If I was to describe someone to you as having poor judgment, slacking impulse control and what seems like stupid high risk-taking behaviors, what would you guess, Skydiver, race care driver? No that is the workings of adolescent behavior, what is often seems as an annoyance that parents hope they themselves and their child live through. Is adolescence just a phase or is there an opportunity here for something more, what can cognition tell us about the adolescent brain? Back in the day we didn’t have the technology to see inside the human brain, so we assumed that most of all the important brain development happens during the first few years of life. Now with modern brain imaging technology such as (MRI) and (fMRI) we are able to look inside the brain of not only those first few years of development but all ages. Bruner’s theory of (Development of Representation in Children) helping explain those first few years and something I will talk about later, consideration for adolescent brain development was in the back burner. (Blakemore) set out to explain this stage of development in the (prefrontal cortex) that had previously been ignored, asking why do take more risks and are completely unpredictable compared to adults. In her study she included both adolescents and adults having them come into her lad to perform a computerized task, not going into details it was set out to distinguish the differences of perspective between the two. She found that between early childhood and mid adolescent there was an improvement in the task in both trials and both conditions, difference were seen when you compared adolescence to adulthood where adolescents showed continued development in the area of the brain that lets us take in other people perspectives. The world has stereotyped teenagers as “bad kids” or “annoying” for there inability to think about anyone else but themselves, but it isn’t their fault their prefrontal cortex is literally still underdevelopment. Explanation of this development I will further explain with the help of Donald Hebb in the discussion section, where his ideas of behaviorism lead to an early explanation of how learning works in the brain via connectionism and neural networks. In addition to not thinking from other peoples point of view. Also about adolescents being risk takers, this risk is increased or with friends, as they tend to try to impress each other. Brain imaging in her lab has shown that adolescents are a lot more sensitive than adults in the via (limbic system) which involves reward and emotion processing, along with the (pre frontal cortex) still being underdevelopment which helps stop risks. The teenager stereotype is real but it is not their fault but a continual development in there brain which can help too create better educational systems and in helping social development. Im going to incorporate three cognitive theorists, Bruner, Piaget, and Vygotsky. These three gentleman. Unlike previous theorists we have studying Watson, Pavlov, Thorndike etc Cognitive theorists as mentioned above focus oh the brain and its development and connections. Focusing on higher mental processes such as thinking, problem solving and imagining. Using these three theorists of cognitive psychology to make connections between their theories of development in the brain with my media ted talk on the adolescent brain, while relating it two psychology articles (Lefrancois, 2012).
Related Research
Recent research has focused on learning and how to improve upon it with little effort being put the teaching side of the relationship. Teaching is the focus of this article and with theories from Bruner, Vygotsky, and Piaget hopefully make connections between the two. Said by (Hewlett BS, Roulette CJ. 2016) “a debate exists as to whether teaching is part of human nature and central to understanding culture”. Would we learn without a classroom without a formal Western education? Bruner mentioned humans would have gotten taken out by the powerful sabertooth tiger a long time ago if it wasn’t for one thing, the evolution of the brain comparing the evolution to the development of a child. Vygotsky stating the importance of the teacher learner relationship and outside influences of the child does this happen in the Aka tribe and does Piaget credit possible learning in hunter-gather cultures via (adaptation)? The question remains is there teaching in hunter-gatherer infancy and what would these theorist say (Lefrancois, 2012).
One out of a dwindling number of tribes that are still considered hunter-gathers called the Aka tribe was used to see if teaching exists within an active forager group. One of the many advantages of the brain in Bruner’s Learning Theory is that with the development of the brain wherein itself is an amazing task we also were given the ability to create language and culture. It is vital to see if teaching exists between cultures as teaching is an important cognitive function of creating language and teaching with helping pass on cultural beliefs and practices of man. This aligns with Bruner's learning theory as through generations information was shared creating culture, language, and beliefs (Lefrancois, 2012). Vygotsky talking about (importance of culture) and how we grow up our (culture) helps us navigate this world and cognition with language and as state above the relationship of the teacher and learner. You could credit a child in the Aka tribe to not being taught to Piaget and the (adaptation theory) that states the combination of (assimilate and accommodation) where these create intelligence. Liking Burner’s take on the article, It is difficult to define what teaching is as across the world and between generations the type of teaching that is happening changes, leading to many different types in the human race. With finding a few of these different types of teachings in infancy in the hunter-gather society, Natural pedagogy, demonstration and task assignment just to name a few we can relate it to western children childhood development in regards to Bruner. Different types of teaching where coded and observed with what is called a “naturalistic” method by watching video recording of the Aka tribe and parents interacting with infants, with positive/negative feedback along with natural pedagogy behavior was observed and categorized as evidence of teaching. Bruner theories talks about the development of representation in children using three stages (enactive representation, iconic representation, and symbolic representation). These three stages of development can be described as enactive (motor) Iconic (image) and symbolic ( symbol). First two motor being an example of touching the dog and iconic seeing a dog and knowing what it is. easier to grasp with symbolic being the highest representation a child is able to to do an example of symbolic would be reading the letter dog and know what that means rather than the first two. Natural pedagogy being based on motor context and interactions, being able to physically touch something was relied on for Aka infants over Western cultures that use more verbal interactions. In the Aka hunter-gatherer tribe even though limited evidence from Shannon & Steele, this studies provides new data in support Bruner's development of representation in children and specifically in enactive and iconic representation. The new data is in support of Bruner’s theory “that parents may start to teach as early as infancy to begin to provide age-appropriate learning opportunities to develop sensory-motor-cognitive foundations” so as to be able to perform more difficult tasks later in life (Lefrancois, 2012).
Teaching has been shown in infancy in the hunter-gatherer society with supporting their hypothesis that teaching should occur as soon as possible in life alongside Bruner’s explanation for the development of representation in children we can see that infants in the Aka tribe like those of western cultures are being taught, the difference is how. Teaching for the Aka tribe was a way of life a type of anthropology approach as learning could be a natural process instead of a choir tied down to classrooms and test centers. Development between the two cultures in infancy only differs as inactive and iconic representations are more important in the jungle than knowing how to spell out (a snake trying to bit you) a symbolic example. Teaching does occur in infancy the focus is different but the evidence is there and with it the research on it a little more culture to the world (Hewlett , Roulette CJ. 2016).
Does having a study strategy or teacher have an impact on learning, or are we just better off going to class listening to the professor and taking tests? The purpose of this study was to find out just that, giving us two different types of learning models a three and two stage version to show expertise development in the educational setting via teacher/learner. Each of the two stages involving three parts including, acclimation, competence and proficiency-expertise to show learning progress in complex problem solving. Study strategies such a clustering where used to see if “learning is a process of transitioning from one stage to another stage within a knowledge base that features concepts and relations”. This follows Piagets (stage theory) where he believes a person experiences a variety of levels of knowledge structure when performing a difficult/problem solving task, where development of that certain knowledge is learned in succession of each other. Learning is simply the gain of knowledge and abilities or skills to complete or solve a certain task. College students know that it isn’t that simple and that school has become more and more complex as technology advances and knowledge of the world expands. Theorist such as Bruner, Vygotsky, and Piaget have helped the world understand the human brain through cognitive psychology, yet when talking about classrooms and teaching in context it still extremely difficult to test as to the uncertain and complexity of problems.
They hypothesis that these three parts in development aren’t the same among learners but a mirror image on how each person creates their own mental models for problem solving. Stating that knowledge dimensions that help explain the stages of learning are most likely to be as different as the learners are to one another.
A valid enough of students and professors who were all interested in some type of educational teaching were used to see learning progression over a three week period.This study reminds me of Vygotsky’s (zone of proximal development (ZPD) and scaffolding) as both play together in the role of the learner and teacher. The study had the participants attend a class where they were taught by and expert teacher based off these two models of learning, after the study they were told to complete a complex problem task that was ill-structured. They gave written responses to measure acclimation, competence and proficiency-expertise of the two learning models adapting it from the Latent Class Model (LCM) a way of getting information in response to patterns associated with categorical or continuous variables. This study tried to make valid the hypothesized models of learning progress in solving problems, using thirty give dimensions of students knowledge called knowledge-attributes they were to show a mastery or non-mastery of those dimensions.
Findings were a little confusing but answering specifically to the initial study identifying the three latent classes acclimation, competence and proficiency matching both of the two learning models to these classes. Even though the two stage model can be explained in the three latent classes, you find misconception and conception where in the three stage model they didn’t. Both models being explained by the latent classes the three stage model had the most matches of over all proficiency even a middle stage called competence where two had a short duration middle stage. This shows the three stage model being more accurate in helping in multiple stages of expertise development.
This study observed important factors that contribute in stages of learning such as the role of teacher learner which is a theory Vygotsky’s where (ZPD) is that “not to hot, not to cold, but just right” type of learning and development, the dissimilarities between what is possible with or without help. Gestalt psychology can also help explain the studies findings in model two contradicting supporting the latent classes, as he believes two main things that one the whole is greater than parts and two people solve problems through insight rather than trial/error. Main connection I am finding is between the study and our three theorists as briefly stated early is Piaget and his stage theory, specifically Concrete and Formal Operations. Concrete being the stage where conservation is accomplished thinking lacks abstract thought and sticks to how things are, yet learning is still achievable via the two stage model of the study. Formal Operation is required of the three stager model as abstract thinking, logic and full cognition is developed, something needed to become and expert in the study three stage model. These models even though molded from different research helps us understand the stages of mastering complicated problems in the learning process, providing knowledge to help create a more proactive learning environment via better classroom setting and teacher learner relationships.
Discussion
Fifteen years ago psychology wasn’t able to look inside the human brain. Behaviorism even longer ago was born as a result of trying to explain human behavior via observation. Technology is the field of psychology is advancing as fast as they throw out a new iPhone. Learning has changed with the growing of technology as with some tasks Its not important to know it but how to get the information e.g I don’t know all my friends and families phone numbers but I know how to access it in my phone. With advancements in technology we are able to see inside the brain like never before. I will talk about Hebb’s theory and how even though a behaviorist made a huge movement pointing towards the brain and mental processes along with observations helped cognitive theorists such as Piaget, Bruner, and Vygotsky. With the helps of them and their theories I will make connections between what is relevant in their theories and what doesn’t apply on the interest in the functions of the adolescent brain, relating it with my own thoughts and experiences and when needed to the two articles above and (Lafrancios, 2012).
Evolutionary Psychology even though I am not totally convinced us because of the lack of evidence is still a good place to start in explaining why adolescence are so crazy. With focus on biology genetics you can't deny the reason behind the madness of teenagers is attributed to biological and hormonal changes that going through their body, I mean don’t you remember when you where going through puberty? Sex difference where also shown in adolescence brains as a result of hormones and guys usually go through puberty later than girls. We saw in hunger-gather societies that Biological Constraints played a crucial role in learning as skills that are needed for survival are more easily learned than those that have no relevance e.g avoiding lions helps survival, thinking they are cute going to hug one is not. Your Brain being directly affected by Experience increases the importance of a stable, loving environment to grow up in. Your equal chances at mental and physical stimulation helps in neuron growth with negative growth when involved in with negative environments, activities. With the help of advances in technology and the use of MRIs they were able to see into one out of the four lobes that are located in the brain specifically the Frontal Lobe, where the Pre Frontal Cortex is located. Frontal Lobe being responsible things as attention and motor movements, the prefrontal cortex located at the “the head” of the frontal lobe its main job is high level cognitive functioning such as what am I going to write this next paragraph. With imaging of the pre frontal cortex evidence was provided of an excess amount of grey matter in adolescents compared to other stages of cognitive development. Evolutionary psychology in general though creative and abstract has little implications and cannot be tested providing little help in explaining why those hormones, genetics make teens go crazy, their must be something more going on in the brain.
Transitioning from behaviorism to modern day cognitivism as stated above is credited to Donald Hebb and his theories. Hebb is represented in each of the three resources that I have used, dealing with mental processes Hebb’s sane is “neurons that fire together, wire together” he realized that not all behavior could be observed and that something must be going on in the brain. Neurons being a primary part of understanding cognition, they transmit electronic signals forming links between neurons with each neurons containing a receptor helping in function and development of thinking memory and processing. With adolescence there is an extra amount of gray matter in the brain (prefrontal cortex) compared to any other stage in human development. During this stage they say a fading a way you could say of gray matter, indicating that this was not a bad thing, so what is the brain doing? She explains but Hebb is the founder father on the theory of Pruning where connects in the brain vanish like some type of magic trick. Now first learning about this my initial though was this being a bad thing, teenager crazy behavior is deteriorating our youths brain development, the true is quite opposite. Pruning’s best explained by “use it or lose it” in relation to environment, those connections that are not used are removed and connections that are “firing together” will strengthen over time and practice, the weak is removed to make the strong, stronger. The number of Neurotransmitters (the brains chemical pony express) is unknown “like the grade I will receive on this paper”. With the Aka tribe and adolescents you could point to Plasticity as a possible reason for outcome of cognitive development among the two. Pruning, Long-term Potentiation and Depressing make up the elements of plasticity where in the Aka connections that didn’t help in a hunter-gather society were lost as are Western adolescence. Heavy impact from environment (brain and experience) in both cultures in Western they may the ability to maybe do math but losing connections that could of helped them kill a dear with a spear. With connections still highly developing in adolescents we can see the importance of a learning model that continues to develop cognition via teaching and learning techniques as seen in the three stage model study.
Hebb was a vital link between behaviorism and modern cognitive psychology. Still years away from technology such as the fMRI in most of their when they first came up with their theories Bruner, Vygotsky and Piaget set out explain and explore the human mind to explaining human behavior not observation. Using humans instead of animals to test cognition these theorists created multiple stages and explanations for the function of the human brain. Bruner’s learning theory is represented in the Aka tribe as the importance of enactive (motor) and iconic (sensory) as a necessary for survival in such environments (biological constraints). Luckily I grew up without cell phones so I developed fluid through all three stages. unlike what I think modern children will have a problem with is (being handed electronics in infancy), focusing on iconic, cause motor skills to possibly be underdeveloped. With adolescence and in western culture we see all three being represented in succession going enactive, iconic and then symbolic. Symbolic stage is where the difference between learning in western and cultures such as the Aka tribe occur, even only just now in the states are see only the past few generations being educated into and beyond adolescence. The biological constraints of modern Western society compared to the Aka tribe will force kinds in the states to highly develop or as they called it in the three stage model, become experts in solving complex problems. Being a Rule-Based theory saying objects depending on their attributes have to go into a category forming Categorization in the brain which gives it the ability to put itself into “sleep mode” saving energy make inferences or judging something based on already learned knowledge and last communication via by symbols languages and cultures have been created.
Piaget stage theory was seen in hunter-gather society much like Bruner when talking about infancy. Explaining from my life I remember my sisters little kid some way or another classed poop in the color brown category, this cause her because she was in the Preconceptual stage to yell out my brown shoes as being poop via error in assimilation. Sensorimotor being the development of object permanence and coordinated activity (touching feeling things) very similar to enactive in Burner’s learning theory. Learning model in the article helped us understand Intuitive via preoperational stage as this is a necessary form of cognition for someone in the learning models for expertise. Basic mathematical understanding and language was required to participate in the study, along with the use of Assimilation fitting new events to a similar already experienced events seen in the two stage learning model. Accommodation was then represented in the three stage model as students experienced new events and even though helped by a teacher, were able to change behavior to fit said new experiences. Piaget development theory combines both accommodation and assimilate working together to form the highest form of cognition that is Adaptation with the end goal of balancing both out to create Equilibrium between the two. Followed but the development of Concrete Operations or full language development and the important Formal Operations. Formal operations are what the learning models tried to increase based of the role of the learner and teacher, also ties into adolescence stage where the prefrontal cortex is still in development as connections are made via experience made stronger by pruning. Piaget stage theory could explain why adolescence behave the way they do as each stage follows each other with adolescence falling into the formal operations stage. I hypothesis the reason teenagers are demons using Piaget theory is the process of the formal operation stage developing as you learn through experience with none of the stages happening instantly.
Saving the best for last and my favorite to spell Lev Semenonvich Vyogostky or in my perfect world he was nicknamed “Vyogotsky the shot ski king”. I even think he could have his own version of that new Portugal the Man song “ooohhhhh I'm a rebel called Vygotsky, I’ve kicking it sense 1896 you see”. His Social-Cognitive Theory highlights my favorite topics the Importance of Culture, language and role of learner and teacher. Having a mediocre education growing up Utah after the few months in class I see how these theorist especially Vygotsky could help us improve upon the currents system. Western adolescence and infancy in hunter-gather societies shows us an example of Importance of Culture. All three sources in this paper show examples of culture sculpting cognition e.g the Aka tribe needing to learn enactive function over symbolic functions based on survival, Western societies and the need to solve complex problems only puts more importance on the role of teacher and learner well into adolescence to help form those connections. In Vygotsky’s Stages of language and Conceptual Development the same succession applies as in Bruner’s learning theory but with a focus on the development of speech where shows evidence of thought and speech as being separate from each other in early infancy. My personal least favorite of all these stages in kids has to be the first, Social speech, yes my sisters baby was cute repeating the same word over and over babbling all over the place but after the one millionth time nothing silence is wanted. Egocentric and Inner speech or self talk follows the babbling stage unfortunately we never grow out of any of these stages as everyone talks to themselves (egocentric) and inner speech that without even the Aka tribe would of been able to survive as mental speech allows for complex thought and helps I feel in creating culture and personality. So adolescents take impulse risks more than any other stage of life does this mean we should just write them off and wait from them to literally grow out of it, what harm could be done. (Blakemore) lab showed evidence no this is not the time to give up this is the time to increase the importance of the teacher/learner relationship and to continue education strengthen new and pruning away old connections. With the help of Scaffolding in education and I feel like the need to implement more interactive motor function in education we will build those needed symbolic and inner speech stages always being in that sweet spot of Zone of Promixal Development which is that limit what is possible with the learner alone vs help aka optimal learning time. My tennis teacher was a great example of this as his continued to challenge me mentally and physically keeping me in that sweet zone of learning always improving.
History has shown that adolescent behavior is not something that is new to western cultures, this behavior is due to the peak development of connections and via pruning of are area of the brain called frontal lope specifically the prefrontal cortex. Development of learning and evidence of teaching was seen in the Aka tribe, models have been shown to helps us learn and master, effectively becoming an expert in the classroom. I was lucky enough to have a stable and loving environment where (ZPD) was helped by countless number of teachers and intelligent, supporting parents. Im not the smartest cookie in the box but I am confident I will graduate college as I have been given the opportunity by my parents and family to learn and grow as a man, not everyone is so lucky and I am grateful for their importance of education. In a perfect world we would give an equal opportunity for every child to learn, money, politics and even religion gets in the way, action is required as technology is rapidly growing as I hypothesis this will continue to separate classes as state above. Technology advancements are so grand in the last fifteen years making it possible to look into the brain of all developmental stages. Data from these theorists of cognitive psychology has given us evidence where will be better equipped to optimize learning in we raise our children in infancy way into the later years of adolescence. Educational systems and the necessity to change them from teacher oriented, instead of teacher/learner centered education. Only sixty percent of adolescent in the U.S are even considering the possibility of secondary education, the evidence is there everyone needs to wake up and take advantage of the knowledge we have been given, “the more we learn the more we are able to learn” its as simple as that.