Daily routines and many habitual behaviors embedded in them are a compromise between what is desirable and what is practical, given the surrounding environment. What people believe their routines ought to be also plays a role—culture defines what is an ideal routine. Like other cultural matters, many features of daily routines are taken for granted and transparent, like the proverbial fish that does not notice the water. Occupational therapists and other professionals can enhance their work by examining their clients' routines, the ecological and cultural factors that shape those routines, and the accommodations their clients already are making to meet adaptive challenges.
BanduraA. (1989). Human agency in social cognitive theory. American Psychologist, 44, 1175–1184.
2.
BernheimerL. P., & KeoghB. K. (1995). Weaving interventions into the fabric of everyday life: An approach to family assessment. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 15, 415–433.
3.
BoorstinD. J. (1983). The discoverers. New York: Vintage Books.
4.
BovillE. W. (1962). English country life 1780–1830. London: Oxford University Press.
5.
ColeM. (1985). The zone of proximal development: Where culture and cognition create each other. In WertschJ. V. (Ed.), Culture, communication, and cognition: Vygotskian perspectives (pp. 146–161). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
6.
D'AndradeR. (1995). The development of cognitive anthropology. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
7.
EdgertonR. B. (1992). Sick societies: Challenging the myth of primitive harmony. New York: Free Press.
8.
FeatherstoneH. (1981). A difference in the family. London: Penguin Books.
9.
GallimoreR.BernheimerL., & WeisnerT. (1999). Family life is more than managing crisis: Broadening the agenda of research on families adapting to childhood disability. In GallimoreR.BernheimerC.MacMillanD.SpeeceD. & VaughnS. (Eds.), Developmental perspectives on high incidence handicapping conditions: Papers in honor of Barbara K. Keogh (pp. 55–80). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum & Associates.
10.
GallimoreR., & GoldenbergC. (2001). Analyzing cultural models and settings to connect minority achievement and school improvement research. Educational Psychologist, 36(1), 45–56.
11.
GallimoreR.WeisnerT. S.KaufmanS. Z., & BernheimerL. P. (1989). The social construction of ecocultural niches: Family accommodation of developmentally delayed children. American Journal on Mental Retardation, 94, 216–230.
12.
GiddensA. (1987). Social theory and modern sociology. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
13.
HansenD. A. (1993). The child in family and school: Agency and the workings of time. In CowanP. A.FieldD.HansenD. A.SkolnickA. & SwansonG. E. (Eds.), Family, self, and society: Toward a new agenda for family research. (pp. 69–102). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum & Associates.
14.
HollandD., & QuinnN. (Eds.). (1987). Cultural models in language and thought. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
15.
KennedyM. M. (1997, October). The connection between research and practice. Educational Researcher, pp. 4–11.
16.
LortieD. (1975). Schoolteacher: A sociological study. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
17.
LynchE. W., & HansonM. J. (1998). A guide for working for children and their families: Developing cross-cultural competence. Baltimore: Brookes.
18.
MeyerE. C., & BaileyD. B. (1993). Family-centered care in early intervention: Community and hospital settings. In PaulJ. L. & SimeonssonR. J. (Eds.), Children with special needs: Family, culture, and society (pp. 181–209). Orlando, FL: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
19.
SkolnickA. (1993). Changes of heart: Family dynamics in historical perspective. In CowanP. A.FieldD.HansenD. A.SkolnickA. & SwansonG. E. (Eds.), Family, self, and society: Toward a new agenda for family research (pp. 43–68). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum & Associates.
20.
StiglerJ. W., & HiebertJ. (1999). The teaching gap: Best ideas from the world's teachers for improving education in the classroom. New York: Free Press.
21.
StiglerJ. W.GallimoreR., & HiebertJ. (2000). Using video surveys to compare classrooms and teaching across cultures: Examples and lessons from the TIMSS video studies. Educational Psychologist, 35, 87–100.
22.
StraussC. (1992). What makes Tony run? Schemas as motives reconsidered. In D'AndradeR. & StraussC. (Eds.), Human motives and cultural models (pp. 197–224). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
23.
TharpR., & GallimoreR. (1989). Rousing minds to life: Teaching, learning, and schooling in social context. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
24.
WalshM. E. (1999). Cultural factors in adaptation to type II diabetes. Unpublished dissertation, University of Arizona.
25.
WeisnerT. S. (1984). Ecocultural niches of middle childhood: A cross-cultural perspective. In CollinsW. A. (Ed.), Development during middle childhood: The years from six to twelve (pp. 335–369). Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences.
26.
WeisnerT. S.BausanoM., & KornfeinM. (1983). Putting family ideals into practice: Pronaturalism in conventional and non-conventional California families. Ethos, 11, 278–304.
27.
WeisnerT. S., & BernheimerL. (1998). Children of the 1960s at midlife: Generational identity and the family adaptive project. In ShwederR. A. (Ed.), Welcome to middle age (and other cultural fictions) (pp. 211–257). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
