Playing at Understanding Vygotsky

We actually read a decent amount about Vygotsky in our Psychology of Learning class, though interestingly enough, I don’t think that we actually read any material written by him.  During that time, I also began reading a book about approaching Vygotsky’s theories in tutoring situations, but I quickly lost interest.  The stuff people write about Vygotsky seems to be fairly confusing, but I didn’t find Vygotsky himself to be too far out there.  The way that he set up each chapter seemed fairly straightforward, and I definitely found myself agreeing with a lot of his points (even though my experiences are mostly confined to older children).  I really enjoyed the chapter on play.  I’m sure that a lot of elementary ed students get training about play theory and the purpose of play, but it’s never been an area that I’ve heard much about.  Vygotsky points out that play seems to be invented due to children’s unrealized/unrealizable desires or tendencies, and it is wrong to think that play is acting without purpose.  As a child, I liked to play school a lot, and I hated being the student.  I really wanted to be in charge, to have power, and that was a space where I could act this out.  Also, this make-believe activity was obviously not without purpose; even without the power struggle issue, I wanted to teach my little brother in the same way that my teacher helped me.  (I also wanted to dole out punishments on a whim.) 

Although Vygotsky states that play structures change as children grow older, I wonder how much of that change is due to school and societal restrictions rather than the developmental level of a child.  When I observed in middle school in the spring, I was surprised that the students didn’t have much time to just hang out on the playground.  Most of their time was structured, down to the second, presumably because the school administrators wanted to make sure that the students weren’t “up to” anything.  Not only does this confinement (and surveillance) make them feel constantly controlled, it also seems to take away their ability to “play” at being adults.  At age 11, all of their time is spoken for by academics.  Now, I’m sure they were required to take P.E., but that’s still a class that has rules, requirements, and grades.  Are we taking away their ability to play, causing them to act as adults far too early?

And speaking of restrictions, I think that ol’ Lev (I can call him that, right?) would have had some choice words about standardized testing.  He argues that writing should be relevant to life, even in a preschool setting, or it would become mechanized!   Obviously, the American educational system did not take his advice; my mother-in-law is a kindergarten teacher who must submit her students to a variety of standardized testing assaults.  Play is once again removed from the equation when these kinds of inorganic restrictions are imposed on writing because creativity does not fit within a small box.  Vygotsky believed that development occurs at some point after learning, so if we are teaching our students a very narrowed conception of what writing is, aren’t we essentially stunting their development?  I wouldn’t say that we are preventing development, but we are not providing a large enough zone for them to realize their full potential as writers and as citizens of the world.