A Child Observation Case Study
A child description
A child observed in the study is a 5 year-old boy. His name is Ansar. His family is immigrants from United Arab Emirates. Ansar’s mother’s native language is Arabic. She speaks English a little. There are 5 children in the family: Ansar, his two brothers, and two sisters. Ansar loves his baby sister very much and tries to patronize her but he often fights with his older brothers. Ansar has close relationship with his mother and adores her. Ansar goes to kindergarten 2. He has to learn English for communication with other children and adults. He is very smart boy but he is rather naughty and independent. He likes active games. Ansar is a kinesthetic learner who remembering the information better by moving, carrying subjects in the hands, or playing. The child does not like learning but his success increases in the learning process if he is motivated. For example, after hearing from the mother that he will be allowed playing computer games if he learns well, Ansar worked at the lesson thoroughly. Ansar likes competing with other peers and it stimulates him to take part in games and activities by learning.In our study we conducted the child’s observation in two settings: his involvement in a child initiated play experiences and in teacher initiated learning experiences. It gives us an opportunity to examine child’s behavior in each of three domains, determine the strengths and weaknesses of a child in all domains, and work out a plan of development on the bases of the theories of development.
2. Examples of the child’s learning in the three domains By playing in blocks center with the group, Ansar cooperates with other children and helps them build castles if they have difficulties to place a necessary block at the appropriate place. He discusses with his peers which color they want and what shape the blocks have. He shares toys with other children eagerly. The observation of Ansar’s playing in blocks center gives us an opportunity to judge about the development of the child across three domains. First of all, we can come to conclusion that Ansar’s gross motor skills are well-developed, since his moves are coherent and exact. Then, the child’s communication and interaction with other children and his intentions to help and organize peers in the work characterize Ansar as an open, friendly, kind, and helpful person who likes to be a leader in the group. It allows us to make an assumption that his social domain is well-developed for his age. In addition, Ansar’s interaction with other children shows that he has a high self-esteem, as most of his peers. Then, the observation of the child in his playing in blocks center with other children shows that Ansar’s cognitive domain development corresponds to his age. Thus, he can find an appropriate place for a certain block and build castle in such way that blocks will not fall down. Therefore, he has good logical …
Child Development Case Study Essay
1027 Words5 Pages
One precious little girl, charming responses, and thirty well spent minutes adds up to a successful Piaget project. The time spent on interviewing a child for cognitive development was insightful, and gave me a first hand look at how a child’s mind matures with age.
N.G., 4 years, 11 months, embodied all I could ask for in a child to conduct such an interview on. Nearing her fifth birthday in the upcoming week, her age is central between ages three and seven, providing me with information that is certainly conducive to our study. Within moments upon entry into our interview it was apparent that my child fell into the preoperational stage of Piaget’s cognitive development. More specifically, N.G. fell into the second half of the…show more content…
stated that the tall glass held more water because, “it’s bigger!” This is a classic example validating no conservation; the ability to recognize the important properties of a substance or object that remain constant despite changes in its shape. A branch of conservation is the logical concept of complementarily, which better argues N.G.’s lack of conservation. Complementarily deals with one tall, narrow glass, and another short, wide glass which is a spitting image of our demonstration.
Entering part two of my interview I was observing for egocentric tendencies which were surprisingly nowhere to be found. I led into this section by telling N.G., “My birthday was yesterday!” Hoping to have a response of, “My birthday’s in six days!” was nonexistent, instead N.G.’s response was, “that’s cool”. Short and simple, N.G. neither showed signs of egocentrism or an understanding of how I should feel by responding with a neutral response. Part three, the questioning section of my interview, solidified my analysis of N.G.’s cognitive functioning. N.G. was asked numerous questions, six specifically, that were to differentiate her recognition of factual and imaginary information. Over the course of the questioning I received a variety of answers that showed no correlation between one another. N.G. was able to logically respond to the following questions: