-The first child appears to be in the formal operational stage. He can think and form representations in his mind about the physical world about actions and their consequences. He can also do this without needing a concrete representation of the situation. This was shown because there was no glass, hammer, or feather. Piaget would explain this as the child participating in formal operational thinking. He is putting his own experience, that of knowing what a hammer and a feather are capable of doing, against what the teacher is telling him. He is able to relfect on and analyze what the teacher is telling him without having to actually hit the glass with either of the objects. He can also recognize implications and incompatibilities, such as the results of what will happen to the glass depending on what it is struck with. This cognition is typical of the formal stage of development. The second child appears to be in the pre-operational stage. She is taking what the teacher says for what it is and is not able to think of any other way that the situation could turn out. This is a demonstration of one-way thinking, a characteristic of the pre-operational stage of development.
-To teach the first child I would use more mentally challenging problems, such as things that require mental representation to reach the conclusion. I wouldn't really focus too much on physical representations because this child has a pretty good idea of what actions have what consequences in the world. To teach the second child I would use a lot of hands-on experiences in order for her to grasp consequences of actions more concretely. I would also challenge her to start thinking about things more than one way.
I disagree that the first child is in the formal operational stage for one main reason, however you do a good job explaining why you believe he is in this stage. I took Psychology 101 last semester and learned about Piaget's stages of cognitive development, and from what I learned in that class the formal operational stage occurs between the ages of 12 and 15 and helps develop higher level thinking skills. The boy focuses on what the objects do, and not what the card specifically says about the objects, and from my past learning about these subjects I believe he is in the pre-operational stage. I like how you would teach both children though, especially the first child because you are right he does need more mentally challenging tasks because he only takes the simple knowledge of what an object does into consideration when solving a problem.
ReplyDeleteI also like your explanation a lot--it's very interesting to see your interpretation, and you argue it well. I THINK the video intended to show the boy as in concrete operational stage for the reasons you describe, he's able to represent the objects in his mind without them being shown. However, the girl appears to be in the formal operational stage because she can think about the words of hammer and feather abstractly--she can form the logical argument required to solve the problem presented, while suppressing her knowledge of the properties of the two objects in the real world.
ReplyDeleteI can tell you really considered the options. It's tricky to notice the distinctions between each stage (review the book for the differences, or look for other youtube videos linked from that one).
Concrete operational children can 'form mental representations that accurately reflect possible actions and events in the physical world...they are not able to manipulate abstract operations' (your book, 123). The idea of a concrete operation is being able represent in the child's mind how the object actually is in the world, without it being in front of him (like what the boy can do).
Formal operational children can 'manipulate abstract operations....solve a problem without needing concrete representation....think hypothetically....consider implications and incompatibilities' (your book, 123). Especially here, think about 'THINKING HYPOTHETICALLY'.... I think that is what the girl is doing here.