What nonuniversal theory still needs to address to become universally accepted. A reaction to Feldman and Fowler

Journal/Book: New Idea Psychol. 1997; 15: The Boulevard, Langford Lane, Kidlington, Oxford, England OX5 1GB. Pergamon-Elsevier Science Ltd. 217-220.

Abstract: In their thought-provoking paper on nonuniversal developmental theory, Feldman and Fowler (this issue) address several of the most fundamental issues of developmental psychology. If I understand them well, they have various aims. First, they wish to clarify such terms as ''developmental'' and ''domain'' which were insufficiently clear in previous expositions of the theory. Secondly, they want to posit additional change mechanisms as they find the notion of equilibration insufficient. Thirdly, they want to improve on previous versions of the theory by positing the notion of a ''pancultural'' domain. Fourthly, they claim that such a revised nonuniversal theory is able to clarify Piaget's and Vygotsky's seemingly contradictory views on the relationship between learning and development. These are quite ambitious goals and it will come as no surprise that I have not become fully convinced that they achieved them. I will, one by one, briefly discuss these topics, point to some points which I find insufficiently clear and raise some questions that in my view still need to be answered. As I feel in no position to present an alternative to Feldman's and Fowler's conception, my comments and questions may seem not to be very constructive. They are meant, however, to enable the authors to formulate a stronger version of their conception or to advance a new one that overcomes the difficulties which I feel the present one still has. And, of course, as always, the comments made reflect as much the views of the authors as the obsessions of the critic.

Note: Editorial VanderVeer R, Leiden Univ, Dept Educ, POB 9555, NL-2300 Rb Leiden, NETHERLANDS

Zurück | Weiter