Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
204
0361-476X/82/030204-13$02.00/O
Copyright @ 1982 by Academic Press, Inc.
AU rights of reproduction in any form reserved.
PIAGETS THEORY AND INSTRUCTION 205
edge as becoming more specialized in much the same way that a fetus
develops increasingly distinctive anatomical structures out of initially un-
differentiated cells. Weikarts (1971) high scope program for teaching
Head Start and Follow Through children organizes the classroom ac-
cording to Piagets principle of progressive differentiation. At the outset,
children are exposed to an environment that provides relatively few
places for storing classroom articles such as toys, books, and games. With
time and experience, the youngsters are required to store classroom arti-
cles in an increasing number of categorically specific places. Thus, the
classroom environment demands of the children a progressively more
complex cognitive structure for organizing stimuli.
A fourth hypothesis of Piagets (1977) that has intrigued a number of
educational psychologists was his suggestion that conflicts in viewpoints
between children could provoke cognitive development. Murray (1982)
discussed the educational implications of this hypothesis in his article. His
research indicates that pairing conserving and nonconserving children
together to solve conservation problems consistently leads the noncon-
serving child to adopt a conservation rule. He speculates that peer teach-
ing may be a particularly effective method for organizing classroom in-
struction. To date, none of the Piaget educational programs that Johnson
and Hooper reviewed has incorporated peer conflict teaching as an ex-
plicit feature of its curriculum. Undoubtedly, this pedagogical process will
be explored in the 1980s.
A fourth feature of Piagets theory that many early childhood educators
(e.g., Kamii & DeVries, 1978) have adopted in some way is the use of
motoric experiences to facilitate young childrens acquisition of knowl-
edge. This hypothesis (Wolff & Levin, 1972) stems from Piagets conten-
tion that sensory-motor concepts derive from childrens motoric explo-
rations of their environment. The implication that many early childhood
educators have drawn from Piagents description is that preschoolers will
be best taught by a curriculum emphasizing hands-on experiences.
Often Montessoris (1912/1964) tasks have been used due to that
educators similar emphasis on the importance of motoric experience.
Johnson and Hooper (1982) caution, however, that this motoric experi-
ence implication is now being challenged within Piagetian circles.
Many of the early childhood programs reviewed by Johnson and
Hooper (1982) have emphasized the use of the chidrens play as an im-
portant instructional experience. Rubin and Pepler (1982) reviewed
Piagets theorizing on the role of play in childrens development, and they
discussed some common misinterpretations of Piagets notions by early
childhood educators. In addition to its virtue in promoting motoric in-
volvement, play is assumed to foster social interactions among children
vis-a-vis learning materials.
PIAGETS THEORY AND INSTRUCTION 207
those instances in which the developing childs needs are being ade-
quately met. Maccoby (1968) cautioned that disadvantaged children
should not be assumed to be intrinsically motivated: In the history of the
culturally deprived child, intrinsic reward for learning has often not been
sufficient enough to overcome the elements in his experience that would
lead him to avoid, or be afraid of, learning situations. External rewards
may be both necessary and desirable to get the child started in the learning
process (p. 198).
The fifth criticism is more general. Rosenthal and Zimmerman (1978)
have argued that Piagets theory is an essentially descriptive approach.
Piaget studied age-related changes in childrens cognitive functioning but
did little to examine the role of the environment. Some inferences about
environmental influences were made during Piagets research on infants
and toddlers (first 2 years of life). Such data allow few conclusions about
how a teacher can best instruct a child. Studying the outcomes of teaching
of children requires an experimental methodology. From experimental
research, prescriptive rules for instruction can be drawn. Piagets genetic
epistemological account affords relatively few prescriptive rules, as he
acknowledged shortly before his death (Sinclair-DeZwart, 1977).
The Define and Conquer Approach
Many educational psychologists, even those who side with either the
compatibility or incompatibility arguments, have decided to ignore the
more general philosophical aspects of Piagets theory and to concentrate
on empirically examining specific Piagetian constructs that relate directly
to instructional concerns. Some general features of Piagets theory can be
redefined in operational terms; others cannot. The following topics have
been defined and studied to some extent: (a) Do stage measures predict
learning? (b) Is conflict necessary for learning to occur? (c) Do stage
measures predict performance on non-Piagetian cognitive tasks? and (d)
Is motoric involvement necessary for learning?
The issue of the utility of stage measures in predicting learning was one
of the first to be studied by Piagetians. There were a series of studies
(Beilin, 1965; Strauss & Langer, 1970; Brainerd, 1972; Langer & Strauss,
1972; Inhelder, Sinclair, & Bovet, 1974) that examined this issue by cor-
relating pretest scores on Piagetian tasks with posttest outcomes after
instruction. Positive correlations emerged in these studies, and they were
interpreted as indicating the predictive utility of stages as constructs.
Brainerds (1977) analysis of these studies, however, revealed a flaw:
Posttest scores were composed of both pretest differences and learning
outcomes. These two effects needed to be separated in order to answer
the stage question. Brainerd (1982) argued that efforts to answer this
question must involve the use of a different type of research paradigm
210 BARRY J. ZIMMERMAN
than has been used in the past, and he proposed an AT1 (Aptitude or Stage
Treatment Interaction) model to provide definitive answers to this ques-
tion. Thus, the question of the usefulness of stage measures in predicting
learning remains open.
A second issue involves the claim by Piaget that cognitive conflict is a
necessary condition for development. Murray (1982) summarized re-
search on use of social conflict in teaching children to conserve and found
consistent evidence of the successfulness of this procedure. However,
social conflict research is not definitive on this issue since social conflict
is different from cognitive conflict (disequilibrium) as Sigel (1979) has
noted, and no study of social conflict, to my knowledge, has yet examined
whether cognitive conflict was in fact produced. An operational definition
of disequilibrium that is separate from social conflict (and learning out-
comes) is necessary before such research can be undertaken.
A third issue that has attracted considerable recent attention by re-
searchers is the usefulness of stage measures in predicting childrens
performance on non-Piagetian tasks. This issue has been termed
operativity research, and correlations between performance on a wide
variety of Piagetian tasks and performance on mathematics, reading,
memory tasks, language tests, and discrimination learning tasks have
been reported. In general, results have been unimpressive (Liben, 1980;
Zimmerman, 1980). The correlations have typically been quite low, and
the use of correlational designs have been challenged (Zimmerman, 1980).
Performance on Piagetian tasks is known to be correlated to some degree
with childrens age. Similarly, performance on the non-Piagetian task is
known to be correlated with age. The fact that a childs performance on
both tasks is correlated to some degree says nothing about a causal re-
lationship between stage measures and performance on non-Piagetian
task. The best research on the operativity issue has been carried out by
Gholson and Beilin (1979). Controlling for childrens age, they found that
concrete operational youngsters (conservers) could learn a complex type
of discrimination learning requiring hypothesis formation and testing,
whereas nonconserving children could not learn. They interpreted their
results as supporting an operativity hypothesis. However, Spiker and
Cantor (1977; Cantor & Spiker, 1978) challenged this conclusion and
showed in their research that preoperational children could profit from
discrimination learning if a less confusing experimental methodology was
used to determine the youngsters hypotheses. Zimmerman (1980) argued,
however, that definitive evidence supporting an operativity hypothesis
can come only from a research paradigm in which operativity (e.g., the
ability to conserve) is taught specifically. If discrimination learning oc-
curred after operativity training but not before, then an operativity as-
sumption appears justified. Such research has not been conducted to date.
PIAGETS THEORY AND INSTRUCTION 211
A final issue that has attracted the attention of several researchers is the
role of motoric involvement in preoperational stage childrens learning.
Wolff and Levin (1972) have demonstrated that motoric contact with toys
improved the childrens recall. Such a finding does not establish motoric
involvement as a necessary condition for learning, only as a facilitative
one. Nor does it indicate why motoric involvement was facilitory. In fact,
evidence was available in the Wolff and Levin study that indicated that
memory was improved by viewing interactions among the stimuli whether
they were carried out by the children themselves or by the experimenter.
This finding is in accordance with rather extensive evidence in the mem-
ory literature showing that embedding stimuli in an event sequence greatly
improves recall (e.g., Jensen & Rohwer, 1965; Jenkins, 1974). Wolff,
Levin, and Longobardi (1974) studied the relative effects of vicarious and
personal motoric experience using a yoking design. One child could ma-
nipulate toys in a paired-associate study and a second child was instructed
to watch. While no differences were found on an immediate posttest, toy
manipulators displayed greater recall than observers after a days delay.
These authors concluded that motoric involvement was necessary for
learning in addition to exposure to interaction experiences with the
stimuli. However, Brody, Mattison, and Zukerwise (1978) conducted a
study in which an adult models manipulations and child manipulations of
toys were factorially controlled, and they found significantly greater adult
manipulation effects compared to child manipulations. When viewed to-
gether, these studies indicate that the quality of the manipulations of toys
in the most important determinant of recall (Zimmerman, 1981). Motoric
involvement can assist children to form stable representations, but it does
not appear to be a requisite condition for learning by kindergarten-age
children.
Attractive Features of Piagets Approach for Teacher
It is possible to consider Piagets contributions to teaching in a less
explicit by nonetheless useful sense. Perhaps ultimately these will be his
most enduring contribution to the field of education: (a) his description of
children as constructing coherence from reality based on their experience
to date and his conclusion that their cognitive framework differs from that
of an adult in important ways; (b) his concern for interrelations among
units of childrens knowledge; (c) his suggestion to look at childrens
errors to deduce the nature of that personal construction; and (d) his
advocacy of research involving careful observation of a single childs
activity in naturalistic contexts.
Many teachers are attracted by Piagets description of children as fun-
damentally rational beings who from the earliest moments of life strive to
make sense out of the world as they encounter it. To Piaget, thinking is
212 BARRY J. ZIMMERMAN
REFERENCES
ALMY, M. New views on intellectual development in early childhood education. In A. H.
Passon & R. Leeper (Eds.), Intellectual development. Washington, D.C.: Association
for Supervision and Curriculum Development, 1964.
BATES, J. A. Extrinsic reward and intrinsic motivation: A review with implications for the
classroom. Review of Educational Research, 1979, 49, 557-576.
BEILIN, H. Learning and operational convergence in logical thought development. Journal
of Experimental Child Psychology, 1965, 2, 317-322.
BIRNS, B., & GOLDEN, M. The implications of Piagets theories for contemporary infancy
research and education. In M. Schwebel & J. Raph (Eds.), Piaget in the classroom.
New York: Basic Books, 1973.
BRAINERD, C. J. The age-stage issue in conservation acquisition. Psychonomic Science,
1972, 29, 115-117.
BRAINERD, C. J. Cognitive development and concept learning: An interpretive review.
Psychological Bulletin, 1977, 84, 919-939.
BRAINERD, C. J. Piagets theory. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1978.
BRAINERD,C. J. The stage learning hypothesis: Strategies for instructional design. Contem-
porary Educational Psychology, 1982, in press.
BRODY, G. H., MATTISON, S. L., & ZUKERWISE, B. L. Imagery induction in preschool
children: An examination of subject and experimenter generated interactions. Journal
of Genetic Psychology, 1978, 132, 307-311.
BRUNER, J. S., OLVER, R. R., & GREENFIELD, P. M. Studies in cognitive growth. New
York: Wiley, 1966.
CANTOR, J. H., & SPIKER, C. C. The problem-solving strategies of kindergarten and first
grade children during discrimination learning. Journal of Experimental Child Psychol-
ogy, 1978, 26, 341-358.
COHEN, D. Deictic reference in childrens speech. Paper presented at Linguistics Society of
American Meetings, Winter, 1973.
DECI, E. L. Effects of externally mediated rewards on intrinsic motivation. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 1971, 18, 105- 115.
ELKIND, D. Children and adolescents. New York: Oxford Univ. Press, 1974.
FILLMORE, C. J. Some problems for case grammar. Report of the State University and The
Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences, 1971.
PIAGETS THEORY AND INSTRUCTION 215
OLEARY, K. D., & OLEARY, S. G. (Eds.) Classroom management: The successful use of
behavior modification. New York: Pergamon, 1972.
PIAGET, J. Language and thought of the child. London: Routledge & Kegan-Paul, 1959.
PIAGET, J. Play, dreams and imitation. New York: Norton, 1962. (Originally published as
La Formation du Symbole Chez tEnfant. Neuchatel: Delachaux & Niestle, 1946.)
PIAGET, J. Developmental and learning. In R. E. Ripple & V. N. Rockcastle (Eds.), Piaget
rediscovered. Ithaca, N.Y.: School of Education, Cornell University, 1964.
PIAGET, J. A conversation with Jean Piaget. Psychology Today, 1970, 3, 25-32. (a)
PIAGET, J. The science of education and the psychology of the child. New York: Viking,
1970. (b)
PIAGET, J. The development of thought: Equilibration of cognitive structures. New York:
Viking, 1977.
ROSENSHINE,B., & BERLINER, P. Academic engaged time. British Journal of Teacher
Education, 1978, 4, 3-16.
ROSENTHAL, T. L., & ZIMMERMAN, B. J. Social learning and cognition. New York:
Academic Press, 1978.
RUBIN, K. H., & PEPLER,P. J. Childrens play: Piagets views reconsidered. Contemporary
Educational Psychology, 1982, in press.
SIGEL, I. E. The Piagetian system and the world of education. In D. Elkind & J. H. Flavell
(Eds.), Studies in cognitive development: Essays in honor of Jean Piaget. New York:
Oxford Univ. Press, 1969.
SIGEL, I. E. On becoming a thinker: A psycho-educational model. Educational
Psychologist, 1979, 14, 70-78.
SIEGLER, R. S. The rule assessment approach and education. Contemporary Educational
Psychology, 1982, in press.
SINCLAIR-DEZWART, H. Recent developments in genetic epistemology. Genetic Epis-
temologist, 1977, 6, l-4.
SMEDSLUND,J. The acquisition of conservation of substance and weight in children II.
External reinforcement of conservation of weight and the operations of addition and
subtraction. Scandinavian Journal of Psychotogy, 1961, 2, 71-84. (a)
SMEDSLUND, J. The acquisition of conservation of substance and weight in children IV. An
attempt at extinction of the visual components of the weight concept. Scandinavian
Journal of Psychology, 1961, 2, 153- 155. (b)
SPIKER, C. C., & CANTOR, J. H. Factors affecting hypothesis testing in kindergarten chil-
dren. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 1977, 28, 230-248.
STRAUSS,S., & LANGER, J. Operational thought inducement. Child Development, 1970, 41,
163- 175.
WEIKART, D. The cognitively oriented curriculum. Urbana, Ill.: ERIC NAEYC, 1971.
WITTROCK, M. C. The learning by discovery hypothesis. In L. S. Shulman & E. R. Keisler
(Eds.), Learning by discovery. Chicago: Rand McNally, 1966.
WOLFF, P., & LEVIN, J. R. The role of overt activity in childrens imagery production. Child
Development, 1972, 43, 537-543.
WOLFF, P., LEVIN, J. R., & LONGOBARDI, E. T. Activity and childrens learning. Child
Development, 1974, 45, 221-223.
ZIMMERMAN, B. J. Operativity: A critics view of the construct and related research. Paper
presented at the Southeastern Association for research on human development,
Alexandria, Va., April 1980.
ZIMMERMAN, B. J., & ROSENTHAL, T. L. Observational rule learning by children.
Psychological Bulletin, 1974, 81, 29-42.
ZIMMERMAN, B. J. Social learning theory and cognitive constructivism. In I. E. Siegel,
D. M. Brodzinsky, & R. M. Golinkoff (Eds.), New directions in Piagetian theory and
practice. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum, 1981. Pp. 39-49.