Dewey and Vygotsky: Society, Experience, and Inquiry in Educational Practice

Abstract

John Dewey and L. S. Vygotsky share similar ideas concerning the relationship of activity and learning/development, especially the roles everyday activities and social environment play in the educational process. However, the two theorists are far apart in their conception of the relationship between process and goals in education. Dewey concentrates on means in education, believing that it is the ability of the individual to question through experience that is most important for the human community. Vygotsky, while recognizing the importance of (especially cultural) process in education, sees social and cultural goals as being integrated into social pedagogy. This paper compares Dewey and Vygotsky on three key points that relate directly to educational processes and goals. First, the two theorists are compared on the role of social history and the tools it produces. Dewey sees social history as creating a set of malleable tools that are of use in present circumstances. Vygotsky believes that tools developed through history have a far more lasting impact on the social community. Second, the two theorists are compared in their conceptualizations of experience/culture. Dewey sees experience as helping to form thinking, whereas Vygotsky, in his cultural historical theory, posits culture as the raw material of thinking. Third, the two theorists are compared on their perspectives on human inquiry. Dewey sees the child as a free agent who achieves goals through her own interest in the activity. Vygotsky suggests there should be greater control by a mentor who creates activity that will lead the child towards mastery. These differences are then explored in terms of how they might impact actual classroom strategies and curriculum.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 313 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.