Senior Manager
Joined: 14 Jul 2019
Status:Student
Posts: 476
Given Kudos: 52
Location: United States
Concentration: Accounting, Finance
GPA: 3.9
WE:Education (Accounting)
role of interpretive games and simulation models on children's cogniti
[#permalink]
30 May 2020, 19:58
Greetings my respected experts and fellow warriors,
I am attaching an awa where I tried to make an argument regarding role of interpretive games and simulation models on children's cognitive development. The argument was based on a scientific article published on a prestigious journal. I would very much appreciate your guidelines on this attempt. Please feel free to help me find any kind of errors.
In this argument the author concludes that to improve the cognitive power in children, it is important to introduce a child with interactive games and simulation models that will challenge the child’s analytical and introduce them to create new ideas to solve a problem. The reasoning on which this argument is based centers on a scientific research article published on one of the most prestigious journals of childhood development. In that article, scientists claim that enabling a child to interpret a situation from various perspective and to apply that findings in similar or different situation is the most effective way to stimulate the cognitive power of the children. While the argument has some merits on its face, some unwarranted assumption and weak comparison call for careful examination.
To begin with, the author readily assumes that any article that managed to get published in the most prestigious journal would provide the most efficient way to carry out a function in a field. But such a presumptuous supposition needs to be covered with relevant and substantial evidence, which is not given in this argument. Without concrete proof, one cannot determine the extent to which applying the findings of an article in practical field would result in the expected manner. And, especially as it is a case related to an immensely important issue like childhood development, experimenting based on findings of only one article may possess serious risks.
In the next place, in this argument we are told that the journal is one of the most prestigious journals of childhood development. But no information is given regarding those measures that make a journal the most prestigious in its field. That journal may be the popular one to readers as it contains a number of entertaining quizzes, news of art and music competitions and has a rich literature section. There is also probability that due to its huge readership, companies frequently advertise their products on that journal than on other competing journals in the market. Nonetheless, none of these factors behind the journal’s prestige makes it a compelling reason to apply the findings of an article published on it. To better evaluate the acceptability of the article’s findings, one need to know the attitude and stance of child psychologists and scientists have regarding that journal.
Moreover, the article itself did not give any empirical result of the hypothesis that if children exercise to analyze a situation from numerous perspectives and apply those knowledges in practical situations, then their cognitive power will improve. Whenever we think about an effective experiment that reformed and developed the prevailing way to do something, we can see scientists didn’t come up just with a theoretical solution, but with a proven one applied in various situations and to representative populations. In this article, no such experiments were mentioned, based on which one can determine the real strength and weakness of the prospective option.
In conclusion, the argument suggesting improving children’s cognitive prowess by interactive games and simulative models suffers from the above-mentioned flaws. A proper correlation between the active participants of the model and evidence buttressing the scientists’ claims would strengthen the argument and make it more considerable.