Dear Jeanne:

Your question is related to how Piaget sees the process of development. It seems to me that you believe that Piaget saw development only as  a  linear and  discontinuous process and base your thinking on  (Rowan, 2016). To be frank,I do not know Rowan's paper.

Let me say that Piaget saw the process of development as implying indeed a vertical, discontinuous and linear dimension, but also a horizontal, continuous, and non-linear dimension. Suffice it to say that according to Piaget, (I) Each of his stages implies a phase of preparation and a phase of consolidation. If there is a preparation phase in each stage, then we can speak of  horizontal growth. (ii) Each of his stages lasts  for several years, which is consistent with the idea of horizontal growth.  (iii) If Piaget saw the process of development only as linear, then he has posited the existence of uncountable  stages, which is not the case. In other words, in Piaget's theory we have continuities (within a stage) and discontinuities (between stages). More to the point, according to Piaget, the next stage (e,g., formal stage) is based on the previous stage (concrete operational stage), which implies continuity, but it overcomes the previous stage, which implies discontinuity. (iv) On several occasions (see, for example, his book on the origins of intelligence in children where it is said that nothing in development begins all of sudden or ex-abrupto, and his book on biology and knowledge in which it is said that psychological developmental continues biological development. 

You still say that Piaget saw development in stages rather than a process and his research base was so small. These statements, I lament to say, are not correct. First, Piaget was more concerned with development as a constructivist process than with stages. Second, Piaget's research base was  not small. He  and  his collaborators interviewed thousands of children and in several countries.

As you can seethrough these examples, only a widespread and erroneous interpretation of Piaget's theory allows us to see his stages, for example, only in linear and vertical terms. As mentioned, his stages as well his theory is, as he used to say, a tercium, that is,a reconciliation between apparently opposite  perspectives or dimensions (e,g., biological vs. psychological; individual vs. social, continuous vs. discontinuous, and the like).

You say that you noticed that he seemed to avoid social development. Did you know, for example, his books:  The moral judgment of the child (1932)  and  Sociological  studies (1995)?. These two books are deeply related to moral and social issues

Here, I have not space  enough  to show you how  Piaget was and still is grossly misunderstood. You can  see this if you read , for example, my publications:  "In defense of Piaget's theory: A reply to 10  common criticisms" and " Developmental stages, Piagetian stages in particular: A critical review" (they are in my publications, Research Gate).

Of  course  Piaget's theory is full of gaps as he  confessed to the  French journalist Jean Claude Bringuier. In my manuscript, The child's understanding of logical necessity: Effects of counter-suggestions, I try  to  address, I think, one  of these gaps.

I hope that I have got your  question and  that this helps,

Best regards,

Orlando

Thank you.  That was one of the gap in literature I was trying to find answers for.  It seemed to be a stumbling block, because everywhere I looked, all I could find was a void in Paiget's social aspect and his research methods.  There seems to be a lot of criticism on his and Erikson's research population and size.  I understood Piaget to be an educator.  i did not expect to find so much criticisms because he work is pushed so much by public school systems.  So thank you for your information.

Jeanne

Jeanne:

I think we can accept the fallibilism (see link below) as theory being tentative as our reality changes over time, then it might be easier to understand the gaps in Piaget's theory. Just my perspective on his gaps.

Many thanks,

Debra

https://books.google.tt/books?id=KTp-CwAAQBAJ&pg=PA19&lpg=PA19&dq=Fallibilist+perspective+-+theories+tentative&source=bl&ots=A-d-_r6CVf&sig=VumkomH60bSIhi_XPILQ-O_LM7w&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi2jfuKo4HRAhWHbSYKHUXLDQQQ6AEIIDAC#v=onepage&q=Fallibilist%20perspective%20-%20theories%20tentative&f=false

Thank you for the link.

Jeanne

Dear Jeanne,

As an alternative to Piaget's stages of development we should perhaps look to Vygotsky's social constructivism where all language and learning originates in the social sphere before becoming internalized within the individual through events such as inner speech.  Take a look at the ZPD- Zone of Proximal Development where learning is social rather than individual and aided by peer group activity in social situations ie classsrooms. Also take a look at Jerome Bruner's notion of scaffolding which fits in with this social non-linear view of learning.

Piaget's stages of development focuses on human learning as an individual enterprise and an individual subjectivity. However we are social beings and our so called individual subjectivity is in fact intersubjective. There is no I without You and so the I is partly defined at least by the language of the other. We are related to the other both in language and in learning.

I hope this helps

kindest regards

Dave

Dear Jeanne,

Yes, these are good points, however, it is important to come back to the fact that Piaget's theory is a theory of development.  That means a change in process, not just addition of content.  I defer to Professor Lourenço in discussing details of Paiget's work, but I am not sure that your distinction between stage and process is a useful or even valid one.  For there to be stages, there needs to be some process that provides the movement from one stage to another (In looking further into his work you would also see that Piaget discussed several processes).  In the case you raise, the integration of knowledge into a more complex understanding is a matter of information processing, not necessarily development.  In addition, Piaget was primarily concerned with development through childhood into adolescence.  While his work has been extended, his crucial insights were especially related to the first 10-12 years of life.  In the example you provide, the individual would almost certainly have already achieved formal operations (in Piaget's theory) and so already have the essential cognitive apparatus with which Piaget was concerned. It in no way surprises me that Piaget's views are less applicable at the point where his work had reached it's limits.  There are models of adult cognitive development that go beyond Piaget (e.g., James Rest; Kitchener and King), that might be useful to you.  At the same time, there have long been questions raised about Piaget's views.  No one theorist can be expected to have a flawless, comprehensive account of a phenomenon.  Even such giants as Newton and Einstein have their limitations.  I would advocate for considering multiple perspectives and make use of the strengths of each.  These different theories make different important contributions and are differently valuable across different ages and domains.

It may also be informative to note that Piaget was not an educator nor a psychologist.  He was a biologist (his dissertation was on molluscs in Lake Geneva) who became fascinated with epistemology, the branch of philosophy that examines how we know what we know.  His initial observations were largely of his own children.  These circumstances lead to certain limitations while also creating the opportunity for unique insights.  (Many fundamental advances have come from individuals who were in some way outside the established authorities in that field.)

Taking a quick look at the review you reference, I find that it takes logical leaps that I am not sure are justified by the intellectual history that the book reviews.  I have not accessed the book, so I am not able to directly evaluate that author's argument.  If the recommendation is truly to ignore the consideration of the so called age-stage disconnect, we do a disservice to children and teachers.  I have learned through painful experience that getting too far ahead of a student's current capacity can instill learned helplessness rather than inspire engagement.  While that is shaped by previous experience and socialization that one would hope to not be the case, it is impractical to assume that society would ever get to the point where those hindrances would cease to exist.  If the key point is to distrust these theories due to their emergence out of a time in which thinking related to race was crude and overapplied, then it would be important to look more closely at the data upon which the theories are based.  While it is important to be skeptical of the underlying assumptions of any theory, stopping at that point is an act of political analysis rather than scientific analysis. 

If my response has raised other questions, please share them with me.

Good luck Jeanne.

Thank you for your insight.

Which Kitchener and King?  I only recall researching Kitchener's ethics.  There are so many Kings.  These answers give wonder research avenues.  I thank all of you for your input.  One never realizes how much one does not know until someone throws another avenue travel down.

Jeanne

Patricia King and Karen Kitchener - they have developed a model called reflective judgment.  Their major book was published in 1994  - Developing Reflective Judgment.  You can check out summaries online:

http://www.umich.edu/~refjudg/reflectivejudgmentmodel.html

http://www.umich.edu/~refjudg/reflectivejudgmentstages.html

http://collegestudentdeveltheory.blogspot.com/2010/10/king-kitcheners-reflective-judgment.html

You will see that they were very much influenced by Dewey, so it doesn't solve that concern, but they address development that largely occurs in late adolescence and emerging adulthood.  Their work has often been applied to college student development.  While they use the term stages, they are really discussion repertoires and that individuals generally have access to more than one set at a time. 

Thank you

Jeanne

First off, I think stage theory is one of Piaget's LEAST useful concepts for education. The stages are very broad, and Piaget changed the age parameters for formal operations throughout his life. Piaget's mechanism of learning through assimilation into and accommodation of schemas (mental representations) is in my opinion much more important. This mechanism is still being elaborated by the science education community. There is a huge body of work on misconceptions and conceptual change that stresses accommodation, and an ongoing debate about the nature of student knowledge (piece-like or theory-like) that relates to assimilation and accommodation.

Secondly, Piaget recognized the social dimension of "learning". He posited interaction with the social environment (or social transmission, depending on the source) as one of four factors of development.

More practially, when wondering whether and how to "combine" Piaget and Vyogtsky, one needs to be aware of important differences and tensions between the two. For instance, the status of abstract knowledge; the relationship between learning and development; and the relationship between logical thought and language are close to diametrically opposed in the two theories.

Also keep in mind that there is not really "a" Piagetian theory. Throughout his very long and productive career, Piaget continued to develop even central concepts.

Excellent points Prof. Delgado.  There is so much that could be said related to this topic that we can only sample a few in this format. 

Thanks, it certainly is a fascinating topic.

We read some Dewey (as well as Piaget and Vygotsky) in my doc course last term, and it is interesting to see how Dewey's ideas about learning and mental representations foreshadow Piaget's.

I finally broke down and ordered one of Dewey's textbooks.

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year. Felice Navida Y Ana Neuvo from Siapan, Guam, and Texax!!!

Thank You,

Jeanne

I believe learning to be linear in the initial stages of acquiring knowledge. As you know, once we are aware of a certain topic or theory of learning, we can expand it horizontally or vertically because our conceptual awareness has been activated. Thank you and have a Merry Christmas!

Buon Natali, Feliz Navidad, Joyeux Noel, Merry Christmas!! Dave