In problem solving, Piaget explains that when a child experiences conflict between their expectancies of a situation and their actual findings, children may rethink the situation and new knowledge can develop. Also, he continues to add that learning is a constructive process. Actively engaged students can incorporate information into their own schemes.
Limitations of his theory are brought about by those who dispute why thinking develops the way it does. Firstly, some argue the existence of stages. If there are separate stages, then when a child masters a set of operations, he/she should be consistent in solving all problems requiring those operations. Secondly, some argue that Piaget underestimated the cognitive abilities of younger children. His theory doesn't explain how some younger children can perform at an advanced level, abstract thinking, if the child has a highly developed knowledge or expertise in a certain area.
The children I observed were in two different groups. The main group I will discuss was a first grade class of 12 students, aged 6 and 7. The second group was a reading group, which came to the cooperating teacher's classroom for one period each day. They were a group of 7 and 8-year-old second graders. I asked questions only to the first graders who are in Piaget's pre-operational stage, explained earlier.
Math period included letting the children figure out the date, using each other for help. The cooperating teacher explained the seven days of the week. Then, she asks the children which days of the week they don't go to school. With prompting the children said Saturday and Sunday. Then the teacher asked the children how many days they go to school, "if there are seven days a week, and we don't go to school two days, how many days do we go to school?" They had trouble reversing their thinking to subtract the weekend, which supports Piaget's theory that suggests they should have trouble with reversibility.
