Compare and Contrast two theories of cognitive development.

There are three main types of cognitive development. There is Piaget’s theory, Vygotsky’s theory and the Information processing approach. The two theories that I am going to compare and contrast are Piaget and Vygotsky’s theories. There are many differences between these two theories, but there are also many similarities too. Piaget suggests that cognitive development takes place as a result of experiences which force the child to accommodate new information, creating new schemas and occasionally leading o a qualitatively different kind of thinking- moving from one stage to another, but these changes need to depend on readiness. However, Vygotsky placed more of an emphasis on the importance of social context in transforming elementary into higher mental functions, and the role of the ZPD in understanding how this transformation takes place.

Piaget’s theory, also known as the ‘discovery learning theory’, brought up two ways in which schemas became more complex, assimilation and accommodation. Assimilation is basically the process of fitting new information and experiences into existing schemas, and accommodation is the process of changing the existing schemas when new information cannot be assimilated. An example of this could be when a child has a schema “wings, beak and being able to fly” (a normal bird). Every new instance of a creature with the same characteristics is assimilated into this schema. But when that child sees an aeroplane in the sky, the child asks what it is. The aeroplane challenges the current schema. This new information cannot be assimilated into the existing schema, instead the child’s schemas must alter to accommodate the new information and a new schema is formed. A new stage in development is reached when the child’s brain has been matured to a point of ‘readiness’ and some new information or experiences that cannot be assimilated challenge the child’s thinking. When the child has reached the point of ‘readiness’; new experiences will lead to a major reorganisation of schemas, so that a new different stage of cognitive development is reached. The stages of Piaget’s cognitive development start with the sensorimotor stage, 0-2 years of age. Next is the pre-operational stage, 0-7 years. Then there is the concrete operational stage, 7-11 years. Finally, there is the formal operational stage, 11+ years. In the sensorimotor stage the infant’s knowledge is limited to what they can experience though their sense and their attempts to co-ordinate this knowledge with what they can do. In the per-operational stage the child can use symbols but their concepts are general. An example of this could be when a child says, “Daddy owns a blue car” and then whenever they see a blue car they say “Daddy’s car”. The concrete operational stage sees children using logical mental rules, only in the context of concrete rather then abstract information. An example could be that the children would not be able to answer a simple question such as “John has a apple more than Mike, but less than Adam. Who has the most apples?” unless you helped them using real apples. The formal operational stage, abstract and systematic thought becomes possible for the child. There have been a lot of studies into each of these stages, but as I am only supposed to compare the theories I will not go into much detail.

This is a preview of the whole essay

Vygotskys suggested that the intellect consisted of ‘elementary’ and ‘higher’ mental functions. Elementary functions are innate capacities such as attention and sensation. These develop to a limited extent through experience, but cultural influences are required to transform them into higher mental functions, such as problem solving and thinking. An individual would not progress further than the elementary functions, without culture. Vygotsky was referring to the body of knowledge, which is held by, for example, books and ‘experts’ (persons with large amounts of knowledge), and which is largely transmitted through language, when he used the concept ‘culture’. Vygotskys used 4 stages of concept formation, which are vague syncretic stage; complexes stage; potential concept stage; and mature concept stage. The vague syncretic stage saw children failing to use systematic strategies and showed little or no understanding of the concepts. In the complex stage is when non-random strategies are used, but these strategies were not successful in finding the main features of each concept. The potential concept is when systematic strategies were used, but they were limited to focusing on one feature at a time, like a shape. Mature concept stage has systematic strategies relating to more than one feature at a time were used, and led to successful concept formation. One main key notion in Vygotskys approach to cognitive development is the zone of proximal development, meaning children who seem to lack certain skills when tested on their own may perform more effectively in the social context provided by someone with the necessary knowledge. Skills shown in a social situation but not an isolated one fall within the zone of proximal development. Three other psychologists developed Vygotsky’s notion of a zone of proximal development. Wood, Ross and Bruner introduced the idea of scaffolding, which refers to the context provided by knowledgeable people such as adults to help children to develop their cognitive skills, which is an important aspect of support as the child’s knowledge and confidence increase. Moss reviewed studies that scaffolding provided by mothers during the pre-school period. First of all the mother instructed her child in new kills that the child could not use on its own. Then the mother encouraged the child to maintain problem solving tactics that it had shown spontaneously. Finally the mother tried to persuade the child to discard immature and inappropriate forms of behaviour. Vygotsky also attached great importance to the development of language. He developed three main speech stages in the development of language and thought. The first stage is called the pre-intellectual, social speech that occurred between the ages of 0-3. The function of this stage was that language served as a social function and at the same time thought was being pre-linguistic. The next stage is called the egocentric stage that occurred between the ages of 3-7. Languages are controlled to one’s behaviour, but is often spoken aloud during this stage. The final stage is the inner stage occurring between the ages of 7+. Here self-talk becomes silent and the child uses speech for social purposes.

Every known theory has criticisms. The same occurs to both Piaget’s theory and Vygotsky’s theory. For Piaget the main criticism was that he underestimated the age at which children could do things. This may be because he failed 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. A study by Borke showed that several factors are important in assessing the competence of young children. But, simply focusing on age limits is to miss the central point of Piaget’s theory that universal, qualitative, biologically regulated cognitive changes occur during development. A study by Smith supports this, as he did a cross cultural research based on Piagets theory. Piaget produced the first comprehensive theory of children’s cognitive development. The theory has been more extensively developed than any other it has changed our ideas about children and has had a general influence on educational practice has. Also the good theories should generate research and Piaget’s theory has certainly done so. Piaget’s theory under emphasizes the role of language and social interaction in cognitive development.

Vygotskys theory focuses on the process of cognitive development rather than the outcome, and this is harder to test. Vygotskys ideas on cognitive development have had considerable influence. Although Vygotsky produced very little direct empirical evidence, other researchers have provided support for his ideas and their application.