Ritically assess how studies of lifespan development have altered our perception of the life course.
The main focus of this question is the issue of whether Lifespan development (LSD) as a sub discipline takes us beyond common sense and in particular what is claimed to be common acceptance of a growth-maturation-decline model of development (which would explain the emphais on childhood development before the emergence of LSD itself.
This then would be the first dimension our our new perception that we look for development in the later years. The how here would then suggest that we are seeing something that we did not see before. Actucally I am not sure that LSD has been all that influential here since at the level of popular culture there seems to be plenty of evidence that ordinary people are changing careers and travelling etc and these people have probably never read any lifespan stuff. I think that it is important to say then that it is impossible to say with any precision the contribution of LSD in this regard its more in the nature of an informed guess. But you can certainly see it as a claim made by the LSD theorists linked to its humanistic belief in human development.
The second sense of how would, I think, relate to ways of looking at middle and later years ( the first how was to do with looking here in the first place). Again the claim being made (which you are invited to comment on) is that just as studying anything is likely to increase ones understanding of it, so too reading about human development in adults will assist our understanding of our own lives. I suppose the expression thats interestingI never thought of that comes to mind as a measure of how our perception might be altered.
There is no right answer here but rather your own view of what LSD is worth and how people might benefit from it. So a little less detail on what LSD is about and more on the critically assess aspect.