DEVELOPMENT OF THINKING
To read up on the development of thinking, refer to pages 325–347 of Eysenck’s A2
Level Psychology.
Ask yourself
 Why do children of 3 believe in Father Christmas (or the equivalent) whilst
an 8-year-old is unlikely to?
 Do children from different cultures use fundamentally different ways of
seeing the world and symbolising it? Does it make a really fundamental
difference to your thinking if you have never been taught to read or write?
 Do children learn better if they discover things for themselves or is it better
to explain things to them?
What you need to know
PIAGET’S THEORY VYGOTSKY’S
THEORY

Description
and
evaluation

Description
and
evaluation
BRUNER’S THEORY APPLICATIONS OF
PIAGET,
VYGOTSKY, AND
BRUNER TO
EDUCATION

Description
and
evaluation



Piaget’s
theory
Vygotsky’s
and
Bruner’s
theories
CASE
(Cognitive
Acceleration
through
Science
Education)
PIAGET’S THEORY
Piaget suggested that children pass through various stages in their cognitive
development. The main assumptions of his stage theory are:
 All children pass through the same sequence in the same order—the order is
invariant.
 Each stage has its own characteristics, which are distinct from those in other
stages.
 Within any single stage, the cognitive operations (the abilities of the child)
form an integrated whole.
The following table illustrates these:
Name of Stage
Age
(approximate)
Characteristics
Key features
The sensori-motor
stage
0–2 year
Children deal with the
environment by using
their senses and by
actions (manipulating
objects). Sensori-motor
development (learning to
co-ordinate one’s senses
with one’s motor
responses) is basically
intelligence through
action. They live in the
“here and now”.
They are incapable of
true object permanence.
In the early part of this
stage children do not
recognise that an object
exists even when they
cannot see it. In the later
stages they develop
perseverative search—
searching for an object in
the place where it was
found some time earlier
rather than in the place in
which it was last seen.
This shows some features
of object permanence but
full object permanence is
only achieved towards
the end of the sensorimotor stage.
Learning through senses
and actions
Living in the “here and
now”
Lack of true object
permanence
The pre-operational 2–7 years
stage
Children are now capable Symbolic thought
of symbolic thought—of Lack of conservation
recognising that one
Egocentrism
object stands for another.
They can now begin to
understand language and
to engage in pretend play.
They are still incapable of
logical thinking shown by
the fact that they cannot
conserve (cannot
understand that objects
remain the same
regardless of changes in
appearance). This in turn
is due to the fact that they
lack an important
cognitive operation of
reversibility. This
involves the ability to
undo or reverse mentally
some operation that has
been carried out.
They are egocentric: they
cannot see things from
another’s point of view.
The concrete
operational stage
7–11/12 years
Children become capable Can perform certain
of some logical
“operations”
thought—of some
“operations”. The term
“operations” is used to
describe internally
consistent mental rules
used in thinking. They
become capable of
conservation.
They can use the various
cognitive operations only
with respect to specific
concrete situations,
usually ones with which
they are familiar, which
are real and can be seen.
The formal
operational stage
11/12 upwards
The person can think
Can reason hypothetically
logically about potential
events or abstract ideas as
well as concrete ones, so
their thinking can go
beyond the limitations of
immediate reality.
The psychological processes involved in Piaget’s theory are as follows:
Schemas
As children explore their environment and interact with it, they gradually organise
everything that they know about a particular object or activity into a schema. A
schema contains all the information, experience, ideas, and memories an individual
has about an object or sequence of events.
Many early schemas are inaccurate. For example, a young child’s thinking is
characterised by animism, the belief that all natural phenomena and inanimate
objects, such as rocks, are alive.
As the child matures and their cognitive abilities develop, so their schemas are
modified: they become more complex and more accurate. This is done as follows.
Equilibration
Children constantly come across information that does not quite fit into their
existing schemas. For example, a child may think all dogs are called “Woof” because
their dog is. They gradually realise this is not true. This puts the child in a state of
disequilibrium. Disequilibrium occurs if new information does not fit into an existing
schema; the individual is then motivated to change the schema or form a new one to
fit the information. Once this has been satisfactorily accomplished, a state of
equilibrium is reached.
Schemas are changed by the use of two processes: assimilation and accommodation.
Assimilation
Assimilation refers to the process whereby new experiences or information are
incorporated into an existing schema without changing any other part of it or
requiring a new schema to be formed.
Young babies soon develop a schema for picking things up. If an infant has
developed a schema for picking up a rattle, he or she may use the same schema—the
same grasp—to pick up other objects such as a toy car, a furry toy, and other small
objects. This is the process of assimilation.
Accommodation
However, this grasp isn’t good enough to pick up very small or very large objects so
eventually the schema will change. This brings us onto the second process:
accommodation.
Accommodation refers to the process whereby new experiences or information cannot
be incorporated into an existing schema without either changing the schema in a
fundamental way or creating a new schema.
If the infant tries to pick up a very small object using the same grasp schema as he or
she used for the rattle, this may not be successful. So the infant changes the
schema—perhaps by using finger and thumb instead of the whole hand—in order to
grasp this new small object. The grasp schema has been changed by the process of
accommodation.
Operations
Operations are the rules by which the child understands the world. Piaget believed
that the reason children think in different ways at different stages is because the
operations they are capable of performing change as they grow older. Only in the
last two stages, the concrete operational and the formal operational stages, are they
capable of performing logical operations.
RESEARCH EVIDENCE
Piaget used the clinical interview to research the development of thinking in
children. There is a focus of interest (the same materials and first question are
consistent). After that the questions depend on what the child replies.
Research evidence will be divided into for and against, depending on whether it
supports or contradicts Piaget’s stages.
Sensori-motor
For: Piaget showed that young infants under about 8 months do not look for a
hidden object. After this, they will look in the last place it was found even though it
has, in front of the child, been moved again.
Against: Baillargeon and Graber (1988; see A2 Level Psychology page 330)—
Children show surprise when a toy is lifted from behind a screen from which it was
previously moved.
Pre-operational
Conservation
For: Piaget and colleagues carried out conservation tasks in which the child is asked
if two quantities (such as the number of counters, water in two jars) are the same
before a transformation is made (one row of counters is spread out or the water
from one glass is poured into a taller, thinner one). Pre-operational children believe
there is now more of one lot than another.
Against: McGarrigle and Donaldson (1974; see A2 Level Psychology pages 331–332)
used “naughty teddy” to move a row of counters. Conservation was shown by 70%
of 6-year-old children compared to only 40% in the standard condition. (It is worth
noting, however, that many children thought the rows were the same when naughty
teddy did add or take away a counter, so this study can also be criticised.)
Wheldall and Poborca (1980; see A2 Level Psychology page 331) found that 28% of
6- to 7-year-olds conserved using the standard task but 50% conserved with a nonverbal version.
Price-Williams, Gordon, and Ramirez (1969; see A2 Level Psychology page 333):
Children showed conservation in familiar tasks more than in ones that were not
familiar to them (even if conservation was the same, e.g. for volume). This points to
the importance of cultural experience, which Piaget underplayed.
Egocentrism
For: Piaget used the three mountains task and found that children under 8 years
nearly always chose the photograph that corresponded to their own point of view.
Against: Hughes (1975; see A2 Level Psychology page 333) used the “policeman doll”
study and found that 90% of children aged 3½–5 succeeded on this task. The task
was simpler, more interesting, and more meaningful than the three mountains
task—any of these factors could have been responsible for the higher percentage.
Concrete and formal operations
For: Piaget’s studies of conservation and egocentrism showed that children can now
conserve and are not egocentric.
Piaget used the pendulum task (see A2 Level Psychology page 330) to differentiate
concrete and formal operational thinkers and this was successful in demonstrating
that children in the formal operations stage can think hypothetically and can test
hypotheses in a systematic way (testing the length of the string, then the weight, etc.
while keeping the others constant).
Against: Bradmetz (1999; see A2 Level Psychology page 334) assessed formal
operational thought in 15-year-olds and found only 1 of 62 showed evidence of it.
EVALUATION
 Piaget has provided an astonishingly complex and detailed overall
theory of cognitive development. He has explained the processes (schema
formation, assimilation, accommodation, equilibration, etc) involved in how a
child’s thinking moves from being irrational and illogical to being rational
and logical.
 There is much evidence in support. Piaget and his colleagues carried out
literally thousands of studies of young children and provided detailed
documentation on which to base the theory. The findings have been
supported by other researchers.
 The theory has been used successfully in many applications. The main
application has been in education, in which Piaget’s notions have been used
extensively and successfully to teach children how to think rather than
simply to provide information.
 Piaget underestimated the cognitive abilities of young children.
Although it has been clearly demonstrated that young children are egocentric
and cannot conserve, Piaget’s tests of this probably underestimated their
ability in this respect.



Piaget overestimated the ability of adolescents and some adults. Many
adults never reach the stage of formal operations and many people do not
reach this stage until much later than Piaget suggested.
Piaget de-emphasised the role of social factors in cognitive
development. Piaget’s theory was very much based on the gradual unfolding
of skills as children’s brains mature and they discover the world for
themselves. He put little emphasis on the role of direct teaching and of the
social world in shaping a child’s development. This is a controversial
criticism because it is not clear whether or not he was correct.
Piaget’s theory does not account well for individual differences. Piaget’s
focus was on the universal processes that underpin every individual’s
cognitive development. He did not pay attention to the reasons why some
people develop more quickly than others, although he did acknowledge that
this is the case.
VYGOTSKY’S THEORY
Vygotsky paid particular attention to social factors in children’s development and
the way in which adults and more experienced people help children learn.
Important concepts are:
The role of others
Vygotsky believed that children make better progress if they work with people who
are more experienced than they are: he believed that little progress can be made if
the child is left to explore the world alone. A major theme of Vygotsky’s theory, then,
is that social interaction plays a fundamental role in the development of
understanding of the world.
The zone of proximal development (ZPD)
One of the reasons why adults (or older children) can help a child to develop is
based on the idea of the zone of proximal development, which can be defined as the
area between the level of performance a child can achieve when working
independently and a higher level of performance that is possible when working under
the guidance or direction of more skilled adults or peers (Wertsch et al., 1992). The
fundamental idea, then, is that there is range of skills that children cannot do alone
but which can be developed with adult guidance or help from more experienced
children. Equally, there is a limit to what a child can do, even with adult help. So the
ZPD is the skill range between what a child can do without help and what they could
not achieve even with help.
Vygotsky distinguishes between a child’s actual developmental level and his or her
potential level of development. When children are operating within their ZPD—their
potential developmental level—they can work with more advanced ideas and
concepts as long as they are working with someone who is more of an expert than
they are.
Scaffolding
The way in which adults help children learn is by a process known as scaffolding,
which can be defined as the appropriate support framework for children’s learning.
Scaffolding is necessary for children to be able to learn for themselves and
eventually internalise the concepts. In the course of everyday life, adults guide
children all the time and they quite automatically change this guidance, or help, to
suit the particular child according to their age and ability.
Language
This develops in three stages:
 Language and thought are unrelated.
 Language and thought develop in parallel and have little effect on each other.
 Language plays a vital role in thought. Children talk to themselves to assist
their thinking and problem solving. This starts with egocentric speech
(speaking without actually talking to anyone) and gives way to inner speech.
RESEARCH EVIDENCE
 Behrend, Harris, and Cartwright (1992, see A2 Level Psychology page 337)
showed that children using inner speech performed difficult tasks better
than children making little use of inner speech.
 Berk (1994, see A2 Level Psychology page 337) found that children using
inner speech when solving maths problems did better at maths over the
following year.
 Girbau (2002, see A2 Level Psychology page 337) found that, contrary to
Vygotsky’s predictions, children aged 8–10 still use egocentric speech.
EVALUATION OF VYGOTSKY’S THEORY
 It recognises the key role of the social environment in cognitive
development.
 It has been successfully applied to education.
 Support from research. Vygotsky’s proposal that inner speech helps
children’s cognitive development has been supported.
 Vygotsky carried out little research. This means that his ideas are largely
speculative.
 He exaggerated the importance of the social environment. Children’s
cognitive development is probably more determined by internal factors than
Vygotsky believed.
 The theory does not specify what types of social interaction are most
helpful. Vygotsky did not say if general encouragement or specific
instruction is more helpful.
 Social interactions are not always beneficial to learning. Sometimes help
from adults can upset and annoy children rather than enlighten them.
BRUNER’S THEORY
Bruner’s theory is basically an extension of Vygotsky’s approach.
Main principles
There are three main principles to Bruner’s constructivist theory.
1. Instruction must be concerned with experiences and contexts that make
students willing and able to learn. This involves a state of readiness on the
part of the student.
2. Instruction should be structured so it can be understood easily. This involves
spiral organisation—topics are returned to at intervals at progressively more
advanced levels.
3. Instruction should be designed to allow students to draw inferences and to
fill in gaps in the information provided. This involves the student going
beyond the information given.
Scaffolding
Bruner agreed with Vygotsky about the importance of scaffolding (see previous
notes). Granott (2005, see A2 Level Psychology page 339) identified four components
of effective scaffolding:
1. Input from scaffolding should always be at a higher level than that of the
child’s.
2. It should be reduced when the child’s input is reduced and increased when
the child’s input is increased. This means the child always takes an active
role.
3. It should be withdrawn once the child does not need it.
4. It should be fun and interesting for both parties.
RESEARCH EVIDENCE
 Wood et al. (1976, see A2 Level Psychology page 339) found that a tutor
helping 3- to 5-year-olds did more telling and less showing and helped less in
general as children got older.
 Moss (1992, see A2 Level Psychology page 339) reviewed studies of
scaffolding and found it was an effective technique for promoting learning in
preschool children.
 Conner, Knight, and Cross (1997, see A2 Level Psychology page 339) found
that both mothers and fathers used scaffolding effectively and that children
who received better scaffolding continued to perform better than those who
had received poor scaffolding.
EVALUATION OF BRUNER’S APPROACH
The positive features are the same as for Vygotsky’s theory:
 It showed the importance of social factors.
 It developed further the notion of scaffolding. It outlined the conditions in
which it is most effective.
 It underplayed internal factors in cognitive development.
 The effects of scaffolding are unpredictable. The personal relationship
between child and scaffolder can influence its effectiveness.

Scaffolding is not appropriate for all children. Some older children (and
even some young ones) prefer to find things out for themselves rather than
by interaction with a tutor.
APPLICATIONS OF PIAGET, VYGOTSKY, AND BRUNER TO EDUCATION
Piaget
Cognitive readiness. What children are taught should never be too far removed
from their existing schemas or they won’t understand them.
Self-discovery. Children should apply the process of assimilation and
accommodation to their active involvement in the world around them. Teachers can
encourage self-discovery by providing materials that induce a reasonable level of
disequilibrium. Piaget did not approve of tutorial training (providing knowledge to
passive children).
Disequilibrium
Neo-Piagetians have argued that cognitive development can be advanced by
exposure to the views of others, thus creating disequilibrium, which the child is
motivated to reduce. Ames and Murray (1982, see A2 Level Psychology pages 341–
342) found greatest advances in cognitive development in conservation were made
if children giving wrong answers were exposed to children giving different wrong
answers. This creates the greatest disequilibrium and makes the child consider the
task very carefully.
Logical Principles
Piaget believed that children need to understand the logical principles underlying
science. They need to build the relevant schemas from logic and maths in order to
understand scientific principles. This, of course, only applies to some school
subjects.
EVALUATION OF PIAGET’S APPROACH
 The theory has been highly influential in education. It has been the basis
of the Plowden report and Nuffield science.
 Self-discovery and creation of disequilibrium work well with intelligent
students.
 Piaget was correct in many applied assumptions. For example, he showed
how important it is to understand concrete problems before dealing with
abstract ones.
 There is evidence against. Brainerd (2003, see A2 Level Psychology page
341) found that self-discovery was less effective than guided discovery in
conservation tasks.
 It only works with certain subjects. The principles are better suited to
some subjects than others—subjects like science and maths, which depend
very much on logic, are helped by these methods but they do not apply to
subjects like history or foreign languages where logic does not apply.

It is difficult to measure “readiness”. It is very difficult to ascertain what
schemas a child uses, yet this information is vital for encouraging new
learning.
Vygotsky and Bruner
Peer tutoring. This involves using children only just above the child’s ZPD to teach
them. This is because these children can best appreciate the problems of
understanding that the child may have.
Learning through play. Vygotsky believed that children learn well through play as
this makes use of their own culture and that children function above their own
average age in play.
Scaffolding. As already mentioned, Vygotsky introduced this and Bruner developed
it.
EVALUATION OF VYGOTSKY’S AND BRUNER’S APPROACHES
 Support from research. Barnier (1989, see A2 Level Psychology page 343)
showed the effectiveness of peer tutoring in 6- and 7-year-olds on
perspective-taking tasks; Van Keer (2004, see A2 Level Psychology page 343)
found perspective taking effective for reading comprehension with an older
child tutor but not one of the same age; Ellis and Gauvain (1992, see A2 Level
Psychology page 343) found that cross-cultural tutoring works well on a
maze game and that two tutors are better than one.
 There are limitations to scaffolding. The learner may not be involved if the
tutor has too much status; It is less effective with some learning tasks than
with others; Scaffolding involves complex interactions and so is hard to
control.
CASE
Some of Piaget’s and Vygotsky’s ideas have been incorporated into the Cognitive
Acceleration through Science Education (CASE). The main ideas are as follows:
Main Features
Principles Used (V=Vygotsky; P=Piaget)
Concrete preparation involves the teacher Use of teachers’ greater knowledge (V)
setting the scene for what is to come. He
or she ensures the students understand
the scientific terms that will be used and
know how to use any necessary
equipment.
Cognitive conflict is created by exposing Disequilibrium (P)
students to unexpected ideas or findings
that don’t fit their preconceptions and
that can’t easily be understood on the
basis of their current ways of thinking.
Construction involves resolving the
Peer tutoring (V)
cognitive conflicts that have been created
by discussion involving small groups or
the entire class.
Metacognition involves asking students Self-discovery (P)
open-ended questions requiring them to
explain their thinking and focus on tricky
issues.
Bridging involves relating students’ new Use of teachers’ greater knowledge (V)
understanding to other aspects of science
and their everyday experience. For this to
work, teachers must have identified good
examples to produce the required
bridging.
RESEARCH EVIDENCE
Shayer (1999, see A2 Level Psychology page 345) points to the success of CASE in
improving the 1997 GCSE performance. This applied to all levels of ability and
across a range of subjects including science, maths, and English.
EVALUATION OF CASE
 It takes full account of internal and external factors in children’s
education.
 Support from exam results and other measures. This was shown by
Shayer (1999) who claims that it increases general intelligence.
 It has led to the development of other programmes. These have focused
on specific subjects, e.g. maths and technology.
 It is difficult to assess the success of each element. Since it involves five
main features, it is difficult to assess the contribution of each.
 It requires lengthy teacher training to be useful.
So What Does This Mean?
Although the theories of Piaget and Vygotsky have often been presented at odds
with each other, there are some very fundamental agreements between them. Both
were writing in an era when children were, on the whole, considered to be
miniature adults who only differed from adults because they knew less. It was not
recognised how much their cognitive abilities were different from those of adults. It
was also an era in which education consisted largely of providing children with
information, which they passively received. Both theorists, especially Piaget,
changed all this and both were instrumental in pointing out that children must be
cognitively ready before they can understand certain concepts. They also both
believed that children learn best when they are actively involved in learning.
Although Piaget tended to lay great emphasis on the internal processes of learning
while Vygotsky laid considerable emphasis on the importance of the external
environment in cognitive development, they both appreciated that both internal and
external factors are important in learning. There is no doubt that there were
significant differences between the two—the role of language being one of them—
but there were probably more areas of agreement than disagreement and both have
made a significant contribution to the education of children.
Over to You
Describe Piaget’s theory of cognitive development. (10 marks)
Discuss how this theory has been applied in education. (15 marks)