Abstract
I argue that Susan Sugarman is right to question the common assumption of connectedness, but wrong to claim that there is not much point in looking for causes of development. I also question her distinction between what children can do and what they actually do do, and I suggest that many of the problems raised in her paper would disappear if developmental psychologists were to concentrate on children's early achievements rather than on their early failures.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
