Through language, children can expand their understanding of the world around them. Language is the key to not only communicate, but how we process the world around us. It is important for parents and the communities surrounding children to support the development of language. Parents in a higher socioeconomic status have access to the resources needed to give their children the attention they need to develop a richer understanding of language. Those in a lower socioeconomic status are restricted only not by the amount of resources, but also by the lack of attention given to children. The public-school systems are not structured to give directed attention or educate other’s in how to interact with children in different stages of language development. Through the studies available today, it becomes apparent that children of a lower socioeconomic status do not have the same language skills as other children because parent in a low socioeconomic status are not educated on child vocabular and development. Hoff argues that parents of different socioeconomic groups have different understandings of their children (2003). Rowe continued the work to find that educated and advantaged parents know more about child development than less educated and advantaged parents (2012). Parents that talked more with their children about event that happened in the past or will happen in the future had children with larger vocabularies one year later than parents who produced fewer narrative utterances (Rowe, 2008). LeBarton wrote on increasing spoken vocabulary with directed attention (2013). As shown in Hathaway’s study, public school systems are disorganized and understaffed (2015). The role of a Literacy Coach should be to increase joint attention activities with pre-school classes.

Before looking at what can be done to support child language development, it is important to first understand the barriers created by socioeconomic status. In 2003, Hoff studied how parents of different socioeconomic status (SES) interacted with their children. By reviewing 90 minute recordings of the primary care giver and child in their homes during the day, it became apparent that high SES mothers produce more speech per unit of time interacting, use a richer vocabulary, issue fewer behavior directives, and ask more conversation-eliciting questions (Hoff, 2003). Despite the economic differnces, parents had a similar amount of time to spend with their children, but the high SES mothers spent more time using language in a way they knew would help child development (Hoff, 2003). They would ask more questions testing their children’s knowledge, rather than yes/no questions (Rowe, 2008). If a parent’s beliefs on child vocabulary capabilities impacts how they interact with their children, then then it reasonable to say that teachers and other public officals would have the same barriers. In an education system where there is no clear language program, a professional cannot be expected to understand the language they need to use to foster vocabulary development.

Rowe followed Hoff’s example to further understand why high SES mothers encourage more vocabulary development than mid-SES mothers. The studies conducted were similar to Hoff; watching recording of primary caregiver interactions. In two different studies, Rowe agreed that high SES parents use more diverse language and use more directive utterances, which is connected to larger vocabulary in children (Rowe, 2008). Parents who have a better understanding of child development tend to talk more to their children. Rowe found that the high SES parents were more educated and thus had a better knowledge of child development (Rowe, 2012). Parents of a low SES have the necessary verbal facilities, but lack the understanding of how to apply them. Rowe found that the parents changed the way they talked as children’s receptive vocabulary skills also changed. Those with a high SES knew how to fine-tune vocabulary with the stages of vocabulary development (Rowe, 2012). Public-school sytems focus on a common core agenda rather than fine-tuning vocabulary for students. Being taught to memorize new words from lists does not expose students to the rich context behind the words. Low SES schools and parents focus on task oriented problems which does not give the student an opportunity to grow.

Because parent verbal facilities are not a barrier, lower SES parent can help develop their children’s language skills as effectively, with the correct educational backgroung and a positive perception of child development. LeBarton studied show shared attention can improve vocabulary development. Researchers spent two weeks teaching studnets different words with picture cards (LeBarton, 2013). The focus was on the relationship of the instructor to student (LeBarton, 2013). Three objects would be present on the page and the researcher would either just say the name, say the name and point to the object, or say the name and point to the object with the child (Lebarton, 2013). All of the children were exposed to the same amount and quality of words. The student were given vocabulary tests to measure the improvement (LeBarton, 2013). After two weeks of vocabulary lessons with researchers, students in the pointing condition improved the most. Having the child and researcher pointing at the same picture while the researcher named the object benefited language most because it guaranteed child was paying attention to the same thing as the researcher. The researchers were able to include a stronger vocabulary development with gestures and attention. The directed, joint attention benefited the student most (LeBarton, 2013). Schools today often don’t use joint attention.

In the public-school system, there is no direct authority on language development for students. Because everyone learns at a different pace and some students could be “late bloomers”, schools don’t support struggling students. Unless the student’s parents are aware of the delayed development and have accesses to resources, that student won’t receive the attention needed to foster language. Literacy coaches don’t have a clearly defined position and are often mistreated (Hathaway, 2016). Rather than working with teachers and student, they are made to do admistrative work (Hathaway, 2016). An educational program needs to be put in place by every literacy coach. Teachers should be taught to identify child development of langauge and the importance of attention in learning (Hathaway, 2016). Teacher’s can use the directed attention on certain aspects of language to foster a better understanding through literacy.

Hathaway, J. I., Martin, C.S., & Mraz, M. (2016). Revisiting the roles of literacy coaches: Does reality match research?. Reading Psychology, (2, 230-56)

Hoff, E. (2003). The specificity of environmental influence: Socioeconomic status affects early vocabulary development via maternal speech. Child Development (74, 1368–78.)

LeBarton, E. (2013). Experimentally Induced Increases in Early Gesture Lead to Increase in Spoken Vocabulary. Journal of Cognition and Development. (16, 199-220).

Rowe, M. (2008). Child-Directed speech: relation to socioeconomic status, knowledge of child development and child vocabulary skill. Child Language. (35, 185-205).

Rowe, M. (2012). A Longitudinal Investigation of the Role of Quantity and Quality of Child-Directed Speech in Vocabulary Development. Child Development. (83, 1762-1774).