Abstract
The aim of the study is to elaborate on factors that contribute to negotiated descriptions of the pupils’ social and academic achievements and future plans in parent-teacher meetings. This is discussed according to Habermas’ theoretical framework. The methodological approach comprises case-study; using focus-group interview, and the data material is examined through content analysis, including features from conversational analysis. The findings identify several factors that have impact on the negotiated descriptions about the pupils’ school achievement and future plans: (1) some teachers might choose to present an embellished reality while others are “brutally” honest; (2) some teachers might probe to find out and then adjust to the parental goals when the level of ambition is discussed; and (3) some teachers act according to parental initiatives and pressure.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Abbott, A. (1988). The system of professions. An essay on the division of expert labour. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Aristoteles. (350 B.C.E./1934). The Nicomachean Ethics (New and rev. ed.).
Blue-Banning, M., Summers, J. A., Frankland, H. C., Nelson, L. L., & Beegle, G. (2004). Dimensions of family and professional partnerships: Constructive guidelines for collaboration. Exceptional Children, 70(2), 167–184.
Bryman, A. (2008). Social Research Methods (Forth ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.
Christie, S., & Szorenyi, A. (2015). Theorizing the relationship between UK Schools and Immigrant Parent of Eastern and Central European Origin: The Parents’ Perspective. International Journal about Parents in Education, 9(1), 145–156.
Crozier, G. (2001). Excluded parents: The deracialisation of parent involvement. Race Ethnicity and Education, 4(4), 329–341.
Gazeley, L. (2012). The impact of social class on parent–professional interaction in school exclusion processes: Deficit or disadvantage? International Journal of Inclusive Education, 16(3), 297–311.
Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago: Aldine.
Goffman, E. (1983/1997). Felicity’s Condition. In C. Lemert & A. Branaman (Eds.), The Goffman reader (pp. 167–200). Oxford: Blackwell Publishers Ltd.
Griffith, J. (1996). Relation of parental involvement, empowerment, and school traits to student academic performance. The Journal of Educational Research, 90(1), 33–41.
Gross, E. (1958). Work and society. New York: The Thomas Y. Crowell Company.
Habermas, J. (1984). The theory of communicative action. Reason and the rationalization of society. Boston: Beacon Press.
Habermas, J. (1987). The theory of communicative action. Lifeworld and system: A critique of functionalist reason. Boston: Beacon Press.
Habermas, J. (1996). Between facts and norms. Contributions to a discourse theory of law and democracy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Henderson, A. T., & Berla, N. (Eds.). (1994). A new generation of evidence: The family is critical to student achievement. Washington DC: National Committee for Citizens in Education.
Jefferson, G., Sacks, H., & Schegloff, E. (1987). Notes on laughter in the pursuit of inimacy. In G. Button & J. Lee (Eds.), Talk and social organisation (pp. 152–205). Slevedon & Philadelphia: Multilingual Matters.
Jeynes, W. H. (2005). A meta-analysis of parental involvment in urban elementary school student academic achievement. Urban Education, 40(3), 237–269.
Kvale, S., & Brinkmann, S. (2009). Interviews. learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing (2nd ed.). Los Angeles, New York, New Delhi, Singapore: Sage.
Lake, J. F., & Billingsley, B. S. (2000). An analysis of factors that contribute to parent-school conflict in special education. Remedial and Special Education, 21(4), 240–251.
Lawson, M. A. (2003). School-family relations in context. Parent and teacher perceptions of parent involvement. Urban Education, 38(1), 77–133.
Lerner, G. H. (2013). On the place of hesitating in delicate formulations: A turn-constructional infrastructure for collaborative indiscretion. In M. Hayashi, G. Raymond, & J. Sidnell (Eds.), Conversational repair and human understanding. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, London, New Dehli: Sage.
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis. An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Ministry of Education and Research. (2006). Knowledge Promotion. Oslo: Author.
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Pillet-Shore, D. (2015). Being a “Good Parent” in parent-teacher conferences. Journal of Communication, 65(2), 373–395.
Regulations. (2009). Regulations for the Educational Act
Report to the Storting number 16 (2006–2007). Early Intervention for Lifelong Learning. In Norwegian: … og ingen sto igjen. Tidlig innsats for livslang læring. Ministry of Education and Research.
Report to the Storting number 30 (2003–2004). Culture for learning. In Norwegian: Kultur for læring: Ministry of Education and Research.
Report to the Storting number 31 (2007–2008). Quality in School. In Norwegian: Kvalitet i skolen: Ministry of Education and Research.
Schegloff, E. A. (2007). Sequence organization in interaction. A primer in conversation analysis I. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: how professionals think in action. New York: Basic Books.
Slavin, R. E. (2006). Educational psychology. Theory and Practice. London: Pearson.
The Education Act. (1998). Ministry of Education. In Norwegian: Lov om grunnskolen og den vidaregåande opplæringa
Turner, B. S. (1990). Theories of modernity and postmodernity. London: Sage.
Tveit, A. D. (2009). Conflict between truthfulness and tact in parent-teacher conferences. Scandinavian Journal of Disability Research, 11(4), 237–256.
Ule, M., Živoder, A., & Du Bois-Reymond, M. (2015). ‘Simply the best for my children’: Patterns of parental involvement in education. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 28(3), 329–348.
Vincent, C., & Martin, J. (2002). Class, Culture and Agency: researching parental voice. Discourse: Studies in the Culture Politics of Education, 23(1), 109–128.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Cambridge, MA, London, England: Harvard University Press.
Weber, M. (1991). Structures of power. In H. H. Gerth, C. Wright Mills, & B. S. Turner (Eds.), Essays in sociology. England: Routledge.
Westergård, E. (2013). Teacher competencies and parental cooperation. International Journal about Parents in Education, 7(2), 91–99.
Westergård, E. (2015). Moving the theory of parental cooperation and innovation into practice. International Journal about Parents in Education, 9(1), 93–105.
Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research. Design and Methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Tveit, A.D. Construction of Pupils’ School Achievements and Future Plans in Parent-Teacher Meetings. Interchange 49, 231–246 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10780-018-9324-7
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10780-018-9324-7