Describe:
Jean Piaget was a Swiss developmental psychologist. In his
studies of his own children, he noticed that they seemed to learn based on
their “manipulation of and interaction with the environment,” (Slavin, 2012).
His theory of cognitive development proposes that children learn and progress
through four specific stages. Each stage is recognized by children’s new
abilities, ways of figuring out problems, and thinking. Piaget’s thinking is
centered around the concept of ‘schemes.’ A scheme is “[a] mental pattern that
guide[s] behavior,” (Slavin, 2012). According to Piaget, schemes are the
building blocks to all future learning. Throughout each stage, new schemas are
built and old ones are added onto and can be changed with new understanding.
Piaget’s stages of cognitive development are defined by age. From birth to two
years, children are in the sensorimotor stage. In this stage, children develop
from babies that have only reflexes to toddlers who use trial-and-error methods
to get what they desire. The following stage is the preoperational stage and
takes place from the age of two to seven years. The preoperational stage is
characterized by a lack of understanding about conservation. Conservation is
the concept that certain properties of objects remain the same regardless of
changes in other properties (Slavin, 2012). Children’s thinking in this stage
is very egocentric, and they therefore believe that everyone around them sees
thing in the ways that they do. They cannot take the perspective of others. The
third stage is named concrete operational, and children develop through this
stages between the ages of seven and eleven. In this stage, children “can form
concepts, see relationships, and solve problems, but only as long as they
involve objects and situations that are familiar,” (Slavin, 2012). Children are
beginning to become less egocentric, can think about objects abstractly, and
are able to reverse their thinking. The final stage of cognitive development is
the formal operational stage. According to Piaget, this stage takes place from
the age of eleven and continues through adulthood. In this stage, children are
able to think totally abstractly and are able to consider the hypothetical.
Today,
many agree with Piaget’s theory that development takes place in stages,
however, most do not think that these stages of development are locked by age.
It is also widely viewed that children learn from experiences and these
experiences “have a strong influence on development,” (Slavin, 2012), while
Piaget mostly considered certain tasks in his studies.
Lev
Vygotsky was a Russian psychologist who also studied cognitive development. Vygotsky’s
theory of development does not focus on a distinct set of stages, rather, his
theories focus on how children learn. Where “Piaget’s study suggests that
development precedes learning…Vygotsky’s theory suggests that learning precedes
development,” (Slavin, 2012). He believed that development occurs as a child
develops self-regulation, or “the ability to think and solve problems without
the help of others,” (Slavin, 2012). He taught that for children, learning
takes place in the zone of proximal development. This is the area of learning
where children are challenged, but are capable of being guided toward
understanding. It is just above their current level of understanding. He also
theorized that scaffolding was a way to teach in which a concept is introduced
and highly supported, but after a while the learner is slowly given less and
less support with their acquisition of more understanding.
Analyze:
The theories of both Piaget and Vygotsky are critical for
teachers to keep in mind. We must realize that students do have different
understandings and abilities as they grow, but we also cannot forget that every
child is different and learns in a different way and at a different pace. I personally
agree more with Vygotsky’s views on cognitive development because of my
experience with young learners. As a pre-k teacher, I teach the minds of four
and five year olds every day. According to Piaget, all of these students should
be in a preoperational stage and they should not be able to reason logically or
reverse their thinking; however, I have found that some of my students are able
to make logical decisions and justify them and a few are able to reverse their
thinking. This shows that the age range of development does not matter quite as
much as the experiences of the child. Some of my students have had little
exposure to critical thinking and their logic skills are not developed. Those
that have older siblings, previous exposure to school, and parents that
actively promote their learning are able to reason and logically justify
statements and decisions. Thi shows me that I cannot simply rely on an age
range to know how to approach teaching- I have to know where each student falls
developmentally and go from there.
I found
the discussion posts from this week to be very interesting. I think that all of
the teachers had a firm grasp of Piaget’s theory of cognitive development and I
enjoyed learning about their perspectives on what it would be like to teach
science to second graders versus eighth graders. In many of the posts, teachers
refered to using the concrete with second graders and only exposing them to
things that they were already familiar with. These ideas are supported by
Piaget’s research on the concrete operational stage. In this stage it is most
effective to teach from what students are familiar. Many used examples of
teaching about plants or weather. This is because second grade students, seven
and eight year olds, have experience with these science concepts. The approach
that most took with teaching eighth graders was to have students use the
scientific methods, consider possibilities, and form conclusions based on
tests. This way of teaching requires a high level of reasoning and hypothetical
thought. These ideas of appealing to the abstract thinking abilities of eighth
graders are aligned with Piaget’s formal operational stage of development.
Reflect:
How is this concept
significant concerning the context of your classroom?
In my
classroom, I know that I teach students that are either four or five. The
theories that I read about this week gave me a better understanding of what
they are not only capable of but incapable of at their age. I will be able to
approach my students from a developmentally appropriate stance knowing that they
cannot think abstractly and that they need concrete experiences to learn.
What are the positive or
negative aspects for this concept?
The
positive aspect of theories of cognitive development is that they provide a
baseline or rough guideline for which to approach teaching. Without knowing
that the five year olds in my classroom are incapable of abstract thought, I
might give them hypothetical situations that would only confuse them; however,
knowing where to start and having some information for where they cognitively
should be helps me to teach appropriately. It also helps me to know when a
child is behind. For example, I had a student this past year who was nonverbal,
even in what Vygotsky would call private speech. He also relied on pointing to
objects as a way of communication. This showed me that he was cognitively far
behind the other students in my classroom and I was able to refer him for
observation by specialists in the school. Another positive aspect is that it
promotes scaffolding and teaches about the zone of proximal development. I am a
firm believer that learning happens when we are being challenged- but not when
we have been challenged to the point of frustration. The zone of proximal
development teaches students to reach for new and deeper understandings with
the help of their teachers. It is supported by scaffolding which is taken away
a little at the time as students develop richer understandings of what they
have been learning about. These two concepts are essential in teaching all
subjects, especially mathematics and literacy.
How might you handle a
situation or activity differently based on this learned information?
Based on
my reading and understanding, in the future I will always consider how my
students learn best. Often times when giving instructions, I will give my
students hypothetical situations of how things can go wrong. If I really want
these consequences to stick, I am going to start giving them real examples, not
just verbal ones.
How did this event change or
confirm your knowledge or beliefs about teaching?
This
reading confirmed my beliefs that all learners are different and that experiences
and home-life truly do affect students’ learning. Certainly there are stages of
growth that children have to go through and realizations that must make, but
this does not happen t the same time or in the same way for every student. I
have also been confirmed in my belief that the best way to teach students is to
first give them a lot of support and to slowly let go and allow them to
experience the learning for themselves. This is especially true for very young
learners like the ones in my classroom. Each week we focus on one math concept
and it is critical that I start out with heavy support showing them each
counting bear, bean, cube, and numeral that we are working with, and discussing
each move that I make. Gradually, I let them control more of the conversation
and at the end of the week, I help them to do the concept themselves. This
could take the form of counting to five or adding onto! I so enjoy seeing them
make connection from the challenge when I present an attainable goal!
Reference
Slavin, R. E.
(2012). Educational psychology: Theory and practice (10th
ed.). Boston, MA:
No comments:
Post a Comment