Development

Development: How did you develop?

Early Brain Development

When the foetus is ¾ weeks old, a long tube

develops in the brain. It forms 3 distinct
sections.

By 5 weeks old, the forebrain and hindbrain

have split into two (anterior and posterior
parts)

Anterior: front part of the brain

Posterior: back part of the brain

At 6 weeks old the cerebellum develops as well as the medulla oblongata.

Cerebellum: Joins the midbrain and spinal

cord. It is responsible for balance,
coordination and moving.

Medulla Oblongata: Responsible for

automatic/involuntary responses e.g.
breathing, blinking and sneezing.

Neural connections development

From birth to three years old is a time of rapid brain development! There is an
increase in the amount of neural connections. With 700-1000 forming every
second. The brain doubles in size in the 1st year and reaches 80% of its size by
three.
Piaget’s Theory of Cognitive Development

Cognitive development are the changes we go through in terms of our thinking,

problem solving, perception and language.

Piaget suggested that all children will go through FOUR stages of cognitive
development like a transition. These stages are UNIVERSAL and INVARIANT.

Universal: Relating to all everyone

Invariant: Never changing

Stages of Cognitive Development

0-2 years – Sensorimotor

2-7 years – Pre Operational

7-11 years – Concrete Operational

11+ years – Formal operational

Sensorimotor Stage

Infants explore the world using their senses. They learn through smell, hearing
and touch. At 6 months, they develop object permanence and often repeat
actions such as dropping items.

Object permanence: They know that an object exist even when it is out of sight.

Pre-Operational

This stage is divided into two aspects: Symbolic Stage and Intuitive Stage.

Symbolic Stage is when children use symbols to represent objects. Animism can
also be seen and children are egocentric.

Animism: believe that all objects are alive e.g. children talk to their teddies and
dolls

Egocentric: Only see the world from their own view.

Intuitive Stage is when children use reasoning to understand the world. Children
can only focus on one aspect of a situation. This is known as Centration. There is
also Irriversibility. This is when a child is not able to use thought to reverse an
event such as knowing that if water from a wide glass is poured into a tall glass so
it looks as if there is more water, when the water is poured back into the wide it
will look the same as it did.

Concrete Operational

Children can apply rules and strategies to aid their understanding and thinking.

Abilities in this stage include:

Seriation: Sorting objects, such as into size

Classification: Naming and identifying objects

Reversibility: can reverse actions

Conversion: Understanding quantity and length stay the same

Decentration: Taking multiple views

Formal Operational Stage

Children’s thinking has more control. They can understand abstract though,
understand time and how it’s changed and can examine consequences.

Evaluating Piaget’s stages of Cognitive Development

Strengths:

Real work application: Piaget’s work has practical applications and can be used in
education to help children to develop into the next stage.

Research support: Research shows the existence of the stages which increases
the validity of the theory.

Useful: Piaget’s data came from interviews and observations with children which
means there is a lot of in depth data which increases the validity of the theory.
Weaknesses:

Lack of research support: Some studies show children develop earlier than Piaget
thought which reduces the validity of the theory.

Not useful: Piaget’s theory did not look at the influence of social interactions or
cultural setting which could impact on a child’d development.

Not useful: Piaget’s data came from interviews and observations with children.
The children may have lied or provided socially desirable responses and the
observations may be subjective to the interpreter.

Lack of research support: Repeating Piaget’s research in a more natural setting

produced different results therefore the theory is not reliable.

Schema development

Equilibrium: Children experience the world around them and the schemas work
for them. For example, a child sees an animal with four legs and calls it a horse
this is their schema. Therefore, every four legged animal is a horse = equilibrium

Disequilibrium: As they experience new things in life, new information is added

which does not make sense in terms of their schema. E.g. A child sees a zebra, it
has four legs but its not a horse??? = disequilibrium

Assimilation: Children need to incorporate new information into their schema

to accommodate new info. E.g. A child learns about new animals = assimilation

Accommodate: when new information or experiences cause you to modify your

existing schemas
Developmental Study 1

Piaget and Inhelder (1959)

Background: Children in the preoperational stage sees the world from their own
viewpoint. Understanding there are other viewpoints is something that
develops. This helps move into the concrete operational stage where they
‘decentre’.

Aims: The extent to what ages do children take the view of another person and
children’s system of putting together different views of what they see.

Procedure: 100 participants took part between the ages of 4-12

4 – 6.5 years = 21 children

6.5 – 8 years = 30 children

8 – 9.5 years = 33 children

9.5 – 12 years = 16

Materials:

1. A model of three mountains including a house, red cross, snow and a path

2. 10 pictures the three mountains from different positions

3. Pieces of card in the shape of mountains to represent the mountains

4. A wooden doll

Ways of questioning:

1. Place the shapes to show how the mountain looked for them and the doll

2. Pick out of 10 pictures what they could see and the doll could see

3. Choose a picture and position the doll to see that view

Findings:

Pre-operational stage (4-6.5 years): Chooses pictures and shows picture for what
they can see.

Concrete operational stage (7-9 years): Start to understand that others see the
model differently. Children 9-10 years old understand the doll has a different view.

Conclusions:

● Children up to 7 were egocentric

● Older children were non egocentric

● The ‘three mountains’ task supports Piaget’s stages of development

Strengths

Validity: Piaget provided a lot of detail about children’s development. We know

when children stop being egocentric.

Reliability: Piaget used careful controls in his study. The same mountain was used
every time.

Validity: Piaget used qualitative data. Data is in detail and from the individual
which makes it valid.

Validity: Children were from Switzerland and familiar with mountain scenery so
the task is argued to be a natural task.

Weaknesses

Validity: Piaget’s study did not have a realistic task. Children were asked to look at
mountains so the study lacks mundane realism.

Validity: Piaget used qualitative data. Participants may give socially desirable
responses which reduces the validity.

Generalisability: Piaget did not have a range of cultures. He only used Swiss
children.
Counter research evidence

Helen Borke (1975) stated that children were not egocentric but they found the
‘three mountains task’ too hard as the task was unrealistic.

Borke changed the wooden doll to Grover (a character from Sesame Street) and
the mountain model was on a turn table that the children could turn themselves.

Borke found that children of 3 years old accurately recalled the view of Grover
over 79% of the time and children ages 4 years old correctly recalled 93% of the
time.

Dweck’s mindset theory

Mindset: A set of beliefs we have about our ability to succeed in education and
other areas of our life.

Growth mindset: Believing that

practice and effort can improve
abilities

Fixed mindset: Believing that

your abilities are fixed and
unchangeable

Key points of the theory

1) Children should be praised for

effort rather than ability

2) Children can develop a fixed

mindset and give up on challenges because it is not ‘in them’ to succeed

3)Teachers also have fixed or growth mindsets – a teacher with a fixed mindset
will focus on a child’s ability whereas a teacher with a growth mindset sees a child
can improve with sticking at things (perseverance).
Strengths

Research Support: Dweck’s theory of development has support by scientific

evidence.For example, Yeager and Dweck found that using a growth mindset
improved 1500 low achieving students grades.

Free will: Dweck’s theory acknowledges that we have free will. Dweck believes we
have the power to change our thinking and thoughts about challenges and that
we can move mindsets.

Useful: Dweck’s theory is useful. For example, we can use the theory in schools.
Teachers are now instructed to praise effort and give continuous feedback about
how to improve their work, rather than being grade focused.

Weaknesses

Lacks research support: For example David Dadau (2017) wrote an article
questioning the theory as he believed that just because you believe you have a
growth mindset doesn’t increase your abilities.

Not useful: For example, the methods used to support the theory include
questionnaires which are lack validity because participants might lie and provide
socially desirable responses.

Willingham’s theory of practice

Willingham suggested that to learn and develop skills you must have previous
knowledge. Knowledge frees up space in our working memory. This allows us to
practice skills such as problem solving.

Practice and effort

Practicing allows knowledge and skills to move from STM to LTM. Enough practice
allows you to do things automatically. This leaves space in your working memory
to learn new things.
Cognitive, Physical and Social Development

Willingham believed that we can boost children’s cognitive, physical and social
development and suggested strategies that teachers should do to support this:

Cognitive development:

Use problems that are not too far out of the student's reach. Remember that
children’s abilities change every day.

Physical Development:

Focus on what movements would be necessary for a task. Practice the muscle
movements in front of children.

Social Development:

Encourage self-regulation (do not be influenced by others). Demonstrate

appropriate behaviour for children to model.

Strengths:

Real work application: Willingham’s work can be applied to education and other
situations to promote a child’s development in a positive way.

Research support: Betty Repacholi and Alsion Gopnik’s (1997) study provides
experimental support, showing that young children needed the knowledge in
Piaget’s experiment before they could understand the skills.

Weaknesses:

Not useful: Willingham ignored the importance of individual differences in

learning. Some of his theory relates to genes (e.g working memory). What is in
someone’s genes cannot be changed easily using strategies.

Not reductionist (holistic): Willingham’s ideas come many areas of neuroscience,

memory theory and cognitive development. This means that his ideas are not
really one singular theory.
Developmental study 2

Gunderson et al (2013) Parent praise to 1-3 year olds predicts their motivation.

Background: There are two types of praise given to children. The type of praise
can affect the type of motivational framework that the child develops.

Person praise can lead to a child developing an entity motivational framework.

Entity motivational framework: Behaviour and ability is fixed and based on a

child’s nature.

Process praise (praising the child’s behaviour) can lead to a child developing
an incremental motivational framework.

Incremental motivational framework: Behaviour and ability can be changed with

effort

Aims:

1. Are children affected by different types of parental praise?

2. Do parents give more person praise to girls than boys?

3. Does the use of parents praise predict their motivation in later life?

Procedure:

The sample included 29 boys and 24 girls. This included a range of cultures
e.g. 64% were white, 17% were African American, 11% were Hispanic, and 8%
were multiracial.

Longitudinal study – Children were assessed using a questionnaire at 14 months,

26 months and 38 months. Five years later their motivation was reviewed. The
questionnaire included a range of questionnaires about their motivation, morality,
beliefs and intelligence

Results: Overall parents gave more process praise than person praise. Process
praise was given more to boys than girls.
Process praise = 18%

Person praise = 16%

Boys = 24% process praise

Girls = 10% process praise

A strong correlation between process praise and motivation was strengthened.

Conclusion:

Clear relationship between parents use of process praise and a child’s later use of
incremental motivational framework (ability being changeable). Did not find that
parental use of person praise led to an entity motivational framework (ability to
fixed)

Evaluating Gunderson et al (2013)

Strengths:

Validity: Gunderson et al conducted their research in naturalistic settings. This

increases the ecoglogical validity of the study.

Validity: The researchers who videotaped and analysed the data did not know
what the study was on. This means the interpretation is less likely to be influenced
by bias.

Generalisability: There were a mixture of participants cultures.

Weaknesses:

Ethical issues: The ethics can be criticised. The participants were told that the
study was on child development.

Validity: The parents were observed during the research and so they may have
changed their behaviour towards their child.
Issues and Debates: Morality

Morals: Understanding what is right and wrong. This can differ depending on
situations and culture.

Moral development: Children’s growing understanding about right and wrong

Piaget

Piaget thought that moral development happens in stages.

From 5-10 years old rules are about punishment and right and wrong. =
heteronomous. Other people provide rules which govern our behaviour.

From 10 years onwards its about bad actions could have good consequences =
autonomous. Individuals are responsible for their own behaviour and decide what
is right or wrong.

Kohlberg – Heinz’s dilemma

To assess at what moral stage a child is at, Kohlberg used ‘Heinz’s dilemma’. How
children responded to the dilemma indicated their moral stage.

Heinz’s wife was dying from a particular type of cancer. Doctors said a new drug
might save her. The drug had been discovered by a local chemist, and the Heinz
tried desperately to buy some, but the chemist was charging ten times the money
it cost to make the drug, and this was much more than the Heinz could afford.
Heinz could only raise half the money, even after help from family and friends. He
explained to the chemist that his wife was dying and asked if he could have the
drug cheaper or pay the rest of the money later.
The chemist refused, saying that he had discovered the drug and was going to
make money from it. The husband was desperate to save his wife, so later that
night he broke into the chemist’s and stole the drug.
Kohlberg’s stages of moral development

1. Obedience and punishment: The child is good to avoid punishment.

2. Individualism: Children realise that adults may have different viewpoints.

3. Relationships: The child is good to look good for other people.

4. Law and order: The child is good to uphold rules in society and not feel
guilt.

5. Social contract: Children realise that sometimes rules might change for the
greater good.

6. Universal Principals: Children develop their own set of morals and laws

Evaluating theories of moral development

Weaknesses:

Not useful: Piaget and Kohlberg used made up unrealistic stories which means the
they lack ecological validity as the answers given might not be the real decisions
they would make.

Not useful: Kohlberg used an all male sample so his findings are not generalisable
to women’s morality.