The contributions of Piaggetian and neo-Piagetian theories to education are great. They introduced new understanding to the learning process; "Learning is all about making connections" , as Piaget said. Based on this defention of learning , educators are required to pay more attention to the learner's prior knowledge while planning for new teaching activities. The theory of cognitive development and its stages helped educators design learning activities and curricula that are appropriate for learners at each stage and illustarted how development leads learning. Science education researchers developed teaching methods ( e.g., Conceptual Change Model) based on the contributions of the piagetian theory.

We could probably debate till the cows come home the strengths and weaknesses of Piaget's theories - for example, "Do his stages of cognitive development still stand scrutiny? Did he pay enough attention to social and cultural factors?' The fact that people still do debate these and other issues is one measure of his impact. Another is the theorists who have also impacted on education that he influenced - for example Bruner and Ausubel.

Thank you both for the above comments. I see education theories as building blocks in a grand design for ever-increasing understanding of the ways humans learn and the ways we teachers can facilitate that. Certainly, using that metaphor, Piaget would have to be the giant cement slab foundation of this design. Whether or not his stages of cognitive development will continue to ground education theory, it's for sure that it has earned its reputation as a founding and profound idea upon which we educators can continue to build.

I think it was fundamental, but the constant changings on the constructivism approach has a negative impact on the outcome. The method needs care to evaluate the learning results: for this we need a very carefuly design of the approach, the method, strategies and evaluate process. Then we can named Piaget Theory or Method and apply the results.

The trouble with Piaget is that people are trying to apply narrow findings from a narrow data set to ALL areas of education. Piaget's research was flawed and his writing is hard to follow, so most people rely in second hand accounts that simplify his thoughts. From this we are left with the concepts of stages of learning and how the building of schema allows for development. For me, Piaget is over-used and under-thought. We use a simplified version of his research and apply it in a generic fashion to all sorts of areas of education. This means that his influence is far-reaching but that the substance of his writing is overlooked.

The work of Piaget inspired me a lot. This author has contributed enormously to the world of education. His constructivism, however, is too focused on knowledge (theory of knowledge), and even on rational knowledge, and so not enough on action (theory action) with all its properties: mental, physical, emotional, situational, distributed, etc. Damasio would say that Piaget’s theory needs to add “la raison des émotions” (in French) i.e. the connection between emotions and rationality.

I have published a text interpreting Piaget’s constructivism, but it is in French. 

https://www.academia.edu/1068095/Le_constructivisme_en_termes_simples

I think on this topic frequently and I published a paper on this (is in Spanish in the attachment). In my opinion, Piaget theory gives to education a powerful tool: the notion of "reconstruction" in knowledge development. It means that you can learn something through understanding it for yourself, putting it in context of your previuos learning or schemes, and making your new thoughts to fit with social conventional shared knowledge. It explains, for example, why some people cannot understand some notions, but when they get more context, knowledge, etc., they can assimilate them.

Piaget's theory is a strong basis to formulate a new learning theory: my own hypothesis is that this theory does not exist yet (a Piaget's theory of learning), but can be built based on Piaget's works, a vast theoretical pathway on cognitive development based on epistemology and biology backgrounds.

I suggest you to read carefully some of Piaget's late works, like La Prisse de Conscience (circa 1974), and some of their followers works, like Emilia Ferreiro's opinion on piagetian possible explanation on how to deal with "cultural objects", Annette Karmiloff-Smith's works on reconstruction mechanisms, and Rebeca Puche - Navarro's reaearch body on child development with cultural framework -sometimes using dynamic system models-.

I give you a link to a special work on this issue in Revista Colombiana de Educación, that would be helpful for you:

http://revistas.pedagogica.edu.co/index.php/RCE/issue/view/101/showToc

Marchand (2012) writes:

"Despite the subsidiary emphasis given to educational aspects, the subordination of the learning process to developmental process, and the lack of consideration of the specificities of the school context, Piagetian theory, because of its unparalleled body of knowledge – namely the conception of development organized into a coherent structural sequence and the descrip- tion of the processes involved in the acquisition of new knowledge – was until the early 1970’s an essential reference for those who were interested in rethinking education. However, a growing disillusionment and skepticism about its educa- tional contributions appeared in the form of more or less violent, more or less unjust, criticisms. How can we explain these criticisms?

The reasons that are extrinsic to the theory resulted from deficient assimilation and accommodation of Piagetian central concepts by many edu- cators (that often show a reduced, incomplete and sometimes distorted reading of his work, that ignored the constant con- ceptual and methodological revisions carried out by Piaget and his collaborators, and led to beliefs that Piagetian theory is a corpus of knowledge from which a series of principles can be directly transposed into teaching practice. The intrinsic reasons to the theory resulted from some weaknesses of Piagetian theory, such as its overgeneralized conception of development, its failure to consider domain specific constraints, individual differences, cultural specificities and the lack of profound analysis of stage transitions, among others. The extrinsic reasons explain the confusions, false pretensions, hasty generalizations highlighted by Rolando Garcia and other Piagetian and non Piagetian scholars; the intrinsic reasons underlie the emergence of neo-Piagetian theories." (page 173)

Seems very relevant and possibly accurate.

Marchand, H (2012) Contributions of Piagetian and post-Piagetian theories to education. Educational Research Review, 7, 165-176

I feel , at this juncture Raaproachment and blending of post Piagetian theories coupled with Objective based teaching of Bloomian thougt  is more useful than  following one theory blindly. Context, cultue and subject matter is to be kept in mind.

I agree that following any theory blindly is always a bad idea and that includes following Bloom's Taxonomy blindly. You may not do that Shakuntia, but many teachers do. I researched the literature some time ago on this and there seems remarkably little evidence (given its influence) for the hierarchy Bloom and his followers present, although I agree that it is a useful practical list for thinking about objectives and that teachers sometimes use the taxonomy to positive effect for their students - at least, they report success in blogs etc..

However, to focus on the topic here, I suspect (haven't tried it) the approach you advocate would result in the same sort of 'cherry picking' of Piagetian and post Piagetian theories that others in this thread have pointed out as being the problem in assessing Piaget's impact. Is that a bad thing? Perhaps, if we turn the question around a little, we might get a clearer insight. How useful are Piagetian and Post Piagetian theories (and Bloom's Taxonomy, if you like) useful for teachers in understanding and finding solutions to the pedagogical problems they encounter in their local contexts? Until we have a theory as powerful in education as, say cell theory is for understanding organisms, 'cherry picking' Piaget's and many other theories may be the only solution teachers have. Start with the problem, then look to the theories for insights and then, as teachers use those insights to devise pedagogical solutions. It should be then theoretically possible to find empirical examples of teachers who have interpreted the problems using Piagetian and Post Piagetian theory (or parts thereof) and devised practical (and evidenced) solutions to those problems from the insights they gleaned from them.

Of course, that raises a host of other questions, that others will no doubt 'pounce upon' -  just trying to keep the debate going.

JEAN PIAGET’S IMPORTANCE FOR EDUCATION

As indicated by McLeod (2018), the influence of Piaget’s ideas in developmental psychology has been enormous, as he changed how people viewed the child’s world and their methods of studying children; he was an inspiration to many who came after and took up his ideas. As McLeod (2018) points out, then, Piaget's ideas have generated a huge amount of research, which has increased our understanding of cognitive development, since his ideas have been of practical use in understanding and communicating with children, particularly in the field of education.

On the word of McLeod (2018), consistent with Piaget (1958), assimilation and accommodation require an active learner, not a passive one, because problem-solving skills cannot be taught, they must be discovered. Within the classroom learning should be student-centered and accomplished through active discovery learning. The role of the teacher is to facilitate learning, rather than direct tuition. Therefore, teachers should encourage the following within the classroom:

• Focus on the process of learning, rather than the end product of it.
• Using active methods that require rediscovering or reconstructing "truths."
• Using collaborative, as well as individual activities (so children can learn from each other).
• Devising situations that present useful problems, and create disequilibrium in the child.
• Evaluate the level of the child's development so suitable tasks can be set.

In this sense, as Lourenço (2016) rightly and cogently states, Piaget's theory is both functional and structural. Functional, for it appeals to functional invariants, such as assimilation, accommodation, and self-regulation, which are involved in any process of knowledge at every age. Structural, because the someway of psychological functioning in all individuals at every age gives rise to different structures and new forms of knowing as time goes by.

Like this manner, in keeping with the above statements and regarding active methodologies it was at the end of the 19th century when an important educational and pedagogical renewal movement known as New Education arose: a trend that sought to change the course of traditional education to give it an active meaning by introducing new teaching styles. Then, students become the center of the educational process, the rote learning is completely rejected, and it fosters their critical spirit through scientific methods.

As a result, active methodologies can be defined as those methods and strategies, which teachers use to make their teaching process into activities that foster active participation of students and lead them to learning, thus providing them with competences such as autonomy, teamwork development, participative attitude, communication and cooperation skills, problem solving, creativity, digital competence, etc (Labrador-Piquer and Andreu-Andrés, 2014). A good example of this approach is Telematic Simulation as a learning experience in the context of the English language Learning and Teaching (García-Carbonell et al., 2012). In this sense, their paper, based on excellent experimental and empirical results, does foreground a great value-laden scientific and didactic research to support some criteria-referenced tools for implementing a “methodology, which encourages the experiential learning of the language and, at the same time, entails the added value of the acquisition of professional competences, as well more meaningful learning.” Particularly, as far as its use with Spanish engineering students in a course of English as a foreign language at advanced level is concerned. Accordingly, it is about a method, whose tasks provide students with the best critical and creative thinking based on such an experiential learning. Thus, I believe that their approach, The Simulation and Game Methodology, is a very innovative one, since it is in accordance with the teacher’s role in the context of second language acquisition, who plays a leading role in the learning assessment, insofar as students must have achieved certain learning objectives and acquired the competences required at their level. Therefore, the methodology, the how, what, and why, is where teachers’ good educational practice is actually shown. In this way, they should integrate the following methodological aspects directly related to students’ learning:

• Learning guidelines;
• Methodological guidelines;
• Learning principles;
• Teaching methods;
• Teaching activities;
• Resources (use of ICT, integrated internet-based materials, etc);
• Kinds of groupings (collaborative work).

Bibliographical references

• García-Carbonell, A., Watts, F., & Andreu-Andrés, M.Á. (2012). Simulación telemática como experiencia de aprendizaje de la lengua inglesa. REDU. Revista de Docencia Universitaria, 10(3), 301-323. Available online: https://polipapers.upv.es/index.php/REDU/article/view/6025. [Accessed November 25, 2018].
• Labrador Piquer, M.J; & Andreu Andrés, M.A. (Eds.). (2008). Metodologías Activas, Grupo de Innovación en Metodologías Activas (GIMA). Universidad Politécnica de Valencia. Available online: http://www.upv.es/diaal/publicaciones/Andreu-Labrador12008_Libro%20Metodologias_Activas.pdf. [Accessed November 25, 2018].
• Labrador-Piquer, M.J., & Andreu-Andrés, M.Á. (2014). Investigación-acción para conseguir grupos colaborativos eficaces. Educatio siglo XXI, 32(3), 75-98. Polytechnic University of Valencia, Spain.
• Lourenço, O. M. (2016). Developmental stages, Piagetian stages in particular: A critical review. New Ideas in Psychology, 40, 123-137. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/283771814_Developmental_stages_Piagetian_stages_in_particular_A_critical_review. [Accessed November 25, 2018].
• McLeod, S. (2018). Jean Piaget’s Theory of Cognitive Development. Available online: https://www.simplypsychology.org/piaget.htm. [Accessed November 25, 2018].

...a possible problem with Piaget is not his theories per se, which can be agreed with and viceversa or developed and adapted and applied, it's how they have been used by governance (i.e. curriculum, settings, measurements) to sift and sort students in relation to age, then 'kind' and then IQ and all other horrendous things schooling does to impact on students' identity and subjectivity...children develop at so many different paces and stages in so many different contexts, trying to pigeon hole them is to limit them...i think, Piaget might have been insightful but I'm not sure it's been used for the right reasons, reflexively...(at the least it seems to me in the UK)...

Nice Dear Danilo di Emidio