representation in children's literature statistics

Covering a story? Visit our page for journalists or call (773) 702-8360.

UChicago Class Visits

Top stories.

• Ecologist tracks how insects can devastate forests—and how to stop them
• Author and ‘Odyssey’ translator Daniel Mendelsohn to deliver Berlin Family Lectures beginning April 23

National study finds in-school, high-dosage tutoring can reverse pandemic-era learning loss

Are children’s books becoming more diverse new research reveals persistent bias, using ai tools, researchers find that ‘mainstream’ books still lack non-white, non-male characters.

For much of American history, the books that children read have largely centered on white, male characters—but is that starting to change? Not very much, and not very quickly, suggests new research from the University of Chicago.

In a new working paper, Asst. Prof. Anjali Adukia of the Harris School of Public Policy found that over the past 100 years, characters in children’s books—as measured by images and text—are largely white and male. This white/male dominance is even true of books published in recent decades, which have seen heightened awareness about race and gender issues.

In fact, Adukia and her co-authors— Emileigh Harrison , Teodora Szasz  and Hakizumwami Birali Runesha of the University of Chicago, and Alex Eble of Teachers College, Columbia University—found that mainstream children’s books have grown less representative in terms of skin color of characters pictured over the last two decades. Surprisingly, children themselves are underrepresented in children’s books as well.

“These findings have important implications for educators and publishers, and others concerned about the influence of books on childhood development,” said Adukia, whose research focuses on educational inequalities. “Research has demonstrated that the way that people are represented within books can contribute to children’s understanding about what roles they and others can or cannot inhabit.”

So how do children’s books stack up in terms of issues pertaining to race and gender?

To answer this question, the authors developed new artificial intelligence tools to analyze images in books, building on advances in the field of computer vision. They trained AI models to detect faces, classify skin color, and predict the race, gender and age of the faces. The effort analyzed 1,133 children’s books totaling more than 160,000 pages that were likely to appear in homes, classrooms and school libraries over the last century.

The works were categorized as either: “mainstream books,” those selected without explicit intention to highlight an identity group; and “diversity books,” which did explicitly highlight an identity group. They found that children were twice as likely to check out mainstream books from a major public library system relative to other books, suggesting greater exposure to the messages in these books.

“We find that mainstream books, which children are more likely to encounter, are more likely to depict characters with lighter skin than ‘diversity books,’ which are specifically selected to highlight people of color or females,” Adukia said. “Perhaps most surprising was that children are portrayed with lighter skin than adults in each collection, which has concerning implications for how perceptions related to youth and innocence may be shaped.”

In short, mainstream children’s books have gotten whiter in recent years. The authors’ analysis of images revealed the following about race in children’s books:

• Books in the mainstream collection are more likely to depict lighter-skinned characters than those in the diversity collection, perhaps speaking to the assumptions of book publishers about the assumed preferences of the median reader.
• Also, while female characters have always appeared in pictures over time (still less than 50% on average, but closer to 50% than in text), they are predominantly white.
• Particularly surprising is that despite no systematic differences in skin tones across ages in society, children are more likely than adults to be shown with lighter skin, regardless of collection.

The authors also compared the incidence of female appearances in images to female mentions in text to find that:

• Female characters are more consistently visualized (seen) in images than spoken about (heard) in the text, except in the collection of books specifically selected to highlight women and girls. This suggests that many books symbolically include female characters in pictures without substantive inclusion in the actual story.
• This underrepresentation holds regardless of the measure used: predicted gender of the pictured character, pronoun counts, specific gendered words, famous figure gender, and character first names.

Males, especially white males, are persistently more likely to be represented by every measure, with little change over time despite substantial changes in female societal participation.

Even though these books are targeted to children, adults are depicted more often than children in both images and text.

“The process of education itself—and its associated books and curricular materials—necessarily, and by design, transmits not only the values of society, but also whose space it is. The inclusion and exclusion of different identities send messages which can contribute to how children view their own potential and the potential of others which can then, in turn, shape subconscious defaults,” Adukia said. “Understanding what identities are being presented to children through their everyday books is a needed step in order to be able to make informed decisions about what content to include in curricula and to help mitigate the structural inequality that pervades society and our daily lives.“

The authors anticipate that their innovative application of AI will lead to further development of tools that can measure how people are represented in books and other media, and thereby help determine what content depicts characters in their full humanity. In addition, their methodology offers the promise of further inquiry into other forms of text and visual media, including literature and nonfiction, journalism, websites, art, photography, television, videos, movies and many others.

—Versions of this story were previously published by the Becker Friedman Institute  and the Harris School of Public Policy .

Get more with UChicago News delivered to your inbox.

Recommended stories

How gender bias impacts college career guidance—and dissuades women…

UChicago students team up with pro athletes to fight inequality

Related Topics

Latest news, big brains podcast: what dogs are teaching us about aging.

Department of Race, Diaspora, and Indigeneity

Course on Afrofuturism brings together UChicago students and community members

Eclipse 2024

What eclipses have meant to people across the ages

Dark matter

First results from BREAD experiment demonstrate a new approach to searching for dark matter

Where do breakthrough discoveries and ideas come from?

Explore The Day Tomorrow Began

Study finds increase in suicides among Black and Latino Chicagoans

Education Lab

Around UChicago

It’s in our core

New initiative highlights UChicago’s unique undergraduate experience

Alumni Awards

Two Nobel laureates among recipients of UChicago’s 2024 Alumni Awards

Faculty Awards

Profs. John MacAloon and Martha Nussbaum to receive 2024 Norman Maclean Faculty…

Sloan Research Fellowships

Five UChicago scholars awarded prestigious Sloan Fellowships in 2024

Convocation

Prof. John List named speaker for UChicago’s 2024 Convocation ceremony

The College

Anna Chlumsky, AB’02, named UChicago’s 2024 Class Day speaker

UChicago Medicine

“I saw an opportunity to leverage the intellectual firepower of a world-class university for advancing cancer research and care.”

Announcement

Ethan Bueno de Mesquita appointed dean of the Harris School of Public Policy

December 1, 2023

Are Children’s Books Improving Representation?

Racial and gender disparities persist in award-winning kids’ literature despite recent gains in representation

By Jesse Greenspan

monkeybusinessimages/Getty Images

Children's literature has become far more diverse in the past decade, helping more kids than ever to see themselves in their favorite books. Of the thousands of kids' and teens' books reviewed in a 2022 analysis , about 45 percent had a nonwhite author, illustrator or compiler, up from 8 percent in 2014. “There are just so many more choices of books [reflecting] the multifaceted complexity of individual lives,” says Tessa Michaelson Schmidt, director of the Cooperative Children's Book Center at the University of Wisconsin–Madison.

But white males remain overrepresented in the most influential children's stories, the authors of a recent study concluded. The research, published in the Quarterly Journal of Economics , examined the winners and honorees of the Newbery and Caldecott medals—widely considered the most prestigious prizes in kids' literature—and the recipients of 17 awards for diversity. University of Chicago social scientist Anjali Adukia and her colleagues scanned 1,130 of these award-winning books, covering more than 162,000 pages, and used an artificial-intelligence program trained to detect faces and determine the age, race and gender of each pictured character.

Machine learning let the researchers pick up on details they may have missed if they had combed through the books by hand. For example, on average, youngsters were depicted with lighter skin than adults of the same race. And female characters appeared more often in images than in text, which “suggests more symbolic inclusion ... rather than substantive inclusion,” according to the study's authors. They also found that the vast majority of famous people mentioned in Newbery- and Caldecott-winning books are white.

On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing . By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.

The results come amid a nationwide cultural clash, with diversity campaigns running alongside attempts to ban books that address aspects of race and sexual identity. But kids crave exposure to stories about people like them, which build up their feelings of self-worth and help them maintain an interest in reading, says Caroline Tung Richmond, an author of young adult fiction and executive director of the nonprofit organization We Need Diverse Books. At the same time, she says, young people benefit from stories that allow them “to see into a different culture or identity and build empathy.”

Credit: Amanda Montañez; Source: “What We Teach about Race and Gender: Representation in Images and Text of Chilren’s Books,” by Anjali Adukia et al., in  Quarterly Journal of Economics , Vol. 138; 2023 ( data )

CCBC Diversity Statistics

The CCBC has been documenting books for children and teens it receives annually by and about Black,  Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC) since 1994. Before that, between 1985 and 1993, we documented books by and about Black people only.

Beginning in 2018, we began to document the content of every new book we receive. Also in 2018, we began to document additional aspects of identity in our analysis, including disability, LGBTQ+, and religion.

Our annual data on Books by and about Black, Indigenous and People of Color (links below), which we’ve been compiling since 1985, and our Diversity Statistics Media Kit , are the most readily accessible and accurate summaries of the CCBC’s Diversity Statistics. 

The CCBC Diversity Statistics FAQs provide essential context for understanding and interpreting this data.

Books by and about Black, Indigenous and People of Color

• All Years (1985-Present)
• 2018 – Present  (All publishers and U.S.-only publishers)
• 2002-2017 (All publishers and U.S-only publishers)
• Diversity Statistics FAQs More
• Diversity Resources More
• On Books and Publishing More

White Characters Still Dominate Kids’ Books and School Texts, Report Finds

• Share article

Educational materials don’t reflect the diversity of the nation’s schoolchildren, a new report finds—and many works that do feature characters of color reinforce stereotypes.

The research review , published by New America, a left-of-center think tank, analyzed more than 160 studies and published works on representation in children’s books, textbooks, and other media dating from the mid-20th century through the present. The report draws on quantitative and qualitative studies, dissertations, institutional reports, and books.

“Over time, what the research shows is that we’ve made progress as far as having more gender-balanced representation, though ... that gender representation tends to be from a binary perspective,” said Amanda LaTasha Armstrong, a research fellow in New America’s Education Policy Program, and the author of the report. “We’re also having more representation from communities of different racial and ethnic groups, but there’s still a very clear disparity.”

This review comes at a time when there’s increased national attention on what children are reading in school. Over the last year and a half, conversations about race and gender in assigned readings, library books, and textbooks have loomed large in classrooms and school board meetings across the country.

After the murder of George Floyd in May 2020, the ensuing protests for racial justice prompted some teachers and school systems to rethink the make-up of their classroom libraries and syllabi , including by adding more books by and about Black Americans and people of color. Other schools had already taken on this work of diversifying reading lists in years past.

But in recent months, parents and school board members in some communities have mobilized in attempts to ban books that address race and gender , claiming that these books are divisive or sexually explicit. Titles such as The Bluest Eye by Toni Morrison, The Hate U Give by Angie Thomas, and Fun Home by Alison Bechdel have all faced recent challenges.

A slew of state laws restricting how teachers can discuss racism and sexism in the classroom have also affected schoolbooks. In Tennessee, for instance, the legislature passed a law that prohibits teachers from saying that any individual is inherently racist due to their race, or that individuals are responsible for actions taken by members of their race in the past. In one district there, parents challenged an autobiography of Ruby Bridges on the grounds that it violated the state’s law by teaching that “ white people are bad ” and “America is unjust.”

But Armstrong said that featuring books that represent a diversity of experiences and backgrounds is about supporting students, and that it’s crucial for creating strong learning environments. The report notes research that has shown that books and stories that represent students’ identities and experiences can foster student engagement in their own learning .

“It’s really about having a fair representation, or authentic representation, of American society, American people,” she said.

White, male characters still dominate children’s media

Over the past decades, children’s media has changed, Armstrong said: More races and ethnicities are represented in children’s books now, and male/female gender representation has moved closer to equal.

Even so, the review found that white characters still dominate children’s media. This holds true within picture books and children’s literature, but also within many school textbooks. Characters of color are underrepresented compared to the demographics of U.S. youth (a little more than half of all schoolchildren in the country are children of color).

Female characters are also underrepresented, though there has been an uptick over time. Still, girls of color may be left out: One cited 2020 study of books that won the Newbery Medal, an award for children’s literature, found that only 20 percent of Black characters and 25 percent of Asian American characters were female.

There is less research on transgender representation in books, though the report cites one study on books with LGBTQ themes that found 14 percent of primary characters and 21 percent of secondary characters were transgender.

It’s hard to know how these disparities translate to U.S. classrooms—are the racial and gender breakdowns in children’s media as a whole reflected in curricula and classroom libraries?

A separate study suggests that classroom libraries, at least, have become more diverse over the past year.

A forthcoming paper in Management Science from researchers at Carnegie Mellon University looked at requests for classroom books on the crowdfunding site DonorsChoose.org in the immediate aftermath of George Floyd’s death. The study found a sharp uptick in requests for books by and about Black Americans, but also in requests for books about Latinos, Asians, Muslims, and Jews.

More than 90 percent of these projects were fully funded, translating to $3.4 million spent on books that reached more than a half-million students.

Some books present multifaceted portrayals of characters of color; others, stereotypes

When people of color and women are present in children’s media, how they’re portrayed varies widely, the New America report finds.

History textbooks don’t often cover Black Americans’ resistance to race-based oppression, outside of the context of the Civil Rights movement. Textbooks also portray attacks on Black people “as if they are isolated events.” In descriptions of the colonial period, Native Americans are often shown as racially inferior to white colonists. Other racial groups are mostly missing from U.S. history textbooks—one study found that Latinos are generally only referenced in relation to immigration and labor movements, for example.

Children’s books show a different picture. Surveys looking at these books have found many examples of multifaceted, positive, and affirming depictions of people of color: books about family and community life, books that accurately portray lesser-known historical events, books that feature characters with a variety of experiences and perspectives.

Some of these trends are the result of relatively recent changes; for example, a 2018 study found that fewer books depict Asian Americans as “foreigners” than in years past. Other studies found that books about characters who shared the same racial or ethnic identity as the author—often called “own voices” stories—presented more positive portrayals.

But books with stereotypes still abound. In stories about Native Americans, Native peoples are often described as aggressive, and traditions from different tribal groups are often mixed together. Some books about Asian Americans uphold the “model minority” stereotype. Stories about Native Hawaiians often exoticize their culture.

Portrayals are also often one-dimensional. A 2018 study from researchers at Bates College in Maine found that races and ethnicities were slotted into different themes in children’s books. For example, most books about experiences of oppression featured Black characters. And while a lot of books about culture and heritage featured Latino characters, there weren’t as many biographies about Latino figures.

Diversity within racial and ethnic groups also isn’t always explored. For example, Armstrong said, most Asian Americans in children’s books are East Asian, without much representation of South or Southeast Asians. That portrayal can frame readers’ perception of who counts as “Asian American,” and who doesn’t, Armstrong said.

“We still need to do a lot of work in terms of having more diverse representation, and in seeing how different communities are represented in the American story,” she said.

Sign Up for EdWeek Update

Edweek top school jobs.

Sign Up & Sign In

IFLA Literacy and Reading Section Blog

An informal and interactive exchange on issues surrounding libraries, literacy and reading across the world, bicop representation in children’s books.

The modest increases in diversity in children’s literature continued in 2023, according to the latest Diversity Statistics report released by the Cooperative Children’s Book Center (CCBC). In 2023, 49 percent of the books the CCBC documented had significant BIPOC content (up from 46 percent in 2022) and 40 percent had at least one BIPOC primary character (up from 39 percent in 2022). The number of books with at least one BIPOC creator was about the same as 2022. Those numbers continue the trend of slow growth in representation year to year. In 2022, the books with significant BIPOC content went up two percent (from 44 to 46) while BIPOC primary characters jumped three percent (from 36 to 39). For this report, the CCBC analyzed 3,491 books for children and teens that were published in 2023. For details, go to https://www.slj.com/story/Books%20%26%20Media/BIPOC-Representation-Childrens-Literatures-Continues-Its-Slow-rise-According-CCBC-Diversity-Statistics

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

share this!

December 15, 2021

60 years of children's books reveal persistent overrepresentation of male protagonists

by Public Library of Science

An analysis of thousands of children's books published in the last 60 years suggests that, while a higher proportion of books now feature female protagonists, male protagonists remain overrepresented. Stella Lourenco of Emory University, U.S., and colleagues present these findings in the open-access journal PLOS ONE on December 15, 2021 and explore the factors associated with representation.

A large body of evidence points to a bias in male versus female representation among protagonists in children's books published prior to 2000. However, evidence is lacking as to whether that bias has persisted. In addition, it has been unclear which factors, such as author gender, may be associated with male versus female protagonists.

To help clarify whether gender bias still exists in American children's literature, the authors conducted a statistical analysis of the frequency of male versus female protagonists in 3,280 books, aimed for audiences aged 0 to 16 years and published between 1960 and 2020. They selected books that can be purchased online in the United States, either as hard copies or as digital books, and primarily written in English (<1% written in multiple languages). To enable direct comparison of the rates of appearance of male versus female central characters, they focused on books featuring a single central protagonist, and also only included books for which the gender of the book author was identifiable and matched for all authors if there was more than one.

The analysis found that, since 1960, the proportion of female central protagonists has increased—and is still increasing—but books published since 2000 still feature a disproportionate number of male central protagonists.

The researchers also found associations between the ratio of male versus female protagonists and several relevant factors. Specifically, they found that gender bias is higher for fiction featuring non-human characters than for fiction with human characters. Meanwhile, non-fiction books have a greater degree of gender bias than fiction books, especially when the characters are human.

Books by male authors showed a decline in bias since 1960, but only in books written for younger audiences. Books by female authors also declined in bias over time, ultimately with more female than male central protagonists featured in books for older children and in books with human characters.

These findings could help guide efforts toward more equitable gender representation in children's books, which could impact child development and societal attitudes. Future research could build on this work by considering reading rates of specific books, as well as books with non-binary characters.

The authors add: "Although male protagonists remain overrepresented in books written for children (even post-2000), the present study found that the male-to-female ratio of protagonists varied according to author gender, age of the target audience, character type, and book genre. In other words, some authors and types of books were more equitable in the gender representation of protagonists in children 's books ."

Journal information: PLoS ONE

Provided by Public Library of Science

Explore further

Feedback to editors

A microbial plastic factory for high-quality green plastic

4 hours ago

Can the bias in algorithms help us see our own?

6 hours ago

Humans have converted at least 250,000 acres of estuaries to cities and farms in last 35 years, study finds

7 hours ago

Mysterious bones may have belonged to gigantic ichthyosaurs

Hurricane risk perception drops after storms hit, study shows

Peter Higgs, who proposed the existence of the 'God particle,' has died at 94

Scientists help link climate change to Madagascar's megadrought

9 hours ago

Heat from El Niño can warm oceans off West Antarctica—and melt floating ice shelves from below

10 hours ago

Peregrine falcons expose lasting harms of flame retardant use

11 hours ago

The hidden role of the Milky Way in ancient Egyptian mythology

Relevant physicsforums posts, what are your favorite disco "classics".

8 hours ago

Cover songs versus the original track, which ones are better?

Interesting anecdotes in the history of physics.

15 hours ago

Biographies, history, personal accounts

Apr 7, 2024

Purpose of the Roman bronze dodecahedrons: are you convinced?

Apr 6, 2024

Favorite Mashups - All Your Favorites in One Place

Apr 5, 2024

More from Art, Music, History, and Linguistics

Related Stories

Study shows stories written by children are more likely to have male characters

Aug 10, 2021

Persistent gender bias found in scientific research and related course materials: A long-term linguistic analysis

Dec 6, 2021

In review of 100 best-selling picture books, female protagonists are largely invisible

Jun 3, 2019

Studies of children's stories shows differences in Russian, U.S. approaches to emotion

Dec 2, 2021

AI tools reveal lack of non-white, non-male characters in 'mainstream' books

May 27, 2021

Male physicians refer patients to male surgeons at disproportionate rates, study shows

Nov 10, 2021

Recommended for you

First languages of North America traced back to two very different language groups from Siberia

14 hours ago

The 'Iron Pipeline': Is Interstate 95 the connection for moving guns up and down the East Coast?

13 hours ago

Americans are bad at recognizing conspiracy theories when they believe they're true, says study

Apr 8, 2024

Earth, the sun and a bike wheel: Why your high-school textbook was wrong about the shape of Earth's orbit

Giving eyeglasses to workers in developing countries boosts income

Let us know if there is a problem with our content.

Use this form if you have come across a typo, inaccuracy or would like to send an edit request for the content on this page. For general inquiries, please use our contact form . For general feedback, use the public comments section below (please adhere to guidelines ).

Please select the most appropriate category to facilitate processing of your request

Thank you for taking time to provide your feedback to the editors.

Your feedback is important to us. However, we do not guarantee individual replies due to the high volume of messages.

E-mail the story

Your email address is used only to let the recipient know who sent the email. Neither your address nor the recipient's address will be used for any other purpose. The information you enter will appear in your e-mail message and is not retained by Phys.org in any form.

Newsletter sign up

Get weekly and/or daily updates delivered to your inbox. You can unsubscribe at any time and we'll never share your details to third parties.

More information Privacy policy

Donate and enjoy an ad-free experience

We keep our content available to everyone. Consider supporting Science X's mission by getting a premium account.

E-mail newsletter

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here .

Loading metrics

Open Access

Peer-reviewed

Research Article

Sixty years of gender representation in children’s books: Conditions associated with overrepresentation of male versus female protagonists

Roles Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

Affiliation Department of Psychology, Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey, United States of America

Roles Validation, Writing – review & editing

Affiliation Department of Psychology, Emory University, Druid Hills, Georgia, United States of America

Roles Conceptualization, Supervision, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

* E-mail: [email protected]

• Kennedy Casey, 
• Kylee Novick, 
• Stella F. Lourenco

• Published: December 15, 2021
• https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0260566
• Reader Comments

As a reflection of prominent cultural norms, children’s literature plays an integral role in the acquisition and development of societal attitudes. Previous reports of male overrepresentation in books targeted towards children are consistent with a history of gender disparity across media and society. However, it is unknown whether such bias has been attenuated in recent years with increasing emphasis on gender equity and greater accessibility of books. Here, we provide an up-to-date estimate of the relative proportion of males and females featured as single protagonists in 3,280 children’s books (0–16 years) published between 1960–2020. We find that although the proportion of female protagonists has increased over this 60-year period, male protagonists remain overrepresented even in recent years. Importantly, we also find persistent effects related to author gender, age of the target audience, character type (human vs. non-human), and book genre (fiction vs. non-fiction) on the male-to-female ratio of protagonists. We suggest that this comprehensive account of the factors influencing the rates of appearance of male and female protagonists can be leveraged to develop specific recommendations for promoting more equitable gender representation in children’s literature, with important consequences for child development and society.

Citation: Casey K, Novick K, Lourenco SF (2021) Sixty years of gender representation in children’s books: Conditions associated with overrepresentation of male versus female protagonists. PLoS ONE 16(12): e0260566. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0260566

Editor: Jennifer Steele, York University, CANADA

Received: April 1, 2021; Accepted: November 12, 2021; Published: December 15, 2021

Copyright: © 2021 Casey et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Data Availability: All data and materials are publicly available on the Open Science Framework ( https://osf.io/97gfk/ ).

Funding: The authors received no specific funding for this work.

Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Introduction

Despite roughly equal numbers of males and females across the world’s population [ 1 ], women are underrepresented in a variety of consequential domains. For example, men outnumber women in STEM disciplines [ 2 , 3 ], politics [ 4 , 5 ], and top-ranking corporate jobs [ 6 ]. Such male overrepresentation is especially pervasive in media, including primetime television programming and television commercials [ 7 , 8 ], virtual platforms [ 9 , 10 ], and sports news coverage [ 11 ]. Often referred to as ‘symbolic annihilation’, disproportionate gender representation negatively impacts women (and men alike) by sustaining explicit and implicit biases against the female gender and diminishing women’s sense of self-worth and belonging [ 12 ].

Symbolic annihilation is also readily apparent in media targeted towards children, where the negative consequences on self-worth and belonging may be especially detrimental [ 13 ]. Accumulating evidence suggests that, in children’s literature, male characters are more prevalent than female characters [ 14 – 20 ], including in titles and illustrations [ 21 ]. In the largest study to date, McCabe et al. [ 22 ] examined the gender representation of central characters as indicated by the title, book description, and/or storyline. Their analysis included 5,618 books published between 1900 and 2000 from three sources: Caldecott award-winning books, Little Golden Books, and the Children’s Catalog. McCabe and colleagues found that male protagonists were overrepresented compared to female protagonists across all sources. There was some improvement in the frequency of female characters across the twentieth century, but even the more recent books in their sample (i.e., 1990–1999) depicted male characters with greater frequency (male-to-female ratio ≈ 1.2:1).

Importantly, McCabe and colleagues also found that specific book features affected the proportion of male and female central characters. In particular, the gender bias was larger when central characters were depicted as non-human animals instead of humans, or as adults instead of children. In another study, Hamilton et al. [ 23 ] examined the role of author gender on the proportion of male and female protagonists. Across a sample of 200 children’s books published between 1995 and 2001, they reported that female authors depicted male and female characters in comparable numbers, whereas male authors overrepresented male characters. Such findings are consistent with a broader literature suggesting that women are paramount in promoting diversity. For instance, female role models in STEM encourage more female representation [ 24 , 25 ], and the presence of women in key positions, including hiring and colloquium committees, improves institutional performance and results in more diverse employees and speakers [ 26 ].

Other studies, however, have failed to find an effect of author gender on gender representation of characters in children’s books [ 27 – 29 ], raising questions about the robustness of this potential moderator. It is worth noting that these studies included books published prior to 1995, during which time female authors may have been underrepresented [ 15 ]. Thus, it is an open question whether author gender impacts the gender bias in children’s books, as might be expected, and importantly, to what extent such an effect may have changed over time, particularly in more recent years when the number of female authors is likely to have grown.

The differential frequency of male and female characters in media might be less consequential if the accompanying content counteracted the disproportionate numbers. However, studies examining the content of children’s literature report stereotypical portrayals of male and female characters [ 17 , 30 ]. For example, males are more likely to be the bread-winners across a broad range of professions and to be depicted outdoors and as adventurous. By contrast, females are typically depicted indoors and as filling domestic roles, such as performing household chores and caring for children [ 23 , 29 , 31 , 32 ].

Despite ample evidence of gender bias in children’s books prior to 2000, there is a dearth of evidence post 2000. Moreover, the evidence that does exist post 2000 is contradictory, with some data suggesting little or no improvement in the frequency of female characters [ 33 ] and other data suggesting that the numbers of male and female characters have reached parity [ 34 ]. A potential explanation for the discrepancy is that these studies have been limited in scope, with potentially confounding variables, such as character type and author gender, not accounted for in the analyses. Previous studies have also typically focused on award-winning books or restricted their sample to only those books available in a single library or school [e.g., 23 , 32 , 35 ], potentially leading to unrepresentative estimates of gender distribution.

Present study

In addition to the impact on reading ability and language development [ 36 ], children’s books have long been considered an important source of enculturation [ 37 , 38 ]. With increasing accessibility of children’s books [ 39 ], questions related to trends in gender representation are of special importance, especially if we are to understand the early forces of gender bias and how best to overcome their cognitive and affective consequences. Thus, the present study sought to provide an updated account of the gender representation in the literature targeted towards children within the last 60 years: 1960 to 2020, with a particular focus on books published post 2000 and on books featuring a single protagonist to allow for direct comparison of the rates of appearance of male versus female central characters.

In order to obtain a representative sample of the books available to children, we analyzed books accessible online for hard copy purchase or digital reading. This approach was used to gauge widespread trends in gender representation across the 60-year period of interest, and it is an approach that overcomes limitations of previous studies, which have typically restricted their analyses to award-winning titles or books available in a specific library or school setting. Although the current approach does not guarantee a direct link to reading rates, it nevertheless addresses a critical question about publication—namely, whether books featuring male versus female protagonists are more likely to be published. Addressing this question is a crucial first step in increasing our understanding of gender bias and the potential impact on cognitive and emotional development.

As noted above, previous research points to the importance of considering moderating variables when characterizing bias in the representation of central characters. We would argue that the potential influence of moderators is especially critical when considering trends across time. Following previous research, we analyzed potentially relevant variables, including author gender (male vs. female) and character type (human vs. non-human). We also included age of the target audience as well as book genre (fiction vs. non-fiction), which, to our knowledge, have not been previously examined. Books targeted to children include those suitable for infants and young toddlers, which may feature more non-human than human characters and may more often be fiction than non-fiction. Given other research suggesting that males are overrepresented when characters are non-human, at least in fiction, the prediction was that books targeted to young children might be less equitable in the representation of male and female characters than books targeted to older children, which could be particularly consequential for our understanding of the early roots of gender biases.

To summarize, the primary aims of the present study were two-fold: (1) to provide an up-to-date estimate of the rates of gender representation in books published within the last two decades, relative to earlier years; and (2) to examine the effect of potential moderators of gender representation across this timeframe. By analyzing trends in the publication of books featuring male versus female protagonists over the last 60 years, while also considering the influence of previously unexamined variables, such as age of the target audience and book genre, we can better understand where (if at all) progress towards gender parity has been most successful and identify where future work may be needed to achieve equitable gender representation in children’s books.

All data and materials are publicly available on the Open Science Framework ( https://osf.io/97gfk/ ). We report all measures collected, along with exclusion information below.

Web search.

We conducted an entirely web-based analysis of the gender representation of central characters in children’s books published between 1960 and 2020. In order to obtain a large, representative sample of books available to children, we included titles from a variety of sources: award winners, best sellers from top retailers at the time of collection (e.g., Amazon and Barnes & Noble), specific recommendations to parents or teachers, and publishing catalogs. As an indicator of representativeness, there is substantial overlap between the current sample and existing children’s book corpora, including all titles from the Wisconsin Children’s Book Corpus [ 30 ] and the Montag corpus [ 40 ], as well as over 300 titles from the Infant Bookreading Database [ 41 ].

Inclusion criteria.

Following the convention established in previous work [e.g., 22 ], we restricted the present analyses to only those books with a single identifiable protagonist. We chose to maintain this approach because this is arguably the most blatant indicator of gender bias in publication, and when considering the potential influence on children’s perception of gender in children’s books, the impact of a single gender is more straightforwardly interpreted than the genders of multiple characters. Recent work suggests that the central character’s gender strongly influences young children’s learning of gender stereotypes [ 42 ], while the relative influence of multiple gendered characters has not been established. Additionally, we only included books for which the gender of the book author was identifiable and matched for all authors if there was more than one (see below for details).

Our search parameters included books, primarily written in English (<1% written in multiple languages) and available for purchase in the United States, that: (1) featured a single protagonist, (2) were published between 1960 and 2020, and (3) were targeted to children ranging in age from 0 to 16 years. All search queries were conducted in Summer 2019 and yielded 6,580 unique hits from 67 sources (see OSF for links). However, a large proportion of books ( n = 2,998) captured by these sampling methods failed to meet our pre-defined inclusion criteria, most often due to the fact that the books featured multiple central characters ( n = 2,801) or were published outside the 60-year window of interest ( n = 196). For transparency, we report the full list of these unanalyzed titles (see OSF).

Additional exclusions were required for the following reasons: ungendered central character ( n = 161), multiple authors with different genders ( n = 68), ungendered author ( n = 37), indeterminable author gender ( n = 3), adult target age range ( n = 1), or indeterminable target age range ( n = 33). Thus, the final sample consisted of 3,280 children’s books published between 1960 and 2020 with either a male or female central character (see OSF for full dataset). The sample includes multiple books in a given series. This decision was made to account for the fact that the central character could theoretically change across publications (e.g., The Baby-Sitter’s Club ). The majority of books ( n = 2,638) were published in the year 2000 or later, ensuring an up-to-date sample. Given the range of publication dates, the size of our dataset was comparable to that of McCabe et al. [ 22 ], currently the largest study on gender representation of central characters in children’s books.

Of the titles meeting inclusion criteria for analysis ( n = 3,280), we coded for: (1) gender of central character, (2) publication year, (3) gender of book author, (4) age of target audience, (5) character type (human vs. non-human), and (6) book genre (fiction vs. non-fiction).

Coding decisions for each variable were made based on information provided in the title, description, front or back cover, and/or dust jacket. As needed, further clarification was sought from the book itself (when freely accessible online), or additional Google searches were conducted to supplement the information found in the book description (e.g., to determine author gender if pronouns were not provided or to determine the original publication year if the book was a reprint edition). A detailed description of the coding guidelines is available on OSF, and a breakdown of the characteristics of our sample by variable of interest is provided in Table 1 .

• PPT PowerPoint slide
• PNG larger image
• TIFF original image

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0260566.t001

Gender of central character.

After identifying each book’s protagonist (i.e., the character highlighted in the book description and/or featured in the book title), the central character’s gender was categorized as male or female based on available information. Critically, gender coding was based solely on textual information, as in previous research. We avoided reliance on visual cues since gender judgments from illustrations are particularly susceptible to cultural assumptions as well as personal conceptions of gender stereotypicality [ 15 ]. Gender coding decisions were made based on normative understandings of gendered nouns (e.g., boy , girl ) and pronouns (e.g., he , she ). If no explicit, text-based gender identification was provided other than the name of the character, then we determined gender based on whether the name was commonly recognized as masculine or feminine (as done by [ 23 ]). For instances in which the central character’s name was gender-ambiguous, where no name was provided, or where the character was ungendered or identified as non-binary, books were excluded from further analysis ( n = 161, or 2.45% of the dataset).

Publication year.

We coded publication year as the original publication date. In the case of reprints, the publication year was coded as the original, so long as the author and content of the book did not change in the newer edition. Conversely, for adaptations of classic stories, the latest publication year was coded, and author credit was given to the adapter, rather than the original author, since more recent publications could involve updates to the gender of the protagonist or other variables of interest (e.g., character type or target audience). As noted above, all books were published or reprinted between 1960 and 2020.

Gender of book author.

As for the gender of the central character, author gender was coded as male or female according to the gender pronouns, and if necessary, based on the author’s name. For books with multiple authors, books were excluded from all analyses if both male and female individuals held authorship ( n = 68, or 1.03% of the dataset) but were retained if all authors identified with the same gender. For books where the author was listed as a publishing company or an organization, or when the author used gender-neutral pronouns, books were excluded from further analysis ( n = 40, or 0.61% of the dataset). Illustrator gender was not coded since the present investigation relied solely on textual information to examine gender representation.

Age of target audience.

We coded the minimum and maximum age of children (in years) for which the book was recommended. We then characterized target audience using six age groups and determined coding according to the minimum age recommendation since some sources used the form ‘X and up’ to specify the target age range: infant/toddler (0 to 2 years), preschool (3 to 5 years), early elementary (6 to 8 years), middle elementary (9 to 10 years), late elementary (11 to 12 years), and teen (13 to 16 years). All analyses reported below use minimum age to categorize target audience group, though the results are qualitatively similar when categorized according to the average of the minimum and maximum ages, or when age is instead treated as a continuous variable. Because of the smaller number of books for teens in our sample, as a robustness check, we ran all analyses on the full set (including teens) and the subset of books targeted to children under age 13. All reported effects hold when the books for teens are excluded, unless otherwise indicated.

Character type.

Character type was coded as either human or non-human . Following [ 43 ], the non-human category not only included animals but also inanimate objects (e.g., vehicles, toys, plants).

Genre was coded as either fiction or non-fiction . Coding was determined based on the explicit genre classification (when provided), or based on the presence of fantastical elements ( fiction ) versus facts about a real-life individual or stories based on true events ( non-fiction ).

Reliability

The primary coder performed the initial exclusion and coded all remaining titles. To ensure satisfactory coding reliability, a randomly selected 30% of books meeting inclusion criteria were re-coded by a second coder, blind to the primary coder’s responses. Inter-rater reliability was high (α > 0.90 for all variables of interest). Additionally, the second coder re-coded a randomly selected 30% of excluded books to confirm reliability in determining whether books met inclusion criteria for analysis (α > 0.95). Discrepancies were resolved by discussion between the two coders. Additional arbitration by a third party was only needed for three items.

Descriptive analyses

In preliminary analyses, we examined whether the distribution of children’s books for the variables of interest varied across time. Binomial logistic regression revealed that the proportion of female authors, relative to male authors, increased between 1960 and 2020 ( B = 0.02, Z = 5.04, p < .001, OR = 1.02, 95% CI = [1.01, 1.02]; Fig 1A ) and so, too, did the proportion of non-fiction books, relative to fiction ( B = 0.04, Z = 8.48, p < .001, OR = 1.04, 95% CI = [1.03, 1.05]; Fig 1B ). The proportion of books targeted to older children (ages 9+), compared to younger children, did not vary during this time period ( B = 0.004, Z = 0.98, p = .327, OR = 1.004, 95% CI = [1.00, 1.01]; Fig 1C ), nor did the proportion of books with human versus non-human protagonists ( B = 0.005, Z = 1.53, p = .127, OR = 1.005, 95% CI = [1.00, 1.01]; Fig 1D ).

Individual points reflect proportion estimates for each year. Shaded regions show standard errors of binomial logistic regression model fits.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0260566.g001

These analyses also revealed that the books written by male authors included relatively more non-human characters than did books written by female authors ( B = 0.61, Z = 6.98, p < .001, OR = 0.55, 95% CI = [0.46, 0.65]; S1A Fig ). There were also more non-human characters in fiction ( B = 2.60, Z = 11.77, p < .001, OR = 13.44, 95% CI = [8.94, 21.33]; S1B Fig ) and in books targeted to younger children ( B = 1.32, Z = 18.07, p < .001, OR = 3.74, 95% CI = [2.25, 4.32]; S1C Fig ).

Male-to-female ratio of protagonists across time

In subsequent analyses, we addressed our first question of interest: has the gender representation in children’s books become more equitable over time? A binomial logistic regression analysis revealed that the ratio of male to female central characters changed significantly over the sampled time frame, such that the proportion of male protagonists decreased between 1960 and 2020, reflecting a trend towards parity, B = -0.02, Z = -4.63, p < .001, OR = 0.99, 95% CI = [0.98, 0.99] ( Fig 2 ). Because a critical contribution of the present study was the examination of gender representation in books published post 2000, we also ran this analysis on this most recent subset of books. In the time period from 2000 to 2020, we found the same significant trend towards parity, suggesting that progress towards equitable representation has continued rather than plateaued in the last two decades, B = -0.02, Z = -3.35, p < .001, OR = 0.98, 95% CI = [0.96, 0.99]. Nevertheless, female protagonists remain underrepresented in the most recently published books ( male-to-female ratio = 1.22:1 for the last decade, and 1.12:1 for the last five years).

Individual points reflect proportion estimates for each year. The dotted line at 0.5 denotes parity. The shaded region shows the standard error of the binomial logistic regression model fit.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0260566.g002

Moderators of the male-to-female ratio of protagonists

The next set of analyses targeted our second question of interest by examining the extent to which author gender (male vs. female), target audience (age of children), character type (human vs. non-human), and genre (fiction vs. non-fiction) affected the male-to-female ratio of central characters. First, we tested whether each variable independently predicted the male-to-female ratio. A binomial regression model with the four potential moderators as predictors (publication year not included in this analysis) revealed a significant effect for each of the variables tested. Our results clearly demonstrated that the male-to-female ratio was larger for books authored by men compared to women, B = 1.27, Z = 15.63, p < .001, OR = 3.57, 95% CI = [3.05, 4.20] ( Fig 3A ). As in previous studies, we also found that the male-to-female ratio was larger when the central character was non-human compared to human, B = 0.96, Z = 10.01, p < .001, OR = 2.60, 95% CI = [2.16, 3.15] ( Fig 3B ). We found a larger male-to-female ratio for non-fiction compared to fiction books, B = 0.29, Z = 3.46, p < .001, OR = 1.33, 95% CI = [1.13, 1.57] ( Fig 3C ). Moreover, we found that the male-to-female ratio was larger for books targeted to younger children than older children, B = -0.13, Z = -3.86, p < .001, OR = 0.88, 95% CI = [0.83, 0.94] ( Fig 3D ). See the next set of analyses for additional context in relation to these main effects.

The dotted line reflects parity (1:1 male-to-female ratio). Error bars denote 95% confidence intervals for ratio estimates.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0260566.g003

We then tested a binomial logistic regression model with all four moderators (i.e., author gender, target audience, character type, genre) and publication year included as predictors. These analyses revealed four significant two-way interactions, described in detail below. No other two- or three-way interactions reached statistical significance (all p s >.05). Notably, these null interactions included those with publication year, suggesting persistent effects of the moderators of the male-to-female ratio across time.

First, we found a significant two-way interaction between author gender and target audience, B = 0.39, Z = 4.64, p < .001, OR = 1.48, 95% CI = [1.26, 1.76] ( Fig 4A ). Male authors overrepresented male protagonists across all age groups, and there was a trend of increasing male overrepresentation as a function of the age of the target audience in books authored by males, though this effect did not reach statistical significance ( B = 0.11, Z = 1.81, p = .071, OR = 1.12, 95% CI = [0.99, 1.27]). Conversely, female authors showed significantly less male overrepresentation as the age of the target audience increased ( B = -0.25, Z = -5.88, p < .001, OR = 0.78, 95% CI = [0.71, 0.84]).

The dotted line at 0.5 denotes parity. Error bars denote 95% confidence intervals for proportion estimates.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0260566.g004

Second, there was a significant two-way interaction between author gender and character type, B = 0.52, Z = 2.35, p = .019, OR = 1.68, 95% CI = [1.09, 2.59] ( Fig 4B ). Male authors depicted more male protagonists regardless of character type ( male-to-female ratio : human = 2.95:1, χ 2 = 107.98, p < .001; non-human = 4.19:1, χ 2 = 66.87, p < .001). By contrast, female authors only showed male overrepresentation for non-human protagonists (2.27:1, χ 2 = 17.75, p < .001). When the characters were human, they depicted more female protagonists (0.75:1, χ 2 = 28.32, p < .001).

Third, there was a significant two-way interaction between character type and genre, B = 1.64, Z = 3.54, p < .001, OR = 5.13, 95% CI = [2.06, 12.86] ( Fig 4C ), such that there was male overrepresentation in fiction but only if the characters were non-human ( male-to-female ratio = 3.09:1, χ 2 = 93.24, p < .001). Importantly, there was also male overrepresentation in non-fiction when the characters were human (1.73:1, χ 2 = 28.02, p < .001). By contrast, there was gender parity in fiction when the characters were human (0.95:1, χ 2 = 0.51, p = .473) and in non-fiction when the characters were non-human (1:1, χ 2 = 0.00, p = 1.00).

Fourth, there was a significant two-way interaction between genre and target audience, B = 0.20, Z = 2.01, p < .001, OR = 1.22, 95% CI = [1.26, 1.76] ( Fig 4D ). The overrepresentation of male protagonists in non-fiction increased as age of the target audience increased, though this effect did not reach statistical significance ( B = 0.15, Z = 1.79, p = .074, OR = 1.16, 95% CI = [0.99, 1.36] except when books for teens were excluded from the analysis ( B = 0.21, Z = 2.34, p = .019, OR = 1.23 [1.04, 1.47]). However, male protagonists tended to be overrepresented in fiction books targeted to younger children, and overrepresentation decreased as the age of the target audience increased ( B = -0.21, Z = -5.65, p < .001, OR = 0.81, 95% CI = [0.75, 0.87]).

Moderators across time

The aforementioned effects did not indicate any interactions with publication year, suggesting stability of these effects across time. However, these previous analyses do not address whether the individual moderators were associated with reduced male overrepresentation across time, as suggested by the main effect of publication year ( Fig 2 ). To this end, we examined each moderator, and the corresponding interactions, across time. Moreover, as a robustness check, and given the focus of the present study, we also conducted all subsequent analyses on the subset of books published between 2000 and 2020. The reported effects hold for the most recent decades unless otherwise indicated.

First, to better understand the effect of author gender, we compared male and female authors when books were written for younger versus older children ( Fig 5A ) and when the books involved human versus non-human protagonists ( Fig 5B ). We found that, across time, both male and female authors decreased their overrepresentation of male characters in books targeted to younger children, but only the effect for male authors reached statistical significance ( B = -0.02, Z = -2.52, p = .012, OR = 0.98, 95% CI = [0.97, 1.00]). However, in more recent years (i.e., 2000–2020), only female authors were found to significantly decrease their overrepresentation of male characters in books for younger children. Although male authors consistently overrepresented male characters in books for older children across the entire 60-year period, female authors decreased their overrepresentation of male characters in these books over time ( B = -0.03, Z = -2.76, p = .006, OR = 0.97, 95% CI = [0.95, 0.99]). Additionally, we found that only female authors significantly decreased their overrepresentation of male human characters across time ( B = -0.01, Z = -2.32, p = .021, OR = 0.99, 95% CI = [0.98, 1.00]); however, this effect did not hold when books targeted to teens were excluded from this analysis. Neither male nor female authors significantly decreased their representation of male non-human characters, but when books targeted towards teens were excluded from this analysis, we found a significant trend towards parity for male authors ( B = -0.02, Z = -1.96, p = 0.0499, OR = 0.98, 95% CI = [0.96, 0.99]) and a marginal trend for female authors ( B = -0.02, Z = -1.77 p = 0.077, OR = 0.98, 95% CI = [0.95, 1.00]). Altogether, these analyses revealed that the changes over time were largely consistent for male and female authors. The main difference is that female authors showed less male overrepresentation, except when writing books featuring non-human central characters.

The dotted line at 0.5 denotes parity. The shaded regions show standard errors of binomial logistic regression model fits.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0260566.g005

Next, we further examined the effect of book genre. We compared fiction and non-fiction books when they involved human versus non-human characters ( Fig 5C ) and when the target audience was younger versus older children ( Fig 5D ). We found that, across time, overrepresentation of male characters in fiction books significantly decreased for human ( B = -0.02, Z = -4.73, p < .001, OR = 0.98, 95% CI = [0.97, 0.99]) and non-human characters ( B = -0.02, Z = -2.45, p = .014, OR = 0.98, 95% CI = [0.97, 1.00]), but these effects did not hold when considering only the subset of books published within the last two decades. By contrast, overrepresentation of male characters in non-fiction books, both human and non-human, did not decrease significantly across the entire 60-year period, though there was a significant decrease in male overrepresentation in non-fiction books featuring human characters when only considering the last two decades ( B = -0.03, Z = -2.35, p = 0.019, OR = 0.97, 95% CI = [0.94, 0.99]). We found a similar effect of book genre in relation to age of the target audience, where only changes for fiction books reached statistical significance for the entire 60-year period. That is, male overrepresentation decreased in fiction books for both younger ( B = -0.02, Z = -4.21, p < .001, OR = 0.985, 95% CI = [0.98, 0.99]) and older children ( B = -0.02, Z = -2.63, p = .008, OR = 0.98, 95% CI = [0.96, 0.99]) across the last 60 years, though the effect for younger children did not hold in the most recent subset of books (i.e., 2000–2020). Altogether, these analyses revealed that trends across time were largely consistent in fiction and non-fiction books, but that statistically significant changes in gender representation were seen only in fiction books across the full 60-year period.

How has gender representation changed in the last 60 years?

Our findings demonstrate that the male-to-female ratio of central characters has improved in the children’s books published between 1960 and 2020. During this time, there has been an increasing trend towards parity, though male protagonists remain overrepresented compared to female protagonists. Our findings are consistent with other research suggesting androcentrism in media, even post 2000 [ 44 ].

Importantly, we also found that particular combinations of author gender, target audience, character type, and genre impacted the male-to-female ratio throughout this 60-year period. Previous studies have investigated character type and author gender, but the impact of book genre and target audience on gender representation has remained largely unexplored. Our findings reveal important effects of all the variables of interest. We found that non-human characters are overrepresented as male, but only in fiction books, though overrepresentation has decreased across time. Moreover, human characters are also overrepresented as male, at least in non-fiction books. Thus, it appears to be the combination of character type and genre that results in significant male overrepresentation, rather than character type or genre alone.

Finally, although previous findings have suggested that female authors represent male and female characters at equitable rates [ 23 , 34 ], no study to date has discussed the interaction between author gender and other important variables, namely character type and target audience. Our findings revealed that male authors showed improvement in the male-to-female ratio of central characters across the 60-year period, but this was limited to books targeted to younger children. Female authors also showed improvement during this time and even depicted more female protagonists, at least with human characters and in books for older children, though there was no significant improvement in books with non-human characters (where male overrepresentation remains). Taken together, the results from the current study suggest important multiple confluences of gender representation in children’s books.

Patterns of gender representation explained

Although significant progress towards gender parity was observed, it is notable that, overall, male protagonists have been overrepresented in children’s books across the last 60 years, between 1960 and 2020. During this time, women have made great social and economic strides. There have been multiple waves of feminist movements [ 45 ], and social media has emerged as a mechanism by which to promote feminist doctrine broadly and expediently [ 46 ]. So, why does the gender bias in the literature targeted towards children persist?

One straightforward reason is that gender stereotypes persist in society. Even if explicit gender discrimination occurs less frequently today than in the past, implicit attitudes about females being submissive and less worthy than males remain pervasive [ 47 , 48 ]. Consistent with this possibility is the observation that males are considered more prototypical than females when categorizing humans [ 49 ]. Such attitudes could result in male overrepresentation in children’s books, with male characters appearing as the default. They may also explain why ambiguous contexts are more likely to be interpreted as male [ 50 ]. For example, mothers refer to gender-unspecified animal characters as male when reading or discussing books with their children [ 51 ], as do children themselves [ 52 ].

Persistent overrepresentation of male characters could also be a historical artifact. Older books, which may reflect the cultural dominance of male figures of years past, have remained popular and continue to be published, such that the overrepresentation of male characters may reflect an earlier perspective. Older books may be adapted and reprinted, and in the current dataset, some of these books were coded according to their most recent publication date. Future research should consider analyzing these books separately to determine the extent to which the reprints of older books (and persisting popularity of classic stories) contribute to continued male overrepresentation.

Another potential explanation for the greater male representation in children’s books is that books with male central characters sell better, such that publishers will be motivated to produce more books featuring male protagonists because of their wider appeal [ 53 ]. That such books sell better is consistent with research showing that parents prefer media with male characters and believe that their sons prefer male-oriented books [ 54 ]. Parents’ preferences for books with male characters may stem from their own experience with older, classic books [ 55 ]. Additionally, parents’ assumptions about their sons’ preferences may come directly from boys responding more favorably to books with male characters [ 54 , 56 ] and/or adults’ resistance to boys engaging in stereotypically feminine activities [ 57 ].

Yet another potential reason for male overrepresentation is that it reflects linguistic properties. In English, female is the marked (irregular) category because the affix “fe” is added to the unmarked (standard) form of “male”. Thus, authors may default to using male characters because male word forms are considered the norm. Even children default to using male word forms indiscriminately [ 58 , 59 ]. The challenge with the male generic is that even when intended to inclusively refer to all genders, the gender bias in prototypicality may lead people to interpret the male generic as referring specifically to males [ 60 ].

Although the aforementioned explanations do well to account for general male overrepresentation in children’s books, what is needed is an account that illuminates the variation across the different combinations of variables. In particular, explanations are needed for why there is greater parity for human characters when the books are fiction and for non-human characters when the books are non-fiction. Moreover, why do female authors show greater parity than male authors, especially in books targeted to older children and in books featuring human protagonists?

We suggest that although there are historical, linguistic, and economic forces working in favor of male overrepresentation, there is also cultural awareness of gender bias. With such awareness, there may be a motivation to ensure parity in the gender of children’s book characters. Yet, implementation of such parity may be more straightforward in specific contexts. Our data point to two such contexts: with human characters in fiction and with non-human characters in non-fiction. It may be easier to depict female human characters in fictional stories because authors need not adhere to real events in which there is greater prevalence of men in particular professions or scenarios. Similarly, when the stories are non-fiction, authors may have greater flexibility in representing characters when they are non-human (e.g., by describing facts about a female animal, such as A Mother’s Journey by Sandra Markle).

It is also important to note that some of the aforementioned effects depend critically on author gender. From 1960 to 2020, male authors consistently overrepresented central characters as male in books targeted to children of all ages. The overrepresentation of male characters (e.g., superheroes) in such contexts may reflect male authors’ own preferences for male fictitious characters. By contrast, female authors represented the gender of protagonists more equitably and even overrepresented female characters in books targeted to older children. This trend may reflect their beliefs that older children are better able to understand gender inequities and so may benefit from greater female representation. Such a perspective is consistent with other research showing that women (and other minorities) play a significant role in promoting diversity and may be integral in ensuring equity across genders [ 61 ].

Remaining considerations and conclusion

The underrepresentation of female characters in children’s books, and media more generally, has been referred to as ‘symbolic annihilation’ because it is believed to promote the marginalization of women and girls by suggesting that they play a less significant role in society. In the present study, we investigated gender disparity in children’s literature in its most blatant form—the male-to-female ratio of central characters. However, other research suggests that stereotypes permeate children’s books at multiple levels, including text [ 14 , 30 , 62 ] and illustrations [ 32 , 63 ]. Even when female characters appear as protagonists, they are often portrayed as more emotional [ 19 , 30 ], less active [ 64 ], and less associated with STEM [ 63 , 65 ]. Thus, it is not only necessary to strive for equitable representation in the numbers of male and female characters, but also for non-stereotypical depictions of these characters. In fact, recent work suggests that exposure to counter-stereotypical protagonists in books can reduce children’s endorsement of gender stereotypes [ 66 ] and promote less stereotypical behavior [ 67 ].

A notable caveat of the present study is that our analyses do not reflect actual reading rates. In other words, we analyzed children’s books available on the internet to estimate general trends in publication, but some books will be more popular than others, with variation across ages. For example, although we did not find that the male-to-female ratio of central characters depended on an interaction between character type and age of the target audience, it is nevertheless possible that younger children are read more books with non-human characters than older children, and thus may experience greater exposure to male characters. Future research might track which books children of different ages are exposed to in order to determine the conditions under which younger and older children are differentially exposed to unrepresentative samples of book characters.

It is also worth noting that the gender coding in the present study was based on a strict dichotomy of male versus female. Given the limited number of books with non-binary central characters, we did not formally assess this category. However, future research would do well to examine trends in the representation of non-binary protagonists to better understand gender diversity in children’s books. Additionally, the present study focused only on books with a single identifiable male or female protagonist and therefore does not address gender representation at all character levels. In future research, it will be important to examine the relative rates of appearance of gendered characters in shared protagonist (or supporting) roles, as well as how these dynamics may influence children’s perceptions of gender. For instance, female characters may be more likely to appear in stories with multiple protagonists, perhaps reflecting endorsement of stereotypical beliefs about women and girls being more community-oriented [e.g., 68 , 69 ], or may be more likely to be featured as supporting characters [e.g., 21 ]. It is also possible that patterns of representation may differ across cultural contexts [e.g., 70 ], highlighting a need for further characterization of gender representation in children’s books from sources outside of the United States.

In conclusion, our analysis of the frequency of male and female central characters clearly demonstrates that although female representation has improved over the last 60 years, parity has not yet been achieved in all types of books or by all authors. Moreover, and perhaps surprisingly, the determinants of gender representation—author gender, target audience, character type, and book genre—are largely unchanged over this period. Yet, the persistence of these predictors, as indicated by the present study, provides crucial data about where disparities in gender representation remain. Knowledge of these effects may allow publishers and authors to increase their awareness of the susceptibility to gender bias and strive to achieve gender equity in children’s books. Even before trends in publication reach parity, knowledge of these effects may help parents and educators to select less biased samples of books for individual children.

Supporting information

S1 fig. proportion of non-human protagonists in (a) books authored by males vs. females, (b) fiction vs. non-fiction books, and (c) books targeted to specific age ranges of children..

Error bars denote 95% confidence intervals for proportion estimates.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0260566.s001

• 1. United Nations, Department of Economic Social Affairs. World population prospects 2019. United Nations; 2019.
• 2. Rivers E. Women, minorities, and persons with disabilities in science and engineering. National Science Foundation. 2017.
• View Article
• PubMed/NCBI
• Google Scholar
• 12. Tuchman G. The symbolic annihilation of women by the mass media. Culture and politics: Springer; 2000. p. 150–74.
• 26. Noland M, Moran T, Kotschwar BR. Is gender diversity profitable? Evidence from a global survey. Peterson Institute for International Economics Working Paper. 2016;(16–3).
• 30. Lewis M, Borkenhagen MC, Converse E, Lupyan G, Seidenberg MS. What might books be teaching young children about gender? 2020.
• 33. Yello N. A contact analysis of Caldecott medal and honor books from 2001–2011 examining gender issues and equity in 21st century children’s picture books. 2012.
• 47. Field A, Tsvetkov Y. Unsupervised discovery of implicit gender bias. arXiv preprint arXiv:200408361. 2020.
• 53. Rider EA. Our voices: Psychology of women: Wadsworth Publishing Company; 2000.

Kids Books Still Have A Lack-Of-Diversity Problem, Powerful Image Shows

Parents Editor, HuffPost Canada

In 1990, scholar Dr. Rudine Sims Bishop wrote that books are mirrors , reflecting our own lives back at us, and that reading is therefore a means of self-affirmation. That idea is the inspiration behind a powerful new image that shows just how badly children’s books are failing our kids.

In the infographic, children of colour gaze skeptically into small and cracked mirrors while, nearby, a white child — and a bear — smile into full-length ones.

It’s based on some troubling, new U.S. publishing statistics that in 2018 there were more children’s books featuring animals and other non-human characters (27 per cent) than all types of visible minorities combined (23 per cent). Meanwhile, half of all the children’s books reviewed featured white kids.

“The positive ‘mirror’ experience is exactly why representation matters. Actually seeing someone who looks like you doing something you never thought of, it can give you the idea that ‘this could be me someday,’” U.S. children’s book illustrator David Huyck , who drew the image, told HuffPost Canada.

Huyck created the image along with Sarah Park Dahlen , a professor in library and information science at St. Catherine University in St. Paul, Minn. Dahlen, who is Korean-American, wrote on her website that the cracks in the mirrors represent how many of the books that do have diverse characters get it wrong.

“Children’s literature continues to misrepresent underrepresented communities, and we wanted this infographic to show not just the low quantity of existing literature, but also the inaccuracy and uneven quality of some of those books,” Dahlen wrote.

To create the infographic, Dahlen and Huyck used data from the University of Wisconsin-Madison School of Education Cooperative Children’s Book Center (CCBC), which has been compiling statistics on diversity in U.S. children’s books since 1985.

Of the 3,134 children’s books they reviewed in 2018, just 23, or one per cent, depicted Indigenous characters. Five per cent of the pics depicted LatinX characters, seven per cent had Asian Pacific Islander/Asian Pacific American characters, and 10 per cent had African/African American characters.

WATCH: Celebrating diversity in children’s books. Story continues below.

In their report, the CCBC urges people to buy and share more books featuring diverse characters .

“Sales matter to publishing,” the CCBC said in the report.

Dahlen and Huyck created a similar image in 2016, using 2015 CCBC data . That year, 73.3 per cent of children’s books depicted white characters.

But, don’t interpret the drop in white characters as a win for representation. The numbers for diverse characters only marginally increased over three years. It was the books featuring animals and trucks that made up the difference, jumping from 12.5 per cent in 2015 to 27 per cent in 2018.

Not just about, but by

While books “about” diverse characters are important, so are books “by” diverse authors. And those numbers are even smaller, the CCBC notes. That means a lot of the books that do contain characters of colour are created by white people, and may not depict the experience properly.

Huyck readily admits he’s a “white, male illustrator.”

“I am that blonde-haired blue-eyed boy at the right of my illustration. I’ve never questioned whether I could identify with the characters in the books I read or the movies I watch. But that is simply not the case for so many children across the U.S., and surely in Canada, too,” he said.

“In an ideal future, there will not only be more books about underrepresented people, but there will be more and more books written and illustrated by people representing their own diverse communities.”

That’s a challenge Canadian graphic artist Jay Odjick has been more than happy to rise to.

Odjick recently collaborated with Canadian author Robert Munsch to create Bear for Breakfast (Makwa kidji kijebà wìsiniyàn), which was published in English and French, with Algonquin translations for both. The duo also previously collaborated on Blackflies , set in a northern Alberta reserve, which made several best-sellers lists.

“I don’t know if there had ever been a bestseller set on a reserve with a cast of all First Nations characters,” Odjik previously told HuffPost Canada .

“It’s important for kids to see themselves reflected in their content. It can be a big deal for a kid to pick up a children’s book and see someone who looks like them.”

For more books by and about diverse and racialized people, check out the gallery below, as well as these LGBTQ-family-approved selections .

13 Children's Books That Celebrate Diversity

Support huffpost, our 2024 coverage needs you, your loyalty means the world to us.

At HuffPost, we believe that everyone needs high-quality journalism, but we understand that not everyone can afford to pay for expensive news subscriptions. That is why we are committed to providing deeply reported, carefully fact-checked news that is freely accessible to everyone.

Whether you come to HuffPost for updates on the 2024 presidential race, hard-hitting investigations into critical issues facing our country today, or trending stories that make you laugh, we appreciate you. The truth is, news costs money to produce, and we are proud that we have never put our stories behind an expensive paywall.

Would you join us to help keep our stories free for all? Your contribution of as little as $2 will go a long way.

As Americans head to the polls in 2024, the very future of our country is at stake. At HuffPost, we believe that a free press is critical to creating well-informed voters. That's why our journalism is free for everyone, even though other newsrooms retreat behind expensive paywalls.

Our journalists will continue to cover the twists and turns during this historic presidential election. With your help, we'll bring you hard-hitting investigations, well-researched analysis and timely takes you can't find elsewhere. Reporting in this current political climate is a responsibility we do not take lightly, and we thank you for your support.

Contribute as little as $2 to keep our news free for all.

Dear HuffPost Reader

Thank you for your past contribution to HuffPost. We are sincerely grateful for readers like you who help us ensure that we can keep our journalism free for everyone.

The stakes are high this year, and our 2024 coverage could use continued support. Would you consider becoming a regular HuffPost contributor?

The stakes are high this year, and our 2024 coverage could use continued support. If circumstances have changed since you last contributed, we hope you’ll consider contributing to HuffPost once more.

Already contributed? Log in to hide these messages.

Popular in the Community

From our partner, huffpost shopping’s best finds, more in life.

Information Visualization

Student work at the school of information, pratt institute, visualizing representation in children’s/ya literature (2018-2022) .

https://public.tableau.com/app/profile/catherine.hartup/viz/CCBCDiversityDataFinal/GayandTransRepbyRace_1

Introduction

While discussions of book banning in school and public libraries have been dominating children’s and YA literature discourses for the last few years, I thought it would be rewarding to look at a (potentially) more positive element in the field. By utilizing the Cooperative Children’s Book Center’s Diversity Statistics, an ongoing organizational data project originating in 1985 that tracks the University of Wisconsin-Madison research library’s new acquisitions of teen and children’s literature that includes BIPOC, LGBTQ+, disability, and religious representation, I hoped to visualize recent and effective trends in this publishing sector. By just taking data from 2018-2022, my initial goal (which was of course always dependent on the data) was to visually represent two things: how much change can happen in just a few years time, while still being incredibly limited in what is actually changing when you break down the intersections of these tracked representations that appear in the data. 

I was able to speak with two employees of the CCBC before embarking on my design process, Madeline Tyner and Tessa Michaelson Schmidt, the director, discussed with me their need for simple graphics that would be applicable to use in a myriad of contexts in which this data is often pulled for – stakeholders, researchers, undergraduate and graduate students, journalists, educators, authors. In all likelihood, most of these users would probably not be shocked to hear that BIPOC LGBTQ+ representation still lags significantly behind depictions of white LGBTQ+ characters, but especially given public outcry about some of these topics appearing in YA and children’s lit, it could still be surprising to see just how little there is of the latter when you can see it comparatively. As the only professional entity who has been working on a project like this for as long as they have, the CCBC has considerable interest in being able to share these statistics in accessible and digestible formats for their wide range of users. 

Material and Methodology 

Basic formats of this data are freely available on the CCBC’s website. They also welcome any researcher or interested party to contact them with further questions or who are looking for more material. One of the librarians, Madeline Tyner, is a friend of mine and oversees the logistical elements of the projects; I discussed with them what information I was looking for, and they were able to share a Google sheets document of relevant information. This originally included all data for books featuring LGBTQ+ representation, starting in 2018, and listed all of the information the CCBC records: ID number, title, ISBN, year, call number, collection (fiction versus nonfiction), genre, publisher, character notes for sexuality, race, disability, and religion, author, and author identity notes. I decided to cut this down significantly to meet my needs for producing effective visuals and kept the year, collection, genre, and notes on primary character race and sexuality. This final collection of data had 539 rows.

Additionally, there was little in the way of data entry standardization. Notes on race and sexuality were sometimes entered in full sentences instead of individual markers, and given the massive perforations between the actual entries and simplified categories that I required, I decided to manually edit the data. Using searching tricks to mass edit small blocks at a time, I ended with two sets of categories for race and sexuality/gender. The former contained Arab, Asian, Black, Brown-skinned (when characters have been described as such but no specific identity was indicated within the data), Indigenous, Latinx, Multiracial, Pacific Islander, Unknown, and White. The second groupings, which were much more subjectively decided by myself, included Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Queer/Unspecified, and Trans/Nonbinary. I originally intended to include trans identities and gender nonconformity in with Queer/Unspecified but decided against it when I saw the range of books that could substantially constitute it as a stand alone category. 

With the dataset prepared for visualization, my next step was to upload my information into Tableau Public. Not only is Tableau the most accessible program that I encountered over this course, I see it as an effective tool in producing the kinds of straightforward visuals that were discussed with the CCBC director. Given that I both wanted to feel as comfortable and confident as possible during the process and the platform fulfilled the needs of the organization, it seemed the most appropriate choice. 

The Design Process 

My Tableau design process started with a considerable amount of experimentation; which measures resulted in the most accessible and interesting design options? I was aware of certain themes and ideas I was expecting to express through the data, but I needed to work with it in a tangible way in order to guide myself into the array of visualizations I ended up producing. 

The first visual is a line graph featuring all books with LGBTQ+ protagonists across 2018-2022, broken down by every available racial category. The line for ‘White’ soars above every other descriptor, generally increasing with every year save for a drop in 2022 (the CCBC site also notes that since 2020, given the pandemic, they have received fewer review copies in general from publishers). Multiracial consistently records the highest numbers among BIPOC categories (with, in 2021, a difference of over sixty between it and White), with only Black starting to come close in 2022. Arab and Indigenous maintain a level of only one or two total titles across all years. More than any other visual, I believe this one provides a general and clear understanding for users to take away from this data – that while LGBTQ+ representation may be reliably increasing across YA and children’s literature, there are still massive gaps among them when it comes to the racial makeup of these characters and that similar, consistent jumps are not being seen for these BIPOC groups. 

Secondly, I used the packed bubbles design to visualize the distribution of LGBTQ+ categories across all BIPOC representations, again across all years. After taking a broader approach in the first visual, I appreciated being able to delve deeper into the BIPOC representation that is available to see what LGBTQ+ identities are being explored. Queer/Unspecified dominated with 93 entries, with Gay and Trans/Nonbinary far behind but surprisingly close to each other (45 and 32, respectively). While I did not recreate this kind of visual to include White and Unknown, just from my own experience with this data, I do see this trend of Queer/Unspecified making up the majority of LGBTQ+ representation in line with the overall data. Given that titles were bestowed this category if no explicit identity is named in the text but queer or same-sex attraction is depicted, it makes sense that BIPOC narratives follow this inclination. 

The following two visualizations, Black LGBTQ+ Representation 2018 and 2022, are an attempt at seeing if the LGBTQ+ identities within a singular racial category changed at all between the first and last year of our available data. Interestingly, the overall total exactly doubled from six to twelve, but the makeup changed drastically from an almost even representation across all categories in 2018 to over half appearing in Queer/Unspecified in 2022. In 2022, lesbian disappeared entirely. 

Next, I included a discrete line graph that compares the categories of Gay and Trans/Nonbinary from 2018-2022 and across all racial categories. I found this one to be possibly the most unique and interesting visual of the group, as the findings across race are by no means consistent beyond Gay generally having higher numbers than Trans/Nonbinary, with the categories often starting to even out by 2022. Predictably, White has the highest of all, with Arab, Indigenous, Brown Skinned, and Unknown all having years with no representation in either category. Others, like Black, Asian, and Multiracial, stay largely close together except for an outlier year. 

Lastly, since I did intend to include another element outside of character identities and the year of publication, I produced an area chart for all 539 entries of books with LGBTQ+ protagonists broken down by genre. Contemporary overwhelmingly carried the majority every year, which runs in line with likely anyone familiar with the general trend of current children’s and YA literature, with Fantasy and Historical staying almost identical year to year from 2020 onward. 

UX Research 

For my user experience research, I decided to provide my visualizations to the two CCBC employees I had already interacted with prior: Madeline Tyner and director Tessa Michaelson Schmidt. I provided them both with a link to my public Tableau project in advance and spoke to each over the phone for a short interview, approximately fifteen minutes and during the work day. I asked them both the same four basic questions to receive instructive and informed feedback on my visualizations: 

• Is the data and information in each different visualization clear? Does anything need further explanation?
• As someone familiar with this data, are these visualizations the kind you’d find useful to share with users and/or stakeholders? 
• Is there anything else you would like to see? Any visual element you would do differently?
• Do you have any additional feedback of any type that you’d like to share?

Generally, both had extremely positive reactions to my work. In answer to the first question, both Madeline and Tessa had small quibbles that were not in my realm of Tableau expertise to fix but that were interesting: Madeline pointed out that when you hover over the bubbles design, the actual category titles from the data sheet are included in listing the total count (for example, PrimaryCharacterHeritageNotes1). Tessa implied interest in having more descriptive elements for the visualizations individually beyond the titles, essentially a method of providing more context around the information. In this vein, both expressed enthusiasm about these being shared with the various audiences who often interact with this data project. Elements that I have already highlighted, such as the comparative nature of seeing the massive difference between White and BIPOC LGBTQ+ representation, was communicated simply with a strong visual component. Tessa specifically cited stakeholders being able to better understand this discrepancy in more than just a conceptual way, as well as how dire the problem actually is and why the project itself is important to document. In the context of funding and allocating resources, thoroughly understanding this issue is paramount. Students were also highlighted as an important user group, as these could be a useful tool in the realm of education for appreciating the current state of the literature. 

When it came to the third question, Madeline reiterated my earlier hope to break down similar information to the first graph as a packed bubbles visual, which would employ a different and effective form of communication around the same data. Tessa was interested in work outside of the scope of this project which is definitely compelling; she proposed including studies done about the real life identities of children and teenagers today. If we know more about the actual makeup of the gender identities, sexual orientations, and racial identities of the intended audience for these works, it can add another layer to the apparent issue of diversity in publishing versus how students look and identify today. For final feedback, they both emphasized the importance of how these visuals can serve as complementary elements to the narrative the CCBC and its users tell around this data. Generally, they provide succinct and accessible visualizations that effectively portray numerous issues of contention in children’s and YA literature and provide key jumping off points for larger conversations. 

Findings and Reflection 

Going into this project, I had the same assumptions that Madeline and Tessa discussed when it came to stakeholders and other audiences who interact with the CCBC’s diversity data – as LGBTQ+ representation has grown within children’s and YA literature over the last few years, the racial breakdown of this work is more stagnant and still more glaring than some users may assume. My visualizations reflect this finding starkly, which gives them, as an organization, the means to both fundamentally justify this ongoing project and advocate for change across channels available to them and the users of their data. The sections of data that I have chosen to work with are simplified compared to the project as a whole, but the visualizations necessary for this information also require a level of simplification and easy access, so the average user does not have to sift through thousands of books over numerous years to understand these trends and issues in diverse children’s and YA representations. As Tessa said to me when we first spoke about the project, simple visuals are effective in a subject like this that has the emotional element of portraying marginalized experiences via distanced numbers and statistics – that huge gap between White LGBTQ+ characters and just about anyone else speaks volumes. 

Going forward, I see massive potential in finding different ways to portray both the macro and micro elements of this data. As Madeline pointed out, trying different formats for the first visual comparing all the racial categories within LGBTQ+ protagonists would likely be quite helpful, especially if a user experience process was included to see which visualizations are preferred by different users. In the process of writing a report on this data, other opportunities for more specific visualizations would likely become clear. Because there is so much available, the needs and interests of the user or audience would best guide these more specific visual works. When it came to my own work, I wish that there was more room and time to get more into a comparative track between the different categories, especially since my one product comparing the track of Gay and Trans/Nonbinary works had some of the least clear takeaways across racial groups. Regardless, the visualizations that have emerged from this project depict a scene of children’s and YA literature that still needs a significant push from all sides to do better by BIPOC LGBTQ+ representation, and it motivates me as a library professional to advocate for the same across other disciplines in the tradition that the CCBC has been championing since the project’s inception.

2022. Data on books by and about Black, Indigenous and People of Color compiled by the Cooperative Children’s Book Center (CCBC), School of Education, University of Wisconsin-Madison, based on its work analyzing the content of books published for children and teens received by the CCBC annually . [Data set.] CCBC. Accessed: 7 December 2022. https://ccbc.education.wisc.edu/literature-resources/ccbc-diversity-statistics/books-by-and-or-about-poc-2018/

No related posts.

Hooked on Classics

• Posted August 28, 2019
• By Jill Anderson

With every new book English teacher Jabari Sellars , Ed.M.’18, introduced to his eighth graders, Shawn had something to say:

“This is lame.”

“This is wrong.”

“Are you serious?”

At first Sellars dismissed the reaction as 13-year-old Shawn just not liking to read.

After all, the book selection for Sellars’ Washington, D.C., class resembled the lists used in a lot of American schools. The Iliad . Romeo & Juliet . The Book Thief . Lord of the Flies . So when Shawn suggested alternative titles — demonstrating how well-read and interested he truly was — Sellars realized he had a different problem: All we’re reading are books about white people.

In a quick attempt to offer something different, Sellars turned to another genre rarely used in schools — a comic book — only to fail again when students identified in the Astonishing X-Men another white male protagonist. Having grown up cherishing the classics, like many English teachers, Sellars hadn’t strayed too far from the influential and often very “white” literary canon — the books and texts considered to be the most important.

It’s been more than 50 years since literacy experts first stressed the need for more diverse books in the classroom, and yet reading lists look surprisingly the same as they did in 1970.

“People teach what they’re comfortable with, so the choices become this narrow realm of what you liked and what you’re familiar with,” says Senior Lecturer Pamela Mason , M.A.T.’70, Ed.D.’75, who directs the Ed School’s Language and Literacy Program. Moving away from the classics toward more diverse books can stretch “people’s imaginations and pedagogy,” she says, but it can also reveal how educators aren’t equipped for that change.

The canon has long been revered in public education as representing the “depth and breadth of our national common experience,” Mason says, the books that many believe all high school students should be studying. The problem is that what was once defined as “common” — middle class, white, cisgender people — is no longer the reality in our country. Unfortunately, Mason says, “making a case for new literature by different authors of color, authors who are not cisgendered, or even just female authors” is a challenge.

Liz Phipps Soeiro, Ed.M.’19, an elementary school librarian in Cambridge, realized the canon’s power after returning to the White House 10 Dr. Seuss books donated by First Lady Melania Trump in 2017. In a now viral blog post explaining her reasons, she wrote about disappearing school libraries, policies that work against underprivileged communities, and how although considered a classic, Dr. Seuss was “steeped in racism and harmful stereotypes.” People responded harshly through personal attacks and threats on Soeiro and her family.

“It’s more complex than ‘I want to throw Dr. Seuss away,’” she says, disputing the charge that she hates Dr. Seuss. While attending a children’s book conference 10 years ago, she saw no diverse books being highlighted and asked the book vendor why, only for the question to be dismissed. It forced Soeiro to think more deeply about inequities, realizing that books — even the most beloved — are part of systemic issues. “Knowing the history of this country and the history of our educational system really puts into sharp focus just how urgent it is to have representation in our books, stories, narratives, and media that we share with children,” she says.

Literacy experts have long called for more representation in children’s literature. In 1965, literacy champion Nancy Larrick’s Saturday Review article, “The All-White World of Children’s Books,” noted how millions of children of color were learning from books that completely omitted them.

Then, nearly 25 years later, children’s literary expert Rudine Sims Bishop reiterated children’s need for mirrors, windows, and sliding glass doors in books to “understand each other better” and “change our attitudes toward difference.” As she wrote in the 1990 publication Perspectives: Choosing and Using Books for the Classroom , “When there are enough books available that can act as both mirrors and windows for all our children, they will see that we can celebrate both our difference and our similarities, because together they are what makes us all human.”

Yet, in the past 24 years, multicultural content, according to book publisher Lee & Low, represents only 13% of children’s literature. Despite national movements like We Need Diverse Books and DisruptTexts, and despite a growing number of diverse books, only 7% are written by people of color.

Considering that the American student population is now 50% nonwhite, the need for that mirror — for opportunities for children to see themselves and navigate a more diverse world — seems more pressing. Much like Sellars’ students, children notice the lack of representation surrounding them. English teachers interviewed for this story, particularly at middle and high school levels, described how students complain about representation, cultural relevance, and boredom in text. Those complaints, especially boredom, signal to Mason a greater need for variety in the classroom.

The solution seems obvious: Add more books that represent LGBTQ issues, gender diversity, people of color, people with disabilities, and ethnic, cultural, and religious minorities. But even as teachers appear aware of a need to diversify the curriculum, there can be roadblocks to making it happen. For example, there’s a diversity gap in the book publishing industry regarding who gets published (mostly white authors), who gets awarded (mostly white authors), and which books make it onto school vendor booklists (mostly white creators). Add in the fact that new books are typically more expensive than classics, says Christina Dobbs, Ed.M.’06, Ed.D.’13, an assistant professor of English at Boston University, and it can be hard to make a case for change.

Even when teachers have the support of school administrators, funding, and autonomy over book selection, they still might feel lost.

“Some teachers might think, ‘I want to diversify the literature,’ but don’t know what to do with it,” says Lecturer Vicki Jacobs , C.A.S.’80, Ed.D.’86, a former English teacher who retired this summer as director of the Ed School’s Teacher Education Program. “They need to understand the multiple contexts — including background knowledge and lived experiences — that both they and their students bring to their reading and interpretations of those texts.”

This lack of understanding could explain why an elementary teacher of color from Virginia who attended a literature institute last year at the Ed School reported that she had discovered that other teachers in the school, who were predominantly white, weren’t using the more representative books she pushed for in the school library.

“It’s a mistake to think having the books gives people the tools to teach the books,” Dobbs says. In her role training teachers, she sees that many want to have conversations about diverse books but don’t know how. “We don’t have evidence that teachers can close that gap independently.”

Mason noticed similar apprehensions among educators, prompting her to create two professional learning experiences — an online module called Culturally Responsive Literature Instruction and its companion workshop on campus, Advancing Culturally Responsive Literature . Both programs, offered through the Ed School’s Professional Education program, focus on instructional literary practices that support and value the many identities present in the 21st-century classroom.

Last fall 51 educators, mostly teachers from the United States, gathered on the Ed School campus for a weekend spent learning how to bring new texts into their classrooms. There was plenty to discuss, like how to vet new books and develop a diverse curriculum to more predictable topics about meeting standards. (Common Core doesn’t identify required reading or tell you how to teach.)

Rachel Schubert, an 11th and 12th grade English teacher at Martha’s Vineyard High School in Massachusetts, attended the workshop to learn from other educators who are prioritizing this work. In her diverse classroom, she aims to strike a balance between the “classics” and multicultural texts like Ta-Nehisi Coates’ Between the World and Me and Jhumpa Lahiri’s The Namesake . Still, she knows many teachers who stick to a classics-only approach, insisting there are ways to teach old books with a different lens too.

Schubert finds new books and methods helpful in creating space for students to grapple with tough issues and questions about identity. “The kids I teach are extremely hungry for these experiences. Diversifying the curriculum is one way to reach them,” she says. “Once you start doing it, it’s not that scary anymore.”

Fear can be a powerful deterrent to making change in the classroom. When adding diverse books and readings, Schubert and Sellars already know the tricky scenarios — how to address stereotypes or not being able to answer a student’s question — that might keep teachers away from the work.

In a lot of ways, learning how to understand and discuss difference with students connects back to the need for diverse books in the first place.

“In our nation, we haven’t been good at learning how to talk across differences in a respectful way,” Mason says. “And that is supposed to be the fabric of our democracy.” When you add in the fact that teacher training hasn’t always included work about race and identity, or even about addressing cultural assumptions, it becomes easy to see how adding diverse books to the curriculum can seem like treacherous territory.

New books come under scrutiny even though they often contain similar elements as classics. For instance, consider the racialized language in Huckleberry Finn , or the treatment of disabilities in Of Mice and Men , or even the sexual content in Romeo & Juliet . But those books still maintain a place in classrooms around the country, whereas new books like The Hate U Give get challenged as “anti-cop” and for profanity, drug use, and sexual references, according to the American Library Association’s Office for Intellectual Freedom. The book also happens to deal with racial injustices and police brutality, and is written by a black female.

“It’s kind of odd that we don’t have a problem giving students of color books written by dead white men, but we get a little queasy when we give white students literature written by African American authors, Latinx authors, transgender authors, Asian American authors,” Mason says. She suggests that, rather than banning books, we instead lead students through a balanced analysis of literature.

As educators try to diversify texts in their classrooms, they need thoughtful intent when choosing which books are appropriate or in determining the methods to teach material. Without that clear purpose, Jacobs fears teachers get lost, along with students, in the text. That purpose also helps safeguard against backlash when you know why you’ve selected certain work.

“A lot of people will see a brown child on the cover of a book and think that’s enough,” Soeiro says. But it’s not. “We have to look critically at the agency of that child, who wrote the book, the dominant narrative in the book. It takes a lot of work.”

It’s work, say educators like Soeiro and Dobbs, that teachers need to do.

“If all you read is one book by an author of color and five books a year by dead white guys, how does that shape your ideas about how stories get told, who they’re about?” Dobbs says.

In some ways, we already know. Today’s educators and students still exist in a canonized world, where prized books both teach and constrain us.

“An inherent part of developing culturally responsive instruction is coming to terms with our narrow view of literature,” Sellars says. “Making our classes culturally responsive may mean bringing in new texts and media, which means teachers will relinquish their position as experts. Many teachers are reluctant to introduce a new text, or even teach an old text from a different perspective, because doing so doesn’t allow them to rely solely on previous lesson plans and teaching strategies.”

After Sellars’ student made him see his “blind spots,” he could have kept everything the same. It would have been easier. But he spent the summer rethinking the reading list. The following year his eighth graders read newer, less canonized books: Ultimate X-Men , Persepolis , Black Boy White School , and excerpts from The Song of Achilles . The experience moved Sellars from what he describes as just talking about being culturally relevant to actually doing the work.

Mason believes a new culture of teaching literature will emerge, one classroom success at at a time, as long as we chip away at the lingering notion that diverse books aren’t worthy of teachers’ time and attention.

“When teachers learn about the cultural assumptions that made them leery about including new, multicultural literature, then learn how to teach the books, that sets them off in a stance of strength and knowledge. Then they have a couple of successes in the classroom,” Mason says. Describing the potential for that success to then snowball among fellow teachers, she adds, “Another teacher tries with their support, and they get successful too, and the new book starts to become part of a larger repertoire of literature to share.” When confronted with a book from the canon, it becomes, ‘Do we have to teach that book again on this theme?’ Well, here are some other options that might be worth a try.’”

Jill Anderson is a senior digital content creator at the Ed School and host of the Harvard EdCast .

Reloading the Canon

Ed. Magazine

The magazine of the Harvard Graduate School of Education

Related Articles

Navigating Book Bans

A guide for educators as efforts intensify to censor books

How to Teach Comprehensive Black History

Four approaches to meaningfully incorporate the stories of Black Americans into curriculum — beyond February

The Need for Asian American History in Schools

Representation Matters: Diversity in Children's Books

“Diverse literature enables students to see themselves as the heroes of the story…”

-Lily Eskelsen García

If you think back to your favorite books from your childhood, which titles come to mind? What is it in those particular books that resonated so deeply with you? For many young readers, being able to see themselves reflected in the main characters strikes a deep chord. Reading books with accurate representations of students’ own cultures can contribute to self-worth within students, while allowing them to connect with themselves and their culture on a deeper level.

Diverse representations of characters in multi-cultural books are beneficial to all readers. Reading multicultural books:

• Helps people to better understand current world issues
• Exposure to multicultural literature increases awareness of the social practices, values and belief systems of other cultures
• Promotes unity and empathy: people learn that not only are differences tolerated, they are embraced
• Promotes the interaction of children across differing ethnic backgrounds

What does the current breakdown of diversity in children’s books look like? Read this short article from Huffington Post to learn more:

Kids Books Still Have a Lack-of-Diversity Problem, Powerful Image Shows

https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/entry/diversity-kids-books-statistics_ca_5d0bb0f8e4b0859fc3db38c3

How can parents and teachers gauge problematic content in children’s books? Check out this article for tips on how to spot racist and sexist ideas in children’s literature:

10 Quick Ways to Analyze Children’s Books for Racism and Sexism

https://wowlit.org/links/evaluating-global-literature/10-quick-ways-to-analyze-childrens-books-for-racism-and-sexism/

Where can you find recommendations for diverse books? Spend some time looking through the multitude of resources on WNDB (We Need Diverse Books) to find suggested titles, blog articles, resources on diversity, equity, and inclusion, and much more:

We Need Diverse Books

https://diversebooks.org/

Sign up to have new Tutor Tips sent directly to your email inbox each week at http://feedburner.google.com/fb/a/mailverify?uri=MLC-Tutor-Tips&amp%3Bloc=en_US

Photo by Tolu Bamwo from  nappy.co

Get the Latest 

Get the latest teaching tips and resources.

• Impact and Mission
• Staff and Board
• Annual Reports and Financials
• Jobs and Internships
• Classes for Adults
• Programs for Children & Families
• Digital Literacy
• Trainings & Workshops
• Volunteer Recruitment
• Northstar Digital Literacy
• AmeriCorps Programs
• Literacy Strategies (Consulting)
• Open Door Collective
• NEW! English Unlocked
• Educator Resources Library
• Distance Learning Platforms
• MN Distance Learning Support
• Ways to Volunteer
• Work with Adults
• Volunteer Interest Signup
• Volunteer Training Calendar
• New Volunteer Information Sessions
• AmeriCorps VISTA
• Open Door Learning Centers

You have exceeded your limit for simultaneous device logins.

Your current subscription allows you to be actively logged in on up to three (3) devices simultaneously. click on continue below to log out of other sessions and log in on this device., bipoc representation in children's literatures continues its slow rise, according to ccbc's diversity statistics.

The Cooperative Children’s Book Center released its latest Diversity Statistics report on children's literature, showing another year of small increases in books with BIPOC primary characters and significant BIPOC content.

The modest increases in diversity in children's literature continued in 2023, according to the latest Diversity Statistics report released by the Cooperative Children’s Book Center (CCBC).

In 2023, 49 percent of the books the CCBC documented had significant BIPOC content (up from 46 percent in 2022) and 40 percent had at least one BIPOC primary character (up from 39 percent in 2022). The number of books with at least one BIPOC creator was about the same as 2022.  Those numbers continue the trend of slow growth in representation year to year. In 2022, the books with significant BIPOC content went up two percent (from 44 to 46) while BIPOC primary characters jumped three percent (from 36 to 39).

For this report, the CCBC analyzed 3,491 books for children and teens that were published in 2023.

Read the full press release below.  

Get Print. Get Digital. Get Both!

Libraries are always evolving. Stay ahead. Log In.

Add Comment :-

Be the first reader to comment.

Comment Policy:

• Be respectful, and do not attack the author, people mentioned in the article, or other commenters. Take on the idea, not the messenger.
• Don't use obscene, profane, or vulgar language.
• Stay on point. Comments that stray from the topic at hand may be deleted.
• Comments may be republished in print, online, or other forms of media.
• If you see something objectionable, please let us know . Once a comment has been flagged, a staff member will investigate.

First Name should not be empty !!!

Last Name should not be empty !!!

email should not be empty !!!

Comment should not be empty !!!

You should check the checkbox.

Please check the reCaptcha

Ethan Smith

Lorem Ipsum is simply dummy text of the printing and typesetting industry. Lorem Ipsum has been the industry's standard dummy text ever since the 1500s, when an unknown printer took a galley of type and scrambled it to make a type specimen book.

Posted 6 hours ago REPLY

Jane Fitgzgerald

Posted 6 hours ago

Michael Woodward

Continue reading.

Added To Cart

Related , lack of english translation in picture book is a lesson in language and communication, 'gender queer' tops list of most challenged books for third year in a row, spend it if you can | slj 2024 budget survey, sora report: digital reading increases with double-digit growth in comics and graphic novels, district leaders tackle the school librarian pipeline, "what is this" design thinking from an lis student.

The job outlook in 2030: Librarians will be in demand

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, --> Log In

You did not sign in correctly or your account is temporarily disabled

REGISTER FREE to keep reading

If you are already a member, please log in.

Passwords must include at least 8 characters.

Your password must include at least three of these elements: lower case letters, upper case letters, numbers, or special characters.

The email you entered already exists. Please reset your password to gain access to your account.

Create an account password and save time in the future. Get immediate access to:

News, opinion, features, and breaking stories

Exclusive video library and multimedia content

Full, searchable archives of more than 300,000 reviews and thousands of articles

Research reports, data analysis, white papers, and expert opinion

Passwords must include at least 8 characters. Please try your entry again.

Your password must include at least three of these elements: lower case letters, upper case letters, numbers, or special characters. Please try your entry again.

Thank you for registering. To have the latest stories delivered to your inbox, select as many free newsletters as you like below.

No thanks. return to article, already a subscriber log in.

We are currently offering this content for free. Sign up now to activate your personal profile, where you can save articles for future viewing

Thank you for visiting.

We’ve noticed you are using a private browser. To continue, please log in or create an account.

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

SUBSCRIPTION OPTIONS

Already a subscriber log in.

Most SLJ reviews are exclusive to subscribers.

As a subscriber, you'll receive unlimited access to all reviews dating back to 2010.

To access other site content, visit our homepage .

• Bipolar Disorder
• Therapy Center
• When To See a Therapist
• Types of Therapy
• Best Online Therapy
• Best Couples Therapy
• Best Family Therapy
• Managing Stress
• Sleep and Dreaming
• Understanding Emotions
• Self-Improvement
• Healthy Relationships
• Student Resources
• Personality Types
• Guided Meditations
• Verywell Mind Insights
• 2023 Verywell Mind 25
• Mental Health in the Classroom
• Editorial Process
• Meet Our Review Board
• Crisis Support

The Importance of Representation in Books

 Krystal Kavita Jagoo is a social worker, committed to anti-oppressive practice, who has worked for three academic institutions across Canada. Her essay, “Inclusive Reproductive Justice,” was in the Reproductive Justice Briefing Book.

Emily is a board-certified science editor who has worked with top digital publishing brands like Voices for Biodiversity, Study.com, GoodTherapy, Vox, and Verywell.

Verywell / Catherine Song

National Literary Accolades

The need for intersectionality in books, negative impacts of representation gaps.

• Publishing's Power Dynamics

How to Increase Diversity in Books

According to the Brookings Institution, there are more BIPOC folx than Whites under the age of 15 years old in the U.S. (The term "folx" is an alternative spelling to "folks" used to emphasize inclusion of marginalized groups.)

While the United States has a very diverse population, this diversity is not always reflected within children's books.

"Books about White children, talking bears, trucks, monsters, potatoes, etc. represent nearly three quarters (71%) of children's and young adult books published in 2019," reports the Cooperative Children's Book Center.

According to the first Diversity Baseline Survey from Lee and Low Books, 79% of those working in children's book publishing were White in 2015. By 2019, the Diversity Baseline Survey found this number had decreased to 76%. While these data indicate that there has been an increase in employees of other ethnic backgrounds, this change is quite minimal.

Additionally, this small change is disheartening because, despite initiatives such as We Need Diverse Books and the Children’s Book Council Diversity Initiative to improve representation in children's books, it's clear that substantial improvement is needed.

Far too often, folx have decided that "the classics" are the most influential literary works of a certain time period. This perspective often does not bode well for oppressed and marginalized groups.

While some may still believe that the caliber of a book is determined by national accolades, such a view fails to understand the reality of systemic barriers in the publishing industry.

Even when diverse books manage the rare triumph of getting published, they receive less recognition from mainstream channels.

A study looked at 100 National Book Award finalists and 20 winners between 1996 and 2015. The researchers found that of the 23 culturally relevant texts nominated as finalists (culturally relevant refers to "texts that are written about a culture by a cultural insider and engage students within that culture, who would not otherwise not see their culture reflected in a book"), only 5 of those books won the National Book Award.

This research shows that if the value of a book is solely determined by how many literary accolades it receives, it may lead to a lack of representation of the experiences of marginalized folx.

In addressing the need for more representation in children's books, taking intersectionality into consideration is essential.

If you are unfamiliar with intersectionality, it may be a good time to learn more about the work of Kimberlé Williams Crenshaw , who coined the term in 1989 to center the unique experiences of marginalization that Black women face but acknowledges that it is an ever-evolving term that is meant to include diverse experiences of identity.

Identity Markers

Intersectionality is important because even if books depict Black characters—if they only show Black boys that play sports or fight for civil rights—they don't represent the Black folx who are disabled, gender non-conforming, or some other identity.

In a study of three early elementary classroom library collections, the books in each of the libraries were reviewed to determine if the books were representative of diverse identities and experiences. The protagonist of each story was scanned for identity markers. Examples of these identity markers include:

• Language use
• Family structure (nuclear, single parent, extended family, etc.)
• Topics of social significance (i.e., homelessness, incarceration, immigrant/refugee status, etc.)

When reviewing books for the presence of these identity markers, it highlighted the importance of utilizing an intersectional lens when considering diversity in books.

By paying attention to such a wide variety of factors, books can promote diverse intersectional experiences, with the understanding that elementary school libraries often supply books that can act as mirrors, windows, and sliding glass doors for its young readers.

In a 2016 content analysis from the Journal of Children's Literature acknowledged that children’s books tend to depict protagonists that are "predominantly upper middle class, heterosexual, nondisabled, English-speaking, and male."

This may make it hard for young folx to engage in learning if they are too marginalized to identify with such privileged characters.

Authentic and diverse representation in books has significant impacts for readers, especially given how they influence the way in which young folx come to make sense of themselves and the world around them.

When children read books that only depict one kind of protagonist, it can skew their perceptions of themselves in a negative way. Children may see less value in themselves because of such poor representation, which can potentially minimize, erase, and ignore their identities.

Diminished Sense of Self-Worth Among Marginalized Children

In a study of children’s board books published between 2003 and 2008 for representations of BIPOC folx, it was ascertained that "racial and ethnic prejudices often make it difficult for children of color to develop positive feelings of competency and worth."

Given that books have the potential to help or harm young BIPOC folx in terms of developing a positive sense of self, the issue of representation in books has far-reaching consequences.

Identity Erasure

Critical race theory scholars advocate that "giving voice to the marginalized, counter-stories validate their life circumstances and serve as powerful ways to challenge and subvert the versions of reality held by the privileged."

In this way, it is crucial for all folx to see authentic representations of themselves and others, especially if oppressed, as it may help them to see new possibilities for their lives.

Publishing's Power Dynamics

The issue of representation has a great deal to do with the power dynamics in the publishing industry.

Laura Atkins, Children's Book Editor

Children's publishing, in both the U.S. and the U.K., is dominated by White, middle class women at lower levels, and men at higher levels of management, which inevitably affects perceptions of audience.

Laura Atkins, children's book editor, describes how, in her line of work, books are shaped by the tastes of editors, the culture of publishers, and potentially biased perceptions about who will buy and read books about such diverse experiences. "Children's publishing, in both the U.S. and the U.K., is dominated by White, middle class women at lower levels, and men at higher levels of management, which inevitably affects perceptions of audience."

For this reason, Atkins recommends that "there needs to be more diversity in terms of who is employed. This reliance on stereotypes is more likely to take place when those acquiring and selling the books do not include greater diversity (in terms of race, class, or region)."

Because of this, Atkins advocates for more diverse hiring practices so that publishers may increase their ability to reach a more diverse readership.

Given the gaps with how decisions are made regarding national literary awards, researchers recommend that publishers, writers, academics, teachers, librarians, and readers should explore the books that were recognized by The Coretta Scott King Award, the Pura Belpre Award, the Printz Award, Amelia Elizabeth Walden Award, and the Stonewall Book Award.

In this way, a focus on more targeted criteria for book accolades may increase the diversity of experiences covered, especially for marginalized folx, as national book awards have left a great deal to be desired in terms of recognizing talent across all groups in the U.S.

What Makes a Book Diverse?

From a study of classroom libraries, these following recommendations were made to help teachers choose books that show more diverse experiences:  

• Books with characters that foreground intersecting identities
• Books that provide mirrors for students’ gender identities, family structures, and disability experiences
• Books that reflect socially significant and critical issues in the community, the nation, and the world
• Transitional chapter books with Black boy characters

Especially for those who are invested in teaching, the issue of authentic diverse representation deserves more attention to ensure that all folx feel included when learning.

It is as crucial for privileged folx to read about the experiences of those who have been historically oppressed, as such learning can help prevent atrocities of the past from being repeated in future. Research suggests reading can teach children to empathize with people from backgrounds different from their own and reduce the salience of harmful stereotypes.

A Word From Verywell

Books have the potential to make a meaningful difference in the lives of readers, but the issue of representation continues to limit the outcomes for the most oppressed folx.

For this reason, it is important to understand how much change is needed in the publishing industry so that more can be done to achieve this.

Given how little progress has been made in terms of increasing diversity despite targeted initiatives for this purpose, a great deal more investment is necessary from the publishing industry.

Brookings Institution.  Less than half of US children under 15 are white, census shows .

Cooperative Children's Book Center. The numbers are in: 2019 CCBC diversity statistics .

Lee & Low Books.  Where is the diversity in publishing? The 2019 Diversity Baseline Survey results .

Bickmore ST, Xu Y, Sheridan MI. Where are the people of color?: Representation of cultural diversity in the National Book Award for Young People’s Literature and advocating for diverse books in a non-post racial society .  Taboo J Cult Ed . 2017;16(1):39-52. doi:10.31390/taboo.16.1.06

Carbado DW, Crenshaw KW, Mays VM, Tomlinson B. Intersectionality: mapping the movements of a theory .  Du Bois Rev Soc Sci Res Race . 2013;10(2):303-312. doi:10.1017/s1742058x13000349

Henderson J, Warren K, Whitmore K, Flint A, Laman T, Jaggers W. Take a close look: inventorying your classroom library for diverse books .  Read Teach . 2020;73(3):747-755. doi:10.1002/trtr.1886

Crisp T, Knezek S, Quinn M, Bingham G, Girardeau K, Starks F. What's on our bookshelves? The diversity of children's literature in early childhood classroom libraries .  J Child Lit . 2016;42(2):29-42.

Hughes‐Hassell S, Cox EJ. Inside board books: representations of people of color .  Libr Q . 2010;80(3):211-230. doi:10.1086/652873

Atkins L. What’s the story? Issues of diversity and children’s publishing in the U.K.   E-rea . 2013;(11.1). doi:10.4000/erea.3537

Newstreet C, Sarker A, Shearer R. Teaching empathy: exploring multiple perspectives to address Islamophobia through children's literature . Read Teach . 2019;72(5):559-68. doi:10.1002/trtr.1764

By Krystal Jagoo  Krystal Kavita Jagoo is a social worker, committed to anti-oppressive practice.

The importance of children’s representation in literature and media

Children’s representation is a key issue for child development and growth, and it has taken different forms over time. Children’s literature has played an important role in the discovery of the external and inner world of children , but the lack of representation of some ethnical groups has also represented a big challenge which is still far from being satisfied. In this sense, media have tried to fill the gap, falling into the same stereotypes which affected the literature’s world. Nevertheless, there are some actors who could still promote a shift in culture. 

Why children’s representation matters

Children shape their reality according to the models they build with many bricks: stories, songs, films, plays, experiences and many other factors which help them in codifying the reality into common patterns to be reproduced. Through these elements, they discover how the world they live in and themselves, too. 

In particular, stories play an important role in children’s representation: they provide information and models, they guide the reader through the discovery of the world, both real and imaginary, and they convey values such as friendship, empathy, courage, sense of belonging, emotions and diversity which are essential for child development and growth. 

At the same time, what stories and books taught to children before is now replaced by media content and this is why children’s representation should take into account both aspects: literature and media. 

Children’s representation in literature and media plays a significant role in child development and growth because it helps children to understand the reality they live in or to discover other cultures, giving them the opportunity to develop empathy and respect for cultural differences. Children’s representation is important to how kids build their perspectives on their own ethnic-racial group , as well as that of others (Rogers, 2021). In this sense, children’s representation has a double dimension: on one hand, it support the discovery of an external dimension, and on the other, it provides inputs for the discovery of the inner dimension.

But what happens if children don’t find representations about themselves or the reality in which they live? 

The consequences of the lack of representation

“Children, especially in the early years, are like little sponges, absorbing all the information around them and then actively making sense of it.” – Hunter, 2018

In this sense, the lack of representation of the reality in which they live may also affect them in a long-term perspective and under many points of view. For instance, research shows that a lack of representation in media can lead to negative psychological outcomes for those with identities that are underrepresented or negatively portrayed (Tukachinsky, Mastro, &Yarchi, 2017). Exposure to negative media depictions of their own ethnic-racial groups can undermine children’s sense of self, whereas high-quality children’s media can promote positive ethnic-racial attitudes and interactions (Rogers, 2021).

A study on the effects of television on elementary-aged children shows a negative correlation between TV exposure and lower self-esteem for Black girls and boys and White girls, but it also emphasized a positive correlation between TV exposure and higher self-esteem for White boys (Martins & Harrison, 2012).

The same findings are shown by the research that underlined how identifying with popular characters with the same identities in mainstream media leads to higher self-esteem on several dimensions (Ward, 2004). The scientific literature about the effects on children’s well-being supports the importance of realistic, diverse and inclusive representation in children’s media.

Moreover, if children do not perceive themselves as represented by the media or the literature they consume, they may also begin to feel invisible, unimportant (Levinson, 2020) or less important than others. The risks related to this aspect play along with the reaffirmation of a single narrative which is based on stereotypes , and which hinder the possibility for individuals to achieve their goals and dreams on the basis of their personal capacities and aspirations. And if children do not perceive themselves as architects, teachers or engineers they may not perceive these carriers in the future. 

If children do not have the possibility to see people with their identities and features being portrayed in a positive way, they may rely on the assumption that their identity is fully represented by those stereotypes which define who they are. The “problems with stereotypes is not the fact they are untrue, but that they are incomplete. They make one story become the only story”. That is what Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie defines by the “danger of a single story” (Adiche, 2019). 

The state of art in children’s literature

The affirmation of the importance of children’s representation in literature can be linked to one important milestone which goes back to 1990 when Rudine Sims Bishop codified the “Mirrors, Windows, and Sliding Glass Doors” metaphor in order to describe the role of children’s literature. According to Bishop, window books “[offer] views of worlds that may be real or imagined,” and “are also sliding glass doors, and readers have only to walk through in imagination to become part of whatever world has been created by the author” (1990). 

In mirror books, “we can see our own lives and experiences as part of the larger human experience,” which, Bishop argues, is a “means of self-affirmation” (Bishop, 1990). In this sense, children’s literature can represent a mirror for the society, both reflecting the reality we live in and “projecting how we want our children to be” (Dahlen, 2020). 

Since then, children’s representation in literature has gained more and more importance and the definition of “representation” has changed over time according to the reality which it was changing, too. For a long time, the children’s literature world has been what Nancy Larrick called “all-white” (Larrick, 2020), but with time, more and more characters representing different ethnicities started to enter the scene of children’s books as a response of the lack of representation.

This was possible thanks to the increase in demand on the part of the consumers, but also thanks to an entire generation of authors who grew up with no reference to such diversity and who wanted to contribute to a shift in culture.

The Cooperative Children’s Book Center (CCBC) at the University of Wisconsin-Madison’s School of Education analysed the percentage of children’s books written by and/or about non-white people from 1985 till today. In the period between 1985 and 2015, the percentage of children’s books written by and/or about non-white people fluctuated between 9 and 14 percent (Dahlen, 2020).

In 2016, the “about” percentage reached 22 percent, but this increase in representation also showed a dark side: as many white authors created more characters of colour and with ambiguous ethnicities, e.g. brown-skinned, they promoted also stereotyped characters which fostered false perceptions about the ethnicities they represented. This aspect was also underlined by the 2016 “by” percentage which amounted to only 13 percent, significantly lower than the 22 percent “about.” 

In the period between 2018 and 2020, the percentage of children’s books written by non-white people fluctuated between 23.79 (2018) and 28.56 percent (2020), whereas the “about” percentage fluctuated between 29.64 (2018) and 30.25 percent (2020) (CCBC’s website). 

The CCBC statistics show a slow increase in diverse books over the past decade, with more drastic changes in more recent years. According to Lee & Low’s 2018 infographic, the numbers rose from 10 to 14 percent between 2013 and 2014, and then “jumped” to 20 percent in 2015, 28 percent in 2016, and 31 percent in 2017 (Corrie, 2018). These data depict a positive trend which is still far from representing the reality American children live in which half of the country’s children are non-white (Dahlen, 2020).

Lee & Low’s infographics demonstrate that the “diversity gap” is not a problem specific to children’s literature, but to power and media industries generally. Their Lee & Low’s 2018 infographic used the 2017 CCBC data and communicated that only 7 percent, or 288 of 3700 books surveyed, were written by Black, Latinx, and Native writers (Corrie, 2018). In this sense, literature and media have a common element which hinders a truthful representation of the reality that children live which is represented by power. 

The role of the media in children’s representation

Media play a key role in the life of children and young people which has increased over time. In 2019, young people spent an average of 2 hours per day watching television shows (Rideout, 2019) and by the Covid-19 pandemic , the use of media contents has increased given its multiple purposes: entertainment, connection, education , creativity and link with the external world (Rideout, 2021). 

Given this context, it is important to consider the main effects of such early and constant media exposure in relation to the positive or negative impacts of children’s representation. An important contribution to answering this question is offered by the Cultivation Theory which states that exposure to media helps to shape thoughts, perceptions, and behaviours, and viewers adopt the assumptions and beliefs of media content as reality (Gerbner & Gross, 1976).

Children are particularly vulnerable to media messages and use what they see in media to create their beliefs about themselves and others. Therefore, the media industry holds great power over the socialization and self-concept of young people (Levinson, 2020) and they play a significant role in children’s representation. 

An interesting report on North American children’s (up to age 12) television content highlighted the recurrent use of stereotypes and the scarce correspondence to the reality in which children live (Lemish& Johnson, 2019). For instance, 65 percent of characters were white, and female characters were more likely to be non-white or racially ambiguous than male characters. Also, 38 percent of characters were women or girls, while almost 51 percent of the US population is female.

Apart from that, female characters were twice as likely to solve problems using magic while males were more likely to solve problems using science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) or their physicality (Levinson, 2020). Moreover, only 1 percent of the characters showed signs of physical disability or chronic disease , even if 20 percent of the population lives with a disability (Okoro et al., 2018) and only 2 percent of the characters presented a lower socioeconomic status, whereas about 20 percent of the American children live below the poverty line (NCCP). 

The latest report at Common Sense, “The Inclusion Imperative: Why Media Representation Matters for Kids’ Ethnic-Racial Development”, has highlighted the underrepresentation and the stereotyping of people of colour in movies and TV roles(Rogers, 2021). For instance, despite accounting for 18 percent of the population, Latinos only make up 5 percent of speaking film roles. Characters of colour in shows most watched by children between 2 and 13 are more likely to be depicted as violent and women of all ethnic-racial groups in adult programming are more likely to appear in sexualized roles (Rogers, 2021).

According to the perceptions of the parents and caregivers involved in the research, white people are often portrayed in a positive light in the media their children are exposed to, whereas one in four believe that portrayals of Black, Hispanic and LGBTQIA+ people are more likely to be negative (Rogers, 2021).

The above-mentioned studies show how children’s representation in the media does not reflect the reality in which children live but, on the contrary, it promotes a narrative which is based on stereotypes and predefined roles in which children may identify. Once again, the media risk promoting a “Single story” (Adiche, 2019). 

Who are the main stakeholders to promote a shift in culture?

Promoting a shift in culture in children’s representation in literature and media is essential in order to fulfil children’s right to “discover and develop their personality, talents and mental and physical abilities to their fullest potential” ( Article 29 (1), lett. a) CRC ). To achieve this goal, all the actors involved in the life of a child play a significant role.

First of all, publishers and librarians contribute to the cause by selecting which books to print and sell. In this way, they can influence the possible choices that consumers can make. In a globalized and interconnected world , it is easier and easier to have access to different sources of information, but this also depends on the open-mindedness and awareness that these actors have about the importance of children’s representation. 

With this respect, also consumers have the power to influence what the market offers them, both in terms of books and media content. In particular, parents are more and more attentive to the content their children consume and they ask media creators to deliver content that better reflects the diversity of the world in which their kids are growing up (Rogers, 2021). 

In this sense, also authors and creators have the power to influence the contents they produce in order to better represent the reality in which children live and to inspire them thanks to their privileged role. They provide “windows” (Bishop, 1990) to the external world and they guide children to the discovery of the world and themselves, too. 

Last but not least, children are the key actors to promote a shift in culture which is more representative of the reality in which they live and more respectful of their identities , needs, thoughts and aspirations. The best way to achieve this goal is to start talking about their stories and to include themselves in the stories they imagine, because each single story is important and needs to be told. 

Humanium is at the forefront in supporting the diversity and inclusiveness of all children all in order to make their voices heard. We advocate for a world where children’s rights are respected and protected, and we work to assure that children of all backgrounds, genders and ethnicities are represented by the media and the literature equally! Discover how to stand up for children’s rights,  join our community ,  interact with our work , and share our mission through our  website ,  Facebook page  or  newsletter !

Written by Arianna Braga [1]

For More Information:

Books by and/or about Black, Indigenous and People of Color (All Years)

Lee & Low’s 2018 infographic

References:

Adichie, C. (July, 2019). The danger of a single story. Retrieved from https://www.ted.com/talks/chimamanda_ngozi_adichie_the_danger_of_a_single_story?language=en , accessed on 16 February 2022.

Convention on the rights of the child (1989) Treaty no. 27531. United Nations Treaty Series, 1577, pp. 3-178. Retrieved from https://treaties.un.org/doc/Treaties/1990/09/19900902%2003-14%20AM/Ch_IV_11p.pdf , accessed on 16 February 2022.

Corrie, J. (10 May, 2018). The Diversity Gap in Children’s Book Publishing, 2018. Retrieved from https://blog.leeandlow.com/2018/05/10/the-diversity-gap-in-childrens-book-publishing-2018/ , accessed on 15 February 2022.

Dahlen S.P. (2020). “We Need Diverse Books”: Diversity, Activism, and Children’s Literature. In: op de Beeck N. (eds) Literary Cultures and Twenty-First-Century Childhoods. Literary Cultures and Childhoods. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-32146-8_5 , accessed on 16 February 2022.

Gerbner, G., Gross, L., (June, 1976). Living with Television: The Violence Profile,  Journal of Communication , Volume 26, Issue 2, June 1976, Pages 172–199. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1976.tb01397.x , accessed on 17 February 2022.

Hunter, E. (January 18, 2018). Children are like little sponges’: early learning can set them up for life. Retrieved from https://theirworld.org/news/early-learning-sets-up-young-children-for-life , accessed on 16 February 2022.

Huyck, D., Park Dahlen, S., Griffin, M. B. (September 14, 2016). Diversity in Children’s Books 2015 infographic. Retrieved from https://readingspark.wordpress.com/2016/09/14/picture-this-reflecting-diversity-in-childrens-book-publishing/  

Huyck, D., Park Dahlen. (June 19, 2019). Diversity in Children’s Books 2018. Created in consultation with Edith Campbell, Molly Beth Griffin, K. T. Horning, Debbie Reese, Ebony Elizabeth Thomas, and Madeline Tyner. Retrieved from https://readingspark.wordpress.com/2019/06/19/picture-this-diversity-in-childrens-books-2018-infographic/ , accessed on 15 February 2022.

Larrick, N. (1965). The All-White World of Children’s Books. Retrieved from https://brichislitspot.files.wordpress.com/2017/08/384larrick.pdf , accessed on 15 February 2022.

Levinson, J. (March 5, 202). Why Diversity in Children’s Media is So Important. Retrieved from https://www.psychologyinaction.org/psychology-in-action-1/2020/3/5/why-diversity-in-childrens-media-is-so-important , accessed on 16 February 2022.

Martins, N., & Harrison, K. (2012). Racial and Gender Differences in the Relationship Between Children’s Television Use and Self-Esteem. Communication Research , 39 (3), 338–357. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650211401376 , accessed on 16 February 2022.

NCCP | Child Poverty. (2019). Retrieved February 28, 2020, from http://www.nccp.org/topics/childpoverty.html , accessed on 16 February 2022.

Okoro, C. A., Hollis, N. D., Cyrus, A. C., & Griffin-Blake, S. (2018). Prevalence of Disabilities and Health Care Access by Disability Status and Type Among Adults — United States, 2016. MMWR. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report , 67 (32), 882–887. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.15585/mmwr.mm6732a3 , accessed on 16 February 2022.

Rideout, V., and Robb, M. B. (2019). The Common Sense census: Media use by tweens and teens, 2019. San Francisco, CA: Common Sense Media.

Rideout, V. and Robb, M. B. (2021). The role of media during the pandemic: Connection, creativity, and learning for tweens and teens. San Francisco, CA: Common Sense.

Rogers, O. (October 20, 2021). Why Representation Matters in Kids’ Media [Blog Post]. Retrieved from https://www.commonsensemedia.org/kids-action/blog/why-representation-matters-in-kids-media# , accessed on 16 February 2022.

Rogers, O., Mastro, D., Robb, M. B., & Peebles, A. (2021). The Inclusion Imperative: Why Media Representation Matters for Kids’ Ethnic-Racial Development. San Francisco, CA: Common Sense

Sims Bishop, R. (1990). “Mirrors, Windows, and Sliding Glass Doors.” Perspectives: Choosing and Using Books for the Classroom, vol. 6, no. 3, 1990 summer.

Statistics compiled by the Cooperative Children’s Book Center, School of Education, University of Wisconsin-Madison:  https://ccbc.education.wisc.edu/literature-resources/ccbc-diversity-statistics/books-by-about-poc-fnn/ , accessed on 15 February 2022.

Tukachinsky, R., Mastro, D., &Yarchi, M. (2017). The Effect of Prime Time Television Ethnic/Racial Stereotypes on Latino and Black Americans: A Longitudinal National Level Study. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media , 61 (3), 538–556. https://doi.org/10.1080/08838151.2017.1344669 , accessed on 16 February 2022.

[1]  I would also thank Professor Sarah Park Dahlen for her valuable insights and comments on the topic which enriched this article.

Petition to Stop the Destruction of the Amazon Rainforest

BE HEARD! Advocate for the protection of child rights by calling for an end to fires and deforestation in the Amazon Rainforest!

Representing Children

• Open Access
• First Online: 12 March 2023

Cite this chapter

You have full access to this open access chapter

• Jonathan Josefsson 9 ,
• Bengt Sandin 9 ,
• Karl Hanson 10 &
• Sarada Balagopalan 11  

Part of the book series: Studies in Childhood and Youth ((SCY))

4726 Accesses

In this introductory chapter we situate children’s rights and representation in a context of childhood politics. The question of children’s representation is particularly timely in today’s world not only because of demographic shifts and the increase of the generation under 18 years of age but also because of the global challenges we face. Despite making up half of the world’s population, children and youth have in many respects been denied the capacity to represent their interests, particularly on matters of political import. However, it is clear that young people in many contexts have been understood as either competent contributors to politics with a legitimate claim to represent themselves, or in other cases, have been regarded as posing a considerable risk to society and stability. In the chapter we start by outlining three key elements of children’s representation. Firstly, we suggest that children’s representation consists of how children as a group, or the child and childhood as a figure, is portrayed or described. Second, children’s representation involves speaking or acting on behalf of children or children’s state of being so represented and [Author1] thus involves a performative act. Thirdly, children’s representation is an act of, and the result of, politics and political struggles around childhood. In the following sections we present and discuss the contributions of the volume in relation to the main themes of the book; Childhood politics: from rights and participation to representation, children’s representation and the international politics of children’s rights, and, children’s representation in times of inequalities and injustices.

You have full access to this open access chapter,  Download chapter PDF

Similar content being viewed by others

Introduction: Lived Citizenship, Rights and Participation in Contemporary Europe

The figure of the child in democratic politics

Daniel Bray & Sana Nakata

Children’s Citizenship in Twenty-first Century Societies: Key Notes from the South

The Oscar winning documentary film Born into Brothels , written and directed by Zana Briski and Ross Kauffman, received critical public acclaim and was praised by many children’s rights advocates at the time of its release in 2004. The film seductively weaves together a narrative of compassion together with showcasing the actions taken by Zana Briski, a New York-based photographer, to remove children of sex workers from Sonagachi, a red-light district in Kolkata, India, from their debilitating environments. Despite their alleged neglect by their sex worker mothers, who are depicted as being both incompetent and indifferent to their offspring, the documentary does not represent children of sex workers as passive beings. Rather, Briski teaches them to use a camera and with this tool the children share their lives as active speaking subjects who, thanks to their own creativity and the lessons learned from Briski, make great photographs that document how they see their lives. Convinced of their potential, Briski takes the role of spokesperson for the children and explores possibilities of enrolling these children in a boarding school. Located at a safe distance from the red-light district of the city, this boarding school would help ensure that the children will not return easily to the brothels where their families live. A few years later, an alternative reading of the situation of children of sex workers from Sonagachi is presented in the 2011 documentary film We are foot soldiers (which is the English translation of ‘Amra Padatik’) directed by Debolina Dutta and Oishik Sircar who also published an article on their film in Childhood (Sircar & Dutta, 2011 ). Even if Born into Brothels portrays children as competent photographers, We are foot soldiers criticises the way the film represents children of sex workers primarily as helpless victims. The struggle over how these children get represented concerns how their portrayal in Born into Brothels relies upon the idea that a ‘saviour from outside’ is required to represent children’s interests and ensure they get an education and thereby improve their future life chances. We are foot soldiers offers a counternarrative by representing children of sex workers as active agents rather than merely passive recipients of welfare interventions by others. Also, through sharing their daily practices of resilience and resistance, which they believe were not portrayed in Born into Brothels , they argue that the rights and interests of children of sex workers are better represented by an advocacy group run by children themselves. This advocacy group not only speaks and acts on behalf of themselves and other sex workers’ children in Sonagachi to reduce the stigma that their mothers and they themselves face while enrolling in school, but they also work in solidarity with other children elsewhere in the world (Sircar & Dutta, 2011 ).

The struggle over the representation of children of sex workers denotes two central dictionary definitions of the word ‘representation’, namely, as ‘a description or portrayal of someone or something in a particular way’, and, as ‘the action of speaking or acting on behalf of someone or the state of being so represented’ (Oxford Languages, 2022 ). First, a key element of children’s representation consists of how children as a group, or the child and childhood as a figure, is portrayed or described. Certain populations of children—like children of sex workers who live in a red-light district in a megacity in the Global South—often serve as iconic symbols of poverty with their descriptive, visual and portrayals reinforcing multiple stereotypes and attendant logics of compassion. As has been demonstrated by childhood scholars before, the aesthetic depictions and dominant discourses of children and childhood have throughout the history in various ways been deeply intertwined with major political, social, and cultural processes of change (Ariès, 1962 ; Balagopalan, 2014 ; Bessant, 2021 , p. 1ff; Bernstein, 2011 , James & Prout, 2015 , p. 202; Hallett & Prout, 2003 ; Nakata & Bray, 2020 ; Sparrman, 2017 ; Higonnet, 1998 ; Rose, 2016 ; Hallberg & Sandin, 2021 ). The portrayals and depictions of children and childhood have in this way always been embedded in institutional and political practices to achieve political or organizational aims (Rose, 2016 ) and display how emotionally charged images of children can both mobilise popular support and reveal different and conflicting ways of representing children (Berents, 2020 ; Burman, 1994 ; Peacock, 2014 ). In the case of Briski’s documentary, it demonstrates the ways that agential depictions of children also can be used to consolidate, rather than decenter, the victimization of children. Conversely, the portrayal of a group of actively engaged children such as the members of Amra Padatik , the collective of children of sex workers central in Sircar and Dutti’s film, needs to take into account the social and economic conditions in the red-light district. Yet, the portrayal of children as subjects of rights does not erase their vulnerabilities.

Second, children’s representation involves speaking or acting on behalf of children or children’s state of being so represented and thus involves a performative act (Holzscheiter, 2016 ). Representation in its performative sense, that is, when people ‘speak or act on behalf of’ someone or something (Alcoff, 1991 ; Saward, 2010 ; Pitkin, 1967 ), can refer to formal and institutionalised structures as found in for example representative democracies (Urbinati, 2006 ) or international organisations (Holzscheiter, 2016 ), but can also be used in reference to family settings, NGOs and the realms of global politics and social media networks, to name a few (Disch et al., 2019 ; Saward, 2020 ). Children often rely on a person or a group of people who speaks on their behalf and who represents them, for instance, in legal or political affairs. Children’s representatives can be influential (usually adult) individuals like Zana Briski but they can also be a group of children who represent other children, as in the case of the organization Amra Padatik . This aspect of representation is closely linked to children’s rights and participation and to the shifting complexities and dynamics that mark the institutionalization and formalization of children’s voices (James, 2007 ).

In addition, the two films’ conflicting viewpoints of children and childhood also indicate the political dimension of children’s representation. Put another way, representing children is not only linked to portrayals and performances, but also politics, where the act of speaking in and of children and childhood is both an act, and the result, of political struggle. Children’s representation as portrayals and performances reflects existing formalized processes as well as long-term political changes and historical conflicts between different interests and ideologies (Berents, 2020 ; Holzscheiter, 2016 ; Peacock, 2014 ). Different actors struggle to claim the authority to define the portrayal of children as, for example, dependent or as autonomous subjects, or both, and use these for different political purposes with sometimes unintended consequences (Hallberg & Sandin, 2021 ). In the context of portraying children of sex workers, it is suggested that they should represent themselves rather than rely on a ‘saviour from outside’. We are foot soldiers focuses on the political organization developed by children of sex workers. These children’s efforts to politicize their struggle for dignity not only for themselves, but also for their mothers requires them to demand attention on distinctly different terms than those offered by the mainstream narrative of victimization. More generally, political conflicts, and for that matter, consensus building, around children and childhood illustrates how children recurrently play a constitutive role as temporary outsiders who present both risk and renewal to the demos (Nakata & Bray, 2020 ). Young people’s involvement in social movements, mass mobilisation and extra-parliamentary action against inequalities and injustices have a long history and speaks to the importance of closer engagement with children’s political representation for our understanding of politics as such (Bessant, 2021 ; Cummings, 2020 ; Dar & Wall, 2011 ; Hinton, 2021 ; Josefsson & Wall, 2020 ; Nakata, 2008 ; Wall, 2021 ). The struggles around securing more accurate or genuine representation of children and youth often entails organizing for self-representation to shift existing regimes of power. It further reveals the intimate interdependence between portrayals, performances, and politics in our understanding of children’s representation.

The Challenge of Children’s Representation

The question of children’s representation is particularly timely in today’s world not only because of demographic shifts and the increase of the generation under 18 years of age but also because of the global challenges we face. Despite making up half of the world’s population, children and youth have in many respects been denied the capacity to represent their interests, particularly on matters of political import. However, it is clear that young people in many contexts have been understood as either competent contributors to politics with a legitimate claim to represent themselves, or in other cases, have been regarded as posing a considerable risk to society and stability. Indeed, you would have to think very hard to come up with a political question that does not involve young people as central objects or agents of change. Whether it be young people organizing against the exploitative extraction of resources in indigenous areas in India (Gergan & Curley, 2021 ), Canada and the USA (Ibid), shaping the struggle for democracy as part of the Arab Spring (Honwana, 2019 ), unifying against climate change (de Moor et al., 2021 ) and migrant policies in Global North countries (Josefsson, 2017 ) and against gun violence, racism and policing regimes in the USA (Hinton, 2021 ), their increased participation in the political sphere has helped produce new, and emergent modes, of formal and informal representation within these global, national and local efforts.

However, these questions about children’s representation, and in particular the politics involved, are not new. The debate on child labour, including how to depict or tell the story of working children as well as who is entitled to speak and act on their behalf, offers a telling example, from the late nineteenth century, of the close connection between portrayals, performances and politics of children’s representation. In 1899, the newsboys of New York went on strike because the Evening World and Evening Journal had decided to lower the pay and the terms for the newspapers that the newsboys sold. The press at that time reported on the wage struggles but also illuminated the independent culture of this class of child workers and their vocal and prolific leadership in demanding their rights and fair pay. The voices of the children were, in these press stories, represented by children themselves ( New York Times, July 25, 1899; New-York Tribune, July 21, 1899 ). At this same time, around the turn of the century, imageries of the street urchins became an important tool for the child saviours calling attention to the deplorable and degrading living conditions of street children and child labourers. Photos by Jacob Riis and later by Lewis Hines influenced legislation and reforms as well as nurtured the ambitions of generations of child saviours, professionals, philanthropists, non-governmental organisations and government agencies that spoke out and represented the interests of children in what Ellen Key described and hoped to be a century of the child (Riis, 1971 ; Dimock, 1993 ; Aronsson & Sandin, 1996 ; Platt, 2009 ). Whereas the newspapers depicted agentive young street vendors who could very well speak on behalf of themselves, iconic photographs of passive victims of child labour later offered visual justifications for well-meaning adult outsiders to act on behalf of children. Some hundred years later, at the end of the twentieth century, images of children as active citizens went hand in hand with the promotion of children’s participation rights including in political matters. In 1996, in line with these changing childhood images, a group of Danish children aged 10–12 protested in front of a government commission against the implementation of an EU directive for newspaper delivery work that would outlaw child labour between 10–13 years of age. About 3200 children would lose their work. The delegates of the commission expressed their sympathy for the cause and agency of the children that wanted to work. However, different political arguments were deployed to limit children’s representation as they declared that the Danish government was bound by a broader agreement with the EU that restricted their ability to meet the demands of the newspaper boys. The Danish parliament had no authority over the matter, they claimed, and could not politically represent the voices of these children given their international obligations (de Coninck-Smith et al., 1997 , 7).

A well-known example from the Global South of contestations over the way how children should be represented is the leadership of young school children in protest marches against the South-African Apartheid regime during the 1976 Soweto uprising (See Twum-Danso Imoh, this volume). In this case, the South-African government at that time did not consider that the protesters had a legitimate political right to voice an opinion which questioned the regime’s racist foundations. The protest was violently suppressed, and the participants were described as undisciplined troublemakers rather than as political activists. This view on the young activists radically changed once the Apartheid regime had ended and 16 June was declared a public holiday to commemorate the actions undertaken by the ‘young heroes’ during the 1976 Soweto uprising (Hanson & Molima, 2019 ). Since 1991, on the initiative of the Organisation of African Unity (OAU), 16 June was proclaimed the Day of the African Child. Even though it commemorates the political courage of the school children who participated in the demonstrations held in 1976, it has been turned into a continent-wide advocacy event for the promotion of children’s rights to education, rather than to recognise children’s political representation.

Children’s representation has, hence, developed into a site of contestation and power over who represents whom, what, when and where. The opposing viewpoints about representation that we have discussed above provide a point of departure to explore the linkage between children, representation, and politics, which is the focus of this book. The controversies around the representation of children actualise the political character of different means of representing children by different agents and institutions across multiple contexts and during various moments in time. Given the intimate entanglement between portrayals, performances, and politics in representing children, how do contemporary representations of children and childhood differ from, and build on, the past? What underlies the current political representational efforts of young people and what are their effects?

In this book, we offer an interdisciplinary analysis of the complexities, and affordances, that have marked, and continue to affect, children, childhood and representation as ‘portrayals’, ‘performances’ and ‘politics’. It builds on the widespread recognition that traditional forms of democratic representation having excluded the participation of children (Bessant, 2021 ; Schrag, 1975 ; Wall, 2012 , 2021 ), as well as acknowledges how depiction of children as right bearers and right subjects has influenced the political discourse about children. However, while new forms of representing children and their rights have certainly shaped new political avenues through which young people have been represented, these have also been deployed to control and govern the younger generation (Sandin, 2012 ; Holzscheiter et al., 2019 ; Wells, 2011 ). This tense interplay between young people who assert their political subjectivity, but who are simultaneously entangled in processes that seek to craft them into governable citizens reveals children’s political representation less as a panacea and more as a fraught exercise. The book attempts to raise fundamental questions around earlier discursive constructions of young people’s agentic actions by exploring children and childhood through the concept of representation.

This book claims that the lens of representation can bring new facets into our thinking that differ from the concept of children’s rights and participation that have been dominant in childhood studies and other fields (Reynaert et al., 2009 ; Lundy, 2018 ; Tisdall, 2008 ). By treading on grounds well-travelled by scholars in Childhood Studies in its broadest sense including those within the disciplines of history, sociology, politics and children’s geography we have assembled a set of different scholarly contributions to highlight the critical importance of representation to our understanding of children and childhood. Our interest in children’s representation complements also a revitalized scholarly debate about the concept of political representation where theorists have been stretching out our concepts about when and how political representation take place (Brito Vieira, 2017 ; Disch et al., 2019 ; Saward, 2020 ; Urbinati, 2006 ). In these discussions, children as a category has been relatively absent in comparison with the interest in categories such as gender, ethnicity and class. As we argue, in times of societal and political transformations, these various forms of representing children have become central to offer visions and directions, as well as long-term legitimacy and sustainability. The representation of children and youth, however, does not only come with promises, renewals and hopes, but is also accompanied by risks, reproduction of existing injustices and instability. Given this, questions around who is representing young people and what claims are being made by these representatives become key.

In order to explore how the lens of children’s representation might be used to enhance our understanding of children, youth and politics, we have collected a series of papers based on empirical and theoretical research in over seven countries. These chapters address a wide range of current social and political challenges where the representation of children and childhood has become sites of contestation that need further empirical and theoretical exploration. By collecting essays on several historical and contemporary subjects that affect children’s lives, including migration, democracy, child labour, street children, poverty, welfare, education and child rights legislation, the volume engages with the very fundamental challenge of how to represent a group of people in democratic societies and global politics, and more specifically, how to represent children and young people.

The book is composed of thirteen chapters that are arranged in three sections. The chapters in the first section look back at the emergence of ideas around children’s rights, participation and representation and studies how these concepts have been used, transformed and critiqued in various parts of the world. The chapters presented in the second section broadly trace the effects of the global circulation as well as limitations of children’s rights discourses in international politics. Section three gathers chapters that are concerned with children’s political representation in relation to structures, processes and experiences of inequalities and injustices.

Childhood Politics: From Rights and Participation to Representation

Young people have over the last decades received significant attention in global politics. Mass mobilisation by children and youth in various parts of the world in recent years illustrate how young people are not only affected by political processes, but also actively shape these very dynamics (Bessant, 2021 ; Cummings, 2020 ; Josefsson & Wall, 2020 ). The engagement of, and for, children and youth in politics constitutes a continuum of longer and multifaceted historical processes where young people have claimed rights and also gained significant formal recognition as rights holders. In this sense the social, cultural, symbolic and political representations of young people during the twentieth century have made possible new systems of welfare and governance of rights for those under the age of majority (Holzscheiter et al., 2019 ; Nakata, 2015 ; Wells, 2011 , 2021 ). Yet, as the contributions of this volume show, while this development clearly opened up new avenues for the protection of young people and their opportunities to participate in matters affecting them (see e.g. the chapters by Balagopalan, Josefsson, Sandin, Twum-Danso Imoh in this volume), the ways in which children and youth get represented have largely been shaped by the emergence of separate and exclusive domains for children and youth (Reyneart et al in this volume).

The adoption of the Convention on the Rights of the Child (hereafter: CRC) by the United Nations General Assembly in 1989 marked what commonly is referred to as a culmination of over 100 years of discourse on international children’s rights (Stearns, 2017 ). The child rights movement has been led by charitable organisations and middle-class philanthropists and governments seeking to improve the conditions and welfare of children, initially in national and local contexts, and later, further afield with as part of a global outreach (Fass, 2011 ; Twum-Danso Imoh, 2012 ). The Convention represented a turning point in how children were perceived in international social policy by elevating children from ‘objects of adult charity’ to independent rights holders (Veerman, 1992 ; Twum-Danso Imoh & Ansell, 2014 ). Such discourses and policies developed in conjunction with a global history of colonial exploitation and expansion, two major world wars, the building of welfare states and rise of neo-liberal economies, the challenges of a post-colonial reconstitution of identities, societies and nations, both in the Global South and the Global North. Yet, the recognition of children as rights holders was also driven by fundamental regional, national and local transformations that developed distinctively before, and after, the breakthrough of the international discourse of children’s rights in the latter part of the twentieth century (see Sandin and Twum-Danso Imoh in this volume). The development of welfare regimes of different characters including the growth of foreign aid, missions, philanthropies and management of distant domains to the liberation, control, and governance in the Global South are some examples of how the emergence of young people’s rights, participation and representation are tied into specific historical and political processes (Balagopalan, 2019 ; Honwana, 2012 ; Kasanda, 2019 ; Marshall, 2004 , 2013 , 2014 ; Nehlin, 2009 ; Pickard & Bessant, 2018 ; Roberts, 2015 , Twum-Danso Imoh & Okyere, 2020 ; Vallgårda, 2015 ).

Against this backdrop, we find good reasons to pay closer attention to how different historical trajectories have informed the growing responsibility of states to protect and represent children during the twentieth century. The role of the state to represent children and their rights evolved as a result of the interaction between social, legal and political spheres of public authority such as education, poor relief and social welfare, labour law, family law and criminal law. The emergence of childhood politics and the representation of children must be understood in relation to the role of parents and governments, as demonstrated in Bengt Sandin’s chapter in this volume (Sandin, Chap. 2 ). Sandin shows how children’s rights were redefined by Swedish legislators in different branches of government from the late nineteenth century and onwards, a redefinition that continued during the 1960s and 1970s with the prohibition of corporal punishment in the family in 1979. He argues that the adoption of the new legislation was a consequence of fundamental changes in the role of the Swedish state during this period in representing, protecting, and controlling children in institutions such as orphanages, reformatories, childcare and penal institutions under government responsibility as well as in schools and in the family. It was built on the concomitant establishment of a new type of relationship between children, the family and the state and on the advent of a multicultural society. In this sense, the chapter illustrates how state action to represent the voice and rights of others, in this case children, is always relational and intimately connected to the work of individuals, groups and various institutions. However, this means that different parts of the state apparatus or organisations outside the national state can act and have acted without coordination and with the aim of solving varying and sometimes conflicting political issues. It is this complex interaction between parental rights and responsibilities, children’s autonomous rights and the responsibility of the state and government agencies that makes it necessary to examine representation as an important and transforming social phenomenon. Yet, the kind of national roots underpinning the issue of representing children and their rights in politics that Sandin describes certainly also ties into international relations, histories and orders of power.

The international diffusion of children’s rights is an expression of the intricate interplay between political traditions of how to represent children by different modes of governance, legal traditions, gender relations and family roles. Children’s rights and the representation of children must thus be understood as situated and as a resulting outcome of intermingling the notions of freedom, liberation and control of children innate in different forms of governance (Balagopalan, 2019 ; Fay, 2019 ; Hanson & Nieuwenhuys, 2013 ; Holzscheiter et al., 2019 ; Twum-Danso Imoh et al., 2019). A key component from the 1970s and onwards of the idea that children had fundamental human rights was expressed in the emphasis that children had the right to participate in matters that affect them. It was significant because earlier international children’s rights discourses and programmes, it was argued, had mostly ignored children’s voices or did not treat children’s voices with sufficient deference, even in their efforts to ensure their welfare and well-being (Hallett & Prout, 2003 ; James, 2007 ; Lundy, 2018 ). The CRC aimed at responding to this deficit by not only including protection and provision rights within its contents, but by also providing for the participation rights of children. However, the limits of such participation rights become evident when we apply the lens of representation to the concept as Afua Twum-Danso Imoh does in her chapter in this volume (Chap. 3 ). Despite the vision behind the CRC and the excitement that the participation principle evoked around the world, it was, from the outset, limiting in its capacity for genuine transformational impact. This is primarily due to the fact that while the CRC foregrounds the importance of children’s views and involvement in decision-making, it also ensures that adults remain in control in deciding the terms relating to who participates, how they participate, the topics on which they participate and ultimately, the outcome of participatory initiatives. Thus, in this way, the control of children’s participation rights is firmly handed to the management of adults. As a result, what emerges within the CRC is a persisting understanding of children’s rights as being a gift of adults which they then give to children—whether this gift is linked to children’s care and protection rights or their participation rights. This limitation surely then raises questions about the extent to which the CRC, a treaty regarded as representing a landmark due to its perception of children as subjects—rather than objects—of rights, represents a genuine shift from earlier human rights laws and social policies which explicitly depicted children as objects of rights dependent on the charity of adults. In her chapter, Twum-Danso Imoh calls for the need to look outside this dominant child participation framework in search for examples of genuine forms of transformative child participation and representation. An example of the transformative impact of what may be considered non-CRC-framed children’s participation is provided through an analysis of the role of children in the struggle to end apartheid in late twentieth century South Africa through actions for self-representation.

In the next chapter, Sarada Balagopalan explores the interrelationship between rights, participation and representation in the context of education in contemporary India. With several states in the majority world having passed legislation around free and compulsory education and millions of marginal children are now enrolled in schools, the question of how we frame children’s participation in their right to education assumes considerable significance. By drawing together discussions around children’s representations, participation and educational equity, Balagopalan critically opens up the particular dynamic that has helped produce educational equity as a continually deferable goal. In her chapter, she argues that the dominant representations of first-generation learners as economically marginal children are variously, as well as continually, leveraged to justify their presence within unequal and deeply segregated school spaces. To help problematize this narrative of assumed victimhood, she studies a set of court cases adjudicated in the Delhi High Court between 1997–2001 that foreground the state’s role in perpetuating existing inequalities through highlighting the effects of these dominant constructions of the experiences of first-generation learners in school. By countering a simplistic narrative around these children’s presence in schools as an adequate measure of their participation, these Delhi High Court cases help foreground the critical and structural role the state is required to assume to fulfil these children’s equitable exercise of their right to education. Moreover, by highlighting their identity as learners, and not as marginal children who are recipients of state welfare services, these cases help expose how schooling for this population circulates as a critical compensatory technology that is no longer about guaranteeing educational equity.

In a related focus on courts and children’s legal representation, though in a distinct geographical setting, namely Europe, Nataliya Tchermalykh’s chapter focuses on the role of the courts and professional lawyers to critically engage with children’s access to rights and justice. She notes how in the twenty-first century, despite the near-universal ascendance of children as independent actors and rights bearers, which have been reinforced by the CRC, children universally lack legal capacity to autonomously act upon these rights in a court of law. In this context, the indispensability of adult legal actors as conduits to children’s access to justice is an undeniable reality. Through a set of court cases, Tchermalykh shows how the courtroom success of a case does not necessarily mean social justice for the aggrieved children; conversely, failure in the courtroom does not necessarily mean alienation and desperation. For children, legal experiences may play an emancipatory role, as it decentres and challenges the unidirectional model of the law (from state to citizen), delineating legal processes as merely top-down mechanisms for social control, that cannot be challenged from the bottom-up. An exercise in legal reasoning that challenges dominant discursive, epistemological, and political norms may, under certain conditions, lead to evidence that illuminate the potential reversibility of the processes of domination and exclusion, and demonstrate a more interactive approach to the law. Yet this should not be interpreted, according to Tchermalykh, as a statement that courts and litigation are the only, or even the central, means to achieve more justice for children. Rather, this chapter considers children’s lack of legal standing as an important exclusionary factor, and therefore, frames children’s representation by adequate legal professionals as one of the important dimensions of their access to justice. Furthermore, it considers legal professionals, representing children in both domestic and international arenas as active actors of the development and interpretation of children’s rights.

Similar to the four chapters that constitute the bulk of this section of the book, several other chapters in the volume explore more closely the interrelationships between rights, participation and representation. The chapters discussed above are mainly based on local contexts and help demonstrate the intimate connection between rights, notions of child participation and forms of representation in specific historical processes. However, as we well know, these questions often intertwine with, and are seldom separable from, the global and transnational arena in which these discourses, policies and practices circulate, develop and in which the success of their national implementation get measured. The following section presents a set of chapters that focuses more distinctively on these processes of international politics of childhood and children’s rights and discusses a few of its myriad effects on the portrayals, performances and politics of children’s representation.

Children’s Representation and the International Politics of Children’s Rights

In the 1960s and 1970s, a growing attention to children and youth as right subjects (Holt, 1974 ; Margolin, 1978 ; Schrag, 1975 ; Sandin’s chapter in this volume) helped to drive the international diffusion of children’s rights norms. This was followed by implementation of legislation, policies and institutions in the wake of the adoption of the CRC in 1989 (Holzscheiter, 2010 ; Holzscheiter et al., 2019 ). The international awareness of children as a distinct population of concern and the heightened attention devoted to their rights and interests at the time of the adoption of the Convention was certainly not new from a historical perspective. It can, instead, be traced back to the end of the nineteenth century and which later manifested in for instance the League of Nation’s Child Welfare Committee in 1919 (Droux, 2016 ), the Geneva Declaration of 1924 and the UN Declaration on the Rights of the Child of 1959 (Fass, 2011 ; Moody, 2014 ). Yet, in the latter part of the twentieth century, a ‘new’ internationalism and international politics of children’s rights emerged together with the institutionalization of political bodies with the purpose of representing specifically the rights of children and youth in national and international politics. When a new landscape of actors, sites and systems of child right governance emerged at the turn of the twenty-first century, this resulted in ‘new defining features’ of the linkage between the representative and the represented (Holzscheiter et al., 2019 , See also Josefsson chapter in this volume). The political representation of young people evolved through a complex playing field involving professionals, NGOs, international organisations, corporations, a plurality of state agencies, families, and young people themselves; all of whom variously claimed to represent children and youth.

At the turn of the twenty-first century, a general opening up of global governance institutions to non-state actors (Tallberg et al., 2013 ) also had implications for the representation of children and childhood in international politics. With regard to children’s rights, this paved the way for new actors who claimed to represent specific or larger populations of young people on a broad range of questions such as migration, environment, health, labour, peace and security and democracy. However, the international recognition of young people as actors and as rights holders became at the same time a productive tool for governance and the advancement of different political interests (Holzscheiter, 2016 , Holzscheiter et al., 2019 ; Kwon, 2019 ; James, 2007 , Josefsson, this volume; van Daalen, this volume). This resulted in challenges around how children and youth were depicted in international politics (Holzscheiter, 2010 , Beier, 2020 , See Tabak’s chapter in this volume) and also produced contestations over who could claim the authority to represent the group of children and youth (Holzscheiter, 2016 , see van Daalen this volume and Hanson this volume).

This latter point is developed in van Daalen’s chapter that traces the struggle of working children’s movements to have their views heard within more normative debates on child labour in the International Labour Organization (ILO). The persistence of these movements and the ILO’s sustained non-representation, as well as misrepresentation, of their viewpoints highlights how the particular portrayal of child labour and the curated performance of a few adult and children’s voices vehemently opposing child labour can stall, but does not necessarily erase, the efforts of more marginalized population of working children at gaining increased political representation. They ways in which young people seek to reframe the debate on child labour helps open up considerations around how changing the current normative framework that marks children’s representations is critical especially if we seek to integrate the experiences of marginal children and youth across the world. Despite the success and the representational power that the campaigns of banning child labour ‘in all its forms’ have had in the shaping of the public imaginary, van Daalen argues that highly diverse and complex phenomena of child labour will certainly remain a controversial question in relation to children’s representation in international politics for many years to come.

Normative framings of children and childhood that mark this global flow of ideas and images are explored in Jana Tabak’s chapter which focuses on the ways legal and representational energies combine to produce an iconic image of the ‘child soldier’ as pathological. She challenges this normative framing by disclosing how apparently oppositional constructions of the child soldier as either innocent or monstrous share this ‘discourse of the norm’. This representational logic of opposite extremes, as Tabak argues, operates to (re)produce child soldiers either as objects of exploitation or as objects of salvation with both representations producing them as targets of international intervention (or, protection) with no chance of autonomous decision-making.

Karl Hanson’s chapter scales up this discussion by taking a critical stance towards organisations that claim to speak on behalf of children in transnational politics and global governance. In his chapter, he explores the close connection between international policymaking on children, childhood and children’s rights, and how transnational campaigns and entities play a dominant role in shaping public discourse. By analysing two particular international campaigns, one about minimum age legislation for child soldiering, and a second about children and young people who have taken the lead to fight climate change via international legal procedures, he points to some of the current limits of representing children at the transnational level and thereby raises fundamental questions around who is speaking on behalf of children and where their representation is being performed.

All of the above chapters draw attention to the continued exclusions that mark the performance of representational power around children in international politics on their rights. In addition, they serve to foreground the reasons why a focus on representation and the international politics of children’s rights may open up new thinking and avenues about how children and youth can assert their rights and be politically represented in international institutions in ways that go beyond the implementation of rights as individual entitlements. In the next section, we discuss in what way a move beyond a traditional liberal framework of individual rights can allow us to theorize children’s political representation in the face of inequalities and injustices. The significance of this move reminds us of the need to continue to remain cautious about how political representation of young people may also risk reaffirming existing exclusions and orders of domination. How might we recognize young people’s efforts to reframe and reimagine political representation while being careful about not reinforcing current geopolitical hierarchies that are based on normative assumptions around what constitutes ‘ideal’ political action?

Children’s Representation in Times of Inequalities and Injustices

So far, we have discussed how children’s representation can work as an analytical device to study the ways in which children and their rights have emerged historically and been shaped in close interrelationship with local, national and global contexts and processes. Yet, as we will point to in this section, children’s representation also open up possibilities to scrutinize how children and youth gain recognition and access to schemes of justice, equality and rights through struggles, contestations and (re)claims of representation (Fraser, 2005 ; Saward, 2020 ; Josefsson & Wall, 2020 ). In times of inequalities and injustices, the chapters of this section suggest, the political representation of children and youth cannot be reduced to a matter of identifying and transmitting interests, rights or voices from a pre-constituted group as defined in international treaties, in domestic law or through policy processes. More than anything, children’s representations become sites of contestation over portrayals and performances of children and childhood between various experiences, actors, spaces and temporalities associated with a considerable amount of social and political power (Disch et al., 2019 ; Holzscheiter, 2016 ; Saward, 2010 , 2020 ). It is by exploring these sites of contestation that the studies in this last part of the book shed light on how children and youth claims of representation present both risk and renewal to social, legal and political orders (Nakata, 2008 ; Nakata & Bray, 2020 ).

The intimate interdependency and power dynamics between children and parents in times of inequalities is addressed by Yaw Ofosu-Kusi. In his chapter, he highlights how street children in Ghana deliberatively use disobedience as a strategy for claiming rights and representation in the family. A central trait in whatever form of childhood one experiences in Ghanaian societies and in many other African societies is the tradition of respect and obedience. The emphasis on such principles is that some adults are generally enabled to claim an almost religious authority over their children or other subordinates (Ikumola, 2017 ; Ofosu-Kusi, 2017 ). However, while the majority of children accept this authority in homes and schools, others are currently questioning its absoluteness by finding ways to constructively participate in decisions affecting them or assuming some degree of control over their lives. In the chapter, Ofosu-Kusi argues that some street children deliberately defy parents, disengage themselves from families, and assume proto-adult status as a way of claiming decision-making space in order to assert rights and self-representation in a context characterised by rapid urbanization, rising dysfunctionality in some homes and woeful economic conditions for increasing numbers of families.

In their chapter, Didier Reynaert, Nicole Formesyn, Griet Roets and Rudi Roose pick up the relationship between parents and children as an entry point to discuss children’s representation and inequalities. In their study on child poverty in Belgium, they demonstrate how the creation of separate domains for children also effects the ways in which their claims for social justice are represented. In the chapter, which is grounded in Nancy Fraser’s three domains of social justice, notably redistribution, recognition and representation, they discuss ‘child poverty’ in relation to children’s rights. According to the authors, the childhood moratorium can be considered as a separate and exclusive domain for children with social provisions such as schools, youth work, youth care, etc. In this childhood moratorium, children are represented as the ‘victims of poverty’ and are thought of as the ‘deserving poor’. In contrast, parents are represented as the ‘undeserving poor’, responsible for their own poverty situation and the poverty situation of their children. Based on in-depth interviews with 30 families living in poverty in Belgium, Reynaert et al argue that a segregated approach of the representation of children and parents in poverty can be considered as a problem of ‘misrepresentation’. This injustice can have a negative impact on realising children’s rights for children living in poverty due to the fact that such an approach narrows the social problem of poverty down to an educational problem.

The kind of misrepresentation that Reynaert et al depict in their chapter speaks to how children and young people’s lives are constitutively marked by intersectional hierarchies including those of caste, class, gender, region and religion that affect their social, economic, cultural and political representation. The acknowledgment of the close and complex interdependence between children, parents and other groups in societies helps us to draw attention to the differences that frame young people’s experiences and compels us to go beyond a more narrow liberal framework of rights. For example, the participation of children and youth in large-scale social movements in several countries of the Global South have produced intergenerational collectivities that give voice to their grievances and their distrust of the state (Baviskar & Sundar, 2008 ). These intergenerational articulations for social justice reflect a mode of organizing that exceeds a liberal exercise of ‘individual rights’ and alerts us a longer and more progressive history of people’s political struggle and organizing (Escobar, 2018 ; Stephen, 1997 ). This volume’s theorization of political representation works with the differences that mark young people’s political organizing in different parts of the world, from experiences of today’s democracies in the Global North to the longer history of civil disobedience movements within anticolonial struggles as discussed above through the example of the Soweto uprising.

Although this edited volume does not focus on these movements per se it works with the recognition that these movements to overturn imperial power often drew on non-liberal traditions to offer a future roadmap around democratic representation (see e.g. the chapter by Twum-Danso Imoh about the Soweto uprising). Several social movements organized by indigenous youth and other marginalized populations in the Global South are mostly anchored in this sense of interdependency and alternate understandings of selfhood. However, not all are non-violent, and our tendency to conflate young people’s assertions around intergenerational interdependency with non-violence has steered discussions on youth political representation to exclude more violent intergenerational movements in the Global South in which youth play a major role.

In contrast, non-indigenous youth engaged in Climate Strikes and Friday for Future actions, as Frida Buhre’s paper in this volume discusses, foreground environmental concerns through alerting their peers to a future plagued by the repercussions of rising temperatures. Buhre’s paper focuses political aesthetic dimensions to children’s representation in the global online participatory culture of Fridays for Future communities on Instagram. Interested in the forms of visual rhetoric employed by grassroot activists to gain visibility and the attendant forms of childhood political subjectivities these represent, her visual analysis highlights how their rhetoric emphasizes courage, the global reach of the movement and the competency of the strikers. She argues that this visual rhetoric and political aesthetics challenges passive and futurist figurations of children in climate discourse by emphasizing the present power of children and youth thereby inviting us to recognize the political subjectivity of these activists.

As Buhre’s chapter clearly illustrates, to study both the changing portrayals and performances of children’s representations consequently provide us with a critical analytical lens to understand how the figure of the child and young people’s claims for justice border on other notions of how children and childhoods are defined and used by different actors in longer processes of social, cultural and political change (Ofosu-Kusi, this volume; Balagopalan, this volume), but also in times of crisis, emergency and radical ruptures (Josefsson, this volume; Buhre, this volume; Twum-Danso Imoh this volume). Further, it speaks both to the temporal and spatial dimensions of children’s representation. The advocacy efforts of indigenous environmental protestors against the continued capitalist extraction of resources on their lands evoke their ancestral/spiritual connections to the land as well as a past history of sustainable practices. As the indigenous scholar Kyle Whyte ( 2017 ) shares in relation to postcolonial settler colonial contexts in the USA, Canada, Australia and New Zealand, indigenous people’s exercise of self-determination against what he terms as ‘industrial settler campaigns’ reveals the need to historicize the recent focus on the Anthropocene as what these communities have encountered over several centuries. With settler colonial campaigns already having degraded, depleted and caused irreversible damage to ecosystems, plants and animals that, ‘ancestors had local living relationships with for hundreds of years and that are the material anchors of our contemporary customs, stories, and ceremonies”’ it is the past that gets foregrounded within the environmental campaigns led by indigenous youth. Like in childhood studies more generally, questions about children’s representation must engage with children and childhood’s past, present and future (Hanson, 2017 ).

Let us take another example of young people’s struggle against injustices with global implications, migration. The global governance and restriction of migration, which has arisen as a top political priority over the past decades to protect the interests of nation states, has developed in tandem with the nearly universal ratification and global mainstreaming of universal human rights of children. The consequence, as Jonathan Josefsson suggests in his chapter, is that the portraying of young asylum seekers as particular vulnerable and in need of protection with reference to children’s rights, has in public discourse and asylum processes turned into an efficient instrument for the state to legitimize restrictive border regimes and deportations. In the chapter Josefsson highlights the ways young Afghan migrants in Sweden make use of particular strategies of self-representation to contest state governance of migration in a struggle for their right to stay in the country. In dialogue with ongoing political theoretical debates around democracy and representation (Disch et al., 2019 ; Brito Vieira, 2017 ; Saward, 2020 ), Josefsson show how these young political actors reject and recast the ways in which they are politically represented by others to claim political space and a voice of their own.

Many of the chapters in this volume consider the historical dimension of children and childhood as key to our understanding of children’s representation today. But as Buhre, Josefsson, and also Sana Nakata and Daniel Bray show in their respective chapters, future dimensions of time appear to be just as central to grasp children’s representation. In their chapter, Nakata and Bray explore the opportunities of political representation of First Nation youth by connecting historical and contemporary injustices faced by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children in Australia. The cases of First Nation youth in Australia are used to illustrate how children play a constitutive role as temporary outsiders who present both risk and renewal to the demos. The first case focuses on the Northern Territory Don Dale Youth Detention Centre that became a site of political controversy in 2016 for its mistreatment of youth detainees. The second case explores a 2020 campaign by the conservative Liberal National Party in a recent Queensland state election to implement a youth curfew in Townsville, a city with a high number of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander residents. As evidenced by these debates, about youth crime and incarceration, Nakata and Bray argue that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children are often represented as a source of risk which lies in tension with the potential of representing indigenous children as sources of renewal. These cases reveal the representative terrain in which Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander young people must resist and speak back to a white national imaginary that works to limit the possible futures that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples imagine for themselves.

A central endeavour of this book is to engage in a discussion about how representation as an analytical prism can deepen conversations in childhood studies and neighbouring fields about children, rights and politics. As legal, social, and political traditions have evolved in different parts of the world, these have configured multiple representations of children and childhood. Sometimes these representations have converged into coherent modes of portraying children and speaking on behalf of children. Other times, the portrayals and performances of children and childhoods have evolved into more conflicting or ambiguous understandings of their representation, not least in contexts where young people have advanced claims to represent themselves.

Our interest in children’s representation, as argued in this book, complements ongoing theoretical and empirical work in childhood studies and related fields and ties into broader revitalised scholarly debates in political theory about how, where and when political representation takes place. Such a turn, we hope, can help us to bridge scholarly divides and challenge limiting notions of children’s representations. From the perspective of politics, which obviously constitutes a red thread throughout this book, we seek to critically engage with how the political representation of children and youth through parliamentary politics, legislation, child ombudspersons, administrative procedures, welfare systems and implementation strategies of children’s rights mobilise policy agendas and schemes of governance. The different contributions pursue to offer new concepts, sites, routes, actors and networks of children’s representation across various parts of the world and put these into conversation with each other.

The chapters presented are thus mindful of young people’s uneven access to citizenship as well as to the need to open up our framing of contemporary youth political representations to a longer history of youth action and organizing and its ethico-political affordances. In recognizing the transformative possibilities of children’s political representation, this volume offers in addition a critical reading of child rights regimes and the ways in which democracies are organized to disclose exclusionary, racialized and colonial pasts of international and national politics. Several chapters push back against the dominant representational politics of marginalized childhoods in the Global South. Their efforts to read the epistemological weight of a normative childhood against the grain is what constitutively frames this volume’s overall approach. While we acknowledge the opportunities of young people’s struggles to gain recognition through new modes of political representation, we treat political representation as an uneven and contingent terrain where the continued risk of reaffirming existing intersectional hierarchies, that for long have marked children’s participation, is still very much alive.

The portrayals and depictions of children and childhood have always been embedded in institutional practices to achieve political aims. We can provide required analytic space only by our efforts to disaggregate, historicize and contextualize children and childhood. In that vein, we hope that the contributions in this volume will stimulate further explorations and scholarly interchange about the politics of children’s rights and representation.

Alcoff, L. (1991). The Problem of Speaking for Others. Cultural Critique, 20 , 5–32.

Article   Google Scholar  

Ariès, P. (1962). Centuries of Childhood: A Social History of Family Life . Vintage.

Google Scholar  

Aronsson, K., & Sandin, B. (1996). The Sun Match Boy and Plant Metaphors: A Swedish Image of a 20th Century Childhood. In P. Hwang, M. E. Lamb, & I. E. Sigel (Eds.), Images of Childhood (pp. 185–194). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Balagopalan, S. (2014). Inhabiting Childhood: Children, Labour and Schooling in Post-colonial India . Macmillan.

Balagopalan, S. (2019). Why Historicize Rights-Subjectivities? Children’s Rights, Compulsory Schooling, and the Deregulation of Child Labor in India. Childhood, 26 (3), 304–320.

Baviskar, A., & Sundar, N. (2008). Democracy Versus Economic Transformation? Economic and Political Weekly , November 15, 87–89.

Beier, J. (Ed.). (2020). Discovering Childhood in International Relations . Palgrave Macmillan.

Berents, H. (2020). Depicting Childhood: A Critical Framework for Engaging Images of Children in IR. In J. Beier (Ed.), Discovering Childhood in International Relations . Palgrave Macmillan.

Bernstein, R. (2011). Racial Innocence: Performing American Childhood from Slavery to Civil Rights . New York: New York University Press.

Bessant, J. (2021). Making-up People: Youth, Truth and Politics . Routledge.

Bourdillon, M. (2006). Children and Work: A Review of Current Literature and Debates. Development and Change, 37 (6), 1201–1226.

Brito Vieira, M. (Ed.). (2017). Reclaiming Representation: Contemporary Advances in the Theory of Political Representation . Routledge.

Burman, E. (1994). Innocents Abroad: Western Fantasies of Childhood and the Iconography of Emergencies. Disasters, 18 (3), 238–253.

Cummings, M. (2020). Children’s Voices in Politics . Peter Lang.

Book   Google Scholar  

Dar, A., & Wall, J. (2011). Children’s Political Representation: The Right to Make a Difference. The International Journal of Children’s Rights, 19 (4), 595–612.

de Coninck-Smith, N., Sandin, B., & Schrumpf, E. (Eds.). (1997). Industrious Children: Work and Childhood in the Nordic Countries 1850–1990 . Odense University Press.

de Moor, J., De Vydt, M., Uba, K., & Wahlström, M. (2021). New Kids on the Block: Taking Stock of the Recent Cycle of Climate Activism. Social Movement Studies, 20 (5), 619–625.

Dimock, G. (1993). Children of the Mills: Re-Reading Lewis Hine’s Child-Labour Photographs. Oxford Art Journal, 16 (2), 37–54.

Disch, L., van de Sande, M., & Urbinati, N. (Eds.). (2019). The Constructive Turn in Political Representation . Edinburgh University Press.

Droux, J. (2016). A league of its own? The league of nations’ child welfare committee (1919–1936) and international monitoring of child welfare policies. The League of Nations’ Work on Social Issues , 89–103. United Nations.

Escobar, A. (2018). The Making of Social Movements in Latin America: Identity, Strategy, and Democracy . Routledge.

Fass, P. S. (2011). A Historical Context for the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 633 (1), 17–29.

Fay, F. (2019). Decolonizing the Child Protection Apparatus: Revisiting Child Rights Governance in Zanzibar. Childhood, 26 (3), 321–336.

Fraser, N. (2005). Reframing Global Justice. New Left Review, 36 , 69.

Gergan, M., & Curley, A. (2021). Indigenous Youth and Decolonial Futures. Antipode . https://doi.org/10.1111/anti.12763

Hallberg, M., & Sandin, B. (2021). Pictured Political Projects: Sunshine Over a Welfare State in the Shadow of War. Journal of the History of Childhood and Youth, 14 (1), 85–112.

Hallett, C., & Prout, A. (Eds.). (2003). Hearing the Voices of Children: Social Policy for a New Century . Routledge.

Hanson, K. (2017). Embracing the Past: ‘Been’, ‘Being’ and ‘Becoming’ Children. Childhood, 24 (3), 281–285.

Hanson, K., & Molima, C. (2019). Getting Tambo Out of Limbo: Exploring Alternative Legal Frameworks that Are More Sensitive to the Agency of Children and Young People in Armed Conflict. In M. A. Drumbl & J. C. Barrett (Eds.), Research Handbook on Child Soldiers (pp. 110–131). Edward Elgar.

Hanson, K., & Nieuwenhuys, O. (2013). Reconceptualizing Children’s Rights in International Development: Living Rights, Social Justice, Translations . Cambridge University Press.

Higonnet, A. (1998). Pictures of Innocence: The History and Crisis of Ideal Childhood . Thames & Hudson.

Hinton, E. (2021). America on Fire: The Untold History of Police Violence and Black Rebellion Since the 1960s . William Collins.

Holland, P. (2004). Picturing Childhood: The Myth of the Child in Popular Imagery . I. B. Tauris.

Holt, J. (1974). Escape from Childhood: The Needs and Rights of Children . E. P. Dutton.

Holzscheiter, A. (2010). Children’s Rights in International Politics: The Transformative Power of Discourse . Palgrave Macmillan.

Holzscheiter, A. (2016). Representation as Power and Performative Practice: Global Civil Society Advocacy for Working Children. Review of International Studies, 422 , 205–226.

Holzscheiter, A., Josefsson, J., & Sandin, B. (2019). Child Rights Governance: An Introduction. Childhood, 25 (3), 271–288.

Honwana, A. M. (2012). The Time of Youth: Work, Social Change, and Politics in Africa . Kumarian Press.

Honwana, M. (2019). Youth Struggles: From the Arab Spring to Black Lives Matter and Beyond. African Studies Review, 62 (1), 8–21.

Ikumola, A. D. (2017). Child Fosterage Dynamics in Selected Markets in Lagos State, Nigeria. In Children’s Agency and Development in African Societies . Council for the Development of Social Science Research in Africa. Dakar.

James, A. (2007). Giving Voice to Children’s Voices: Practices and Problems, Pitfalls and Potentials. American Anthropologist, 109 (2), 261–272.

James, A., & Prout, A. (2015). Constructing and Reconstructing Childhood: Contemporary Issues in the Sociological Study of Childhood (3rd Rev. and Updated ed.). Falmer.

Josefsson, J. (2017). ‘We beg you, let them stay!’: Right Claims of Asylum-Seeking Children as a Socio-Political Practice. Childhood, 24 (3), 316–332.

Josefsson, J., & Wall, J. (2020). Empowered Inclusion: Theorizing Global Justice for Children and Youth. Globalizations, 17 (6), 1043–1060.

Kallio, K. P., & Häkli, J. (2011). Are There Politics in Childhood? Space and Polity, 15 (1), 21–34.

Kasanda, A. (2019). The African Youth Civic Movements and the Struggle for Peace: The Case of Balai Citoyen and Filimbi. Critical Sociology, 45 (6), 859–870.

Kwon, S. A. (2019). The Politics of Global Youth Participation. Journal of Youth Studies, 22 (7), 926–940.

Lundy, L. (2018). In Defence of Tokenism? Implementing Children’s Right to Participate in Collective Decision-Making. Childhood, 25 (3), 340–354.

Margolin, C. R. (1978). Salvation Versus Liberation: The Movement for Children’s Rights in a Historical Context. Social Problems, 25 (4), 441–452.

Marshall, D. (2004). Children Rights in Imperial Political Cultures: Missionary and Humanitarian Contributions to the Conference on the African Child of 1931. The International Journal of Childrens Rights, 12 , 273–318.

Marshall, D. (2013). Children’s Rights from Below: Canadian and Transnational Actions, Beliefs, and Discourses, 1900–1989. In D. Goutor & S. Heathorn (Eds.), Taking Liberties. A History of Human Rights in Canada (pp. 189–212). Oxford University Press.

Marshall, D. (2014). The Rise of Coordinated Action for Children in War and Peace: Experts at the League of Nations, 1924–1945. In D. Rodogno, B. Struck, & J. Vogel (Eds.), Shaping the Transnational Sphere. Transnational Networks of Experts and Organizations . Berghahn Books.

Moody, Z. (2014). Transnational Treaties on Children’s Rights: Norm Building and Circulation in the Twentieth Century. Paedagogica Historica, 50 (1–2), 151–164.

Nakata, S. (2008). Elizabeth Eckford’s Appearance at Little Rock: The Possibility of Children’s Political Agency. Politics, 28 (1), 19–25.

Nakata, S. (2015). Childhood Citizenship, Governance and Policy: The Politics of Becoming Adult . Routledge.

Nakata, S., & Bray, D. (2020). The Figure of the Child in Democratic Politics. Contemporary Political Theory, 19 (1), 20–37.

Nehlin, A. (2009). Exporting Visions and Saving Children: The Swedish Save the Children Fund . Diss., Linköpings universitet, Linköping.

Ofosu-Kusi, Y. (eds). (2017). Children’s Agency and Development in African Societies . Council for the Development of Social Science Research in Africa. Dakar.

Oxford Languages. (2022). English Dictionary . Oxford University Press.

Peacock, M. (2014). Innocent Weapons: The Soviet and American Politics of Childhood in the Cold War . The University of North Carolina Press.

Pickard, S., & Bessant, J. (Eds.). (2018). Young People Re-Generating Politics in Times of Crises . Palgrave.

Pitkin, H. (1967). The Concept of Political Representation . University of California.

Platt, A. M. (2009). The Child Savers: The Invention of Delinquency (Expanded 40th anniversary ed.). Rutgers University Press.

Quennerstedt, A. (2013). Children’s Rights Research Moving into the Future—Challenges on the Way Forward. International Journal of Children’s Rights, 21 (2), 233–247.

Reynaert, D., Bouverne-de-Bie, M., & Vandevelde, S. (2009). A Review of Children’s Rights Literature Since the Adoption of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. Childhood, 16 (4), 518–534.

Riis, J. A. (1971). How the Other Half Lives: Studies Among the Tenements of New York: With 100 Photographs from the Jacob A. Riis Collection . Dover.

Roberts, K. (2015). Youth Mobilisations and Political Generations: Young Activists in Political Change Movements During and Since the Twentieth Century. Journal of Youth Studies, 18 (8), 950–966.

Rose, G. (2016). Visual Methodologies: An Introduction to Researching with Visual Materials (4th ed.). Sage.

Sandin, B. (2012). Children and the Swedish Welfare State: From Different to Similar. In P. Fass & M. Grossberg (Eds.), Reinventing Childhood After World War II . University of Pennsylvania Press.

Saward, M. (2010). The Representative Claim . Oxford University Press.

Saward, M. (2020). Making Representations: Claim, Counterclaim and the Politics of Acting for Others . Rowman and Littlefield.

Schrag, F. (1975). The Child’s Status in the Democratic State. Political Theory, 3 (4), 441–457.

Sircar, O., & Dutta, D. (2011). Beyond Compassion: Children of Sex Workers in Kolkata’s Sonagachi. Childhood, 18 (3), 333–349.

Sparrman, A. (2017). Visual Representations of Childhood. In M. Heather (Ed.), Oxford Bibliographies of Childhood Studies . Oxford.

Stammers, N. (2012). Children’s Rights and Social Movements: Reflections from a Cognate Field. In K. Hanson & O. Nieuwenhuys (Eds.), Reconceptualizing Children’s Rights in International Development: Living Rights, Social Justice, Translations (pp. 275–292). Cambridge University Press.

Stearns, P. (2017). History of Children’s Rights. In W. Vandenhole, E. Desmet, D. Reynaert, & S. Lembrechts (Eds.), Routledge International Handbook of Children’s Rights Studies . Routledge.

Stephen, L. (1997). Women and Social Movements in Latin America: Power from Below . University of Texas Press.

Tallberg, J. S., Squatrito, T., & Jönsson, C. (2013). The Opening Up of International Organizations: Transnational Access in Global Governance . Cambridge University Press.

Tisdall, K. M. (2008). Is the Honeymoon Over? Children and Young Peoples’ Participation in Public Decision-Making. The International Journal of Children’s Rights, 16 (3), 419–429.

Tremmel, J. C. (2006). Handbook of Intergenerational Justice . Edward Elgar Publishing.

Twum-Danso Imoh, A. (2012). The Convention on the Rights of the Child: A Product and Facilitator of a Global Childhood. In A. Twum-Danso Imoh & R. K. Ame (Eds.), Childhoods at the Intersection of the Local and the Global (pp. 17–33). Palgrave Macmillan.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Twum-Danso Imoh, A., & Ansell, N. (2014). Realizing Children’s Rights in Africa: An Introduction. In Children’s Lives in an Era of Children’s Rights (pp. 19–34). Routledge.

Twum-Danso Imoh, A., & Okyere, S. (2020). Towards a More Holistic Understanding of Child Participation: Foregrounding the Experiences of Children in Ghana and Nigeria. Children and Youth Services Review, 112 , 104927.

Urbinati, N. (2006). Representative Democracy: Principles and Genealogy . University of Chicago Press.

Vallgårda, K. (2015). Imperial Childhoods and Christian Mission: Education and Emotions in South India and Denmark . Palgrave.

Vandenhole, W., Desmet, E., Reynaert, D., & Lembrechts, S. (Eds.). (2017 [2015]). Routledge International Handbook of Children’s Rights Studies . Routledge.

Veerman, P. E. (1992). The Rights of the Child and the Changing Image of Childhood . Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.

Wall, J. (2019). From Childhood Studies to Childism: Reconstructing the Scholarly and Social Imaginations. Children’s Geographies . https://doi.org/10.1080/14733285.2019.1668912

Wall, J. (2021). Give Children the Right to Vote: On Democratizing Democracy . Bloomsbury Academic.

Wells, K. (2011). The Politics of Life: Governing Childhood. Global Studies of Childhood, 1 (1), 15–25.

Wells, K. (2021). Childhood in a Global Perspective . Polity.

Whyte, K. (2017). Indigenous climate change studies: Indigenizing futures, decolonizing the Anthropocene. English Language Notes, 55 (1), 153–162.

Wall, J. (2012). Can Democracy Represent Children? Toward a Politics of Difference. Childhood, 19 (1), 86–100.

Newsboys Act and Talk. (1899, Jul 25). New York Times (1857–1922), p. 3.

Newsboys Go on Strike. (1899, Jul 21). New-York Tribune (1866–1899), p. 10.

ww.nypl.org/blog/2012/05/25/extra-extra-read-all-about-newsboys-strike-1899?fbclid=IwAR1pGYmbbYG1Xvl_ByB-MYzw5V_70TltpY2EPJrnSC-sS0sMvI2iTUU9RJM

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Thematic Studies—Child Studies, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden

Jonathan Josefsson & Bengt Sandin

Centre for Children’s Rights Studies, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland

Karl Hanson

Department of Childhood Studies, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, Camden, NJ, USA

Sarada Balagopalan

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jonathan Josefsson .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Bengt Sandin

Jonathan Josefsson

Rights and permissions

Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license and indicate if changes were made.

The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter's Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the chapter's Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder.

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Josefsson, J., Sandin, B., Hanson, K., Balagopalan, S. (2023). Representing Children. In: Sandin, B., Josefsson, J., Hanson, K., Balagopalan, S. (eds) The Politics of Children’s Rights and Representation. Studies in Childhood and Youth. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-04480-9_1

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-04480-9_1

Published : 12 March 2023

Publisher Name : Palgrave Macmillan, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-031-04479-3

Online ISBN : 978-3-031-04480-9

eBook Packages : Social Sciences Social Sciences (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

The Current State of Disability Representation in Children’s Books

Margaret Kingsbury

Margaret Kingsbury grew up in a house so crammed with books she couldn’t open a closet door without a book stack tumbling, and she’s brought that same decorative energy to her adult life. Margaret has an MA in English with a concentration in writing and has worked as a bookseller and adjunct English professor. She’s currently a freelance writer and editor, and in addition to Book Riot, her pieces have appeared in School Library Journal, BuzzFeed News, The Lily, Parents, StarTrek.com, and more. She particularly loves children’s books, fantasy, science fiction, horror, graphic novels, and any books with disabled characters. You can read more about her bookish and parenting shenanigans in Book Riot’s twice-weekly The Kids Are All Right newsletter. You can also follow her kidlit bookstagram account @BabyLibrarians , or on Twitter @AReaderlyMom .

View All posts by Margaret Kingsbury

I began this piece out of frustration. Despite the many initiatives to make children’s books more diverse and representative of everyone instead of a select white, able-bodied, cis het population, it’s still hard to find disability representation in children’s books, particularly ones written by disabled folk, and particularly ones that depict multiple identities (Black and disabled, for example). What’s happening in the children’s publishing industry? I wondered. Are there truly so few books with disabled characters being published? Are things getting any better? What are children’s publishing companies doing to be more inclusive of disabled folk? 

I decided to find out, and spoke to numerous authors and publishers about disabled representation in the children’s book publishing industry. What I discovered is both heartening and worrying. Yes, in many respects, things are improving in terms of disabled representation in children’s books. But there are still many gaps in representation and a lack of both understanding and specific initiatives among some (though not all) publishers.

The Stats On Disabled Representation In Children’s Books

According to the Cooperative Children’s Book Center’s 2019 study , only 3.4% of children’s books have disabled main characters. Compare this statistic with the CDC’s finding that 26% of Americans have disabilities , and it’s easy to see there’s a problem. The children’s book industry is failing to portray the many myriads of ways bodies and people exist and interact with the world. These are ways that many children experience themselves or will experience in the future.

This lack of representation extends to publishing companies as well. Since 2015, Lee & Low Books has tracked diversity within the publishing industry. Their 2019 study had 11% of responders identifying as disabled. This is a marked improvement from their 2015 study, which had only 4% of responders identifying as disabled. But they note this is most likely due to their rephrasing of the question and because of changes in how society in general looks at and defines mental-health issues, not necessarily because the publishing industry is hiring more disabled folk. Even with this increase, the number of disabled folk working in the publishing industry is less than half of the percentage of people who have disabilities in the United States.

Thank you for signing up! Keep an eye on your inbox. By signing up you agree to our terms of use

Barriers Of Entry For Disabled Writers And Illustrators

In my interviews with various authors and illustrators, a few main themes came up when discussing barriers of entry into publication: Ableism, narrative stereotypes industry professionals have, characters with multiple identities, accessibility at writing conferences, and pushback from readers.

Ableism is the intentional and unintentional discrimination against disabled people. These practices often make it difficult for disabled writers to break into the industry and, even once published, thrive and continue publishing. I spoke with Alaina Lavoie, the communications manager for We Need Diverse Books and adjunct professor at Emerson College, about the ways ableism presents itself in publishing.

“Literary agents and editors often turn down books with disabled main characters because they explain they ‘can’t connect to the story’ or don’t think the book has marketing potential,” she explained. “Once disabled creators do get a book deal, they often face ableism at other levels throughout the process. It may be that they’re challenged on book jacket copy, or not given a large promotional budget, or assumed to be a niche book for just a niche audience that isn’t seen as ‘mainstream.’ A lot of the ways that ableism shows up in publishing are subtle microaggressions, and disabled creators often have to continue to advocate for themselves and their work: To get printed ARCs [advanced review copies] made for accessibility reasons, to request accessible event venues for their in-person readings and events, to push for accessibility for online events, to have their work submitted for awards and to the media for promotion.”

At every step in the publishing process, from the initial spark to write to the accessibility of ARCs, disabled creators might face a challenge to their work and their disabled identities.

Stereotyping Disabled Narratives

One major ableist hurtle disabled writers face is, even once they’ve written a stellar book, having non-disabled publishing gatekeepers (from literary agents to editors) reject their book for not following certain stereotyped narrative arcs included in many popular books written by non-disabled writers.

Jen Malia, author of Too Sticky! Sensory Issues with Autism and Associate Professor of English and Creative Writing Coordinator at Norfolk State University, elaborates on the ableist, stereotyped narratives many readers — including publishing professionals — expect to see in books with disabled characters:

“[A] harmful stereotype that reappears over and over again in disabled literature is that disabled people are a burden to their families. It’s hard for disabled authors to publish authentic and positive representations in an industry that expects to see these stereotypes from non-disabled authors.”

This is why publishing narratives by disabled authors is so important.

An anonymous dyslexic author told me she’s had many editors ask her to include dyslexic stereotypes into her picture book manuscript. When she explains that what they want her to include are stereotypes and mostly untrue, they tell her they have trouble connecting to her work and reject it.

Another stereotyped narrative non-disabled readers expect to find is stories where the disabled person “overcomes” their disability. Kati Gardner, the author of Finding Balance , is currently battling this stereotype. “They [publishers] aren’t interested in messy, true-to-life, disabled stories,” she explained in a group chat of online disabled creators in the kid lit community. “They are only interested in the familiar tropes of overcoming adversity or death. There’s no in-between.”

Her statement was corroborated when I spoke to the VP of a major publishing house and she expressed the importance of readers, disabled and non-disabled alike, reading stories of people overcoming their disabilities. “How much better that person is after reading such a book,” she told me. As a gatekeeper in the publishing industry, she has the important job of determining which books by disabled creators get published. What happens to the disability narratives, then, where the disabled character has no desire to “overcome” their disability? Many in the disabled community embrace their disabled identities as part of their essential self. Also, what happens to the narratives where the disabled person doesn’t overcome their disability? Or where the story has nothing to do with their disability? Disability narratives are nuanced and complex and cannot and should not be forced into narrow narrative arcs. What she and other editors like her consider a “good” book with disability representation may be because it has the stereotyped narratives they enjoy. At the same time, they reject more nuanced books by disabled creators for failing to follow these ableist arcs. 

Multiple Identities

Speaking of nuanced narratives, what happens when characters are, in addition to being disabled, also non-white and/or LGBTQ+?

“There still needs to be a lot more improvement, especially at the intersections of marginalized identities; most disability books still often feature the white, straight, cis perspective,” said Alaina Lavoie.

“It’s time we stop saying whiteness in every single category is the default,” added Keah Brown, the author of The Pretty One and the 2022 picture book Sam’s Super Seats . After the publication of The Pretty One , she received pushback within the disabled community for centering race in addition to disability. While The Pretty One is not a children’s title, with 85% of editorial boards in children’s publishing comprised of white folk, it’s no surprise that when children’s books are published with disabled main characters, those characters are almost always white.

James Catchpole, children’s book literary agent and author of What Happened to You? , told me he thinks “a lot of the barriers have to do with class, with social background, and who might be expected to be a children’s writer (and who can afford to be one…). And that intersects with disability and with race in various ways, meaning some communities are definitely underrepresented in the industry — some drastically so. Whereas if you’re an upper-middle-class white person with a good degree and a disability, like me, then that’s often not a hindrance.” While he was speaking specifically of the UK children’s publishing industry, in the United States, BIPOC are also less likely to earn a livable income, and considering the slow growth of racial diversity that’s also present in the children’s book industry, it’s safe to assume that disabled, non-white children’s book creators face additional hurdles to publishing their children’s books. 

It does seem like some publishing companies are attempting to correct the “single identity” focus by actively seeking works from disabled creators like Jessica Lewis, who wrote the novel Meow or Never for Scholastic as an IP work under the name Jazz Taylor. The preteen main character in this charming middle grade novel is disabled, Black, and a lesbian.

Accessibility in Writing Conferences

Writing conferences are considered essential tools for many new writers. Conferences can provide craft lectures, sources for feedback, networking with agents and editors. This is the place many new writers find agents or feedback groups. Yet, many conferences are inaccessible for disabled writers in a variety of ways.

Deaf disability activist and prospective YA author Jenna Beacom told me that conferences remain largely inaccessible for her. She misses out on essential networking. While she’s asked for accessibility at some of the conferences she’s attended, she fears antagonizing the very people she’s supposed to be cultivating a writing relationship with. Instead, she’s turned to Twitter to make writing connections, but it takes a lot of her time and energy. She did applaud DVCon as being one of the only accessible conferences she’d ever attended and a source of inspiration for her current writing project. “[O]ne panel in particular,” she explained, “was so great that I credit it specifically with the fact that I’ve written about 50K words since, and am now very close to finishing my book.”

If she had been unable to attend that conference due to accessibility issues, then she would’ve missed out on much-needed inspiration.

While my disability doesn’t require many accommodations, I’ve experienced negative feedback from writing peers at conferences I’ve attended when I asked for accommodations. I was told by one writer multiple times that I was lazy for using the elevator. Another writer mocked me when I requested food changes at a conference banquet to prevent an allergic reaction, then spent the entire meal complaining I had better food than her and demanding the waiter serve her meals like mine. These scenarios, while minor, create discomfort and added stress to what should be a networking and craft-building experience. They also show ableism in the industry. Would a literary agent overhearing me discuss food allergies with a waiter assume I was “whining” and thus avoid signing me as a client? (To be clear, I wasn’t seeking an agent at the time.) Are writers who request accommodations for their disabilities perceived as being high maintenance and not worth working with? These are all issues that need to be addressed.

Improvements In Disabled Representation

Most of the writers and illustrators I spoke to have noticed improvements in disability representation. Jen Malia cited the increase in the number of #OwnVoices books leading to more authentic disabled representation. Alaina Lavoie talked about how the publishing industry is “expanding the scope to beyond just books centered around trauma and education (explaining disability at a 101 level) to books about disabled characters going on adventures, solving mysteries, playing sports, and more.”

Sarah Allen, middle grade author of What Stars Are Made Of , agrees. “In my opinion,” she explained, “disability representation is centered on giving writers with disabilities space to tell their stories. Whether those stories focus on the particular disability directly or incidentally, whether the genre is contemporary, fantasy, or something else entirely. While I’m just one person with one point of view, from what I’ve seen in the last several years, the space for these stories has only grown and grown. Children’s publishing as a whole seems to be more and more aware of the need for these stories and these authors, and the value of disability representation.”

In my own experience covering children’s books, it seems like 2020 and especially 2021 have seen a marked increase in disabled #OwnVoices children’s books. I’m interested in seeing what the Cooperative Children’s Book Center’s 2021 and 2022 studies will reflect.

As both an agent and an author, James Catchpole has a unique perspective from both sides of the industry.

“I think the industry is changing quickly to keep up with what feels like the rapid pace of change in society, in terms of making space for marginalised voices. I would say disability tends to lag behind race and gender, but there are signs of things shifting nonetheless,” he told me.

“To take an example I’ve recently heard, ten years ago a very celebrated picture book writer in the UK, with some personal experience of disability, had to twist her publisher’s arm to accept a story she’d written about disability.

“In contrast, four years ago, when I started showing an early draft of my book What Happened to You? to editors, they were receptive at least in theory, not because I had any pedigree as an author, but because I understood the craft as an agent, and because I had direct personal experience of my subject. (I think the book struggled to sell at that point because Karen and I hadn’t got it right yet!)

“Now that my book’s here and gaining some traction, a year on from the summer of Black Lives Matter (which really pushed the call for marginalised voices into the mainstream), I’m being actively asked by editors to send them stories by disabled writers. That’s quite a change in ten years.”

It’s interesting and important to note that he’s seen a marked increase in interest since the Black Lives Matter Movement. Uplifting marginalized voices for one group does help to uplift other marginalized voices, though specifically addressing some of the unique problems groups of people face is also important.

While it does seem like there’s an increase in the number of #OwnVoices children’s books with disabled main characters, there’s still a lot of room for improvement. As Raymond Antrobus, author of the picture book Can Bears Ski? , told me, “It still seems the industry is generally at pre-school level in how they think and talk about disability.” He did express hope, however. “People like Joyce Dunbar, Jillian Weise, Alice Wong, San Alland, Shelia Black, Ilya Kaminsky, Daniel Sluman, Khairani Barokka (just to name a few) have been present and engaged with the issues of ableism and writing and speaking against it for years. There is hope.”

Hopefully, publishers will be open to listening to these voices.

What Publishers Are Doing

To better understand what’s going on behind the scenes, I emailed 16 children’s book publishers. I asked them the same question: “I’m curious about what the people at X PUBLISHER are doing to promote disabled voices and to prevent ableism? Sensitivity readers, a commitment to publishing more disabled voices, and/or hiring more disabled voices?”

Only six publishers responded: Sourcebooks, Holiday House, Candlewick, Orca, Quarto, Running Press, and Delacorte. Five more responded they would relay my message to others, but I never heard back.

I received a variety of answers.

All six expressed a commitment to publish more disabled voices and listed some of their books with disabled main characters.

“We are thoughtful in representing kids with disabilities in our illustrated books and have worked closely with our authors and artists to make sure kids of all abilities and backgrounds are represented in our illustrations. We also welcome and look for books written by disabled voices and hope to increase our offerings there in future lists.” —Julie Matysik, Editorial Director at Running Press Kids

“Holiday House, along with our sister companies Peachtree Publishing and Pixel+Ink, continues to seek authors and illustrators who can illuminate the experiences of the neurodiverse and disabled communities.” —Derek Stordahl, the Vice President and General Manager of Holiday House Publishing Inc

Three publishers mentioned a commitment to depicting disabled characters even when the book isn’t specifically about disability (Orca, Running Press, Candlewick).

“I think the first and most immediate or visible places Orca is working to prevent ableism, promote disabled voices and increase disabled visibility in the children’s book industry is through incidental yet intentional representation in our books. And by this I mean our authors, illustrators, and designers are always making a concerted effort to ensure people with disabilities are present on the page. I am not referring only to books like The Disability Experience … but also picture books like When We Are Kind or We Wear Masks and others. We know how important it is for children — and adults — to see themselves reflected on the pages of the books they’re engaging with and we do not want anyone to miss that opportunity.” —Kennedy Cullen, Marketing Coordinator at Orca

“Because many Running Press Kids books include versatile texts that speak to groups of children, one way that we have been able to increase disability representation is through art direction. Our Creative Director, Frances Soo Ping Chow, has been instrumental in making sure that group scenes always include characters with a range of mobility enjoying themselves, playing, and engaging with the theme of the book.” —Running Press Kids

Three publishers mentioned working with sensitivity readers (Orca, Quarto, Delacorte).

“[A]ll of our titles (whether or not they center disabled characters) are run by sensitivity readers who make sure we are accurately reflecting the experiences of the people we are featuring. This specifically includes sensitivity readers who specialize in disability and ableism.” —Mel Schuit, Quarto Group

Both of the people I communicated with from Orca and Delacorte said they utilize disabled sensitivity readers on their books with disabled characters. Beverly Horowitz, Senior Vice President & Publisher at Delacorte, added that she frequently finds herself learning new things from her sensitivity readers.

Three publishers spoke of making the workplace more accessible (Orca, Candlewick, Delacorte).

“As for in office, we always hope that we can make the accommodations necessary to make working with Orca possible for anyone. It is important to us that we work to employ staff from a diversity of backgrounds so that all of our unique ways of engaging with the world can contribute to making books that serve a wide readership and illuminate the breadth of the human experience for all of our readers. Though our actual office, being a heritage building with lots of stairs, may present some accessibility issues for people, we do make sure that remote access is possible for anyone who requires it.” —Kennedy Cullen, Marketing Coordinator at Orca

“We are constantly striving to foster and maintain a mutually supportive work community where all individuals feel safe, welcome, and equally free to participate fully and express themselves, regardless of gender, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, physical ability, background, or any other protected and/or distinguishing characteristic with which they may identify.” —Candlewick Press

On the phone, Beverly Horowitz of Delacorte told me she imagines — now that it’s been proven that remote work is possible — that even once the company can return to the physical workplace they’ll remain remote, enabling more disabled people to work with the company. But she cited no specific initiatives or advocacy of remote work.

Two publishers mentioned making their books more accessible to everyone (Orca, Candlewick).

“We also believe the experience of reading should not be missed by anyone and so we continue to work on making our books as accessible as possible — in all meanings of the word. For us, that means additional features in several series of our print books like dyslexia-friendly fonts and cream-based paper to decrease the contrast for those with language-based learning difficulties, as well as a new collection of accessible audiobooks that include image descriptions.” —Orca

“We have licensed large print publishers to publish some of our books. And we have also licensed specialty publishers to create combination braille and illustrated editions of some of our picture books.” —Candlewick

Since my initial question did not mention making books accessible to readers, I imagine other publishers might also have similar initiatives.

Quarto mentioned disability-themed book lines.

“I also wanted to call attention to our SEN Superpowers series , which celebrates the positive traits associated with a range of common SEN (Special Education Needs) conditions, boosting the confidence and strength-awareness of children with those conditions, while also allowing for better understanding and positivity among their peers.”—Quarto

Candlewick mentioned staff training about ableism and disability.

“We were pleased to send 10 staff members including editors and designers to a Highlights Foundation month-long symposium this past October, which addressed ableism and where attendees deconstructed colonial thinking processes using youth literature, and discussed misrepresentations in books to develop action plans for resisting them. We’ve also provided groupwide deaf awareness training for Candlewick and Walker staff to coincide with the release of our book Can Bears Ski? .” —Candlewick

While I did not email Kokila, a division of Penguin Random House, Keah Brown told me she’s had a wonderful experience working with them on her forthcoming picture book Sam’s Super Seats , with every single editor from the Kokila team giving feedback on her book and listening to her responses and ideas. Publishers tend to focus on mobility aids in depicting disability, Keah told me, but when she suggested her picture book display disability without mobility aids, like her own, the team embraced the idea.

Albert Whitman did not respond to my email queries, but Jen Malia told me she had a wonderful experience publishing her picture book Too Sticky! with them:

“What I really loved about working with my book editor, Andrea Hall at Albert Whitman, is that she was really patient with me when I made mistakes. For example, I didn’t track my changes on my draft of Too Sticky! one time. This included me deleting a scene from the manuscript. I had second thoughts and didn’t feel like the scene was an authentic interaction between my main character, an autistic girl, and her classmate. My editor said she thought it was important to show the interaction between them. When I told her what I thought the problem was and suggested a different approach to the scene, she said that worked even better. I felt like we truly collaborated on my book, and she really listened to what I had to say.”

I’ve also noticed an increase in the number of books with disabled main characters published by Albert Whitman, which suggests similar experiences to Jen’s and in-house initiatives to increase disabled diversity. Though I want to add that Albert Whitman has a history of failing to pay authors .*

How The Children’s Book Publishing Industry Could Be More Inclusive Of Disability

“Nothing about us without us.” —Raymond Antrobus

Hire More Disabled People

“The book publishing industry needs to hire more disabled people who are gatekeepers — from agents to editors to publicists to the highest positions within publishers — so disabled authors can be give the space to publish authentic books.” —Jen Malia

“I believe the biggest problem in publishing is that decisions on what titles are published and which ones are not are made in a closed room of cis-gendered, temporarily able-bodied, White people. What if the decision-makers decided what books were published based on what titles were missing (especially when looking at global demographics) and what people were asking for?” —Brittany Murlas, Founder of Little Feminist and publisher of We Are Little Feminists: On-the-Go

While all publishers claim to be open to hiring disabled people, few initiate specific protocols that would welcome disabled writers. Topping the list is allowing workplaces to be remote. The past year has proven that remote work is possible, yet every new job listing in publishing states “currently remote, but must live in NYC for when the company returns to office” (or another city, but usually NYC). Alaina Lavoie discusses this issue in a recent article for Publisher’s Weekly :

“If there’s a lesson that publishers can learn from this pandemic, it’s that our industry needs more remote-friendly opportunities if we want to address the widespread ableism and inequality in publishing. We need more remote opportunities in book publishing. Of 166 recent job listings for positions at Hachette, Macmillan, Penguin Random House, Scholastic, and Simon & Schuster, only two specify that they are open to remote candidates, and one of those two is a contract position, not a full- or part-time job.”

Remote work is the best and most inclusive way to open up publishing to disabled people. If publishers aren’t open to remote work, then they’re not creating a welcome environment for disabled folk.

And hiring disabled people will mean having their much-needed perspective on disabled narratives.

Have An Individualized Approach For Working With Disabled People

“I think asking their authors what they need is key. As long as the industry is attentive and willing to bend according to what each individual needs, we’ll be in good shape! There’s no one size fits all approach to disability; everyone has a unique experience. So being open and willing to work with the author is very important.” —Jessica Lewis/Jazz Taylor, author of Meow or Never

“Often, people are looking for a checklist of things they can do to make sure they’re being accessible, but the reality is that it varies from person to person and even two people with the same disability aren’t the same. So it makes more sense to have a flexible attitude at your publishing house with an individualized approach: Do your processes actually have to be identical for all employees, or all authors and illustrators? Or can you accommodate, for example, phone conversations for someone if email doesn’t work for them?” —Alaina Lavoie

Both Keah Brown and Jen Malia shared how having an individualized approach to their books made the publishing experience so much better. Listening, valuing each individual, respecting their needs, these should all be basic tenants of working with disabled people (and really every person), whether they’re employees in the publishing industry or authors and illustrators.

Publish More Books With Disabled Characters That Aren’t “About” Disability

“I would love to see more disability representation in books that aren’t specifically about disability. Of course books that help kids learn about disability are so important and needed, but it would also be great for kids to see disabled characters (especially disabled main characters) with storylines about friendship or magic or monsters too!” —Tyler Feder, author and illustrator of Bodies Are Cool

While many of the authors I spoke to mentioned they’re seeing more books with disabled characters that aren’t “about” disabled characters, it’s still rare. I also cover fantasy and science fiction, and I can attest to how rare it is to see a disabled main character fighting dark magic or riding dragons.

Publish More Books By Disabled Creators

This is a very long excerpt from my conversation with disabled literary agent and children’s book author James Catchpole, but I thought he perfectly described why #OwnVoices creators are necessary in diversifying publishing, and how they can bring more to publishing than disability-adjacent creators. That doesn’t mean that disability-adjacent creators can’t write good and nuanced books with disabled main characters, but that disabled creators should be a bigger part of the story, and they’re also less likely to use harmful stereotypes in their books.

“I think the best thing the industry could do would be to start taking disability seriously, as a subject. By this I mean: stop allowing it to be used by writers as a literary device (as crude metaphor or a tool for emotional manipulation, be it for pity or malice or inspiration) and start thinking of it as a specialist subject, on which a level of expertise is required on the part of the writer.

“Where an author writes about a brain surgeon, then assuming they’re not a brain surgeon, we expect them to do their research. Where they write about a wheelchair user, then assuming they’re not a wheelchair user, we expect them to wing it, and make up any old clichéd rubbish from the accumulated stereotypes knocking around in their unconscious.

“This used to be the attitude with white authors writing characters of colour, and I’d say there’s been a long-overdue reckoning on that score. Could we have the same for non-disabled writers writing disabled characters, please?

“Maybe one more thing, as a continuation of the above. Perhaps the reason things have been slower to change with disability than with race, in that regard, is that the industry tends to give non-disabled people who may be disability-adjacent an unearned degree of authority, both as creatives and as so-called ‘sensitivity readers’ (dreadful term!). I think this happens because of the role of groups around disability — whether charities, the medical profession, or families of disabled people.

“I need to be clear that I’m not saying non-disabled people should never be writing books about disabled characters. It’s not as simple as that. As an agent, though, I regularly receive stories on submission from disability-adjacent people. I completely understand the impetus and the good intentions that drive them to write these stories. They want disabled children to feel represented in the books they read, and they quite rightly see how thin the selection currently on offer is — so of course they wish to address this…

“But being adjacent is not the same thing as having that experience yourself, and the great majority of stories I’ve read by disability-adjacent people follow the same path as books by well-meaning professional writers who are not themselves disabled: almost always, the disabled child either isn’t centred in the story, or they aren’t given real agency in the plot…or there just isn’t a plot, but a slightly empty message instead (usually something like: disabled kids are kids too! Which honestly I’d hope we could take as read).

“It is possible to address the subject of disability well in writing for children, as a non-disabled writer. We’ve an old favourite from the 90s, Mama Zooms by Jane Cowen-Fletcher, where a non-disabled child delights in riding on his mother’s wheelchair – something we well know to be true!

“But what we really need is stories from the perspective of disabled children – stories that centre disabled characters. We’d like to see the industry heed the call for #OwnVoices, by finding and supporting writers who were those disabled children, to write those books.”

Work With Disability Organizations

“I think it would be incredibly exciting to see increased coordination between publishing and the many wonderful national and international organizations out there dedicated to disability rights and advocacy. I think everyone in publishing is always looking for positive ways to expand and reach outside the publishing ‘bubble,’ and when it comes to disability representation, this might be one way of doing that!” —Sarah Allen

Publishing companies could work with disability organizations in numerous ways: conducting anti-ableist training like Candlewick; publishing books together; accessibility discussions for both in-house hiring and in printing books; having a book series chosen by these organizations. The possibilities are endless.

Hire Sensitivity Readers

“After I finished the initial round of illustrations, I worked with a wonderful disability sensitivity reader, Rabbi Ruti Regan, who gave me so much helpful feedback on how to refine my depictions of disability (like adjusting how a wheelchair fit a particular character’s legs). Rabbi Regan also completely opened my eyes to ways of including autism representation in the book, like having a character on the ‘hands’ page drawing a repetitive pattern. I feel really grateful for her help!” —Tyler Feder

I was actually surprised more of the creators I interviewed didn’t mention sensitivity readers, and I think that’s because sensitivity readers are one way to be inclusive, but it shouldn’t be the only way a publishing company ensures their books don’t contain harmful stereotypes. I take work sometimes as a sensitivity reader, and I’ve had mostly positive interactions, particularly with individual authors. Authors have been very happy to implement my suggestions and to do additional research. I’ve worked with publishing companies twice, and in both instances I felt like they did the minimum after receiving my feedback. It feels more, from my limited perspective, that when a publishing company hires sensitivity readers, it’s to check a box, while when individual authors hire me, it’s to ensure their books are accurate and in no way cause harm to the disabled community.

Tyler’s experience working with a sensitivity reader shows how they can add to the process. Her picture book Bodies Are Cool depicts many different types of bodies and disabilities, so it was necessary for her to do a lot of research into many different disabilities to portray them in her illustrations accurately.

Literary Agents: Be Willing To Work With Disabled Creators

I’m a member of several groups of disabled creators, and, over the past year, I’ve heard many horrifying stories of literary agents declining to work with an author after discovering they were disabled. This is particularly the case for neurodiverse authors. This should not have to be said, but neurodiverse authors offer a multitude of creative potential for literary agents. Their books offer a unique and needed perspective on the world.

Once again, having an individualized approach is best. Here is Jen Malia describing working with her agent:

“When I was working on a different picture book manuscript also with an autistic girl as the main character, my agent, Naomi Davis at BookEnds Literary, suggested making some cuts to a scene to clarify why my character had an autistic meltdown. I explained why I thought the meltdown probably wouldn’t have happened at all without the complexity of what was going on in the scene. She agreed with me, and we left it in with some other tweaks. My agent knows my perspective as an autistic person is important to making my books authentic.”

Literary agent Eric Smith recently conducted a Twitter survey about how literary agents can better serve neurodiverse writers. His blog on the results can be found here . I highly recommend all agents read it.

Make Conferences Accessible

This has already been mentioned above, but I also wanted to note that inaccessible publishing industry conferences are also barriers for disabled folk who want to work in the industry. All conferences need to be made accessible, and people who run conferences need to investigate how they can make that happen. 

What Are The Implications For Readers?

Readers, whether you’re disabled or not, you need to read books with disabled characters. I think readers know and already want that!

When I spoke with Brittany Murlas, the founder of Little Feminist , about her book On-the-Go (which Book Riot editor and contributor Kelly Jensen discusses here ), she told me that when the Little Feminist company began trying to find diverse books for their children’s book box, they found zero board books featuring disabled characters. Zero. “And 100% of children’s books we found featuring people with disabilities were about how they overcame/survived their disability (the one exception is Mama Zooms ), portraying disability as a problem to be solved, as opposed to showcasing people with disabilities living their lives and thriving just like any other story would,” she added. Considering that 26% of the population is disabled, this is ridiculous.

Readers want and need disabled characters in their books. Readers, while you’re not in charge of who publishing companies hire, you can show them you want more disabled representation in your books by buying #OwnVoices children’s books by disabled main characters, asking your library to purchase these books if you’re unable to afford them yourself, and even writing emails to your favorite publisher, or tweeting them, that you want #OwnVoices disabled representation.

If you’re needing some book suggestions, check out all the books I’ve mentioned in this piece, my list of children’s and middle grade titles , and these two lists of YA novels with disabled characters .

*Editors Note: Information about claims against Albert Whitman for failure to pay authors came to light, and was added to the piece, shortly after its publication.

Publishing Perspectives

• Submit Rights Deal

Children’s Books and Creators of Color: BookTrust Reports

In Feature Articles by Porter Anderson December 16, 2022

Taking time to honor progress—and point to the need for more—England’s BookTrust reflects on diversity in children’s books.

By Porter Anderson, Editor-in-Chief | @Porter_Anderson

‘I Just Want Some Regular Tales’

Children’s literature in recent years has served as a robust communications channel in topics of diversity and inclusion. Many parents and educators appreciate the assistance that books can offer in helping to raise children less encumbered than earlier generations with bias, however unconscious.

Issues of diversity are among those that British publishers, led by the Publishers Association , are admired for having taken especially seriously among international markets. On the other hand, research commentary from BookTrust’s reporting indicates, “Creators we spoke to raise[d] concerns that some publishers are engaging superficially with issues of exclusion and under-representation. They worry that the push to publishing creators of color has become either a trend or a tick-box exercise and that engagement with representation will not be sustained.”

Needless to say, a 43-page and 23-page study, landing at once on journalists’ desks is not something those journalists can fully encapsulate in the news media. We recommend that, if interested, you have a look at both.

The first examines those who write and/or illustrate children’s books in the UK market—how many of them are of color?

• Here is Representation of People of Color Among Children’s Book Creators in the UK (PDF)

The second takes stock of BookTrust’s “Book Trust Represents” program, which supports appearances by creators of color in classroom visits.

• Here is Book Trust Represents School Support: Evaluation Report (PDF)

Top-line observations from the BookTrust studies:

• New research suggests that 11.7 percent of children’s book creators in 2021 were people of color, compared to 4 percent in 2007, clearly an advance.
• Analysis of BookTrust’s school-visit “Represents” program—which the organization says has introduced emerging creators of color to 48,800 children—points to the impact that such representation may have on children’s motivations to read.

BookTrust reports that last year, 28 percent of the books it distributed to children in its programs in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland, were books written and/or illustrated by people of color. The organization began researching the representation of people of color among writers and illustrators of children’s books in 2019. Diana Gerald, the program’s CEO, writes in her introduction, “Three years ago, I wrote that ‘there is still a way to go before we have a truly representative canon of children’s literature’. That is still the case today.”

Points from the BookTrust Research

Melanie Ramdarshan Bold is an associate professor in children’s and YA literature studies at University College London, and she’s the author of BookTrust’s 43-page study Representation of People of Color Among Children’s Book Creators in the UK. Bold points out in her executive summary the nature of the “motivational” factor the research is concerned with alongside sheer data points. 

“The absence of an inclusive range of characters or creative role models,” she writes, “has the potential to deter children from minority backgrounds from reading and experiencing its wide ranging benefits. In turn, this lack of engagement with reading could deter children of color from pursuing careers in writing and illustration and further embed the imbalance.”

And in terms of progress, she writes, “While we are seeing a year-on-year increase in books by creators of color, we are still far from an equitable culture of reading, creating, and publishing children’s books. In 2020, we set a target for 13 percent of children’s books to be created by authors and illustrators of color by 2022. Our analysis of a dataset of children’s books published in the United Kingdom in 2021 reveals that, if recent increases are sustained, the sector could well be on track to reach that target.”

You can see something of the slow but steadily upward trend lines Bold is referencing seeing in this illustration from the study.

Certainly one of the most cheering trend lines is in the number of debut British creators of color in UK children’s book publishing yearly from 2007 to 2021:

On the other hand, a concerning point arises when Bold looks at ethnicity and gender identity, her research indicating the imbalance seen in the United Kingdom—and this surely would be replicated in many world markets today—in the gender of book writers and/or illustrators. We’ll bullet out for you some of the most telling numbers she has for any society looking for balanced gender, as well as racial, representation:

• “In the UK, women are more likely to create children’s books than men.
• “Nearly seven in 10 creators (66.0 percent) published in 2021 were women.
• “This gender gap is bigger among creators of color than among white creators.
• “White women were 1.8 times more likely to be creators of children’s books than white men.
• “Women of color were 3.8 times more likely to be creators of children’s books than men of color.
• “7.1 percent of the unique titles published in 2021 were by women of color and 1.9 percent were by men of color.”

They’ll immediately see the parallels here between this research and a factor on which he spends an entire chapter. Reeves examines the stark imbalance between men and women working in “HEAL” occupations—health, education, administration, and literacy. (On a wider note about men and boys in the English-language markets, Reeves points out that suicide is the biggest killer of British men younger than 45.)

Bold’s research for BookTrust has reflected here the alarm Reeves is sounding about occupational trends. Even as many women are successfully encouraged to move smartly into STEM occupations, the “HEAL” occupations are struggling with labor shortages and men find little encouragement to enter those careers.

From Bold’s BookTrust research:

Of importance to our international readership of publishing professionals, Bold’s research also examines who is publishing creators of color in the United Kingdom. Some of the results are telling.

“There has also been a marked increase in the number of unique titles written and/or illustrated by creators of color being published by conglomerates,” Bold writes.

“Conglomerate publishers tend to have substantial marketing budgets and infrastructures, and wider international and national distribution networks; thus, the potential to reach a much wider audience. In [our] interviews, creators highlight the importance of this reach and more mainstream visibility to further improving representation of people of color among children’s creators in the UK.”

This, of course, is heartening for many who work in the most internationalized houses. Corporate-owned publishing takes a nonstop barrage of criticism–as is the case in many industries, of course–and the point is well taken that their ability to mainstream and market content created by writers and illustrators of color carries real value.

At the same time, Bold’s research also shows that creators of color (25.4 percent) were more likely to self-publish or use a “hybrid publisher,” than white creators (17.8 percent), with debut creators of color doing the most self- or hybrid publishing (44.6 percent).

“I just want stories where Black people, Brown people are just being, just existing, without constantly having to be defined by their difference. I just want some regular tales.” Sharna Jackson, author

Is this because writers and illustrators of color simply find major publishing houses less receptive to their work? The answer isn’t here, but in the report’s conclusion, there are strong arguments for the need to focus on diversity while wishing that it didn’t have to be made “a thing,” if you will.

The author Sharna Jackson, published by Penguin Random House UK, the independent house Knights Of, the fine Tate (Museum) Publishing wing, and others, says this well: “I want creators of color to feel free enough to write what they want. I just want stories where Black people, Brown people are just being, just existing, without constantly having to be defined by their difference. I just want some regular tales.”

And where the first study focuses on quantitative data, the second about creators of color “representing” in BookTrust’s school-visitation programs, is more qualitative. In that one,  you read the comments of teachers and their classroom visitors of color.

“Teachers did not at first call attention to the fact that the story featured LGBTQ+ characters and themes, and instead allowed students to encounter these naturally,” BookTrust reports. “In doing so, the school [was] able to organically discuss ideas surrounding LGBTQ+ identities in a way that did not ‘other’ these identities.”

Taken together, the BookTrust reports form a welcome, intelligent set of thought-leading documents well worth your consideration for a read during some down time at the end of the year.

Bold is an author, herself. Inclusive Young Adult Fiction: Authors of Colour in the UK (SpringerLink) was released in 2019, and Cambridge University Press (we just wrote about its digitization of its “Christmas books” ) is the publisher of Bold’s new YA Anthologies and Activism , to be published in the new year.

As Bold’s research says in its opening pages, “Beginning with the work of early pioneers in the United States, research has demonstrated that books that reflect the world we live in help to build children’s self-esteem and an understanding and empathy toward others.”

More from Publishing Perspectives on industry statistics is here , more on diversity and inclusion in world publishing is here , more on children’s books and content is here , and more on the United Kingdom’s market is here .

About the Author

Porter anderson.

Porter Anderson has been named International Trade Press Journalist of the Year in London Book Fair's International Excellence Awards. He is Editor-in-Chief of Publishing Perspectives. He formerly was Associate Editor for The FutureBook at London's The Bookseller. Anderson was for more than a decade a senior producer and anchor with CNN.com, CNN International, and CNN USA. As an arts critic (Fellow, National Critics Institute), he was with The Village Voice, the Dallas Times Herald, and the Tampa Tribune, now the Tampa Bay Times. He co-founded The Hot Sheet, a newsletter for authors, which now is owned and operated by Jane Friedman.