You’re a opinion read each paragraph and give me your opinion if you agree or disagree with it

1.

The stage theory explains a child growth throughout life how it changes and they experience stepping stone. As the stages changes the child is becoming more mature. It also explains how one can change rapidly as they migrate from one stage to the next stage. However, change is also at a steady level. In this stage, changes happens fast instead of gradually.

Non-stage theory explains how change is also at a steady pace but happens much slower. Two factors that help understand a child's development are the concepts continuous and discontinuous development. Continuous theory corresponds more with the stage theory and it describes the process of gradually argumenting the same type of skill were there begin with. Discontinuous corresponds with the non-theory stage describes process in which new ways of understanding and responses to emerge the world at specific times.

Stage theory has one understand that everyone has the same sequence of development. When understanding development, it is very important to know that people develop in different ways. People learn and grow in different ways. Some people are visual learners and some are hands on. Berk (2018) explains the cognitive development theory that helps one break down the development as it refers to cognitive. How do we think? Behavioral and social theory explains the concept of learned behaviors.

2.

What are the similarities and differences between stage and non-stage theory? Staged development also called Continuous development which increases skills in a gradual movement. This limiting the performance of such skills. Whereas non-staged, also known as Discontinuous theory, one must understand, respond and develop at specific times. Each step will enhance the development until there is perfection.

Both theories highlight the progression of development specifically in children. The continuous theory is the stage that we all begin with. We respond to needs in a manner that our parent or caregiver will understand usually crying, this comes naturally for survival. As we develop our motor skills and verbal ability, the discontinuous theory emerges and a combination of personal and environmental influences contribute to the developmental process ( Kagan, 2013a; Mistry & Dutta, 2015). Both these theories show that natural progression of development.

I believe that people develop similarly in early development, as an infant we have basic needs for survival. We might cry or fuss for food or a clean diaper, and then progress to one word indications of our needs and so on. When we are more aware of our surroundings and thought process we develop differently based on our environment and experiences.

3

Two research designs used in lifespan development research include longitudinal and cross-sectional. According to Laura Berk (2018), a longitudinal study follows participants at various points of development over months or years. This type of study provides the ability to see patterns of development as well as individual differences in development (Berk, 2018). In contrast, cross-sectional research is the study of a group of participants and different ages and stages of development at the same moment in time (Berk, 2018). Cross-sectional studies are more efficient because they are a one-time snap-shot of the group and therefore need not be concerned about participant drop out. This type of study provides the average for a given group.

The problems associated with longitudinal and cross-sectional studies are very different. The longitudinal study can be problematic due to participant drop out, which in turn can skew results (Berk, 2018). Another problem for longitudinal studies is that participants may become familiar with the process and thus unintentionally alter their thoughts or behaviors (Berk, 2018). On the other hand, cross-sectional studies are very limiting in providing information. Because it is a one-time view, cross-sectional studies are unable to provide detailed information as to when development occurred (Berk, 2018). Both studies can suffer from the cohort affect, which is when a group may have specific shared historical or cultural experiences (Berk, 2018). Results based on one cohort may not be applicable for another, so it is important to consider these influences (Berk, 2018).

In a longitudinal study by Van Daal, Verhoeven, and Balkom (2009), the authors studied cognitive predictors of language development in children with specific language impairment (SLI). This study followed participants over the course of two years in an effort to uncover key factors involved in language development (Van Daal et. al, 2009). While this study was longitudinal in nature, if the authors had chosen to complete a cross-sectional study they could have uncovered average age of language develop for children with SLI, which may have given them a benchmark for expectations and greater understanding of the environment and timing at which certain skills occur.

Both types of research provide a piece of the puzzle to understanding development. While the cross-sectional study can provide averages for developmental progress, the longitudinal study can provide a detailed analysis of the skills acquired and the timing and environment associated with development. According to Laura Berk (2018), sequential studies offer a way to overcome the shortfalls of both the longitudinal and cross-sectional studies. Sequential studies can study participants at the same age over different years or it could be used to study participants of different ages over the same time periods (Berk, 2018

4.

The two research designs that I have chosen are Naturalistic Observation and Correlation design. The naturalistic observation is designed to witness a participant in their natural surrounding such as a school or day care. An example of this design would be to observe a child’s reaction when another child is crying or gets hurt. The first child may show empathy as they have seen this reaction from caregivers or teachers. The limitations of this design are that research cannot be controlled and some of the other participants would not have the opportunity to witness this same situation and respond to it. Perhaps this design would be better conducted on single individuals.

The correlation design is similar to the naturalistic observation, in that it is researched in the natural life circumstances, without altering their experience. An example of this design would question, ‘does the parents style of involvement effect the intelligence of the child, or does the intelligence of the child cause different involvement of the parents?’ Berk, L. (2018). This design has limitations that we cannot guess at the cause and effects, we could not know if the parents involvement causes the child to be intelligent or if the child’s intelligence effect the parents involvement.

Both these designs can help us understand development as situations observed in the natural settings can show the natural reaction that is not staged or guided.