All Academic, Inc. Research Logo

Info/CitationFAQResearchAll Academic Inc.
Document

How very young children use gaze avoidance to resist caregiver interventions in their acts of misconduct
Unformatted Document Text:  his as she does this (lines 4 and 5). She utters his name a third time (more strongly than the previous, second utterance), at which point he has fully turned to look at her. They maintain their gaze toward one another for about .2 seconds; then the caregiver issues the “corrective” (a negative assessment), and then another “corrective” after a longer, 1.2 second silence (a prohibition designed as a rule invocation). In CASE 8, the caregiver’s “correctives” are constructed as particularly stern, embedded as they are between spates of non-talk and an intense look straight into B1’s eyes by the caregiver. In the next case, CASE 9, a caregiver rebukes a child for not looking at her. CASE 9: “box” 1 B: hitting children over the head with a box 2 CG: running to the scene, That’s not okay Enzo! 3 CG: [arrives at scene, starts trying to pull B away from children; moves her gaze into line with his, saying, We’re not here to hit (em) on the head ( . ) with a box. [B is looking away from CG, trying to pull away from her 4 CG: A- are you looking at me? I want you to look at me. 5 B: looks briefly at CG, then back at children, still trying to pull away. 6 CG: I want you to look at me Enzo. 7 B: turns back to CG, then pulls away and runs away with a shriek, Ahh! 8 CG: says as boy runs away, We’re not here to hit ‘em on the head. In CASE 9, the caregiver, upon arriving at the scene and beginning to pull the children apart, issues the “corrective”, anticipating compliance (line 3). But as the boy attempts to pull away from her, and does not look at her, she rebukes him specifically for not attending to her, first with a rhetorical question, and then with a directive to look, (line 4), treating his failure to look as a failure to align as a recipient of her talk,

Authors: Kidwell, Mardi.
first   previous   Page 12 of 15   next   last



background image
his as she does this (lines 4 and 5). She utters his name a third time (more strongly than the previous,
second utterance), at which point he has fully turned to look at her. They maintain their gaze toward one
another for about .2 seconds; then the caregiver issues the “corrective” (a negative assessment), and then
another “corrective” after a longer, 1.2 second silence (a prohibition designed as a rule invocation). In
CASE 8, the caregiver’s “correctives” are constructed as particularly stern, embedded as they are between
spates of non-talk and an intense look straight into B1’s eyes by the caregiver.
In the next case, CASE 9, a caregiver rebukes a child for not looking at her.
CASE 9: “box”
1
B: hitting children over the head with a box
2
CG: running to the scene, That’s not okay Enzo!
3
CG: [arrives at scene, starts trying to pull B away from children; moves her gaze into line with his,
saying, We’re not here to hit (em) on the head ( . ) with a box.
[B is looking away from CG, trying to pull away from her
4
CG: A- are you looking at me? I want you to look at me.
5
B: looks briefly at CG, then back at children, still trying to pull away.
6 CG: I want you to look at me Enzo.
7 B: turns back to CG, then pulls away and runs away with a shriek, Ahh!
8
CG: says as boy runs away, We’re not here to hit ‘em on the head.
In CASE 9, the caregiver, upon arriving at the scene and beginning to pull the children apart, issues the
“corrective”, anticipating compliance (line 3). But as the boy attempts to pull away from her, and does not
look at her, she rebukes him specifically for not attending to her, first with a rhetorical question, and then
with a directive to look, (line 4), treating his failure to look as a failure to align as a recipient of her talk,


Convention
All Academic Convention is the premier solution for your association's abstract management solutions needs.
Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf.
Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets!
Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more!
Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering.
Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more!
Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches!
Click here for more information.

first   previous   Page 12 of 15   next   last

©2012 All Academic, Inc.