“Multiple meanings sounding-together”
Chapter 7 of a serializing of Growing Sustainable Children; and, Schools Worthy of Our Affection.
In Waldorf theory-method, from Steiner’s lectures to teachers I believe, is the idea of exercising your capacity to hear multiple meanings sounding-together in a greater whole, a greater music, partial truths sounding together in a larger truth. RS’s idea has its most natural use in music; where, except for solos, we don’t listen to only one instrument of an orchestra; we listen to the symphony as a whole.
This is perhaps the only way we can make sense of orchestra music and choir singing. Even commercial pop songs, if we wish to hear them, invite us to hear vocals and music sounding together.
The classic example here is naturally, a tuba or trombone, sounding alone may not sound like much; yet, as part of a chorus of instruments, in an orchestra, a tuba or trombone can add magnificence. In acoustic guitar playing, this is as simple as hearing vocals and music sounding together.
“Sounding-together” has uses way beyond music. An example of how we commonly group different phenomena into a larger category, where all the pieces sound together is “weather” and “climate.” Over 12 months, in one area, it may rain, snow, be sunny, and this pattern altogether, for this area is termed “climate.”
port·man·teau
1. a large trunk or suitcase, typically made of stiff leather and opening into two or more parts for multiple functions-uses.
2. a word blending the sounds and/or combining the meanings of two others, for example motel (from ‘motor’ and ‘hotel’) or brunch (from ‘breakfast’ and ‘lunch’).
“podcast is a portmanteau, a made-up word coined from a combination of the words iPod and broadcast”
The word “weather” can be conceived of as a portmanteau” of multiple significant seasons treated as one thing.
The greatest artistic presentation of hearing multiple meanings sounding together? Right here:
:=:+:=:+:=:+:=:+:=:+:=:+:=:+:=:+:=:+:=:+:=:+:=:
We Are Blind Men Groping an Elephant
:=:+:=:+:=:+:=:+:=:+:=:+:=:+:=:+:=:+:=:+:=:+:=:
The voyage of discovery lies not in finding new landscapes but in having new eyes ~ Marcel Proust
In exploring Team Human K-12 ed, we are blind Men listening to explanations sounding together until the whole is more apparent in our individual conception (inner) and our group consensus (outer).
We are all blind when it comes to things invisible. Who is not a “blind man” when it comes to “love”?
Education is also invisible, intangible. For those humble enough to admit their blindness and still determined to handle the mystery with both hands, I offer…
THE BLIND ~ MEN AND THE ELEPHANT (A Hindu Fable)
It was six men of Indostan
To learning much inclined,
Who went to see the elephant
(Though all of them were blind),
That each by observation
Might satisfy his mind.
The First approached the Elephant,
And happening to fall
Against his broad and sturdy side,
At once began to bawl:
“God bless! But the Elephant
Is very like a wall!”
The Second feeling of the tusk,
Cried, “Ho! What have we here
So very round and smooth and sharp?
This wonder of an Elephant
Is very like a spear!”
The Third approached the animal,
And happening to take
The squirming trunk within his hands,
Thus boldly up and spake:
“I see,” quoth he, “the Elephant
Is very like a snake!”
The Fourth reached out an eager hand,
And felt about the knee.
“What most this wondrous beast is like
Is mighty plain,” quoth he;
“Tis clear enough the Elephant
Is very like a tree!”
The fifth, who chanced to touch the ear,
Said, “E’en the blindest man
Can tell what this resembles most;
Deny the fact who can,
This marvel of an Elephant
Is very like a fan!”
The Sixth no sooner had begun
About the beast to grope,
Than seizing on the swinging tail
That feel within his scope,
“I see, ”quoth he, “the Elephant
Is very like a rope!”
And so these men of Indostan
Disputed loud and long,
Each in his own opinion
Exceeding stiff and strong,
Though each was partly in the right
and all were in the wrong!
MORAL
So oft in theologic wars,
The disputants, I ween,
Rail on in utter ignorance
Of what each other mean,
And prate about an Elephant
Not one of them has seen!
John Godfrey Saxe (circa 1860)
Q: What’s the solution for the above?
A: Support each other to hear two or more explanations sounding together.
Later, we explore Goethean Psychology as our best hope to hear multiple explanations sounding together. Notice, ‘hearing the explanations sounding together’ alone and by itself would have freed the blind men from their Holy Man’s Disease. Eye-sightedness is less significant.
The above poem is the strongest artistic representation I know of “hearing the explanations sound together.”
I invite readers of this book to begin this exercise, if they have not already begun. Why?
Education is also invisible, intangible. For those humble enough to admit their blindness; yet, determined to handle the mystery with both hands, Steiner had this to say:
If we desire to appreciate an idea…with great precision, we can only really grasp it by approaching the subject from different sides, then observing the different aspects and facets together. In music, something we are all familiar with, a single tone does not reveal a melody. In a scientific investigation it is the same way: no single characterization of an intangible matter can represent the full…content. …ln former ages this was called “hearing the different explanations sound together” (RS, Balance in Teaching 44–45).
For Team Human K-12 education, the blind men and their elephant is a wonderful metaphor for pulling together, synthesizing, workable psychology, methods and curriculum. Some assembly required.
I wonder if everyone who teaches aren’t similar to a bunch of blind men and blind women, groping an invisible elephant called K-12 education,” trying to hear each other’s explanations sound together, so each can synthesize a more complete conception of the elephant in all its aspects.
Original target of the poem’s satire
Q: What target did the original poem have?
A: Taking to task competing religious and metaphysical orthodoxies for their narrow-mindedness and mutual intolerance.
Saxe pokes fun at how each religion has the “holy man’s disease,” believing their truth to be the one and only truth.
Today, we are blind men groping the intangible of a better, more holistic, public education. Why not listen to other blind men groping the same animal as we?
The cure for the “holy man’s disease” is the same for religion or any other intangible. We carefully report our experience; then, listen carefully to what others have perceived of the same elephant. I wonder how many people now have the patience to acknowledge their own blindness; and, have willingness to feel out a subject by touch, by direct personal experience. Are you up for patience and tolerance?
Teaching blind men to listen more and better
Notice, ‘hearing the explanations sounding together’ alone and by itself would have freed the blind men from their Holy Man’s Disease. Eye-sightedness per se is less significant. The “Blind Men and the Elephant” poem is the strongest artistic representation I know of the value of “hearing multiple explanations sounding together.”
Let’s support each other to hear, two or more explanations, sounding together. Goethean Psychology is a touchstone-reminder to hear explanations sound together.
‘Hearing the explanations sound together’ is a wonderful wisdom in Goethean Psychology, exercising capacity to hear two or more interpretations of the phenomena sounding-together into a greater whole than any one perceiving alone can’t give. It is for this reason the police interview multiple eyewitnesses to a crime if they can. When it works, police can synthesize an accurate visualization of what happened.
What we’re finding is Goethean Psychology insights very often come from hearing multiple meanings sounding-together revealing more facets of a phenomena.
Speaking roughly, listening to multiple meanings “sounding together” is opposed to one-sided, male-dominator, competition-mad thinking; where, only one thing can be true at a time; and, there MUST BE winners and losers; one wins, the rest lose. A simple intent to listen attentively to alternative views can do wonders to moderate overbearing distorted, one-sided, male thinking.
A great wisdom of Goethean Psychology, thru Waldorf theory-method, is exercising your capacity to hear multiple meanings sounding-together towards a greater whole.
Which is the part and which is the whole?
What did the blind men above get tangled up in? Each of them in the poem lost track of which was only a part and which was the whole.
Their second error? Assuming their piece was the whole of the elephant.
Another famous rhyme shows this trap from another angle:
Humpty Dumpty sat on a wall,
Humpty Dumpty had a great fall.
All the king’s horses and all the king’s men,
Couldn’t put Humpty together again!
Originally a satirical verse about English politics a couple centuries ago, the rhyme has out-lived its original political context. Why?
Evidently Humpty was unable to hear all his own-pieces sounding together again. Linear-sequential thinking does this to anyone habituating Thinking to only lines and sequences.
Humpty Dumpty expresses the anxiety, consternation and puzzlement all of us feel at age three, or six, or nine, or puberty when the bubble of childhood bursts; and, we begin to see the world as more complex, with many more pieces now necessary to manipulate. The naive child looking at the world as one whole — once lost, the old view can’t be re-constituted, put back together again, the same way. Tom Wolfe put it more abstractly, “You can’t go home again.”
Humpty Dumpty reminds us of two things, the loss of innocence; and, the danger of taking apart the whole prematurely, for curiosity’s sake: “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.”
“Whole to part” vs.”part to whole” thinking
Occasionally thru this text, quotes noted with page numbers only, are from the 1966 English edition of ‘A Study of Man’ lecture transcripts, revised as noted for clarity.
Following quotes should be indented:
If we want to come near to what is present in human nature, we must be clear how all separation is preceded by unity.
If we were to stop at cognizing only the unity of a subject, then we should learn nothing further about it. If we never differentiated, the whole world would remain vague … This suggests why those persons who want to grasp the world solely in terms of abstract unities see the real world dimly, gray on gray.
On the other hand, if we only differentiate, continually separating every piece from every other, we should never come to further knowledge either. We would only have a collection of parts. The essence of the whole could still elude us.
Which is more important when a specific decision needs to be made, the whole or the part?
The capacity we exercise here is usually called “discrimination.” However, in the realm of matter and quantity if discrimination is ONLY exercised, all that is not-matter seems to not matter and not exist. Then we have materialism (revised diction and paragraphing from SOM 1966 pg. 115).
Two approaches to large jigsaw puzzles
A 500 piece physical jigsaw puzzle on a table can be assembled two ways. You refer to the completed picture on the box first, last and always, arranging individual pieces on the table in their approximate position suggested by the completed image.
This is working whole-to-part. Start with the whole, the goal, connect each little part back to the whole image.
Or you can ignore the picture, put it away, never look at it, and work strictly from the pieces. You can look for similarities, make categories, grouping by color, texture and so on. Once you have all your pieces in categories, what two piles must be adjacent? Which third small pile must be adjacent to the combined first two? Trial and error is valuable here. You gradually build-up connections between possible adjacent pieces. Over time the larger whole image emerges slowly, categories coalesce. Finally each little piece is revealed to be an integral part of the whole image.
This is working part-to-whole. The pieces come first, the whole image comes last.
Pop Quiz: (1) Which kind of thinking is more used in crime scene investigations?
(2) Which kind of thinking is more used when writing a love letter?
(3) What other example applications of each of these two kinds of thinking can you and your teacher training class come up with?
Tension always exists between these two approaches, experiencing a whole system’s unity; and, attending to differentness within the system. We might also ask, could the jigsaw assembler above use BOTH strategies, alternating between them? Why or why not?
How might you apply the above to teaching Grade Three? For me, the whole is the stage-developmental readiness of the children this semester. The parts are matching academic content, songs, poems jokes, moods, assignments to those needs.
Q: Isn’t this what all K-12 schools do?
A: No. Historically from 1880–1990 conventional public K-12 admins used primarily part to whole thinking: The curriculum is in a book. The children must be matched to the curriculum so by the end of the year they complete it.
Procrustean Bed story
The part-to-whole approach to K-12 ed is closely related to the Procrustean Bed teaching story https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Procrustes
Q: How did K-12 ed get into the Procrustean Bed business?
A: This began in earnest when Natural Science took K-12 ed for its fourth wife, discussed in Vol. 2.
This in turn had its origins in efforts to teach intelligence (logical sequential thinking, mathematical intelligence) to children before its natural time in child development.
Q: This is all nice — how does it apply to K-12 kids?
A: The above ideas bear very directly on the task of developing existing and new potential intelligences in children.
Sound together: Quaker Meeting Clerk function
In adult group meetings of all kinds, listening for underlying, harmony — if any “sounding-together” often occurs. To alert listeners, if a growing consensus (harmony) exists, it can be “heard” within and under more superficial word levels, questions and confusion.
This is a main function of the Quaker Meeting Clerk, to listen to all contributions from individuals during the group silence; then if asked, to compose and articulate the “sense of the Meeting,” when and if called to do so.
Sound together: left brain~right brain
The size and influence of the fad of right and left brain hemispheres, 1975–1985, is difficult to estimate. Somehow, especially in California 1975–1985, a large fraction of print journalists, newspapers and magazines, such as in LA Weekly, made it their mission to propose right~left brain hemispheres to explain every contemporary topic from soup to nuts.
One of the reasons this fad faded and did not evolve was too few people — men mostly — interested in and willing to hear Thinking and Feeling sounding-together, working together flexibly, as equal partners in our waking psyche. Outside of feminists with counseling-therapy degrees, almost no one talked about hearing our two intelligences sounding together.
The over-intensity of this pop-psychology fad helped create the backlash of “fake science” and skeptics of authentic holistic healing. Dyed-in-the-wool materialists needed scapegoats to focus their anger at new paradigms threatening to overturn one-sided, control-mad, male-centric, Thinking-dominant culture.
In late 2021 — somewhat unbelievably — male-dominator corporate leaders remain Kings of the World. Descartes is still their king: I Think therefore I am. Why should they listen to or cede any part of their psychic hegemon to Feelers, Sensers, or iNtuiters? “What’s in it for men?” they ask.
The excessive promises and wishes of right~left brain holism, gave skeptics of holism an easy, convenient target to shoot at.
Simply knowing right~left brain hemisphere wisdom exists; how, each contains contrasting, different, complementary intelligences, is only a first step towards a workable whole-brain theory and method.
Q: Did Howard Gardner’s Multiple Intelligences, Frames of Mind (1983), help people hear multiple intelligences “sounding together?”
A: For some, yes. As Eugene Schwartz recounts in Millennial Child, Gardner was originally more interested in the idea K-12 teachers would discern which one or two intelligences an individual student was, or could, or might excel in; and then, encourage students to specialize in their “strong suit.”
Looking back from 2021, Gardner’s primitive model was useful, adequate yet not sufficient. What was missing was the lack of a general experimental method to verify and validate guesses people were making about brain hemisphere intelligences in specific phenomena and specific client case studies. Not until Iain McGilchrist in 2009s Master and Emissary did a more 3D image of right~brain contrasts emerge, mostly from stroke-damage patients reported in non-English journals.
Before Iain, around 1965, Paul Dennison evolved a general experimental method to verify and validate activity and non-activity of brain hemispheres. Alas, few skeptics were interested in his data accumulated thru the First Order Science methodology of muscle-testing and surrogate muscle testing. Too bad. Paul was a clinician treating school-age kids with reading disorders and “dyslexia” in the Pasadena, Ca area, innovating off of Applied Kinesiology, also originated in Pasadena.
Paul’s earliest books offer case studies using muscle testing to diagnose and moderate reading problems in kids. Tho Paul’s methods, research and conclusions were widely celbrated among Touch for Health practitioners and fans, it went no further. Goethean Holistic Science (2014) had yet to build a bridge to clarify the domain of one person Paul’s research was limited to and valid within.
Gut brain~head brain sounding together
Since the Gut and Psychology Syndrome (GAPS) book (first ed. 2004) big pharma and academics have begun exploring the gut-brain connection and the gut biome effect on brain biome. Unfortunately virtually 100% of attention and research has gone towards new drugs and products to patent.
When they are ready, in about 100 years from today, the years of research, 1965–2005, and innovations on top of this, will hopefully still be accessible to those looking for them.
Jung’s MBTI as hearing intelligences sound-together
Starting with Jung around 1905, he tried to hear the whole of an individual’s personality sounding-together, the combined voice of three categories of personal preferences.
This useful idea went thru much evolution and is now best-represented as David Keirsey’s and Marilyn Bates’ version of MBTI, starting with Please Understand Me (1978), but more accessible now in https://www.16personalities.com/
Keirsey’s post-modern view of MBTI was some of the most-visited pages on the internet between 1995–2005.
To Learn More about “sounding-together”
We have from RS:
The sounding-together of wish and reason, or thought and desire as they live in the human [psyche] ~ Event of the appearance of the Christ in the Etheric world, RS Jan 25, 1910. pg. 6 Compiled Lectures By Rudolf Steiner
By Rudolf Steiner Reprinted 1969 by Heath Research https://books.google.com/books?id=JjKvfO6aDZUC&pg=RA1-PA6&lpg=RA1-PA6&dq=%22rudolf+steiner%22+%22sounding+together%22&source=bl&ots=-voce4F0Ct&sig=8nqSuoPB9PJvJMHiDfU-6vtcwOU&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi2iujY0YrZAhUByoMKHfWrCeAQ6AEIQjAK#v=onepage&q=%22rudolf%20steiner%22%20%22sounding%20together%22&f=false
And…
A completely harmonious sounding together of the two rhythms — of the human world and the world rhythm … pg 193 May Human Beings Hear It!: The Mystery of the Christmas Conference
And…
Their many voices many tones, many activities, sounding together, from the Cosmic Word, in which our own soul being — itself Cosmic Word — begins to find itself… ~ No page number. Secrets of the Threshold (1913) By Rudolf Steiner (1987) by Anthroposophic-Rudolf Steiner presses.
SIDEBAR ~ K-12 schools based on modern neuroscience — where are they?
Q: I’m looking for neuroscience-based schooling for my child. Where is it?
A: No successful schools yet. The reporting below suggest why this is so.
Q: I’m looking for teacher training based on modern neuroscience. Where is it?
A: It exists right here: https://www.learner.org/courses/neuroscience/
As long as you are comfortable being turned into a teacher-researcher, this could be your cup of tea.
Defining terms
From living thru the period, my recall is modern neuroscience began with real-time, live brain imaging, no earlier than 1980. The 1990s, the Decade of the Brain, was also the beginning and the end of a very useful concept, the Triune Brain. Unfortunately, genetic explanations for brain activity superceded the more Goethean Triune Brain. Finally, gut-brain biome explorations and experiments came in the very early 2000s, starting from Canadian researchers working on bacteria to counter AIDS.
Mr. Google has 52 million pages for the search string: neuroscience “K-12.” Even if I could make one, a summary is probably not useful here. For comparison with Classic Waldorf, we wish to know what their theory-methods are.
The latest significant development I know of is AltSchool. This well-funded Silicon Valley startup, opened in 2015. By 2017 reports suggest it had peaked and is now in decline. Here’s the reporting:
INSIDE THE SCHOOL SILICON VALLEY THINKS WILL SAVE EDUCATION by ISSIE LAPOWSKY (May 2015) — https://www.wired.com/2015/05/altschool/
Update on this experiment two years later…
Tech billionaires spent $170 million on a new kind of school — now classrooms are shrinking and some parents say their kids are ‘guinea pigs’ Melia Robinson (Nov. 2017) — http://www.businessinsider.com/altschool-why-parents-leaving-2017-11
I believe the decline-demise? of AltSchool was 100% predictable by anyone with a good grasp of school reform learning 1975–1995 and some familiarity with Classic Waldorf.
Neuroscience ignores “sounding-together”
Neuroscience’s capacity to hear multiple explanations working and sounding together seems very poor.
We do have rhetoric for why this seems so. Jumping forward to what we will learn in the MBTI Chapter on preferences, Neuroscience and its paid practitioners are likely to be more Sensory and Thinking oriented than basic psychology researchers; who are, very likely more iNtuition-oriented (both NTs and NFs). Paid Neuroscience practitioners are also likely to be Thinking-oriented; where, each topic is in its own vertical “silo” deliberately separated from adjoining topics to “reduce contamination.” No sounding-together allowed.
Because significant-meaningful activity our psyche is primarily invisible, this will be more perceptible to those preferring iNtuition than to those preferring only five Sensory data.
In whole-brain rhetoric we are encouraged to consider how two or more explanations sound together. The “sounding-together” of a healthy waking adult psyche — not brain — begins with some matching of thoughts to feelings and vice versa, a “two-handed” approach to T and F.
We also have this possibility: if neuroscience since 1990 is only and exclusively about applied (profit-making) research for new drugs and devices; then, please, let’s not expect basic research breakthrus in psychology or education here, ok? Neuroscience 1990–2010 seems well-characterized as “in it for the money” not for basic research. This is why Iain McGilchrist has been so influential and useful.
Q: So most or maybe even all innovative basic research in psychology and K-12 education has been going on outside of the mainstream since the 1970s?
A: Pretty much. This is why it’s meaningful and significant for doing basic psychology research with Goethean methods to speak up and push back on immature and half-baked mainstream ideas — fake news — gaining public traction thru mere repetition instead of clinical validity.
Q: What are some erroneous ideas in mainstream Big Pharma-based psychology?
A: Conceptions explaining all psychic activity as derived exclusively from either:
- physical-based anatomy,
- physical-based genetic activity, and/or
- physical-based electro-chemical activity.
These phenomena do exist. Yet are they the dog or its tail? Basic Goethean research since the 1970s clearly observes these as “tail of the dog” not “the dog.”
If anatomy and electro-chemical reactions were the majority of our waking adult psyche, each and every adult would be consciously aware of this activity, at least somewhat — and we are not.
Further, if anatomy and electro-chemical reactions were the majority of our waking adult psyche, there would be no need for any immortal-eternal awareness returning from prior existences into new human bodies; nor, leaving Earth life, continuing on into future experiences. Western culture has paid dearly for separating science from spirituality so effectively.
Lastly, modern neuroscience is no more than 30 years old. Why should it be exempt from error? Who still has an open mind? Ooops, I forgot, the rule is: If it doesn’t make money for a corporation, it’s “irrelevant.”
Consequences of a more Feeling-ful culture
A more balanced, more pro-Feeling culture, will have economic consequences. It will not be “business as usual.” Give it another 100 years, short of blowing up Earth, I see no way to stop a more healthy, Feeling-ful culture eventually establishing itself in human culture.
Team Human K-12 ed which prepare students for a culture where both T and F functions are developed and work together, give their graduate a great advantage for the future.
Q: Can children learn Emotional Intelligence, interpersonal competence and still receive a STEM education and take advanced Placement classes in high school?
A: Why not? The big bottle neck is not the kids; it’s the adults, what the adults can learn and cooperate on, not what the kids can learn. Kids will primarily learn whatever they perceive adult role models are committed to and demonstrating in their behavior — not their words.
When mainstream psychology lost its soul
Psychology lost its soul when it acquiesced to Sherlock Holmes Science and capitulated, “‘Yes, consciousness can and must only arise from physical matter.” Just add electricity. This was Dr. Frankenstein’s experiment. How did that turn out?
“Psychology” which has the word “psyche” in it. Our psyche is altogether invisible. If those who study the psyche, psychologists, agree with corporate, commercial, materialistic interests; how, something invisible could only have arisen from something physical-material — then you have the confused state of our dying Western culture since 2001 or earlier.
Perhaps this is what Ernst Lehrs had in mind titling his Book Man and Matter: the immortal-eternal essence of each person in relationship to matter — temporarily. Our essence is IN but not OF physical matter. If you identify as “man,” as “humankind,” you are thereby identifying with the invisibles chiefly making us better than animals, plants and rocks. If you identify as “matter,” you win all the materialistic, corporate, Empire Strikes Back prison culture projected around us today.
Around 2012, coach Derek Rydall made short work of the theory: “soul/consciousness arises from matter.” Derek calls out those hard scientists enamored with both the Big Bang and agreeing soul/consciousness arises from physical matter.
Derek says, you can’t believe both. The Big Bang theory says the Big Bang emerged where no matter at all existed before it. Matter exploded (bloomed?) from an unknown pre-physical, invisible field.
Now, after the Big Bang, after matter arose from non-materiality, why should consciousness arise from matter alone?
Big Bang itself suggests invisible fields pre-date and are causative factors of physical matter.
Put that in your pipe and smoke it (to confound your critics).
To Learn More
(September 2016) https://theconversation.com/why-psychology-lost-its-soul-everything-comes-from-the-brain-54828
SIDEBAR ~ Arnold Gesell’s stage-development
Q: What about Harvard educator Arnold Gesell’s stage-development of children? Wasn’t this roughly equal to Steiner’s stage-development model, at least in the 1980s?
A: Yes, in the 1980s conventional and even Waldorf literature respected Gesell’s child development model. Waldorf lit of the 1960s-1970s suggested the two were supportive of each other. Both models acknowledged repeating seven year cycles and applied these to classroom subjects and methods.
However <sigh> I have bad news for you. As now represented online, Gesell’s model has been re-constituted to align with Pam Levin’s Seasons of Change, where developmental periods, leap-frog multiple times over a single lifetime. You have to track multiple leaps of multiple frogs. I’m not sure if this change connects with astrology, with Montessori, with both or neither. The simplicity and appeal to iNtuitive Feelers is lost in all the analysis needed just to understand the basics.
Lively discussions of Gesell’s child development model, pro and con, can be found here: Patterns in development — A Background to the child development profiles by Susan Laing — http://www.creativelivingwithchildren.com/the-profiles/background-information-to-the-development-profiles/patterns-in-development/
“Gesell’s Maturational Theory” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gesell%E2%80%99s_Maturational_Theory
“Children up to Seven” by Susan Laing — http://www.creativelivingwithchildren.com/the-profiles/children-up-to-seven/
