A speech by Margaret Hamilton recapping a career in Australian Children's literature starting as an assistant in a library to becoming a librarian, through book retailing and into publishing. A nice snapshot of the development of children's literature in Australia over the past fifty years.
An article (May 31st, 2007) in The Economist makes the point about the huge disparity in exposure to language between groups of people. The article is actually about the role of marriage in wealth maintenance and creation in different classes but has this aside about the impact of those differences on language exposure.
Research also suggests that middle- and working-class parents approach child-rearing in different ways. Professional parents shuttle their kids from choir practice to baseball camp and check that they are doing their homework. They also talk to them more. One study found that a college professor's kids hear an average of 2,150 words per hour in the first years of life. Working-class children hear 1,250 and those in welfare families only 620.
A lifetime's passion starts here
by Amanda Craig
The Times, January 7, 2006
A nice article on parent's and reading with a set of suggestions of when to introduce which titles.
Books are not toys; they are much more magical than that, they are windows into the world of story. Children who have learnt to love books are never bored — how could they be, plugged into some of the greatest entertainment of all time? Yet the gulf between being simply able to read and finding words a uniquely rich source of pleasure is vast. This is a burden — or a privilege — that has to fall on parents. By the time a child gets to school, it's almost too late, especially if school makes the fatal association between work and reading rather than adventure and reading.On the assumption that your child has enough vocabulary to understand words such as cat, run, mouse and rabbit, I recommend beginning with . . .
Once upon a time we told our children stories
by Michael Morpurgo
The Times
March 3, 2005
FOR THE past 18 months in my role as Children's Laureate I have been travelling the country telling stories to young readers and young writers, telling how this particular weaver of tales writes his stories. Like some superannuated strolling player, I have set up and performed wherever anyone would let me: in tiny village halls, grand concert halls, in tents and bookshops and school halls and, once, in an old people's home; from audiences of 14 children in the small island school on Jura in the Hebrides, to 2,500 people in the Albert Hall. I have talked to families — grandparents, parents and children together. In Broughton-in-Furness and Ulverston in the Lake District, I spoke to children from 24 village schools. All came wide-eyed with excitement and expectancy. I strutted my story stuff as best I could, read to them, and answered their questions: "Were you good at writing when you were young?" "No. But I was unbelievably good at rugby," I told them, and sent them and their teachers away, buzzing, I hope, about books, enthused to read more and feeling that they, too, have a story to tell and a voice with which to tell it.Today, World Book Day, hundreds of my fellow writers, and storytellers, illustrators, librarians, teachers and booksellers, are doing just what I've been doing. Indeed, they do it all the year round: this is not a one-day wonder. This kind of sustained effort to bring children to books and books to children is much needed and is, in my view, the most effective way of persuading children to become readers and writers.
It is effective because it is personal and because the children know it is meant. Here is someone in front of them who loves stories, who tells them with such passion that the world of reading, the sheer joy, fun and wonder of it, can be opened up to children who may never have enjoyed books at all. A young life can be changed that way, enriched for ever.
When you think of the extraordinary talent among our children's writers, storytellers and illustrators, it is not surprising that so many children turn to books and become readers after just such an encounter.
Writers and illustrators visit schools all the time, the books exist, various and brilliant enough for all ages and tastes, the publishers design them beautifully, there are dedicated librarians, teachers and booksellers working their socks off to engage children in reading and there are bold and imaginative initiatives such as World Book Day, the wonderful Book Start project and Storyquest. So why do we fail to engage so many children? . . .
Finding Neverland
By Barbara Feinberg
Boston Globe
July 17, 2005
One night, when my daughter was about to turn 7, I asked her what she wanted for her birthday. We discussed various toys, and after a while she began to drift off to sleep. I had just tiptoed out when she jolted awake and suddenly sat up. There must have been a moon through the window, because I recall the bright clarity of her face. ''I know just what I want!" she said. ''I want a little room. One you could put in my real room." . . .
Dahl's stern morality gives his work the edge
Nicolette Jones
Times Online June 21, 2005
ROALD DAHL has a reputation for subversiveness and political incorrectness, which most people assume is why children love reading him. When his books were promoted in a television advertisement, its slogan was: "Nice children don't read Dahl". In fact, Dahl's books are a mixture of wild impropriety and very high standards indeed of children's behaviour — and that of their parents.Yes, Dahl lets George poison his bad-tempered grandmother in George's Marvellous Medicine with a concoction that includes paraffin, sheep-dip and engine oil. He lets Matilda put superglue inside her father's hat. A child in the same novel puts itching powder in her headteacher's gym knickers. The hero of Danny, the Champion of the World, who is about 10, takes it upon himself to drive his father's car several miles. And in James and the Giant Peach the horrible aunts Sponge and Spiker are run over until they are "ironed out upon the grass as flat and thin and lifeless as a couple of paper dolls cut out of a picture book", though the hit-and-run peach is not, to be fair, really under James's control. . . .
Once Upon a Time We Told Our Children Stories
Michael Morpurgo
The Times March 3, 2005
FOR THE past 18 months in my role as Children's Laureate I have been travelling the country telling stories to young readers and young writers, telling how this particular weaver of tales writes his stories. Like some superannuated strolling player, I have set up and performed wherever anyone would let me: in tiny village halls, grand concert halls, in tents and bookshops and school halls and, once, in an old people's home; from audiences of 14 children in the small island school on Jura in the Hebrides, to 2,500 people in the Albert Hall. I have talked to families — grandparents, parents and children together. In Broughton-in-Furness and Ulverston in the Lake District, I spoke to children from 24 village schools. All came wide-eyed with excitement and expectancy. I strutted my story stuff as best I could, read to them, and answered their questions: "Were you good at writing when you were young?" "No. But I was unbelievably good at rugby," I told them, and sent them and their teachers away, buzzing, I hope, about books, enthused to read more and feeling that they, too, have a story to tell and a voice with which to tell it.Today, World Book Day, hundreds of my fellow writers, and storytellers, illustrators, librarians, teachers and booksellers, are doing just what I've been doing. Indeed, they do it all the year round: this is not a one-day wonder. This kind of sustained effort to bring children to books and books to children is much needed and is, in my view, the most effective way of persuading children to become readers and writers. . . .
A lifetime's passion starts here
By Amanda Craig
The Times January 7, 2006
TO GET A CHILD AGED under 7 hooked on books may seem to be the hardest thing you've done. With an excellent Ultimate Book Guide for teenagers out next month from A & C Black, and the launch of www.readingzone.com, a website funded by the Arts Council, it has never been easier to find good books — though persuading a child to fall in love with them is still another matter.Books are not toys; they are much more magical than that, they are windows into the world of story. Children who have learnt to love books are never bored — how could they be, plugged into some of the greatest entertainment of all time? Yet the gulf between being simply able to read and finding words a uniquely rich source of pleasure is vast. This is a burden — or a privilege — that has to fall on parents. By the time a child gets to school, it's almost too late, especially if school makes the fatal association between work and reading rather than adventure and reading. . . .
It is so delightful when you find someone who has written a piece on an issue which you might have been mulling over and find that they have written about it much better than you ever could have.
One of the issues motivating the establishment of Through the Magic Door has been to try and counteract the very large volume of unremittingly negative children's books that have come out in the past couple of decades. Some of these are wonderfully well written. Many have been award winners. But there are so many and they are so dark.
It makes you want to take up arms - Optimists of the World Unite!
I have just discovered an author, Barbara Feinberg, who has written a delightful piece which is an exploration of why our children are being burdened with all these negative novels. Please take a look at her article, Reflections on the "Problem Novel" which is adapted from her book, Welcome to Lizard Motel.
With her delightful essay, I can safely point to her words and restrain myself from ranting.
Caleb Crain, in the December 24, 2007 edition of the New Yorker, has an article, Twilight of the Books.
One part book review of Proust and the Squid by Maryanne Wolf, one part summary of recent literacy stats, and one part speculative essay, it is a bit of a dog's breakfast but interesting none-the-less.
I don't agree with his somewhat dispirited conclusions but there is at least meat in the article which is perhaps more than can be said for most articles these days.
There are many cited statistics, almost every one of which sparks further questions as well as objections or ripostes. For example
In 1982, 56.9 per cent of Americans had read a work of creative literature in the previous twelve months. The proportion fell to fifty-four per cent in 1992, and to 46.7 per cent in 2002.
One wonders if this decline is a function of lack of demand on the part of the reading public or a function of lack of supply (quality) on the part of the writing population. Also, since these figures cover a period encompassing a massive migration into the country of people from low literacy backgrounds, one would expect there to be a significant erosion of reading as reported by respondents; was this factored in?
The article is interesting and I do agree with the article's premise that reading is an integral part of our recent human history and a causative factor in the development of our advanced civillization and that there are many mysteries; historical, physio/neurological, and social, attendant to the act of reading which we do not yet fully comprehend and that the barrage of new technologies (radio, TV, internet, etc.) are likely to change reading practices in some way but in ways that are only dimly discerned at this juncture.
In the Jaunary 11, 2008 New York Times, A.O. Scott has an article, Take the Kids, and Don't Feel Guilty, which you might find interesting.
His central argument is two-fold. Parents should look beyond easy rules of thumb in deciding what is beneficial for their children. Yes, we should seek age appropriate materials (movies in the case of his article and books in the case of TTMD). But we should be simultaneously seeking to expand their horizons in terms of both what they are familiar with and what they are comfortable with.
Which leads to his second point. The biggest impact is not the movie/book itself, but the conversations arising from it.
I agree with both points.
The Telegraph in the UK had an interesting article, Reading Shouldn't Be Such Hard Work by Alice Thomson this past week, in the January 11, 2008 edition.
Some interesting comments from readers follow as well.
An interview and article from a number of years ago on the old Homearts site with Harold Bloom. Recovered through The Wayback Machine.
An interview from the old Homearts site with Fay Weldon.
Here is an interesting article, The History of Children's Books written in January, 1888 by C.M. Hewins in the Atlantic Monthly. Yes, 1888.
In it, Hewins tracks the emergence of children's books in the English speaking world from the 1430's onwards, with some intriguing commentary of the development of this branch of literature in the USA.
Interesting to see these views and this synopsis in that year, just before children's literature really began to bloom in the US.
There is always a tension in reading. There is the tension between volume and quality (I need to finish this). There is the tension between the pleasure of the process and the realization that the more you enjoy the reading of a tale, the closer you are bringing yourself to its end. There is the tension between the art of tale telling and the value of what is being learned. And there is, as described by Francine Prose in her July, 2006 Atlantic Monthly article, Close Reading, the tension between losing yourself in the dyanmic of the story and studying the mechanics of how the story is constructed.
A couple of quotes:
Long before the idea of a writer's conference was a glimmer in anyone's eye, writers learned by reading the work of their predecessors. They studied meter with Ovid, plot construction with Homer, comedy with Aristophanes; they honed their prose style by absorbing the lucid sentences of Montaigne and Samuel Johnson. And who could have asked for better teachers: generous, uncritical, blessed with wisdom and genius, as endlessly forgiving as only the dead can be?
I like that; "as endlessly forgiving as only the dead can be".
And she has a wonderful evocation of that discovery, long after one has become proficient in reading but well before one is wise in it, of the depth of thought that can go into the construction of a story.
When I was a high school junior, our English teacher assigned a term paper on the theme of blindness in Oedipus Rex and King Lear. We were supposed to go through the two tragedies and circle every reference to eyes, light, darkness, and vision, then draw some conclusion on which we would base our final essay.The exercise seemed to us dull, mechanical. We felt we were way beyond it. All of us knew that blindness played a starring role in both dramas.
Still, we liked our English teacher, and we wanted to please him. And searching for every relevant word turned out to have an enjoyable treasure-hunt aspect, a Where's Waldo detective thrill. Once we started looking for eyes, we found them everywhere, glinting at us, winking from every page.
Long before the blinding of Oedipus or Gloucester, the language of vision and its opposite was preparing us, consciously or unconsciously, for those violent mutilations. It asked us to consider what it meant to be clear-sighted or obtuse, short-sighted or prescient, to heed the signs and warnings, to see or deny what was right in front of one's eyes. Teiresias, Oedipus, Goneril, Kent—all of them could be defined by the sincerity or falseness with which they mused or ranted on the subject of literal or metaphorical blindness.
Tracing those patterns and making those connections was fun. Like cracking a code that the playwright had embedded in the text, a riddle that existed just for me to decipher. I felt as if I were engaged in some intimate communication with the writer, as if the ghosts of Sophocles and Shakespeare had been waiting patiently all those centuries for a bookish sixteen-year-old to come along and find them.
"PISA is a triennial survey of the knowledge and skills of 15-year-olds. It is the product of collaboration between participating countries and economies through the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), and draws on leading international expertise to develop valid comparisons across countries and cultures.More than 400 000 students from 57 countries making up close to 90% of the world economy took part in PISA 2006. The focus was on science but the assessment also included reading and mathematics and collected data on student, family and institutional factors that could help to explain differences in performance. This report summarises the main findings."
I am always enthusiastic about the effort to measure that which is important (like reading) and therefore scrutinize reports such as these for what they might tell us. On the other hand, having authored, administered or participated in many such multinational studies, I am also very alert to issues of data integrity and comparability (are apples being compared to apples) and therefore remain cautiously skeptical about what they really can actually tell us.
In this PISA study, unfortunately, it appears that the USA did not participate in the reading section of the study. One item in particular, though, grabbed my attention.
Across the OECD area, reading performance generally remained flat between PISA 2000 and PISA 2006. This needs to be seen in the context of significant rises in expenditure levels. Between 1995 and 2004 expenditure per primary and secondary student increased by 39% in real terms, on average across OECD countries.
Time and again we have seen within the USA that, above a certain minimum, increased expenditures do not particularly correlate with improved results. Given the disparate nature of American culture and the profound freedom of choice experienced here, in education as in many other arenas, compared to other countries, it is interesting to see that this lack of correlation is true internationally as well.
Another study, this one from Scholastic, 2008 Kids & Family Reading Report and subtitled Reading in the 21st Century: Turning the Page with Technology.
I approach with my customary caution about any survey or comparative study. Pertinent details for this study are:
"In 2008, Scholastic and Yankelovich conducted a survey to examine the factors shaping children's relationship with reading now, and as we progress through the 21st century.The key findings of the research, based on interviews with 501 children age 5-17 and their parents or guardians (1000+ total respondents) in 25 cities across the country"
While there is a reasonable amount of statement of the obvious, there are, as almost always there are, some interesting titbits.
I am not at all surprised to find the report confirming that:
High frequency readers are five times more likely than low frequency readers to say reading is extremely or very important (94% vs.18%).
On the other hand, here some interesting pieces picked randomly:
About nine in ten kids agree that they need to be strong readers to get into a good college and to get a good job.Three in four agree that things will be "much harder" when they are grown if they are not strong
readers.These sentiments do not vary significantly according to a child's age or gender.
High and moderate frequency readers are far more likely to read books than other printed materials.
Low frequency readers are far more likely to read magazines than books or other printed
materials."There aren't enough really good books for boys/girls my age." 55% Total Agree among Kids
Among children age 9-17, "having trouble finding books that I like" is among the top reasons for not reading more books for fun.
Boys are more likely than girls to have trouble finding books they like
Kids are nearly twice as likely as their parents (26% vs. 14%) to say having trouble finding books they like is a reason kids do not read more books for fun.
I thought these findings were especially pertinent.
Parents overwhelmingly view reading as the most important skill a child needs to develop; yet parents with older children believe this to a lesser degree.Eighty-two percent of parents say they wish their child would read more books for fun.
Parents who read books for fun daily are six times more likely than low frequency reading parents to have kids who read for fun daily.
Reading at home starts young for some, but not all, children. About half of all parents begin reading to their children before their first birthday.
The percent of children who are read to daily drops from 38% among 5-8 year olds to 23% among 9-11 year olds - the same time when kids' daily reading for fun starts to decrease.
Parents employ several tactics to encourage kids to read more, such as giving books as gifts,
using movies or TV shows based on books, or encouraging kids to go online and extend the
reading experience. Parents of high frequency readers employ more tactics than parents of low
frequency readers.Parents are a key source of books suggestions for their children, yet nearly half of all parents say they have a hard time finding information about books their child would enjoy reading.
The whole thing is worth a perusal.
"Reach Out and Read (ROR) is a national non-profit organization that promotes early literacy by giving new books to children and advice to parents about the importance of reading aloud in pediatric exam rooms across the nation."
They sponsored a study released in December, 2007 that provides some interesting statistics nationally and on a state-by-state basis regarding reading results. The Executive Summary is well worth reading and it is almost impossible not to examine the results for your particular state. Some insight and lots of interesting nuggets.
Reading Across the Nation: A Chartbook
They describe the study as follows:
Reading Across the Nation is designed as a resource for policymakers and professionals who are working to optimize the early language and literacy experiences of young children. By presenting "reading snapshots" for each state, with comparative rankings on literacy indicators, this chartbook will be a useful tool for policy makers and program planners as they consider how to make investments in the early years to enhance literacy and language development. The charts provide detailed state by state information about whether parents are meeting the basic recommendation of daily reading aloud to their children.
Dr. John Miller conducts an annual study of which cities in America are the most literate based on array of publicly available information. Some of the rankings just don't ring true based on my personal experience of travelling to many of these cities - and yet. Data exists to challenge our experiential assumptions. An interesting study. The most recent study is America's Most Literate Cities, 2006.
An article in the July 21, 2008 New Yorker discussing the role of Anne Carroll Moore in the early evolution of children's books. The title of the article is The Lion and the Mouse.
The most recent report covering reading patterns and trends in the US for the past twenty years. The most recent survey of data is from 2002 and the report can be obtained from the NEA site as a download or by ordering for free through their site.
Some nuggets from the report which had broadly negative trends to report:
From the Chairman, Dana Gioia, of the National Endowment for the Arts, "Reading is not a timeless, universal capability. Advanced literacy is a specific intellectual skill and social habit that depends on a great many educational, cultural, and economic factors. As more Americans lose this capability, our nation becomes less informed, active, and independent minded. These are not qualities that a free, innovative, or productive society can afford to lose."
Executive summary: "Literature reading is fading as a meaningful activity, especially among younger people. If one believes that active and engaged readers lead richer intellectual lives than non-readers and that a well-read citizenry is essential to a vibrant democracy, the decline of literary reading calls for serious action."
Chapter 2: "literary readers are nearly three times as likely to attend a performing arts event, almost four times as likely to visit an art museum, over two-and-a-half times as likely to do volunteer or charity work, over one-and-a-half times as likely to attend sporting events, and over one-and-a-half times as likely to participate in sports activities. In fact, people who read large numbers of books tend to have hte highest levels of participation in other activities, especially arts activities."
Chapter 4: "Between 1985 and 2000, annual consumer spending on television, radios, and sound equipment increased by 68%, from $371 per household in 1985 to $622 in 2000. In comparison, annual spending on reading increased by only 4%, from $141 per household in 1985 to $146 in 2000."
Key Figures on Cultural Participation in the European Union, by M. Skaliotis, EUROSTAT
A very interesting document showing the huge variability within the European Union of reading as a cultural activity. It is interesting that the north/south (beer/wine, cold/warm) divide is evident in these statistics as well. The highest levels of reading on virtually all measures are in northwestern Europe. Some interesting nuggets:
As measured by the percentage of the population not having read a book in the past year, the lowest levels of reading are: Portugal (67% not having read a book in the past year) Belgium (58%), Spain (54%) and Greece (53%). Across the European Union (EU), 42% of the population had not read a book in the prior year.The highest rates of reading (as measured by any books read in the prior year) were clocked in by Sweden (72%), Finland (66%), the UK (63%) and Denmark (55%). Surprisingly to me, Germany and France were only at 40%.
Overall book reading rate in Europe (all books - pleasure, work, study) was 45% in 2001. The comparable figure for the US was 57%.
A similar gender imbalance (women reading more than men) is prevalent in Europe as it is in the US. Europe's ratio of Female to Male reading being 51% to 40% as measured by books read for pleasure (i.e. not for work or study). In the US the comparable figure is 55% to 38%.Newspaper reading appears to still be thriving in Europe with 46% of the population reading a newspaper every day. While book and newspaper reading is generally closely correlated in the statistics (for example top scoring book reader Sweden is also the top newspaper reading country with 78% of the population reading a paper every day) there are a couple of exceptions. Interestingly, a low book reading country like Germany (40%) has 65% of the population reading a newspaper everyday.
Lots of great research and statistics at theNational Institure for Literacyalong with useful materials.
The US Census Bureau can be a fascinating font of information about this incredibly diverse country and it is amazing what nooks and crannies they have statistics on, including books and reading.
An article from the UK Times, July 24, 2008, Authors Unite Against Drive for Toddler Literacy by Nicola Woolcock.
As the research increasingly seems to indicate that much of a child's future literacy, academic and economic success are determined by the values and behaviors they absorb in the first five years of life before they even arrive in school, the capacity of government to intervene successfully becomes much more challenging. Even in a country such as the UK, it is interesting to see the response to some of the initial efforts along this path.
An article by Myron Magnet, What Use is Literature?, in the Summer 2003, edition of City Journal.
Magnet makes the argument for engaged literacy over the dessicated enthusiasms of some cultural critics.
Literature is a conversation across the ages about our experience and our nature, a conversation in which, while there isn't unanimity, there is a surprising breadth of agreement. Literature amounts, in these matters, to the accumulated wisdom of the race, the sum of our reflections on our own existence. It begins with observation, with reporting, rendering the facts of our inner and outer reality with acuity sharpened by imagination. At its greatest, it goes on to show how these facts have coherence and, finally, meaning. As it dramatizes what actually happens to concrete individuals trying to shape their lives at the confluence of so many imperatives, it presents us with concrete and particular manifestations of universal truths. For as the greatest authors know, the universal has to be embodied in the particular—where, as it is enmeshed in the complexity and contradictoriness of real experience, it loses the clarity and lucidity that only abstractions can possess.
In this month's edition of The Atlantic, there is an article by Nicholas Carr, Is Google Making Us Stupid?, worrying about the impact Google has on our reading and ways of thinking. It is an erudite and engaging article but somewhat frustrating - where's the beef?
Carr starts out with a disquisition on how Google and the internet seem to be changing how people think, not just metaphorically but in their practices. After a few quotes and anecdotal citations of his own experience and that of others, though, he then shifts to a discussion of some other historically significant technology changes such as the impact of time pieces, industrial standardization and efficiency, and finally a little about the goal of Google in their pursuit of the perfect search engine.
He has the grace to anticipate the criticisms of being a Luddite and fearing that which is simply new. My frustration is that I wish he would find an argument and stick with it. Is the internet and Google changing your behaviors and capacity for sustained concentration? Then make that case. Do you want to argue the pros and cons of historical technology shifts? Then follow that argument through. It is as if Carr is writing his article in a fashion that bolsters his argument that over-reliance on the internet reduces ones capacity for focused argument and contemplation and leads one to hop all over the place, buzzing about but never alighting.
Carr begins to wrap up his essay with a citation from Plato's Phaedrus in which Socrates worries about the implications of writing as a "technology" for information capture and transmission. We are left almost with an implication of a Greek tragedy, we are caught in the grip of fate and will suffer unknown consequences.
Free will seems to have been abandoned. While this is a graceful essay, entertaining, and a fresh jolt in making one consider a topic, it does seem to leave out any consideration of free will. All new technologies open up the potential for human nature to be amplified for good or for ill. Can the pathways and crevasses of the internet be a corrosive locale that corrupts our capacity to concentrate and reflect deeply on issue large and small? Absolutely!
Are we fated to irreversibly cascade down that maelstrom? Absolutely not.
With three children in or entering their teen years, I am fascinated by both the potential and dangers I see in how they are acculturalizing to the internet. I have been using the internet for business purposes since it's initial evolution and have seen its huge potential. But we are at that juncture where all that potential is spilling into a broader societal context and we have few cultural, technological or legal frameworks to anticipate quite how this will play out in the next couple of decades.
What I am confident of us that we do have free will. This article smacks of those laments twenty years ago when voice messaging came along in offices and people complained about the loss of personal connection. Or of the still current jeremiads against the "avalanche" of e-mails and how that is destroying one's capabilities to focus and prioritize.
These are all tools. We almost always figure out how to use them productively. It might in the 1910s and 1920s, with rutted roads and Mr. Toad drivers, and cars breaking down and operating in (mal)functioning ways, have been impossible to anticipate the day when literally hundreds of thousands of drivers zoom along at sixty miles an hour, a few feet apart and with statistically minimal accidents. But we did get from there to here. So will we with the internet and Google and many of the chicken little concerns will seem yet again to be ill-founded panic attacks.
We choose to allow ourselves to be distracted or not.
A pdf document by Dr. Todd R. Risley describing the results of the in-depth research he and his co-researcher, B. Hart, conducted in order to understand what happens in the everyday life of a child with particular focus on the aspects related to language acquisition.
Fascinating.
Here is an extended interview with Dr. Risley in which the research is explored in greater depth.
How Should One Read a Book? by Virginia Woolf
Elizabeth Cosgriff has an article in Open Spaces Quarterly that provides a thumbnail sketch of the history, purpose and past winners of the Newbery Award.