Nature and nurture all have an effect on people, and that tends to determine how children grow up based on their behavioral traits. People have been known to grow up with different traits, and this makes people question as to whether it is nature or nurture to blame for these differences. Nature is mainly associated with heredity, and that means that children tend to turn out to be like their parents or guardians. Nurture, on the other hand, is mainly associated with environmental factors. It assumes that the environment in which people grow up tends to determine the kinds of people they will be in the future. .[Click Essay Writer to order your essay]
The case of nature assumes that children will imitate the characteristics of their parents or guardians. For instance, a child could easily gain interest in sports if one of the parents constantly involves them in the same. This means that they look up to other people for guidance and adapt whatever they observe to determine how they turn up in the future. In the case of nurture, the children have to respond to the environmental conditions. This includes stress levels, nutrition, and peer relationships (McDevitt & Ormrod, 2010). When children live in an environment characterized by abusive relationships between the parents, they are likely to seek outside care.
From a personal perspective, I would consider nurture more effective in child development. This is the case because I believe all persons have their individual personalities that cannot be affected by nature. This should explain why even families living within the same environment could still have people with different characters. Parents and teachers should understand that nature and nurture are both important in determining child development. I consider nurture more effective in child development but then nature also has its role in playing the same. Therefore, this should be of help to parents and teachers in understanding the different characters of children. [Need an essay writing service? Find help here.]
I do agree that it is tricky to explain why one of these factors could have a greater effect on children but then by using examples, this should become easier. When people classify countries based on the characters of the citizens, then that shows that nurture is more effective. For instance, when people speak of the United States, they consider people who are objective oriented and can do anything to achieve their goals. On the other hand, when people speak of the Chinese, one assumes that everyone works in a factory or is good at producing electronics. This shows how the environment in which people grow can easily affect their roles in society and how the entire world views them. However, in such countries, one can easily find some individuals that do not fall within these descriptions, and that show why nature also becomes a factor that determines child development.
The schools attended by children could also provide an example to show that both nature and nurture has an effect on child development. The children that attend rich schools tend to behave differently from the ones in community schools. This is because they are subjected to different environments and the teachers also act differently as role models. The children in rich schools are likely to have greater visions since they can easily look at their teachers and consider them as role models. On the other hand, the children in community schools could adapt to the environment and have lower targets since they are adapting to the resources availed in their environment. While such a model could provide a large number of children, people will also find some that fail to measure up to these expectations. For instance, community schools have produced some children that have become important people in society. [“Write my essay for me?” Get help here.]
McDevitt, T. M., & Ormrod, J. E. (2010, July 20). Nature and Nurture. Retrieved September 17, 2016, from Education: