#classsix

Look at that fluorescent green glow!

A fortune telling Eel, a Neanderthal, singing Sirens, a dandruff-shedding Troll and a giant origami sea-serpent with metre long fangs: All in a day’s work for Class Six! (Oh and not forgetting Mr Ogersby, of course!)

Week 6 Overarching Question

Eldén’s argument is coherent and thoroughly explains each aspect of the issue and uses logic and previous literature to support their claims and findings. 

February 15, 2017

~Article 2: “Using mobile phone diaries to explore children’s everyday lives” By Plowman and Stevenson (2012)

1. What are the basic assumptions that inform the reading?

-Using mobile phones with picture and text messaging as an ecoculoural approach to researching children’s everyday lives at home. 2. What are the major organizing ideas?

-The research method claims to show the variety of activities children engage in throughout the day when at home and their experiences. The authors state that this method can be altered to gather data in other contexts as well. 

3. What serious questions does the reading raise regarding the fields of child and youth study?

-Considering that these children are young and require their parents’ participation and selection of which experiences to document and how, is this method truly obtaining reliable data on their research subject? Are these accounts of children’s experiences really reflective of their experience, or of the child’s experience from the parent’s perspective?

4. What serious omissions are left out of the article or reading (if any)?

-The lens in which a child’s activity or experience is captured should be considered as a caveat. Additionally, the data collection process is parent-driven and parent-controlled. This kind of research method may be best used with children who are familiar with technological devices that can take pictures and notes, or to simply familiarize your selected population with the necessary technology to document what they choose and how. 

5. In what ways does this article reinforce, extend, challenge, or oppose your own views on child and youth study/research/practice?

-The article challenges my views on the benefits of adults (parents particularly) being closely involved with children’s research processes and data collection. I mentioned the role of technology and how this tool can be made available for children’s use, though, is this kind of technology accessible for all participants? 6. What do you take away from the reading in terms of your own child and youth practice?

February 15, 2017

~Article 1: “Inviting the messy: Drawing methods and ‘children’s voices’” by Eldén (2012)

1. What are the basic assumptions that inform the reading?

-The author contributes to the conversation regarding children’s voices and state that there are issues of representation in this research area. Research suggests that drawing methods can reveal children’s “authentic” voices and allows for the complex stories of children’s lives in care to be uncovered.

2. What are the major organizing ideas?

-The voice of a child should be regarded as a process, a function of thought, rather than a pin-point location of a child’s view. The relationality of care contributes to the expression or repression of children’s voices, which involves “negotiations, reciprocity, and deservingness” through which relationships are affirmed as equal or “deserving”, or are undermined. A sociological interpretation of drawings allows for the complex narratives to contribute to the scientific understanding of children’s voices. 

3. What serious questions does the reading raise regarding the fields of child and youth study?

-Acknowledging the relationality of care is tightly intertwined, in my opinion, with the importance of focusing on children as ‘active co-participants in their parent’s care’…and thus bringing children’s perspectives on care into research.

4. What serious omissions are left out of the article or reading (if any)?

-Drawing as a methodological approach seems accessible, but as suggested in previous research, the conversation about the drawing seems to be more meaningful than the drawing at face value. “Member-checking” could be useful when using the drawing method, to ensure that what we interpret and see in the produced image is what the child intends to communicate.

5. In what ways does this article reinforce, extend, challenge, or oppose your own views on child and youth study/research/practice?

-This article proposed a new lens in which to consider children’s voices as accessible, narrative thought processes, observed through drawing. Children can express themselves with flexibility and think “fluidly”, speaking to the nature of process. Meaning comes from the child’s interaction with others and environment, so as interaction continues, so does the child’s voice reflect the process of their thinking. The method of drawing is useful in research because it is another medium for children to express themselves and communicate, but it also allows the child to express their perspectives and display their understanding. “The drawing is a part of the whole picture”. 

6. What do you take away from the reading in terms of your own child and youth practice?