To carry out the recording of the observation I decided to use the ‘Naturalistic Observation’ method, (Fawcett. M. (1996) cited in O.L.F. Material) as this was in my view the simplest for me to adapt to and carry out. This method of recording is also referred to as “specimen description” and is in the form of a running record (see appendix 1 for recoding notes). To make the observation recording more efficient I have used abbreviations such as LH for left hand, all abbreviations are explained in appendix 2. I also decided to stay a passive observer and have no interaction with the child.
This was extremely difficult as the child was observed in a garden that was very small in size in the first observation and in the second observation the child was playing in a public park. I will discuss these difficulties and how I over came them later.
Again before embarking on the actual observation I revaluated my self in relation to prejudices and discriminatory judgments being placed on the child through assumptions and generalisations I must value this ‘A’s uniqueness. As Mary fawcatt states ”as each child is unique observes must avoid generalising about the behaviour on the basis of a single child” (Fawcett. M.2002).
I also recognised that through the observation I need to bear in mind the child’s body language as this may give cultural clues (A Framework for the assessment ….)
As this observation was not carried out in a formal setting I used empathy and respect for the parent as a tool of communication with the parent.
Key events that occurred during the observation were
- K assaulting another child by thumping child b in the face several times as child b was riding a tricycle belonging to k. This was a dilemma for me it was ethically impossible for me to sit and continue to be a non-participant observer, so as I stated earlier I would intervene if there were a danger to any child. My action was to alert the parent of k. Her reaction was to shout at k using words such as “bad” and “Stupid” after which she removed the child from the garden and placed k in the house.
-
The second key event was the duration of the second observation, which was only 14-15 minutes long. After speaking to parent A she stated that the only next opportunity to observe k would be the 18th of may, I saw this as a major obstacle as my evaluation will only be based on very little information.
Evaluation of theoretical perspectives
For this part of the report I will discuss relevant theoretical perspectives relating to k.
Although I am aware of most theories are based on a euro-centric concept and may not always be applicable to children of other ethnic groups.
I will start of with attachment theory and explore the child’s attachment with his main carer.
Bowlby (1958) applied the understanding of attachment to the mother and child he stated, “it is about a two way bond between child and main carer.
Using Bowlby’s ‘internal working model’ I can argue that ‘k’ is securely attached to his carer as he showed all the behaviour necessary such as capable he was capable to assert him self in relation to asking for food and drink which ‘K’ did on several occasion. ‘K’ viewed parent A as responsive as she was able to meet the needs for nutritional satisfaction.
At no time through the course of the observation did ‘K’ seem to be powerless or helpless if he wanted a toy he had the ability to get it.
If we examine Ainswoth’s theory of attachment we see she uses categories for different attachment types I believe ‘K’ in relation to this theory base is type ‘B’ securely attached. I can come to this conclusion on based on my observation of ‘K’. On several occasions I observed him showing signs of missing the carer, such as hugging parent A as she came back to him after a period of time; after which he continued to play.
In further assessing the ‘K’s attachment with the carer ‘A’ I examined the checklist put forward by (V. Fahlberg. V. (1991) A Child’s Journey Through Placement) I saw this a good tool to utilise while reflecting on the observation. Although I could not relate all the behaviours on the checklist to ‘K’ this may be due to the shortness of the observation. Although as discussed in lectures a checklist at times can be too rigid and not deliver a true picture of the child capabilities.
On examining attachment I believe it is important to examine how emotionally expressive the culture in question is only then can we build a true picture of the attachment of the child based on an anti-discriminatory theory base.
I secondly will examine the developmental milestones of ‘k’.
Many theorists explain the development stages of a child as “what children should be doing at different stages of their life”.
I am aware that the developmental stages of a child can differ according to the child’s cultural background, and the environment of the child as well as experiences that the individual child may have had.
I will firstly evaluate the emotional development of ‘k’ using the chart laid out by Mary Sheridan (cited in “Children’s Development, Open University) for a child of 3-5 years old.
She discusses the child as being friendly, and copying the moods of adults as well as the child being stable and emotionally secure.
In Analysing my observation notes I see similarities between the child’s behaviour towards other children and the interaction by parent ‘A’. Were the parent used language in an aggressive tone, towards ‘K’ and his aggression towards other children.
‘K’ meets the physical milestones for a child aged five years old, as on several occasions I recorded him kicking and throwing a ball, while doing this he focused his eyes in the ball.
I cannot judge his language development, because of the little language he used and the shortness of the observation.
Although ‘K’s social development did appear to be reaching the milestone as he was proud of his possessions and his achievements.
Again I feel it important to point out the child’s cultural development is an important factor in consideration of the overall development of the child.
Analysis of Skills
Reflecting back at the skills I utilised in conducting this observation and setting it up, I acknowledge that the setting up the observation could have been better planned.
The observation was arranged in a very small time frame, which was then interpreted and written up into this report.
I acknowledge that theories inform us to predict or interpret behaviour, but I also understand this can act as an inhibiter to staying non-judgemental throughout the observation.
During the observation I was observing the child’s behaviour and interpreting the behaviour using theories such as Piaget’s (1965) concept of justice in which he discuses that children favour and learn the concepts of equality in the early stages of life.
I felt this interpretation of the behaviours with related theories hindered and equally enhanced my observation, in one sense I was able to understand the child’s behaviours. In the second the behaviour was interpreted in the limited time span and in an environment I had no control over.
Further the skills I felt that were invaluable along with the Anti-discriminatory, Anti-oppressive and non-judgemental approaches were.
Recording skills, for the observation it self.
Interpretation skills in the evaluation of the overall observation it self based the Anti-discriminatory, Anti-oppressive and non-judgemental interpretations of the actions and behaviours displayed by ‘K’.
I also utilised my skills in working along side the parent in setting up the observation, I empowered the parent by full involvement and allowing her to look at my notes, of the observation.
Reflections on Learning
In reflection I have learnt a child’s development can differ form culture to culture, I have learnt that children react to situations differently according to their environment.
A problem, which I encountered in observing the child, was that I paid a lot of attention to the individual child and little with his interactions with other children.
Although I see this as a learning experience so from this I have learnt my weaknesses that I have sort to remedy.
Conclusion
Observation plays a vital role in assessment; only after I carried out the observation did this become so apparent. So much can be learnt form the interaction of the child and his or her environment, peers or family. This can then be the basis for making an informed decision relating to the specific child.
I feel as if theories relating to children of dual heritage are limited and need to be researched further.
Bibliography
Adams. R (1996) Social Work an Empowerment. London. B.A.S.W. Macmillan press
Bee, H. (1999) The Developing Child, 8th edition, New York. Longman
Cree. E. V. (2000) Sociology for Social Workers. London, Routledge
Dalrymple. J & Hough. J. (1995) Having a Voice, An Exploration in to Children’s Rights. Birmingham, Venture Press
Davies. M (1997). The Blackwell Companion to Social work. Oxford. Blackwell
Dominelli. L (1990) Woman and Community Action. Birmingham, Venture Press
Ellison. N. & Pierson. C. (1998) Developments in British Social Policy. Hampshire. Palgrave.
Fahlberg. V. (1991) A Child’s Journey Through Placement. London. BAAF
Healy. K. (2000) Social Work Practices, Contemporary Perspectives on Change. London. SAGE
Herbert. M & Harper-Dorton. V. (2002) Working with Children Adolescents and their Families. Oxford. B.P.S. Blackwell
Hughes. G (1998) Imagining Welfare Futures. London. Routledge
Inhelder. B. & Piaget. J. (1958) ‘The growth of Logical Thinking’ France. Presses Universitaires de France.
Inhelder. B. & Piaget. J. (1964) The Early Growth of Logic in the child. London Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Irwin, D, M. (1980) ‘Observational Stratagies for Child Study’. U.S.A. Holt, Rinhart and Whinston.
Kapasi. H. (1992) Asian children play. Birmingham. Play. Train.
Messer. D Jones. F (2001) Psychology and Social Care. London and Philadelphia. J.K.P.
Payne. M (1997) Modern Social Work Theory 2nd edition, Hampshire. Palgrave
Piaget. J. (1979) The origins of intelligence in the child. London Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Pieget. J. (1965) ‘The Moral Judgement of a Child. London, Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Pithouse. P & Williamson. H. (1997) Engaging the User in Welfare Services. Birmingham. Venture Press
Richards. G. (1997) Race, Racism and psychology. London. Routledge
Stepney. P. & Ford. D. (2000) Social Work Models, Methods and Theories. Dorset. Russell House Publishing.
Derby City council Social Services, ‘ A framework for the Assessment of Children in need and their Families,
Department of Health Documents
Working Together to Safeguard Children
Framework For the Assessment of Children in Need and their Families
