Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Environmental factors that influence child development
Environmental factors that influence child development
Academic performance and social economic status
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
In recent years, policy makers, service providers, and researchers, have emphasised the importance of early intervention programs to promote development in young children. In this essay, I shall review and evaluate research that is focused on the development of children's cognitive abilities, particularly research that is focused on children from low Socio-economic status (SES) environments. I will focus on two types of cognitive outcomes assessed in the literature, specifically general cognitive ability, and, literacy and numeracy skills. I will examine literature that has a strong focus on environmental effects as the main causal element that impacts a child's cognitive development, then turn to research that has a stronger focus on the role that genetics play, not only in the developing cognitive abilities of children, but also its link to SES. I will suggest that, although environmental factors do need to be investigated, and play a role in a child's development, research that places little or no emphasis on genetics is overlooking a vital aspect of children's development, thus ultimately deficient, and has the potential to result in less helpful policy for intervention strategies. Furthermore, as the results of research that focuses on the genetics of cognitive development and SES are more widely accepted, and integrated into developmental programs and policy, there will be greater potential to close the gaps between the abilities of different children, as a greater understanding of personalised education can lead to its more successful application. According to Arnold & Doctoroff (2003) significant discrepancies between children in regards to their educational achievement, is a consequence of SES. They go on to say assert ... ... middle of paper ... ...s of children in the United States Part II: Relations with behavioral development through age thirteen. Child development, 72(6), 1868-1886. Kovas, Y., Voronin, I., Kaydalov, A., Malykh, S. B., Dale, P. S., & Plomin, R. (2013). Literacy and numeracy are more heritable than intelligence in primary school. Psychological science, 24(10), 2048-2056. Trzaskowski, M., Harlaar, N., Arden, R., Krapohl, E., Rimfeld, K., McMillan, A., & Plomin, R. (2014). Genetic influence on family socioeconomic status and children's intelligence. Intelligence, 42, 83-88. Tseng, J. C., Chu, H. C., Hwang, G. J., & Tsai, C. C. (2008). Development of an adaptive learning system with two sources of personalization information. Computers & Education, 51(2), 776-786. Whitehurst, G. J., & Lonigan, C. J. (1998). Child development and emergent literacy. Child development, 69(3), 848-872.
Children in families with lower incomes at or below the poverty line have been connected with poor cognitive and social development in early childhood. The studies that I chose to use evaluate the cognitive and social development during early childhood using various surveys, evaluations, and observations completed by or with the children, parents, and teachers. Development of any kind is dependent on the interplay of nature and nurture, or genetics and environment. These studies draw from a child’s environment during the earliest years of development, specifically birth, pre-school, and early elementary school. The studies propose living in an impoverished environment as opposed to an environment above the poverty line imposes certain restrictions on cognitive and social development during early childhood.
Stanley, J., Gannon, J., Gabuat, J., Hartranft, S., Adams, N., Mayes, C., Shouse, G. M.,
Forsyth, K., Taylor, R., Kramer, J., Prior, S., Richie, L., Whitehead, J., Owen, C., & Melton, M.
Zhang, Y. B., Harwood, J., Williams, A., Ylänne-McEwen, V., Wadleigh, P. M., & Thimm, C.
Skiba, R. J., Horner, R. H., Chung, C. G., Karenga-Rausch, M., May, S. L., & Tobin, T.
Wade, T. D., Tiggemann, M., Bulik, C. M., Fairburn, C. G., FMedSci, Wray, N. R., Martin, N.
Ottenberg, A. L., Wu, J. T., Poland, G. A., Jacobson, R. M., Koenig , B. A., & Tilburt, J. C.
Finding a definition of literacy is not as easy as it sounds. The Webster definition says that to be literate is to be” able to read and write.” But to some researchers, this definition is too simplistic, leading to multiple models of literacy. Most Americans adhere to the autonomous model, which falls closest to the standard, dictionary definition. Believers in this form say that literacy is a cognitive activity that students learn like any other basic skill. It has a set of proficiencies that one must master in order to be capable of decoding and encoding text (Alvermann, 2009; SIL International, 1999). A competing theory is the ideological model, which claims literacy is intrinsically linked to culture, and therefore what constitutes a “literate” individual is ever-changing. Society is the largest influence on literacy, according to this thought, and it is affected by politics, religion, philosophy and more (Alvermann, 2009; SIL International, 1999). These two are just the tip of the iceberg. For example, some studies recognize “literacy as competence,” which is a “measure of competence to do a given task or work in a given field,” (SIL International, 1999) such as being computer literate. Although more researchers are recognizing and exploring multiple literacies, the one that most influences American schools is the autonomous, cognitive model – the ability to read and write. For many, it seems a simple task, but millions of adolescents are struggling or reluctant readers, and there are many reasons why young readers have difficulty with reading. XXXXXX------NEED HELP WITH THESIS STATEMENT HERE PLEASE—(This paper will focus on the effects of low reading skills, some of the possible causes of reluctant and struggling readership...
Kobau, R., Zack, M. M., Manderscheid, R., Palpant, R. G., Morales, D. S., Luncheon, C., et al.
Ornstein, R., Rosen, D., Mammel, K., Callahan, S., Forman, S., Jay, M., Fisher, M., Rome, E., &
Zosuls, K. M., Ruble, D. N., Tamis-LeMonda, C. S., Shrout, P. E., Bornstein, M. H., & Greulich,
Whelan, R., Conrod, P. J., Poline, J., Lourdusamy, A., Banaschewski, T., Barker, G. J, Bellgrove, M. A.,
Duley, S. M., Cancelli, A. A., Kratochwill, T. R., Bergan, J. R., & Meredith, K. E. (1983).
Socioeconomic status (SES) is a major topic of interest within the study of language development in children. It has been indicated as one of the most widely studied constructs in the social sciences (Bradley & Corwyn, 2002). Even with the wide variety of studies involving SES, there has never been a complete consensus on what SES actually represents. Beyond the development of language, SES also affects the overall development of a child. These developmental differences then further lead to differences in language acquisition. When looking at SES, there are many factors to consider. The concept of capital seems to best embody the current meaning psychologists hold of SES, according to Bradley and Corwyn (2002). Capital is favored because of its inclusion of access to financial (material resources), human (nonmaterial resources such as education) and social capital (social connections). The current working definition of SES involves family income, education level, and occupations, which influence the theories and characteristics that children develop (Hill, 2006). The effects of socioeconomic status on children are shown through many factors that affect language development through the child’s overall growth, their cognitive development, as well as their stress management and the parenting styles that they are exposed to.
Hill, T.F., & Nabors, L.A., & Reynolds, M.W., & Wallace, J., & Weist, M.D. (2001). The