Cognition is the process involved in thinking and mental activity, such as
attention, memory and problem solving. In this essay on cognitive development I
will compare and contrast the theories of Piaget and Vygotsky, who were both
influential in forming a more scientific approach to analyzing the cognitive
development process of the child active construction of knowledge. (Flanagan
1996 P.72). I will then go onto evaluate the usefulness of these theories in
understanding a child's development.
Both Piaget and Vygotsky agreed
that children's cognitive development took place in stages. (Jarvis, Chandler
2001 P.149). However they were distinguished by different styles of thinking.
Piaget was the first t reveal that children reason and think differently at
different periods in their lives. He believed that all children progress through
four different and very distinct stages of cognitive development. This theory is
known as Piaget’s Stage Theory because it deals with four stages of development,
which are sensor motor, preoperational, concrete operational and formal
operational. (Ginsburg, Opper 1979 P. 26).
In the first stage
sensor motor, which occurs from birth to the age of two is the time in an
infant’s life when the child basically deals with what is presented to him. They
learn about physical objects and are concerned with motor skills and the
consequences of some of their actions. (Thomson, Meggit 1997 P.107). During this
stage children will learn the concept of object permanence. This is where an
object will continue to exist even if it is out of sight. (Ginsburg, Opper 1979
P.48)
The preoperational stage last from two to seven years. In this
stage it becomes possible to carry on a conversation with a child and they also
learn to count and use the concept of numbers. This stage is divided into the
preoperational phase and the intuitive phase. Children in the preoperational
phase are preoccupied with verbal skills and try to make sense of the world but
have a much less sophisticated mode of thought than adults. In the intuitive
phase the child moves away from drawing conclusions based upon concrete
experiences with objects. One problem, which identifies children in this stage,
is the inability to cognitively conserve relevant spatial
1
information.
This is when, when a material is manipulated and no longer matches the cognitive
image that a child has made, that child believes the amount of material has been
altered instead of just its shape. (Jarvis, Chandler 2001 P.135)
During
the Concrete Operational stage from ages seven to ten, children of this age are
in school and they begin to deal with abstract concepts such as numbers,
relationships and how to reason. They can now group certain things into
categories, and put objects into size order, number order, and any other types
of systematic ordering. There is a form of logical reasoning and thinking. Using
logic, the child is capable of reversibility and conservation, which is the
understanding of that mental operations and physical operations, can be
reversed. They are now beginning to understand other people’s perspectives and
views and are capable of concentrating on more than one thing at a time. In this
stage a person can do mental operations but only with real concrete objects,
events or situations. (Jarvis, Chandler 2001 P.139).
Finally, in the
formal operational stage, age twelve to fifteen, the child has become more
adult-like in their thought structures and processes. They begin to reason
logically, systematically and hypothetically. (Jarvis, Chandler 2001 P.139).
They understand meanings without the need for physical objects or images. In
other words, they can imagine things that do not exist or that they have never
experienced. This stage is generally like the preceding stage but at a more
advanced level. The formal operational person is capable of meta-cognition, that
is, thinking about thinking.
Piaget also theorized on Adaptation, and
Development. The adaptation theory (also known as the Constructivist theory)
involved three fundamental processes, which contributed to the child’s cognitive
development. These are assimilation, accommodation, and equilibrium.
Assimilation involved the incorporation of new events into pre-existing
cognitive structures. Accommodation is the adjustment involved in the formation
of new mental structures needed to accommodate new information. Equilibration
involved the person striking a balance between himself and the environment,
between assimilation and accommodation. When a child
2
experienced a new
event, disequilibrium set in until he was able to assimilate and accommodate the
new information and thus attain equilibrium. There were many different types of
equilibrium between assimilation and accommodation, which varied with the levels
of development and the problems, which needed to be solved. (Thomson, Meggit
1997 P.105)
This dual process, assimilation-accommodation, enabled the
child to form schema, and with each stage there came new methods for organizing
knowledge together with the acquisition of new schema. Schemas are “ Form action
plans which guide us in understanding what is going on around us” (Hayes b.
P.15) These are similar to responses but imply more cognitive processes. A
schema includes ideas, information, actions and plans. People can learn by
adopting new schemes or combine smaller already present schemes to create new
larger ones. (Hayes a. 1999 P.98)
In contrast of Piaget, Vygotsky, a
Russian psychologist and philosopher in the 1930’s, is most often associated
with the social constructivist theory and came into three general claims;
Culture - which is that higher mental functioning in the individual emerged out
of social processes. Secondly Language - which human social and psychological
processes are fundamentally shaped by cultural tools. Lastly the developmental
method Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) which is the concept that the
potential of the child is limited to a specific time span. (Jarvis, Chandler
2001 P.149-150).
Vygotsky believed that it was adults and the Childs
peers, which had the responsibility in sharing their greater collective
knowledge with the younger generations. (Jarvis, Chandler 2001 P.149-150). This
type of learning supports a discovery model of learning and places the teacher
in an active role while the students’ mental abilities develop naturally through
various paths of discovery. Vygotsky argued that through social activities
children learnt cultural ‘tools’ and social inventions. These included language,
rules, counting systems, writing, art, and music.
3
Language for
Vygotsky was a system of symbolic representation, which had been perfected over
many previous generations and allowed the child to "abstract" the world. It
provides the symbols for the child's equations concerning the world;
Language came into three separate categories, which were Social, Egocentric,
and Inner. For Vygotsky language was what made thinking even a possibility.
Language is the difference between thinking on an elementary level and on a
higher level.
According to Vygotsky's theory ‘ZPD’ had to do with a
child’s current and potential abilities to do something. (Flanagan 1999 P.72).
He believed that problem-solving tasks could be placed into three categories,
which were as follows: (a) those performed independently by the student
“independent performance” (b) those that could not be performed even with help;
and (c) those that fall between the two, the tasks that can be performed with
help from others “assisted performance.” (www.teachers info site). Vygotsky
believed the concept of ‘ZPD’ recommended a better move towards to education and
allowed a better understanding of the learning process. (Flanagan 1999 P.73)
Bruner built on Vygotsky's idea of the ZPD, by introducing what he
described as scaffolding. Scaffolding is the help, which is given to a child
that supports the child's learning. Scaffolding is similar to scaffolding around
a building; it can be taken away after the need for it has ended. When a child
is shown how to do something he can now accomplish this task on its own.
(Jarvis, Chandler 2001 P.154).
Vygotsky believed that the history of the
child and the history of the child’s culture needed to be understood because it
overrides the cognitive schema process that Piaget described. (www.Teachers info
site). Piaget believed that the sequence of how children experience the stages
was universal, but acknowledged the rate at which each child moved through these
stages was flexible and relative upon factors such as maturity, social
influences, and other factors. Because of the difference in the skills needed
for each level, Piaget believed that children should not be forced into learning
4
the knowledge of the next stage until the child was cognitively ready.
(Flanagan 1999 P.57) However, Vygotsky believed that instruction came before
development and that instruction lead the learner into ZPD.
Piaget and
Vygotsky had many contrasting views which included Piaget believing that
cognitive changes precede linguistic advances, unlike Vygotsky who proposed that
language allowed the child a far greater freedom of thought and lead to further
cognitive development. (Flanagan 1999 P.59) Piaget believed in the development
of thinking and that language moved from individual too social. (Ginsburg, Opper
1979 P.84). However, Vygotsky believed that language moved from the social to
the individual. (Jarvis, Chandler 2001 P.150).
For Vygotsky speech moved
from social speech (communicative) to inner egocentric speech. (Jarvis, Chandler
2001 P.150) He believed that children began by voicing a personal dialogue and
then moved to social speech. He argued that it became internalised as an adult.
In contrast, Piaget claimed that egocentric Speech was simply an accompaniment
to a child’s actions (Ginsburg, Opper 1979 P.84) and that egocentric speech went
away with maturity. However, even though they both had different opinions on the
purpose of egocentric speech both agreed on the importance that it played in
cognitive development.
Vygotsky, like Piaget, believed the relationship
between the individual and the social as being a necessary relational. However,
Vygotsky believed that it was adults and the Childs peers, which had the
responsibility in sharing their greater collective knowledge with the younger
generations. He did not believe it was possible for a child to learn and to grow
individually and the culture and the environment around the child played a big
part in their Cognitive Development. (Flanagan 2001 P.72). He also believed a
child was unable to develop the way he or she had without learning from others
in the environment in which they were raised. In contrast, Piaget maintained
that children were naturally inquisitive about their own abilities and about
their environment (Jarvis, Chandler 2001 P.129) and that children advanced their
5
knowledge because of biologically regulated cognitive changes.
(Flanagan 2001 P.57). Whereas, Piaget believed that a child was only possible of
learning the processes in each stage at any time (Flanagan 1999 P.60) and
overlooked the role of the child's activity with relation to thought processes.
For Piaget, children construct knowledge through their actions on the world. By
contrast, Vygotsky’s stages, unlike Piaget’s, were that of a smooth and gradual
process. That understanding is social in origin. For Vygotsky the cultural and
social aspects took on a special importance which is much less symmetrical than
Piagets theories.
In summary, Vygotsky was critical of Piaget's
assumption that developmental growth was independent of experience and based on
a universal characteristic of stages. Vygotsky believed that characteristics did
not cease at a certain point as Piaget did. When one thing was learned, it was
used from then on. It did not stop just because a child entered another stage of
development. Everything was progressive. Vygotsky also disagreed with Piaget's
assumption that development could not be impeded or accelerated through
instruction. (Flanagan 1999 P.57) Vygotsky believed that intellectual
development was continually evolving without an end point and not completed in
stages as Piaget theorised. Piaget’s stages only approach up to, and end with,
approximately age fifteen. This theory does not seem to have any major factors
after approximately age fifteen.
There are factors that can disrupt the
Stage theory or the Constructivist theory. A child with autism, brain
dysfunction or special needs would not be capable of going through all of
Piaget’s development stages as a number of studies have shown (Jarvis, Chandler
2001 P.137). Not all adults in all cultures reach the formal operational stage
of development and are non the less able to live a fulfilling life without doing
so.
Due to experiences Piaget had over the years he changed the way he
thought and modified his techniques of research to include a greater emphasis of
the role of the child's activity. Vygotsky although critical of Piaget, realised
the importance of the information that Piaget had gathered and in spite of his
criticisms, Vygotsky built his educational theories on the strengths of Piaget's
theories.
6
After evaluating Piagets and Vygotsky's theories on
cognitive development I believe there still more which we can continue to learn
and build on with both Piagets and Vygotsky's ideas and theories, especially
when applied in education.
Bibliography
Flannagan, C. (1999). Applying Child Psychology to
Early Child Development. Cheltenham: Nelson Thornes Limited
Ginsbury, H.
Opper, S. (1979). Piaget‘s Theory of Intellectual Development. Englewood Cliffs:
Prentice Hall, Inc.
Hayes, N. (1999). a Access to Psychology. 5th ed.
London:
Hodder & Stoughton Educational.
Hayes, N. (1991).b
Psychology. London: British Psychological Society.
Jarvis, M. Chandler,
E (2001). Angles on Psychology. Cheltenham: Nelson Thornes Limited
Thomson, H. Meggit, C. (1997). Human Growth and Development. Abingdon:
Bookpoint Limited
Sources of Reference
http://www.gse.buffalo.edu.htm
Accessed 10/12/01
http://www.teachers/piaget.html
Accessed 10/12/01
8