European Journal of Special Education Research

ISSN: 2501 - 2428

ISSN-L: 2501 - 2428
Available on-line at: www.oapub.org/edu

doi: 10.5281/zenodo.3556948 Volume 5 │ Issue 2 │ 2019

APPLICATION OF JEAN PIAGET’S COGNITION DEVELOPMENT

TASKS ON STUDENTS WITH SPECIAL EDUCATIONAL NEEDS

Milen Z. Zamfirovi
DSc,
“St Kliment Ohridski” Sofia University,
Bulgaria

Abstract:
The article presents a correlative model based on the Piagetian phenomena and student
with special educational needs. Approaches are indicated allowing the mental age to be
defined by applying Jean Piaget’s experiments, as well as doing it vice versa – defining
the stage as per Jean Piaget in determining the IQ of the individual. The proposed model
allows the general education teacher and also the individual progress development team
in school, to get easily oriented on the capabilities of the student with special educational
needs and prepare individual programs adequate to the student’s development.

Keywords: Piagetian inventories, student’s development, special educational needs

1. Introduction

In recent years, the activities aimed at the inclusion of children and students with special
educational needs (SEN) in Bulgaria are particularly multidirectional. This is due to the
percentage of disabled children in kindergardens and students in schools. Such a fact
implies that general education teachers – also referred to as mainstream teachers – are to
face various obstacles, the primary one being is what to teach the disabled children and
students, rather than to find which approach to select. To some extent solving the
problem is done by development of individual education programs (also known as the
IEPs) by the individual progress development team in the respective school, but such an
approach is not always efficient. For that reason, in this article we propose a model, which
might support the mainstream teacher in assessment of the most effective approach for
the teaching process in a classroom with a SEN student.

i Correspondence: email [email protected]

Copyright © The Author(s). All Rights Reserved.

© 2015 – 2019 Open Access Publishing Group 79
 Milen Z. Zamfirov
APPLICATION OF JEAN PIAGET’S COGNITION DEVELOPMENT TASKS
ON STUDENTS WITH SPECIAL EDUCATIONAL NEEDS

2. Jean Piaget’s Stage Model

Year 2016 marks the 120th anniversary of the birth of the great Swiss biologist,
psychologist and logician Jean Piaget. The past proves, that he offered one of the best
argued theories on the intellectual development of a child. His theoretical ideas meet
exceptional support since those are cleverly supported by hundreds of fine and simple
experiments, serving a multitude of aspects of the thinking of a child (Humphreys and
Parsons, 1979).
Piaget separates the cognitive development of children and juniors into four
stages:
• sensorimotor;
• preoperational;
• concrete operational;
• formal operational.
Piaget is convinced that all children undergo consequently those stages, and no
one cannot avoid a particular stage, though some children pass through the stages at
different pace (Slavin, 2018).
As a generalization, one might state, that a student in a preoperational stage has a
his own logic about the world, good enough for him, but this logic has nothing in
common with the logic of regular school students. For example, the teacher might “teach”
him to say that a plasticine ball and another such ball smashed to being flat are equal in
size and weight, but the student shall not thrust that and shall accept such a statement as
another proof that teachers lie to little children.
A student at a stage of particular operations, possesses the logic of the adults, but
is capable of logical treating only those matters, that are subject of his own experience
and accepts via his own senses (Shayer, 2008).
This means that complex ideas and concepts are beyond his capacities, which leads
to the fact that words and formulas are remembered but not understood. Students really
become capable of understanding abstract and complex ideas when they reach the level
of formal operations (Piaget & Inhelder, 1956).
The determination of whether a child has or has not reached a particular stage is
affected by experiments popularly known as the Piaget’s phenomena. In this sense
coping with every phenomenon suggests coordinated action of a system of reversible
logical operations (Marwaha et al., 2017). For example, a child, who has just reached a
certain level of thinking cannot operate at a higher stage (Inhelder & Piaget, 1958).

2.1 Experiment
An experiment linked with the Piaget’s phenomena aimed at application of those to
various SEN students was carried out. Subject to research were in total some 56 children
and students with intellectual disability (mild and moderate), hearing loss, speech and
language disabilities and a few absolutely normal students.
The phenomena realized were as follows:

European Journal of Special Education Research - Volume 5 │ Issue 2 │ 2019 80

 Milen Z. Zamfirov
APPLICATION OF JEAN PIAGET’S COGNITION DEVELOPMENT TASKS
ON STUDENTS WITH SPECIAL EDUCATIONAL NEEDS

A. Volume preservation
The phenomenon establishes the understanding of the constant volume concept for an
object subjected to deformation. Object’s volume is defined by the volume of water it
displaces when immersed in a vessel filled with water.
Level 1 (age 6). The child does not accept the concept for substance preservation,
neither for weight, or for volume.
Level 2 (age 7–8). The child accepts substance preservation concept, but not for
weight, or volume.
Level 3 (age 9–10). The child accepts on some occasion preservation of weight, but
volume preservation is not accepted. Child’s judgement is based on the dimension, which
impresses him most. The child fixes on one dimension at a time only.
Level 4 (age 8–11). The child accepts preservation of weight, but not that of
volume. The latter changes according to the shape and position of the object
• a ball divided in separate parts takes less space, since “smaller parts are scattered
all over”.
• a laying cylinder “pushes” the water through larger surface, so that it takes more
space.
Level 5 (age 9–11). The child accepts volume preservation only on some occasions.
Level 6 (age 10–12). The child accepts volume preservation on all occasions. The
child often justifies this by addressing onto preservation of weight and matter.

B. Preservation of numerical equality between two entities

The phenomenon examines how by the children the double-single meaning
correspondence between two pluralities leads to a judgement for respective equality.
a. Length preservation
The goal of this phenomenon is to settle the criteria used by a child in assessing length
comparing a long stick and wavelike ribbon.
Level 1 (age 4–5). The child assesses the length of the lines regarding start and end.
The stipulation is that the strait stack and folded ribbon are equally long, even after seen
the latter straiten, prior to being brought back to its initial form.
Level 2 (age 5). Static assessment: the child estimates the length by the end points.
Assessment by movement (following the line by finger): in this case the folded
ribbon seems to the child longer than the straight line. Returning to the static case, the
child goes back to its initial judgement.
Level 3 (age 6–7). Child assesses according to the stretch between two cuts.
b. Cover a bottle with cloth
The experiment shows that objects are physically stable and exist even when they are out
of the sight of a physically present child.
Level 1. Children manage to cope with the experiment.
Level 2. Children fail to cope with the experiment.
c. Liquid transfer – volume remains constant (volume preservation)

European Journal of Special Education Research - Volume 5 │ Issue 2 │ 2019 81

 Milen Z. Zamfirov
APPLICATION OF JEAN PIAGET’S COGNITION DEVELOPMENT TASKS
ON STUDENTS WITH SPECIAL EDUCATIONAL NEEDS

The phenomenon establishes how the constant volume concept is being learned when a
certain object is deformed.
Taken are two identical cups, already filled with equal volumes of water. Taken is
a dinner-plate and the in the presence of then child, all the water contained in one of the
cups I poured into the plate. The other cup remains untouched. The child is questioned
where is more water.
Results:
1) The child says that in the tall cup the water was more (i.e. the empty cup).
2) The child says that in the dinner-plate the water is more.
3) The child says that the amount of water in the tall cup and in the dinner-plate is
equal.

C. Abstract height
Effected for all children with disabilities, age not considered. Age of normal children is 7
to 11.
Established is the presence of hardships linked to the preservation issues, since the
concept of reversibility is already assimilated.
Question: if Ivan is taller than Mary, and Mary is taller the Theodor, who is the tallest?
1) Ivan is taller than Theodor,
2) Mary is taller than Theodor,
3) Mary is taller than Ivan, etc.
The correct answer is Ivan is taller than Theodor. All other answers are wrong.

Hypotheses are as follows:

1) Individuals within the absolute norm show results at level corresponding to their
calendar age. If an individual within the absolute norm is 10, the results of the
experiments shall correspond the age level 10 or 11.
2) When an individual is with intellectual disability, the calendar age shall not
correspond to mental age, which is to be seen in corresponding level results. For
example, if we have an individual being with mild intellectual disability and is
aged 10, the results would be that of an individual aged 7-8, i.e. the lag behind is
one level compared to the ones within the absolute norm.
3) If and individual is with moderate intellectual disability, then such an individual’s
results would be even worse than those of individuals with mild intellectual
disability, due to greater metal deficiencies.
4) For individuals having hearing loss and individuals having speech and language
disorders, it is expected that the results will be close to individuals of the absolute
norm.
Working tasks are linked to the following correlated suppositions:
1) For example, if an individual manages to solve a higher experimental level of the
Volume preservation experiment better than expected for his age, will the same

European Journal of Special Education Research - Volume 5 │ Issue 2 │ 2019 82

 Milen Z. Zamfirov
APPLICATION OF JEAN PIAGET’S COGNITION DEVELOPMENT TASKS
ON STUDENTS WITH SPECIAL EDUCATIONAL NEEDS

individual solve the Liquid transfer experiment also better than expected for his
age?
2) Will an individual solving at higher level Retaining numeric equality in 2 entities
experiment be able to solve on a higher level the Length preservation experiment?

3. Results

In results assessment correlation analysis was used. The application is used to describe
the strengths and the direction of mutual dependence between changing values.
Correlation coefficients are a statistic measure, representing the mutual
dependence between two random variables. Various correlation coefficients are used in
accordance with the measurement scale used in expressing the random values.
In operating Spearman (rs) coefficient for rank correlation were used.
The absolute value of correlation coefficient is between the limits o t 1.

3.1 Dependence strength

The interpretation of the correlation coefficient strength (dependence strength) is to some
extent casual. It depends on the specifics of the phenomenon subject to research and
usually is done with the context of the correlated variables. Although there are some
empiric rules that might be applied when interpreting correlation coefficients.
When the value is 0 – dependence is absent, up to 0.3 – dependence is week, from
0.3 to – moderate dependence, from 0.5 to 0.7 – significant dependence, from 0.7 to 0.9 –
strong dependence, above 0.9 – very strong dependence, when 1 – dependence is
functional. (https://www.btu.bg/statexcel/file8.html).

3.2 Data Analysis

Start analysing data with positive correlation. If the correlation coefficient is a positive
number, the dependence is positive, rising – to grater values of the first variable
correspond greater values of the other variable (Table 1).
Data having negative correlation also bear some information, since if the
correlation coefficient is a negative number, the dependence is negative, downwards
going to grater values of the first variable correspond smaller values of the other variable.
In the first place, from the table is clear that mutual dependency Age – Class is
obviously increasing. Practically when the age rises, the class is rising too. This just a hint,
that the data is valid.
Next correlation is that of Age – Preservation of Volume. Here is accounted the
positive correlation 591**, add to that a substantial dependence. This means, that the elder
the students are, the easier they handle the Preservation of Volume phenomenon.
Practically this means that the child accepts Preservation of Volume in all cases. The child
often justifies the fact referring to preservation of weight of matter as well (Table 1).

European Journal of Special Education Research - Volume 5 │ Issue 2 │ 2019 83

 Milen Z. Zamfirov
APPLICATION OF JEAN PIAGET’S COGNITION DEVELOPMENT TASKS
ON STUDENTS WITH SPECIAL EDUCATIONAL NEEDS

Table 1: Spearman's Correlative Data Analysis

Correlative data

equality between two entities

Preservation of numerical

Cover a bottle with cloth

Preservation of Volume

Preservation of Length,

Abstract Height
Liquid transfer

Class
Age

IQ
Spearman' Age Correlation 1.000 ,339* - -.047 ,323* .044 .121 .092 ,909**
s rho Coefficient ,415**
Sig. .011 .001 .733 .015 .746 .373 .500 .000
(2-tailed)
N 56 56 56 56 56 56 56 56 56
Preservatio Correlation ,339* 1.000 .150 ,591** -.247 ,421** - ,456* ,273*
n of volume Coefficient ,537** *

Sig. .011 .269 .000 .067 .001 .000 .000 .042

(2-tailed)
N 56 56 56 56 56 56 56 56 56
Preservatio Correlation - .150 1.000 .183 - .259 - .061 -
n of Coefficient ,415** ,451** ,419** ,493**
numerical Sig. .001 .269 .177 .000 .054 .001 .656 .000
equality (2-tailed)
between N 56 56 56 56 56 56 56 56 56
two entities
Preservatio Correlation -.047 ,591** .183 1.000 -.187 ,436** - .189 -.086
n of length Coefficient ,517**
Sig. .733 .000 .177 .167 .001 .000 .164 .528
(2-tailed)
N 56 56 56 56 56 56 56 56 56
Cover a Correlation ,323* -.247 - -.187 1.000 -.217 ,486** -.117 ,480**
bottle with Coefficient ,451**
cloth Sig. .015 .067 .000 .167 .108 .000 .390 .000
(2-tailed)
N 56 56 56 56 56 56 56 56 56
Liquid Correlation .044 ,421** .259 ,436** -.217 1.000 - ,584* -.068
transfer Coefficient ,486** *

Sig. .746 .001 .054 .001 .108 .000 .000 .616

(2-tailed)
N 56 56 56 56 56 56 56 56 56
Abstract Correlation .121 - - - ,486** - 1.000 -.169 .197
height Coefficient ,537** ,419** ,517** ,486**
Sig. .373 .000 .001 .000 .000 .000 .213 .145
(2-tailed)
N 56 56 56 56 56 56 56 56 56
IQ Correlation .092 ,456** .061 .189 -.117 ,584** -.169 1.000 .046
Coefficient
Sig. .500 .000 .656 .164 .390 .000 .213 .734
(2-tailed)
N 56 56 56 56 56 56 56 56 56
Class Correlation ,909** ,273* - -.086 ,480** -.068 .197 .046 1.000
Coefficient ,493**
Sig. .000 .042 .000 .528 .000 .616 .145 .734
(2-tailed)
N 56 56 56 56 56 56 56 56 56

Next interlink worth attention is Preservation of Volume - Preservation of Length,

591**. A positive correlation is recorded with a significant dependence. This means that

European Journal of Special Education Research - Volume 5 │ Issue 2 │ 2019 84

 Milen Z. Zamfirov
APPLICATION OF JEAN PIAGET’S COGNITION DEVELOPMENT TASKS
ON STUDENTS WITH SPECIAL EDUCATIONAL NEEDS

student able to solve the Preservation of Volume handle very well Preservation of Length
also.
A positive correlation exists in Preservation of Length - Preservation of Volume, 591**
with a substantial dependence as in Preservation of Length – Abstract Height, 517**. This
means that these phenomena are solved easier, but by students who are not intellectually
disabled, since operating at a higher level is required.
As a proof is the mutual link Cover a bottle with cloth - Preservation of numerical
equality between two entities - 451**. The negative correlation indicates that children can
easily handle an elementary phenomenon typical for the sensorimotor stage, but in no
way with the phenomenon Preservation of numerical equality between two entities, which is
on the superior pre-operational stage.
On the other hand, those who have solved the phenomenon Abstract Height (level
2 and 3), face no problems in solving the easier phenomenon Cover a bottle with cloth, 486**,
whereas here the correlation is positive, on the border between moderate and substantial
dependence. Additional support to this thesis is the following negative correlation
between Abstract Height - Preservation of Volume 537** having substantial dependence.
This may mean that students who easily handle Preservation of Volume are unable to
handle Abstract Height. Here the most probable explanation is that students with
intellectual disability face no problems handling the easier phenomenon, but a case
requiring mental conclusions bordering formal and specific operations, are beyond the
mental capacity of such children.
The negative correlation is observed between Age – Numeric entity. Phenomenon
Numeric entity considers double-single correspondence between two entities leads to
stipulation for equivalence of the two. Here is seen the negative correlation – 046, being
a moderate one. Analysis hints that the more age grows, the more students fail, since
coincidence and stable equivalency is required. The child should eventually accept that
in every case the quantities remain equivalent independently from of the partial
transformations in the elements’ arrangement.
The same situation is preserved with the phenomena Preservation of numerical
equality between two entities – Abstract height, 419**. There is a negative correlation and the
explanation is – the simpler phenomenon of two - Preservation of numerical equality between
two entities – is solved by student with various deficiencies, but not the harder one which
needs operation on higher stage (Table 1).
Positive are and the following two correlations: Liquid transfer – Preservation of
Volume, 421** and Liquid transfer - Preservation of Length, 436**. Here the explanation is that
the phenomena examine similar phenomena and logically when the children manage to
solve the first problem, they easily manage to solve the other.
It is a different story with the correlation Liquid transfer – Abstract Height -,486**.
The negative correlation, moderate dependence hint that the easy phenomenon – Liquid
transfer is solved, because is at inferior stage, contrary to Abstract Height phenomenon.
This means that students, for example, having mild or moderate intellectual

European Journal of Special Education Research - Volume 5 │ Issue 2 │ 2019 85

 Milen Z. Zamfirov
APPLICATION OF JEAN PIAGET’S COGNITION DEVELOPMENT TASKS
ON STUDENTS WITH SPECIAL EDUCATIONAL NEEDS

disability, would not be able to solve the Abstract Height phenomenon, in contrast to
Liquid transfer.
As a confirmation of this conclusion is also the positive correlation Liquid transfer
– IQ, 584**, which is substantial. This means that the higher the IQ of the examined
person, the easier the person tackles the phenomenon and vice versa.
Intellectual disability is the probable explanation as well for the negative
correlation Class - Preservation of numerical equality between two entities – ,493**. I.e.
although increase in class, the intellectually disabled student fails to overcome the
respective stage level at which he operates.
The correlation Preservation of numerical equality between two entities - Cover a bottle
with cloth-,451**, a moderate dependence is marked as negative. Here the explanation is
the following one – the more fail to solve one phenomenon, the more succeed to cope
with the other one. This is to be logically expected, since the phenomenon Preservation of
numerical equality between two entities is of concrete operations level – age 4-7 and as shown
earlier, hard to understand, particularly for children with some deficiencies. On the
contrary, the - Cover a bottle with cloth experiment is some of the simplest and is of the
sensorimotor stage – age 0-2.
A positive correlation ,591**, yet with substantial dependence we have with the
mutual link between phenomena Length preservation - Volume preservation. As successfully
the students solve one phenomenon, equally well they solve the other one. Here one can
build the opportunity to carry out just one of the experiments – the easier one for the
experimenter – and validate the results for the other experiment. In addition, due to
significant dependence between the two phenomena, those could be used in defining the
mental age of the examined individual and consecutively calculate the IQ.
A more detailed data, distributed according to deficiencies, is presented analysed
on the pages herein below.

Table 2: Correlation between Deficiency and Abstract Height

Crosstab
Abstract Height
1,0 2,0 Total
Disability Hearing loss Count 5 2 7
% within Abstract Height 22.7% 5.9% 12.5%
Individuals with mild Count 5 17 22
intellectual disability % within Abstract Height 22.7% 50.0% 39.3%
Individuals with moderate Count 1 8 9
intellectual disability % within Abstract Height 4.5% 23.5% 16.1%
Individuals with speech Count 2 6 8
and language disabilities, % within Abstract Height 9.1% 17.6% 14.3%
developmental delay
Individuals with down Count 1 1 2
boarder of absolute norm % within Abstract Height 4.5% 2.9% 3.6%
Individuals without Count 8 0 8
disabilities – absolute norm % within Abstract Height 36.4% 0.0% 14.3%
Total Count 22 34 56
% within Abstract Height 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

European Journal of Special Education Research - Volume 5 │ Issue 2 │ 2019 86

 Milen Z. Zamfirov
APPLICATION OF JEAN PIAGET’S COGNITION DEVELOPMENT TASKS
ON STUDENTS WITH SPECIAL EDUCATIONAL NEEDS

Five children with hearing loss have 22.7% results at level 1 – phenomenon Abstract
Height, two children having the same deficiency have 5.9% at level 2 for the same
phenomenon (Table 2).
Five children with mild intellectual disability have 22.7% positive results at level
1, 17 children or some 50% at level 2.
Herein some clarifications are needed. This phenomenon is typical in operating
and solving by children that are in preoperational stage. For example, if you say that Ivan
is taller than Theodora and that Theodora is taller than George, the children shall not
understand that Ivan is taller than George, but children in stage of particular operation
shall have no problems at understanding such arrangement and classification.
Synchronized with our hypothesis, aural deficiencies students have low number
of wrong answers, contrary to those with mild intellectual disability. Some 50% to cope
with this problem, which corresponds to a lower level, whereas 22.7% fail to cope with
this phenomenon (Table 2).

Table 3: Correlation between Deficiency and Volume Preservation

Volume preservation
1,0 2,0 3,0 4,0 5,0 6,0 Total
Disability Hearing loss Count 2 5 0 0 0 0 7
% within
Preservation
of numerical
15.4% 27.8% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 12.5%
equality
between two
entities
Individuals with Count 5 8 3 5 1 0 22
mild intellectual % within
disability Preservation
of numerical
38.5% 44.4% 37.5% 62.5% 100.0% 0.0% 39.3%
equality
between two
entities
Individuals with Count 3 3 2 1 0 0 9
moderate % within
intellectual Preservation
disability of numerical
23.1% 16.7% 25.0% 12.5% 0.0% 0.0% 16.1%
equality
between two
entities
Individuals with Count 3 2 2 1 0 0 8
speech and % within
language disabilities, Preservation
developmental of numerical
23.1% 11.1% 25.0% 12.5% 0.0% 0.0% 14.3%
delay equality
between two
entities
Individuals with Count 0 0 1 1 0 0 2
down boarder of % within
absolute norm Preservation
of numerical
0.0% 0.0% 12.5% 12.5% 0.0% 0.0% 3.6%
equality
between two
entities
Individuals without Count 0 0 0 0 0 8 8
disabilities – % within
absolute norm Volume 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100.0% 14.3%
preservation

European Journal of Special Education Research - Volume 5 │ Issue 2 │ 2019 87

 Milen Z. Zamfirov
APPLICATION OF JEAN PIAGET’S COGNITION DEVELOPMENT TASKS
ON STUDENTS WITH SPECIAL EDUCATIONAL NEEDS

Total Count 13 18 8 8 1 8 56
% within
Volume 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
preservation

Here the attention is drawn by solutions made by individuals having mild and moderate
intellectual disability. This is so since individuals having other deficiencies manage to
cope with the higher levels of this phenomenon (Table 3).
It is logical to suppose that individuals without deficiencies or such within the
lower limits of normality, that the results of these shall be situated at the right-hand part
of the table, i.e. closer to the higher levels.
Summing up, the largest number of the examined individuals having deficiencies
fall within the first two levels – Level 1 (age 6), where the child does not accept
preservation neither of matter, weight or volume and Level 2 (age 7-8), the child accepts
preservation of matter, but not that of weight or volume.
Quite naturally, the largest share of the total number belongs to the individuals
having mild and moderate intellectual disability – 13 having mild intellectual disability
and 6 moderate intellectual disabilities.

Table 4: Correlation between Deficiency and Preservation of

Numerical Equality between two Entities
Crosstab
Preserves the numerical equality of
two countables
1,0 2,0 3,0 Total
Disability Hearing loss Count 0 0 7 7
% within Preserves the numerical
0.0% 0.0% 15.9% 12.5%
equality of two countables
Individuals with Count 6 0 16 22
mild intellectual % within Preserves the numerical
disability 54.5% 0.0% 36.4% 39.3%
equality of two countables
Individuals with Count 5 0 4 9
moderate intellectual % within Preserves the numerical
45.5% 0.0% 9.1% 16.1%
disability equality of two countables
Individuals with Count 0 1 7 8
speech and language % within Preserves the numerical
disabilities, equality of two countables 0.0% 100.0% 15.9% 14.3%
developmental delay
Individuals with Count 0 0 2 2
down boarder of % within Preserves the numerical
0.0% 0.0% 4.5% 3.6%
absolute norm equality of two countables
Individuals without Count 0 0 8 8
disabilities – absolute % within Preserves the numerical
0.0% 0.0% 18.2% 14.3%
norm equality of two countables
Total Count 11 1 44 56
% within Preserves the numerical
100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
equality of two countables

Similarly, the results of the individuals without deficiencies are on the upper levels – 3
and 4, whereas intellectually disabled individuals are oriented towards Level 1 (age 4 to
5), at which is established the absence of correspondence and equivalency. Therefore, the
child is unable to establish the correspondence one by one and asses length or density of
the selections observed using global comparisons (Table 4).

European Journal of Special Education Research - Volume 5 │ Issue 2 │ 2019 88

 Milen Z. Zamfirov
APPLICATION OF JEAN PIAGET’S COGNITION DEVELOPMENT TASKS
ON STUDENTS WITH SPECIAL EDUCATIONAL NEEDS

Of interest is the fact that there are no intellectually disabled individuals of Level
2 (age 4 to 7), at which the child establishes correspondence, but there is the lack of
understanding durable equivalence.

Table 5: Correlation between Deficiency and Liquid Transfer

Crosstab
Liquid transfer
1,0 2,0 3,0 Total
Disability Hearing loss Count 6 0 1 7
% within Liquid transfer 20.0% 0.0% 9.1% 12.5%
Individuals with Count 16 5 1 22
mild intellectual % within Liquid transfer
53.3% 33.3% 9.1% 39.3%
disability
Individuals with Count 4 5 0 9
moderate intellectual % within Liquid transfer
13.3% 33.3% 0.0% 16.1%
disability
Individuals with Count 4 4 0 8
speech and language % within Liquid transfer
disabilities, 13.3% 26.7% 0.0% 14.3%
developmental delay
Individuals with Count 0 1 1 2
down boarder of % within Liquid transfer
0.0% 6.7% 9.1% 3.6%
absolute norm
Individuals without Count 0 0 8 8
disabilities – absolute % within Liquid transfer
0.0% 0.0% 72.7% 14.3%
norm
Total Count 30 15 11 56
% within Liquid transfer 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

The greatest share belongs again to the intellectually disabled individuals. Some 16
intellectually disabled students solved the problem on Level 1 (age 5), where the visible
ratio between the quantities directly defines the child’s opinion (Table 5). The child
believes that quantities increase or decrease proportionally to the level, width and
number of vessels.
Here the accent is on the students with hearing loss, who also mark inferior levels
compared to individuals free of deficiencies but cope well better than those being
intellectually disabled do.

4. Discussion

4.1 Qualitative analysis of the results obtained by solving the phenomena

An interest is the explanations given by the students on their experience gained during
solutions of the phenomena.

4.2 Volume preservation

Most of the intellectually disabled children enjoyed the Plasticine. Often spill the water
and are scared by this, but like to drop the ball from high position in order to spill the
water. All intellectually disabled individuals – 100% - say that when Plasticine is inserted
into the water, the water would change in colour – shall turn red or black according to

European Journal of Special Education Research - Volume 5 │ Issue 2 │ 2019 89

 Milen Z. Zamfirov
APPLICATION OF JEAN PIAGET’S COGNITION DEVELOPMENT TASKS
ON STUDENTS WITH SPECIAL EDUCATIONAL NEEDS

Plasticine’s colour and at the same time do not find any link between the fact that the
volume of the object is defined by the space it occupies being immersed.
Some would like to drink the water; prior the ball is dropped into the water and
after that in order to understand if taste remained the same.
Some students say that nothing will change in the glass of water, and that
Plasticine does not change the colour of the water.
There are no intellectually disabled students, no matter of their calendar age, say
15 or 16, who are able to reach Level 5 (age 9–11), where the child accepts volume
preservation on some occasions only, or Level 6 (age 10–12), at which the child accepts
the volume preservation on all occasions and often justifying it by quoting preservation
of weight and matter.

4.3 Preservation of matter

For some intellectually disabled students, for this phenomenon they lack the idea of
bigger, smaller, and equal quantity – are unable to make a ball of the same size, put in
much more material and when asked to remove some of the material, they remove too
much.
Most often, the SEN students are identified at level 1. When a ball is changed into
the shape of pancake, the children say that in there is more Plasticine in the pancake.
Typically, the presence of mild or moderate intellectual disability is identified at level 1.
Students having hearing loss or those absolutely normal have no problems reaching
Level 3 (age 7–12), at which level the matter preservation seems a necessity to the child,
whatever transformations the initial mater has undergone.

4.4 Length preservation

With this phenomenon most of the individuals also solve the problem at level 1. The
answers are grouped around the difficulties in defining the identities of both lines. All
students being mildly or moderately intellectually disabled making the first movement
between the line and the folded strip, draw the conclusion that the strip is shorter. After
the strip is spread along the line, the students observe that the two are equal, i.e. they
succeed in finding out the equality between the strip and the line, by stretching the strip.
When strip is folded, the strip is defined as very short. All examined individuals who are
mildly intellectually disabled reach up to Level 2 (age 5). Returning to the static situation,
the child returns to its initial stipulation.
Individuals free of any deficiencies have no problems with the levels and reach
maximum level 3, at which assesses length by measuring the distance between the cuts.

5. Conclusions

1. From point of view of Piaget’s theory, the cognitive development of a intellectually

disabled child is a slower progress in passing through the various cognitive stages
and overall lower values of general development.

European Journal of Special Education Research - Volume 5 │ Issue 2 │ 2019 90

 Milen Z. Zamfirov
APPLICATION OF JEAN PIAGET’S COGNITION DEVELOPMENT TASKS
ON STUDENTS WITH SPECIAL EDUCATIONAL NEEDS

2. Due to personal passiveness and lack of concern from the early stages of
development, mild and moderate intellectually disabled children commence
additional lagging behind because of insufficient stimulation and poor interaction
with environment. Their development stages are stretched in time and every
consecutive is longer, until development stops.
3. Individuals of absolute norm demonstrate results corresponding to their calendar
age.
4. For individuals who are intellectually disabled, the calendar age does not
correspond to the mental age.
5. For individuals who are moderately intellectually disabled, their stage levels are
even worse than those who are mildly intellectually disabled, due to heavier
mental deficiencies.
The experiments developed in this article prove that from point of view of Piaget’s
theory, the cognition development of an intellectually disabiled child displays slower
progress passing the various cognition stages and with lower values of overall
development.
The demonstrated experiments allow every teacher to repeat Piaget’s experiments
and find out at what stage the student is.
The model offered would allow the general teacher as well as the school
personality development team to easily orient themselves with the capabilities of a SEN
student to develop individual programs adequate to the student’s progress.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research,
authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding
The author received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication
of this article.

References

Humphreys, L. and Ch. Parsons (1979). Piagetian tasks measure intelligence and
intelligence tests assess cognitive development: A reanalysis. Intelligence, Volume
3, Issue 4, October–December, Pages 369-381. doi.org/10.1016/0160-2896(79)90005-
9.
Inhelder, B., & Piaget, J. (1958). The Growth of Logical Thinking from Childhood to Adolescence.
New York: Basic Books.
Marwaha, S. Goswami, M. and B. Vashist (2017). Prevalence of Principles of Piaget’s
Theory Among 4-7-year-old Children and their Correlation with IQ. Journal of

European Journal of Special Education Research - Volume 5 │ Issue 2 │ 2019 91

 Milen Z. Zamfirov
APPLICATION OF JEAN PIAGET’S COGNITION DEVELOPMENT TASKS
ON STUDENTS WITH SPECIAL EDUCATIONAL NEEDS

Clinical and Diagnostic Research. Aug; 11(8): ZC111–ZC115. doi:

10.7860/JCDR/2017/28435.10513.
Piaget, J., & B. Inhelder (1956). The child’s conception of space. London: Routledge & Kegan
Paul, 1956.
Shayer, М. (2008). Intelligence for education: As described by Piaget and measured by
psychometrics. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 78, 1–29. doi:
10.1348/000709907X264907.
Slavin, R. (2018). Educational Psychology: Theory and Practice. Pearson.

European Journal of Special Education Research - Volume 5 │ Issue 2 │ 2019 92

 Milen Z. Zamfirov
APPLICATION OF JEAN PIAGET’S COGNITION DEVELOPMENT TASKS
ON STUDENTS WITH SPECIAL EDUCATIONAL NEEDS

Creative Commons licensing terms

Authors will retain the copyright of their published articles agreeing that a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0) terms will
be applied to their work. Under the terms of this license, no permission is required from the author(s) or publisher for members of the community to
copy, distribute, transmit or adapt the article content, providing a proper, prominent and unambiguous attribution to the authors in a manner that makes
clear that the materials are being reused under permission of a Creative Commons License. Views, opinions and conclusions expressed in this research
article are views, opinions and conclusions of the author(s). Open Access Publishing Group and European Journal of Special Education Research shall
not be responsible or answerable for any loss, damage or liability caused in relation to/arising out of conflict of interests, copyright violations and
inappropriate or inaccurate use of any kind content related or integrated on the research work. All the published wor ks are meeting the Open Access
Publishing requirements and can be freely accessed, shared, modified, distributed and used in educational, commercial and non-commercial purposes
under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0).

European Journal of Special Education Research - Volume 5 │ Issue 2 │ 2019 93