There have been copious amounts of research conducted on the study of infants and their development. One of the more prominent studies is the debate on whether or not babies learn to walk in stages or if these stages do not matter. Researchers Adolph and Robinson argue that infants do not follow a chronological series of events in order to begin walking. Infants have shown that they somewhat know the motions of walking because when an adult holds an infant and lets their feet rest upon a flat surface, their legs begin pulling back and shifting forward, portraying a walking-like motion. This ability then goes away as the infant gains weight since the muscles are too weak to pull the legs back. Adolph and Robinson mention that crawling, rolling,
…show more content…
8). This example further proves Adolph and Robinson’s argument that environmental influences can affect an infant’s learning pace and that stages can be skipped with absolutely no consequences. Another example took place in England, it covered British infants and this study resulted in 17% of infants skipping crawling, 10% “bum shuffled”, and 7% began walking (p. 8). The last argument against the stages of learning to walk is that when babies first begin to crawl they do not know their limitations or restrictions yet. After babies become expert crawlers they understand what’s safe and what is too dangerous. This knowledge disappears when they being to walk, they have to relearn their limitations all over again and realize what’s safe and what’s not. Typically, when one thinks about developing stages, they tend to coincide and information previously learned is then transferred on to the rest of the stages. Adolph and Robinson’s argument against the stages in learning to walk are supported by research and results. Before an infant is born their legs begin to move and show mobility even if it’s in minimal forms, an infant’s mobility does not wait for
8). This example further proves Adolph and Robinson’s argument that environmental influences can affect an infant’s learning pace and that stages can be skipped with absolutely no consequences. Another example took place in England, it covered British infants and this study resulted in 17% of infants skipping crawling, 10% “bum shuffled”, and 7% began walking (p. 8). The last argument against the stages of learning to walk is that when babies first begin to crawl they do not know their limitations or restrictions yet. After babies become expert crawlers they understand what’s safe and what is too dangerous. This knowledge disappears when they being to walk, they have to relearn their limitations all over again and realize what’s safe and what’s not. Typically, when one thinks about developing stages, they tend to coincide and information previously learned is then transferred on to the rest of the stages. Adolph and Robinson’s argument against the stages in learning to walk are supported by research and results. Before an infant is born their legs begin to move and show mobility even if it’s in minimal forms, an infant’s mobility does not wait for