W. T.

LeGard (2004) OU

Piaget Versus Vygotsky

Jean Piaget (1896-1980) and Lev Vygotsky (1896-1934) proposed the classical
constructivist theories of cognitive development. Although often compared, the
concepts differ significantly. Indeed, the purpose of this essay is to argue that
Piagetian theory marginalizes the social contribution to intellectual development and
that, consequently, the Vygotskian approach offers a more accurate and
comprehensive analysis. This paper will begin with an explanation of the theories of
cognitive development propounded by Piaget and Vygotsky followed by a definition
of constructivist and social constructivist theory. The superiority of Vygotsky’s theory
will be established via a critical examination of Piaget’s stages of intellectual
development, his perspective on language acquisition, and the methodology of his
classic tests.

Piaget maintained that cognitive development is a continuous progression of

assimilation and accommodation and that these complementary processes lead to
adaptation. Knowledge is constructed progressively via a sequence of behaviours or
mental operations, what Piaget termed schemas. Piaget proposed that children develop
mental representations of the world based on physical or mental actions, which they
execute on the environment. These initially reflex behaviours are repeated while
intrinsic motivation encourages the child to apply schemas to different situations.
Assimilation occurs when the new experience is incorporated into an existing schema.
The existing schema then adjusts itself to correspond with evidence from the
environment. Piaget called this accommodation. Finally, the schema adapts to the
objects and circumstances, and is replaced with a constructed schema, producing
adaptation. The child then achieves a state of (temporary) equilibrium (Smith et al.,
1998).

Piaget (1990) described four stages of intellectual development: the sensori-motor, the
pre-operational, the concrete operational, and the formal operational stage. Thus,
knowledge is constructed sequentially and the child – regardless of social background
− must pass through each stage of cognitive development in succession. These stages
dictate the child’s cognitive ability. Children at the pre-operational stage, for example,
are said to be unable to conserve. They fail to recognize that a quantity will remain
unchanged if it is presented differently. Moreover, Piaget claimed that young
children’s egocentrism prevents the realization that other people possess a different
mental perspective. This egocentrism can be observed in young children’s use of
language. The pre-operational child is unable to decentre and therefore participates in
egocentric speech. For Piaget, language assists the development of concepts.
However, it is insufficient to create the ‘mental operations which make the formation
of concepts possible’ (Lovell, 1969, p.106).

Vygotsky agreed with Piaget regarding the constructive nature of intellectual

development. However, for Vygotsky, cognitive development occurs within a social
context. Rather than construct methods of cognition as an individual, the child
appropriates ways of thinking through social interaction. A society is produced
through the construction and use of cultural tools, e.g. language. These tools are
acquired during a culture’s development and forwarded to subsequent generations. As
a culture develops, new generations may adapt a cultural tool. This is known as
appropriation.

Vygotsky perceived the child as a social being who is able to appropriate new patterns
of thinking when learning alongside a more competent individual. He called this
concept, the Zone of Proximal Development. This is the expanse between the child’s
level of development and their potential development level, in collaboration with
more competent individuals. Social interaction, therefore, supports the child’s
cognitive development in the ZPD, leading to a higher level of reasoning.

Vygotsky stated that language has two functions. Inner speech is used for mental
reasoning and external speech is used to converse with others. These operations occur
separately. Indeed, before the age of two, a child employs words socially; they possess
no internal language. Once thought and language merge, however, the social language
is internalized and assists the child with their reasoning. Thus, the social environment
is ingrained within the child’s learning.

Constructivist theory, then, proposes an exploratory approach to learning, focusing on

the individual learner and their comprehension in relation to stages of cognitive
development. The teacher is not a distributor of knowledge but a facilitator who
provides an appropriate learning environment and encourages the child to formulate
ideas, discover concepts and think independently. Social constructivism maintains that
knowledge is constructed by an understanding of social and cultural encounters and
by the collaborative nature of learning. Social constructivist theory emphasizes the
significance of adult tuition with the teacher occupying an active role.

Piagetian theory does not advocate that children perform tasks that are beyond their
cognitive capabilities. The teacher merely prepares the environment for the child’s
developmental level of mental or motor operations. Thus, the child is limited by their
developmental stage. The ZPD, however, challenges the child to work beyond their
potential. It may be argued that Vygotsky’s developmental concept is flawed and,
indeed, the ZPD does have its critics. Foot et al. (1990) suggest that children working
collaboratively with their peers are unproductive and remain off task for long periods.
Certainly, the point is a valid one. That said, theirs is not a completely convincing
argument. Vygotsky cannot be held responsible for the misapplication of his theory.
Indeed, employment of the ZPD stimulates developmental processes only when the
child interacts with the environment and collaborates with their peers. It is the
responsibility of the teacher to ensure this occurs.

Piaget, in accordance with Vygotsky, proposed that interaction with peers assists
cognitive development. Such interaction – which requires the ability to decentre −
allows the child to experience cognitive conflict, which may compel them to re-
evaluate their individual knowledge. Although this type of setting brings together
children at different developmental levels, cognitive conflict cannot be guaranteed,
nor, claims Piaget, can pre-operational children achieve it. Further, the developmental
gains are not as significant as those that are attained through the ZPD because the
disputes merely relate to opinion rather than to a specific cognitive task.

For Piaget, the initial acquisition of speech is unrelated to cognitive development; it is

simply an indication of intellectual progress. As the child ages, egocentric speech

2
begins to fade away. Piaget considered this evidence that the child was simply
becoming less egocentric (Oates, et al., 2005). This self-communication, however, can
be regarded as social-language imitation, not merely an indication of the child’s
egocentricity. Vygotsky did not regard young children’s speech as egocentric. Rather,
he perceived private speech as social and communicative. It is, he suggested, the
beginning of the internalization of external social speech. This communication with
the self initiates inner speech and social dialogue. Inner speech is used to guide the
child’s actions. Certainly, children and adults are known to partake in private speech
when experiencing difficulties. Indeed, re-evaluating Piaget’s egocentric speech,
Vygotsky established that language is fundamental in shaping thought and is an
instrument of contemplation in ‘planning the solution of a problem’ (1986, p.87).

Following various developmental tasks, including the ‘Three Mountains’ experiment,

Piaget claimed that the pre-operational child was unable to decentre. Indeed, this
conclusion is supported by Sheehy’s reproduction of the classic experiment. Mountain
ranges, however, are not culturally significant to most children. Certainly, such a task
ignores the social background of the participants, and this supports Donaldson’s
(1982) assertion that the test is an unusual activity for young children who are
unlikely to have much familiarity with model mountains. Borke (1975) replaced
Piaget’s mountains with socially recognizable objects such as a house and a lake, and
concluded that children as young as three are able to decentre. Hughes devised a
similar point-of-view task to that of Piaget’s ‘Three Mountains’. The ‘Police Officer’
task is, however, socially relevant. Most children will not have been pursued by the
police. Nevertheless, children are familiar with the concept of hiding from another
individual. Moreover, they understand that punishment is a consequence of capture.
This comprehension derives from the social world of play and family interaction. As
Donaldson proclaims, the task makes ‘human sense’ (1982, p.25). Young children,
therefore, are not as egocentric as Piaget supposed.

Pre-operational children, averred Piaget, do not have the ability to conserve. Piaget
made this claim following his conservation experiments. However, various
researchers have argued that the types of question asked of the children are not
socially meaningful. McGarrigle (quoted in Donaldson, 1982) re-phrased the
customary questions and discovered that children were more likely to respond
correctly. Similarly, McGarrigle and Donaldson (1974) revealed that the setting and
social context of the experiment can affect a child’s ability to conserve. Psychological
research is best conducted in a familiar and natural environment. Indeed, any formal
assessment or observation is primarily devoid of social realism. McGarrigle’s
‘Naughty Teddy’ was introduced to lend social meaning to the situation and a greater
number of children were able to conserve when compared to those who participated in
the traditional Piagetian task (McGarrigle and Donaldson, 1974).

It has been established, then, that a significant number of Piaget’s claims, pertaining
to the cognitive development of children, must be disputed and, indeed, rejected once
the social aspect of development is considered. Piaget’s intellectual stages restrict the
child’s cognitive development while the collaborative nature of Vygotsky’s ZPD
motivates the child to work beyond their potential. Moreover, cognitive conflict
necessitates the child to decentre – dictated by the particular stage of development –
and generates less significant developmental gains. Piaget dismissed speech
acquisition as irrelevant to cognitive development. Vygotsky, however, established

3
inner speech as a social tool that is used by the child to regulate action and thought.
Various researchers have confirmed that devising and implementing experimental
tasks that are culturally significant fundamentally affects children’s ability to conserve
and decentre.

Comparing the constructivist theories of Piaget and Vygotsky reveals the significance
of the Vygotskian approach to socio-cultural aspects of development. Certainly, a
social constructivist method presents a more accurate examination of cognitive
development than a constructivist approach. Indeed, any study of child development
must consider the social and cultural perspective. As Das Gupta declares,
psychological theories must ‘acknowledge the influence of social context both within
and across cultures’ (2004, p.39).