Option #1
To what extent do you think cognitive development and language are natural?

I believe cognitive development and language acquisition are products of both innate predispositions and environmental influences. While humans possess an inherent capacity for language and cognitive growth, the extent and manner of development are significantly shaped by experiences and interactions.

What are the potential strengths and weaknesses of neuroscience as an approach to the understanding of learning?

- Strengths: Neuroscience provides objective, empirical data on brain activity during learning processes. Techniques like fMRI and EEG allow researchers to identify neural correlates of cognitive functions, offering insights into memory, attention, and language processing (Gabrieli, 2009).

- Weaknesses: Neuroscience can be reductionist, focusing on biological mechanisms while neglecting the social, cultural, and contextual factors that influence learning (Anderson, 2010).

Make an Update:
One concept in constructivism is the Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD), introduced by Vygotsky (1978). The ZPD refers to the gap between what a learner can do independently and what they can achieve with guidance from a more knowledgeable person.

- Insightful Aspect: The ZPD highlights the importance of social interaction and scaffolding in learning.

- Possible Limits: Critics argue that the ZPD may not fully account for individual differences in learning styles and motivation.

- Recent Brain Research: A study by Rizzolatti and Craighero (2004) on mirror neurons suggests that these neurons play a crucial role in observational learning, supporting the constructivist idea that learning occurs through active engagement with the environment and social interactions.

References:

- Anderson, J. R. (2010). Cognitive psychology and its implications. Worth Publishers.

- Gabrieli, J. D. E. (2009). Neuroscience of human learning. In The Cambridge handbook of learning sciences (pp. 99-118). Cambridge University Press.

- Rizzolatti, G., & Craighero, L. (2004). The mirror-neuron system. Annual review of neuroscience, 27, 169-192.

- Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.

• Angela May Mangahas

Option#2

The update explores how collaborative storytelling exercises the social mind by having students build a narrative together. This approach expands learning beyond individual ideas, fostering shared ownership and collective intelligence. The process involves active listening, negotiation, and empathy, enhancing communication skills. A writing workshop is presented as a community of practice, emphasizing shared passion and constructive feedback.

• Angela May Mangahas

Cognitive development and language are kind of like having a phone with pre-installed apps—you’re born with some stuff, but you still need Wi-Fi (aka your environment) to really use them. Babies aren’t born speaking English or doing math, but their brains are wired to learn those things—if people actually talk to them and teach them.

Neuroscience is like the brain’s detective—it shows us what parts of the brain light up when we learn stuff. That’s cool and super helpful, especially for understanding learning problems. But it’s not perfect. Just because we know where learning happens doesn’t mean we fully get how or why. Plus, brain scans don’t show what’s going on when your group project partner ghosts you before the presentation.

• Patricia Garalde

Kalantzis and Cope's treatment of brain developmentalism is valuable in drawing attention to how biology constrains and enables learning - for instance, how ,maturation of brain structures, neural plasticity, and timing can influence how and when certain learning is more effective. However, what is especially strong in their approach is that brain developmentalism is not the whole story. They integrate it with other learning paradigms - social cognition, multimodal literacies, cultural and communicative dimensions - so that educational design does not become reductive.
In general, their approach helps educators appreciate the biological scaffolding of learning, while also seeing the necessary of social, cultural, and communicative scaffolds.

• Gina Barrios

Option #1
Cognitive development and language are both natural but they are shaped through nurture. In the biological perspective, theorists like Jean Piaget and Noam Chomsky discuss that children are born with innate capacities for thinking and language acquisition. Chomsky's concept of Language Acquisition Device (LAD) suggests that humans possess an inborn ability to understand and produce language ( Chomsky, 1965). However, Lev Vygotsky emphasized the crucial role of social interaction and cultural context, asserting that learning and language growth depend on communication and environmental support (Vygotsky, 1978). Therefore, while the foundation of cognitive and linguistic ability is natural, its development and refinement largely depend on environmental stimulation and social experiences (Piaget, 1952). When the baby was born there is already a language there, the way she/he cries is her way to communicate upon growing up his/her parents (environment) taught her simple worlds and from those simple words she can form his/her thoughts and ideas in order to interact in his/her surroundings. In short cognitive development and language are natural in their foundation but their expression and refinement depend greatly on nurture. Neuroscience helps us understand how the brain works during learning. it explain how we remember, pay attention and build a new knowledge and offering teachers a scientific basis for effective instruction. however, its findings are sometimes hard to apply in classrooms and can lead to misconceptions about learning. therefore, while neuroscience is helpful, its must be used carefully together with psychology and education.
Option #2.
Social mind refers to the human ability to think, understand and learn through social interaction with others. Even we think inside our head is consider as social thinking because it develops from interactions with others. What we have thinking inside our head eventually we will voice out it through a interaction with one another. According to Vygotsky (1978), higher mental functions such as reasoning and problem-solving first occur in social communication before becoming internalized as individual thought. Likewise, community and culture also shape how ew learn by providing language, value and ways of understanding the world. Which means that both our thinking and learning greatly influenced by our social and cultural environment.

• Johaima Haron

Option #1 – Cognitive Development and Constructivism

I’ve always wondered whether cognitive development and language are truly “natural” or if they depend more on the environment. I think it’s a mix—while humans are born with the ability to learn, the experiences we have shape how we think and communicate. For example, I noticed that when I taught a young student how to read, giving guided hints and gradually letting them try on their own (scaffolding) helped them gain confidence faster than just telling them the answers. This is exactly what constructivism emphasizes: learners actively build knowledge with support. I also realized that sometimes focusing too much on individual learning can overlook the value of group discussion, which also helps students develop understanding.

Option #2 – The Social Mind and Collaborative Learning

I’ve come to see that thinking is rarely just “inside your head”—even when I solve a problem alone, it’s influenced by what I’ve learned from others. One example is when I worked with classmates on a group research project. We each shared ideas, debated solutions, and gave feedback, which led us to a much better outcome than if we’d worked alone. This experience showed me the power of the social mind and collective intelligence, where collaboration allows everyone to learn from each other. It made me realize that community and culture don’t just shape learning—they can make it deeper and more meaningful.

• Janice Betios

Option #1 – Cognitive Development and Constructivism

I’ve always wondered whether cognitive development and language are truly “natural” or if they depend more on the environment. I think it’s a mix—while humans are born with the ability to learn, the experiences we have shape how we think and communicate. For example, I noticed that when I taught a young student how to read, giving guided hints and gradually letting them try on their own (scaffolding) helped them gain confidence faster than just telling them the answers. This is exactly what constructivism emphasizes: learners actively build knowledge with support. I also realized that sometimes focusing too much on individual learning can overlook the value of group discussion, which also helps students develop understanding.

Option #2 – The Social Mind and Collaborative Learning

I’ve come to see that thinking is rarely just “inside your head”—even when I solve a problem alone, it’s influenced by what I’ve learned from others. One example is when I worked with classmates on a group research project. We each shared ideas, debated solutions, and gave feedback, which led us to a much better outcome than if we’d worked alone. This experience showed me the power of the social mind and collective intelligence, where collaboration allows everyone to learn from each other. It made me realize that community and culture don’t just shape learning—they can make it deeper and more meaningful.

• Janice Betios

Option #1 – Cognitive Development and Constructivism

I’ve always wondered whether cognitive development and language are truly “natural” or if they depend more on the environment. I think it’s a mix—while humans are born with the ability to learn, the experiences we have shape how we think and communicate. For example, I noticed that when I taught a young student how to read, giving guided hints and gradually letting them try on their own (scaffolding) helped them gain confidence faster than just telling them the answers. This is exactly what constructivism emphasizes: learners actively build knowledge with support. I also realized that sometimes focusing too much on individual learning can overlook the value of group discussion, which also helps students develop understanding.

Option #2 – The Social Mind and Collaborative Learning

I’ve come to see that thinking is rarely just “inside your head”—even when I solve a problem alone, it’s influenced by what I’ve learned from others. One example is when I worked with classmates on a group research project. We each shared ideas, debated solutions, and gave feedback, which led us to a much better outcome than if we’d worked alone. This experience showed me the power of the social mind and collective intelligence, where collaboration allows everyone to learn from each other. It made me realize that community and culture don’t just shape learning—they can make it deeper and more meaningful.

• Janice Betios

option #1
Brain developmentalism is a model of learning that attributes cognitive growth primarily to internal,fixed, and biologically determined maturational stage. Kalantzis and cope classify this view as overly focused on individual brain, failing to adequately account for the profound influence of cultural and social contexts in shaping what and how people learn.

• Ahbie Vallesteros

Cognitive development and language acquisition have strong innate foundations, supported by evidence that children are biologically prepared to learn language and develop thinking abilities in early life (Chomsky, 1965; Piaget, 1952). For example, infants can distinguish phonemes from different languages, showing a natural readiness for language input. However, this natural predisposition alone isn’t enough—environmental factors, like rich social interaction and exposure to language, critically shape how these abilities flourish.

Neuroscience offers powerful insights by showing what happens in the brain during learning processes—such as synaptic pruning or neuroplasticity—which helps educators understand how learning can be supported across ages and abilities (Goswami, 2004). Yet, neuroscience can be limited when it overlooks motivation, cultural context, and emotional factors that deeply influence learning. Sometimes findings are prematurely generalized, leading to “neuromyths” in education (Howard-Jones, 2014). Therefore, neuroscience should be integrated with cognitive, social, and emotional perspectives for a holistic understanding of learning.

• Rochelle Francisco