Excerpt: The thesis of the present paper is that activity-dependent multimodal experience is a core mechanism creating developmental change. This is certainly a classic idea in perceptual learning (e.g., Held and Hein 1963) but also one receiving increasing attention, in cognition and cognitive neuroscience (Barsalou et al. 2005; Martin and Chao 2001; Pulvermüller 1999; Pulvermuller et al. 2005) and in computational studies of learning (Lungarella et al. 2005; Lungarella and Sporns 2005). Here, we review behavioral evidence from human development, evidence that suggests that transformative change is driven by the sensor-motor coordinations of an active agent in a physical world.

Piaget’s logical model of formal operations is problematic since it is unclear how Piaget’s logic should be understood. In a recent review, Braine and Rumain conclude that neither of the two available interpretations is adequate. Under one interpretation, formulae which should be compatible are incompatible in Piaget’s logic. Under the other interpretation, formulae which should be incompatible are compatible in Piaget’s logic. A constructivist interpretation is outlined so as to overcome these weaknesses. It is proposed that the attribution of formal operational thinking depends upon an individual’s generalization of classificatory abilities which are present during concrete operations. Each of the formal operations has a unique specification in terms of the 16 patterns inherent in such classifications. Access to formal operations does not require conscious awareness of propositional symbolism. The interpretation is shown to be minimally adequate in avoiding the objections which invalidate existing interpretations. The interpretation is taken to exemplify two features of Piaget’s constructivism, namely the differentiation and integration of understanding which has a modal character.

Review of: Constructivism and education, edited by Marie Larochelle, Nadine Bednarz & Jim Garrison. Cambridge University Press, 1998

Eduardo Martí (Chapter 5, this volume) has presented a perceptive account of Piaget’s intellectual journey comprising a biographical sketch with pointers to his constructs, reasons for their decline, and an inventory of principles for further attention in developmental science. These principles merit attention, even though they are merely listed without adequate guidance about their interpretation. Thus, my commentary includes an outline of Piaget’s research programme and a critique of the factors cited by Martí as related to its decline. Following this, I present an analysis of the six principles proposed as a valuable legacy of Piagetian thinking, namely: epistemology of development; interdisciplinarity; explanatory non-reductionism; action, organization, development; epigenesis; and methodological diversity.

Open peer commentary on the article “A Temporal Puzzle: Metamorphosis of the Body in Piaget’s Early Writings” by Marc J. Ratcliff. Abstract: Ratcliff’s target article is an insightful introduction to a major corpus, the journal comprising the notes of Jean and Valentine Piaget in their studies of their three children. These studies were part of a research program in what Jean Piaget called “genetic epistemology.” My commentary focuses on a series of epistemological issues central to this theory of knowledge.