'Human Growth and Development Essay\r'

'Definition of Plagiarism\r\nPlagiarism is an attempt (deliberate or inadvertent) to gain advantage by the representation of other(prenominal) soulfulness’s bet, with forbidden ac experiencement of the source, as the school small fry’s induce for the purposes of satisfying formal sound judgement requirements.\r\nRecognised forms of plagiarization include\r\n1. the use in a student’s own usage of to a colossaler extent than a single phrase from other person’s convey with disclose the use of quote marks and acknowledgement of the source; 2. the summarising of another person’s campaign by simply changing a a few(prenominal) works or modify the ball club of presentation, with show up acknowledgement; 3. the use of likings or in foolect data of another person without acknowledgement of the source, or the entranceway or presentation of work as if it were the student’s own, which ar substantially the ideas or intellectual data o f another person; 4. write the work of another person;\r\n5. the submission of work, as if it were the student’s own, which has been obtained from the internet or any other form of protestation technology; 6. the submission of coursework making substantial use of unattri exactlyed digital images such(prenominal) as graphs, remands, photographs, etc. taken from books/articles, the internet or from the work of another person; 7. the submission of a piece of work which has previously been assessed for a antithetic award or module or at a antithetical institution as if it were unfermented work;\r\n8. a student who allows or is pertain in allowing, either knowingly or unknowingly, another student to copy another’s work including physical or digital images would be deemed to be guilty of plagiarism. 9. If plagiarism is suspected students pass on be necessary to supply an electronic copy of the work in question so that it whitethorn be subjected to electronic plagi arism detection testing. Therefore students atomic number 18 required to keep work electronically until by and by they receive their results as electronic detection whitethorn be explode of the investigative process.\r\nSource: opinion Handbook 15f.\r\nIn submitting this work I actualise I have read and silent the regulations relating to plagiarism and academic misconduct that I sign-language(a) when I submitted my Assessment Confirmation Form.\r\nIn submitting this work I confirm I have read and unders similarlyd the regulations relating to plagiarism and academic misconduct that I signed when I submitted my Assessment Confirmation Form.\r\nASSIGNMENT gloss\r\nHuman Growth and Development PortfolioI am disc e really steer a 22 month old boy, who for this reveal I will call gobbler. tomcat lives with his ma, popping and older sister molly who is 3 geezerhood of age and has just started nursery. His mammy stays at home with the children whilst Dad works. Both parents are from Poland thereof gloss is their first language, however their understood explained to me that molly is going to nursery to develop her English. She likewise give tongue to that tom turkey was only speaking a miniscule; some(a) ac enumeration books English and some Polish. I will be observant tomcat in his home. sight gobbler †Week one and only(a)\r\n12.10.2012 ledger count: 991\r\nI arrived at the flat and was greeted by tomcat’s mother who took my coat and showed me close to the flat. tom’s sister was sat take at the table in the living bring on and turkey cock walked out of his bed fashion and pictureed at me. He stared at me and I give tongue to â€Å"hello”, he smiled and ran spine in his bedroom. molly walked down the sign and smiled at me and round to mammary gland in polish and mommy replied, she because galloped past me and sat on the grace with toys. momma told me that she had told molly they had a visitant coming unless they had to pre run away I was ultraviolet; she said she hadn’t told Tom as he wouldn’t understand. Besides the anxiety I was experiencing, I felt quite comfortable in the flat, the timber of washing powder was precise familiar and I instantly w weaponed to the children. It seemed as though they were hold for me to engage and it felt alien that I couldn’t. mute encouraged the children to playact in their bedroom as they were two stood flavor at me.\r\n mute went into the kitchen and I crouched down in the corner of the bedroom. I right away realised this wasn’t a great idea as they both presented me with toys and giggled projecting at several(prenominal)ly(prenominal) other. mollie kick the bucketed me a Barbie and held another one and said, â€Å"This is bird and you have man dolly” she thusly(prenominal) wheel talk in reference point with the Barbie and said, â€Å"Hello!” I found it difficult to divert f rom playing with her, I said â€Å"hello” and passed it to Tom to encourage them to play together. mollie go along to assure, â€Å"This is dolly” difficult to pass her to me. She seemed slightly frustrated that I was attempting to divert her attendance away from me and I found it unnatural.\r\nAs kneeling down was attracting their vigilance I stood in the entrance out the way. dumb came in the bedroom and entrap a children’s DVD of nursery rhymes. mollie started jumping nearly; Tom watched molly and copied her jumping. They both smiled and kept looking at me. I smiled at them but was unsure of my facial expressions because I didn’t want to seem too approach pathable. I go on to find it uncomfortable how much they seemed to plea for my attention and I couldn’t answer by rights. mollie so got out a box of Lego and brought it over to where I was stood, Tom followed and they started building the blocks together. They played nicely, taki ng it in turns; I enjoyed observance them and felt at backwardsup man that the attention was off me.\r\nWhen they do a hulk molly said, â€Å"no finish, no finish” each cartridge clip they swan a piece on and so(prenominal) said, â€Å"Finished!” and they both clapped their give smiling. They did this several dates. I noticed that Tom seemed relaxed and let mollie take the lead when she wanted to. mollie accordingly went to get a junket set and brought it back. Tom pretended to pour me a drink and passed me a cup; I said â€Å"Thank-you” and pretended to drink. I pointed at Molly to encourage him to pass it to her. Molly laid three plates on the floor and pointed at one and said, â€Å"Play?” I think mama could see that I unavoidablenessed some tending diverting their attention so she encouraged Molly to go back into her bedroom and they put some books away. Tom quickly ran back in his room following them.\r\nMum laid a expedition blank et and laid it down on the floor in the bedroom and asked Molly to bring the picnic set in there. Mum thence changed Tom’s nappy. Molly fluctuated from polish to English as she verbalize. She then got out a vision browse and showed me, thinking â€Å"Look its Molly’s dress.” Mum helped her put it on. Tom tugged at the box of fancy dress c naphes and so Mum besides helped him into a hoot. They danced near the room together express mirth. Molly kept spinning roughly and giggling and Tom copied her. I liked the way Mum had no line of work with letting Tom wear a doughnut and it reminded me of my own puerility when my younger brother would alike wear my dresses. ‘Wheels on the bus’ came on and Tom danced in appear of the television and they both did the arm motions. Tom wiggled his bum and stood right in front of the television. Mum laughed and sat cross legged future(a) to them.\r\nAlthough the children were quite active, the atmosphere in the house was truly calm and steady, Mum’s presence was very peaceful and she spoke very quietly. Molly climbed on to her bed, Mum went over and tickled her; she giggled loudly. Tom excuse had his skirt on and continue to dance virtually the room. He then started to push a drug dealer with a doll in around the room; he continued to watch the television and wiggled his bum watching with his mouth open. He then tipped over the pram and sat on the floor; he held the back wheel and moved it like he was pretending to drive.\r\nMolly then ran in to the abode and put on her shoes; Tom followed her and copied her. Molly put a hat on and then put one on Tom’s head. Mum laughed and helped Tom put his shoes on. She then tried to take off Tom’s skirt but he held on to it so she let him keep it on. Tom then pottered back into his bedroom where Molly was dancing, he joined in. Molly spun around with her eyes closed and then giggled looking at me. Tom copied her and s tumbled backwards, Molly pulled Tom towards her and cuddled him and kissed his face. I wondered if Molly was ‘acting up’ because she was universe watched by me, I questioned whether their demeanour was entirely natural. shoemakers outlive of observation.\r\nObserving Tom †Week four\r\n02.11.2012 word count: 1,025\r\nWhen I arrived Tom ran out of his bedroom and into his parents’ room. He climbed up on to the bed and turned around to look at Mum, smiling as if he knew she was going to react. Mum said, â€Å"Hey, Tom” in a cautionary manner that smiling. She grabbed him playfully and tickled him; he laughed loudly and squealed rolling on his back. He then climbed up on to the window sill. Mum spoke more sternly to Tom (in Polish) I put on she was asking him to either get down or be careful. Again Tom turned back and looked at Mum gingerly with a edgy smile. Mum told me she had felt poorly for a pit of work calendar weeks; she seemed quite run down and a low stressed. However she was patient with Tom. Mum was sat side by side(p) to him and had her hand on the window handle so he couldn’t open it. Tom pointed out the window and looked astonished, Mum said, â€Å"Oooh ****” (Polish) Tom repeated the word and Mum n eccentriced and smiled.\r\nShe explained to me that he had seen a motor bike, she then pointed at confused things out the window and said their names and Tom attempted to repeat the words. Tom spoke in a deep vocalization and stuck his chest out. Mum laughed and told me she was pointing out the vehicles names. I wondered whether Tom was speaking in a deep verbalize to imitate someone or whether he was trying to be ‘manly’. Tom then reached out to the window handle, Mum said, â€Å"Tom” firmly and took his hands away. He did this several more times, Mum once more said his name and on the 4th time Tom imitated Mum and shouted, â€Å"Tom!” Mum started laughing and extract ed him up and sat him on the bed and tickled him over again, he laughed loudly and then climbed down and ran out into the hallway. Molly came out into the hall from her bedroom and smiled at me, she then ran after Tom and they both went into the living room. Mum pulled out their table and chairs and got out some story for them.\r\nMolly said, â€Å"We’re going to samara, you know?” Mum laughed and sat them down with some paint and cups of water. Tom picked up devil paint cleansees and banged them on his wall base and do roaring sounds. He then struggled to pick up paint on his paint brush and frowned as he brushed over the pallets of paint, he tried to paint on the composition but nothing stuck, he stamped his feet a few times. Molly soaked up more water on her paint brush and slowly brushed her paint brush over the pallets, she seemed to know what she was doing, perhaps from scene at nursery or remembering what Mum or Dad had taught her. Tom seemed a lot more impatient and frustrated and looked at Molly painting, slightly frowning. He then leant over and varicoloured on her paper.\r\nShe shouted out, â€Å"No Tom!” nevertheless he had left no mark, just a watery smear, so she pulled her paper away and continued to paint. Mum turned around and said, â€Å"Hey, hey Tom.” Tom continued to try to paint and let out noises of frustration; Mum came over and tried to help him return the paint on his brush. Molly said, â€Å"Mimi” and Mum pull a Mickey Mouse face on her piece of paper in pink. Molly held her paper and came over to me saying, â€Å"Look its Mimi, Mickey Mouse, you know?” I laughed and wondered if Molly had heard someone at Nursery saying, â€Å"you know” and was imitating them as she had said it a few times and I hadn’t heard her say it before. Tom leant over and tried to paint on Molly’s Mickey Mouse, Molly squealed out and shouted, â€Å"No, Tom!” Mum seemed to tell them off as she spoke sternly in Polish, however still remained calm. The children seemed more agitated today and I wondered if Mum being ill had slightly impacted their demeanour, although Mum seemed to be struggling she was still calm with the children.\r\nI also noticed that Mum and Molly spoke more in Polish than previous weeks, I wondered if this was because they were more comfortable in my presence. Mum pull a Mickey Mouse for Tom so he wouldn’t bother Molly anymore. She force his Mickey Mouse in blue, perhaps to tell the difference between whose was whose, but I also fenceed whether it was colour coded for ‘girl’ and ‘boy’. He smiled and shouted, â€Å"Mimi!” Molly and Tom both called out, â€Å"Mimi” they seemed to be in rivalry with each other of who could shout louder and laughed each time they shouted. Tom then went around the table on the opposite side to Molly and she prodded him playfully in his tummy with the end of her p aint brush. Tom giggled so she did it again, she continued to do it and they both giggled more and more each time, becoming very excited.\r\nMolly then climbed up onto a seat at the dine room table and asked Mum if she could have her stickers, Tom went over and peered up at the table to see what Molly was doing. Mum helped Tom into his seat and brought over a sheet of stickers, Molly began sticking them onto her paper but Tom struggled to peel his stickers off, he made a fist and banged the paper making grunting noises.\r\nMum went over again and helped him peel them off. Tom struggled again when Mum went back to the computer so he seemed to lose interest and again became more raise in Molly’s paper. Seeing Tom struggling made me feel uncomfortable that I couldn’t assist him. Tom climbed down from the table and ran into his bedroom; he peered up at the shelf of DVD’s. He shouted out, perhaps in Polish, Mum came in the room and pointed at various DVD’s u ntil he said yes. She put on a film called ‘Pipi’ Tom danced around to the introduction music and stood close to the screen wiggling his bottom. End of observation.\r\nIn this essay I will label my experience as an perceiver and describe the place of observation in affable work. Finally, I will focus on windual urge development as my major theme of consideration. Initially, although I was a bitty apprehensive; I came to find the power of the observer a considerable challenge. Although in some slipway I grew more comfortable with certain aspects of the exercise, I found a degree of discomfort in the role I was to undertake. I could relate greatly to the content of Quitak, N (2004) article, as I too struggled to find my feet to gain the right balance in distance and involvement. I experienced feelings of guilt when the children required my attention and learnt that I had to tolerate the anxiety of non-intervention. Trowell and Miles (1991) say in relation to neig hborly work, that due to the requirements of the role, they at times have to be assertive (cited in Quitak, 2004). Therefore to be effective, they moldiness come to foothold with the discomfort this preempt imply. Mattinson (1975) cited in Quitak, N (2004) discusses this construct in terms of the ‘psychological distance’ ofttimes required.\r\nTrowell and Miles (1991) cited in Quitak (2004) in terms of remaining ‘actively positive’; retaining a physical distance, whilst allowing one ego to become deeply involved. When recording my observation afterwards, I found that the first things I recalled were from the first and last part of the hour, plus what was unusual and stood out to me. sake (1991) says that this is because we are trying to hold onto awareness of the environs and the different ways in which concourse chat and interact, (cited in Lefevre, 2010). I recognised I was abstracted with trying to remember everything. On reflection I realised that I should have observed everything and then later try to identify the most undischarged points. A further distraction was Tom’s sister, Molly, who features heavily in my records, because her doings was more emphatic, however, I was unable to moderate her behaviour in order to allow Tom a more signifi sewert role. Munro (1991) says that such challenges and disruptions to memory are one of the reasons assessments are oft based on rudimentary or inaccurate information.\r\nI was also come to on whether pre-determined bias would creep in, as indeed, people’s values, culture and previous experiences will everlastingly influence how they interpret what they see (Cox, 2005, cited in Lefevre, 2010). what is more due to Tom not speaking properly all the same and the language barrier it was harder for me to recall as I couldn’t prompt my memory with odd sentences. Malekoff (1994) says that thoughts and feelings of children are often emotionally processed and conve yed by more draw a bead on means, and body language whitethorn provide important clues as to how they feel (cited in Lefevre, M. 2010). This heightened my awareness of non-verbal communication and improved my capacity to prove non- verbal behaviour. Observing children over time whitethorn help to explain what relates more to their general character and what might be a response to caretaking and environmental experiences.\r\nWhat they convey through certain choices provides insight into their affectionate individuality and sense of self and heathenish norms. sum their racial individuation may also be revealed. A neighborly worker will need to be open to different social and cultural experiences and consider how a child may be touch by different fixingss such as ethnocentrism. Self-awareness and understanding of the impact of oppression on racial identity will be important (Robinson, 2007, cited in Lefevre, 2010). Recent work on prejudice/identity development focuses on a pplications of inter class theory to examine the soil of social categorization and its cause. One development has been to look more generally at children’s knowledge of other countries and nationalities (Cowie et al. 2009). I believe this could be very beneficial for Tom in the future. When watching the children I questioned whether their behaviour was altered by my presence (see week one, lines 58-62 and week four, lines 109-110).\r\nThe experience of being observed can evoke anxiety and feelings of disempowerment due to possible idolise of being judged or misunderstood, which can result in them behaving differently. In relation to assessments, it is important to consider how workers might affect the observed situation (Tanner and Turney, 2000 cited in Lefevre, 2004). I understand that the move from observation to interpretation is multiform and therefore should proceed with caution. In bringing brooding approaches to child observations into social work, a link is made ‘between knowledge of human growth and development, experimental skills and effective social work communication with children (Luckock et al, 2006, p 39). A picture of a children’s world, in particular their emotional experience, is created, which may include how they interact with and respond to parents.\r\nThis may then be used to inform assessment and care planning, including the assessment of neglect (Tanner and Turney, 2000), child protection assessments (Fleming, 2004), multidisciplinary assessments for the family courts (Youell, 2002) and the supervision of contact (Hindle and Easton, 1999). The debate about the health, safety and welfare of children became a preoccupation of organisation following the death of Victoria Climbie in 2000 (Youell, 2009 and Wilson, 1992). It ‘can refer to both one’s own and one’s partner’s expression, with deficiency’ of expressiveness on either one’s part seen as dissatisfying’ (He cht et al., 1989). Cultures vary in what is considered ‘appropriate channelling’ of emotions. For event in some cultural groups restraint of pixilated feelings is highly valued. Social workers must always consider cultural factors when assessing people (Robinson, 2007. Pg. 116-120).\r\nI considered cultural differences whilst observing, Mum was always very quiet and when I met Dad, he was also quiet. Although I was aware that this may be their personalities, I considered if is in their culture to be quiet (see week one, line 49). This experience has taught me that although it is imperative for practitioners to be sensitive to the impact of our presence, it is vital not to lug that we must remain focussed upon the objectives set for the observation. From observing Tom, I found myself particularly implicated in his behaviour in relation to his ‘gender role’. I became drawn in to spotting which toys interested him, what he chose to wear and his general beh aviour. Piaget has shown how important symbolic representation is to cognitive development. One of the many another(prenominal) important things children must learn during their first historic period is what trip out they are; they learn that they are demanded to guide in different ways according to whether they are a boy or a girl. education to behave â€Å"appropriately” for their sex involves learning their â€Å"gender identity” (Davenport, 1992, pg. 275).\r\nI will be looking at theories of acquiring a sex-role, looking at; biologic factors, social learning and cognitive development. The results of various studies propose that most children begin to acquire their sex identity from around 18 months. By 2 years they begin to identify what sex other children are, although they’re not too sure of their own gender identity until somewhere between two and a half and three years (Davenport, 1992, pg. 275). Accordingly, at 22 months, Tom should be beginnin g to identify gender, but not his own for another 7 or 8 months. sons and girls differ in one chromosome cope with; this genetic difference normally leads to differential payoff of hormones. These hormones lead to differentiation of bodily characteristics, such as the genital organs, and may also influence mind growth and therefore behaviour patterns (Cowie et al, 2003). Theories emphasising biological forces look for experimental reason that links male hormones with certain types of behaviour (Davenport, 1992). Collaer and Hines (1995) cited in Cowie et al. (2009) examined the evidence for the effects of sex hormone abnormalities on behaviour over a range of outcome variables.\r\nThey conclude that the evidence is strongest for childhood play behaviour; in normal fetal development male sex hormones seem to predispose boys to become more physically active. They also fight that the evidence is relatively strong in two other areas: hostility and sexual orientation. Such effects a re consistent with evidence that some sex differences appear early in life. Much search has shown males to be more aggressive, and that aggression begins at around 2 years (Cowie et al. pg. 190-192. 2009). Tom demonstrated behaviours of aggression; see ‘observation week four’ (lines 88-103 and 119). This has been explained by the higher testosterone levels than females.\r\nHowever, it is possible that boys are reinforced for behaving aggressively, and this makes them state more testosterone (Cowie et al. 2009). Money and Ehrhardt (1972) carried out a occupy to understand the effect that the male sex hormone, androgenic hormone has on girls. They examined girls who had been exposed to unusually high levels of androgen before birth. Compared with a matched group of girls who hadn’t, these girls and their mothers reported themselves to being ‘tomboys’. However, Cowie et al (2009) argue that because the parents knew of the hormonal abnormalities, thi s could have affected their behaviour towards their children.\r\nWhile biological factors are believably important in explanations of sex differences, they do not fully explain the process of sex-role identification, or explain the variations in sex roles in different societies (Cowie et al, 2009). Social Learning theorists claim that we acquire our gender roles by observation, modelling, and being reinforced for behaving accordingly. This implies a learning process, that social factors are also important. For example it may be that female babies are spoken to more often than boys, thus pick up language in the first place (Davenport, pg. 276-278, 1992). On reflection, Tom’s Mum spoke more to Molly, although this may be because she was replying to her. An early approach to the learning of sex-role identification was that children are moulded into sex-roles by the behaviour of adults, especially parents and teachers (Bandura, 1969; Mischel, 1970). In its early version (which Maccoby, 2000, calls ‘direct sociolization’) this theory suggests that parents and others reward sex-appropriate behaviour in children (cited in smith et al. 2009), (see week one, lines 45-47 and also lines 40-1 and 56-57).\r\nMum merrily helped Tom in to the skirt, although would then attempt to get it off. I wondered if this was because Mum was a bit loth(p) to him wearing it, or even feared I may judge her. I also considered if it would be different if Dad were around. Fagot (1978) studied children ages 20-24 months in American homes and found that girls were encouraged by their parents to dance, dress up and play with dolls, whereas boys were encouraged to play with blocks and trucks. Conversely, Tom’s Mum did not discourage him from playing with the pram (see week one, lines 51-54) a typical ‘girls toy’. moreover Fagot (1985) found that nursery school teachers tend to reward ‘feminine’ types of behaviour, in both boys and girls, y et this does not prevent boys engaging more in noisy, rough-and-tumble play. Nevertheless, many reviews have felt that this evidence has not been very convincing (Golombok, and Hines, 2002; Maccoby, 2000, cited in smith et al. 2009). It may be that any differential behaviour by parents is simply responding to pre-existing differences in boys and girls behaviour (Davenport, 1992).\r\nIndirect socialization (Maccoby, 2000), supposes that children observe the behaviour of similar sex models, and imitate them, for example, boys might imitate the behaviour of male figures on TV (cited in smith et al. 2009).TV features in every record, and Tom was always very engrossed and on more than one thing I noticed him imitating what was acted or said (see week one, line 52). A report by Himmelweit et al. (1958) looked for changes in children’s behaviour with the concern that violence on television may make children more aggressive, and that many programmes portray stereotyped images of sex roles. Alternatively, others think that television can be used to encourage cooperative behaviour, or reduced stereotyped views (Greenfield, 1984, cited in Smith et al. 2009).\r\nThis introduces influences on behaviour that suggest the importance of cognitive factors. Social cognitive theory (Bussey and Bandura, 1999) draws together the ideas of both theories. They suggest children monitor their own behaviour construct on what is appropriate; identification with peer group monitoring their behaviour in relation to how they expect same-sex peers might react (cited in Cowie et al. 2009). I didn’t get to see Tom interact with any male children, I found Molly to be a great influence on his behaviour; i.e. see week one lines 21-22, 26 and 59.\r\nI imagine this is because supposedly he has not yet identified himself as a boy and does not have much, if any, contact with other boys of similar age. resource for same-sex peers seems to be a cross-cultural phenomenon, and one that increases through childhood into adolescence. Maccoby (1998, 200) has documented this, and argues that it is a key factor in integrating not only cognitive and social factors, but also the biological factors affect sex differences (Cowie et al. 2009).\r\nObserving Tom enabled me a great insight into his world, but has also indeed taught me a lot about myself, gaining skills of self-awareness and reflective practice that I hope to bring to future practice.\r\nBibliography\r\nBandura, A. 1969: Social Learning theory of identificatory processes. In D. A Goslin (ed.), Handbook of culture Theory and Research. Chicago: Rand McNally.\r\nPeter K.Smith, Helen Cowie and Mark Blades (2009). arrest Children’s Development . 4th ed. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing. 186-194.\r\nG C Davenport (1992). An introduction to Child development. capital of the United Kingdom: Colins Educational. 275-291.\r\nMoney, J. and Ehrhardt, A. A. 1972: Man and Woman, Boy and Girl. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkin s University Press.\r\nMichelle Lefevre (2010). Communicating with children and young people making a difference. Bristol: The Policy Press. 147-169.\r\nJudith Trowell and Gillian Miles. (1991). The contribution of observation development to professional development in social work . Journal of social work practice. 5 (1), 50-56.\r\nNatasha Quitak. (2010). Difficulties in Holding the role of the observer.Journal of social work practice. 18 (2), 247-253.\r\nLena Robinson (2007). Cross-Cultural child development for social workers an introduction. London: Palgrave Macmillan. 116-120.\r\nKate Wilson. (1992). The place of child observation in social work.Journal of social work practice. 6 (1), 37-47.\r\nBiddy Youell . (2009). execute to emotional and behavioural health . Available: http://www.ccinform.co.uk/articles/2009/10/19/3614/guide+to+emotional+and+behavioural+health.html. stretch forth accessed 27th Nov 2012.\r\n'