We all know what the regular IQ test is like (well kinda for me. My mom bought one for me from Barnes & Noble when I was a kid and I found it really easy, even more so when I found out the answers were in the back of the book :P ) but as the book talks about is it really to gauge how smart or dumb a person is? I found out that it's reading, math and comprehension skills and how well a person can grasp concepts and ideas but it never takes into account any other kind of aspects of intelligence. Yah a person may score extremely high on the IQ test but not be able to hold a conversation with a "regular" person, they might not be able to assimilate into society because they are to smart. The best example here I can think of is a TV show (sadly). I watch Bones and in the first couple of seasons they had a young man on there playing the character of Dr. Zack Addy and he had an IQ in the crazy high range like 180 or something. But they wrote the character as having a tough time just trying to make simple conversation that didn't have to deal with work, didn't get any jokes people cracked, basically had no sense of humor and dealt in absolutes. Sure he was smart but he wasn't life smart as I call it.
I really liked Gardner's Theory of Multiple Intelligences in how it doesn't relie on test scores to base a subjects intelligence but rather research in many different categories like child development, studies of brain damaged people, and studies of exceptionally talented people (I would guess savants would be placed in this one). A savant is a prime example of other intelligence besides the basic ones we test. They can be really smart at one thing like music (as the example in the book). They can hear a tune just once and play it back without any training of any sort but according to regular IQ tests they are in the mentally retarded range. But I would like to say if one is mentally retarded how do they preform such a feat and play beautiful music? How about people that study other people and their emotions (like a profiler)? They can be really smart, above what we think day to day stuff, and predict what criminals are going to commit what crimes and where they will strike next. Is this not a kind of intelligence? Another is someone that can read someone's emotions and play on a persons strengths and weakness of that. The only thing that is coming to mind is some kind of con-artist like the people that say they can talk to the dead. Is this still some other form of intelligence? The list can go on and on.
I wish the book gave more examples of Gardner's Theory and not just a list of the intelligences he came up with. It would have been excellent reading and quiet captivating if they had.
Monday, April 29, 2013
Monday, April 22, 2013
More Step By Step Progress
Wow what a fact filled fun 2 chapters! I really wish I could transfer some sarcasm here but it doesn't work to well typing.
I am having fun reading but also not so fun trying to relate to some of the information given as I don't have any kids nor do I interact with them on a daily basis. This stuff is great for when kids do come along (if they ever do) but right now it's not in the cards.
I found that in chapter 4 when they talk about babies and how they perceive things and make sense of the world interesting. I didn't know there was a Naive Physics and Naive Biology for babies until I read this. I can see where they are coming from. However some stuff I'm not on board with. The talking about of teleological explanations where children believe that parts of living things exist for a purpose, they give the example of lions exist so people can see them in a zoo, just doesn't jive with me. I'm not sure if they are going as a blanket statement that says all children think this way, some children, a selected small %, or what. I remember when I was a kid I always drove my parents nuts always asking why to everything. Of course being good parents after they got tired of supplying answers they said just cuz that's the way it is now be quiet! LOL. But I really didn't think that the reason a zebra exists is so we could all see it in a zoo. I find this concept strange and either I didn't get put in the pool with the other kids or maybe I had a better understanding of the world by then.
Now moving along, the whole part on the learning of number skills; very interesting and sounds about right. I know that children from other parts of the world like Japan are far more advance in math than the United States (sadly we come in pretty dam low for a developed nation). This really just showed me how far we fall behind as kids when it comes to learning our numbers.
Another thing that caught my eye while reading was in chapter 5 the section on attachment. How there's good and bad attachment and how it affects the child later in life. After reading it I wanted to call up my mom and ask her what I was like when I was a baby when she left the room, what kind of attachment I had. I know when I was in kindergarten I had separation issues. My mother would drop me off and I would spend half the day crying because I wanted her to come back.
I am having fun reading but also not so fun trying to relate to some of the information given as I don't have any kids nor do I interact with them on a daily basis. This stuff is great for when kids do come along (if they ever do) but right now it's not in the cards.
I found that in chapter 4 when they talk about babies and how they perceive things and make sense of the world interesting. I didn't know there was a Naive Physics and Naive Biology for babies until I read this. I can see where they are coming from. However some stuff I'm not on board with. The talking about of teleological explanations where children believe that parts of living things exist for a purpose, they give the example of lions exist so people can see them in a zoo, just doesn't jive with me. I'm not sure if they are going as a blanket statement that says all children think this way, some children, a selected small %, or what. I remember when I was a kid I always drove my parents nuts always asking why to everything. Of course being good parents after they got tired of supplying answers they said just cuz that's the way it is now be quiet! LOL. But I really didn't think that the reason a zebra exists is so we could all see it in a zoo. I find this concept strange and either I didn't get put in the pool with the other kids or maybe I had a better understanding of the world by then.
Now moving along, the whole part on the learning of number skills; very interesting and sounds about right. I know that children from other parts of the world like Japan are far more advance in math than the United States (sadly we come in pretty dam low for a developed nation). This really just showed me how far we fall behind as kids when it comes to learning our numbers.
Another thing that caught my eye while reading was in chapter 5 the section on attachment. How there's good and bad attachment and how it affects the child later in life. After reading it I wanted to call up my mom and ask her what I was like when I was a baby when she left the room, what kind of attachment I had. I know when I was in kindergarten I had separation issues. My mother would drop me off and I would spend half the day crying because I wanted her to come back.
Monday, April 15, 2013
Birth and Development
Disclaimer:
Please forgive this poor blogger as I have just gotten off work and am not that awake so spelling may be off and/or rambling my be in affect.
Well chapter 2 didn't have to much affect on me and it seems to align with basic biology pretty well. I don't have any kids so I can only take the authors' words about being pregnant and childbirth at what they say. I have witnessed my cat being pregnant, having kittens, and rearing them but I don't quiet think that is what this chapter is after.
The 3rd chapter I found much more interesting. From the get go it seems like almost an A,B,C of child rearing. What to look for, what this particular action/non action means, what happens if kind of thing. Some of the stuff that is mentioned while the infant is a new born like the scales I had a grasping of but nothing in depth like the book talks about. I was very keenly into the part about the reflexes, crying and sleeping of infants. I am not much of a person for crying and I know when a baby starts to cry that I am holding that is my cue to give him/her back to mom and let her take care of the child. Some of the reflexes I know a baby does like the stepping and how it's kinda the building blocks for walking later in life but didn't know there was more than just that. Stuff I thought was just innate to infants is actually a reflex that leads to something else! Also didn't know about the different kinds of crying. I swear it was all just the same to me until I read this. Also, the sleeping item. I know a lot of parents put their child in a crib in the child's room and that's where they sleep. I however, didn't know that this isn't the norm and that a lot of cultures and people around the world sleep with the infant and toddler later in life. Also just to throw another ball out there I also found the writing about malnutrition very informative. It makes me sad to see the starving baby and the older sibling being so thin. I know that a lot of the developing nations have problems with getting food to their populations, droughts, and warfare that interferes with people getting the proper nutrition they need. The statistic that they threw out where about half of the world's undernourished children live in countries in Asia and not Africa. Granted the information is from 2006 and a bit dated but I always thought Africa had a worse problem of this than some of the countries in Asia. I think this merits some more digging in the future.
This chapter covers a lot of material (roughly 40 pages and I think one of the bigger chapters in the book). I wish the authors broke it down more into 2 chapters. I had a problem going through the reading and trying to remember some of the concepts and then tying some concepts that were mentioned in the beginning to others mentioned like 10 pages later. It seems to be a theme with these authors in that the flow isn't as great. I will say that I do know that the statistics are about 7+/- years out of date but you can't publish a new book every year and expect the teachers and students to shell out over $100 for it just to update the statistics. A suggestion is maybe a link in the book to the website that the statistic is from so we can go and check it in present time and see how it differs from when the book was published.
Please forgive this poor blogger as I have just gotten off work and am not that awake so spelling may be off and/or rambling my be in affect.
Well chapter 2 didn't have to much affect on me and it seems to align with basic biology pretty well. I don't have any kids so I can only take the authors' words about being pregnant and childbirth at what they say. I have witnessed my cat being pregnant, having kittens, and rearing them but I don't quiet think that is what this chapter is after.
The 3rd chapter I found much more interesting. From the get go it seems like almost an A,B,C of child rearing. What to look for, what this particular action/non action means, what happens if kind of thing. Some of the stuff that is mentioned while the infant is a new born like the scales I had a grasping of but nothing in depth like the book talks about. I was very keenly into the part about the reflexes, crying and sleeping of infants. I am not much of a person for crying and I know when a baby starts to cry that I am holding that is my cue to give him/her back to mom and let her take care of the child. Some of the reflexes I know a baby does like the stepping and how it's kinda the building blocks for walking later in life but didn't know there was more than just that. Stuff I thought was just innate to infants is actually a reflex that leads to something else! Also didn't know about the different kinds of crying. I swear it was all just the same to me until I read this. Also, the sleeping item. I know a lot of parents put their child in a crib in the child's room and that's where they sleep. I however, didn't know that this isn't the norm and that a lot of cultures and people around the world sleep with the infant and toddler later in life. Also just to throw another ball out there I also found the writing about malnutrition very informative. It makes me sad to see the starving baby and the older sibling being so thin. I know that a lot of the developing nations have problems with getting food to their populations, droughts, and warfare that interferes with people getting the proper nutrition they need. The statistic that they threw out where about half of the world's undernourished children live in countries in Asia and not Africa. Granted the information is from 2006 and a bit dated but I always thought Africa had a worse problem of this than some of the countries in Asia. I think this merits some more digging in the future.
This chapter covers a lot of material (roughly 40 pages and I think one of the bigger chapters in the book). I wish the authors broke it down more into 2 chapters. I had a problem going through the reading and trying to remember some of the concepts and then tying some concepts that were mentioned in the beginning to others mentioned like 10 pages later. It seems to be a theme with these authors in that the flow isn't as great. I will say that I do know that the statistics are about 7+/- years out of date but you can't publish a new book every year and expect the teachers and students to shell out over $100 for it just to update the statistics. A suggestion is maybe a link in the book to the website that the statistic is from so we can go and check it in present time and see how it differs from when the book was published.
Monday, April 8, 2013
Well first off I want to state that text books are cut and dry and I swear the authors need to start spicing them up and making them more interesting. Pictures are good but I'm sure there's other things that can be added to keep the readers attention (I had a hard time slogging through this material).
Anyways, the quick rundown of the learning going on is basically THIS vs. THAT in the upbringing of a child in the world we live in today. After a pass of this quick material you are introduced into some dead guys and some living guys that helped form theories on development. Yes, I have heard some of these guys before like Piaget because in Sociology 100 you cover a bunch of different bases and he is just one of the guys introduced (Freud of course it another big hitter to).
Out of the many theories that were thrown out at us I really liked the ones that have to do with the Ecological and Systems, Bronfenbrenner's Theory and the Competence-Environmental Press Theory. All the others try to explain the development of a human in stages and how each stage is broken up but I think there is a bigger picture here. Drawing back on Nature vs. Nurture and how it ties in very well with the environmental theories. The best line that is written is "In ecological theory, human development is inseparable from the environmental contests in which a person develops." This line is the best ever! The analogy they give of it being like the threads on a spider web all being connected is a pretty good picture. However I would like to ask the person who laid out the book why they did the This vs. That first, theories and then how to go about conducting experiments and not jumble them up and have each piece of information lead into the next. You could start out with Nature vs Nurture and the environmental theories, then lead into continuity vs discontinuity and have the theories on how life is in stages and depending on who suggested the theory what those stages are. Then tie it all up in conducting experiments and all that jazz but also referring to the stuff earlier in the book. (Just what I would think would be a better layout than what we have going on)
At this point I'm pretty blown by some of the stuff and just a review on the other stuff. So more to come later today after my mind can quiet down and let me think!
Anyways, the quick rundown of the learning going on is basically THIS vs. THAT in the upbringing of a child in the world we live in today. After a pass of this quick material you are introduced into some dead guys and some living guys that helped form theories on development. Yes, I have heard some of these guys before like Piaget because in Sociology 100 you cover a bunch of different bases and he is just one of the guys introduced (Freud of course it another big hitter to).
Out of the many theories that were thrown out at us I really liked the ones that have to do with the Ecological and Systems, Bronfenbrenner's Theory and the Competence-Environmental Press Theory. All the others try to explain the development of a human in stages and how each stage is broken up but I think there is a bigger picture here. Drawing back on Nature vs. Nurture and how it ties in very well with the environmental theories. The best line that is written is "In ecological theory, human development is inseparable from the environmental contests in which a person develops." This line is the best ever! The analogy they give of it being like the threads on a spider web all being connected is a pretty good picture. However I would like to ask the person who laid out the book why they did the This vs. That first, theories and then how to go about conducting experiments and not jumble them up and have each piece of information lead into the next. You could start out with Nature vs Nurture and the environmental theories, then lead into continuity vs discontinuity and have the theories on how life is in stages and depending on who suggested the theory what those stages are. Then tie it all up in conducting experiments and all that jazz but also referring to the stuff earlier in the book. (Just what I would think would be a better layout than what we have going on)
At this point I'm pretty blown by some of the stuff and just a review on the other stuff. So more to come later today after my mind can quiet down and let me think!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)