was so that we could digest the psychologists ourselves and not get biased views. Because we had this primary source information, we even disagreed with one of our tertiary sources about what he said about one of the psychologists (Bowlby). She did this to empower us, and I think it was a really important part of our coursework.

Anyway, at the end of the semester, we studied the educational implications, one of which was the Developmental-Interactionist Approach, as done at Bank Street School by various people. This is my paper about the DI-Approach.

Integrating theories into an Educational Practice

The developmental-interaction approach is not a psychological theory in its own right, but rather an approach that incorporates several theories of development into an educational practice for the classroom. As long as there exists a “goodness of fit” between the theories, a variety of theories can be integrated into this approach. This is particularly seen in the evolving nature of the developmental-interaction approach as outlined by Shapiro and Nager (1999). As new theorists came to the attention of the developmental-interactionists (for example, Vygotsky), their theories were incorporated into the DI approach that initially utilized Piaget, Kohlberg, (Werner) and Erikson. Piaget's theories of cognitive development, Kohlberg's theories of moral development (based on Piagetian stages), and Erikson's ego psychology were integrated to create an understanding of all aspects of a child – affective-social and cognitive. Werner was integrated because his theory provided flexibility that Piaget's lacked. Later, Vygotsky's theories were easily integrated because they shared important characteristics with Werner's and Piaget's theory.

The fundamental principle of the developmental-interaction approach is “...that the growth of cognitive function... cannot be separated from the growth of personal and interpersonal processes” (Shapiro & Biber, 1972, p.61, as cited in Shapiro and Nager, p. 21). Thus, the integrated theories must explain not only cognitive, but also social and emotional development. To be cognizant of the interdependence between cognitive development and affective-social is vital in planning educational practices to reflect how children and people actually function (Franklin & Biber, p. 18). If an educational system only takes into account the cognitive development, and ignores the affective-social, then it places limits on understanding the child's actions and what the child has learned from their experiences. “Growth and development require conflict in both cognitive and affective domains,” (Shapiro and Nager, p. 21). The development of the affective-social and of cognitive processes are not merely parallel pathways where changes in one system always cause changes in the other. Rather, the two systems are interwoven in a path of interdependence. The truly interactionist view espoused by Franklin and Biber integrates the two systems in a fashion that allows for a back-and-forth between the two, sometimes one affecting the other and sometimes a third system affecting both (Franklin & Biber, p.18). “The interplay between the [child's] propensities and activities and that which impinges on him from the outside” (Franklin & Biber, p. 18) creates conflicts that drive a child's development forward. Interactions with other people and with their physical environment “provide the critical situation without which no growth or education is possible” (Shapiro & Nager, p. 23). Essentially, growth in any domain requires conflict. This conflict can come in many forms and can be driven by conflict in other domains.

If one starts from the concept that “One has to understand children in order to plan a school that was right for their development” (Mitchell, 1953, p. 273, as cited in Shapiro and Nager, p. 12), then the relation of psychological theory to educational planning (Franklin & Biber, p. 24) becomes obvious. The psychological theories can provide the conceptual grounding for understanding the goals of development and how to get there. If a teacher is grounded in a variety of theories of development, they are able to make an informed decision as to their ideal classroom goals. Even if they are unable to achieve their ideal goals due to real-world constraints, having a goal in mind allows them to guide all of their practices along a consistent path. Furthermore, just by understanding these theories, teachers are better able to articulate the reasons behind their practices. This allows them to justify why their particular practices are employed. For example, a teacher might explain that they have a large area dedicated to blocks in order to allow the space to be big enough for multiple children to engage simultaneously, which will facilitate the practice of social skills alongside cognitive skills gained from the block play itself. Additionally, in my fieldwork at the Early Childhood Center, the head teacher explained a situation in which one of the parents expressed concern that her child was not learning enough in the classroom because when asked what she had done at school, the child always said, “I played all day.” The teacher then explained to the parents the educational goals of the play. For example, in playing bingo (first with numbers and later with letters), one goal was to assess the children's ability to recognize letters and numbers and to expose them to those numbers and letters.

Furthermore, everyone operates using psychological theories; better to have them explicitly stated and understand the lens through which one sees children than to implicitly expect everyone to see the world in the same manner. This may help to identify when a psychological theory is being misused to constrain people rather than to liberate them. Although a theory may be misapplied or abused, that does not speak to inherent problems in the theory, merely the implementation. “What is the theory being used for?” is an important question that needs to be asked before a theory can be assessed. Is it being used to pathologize people and restrict them or to empower and liberate them?

A solid understanding of the theories of child development provide a teacher with a number of options for their educational practice. These theories do not come as “all or nothing” packages, but rather can be drawn from in a useful manner to create an approach that works. The question that has to be asked is “Is this a good theory to think with? Does this theory give you something to think about that helps you see/understand something you wouldn't have otherwise, without this theory?” If there is an aspect of a theory that proves useful, that part of the theory may be usable, even if other parts of the theory are not applicable. For instance, although Piaget's theories did not pay enough attention to the affect of the environment for the developmental-interactionist approach, several of his key ideas were compatible and incorporated into the approach. Piaget's theory operated from a constructivist point of view, which sees the learning process as involving an active learner who builds their own knowledge and understanding, with the appreciation for learning and development as separate, though related, processes. With Piaget's theories, his stages of development (sensory-motor, pre-operational, concrete operational, and formal operational) are a linear pathway that leads to the highest form of functioning. According to Piaget, the earlier pathways should be regarded as necessary steps to the higher forms of functioning, but once a higher form is achieved, the previous forms are discarded. Piaget's strict adherence to the developmental stages was too restrictive for the developmental-interactions, and thus they drew on Heinz Werner's theory instead. Werner's concept of development was not as a fixed achievement, but rather a process that reveals a range of abilities to deal with interactions between people and situations. There is an understanding that even when a child has moved into a later stage, they do not lose their previous abilities, but rather have expanded their crayon box to include more colors.

Based on Werner's conceptualization of optimal functioning, “...the movement from lesser to greater maturity is characterized by widening the range of developmentally different operations and thus making available different modes of structuring to be brought into play in any given situation” (Franklin & Biber, p. 28). The child with less maturity has a smaller crayon box of developmentally different operations to draw from. As the child matures, their crayon box is added to and expands, but they do not lose the crayons they started with; those crayons perhaps get used less as there are now more options. The current trend of accelerating children's acquisition of skills becomes unsatisfactory if the goal is to expand the child's crayon box of skills. Rather, widening the repertoire of abilities that a child possesses (and thus broadening their crayon box) should become the focus. Furthermore, within this approach, getting the child to transfer the crayons (skills) he already has to the new tasks should be an important goal.

Based on this model, the test procedures currently used to measure growth are inadequate. Standardized tests in particular focus too much on a snapshot of the child's knowledge, and very minimally even addresses their abilities. The evaluation procedure must become process-oriented rather than continuing to evaluate arbitrary end-points. The evaluations must occur in the learning environment and make observations of how the child's capacities are being utilized in a particular environment (Franklin & Biber, p. 28).

In enacting an educational philosophy, it is vital for the teachers to have an understanding of the “collateral learning” (Franklin & Biber, p. 19) that the child gains from learning under that system. “In Dewey's words (Dewey & Dewey, 1915): 'The greatest of all pedagogical fallacies is the notion that a person learns only the particular thing he is studying at the time'” (Franklin & Biber, p. 20). While a person is studying a specific subject, they are also learning about how to learn and how to make decisions. This is why it is critical to examine what the side-effects of a teaching system is. For instance, the behavioristic learning system that employs didactic teaching methods, imbues the teacher (or authority figure) with all of the right answers (knowledge) and only by getting the same answer will a student be correct. Thus, the child learns that the authoritarian figure has all of the knowledge. In the Piagetian system, the learning is more active and child-constructed, which teaches a child that learning involves activity on their part with the ability to learn anything they are interested in. Additionally, the developmental-interactive approach prepares a child to participate in a democracy, as they are responsible for selecting and pursing their own education as well as resolving conflicts with other students.

In addition to side effects that tell a child about the values of learning, there may be emotional and social effects. Teachers must have a “...concern with the individual in context of community” (Shapiro & Nager, p. 24). For instance, if a block area of a classroom is set up with enough space for multiple children to build next to each other, this allows for many possibilities of social interaction. The social skills in children may be developed through block play in this area as a side effect of the children playing together with the same materials. Furthermore, if children are allowed to share personal experiences of the subject matter (for instance, a family member who builds bridges) with the class, that may serve to create an emotional involvement. By using something that the children are engaged in, they may learn better because they will be more motivated. Being engaged means caring or creating an emotional connection for the children by using relevant situations. Thus, the learning takes place in the context of meaningful activities and play. Additionally, by valuing and addressing emotional stresses, the teachers may understand better why a child isn't able to learn in a given situation. For instance, if the teacher knows that a student's parents are on a trip and the child is staying with grandparents, this may explain why the child's behavior is uncharacteristic. This child may be unable to focus on school work or may need to be drawn into a subject when they are normally a self-motivated child.

The Developmental-Interaction Approach can be implemented – if its importance is taken seriously enough. In order to effectively prepare teachers to enact this approach, teacher training requires a major overhaul. Groups of teachers must get together and talk about what is going on in their classrooms and the practices that they employ. The groups must then engage in critical reflections and enact changes based on that. The teachers need to have enough knowledge of other cultures and other ways to be open to other ways of being. Finally, although some might attempt to develop a formula for how to implement this approach, anything applied formulaically is antagonistic to this perspective.

According to the developmental-interaction approach, the goal of the schools should be to “strengthen the child's competence to deal effectively with the environment; encourage the development of autonomy and the construction of a sense of self; promote the integration of functions—that is, thought and feeling, feeling and action—and stimulate individuality and vigorous, creative response” (Shapiro & Nager, p. 22). This emphasis on social aspects and sense of self prepare students to be adults in the American democratic society. Furthermore, expanding the child's crayon box of skills is seen as the method by which teachers can help children be successful.