MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2074311568 · doi:10.1002/icd.702

International perspectives on early childhood research: a day in the life. Edited by Julia Gillen and Catherine Ann Cameron. Palgrave Macmillan, New York, USA, 2010. pp. 208. Price £50. ISBN 978‐0230232495.

2011· article· en· W2074311568 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Josephine Roß

Bibliographic record

VenueInfant and Child Development · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEarly Childhood Education and Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThrivingWrightPsychologyHistoryVisual artsArt historySociologyArtSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The goal of this book is to highlight a new methodology for gaining international perspectives on early childhood. The authors filmed a ‘day in the life’ of seven 2-year-old girls ‘thriving’ in seven different locations (Canada, Italy, Peru, Thailand, Turkey, UK, and USA). From these observations, five common themes emerged; the development and socialization of musicality, emotional security, eating, notational systems, and humour. These topics form the main content of the book (Chapters 3–7), flanked by introductory and concluding chapters focusing on the methodology used (Chapters 1, 2, and 8). It is striking that ‘day in the life’ observations have not previously been filmed. Earlier works have necessarily relied on written records (Barker & Wright, 1951). However, even modern works have missed the opportunity to faithfully record a ‘day in the life’, for example, filming using time sampling methods taken over a week to represent a typical day (Tudge, 2008). As the authors note, the latter precludes objective review of the data gathered, whereas the former gives a disjointed view of the child's activities. To circumvent these problems, this project dispatched two field researchers to each location; one to film for a minimum of 6 h, and the other to take field notes that could be used to support understanding of the film. Footage and field notes were viewed (first individually) by two distal researchers, who then worked together to create a 30-min compilation video. This footage was later used as an elicitor for discussion with the child's family. As a result, an incredibly rich data set representing a variety of objective and subjective perspectives is secured. To illustrate, in Chapter 3, the authors describe how initial difficulties in interpreting foreign utterances blurred the distinction between speech and musical vocalization. This highlighted the interaction of visual and audio streams in video footage, leading to analysis of all instances of rhythmic activity (vocal and physical) occurring during the day. Although families varied in their explicit recognition of the importance of musicality, rhythmic communication was used reciprocally to strengthen the bond between the child and their caregivers in all the countries observed. The socialization of emotional security is the direct focus of Chapter 4. It appeared that receiving positive physical contact (rocking, soothing, patting) and independently exploring their environment was common to all the children. Although responses to the question ‘What makes a strong child?’ varied cross-culturally, the importance of finding a balance between giving emotional support and fostering self-reliance was highlighted by all parents. Traditionally underplayed in childhood studies (and emphasized in the current volume only following repeated viewing of the ‘days’), the activity of eating showed perhaps the largest geographical differences (Chapter 5). Although some caregivers (Italy, Peru, and UK) instituted clearly delineated mealtimes, in other countries (Canada and Thailand) eating activities were largely child led. Nevertheless, in all instances, children showed a continued determination to incorporate (or substitute) play with eating. Geographical differences were also found in the socialization of notational systems (Chapter 6). For example, although drawing was modelled by a relative expert in some countries (Peru, Thailand, Turkey, and UK), in others children were left to their own devices (Canada and USA). In contrast, reading development was universally supported through joint activity with reading materials. Finally, in Chapter 7, humour is identified as a common feature of many interactions occurring during the ‘days’. The authors highlight the reciprocal use of wordplay, clowning, teasing, and physical play in fostering (and displaying) children's emotional and cognitive engagement with their home environment. Despite some notable exceptions, what emerges from these chapters is that the similarities in the seven girl's experiences were larger than the differences. Indeed, rather than considering the seven countries representative of a culture, the authors insist that we consider these individual examples of children ‘thriving’ in different environments. Thus, although the book offers an international perspective on early childhood, it is cautious in drawing any conclusions concerning enculturation. Similarly, although the issue of resilience is identified as a major theme, the authors acknowledge that the common conception of resilience (as triumph in the face of adversity) is not represented here. Where this volume makes its real contribution is in illustrating how a relatively simple observational methodology can be used to guide and inform our exploration of early childhood. With the exception of emotional security and notational systems, the themes identified in this project (which emerged strongly despite the small and geographically disparate sample) are currently under-researched. As a result of this ambitious attempt to highlight several novel issues, the thematic chapters are often regrettably short. Nevertheless, they make clear that the issues identified, which would remain hidden without this innovative method, are of upmost importance. It is clear then, that the authors have succeeded in their aim to highlight the value of the methodology employed. As the proverb suggests, walking a day in another's shoes is an informative experience.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.825
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.046
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.244 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInfant and Child DevelopmentSame topicEarly Childhood Education and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207