Bruner’s Theory of Cognitive Growth (Development)

Jerome Bruner, a developmental psychologist of considerable repute, propounded a theory concerning cognitive growth (Lutkehaus, 2003). In contradistinction to Piaget, who sought to correlate developmental changes with cognitive structures, Bruner accentuated the manifold modalities by which children delineate and represent knowledge. Bruner's perspectives constitute a functional exposition of human development and possess salient implications for pedagogics and the acquisition of knowledge.

According to Bruner (1964), “The development of human intellectual functioning from infancy to such perfection as it may reach is shaped by a series of technological advances in the use of mind” (p. 1). These technological advances hinge upon an increasing facility with language and exposure to systematic instruction (Bruner, 1966). As children develop apace, their actions are constrained less by immediate stimuli. Cognitive processes (e.g., thoughts, beliefs) mediate the relationship between stimulus and response, such that learners may maintain the same response in a changing environment, or perform different responses in the same environment, depending on what they deem adaptive.

Individuals represent knowledge via three distinct modes, which emerge in a developmental sequence: enactive, iconic, and symbolic (Bruner, 1964; Bruner, Olver, & Greenfield, 1966). These modes are not structures per se, but rather encompass differing forms of cognitive processing (i.e., functions; Vide Table 'Bruner’s Modes of Knowledge Representation').

Enactive representation encompasses motor responses, or means of manipulating the environment. Actions such as riding a bicycle and tying a knot are represented largely in muscular actions. Stimuli are defined by the actions that prompt them. Amongst toddlers, a ball (stimulus) is represented as something to throw and bounce (actions).

Iconic representation pertains to action-free mental images. Children acquire the capability to contemplate objects that are not physically present. They mentally transform objects and consider their properties separately from what actions can be performed with the objects. Iconic representation enables one to recognise objects.

Symbolic representation utilises symbol systems (e.g., language, mathematical notation) to encode knowledge. Such systems enable one to comprehend abstract concepts (e.g., the 'x' variable in ) and to alter symbolic information as a consequence of verbal instruction. Symbolic systems represent knowledge with remote and arbitrary features. The word “Philadelphia” bears no more resemblance to the city than a nonsensical syllable (Bruner, 1964).

The symbolic mode is the last to develop and swiftly becomes the preferred mode, albeit individuals maintain the capability to represent knowledge in the enactive and iconic modes. One might experience the feel of a tennis ball, form a mental picture of it, and describe it in words. The primary advantage of the symbolic mode is that it enables learners to represent and transform knowledge with greater flexibility and power than is possible with the other modes (Bruner, 1964).

That cognisance may be depicted in divers manners doth suggest that pedagogues ought to contemplate varying instruction contingent upon the developmental echelons of the pupil. Ere children may comprehend abstract mathematical notation, they may be exposed to mathematical concepts and operations represented enactively (with blocks) and iconically (in pictures). Bruner did emphasise pedagogy as a means of prompting cognitive development. To posit that a particular concept cannot be imparted because students shall not comprehend it (i.e., they lack readiness) verily is to assert that students shall not comprehend the concept in the manner that pedagogues intend to impart it. Instruction must be matched to the cognitive capabilities of children.

Bruner (1960) is well-renowned for his controversial proposition that any content may be imparted in a meaningful fashion to learners of any age:

Experience o'er the past decade doth point to the fact that our schools may be squandering precious years by postponing the teaching of many import subjects on the ground that they are too difficult. . . . The foundations of any subject may be imparted to anybody at any age in some form. . . . The basic ideas that lie at the very heart of all science and mathematics and the basic themes that give form to life and literature are as simple as they are potent. To be in command of these basic ideas, to employ them effectively, requires a continual deepening of one’s understanding of them that comes from learning to employ them in progressively more complex forms. It is only when such basic ideas are put in formalised terms as equations or elaborated verbal concepts that they are out of reach of the young child, if he has not first understood them intuitively and had a chance to try them out on his own. (pp. 12–13)

Bruner’s proposition may be misinterpreted to signify that learners of any age may be taught aught, which is not veracious. Bruner recommended that content be revisited: Concepts initially should be taught in a simple fashion, so children may comprehend them, and represented in a more complex fashion with development. In literature, children may be able to comprehend intuitively the concepts of “comedy” and “tragedy” (e.g., “comedies are funny and tragedies are sad”) even though they cannot verbally delineate them in literary terms. With development, students shall read, analyse, and compose papers on comedies and tragedies. Students should address topics at increasing echelons of complexity as they advance through the curriculum, rather than encountering a topic only once.

Bruner’s theory is constructivist, for it doth assume that at any age learners assign meaning to stimuli and events based upon their cognitive capabilities and experiences with the social and physical environments. Bruner’s modes of representation bear some similarity to the operations that students engage in during Piaget’s stages (i.e., sensorimotor: enactive, concrete operational—iconic, formal operational—symbolic), albeit Bruner’s is not a stage theory. Bruner’s theory also allows for concepts to be mentally represented in multiple modes simultaneously: An adolescent knows how to throw a basketball, can visualise its appearance, and can compute its circumference with the formula Below, you may consider Bruner’s ideas applied to teaching and learning: