Development Flashcards
brain stem
- highly developed at birth
- connects brain to spinal cord
- autonomic functions
cerebellum
- matures late
- near top of spinal cord
- co-ordinates sensory and motor
thalamus
- deep inside the brain in each hemisphere
- information hub, recieves and then sends signals around the brain
cortex
- very thin and folded cover
- thinking and processing
- frontal, visual, auditory, and motor areas in each hemisphere
nature vs. nurture
nature is inherited and nurture is environmental influences
smoking
smoking during pregnancy can lead to a smaller brain
infection
in the womb, German measles can lead to hearing loss
voices
babies learn to recognise mother’s voice
imteraction between nature and nurture
the brain forms due to nature but the environment has a major influence, even in the womb
early brain development
how the brain develops in the womb and matures
Piaget’s theory
changes in thinking (cognition) over time
children think differently from adults
stages
different kinds of logical thinking occur at each stage
schemas
mental structures containing knowledge. schemas become more complex through assimilation and accomodation.
assimilation
adding new information to an existing schema
accomodation
recieving new information that changes our understanding so a new schema is formed
Piaget’s theory - evaluation points
research evidence - many studies have been conducted to test Piaget’s theory, which has helped improve our understanding of how children’s thinking develops
real-world application - the theory has helped change classroom teaching so it is now more activity-based
the sample - middle-class Swiss children were used so theory may not be universal
conservation
although appearance changes, quantity stays the same.
Piaget showed younger children can’t conserve quantities.
challenged by ‘naughty teddy study’.
mcgarrigle and donaldson’s study - aim
the ‘naughty teddy studdy’ aimed to see if a deliberate change in the row of counters would help younger children conserve.
mcgarrigle and donaldson’s study - method
children aged 4-6 years
two rows of counters, teddy messed up one of them. child asked if rows were the same
mcgarrigle and donaldson’s study - results
deliberate change = 41% conserved
accidental change = 68% conserved
older children did better than younger ones
mcgarrigle and donaldson’s study - conclusion
Piaget’s method doesn’t show what children can do
this study does show there are still age-related changes
mcgarrigle and donaldson’s study - evaluation points
the sample - primary school sample from one school, so comparisons between groups may not be valid
the change was not noticed - children may appear to comserve because they simply didn’t notice the change as they were distracted by the teddy
challenges Piaget- the study shows that Piaget confused young children with his style lf questioning. this helps to refine his theory
egocentrism
seeing the world only from one’s own point of view
Piaget tested this with the three mountains task, showing egocentrism up to age 7
this was challenged by the ‘policeman doll study’
hughes’ study - aim
to create a test that would make more sense than Piaget’s
hughes’ study - method
3 1/2 to 5 year-olds asked to hide a boy doll from two policemen. they were given practice first with one doll
hughe’s study - results
90% could hide the boy doll from two policemen. 3-year-olds did less well with a more complex task
hughes’ study - conclusions
children aged 4 years are mostly not egocentric
Piaget underestimated abilities but was right that thinking changes with age
hughes’ study - evaluation points
more realistic - task made bettter sense to children and they were given practice so they understood, so a more realistic test of abilities
effects of expectations - unconscious cues from the researcher may have influenced the children’s behaviour, so the results lack validity
challenges Piaget - the study shows that Piaget’s task confused the children, making them appear less able thinkers
stages of cognitive development
four stages at different ages. children think differently as their brains mature. universal order of stages
sensorimotor stage
0 - 2 years
learn to co-ordinate sensory and motor information
pre-operational stage
2 - 7 years
can’t think in a consistently logical way (it doesn’t ‘make sense’)
egocentric and lack conservation
concrete operational
7 - 11 years
at 7, most children can conserve, and show less egocentrism
logical thinking applied to physical objects only
formal operational
11+ years
children can draw conclusions about abstract concepts and form arguments
stages of cognitive development - evaluation points
underestimated children’s abilities - some types of thinking develop earlier than Piaget proposed
overestimated children’s abilities - suggested that children 11+ are capable of abstract reasoning but most can’t cope with Watson’s card sorting task in abstract form
basic idea is correct - does show children’s thinking changes with age so theory is valid
application in education - readiness
can only teach something when child biologically ‘ready’
application in education - learning by discovery and the teacher’s role
children must play active role, not note-learn. teachers should challenge schemas
application in education - individual learning
children go through same stages in same order but at different rates
application in education - application to stages
sensorimotor - stimulating sensory environment
pre-operational - discovery learning rather than written work
concrete operational - physical materials to manipulate
formal operational stage - scientific experiments to develop logical thinking
application in education - evaluation points
very influential - positive impact on UK education as more child-centered activity in primary schools
possible to improve with practice - thinking can develop at an earlier age if given enough practice, not just when ready
traditional methods may be good - direct instruction is a better teaching method in some subjects
dweck’s mindset theory
the set of assumptioms we have (mindset) affects success
success is due to effort not talent
dweck’s mindset theory - fixed mindset
effort won’t help because talent is fixed in the genes. focused on performance
dweck’s mindset theory - growth mindset
can improve with effort, enjoy challenge. focused on learning goals
dweck’s mindset theory - dealing with failure
fixed mindset - failure indicates lack of talent, so give up
growth mindset - opportunity to learn more and put in more effort
dweck’s mindset theory - a continuum
not simply one or the other (fixed or growth). depends on the situation
dweck’s mindset theory - evaluation points
research support - Dweck found children taught a growth mindset had better grades and motivation
both mindsets involve praise - praising effort still leads to doing things for approval so can discourage independent behaviour
real-world application - in business, sport, relationships - seeing failure as a lack of effort rather than a lack of talent motivates future effort
learning styles
people differ in how they learn
matching teaching to learning style should improve learning
learning styles - verbaliser
focus on words. processing by hearing or reading information and talking about it
learning styles - visualiser
processing information by seeing spatial relationships using diagrams, mind maps, graphs, etc.
learning styles
