Montessori vs piaget: Similarities and Differences Between Montessori and Piaget – Montessori for Today

Опубликовано: December 27, 2019 в 10:12 am

Автор: alexxlab

Категории: Miscellaneous

Similarities and Differences Between Montessori and Piaget – Montessori for Today

In this article, we will look at the similarities and differences between the theories of Maria Montessori and Jean Piaget, two landmark thinkers who revolutionized the way we view education and child development. We will also visit a theorist named Lev Vygotsky. Vygotsky differed from Montessori and Piaget on some basic, structural issues, but they also had a lot of important ideas in common.

Montessori and Piaget’s theories diverge on the specific stages of development and the importance of social and cultural aspects of learning, but they have much in common. Both share an emphasis on child-centered classrooms, repeating lessons as needed, and allowing children to learn at their own pace. More importantly, they share a belief in the importance of sequential, discreet stages of development.

We will also see that Vygotsky plays a vital role. His views of the structural, sequential aspects of development diverge greatly from Montessori and Piaget. His views on the social and cultural aspects of development, however, help us understand the Montessori method.

Piaget and Pyschological Constructivism

Jean Piaget was a Swiss psychologist who lived between 1896 and 1980. He conducted his early studies at the Las Maison de Petit school in Geneva. This was an experimental nursery school based on Maria Montessori’s ideas. He also served as the head of the Swiss Montessori Society for many years. While it may be a common misconception that Maria Montessori’s method is based on the ideas of Piaget (or perhaps Vygotsky), it’s actually it’s the reverse that is true. Both were influenced by Montessori.

Piaget’s Four Stages of Cognitive Development

Piaget’s stages of development are called ‘discreet’ which means they adhere to a certain order that should not, and cannot be rearranged or reordered. These periods are flexible guidelines that may vary from child to child. Some periods may overlap, and some children may learn faster or slower. The stages, however, cannot be skipped. This is why they are more commonly referred to as ‘hierarchical’.

1. Sensor-motor Stage- This occurs during 0-2 years of age.At this stage, the child demonstrates and develops ‘Intelligence in action’.They do this by interacting with their environment through manipulating physical objects.At this point, children are using their senses to learn about the world.

2. Pre-operational Stage– This stage divides into two substages: the pre-conceptual stage (0-2 years) and the intuitive stage (4-7 years). At this point, children are still predominately self-centered. Although the child’s thinking is dominated by sensory perception, they become more and more capable of symbolic functioning; language development occurs.
During the intuitive stage, the child will begin to go beyond sensory perceptions, but they are still overtly influenced by their perception of the environment. Children only acquire the basic skills of symbolic functioning; they can’t quite understand abstract reasoning or logic.

3. Concrete Operational Stage

This stage occurs during age 7-11, sometimes age 12. Logical reasoning and critical thinking are developed at this time. Children can organize knowledge, classify objects and work on rudimentary thought problems, but logical reasoning can only be applied to objects that are “real” or can be seen (i.e physical objects, not metaphysical objects, such as “contradictions” or “justice”).

4. Formal Operational Stage

This occurs during ages 11-12 and up. Now the child can think realistically about their future. The individual can now think logically about things beyond physical or real objects. Thinking about potential events and abstract ideas begin. Here one gains the ability to solve abstract, complex problems.

These are the stages that all humans must pass through, according to Piaget, to achieve full intellectual and psychological maturity. Reaching the next stage and developing properly is not a given, however. For example, studies have shown that one-third of adults have not reached the Formal Operational Stage (Theories of Development– William Crane 2005).

When a child’s development is not addressed according to these stages, or they do not succeed in moving on to the next stage, this causes boredom in students. This, in turn, leads to teachers moving from topic to topic, subject to subject, and in a traditional classroom environment, some kids get left behind in the process.

One thing to note is that Piaget’s theory is generally devoid of any social or cultural context when he lays out these stages. It is a purely psychological theory. It takes place in a typical classroom setting; Lessons are structured and predetermined, and students do not choose their activities.

Vygostsky and Social Constructivism

Lev Vygotsky was a Russian psychologist from Belarus, in the former soviet union. He died, tragically, at the age of thirty-seven, in 1934. His theory is known as the sociocultural theory of development. Unfortunately, we have no idea what his theory might have been, had his life not been cut short by Tuberculosis.

The first, most important aspect to note about Vygotsky’s theory, for purposes of our comparison, is that community and language are essential aspects of learning. Also, he does NOT believe that children necessarily develop in stages. He believes that children develop independently, according to their own process, as the result of social interaction.

This development occurs via what he calls the Four Elementary Functions:

Attention
Sensation
Perception
Memory

These are the abilities that all humans have from birth. He begins with the earliest possible explanation because he is laying down not just an education or development theory, but a full epistemology that explains how learning and knowledge are possible (we will explain this further in a moment). By using these four abilities in society, we gain higher, more complicated mental abilities.

These are also abilities that we can use independently, without the aid of a parent, teacher, or mentor. These people are what Vygotsky would call “More Knowledgable Others”. He emphasizes the role of these others in development, over and above any hierarchical system. Instead of sequential models, his notion is based on modeling and guided practice.

He also notes that this ‘more knowledgable other’ could be a technological tool, such as a book or an electronic device, not necessarily a present human being. You might think of this as a “Knowledgable Other, by Proxy”.

This all occurs in what Vygotsky calls the zone of proximal development. This is the category of things that we can do with the help of a More Knowledgable Other. Beyond this zone are things that are beyond the scope of our current ability. For example, you can’t teach a baby to play the piano and you can’t teach a toddler to diagram a sentence. It is simply beyond their zone of proximal development, according to Vygotsky. This is why he might say it’s not a good idea to teach philosophy to children who are too young. The concepts may be beyond their reach.

Note, that while there is a clear path of progression here (left to right), making this a “constructivist” theory, this is different than passing through hierarchical stages, as we see with Montessori and Piaget.

An interesting result of this is that we might find situations where a child’s learning precedes their development. This explains how a child might develop a skill that goes beyond their natural maturity. For example, children who are prodigies at chess, mathematics, or music. This is not something to be ordinarily expected in the normal course of development, according to this theory, however.

Another important result of this theory regards the internalization of language. Children who have not completed this aspect of development are limited to “thinking out loud” when they use language. A child must develop in such a way that ‘internal language’ and spoken language are independent. This internalization of language is what produces higher thought.

Montessori Solutions: A Cognitive Approach

So, how does the Montessori method relate to these two? Let’s look closely now at the similarities and differences:
The Montessori method incorporates the best aspects of both of these constructivist approaches, but without the rigid structures that tend to hinder development. It incorporates the social and cultural aspects of Vygotsky’s approach, and it also incorporates the “sequential” approach of Piaget. However, unlike Piaget’s method, it does not focus on purely intellectual issues. And unlike Vygotsky’s method, it does not assume that a child is too young to engage in certain learning activities.

The Montessori method and Piaget’s constructivism are both similar to a degree. Constructivism as we mentioned, is an epistemology, which is philosophical jargon for “how someone knows what they know”. Typical examples are rationalism (the view that knowledge is a direct result of reason) and empiricism (the view that knowledge comes from our senses or experience). Constructivists believe that knowledge is acquired as a result of the interaction of thoughts and experiences. This is also in line with Montessori’s views.

Montessori and Piaget both believe children develop in sequential order, which necessarily builds on the development that came before. As one acquires experience, this is processed by the rational mind, which leads to further experience, which leads to development and learning. This mirrors the Montessori views expressed in the five great Montesorri lessons. As the universe develops, so does the human mind.

Despite these similarities, Montessori is not, technically, a constructivist. Her method has many traits in common with cognitivism. This is the view that knowledge cannot be acquired or understood purely in terms of observable behavior or the purely physical aspects of the universe. One must refer to the inner mind and internal mental processes. This is apparent when we look at the Montessori method’s focus on what is referred to as “Planes” of development (as opposed to Piaget’s “Stages”).

Montessori Planes of Development

Birth-3 years: Focuses on the absorbency of the mind and learning from the senses.

18 months: 3years: Muscle development and physical coordination begin. Children focus on smaller objects.

2-4 years: Physical movement becomes more refined. Time and space perception develop; sequences in time and space are realized. The child becomes aware of notions of truth and reality.

2.5-6 years: The senses are developed. The processing of sensory information is refined.

3 -6 years: Children become susceptible to adult influence. Good and bad examples begin to set in.

3.5-4.5 years: The focus is on writing and written language skills.

4-4.4 years: The tactile senses begin to mature. Sense of taste and touch develop.

4.5-5.5 years: The focus is on reading. Acquiring information using the language skills that have been developed.

As you can see, these planes are quite different in focus and organization than Piaget’s stages. One result is that the Montesorri method does not get hung up on the concrete operation stage, or any particular stage. It acknowledges “sensitive periods” where it’s best for a certain kind of learning to occur but realizes that it’s never too early to begin developing the senses and laying foundations for higher learning.

Comparing Practical Methods: Montessori vs Vygotsky

In many ways, the Montessori method also differs from Vygotsky’s. Whereas Vygotsky might say teaching philosophy is beyond the reach of the zone of proximal development, Montessori would at least begin introducing some very basic philosophical notions as soon as possible.

You might not teach a toddler to play piano, but not only can you let them get familiar with one. They’ll learn more just touching it than they would from a toy instrument! You can also begin playing music for them in the womb, to use a common example. This also means children are assumed to be capable of learning reading, writing, and arithmetic much earlier than under Piaget’s theory.

The Piaget and Montessori methods are similar for children under the age of three. After this, they diverge. The Montessori method is “child-directed”, where The Piaget system assigns activities. The Piaget classroom resembles a traditional school setup, while in a Montessori classroom, children of more diverse ages (usually three groups within 3-4 years) may be learning together at the same time.

Piaget focuses on the individual child, one child at a time. Conversely, Vygotsky focuses on groups of children and social learning. We learn social skills through language. This is the primary focus of learning and teaching. Using these skills, we develop the complete child as a total package. We go beyond academic learning and problem-solving.

In this way, Montessori and Vygotsky both encourage a less rigid learning environment. In particular, they de-emphasize the importance of groups and organized activity. This is mainly because Piaget’s theory, unlike the other two, does not address the social and cultural aspects and impacts of learning.

It is important to keep in mind that many of these differences become clear when we note that Piaget and Vygotsky are clearly constructivists, whereas there is some debate as to how Montessori fits into that category. If we define ‘constructivist’ as any theory of development that uses previous knowledge as a foundation for new ideas, then the shoe would seem to fit. Here are some notable differences, however:
Montessori and Constructivism

Montessori initially focuses on the senses and sensory processing.

-Constructivists initially focus on meaning and organization.

The Montessori method uses self-correcting materials for teaching.

-Constructivism relies on input from teachers for correction.

Montessori encourages “error-filled experimentation”. Self-correcting materials act as a control.

-Constructivism avoids discouraging wrong answers.

Montessori emphasizes individual works and the importance of personal choice.

-Constructivism emphasizes cooperative group projects and group discussions.

Montessori emphasizes proper social dynamics in the classroom. Courtesy, respect, and love are expected.

-Constructivists believe suppressing conflict can hinder a child’s development by causing them not to consider opposing points of view.

Montessori believes children’s proper behavior and discipline come from “joyful obedience”, based on a fundamental worldview, and that teachers are there to guide, not to discipline.

-Constructivists believe the teacher is a knowledgable companion who forms a personal, equal peer relationship with the children.

Some Basic Advantages

An important question to ask when comparing these theories is which comes first, social learning, or development? This was a point of contention between Piaget and Vygotsky. For Piaget, whose views were primarily psychological, a child must first develop to a certain intellectual degree, even if only a little, before they could acquire the ability to interact socially. But for Vygotsky, whose views were primarily social, the only way a child could develop any intellectual ideas was through socializing with others! So which comes first, the chicken or the egg?

The Montessori method provides a clear way out of this conundrum. Social learning and development are interrelated, symbiotic, and happen simultaneously. From the moment of birth, a newborn human is already socially interacting with the first person it sees, and in that very process, is already learning something. This relationship and how it works should be the focus, rather than neglecting one process for the other. Here we see a familiar pattern! One might think of a feedback loop. They are two things that are caused and created by each other.

While the Montessori method encourages play activities and imagination and certainly allows “kids to be kids”, it might be misleading to view it as “play-based”. Technically speaking, play-based activities tend to be those that are generally not grounded at all in any kind of reality. They are things a child might do simply for the sake of doing it. These activities are “pretending”. Often they involve role-playing various stereotypes. This is not the kind of “play” the method encourages.

One of Maria Montessori’s observations was that children who are given the choice of “real” things to do usually prefer this over “pretend” activities. For example, a child would almost always prefer to learn how to use a tool, instead of playing with a toy version of a tool. They would always prefer to bake a cake instead of pretending to bake a cake. This is true, even at an extremely early age. Montessori methods encourage children to take part in these “real” activities sooner than other educational methods would, including those based on Piaget and Vygotsky.

Unlike Piaget’s or Vygotsky’s method, the Montessori method helps show children where they fit into the stages of development. It gives them identity and shows how we are all interconnected. It shows how their decisions affect other people and how other people affect them. In this way, it gives them ownership and responsibility for their learning.

The focus of the Montessori method is allowing children to “grow their intelligence”. This means that interrupting a child with admonishments, praise, punishments, etc. is nothing more than adult interference. It just distracts the child from learning. The Montessori method avoids this approach. Because of this, a child learns self-esteem, confidence, and the true value of the work they’ve done, as opposed to being conditioned by praise and disapproval of the adult. This issue is not addressed by either Piaget or Vygotsky.

The Montessori method also allows children to learn critical thinking and problem solving much earlier than the other theories. This is a key aspect of Piaget’s fourth development stage. This means a Montessori student will acquire problem-solving skills for life, not just for school. Examples are the scientific method or Design Thinking (a seven-step process for problem-solving).

Conclusions

So, now that we have a lot of complicated information, let’s wrap this all up in a nice, simple package!
Piaget and Vygotsky have fundamental disagreements. Some they have in common with Montessori. Others, they agree with Montessori but disagree with each other. But both theorists were highly influenced by Maria Montessori. She pioneered the discreet, sequential model of development that inspired Piaget. She also pioneered the kind of social and cultural insights in education and development that inspired thinkers like Vygotsky. It should come as no surprise that the Montessori gives a method that comprises the best of both worlds.

Traditional classrooms are not adequate for developing children to the formal reasoning of Piaget. Piaget’s method is inadequate for explaining the social and cultural aspects of learning or preparing children for it. Vygotsky’s method is inadequate in providing a structure that clearly explains how development happens, and thus, any guide for navigating through it. This is why the Montessori method provides the best solutions to the problems left unsolved by other development theories.

“Children are better prepared to be independent and responsible individuals through cosmic education and Montessori method.”

-Maria Montessori

Click The Image Above For Recommendations!

Comparison of Piaget, Vygotsky, Montessori on Early Childhood Education Theories

Piaget’s Theory of Development

Jean Piaget, a Swiss psychologist, developed several key concepts. First, “schemas” involve the physical and mental actions in learning, understanding, and knowing. Schemas involve anything a child is learning about. If the child’s family has a cat, they develop a schema about felines: small, fluffy, cute, makes purring sounds.

If the child goes to the zoo with their family and they see the tigers’ cage, they may be surprised at the size of those cats. This forces them to modify an existing schema about cats. Now, they need to add new information about the large size of tigers and lions. Mentally, they will modify that previous schema so they can easily include the new information.

Next, Piaget said that children who are adding new information to a schema are assimilating that information. Children try to modify information or their experiences so that they fit into beliefs they already hold.

Next, they attempt to create a comfortable balance between assimilation and accommodation, using a process called equilibration. As children move through each stage of cognitive development, they work at keeping that balance between using new knowledge and changing their behavior/schema to account for new knowledge they have learned (assimilation and accommodation). By using equilibration, children can progress more easily from one developmental stage of thought and into the next one.

Vygotsky’s Theory of Social Development

Vygotsky’s theory differs a little because he says that social interaction has a strong influence on how children develop cognitively. Children rely on people or devices with knowledge they don’t yet have.

The adult, more experienced peer, or (in today’s world) an electronic learning device is referred to as the More Knowledgeable Other or MKO. A teen or adult child can be an MKO to an adult who wants to learn something new about teen culture or a new electronic device.

Learners work within a Zone of Proximal Development or ZPD. This zone consists of three circles, with 2 inside the outermost circle. Within the smallest, interior circle, is what the child already knows. The next, larger circle contains information that the child still doesn’t know but is capable of learning with assistance from an MKO. The largest, exterior circle consists of information, skills, or knowledge that the child can’t yet learn, even with help.

Vygotsky believed that the MKO should teach the learner only what is within reach, in the zone of proximal development, with guidance and encouragement. The MKO demonstrates the new skill, then begins to guide the child through each step, and then the student can progress to more complicated skills that were previously out of range for them.

Montessori Theory

After Montessori was able to successfully treat mentally disabled children who were thought to be impossible to educate, she decided she wanted to determine the potential of regular children who had no problems learning.

Working with children living in the San Lorenz slum, she developed her own theory, which is based on Periods of Development. She proposed the idea of Conducive Learning, where children were grouped based on periods of development. Children are grouped in three-year or six-year spans and work with the same teacher during this period.

The youngest group (Nido) is aged 0 to 1, or until the child is walking. The second group is the Infant Community, aged 1 to about 2 and a half or three. Group three is the “Casa dei Bambini,” aged 2.5 or 3 to 6.

Group four covers a wider age range, from 6 to 12. The children in this group have the same learning habits and tendencies. Their emotional and physical growth tends to be steadier, and their intellectual work is strong. In this group, the younger children are inspired by and learn from the older children. Finally, the next grouping is 12 to 15-year-olds. Montessori proposed a farm school for this age group, giving the children real farm work to do.

Stages vs. Planes of Development

Piaget based his theory on what he saw as a child’s stages of development. These included:

Sensorimotor, from birth to 2 years. They use their senses to learn about the world.
Preoperational Period, from 2 to 7 years. They learn and develop language and learning skills, but are self-centered, and can’t understand abstract reasoning or logic.
Concrete Operational Period, from 7 to 11 years. Now they think logically and organize their knowledge. They classify objects and work on thought problems.
Formal Operations Period, 11 to 15. The child starts reasoning more realistically about their future and deals better with abstractions.

Montessori worked using her own Planes of Development. These included:

Birth to 3 years: An absorbent mind, learning from the sensory
18 months to 3 years: Begins muscle development and working on coordination – Likes smaller objects
2 to 4 years: Refines movements – Focuses on truth and reality – Develops awareness of order sequences in time and space
2. 5 to 6 years: Sensory refinement
3 to 6 years: Becoming susceptible to adult influence
3.5 to 4.5 years: Works on writing
4 to 4.4 years: Tactile senses begin to mature
4.5 to 5.5 years: Works on reading

Piaget vs. Vygotsky

Piaget didn’t spend much time thinking about a child’s social context. Instead, he believed that their cognitive development revolves around changes in the cognitive process and the child’s abilities. Early cognitive development uses processes based on actions, then progresses to changes in mental operations.

He used schemas or categorization to explain how children learn, using both the physical and mental in learning. Within schemas, assimilation and accommodation also take place. Children also place already-known information with newly learned information in a process called equilibration. In his theory of child and human development babies, toddlers, preschoolers, children, teens, and young adults progress through four stages of learning and development. He said that the early cognitive development of a child involves processes that are based on actions. This development then progresses into changes in mental operations.

Vygotsky believed that social interactions have a big influence on the development of cognition. He also felt that the community surrounding a child holds a role in how children make meaning out of everything they see, learn, feel, and hear.

He introduced the More Knowledgeable Other as a source of experience and learning for a child. This MKO can be a parent, teacher, or relative of the child. This person can also be a younger child or teen who teaches an older adult or family friend about using electronics or learning a new dance, for instance.

Next, he introduced the Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) in where the most sensitive guidance should be provided, allowing the child to learn by practicing.

What Do They have in Common?

Between Piaget and Montessori, both psychologists believe that young children begin to work on the refinement of their movements early. At 3.5 to 7 years (covering the developmental periods for both professionals), children begin to develop drawing and writing skills.

While Vygotsky didn’t divide child development into age groups, he did believe that a child could progress to this stage if that was what was culturally expected of him. If the majority of children in a certain age group know a certain skill, then one of them, or a teacher-figure, will act as the MKO for that child and he will inevitably also learn that skill.

In all three theories, the psychologists say that every child begins to learn about their world by using their senses. Vygotsky calls it “making meaning.” Piaget says that children obtain knowledge or their environment through the five senses.

Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) is similar to Montessori’s Planes of Development and Piaget gives each developmental stage a name (sensorimotor, preoperational, formal operations).

Likewise, Vygotsky’s ZPD has an outer ring that denotes all the information that a child is not yet ready to learn. Montessori’s planes of development show that some learning may be out of reach of children at various stages. Piaget does the same thing, noting that there are things children can’t learn until they reach a certain cognitive level.

Image from http://steppingstonesoflearning.blogspot.com

How These Theories Manifest in the Classroom

Children are social creatures. When they start school, they are one of 20 or more other students who are ready to begin formal learning.

Montessori created a model for learning that is known the world over. Montessori-based schools exist in most communities around the world. Individual classrooms and teachers in a Montessori school don’t teach traditionally. Instead, they are based on conducive learning, with multi-aged groups. The teacher doesn’t actively teach the entire classroom. Instead, they have a more generalized lesson plan. They introduce children to a concept using a book, lesson, or lecture. As the children learn, individually and with older children, they process the information, then “know” the knowledge and demonstrate this by passing a test, completing a project, expressing what they have learned, or by teaching another student.

Montessori said that children are always learning something new, which prepares them to learn another new thing. This is indirect learning. The entire class isn’t learning the same thing as classmates; they are working at their own pace, using the environment, and working with other classmates. The teacher teaches one child at a time. All areas of study link together and students can work on them in the order they choose.

In Piaget’s theory, assimilation, accommodation, and equilibration all work in a classroom setting. Children learn something new in the primary grades; as they progress grade by grade, they encounter the same information at a higher level of difficulty.

Vygotsky’s theory relies much more on the social interactions between children, adults, and society in general. Because of the social networks between children and their families, children can go to someone they know to ask for help in learning something new.

Constructivism Explained

“Constructivism” is a learning theory that says humans construct their knowledge using hands-on experience rather than being taught abstract concepts from books. The teacher who uses constructivism in teaching students does everything they can to give students hands-on experiences, using people and objects. The teacher also asks students to use any skills they have already learned.

It’s a constructivist learning process to use materials to learn about assembly lines and what working conditions were like when assembly lines were most in use.

When the teacher has students use wrapping paper to determine whether it’s sufficient to wrap two cans, students put together a mathematical formula to determine a cylinder’s area.

It’s also constructivist to have students read persuasive articles, decide which of the articles have features that make them the most effective, and then create a rubric that includes all of those qualities for their own persuasive papers. Once they have written their reports out, they will be assigned to read more persuasive papers so they can fine-tune their criteria even more.

Maria Montessori was a constructivist. She wrote, “Education is not something which the teacher does, but a natural process which develops spontaneously in the human being. It is not acquired by listening to words but in virtue of experiences in which the child acts on his environment.”

Lev Vygotsky was another constructivist. He wrote, “A child’s play is not simply a reproduction of what he has experienced, but a creative reworking of the impressions he has acquired. He combines them and uses them to construct a new reality.”

Jean Piaget was also a constructivist and said, “Each time one prematurely teaches a child something he could have discovered himself, that child is kept from inventing it and consequently from understanding it completely. ”

Find Elementary School Teacher and Early Childhood Education Jobs

Sources:

Theories of developmental stages – The Montessorian

Several educational theorists believe that there are different stages of development over the course of a human’s life. Some of these theorists include Maria Montessori, Erik Erikson, Jean Piaget, and Rudolf Steiner. In this section, Montessori’s theory about the developmental stages will be compared to those of the other three theorists mentioned above.

Erik Erikson

Erikson’s theory focuses on the psychosocial development of humanity (Mooney, 2013). He believed that there are eight ‘ages’ of humanity that cover the whole life span (Mooney, 2013). The age brackets seen in Erikson’s theory (refer to Table 1) are similar to those seen in Montessori’s planes and sub-planes, with some comparable terminology as well. Just as with Montessori’s planes of development, as the person passes through each of Erikson’s ages they adopt certain characteristics before passing on to the next age (Mooney, 2013). For each age of Erikson’s theory, Mooney (2013) specified a developmental stage and strength, similar to Montessori’s sensitive periods. However, Erikson also identified ‘weaknesses’ of each stage (Mooney, 2013).

Erikson believed that patterns were developed in the earliest years of life from the strengths and weaknesses acquired during that time (Mooney, 2013). These patterns would “… regulate, or at least influence, a person’s actions and interactions for the rest of his or her life” (Mooney, 2013, p. 55). This is comparable to the significance of Montessori’s ‘sensitive periods’ for a human’s development in the early years. Similarly, Erikson and Montessori both understood the importance of the early years for children’s development. However, Erikson thought that it was possible for a person to go back and ‘renegotiate’ any difficulties encountered in the first three stages.

Erik Erikson (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Erik_Erikson_Photo2.jpg)

Erikson’s Stages of Psychosocial Development
Age	Stage	Strength Developed
Birth to 12 months	Trust vs. Mistrust	Hope
1-3 years	Autonomy vs. Shame and Doubt	Willpower
3-6 years	Initiative vs. Guilt	Purpose
6-11 years	Industry vs. Inferiority	Competence
Adolescence	Identity vs. Role Confusion	Fidelity
Young adulthood	Intimacy vs. Isolation	Love
Middle age	Generativity vs. Self-Absorption	Care
Old age	Integrity vs. Despair	Wisdom

Source: Mooney, C. G. (2013). Theories of Childhood: An Introduction to Dewey, Montessori, Erikson, Piaget & Vygotsky (2nd ed.). Minnesota: Redleaf Press.

Jean Piaget

Piaget followed Montessori’s work, using it as the foundation for his own educational theories (Mooney, 2013). He too believed that children need to do meaningful work for themselves and identified stages of cognitive development linked to age brackets (Mooney, 2013) (see Table 2). Contrary to Erikson’s ‘psychosocial’ stages, Piaget described his developmental theory as ‘stages of cognitive development’ (Mooney, 2013). He focused more on behaviours learned through these times, rather than ‘strengths’ or the broader characteristics identified by Montessori in her planes of development.

Piaget’s sensorimotor stage has strong correlations with Montessori’s first plane of development. They both believed that children first learn through absorbing information with unconscious thought, dubbed reflexive by Piaget (M. Montessori, 2012; Mooney, 2013). Both Montessori and Piaget understood that children process their environment through their senses in the first plane and the sensorimotor stage, and that this is where intelligence formed and cognitive development is started (M. Montessori, 2012; Mooney, 2013). Montessori and Piaget had differing views on the ages of the next developmental stage, with Piaget’s preoperational stage two to seven years of age, whilst Montessori considered this part of the sub-plane of the first plane, and considered the age bracket to be three to six years of age (M. Montessori, 2012; Mooney, 2013). They both viewed learning during these times as forming ideas from life experiences. Furthermore, Piaget recognised the importance of large blocks of time for ‘free play,’ based on Montessori’s theories about the uninterrupted work cycle (Mooney, 2013). Real life experiences were also considered vital by both theorists in children’s learning, providing opportunities for deeper construction of knowledge (Mooney, 2013).

Jean Piaget (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Jean_Piaget_in_Ann_Arbor.png)

For the final two stages of Piaget’s developmental theory, similarities are evident with Montessori’s works in that the child moves from concrete thought to abstract thought. Mooney (2013) describes a flexibility of thought, where the child moves towards logical and hypothetical thought, where richer questions can be considered, and several qualities can be held in the brain at one time (Grazzini, 1979; Haines et al.

, 2000). While Montessori described young adulthood age brackets in detail as part of her developmental planes, Piaget’s stages of development are much broader and end with “11 or 12 years of age and older” (Mooney, 2013, p. 81).

Piaget’s Stages of Cognitive Development
Age	Stage	Behaviours
Birth to 2 years	Sensorimotor	Learn through the senses; learn through reflexes; manipulate materials.

2-7 years	Preoperational	Form ideas based on their perceptions; can only focus on one variable at a time; overgeneralize based on limited experience.

7-11 or 12 years	Concrete Operational	Form ideas based on reasoning; limit thinking to objects and familiar events.

11 or 12 years	Formal Operational	Think conceptually; think hypothetically.

Source: Mooney, C. G. (2013). Theories of Childhood: An Introduction to Dewey, Montessori, Erikson, Piaget & Vygotsky (2nd ed.). Minnesota: Redleaf Press.

Rudolf Steiner

Steiner believed in three stages of learning, with unique requirements for learning in each (Edwards, 2002). Steiner, like Montessori, viewed the first stage of learning as a time where learning is done through ‘doing’ with hands-on experiences. However, while they both cited this stage as a time for physical, intellectual, and emotional growth, Steiner put a much greater emphasis on the term ‘imaginary play’ (Edwards, 2002).

While this terminology is not seen as frequently in Montessori’s works (and her views on it created controversy), the descriptions of activities and characteristics are similar to the work and qualities of children in Montessori programs. For example, children will “… become deeply and engaged and develop powers of concentration and motivation” (Edwards, 2002, p. 5) through “bodily exploration, constructive and creative play, and oral … language” (Edwards, 2002, p. 4) in both Steiner and Montessori education. Both theorists recognised the importance of an uninterrupted work cycle and a regular schedule (Edwards, 2002). Furthermore, they both emphasised the significant impacts science, literature, music, and education through nature have on children’s learning.

Rudolf Steiner (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:RudolfSteiner.jpeg)

However, a noteworthy difference between the two approaches was Steiner’s focus on learning through oral language rather than the concrete to abstract approach that Montessori employed (Edwards, 2002).

Steiner’s Cycles of Child Development
Age	Stage	Characteristics
Birth to 7 years	Imitation	Learn through imitation and doing; imaginary play the most important ‘work’; educational focus on bodily exploration, constructive and creative play, and oral language.

7-14 years	Imagination	Explore the world through conscious imagination; integrated, multisensorial approach to learning and expression.

High school	Intellect	Rational, abstract power of intellect emerges; focus on ethics, social responsibility, and mastery of complex and rigorous subject matter.

Source: Edwards, C. P. (2002). Three approaches from Europe: Waldorf, Montessori, and Reggio Emilia. Early Childhood Research and Practice, 4(1)

Summary

Montessori’s planes of development have clearly delineated age brackets and characteristics, each of which plays its own significant role in the development of the human. A variety of educational theorists believed in these stages, with connections between Montessori’s theories and those of some other theorists evident. There were, however, some differences in their understandings of where the age brackets started and stopped, and differences in terminology or developmental characteristics.

The sensitive periods of development are evident in brain research as well as educational theory. Educational experiences that are tailored to meet the needs of children in these periods will provide rich learning that will be carried throughout life. Furthermore, these sensitive periods are intrinsically linked to Montessori’s concept of the absorbent mind. The absorbent mind processes and utilises what is learnt during each plane of development so the information can be used appropriately by the person.

The concepts discussed in this paper are evident in early childhood education today. The way children are observed, curriculum planned, and our understandings of child development owe a lot to the theories and research mentioned here. The work of theorists such as Montessori, Erikson, Piaget, and Steiner paved the way for quality, tailored education in modern society.

Reference List

Edwards, C. P. (2002). Three approaches from Europe: Waldorf, Montessori, and Reggio Emilia. Early Childhood Research and Practice, 4(1).

Grazzini, C. (1979). Characteristics of the child in the elementary school. AMI Communications, 29–40.

Haines, A., Baker, K., & Kahn, D. (2000). Optimal Developmental Outcomes: The social, moral, cognitive, and emotional dimensions of a Montessori education.

Montessori, M. (1966). The Secret of Childhood. (M. J. Costelloe, Ed.). New York: Ballantine Books.

Montessori, M. (2012). The Absorbent Mind. California: BN Publishing.

Mooney, C. G. (2013). Theories of Childhood: An Introduction to Dewey, Montessori, Erikson, Piaget & Vygotsky (2nd ed.). Minnesota: Redleaf Press.

A Comparison of Piaget, Vygotsky, and Montessori

Image from http://steppingstonesoflearning.blogspot.com

A Comparison of Piaget, Vygotsky, and Montessori

Three psychologists of the 19th century developed three different theories of child and cognitive development. Two of these (Montessori and Piaget) said that children learn and develop in sequence. Vygotsky said that children learn using their social environment. He believed that a child’s community holds a major role in how children learn to “make meaning” of the world around them.

Each psychologist’s theory has had a strong impact on the education of today’s children. Montessori said that children should be allowed to direct their learning to the point that, if they are in an independent work period, they should not be required to interrupt it for a group activity.

Piaget said that the cognitive development of a child involves changes in their cognitive process and abilities as they age. Early cognitive development influences later progression into how the child adapts their mental operations as they get older.

Piaget’s
Vygotsky’s
Montessori
Versus
Common
Constructivism

Piaget’s Theory of Development

Vygotsky’s Theory of Social Development

Montessori Theory

Stages vs. Planes of Development

Piaget based his theory on what he saw as a child’s stages of development. These included:

Sensorimotor, from birth to 2 years. They use their senses to learn about the world.
Preoperational Period, from 2 to 7 years. They learn and develop language and learning skills, but are self-centered, and can’t understand abstract reasoning or logic.
Concrete Operational Period, from 7 to 11 years. Now they think logically and organize their knowledge. They classify objects and work on thought problems.
Formal Operations Period, 11 to 15. The child starts reasoning more realistically about their future and deals better with abstractions.

Montessori worked using her own Planes of Development. These included:

Birth to 3 years: An absorbent mind, learning from the sensory
18 months to 3 years: Begins muscle development and working on coordination – Likes smaller objects
2 to 4 years: Refines movements – Focuses on truth and reality – Develops awareness of order sequences in time and space
2.5 to 6 years: Sensory refinement
3 to 6 years: Becoming susceptible to adult influence
3.5 to 4.5 years: Works on writing
4 to 4.4 years: Tactile senses begin to mature
4.5 to 5.5 years: Works on reading

Piaget vs. Vygotsky

Next, he introduced the Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) in where the most sensitive guidance should be provided, allowing the child to learn by practicing.

What Do They have in Common?

Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) is similar to Montessori’s Planes of Development and Piaget gives each developmental stage a name (sensorimotor, preoperational, formal operations).

How These Theories Manifest in the Classroom

Children are social creatures. When they start school, they are one of 20 or more other students who are ready to begin formal learning.

Constructivism Explained

It’s a constructivist learning process to use materials to learn about assembly lines and what working conditions were like when assembly lines were most in use.

When the teacher has students use wrapping paper to determine whether it’s sufficient to wrap two cans, students put together a mathematical formula to determine a cylinder’s area.

A Comparison of Piaget, Vygotsky, and Montessori was 1st published to website discoverearlychildhoodedu

A Comparison of Early Childhood Development Theorists

Many theorists have influenced our understanding of early childhood and the way humans learn and develop. Some theorists sought to awaken society to the discrepancies in traditional education. They strayed from the historical approach, which viewed children as empty vessels that are to be filled and shaped, and instead, advocated a more progressive approach, which demanded that society look at children as individuals, with their own strengths and drive to learn. Five of these theorists are Friedrich Froebel, John Dewey, Maria Montessori, Jean Piaget and Erik Erikson 23.

Friedrich Froebel

Friedrich Froebel, who lived from 1782 to 1852, was best known for his kindergarten system 34. He believed that humans are inherently creative beings and that play helps facilitate creative expression. As written on the website, Froebel Web, Froebel believed that “The kindergarten was to be an environment in which children could reach their full creative potential under the protective and interactive guidance of an adult.” Froebel based his system around play materials, which he called “gifts” and activities, which he called “occupations.” He believed that when play is engaged in a meaningful and developmentally appropriate way, play can be a powerful source of education 3. The teacher’s role is to assist in the child’s discovery. Froebel claimed that effective learning occurs via a child’s regular interaction with the world.

John Dewey

John Dewey lived from 1859 to 1952 5. Dewey was a founder of the philosophical movement called pragmatism and a key theorist of the progressive movement in education. Like Froebel, Dewey believed that a child’s daily experience is critical to his learning and that curriculum should relate to children’s lives. According to PBS, “Unlike earlier models of teaching, which relied on authoritarianism and rote learning, progressive education asserted that students must be invested in what they were learning.” Dewey suggested that a child’s mind grows via social participation, which is the primary purpose of school. He felt that children do not need activities to learn because they have their own internal tendencies toward action. Lastly, Dewey argued that education should not be solely about preparing for the future. Education focus on the importance of living in the present.

Maria Montessori

Maria Montessori lived from 1870 to 1952. In a manner similar to Froebel, she believed in the importance of the senses in cultivating the independence of the child. She agreed with Dewey that children have a natural aim to learn. In her book, “The Secret of Childhood,” she wrote, “When a new being comes into existence, it contains within itself mysterious guiding principles, which will be the source of its work, character, and adaptation to its surroundings.” In some ways, her ideas strayed from those of other theorists 2. Froebel’s kindergarten engaged children in group learning and provided materials for imaginative use versus practical use. Dewey believed that fostering the imagination and social relationships should precede the expansion of the intellect. Montessori argued that only by developing the intellect can the imagination and social relationships emerge. She emphasized freedom within a structured environment.

Jean Piaget

Jean Piaget was born in 1896. His theory of cognitive development focuses on stages of growth and on a child’s ability to acquire knowledge gradually 16. Piaget focused on intellectual development 1. He, too, believed that children develop because of their personal interactions. He believed children use “schemas” to acquire information. WebMD, in the article “Piaget Stages of Development,” calls these stages “a blueprint” for normal intellectual development 1. The stages include sensorimotor (birth through 18 to 24 months), preoperational (18 to 24 months through age 7), concrete operational (7 to 12), and formal operational (adolescence through adulthood). The sensorimotor stage is a time of experimentation and physical interactions with one’s environment. During the preoperational stage, children develop language skills, memory and imagination. During the concrete operational stage, logical reasoning and an awareness of external events are the key markers of this phase. In the formal operational stage, children engage with abstract concepts such as justice.

Erik Erikson

Erik Erikson, who lived from 1902 through 1994, argued that the individual develops on three levels at the same time: biological, social and psychological. Learning-Theories.com explains, “Erikson’s psychosocial theory of development considers the impact of external factors, parents and society on personality development from childhood to adulthood. ” Erikson named five stages of human development through age 18 but suggested additional stages of growth that continue into adulthood 16. The childhood stages of development focus on identity formation and include the following: trust versus mistrust, autonomy versus shame and doubt, initiative versus guilt, industry (competence) versus inferiority and identity versus confusion 1. He believed that all people pass through these stages as they grow into adults, as they learn about the world and as they form their personalities.

About New Morning School – New Morning School

Based on the work of Jean Piaget

New Morning School’s curriculum and philosophy are influenced by the work of Swiss psychologist and philosopher Jean Piaget. Piaget developed the fields of developmental psychology and cognitive theory and spent countless hours observing children.

Spend time reading more about Piaget’s Stages of Cognitive Development. The assumptions about the mental development of children and the manner in which they build their understanding of the world is at the very heart of our curriculum.

Head of School Elaine Kennedy outlines how Piaget’s theory translates into practice at New Morning School. You might also explore why Time Magazine named Jean Piaget one of the 100 Most Important People of the 20th Century or learn more about the connection between the work of Jean Piaget and that of his contemporary, Maria Montessori.

How does Piaget differ from Montessori?

Parents familiar with a Montessori system of education will notice many similarities in the New Morning School approach, including:

Hands-on activities
Learning focused on creating mental models, not memorizing facts
Multiple means of assessing learning
Incorporating students’ prior knowledge into the curriculum

There are a number of differences between a Piagetian approach to education and a Montessori approach; however, both Jean Piaget and Maria Montessori were constructivists. (Read this article about constructivism for a more complete understanding of constructivism, especially as it relates to learning.) In his article entitled Jean Piaget’s Genetic Epistemology: Appreciate and Critique, Clemson University Professor Robert L. Campbell points out that: The experimental nursery school in Geneva, La Maison des Petits, where Piaget carried out his first studies of children in the 1920s, was a modified Montessori institution, and Piaget was for a number of years the head of the Swiss Montessori Society (see Rita Kramer, Maria Montessori: A biography, New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1976, pp. 311, 321, 326). Piaget seems to have grown dissatisfied with Montessori’s lack of theoretical rigor in psychology, but disgust with her long and ultimately futile collaboration with the Mussolini regime in Italy (1922-1934) may have played a more decisive role… …In fact, an article by David Elkind, written in 1967 when both thinkers were getting renewed interest in the United States (Piaget and Montessori, Harvard Educational Review, 37,535-546) correctly identifies several points of agreement without showing any awareness of Piaget’s role in the Montessori movement.

Piaget at New Morning School

The following is a letter written for the Alumni News by New Morning School Head of School, Elaine Kennedy.

You have to spill a little milk to grow…

Dear Parents,

This fall parents at New Morning have been learning about Jean Piaget, a Swiss psychologist who researched the cognitive growth of children.

Piaget writes, “The goal of intellectual education is not to know how to repeat or retain ready-made truths. (A truth that is parroted is only a half-truth.) It is learning to master the truth by oneself at the risk of losing a lot of time and going through all the roundabout ways that are inherent in real activity.”

What’s important about what Piaget said is that true discovery of knowledge is not clean, doesn’t proceed in a straight line, and is not necessarily quiet. It involves trial and error, interfacing with peers, sometimes being extremely focused, while other times not. In sum, real learning is a bit messy. When children discover something of their own by playing with the blocks, they may go through three or four iterations or even days of discovery before beginning to understand that two little blocks are the same size as a bigger block. Remember, in pre-operational children (ages two through seven) conservation of volume/size is not yet in place. We could tell a four-year-old that the two blocks are the same as the big block and they could parrot back that two blocks equal a larger block, but real understanding only comes through student discovery.

Two children in the elementary room are weighing pumpkins on a balance scale, the goal being to arrange the pumpkins in order of weight. A teacher might enrich this environment by using plastic pumpkins and real pumpkins of different sizes. Then a child couldn’t just surmise that if he put them in order from smallest to largest, that they would also be in order by weight. Within the elementary classroom you would see children use a variety of approaches to this problem, based on their developmental levels. As adults we would weigh pumpkins against each other to put them in order of weight. Older elementary children might use this approach, but younger children, by trial and error, would approach it in different, sometimes incorrect ways.

What do we do as adults? Do we observe and guide with questions or do we show a child how to do it step by step? If you show a child, you have robbed from her the joy and permanence of her own discovery.

Piaget writes, “Every time we teach a child something, we keep him from inventing it himself. On the other hand, that which we allow him to discover for himself will remain with him visible for the rest of his life.”

The process is the same at the middle school level. Our science teacher might ask students to construct an experiment. Some will easily make a hypothesis and keep all but one variable constant (formal operational thought, age 11+) while others may need much trial and error and growing time to do this. The teacher can ask questions and make suggestions, but the best thing she could do would be to let a student do his experiment where variables are not held constant. Through the course of the experiment, he might reach that “ah-ha” stage where he understands how he should have done it or may do it the next time.

Does teaching him how to set up an experiment and holding his hand every step of the way result in powerful learning?

– No.

Does trial and error, false starts, and eventual success lead to real, lasting discovery?

– You know the answer.

Learning is not neat and clean and efficient as you or I might like it to be. Children need to experiment and figure if out for themselves, though it takes longer and is a bit “messy.”

Next time you’re feeling uncomfortable about a learning situation and asking yourself things like:

“Are the kids playing too long in the block area?”
“Are the kids writing the play making too little progress?”
“Wouldn’t it be simpler in middle school if they gave up those silly fraction pieces and just had the students learn it with paper and pencil?”

Think of Piaget. You know the answer to the questions. Let me know what you think.

Elaine Kennedy

Head of School

Brain Learning

New Morning School prides itself on remaining current in the implications of the latest research in brain development and learning. When necessary, we use the information to make changes that we can incorporate into our classroom. However, most often we find that the latest brain research confirms that we have been on the right track all along.

The Head of School, Elaine Kennedy, and teachers have attended multiple Brain Expo conferences. Elaine Kennedy is in a graduate program on brain research and education, completing her studies at the Midwest Brain and Learning Institute. She shares the latest information with her staff and the parents. Areas of focus include the five principles for learning (information processing, social, emotional, safety and nourishment) and specific strategies for brain-friendly instruction.

Download these articles written by Head of School Elaine Kennedy on brain-based learning:

Brain Compatible Learning
Find out how we translate brain research into practice at New Morning School.
Museum and Brain-Based Learning
Learn how the student museum projects are connected to the scholarly research on the best practices for putting brain/mind principles in action.
The Teen Brain
Discover the brain research that sheds light on teen behavior and how parents can respond.

Mission Statement

New Morning School offers an extraordinary, individualized learning environment where we nurture children to their full potential as critical thinkers, creative problem solvers, and responsible citizens.

New Morning School is:

Nationally recognized Model Parent Cooperative by the National Cooperative Bank,Washington, D.C.
Member, Association of Independent Michigan Schools
Certified by Michigan State Board of Education
Licensed by Michigan Department of Human Services
Member, Plymouth and Livonia Chambers of Commerce

New Morning School is the best Piaget-based school in Michigan for students in preschool, kindergarten, elementary school and middle school. If you are looking for a private school near Plymouth, Northville, Farmington, Farmington Hills, Canton, Livonia, Novi, Ypsilanti, Brighton, Walled Lake, Whitmore Lake or Ann Arbor, Michigan, consider New Morning School, which offers continuous enrollment opportunities. Call 734-420-3331 or email [email protected].

The development of the child’s intellect according to the system of Maria Montessori

rationalized goal (harmonious and comprehensive development) and predominantly directive technologies. The achievement of the predicted results of a developed childhood is seen in the enrichment of children’s education with the ideas of socialization and its quality.

Notes

1. Abramenkova, VV Methodology and principles of analysis of child relations in the social psychology of childhood [Text] / VV Abramenkova // Psychological science and education. 2001. No. 4.

2. Abramenkova, V. V. Decree. op.; Buhler-Niederberger, D. Social space of the individual: from socialization studies to the sociology of childhood [Electronic resource] / D. Buhler-Niederberger// Electronic version of the journal Personality Development. Access mode: http://www.rl-online.ru/archives/2003/4/2003_04-69.htm; Kon, I. S. The child and society [Text] / I. S. Kon. M.: Nauka, 1988; Feldstein, D. I. Psychology of personality development in ontogenesis [Text] / D. I. Feldstein. Moscow: Pedagogy, 1989. 208 p.

3. Mitrofanova, S. Yu. Conceptualization of the main approaches to the study of childhood in sociology [Electronic resource] / S. Yu. Mitrofanova. Access mode: http://bulletin.region.ulsu.ru/ publications/ mitrofanova/ conceptualizationresearchofyouth/

4. Kudryavtsev, V. T. Cultural and historical status of childhood: a sketch of a new understanding [Text] / V. T. Kudryavtsev / / Psychological journal. 1998. No. 3.

5. Ikonnikova, S. N. The protective belt of culture and the strategy of attitude towards childhood [Text] / S. N. Ikonnikova // Children and the elderly as risk groups: the mission of social work in a transitional society: collection . Art. and m-fishing intl. conf. Samara, 2001. S. 15.

6. Kon, I. S. The child and society [Text] / I. S. Kon. M.: Nauka, 1988.

7. James, A. Preface [Text] / A. James, A. Prout (eds) // Constructing and Reconstructing Childhood. 2nd Edition. L „ 1997. P. IX-XVII, IX.

8. Mud, M. Culture and the world of childhood [Text] / M.Mid. Moscow, 1988, pp. 322-362.

9. Ibid.

10. Vygotsky, AS The problem of cultural development of the child (1928) [Text] / LS Vygotsky // Vestnik Mosk. university Ser. 14, Psychology. 1991. No. 4. S. 5-18.

IN Sevastyanova

DEVELOPMENT OF THE CHILD’S INTELLIGENCE ACCORDING TO THE SYSTEM OF MARIA MONTESSORI

The pedagogical system of Maria Montessori is widely known and has been used in the practice of education all over the world for more than 100 years. This article discusses the process of developing the intellect of a child of 6~7 years old by means of this system, determines the principles, conditions and mechanism of this process, substantiates the relevance of Montessori pedagogy approaches to solving the issues of developing the intellect of children.

Montessori’s pedagogical system is widely-spread and has been used in the practice of education all over the world for more then 100 years. The process of the development of the child’s intellect at the age of 6 or 7 years old is under the view in this article. The technique, conditions and principles of this process are based on the urgency of Montessori’s pedagogy. They are necessary for the development of the children’s intellect by this pedagogical system.

The development of the intellect of a child of 6-7 years old is one of the most important tasks facing the teacher. It acquires particular relevance in modern conditions, when the need to form in students such qualities of mind as independence, independence, speed, flexibility, creative thinking, which is reflected in the concept of education development, comes to the fore. That is, speaking of intelligence in the broadest sense of the word, we will mean not only the ability of a person to remember and reproduce information received from the outside, but also such qualities as the ability to independently set mental tasks, look for ways and means of solving them, navigate in the flow of information, independently extract, produce new knowledge (or subjectively new), make decisions, adjust their actions in an adequately changing situation.

To date, two main theories of learning have developed in pedagogical science, illustrating in practice different approaches to the problem of intelligence development: associative and active. The associative theory underlies explanatory and illustrative forms of education, which mainly contribute to the development of the reproducing qualities of thinking and the tendency to the mechanical accumulation of knowledge perceived from the outside. Realizing the limitations of explanatory and illustrative teaching, modern pedagogical science orients teachers to the formation of the mental functions of students (studies by L. S. Vygotsky, N. A. Menchinskaya, L. V. Zankov, V. F. Shatalov, etc.).

Associative theories are opposed by theories based on the activity approach. These include the theory of problem-based learning (A. M. Matyushkin, M. I. Makhmutov), the theory of learning activity (V. V. Davydov, D. B. Elkonin), the theory of the phased formation of mental actions (P. Ya. Galperin , N. F. Talyzina). We have the opportunity to attribute the technology of mental education, implemented in the pedagogical system of M. Montessori, to the theories of the activity approach to learning.

After analyzing the works of M. Montessori, her students and followers, researchers of her pedagogical and philosophical work, we

were able to determine her special understanding of the intellectual development of the individual, formulate the principles, conditions and mechanisms of this process, as well as analyze the possibilities of the pedagogical tools she offers.

First of all, it should be noted that M. Montessori did not divide the upbringing of children into physical, moral, aesthetic and mental. Since the personality is integral and indivisible, upbringing is one thing. The center of the upbringing of children according to its system is the upbringing and development of the intellect. M. Montessori herself interprets the intellect as follows: “. .. it is a set of reflexive and associative, or reproductive, activities that allow consciousness to build itself by interacting with the environment” [1]. After analyzing the definition, we can highlight the main aspects that express the understanding by the author of this theory of the mechanisms of the intellectual development of the individual and, as a result, the possibilities of managing this process.

First of all, it is necessary to note the intellectual goal, namely, the ability of consciousness to “build itself”, and as a result, the child achieves the maximum level of development of the potential inherent in him by nature. Montessori claims that each child is unique, as he carries within himself an individual, special, unique program. From birth, a person has an impulse – energy for the implementation of this program, just as the seed of an apple tree has the potential to become an apple tree, and the seed of wheat – wheat. Consequently, the first principle of mental education according to the M. Montessori system is the principle of individuality.

An adult is not able to discern the potential inherent in a child, therefore any active influences during this period may turn out to be useless, and sometimes even harmful for a developing personality, as if we were trying to grow wheat from the seed of an apple tree. M. Montessori believes that, developing independently, the child himself draws from the environment what his internal program requires at the moment, you just need to give him the opportunity to make his choice.

Montessori noted that children who study frontally within the framework of the class-lesson system using explanatory and illustrative methods are deprived of the opportunity to choose. Their activity is limited by the reproductive form, as well as regulated terms and selection of material, which leads to a leveling of the personality and inhibits the development of arbitrariness, cognitive activity and intelligence. As a result, M. Montessori came to the conclusion:

The main condition for the normal intellectual development of a child is freedom. Freedom is the second principle of mental education according to M. Montessori’s system.

Yu. I. Fausek developed the interpretation of this principle of M. Montessori’s pedagogical system: “Not the child who is free who simply moves, but the one who has a reasonable goal in his actions, who has the ability to deploy and form his inner personality in an organized environment , he who himself can choose works for development and indulge in one work for a long time on his own impulse, attracted by an intellectual goal: he who, concentrating on objects, gets the opportunity to achieve choice, reasoning and research, working out by all this a force that pushes him to progress » [2].

As a direct consequence of the freedom of the child, his activity develops. Passive perception by a student of other people’s words does not form intelligence. Only human activity makes it possible to independently act and make discoveries. The role of an adult is observation and timely creation of conditions for the current and future (proximate) development of the child. Therefore, the third principle of the development of intelligence according to the Montessori system is the student’s own activity.

Encouraging children’s activity leads to the development in children of the quality of independence. Independence is a direct consequence of the principle of the activity of the child, as well as the first condition necessary for the full development of the intellect. “Exercises that set in motion intellectual mechanisms can only be performed in self-learning mode. It is impossible for another person, studying instead of us, to improve our abilities” [3].

The consequence of the independence of children is their independence, which we define as the independence of opinions, judgments, ideas, and which is the second necessary condition for the intellectual development of the individual. Thus, manifesting itself as the necessary qualities and conditions for children’s activity, independence and independence gradually pass into the inner plane of the personality and are already formed as integral qualities of the student’s thinking.

The third important condition for upbringing according to the Montessori system in general and mental upbringing in particular is the availability of means that stimulate the intellectual development of the personality in the immediate environment of the child.

M. Montessori writes: “The basis of intellectual activity in relation to the outside world is sensations” [4]. It is through

sensations in the process of the work of the sense organs that we perceive information that serves as the basis of our knowledge about the phenomena and processes of the surrounding world. Yu. I. Fausek, introducing the experience of M. Montessori in Russia, comes to the conclusion that “the beginning of intellectual construction lies in collecting facts and distinguishing them” [5].

Therefore, we can conclude that the means of developing the intellect are the images of the environment that enter the human mind through perception. Therefore, the development of intelligence depends, firstly, on the quality and completeness of the information entering the consciousness, and secondly, on the capabilities of the organs of perception of a given individual.

Since a person is able to distinguish things by their qualitative characteristics, such as size, shape, color, texture, weight, temperature, smell, taste, sound – all these characteristics should be presented for the perception of the child as the main material means of influencing his intellect . Acting with objects, the child exercises in identifying, distinguishing, comparing and contrasting these qualities, their gradation, seriation and classification.

In order for all the above mental actions to become possible, it is necessary to train, develop and refine the sensory apparatus: the organs of perception and pathways, as well as the corresponding parts of the brain. And this is possible through repeated repetitions and exercises. Consequently, the fourth important condition for the implementation of the principles of mental education according to the Montessori system is the possibility of exercises and repetitions of actions and manipulations.

But exercises and repetitions do more than just train the sensory apparatus. By manipulating an object, a person focuses his attention on one of its sides: gradation of color shades, thermal or kinesthetic sensations, etc. Deep concentration on an object contributes to the understanding of internal connections, dependencies – that is, understanding the nature of this thing. As a result, instead of mechanically memorizing other people’s thoughts, the child gets the opportunity to independently discover the world for himself. Independent discoveries of the child are a characteristic feature of learning according to the M. Montessori system. Therefore, as the fifth condition for intellectual development using the principles of M. Montessori, we note the possibility of deep concentration on the object and independent discoveries.

M. Montessori notes that the external manifestation of a developed intellect is the speed of reaction. What is important is speed in reaction to a stimulus, in the association of ideas, in the ability to formulate solutions. Speed is achieved, firstly, through exercises that contribute to the training of the sensory apparatus and pathways, as mentioned above; secondly, the presence of a system of order of internal impressions.

Order is the sixth condition of intellectual development in M. Montessori’s system. The desire for order is the original tendency inherent in every person. Disordered knowledge, scattered facts do not form the intellect, as they do not provide an opportunity for independent conclusions, conclusions, and forecasting. Therefore, a hierarchy of knowledge about the facts of the surrounding world is necessary, which makes it possible to establish connections and dependencies, as well as for their operational use in the process of intellectual activity. M. Montessori writes: “There are reasons to believe that developing the mind means organizing images in the mind” [6].

An external pattern is needed to form an internal system of order. The hierarchy of the qualities of things in the surrounding world, based on their perception with the help of human senses, is called upon to become such a model, an external standard of internal order. “Distinguishing, classifying, systematizing objects on the basis of an order firmly established in the mind is the mind and at the same time culture” [7].

M. Montessori revealed that every child has an inner desire to establish order in his environment as a necessary means for him to form an internal order. In a certain time-limited age period, he shows an acute sensitivity to order – the “sensitive period”, which is confirmed by repeated observations of M. Montessori herself, her students and followers (Yu. I. Fausek and V. Taubman wrote about this in studies of the early 20th century .), modern research (Moscow Montessori Center, etc.) as well as our own practice and observations at the Montessori Child Development Center in Kirov.

The seventh necessary condition for the correct functioning of the child’s intellect is the isolation of a certain feeling, the isolation of a stimulus. By isolating the feeling and stimulus, separating it from everything extraneous, insignificant, we give the child the opportunity to receive clear ideas in his mind. For example, if we aim to acquaint a child with the concept of length, then we use for this purpose objects that differ from each other only in length, all other qualities (material, color, texture, etc. ) must be the same. In order to give the child a clear idea of an object, it is necessary to single out this object and give the developing intellect the opportunity to focus on it.

The eighth important condition is called isolation of complexities. The principle of isolation of complexities says: in each exercise there should be only one didactic task. It’s bad when a child faces several tasks of equal complexity, but it’s even worse when there is no task at all. After all, joy, pleasure from a correctly solved problem is an integral characteristic of the method. In addition, the isolation of difficulties must be understood as the absence of elements that distract the student’s attention from solving the main problem and prevent the emergence of concentration.

M. Montessori offers his own system of autodidactic materials as a tool for implementing these principles, which meets all the specified conditions. The term “autodidactic” means the purpose of these subjects for the independent individual work of the child and the heuristic development of his intellect, which do not need adult control. In other words, working with the material of M. Montessori, the student, without realizing it, develops his intellect, precisely those aspects and qualities that he most needs at the moment to implement his internal program.

Montessori material is a “safe model of the world” containing, in Montessori’s own words, “a series of motivations for cultural activity.” K. E. Sumnitelny, a researcher of the philosophical and pedagogical heritage of M. Montessori, conditionally identifies the following characteristics of autodidactic Montessori materials [8]:

1. The material is the key to gaining more extensive knowledge and expanding existing ideas. This determines the presence of a creative component in the content of education and the possibility of free creativity as such.

2. Error control ensures the independence and independence of the subject, which contributes to the emergence of a sense of responsibility for the work done.

3. Isolation of properties allows the child, with the help of one separate material, to work out only one aspect of the object of study, which allows you to deepen the nature of the study and achieve perfection in the chosen work.

4. The scientific character implies that, by accumulating knowledge about the individual properties of the object of study, the child classifies these properties and creates a structure that he learns to sequentially schematize, revealing patterns and relationships.

5. Functionality is defined as the readiness of the material for work and its recovery after work to its original position.

6. Aesthetics means precise and colorful design and high quality natural materials. This allows you to make the material attractive, not only evoking pleasant emotions in the child, but also increasing the responsibility of the student for its preservation.

In addition, there are additional characteristics that are a combination of the main ones:

1. The autonomous nature of the material implies that after its presentation the student is able to build independent work due to the simple structure and the possibility of self-control (a combination of the principles of error control and isolation of complexity), which contributes to the growth of the child’s self-confidence and allows him to fully reveal his creative potential .

2. The qualitative limitation is that the object of study must be presented to the child through parts in a holistic way and the number of parts in the description of this object must be limited [9].

All material in the Montessori class is arranged in accordance with the general direction of the development of the human intellect: from understanding concrete things through establishing relationships and interdependencies, to abstract thinking. Each stage of development corresponds to its own special incentive – Montessori-material. The beginning of the development of any object or action occurs with direct external manipulation with it as a material object. In the future, external actions are gradually curtailed, transferred to the internal plane (the process of internalization takes place), the object itself is replaced by a symbol, and the action is replaced by an abstract concept.

As an example from our own long-term experience of working with children according to the M. Montessori system, we could cite the development of mathematical operations of addition, subtraction, multiplication and division of four-digit numbers, which are easily mastered by children of six and even five years of age on the “golden Montessori material” . This material consists of beads, connected in a special way in tens, hundreds, thousands. A subgroup of children easily and enthusiastically operates with them, performing these mathematical actions: putting them on a common tray, dividing by an arbitrary number of people, etc. In the future, the beads are replaced by numbers, actions by mathematical signs, the children move on to solving problems and examples on cards, with this without memorizing a single rule, simply realizing the inner meaning of the actions performed.

Thus, we can establish an undoubted, in our opinion, connection between the methodology for the development of intelligence developed by M. Montessori and the theory of the gradual formation of mental actions by P. Ya. Galperin, N. F. Talyzina and others. This connection lies in the direction of the vector the process of cognition-understanding from the concrete to the abstract, in the development of abstract concepts, starting with the objective perception of an object in the process of independent activity.

The difference is, in our opinion, that the application of the method of P. Ya. as well as the different pace of the internalization process for all students in the class. In the pedagogical system of M. Montessori, learning has an individualized nature of free work, not limited by time frames, where the subject development of activity by one child can be significantly delayed from the formation of internal mental actions, which makes it possible to exercise and improve in activity as much as a given student needs for a natural formation of a conscious internal mode of action.

K. E. Somnoyatny, exploring M. Montessori’s understanding of the dynamics of the development of thought processes, writes: “Thus, orientation is the initial stage of any study and allows the child to concentrate on the most relevant developmental stimuli for him at the moment and ensures the mental actions of the individual in environment. Research, as the main and most dynamic phase of the process of cognition, provides a transition from the simple to the complex, from the concrete to the abstract. Manipulation becomes an external manifestation of the research process, which makes it possible to understand the differences in qualities and properties and the potential of a particular didactic material” [10].

Abstraction is defined by K. E. Somnitelny as the highest realization of the need to be independent of real things. Orienting, exploring, manipulating, the child accumulates information about the properties of real objects, and at a certain moment becomes ready to replace these objects with their abstract symbols.

In accordance with the logic of this process, Maria Montessori has developed a mechanism for familiarizing the child with the objects of the surrounding world and formulates it in the form of a “three-step lesson” for introducing a new concept. First stu-

stump – acquaintance with the object. Usually the child is offered three objects, this number may vary depending on the intellectual capabilities of the child. In our practice, there were children who were able to simultaneously perceive and memorize up to five concepts, and there was a child whose abilities were limited to just one subject. The teacher shows and names each of the presented objects in turn. The second stage is tentative-by-claim. The teacher names the concept – an abstract symbol of the object – and asks the child to show this object. The third stage is the level of self-abstraction. The teacher points to the object, the child names the concept.

M. Montessori pedagogically instrumented the idea of J. Piaget, according to which the intellectual development of an individual occurs in the process of the action of the subject on the object, during which the object undergoes transformation (movement, combination, etc.). J. Piaget believes that the source of knowledge lies not in subjects and not in objects, but in their interaction. The number of interactions brings the subject closer to an adequate, objective perception of the object. M. Montessori created an environment that includes materials that motivate children’s intellectual activity, and provided the child with the opportunity to transform and construct them in the course of their work for so long until the internal need for this activity is satisfied.

Thus, we can conclude that the theoretical provisions of the pedagogical system of M. Montessori in the development of the intellect of a child of 6-7 years old are confirmed by the data of modern psychological and pedagogical research and have their own value for the development of modern methods of pedagogical practice.

Notes

1. Montessori, M, My method. Method of scientific pedagogy [Text] / M. Montessori. M.: Astrel, 2006. S. 119.

2. Chuprikova, N. I. Mental development and learning [Text] / N. I. Chuprikova. M., 1995. S. 30.

3. Montessori, M. Decree. op. P. 119.

4. Ibid.

5. Fausek, Yu. I. Kindergarten Montessori [Text] / Yu. I. Fausek. M.: Karapuz, 2007. S. 31.

6. Montessori, M. Decree. op. P. 121.

7. Ibid. P. 122.

8. Questionable, K. E. Cosmic education (in the pedagogical system of Maria Montessori) [Text] / K. E. Questionable. M., 2000.

9. Talyzina, N. F. Management of the process of mastering knowledge [Text] / N. F. Talyzina. M 1975. P. 51.

10. Ibid. P. 27.

Holistic Pedagogy. Systems by Maria Montessori and Rudolf Steiner

Concepture continues the story of the projects and schools of the “new pedagogy”. Today we will get acquainted and compare two approaches that have become widespread in the twentieth century. This is the Waldorf school, based on the ideas of Rudolf Steiner, and the pedagogical approach of Maria Montessori. Without becoming the dominant trend in pedagogy, both theories have had a certain impact on modernity.

The general idea of the beginning of the 20th century was to reformat pedagogy for the changed content and correlation of sciences. First of all, by the end of the 19th century, psychiatry and experimental psychology were formed, then psychoanalysis.

The humanities justified their autonomy from natural science models, significant changes occurred with social institutions and technologies. Therefore, the idea of “proportionality of pedagogical requirements to the student (and society)” turned out to be very relevant, because the classical Prussian and Anglo-American approaches (established more than three centuries ago) seemed increasingly emasculated and harsh.

The Steiner system, also called the Waldorf School, as well as the Montessori system, in response to the challenge of modernity, proposed an already familiar idea – to focus on the nature of the child and childhood, not to teach, but to direct its development. However, in order to guide the nature of the child, it must first be conceptually constructed and described.

Steiner will do this based on the ideas of theosophy and esotericism (and to some extent transcendental philosophy), and Montessori on the basis of neurology, pediatrics and pedagogy (among the important authors for her are Johann Pestalozzi, Edouard Seguin, Jean Itard and Friedrich Froebel). However, subsequently Maria Montessori would move away from science, and starting from the 30s she would cooperate not only with psychologists, but also with the Theosophical Society.

These and other approaches will declare war on violent methods and the predominance of purely intellectual development in teaching. In establishing their schools, they will try in practice to prove the superiority of their doctrines. By the end of the twentieth century, reformist pedagogy will continue to spread throughout the world.

Pedocentric pedagogy: to help or to entice?

Both approaches give great credit to both the child himself and his ability to learn. Learning itself is understood in different ways, as, in fact, the subject of such learning. The Waldorf school for the most part speaks of personality, of a complex combination of thought, feeling and will (Spirit, Soul, Body), while in the Montessori school a living organism is active, endowed with an “absorbent mind”.

One of the frequent elements of the new pedagogy is its own theory of development: what stages and with what characteristics children go through. Alas, it could not do without free interpretations and biased assessments. The underdevelopment of developmental psychology, together with weak methodology, led to the fact that each such theory (including the theories of Steiner and Montessori) contained both accurate observations and incorrect generalizations.

Waldorf school (Photo: elfarol-waldorf.org)

For example, the stages according to Steiner were strictly determined by a seven-year cycle, which was very conditionally supported by actually observed patterns (at 7 years old – loss of milk teeth, 14 years old – hormonal changes). In fact, this is simply a sacred number, which is endowed with a special meaning in any European theosophy, to which Steiner belongs.

Montessori has a six-year cycle with two periods of three years (fast and slow, conditionally corresponding to the accumulation of experience with the development of abilities and then their processing and comprehension). The cycles are based on the experience of Maria Montessori herself and are not subject to any criticism.

However, unlike the Waldorf school, the Montessori system assumes individual differences in the speed of development, but in general, both systems poorly or do not explain a whole series of questions at all. Including “why should the periods be equal?” (psychoanalytic observations contradict this assumption), “why are there cycles?”, “what factors influence developmental delay?” etc.

Another cornerstone is the issue of the teacher’s role. No one at that time seriously considered the idea of abandoning the teacher as such. And in contrast to the pragmatic approach of Dewey, European schools remained in the position of knowledge, which for the most part belongs to the adult (ie, the teacher).

Steiner dealt with this issue in the traditional way, inspired by the example of spirit guides and gurus. In his opinion, a teacher should be an unconditional authority for a student, a person who not only teaches, but also inspires, is a friend and an example. The most important thing for a Waldorf teacher is the ability to captivate the child with the material, as well as recognize his talents. It is these elements (curiosity and creativity) that will allow you to develop a personality in all its manifestations.

One teacher leads the entire class from beginning to end: from the first to the eighth grade, then some of the disciplines are taught by other teachers. On the one hand, it is very convenient for children, especially if they have difficulty adapting to new people. On the other hand, this is a huge power and influence, which in fact bind each student to the teacher for life (which complicates his growing up and separation, and in some cases can make him a hostage to other people’s values and ideas).

Montessori Pedagogy, on the contrary, paying great attention to the preparation of a Montessori teacher, will leave him with purely service, auxiliary functions in the process of teaching a child. Since the system’s central thesis is “ Children are taught by what surrounds them ”, then the teacher turns out to be only a part of a specially designed environment, or rather a guide through it. The activity and creativity of the child, which should not be interfered with, comes to the fore. An adult does not transfer his knowledge about the world, he only helps to obtain it, as well as analyze and systematize it.

Until the child asks for help, the teacher only observes, but not passively, but trying to see the inclinations and level of the child’s abilities (in order to offer him didactic material of suitable complexity). The ethics of communication with the pupil are spelled out in some detail here: communication at the same level (sitting on the floor or squatting next to him), the obligation to answer a request, respect for an error, mild stimulation to the unmastered, lack of criticism.

Rejecting the policy of prohibitions and coercion, both systems tried to thoughtfully work out the question of how to create conditions in which prohibition is not needed, and coercion is unnecessary.

The Montessori system: collaboration and “prepared environment”

Already the theories of Lamarck and Darwin drew the attention of all natural scientists to environmental factors, and at the turn of the century “environment” (or “umwelt”) becomes an important concept not only for biologists (like Haeckel and Uexkül), but also for doctors (especially in the field of prevention, occupational health and safety), psychologists and psychiatrists.

Developing the already existing ideas about ontogeny, Maria Montessori comes to the conclusion that the source of child development is innate sensitivity to the environment (“absorbing mind”), and the main factor influencing this process is the objective environment surrounding the child.

Under the “absorbent mind” she understood the ability of children to unconsciously and easily adopt the basic elements of the environment (language, culture, habits and attitudes). Mirror neurons will only be discovered at 1992, however, systematic observations of children and young mammals repeatedly confirmed the thesis that many elements of behavior are acquired very quickly, as if bypassing all the usual (mediated) forms of learning. Montessori summarizes this experience in the idea – “ impressions teach and shape consciousness “.

This mechanism works especially clearly in the first six years of life, which is why education should begin at birth, but take place not according to the patterns of adults, but according to the laws of the world – through the environment. Therefore, the task of adults is to create a special environment in interaction with which the child will develop as efficiently as possible. This is the “prepared environment”.

The environment also includes other people who, according to Montessori, unnecessarily impose their ideas on the child, thereby undermining his independence and the natural course of development. Therefore, the teacher takes the position of non-intervention and help on request, while the learning itself takes place through the personal impressions and discoveries of the child.

“Neither philosophers nor scientists are able to invent and impose on us this or that method of teaching. Only nature, which has established its own laws and laid certain developmental needs in man, can dictate to us such teaching methods that will have a very specific goal – the fulfillment of vital needs and laws. Only the child himself can reveal these laws and these needs – by his spontaneous reactions, by his successes. <…> We will have to learn from him and help him in every way we can.” Maria Montessori

Freedom turns out to be an important category in this system, although it is freedom within established boundaries: the child is free to choose the occupation, rhythm and nature of work, he can move around the classroom and organize the space (arranging tables, chairs), materials must be accessible to the eye and hand.

Despite the rather democratic style of interaction, in Montessori classes usually each material / manual exists in one copy, stimulating the child to develop social behavior in relation to others. At the same time, some requirements in this system exist and must be strictly observed.

First of all, this is the safety of others, as well as a number of work rules – for example, the mandatory return of materials to the place, strictly individual work (if the material is not intended for group work), during which the other child can only observe. Also, quite often in such groups there are no active and role-playing games, too creative handling of didactic materials is not encouraged (it is required to interact with them according to the rules).

The first Montessori school will appear in Rome at 1907 year. Today, children’s groups with a similar approach exist in many countries, and there are special schools. By the way, despite a number of discrepancies, the system of Maria Montessori was highly appreciated and financially supported by Jean Piaget and Sigmund Freud. Anna Freud became one of the popularizers of the approach, and the phrase is attributed to the founder of psychoanalysis: “ Where Montessori is, I am not needed “.

The Waldorf-Steiner system: the development of the essence of man

The ideas of Rudolf Steiner have always extended to a wider range of topics than just pedagogy. Breaking off his relationship with part of the theosophical movement, Steiner called his theory “anthroposophy”, the purpose of which he considered the combination of the supersensible and the scientific. This teaching is focused on ensuring that each person recognizes his inner abilities (and not just abilities, but connecting him with the highest spiritual knowledge), which will allow all mankind to find peace and harmony.

Hence it is quite logical that the school becomes for him a place for the development of the personality as a whole, and not just its intellectual or practical skills. In Steiner’s system, a person goes through a whole series of formations or even births: first, a physical body arises, at 7 years old – an etheric body, at 14 years old – an astral body, and by the age of 21 he has an I (immortal essence), which completes the learning process and opens self-development .

“You can achieve something only if you constantly give yourself over and over again to one completely definite thought, if you make it completely your own. This thought is: “I must do everything for the development of my soul and spirit; but I will wait quite calmly until the higher powers find me worthy of a certain enlightenment. ” If this thought becomes so powerful in a person that it becomes a feature of his character, then he is on the right path. Rudolf Steiner

These ideas have developed into a rather specific system in practice. The Waldorf School was conceived as a place in which the child will learn from childhood to perceive himself as the center of the universe, but on an equal footing with other people. Therefore, despite the high importance of the teacher, the educational process itself is focused on supporting the desire and ability of the child to independently implement their ideas and ideas. Competition is not supported here, and there are no grades, as well as homework.

The first such school appeared in 1919 in Stuttgart, and today there are about 1000 of them all over the world. In terms of subjects, a tangible emphasis is placed on speech (including the study of two foreign languages from the first grades) and creativity. According to Steiner, one must first learn to listen attentively and enthusiastically, then to speak, and only then to write.

True, it is worth noting that sometimes Waldorf teachers lisp and use an exorbitant number of diminutive suffixes, which, according to the latest scientific data, only makes it difficult to master speech (for comparison: Montessori teachers talk to any children as if they were adults). Creative development includes singing, drawing, dance, theater, playing musical instruments, eurythmy (a subject of harmonious movement that replaces gymnastics), as well as various types of needlework.

Among the latter, much attention is paid to the creation of “Waldorf dolls”. A mandatory requirement for its creation is the natural proportions of the body (corresponding to the age of the person depicted by the doll) and natural materials. Making dolls for Waldorfs is a process close to mystical, which is why they are often given names, spoken of as if they were alive, and also claimed that “ plastic and other artificial materials steal the soul of .” However, a doll for a child is indeed an important object for learning about the world and self-knowledge, so the seriousness and thoroughness with which they approach its creation at school is not without meaning.

A lot of time is also devoted to social interaction, especially in celebrating holidays, birthdays, end of term. The classical Waldorf school did not have a director, and many issues were resolved jointly by teachers, children and parents. Actually, parent meetings are a phenomenon that came from here.

Another unusual feature is the study of educational material in “epochs”, i.e. within 3-4 weeks all subjects are more or less devoted to one topic (“ancient Rome”, “engineers”, “native flora and fauna” etc.), which allows you to get used to the material and not waste energy switching from one topic to another. In fact, interdisciplinary and cyclical nature (return to the same material, but at a new level of complexity) is widely used throughout the course. In addition, textbooks are not used in the lower grades: each child has his own workbook, which turns into a personal summary that reflects experience and impressions.

Maria Montessori with children (AP Photo)

The method of “spiritual economy” is designed to give the child only the material that he is ready to handle without internal resistance. Therefore, they begin to study the exact sciences much later than in a regular high school, however, this also applies to many other things (for example, reading is not taught here from the first grade). Premature intellectual development is considered one of the roots of many problems of modern man.

Of course, this leads to the fact that training in a Waldorf school is ideally 12 years or more, and when transferring to another school, there are many difficulties. In addition, the special atmosphere in the school is strongly divorced from reality, which sometimes produces a feeling of sectarianism. True, it is worth remembering that escapism or adaptation to the surrounding realities is to a greater extent the choice of the subject, and not parents, school and conditions.

Comparative characteristics and criticism of approaches

It is not only difficult to talk about the effectiveness of these models (it depends on specific people and realities), but it is also unnecessary, since both refuse from the generally accepted measures of success. Rather, it makes sense to talk about the essence of ideas and their consequences. However, one should not forget about practice. Ultimately, without a trained teacher, all this will remain at the level of good wishes.

Good advice is, of course, good, but wise things are generally not so lacking in culture (you will find this if you start reading books). But no one has yet solved the problem with motivation: neither how to be good, nor how to start acting according to other people’s advice. And here, in fact, we can see an important substantive aspect: the requirements of Steiner and Montessori are very difficult to implement, it is necessary to somehow get past the Scylla of formalism and the Charybdis of obsession. As it is easy to see, each of the systems is characterized by a bias in one direction.

In fact, Montessori pedagogy, despite its thoughtful ethics, still tends towards objectivism. The very idea “environment determines formation” is a view through the prism of cause-and-effect relationships (and not semantic ones), giving the child as an object (for indirect influence through a “prepared environment”). In extreme, albeit rare cases, this gives a formalist teacher who relies on an allowance – they say, it will teach everything, and I am eliminated (after I have explained everything).

However, the desire to explore the world cannot be obtained from biological coercion to adapt, it can only be infected by other people. In other words, a Montessori teacher still has to want something a little (probably, first of all, development to some kind of norms) from a child. It is this part that is weakly expressed in theory, but is a significant element of the effectiveness of the method.

The Waldorf school tends to the other extreme. Considering the child as a subject and a future full-fledged personality, this pedagogy relies too much on suggestion. Suggestion – both on a conscious and unconscious level – is what allows the child to lean on the authority of the teacher and move in a certain direction. Such a transfer of strong feelings and affections from important people to the teacher in the long term gives rise to all sorts of difficulties: from an unconscious desire to please him in every possible way to a conscious rebellion.

Without suggestion and transfer it is impossible to learn: both children and adults are arranged in such a way that they will not take anything from someone who is not interested at all. However, I emphasize once again: suggestion includes the unconscious, and therefore it is difficult to control it. And it is even more difficult to correct its flaws if it has been going on for years. Surely, many could learn something from Steiner, but adopting all his imaginary constructions about the world is somehow too much. This is indeed sectarianism, because it is the one who, without a shadow of a doubt, perceives someone else’s transference (I am worthy of this, I am an authority), is usually called a guru. That’s just it, whatever one may say, the suppression of the subject with his desires.

Classroom at the Peaceful Pathways Montessori Academy, USA (Photo: www.howwemontessori.com) requirements. And this means, among other things, allowing him sometimes not to be a person, to admit that he does not want to develop and become happy, to resolve not only mistakes, but also perseverance in them. And this is quite difficult, since teachers sooner or later cease to doubt whether they are good and what it consists of.

This critique applies mainly to specific cases, but theory sets the trend. And yet, children who have passed the Montessori children’s groups or the Waldorf school have a very important bonus. And these are by no means some miraculous results of a prepared environment or a captivating teacher’s story. Everything is somewhat simpler: those children whose parents think about their future (and this is already confirmation of the desirability of these children) often get into such institutions.

Plus, the credit of trust given to the child by the teachers of these schools. A more balanced contingent, trust, and an element of parental recognition/care is what saves the child from a significant amount of social trauma and deformity. Regardless of what the child spends this saved energy on, he already has an advantage. What is especially noticeable to those who went through a regular high school (especially in its not the best periods).

Yes, sometimes the choice between innovative pedagogies and regular school is very similar to the choice between a happier or more successful future for a child. And yet this perspective is wrong, because ultimately the fate of a person is in his own hands. If you wish, you can suffer in paradise, or you can find your pluses in a post-apocalyptic existence.

In addition, for a person who has retained the desire to learn, any exams are only a matter of time. Therefore, the task of parents and education should be more modest: to give place to individual desire, to teach how to learn and take responsibility for one’s life. Even adaptation is already an unnecessary requirement, because a person is an extremely variable creature.

Finally, it is interesting to note that modern trends in education draw from both sources to one degree or another. On the one hand, virtual simulation is recognized as very promising, and this is still the same “prepared environment” Montessori.

On the other hand, with the advent of diversity in education, there is an increasing demand for those who will not only teach, but help with motivation and choice (where, what and how to study) – tutors. And the tutor, who builds the educational trajectory, is quite similar to the Waldorf teacher, who is not interested in the exam and the red cardboard. After all, education should serve the individual, and not vice versa.

Preview photo taken from: www.montessori.org .

Maria Montessori method. Encyclopedia of Early Development Methods

Maria Montessori Method

Montessori is the true pride of Italy, the first woman doctor in the country, who was also nominated for the Nobel Prize three times. She devoted her whole life to the free and natural development of children, and tens of thousands of her followers still work in teacher training colleges and universities around the world, promoting and implementing her views. At 189In the year 6, a graduate of the Faculty of Medicine, Maria Montessori, began working as a doctor’s assistant in a university clinic. There she first encountered mentally retarded children who were in an empty room, without toys, books and any human interaction. Montessori began to bring them the simplest items: boxes, shreds – and the progress in the behavior of children exceeded all her expectations. This was the starting point of Montessori pedagogy: children (both sick and healthy) need a developing environment that would help them comprehend the world around them. Montessori began to study works on pedagogy, psychology, anthropology, talked a lot with Jean Piaget, Anna Freud, observed, experimented, and thought. At 19In 00, she became the director of a Roman school for children with developmental delays and created a special developmental environment in it.

The results of the work of this school stunned the commission of the Italian Ministry of Education, which visited it three months later: children with developmental disabilities almost caught up with their healthy peers! Montessori methods have been given the green light. In January 1907, the first Montessori school began its work – the famous Orphanage in the Roman suburb of San Lorenzo. In 1929In the same year, together with her son Montessori, she organized the International Montessori Association (AMI), which is still active today.

Now the world is experiencing a real boom, this is one of the most popular methods of developing children: for example, in the United States, studying at Montessori is a good help for career growth. There are Montessori schools and kindergartens in almost all countries of the world, from Italy to New Zealand. There are many of them today in Russia.

Tragedy for Maria Montessori was that she was forced to send her own son to a boarding school: marriage with his father did not take place, and Maria was afraid of condemnation by the Catholic Church. However, having become a young man, Mario recognized his real mother, became her close friend, comrade-in-arms and successor to her work.

A distinctive feature of the Montessori method (unlike the Doman method, for example) is the complete freedom of the child. He chooses what, how and to what extent he does. For promoting complete freedom, this technique was banned both in Russia during the time of Stalin, and in her homeland under the Mussolini regime. Montessori said: unfold a colorful picture of the world in front of the baby, and when the first confusion passes, he himself will find what interests him. But this “beautiful freedom” also turns out to be the source of many problems that Montessori children face.

When choosing this method, be prepared for the fact that your child will not accept school rules: after all, he is used to choosing whether to study mathematics or reading. At school, he will not have such a choice, and he will not be able to manage his time the way he did before.

It should be noted that Maria Montessori developed her method for children over three years old, but her followers “lowered” the method for a year and recommend starting its use from two to two and a half years.

This text is an introductory fragment.

Maria Montessori Method

Maria Montessori method
Principles of the systemHelping the natural development of the child • Every child has an inner potential from birth, which encourages him to develop. Even if no one will study with him, he will still learn to walk, talk … But not

Maria Montessori Developmental Environment

Developing environment according to the method of Maria Montessori
You can properly organize your home using the method of the Italian teacher Maria Montessori. It is so versatile that it will help to solve absolutely all questions: • what toys and at what age do you need

Montessori games: intelligence at your fingertips

Montessori games: intelligence at your fingertips
A bit of theory
The Montessori method of raising children became the motto of five words: “Help me do it myself!”. Harmonious fusion of freedom and discipline, education of a creative and at the same time responsible person –

…together with Maria Montessori

…together with Maria Montessori
A bit of theory
Maria Montessori offers a way for children to easily and willingly learn to read. Without the help of special training, without alphabets, primers, copybooks, and almost without a pencil and paper! And read fluently, without

Help me do it myself! Child development through the eyes of Maria Montessori

Help me do it myself!
Child development through the eyes of Maria Montessori
We are used to the fact that a child receives knowledge from an adult. Maria Montessori is sure that children should learn and develop on their own, without prodding and instructions from elders. Every kid should do what he

Who is not suitable for the Montessori method

Who Shouldn’t Use the Montessori Method?
Convinced supporters of the system believe that it is suitable for all children, but not all parents. This means that too authoritarian parents will not be able to let their baby go “free swimming”. Perhaps this is not entirely true. Adult

Montessori parenting: “Our kids eat everything and don’t bite”

Montessori parenting: “Our children eat everything and not

Suzuki method

Suzuki Method
About the method of this author – the Japanese teacher and musician Shinichi Suzuki – they begin to talk and write more and more, groups and teachers working on this system appear in music schools. The main idea of the author of the system is that all

Eric Jensen’s Accelerated Neurolearning Method and ILLT as an Intensive Learning Method

Eric Jensen’s Accelerated Neurolearning Method and ILLT as an Intensive Learning Method
Modern education is constantly looking for ways to modernize itself and, accordingly, new teaching methods. For these purposes, it refers to various branches of science and on their basis

Method X and Method Y

Method X and Method Y
In 1960, Douglas McGregor, the late professor of management at MIT, published The Human Factor of Entrepreneurship. She markedly increased the popularity of Applied Behavior Science in her work on

Topic 6. Theory of women. Piaget Questions for discussion

Short
biography of J. Piaget. Possible connection
scientific views and interests of Piaget with
his childhood experiences and individual
inclinations. [(12,
Ch. 2)]
Genetic
psychology as a link between
evolutionary biology and genetics
epistemology: general contours of the theory.
The development of the child’s intelligence is ideal
model for studying human evolution
intellect as the highest, functional
forms of adaptation to rapid change
environment. Understanding the intellectual
adaptation as achievement balance
between the impact of the organism on the environment
and the impact of the environment on the body.
Consistent design all
more accurate understanding of
reality in process balancing
influences of the organism on the environment and environments
on the body. Natural selection
adaptive perceptions of reality.
The device of intelligence as biological
body systems. Postulation
basic structure ( scheme ) and basic
processes ( assimilation and accommodation )
intellect. The development of intelligence as
transformation of basic circuits (reflexes)
into complex mental circuits (logical
structures). [2, Chap. 2]
Theory of stages.
Three main periods in the development of intelligence:
1) sensorimotor period, 2) period
representative intelligence, 3) period
formal transactions. Characteristic
sensorimotor intelligence. six stages
development of sensorimotor intelligence:
from exercising reflexes to inventing
new means of solving problems by
mental combination. Promotion
in the direction of reversibility of sensorimotor
schemes and understanding the constancy of the object.
The Beginning of Representative Intelligence
– preoperative sub-period. Main
features of the logic of the child on the pre-operational
stage of development: cognitive
egocentrism, centering, misunderstanding
logics of relations, syncretism, transduction
and insensitivity to contradictions,
intellectual realism, artificialism
etc. Transition to specific operations.
Content dependent logic. Understanding
conservation laws. period of formal
operations: freeing logic from
specific content. Hypothetical-deductive
reasoning and combinatorial thinking.
Full reversibility and education
ensemble of logical operations. [(12,
Ch. 3), (3), (4)]
Piaget’s theory:
pros and cons. Ten main points
criticisms and responses to them by Piaget and his
supporters. [1, 3, 4]

The lesson is calculated
for 4 academic hours. Conduct form
activities: free discussion of issues,
set by the teacher.

Preparation literature:

1. Crane w. Theories of development. SPb., 2002, Ch. 6.

Crane
U. Theories of development. 5th international ed. –
St. Petersburg: prime-EVROZNAK, 2002, p. 149– 193 (with
changes. – A. A.)

Chapter 6. Piaget’s theory of cognitive development

Biographical
details

AT
psychology, there are not many theorists,
who played such an important
role as Jean Piaget (1896-1980), who created
most comprehensive and persuasive
theory of intellectual development.

Piaget
was born in Neuchâtel, a small Swiss
town, in
the university where his father taught
medieval history.
Piaget (Piaget, 1952) described his father as
serious and methodical thinker.
His mother, on the contrary, was very emotional,
and her behavior created tension
within the family. Piaget adopted his father’s love
to science and found salvation from family
conflicts
in solitary explorations.

Piaget
showed great promise from an early age
like a scientist. At 10 years old
age, he published an article about
albino sparrow observed
in the park. The boy was still in high school.
school, when
of his research on mollusks received
an invitation to meet
with foreign colleagues and offer
become a museum curator
— which he rejected because of his
age.

AT
At the age of 15, Piaget survived
intellectual crisis when
realized that his religious and philosophical
beliefs are lacking
scientific basis. So he decided to find
path that allows
combine philosophy and science. He is a lot
read and presented his new
ideas in writing, although its
essays were intended
for him alone. These searches did not take
all his time – when Piaget was 21 years old,
he managed to get his doctorate
in natural
sciences,
but
sometimes his broader research
brought
him into a state of confusion and
exhaustion. Finally at 23
year, he came up with a plan. First he
will do scientific research in children’s
psychology, having studied the development of mental
abilities.
And then uses the received data
to respond to broader
questions in the field of epistemology –
philosophical discipline,
concerning the origin of knowledge. He
called this new direction
“genetic epistemology” (Ginsburg &
Opper 1988, p.
2-3; Piaget, 1952, p. 239-244).

Piaget
decided to study children in 1920 when he worked
in Binet’s laboratory
in Paris. There he was assigned to develop
test of children’s intelligence.
At first this work seemed boring;
he wasn’t too interested
evaluate children’s answers as correct or
incorrect, but
this requires intelligence testing.
But soon Piaget began to show
interest in the answers of younger children
age, especially to their wrong answers.
He found that their mistakes follow
some sustainable
pattern that suggested
that their thinking
may have their own unique
peculiarities. Perhaps small children
Piaget reasoned, not “sillier” than children
senior
age or adults, but just think
completely different
(Ginsburg & Opper,
1938, p. 3).

To
learn more about the ideas of children, Piaget
abandoned standardized
tests that directed reactions
children in “artificial
the course of established questions and answers”,
and developed
more free clinical interview,
which “contributed
flow of spontaneous tendencies” (Piaget, 1926,
R. four). He also held
many hours watching spontaneous
children’s activity. The purpose of these
observation was to
refrain from own adults
thinking biases
children and learn more
from the children themselves.

Being
in Paris, Piaget published two
research work based
on his new approach, but for the most part
these new
research he did at the institute
Rousseau in Geneva, where
settled in
1921
d. He interviewed mainly
children
between the ages of 4 and 12 and found that
young children,
until about 7 years old, really meditate
qualitatively
otherwise about dreams, moral standards
and many other issues.

AT
1925 Piaget’s first child was born,
daughter Jacqueline, – an event,
which initiated a series of important
cognitive research
infant behavior. Piaget and his wife
Valentina Chatenay had a very
careful observations of Jacqueline’s behavior,
as well as her other two children, Lucienne
and Laurent.

Beginning
around 1940, Piaget returned to the study
children as well as teenagers, but changed
focus of their research. Whereas
his early research concerned such
the way dreams, moral
behavior and other issues related to
everyday
interests of the child, his new research
were focused
on the child’s understanding of mathematics
and scientific concepts is a problem that
dominated his work until the end of his
life
(Ginsburg & Orper, 1988, pp. 15-16).

AT
1950s Piaget finally turned to
philosophical questions in
epistemology, while continuing at the same time
study cognitive development
children. Here we will only briefly touch
epistemological
Piaget’s theories; our task will be
get some
insight into his theory of development.

Attitude
psychologists to Piaget’s research
changed over time. His first
work attracted the attention of psychologists
in many parts of the world. However, after
initial enthusiasm
interest in Piaget waned, especially
in the United States.
On the one hand, it was difficult for psychologists
understand his theoretical position.
They also objected to his methodology.
Piaget sometimes
changed his questions during the interview,
if you thought it was
can help him understand thinking
specific child; similar
actions, many psychologists have pointed out,
violate the canon of the standardized
interview. Piaget also ignored such
questions like messages about their sizes
samples and statistical
processing results. Apparently he
considered such questions
less important than the content
detailed examples of thinking
children (Flavell, 1963, r. 10-11, 431; Ginsburg & Orper,
1988
R. 6).

AT
in general, throughout the professional
Piaget’s career
studies suffered from the same
methodological shortcomings,
but the 1960s were notable
revival of interest
to his work. Psychologists have begun to realize
what is his theory
complex and superficially documented
she was,
is of great importance. Today hardly
Is there at least one
study of children’s thinking, where not
there would be references to work
Piaget.

Overview
theory

Although
focus of Piaget’s research
changed over time,
each part contributed to a single,
unified theory
stages. The most common stages, or
periods are listed in Table.
6.1.

Before
than we will consider these stages in detail,
it is important to note two
theoretical moment. First, Piaget
admitted that children
go through different stages
pace, and therefore gave
little value for age limits,
associated with them. However, he
claimed that children go from one
stage to another in unchanged
sequences in the same
okay.

Secondly,
when we discuss the stages, it is important
remember the general
Piaget’s view of the nature of change in
the course of development. Because he
postulated an unchanging sequence
stages, some scientists
(e.g. Bandura & McDonald, 1963) suggested that
what he was
proponent of the maturation theory. He them
was not. Proponents of this theory
believe that the sequence of stages
laid down in the genes and what stages
disclosed according to
internal chart. But Piaget
did not consider that its stages are genetically
conditioned. They only reflect
ever more universal ways of thinking.
Children constantly
explore the environment, manipulate it and
trying to comprehend it, and in the process
they are actively designing new
and more complex structures
allowing contact with the environment
(Kohlberg, 1968).

table
6.1. General periods of development

Period
I Sensorimotor
intelligence (birth -2
of the year). Toddlers build their own
scheme
physical activities such as sucking,
grasping
and punching to set
contact
with the surrounding world.

Period
II Preoperative
thinking (2 years – 7 years). Children
learning to think—to use symbols
and internal images – but their thinking
not systematic or logical. It
very different from the way adults think.

Period
III Specific
operations (7-11 years). Children take over
ability to think systematically
but only if
can be linked to specific objects
and action.

Period
IV Formal
operations (11 years – maturity). Young
people master the ability
think
systematically in a purely abstract and
hypothetical key.

Piaget
still used biological
concepts, but only in limited
limits. He noted that babies
inherit reflexes,
for example sucking. Reflexes are important
in the first month of life, but
after that they have to develop
much less impact.

Except
Moreover, Piaget sometimes characterized
kids activity with point
view of biological tendencies that
found in everyone
organisms. These trends are
assimilation, accommodation
and organization. Assimilation means
assimilation, like
the one that takes place while eating
or digestion of food.
In the intellectual realm, we must
assimilate objects
or information into their cognitive
structures. For example,
adults assimilate information by reading
books. Long before
this kid might try to assimilate
object by grabbing it
and trying to include it in your scheme
grasping.

Some
objects do not match
existing structures, so we
must be produced in our structures
accommodation, or change. For example,
little girl can
discover what you can handle
cube, only preliminary
removing some obstacle. way
of such accommodations, infants begin
design ever more efficient
and sophisticated means to implement
contact with the world.

Third
trend – organization. For example,
4 month old boy
may have the ability to see
on objects and grab them. Soon he
will try to combine these two actions,
grabbing those objects
which he is looking at. At the level of more
intellectual behavior we
building
theories. Apparently we’re constantly trying
organize your
ideas into connected systems.

Tem
most, although Piaget believed that the stages
not due to genetics
code, but are constructed by the children themselves,
he still considered the process
design in terms of
biological
trends (Ginsburg & Orper, 1988, pp. 16-19).

Piaget
was not a supporter of the maturation theory,
but to an even lesser extent
he shared the positions of the supporters of the theory
learning. He did not believe that thinking
children
formed through learning
conducted by adults, or
other influences from the environment. Children
must interact with the environment
to develop, but build new ones
cognitive
they are the structures, not the external environment.

So
Thus, development is not driven by internal
ripening processes
and not external training. It’s a process
active design,
in which children, through their own
activities, build
increasingly differentiated and
comprehensive cognitive
structures.

Period
I. Sensorimotor intelligence (birth
– 2 years)

First period
Piaget’s development consists of six stages.

Stage
1 (birth – 1 month). ¹
Using reflexes

When
Piaget talked about action structures
baby, he used
the term schema (eg Piaget, 1936a, p. 34).
The schema can be
any pattern of action that provides
contact with the environment, such as staring,
grabbing, punching or kicking.
As already mentioned, although babies
design their plans and
subsequent structures through
own actions, their first
schemes are mostly
inborn reflexes. Most
a noticeable reflex is sucking;
kids do
automatic sucking movements
whenever someone touches
to their lips.

reflexes
suggest a certain passivity.
The body does not show
activity until something appears
its stimulating.
But Piaget showed that even such a reflex,
like sucking, fast
becomes part of a self-initiated
baby activity. For example,
when his son Laurent was only 2 days old,
he started doing sucking
movements when nothing was causing them.
Because he did
them between feedings, when not
hungry, it seems
sucked for the sake of the process of sucking.
Piaget said that once
we have some kind of scheme, we have
there is also a need
actively use it (p. 25-26.35).

Except
Moreover, if the kids are hungry, they are not
in passive
waiting for the mother to invest in them
nipple mouth. When Laurent
it was 3 days old, he began to look for the nipple, as
only his lips touched
any part of the mother’s breast. He
felt with open mouth
the whole breast until it finds the nipple (p. 26).

kids
are not limited to one breast sucking.
Piaget’s children sucked
linen, pillows, blankets, own
fingers are all they are
accidentally bumped into. According to the terminology
Piaget, they assimilated all sorts of
objects by embedding them in the sucking circuit
(pp. 26,32,34).

¹
Age limits for this period
proposed by Ginzburg and Opper (Ginsburg
& Orper, 1988) in their excellent review
Piaget’s theories.

Although
in stage 1 the most noticeable action
is assimilation,
we can also discover the beginnings
accommodation. For example,
kids need to learn how to regulate
movements of your head
and lips in order to find the chest and
nurse. Similar regulatory
actions also show the beginnings
organizations; kids organize their
movements so that feeding becomes
all
smoother, faster and more efficient
(p. 29-31.39).

Stage
2 (1-4 months). Primary circular
reactions

Circular
the reaction takes place when the baby accidentally
commits
some new action and trying it
repeat (Piaget, 1936a,
R. 55). A prime example of this is
thumb sucking. Hand randomly
comes into contact with the mouth, and when it
going down, baby
trying to get her back to where she was.
However, for some time
babies can’t do it. They beat
in the face
hand, but they cannot grasp it; or
they wave their hands frantically;
or follow the hand with the mouth, but cannot
grab her because
their whole body, including their arms and hands,
moves as one
and in the same direction (p. 51-53). According to
Piaget’s terminology
they are incapable of accommodation,
necessary in order to
to assimilate the hand into a scheme
sucking. After repeated
failures they organize sucking and movements
hands and master the technique of sucking
finger.

Like
thumb sucking incident, most
primary circular
reactions includes the organization
two previously independent
bodily patterns or movements. For example,
when little
the girl repeatedly brings her hand closer to
his face and look at
her, she carries out the primary
circular reaction. She coordinates
looking at and moving the hand (p. 96-97).

These
circular reactions are good
an illustration of
What does Piaget mean by intellectual
development as
“construction process”. Baby
actively “puts together”
various movements and schemes. Important
note the amount of work done
work; baby can coordinate
independent movements
only after repeated failures.

Stage
3 (4-10 months). Secondary circular
reactions

Elements
development at stage 2 are called primary
circular
reactions because they involve
coordination of parts
the child’s own body. Secondary
circular reactions are
the place where the baby discovers and
reproduces something interesting
an event outside one’s body (Piaget, 1936a, p.
154). For example,
one day Piaget’s daughter Lucien, lying in her
crib, made
leg movement that caused the swing
dolls hanging from her
over your head. She was looking at dolls
a few seconds and then again
pushed the back of the crib with her feet, again
following the movement of the dolls. During
for the next few days she repeated
these actions are many
times, kicking their feet and following the swing
dolls, and often flooded
laughing at the sight of moving dolls (p.
157-159).

Piaget
sometimes called secondary circulars
reactions “prolongation
interesting impressions” (p. 196). He
thought babies smiled
and laugh while watching relatively new
event (p. 197). At the same
time they seem to enjoy
own capabilities,
the ability to trigger an event
again and again

Stage
4 (10-12 months). Secondary
diagrams

On the
stage 3 baby performs elementary
action to achieve a certain
result – for example, kicks legs,
to cause the movement of suspended
dolls. At stage 4 actions
babies become more differentiated:
he is learning
coordinate two independent circuits
to achieve a result.
This new achievement is most notable,
when babies encounter
obstacles. For example, once Laurent
wanted to grab a matchbox, but
Piaget placed his hand
is on his way. Laurent first tried
ignore the hand; he
I tried to go around it from the top and side. But
he didn’t try to move
her aside. When Piaget continued
keep your hand in his way,
Laurent resorted to ‘assault the box, waving
hand, shaking and shaking his head from the side
aside,” producing various
“magic” gestures (1936a, p. 217). Finally,
a few days later Laurent
managed to remove the obstacle by pushing
arm out of the way with punches,
before he grabbed the boxes. So
way, Laurent coordinated
two independent schemes – drawing
punches and grabs,
– to reach the goal. one scheme,
striking has become a means
reaching the goal, grasping the box.

Similar
simple observations are very important for
our understanding
how children develop basic
categories of perception
space and time. We can not
talk to kids
and ask them how they perceive
space and time,
but we can see how these categories
formed through their
actions. When Laurent learned to move
hand to take possession
box, he showed understanding
that some objects are
in front of others in space and that
some
events must precede others
in time (Ginsburg &
Orper, 1988, p. 52).

Stage
5 (12-18 months). Tertiary circular
reactions

On the
stage 3 babies do elementary
action to achieve
one result – an extension of the interesting
impression.
At stage 4, they make two independent
actions to achieve the same result.
Now, at stage 5, they are experimenting
with various actions for the purpose of observation
various results.

For example,
once Laurent showed interest in a new
table. He hit
on it several times with a fist, in some
stronger in other cases
more carefully in order to listen
different sounds that
produced his actions (Piaget, 1936a, p.
270).

Similar
same way, one 12 month old boy
sitting in the bathroom
watching the water flow from the faucet. He
put his hand under the faucet and noticed that
water splashes in all directions. He
repeated this action
twice, prolonging an interesting spectacle
(stage 3). But then he
began to change the position of the hand, sometimes
bringing it closer, and sometimes pushing it away
from the faucet and watching the water splatter
at different angles.
He varied his actions to
see what’s new
dissimilar results will follow.

Costs
note that babies learn
completely on your own
without any hints from outside
adults. They formed
their schemes exclusively from innate
curiosity to
the surrounding world.

Stage
6 (18 months – 2 years). The beginning of thinking

On the
stage 5 children are little scientists,
varying their actions
and observing results. However, all
they make their discoveries
through direct physical
actions. On the stage
6 children before
take action,
Apparently, they are thinking through situations with support
to internal representations.

AT
the most famous example of behavior
Stage 6 involves Lucienne
and a matchbox. Piaget put in
chain boxes
Lucienne tried to extract it immediately.
She had two schemes
to get a chain: flip
boxes and stick your finger
in the slot of the box. However, none of the schemes
didn’t work. Then she
did something interesting. She stopped
their attempts and looked very
closely at the gap. She then a few
times in a row
opened and closed her mouth, opening it with
every time wider and wider
(Piaget, 1936a, p. 338). After that she quickly
opened the box
and got the chain.

Piaget
(p. 344) noticed that at stage 5 the child,
would probably get
chain through a slow process
trial and error, experimenting
with different actions. Having stopped their
trying and thinking about the situation, Lucienne
was able to achieve much
faster. She still didn’t speak the language well.
so resorted to motor
movements (his mouth) to symbolize
action that
she had to do.

Progress
children in stage 6 can also be seen in
their attempts at imitation. Piaget drew
note that for some
time
children are generally incapable of imitating
new samples; they can
only reproduce actions that
are already present in them.
behavioral repertoire. However, to
stage 5 they can already produce
the necessary accommodations to mimic
new behavior
through experimental method
trial and error. But only
at stage 6, children are capable of delayed
imitations –
imitations of currently absent
patterns of behavior. For example, to
16 month old
Jacqueline came to visit a little boy,
whom she used to
saw several times and which in that
day made a “terrible scandal. ” He
squealed, trying to get out of the nursery
arena, and
pushed him back, stomping his feet. Jacqueline
stood and stared in wonder
never seen a scene like this before.
The next day
she herself squealed, being in her
playpen, and tried to move
him by lightly stamping his foot several times
contract. Imitation of the whole
scene was quite impressive (Piaget,
1946, p. 63).

Piaget
suggested that because imitation
Jacqueline took place
a whole day later, in the mind of a girl
should have kept some
internal representation of the model. So
how she was missing
vocabulary required for
representation of her actions in verbal
form, she probably used
certain type of motor
representations. She is
could imitate the boy’s behavior
with very fast muscle
movements while watching
him, and these movements formed the basis
her subsequent imitation
(chap. 3).

Development
understanding the permanence of objects

Bye
we have described only some of the main
features of six
sensorimotor stages. Piaget explored
and other elements of development
during this period; he showed how
babies construct concepts of permanence
objects, time, space and
causality
and how they develop the ability to
game. Due to lack
places we will briefly consider only one
important element of development
– Understanding the permanence of objects.

On the
stages 1 and 2 babies have no idea
about the objects that exist
Around them. If a person or object
are removed from their field of vision, maximum,
what they do is continue some
time to look where they last
once seen him. If the object
does not appear again, they switch
your attention to something else. They are not
are trying to find it. Kid follows
rule: out of sight
— out of mind (Piaget, 1936b, p. 1-12).

On the
stage 3 toddlers make new progress. How
we mentioned earlier,
now they are showing interest in the outside
world (for example, to extend
interesting experiences). Respectively,
they start better
understand the permanence of external objects.
If objects fall, disappearing
out of their sight, they are now watching
where the object fell.
They may also find partially hidden
objects. If they temporarily put an object
to the side (for example, behind your back), then
may, after a short pause, find him.
They can do this when the object has been
associated with their own actions.
However, babies at this stage
unable to find objects that
completely hidden by others
people even in front of them (p. 13-48).

On the
stage 4 the first manifestations are noted
genuine understanding
permanence of objects. Toddlers can
now find complete
hidden objects. If we are completely
cover the toy with a blanket
the baby will pick it up and find the toy (p.
51).

But
Piaget discovered at this stage a curious
limitation. When
he hid the object at point A, his children
could find him, but when he
then, in front of them, he hid
same object at point B, they tried again
find him
at point A – the place of its previous
success. According to the terminology
Piaget, they couldn’t follow the next
permutations (movements
from one secret place to another)
(p. 54).

On the
stage 5 children can follow the row
permutations if they see how we
perform. Behind invisible permutations
babies are capable
trace only at stage 6. For example,
just on
sixth stage, Jacqueline was able to, having done
detour around the couch, find the ball,
who rolled under the sofa. She was able
do
it’s because now she has
ability to mentally imagine
own trajectory of the ball, even when it was
invisible (p. 231).

According to
Piaget, such roundabout actions are very
are important. They are showing,
that the child has developed a sense of space,
which
has the characteristics of a mathematical
model called a group. For example _i
roundabout
Jacqueline’s journey demonstrates
such an important property of a group as
associativity – the ability to achieve
some
points through various interconnected
steps. Jacqueline also demonstrates
reversibility property, returning the ball
back. These roundabout actions indicate
and on
other properties that characterize
connected structure,
described by the mathematical concept
groups (Piaget & Inhelder, 1966, pp. 15-47).

Leaving
technical details aside, we can
note the huge
the progress that babies make when
gain understanding
permanence of objects. At the beginning of life
they lack representation
about objects that exist themselves
on its own, regardless
from watching them or doing
actions with them. By the end of the sensorimotor
period objects are separated from each other
and constant. So in the mind
children, a universe is formed containing
independent
objects in which they themselves are
just one
object among many others. So
along with the understanding of constancy
objects they develop a clear
self-image
as independent beings (Piaget, 1936b,
p. 108-109).

Periods
II and III. Pre-operational thinking (2
years – 7 years) and specific operations (7-11
years)

To
the end of the sensorimotor period
able to make effective
and well organized activities,
allowing him to contact
with your immediate environment.
Child
continues to use sensorimotor
lifelong skills,
next period, preoperative period
thinking, marked
an important change. Mental capacity
baby fast
reach a new level, the level of symbols
(including images
and words). As a result, the child must
reorganize
your thinking. This cannot be done right away.
For some
time, throughout
preoperative period,
the child’s thinking is generally not systematic
and not logical. It
organized on a mental level
before the child turns
7 years or so, not before the start
specific
operations (Piaget, 1964a, p. 22).

Height
symbolic activity

Children
start using symbols when
use one object
or action to represent another,
absent (Ginsburg
& Opper, 1988, p. 70). In fact, as we
seen children begin
do it in the sixth stage of the sensorimotor
development. For example,
Lucienne opened her mouth before opening
Matchbox;
she used her mouth to represent
action that
she hasn’t done it yet. Similar
delayed imitation includes
into a certain kind of internal
presentation of past
events. Piaget believed that delayed
imitation also first
includes motor imagery, and
stressed that the first
characters are motor characters, not
linguistic.

Examples
non-linguistic characters we find
and in children’s play. One Day Jacqueline
imagined that a piece of cloth is hers
pillow.
She laid her head on the cloth and, laughing,
pretended to fall asleep.
Her game was symbolic, because
she used
one object, a piece of cloth, for presentation
another missing
– pillows (Piaget, 1946, p. 96). Make-believe game
also begins on the sixth sensorimotor
stages and becomes clearly visible
over the next few years.

Main
the source of the characters is of course
well, the language that
develops rapidly in the beginning
preoperative period (approx.
from 2 to 4 years). One of the first times when
Jacqueline symbolically
used language happened when she
it was almost 2 years after
after she had been by the pond. Back
home, she told her father
about what happened, saying: “Robert cry,
duck swim in the lake, fly away”
(p. 222). That is, she used the words
for the reconstruction of the missing
events – an event that took place in
past.

Language
significantly expands the horizons of the child.
Through language
the child can relive the past,
anticipate the future
and report some events to others
people. But precisely because
that the child’s thinking expands so
swiftly, he first
lacks the qualities of coherent logic. it
manifests itself in how
a small child uses words.
He doesn’t use them to refer to
true classes of objects, but only in
as assumptions
(preconcepts).
For example,
when Jacqueline was
3 years old, she said that dad is
a man who has “a lot of Lucien
and a lot of Jacqueline” (p. 255). She has not yet owned
concept of common
class, inside which children with names
Lucienne and Jacqueline make up
only a small subset.

Because the
children have no idea about the general
classes, their reasoning is often transductive,
moving from particular to particular.
At 4.5 years old, Lucienne said: “I haven’t slept yet
after dinner, that is
now it is not daytime” (p. 232). She is
didn’t realize it was daylight
time is the total period of time
containing many private events,
of which her dream was only one.

Some
psychologists believe that children learn
think more
logical when they master the language.
According to this view, language
provides us with conceptual categories
(see Brown, 1965). But Piaget
was of a different opinion. Although language has great
value – it provides
us a source of commonly used symbols
for communication with
other people – in itself it is not
creates a logical structure
thinking. Logic comes from actions.
Babies form
logically connected system of actions in
course of sensorimotor
period before they start talking
and subsequent
logic is just organized
actions that have taken more
internal view (Piaget & Inhelder, 1966, p.
86-90). To explore
how internal actions shape
logical systems
Piaget gave the children various tasks
scientific nature. He usually started
similar experiments with 4-year-old children,
because they could already sit,
focus on tasks
and communicate with the examiner.

Scientific
reasoning

Saving
volume (liquid). This
most famous experiment
Piaget. In one case (Piaget & Szeminska, 1941,
p. 17) the child is shown two identical
glasses, A1 and A2, which are filled up to
the same mark. The child is asked
whether they contain
both glasses are the same amount
liquids, and the child is almost always
says they contain. Next, the experimenter
(or child) overflows
liquid from A1 to glass P, which is lower
and wider. child
ask if there is a quantity left
the same liquids. At the preoperative
level, the answers are divided into two
substages.

On the
children in the first substage are clearly incapable
understand the principle of conservation – i.e. they
do not realize that the quantity remains
same. Usually
they say there is more liquid now
in glass A1, since it is higher. Sometimes
baby says she’s bigger now
in P, as it is wider. Anyway
the child is “centered” on only one
parameter, height or width. Only
one perceptual parameter
– appearance, produces on the child
such a strong impression
that the child is unable to use
logic to understand that quantity
liquid remained unchanged. On the second
substage baby
takes steps towards the principle of conservation,
but not yet mastered
them. The child may first say that
liquid more
in glass A1, since it is higher, then
change your mind and say
that there is more of it in P, since it is wider, and,
Finally, get confused.
The child demonstrates “intuitive
regulation”,
he begins to consider two perceptual
parameter, but not yet
talks about two things at the same time
and is unaware that the change
one parameter compensates for the change
another. But his confusion shows
that he begins to realize that he himself
contradicts,
and you can be sure that soon he
resolve this contradiction
and proceed to the save stage.

How
as a rule, children come to understand
fluid retention approx.
at the age of 7. When it happens
they enter into
stage of specific operations. Mostly,
children come to understand
conservation, using three arguments.
First, the child may say, “You
did not add anything and did not pour anything,
so there should be the same amount of water.”
This is an identity argument. Secondly,
the child may say: “This glass
taller here but the other is wider
here, so the water is the same in both.”
This is the compensation argument – changes
balance each other. Child
suggests that
change is part of an organized
systems – what a change
one parameter is bound in a mandatory
order with compensating
changing the other. Third, baby
can say:
“It’s the same in both, so how can you
pour water from here to there,
where she was before. This is the argument of inversion,
or reversibility (Piaget & Inhelder, 1966, p. 98).
Piaget believed that the child is at the stage
specific operations
can use all three arguments though,
maybe he won’t be able to do it.
spontaneously while doing
each task.

AT
These arguments are based on logical
operations are mental
actions that are reversible
(p. 96). When a child
indicates that the change in one glass
compensated by a change in the other, it
understands that the end result is
return
to the original amount. Similar
the same way when
baby claims we can transfuse
water back, he suggests
that we are reversing the process.

Important
note that operations are internal,
mental actions. Child
makes compensation or reverse
actions in the mind. Actually,
the child has not yet performed and has not seen
the transformations he
He speaks. These transformations (for example,
reversibility) are like transformations,
committed by a baby, but now they
take place on
more internalized level.

Sometimes
people ask if they are
cause of misunderstanding
children of the principle of preserving only
their language difficulties.
Children may think that under “more”
the experimenter means “higher”,
and therefore indicate a higher
cup. Similar
difficulties can be circumvented by changing
the wording of the question, for example,
asking: “From which glass could you
drink more water?” Usually
we find that a small child
still unable
understand the principle of conservation (Peill, 1975, p.
7, chap. 2).

How
in the same way the child acquires understanding
conservation laws? Most
simple answer: understanding the laws
conservation is instilled in him by
learning. However, as we will see below,
conservation law training
often comes across the unexpected
resistance. preoperative
the child sincerely does not believe the explanations
adult.

Piaget
argued that children acquire understanding
save spontaneously. Decisive moment
occurs in the second substage, when
the child first says that in one of
more glasses of liquid
since he’s taller, then he says more
in the other, since it is wider,
and finally gets confused.
The child is in a state
internal contradiction, which
allows by passing
to a higher stage. Sometimes we can
see how this change is happening on
our eyes. The child says: “In this
more…
no, this one is wider, no, wait. In both
equally. This one is higher
but you poured water into a wider
cup”.

Saving
quantities. B
one of his conservation experiments
quantities (Piaget & Szeminska, 1941, p. 49-56) Piaget
gave children
a row of egg glasses and a few eggs. Then
he asked them to take so many
eggs, as needed to fill
glasses. And again the answers in the preoperative
period was divided into two sub-stages.

On the
the first substage children just lined up
rows of equal length
ignoring the number of eggs in a row. When
Piaget then asked them
put the eggs in the glasses, they are surprised
discovered that they had too many eggs
too much or too little.

On the
second preoperative stage children
spontaneously obtained the ratio
one to one, placing one egg at a time
next to each glass
(see figure 6. 2). According to Piaget, they used
intuitive approach
obtaining an exact perceptual order.
But their success was limited
this simple perceptual arrangement.
When Piaget then squeezed (or sometimes
stretched) one of the rows, the children stated
what now
there are more items in one row. As in
in case of fluid retention,
children were unable to understand the principle
conservation, because
they were more influenced by their direct
perception, not logic. Because one
the row now looked much longer,
they couldn’t figure out how many
items should remain the same.

Except
Moreover, at this stage, children sometimes begin
hesitate in your
answers. First they say that in one
a number of more items
since it is longer but then declare
that there are more of them in another
row, as it is denser. This state
conflict characterizes the transition to
specific operations.

On the
stages of specific operations, children are aware
that the number of items
in each row is the same, despite
difference in line length.
They conclude that the two rows are the same,
because “you’re nothing
did not remove or add anything”
(identity), because “that
the row is longer here, but this one is tighter.”
(compensation) or because
that “you can do this row again
long and they will
the same” (inversion).

Others
conservation experiments. Piaget
explored a number of other
types of conservation, such as conservation
matter, weight, volume
and length. So, in the experiment on conservation
substances, the child is shown
two identical balls of plasticine
or test, and then he sees how one
the ball is given an elongated, thinner
shape like a cake. baby on
pre-operational level
thinks two balls contain different things
amount of test.

We will not consider here various
types of conservation, but only note that all
they are believed to involve mastery
the same logical concepts
– identity, inversion and compensation.
However, some types of laws

conservation,
appear to be more complex than others,
and absorbed later. ¹
So reaching understanding
conservation is a gradual
process within a specific period
operations.

Switching on
to class. B
typical switching experiment
element to class
Piaget (Piaget & Szeminska, 1941, pp. 161-181) suggested
children
20 wooden beads, of which 18 were
brown and two
– white. Piaget made sure that children
understand that although most of the beads
brown and two are white, they are all made
from wood.
Then he asked the children: “What kind of beads
more: brown
or wooden? Children on preoperative
level said more brown
beads. Obviously, the abundance of brown
beads compared to two white
produced on them so strong
the impression that they were incapable
realize that both brown and white
beads are part of some
greater whole
– a class of wooden beads. As in
in the case of conservation,
period of specific operations children
deal with similar tasks.
to include the element in the class, and,
appear to use the same
logical operations (p. 178).

¹
It can be assumed that the acquisition of one
a number of laws always occur in one
and the same sequence – assimilation
conservation of matter, then weight and volume
(Ginsburg & Opper, 1988, p. 151-153; Piaget & Inhelder, 1966,
p. 99).

Social
thinking

Egocentrism.
Piaget
believed that in each period there is
general correspondence between scientific and
social thinking. For example,
just like pre-operational
children are incapable
take into account two parameters
performing conservation tasks, they
also unable to take into account more than one
points of view
in their interactions with others.
preoperative children
often show self-centeredness, considering
all exclusively with their own
positions. It becomes clear from conversations
children (Piaget,
1923). For example, a little girl might
tell your girlfriend:
“I’m putting it in here” no matter what
the place to which she
indicates, hidden from the eyes of her girlfriend.

One
of the most widely cited studies
Piaget devoted to egocentrism concerned
child’s perception of space.
In this study (Piaget & Inhelder, 1948)
the child was led around
layout of three mountains so that he can see
how the layout looks from different angles.
After this bypass, the child was seated
one side
layout, facing the doll that was looking
on the layout with the opposite
sides. The child was then asked to choose
from several photos
the picture that best shows
what he sees and
picture showing what he sees
doll. All the children could find
a picture that reflected their own
position, but the smallest
children (approximately 4 to 6 years old) often chose
the same pictures
to show the position of the doll. Obviously,
they didn’t understand that
the position of the doll is different from theirs
own.

Egocentrism,
thus refers to the inability
separate your point of view from someone else’s. But
egocentricity does not necessarily mean
selfishness or vanity. This thought can
explain with an example.
One day two boys went to the store
with his aunt to do
gift for mom on her birthday. Older
the boy who was
7 years old, chose a piece of jewelry. Jr,
who was 3.5
year, chose a toy car.
Younger boy’s behavior
was not dictated by selfishness or
greed; he carefully packed
gift and gave it to my mother with a look that
showed clearly that
he thought she’d like the gift.
However, his behavior
was self-centered; he did not accept
attention to the fact that interests
his mothers are different from his own.

Bye
children are self-centered, they are usually just
play next to each other
friend. For example, two boys in the sandbox
will build their own
buildings. When they overcome
self-centeredness, then learn
coordinate their actions in a joint
work. Each
can dig a tunnel so that the tunnels in
eventually connect. It requires
from each of them considering the point of view
another. Such a cooperative
the game takes place at the specific stage
operations.

Egocentrism
may also affect the speech of young children
children, for example
when they participate in a “collective
monologue.” It may seem that two
little girls have a conversation then
how
in fact, each
tells what she thinks
Currently. One girl can
talk about a toy house that
she’s building now, and the other is about the trip,
which
she did, and between their words there is no
no connection. When
children overcome egocentrism, they
take into account the reactions and point
the eyes of your listeners.

So
Thus, a significant part of the interactions
differs between peers
egocentrism. However, he assumed
Piaget
(1923, p. 101; 1932, p. 94), children overcome
egocentrism when
begin to interact not only
exclusively with adults
but more and more with other children. They are
discover that while
adults seem to understand everything that
they want to tell their peers on it
incapable. Accordingly, they learn
take into account the point
view of others in order to be understood.

Except
moreover, it produces less for children
impression of the authority of others
children, and they are more freely involved with
them into conflict. They are
argue with their peers and sometimes
reach compromises
and cooperate with them. Thus they
begin to coordinate alternative
points of view and interests (Piaget, 1924, p. 205).

Regardless
on whether children overcome egocentrism
predominantly
through interactions with peers
or not, the most important point in the theory
Piaget is that the children themselves play
an active role in the awareness of the existence
alternative points
vision. In this regard, I recall the case
when one of our
sons, who was then 5 years old,
apparently really
made this discovery. One day when
the two of us rode in the car,
after a few minutes of silence he
said: “You know, dad, you
don’t remember what I remember
I”. I asked him what he meant and
he replied: “Well, for example, when I
I remember my
boots, you don’t know about it; you do not
you can remember what I remember
I”. So at that moment he
apparently really
I understood, and understood myself, that the point of view
other people
different from his own. Maybe,
then it’s not completely
overcame his egocentrism, but the essence
here in another: how
whatever his step, he took it
on one’s own.

Moral
judgment. Piaget
explored social thinking
children in many areas, including
moral standards. In his
classic work “The Moral
child’s judgment” he
paid special attention to how children
understand
ball game rules.

Piaget
first observed how children really
play this
game and found that between the ages
4 and 7 years they are usually
play in an egocentric manner. If a
two boys were playing
everyone played in their own way. They had a vague
idea of victory;
one of them could exclaim: “I won,
and you won too!
After the age of 7 children tried
follow the general rules
and win according to them (Piaget, 1932/1965, pp.
29-46).

Then
Piaget studied the thinking of children,
regarding the rules. His
I was especially interested in whether children think
that the rules can be changed.
Here he discovered that children during
several years – approx.
up to 10 years of age – it is believed that
the rules are fixed
and immutable. They said the rules
establishes some
authoritative person: the state or God.
The rules can’t be changed, they said
they, because then it won’t
real game.

About
after 10 years, children became more
realistic. Now they’ve seen in
the rules are just the way the game is played,
established
as a result of mutual agreement.
The kids didn’t count the rules anymore
fixed or absolute; they
said that the rules
probably changed over time
when the kids came up with
new rules. And they also said that
can change them
if all participants in the game agree
(ibid., pp. 50-76).

These
different ideas about the rules,
Piaget said, demonstrate
two basic moral principles.
The first characteristic
for young children is
moral heteronomy,
blind obedience to the rules set
adults. The children assume
that there is one sovereign law,
to which they always
must follow. Second moral
principle characteristic
for older children, autonomy.
This principle regards rules as
inventions of people created by equal
participants for the sake of cooperation (ibid.,
pp. 401-406).

Piaget
believed that moral heteronomy
associated with egocentrism;
children evaluate the rules with a single
points of view – points
adult vision. Being a form
egocentrism, moral heteronomy
overcome rather late
age 10 or so
Moreover, in comparison with the egocentric
a game that is usually overcome
by the age of 7. Here Piaget
reminds us that
heteronomy is a form of egocentric
thinking and saying
that thinking often lags behind action.
Children may need to participate
really in large numbers
collective
games with peers in which they
actually change the rules to
satisfy the desires of all participants,
before they can appreciate
the reality of the rules on the conscious
level (ibid. , p. 94-95).

Animism.
Piaget
describes other differences in thinking
small
children from the thinking of older children
and adults. Like Heinz Werner, Piaget
noticed that small children do not spend
those differences between
animate and inanimate
items that
we do. Werner said they
perceive all objects
including physical, physiognomic
way as full of life
and feelings. The rumbling truck can
seem angry to them
and the only cloud in the sky is lonely.
Piaget called this
view of the physical world is animistic.

Although
Werner and Piaget were impressed
similar installation
in young children, each of them studied
her under a few
a different angle. Werner was interested
direct perceptions
objects by children; Piaget was more interested
the way children represent
themselves and define life.

First,
discovered by Piaget, children equate
life to any kind
activity. For example, one boy
asked:

living
whether the sun? – Alive. – Why? – It gives
light. – is it alive
a candle?—Alive, because it gives light. She is
alive when it gives light, but
not alive when it does not give … Is it alive
bell? – Alive, he
rings (Piaget, 1926, p. 196).

Similar
thinking is common in children in
ages 4 to 6
years.

a little
later, at the age of about 6 to 8 years,
children restrict
the concept of “life” by objects that
are moving. For example:

Alive
whether a stone?—Alive. – Why he
moves… How does it move?
– He’s rolling. Is the table alive? – No he
can’t move…
Is the bike alive? – Alive. – Why?
– He is going (p. 196).

Only
after 8 years or so children limit
the concept of “life”
objects that move on their own
yourself, and later plants
and animals.

Piaget
found quite similar stages in
thinking about
various types of objects that
endowed with feelings and consciousness. First
children believe that the object is endowed
feelings, if
he reacts in some way
external influences. For example,
the stick feels the fire, since its
burn. A little later the children
limit the senses and consciousness
objects that move, then
objects that move on their own
himself and, finally, animals and people.

So
Thus, children gradually refuse
from their animism and start doing
differences for most
adults. Fate
animism in Piaget’s theory, how can we
note is different from destiny
physiognomic perception in Werner.
According to Werner,
physiognomic perception, although
less dominant in most
adults than children, still remains
with us and influence
on our artistic and poetic
views. According to Piaget, animism is simply
overcome.

Dreams.
Single
from Piaget’s earliest research was
devoted to the presentation
children about dreams (1926, chap. 3). Like
in the case of ideas about life, understanding
little children of dreams,
seems to follow a specific
stage sequence.
After Piaget’s first study, others
scientists (primarily
turn Kohlberg, 1966a) clarified the
its sequence
dream perception.

First
children seem to believe that dreams are real.
For example, when
A 4-year-old girl was asked if there was a giant
from her dream indeed
there, she replied: “He really
was there but disappeared when
I woke up. I saw his footprints on the floor.”
(Kohlberg, 1966a, p.
6). Shortly thereafter, the children discover
that dreams are not real, but still
evaluate them differently than
older children or adults.
They think their dreams are visible to others
people and that they come from outside (from the night,
from the sky or through the window from
street lights). They also think that
dreams are outside of them when
they see them. As if they were watching
film, which
unfolds in their room on their
eyes. Gradually, step
step by step, children realize that dreams are not only
unreal, but also invisible,
are of internal origin
internal localization
and have other characteristics
which adults ascribe to them.
Children usually complete their discoveries by
6-7 years of age, at the beginning of the period
specific operations.

How
How do children learn about dreams? Our
the first guess would probably be
next: they learn about them from adults.
When children have nightmares, parents
reassure them by saying:
“Don’t worry, it was just a dream. it
It was not in reality, but only in your head.
However, Piaget’s followers believe that
that the children in
reality open various
properties of dreams on their own.
Kohlberg (1966a), for example, argued that
that since
children learn sequence
dream perception
through six unchanging stages,
it is unlikely that their thinking
is a product of learning from
adults; adults don’t
burden themselves with the task of informing
children about dreams in such detail,
exact order. Children come to different
concepts
independently, in sequence,
which is becoming more and more
complex.

FROM
the purpose of collecting additional information
about the role of learning from
adults Kohlberg (1966a) asked about
dreams of children from the community of natives, in
where adults believe that dreams are real
(Atayal tribe in Taiwan). Despite
on the beliefs of adults, these children,
apparently
go through the stages in the same order,
as American
or Swiss children. That is, they first
discover that
dreams are not real, then – that they are invisible
etc. Finally, when they
reach the final stage, they experience
the influence of representations
adults and change their views, taking
end point
seeing that dreams are real. Nonetheless
first they go through
dream sequence
against all beliefs
adults, so the views of the latter are not
may
to be the only determinants of them
learning.

Summary

Piaget
argued that the thinking of children in
preoperative period
very different from how children think
seniors and adults.
Pre-operational thinking is characterized
egocentrism
animism, moral heteronomy,
the idea of dreams as external
events, lack of classification,
misunderstanding of the principle
conservation, as well as other attributes,
which
we have no opportunity to consider.

It turned out
long list, and you can ask a question:
“What do they have in common?
all these characteristics among themselves?
This question is central
in Piaget’s theory, as he points out,
that each stage of development
there is a basic unity. Unfortunately,
Piaget did not devote as much
attention as much as we would like, but
most often
(e.g. 1964a, p. 41-60) he tries to tie
various preoperative
characteristics with the concept of egocentrism.

AT
children are self-centered in their speech when they
consider issues
only from my own point of view.
Animism is the attribution of animation
physical objects – also follows
out of egocentrism;
children assume that everything around
functions the same as
they themselves. Likewise, Piaget
tried to show that representations
little children about dreams are bound
with egocentrism. While children are self-centered,
they fail to realize that each
human
may have personal, subjective experience,
like dreams.
Further, in the field of moral norms
egocentrism goes hand in hand
with moral heteronomy. small
children look at the rules with only one
positions – as absolute concepts,
sent down
over. They still don’t understand what the rules are
based on mutual
agreements between two or more
actors seeking
reconcile their differing goals
through cooperation.

Available
also the relationship between egocentrism and
children’s performance
scientific assignments such as
conservation experiments.
Just like an egocentric child
examines items
from a single point of view, baby,
unable to understand
conservation principle, focuses its
focus on only one
aspect of the problem. For example, when water
poured from one glass to another
lower and wider, baby
“centered” on
one conspicuous parameter –
difference in height. Child
cannot “de-center” and accept
take into account two
aspect of the situation.

Children
at the level of specific operations are capable of
consider two aspects of the problem at the same time.
In their social interactions they
take into account
not only what they say themselves, but also
the needs of the listener.
When they do experiments on
saving, then accept
into account not only the most conspicuous
change, but also compensating
changes. Thus, the ability
coordinate
two points of view at the same time
basis of both social and
and scientific thinking (Piaget, 1947, pp. 156-166).

Period
IV. Formal transactions (11
years—maturity)

On the
level of specific operations, children can
think systematically
in relation to “mental actions”.
For example, when water
poured into a new glass, they can
tell us what reversibility is
this process, without performing itself
action. But such abilities are
your limitation. Children can think
logically and systematically
when dealing with tangible
objects with which you can make
real action (Piaget,
1964a, p. 62).

Against,
at the level of formal operations thinking
soars
into the realm of the purely abstract and hypothetical.
Ability for abstract
reasoning can be seen in the answers
to such questions
how: if Joe is shorter than Bob and
taller than alex who out
the three highest? At the level of specific
operations children can
solve this problem only if
put people in order and compare
their growth; otherwise they will
just guess.
But adolescents, having reached the level of formal
operations, already
can organize thoughts in their head
(p. 62).

Piaget
most interested in the ability
talk, related
with hypothetical possibilities. AT
one experiment (Inhelder
& Piaget, 1955, p. 107-122) children were given four
bottles containing colorless liquids
and marked with the numbers 1, 2, 3 and 4. They also
gave a small vessel with colorless
liquid, marked
the letter “r”. Their task was to mix these
liquids like this
so that the color turns yellow.

Children
at the level of pre-operational intelligence,
usually acted
completely disorderly. They poured
liquids into and out of bottles at random.

On the
level of specific operations actions
children looked more
organized. Model strategy
was to pour liquid from a vessel with the letter
“r” in each bottle: 1, 2, 3 and 4. But then
children stopped
their attempts. When they were asked
why are they usually
they said they couldn’t do anything
do. Thus their actions
showed some organization
similar to the one that
we might expect from their systematic
behavior
when performing save tasks,
when they are able to reason,
given two parameters at the same time.
But they overdid
only a limited number of options.

On the
the level of formal operations adolescents
work systematically
in terms of considering all possibilities.
Some start
with checking different combinations, but
then realize that they are better
ensure that all possible
combinations, so
they write them out before
act further.

When
teenagers think about different
opportunities provided
in a situation, and then systematically
check they work like real ones
scientists. For example, a teenage girl
may decide to check the properties of the new
land for planting.
At the level of formal operations, it is not
just put in a new one
earth in a pot with one plant, and
old – in a pot with another;
she is considering other possibilities.
Perhaps these two plants
in any case would have achieved different
height, due to individual
differences, so she takes a few
plants and studies
the average effect given by each land.
Possibly sunny.
light also has an effect, so
she makes sure that
all plants are lit equally.
Perhaps the quantity is also important.
water, so it exercises control
and behind this variable.
The essence of such reasoning is that
that a person systematically
considers hypotheses. He not only tries
new opportunity,
but isolates one of the hypotheses by controlling
impact of others
possible variables.

How
and in the case of other periods, Piaget introduced
logico-mathematical
models, describing the formal-operational
thinking. These
models are in some respects similar to
those that are used
at previous levels of development, but with
this they go beyond them
framework. The models are very complex and we will not
try to cover them here.
But it is important to note that at the level of formal
operations thinking
reaches the highest degree of balance.
This means among
other things that various operations are more
are closely related and
they are used in the widest of
possible areas of application – in the field
hypothetical possibilities.

Although
Piaget limited most of his
adolescent math research
and scientific reasoning, he pondered
and the role of formal operations in social
adolescent life
& Piaget, 1955, chap. eighteen). Unlike
concrete-operational
a child who lives predominantly
in “here and now”
teenagers are beginning to think about more
distant problems
– about their future and the nature of society,
to which they should
enter. At the same time, their new cognitive
opportunities may lead to
striking idealism and utopianism.
They can now
embrace abstract principles
and ideals such as freedom,
justice and love, and represent
imagine hypothetical societies, strongly
different from all those that exist
to the present
moment. So the teenager
becomes a dreamer, constructing
theories about a better world.

Piaget
believed that such an idealistic
and utopian thinking
brings with it a new kind of egocentrism.
To fully appreciate
this new egocentricity, we must
remember how egocentrism
appears whenever the child
enters a new field of intellectual
life. Babies are self-centered at first
in the sense
that they have no concept of the world beyond
outside of their own actions.
External objects are devoid of permanent
independent
existence. Only at the end of the sensorimotor
period, children decenter and include
yourself into a world of permanent objects, from
of which they are but one.

On the
the next level – the level of pre-operational
thinking – children
step into a new much bigger world,
which includes language, symbolic
presentation and communication with others
people. Children
become self-centered again, and they
difficult to take into account except for the position,
currently occupied by them, also
other. Gradually they
decentered and learn to consider
alternative points
vision – if they think about specific
objects located directly
In front of them.

Finally,
teenagers are entering into an even wider
the world is a world of possibilities,
– and egocentrism reappears. On the
this time egocentrism
noticeable when teenagers attribute
limitless to your thoughts
power. They dream of a “glorious future
or about transforming the world with
ideas” (p. 346), without trying to test his
thoughts in real life. According to the theory
Piaget, final
decentralization occurs when adolescents
start to take on
assume adult roles and thus
aware of the obstacles that limit
their dreams. They learn that the theoretical
design or
utopian dream has value only
when she even
can be partially implemented
practically.

Theoretical
questions

Concept
stages

Many
psychologists use the term stage
quite freely
only as a convenient way to generalize
their results. it
does not apply to Piaget. As emphasized
Kohlberg (1968),
Piaget’s concept of stages suggests
several solid
provisions concerning the nature of development.

Firstly,
in a rigorous theory of stages, their sequence
should be unchanged. people pass
through stages at different speeds, and
some may not reach the highest
stages of Piaget; but if
they pass through them, then move forward
forward in a certain order.

Secondly,
stages suggest that growth is shared
on a qualitatively
different periods. If intellectual
development was
continuous quantitative process,
any division into
independent stages would be arbitrary
(Flavell, 1963, p. 19). To
For example, if knowledge can be assessed in
points from 0 to 100, then any
division into stages at 40, 50 and 70
would make no more sense
than any other series of dividing
points. Piaget believed
that thinking in different periods is organized
qualitatively different
manner. Thinking at the concrete level
operations, for example, are qualitatively different
from thinking at the level of formal
operations (it is logical insofar as
refers to specific
objects and actions, but is not yet
really abstract
and hypothetical). Accordingly, between
two periods there is a natural,
real difference.

Thirdly,
stages refer to general characteristics.
Kohlberg when discussing this moment
likes to ask the next question. AT
A 4 year old child cannot
copy rhombus. Aged 5
years he can do it. Has it reached
baby stage copy diamonds?
Kohlberg added that this assumption
sounds pretty
stupid because copying diamonds
too specific to
call it a stage. If we become
call each quotient a stage
achievement, we will have thousands of stages.
It would be more correct to say
that the child has reached a new general stage
perceptual-motor
coordination that allows him
perform many new
operations. Similarly, Piaget’s stages
belong to the general structures
thinking and if we know that baby
is on a certain
stages, we must be able to predict
his behavior at
performing a variety of tasks. it
statement is not
absolutely true, because children can
be on several other
stages in various areas (for example,
in scientific judgment
in comparison with the area of social
judgments). Piaget called
similar inconsistencies with decals
( decalages French
displacements, shifts),
but in each common period must have
fundamental place
unity in the results shown.

Fourth,
Piaget (Inhelder & Piaget, 1955) believed that his
stages
are hierarchical
integration. That is, the lower
stages do not disappear, but are integrated into
new wider structures
and, in a certain sense, obey
them. For example, a teenage boy
who begins to use formal
operations,
may still use specific
operations
– he can still reason
systematically about specific,
visible events, but now he realizes
that these events are
only part of a wider spectrum
theoretical possibilities,
and prefer to approach different
problems, considering
this wider spectrum. ¹

Fifth,
Piaget, like other orthodox
stage theorists, argued that his
stages are revealed in the same
sequences
in all cultures.

¹
Piaget’s followers believe that
sequential hierarchical
integration
characterize development throughout
periods, with the exception of
pre-operational thinking. Peculiarities
this period,
associated with illogicality, apparently
not saved and integrated into
any higher structures;
they are simply overcome (Inhelder, 1971).

it
assumption is often puzzling
readers. Aren’t different cultures
instill various
representations, especially
moral standards? We
We will discuss this issue in the next chapter,
but in general Piaget’s response
boils down to the fact that his theory deals with
not specific ideas, but
fundamental cognitive
abilities.
Thus, small children, regardless
from their cultural representations
on matters such as sex or
militancy, will
base their views on the fact that
their opinion is justified
or condemned by authority figures.
And only in youth
when young people master the formal
operations, they will start
indulge in abstract, theoretical
reasoning on moral
topics, whatever their specific
representation.

So
Thus, Piaget put forward a rigorous theory
stages. It means,
that he believed that his stages a)
deployed in an unchanging
sequences, b) describe
qualitatively different periods, c)
belong to the general properties of thinking,
d) are
hierarchical integrations and e) culturally
universal.

Transition
from stage to stage

Piaget
paid much attention to the structures of his
stages and significantly
less – the problem of their passage. Tem
no less he had
well-defined views on this
question.

He
recognized (1964b) that the biological
maturation plays a role in
development. For example, children are probably not
can master
specific operations without a specific
minimum maturation
nervous system. At the same time, Piaget
claimed that one maturation
cannot play a dominant role
because the pace of development
depends a lot on where the children are
live. Children who grow up in poverty
rural areas often develop
at a slow pace, obviously because
that they lack intellectual
stimulation. So the environment is also important.

But
the role of the environment is easy to exaggerate, as it
do proponents of learning theories.
In general, they believe that thinking
baby is in
main product of external reinforcements
and learning. Piaget’s concepts, they believe,
must be vaccinated by parents
teachers and others. But as we
we will see in the last section of this chapter,
it’s far from clear what’s going on
exactly. On the
Piaget’s view, the environment is important, but only
kind of. The environment nourishes, stimulates
and tests the child, but the children themselves
build cognitive
structures. When children explore the environment,
they face events
that arouse their interest. Especially
they are intrigued by events;
being relatively new, events
which are exactly
inconsistent with their past experience.
Then the kids make adjustments
in your activities to learn more about
these events, and in this
the process of constructing new means
interaction with the world.
For example, we saw how small
the boy was amazed at how
water splashes in all directions
when you put your hand under
crane, then he began to move his hand
up and down, and probably
realized the benefits of active experimentation,
which allows you to get
different outcomes (stage 5 of the sensorimotor
development). AT
similar behavior, the child’s thinking
it is not the environment that structures, but the child himself,
constructing new schemes.

Except
addition, an experience that contributes
cognitive development,
only interesting, but usually introduces
child in conflict.
For example, an infant may not be able to
grab an object from behind an obstacle,
in his path. To kid
need to create
new structure – the relationship between
means and purpose, to
get an object. The child assimilates
new objects, producing
accommodations that help build
new cognitive
structures.

concept
conflict is included in the formal model
progressive
change, which Piaget called
balancing (Piaget, 1964b). We already
talked about the essence of this model,
without mentioning its name when described,
how do children learn
the concept of conservation. For example, small
the girl sees how the clay
ball, and at first thinks that the number
clay has increased. However, after some
time she notices a small
the width of the clay and thinks the clay has shrunk.
That is, she perceives
something contrary to its original
look. When
she thinks about both length and width,
then he gets confused.
This conflict prompts the child to realize
that one change
compensates for the other, and leads to the discovery
conservation principle.
Piaget’s balancing model tries
link numeric
probabilities with the possibility that the child
consider one parameter,
then the other, and finally both.

AT
philosophy, this model of Piaget would be called
dialectical theory.
Dialectical theory says that
change is happening
when our ideas collide
facts that refute
them, and this prompts us to formulate
new, improved
ideas.

Other
source of a new, conflicting
information is
social environment. For example, preoperative
children overcome
egocentrism when interacting with
peers with whom
they enter into disputes and conflicts. During
such exchange
they learn that other people have views
different from
of their own, and also learn
coordinate different interests,
participating in collective activities.
This ability to coordinate
point of view can help develop
scientific thinking,
where coordination of different
parameters (Piaget, 1947,
R. 156-166).

So
Thus, Piaget tried to point out various
opportunities, with
which interesting and conflicting
elements of information fail
children to develop new cognitive
structures. It is important to emphasize
that development is always spontaneous
process. Children themselves assimilate
new information, resolve conflicts
and design
new cognitive structures.

Practical
application

Piaget
didn’t write too much about issues
pedagogy, but still gave
a few recommendations. In essence, his
general pedagogical philosophy
similar to the views of Rousseau and Montessori.
Piaget also has genuine learning.
is not transmitted through the teacher, but is
something
emanating from the child. It’s a process
spontaneous inventions
and discoveries. This statement is undoubtedly
true about
babies who achieve incredible
intellectual progress
just by self
environment and manipulation research
her. It may also be true for
older children
age. Accordingly, the teacher should
do not impose
child knowledge, and to select materials,
that will interest the child
and force him to strain his strength, and
then let him on his own
solve problems (Piaget, 1969, p. 151-153,160).

Like
Rousseau and Montessori, Piaget emphasized
the importance of anchoring
education to a specific level
child development. He didn’t agree
with a Montessori eye on the stage,
based on maturation
but the general principle remains the same:
The teacher must take into account differences in
interests and modes of learning children in
different periods.

For example,
some boy just stepped in
specific
operations. He starts to think logically
but his thinking
still partly related to specific
objects and actions.
Accordingly, classes should
give him the opportunity to actively
dealing with real things. For example,
if
we want to teach him operations with fractions,
you shouldn’t draw
charts, lecture him or draw him in
him into verbal
discussions. We must let him
separate into parts
objects (Flavell, 1963, r. 368). If we assume
what he
able to learn verbally
then we show egocentrism; in this case
we assume that he acquires knowledge,
precisely
the way we do it. As a result, he
take what we say as something
far-fetched, and the lesson will pass him by
ears. Can
to think that this principle is a fit
educational process
to the child’s own stage
self-evident. Unfortunately,
it is not always so. A case in point
there was a wave of training
reforms that were carried out in the United States in
1950-1960, after
how the Soviet Union was the first to achieve
success in space exploration. Trying
catch up with the Russians, teachers introduced a “new
mathematics”, “new natural science” and
other subjects designed to teach
children Abstract,
theoretical reasoning in a very
early age.
At first this idea was considered great,
but the new curriculum
was not very successful. Cause
is believed
Kohlberg & Gilligan (1971)
was that small
children who were mostly at the level
specific operations
and below have attempted to explain the ideas that
suggest the presence
abilities acquired only on
formal
operations. Educational reforms began with
adult performances
about what children need to learn
taking into account one’s own cognitive
children’s level.

AT
late 1970s and early 1980s we watched
similar trend
– a trend that continues
today. Leaders
our country, concerned that
The United States is ceding technological
leadership to the Japanese, began to call for
new rise in education. Parents
also began to worry
about the future of their children and
wanted to teach them at an early age
age. One of the results was
more training
programs that are taking place in more and more
early age – from childhood
garden and even earlier. David Etkind (Etkind,
1981, 1985),
follower of Piaget, one of the first
began to protest against
this trend. Five year old children pointed
Etkind, learn
predominantly through play and
direct touch contact
with the environment; formal Education,
including textbooks and written
tasks that do not coincide with natural
modes (methods – A.A.) of learning
little children. early formal
education teaches the little ones
children mainly what study
heavy and unnatural.

Not
it is always easy to pick up study tasks,
which are the most natural
for this child. Knowledge can help
cognitive stages, but sometimes in different
areas children are
at different stages (Piaget, 1969, p. 171). Required
sensitivity
and flexibility on the part of the teacher – willingness
take a close look
on the child’s actions, learn from the child
and be guided
spontaneous interests of the child (Ginsburg
& Orper, 1988, p. 239). Because interest is always
is a prerequisite for active learning
(Piaget, 1969, p. 152).

So
way, like Rousseau and Montessori,
Piaget believed that learning
should be a process of active discovery
and should be tied to the stage of the child.
But on one point Piaget disagreed.
With
Rousseau and Montessori. Piaget saw
much greater pedagogical value
in social interactions. Children begin
think logically – coordinate
two parameters at the same time, – partially
by learning to take into account
two or more points of view in their
relationships with others. In this way,
interaction should
encourage, and most beneficial
are those in which
children feel the initial equality, as
this happens most often
in their relationships with peers. Bye
children feel pressured
from some authority figure,
who knows the “correct” answer
it will be difficult to assess differences in points
vision. Against,
in group discussions with other children
they have the best
opportunity to deal with different
points of view as tasks,
stimulating their own thinking
(r. 173-180).

Constructivism
Camii

Undertaken
several attempts to transfer Piaget’s ideas
to the educational
audience, in particular in preschool and
elementary grades (DeVries
& Kohlberg, 1987, chap. 3). Some educators
focused
focus on Piaget’s assignments, trying
teach children the principle
conservation, classification, etc.
Others were more interested
spirit of Piaget’s theory. active supporter
this approach is
Constance Kamiy (Kamii).

Camii
starts with Piaget’s premise, according to
which real
cognitive growth takes place only
when children construct
own knowledge. Children must be provided
opportunities for independent
understanding things. They won’t do it
Kamiya made sure if the teachers use
written assignments
and tests. This practice causes children
such anxiety in
about finding the “right
answers” – answers that
the teacher will consider correct – that they are not
think about tasks on their own.
Instead of written assignments and tests,
teachers need
offer children exercises that
they will find so interesting
and meaningful that will work
over them for them
themselves. Similar tasks, says Camii,
can be found everywhere in everyday life
children’s lives. For example, first graders
enthusiastically
solve arithmetic problems that arise
during card
games, keep score during the street yoke,
vote for decisions
accepted in the class, and make a roll call.
During such
activities the teacher can ask
questions that are even more
stimulate children’s interest in arithmetic.
If the children are playing
in softball, the teacher might ask:
how many more points do you need
take to score a total of 11? If a
child brings pudding to treat
classmates, the teacher can ask
the question is enough
Do all children have cups? Teacher questions
lead children’s thinking
in motion, but it always leaves
problem solving for children.
The teacher must be respectful
even to “wrong
answers” of children. It would be better if the children
give the wrong answer
which belongs to them than
think they should apply
to an adult to find out the correct
answer (Kamii, 1985, p. 46-49, 119-121, 161-165; Kamii &
DeVries, 1977).

When
children go to second and third grade,
Camii adds a lot
dice games, card and board games,
that stimulate
mathematical thinking. She also
offers children standard
tasks for addition, subtraction, etc., but
always encourages children
find your own solutions. Camii
vehemently opposed to traditional
the practice of teaching algorithms (for example,
teacher tells child to fold in
column 18 and 17 by adding 8 and 7,
postponing
mentally 1, etc.). Algorithms, she says,
teach children to follow mechanical
procedures without the slightest understanding,
why do they do it. Children in
constructivist class invent
methods that
make sense to them (for example, “I will add
two tens, and 7 and 8
I will add later). They come up with methods
for a striking solution
difficult tasks, and their methods are often
are very original
(Kamii, 1989, 1994).

Camii
applies its own approach to almost everyone
aspect of school life
including “disciplinary issues”.
If one of the children starts an argument during
card game time, the teacher should
resist
desire to intervene and resolve the problem
for them. Instead, the teacher
may ask: can you think of
solution that satisfied
everyone? (Kamii, 1985, p. 48). Thus the teacher
encourages children
for them to work on
settlement of the issue
justice.

Education
according to Piaget, says Kamii (Kamii, 1973), often
means giving children more
time to work on assignments
than is customary in schools. Camii
describes, for example, lessons
on the specific gravity of substances.
Children in primary school
are usually surprised when they see that
the pin plunges into
water, and a piece of wood (whose dimensions
more) floats on the surface.
And usually children need a certain
time to understand
why is this happening. Therefore, teachers
tempted to explain
response to your students, especially when
The teacher wants to move on to a new topic. But
Camii urges the teacher to wait.
Will be much
better, she says, if the children continue
think and ask
question about what is happening than if they
“will hear the answer and at the same time
learn that the answer always comes from
teacher’s mouth” (p. 225).

Camii
(Kamii, 1985, 1989, 1994) assessed
research
own method of teaching arithmetic in
elementary grades. She discovered
that in traditional standardized
tests her children
show about the same results
as children taught by ordinary
methods. But her children demonstrate
greater understanding
the logic behind their work. Except
In addition, they think much more independently.
When the teacher tried to help one
first grader
with a hint, she said:
“Wait, I need to think
herself” (Kamii, 1985, p. 235). For Kamiya such
the answers are very important.
Like Rousseau and Montessori, Camille is more
interested
not the amount of knowledge acquired by children, but
their desire to think for themselves.

Estimated

Beginning
since about 1960, Piaget’s ideas have stimulated
huge number
research and theoretical discussions.
We don’t have the opportunity
tell here about everyone, but we can
review the main trends and
Problems. I organize this section around
some basic questions.

Confirm
whether Piaget’s theory other studies,
using
his assignments?

How
mentioned at the beginning of the chapter, own
Piaget’s research
have been criticized for their scientific
limitations. For example, he
based some conclusions
observing three
own children – hardly
representative sample. Respectively,
when Piaget was rediscovered at the beginning
1960s, many wanted to check
whether their results will be repeated.

Sequence
stages. B
In general, repeated studies
using the tasks of Piaget himself,
confirm its sequence
stages. That is, the children seem to
go through
sub-stages, stages and periods are in order,
originally discovered
Piaget. His stages showed themselves especially
well applied
to the sensorimotor period and to the scientific and
mathematical
reasoning in later stages.
(Almy, Chittenden & Miller,
1966; Corman & Escalona, 1969; E. Evans, 1975; Lovell, 1968;
Niemark, 1975). The results were somewhat
less certain
for Piaget’s proposed stages of social
thinking, such
like animism (Looft & Bartz, 1969), heteronomy
(Kohlberg,
1964) and egocentrism (Damon, 1983, pp. 120-121), but in
in general
really young children
different from older children
age, as Piaget discovered. These
re-studies,
It should be noted that, as a rule, they used
Piaget’s own assignments. Later we will provide
research results that
modified Piaget’s tasks and thus
thus subjected some
Piaget’s conclusions are questioned.

Versatility
stages. Although
Piagetian sequences got
confirmation, his position, what stages
are common modes
thinking was justified to a lesser extent.
That is, researchers
found rather weak correlations
among the tasks to be
be decided on the basis of a common structure
thinking characteristic of a certain
stages (Flavell, 1977, p.
248; Gelman & Baillaigeon, 1983, p. 169-172). For example,
child who
demonstrates an understanding of conservation
liquids, may not show
understanding of class membership
which, it would seem, must be accompanied
first. Piaget himself recognized that children
learn the principle of solving various
tasks at different speeds – he called
similar unevenness
decalage ,
– but assumed greater consistency
results,
than the one that was found.

AT
1980s these generally negative results
prompted many psychologists
(e.g. Bandura, 1986, pp. 484-485) speak with
reject recommendations completely.
from Piaget’s stages. Children, psychologists said,
do not go through common periods, in
who are their thinking
is a reflection of major mental
structures. They simply
master multiple skills
serving specific
tasks. Children learn arithmetic
skills, skills
reading, communication skills, etc.
etc., and there are no
common mental structures behind
them. (With this position
Some psychologists agreed
sympathetic theories
Piaget – for example, Flavell, 1985, p. 92-93.) However
last
time, after evaluating additional
data, many psychologists
ready to reconsider
(Flavell, Miller & Miller, 1993, p. 159; Siegler, 1998; p. 57). I
I believe this is a reasonable decision.

Let’s take
for example, children aged 5-7 years. Sheldon
White (White,
1965,1970) and others (e.g. Kegan, 1985; Sameroff & Haith,
1996) collected
numerous data to
assume that in
during this period important things happen to children
psychological changes. changes,
associated with this transition from 5 to 7 years,
go far beyond the answers to
Piaget’s assignments. They include
behavior in a variety of contexts
learning. Before this transition, children
usually impulsive, easily distracted
and full
fantasies. After that they become
more consistent, rational
and prudent. In all cultures
peace it
the time when children begin to trust
performance of important duties, including
caring for babies (Weisner, 1996). Thereby
the presence during this period of an important stage
transition can be considered
proven. And, as White notes (White,
1965, 1996), Piaget’s theory
might help to explain this
transition: children begin
approach life more rationally,
in a reasonable way, because
that they form concrete-operational
thinking.

We
we see, therefore, that the proposed
Piaget stage-specific
operations has great potential
value. Of course,
the problem of versatility remains
stages – there is a weak consistency
results when performing various
assignments
Piaget. Some researchers consider
that higher levels of versatility
may be found in certain
moments within common periods (Siegler,
1998, p. 57; Uzgiris, 1964). White (1996) suggests that
that final confirmation
stage theory should be sought in everyday
life. I agree with
his opinion. For example, we can find
what an 8 year old boy
can take care of her little one
sister because he can
perform specific operations in many
areas. overcoming
self-centeredness, he can foresee her
unique needs; using
logical operations, it can distribute
supply of juice for the day and buy in the store
things she needs, etc. Boy
may also carry out specific
operations and many others.
areas, for example, doubting miracles
and in existence
Santa Claus. In other words, rationalism
the boy is
general characteristics of his personality.

Reach
whether people of higher stages?

Very
interesting is the following fact:
most adults usually do not
demonstrate the higher stages of the stage
formal operations
when performing standard tasks
Piaget. Most of the adults
belonging to the middle class
use formal operations
only sometimes (Kuhn, Langer, Kohlberg & Hahn, 1977;
Neimark, 1975),
and in many small villages and tribal
communities the majority
adults almost never
use any of the formal
operations (Cole & Cole, 1993, p. 613; Dasen, 1972). These
data is not
necessarily contradict
Piaget’s theories. There are no theoretical
reasons why all people owe
reach his highest
stages; perhaps their thinking is not
faced sufficient
difficulties to climb this
level. However, these data
puzzle.

Piaget
(Piaget, 1972) tried to find an explanation for this
facts. Probably,
he said, most people master
to a certain extent
formal-operational thinking,
but resort to
formal operations predominantly
in areas related to
their special interests or abilities.
Possibly an auto mechanic
does not reason in a formal, theoretical
key about philosophy or
physics, but he still uses
formal operations when reveals
malfunctions in the car. Purposeful
law student
faculty may not use
formal transactions.
when faced with a problem
from the field of chemistry,
but he will do so when discussing matters
concerning the constitution.
Likewise, Talkin and Conner
(Tulkin & Konner, 1973) admit that adults
in small tribal communities
be unable to demonstrate
formal operations
when performing Piaget’s tasks related to
with mathematical and scientific reasoning,
but they will use them when they decide
problems that are vital to them
importance. For example,
when the Bushmen of the Kalahari Desert discuss,
how to track down an animal, then put forward and
weigh the hypotheses in a manner that
requires
using the highest logical and
analytical skills
human mind” (p. 35).

Piaget
acknowledged, therefore, that at the highest
stages people don’t
demonstrate great persistence
when performing a wide
range of intellectual tasks –
definitely not that much
consistency that can be expected
earlier stages.
Instead, people use higher
stages of thinking
in their areas of greatest interest.

Valid
Do children learn on their own?

Maybe,
the most controversial is
the following statement
Piaget: cognitive development is
spontaneous process. Children,
he says, form cognitive
structures on their own,
without direct training
side of adults. The most undeniable
proof of spontaneous learning
comes from observations
Piaget for babies who achieve
huge intellectual
progress through simple research
environment before anyone takes over
labor to educate them. In fact, how
as soon as we begin to teach the child, then
often seem to suppress it
natural curiosity. Children at school
become indifferent, lazy,
obstinate and begin to fear failure.
The main task of education, how can
assume is
releasing that fearless
the curiosity with which children enter
life.

When
Piaget said that children learn
on your own, then had no
mind that they are learning in a vacuum. Other
children can stimulate and expose
test the child’s thinking, and, apparently,
adults can
do the same. As we saw earlier,
Kamiy asks children stimulating
questions that make them think.
But Piaget did not think that especially
productive attempts to teach
children right
responses or procedures. Against,
genuine learning
comes from experience that awakens
children’s curiosity and
them the opportunity to come to independent
decisions.

Tem
at least many psychologists, especially
American, adhering
traditions of learning theory, believe that
training provided
adults is more important than Piaget thought.
To demonstrate
this, they conducted a series of “training
research, most of which
attempts have been made to teach
preservation of 4-5 year old children.

One
of the important results is the following:
conservation principle
teaching is surprisingly difficult (E. Evans, 1975;
Flavell, 1963, p.
377; Liebert, Poulos & Marmor, 1977, p. 176-179). For example,
hard to teach
principle of conservation, simply explaining
and reinforcing the right
answers. And if the child still succeeds
in the performance of one
tasks, this ability is not always
carried over to new assignments.
In addition, training does not always allow
fairly deep roots.
People told me how they felt
would be able to form
the child has an understanding of the principle of conservation
liquids; but when
they then asked the child to do
choice between fluids
he liked to drink (like lemonade), child
insisted on taking a glass
bigger size.

However
the principle of conservation, apparently, everything
or you can teach.
In the first completely successful experiment
Gelman (Gelman, 1969)
taught children the preservation of number and length,
reinforcing their reaction
to the most relevant stimuli
for example, the number of objects
per row, not per row length. Education
worked, and, moreover, 60% of children
immediately demonstrated a new
ability to understand the conservation of matter
and liquids. But the learning process
Gelman was different
labor intensity. Training continued
two days and consisted of
192 approaches. You can ask a question, reflect
whether exactly similar
methods how children learn the principle
saving in your daily
life. You may also ask,
what impact
such training affects the senses
children. When children decide
tasks on their own, they acquire
confidence in one’s abilities
make discoveries. When do they participate?
in an intensive training program
which they are systematically rewarded for
answers,
given in the manner in which they
usually do not answer, they have
may develop a habit of distrust
own
thinking.

Piaget
(Piaget, 1970) made a number of additional
thoughts that
appropriate here. We often
We assume that spontaneous
development is undesirable because it
happens slowly;
direct learning seems
attractive because it can
speed up the course of events. However, Piaget
pointed out that when
Gruber studied the development of a sense of constancy
objects in kittens,
then found them going through
sequence of stages
much faster than babies. But kittens
“do not progress
further, and you can ask a question, not
does the slower
faster forward pace
progress” (Piaget, 1970,
R. 111). Piaget also noted that Darwin
it took
too much time to articulate
their original ideas
and Piaget wonders if
slowness sometimes
be one of the conditions for useful
discoveries. Thus Piaget
calls into question the assumption that
slowness is undesirable
and admits that each child can
be own
optimal pace through
stages.

Did you underestimate
Piaget’s abilities of children?

AT
In recent years, a number of researchers
(some of them were
educational research) tried
to show that Piaget underestimated
abilities of children: children are much more
smarter than he thought.
To demonstrate this, researchers
changed his tasks or invented
new.

AT
experiments with infants
researchers gathered
evidence that babies understand
permanence of objects develops
earlier than Piaget claimed; when the kids
watch movies, they look for hidden
objects at an age when they are still
unable to look for them in ordinary life
(Goubet & Clifton, 1998). How
and in the case of the neonatal study,
laboratory
experiments seem to
reveal nascent abilities to
how they appear
in a natural setting.

AT
much more research
there have been attempts to demonstrate
that Piaget underestimated intellectual
capabilities
preoperative child. Researchers
tried to find ways to change or
simplifying Piaget’s tasks related to
conservation,
egocentricity, classification and
other questions
to show that 3-, 4-, and 5-year-olds
may actually
think like older children
and adults. Similar
results, they say, correct
Piaget’s description
young children as cognitively
helpless.

For example,
Borke (1975) suggests that small
children are not as self-centered as
Piaget thought. Her research shows
that although 3-4 year olds experience
Difficulties completing Piaget’s task
with a mountain, they can act less
self-centered
in the case of simpler variants of this
tasks. Other
the researchers got similar results.
So apparently
even many two-year-olds know that the party
the cube they
see is different from the side that
sees a person who is
facing them (description of these studies
see Gelman & Baillargeon,
1983 and Siegler, 1998, p. 58-59).

Researchers
also tried to demonstrate
that small
children can think rationally by doing
mathematical
and scientific assignments. Gelman (Gelman, 1972), to
For example, it assumes
that young children have a certain
ability to keep
number. Piaget, as you remember, showed
that when we shorten
or we lengthen a number of objects, preoperational
children think
that number is changing. Apparently on
they are more influenced by perceptual
configuration – what the row looks like –
than logic or number.
However, in Piaget’s studies, series are often
contained up to eight
objects, Gelman also offered 3-5-year-olds
smaller children
object sets – two, three or four
object – and found
that children ignored length changes
and continued to build
their judgments on the same number. So
Thus, in the case of these small
sets they demonstrated understanding
conservation.

Can
note that Gelman’s results are not
necessarily contradict
Piaget’s conclusions. It is possible that the change
such small rows causes very
slight perceptual change
so we don’t
know if small children can ignore
perceptual changes in favor of logic
or numbers. Nevertheless, Gelman showed
that small
children begin to think in numbers
categories. They are not so
incompetent, she says, as claimed
Piaget.

AT
another type of experiment by Bryant and
Trabasso (Bryant, 1974) tried to show
that the difficulties of young children with
logical
conclusions are in fact
memory problems. Piaget
showed that although the child sees that
stick A is shorter than stick B and that B is shorter,
than B, it can’t do logical
conclusion that A must
be shorter than W. Bryant and Trabasso,
however, hypothesized that small
kids just forget the earlier ones
comparisons. So they taught the children
how to remember these comparisons, and
found that children subsequently
appear to be capable
draw logical conclusions. In this way,
children showed again
themselves less illogical than expected
Piaget.

it
just a few studies
who question
characterization of the thinking of small
children given by Piaget.
These and many other studies
allow us to assume that
children as young as 3 or
4 years, already possess some
from the abilities of adults (Siegler, 1998, p.
55). These studies
It should be noted that they have undergone a number of
criticisms,
and their results tend to look like
more convincing in some areas,
than in others. And yet the results
testify
that small children do not
sheer egocentrism. They are
may be generally more egocentric,
than older children
or adults, but their egocentrism varies
from task to task.
As for conservation laws and other
types of scientific reasoning
the results, on the contrary, are often less
convincing. While doing
these tasks rational abilities
little children,
as Gelman herself admits (Gelman, 1979),
seem weak and
difficult to identify. However, she and others
the researchers insist
what young children can demonstrate
the beginnings of rational thought, and Piaget,
therefore, was wrong when
portrayed
their cognitively helpless.

AT
end of his career, Piaget briefly
responded to the accusation that
would he describe small children
too negative. He
pointed out (Piaget, 1970) that the preoperational
thinking contains
also a number of positive components. So,
at that time children realize
qualitative identities, for example, that
the fact that the child is now
and in infancy it is the same
human. However, Piaget
went on to argue that the pre-operational
thinking in general
still illogical, static and conditioned
perception, irreversible,
full of mistakes, etc. That is, he never
raised strong objections
in response to the accusation that his view of
pre-operational thinking
negative and pessimistic.

Now
I would like to address this issue with
general
development, as I believe they would
Rousseau and Werner. Primarily,
we can note that the critics of Piaget,
seems to be signing
equality between “positive”,
optimistic view of
childhood and early, rapid development. We
you might ask how Rousseau did it,
why the statement that development
logical structures
takes time, certainly pessimistic.
Piaget himself brought this
argument in response to teaching research,
and he could repeat
him here.

Except
Moreover, Piaget’s critics suggest that
thinking deserves
praise only if it
rational and logical
like ours. They never really
considered the possibility that thinking
the child is qualitatively different. Piaget started
their research,
mindful of this opportunity, and he
drew a convincing
picture of what the difference is
pre-operational thinking.
It is perceptual, not
logic, it is animistic
etc. In this way, Piaget could indicate
what is pre-operational
thinking is not so much secondary to
to the logic of adults,
how much is quality
a different view of the world.

But
Piaget never developed this idea. Instead of
he was so into it
comparison of pre-operational thinking
with the logic of adults,
that he could not go beyond the boundaries of “magic
circle” of his shortcomings. In his writings
small
the child is constantly
unable to understand” basic
concepts, “continues to do the same
the same mistakes, etc. (Piaget &
Szeminska, 1941, p. 13.142). Piaget failed completely
consider pre-operational
thinking on its own and didn’t appreciate it
unique
merits. In particular, he did not pay
attention to Werner’s guess,
that perceptual and animistic
(physiognomic) orientation
goes hand in hand with art
vision of the world and possibly
it is the latter that develops in
small child. Available
data (Gardner, 1980) about being small
kids are surprisingly good
artists.
By 6 or 7 years of age, they
make drawings together
characterized by freshness, vitality
and great composition. Thereafter
age their creativity becomes more
geometric,
frozen and lifeless. Apparently
starts to take over
logical intelligence. In addition, rich
fantasy and theatrical
playfulness of a small child
correspond to the mental organization,
which is more akin to art than
logic.

So
way, Piaget could say that each
period has its
unconditional advantages and should
considered on an individual basis
positions. A small child may or may not
be a good logician
but perhaps his thinking is directed
mostly on the other side. At
young children are formed more quickly
artistic
orientation, and it differs like this
natural grace
and vivacity that many great artists
they said they
constantly trying to resurrect it
(Gardner, 1973, p. 21). Scientists
could also recognize some special
qualities of pre-operational thinking.
As Werner noted, scientific inspiration
maybe
start with a return to perceptions
and intuitive insights
that are filled with feelings, fantasy
and imagination.
Unfortunately, Piaget was so carried away
formal logic that
did not pay attention to such possibilities.

So
way, Piaget really portrayed
pre-operational
children in a very negative way,
focusing on logic
flaws in their thinking. However, if
we want to fix this picture, we don’t
must be like his critics
and try to show that thinking
little children are almost the same
logical, like ours. It will be better if
we will take into account the possibility
that the thinking of young children can be
own
qualities and merit.

Conclusion

So
Thus, we see that Piaget’s theory
subjected to numerous critical
comments. Controversy with Piaget
such great theorists
like Bandura, Vygotsky and Chomsky. In our
days literally
everyone is seized by the desire to measure their strength
with Piaget and contrast their ideas
his views.
This in itself is evidence of
the significance of Piaget’s theory.
And you can vouch that when all the passions
settle down, Piaget’s theory is still
will remain in effect. For, with all her
weaknesses, it covers the most important
aspects of cognitive development. 936, is still used in some areas of education and psychology. It focuses on children from birth to adolescence and characterizes various stages of development, including: build their own knowledge on the basis of their experience.

Children learn things on their own, without the influence of adults or older children.

Nature motivates children to learn. They don’t need rewards as motivation.

There are four stages in total:

sensorimotor stage
preoperative stage
specific operational stage
formal operational stage

The stages cover the range of ages from birth to adulthood.

Piaget’s four stages

Piaget’s stages depend on age and are marked by important characteristics of thought processes. They also include goals that children need to achieve as they progress through a particular milestone.

Sensorimotor	Birth to 18-24 months	Motor activity without symbols. Everything learned is based on experience or trial and error.	Permanence of the object
Preoperative	Age from 2 to 7 years	Development of speech, memory and imagination. The intellect is both egocentric and intuitive.	Symbolic thought
Service concrete	Age 7 to 11	More logical and methodical manipulation of symbols. Less egocentric and more aware of the outside world and events.	Operational thought
Formal operational	Adolescence	The use of symbols to denote abstract concepts. Can hypothesize and understand abstract concepts and relationships.	Abstract concepts

Sensormotor

The sensorimotor stage covers children from birth to 18–24 months of age. Characteristics include motor activity without the use of symbols. Everything learned is based on experience or trial and error.

The main goal at this stage is to establish an understanding of the permanence of the object – in other words, to know that the object still exists even if you can’t see it or it’s hidden.

Preoperative

The preoperative phase is observed in children aged 2 to 7 years. Memory and imagination develop. Children at this age are self-centered, which means they find it hard to think outside of their own perspective.

The main achievement of this stage is the ability to give meaning to objects using language. This is a symbolic reflection on things. Symbolic thinking is a type of thinking in which a word or object is used to represent something other than itself.

Service concrete

Children are much less egocentric at the stage of a concrete operation. It falls on the age of 7 to 11 years and is characterized by a more logical and methodical manipulation of symbols.

The main goal at this stage is for the child to start working in his head. This is called operational thinking, and it allows children to solve problems without physically meeting things in the real world.

Formal operational

Children 11 years of age and older enter the formal operational Piaget stage. The milestone of this period is the use of symbols to understand abstract concepts. Not only that, older children and adults can also think about multiple variables and make hypotheses based on previous knowledge.

Piaget believed that people of all ages develop intellectually. But he also believed that once a person reaches the stage of formal exploitation, it is more about building knowledge than changing how it is acquired or understood.

Schema, assimilation, accommodation and balancing

In his theory, Piaget uses many terms to explain cognitive development and how it is achieved at different stages.

Diagram is the term he used to refer to the building blocks of knowledge. You can think of circuits as different index cards inside the brain. Each of these informs the individual on how to respond to new information or situations.

For example, imagine a person who goes to the grocery store to buy milk. In this case, the schema is a learned pattern of behavior that can be applied to a given situation. A person remembers how to walk between the aisles, find milk, choose the preferred type, and then pay at the checkout. Whenever a person is tasked with getting milk, that particular “scenario” or schema is recalled from memory.

Other important terms:

assimilation takes an existing schema and applies it to a new situation or object.
Housing changes approaches when the existing scheme does not work in a particular situation.
Balancing is the driving force that drives all development forward. Piaget did not believe that development was sustainable. Instead, he moved by leaps and bounds according to experience.

How can educators use charts?

Parents and teachers can help the child create a variety of schemes to promote learning and development at all stages. This can be achieved by giving children a lot of contact with the outside world. Exposure to a variety of learning-by-doing experiences from an early age can help create these internal index cards. Then, as the children get older, it’s about expanding the experience and applying it to new, even hypothetical, situations.

How to apply Piaget’s steps to learning and development

So how exactly can Piaget’s steps be applied to education? Essentially, it is about recognizing the stage a child is currently in and adjusting to that level of development.

Teachers and parents can help by providing children with different experiences or ways to explore and experiment with their environment. Through this experience, children can gain a practical understanding of various concepts.

For young children entering preschool and kindergarten, Piaget’s theories are more in line with playful school programs or environments in which children are offered opportunities for trial and error and interaction with the real world.

Piaget’s philosophy can be included in any educational program.

Examples include:

Giving chance for trial and error. Focus on the learning process, not the end result.
Providing children with visual aids and other props, such as models, to illustrate different ideas and concepts.
Use real life examples to draw complex ideas, such as math word problems.
Providing the ability to classify or group information. Outlines and hierarchies are good examples and allow children to create new ideas based on previous knowledge.
Suggesting problems that require analytical or logical thinking. In this case, puzzles can be used as a tool.

You can also help your child at all stages, adapting to his specific learning style:

Sensorimotor

Use real objects in play activities.
Connect the game to the five senses.
Implement a daily routine for the youngest children. They are predictable and can be very helpful in developing communication.

Preoperative

Children learn best by doing. Let them actively interact with various things in their environment, including books, people, games, and objects.
Ask questions while the children go about their daily activities and let them come up with their own ideas.
Pay attention to new things and encourage children to ask you questions about these things.

Service Concrete

Create timelines, 3D models, science experiments, and other ways to manipulate abstract concepts.
Use puzzles and riddles to develop analytical thinking.
Focus on open questions.

Formal operational

Offer step-by-step explanations of concepts and use diagrams and other visual aids.
Explore hypothetical situations. You can link them to current events or social issues.
Expand your concepts whenever possible. For example, if you are talking about the Civil War, discuss other issues that have divided the country since that time.

Cons of Piaget’s theory

There are some critical remarks about Piaget’s stages. In particular, researchers in the 1960s and 1970s argued that Piaget may have underestimated children’s abilities by using confusing terms and especially difficult tasks in his observations. In other studies, children have successfully demonstrated knowledge of certain concepts or skills when presented in a simpler way.

Piaget’s theory also assumes that children of a certain stage will first of all be at this stage in all directions with all the tasks assigned to them. Other researchers have found that there are a range of abilities associated with cognitive tasks. In other words, some children may excel or struggle in one area over another.

Piaget’s theory also explains that attempts to teach children particularly complex concepts would not be successful. However, in some cases, children can pick up cutting-edge ideas with even brief instruction. Children may be more adaptable and competent than Piaget’s stages suggest.

Finally, Piaget’s work focused primarily on middle-class white children from developed countries. As a result, its results may be skewed for this subgroup of people and may not apply directly to other groups or places.

Piaget vs. Vygotsky

Lev Vygotsky developed his theory of child development at the same time that Piaget was developing his own theory. Like Piaget, Vygotsky believed that children develop in stages. Unlike Piaget, Vygotsky believed that learning and development are linked to social interactions and culture. While Piaget believed that children learn by doing things, Vygotsky believed that they learn when they are shown.

Piaget versus Montessori

Maria Montessori shared some ideas with Piaget, including how children go through the stages. Their theories are similar until children reach the age of three. At school, Montessori classes are more child-oriented. Piaget’s classrooms are more teacher-focused and routine-focused, although they do have flexibility and opportunities for child-oriented activities.

Conclusion

The work of Jean Piaget helped people understand how knowledge is formed at different stages of childhood, starting from birth. His philosophy is still used today in classrooms from preschool to 12th grade. Understanding the different stages can help you better understand your child and help them learn.

Health

Read online “Children are different. Self-development. Parts two and three, Maria Montessori – LitRes

© Karapuz Publishing House, 2012

© K.E. Doubtful, entry. and conclude. articles, comments, 2012

The Secret of Montessori

Let’s go back to the school of dear Madame Montessori. The most important thing is that children do not feel the burden of learning, as they learn everything by playing. Secondly, the goal is to develop all the organs and senses of the child. Very little space is devoted to mere memorization.

Mahatma Gandhi

The secret of success

The history of pedagogy has preserved hundreds of names, but real schools that have survived after the death of the authors can be counted on the fingers of one hand. Maria Montessori stands in this honorary row. This happened not only because many of her insights found scientific confirmation, but also because Maria found the key to translating her ideas into everyday pedagogical practice.

Her system was not built in one day. She was friends with the founder of genetic psychology, Jean Piaget (for some time he personally headed the Montessori Society of Geneva), corresponded with the child psychologist Anna Freud. Under their influence, she clarifies the conclusions of her observations of the patterns of child development. But in many ways she remains a doctor and comes from the physiology of children. Even in the concept of freedom, she puts a biological meaning and understands by it, first of all, independence.

Using examples from her own teaching practice, Maria proves that an adult should not do something for a child, but help him act independently. This is special work. After all, the baby, getting into our world, sees it as alien and unsuitable for his life.

The child has poor coordination of movements, he is not confident in himself and does not know what to do with the objects around him. The kid is dependent on giants, who are called adults and who, without thinking about him, cut the world for themselves. It is difficult for a baby to unbutton the buttons on a jacket, tie a lace on a shoe, move his chair to a convenient place.

Montessori proposes to give the child the opportunity to do this and much more as early as 2.5–3 years. The teacher (adult) only helps him. He creates order in those things that are needed for the development of the child, and there are a lot of them. All these cups, trays, sponges and brushes, as well as sticks and cubes, beads and rods, cards and boxes, put them in disorder, can only cause a feeling of powerlessness before the chaos of the world. Montessori suggested arranging them in a certain strict logic, and teaching kids from the first day in the class to maintain the established order. Not only and not so much because adults want it, but because it is more convenient for the children themselves.

Montessori generally believes that order is organic for a child, but he does not always know how to organize it himself. An adult can create conditions in which order is simple and natural. He does not have long and exhausting conversations with the baby, he does not use figurative allegories, the morality of which jumps out like a devil out of a box, leaving only a feeling of bewilderment. The teacher offers the child to accept only a few clear rules, one of which is: “I took it, worked it out, put it back.” But in order for the work to be useful, the teacher gives the kid a short (2-3 minutes) lesson, showing how to handle objects in order to achieve results, and not to despair and not lose interest.

Interest is the first thing that Montessori highlights in his pedagogy. The second is an individual approach. This, of course, does not mean that each child has a separate teacher. Everything is somewhat different. Each child during free work chooses what he likes to do, and the teacher shows him how to cope with the task. Then the child works on his own, because the material, without outside interference, will show him the mistake he made.

The child has freedom of choice right after he crosses the threshold of the class, because only he himself knows exactly what he needs to develop right now. Although there are some guidelines here. So, M. Montessori drew attention, and modern psychology confirmed that every child from 0 to 6 years old has sensitive periods in which he easily and naturally learns certain things. If you are late and do not take advantage of the opportunities that have appeared in children, then they may lose interest in this for life or return the mistakes and accidents of these periods in the most unexpected and unpleasant forms after the age of six.

Montessori urges us not to speed up the development of the child, but also not to miss the moment and spread a self-assembly tablecloth in front of him in time, on which a reduced safe model of our entire world will open. First, the baby’s eyes will run wide, and then they will find what he needs here and now. We just need to remember that on our tablecloth are not simple objects, but selected by a long observation of what and how helps children in development.

Surprisingly, if the teacher does everything right, and the parents do not really interfere with him, the child has an inner need to master and learn about the world around him. It turns out that in order for a child to teach (and better educate) himself, he no longer needs to be punished or encouraged, you just need to throw a “coal” into the furnace of his mind in time, and even better, show how and where to find this coal. Maria herself writes: “It is not true that the Montessori teacher is inactive when the ordinary teacher is active: all activity is ensured by the active preparation and guidance of the teacher, his subsequent “inactivity” is a sign of success.”

The main task of an adult is to help children learn to concentrate on work that is interesting for them. In this complex matter, the teacher goes through three stages. The first is the preparation of an environment that is attractive to the baby and convenient for his work. The second is the destruction of the activity of individual children, which hinders the progress and development of others. At this difficult stage, the teacher shows the naughty that he is loved even so, restless and unbearable, and at the same time tirelessly helps the child find something that will interest him and help him concentrate on work. The energy of the child is redistributed from chaotic splashing to constructive activity aimed at development. At the third stage, the most important thing for the teacher is not to interfere with the baby, not to disturb his searches and his work.

Most of the teacher’s influences occur indirectly, through the environment or with the help of rules that he invents with the children. The whole appearance of an adult and his enthusiasm captures children and helps the teacher to establish a trusting relationship with each child, to create that unique atmosphere that Montessori classes are so different from.

Montessori pedagogy returned to Russia only in 1992. Several teams simultaneously took on the task of preparing teachers for preschool Montessori classes. But only the Montessori Center manages to establish contacts with the AMI course, which is conducted in Munich by Montessori trainer Maria Roth. This course from 1993 to 1998 graduated eight envoys of our country. They became the teaching backbone of the course organized by the Montessori Center. In 1998, the Deputy Director of the Center Sophia Somnitelnaya met in Munich with AMI General Secretary Renilda Montessori and received approval to open an Associative AMI Teacher Training Course for Preschool Classes in Moscow. So Russian teachers finally entered the European community.

Part two

Chapter 1

Education of a child

Let’s face the impressive facts of the presence of a spiritual life in a child, the most tender forms of existence of which remain unnoticed. An adult does not want to recognize it and thereby violates the plan for building a child’s soul. The environment of an adult is insignificant for the life of a child. Often it is a collection of obstacles in which the child develops his defensive powers, is forced to adapt and is subject to all sorts of suggestive influences.

In our time, they begin to study the properties of the child’s soul from the moment when the child moves away from the natural, normal path of development. From this moment on, children become an object for education. This means that child psychology needs a fundamental revision. We have already learned a lot: behind every unexpected reaction of a child lies a secret. Every childish whim is an expression of a deeply hidden cause, which means not only a superficial clash of children’s protective forces with an environment unsuitable for the child. As if some kind of fog prevents the child’s soul from coming out of its secluded haven and expressing itself.

It is clear that all these episodes behind which the efforts of the child’s soul for self-building are hidden, all these whims and struggles do not give us an idea of the child’s personality. They are nothing more than the sum of character traits. And yet there must be a personality, because that spiritual embryo, a child whose spiritual development is denied, follows a constructive plan of construction. Thus, in the child, as we see it, an independent person is placed, a living captive being who needs to be freed. This is the essential task of education.

Researchers of psychoanalysis and the psychology of the “unknown” find a significant difference in the study of the adult and the child. It consists in the following: what is hidden in the adult himself is repressed by the individual himself. Therefore, the individual must turn to a doctor who will help him unravel the tangle in which are hidden, as if buried, complex symbols and pretense accumulated throughout life. While what is hidden from us in a child is blamed on him. But we need to influence the environment of the child in order to enable him to freely express his personality. He is going through a period of creation and gathering, and nothing else is needed but to open the door for him. What enters into his being from the void and turns from the potential into the actual cannot yet give rise to any complications. The energy of the child is included in the work and, gaining momentum, cannot in itself lead to deviations. This means that when we prepare an open environment suitable for a child at a given moment in his life, the child’s soul spontaneously opens up. The veil is removed from the secret of the child. Isn’t it all the same aspirations that were lost in the endless labyrinths of education?

So, a truly new upbringing consists, firstly, in the discovery of the secret of the child, and, secondly, in his liberation. The problem of existence as such consists in existence itself. Only then follows a long, like the very period of development from a child to an adult, the second chapter, which is called: “Help that should be offered to the child.”

But the canvas for both chapters is an environment that facilitates the growth of the child. It should minimize all barriers to development. It is to this environment that all children’s energies are directed, it is this environment that supplies all the means that affect the child’s activity.

But the adult himself also finds himself in this environment of the child. He must adapt to the needs of the child, help his independence, he has no right to become an obstacle for him, replacing him in the main activities and development.

This is what characterizes the main principle of our method of education, which is carried out in this environment. In our method, the teacher became a new discovery, and this aroused great interest and discussion: we are talking about a passive teacher who is trying to overcome the contradictions that might appear in his own activity. It affects the child in such a way that the activity comes from the child himself. In the role of a teacher, we mean that person who will be satisfied to see a child acting on his own inner urges, making progress. He does not deprive the child of his own merits. This teacher should take as a model John the Baptist, who said: “The one who follows me is stronger than I.” We also know one more provision of our method, which so far has not so resolutely focused attention on respect for the personality of the child.

These three main points (environment, teacher, respect for the personality of the child – approx. ed. ) were carried out in our educational institutions, which were first called children’s homes, and this name well denoted our idea of \u200b\u200bthe environment in the family. Anyone who has followed this parenting movement knows that there has been a lot of controversy over our orphanages. Strong objections were raised by the revolution in relations between adults and children: a teacher without a chair, without the usual authority, almost without teaching functions. The central point of all his activities is the child who teaches himself and is free to choose his occupation and movements. Many do not consider this a utopia, but still believe that there are many exaggerations.

On the other hand, the idea that the material environment should correspond to the growth of the child deserved universal applause. Our spacious room, filled with flowing streams of light, with low windows decorated with flowers, with low furniture of various shapes, looks like a modern residential apartment. Tables, an armchair, bright curtains, low cabinets from which you can take or put back your things – all this really seems to be a practically significant improvement in children’s life. And I think that most of the orphanages have retained these signs as the main characteristic principles to this day.

After many years of research and experience, we feel the need to return once again to the story of problems and especially to the origin of our method. It would be a great mistake to assume that all kinds of observation of children led us to the bold conjecture that the child has a hidden nature, and that then thoughts of a new school and methods of education sprouted from this intuitive idea. The hidden cannot be seen. The vague notion that the child has a dual nature would not induce us to say: “Now we want to try to prove it experimentally.”

The new must be born from its own strong energy, and often it is enough just what is shown on your doubting eyes, as if you were blind. This blind man simply rejects the new as superfluous objects that interfere with his world. The new must constantly invade his world so that he finally sees it in his field of vision. Then he will recognize him and greet him boisterously. But how strong is the joy of seeing, at last, a new light! Enthusiasm leads him to conjectures, assumptions, because he created this new light himself, although he did nothing but see the open signs himself. Then, at some point, he managed to learn and do what is written in the Gospel: “The Kingdom of Heaven is still like a merchant looking for good pearls, who found one precious pearl, went and sold everything he had, and bought it.” It has always been the most difficult thing for us to notice the new and establish ourselves in it, because it is in front of the new that the gates of our perception are locked. The wealth of the mind is like the closed salon of the nobility. Anyone wishing to become a member must be represented by someone who is already known in this salon. In other words, he must go “from the familiar to the unfamiliar.” The new should not break in or creep in, because this will cause an unexpected reaction and confusion in the cabin.

Without excitement or doubt, A. Volta watched how the separated dead limbs of the frog began to tremble, but he confidently asserted this fact, and deduced the properties of electricity from it. Sometimes a tiny detail is enough to open up a new perspective, because a person is by nature a seeker, an explorer. But no discovery would be possible without collecting information about these small details. In physics and medicine, we have strict rules for discovering a new phenomenon. A new phenomenon is the discovery of an unknown fact, the existence of which was not expected. Fact is always objective and does not depend on intuition. If we are talking about proving a new fact, then we need to prove that it arises on its own, i. e., isolated from the will and consciousness of the researcher. Then comes the second step – the study of the circumstances under which this phenomenon manifests itself. A direct study of the phenomenon itself can be started only after the formulation of fundamental problems. An open phenomenon is the hallway to the research laboratory. But there is such a form of research when this phenomenon is called up again and again, held, honed so as not to resemble a vision. This research requires real action. Only then will this phenomenon be truly appreciated.

Our first children’s home is a testament to discoveries that began with a tiny fact that opened up unexpected horizons for us.

The origin of our method. Some sketches I found among my old papers describe the origin of our method as follows.

On January 6, 1907, our first school was opened for normal children from three to six years old. I cannot say that it was the first school where my method was active, because the method did not yet exist. But he was to be born very soon. On that day, one could see fifty of the poorest, neglected, obviously frightened children, many of whom were crying. Almost all of them had illiterate parents. So the children were placed in my care.

Initially, nothing more was envisaged than to gather the small children of the workers in one room so that they would not be left to themselves on the stairs, dirty the walls and generally repair disgrace. To this end, a room was prepared in the building, and I was entrusted with the leadership of this institution, which was predicted to have a “promising future.”

An indefinable feeling told me that a great deed would begin here. The words of the liturgy that are read in the church on the Day of the Three Kings seemed to me prophetic: “An eclipse will cover the earth … but the Lord will rise over you … and the nations will march, wander, convert.”

All participants of the opening ceremony were surprised and asked: “Why is it only this Montessori exaggerates the importance of a simple shelter for the poor?”

I started my work as a farmer who has a suitable seed grain and who was given a fertile piece of land at his disposal so that he could sow it at his discretion. When I touched someone on the ground, I found gold instead of grain. These clods concealed a priceless treasure. Later it turned out that I was not at all the peasant I mentioned – I was Aladdin and, without knowing it, I was holding a magic lamp in my hands, which gave me access to hidden treasures. Before I could begin working with mentally normal children, a series of surprises opened up before me.

It was logical to assume that aids, which have yielded significant results in the upbringing of mentally retarded children, may be the true key to the upbringing of normal children. What served to strengthen the strength of the spirit and set the mind on the right path, standing on the wrong path, was to help healthy souls in their healthy and correct growth. There is nothing miraculous in all this, and the educational theory that finally emerges from our experiments has a clearly positive and scientific character and is capable of convincing the most sane mind. Nevertheless, the first results overwhelmed me with the greatest surprise and seemed incredible.

The didactic material that I showed normal children made a different impression on them than it did on imbeciles. A particular object did not just attract a normal child, but attracted his attention. He worked with him incessantly, with admirable concentration. Only after the end of work did the child seem satisfied, rested and happy. Rest was read in those little merry faces, in the contented luminous eyes of children after the voluntarily undertaken work had been done. My material seemed to be the key to the winding of the clock, which is turned only a few times, and the clock works for a long time by itself. It took a long time before I was convinced that this was not an illusion. Before each new experience of this kind, I remained for a long time in disbelief, but at the same time in confusion, trembling. It often happened that I reproached the teacher when she told me what the children were doing. “Don’t tell me lies!” I spoke sternly. And I also remember how she, not offended, with tears of emotion in her eyes, said: “You are right, when I see these things, it seems to me that angels send all this to children.