This article was downloaded by: [Harvard Library]On: 07 October 2014, At: 08:56Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Early Education and DevelopmentPublication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/heed20

Home Environments and Parental Support forLiteracy: Children's Perceptions and School LiteracyAchievementJanice Porterfield StewartPublished online: 08 Jun 2010.

To cite this article: Janice Porterfield Stewart (1995) Home Environments and Parental Support for Literacy:Children's Perceptions and School Literacy Achievement, Early Education and Development, 6:2, 97-125, DOI: 10.1207/s15566935eed0602_1

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15566935eed0602_1

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) containedin the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of theContent. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, andare not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon andshould be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable forany losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoeveror howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use ofthe Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematicreproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in anyform to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Early Education and Development April 1995, Voltrme 6, Number 2

Home Environments and Parental Support for Literacy: Children’s Perceptions and School Literacy Achievement

Janice Porterfield Stewart Rutgers University

This study examined literacy in home environments and how children perceive literate events that occur in their families. Four children were selected from a larger study of 129 children. Two children (one African American and one bira- cial) were from a low income urban community. The other two were Caucasian and from a small farm community. Ninety-six hours of observations over eight weeks during the summer of the kindergarten school year were conducted. Data collected included field notes, tape recordings, parent questionnaires, aware- ness interviews and school achievement measures. Domains were identified and analyzed for literacy support in the home, The analysis indicated three major findings: 1) all the parents provided support for literacy but there were differences in the way literacy was constructed, 2) the differences in the children’s awareness responses describing how they were learning to read at home re- flected their home literacy experiences, 3) the home literacy environments of the four children who were from low income families were conducive to literacy development and school success.

Home Environments and Parental Support fo r Literacy: Children k Perceptions and School Literacy Achievement

Home literacy environments and interaction patterns between parents and their chil- dren serve as contexts in which children learn strategies for literacy development at home and in the classroom. The manner in which these youngsters view and interpret such literacy events influences their social construction of literacy. Furthermore, parents’ inter- actions with their children during literacy activities are influenced by parents level of control and their beliefs about literacy learning (Burns & Casbergue, 1992). This article examines the home literacy environments and perceptions of four kindergarten children from a larger longitudinal study (Mason, Stewart, Peterman & Dunning, 1992). Results from the larger study indicated that parental support for literacy was a significant predic- tor for beginning-of-first-grade decoding as well as reading comprehension at the end of third grade. Thus information from case study investigations helps to shed light on some of the salient factors inherent in homes where parents support literacy.

Requests for reprints should be sent to Janice Porterfield Stewart, Graduate School of Education, Rutgers University, 10 Seminary Place, New Brunswick, NJ 08903.

1

1

!

i

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Har

vard

Lib

rary

] at

08:

56 0

7 O

ctob

er 2

014

98 Stewart J

The effect of parental support for literacy has been well documented in the research. Many parents provide litera events and supportive interactions to their children from as

achievement, availability of reading matenals in the home, amount of time parents spend reading with child, and children’s opportunities for verbal interactions mess & Holloway, 1984). Other signs of parental support identified by Mason, Stewart, Peterman, & Dun- ning (1992) were the number of books at home, age at which parents began reading to the child, how often family members help the child read, how often famil members help the child print, number of hours child watches TV, number of positive chird ualities, and the number of chores the child performs. The child’s environment is partialyy defined by the availability of literacy matenals, and reflects the parents’ as irations for academic acheve-

ronments and the course of formal and informal instruction vary in the degree to which they rovide a milieu for children to learn, and to the degree that they produce learning (Clar!, 1985).

One of the roles parents play is that of mediators for their offsprings aftem ts at

between the mother and child as a “scaffoldin dialogue that was conducive to optimum

that the way in which parents interact with their children to promote and provide support literacy may vary. Parents label different parts of storybook reading as important, ask different questions and engage in different types of interactions. What parents transmit through verbal statements during story reading or other es of litera events influence

identifying book reading as an influential predictor for success has been more recently questioned. Scarborough and Dobrich (1993) reviewed ublished studies from the last 30 years on the efficacy of parent book reading to preschoofchildren, and found that reading aloud accounted for only about 8% of the variance of the literacy outcome measures in- volved. However, this modest variance is still of si@icance since it is an environmental variable that can be manipulated (unlike more stable variables like SES), thus leading to applications at home and in school (Dunnin Mason, & Stewart, 1994). Lan age inter-

It is possible to demonstrate how the parent frames and communicates aspects of the lit- eracy experience to the child by exarmning the structure and content of parent and child interactions (Stewart, 1993).

Studies of children’s acquisition of reading prior to formal instruction revealed that some parents were unaware of how their child started reading. However, these parents promoted regular reading activities, rovided extended and positive interaction with an adult, answered questions about worg and read books to their children (Briggs & Elkind, 1973; Clark, 1976; Durkin, 1966; King & Friesen, 1972; Morrow, 1983; Plessas & Oakes, 1964; Teale, 1978;). It has been reported that between 47% to 83% of parents of early readers said that paper and pencils, blackboards, and reading material were available in their homes (Clark, 1976; Durkin, 1966). Some of the underlyin similarities in the homes of early readers were: parents read a variety of materials to tfe children, reading materials were readily accessible, children went to libraries and bookstores (Morrow, 1983), reading and writing were valued, activities were scheduled, and the interactions among family members were meaningful and centered around literacy (Durkin, 1966; Holdaway, 1979; Taylor, 1986; Teale, 1984). These findings suggest that children who did well in school had early sup ortive learning experiences at home and in school, and possessed

lated with successful school erformance. In a longitudinal study with one hundred and twen -seven kinder arten ckldren, early home literacy environment including both pa-

reading (Mason, Stewart, Peterman, & Dunning 1992).

One of the deliberate uses of literacy exhibited by many families is storybook read@ (Taylor and Strickland, 1986). This type of parent and child interaction provides a ric

young as age 1 (Stewart, 1 7 92). The support may be termed as a press for academic

ment and their attitude toward literacy, (Leichter, 1984). 3 atterns of family literacy envi-

expression. In their research, Ninio and Bruner (1978) identified the verbal interc K ange

learning. In her investigation of reading in if e home environment, Heath (1983) found

what children come to understand about literacy. The fyB ro ustness anTnature of studies

actions between the parent and child help tok i ld a foundation for literacy un B erstanding.

student personality c K aracteristics such as a positive view of themselves that were corre-

rent a!? support and ckldren’s own interest and involvement in literacy predicted g a m in

PI

1 - 1 ‘

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Har

vard

Lib

rary

] at

08:

56 0

7 O

ctob

er 2

014

Parental Support for Literacy 99

context for language learning and for the development of story comprehension (DeLoache & DeMendoza, 1983; Morrow, 1989). Holdaway (1979) found the major purpose of story reading from the parent’s point of view was “to give pleasure, and the parent is sustained in this behavior by the ample bonuses proyided” (p.39). Thus, @e story rpding event becomes a very happy experience for the chdd and the parent. Th~s is a deliberate event because parents intentionally make the decision to read books. Although the evidence is only correlational, the verbal interactions that take place durin storybook reading have

Heath, 1982; Ninio & Bruner, 1978; Wells, 1986). Often parents naturally use some of the successful interactive behavior patterns such as labeling, scaffolding, relating book information to life experiences and guidin qoseful discussions (Applebee & Langer,

Strickland, 1986). Many of these experiences prior to schooling impacts on the match between children’s understandings about literacy and formal instruction (McIntyre, 1992).

Research b Majoribanks (1979) showed that variations in children’s achievement are evident when k e r e n t forms of family environment measures are used in the analysis. It is suggested that at any initial level, children who experience insufficient intervening family environments will show a decline in their later reading achievement. Wells (1986), in examining preschool literacy and related activities with success in school, found a strong relationship between children’s knowledge of literacy and achievement. He argued that the differential attainment in school was due to the differences between children in their experiences of written language in preschool years and knowledge of functions and me- chanics of reading and writing. Norman-Jackson (1982), examined the social interactions between parents and preschool siblings of successful and unsuccessful readers (of black second-grade students) and found that the successful readers were from families where there was encouragement for child-initiated verbal interactions.

Children’s involvement in literacy and the kind of support from the parents are asso- ciated with children’s awareness of literacy (Stewart, 1992). How children talk about literacy events and their awareness of how they are learning to read has been the focus of several studies (Canney and Winograd,1979; Dhreher and Zenge, 1990, Downing, 1969; Johns, 1972, 1980;, John’s and Ellis, 1976; Meyers and Paris, 1978; Reid, 1966; Stewart, 1988; 1992). The sigmficant contribution of John’s research is that he did find a correla- tion between children conce t of reading and their reading achievement. As an extension of this research, Johns a n d h i s (1976) studied 1,655 students from grades 1 to 8. By looking at responses made by children across grade levels the researchers were able to see developmental changes in how children talk about reading. The results indicated that older students’ understanding of the reading process was better than that for the younger students. These findings were substantiated by Clay (1976) who found that 69 percent of 5-year-olds in New Zealand did not know that print rather than pictures told the story. Furthermore, even after a ear of schooling, some children were still confused about the purposes and nature of rea2ng. Clay’s research supported the view that there was a devel- opmental difference with respect to responses given by 5, 6, 7 and 8-year-olds children. Dreher and Zenge (1990) looked lon ‘tudinally at responses about the purposes of reading made children in first, third and f g h grade. They found that first grade awareness is predictive of later reading comprehension in both third and fifh grade, even when con- trolling for academic aptitude.

By using a range of tasks that were given to the same children over time and by using scoring techniques that included an analysis of error patterns, it was determined that chil- dren can talk about learning to read (Canney & Winograd, 1979; Stewart, 1992). When children were asked to both tak about and write about how tfiey were learnin toread in

increasing sense of the reading process. In addition, the content of the children’s com- ments shifted from focusing on letters to decoding slulls. These awareness responses were found to be reflective of reported home experiences. Children who gave more integrated res onses had a number of books available for use, tried to read various es of materials, an! borrowed books from the library (Stewart, 1992). Stewart’s (199gtudy examined

been found to have an impact on literacy development (Cochran- s mith, 1984; Flood, 1977;

1983; Cochran-Smith, 1984; Flood, 1977; 81! iruo, 1980; Ninio & Bruner, 1978; Taylor &

school and at home, the awareness responses changed over bme and reflecte % chldren’s

,

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Har

vard

Lib

rary

] at

08:

56 0

7 O

ctob

er 2

014

100 Stewart

kindergarten children’s awareness of how they were learning to read at home and in school using the categories as determined by John’s because they gave an accurate profile of the nature of the awareness. The question “What is reading? ’ was moditied to provide famil- iar support and encourage richer responses. The questions wqre “Tell me, what ou are doing at home to leam to read?“ and ‘How does your teacher teach you to read? (&ewart, 1992).

In order to analyze the home literacy events of the four children in t h i s study, several ways of examining literacy were studied. Andcrson and Stokes (1984) looked at the home environment of low income families and cultural groups for the purposes of describing litera events. After 2,000 systematic observations and many behavior samples, they

related, religious, general information, woz, literacy techniques and skills, interpersonal communiation and storybook time. Anderson and Stokes concluded that: “Literacy events fimction not as isolated bits of human activity but as connected units embedded in a func- tional system of activity generally involving prior, simultaneously occurring, and subse- quent units of action” (p.26). Their results suggest considerable variability distributed across all families in all ethnic groups, and that the frequency and duration of particular experiences that a preschool child had with print was determined by the interactions that his or her parents had withvarious organizahons and persons outside of the home. Under- lying the develapment of their categories was Anderson and Stokes belief that economi- cally poor children have literacy related experiences outside of book-reading and storybook time.

Leitcher (1984 clustered preschool children’s experiences with literacy into three

motivational climates. Leitcher concluded that intensive study involving observations, videotaping, ta e-recording and other methods were useful in ensurin the objectivity of

to look at families. %e categories for reading were: instrumental, social interactional, new-relate2 confinnational. recreational and criticalleducational. Their findines indicated that the

iden 3 * ed the following domains of litera activity: daily living, entertainment, school

broad categories: p b ysical enwonment, interpersonal environment, and emotional and

the observer. dylor and Dorsey-Gaines (1988) used a system adapted fi om Heath (1983) es and uses of reading and writing in African American and poor inner4

.

types of literacy used in our society cross all barriers, that is, social, c‘ultural and racial. It is also true that deliberate uses of literacy are moment-to-moment literacy events that have been isolated and often given specific attention. Furthermore, Ta lor and Dorsey-Gains (1988) found that it is possible for literacy events that occur in &nily settings to have multiple interpretations and that over time various interpretations may be valid.

This study applied the categories of literacy as identified b Anderson and Stokes (1984) while keeping in mind the premise that literacy events wi&n families are natural, purposeful and embodied with individual meaning. Theses categories captured literate events that are so intertwined in daily activities that they are largely unnoticed. Since I believe that home literacy e eriences are predominately social and interactive, I decided to use the Anderson and Stxes categories, while keeping in mind that whatever a child does is embedded in the family life of the home.

The purpose of this study was to extend the research on literacy that occurs in the home environments of children from low socioeconomic families. Questions to be ad- dressed in this study were 1 What litera experience are naturally occurrin in homes of low socioeconomic status ( s ES) familie3 2) m a t is the nature of the chidren’s aware- ness about learning to read at home and in school?

The results from the observational notes and tape recordings of four children are presented by describing the home environment, parents, children, and the home literacy events of each child. Awareness responses, parent questionnaire information and school achievement measures are discussed in light of the home literacy information. From field observations, domains were identified and analyzed for literacy support in the home. Fi- nally, implications for school success contingent upon home literacy environments and events are discussed.

I

4

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Har

vard

Lib

rary

] at

08:

56 0

7 O

ctob

er 2

014

Parerital Support for Literacy 10 1

Method

Subjects. Case Study Children Fifty-six children were selected from a sample of 127 kindergarten children in two

schools who were in a longitudinal research project (Mason, Stewart, Peterman & Dun- ning, 1992). The criteria used in the selection were performance on a listening compre- hension test, and a letter and word readin test. The children had scores on both tests that were within one standard deviations of &e means of the Early Reading Test (Mason & McCormick, 1979; Mason & StewM, 1990) and the Circus Listening Test @TS, 1979). A t test showed no si&icant differences between the samples on either of the measures. Far the sample of 56, four children were selected for home observations. The criteria for the selection of the case study children was their low SES status and parents’ willingness to participate in home observations.

A letter was sent home to each parent requesting them to complete a questionnaire (Mason, Bhavnagri, & Meyer, 1983). The letter explained to the parents that we would like them to tell us how their child was becoming interested in readmg and wrimg. We explained that we were asking questions about what the child did before coming to kmder- arten and what the chdd does at home to study how chlldren’s Merences affect their

f t e r years in school. The parents were told that anyone in the family could he1 , so that the responses to the questions would be the truest possible description of the ckld. The questionnaires were returned to the school and sent directly to the researchers (96%). The parents of the four children in this stud are represented in that percentage. Out of 59 uestionnaire items, 37 were related to lome literacy in order to assess parental support

?or literacy and children’s interest and involvement in reading and writing. The queshon- naire provided estimates of family social class from 5 questions about fathers’ and moth- ers’ education and occupations (Treiman, 1977). Names of the children, teachers, schools and communities have been changed to protect the identity and confidentiality of the sub- Jects.

Additional information included an overall ranking of progress in kindergarten by the kindergarten teachers of the case study children. This data was collected in March of the kindergarten year,

Two of the case study children, Sean who is African American and Erica who is biracial (African American and white), were from an urban community. The other two children, Joseph and Donna, both Caucasian, lived in a rural community.

Sean, age 5, lived in a single family house in an all black neighborhood. He had two brothers and three sisters, ages 8 through 16. His father worked as a laborer in a factory and his mother cared for three boys, all under two years old. The home was full of children’s books, religious materials, newspapers, and encyclo edias. Sean was a confident child and was usually the leader when he played with the cfuldren in the nei hborhood., Sean’s

stressed and the family had a s ecial time when all members were expected to work on school related work. During $e summer of this study, Sean’s mother insisted that he borrow books from the library instead of toys because he was going be in first grade. Both

arents reported that they fre uentl read to Sean and he was beginning to read alone. gean ranked eighteenth in a $ass of23. All children in the study were ranked by their respective teachers using an overall criteria of progress in reading (comprehension and decoding).

Erica, age 6, lived about 10 blocks from Sean in a modest income neighborhood. Erica was the youngest child in a family of five children. At the time of the study Erica’s mother was a communi aide in a federally funded reschool program and worked art

observations. Erica s home was full of literacy materials. Evidence of litera included

mother reported that there was about 100 children’s books in the home which were usually

parents were very interested in the academic success of all their chi1 8; en. Readmg was

time at the university. S x e was divorced and receivefPublic Assistance at the time o P the

puzzles, games, encyclopedias, a variety of children and adult reading materi 3 s. Erica’s

I 1

i

i i

I

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Har

vard

Lib

rary

] at

08:

56 0

7 O

ctob

er 2

014

102 Stewart

purchased based on recommendations in Family Circle and WomanS Day magazines. The children were encoura ed to view educational television programs that included Sesame Street and ME Rodgers. %rica read frequently, listened to record books, wrote letters to relatives and worked in workbooks. Erica’s mother noted that Erica took the initiative to learn, had high ambitions and was very competitive. Erica was ranked seventh in a class of 23.

Joseph, age 5, lived in a small frame house on a comer lot and was the older of two boys. Joseph’s father worked for the town repairing streets. Joseph’s mother taught Sunday school and spent most of her time during the week doing household chores such as cleaning, cooking, and washing clothes. There were no children’s books in the living room of Joseph’s home, but adult magazines were on the end tables near the couch. There were some books and record books on the bookshelf in Joseph’s bedroom. His mother reported that Joseph has 50 children’s books and 1 magazine subscri tion. Joseph was described by his mother as very popular with his classmates and the cddren on the block. On a typical day in the summer, Joseph was usually found playing in the backyard alone with his brother, Justin age three. Academically, he ranked 15 in a kindergarten class of 20.

Donna, age 5, lived on the same tree-lined street as Jose h, three blocks away. Donna was the oldest of the two children in the family. Her brother, &avid, was two years younger. Donna’s mother taught piano lessons in her home to neighborhood children and cared for her sister’s children. Donna’s father worked with a local building company as a laborer. Donna’s mother reported on the Parent Questionnaire that they owned 40 children’s books and subscribed to 2 children’s publications. In the living room there were 25 hardcover children’s books, newspapers, several magazines, encyclopedias, and an open Bible. During daily activities, Donna’s mother corrected Donna’s language, asked questions about her play, and allowed her freedom to make decisions. Both parents encoura ed Donna to teach her brother and cousins to read. Donna was ranked sixth in a class 0?20 in kinder- garten. School Environment

Sean and Erica attended a child-centered kindergarten class with a flexible schedule that involved readin , math, language activities, games, arts, and free play. The reading program was indivifmlized and the teacher worked with each child at their own reading levels. The reading instruction focused on many language development activities, book reading and some phonics instruction (Modern Curriculum Press & MacMillan, 1978). During thc individual sessions with the teacher the children were asked to ick out words, use phonetic cues, talk about letters, pictures and text meaning. The chiden read alone, to each other and took books home regularly.

The instruction in Donna’s and Joseph’s kindergarten class was teacher-directed. The reading program began with whole-class instruction of letters and letter-sounds from a tightly structured commercial program (Alpha-Time, 1978). The time for the reading instruction took place the first hour and a half each day. The instruction consisted of numerous dittos and pages from workbooks to introduce and reinforce the letters and sounds. The children worked independently at their seats after the lesson had been re- sented. Stories not related to the phonics instruction were read to the children about &ee times a week. For the last two months of the school year, the children were separated into three ability groups and read pre-primers (Houghton Mifflin, 1978).

Procedure The four case study children were observed in their homes eight times over a two-

month period for three hours each time between the hours of 8:OO a.m. and 3:OO p.m., during the summer at the end of their kinder arten school ear. An attempt was made to ensure a balance of morning and afternoon o%servations. $he observer was a nonpartici- pant, unless encouraged to be a participant by the parent or child. Observation notes were taken during all observations and one story-reading session was recorded. Before begin- ning observations, the investigator visited the mothers, explained the study and the

i

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Har

vard

Lib

rary

] at

08:

56 0

7 O

ctob

er 2

014

Parental Support for Literacy 103

procedure to be followed, and stressed that the children should be allowed to do what they normally do. The observer tried to maintain the role of a friend non-evaluatin non- directive and nonparticipating person who is interested in what &hilies do. Tfe data collected and reported in this article was part of a larger 3 year Ion ‘tudinal study and

ment measures, tapes of storybook reading of the case study children and their mothers (Stewart, 1993), and interviews with the parents. Home Literacy Events

The six domains of literacy activities the home environment identified from the obser- vations were Deliberate Literacy Events, Religious Literacy Events, Media Related Lit- eracy Events and Daily Living Events, School Literacy Events (Anderson & Stokes 1984). These events were coded only when observed, although information was recorded when the parent(s) reported such events to create a complete profile of each child’s home envi- ronment and to help the researcher understand the milieu of the home: Additionally, the reported data was used to aid understanding and interpret the f m l y literacy patterns.

Deliberate Literacy Events. Deliberate literacy events were those events that had been structured to facilitate the occurrence of activities (bedtime stories, talk about a story or activities at the library). These events involved exposure to.experiences that led to the transmission of literacy rules or cognitive knowledge (recogruhon of letters and sounds or rules of storybook reading, exposure to various genres, ways to talk about writing or read- ing).

An example from the observation data of Donna and her mother readmg a book:

included videotapes of the instruction in the classrooms of the case stu P y children, achieve-

Donna: “Here’s Snow White.” Mother: Donna: (smiles) “Three Little Pigs”

“Snow white doesn’t have pigs in it”.

In this interaction, Donna’s mother allows Donna to use her background knowledge

An example from the observation data of Donna reading the label on a crayon during

of the context of the fairy tale The Three Little Pigs.

a session when the children are coloring a book.

Donna:

Mother: “Carnation.” Donna:

“Pink, what does that word, the first one say?”

“Here David. Here’s your carnation pink.”

In this interaction, Donna’s mother is providing information requested by Donna. Communication Literacy Events. These events were most often spontaneous and oc-

curred during verbal exchanges between the child and parent or chlldren and eers or siblings. They involved talk about literacy type events. The verbal exchange &at took place during these events usually centered around events about names, numbers, time, words and reading.

An example from the observation data of Joseph talking to a friend over the fence about action figures:

Joseph:

Friend: Joseph:

Joseph:

“I have 12 more than my cousins do.”

“Why didn’t you sign up for baseball?” “It’s this week, well, I forgot about the time. I thought it was the 12th. “I can go down 4 feet”.

!

i I

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Har

vard

Lib

rary

] at

08:

56 0

7 O

ctob

er 2

014

104 Stewart

Friend:

Joseph:

Joseph:

“I can go 3 feet

“We have a new name for the club and only us kids know it.” “William and John went on vacation first, Jones Beach, and they’re coming back on the 10th and we’re coming back on the 8th.”

“You know what she (the observer) knows about me? She knows my name is Patrick but she doesn’t know my last name is Francis.”

“Yes, she does. She doesn’t h o w your middle name.”

Friend:

Joseph

Friend: “Patrick James Francis.”

Joseph: “I know your whole name. Don’t you know Michael?”

Religious Literacy Events. Events of this nature were based on events that took place in the context of religion. Information was collected on two observations at a Bible School for one case study child. Information about religious events regarding the other three case study children was reported by the parents. Sean’s father reported that during their spiri- tual month he and his wife fast from sun up until sun down. He also mentioned that he was attempting to teach Sean how to read the Koran. Donna’s mother mentioned that she goes to Bible study and when it’s held in the evening she has to take Donna and her brother with her.

Media Related Events. These were events that occurred while the child watched shows like Sesame Street or ME Rogers and actively participated by either repeating the words on the screen, trying to read the words, or by playing the games.

An example from observational data on Donna:

Donna:

Donna:

“Mister Rogers is on” (Donna picks up her cousin, Noelle, and sits in a chair holding her on her lap).

“See what he is going to make today? Look, it’s a snake, Ncelle!”

Daily Living Events. These were verbal exchanges that centered around activities that regulated daily life, such as setting limits, giving directions for appropriate behavior, and setting up daily schedules. These were events that often formed the frame for literacy events to occur. These events were coded because they are part of the child‘s environment and influenced the regulatory nature of the home which may have an impact on the child’s behavior in the classroom (Clark, 1985).

An example from observation data of Erica’s mother helping Erica make choices:

Erica:

Mother:

Erica:

Mother:

Erica: “Why not?”

Mother:

”I want to go swimming.”

“You want to go swimming or to the movie?

“First swimming and then to the movies!”

“You must decide on one or the other, you cannot do both.”

“It will cost too much money, anyway ifyou go swimming, it will be too late to go to the movies.”

i

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Har

vard

Lib

rary

] at

08:

56 0

7 O

ctob

er 2

014

School Literacy Events These events pertained to school. Since the home observations were conduc?ed dur-

ing the summer months, these activities focused on what the parent(s) said they &d to get the child ready for kindergarten or are doing for first grade. The information was reported to the observer by the parent(s).

For example, information from Sean’s mother:

Sean’s mother: “I tried to teach him the alphabet before he went to kinder- garten. ”

Coding, These six types of events were coded according to the frequency with which they occurred. Each event was also coded as either adult initiated or chdd imtiated. In an observation of Erica at the library, she was observed en aging in three activities such as a

Home Awareness. To assess the children’s understanding about what was occurring in their homes and classrooms with respect to learning to read, the children were asked two questions about their awareness in March and May of the kindergarten year and Sep- tember of first grade. The tester said, “I see you are beginning to learn to read; tell me what you are doing at home to learn to read? and “How does your teacher do to teach you how to read?“ (Stewart, 1992). All responses were written down by the tester. The re- sponses for the awareness questions were coded in two ways, Awareness Process and Aware- ness Content. The Awareness Process was based on levels developed by Johns (1972). This classification documents the process the child uses to describe how helshe is learning to read. Johns classified responses into five levels of awareness. The first level was No Response, Vague, Circular, Irrelevant or I don’t know. This level included responses such as, ‘ Just read, “It’s fun”. The second level was Classroom Procedures and/or Educational Value. This included responses such as “Do worksheets”, “Read in books” and “Write it out”. Word RecognitionDecoding was the th$d level. This level included res onses such as, “You say the sounds of word”. Responses in h s level were, “You try to unierstand the meaning of words”. Meaning or Understanding was the fourth catego? Responses in this category were, “You try to understand the meaning of words”. John s fifth level was Decoding and Understanding. Johns’ examples for such responses were, “Look at words and read them and think about what you are saying”. These categories were used in the larger study of which these four case study children were part of the sample (Stewart, 1992). It is important to note that by using these categories siMicant information about the children’s awareness was obtained.

The second type of scoring for the awareness responses, Awareness Content docu- mented the $es of activities and materials that children described when.$ey were dis- cussing how t ey were learning to read at home and in school. These actwiues and mate- rials were classified into four categories developed by Stewart (1992): (a) Unrelated, @) I d e n w n Letter Sounds, (c) Reading Books, and (d) Writing. Responses classified in the Ident&ng Letters and Sounds category were related to talking about sounds of letters or words. The Readin Books category included children’s res onses that described

reflected responses where children talked about using writing while learning to read (e.g. “We wnte words on the blackboard” or “We write stones’). The unrelated responses described activities and procedures such as “Nothing” or “Putting on sunglasses”.

For each coding system a holistic judgement was made to class@ each statement made by an individual child. The judgement was according to what aspects of reading the child focused on is hisher response. Two doctoral level research assistants in addition to the researcher read responses for the kind of rocess or e of acuvitied matenals that

independently coded, then differences were noted and discussed. Interrater reliability was determined by clarifylng categories and providing additional and revised (non sample) examples. The disagreements were addressed through discussions and then the raters

word game, storytelling, and a song. These were code f as three literacy events.

storytelling, reading boo f s, or listening to someone read to them. !he Writing Category

each child said was being used to help them P earn to re$? In each case, the data were

Parental Support for Literacy 105

i 1

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Har

vard

Lib

rary

] at

08:

56 0

7 O

ctob

er 2

014

106 Stewart

adjusted their coding. Agreement between three raters after discussion averaged between 94% and 100% for each coding categov.

Results

The results indicate that each of the case study children engaged in literacy events in their homes and there was a wide range of the type of engagement and frequency. The purpose of th is study was to provide evidence to support the premise that literacy events do occur in low income families, in white, black, and biracial homes and in a single parent family and that kindergarten children can accurately describe some of the events sur- rounding learning to read. The first part of the results section will provide an in depth description of the types of literacy events that were observed and sometimes reported in the homes of the four case chi1drc.n. Tlc scc:iild. p::,Ifioa offhis s(:ctkl.? \.ziIl .?OCUS OIZ t.he awareness responses of the four case study chddren.

Deliberate Literacy Events: Erica

Erica’s deliberate literacy events comprised 74 percent of all of the observed events (see Table 1). Several of these events took place at the library or at home during reading sessions between Erica and her mother.

Deliberate Literacy child initiated events at the library: 1. Erica: “Can I go check my books out?”

Mother: “Not yet.”

Erica: Erica filled out her library club form.

Erica:

Sister:

Erica:

Sister:

Erica:

Sister:

Erica:

Sister:

Erica:

Sister: “1’11 help you.”

Erica’s mother directed her to return a book to its correct place on the shelf.

Mother:

(Sat with older sister, Leah, and read a book.)

(Writing the title of the book and author.)

“Ph” (points) “YOU forgot the dot.” “E-E-A-S-T-M-A-N” (Spelling as she Writes.)

“Ok. Fold it up and put it back. You put it back here.”

“But you have to see my name. I want to know which is mine.”

(Turns the folder around and puts it in the file box with Erica’s name showing.)

“I want to look at a magazine.”

“Let’s go over here. Highlights, here are stories you can read. Things you can find out.”

“Figure out the words. This is a hard one, you may have to help me.”

Adult initiated events:

2.

“Leah, take Erica back and show her the correct place to put it back.”

t

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Har

vard

Lib

rary

] at

08:

56 0

7 O

ctob

er 2

014

Erica:

Leah: Erica: Leah:

Parental Support for Literacy

“Hey look. ‘E’, this is where I found it.”

“That’s not right because there is no ‘E’.’’ “Here’s an ‘E’ right here.” “‘F’ is over here, over here around the corner.”

Table 1.

Percentage” of Home Literacy Events

107

Type Joseph Donna Sean Erica

Deliberate 13.1 23.1 41.6 74.0

Communication 18.0 17.9 9.1 9.9

Television 0.0 9.7 0.0 2.9

Religion 0.0 7.4 0.0 0.0

Daily Living 68.9 41.9 49.3 13.2

School 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 (not observed)

The percentage represents the frequency of observed occurrences of events in each category. This does not preclude the occurrence of events (not observed) in any of the categories in the life of the children.

Communication Literacy Events: Erica

Erica’s communication literacy events totaled 9.9 percent. These events focused on spontaneous talk about reading and writing. Often the activities taking place during the events included papers, pencils, books and other materials.

“Erica is like her middle sister. Leah, she loves to read.” (Erica smiled) “Erica writes letters to her relatives. Last Friday she wrote a note to her grandmother asking if she and her sisters could come for dinner. She asked me to buy a stamp and a card so she could send a thank you card to her grandmother.”

Mother:

Mother:

Daily Living Events: Erica

Erica’s daily living events (13.2%) centered around schedule planning and types of behavior. Most of the exchanges in Erica’s home were done with explanations expressing the reasons for certain decisions.

Daily Living Events: Erica: “Can we go now?” I

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Har

vard

Lib

rary

] at

08:

56 0

7 O

ctob

er 2

014

108 Stewart

Mother: “Erica, be patient.” Erica: “Mother, I’m going swimming.”

Mother: Erica: “Can we go now?’ Mother; “Why, Erica?”

Erica:

Mother:

Mother: “I bet you can!”

‘‘’YOU want to go swimming or the movie.”

“Because I can go swimming in the afternoon and still go to the movie.” “So you think you can still go swimming, come home, have popcorn, take a nap and still go to the movie?”

Religious Events: Erica

Media Related Events: Erica Television related litera9 events accounted for 2.9 percent of Erica’s literacy events.

During one observation, Enca’s mother was watchlng an intexview about crime on the Phil Donahue Show, Erica started listening and asked her mother a few questions about the discussion. Deliberate Literacy Events: Sean

Erica’s mother mentioned that Erica liked to read religious storybooks.

Sean had a high amount of observed litera events (41.6%). The observed events centered around storybook reading with his mot x er, sister, brother or the observer. The events were initiated twice as many times by the child.

Examples of child-initiated deliberate literacy events are: 1. Sean:

Mother:

Mother:

Sean: Sean: Sean: Mother:

Sean: Mothef :

“Mommy, I want to read.” “Ok.” (Sits down with Sean and asks questions about the pic- tures in the book.) “What’s they doing there?” “They fixing to fall and knock over the kitty.” “Wait.” (Reads word ‘wait’.) “Ooh.” (Trying to read ‘oops’.)

“oops.” “Oops, why is he saying that? Oh, he’s about to fall.” “Do you remember where they go then?”

2. Sean selected a book title Peter and looks at the pictures.

Mother:

Sean: Mother:

Sean:

“Tell us about the story.” ‘‘I have to stretch first. He see something up and down.” “Why does he see like that?”

“Because he was turning around.”

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Har

vard

Lib

rary

] at

08:

56 0

7 O

ctob

er 2

014

f Parental Support for Literacy

Mother: “...and he got dizzy.”

109

Examples of adult-initiated event:

Mother:

Sean:

Mother:

“I know you don’t know all the words. Just tell us the story.”

“Tell Janice what you have on reserve at the library.”

“Here are your books, Sean, what do you want to read?”

Communication Events: Sean

(Q 1 percent) The events centcrcd :;r’j l ~ c l ~ i l d m g , r,ountjng, 01 dAirit Communication literacy events represented B small portion of Sew’c Fiterac~ events

Examples of dommunication child-initiated events are:

Sean: “We were going to make a fireplace, so we got 40 or something bricks, but they were not the right kind of bricks so we are going to make a patio.”

Daily Living Events: Sean Sean’s daily living events accounted for 49.3 percent of his observed events. The

observed events were primarily child initiated. The events focused on responsibility, play interactions and Sean’s behavior.

Daily Living child initiated observed event:

Sean: “It ain’t fair anyway.”

Friend:

Sean:

Friend:

Sean:

“You called it, you picked it. You quit?“

“I’ll be back.” (He goes in the house.)

“No. Sean. He’s not an out.” “One.”(He called out anyway and went to kick the ball.)

Religious Events: Sean

father was teaching Sean to read the Koran.

Deliberate Literacy Events: Joseph

Joseph was observed engaging in eight deliberate literacy events. This accounted for 13.1 percent of all the observed events. All of these events were adult initiated. Joseph was observed on one trip to library with his mother and younger brother. Seven deliberate literacy events occurred while the children were listening to stones, following directions for a shape and color game, and singing a song.

Communication Events: Joseph Joseph’s communication literacy events occurred 18.0 percent of the time. Joseph

was observed engaging in 11 of these exchanges, 10 were child initiated. Most of his interaction took place while he was playing outdoors.

Sean was not observed engaging in any religious events, but it was reported that his

Examples of Communication Events:

2. Joseph: “It’s illegal to ride a Honda ACT in the house.”

j

? i 1 i

i

i

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Har

vard

Lib

rary

] at

08:

56 0

7 O

ctob

er 2

014

110 Stewart

Friend:

Joseph:

“If you are 8,9, 10, 12, 13, it is.” “No, you can ride it in your yard, though.”

Daily Living Events: Joseph

During the observations of Joseph many daily living events observed. Jcseph’s verbal interactions with his mother were primarily of the regulation nature.

He had 42 of these types of exchanges (68.9% of all observed events), most of which look place outside during play.

Daily Living-regulation:

1. Mother: Joseph: Joseph: Mother: “You know you can’t.’’ Mother: “Where are you going?” Joseph: “Inside.” Mother: “No, you stay outside little boy; it’s too nice a day to be inside.” Joseph: “I’m not a little boy, you are!” (Joseph- to a little girl several yards over from his house)

Joseph: “What are you doing?” Girl: “Watering the grass.”

Joseph:

“Go back outside so 1 mi rinish cleaning up.” “Ok. Can I get my bike out?” “I wish I could go out and play.” (Wants to leave the yard.)

2.

“You’re suppose to be watering the grass and not the house.”

Religious Events: Joseph

Joseph’s mother reported that he attended Bible classes in the evening. Deliberate Literacy Events: Donna

DOMa was observed engaging in 24 (23.1%) deliberate literacy-events, 12 were adult initiated and 12 were chld imtiated. These events were framed around reading stones or coloring with her parents.

Deliberate Literacy Events:

1. Father: “You read it to me.” Donna: Father: “It says, ‘many monsters’. How many is there?’

Donna: “Six.”

Father:

“I can’t. Oh, I’ll read theMonster Book. Oh, it’s a little hard.”

“That’s what you do all the time, making a mess.’

Donna showed her father the next page of the book.

Donna: “Smashing marshmallow and me in the middle.”

An example of Donna and her father figuring out a word:

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Har

vard

Lib

rary

] at

08:

56 0

7 O

ctob

er 2

014

Parental Support for Literacy

2. Donna:

Father:

Father:

“Pick up book, pick up ball, blocks and blocks.”

“Uh-uh. That’s books, isn’t it?“

“Read this one, that’s ‘surprise’..the one with the S.”

Communication Events: Donna

Communication literacy events constituted 17.9 percent of the observed events for Donna. Three times as many events were child initiated rather than adult initiated. The events centered around conversations pertaining to reading, ages, and time. These events took place while Donna played with her brother andor cousins. Donna’s mother reported cornrn!inkatlon events that occurred while on a family outings or playing.

Examples of child-initiated events are:

Donna:

Father: “She’ll learn.”

“She don’t know the words.” (talking about her cousin Noelle, age 1)

Media-related Events: Donna

Television related events accounted for 9.7 percent of Donna’s observed events. Donna watched either Sesame Sfreet or Mr Rodgers, alone or with her brother and cousins. At times Donna watched the shows intermittently: she would play on the rug with her brother or go outside and play for a few minutes, then run back in the home and watch a few more minutes of the show. Other times DOMa sat in a large chair which faced the television at and angle and watch the television show for about 20 minutes at one sitting. She usually tried to get her cousins and brother involved by telling them to repeat some words, clap with the Sesame Street characters or sing the song. If the other children were in another room, she would call, “Sesame Street is on!” Additional information was reported by Donna’s mother (4.1%). Religious Events: Donna

Religious events were observed with Donna and accounted for 7.4 percent of the lit- eracy events. Donna attended Bible School on two of the observed occasions. During one visit the Bible study teacher instructed the children to cut and paste pictures from cata- logues that depicted families sharing the good news.

Teacher:

Donna: Shakes her head, yes

Teacher: “OK you’re all set.”

“This is your mommy, brother, daddy. Is that you?“

111

Daily Living Events: Donna

Donna’s daily living events represented the largest proportion of observed events (41.9%).

Daily Living Events:

Donna: “You can’t go outside without your shoes.” (to her brother)

When talking about a dog that’s sitting in the middle of the street, DoMa said to her

“There’s Nicky out in the street. He may get hurt. Oh, Nicky’s in trouble. His dad might get mad.”

cousin, Sherry:

Donna:

i

!

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Har

vard

Lib

rary

] at

08:

56 0

7 O

ctob

er 2

014

112 Stewart

Many of the events focused on setting limits, but, unlike Joseph, it was Donna who did some of the limit setting.

Donna:

Sherry: Donna: “No.”

Sherry:

Donna: ‘‘Okay.”

“Get a toy for Noelle.”

(Sherry brings a large plastic bat.)

“This?” (She brought a stuffed bear)

‘The adult encounters were ais0 primarily for regulation of behavior or tasks for daily living.

Mother:

Donna:

Mother:

Donna: “Come on, David.”

Father:

Donna: “Yep.”

Father: “You know how?”

Donna:

Father:

“Donna, you help your brother.”

“I’m eating a apple right now.”

“Go make him some chocolate milk right now.”

“Donna, can you change Noelle’s diaper?’

“Sure, she’s not wet yet.”

“Don’t push down on her stomach.”

When examining the results of the domain analysis for the case study children, it is clear that Erica had the clearest and most consistent exposure to deliberate literacy events. The daily living events were the highest for Joseph, Sean and Donna. As noted by Clark (1985), the types of parent interchanges that occur during daily living as setting rules, delineating limits, reprimanding, etc. are often factors that influence the structure of children’s literacy patterns.

Awareness about literacy at home and school.

The awareness responses for the case study children are presented in Figure 1. The responses to the question, “How are you beginning to learn to read at home?” are qualita- tively different for all four children. Sean’s responses across all three time periods were procedural. The materials he said he used to learn to read were books.

Erica’s responses for March were procedural. Her responses changed in May and September to decoding. The materials described in the responses were books in March and letters and sounds during the later time periods.

Donna’s awareness responses for March of the kindergarten school year was some- what vague but she did mention that letters help. In May and September her responses were procedural and included the use of books.

i

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Har

vard

Lib

rary

] at

08:

56 0

7 O

ctob

er 2

014

Parental Support for Literacy 113

Joseph’s responses in March of the kindergarten school year were classified as proce- dural. In May his statements were classified as decoding and in September they were vague. In May, Joseph mentioned letters and sounds but in September of first grade he said “Don’t know, just learning at school”.

Figure 7.

Case study children’s responses on the awareness question:

“How are you beginning to learn to read at home?”

Meaning

8 E Decoding’ 2 5 a

w- 0 Procedural I - a, 5

3 k g u e

March Kindergarten

Joseph

Donna

Sean 17 Erica 0

May Kindergarten September First Grade Time

I

When the children were asked, “What does your teacher do to teach you how to read?” differences were found among the four children. Sean’s responses went from Procedural to decoding and back to procedural. He mentioned reading and writing at all three time periods. Erica’s responses were procedural and remained as decoding in May of kinder- garten and September of first grade. Erica spoke about reading books in March and letters and sounds at the other time periods. Donna’s responses changed from decoding in March to procedural at the following time periods. She talked about letters and sounds in March and then reading books in May and September. The school responses for Joseph changed from decoding in March, to vague in May and procedural in September. He talked about letters and sounds in March, unrelated in May and copying in September.

The responses to the question that tapped the home awareness for all the case study children were classified in as decoding or procedural. In May, the responses that were classified as decoding increased for Joseph and Erica. Erica was the only case study child to have her awareness response classified as decoding in September. Overall the children mentioned reading books, letters and sounds and writing as being important in learning to read (see Table 2).

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Har

vard

Lib

rary

] at

08:

56 0

7 O

ctob

er 2

014

114 Stewart i

Table 2.

Awareness responses for the case study children to the questions: "How are you beginning to learn to read at home?" and

'What does your teacher do to teach you how to read?"

Case Study I: Joseph's Awareness Responses

Home School

"By spelling the words for us and helping us learn the I ette rs . "

"My cousin helps. He's in first grade. He helps me read and watches my brother; he listens to me try to read and tells me words."

March of

Kindergarten

May of

Kindergarten "I read to my cousin; I sound out the words and copy out the letters."

"We have a horse in a barn, shuttle up in space."

"Don't know; just learning at school."

"She writes stuff on the blackboard and we copy off of it."

September of

First Grade

Case Study 2: Donna's Awareness Responses I

Home School

"Nothing. Letters, letters help."

"Letters. Letters help so we can spell. I can read Mike and Jeff and Van."

March of Kindergarten

"The green book at my house helps me to read. It has children in it."

"Because it's easy, my book helps me to read. A big blue book."

May of

Kindergarten

September of

First Grade 'We take the book home. We read."

"Learn the books last year."

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Har

vard

Lib

rary

] at

08:

56 0

7 O

ctob

er 2

014

Parental Support for Literacy

Table 2. (Cont'd.)

Kindergarten

115

she's two. I be the teach e 1.''

Case Study 3: Sean's Awareness Responses

March of Kindergarten

May of

Kindergarten

September of

First Grade

Home

" I practice reading at home. I be reading to my mom and dad. My mom 7nd d x r rCll q c '

"Think, ask somebody to read it, a book, the Friday and the next day I read it myself."

"My mother teaches me and sometimes we by ourselves and sometimes I read to my daddy and sometimes my sisters read to me."

____ ~

"She reads to us and me be thinking and we write sentences We write ~vfures;~nd -r1eic>& ' 1 '

then sl~e helps us leaill.

Case Study 4: Erica's Awareness Responses

"At home I read books and play school with my sister; t March of

"By sounding out: I'm a real good writer." May of ----I-- Kindergarten

~

September of

First Grade

"Cause I sound out words and my mom tells me."

School

"Sometimes I ask her the, words. She tells me some of them. Do sentences. Write letters, words, and I have to read them to her."

"So m et i m es we writ e sentences and sometimes we have a group and we read this in our book, our bear book and our workbook, our bear bookis our reading book.."

School

"Mrs. Summers lets us read in class, the books. She lets us read sentences. She puts the writing and we read them to ourselves."

"By letting us sound out words. She tells us to look at the picture and that tells us what they are doing and then we can read it."

"Because she tells me a lot of words and when we write words, we find out."

1 1 i i i i i i

I 1

i

i ! ! i j

1

I

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Har

vard

Lib

rary

] at

08:

56 0

7 O

ctob

er 2

014

116 Stewart

1 __ - r T

i

Discussion

Children’s views of literacy are determined in part by where parents place their em-

study appeared to value an environment that provided literacy materials for their children.

J

I 1

! phasis and how they verbalize certain expectations. All of the parents observed in this study promoted successful literacy interactions with their children. The parents in this

Data from the Parent Questionnaire (see Appendix A) show that the mean number of children’s books in the home was 91.5. The home environments and activities observed in the homes of Erica, Donna, Joseph and Sean siipport findings from previous research in that exposure to an environment that contains interaction with parents and children and

1966; Torrey, 1969; Taylor and Stricktand, 1986). lax the honles of these children literacy activities were extencled through television progr a l ibmy visits and church aetivitiw Clark (1 985) and Hess, Holloway, Price and Di n (1983) found that the number or‘ hours watching Sesame Street, checking out books from the library, and the amount of time parents read to the child had an effect on children’s cognitive development. The variables with the strongest effect were the mother’s achievement aspirations, preschool learning activities, concern over the child’s expected program in school and mother’s assessment of the child’s verbal initiation and assertiveness. With this in mind, the results for Erica are not surprising. Her mother structured her preschool literacy activities, was concerned about her literacy progress, and had high aspirations for her. All of the case study parents of these children did, to some degree, possess these characteristics. How- ever, Erica’s mother was much more direct concerning the literacy involvement for Erica than the other parents were with their children.

an abundance of literacy materials has a positive effect on literacy development ((Durkin, i

i

i 1

f

- -~

These case study parents were involved in monitoring their children’s daily living and deliberate literacy events. Pressure was on for either literacy closely related to reading or regulation of social activities. The similarity between all four parents is that they exempli- fied how vgotsky‘s zone of proximal development a p p e d at an informal level in the homes of these children. The types of questioning and story interactions that took place with Erica, Sean, and their parents matched the children’s cognitive level and the instruc- tional approach in school. Their kindergarten teacher worked with the children by ques- tioning, discussing, and supplying answers, but only enough to lay a base from which the children moved into independent learning. Joseph was monitored by his mother and given clues from which to make steps for independent guesses or problem-solving. Donna’s mother continued her verbal interactions in a very relaxed manner, allowing Donna to lead the activity, listening patiently, and providing help or questioning when needed. The quiet approaches of both Donna’s parents and Donna’s kindergarten teacher created a familiar milieu for literacy development. These parents provided considerable support for literacy in the home, both with materials and verbal exchanges. Erica’s parent did so to the point that Erica was reading by the middle of the kindergarten school year. The other parents continued to provide home support that was adjusted to the level of their child’s understanding about reading constructs (books, letters, sounds, comprehension) and that supplemented the school instruction. The fact that some of the awareness responses moved from procedural to decoding, or decoding to procedural is a reflection of the impact of schooling and the children’s impressions of what is important to reading. In both settings by first grade the children were involved with basal reading instruction and received vary- ing amounts of phonics instruction. However, Erica, who was reading fluently by the end of kindergarten, was the child who continued to express an awareness that phonological awareness and skill was important in first grade. Donna and Sean were tuning into the procedures involved in the teacher initiating reading group activities. Yet, Joseph had not sorted out the procedures or process involved in reading instruction with his new first grade teacher. This pattern of responses moving from decoding in May to procedural or vague in September represents real differences and is supported in the larger study of kindergarten children’s awareness where the analysis showed that time and the interaction of time by setting to be significant (Stewart, 1992).

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Har

vard

Lib

rary

] at

08:

56 0

7 O

ctob

er 2

014

Parental Support for Literacy 117

A major difference among the four children was that both boys preferred to be out- doors engaging in active play while the girls spent much of their time engaging in literacy activities alone, with other children, or their parents. Whether this is a reflection of oppor- tunities provided by the parents as a result of gender views and boy and girl roles or each child’s individual preference was not examined. Sean’s mother voiced a desire for him to engage in more book reading but did not disturb his play or initiate these types of activities during the day. The girls were both very comfortable being with their mothers or siblings indoors engaged in a deliberate literacy experience such as reading books with or without their parents.

The observational and awareness results for these children were varied and reflected literacy experiences both at home and at school. Sean, who was not a fluent reader by September 9Pfirse grade but had sibling role models, was very clear in describing how he was learning to read at home and in school. The majority of his statements were proce- dural but he did talk about using books in most of his responses. Sean, like Joseph, spent most of the summer playing with peers, but his parents expressed their concern about his reading. Sean knew he would learn, but he was not worried nor was he in a hurry. Al- though Sean’s mother knew that he would read, shevoiced disappointment that he did not do so in kindergarten like her other children. However, Sean accurately described what was happening in his home to help him to learn to read. He said that both parents and siblings read to him and had him read to them. This type of activity was also reported by his mother as being a daily evening activity. Furthermore, Sean went to the library on a regular basis to borrow books.

Erica’s results reflect direction and cooperation with the child on the part of the par- ent. Borrowing books from the library and daily reading with the mother was both ob- served and reported. Going to the library was a weekly event for Erica. With this is mind, it is not surprising that Erica’s awareness responses were more reflective of her experi- ences. Erica was the only case study child who was a fluent reader when she entered first grade. In Erica’s case, the integration in her awareness responses was thought to be due to her increased ability to read. By the end of kindergarten, she was reading. The instruction at home was not focused on particular words but on the meaning of the text. During reading sessions Erica’s mother did not correct words but instead, emphasized compre- hension of the story. However, Erica’s awareness responses indicated that Erica realized that decoding was a salient part of learning to read. She mentioned this in May of kinder- garten and in September of first grade. In March and May, Erica talked about playing school, writing, reading books, reading sentences, and studying the pictures to derive meaning. By September, Erica was attending to other components of reading, like com- prehension. Indicative of this were comments such as, “Sometimes, I have to think about what the words mean.” Her mother was constantly trying to challenge her by asking questions that tested Erica’s understanding. The finding that Erica’s home literacy expe- riences and school experiences were similar in content and technique may be a factor in why Erica’s awareness was more integrated than Joseph’s and Donna’s. Erica’s awareness responses demonstrated how a beginning successful reader in kindergarten and a good reader in first grade talks about learning to read. Erica mentioned decoding skills, writing and reading books as a part of learning. Even though she was a reader in first grade, Erica was still aware of her mother’s role in helping her learn to read.

Joseph’s awareness responses about home for March, May, and September went from procedural to decoding to vague. In March, the response described an activity that his mother reported happening before and during kindergarten. In May, Joseph used his school experiences of sounding out words which had transferred to his reading at home: “I read to my cousin, I sound out the words and copy out the letters.” Joseph’s mother reported in the parent questionnaire that there was a regular time for reading, she usually read to him at bedtime and that he usually tried to read a few things (traffic signs, words on TV, and other environmental print). His mother mentioned that family members read to

!

1 I 1

! I i I 1 I 1 i i i I I

i I

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Har

vard

Lib

rary

] at

08:

56 0

7 O

ctob

er 2

014

. -

118 Stewart

Joseph occasionally. In September of first grade Joseph said he did not know what he was doing at home to learn to read. He had not yet begun to read fluently. He did not start until December of first grade. Therefore, one may interpret his response of “Don’t know, just learning in school” to reflect an inability to connect what is happening at home to reading. In school they were focusing on procedures and grouping which may have confused Joseph even more. Joseph did not see the activities of bedtime reading or reading a favor- ite book to his younger brother as part of learning to read. Joseph’s awareness responses for school matched what was occurring in school. In May, he focused on a specific book since they were into basal reading. In March he ivas paying attention to words and sounds as was stressed in school. In September of first grade his responses were vague, probably because of new approaches and a new teacher.

2: !h/iaY~;t d l tk kmdergxten year, DOY: dcs. &ed letters 8s being in ipv i3 nl f i )? learning to read. It is clear throughout Donna’s responses for home that she could not select even one activity at home that helped her read. She entangled what was occurring at school and talked about decoding for both home and school. Donna described procedures for home and school in May and September. During the events at home, Donna did a lot of the initiating. At school she was quiet and did not do much initiating. DOMa did not read as early as Erica, but her parents had conveyed to her their assurance that she would read well. Emphasis was placed on DOMa being the role model in the family and teaching letters and numbers to her younger brother and cousins. As can be seen from the results, Donna’s experiences were quite Werent from Joseph’s who spent the majority of his time in play with his peers. It is interesting to see that the results for the school question indicate that these two children did mention letters and spelling in March just as the height of their decoding instruction. Donna’s mother reported that Donna tried to read numerous types of reading materials and that family members read daily to the child. Donna did not borrow books from the library, although her mother expressed a desire to take Donna to the library. Donna, who became a reader in first grade responded to the question about school by mentioning that she learned from her kindergarten books.

Conclusion

The home environment plays a strategic role in literacy development of young chil- dren. We must realize, as do the results from the case study children indicate, that chil- dren are constantly thinking and interacting with information and structure in their home and school environments. Through this understanding, teachers and parents may be able to look at children’s views and create optimal learning environments by altering social, communicative and instructional conditions within the home and school.

In all of these homes, there was literacy engagement. Some of the children were more directed than others. Joseph was more concerned with peer interactions and regarded reading types of activities as part of school and something to be done there, separate from home. Donna experienced literacy as a natural part of daily living. Sean understood the importance of reading books but was more interested in playing with his peers. Erica realized what was needed to be the best reader in the class and appeared to receive intrinsic motivation to continuously engage in literacy events.

Data gathered from the observations of these four children indicated that there were differences in the opportunity for the children to engage in literacy activities. According to the parents’ understanding of literacy and the teachers’ estimation of the children’s reading ability, all the children became successful readers. The success that the children achieved in reading was accomplished at different times during kindergarten and first grade. These children expressed how they were learning to read in a way that mirrored their home and school experiences. Erica, who was exposed to concentrated literacy events during kindergarten and for sustained periods of time, left kindergarten able to read. Donna, who experienced most of her literacy events meshed throughout a relaxed and sometimes spontaneous schedule, became a reader in first grade. Joseph and Sean, who were geared

d

1

i

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Har

vard

Lib

rary

] at

08:

56 0

7 O

ctob

er 2

014

Parental Support for Literacy 119

toward child-initiated communication events became successful readers toward the middle of first grade.

This study described children’s home environments and their awareness of reading in these environments. Children have been observed becoming successful readers in differ- ent home and school settings. The awareness responses were indicative of what the chil- dren saw as being instrumental in helping them to learn to read at home and in school. These case studies revealed that substantive differences do exist between home and school contexts and literacy activities. Literacy events at home do play a role in initiating and mediating beginning reading experiences. Consequently, environments for learning will become more favorable when parents and teachers act as partners in the learning process. Teachers should consider children’s emergent literacy knowledge in conjunction with the variation that exists in the family environment for literacy. Teachers should organize meaningful learning environments for children that reflect the varying expectations and circumstances of the parents. They should seek out what children already know about the reading process. What children say about learning to read at home should be considered. The goal of all schools should be to create a stimulating and effective learning environ- ment that is based on positive parent-teacher relationships.

Since family literacy shapes the literacy development of children before they enter school, teachers should be sensitive to the construction of literacy in the families and communities of the children that they teach. Furthermore, it is important to look at lit- eracy experiences in the home in order to fully understand and extend children’s literacy development in the classroom. Home factors such as the parents’ monitoring of literacy activities, ensuring the availability of materials, and providing appropriate verbal support are primary factors in creating children’s understanding of literacy. If parents and teachers work in a collaborative manner to understand what children are aware of during their emergent literacy development, perhaps they will be able to provide optimum envi- ronments and support.

Epilogue An interview with the parents of these children in April of their first grade year pro-

Joseph S mother said:

“He is doing just great. He ot two A’s, one in reading and one in spelling. He reads everythmg. We can’t keep him ifom reading books. He was in the book club at school and read 36 books. We had to go to the library eve night and take out three or four books. They had a magazine reading test at school andxe only missed one. His teacher said that was exceptional for his age. We can’t keep him from reading. Sometimes it gets to be a bit much.”

“Even his teacher say he’s a different child from the beginning of the year. He now raises his hands all the time and wants to read and spell. In the beginning, he wouldn’t read out loud in class; now he does.”

vided information about the children’s progress in first grade.

Donna S mother said:

“Donna was doing great, her marks were coming up and she wants to go to summer school. We would like to send her if we can get the money. She reads to her younger brother when we can corral him to sit and listen.”

Sean S mother said:

“He enjoys reading. He has surprised his teachers. I’m so pleased, I was worried before. He’s now inMoonbeams. At first in September, I was disappointed. All my other children started in the hard books. Now I’m very pleased. He’s reading so well.”

i

!

I

I

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Har

vard

Lib

rary

] at

08:

56 0

7 O

ctob

er 2

014

120 Stewart

Erica’s mother said:

“The only thing we are working on now is trying to get her to slow down and read the instructions. She must slow down so she understands the instructions. Erica is reading so well. For example, one day I took her to work with me and she was reading a book about the handicapped. Everyone was so surprised that she could read adult books. If she had a problem with a word, she would sound it out and then she knew it when she saw it again. She’s really good with putting two and three letters together, and she goes back and pulls the information from other parts of the story. At home, I have to keep buying books that are at a higher level for her.”

References Anderson, A. B. & Stokes, S. (1984). Social and institutional influences on the develop-

ment and practice of literacy. In H, Goelman, A. Okrg, & F. Smith.(Eds.) Awakening To Literacy (pp.24-37). Exeter, NH: Hememann Educat~onal Books.

Applebee, AN. & Langer, J.A (1983). Instructional scaffolding: Reading and writing as natural language activities. Language Arts, 60, 168-175.

Brigs, C., and Elkind, D. (1973). Cognitive development in early readers. Developmental

Burns, S.M. & Casbergue, R. (1992). Parentchild interaction in a letter-writing context.

Canney, B., & Winograd, P. (1979). Schemata or Readin8 andReading Corn rehension

P ~ c h o l o p , 9, 279-280.

Journal OfReading Behavior: 14,3.

Perfomance. (Tech. Rep. No. 120). &ma: Uruversity of Illinois, dnter for the Study of Reading.

Cochran-Smith, M (1984). The Making of a Reader. Norwood, NJ.: Ablex Publishing

Clark, MM. (1976). Young Fluent Readers. London: Heinemann Educational Books. Clark, RM. (1985). Home Interaction and Children ’s School Learning, ( S ncer Founda

Clay, M.M. (1976). m a t did I Writ? Exeter, N H : Heinemann Education Books. DeLoache, J. S., & DeMendoza, G. A. P. (1983). Joint PicturebookReading ofMothers

and One-Year-Old Children. Urbana, Il: University of Illinois. Downing, I. (1969). How children think about reading. The Reading Teacher: 23, 217-230.

Dreher, M.J. & Zenge, A.D. (1990). Using metalinguistic awareness in first grade to

Dunning, D., Mason, J. & Stewart, J. (1994). Half Emp or Half Full?: A response to

Cow

tion, Grant No. D-107). Unpublished paper, University of Clamnont, F- laremont CA.

predict reading. Journal ofEducationa1 Research, 84, 1, 13-21.

Scarborough & Dobrich. Development Review 8 erspectives in Behavior and Cognition, In press.

Durkin, D. (1966). Children who read eark New York: Teachers College Press. Educational Testing Service. (1978). CitrusListen to the Story. Menlo Park, CA: Addison-

Wesley. Flood, 3. (1977). Parental styles in reading episodes with young children. Reading

Teacher: 30, 864-867.

Heath, S.B. (1982) What no bedtime story means. Language in Society, 11,49-76.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Har

vard

Lib

rary

] at

08:

56 0

7 O

ctob

er 2

014

P t

Parental Support for Literacy 121

Heath, S.B. (1983 . Way with wods: Language, life and work in communities and class-

Hess, R., Holloway, S., Price, G., & Dickson, P. (1983). Family enVironments and the acquisition of reading skills. In L.M. Laosa & LE. Sigel (Eds.), Families as Learning Envimnments for Children, pp. 87-113. New York: Plenum Press

Parke @d.) Review of Child Development Research, lblume Seven: The Family. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

moms. Jam bridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

Hess, R.D., & Holloway, S.D. (1984). Family and school as educational institutions. In R

Holdaway, D. (1979). The Foundations of Literacy Sydney: Ashton Scholastic. Houghton-Mifflin. (1978). Boston: MA Johns, J. (1972). Children’s conc t of reading and their reading achievement. Journal of

Johns, J. (1980). First graders’ concepts about print. Reading Research Quarterly.. 15,

Johns, J. &Ellis, D., (1976). Reading: Children Tell it like it is. Reading World. 16, 115-

King, E.M. & Friesen, D. T. (1972). Children who read in kindergarten Alberta Journal

Leichter, H. J. (1984). Families as environments for literacy. In H. Goelman, A. Oberg &

Reading Behavioc 4, 56y7.

529-549.

118.

ofEducational Research, I8 147-161.

E Smith (Eds.). Awakening to Literacy (pp. 38-50). Exeter, NH: Heinemann Education Books

MacMillan. (1978). Reading Readiness Series. Majoribanks, K. (1979). Families and their learning envimnments. Boston, M A :

Routledge and Kegan Paul. Mason, J., Bhavnagri, N., & Meyer, L. (1983). Kindeearten General uestionnaire.

Unpublished manuscript. Champaign, E Center for the Stu % of Reading. Mason, J. & Stewart, J. (1990). Testing emergent literacy in kindergarten. In L. Morrow

& J. Smith (Eds.) Assessment forlnstruction in Early Literacy @p. 155-175). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Earl Reading Develo ment (Readin Research Re rt No. 566). Champaign, IL: 6enter for the Stu& of Reading, bniversity of !? traditional first grade classroom. Reading Horizons, 33, 3-18.

Journal of Educational Pycholom, 70,680490.

nal ofEducationa1 Research, 76, 221-230.

Prentice Hall.

in Israel. ChildDevelopment, 5, 1-15.

ChildLanguage, 5, 1-15.

Mason, J., Stewart, J., Peterman, C. &Dunning, D. (1992). Towardafl IntegratedModel of

McIntyre, E. (1992). Instruction meets learner: Success in an inner-city learner in a

Meyers, M., & Paris, S. G. (1978). Children’s metacognitive knowledge about reading.

Morrow, L. M. (1983). Home and school correlates of early interest in literature. Jour-

Morrow, L. (1989). Literacy Development in the Early Years. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:

Ninio, A. (1980). Picture book reading in mother-infant dyads belonging to two subgroups

Ninio, A., & Bruner, J. (1978). The achievement and antecedents of labelling. Journal of

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Har

vard

Lib

rary

] at

08:

56 0

7 O

ctob

er 2

014

122 Stewart

Norman-Jackson, T. (1982). Family interactions and primary reading achievement of black

Plessas, G.P. & Oaks, C.R (1964). Prereading experiences of selected early readers.

Reid, J.F. (1966). Learning to think about reading. Educational Reseamh, 9,5662.

Smhorough, H. & Dobrich, W On the effica of reading to preschoolers. Developmental

Stewart, J.P. (1988). A stu learnin to read: % 8 ome and chool Perspectives. ERIC, Reading and Communi- cation &ills, ED 285 120, Urbana, IL

Journal of Educational Research, 86, 95-104.

Horizons, 34, No. I , 13-31.

literacy: Writing and wading. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

families. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Heinemann Educational Books.

tell us. Language Arts, 55, 922-932.

children in families of low income. Child Development, 53,349-358.

Reading Teachec 17,241-245.

Review Perspectives in Behavior an 7 Cognition. In press.

of kinder arten children’s awareness of how they are

Stewart, J. (1992). Young children’s awareness of reading, home and school perspectives.

Stewart, J.P. (1993). Book reading interactions: What parents and children say. Reading

Taylor, D. (1986). Creating a f d y s t o ~ . In W. Teale & E. Sulzby (E&.), Emexent

Taylor, D. & Dorsey-Gains, C. (1988). Growing up literate: Learningfim inner-city

Taylor, D. & Strickland, D. (1986). Family Storybook Reading. Exeter, N.H.:

Teale, W. (1978). Positive environments for learning to read: What studies of early readers

Teale, W. 1984). Reading to youn children: Its si cane for literacy development. In daelman, A. Oberg, and # . Smith (Eds.) P wakening to Literacy. Exeter, N.H.: Heinemann Educational Books.

Torrey, J. (1969). Learning to read without a teacher: A case study. Elementary English.

Treiman, D. J. (1977). Occupational prestige in comparative perspective. New York:

ylgotsky, L.S. (1979). Mind in society: The Development of Higher Psychological Pro-

Wells, G. (1986). The meaning makers: Children learning language and using

46, 550-556, 658.

Academic Press.

cesses. Cambridge, MA: Narvard University Press.

language to learn. Exeter, N.H.: Heinemann E d u ~ a t i o ~ l Books

t

!

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Har

vard

Lib

rary

] at

08:

56 0

7 O

ctob

er 2

014

Parental Support for Literacy 123

APPENDIX A

PARENT QUESTIONNAIRE

CHILD’S NAME BIRTHDATE

RE AD IN G

1. Do you read to your child?

DAILY WEEKLY OCCASIONALLY HARDLY EVER NO

If you read to your child, when did you begin?

Age 1 Age 2 Age 3 Age 4 Age 5

Does the child ask to be read to?

DAILY WEEKLY OCCASIONALLY HARDLY EVER NO

4. Does the child have a favorite book? YES NO

2.

3.

If yes, about how many times have you read it?

5. Is there a regular time for reading? YES NO

If yes, when?

6. Did any family member read to the child yesterday? YES NO

If yes, how long?

Circle what the child likes to look at picture books, children’s reading books, coloring books, comics, alphabet books, number books, school books, newspapers, magazines. How often?

DAILY WEEKLY OCCASIONALLY HARDLY EVER NOT AT ALL

About how many children’s books do you have at home?

How many books

7.

8.

9. Does the child have any magazine or book subscriptions? YES NO

If yes how many?

10. Do you buy reading materials to help your child learn to read?

VERY OFTEN OCCASIONALLY NO

11. Do you buy games to help your child learn to read?

VERY OFTEN OCCASIONALLY NO

12. Circle what the child fries to read Bible, newspapers, comics, magazines, jokes, favorite story, school books, stories, T-shirts, food labels, traffic signs, billboards, TV words. How often?

DAILY WEEKLY OCCASIONALLY HARDLY EVER NOT AT ALL

13. Does the child try to read to you?

DAILY WEEKLY OCCASIONALLY HARDLY EVER NO

14. Do any family members help the child read?

DAILY WEEKLY OCCASIONALLY HARDLY EVER NO

I

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Har

vard

Lib

rary

] at

08:

56 0

7 O

ctob

er 2

014

124 Stewart

15.

16.

1.

2.

3.

1.

2.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

7.

8.

9.

IO.

Appendix A (Cont'd)

Does the child read alone?

DAILY WEEKLY OCCASIONALLY HARDLY EVER NOT YET

Does the child read to other children?

DAILY WEEKLY OCCASIONALLY HARDLY EVER NO

LISTENING

Does the ohild listen to stories on records and cassettes?

DAILY WEEKLY OCCASIONALLY HARDLY EVER NOT AT ALL

Is story telling without a book a regular family activity?

DAILY WEEKLY OCCASIONALLY HARDLY EVER NO

Does the child tell stories to others?

DAILY WEEKLY OCCASIONALLY HARDLY EVER NOT AT ALL

WRITING

Does the child try tb print letters, words or stories?

DAILY WEEKLY OCCASIONALLY HARDLY EVER NOT AT ALL

Circle what the child prints: alphabet letters, words, stories, cards or letters, telephone messages, shopping lists, copying, reminder notes, labeli ng pictures, own name,+

Do any family members help the child print?

DAILY WEEKLY OCCASIONALLY HARDLY EVER NO

OTHER ACTIVITIES

Does the child take books from a public librafl

About how many hours in a school day does the child usually watch TV?

How many hours on Saturday does the child usually watch TV?

Does the child watch Sesame Street? YES OCCASIONALLY NO

Does the child talk to you about TV programs?

DAILY WEEKLY OCCASIONALLY HARDLY EVER NOT AT ALL

Does the child play school with others? YES SOMETIMES NO

Does the child do school work at home? YES SOMETIMES NO

What kind of work: read library books, read school books, finish work, study words or letters,

YES NO

~

Does the child get any help on school work? YES SOMETIMES NO

Does the child help with chores? YES SOMETIMES NO

Circle how child helps: making bed, cleaning room, dusting, caring for younger child, caring for pet, picking up toys, cooking, dish washing, setting table, taking out garbage, moving lawn, weeding, gardening, raking leaves, shoveling snow, other

1 i

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Har

vard

Lib

rary

] at

08:

56 0

7 O

ctob

er 2

014

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

- 8.

9.

10.

11.

Pawn tal Support for Literacy 125

Appendix A (Cont '0''

BACKGROUND OF CHILD AND FAMILY

Circle any problems the child has had since birth: major illness, poor hearing, poor vision, hard to toilet train, hard to discipline, tantrums, fearful, overactive, fussy eater, poor sleeper, emotional, distractible, short attention, not adaptable, unpredlctable, slow, other

What do you think are the child's ymd qualities: calm, confident, considerate of others, emotionally stable, outgoing, friendly, cheerful, understands others' feelings, sense of humor, honest, good-na- tured, sincere, socially well-adjusted, well-liked, bright, clear thinking, curious, inventive, a talker, imagi- native, other

If the child regularly went to school or to a babysitter before kindergarten, please check the kind of care and when the child attended.

AGE 1 AGE 2 AGE 3 AGE 4

HALF DAY SCHOOL

WHOLE DAY SCHOOL

PART DAY BABYSITTING

WHOLE DAY BABYSITTING

Who usuallywtcha the child afterschool now? parent, other adult, older child, babysitter, after school program, self-care

How many brothers and sisters does this child have?

How many are older younger than this child?

How many adults live at home? Circle what adults:

MOTHER FATHER GRANDPARENT(S) OTHER RELATIVES FRIENDS

Circle the highest school that the child's mother completed:

ELEMENTARY JUNIOR HIGH HIGH SCHOOL JUNIOR COLLEGE UNIVERSITY

GRADUATE SCHOOL

Circle the highest school that the child's father completed:

ELEMENTARY JUNIOR HIGH HIGH SCHOOL JUNIOR COLLEGE UNIVERSITY

GRADUATE SCHOOL

What kind of work does the child's mother do?

About how many hours of work each week:

What kind of work does the child's father do?

About how many hours of work each week:

Are there any other important things about your child learning to read that we should have asked? Please let us know here.

Thank you for filling out this questionnaire. We're sorry it was so long but we couldn't learn what is rea//y important without asking many questions. Please send it to us right away or ask your child to take it to school. The teacher will collect them for us.

L J

1

1

i i .! ! i

I

i

i

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Har

vard

Lib

rary

] at

08:

56 0

7 O

ctob

er 2

014