Running head: CHILD DEVELOPMENT 1

Gillian L Edwards

University of Alaska

April 24th, 2018

CHILD DEVELOPMENT 2

Abstract

Teachers must understand student’s development and what they are capable of to move them

forward as learners. This paper focuses on the theories of Piaget, Vygotsky, Bandura and

Kohlberg/Lickona and the ways in which those theories help me create developmentally

appropriate supports and challenges in the classroom.

CHILD DEVELOPMENT 3

Child Development

A teacher understands how students learn and develop and applies that knowledge in the

teacher’s practice.

Candidates know, understand and use the major concepts, principles, theories and

research related to development of children and young adolescents to construct

learning opportunities that support individual students’ development, acquisition of

knowledge and motivation.

Eleven years of substitute teaching, especially substitute teaching physical education,

gave me with daily opportunities to study child development. A day in the gym is a whirlwind

tour of the stages of cognitive and social development. Kindergarteners and first graders love

pretend play and enjoy games like Chicken Rescue, but they have trouble working together and

following the rules. Second graders think that Chicken Rescue is a little babyish, but beware:

kickball is not in their zone of proximal development. Fourth graders would rather not pretend to

be chickens, but they do like to play in teams where they can both compete and cooperate. Sixth

graders will absolutely play Chicken Rescue, so long as their friends think it’s cool, and they’ll

take the game to a whole new level adding evil farmers, free range chickens and oppressed

battery hens. The most important thing to understand about children is that they are not mini

adults. There are huge developmental differences between the magical yet egomaniacal world of

the kindergartener, the emerging cooperative morality of the 3rd grader, and the sassy attitude of

the sixth grader. We must appreciate them as children and adjust our expectations to their level

of development.

Why are Theories of Development and Learning Important?

CHILD DEVELOPMENT 4

Teachers must understand children’s development and what they are capable of to move

them forward as learners. As a PE teacher, I quickly discovered that activities that work for one

grade level are a disaster with another because they are not appropriate for their level of social or

cognitive development. Understanding how children learn and develop allows us to plan

instruction and plays to their developmental strengths. Thomas Lickona identifies two ways of

dealing with children’s stages of development: going with the flow and challenging. Both

approaches are needed to help children grow (1983). When we go with the flow, we accept the

child for who they are and meet them at their level. When we challenge them to use reasoning

that is at the upper level of their stage of development, we help them move towards a higher

stage (Lickona, 1983). There are a myriad of theories of development and learning. This paper

focuses on the theories of Piaget, Vygotsky, Bandura and Kohlberg/Lickona and the ways in

which those theories help me create developmentally appropriate supports and challenges in the

classroom.

Theories of Cognitive Development

Piaget’s Stages of Cognitive Development

Jean Piaget was born in Switzerland in 1896, his work on child development and how

children learn forms the foundation of the constructivist model of education (Mooney, 2000).

Although some of Piaget’s work has been challenged by more recent research, his stages of

cognitive development and theory of learning remain essential elements of our understanding of

how children learn and develop (Mooney, 2000).

Preoperational. When children come to school, they are in Piaget’s preoperational stage

of cognitive development which extends from age two through seven or eight. This is the stage

in which the child’s thinking is most unlike that of an adult (Mooney, 2000). Preoperational
CHILD DEVELOPMENT 5

children are egocentric. They view think of the world chiefly as it relates to them and believe that

everyone sees the world exactly as they do (Slavin, 2012). Egocentrism is often evident when

kindergarteners respond to literature: a book about a dog will quickly have hands raised to share

exciting stories about their own dogs even if the teacher has asked a question about another

aspect of the book. Preoperational children tend to focus on one thing or characteristic of a

situation at a time, a quality that Piaget called centration; (Slavin, 2012) learn through experience

rather than words; and overgeneralize (often incorrectly) based on their experience (Mooney,

2000).

Teachers of children in the preoperational stage can support their cognitive development

by providing opportunities for children to directly experience the concepts they are learning

(Mooney, 2000). Examples might be using manipulatives in math lessons, creating science

centers, or providing concept related dramatic play centers with real props and tools for students

to explore.

Concrete operational. Children aged seven to eleven years are generally in Piaget’s

concrete operational stage. Unlike preoperational children, concrete operational thinkers possess

the ability to reverse their thoughts and infer reality (Slavin, 2012). They are developing logical

reasoning skills and beginning to think abstractly but only about familiar objects and situations

(Furth, 1970). Concrete operational thinkers can attend to more than one characteristic at a time

which makes their thinking more flexible (Mooney, 2000). Seriation and transitivity are two

important skills that develop during the concrete operational stage. Seriation is arranging objects

in a sequential order according to a characteristic such as size. Transitivity is the ability to infer a

relationship between objects by mental comparison (Slavin, 2012). Seriation and transitivity are

important in math, science and social studies. They allow concrete operational thinkers to
CHILD DEVELOPMENT 6

perform mental calculations, engage in basic algebraic thinking, create a hypothesis about a

concrete situation, draw a map of known places and understand timelines. Concrete operational

thinkers are far less egocentric than preoperational children, they can see that others think and

perceive differently than they do (Slavin, 2012).

We can support students in the concrete operational stage by providing learning

experiences that help students move from the concrete to the abstract and by inviting them to

consider multiple perspectives. Examples include engaging students in scientific experiments

centered on observable phenomena such as gravity or the water cycle; considering historical

events from different cultural perspectives; or scaffolding math instruction to help students move

from concrete representations of multiplication and division to numeric representation.

Formal operational After about age twelve children enter the formal operational stage

of development (Levine & Munsch, 2011). This stage is characterized by the development of

logical reasoning and abstract thinking (Slavin, 2012). Students in the formal operational stage

use what Piaget called hypothetico-deductive reasoning: the ability to see potential and form

hypothesis to answer questions (Levine & Munsch, 2011). In the formal operational stage,

students can conceptualize and explore broad concepts such as how systems of government

affect our lives (Levine & Munsch, 2011).

Teachers can support students in the formal operational stage by asking open ended

questions, posing problem solving challenges and teaching metacognitive strategies that help

students monitor their thinking. Examples might include using simulations to explore different

systems of government; building Rube Goldberg machines; or developing business models in

math.

Piaget’s Theory of Learning

CHILD DEVELOPMENT 7

Piaget is said to have been fond of the phrase “construction is superior to instruction”

(Hendricks in Mooney, 2000, p. 61). He believed that children construct their understanding of

the world based on their experiences and interactions with their environment (Levine & Munsch,

2011). For Piaget, learning is a process of assimilation, disequilibrium, equilibrium and

accommodation (Levine & Munsch, 2011). Our existing knowledge is organized into schema:

cognitive framework that organize our experiences and understandings into categories. A child

may have a schema for vehicles that includes cars, trucks, planes and trains and all the child’s

associated understandings. This child also has a schema for people and the things they do such

as: walk, talk, eat, jog, ride bicycles. When the child sees a person roller skating, he attempts to

assimilate the new information into a schema and, because roller skates have four wheels, the

child connects with his vehicle schema and says the person has cars on their feet. However, he

realizes that roller skates do not quite fit with his existing schema for vehicles, he is confused - a

state Piaget calls “disequilibrium.” (Levine & Munsch, 2011) As he works through his new

experience, the child accommodates his schema about people to include movement with wheels

on their feet and reaches a state of equilibrium (Levine & Munsch, 2011). Piaget’s schema

theory has many applications in the classroom. Teachers can support students’ schema

development by activating prior knowledge, making connections to student’s experience and

prior learning, creating mind maps, and teaching explicitly about schema building (Miller, 2008).

Vygotsky

Now that he knows that people can move with wheels on their feet, how does the child

know what the foot wheels are called? Are they roller skates or patin a roulettes? Vygotsky’s

work helps us answer these questions. According to his theories, the answers depend on the
CHILD DEVELOPMENT 8

child’s cultural context and on social interactions in which the child hears someone talking about

roller skates or receives an explanation of roller skates from a more able peer.

Like Piaget, Vygotsky believed that learning requires active involvement in the

environment, however he also believed that learning could not be separated from its cultural

context and that social interaction is an essential ingredient in learning (Mooney, 2000).

Vygotsky proposed that young children acquire language from their family, school environment

and peers and use “private speech” to work through problems (Slavin, 2012). As children grow

older, private speech is internalized but remains important and helps children master complex

tasks (Slavin, 2012). Perhaps the most important of Vygotsky’s ideas is the zone of proximal

development: “the distance between problem-solving abilities exhibited by a learner working

alone and that learner’s problem-solving abilities when assisted by or collaborating with more

experienced people” (Daniels, 1996, p. 144). For Vygotsky, imaginative play is crucial to young

children’s development; it helps children create their zone of proximal development because they

are always stretching beyond their age (Bodrova, 2003).

Vygotsky views teachers and children as co-constructors of learning (Bodrova, 2003).

The teacher is the “guide on the side” or in Vygotskian terms, the “more able peer” enabling

students to progress in their zone of proximal development (Fernández, Wegerif, Rojas-

Drummond, 2015, p.52). He proposed that children require scaffolding to progress in their zone

of proximal development (Powell & Kalina, 2009). Thus, the teacher’s role is to carefully

observe students to determine their zone of development; to provide scaffolding to help children

structure their initial understanding; and to reduce or remove scaffolding as learners become

more competent (Daniels, 1996). If the child now wishes to learn to skate, Vygotsky does not

expect him to put on a pair of roller skates and figure it out for himself. Instead, learning begins
CHILD DEVELOPMENT 9

with scaffolding: training skates and an adult for the child to hold onto. Once the child achieves a

sense of the balance and movement needed to skate the support of the adult is removed. When he

has mastered the training skates that scaffold will be removed too, and he will continue to

progress in his zone of development on regular skates. It is not only teachers who can provide

scaffolding: peers who possess a higher level of understanding can also help children stretch

within their zone of proximal development (Mooney, 2000).

Classroom applications. Vygotsky’s theories of development and learning have many

practical applications in the classroom. Vygotsky shows us that children learn not only through

interaction with the environment but also by working with teachers and peers (Mooney, 2000).

Teachers of young children can provide options for social interaction and imaginative play,

especially with a more able peer (either a teacher or student) who provides scaffolding and

support for private speech by narrating and extending play (Mooney, 2000). Pre-assessment and

planning instruction using the gradual release of responsibility model also support scaffolding

(Miller, 2008). Cooperative group work in mixed ability groups allows students to learn from

more able peers and provides access to others’ private speech as they talk through problems

(Slavin, 2012). The zone of proximal development is a powerful concept: we must ensure that

learning goals are within our students’ zone of development and that our instruction is scaffolded

to help them progress in their zone.

Bandura’s Social Learning Theory

Now that our child has learned the basics of roller skating, he comes to the rink every

Saturday to skate. As he skates, he watches older children who skate with speed, power and

grace. They are the epitome of cool! He observes and imitates them, engaging in Bandura’s

observational learning. Albert Bandura’s social cognitive learning theory is based on the belief
CHILD DEVELOPMENT 10

that humans learn by imitating other people and processing the information they discover

(Levine & Munsch, 2011). His theory bridges cognitive and behaviorist theories of learning as it

encompasses motivation - people are motivated by the expectation that correctly imitating a

model will lead to reinforcement - and the internal mental processes involved (David, 2015).

Bandura’s theory illuminates the value and importance of modelling and vicarious learning in the

classroom.

Conditions for observational learning. Bandura outlines four phases of observational

learning. First, in the attentional phase, children pay attention to an interesting or attractive

model (Slavin, 2015). Second, in the retention phase the child observes the model, creates a

mental image, organizes the incoming information and rehearses (either mentally or physically)

the modelled behavior (David, 2015). Third, in the reproduction phase children try to match their

behavior to the model’s. In the classroom setting assessment occurs in this third phase (Slavin,

2012). Finally, in the motivational phase children receive feedback or praise to reinforce the

learned skill. In the classroom the feedback is typically a grade or teacher comment, however

children are also motivated by imagined rewards such as being cool, and vicarious rewards such

as seeing the behavior of the model reinforced (David, 2015). Research shows that both behavior

and attitudes are learned through modelling (Slavin, 2012). Whether we are intentionally

employing them or not, observational and vicarious learning are always at work in a classroom

setting.

Classroom applications. Bandura’s social learning theory makes us aware of the power

of modelling. One of its most important implications is that teachers must model the behaviors

they wish to see in their students (Slavin, 2012). If we want students to speak respectfully, we

must model respect in all or our interactions. Vicarious learning is another important part of
CHILD DEVELOPMENT 11

Bandura’s theory. To take advantage of vicarious learning, we can provide positive

reinforcement to students who are on task so that students who need redirection know which

students to imitate to receive positive reinforcement themselves. Strategies that support

Bandura’s observational learning cycle include using a hook to capture student attention;

(Burgess, 2012) explicitly modelling the skills being taught; providing worked examples or

samples of exceptional student work for children to imitate; and providing opportunities, such as

reading buddies or science partners, for younger students to work with and observe older

students.

Theories of Moral Development

Piaget

Theories of moral development have applications in classroom management and help us

understand why students behave the way that they do. Piaget described two stages of moral

development that apply to K-8 students: heteronomous morality and autonomous morality. From

the ages of about four to seven children are in the stage of heteronomous morality. They do not

truly understand why rules should be followed and base their judgements on adults. In this stage

children are not able to apply rules consistently (Levine & Munsch, 2017). Children develop

autonomous morality as they become less egocentric and sometime around age eight, they come

to see that they must follow rules to be a part of society, not because an adult tells them to

(Levine & Munsch, 2017). Self-regulation develops with autonomous morality: “the individual

who is autonomously moral follows internal convictions about the necessity of respect for

persons in relationships with others” (Devries, 1998, p.40). Piaget’s stages of morality provide

insight into appropriate classroom rules and expectations and they type of reasoning that we can

expect children to use in following the rules.

CHILD DEVELOPMENT 12

Kohlberg & Lickona

Lawrence Kohlberg further developed Piaget’s stages of moral development and Thomas

Lickona built upon Kohlberg’s work. Lickona’s (1994) stages include “unquestioned obedience”

(p.36) in which children around kindergarten age do as they are told by authority figures to stay

out of trouble. Lickona (1994) describes the moral development of early elementary children as

“what’s in it for me?” (p.37) or fairness. This stage has a transactional nature, in which children

are good to those who are good to them and evaluate the benefits of choosing certain behaviors

over others. Behaviorist rewards programs are likely to be effective with students in this stage

although they may not help students move forward in their development. In the upper elementary

grades, students enter the interpersonal conformity stage. Peer approval becomes more important

than adult approval and children follow (or break) rules to earn the respect of their peers and to

improve their own self-image (Lickona, 1994). Research has found that children’s thinking is

often more sophisticated than theories of moral development give credit for, (Slavin, 2012)

however the stages and their characteristics are helpful for teachers as a general guide.

Classroom applications. Teachers can accommodate children's moral development by

adjusting their classroom management structures and activities to match the developmental level

of their students. A kindergarten teacher might have a tattling turtle in the classroom while a

fourth-grade teacher might have students choose a reward for good behavior. We can provide

support for children's moral development by providing opportunities for children to play

cooperatively and resolve conflicts on their own - this is how Piaget believed children moved

from heteronomous to autonomous morality; (Furth, 1987) by using literature to present moral

dilemmas - which is how Kohlberg believed children advanced (Slavin, 2012); and by creating

positive group norms for upper elementary students (Lickona, 1994).

CHILD DEVELOPMENT 13

Theories of Learning and Development in My Classroom

The Kindergarten Insect Science Centers are an example of how I use theories of

learning and development in my teaching. The Insect Science Centers included a tank of

ladybugs with three different types of food and magnifying glasses for students to use to observe

the insects; trays of mealworms with microscopes for children to use to examine the insects; a

dramatic play bee center with pattern blocks; and a puzzle center with insect habitat puzzles.

First, we worked together as a class to create a KWL chart about insects which activated

students’ prior knowledge and helped uncover misconceptions and questions. For the next three

days, small groups rotated through each center making observations, asking questions, building

models and writing or drawing about what they had learned. A teacher or paraprofessional

supported the groups working with the ladybugs and mealworms. The adult modelled the use of

the science tools and scaffolded the exploration by asking open ended questions and encouraging

students to extend their thinking. In the dramatic play center, students used what we had learned

about bees to create beehives and act out the roles of queen bee, worker bee, builder bees and

nurse bees. The dramatic play helped them explore the science concepts and build the social

skills they need to move beyond preoperational egocentric thinking.

The Insect Science Centers provided hands on experiences that allowed our

preoperational thinkers to interact with insects and learn how to use science tools in a

developmentally appropriate way. As they worked together, students engaged in social learning.

They talked through theories, asked questions and had access to the thinking of others. The

explorations were student centered with adults providing scaffolding and modelling to support

the construction of knowledge.

Conclusion
CHILD DEVELOPMENT 14

Eight or nine years after he first encountered people with cars on their feet, a young man

on rollerblades zooms along the bike path in the late afternoon sun. He skates powerfully and

gracefully and with terrifying speed. It is amazing to think of all the experiences, practice,

physical and cognitive processes that went into making him a competent skater. His parents held

him up for those first tentative skates. His brother egged him to go faster as his confidence grew.

His third-grade teacher shared her collection of rollerblades with his class and helped him

transition from skates to blades. A friend taught him to skate backwards and play roller hockey.

Parents and teachers provided him with appropriate materials, opportunities and scaffolding, but

he learned through experience how to push off with each foot and keep his balance. His

competence developed through interaction with the world, trial and error, observation, practice

and with the help of more able peers. The child, whether he is stumbling on training skates, or

gliding with grace, is what teaching is all about. Understanding his development and how he

learns is essential in creating meaningful learning experiences that build competence.

CHILD DEVELOPMENT 15

References

Bodrova, E. (2003). Vygotsky and Montessori: One dream, two visions. Montessori Life, 15(1),

30-33.

Burgess, D (2012). Teach like a pirate. San Diego, CA: Dave Burgess Consulting.

David L, (2015). Social learning theory (Bandura). Learning Theories, June 19, 2015. Retrieved

from: https://www.learning-theories.com/social-learning-theory-bandura.html.

DeVries, R. (1998). Implications of Piaget's constructivist theory for character education. Action

in Teacher Education, 20(4), 39-47.

Daniels, H. (1996). Introduction to Vygotsky. London, UK: Routledge, 1996.

Fernández, M., Mercer, N., Wegerif, R., & Rojas-Drummond, S. (2015). Re-conceptualizing

"scaffolding" and the zone of proximal development in the context of symmetrical

collaborative learning. Journal of Classroom Interaction, 50(1), 54-72.

Furth, H. G. (1972). Piaget for teachers. Englewood Cliff, NJ: Prentice -Hall Inc.

Gredler, M. (2012). Understanding Vygotsky for the classroom: Is it too late? Educational

Psychology Review, 24(1), 113-131.

Harvey, S. & Goudvis, A. (2007). Strategies that work: Teaching comprehension for

understanding and engagement. Portland, ME: Stenhouse Publishers.

Levine, A. E., & Munsch, J. (2011). Child development: An active learning approach. Thousand

Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Inc.

Lickona, T. (1994). Raising good children. New York, NY: Bantam.

Miller, D. (2008). Teaching with intention: defining beliefs, aligning practice, taking action.

Portland, ME: Stenhouse Publishers.

CHILD DEVELOPMENT 16

Mooney, C. G. (2000). Theories of childhood: An introduction to Dewey, Montessori, Erikson,

Piaget & Vygotsky. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Redleaf Press.

Powell, K. C., & Cody J. K. (2009). Cognitive and social constructivism: developing tools for an

effective classroom. Education, 130(2) 241 – 250.

Slavin, Robert E. (2012) Educational psychology: theory and practice. 10th edition. Boston,

MA: Pearson.