Child-led research, children’s rights and childhood studies: A defence

IF 1.6 3区 社会学 Q2 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY
N. Thomas
{"title":"Child-led research, children’s rights and childhood studies: A defence","authors":"N. Thomas","doi":"10.1177/0907568221996743","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Recent articles by Kim and Hammersley have critiqued, respectively: the methodological and normative assumptions that underlie research ‘by’ children; claims made about the implications of children’s rights for the ethics of research with children; and more broadly, some of the central commitments of Childhood Studies. This paper offers a response to these critiques, seeking to distinguish between those that clearly should be accepted, those that appear to be based on a misreading of the claims being made by scholars and researchers, and those that represent serious challenges to defend, redefine or rethink our aims, claims or practices.","PeriodicalId":47764,"journal":{"name":"Childhood-A Global Journal of Child Research","volume":"28 1","pages":"186 - 199"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2021-02-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/0907568221996743","citationCount":"14","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Childhood-A Global Journal of Child Research","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0907568221996743","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 14

Abstract

Recent articles by Kim and Hammersley have critiqued, respectively: the methodological and normative assumptions that underlie research ‘by’ children; claims made about the implications of children’s rights for the ethics of research with children; and more broadly, some of the central commitments of Childhood Studies. This paper offers a response to these critiques, seeking to distinguish between those that clearly should be accepted, those that appear to be based on a misreading of the claims being made by scholars and researchers, and those that represent serious challenges to defend, redefine or rethink our aims, claims or practices.
儿童主导的研究、儿童权利和儿童研究:辩护
Kim和Hammersley最近的文章分别批评了:作为儿童研究基础的方法和规范假设;关于儿童权利对儿童研究伦理的影响的主张;以及更广泛地说,儿童研究的一些核心承诺。本文对这些批评做出了回应,试图区分哪些是明显应该接受的,哪些是基于对学者和研究人员所提出的主张的误读,哪些是对捍卫、重新定义或重新思考我们的目标、主张或实践的严重挑战。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Childhood-A Global Journal of Child Research
Childhood-A Global Journal of Child Research SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
15.80%
发文量
43
期刊介绍: Childhood is a major international peer reviewed journal and a forum for research relating to children in global society that spans divisions between geographical regions, disciplines, and social and cultural contexts. Childhood publishes theoretical and empirical articles, reviews and scholarly comments on children"s social relations and culture, with an emphasis on their rights and generational position in society.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信