you won't believe this

Fri Feb 29 14:46:41 UTC 2008

Thanks to all who have responded.  The larger issue that many point  
out  -- especially Tom -- is  this: How do we allow for a free  
marketplace of ideas and products but insert some social  
responsibility as scientists?

  This product particularly offends because the data on which it is  
based are the Hart and Risley data  whose major goal was to point out  
the language input deficiency in low income, what they called,  
"welfare" mothers.  Those "welfare" moms can hardly pay $399.00 to  
purchase Lena, nor can they buy the cute outfits that house LENA.    
And as was pointed out in one response, those who are desperately  
worried about their children's language should probably see a  
therapist rather than spend a lot of money on this product.

So this becomes a classic case that we have seen in science before.   
In the 1960s Mark Rosenzweig published findings that rats raised in  
enriched environments had heavier and thicker brains.    Greenough   
built upon these findings.   What the researchers meant by enriched,  
however,  was a "normal" rather than a deprived or isolated environment.

I bet that the folks who purchase this product are already giving  
their kids ample "professional" (Hart and Risley)  level language and  
a quite normal environment.  They don't need this to help them see  
whether their child has autism or language delay.  Some of the folks  
involved in the product are scientists -- so I just wonder what our  
social responsibility is in this case.   And I worry that this is  
mentioned in widely accessible media becoming a public face for our  
work.

I think the blog idea raised yesterday  is an interesting one as  
issues re language and society come up all of the time. Would it be  
good to have a CHILDES blog?  We could choose which issues we want to  
comment on as a group and if we decide to post, then at least have a  
more public position as a group of scientists.

And who could actually manage such a thing?  My sons tell me that I  
am technoplegic so I don't really know how blogs work.

Thoughts?

kathy

On Feb 28, 2008, at 7:57 PM, Tom Roeper wrote:

> Dear Kathy---
>
>     I think the goal of having an impact on how knowledge is  
> presented in the media is an excellent one.  I'll suggest below how  
> I think it might be done, but some background on the article
> might be helpful.
>    I was cited very briefly in that article with an incredibly  
> simple-minded sentence.   The author is someone with a general  
> interest in science and a very young child.  That is the source of
> his interest.   I spoke to him for over an hour----and said that I  
> was really not familiar with the instrument---but that any effort  
> to assess children should pay attention to how children show
> kowledge of the actual structure of the language---and referred him  
> to the DELV which Harry Seymour, Jill deVilliers and I developed--- 
> and told him how simple sentences like
> "who ate what" can use very simple sentences to approach core  
> features of grammar.  I also sent him chapters and a copy of my  
> book "The Prism of Grammar"---hoped he might mention it, since
> it is simple enough for parents to use and has been very well  
> received.
>    All of this I mention because it shows that the media often  
> comes with a pre-set idea of what they want to hear you say and  
> what scope they will give to it.  Therefore the way we might be
> successful in reaching the public is in seeking to write articles  
> ourselves---perhaps with many authors who have legitimacy---in  
> places like Parents' magazine and places where one can
> explain with simplicity how to think about their children and the  
> tests that they take.  I suspect it will not work by trying to  
> persuade existing journalists what you want them to say.
>
>     The issue is much broader actually, as any of you familiar with  
> the legal wrangles over Larry P and evidence-based evaluation,  
> already knows.   We also need to have more straightforward
> evaluation of what goes to the public.  Parent magazines approve  
> toys and other things.  The FDA approves drugs----though often the  
> science is very ambiguous---but at an ASHA convention
> all products seems equal.  It seems to me that outsiders should be  
> able to offer the public products that may not be subject to  
> independent evaluation, just like patients seek the right
> to have experimental drugs.  But a more systematic method of  
> evaluating assessment products----and an effort to explain it  
> simply through media directed at the parents and public
> would be a good idea.    We will need to write it ourselves.
>
> That's how it looks to me, best, Tom
>
>
>  This came after I discussed the matter with the author for over an
>
> On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 7:57 AM, Kathy Hirsh-Pasek  
> <khirshpa at temple.edu> wrote:
> I just read the article in the NYTimes on baby techtronics part of  
> which described the Lena system.  Yes, Lena is in the news again.   
> The adds from their web site tell us that it is relevant to any  
> parent concerned about "language delays, autism or transitioning an  
> adopted child!"  I am copying the description from the Times and  
> thought we might all want to check out how our research is  
> interpreted in the marketplace. Does this require a response from  
> our community?  What is our professional responsibility when this  
> keeps coming up in the news?
>
> Kathy
>
>
> Last on our list was the LENA System ($399) a language measurement  
> tool developed by Infoture, in Boulder, Colo. The system is based  
> on research demonstrating a correlation between the amount parents  
> talk to their babies during their first three years and their  
> professional success later in life.
>
> The LENA System includes a credit card device and several  
> children's outfits designed with large pockets in the front.  
> Several days a month, you slip the device into the clothing and it  
> records conversation between parent and child.
>
> At the end of the day, you plug it into your personal computer.  
> Special software (available for Windows, but not Macs) analyzes the  
> speech — separating adult words and baby gurgling from other noises  
> — and reports on how many words you have spoken to your baby, how  
> often your baby responds, and where you match up against the rest  
> of the American population, to ensure your infant is getting that  
> all-important verbal edge on other infants.
>
> My girls are a bit too young for the LENA, which Infoture  
> recommends for infants from 2 months to 4 years. Instead I called  
> Jennifer Jacobs, a mother of two from Boise, Idaho, who used the  
> device to ensure her youngest child, Katherine, was not getting  
> left behind.
>
> http://www.lenababy.com/
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> Tom Roeper
> Dept of Lingiustics
> UMass South College
> Amherst, Mass. 01003 ISA
> 413 256 0390
>
> >

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Info-CHILDES" group.
To post to this group, send email to info-childes at googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to info-childes-unsubscribe at googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/info-childes?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/info-childes/attachments/20080229/5cca7a66/attachment.htm>