Developmental Psychological Perspectives on Young Childrens Learning - Essay Example

Question All learning takes place in a social context which has three dimensions: socio-historical or socio-cultural, inter-personal and intra-personal’. Discuss with reference to developmental psychological perspectives on young children’s learning. Humans are innately social beings. Biological studies indicate that when human babies are born, their brains are underdeveloped, hence are born highly dependent and in constant need of care. Unlike other mammals like horses or cows whose offspring can stand on their own minutes after their birth, human biology draws both mother and newborn towards each other to ensure the survival of the infant. A child will not survive without the care and support of others. He learns about life and living not only by his own discoveries but with interactions with people around him and within the environment he lives in. Piaget’s Stages of Cognitive Development outlines how a child develops his learning abilities that equip him to survive life’s challenges. Initially, he discovers the world using his senses, and as he grows, learns to form associations and conclusions. With a healthy attachment to significant adults, the child develops a sense of security enabling him to venture into more learning about his world. “Piaget believed that children create knowledge through interactions with the environment. Children are not passive receivers of knowledge; rather, they actively work at organizing their experience into more and more complex mental structures.” (Brewer, 2001, p.6). He insists that children need to use all their cognitive functions. These theories were designed to form minds which can be critical, can verify, and not accept everything they are offered. Such beliefs reflect his respect for children’s thinking. Vygotsky (1978) believed that children’s intellectual development is influenced more by social context than by individual experiences. His theory places a great deal of emphasis on effective social interaction. Learning ensues in social interactions. A person ingrained in a particular cultural group automatically adapts to its socio-history and socio-cultural ways. Learning about one’s culture comes easy if the individual is totally immersed in it. A perfect example is how Reggio Emilia schools in Italy are run. There, the whole community is involved in rearing the children. “Reggio Emilia educators repeatedly emphasize that "no one has a monopoly" on what children need and, as noted above, invite parents to become partners prior to, throughout, and even beyond their child’s participation in the city’s municipal programs.” (New, 1999). Thus, such support makes it much easier to transfer cultural education to the youth. Sometimes, the direction of learning is from the teacher to the learner, other times, the learner provides new learning to the teacher. This flow of learning vacillates as teacher and learner interact. Sometimes, learning happens in group interactions, where each member contributes his or her own learning. Such learning gets internalized when the learner is on his own, and does his own individual learning. Learners have the capacity to construct their own learning through the experiences and social interactions they have. All humans have natural learning abilities ingrained in us. Babies learn to crawl and to walk as nature has designed. Social learning greatly enhances that natural and individual learning. Whatever knowledge a learner gains from his social interactions, he firms up by his own individual learning. He integrates his new knowledge with his past experiences and skills. Salomon and Perkins (1998, pp. 17-19) came up with theories on the relationship between individual and social learning. The first relation, “Individual learning can be less or more socially mediated learning” confirm the thesis point that learning social interactions have a great effect on an individual’s learning. However, the value of individual reflection and “time-out” from social interactions should not be undermined, as it is at this time when the learner comes to depend on his own insights, and skills to be able to make his own decisions in the direction of his learning and development. The second relation, “Individuals can participate in the learning of a collective, sometimes with what is learned distributed throughout the collective more than in the mind of any one individual” explains that a whole social entity can benefit from the knowledge of an individual sharing his own learning. Thus, the significance of a good mentor that a social group can consult and learn from. The third relation, “Individual and social aspects of learning in both senses (Relations 1 and 2) can interact over time to strengthen one another in what might be called a “reciprocal spiral relationship” strengthen the belief that learning evolves through a variety of modes, and all modes benefit the learner. Bonk and Cunningham (1998) defines internalization as a “process of taking new information that was experienced or learned within a social context and developing the necessary skills or intellectual functions to independently apply the new knowledge and strategies” ( p. 36). When a learner is exposed to social learning, he gets to grasp certain concepts and new knowledge that he privately “digests”. In the process of internalization, there is ongoing inner language processes as he decodes the information in his mind. This is the independent learning that happens after. The learner now attempts to apply this new knowledge by calling on his existing skills and abilities to integrate the internalized knowledge. The perennial conflict of nature vs. nurture is applied in many aspects of human development. Learning to talk is one of them. Many theorists have argued for both a natural learning ability of humans and a nurturing effect of the environment in helping individuals learn language. Skinner’s Behaviorist Model of language acquisition is consistent with the rules of operant conditioning, based upon a stimulus-response model. Simply put, infants are presented with language which they imitate. They are rewarded for their imitations so they continue to repeat what they have heard. Their imitation does not have to be exact or immediate in order for them to make use of it in learning language. (Brewer, 2001) For example, a baby is happily babbling in his crib and then his mother appears to play with him and by chance, he hits on the syllables “ma-ma” (which is likely in the phonological development of infants and may not serve any meaning to the baby). He gets a very positive response from his mother as she shrieks with glee and gives him hugs and kisses. Such “reward” will surely reinforce the baby’s utterance of ma-ma in her presence. (Lindfors, 1987). According to the behaviorist view, an individual is reinforced (positively or negatively) for responses to various stimuli, hence, the external environment plays a great part in the formation of behaviors. By administering positive reinforcement such as praising or smiling when a desired behavior occurs and administering negative reinforcement such as scolding or correcting when an undesired behavior occurs, one is assumed to encourage the desired behavior and make it more likely that that behavior will recur (Lindfors, 1987). On the other hand, Chomsky’s theories, known as many names… Linguistic, Nativistic or Innatist, uphold that language is inherent or “wired-in” in the child at birth and needs only to be triggered by social contact with speakers in order to emerge. (Brewer, 2001). He does not need to be taught language, as he is equipped with a language acquisition device, a structure in the brain that made possible the learning of language (Chomsky, 1965). This contention might have been brought about by Chomsky’s denouncement of the behaviorist characterization of language and how it is learned by children, which was the stronger influence at the time. From the foregoing discussion, it can be gleaned that indeed, ‘All learning takes place in a social context which has three dimensions: socio-historical or socio-cultural, inter-personal and intra-personal’. A child born into a society that supports his learning has what it takes to grow up with the full influence of the people and culture that surrounds him, yet, he is equipped with his own thinking to eventually decide which influence he shall imbibe in his personality as he grows to be an adult. Question 2: ‘Freud is just about sex, isn’t he?’ To what extent do you agree with this assertion? Discuss Freud’s contribution to our understanding of individual development. I have come across the Psychoanalytic theory in my past studies and found it fascinating. Not that I completely embrace his stupendous ideas, but because I am in awe of the imagination and genius of its founder, Sigmund Freud, who was courageous enough to stand for his beliefs at a time when society was very restrictive of such free thought. His controversial theories on pinning human development on sexuality shocked the prudent society he belonged to, and generated much interest and criticism from different sectors. Although his theories seemed to revolve around sex, he had contributed others that illuminated our understanding of human development. Freud’s Psychoanalytic theory is premised on the belief that human nature is greatly affected by a person’s early childhood experiences and conflicts between impulses and prohibitions. He views human behavior as determined by irrational forces, unconscious motivations and biological and instinctual drives evolving in the first six years of life. Although the Freudian view of psychosexual stages of development coincides with other contemporary theories on human growth and development, it is my personal opinion that it is degrading to the human spirit. It demeans a person’s capacity to make sound judgments because he is viewed as enslaved by his biological fixations and primal needs. It is as if it implies that a person is imprisoned by his past experiences and that his horrible past determines his woeful future. According to Freud, there are two levels of personality: the conscious corresponds to its ordinary everyday meaning; the unconscious is the invisible portion of personality below the surface. (Schultz & Schultz, 2005). The unconscious is likened to an iceberg which the greater part is substantially hidden from the surface. This becomes the major driving power behind all behaviors and we are not able to control this portion. Biologically, I agree with Freud that humans are driven by aggressive and sexual instincts, as its functions are for the survival of the species. His idea of the three systems of personality, the id, ego and superego being in constant unconscious battle within a person makes sense to me, as I liken it to a person’s continual debate of what is right and wrong, and then behaves according to his moral decisions. Such decisions are affected by what society dictates as well as what the person truly desires for himself. To survive living with negative experiences that may have marred a person’s personality or life views, he develops “defense mechanisms” that aim to keep those traumatic experiences repressed in the unconscious. These defense mechanisms are usually practiced by everyone in their daily life not knowing that they are applications of Freudian thought. An example of a defense mechanism commonly used is ‘rationalization’. If a person has strived hard to reach a goal like applying for a certain job position and does not get it, he would rationalize to his family that he was not so interested in it after all. It is much like the fabled fox “sour-graping”. This is an attempt to mask his utter disappointment and maintain an “unaffected” façade to the people around him. The goals of Psychoanalytic therapy are settling unresolved conflicts in a person’s past that deeply affect his current patterns of behavior and personality. It may involve bringing repressed painful memories to resurface to be dealt with consciously through the techniques of free association, dream analysis, hypnosis, transference, and analysis of resistance handled by a skilled psychoanalyst. This tedious process intends for the client to reach a level of self-understanding for him to be able to move on with his life without the heavy emotional baggage he has been carrying all his life. This understanding is necessary for an eventual change in views, personality and character. Freud has become an icon in Psychology and has created his own following. However, in the evolution of ideas, some have modified Freud’s original theories to venture into others they more strongly agree with. A psychoanalyst who went on to formulate his own theories on personality development was Erik Erikson. Like Freud, he put a lot of premium on childhood experiences and studied human development from the cradle to the grave. He theorizes that “at each stage of life we face the task of establishing equilibrium between ourselves and our social world.” (Corey, 2005). I believe that Erikson’s Psychosocial Stages of Development was well-studied and typically reflects how people progress from one life stage to another. To him, “human development involves a series of personal conflicts, where each stage demands certain adaptations. When we confront our environment, the crisis involves a shift in perspective, requiring us to refocus our instinctual energy in accordance with the needs of each stage of life.” (Schultz & Schultz, 2005) According to him, a crisis is equivalent to a turning point in life, when we have the potential to move forward or to regress. Whatever we decide reflects the strength of our character. Personally, it will be my guide in understanding people and what they go through in their particular circumstance and developmental life stage. In an attempt to understand personality and human behavior, Carl Jung, another renowned psychologist and contemporary of Freud, has likewise conceived of highly interesting constructs. He termed personality as the psyche. This psyche derives its energy from the libido which is a potent source of life energy. The ego is the center of the consciousness, the part of the psyche concerned with perceiving, thinking, feeling, and remembering. Jung considered past history as having a strong influence on people. He termed these driving “inherited” predispositions as the collective unconscious. “The ancient experiences contained in the collective unconscious are manifested by recurring themes or patterns Jung called archetypes.” (Schultz & Schultz, 2005). Among these archetypes are the persona and the shadow. The persona is a mask, or public face that we wear to cover our true selves. Sometimes, when what we feel inside is not socially acceptable or appropriate, we struggle to keep it inside and put on a smile and a happy façade even when deep inside, we are fuming and feel like breaking things and strangling the people who cause us pain and anger. We wear this persona in order to survive. If we go around “naked” without this persona, we run the risk of being thought of as a sociopath with uncontrollable, aggressive urges and perhaps be labeled as a danger to society. This brings us to another archetype, the shadow. It has the deepest roots in our unconscious and is the most dangerous and powerful of the archetypes. It represents our dark side – our thoughts, actions and feelings that we want to disown and project outwards. For example, we feel hostility towards our co-worker, and in our time alone with ourselves, think the worst of him and even wish bad things to happen to him. We can project it to appear that our co-worker is the one who has hostile feelings towards us and it is rightful for us to avoid him. We keep our shadow hidden deep inside us. The persona and the shadow are essential parts of our personality, as it helps us face people without fear of judgment for our innate, primal “badness” and be accepted as productive members of society. It helps us control our impulses in order to project a more civilized persona. Freud’s controversial theories have planted the seeds of other accepted psychological explanations to the mysteries of human nature. His deep ideas not only sprouted from his interest in sex and aggression, but a host of other constructs not many great thinkers would be comfortable in dissecting. He may have been criticized and severely chastised for entertaining “malice” in childhood sexuality and the degradation of women’s position as being less developed than men, coming from such a patriarchal society, but it cannot be denied that he has greatly contributed to the field of Psychology. References Bonk, C.J. & Cunningham, D.J. (1998) “Searching for Learner-Centered, Constructivist, and Sociocultural Components of Collaborative Educational Learning Tools” in Electronic Collaborators. Retrieved on April 15, 2007 from: www.publicationshare.com/docs/Bon02.pdf Brewer, J., (2001) Introduction to Early Childhood Education, Allyn & Bacon Chomsky, N.,(1965) Aspects of a Theory of Syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Corey, G. (2005) Theory and Practice of Counseling and Psychotherapy, 7th ed. Brooks/Cole, a division of Thomson Learning Inc. Lindfors, J.W., (1987) Children’s Language and Learning, 2nd Ed. Prentice Hall, Inc. New, R.S. (1999) “What Should Children Learn? Making Choices and Taking Chances”, Early Childhood Research and Practice, Fall, Vol 1, No. 2 Piaget, J. & Inhelder, B. (1969) The Psychology of the Child. New York: Basic Books Salomon, G., & Perkins, D.N., (1998), “Individual and Social Aspects of Learning”, Review in Research Education, Vol 23, pp. 1-24 Schultz, D. & Schultz, S. (2005) Theories of Personality, 8th ed Thomson-Wadsworth Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Read More