Piaget vs Vygotsky Essay

Initially the arna of lifespan instruction rose due to Darwins desire to go through human evaluation (Boyd & Bee, 2006). developmental psychology is concerned with the changes of people during their life span including motor skill changes, problem solving changes, incorrupt understanding changes, but it is originally concerned with these changes during infancy and childhood (Boyd & Bee, 2006). Without any doubts, Jean Piaget (1896-1980) and Lev Vygotsky (1896-1934), atomic number 18 both study contributors who kick in affect developmental psychology with their theories on human development. According to Lerman (1996), Piaget and Vygotsky belong to 2 different traditions Piaget belongs to the requireivism prospect that sees learning as construction and Vygotsky to the military action theory perspective that sees learning as an appropriation.According to Piaget, cognitive development results from the development of the brain, acquiring new abilities and bugger offs, thu s he separated development into layers (as cited in Santrock, 2008). Piaget developed four poses the sensori-motor stage (0-2 years) where the infant is trying to make sense of the world, and acquires the development of disapprove permanence (Shaffer & Kipp, 2007). The pre-operational stage (2-7 years) where row development, animism, egocentrism and the use of symbols hallmark this stage (Shaffer &Kipp, 2007).The concrete operational stage (7-11 years) where children start classifying objects and are able to conserve and think logically virtually objects and events (Shaffer & Kipp, 2007). And the formal operational stage (11 years and beyond) where children develop hypothetico-deductive reasoning and imaginary audience and believe in the uniqueness of oneself and ones experiences (Shaffer & Kipp, 2007).On the other hand, Vygotsky developed his sociocultural theory indicating that cognitive development is promoted in a sociocultural context which influences the form it takes (S haffer & Kipp, 2007). Furthermore, Vygotsky indicated that many of the childs most important cognitive functions develop from neighborly interactions with parents, teachers and other more competent associates. Moreover, Vygotsky elaborated his Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) where the child is the learner and washstand manage independently and the difference between what the children can learn with guidance of a more experienced and competent partner and expect further cognitive growth, by internalising the help of the skilled partner (Shaffer & Kipp, 2007). starting time on the debate and trying to shed light upon the different surfacees on development from Piaget and Vygotsky, the differences on self-absorbed mother tongue and language entrust be analyzed. Vygotsky in one of his main books published in 1934 mentation and Language wrote about Piaget Psychology owes a great deal to Jean Piaget. It is non an exaggeration to affirm that he revolutionised the study of chil d language and mind (Vygotsky, 1962, p.9). Though, even if he exalted Piaget he differed his approach around the concepts of egocentric lyric and egocentrism.In line with Vygotsky (1962, p. 14-15), the outcome of the observations of Piaget led him to the conclusion that childrens public lecture can be divided only in two distinct entities, the egocentric speech and socialize speech. The difference between them is due to their functions, during egocentric speech the child talks only about him having no interest in other people and expecting no answers, whereas socialized speech attempts exchanges with other people.According to Vygotsky, the conclusions of Piaget showed that the volume of preschool children talk is egocentric, though when the child reaches school age, egocentric speech declines (Vygotsky, 1962, p. 16).Vygotsky differed his view from Piaget on egocentric speech believing that it has a specific function and this function other than its communicative role, it in ad dition serves as a thinking tool and as a tool to solve problems (Vygotsky, 1962, p. 18).Piaget and Vygotsky seem to agree that inner speech develops from egocentric speech which leads to logical thinking, though Vygotsky highlighted language as an apparatus of thought other than some other way of expression. On the other hand, Piaget awarded to language a less significant role than Vygotsky toward the development of thought (Piaget, 1970).Moreover, Vygotsky praised the use of language and egocentric speech as thinking tools which promote development, but Piaget disagrees indicating that Vygotsky could non understand that egocentrism could be a main obstacle for learning, concluding that language can also overturn learning and development (Piaget, 1962). some other main issue where Vygotsky and Piaget collide is the role of the social and the role of the mortalistic(a) in learning. Piaget indicates that teaching is divided in two sides, the one is the rising soulfulness, and the other side consists of social, intellectual, and moral values that the educator attempts to transmit (Piaget, 1969).Piagets aim was to make children capture the solution of the problem on their own strength, self-regulation, and their own experiences rather than receiving help from any rules or from a more skilled individual (Piaget, 1969). Thus, Piaget points out that learning is not social, and that the individual on his own exclusively captures the surrounding knowledge. On the inauspicious, Vygotsky who belongs to the activity theory indicates that learning is an active process from the childs perspective, and that the child can duplicate culturally accumulated knowledge with assistance from social support (Vygotsky, 1962).The outstanding difference in learning is that Piaget perceives the individual as the onset of learning and also children can learn through repetitive interaction and experience with the environment, moreover the egocentric speech serves as a tool for l ogical thinking, though it can also intricate the meaning (Piaget, 1969). On the other hand, Vygotsky is emphasising more that an individual (child) cannot produce knowledge and learn without the communicatory interaction and activity of other probably more skilled individuals (Vygotsky, 1962). Thus, Piaget seems to combine and emphasise on both the individual side and the social side, whereas Vygotsky emphasises more on one side, the social side. Additionally, Vygotsky proposes that knowledge arrives from the outside, on the obdurate though Piaget points out that learning lies on a childs innate capability.Piaget was mainly affected from his biological roots which influenced his approach on human development, and Vygotsky was influenced by the Marxist tradition forming his own ideas about human development and that is where the foundational difference lies on these two approaches on the essence of humanness ( soreman & Holzman, 1993). On the contrary to Piaget who has strongly se ttled in a biological worldview and asserts human development in the adaptation to the environment, Vygotsky emphasizes on the centrality of transformative collaborative practices by individuals who do not adapt to their environment but as a full-page transform it, and through this transformation also alter themselves and acquire their own status and essence (Newman & Holzman, 1993).For Piaget what promotes cognitive growth is disequilibration, a revolution made from the nexus of two elemental processes. Concurrences with the world were either adapted, assimilated to earlier existing mental functions, or prevailing functions were altered to accommodate them. According to Piaget, there is this double connection between assimilation and accommodation highlighting that this double connection leads to cognitive growth, but none of these two functions can serve on its own the purpose of cognitive growth (Bruner, 1990).On the other hand, Vygotsky did not attribute to the mind this logi cal calculus. For Vygotsky, the mind is determined to consist of processes for attributing experience with meaning. Vygotsky indicated that meaning does not entirely depend upon language but also on the ability to apprehend the cultural context where language is used (Bruner, 1990). Vygotsky believed that cognitive growth would be promoted by acquiring essential order culturally allocated emblematical structures, with each of these symbolic structures having the ability to blend or switch pre-existing knowledge (Bruner, 1990). Additionally, these essential orders are manu concomitantured by culture and cognitive growth is not create by the biological perspective unless they are aided by language and culture which rely upon endured social interactions.Piaget was mainly concerned with the equilibrize order of mental development, whereas Vygotsky was merely concerned with how other more skilled individuals or the society carry through the cultural patterning that constructs the pro cess of cognitive growth and makes development achievable.According to Vygotskys general genetic faithfulness of cultural development any function the childe displays during his cultural development will appear two times. Firstly, it will appear in the social stage and then on the psychological stage. For Vygotsky, the unit of analysis is the individual engaging in social activities rather than psychological activity of the individuals characteristics, arguing with Piagets position that childrens development must precede learning, Vygotskys position was that the development process lies bottom of the inning the learning process.These two major theorists seem to disagree ontologically about learning due to the fact that Piaget is a constructionist and Vygotsky belongs to the activity theory. Ontologically constructivism indicates that there is no reality that exists outside of human thinking, whereas the activity theory points out that for everything that exists it does hold physi cal characteristics. Furthermore, constructivism indicates that knowledge and thinking are inextricably on peoples brains and they just construct from their personal experiences.On the contrary, the activity theory indicates that knowledge is formed from a social negotiation involving people. Another issue which differs Vygotskys approach from Piagets is that the Piagetian theory does not provoke that children perform tasks that are far away from their cognitive capabilities. The teacher simply prepares the environment for the childs developmental train of mental operations, concluding that the child is limited by its own developmental stage. On the other hand, Vygotskys zone of proximal development welcomes the child to attempt beyond its potential mental capabilities.Both theorists have contributed with their approaches of human development. The Swiss psychologist Jean Piaget and the Russian Lev Vygotsky consequently influenced from their environments and cultures and also from t heir beliefs in constructivism and the activity theory formed their approaches on human development were in some parts seem to agree, but have major differences between them.Most critiques reflecting on these two approaches seem to weigh more on Piaget due to the fact that several developmental tasks he applied on children especially in the pre-operational stage are not clearly stated and it seemed that Piaget often underestimated childrens mental capabilities. Piaget claimed that pre-operational children cannot decentre on the three mountain task though new studies have shown that by altering the objects with something more familiar, children were able to decentre.Also in some other Piagetian tasks children performed better than expected by Piaget. And that has revealed that Vygotskys approach to the socio-cultural aspect seems more appropriate than Piagets constructivist approach.REFERENCE LISTBoyd, D. & Bee, H. (2006). Lifespan Development (4th. Edition). Upper Saddle River, NJ P earson.Bruner, J. (1990). Acts of meaning. Cambridge Harvard University Press.Lerman, S. (1996). Intersubjectivity in Mathematics learning A Challenge to the Radical Constructivist Paradigm? Journal for Research in Mathematics Education Vol. 27 2, pp.211-223.Newman, F., & Holzman, L. (1993). Lev Vygotsky Revolutionary Scientist. London Routledge.Piaget, J. (1962). Comments on Vygotskys critical remarks concerning The Language and Thought of the Child, and Judgement and conclude in the Child. Cambridge Massachusetts, The M.I.T.Piaget, J. (1969). Psykologi og paedagogik Copenhagen Hans Reitzell.Piaget, J. (1970). Genetic Epistemology. New York Columbia University.Santrock, J., W. (2008). A topical approach to life-span development (4th Edition). New York City McGraw- Hill.Shaffer, D., R., & Kipp, K. (2007). Developmental Psychology Childhood & Adolescence (7th Edition). Belmont Thomson Wadsworth.Vygotsky, L., S. (1962). Thought and Language Cambridge Massachusetts, The M.I.T.View as multi-pages