PSY FPX 6020 Assessment 2

Introduction

Urie Bronfenbrenner, an eminent developmental psychologist, developed the ecological systems theory, the aim of which was to explain processes of child development (Darling, 2007). The theory outlines how a child’s inborn qualities and environment decide his/her development and growth. Composed of five interconnected components, the ecological systems theory sheds light on the diverse environments of children that shape development to different degrees (Ashiabi & O’Neal, 2015).

Microsystem & Mesosystem Case Analysis: Katie

Katie’s Microsystem:

Suburban Miami is where fourteen-year-old Katie resides with her parents and special-needs younger sister—the epitome of a microsystem, her daily familial environment (Ashiabi & O’Neal, 2015). Being academically well-prepared, Katie is otherwise ostracized in the home and becomes resentful towards her parents. Emotional dissonance impacts her interpersonal relationships in her family, thereby creating strained relationships (Dolgin, 2018).

PSY FPX 6020 Assessment 2: The Microsystem, Mesosystem, and Development

Katie’s Mesosystem:

Her teachers’ negativity towards her worsening academic performances due to her newfound friendships illustrates the impact of the mesosystem on her development (Arnett, 2013). Her parents’ disapproval, on the other hand, triggers conflict and increases Katie’s internal conflict. 

Microsystem & Mesosystem Case Analysis: Daniel

Daniel’s Microsystem:

Daniel is a twelve-year-old boy living in a rural town in Louisiana, and his microsystem is formed by his mother and grandmother. Even though he lacks a father figure, Daniel has a secure relationship with his caregivers, who involve him in after-school activities (Arnett, 2013).

Daniel’s Mesosystem:

In Daniel’s mesosystem, communication among his immediate environment and external forces, such as his teachers and soccer coach, is essential. Although shy, Daniel is supported by positive adults who facilitate his learning and socialization (Ashiabi & O’Neal, 2015).

Comparative Analysis: Katie & Daniel’s Microsystemic/Mesosystemic Factors

While Daniel thrives in a cohesive microsystem and mesosystem, Katie is challenged by a neglectful home life and discordant relationships that adversely affect her emotional and educational development. Daniel’s caregivers are in concert with external forces to nurture his potential, unlike Katie’s fragmented support system (Waters, Cross, & Runions, 2009).

Conclusion

Healthy growth depends on the co-occurrence synergy between a child’s microsystem and mesosystem. Through the facilitation of positive relationships among environments, caregivers can overcome negative influences, enabling children to develop holistically (Ashiabi & O’Neal, 2015).

PSY FPX 6020 Assessment 2: The Microsystem, Mesosystem, and Development

Dolgin, K.G. (2018). The adolescent: Development, relationships, and culture (14th ed.). New York, NY: Pearson.

Waters, S. K., Cross, D. S., & Runions, K. (2009). Social and Ecological Structures Supporting Adolescent Connectedness to School: A Theoretical Model. Journal of School Health, 79(11), 516-524. doi:10.1111/j.1746-1561.2009.00443.x