Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

Re: [Phys-l] More on Piaget



The Wikipedia account ignores the fact that Piaget also pointed out that the
cultural background had an effect on the development. He was quite aware of
it. It is not clear that Vygotsky contradicted Piaget. He stressed the
cultural effects, while Piaget looked at the development, but was not as
much interested in the cultural effects. Piaget looked at specific tasks as
developmental markers. So the two in some ways complement each other.
Piaget had no interest in engineering education, and called that "the
American problem". Piaget's ideas evolved and changed as his research
progressed. In a sense Piaget was more of an experimentalist while Vygotsky
was more of a theoretician. Vygotsky's papers are apparently individual
works and do not show the gradual development that is evident in Piaget.
Psychology has progressed to more nuanced ideas since both of them.

PER has generally seemed to draw more on Piaget, and the Piagetian tasks are
important diagnostic markers of evelopment. Shayer, Adey, Lawson, and
Feuerstein are all probably neo-Piagetians.

John M. Clement
Houston, TX

-----Original Message-----
From: phys-l-bounces@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu
[mailto:phys-l-bounces@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu] On Behalf
Of Jack Uretsky
Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2011 2:29 PM
Cc: Forum for Physics Educators
Subject: [Phys-l] More on Piaget

Here's some more on Piaget - an extract from Wikipedia:
================================================
Challenges

Piaget's theory, however vital in understanding child
psychology, did not
go without scrutiny. A main figure whose ideas contradicted
Piaget's ideas
was the Russian psychologist Lev Vygotsky. Vygotsky stressed the
importance of a child's cultural background as an effect to
the stages of
development. Because different cultures stress different social
interactions, this challenged Piaget's theory that the hierarchy of
learning development had to develop in succession. Vygotsky
introduced the
term Zone of proximal development as an overall task a child
would have to
develop that would be too difficult to develop alone.

Also, the so called neo-Piagetian theories of cognitive development
maintained that Piaget's theory does not do justice either to the
underlying mechanisms of information processing that explain
transition
from stage to stage or individual differences in cognitive
development.
According to these theories, changes in information processesing
mechanisms, such as speed of processing and working memory, are
responsible for ascension from stage to stage. Moreover, differences
between individuals in these processes explain why some individuals
develop faster than other individuals (Demetriou, 1998).

Curiously, Piaget had published a novel at the age of 20, before he'd
begun any research in psychology, in which he stated what
would later be
the "conclusions" from decades of studying the development of
intelligence
in children.[25]
--------------------------------------------------
The education department at UIC seems to emphasize
neo-Piagetism rather
than the original version. Also, I recall some assertions that his
research was not free of some imagined interludes.
Regards,
Jack


"Trust me. I have a lot of experience at this."
General Custer's unremembered message to his men,
just before leading them into the Little Big Horn Valley




_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu
https://carnot.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l