Comparing Piaget And Vygotsky
Jean Piaget and Lev Vygotsky have created methods and approaches to teaching that have been greatly influential. Both have made excessive contributions to the field of education by illustrating explanations for children’s cognitive learning styles and abilities. Piaget and Vygotsky have differing theories and both strongly believe in different best-practice teaching perspectives. Throughout this essay, the theories of Vygotsky and Piaget will be discussed in relation to the Year Five scenario, which manifests various problems with the theories and how they were covered throughout the scenario with assistance to various readings.
Vygotsky mainly focused on working together and socialising to get information from others. This is where Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory of cognitive development comes into place as he focuses on mediation and the assistance for learning a concept or a procedure from knowledgeable adults or peers (able helping the less able) (Duchesne & McMaugh, 2016).
Throughout the scenario, the Year Five class took an informal learning approach as the children were given access to seeds and their outside environment to discover and explore their surroundings with …show more content…
assistance. As Vygotsky mentions, it is much better to work in a group than alone as it can assist learning and exploits potential strengths. As the children were allowed to work in groups, students that were more capable were able to teach those who were less, which increased confidence. But large groups are not always beneficial as they can leave children and thoughts out of discussions, which is why triads would have been a better solution, as they are smaller groups.
Another learning approach that Vygotsky emphasises that was used in the scenario is that no real person knowledge was shared by the teacher or a gardener during the practicals, as the only information that was shared was by social interactions.
When studying about seeds core guided discovery was made and less exploratory and spontaneous. This resulted in not covering the issue of differentiation and how each child has different needs to be catered for, rather than the whole class basis, which is also expected by the Board of Studies. Whereas Piaget mainly focuses on the differentiation of the development of a child rather than learning, and understands that each child has a different way of learning, but in contrast does not address learning of information or specific mental
behaviours.
Another Vygotskian theory for teaching includes the Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD). ZPD refers to the zone where teachers and students work together to move towards independence. This zone deviates as students and teachers progress into new areas of knowledge ("Literacy Professional Learning Resource - Key Concepts - AusVELS Levels 7 to 10 - Zone of Proximal Development and Scaffolding", 2014). As seen in the scenario, Ann and her Year Five students had a clear objective of working outside in her “outdoor classroom” as the students progressively became more independent to work on their own during the break by exploring their own natural environment. Similarly to Piaget, Vygotsky believed that there were problems out of a child’s range of understanding. However in contrast, Vygotsky believed that given proper help and assistance, children could perform a problem that Piaget would consider to be out of the child’s mental capabilities (Duchesne & McMaugh, 2016). For example, in the scenario the children helped with the garden “Garden help” as they were involved in harvesting, mulching, weeding etc and, as the children were exceeding their mental capabilities by doing activities they were taught to do and not all year Five Students know how to do them. This concept is where Vygotsky’s theory of scaffolding came into place as the teacher or peers were assisting one another in learning the procedure.
Equilibrium commonly occurs when a child's schema can deal with new information through assimilation (McLeod, 2009). Rendering to Piaget's beliefs if a stage is missed an unpleasant state of disequilibrium occurs when new information cannot be fit into existing schemas. This idea is not necessarily true as some children can miss stages, or the stages can last for more than the certain age limits that Piaget has stated due to mental capabilities. Throughout the Year Five scenario Ann focuses on setting out many tools so the students have different methods to integrate the experiences within the existing classroom lessons and science kits. Through the use of these many materials Ann was able to reach out to those children who were not able to understand the topic in a normal everyday classroom environment and needed hands on play to enquire and comprehend the topic, as not all children are the same and understand in different ways using different materials.
As humans, we have a tendency to organise objects in groups; it is a sign of cognitive intelligence and higher human being and this is what sets us apart from animals. Piaget believed that people are driven to organise in schemas so that they can achieve the best adaptation. This concept is commonly a “building block” of thinking as it compiles information and organises it in categories, which was best known as assimilation (Duchesne & McMaugh, 2016). Accommodation generally occurs when an existing schema (knowledge) is no longer needed or needs to be transformed to deal with new information or situations (Duchesne & McMaugh, 2016). As mentioned in the scenario, Ann continued to use the outdoor classroom for children to play and explore their “natural surroundings” as they looked for insects and discovered the local impacts of industry development on the stream. This prior/domain knowledge demonstrated how much a child knows about a specific area, as it activated a schema network of domain, which will eventually build up into different schemas. New schemas had emerged as the Year Five students met the important science objectives- natural cycles, animal classification and habitat protection- by studying and understanding the impacts that construction sites had on the stream, animals and the land, the students were then able to broaden their knowledge about their environment.
According to Piaget’s stage theory, it is invariant and children have to go through these stages, which cannot be missed or skipped. One of Piaget’s main theories are the stages of cognitive development these stages include Sensory Motor Stage which is from birth to two years, Preoperational Stage from two to seven years, Concrete Operational Stage from seven to eleven years and Formal Operations Stage from eleven to sixteen years. Students within the scenario fall into the Concrete Operational Stage category, according to Piaget. During this stage children learn the best through hands-on discovery learning while working with tangible objects, which was visible throughout the scenario, as the children were given a chance to go out into the environment and explore their natural surroundings. In the theory Piaget states that throughout the stage there are three main skills that the children acquire: identity, compensation and reversibility (Woolfolk & Margetts, 2004). These stages were seen throughout the scenario as an identity was formed through the interaction between the students and the environment, and compensation through one action that caused a change in the other (Woolfolk & Margetts, 2004).
The importance of play was a part of Piaget's educational implications as he stated that the brain develops with stimulation and play is a part of stimulation (Duchesne & McMaugh, 2016). Ann allocated unstructured play for her students after lunch as it worked as a “natural extension” of what the students were learning. This “play” generated a curiosity and wonder into the children’s natural environment as they explored their outdoor classroom looking for small animals. There are three main stages that can greatly influence the thinking processes of a child and they include maturity, activity and social transmission. These stages are evident throughout the scenario as the children activate their maturity and socialisation through engaging with others and being open to new experiences and spontaneous objectives.
In conclusion, as both Lev Vygotsky and Jean Piaget's theories are valid and have both agreed that actions do underlie thinking, Vygotsky focuses more on socialising and interacting through groups to acquire information from one another. On the other hand, Piaget focuses more on the stages and constraints of a child's development. It is important to note that both Vygotsky and Piaget have theories that overlap and that were shown thoroughly throughout the Year Five scenario. However, these psychological theorists came from a time and culture that has dramatically changed and it is important to think about how some of the theories are currently invalid and no longer apply in the best interests of the current generation.
Vygotsky mainly focused on working together and socialising to get information from others. This is where Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory of cognitive development comes into place as he focuses on mediation and the assistance for learning a concept or a procedure from knowledgeable adults or peers (able helping the less able) (Duchesne & McMaugh, 2016).
Throughout the scenario, the Year Five class took an informal learning approach as the children were given access to seeds and their outside environment to discover and explore their surroundings with …show more content…
assistance. As Vygotsky mentions, it is much better to work in a group than alone as it can assist learning and exploits potential strengths. As the children were allowed to work in groups, students that were more capable were able to teach those who were less, which increased confidence. But large groups are not always beneficial as they can leave children and thoughts out of discussions, which is why triads would have been a better solution, as they are smaller groups.
Another learning approach that Vygotsky emphasises that was used in the scenario is that no real person knowledge was shared by the teacher or a gardener during the practicals, as the only information that was shared was by social interactions.
When studying about seeds core guided discovery was made and less exploratory and spontaneous. This resulted in not covering the issue of differentiation and how each child has different needs to be catered for, rather than the whole class basis, which is also expected by the Board of Studies. Whereas Piaget mainly focuses on the differentiation of the development of a child rather than learning, and understands that each child has a different way of learning, but in contrast does not address learning of information or specific mental
behaviours.
Another Vygotskian theory for teaching includes the Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD). ZPD refers to the zone where teachers and students work together to move towards independence. This zone deviates as students and teachers progress into new areas of knowledge ("Literacy Professional Learning Resource - Key Concepts - AusVELS Levels 7 to 10 - Zone of Proximal Development and Scaffolding", 2014). As seen in the scenario, Ann and her Year Five students had a clear objective of working outside in her “outdoor classroom” as the students progressively became more independent to work on their own during the break by exploring their own natural environment. Similarly to Piaget, Vygotsky believed that there were problems out of a child’s range of understanding. However in contrast, Vygotsky believed that given proper help and assistance, children could perform a problem that Piaget would consider to be out of the child’s mental capabilities (Duchesne & McMaugh, 2016). For example, in the scenario the children helped with the garden “Garden help” as they were involved in harvesting, mulching, weeding etc and, as the children were exceeding their mental capabilities by doing activities they were taught to do and not all year Five Students know how to do them. This concept is where Vygotsky’s theory of scaffolding came into place as the teacher or peers were assisting one another in learning the procedure.
Equilibrium commonly occurs when a child's schema can deal with new information through assimilation (McLeod, 2009). Rendering to Piaget's beliefs if a stage is missed an unpleasant state of disequilibrium occurs when new information cannot be fit into existing schemas. This idea is not necessarily true as some children can miss stages, or the stages can last for more than the certain age limits that Piaget has stated due to mental capabilities. Throughout the Year Five scenario Ann focuses on setting out many tools so the students have different methods to integrate the experiences within the existing classroom lessons and science kits. Through the use of these many materials Ann was able to reach out to those children who were not able to understand the topic in a normal everyday classroom environment and needed hands on play to enquire and comprehend the topic, as not all children are the same and understand in different ways using different materials.
As humans, we have a tendency to organise objects in groups; it is a sign of cognitive intelligence and higher human being and this is what sets us apart from animals. Piaget believed that people are driven to organise in schemas so that they can achieve the best adaptation. This concept is commonly a “building block” of thinking as it compiles information and organises it in categories, which was best known as assimilation (Duchesne & McMaugh, 2016). Accommodation generally occurs when an existing schema (knowledge) is no longer needed or needs to be transformed to deal with new information or situations (Duchesne & McMaugh, 2016). As mentioned in the scenario, Ann continued to use the outdoor classroom for children to play and explore their “natural surroundings” as they looked for insects and discovered the local impacts of industry development on the stream. This prior/domain knowledge demonstrated how much a child knows about a specific area, as it activated a schema network of domain, which will eventually build up into different schemas. New schemas had emerged as the Year Five students met the important science objectives- natural cycles, animal classification and habitat protection- by studying and understanding the impacts that construction sites had on the stream, animals and the land, the students were then able to broaden their knowledge about their environment.
According to Piaget’s stage theory, it is invariant and children have to go through these stages, which cannot be missed or skipped. One of Piaget’s main theories are the stages of cognitive development these stages include Sensory Motor Stage which is from birth to two years, Preoperational Stage from two to seven years, Concrete Operational Stage from seven to eleven years and Formal Operations Stage from eleven to sixteen years. Students within the scenario fall into the Concrete Operational Stage category, according to Piaget. During this stage children learn the best through hands-on discovery learning while working with tangible objects, which was visible throughout the scenario, as the children were given a chance to go out into the environment and explore their natural surroundings. In the theory Piaget states that throughout the stage there are three main skills that the children acquire: identity, compensation and reversibility (Woolfolk & Margetts, 2004). These stages were seen throughout the scenario as an identity was formed through the interaction between the students and the environment, and compensation through one action that caused a change in the other (Woolfolk & Margetts, 2004).
The importance of play was a part of Piaget's educational implications as he stated that the brain develops with stimulation and play is a part of stimulation (Duchesne & McMaugh, 2016). Ann allocated unstructured play for her students after lunch as it worked as a “natural extension” of what the students were learning. This “play” generated a curiosity and wonder into the children’s natural environment as they explored their outdoor classroom looking for small animals. There are three main stages that can greatly influence the thinking processes of a child and they include maturity, activity and social transmission. These stages are evident throughout the scenario as the children activate their maturity and socialisation through engaging with others and being open to new experiences and spontaneous objectives.
In conclusion, as both Lev Vygotsky and Jean Piaget's theories are valid and have both agreed that actions do underlie thinking, Vygotsky focuses more on socialising and interacting through groups to acquire information from one another. On the other hand, Piaget focuses more on the stages and constraints of a child's development. It is important to note that both Vygotsky and Piaget have theories that overlap and that were shown thoroughly throughout the Year Five scenario. However, these psychological theorists came from a time and culture that has dramatically changed and it is important to think about how some of the theories are currently invalid and no longer apply in the best interests of the current generation.