Piaget' theories. Include the work of Vygotsky, Bruner, Donaldson and Rogoff to discuss and analyse Piaget's theories
Write a detailed 1,500 word critique of Piaget' theories. Include the work of Vygotsky, Bruner, Donaldson and Rogoff to discuss and analyse Piaget's theories
Jean Piaget (1896 - 1980) was a constructivist theorist. He saw children as constructing their own world, playing an active part in their own development. Piaget's insight opened up a new window into the inner working of the mind and as a result he carried out some remarkable studies on children that had a powerful influence on theories of child thought. This essay is going to explain the main features and principles of the Piagetian theory and then provide criticism against this theory.
Cognitive development refers to way in which a person's style of thinking changes with age. Piaget argued that cognitive development is based on the development of schemas. This refers to a psychological structure representing all of a person's knowledge of actions or objects. To perform a new skill which the person has no schema, they have to work from previous skills that they have. This is called assimilation, where they have pulled previous schemas together then adapted and changed them to fit their task through accommodation. Piaget theorised that children's thinking goes through changes at each of four stages (sensory, motor, concrete operations and formal operations) of development until they can think and reason as an adult. The stages represent qualitatively different ways of thinking, are universal, and children go through each stage in the same order. According to Piaget each stage must be completed before they can move into the next one and involving increasing levels of organisation and increasingly logical underlying structures. Piaget stated that the 'lower stages never disappear; they become integrated into the new stage (hierarchic integration) (Inhelder and Piaget, 1958). Children themselves, through their actions on the environment, interacting with there biologically - determined level of maturation, bring about the cognitive changes, which result in adult thinking.
The stages theory is open to criticism as they are too rigid and neglects individual differences such as memory span, motivation etc. Piaget also underestimated the age at which children could do things. This maybe due to his failure to distinguish between competence and performance. Piaget's studies tested performance and then he assumed that a child who failed simply lacked the underlying cognitive structures that he believed were needed to succeed on that task. Subsequent research suggests that a child may have these competencies earlier than Piaget suggested. However, simply to focus on age limits is to miss the central point of Piaget's theory that universal, qualitative, biologically regulated cognitive changes occur during development. This is supported by cross-cultural research that has replicated Piaget's findings (Smith et al, 1998).
Another criticism relates to the concept of biological maturation or 'readiness'. If the development of cognitive structures is related to maturity, then practice should not improve performance. In other words, if a person is not biologically ready to move on to the next stage then no amount of practice should get them there. However, there is evidence to suggest that practice can make a difference (Danner and Day 1977).
A third criticism relates to the role of language and social factors. Piaget did not feel that language influenced cognitive development. To incorporate these two elements researchers have ...
This is a preview of the whole essay
Another criticism relates to the concept of biological maturation or 'readiness'. If the development of cognitive structures is related to maturity, then practice should not improve performance. In other words, if a person is not biologically ready to move on to the next stage then no amount of practice should get them there. However, there is evidence to suggest that practice can make a difference (Danner and Day 1977).
A third criticism relates to the role of language and social factors. Piaget did not feel that language influenced cognitive development. To incorporate these two elements researchers have extended Piaget's experiments.
Vygotsky took a socio-cultural view of development that makes social interaction the centre of his theory. Vygotsky claimed that cultural tools are acquired through interacting with others, which children then adopt as their own: what was an interpersonal behaviour pattern becomes an intrapersonal cognitive process. One major way in which Vygotsky's theory is distinctive is the importance of instruction to him. He believed that the highest forms of thinking could only be achieved through appropriate instruction. Vygotsky claimed that purely abstract thinking is only found in highly technological cultures, which have a heavy emphasis on formal instruction. Whereas Piaget concluded that young children's language is egocentric and non-social, Vygotsky reasoned that children speak to themselves for self-guidance and self-direction. Because language helps children think about their own behaviour and select courses of action, Vygotsky regarded it as the foundation for all higher cognitive processes. Vygotsky believed that through joint activities with more mature members of society, children come to master activities and think in ways that have meaning in their culture. He believed that children learn best when tasks are in their zone of proximal development, a range of tasks that the child cannot yet handle alone but can accomplish with the help of adults and more skilled peers. This emphasises the role of the adult as a teacher. Like Piaget's theory, Vygotsky's theory is also a stage theory. 'Both Piaget and Vygotsky agreed that human development is made up of both continuous and discontinuous changes and that transitions in development are the result of changes in the organisation of mental structures. Vygotsky believed the pattern of social interaction determines the structure and pattern of internal cognition: 'the very mechanism underlying higher mental functions is a copy from social interaction; all higher mental functions are internalised social relationships. (Vygotsky, 1988,p74,p14).
Bruner's interventionist approach, on the other hand is as distinct and contrasting from Piaget's model of learning, but that is not to say that they are not comparable because they do share lots of similarity. To begin with Bruner proposes a three-stage learning process. The enactive stage, which is learning by doing, the iconic stage, which is learning by means of images and pictures, and symbolic learning, which is learning by means of words or numbers. Though the premises are not stated, both rely upon a previous schemas or schemata for learning development to take place. Academicians normally regard Bruner's approach as a more student-centred learning approach. It does not leave the learning process totally up to the child and it calls upon the teacher to intervene in a pre emptive sort of way in order to facilitate learning, as opposed to Piaget's model, wherein the teacher provides the learning instruments for the child's learning, and monitors or views the result of the activities.
Critics have often made mention of Bruner's famous challenge to teachers, that any topic can be taught to children of any age in an intellectually respectable form. For the most part, Bruner's emphasis on 'appropriate pedagogy' is not dissimilar to Piagetian thought, in that in both models, the teachers are the wholly responsible for planning the learning environment, tools and context within with the child will learn.
Yet other criticisms of Piaget's view has to do with his decidedly determinist view that children's / students' abilities are of an innate nature, and therefore they may or may not be able to do tasks. Margaret Donaldson (1978, as cited by Lights and Oates, p 114) argued that the real problem with the Piagetian tasks is that they are testing diembedded thinking on the part of the child; they are asking the child to solve problems unrelated to the child's own knowledge and experience. A change in materials used will enable children to perform better on some tasks than on others. Margaret Donaldson countered, with good proof, that children are capable and can be taught to solve problems if they are given optimal help. Piaget's concept of the cognitive egocentrism of the child is challenged. Donaldson's research observes that children learn more, better and faster if the problems, classroom situations and the learning environment is 'embedded' to them. 'Embedded is the process wherein learning takes place in as natural and relevant a setting as possible, as opposed to the 'disembedded' experiments and situational learning experiments of Piaget. The 'optimal help' that Donaldson outlines are the meaningful helpful intervention of the teacher, and the right context and environment of the tasks and the classroom that would enable the child to identify and cope with the situation. Donaldson, therefore, helped to shift the teacher's academic, aloof observer style into a more humane and learner-relevant context to facilitate learning more on the part of the students.
CONCLUSION
Piaget is credited with pioneering studies and researches into children cognitive development. Whilst his work may have been the standard against which a lot of later work, developments and research was done. It nevertheless revealed certain weaknesses. First there was a wrong assumption that children cognitive development was egocentric. His methodology was criticized. It was held that his aloof, academic style and researches were not scientifically rigorous enough, noteworthy amongst some of the problems was Piaget's approach, often bordering on trying to 'catch children out rather than try to help them'( Sutherland 1992). His theory that learning ability was more innate of course went and goes against the acceptable theory of nurturing and cognitive development. His approach was less teacher and student oriented. More specific criticism are given in contrast to other theorists such as Vygotsky, Bruner and Donaldson.
As we have seen, there are a number of ways in which Piaget's and Vygotsky's child differs in the way it learns about the world. Although they both agreed that action underlies thinking, Vygotsky places far greater emphasis on language as the creator of thought whereas Piaget concentrated more on the stages and constraints of logical development. It is important also to note Vygotsky's interest with culture and how he claimed society and it's cultural artifacts such as language, provided the tools to advance children's thinking (Smith p335). Bruner and Donaldson believed that Piaget underestimated children and overestimated adults. Piaget has been criticized for using concepts and objects unfamiliar to children, and there is now a significant body of thought that suggests children perform beyond Piaget's levels when using more familiar things. Furthermore, the level of formal operations, Piaget's last level, is not nearly as universal as Piaget believed. It would appear that Piagets gave some adults more credit than they were really entitled to. While Piaget's work has undergone severe criticism and has been subject to numerous objections, there is no disputing his contributions to the area of child psychology and cognitive development. Although he may have underestimated childhood abilities and also the age at which cognitive development occurs, it is not disputed that the changes in fact do happen. The significance of Piaget's work, however, cannot be underestimated for present day teachers. It is all too easy to try to substitute one theory for another, and then find out that both are unable to deliver the results that a high level of teaching would demand. Therefore if we gain a proper understanding of the strength and weakness of the major models and theories of learning as dealt within this assignment, we will see how each of the researchers added new dimensions to the original Piagetian premise in order to give us a more comprehensive workable learning teaching model.
REFERENCE
Inhelder and Piaget, (1958), as cited in 'Children's Cognitive and Language Development, Gupta, P and Richardson, K (1995), Blackwell Publishers Ltd in association with the Open University.
Light P and Oates, J (1990) 'The development of Children's Understanding' in Roth, I (Ed) Introduction to Psychology, Vol 1, Hove, East Sussex, Psychology Press in association with the Open University.
Peter Sutherland (1992) 'Cognitive Development Today-Piaget and His Critics' Paul Chapman Publishing London.
Smith et al, 1998, as cited in 'Children's Cognitive and Language Development, Gupta, P and Richardson, K (1995), Blackwell Publishers Ltd in association with the Open University.
Vygotsky, L.S. (1988) 'The genesis of higher mental functions' in Richardson, K and Sheldon, S. (eds) Cognitive development to Adolescents, Hove, Erlbaum