Chapter 2 Cognitive, Language, and Literacy Development.

Description:

            The focus of chapter 2 was centered on cognitive development in various stages of a child’s life. The chapter introduced Piaget, Vygotsky, and Bronfenbrenner’s theories on the development of cognition and learning, as well as some of the strengths and weaknesses of each theory.

 

Analysis:

            In order for students to learn, educators must have a robust understanding of how children perceive, think, learn about their environment, and apply understanding.  Educators should use this knowledge to construct effective learning opportunities that are attainable and facilitate true understanding. Jean Piaget’s theories of the stages of cognitive development are arguably a foundational stone in constructing developmentally appropriate lessons, assessments, and learning experiences. Piaget used four stages associated with a child's age to define and group skills that a child is expected to experience (Slavin, 2012). These stages describe how children move from concrete to abstract thinking, and the mindset associated with those stages is important to consider (Slavin, 2012). An example of this would be that according to Piaget, students in the preoperational stage cannot imagine the world or a situation from the perspective; therefore, any hypothetical task is not best suited for this age or stage of development (Slavin, 2012).

            Teachers should also understand Piaget’s stages and “timeline” for cognitive development are not infallible. There is some dispute that learning is more fluid and that when students are presented with the proper education and experiences, some children may exceed their assigned development stage. Slavin points out that some researchers contend that the development of skills depends on the tasks that students are presented, “…their experience (including direct teaching in school or elsewhere) can have a strong influence on the pace of development) can have a strong influence on the pace of development” (2012). This statement should prompt educators to consider the experiences and supports they provide to students and not limit their instructional approach to Piaget’s stages of development.

            The Neo-Piaget theorists proclaim “that training and experience, including social interactions, can accelerate children’s development” (Slavin, 2012). This interpretation of the stages of development couples well with Vygotsky’s of proximal distance. Learning does not occur when the tasks are too simple or out of a student’s cognitive capability. This theory supports the idea that teachers should provide challenging and rigorous work for students that is ultimately attainable, “s tasks that a child has not yet learned but is capable of learning at a given time” (Slavin, 2012). This idea supports instructional strategies such as gradual release and modeling. Teachers should support students in the beginning stages and construct experiences that move students towards a learning objective as an independent learner.

            Moving forward, educators should be aware of the cognitive stage of development, but also explore broadening their planning and instructional approaches in order to propel students forward with authentic experiences. Each theorist discussed maintain that experiences and collaborations are vital to internalized understanding.

 Slavin describes a developmentally appropriate as, “environments, curriculum, materials, and instruction that are suitable for students in terms of their physical and cognitive abilities and their social and emotional needs.” (Slavin, 2012). Educators should be aware of the developmental needs of their students and strive to meet those needs when constructing lessons.

Reflection:

            I have always enjoyed learning about how the mind works. My favorite undergraduate class was cognition and development, and that was where I first learned about the theorists discussed in this chapter. As a student, I never realized how important this information truly was for a teacher. For me, learning cognitive development and learning in students meant that educators need to analyze and meet a student where they are at cogitatively and deliver experiences that guide them to authentic learning. I believe that the most effective teachers could also be confused for mind readers. They just know students well enough to provide them what they need, when they needed it, and how to let students fly on their own.

            Understanding how students think and how they perceive the world is fundamental for planning a lesson or unit. There are things that adults take for granted, and one of the most difficult things is to remember what it was like to “not know” something. Every student that walks through my door each August has never multiplied a decimal. I have taught it for 4 years. Each student that comes to me has never thought about animal cells. I was a pre-vet student. Therefore, taking the time to reflect on this information and building my instructional strategies around what it is like to “not know” has helped me grow as an educator. I am ashamed to admit that I cannot always see information from a student’s perspective. I am also guilty of try to complete the “teacher version” of shoving a square block into a round hole when it comes to some content. I am proud to say I have grown and can weave more meaningful strategies into my lessons, but I still struggle.

            Despite how much I adore this content, I worry that some people may look for concrete strategies inside a classroom. In my experience, people need obvious criteria to hold educators or students too. Those rigid standards would only limit the freedom of learning. You can this with Piaget’s theories. He tried to define each stage, but research proves that learning is more fluid. So, I believe one of the most negative sides of this topic is the lack of surety and variability. 

            Regarding what this information means to me as an educator and what it means to my classroom the only word I have at this moment is frustration. The math curriculum my district uses does not align with the content from this chapter. There are no teachers in our building that feel the curriculum is appropriate for our students, but due to whatever reasons, we must use it. I am afforded very little control of the lessons and groupings of my student. We are discouraged from altering the lessons despite what we feel students need. Learning that there are theories that are being ignored by our curriculums or curriculum team is tremendously disheartening for me as a teacher. However, this only feeds my passion for learning more. I am determined to weave what strategies I can into my classroom and lessons.

I am thankful that I also teach another content area, science, that is not as regulated as my math class. I hope to use what I have learned from this chapter to launch me into a deeper understanding of student cognitive development, thus broadening my instructional approaches to ultimately become a more inclusive and responsive educator for any content that I teach.  

Reference

 Slavin, R. E. (2012). Educational psychology: Theory and practice (10th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education.