`I told you so': justification used in disputes in young children's interactions in an early childhood classroom

Abstract

While justifications are used frequently by young children in their everyday interactions, their use has not been examined to any great extent. This article examines the interactional phenomenon of justification used by young children as they manage social organization of their peer group in an early childhood classroom. The methodological approaches of conversation analysis and membership categorization analysis were used to analyse video-recorded and transcribed interactions of young children (aged 4—6 years) in a preparatory classroom in a primary school in Australia. The focus is an episode that occurred within the play area of the classroom and involved a dispute of ownership relating to a small, wooden plank. Justifications were frequent occurrences as the young participants drew upon justificatory devices to support their stances. The justifications related to the concepts of ownership and were used by those engaged in the particular dispute to support their positions and provide reasons for their actions. Four types of justificatory responses using child-constructed rules are highlighted. They are: justification based on the rule of transferred ownership; the rule of first possession; rules associated with custodianship; and the rule of third-party verification. The justifications are practices that work to build and reinforce individual children's status within the group, which in turn contributes to the social order of the classroom.

Gimme! Gimme! Gimme!: Object requests, ownership and entitlement in a children's play session

“…The invocation of a membership category, and/or its associated 'rules of application' (Baker, 2000), is used by children to control access to toys and for inclusion in activities (e.g. Cobb-Moore et al, 2008). Here, the category of 'owner of all the grey toys' is invoked to justify grabbing one particular grey toy.…”

“…Lucy notices this and responds by grabbing the toy out of Cara's hand and issuing the 'prior use' justification for this action: 'hey this is the tree that I put there' (lines 187--189). Children's justifications have been previously examined as statements that make explicit the reasons for why one has taken a particular position, with the ultimate aim of making ''the speaker's position less questionable by the recipient'' (Church, 2009; see also Cobb-Moore et al, 2008;Orsolini, 1993:281). By using justifications, children thus reveal for each other, and the researcher, the situational factors which are most salient in the construction of their request-making talk.…”

Chinese children’s justifications for sharing resources: why do we have to share?

“…Sharing is a pro-social behaviour that has behind it the intention to benefit other people (Staub, 1978(Staub, , 1979, but it may also create conflicts over ownership rights among peers (Cobb-Moore, Danby, & Farrell, 2008) since it may involve a distribution of power, positions and rights among peers (Cobb-Moore, Danby, & Farrell, 2009). Different children may use different rules to argue for ownership rights when playing a game: some may argue that resources should be owned by the original players, but latecomers to the game may argue that every child has an equal right to use school resources (Cobb-Moore et al, 2008).…”

Early childhood problem-solving interaction: young children’s discourse during small-group work in primary school

“…Another line of research that focuses on (very) young children's disputes and arguments underscores that children in peer interaction accomplish specific initiating and responsive actions (Danby & Theobald, 2012). Then, children may argue about rules, the organization and/ or the subject of play (Butler, 2008;Goodwin, 2007;Van der Schaaf, 2016) and about the ownership and possession of objects or toys (Church, 2009;Cobb-Moore, 2008;Danby & Baker, 1998). A dispute is a joint activity (Cromdal, 2004) launched by a verbal or non-verbal 'offensive' action of a participant that is challenged by one of the other participants (e.g., Church, 2009;Van der Schaaf, 2016).…”

“…These challenges may turn into aggravated disputes in which children accomplish different practices to design their opposition and to emphasize their position (Corsaro & Rizzo, 1990;Goodwin, 1983). For instance, children use accounts to support their position and to undermine the position of the other participants (Cobb-Moore, Danby, & Farrell, 2008;Goodwin & Goodwin, 1987); young children seem to do that more with increasing age (Van Krimpen-Bijlefeld, 1995). In addition, it turns out that the continuation of the dispute depends on the type of account.…”