The article I chose to critique is Early Brain Development for Social Work Practice by Lefmann and Combs-Orme. It provides examples of the usefulness of understanding the ontology of early brain development by proving how this comprehension can be incorporated into Piaget’s theory of cognitive development, more specifically throughout the stages of the sensorimotor period of Piaget’s theory. The problem addressed by the author is how social work profession fails to include critical bio-physiological approaches to human behavior and development. Also, they fail to incorporate physiological knowledge into practice, research and education. In lecture we discussed gene environment interactions. Humans learn and become who they are through genetics
…show more content…
The authors use Piaget’s theory to address the problem by breaking down the sensorimotor period into multiple sub-stages and Piaget argues that the physiological approach is useful. In my opinion the author is very successful in making their case. Piaget’s cognitive developmental theory is used to support their case. His theory began in the search of how children develop their knowledge. Piaget designed a method which was used to observe the ways children respond and communicate in certain situations with their own thoughts as a way to examine the thought process. Neuroscience hasn’t focused on the development at an early age. Therefore, the authors emphasize Piaget’s sensorimotor period. “Piaget (1973) stated that ‘…in order to reach a certain stage, previous steps must be taken… thus we reach a hierarchy of mental structures which are built in a certain order of integration,”(Lefmann, 641). For example, if a child was seven years old and tried to do a multiplication question when they only have the knowledge to carry out addition and subtraction questions, they will struggle to complete a question this …show more content…
Piaget came up with multiple sub-stages for the sensorimotor by creating certain situations and seeing how his children responded. During the first sub-stage Jean found that children learn through their senses; such as following moving objects or closing the hand when it makes contact with an object. The second sub-stage focuses on repetition; when a child sucks on their thumb it is now by coordination. In the third stage, children learn that they can take a particular action and it will cause a certain effect. Throughout the fourth sub-stage, the child’s neuromuscular functioning improves and they have the ability to plot and carry out certain movements to get exactly what they want. The understanding of object permanence is key in the fifth sub-stage. The child begins to understand that even though an object isn’t in reach or visible, they know the object still exists. Resulting in a major cognitive breakthrough for the child. The final sub-stage emphasizes on a child’s
The authors use Piaget’s theory to address the problem by breaking down the sensorimotor period into multiple sub-stages and Piaget argues that the physiological approach is useful. In my opinion the author is very successful in making their case. Piaget’s cognitive developmental theory is used to support their case. His theory began in the search of how children develop their knowledge. Piaget designed a method which was used to observe the ways children respond and communicate in certain situations with their own thoughts as a way to examine the thought process. Neuroscience hasn’t focused on the development at an early age. Therefore, the authors emphasize Piaget’s sensorimotor period. “Piaget (1973) stated that ‘…in order to reach a certain stage, previous steps must be taken… thus we reach a hierarchy of mental structures which are built in a certain order of integration,”(Lefmann, 641). For example, if a child was seven years old and tried to do a multiplication question when they only have the knowledge to carry out addition and subtraction questions, they will struggle to complete a question this …show more content…
Piaget came up with multiple sub-stages for the sensorimotor by creating certain situations and seeing how his children responded. During the first sub-stage Jean found that children learn through their senses; such as following moving objects or closing the hand when it makes contact with an object. The second sub-stage focuses on repetition; when a child sucks on their thumb it is now by coordination. In the third stage, children learn that they can take a particular action and it will cause a certain effect. Throughout the fourth sub-stage, the child’s neuromuscular functioning improves and they have the ability to plot and carry out certain movements to get exactly what they want. The understanding of object permanence is key in the fifth sub-stage. The child begins to understand that even though an object isn’t in reach or visible, they know the object still exists. Resulting in a major cognitive breakthrough for the child. The final sub-stage emphasizes on a child’s