7/30/2019 Peer Review HDF378L.2

1/3

Peer Review of Paper #2- Attachment Theorist vs. Behaviorists: Views on Daycare

This paper reviews an essay on behaviorist and attachment theorists perspectives

regarding daycare. The paper under review discusses their different approaches and views with

respect to the structure of childcare programs, hours of daycare attendance, advice regarding

responsiveness to a childs crying, child/caregiver separation, and the importance of peer

interactions.

The papers introduction provides a good preview of what is to come later on in the paper

and it thoroughly addresses the main points in the assigned prompt. The introduction also gives

the reader a good understanding of what the paper is about. The introduction does not, however,

address why its important to study the differences between the two theorists views on daycare.

Lastly, the introduction incorporates the use of the word would often and awkwardly.

The next two paragraphs following the introduction provide overviews of attachment

theory and behaviorism respectively. The descriptions are lengthy and some of the information

provided is superfluous to the purpose of the paper. For example, the different attachment styles

discussed in the paragraph describing attachment theory were not incorporated significantly

anywhere else in the paper. The writer also mentioned, attachment was a construct that was not

observable but rather inferred, which again did not add to the purpose of the paper. In the

paragraph regarding behaviorism, a good example of superfluous information was when the

writer included these sentences: The child seen isreactive. Being reactive entails that you

respond to the environment and you focus on controlling the environment. The overviews of the

theorists take up almost half of the papers length and most of the information was not

incorporated meaningfully in the following paragraphs.

7/30/2019 Peer Review HDF378L.2

2/3

The paragraph regarding the number of hours of childcare attendance adequately

addressed attachment theorists beliefs about hours spent in daycare. The writer sufficiently

illustrated their negative views surrounding childcare. The writer, however, left out a critical

piece of information in his or her description of behaviorists views of hours spent in daycare.

The writer did not include the reinforcement of desired behaviors in his or her description of

reinforcement contingencies.The paragraph about the theorists views regarding

child/caregiver separation provided unnecessary information regarding the use of different

conditioning techniques. The discussion of operant and classical conditioning does not

appropriately address the explanation that the prompt sought out with respect to child/caregiver

separation. The writer focused on the application of separation and the use of separation as a tool

rather than their view of the impact of child/caregiver separation. The writer also included a false

piece of information in this paragraph, which can damage writer credibility. The writer said,

The children with a secure attachment will have the most trouble separating from their primary

care giver. The sentence is vague and is misleading. The paragraph overall did not provide a

sufficient explanation of each theorists views regarding separation.

The next paragraph regarding how each theorist views parent responsiveness with respect

to a childs crying is very brief. It could have gone into more detail especially for how

behaviorists would advise parents when a child cries. The writer did not incorporate the concept

of reinforcement in his or her description of a behaviorists advice. Lastly, a large portion of the

conclusion was the writers opinion. The writer incorporated the word I, and the information

provided in the conclusion was based on his or her experience and not on objective facts or

information.

7/30/2019 Peer Review HDF378L.2

3/3

Overall, the paper had good transitions between paragraphs and addressed most of the

topics in the prompt. However, the writer completely left out how behaviorists and attachment

theorists would differ in the structure of a childcare program. The paper also did an adequate job

of covering both sides of each argument but didnt go into the necessary amount of depth for any

of the topics. The paper also contained too much false information to be a credible source of

knowledge. Lastly, it was not evident in the paper that a controversy even existed.

Suggestions for improvement include: providing factual or credible evidence-based

information from class lecture or the text, more elaboration on each of the papers main topics,

reducing the amount of superfluous background information and increasing the amount of

introductory information that could add to the purpose of the paperor the writers main points,

and revising the paper for awkward sentencing and diction. Lastly, the paper should not include

information based on opinion and subjective experience.