"Piaget's approach is central to the school of cognitive theory known as "cognitive constructivism": other scholars, known as "social constructivists", such as Vygotsky and Bruner, have laid more emphasis on the part played by language and other people in enabling children to learn." Please dialogue about the value of such theories. Share what you have learned about Piaget, and Vygotsky. Take the time to look up information about Bruner. Compare and contrast the three theorist. Feel free to post questions on the blog for your classmates to answer.
Piaget and Vygotsky differ from each other really in only one significant way. Piaget believed that the child developed cognitive structures on the basis of an innate natural progression. In other words, that there had to be the development of cognitive structures before the child could acquire things like language, object constancy, conservation of number, mass, etc. Vygotsky agreed that there was a natural innate progression, but that this is necessarily dependent on the child’s social interactional experience. For example – a parent’s communicating to a child is necessary to the process of the child developing language. Bruner was initially more influenced by Piaget’s conception of cognitive development. Later he opted for a position that development is influenced by social context, being much more influenced by Vygotsky. - Steve
ReplyDeleteAll three theorists emphasized cognitive development is optimized within social settings.
ReplyDeleteVygotsky: Believes that children learn through a process of scaffolding that occurs when they interact with childen that are more knowledable or experienced. He emphasizes the importance of multi-age children interacting at different developmental stages.
Piaget: Believes the most important dcognitive development happens among peers. This forces children to consider others' points of view. He belived that children are more willing to confront ideas when they are among other children instead of adults. It is especially important to be among peers that are different from themselves. This 'cognitive conflict' results in greater developmental gains.
Bruner: Children acquires a framework for interpreting experiences through social context. He also belives that curriculum should offer many choices for children.
One thing that I read about Bruber discussed his idea that even very young children can learn complex material as long as the instruction is organized approrpiately. His theory of development in children identified three stages that were integrative with one another as it applied to the context of the material being learned. These stages are encative representation (action-based, iconic representation (image based), and symbolic representation (manguage based) - which is the ultimate goal. One thing that came to mind is recent commercials teaching babies how to read - clearly these kids are reading and comprehending, but it is uite outside the realm of what we think is developmentally appropriate for this age group. It is a good demonstration of instruction organized so that learning can take place.
ReplyDeleteThis quote from Bruner found at http://www.infed.org/thinkers/bruner.htm
To instruct someone... is not a matter of getting him to commit results to mind. Rather, it is to teach him to participate in the process that makes possible the establishment of knowledge. We teach a subject not to produce little living libraries on that subject, but rather to get a student to think mathematically for himself, to consider matters as an historian does, to take part in the process of knowledge-getting. Knowing is a process not a product. (1966: 72)
Bruner makes clear that learning is not the same as knowing - that the latter is constant engagement to refine, expand and expound upon our learning.
Vygotsky, Piaget and Bruner are all considered constructivists with different points of view. Vygotsky (social constructivism) asserts that social interaction (the zone of proximal development) is key to the student's level of development. Cognitive tasks or social demands of the environment must be arranged to 'read' the student and pull the student toward growth. Piaget (personal constructivism) believes that the environments has to be prescribed to enable the student to function and learn within the student's stages of development. In Piaget's view each level of development must have appropriate material for that level, and has to be relevant and/or familiar to the student's past experience or most recent stage of development. Bruner (radical constructivism) suggests that in order to test the developmental levels the student has to have examples and be able to ask questions that fit the environment. Bruner says that different levels of attainment can be outlined for the student but they most provide choices. Vygotsky explains that multiage settings can have greater social interaction opportunities because of different ages, experiences and development levels. Piaget says the student should stay within their age level and can develop a a higher level with peers. Bruner opines that there is no unique sequence rather it is more important that the social context presents a framework for interpreting and absorbing experiences.
ReplyDeleteAll 3 theorists have valid points that can contribute to the learning environment. Their views and work represent a foundation for using different forms of social interaction and, they all profess that their must be the opportunity for the student to be challenged and to attain the greatest amount of knowledge from the experience. It will be a matter of choice as to what is being taught and what outcome is expected that will determine the approach or learning method. It must be remembered that each theorist is also coming from his own personal environment that impacts on their approach. For example, Vygotsky grew up in Russia when the political environment dictated much of the culture and social interaction. The Marxist theory emphasized socialism and collectivism. For Vygotsky, social interaction was directly related to what was understood from the culture - all age groups - and what the individual learned (or developed) as a result of that culture. Thought and reasoning were a process developed from interaction with people of all ages and then within the individual.
ReplyDeleteI feel like these theories have value in how much they correspond with the current research taking place in child development today. Piaget was said to have done the majority of his research with his two children, which calls into question the generalizability of his theory being applied to all other children. And Bruner's idea that very young children could be taught just about anything as long as the lesson was appropriately setup seems absurd. If you have spent anytime with young children, it's clear they don't have the capacity to understand advanced mathematic material (with the exception of a few child einsteins). I think a blending of research supported elements from the various theorists would be ideal.
ReplyDeleteSimilar to the previous school of thought, Vygotski believes that culture strongly affects and shapes development. He also believes that social identity and factors contribute a great deal to the development of an individual. Additionally, Vygotsky believes that language is extremely important in development. Essentially, Vygotsky's theory embraces othe outside factors in the overall development of an individual.
ReplyDeletePiaget believes that as a person grows, they find ways to adapt to their environment. In the process of adapting, they automatically find ways to assimilate and accommodate within the environment. Piaget does not feel that social factors play an important part of development. Piaget does not place emphasis on language as an important developmental factor. Ultimately, Piaget embraces self-discovery as a developmental motivator.
Bruner, on the other hand, believes that anyone can learn anything as long as it is organized into a progression that follows enactive, iconic, and a symbolic progression.
Posted for Suzette Porter she is having technical difficulties posting herself
ReplyDelete"Piaget's approach is central to the school of cognitive theory known as "cognitive constructivism": other scholars, known as "social constructivists", such as Vygotsky and Bruner, have laid more emphasis on the part played by language and other people in enabling children to learn." Please dialogue about the value of such theories. Share what you have learned about Piaget, and Vygotsky. Take the time to look up information about Bruner. Compare and contrast the three theorist. Feel free to post questions on the blog for your classmates to answer.
I agree with Gloria that all three theorist agreed that cognitive development is directly related to effective social settings.
Vygotsky believed that an individual’s social and cultural background contributes directly to their development and the two can not be separate from each other, they are embedded in the context of the development. Vygotsky focused on the mechanism of the development apart from clear developmental stages, this is where he differed from Piaget or Bruner. One other similarity between Vygotsky and Piaget is that they both believe that the boundaries of cognitive growth were established by societal influences.
Piaget believed that intelligence came from action and that children learned through interaction with their environments and that learning takes place after development. Piaget believed that human beings make sense of their world by means of their mental structures and Vygotsky believed the opposite basically; felt that learning happened before development and that children learn because of history and representation. He felt that the external world models the mind and that knowledge is internalized. This is supported by the ZPD and scaffolding; which is Piaget’s view of cognitive development differs from Vygotsky and Bruner.
Bruner was influenced by both theorists and he introduced Vygotsky’s work to the non-Soviet world. Bruner believed that the child is a social being and because of their social life, environment and awareness, will acquires a framework for interpreting experiences and this means that the process of constructing knowledge of the world is not done in isolation, but rather within a social environment. Bruner also notes that "there is no unique sequence for all learners, and the optimum in any particular case will depend upon a variety of factors, including past learning, stage of development, nature of the material, and individual differences".