• Home
    Home This is where you can find all the blog posts throughout the site.
  • Categories
    Categories Displays a list of categories from this blog.
  • Tags
    Tags Displays a list of tags that have been used in the blog.
  • Bloggers
    Bloggers Search for your favorite blogger from this site.
  • Archives
    Archives Contains a list of blog posts that were created previously.
  • Login
    Login Login form
Dr. Roberta Golinkoff

Dr. Roberta Golinkoff

Roberta Michnick Golinkoff holds the H. Rodney Sharp Chair in the School of Education at the University of Delaware and is also a member of the Departments of Psychology and Linguistics. An author of twelve books and numerous professional articles, she founded and directs the Child's Play, Learning and Development Lab (formerly the Infant Language Project), whose goal it is to understand how children tackle the amazing feat of learning language. The recipient of a prestigious John Simon Guggenheim Fellowship, and a James McKeen Cattell Sabbatical award, she is frequently quoted in newspapers and magazines and has appeared on Good Morning America and many regional morning shows. Dr. Golinkoff also speaks at conferences and for organizations around the world about children’s development.

Posted by on in What If?

Cute baby reading stock photo

Leher Singh is an Associate Professor of Psychology at the National University of Singapore. She conducts research on early phonological development in the infant and preschool years. In view of a growing trend towards early reading instruction, she co-wrote this blog with Dr. Roberta Golinkoff to share the science behind this movement.

Winning the battle but losing the war? Behind the science of early reading instruction.

As parents, we can find ourselves drowning in advice about how to position our children well for their future. One example of this is the increasing pressure to teach children to read earlier and earlier. Is this pressure justified? Are early readers better readers? Should we be pushing our kindergarteners to learn to read or should we wait until elementary school?

Reading in today’s kindergartens

Last modified on

Posted by on in What If?


The regional rail station was the first stop on my 2-hour journey to Washington where I would deliver a talk on the art of conversation. Twelve people sat spaced on various benches, wrapped in warm winter garb that would shield them from the impending 2 feet of snow due to visit the Northeastern corridor of the U.S.. My rail station sits behind a little shopping village in a small town outside of Philadelphia —in a town that considers itself a tight knit neighborhood. But in this place on this day, 8 of the 12 present were fairly aloof — looking down at their phones, engaging in no eye contact with one another, with no words to fill the silence. No one even kvetched about the weather.

I gave the speech I was about to deliver the somewhat provocative title, “Talk Back” to demonstrate, in a punnish kind of way, that talking back and forth is a basic human trait that is critical if we are to help children develop a strong foundation for literacy and formal schooling. Language is central to our narrowing the 30-million word gap between middle and low-income children, is important for early reading success and is a cornerstone for high quality preschool interactions. Science tells us that having conversations with children will help them build rich vocabularies that are nested in meaningful narratives. Our challenge is to nurture more conversations in our homes and schools as we build foundational language skills.

I was mentally rehearsing my message from my new perch in the Ardmore train station and it suddenly occurred to me that this was not merely a problem of mothers and daughters, fathers and sons, but of everyday people who are living their lives in 2015 glued to Facebook, Instagram and Twitter feeds. My talk was centered on young kids, but perhaps one answer to the questions raised in my talk was blatantly evident at the train station. Parents are not talking to kids because no one is talking to anyone! We have lost the art of conversation between real people who occupy a common space.

I had certainly noted this phenomenon before. My 20-something son intermittently gazes down during our dinner conversations when he hears the faint “ding” of a text message. Always alert to the digital heartbeat, he can promptly respond to “friends” even if a life-sized waiter is standing patiently expecting his order. Our email addictions compel us to sneak a peek several times as we wait in line to pay for our groceries. Eyes gaze down when we are crossing busy streets, traveling to never before seen sights, or walking quickly through crowded corridors. We literally bump into people and see right past them. It’s as if living, breathing, sentient humans in our orbit are invisible. What are the consequences of being social online, when we are not social offline?

Last modified on

Posted by on in What If?

This blog post was written by our wonderful postdoctoral fellow, Dr. Rebecca Dore.

“It’s a twain,” almost 3-year-old Amanda said when I asked her to name the picture. But Amanda thought that trains were magical and only existed in Thomas the Tank Engine videos. How was she supposed to know? She’d never been on a train or seen a train in real life, so it makes perfect sense for her to assume these smiling, talking, autonomous creatures had no analogue outside of the fictional island of Sodor.

But sometimes we do want children to expect new information from their media to also be true in the outside world. Take Dora the Explorer for example: Dora is a wealth of information! She teaches kids about problem solving, friendship, and even how to speak Spanish!

But wait, Dora also has a backpack that can talk and a monkey friend who wears bright red boots. She has to solve a riddle for a troll in order to cross a bridge and in another episode saves a trapped mermaid. So how are kids supposed to know that they should expect Dora’s problem solving skills to apply to real life, but not expect a troll to come out to play a game every time you drive over the interstate?

This question of what information children take from fictional worlds to the real world is one that child development researchers have been grappling with for years. A 2014 study highlights the issue. The researchers showed preschoolers an episode of Dora and then asked them whether they thought the new information in the show was real or “just pretend.” More than 75% of 3-year-olds said that the Spanish words in the show weren’t real, or that they weren’t sure if they were real. Not surprisingly, children who said the Spanish words weren’t real were less likely to learn them! A quote in the article’s title reflects the problem: “Vámonos means go, but that’s made up for the show.” Fortunately, older preschoolers were better able to recognize that the educational content in the show would apply to the real world and learned the Spanish words better, but even 5-year-olds sometimes doubted the reality of the information, obstructing their learning.

Last modified on

Posted by on in Social Emotional Learning

photodune 7911776 behavior concept xs

Co-written with Kathy Hirsh-Pasek and Vinaya Rajan. 

During story time, Emily had trouble paying attention to the teacher and squirmed and wiggled in her seat. She noticed a blue jay sitting on a nearby tree branch and spent most of her time looking out the window. During a group activity, Emily spoke out of turn many times and barely allowed the other children in her group a chance to share their work with the class. Later in the day, when her teacher asked all the students to help clean up after art class, Emily put away some of the painting supplies but then quickly moved on to play with a puzzle and never finished cleaning the rest of her work station. When the teacher asked Emily to stop playing with the puzzle, she immediately started crying and fell to the floor in frustration. Emily's story is one that many kindergarten teachers (and parents!) across the country can certainly relate to.

When it comes to success in the school environment, what are the important skills children need to master? Most adults think the focus should be on academic skills, such as counting or knowing the letters of the alphabet. However, it is just as important to teach children to regulate their emotions, thoughts and behavior. Self-regulation is an important skill for children to develop. Kids with good self-regulation can pay attention to classroom activities and ignore distractions, remember the teacher's directions long enough to carry out a task and resist impulses. All of these skills may give them an advantage to succeed in school. In fact, kindergarten teachers rank self-regulation as one of the most important skills for school readiness. Unfortunately, these teachers also report that many of their students struggle with low levels of self-regulation once they enter school. The more kids a teacher has like Emily, the harder it is to manage.

Self-regulation comes in different forms. Emotional self-regulation is important for helping children manage how they express and experience emotions. In Emily's example, the problems she experiences managing her frustration may make it hard for her to concentrate on school-related activities. The next time Emily is placed in a frustrating situation, it may be useful to teach her how to walk away and cool down rather than having an emotional outburst. Behavioral self-regulation helps children demonstrate control over their actions. Simple games, like Simon Says, have been shown to help children control their impulses. Behavioral self-regulation will help Emily learn to resist the desire to shout out the answer to a problem when it is someone else's turn to speak. Cognitive self-regulation helps children follow rules and plan out the appropriate response (such as listening during story time). For some kids, school may be the first time they practice these skills and learn to regulate themselves.

Last modified on

Posted by on in Early Childhood
0 0 1 438 2498 University of Delaware 20 5 2931 14.0

Welcome to the indistinguishable boundary between sci-fi and the real world, to a world in which technology lets blind children see and deaf children hear, where limbs can be replaced and where the bionic person runs in the Olympics. Such is the world brought to us, in part, by the cochlear implant. We were privileged to speak at the recent American Academy of Audiology (AAA) meetings in Anaheim, Calif. about language development. We learned just how far this technology has come and heard first hand about the expansive promise that these implants hold for our children.

Two to three children out of every 1,000 are born deaf. And fully 90 percent of these kids are born to hearing parents. That means that most of the deaf babies come into a home where parents are likely in shock and denial. Their baby looks like the kid next door and does all the things newborns do -- they even coo and gurgle. But their child is a little different because she cannot hear the sounds that she utters. With the guidance of professionals in their community, the parents quickly face two choices. They can learn sign language and can raise their baby within the deaf community, or they can opt for getting the baby -- yes, the baby-- cochlear implants. Today with the technology at their fingertips, many are choosing implants.

If you have seen babies with what looks like a large disk pasted on their heads behind one or both of their ears, you were likely seeing a baby sporting cochlear implants. Scary though it is to have your 12-month-old undergo anesthesia and surgery, the research suggests that parents who choose this route have children who become virtually indistinguishable from their hearing peers.

A quality of life survey on children 8 and 16 years old tells the tale. Loy et al. reported that children with cochlear implants learn to read, go to college, have friends, and have the same quality of life as their hearing friends. They even practice "selective deafness" when a parent tells the teen that he cannot go to the 9:30 viewing of Matrix 2.

The research also tells us unequivocally that the decision about whether to implant must be made quickly. There is a critical period for language acquisition -- meaning that language grows most rapidly in the first two years of life. Even implantation after 18 months yields less-positive outcomes than implantation in the first year. As children get older the positive effects of getting an implant decline. Shockingly, the specialists at this meeting suggested moving the age of implantation down to 9 months. Why wait?

Last modified on