Running Head: Theorists’ Views on the Nature of Development 9/20/17

The Nature of Development

Lindee Fenn

Brigham Young University—Idaho

Running Head: Theorists’ Views on the Nature of Development 9/20/17

Nature of Development

There are two very basic views concerning the nature of development. The general

population today tends to believe that children must be taught everything. That they learn and are

shaped by the circumstances of their environment. On the other hand, many people believe that a

major influence in their development is in their biology. They believe that children are shaped

into who they are because of their natural instincts and their biological differences.

John Locke was a strong environmentalist, meaning that he believes that a child’s

social environment plays a large influence on development. He supported the learning theory

and believed that children are shaped largely by their education.

Jean Jacques Rousseau held a different opinion than Locke. Rousseau firmly stood on

nature’s side. He believed that children should depend less on others and their social

environment and that they should allow their biology to lead a child in their development.

Arnold Gesell, similar to Rousseau, believed that a child is more influenced by the

maturation of their genes. More specifically, that they develop and are shaped by the sequence

and pattern of their body’s physical development.

Erik Erikson was known for believing that everyone must go through certain stages

throughout their lives. He believed that one of the most basic needs of young children

especially was the presence of a reliable, dependable mother. Someone for the child to trust.

B.F. Skinner was an environmentalist. This was also combined with his behaviorist

views. He practiced the theory of conditioning, meaning that certain experiences and

behaviors can lead to different experiences and behaviors.

Running Head: Theorists’ Views on the Nature of Development 9/20/17

Jean Piaget is most known for his cognitive-developmental theory. He organized his

theories into stages of intellectual development. He also tended to lean more on the idea that

the environment is more influential.

John Bowlby was known for his study of attachment theory. He believed that the

parent-child attachment is of utmost importance and influences the child’s ability to form

lasting and meaningful relationships.

Lev Vygotsky largely studied cognitive development. He believed that both the

external and social influences as well as the biological and innate influences made a

significant difference in the shaping of a child.

Ecological Systems Theory is a view that children develop within different levels of

social systems. The four systems are differentiated by how closely they influence children’s

environment. The microsystem, being the innermost environment, includes the everyday

activities and personal relationships of the child. The outermost system, the macrosystem,

includes the influences that may only indirectly influence the child, such as laws or cultural

values. All of the systems influence and work together to shape children.

The dynamic systems perspective assists children in learning and adapting to new

skills and environments. The child’s physical and social worlds work together as an integrated

system. According to the perspective, when something changes, the child is able to adapt and

incorporate new skills.

Running Head: Theorists’ Views on the Nature of Development 9/20/17

References:

Berk, L.E., & Meyers, A.B. (2015). Infants, Children, and Adolescents. Boston: Pearson.

Crain, W. C. (2011). Theories of development: concepts and applications. Boston, MA: Prentice

Hall.