Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
Education Research International
Volume 2011, Article ID 195812, 19 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2011/195812
Research Article

The Multifaceted Use of a Written Artifact in Student Supervision

Department of Scandinavian Languages, Stockholm University, 106 91 Stockholm, Sweden

Received 3 November 2010; Accepted 29 March 2011

Academic Editor: Miriam David

Copyright © 2011 Gunilla Jansson. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Linked References

  1. J. Latimer, The Conduct of Care, Blackwell Science, Oxford, UK, 2000.
  2. P. Sully and J. Dallas, Essential Communication Skills for Nursing, Elsevier Mosby, Edinburgh, UK, 2005.
  3. M. Ehnfors, A. Ehrenberg, and I. Thorell-Ekstrand, The VIPS-Book: On an Empirically Based Template for Documentation of Nursing Care in the Patient Record, Vårdförbundet, Stockholm, Sweden, 2000.
  4. S. Candlin, Therapeutic Communication: A Lifespan Approach, Pearson Education Australia, New South Wales, Australia, 2008.
  5. S. Candlin, “Taking risks: an indicator of expertise?” Research on Language and Social Interaction, vol. 35, no. 2, pp. 173–193, 2002. View at Google Scholar
  6. P. Bourdieu, Language and Symbolic Power, Polity, Cambridge, UK, 1991.
  7. C. Goodwin, “Professional vision,” American Anthropologist, vol. 96, no. 3, pp. 606–633, 1994. View at Google Scholar
  8. C. Goodwin and M. Goodwin, “Seeing as a situated activity: formulating planes,” in Cognition and Communication at Work, D. Middleton and Y. Engeström, Eds., pp. 61–95, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 1996. View at Google Scholar
  9. J. Hindmarsh and C. Heath, “Sharing the tools of the trade: the interactional constitution of workplace objects,” Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, vol. 29, no. 5, pp. 523–562, 2000. View at Google Scholar
  10. C. Heath and P. Luff, Technology in Action, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 2000.
  11. L. Mondada, “Videorecordings as the reflexive preservation and configuration of phenomenal features for analysis,” in Videoanalysis, H. Knoblauch, J. Raab, H.-G. Soeffner, and B. Schnettler, Eds., pp. 51–58, Lang, Bern, Switzerland, 2006. View at Google Scholar
  12. M. Broth, “Analyse de l'interaction à la télévision,” Moderna Språk, vol. 97, no. 2, pp. 193–201, 2003. View at Google Scholar
  13. C. Heath, P. Luff, and M. Sanchez Svensson, “Technology and medical practice,” Sociology of Health & Illness, vol. 25, pp. 75–96, 2003. View at Google Scholar
  14. A. Pilnick, J. Hindmarsh, and V. Teas Gill, Communication in Healthcare Settings: Policy, Participation and New Technologies, Wiley-Blackwell, West Sussex, UK, 2010.
  15. C. Heath and J. Hindmarsh, “Analysing interaction: video, ethnography and situated conduct,” in Qualitative Research in Practice, T. May, Ed., pp. 99–121, Sage Publications, London, UK, 2002. View at Google Scholar
  16. A. Jones, “Nurses talking to patients: exploring conversation analysis as a means of researching nurse-patient communication,” International Journal of Nursing Studies, vol. 40, no. 6, pp. 609–618, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  17. A. Jones, “Putting practice into teaching: an exploratory study of nursing undergraduates' interpersonal skills and the effects of using empirical data as a teaching and learning resource,” Journal of Clinical Nursing, vol. 16, no. 12, pp. 2297–2307, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at PubMed
  18. A. Jones, “Creating history: documents and patient participation in nurse-patient interviews,” Sociology of Health & Illness, vol. 31, no. 6, pp. 907–923, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at PubMed
  19. C. Heath, Body Movement and Speech in Medical Interaction, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 1986.
  20. H. Eide and T. Eide, Communication in Healthcare. Relational Ethics, Cooperation and Conflictsolving, Studentlitteratur, Lund, Sweden, 1997.
  21. K. L. Becker, L. E. Rose, J. B. Berg, H. Park, and J. H. Shatzer, “The teaching effectiveness of standardized patients,” Journal of Nursing Education, vol. 45, no. 4, pp. 103–111, 2006. View at Google Scholar
  22. M. H. Rosenzweig, K. Magdic, M. Beach, M. Clifton, and R. Arnold, “Patient communication simulation laboratory for students in an acute care nurse practitioner program,” American Journal of Critical Care, vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 364–372, 2008. View at Google Scholar
  23. G. Thomassen, The double-barreled training talk: a study of talks between patients and students from nurse and physician education, Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Norwegian University of Technology and Science, Trondheim, Norway, 2005.
  24. G. Thomassen, “Te role of role-play: managing activity ambiguities in simulated doctor consultation in medical education,” Communication & Medicine, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 83–93, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  25. A. Jones, “Admitting hospital patients: a qualitative study of an everyday nursing task,” Nursing Inquiry, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 212–223, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at PubMed
  26. C. Goodwin, “Action and embodiment within situated human interaction,” Journal of Pragmatics, vol. 32, no. 10, pp. 1489–1522, 2000. View at Google Scholar
  27. C. Goodwin, “Pointing as situated practice,” in Pointing: Where Language, Culture and Cognition Meet, S. Kita, Ed., pp. 217–241, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ, USA, 2003. View at Google Scholar
  28. A. Kendon, Conducting Interaction: Patterns of Behaviour in Focused Encounters, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 1990.
  29. L. Vygotsky, Mind in Society. The Development of Higher Psychological Processes, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass, USA, 1978.
  30. J. V. Wertsch, Voices of the Mind: A Sociocultural Approach to Mediated Action, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass, USA, 1991.
  31. J. Wertsch, “A sociocultural approach to socially shared cognition,” in Persectives on Socially Shared Cognition, L. B. Resnick, J. M. Levine, and S. D. Teasley, Eds., pp. 85–99, American Psychological Association, Washington, DC, USA, 1991. View at Google Scholar
  32. J. Wertsch, Mind as Action, Oxford University Press, New York, NY, USA, 1998.
  33. E. Hutchins, Cognition in the Wild, The MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass, USA, 1995.
  34. P. Thibault, “The interpersonal gateway to the meaning of mind: unifying the inter- an intraorganism perspective on language,” in Continuing Discourse on Language: A Functional Perspective, R. Hasan, C. Mathiessen, and J. Webster, Eds., pp. 117–156, Equinox, London, UK, 2005. View at Google Scholar
  35. J. Gibson, The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception, Houghton-Mifflin, Boston, Mass, USA, 1979.
  36. P. Linell, Rethinking Language, Mind, and World Dialogically: Interactional and Contextual Theories of Human Sense-Making, Information Age Publishing, Charlotte, NC, USA, 2009.
  37. M. Holquist, Dialogism: Bakhtin and His World, Routledge, London, UK, 1990.
  38. R. Rommetveit, “On axiomatic features of a dialogical approach to language and mind,” in The Dynamics of Dialogue, I. Markova and K. Foppa, Eds., pp. 83–104, Harvester Wheatsheaf, New York, NY, USA, 1990. View at Google Scholar
  39. H. Sacks, E. A. Schegloff, and G. Jefferson, “A simplest systematic for the organization of turn-taking for conversation,” Language, vol. 50, no. 4, part 1, pp. 896–735, 1974. View at Google Scholar
  40. J. Sidnell, Conversation Analysis. An Introduction, Wiley-Blackwell, Singapore, 2009.
  41. C. Goodwin, “Participation, stance and affect in the organization of activities,” Discourse & Society, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 53–73, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  42. J. Lave and E. Wenger, Situated Learning. Legitimate Peripheral Participation, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 1991.
  43. G. Jansson, “Student supervision in hybrid contexts,” Språk & Stil, vol. 20, pp. 189–219, 2010. View at Google Scholar
  44. H. Bani-Shoraka, “When different worlds meet. Ethnographic fieldwork in a multilingual educational environment,” Ethnography and Education. In press.
  45. G. Jansson, “Artifact-based interviews at a hospital ward,” in Svenskans beskrivning 31. Förhandlingar vid Trettioförsta sammankomsten för svenskans beskrivning, A.-C. Edlund, Ed., Norstedts Akademiska Förlag, Stockholm, Sweden, May 2010.
  46. T. Stivers and J. Heritage, “Breaking the sequential mold: answering ‘more than the question’ during comprehensive history taking,” Text, vol. 21, no. 1-2, pp. 151–185, 2001. View at Google Scholar
  47. E. Boyd and J. Heritage, “Taking the history: questioning during comprehensive history taking,” in Communication in Medical Care: Interaction between Primary Care Physicians and Patients, J. Heritage and D. Maynard, Eds., pp. 151–180, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 2006. View at Google Scholar
  48. E. Ochs and B. Schieffelin, “Language has a heart,” Text, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 7–25, 1989. View at Google Scholar
  49. H. Sacks, “Everyone has to lie,” in Sociocultural Dimensions of Language Use, M. Sanches and B. G. Blount, Eds., pp. 57–79, Academic Press, New York, NY, USA, 1975. View at Google Scholar
  50. G. Jefferson, “On "Trouble-premonitory" response to inquiry,” Sociological Inquiry, vol. 50, no. 3-4, pp. 153–185, 1980. View at Google Scholar
  51. P. Linell, “Grammatical constructions in practices of talk,” in Grammar and Conversation. Studies in Memoriam of Mats Eriksson, B. Nordberg, L. Keevalik Eriksson, K. Thelander, and M. Thelander, Eds., pp. 199–218, Department of Scandinavian Languages at Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden, 2003. View at Google Scholar
  52. N. Norén, A Family of Methods for Grammatical Construction and the Resolving of Local Communicative Projects, Linköping Studies in Arts and Science 405, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden, 2007.
  53. M. Berg, “Practices of reading and writing: the constitutive role of the patient record in medical work,” Sociology of Health & Illness, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 499–524, 1996. View at Google Scholar
  54. T. Stivers, “Stance, alignment, and affiliation during storytelling: when nodding is a token of affiliation,” Research on Language & Social Interaction, vol. 41, no. 1, pp. 31–57, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  55. G. Jefferson, “On stepwise transition from talk about a trouble to inappropriately next-positioned matters,” in Structures of Social Action, J. M. Atkinson and J. Heritage, Eds., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 1984. View at Google Scholar