1.

0 INTRODUCTION

Child development is a field of study devoted to understanding all aspects of human

growth and change from conception through adolescence (Berk, 2012). According to Feldman
(2010), child development is a continuing process throughout childhood and adolescence,
where the development occurs in various aspects. This case study entitled “Another Typical
Day” mainly focuses on the cognitive development of children. According to Krause, Bochner &
Duchesne (2003), cognitive development is concerned with our ability to think, to reason and to
understand and remember the world around us. It is bound by more than one development
theory as child development is a complex and varied process and focus on different capabilities.
In this essay, I will analyse the case study and link the developmental theories that are
exemplified in the case to the teacher’s roles followed by suggestions to address the challenges
in the classroom.

2.0 PIAGET’S THEORY

According to Piaget, the preoperational stage children of the age of two to seven years
old are still unable to understand the process of transformation, reversibility, and reasoning. For
example, Luke claimed that Russell had more brownies than his because Russell was seen to
have two pieces of brownies but in fact, the quantity of brownies obtained by both of them were
actually the same. Other children were also complaining about the two pieces of brownies that
Russell had. Their reasoning is tied to what they can see. The children focused on the
differences in quantity of the brownies rather than the size of the brownies each children gotten.
The children were unable to go through the process of transformation as they could not perform
the reverse action in their minds. They were not able to mentally trace the process of putting the
two pieces of brownies side by side. They think qualitatively differently at the preoperational
stage.

Mrs. Arling was well aware of their reasoning at their stage. She was able to react quick
enough to accommodate to the children by cutting their brownies into two. By reacting at such a
manner, she was not seen to be ignoring the understanding of the children, but as a teacher
herself, she was able to comprehend the cognitive development of her students.

In efforts to curb this challenge, instead of merely cutting the pieces of brownies into two
to give the children the impression of having the same amount, the teacher should seize the
opportunity to explain about equality in line with Piaget’s solid quantity conservation task.
Teaching them that the distribution of the brownies was done evenly will reduce the probability
of a similar predicament repeating itself.

In the preoperational stage, children adapt to new objects, new information, or new
experiences as a result of two complementary processes called assimilation and
accommodation. An example from the case, once Mrs. Arling introduced herself as a teacher,
Noah had constructed a symbolic schema that Mrs. Arling is a teacher and not something else.
This schema of his became the assimilation that Mrs. Arling is not anything else, to the point
that the word 'mother' which contradicts with the word 'teacher', will not be added into the
existing schema. Even though Mrs. Arling has repeatedly told Noah that she has a son and by
that, she is a mother. According to Piaget, this creates a state of disequilibrium, in which the
child’s cognitive equilibrium or balance is upset as a result of encountering new information that
cannot be assimilated into an existing schema. However, this does not necessarily mean that
Noah will think as such forever. In order to restore Noah’s cognitive balance or equilibrium, the
child must modify his existing schema to accommodate and accept the fact that Mrs. Arling is
both a teacher and a mother.

In aiding Noah’s modification of his existing schema to address the issue, Mrs. Arling
can introduce occupations to him. Learning about people's jobs or professions can prompt Noah
to further construct his prior knowledge by linking the word 'teacher' which was used before by
Mrs. Arling, to the new word 'occupations'. This will then lead to the realisation that a person can
be both a mother and a teacher at the same time as Noah makes sense of the difference
between the two using the newly modified schema.

According to Piaget, preoperational children are egocentric, they have a very limited
ability to represent the psychological experiences of others. They find difficulty in taking the
point of view of another. The limitations of preoperational thought is recognised as egocentrism.
Preschoolers have difficulty in thinking about how another person feels (Crosser, 2008).
Instead, these children often assume that everyone else share their feelings, reactions, and
perspective. This is shown by Margo and Luke in the case. Luke was using the green coloured
pencil which was later snatched by Margo who then told Luke to use a different colour pencil
instead. In this situation, Margo exhibits very low understanding of turn taking as she should
have waited for her turn to use the colour pencil instead of just taking it away from Luke. Same
goes to Luke. The bin filled with colour pencils that was in the center of their table does not
belong to any of the children. It was supposed to be shared by all who wish to use them. The
children claiming the green coloured pencil as theirs shows that children at their age tend to
have assumed ownership over things which are not over theirs.

Mrs. Arling was wise enough to present the problem that require logical analytic thinking.
Mrs. Arling gave an insight to how Luke felt by putting Noah in his shoes. This is able to
encourage her to look things at a different point of view and to reason out of it.

As a suggestion to avoid such a problem Mrs. Arling could attach instructions for the
usage of the bin colour pencils in simple words accompanied by images to attract the children’s
attention. Instructions with inspirational words can be created to assimilate the schema of
‘sharing’ is ‘caring’ for children at that stage.

3.0 VYGOTSKY’S THEORY

Lev Vygotsky believed that children are active seekers of knowledge, but he did not view
them as solitary agents. In his theory, rich social and cultural contexts profoundly affect
children’s cognition (Berk, 2003). Vygotsky believed that all higher cognitive processes develop
out of social interaction.

Through joint activities with more mature members of society, children come to master
activities and think in ways that have meaning in their culture. A concept called zone of proximal
development (ZPD) explains how this happens. It refers to a range of tasks that the child cannot
yet handle alone but can accomplish with the help of adults and more skilled peers.

Based on the evidence above from the case study, Mrs. Arling kept the assignment
within her students’ zone of proximal development, at a manageable level of difficulty according
to their capabilities by giving the appropriate amount of enlightenment. Within the zone,
interaction constantly adjust to fit the students’ changing competencies and Mrs. Arling’s
insights into what will best help him learn. Eventually, children take these knowledge into their
intrapsychological understandings, and use them to organize their own thinking. Mrs. Arling took
the effort to cater to all her students who demonstrate distinct potential by providing differing
forms of guidance.

To lessen the burden of Mrs. Arling, instead of giving different forms of guidance, she
can consider giving different questions of various difficulties according to the students’ abilities.
This does not only help Mrs. Arling, but it encourages the students to gain more confidence
when one realises that they are able to solve the task given.
4.0 CONCLUSION

Theories of development provide a framework for understanding human behavior,

thought and development. In this case, understanding the behavioral development of
preoperational stage children from age two to six years old. By having a broad base of
understanding about the how’s and why’s of human behavior, we can better understand
ourselves and others.
References

Berk, L. E., (2003). Cognitive development : Piagetian, core knowledge and Vygotskian
perspectives (Chapter 6). Child Development (p. 216-267). United States: Pearson
Education

Crosser, S (2008). Emerging Morality: How Children Think About Right and Wrong. Retrieved
2017, September 3 from http://www.earlychildhoodnews.com/earlychildhood.html

Krause, K. L., Bochner, S., & Duchesne, S. (2003). Educational psychology for learning and
teaching. Australia: Thomson

Woolfolk, A. (2007). Social cognitive and constructivist views of learning (Chapter 9).
Educational Psychology (p. 204-245). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.