Review of The Literature: Family Literacy Programs: Prepared by

Review of the Literature: Family Literacy Programs
March 2009
Prepared by:
Associate Professor Kaye Lowe Debbie Martens Kelly Hannett Ros Tunks
is Project is supported by funding from the Australian Government Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations under the National Projects element of the Literacy, Numeracy and Special Learning Needs Program. Any views expressed do not necessarily represent the views of the Australian Government Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations.
Literature Review - Family Literacy Programs
Page I
Contents
Introduction The literacy context Rationale for parent involvement De ning parent education programs and family literacy Essential criteria associated with e ective parent education programs Programs delivered to adults in order to bene t children Course components Evaluating parent education programs Implications and recommendations References 1 2 3 6 7 16 22 25 26 28
Page II
Review of the Literature: Family Literacy programs

Project Description e aim of this Project is to complete an in-depth literature review of world-wide family literacy programs that actively and successfully support the development of childrens literacy skills. e Project explores the evidence base for successful family literacy programs; and identies the benets of parental/caregiver involvement in literacy education programs on educational achievement, reading acquisition, and attitudes towards education. Project Objectives To identify the benets of parental/caregiver involvement in literacy education programs on educational achievement, reading acquisition, and attitudes towards education. To explore the evidence base for successful family literacy programs and identify the characteristics that make these programs successful and sustainable To document commonalities across successful family literacy programs To compile a set of recommendations for developing family literacy projects and initiatives for the provision of quality education opportunities for parents that reduce fragmentation in services for families; improve program accountability; raise standards; and expand professional development and technical resources for programs.
Page III
Introduction
e parent [caregiver] is the primary force that propels the child into the world of discovery, the world of literacy, and the world of success. Gilliam (2004, p.226) While the intention of this review is to report the research literature on parent involvement in the acquisition of reading from K-10, an intensive search reveals that evidence-based, prolonged research on the eectiveness of parent education programs is lacking. It appears that most programs are short-lived, often school based and predominantly designed for parents of children in the early years of school (P-3). Few parent programs, according to Wasik (2004), address the needs of children in the primary grades and beyond. ere is considerable emphasis on programs conducted for families from low socio-economic backgrounds and/or ESL families. Indepth descriptions of the components of parent education programs, their specic content, desired strategies and evaluation processes are often overlooked. An exception is the Canadian Paired Reading program described in research by Cadieux and Boudreault (2005). e research involved assessing the eects of a parent-child paired reading program on reading abilities, phonological awareness and selfconcept of at-risk students with 54 kindergarten students divided into control and experimental groups. Training for parents involved using the paired reading method whereby the parent and child read together until the child signals an intention to proceed independently. When the child falters for more than four seconds or makes a mistake, the parent reads with the child again until the next signal. e results of the research indicate positive gains for the experimental group. Research by Senechal et al (2000) conrms the lack of research evidence. One of the most important ndings here was the dearth of intervention research on parent reading with children in kindergarten to grade 3 (p.20). When it comes to the involvement of fathers in the learning of children, there are even fewer studies. While there is a considerable body of research on the eects of literacy interventions with mothers of young children (Ortiz, 1994, 2004), studies of the impact of literacy programs with fathers is generally neglected. In general, there is limited research on fathers contributions to their childrens reading and writing development. As Ortiz 2004 points out, parent involvement is an important goal of early childhood education programs, but parents often mean mothers. Bronsteins (1984) study of parent-child dyads indicated a number of dierences between maternal and paternal behaviours. Marks and Palkovitz (2004) made a case for families to have a balance involving fathers. Nord et al (1997) showed that fathers from two parent families who participated in school at a moderate or high level had children who usually achieved high marks, enjoyed school and never repeated a grade. e same outcomes were achieved by fathers who had the same level of involvement but lived outside the home. Gadsden (2003) stresses that Fathersthrough their presence or absence, their involvement
Page 1
or distanceare a critical subset of adults whose uses of and interactions around literacy help to frame literacy expectations and goals of both individual family members and the entire family unit. (p. 86) More research is needed to identify parent involvement programs that are eective for target populations. Cultural and language dierences often preclude parents from attending parent education programs. Parents who for various reasons feel intimated or threatened in a school context are referred to in the literature as invisible parents. e eorts of some schools to reach these parents is commendable. Gauging the depth of information about reading and how best to present it requires a concerted research eort by the education community. Long term investigations of the training requirements of providers are also crucial. As Cassidy & Cassidy (2002-03) point out family literacy is not receiving current or positive attention even though it was agreed by participants of their research that it should be.
The literacy context

Cadieux & Boudreault (2003) claim that over the last few years there has been an increase in the number of pupils experiencing diculties in normal classrooms. When this is combined with budgetary cuts, limited services are available to students. As a result, policy makers and education specialists are urged to improve cooperation between schools and parents in order to prevent continued academic failure, particularly in reading. In 2009, the percentage of children leaving Year 12 having attained inadequate literacy levels is perplexing. e Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) reported in July 2008 that literacy levels among high school students and student leavers has dropped 3.7 percentage points in the past ten years. Approximately one in two 15- to 24-year olds is unable to read to an adequate level to properly function in society. e report claims that only one in four people achieved a score of three or above in all test areas. e results were ranked one to ve with ve being the highest. e proportion of teenagers aged between 15 and 19 with literacy skills above three dropped to 9.3 per cent from 14.1 percent in 1996. (www.independentschoolparents.com.au/news/2008/abs_literacy_survey.html) e National Assessment Program in Literacy and Numeracy, 2007, reports that one in ve Indigenous students in Year 3 failed to meet the reading benchmark. In a media release (19th December, 2008) the Hon Julia Gillard MP, stated that the data shows that Indigenous student achievement is signicantly lower than non Indigenous students in all areas tested and in all jurisdictions. e problem is not conned to Australia. In the US, A long-awaited federal study nds that an estimated 32 million adults in the US about one in seven- are saddled with such low literacy levels that it would be tough for them to read anything more challenging than a childrens picture book or to understand a medications side eects listed on a pill bottle (nces.ed.gov/naal/estimates/index.aspx) .
Page 2
Rationale for parent involvement

Parents and caregivers are an under utilised and often undervalued resource. Informed parents can make a dierence in reducing the burgeoning literacy problems evident in todays classrooms. In the majority of cases, they have a vested interest in their children achieving literacy success and have ready access (and in most cases, elect to make time) to provide one-on-one assistance to children experiencing literacy diculties. Research ndings from Project ROAR (Reach Out And Read) indicate that parents are eager to help their children and when instructed in appropriate literacy activities can positively aect the academic progress of their children (Gilliam et al, 2004). Research indicates that training of parents done in conjunction with the provision of a grab-bag of eective strategies to use at home is the most eective form of parent education. Newmen et al, (1995) concurs that parents are willing, able, and want to help in the literacy development of their children. Most, however, are unsure of how to teach reading or help their children with literacy development. (Cunningham and Allington, 2003). e benets of parental involvement in the early years are well documented. If the only thing a parent did in the name of literacy was to read on a regular basis to their children, the benets would be undeniable. A child between ages one and six who shares a book with an adult for 15 minutes a day will have had 455 hours of individual reading instruction before entering school. A child who isnt read to will have none. (Weigel, Behal & Martin, 2001). Parents during reading time may be unaware that they are contributing to reading acquisition. In reading to their children, they model good reading, demonstrate what readers do, and promote a love of reading. Children who begin school with knowledge of book language, familiarity with concepts of print and positive attitudes toward reading are privileged. Sargent, Hill & Morrison (2006) contend that parental involvement, beliefs, and attitudes toward reading exert a profound impact on childrens literacy development. is notion of parents promoting a positive attitude is stressed in the research of Snow, Burns and Grin, (1998) who claim that parents perceptions, values, attitudes, and expectations play an important role in their childrens attitudes toward reading and subsequent literacy development. Unfortunately, research ndings highlight the inequities of literacy opportunities in the early years. Parents who are economically disadvantaged and have limited English prociency rarely read to their preschool children or read themselves. (Gadsden and Wagner, 1995; Philliber, Spillman & King, 1996). Regretfully, the solid foundation of beginning reading is often absent for children born into these families. Going beyond reading aloud, parents who read to their children in combination with literacy strategies contributed the most to positive eects. Senechals (2006) metaanalytic review of parent programs concluded that fourteen intervention studies involving 1174 families showed that overall parent involvement had a positive im-
Page 3
pact on childrens reading acquisition. Parent programs where parents were taught specic literacy skills to use with their children were twice as eective compared to those where parents listened to their children read and six times more eective than those where parents were encouraged to read to their children. Toomey (1993) reinforces that parents listening to their children read contributed to reading improvement of their children. Toomey adds that parents who were given simple but specic strategies on how to read books sent home from school fared better than students whose parents were given general strategies. In another study conducted by Topping and Lindsay (1992), paired reading was a strategy seen to benet children. Investigations by Bus, van Ijzendoorn, & Pellegrini, (1995) of the reading strategy joint book reading revealed an overall positive association between parents reading to their children and childrens emergent literacy or reading achievement. Darling & Westberg (2004) agree that the most eective form of parent involvement, producing the best results, is training parents to use a specic reading strategy. ey argue that the strategy should be one that children are working on in school. ey refer to the Family Fluency Program that combined teacher training and working with children at school with workshops for parents. Parents were taught a number of dierent reading strategies such as echo reading, choral reading, partner reading and repeated reading to help support their children at home. e children also participated in the parent workshops and practiced these strategies together with support from the trainers. e Cooperative Extension Children, Youth and Families team in Nevada used storytelling as their strategy. ey initiated a family program named Family Storyteller in 1997. e program held 41 workshops to reach target families and community programs. e program aimed to get books into childrens hands and improve their early literacy skills. e child and parent participated in activities together during a series of six workshops. e children were encouraged to enjoy reading and the parents learned what to do to help their children. ere was a positive response from parents and families who participated in the program with results showing that their children made signicant gains in their enjoyment of reading with parents and an increased understanding of print concepts. Darling and Westbergs (2004) investigation of twenty interventions reinforces the positive eects of parent involvement on childrens reading acquisition. Training parents to teach their children reading with specic exercises produced greater results than training parents to listen to children read with or without training. Training parents to listen to their children read was two times more eective than having parents listen to their children without training. Interventions four months or shorter were more eective than interventions longer than ve months. e amount of training and feedback parents received had no impact on the eec-
Page 4
tiveness of the intervention. Parent involvement had a positive eect on all children K-3 Socio economic status of the participating families did not impact on the positive eect of the interventions e Complexity of Community and Family inuences on Childrens Achievement in New Zealand: Best Evidence Synthesis (2003) concluded that: Parents and caregivers can have a signicant inuence on childrens achievement Parents want the best for their children Many parents are prepared to learn appropriate strategies to help them. e New Zealand Quality Teaching for Diverse Students in Schooling: Best Evidence Synthesis (2003) found that quality teaching eects are enhanced when there are eective school-home partnership practices which are focused on student learning. Prevention rather than cure Research by Snow, Barnes, Chandler, Goodman, and Hemphill (1991) demonstrates that children from homes where parents model the uses of literacy and engage children in activities that promote basic understandings about literacy and its uses are better prepared for school. A number of projects focus on supporting parents as the childs rst literacy educator. For example, the project Support at Home for Early Language and Literacies (SHELLS) is an early literacy intervention program developed by sta at the University of Newcastle with an emphasis on rural and remote communities. It is a home-based program for parents with children aged 0-3. Home visits, group meetings, telephone contact, community radio, and newsletters are the means of communication. e program aims to: a. Support childrens literacy by empowering their parents and caregivers in their role as their childrens rst literacy educators b. Learn more about the foundations of literacy. Among the outcomes observed are positive changes in family literacy experiences and interactions as well as increased condence among parents and caregivers in their literacy educator role. Further, the intervention has provided a collaborative model for early literacy partnerships between researchers and parents. (Eakle & Garber, 2003). According to Purcell-Gates (2000), the number of children failing is signicantly reduced when parents co operate actively in their childrens school education right from the start. In addition, evidence suggests that when teachers and parents partner to support childrens reading and academic achievement, at-risk children exhibit demonstrable gains (US Dept of Education 2001, Longitudinal Evaluation of School Change and Performance in Title I Schools).
Page 5
De ning parent education programs and family literacy

e nature and composition of Australian families is changing. According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics, decreases in marriage rates and increases in divorce rates over the past twenty years have resulted in changing family structures within Australia. Increases in the proportion of babies being born outside registered marriages and increases in cohabitation provide evidence that registered marriage as the traditional social institution for family formation is declining. e use of words such as parent education and family literacy has taken on dierent connotations as a result of the changing nature of families. Family members, other than mothers and fathers, help children at home. ere is a growing involvement of grandparents as primary carers and providers of education support. If parent education and family literacy initiatives are to be inclusive, the changing nature of families and the diversity of communities and cultures must be reected in the naming of such programs. Recognizing and valuing dierent forms of literacy and the many ways literacy is supported in homes and communities means that parent education programs must embrace diverse cultural and linguistic contexts. Mui & Anderson (2008) state that: Families are sites for myriad forms of literacy, not just storybook reading Dierent family members, not just parents, play a role A complex set of interaction patterns, not just parents or other signicant others transmit reading and writing skills to children in a unidirectional manner (p. 240) Mace (1998) and Anderson, Streelasky & Anderson (2007) reject the stereotypes often associated with family literacy the mother reading a book with her young child is all too often the norm and appeared as the dominant image on one hundred randomly selected family literacy websites. e literature classies parent education according to broad categories. Nickse (1991) identies three types of literacy programs: ose delivered directly to adults and children, for example, Project ROAR (Texas US), REAL Project (Northern England), Fathers Literacy Program (US), Family Literacy Program (Canada), Paired Reading (Canada), Family Fluency Program (New Jersey) , Fast Start (US), Bridges to Literacy (Southeastern US), Project EASE (US), Even Start (US), BLT (US), Family Storyteller (US), PALS (Canada) and FAB:ulous (US). ose delivered to children only with benets for parents, for example, Reading Clinic (US) ose delivered to parents with expected benets for children, for example, Parents As Teachers Home Visiting Program (Missouri), Reading Together (New Zealand), Toyota Families in Schools Program (US), Intergenerational Literacy Project (US)
Page 6
Another classication of parent involvement involves the location of the program (Fantuzzo et al 2000; Hill and Craft, 2003): School-based i.e., activities that occur in school environment - volunteering in classrooms, fundraising, for example, Intergenerational Literacy project (US) Home-school-conferencing communicating between school and home e.g. attending parent teacher interviews, discuss daily routines, for example, Project Ease Home based learning that takes place in the home, reviewing homework, for example, Paired Reading (Canada) More specic classications refer to the focus of instruction as indicated by e Barbara Bush Foundation (2001) as cited in (Lilly & Green, 2004). A four pronged approach to family literacy programs is identied: adult literacy instruction emergent literacy experiences for children time for parents and children to be together group discussions for parents. Family literacy on the other hand is more encompassing and has two broad denitions. e rst refers to the many ways parents and a child interacts around texts and usually takes into consideration the day to day interactions that occur in the home. Understanding the myriad ways dierent households support literacy in a multicultural and multilingual context is essential to the variety of family literacy programs created. Clay (1993) claims that the denitions of literacy, the values and functions ascribed to it, and the ways in which it is taught and learned vary from one cultural group and social context to another (Clay, 1993). e second refers to family literacy as a program or curriculum aligned with parent and carer type programs that have a focus on preparing children for success in school.
Essential criteria associated with e ective parent education programs

Hands on approach e literature accentuates the need for parent education programs to be practical and comprehensible. e emphasis is in helping parents understand why particular practices and strategies are important. Parents benet from opportunities to discuss and practice literacy routines before implementing them on their own at home through communication channels that are open, dependable, non intrusive (Shockley, Michalove & Allen 1995, p.94). A workshop approach to family involvement should be a dynamic, relevant opportunity for families Participants should be active, participating in tasks and activities. Participants should be considered equals and current strategies in the home should be recognised. Communication with parents is vitally important
Page 7
for building integrated, collaborative literacy partnerships with families. (Lilly & Green, 2004). Parent education must provide ongoing training, communication, and support. Training includes demonstrations, opportunities for discussion and questions. It is not uncommon for parents to feel threatened about their own lack of education or ability to read. erefore, the course needs to be sensitive to the needs of parents and meet them where ever they are at, with ongoing support and personal contact. Provide authentic reading texts A key to success is parents reading to children. In reading aloud they model eective reading and point out pertinent text features. Parents who listen to their children read aloud provide the necessary support for their children to succeed. Texts must be authentic and interesting. Parent courses that provide a choice of reading materials and resources are most supportive of parents eorts. Activities are easy, enjoyable and consistent Time is an important consideration of a home reading program and ten to fteen minutes ve nights a week is an adequate request. Routines should be simple and easily established as part of a nightly routine. Documented home activities Eective programs encourage parents to document their home involvement. Often it is suggested that parents maintain a log of activities posted in an obvious place. e log serves not only as a reminder, but also documentation of the learners progress and involvement in the program. Build parents and child con dence through quality and appropriate literature Families need to provide children with opportunities to access books that will enhance their perception of competence with print (Barnes et al 2000). Often parent education programs are accompanied by a family lending library. e libraries provide an ideal way to encourage the families literacy opportunities at home. It gives parents the chance to continue with literacy strategies in the home. e lending library gives children access to texts that they are excited to read. Accessibility According to Morrow et al (2006) involving parents as an integral part of literacy instruction is crucial. Letting parents know how they can help to support the school program at home is important, but homeschool programs need to be easy to use. e timing and availability of courses is important. Most courses were conducted after school hours. Others oered child care. e Intergenerational Literacy Project
Page 8
oered child care to parents below school age whilst parents attended courses run concurrently with school hours. Follow up included home visits. In order to strengthen the accessibility of a program, there were a number of parent programs combined with other services such as health and social services, for example, Even Start (US). Parents involved in the planning Come and Fredericks (1995) found that the key ingredient to the success of the program was the involvement of the parents in the planning. Families engage in widely dierent literacy experiences and practices in their homes and communities. It is important to continually recognise and respect the unique and diering ways families participate and promote literacy in their homes. An eective parent program builds upon what is already happening in the home and encourages parents to share their literacy experiences with their children. A simple, open-ended questionnaire or interviews are helpful ways to compile this information quickly and easily. (Lilly & Green, 2004). According to Strickland (2004), successful parent education programs are sustained and consistent over time. ey go well beyond specic program activities to include strong parent outreach in every aspect of home-school relations. e FAB:ulous program goes beyond this brief to endorse the notion of planning as part of a selfeducative function of the program. e FAB:ulous program recommends that an inclusive team be indentied to create the program and that the planning function be self-educative. Longwell-Grice & McIntyre, (2006) claim that through self-education, facilitators are empowered and communities grow. When developing the Family Literacy Program in Rural Atlantic Canada, the following characteristics were considered as essential that the program should be: Meaningful to the participants and situated in the family and community context (Brown, 1998) Involve parents in the planning Include activities that are family based Implement ongoing assessment Families created social networks among each other in the groups (Newman, Caperelli & Kee, 1998). e Bridges to Literacy project reported by Waldbart , Meyers and Meyers (2006) conveys the idea of making connections between home and school. Bridges to Literacy aims to enhance the quality of childrens literacy interactions with family members and simultaneously increase family involvement at schools. Implications of the project contradict the characterization of many parents who are marginalized due to race or class as having low expectations and being unwilling to be involved in their childrens schools.
Page 9
Meyers, Dowdy, & Paterson (2000) raise the issue of invisible families those who are reluctant to participate and rarely seen at school events. ey point out that the Majority perspectives of parent involvement make assumptions that may be incompatible with the customs and actions concerning the involvement of non majority families. is mismatch between expectations and behaviours contribute to tensions between caregivers and educators (p.60). Re ect the literacy practices associated with what families already know and do in their home and community Students learn to read and write when families provide literacy rich environments, experiences and interactions. e most eective literacy practices are those that reect the literacy practices associated with what families already know and do in their home and community (Nistler and Maiers, 2000; Saracho, 2002a; Tett 2000). Mui & Anderson (2008) stress that As teachers work with increasing numbers of children and families from dierent cultural groups, it is essential that they recognize and value the dierent ways that literacy is supported in homes and communities (p.234). is notion is well supported in the literature. Planning literacy strategies in the home after identifying what the focus should be is a way to ensure a strong literacy environment for children. For example, if a family has a strong oral tradition the focus may then become involvement with written text. Planning the writing of a shopping list, scribing a story or researching a topic on the Internet will begin to change the focus to the written text. (Lilly & Green, 2004). Reading together research demonstrates that partnerships between home and school help to raise childrens achievement and to bridge cultures, thereby reducing the negative eects that can occur when the childs language and culture dier from those of the school (Biddulph, 1983; Biddulph, 2004a; Biddulph & Tuck, 1983). In the Clarke Elementary School case study conducted by Graves Smith (2006), one of the most important ndings was related to the consideration for the needs of families. It was found that understanding the neighbourhood was critical for successful development of the parent/family program. Assessing the community led to the creation of a program that parents attended and were enthusiastic about. It was suggested that low socio economic school/communities may have diering concerns or willingness when compared with middle to upper class schools/communities. is information was essential to consider in guiding the program. Parent programs must overtly ground their eorts in needs as perceived by the communities they serve. It is recommended that once a potential program is conceived, specic plans should be outlined to engage the target population in the planning process. According to Strickland (1996) planning should highlight and build on the
Page 10
strengths of the community to be served. In addition, Strickland claims that when a community has limited resources, programs should be targeted to the most needy. Incentives A number of programs that oered incentives for parents to attend are identied in the literature. Single parent families, immigrant and low socio-economic families were provided with incentives such as child care. e Family Fluency Program in New Jersey targeted parents of children in Grade 2 from low-socio-economic areas. e program catered for families by running three evening workshops where children, parents and siblings attended together. Parents were instructed in a workshop whilst the children and siblings were cared for in another room. Later in the evening, parents and children worked together to put the reading activities into practice. Other incentives oered to help parents attend included the serving of refreshments and certicates such as VIP Certicates for Very Involved Parents. A number of programs oered incentives such as book give-aways and family dinners (Project FAB:ulous) and meal sharing (PALS Program). In the PALS Program, parents were identied as working in the program but in reality this term included caregivers such as grandparents, siblings, aunts and uncles and other caregivers. REAL Project oered an optional adult education component leading to accreditation of parents learning, which gave the opportunity for parents to continue their learning in a more formal or structured way. Project ROAR oered monetary incentives to encourage participation such as payment of $10 per session attended by parents and a $25 bonus on completion of the course (Project ROAR) and the Literacy Connection provided gift certicates. Bene ts e benets of parent education programs cannot be underestimated. e outcomes of such programs are multifaceted and impact not only on the literacy outcomes of children but often have desirable outcomes for parents in areas of condence building, improved literacy, and a developing sense of community. Schools benet from parent education in that parents share the responsibility in an informed way on how to help children identied as struggling readers and supplement school-based interventions. e benets of parent programs identied in the literature are outlined below. Added value Parent education programs can be designed to serve both parents to improve their literacy skills as well as enhance the learning of their children. According to Paratore (2005) the outcomes of such programs are:
Page 11
To teach the codes needed to participate fully in the mainstream of American life (Delpit, 1995, p.45) To uncover and build on the household funds of knowledge present in all families (Moll & Greenberg, 1991) Research by Darling & Westberg (2004) reinforced these ndings stating that literacy development through intentional activities and strategies that engage parents in their childrens reading acquisition had positive results. As parents learn about the essential skills for reading and practice those skills with their children, they can support their childrens reading acquisition while improving their own (p.776). Handel (1999) claims that family literacy programs seek to enhance the literacy of both generations through participation of family members in a co ordinated literacy program. Bene ts for Fathers Despite the lack of research around the involvement of fathers in literacy programs, one particular case study by Lenters (2007) looks closely at the role families and specically, the roles that fathers play in encouraging young children to become engaged with literacy. roughout the case study, a boy aged eight and his father were heavily involved in the literacy practice of the family. e boys father shared his favourite novels with his son, and the boy in turn shared his favourite books with his father. e father had a keen interest in cartoons which led to the sharing of his comics and the development of cartooning skills when illustrating his writing. e boys father also had an electric guitar and the boy took an early interest in playing the instrument. Later, this led to song writing and reading musician magazines together. Both parents played an important role in this young boys literacy world, encouraging the use of computers and research on the Internet, using genres of interest for personal writing, reading quality literature, turning plays into book making and writing play scripts. e ndings of this study concluded that fathers play an important role in the literacy development of their children. e mothers role in this young boys literacy development is by no means negligible; however the boys literate practice had been shaped by his fathers participation in the literacy practice. In the Fathers Literacy Program, it was apparent that fathers had to see the practical application and meaningful nature of the content that was presented. It was found that fathers engaged in literacy practices in the following ways: 1. Stimulated children to explore written language. Fathers demonstrated reading and writing and discussed the importance of reading and writing with their children and the children tended to imitate their behavior. 2. Built on knowledge from the community. Fathers used their own interests and this seemed to motivate the children in print. Literacy related to the daily realities of the children. Fathers selected books that were of interest to the child but also reinforced the father child relationship.
Page 12
3. By embedding literacy in community and family life fathers developed a sense of community and closer relationships with the childs school. Fathers and children composed joint texts and experienced many writing genres. Reassurance for parents Parent programs provide a venue for parents to share their grievances, celebrate their successes and realize that they are not alone in their quest to improve their childrens literacy skills. Newmen, Caperelli, & Kee (1998) found that families created social networks within the group. Guilt and shame often associated with reading failure was alleviated because the parent was involved in addressing the issues with the guidance of trained literacy educators. ey became familiar with strategies for success and a resolution to a lingering problem about which they lacked knowledge and understanding. Parents enrolled in the PALS program regarded highly the role of the facilitator, who helped them develop their understanding of the reading process. Some parents in this program had traditional views of literacy learning, prompted by memories of their school days. It was found that parents soon became comfortable with a more expansive and contemporary view. After print walks, they commented on how unaware they had been regarding the value of the environment in extending their childrens literacy experience. (Anderson & Morrison, 2007). In addition, effective courses often give parents the condence and language with which to discuss their childs learning with the classroom teacher. A review of a parent literacy initiative, Parents as Literacy Supporters (PALS) in 2007 concluded that the program helped parents gain condence in their own abilities as literacy users. Parents were given an opportunity to address their insecurities around literacy and working with their children. e program also promoted communication about literacy with other adults. (Anderson & Morrison, 2007). Parents of the PALS program also recognized how the program provided an opportunity to form and maintain social relationships. Parents stated that the program made them feel a part of something and fostered communication between parents and school sta which enhanced the childs learning in both settings (Anderson & Morrison, 2007). Building and restoring relationships with children Often the relationship between parent and child is fractured when the child fails to learn despite the parents best eorts to teach. Parent education programs provide a means of restoring the bond using strategies geared for success and fun. A number of programs involved parents working alongside their children as they received instructions. Spending time with the child as part of the program proved positive, for example, throughout the PALS program, parents worked one on one with their children. Many parents reported that they lived increasingly busy lives and they valued the time they shared in the sessions with their children. (Anderson & Morrison, 2007).
Page 13
Parents who participated in the PALS program observed that the parent/child bond had formed and strengthened during their time in the program. Parents stated that they valued their time in the program and participating in literacy activities that would not have happened if they did not attend the program (Anderson & Morrison, 2007). Bene ts to schools and communities Darling and Hayes (1996) report that K-12 schools that have high success rates usually also have high rates of parental involvement. Schools also benet when university reading services oer reading clinics as a component of undergraduate reading-methods courses. Research found that graduates of the excellent programs were more eective than teachers in comparison groups in creating and engaging their students with a highquality literacy environment (Homan et al 2005, p.267). According to Morrow (1999) and Weinberger (1996), there is a need for researchers and teacher educators to help pre service teachers understand the multiple literacy environments of the childrens homes and consider how to use this information to foster eective home and school interactions. Snow, Burns and Grin (1998) contend that Teacher preparation programs need to do a better job of building conceptual links between classroom, clinical and eld-based experiences in ways that will prepare future teachers to apply their course work and other pre service experiences to their teaching practice (p. 219). e university reading clinics have three benets. 1. Provide training for in-service teachers at the university as they tutor students in reading. 2. Provide experience for pre-service teachers in applying what they had learn in the university classroom 3. Provide tutoring in reading for students and their families. Sargent et al (2006) contend that parents perceive university reading clinics as extremely benecial not only to their children but to the whole community. Parents believe their children gain a more positive approach to reading as well as improved prociency in reading, condence and self-esteem. e FAB:ulous program in the US focused on community literacy and ways for parents to discover that literacy is really more than just being able to read a book or write a story. (Longwell-Grice & McIntyre, 2006).
Page 14
Bene ts to students Improved student results Research evidence shows that parent involvement has a positive and strong inuence on student achievement (Jordon, Snow & Porche, 2000, Westat & Policy Studies Associates, 2001). In addition, evidence suggests that parent involvement at home has a more signicant impact on children than it does in school activities (Christenson & Sheridan, 2001). According to a student performance survey developed by the National Center for Family Literacy, teachers rated children participating in the Toyota Families in Schools (TFS) Program higher in nine domains including academic performance, motivation to learn, support from family and likelihood of future school success. e TFS program targets primary school children from low socioeconomic, immigrant and Hispanic families and their parents. e program educates parents in basic literacy skills such as phonemic awareness, phonics, uency, vocabulary and text comprehension (Darling & Westberg, 2004). In a parental involvement program at Clarke Elementary School (US) in 2002, Graves Smith (2006) reported that teachers and family workers involved in the program believed that children with engaged parents would be more successful at school, scoring higher on tests and earning higher grades. It was found that children who had parents participating had improved motivation as a positive outcome stemming from the parents belief s that literacy education was important. Teachers who participated in this program also reported that the children had an improved self esteem in the classroom and were able to complete homework at a higher level.
Page 15
Programs delivered to adults in order to bene t children

Duration
15 weeks Basic literacy skills, One on one direct trainreading to their chiling dren, self-identied literacy needs Kindergarten story Group sessions for partelling, public library ents choosing books, puppetry, poetry Individual program based on families existing literacy practices Support for parents to develop literacy skills Parent modeled : holding a book, Previewing a book, reading aloud Culture-valued Learner goal driven Make reading fun Gift Certicate incentives for parents Introduce library procedures, storytelling, reading to children, puppets and literacy games, reading and writing poetry $10 paid per session to parents attending, $25 bonus at nal session Opportunities for learning, recognition of the childs activities, interaction with the child on literacy activities, model of a literacy user, ORIM Framework including four strands of literacy environmental print, books, writing, oral language
Title
Audience
Location
Focus
Delivery Mode
Content
Literacy Parents Connection
Texas US
Project ROAR
Parents and Kindergarten children
Texas US Elementary School low socio-economic area
10 sessions Once a month 2hours 5.30-7.30pm
REAL Project
3 year olds and Northern England 18 months their parents from socio-economically disadvantaged community Randomly selected from dierent school waiting lists 5 months
Fathers Fathers and their Literacy Kindergarten Program children
University of Maryland MD
Home visits, provision of literacy resources, centrebased group activities, special events, postal communication, optional adult education component leading to accreditation Fathers and their eect on their childrens literacy
3 hour literacy workshops, twice a week over 5 months
Provision of objects and materials in the home environment, development of strategies to enhance communication and extend the childrens understanding of new information Process: fathers select a book, read it to the child, interact with the child, complete activity, write
Page 16
Title
12 sessions for 1 hour Preparation of Undergraduate teachers to teach literacy skills Improved reading skills for children 10 weeks Literacy skills as 1.5 hours per identied by the week parents 6 training sessions Home visits Expert tutors train parents and then supervise them through home visits One on one teaching Read familiar text, guided contextual reading, Parent contact before and skills and strategies, personal reading and writparent/child/tutor confer- ing (Walker Model) ence at the end
Audience
Location
Duration
Focus
Delivery Mode
Content
Reading Clinic
Grades 1-8
US
Family 10 families identi- Canada Literacy ed on a needs Program basis- low literacy levels
Paired Reading
Parents with Kindergarten children recognised as at-risk
Quebec Canada
Parents as Teachers Home Visiting Program Reading Together 7 weeks 75 minute sessions for parents
Not stated
Child development, School readiness, Encouraging school enrolment Early literacy
10 parent modules and 10 Homework, parenting and discipline, decoding child modules and phonics, literacy in and around the home, uency, guided reading, comprehension, language experience, word recognition, working with schools Paired Reading Strategy Child chooses a book taught to parents Simultaneous reading (parent and child read Flash cards letters and along together with parent modeling, indesyllable-materials such pendent reading (child signals when they want as high interest books to take over and continue until coming to a supplied mistake or faltering for longer than 4 seconds). e parent resumes reading until the next child signal. Home visits Principles of child development Parent group meetings Model activities, Kindergarten teacher Reading to children, training Enrolling them in preschool, facilitate access to social and supportive services Reading process, learn to read, strategies, constructive support, selecting material, reect and discuss experiences
Page 17
Pre-natal to Missouri Kindergarten program Children tested as to school readiness Parents of ChilNew Zealand dren 5-15 years old (Research Project originally involved 9-10 year old children and their parents)
Parent workshops Enable parents to support their children with reading at home - originally designed for struggling readers but claims it can be used with competent readers as well
Title
Various depending on the project group One year Improved uency in Reading Parent education to help support their children in early literacy ESL courses, childrens education, parenting education, Parent and Child Together (PACT) activities, and computerliteracy instruction. Teachers were trained and delivered a 90-minute program to students every day Reading books were sent home twice a week based on the lessons in class 3 Evening Parent workshops Children and siblings attended as well but went to another room with teacher supervision and then worked with their parents at the end of the evening Various lengths programs from 5 to 11 weeks Improve reading skills of children through home involvement 10-15 minute daily session with parent and child Phonics, phonemic awareness, uency, vocabulary, text comprehension, print concepts, writing
Audience
Location
Duration
Focus
Delivery Mode
Content
TFS Toyota Families in Schools Program Family Fluency Program
Parents of chilUS many locadren K-3 grade tions who are identied as at-risk, Hispanic/immigrant families Parents and New Jersey, US students from low socio-economic areas Children in second-grade and their parents
Fast Start Primary grade students and parents
US
Developing uency through reading activities such as: Echo reading- where the parent reads a line and the child reads the same line after, gradually increasing the number of lines read and echoed as the childs reading improves (one story per week) Choral reading Child and parent read the same text aloud together (twice a week) Partner Reading Child and parent take turns reading. Begin by reading one sentence each and as uency improves, read longer passages (once a week) Repeated Reading Read the same book or story more than once a week Incentives to help get parents to come along included serving refreshments and certicates VIP Very Involved Parents Provision of authentic reading texts, parent training in proven and eective strategies, ongoing training and communication, make activities enjoyable, simple and brief(10-15 minutes), document home activities
Page 18
Title
Year long Creating strong communication between school and home Teaching parents literacy practices to support their children at home In-class and modeled activities after school Home visits Newsletters Lending library
Audience
Location
Duration
Focus
Delivery Mode
Content
Bridges to Literacy
Kindergarten stu- Southeastern US dents and parents at a federally funded program for disadvantaged children school
Intergenerational Literacy Project
Chelsea Massachusetts US
Project EASE (Early Access to Success in Education)
New immigrant families to America with preschool and elementary school children Kindergarten Children and their Parents
US
3 workshops Parents develop and extend their own English literacy and support their childrens literacy development One year Increase frequency and quality of language interactions through book centred activities, share information for engagement
In-class modeling to parents of balanced literacy based on Fountas and Pinnell (1998) framework Question and Answer session with teachers and parents Lending library After school modeling of small group guided reading for parents Tip-Sheet sent home about Paired Reading Home visits including demonstrations of Paired-reading Semi-structured interviews 2 hour parent classes run Childcare is provided for children below concurrently with chilschool age drens school classes Reading and writing focused on comprehension Ideas for helping to support their childrens literacy at home Parent education, atStrengthen vocabulary, extend narrative underschool parent/child standing, letter recognition, sound awareness, activities, at-home medi- narrative retellings, understand expositions ated activities
Page 19
Title
Yearly Direct Service Home visits Links with other agencies emed units built around childrens books
Audience
Location
Duration
Focus
Delivery Mode
Content
Even Start
Parents and Chil- US dren
BLT Parents and their Build- pre-school chiling Lan- dren guage Together Six workshops and at home activities
US
4 work shops and follow up activities at home
Focus on literacy learning of child while parent acts as facilitator
Family Storyteller
Parents and their preschool children
US - Nevada
ParParents and 3-5 ents as year old children Literacy Supporters (PALS)
Canada
Focus is to encourage families to read and to give parents strategies for helping beginning readers. Across ve Kindergarten teacher schools, 10 runs the program -15 workfocusing on early shops every literacy, language and fortnight mathematics skills. were held, Encourage, promote including and value literacy reection activities that engage session at the families in the home. end
Early childhood education Adult literacy Parenting Education Interactive Literacy activities for parents and children Focus is on family reading including choosing literature, reading aloud together, and activities based on reading, promoting positive attitudes and self esteem. Four Parent workshops Language based activities, book centred, variwhich include parent ety to choose from, follow up activities to do at child interaction time home including many hands-on Vocabulary, narrative understanding, noncactivities tion text, phonological awareness, letter recognition, parent instruction Group sessions with Book orientation, reading strategies, modeling parents and children and viewing quality materials and literature. participating in activities including video, role play and materials e group sat and ate Alphabet, early mathematics development, dinner with the children computers/ technology, learning to write, enrst, discussion around vironmental print, and reading with children. the topic was introduced, ere were sessions left free for requests from one on one activities with the parents parents and children, literacy centres were set up so that parents and children could learn together, reection was at the end of each session
Page 20
Title
Family Night Family literacy four month project around books period and literacy. Build on families knowledge and interests, teach specic ways families can assist their children with literacy. Dinner was oered rst Spelling, grammar, phonics and a four block then a skill was taught reading approach. e sessions included media and the parents would try and critical literacy as well as speaking. with their children.
Audience
Location
Duration
Focus
Delivery Mode
Content
FAB: ulous
Parents and primary school children
US
Page 21
Course components
e content covered in most programs is not described in detail. e components listed below were extracted from across all programs researched and exist to varying degrees. In some cases, the focus was on one reading area such as uency and the strategies selected reinforce that one area. In what follows are the types of activities, strategies and content associated with the diverse array of programs available. e lack of in-depth descriptions make it only possible to provide a general overview of what these programs entail. Strategies for prompting In many cases, parents were taught strategies for helping children identify unfamiliar words. Parents were encouraged to use context clues, meaning, and phonic clues. Parents were discouraged from giving direct prompts. ey were encouraged to praise their child and delay intervention when the child struggled with a word. Modeling Many programs advocated for parents to demonstrate reading aloud. Modeling also involved the use of specic strategies such as paired reading, simultaneous reading, choral reading, and shared reading. Vocabulary In some programs, parents were instructed on the importance of vocabulary and how vocabulary impacts on reading. Examples of strategies include: how to use extended conversations, book reading, dramatic play, outside activities, sorting and classifying objects, brainstorming words around a topic chosen by the child and being a scribe for dictated stories. e literature supports the inclusion of vocabulary especially with parents with ESL backgrounds. As Gadsden (2000) points out a child from economically disadvantaged homes or homes where English is a second language often has diculty learning to read. However it is vital that parent education programs cover a range of literacy components and not just reading. Studies by Hart & Risley (2003) found a stunning dierence in childrens access to language. In their study of 42 families, children from the wealthiest families heard over more than 1500 words each hour on average, than children from the poorest families (616 vs. 2153). Over four years this amounts to a 32 million word dierence. In addition, they went on to show that the childrens rate of vocabulary growth and vocabulary use at age 3 was closely associated with their grade three standardized test scores (Hart and Risley, 2003). Wordless picture books and print walks were used in the Parents as Literacy Supporters (PALS) program to help families from cultural backgrounds continue their tradition and passion for story telling. It also gave families who could not read or
Page 22
speak English well the opportunity to participate in the activity (Anderson & Morrison, 2007). Story reading at home Some programs instructed parents on how to read stories at home. Stories were seen to oer unique language opportunities, present rare words, broaden childs horizons, instill condence, and support the development of comprehension skills through retelling, dramatic play, and story extensions. Print related concepts Parents were taught about concepts of print, phonological awareness and alphabetical principles. In some cases, the following ideas were shared: sorting food according to beginning sound, using alphabet books, reading and learning nursery rhymes, and playing with alliteration. Variety of text types Parents were instructed in the use of many texts types. Some programs had a particular preference for one text type such as nonction texts that was introduced as a means of capitalizing on the curiosity of the child. Other programs recommended the use of environmental print, expository texts, factual texts, and the use of scribed texts dictated by the child. Choosing a book Methods of book selection were often considered in parent programs, for example, the ve nger rule was given as a guide to choosing books. Book orientations were used in many programs to introduce the child to a book and scaold their success. Behaviour management and discipline Some programs included a component that examined ways to manage the childs behaviour and improve parent-child relationships. Ways to establish and maintain eective parent-child communication was also a feature of some programs. Additional areas covered A number of programs included a component on spelling and writing. A few programs integrated mathematics activities and strategies to assist children at home.
Evaluating parent education programs

e research reveals that the most common evaluation practices were interviews, observations and questionnaires/surveys. In most programs, these evaluations were
Page 23
conducted prior to the commencement of the program and then again at the conclusion of the program. Other factors considered in evaluations included: levels of family participation (Wagner et al, 2002) frequency of reading sessions (Hannon and Jackson, 1987, Whitehurst et al 1994) number of books shared with children (Whitehurst et al, 1994) extent of their involvement as reported by parent (Hebbeler and GerlachDownie 2002) Analysis of reports and records of those delivering the programs (Pfannenstiel and Seltzer, 1989) Dropout rate (Wagner et al, 2002) Parent reports in combination with outcome measures for children (Kirkpatrick, 2004) One program which focused on fathers and their children (Saracho, 2007) used observations; samples of childrens work; photographs; in-depth periodic interviews with children, fathers and teachers; video of fathers working with their children and eld notes written in a notebook. ese evaluations provided a description of the learning process. e results of this program were fathers focused on the family and community environments; they chose activities and strategies they most felt comfortable with; and were engaged in formal and informal literacy activities involving both the parent and child. For this particular program to be successful, fathers needed to be actively involved and interested and engaged in the literacy activity and willing to share their interests with their child. ey were asked to select a book with their child, read the book to the child, follow with an activity and to write a story together. Results showed that fathers used their own personal style and interests to carry out the strategies they learned in the literacy program. (Saracho, 2007). Family literacy programs are evaluated based on student outcomes, (Wagner, Spiker & Linn, 2002) Evaluations of the programs researched showed that the programs were most eective when: parents as well as teachers were trained (Whitehurst et al, 1994) parent involvement was crucial to the success of the program [as opposed to dropping their children o for tutoring] (Wagner, Spiker & Linn, 2002)
Implications and recommendations

Parents are an over-looked resource, readily available, and keen to assist in the education of struggling readers. However, the constraint of not being able to access
Page 24
quality education programs that support childrens learning restricts their eorts. Parents are often left feeling bewildered, frustrated and inadequate and children not only continue to struggle, but often suer the consequences of their parents guilt. e name parent education is misleading and restrictive. Most programs cater for a diverse range of carers mothers, fathers, step parents, aunties, uncles, grandparents, siblings all participating with the hope of improving literacy outcomes for children in their care. Research in parent education is limited. Few programs were found to address the needs of children beyond the early years. Rightfully, the emphasis has been on prevention (ages 0-5) and supporting success for young children. However, many children continue to fail beyond grade 2 and the chances of parents receiving assistance appears to diminish. Assisting parents to support their children at any stage of reading development is crucial if the concerns of illiteracy are to be addressed. e following recommendations are made on the basis of the research ndings. e gaps in the research literature highlight the need to examine the role of fathers, school involvement in parent education, evaluation of programs and sustainability and quality of eective programs. Quality strategies Eective programs combine parent education (such as an understanding of the reading process) with the provision of a range of researched strategies to implement at home. Prior to undertaking a parent program, parents usually draw on their memories of schooling and what they recall of their own literacy experiences when working with their children. Providing a repertoire of strategies and an understanding of why they are important is empowering to the parent and benecial to struggling readers. Ease of access Eective programs oer: A broad range of times, for example, during school time, afterschool, weekends Multiple modes of delivery, for example, online, hotline, home visits Incentives such as child care, links to other service providers, certicates of achievement Resources Eective programs make available resources to complement the education program. A range of quality literature including many text types is on hand for children to borrow. Authentic and high interest literature and student choice are factors to be considered in the selection of resources.
Page 25
Research Parent education is under researched. e role of fathers and the growing involvement of grandparents in childrens education are just two areas where the literature is lacking. If funding bodies, education departments and researchers are committed to improving education for parents and ultimately literacy outcomes for children, the following pertinent questions require further investigation: What sustains an eective program? What are the essential components of programs that produce results and improve learning outcomes for children? What do parents really need to know about literacy to better prepare them to help their children at home? How do communities assist in the planning and presentation of workshops in order to address the specic needs of cultural groups, invisible families and families in need? What can schools do to enroll parents in supporting quality learning outcomes for their children? What is being done to improve literacy outcomes for students beyond Year 2? Why are boys failing and how can fathers be supported to play more active roles in literacy learning? Technology Parent education courses provide an opportunity to show case best practice and demonstrate technology as the medium of todays education. For struggling readers, it can be an incentive to explore new ways of engaging with texts, provide fun and entertainment while reading, and give readers access to information about topics of interest. It is the ideal resource to supplement ongoing literacy practices in the home. No program mentioned the use of technology to assist parents nor the use of software programs designed to support struggling readers. Accountability and evaluation From the research, it is apparent that parent programs use a variety of evaluative measures to assess the eectiveness of programs. e benets of programs are multifaceted and research that accounts for improvements in student literacy outcomes, attitudinal changes, outcomes for parents, benets to schools and communities, and the long term impact on childrens literacy achievement must be considered. e use of evaluative information to inform and improve programs in the future is essential.
Page 26
References
Anderson, J. & Morrison, F. (2007) A Great program for me as a Gramma: Caregivers Evaluate a Family Literacy initiative. Canadian Journal of Education 30, 1: 68-89. Anderson, Streelasky & Anderson (2007). Representing and promoting family literacy on the World Wide Web: A critical analysis. e Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 53(2), 143-156. Australian Bureau of Statistics. (July 2008). Adult Literacy and Life Skills Survey, Summary Results, Australia. Retrieved on 25th February, 2009 from: www.independentschoolparents.com.au/ news/2008/abs_literacy_survey.html Barnes, W. S., Snow, C. E., Hemphill, L., Chandler, J., & Goodman, I. F. (2000). Unfullled expectations: Home and school inuences on literacy. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Biddulph, J. (1983). A group program to train parents of children with reading diculties to tutor their children at home. Unpublished MA Research Report, University of Canterbury, Christchurch. Biddulph, J. (2004). Reading Together: Suggestions for helping children with reading at home. Hamilton, NZ: e Biddulph Group. Biddulph, J. & Tuck, B. (1983). Assisting parents to help their children with reading at home. Paper presented to the Annual New Zealand Association for Research in Education Conference, Wellington. Biddulph, F., Biddulph, J. and Biddulph, C. (2003). e Complexity of Community and Family Inuences on Childrens Achievement in New Zealand: Best Evidence Synthesis Iteration (BES). New Zealand Ministry of Education Bronsteins, P. (1984) Dierences in mothers and fathers behaviour towards children: A cross-cultural comparison. Developmental Psychology, 20(6), 995-1003. Brown, D. J. 1998. Schools with heart: Voluntarism and public education. Boulder, Colo.: Westview Press. Bus, A.G., van Ijzendorn, M.H., & Pellegrini, A.D. (1995). Joint book reading makes for success in learning to read: A meta-analysis on intergenerational transmission of literacy, Review of Educational Research, 65(1), 1-21.
Page 27
Cadieux, A., & Boudreault, P. (2003). Eects of a reading intervention on parental knowledge of names and letter sounds and phonological awareness of students at risk. Revue des sciences de leducation, 29, 545-563. Cadieux, A., & Boudreault, P. (2005). e Eects of a Parent-Child Paired Reading Program on Reading Abilities, Phonological Awareness and elf-Concept of At-Risk Pupils. Reading Improvement, 42(4), 224-237. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx? Cassidy, J. & Cassidy, D. (2002-03). Whats hot, whats not for 2003. Reading Today, 20(3), 1, 18. Christenson, S. L., & Sheridan, S. M. (2001). School and families: Creating essential connections for learning. New York: Guilford Press. Clay, M. ( 1993). Always a learner: A fable. Reading Today, 3(5), 10. Come, B., & Fredericks, A. (1995). Family literacy in urban schools: Meeting the needs of at risk children, e Reading Teacher, 48 (5), 392-403 Come, B. & Fredericks, A. D. (1995). Family Literacy in Urban Schools: Meeting the needs of at-risk students. e Reading Teacher. 48, p566-70. Cunningham, P.M., & Allington, R.L. (2003). Classrooms that work: read and write. Boston: Allyn and Bacon. ey can all
Darling, S., and Hayes, A.E. (1996). e Power of Family Literacy. Louiseville, KY: National Center for Family Literacy. Darling, S., & Westbury, I. (2004). Parent involvement in childrens acquisition of reading. e Reading Teacher, 57, 774-776 Delpit, L. (1995) Other peoples children: Cultural conict in the classroom. NY: New Press e
Eakle, A.J. & Garber, A.M. (2003). International Reports on Literacy Research. Reading Research Quarterly Vol. 38, No.1 pp. 142-144 For the National Centre Fantuzzo, J. Mcwayne, C. Perry, M. A. Childs, S. (2000) Multiple Dimensions of Family Involvement and eir Relations to Behavioural and Learning Competencies for Urban, Low-Income Children. School Psychology Review, Vol. 33, 2004.
Page 28
Fantuzzo, J. McWayne, C. Perry, M. A. Childs, S. (2000) Multiple Dimensions of Family Involvement and eir Relations to Behavioural and Learning Competencies for Urban, Low-Income Children. School Psychology Review, Vol. 33, 2004. Fantuzzo et al. 2000 Fantuzzo, J.L. Davis, G., & Ginsburg, M.D. (1995). Eects of parent involvement in isolation or in combination with peer tutoring on student self-concept and mathematics achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87, 272-281. Gadsden, V.L. (2003). Expanding the Concept of Family in Family Literacy: Integrating a Focus on Fathers. In A. DeBruin-Parecki, & B. Krol-Sinclair (Eds.), Family Literacy (pp. 86-125). Newark, DE: International Reading Association. Gadsden, V. L., & Wagner, D. A. (1995). Literacy among African-American youth: Issues in learning, teaching, and schooling. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press. Gadsden, V. L. (2000). Current areas of interesting family literacy. National Center for the Study of Adult Learning and Literacy. Vol 3, 2002. Gilliam, B., Gerla, J.P., & Wright, G. (2004). Providing Minority Parents with Relevant Literacy Activities For eir Children. Reading Improvement, 4194), 226-234. Graves Smith, J. (2006) Parental Involvement in Education Among Low-Income Families: A Case Study. e School Community Journal, Volume 16, Number 1. Handel, R. (1999). e multiple meanings of family literacy. Education & Urban Society, 32 (1), 127-144. Hannon, P., Morgan, A. & Nutbrown, C. (2006). Parents Experiences of a Family Literacy Program. Journal of Early Childhood research Hannon, P. & Jackson, A. (1987) e Beleld Reading Project Final Report. London, Rochdale: National Childrens Bureau/Beleld Community Council. Hart, B. & Risley, T.R. (2003) e early catastrophe: 3. American Educator, 27 (1), -9. e 30 million word gap by age
Hart, B. & Risley, T. R. Baltimore: Paul H. Brooks, (1995). Meaningful Dierences in the Everyday Experience of Young American Children. Hebbler, K. M., Gerlach-Downie, S. G. (2002). Inside the black box of home visiting: A qualitative analysis of why intended outcomes were not achieved. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 17, 28-51.
Page 29
Hill, N.E., & Craft, S.A. (2003). Parent-school involvement and school performance: Mediated pathways among socioeconomically comparable African-American and Euro-American families. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 7483. Homan, J., Roller, C., Maloch, B., Sailors, M., Duy, G., Beretvas, S. N. (2005). Teachers preparation to teach reading and their experiences and practices in the rst three years of teaching. e Elementary School Journal, 105(3), 267-287. Jordan, G.E., Snow, C.E. and Porsche, M.V. (2000). Project EASE: e eect of a family literacy project on kindergarten students early literacy skills. Reading Research Quarterly, 35, 524-546. Kirkpatrick, A. (2004). Shared reading interactions: Identifying and developing behaviours between parents and preschool children. Unpublished PhD esis, University of Sheeld. Lenters, K. (2007) From Storybooks to Games, Comics, Bands and Chapter Books: A Young Boys Appropriation of Literacy Practices. Canadian Journal of Education 30, 1: 113-136 Lilly, E. Green, C. (2004) Developing Partnerships With families Literature. Pearson Education, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey. rough Childrens
Longwell-Grice, H. & McIntrye, E. (2006) Addressing Goals of School and Community: Lessons from a Family Literacy Program. e School Community Journal, Volume 16, Number 2. Mace, J. (1998). Playing with time: Mothers and the meaning of literacy. London: UCI, Press. Marks, L., & Palkovitz, M. R. (2004). American fatherhood types: and the uninterested. Fathering, 2(2), 113129. e good, the bad,
Meyers, B., Dowdy, J., & Paterson, T. (2000). Finding the missing voices: Perspectives of the least visible families and their willingness and capacity for school involvement. Journal of Middle Level Education, 28, 59-67. Moll, L. & Greenberg, J.B. (1991). Creating zones of possibilities: Combining social contexts for instruction. In L.C. Moll (Ed.), Vygotsky in education (pp. 319-348) NY: Cambridge. Morrow, L.M. (1999). Family literacy connections at school and home. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Page 30
Morrow, L., Kuhn, M.R., & Schwanenugel, P.J. (2006, December). e Family Fluency Program. e Reading Teacher, 60(4), 322333. doi: 10.1598/RT.60.4.2 Mui, S. & Anderson, J. (2008) At home with the Johars: Another look at family literacy. e Reading Teacher, 62 (3). Pp 234-243 National Centre for Education Statistics (US) nces.ed.gov/naal/estimates/index.aspx Neuman, S.B., Hagerdorn, T., Celano, D., & Daly, P. (1995). Toward a collaborative approach to parent involvement in early education: A study of teenage mothers in an African American community. American Educational Research Journal, 30, 95-122. Neuman, S. Caperelli, B. J. & Kee, C. (1998). Literacy learning, a family matter. Reading teacher, 52(3), 244 252 Nickse, R. S. (1991)Family and Intergenerational Literacy Programs. Information Series No. 342. Columbus: ERIC Clearinghouse on Adult, Career, and Vocational Education. (ED 327 736). Nistler, R. J. & Maiers, A. (2000). Stopping the silence: Hearing parents voices in an urban rst-grade family literacy program. Reading Teacher, 53(8), 670-680. Nord, C. W., Brimhall, D., & West, J. (1997). Fathers involvement in their childrens schools. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education. (nces.ed.gov/naal/estimates/index.aspx) Ortiz, R. W. (2004). Hispanic/Latino fathers and children literacy development examining involvement practices from a socio cultural context. Journal of Latinos and Education, 3(3), 165180. Ortiz, R. W. (1994). Fathers and children explore literacy. of Education, 5, 131134. e Kamehameha Journal e
Padak, N., & Rasiniski, T. 92006). Home-school Partnerships in literacy education: From rhetoric to reality. Reading Teacher, 60(3), 292-296. doi:10.1598/RT.60.3.11 Paratore, J.R. (2001). Opening doors, opening opportunities: Family literacy in the urban community. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon Paratore, J.R. (2005) Approaches to Family Literacy: Exploring the possibilities. IRA Pfannenstiel, J., and Seltzer, D. Evaluation Report: New Parents as Teachers Project Overland Park, KS: Research & Training Associates, 1985; Pfannenstiel, J., and Seltzer, D. New Parents as Teachers: Evaluation of an Early Parent Education Program.
Page 31
Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 4, 1-18, 1989. Phillerber, W. W., Spillman, R. E. and King, R. (1996) Consequences of family literacy for adults and children: Some preliminary ndings. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy 39(7): 558-65 Purcell-Gates, V. (2000). Family literacy: A research review. Handbook of Reading Research, vol. 3. New York: NY: Erlbaum. Rasinski, T.V. & Padak, N. (2004). Eective reading strategies: Teaching children who nd reading dicult (3rd Ed.). Upper saddle river, NJ: Prentice Hall. Saracho, O. N. (2002a). Family literacy: exploring family practices. Early Child Development and Care, 172(2), 113122. Saracho, O. N. (2007). A Literacy Program for fathers: A Case Study. Early Childhood Education 35 p 351-356. Sargent, S.E. ,Hill, N & Morrison, S. (2006) e Impact of University Reading Clinics: Parental Perceptions. Reading Research and Instruction Vol.6 No. 1 Supp. Pages 184-197 Snchal, M., LeFevre, J., Smith-Chant, B. L., & Colton, K. (2000). On rening theoretical models of emergent literacy: e role of empirical evidence. Journal of School Psychology. 39, 439460. Senechal, M., & National Institute for Literacy. (2006). e eect of family literacy interventions on childrens acquisition of reading: From kindergarten to Grade 3. A meta-analytic review. Portsmouth, New Hampshire: RMC Research Corporation Shockley, B. Michalove, B, & Aleen, J. (1995). Engaging families: Connecting home and school literacy communities. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann Snow, C., Burns, S. & Grin, P. (1998). Preventing Reading Diculties in Young Children. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press. Snow, C. E. Barnes, W. Chandler, J. Goodman, I. F. & Hemphill, L. (1991) Unfullled Expectations: Home and school inuences on literacy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Strickland, D. S. (2004). Working with families as partners in early literacy. Reading Teacher, 5891), 86-88.doi:10.1598/RT.58.1.9 Strickland, D. (1996). Meeting the needs of families in family literacy programs. In
Page 32
L.A. Benjamin & J. Lords (eds.), Family literacy: directions in research and implications for practice. Washington, D.C: Pelavin Research Institute. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 391-945). Tett, L. (2000). Excluded voices: Class, culture, and family literacy in Scotland. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 44(2), 122128. Toomey, D. (1993). Parents hearing their children read: a review. Rethinking the lessons of the Haringey Project. Educational Research, 35, 223 236. Topping, K. J. Lindsay, G. A. (1992) Paired Reading: A Review of the Literature. Research Papers in Education, Vol 7(3), p199-246. US Department of Education (2001). e longitudinal evaluation of school changes and performance in Title I schools, Volume 1: Executive Summary. Washington DC:Author Wagner, M., Spiker, D., & Linn, M. (2002). e eectiveness of the Parents as Teachers program with low-income parents and children. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 22(2), 67-81. Waldbert, A., Meyers, B., & Meyers, J. (2006). Invitations to families in an early literacy support program. Retrieved from http://nd.galegroup.com/ips/infomark. do?&contentSet+IACWasik, B.H. (2004). Handbook of family literacy. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Weigal, D. , Behal, P. & Martin, S. (2001) e Family Storyteller: A Collaborative Family Literacy Program. Journal of Extension 39, 4. Weinberger, J. (1996). A Longitudinal study of childrens early literacy experiences at home and later literacy development at home and school. Journal of Research in Reading, 19(1), 14-24 Westat and Policy Studies Associates. (2001). e longitudinal evaluation of school change and performance (LESCP) in Title I schools. Rockville, MD and Washington, DC: Author. Whitehurst, G. J., Arnold, D. S., Epstein, J. N., Angell, A. N., Smith, M., & Fischel, J. E. (1994). A picture book reading intervention day care and home for children from low-income families. Developmental Psychology, 30(5), 679-689.
Page 33

Review of The Literature: Family Literacy Programs: Prepared by

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Review of The Literature: Family Literacy Programs: Prepared by

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Review of the Literature: Family Literacy Programs

Literature Review - Family Literacy Programs

Literature Review - Family Literacy Programs