We discussed Piaget's theories on cognitive development. Write a reaction to each of the following questions critics have raised about Piaget.
1. Piaget's theories are based on case studies of a small population of white, middle-class children. Are the same stages true for other cultures, atypical living arrangements, and other populations? What influences do environmental factors have on these stages?
2. The sequences and chronology of Piaget are rigid. Some "normal" children are far behind these stages while others are far ahead. Can stages be skipped? What about precocious seven-year-old chess players? Shouldn't adults be capable of formal operational thinking. (if adults know that drinking and driving is dangerous, why do they do it?)
3. Piaget does not adequately describe adolescents. Should they have their own egocentric stage? They appear to understand rules, as in the formal operations stage, yet many feel that rules apply to everyone else but themselves. (Teenagers believe in using birth control, yet many do not use it themsevles.)
18 comments:
1. Some other cultures may progress more rapidly. I have had experiences with Asian children who have been far beyond what Piaget would have classified them by age. Also, if the children grow up in an environment where they are ignored or neglected, they will not progress as rapidly.
2. I believe that these stages are a good starting reference, but by no means are absolute. A child could be beyond or below these stages without there being a problem. Some adults know how to reason, but ignore this reasoning in order to have fun etc.
3. This is the same idea as the adults. Teenagers are in the formal operational stage because they understand the reasoning. I believe that it is a completely different topic that students ignore this reasoning at times.
1. Studying only middle class white children leaves a large gap in the information. Different environments contribute to a child's developement. An impoverished child is likely to develop slower than a middle class child due to lack of certain advantages (like educated parents and a nurturing home environment).
2. Piaget's stages are a good outline for childhood development. However one can certainly skip stages or stay in them for an extened period of time. It all depends on the individual child. As for adults, most adults have the ability to reason but that doesn't mean they have common sense.
3. I think Piaget doesn't have as specific stage for teens as we do still retain some of the those childish impulses. We are able to reason but, like adults, that doesn't mean we have the best judgement.
1. No, the same stages could not be true for different cultures. Some students who have lower incomes could progress slower because they do not have the resouces that the middle class children have. Also, environments that have negative effects on children can slow the process down, the reverse being true with positive environments.
2. The stages are a good guideline. Stages could be skipped and some stages could never be reached. Like some children with learning disabilities or autism may never reach the last stage. Also some people may choose to ignore a process of thinking. Like the drinking and driving, yes they know that it is bad but adults choose to ignore it.
3. Teenagers should have a stage all to themselves. So much is going on in the mind during that age, that it is almost impossible to classify them, other than teenagers. They defy authority, even when they know its wrong. They also have made it to formal operational stage but just choose to ignore it.
1. Cultures are different. Children are raised different and they do different things. It's just a different kind of thing!
2. Children progress differently some are really slow for a while, but others rapidly grow. It depends on technology and how they are being raised at home.
3. How can anyone describe an adolescent adequately? They are all different. Why would they need their own stage?
1.) I think that depending on the culture and the background, Piaget's theory may not relate to every single individual on the world the same. I feel for middle-class white children, that the stages will be accurate, but a person with less opportunity will not develop as fast.
2.) I think to skip a stage is impossible because they grow on each other. I think that it is possible for a seven year old child to be on the formal operational stage. I also feel however an adult may be on that stage, other things can influence how they act.
3.) This is like the example above, if adults have the capacity to know consequences and actions, yet they still do it anyways, why? I feel it's because they understand that, but they feel the risk is not as high and they chose to ignore there common sense.
1. I agree with Erin about the first one if he only studies one group of people then he definatly will have a gap in his research.
2. Not all children are exactly the same and how do you classify "normal" not all kids will go through all the stages necesarily.
3. Teenagers should be in the formal operational stage. We know how to reason and we might not be complete adults but i think the things we will learn from here on out comes mainly from experiences that we will have.
THIS IS FOR MRS TURNER....I GOT ACCEPTED TO ERSKINE WOOHOO LOL
First off... Jon, "The Man", more like "one of three" hah! And Michael...no, just no.
Okay sorry! Now to get started!!!
1.With a broader group of subjects, the results would vary more (obviously). Environment would effect the rate of progress. Middle class children have more access to better resources and would progress at a faster rate than children of lower class areas.
2.Adults are capable of formal operational thinking but they do not always use the right judgement. It is the same with young children. I think that all people, no matter what age, progress and regress at periods in time. It's like climbing a ladder, sometimes you might drop a rung or two and climb a rung or two at anytime.
3.Yes, teens should have their own stage because being an adolescent leads up to you becoming an adult and I think that if teens had their own stage of progression and were adressed at that a stage it might lead to making better adults in the world.
I guess that's about it folks!!!
1. Some of these stages may vary for different cultures, areas, and living arrangements. It really depends on your exposure to the world, and with your home life. An impoverished child is more than likely going to develop quicker in areas of self-awareness and self-protection, while their intelligence will not develop nearly as quickly of that of a well-educated upper-middle class child.
2. I believe the sequence of Piaget's theories should be relaxed; it's ridiculous to expect a child to develop according to a rigid schedule. It's just not going to happen for everyone.
3. I very much agree with Jon in that every single adolescent is different. However, that is reason to put us in our own group. We understand the rules, and while many of us choose to ignore them, many of us follow them. (My beliefs system may somewhat resemble Mrs. Turner's, but that does not put us on the same level; she's had the life experience to make reasonable, adult decisions, while I retain a [small] amount of immaturity.) We're a strange combination of adult- and child-like qualities, and that should be considered in Piaget's theories.
1. I mostly agree with what everyone had to say about this question. All cultures do not have the same opportunites and advantages like "typical" middle class white children.
2. I like what Kate said. Like, with the observations that we had to do...some children had goals for that year. While maybe other kids progressed and are trying to reach for new and higher levels. Also, the last part of the question had me giggling. Because it's the same thing with having unprotected sex. You know you shouldn't do it..but you're going to take the risk anyway(going into #3).
3. I don't know what to really say about this. I want to say no because we should know right from wrong by now. But then I want to say yes because some people know what they should do but they choose to ignore it(like what a lot of people said). Which causes more pregancy rates, death rates, etc.
1. Piaget's stages of cognitive development seem pretty basic. I do not see why they should vary much according to class, culture, or situation. At the same time, I remember hearing about how reading and singing to children at a young age makes an impact on their cognitive development. I guess that children in a culture and class where bed time stories and the like are prevalent might develop faster then those whose parents do not choose to or are not able to spend time in such a way.
2. I don't think any of these stages could be "skipped" entirely, but children could progress through stages at different rates, and some might even develop certain cognitive skills out of order. I imagine that a 7-year-old who thinks on a formal operational level must also have mastered concrete operational thought. I see the most opportunity for "skips" between the pre-operational and concrete operational levels. For instance, it seems concievable that a child might be capable of seriation or some abstract thought before he or she has progressed beyond animism. As for adults making poor choices, I think this is not a defect in formal operational thinking but rather a defect in priorities. To some, the pleasure of drinking outweighs their concern for safety.
3. Again, I think the problem with adolescents lies with values, not with cognition. I don't think that any human being ever entirely overcomes egocentrism. As for the birth control example, it would seem that such teenagers simply value something else more than they value the benefits for birth control.
4. I think that one of two, maybe three things will happen in the given situations. On the optimistic side, such practices may push students to progress faster in their cognitive development. Perhaps more often, students will memorize the concepts and come to really understand them later on. More often still, I am afraid, a phenomenon may occur in which students build knowlege on less than solid foundations. Such a flaw is likely to cause trouble for students trying to understand more advanced concepts later on. If this is so, it would seem that perhaps more of an effort should be made to separate students according to how advanced their cognitive development is, so that they can continue to progress at their natural rates without being either held back or rushed.
1. Each child's developement is going to be vary due to different class of families, cultures, and environments. If parents are educated, kids are most likely to progress more quickly. The poor kids are likely to progress slower because they don't have the advantages that others have.
2. I think it really depends on individual. Some kids are gifted, so some stages could be skipped for them. However,stages could not be skipped for some normal or challenged kids. Also, adults know what is right and wrong, but sometimes they choose to ignore it or go back to their earlier stages to stay away from reality.
3. I think teens should have their own stage because teens are so different during that period of time. Teens hit the formal operations stage and should think like the adults. However, some are still somewhat childish and trying to ignore the reality just so they can do whatever they want and to have fun.
1. I think by giving such a limited group, Piaget limits his findings. Had he looked at other incomes and races, the finding would have been completely different. There would have been more information to further prove his claims.
2. The stages Piaget use are good starting guidelines. Some kids may skip over certain stages or even multiple stages in the case of prodigies.
3. Piaget should have a different category for teenagers. As a group, they are more diversified than any other. Some are still "child like" while others act more mature than some adults.
I LOVED READING YOUR COMMENTS!!
You all have wonderful insight into criticism of Piaget's thoery. You also gave good examples from your life experience. This a good forum for a discussion. I appreciate you reading and commenting on each others thoughts. This is a great learning tool to use in the classroom!
PS - WAY TO GO JESSICA - I'm so proud of you!!
Anthony aka Crazy Spades said...
1. All people are different end of story. Showing just one view of people limited his studied so making him a bad researcher like Mrs. Studar says "Don't be a dog in a backyard and look.
2. Everyone progresses differently so yes alot of people go too a different one and go back to a one that is another one later. Like a teenage boy in a teacher cadet class that is like a four year old, we are just different. Or a kid who witness a murder we all have different issues to get though.
3. Teenagers and some adults have the foriddean Friut Stage in my book. That if we are told to do something we choose to do the opposite. Our parents tells us not to drink we drink. That is why having sex ed, somethings increase the chances of teen pregnacy.
1. This is where I disagree with some of what Piaget's theory states. I believe that by studying other cultures, living arrangements, and other environmental factors would close up the wide "gap" that Piaget has seemed to create. Every culture progresses and develops at different rates, whether rapidly or slowly. A major influence on these stages would definitatly be environmental factors. If instance, say you have a neglected child, this child will most likely develop and learn at a much slower rate than a child that is loved and treated well because he/she doesn't have anyone there to guide or support them. The same situation is seen with improverished families because they lack resources that may help children learn and grow.
2. I believe that Piaget set out a great sketch or outline of what is suspected for child development. However, I do feel that given the circumstances of whomever, some of the stages could be skipped along with lasting longer than excepted. I think that most adults are capable of this, but choose to how they act, their reactions. Also, influence is a huge impact with adults as well.
3. I believe that most teenagers(especially older ones..such as 16) should be in a formal operational stage because they know how to think reasonably and know what's right and what's wrong. However, many teenagers might understand the rules and know what's right, but may ignore them for several reasons.
**I just wanted to say that every one of you had awesome responses!! I enjoyed reading them and listening to what you all thought!!**
and ps-congrats Jessi!!!
1.Some other cultures are far beyond piaget's theories because of their enviroment and the surroundings, other cultures that are low in society or a 3rd world country will learn slower than others.
2.It is okay for children to go beyond the stages and it is also okay for them to regress. Some adults refuse to move on to other stages, because its fun or they really don't want to grasp their mind around it.
3.Teenagers should have a stage of their own, during this time they are learing but they don'e always make the best judgement...we need room for mistakes to learn from (we'er only human!)
4.Not all students will reach the formal operational stage untill twelve this is fine. I think those who are not at that stage should not be learning algebra, but at the sametime they should not be "shuned (sp)" because they are not at that level
Oh ya and this is to Mrs. Turner...I GOT INTO HARVARD!!!
Post a Comment