Practical 2
( 2. Observation of 5 and 9 year old kids )
2.1 AIM
The aim of the present study is to investigate the development of the concept of
conservation among children belonging to two different cognitive stages as proposed
by
Jean Piaget— Preoperational Stage (2–7 years) and Concrete Operational Stage (7–11
years)—and to analyse how children of different ages (5 years and 9 years) differ in
their logical reasoning abilities.
2.2 INTRODUCTION
(Importance of Conservation in Piaget’s Theory)
Jean Piaget’s theory of cognitive development is one of the most influential frameworks
in understanding how children think and learn. According to Piaget, children do not
simply acquire knowledge; rather, they actively construct it through interaction with
their environment.
A central concept in his theory is conservation, which refers to the understanding that
certain properties of objects—such as number, mass, volume, and quantity—remain
unchanged even when their outward appearance is altered.
The importance of conservation in Piaget’s theory lies in the fact that it marks a major
cognitive shift from intuitive, perception-based thinking to logical, rule-based thinking.
It acts as a clear indicator of cognitive maturity, distinguishing between the
Preoperational and Concrete Operational stages.
Children in the Preoperational Stage (2–7 years) tend to rely heavily on what they see.
Their thinking is dominated by:
• Centration (focus on one aspect)
• Irreversibility (inability to mentally reverse actions)
As a result, they often fail conservation tasks.
In contrast, children in the Concrete Operational Stage (7–11 years) develop
• Decantation (ability to consider multiple aspects)
• Reversibility (ability to mentally undo actions)
• Logical reasoning Thus, conservation is not just a concept but a foundation of logical
thinking, crucial for learning mathematics, problem-solving, and scientific reasoning.
2.2.1 Law of Conservation (Piaget)
The Law of Conservation states that certain physical properties of objects such as
number, mass, volume, and quantity remain constant, even when their appearance
Changes. In simple terms, “nothing is added or removed, so the quantity stays the same.”
This ability develops during the Concrete Operational Stage (7–11 years).
Children in the Preoperational Stage (2–7 years) usually fail these tasks because they rely on
what they see rather than logical reasoning.
2.2.2 Why Children Fail (Important for theory)
Younger children fail conservation due to:
• Centration → focusing on one aspect (e.g., height only)
• Irreversibility → cannot mentally reverse actions
• Perceptual thinking → depend on appearance
Older children succeed due to:
• Decentration
• Reversibility
• Logical reasoning
2.2.3 Table: Types of Conservation (Piaget)
Type of conservation Explanation Example Age of development
Number Quantity remains Coins spread out 6-7 years
same despite look more but are
rearrangement same
Mass Mass remains same Clay ball → flat 7-8 years
despite shape shape
change
Volume Volume remains Water in tall vs 6-8 years
same short glass
despite container
change
Liquid Liquid quantity Glass → bowl 6-7 years
remains same transfer
despite
appearance
Length Length remains Two sticks 6-7 years
same misaligned
despite position
change
Area Area remains same Blocks spread 7-9 years
despite arrangement out
2.3 PARTICIPANT DETAILS
Participant Name Exact age Stage
Ishant 5 years 2 months Preoperational
Aarav 9 year 1 month Concrete operational
2.4 TOOLS USED
• Transparent glasses and bottles
• Clay / play dough
• Coins
• Water (coloured for visibility)
• Artificial flowers
2.5 METHODOLOGY
The present study follows an experimental method in which five structured activities
(experiments) are conducted to assess different types of conservation.
Each activity is designed to test a specific aspect of conservation such as volume,
number, mass, liquid, and classification. The children are observed individually while
performing each task.
The methodology focuses not only on the correctness of the answer but also on:
• The reasoning provided by the child
• The behaviour and confidence level
• The cognitive strategies used
This approach helps in understanding the underlying thinking process, rather than just the
final response.
2.6 PROCEDURE
The study was conducted in the home environment of the children to ensure comfort
and natural behaviour.
Before beginning the activities, a basic
rapport was established with the children through casual conversation to make them feel
relaxed.
After this, five activities were conducted one by one.
In each activity:
1. The child was first shown two equal quantities
2. The child confirmed equality
3. A transformation was performed in front of them
4. The child was asked to judge and explain
All responses were carefully observed and recorded.
ACTIVITY 1: CONSERVATION OF
VOLUME
Aim
To study whether children understand that the volume of liquid remains constant
despite change in container shape.
Concept Background
According to Piaget, conservation of volume develops during the Concrete Operational
Stage. Younger children (Preoperational Stage) fail because of centration (focusing
only on height) and irreversibility (cannot mentally reverse the action). Older children
apply decentration and understand that height and width compensate each other.
Material Required
• Two identical bottles
• One tall narrow bottle
• Water
Step by Step Process
1. wo identical bottles were filled with equal water.
[Link] and Aarav were asked if both had same water.
[Link] from one bottle was poured into a tall bottle.
[Link] were asked which has more and why.
Observation Table
Aspect Ishan (5 year ) Aarav (9year)
Initial “Same hai” “Same hai”
After change “Isme zyada hai” Same
Reason “Ye lamba hai” Transfer hua”
Analysis (Piaget Focused)
Ishan’s response reflects centration, as he focused only on height. He lacked
reversibility, as he did not think of pouring back. Aarav demonstrated decentration
and reversibility, indicating Concrete Operational thinking
Interpretation
Ishan is in Preoperational Stage where thinking is perception-based. Aarav has
developed logical reasoning, supporting Piaget’s theory.
Result
Ishan failed; Aarav succeeded in conserving volume.
Conclusion
Conservation of volume develops with cognitive maturity and logical reasoning.
Limitation
Visual difference may influence response.
ACTIVITY 2: CONSERVATION OF
NUMBER
Aim
To study whether number remains constant despite rearrangement.
Concept Background
Piaget states number conservation develops early but still requires logical thinking.
Younger children depend on visual length, while older children use counting (logical
operation).1
Material Required
• Coins
Step by Step Process
1. Two equal rows of coins were placed.
2. Ishan confirmed equality.
3. One row was spread out.
4. Child was asked which has more.
Observation Table
Aspect Ishant Aarav
After changes “Flat wala is good” “Same hi hai”
Reason “Bada hai ” “Row change hai”
Analysis
Ishan relied on visual appearance (centration). Aarav used logical counting, showing
understanding of conservation.
Interpretation
Ishan lacks logical operations; Aarav shows Concrete Operational abilities.
Result
Ishan failed; Aarav passed.
Conclusion
Number conservation requires logical verification beyond perception.
Limitation
Counting ability may influence result.
ACTIVITY 3: CONSERVATION Of
MASS
Aim
To study understanding of mass despite change in shape.
Concept Background
Mass conservation develops when children understand that shape change does not
affect quantity. Younger children focus on surface area, while older children apply
Reversibility.
Material Required
• Clay
Step by Step Process
1. Two equal clay balls were shown.
2. Ishan confirmed equality.
3. One ball was flattened.
4. Child was asked which has more.
Observation Table
Aspect Ishan Aarav
After change “Bowl me zyada haiu ” “Same hai”
Reason “Spread ho gaya” “Bas dala hai”
Analysis
Ishan showed centration on size and lacked reversibility. Aarav showed logical
Reasoning.
Interpretation
Ishan’s thinking is perceptual; Aarav’s is logical.
Result
Ishan failed; Aarav succeeded.
Conclusion
Mass conservation depends on ability to reverse transformation mentally.
Limitation
Experience with clay may affect responses.
ACTIVITY 4: CONSERVATION OF
LIQUID
Aim
To assess understanding of liquid quantity.
Concept Background
Liquid conservation requires understanding of compensation (height vs width). Younger
children focus on spread, older understand logical equivalence.
Material Required
• Glass
• Bowl
• Water
Step by Step Process
1. Equal water in two glasses was shown.
2. Ishan confirmed equality.
3. Water was poured into a bowl.
4. Child was asked which has more.
Observation Table
Aspect Ishan 5 year Aarav 9 year
After change “ bowl me zyda hai” “ same hai ”
Reason Spread ho gaya Bas dala hai
Analysis
Ishan focused on surface spread (centration). Aarav applied reversibility and logic.
Interpretation
Ishan shows Preoperational thinking; Aarav shows Concrete Operational reasoning.
Result
Ishan failed; Aarav succeeded.
Conclusion
Liquid conservation reflects development of logical thinking.
Limitation
Visual illusion may mislead.
ACTIVITY 5: CLASSIFICATION
TASK
Aim
To study classification ability in children.
Concept Background
Classification requires ability to consider multiple attributes. Younger children show
centration, older children show hierarchical thinking.
Material Required
• Artificial flowers
Step by Step Process
[Link] flowers were given to Ishan.
[Link] was asked to group them.
[Link] asked to sort by another feature.
Observation Table
Aspect Ishan 5 yrs Aarav 9 yrs
Sorting By colour only By color and type
multi -criteria Unable ,confused Able to use both
Class inclusion Could not understand Understood clearly
Behaviour Hesitant, changed groups Confident ,synamatic
Analysis
Ishan could focus on only one feature at a time (centration).
Interpretation
He lacks ability to apply multiple criteria, confirming Preoperational Stage.
Result
Failed classification task.
Conclusion
Classification develops with logical thinking and supports conservation development.
Limitation
Only one child tested.
2.7 INTERPRETATION
The findings of this study strongly support Piaget’s theory of cognitive development.
Ishan consistently relied on perceptual features such as height, length, and spread,
demonstrating centration and irreversibility.
In contrast, Aarav applied logical reasoning, reversibility, and decentration across all
tasks. This clearly shows that cognitive development involves a transition from intuitive
thinking to logical thinking.
The experiment successfully demonstrates that conservation is not learned through
instruction alone but develops naturally with cognitive maturity.
2.8 RESULT
Activity Ishan 5 yrs Aarav 9 yrs
Volume Failed Passed
Number Failed Passed
Mass Failed passed
Liquid Failed Passed
Classification Failed —
The overall results indicate a clear developmental difference between the two
participants. Ishan failed all conservation tasks, showing reliance on perceptual cues.
Aarav successfully completed all tasks, demonstrating logical reasoning.
These findings strongly validate Piaget’s concept that cognitive development occurs
in stages and is marked by qualitative changes in thinking patterns.
2.9 DISCUSSION
The findings confirm that cognitive development follows a structured pattern. Younger
children’s errors are not random but systematic, reflecting developmental limitations
like centration and irreversibility.
Older children demonstrate logical thinking, reversibility, and decentration, proving that
cognitive abilities evolve with age and experience.
2.10 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY
• Small sample size
• Individual differences ignored
• Environmental factors not controlled
• Prior experience may influence responses
2.11 CONCLUSION
The study concludes that conservation develops gradually as children move from the
Preoperational to the Concrete Operational stage. It highlights that thinking patterns
change qualitatively, not just quantitatively, validating Piaget’s developmental
Framework
2.12 REFERENCES
• Piaget, J. (1952). The Origins of Intelligence in Children
• Piaget, J. & Inhelder, B. (1969). The Psychology of the Child
• Berk, L. (2013). Child Development
• Santrock, J. (2018). Child Development