The Reflection- The impact that literacy gaps have on diversity and inclusion in the library
The activity- analysing the theory of the ’30-million-word gap’
Whilst reflecting and researching throughout my Masters course I have read and analysed a number of articles and theories that are pertinent to children’s librarianship. One that fascinated me was called Out of the Box and Into the Book: Innovative Library Partnerships to Close the 30 Million Word Gap an idea surmised by researchers Todd Risley and Betty Hart in 1995 that sought to establish a link between children’s early family experience and their intellectual growth as they performed in school. My analysis of the original work is attached below in Appendix A and read having through numerous responses to the work, it has got me thinking about how libraries play a role in improving language diversity through resource and service provision that meets the needs of a wide range of people, cultures and socio-economic status’s.
Professional Learning
Criticisms of the study focus strongly on race and the role that racialized study has on the subject and the point is made that it facilitates bias towards lower income and welfare families. The argument is made that the study’s findings do little to empower children and promote their sense of self and inclusion. The reasons for the differences between the results of high and low-income households is multi-faceted, the real question should be how do we use these findings to promote the change required to achieve diversity, inclusion and representation in the library environment.
Despite the critics of the study, there is still resounding support for the promotion of conversation with children and the benefits it has for their language skills and vocabulary development. This is why baby time and story time in the library are such valuable programs as they encourage the conversation between parent and child. A 2015 study also outlines the importance of educating parents, claiming that, “intervention improved parents’ knowledge of child language development and increased the amount and diversity of parent talk.” (Suskind et al, 2015, p.8). It is claimed that, “Six in ten parents with children ages 0–5 (60 percent) has received advice that children should be read aloud to from birth; however, just under half of parents in the lowest-income households (47 percent) received this advice vs. 74 percent in the highest income households.” (Baldini & Martens, 2016, p.1) There is a clear need for programs that educating and inform parents on the ongoing value of literacy and reading skills and the impact that it has on a child’s development. Partnership also seems to be an effective way of reaching parent groups that need assistance. Health services and not for profit organisations that work with vulnerable communities could be effective pathways for communicating the message, as people already accessing services could indeed be further ‘siphoned’ through to programs.
This analysis has highlighted for the importance of library programs collaborating with parents and external organisations to improve the literacy development of all children regardless of backgrounds, is the primary target of programs and services within the library. This in itself is a commitment to diversity and inclusion.
References
Baldini, M., & Martens, M. (2016). Out of the Box and Into the Book: Innovative Library Partnerships to Close the 30 Million-Word Gap. Children & Libraries, 14(1), 12–. https://doi.org/10.5860/cal.14n1.12
Brushe, M. E., Lynch, J., Reilly, S., Melhuish, E., Mittinty, M. N., & Brinkman, S. A. (2021). The education word gap emerges by 18 months: findings from an Australian pro-spective study. BMC Paediatrics, 21(1), 1–247. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12887-021-02712-1
Figueroa, M. (2022). Podcasting past the paywall: How diverse media allows more equitable participation in linguistic science. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 42, 40–46. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190521000118
Hart, B., & Risley, T. R. (2003). The early catastrophe: The 30-million-word gap. American Educator, 27, 4-9.
Kamenetz, Anya (2018, June 1). Let’s Stop Talking About The ’30 Million-Word Gap’, NPR. https://www.npr.org/sections/ed/2018/06/01/615188051/lets-stop-talking-about-the-30-million-word-gap
Suskind, D. L., Leffell, K. R., Graf, E., Hernandez, et al (2016). A parent-directed language intervention for children of low socioeconomic status: a randomized controlled pilot study. Journal of Child Language, 43(2), 366–406. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0305000915000033
Appendix A- analysis of The Early Catastrophe The 30 Million Word Gap by Age 3 (Hart & Risley, 1995)
University of Kansas researchers Betty Hart and Todd Risley came up with the term ‘30 million word gap’ by “estimating through linear extrapolation of data collected from 10 to 36 months, that by age four, parents in the United States (US) who were on welfare had spoken 30 million words less to their child than parents with professional occupations”. (Brusche et al, 2021, p.1) As problematic as this statement sounds today, it is a study that has influenced dozens of follow up reviews and divided opinion in the decades that have followed.
Risley and Hart were heavily influenced by the 1960s war on poverty and focused their work on understanding the impacts of developmental growth on children and the factors impeding vocabulary growth and its implication on their futures. Given the influence a family has on a child under 3 years, it’s not surprising that the children involved in the study mirrored their family’s vocabulary levels and how much they talked.
Given how influential this study has been, it’s important to understand the methodology employed. The initial study comprised of 42 families, each with one child involved. Each family adhered to 2 1/2 years or more of monthly hour-long observations with researchers. The sample group contained 13 families of a high socioeconomic status, 10 were considered middle status, 13 were lower status, and six were relying on welfare payments. (Hart & Risley, 1995). There was also a spread of cultures and backgrounds within the sample; 17 of the students were African American (I could not find further breakdowns of the other 25 children and their nationalities/ backgrounds) and 23 of the total number were girls.
The study was able to predict, based on the language progression of 3-year-olds, outcomes for 9–10-year-olds, as they followed a similar trajectory as the initial study, meaning their vocabulary use was predictive of language skills and comprehension. Furthermore, their recommendations for teacher intervention at an early age is imperative for language development and education success and opportunity later in life.
The research has been highly influential and hotly debated for over 35 years. More recently, there has been a focus on the racial undertones of the study. Referring back to the sample group, it was more recently revealed that 7 of the 10 lower class families and all of the welfare families were black and 9 of 10 upper class families were white. (Kamenetz , 2018). This information is pertinent to the language standards that the children were tested against. “The ethno-racial makeup of the field of linguistics allows white people to define what is normative and valued” (Figueroa, 2020, p.3) The study did little exploration into the cultural differences between the families, other than defining their financial means. It’s doubtful that the study would hold up in a modern context as its findings do not represent the reality of low-income earners in Australia in particular- migrant communities for instance often have high levels of education but struggle to gain reflective positions in Australia.
Despite this, a recent study out of Australia concluded that evidence of the socioeconomic word gap began to emerge in children between 12 months and 18 months and that, “child vocalisations and vocabulary development” should commence before then.” (Brusche et al, 2021, p.1) Library programs can be an effective way to promote literacy development and increase community engagement.
Despite the obvious flaws in the study, there is evidence to say that the gap is real, but it’s how we frame the problem and the way we work to overcome it that has the power to promote diversity in language, inclusion and an enriched respect for cultural differences and their representation in libraries and schools. This would benefit our combined linguistic traditions and information dissemination.