Question 3.

In lecture and in the textbook, theories of cognitive development in childhood have

been presented as fundamentally incompatible. For example, Piaget's view of the development of
children's self-directed, or private, speech as egocentrism seems to contrast sharply with
Vygotsky's view of it as progressive internalization of thought. Similarly, Piaget’s account of
acquisition of conservation as a logico-mathematical insight seems incompatible with the
Information Processing claim that it reflects the acquisitions of reasoning strategies or specific
knowledge/experience. The Nativist claim that acquiring a “theory of mind” reflects the revision
of a theory appears fundamentally different than the Vygotskian notion that children are
cognitively socialized into talking about the mental world. Finally Cognitive Developmentalists,
Freudians, and Behaviorists disagree about whether the focus of moral development should be
moral thought, emotions, or behaviors. Focus on any one of these phenomena or any other (e.g.,
math, literacy, logic, development of self, emotions, pretense, gender identity, abstract thinking,
etc.) with apparently incompatible theoretical accounts of its development. Then argue either that
the theoretical accounts really are incompatible or that there is a way to integrate them. Be
explicit about the source of the apparent inconsistency and why they really are incompatible or
how you can reconcile them!
Question 3. In lecture and in the textbook, theories of cognitive development in childhood have
been presented as fundamentally incompatible. For example, Piaget's view of the development of
children's self-directed, or private, speech as egocentrism seems to contrast sharply with
Vygotsky's view of it as progressive internalization of thought. Similarly, Piaget’s account of
acquisition of conservation as a logico-mathematical insight seems incompatible with the
Information Processing claim that it reflects the acquisitions of reasoning strategies or specific
knowledge/experience. The Nativist claim that acquiring a “theory of mind” reflects the revision
of a theory appears fundamentally different than the Vygotskian notion that children are
cognitively socialized into talking about the mental world. Finally Cognitive Developmentalists,
Freudians, and Behaviorists disagree about whether the focus of moral development should be
moral thought, emotions, or behaviors. Focus on any one of these phenomena or any other (e.g.,
math, literacy, logic, development of self, emotions, pretense, gender identity, abstract thinking,
etc.) with apparently incompatible theoretical accounts of its development. Then argue either that
the theoretical accounts really are incompatible or that there is a way to integrate them. Be
explicit about the source of the apparent inconsistency and why they really are incompatible or
how you can reconcile them!
Question 3. In lecture and in the textbook, theories of cognitive development in childhood have
been presented as fundamentally incompatible. For example, Piaget's view of the development of
children's self-directed, or private, speech as egocentrism seems to contrast sharply with
Vygotsky's view of it as progressive internalization of thought. Similarly, Piaget’s account of
acquisition of conservation as a logico-mathematical insight seems incompatible with the
Information Processing claim that it reflects the acquisitions of reasoning strategies or specific
knowledge/experience. The Nativist claim that acquiring a “theory of mind” reflects the revision
of a theory appears fundamentally different than the Vygotskian notion that children are
cognitively socialized into talking about the mental world.
Question 1. In the lecture on Brain Development, brain functioning was characterized as
becoming faster, more efficient, and better controlled and organized through specialized and
non-specialized neurological mechanisms. Imagine you are a Neuropsychologist writing a grant
to explore the role of the brain changes in development. The grant application is asking you to
identify a particular developmental change (other than language) that shows the most promise to
have neurological underpinnings. Like any grant applicant, you must justify your thinking: Why
do you think there is a correspondence between your candidate ability, skill (etc.) and brain
development? Your argument should outline why you think that there is a potential connection
between brain development and your candidate acquisition. Remember, you are not attempting to
describe how mental functions are caused by neurological ones, only that the parallel between
brain development and your particular acquisition is worthy of continued investigation by those
interested in such questions about mind/body relationships.

Finally Cognitive Developmentalists, Freudians, and Behaviorists disagree about whether the
focus of moral development should be moral thought, emotions, or behaviors. Focus on any one
of these phenomena or any other (e.g., math, literacy, logic, development of self, emotions,
pretense, gender identity, abstract thinking, etc.) with apparently incompatible theoretical
accounts of its development. Then argue either that the theoretical accounts really are
incompatible or that there is a way to integrate them. Be explicit about the source of the apparent
inconsistency and why they really are incompatible or how you can reconcile them!