This article was downloaded by: [University of Chicago Library]On: 08 December 2014, At: 10:21Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Early Child Development and CarePublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/gecd20

Perspectives on Family LiteracyOlivia N. Saracho aa Department of Curriculum & Instruction, Reading Centerand National Reading Research Center , University ofMaryland , College Park, Maryland 20742 E-mail:Published online: 30 Jul 2010.

To cite this article: Olivia N. Saracho (1997) Perspectives on Family Literacy, Early ChildDevelopment and Care, 127:1, 3-11, DOI: 10.1080/0300443971270102

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0300443971270102

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information(the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor& Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warrantieswhatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purposeof the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are theopinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor& Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should beindependently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francisshall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs,expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arisingdirectly 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 systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expresslyforbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Early ChildDevelopment and Care, 1997, Vols. 127-128, pp. 3-11Reprints available directly from the publisherPhotocopying permitted by license only

© 1997 OPA (Overseas Publishers Association)Amsterdam B.V. Published in The Netherlands under

license by Gordon and Breach Science PublishersPrinted in Malaysia

Perspectives on Family Literacy

OLIVIA N. SARACHO

University of Maryland, Department of Curriculum & Instruction,Reading Center and National Reading Research Center,College Park, Maryland 20742E-mail: os1 @ umail.umd.edu

(Received 5 October 1996)

For more than a decade, research has demonstrated the importance of parent-childinteractions in developing literacy. Language and literacy theories have been generatedand research has been conducted on home literacy strategies. Evidence confirms thatparent literacy programs are effective in the children's literacy development. Research onthe value of extensive interventions can suggest ways to improve the parents' interactionswith their children during literacy experiences.

PERSPECTIVES IN FAMILY LITERACY

Numerous studies have attempted to define family literacy (e.g., Harris & Hodges,1995; Morrow, Tracey & Maxwell, 1995; Tracey, 1995) without being able to agreeupon a definition. Most attempts have failed to define the concept of home literacy ina way that can be of use to both researchers and practitioners in fostering children'sliteracy development within a family context. As a result, there has been ambiguityabout the concept of family literacy and an absence of theoretical frameworks.

This vacuum has forced literacy specialists to create their own definition andto conceptualize their own theoretical framework. Multiple domains (e.g., adultliteracy education, parent education and support, children's literacy education)were integrated to encourage parents to provide quality time with their children.They developed the concept of family literacy reflecting several domains, includingemergent literacy, early reading, intervention, parent involvement, and parenteducation. Researchers have used these domains to define the term, identifytheir theoretical framework, conduct studies, and develop programs accordingly.Currently, studies on family literacy have concentrated on cross-cultural and socialsituations or on understanding family ecology, family within school contexts,and mother-child interactions (Bronfenbrenner, 1986; Scott-Jones, 1987; Willett& Bloome, 1992). Various researchers (e.g., Delgado-Gaitan, 1987; Diaz, Moll

3

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

hica

go L

ibra

ry]

at 1

0:21

08

Dec

embe

r 20

14

4 O.N. SARACHO

& Mehan, 1986; Taylor & Dorsey-Gaines, 1988) augmented the family literacydefinition to include literacy materials of practical use found in the home, suchas notes, bills, and grocery lists.

FAMILY LITERACY MOVEMENT

For more than three decades, studies have shown that when parents read to andwith children, their children's literacy is developed (Anderson, Hiebert, Scott &Wilkinson, 1985; Chomsky, 1972; Laosa, 1982; Teale & Sulzby, 1986). The followingsections describe home factors, literacy programs, strategies, social situations, andschool and contexts that have influenced the family literacy movement.

Home Factors

Since the 1960s researchers in reading, linguistics, both educational and devel-opmental psychology, and sociology have attempted to understand the factors inthe home that might contribute to children's success and failure in school. Thisresearch was mostly an outgrowth of the "War on Poverty", concentrating on thepoverty community in general and the African American community in particular(Gadsden, 1994). Durkin (1974-1975) explored the factors found in the homesof low-income parents from Chicago in Black children's reading development,performance, and behaviors. Labov (1965) explored the linguistic componentsrelated to Black children's code structures within urban homes and communities andthe influence of these structures on their literacy. Coleman and his colleagues (1966)delineated the situation of Black families in America and the challenge their childrenencountered to secure admittance in the educational system. Moynihan (1965)described the obstacles Black families confronted in connection to national agendas.Bilingsley (1968) studied the sociology ofBlack families, whereas Blassingame (1972)wrote a historical perspective on Black families.

Later studies on family literacy and those on related areas reveal a relationshipbetween children's performance in school and the way parents practice literacywithin home contexts (Gadsden, 1994). Hiebert and Adams (1987) described howfathers' responses in the home motivated young children's print awareness as wellas parents' perceptions and knowledge of children's literacy. Wigfield and Asher(1984) demonstrated that parents' attitudes and expectations for their children'sperformances are good predictors of children's attitudes toward learning, effort inschool, and classroom performance.

Literacy Programs

During the late 1980s and early 1990s, several comprehensive family literacyprograms were initiated. Criteria for satisfactory family literacy settings and familyconditions were established to support the children's development and learning

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

hica

go L

ibra

ry]

at 1

0:21

08

Dec

embe

r 20

14

PERSPECTIVES ON FAMILY LITERACY 5

within the family context. According to Hayes (1996), family literacy programs haveintervention schemes that:

• address one or more of the capabilities required for a literate family.• share intergenerational program goals; and• provide or coordinate services to meet family literacy needs in a way that is

sufficient to produce intergenerational effects, (p. 47).

The national Even Start programs and the Kenan model programs, as well as locallevel programs are examples of such programs (Morrow et al, 1995).

1. Even Start programs, initiated by the United States Department of Educationin 1989, trained parents in literacy to help children to achieve their fullestpotential as learners. The requirements for this program were that childrenwere under eight years of age and their parents were over 16 years of age, werenot enrolled in secondary school, and were weak in basic skills.

2. Kenan model programs, funded by the National Center for Family Literacy,provided family literacy instruction as well as extended training and support toinstructors and program developers.

3. Other programs promoted parent-child literacy-related interactions throughparent-child home reading, visits to libraries, literacy materials in the home,and children's literacy activities. Mikulecky and Lloyd (1995) evaluated theseprograms and found an increase in children's repeated reading of books andmagazines, participation in some form of writing, and time with parents devotedto literacy activities, such as parent book reading and trips to the library.

Presently the concept of family literacy reflects a blend of models and approachesderived from various empirical studies that support claims of success; it still suffersfrom a weak theoretical framework.

Literacy Strategies

Reviews of the literature related to family literacy (e.g., Topping, 1986; Tracey, 1995)discuss experimental studies that suggest successful strategies for parents to helptheir children with reading. These reviews describe extensive intervention programsto improve parents' interactions with their children. These studies and reviews haveencouraged the family literacy movement for more than 30 years. Lancy, Draperand Boyce (1989) report that parents of good readers employ elaborate strategiesdiat incorporate scaffolding when children make an effort to understand stories.They also use strategies to help them avoid frustration. For example, the parentwould begin the story and model how to make predictions. After reading the booksmany times, the parent gradually talks less but asks the child to become moreactive in reading or telling a story. In contrast, parents of poor readers employcompressed strategies that lead to decoding, criticism, and covering the picturesin order that the child would not "cheat" in identifying the word. Goldenberg,Reese and Gallimore (1992) explain thatwhen low-income Hispanic parents attempt

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

hica

go L

ibra

ry]

at 1

0:21

08

Dec

embe

r 20

14

6 O.N. SARACHO

to help their children with their reading, they usually stress letter naming andspelling-sound correspondences. These parents are taught to wait for children'sresponses, to offer more praise, to use contextual prompts rather than word-levelprompts, and to read storybooks with dramatic approaches.

Recendy researchers have identified what they consider to be die essentialrelationship between parental reading and children's literacy development. Lancyand Begin (1992) found that children become more fluent and positive aboutreading if parent-child dyads view reading as fun, read stories using a "semantic"radier than a "decoding" instruction, and generate questions and foster humorduring reading.

Social Situations

Studies on family literacy often revolve around social situations to better understandthe children's literacy development within a family setting. Since the late 1980s,Edwards (1995) have provided evidence where low-income parents want to learn howto read to their children. Other researchers indicate that many low-income familiesrecognize the importance of education. Fitzgerald, Spiegel and Cunningham (1991)show diat low-income parents rate the value of education higher than high-incomeparents do. Delgado-Gaitan (1987) assert that the Hispanic immigration to theUnited States is motivated mainly by the desire for the children to receive a bettereducation. Taylor and Dorsey-Gaines (1988) describe low-income families whosechildren have.succeeded in school and the incredible sacrifices and efforts diesefamilies have gone through to support their children's education. These parentsinclude those whose education levels are very low.

In comparing differences between literacy activities of low- and middle-incomefamilies, Baker, Sonnenschein, Serpell, Fernandez-Fein and Scher (1994) describethat low-income parents reported having done more reading practice and homework(e.g., flashcards, letter-practice) with their kindergarten children than did middle-income parents. Middle-income parents reported having engaged in more play withprint and more independent reading by children. Purcell-Gates (1994) indicate thatlow-income families use a low level of print, most of it used for daily routines, utilizingsimple language at the clause and phrase level.

Between the 1970s and early 1980s Anderson and his associates (1985) registeredmore books, magazines, and educational literacy materials in die homes of higher-income families. High-income parents model more book/magazine reading andaccompany children to libraries more than do low-income parents (Fitzgerald et al,1991; Baker et al, 1994). In contrast, low-income parents extend literacy-relatedbehaviors (such as storytelling and singing) and support dieir children's education(Baker et al, 1994; Gadsden, 1995; Headi, 1983; Taylor & Dorsey-Gaines, 1988). Themajor differences among low-income, middle-income, and high-income families arethe literacy support systems and the extent to which schools concentrate on literacyeducation for families from middle-class homes.

Researchers found that the critical nature and value of the relationship betweenmaternal reading and die development of dieir children's literacy varies with

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

hica

go L

ibra

ry]

at 1

0:21

08

Dec

embe

r 20

14

PERSPECTIVES ON FAMILY LITERACY 7

mothers who have a college education and read to them at home. Tracey and Young(1994) investigated the home reading of accelerated and at-risk readers and theircollege-educated mothers. Their results showed that at-risk readers did more oralreading in the second and third grades than did accelerated readers. In examiningtheir reading sessions, Tracey (1995) noticed remarkable differences in the degree towhich the accelerated reader received more physical and verbal attention, support,and extended oral feedback than did the at-risk readers.

Recent studies address discussions of family support attempts integrated inprograms to counteract the illiteracy of parents (especially those low-income, minorityfamilies) by helping them to improve their children's school performance (Morrow,1992).

Home and School Contexts

Over the past five years the focus in family literacy has been on family supportinitiatives within school and home contexts. Research and practice in literacyhave expanded from child to adult development as a result of legislative efforts(e.g., Family Support Act of 1988), which has attempted to integrate services forchildren and families and to establish discussions on ways to modify the role ofschool in supporting parents and communities (Gadsden, 1994; United StatesDepartment of Education and United States Department of Human Services, 1993).This achievement has extended to include the intergenerational nature of literacyand life-span development of individual family members (Coleman, 1987; Smith,1991).

Family literacy strives to improve the developmental capacity and educationalopportunities for family members. Most of these studies are correlational (asopposed to causal studies) and suggest many overly simple ways to intervene indealing with family literacy. They suggest a rationale for direct interventions such as:

1. Reading material in the home has an impact in reading performance.2. The literacy levels of parents have an impact on the child's later academic

success.3. The amount of time parents spend reading to their children has an impact on

their later academic performance.

Studies in family literacy frequently present two major views on learning in thehome to extend: (1) the parents' degree of literacy that motivates the children toacquire, develop, and use literacy and (2) the physical environments where books areavailable become a positive influence on children's print development. For example,Leichter (1984) show that when parents have levels of literacy that cause them tobelieve that they are efficient with print, speech and other literate behaviors, thenumber of books in the home as well as the quantity and quality of interactionsbetween parents and their children increase. Parents assume new roles in assistingand directing their children in their literacy development and learning. Parents serveas role models (Auerbach, 1989) to communicate to their children the importanceof literacy.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

hica

go L

ibra

ry]

at 1

0:21

08

Dec

embe

r 20

14

8 O.N. SARACHO

CONTROVERSIAL THEORIES

The weak rationale for family literacy has led experts to challenge each others'theories. A controversy prevails on the influence and effectiveness of family literacyprograms. Several family literacy researchers recommend focussing on parent-childliteracy interactions by extending literacy materials in the home and educatingparents to use literacy and language strategies with their children. Those whodisagree with this point of view refer to this method as a "deficit" model becauseit identifies family deficits that need to be corrected. They believe that this modeldestroys any family strengths and attempts to make parents conform to a particularmold (Auerbach, 1995), appropriate for the school but inappropriate for the family.

The predicament in educating parents becomes profound if the family literacyprogram modifies the parents, style of dinner conversation and other child rearingpractices. Several researchers (e.g., Anderson et al, 1985; Baker et al, 1994;Delgado-Gaitan, 1987; Edwards, 1991, 1995; Fitzgerald et al, 1991; Gadsden, 1995;Heath, 1983; Purcell-Gates, 1994; Taylor & Dorsey-Gaines, 1988) show differences inliteracy-related practices of low-income, middle-income, and high-income families.Their purpose and the ways they present literacy to children differ. Heath (1983)recommends that schools rather than families conform to these differences and notconcentrate their literacy education toward only middle class family models. Theybelieve it is important that parents be encouraged to continue their lifestyle andavoid becoming a clone of the teacher. Family members should not be forced to giveup their home social interactional patterns and culture to meet the requirements ofliteracy and schooling (Coles, 1984; Gadsden, 1991; Johnston, 1985).

These researchers propose a "wealth" model that designs literacy instruction basedon parental strengths and deals with immediate social issues such as immigration,employment, housing, safety, and drugs (Auerbach, 1995). Many parents want toknow how to help their children with literacy and resent not being taught specificstrategies on how to read with their children (Edwards, 1991, 1995). Additionally,the notion of reading for fun may be absolutely unfamiliar to parents who haveencountered negative experiences with print and schools. The "wealth" model seemsto reduce these possibilities because it diminishes the importance of parent-childinteractions (Auerbach, 1995).

There is sufficient evidence to suggest that family development is an essentialeducational and policy concern. The conclusions of these studies provide someframework for family literacy programs, but the results may be counter-productive.These studies are usually single approaches to improved family literacy and fail toprovide sufficient justification to impose any of these conditions into family settingsthrough intervention.

Few studies have examined the boundaries of literacy programs and effects of theliteracy activities on the families they serve (Paratore, 1992). In addition, learningis not maintained over time but achieves only short-term gains in these settings.Although the family literacy studies have identified several factors that suggestmethods, variable selection, and interpretation of results for future research, thestatus, expectation, and future of family literacy are remarkably more indefinite.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

hica

go L

ibra

ry]

at 1

0:21

08

Dec

embe

r 20

14

PERSPECTIVES ON FAMILY LITERACY 9

SUMMARY

For more than ten years, research has demonstrated the importance of parent-childinteractions in the development of children's literacy. Language and literacy theorieshave been observed, tested, and enriched. Evidence confirms that parent literacyprograms are effective in the children's literacy development. Research on the valueof extensive interventions can suggest how to improve the parents' interactions withtheir children during literacy experiences.

Quality parent-child interactions can develop the children's literacy abilities.Evidently these interactions require more than simply reading to children andmaking books accessible to them. Studies indicate that the parents' backgroundinfluences the way parents read to their child. They also show that how parentsspeak with their children and the quality of time they spend reading to their childrenaffects their later reading achievement.

The studies on family literacy need to be taken seriously, because they suggeststrategies that assist parents to focus on literacy instruction that can help them tohave more control over their world. It is important for parents to know successfulstrategies that can be used to promote their children's literacy development. Familyliteracy programs need to have a balanced, concrete focus on literacy, parenting,and child development. They need to improve literacy skills of both parents andchildren. Data are also needed on the effects of the different programs in developinga curriculum for parents to help them cope with their daily social situations.

Family literacy programs should be an extension of the family itself rather than anextension of the school. They must be involved with and coordinated with supportservices. Research advises that programs help instructors to become more sensitiveto parents and teach them how to promote their children's literacy developmentin their own unique teaching style. Parents must participate in making decisionsconcerning the process of the program and their expressed needs must guide thedelivery and instruction of the program. It has been found that when participantsare involved in planing, retention rates in the family literacy program are higher.

References

Anderson, R.C., Hiebert, E.H., Scott, J.A. and Wilkinson, I. (1985). Becoming a nation of readers: The reportof the Commission on Reading. Washington, DC: The National Institute of Education.

Auerbach, E.R. (1989). Towards a socio-contextual approach to family literacy. HarvardEducational Review,59, 165-187.

Auerbach, E.R. (1995). Which way for family literacy: Intervention or empowerment. In L. Morrow(Ed.), Family literacy connection in schools and communities, pp. 11-28. Newark, DE: International ReadingAssociation.

Baker, L., Sonnenschein, S., Serpell, R., Fernandez-Fein, S. and Scher, D. (1994). Contexts of emergentliteracy: Everyday home experiences of urban prekindergarten children. (Research report no. 24). Athens, GA:National Reading Research Center, University of Georgia and University of Maryland.

Bilingsley, A. (1968). Black families in white America. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Blassingame, J. (1972). The slave community. NY: Oxford University Press.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

hica

go L

ibra

ry]

at 1

0:21

08

Dec

embe

r 20

14

10 O.N. SARACHO

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1986). Ecology of the family as a context for human development researchperspective. Developmental Psychology, 22, 723-742.

Chomsky, C. (1972). Stages in language development and reading exposure. Harvard Educational Review,42, 1-33.

Coleman,J.S. (1987). Families and schools. Educational Researcher, 16, 32-38.Coleman, J.S., Campbell, E.Q., Hobson, C.J., McPartland, J., Mood, A.M., Weinfeld, F.D. and York, R.L.

(1966). Equality of educational opportunity. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.Coles, G.S. (1984). Adult literacy and learning theory: A study of cognitive and activity. Science and Society,

47, 451-482.Delgado-Gaitan, C. (1987). Mexican adult literacy: New directions for immigrants. In S.R. Goldman and

K. Trueba (Eds.), Becoming literate as a second language, pp. 9-32. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Díaz, S., Moll, L. and Mehan, K. (1986). Socio-cultural resources in instruction: A context-specific

approach. In Beyond language: Social and cultural factors in schooling language minority children, pp. 87-229.Los Angeles, CA: California State Department of Education and California State University.

Durkin, D. (1974-1975). A six year study of children who learned to read in school at the age of four.Reading Research Quarterly, 10, 9-61.

Edwards, P.A. (1995). Combining parents, and teachers, thoughts abut storybook reading at home andschool. In L. Morrow (Ed.), Family literacy connection in schools and communities, pp. 54-69. Newark, DE:International Reading Association.

Edwards, P.A. (1991). Fostering early literacy through parent coaching. In E. Hiebert (Ed.), Literacy for adiverse society, pp. 199-213. NY: Teachers College Press.

Fitzgerald, J., Spiegel, D.L. and Cunningham, J.W. (1991). The relationship between parental level andperceptions of emergent literacy. Journal of Reading Behavior, 13(2), 191–212.

Gadsden, V.L. (1995). Representations of literacy: Parents' images in two cultural communities. InL. Morrow (Ed.), Family literacy connection in schools and communities, pp. 287–303. Newark, DE:

International Reading Association.Gadsden, V.L. (1994). Understanding family literacy: Conceptual issues facing the field. Teachers College

Record, 96(1), 58-86.Gadsden, V.L. (1991). Trying one more time! Gaining access to literacy. In M. Foster (Ed.), Reading in

equal education: Qualitative investigations into schools and schooling, 11,189-201. NY: AMS Press.

Goldenberg, C, Reese, L. and Gallimore, R. (1992). Effects of literacy materials from school on Latinochildren's home experiences and early reading achievement. American Journal of Education, 100, 497-537.

Harris, T.L. and Hodges, R.E. (1995). The literacy dictionary: A vocabulary of reading and writing. Newark,DE: International Reading Association.

Hayes, A. (1996). Longitudinal study of family literacy program outcomes. In L.A. Benjamin and J. Lord(Eds.), Family literacy: Directions in research and implications for practice, pp. 45-54. Washington, DC: UnitedStates Department of Education Office of Educational Research and Improvement in collaboration with

' the Office of Vocational and Adult Education and the Office of Elementary and Secondary Education'sEven Start Program.

Heath, S.B. (1983). Ways with words. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Hiebert, F. and Adams, C. (1987). Fathers' and mothers' perceptions of their preschool children's

emergent literacy. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 44, 25-37.

Johnston, P. (1985). Understanding reading disability: A case study approach. Harvard Educational Review,55, 153-178.

Labov, W.A. (1965, June). Linguistic research on nonstandard Enalish of Negro children. Paper presented to

the New York Society for the Experimental Study of Education, NY.Lancy, D.F. and Begin, C. (1992, April). The role of parents in supporting beginning reading. Paper presented

at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.Lancy, D.F., Draper, K.D. and Boyce, G. (1989). Parental influence on children's acquisition of reading.

Contemporary Issues in Reading, 4(1), 83-93.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

hica

go L

ibra

ry]

at 1

0:21

08

Dec

embe

r 20

14

PERSPECTIVES ON FAMILY LITERACY 11

Laosa, L.M. (1982). School, occupation, culture and family: The impact of parental schooling on theparent-child relationship. Journal of Educational Psychology, 74, 791-827.

Leichter, H. (1984). Families as environments for literacy. In H. Goelman and A. Oberg (Eds.), Awakeningto literacy, pp. 38-50. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Mikulecky, L. and Lloyd, P. (1995, May). Parent-child interaction in family literacy programs. Paper presentedat the National Center for Family Literacy conference, Louisville, KY, May.

Morrow, L.M. (1992). The impact of a literature-based program on literacy achievement, use of literature,and attitudes of children from minority backgrounds. Reading Research Quarterly, 27, 251-273.

Morrow, L.M., Tracey, D.H. and Maxwell, C.M. (Eds.). (1995). A survey of family literacy. Newark, DE:International Reading Association.

Moynihan, D.P. (1965). The Negro family: The case for national action. Washington, DC: United StatesDepartment of Labor, Office of Policy, Planning, and Research.

Paratore.J. (1992). An inter-generational approach to literacy: Effects of literacy learning on adults andon practice of family literacy. In DJ. Leu, C.K. Kinzer, L.M. Ayre and J.A. Peter (Eds.), Examiningcentral issues in literacy research, theory, and practice. Forty-second Yearbook of the National Reading Conference,

pp. 83–92. Chicago, IL: National Reading Conference.Purcell-Gates, V. (1994). The relationships between parental literacy skills and functional uses of print and children's

ability to learn literacy skills. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Graduate School of Education.Scott-Jones, D. (1987). Mother-as-teacher in families of high- and low-achieving low-income black

first-graders. Journal of Negro Education, 56, 21-34.Smith, S. (1991). Two-generation program models: A new intervention strategy. SocialPolicy Reports: Society

of Research in Child Development, 5, 1-15.Taylor, D. and Dorsey-Gaines, C. (1988). Growing up literate: Learning from inner-city families. Portsmouth,

NH: Heinemann.Teale, W.H. and Sulzby, E. (1986). Home background and young children's literacy development. In

W.H. Teale and E. Sulzby (Eds.), Emerging literacy: uniting and reading, pp. 173–206. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Topping, KJ. (1986). Parents as educators. London: Croom Helm.Tracey, D.H. (1995). Children practicing reading at home: What we know about how parents help.

In L. Morrow (Ed.), Family literacy connection in schools and communities, pp. 253-268. Newark, DE:International Reading Association.

Tracey, D.H. and Young, J.W. (1994). Mother-child interactions during children's oral reading at home.In D. Leu and C. Kinzer (Eds.), Multidimensional aspects of literacy research, theory, andpractice. Forty-thirdYearbook of the National Reading Conference, pp. 342-350. Chicago, IL: National Reading Conference.

United States Department of Education and United States Department of Human Services. (1993).Together we can. (Publication No. RR 940290). Washington, DC: United States Department of Educationand United States Department of Human Services.

Wigfield, A. and Asher, S.R. (1984). Social and motivational influences on reading. In P.D. Pearson,R. Barr, M.L. Kamil and P. Mosethal (Eds.), Handbook of reading research, 1, 423-452. New York, NY:Longman.

Willett, J. and Bloome, D. (1992). Literacy, language, school and community: A community-centered view.In A. Carrasquilo and C. Hedley (Eds.), Whole language and the bilingual learner, pp. 35-57. Norwood,NJ: Ablex.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

hica

go L

ibra

ry]

at 1

0:21

08

Dec

embe

r 20

14