QUESTION:
ASSIGNMENT 1
ESSAY EXAMINING THEORETICAL MODELS OF LEARNING AND PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS FOR GUIDANCE
• This assignment requires you write an essay which demonstrates a critical understanding of a child’s developmental context, how this influences their behaviour, and then shapes prosocial guidance.
• In the essay, you are required to apply your understanding of: developmental issues; individual differences; the context of the child’s family and community; and the ecological systems theory; and then analyse the impact on the child’s behaviour. You are required to use this analysis to recommend implications for guiding the child in a prosocial manner. In your essay you are expected to provide an evaluation that relates to relevant theory and research so that your analysis is supported by evidence. You will need to communicate your ideas in a clear and professional manner, and use appropriate referencing.
• LENGTH: 2000 words (can go ten percent under or ten percent over lee way try to stick to the word count if you get stuck reword Pricilla and morgans and add your own stuff)
• WHAT DO I NEED TO SUBMIT? 1 Essay to Turnitin.
• ASSIGNMENT 1 DETAILS In order to complete this assignment you need to: Focus on a child featured in the series ‘Super Nanny’. The clip of the Bradbury Lambert family is uploaded onto the vUWS site in the assessments folder.
• The following is the link to the Bradnbury Lambert Super Nanny video that is to be viewed and used according to the Assignment 1 guidelines
• https://www.youtube.com/embed/X79gd1vZK_0
• Matthew is the focus child. Essay question: Apply Urie Bronfenbrenner’s ecological model to critique how a child’s developmental context impacts on her/his behaviour and the implications for teachers seeking to guide her/his prosocial behaviour. You will need to view the above clip and then select two aspects of the child’s context (drawn from Bronfenbrenner’s ecological model) that influence his/her behaviour. The two aspects must be drawn from a different element in Bronfenbrenner’s model (that is, individual, microsystem, mesosystem, excosystem, macrosystem, and chronosystem). As an example, you may choose to discuss gender (individual) and parenting style (microsystem); or the parents’ work practices (exosystems) and a harmonious relationship between parents (microsystem). The clip, of course, does not provide a comprehensive presentation of the child’s context. You may wish to apply some reasonable hypothetical developmental factors or diversity issues (e.g. you may propose that the child may have a language delay or be from a cultural background that is a minority in their community).
• The following components must be incorporated into your essay:
• 1. Describe and analyse how the two selected characteristics are influencing the child’s behaviour at home and how this may present in an educational setting. You must identify how these characteristics fit into Bronfenbrenner’s ecological model.• You may focus on both risk factors and protective factors for the child.• Use recent and relevant research and theory to support your assertions.
• • 2. Describe and evaluate how these factors might influence the teacher’s approach to prosocial guidance for the child. Identify some implications for teachers working with the child to guide his prosocial behaviour
• . Evaluate how these issues link to the child’s learning and developmental context.
• • Use recent and relevant research and theory to support your assertions.
• • Note: Remember, your discussion needs to be critical and evaluative and should not be merely descriptive. Note: Make relevant links to theory and research in your discussion. You should consult recent research (from the last 5 years) and peer-reviewed research articles and scholarly text books. In the assessment folder on vUWS you will find information about how to find peer-reviewed research articles and how to reference using the APA 6th edition referencing style. Note: You are to construct a formal essay. You should include an introduction and conclusion and use formal academic language. No subheadings, bullet-point or first-person are permitted.
• ASSESSMENT CRITERIA 1. Provide an analysis and synthesis of the child’s context rather than just a description; (10 marks)
• Demonstrate a coherent and insightful understanding of Bronfenbrenner’s ecological model, the context of a child’s behaviour and risk and protective factors; (10 marks)
• 3. Demonstrate a coherent and insightful understanding of the teacher’s prosocial guidance approach for an individual child within an educational setting; (10 marks)
• 4. Demonstrate competence in applying a range of theoretical perspectives and recent credible research to support your discussion; (10 marks)
• 5. Demonstrate effective integration of academic literature and professional presentation of work. (10 marks)
EXAMPLES OF ASSIGNMENT 1 Past exemplars/excerpts of assignments identified as a distinction/credit/pass can be found in the assessment folder on the Unit’s vUWS site. ASSESSMENT STANDARDS
The assessment standards outline what is expected for each of these criteria in order to pass this assignment, and to gain higher grades of credit, distinction and high distinction. All markers use these standards when assessing your work and you are strongly advised to use them to self-assess prior to submitting your assignment.
• Due to time im happy for you to Reword morgan and pricillas example but make sure it’s completely different and do your own research .. make it strong but to save time get ideas from Pricilla and morgan but aim for a high distinction use the references they did as it’s a requirement..
• Make sure it’s not exactly like theirs reword it completely different and make sure it’s meeting the criteria..
• Ive failed this assignment several times due to previous writers.. and need to aim for a high distinction..
• Use morgan and pricillas references as their requirements but have some of your own as well.
On the title page (do mine like morgans one and have
Name of the unit: Prosocial Learning Environments
Name of Assignment:
Assignment One
Essay examining theoretical model of learning and practical implications for guidance
(see Morgan’s cover page)
Apply Urie Bronfenbrenner’s model to critique how a child’s developmental context impacts on her/his behaviour and the implications for teachers seeking to guide her/his prosocial behaviour.
My introduction (I have started my introduction based on morgan and pricillas example make it stronger though)
Children’s development can be communicated through a mixture of theories, methodologies, approaches and context settings, which have an impact and decide how a scope of learning encounters, behavioral practices and connections with others can impact on change on an individual (Hoffnung, Hoffnung, Seifert, Smith & Hine, 2010). Development is consider as a process that is regularly alluded to as being dynamic and active that draws it’s impacts from connections between the individual and their physical and social situations, their biological upbringing, and their social and emotional encounters, whether they are deliberately or unwittingly known (Hoffnung, Hoffnung, Seifert, Smith & Hine, 2010). Bronfenbrenner further talks about these numerous impacts on people through his generally utilized structured framework known as the “ecological system theory” (Hoffnung et al., 2010). The theory utilizes the prospect that a individuals advancement and development is strongly influenced by everything in their encompassing surroundings through five interrelated frameworks. These incorporate of the microsystem, mesosystem, exosystem, macrosystem and the chronosystem (Swick & Williams, 2006). This is evident as Bronfenbrenner has distinguished that children exist amongst various different environments and situations that interweave with each other (Marion, 2011). Therefore, Bronfenbrenner’s ecological system framework theory clearly recognizes these environments and situations as the microsystem, mesosystem, exosytem, macrosystem and chronosystem (Marion, 2011). Krause has further clarified the ecological theory by expressing that the earth and environment is influenced by each individual persons different practices, behaviours and qualities, which consequently recognize that an individual’s behavaior advancement is affected by the nature and the environment (Marion, 2011). This essay will evaluate how Matthew’s behavior conduct is affected by his microsystem and mesosystem, the two frameworks from Bronfenbrenner’s ecological theory. It will further examine suggestions that educators can use to guide Matthew’s prosocial behavior whilst assessing his learning and behavior conduct.
Pricillas example (reword relevant notes and from morgans to but make sure it’s completely different)
The following is pricillas example use ideas and notes from her and morgans one but make mine stronger and better..
Matthew is five years old. He is part of a blended family. He lives with his mother Laura and stepfather Stuart. He has two younger half siblings, Tegan Olivia who is aged two and Diesel who is five months old. Laura does not let Stuart parent Matthew as she considers Matthew to be her child. The two parents have divided there family, with Laura looking after Matthew and Stuart looking after Tegan Olivia. Because of this, Stuart seems to steer away bonding with Matthew due to him not being his biological father. Despite this, Stuart does want a relationship with Matthew and to be able to treat him like his own son. The family also owns a gym where Matthew is able to spend some time there. Both parents believe that Matthew imitates the fighting actions he sees at the gym within his home environment.
The microsystem within Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory refers to the interactions that occur within the child’s immediate environment (Krause, 2013). Matthew’s main interactions are with his immediate family, whichas mentioned earlier, consist of his mother, stepfather and his two younger half siblings. Matthew’s parents are in a committed relationship, however, Laura does not allow Stuart to discipline Matthew and she states that it is her biggest flaw. Both parents notice that Matthew’s younger sister is imitating his behavior and they worry that if they do not “sort it out”, greater issues may arise. Laura states that Matthew has between three and four tantrums a day where he is kicking and punching her. Matthew is usually sent to his room during these instances with the door being held shut. Laura allows Matthew’s tantrumsbut is confused as to why he acts the way he does. Baumrind (1991) argues that parents should work together to “influence, teach and control their children” (Darling, 2000) and through this, children are able to gain a sense of security (Erikson, 1963).
According to Baumrind’sapproaches to parenting, it seems clear that Stuart is rejecting and neglectful towards Matthewas rules are inconsistent and he is disengaged in Matthew compared to his two other children (Robinson et al., 1995), however, he has stated in the video, he does not want to be that type of father towards Matthew. Laura’s approach to parenting seems to be warmer and it seems to be indulgent and permissive where like above there are few rules, however she is warm and loving towards Matthew (Robinson et al., 1995).
Due to these parenting approaches by both parents, Matthew has regressed to Erikson’s stage of trust versus mistrust (Ainsworth, Blehar, Waters and Wall, 1978; Bowlby, 1969). Although Matthew’s parents did not mean to, they have been inconsistent, erratic and neglectful (Raikes & Carolyn, 2009) and because of this, Matthew is finding conflicts difficult to resolve and his relationship with his parents and siblings difficult (Raikes & Pope Edwards, 2009), this is evident through Matthew’s actions of kicking, hitting, pushing and swearing. This is depicted in the episode when it was time for Matthew to go to bed and he was kicking Laura and crying because he did not want to go. Stuart did not intervene and help Laura straight away and told him “if you want to kick someone you kick me” which will in turn confuse Matthew.
The second system of Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory that influences Matthew’s development is the mesosytem. The mesosytem refers to the connections between a setting and the child (Krause, 2013) and in this case, it refers to Matthew’s connection to the family gym. Matthew often visits the family gym, where he is witnessing boxing and is able to participate by putting on gloves and hitting a boxing bag. When Matthew is upset, he punches and kicks his parents and as a result injures them, for example, when Matthew hit his mother’s lip and made her bleed at the beginning of the episode. Within the episode, Jo Frost identifies that this may be an influence to Matthew’s violent behaviour within the home setting. This can be linked with Piaget’s theory and the link to Matthew’s developmental egocentrism (Gartell, 2011). This is evident as Matthew is witnessing what is happening in the gym and in his perspective he is able to imitate that behaviour at home (Gartell, 2011).
Gardner’s theory of multiple intelligences can also be linked to this scenario and the influence Matthew’s mesosytem has on his development. Gardner (2011) identifies that the environment, which a child is exposed to, tends to have a large effect on their multiple intelligences. The episode depicts how Matthew is taught to follow a chart to help him calm down. This identifies that although Matthew is exposed to violence at the gym, he is able to use other techniques to calm himself down.
When Jo Frost intervened, she identified the issues, which the family had, with the major one being the fact that Laura did not allow Stuart to discipline Matthew and Stuart did not feel a bond towards Matthew because of Laura. She discussed with the parents the importance of working together in the benefit of the children, especially Matthew.
By Laura not allowing Stuart to discipline Matthew as she states in the video,“I don’t like Stuart disciplining Matthew” and Stuart continuing to keep his distance from Matthew, it has become a situation where Stuart’s relationship with Matthew depicts to be a risk factor for his development and this is evident through his unsupportive, neglectful and inconsistent parenting (Kids Matter, n.d.). Through this Matthew has caused internal risk where he is behaving aggressively and having difficulty understanding and using language (Kids Matter, n.d.). These risk factors are also liked to the fact that Matthew is exposed to boxing at the gym, however, it has not been explained to him that boxing should be kept at the gym and that hitting is not permitted in the house. This video identifies the risk that Matthew is displaying behaviour that both parents find difficulty managing which coincidently leads to him being unable to understand consequences of his actions (Kids Matter, n.d.), as mentioned earlier, making his mother bleed.
Through the help of Jo Frost and her implementations of household rules, time out and the ‘chill out chair’ that had a chart to help eliminate Matthew’s anger, hisparents became united and their roles became more evident to Matthew. Furthermore, he was able to recognise his anger and therefore his behaviour began to improve. This improved Matthew’s internal risk of protective factors by, having positive expectations, problem solving skills through the ability to “identify, express and manage” (Kids Matter, n.d.) his behaviour and finally having positive hope for the future (Kids Matter, n.d.). This evident when Matthew was being rude and hitting his mother and she walked him out of the room to the chill out chair and Matthew sat in the chair for his designated time of five minutes and following the process of the chart. This calmed him down and stopped his tantrum.
When sending Matthew to school, his parents should ensure that they notify the teacher about his past behaviour, however the teacher should also take an interest in this and try to find out more information. The teacher should also try to ensure to guide Matthew’s prosocial behaviour positively by implement effective practices (Stormont, Lewis, Beckner, & Richter, 2008). This could be done using many techniques. Some main techniques are developing an open and trustworthy relationship with the parents and child, scaffolding, precorrective statements and praise for specific behaviour.
Greenberg (1989) identifies that partnerships with families is an essential aspect for teachers (Gestwicki, 2012). The teacher should understand that the child is an extension of the family and through understanding the family, they are able to understand the child at a deeper level and therefore be more “successful in guiding the child’s development” (Gartrell, 2011 pp 143). By the educator understanding Matthew’s family environment, the teacher is then able to understand where he may getting his anger and aggression from and can implement the strategy of the ‘chill out chair’ within the learning environment. This shows a sense of continuity for Matthew and will help make the transition easier for all stakeholders involved, including Matthew himself.
Through implementing scaffolding within the classroom, teachers are able to help develop children’s learning and extend their level of development (Gartrell, 2011). This is referred to as zone of proximal development, which was identified by Vygotsky (Gartrell, 2011). If the teacher is aware of Matthews zone of proximal development, then planning accordingly can take place that will help to further develop his learning but it will also ensure that the task set is not to difficult for help which will therefore help with his anger as he will not get frustrated, but instead feel a greater sense of accomplishment and self esteem for being able to complete the task. This is linked to Rosenberg’s self-esteem scale where Matthew will be at the higher point of the scale instead of the lower (1965).
Precorrective statements are statements that describes the expectations of behaviour during the set activity. They should be stated at the beginning of each activity and can be asked in a question format to allow children to think about the correct answer (De Pry &Sugai, 2002). By using these sorts of statements with Matthew, it outlines the rules and expectations while completing the activity but it elements the idea of rules as it is stated positively and allows the child to answer according to the teachers expected idea (Haydon & Scott, 2008). Precorrective statements should be accompanied with constant supervision and monitoring of behaviour to ensure children are following what has been set out which therefore minimises confrontation.
When the teacher implements praise to specific behaviour, it provides the opportunity for the students to get acknowledge and the children not following the correct behaviour to want to behaviour accordingly so that they also get acknowledged (Conroy et al., 2009). By implementing this technique within the classroom, it will provide Matthew with the opportunity to correct his behaviour if he is misbehaving without lowering his self-esteem and therefore devaluing his self worth, which will lead to demotivation of participation.
There is much research around the development of a child and what is considered to be the best way to raise a child. Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory identifies five systems, which impact a child and their development, however it is not just that theory that can explain Matthew’s proscoial development and his anger. It takes extensive and constant research to understand a child’s development and it takes both loving and committed parents and educators to ensure the child is nurtured and cared for in order to become a profound member of society. It is key to remember that open relationships with parents and children’s community is important to understanding the child as a whole. The Early Years Learning Framework states that belonging is ‘integral to human existence’ (DEEWR, 2009, p.7). As an educator it is important to remember this as all children should be acknowledged and valued.
Reference List
Ainsworth, M., Blehar, M., Water, E., & Wall, S. (1978). Patterns of attachment.Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment and loss, vol.1: Attachment. New York: Basic Books.
Baumrind, D. (1991). The influence of parenting style on adolescent competence and substance use.Journal Of Early Adolescence, 11(1), 56-95.
Robinson, C. C., Mandleco, B., Frost Olsen, S., & Hart, C. H. (1995). Authoritative, authoritarian, and permissive parenting practices: Development of new measures. Psychological Reports: Volume 77, Issue , pp. 819-830.
Darling, N. (2000).Parenting style and its correlates. ERIC Clearinghouse on Elementary and Early Childhood Education Campaign IL. Retrieved from http://www.ericdigests.org/1999-4/parenting.htm/
De Pry, R. L., Sugai, G. (2002). The effect of active supervision and precorrection on minor behavioral incidents in a sixth grade general education classroom. Journal of Behavioral Education, 11, 255-26
Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations (DEEWR) (2009).Becoming, Beingand Belonging: The Early Years Learning Framework forAustralia. Canberra, ACT: DEEWR.
Department of Health. (n.d.). Kids Matter: Risk and protective factors in early childhood. Canberra, ACT. Retrieved from https://www.kidsmatter.edu.au/families/about-mental-health/mental-health-basics/risk-and-protective-factors-early-childhood
Erikson, E. H. (1962). Childhood and society.New York: W. W. Norton and Company.
Gardner, H. (2011). Frames of mind: The theory of multipleintelligences for the 21st century. New York: Basic Books
Gartrell, D. (2011). A guidance approach for the encouraging classroom (5th ed.). Belmont, CA: WadsworthCengage
Gestwicki, C. (2012). Home, school, and community relations (8th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Cengage Learning.
Haydon, T., Scott, T. M. (2008).Using common sense in common settings: Active supervision and precorrection in the morning gym. Intervention in School and Clinic, 43, 283-290
Krause, K. (2013). Sociocultural factors in the learning process. In S. Duchesne, A. McMaugh, S. Bochner, & K. Krause, Educational psychology: For learning and teaching (4th ed., pp. 376-445). South Melbourne, Australia: Cengage Learning.
Marion, M. (2011). Theoretical foundations of child guidance.In Guidance of young children. (8th ed., pp. 27-55). Boston, MA: Merrill Prentice Hall.
Raikes, H. H., & Pope Edwards, C. (2009). Extending the dance in infant & toddler caregiving. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Company. Washington, DC: NAEYC.
Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the adolescent self-image. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Stormont, M., Lewis, T. J., Beckner, & Richter, M. (2008).Implementing systems of positive behavior support systems in early childhood and elementary settings. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Stormont, M., &Reinke, W. (2009).The importance of precorrective statements and behaviour-specific praise and strategies to increase their use.Beyond Behaviour, 18(3), 26-32.
‘Super Nanny’. The clip of the Bradbury Lambert family.
