critique of a journal article
Howes, Hamilton, & Matheson (1994) hypothesised that good child-teacher interactions would be positively correlated with good child-peer interactions. They drew from John Bulby’s attachment theory and from recent studies of teacher-child relationships. While Bulby primarily focuses upon how the parent-child relationship affects the forming of later relationships, recent studies observe the influence of the teacher-child relationship. The article’s introduction discusses the inspiration for the researchers’ studies; however, theoretical explanations for their work are vague. The researchers make loose associations between Bulby’s work and recent studies in attachment. Attachment theory seems irrelevant to what the researchers expect to find in the study.Research Methods and Design and their Limitations Graduate students, who did not know the study’s hypothesis, met with 48 children over three years. Each graduate student observed a child every six months but never saw the same child twice. Research Methods and their Limitations This study used a naturalistic observation method, where the graduate students would simply watch their subjects’ behaviour. Naturalistic observation is limited in that the researcher has little control
. . .
Some common words found in the essay are:
Design Limitations, Attachment Q-Set, John Bulbys, Methods Limitations, Limitations Graduate, Hamilton Matheson, Child Development, positively correlated, teacher-child relationship, negative mediation, child-peer relationships, scores impact, negatively correlated, naturalistic observation, complex play, recent studies, Matheson Catherine, longitudinal design, Research Methods, mediation positively correlated, characteristics teacher-child relationship, withdrawal negatively correlated, positively correlated child-peer,
Approximate Word count = 871
Approximate Pages = 3 (250 words per page double spaced)
|
 |
