Cover not available
Article published In:
Dialogue in institutional settings
Edited by Franca Orletti and Letizia Caronia
[Language and Dialogue 9:1] 2019
► pp. 125–148

Assessing a (gifted) child in parent-teacher conference

Participants’ resources to pursue (and resist) a no-problem trajectory

| University of Bologna (Italy)
| University of Bologna (Italy)
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.
Keywords: assessment trajectories, conversation analysis, deontic rights, epistemics, institutional cautiousness, knowledge management, mitigation, parent-teacher conference
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.The structural organization and knowledge distribution in parent-teacher conference
  • 3.Data collection and analysis
  • 4.Constructing the assessable child
    • 4.1Displaying epistemic cautiousness: Evidentials and other mitigating devices in teachers’ assessment
    • 4.2Reducing the relevance of negative results
    • 4.3Negative assessments in service of positive evaluation: Co-implicating the parent in the making of diagnostic news
    • 4.4Downgrading the idiosyncratic nature of problematic behaviors: Generalizing as a normalization practice
  • 5.The mother’s receptions of the teacher’s assessments
  • 6.Concluding remarks
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 5 July 2019
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ld.00035.car
References (60)
References
Addimando, Loredana. 2013. “I comportamenti controproducenti dei genitori a scuola: un’analisi sulla soddisfazione e l’autonomia lavorativa degli insegnanti” [Counterproductive behavior of parents at school: a satisfaction analysis and teacher’s autonomy in working life]. Psicologia della Salute 21: 33–51. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Baker, Carolyn and Jayne Keogh. 1995. “Accounting for Achievement in Parent-Teacher Interviews.” Human Studies 18(2–3): 263–300. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bergen, Clara and Tanya Stivers. 2013. “Patient Disclosure of Medical Misdeeds.” Journal of Health and Social Behavior 54(2): 221–240. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bronfenbrenner, Urie. 1979. The Ecology of Human Development: Experiments by Nature and Design. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
. 1986. “Ecology of the Family as a Context for Human Development: Research Perspective.” Developmental Psychology 22(6): 723–742. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brody, E. Linda and Carol J. Mills. 1997. “Gifted Children whit Learning Disabilities: a Review of the Issues.” US National Library of Medicine 30(3): 282–296.Google Scholar
Caffi, Claudia. 1999. “On Mitigation”. Journal of Pragmatics 31(7): 881–909. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Caronia, Letizia and Chiara Dalledonne Vandini. 2018. “Voicing a Gifted Child: Reported Speech as Resource for doing Epistemic and Moral Work in Parent-teacher Conference.” Unpublished paper presented at 68th Annual ICA Conference – Voices, Prague, CZ.
Cedersund, Elisabet and Lennart G. Svensson. 1996. “A “Good” or a “Bad” Student: A Study of Communication in Class Assessment Meetings.” Language and Education 10 (1): 132–150. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Christenson, Sandra and Susan M. Sheridan. 2001. Schools and Families. Creating Essential Connection for Learning. New York, London: The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Drew, Paul and John Heritage. 1992. Talk at Work: Interaction in Institutional Settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Epstein, L. Joyce. 1983. Friends in School. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Epstein, L. Joyce and Caren K. Salinas. 2004. “Partnering with Families and Communities. A Well-organized Program of Family and Community Partnerships Yields many Benefits for Schools and their Students.” Schools as Learning Community 61(8): 12–18.Google Scholar
Fabbri, Maurizio. 2012a. Il transfert, il dono, la cura. [The transfert, the gjft and the care]. Milano: Franco Angeli.Google Scholar
. 2012b. “Ragioni d’alleanza, problemi di disalleanza: territori e servizi per l’infanzia fra cultura e controcultura.” [Reasons for alliance, problems of dis-alliance: territories and services for children between culture and counterculture]. In Dis-alleanze nei contesti educativi [Dis-alliances in educational contexts], ed. by Mariagrazia Contini, 63–75. Roma: Carocci.Google Scholar
Fraser, Bruce. 1980. “Conversational Mitigation.” Journal of Pragmatics 41: 341–250. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2010. “Pragmatic Competence: The Case of Hedging.” In New Approaches to Hedging, ed. by Gunther, Kaltenbock, Wiltrud, Mihatsch and Stefan Schneider, 15–34. Bingley, West Yorkshire: Emerald Group Publishing Limited. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Garcia-Sanchez, Inmaculada and Marjorie F. Orellana. 2006. “The Construction of Moral and Social Identity in Immigrant Children’s Narratives-in-Translation.” Linguistic and Education 171: 209–239. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gill, Virginia and Douglas W. Maynard. 1995. “On ‘Labeling’ in Actual Interaction: Delivering and Receiving Diagnosis of Developmental Disabilities”. Social Problems 43(1): 11–37. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goodwin, Charles. 1994. “Professional Vision.” American Anthropologist 96(3): 606–633. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goodwin, Charles and Marjorie H. Goodwin. 1992. “Assessments and the Construction of Context”. In Rethinking Context. Language as an Interactive Phenomenon, ed. by Alessandro Duranti and Charles Goodwin, 147–189. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Granata, Anna, Ouejdane, Mejeri and Federica Rizzi. 2015. “Non è solo questione di cultura. Fattori di ostacolo e risorsa nella relazione famiglia-scuola dell’infanzia.” [Is not only a question of culture. Obstacles and resources in the family/childhood school relationship]. Rivista dell’Educazione Famigliare [Family education magazine] 11: 79–91.Google Scholar
Greenfield, M. Patricia, Blanca Quiroz and Catherine Raeff. 2000. “Cross-Cultural Conflict and Harmony in the Social Construction of the Child.” New Direction for Child and Adolescent Development 871: 93–108. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heritage, John. 2004. “Conversation Analysis and Institutional Talk: Analyzing Data.” In Qualitative Research: Theory, Method and Practice, ed. by David Silverman, 223–245. London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
. 2012a. “Epistemics in Action: Action Formation and Territories of Knowledge.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 45(1): 1–29. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2012b. “The Epistemic Engine: Sequence Organization and Territories of Knowledge.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 45(1): 30–52. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heritage, John and Steven Clayman. 2010. Talk in Action: Interactions, Identities, and Institutions. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heritage, John and Geoffrey Raymond. 2005. “The Terms of Agreement: Indexing Epistemic Authority and Subordination in Assessment Sequences.” Social Psychology Quarterly 681: 15–38. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2006. “The Epistemics of Social Relationships: Owning Grandchildren.” Language in Society 35(5): 677–705. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2012. “Navigating Epistemic Landscapes: Acquiescence, Agency and Resistance in Responses to Polar Questions.” Questions: Formal, Functional and Interactional Perspectives, ed. by Jan P. De Ruiter, 179–192. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Howard, M. Kathryn and Sarah Lipinoga. 2010. “Closing down Openings: Pretextuality and Misunderstanding in Parent-Teacher Conferences with Mexican Immigrant Families.” Language and Communication 30(1): 33–47. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Horvat, Erin, Elliot B. Weininger and Annette Lareau. 2003. “From Social Ties to Social Capital: Class Differences in the Relations between Home and School and Parents Networks.” American Educational Research Journal 40(2): 319–351. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jefferson, Gail and John R. E. Lee. 1981. “The Rejection of Advice: Managing the Problematic Convergence of a ‘Troubles-Telling’ and a ‘Service Encounter’.” Journal of Pragmatics 5(5): 399–422. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jefferson, Gail. 1984. “Notes on a Systematic Deployment of the Acknowledgment Tokens ‘Yeah’ and ‘Mmhm’.” Paper in Linguistics 17(2): 197–216. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2004. “Glossary of Transcript Symbols with an Introduction.” In Conversation Analysis: Studies from the First Generation, ed. By G. H. Lerner, 13–23. Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kim, M. Elizabeth, Susan M. Sheridan, Kyongboon Kwon and Natalie Koziol. 2013. “Parents Beliefs and Children Behavioral Functioning: The Mediating Role of Parent-Teacher Relationship.” Journal of Psychology 51(2): 175–185.Google Scholar
Kotthoff, Helga. 2015. “Narrative Constructions of School-Oriented Parenthood during Parent-Teacher-conferences.” Linguistics and Education 311: 286–303. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lareau, Annette and Elliot B. Weininger. 2003. “Cultural Capital in Educational Research: A Critical Assessment.” Theory and Society 32(5): 567–606. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lawrence-Lightfoot, Sara. 2003. The Essential Conversation: What Parent and Teachers can Learn from Each Other. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
MacLure, Maggie and Barbara M. Walker. 2000. “Disenchanted Evenings: the Social Organization of Talk in Parent-teacher Consultations in UK Secondary Schools.” British Journal of Sociology of Education 21(1): 5–25. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Maynard, Douglas W. 1992. “On Clinicians Co-implicating Recipients’ Perspective in the Delivery of Diagnostic News.” In Talk at Work: Interaction in Institutional Settings, ed. by Paul Drew and John Heritage, 331–358. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
2003. Bad News, Good News: Conversational Order in Everyday Talk and Clinical Settings. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Maynard, Douglas W. and John Heritage. 2005. “Conversation Analysis, Doctor-Patient Interaction and Media Communication.” Medical Education 391: 428–435. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Milani, Paola. 2009. “La formazione e la ricerca in educazione familiare. Stato dell’arte in Italia” [Formation and research in family education. State of art in Italy]. Rivista Italiana dell’Educazione Familiare 11: 17–35.Google Scholar
. 2012. “Sconfinamenti e Connessioni. Per una nuova geografia dei rapporti fra scuole e famiglie” [Crossing borders and connections. For a new geography of relations between schools and families]. Rivista Italiana di Educazione Famigliare 11: 25–37.Google Scholar
Orletti, Franca. 2000. La Conversazione Diseguale [The Unequal Conversation]. Roma: Carocci.Google Scholar
Orletti, Franca and Marilena Fatigante. 2009. “La modulazione dell’agency nell’interazione in colloqui di consultazione pedagogica” [The agency modulation in the interaction in psychological consultation interviews]. In Fenomeni di intensità linguistica [Phenomena of linguistic intensity], ed. by Barbara Gili Favela and Carla Bazzanella, 195–206. Firenze: Franco Cesati Editore.Google Scholar
Pfeiffer, I. Steven and Yaacov Petscher. 2008. “Identifying Young Gifted Children Using the Gifted Rating Scales-Preschool/Kindergarten Form.” Gifted Child Quarterly 52(1): 19–29. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pillet-Shore, Danielle. 2001. “Doing pretty well: How Teachers Manage the Interactional Environment of Unfavorable Student Evaluation in Parent-Teacher Conference.” Unpublished Master’s thesis. Los Angeles: University of California.Google Scholar
. 2003. “Doing Okay: On the Multiple Metrics of an Assessment.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 36(3): 285–319. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2012. “The Problems with Praise in Parent–Teacher Interaction.” Communication Monographs 791: 181–204. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2015. “Being a Good Parent in Parent-Teacher Conferences”. Journal of Communication 65(2): 373–395. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2016. “Criticizing Another Child: How Teachers Evaluate Students During Parent-Teacher Conference.” Language and Society 451: 33–58. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pomerantz, Anita. 1986. “Extreme Case Formulation: A Way of Legitimizing Claims.” Human Studies 91: 219–229. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sacks, Harvey. 1974. “On the Analyzability of Stories by Children.” In Ethnomethodology: Selected readings, ed. by Roy Turner, 216–232. Harmondsworth: Penguin.Google Scholar
Schegloff, Emmanuel A. 1996. “Some Practices for Referring to Persons in Talk-in Interaction: A Partial Sketch of a Systematics.” In Studies in Anaphora, ed. by Barbara Fox, 437–485. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A. 2007b. “Conveying Who You are: The Presentation of Self, Strictly Speaking.”. In. Person Reference in Interaction: Linguistic, Cultural and Social Perspectives, ed. By John N. Enfield and Tanya Stivers, 123–148. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Subotnik, Rena, Paula Olszewski-Kubilius and Frank C. Worrell. 2011. “Rethinking Giftedness and Gifted Education: A Proposed Direction Forward Based on Psychological Science.” Psychological Science in the Public Interest 12(1): 3–54. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stevanovic, Melisa and Anssi Peräkylä. 2012. “Deontic Authority in Interaction: The Right to Announce, Propose, and Decide.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 45(3): 297–321. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zanetti, Maria Assunta. 2012. Bambini e ragazzi ad alto potenziale. Una guida per educatori e famiglie [Children and young with high potential. A guide for educators and families]. Roma: Carocci.Google Scholar
Cited by (8)

Cited by eight other publications

Caronia, Letizia, Federica Ranzani, Vittoria Colla, Silvia Demozzi & Giulia Benericetti
2023. Polyphony in the pediatric clinic: Parents reporting teachers’ talk as a resource for building deontic and epistemic (dis)alliances among caregivers. Discourse Studies DOI logo
Colla, Vittoria
2023. “Doing being an involved parent”. Language and Dialogue 13:2 ► pp. 277 ff. DOI logo
Munthe, Elaine & Elsa Westergård
2023. Parents', teachers', and students’ roles in parent-teacher conferences; a systematic review and meta-synthesis. Teaching and Teacher Education 136 ► pp. 104355 ff. DOI logo
Pillet-Shore, Danielle
2023. Depersonalizing troubles in institutional interaction. Research on Children and Social Interaction 7:1 DOI logo
Ranzani, Federica
2023. Chapter 9. The pediatrician’s normalizing practice in well-child visits. In A Pragmatic Agenda for Healthcare [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 338], ► pp. 227 ff. DOI logo
Caronia, Letizia
2022. Reported speech in problem telling. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Professional Practice 16:2 DOI logo
Caronia, Letizia
2024. Epistemic and Deontic Authority in Parent–Teacher Conference: Referring to the Expert as a Discursive Practice to (Jointly) Undermine the Teacher’s Expertise. Journal of Teacher Education 75:4 ► pp. 397 ff. DOI logo
Caronia, Letizia & Vittoria Colla
2021. Objects that matter. Language and Dialogue 11:1 ► pp. 8 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 22 october 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.