IB Psychology HL 3.2 Human Development Topic Practice

Refer to the paper 2 assessment criteria when awarding marks.
The command term "discuss" requires candidates to offer a considered review of one or more factors influencing brain development.

Relevant factors may include, but are not limited to:
- neuroplasticity
- genetic factors e.g. genetic similarities, epigenetics
- environmental factors e.g. stress, neglect, trauma recovery
- cognitive factors eg problem-solving, cognitive stimulation, language acquisition, executive function development
- maturational theory of brain development.

Responses to this question may also use Piaget's and Vygotsky's theories. For these responses, marks should be awarded depending on how effectively responses link these to brain development.

Relevant studies may include, but are not limited to:
- Waber's (2007);
Gogtay et al.'s (2004) longitudinal studies of brain development using MRI scans
- Chugani et al.'s (2001) study on developmental changes in brain serotonin synthesis capacity
- Johnson and Newport's (1989) study on maturational predispositions for learning a language
- Baird et al.'s (2002);
Diamond's (1991) studies on the effect of maturation on the frontal lobe and the development of object permanence
- Bell and Fox's (1996) study on crawling experience related to changes in the cortical organization during infancy using EEG
- Danelli et al.'s (2012) case study on functional neuroplasticity
- Gieldd et al.'s (2004) longitudinal study on brain development across developmental stages
- Rosenzweig et al.'s (1972) study on environmental effects on brain development
- Bremner's (2003) study on how early sexual abuse correlated with the atrophy of the hippocampus.

Discussion points may include, but are not limited to:
- methodological and ethical considerations
- practical applications and implications of the findings
- the accuracy and clarity of theoretical concepts
- accuracy of assumptions and the role of biases
- interpretation/application of research/concepts
- supporting and/or contradictory evidence.
- comparison of different factors' effects

Responses referring to research on animals, such as Rosenzweig et al.'s (1972) study should be linked to human brain development. Responses that do not explicitly make any link to human brain development should be awarded up to a maximum of [3] for criterion C: use of research to support the answer. All remaining criteria should be awarded marks according to the best fit approach.

Candidates may discuss one factor influencing brain development in order to demonstrate depth of knowledge, or may discuss a larger number of factors in order to demonstrate breadth of knowledge. Both approaches are equally acceptable.

Refer to the paper 2 assessment criteria when awarding marks.
The command term "to what extent" requires candidates to consider the contribution of poverty/socio

economic status on cognitive and/or social development.

Candidates may address only cognitive development or only social development or may address both. These approaches are all equally acceptable.

In order to respond to the command term "to what extent", it is appropriate and useful for candidates to address other factors (e.g. protective factors) that may influence cognitive and/or social development.

Relevant research may include, but is not limited to:
- Bhoomika et al.'s (2008) research on the effect of malnutrition on cognitive performance in Indian children
- Wertheimer's (2003) research on the correlation between academic achievement and living in poor families
- Schoon's (2002) longitudinal study investigating the long-term effect of poverty on academic achievement and attainment in adult life
- Bernstein's (1971) research on the influence of socio-economic status on the use of language in children
- Russell et al.'s (2008) research on the view of poverty as a barrier on adequate parenting
- Turnbull's (1972) research on the link between poverty and pro-social behaviour.

Discussion points may include, but are not limited to:
- methodological considerations
- how the findings of research have been interpreted and applied
- implications of the findings
- the accuracy and clarity of the concepts
- assumptions and biases
- cultural considerations
- areas of uncertainty
- supporting and/or contradictory evidence
- alternative explanations or factors
- practical applications.

Candidates may address one or a small number of potential influences of poverty/socio-economic status to demonstrate depth of knowledge or may address a larger number of potential influences of poverty/socio-economic status to demonstrate breath of knowledge. Both approaches are equally acceptable.

If only the impact of trauma on development is addressed with no reference to poverty or socio

economic status, then the response should be awarded up to a maximum of [2] for criterion B: knowledge and understanding. All remaining criteria should be awarded marks according to the best fit approach.

Refer to the paper 2 assessment criteria when awarding marks.
The command term "evaluate" requires candidates to make an appraisal by weighing up the strengths and limitations of one or more theories/models of cognitive development. Although a discussion of both strengths and limitations is required, it does not have to be evenly balanced to gain high marks.

Candidates may discuss one theory/model of cognitive development in order to demonstrate depth of knowledge, or may discuss a larger number of theories/models in order to demonstrate breadth of knowledge. Both approaches are equally acceptable.

Theories/models may include, but are not limited to:
- Piaget's theory of cognitive development
- Bruner's theory of cognitive development
- Vygotsky's theory of cognitive development
- Kohlberg's theory of moral development
- theories of brain development.

Research studies may include, but are not limited to:
- Piaget and Inhelder's (1956) Swiss mountain study
- Bower and Wishart's (1977) study on object permanence
- Samuel and Bryant's (1984) study on conservation
- Saxe et al.'s (1987) study on the zone of proximal development
- Winsler et al.'s (2003) study on speech patterns and problem-solving tasks
- Kohlberg's (1984) study on dilemmas
- Zuliana et al.'s (2019) study on teaching mathematics
- Giedd's (2004) longitudinal study using MRIs to investigate structural changes in the human brain during adolescence.

Evaluation may include, but is not limited to:
- stages versus continuous process
- the accuracy and clarity of the concepts
- practical applications of the theory
- how the findings of research have been interpreted
- assumptions and biases
- areas of uncertainty
- supporting and/or contradictory evidence
- contradictory explanations
- gender and/or cultural considerations
- methodological and ethical considerations
- comparisons/contrasts of different models.

If the candidate addresses only strengths or only limitations, the response should be awarded up to a maximum of [3] for criterion D: critical thinking. All remaining criteria should be awarded marks according to the best fit approach.