Post 2 a

I am comparing myself to one of my brothers...Brad. He is the second youngest. Brad and I are very similar in many ways and they are very noticable. Both of us can be friends with pretty much anyone. We have super rich friends, and ones that are broke...we don't discriminate which allows people to be very trusting of us. Neither of us put up with much bull either, and will say what needs to be said. We have a very close relationship unlike any of our other siblings have with each other. I think this is because I was his "baby sis", and he spoiled me, so I wanted to be just like him and our habits and thoughts grew alike.

10B

If my parents were together, I definitely would have a different living style. I would actually see one of my parents that I rarely see. I would love to have a better relationship with them, but feel as if that probably won't be possible. My dominant parent has done an excellent job raising and taking care of me, so I am gratiful for that. And because I was raised like that, I feel as if my life overall is just fine like that, and they are probably better off as friends then partners in a relationship.

Post 10b

My childhood would have been very different had my parents not gotten a divorce. My time would not have had to have been divided between my parents, it was especially hard having to divide my time on the holidays. I also didn't like that I only got to see my dad every-other weekend. It was difficult leaving my mom's house to go and then it was difficult to leave my dad's to come back. I would have much rather been able to spend time with my parents at the same time. I was never very close with my dad until I got older and could drive myself to his house whenever I wanted to visit him. Another reason I wasn't as close to him is that he owned his own business and was always working but as I got older I enjoyed going out to his job sites and riding around with him on whatever piece of equipment he was operating. Growing up I had a hard time not resenting my mom for not allowing me to see my dad more but now I understand why the circumstances were the way they were. Although I wish I could have had my parents living under one roof I think this experience made me a stronger person. Now that I am older I am thankful that I am able to be close with both of my parents.

Post 10 Part B

I believe I would be a very different person if my parents had gotten a divorce. My brother and I are extremely like our dad and I still don't understand how that came to happen. Many people in my high school didn't even recognize my dad as being my dad but yet they all called my mom their second mother because she was always there for EVERYTHING I did, every sports game, concert, or anything. Many people might believe that it is as if my parents are divorced. My dad is still not around very often although my mother & him are still married and have a good relationship. This is because when I was 9 years old my dad became an over the road truck driver. He is only home for a few days every couple to threee weeks he's on the road. Most of my childhood he has not been around for the day to day events so my mother stepped in to be the best stay at home mom she could.
I feel that if my parents hadn't worked through the tough times, him going out on the road was a huge obstacle, I wouldn't be the person I am. I would not always know that my dad is there for me no matter what, I also think my personality would be different because I have soo many of his mannerisms. My brother would also not be who he is & he would have had no male role model in his life.
My parents showed me that if there is trust and communication then your relationship can survive anything, including distance.

10 B

My parents have been married for 26 years, and I belive that if they had ever gotten a divorce, that my life would have been dramatically different. When I was a kid, my dad was an alcoholic and had a strained relationship with my mother, and with my brothers and I. Because of his drinking, he was rarely home, or he was drunk when he was the only one watching us. I hold a lot of animosity toward him for not trying to be a better dad, and often wished (privately) that my parents would separate. They have never had the strong, loving relationship (from what I have seen) that I would want from my marriage, and every day seemed to be a struggle. I think that if my parents had divorced, I wouldn't be so angry that my dad was and unfit father, maybe my brother wouldn't be an alcoholic now, and maybe my mom would have had a better life.

Post 10A

I think Principals can reduce bullying in school several ways. Devote a week to education , call it no bully allowed week. Have different activities everyday. Police officers can come in a teach a lesson on bullying and circumstances for anyone caught bulling. Teach children 'is perfectly ok to let a teacher know if she sees a sign of bullying. This could be done without anyone knowing it. There has to have a set standard on how to handle

Post 10

My childhood would have been a lot different if my parents stayed together, but even when I was 3 when they seperated I never wanted them to stay together because they always fought. I feel that if they would have stayed together I would not be as close to my dad's side of the family and I also would not have a wonderful step mom that I do now and a little sister that is amazing. I feel that I would probably not be as well off as I am not because I have lived with my dad all my life who has always worked hard and as much as possible to take care of my sisters and I. On the other hand my mom has never really had a "real" job and has never completely paid her child support. She is forty two years old and is returning back to school for nursing to have a real job. If she had helped raise us we would be paying for college completely, which now I have not had loans until now my junior year only because there are 3 of us in college. When I graduate I will only have 11,000 in loans where as if she raise us I don't even know if I could afford college. I am glad that my parents divorced because they were not meant to stay together!

post 10-B

My life would be different if my parents had stayed together and raised me, for one I would be different being raised by my biological father. I have only known him for four years and when he did come into my life I was already grown and there wasn't much left that he could of contributed to my life as a father. Also if my parents would of stayed together then I would not have all of the siblings I have now. I believe I would be a different person as well because the father that raised me is a little more laid back and easy going where as my biological father is more strict and uptight especially when it comes to punishment.

Post 10

b) My childhood would have been a lot different if my parents had got a divorce. My parents have been married for 31 years and I know that I am very lucky for having parents with a good relationship. My parents taught me that family sticks together through thick and thin and you always have to be there for your family. I think if my parents would have ever got a divorced it would of been harder for me to get those same family values. My relationship with my older brothers probably would be a lot different too. I am very close to both my brothers and I think it would of be easier for us to grow apart if my family wasn't so close. I know that I am very fortunate for my close family.

Post 10C - Alex

I think the man needs consequence for selling the marijuana, as well as walking away from his 10 year sentence only six months in. However, what would society gain by sending this man back to prison? As a model citizen well into his fifties he has, more than, proved he is not a risk for further illegal behavior. Wouldn’t everyone be better served by this mans sentence being changed to some type of community service? His hours could be spent teaching a drug prevention education program in schools, community centers, etc. I think this idea fits into Kohlberg’s Postconventional Reasoning Stage 5.

POST TEN B

I can sort of see how my life would be different if my parents had gotten a divorce, but then again i could see how i could still have come out the same way. My dad is a merchantseaman, means he works on oil barges off the east coast, and he is gone for three weeks and then home for three weeks all year long and all throughout my life. With his job holidays and birthdays dont matter, and there have been years where he misses everything, such as christmas, thanksgiving, my birthday and so on, and years when he is home for all and years where it is a mix up. Since that is what I am used to, I could see that I would just be with dad when he is home and mom when hes not. I guess since I have a special situation with my dads work, it makes it really hard for me to imagine my parents actually divorced, rather than just constantly away from one another.

Post 10B

I think that if my family structure had been different in my childhood then I would definitely not be the kind of person that I am today. I grew up with a really close family my mom, dad, and sister. We ate dinner together every night and I told my parents everything. Of course my sister and I weren't always nice to each other but that siblings for you. If my parents would of gotten divorce I know we wouldn't of been so close as a family mainly because of the separate house holds. But I also grew up supporting everything that my family did and now I go and support anything of my friends of boyfriends because I grew up that way, and that could of been changed with my parents being divorced. My parents also have high values which keep me to be determined and to never give up.

Post 10

I do not believe he should be sent back, however, I also feel like he should have never been released early. This is where our justice system is flawed, you can get off relatively easy if you just keep your nose clean when locked up (in most cases). There is no way of knowing beforehand if someone will be a repeat offender when let out so one of the best ways to prevent this from happening, in my opinion, is to hold everyone to their full sentence. Whether it be for arson, larceny, or dealing even the smallest amount of illegal substances. If, at the time of their release, they feel the need to continue what got them in trouble in the first place then so be it, they will be punished again, but if they clean up their act then we have succeeded in riding the world of one less criminal mind. In this instance the justice system and morality conflict so I would place it in the 5th stage of Kohlberg's theory.

post 10 :)

my childhood would have been completely different if my parents had stayed together. if my father didn't have the issues that he did and my mom stayed with him. first i know my mom would have kept me in private school. (she could not afford it after the divorce) we moved to missouri because my mom decided to transfer to keep her job. we probably would have still moved. Although my mom made a very good living from her job, two incomes is usually better than one. so when she retired my sophmore year of high school, maybe she would not have had to get a full time job to make ends meet. basically things would have just been easier for my mom not having to carry the load by herself and perhaps i would have a good relationship with my father. Also maybe my sister could have finished college, and i would know my brother. (my parents both had children from previous relationships) however things happen for a reason.

Post 10b

I think my life would be totally different if my parents were divorced. I think my life would be more stressful because I am so close to both of my parents and having to spend time with them equally would be really hard. Also, I would have a really hard time if they got re-married because I couldn't see either of them with anybody else. I think it would be hard on my younger sisters, too, which would, in turn, be hard for me to deal with because I don't like seeing them upset. I'm thankful that my parents are still married. I think this has made my life easier and happier. They have also been good role models for my sisters and I. Because of this, I think my relationships in the future will be healthier.

Post 10c

I do not think he should be sent back to prison. I think this way for many reasons. Number one, his crime was just selling a small amount of marijuana. It wasn't like he robbed or killed anyone, so he wouldn't be a threat to the community. Secondly, it says he was a model citizen. This means he has never been in trouble before. So it would be less likely that he would do it again later. He did serve some amount of time, so it's not like he got off without any punishment. My response would probably be placed at stage 5 by Kohlberg. Just like in the Heinz issue, the moral and legal standpoints conflict. The man should have been punished, and he was. Yet, his crime was a minor one and he was a model citizen.

Post 10--B

My childhood would have been completely different if my parents would have divorced. Growing up my parents always told us that marriage is important and it is a commitment for life. They believe that for the children it is good to have both parents together. Every holiday we visit our family in St. Louis and it would not be the same if one parent was missing. I would feel like I would have to choose who to see and when.

Post 10!

Please respond to one of the following:

a)If you were a school principal, what would you do to reduce bullying in your school?

b)How do you think your childhood would have been different if your family structure had been different, such as if you had (or had not) lived with your granparents, if your parents had (or had not) gotten divorced, if you had (or had not) lived in a foster family?

c) What do you think about the following circumstance? A young man who had been sentenced to serve 10 years for selling a small amount of marijuana walked away from a prison camp six months after he was sent there. He is now in his fifties and has been a model citized. Should he be sent back to prison? Why or why not? At which Kohlberg stage should your response be placed.

Response 9

I think a major way that we can improve NCLB is getting rid of the standardized tests as they are administered today. Students have no motivation to do well or even try on the test because they don't mean anything to them. One way to improve this is by making certain final exams standard across the nation. This way, students are held accountable for their scores as they will effect their grades, and we will be able to compare different regions with one another.

Post 9

I feel that if schools start teaching them a foreign language when they first get into school, so either preschool or kindergarten the kids will better learn the language and feel more comfortable with learning it over time. In the school I went to foreign language was not an option until 7th grade so most students tried to take it but dropped out of it due to not being able to learn as fast as the teacher wanted us to.

post 9 A

I think that the best way to teach another language would be to start the "foreign" language once they enter kindergarten. At my grade school, children were taught Italian from kindergarten until they graduated in 8th grade. I feel that this really works because it doesn't just throw the child into it, it allows the child to gradually learn the language, and any struggles can easily be explained because the class isn't based on how quickly one can learn the language, it is based on how one can master the language.

9a

The best and most effective method of teaching a foreign language, in my opinion, would be English as a Second Language. Everyone in the class would be at the same level, and learn together at the same pace, which I think would build their confidence in their foreign language speaking abilities.

Post 9 part A

I believe that the best way to teach a foreign language is bilingual education because it is the most natural way to learn a language. Many people grow up in houses that speak a language other than English and they are very fluent in both. The only set back is that a lot of times those kids don't know the grammar rules of the language spoken in the home. I feel that if schools start teaching language at an earlier age, they will learn the simple rules that are missing from their home environment. The reason other countries are better with languages is because they start their education sooner.

Post 9a

I think the most effective approach to learning language would have to be ESL (English as a second language). This is because all the students who are learning English are placed in a classroom together and at the same level. They would be staying together, working at the same pace through the course. They would have the support of not only their teachers, but also each other. This way is also good because they will feel confident speaking English once they are done with the course and are put in the classroom with native English speaking students.

9A

I think ESL (English as a second language) is the most effective method of teaching a second language. I think this because it allows the ELL students to learn English in a non threatening way because they are learning it alongside other ELL students. Also, this is an approach where the students aren't shoved into learning a new language. They are gradually able to learn it, and I think they would feel more comfortable learning a second language this way. Overall, ELL students wouldn't feel as pressured to learn a second language, in my opinion, by using the ESL method. Also, when it is time for them to be put in a classroom with English speakers, they won't feel as intimidated because they will be ready.

9a

in teaching a second language both methods have good intentions. Immersion is attempting to create the original environment that the person leaned their primary language. I'm not sure how effective it is because depending on the age of the person, as you get older it is hard to learn language. Learning language from a book may not be very effective either. A person may know the grammer rules, and may know what the words mean, but it may not help them learn how to communicate socially. someone who learned a Spanish from a textbook may not be able to talk and understand someone who speaks it as their primary language. I believe there should be a little of both.

Post 9b

I think that the ultimate goal of NCLB would have been great if they could have found another way to go about it. I don't think holding other students back from learning things just because one or two students in their class aren't doing as well is working against the end goal of NCLB. To help all students master the curriculum I think there should be a short test given two times a quarter to see where each child is and to help teachers reevaluate what styles of teaching they may need to use. If the same child continues to school significantly lower than the rest of the class than I think an aid for that student should be brought in to help the child do better. Once an aid is brought in and the child is getting extra attention there is no reason that he/she should not improve on these tests.

Post 9 B

In my opinion NCLB, though founded on good intentions, is anything but. This holds teachers up to accountability, which I agree with, but not parents or other people influencing students' lives. Parents no longer believe it is right to fail their child in anything. Teachers are afraid to because they are the only ones being held accountable. So teachers start passing students that shouldn't be because they are afraid to do other wise. Also, MAP and other tests are what is being focused on instead of how well-rounded our students can be in their learning. When I did my internship in my first semester of education, it amazed me how much emphasis was put on the MAP testing, which is too much. Overall, I think that, though teachers should be held accountable, I believe there are other factors to look at too. Teachers are trying to teach students things they are not ready to learn, so both shut down. And without the proper encouragement from parents, administrators, and the school board, this problem cannot be changed.

Post 9

I believe the No Child Left Behind Act started as a good idea, but simply wasn't implemented correctly. Penalizing schools who have low test scores by taking financial assisstance away makes no sense at all. These are the schools that need more resources. Teachers are pressured to pass a child from one grade to another, which is truly doing a student not ready an injustice. There should be some sort of accountability to the schools and teachers but it has to be realistic and a plan that makes sense.

Post 9

(b) I believe that the No Child Left Behind truely in ineffective, so our education system really does need to think of alerternatives to this act. The major problem is some students are being pushed from grade to grade without actually be proficient in the subject. First, students with below average test scores need more one on one attention, or time set aside where they go to a different classroom to learn. By giving them more attention and time students may achieve more. Secondly, while I understand that most teachers do their best to teach their students, their should be some accountability placed on the teachers. If their students aren't preforming well, the teachers need to take a look at how they're teaching and what they're teaching. If a teacher altered their lesson plans to give more individualized attention, they may see better results from their students.

Post 9 - Alex

According to the class text, immersion, bilingual education, and ESL are all methods of teaching a second language. I think bilingual education would be the most effective way to teach a second language because it is taught in a logical, step by step way. However, based on the content in chapter 12 I also understand for any second language program to be successful a language rich environment, along with reading, writing, and speaking instruction must be included.

Post 9B

I feel like there should be a test that decides whether the student needs to use the Child Left Behind Plan and that it should be separate then the every day lesson in class. I understand they want to get the students to learn but I feel like there is a certain extent where there is nothing more that they can do. In the high school years there is even less of an impact on school programs like this because some high school students don't care and have stopped trying. If there was a way to decide the students that need it the most and give them the extra help I think that it would be a good compromise.

Post-9-B

I think No Child Left Behind could have potential if changed or altered. Personally I think it will take time. I understand why the government decided on No Child Left Behind, but it could have been carried out better. I think student who are "high risk" or need the help should get more one and one. Not just pushed through. The problem though is even in high school, students are not held up to the responsibility they should be. With younger children I could see more of a reward system set up to get them to work harder, but lets face it if someone does not want to do something they wont. I think with time it could something more efficient could be figured out, like more one on one time or a different way of teaching certain children. I do not think district that do not meet the goals should be penalized because they usually need more then the districts that do reach the goal.

Post 9b

I feel like the no child left behind act is one of the dumbest things ever concocted by our government. It doesn't work, it never will and it's a complete joke. It does not matter how much you push a person to learn or do better, because if they don't want to they aren't going to do it. This act takes away from the better students by forcing schools to dumb down the curriculum so their rate of failure "decreases," which I highly doubt it does.

Post 9

Please respond to one of the following:

a) Review the methods of teaching a second language covered in chapter 12. Which approach do you think is most effective? Why?

b) Assuming that you think No Child Left Behind is ineffective, unfair etc. What are some alternatives that could accomplish the goal of NCLB (increasing accountablity and student achievement).

post 8a

A) The children who had ADHD in my classes through grade school I was always able to tell who they were because they always got extra help and left the class during the day with a certain teacher. When we would take our test they were always able to leave with this teacher an go take their test in another place. To my knowledge the school seemed to have done fine with getting help to these students in need. I didn't personally get to speak with any of them on if they felt as if it were beneficial to them but they got through school fine so I'm guessing they at least helped some.

Post A8

In first grade i remember a girl named Precious. In my childhood all i knew was everybody was extra nice to her and would help her out, and i knew she was a little different but taht was never cause for her to be looked down upon. i feel at that age group the amojnt of help she recieve was probably as much as she needed. In later elemenary school after leaving Louisville, Kentucky and coming here i remember the kids who needed extra help, for that matter i remember being one of them. during a certain part of the day i would go into a room with a few other kids and we would work on our skills involved with reading aloud. I don't ever remember hhaving a probalby reading i was just a shy kid. this makes me feel taht sometimes these programs are misguided and misdiagnosed.

-Darius Walker

Post 8

Thinking back to grade school and middle school there were kids that need extra help like when it came to taking test and doing homework. Those kids during test time would be sent to another room where someone to read their test to them. I think my school did a good job at helping the kids that needed it. I was one of the students that got to leave during classtime right before lunch because I had a speech problem. I think my school did a good job at accommodating my problem and not making me feel like an outcast because of it either.

Post 8

In my school, everyone was well aware of how needed the help. There were specialist for the students and they got to go to th specialist for tests. Although there were some kids that you didn't know abut until they went to the other room to take their test because their disability was not as bad as the others. I think that my school did a good job with the learning disability kids. I think having a helper and taking the test in a different room is very helpful to them.

post 8

I do not think that parents should be able to give their children IQ tests. Children are already under enough pressure as it is to succeed according to their parent's standards. Besides, how many parents are educated enough to interpret the results? and if their child's score is not what they want it to be, what would they do? They could possibly interfere with their education at school. Parents are always wanted to participate in their child's education, but there is a reason why there are teachers and other administration. they are qualified to administer these kinds of tests.

Post 8A

Thinking back about elementary school I do not remember specifically any kids in my class having ADHD. This was because I wasn't aware that there was such a thing though because I wasn't dealing with the learning disability. I do remember certain kids always acting out in class but there was not special teacher for them. There were a few of them that sat away from the rest of the class. If our desks were arranged in groups their desks were put next to the teachers. I think that it would have been less distracting for the rest of the class if the kids that had problems focusing (ADHD) had had an aid that was there to keep them under control and help them with their school work. This is where I think my school could have done better helping those kids. The school obviously recognized that they had a learning disability since they were sat away from the rest of the class but that is as far as they went with it.

Post 8 part A

There were definitely people in my class in elementary and on up into high school with learning disabilities of all kinds and we all knew exactly who they were. There were ones that had trouble reading and understanding directions and ones who couldn't control their temper. What the school did for them didn't seem very helpful to me at the time and still doesn't now. When a kid started acting out or needed help when taking a test they had a special room they would send them to called the "reading room". I don't think this was helpful at all because there were kids who were seniors in high school who were completely dependent on the teacher in that room and they could have been perfectly fine on their own if the school had tried to make them more independent.
There was one child in particular who supposedly had a ton of different disorders and he, his family, and even the school always used them as an excuse for whatever wrong things he ever did. I think it is ridiculous that he never got punished in anyway for his behavior. One day he actually beat up a little girl on the playground for no good reason & his grandmother happened to be there. She told him that it wasn't his fault at all. I believe that no matter what a person should be taught to take responsibility for their actions even if they have a disability.

Post 8b

I think it is a bad idea for parents to give their children IQ tests off a CD-ROM. Parents will get all worked up if their child's IQ score does not correspond with their grades in school. This, in turn, will cause problems for the teachers. Eventually the administration could get involved and even the school board. I just see this being a huge problem. Testing should left to the schools because they are there to teach and assess. Also, I just wonder how accurate these CD-ROM tests are. It could cause a lot of problems when it's not even accurate.

Post 8-B

I think that there are benefits and detriments when it comes to showing parents their kids IQ tests at early ages. One benefit is that it allows the parents and schools to identify gifted children in get them into classes that will challenge them more than a regular class. However, if parents do not fully understand that IQ tests are merely one type of intelligence they may take this information and either think that their child is entitled to more or may think that a kid with a lower IQ has no chance of making it.

Post 8 (b)

I really don't like the idea of parents giving their children IQ tests at home. I know they want to make sure their child is on track academically but kids have enough reason to dislike school already. When they're home they may have some homework as it is and to add a test on top of that would make schoolwork even more aversive. They need to have their play time and family time to offset the rest of their increasingly busy schedules. Let kids be kids I say. They grow up fast enough as it is.

POST 5

I think that flashcards can be helpful. I think that you have to use them in the correct way. I have seen many babies that are much smarter now that they have been exposed to flashcards and or books with words and pictures.

POST 6

I for sure have been effected by maltreatement. There have been rumors about me that were very much intentional hurt. This is maltreatement because it was an intentionaly hurting me.

Post Eight (a)

I went to school and I am close friends with a couple of people who have ADHD as well as a learning disability. I don't think the school did anything much to help these students, except give them a longer time to take tests, and many of these students who had ADHD were on medication which helped them focus a little bit, but not fully. My roommate actually has a learning disability, and once she was in high school, they didn't do much to help. She didn't even bother in enrolling here at UCM as having a learning disability because not much can really be done, not to mention once out in the "real world" jobs don't really take into account learning disabilities. I understand that sometimes things need to be approached in a different way, as with trying teach children with learning disabilities, but I do find it sad that once out in the real world, most things are only explained in one way, and if you don't pick it up fast enough you are seen as incompetent.

POST 7

Vygotsky was more about the social and cultural concepts of cognition. There is a zone of proximinal developement, which is skills that a child can preform with help but not independently.He used techniques like scaffolding, which is sensitive suppourt. A child will use some private speech, which is when a child talks to themselves and develope ideas.

POST 8

I have had a personal experience with a child who has ADHD. I work in a preschool. This student did take medication. If he did not take his medication he was very flakey and uncontrolable. While he was at our school, he tried several medications and some of them made him sleepy. He actually feel asleep when I was reading a book, several times. Ithink parents should find the right medications for their children.

Blog 8

I have had a personal experience with a member of my family being diagnosed in middle school with ADHD. After many requests from this child's mother, he was tested by the school system and placed in a Learning Disabled Classroom. Basically this was a trailer where all the children with , behavior, emotional and learning disabilities were placed in a self contained classroom. The child was very intelligent, but was immediately labeled "one of those kids from the trailer". He struggled with his classwork as there was no teaching going on in this environment. He was outcasted by his peers and eventually decided to go to an alternative school. If possible, the situation got worse. During this time not one teacher took an interest in helping this child learn. He eventually quit school in high school. He later took his GED and scored extremely high. This was in a rural community, without many resources, but I feel surely someone should have not let this bright, creative child fall through the cracks.

Post 8 B

I believe these is a very large drawback to testing your child's IQ at a young age. First off, regardless of who believes that a child is intelligent enough to handle a test that young, many children have not gone through the pruning process and a parent cannot know if the test holds any validity to it. Also, a parent is not an expert and to administer a test to your child without knowing the reprecussions, is asking for disappointments. Another point is that this gives the parents pre-concieved expectations for their children before they even begin school. If your child scores high, a parent might have higher expectations than they should. If a child scores low, then parents will have low standards for their child which can damage their overall intelliegence in the long run. I really cannot see an upside to testing a young child's IQ except to maybe have a "slight" idea into how smart a child is.

Post 8a

In elementary school I remember students with learning disabilities being taken out of the classroom for certain subjects. They would leave to get one-on-one help in whatever subject area they had difficulty in. It was made so routine that none of the other students ever questioned it or made a big deal of it. In high school, students with learning disabilities just had different classes than everyone else, so it wasn't really a big deal either. The students with ADHD were given medication. I think the school did a good job of helping the students with learning disabilities and placing them in the best possible learning environment. Students with learning disabilities require more attention and help from the teacher. So, by being taken out of the full classroom and getting that one-on-one help, it really benefits those students.

Post 8-A

When I was in elementary school I did not really notice the students that had ADHD or learning disabilities. I knew students left the classroom, but never really thought anything of it. Our teachers tried not to make it a big deal so that the students that did leave the classroom weren't embarrassed or anything. My school only had one teacher to help the students with Learning Disabilities and ADHD. I still do not think they have any other teachers, but her. I think they should get more teachers to help these students so they do not fall behind.

Post 8

In elementary school I remember the children that had learning disabilities because they were the students that were taken out of class at different times of the day. They each had a certain time where they would go to the "TAP" room and get help with their reading. They also were the students that did not complete their math facts or finished their work later then everyone. In Junior High and High School the students with learning disabilities had different classes then everyone else and if they could not finish their work in class then they could go to a separate classroom and get help with it. ADHD was very common, everyone said they had ADHD but they did not get as many privileges other then medicine. I think schools are doing a good job giving the students extra help and removing them from the classroom gets them to focus better on their work, because that's what they need.

Post 8

(b) I do not agree with Children's IQ and Achievement Test, especially if they are administered by the schools. I think it should be an individual choice if parents want to allow their children to take these test at home. I personally would not give a child an IQ test because they may give unrealistic expectations of a child with a high IQ or allow parents or teachers to give up on a child with a low IQ. IQ test are also going to put those children with higher IQ on a pedestal. Teachers will be more likely to give them more attention and praise them more. Whether they mean to or not, they may look down on the children with the lower IQ. Parents may use their children's low IQ as a crutch for while their children are not doing well in school, rather than be creative and finding new ways to teach their children. I think if an IQ test we used just for "fun" then that would be fine, but the likelihood of parents and teachers not making judgements on a child based on their IQ is high unlikely, therefore do not need be used on children.

Kelly

Post 8 - Alex

Based on the information I read in the class text, I would not advocate parents testing their child’s IQ with a self administered IQ test such as Children’s IQ and Achievement Tests. First of all, I would have to question the validity of a test not administered by a trained professional. Secondly, I would have to question whether or not the results, regardless of who administered the test, are a true measure of intelligence. This is because I agree with the texts assessment that an IQ test is not a true measure of overall intelligence. IQ tests are deficient in assessing intelligence because they are culturally bias, do not measure multiple intelligences, and cannot predict potential intellectual changes over a lifespan. Furthermore, the results of an IQ test are likely to be misused. If the result of the parent facilitated exam is low, they are apt to manifest in the parents having low expectations of the child. The reverse is also true, in that unrealistically high expectations may be placed on a child with a high IQ score. Overall, I do believe there is a place for IQ testing as long as the test is only a small part of a larger, more comprehensive, aptitude assessment. Additionally, all of those assessments should be administered and interpreted by a trained professional, in a controlled environment.

Post 8

Please respond to one of the following:

a) Think back to your own schooling and how children with learning disabilities or ADHD either were or were not diagnosed. Were you aware of such individuals in your classes? Were they helped by specialists? Do you think school scould have done a better job of helping them?

b) There are CD-ROM's such as Children's IQ and Achievement Test, that lets parents test their child's IQ and how well the child is performing in relation to their grade in school. Is this a good idea? What might be some benifits or problems with parents giving their children an IQ test?

Vgoatsky believed that social interaction is the best way for children to learn. His way of thinking was geared that children learn from why they see. Meaning that if a child saw you pick your nose then that child is more likely to his/her nose to see what is does. That biggest way we as humans learn is through observation of others. Along with the social aspect seeing others learn from the mistakes teaches us all that we should not make the same mistake. Example is cops we see cops and see how these guys are dumb for running from the police as we see these people getting arrested we learn from what happened to that person. From learning that if you were to get pulled over you might think back to the cops show and not run because you already know what's going to happen from tour social learning.

Post 7

Vgoatsky believed and promoted that childrens development is geared and supported by social interaction. These social interactions help the child learn for themselves and how to act in society. These types of learning interactions are seen in the zone of proximal development. Guided participation, scaffolding, and apprentice in thinking are ways children can develop through social interactions.

Post 7

Vygotsky stressed social aspects of childhood cognition. He said children learn by participating in various experiences, with help from more knowledgeable individuals. He also believed in scaffolding, which allows children to master one skill at a time, rather than all at once. Private speech was another thing Vygotsky believe in. Private speech was used to describe when someone talks to themselves. This helps because it is allowing the child to explain, review, and get a better understanding of the current situation going on.

Post 7

This example is very much like Rogoff's example with the Mayan girls making tortillas. My aunt has taught my cousin to make homemade pizza in much the same way. She makes the crust from scratch and lets him help roll it out and knead it. Apprentice in thinking is happening because she has been making pizzas this way for many years so she is more skilled than he is. She uses guided participation to teach him what he needs to do, when it needs more flour, and its size, etc. He is able to roll out the dough as well as he does because she has been teaching him at his ZPD, the level of the activity that he can do with her help. Scaffolding is also at work because as he has gotten more skilled she helps him less with his pizza and uses the time to work on a seperate one of her own.

Post 7

Vygostky held that children follow apprenticeship thinking. Their cognition is stimulated by helping older peers, who are more skilled, with at task. This is why it seems almost innate for children to ask "why". They learn from helping and watching those around them. This kind of learning morphs into something else Vygostky believed in called scaffolding. This is when the child is doing the activity and is helped along by the adult. However, the adult or peer lessens the help the longer the child does the activity. This gives the child interaction with their peers while teaching them how to complete a task on their own. It's important for the child to learn how to do things on their own without someone to do it for them. Children also use what Vygotsky would call "private speech." They talk to themselves in their heads or out loud to help work through a decision or a task. This can help them retain memories better and see the task more clearly.

Post 7

One of Vygotsky's main theories of cognitive development is that of guided participation with the help of zone of proximal development. More knowledgable people in society use guided participation to teach their children, grandchildren, neices, nephews, younger siblings, etc. With this comes knowledge of the child's zone of proximal development. A father knows when to let go of the back of the bike. A mother knows when to let a child walk across the street without holding your hand. Knowing a child's ZPD helps to be able to better participate in guided participation and helps the child get the best cognitive development out of it.

post seven

Vygotsky believed that children are "apprentences in thinking" that they are constantly learning from adults and siblings around them. other parts of his theory are that children learn by scaffolding, which is what a child is able to do with the assistance of a skilled adult. there is also guided practice, going step by step with an adult, and there is when children talk themselves through certain activities, or other things. children are very social, and need social interaction to be able to learn and grow into functional adults.

Post 7

Vygotsky emphasized the importance of social activity and social learning in a child's cognitive development. He notes that children are curious and want to know how things work. They often ask "why." One of the aspects of Vygotsky's theory on social learning and cognitive development is that children are apprentices in thinking. This means that children learn from observing, helping, and being taught by older people (including parents or older siblings) in their society. Another aspect of Vygotsky's theory pertaining to cognitive development is scaffolding. This is used to help children eventually reach a level where they can do something alone. In scaffolding, a teacher, parent, or any adult provides assistance to a child who is trying to complete something or learn something. Slowly, the adult lessens the amount of assistance given to that child until he or she is able to work alone. Private speech is another aspect of Vygotsky's theory on cognitive development. Private speech is when a child talks to himself or herself either silently or aloud. Children do this when trying to make a decision, explain something, or review something.

Post 7

Vygotsky's theory states that children are curious and observant in a social context. They are given the opportunity to be active in developing with guidance by someone else. The zone of proximal development are skills that the child can only do with assistance. Scaffolding is the temporary support that is adjusted for each learner.

Post 7

Vygotsky's theory of children cognition was based upon the idea that children learn better when being guided by a more skilled individual. An example of this theory could be a child learning to tie their shoes. First, a parent would suggest that their child learn to tie their shoe and help by walking them through the steps of tying their shoe, this is an example of apprentice in thinking. Second, children will work in their guided participation, which would be a parent tying the first knot and helping the child tie the second one. Next, the children would be encouraged to tie their shoe by themselves. The parent could help tie one shoe for them, and the second shoe the child could try to do themselves, this is an example of scaffolding. Hopefully by the end of this theory the child would have progressed or be able to tie their own shoe.

Post 7 - Alex

The way in which I teach my children how to make Brownies is an example of the process of cognition in early childhood as Vygotsky would describe it. This is because Vygotsky’s theory is based on children being an, “apprentice in thinking”. My children are learning to complete this task through guided practice, scaffolding, and private speech, all parts of Vygotsky's theory. Guided practice because we engage in conversation and physically acting out the steps. Scaffolding, because I offer them support during the process based on their individual zones of proximal development. Also, during this process I often hear my children engaging in private speech when they are trying to decide what to do next in regards to making the brownies.

POST SEVEN

Vygotsky believed that every part of a child's cognitive development is brought on by social context. He considered children to be apprentices in thinking because children learn and are stimulated by older and more skilled people. Most of the time this consists of parents and siblings. Vygotsky also believed in private speech, which is when someone talks to themselves, which most children do, but dont realize it. This is beneficial because it allows the child to review, decide and explain events to themselves. Finally Vygotsky also believe in scaffolding, which helps because it allows the child to master one skill at a time, rather than being overwhelmed by a whole process.

Post 7

Vygotsky 's theory of cognitive development states that children learn best through interacting with their surroundings. He believed that children's cognitive development could be enhanced if they work in their ZPD (Zone of Proximal Development). This is the level of tasks a child cannot yet perform independently, but can succeed in if guided by another individual. When they are guided by another individual it is called guided participation. Vygotsky also believed in scaffolding, where the experienced individual breaks down the task into small steps for the person learning. A good example of this would be a parent helping a child learn to ride a bike. The parent would first start the child out with training wheels. Then once the child got good at that, the parent would probably hold onto the handle bars while the child is riding slowly. The parent would gradually teach the child how to use the brakes,steer, and stay balanced. This would be scaffolding. Eventually the child would be able to ride by themselves without any guidance.

Post 7

Vygotsky's theory is based on the social aspect of young children's cognition. Children are curious and observant and whose cognition is stimulated and directed by more skilled and older members of a society. This is called apprentice in thinking. He also believed children learn to think via guided participation or learn from others who guide their exploration and experiences. ZPD are skills that a person can exercise only with assistance, and are not yet independent at achieving the skill. Scaffolding is used to teach a certain skill needed, through guided participation, to help children with what is needed to master the next task in any given learning process.

Post 7

Vygotsky believed that children cognitive development was based on a socail context. Children were more observant and curious. Vygotsky called children apprentice in thinking because their thinking was changed and stimulated by what adult was in their life. Children need guided participation in social experiences to help them gain knowledge. Vygotsky also believed that each child has a zone of proximal development (ZPD) which is a skill the person has, but has not mastered it completely by themselves.

Post 7

Please respond to the following:

Give an example of the process of cognition in early childhood as Vygotsky (or Rogoff) would describe it, highlighting at least three of his (her) specific concepts.

Post 6a

If I had funds I would use them toward the Secondary Prevention. That way whatever problems were occurring at the time could be dealt with in a timely fashion. The longer it would take to fix them the more damage could be done to the child physically, psychologically, or emotionally. Because there will be problems that arise no matter how many precautions you take in the beginning so I'd rather have tools that help take care of the ones that slip through the cracks.

Post 6A

I would focus my money on primary prevention. I feel that primary prevention is the most beneficial because it puts a stop to abuse in the beginning. Abuse effects someone for the rest of their life so I feel that it is most important to put a stop to it as soon as possible. Not only is it important for abuse to be stopped as early as possible due to damage later on down the road but because it effects not only the person being abused but people around them as well.

Post 6

I would support Primary prevention if I had a limited amount of funding. I would support Primary because it would help on a bigger level then secondary. Primary is in need of the most attention to its plans. If there were easier or more ways of reporting abuse then more people might report it sooner before its too late.

Post 6A

If I had a limited amount of funding I would spend it on Primary Prevention because it allows us to cover the largest amount of kids with the least amount of homey. In the example with bike helmets if we used secondary prevention only the kids at the skate park would get help while the rest were left out. By focusing on primary prevention we can help kids out on a much broader level.

post 6

I would support the primary prevention. Hands down this is the choice when it comes to abuse. Abuse is not cool in anyway. The biggest topic that is linked to abuse is spanking children for doing something wrong. When i was a kid and i said a bad word or did something that i was not suppose to do my mother would ask no questions go out to the back yard and get a switch. Then she would proceed to to spank me a few times. Trust me once you get spanked by a switch from a tree you will think twice about doing something your not suppose to do. This taught me right from, but there are people that say spanking is beating. Beating i my eyes is uncontrollable hitting of the child and if there is no reason to spank then it would be considered beating. Example, if a three year boy throws his dinner from the table and it lands on the wall, what do you do as a parent? Most would then proceed to spank the three year old because he/she needs to no that is the wrong thing to do. Now the other way, the three year boy throws the food on the wall, what do you do as a parent? These people would proceed to tell the child no but the child has not been shown that that is the wrong thing to do. Mostly the child would begin to throw more food from the lack of knowing that the action he/she is doing is wrong. But stopping abuse should be a main goal from day 1 of bring a child into the world.

post six b

I remember one time when I was little I was over at my neighbors house playing upstairs with her and her cousin, who was a few years older. Next thing you know they (the neighbor and cousin) start fighting over an umbrella because it was raining and we wanted to go outside. My friend, the neighbor, told me to run downstairs and get her dad, so I went downstairs to tell him that they were fighting, and next thing you know my friend, the neighbor, comes running downstairs crying, with her cousin chasing after her saying "that's what you get." Once my friends dad saw this, he took off his belt and started to whip the cousin, his niece, while her dad, the cousins dad, just sat there in the living room laughing and watching TV. At this point my friend and I high-tailed it over to my house. This would be maltreatment because it was deliberate action which is harmful to the child's physical and emotional well-being.

Sorry its confusing with all the relationships.

Post 6 part A

If I were to donate money to programs for a kind of prevention I would give it to primary programs. This is because they are the plans that are in the most need of attention. Many people out there want to help children who are at risk and get involved with foster children or other maltreated kids. But really how many people sit by everyday and KNOW that their neighbor or co-worker or whoever it may be abuses their child or children in some way. Too many times do people not step forward and say what they know until it is already too late for that child.
I think the problem would be more undercontrol if people focused on those in need of help before the damage is done. I think that people should understand that it is their duty as a person with a conscience to get involved as soon as they think something is going on. If there were more programs out there that made it easier than it currently is to report someone and more force directed at investigation it would help the situation. Now a lot of people either don't know what they need to do or who they need to talk to or they are afraid of accusing someone and it being a false accusation, so they do nothing or too little too late.

Post 6a

If I had limited funds and could only support one prevention program it would probably be primary. The reason for this is I feel that it needs to be st oped sooner rather than later. We need to stop the injury/abuse from the beginning so there hopefully will not be much of it. If you get it before it's too late, then it's already done and there's nothing one can do anymore from preventing it from happening to that individual.

Post 6a

I would put funds toward primary prevention. I think it is best to prevent abuse or injury from happening in the first place than to deal with the consequences of abuse or injury after the fact. I think it is important to put a stop to abuse and injury because it is becoming so common, which is very disturbing. Abuse not only affects the person being abused at the time of the abuse, but for the rest of that person's life. In my opinion, it is much better to put a stop to abuse or injury before it even happens. People would, hopefully, live happier, healthier lives because of this.

Post 6

There was no maltreatment towards me in my childhood but I did have friends that their parents were very strict on their child and their sports, or authoritarian style of parenting. Even at a young age the parents would be upset if they did not do something right or if they had one mistake. For example in dance, a friend of mine would have to practice her dance until it was perfect for her mother and then she was allowed to go on stage and do her dance. But that was the only way she could go on stage to do her dance and then if she messed up on something while she was on stage her mom would not talk to her until later that day. It got to the point that she was scared to even talk to her mom after a dance because she did not know what she would say or what she would think of the dance she had just performed.

Post 6

(a) Thinking about maltreatment with limited funds, I would probably target my money towards secondary prevention. These funds would help those who were at the highest risk for abuse. Secondary treatment would eliminate the problem at the place it occurs. These funds would not be wasted on children who may not be at risk for maltreatment at all. Although Primary prevention would eliminate the risk for abuse initially, it should not be required for all children, especially those at the lowest risk. Secondary prevention would help the situation immediately and would help the specific groups in preventing further abuse.

Post 6a

If I had limited funds and could only support one type of prevention program, I would choose primary prevention. This is because it's goal would be to actually prevent the maltreatment from ever occurring in the first place. Some examples of this would be creating stable neighborhoods and working on family cohesion. In actuality maltreatment will occur, however, I feel that the top priority and focus should be absolute prevention.

Secondary Prevention - Alex

If I had limited funds and could only support one type of maltreatment prevention plan, my initial reaction would be to support the primary plan. This is because, my hope would be to eliminate maltreatment altogether. However, after further consideration this plan did not seem practical. Maltreatment will never fully be eliminated and a primary plan would waste a lot of resources on people that will never engage in, or be affected by, maltreatment. It seems more realistic to me to spend my allotted money on the people that clearly need it. A secondary prevention program would offer these people education, home visits, preventative medical treatment, and high quality day care.

Post 6

(a) If I had only limited funds I would support a primary prevention program. This is because a primary program provides for the overall situation is structured to make injuries less likely. Primary prevention works to reduce every child's chance of injury. So if I only had limited funds I would want to work at the source of child maltreatment by trying to prevent it before it even happens. I also feel like primary prevention would help all children, rather than just specific cases like secondary and tertiary prevention.

Post 6--Letter A

If I had to decided where I would place more money between primary, secondary, or tertiary prevention I think I would have to spend more money on primary. I picked primary prevention because it the the structure to make injury less likely, so hopefully I can stop it before it gets worse or even begins. Primary prevention tries to help by taking measures to make the environment safer for all.

Post 6

Please respond to one of the following:

(a) One of the topics we will cover in chapter 8 is child maltreatment and prevention. The author of your text describes three levels of prevention. If you had limited funds and could only afford to support a primary, secondary, or tertiary prevention program (regarding maltreatment), where would you target your money? Why?

(b) Think back on your childhood and the peers/friends you had at the time. Based on what you read in the chapter were there any examples of maltreatment that you recall? Why was it maltreatment?

Flashcards

I am a little skeptical about the use of flashcards to teach infants to read. Before this type of educational series came out, children developed their communication by listening, and imitation of the sounds their heard. I believe that the use of flashcards really isn't what it is cracked up to be and seems like a good idea now, but could cause issues for the child's future developing skills. From what we have learned about Piaget, I do not believe this system would work together.

Flash Cards

I don't think that using flash cards helps a child to learn language. I have seen methods like this used before. The child is simply memorizing, not learning. Also, due to infantile amnesia, the child will never remember what it has memorized because the cutoff for memory is about two or three years of age. The flash cards would serve to enrich the child's environment, so they couldn't hurt, but they also won't be of any real benefit. Piaget would probably not use this method because he thought children learn by watching and imitating their parents and peers, which is not what is happening when the child is memorizing flash cards.

Post 5 B

I do not think that holding up large flash cards infront of an infant would benefit them. It might help enrich their schema and environment later in life but I don't think that it would be beneficial to an infant at that point and time in their lives. I also don't think that it would benefit them due to the fact that the mind doesn't develop until at least when a child is two years old. Piaget would not agree with this because he feels that children should learn by observing and trying.

post 5

As I grew up, I have always used flash cards to learn new things. Although I use flash cards to learn I don't think they will 100% help infants learn language. I think for infants to learn how to talk they need to also hear language and everyday talk. I think that if parents aid talking to their children and using flash cards that could be a helpful way for infant to learn to talk.

Post 5

I do not think that flashcards will do much for an infant. Simiply on the fact that an infant can not talk in fact it can barely walk. So the only positive thing out of holding flashcards in front of an infant is the enviroment is being enriched. Which is a good thing the the enviroment be enriched will thing that will maybe give the child an edge over other chilren. It can not hurt to show the infant the cards the only thing it would do is help the child with schemas later in the development. But if the mind really does not start develpoing memory until 2 years then would holding flash cards up to the infants face be a waste of time. It could very well be that it is a waste of time, but everyone is different from one to the other so who really knows. Piaget would probably not agree with this method fully unless the child showed intrest in the flashcards then i think that Piaget would maybe try this method.

Post 5

I do not think that holding flashcards in front of an infant is a good idea. The baby needs to learn how to talk before the parents start trying to have the baby trying to learn to read. Showing the child flashcards might not hurt them but I do not think they would be helpful for the child.Piaget would not agree with this flashcard idea either. He thinks that they learn by observing and trying.

post 5

babies learn by observing others, especially their parents. I don't believe that flashcards would hurt a child, but how successful it would be, im not sure. Although I don't believe it to be very healthy to push your child to learn. Children learn in their own time, and sometimes they may need help, but a parent should not start that habit. Piajet would definately be against it because he believes that children learn by trying and observing what the people around them say.

Post 5b

I do not think that holding flashcards up in front of an infant is a good idea, but if taught in the correct way, may be useful later in development. If the parent were to hold up the card, say the word and then relate it to something the child is familiar with, the child may experience a greater understanding of the word later on in language development. Although this sort of teaching would not be useful on an infant because they are learning through senses and personal experiences. Piaget would not agree with this sort of teaching because he believes children should learn through interaction and sensible experiences. Just holding up the card is not enough, language development occurs when the parent is constantly interacting with the infant in an enriched environment.

Post 5 Part A

I think a major implication in Piaget's theories when it comes to parenting is to remember, though all stages are important, children to develop rapidly in the first two stages, sensorimotor and preoperational stages. They are learning how to adapt to their environment in a very goal-driven way by using accomadation and assimilation. This is important to remember when a child might say or do something that might seem foreign to you. Remember that this world seems a lot more foreign to them. Patience and encouragement are the key.

POST FIVE! (B)

I think that the idea couldn't hurt the child if the parent used flash cards, as long as the parent was saying each word as the card was held up, and then demonstrating the word. I think that while possibly it wont help the child to learn the language faster, it may help the child later on to learn to read, because they could subconsciously recall the flash cards where the words were spelled. I think that Piaget would agree with this because the child would still be hearing the parent speak, and in turn imitate what the parent is saying as it relates to the card.

Post 5b

I do not think it would be a good idea for parents to hold flash cards in front of their infant to help them develop language. Babies learn language from hearing it, and then they imitate it, although the beginnings of language, such as babbling is universal. Babies will learn language when they are ready. Holding flash cards up to a baby is going way too far. I do not think they would be learning anything from the flash cards, so pretty much they would be pointless. I think Piaget would disagree with the flash card idea because of what his stages suggest. Babies are in the sensorimotor stage where they use their senses to explore their world. I think Piaget would think that flash cards would be a little overboard. He also might say that there comes a time when flash cards might be appropriate, but it is definately not appropriate for a baby.

Post 5 part A

One implication of Piaget's theory of infant development is that parents, and all people around children, need to be cautious of what they say and do around a child; especially at the 6th stage (18-24 mths). This is because the child is starting to have deferred imitiation-imitating observed behavior and remembering it to replicate later. If people around the child are doing inappropriate things it is very probable that the child will start to pick up on their bad habits and start imitating those behaviors themselves. People know that kids will definitely pick up on bad language and it's a good idea to try to keep this in mind all the time to avoid slip ups. But I believe it can also go deeper than just specific actions; kids are very observant and are pretty much like a sponge, they will absorb everything they see & won't be able to know what is right or wrong. Therefore, not only should people not say bad things, they need to be aware of their behaviors and how they interact with others because it could have a significant positive or negative affect on the child.

Post 5 b

I don't think that holding flash cards in front of an infant would be effective in their language development. I believe the best way for children to develop language is by listening to their parents and people around them. They immitate what they hear in their environment. Maybe once they get older and start learning to read, the parents could use flash cards. Plus children learn to talk before they learn to read, so I really don't think the flash cards would be of any use. Piaget would not agree with the flash card idea because his theory focuses on children exploring the world through movement and the five senses. The flash cards would appeal visually to the child, but they wouldn't get any meaning out of them.

Post 5

I think holding flashcards in front of an infant to help them learn a language wouldn't be the best idea. They first need to learn how to speak, and to learn this they need to look at the parents and try to imitate the words they are saying. By holding a flashcard in front of the infant, it is not helping them say that particular letter/word. Flashcards should be used in more advanced teachings; such as how to read or spell a word. Piaget would say this isn't a good idea at all because according to him; children are supposed to learn from trial and error and interaction.

Post 5-B

I feel like using flash cards to help your child learn language is not the best of ideas. As we learned in the video last class, children begin the language development process by imitating sounds they hear when spoken to, and as far as I know flashcards don't talk. The video also said that children going through this process do not do so in a passive manner. They cannot pick up just any sound they hear, they need to be spoken to. The whole thing depends ion parent child interaction, and flash cards just don't cut it. Piaget would disagree with this method because he believed children learned by sensory experiences and once again, flashcards are not going to give the right kind of stimulation to elicit the desired response.

Post 5 - Alex

I do not think Piaget would advocate holding flash cards of words in front of an infant to teach language. This is because according to Piaget’s Theory, infants construct an understanding of the world by coordinating sensory experiences w/ physical ones. Showing an infant flash cards is not a sensory experience. Based on the information we learned in class on Tuesday, about language development, I wouldn’t advocate it either. I think the parent’s time with the infant would be more wisely spent speaking slowly in a high pitched voice, exaggerating facial expressions while talking, and saying the name of an object when the infant touches it.

Post 5

I think holding flash cards in front of infant to teach the language would not be the best idea. I don't think it would necessaily hurt them but it's not the natural way they learn language. Infants learn language by listening to others around them and learning how to form their own words. Simply looking at words on a card wouldn't help an infant develop language because looking at a word won't teach them how to say it. I believe letting the natural events of language occur is better than trying to force an infant to speak using flash cards. I don't think Piaget would like this activity because he believed that infants learned actively and that had no reflective thought. Therefore, Piaget would not see to effectiveness of flash cards for infants.

Post 5--B

I think it would be alright if a parent used flash cards with their baby. I know it is probably not going to work, but I think if you keep doing something over and over they will finally understand. It is really working with the child. Saying the word out loud and repeating is key. I do not think Piaget would agree with the flashcards because he believes in the child learning on their own by doing it and either succeeding or failing.

Post 5

No it would not be a good idea for parents to use flashcards to teach language to their child because when children are first learning to speak they are imitating words that their parents say to them. They learn through imitation of the sounds that eventually turn into words and then sentences. By putting flashcards in their faces they are just looking at the words on the cards but do not know what the words mean because they cannot read yet. Piaget would disagree with this activity because he believes that children learn from experiences of trial and error, such as practicing the words that their parents are saying to them. Deferred imitation is a good example that he would use of the children imitating their parents.

Post 5

Please respond to one of the following:

A) What are some of the implications of Piaget's theory of infant development for parenting?

B) Would it be a good idea for parents to hold large flash cards of words in front of their infant to help the infant learn language? Why or why not? What do you think Piaget would say about this activity?

Post 4

I would first advise a new mother to maintain a healthy relationship with her partner if she is married. I've seen many women neglect their marriages when they have a new baby. I think the addition to the family is an opportunity to bring a couple closer together-to embark on the adventure together will strengthen the bond of the relationship. The mother should not take all the responsibility upon herself, but include her spouse in the process of caring for the infant. Another piece of advice I would provide to a new mother is to let the baby sleep as much as it will. Seventeen hours seems like too much to us, but the baby is developing brain connections and building its immune system while it sleeps. Another important factor to consider is co-sleeping. I think the infant should learn from the beginning that nighttime is not something to be afraid of, and to be able to soothe itself during the night when Mom is not there. Therefore, I think co-sleeping would form an unhealthy and co-dependent relationship between the parent and child.

post 4

One piece of advice I would give to the mother is to let the baby get the needed amount of sleep. Babies need at least 17 hours of sleep a day, and I think mothers tend to freak out if they get too much/not enough sleep. Along with the sleeping issue, I don't think that mothers should co-sleep for very long after birth. I feel like a child should be dependent and by co-sleeping the mother will be very dependant early on. Another thing I would tell the mother is that they need to have their child in an enriched environment, this will allow the child to grow mentally and phyically.

Post 4

I would encourage a new mother to co-sleep with their new baby but not too often. I think that it is important for the child to feel the warmth and affection of their mother but I also feel that it is important for the child to learn to comfort themselves while sleeping and not become dependent on their mother to always be there when they wake up. I would also tell a new mother that it is important to help their child develop motor skills. I would encourage them to play with their baby and to challenge their child to try and hold their bottle while feeding so that they can develop hand-eye coordination.

post 4

Something that i would tell a new mother is keep a health relationship between the newborn and herself. When i say healthy i mean do not spend every waking moment with the new born. The mother needs some time to her self so the new experience of have a child is no so overwhelming. Other piece of advice i would give to the new mother is please do not smoke around your new born child. The effects of smoking can be very bad and cause cancers later in life so why let your new born child be exposed to poison.

Post 4

Two pieces of advice that I would give to mother's about biosocial/physical development, would be the importance of motor skills and brain development. Mother's with newborn children need to keep thier child in an enriched environment in order to develop correctly. Motor skills are critical in development because if the child is not properly developed socially, learning disabilities tend to increase. Mother's should be aware of their child's cognitive development so when they get older, the child will be prepared. Brain development is also critical during this time because more parts of the brain are developing and growing. As long as the child grows up in an enriched environment, all other development should be normal.

Post 4

The first thing I would say is to have plenty of physical contact with the baby. When you spend more time touching and being around your baby it becomes more familiar and comfortable with you. Also, physical contact has a big impact on the social development of the child. The second things I would advise is to make sure your baby's sleeping and eating patterns stay somewhat regular. Obviously it's impossible to make it a set schedule but the more regular it is the better the baby will adjust to a set schedule later in life and will physically develop much better. When their body is on a somewhat regular schedule it develops better.

Post 4

Advice I would give a friend who has just had a baby is:
-Not to make things harder than they need to be (don't line dry their clothes, make homemade baby food, use cloth diapers, ect. if it is stressing you out)
-A baby has never died from crying. If they feel overwhelmed put the baby in their crib and go out on the back deck for 5 minutes.
-All a baby really needs is diapers, food, shelter and love, all the expensive baby gear is really for the parent
-The sleepless nights eventually end.
-Take time to enjoy as many moments as you can because it goes by way to fast

Biosocial/physical
I would encourage them to let their baby sleep because during sleep is when their babies body is working its hardest to develop his/her brain. I would also explain that lack of sleep can lead to impaired motor function and a weakened immune system. I would also advise the parents to alert their doctor immediately if they suspect their child’s vision is not developing or they seem to have a hearing problem. I would reassure my friend that testing for these issues are fairly simple and untreated they can lead to permanent social and physical development issues. The reason I chose these two things is because many new mothers think they need to wake the baby to feed it, give it a bath, when visitors come over, etc. and I would want them to know the benefits of letting the baby sleep outweigh the gain from these other things. I would speak with them about the sight and hearing because these issues need dealt with within the critical period and mothers most often the first person to suspect an issue.

Post 4

The two pieces of advice I would give is the importance of sleep and the advantages of an enriched environment. The experiments involving the rats showed that those raised in the enriched environment setting had a significantly thicker cortex. This enriched environment will help the child not only develop well mentally but also physically. As an infant, approximately 17 hours of sleep are needed to keep their growing bodies in good form. During sleep, the body undergoes several important processes. Including replenishing neurotransmitters, distributing growth hormone, development of immune and cardiovascular systems, and several others.

Post 4

One of the things I would tell one of my friends is that the idea of co-sleeping can be beneficial if done right and detrimental if done wrong. I would explain to them that for the first 8-12 months co-sleeping can help develop of better relationship between the child and the parent but if it is a practice used for too long it can create independence problems for the child. I would tell them this so that they can better develop a good relationship with their child. I would also tell them about the idea of enriched environments and how they can stimulate brain functions. This is important because I would want their child to get the best available practices in order to get a jump start on learning.

Post 4

With the idea of co-sleeping I would want parents to know all of the benefits of co-sleeping and that it really is great for bonding. I would also like them to be aware of the lasting affects it can have on a child if it is continued longer than it should be. I would want to present them with all the facts and allow them to make an informed decision.
One thing I would encourage a mother to do would be to breast feed because of all the nutritional benefits that come along with it. Often times mothers who are wanting to breast feed can't because of time or they just don't produce enough. I would also explain, however, that it is not a huge problem if they are unable to for some reason. The vitamins, nutrients, and anti bodies from breast milk are only temporary so in the long run the child will be fine without it.

Post 4

The two things I would tell a mother to be about her newborn's biosocial/physical development would be to explain co-sleeping and how it tends to benefit the mother and the infant, but the drawbacks of it as well. The second thing would be the way to encourage walking would be to have plenty of safe things the baby could pull themselves up on, such as a padded stepstool.

Post 4

One piece of advice I would give her is that an infants brain is developing rapidly and needs to be in an enriched environment. Being in an enriched environment will help the child develop mentally and physically well. I would also stress the fact that motor development is very important. Not all infants develop the motor skills at th same time but there are important gaps in which they need to be developed.

Post 4

Two pieces of advice i would give would be one; to promote motor skills activities because this is very important on your baby in orer to develop correctly. Not all infants do the same things at the same exact ages; but they all should be doing it within a certain time gap and you wouldn't want your child to get too behind with the skills. Another piece of advice, I feel is important and you can start with your infant at a very young age would be to encourage co-sleeping to become more connected with your child.

Post 4

I would inform my friend about sleep and sensitive periods in their infant's development. I would tell them that their infant, as a newborn, needs 17 hours of sleep a day. Sleep is important for replenishing neurotransmitters, and it also helps the brain to mature. Sleep also builds up the child's immne and cardiovascular systems to keep them healthy. If a child does not have sleep, he could get sick, be irritable, and could have problems with his motor functioning. I would also inform the mother about sensitive periods. I would tell her that she needs to make sure the child's vision and hearing are developing in the time frame they are supposed to. I would tell her to be watchful to be sure these things are developing because if they don't develop in a certain time frame, the odds of these things developing correctly are low. I chose these two pieces of advice because I think they are very critical, and I also think they may be things a new mother is not aware of.

Post 4

The two pieces of information that I would tell new mothers about a child's bio social/ physical development is the importance of sleeping and brain development. The mother needs to know that newborns need to get 17 hours of sleep and that importance of sleep, associated with the neurotransmitters and what can happen with sleep deprivation. Also the importance of brain development through experiences in their environment with their motor skills and how there are sensitive periods that the child has to learn.

Post 4

The two pieces of information I would give a new mother about her infant's biosocial/physical development would be information about an enriched environment and motor development. An enriched environment is important for an infants physical and social developments. Making sure her infant is in a nourishing environment that promotes these things will ensure her physical and emotional health as she grows older. I would also stress the importance of motor development. I would show her ways to improve her infants gross and fine motor skills and teach her the importance.

Post 4

The first piece of advice I would give a new mother would be the importance of brain development within her infant. The brain is growing and developing rapidly during this time. So it is important that the mother provide the infant with an enriched environment for the infant to thrive mentally. I would also stress the importance of motor skills. The infant should begin to move and control their body. The mother should do activities to enhance the infants motor skills.

post 4

The two pieces of advice I would give someone about the biosocial/physical development I would give a new parent would be the importance of sleep and explain to about co-sleeping, and the advangtage of an enriched enviroment. I would tell them the importance it is on an infant to have an adequate amount of sleep for regualtion of their immune systme and emotional regulation. And also it is good for brain development to get a sufficient amount of sleep when their child is younger. I would also give the advantages and disadvantages of co-sleeping and the time line they should try and stay within if they choose to have their child sleep with them. I would then explain to them the importance of an enriched enviroment it is on a child, to develope fully and beyond mentally, physically and even emotionally.

Post 4

Two pieces of advice I would give to a new parent about their baby's biosocial/physical development would be to give their infant an enriched environment and give them the chance to develop their muscle control. The rat experiment showed that an enriched environment helped them develop a thicker cortex. Well, why not try that with your child. Give them every opportunity to make more connections. Babies will need to learn muscle control because as they grow they figure out how their body works. Maybe make up some type of game that the two of you can do that way you are bonding and the baby is also learning.

Post 4

Please respond to the following:

What 2 pieces of advice about the infant's biosocial/physical development would you want to give a friend who has just had a baby? Why those two?

Post three

I think that all pregnant women should deffinatly be informent that drinking and smoking while they are pregnant is very harmful to the baby and the mother. All pregnant women should know about Fetal Alcohol Syndrome, which can cause deformations in the baby and is 100 percent preventable. I think there should be more information, such as videos, that are readily available for young people. I don't think a lot of younger girls know exactly was FAS means and how it can affect their children. I also think there should be prevention programs for pregnant women so that drinking and smoking don't happen while they are pregnant.

Post 3

I believe that women are so desensitized to dangers that could befall their newborn babies, that if a woman wants to smoke or drink, she will. To me this is a sad but realistic outlook. It is almost like the blame would not be on them because it could have been any number of reasons that a child comes out affected. This is why I think the only way to affect women who are pregnant and smoking or drinking is to put the responsibility where it belongs; on the pregnant women. This includes not only the doctor but on society as a whole, including tobacco companies!

post 3

I think that there are a lot of women who love their babies enough to follow the rules and don't drink or smoke. However, those that don't need a reality check. Maybe there could be a way for insurance companies to cut coverage if the mother smokes or drinks during pregnancy, or they have to pay more to keep their coverage. I high school they did mock crashes to show students the affects of drinking and driving. they took it very seriously. there were actual ambulances and actual wrecked cars. There was even a funeral after the "crash" with caskets and blown up photos of our classmates. If there was a in your face way to show parents what drinking and smoking could do to their children in utero, maybe it would be more of an impact. Because I certainly will never drink and drive.

Post 3

I think they only way people ever listen is if you make a big enough impression on them. The only way pregnant women will believe that their baby is being harmed by smoking and/or drinking is if you convince them. The best way to do that would be to show them first hand what these actions can do to a baby. Let other mothers explain to them all the reasons they regret making the wrong choice of drinking or smoking while pregnant & prove to them what could happen to their baby. Take those mothers who think that what they are doing to their bodies isn't affecting the baby all that much and let them look at the babies of other women who stupidly thought the same thing when they were pregnant & were later proven wrong. The only problem with this solution, or any idea for that matter, is that not all mothers-to-be really care all that much about the person inside of them. It is an unfortunate reality that a lot of mothers are perfectly aware of what their actions will cause & they just don't care enough to change.

Post 3

For those women who are pregnant, it is important to be educated on what harmful effects certain drugs/alcohol may have. However, those women who chose to abuse those drugs or even alcohol are already putting themselves at risk, so they obviously are aware of the effects it may have on the baby. I think insurance companies provide enough information about the harmful effects that certain substances might have on the child, as well as on the mother. It is important to educate those women who may not have been previously informed about the certain defects it may lead to. Heath-care providers are supportive of women who are pregnant, and are helpful in answering questions. Most doctor's offices provide pamphlets and brochures for pregnant women. Pregnant women themselves should be aware of the harmful effects by just watching the news, or looking through magazine ads. Most people are aware of the effects smoking has just through the media itself.

post 3

I personally think that health care programs and insurance companies already shell out plenty of money on educating there customers about health risks. It's not rocket science, smoking leads to Cancer and other health problems. These health problems have already been in the main stream media for 50 to 60 years. If the mother wants to choose to have her baby under the influence of cocaine and other illegal drugs, unfortunately could have some effect of the unborn child. Someone else should not have to educate someone that should already be educated about sex and drugs and other things. Adding more cost to our insurance companies would only make every ones rates jump through the roof. I think the system should not be changed for a few thousand people that are not careful during their pregnancies.

Post 3

I don't think that scarring women into avoiding smoking and drinking is enough to get it to stop. We have seen in case of smoking in general, drunk driving and unprotected sex, that scare tactics are not enough. I think part of the solution is better avoiding unwanted pregnancy through safe sex practices and birth control. Most women that are not mature enough to take pregnancies seriously are the same ones that will smoke and drink. Insurance companies can make the pill and condoms more readily available and affordable. Also once a woman is pregnant, there should be incentives to quit smoking and drinking including possibly receiving money for diapers and other necessities after the birth if they can prove that they are not drinking and smoking.

post tres

I think that women should be educated about the effects that alcohol and smoking have on the baby. They can have some sort of class which would be given at the doctors appointments, or not even necessarily a class but an informational video. I also think that the insurance should have some sort of like benefit program, like Allstate (i believe) and their safe drivers program. If during the check ups the doctors find out that you haven't been smoking or drinking during the pregnancy, they will report it to the insurance agency and then the insurance can pay more, or pay the deductible, as a reward. I personally know someone who has 5 children, and three out of the five children have FAS, so obviously just education and past experiences aren't enough. People seem to respond to things really well when they personally get something out of it.

Post 3

I think that in the beginning their health-care provider needs to make sure they stress how bad of an outcome these things have on the fetus. Pictures, brochures, video clips; whatever is most graphic or most influential to get the point across to pregnant women. I have no doubt that pretty much every women knows it's not good to drink nor smoke while being pregnant, but I do believe some don't understand the severity of this and what the consequence could result in. I personally didn't realize a lot of things it could do till we did research in class. I knew that it was extremely bad but didn't realize how many consequences that the fetus/baby could experience if a women who is pregnant smokes or drinks during her pregnancy.

Post 3

I believe the best thing to do is make sure they know the dangers and harm they are causing to their baby. They need to be informed and educated by doctors or health care providers. I also think that the expectant mother actually meeting or seeing a child who has FAS would allow them to see the repercussions firsthand. Seeing is sometimes more effective than just hearing. It would make it more real and personal to them. Insurance companies should not cover expecting mothers who choose to continue drinking or smoking.

Post 3

I think that educating pregnant mothers is the best way to prevent smoking and drinking during pregnancy. I mean, if you don't know what harm, or good, can come from something then your habits won't change. When it comes to health-care I think hospitals should give out some kind of info on what the risks are and if the future parents want to they can view pictures or a video of children whose mothers have used while they were in the womb. It's kind of the same approach to drinking and driving for teens. When it comes to insurance companies and the like I don't know how much push they would have. Although, maybe if the baby is born with some defect that can be related to smoking or drinking then they don't help pay for the medical bills or something. Regardless, I think that education on the subject would be the best course of action.

Post 3

Health-care providers and insurance companies need to partner together to develop education and monetary incentive programs to convince women who are pregnant not to smoke or drink. The insurance companies could justify paying for the program based on the amount of money they would save long term if these woman stopped engaging in harmful behavior. The health-care provider could present the program at the women’s first prenatal visit and explain that if she attends she will get X amount of money.

A few other ideas I have to encourage women to stop smoking or drinking includes:

-Helping the women mak a connection with the baby. One way to encourage this would be by providing an ultrasound earlier in the pregnancy. Most women don’t visually see their baby until they are 20 weeks pregnant. Perhaps if they say the baby sooner they would feel a stronger responsibility to protect the baby through healthy behavior.

-Offering support like smoking and drinking cessation programs.

-Have them attend a program like Bodies Revealed that was in KC this past summer. I attended, and what I saw was SO much more powerful than a picture. I can’t imagine a pregnant person engaging in unhealthy behavior after seeing persevered babies at 2, 4, 6, 8,….weeks of gestation.