Barbara T. Bowman

Child Development Knowledge: A Slippery Base for Practice.

Abstract The changing nature of child development theory and research, the fact that it can only approximate reality, and its reflection of particular sociocultural positions make it a slippery base for practice. Still, formal child development knowledge is necessary to teacher preparation—as is practice. They must, however, be grounded in their ambiguity and supplemented by attention to reflection on practice and self-knowledge. Finally, the process of teacher education itself is a critical element that must model a community of supportive relationships that create meaningful and transformational learning experiences.

Who Is at Risk for What and Why.

Over the past 25 years, those of us who work with children have become increasingly aware of their developmental potential. We are particularly eager to make early diagnoses of disabling conditions, or of hazardous environments, or of special talents and abilities, so that childrens futures will not be limited because of too few educational supports. A rich body of evidence now shows that early educational programs can prevent or ameliorate many of the disabilities that limit some children or act as a springboard for other childrens talent and ability. Unfortunately, however, our programs have not always been successful. Despite our best intentions, some of our best efforts have, themselves, led to new risks for children. It is of those dangers 1 wish to speak today. The issues I address are ticklish ones: they challenge the effectiveness of our clinical practice and the relevance of our professional ethics. I raise these issues not to detract from our work, but rather because I believe that by knowing the dangers we can plan more supportive programs. The first danger is to confuse culture and development. Let me begin by reminding you of the synergetic relationship between culture and development Development refers to the underlying structures that define human accomplishment and accounts for the acquisi-

Data and development: revisit the framework.

The featured study by Fantuzzo, LeBoeuf, Rouse, and Chen (2012) contributes to our understanding of the achievement gap and what we can do about it. The conclusion is not new; the more risk children are exposed to, the more trouble they will have in school and in life. What is useful is applying data from a number of sources to an ecological model of development that includes family, community, and school. This paper demonstrates how access to data sources such as the Kids Integrated Data System can provide insight into school achievement trends in a community. It shows that a range of systems impinge on the lives of poor African American children – health, housing, education, and welfare – all of which contribute to their poorer school achievement. The model exemplifies how schools, by combining data sources with other institutions, can illuminate aspects of educational achievement not generally considered. By beginning with developmental theory, it forces consideration of the relationship of internal and external factors that affect childrens development and learning. As the authors note, it also provides a reality check on what some may believe are critical risks as opposed to the actual risks to which particular children are exposed. Threats can be confirmed or discarded by collecting relevant data from a variety of sources and