Week 8 · Chapter

Chapter 8 — Midterm Review & Exam

Child Development Free sample edition

The module's primary reading · ~35–45 minutes · Objective 1 (explain child development's domains, periods, and core questions (nature and nurture, continuity and discontinuity), the ecological systems model, and the major theories of development, describing what each theory explains and what it leaves out), Objective 2 (describe research and observation methods with children — descriptive, correlational, and experimental designs; longitudinal and cross-sectional designs; running records, anecdotal records, checklists, and time and event sampling — and the ethics of consent, assent, and confidentiality), Objective 3 (describe prenatal development and birth: the germinal, embryonic, and fetal periods, teratogens and sensitive periods, birth, and the newborn's Apgar assessment), Objective 4 (analyze physical, cognitive, and language development in infancy and toddlerhood: brain development, reflexes, motor milestones as windows of achievement, safe sleep, the sensorimotor stage, object permanence, and early language), Objective 5 (analyze social-emotional development in infancy and toddlerhood: early emotions, temperament and goodness of fit, attachment theory and research, and Erikson's first two stages) · Read it early this week, before the practice set and the discussion and well before the midterm.

In plain language

This chapter helps you review the first seven weeks before the midterm. Instead of rereading everything, you ask each topic for the one distinction it asks you to keep (a line between two ideas that are easy to mix up). You rerun each distinction on a record or a number you have already worked, so the review adds no new figures. Then you meet one new idea: play (what children do for its own sake, alone or together) as a window on how they grow. You finish by reading a short record of one preschooler's play, minute by minute.

Why you already care about this

Picture a neighborhood playground on a warm afternoon. Two toddlers sit in the sandbox a foot apart. Each one fills a bucket, pats it, and dumps it. Neither says a word to the other. A grandparent on the bench sighs, "They won't play together." In 1932, a researcher named Mildred Parten gave this kind of play a name.

Nothing is wrong with these two. You have watched a very common kind of play. By the end of this chapter you will have that name, five more like it, and a way to count them. You will also have the review you need for the midterm, because every idea from Weeks 1 to 7 comes back here in one place, with 8 records, 5 Apgar signs, and 1 walking window you already know.

By the end of this chapter you will be able to:

state the one distinction each topic from Weeks 1 to 7 asks for, and rerun it on a record you have already read;
total an Apgar score from its five sign scores and read a motor window as a range;
tell temperament from attachment, and receptive from expressive language, in one record;
name Parten's six categories of social participation in order and code a moment of play with one of them; and
read a play time sample: count the intervals, find each percent, and state a gap in percentage points.

Carry this sentence with you: Parten's codes describe moments of play; they never label children.

Where we are

Already covered: Week 1 gave you the three domains, the periods, and nature and nurture as interaction. Week 2 gave you the theories and Erikson's stages. Week 3 taught research designs, observation methods, and ethics. Week 4 followed development before birth and the Apgar score. Weeks 5, 6, and 7 followed the first two years: the body, then the mind and language, then feelings and first relationships.
This week: a review of Weeks 1 to 7 organized by the one distinction each topic asks for, one new piece of material on play and Parten's six categories, and the midterm.
How they connect: every worked example in Sections 1 to 7 is one you have already met, and the new material on play bridges toddlerhood into early childhood.
Where we're going next: Week 9 opens a new unit, early childhood, with Piaget's preoperational stage and Vygotsky's ideas, and it calls back this week's play record.

The midterm checks Objectives 1 to 5 as taught in Weeks 1 to 7. You take it without AI help, because it confirms that you personally can define the course's distinctions, name each model's categories in order, and read an observation record. Every other activity this week, including the practice set and the discussion, welcomes an approved chatbot as a sparring partner, as long as you check what it says against the course's pinned sources.

One habit carries the whole review. In Week 3 you learned to walk every reading in the same order: what the child did, what concept it shows, which theory explains it, and what a second theory adds. Then you say the reading in one plain sentence. Each section below ends that way.

1. Keep the domains together: Week 1's two distinctions

Think of a toddler's morning at a childcare center. The child walks in, says a word or two, and cries at goodbye. That is one morning, but it is three kinds of growth at once.

Week 1 asked you to keep two ideas straight:

The physical domain is the body, brain, motor skills, and health. The cognitive domain is thinking, memory, language, and learning. The social-emotional domain is feelings, relationships, and identity. The three domains affect one another.
Nature and nurture (genes and experience) work together. They interact; neither one acts alone.

Worked example — rerunning record R3. Record R3 of the running case (Dataset A, illustrative, constructed for this course and describing no real child) is the toddler at 14 months, at a childcare center's morning drop-off. Walk it by domain:

Walking alone is the physical domain.
Saying "ball", "up", and "more" is the cognitive domain, because language is part of thinking and learning.
Crying when the parent leaves and accepting comfort from a caregiver is the social-emotional domain.

So one record shows all three. Week 1 then tallied every record of the running case. Across all 8 records of Dataset A, the domain readings are physical 4, cognitive 5, and social-emotional 4, so 4 + 5 + 4 = 13 domain readings. That is more than 8 because some records show more than one domain.

Now the second distinction. R3's walking alone at 14 months needs a maturing body and brain (nature) and the chance to practice (nurture), working together. In words: you cannot split the walk into a "genes part" and a "practice part". If someone asks you "genes or environment?", your reply is "both, together".

Misconception check — the domains as separate tracks. Students often study the domains as if each one grows on its own schedule. It is tempting because the chapters of a course come one domain at a time. The cure: R3 shows all three domains in one morning, and the 13 readings across 8 records show how often they overlap.

2. Ask what each theory explains: Week 2's lenses

Picture three friends describing the same movie. One talks about the characters' feelings, one about the plot, and one about the setting. Nobody is wrong, and each one notices something the others miss. Theories work the same way.

Week 2 asked you to keep one idea in mind: a developmental theory organizes observations into an explanation that makes testable predictions, and the course uses several theories because each explains some things better than others.

Worked example — rerunning record R4 through three lenses. Record R4 (illustrative) is the child at 2½ years in a childcare center's block area. The child pushes away a caregiver's hand and says, "Me do it."

Erikson's psychosocial theory. Erikson (1950), Childhood and Society, described eight stages across life, and 5 of them fall in childhood and adolescence (Dataset E). R4, at 2½ years, falls in toddlerhood (about 1 to 3). That is stage 2, autonomy vs. shame and doubt, and "Me do it" fits its autonomy side.
The learning lens. Skinner's operant conditioning and Bandura's social learning ask what has followed doing it alone, such as success or praise, and whom the child has watched build towers. The record cannot show either, so this lens asks for more observation.
The ecological lens. Bronfenbrenner's model places the block area in the child's microsystem, the setting the child is in every day.

A small count from Week 2 also returns here. Erikson's stages across life: 8 − 5 = 3 adult stages, named in words only.

The reading in one plain sentence: "Me do it" fits Erikson's autonomy vs. shame and doubt, the learning lens adds what the child may have seen and what has followed, and the ecological lens adds the setting.

Misconception check — one theory to rule them all. Students often think the newest or most famous theory replaced the others. It is tempting because science does move on. The cure: no theory in this course is the one right answer; each lens on R4 noticed something the others did not.

Pause and think. Choose one option and answer it in two or three sentences:

(a) Think of something you learned to do on your own as a child, such as tying shoes. Which of the three lenses explains your memory best, and what does it leave out?
(b) Pick one of the three lenses and write one question it would want answered about R4 that the record cannot answer.

3. Separate going together from causing, and description from interpretation: Week 3

Imagine a coach who notices that the players whose families come to every game also make the most practices. It is tempting to say the families' cheering causes the attendance. But a family with more free time might do both. Week 3 gave you the words for that worry.

Week 3 asked for two pairs:

Correlational research measures whether two things vary together; it can show that they are related but cannot show that one causes the other.
Experimental research changes one thing and compares conditions that children were randomly assigned to, so it can test whether that one thing causes a difference.
Objective description is what the child did and said, written so two observers would agree. Subjective interpretation is what it might mean, kept in a separate column.

Worked example — two studies, two kinds of evidence. Week 3's first example was a researcher who visits families at dinner and finds that reading together and a child's words go up together. That is a correlation. It cannot show a cause, because a third thing, such as more evening time, might explain both. Week 3 then called back Bandura, Ross, and Ross (1961), who compared children who watched an aggressive adult with children who did not. That study set up the conditions itself, the move that lets an experiment test a cause.

Worked example — rerunning R4's running record. In Week 3 you wrote R4 as a running record. It had 3 timed lines, from 9:05 to 9:07, and 9:07 − 9:05 = 2 minutes of continuous recording. Now sort two sentences:

Two sentences about record R4 (illustrative), sorted into the description and interpretation columns
Description (what the child did and said)	Interpretation (what it might mean)
"Pushes the caregiver's hand away. Says, 'Me do it.'"	"The child was annoyed with the caregiver."

The first sentence is objective description, so it stays in the left column. "The child was annoyed with the caregiver" is subjective interpretation, so it moves to the right column as a possibility, not a fact. In words: the record shows a push and four words; it does not show a feeling.

Misconception check — correlation read as causation. Students often read "goes together" as "causes". It is tempting because the story makes sense. The cure: correlation is not causation; name a third thing that could explain both before you trust a causal claim.

4. Tell the embryonic period from the fetal period, and total the Apgar signs: Week 4

Picture a family at a prenatal clinic visit. One month the family hears the word "embryo"; a few months later the word is "fetus". The words mark two periods with two different jobs.

The embryonic period runs about weeks 3 to 8; that is when the major organs and body structures form.
The fetal period runs about week 9 to birth, a time of growth and refinement.
The Apgar score, the newborn's first check, rates five signs (heart rate, breathing effort, muscle tone, reflex response or grimace, and skin color), each scored 0, 1, or 2, at 1 and 5 minutes after birth. The total is always the sum of the five sign scores.

Worked example — rerunning R1's Apgar scores (Dataset B). Record R1 is the running case's newborn in a hospital birthing room.

Record R1's Apgar sign scores (illustrative) at 1 and 5 minutes, with each total as the sum of five signs
Sign	1 minute	5 minutes
Heart rate	2	2
Breathing effort	2	2
Muscle tone	1	2
Reflex response (grimace)	1	2
Skin color	1	1
Total	7	9

At 1 minute: 2 + 2 + 1 + 1 + 1 = 7. At 5 minutes: 2 + 2 + 2 + 2 + 1 = 9. The maximum is 5 signs × 2 = 10. MedlinePlus states that a score of 7, 8, or 9 is normal, and a 10 is uncommon, so both totals fall in the normal range. In words: R1 scored 7 and then 9, both normal, and the score describes the baby's condition in the first minutes after birth.

Misconception check — organs in the fetal period. Students often place the forming of the major organs in the fetal period, because it is the longest. The cure: the major organs and structures form in the embryonic period, about weeks 3 to 8; the fetal period is growth and refinement.

Misconception check — the Apgar score as a forecast. Students often read a score of 7 as a problem or a 9 as a sign of a bright child. The cure: 7 is inside the normal range, and the Apgar score predicts nothing about intelligence or later development.

5. Read a window as a range: Week 5's motor distinctions

Think of two toddlers at a family table. One stands up and walks to the window. The other, still seated, picks a pea off the tray with a thumb and finger. Both are moving, but they use very different muscles.

Gross motor skills use the large muscles of the body, as in sitting, crawling, and walking.
Fine motor skills use the small muscles, especially of the hands, as in grasping a spoon or picking up a small piece of food.
A window of achievement is the span of ages within which most healthy children reach a milestone; the WHO windows run from the 1st to the 99th percentile.

Worked example — rerunning the walking-alone window (Dataset H). The WHO Motor Development Study (WHO Multicentre Growth Reference Study Group, 2006) reported that walking alone has a window of 8.2 to 17.6 months. Find its width:

17.6 − 8.2 = 9.4 months wide.

R3 walks alone at 14 months. Since 14 is more than 8.2 and less than 17.6, R3's walk falls inside the window. Walking alone is a gross motor skill. In words: R3 walks at 14 months, inside a window more than 9 months wide, so the age is one point in a range, not a deadline met or missed.

Misconception check — a milestone as a deadline. Students often say "children walk at 12 months". It is tempting because one number is easy to remember. The cure: write a range, such as "most children walk alone somewhere between about 8 and 18 months". A child outside a range is a reason for a family to talk with a health professional, never a conclusion this course draws.

6. Find the hidden toy and count the first words: Week 6

Picture a game of peekaboo at a family dinner. The adult hides behind a napkin, and the baby squeals when the face comes back. Behind the game sits one of Week 6's big ideas.

Object permanence is knowing that a thing still exists when you can no longer see it.
The A-not-B error is an infant's search under the first hiding place, A, after watching a toy hidden under a second place, B.
Receptive language is understanding words; expressive language is producing them. Receptive language usually runs ahead of expressive language.

Worked example — rerunning R2 against Dataset D. Record R2 is the running case at 9 months, at the family home with a parent present. The infant finds a toy twice under the left cloth, A, watches it hidden under the right cloth, B, and then searches under A again. Dataset D's A-not-B task places that response in the fourth sensorimotor substage, at about 8 to 12 months. In words: searching under the old cloth after watching the toy move is the A-not-B error, which Piaget placed in the fourth substage.

Worked example — rerunning R3's words. At 14 months, R3 says "ball", "up", and "more". That is 3 single words, which is expressive language. R2's "ba-ba-ba" at 9 months is babbling. Because receptive language usually runs ahead, the toddler in R3 probably understands more words than the toddler says.

Misconception check — object permanence all at once. Students often think object permanence switches on one day. It is tempting because "permanence" sounds like a light switch. The cure: R2 searches for the toy, which shows some understanding, and still makes the A-not-B error; the idea grows in steps across the sensorimotor substages.

Pause and think. Choose one option and answer it in two or three sentences:

(a) Think of a baby or toddler you have known. Describe one moment that showed receptive language running ahead of expressive language, using behavior only.
(b) A relative says a 14-month-old who says only three words "doesn't understand much yet." Write a two-sentence reply a family could follow.

7. Tell temperament from attachment: Week 7

Picture a crowded park and two toddlers whose parents step away to buy a drink. One wails loudly; the other frowns and goes quiet. Both reach for the same parent when the parent comes back. The loudness is one thing, and the reaching is another.

Temperament is the stable early differences among children in activity, mood, and reactivity. It is a child's own style.
Attachment is a lasting bond with a particular caregiver, shown in whom the child seeks for comfort and uses as a secure base for exploring.

Worked example — rerunning R3 one more time. At the childcare center's morning drop-off, the toddler cries when the parent leaves, accepts comfort from a caregiver, plays while glancing back toward the caregiver, and at pickup reaches for the parent and calms within a minute.

How hard and how long the toddler cries may reflect temperament.
Whom the toddler turns to for comfort, and how the toddler uses that person while playing, is attachment.
R3 is one naturalistic morning, not the Strange Situation, so the course assigns R3 no classification.

The classifications themselves are a small sum: 3 from Ainsworth, Blehar, Waters, and Wall (1978), Patterns of Attachment (secure, insecure-avoidant, and insecure-resistant), + 1 from Main and Solomon (disorganized) = 4. Each one is a research category for a pattern of behavior in one procedure, never a label. In words: R3's crying may say something about temperament, while R3's glancing back and reaching for the parent say something about attachment.

Misconception check — one drop-off, one type. Students often read one morning as proof of a child's attachment type. It is tempting because the record feels detailed. The cure: one observation describes one morning; a classification comes only from a structured research procedure, and even then it describes a pattern, not a child.

8. Watch play: Parten's six categories

Go back to the sandbox. The two toddlers fill and dump buckets a foot apart, with no word between them. Now picture three more children nearby. One wanders the edge of the playground, looking at nothing in particular. One stands by the slide and watches older children for a long time. Two older children argue happily about whose turn it is to be the store clerk in their pretend shop.

All of that is the week's one new piece of material: play as a window on development (watching play to see a child grow). Play shows all three domains at once. The body moves; the mind plans, pretends, and solves; and the child learns to be with other people. Parten (1932), "Social Participation among Pre-School Children", watched preschoolers at play and described six categories for how a child is taking part with other children at a given moment.

Here are Parten's categories of social participation, in order:

Unoccupied behavior — the child is not playing, such as standing and looking around or moving about without settling on any activity.
Solitary (independent) play — the child plays alone with their own materials, not involved with the children nearby.
Onlooker behavior — the child watches other children play, sometimes talking to them or asking questions, without joining.
Parallel play — the child plays beside another child with similar materials but without a shared goal.
Associative play — children play together, sharing materials and talking about what they are doing, without a shared goal or assigned roles.
Cooperative play — children play in a group organized around a shared goal, such as building one thing together or acting out a scene with roles.

The categories describe a moment, not a child. A child can be in three of them before snack time.

Worked example — naming R4's play. Back in Week 2, record R4 included a detail the course promised to name later. At 2½ years, in the block area, the child builds a tower beside another child, both talking to themselves, with no shared plan. Walk it in order. What the child did: built beside another child, with similar materials, without a shared plan. What it shows: behavior consistent with parallel play, the fourth of Parten's 6 categories. In words: building side by side with no shared plan is parallel play, a common way for a 2½-year-old to be near another child.

Notice the careful wording. The course says "behavior consistent with parallel play" and never "a parallel player". A category names a moment, not a child.

Misconception check — parallel play as antisocial. Students often read side-by-side play with no talking as a child who does not want friends. It is tempting because the children are not "playing together" in the everyday sense. The cure: parallel play is a common, social form of play rather than a sign of a problem; the children chose to be near each other with the same materials.

Misconception check — solitary play as a problem at every age. Students often worry about any child who plays alone. The cure: solitary play is one of Parten's categories, and children of many ages spend some of their play alone, focused on their own project. One moment of solitary play tells you about that moment.

Pause and think. Choose one option and answer it in two or three sentences:

(a) Think of a time you were an "onlooker" at something new, such as a pickup game or a new job. What did watching first let you learn before you joined?
(b) The grandparent on the playground bench said, "They won't play together." Using Parten's categories, write a kind, two-sentence reply.

9. Read the play time sample: counting moments

How would you show that a child moves among Parten's categories, rather than sitting on one step? You would watch at set moments and write down what you see. That is time sampling, from Week 3: recording what happens at set intervals.

Worked example — reading Dataset C (illustrative). An observer coded one 4-year-old's play at a preschool. The sample ran 20 intervals of 30 seconds, and each interval was coded with Parten's category for what the child was doing at the end of the interval. First, the sample's length: 20 intervals × 30 seconds = 600 seconds, and 600 ÷ 60 = 10 minutes.

Dataset C (illustrative): one 4-year-old's play in 20 intervals of 30 seconds at a preschool, by Parten's category
Category	Intervals	Percent of 20
Unoccupied	1	5 percent
Solitary (independent)	3	15 percent
Onlooker	2	10 percent
Parallel	6	30 percent
Associative	5	25 percent
Cooperative	3	15 percent
Total	20	100 percent

Work it like a teacher at a whiteboard, and check each step yourself as you go.

Check the counts. 1 + 3 + 2 + 6 + 5 + 3 = 20 intervals, so every interval is coded once.
Find each percent of 20. Divide each count by 20. Unoccupied: 1 ÷ 20 = 0.05, 5 percent. Solitary: 3 ÷ 20 = 0.15, 15 percent. Onlooker: 2 ÷ 20 = 0.10, 10 percent. Parallel: 6 ÷ 20 = 0.30, 30 percent. Associative: 5 ÷ 20 = 0.25, 25 percent. Cooperative: 3 ÷ 20 = 0.15, 15 percent. Check the column: 5 + 15 + 10 + 30 + 25 + 15 = 100 percent.
Group the play with other children. Parallel 6 + associative 5 + cooperative 3 = 14 of 20 intervals, and 14 ÷ 20 = 0.70, which is 70 percent.
Group the rest. Unoccupied 1 + solitary 3 + onlooker 2 = 6 of 20 intervals, 30 percent, and 14 + 6 = 20.
Compare two categories. Parallel play's 30 percent exceeds cooperative play's 15 percent by 30 − 15 = 15 percentage points. Parallel play, at 6 intervals, is the single most frequent category.

That last step uses Week 3's rule about units. A share of a total is a percent (6 of 20 intervals is 30 percent). A difference between two percents is in percentage points (30 percent against 15 percent is a gap of 15 percentage points).

Now read the record through two theories. Parten's categories are your first lens. Each code describes what the child was doing at the end of one interval. So the table shows you a child moving among all 6 categories in 10 minutes, not a child at one step of a ladder. Social learning theory is your second lens: the 2 onlooker intervals are watching others play, which Bandura's learning by observation suggests can be a way of learning how to join.

Here is the reading, which you can say in one plain sentence: the illustrative 4-year-old spent 14 of 20 intervals, 70 percent, playing with or beside other children, mostly in parallel play, so participation shifted moment to moment.

Here is an honesty note about the method. A time sample codes only the moment at the end of each interval, so it can miss a short burst of cooperative play that started and ended in between. It also tells you nothing about why the child moved. A second caveat: one 10-minute sample is one morning, so it describes that morning, never the whole child.

Misconception check — the categories as a ladder. Students often read Parten's six categories as stages a child climbs and leaves behind for good. It is tempting because the list has an order. The cure: the order is the course's way of writing the list, and Dataset C shows one 4-year-old using all six within 10 minutes; a category names a moment, not a step.

Key terms

Distinction — A line between two ideas that are easy to mix up, such as correlational versus experimental research, which a topic asks you to keep straight. (first used: 1. Keep the domains together: Week 1's two distinctions)
Play as a window on development — The idea that watching children play shows their development in all three domains at once: the body moving, the mind planning and pretending, and the child learning to be with other people. (first used: 8. Watch play: Parten's six categories)
Parten's categories of social participation — Six categories Mildred Parten described in 1932 for how a young child is taking part with other children at a given moment: unoccupied, solitary (independent), onlooker, parallel, associative, and cooperative. (first used: 8. Watch play: Parten's six categories)
Unoccupied behavior — Parten's category for a moment when a child is not playing, such as standing and looking around or moving about without settling on any activity. (first used: 8. Watch play: Parten's six categories)
Solitary (independent) play — Parten's category for a child playing alone with their own materials, not involved with the children nearby. (first used: 8. Watch play: Parten's six categories)
Onlooker behavior — Parten's category for a child watching other children play, sometimes talking to them or asking questions, without joining the play. (first used: 8. Watch play: Parten's six categories)
Parallel play — Parten's category for a child playing beside another child with similar materials but without a shared goal; it is a common, social form of play. (first used: 8. Watch play: Parten's six categories)
Associative play — Parten's category for children playing together, sharing materials and talking about what they are doing, without a shared goal or assigned roles. (first used: 8. Watch play: Parten's six categories)
Cooperative play — Parten's category for children playing in a group organized around a shared goal, such as building one thing together or acting out a scene with roles. (first used: 8. Watch play: Parten's six categories)
Percentage point — The unit for the difference between two percentages, as when 30 percent against 15 percent is a gap of 15 percentage points. (first used: 9. Read the play time sample: counting moments)

Summary

The three domains work together, and nature and nurture interact.
Each theory explains some things and leaves others out.
Correlation shows that two things go together; an experiment can test a cause.
Description goes in one column; interpretation goes in the other.
The major organs form in the embryonic period; the fetal period is growth.
An Apgar total is the sum of five sign scores, and 7, 8, or 9 is normal.
A motor window is a range, not a deadline.
Receptive language usually runs ahead of expressive language.
Temperament is how a child reacts; attachment is whom the child reaches for.
Parten's six categories name moments of play, not stages or children.
A share of a total is a percent; a gap between percents is in percentage points.

Check your understanding

Work these before looking at the answers — they are ungraded, and the answers (with reasoning) are at the bottom of the page.

At an illustrative backyard birthday party, an observer codes a 3-year-old's play in 10 intervals: solitary 3, onlooker 1, parallel 2, associative 3, and cooperative 1. What percent of the intervals were play with other children, and by how many percentage points does associative play exceed parallel play?
An illustrative newborn at a community hospital has these 1-minute sign scores: heart rate 2, breathing effort 1, muscle tone 2, reflex response 1, and skin color 1. Total the score and say how MedlinePlus's range reads it.
A youth-league newsletter reports that children who eat breakfast at home before weekend games score more goals. A parent writes, "Breakfast makes kids better players." Name the kind of research and say what the parent's sentence gets wrong.
A classmate writes, "At 4, the child should be past parallel play and into cooperative play." Explain what is wrong with the sentence and how to fix it.

Answers (worked reasoning — read after attempting)

First check the counts: 3 + 1 + 2 + 3 + 1 = 10 intervals. Play with other children is parallel 2 + associative 3 + cooperative 1 = 6 of 10, and 6 ÷ 10 = 0.60, which is 60 percent. Associative play is 3 ÷ 10 = 30 percent and parallel play is 2 ÷ 10 = 20 percent, so the gap is 30 − 20 = 10 percentage points. These are fresh, illustrative numbers, not the course's play record.
Add the five signs: 2 + 1 + 2 + 1 + 1 = 7. MedlinePlus states that a score of 7, 8, or 9 is normal, so 7 sits at the low end of the normal range. The score describes the newborn's condition in the first minute and predicts nothing about later development.
The newsletter describes correlational research: it found that two things go together, breakfast and goals. Nothing was randomly assigned, so it cannot show a cause. A third thing, such as more sleep or more family time on game days, could explain both, so the parent's causal sentence goes further than the evidence.
The sentence treats Parten's categories as a ladder with a deadline. Parten's categories describe what a child is doing at a moment, and children of every age move among them. A fixed sentence: "At 4, the child was seen in parallel play at some moments and cooperative play at others."

Next up in this module: the lecture, the slide deck, the Readings & Resources page, the practice set, the discussion, and the midterm; next week, Piaget's preoperational stage meets the play record again in early childhood.

Built with The Course Maker · samples.thecoursemaker.com