Oral language skills and poverty
‘I have children coming into our school who don’t know their own name – and don’t even know that
they have a name.’ Headteacher, Hull
‘The truth is a lot of our white children in nursery have fewer words of English than bilingual
children.’ Headteacher of a multi-ethnic, multilingual school in Lambeth
Language skills are a critical factor in social disadvantage and in the intergenerational cycles that
perpetuate poverty. Poor language skills are the key reason why, by the age of 22 months, a more
able child from a low income home will begin to be overtaken in their developmental levels by an
initially less able child from a high-income home – and why by the age of five, the gap has widened
still more.






On average a toddler from a family on welfare will hear around 600 words per hour, with a
ratio of two prohibitions (‘stop that’, ‘get down off there’) to one encouraging comment. A
child from a professional family will hear over 2000 words per hour, with a ratio of six
encouraging comments to one negative (Hart and Risley, 2003).
Low income children lag their high income counterparts at school entry by sixteen months in
vocabulary. The gap in language is very much larger than gaps in other cognitive skills
(Waldfogel and Washbrook, 2010).
More than half of children starting nursery school in socially disadvantaged areas of England
have delayed language - while their general cognitive abilities are in the average range for
their age, their language skills are well behind (Locke et al, 2002)
A survey of two hundred young people in an inner city secondary school found that 75% of
them had speech, language and communication problems that hampered relationships,
behaviour and learning (Sage, 1998)
Vocabulary at age 5 has been found to be the best predictor (from a range of measures at
age 5 and 10) of whether children who experienced social deprivation in childhood were
able to ‘buck the trend’ and escape poverty in later adult life (Blanden, 2006).
Researchers have found that, after controlling for a range of other factors that might have
played a part (mother’s educational level, overcrowding, low birth weight, parent a poor
reader, etc), children who had normal non-verbal skills but a poor vocabulary at age 5 were
at age 34 one and a half times more likely to be poor readers or have mental health
problems and more than twice as likely to be unemployed as children who had normally
developing language at age 5 (Law et al., 2010).
The cycle can be broken
 Research shows that it is not poverty per se which matters most. The child’s communication
environment (the early ownership of books, trips to the library, attendance at pre-school,
parents teaching a range of activities and the number of toys and books available) is a more
important predictor of language development at two, and school entry ‘baseline’ scores at
four than socio-economic background alone (Roulstone et al , 2011)
 Work with parents is vital. ‘Growing up in Scotland’ longitudinal research has found that
progress in language amongst 3-5 year olds was most affected by factors in the home
1

environment, while progress in problem-solving was more affected by external factors such
as type of pre-school education attended
Intervention needs to be early. The Scottish research found that progress in language
amongst 3-5 year olds was strongly predicted by language skills at 2, and that for children
whose parents had no or lower qualifications, poor early communication skills were highly
likely to persist through the pre-school(3-5)period
‘Any strategies for improving school readiness via the pre-school setting need to include , for
more disadvantaged children, strategies which seek to influence the child’s home
environment and parenting experiences at the same time..to ensure that children’s cognitive
ability is maximised... such strategies should focus on the quality of the parent-child
relationship and frequency of home learning activities’
Growing up in Scotland, 2011
Why does poor language affect the life chances of children in low income families
 Poor language predicts poor literacy skills.
At the age of six there is a gap of a few
months between the reading age of
children who had good oral language
skills at 5, and those with poor oral
language skills at 5. By the time they are
14, this gap has widened to five years’
difference in reading age (Hirsch, 1996)


Poor language also predicts behaviour problems. Two thirds of 7-14 year olds with serious
behaviour problems have language impairment (Cohen et al 1998).65% of young offenders
have speech, language and communication difficulties, but in only 5% of cases were they
identified before the offending began (Bryan et al, 2008).
Poor language and communication skills in school leavers reduces the probability of getting
into employment. Employers now rate communication skills as their highest priority, above
even qualifications. 47% of employers in England report difficulty in finding employees with
an appropriate level of oral communication skills (UK Commission for Employment and Skills,
2009).
2
What works in interrupting the cycle
Early intervention
There is good evidence that co-ordinated, community-wide, interagency strategies to upskill the
children’s workforce and get key messages across to parents of young children can improve
language skills across the community, with a particular impact on disadvantaged children.
Stoke Speaks Out is a multi-agency strategy set up in 2004 to tackle the high incidence of speech and
language difficulties in Stoke-on-Trent. It aims to support attachment, parenting and speech and
language issues through training, support and advice. It developed from local Sure Start initiatives
which identified that between 60% and 80% of children assessed in Stoke at age three to four years
had a language delay.
Stoke Speaks Out developed a multi-agency training framework for all practitioners working in the
city with children birth to seven years or their families. The training has five levels, ranging from
awareness-raising to detailed theoretical levels, and was jointly written by the project team of
speech and language therapists, a clinical psychologist, a midwife, play workers, teachers and a
bilingual worker. All levels have an expectation that the practitioner will create change in their
working environment. In addition the initiative has developed resources for parents, including a
model for toddler groups to follow which enhances language development, and a website offering
practical information for parents to help with children's language development. ‘Talking walk-ins’
provide drop in sessions at Children’s Centres where parents can get advice from speech and
language therapists.
As a result of the initiative, the percentage of three to four year olds with significant language
delay in the area has reduced from 64% in 2004 to 39% in 2010.
The work in Stoke is one example; similar impact has been achieved in other local areas. In
Sandwell, a ‘Time to Talk’ community-wide initiative reduced the percentage of children whose
language gave cause for concern from 32 to 21%. In Brighton and Hove, a two year project ‘Talking
and Learning together’ developed a local, accessible and integrated service empowering
parents/carers and early years staff to help all children learn to talk. The results show a huge rise in
the number of children entering Key Stage 1 (at the age of five) with age-appropriate language skills,
and a significant decline in the number of referrals to the speech and language therapy service.
The national Every Child a Talker programme has built on initiatives like these and has already
demonstrated rapid impact over a short period; recent data shows a drop of seven percentage
points in children with poor language skills over just seven months in the early years settings
involved.
Work in schools to teach children important language and communication skills
Work on oral language is not currently given priority in schools. Literacy and numeracy dominate.
And yet:

Children aged nine with poor reading comprehension made greater improvements in
reading when provided with an intervention to develop their oral language than they did
3



when provided with an intervention directly targeting reading comprehension skills
(Snowling et al, 2010)
Socially disadvantaged children can catch up with other children in language skills after just
nine months if their teachers are trained to have the right kind of conversations with
them(Hank and Deacon, 2008)
Small group interventions to boost language skills have a rapid, measurable effect on
vocabulary and other aspects of language development – themselves very strong predictors
of later academic achievement. Key Stage 1 children (ages five to seven) receiving one such
intervention, for example, made on average 14 months progress on a test of vocabulary and
language development after just ten weeks of twice weekly group help.
It is never too late. Re-conviction rates for offenders who studied the English Speaking
Board’s oral communication course fell to 21% (compared to the national average of 44%) greater than the fall to 28% for offenders who followed a general education course (Moseley
et al, 2006).
Jean Gross, Communication Champion
September 2011
References
Blanden, J. (2006) Bucking the Trend – What enables those who are disadvantaged in childhood to
succeed later in life? London: Department for Work and Pensions.
Bryan, K. (2008) Speech, Language and Communication difficulties in juvenile offenders. In C. Hudson
(ed) The Sound and the Silence: Key Perspectives on Speaking and Listening and Skills for Life.
Coventry: Quality Improvement Agency.
Cohen, N., Barwick, M., Horodezky, N., Vallance, D. & Im, N. (1998). Language achievement, and
cognitive processing in psychiatrically disturbed children with previously unidentified and
unsuspected language impairments. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 39, 865–877.
Hank, N., & Deacon, S.H. (2008). Building Vocabulary in High Poverty Children. Literacy Today. 54, 29.
Hart, B., and Risley, T. (2003). The early catastrophe: The 30 million word gap by 3. American
Educator, 27(1), 4-9.
Hirsch (1996) The Effects of Weaknesses in Oral Language on Reading Comprehension Growth cited
in Torgesen, J. (2004). Current issues in assessment and intervention for younger and older students.
Paper presented at the NASP Workshop.
Law, J. et al (2010) Modelling developmental language difficulties from school entry into adulthood.
Journal of speech, language and hearing research, 52, 1401-1416
Locke, A., Ginsborg, J., and Peers, I. (2002). Development and disadvantage: Implications for early
years and beyond. International Journal of Language and Communication Disorders, 37(1), 3-15
Moseley, D.; Clark, J.; Baumfield ,V.; Hall, E.; Hall, I.; Miller, J.; Blench, G.; Gregson, M.; Spedding, T.
(2006). The impact of ESB oral communication courses in HM Prisons - an independent evaluation. UK
Online: Learning and Skills Development Agency.
4
Parkes, a. and Wight, D. (2011) Growing Up in Scotland - 2011: Research Findings No.3/2011:
Growing Up in Scotland - Parenting and Children's Health
Roulstone, S. et al (2011) Investigating the role of language in children’s early educational outcomes
DfE Research Report 134
Sage, R., (1998) Communication Support for Students in Senior Schools. Leicester: University of
Leicester
Snowling, M., Clarke, P., Hulme, C. (2010) Reading comprehension: nature, assessment and teaching.
London: Economic and Social Research Council
UK Commission for Employment and Skills (2009) The Employability Challenge
http://www.ukces.org.uk/tags/employability-challenge-full-report
Waldfogel, J. and Washbrook, E. (2010) Low income and early cognitive development in the U.K.
London: Sutton Trust
5