Helping family understand child development to cope with changes in children’s learning and living
We are living in a continuously varying world where the pace of variation is rapid than before. The new process and products are also continually available hence increasing the rate of new information exposure (Felt and Robb, 2016). Strom and Strom (2015) demonstrated that there is a need for communication where patiency will be required to enhance family relationships. Advance warming, as demonstrated, plays a vital role in child coping up with change, being consistent, and socialization is essential to ensure that the child has progressive interpersonal tools before they learn technology skills. Hence most of the parent’s trust in their children involves a lot of disclosure, thus more disclosure on the usage of technology (Clarke et al., 2009). Researchers, as well as philosophers, have urged that through experience is the key behind the child development and learning about the family perspective, culture and functioning (Bornstein, 2002; Dunst et al., 2001). Most of the research has shown that parents do not introduce their children earlier on which activities they engage in, thus giving the children a specific number of events for learning (Merriam, 1998).
Furthermore, Dadds et al., (1996) demonstrated that family processes could encourage advancement and the maintenance of internal challenges in children. Children’s support has merged to be useful, especially in early intervention, to identify anxiety risk and depression difficulties (Asarnow et al., 2001; Dadds et al., 1997, 1999). Rowe and Kisiel (2012) demonstrate that parent-child interaction helps children in biological as well as psychological reasoning about the living hence it reveals opportunities for learning (Kisiel eta al., 2012; Allien, 2003; Ash, 2003; Rigney and Callanan, 2011). Green (2002) has demonstrated the importance of listening to children and actions taken after (Warshak, 2000). Thus, the main aim of the study is to help a family understand child development to cope with changes in children’s learning and living.
References
Felt, L., & Robb, M. (2016). Technology addiction: Concern, controversy, and finding balance. San Francisco, CA: Common Sense Media.
Strom, R., & Strom, P. (2015). Assessment of intergenerational communication and relationships. Educational Gerontology, 41(1), 41–52.
This study shows that having several friends in touch influences emotional status, physical health, longevity, and psychological well-being. Grandparent education is a way to support feelings of satisfaction and purpose of assisted living. Thus there is a need for communication between parents and children to enhance the family relationship.
Clarke, B. H. (2009). Early adolescents’ use of social networking sites to maintain friendship and explore identity: Implications for policy. Policy and Internet, 1, 55–89. doi:10.2202/ 1948-4682.1018
Clark used a survey to demonstrate the difference between parents and children. The results show that most of their parents trust their children, hence the minimal review of what they are doing on the internet. Regarding the use of the internet for homework, there is much disclosure. Similarly, parent lacks much information disclosure which results in undesired behavior. The study suggests that despite high trust, the parent should have an accurate perception of their children and be a caregiver.
Bornstein, M. (2002). Parenting infants. In M. Bornstein (Ed.), Handbook of parenting: Vol. 1. Children and parenting (pp. 3–44). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum
Dunst, C., Trivette, C., Humphries, T., Raab, M., & Roper, N. (2001). Contrasting approaches to natural learning environment interventions. Infants and Young Children, 14, 48–63.
Merriam, S. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Through interviews, observations, and records review, the researcher found parent across the world helps their children in development through routine activities which are essential learning opportunities. However, determining early intervention for the parent has been a problem, hence failing to learn early about their children’s learning characteristics.
Asarnow, J. R., Jaycox, L. H., & Tompson, M. C. (2001). Depression in youth: Psychosocial interventions. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 30, 33–47.
Dadds, M. R., Barrett, P. M., Rapee, R. M., & Ryan, S. (1996). Family process and child psychopathology: An observational analysis. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 24, 715–734.
Dadds, M. R., Spence, S., Holland, D., Barrett, P. M., & Laurens, K. (1997). Early intervention and prevention of anxiety disorders in children: A controlled trial. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 65, 627–635.
Dadds, M. R., Holland, D. E., Laurens, K. R., Mullins, M., Barrett, P. M., & Spence, S. H. (1999). Early intervention and prevention of anxiety disorders in children: Results at two-year follow-up. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 67, 145–150.
Based on the hypothesis used to demonstrate the study effectiveness of the intervention program. The trial showed that 34 percent of the interested group turned up, which was higher than the others. This supported that intervention is advantageous. Therefore, it appears that intervening in child development will reduce their risk of anxiety and depression challenges. They were thus showing that universal intervention programs in school help in preventing child anxiety disorders.
Allen, S. (2002). Looking for learning in visitor talk: A methodological exploration. In G. Leinhardt, K. Crowley, & K. Knutson (Eds.), Learning conversations in museums (pp. 259–303). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum
Ash, D. (2003). Dialogic inquiry in life science conversations of family groups in a museum. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40, 138–162.
Kisiel, J., Rowe, S., Vartabedian, M. A., & Kopczak, C. (2012). Evidence for family engagement in scientific reasoning at interactive animal exhibits. Science Education, 96, 1047–1070.
Rigney, J., & Callanan, M. (2011). Patterns in parent-child conversations about animals at a marine science center. Cognitive Development, 26, 155–171.
Rowe, S.,&Kisiel, J.(2012).Familyengagementataquariumtouchtanks: Exploringinteractionsandthe potential for learning. In E. Davidsson & A. Jakobsson (Eds.), Understanding interactions at science centers and museums: Approaching sociocultural perspectives (pp. 63–77). Rotterdam, Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
The study was to demonstrate whether parents provide useful information to the children, which helps them in biological development. Based on the empirical investigation of the parent-child interaction about the various animal. The finding shows that different conversations impacted child reasoning about a given kind of animal. The provision of biological and social info, assist children in drawing relation amongst animals. Thus, parent-child interaction is vital for child development.
Green, B. (2002). Hearing children’s voices. Panel at the Advance Law Course. State Bar of Texas, Dallas.
Warshark, R. A. (2000). Social science and children’s best interest in relocation cases: Burgess revisited. Family Law Quarterly, 34, 83-113.
Warshark supported that both parents should remain close to their children. After reading 75 studies, Warshak concluded that relocation choices are involved, having both hazards and benefits attached. Furthermore, Green provided an empirical where the findings showed that putting children at the center of parent conflict will be affected psychologically. Thus, children’s voices should be heard for their interest in the family to feel their participation as part of the family.