Difference between revisions of "Caronia-Vandini2019"
ElliottHoey (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=ARTICLE |Author(s)=Letizia Caronia; Chiara Dalledonne Vandini |Title=Assessing a (gifted) child in parent-teacher conference: Participants’ resources to...") |
AndreiKorbut (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
|Volume=9 | |Volume=9 | ||
|Number=1 | |Number=1 | ||
| − | |Pages= | + | |Pages=125–148 |
|URL=https://www.jbe-platform.com/content/journals/10.1075/ld.00035.car | |URL=https://www.jbe-platform.com/content/journals/10.1075/ld.00035.car | ||
| − | |DOI= | + | |DOI=10.1075/ld.00035.car |
|Abstract=Delivering and acknowledging assessments are the most recurrent institutional activities occurring in parent-teacher conference. This paper reports data from a mother-teacher conference concerning a gifted child. We show how participants’ practices to accomplish and receive assessment in the report-assessment phase of the event: (a) display their relative epistemic and deontic rights, (b) are oriented to participants’ institutional relevant identities, and (c) project or even enact different and quite opposite assessment trajectories. We contend that struggles in assessing the child display participants’ different stances: teachers’ ‘normalizing’ and ‘group oriented’ trajectory vs. the mother’s orientation toward ‘doctorability’ and pressure for individualized treatment. Although typically occurring between routine-case oriented institutions vs. idiosyncratic-case oriented clients, such a struggle displays also the ‘paradoxical injunctions’ that frame teachers’ everyday work: adopting a ‘group-oriented’ perspective while at the same time being accountable for an individualized approach. | |Abstract=Delivering and acknowledging assessments are the most recurrent institutional activities occurring in parent-teacher conference. This paper reports data from a mother-teacher conference concerning a gifted child. We show how participants’ practices to accomplish and receive assessment in the report-assessment phase of the event: (a) display their relative epistemic and deontic rights, (b) are oriented to participants’ institutional relevant identities, and (c) project or even enact different and quite opposite assessment trajectories. We contend that struggles in assessing the child display participants’ different stances: teachers’ ‘normalizing’ and ‘group oriented’ trajectory vs. the mother’s orientation toward ‘doctorability’ and pressure for individualized treatment. Although typically occurring between routine-case oriented institutions vs. idiosyncratic-case oriented clients, such a struggle displays also the ‘paradoxical injunctions’ that frame teachers’ everyday work: adopting a ‘group-oriented’ perspective while at the same time being accountable for an individualized approach. | ||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 03:00, 19 January 2020
| Caronia-Vandini2019 | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Caronia-Vandini2019 |
| Author(s) | Letizia Caronia, Chiara Dalledonne Vandini |
| Title | Assessing a (gifted) child in parent-teacher conference: Participants’ resources to pursue (and resist) a no-problem trajectory |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | EMCA, Assessment trajectories, Deontics, Deontic rights, Epistemics, Institutional cautiousness, Knowledge management, Parent-teacher conferences |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 2019 |
| Language | English |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | Language and Dialogue |
| Volume | 9 |
| Number | 1 |
| Pages | 125–148 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | 10.1075/ld.00035.car |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
Delivering and acknowledging assessments are the most recurrent institutional activities occurring in parent-teacher conference. This paper reports data from a mother-teacher conference concerning a gifted child. We show how participants’ practices to accomplish and receive assessment in the report-assessment phase of the event: (a) display their relative epistemic and deontic rights, (b) are oriented to participants’ institutional relevant identities, and (c) project or even enact different and quite opposite assessment trajectories. We contend that struggles in assessing the child display participants’ different stances: teachers’ ‘normalizing’ and ‘group oriented’ trajectory vs. the mother’s orientation toward ‘doctorability’ and pressure for individualized treatment. Although typically occurring between routine-case oriented institutions vs. idiosyncratic-case oriented clients, such a struggle displays also the ‘paradoxical injunctions’ that frame teachers’ everyday work: adopting a ‘group-oriented’ perspective while at the same time being accountable for an individualized approach.
Notes
