Criticism of Quitak’s Child observation Essay
Quitak first points out that she is “working for the assumption which the problematic facets of our encounter contain the maximum potential”. Even so I think it is important to clarify from the outset, just how she come to this assumption, as someone does not know whether the girl went into the observation with this perception or if these presumptions were developed as a result of her observation.
There may be another important omission relating to who also the author happens to be. She hasn’t positively stated that the girl with a Interpersonal Work pupil, although this can be implied when she states that her observations experienced “implications to get social work. ” It is therefore difficult to uncover her purpose for carrying the actual observations. Furthermore Quitak does not mention how she reached select the child included in her observations, how many statement sessions occurred and the entire sessions. Which means reader is unable to assess if there were any issues of bias involved with her selection process.
The fact that she is the product of The english language middle class parents means she may be going into the analysis with particular assumptions, as she is watching a child who has a Palestinian parent. A tremendous area that was lacking in her observations was her lack of ability to “tune in to Selena’s inner world” (pg 250), although Quitak does admit this omission. She didn’t really make an effort to question and understand Selena’s behaviour or perhaps how the girl might be feeling when the girl demonstrated conduct she didn’t like, which usually meant her observation experienced as a result.
Full (2010) tensions the importance of “to access the child’s emotional world”.