This is the story of two children and a comparison of their unique and distinct developmental niche.
The developmental niche examines a child’s life by examining their physical and social setting, customs of childcare and child-rearing, and the psychology of the caretakers.
Our first child has a home with an enriching environment. It is clean, organized, with the child’s basic needs being met for sleep, proper nutrition, books, and age-appropriate toys available for the child to engage with.
Healthy routines and rituals guide the child’s day and week.The customs of childcare include the teaching of delayed gratification, and the caregivers have a high emotional-intelligence quotient (IQ), so the child can self-regulate their emotions because the caretakers meet the child’s needs and demands on a timely basis.
A child’s brain is hardwired to the emotions of sadness, joy, disgust, anger, surprise, and fear. But a child must be taught humility, forgiveness, empathy, optimism, compassion, sympathy, patience, shame/pride, cooperation, and gratitude.
The home is ideally a stable and secure place where the child is free from anxiety. In the home of our first child, the caretakers are consistent, supportive but demanding in their approach with the child. They also foster the child’s intrinsic passions and interests. This may be demonstrated by the toys and materials in the home for the child to explore and enjoy.
Now let us examine the developmental niche of the second child. This home lacks enrichment. There are no books, toys, or any stimulating activities for the child to engage in.
The home does not provide basic routines, rituals, or set meal times. The child has no bedtime or morning routines to guide their circadian rhythm. We know from recent research how imperative sleep is to one’s overall health.
Moreover, the child’s emotional needs are never met. The home environment is unpredictable and unstable, with high anxiety. The child does not know how the caretaker will respond to any situation.
For example, the caretaker is unavailable or undisciplined when addressing disciplinary needs. The child is not given the appropriate modeling or example of self-control from the caretakers.
In this home, there are no healthy demands placed on the child. The child has no responsibilities in the home and nothing that prepares them for their future as independent individuals living autonomously. Accordingly, the child never develops the ability to take action or choose what action to take.
When you compare the two homes, it is evident which child will be more successful academically in a school setting.
The first child is ready to learn when arriving in a classroom, whereas the second child is unprepared to learn. By comparison, this second child has no self-regulation to attend to a teacher’s instructions or follow the rules in a given classroom.
Without a bedtime routine or schedule, the second child arrives at school exhausted and unable to pay attention or retain information. In the nutrition domain, the child does not have the opportunity to eat healthy and nutritional foods.
How can we, as educators, help to mitigate these discrepancies? As school communities, we can only do so much. In particular, we can provide wrap-around services to meet unmet needs, but we cannot change the child’s home environment or the caretaker’s psychology.
Indeed, one discussion of necessity is how to assist caretakers in aiding and increasing their child’s success.
For instance, one example is by discussing the habits or routines which increase a child’s academic success with the primary caretakers. We cannot change the world until we fix ourselves.
How can we help the caretakers in their role and aid them in adopting these healthy lifestyles to ensure their child’s academic future? Is this a conversation that should occur in our public educational communities?
Lynn resident Dr. Maria Perez is an adjunct professor at Gordon College teaching fundamental and foundational human growth and development.
