Observation Of The Child - Case Study Example

I chose to observe my nephew for the observation hours in this project. The observations took place over several weeks. Luke is five years old. Heis the third child in a family of six children. His parents are both educated professionals that have provided a very comfortable, stable home environment for Luke. His mother is a stay-at-home mom, despite the fact that she has had a successful career as a manager and business consultant before having children. She and her husband both agreed that once they began their family, Mary, Luke’s mom would stay home to be with the children. Most of the observation activities involved everyday activities such as playing with various manipulative toys (blocks, Lagos and art supplies), helping to fix lunch and cleaning up playthings. One of the first things I was able to observe Luke doing was playing with Lego building blocks. Luke is a Lego maniac. He builds elaborate structures with these toys, but is always very careful to keep the “sets” of Lagos sorted out from one another. This way he can build them the “right” way by following the instructions. When he combines sets to build one structure, he is very careful to observe which set it came from so he can return it to its proper place. The idea of equilibrium is an important idea introduced by Piaget (Slavin). According to this theory, when something new is introduced to the child, a disequilibrium is created in the child’s understanding of how the world works. This disequilibrium is what causes learning. I was able to observe this when Mary introduced a new type of Lego set to Luke. I notice that Luke would follow a pattern in building his structures. He always used dark, sturdy Lagos for the base of his structures and lighter colored, thin Lagos at the top. This new set of Lagos, however, did not have any dark, sturdy Lego’s. I could tell that Luke was keen to use his new set, but could not reconcile the fact that the new dark Lagos would not work for the base. He dealt with the new situation by excluding the new Lagos from the building. Eventually, Luke may realize that it is not the color that makes for a good base, but the thickness of the blocks. When he does this, he will have assimilate new information and will have learned something new. While watching Mary serve Luke and his younger sister some lunch, I was able to observe another hallmark of Piaget’s research, namely, Luke’s early ability to display the idea of conservation. Juice was being poured into two different sized glasses. Luke’s was tall and thin while his sister’s glass was shorter and broader. Luke’s sister began to cry because Luke got “more”. His glass did appear to have more due to the higher level of juice in the glass, but both glasses held nearly the same amount of juice. Luke tried to console his sister by saying, “It’s OK Ginny, they are the same size juice just different shapes.” According to Piaget, Luke should still be in the preoperational stage, but being able to show an understanding of conservation shows that even at age 5, he is beginning to mature out of this stage. This doesn’t really mean that Luke is abnormal because it is clear that Piaget’s stages are flexible, not rigid (Costello an Costello). I thought it was interesting that Mary would give up a successful career to be a stay-at-home mom. When I asked her about this during one of my observation visits, she said that she felt she could provide a better atmosphere for learning in her home than her kids would get at a daycare facility or even a preschool. I have observed children in these other environments before and I agree with her. I just never quite realized why until I observed Luke talking to himself during one of his block building activities. He was literally talking himself through building one of his towers. I could hear him saying things to himself like, “If I put that there it won’ work…too heavy.” Vygotaky called this private speech and he felt that it was a necessary part of development and learning. I knew going into the observations that Mary had some concerns about Luke. Some of his behaviors were worrying her because they were associated with disorders on in the autism spectrum and some psychological problems. I observed that Luke had to have the exact same thing for lunch each day. It had to be on the same plate an at the same place at the table. He wouldn’t just whine or complain if this didn’t happen. He would become immobilized, talking excitedly and excessively about the situation and what needed to be done to fix the situation. Another concern was his apparent obsession with Lagos and building. Luke is obviously bright, with an active mind, yet he still is struggling to recognize letters and some numbers. He has no interest in looking at books and never has according to Mary. I once observed Mary attempting to read to him while she tried to have him finger-trace the words as she read. I notice that Luke didn’t make eye contact with the page for more than a split second. He sat obediently on his mother’s lap, but obviously did not enjoy the activity. I thought about the idea of multiple intelligences during this final part of my observation. I wondered if the real issue with Luke was the fact that he had a strong preference for a sensory-motor style of learning (Armstrong). I can’t pretend to diagnose any psychological or developmental disorders Luke might have, but I have thought that maybe a different approach to literacy might be worth trying for Mary an Luke. Acquiring the basic ability to read and write can occur in many different ways (Hancok). Maybe Luke would begin to recognize letters and numbers if he experienced them in a different way. I decided that I would develop a game that would build on Luke’s obvious strengths in building an manipulating Lagos. The objective of the game would be for Luke to begin to associate phonemes with the letters of the alphabet and numbers with their actual value in items that Luke could manipulate. For the game I created cards with each letter of the alphabet. The letters were drawn in a block style with very sharp, crisp edges an angular intersections of lines. I would have Luke select a card from the pile. I would say the letter and make the phonetic sound of the letter. I would ask Luke to do the same. I would then challenge Luke to build a building in the shape of each letter. When the building was completed, I asked him which letter his building was shaped like and what sound the letter would make. One of the strengths of the game is it incorporates an activity that Luke already loves. The interest in the game was high from the start because it involved Legos. Luke was an active participant from the beginning. Luke was able to build a building for each of the first three letters he selected. These were the letters H, L and T. He said the letter and pronounced the phoneme each time when prompted. The fourth letter exposed a real flaw in the game. The letter was W. We did not have the proper type of Legos to joint together to form a W. I tried to show Luke that we could make a letter that was similar to a W, but his response was, “But that’s not right,” each time I tried to pass off an irregular Lego W as a “proper” W. The game showed me the challenge of working with a child like Luke. According to developmental theories, he was capable of abstract thinking in some situations but not in others. I observed Luke use the idea of conservation to explain to his sister why they were actually getting the same amount of juice, just in different shaped containers. This is a very abstract idea. Yet, this ability for abstraction does not convey to the idea of letters standing for phonetic sounds. Luke is exceptionally concrete in his thought in some ways, but able to think abstractly in others. This observation experience has really opened my eyes in some ways. The information in the course concerning stages of development was very helpful in completing an understanding this assignment. I feel as though I have a broader view of what to expect from children as they grow and learn. Specifically, I enjoyed working with my nephew because I think he is an exceptional child. He has showed me that it is possible for children to be advanced and behind in their development all at the same time. I think that this activity as also shown teaching and me that a “one-size-fits-all” approach to raising kids simply does not work. Luke shows his intelligence most profoundly by manipulating physical, tangible items. What would happen if he lived in a home where these items were not made available to him or if these activities would not be recognize as worthwhile? I think that it would be very easy to judge a child such as Luke harshly if the only measure was other children. He is fortunate to be in a home that can provide things such as Legos so he can learn and grow. As a parent, I need to understand that each one of my children will be a unique individual that have different strengths and weaknesses. I hope that I can always keep the perspective that what is good for one of my children will not be the best thing for another. I know that issues of fairness may be raised by the other kids for they don’t always get the same thing, but hopefully I will be able to make them understand that fairness is giving everyone what they need, not giving everyone the same thing. Looking back on my observation, I think that I would have done a little more research on developmental theories before observing so they were fresh in my mind. I think that even going in with the idea of observing specific things pertaining to development would be a good idea. Finally, I think a chart that would have notes about the most prominent theories to have, as a ready reference during the observation might be a good idea. Works Cited Armstrong, Thomas. Multiple Intelligences in the Classroom. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, 2000. Print. Costello, Timothy W., and Joseph T. Costello. Abnormal Psychology. New York, NY: HarperPerennial, 1992. Print. Hancock, Marjorie R. Language Arts: Extending the Possibilities. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Merrill Prentice Hall, 2007. Print. Slavin, Robert E. Educational Psychology: Theory into Practice. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1988. Print. Smith, Deborah Deutsch. Introduction to Special Education: Teaching in an Age of Opportunity. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 2001. Print. Read More