Storytime Librarians Are Striving to Deliver Effective Storytime Programming to Children with Disabilities and Developmental Delays
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
A Review of: Daskalakes, D. T. M., & Cahill, M. (2023). “We’re all pretty welcoming”: Inclusion of children with disabilities in library storytime programs. Journal of Early Intervention. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/10538151231176193 Objective – To identify and characterize public librarians’ inclusion of children with disabilities and developmental delays (and their caregivers) in storytime programming, and to characterize how librarians determine if inclusion was successful. Design – Qualitative study using semi-structured interviews. Setting – Public library settings across Kentucky, Ohio, and Indiana (United States). Subjects – 34 public librarians offering storytime programming. Methods – The researchers invited all public libraries in the geographic area of interest to complete an internet survey expressing their interest in participating, and from the responses a stratified random sample of libraries was chosen. From each of these libraries, researchers randomly selected one storytime librarian to participate in the study. An experienced research team member conducted interviews using video conferencing software, and the other team member reviewed all transcripts to ensure accuracy. The researchers first analyzed the data using an inductive approach to generate descriptive codes. They then assigned these codes to the data that matched the study’s research questions. Finally, they conducted a third round of coding to describe some topics in greater detail. Main Results – Librarians are making attempts to be inclusive, and their attitudes toward children with disabilities and developmental delays (and their caregivers) are welcoming and flexible. However, they expressed limited experience in offering accommodations, and they perceived their positive attitude as being an accommodation in and of itself. Librarians are largely relying on the child’s experience to gauge how successful they are at being inclusive, and engaging in collaborative conversations with caregivers is also common. Conclusion – Overall, librarians are interested in offering programs that are accessible to children with disabilities and developmental delays but struggle to engage with meaningful accommodations that promote better educational outcomes. The authors emphasize that it is important for libraries to be welcoming of everyone, but more should be done to actually meet the needs of these patrons. This study has implications for public libraries and librarians, who should review their practices to ensure they are addressing the needs of children with disabilities and developmental delays and their caregivers. It also has implications for the profession, as it supports the idea that librarians should be better prepared to support these patrons in storytime programming and that institutions should facilitate librarian efforts through information exchanges. Finally, this study establishes that there is a need for further exploration of inclusivity for children with disabilities and developmental delays in storytime programming.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,239 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; les deux têtes enseignantes s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».