Development of thinking
Introduction to Piaget theory and Piaget's Stages Piaget: General Evaluation with Applying Piaget to Education
Background and
introduction: Piaget is a towering
figure in psychology and widely respected by all, including those who have
criticised or adopted his theories. Contrary to popular belief Piaget
was not French (despite being called Jean), he was in fact Swiss. Nor was
he a psychologist (not at the outset anyway) but a zoologist (which should
really be spelt zooologist surely!). He had his first publication on
molluscs when he was still at High School!
Whilst working with
Binet (who
was
French) and an early pioneer of IQ tests, he became fascinated by child
development and spent the next 50 some years of his life studying the
subject. As a result Piaget was a true expert in his field, which as
we shall see later, also covered moral development.
Piaget’s theory is
sometimes described as ‘genetic epistemology.’ ‘Genetic’ because he
believed that the stages we progress through and the structures and
processes we use, are inbuilt and true for all of us regardless of
culture. ‘Epistemology’ (not a word to be uttered when in the state
suggested by the word) actually means the study of knowledge. Basically
Piaget believed that the way in which we learn about and adapt to our
World is constant across all cultures and races, and proceeds as a set
sequence in all.
Central to Piaget's
theory is how the child adapts to an ever-changing World. Piaget noticed
that even the youngest of children are inquisitive and actively explore
their world. Piaget is most famous for his stages but any description of
his theory must also include a discussion of the structures that underlie
these stages. It is tempting in an essay on Piaget to write exclusively
about his stages, since you will know them backwards in great detail by
the time the exam comes round. However, it is essential that the other
aspects of his theory are covered too. His processes (or ‘functional
invariants’ as he lovingly referred to them) are constant (as their name
suggests) throughout all stages, working to make sense of our
environment. Schemas (strictly speaking the plural should be ‘schemata’)
are the internal representations that we hang our understanding on.
Schemata were mentioned in AS memory and will crop up in other topics
later in the year. Enough waffle… lets get on with it.
Above: photo of Piaget in later life. He died in 1980 at the age of 84 (despite being a ‘sickly’ as a child).
I got so excited telling you about the great man that I neglected to mention the
structure of this first topic. It covers
the way our thinking develops over time, and how as we mature we become capable
of more complex methods of thinking.
A number of theories have developed (that word again) to try and explain
how this happens. The syllabus
currently specifies three: Piaget, Vygotsky and Bruner. As of 2011-12
series however, Bruner will be dropped.
You may
also come across ‘Information Processing’
which does appear later, but which you cannot be specifically tested
on.
Schemas and associated concepts
Schema:
an internal representation of the world. This acts as a framework on
which the child bases its knowledge of its environment. According to
Piaget we are born with some schemata including sucking and
grasping. In the first year of life many other simple schemata
develop, for example the schema for mum very quickly develops as the child
learns to distinguish her from others as a source of food and comfort.
Later the schemata become more complex and include concepts such as
density, grammar, love, nature-nurture debate etc. Schemata
are crucial as they enable us to interpret and predict events.
Helen Bee (2000)
believes that schemata are not so much the categories themselves but the
action of categorising.
Equilibrium and
disequilibrium:
the child requires a
stable internal world. If new experience does not match existing schema
then a state of disequilibrium (or inbalance) is produced. The child
needs to accommodate to restore the balance, i.e. alter its perception of
how things work. Piaget saw this desire for equilibrium as innate and
believed that it drives or motivates us to learn. Simple examples would
be having a schema for dog and misinterpreting a cat as a dog. On being
told the mistake this causes temporary confusion and the child needs to
alter its schemata to allow for this.
Disequilibrium
is essential for learning!!!!
Adaptation:
refers to how
a child changes over time as it makes sense of the World in which it
lives. Adaptation comes about through the processes of assimilation and
accommodation:
· Assimilation:
new information or experiences can be fitted into the child's existing
schema or current understanding of the world. It sees a poodle and is
able to fit this into the same schema as the family’s bull mastiff!
· Accommodation:
new information or experiences cannot be fitted into the child's current
understanding so it either has to alter existing schema or create a whole
new schema; for example cat doesn’t fit in with its schema for dog or
George W Bush doesn’t tie in with its concept of intelligent life form!
In these cases new schemata need to be constructed or changes made to
existing schemata. So the child develops a schema for cat and one for
nepotism in World Politics!
Operations
Not always mentioned
specifically in texts but nevertheless crucial, by definition, to the
stages. Operations are mental transformations or manipulations that occur
in the mind. Piaget believed that it was operations that provided the
rules by which the child is able to understand the world. While schemas
develop with experience operations only develop as the child’s brain
develops. So children in the first two stages do not possess operations,
hence ‘preoperational.’ As the brain matures the child is capable of ever
more complex understanding.
Stages
Sensori-motor (0-2 years)
The child lacks
internal schemas or representations. The child's understanding of its
world is directly through its senses from moment to moment. It is so
called because it senses its environment and carries out movement (motor)
to react to it. At this stage that is all the child can do!
Features:
Egocentricism.
The child has no concept of 'self' so is unable to distinguish itself from
its environment. Unlike some of the other concepts Piaget believed that
egocentricism gradually reduces as the child gets older.
Research
evidence
See three mountains
task in preoperational stage.
Lacks object permanence.
Child assumes
that objects no longer exist if they’re not visible.
Research
evidence
Piaget carried out
research on his own children. They would be shown an attractive object
that would then be hidden from view. Children up to the age of 8 months
don’t bother to look for it assuming it to no longer exist. After 8
months children will continue to search for hidden objects.
Evidence
against
Bower & Wishart
(1972) showed objects to children between the ages of 1 and 4 months.
Lights were switched off so that the objects were no longer visible but
the child could be seen, by infrared camera, continuing to search for the
object.
Baillargeon and DeVos
(1991) employed an ingenious experiment using long and short carrots.
It relies on the concept that children will
spend longer looking at events that they consider to be impossible. In
this case, even though the carrots were not visible for a crucial stage of
the experiment children as young as three months old realised that they
still existed and spent longer puzzling over the ‘impossible situation.’
Clearly this casts
doubt on Piaget’s assertion that children didn’t develop object permanence
until 8 months of age!
Pre-Operational Stage (2 to 7 years)
Child is still
dominated by the external world, rather than it's own thoughts. However,
it now forms some simple internal representations of its world (schemas)
through its increasing ability to use language. The stage is called
'pre-operational' since the child is unable to perform operations (such as
heart by-passes and key hole surgery; well you know what I mean!). An
'operation' according to Piaget, is a mental rule for manipulating objects
or ideas into new forms, and then, crucially, being able to manipulate
them back again. Since preoperational children are unable to reverse
things mentally they are unable to do this.
Features:
Egocentricism
Child remains
egocentric but this now refers more to its inability to see things from
other people's perspectives, as famously demonstrated by the 'Three
Mountains' task.
Research
evidence
Piaget & Inhelder’s
‘Three Mountains Task.’ Children would be seated at a table with a 3D
model of three mountains in front of them. A doll would be placed in
various positions around the table and the child shown photos of various
views. They would be asked to choose the picture that best fitted the
view as seen from the doll. To complete this task successfully children
would have to imagine the view as seen by the doll. The researchers found
that children below the age of 7 had problems completing the task, tending
to choose the photo that showed their view of the mountains. Think of the
young girl in the video explaining her new toy to her grandfather on the
phone and assuming that because she could see it so could her granddad.
Evidence to
contradict Piaget
Hughes (1975)
repeated the three mountains task using a situation he thought would be
more familiar to the child, i.e. the naughty boy hiding from the
policeman. Hughes found that 90% of children aged 3 to 5 could complete
the task successfully, concluding that it was lack of understanding rather
than egocentricism that was causing the problems for Piaget's
participants.
Animism
This is related to
egocentricism and is the tendency to attribute feelings to inanimate
objects so for example the child may apologise for hurting its teddy bear
or decide to punish one of its toys for being naughty. I’ll restrain from
any adult humour here!
Realism
Believing that
psychological events, such as dreams, are real.
Lack of Conservation
The inability to
realise that some things remain unchanged despite looking different.
Piaget concentrated on conservation of number and volume. Piaget put this
down to the child's inability to pay attention to more than one
characteristic of a situation at a time and to its inability to reverse
operations in its head (e.g. to visualise the water being poured back into
the original container).
Piaget believed that
conservation of number develops first. He demonstrated this by the use of
counters. Children are shown 2 rows each with the same number of counters
and realise the 2 rows contain the same number. If the researcher
rearranges one of the rows by spacing the counters out the child believes
there are more.
Conservation of
volume, as demonstrated by pouring liquid from small wide beakers into
tall thin measuring cylinders, develops later, at the very end of the
preoperational stage.
|
Evidence
against
McGarrigle &
Donaldson (1974) showed that children as young as 4 could conserve number
if the situation is given meaning.
It is also important
to note that Piaget concentrates almost entirely on mathematical skills
and logic. Between the ages of 7 and 11 children acquire a vast number of
other new skills that Piaget chose to ignore.
McGarrigle &
Donaldson (1974) repeated Piaget’s conservation experiment on 6-year-old
children. The child is shown 2 rows
of equal numbers of counters. The
child agrees that the 2 rows are the same.
If the researcher then messes one of the rows up, without altering the
number of counters, only 16% believe that the number of counters is still the
same. So far just as Piaget would have
predicted. However, when a naughty teddy bear messes up the row of counters 62%
of children in this age group are able to conserve!
This shows that children are better able to conserve than Piaget
proposed. M & D assume that in the
original condition it appears to the child that the researchers are intending to
alter the number of counters, or that they are asking a trick question.
In the teddy condition there is a reason for the counters just to be
messed up so the situation has meaning.
Rose & Black (1974)
believed asking the child the same question twice was confusing. ‘Are
there the same number of buttons in each row?’ The buttons would then be
rearranged and the question repeated. Perhaps the children believe this
to be a trick question. Samuel & Bryant (1984) repeated the counters
experiment but only asked the question once, after the counters had been
rearranged. This produced more correct answers!
General
evaluation points on this stage:
Piaget’s research has
generated lots of research into this particular stage, but it has been
inconclusive or at odds with Piaget’s original work:
Piaget often
under-estimated the age at which children could perform activities.
Wheldall & Poborca (1980) believe that children are unable to perform
conservation tasks because they don't understand the question.
Variations in an
experimental procedure can produce very different findings. Some studies
conclude that children are still egocentric others that they have out
grown this characteristic.
Piaget’s original
studies were often poorly thought through and for example were not suited
to the age range of the children he was studying. Instructions may have
been confusing or the tasks themselves too complex. For example ‘Three
Mountains’ task which was manageable when re-worked by Hughes in a more
familiar format.
Concrete Operations Stage (7 to 11
years)
The child is now able
to carry out operations on its environment and develops logical thought.
However, it still requires concrete examples, being unable to think in
abstract terms. Less importance is attached to information from our
senses as we use thought and imagination more.
Features
Reversibility
refers to the ability to mentally picture an action being carried out in
reverse. This is essential for conservation, e.g. imagining the water
being poured back into the original beaker.
Conservation
made possible by the ability to decentre. Conservation of number is first
(5 to 6 years), followed by conservation of weight (7 to 8 years) and
finally conservation of volume by 11 years of age.
Transitivity
is only
possible with concrete examples. For example 'Jackie is fairer than
Sarah, Jackie is darker than Nicola. Who is the darkest?' The concrete
operational child would not be able to work this one out mentally, it
would require dolls or pictures of the three girls. Similarly A > B > C.
This would not be possible since it requires abstract thought rather than
concrete examples.
Research
Evidence
Piaget's own studies
demonstrated that children in this age group were able to conserve
successfully.
Other studies have
broadly backed Piaget’s findings for this stage, although he has been
criticised for failing to consider other cultures.
· Jahoda
(1983) found that children as young as 9 years old in Zimbabwe could
understand abstract economic concepts if they’d worked in their parents’
business.
· Price-Williams
(1969) showed conservation in children as young as 6 years old who had
been raised in pottery making factories.
Formal Operational stage (11 years
onwards)
Piaget used the term
‘formal’ since children in this stage can concentrate on the form of an
argument without being distracted by the content (Jarvis 2001). For
example if x is greater than y but less than z. The child can now work
this out without needing to know what x, y and z refer to. Smith et al
(1998) provide the following example:
‘All green birds have
two heads. I have a green bird called Charlie. How many heads does
Charlie have?’ A child in the earlier stages would be bogged down by the
content, i.e. birds have one head. Formal thinkers can concentrate on the
structure (or form) of the question in this context.
Piaget maintained
that everyone would reach this stage eventually, even if it took us until
20. However, there is plenty of evidence to suggest that this is not the
case and that certainly it tends to occur later than Piaget predicted.
Bradmetz (1999), in a
longitudinal study showed that out of 62 children tested at the age of 15,
on a series of Piagetian tasks, only one had reached formal thought!
Features
Abstract thought
The child can now
think in abstract terms so no longer requires concrete examples to solve
problems.
Hypothetical thought
The child is able to
consider things that it has no experience of and consider imaginary
scenarios.
Hypotheses testing
Faced with a problem
the formal thinker will approach it logically, produce a list of
possibilities and test each one systematically. (Think of GCSE science
coursework).
Solve syllogisms
These are a form of
reasoning in which a conclusion is reached from a number of statements.
For example:
When B is
larger than C, X is smaller than C. But C is never larger than B.
True or
false, X is never larger than B?
Other features
This level of thought
also allows for an appreciation of values and ideals (necessary for more
advanced moral thinking).
Research
evidence
Piaget would set
children the task of finding what determines the frequency of swing of a
pendulum. Concrete thinkers normally believe that it is the push that the
experimenter gives it. When they test possibilities they fail to control
other variables. The formal thinker on the other hand considers all
possible variables such as push, length of string, weight of bob etc.
They carefully isolate variables and control confounding variables.
Evidence
against
1.
Some psychologists argue that formal
operational thought is not as important to everyday life as Piaget seems
to have concluded. Since most problems we face have no one obvious right
answer, logical thought is not always necessary.
2. It
seems many adults never actually reach Piaget’s description of formal
thinking.
3. Gladwin
(1970) argues that the tests Piaget used are inappropriate for testing
non-western culture. The Pulawat navigators of Polynesia demonstrate
formal thinking when navigating in their canoes but fail western tests
designed to test their formal thinking.
|
||||
General criticismsAges and stagesResearch mostly suggests that children acquire their skills earlier than Piaget suggested (e.g. Hughes, McGarrigle and Donaldson etc).
Some psychologists
believe that only 30% of the population reach formal ops. This is the
one stage were Piaget seems to have over-estimated rather than
under-estimated the ability of the child. Dasen argues that some
cultures don’t develop formal operational thought at all.
Many of the stages
overlap (decalage) for example during the concrete stage there is
constant development in small sub-stages as the child learns to conserve
number then amount and finally liquid. So rather than a sudden
stop-start stage process, development becomes more of a steady
progression.
Cross-cultural
evidence
From a
cross-cultural perspective the order of the stages seems to be
universal, although rate of progression varies.
Dasen (1984)
carried out conservation type tests and tests of spatial relationships
on Aboriginal children ages eight to fourteen.
Typically he found
that they performed less well than Western children on conservation
tasks with this skill not being developed until the age of 13 in some of
those tested whereas spatial awareness developed younger than in the
west. In fact when tested for conservation many adults couldn’t
complete the task successfully. Such finding are perhaps not surprising
in a group of people that spend so much time on the move and amounts
don’t need to be measured accurately. However, when Aborigines live in
western societies and receive a western education their skills develop
in line with western norms.
This would suggest
that the stages are not as universal as Piaget believed and also
suggests that culture is a major influence on development. See
Vygotsky’s theory for an explanation of this one.
Performance and ability.Piaget measured a child’s performance and assumed that this was a true reflection of its underlying ability. For whatever reason children do not always perform to the best of their ability, e.g. lack of understanding of the problem, as highlighted by McGarrigle & Donaldson (1974).
Other abilities.
Piaget tended to
focus on logical and mathematical thought development, neglecting other
developments such as memory and social abilities etc. These may account
for the wide individual differences between children.
|
Methods.
Hughes and
McGarrigle & Donaldson have shown that using different methods, children
can achieve stages at an earlier age than was predicted. They believe
Piaget’s experiments were over complex and used language that the child
was unable to relate to.
Piaget used the
clinical interview technique, which is time consuming. As a result his
sample sizes tended to be small.
When observing
behaviour it is usual to use inter-rater reliability (two or more people
observing and comparing notes in some way) in order to reduce bias.
Piaget could have used this method but preferred to observe alone making
his research less reliable and reducing its validity.
Demand characteristics
It is believed that
children in Piaget’s experiments may have given answers that they
thought Piaget wanted to hear rather than the answers that they believed
to be right.
Unrealistic
As Segall (1999)
points out, Piaget portrays a child as an ‘idealised, non-existent
individual, completely divorced form the social environment.’ As we’ll
see later, Vygotsky helps to redress this balance.
Individual
differences
These were largely
ignored. Piaget admitted that he wanted to produce a general (nomothetic)
theory of development of intelligence and knowledge. He wasn’t
interested in individual differences.
General Favourable comments
Much of Piaget’s
work has received widespread support. Piaget did adapt his early
theories to take account of criticisms. He also believed that one day
it could be integrated with other theories to produce a rounded view of
child development.
Productivity
Few Psychologists,
if any, have provoked as much follow up research. Over the years this
has added significantly to our understanding of child development. For
example Bruner and the Information Processing theories both take Piaget
as a starting point.
Always mention
how influential Piaget’s work has been, both in influencing educational
policies (although this was not Piaget’s intention) and in stimulating
other research. Schaffer (2004) believes the theory is still the most
comprehensive account of how a child comes to understand the World.
|
No comments:
Post a Comment