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 analysing 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 sensorimotor, preoperational,
concrete operational and formal operational. (Ginsburg, Opper 1979 P. 26).
In the first stage sensorimotor, 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 theorised 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 organising 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.
7
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