piaget and gesell: a comparison of behavioral age and cognitive ability
Post on 23-Feb-2016
113 Views
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
PIAGET AND GESELL:
A COMPARISON OF BEHAVIORAL AGE
AND COGNITIVE ABILITY
Allie CohillAnnie Kaplan
PIAGET 1896-1980 Switzerland Swiss Developmental Psychologist and
Philosopher Natural Sciences Ph. D University of
Neuchatel Worked at University of Zurich, developed
interest for psychoanalysis Studied cognitive development
Became the theory of cognitive development Strongly interested in the development of
knowledge, specifically with the child
PIAGET TERMS Schema
Each child had knowledge, acquired through experiences and interactions, organized through groupings
Pre-operational StageTypically ages 2-7The beginning of thinking in symbols, but
still unsystematic and illogical. The ability to mentally represent what has been absorbed on the level of action
PIAGET TERMS Concrete Operational Stage
Typically ages 7-11 Thinking becomes more organized logically on a
mental plane Conservation occurs at this stage
Conservation The ability to transform reality by means of
internalized actions which are grouped into coherent, reversible systems.
A psychological indication of the completion of an operatory structure. Requires the ability to see multiple aspects of a problem
conservation of substance (age 7-8) conservation of weight (age 9-10) conservation of volume (age 11-12)
Arnold Gesell Completed Ph.D in psychology at Clark
U Yale Medical Degree Founded clinic at Yale Established Gesell Institute of Child
Development in New Haven, CT 1950 Set out to provide a standard in which
people could recognize typical and not ordinary child patterns in behavior
GESELL TERMS Maturation
The process by which development is governed by intrinsic factors--principally the genes, which determine the sequence, timing, and form of emerging action-patterns
School readinessPoint in the biological development of the
child in which he or she is behaviorally mature enough to learn in a school environment and accomplish school age tasks.
Occurs usually at age 5 or 6Complex construct
GESELL TERMS Incomplete Man Test
Children are given a drawing of a stick figure which is incomplete and they are asked to draw the missing parts.
The open ended nature of this task allows the children to demonstrate many different aspects of their personality and development, especially their ability to observe and copy from a picture.
HYPOTHESIS If students are at the normative
behavioral age according to the incomplete man test by Gesell, they will also not be able to complete Piaget Conservation tasks.
OUR STUDY Small North Texas Catholic School
7 kindergarteners, 5 boys, 2 girls
Study was conducted in school library
Incomplete Man Test was given to the students while sitting at one main table
Students were taken aside individually to complete conservation task
GESELL’S ANALYSIS OF INCOMPLETE MAN TEST RESULTS
Hair inclusion of hair is normative (Age 5.5) Hair too long (until age 5.5) Too few hairs (until age 9) Better stroke developed, majority achieve good length of
hair (Age 7) Most placement of hair accurately (Age 9) Only 6% of girls, 12% of boys, reproduce the number
correctly (Age 10) Eyes
One fourth of children make a pupil (Age 5.5) Eyes match in size and placement, though horizontal
placement may not be as accurate (Age 6) Pupil normative (Age 9)
ANALYSIS Neck Area
Simple completion of the body line (Age 4.5-5)
Instead of a simple extension of the body line, as earlier, some now make a slanted combination of neck and body line. Neck area tends to consist of a two-part straight neck and body line. (Ages 5.5)
Struggle to make the bow with difficulty (Ages 5.5-6)
Bow added to the earlier body line (Age 7)
“The ages of 4 through 6 emphasize the gradual improvement of the neck area: first the extension of the body line to meet the knot in the given bow, then the addition of the neck, and then the struggle with the bow. At this time, when some arm and fingers, leg and foot, hair, ear, and eyes can be pretty well taken for granted, how the child handles the neck area can be an examiner’s best clue as to how far that child has developed.” (Ilg, Ames, etc, 98)
ANALYSIS
Arm Arm and leg are becoming shorter in some (age 5)
Arms are moving upward and point upward (age 5.5)
Leg Leg is good length (age 6)
RESULTS
Student 7 (Age 6) HairDoes not make anyEyesDoes not make anyEarMakes ear
-Placement: correct
-Size: Too small Shape: Some
indent but not correct
Neck Area Makes neck areaBody line and
neck only
Arm Placement: MiddleDirection: UpLength: CorrectFingers: Correct
Leg Makes leg placement: Too farDirection: CorrectLength: Too shortFoot: Good length
Student 2 (Age 6) HairMakes hairNumber: too fewEyesDoes not make anyEarMakes ear
-Placement: too high
-Size: Too smallShape: poor
Neck Area Makes neck areaBody line NeckBow
Arm Placement: Just right
Direction: UpLength: too longFingers: correct
Leg Makes leg placement: Too nearDirection: CorrectLength: Too shortFoot: up too much
Student 3 (Age 5) HairMakes hairNumber: too fewEyesMakes eyesPlacement: too high/unevenEarMakes ear
-Placement: correct-Size: Too bigShape: poor
Neck Area Makes neck areaBody line
Arm Placement: upper thirdDirection: UpLength: correctFingers: correct
Leg Makes leg placement: Too nearDirection: CorrectLength: Too shortFoot: up too much
CONSERVATION OF NUMBER According to Piaget
Before conservation of number, children link numerical evaluation with the spatial arrangement of the elements
8 penniespennies close togetherpennies spread apart Ask if there is the same amount in each row
CONSERVATION OF NUMBER
CONSERVATION OF VOLUME According to Piaget
Before conservation of volume, the pouring of the water from one cup to another is not conceived as a reversible movement from one state to another, changing the form but leaving the quantity constant
CONSERVATION OF VOLUME
RESULTS Hypothesis confirmed
Most students did not have the behavioral characteristics to be labeled as ready in the incomplete man test
All students except one could not conserve Behavioral and cognitive development is
related
Student 7 Able to conserve number Unable to conserve volume Incomplete man test was below average
LIMITATIONS Could have encouraged children more
Ask if they were missing any parts of the stick figure
Shortened the children’s gym class, were very anxious and wanted to finish quickly
More students Find out age per month More readiness tests
Useful is assessing child in various aspects
Should we look again at the curriculum for the age levels and ask whether it expects students to have the ability to conserve?
Does the curriculum match cognitive ability?
Maybe we should do a better job of analyzing cognitive abilities in order to better teach them
Children may not be prepared for a first grade curriculum
Our study stimulated some questions for one to think about:
Would a child learn how to conserve if they had never been asked?
Would children be able to develop logical skills if they had not been asked?Stimulation has to be there
Piaget criticized about Americans trying to speed things upAre we not stimulating children enough at
younger ages?Or are we forcing complex thinking on
children when they are not ready?
PiagetThe child must be independently doing
things and learningNot all about demonstrationChild works alone until the “aha!” moment
with conservation Child must be cognitively developed to
a point for this moment to happen Gesell
Believed one had to wait until the child’s human genetic processes have occurred in that child
FINAL THOUGHTS
WHAT CAN THESE CHILDREN DO? Do not want to shortchange a child
Also want to challenge a child
Important to understand there is a uniqueness in their rate of learning and development
Piaget and Gesell focused on different aspects of child development Both useful in developing a correct curriculum for a
child and helping them grow
top related