[Edling] Why Boosting Poor Children’s Vocabulary Is Important for Public Health

[Richard Hudson]

Hello again Daniel. Thanks for the interesting link. Would you agree 
that even these researchers accept that poor children reach school with 
fewer words than rich children?

Dick Hudson






On 15/09/2015 21:51, Daniel Ginsberg wrote:
> There was an invited forum in Jnl Ling Anth earlier this year that 
> debunked a lot of this "word gap" discourse. I would love to see more 
> public awareness of this, and less uncritical citation of the highly 
> flawed Hart & Risley study.
>
> http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jola.12071/full
>
> --
> Daniel Ginsberg
> Doctoral candidate, Linguistics
> Georgetown University
> http://georgetown.academia.edu/DanielGinsberg
>
> On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 7:27 AM, Francis Hult 
> <francis.hult at englund.lu.se <mailto:francis.hult at englund.lu.se>> wrote:
>
>     [Moderator's note: I post this story because it relates to a
>     discourse that is gaining public traction.  I am reminded of an
>     article that was recently posted to Edling:
>
>     Johnson, E.J. (2015) Debunking the “language gap”. /Journal for
>     Multicultural Education, 9/(1), 42-50.
>
>     I wonder what perspectives list members working in different
>     research traditions have on this topic. What additional research
>     findings and ideas should we be getting out to the public and
>     how?  FMH]
>
>     The Atlantic
>
>     Why Boosting Poor Children’s Vocabulary Is Important for Public Health
>
>     Re­search sug­gests that poor chil­dren hear about 600 words per
>     hour, while af­flu­ent chil­dren hear 2,000. By age 4, a poor
>     child has a listen­ing vocab­u­lary of about 3,000 words, while a
>     wealth­i­er child wields a 20,000-word listen­ing vocab­u­lary. So
>     it’s no sur­prise that poor chil­dren tend to enter kinder­garten
>     already be­hind their wealth­i­er peers.
>
>     But it’s not just the poverty that holds them back—it’s the lack
>     of words. In fact, the single-best pre­dict­or of a child’s
>     aca­dem­ic suc­cess is not par­ent­al edu­ca­tion or
>     so­cioeco­nom­ic status, but rather the qual­ity and quantity of
>     the words that a baby hears dur­ing his or her first three years.
>
>     Full story:
>     http://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2015/09/georgias-plan-to-close-the-30-million-word-gap-for-kids/403903/
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Edling mailing list
>     Edling at bunner.geol.lu.se <mailto:Edling at bunner.geol.lu.se>
>     http://bunner.geol.lu.se/mailman/listinfo/edling
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Edling mailing list
> Edling at bunner.geol.lu.se
> http://bunner.geol.lu.se/mailman/listinfo/edling

-- 
Richard Hudson (dickhudson.com)

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/edling/attachments/20150916/7330dac3/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Edling mailing list
Edling at bunner.geol.lu.se
http://bunner.geol.lu.se/mailman/listinfo/edling