PART ONE: MY NIECE’S COGNITIVE GROWTH ON THE ACCOUNT OF PIAGET’S THEORY
Kate Rodgers was born December 31, 2000 to Bernard Rodgers and Nelly Rodgers in Beverley Hills. Kate’s parents described her as a jovial and playful infant. She was very active that she began playing the piano at the age of three. She was always the center of focus because of her activeness, maybe she was in the experimental stage that Piaget describes in his theory.
The first stage, sensorimotor, takes center stage from birth to between eighteen and twenty-four months. In this stage, infants can only recognize what is in their immediate environment, particularly things immediately in front of them. I had the opportunity to observe my niece grow up. I recall that she was more concentrated on whatever she saw in front of her; in fact, vibrant or dominant things would intrigue her, for example, the T.V, colored bulbs, and fancy toys among others. Children at this stage only concentrate on what they are doing; physical interactions, as well as their immediate environment. Infants at this age are less concerned with things happening beyond their immediate environment. This phenomenon occurs because they have limited intellectual capacity and knowledge.
Kids in this stage do not know how things react; in fact, they keep on experimenting through trial and error. They often shake or throw things around them or put those things in their mouth without knowing the repercussions. My niece had a terrifying ordeal at this stage because she attempted to swallow a button. Apparently, she had picked the button from the floor without anyone in the house realizing, and it almost choked her.
In addition, at this stage, the kids begin to crawl, stand and walk; they undergo additional cognitive development through their interaction with their immediate environment. At this stage, my niece had become very playful, and she would leave the house in a mess if given the freedom to play. She would play with whatever object she came across irrespective of whether that object was safe or not.
The second stage is the pre-operational stage. It takes center stage from the age of two to the age of seven years. At this stage, kids can think about things in a more symbolic manner. The use of language also matures. Most importantly, kids at this stage develop memory and imagination. This helps them relate the past and the future. My niece could recall that while she was four, there was a birthday party, and so, she would ask the following year when it was going to be organized. This is an indication that her memory and imagination were maturing, and she could relate the past with the future. However, at this stage, their thinking is still not logical; it is intuition-based. Complex things such as cause-effect, comparison and time still trouble them. At the age of five for instance, my niece would comprehend the basis of staying at home during a national holiday. She would say “our teacher asked us to stay at home today because it’s a national holiday.” She was less concerned with the significance of such holidays, but later at the age of ten, she could tell when every national holiday is celebrated, and why it is celebrated.
Concrete operational stage is the third stage. It takes prominence at the ages of seven to eleven years. Kids at this stage have logical and concrete reasoning. Kids at this stage can now use logical thought, for instance, rules, but this is primarily based on physical objects. At this stage, my niece was aware of the rules in the house; no watching TV before completing homework. In addition, kids at this stage become aware of external events. They tend to recognize that everyone has unique thoughts and feelings that may not be shared by others. However, at this level, abstract or hypothetical thinking is still limited. For instance, at the age of seven, when conducting her mathematics assignment, my niece could not make tell why every sum was giving the same answer. The assignment was unique in the sense that, the student would get the same answer because of a common factor. At this level, my niece was more concerned with getting an answer than making logical inferences.
Children at this stage can conceptualize multiple variables and make hypotheses. For instance, in her chemistry assignment, my niece could now explain why some substances react more explosively than others. She could tell what can be done to manipulate such reactions. Piaget believed that later in life, cognitive development occurs as a result of the accumulated knowledge.
Part TWO: FOLLOW-UP RESEARCH
Piaget’s theory has been evaluated my numerous follow-up studies. Some have pointed out ambiguity and the lack of a well-defined research process as the key setbacks. Besides, Piaget used his kids as the sample, and this has raised eyebrows; the reproducibility of his research is questionable. Vygotsky (1978) questions the existence of stages in the process of cognitive development. In his view, he thinks that such a development is continuous. In addition, he argues that Piaget did not take into account the effect of the social and cultural settings on cognitive development. Vygotsky (1978) contends that the data collected by Piaget is subject to biases. Thus, his findings cannot be generalized to other children in different cultures. He conducted the data personally, and there is some degree of ambiguity. Another study has shown that there is no guarantee that the child will graduate to the formal operation stage (Keating, 1979). Keating’s study found that 40-60 percent of college students cannot execute formal operational tasks. These studies point to the notion that less than a third of all adults reach the formal operational stage, and this raises more questions about the application of Piaget’s theory.
References
Keating, D. (1979). Adolescent thinking. In J. Adelson (Ed.), Handbook of adolescent psychology, pp. 211-246. New York: Wiley.
Piaget, J. (1958). The growth of logical thinking from childhood to adolescence. AMC, 10, 12.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
