Vygotsky vs. Piaget: Comparing Child Development Theories

Introduction: Two Theories of Child Development

Two of the most influential theorists in developmental psychology — Jean Piaget and Lev Vygotsky — offered strikingly different accounts of how children learn and grow. While both men have shaped modern educational practice, their fundamental philosophies about childhood, cognition, and the sources of learning stand in sharp contrast to one another.

Piaget's Biologically-Driven Stage Model

The French developmental theorist Jean Piaget is notable for his biologically-oriented, developmentally-driven account of how children learn. Rather than viewing children merely as small, less intelligent adults, Piaget was the first major theorist to argue that children conceptualize the world in a fundamentally different way than adults — in his view, due to biological limitations inherent to a child's brain. He was more interested in the way in which fundamental concepts like the very idea of "number," "time," "quantity," "causality," and "justice" emerged (McLeod, 2015). In Piaget's view, these were not concepts that were taught but rather emerged as part of maturation, just as a child grows taller and stronger with age.

A child in the sensorimotor stage eventually achieves object permanence; according to Piaget, around 9 months of age, a child will search for a toy that has been removed from his or her visual field (McLeod, 2015). Conservation of liquid tasks and spatial awareness developed around ages five to seven (McLeod, 2015). Another critical component of Piaget's theory was that of schemas — "a set of linked mental representations of the world, which we use both to understand and to respond to situations" (McLeod, 2015).

Vygotsky's Social and Cultural Approach to Learning

In contrast to Piaget, the Russian developmental theorist Lev Vygotsky did not view learning as triggered by specific biological milestones but rather as a social product of the child's interactions with his or her environment. Rather than viewing learning as a series of fixed stages, Vygotsky argued that "the child's learning always occurs in a social context in co-operation with someone more skillful (MKO). This social interaction provides language opportunities, and language is the foundation of thought" (McLeod, 2014). Vygotsky understood children's learning as a product of cultural dialogue with peers and adults — referred to as more knowledgeable others (MKOs).

There is cross-cultural evidence to support this view, given that anthropological research suggests Piaget's age progression is far from universal. Studies of Aboriginal children found that "the ability to conserve came later… between [children] aged 10 and 13," but that "spatial awareness abilities developed earlier amongst the Aboriginal children than the Swiss children" Piaget had used in his research (McLeod, 2015). Furthermore, not all educated adults pass Piaget's tests for the formal operations stage: other researchers using Piaget's same instruments found that "40–60% of college students fail at formal operation tasks… [and] only one-third of adults ever reach the formal operational stage" (McLeod, 2015).

Conclusion: Opposing Frameworks of Child Cognition

Vygotsky saw fewer inherent differences between adults and children than Piaget did, and thought they used similar social processes to acquire knowledge. Children's development, in his view, was also far less beholden to biology than Piaget's model implied. Although both theorists have been highly influential in shaping how children are taught today, their fundamental philosophies and conceptions of childhood were very different. Rather than complementary perspectives, Piaget's theory of cognitive development and Vygotsky's sociocultural theory are best understood as opposing frameworks.

References

McLeod, S. A. (2015). Jean Piaget. Simply Psychology. Retrieved from www.simplypsychology.org/piaget.html

McLeod, S. A. (2014). Lev Vygotsky. Simply Psychology. Retrieved from www.simplypsychology.org/vygotsky.html