What if libraries could change the world?

A couple of years ago when I was working with a library service on planning for their future I had an idea about how the local library could change the world. Not a grand Martin Luther King “I have a dream” sort of idea, a bit of Bob Hawke’s optimistic “No Australian child will be living in poverty”, but much better than the Anne Elk (Miss) Theory on Brontosauruses (a silly Monty Python reference). It was an idea that, if implemented and successful:

• would make a real difference to people’s everyday lives

• would have long-lasting, potentially inter-generational, individual, social and economic benefits

• would contribute to at least three of the United Nation’s Sustainable Development Goals (even in a relatively developed country like Australia)

• could be shown to be linked to library actions using existing and widely agreed performance indicators and data collection methods.

So what’s the plan? Well, it’s linked to one of those Handy Library Statistics I talked about a few blogs ago. The one that says, “1 in 6 Australian children start primary school without the language and cognitive skills needed to commence school-based learning (Australian Early Development Census 2018).” What if the library got together with its community partners and they set themselves a target that: 

“100% of children starting school in our LGA will be assessed as ‘on track’ in language and cognitive skills.”

What would it take and why is it important? I’ll try to be brief (not my strong point).

This requires some serious effort. But COVID has shown that libraries are adaptable and resilient, and if you’re ever going to do anything bold – why not now.

• What we need is every pre-schooler being read to every day.

• Set the target for the 2024 AEDC, 2021 is way too close. That means in most states/territories you’re looking for kids who were born in 2018 – two year olds. Maybe trial this for 2024 and aim for 2027 with a cohort of kids who are not yet born.

• Get together with everyone who has a stake in early years development and, in particular, early years literacy. This will involve (at least):

  • Public libraries – you have the books, as well as Story Time programs, family-friendly spaces, great staff and a good reputation.

  • Maternal and Child Health staff in Council – they already schedule visits with families with young children in the first 3½ years of a child’s life that include assessment of language and cognitive skills from around 6 months onwards, as well as having connections to playgroups

  • Primary schools, kindergartens and child-care centres – the content experts, and they have access to families

  • Welfare and multicultural organisations – especially for getting to hard to reach families

  • Universities – they’d love this as a research project

  • State Government early years and education departments – often hard to engage, but if it works they’ll be all over it

  • Funders, sponsors, authors, publishers and anyone else who seems like a good idea.

• Come up with a plan to:

  • reach out to every family with a child in the target cohort

  • invite them to the library and get them a library membership

  • encourage them to attend Story Time and/or download you online version (where they can be modelled good reading practice)

  • promote programs like 1000 Books Before School, Better Beginnings and First 5 Forever

  • get them borrowing books and reading to their children.

Simple! NOT. But what’s the harm in trying?

And what difference would it make? Well that’s an easy one as the research is already there.

• Nationally, the 2018 AEDC shows that 84% of children start school developmentally ‘on track’ in language and cognitive skills, 9% are ‘at risk’ and 7% are developmentally ‘vulnerable’.

• This number hasn’t moved much in previous censuses (2012 83%, 2015 85%, 2018 84%), so we’re not dealing with a situation where improved living standards will inevitably get us there. There will only be a step change if someone does something different.

• The % of children ‘at risk’ or ‘vulnerable’ typically varies within suburbs in an LGA from 10% to as much as 35%. Pushing that toward 0% would be huge.

• Improvements in one of the five areas of early development are known to have flow on effects in the other four (i.e. communication skills and general knowledge, emotional maturity, social competence, physical health and wellbeing).

• And once you get reading habits established for one child it can flow on to the younger children in the family, so it’s easier for your next cohort. In some cases the older sibling can be reading to the toddler.

• Children who are read to 6 to 7 times a week have a literacy level almost a year ahead of children who are not read to at home. So not only would this approach get kids ‘on track’, realistically they would be starting school ‘somewhere down the track’.

• If a child is a poor reader at the end of Grade 1, there is a 90% chance they will still be a poor reader at the end of Grade 4. And ‘on average’ you can follow that line to school completion rates, further education and employment prospects, financial wellbeing, welfare needs and health and social outcomes.

The long-term economic and social benefits are potentially enormous, but they won’t materialise for many years, and that can be a challenge when everybody wants results now. But even if you only got to 95%, or a low SES suburb went from 35% of kids being ‘at risk’ or ‘vulnerable’ to 20%, that’s a lot of kids that have a better chance at life because they have better reading skills.

Just another way ‘Libraries Change Lives’.

References: Check out AEDC community profiles for your LGA at https://www.aedc.gov.au/data.