EDU 6132: Reflection 2

The first of the eight Seattle Pacific University (SPU) program standards, expectations, is highly relevant in relation to the material that we have covered thus far in the course. The concept of nature v. nurture and various theories about biological and cognitive development all relate to the SPU standard of expectations. Most importantly, the overarching theme I gather regarding these topics is that it is often a combination of factors that actually has effect, not simply one versus another in a dichotomy, and these all must be taken into consideration when understanding the context of a classroom.

As discussed in my first reflection, discussed in module one, and cited by various researchers and educators including Pressley and McCormick (2007, p. 4), it is not just nature or nurture, but a harmonious combination of the two that shape individuals. As such, with individuals coming from diverse backgrounds (cultural, socioeconomic, linguistic, etc.) it is paramount for educators to first acknowledge this diversity exists; then they must incorporate a celebration of diversity in the classroom by including ties to student backgrounds, interests, and current knowledge/perceptions into lessons, curriculum, and standards.

In addition to a combination of nature and nurture affecting the development of individuals, there are various biological and cognitive development theories acknowledged, that often while presenting opposite information, actually work together/in conjunction with one another to create the individual. As discussed by Pressley and McCormick, for example, while the maturation deviance hypothesis (p. 42) details off-time development and possible correlation with greater adjustment difficulties in students, the early maturation hypothesis also correlates similar adjustment difficulties. Thus, again, we see a case where in reality, multiple theories come together to represent what is actuated in a classroom population, where different students are likely to have traversed along different paths. Therefore, I emphasize again, how it is important for teachers to acknowledge the diversity of their classroom so that they may plan and/or adjust accordingly.

Regarding cognitive development, while there are proscribed stages of development, such as those of Piaget, and they tend to hold true across populations, there is always the factor of individual variance. Despite developing along similar staged paths, male and female cognitive development has marked differences, for example, with regard to thinking based on rationality and justice, versus thinking strategies based on human, interpersonal consequences (Preslley and McCormick, 2007, p. 79). In his chapters on wiring, gender, exploration, and memory, Medina (2008) illustrates the diversity of humans despite such proscribed developmental processes. Understanding how individuals think and learn differently is essential for being able to adapt a teaching strategy to engage the diverse population, which is key to the first SPU program standard related to expectations.