End of the Semester Countdown

I really really really really can't wait for this semester to end. I don't know what I was thinking teaching 4 classes rather than 3 this semester. The extra money for the 4th class will be nice once I get it (they don't pay us until the grades are in for extra courses), but it's just exhausting and stressful. This is why you haven't heard from me in a while!

But the end is near. At this point, I have 22 portfolios, 8 research papers, 33 Cognitive Development finals (which I proctor on Tuesday), and 24 Social-Emotional Development finals (which I proctor on Wednesday) still left to grade. I hope to be completely done with all my grades turned in by June 1. Then I can focus completely on nesting and Nugget's impending arrival! Or maybe I'll just rest up for birthing the little one! I certainly need it after my first year of being a professor. I'd probably need it even if I wasn't 37 weeks pregnant!

More Belly Shots and Nugget Update

There are three new weekly belly shots since I last posted and some new stuff to share.

Both Nugget and myself are still doing great . Nugget is growing right on target and his/her heartbeat sounds great. I'm doing good too. At my 34 and 35 week checkups, we found that I was 20-30% effaced and 1.5 cm dilated, and my mucous plug has started to break down and pass. This process of normal cervical changes started a little earlier than usual, but it's not really anything to worry about either, since many women walk around for weeks being even more dilated than I. The midwife basically said that my body was just preparing for childbirth and that I'm not at risk for preterm labor even with these factors and Braxton Hicks contractions. At 34 weeks, the Midwife told me that I should take it easy since my activity level can lead to labor - so I started making myself walk slow across campus to class, started taking the elevator, and started rolling my laptop around campus in a small suitcase instead of carrying my backpack. It must be working since at almost 37 weeks now, Nugget is still safe and sound and healthy in my belly and has so far let me continue working. I'll be happy as long as Nugget stays in for another week - so I can proctor my class' exams this week, finish all my grading and not have to do it while recovering from childbirth!

On Tuesday I will be at 37 weeks gestation, so technically Nugget will be considered "full-term" at that point! Although I'd still like the little one to stay put for another week or so!

Survey says...

We were fortunate to collect the opinions of 38 people in our survey. Here's what you thought.

The good news is we think there is a 50/50 chance the baby will be either a boy or a girl -- and it was a 48.6% tie on the gender question with 2 people not giving an opinion. No help there, so let's move onto names.

There is a lot riding on the name for the baby, so we asked about baby names. We already know a middle name of Wayne is a bad idea. The Social Security Administration also just recently released the popular baby names for 2006.

        Boy        Girl
1   Jacob          Emily
2   Michael        Emma
3   Joshua         Madison
4   Ethan          Isabella
5   Matthew        Ava
6   Daniel         Abigail
7   Christopher    Olivia
8   Andrew         Hannah
9   Anthony        Sophia
10  William        Samantha

Despite the obvious benefits of being able to google a unique name, there is some criticism for being too novel as reported in this Guardian article.

In his book Baby Name Report Card, UCLA psychology professor Albert Mehrabian tested a host of names to see how attractive people found them. Some names immediately aroused images of success, others of popularity or kindness. On the whole, people judged to have more traditional names such as Rachel and Robert did extremely well. More alternative names scored badly. Breeze, for example, was given 16 out of 100, while Christopher received full marks. 'A name is part of an impression package,' said Mehrabian. 'Parents who make up bizarre names for their children are ignorant, arrogant or just foolish.'

The boy name theoretically was a no brainer. It may go back even farther, but there is a pattern to boy names in my family:

  William Robert DeLancey
  Robert George DeLancey
  George Jay DeLancey
  Jayson Jeremy DeLancey

Most of you also liked Jeremy, 21.1% (or 8) in fact. The other top choices:

  18.4% 7 Reed
  13.2% 5 Logan
  13.2% 5 Benjamin
   7.9% 3 Finn
   5.3% 2 Marshall

There were a lot of other suggestions getting one vote each: Koos, Mechanic, Lupay, Deven, Noah, Gabe, Bobby, and Reece. Nobody seemed intrigued by Leif or Stone.

For girl names there was not as much of a variety to choose from. Most of you (50%, 19) picked Lily as a good name for a girl. Gabriella was second with 28.9% and Harmony receiving only 3 votes. There was also votes for Reagan, Tia, Driver, Stefanie, and Erotica Jones.

Our choice of first names come with some ambiguity in spelling. Using the baby search tool on the Social Security Administration website we have some indications. First off, in the past 15 years there are no boys named Lily or Lilly and no girls named Reed or Reid. No gender confusion, check. As for popularity in 2006, Lilly ranks 151 while Lily ranks 33. Reed comes in at 470 and Reid has a slight edge at 422. Your opinion was consistent with the overall trend.

Belly Shot Update

Yep, it's time for another belly shot update. You know the drill - click on my belly to get the rest of the belly pictures. 33 weeks and counting.

Mind Altering Media...

Cheryl has for some time held the belief that TV is detrimental to child development and behavior, particularly the large majority of children's programming which portrays violent themes. This discussion has come up a few times over the years. I only have anecdotal evidence to suggest that media alone cannot possibly be the cause as there is a long history of violent behavior prior to the invention of electricity. Even Stephen Pinker brought this up at the recent TED conference and in an article in New Republic last month:

In sixteenth-century Paris, a popular form of entertainment was cat-burning, in which a cat was hoisted in a sling on a stage and slowly lowered into a fire. According to historian Norman Davies, "[T]he spectators, including kings and queens, shrieked with laughter as the animals, howling with pain, were singed, roasted, and finally carbonized." Today, such sadism would be unthinkable in most of the world. This change in sensibilities is just one example of perhaps the most important and most underappreciated trend in the human saga: Violence has been in decline over long stretches of history, and today we are probably living in the most peaceful moment of our species' time on earth.

I played video games, I watched R rated violent movies, and I played with a gun and I turned out ok right? Well, the April issue of New Scientist has a feature article Mind Altering Media that discusses the effects of television and video games on children. They point to some research that further backs up the findings that helped formulate Cheryl's beliefs:

When it comes to TV, however, there's no getting away from the fact that the bad news outweighs the good. One of the biggest studies was done by Jeffrey Johnson and colleagues at Columbia University in New York, who followed more than 700 families for 17 years, recording their viewing habits, health, backgrounds and various behavioural tendencies. Their findings confirm those of previous, smaller studies showing that the amount of TV watched during childhood and teens correlates with changes in attention and sleep patterns, among other things.

The group's latest analysis will be published next month, so Johnson can't reveal details yet, but says: "High levels of TV viewing may contribute to elevated risk for a type of syndrome which is often characterised by two or more of the following types of problems: elevated levels of verbal and physical aggression; difficulties with sleep; obesity and long-term risk for obesity-related health problems from a lack of physical exercise; and attention or learning difficulties."

There is also reference to Bandura's Bobo effect (also known as Social Learning Theory in Academic Circles):

One of the most straightforward demonstrations dates back to 1961, by Albert Bandura at Stanford University in Palo Alto, California. He showed short films to pre-schoolers. Half saw a man beating up a plastic clown (called a Bobo Doll). The other half saw more innocuous images. After watching the film the children were allowed to play with all kinds of toys, including the doll. Those who had seen the beating went and punched it, even copying details like words the clown said. The Bobo doll studies show that children will imitate violent acts in precise detail.

So, it really comes down to a risk assessment. How much enjoyment is there from these violent observations versus the risk that good parenting will not be enough to counter-act negative behavior. The American Academy of Pediatrics made a few recommendations in the article:

* no tv at all for children under 2 (Cheryl says babies need direct interaction that the TV does not provide - so all those Baby Einstein videos are overpriced crap and studies have shown that the potential costs greatly outweigh any meager gain in knowledge that a child could and generally does get elsewhere.)
* no more than 1 or 2 hours a day thereafter
* with teenagers, set conditional rules with homework
* encourage alternative activities
* look for nonviolent shows and games (there are some spatial awareness and other positive effects from video games)
* discuss what is real and what is make-believe (Cheryl says this is one of the many reasons why Mister Rogers' Neighborhood is a quality show)

More information:

* www.tvtroubles.com
* www.mindscience.org

So, even though G.I. Joe taught me that "knowing is half the battle", our kids will learn that lesson from a different source.

Funny things that professors say...

Usually all the "fun" job-related posts come from Lance. After all - he has mandated screenings of movies such as "Meet the Robinsons" and he gets to play with Shrek all day long. But, even in my more mundane job teaching college students about Child Development, occasionally something fun comes along to share with you all.

Last week, I was teaching my Developmental Assessment class all about Standardized testing, and the various types of standardized testing that exist. We were talking about Screening and Diagnostic testing, and primarily the differences between the two. Like any good professor, I was giving them well-known examples of such tests. One frequently used diagnostic test used in special education is the "Woodcock-Johnson-III", which, if you're interested measures "general intellectual ability, specific cognitive abilities, scholastic aptitude, oral language, and academic achievement." So I ask (since many of my students work part-time in classrooms or have taken a break from work to continue their education), "Are any of you familiar with the Woodcock-Johnson-III?" And the response I got was a bunch of giggles AND one student, who I now have much admiration for, blurted out, "Wow, that's three for three!" and then any hope for serious conversation was of course temporarily suspended.

Once my classroom settled down and we could talk more seriously about the test (although we all had to refrain from referring to the test by name in order to prevent any further giggle outbreaks), we began talking about how to interpret the results and to be careful about how we use the results, when I, clearly not thinking straight, used the following phrase. "We really need to be careful about who administers the tests, because usually so much is riding on the Woodcock-Johnson that it can change the whole course of a child's educational opportunities." And of course, the class erupts again, and I snarked, not realizing what I said yet, "really? the name of the test is still funny?" and got the response from one student who could barely contain her giggling, "No, you just said that a lot was riding on it." This of course led to even more of a giggle-eruption.

Anyway, needless to say, I really appreciate these students much more now that they've revealed that they're just as immature as my dear friend Grundle.

Prenatal Appointment - May 3

So, all is well with both Nugget and myself. Our midwife is very happy with my weight gain. I've packed on about 20 lbs so far - with about 6 weeks worth of gaining to go. About half of any future weight gained will be going directly to Nugget - the average weight gain for a woman to gain is about a pound a week - and usually half a pound goes directly toward making baby look like a fat little cherub. So if we extrapolate, when all is said and done, I will have gained approximately 26 lbs over the course of the pregnancy. Of that 26 lbs, about 8 lbs (give or take) will be Nugget, 1.5 - 2 lbs will be Nugget's placenta, about 12 lbs is a combination of amniotic fluid, uterine enlargement, increased blood volume, and fluids in maternal tissue. Plus, about a pound or two is all in my breasts . So really when it comes down to it, not a whole lot of my weight gain is fat that needs to be "burned" after Nugget and his/her placenta and amniotic fluid comes out - most of it will be taken care of naturally in the course of the month or so after Nugget's arrival with regular uterine shrinking and a naturally decreasing blood and fluid volume. Our midwife told me right out that she suspects that within a month or so of breastfeeding I'll be right back to "normal" and maybe a little less with the exception of my breasts (which I'm perfectly okay with!). She even noted that I'd have to watch that I don't loose too much weight since I have a naturally fast metabolism and will be putting extra energy into breastfeeding.

She also noted that Nugget is growing at a perfect rate. Nugget's heart sounds great too. And, Nugget is head down (and has been for weeks now), which bodes well for birth.

My blood pressure has remained remarkably steady - I've been at 110/70 at every prenatal visit. This time I was slightly lower at 100/66, but still well within that normal range, and nothing to write home about. This bp is actually closer to my pre-pregnancy normal - which is usually about 100/60.

Nothing else is really exciting about our progress, but I figured you'd all like to hear that Nugget and I are doing really well. 6 more weeks and counting!