Questions of child psychology. Vygotsky Lev Semenovich: biography, main works Vygotsky and issues of child developmental psychology

BBK88.8

B92

Vygotsky L. S.

B92 Questions of child psychology. - St. Petersburg: Soyuz Publishing House, 2004, -224 p.

ISBN5-87852-043-5

The book by the outstanding Russian psychologist L. S. Vygotsky, “Questions of Child Psychology,” is devoted to the main problems of child psychology: general issues of the periodization of childhood, the transition from one age period to another, characteristic features of development in certain periods of childhood, etc.

For psychologists, teachers, philosophers.

BBK 88.8

Original layout by K. P. Orlova

ISBN 5-87852-043-5

Age problem

1. The problem of age periodization of child development

Based on theoretical foundations, the schemes for the periodization of child development proposed in science can be divided into three groups.

The first group includes attempts to periodize childhood not by dividing the very course of child development, but on the basis of a step-by-step construction of other processes, one way or another connected with child development. An example is the periodization of child development based on the biogenetic principle. The biogenetic theory assumes that there is a strict parallelism between the development of mankind and the development of the child, that ontogeny in a brief and condensed form repeats phylogeny. From the point of view of this theory, it is most natural to divide childhood into separate periods in accordance with the main periods of human history. Thus, the basis for the periodization of childhood is the periodization of phylogenetic development. This group includes the periodization of childhood proposed by Hutchinson and other authors.

Not all of this group's efforts are equally unsuccessful. This group includes, for example, an attempt to periodize childhood in accordance with the stages of a child’s upbringing and education, with a division of the public education system adopted in a given country (preschool age, primary school age, etc.). The periodization of childhood is not built on the basis of the internal division of development itself, but, as we see, on the basis of the stages of upbringing and education. This is the fallacy of this scheme. But since the processes of child development are closely related to the upbringing of the child, and the very division of upbringing into stages is based on vast practical experience, it is natural that the division of childhood according to the pedagogical principle brings us extremely close to the true division of childhood into separate periods.

The second group includes those most numerous attempts that are aimed at isolating any one sign of child development as a conditional criterion for dividing it into periods. A typical example is the attempt of P. P. Blonsky (1930, pp. 110-111) to divide childhood into eras based on dentition, that is, the appearance and change of teeth. A sign on the basis of which one era of childhood can be distinguished from another must be 1) indicative for judging the general development of the child; 2) easily observable and 3) objective. These requirements are exactly what dentition satisfies.

The processes of dentition are closely related to the essential features of the constitution of a growing organism, in particular with its calcification and the activity of the endocrine glands. At the same time, they are easily observable and their statement is indisputable. Dentition is a clear sign of age. On its basis, postnatal childhood is divided into three eras: toothless childhood, childhood of milk teeth and childhood of permanent teeth. Toothless childhood lasts until the eruption of all milk teeth (from 8 months to 2-2 1/2 years). Milky-toothed childhood continues until the onset of tooth change (up to approximately 6 1/2 years). Finally, permanent dentition ends with the appearance of the third posterior molars (wisdom teeth). In the eruption of primary teeth, in turn, three stages can be distinguished: completely toothless childhood (first half of the year), the stage of teething (second half of the year), and the stage of eruption of promulars and canines (third year of postnatal life).

A similar attempt is made to periodize childhood on the basis of any one aspect of development in the scheme of K. Stratz, who puts forward sexual development as the main criterion. In other schemes built on the same principle, psychological criteria are put forward. This is the periodization of V. Stern, who distinguishes between early childhood, during which the child exhibits only play activity (up to 6 years); a period of conscious learning with a division of play and labor; the period of adolescence (14-18 years) with the development of individual independence and plans for future life.

The schemes of this group, firstly, are subjective. Although they put forward an objective criterion as a criterion for dividing ages, the characteristic itself is taken on subjective grounds, depending on which processes our attention focuses on. Age is an objective category, and not a conditional, arbitrarily chosen and fictitious value. Therefore, milestones that delimit ages can be placed not at any points in a child’s life path, but exclusively and only at those at which one age objectively ends and another begins.

The second drawback of the schemes of this group is that they put forward a single criterion for distinguishing all ages, consisting of any one sign. At the same time, it is forgotten that in the course of development the value, meaning, indicativeness, symptomaticity and importance of the selected attribute changes. A sign that is indicative and essential for judging the development of a child in one era loses its significance in the next, since in the course of development those aspects that were previously in the foreground are relegated to the background. Thus, the criterion of puberty is significant and indicative for puberty, but it does not yet have this significance at previous ages. The eruption of teeth at the border of infancy and early childhood can be taken as an indicative sign for the general development of the child, but the change of teeth around 7 years and the appearance of wisdom teeth cannot be equated in importance for general development with the appearance of teeth. These schemes do not take into account the reorganization of the development process itself. Due to this reorganization, the importance and significance of any characteristic continuously changes as we move from age to age. This excludes the possibility of dividing childhood into separate eras according to a single criterion for all ages. Child development is such a complex process that at no stage can it be fully determined by just one characteristic.

The third drawback of the schemes is their fundamental focus on studying the external signs of child development, and not the internal essence of the process. In fact, the internal essence of things and the external forms of their manifestation do not coincide. “...If the forms of manifestation and the essence of things directly coincided, then all science would be superfluous...” (K. Marx, F. Engels. Works, vol. 25, part II, p. 384). Scientific research is therefore a necessary means of understanding reality because the form of manifestation and the essence of things do not directly coincide. Psychology is currently moving from a purely descriptive, empirical and phenomenological study of phenomena to the disclosure of their inner essence. Until recently, the main task was to study symptom complexes, that is, a set of external signs that distinguish different eras, stages and phases of child development. Symptom means sign. To say that psychology studies the symptom complexes of various eras, phases and stages of child development means to say that it studies its external signs! The real task lies in researching what lies behind these signs and determines them, that is, the very process of child development in its internal laws. With regard to the problem of periodization of child development, this means that we must abandon attempts at symptomatic classification of ages and move, as other sciences did in their time, to a classification based on the internal essence of the process being studied.

The third group of attempts to periodize child development is associated with the desire to move from a purely symptomatic and descriptive principle to highlighting the essential features of child development itself. However, in these attempts, the problem is rather correctly posed than solved. Attempts always turn out to be half-hearted in solving problems, never go to the end and reveal inconsistency in the problem of periodization. A fatal obstacle for them turns out to be methodological difficulties stemming from the anti-dialectical and dualistic concept of child development, which does not allow it to be considered as a single process of self-development.

Such, for example, is A. Gesell’s attempt to construct a periodization of child development based on changes in its internal rhythm and tempo, from the definition of the “current volume of development.” Based on basically correct observations of changes in the rhythm of development with age, Gesell comes to the division of all childhood into separate rhythmic periods, or waves, of development, united within themselves by a constancy of tempo throughout a given period and delimited from other periods by a clear change in this tempo. Gesell presents the dynamics of child development as a process of gradual slowdown in growth. Gesell's theory belongs to that group of modern theories which, in his own words, make early childhood the highest authority for the interpretation of personality and its history. The most important and important thing in the development of a child, according to Gesell, occurs in the first years and even in the first months of life. The subsequent development, taken as a whole, is not worth one act of this drama, which is rich in content to the maximum extent. Where does this misconception come from? It necessarily stems from the evolutionary concept of development on which Gesell relies and according to which nothing new arises in development, no qualitative changes occur, here only what is given from the very beginning grows and increases. In fact, development is not limited to the “more-less” scheme, but is characterized primarily by the presence of high-quality new formations, which are subject to their own rhythm and each time require special measures. It is true that in early ages we observe the maximum rate of development of those prerequisites that determine the further development of the child. Basic, elementary organs and functions mature earlier than higher ones. But it is wrong to believe that all development is exhausted by the growth of these basic, elementary functions, which are prerequisites for the higher aspects of personality. If we consider the higher sides, the result will be the opposite; the pace and rhythm of their formation will be minimal in the first acts of the general drama of development and maximum in its finale.

We have cited Gesell's theory as an example of those half-hearted attempts at periodization that stop halfway in the transition from the symptomatic to the essential division of ages.

What should be the principles of constructing a genuine periodization? We already know where to look for its real basis: only internal changes in development itself, only fractures and turns in its course can provide a reliable basis for determining the main eras in the construction of a child’s personality, which we call ages. All theories of child development can be reduced to two main concepts. According to one of them, development is nothing more than the implementation, modification and combination of inclinations. Nothing new arises here - only an increase, deployment and regrouping of those moments that were already given from the very beginning. According to another concept, development is a continuous process of self-propulsion, characterized primarily by the continuous emergence and formation of something new that did not exist at previous stages. This point of view captures something essential in development for the dialectical understanding of the process.

It, in turn, allows for both idealistic and materialistic theories of personality construction. In the first case, it is embodied in theories of creative evolution, guided by the autonomous, internal, l . the vital impulse of a purposefully self-developing personality, the will to self-affirmation and self-improvement. In the second case, it leads to an understanding of development as a process characterized by the unity of the material and mental aspects, the unity of the social and personal as the child ascends the stages of development.

From the latter point of view, there is and cannot be any other criterion for determining specific eras of child development or ages, except for those new formations that characterize the essence of each age. Age-related neoplasms should be understood as that new type of personality structure and its activity, those mental and social changes that first arise at a given age stage and which in the most important and fundamental way determine the child’s consciousness, his relationship to the environment, his internal and external life, the whole the course of its development in a given period.

But this alone is not enough for the scientific periodization of child development. It is also necessary to take into account its dynamics, the dynamics of transitions from one age to another. Through purely empirical research, psychology has established that age-related changes can, according to Blonsky (1930, p. 7), occur abruptly, critically, and can occur gradually, lytically. Blonsky calls epochs And stages times of a child's life separated from each other crises, more (epochs) or less (stages) sharp; phases - times of a child's life, separated from each other lytically.

Indeed, at some ages development is characterized by a slow, evolutionary, or lytic, course. These are the ages of predominantly smooth, often imperceptible internal changes in the child’s personality, changes that occur through minor “molecular” achievements. Here, over a more or less long period, usually covering several years, no fundamental, sharp shifts and changes occur that restructure the child’s entire personality. More or less noticeable changes in the child’s personality occur here only as a result of a long course of a hidden “molecular” process. They emerge and become accessible to direct observation only as the conclusion of long processes of latent development.

At relatively stable, or stable, ages, development occurs mainly due to microscopic changes in the child’s personality, which, accumulating to a certain limit, are then abruptly revealed in the form of some age-related neoplasm. Judging purely chronologically, most of childhood is occupied by such stable periods. Since development within them proceeds, as it were, underground, when comparing a child at the beginning and at the end of a stable age, enormous changes in his personality appear especially clearly.

Almost none of the bourgeois researchers could theoretically understand their real significance. Our attempt at systematization and theoretical interpretation, their inclusion in the general scheme of child development should therefore be considered as perhaps the first.

None of the researchers can deny the very fact of the existence of these unique periods in child development, and even the most undialectical-minded authors recognize the need to admit, at least as a hypothesis, the presence of crises in the development of a child, even in very early childhood.

From a purely external perspective, these periods are characterized by features opposite to stable, or stable, ages. In these periods, over a relatively short period of time (several months, a year, or, at most, two), sharp and major shifts and shifts, changes and fractures in the child’s personality are concentrated. In a very short period of time, the child changes as a whole, in the main personality traits. Development takes on a stormy, rapid, sometimes catastrophic character; it resembles a revolutionary course of events both in the pace of changes taking place and in the meaning of the changes taking place. These are turning points in child development, which sometimes take the form of an acute crisis.

The first feature of such periods is, on the one hand, that the boundaries separating the beginning and end of the crisis from adjacent ages are extremely unclear. A crisis occurs unnoticed - it is difficult to determine the moment of its onset and end. On the other hand, a sharp aggravation of the crisis is characteristic, usually occurring in the middle of this age period. The presence of a climax point, at which the crisis reaches its apogee, characterizes all critical ages and sharply distinguishes them from stable eras of child development.

The second feature of critical ages served as the starting point for their empirical study. The fact is that a significant proportion of children experiencing critical periods of development exhibit difficulties in educating themselves. Children seem to fall out of the system of pedagogical influence, which until quite recently ensured the normal course of their upbringing and education. At school age, during critical periods, children experience a decline in academic performance, weakening interest in school activities and a general decrease in performance. At critical ages, the development of a child is often accompanied by more or less acute conflicts with others. The inner life of a child is sometimes associated with painful and painful experiences, with internal conflicts.

True, all this is far from necessary. Different children experience critical periods differently. In the course of a crisis, even among children who are closest in type of development and social situation, there are much more variations than in stable periods. Many children do not experience any clearly defined educational difficulties or decline in school performance. The scope of variations in the course of these ages in different children, the influence of external and internal conditions on the course of the crisis itself are so significant and great that they have given rise to many authors to raise the question of whether crises of child development in general are not a product of exclusively external, unfavorable conditions and should not Is it therefore considered an exception rather than a rule in the history of child development (A. Busemann et al.).

External conditions, of course, determine the specific nature of the detection and occurrence of critical periods. Dissimilar in different children, they determine an extremely motley and diverse picture of critical age options. But it is not the presence or absence of any specific external conditions, but the internal logic of the development process itself that causes the need for critical, turning points in a child’s life. The study of relative indicators convinces us of this.

Thus, if we move from an absolute assessment of educational difficulties to a relative one, based on a comparison of the degree of ease or difficulty of raising a child in the period preceding the crisis or the following stable period with the degree of educational difficulties during the crisis, then one cannot help but see that any a child at this age becomes relatively difficult to educate compared to himself at an adjacent stable age. In the same way, if we move from an absolute assessment of school performance to its relative assessment, based on a comparison of the rate of progress of the child in the course of education at different age periods, then one cannot help but see that any a child during a crisis reduces the rate of progress compared to the rate characteristic of stable periods.

The third and, perhaps, the most theoretically important feature of critical ages, but the most unclear and therefore complicating a correct understanding of the nature of child development during these periods, is the negative nature of development. Everyone who wrote about these unique periods noted first of all that development here, in contrast to stable ages, performs more destructive than creative work. The progressive development of the child’s personality, the continuous construction of a new one, which was so clearly evident at all stable ages, during periods of crisis seems to fade, to be temporarily suspended. The processes of death and coagulation, disintegration and decomposition of what was formed at the previous stage and distinguished a child of a given age are brought to the fore. During critical periods, a child does not gain as much as he loses what he previously acquired. The onset of these ages is not marked by the emergence of new interests of the child, new aspirations, new types of activities, new forms of inner life. A child entering periods of crisis is rather characterized by the opposite features: he loses the interests that yesterday directed all his activities, which absorbed most of his time and attention, and now seem to freeze; the previously established forms of external relations and internal life seem to be deserted. L.N. Tolstoy figuratively and accurately called one of these critical periods of child development the desert of adolescence.

This is what is primarily meant when they talk about the negative nature of critical ages. By this they want to express the idea that development, as it were, changes its positive, creative meaning, forcing the observer to characterize such periods primarily from a negative, negative side. Many authors are even convinced that the negative content exhausts the entire meaning of development during critical periods. This conviction is enshrined in the titles critical ages (some such ages are called the negative phase, others - the phase of obstinacy, etc.).

The concepts of individual critical ages were introduced into science empirically and in a random order. Earlier than others, the 7-year crisis was discovered and described (the 7th year in a child’s life is the transitional period between the preschool and adolescence periods). A 7-8 year old child is no longer a preschooler, but not an adolescent either. A seven-year-old is different from both a preschooler and a schoolchild, so he presents educational difficulties. The negative content of this age manifests itself primarily in mental imbalance, instability of will, mood, etc.

Later, the crisis of 3 years of age was discovered and described, called by many authors the phase of obstinacy or stubbornness. During this period, limited to a short period of time, the child's personality undergoes drastic and sudden changes. The child becomes difficult to educate. He exhibits obstinacy, stubbornness, negativism, capriciousness, and self-will. Internal and external conflicts often accompany the entire period.

Even later, the crisis of 13 years was studied, which is described under the name of the negative phase of puberty. As the name itself shows, the negative content of the period comes to the fore and, upon superficial observation, seems to exhaust the entire meaning of development during this period. A drop in academic performance, a decrease in performance, disharmony in the internal structure of the personality, the collapse and withering away of a previously established system of interests, the negative, protesting nature of behavior allow O. Kro to characterize this period as a stage of such disorientation in internal and external relations, when the human “I” and the world are separated more than in other periods.

Relatively recently, it was theoretically realized that the factually well-studied transition from infancy to early childhood, which takes place around one year of life, is in essence also a critical period with its own distinctive features, familiar to us from the general description of this peculiar form of development.

In order to obtain a complete chain of critical ages, we would propose to include in it as the initial link that perhaps the most unique of all periods of child development, which is called newbornness. This well-studied period stands apart from the system of other ages and is, by its nature, perhaps the most striking and undoubted crisis in the development of a child. An abrupt change in developmental conditions during the act of birth, when a newborn quickly finds itself in a completely new environment, changes the entire structure of his life and characterizes the initial period of extrauterine development.

The neonatal crisis separates the embryonic period of development from infancy. The one-year crisis separates infancy from early childhood. The 3-year-old crisis is the transition from early childhood to preschool age. The 7-year-old crisis is the connecting link between preschool and school age. Finally, the crisis at age 13 coincides with a developmental turning point during the transition from school to puberty. Thus, a logical picture is revealed to us. Critical periods alternate stable ones and are turning points in development, once again confirming that the development of a child is a dialectical process in which the transition from one stage to another is accomplished not in an evolutionary, but in a revolutionary way.

If critical ages had not been discovered purely empirically, the concept of them should have been introduced into the development scheme on the basis of theoretical analysis. Now the theory can only realize and comprehend what has already been established by empirical research.

At turning points in development, a child becomes relatively difficult to educate due to the fact that changes in the pedagogical system applied to the child do not keep up with the rapid changes in his personality. The pedagogy of critical ages is the least developed in practical and theoretical terms.

Just as all life is at the same time dying (F. Engels), so child development - this is one of the complex forms of life - necessarily includes the processes of coagulation and dying. The emergence of something new in development certainly means the death of the old. The transition to a new age is always marked by the decline of the previous age. The processes of reverse development, the death of the old, are concentrated mainly at critical ages. But it would be a great mistake to believe that this exhausts the significance of critical ages. Development never stops its creative work, and during critical periods we observe constructive development processes. Moreover, the processes of involution, so clearly expressed at these ages, are themselves subordinate to the processes of positive personality construction, are directly dependent on them and form an inextricable whole with them. Destructive work is carried out during the indicated periods to the extent that this is caused by the need to develop personality properties and traits; actual research shows that the negative content of development during critical periods is only the reverse, or shadow, side of positive personality changes that constitute the main and fundamental meaning of any critical age.

The positive significance of the 3-year-old crisis is that new characteristic features of the child’s personality arise here. It has been established that if a crisis, for some reason, proceeds sluggishly and inexpressively, then this leads to a profound delay in the development of the affective and volitional aspects of the child’s personality at a later age.

With regard to the 7-year crisis, all researchers noted that, along with negative symptoms, there were a number of great achievements in this period: the child’s independence increases, his attitude towards other children changes.

During a crisis at the age of 13, a decrease in the productivity of a student’s mental work is caused by the fact that there is a change in attitude from visualization to understanding and deduction. The transition to a higher form of intellectual activity is accompanied by a temporary decrease in performance. This is confirmed by the other negative symptoms of the crisis: behind every negative symptom lies a positive content, which usually consists of a transition to a new and higher form.

Finally, there is no doubt about the presence of positive content in the crisis of one year. Here, negative symptoms are obviously and directly related to the positive gains that the child makes as he gets on his feet and masters speech.

The same can be applied to the newborn crisis. At this time, the child initially degrades even in terms of physical development: in the first days after birth, the weight of the newborn drops. Adaptation to a new form of life places such high demands on the child’s vitality that, according to Blonsky, a person is never as close to death as at the hour of his birth (1930, p. 85). And yet, in this period, more than in any of the subsequent crises, the fact emerges that development is a process of formation and the emergence of something new. Everything that we encounter in the development of a child in the first days and weeks is a continuous new formation. The negative symptoms that characterize the negative content of this period stem from difficulties caused precisely by the novelty of a form of life emerging for the first time and becoming increasingly complex.

The most significant content of development at critical ages lies in the emergence of new formations, which, as specific research shows, are highly original and specific. Their main difference from neoplasms of stable ages is that they are transitional in nature. This means that subsequently they are not preserved in the form in which they arise during the critical period, and are not included as a necessary component in the integral structure of the future personality. They die off, as if absorbed by the new formations of the next, stable age, being included in their composition as a subordinate entity that does not have an independent existence, dissolving and transforming in them so much that without a special and in-depth analysis it is often impossible to discover the presence of this transformed formation of the critical period in acquisitions subsequent stable age. As such, neoplasms of crises die off with the onset of the next age, but continue to exist in a latent form within it, not living an independent life, but only participating in that underground development, which at stable ages, as we have seen, leads to the abrupt appearance of new formations.

The specific content of the general laws on neoplasms of stable and critical ages will be disclosed in subsequent sections of this work devoted to the consideration of each age.

The main criterion for dividing child development into separate ages in our scheme should be neoplasms. The sequence of age periods in this scheme should be determined by the alternation of stable and critical periods. The dates of stable ages, which have more or less distinct boundaries of beginning and end, are most correctly determined precisely by these boundaries. Critical ages, due to the different nature of their course, are most correctly determined by noting the culminating points, or peaks, of the crisis and taking the previous six months closest to this period as its beginning, and the nearest six months of the subsequent age as its end.

Stable ages, as established by empirical research, have a clearly defined two-member structure and fall into two stages - the first and second. Critical ages have a clearly defined three-member structure and consist of three phases interconnected by lytic transitions: precritical, critical and post-critical.

It should be noted that our scheme of child development differs significantly from other schemes that are close to it in defining the main periods of child development. New in this scheme, in addition to the principle of age-related neoplasms used in it as a criterion, are the following points: 1) the introduction of critical ages into the age periodization scheme; 2) exclusion from the scheme of the period of embryonic development of the child; 3) exclusion of the period of development, usually called adolescence, covering the age after 17-18 years, until the onset of final maturity; 4) inclusion of the age of puberty among the stable, stable, and not critical ages.

We removed the embryonic development of the child from the diagram for the simple reason that it cannot be considered on a par with the extrauterine development of the child as a social being. Embryonic development is a completely special type of development, subject to different laws than the development of the child’s personality, which begins from the moment of birth. Embryonic development is studied by an independent science - embryology, which cannot be considered as one of the chapters of psychology. Psychology must take into account the laws of embryonic development of a child, since the characteristics of this period are reflected in the course of post-uterine development, but because of this, psychology does not include embryology in any way. In the same way, the need to take into account the laws and data of genetics, that is, the science of heredity, does not turn genetics into one of the chapters of psychology. Psychology does not study heredity or uterine development as such, but only the influence of heredity and uterine development of a child on the process of his social development.

We do not include youth in the scheme of age periods of childhood for the reason that theoretical and empirical research equally force us to resist the excessive stretching of childhood development and the inclusion of the first 25 years of a person’s life in it. In the general sense and according to basic laws, the age from 18 to 25 years is, rather, the initial link in the chain of mature ages, rather than the final link in the chain of periods of childhood development. It is difficult to imagine that human development at the beginning of adulthood (from 18 to 25 years) could be subject to the laws of childhood development.

The inclusion of pubertal age among the stable ones is a necessary logical conclusion from what we know about this age and what characterizes it as a period of enormous growth in the life of a teenager, as a period of higher syntheses occurring in the individual. This follows as a necessary logical conclusion from the criticism to which theories were subjected in Soviet science that reduced the period of puberty to a “normal pathology” and to the deepest internal crisis.

Thus, we could present the age periodization in the following form.

Newborn crisis. Preschool age (3 years - 7 years).

Infancy (2 months-1 year). Crisis 7 years.

Crisis of one year. School age (8 years - 12 years).

Early childhood (1 year-3 years). Crisis 13 years.

Crisis 3 years. Puberty (14 years-18 years).

He is not the author of the methods, but his theoretical developments and observations formed the basis for the practical systems of famous teachers (for example, Elkonin). The research begun by Vygotsky was continued by his students and followers, giving them practical application. His ideas seem especially relevant now.

Biography of L.S. Vygotsky

L.S. Vygotsky was born on November 17, 1896 in Orsha, the second child in a large family of a bank employee. In 1897, the family moved to Gomel, where it became a kind of cultural center (the father is the founder of the public library).

Lev was a gifted boy and was educated at home. From 1912 he completed his studies at a private gymnasium.

In 1914, after graduating from high school, Vygotsky entered the medical faculty of Moscow State University, and a month later he was transferred to law and graduated in 1917. At the same time, he received an education at the Faculty of History and Philology of the Shanyavsky University.

In 1917, with the beginning of the revolution, the young man returned to Gomel. The Gomel period lasted until 1924 and was the beginning of his psychological and pedagogical activity. Here he marries and has a daughter.

At first he gave private lessons, then taught a course in philology and logic at various schools in the city, and took an active part in the formation of a new type of school. He also taught philology at the Pedagogical College, where he created a consulting room for psychology. Here Vygotsky began his psychological research.

In 1920, Lev contracted tuberculosis from his brother, who died.

In 1924 he was invited to the Moscow Institute of Experimental Psychology. From that moment on, the Moscow period of the scientist’s family began.

In 1924 - 1925 Vygotsky created his own cultural and historical psychological school on the basis of the institute. He began to become interested in working with special needs children. Continuing his psychological research, he simultaneously worked in the People's Commissar of Education, where he proved himself to be a talented organizer.

Through his efforts, an experimental defectology institute was created in 1926 (now the Institute of Correctional Pedagogy). He headed it until the end of his life. Vygotsky continues to write and publish books. From time to time the illness put him out of action. In 1926 there was a very severe outbreak.

From 1927 - 1931 The scientist published works on the problems of cultural-historical psychology. During these same years, he began to be accused of retreating from Marxism. It became dangerous to study psychology, and Vygovsky devoted himself to pedology.

The disease periodically worsened, and in 1934 Lev Semenovich died in Moscow.

Main directions of Vygotsky's research

Vygotsky was, first and foremost, a psychologist. He chose the following areas of research:

comparison of adults and children;
comparison of modern man and ancient man;
comparison of normal personality development with pathological behavioral deviations.

The scientist drew up a program that determined his path in psychology: to look for an explanation of internal mental processes outside the body, in its interaction with the environment. The scientist believed that these mental processes can only be understood through development. And the most intensive development of the psyche occurs in children.

This is how Vygotsky came to an in-depth study of child psychology. He studied the patterns of development of normal and abnormal children. In the process of research, the scientist came to study not only the process of child development, but also his upbringing. And since pedagogy is the study of education, Vygotsky began research in this direction.

He believed that any teacher should base his work on psychological science. This is how he connected psychology with pedagogy. And a little later, a separate science in social pedagogy emerged - psychological pedagogy.

While engaged in pedagogy, the scientist became interested in the new science of pedology (knowledge about the child from the point of view of various sciences) and became the main pedologist of the country.

He put forward ideas that revealed the laws of cultural development of the individual, his mental functions (speech, attention, thinking), explained the internal mental processes of the child, his relationship with the environment.

His ideas on defectology laid the foundation for correctional pedagogy, which began to practically help special children.

Vygotsky did not develop methods for raising and developing children, but his concepts of the proper organization of education and upbringing became the basis of many developmental programs and systems. The scientist’s research, ideas, hypotheses and concepts were far ahead of their time.

Principles of raising children according to Vygotsky

The scientist believed that education does not consist in adapting the child to the environment, but in the formation of a personality that goes beyond this environment, as if looking forward. At the same time, the child does not need to be educated from the outside, he must educate himself.

This is possible with proper organization of the education process. Only the personal activity of a child can become the basis of education.

The teacher should only be an observer, correctly guide and regulate the child’s independent activity at the right moments.

Thus, education becomes an active process from three sides:

the child is active (he performs an independent action);
the teacher is active (he observes and helps);
The environment between the child and the teacher is active.

Education is closely related to learning. Both processes are collective activities. The structure of the new labor school, which Vygotsky created with his students, is based on the principles of the collective process of education and training.

Unified Labor School

It was the prototype of a democratic school based on a creative, dynamic, collaborative pedagogy. It was ahead of its time, imperfect, and made mistakes, but it was still successful.

Vygotsky’s ideas were implemented by teachers Blonsky, Wenzel, Shatsky and others.

The pedological theory was tested at the school:

there were rooms for psychological and pedological diagnostics;
constant medical and psychological monitoring was carried out;
classes were created according to the principle of the child’s pedological age.

This school existed until 1936, when the Soviet authorities began attacking it. The school was repurposed as a regular one.

The very idea of pedology was distorted, and it fell into oblivion. Pedology and the idea of a labor school received a second life in the 90s. with the collapse of the USSR. A unified labor school in the modern sense is a democratic school, very appropriate in today's education.

Development and education of special children

Vygotsky developed a new theory of abnormal child development, on which defectology is now based and all practical correctional pedagogy is built. The purpose of this theory: the socialization of special children with a defect, and not the study of the defect itself. It was a revolution in defectology.

He connected special correctional pedagogy with the pedagogy of a normal child. He believed that the personality of a special child is formed in the same way as that of ordinary children. It is enough to socially rehabilitate an abnormal child, and his development will follow the normal course.

His social pedagogy was supposed to help the child remove the negative social layers caused by the defect. The defect itself is not the cause of the child’s abnormal development, it is only a consequence of improper socialization.

The starting point in the rehabilitation of special children should be an unaffected state of the body. “We should work with the child based on what is healthy and positive,” Vygotsky.

By starting rehabilitation, you can also start the compensatory capabilities of the special child’s body. The idea of the zone of proximal development has become very effective in restoring the normal development of special children.

Zone of Proximal Development Theory

The zone of proximal development is the “distance” between the level of the child’s actual and possible development.

Level of current development- this is the development of the child’s psyche at the moment (which tasks can be completed independently).
Zone of proximal development- this is the future development of the individual (actions that are performed with the help of an adult).

This is based on the assumption that a child, learning some elementary action, simultaneously masters the general principle of this action. Firstly, this action itself has a wider application than its element. Secondly, having mastered the principle of action, you can apply it to perform another element.

This will be an easier process. There is development in the learning process.

But learning is not the same as development: learning does not always push development; on the contrary, it can become a brake if we rely only on what the child can do and do not take into account the level of his possible development.

Learning will become developmental if we focus on what the child can learn from previous experience.

The size of the zone of proximal development is different for each child.

It depends:

on the needs of the child;
from its capabilities;
on the willingness of parents and teachers to assist in the development of the child.

Vygotsky's merits in pedology

At the beginning of the 20th century, educational psychology appeared, which was based on the fact that learning and upbringing depend on the psyche of a particular child.

The new science did not solve many problems of pedagogy. An alternative was pedology - a comprehensive science about the full age development of a child. The center of study in it is the child from the point of view of biology, psychology, sociology, anthropology, pediatrics, and pedagogy. The hottest problem in pedology was the socialization of the child.

It was believed that child development proceeds from the individual mental world to the external world (socialization). Vygotsky was the first to postulate that the social and individual development of a child are not opposed to each other. They are simply two different forms of the same mental function.

He believed that the social environment is the source of personal development. The child absorbs (makes internal) those activities that came to him from the outside (were external). These types of activities are initially enshrined in social forms of culture. The child adopts them by seeing how other people perform these actions.

Those. external social and objective activity passes into the internal structures of the psyche (interiorization), and through general social-symbolic activity (including through speech) of adults and children the basis of the child’s psyche is formed.

Vygotsky formulated the basic law of cultural development:

In the development of a child, any function appears twice - first in the social aspect, and then in the psychological (i.e., first it is external, and then it becomes internal).

Vygotsky believed that this law determines the development of attention, memory, thinking, speech, emotions, and will.

The influence of communication on raising a child

A child develops quickly and masters the world around him if he communicates with an adult. At the same time, the adult himself should be interested in communication. It is very important to encourage your child's verbal communication.

Speech is a sign system that arose in the process of socio-historical development of man. It is able to transform children's thinking, helps solve problems and form concepts. At an early age, a child’s speech uses words with a purely emotional meaning.

As children grow and develop, words of specific meaning appear in their speech. In older adolescence, the child begins to designate abstract concepts in words. Thus, speech (word) changes the mental functions of children.

The mental development of a child is initially controlled by communication with an adult (through speech). Then this process moves into the internal structures of the psyche, and inner speech appears.

Criticism of Vygotsky's ideas

Vygotsky's research and ideas on psychological pedagogy were subjected to the most vehement condemnation.

His concept of learning, based on the zone of proximal development, carries the danger of pushing forward a child who does not have sufficient potential. This can dramatically slow down children's development.

This is partly confirmed by the current fashionable trend: parents strive to develop their children as much as possible, without taking into account their abilities and potential. This dramatically affects the health and psyche of children and reduces motivation for further education.

Another controversial concept: systematically helping a child perform actions that he has not mastered on his own can deprive the child of independent thinking.

Dissemination and popularity of Vygotsky's ideas

After the death of Lev Semenovich, his works were forgotten and did not spread. However, since 1960, pedagogy and psychology have rediscovered Vygotsky, revealing many positive aspects in him.

His idea of the zone of proximal development helped assess learning potential and proved fruitful. Her outlook is optimistic. The concept of defectology has become very useful for correcting the development and education of special children.

Many schools have adopted Vygotsky’s definitions of age standards. With the advent of new sciences (valeology, correctional pedagogy, a new reading of previously perverted pedology), the scientist’s ideas became very relevant and fit into the concept of modern education, a new democratic school.

Many of Vygotsky’s ideas are being popularized here and abroad today.

Michael Cole and Jerome Bruner incorporated them into their theories of development.

Rome Harré and John Shotter considered Vygotsky the founder of social psychology and continued his research.

In the 90s Valsiner and Barbara Rogoff deepened developmental psychology based on Vygotsky's ideas.

Vygotsky's students were prominent Russian psychologists, including Elkonin, who also worked on problems of child development. Together with teachers, based on Vygotsky’s ideas, he created an effective Elkonin-Davydov-Repkin development program.

It is used to teach mathematics and language according to a special system; it is approved by the state and is now widely used in schools.

In addition, there are still many talented hypotheses and unrealized ideas of Vygotsky that are waiting in the wings.

Treasury of the scientist's works. Bibliography

Lev Semenovich Vygotsky wrote more than 190 works. Not all of them were published during his lifetime.

Vygotsky's books on pedagogy and psychology:

"Thinking and Speech" (1924)
"Instrumental method in pedology" (1928)
"The problem of the cultural development of the child" (1928)
"Instrumental Method in Psychology" (1930)
"Tool and sign in the development of the child" (1931)
"Pedology of school age" (1928)
"Pedology of Adolescence" (1929)
"Pedology of a teenager" (1930-1931)

Main publications:

1. Educational psychology. — M: Education worker, 1926

2. Pedology of a teenager. - M: Moscow State University, 1930

3. Main trends of modern psychology. — M + Leningrad: Gosizdat, 1930

4. Sketches on the history of behavior. Monkey. Primitive. Child. — M + Leningrad: Gosizdat, 1930

5. Imagination and creativity in childhood. — M + Leningrad: Gosizdat, 1930

6. Thinking and speech. — M + Leningrad: Sotsgiz, 1934

7. Mental development of children in the learning process. - M: State educational teacher, 1935

8. Developmental diagnostics and pedological clinic for difficult childhood. — M: Experiment, defectol. Institute named after M. S. Epstein, 1936

9. Thinking and speech. Problems of child psychological development. Selected pedagogical studies. - M: APN, 1956

10. Development of higher mental functions. - M: APN, 1960

11. Psychology of art. Art. - M, 1965

12. Structural psychology. - M: Moscow State University, 1972

13. Collected works in 6 volumes:

vol. 1: Questions of the theory and history of psychology;

vol. 2: Problems of general psychology;

vol. 3: Problems of mental development;

vol. 4: Child psychology;

vol. 5: Fundamentals of defectology;

vol. 6: Scientific heritage.

M: Pedagogy, 1982-1984

14. Problems of defectology. — M: Enlightenment, 1995

15. Lectures on pedology 1933-1934. - Izhevsk: Udmurt University, 1996

16. Vygotsky. [Sat. texts.] - M: Amonashvili, 1996

Based on theoretical foundations, the schemes for the periodization of child development proposed in science can be divided into three groups.

The processes of dentition are closely related to the essential features of the constitution of a growing organism, in particular with its calcification and the activity of the endocrine glands. At the same time, they are easily observable and their statement is indisputable. Dentition is a clear sign of age. On its basis, postnatal childhood is divided into three eras: toothless childhood, childhood of milk teeth and childhood of permanent teeth. Toothless childhood lasts until the eruption of all milk teeth (from 8 months to 2-2"/2 years). Milk-toothed childhood lasts until the beginning of teeth change (up to approximately 6"/2 years). Finally, permanent dentition ends with the appearance of the third posterior molars (wisdom teeth). In the eruption of primary teeth, in turn, three stages can be distinguished: completely toothless childhood (first half of the year), the stage of teething (second half of the year), and the stage of eruption of promulars and canines (third year of postnatal life).

The third drawback of the schemes is their fundamental focus on studying the external signs of child development, and not the internal essence of the process. In fact, the internal essence of things and the external forms of their manifestation do not coincide. “... If the forms of manifestation and the essence of things directly coincided, then all science would be superfluous...” (K. Marx, F. Engels. Works, vol. 25, part II, p. 384). Scientific research is therefore a necessary means of understanding reality because the form of manifestation and the essence of things do not directly coincide. Psychology is currently moving from a purely descriptive, empirical and phenomenological study of phenomena to the disclosure of their inner essence. Until recently, the main task was to study symptom complexes, that is, a set of external signs that distinguish different eras, stages and phases of child development. Symptom means sign. To say that psychology studies the symptom complexes of various eras, phases and stages of child development means to say that it studies its external signs. The real task is to study what lies behind these signs and determines them, that is, the very process of child development in its internal laws. With regard to the problem of periodization of child development, this means that we must abandon attempts at symptomatic classification of ages and move, as other sciences did in their time, to a classification based on the internal essence of the process being studied.

Where does this misconception come from? It necessarily stems from the evolutionary concept of development on which Gesell relies and according to which nothing new arises in development, no qualitative changes occur, here only what is given from the very beginning grows and increases. In fact, development is not limited to the “more - less” scheme, but is characterized primarily by the presence of high-quality new formations, which are subject to their own rhythm and each time require special measures. It is true that in early ages we observe the maximum rate of development of those prerequisites that determine the further development of the child. Basic, elementary organs and functions mature earlier than higher ones. But it is wrong to believe that all development is exhausted by the growth of these basic, elementary functions, which are prerequisites for the higher aspects of personality. If we consider the higher sides, the result will be the opposite; the pace and rhythm of their formation will be minimal in the first acts of the general drama of development and maximum in its finale.

We have cited Gesell's theory as an example of those half-hearted attempts at periodization that stop halfway in the transition from the symptomatic to the essential division of ages.

It, in turn, allows for both idealistic and materialistic theories of personality construction. In the first case, it is embodied in theories of creative evolution, guided by the autonomous, internal, vital impulse of a purposefully self-developing personality, the will to self-affirmation and self-improvement. In the second case, it leads to an understanding of development as a process characterized by the unity of the material and mental aspects, the unity of the social and personal as the child ascends the stages of development.

But this alone is not enough for the scientific periodization of child development. It is also necessary to take into account its dynamics, the dynamics of transitions from one age to another. Through purely empirical research, psychology has established that age-related changes can, according to Blonsky (1930, p. 7.), occur abruptly, critically, and can occur gradually, lytically. Blonsky calls epochs And stages times of a child's life separated from each other crises, more (epochs) or less (stages) sharp; phases- times of a child's life, separated from each other lytically.

Indeed, at some ages development is characterized by a slow, evolutionary, or lytic, course. These are the ages of predominantly smooth, often imperceptible internal changes in the child’s personality, changes that occur through minor “molecular” achievements. Here, over a more or less long period, usually covering several years, no fundamental, sharp shifts and changes occur that restructure the child’s entire personality. More or less noticeable changes in the child’s personality occur here only as a result of a long course of a hidden “molecular” process. They come out and become accessible to direct observation only as the conclusion of long processes of latent development 2 .

Stable ages have been studied much more fully than those characterized by another type of development - crises. The latter were discovered purely empirically and have not yet been brought into the system, not included in the general periodization of child development. Many authors even question the internal necessity of their existence. They tend to take them rather as “diseases” of development, for its deviation from the normal path. Almost none of the bourgeois researchers could theoretically understand their real significance. Our attempt at systematization and theoretical interpretation, their inclusion in the general scheme of child development should therefore be considered as perhaps the first.

Thus, if we move from an absolute assessment of the difficult to raise™ to a relative one, based on a comparison of the degree of ease or difficulty of raising a child in the stable period preceding the crisis or following it with the degree of difficult to raise during the crisis, then one cannot help but see that any a child at this age becomes relatively difficult to educate compared to himself at an adjacent stable age. In the same way, if we move from an absolute assessment of school performance to its relative assessment, based on a comparison of the rate of progress of the child in the course of education at different age periods, then one cannot help but see that any a child during a crisis reduces the rate of progress compared to the rate characteristic of stable periods.

This is what is meant “first of all when they talk about the negative nature of critical ages. By this they want to express the idea that development, as it were, changes its positive, creative meaning, forcing the observer to characterize such periods mainly from a negative, negative side. Many authors are even convinced that negative content exhausts the entire meaning of development during critical periods.This belief is enshrined in the names of critical ages (some such ages are called the negative phase, others - the phase of obstinacy, etc.).

The concepts of individual critical ages were introduced into science empirically and in a random order. Earlier than others, the crisis of 7 years was discovered and described (the 7th year in a child’s life is the transitional period between the preschool and adolescence periods). A 7-8 year old child is no longer a preschooler, but not an adolescent either. A seven-year-old is different from both a preschooler and a schoolchild, so he presents educational difficulties. The negative content of this age manifests itself primarily in mental imbalance, instability of will, mood, etc.

Just as all life is at the same time dying (F. Engels) 3, so child development - this is one of the complex forms of life - necessarily includes the processes of coagulation and dying. The emergence of something new in development certainly means the death of the old. The transition to a new age is always marked by the decline of the previous age. The processes of reverse development, the death of the old, are concentrated mainly at critical ages. But it would be a great mistake to believe that this exhausts the significance of critical ages. Development never stops its creative work, and during critical periods we observe constructive development processes. Moreover, the processes of involution, so clearly expressed at these ages, are themselves subordinate to the processes of positive personality construction, are directly dependent on them and form an inextricable whole with them. Destructive work is carried out during the indicated periods to the extent that this is caused by the need to develop properties and personality traits. Actual research shows that the negative content of development during critical periods is only the opposite, or shadow, side of positive personality changes that constitute the main and fundamental meaning of any critical age.

The specific content of the general laws on neoplasms of stable and critical ages will be disclosed in subsequent sections of this work devoted to the consideration of each age.

The main criterion for dividing child development into separate ages in our scheme should be neoplasms. The sequence of age periods in this scheme should be determined by the alternation of stable and critical periods. The dates of stable ages, which have more or less distinct boundaries of beginning and end, are most correctly determined precisely by these boundaries. Critical ages, due to the different nature of their course, are most correctly determined by noting the culminating points, or peaks, of the crisis and taking the previous half-year closest to this period as its beginning, and the nearest half-year of the subsequent age as its end.

Thus, we could present the age periodization in the following form 5.

Newborn crisis.

Infancy (2 months - 1 year).

Crisis of one year.

Early childhood (1 year - 3 years).

Crisis 3 years.

Puberty (14 years-18 years).

Crisis 17 years.

Preschool age (3 years - 7 years).

Crisis 7 years.

School age (8 years - 12 years).

Name: Psychology.

The book contains all the main works of the outstanding Russian scientist, one of the most authoritative and famous psychologists, Lev Semenovich Vygotsky.
The structural construction of the book is made taking into account the program requirements for the courses “General Psychology” and “Developmental Psychology” of psychological faculties of universities.
For students, teachers and everyone interested in psychology.

Lev Semenovich Vygotsky (1896-1934) is an outstanding Russian psychologist, the author of a large number of works that influenced the development of psychology and pedagogy both in our country and abroad. Although the scientific life of L. S. Vygotsky was extremely short (for example, it was five times shorter than the scientific life of Jean Piaget), he was able to open up for psychology such prospects for further movement, the significance of which is not fully realized even today. That is why in psychology there is an urgent need to analyze the legacy of this outstanding thinker, the desire not only to develop his teaching, but also to try to look at the world from his position. There are different authors. Some are overwhelming with their erudition, others provide a huge amount of empirical material. When reading the works of L. S. Vygotsky, the reader not only gets acquainted with new ideas, but every time he finds himself in that interesting and intellectually intense scientific world. who begins to experience it. tempt to search for solutions to complex problems, elevate to the level of a theorist and involve in dialogue with the author. It is no coincidence that L. S. Vygotsky is called the Mozart of psychology. In his works he was extremely sincere and tried to present as fully as possible all the grounds for the theoretical and experimental study of the questions posed. Each of his works is a complete independent work and can be read as a separate book. At the same time, all his works constitute an integral scientific line, united under the general name of the cultural-historical theory of the origin of higher mental functions. The works of L. S. Vygotsky need to be read more than once or twice. Each reading reveals new, previously unidentified contexts and ideas. One of his students, D. B. El-konin, noted: “... when reading and re-reading the works of Lev Semenovich, I always get a feeling. that there is something I don’t fully understand about them.” In this confession of a person who had a lot of direct contact with L. S. Vygotsky, one can discern the idea. that all his works contain tension, unspokenness. ready to generate new content. One gets the impression that L. S. Vygotsky possessed some special gift of scientific analysis. In other words, he was not only a psychologist, theorist, practitioner, but also a methodologist. He could and did apply special techniques for posing and solving scientific and practical questions.

SECTION I. METHODOLOGY
HISTORICAL MEANING OF PSYCHOLOGICAL CRISIS
SECTION II. GENERAL PSYCHOLOGY
PSYCHOLOGY
About behavior and reactions
Three elements of reaction
Reaction and reflex
Hereditary and acquired reactions
Hereditary or unconditioned reflexes
Instincts
Origin of hereditary reactions
The doctrine of conditioned reflexes
Super reflexes
Complex forms of conditioned reflexes
The most important laws of higher nervous activity (behavior) of a person
Laws of inhibition and disinhibition
Psyche and reaction
Animal behavior and human behavior
Adding reactions into behavior
The principle of dominance in behavior
The constitution of man in connection with his behavior
Instincts
Origin of instincts
The relationship between instinct, reflex and reason
Instincts and biogenetic laws
Two extremes in views on instinct
Instinct as a mechanism of education
The concept of sublimation
Emotions
Concept of emotions
Biological nature of emotions
Psychological nature of emotions
Attention
Psychological nature of attention
Installation characteristics
Indoor and outdoor installation
Attention and distraction
Biological significance of the installation
Attention and habit
Physiological correlate of attention
The work of attention in general
Attention and apperception
Memory and imagination: consolidation and reproduction of reactions
The concept of plasticity of matter
Psychological nature of memory
Composition of the memory process
Memory types
Individual characteristics of memory
Limits of memory development
Interest and emotional coloring
Forgetting and erroneous remembering
Psychological functions of memory
Memory technique
Two types of playback
Reality of fantasy
Functions of the imagination
Thinking as a particularly complex form of behavior
The motor nature of thought processes
Conscious behavior and will
Psychology of language
Me and It
Analysis and synthesis
Temperament and character
Meaning of terms
Temperament
Body structure and character
Four types of temperament
The problem of vocation and psychotechnics
Endogenous and exogenous character traits
ABOUT PSYCHOLOGICAL SYSTEMS
CONSCIOUSNESS AS A PROBLEM OF BEHAVIORAL PSYCHOLOGY
PSYCHE, CONSCIOUSNESS, UNCONSCIOUS
THINKING AND SPEECH
Preface
Chapter first. Problem and research method
Chapter two. The problem of child speech and thinking in the teachings of J. Piaget
Chapter three. The problem of speech development in the teachings of V. Stern
Chapter Four. Genetic roots of thinking and speech
Chapter five. Experimental study of concept development
Chapter six. Research on the development of scientific concepts in childhood
Chapter seven. Thought and word
SECTION III. DEVELOPMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY
HISTORY OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF HIGHER MENTAL FUNCTIONS
Chapter first. The problem of the development of higher mental functions
Chapter two. Research method
Chapter three. Analysis of higher mental functions
Chapter Four. Structure of higher mental functions
Chapter five. Genesis of higher mental functions
Chapter six. Oral speech development
Chapter seven. Background to the development of written speech
Chapter eight. Development of arithmetic operations
Chapter Nine. Mastering attention
Chapter ten. Development of mnemonic and mnemotechnical functions
Chapter Eleven. Development of speech and thinking
Chapter twelve. Mastering your own behavior
Chapter thirteen. Education of higher forms of behavior
Chapter fourteen. The problem of cultural age
Chapter fifteen. Conclusion. Future avenues of research. Development of the child’s personality and worldview
LECTURES ON PSYCHOLOGY
Lecture one. Perception and its development in childhood
Lecture two. Memory and its development in childhood
Lecture three. Thinking and its development in childhood
Lecture four. Emotions and their development in childhood
Lecture five. Imagination and its development in childhood
Lecture six. The problem of will and its development in childhood
TOOL AND SIGN IN CHILD DEVELOPMENT
Chapter first. The problem of practical intelligence in animal psychology and child psychology
Experiments on the practical intelligence of a child
The function of speech in the use of tools. The problem of practical and verbal intelligence
Speech and practical action in child behavior
Development of higher forms of practical activity in a child
Path of development in the light of facts
Function of socialized and egocentric speech
Changing the function of speech in practical activities
Chapter two. The function of signs in the development of higher mental processes
Development of higher forms of perception
Division of the primary unity of sensorimotor functions
Rebuilding memory and attention
Arbitrary structure of higher mental functions
Chapter three. Sign operations and organization of mental processes
The problem of the sign in the formation of higher mental functions
Social genesis of higher mental functions
Basic rules for the development of higher mental functions
Chapter Four. Analysis of the child’s sign operations
Structure of a sign operation
Genetic analysis of sign surgery
Further development of sign operations
Chapter five. Methodology for studying higher mental functions
Conclusion. The Problem of Functional Systems
Use of tools in animals and humans
Word and action
ISSUES IN CHILD PSYCHOLOGY
Age problem
1. The problem of age periodization of child development
2. Structure and dynamics of age
3. The problem of age and the dynamics of development Infancy
1. Newborn period
2. Social situation of development in infancy
3. Genesis of the main neoplasm of infancy
5. Main neoplasm of infancy
6. Basic theories of infancy
Crisis of the first year of life
Early childhood
Crisis of three years
Seven Years Crisis
LITERATURE

4. Vygotsky describes experiments conducted by F. Lebenstein under the guidance of G. Volkelt, at which the latter was repeatedly present.

5. See the last paragraph of this chapter - “Basic theories of infancy.”

6. The representative of this theory was, first of all, N. M. Shchelovanov, one of the closest students of the founder of reflexology V. M. Bekhterev. The creators of reflexology in the field of infancy were Shchelovanov’s employees -

N. L. Figurin, M. P. Denisova, N. I. Kasatkin. On the initiative of V.M. Bekhterev in the early 20s. Shchelovanov organized a special institution in which the development of children from birth to 3 years was studied. Here, on the basis of daily systematic observations of the development of children and special experiments, important materials were obtained on the progress of development of children of this age. The materials have not lost their significance to this day. Subsequently, the institution branched into two: one worked in Leningrad under the leadership of Figurin as part of the Leningrad Medical Pediatric Institute; the other, under the leadership of Shchelovanov in Moscow, became part of the Moscow Pediatric Institute. Based on the work carried out in these institutions, a system for raising young children and corresponding guidelines for educators were created (Education of young children in child care institutions / Edited by N. M. Shchelovanova, N. M. Aksarina. - 3rd ed. M., 1955).

7. This theoretical concept was developed by K. Bühler (1932). Vygotsky repeatedly critically examined Bühler's theoretical views on both this and other issues (Vol. 2).

8. The representative of this theory is K. Koffka. For a more detailed criticism of Koffka’s views, see: vol. 1, p. 238-290.

9. This concept was represented, firstly, by the Freudians in the person of Z. Freud himself and Z. Bernfeld; secondly, J. Piaget. For criticism of Vygotsky’s theory of autism and egocentrism, see also vol. 2, p. 20-23.

Crisis of the first year of life

1. Transcript of a lecture given by L. S. Vygotsky at the Leningrad Pedagogical Institute. A.I. Herzen in the 1933/34 academic year. From the archives of the author's family. Published for the first time. The transcript reflects the author's oral speech. Vygotsky's lectures were distinguished by their special semantic expressiveness. They were devoid of any external showiness, but rich in intonation. At the same time, they were in the nature of reasoning out loud and contained various hypotheses. Vygotsky often presented in lectures what he was thinking about at that time. This course was a problem-based course, and not a systematic presentation of all issues in child psychology. The lectures covered issues that their author considered key. During the period of lecturing under the leadership of Vygotsky, T. E. Konnikova conducted research on the initial stage of speech development. The study was completed after the death of the leader (see: T. E. Konnikova, 1947). Some examples given in the lecture are taken from Konnikova's research. Interesting materials on the emergence of a child’s first words are also contained in the article by Vygotsky’s student, F.I. Fradkina, “The Emergence of Speech in a Child” (1955). Important materials on the characteristics of autonomous speech in twins, the conditions for speech delay at this stage of development and overcoming such a delay are given in the book: A. R. Luria, F. Ya. Yudovich. Speech and the development of mental processes in a child. M., 1956.

2. We are talking about the personalistic theory developed by Stern (vol. 2, pp. 80-89, 484).

3. There seems to be a contradiction here. Vygotsky calls this stage of speech development autonomous speech, and in the lecture he says that this language cannot be considered as autonomous. In this case, Vygotsky wants to emphasize that this form of language nevertheless arises on the basis of the developed language of adults and in interaction with them.

4. The Experimental Defectology Institute (EDI) is currently the Scientific Research Institute of Defectology of the Academy of Pedagogical Sciences of the USSR.

5. Rau Fedor Andreevich (1868-1957) - prominent Soviet teacher of the deaf and speech therapist. For many years he worked at the Research Institute of Defectology.

6. See: K. Marx, F. Engels. Soch., vol. 3, p. 29: "Where there is any