Social constructionist theory argues that understandings of childhood, development and appropriate care for children and young people vary between different historical and geographical/cultural/family contexts
Viewing development as a stage-based pathway is strongly embedded in practice and legislation, with understandings of children and young people often based on their age and perceived developmental stage
Development as a stage-based pathway needs to be approached with caution as it has implications for some children and young people who are not easily accommodated within the ‘normative’ assumptions of the pathway
Models of parenting have been proposed which suggest some parenting styles are more appropriate than others. However, a social constructionist argument would be that notions such as ‘sensitive mothering’ are difficult to achieve and maintain.
Thursday, 3 March 2011
The construction of care
Social constructionist theory argues that what is seen to be appropriate behaviour towards children is constructed and can vary through time and in different cultural contexts.
Construction of the child - Appropriate care and parenting
Child as mini adult - Child needs no special treatment, can work
and take part in ‘adult’ activities
Child as in a state of ‘original sin’ - The Victorian notion of ‘spare the rod and
spoil the child’ required adults to provide
harsh physical punishment to prevent the
child from developing inappropriately
Child as dependent, as a learner - Child needs developmentally rich
environment to learn in, supported by
‘teachers’ (adults or older children/young
people) to support learning
Child as innocent and vulnerable - Child needs protection from hazards in the
world, requires adult intervention and
monitoring
Models of parenting
Researchers and academics have proposed various models of parenting. Commonly, parenting styles are broken down into four categories:
Permissive - Few rules are given to children, those that are
given are inconsistently applied. Parents do not
monitor, challenge or praise behaviour.
Authoritarian - A hierarchical model of parenting with parents in
control of their child’s life. A focus on correcting
bad behaviour, strict rules and punishment
consistently applied.
Authoritative - Clear and consistent expectations of children.
Expectations are explained and negotiated with
children.
Neglectful or dismissive - Exert little care or consideration for their
children
Research based in the UK and North America suggests that an authoritative parenting style provides children and young people with the most effective support and care. However, there are variations in what is considered to be an appropriate parenting style. For example, in his work Martin Woodhead (1999) cites an example of a Thai textbook on parenting, which is concerned about the effect on families if parenting is not authoritarian in style.
Parenting style and behaviour is also a product of the material resources available to a family. For example, Walkerdine and Lucey (1991) suggested that the ideal of ‘sensitive mothering’, whereby a mother is attuned to her baby’s needs and responsive to them, is difficult to sustain, particularly in situations where families have little support and a baby has been crying constantly for hours at a time.
Construction of the child - Appropriate care and parenting
Child as mini adult - Child needs no special treatment, can work
and take part in ‘adult’ activities
Child as in a state of ‘original sin’ - The Victorian notion of ‘spare the rod and
spoil the child’ required adults to provide
harsh physical punishment to prevent the
child from developing inappropriately
Child as dependent, as a learner - Child needs developmentally rich
environment to learn in, supported by
‘teachers’ (adults or older children/young
people) to support learning
Child as innocent and vulnerable - Child needs protection from hazards in the
world, requires adult intervention and
monitoring
Models of parenting
Researchers and academics have proposed various models of parenting. Commonly, parenting styles are broken down into four categories:
Permissive - Few rules are given to children, those that are
given are inconsistently applied. Parents do not
monitor, challenge or praise behaviour.
Authoritarian - A hierarchical model of parenting with parents in
control of their child’s life. A focus on correcting
bad behaviour, strict rules and punishment
consistently applied.
Authoritative - Clear and consistent expectations of children.
Expectations are explained and negotiated with
children.
Neglectful or dismissive - Exert little care or consideration for their
children
Research based in the UK and North America suggests that an authoritative parenting style provides children and young people with the most effective support and care. However, there are variations in what is considered to be an appropriate parenting style. For example, in his work Martin Woodhead (1999) cites an example of a Thai textbook on parenting, which is concerned about the effect on families if parenting is not authoritarian in style.
Parenting style and behaviour is also a product of the material resources available to a family. For example, Walkerdine and Lucey (1991) suggested that the ideal of ‘sensitive mothering’, whereby a mother is attuned to her baby’s needs and responsive to them, is difficult to sustain, particularly in situations where families have little support and a baby has been crying constantly for hours at a time.
Tuesday, 1 March 2011
Development is not experienced in the same way by all children and young people
Viewing ‘development’ as a single pathway on which all children and young people can be measured is a powerful and very common way of understanding development. We’ll now look at the impact of a singular view of physical development and then psychological development is discussed.
Physical development
The physical development of babies is an essential aspect of monitoring the growth of newborn babies and young children. In the UK babies have health records often termed a ‘red book’ that record the child’s progress in many developmental aspects including the child’s weight.
Psychological development
Psychological development can include cognitive, social and emotional development. The dominant construction of development as a stage-based process, with skills building like a stack of blocks, has implications for how we view children. A social constructionist argument suggests that stages of development need to be used with caution. Assessing children in terms of how they measure up to predefined developmental stages may be helpful as an initial guide in getting to know about them. However, the contextual information surrounding a judgement on a child’s developmental stage is essential. For example, a child may not talk at three years old for a variety of reasons – sustained neglect may have caused physiological difficulties in development that have delayed/reduced the child’s neurological ability to talk; or the child may have a hearing loss that has not been picked up; or the child could have a hearing loss as a result from a physical assault to the head; or the child may be the youngest in a large family and so may be a late talker. The actual developmental task – not talking at an age that a child would be ‘expected’ to talk – is not the key issue here, but it allows us to ask further questions which may alter how concerned we are about the child.
Significant harm
Measures for the physical development of babies need to be taken in context but they provide a way of comparing a child against what is expected of children at the same age. The notion of using ideas about ‘usual’ or ‘normative’ development to measure an individual child is also evident in ways in which practitioners assess whether a child has experienced a situation or events that have caused them distress and considerable harm.
The notion of significant harm, as defined in the Children Act (1989), draws on the assumption that harm is demonstrated if children/young people are developing differently to the expected developmental pathway.
Harm is defined in s.31 (9) of the Children Act 1989 as ill-treatment or the impairment of health or development. In this context:
ill-treatment includes sexual abuse and other forms of ill-treatment which are not physical;
health means physical or mental health;
development includes physical, intellectual, emotional, social or behavioural development.
It is important to keep in mind that the health or development of children subject to ill-treatment may be impaired in a number of different ways.
In assessing and establishing significant harm, it is therefore necessary to consider:
the family context;
the child’s development within the context of their family and wider social and cultural environment;
any special needs, such as a medical condition, communication difficulty or disability that may affect the child's development and care within the family;
the nature of harm, in terms of ill-treatment or failure to provide adequate care;
the impact on the child's health and development; and
the adequacy of parental care.
It is important always to take account of the child’s reactions, and his or her perceptions, according to the child’s age and understanding.
Cultural differences in development
A social constructionist view of development stresses that there is no single ‘right’ way of developing and that children will develop differently in different cultural locations. For example, a child growing up in Vietnam will experience a very different cultural context for their development than a child growing up in the UK or Ireland. This is the result of societal expectations, values, access to schooling, economic situation of families, parents’ views of their role as parents, etc.
Ideas about appropriate parenting will also differ in different cultural locations. For example, play is considered to be a key aspect of the lives of young children in the UK. However, Woodhead (1999) cites research with Venezuelan mothers and day-care workers in which they were asked ‘Which is most important, play or discipline?’ Eight per cent of the mothers thought play was the most important, with 52 per cent of mothers saying that discipline was most important. A social constructionist theory argues that all knowledge is produced within a particular cultural setting at a particular point in time and its use is limited to that context. Therefore it makes sense that being a child and parenting are different in different cultural settings. It is also evident that in a culturally and ethnically diverse society such as the UK, there are many different views about appropriate parenting and appropriate child development. However, the issue for practice in the UK is that while it is important to recognise cultural differences in parenting and a child’s development, practitioners need to decide what is appropriate and safe for children and young people in the context of mainstream British culture.
Physical development
The physical development of babies is an essential aspect of monitoring the growth of newborn babies and young children. In the UK babies have health records often termed a ‘red book’ that record the child’s progress in many developmental aspects including the child’s weight.
Psychological development
Psychological development can include cognitive, social and emotional development. The dominant construction of development as a stage-based process, with skills building like a stack of blocks, has implications for how we view children. A social constructionist argument suggests that stages of development need to be used with caution. Assessing children in terms of how they measure up to predefined developmental stages may be helpful as an initial guide in getting to know about them. However, the contextual information surrounding a judgement on a child’s developmental stage is essential. For example, a child may not talk at three years old for a variety of reasons – sustained neglect may have caused physiological difficulties in development that have delayed/reduced the child’s neurological ability to talk; or the child may have a hearing loss that has not been picked up; or the child could have a hearing loss as a result from a physical assault to the head; or the child may be the youngest in a large family and so may be a late talker. The actual developmental task – not talking at an age that a child would be ‘expected’ to talk – is not the key issue here, but it allows us to ask further questions which may alter how concerned we are about the child.
Significant harm
Measures for the physical development of babies need to be taken in context but they provide a way of comparing a child against what is expected of children at the same age. The notion of using ideas about ‘usual’ or ‘normative’ development to measure an individual child is also evident in ways in which practitioners assess whether a child has experienced a situation or events that have caused them distress and considerable harm.
The notion of significant harm, as defined in the Children Act (1989), draws on the assumption that harm is demonstrated if children/young people are developing differently to the expected developmental pathway.
Harm is defined in s.31 (9) of the Children Act 1989 as ill-treatment or the impairment of health or development. In this context:
ill-treatment includes sexual abuse and other forms of ill-treatment which are not physical;
health means physical or mental health;
development includes physical, intellectual, emotional, social or behavioural development.
It is important to keep in mind that the health or development of children subject to ill-treatment may be impaired in a number of different ways.
In assessing and establishing significant harm, it is therefore necessary to consider:
the family context;
the child’s development within the context of their family and wider social and cultural environment;
any special needs, such as a medical condition, communication difficulty or disability that may affect the child's development and care within the family;
the nature of harm, in terms of ill-treatment or failure to provide adequate care;
the impact on the child's health and development; and
the adequacy of parental care.
It is important always to take account of the child’s reactions, and his or her perceptions, according to the child’s age and understanding.
Cultural differences in development
A social constructionist view of development stresses that there is no single ‘right’ way of developing and that children will develop differently in different cultural locations. For example, a child growing up in Vietnam will experience a very different cultural context for their development than a child growing up in the UK or Ireland. This is the result of societal expectations, values, access to schooling, economic situation of families, parents’ views of their role as parents, etc.
Ideas about appropriate parenting will also differ in different cultural locations. For example, play is considered to be a key aspect of the lives of young children in the UK. However, Woodhead (1999) cites research with Venezuelan mothers and day-care workers in which they were asked ‘Which is most important, play or discipline?’ Eight per cent of the mothers thought play was the most important, with 52 per cent of mothers saying that discipline was most important. A social constructionist theory argues that all knowledge is produced within a particular cultural setting at a particular point in time and its use is limited to that context. Therefore it makes sense that being a child and parenting are different in different cultural settings. It is also evident that in a culturally and ethnically diverse society such as the UK, there are many different views about appropriate parenting and appropriate child development. However, the issue for practice in the UK is that while it is important to recognise cultural differences in parenting and a child’s development, practitioners need to decide what is appropriate and safe for children and young people in the context of mainstream British culture.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)