Reflections on Child Development Theories                                                         

 

            Berk, Laura E. (2002).  Infants, Children, and Adolescents,  pp 11 -32.  Reflections on the various theories of child development

 

Berk in Chapter One discusses numerous theories of cognitive development in children.  She begins with a historical perspective and continues through the 19^th and early 20^th century theories, ending with the more recent philosophies.   All the theories discussed have some basis in fact and are interesting to read, but two of the theories stand out to me as ones that ring true.  As a 4^th/5^th grade teacher and a mother to two young children I have a front row seat to numerous examples in the development of thinking/awareness skills in early childhood.  Using these experiences, I feel that a combination of Piaget’s Cognitive-Developmental Theory and the Dynamic Systems Theory are most accurate in describing the three basic issues in child development.  These issues are 1) Is development continuous or discontinuous?, 2) Is there one course or many in development?,  and 3) Is nature or nurture a more important component of cognitive development?

Piaget’s theory of development states that cognitive skills arrive in different distinct stages and these stages are universally found in every child.  His theory holds that both nature and nurture are important in development.  A child needs a stimulating environment to develop cognitively, but these skills only develop when the brain in mature.  The Dynamic Systems theory differs from Piaget’s theory in that cognitive skills develop along both a continuous and discontinuous scale and that these developing skills can occur along many different courses.  In this theory, again both nature and nurture are involved, but cognitive learning skills guided through the integrated  system of the child’s mind, physical, and  social surroundings.  I believe that Piaget is correct in his thoughts on a child needing a stimulating environment to grow and that skills develop only when the child is cognitively mature for gaining that skill.  In the Dynamic Systems theory the thought that skills are learned along a continuous and multi-course path are more believable than Piaget’s one course and discontinuous path.

When comparing my children, which I believe have grown up in a loving, and stimulating environment, to students in my class that come from relatively neutral nurturing home environments, the children from these less than ideal homes seem to be lower achievers in school.  They have more problems socially, following directions in class, their reading levels are much lower, and they are less interested in learning.  These children come from lower socio-economic status family environments and were not usually played with or were allowed to play with many other children.    My two children have been read to since birth and have had early access to educational opportunities and toys.  One child is in an accelerated class and the other is scholastically at the top of her on-level class.   Their cognitive skills were encouraged by physical play, going to pre-school, and by playing with both peers and older children.  They were given ample opportunities to interact with their environment both physically and mentally.   Given these comparisons, nature and nurture do have equal footing in cognitive development.

In the issue of continuous or discontinuous and one course or many in thinking skills I have to lean towards the Dynamic Systems Theory being more realistic.  My two children have been given basically the same upbringing but each has developed along a different course from each other to meet the same end.  Their development of cognitive skills have been both a continuous and discontinuous process.  They can gradually gain “minor” skills more on a continuous path, but yet over night develop a major skill depicted as a discontinuous step.

.