Human development involves systematic increases in each of the three key domains: cognitive, physical, and social. The coordination between the affected functional areas ultimately determines the form and nature of a human being. The area of interest in this essay is cognitive development with a specific bias to its nature in infancy and early childhood. Cognitive development pertains to growth and change in mental/ intellectual abilities that include thinking, learning, and language (Boyd " Bee 2014). The understanding of cognitive development in early years is influenced by theoretical research from the twentieth century. The main players here are Jean Piaget (1896-1980) and Lev Vygotsky (1896-1934). Piaget focused on the biological influences on cognition with development revolving around changes into mental operations. However, Vygotsky was more concerned with the influence of social interaction on cognition and behaviour. In infancy, senses and movement are influential in the individual learning about the world, as described in Piaget’s sensorimotor stage. The infant also learns about goal-directed behaviour and object permanence during this stage hence developing some knowledge of their environment. Early childhood marks Piaget’s preoperational stage which is marked by aspects such as symbolic thinking and acquisition of the skill of conversation. Accordingly, this essay will explore, in detail, the cognitive developments in infancy and childhood as informed by Piaget, Vygotsky, and current research. Both scholars have provided educators and caregivers with essential views on the development of the child. While both Piaget and Vygotsky both offer essential views on cognitive development in children, Vygotskian principles are more practical and useful when it comes to knowledge acquisition in children.
The perception of infancy and early childhood before the 20th century was they were passive and straightforward stages concerning intellectual progress. Contrary to the mainstream view, infants and very young children are always stimulating their mental capacities by learning, thinking, and exploring. Scholars such as Piaget and Vygotsky are responsible for the paradigm shift. Research has described a wide range of cognitive competencies that show the remarkable progression of intellectual abilities during infancy and early childhood (Dehaene-Lambertz " Spelke 2015). The milestones range from seeing all colours in the human visual spectrum to responding to facial expressions.
Piaget’s observation of children’s thinking and his subsequent research culminated in the theory of cognitive development. The premise of the theoretical framework is that intelligence is not a fixed strait. Instead, he theorised that intellectual abilities evolve throughout one’s lifetime due to biological development and interaction with the environment (Barrouillet 2015). An individual’s behaviour is controlled through schema which are mental arrangements that one uses to represent and understand the world. Piaget hypothesised that there is a biological drive to achieve equilibrium between the schema and the environment. An infant is born with a schema known as reflexes which the individual uses to develop constructed schema (Zelazo 2017). To adapt to the environment, the individual uses assimilation and accommodation. The former involves transforming the environment so that it can fit into existing cognitive structures, while the latter involves changing cognitive structures for them to accept a new aspect from the environment. As the complexity of the schema increases, they are organised hierarchically. The cognitive development process inspired the development of four universal stages in the development of intellectual skills: “sensorimotor, pre-operational, concrete operational and formal operational.”
Infancy and early childhood are represented by the sensorimotor and the pre-operational stage respectively, in Piaget’s theory. Intelligence is manifested through motor activity during the sensorimotor stage. The learning process involves physical stimuli such as looking, touching, sucking, and grasping. Successful learning is achieved through coordinating physical movements with incoming sensory data. Infants seek to interact with the environment, which may lead to different consequences. Experiences learnt during this stage mark the start of understanding cause-and-effect relationships (Gutman " Feinstein 2010). Infants have limited knowledge of the world because it is based on physical interactions at this stage. The development of memory is observed in the latter parts of the stage when infants develop object permanence (Sirois and Jackson 2012). The child also begins to understand the implications of their actions. The result of this is that a child in this stage can modify their behaviour to achieve individual goals. Another important observation in the sensorimotor stage is that while children can reverse actions, they lack the reverse thinking ability (Camaioni 2017, p.84).
In the preoperational stage, the child has not become thoroughly proficient in their mental operations. The implication is rather than thinking through actions, children in this stage think about things symbolically (Carmel " Yezierski 2013). Another feature associated with this stage is egocentrism. The development is based on a child's assumption that everyone shares their perspective. As a result, children in the preoperational stage engage in collective monologues instead of actively interacting with other children. This development is indicative of the acquisition of the skill of conversation even if it is still limited to the self at the moment. Thinking also develops significantly in the preoperational stage. However, like infants, children in the preoperational stage are incapable of reversible thinking. Piaget created the conservation problem of liquid and volume to prove that children at the preoperational had not yet developed the critical cognitive skill.
Piaget’s theory has been applied across the world by teachers and parents. An understanding of the various stages and ability levels at each stage has evolved into effective teaching strategies. One can explain the use of actions and verbal instruction in early childhood using principles gained from the theory of cognitive development. At this age, the child lacks mastery in mental operations. Therefore, the caregiver or teacher must demonstrate their instructions (Anderson et al. 2014). The short concentration span associated with children in the stage also necessitates the use of visual aids. Encouraging active participation during activities in both the sensorimotor and the preoperational stages aids with learning complex skills in the future. Tolerance is also necessary when handling children in the preoperational stage since their thinking is still egocentric.
Lev Vygotsky offered an alternative view of cognitive development in his sociocultural theory. The central claim of the theory is children learn through social interaction and their culture. This point of view is based on the understanding that humans are social beings through dialogues with more skilled individuals in the society, we learn cultural values (Scribner 2013, p.117). The Zone of Proximal Development plays a critical role in children’s learning according to the sociocultural theory. A child in the zone for a specific task can accomplish the task successfully with the appropriate amount of assistance (Kuusisaari, 2014). The instructions received are then organised existing schemas to aid the future goal of performing the specific task independently. Children are part of a sociocultural framework and interaction with adults plays a crucial role in their learning. The adults are responsible for directing and organising learning experiences to ensure internalisation and mastery. Children can also learn from peers if the latter possess a higher skill level about a particular task.
The sociocultural theory of cognitive development also proposes the scaffolding concept as essential children's learning. The principle refers to the temporary support afforded by a more skilled individual such as a parent or teacher to help the child perform a task independently. An example of a technique associated with scaffolding is providing the child with hints or clues for problem-solving. The rationale behind scaffolding is to help the child learn how to approach the problem in the future. In this regard, a skilled instructor will alter the quality and quantity of scaffolding to meet the child's needs. The support is removed once the child can complete the task in question independently (Smit, van Eerde " Bakker 2013).
The development of language is an essential component of cognitive development in infancy and early childhood. According to Vygotsky, language is a representation of a peoples' beliefs and value system. Children learn the language in a similar way to how they learn other cognitive skills. An important aspect of this process is private speech which refers to self-talk that children use to aid thinking and to guide actions. The sociocultural theory considers private speech as important since it is considered as self-directed regulation (Goodman " Goodman 2014, p.105). This position differs from Piaget’s view that private speech was an indication of immaturity and a child’s egocentric tendencies.
The sociocultural theory acknowledges that the social component is essential in both cognitive and psychosocial development. As a result, research in developmental psychology has shifted from concentrating on the individual to focusing on larger interactional units such as parent and child. The perspective offered by Vygotsky also made people realise that variability between cultures or subcultures could affect cognitive development in children (Eun 2010). This knowledge has helped prevent the generalisation of developmental experiences of children. Vygotsky’s approach has encouraged teacher-student collaboration in the formative years and the active participation of children in their learning process.
The influence of Piaget and Vygotsky in developmental psychology is attributable to the transformative effect of their theoretical frameworks. The two differ in their approach to cognitive development, but both offer essential insights to parents and teachers. However, Vygotsky’s practical approach to cognitive development in children makes it a better option during infancy and early childhood. The more skilled individual, who could be a parent or a teacher, is an active member in the child’s education. The support offered by such individuals not only expedites the learning process but also enhances mastery. The concept of guided discovery is superior to Piaget’s stance on discovery learning with little support from a parent or a teacher (Alfieri et al. 2011). The latter can lead to frustration thus hindering a child’s learning process. Assistance from a knowledgeable source, on the other hand, boosts a child’s confidence. In addition to assisting, scaffolding also provides a chance for the parent or teacher to offer feedback concerning new information (Pentimonti " Justice 2010). Vygotsky emphasised that social tools are essential in the development of cognitive skills. In the modern context, these include the media, computers, and books. A knowledge source using Vygotskian methods would, therefore, ensure that children are provided with appropriate tools for learning. In this context, the parent would acquire age-appropriate toys and books to support learning (Mercer " Howe 2012). The integration of peer learning also emphasises the superiority of Vygotsky’s principles. Children are encouraged to interact with each other through dialogues and scaffolding. This approach can help children internalise new information hence gain a better understanding of a skill or concept (Wenger 2010). The useful strategies that children learn from adults or their peers can be utilised later and help in problem-solving. The importance of Vygotsky’s principles is also apparent when one considers today’s diverse classroom. Teachers must acknowledge their students’ cultural background and language since the two play essential roles in knowledge construction.
The development of cognitive skills is a gradual process that involves the interaction of many factors; both internal and external. Formative years provide the perfect basis to study knowledge acquisition and dissemination by the human brain. The theories by Piaget and Vygotsky contributed to the understanding of cognition in children as evidenced by many teaching strategies employed today. Piaget’s biological approach contributes to a better understanding of the mechanisms behind cognitive behaviour observed in children. Vygotsky’s approach, on the other hand, explains how social interaction contributes to learning. Vygotskian principles are, however, superior because they foster a better learning environment for children and increase mastery of skills. A teacher using methods advocated by Vygotsky would be an active member in the student's learning experience. Principles such as scaffolding, educational tools, and co-constructed knowledge are critical components of the knowledge acquisition process. By considering cultural variabilities, Vygotsky’s theory is more appropriate for the modern age where diversity is a common theme across learning institutions. A parent or teacher should always seek to help children in need and provide them with the necessary tools to foster the learning process. These considerations make the sociocultural theory a superior offering due to its positive outlook on cognitive development.
The Development of Motor Skills from Birth to Adolescence
Motor development is perhaps the most observable of all human development processes. Changes can be detected even before birth and persist throughout an individual's life. Motor development involves the following aspects: movement, motion, excellent motor skills, and delayed motor development. Although motor development varies from one individual to the other due to both internal and external factors, there are reasonable expectations of motor development milestones from birth through adolescence (Puciato et al. 2011). The milestones have been explained variously by theorists, with the primary schools of thought being maturational theories of movement and dynamic systems theories. This essay will review and analyse information based on theory and research evidence on motor skills development from birth to adolescence. The dynamic systems model offers more insight into a developmental change from birth to adolescence and can inform movement interventions.
The 1930s and 1940s are crucial periods in developmental psychology due to the pioneering work of scholars such as Arnold Gesell (1880-1961) and Myrtle McGraw (1899-1988). The former is credited with the development of the maturation theory which maintains that growth and development are influenced by their genes and environment (Greene 2013 p.2). However, Gesell gave prominence to intrinsic factors such as genes. According to the maturation theory, the rate of physical development is dependent on the growth of the central nervous system. The explanation of motor development after birth is explained by a genetically predetermined head-to-foot trend (Lubans et al., 2010). Therefore, after birth babies will first attain control over their tongues and lips. Motor developments that follow after this are eye movements, control over the neck and other upper body parts such as arms, and finally the movement of the feet. According to the theory, individual differences observed in motor skills development are attributable to internal genetic mechanisms (Green and Piel, 2015). Gesell appreciated the role of sociocultural factors in motor development but insisted intervention should concur with the genetic maturational timetable. The theory assumes that children would master motor skills naturally through inner urges.
Modern developmental psychologists have challenged the maturation theory for its simple interpretation of early development. McGraw also disputed the maturational theories through her research findings. Rather than the development of motor skills being a predetermined process, McGraw argued that it involves frequent alterations in the pace and complexity interactions between behaviour and brain growth (Cicchetti 2014, p.34). However, she agreed that the nervous system had to grow to meet the increased demand for coordination. This claim was justified by the fact that balance is the biggest challenge for babies learning to walk. Another significant departure from the maturational theory is that McGraw maintained and proved that early stimulation promotes the development of motor skills (Clark 2017). McGraw’s research focused on growth and learning and hence remains a relevant source of information for parents and researchers.
Further research in motor development made researchers realise that the process was more multidimensional than initially thought. Scholars such as Esther Thelen (1941-2004) rethought motor development challenging the dominating view that motor development was decided by neural maturation (Sameroff 2010). Thelen also argued that developmental milestones described by pioneers such as Gesell and McGraw made motor development rigid and gradual unfolding of movements. This stance eventually led to the application of dynamic systems thinking to motor development. The guiding principle of the dynamic systems model is that “development can only be understood as the multiple, mutual, and continuous interaction of all levels of the developing system, from the molecular to the cultural” (Spencer, Perone, " Buss 2011). The development of motor skills is, therefore, the consequence of complex interactions between various subsystems in the body, the environment, and the task in question. Motor development evolves and proceeds in a non-linear manner (Hadders-Algra 2010). The detailed approach enabled Thelen and her contemporaries to analyse how movement behaviours change and in extension how learning occurs.
A specific motor skill that Thelen studied is the stepping behaviour of infants. Existing knowledge at the time was that when infants are held upright, they will start stepping as though they want to walk. The behaviour is inconsistent since it disappears after some months but then re-emerges later. The explanation by maturation theories is that infants acquire and then lose motor control programs based on reflexes (Campos et al. 2012). The development of mental skills is therefore dependent on the maturity of the central nervous system. However, Thelen challenged this view when she created stepping behaviour in infants who were perceived to lack the necessary nervous system maturity. Thelen induced behaviour by altering the environment when she partially submerged the infant’s feet in the water. The experiment proved that CNS programming was not the critical factor in motor development (Thelen 2013, p.115). Thelen asserted that development varies between individuals, depends on a great extent on context, and can be accomplished variously (Stergiou and Kyvelidou, 2013). Significant non-linear changes can, therefore, explain changes in motor behaviour from birth to adolescence. This discovery helped explain why the rate of motor development varies between individuals.
The development of motor skills is a crucial component of human development. The view of motor development has evolved due to empirical research over the years. The increased understanding of motor development has improved how parents and educators deal with problems in motor skills. Maturation of the nervous plays a significant role in the development of motor skills. However, other subsystems also influence movement behaviour. The study of the various subsystems by modern scholars like Thelen demonstrated that change in a specific subsystem could act as a control variable. The modern dynamic systems perspective has encouraged movement interventions hence helping motor development in young children. Appreciation of the interaction of multiple variables in the development of motor skills marks a departure from the simplistic view offered in traditional theories. The practicality of dynamic systems point of view has not only helped expedite motor development but also been invaluable in the rehabilitation of injured and deformed individuals.
References
ListAlfieri, L, Brooks, PJ, Aldrich, NJ " Tenenbaum, HR 2011, ‘Does discovery-based instruction enhance learning?’ Journal of Educational Psychology, 103(1), p.1.
Anderson, GT, Spainhower, AR, Sharp, AC 2014, ‘Preschool; “Where Do the Bears Go?” The Value of Child-Directed Play’, YC Young Children 69, 8–15.
Barrouillet, P 2015, ‘Theories of cognitive development: From Piaget to today’, Developmental Review, 38, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2015.07.004.
Boyd, DG " Bee, HL 2014, Lifespan development. 6th
ed. London: Pearson.
Camaioni, L 2017, ‘The development of intentional communication: A re-analysis’, In New Perspectives in Early Communicative Development
(pp. 82-96). Routledge.
Campos, D, Gonçalves, VMG, Guerreiro, MM, Santos, DC, Goto, MM, Arias, AV " Campos-Zanelli, TM 2012, ‘Comparison of motor and cognitive performance in infants during the first year of life’, Pediatric Physical Therapy, 24(2), pp.193-197.
Carmel, JH, Yezierski, EJ 2013, ‘Are We Keeping the Promise? Investigation of Students’ Critical Thinking Growth’, Journal of College Science Teaching
42, 71–81.
Cicchetti, D 2014, ‘How a child builds a brain: Insights from normality and psychopathology’, In Child Psychology in Retrospect and Prospect
(pp. 23-71). Psychology Press.
Clark, JE 2017, ‘Pentimento: A 21st century view on the canvas of motor development’, Kinesiology Review, 6(3), pp.232-239.
Dehaene-Lambertz, G, Spelke, ES 2015, ‘The infancy of the human brain’, Neuron 88, 93–109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2015.09.026.
Eun, B 2010, ‘From learning to development: A sociocultural approach to instruction’, Cambridge Journal of Education, 40(4), pp.401-418.
Goodman, YM " Goodman, KS 2014, ‘Vygotsky in a whole language perspective’, In Making Sense of Learners Making Sense of Written Language
(pp. 98-114). Routledge.
Gutman, LM " Feinstein, L 2010, ‘Parenting behaviours and children’s development from infancy to early childhood: Changes, continuities and contributions’, Early Child Development and Care, 180(4), pp.535-556.
Green, MG " Piel, JA 2015, Theories of human development: A comparative approach. Psychology Press.
Greene, S 2013, ‘Child development: Old themes and new directions’, In A Century of Psychology (Psychology Revivals) (pp. 60-77). Routledge.
Hadders-Algra, M 2010, ‘Variation and variability: Key words in human motor development’, Physical Therapy, 90(12), pp.1823-1837.
Kuusisaari, H 2014, ‘Teachers at the zone of proximal development–Collaboration promoting or hindering the development process’, Teaching and Teacher Education, 43, pp.46-57.
Lubans, DR, Morgan, PJ, Cliff, DP, Barnett, LM " Okely, AD 2010, ‘Fundamental movement skills in children and adolescents,’ Sports Medicine, 40(12), pp.1019-1035.
Mercer, N " Howe, C 2012, ‘Explaining the dialogic processes of teaching and learning: The value and potential of sociocultural theory’, Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 1(1), pp.12-21.
Pentimonti, JM " Justice, LM 2010, ‘Teachers’ use of scaffolding strategies during read-alouds in the preschool classroom’, Early Childhood Education Journal, 37(4), p.241.
Puciato, D, Mynarski, W, Rozpara, M, Borysiuk, Z, Szyguła, R 2011, ‘Motor Development of Children and Adolescents Aged 8–16 Years in View of Their Somatic Build and Objective Quality of Life of Their Families’, J Hum Kinet 28, 45–53. https://doi.org/10.2478/v10078-011-0021-1.
Sameroff, A 2010, ‘A unified theory of development: A dialectic integration of nature and nurture’, Child Development, 81(1), pp.6-22.
Scribner, S 2013, ‘A sociocultural approach to the study of mind’, In Theories of the evolution of knowing (pp. 113-126). Psychology Press.
Sirois, S " Jackson, IR 2012, ‘Pupil dilation and object permanence in infants’ Infancy, 17(1), pp.61-78.
Smit, J, AA van Eerde, H " Bakker, A 2013, ‘A conceptualisation of whole‐class scaffolding’ British Educational Research Journal, 39(5), pp.817-834.
Spencer, JP, Perone, S " Buss, AT 2011, ‘Twenty years and going strong: A dynamic systems revolution in motor and cognitive development’, Child Development Perspectives, 5(4), pp.260-266.
Stergiou, N, Yu, Y " Kyvelidou, A 2013, ‘A perspective on human movement variability with applications in infancy motor development’, Kinesiology Review, 2(1), pp.93-102.
Thelen, E 2013, ‘Timing and developmental dynamics in the acquisition of early motor skills’, In Developmental Time and Timing
(pp. 103-122). Psychology Press.
Wenger, E 2010, ‘Communities of practice and social learning systems: the career of a concept’, In Social learning systems and communities of practice (pp. 179-198). Springer, London.
Zelazo, PR 2017, ‘The year-old infant: A period of major cognitive change’, In Regressions in Mental Development (pp. 47-80). Routledge.
