that they are capable of operational groupings only with concrete objects such as blocks, sticks, clay, liquids and marbles. Logical thought does not yet extend to verbal stimuli.
(Honstead, 1968: 139) 4. Formal operations period (11+ years). In Piaget's theory this is the
final period of cognitive development. McGurk (1975: 39) notes that 'The hallmark of this stage is the child's ability to reason abstractly without relying upon concrete situations or events'.
Piaget's view of cognitive development is that in the process of develop- ment the individual moves from a less to a more mature level of function- ing. The child is actively involved in pursuing information and attempting to understand the world. Piaget's theory has been labelled 'constructivist' (Gelcer and Schwartzbein, 1989) inasmuch as the child actively constructs the external world in acting upon it. Such a view contrasts with behaviour- al theories that emphasize the passivity of the child who is acted upon and shaped by the external world. From a biological perspective, though, Piaget viewed development as progressive and directional. The invariant feature of his theory emphasized a stage-like development, in which the child's manner of thinking at one level is qualitatively different from the way of thinking at a later stage.
the disillusionment can be attributed to research that challenged many of Piaget's assumptions regarding the nature of cognitive development and to the failure of Piaget's research to reap the anticipated rewards in some applied areas. The following represents an overview of some of the major criticisms of Piagetian theory.
A feature of Piaget's experimental method, la methode clinique, was his careful interviewing of the child. His child-centred approach in his earliest work consisted of an open-ended discussion with the child. From an empirical perspective, as outlined in Chapter 1, Piaget's interview tech- nique has been criticized as too subjective and value-laden. Criticism has also been directed at the reliance on verbal introspection of immature minds. Phillips (1969: 4) described Piaget's interview methods thus:
He observes the child's surroundings and his behaviour, formulates a hypothesis concerning the structure that underlies and includes them both, and then tests that hypothesis by altering the surroundings slightly - by rearranging the materials, by posing the problem in a different way, or even by overtly suggesting to the subject a response different from the one predicted by the theory.
For example, in a simple conservation task the format might be as follows.
Arrange two rows of objects (such as one cent pieces or buttons), about ten in each row so that there is a one-to-one correspondence and the two rows are of equal length. Ask the child 'Are there the same number of but- tons in each row?' If he or she agrees, say 'Watch me now' as you lengthen one of the rows, and then repeat the question, 'Are there the same number of buttons in each row?' Depending upon the child's answer, you might ask the child about the reason for the answer, rephrase the question or reset the experiment to repeat it.
Thus language was a very significant element that Piaget used to try to discover the course of children's cognitive functioning. McGarrigle and Donaldson (1974) and Donaldson (1978) are critical of the language used in such experiments. A child may take the repetition of the question as a cue to alter his or her first judgement, reasoning along the lines that if the researcher has altered the experimental set-up then perhaps a different answer is warranted. Donaldson also argues that sometimes the language used will carry so much weight that it will override the meaning of the situ- ation, leading the young child to make errors in judgement. This is exem- plified by the following:
'So here's a question for you. How old did you say you were?' Alice made a short calculation, and said 'Seven years and six months.'
'Wrong!' Humpty Dumpty exclaimed triumphantly. 'You never said a word like it!'
'I thought you meant "How old are you?"' Alice explained.
'If I'd meant that I'd have said it', said Humpty Dumpty.
(Carroll, 1982) Another trenchant criticism of Piagetian theory is directed at the sequence of stages and the nature of children's behaviour within the stages (Gardner, 1979). Major concerns have been expressed that a universal age/stage approach overlooks the part played by differences in mental and environmental factors in shaping a child's behaviour.
A further criticism is that Piaget tended to treat other people in the child's life as objects. This neglects the social competence of infants and the role of others as social partners, with such partnerships promoting cog- nitive development (Eibl-Eibesfeldt, 1989).
Piaget's theory has been said to fit 'the orderliness of development on a large scale' (Thelen and Smith, 1994: 21). To that extent, while Piaget's theory of cognitive development and the conclusions drawn from it have come under increasing scrutiny, the fact remains that few viable alternative frameworks have been developed (Halford, 1989). Piaget's writings have helped 'psychologists to think of development as transformation in the direction of greater epistemological adequacy, or as a construction of more adequate forms of knowing' (Bassecher, 1989: 189).
However, Thelen and Smith argue that on a more detailed scale the the- ory fails to capture the 'complexity and messiness of cognitive develop- ment in detail' (1994: 21-2). Donaldson's (1978) work, among others, indicates that when variations are made to Piagetian tasks there are confus- ing and contradictory findings. In particular, some central tenets of Piagetian theory have been challenged, as follows (Thelen and Smith, 1994).
1. Children develop from an impoverished beginning state. Research sug- gests that, in fact, the young infant is highly competent.
2. There are global discontinuities in cognition across stages. In fact, there is evidence of early precursors to abilities.
3. Cognitive growth is monolithic. In fact, there is wide individual varia- tion in development and competences.
Thelen and Smith (1994: 22) conclude that 'Cognitive development does not look like a marching band; it looks more like a teeming mob'.
Despite such criticisms, Piaget's theory remains influential educationally and has become one of the best-known theories of child development. It has also triggered much further research, one of the best-known neo- Piagetian theorists being Robbie Case (see, e.g. 1998), who has combined a Piagetian approach with an information-processing one (see Chapter 6).
According to his theory, as the brain develops and schemes become more automatic with practice, working memory capacity increases, allowing more advanced processing of information. Thus, children become able
to undertake more complex cognitive tasks. The uneven nature of cognitive development noted by Thelen and Smith is accounted for in this formulation, as practice in one domain more than another would lead to uneven development across domains. For example, as we will see in Chapter 9, children who are 'supposed' to be in the concrete operational stage may display abstract reasoning in areas to which their culture exposes them.