Developmental Assessment Observational Notes Year-Old

Developmental Assessment

Observational Notes

year-old female (daughter).

Playing quietly alone on the floor with two dolls -- Barbies. Subject entirely unconcerned with the fact that they are without clothes. Has a wooden pizza in pieces (different ingredients, etc.) on the floor also. Barbies are going to make a pizza. Unconcerned with proportional discrepancy (pizaa is far larger).

Pizza making takes approx. twenty minutes. Subject places ingredients under coffee table. Barbies must leave several times to get ingredients. The "store" is under the coffee table, on the other side of the subject from the pizza. Barbies must "walk" to and from the "store" and the pizza several times. Subject bounces the Barbies up and down to simulate walking. Barbies talk with each other constantly about what they are doing, value judgements. Same high-pitched voice and over-simplified sentence structure used for both dolls "voices."

Standard presentation of Piaget's conservation model: two identical glasses, third much shorter and wider glass. Subject determined that no volume change occurred: "Its the same water." Did not deliberate very long in making this determination. Very proud of being right; also seemed to think the whole things was obvious and therefore rather silly.

Series of moral dilemmas presented to subject. Asked if she would tell on a friend who took her cookie at school, subject instantly replied "Yes." Asked if she would ell on the friend for taking someone else's cookie, subject thought, appeared uncomfortable, and said "no." Asked why, responded "it's not right to tattle."

Assessment of Observations

Though it is somewhat difficult (entirely impossible, in fact) to objectively observe and judge one's own child, my observations of my six-year-old daughter have still yielded some very useful real-world examples of many of theories of child development. Her imaginative play with the Barbies showed a great capacity for cooperative play. Though she did not have any playmates over at the time, her use of two Barbie dolls with their own separate (all but indistinguishable, admittedly, but separate nonetheless) was itself an example of the type of play associated with appropriate interactions and organized play activities seen in cooperative play (Snowman & Biehler 2004). Her imaginative play also seems to be primarily concerned with adult occupations, attitudes, and activities -- the Barbies are not going to school, but rather are experiencing things that my daughter has only witnessed or imagined happening in the world of adults.

These concerns about adult behaviors and perceptions are a fairly recent emergence, as is predicted for children in the first grade (Snowman & Biehler 2004). The fact that the Barbies converse with each other is also standard for my daughter's age-range, which is in the established peak of talking to oneself people who allow pet owners to mistreat their pets (Snowman & Biehler 2004). Overall, my daughter's behaviors during her undirected solitary play were fairly standard for her age group, and clearly demonstrated many of the principles and developmental stages that have been identified in the text.

Her performance on Piaget's conservation model assessment also upheld the text, in its criticism of Piaget as having underestimated the abilities of children (Snowman & Biehler 2004). Her immediate assessment of the water's consistent volume (which was, of course, correct) suggest that she is in the operational stage with more solid footing than Piaget predicted for a child a year older than my daughter (Snowman & Biehler 2004). The difference of one year in this single instance might not be compelling evidence of Piaget's shortcomings in and of itself, but combined with the text's analysis it seems likely that despite her stellar performance, my daughter matches her peers in their cognitive development, just as they match in operational development. Her specific assessment of the water does fit Piaget's theory that operation are completed based on generalized evidence -- "it's the same water" is no less true for the fact that it is basic, but it is definitely generalized (Snowman & Biehler 2004).