The first one is called “Sensorimotor” and occurs in children at 0-2 years of age also known as the age of infancy. (Jardine 2006: 50) The main characteristic of this stage is Solipsism – failing to differentiate between themselves and their surroundings. The baby presumes the world lacks permanence and when something is not present then it is non-existent, the stage where the child cannot comprehend that things exist even when they are not in immediate contact. During Piaget’s experiments he found that at this stage babies had the dexterity to grasp things but that once they were removed from view they turned their attention away. If it was revealed again, the baby realises its existence again which suggests that just because the concept of its existence has been dismissed, it doesn’t necessarily mean that recognition of the object has been forgotten. (Ziegler & Mitchell, 2006) The second stage is called “Preoperational” and occurs in children at 2-7 years, the years of early childhood. (Ziegler & Mitchell, 2006: 16) The main characteristic of this stage is that the child is ripe with egocentrism. This is where a child cannot look at things from another person’s point of view. The appearances of concepts are judged from the surface and not from what builds them up. In Piaget’s conservation experiments he poured liquid in to a jar of a certain shape and with the child watching poured them in to another that was taller – “he took pains to ensure the child was watching carefully” (Ziegler & Mitchell, 2006: 21) but nearly all children below 7 years say that the former held more. This shows that knowledge occurs as a progression because the child has gone from lack of object permanence to understanding that things exist permanently, however they have now developed the ability to understand permanent concepts, but lack the ability to understand variation and understanding another person’s point of view.
It could be argued that Piaget’s experiments being carried out on babies and children were unethical purely because they were being subjected to conditions that they were not used to, however this could be justified because the children did not come to any harm nor were they put in conditions that differed from everyday life. Another issue that could be raised is whether the children understood what was being asked of them. If they did not understand what they were being asked for, how could they possibly give the researcher what he was asking for? However this can also be justified. It can be used in favour of the research because it will prove just how far children understand what they were being asked and how much they understand at the age they were being tested.
The third stage is called “Concrete Operational” and occurs in children at 7 – 12 years (Ziegler & Mitchell, 2006: 16), the years of middle childhood with the main characteristic being that principled thought was confined only to real-life problems. This is the stage where the child overlooks superficial appearances and come to an understanding that there is an “objective reality” (Ziegler & Mitchell, 2006:23) that operates on principles. In terms of the conservation experiment the children at this stage give the correct answer as well as justification for them. Piaget identified three operational principles that they used to give the correct answers: Compensation, inversion and identity. This shows that knowledge is a progression because they have gone from not being able to understand variation to being able to understand that there is a reason and logic behind the change (in the conservation task). The fourth stage is called “Formal Operational” (Ziegler & Mitchell, 2006:16) and occurs in children at 12 years and upwards, the age of adolescence where principle thought is applied to abstract problems. At this stage the youngster is aware of, and can deal with hypothetical problems with the ability to understand the value of the comparison of conditions with regards to interpretation of data. (Ziegler & Mitchell, 2006) This proves that knowledge occurs as a progression because the youngster went from not being able to understand concepts in a hypothetical sense to now being able to solve problems that were not necessarily real.
To conclude I agree that knowledge progresses through a succession of stages. I agree with this view because it is clear that from birth a child is born with a small ability to understand the world around them and as they grow and develop this small ability acts as a foundation for the stages of knowledge to take place, i.e. Piaget’s Stages of Development. Firstly recognising “objects” and then coming to realise they have permanence. Thereafter realising variation and understanding principle thought and its application to abstract problems from a non-understanding of variation and inversion logic. These are clearly taking place step-by-step and thus show that knowledge does indeed progress through a succession of stages.
Word Count: 1000
References:
Mitchell, P & Ziegler, F (2004) “Fundamentals of Development: The Psychology of Childhood” (1st edition) East Sussex: Psychology Press
Jardine D.W (2006) “Piaget and Education” (1st Edition) New York: Peter Lang Publishing Inc.
Biography.com: (2012) “Jean Piaget”. Available at: [Accessed 20th March 2012]
by
zizou91 (student)
