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.