Infant Brain Development and Child-Care Settings
This activity reviews research studies regarding infant brain development and applies the research findings to the development of an infant child-care setting.
- Using research articles and your textbook, identify how the brain develops during the first year of life. Explain how experiences influence brain development.
- Develop a child-care program for infants that would facilitate infant brain/perceptual development. The child-care program should be based on suggestions from current research findings that would enhance infants’ development. For example, you will want to consider what toys would be appropriate for infants of different ages, and decide how you would decorate the setting. More stimulation is not always better.
Paper Assignment Rubric
Critical thinking is a habit of mind characterized by the comprehensive exploration of issues, ideas, artifacts, and events before accepting or formulating an opinion or conclusion.
| Excellent | Good | Okay | Needs Improvement | |
| Explanation of issues (5 pts) | Issue/problem to be considered critically is stated clearly and described comprehensively, delivering all relevant information necessary for full understanding. (5 pts) | Issue/problem to be considered critically is stated, described, and clarified so that understanding is not seriously impeded by omissions. (4 pts) | Issue/problem to be considered critically is stated but description leaves some terms undefined, ambiguities unexplored, boundaries undetermined, and/or backgrounds unknown. (3 pts) | Issue/problem to be considered critically is stated without clarification or description. (2 pts) |
| Evidence (10 pts) Selecting and using information to investigate a point of view or conclusion | Demonstrates skillful use of high-quality, peer-reviewed, relevant sources to develop ideas with enough interpretation/evaluation to develop a comprehensive analysis of the issue. Viewpoints of experts are questioned thoroughly. (10 pts) | Demonstrates consistent use of peer-reviewed, relevant sources to support ideas with enough interpretation/evaluation to develop a coherent analysis. Viewpoints of experts are subject to questioning. (8 pts) | Demonstrates an attempt to use credible and/or relevant sources to support ideas with some interpretation/evaluation, but not enough to develop a coherent analysis. Viewpoints of experts are taken as mostly fact, with little questioning. (6 pts) | Demonstrates an attempt to use sources to support ideas in the writing. Information is taken from source(s) without any interpretation/evaluation. Viewpoints of experts are taken as fact, without question. (4 pts) |
| Sources (5 pts) | Number of required peer-reviewed sources is met (5 pts) | Missing one required peer-reviewed source. (4 pts) | Missing two required peer-reviewed sources. (3 pts) | Missing more than three peer-reviewed sources. (2 pts) |
| Influence of context and assumptions (10 pts) | Thoroughly (systematically and methodically) analyzes own and others’ assumptions and carefully evaluates the relevance of contexts when presenting a position. (10 pts) | Identifies own and others’ assumptions and several relevant contexts when presenting a position. (8 pts) | Questions some assumptions. Identifies several relevant contexts when presenting a position. May be more aware of others’ assumptions than one’s own (or vice versa). (6 pts) | Shows an emerging awareness of present assumptions (sometimes labels assertions as assumptions). Begins to identify some contexts when presenting a position. (4 pts) |
| Student’s position—perspective, thesis/hypothesis (10 pts) | Specific position (perspective, thesis/hypothesis) is imaginative, taking into account the complexities of an issue. Limits of position (perspective, thesis/hypothesis) are acknowledged. Others’ points of view are synthesized within position (perspective, thesis/hypothesis). (10 pts) | Specific position (perspective, thesis/hypothesis) takes into account the complexities of an issue. Others’ points of view are acknowledged within position (perspective, thesis/hypothesis). (8 pts) | Specific position (perspective, thesis/hypothesis) acknowledges different sides of an issue. (6 pts) | Specific position (perspective, thesis/hypothesis) is stated, but is simplistic and obvious. (4 pts) |
| Conclusions and related outcomes—implications and consequences (10 pts) | Conclusions and related outcomes (consequences and implications) are logical and reflect student’s informed evaluation and ability to place evidence and perspectives discussed in priority order. (10 pts) | Conclusion is logically tied to a range of information, including opposing viewpoints; related outcomes (consequences and implications) are identified clearly. (8 pts) | Conclusion is logically tied to information (because information is chosen to fit the desired conclusion); some related outcomes (consequences and implications) are identified clearly. (6 pts) | Conclusion is inconsistently tied to some of the information discussed; related outcomes (consequences and implications) are oversimplified. (4 pts) |
