Hdfs 2950 Early Childhood Lab Report

Running head: LAB 3 EARLY CHILDHOOD 1
Lab 3 Early Childhood
Eva Bourland
University of Georgia

LAB 3 EARLY CHILDHOOD
2
2
Part I
Part II
Date: 10/17/19 Begin time: 11:15 AM End time: 11:25 AM
Child’s initial: E Child’s age: 3 years old Child’s sex: Female
Description of the location and scene: In the playground, near the left area with two slides
and a sandbox.
Time Running Record Interpretation
11:15 Child E and her friend are
standing in a rollable play
structure, and they are acting
yelling that they are in a boat
and there is a storm. They are
Child E and her friend are representing make-
believe play, as they are “acting out an
imaginary activity” (Berk & Meyers, 2016).
As the children are 3 years old, they are
pretending with a less realistic toy. The

3
3
pushing the rollable structure
around and yelling.
rollable structure does not look like a boat
and the ground doesn’t look like water but
they are in the phase of make-believe play
where they do not need support from the real
world to pretend.
11:16 Child E then tells her friend
that she will get out of the
‘boat’ to help. Child E then
gets out of the ‘boat’ and pulls
the rollable structure while her
friend pushes. Child E keeps
saying they must get to the
slides to be safe.
Child E and her friend are participating in
cooperative play, a more advanced type of
interaction. The children are interacting and
playing with a common goal in mind. Their
goal is to get to the slides to be safe and they
have made a plan to do this together. They
are communicating as they play and reach
their goal.
11:17 They reach the slide and child
E runs up the ramp to get onto
the slide. Child E tells her
friend that she needs to come
slide with her so they can play
the ‘Frozen’ game. The friend
asks if she can be baby Elsa
and child E says no, that she
gets to be baby Elsa because
that is what she always is. The
At this moment, Child E seems to be showing
egocentrism, which is “failure to distinguish
the symbolic viewpoints of others from one’s
own” (Berk & Meyers, 2016). Child E has
appeared to assume that her friend will think
and feel the same way she does, even though
this is not true.

4
4
friend seems upset but does not
say anything.
11:18 Child E then gets up from the
slide and walks around. She
sees a toy lizard on the ground
and exclaims “Oh no, the lizard
is going to be so cold all
alone!” Child E then picks up
the lizard and holds it close.
Child E is representing the concept of
animism by assuming that the lizard has
feelings, even though it is a toy. Child E
believes that the lizard has lifelike qualities
such as thought and emotion.
11:19 Child E then notices her friend
had left and went to the
sandbox. Child E runs over to
the sandbox with her toy lizard
and picks up a shovel on the
way.
Child E is representing the gross motor skill
of running here. As Child E is 3 years old, her
running is a little bit slow and uncoordinated
but she is showing that she can use this gross
motor skill. As she gets older, her running
will become more smooth.
11:20 Child E sits down next to her
friend. As her friend is filling
up a bucket with sand, Child E
puts her toy lizard down and
begins to dig sand to build a
mountain.
Child E and her friend are now representing
the concept of parallel play. The children are
playing near each other with similar materials
within the sand box but they are not
influencing eachother’s behavior.

5
5
11:21 Child E then begins talking to
herself out loud saying “this
will be the home for my lizard.
He will stay warm and sleep
here.” Child E continues to dig
and build this mountain.
Child E is using private speech here as she
talks to herself about how her lizard needs a
home. Child E appears to be using private
speech to help plan and guide her own
behavior.
11:22 Once Child E has built the
mountain she puts the lizard on
top of it. She says out loud “my
lizard is so hungry he needs
some food.” She then grabs
some sand and feeds it to her
lizard.
This moment represented one of the three
important indicators of symbolic play. The
indicator here is that play becomes less self-
centered. Child E is directing pretend actions
toward the lizard instead of directing the
pretend actions toward herself.
11:23 Child E’s friend then turns to
Child E and tells her that she
made food and asks if Child E
wants some. Child E says yes
and pretends to eat off the plate
that her friend hands her.
This represents another indicator of symbolic
play which is when play detaches from the
real-life conditions associated with it. Child E
pretended to eat from the plate that her friend
hands her even though there is no real food
on the plate.
11:24 The teacher calls that it is time
to start cleaning up because
their parents are coming for
lunch. The teacher asks Child
This is a task that is out of Child E’s zone of
proximal development. She seems very
confused by the task and does not seem to be
able to move the scooter. Since this task

6
6
E to help her clean up by
rolling one of the small
scooters to the place it belongs.
Child E then attempts roll the
scooter but fails.
seems to be out of Child E’s zone of proximal
development she may need scaffolding to
help her complete this task.
11:25 The teacher then notices that
Child E is having a hard time
and walks over to show her
how. She tells Child E to “use
both hands to push the
handlebars and then the wheels
will help to move it along.”
Child E then does this and
slowly rolls the scooter back to
where it belongs.
This task was out of Child E’s zone of
proximal development so the teacher used
scaffolding to help Child E. As Child E had
little notion of how to proceed, the teacher
used direct instruction to help lead Child E in
the right direction of moving the scooter. The
teacher gave her a few tips and once she did,
the child was able to complete the task.
Part III
In the beginning of my observations of Child E she was participating in make-believe
play with her friend. Child E was saying how this rollable structure was the boat and that they
are in a storm, as she was yelling loudly acting as if this was real. Child E is representing one of
the three changes that reflect her growing symbolic mastery as this play detaches from the real-
life conditions associated with it. Children younger than the age of 2 tend to have trouble using
an object that already has an obvious use as a symbol of another object. The textbook explains
that “after age 2, children pretend with less realistic toys” (Berk & Meyers, 2016). As Child E is

7
7
3 years old, she is representing this concept by pretending that a rollable structure is a boat.
Being able pretend with less realistic toys is an important developmental change in mastering
symbolic play. Child E will gradually be able to imagine objects and events without any support
from the real world. Make-believe play is an important example of the development of early
representation in childhood and according to Piaget, as Child E pretends, she is strengthening her
newly acquired representational schemes.
Child E also represented the concept of not only cooperative play, but an advanced form
of cooperative play known as sociodramatic play. Sociodramatic play is the make-believe play
with others that is under way by the end of the second year. Sociodramatic play “becomes
especially common over the preschool years and supports cognitive, emotional and social
development” (Berk & Meyers, 2016). Child E and her friend represent sociodramatic play when
they are trying to get to the slides safely as their ‘boat’ is in a storm. They work together,
communicating while they play. In this joint make-believe, the children are acting out and
responding to one another’s feelings, as they scream and try to move the boat closer to the slides.
The children are also exploring a fear-arousing experience which helps to better understand each
other’s feelings. In this sociodramatic play, the children have spent time negotiating their roles in
the play and also the rules. Sociodramatic play requires children to “understand emotions,
exercise self-control and respond to other children’s verbal and nonverbal cues” (Berk &
Meyers, 2016).
Near the end of my observations of Child E, a teacher used scaffolding to help Child E in
completing a task. The teacher asked Child E to help her clean up by taking a scooter back to
where it belongs. This task appeared to be outside of the child’s zone of proximal development
as she could not figure out how to roll the scooter on her own. The teacher used scaffolding

8
8
which is “adjusting the support offered during a teaching session to fit the child’s current level of
performance” (Leigh, Cognitive Development in Early Childhood 1, 2019). As Child E had little
notion of how to proceed with this task, the teacher used direct instruction and suggested
strategies to Child E. The teacher told her to stand next to the scooter, put both of her hands on
the handlebars and push, explaining that the wheels will help to move the scooter. By giving
Child E these instructions and strategies, she completed the task on her own. To promote
cognitive development, social interaction must have two vital features with scaffolding being one
of them. As Child E completed this task on her own by using her teacher’s instructions, it is
possible that her cognitive development has improved.
Part IV
Physical Development
While observing the preschoolers on the playground I watched as a child moved around
on a bicycle with no pedals. The child was sitting on the seat and using their feet to push along
the ground and move across the pavement. From our lecture notes, “pushing a riding toy with
feet and little steering” (Leigh, Physical Development in Early Childhood 2, 2019) is a gross-
motor skill seen in children ages 2-3 years old. Gross-motor skills in early childhood can include
walking, running, riding, throwing, and jumping, while gross motor skills in infancy are skills
that help infants get around their environment such as crawling, standing and walking. Gross-
motor skills in early childhood differ from those in infancy because in early childhood, as
children’s bodies become more streamlined and less top-heavy, their center of gravity shifts
downward. As a result, “balance improves greatly, paving the way for new motor skills
involving large muscles of the body” (Berk & Meyers, 2016). As children are becoming more
steady on their feet, their arms and torsos are able to experiment with new skills such as steering

9
9
tricycles. Gross-motor skills continue to become more advanced and smooth in early childhood
than they were in infancy.
During my observation I watched as a young girl was standing alone in the sandbox while
taking off her jacket. She undid the zipper and pulled the jacket off, setting it on the ground. A
fine-motor skill seen in 2-3 year olds is the ability to “put on and remove simple items of
clothing” (Leigh, Physical Development in Early Childhood 2, 2019). Fine motor skills in early
childhood involve self-help activities such as dressing and eating, as well as advances in
drawing. In infancy, fine motor development has to do with smaller movements such as reaching
and grasping. Success in fine motor development in early childhood requires a longer attention
span, memory for a detailed series of hand movements and the dexterity to perform them than is
required in infancy. As this child was able to combine these actions to be able to take off their
jacket on their own, they are demonstrating the close connection between motor and cognitive
development.
Cognitive Development
While observing the preschoolers on the playground, I watched as two boys played in the
sandbox with toy dinosaurs. They were representing the concept of pretend play which is when
children understand that one thing can “be” another. As the boys played they were talking about
how they need to build a mountain and a forest where their dinosaurs could live. They pretended
that the sand would be the mountain and that they could use the leaves nearby to act as a forest.
The children exhibited two of the three important changes that reflect the preschool child’s
symbolic mastery which is play becoming less self-centered and sociodramatic play. At first,
make-believe is directed toward the self but soon “children begin to direct pretend actions toward
objects” (Berk & Meyers, 2016). These two children were directing their pretend actions toward

10
10
their toy dinosaurs, as they built them a home made of sand and leaves. These children are also
participating in sociodramatic play as they combine more complex combinations of schemes and
create an imaginary world for their dinosaurs together. Play not only reflects but also contributes
to children’s cognitive and social skills (Berk & Meyers, 2016). As children engage in
sociodramatic play specifically, their interactions last longer, show more involvement and they
become more cooperative.
As I sat observing the preschoolers, I watched as a child ran up to the teacher and
exclaimed “there are balloons over there! I saw balloons once with my mom when we went to a
parade and it was so cool!” This would be an example of autobiographical memory, or
“representations of personally meaningful, one-time events” (Berk & Meyers, 2016). Between
the ages of 3 and 6, children’s descriptions of special events become more detailed and enriched
with personal perspective. The child did not just say “I went to a parade” but instead included
who she went with, what happened there and what she thought of this experience. As
preschoolers continue to age, they will include subjective information more often that explains
the event’s personal significance. Autobiographical memory also relates to self-concept and self-
identity. The memories created in this age are often connected to strong emotions, influencing
how the child views the world and if they can trust it. When children are able to “name their
emotions, identify and learn healthy ways to cope with that, it will directly influence their self-
concept” (Leigh, Cognitive Development in Early Childhood 2, 2019). As children reminisce on
their past experiences they are creating a shared history that strengthens close relationships and
their own self-understanding.
Private Speech

11
11
As my observations continued I witnessed a child walking around the playground alone,
saying to himself “I don’t have to wear a helmet like everyone else because I am bigger and
older. Everyone is wearing helmets but not me! Even my mom says I don’t need a helmet.” This
is an example of private speech which is “self-directed speech that children use to plan and guide
their own behavior” (Leigh, Cognitive Development in Early Childhood 1, 2019). The theorist
Vygotsky believed that language growth helped to broaden preschooler’s involvement in social
activities and eventually they will start communicating with themselves in the same way that
they communicate with others. As Vygotsky believed that language is a way for children to
assess their mental activities, he saw it as the foundation for “all higher cognitive processes,
including controlled attention, planning, and self-reflection” (Berk & Meyers, 2016). This child
represented the idea that private speech is basically a “talk for self” where he was conveying his
thoughts on how he didn’t have to wear a helmet, not intending for anyone else to understand.
This speech was not intended for anyone to respond to it or ask questions as he was only talking
to himself about the way that he felt.
Over-regulation
Over-regulation refers to the “extension of regular grammatical rules to words that are
exceptions” (Leigh, Cognitive Development Early Childhood 2, 2019). As I sat by the slides I
observed a child climbing on a table and trying to hang off of it, only holding on by their legs.
The child fell off the table onto his foot and started to cry. A teacher came over and asked what
had happened and the child responded “My foots hurt.” The teacher then asked “And how did
that happen?” The child answered with “I falled off the table.” This is an example of over-
regulation as the child used “foots” instead of “feet,” as well as “falled” instead of “fell.”
Although this is technically wrong, over-regulation is actually a sign that children are applying

12
12
the rules and becoming more sophisticated in their use of language. Over-regulation is an
indicator that this child is on the path of normal development as this type of language is a part of
the cognitive development in early childhood.
Socio-emotional Development
In Erikson’s third stage of socio-emotional development, initiative vs. guilt, the
psychological conflict is resolved through play. Through make-believe play, children start to
figure out who they can become. Initiative develops when parents support their child’s sense of
purpose but if parents demand too much self-control, initiative will not develop. If initiative
develops correctly, children are able to leave their friends and do their own activities. If it does
not develop correctly, then they are unable to make their own decisions and the child will
experience a sense of guilt (Leigh, Social Emotional Development Early Childhood 2, 2019). I
observed a child who appeared to have a sense of initiative as he ran over to the slides with two
other children following him. He then told the two other children that they need to hurry and
slide down the slides so that the monsters won’t get them. The three of them all quickly ran up
the hill and slid down the slides over and over again, as the child who seemed to be the leader
kept yelling instructions. He continued to yell “run faster or they will get us!” This moment
showed me how the child who made up the game seemed to be asserting himself with
confidence. His initiative appeared to shine through as he made up this game and told his fellow
classmates how to play. Since this child was given the opportunity to make up this game and to
play it with his classmates, he will develop a sense of initiative and will likely feel more secure
in his ability to lead others and make decisions.
Reactive Aggression

13
13
Reactive aggression is “an angry, defensive response to provocation or a blocked goal
and is meant to hurt another person” (Leigh, Social Emotional Development Early Childhood 2,
2019). I observed reactive aggression as I watched a girl approach a boy who was standing next
to a bike he was about to use, and she grabbed the bike from his hands. She then proceeded to try
to get onto the bike to ride it and the boy ran and hit her on the arm. The boy was provoked by
the girl who stole his bike and then reacted aggressively towards her. The boy was also showing
a more specific form of reactive aggression known as physical aggression by hitting the girl who
stole his bike. A teacher then came up and said to the boy “you cannot hit people. We have had
this conversation so many times, you must stop doing that.” By this interaction I learned that this
boy had hit other children on multiple occasions. This led me to wonder if his parents fight at
home and if he lives in a conflict-ridden atmosphere. There are child-rearing practices that
undermine moral internalization such as love withdrawal, power assertions and negative
emotions. As this child had a history of physically hitting his classmates, there is a possibility
that his parents and his home life have influenced him to behave in this way.
Prosocial Behavior
Prosocial behavior includes “actions that benefit another person without any expected
reward for the self” (Berk & Meyers, 2016). The concept of empathy, feeling a certain way and
responding in an emotionally similar way, serves as a motivator for prosocial behavior. On the
playground I observed a child trip and fall onto the ground. As the child began crying another
classmate ran over quickly asking “Are you okay? Are you okay?” The concerned child then
went to get a teacher and came back, still asking the child on the ground if they were okay. The
concerned child appeared to be exhibiting prosocial behavior as they kept asking if the child was
okay and then going to get the teacher. The concerned child was likely not expecting any reward

14
14
from helping the child who fell but instead was expressing empathy for how the hurt child may
feel. Preschoolers rely more on words to express their empathic feelings than toddlers do, which
is seen as this child continues to express concern through his questions. This child has likely
developed this empathic concern from a secure parent-child attachment relationship. Although I
cannot be sure that this is true, it is found that when parents are warm and show sensitive,
empathic concern for their child’s feelings, their child will then carry the same behavior and
express empathic concern for their classmates. It is possible that this concerned child has been
comforted and been shown empathic concern by their parents, leading them to do the same for
their hurt classmate.

15
15
References
Berk, L. & Meyers, A. (2016). Infants, Children and Adolescents. (8th ed.) Boston, MA: Pearson
Leigh, K. (2019). Cognitive Development in Early Childhood 1 [PowerPoint slides]. Retrieved
from https://uga.view.usg.edu/d2l/le/content/1834117/viewContent/27819960/View
Leigh, K. (2019). Cognitive Development in Early Childhood 2 [PowerPoint slides]. Retrieved
Leigh, K. (2019). Physical Development in Early Childhood 2 [PowerPoint slides]. Retrieved
Leigh, K. (2019). Social Emotional Development Early Childhood 2 [PowerPoint slides].
Retrieved from
https://uga.view.usg.edu/d2l/le/content/1834117/viewContent/27848890/View

Hdfs 2950 Early Childhood Lab Report

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Hdfs 2950 Early Childhood Lab Report

Similar to Hdfs 2950 Early Childhood Lab Report (12)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Hdfs 2950 Early Childhood Lab Report