Brain Bigelow, John La Gaipa and William Corsaro Essay Example

may have lost some of the children's individual opinions by creating this list of characteristic's beforehand and then looking for the occurrences in the essays. Brace and Byford (2012) However as Bigelow and La Gapia compiled 480 essay's it would have been too time consuming to go through them all with a fine tooth comb considering the volume acquired. Nevertheless it was essential Bigelow and La Gapia kept the study as such because they wanted to extend the findings in children's friendship's and apply it to a broader society.

So by transforming written text into a form that can be counted or “frequency counts” it enabled Bigelow and La Gapia to identify any similarities in the data that would help provide information about the way children's friendship's alter. Brace and Byford (2012). Subsequently Corsaro took a different approach to studying children's friendship, Corsaro was more interested in maintaining the children's individual view of the word “friend” and seeing how children talk to each other about this. In addition Corsaro wanted to see what this may mean to children from different backgrounds and personal beliefs.

Corsaro carried out his study by using a “reactive” method, that is letting the child draw him in then observing the children from within the group. Corsaro made detailed notes and video recorded the children's interactions with one and other and then analysed the conversations between the children. Corsaro argued that rather than asking a child to write down their thoughts on friendship it enabled him to gain a first hand account of the child's experience, to see things from a child's perspective and by engaging with the children

on their own terms he was able to better understand the world of children's friendship.

Interview with William Corsaro (2010) Consequently these two different approaches to studying friendship will generate different data, and both have distinct advantages and disadvantages. Bigelow and La Gaipa's study collected essays from children between the ages of 6 – 14years, on the one hand this allowed children to write openly about their personal views on what friendship means to them, and also enabled Bigelow and La Gapia to compile such a large sample, but on the other hand thought may need to be taken how younger children would be able to explain their definition of a best friend in written form.

Namely, they may find it difficult to express themselves properly this way. Nevertheless the outcome provided some interesting findings concerning how children's expectations of friendship changes and develops as children get older. Bigelow and La Gapia proposed that the findings of the study could be thought out in a three stage model such as, firstly children saw friendship based on similarities in play and activities, then shifts to more about dependability and sharing, to finally more a focus on similar interests, loyalty and intimate relationships.

These results therefore proposed that as children develop so do their friendship requirements. Brace and Byford (2012)as cited in Bigelow and La Gapia (1975). However even though Corsaro wasn't interested in turning his results into quantitative data or frequency counts his approach into children’s friendship still posed another question of how easy it would be to blend in with the children due to adults being larger physically and how a child

perceives an adult, and in addition how to become the child's friend.

Corsao learnt that by not asking the children too many questions and not acting like a typical adult the children would warm to the idea of an adult figure being present, then through time the children would invite him into their social group. To begin with Corsaro suggests an approach where the researcher participates by watching and observing from a distance. An example of such was through his Study in Italy where Corsaro was invited into a group fairly quickly.

His accent was funny to the children and they were also able to pick up that his Italian wasn't the best. As the children tried to help him with his Italian it gave the children and Corsaro some common ground. Over time the children started asking him questions about who he was etc, and so by letting the children bring him in he was able to join in but on an outside level. Corsaro found that the “reactive method worked well in the research he has carried out” Interview with William Corsaro (2010).

As a result of using this reactive method or “ethnographic approach” not only did Corsaro see first hand how children even as young as 2, 3 and 4 create their own talk and fantasy worlds, and that other children picked up on that and interacted with each other from it, but also through their talk they showed concern and regard for one another and used the word friend to join in play. Furthermore Corsaro gained an insight into culture influences and values within the group.

He

found that Italian children are passionate about debates, whereas White American's avoid this, but similar to African American children. This shows a reflection on culture differences. Interview with William Corsaro (2010) To conclude, both Bigelow, La Gapia and Corsaro's study into investigating children’s meaning of friendships has provided examples on how different methods and approaches on a similar topic can produce different findings.

Bigelow and La Gapia's approach illustrated that as children got older their definition of a friend became more about forming close, loyal and trustworthy relationships compared to a focal point on activities and play earlier on. Similarly Corsaro's ethnographic method highlighted how children’s friendship can also grow and be retained but surprisingly that children as young as three can show concern and regard for others and not much later in life as Bigelow and La Gapia had argued. Bigelow and La Gapia (1975)cited in Brace and Byford (2012).