Running Head: EDUCATIONAL IMPLICATIONS OF COGNITIVE AND
PSYCHOSOCIAL DEVELOPMENT THEORIES
EducationalImplicationsofCognitiveandPsychosocialDevelopmentTheories
LibertyUniversity
2
Theburdenofblazinganewtrailinscienceisthatitinspiresasmanycriticsasit
doesadmirers.Subsequentgenerationsstrivetoreplicate,reproduce,expand,
deconstruct,disprove,orsimplycriticizetheforefathersofanyinnovationinorderto
advancecollectiveunderstandingortoadvanceaselfishgoalofgarneringpublicityby
association.Beforeexploringmoremoderninterpretationsofspecificscientifictheories,
itisimportanttounderstandthefoundationalpremisesthatenableadvancementand
inspiretheongoingevolutionofthoughtthatpropelssocietytoagreaterappreciationof
humandevelopment.Piaget,VygotskyandEriksonblazedsuchatrailandcollectively
establishedthegroundworkinthedomainofcognitiveandsocialdevelopmenttheory.
Ithasbeensaidthat“assessingtheimpactofPiagetondevelopmentalpsychology
islikeassessingtheimpactofShakespeareonEnglishliterature,orAristotlein
Philosophy–impossible”(Beilin,1992,p.191).RichardDeLisi,inhisessay“From
MarblestoInstantMessenger:ImplicationsofPiaget’sIdeasAboutPeerLearning”,
delvesintotheapplicationorPiagetiantheoryintheclassroom.DeLisifirstexplains
thatthepurposeofpeerlearninginaneducationalsettingis“tosharpenacademicskills
suchaslisteningandcommunication,and…learninghowtomanageinteractionswith
classmatesinordertohaveaneffectiveandsuccessfulteamexperience”(DeLisi,2002,
p.5).Asa“cognitiveconstructivist”,Piaget’stheoryheldthatthematurationofchildren
occurredinstagesthatincreasedachild’scapacitytolearn,butDevries(1997,2000,
2001)expandedonPiagetbyemphasizingthatthesocialenvironmentinwhichthe
learningoccurscapitalizesonthecognitiveabilitiesofthestudenttomaximizegrowthin
understanding(DeLisi,2002,p.6).Therefore,inordertounlockthepotentialofthe
3
EDUCATIONAL IMPLICATIONS OF COGNITIVE AND
PSYCHOSOCIAL DEVELOPMENT THEORIES
studenttodevelopwithinastageortothenextstage,theeliminationofthesingular
teacher studentrelationship(anditsunderlyingauthoritarianconstraint)andtheadoption
ofpeerlearning(anditsunderlyingmutualrespectfreedom)isrequiredinorderto
unleashthetruepotentialofaneducationalexperience.
InkeepingwithPiaget’scognitivefocus,DeLisi(2002,p.7)alsoarguedthata
peerlearningexercisewasmorelikelytoengageastudent’scognitivesystemwhen“[the
student]feelsthat[thestudent’s]learningeffortsarerespectedandvaluedbyteachers
andbyclassmates,[thestudent]haspositivefeelingsaboutthelearningsituation,andthe
curriculumtasksandproblemsaredevelopmentallyappropriate.”Itisworthnotingthat
DeLisimakesrepeatedreferencetotherequiredbalancebetweencognitiveabilityand
theproblemortask,underpinnedbythenotionofrespect,throughouthispaper.He
assertedthatstudentswillnotengagetheircognitivepotential,criticaltoPaiget’stheory
ofdevelopment,“whentheyfeeldisrespectedbyateacherorclassmatesandwhen
genuineeffortsatlearningarenotrewarded”(2002,p.7).Whenpoorlydesigned,peer
learningcaninhibitdevelopmentasdysfunctionalinteractiondistractsfromthetaskat
hand(reducingcognitiveengagement)andcancauseunhappiness(reducingsocial
engagement).Whenproperlydesigned,peerlearningprovideschildrenwithenhanced
understandingthroughassimilationandaccommodation,skillsthatareessentialtothe
progressionthroughPiaget’sstagesandthebedrockofcognitivedevelopment.
VygotskyrejectedPaiget’stheorythatachild’sdevelopmentenabledlearning
(constructivism)anddeveloped,asapartofamoregeneralizedtheoryofchild
development,“thezoneofproximaldevelopment”.Hemaintainedthatitispossibleto
4
measure“thedistancebetweentheactualdevelopmentallevelasdeterminedby
independentproblemsolvingandthelevelofpotentialdevelopmentasdetermined
throughproblemsolvingunderadultguidanceorincollaborationwithmorecapable
peers”(Vygotsky,1978,p.86).Inotherwords,thezone,ifproperlyidentified,defines
thelow endofanindividual’scapabilitytoaccomplishtasksindividuallyandthehigh -
endofanindividual’scapabilitytoaccomplishtasksincollaboration(whichwill
eventuallybeaccomplishableindividually).Chaiklin’sessay,“TheZoneofProximal
DevelopmentinVygotsky’sAnalysisofLearningandInstruction”,soughttoanswerthe
criticismofferedbynumerousindividuals,includingPalinscar(1998),whosurmisedthat
Vygotsky’stheorywas“probablyoneofthemostusedandleastunderstoodcontructsto
appearincontemporaryeducationalliterature.”Forinstance,whenVygotskywroteof
“problemsolving”,heclarifiedelsewherethathewasnotreferringtothelearningofa
singulartask,butrather,thecollectivedevelopmentinunderstandingandcognitive
abilitiesthatcomesfromthematuringfunctionsthatoccurwhenthechildischallenged
attheupperlevelofthezone(1934/1987,p.212).Withoutthisamplificationby
Vygotsky,itisunderstandablethatindividualscouldbelievehewasreferringtotasks,
butthatwouldruncountertohisgeneraltheoryofchilddevelopmentwhichfocusedon
theholisticchildincludingcharacteristicsorqualitiesandthechild’srelationshiptohis
environment(Chaiklin,2003,p.7).
Chaiklin(2003)goesontoredefinethezoneofproximaldevelopmentseveral
differentwaystoaidintheunderstandingthatPalinscarsaidwasmissing.Herestatesit
as“thoseintellectualactionsandmentalfunctionsthatachildisabletouseininteraction
,
5
EDUCATIONAL IMPLICATIONS OF COGNITIVE AND PSYCHOSOCIAL
DEVELOPMENT THEORIES
whereindependentperformanceisinadequate”(p.9).Alternatively,hecitesVygotsky
(1934/1984)whowrite,“Theareaofimmature,butmaturingprocessesmakesupthe
zoneofproximaldevelopment”(p.202).Oneofthemorecontroversialaspectsof
Vyotsky’stheorywashisexperimentationandconclusionthat“thesizeofthezoneof
proximaldevelopmentwasmorepredictivethanIQ”(Chaiklin,2003,p.12).Mercerand
Fisher(1992)believedthat“thereisadangerthatthetermisusedaslittlemorethana
fashionablealternativetoPiagetianterminologyortheconceptofIQfordescribing
individualdifferencesinattainmentorpotential”,butclearlyVyotskydifferentiatedhis
theoryfromPaigetsufficientlyenoughthat,althoughtheybothidentified“stages”in
childdevelopment,therewaslittlechanceofconfusionbetweentheprinciples(p.342).
Additionally,VyotskydirectlycomparedIQtothezoneofproximaldevelopmentsoitis
difficulttoassertthatthetermsareinterchangeable.Insummary,Chaiklin(2003)found
that“instruction/teachingshouldbefocusedonmaturingpsychologicalfunctions,rather
thanalreadyexistingfunctions,thatarerelevantforthegeneralintellectualdevelopment
tothenextageperiod”(p.13).
Intheirarticle,“HowEarlyisTooEarlytoBeginLifeCareerPlanning?”,
CarolynMagnusonandMarionStarr(2000)appliedErikson’stheoryofchild
developmenttoadiscussiononthematurationprocessthatleadstotheselectionof
occupations.Eriksoncontributedtoourunderstandingofhowindividualsprocess
experiencesthrougheightstagesofsocialandemotionaldevelopment:hopes(0 2years),
will(2 4years),purpose(4 5years),competence(5 12years),fidelity(13 19years),love
(20 24years),care(25 64years),andwisdom(65 death)(MagnusonandStarr,2000,p.
6
94).Eachstageinvolvesacrisisbetweenconflictingemotionsthatmustberesolvedin
ordertobepreparedforthenextstage.Eriksondidnotproposethatachildcannotmove
ontoanewstageuntilmastery,rather,thatthechildacquirescharacteristicsorvirtues
throughsuchresolutionthatwillaidinfuturedevelopmentandlikewiselacksthesameif
theyprogresswithoutresolution.Bythetimeachildentersformaleducationhehas
alreadyreconciledfeelingsoftrustversusmistrust,autonomyversusshameordoubt,and
initiativeversusguilt.MagnusonandStarr(2000)discussedtheeffectofthesefeelings
onlong termaspectsofthechild’sdevelopment “theleveloftrusttheycanputinadults
andtheirdegreeofself sufficiency”(p.94).Awell adjustedchildwillenterschool
believingthatadultswillcareforthem,thattheycanaccomplishtasks,andthattheycan
actindependently.Anatypicalchildmaynottrustadults,maylackconfidence,andmay
becodependentonothers.
MagnusonandStarr(2000)postulatedthat“discouragedchildrenwillbemorelikelyto
limittherangeofoccupationsinwhichtheyimaginethemselvesandthesedecisionswill
influencetheircontinuingdevelopment,includingtheirideasaboutwork,workersand
themselves”(p.95).WhilePiagetfeltchildrenwouldnaturallydevelopandthenlearn,
andVygotskystressedtheroleofmentorstoaidindevelopment;Erikson’stheorywas
moresocial based,stressingtheinternalconflictthatoccursduringstagesofdevelopment
andtheself judgmentinresponsetofeedbackderivedfromthosearoundthem.One
especiallyresoundingobservationfromMagnusonandStarr(2000)wasthat“our
responsibilityasadultsinthelivesofchildrenandyoungadultsistoprovidemanyand
varieddevelopmentallyappropriateopportunitiesforcareerawareness,careerexploration
7
EDUCATIONAL IMPLICATIONS OF COGNITIVE AND PSYCHOSOCIAL
DEVELOPMENT THEORIES
Resources
Beilin,H.(1992).Piaget'senduringcontributiontodevelopmentalpsychology.
191 204.
Chaiklin,S.(2003).ThezoneofproximaldevelopmentinVygotsky’sanalysisof
learningandinstruction.
andthedevelopmentoflifecareerplanningskills”(p.98).Thisconceptisreiteratedina
meldingofMaslow’sHierarchyofNeedswithJapaneseProfessorShigekazuFukuyama
whosaid,“Unlessworksatisfactionisderived,anindividual’sself fulfillmentisnot
acquiredand,consequently,aperson’struehappinessisnotsecured”(Magnusonand
Starr,2000,p.89).
Proverbs20:11remindsusthat“Evenachildisknownbyhisactions,bywhether
hisconductispureandright.”Ourroleasparentsandeducatorsisguideourchildren
throughtheinternalandexternalconflictsthatariseonyouth,passonthewisdomof
experience,andprovidethemwiththeopportunitytorealizetheirpotential.Thechild
developmenttheoriesofPiaget,Vygotsky,andEriksonattempttoexplainthescientific
basisofcognitiveandsocialgrowth,developmentandlearning,internalenlightenment
andexternalmentoring.Regardlessofthecriticisms,thesetheoriesplayacriticalrolein
expandingtheunderstandingofadultsinordertoprovideadditionaltoolstoenhancethe
classroominstructionofourchildren.
DevelopmentalPsychology,28,
Vygotsky’seducationaltheoryandpracticeinculturalcontext.
8
Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.RetrievedonOctober5,2012,from:
http://people.ucsc.edu/~gwells/Files/Courses_Folder/documents/chaiklin.zpd.pdf.
DeLisi,R.(2002).Frommarblestoinstantmessenger:Implicationsofpiaget’sideas
aboutpeerlearning.TheoryIntoPractice,41,1).Winter2002.TheOhioState
University.RetrievedOctober5,2012from:
http://web.centre.edu/plummer/readings/228readings/DeLisi.pdf.
DeVries,R.(1997).Piaget'ssocialtheory.EducationalResearcher,26,4 17.
DeVries,R.(2000).Vygotsky,Piaget,andeducation:Areciprocalassimilationof
theoriesandeducationalpractices.NewIdeasinPsychology,18,187 213.
DeVries,R.(2001).Constructivisteducationinpreschoolandelementaryschool:The
sociomoralatmosphereasthefirsteducationalgoal.InS.L.Golbeck(Ed.),
(pp.153 180).Hillsdale,NJ:Erlbaum.
Magnuson,C.S.,&Starr,M.F.(2000).Howearlyistooearlytobeginlifecareer
planning?Theimportanceoftheelementaryschoolyears.JournalofCareer
Development,27,2.Winter2000.89 101.RetrievedonOctober5,2012from:
http://www.springerlink.com/content/l276qnw3t11q783v/.
Mercer,N.,&Fisher,E.(1992).Howdoteachershelpchildrentolearn?Ananalysisof
teacher’sinterventionsincomputer basedactivities.LearningandInstruction,2,339
355.
Palinscar,A.S.(1998).Keepingthemetaphorofscaffoldingfresh—AresponsetoC.
AddisonStone’s“Themetaphorofscaffolding:Itsutilityforthefieldoflearning
disabilities”.JournalofLearningDisabilities,31,370 373.
Vygotsky,L.S.(1978).Interactionbetweenlearninganddevelopment(M.Lopez
Morillas,Trans.).InM.Cole,V.John Steiner,S.Scribner,&E.Souberman(Eds.),
insociety:Thedevelopmentofhigherpsychologicalprocesses(pp.79 91).Cambridge,
MA:HarvardUniversityPress.
Vygotsky,L.S.(1987).Thinkingandspeech(N.Minick,Trans.).InR.W.Rieber&A.
S.Carton(Eds.),ThecollectedworksofL.S.Vygotsky:Vol.1.Problemsofgeneral
psychology(pp.39 285).NewYork:PlenumPress.(Originalworkpublished1934).
Mind
Psychological
perspectivesonearly childhoodeducation.Reframingdilemmasinresearchandpractice