Piaget’s theory on cognitive development was based on his idea of nature versus nurture. Nature meaning that some individuals use prior knowledge based on biology compared to nurture which describes how an individual learns from the environment that it is surrounded and brought up in. In young children, schemes are the basis of further development cognitively. Piaget also firmly believed in equilibration, the balance between our existing knowledge and new experiences. Assimilation and accommodation work together in order to help individuals maintain this equilibration. The main experiement that Piaget was known for was his stages of cognitive development: Sensorimotor, pre-operational, concrete operational and formal operational.
Vygotsky, on the other hand, argued that cognitive development resulted from an interaction between heredity and environment. He stated that one needs to know how the individual is “built” and how ready it is to undergo certain social and intellectual situations. The Zone of Proximal Development includes all the possible skills that children are on the verge of developing and can perform only with help from someone more intelligent than them.
Both Piaget and Vygotsky made significant scientific contributions to cognitive developmental research and both have very important standpoints on certain topics. There are many opinions still standing on both of these intelligent scientists, but there is no right answer.
2. I would like to know about some experiments that both Piaget and Vygotsky did that proved each of their theories “right”.
After concepts are developed, the children start forming mental representations that reflect possible actions or events in the real world. They also begin to engage in conversations with other people with actual thought of the listener’s opinions and reactions. They then move onto the last stage, which Piaget thought that cognitive development culminated and which individuals now have developed all the processes needed for thinking. This stage is shown to happen with extensive schooling.
In your big picture, you do a good job of summarizing each bit, but still in the book's terms. My goal in doing this was for you to sit back after reading and think 'ok, so what does this all mean in the big picture?' to see what the chapter meant to you.
ReplyDeleteYou seem to think otherwise, but BOTH Piaget and Vygotsky thought biology and environment played a role in development. They disagreed about the mechanism by which development happened. So, for example:
Piaget believed biology was a huge determinate. He thought each child biologically went through each stage (this couldn't be influenced by experience). Within each stage, the children could encounter things (through experience) that caused disequilibrium, or some conflict between their current mental schemes and what they were perceiving. They adjusted their schemes through accomodation or assimilation.
Vygotsky couldn't deny that biology existed, and that humans exhibit development and tend to develop higher mental processes in the same sorts of ways. His model of learning and development was based on internalizing things from the external world into the mind (more about this next week!)
You ask a very good question! Where is the empirical proof for any of this? The short answer is that there isn't much from Piaget or Vygotsky (but others influenced by each have produced a lot since then, if you search in Google Scholar). Piaget mostly observed his own children. Vygotsky did experimentation, but of the works that reached the US after the cold war, I haven't seen any that have empirical data (there may be some).