PIAGET'S AND

CONSTRUCTIVISM CHILDHOOD IN JAPAN

Kamii

EDUCATION
Yasuhiko Kato and

Constance

Introduction
Japan came in contact with Piaget's theory for the first time in 1927, when Professor Kanji Hatano held La representation du monde chez l'enfant [The child's conception of the world] (Piaget, 1929) in his hands. Hatano, the foremost Piaget scholar in Japan, was then a student at Tokyo University. According to Akira Nakagaki (1990), some Japanese educators at that time valued children's freedom and individuality and viewed their thinking as being different from adults'. However, no

Original language: English

Associate professor in the Department of Early Education at Chugoku Junior College, Okayama. Since the 1980s, he has been applying and further developing the Piagetian early childhood curriculum developed by Constance Kamii and Rheta DeVries to early education in Japan. In 1993-94, as a visiting scholar at the University of Alabama, he studied Piaget's theory under Constance Kamii. In 1997, he published a book in collaboration with Constance Kamii and Hermina Sinclair on the literacy development of Japanese young children. This book presents findings that support the work of Emilia Ferreiro and documents classroom activities based on Piaget's constructivism. Studied under Jean Piaget, Barbel Inhelder and Hermina Sinclair in the late 1960s and 1970s and subsequently developed an early childhood curriculum based on Piaget's theory. She later extended this work to mathematics education in the first three grades and is now working at the fourth and fifth grade level. She has taught at the University of Illinois, Chicago, and the University of Geneva, and is now professor of education at the University of Alabama, Birmingham. E-mail: [email protected]

Yasubiko Kato (Japan)

Constance Kamii (United States of America)

Prospects,vol. XXXI, no. 2, June2001

210

Yasubiko Kato and Constance Kamii

one was clear about how children thought differently from adults, and Piaget provided concrete and vivid descriptions in La representation du monde cbez l'enfant. In 1931, Hatano published ]idobsbinrigaku [Child psychology] (Hatano, 1931), in which he introduced Piaget's theory to Japanese readers. In this book, Hatano discussed Le langage et la pens3e cbez l'enfant [The language and thought of the child] (Piaget, 1926), Le jugement et le raisonnement cbez l'enfant [Judgement and reasoning in the child] (Piaget, 1928), La repr3sentation du monde chez l'enfant [The child's representation of the world], and La causalit3 physique chez l'enfant [The child's conception of physical causality] (Piaget, 1930). He also introduced Le judgement moral cbez l'enfant [The moral judgement of the child] (Piaget, 1932) in a subsequent volume. Piaget's research caught the attention of Japanese psychologists, and educators in the 1930s were greatly influenced by these publications. In the 1950s, after the Second World War, translations of Piaget's books began to appear under Hatano's leadership as well as Shigeru Ohtomo's, and twenty-five books had been translated by the 1970s. Many replication studies were undertaken in the meantime, and other research inspired by Piaget's work became popular. However, these activities took place within the framework of child psychology, and Piaget was not recognized as an epistemologist. His popularity and influence declined in the 1980s: and the only scholar still conducting research today within Piaget's paradigm is Akira Nakagaki, of the National Institute of Educational Research. Why did Piaget's theory lose its enormous popularity? There are two reasons. First, Japanese psychologists viewed Piaget as 'Mr. Stages' and his theory only as a stage theory of child development. These researchers never noticed that Piaget's theory is an epistemological theory about the nature and development of human knowledge, and that its essence is constructivism. Japanese researchers focused on minor findings related to Piaget's stages and became critical of them. Following the fashion from the United States, Japanese psychologists began to leave Piaget's theory alone. Second, many educators in Japan were highly impressed by Piaget's insights, but there was no one who could correct the misinterpretations of this theory. One early childhood educator in particular used Piaget's research tools as educational materials and sold these materials as well as his kindergarten programme as being based on Piaget's theory. This commercial enterprise is still flourishing today. Other people harshly criticized Piaget as having overlooked the importance of social factors in children's development. There was no one in Japan knowledgeable and influential enough to correct these misunderstandings. Unable to draw pedagogical implications from Piaget's stages, the Japanese educators who had been profoundly touched by Piaget's insights were forced to leave them alone.

in Japan

Piaget's constructivism and elementary education

In general, Piaget's constructivism cannot be said to have had any direct influence on elementary education in Japan. The Japanese system of education is highly centralized, and Japanese society is competitive with a tradition of filling prestigious jobs with gradProspects, vol. XXXI, no. 2, June 2001

Piaget's constructivism and childhood education in Japan

211

uates of certain universities. Every teacher, official and parent is therefore influence by the pressure of entrance examinations. Reinforced by the profound respect the Japanese feel for knowledge and know-how, Japanese educators are encouraged to follow the tradition of getting children to learn throagh repetition and memorization.
T O H Y A M A ' S W O R K IN M A T H E M A T I C S E D U C A T I O N

The preceding statements do not imply that no one in Japan made major efforts to counteract the empiricist education that many teachers knew to be basically flawed, especially in mathematics education. The scholar who first recognized Piaget's insights and originality in La genbse du nornbre cbez l'enfant [The child's conception of number] (Piaget &: Szeminska, 1952) was Hiraku Tohyama. He was already a famous mathematics educator and became convinced that the child's thinking and stages of development revealed by Piaget would help teachers in reforming arithmetic education in a fundamental way. With this conviction, he translated La genbse du nornbre and published it in 1962. Tohyama had been working with elementary school teachers in a new organization called the Association of Mathematical Instruction (AMI), which was founded in 1951. This is an organization mostly of teachers at the preschool, elementary, middle and high school levels, as well as professors and researchers in universities. Applying Piaget's insights, Tohyama worked with classroom teachers who agreed about the importance of children's thinking and wanted to get away from memorization and repetition. Tohyama conceptualized a new theory of teaching arithmetic called 'Suidoh' and invented a new material called 'tiles'. Tiles are like Dienes' base-ten blocks (Dienes &: Golding, 1971) but are made of cardboard. A 1 cm x 1 cm square tile represents one. A 1 cm x 10 cm rectangular tile represents 10, and a 10 cm x 10 cm square tile represents 100. These files are still being used in the primary grades today, and every first grader is required to have a set of tiles. Tohyama (1969) made the following statements about these tiles: One of the most important contents of arithmetic education is the principle involved in place value. Our problem is how to enable children to understand the principle involved in making bundles of ten. [...] One stick for one, ten sticks bundled together with a string for ten, and 100 sticks work well but are cumbersome. Tiles were designed to overcome this shortcoming. [...] When children use these files, it is possible for them to master the structure of the base-ten system (p. 216-18). Many teachers enthusiastically received Tohyama's ideas in the 1960s and 1970s and tested them in their classrooms. However, Tohyama did not succeed in going beyond his empiricist misinterpretation of Piaget's theory. He praised Piaget, but his 'Suidoh' theory as well as his tiles were in contradiction with Piaget's theory about logico-mathematical knowledge (which we will explain shortly). After Tohyama's death, his followers continued some activities of the Association of
Prospects, voL XXXI, no. 2, June 2001

212

Yasubiko Kato and Constance Kamii

Mathematics Instruction. However, no teacher today is trying to go beyond Tohyama by studying Piaget's constructivism. RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN MATHEMATICS EDUCATION We do not wish to give the impression that nothing resembling constructivist education is now taking place in Japanese elementary schools. As can be seen in the Third International Mathematics and Science Study (NCTM, 1997) and Stigler and Hiebert (1999), teachers in Japanese schools take their profession seriously and engage in on-going professional development for years. Many of them have drastically changed their approach to mathematics education. Instead of showing children what to do, they now present children with problems and ask them to solve the problems in their own ways. The teacher circulates around the room noting how individual children are reasoning and responds to students' questions without telling them what to do. When the children have had sufficient time to solve the day's problem, the teacher conducts a whole-class discussion in which students present and defend their procedures for solving the problem. This way of 'teaching' without teaching in the traditional sense is very similar to the constructivist approach based on Piaget's constructivism developed in the United States by Kamii (1985, 1989, 1994, 2000). This Japanese approach is the exact opposite of traditional, empiricist teaching in which the teacher shows students how to solve a problem and gives similar problems for children to practice the newly taught procedure. It is hard to trace the origins of this new Japanese approach, but it probably grew out of teachers' organized, on-going exchanges of ideas, especially 'lesson study' (Stigler &: Hiebert, 1999). In 'lesson study', teachers meet regularly over long periods of time to work on improving their teaching. They plan and implement lessons, and as many as thirty teachers may observe a lesson before meeting together for a seminar. These seminars last about two hours and involve indepth, critical exchanges about objectives, materials, organization, pacing, appropriateness of the teacher's interventions, etc. Our description of 'lesson study' is far too brief, but we hope the reader will get the idea that Japanese teachers get together on an on-going basis for years to improve what they do in the classroom. Teachers evaluate their own teaching by observing how children are reacting from moment to moment. Many Japanese teachers have known for years that the traditional way of teaching mathematics was not working, and their collective intuition seems to have led them to a revolutionary, better approach that resembles constructivist teaching. In the United States, the term 'constructivism' has become fashionable, and many teachers are following the so-called 'Japanese way of teaching' described above. These American teachers claim to be constructivist, but they do not know Piaget's constructivism, which is a scientific theory based on sixty years of empirical research.
Prospects, vol. XXXI,no. 2, June 2001

Piaget'sconstructivismand childhoodeducationin Japan

213

We have no statistics to be able to say how widely the so-called 'Japanese way of teaching' is being practised in Japan. However, our first-hand observation leads us to believe that the great majority of teachers are continuing in the traditional way by following a textbook and workbook.

Piaget's c o n s t r u c t i v i s m e d u c a t i o n in Japan

and early c h i l d h o o d

Early childhood education in Japan takes place mostly in private institutions, and kindergarten is rarely attached to a public, elementary school. There are many public day-care facilities, and these facilities are controlled by the Department of Welfare rather than by the Ministry of Education. It is, therefore, not surprising that while most preschool programmes emphasize children's play, many focus on specific skills that appeal to parents. In August, 1980, just before Piaget's death and when his theory was on the wane in Japan, 'Piaget for early education' (Kamii & DeVries, 1977) was translated into Japanese and published as a book. To mark this event, Kamii (the second author of this article) was invited to Japan to give lectures in several cities about the contribution of Piaget's theory to early childhood education. As a third-generation Japanese-American who had been working under Piaget for almost fifteen years, Kamii focused on two points in her lectures. First, she pointed out the unimportance of Piaget's stages and the fact that his stages are important only insofar as they support constructivism. She also pointed out that Piaget was an epistemologist interested in explaining the natuxe and development of human knowledge. Mathematics, physics and so on should be taught differently, she argued, based on the three kinds of knowledge Piaget distinguished. (These will be explained shortly.) The second point Kamii made was that, for Piaget (1973), the aim of education was autonomy. Autonomy in the Piagetian sense will be clarified shortly, but suffice it to say here that no one else in Japan (or anywhere else) had pointed out this important aspect of Piaget's theory that changes almost everything a teacher does from one moment to the next. In the audience of the lecture Kamii gave at Hiroshima University was Yasuhiko Kato, the first author of this article. Kato had been looking for a long time for a scientifically based theory of education to replace the traditional pedagogical theories based on opinions. (These opinions are commonly called 'philosophies'.) Not only researchers but also teachers and teacher educators were deeply touched by Kamii's arguments. Kato and his colleagues immediately organized a trip to Chicago for thirty-five teachers and child-care leaders to visit Kamii to learn more about Piaget's constructivism. In 1981, they founded the Association for the Study of Constructivism consisting mostly of early childhood educators. Since then, this organization has been inviting Kamii every summer to learn more about Piaget's constructivism, to develop the curriculum, and to evaluate classroom activities.
Prospects,

voL XXXI, no. 2, June 2001

214

Yasubiko Kato and Constance Kamii

The Association has grown during the past twenty years into a network of five organizations totalling about 500 members widely scattered around five cities-Fukuyama, Okayama, Kobe, Nagoya and Kanazawa. These organizations collaborate and now engage in the following kinds of activities.
AN ANNUAL THREE-DAY COURSE GIVEN BY KAMII AND KATO

Every summer, approximately 100 members get together over an extended weekend to discuss Piaget's theory in relation to videotaped Piagetian tasks and classroom activities. The first half of the course is reserved for those who have never taken it before, and the second half is open to those who want to come again. Since everybody from widely scattered areas stays in one building, the discussions are intense and last late into the night.
AN ANNUAL CONFERENCE SPONSORED JOINTLY BY THE FIVE O R G A N I Z A T I O N S

The five organizations jointly sponsor an annual conference in two cities. These conferences are attended by about 400 people including parents, early childhood educators, students and researchers who are unfamiliar with Piaget's theory. The conference includes a plenary lecture and many workshops in which videotaped classroom activities are presented and critically evaluated by the presenter and the audience. People attending these workshops for the first time comment that our criteria of evaluation are different from their traditional, empiricist criteria. They can see that we evaluate the teacher's interventions in light of children's process of thinking that eventually leads to autonomy.
WORKSHOPS CONDUCTED BY EACH OF THE FIVE O R G A N I Z A T I O N S

Throughout the year, each of the five organizations invites Kato and conducts a workshop every other month. (In 1993/94, Kato spent a year of study under Kamii at the University of Alabama at Birmingham as a visiting scholar.)
THE STUDY OF PIAGET'S TASKS

Whenever possible, members get together with Kamii to learn how to interview children with Piaget's tasks. In the seminars that follow, members discuss how the findings are related to children's process of constructing knowledge, and what their implications are for the classroom.
THE PUBLICATIONS OF TEACHERS' REPORTS AND OTHER REFERENCES

Eleven publications have come out so far relating theory to practice on topics such as group games, physical-knowledge activities, number, reading and writing, and moral development and the teaching of behaviours expected
Prospects, voL XXXI, no. 2, June 2001

Piaget'sconstructivism and childhood education in Japan

215

by convention. The Association has also supported the translation of many of Kamii's publications (Kamii & DeVries, 1978, 1980; Kamii, 1982, 1984, The reader must be wondering how early childhood education based on Piaget's constructivism is different from traditional, empiricist practices. This is the topic to which we now turn.

1985).

constructivism

Early c h i l d h o o d e d u c a t i o n

based on Piaget's

Traditional educators all over the world have assumed that 'to teach' is to put knowledge and moral values into the child's head, and 'to learn' means to internalize what is transmitted from the outside. As a result, teachers have valued obedience rather than children's interest and initiative, and they have used reward and punishment rather than children's exchanges of ideas to foster 'good' behaviour. In the following discussion, we begin with autonomy, the aim of education for Piaget (1948) to show that our goals are different from those of traditional education.
AUTONOMY. AS THE AIM OF E D U C A T I O N

In common parlance, autonomy means the right to make decisions. When we speak of Palestinian autonomy, we are referring to this kind of right. In Piaget's theory, however, autonomy refers to the ability to make decisions, about right and wrong in the moral realm and about what is true and untrue in the intellectual realm, by taking relevant factors into account, independently of reward and punishment. The opposite of autonomy is heteronomy. Heteronymous people are governed by someone else because they are unable to think for themselves. Moral autonomy. An unusual example of moral autonomy is Martin Luther King's struggle for African Americans' civil rights. King was autonomous enough to take relevant factors into account and concluded that the laws discriminating against African Americans were unjust and immoral. Convinced of the need to make justice a reality, he fought to end the discriminatory laws in spite of the jails, police dogs, fire hoses and threats of assassination used to stop his efforts. Morally autonomous people are not governed by reward and punishment. An example of moral heteronomy is the people in the cigarette industry who covered up the evidence about the harmful effects of smoking. These people did what they knew to be morally wrong because they expected to be rewarded for helping in the cover-up. The moral judgment of the child (Piaget, 1932) gave more commonplace exampies of autonomy and heteronomy. He interviewed children between the ages of 6 and 14 and asked them, for example, why it is bad to tell lies. Young, heteronymous children replied, 'Because you get punished when you tell lies'. Piaget asked, 'Would it be O.K. to tell lies if you were not punished for them'? Young children answered, 'Yes'. These children were governed by others to judge between right and wrong.
Prospects, vol. X X X L no. 2, June 2001

216

Yasubiko Kato and Constance Kamii

All young children are heteronymous. Ideally, they become increasingly autonomous as they grow older. As they become more able to govern themselves, they are governed less by other people. However, most human beings do not develop in this ideal way. Most people stop developing at a low level and do not have the moral courage of a Martin Luther King. The important question for parents and teachers is: What causes certain children to become more autonomous than others? Piaget's answer was that adults reinforce children's natural heteronomy when they use rewards and punishments, thereby hindering the development of autonomy. By refraining from using rewards and punishments, and by exchanging viewpoints with children instead, we can foster the development of autonomy from the inside, he said. For example, if a child tells a lie, an adult can punish the child by saying, 'No dessert tonight'. Alternatively, the adult can look the child straight in the eye with affection and scepticism and say: 'I really can't believe what you are saying because (state the reason). And when you tell me something next time, I am not sure I'll be able to believe you. I want you to go to your room (or seat) and think about what you might do next time to be believed'. When they are confronted with this kind of exchange of viewpoints, children are likely, over time, to come to the conclusion that it is best for people to deal honesdy with each other. In other words, the adult tries to motivatethe child from within to construct the value of honesty. In general, punishment leads to three possible outcomes. The first one is a weighing of risks. Children who are punished will learn to calculate their chances of getting caught the next time and the price they might have to pay if they are caught. The second outcome is, interestingly, the opposite of the first one, namely, blind obedience. Sensitive children will do anything to avoid being punished. The third outcome derives from the second: revolt. Many 'model' children surprise everyone by beginning to cut classes, take drugs and engage in other acts that characterize delinquency. These children have decided that they are fired of living for their parents and teachers and that the time has come for them to start living for themselves. Many behaviourists and others believe that punishment is bad because it is negative but that rewards are positive and good. However, rewards do not make children any more autonomous than punishment. Children who help their parents only to get money and those who fill out worksheets only to get a good grade are manipulated by someone else, iust as much as those who behave well only to avoid being punished. Traditional education gives ready-made rules to children and uses rewards and punishments to get children to intemalise these rules. It is much better for children's construction of autonomy not to give ready-made rules and, instead, wait for a problem to come up. For example, if everybody talks at the same time, the teacher can say: 'I can't hear anybody because everybody is talking at the same time. What can we do to solve this problem'? Children invent rules when they are encouraged to, and they respect the rules they made much more than the same rules made by the teacher. It is not possible in this brief article to discuss intellectual autonomy or to give more examples of how to foster the development of moral autonomy. The reader can find more details in Kamii (1982, 1984, 2000).
Prospects, vol. XXXI, no. 2, June 2001

Piaget's constructivism and childhood education in Japan

FOSTERING CHILDREN'S INTELLECTUAL DEVELOPMENT

217

Three kinds of knowledge (Piaget, 1971, 1951) distinguished three kinds of knowledge based on their ultimate sources: physical knowledge, social (conventional) knowledge, and logico-mathematical knowledge. Physical knowledge is knowledge of objects in external reality. The colour, shape, and weight of a banana are examples of physical properties that are in the object and can be known empirically by observation. The fact that a ball bounces and rolls is also an example of physical knowledge. Examples of social (conventional) knowledge are holidays, written and spoken languages, and the fact that we use our right hand to shake hands. While the ultimate source of physical knowledge is partly objects, the ultimate source of social knowledge is partly conventions, which are made by people. Our reason for saying 'partly' will be clarified shortly. Logico-matbernaticalknowledge consists of mental relationships, and the ultimate source of these relationships is each person's mind. For example, I used to give a test in which I asked, 'In what way are a banana and an apple alike'? Children often answered, 'An apple is red, and a banana is yellow'. I then tried to clarify the question by pointing out that the child had given a difference but that I wanted a similarity. When I repeatedly asked in what way a banana was like an apple, the child continued to reply, 'An apple is red, and a banana is yellow'. A similarity is not observable, and when a child cannot think of two objects as being similar in any way, they simply cannot 'see' any similarity between them. Another example of logico-mathematical knowledge is number. A banana and an apple are both observable, but the number 'two' is not. Only when the child thinks about the objects as 'two' do they become 'two'. 'One' is not observable either. Only when we think about an apple as 'one', does the apple become 'one'. We have spoken so far as if the three kinds of knowledge were independent of each other. Piaget made these theoretical distinctions but went on to say that, in the psychological reality of the child, the three kinds of knowledge exist together. For example, if we could not make a classificatory relationship (logico-mathematical knowledge), we could not recognize a banana as a banana (as opposed to other objects). Conversely, we could not make the relationship 'different' if all the objects in the world were identical. Educational implications of the three kinds of knowledge. Early childhood education is generally based on empiricism, which tells us that young children learn through their senses---of vision, touch, smell, etc. Piaget opposed empiricism by pointing out that what is important is the child's actions, which are physical and mental. For example, only by shaking a rattle can babies find out that it makes a noise. The senses are necessary for hearing and seeing the rattle, but without the baby's mentaland physical actions, it would be impossible for it to know a rattle or any other object. Piaget's theory about the importance of children's actions led us to conceptualize physical-knowledge activities as can be seen in Kamii and DeVries (1978).
Prospects, vol. XXXI, no. 2, June 2001

218

Yasuhiko Kato and Constance Kamii

Examples of physical-knowledge activities are bowling and playing with a pendulum. In these activities children act on objects to produce desired effects, and the thinking they do while trying to knock many pins down, for example, contributes to their development of logico-mathematical knowledge. This is a new approach to physics in early childhood education. Bowling is an example of a group game. Group games have traditionally been used in early-childhood programmes, but we use them differently, for children's development of autonomy. We do not give more than a few basic rules, such as the object of the game, which is to roll a ball to knock as many pins (empty plastic bottles) down as possible. Details such as who goes first and where to stand are decided by children through negotiation. We help children learn to negotiate so that they will become able to govern themselves rather than continuing to depend on the teacher's control. Negotiations are good not only for children's socio-moral development but also for their development of logico-mathematical knowledge. Children make temporal relationships when they decide who goes first, next, and so on. They make spatial relationships and find out that everybody wants to stand close to the pins because a short distance makes their task easier. They make numerical relationships as they count the pins that were knocked down and classificatory relationships when someone argues that if a player knocks all the pins down, he or she should get another turn. The reader can find more about group games in Kamii and DeVries (1980). Before concluding this article, we would like to return to Tohyama's tiles and explain why these tiles are in contradiction with Piaget's theory. Giving well-structured materials such as tiles and base-ten blocks is an attempt to give observable objects to children so that they will abstract the base-ten system as if numbers were physical knowledge. As stated earlier, a number is logico-mathematical knowledge, which is not observable. Therefore, neither 'ten ones' nor 'one ten' is observable and must be constructed through the child's own mental action. Dienes (Dienes &: Golding, 1971) made a similar empiricist error when he gave credit to Piaget for the invention of base-ten blocks.

Conclusion
In spite of the good reputation Japanese education is enjoying, many schools at the elementary and junior-high school levels have experienced major problems during the past several years. Among them are violent behaviours, bullying, children who refuse to go to school, chaos in classrooms and suicides. Incidents of bullying have been reported in newspapers for at least a decade and involve the singling out of specific children to torture. Ganging up on them to hit them, following them home to attack them, and taunting are some of the methods used for torture. In classrooms, some children create chaos by walking around, reading comic books, disobeying the teacher and disrupting lessons. These problems became so severe that some public schools allowed national television crews to videotape in their buildings to inform the public. Many children simply refuse to
Prospects, vol. XXXI, no. 2, June 2001

Piaget's constructivism and childhood education in Japan

219

go to school, and adults do not know what to do with them. To cope with disobedience, many teachers have turned to authoritarianism and resort to rewards and severe punishments. In a country where tradition and conformity reign, it takes special courage for an educator to advocate autonomy as the aim of education. We strongly believe that constructivism and autonomy are ideas that can serve to reform and rebuild Japanese education in the twenty-first century. However, elementary-school teachers who come to our conferences and public lectures are still very rare. We are convinced that Piaget's scientific, revolutionary theory will eventually be accepted just as Copemicus's theory became universally accepted after 150 years of resistance and/or indifference.

References
Dienes, Z.P.; Golding, E.W. 1971. Approach to modern mathematics. New York, NY, Herder & Herder. Hatano, K. 1931. Jidobsbinrigaku [Child psychology]. Tokyo, Dohbunkan. Kamii, C. 1982. Number in preschool and kindergarten. Washington, DC, National Association for the Education of Young Children. -. 1984. Autonomy: the aim of education envisioned by Piaget. Phi delta kappan (Bloomington, IN), vol. 65, no. 6, p. 410-15. .... .1985. Young children reinvent arithmetic. New York, NY, Teachers College Press. -----. 1989. Young cbildren continue to reinvent arithmetic, 2nd grade. New York, NY, Teachers College Press. ----. 1994. Young children continue to reinvent arithmetic, 3rd grade. New York, NY, Teachers College Press. . 2 0 0 0 . Young children reinvent arithmetic. 2nd ed. New York, NY, Teachers College Press. Kamii, C.; DeVries, R. 1977. Piaget for early education. In. Day, M.C.; Parker, R.K., eds. The preschool in action, 2nd ed., p. 365-420. Boston. MA, Allyn & Bacon. - - - - ; - - - - . 1978. Physical knowledge in preschool education. New York, NY, Teachers College Press. [1993.] ..... , - - - - . 1980. Group games in early education. Washington, DC, National Association for the Education of Young Children. Nakagaki, A. 1990. Explanatory remarks. In: Hatano, K., ed. Piaget: bitoto sbisob [Piaget: the man and his ideas]. Tokyo, Shohgakukan. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM). 1997. Attaining excellence: a TIMSS resource kit. Reston, VA, National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. Piaget, J. 1926. The language and thought of the child. Londor~ Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner. (Original work published in 1923.) .1928. Judgement and reasoning in the child. London, Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner. (Original work published in 1924.) ----. 1929. The child's conception of the world. London, Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner. (Original work published in 1926.) ----. 1930. The child's conception ofplrysical causality. London, Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner. (Original work published in 192 7.)
Prospects, voL XXXI, no. 2, June 2001

220

Yasuhiko Kato and Constance Kamii

-----. 1932. The moral judgement of the child. London, Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner. (Original work published in 1932.) ----. 1951. Play, dreams and imitation in childhood. New York, Norton. (Original work published in 1945.) ----. 1971. Biology and knowledge. Chicago, IL, University of Chicago Press. (Original work published in 1967.) ----. 1973. To understand is to invent. New York, The Viking Press. (Original work published in 1948 by UNESCO under the title 'Le droit h l'6ducation dans le monde actuel'.) Piaget, J.; Szeminska, A. 1952. The child's conception of number. London, Routledge & Kegan Paul. (Original work published in 1941.) Stigler, J.W.; Hiebert, J. 1999. The teaching gap. New York, NY, Free Press. Tohyama, H. 1969. Suugakukyoiku nobto[Notes on mathematics education]. Tokyo, Kokudosha.

Prospects, vol. XXXI, no. 2, June 2001