ED 362 766 CE 064 881 TITLE FaiIly.Literacy. … · ED 362 766 TITLE INSTITUTION REPORT NO PUB DATE NOTE AVAILABLE FROM. PUB TYPE. EDRS PRICE DESCRIPTORS. IDENTIFIERS. ABSTRACT

ED 362 766

TITLE

INSTITUTION

REPORT NOPUB DATENOTEAVAILABLE FROM

PUB TYPE

EDRS PRICEDESCRIPTORS

IDENTIFIERS

ABSTRACT

DOCUMENT RESUME

CE 064 881

FaiIly.Literacy. Viewpoints: A Series of OccasionalPapers on Basic Education. 15..Adult Literacy and Basic Skills Unit, London(England).ISSN-0266-20989Mar 9343p.

Adult Literacy and Basic Skills Unit, KingsbourneHouse, 229/231 High Holborn, London WC1V 7DA,England, United Kingdom (2.50 British pounds pluspostage).Collected Works General (020)

MF01/PCO2 Plus Postage.Adult Basic Education; Adult Literacy; DemonstrationPrograms; Economic Development; Elementary Education;Foreign Countries; *Intergenerational Programs; LaborForce Development; *Literacy Education; Models;*Parent Child Relationship; Parent Influence; *ParentParticipation; Parent Role; *Parents as Teachers;Parent Student Relationship*Family Literacy; *United Kingdom

The six articles in this issue attempt to answerquestions that have arisen due to the increase in programs that crossexisting or traditional age barriers in literacy education. They drawupon recent and current research and practice both in the UnitedKingdom and the United States. "Family Literacy: An IntergenerationalApproach to Education" (Sharon Darling) describes and comments onsome current models for family literacy programs in the UnitedStates. "Intergenerational Literacy Intervention: Possibilities andProblems" (Peter Hannon) starts from research into school readingattainment and offers a framework for parental involvement in readingacquisition. "Workforce Education, Family Literacy, and EconomicDevelopment" (Thomas Sticht) places family literacy in the context ofthe needs of the work force and examines the interrelationship ofliteracy acquisition in these different areas. "Parent Involvement inFamily Literacy: An Anti-Poverty Perspective" (Ray Phillips) tracesthe development of parent involvement initiatives against thebackground of broader social and policy change in theBritish/European context. "Techniques in Family Literacy" (KeithTopping) looks at specific techniques for parental intervention inbasic skills acquisition by children, including paired reading, cuedspelling, and paired writing. "A Typology of Family andIntergenerational Literacy Programmes: Implications for Evaluation"(Ruth Nickse) explores issues of evaluation by seeking to establish atypology of family literacy programs. (YLB)

************************************************************************

Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made* from the original document.***********************************************************************

rAL

A Series Of Occasional Papers On Basic Education

n s

15. Family Literacy

U & DEPARVIONT OP EDUCATIONOAK* al ENeaftsno NIANNN she hwevoNeAl

E 7 TIONAI. REsouncts woottunotoCENTER IERIO

Thi 0:RuhNom Nis talm l011idwted ashhcovle horn Rik omen t adandallAOhgmbhnd It

o hi..0.' chOhdas h tome 0455 to mdlowoMIN000C1,00 !NOWT

Ponta *yew 0, 00ewsWIIMMOlondhOCCWmeal do nol nClidIney MOIVIMInt 010AOEM AARON, of oco.er

"PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE THISMATERIAL HAS SEEN GRANTED BY

&WITTO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCESINFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)"

t,'`

,

FAMILY LITERACY AN INTERGENERATIONALAPPROACH TO EDUCATION

Sharon Darling

INTERGENERATIONAL LITERACY INTERVENTION :POSSIBILITIES AND PROBLEMS

Peter Hannon

WORKFORCE EDUCATION, FAMILY LITERACY AND

ECONOM IC DEVELOPMENTThomas G Sttcht

PARENT INVOLVEMENT IN FAMILY LITERACY :

AN ANTI-POVERTY PERSPECTIVE

Viewpoints:I Series Of Occasional Papers On Basic Education

15. Family Literacy

IntroductionAs concern continues about 'adequate' levels of basic skills in Western society, the

respective roles of educational institutions and the roles and responsibilities of parents arebeing questioned. There is considerable interest and debate about the achievement of literacyat an early age and the various factors that influence it. Significant levels of adult basic skillsneeds remain and the interrelationship of improved basic skills among adults and acquisiticnof basic literacy among children is being explored more closely. Against this setting it isimportant to look at what strategies and practice have been developed. The increase inprogrammes that cross existing or traditional age barriers raises a number of issues: Who arethe programmes aimed at? Who gains most benefit? How is this best done? How should theeffectiveness of such programmes be judged?

The articles in this issue of Viewpoints start to provide some of the answers to thesequestions. They draw upon recent and current research and practice both in the UnitedKingdom and the United States of America. In the first article Sharon Darling describes andcomments on some of the current models for family literacy programmes in the LiS. PeterHannon's contribution starts from research into school reading attainment and offersa framework for parental involvement in reading acquisition. Tom Sticht places familyliteracy in the context of the needs of the workforce and examines the interrelationsFn ofliteracy acquisition in these different areas. In the British/European context, Ray Phillipstraces the development of parent involvement initiatives against the background ofbroader social and policy change. In particular the link between basic skills needs andanti-poverty strategies is explored. Keith Topping looks in some detail at specifictechniques for parental intervention in basic skills acquisition by children, includingpaired reading, cued spelling and paired writing. Finally, Ruth Nickse explores issues ofevaluation by seeking to establish a typology of family literacy programmes.

ContentsFAMILY LITERACY: AN INTERGENERATIONAL APPROACH TO EDUCATION

Sharon Darling 9

INTERGENERATIONAL LITERACY INTERVENTION: POSSIBILITIESAND PROBLEMS

Peter Hannon 6

WORKFORCE EDUCATION. FAMILY LITERACY ANDECONOM IC DEVELOPMENT

Thomas G Stwht 9

PARENT INVOLVEMENT IN FAMILY LITERACY: AN ANTI-POVERTYPERSPECTIVE

Ray PhilliPs 16

TECHNIQUES IN FAMILY LITERArYKeith Mpping

A TYPOLOGY OF FAMILY AND INTERGENERATIONAL LITERACYPROGRAMMES: IMPLICATIONS FOR EVALUATION

Ruth S Nickse 34

The views expressed in this publication are those of the authors alone and are notnecessarily shared by their employers or the Adult Literacy & Basic Skills I'nu.

Viewpoints 15: Family literacy

Family literacy: an intergenerational approach to educationSharon Darling

Sharon Darling has worked in the field of adult education for over twenty yearsand has served as an education consultant to governors and public policymakersthroughout the United States. Sharon Darling has served on numerous boards andcurrently is V ice Chair of the Board of Directors for the National Institute forLiteracy, a board member of the Barbara Bush Foundation for Family Literacy,the National Coalition for Literacy, and the Board of Visitors for the University ofNorth Carolina at Chapel Hill. In addition to her professional responsibilities, shepartkipates in many community organisations and agencies including as a Directorto the Louisville area Chamber of Commerce, as a member of the Kentucky Women'sForum and as a boa rd member of the Louisville Community Foundation.

In :he face of what appears to be an overwhelmingagenda of staggering complex social, educational andeconomic problems, we Americans are often temptedto view new solutions with a jaundiced eye. We haveheard endlessly about the crisis in the classroom, theextent of adult illiteracy. and the skill deficits of theworkforce. A variety of approaches have been tried.based on expert opinion, research findings, andcommon sense. Education, social services, privatevolunteer organisations, and business and industryhave also attempted to address the problem. Andwhat about all those programmes we've supported, allthose school reforms implemented in Lie 1980s?Surely, we have tried it all, and yet our efforts do notseem to keep pace with the rate of change in oursociety. These attempts have not prevented problemsfrom growing faster than we can begin to address them.

The National Centre for Family Literacy wasestablished to attack some of the pervasive problemsin education by looking beyond the schoolhouse wallsto target the most powerful educational institution -the family. The NCFL is an advocate for policy changesand legislative initiatives that focus on families andNCFL conducts training seminars for over 5000 teachersand community leaders each year to help themestablish programmes aimed at breaking the cycle ofilliteracy. NcF1. now has trained staff of programmesin each of the 50 states and the outcomes of thoseprogramme participants make a convincing case forfamily literacy, as a powerful intervention that is acritical ingredient for education reform and the broadereconomic and social agenda of the next decade.

Why is family literacy a better solution to thepersistent educational problems of the United States?Perhaps because it proposes a comprehensive strategywhich attempts to get at the root of school failure andundereducation. Family literacy holds the key to twofrustrating educational problems which havestubbornly resisted recent reform efforts. N lost

observers agree that these problem areas are criticalfor .America's future. Too many American adults are

unable to cope with the increased level of literacyskills demanded by our rapidly coanging world andconsequently cannot find employment, if working areunable to progress on the job. and do not have theskills to build our communities. We must get seriousabout the critical needs of undereducated adults tosolve our immediate social and economic woes. But wemust also address the issue of prevention for ourfuture adult workers and citizens. We must do a betterjob of educating our children - increasing the successrate while decreasing the dropout rate, especially forthose most at risk. Family literacy programmesrecognise that these two groups - undereducatedadults and educationally "at risk children- - interlock:they are bound so tightly together that excellence inpublic school education is an empty dream for youthswho go home each afternoon to families where literacyis neither practiced nor valued. Literacy and the valueof education are intergenerational and the messagesabout education transmitted in the home are criticalto the future success of children.

This is why family literacy programmes focus onparents and children simultaneously, providing bothadult basic skills training and early childhoodeducation. The comprehensive family literacyprogramme model also acknowledges that throughtheir attitudes, parents convey a critical messageabout schooling, the work and joy of learning, and theconnection between education and quality of life. Thisis why the programme design includes blocks of timefor intergenerational activities, discussion of parentingissues, and a time for parents to become involved inthe school setting as volunteers. These basiccomponents - education for parents and children.combined with regular interaction and parent support- comprise a powerful, family-focused intervention.

The Kenan ModelOne highly successful programme of this

comprehensive type is the lienan Model. namA for

9

Family literacy: an intergenerational approach to education

the William R. Kenan. Jr.. Charitable "nust which hashelped spread the model throughout the nation.Thousands of families are participating in Kenanprogram:nes. whose primary goal is to break theintergenerational cycle of undereducation byimproving parents' skills and attitudes towardeducation, developing children's skills, and unitingparents and children in a positive educationalexperience.

The Model. originally based on the KentuckyParent and Child Education PACE programme.brings together undereducated parents or adultcare-givers with their three or four year old childrenfor three days each week at a programme site. usuallyan elementary school. While the children participatein a high quality preschool programme, the adultswork on basic academic and life-coping skills. TheModel also develops positive interaction betweenparent and child, and enhanced parenting skills.

The intensive programme runs for the entire schoolyear. and parents who make this major commitmentare likely to see meaningful, lasting improvements intheir own skills and attitudes, their youngsters'abilities, and their families' values and interactionpatterns.

A summary of the major functions and outcomes ofKenan Model programmes reveals the power of thisapproach:

Adult basic skills instruction aims to raise theeducational level of parents. Group instruction relatingto parents' common needs and interests is combinedwith individualised study targeted at personal andacademic goals. Adults develop learnil..: strategiesand communication skills which transfer to real lifesettings. In doing so. they build confidence and act asrole models for their childien, demonstrating thepower of learning with their actioi.= as well as theirwords.

The significance of these educational outcomes isnot lost on the participants. A mother in the Louisvilleprogramme says, left school at 1.1. had 6 children. andfinally I went back to school with my :3 year old to get a .oband get off welfare." It took her two years after shefinished the programme to finally get a good enoughjob to support her family. "The first time that welfarecheque wasn't in the mailbox. the kids came to me.- shesaid. "Thcy were worried. I told them there weren't g,,ingto be any more cheques in the mailbox.-

Early childhood educatior offers two to five yearold children a developmentally appropriateprogramme adapted from the acclaimed HighiScopecurriculum. Children initiate learning experiencesthrough play activities which they plan and carry out.This "active learning- builds on their existingstrengths and accomplishments, and allows each childto develop at an individual pace. The children alsoacquire the cognitive and social skills necessary forschool readiness.

.A mother in a Richmond, Virginia. programmenoted a major change in her three year old child: "Ilewent from one or two words: now you lust can't hush hunand he's always asking. 'What's this and 'What's that

Parent Time is a learning and support group thatprovides parents with information on issues of concern

such as early childhood development, health andnutrition, and budgeting - and offers them anopportunity to share feelings and problems with theirpeers. Many adults struggling with the problems ofparenthood and poverty appreciate the opportunityto interact in a supportive, nonjudgmentalatmosphere.

"School was once lust a nest of bad memories for me. Ihated it beyond words. Now. I love it because this is where Iwas dared to dream again. I will be forever grateful forwhat family literacy gave me." one mother said, "but Iam even more grateful for what a took away. What it tookwas the fear, the self-doubts, the emotional illiteracy.'

Parent and Child Together (PACT). This part ofthe Kenan Model provides parents and children withdaily practice in positive interaction. It is a criticalcomponent because it. synthesises the learning fromthe other programme components. If family literacy is i

about changing messages. then PACT is designed toproduce lasting changes in the interaction patternsthat communicate those altered messages. It is duringPACT time that parents practice what they havelearned during adult education and Parent Timeabout their children's development, and come torealise the importance of their roles as models andteachers.

PA('T involves child-parent pairs playing togetherin the early childhood classroom for 30 45 minuteseach day. The activities are child-initiated, and parentslearn how to encourage their children's imagination,thinking, and use of language, while activelyparticipating in the activities.

A mother in Walnut. North Carolina. explains. "Itis a Joy to watch hun grow and learn. I never knew I couldteach him anything or that learning could even be fun."

The Toyota Families for LearningProgrammeUrban InitiativesNM. was able to widen its efforts to reach families inneed by establishing the Toyota Families for LearningProgramme with the help of the Toyota MotorCorporation. In just three years Toyota has grantedthe Centre S5.1 million to launch family literacyprogrammes in fifteen American cities withpopulations of over 300.000. Toyota's contribution todate has generated nearly three times that amount inlocal funds from the budgets of the public and privatesectors of the cities. In the ten cides where theprogrammes are established the seeds are gr.,ing andthe models are being replicated. An additional fivecities will be added in the fall of 1993.

The Toyota Families for Learning Programme isstructured in the same fashion as all NCFI. programmes.Undereducated parents work towards increasing theirliteracy and life skills while their children attendpreschool under the same roof. Soon these parents andchildren become as partners in learning and success.

In its first year 234 families .936 individuals) wereserved by the Toyota Programme. An estimated 500new families 2000 individuals) are expected to enterthe programme during the 1992 - 93 school year. Wellover 100 public and private organisations are

3


supporting these families. In the participating cities.this collaborative network will remain in place afterthe Toyota funding has ended to ensure the long-termviability of the family literacy programmes.

Profile of Toyota familiesage range of parents 17 to 50. most early 20s tomid-30s170,, white. 63% African-American, 17"Hispanic and 3" Other9600 of parents unemployed70% unmarried82% of families on public assistance770 have annual incomes under $7500 a yearaverage number of children per family : 3

First year results in citiesBecause the Toyota Families for Learning

Programme is so new, first year results can onlyproject what kind of success the programme is having.But these early results are encouraging. The gainsmade by the families indicate that the family overall ismoving to break the cycle of undereducation andpoverty. By expanding their basic skills and increasingtheir employability potential the adults are movingtoward self- sufficiency. Additionally, the children aremuch more likely to enter school ready to learn.thereby avoiding retention in grade.

In order to measure progress, children in the Toyota Programmewere given the Peabody Picture Vocabularly Thst twice beforethey started the family literacy programme, and at the end ofthe school year.

BEFORE At the beginning of the Programme. a3" of thechildren scored at or below the 25th percentile. That meansthat compared to children nationwide. 95" of the ToyotaProgramme children scored in the bottom quarter. Even morealarmingly, mer half scored at the 1st percentile. putting them

. in the bottom 1",, of all American children. And unix- 1., ofThyota Programme students scored at or above the SOthpercentile.

.; AFTER Once they nad completed the Programme year. the:I numbers were very different 27., of those children who had

scored in the bottom quarter were now above the 25thpercentile. nwamng one quarter oi these children were nolonger in an -at risk' category. Nearly 60", of those who hadbeen at the very bottom, at the 1st percentile, increased theirscores. Finally, the percentage of children scoring at or above

! average increased dramatically.

Further NcH. studies indicate that by the timethese children are in grade school. all of them will havebroken out of the 'at risk' category. Even those who donot show an immediate score change are already onthe road to improving their skills to a level where theycan achieve academically. Through family literacy.they are on their way to reversing a downward spiral.

The promise NeFt.'s family literacy programmeholds is demonstrated by the gains its programmegraduates have made. By treating the family as aunit understanding that the problems individualsin the family face are relate:2 and must be takentogether the National Centre for Family Literacyhas shown that it can break the cycle of under-education.

What do we know about theeffectiveness of family literacy?

Preliminary research indicates that intensiveprogramme models, like the Kenan Trust FamilyLiteracy Programme, the Kentucky PACE Programme.and the Toyota Families for Learning Programmes.are succeeding with both generations. Recent studiesof participants of Kenan Model programmes show theimpact on parents and children.

.A follow-up study was conducted in family li eracyprogrammes where the National Centre for FamilyLiteracy trained the teachers. This study focused onfamily literacy progi amines in three states: WestVirginia. Kentucky and Indiana. Of the 30 familyliteracy programmes identified in those three states.14 were chosen to be included in the study. Purposefulsampling was used to identify sites in Indiana and\Vest Virginia. Stratified random sampling was usedto choose the sites in Kentucky.

This study examined current school success ofchildren . Ito participated in family literacyprogrammes as preschoolers. The children are now ingrades Kindergarten through to grade 4. Ratings bythe children's elementary school teachers show thatthis group of 'at risk' children are performing muchhigher than would be expected if they had notparticipated in the family literacy programmes.

'At risk' children typically enter school without thereadiness skills necessary for success. They fall behindtheir peers academically and are often referred forremedial and special education services.

In the group of 'at risk' students whoparticipated in family literacy programmesas preschoolers. only 25% subsequentlyreceived Chapter I or special educationservices in the early grades of elementaryschool.

Studies have shown that kindergarten and firstgrade teachers can accurately predict those childrendestined for failure in school. From their classroomexperience, they recognise the indicators of futureschool failure.

When rated by their current elementaryschool teachers. 90% of the children whohad participated in the family literacyprogrammes were not considered 'at risk'for school failure.

'At risk' children often lack the types of homeexperiences that prepare them for school. They are notexposed to school-like activities at home and have notbeen motivated to participate in those kinds ofactivities.

Over 90% of the children who participatedin family literacy programmes were ratedby their current elementary teachers asbeing motivated to learn.

4

Family literacy: an intergenerational approach to educationWhen 'at risk' children enter school, they are behind

academically and fall further behind each year.

None of the children who participated inthe family literacy programme had beenretained in grade in elementary school.

This study also examined teachers' ratings ofparental support for their children's education. Theparents in this study were all school dropouts. They allhad a history of failure in school. Many lacked theknowledge and skills required for supporting children'seducational achievement. These parents typicallywant their children to succeed in school but don'tprovide the necessary support.

The parents who participated in the family literacyprogrammes developed the skills and knowledgenecessary for supporting their children's education.

Teachers consistently rated the parents asbeing supportive of their children'seducation.

The parents in this study had few, if any, positivememories of their ov. n school experiences. Beforeentering the family literacy programmes, they reportedfeeling uncomfortable when talkin _ to teachers andprincipals. Many said they didn't like to even be in aschool building. One of the outcomes of participationin the family literacy programmes was thedevelopment of comfort with schools and schoolpersonnel.

In addition to supporting the education oftheir children through home activities.well over half of the parents currentlyserve as volunteers in their children'selementary schools.

Student retention, a perennial problem in Adult

Basic Education, is improved in these programmes.Almost half of the parents in these studies haddropped out of other adult education programmes inthe past. They persisted in their studies this time for avariety of reasons. Teachers focused instruction onindividual goals and demonstrated a caring, respectfulattitude toward the students as persons. Perhaps mostsignificant. parents reported a sense of "family-developed within groups, and learners supported eachother in both academic and personal areas. Manyparents said they had never before had such a supportgroup. Another extremely telling factor in adultretention was the urging of children many parentsreported their children loved school and would notallow them to miss a day.

While these findings must be regarded aspreliminary, they do provide evidence that teachers'.students' and administrators' subjective assessmentsof progi.amme outcomes are being substantiated overtime. Family literacy is creating two generations oflifelong learners.

The link between undereducated parents and thepotential failure of their children is well documented.But the reverse is also true: the link between educatedparents and children who are motivated to learn is just

-ong. or stronger. The same forces that work tomake a downward spiral can be channelled to createan upward one.

No natural resource is as important to a country'sfuture as its people. And because the family unit is thebuilding block of any society, it is vital that we as anation work together to support and nuture healthy,educated families.

Family literacy is not a panacea. nor is it a quickand easy "fix." Complex, deeply rooted problems arenot quickly or easily solved. But family literacy is animportant part of the solution. This powerfulintervention holds great promise for breaking theintergenerational cN-cle of undereducation and fulfilling.America's broadest, educational aims.

5


Intergenerational literacy intervention: posSibilities andproblemsPeter Hannon

Peter Hannon is a Senior Lecturer in Education at Sheffield University where hehas carried out a number of studies on parental involvement in young children'sliteracy development. Previously he worked with preschool children and theirfamilies in a community primary school in the north of England. He was invited byUNESCO and the City University of New York to contribute to a panel onIntergenerational Literacy at the 1992 International Adult Urban LiteracyConference at U.N. Headquarters, New York. Here we reprint a copy of his .

presentation.

It is clear why adult literacy educators are nowfocusing on intergenerational and family literacyprocesses. A common reason for adults enteringprogrammes is being a parent and wanting to be partof their children's literacy development -especially inthe preschool and early school years. Many students.of course, are not parents of young children but eventhey often have some kind of intergenerational role !asgrandparents, aunts, uncles. siblings, future parents.etc. ;. There is also the long term view to consider -some adult students of the future are children todayand one has to ask whether something could be donenow - in the family context - rather than leaving it allfor later.

However. I approach this field from the oppositedirection to that of most of you at this conferencefrom early childhood education rather than adulteducation - starting with children and moving to theadults rather than the other way around. It is throughbeing interested in children's literacy development.and the role of parents in it. that I have had to thinkabout family literacy.

The most useful contribution I can make here is tooffer some ways of thinking about the role of parentsin children's early literacy development actuallytheir preschool literacy development ). Any familyliteracy intervention has to be based (explicitly orimplicitly ) on some kind of view of the parent's role. Iwant to indicate possibilities for working with parents,and to identify one or two dilemmas or problemswhich I think we face at the present.

Let me explain how I came into this field. Duringthe 1980s I worked with several colleagues andstudents at Sheffield on a series of studies into homefactors in school reading attainment (concentratingon young children in poor urban areas).

We found that parents -even in very disadvantagedcircumstances - were often very active in helpingchildren learn to read: their help was positivelyassociated with school reading attainment; almost all

; parents wanted to help more; and it was feasible to

intervene to increase that help IHannon. 1987. 1 Wefound that parents helping strategies at home couldbe superior, in important ways, to those of schoolteachers in busy classrooms : Hannon, Jackson &Weinberger. 1986 It was clear. too. that even parentswho had reading difficulties wanted to help theirchildren :their desire to help may have been all thestronger for that reason ). Ways could be found toinvolve them, and they sometimes became betterreaders themselves by being involved ( Hannon &Jackson. 1987 .

All this was very encouraging. But there was causefor concern too. The 1980s were years when many of usbecame increasingly dissatisfied with school methodsfor teaching reading -the reliance on a narrow range oftexts ; 'reading scheme books', as they are called inBritain), the separation of reading from writing, andthe concern with form over function.

We realised that our focus should be literacy ratherthan just reading, and at that time research intoliteracy was revealing aspects of preschooldevelopment previously overlooked. The work ofClay, Goodman. Sulzby, Taylor. Brice-Heath andothers showed us how preschool children explore thefunctions and nature of written language -somethingwhich obviously depends on interaction with parentsand other family members. Also, we knew from thework of Wells. Tizard and others in Britain that somepreschool measures of literacy development werestrong predictors of later school attainment.

We wanted to find ways of using these insights.sharing them with parents if possible, and givingparents a bigger role before children came to school.

A further stimulus to do something came from asurvey we carried out in Sheffield which showed thatvirtually all parents of preschool children-irrespectiveof background - were trying to help their children'sliteracy although they often felt they might not bedoing it in the right way ( Hannon & James, 1990).Preschool teachers seriously underestimated andundervalued this parental involvement.

6

Intergenerational literacy intervention

A framework for understanding theparent's role

We have found it helpful think of children's earlyliteracy experience in terms of three strands.

First, there are encounters with environmentalprint. This is an almost unavoidable feature of urbanlife in Western industrialised countries I am painfullyaware of my ignorance of the extent to which thismight be true, if at all, of developing countries).Children's experience of environmental print variesaccording to several factors, including family income.

Second, there are early writing experiences. Givenbasic materials most young children - at least in theurban contexts with which I am familiar - willeventually try to write. It may emerge in the contextof drawing, playing, joining in family activities, orasserting their independence. How far they go dependson aspects of the parent's role which I will come to in amoment.

Third, there are books and other texts - usuallyshared with a parent or other family member. There ishuge variation in children's experience of books beforethey come to school, ranging from thousands of hoursin some families to almost nothing in others.

What about the parent's role? Here are some of thethings children can get from

IMPORTANCE OF PARENT'S ROLE

PARENTS CAN PROVIDE ...Esompl,

MODEL Reactii.e mg, Itinrt In. .0.1rurtion, pacKaeline print 01

the environment writing note.. kiwi,. nopping 0twading nenspapers. magazine, b.lks bringing norkhome

OPPORTUNITIES Tri, Isits quipping. moterun ler rritihling. Ironing.orating npportunnie. ler .40-1 dramatic pla, Inkirenbook.,

..... RECOGNITION lit-cognising and exniuitis hawing ehnIren earisvillunt, In Mourne o-ne ii onvironito nub print. in

arle netting. and in .1,ine Nine,

... INSTRUCTION Uphabet. letter mum, nound, letter Pirrnatien locoreencnitinn oral reading

Figure 1. Importance ol parent s role

Parents can provide a model for using writtenlanguage, for example when children see them readingsigns, directions and other print in the environment:writing notes. letters, lists, etc.: and readingnewspapers, magazines, books. I suspect that manyof us h2re provide a powerful literacy model when webring work home and our children see us reading andwriting.)

They can provide opportunities for children:through having print in the home, taking children outon trips and visits: providing drawing/writingmaterials, involving children in sending letters, cards:they can provide books, and make time to share themwith children.

They may also structure or 'scaffold theseopportunities so that children do as much as possibleindependently yet. with the right amount of help, stillsucceed in real tasks achieving today with theparent's help what tomorrow they will manage ontheir own ).

Parents can provide recognition of early literacyachievements whether it is their children getting toknow logos, producing letter-like shapes, inventing

spelling, handling books, or joining in stories.Recognition means seeing what, children can do ratherthan what they cannot do it's the difference betweensaying 'Ah. you've written your name!' and 'It's onlyscribbling' ).

Some parents provide a fourth element, instructiondeliberately teaching the alphabet, writing skills,

and so on ).We can now go back and look at the strands of

literacy experience in relation to the parent's roleFigure 2%.

PARENT ROLES ANDCHILDREN'S EARLY LITERACY EXPERIENCES

Motiel

Opportunities

Recognition

Instruction

STRANDS OFEARLY LITERACY EXPERIENCE

Print in Rookenvironment Writing sharing

Figure 2. Parent roles and children s earh literacy expertences.

Parents can provide a model, opportunities, andrecognition in relation to each strand. Some mayprovide instruction too.

PossibilitiesI do not claim that this framework gives us a

complete picture but it does help us see interventionpossibilities in terms of attempts to make changes inthe various cells in Figure 2.

For example, there have been several interventionprogrammes based on bringing books into children'shomes in England. projects in Liverpool andCalderdale: in the States. in Pittsburgh and Illinois).This can make a dramatic change to parents' ability toprovide opportunities for children to experience booksbut it does not necessarily change the other waysparents influence what children learn from, and about.books.

I do not know of many examples of interventionfocused on writing although I am aware of aninteresting study in Texas which, as I see it, did try toincrease parent modelling and recognition of writingas well as children's opportunities).

There may have been interventions focused onenvironmental print but I am not familiar with them.Could we have intervention to produce changes in

9


every cell in Figure 2? That is something weattemptedin the Sheffield Early Literacy Development ProjectHannon, Weinberger & Nutbrown. 1991 . We did not

try to extend parents' instructional role but we did tryto engage them in a dialogue about providing a model.opportunities and recognition. and we tried to showthem why we thought environmental print and writingwere important as well as books.

There is no way I can explain our programme indetail in this paper. All I can say is that we workedwith different kinds of families and a wide range ofparent literacy levels. Our methods included providingbooks'materials. small group meetings for parents.and home visiting see Weinberger. Hannon &Nutbrown. 19901 Our evaluation based on casestudies suggested that the intervention had quite animpact on parents' recognition of preschool children'sliteracy development. In terms of opportunities. therewas a very big change in children's access to booksand, to some extent. in their exposure to environmentalprint. There was some change in parents providing amodel. at least in relation to writing. Now that thesemethods have been shown to be feasible. the effects onfamily literacy need to be investigated thrOugh anexperimental research design.

ProblemsI will highlight two problems for discussion. The

most fundamental and the most difficult one foreducationists to confront is. 'Whose literacy are wetrying to promoteT. In the Sheffield Project we did tryvery hard to listen to parents. to respond to theirinterests, and to have a dialogue with them. But in theend I think what we offered them was probably schoolliteracy albeit a reasonable version of it . We did notimpose it what we offered was eagerly taken up bythe parents but it could be argued that we broughtsomething which did not fit naturally into the lives ofall our families.

There is nothing necessarily wrong with thisprovided that we are aware of it and prepared for thepossibility that alien literacy practices howeversensitively introduced may not take root permanentlyif the family, commuMty or work environmentencourages something else. We need to be realistic hereabout what chiidren and parents stand to gain fromchanges in family literacy culturally, economically.politically . In addition, as a check on the dangers ofone social group imposing its literacy on another, it isimportant to rnaximise community control overintervention programmes.

The second problem is the need for good qualityresearch in this field. We need research which combinesevaluation of intervention effects 1 and I think thatmeans experimental quantitative designs I withqualitative studies of how an intervention isimplemented and what it means for the participants.strongly believe that we need both kinds of research.Without studies of effects we cannot be sure what.benefits to expect at what, cost in terms of resources.Without qualitative studies we will not know whetherprogrammes genuinely empower parents or merelytreat them as behavioural technicians implemeating

someone else's agenda. We also need longitudinalstudies: and we need research which is not limited tosingle cultural sett ings.

ConclusionSo where do we go from here? Despite the problems.

I certainly believe that intervention is worthwhile.The positive responses we have experienced fromfamilies are too strong to be ignored.

Perhaps the issues we need to discuss now arewhether we are clear enough about what we are tryingto change in intergenerational literacy I have offeredsome ideas concerning parents and preschool children:.and how we can resolve some of the deeper problemsraised by intervention.

ReferencesPublications from the Sheffield research

Hannon. P. 1987 A study of the effects of parentalinvolvement in the teaching of reading on childrenreading test performance. British Journal ofEducational Psychology. 57, 56-72.

Hannon. P. 1990 Parental involvement in preschoolliteracy development. In D. Wray :Ed.i Emergingpartnerships: current research in language and literacy.B.E.R.A. Dialogues in Education. 4. Clevedon.Avon: Multilingual Matters.

Hannon. P. and Jackson. A. 1987 The BelfieldReading Proiect, London: National Children'sBureau.

Hannon. P. Jackson. A.. & Weinberger, J. 1986Parents' and teachers' strategies in hearing youngchildren read. Research Papers in Education. 1 1

6-25.

lannon. P. and James. S. 19901 Parents' andteachers perspectives on preschool literacydevelopment. British Educational Research Journal.16 .3' . 239-272.

Hannon. P., Weinberger. J.. & Nutbrown. C. 19911 Astudy of work with parents to promote early literacydevelopment. Research Papers in Education. 6 ,2,,77-97.

Nutbrown. C., Hannon, P. & Weinberger. J. !1991'M'aining teachers to work with parents to promoteearly literacy development. International Journal ofEarly Childhood. 2.1 -2 1-10.

Weinberger. J.. Hannon. P. & Nutbrown. C. 19901

Ways of working with parents to promote earlyliteracy development. USDE Papers in Education,N0.14. Sheffield: l'niversity of Sheffiek' )ivision ofEducation. Description of methods used in SheffieldEarly Literacy Development Project. Availablefrom Publication Sales. Division of Education. The

'niversity. Sheffield 510 2TN. England. Price £4.50within UK i.:7.00 by airmail . Cheque or creditcard payment in sterling to '1'niversity of Sheffield'.

8 1 0

Workforce education. family literacy and economic development

Workforce Education, family literacy and economicdevelopmentThomas G. Sticht

Thomas Sticht is President and Senior Scientist at Applied Behavioural CognitiveSciences, Inc., California. He is a leading authority on functional contexteducation, intergenerational literacy and evaluation in workplace literacy. He hasfrequently been called upon to advise on literacy initiatives in the United States,including Work in America Institute's Job-Linked Literacy project and theSecretary of Labour's Commission on Achieving Necessary Skills (SCANS).

All societies must prepare each generation of itshuman resources with the knowledge and skills neededto perpetuate and extend the culture of the society. Inindustrialised nations, this preparation typicallyinvolves engaging infants at home and in thecommunity. Then, children enter into a lormaieducation sequence of ten or more years that isdesigned to promote the development of a variety ofcognitive abilities, such as literacy and mathematicsknowledge, as well as certain attitudes and valuesconducive to the person's participation in the adultsociety. The childhood education system is supposedto help parents and:or other caregivers prepare theemergent adult to enter into the activities of adults inthe society. This may include various civic activities.such a voting, participating in community affairs.governing, obtaining a driver's license, or other adultactivities such as having and raising children.managing a home and personal affairs, and joining thegroup of adults available for commercial work, referredto here as the workforce.

Workforce literacy problemsThe international press recently reported studies by

the Organisation for Econonmic Cooperation andDevelopment UECD1 which concluded that in manyindustrialised nations, the developmental sequenceoutlined above is not as effective as it should be inproducing adults with the liter Acy skills needed tomeet. the demands of contemporary society.particularly the world of work. Many of the youngadults entering the workforce are considered lackingin basic reading, writing, and mathematics skills.According to the OECD, "functional illiteracy- is agrowing problem in the workforces of manyindustrialised nations Wheatley. 1992 .

The news story reported that in the United States.the Secretary of Labour expressed concern that sometwenty percent of high school graduates could notread their own diplomas. In Canada over 40"0 ofadults were considered so lacking in literacy skills thatt hey could not meet most everyday reading demands.Officials from Germany estimated that there were

between 500.000 and .3 million illiterates in Germany.In France. the Ministry of Defence estimated that ofover 400.000 young men called up for military servicein 1990-91. 20" could not adequately read andunderstand a 70-word text. In London, the Daily Mailfor September 30. 1992 published an article statingthat Eight million Britons are so illiterate they areunable to follow up a job advert".

In many nations, a major factor contributing toworkforce literacy problems. in addition to the failureof the developmental system for enculturating literacymentioned above, is that immigration introduces intothe workforce a number of people without the orallanguage and literacy skills of the dominant society.Many of these immigrants may also be illiterate oronly marginally literate in their native language. Inthe United States, for instance, one of three studentsenrolled in adult basic education studies English as asecond language I's Department of Education. 19911.In California. some a0" of the enrolments in adultbasic education programmes are adults seeking Englishas a second language training California WorkforceLiteracy Task Force, 1990

In addition to the general workforce literacy problemsidentified by the 0E('D study, problems of specifcworkplace literacy were also reported. Here, the OEC Dconsidered that the problem was not one of failing tomeet literacy standards upon entrance into the work-force. but rather one in which the literacy demands ofjobs in particular workplaces had changed. In thiscase, previously qualified workers faced new literacydemands for which they were no longer qualified.

While acknowledging the paucity of trustworthydata. the OECD opined that about one-third of workerscould do their jobs better if they were more literate. Inone survey, about one-third of Canadian firms reportedserious difficulties in introducing new technology andincreasing productivity because of the poor skills oftheir workers. In Britain. a survey suggested that"Britain's general 'under-education would createserious economic problems when competition with more!..lohlv-skilled nations intensified m the single Europeanmarket. The Daily Telegraph. September 30.1992 .

I J 9


The Workforce Education and LifelongLearning (WELL) Strategy forEducation and Economic Reform

In the United States, concern for workforceeducation and literacy and its relationship tointernational competitiveness was expressed in a 1983report entitled A Nation at Risk. That report arguedthat the public schools were not doing their job inpreparing an educated workforce that could comparein the new global economy. Further, many of theadults in the workforce were only marginally literate.Some 13°c were considered functionally illiterate andunable to find good work nor to be as productive asmore literate and better trained members of theworkforce.

Following the Nation at R isk report were a successionof reports that led, for the first time in the UnitedStates, to a set of national education goals and anational education strategy endorsed by the Presidentof the United States. The most influential of thesereports are reviewed below to set the stage for theintroduction of the WELL Strategy whi.ch regardsadult education as the key to economic growth andeducational reform.

The Workforce 2000 Study. Perhaps the mostimportant report that added a significant newdimension to the issue of educational reform andworkforce competitiveness, and stimulated theeventual conception of the WELL Strategy was the1987 report by the Hudson Institute entitled.Workforc .2000: Work and Workers for the Twenty-FirstC'entury ( Johnston & Packer. 19871. What the laboureconomists pointed out in that report was that, even ifpublic school reform could be rapidly accomplished, itwould have little influence on workplace productivityin the next twenty years because out-of-school youthand adults are not subject to school reforms and theywill constitute more than three-quarters of theworkforce of the year 2000.

Adult Skills Assessments. This new appreciationof the importance of the present workforce to thenation's competitiveness posture of the next centuryfocused attention on programmes for the educationand training of out-of-school youth and adults. Ofspecial concern was youth and adult "literacy" or"basic skills". The Natton at Risk report had suggestedthat some 130 of high school leavers were "functionallyilliterate- ! National Commission on Excellence inEducation. 1983). In 1986 the National Assessment ofEducational Progress ( NAEP published the results ofa national survey of the literacy skills of young adults21 to 25 years of age. It reported that one in five failedto meet the eighth grade standard for functionalliteracy established a quarter century earlier in theWar on Poverty Kirsch & Jungeblut. 1986. ) TheWork in America Institute reported data suggestingthat ,(er 50"c of young adults aged 18 to 23 in 1980had literacy skills below those of the beginning tenthgrader, while one in twenty had skills below that of afifth grade child I Rosow & Zager. 1988. pp.172-177

The Commission on the Skills of the AmericanWorkforce. This Commission reported in June. 1990the results of a year-long study of the productivity of

the American workforce in relation to that of other.strongly competitive nations. They concluded thatthe American workplace is too often designed toremove the requirements for the use of complexactions by workers, following the "scientificmanagement- approach of the early industrial age.This approach produces the assembly line type ofwork in which workers perform one prescribed action,make no decisions and management does all thethinking Commission on the Skills of the AmericanWorkfo: ce. 1990. !

Competitor nations, on the other hand. were foundto be using a "high performance" approach to work inwhich many complex actions and decisions are pushed"down- from management to line workers. The use of'focus factory.' or "total business" schemes in

manufacturing, for instance, requires line workers totake on responsibility for an entire product. Thismeans contacting customers, taking orders, obtainingraw materials in just enough supply to meet presentneeds but not so much as to require expensivewarehousing .. negotiating in the work team to prepareproduction schedules. producing a product. performingquality control on the product, packaging and shippingthe product to the customer.

The Commission recommended that Americanindustry provide much more education and training forthe existing workforce, and that a new educationalsystem for children and adults be developed that wouldprovide "high performance- schools. In this system, allchildren would be permitted to strive for a "Certificateof Initial Mastery" by the age of sixteen. ThisCertificate would certify the student as work-readyfor entry level jobs in high performance businesses.

For students 'at risk- for dropping out of school. a"Youth Centre" school separate from the regularsecondary school would be established. Such Centreswould offer apprenticeship programmes or other typesof part-school. part-work programmes to help studentsmake the transition from school to work. Then, onceon the job. "Certificates of Advanced Mastery- wouldbe available to provide incentives for workers to striveto complete more education and training to develophigher levels of competence. Promotions and payraises would then be based on competence. rather thanon seniority as in many companies.

The Secretary's Commission on AchievingNecessary Skills (SCANS). Following up on therecommendations of the Commission on the Skills ofthe American Workforce. the Secretary of Labour in1990 established the SCANS to identify the skillsnecessary for productive work in high performance

'ness and industries. These skills, once identified.and subjected to modifications based on nationalforums, are to form the basis for the "Certificates ofInitial Mastery- recommended by the Commission onthe Skills of the American Workforce. With theseskills and certification procedures identified. the sc.ANsaims to provide a stimulus for schools to transformthemselves from the "assembly line" models thatreflect "assembly line" workplaces, to "highperformance- schools that resemble "high perform-ance- workplaces The Secretary's Commission onAchieving Necessary Skills, 19911,

10 1 2


The National Education Goals and theIntergenerational Cycle of Cognitive Develop-ment. Reflecting the national mood for educationalreform across the lifespan to make the t's morecompetitive in the new world economic order, thenation's fifty Governors and the President in Februaryof 1990 adopted six ambitious national education goals.see Figure 1' Us Department of Education, 1991 .

Again, reflecting the newly recognised importance ofadult education in improving national competitivenessand in reforming the schools through parentalinvolvement, half of these goals concern adult educationand the adults' role in the education of their children.

The first of the goals calls for all American childrento be prepared by parents at home and in thecommunity to be ready for learning in school by thetime they are school age. The second, third and fourthgoals pertain to reform efforts in the K-12 schoolsystem. The fifth goal states. "By the .'ear 2000, everyadult American will be literate and will possess theknowledge and skills necessary to compete in a globaleconomy and exercise the rights and responsibilities ofcitizenship". The sixth goal calls for every school inAmerica to be free of drugs and violence and to offer adisciplined environment conducive o learnir a. Itcalls f, parents. business and communityorganisations to form teams to work together toachieve this goal.

Goals one, five, and six focus on the role of adultsand the community in the education of each newgeneration of citizens. Adults themselves need to behighly educated so that as parents they may preparetheir children for learning in school. They need skillsand knowledge so that they can individually competefor well-paying jobs and serve as members of aworld-class workforce that can compete for high wagejobs in the new world economic order. And they needto constitute a social community that controlsviolence, drug abuse, and is conducive to learningboth in and out of school.

AMERICA 2000: An Education Strategy

In what is more or less the culmination of thevarious efforts that have forged an interest in adulteducation as a major part of the United States humanresources development efforts. on April 18. 1991. thet's President announced 2000: An EducationStrategy. This is a four-track strategy for revitalisingAmerican education for the 21st century. Significantly.while the strategy does emphasige improving the K-12education system, two of the four tracks are concernedwith the education of out-of-school adults t sDepartment of Education. 1991 .

Track I I I of AMERICA 2000 is entitled For the Rest ofUs Ii!sterday's Students; Today's Workforce': .1 Nationof Students. In a move to transform the United Statesfrom a "Nation at Risk to a "Nation of Students-.this part of the strategy states that:

'E ighty-live percent of America's workforce for the year2000 is already in the workforce today, so improvingschools for today's and tomorrow's students is not enoughto assure a compent we America in 2000. And we iweamore than lob skills to live well in America today, We need

to learn more to become better parents. neighbours. citizensand friends. Education is not lust about making a living: Itis also about making a life.

"That is why the President is challenging adultAmericans to "go back to school" and make this a "Nationof Students". For our children to understand the importanceof thier own education, we must demonstrate that learningis important for grown-ups, too. We must "go back toschool" ourselves. The President is urging every Americanto continue learning throughout his or her life, using themyriad formal and informal means available to gainfurther knowledge and skills.

TI:ack III goes on to recommend that business andlabour establish job-related skill standards builtaround core proficiencies, such as those identified bythe SCANS, that can form the basis for "skillcertificates- to be awarded to youth and adults whoqualify and that skill "clinics- be established in everylarge community where people can find out how welltheir present skills compare with those they would liketo have for working in various jobs and where they canacquire the skills and knowledge they need.

The Track I II statement states that Federal agencieswill set an example for other employers by embarkingupon a government-wide programme of skill upgradingand the nation's adult education efforts will bestrengthened by the specification of performancestandards for all federally aided programmes andmaking programmes accountable for meeting thesestandards.

The "Learning Community". Track IV ofkMERICA 2000 calls for the creation of drug-free.non-violent communities where learning can happen.This Track points out that there are limits to what thegovernment and schools can accomplish:

"Government at every level can play a useful role, and itis incumbent upon ail of us to see that this is done efficientlyand adequately. But much of the work of creating andqistaining healthy communities - communities whereeducation reall. happens - can only be performed by thosewho live in them: by parents. jam dies, neighbours and othercaring adults: by churches, neighbourhood associations.community organisations. voluntary groups and the other"little platoons- that have long characterisedwell-functioning American communities. Such groups areessential to building relationships that nurture childrenand provide them with people and places to which they canturn /Or help and guidance."

To accomplish the development of karningcommunities. AMERICA 2000 emphasises theimportance of individual responsibility.

"Increased attention will be focused on adult behaviour.responsibility for children and family, and communityvalues essential jor strong schools. This includes invokingparents as teachers of their children and as school partners.

The WELL Strategy

The AMERR'A 2000 education strategy is presentedas a series of four, separate, parallel tracks. However.this conceptualisation is not valid because, in fact, thefour tracks are interrelated. In Figure 1 a newconceptualisation of the National Education Goalsand the ANIERICA 2000 Strategy is presented that

1 311


explicitly recognises the interrelationships among thesix education goals and the four tracks of the AMERICA2000 Strategy.

Getting WELL:The Workforce Education and Lifelong LearningStrategy For Improving Productivity At Work. Home. &School

N .4 t lona 1 i.ducilt um Goa Is lit t he. fi I. 215)1):

I. All children in America will start school ready to learn.2. High school graduation rate will increase to 9000 or more.3. In school children will demonstrate competency in challenging

subjects.4. C.S. students will be first in the world in science and

mathematics.5. Every adult American will be literate and possess competence

to compete in a global economy and exercise rights Sindresponsibilities of citizenship.

6. Every school in America will he free of drugs and violence andwill offer an environment conducive to learning.

.1mui Ica 1044I: \ n l.tlurat ion St egv

"Four big trains, moving simultaneously down four paralleltracks: Better and more accountable schools: a New ;enerat ionof American Schools: a Nation of Students continuing to learnthroughout our lives: and communities where iearning canhappen."

Track I Track 2 Track 3Better Schools New GenerationA Nation of

of Schools Students

Track 4LearningCommunities

The %%1-1 I St i a teg s for Ed tica t ion and Economic Moral

HOME SCHOOL WORK COMMUNITYGold I Goals 2.3.4 Goals I.2.3.4.L6 Goals 1.6(3) More 1.410. 14IChildren amet. HI Improve =P. (2) Improved

Skilled Enter tikills of Skills ofParents Better Employees/ Employees,

Improve School Parents Parents:

Preschool Better Citizens

Skills of Prepared

Children To LearnAttracts MoreIlighWageJobs

Safer,NurturingCommunities

Leads to BetterSupport ofEducation

Figure I. The orti Stratea.s corrects the .Amerwa 2000 Strata) and

shows that Aduit Education. Mack .3. is (he if otral point for neu

int estrizents III education. The adult's education 'hen al feeds homes.

schools, communities as weil as workplaces. It at leers both the previa and

future workforce

The wELL Strategy places Track .3. becoming anation of students. with an emphasis upon workforceeducation and adult lifelong learning, as the numberone priority for human resources development thatcan lead to both economic and educatioilal reform.This is based on four interrelated consequences thatresult from improvements in the education of adults.

(1) Better educated adults produce bettereducated children. As illustrated in Figure 2.

parents'. and especially mothers' education levels arerelated to the development of children's learningabilities before school Goal 1 ,. during school Goals2.3,4 1, and into adulthood Goal 5). This suggests thatadult education should be emphasised in a humanresources development policy because such educationmay provide "double duty dollars." That is. it mayaffect not just the adults. but also their children, andhence the next generation of workers when the adult's

children grow up , The California Workforce LiteracyTask Force. 19901.

The idea that adult workforce literacy educationcan affect family literacy is reinforced by research bythe Wider Opportunities for Women ( Van Fossen &Sticht, 1991). This research studied the effects ofparticipation in literacy andfor job skills training bywomen on , 1 their behaviour towards their childrenand ( 2) their childrens behaviour in school. As Figure3 indicates, mothers in the training programmesreported that, as a result of their participation in theliteracy and job training programmes, they talkedmore with their children about school, helped theirchildren more with their homework. and so forth. Inturn, this led to reports that their children showedimprovements in their school grades (.45°0), testscores 421-o and so on ( Figure 41.

Figure 5 presents samples of observations byinterviewers who went to programme participant'shomes to find out if there were indicators, beyond theself reports of the women, that participating in theprogramme had sorne effects on the women's children.As indicated, the home observers found that childrenreported changed attitudes about the value ofeducation, they reported that their mother's helpedthem with their homework, and that their motherread to them more.

This concept of the intergenerational transfer ofliteracy skills from parents to children has become amajor factor in adult education in the United States.Major programmes of family literacy have beenlegislated by the United States (.'ongress. Oneprogramme, called "Even Start" calls for literacyprogrammes that educate parents and childrentogether. It is funded now at some S90 million a yearBusiness Council for Effective Literacy, 1993. p. 2).

In October. 1992 thc laws were changed regulating thet.s Head Start programme, funded at some S2.9billion. It is now mandatory that this programme.originally strictly an early childhood educationprogramme. offer adult literacy training to children'sparents.

(2) Better educated adults are more productiveon the job. The Commission on the Skills of theAmerican Workforce and the Secretary's Commissionon Achieving Necessary Skills (SCANS) both advocatethe development of a high skilled workforce as ameans of stimulating more businesses and industriesto adopt high performance work practices thatempower workers to make decisions, interact withcustomers, and participate as members of worker-management teams. The aim is to increase theproductivity of workplaces so that businesses maycompete better in the international marketplace; Marshall & "nicker. 1992).

The fact that more highly education and literate^dults are more productive is one of the reasons themilitary services try to recruit high school graduateswho achieve above the median on the Armed ForcesQualification Test or reading and mathematics skills.Studies in the military have indicated that morehighly literate personnel who use their literacy skillswhile performing job tasks such as automobile repairor supply clerk's forms completion. may show

12 14

Workforce education, family literacy and economic development

N

IC.1811116:fi t.

The Intergenerational Transfer of Literacy

,11. link .

:t tit 1... ...A.,

innal . \ ,,,inunt i Edut kilnI 1.1trl It

At

ilt. or I .1

[nem 1,1 1)1.1rute. N'Autlt Prutilt, Stud, 19,0ewd F..rteg mum

M E+ua,1-.11 ,-

114.p.um,

. \tne.lit 111%

svtio.,

,!1:4,1 t. to,

tn

.1,

4:.

ol III, r0

Figure 2. Performance of young adults on theReadtng Pmfictency scale of the NationalAssessment of Educational Progress's profile ofliteracy 1986) and the Department of Defence'sprofile of readmg and mathematics on the ArmedForces Qualification Test in the 1980 renormmgof the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Batteryas a function of mother's education level. After theperson's own years of education, mother's years ofeducation is the best prediction of her childrenSachievement in education and their performance9n achievement tests such as the NAEP and the AFQT.

Father's education is also correlated with theirchildren's subsequent achievement in school andon tests, but not to as great a degree. These datasuggest that adult education may have anintergenerat tonal impact on children's educationalachievement.

Figure 3. Mothers' average ratings of the changesin the frequency uith which they participated inthe different activities from before to after theycompleted one of the women's educattonprogrammes.

all changes are statistically reliable.

Figure 4. Work by the Ili, 's and WiderOpportunities for Women on the intergenerationaltran.sfer of literacy showed that after mothers hadparticipated in a uomen's education programmesignificant percentages of them reported positiveimprovements in their children's school activatesand attitudes. This happened even though thereuas no plan or programme to have this

intergenerational transfer.' of the benefits ofmother's education to their children. In somecases, the education of the mother benefited 3 to 4chddren.

1513


Mother andChild Activity

Talk to child aboutSchool

Read with Child

Help Child WithHomework

Take Child to Library

Goes to and Helps WithSchool Activities

Talk With Child'sTeacher

Notes From Home Visits and Interviews

'The kids say they had definitely seen a big change in theirmother. ... she is happier and likes learning and studying withthem. She 'constantly' tells them how important it is to stay inschool and get a good education, so they won't live like she hadto." - wow Case C

LD's son was glad his mother was going to school because ". . .

,-.he read hi: . and his sisters stories and showed him words inthe books." MCA Case A',

"The second-grader said. "I do my homework just likeMommv" . . and thrust his homework into the interviewer'shand. (NEW Case C'

The mother states she "frequently goes to the Goodwill topurchase used books. I saw a nice collect ion of nursery rhymes.(AREREARS. and other primary books in the small apartment."wow Case B1

"MM . has become very active in school and sees to it thather 7 year old son I does his homework, studies for tests and is

dressed, fed and at school on time each day." MCA Case C

"The client states . . . that now when she meets with theteacher, she is not intimidated and can discuss a workablesolution that involves both teacher and parental support...N OW cas, B

productivity increases as much as 10 to 15"California Workforce Literacy Task Force, 1990.

pp. 17-18).(3) Better educated adults produce safer

communities conducive to learning. TheWorkforce Education and Lifelong Learning ;WELLStrategy aims not only to prepare people for productivework, but also to produce drug and violence freeschools Goal 6) and better "learning communities.'Thck 4 : that produce more highly skilled citizens

who can attract more high performunce, better payingjobs. From this point of view, workforce educationaims not only to prepare people for an existing worldof work, but also to stimulate the creation of a newwol Id of work in which employees are empowered toparticipate in lifelong learning activities and to operateat a much higher level of. cognitive and interpersonalskills than is currently the case both in and outside theworkplace. Communities of better educated adultswho are workers, citizens, and parents attract hightechnology, high wage jobs into the community.provide a higher tax base that will support betterschools and better social services law enforcement:adult education and training; day care; recreationalfacilities, etc. and promote a safer, supportivecommunity that can produce drug and violence freeschools and influence better teaching and greatersuccess for children in school (Track 1).

In one workplace education project, management.labour union members, and educators got together at.4(' Rochester in New York State. a supplier ofcomponents for General Motors automobilemanufacturing, and developed adult educationprogrammes in basic education. English as a secondlanguage, secondary school completion and basic

Figure 5. Examples of commentswcorded by observers m home visasto mothers involved in the study of the

tergenerationai transfers of literacyskills kr Wider Opportunities for11;imen.

reading skills programmes. This was done because itwas discovered that many employees could not benefitfrom training that was needed to convert themanufacturing plant to a high performanceorganisation in which each worker had to take on moreresponsibility for quality control, work schedulingand so on. As a consequence of the company'sreorganisation and education programmes, a newbillion dollar contract was signed with a foreign nationand General Motors moved new work into the plantRosow & Zager. 1992, pp. 49-55). This suggests that

organisational changes and greater investments .inworkforce education may lead to economic growth inthe community and provide a better tax base forcommunity activities.

(4) Better educated adults demand and getbetter schools. A major feature of the WELL Strategyis that focusing on 11-ack 3 may lead to reform of theschools ,TI'ack 2 . The hypothesis is that throughinvestments in adult education in the workplace,workers will eventually demand and employers willdevelop more cognitively demanding, high perform-ance workplaces in which employees are engaged inhigh order, collaborative, decision making skills alongwith management. Then, since the schools largelymodel themselves after the world of work, as they didin adopting the "scientific." "assembly line" schoolsfractionated into grade 1. 2. etc.. after the industrialrevolution, it is expected that schools will transformthemselves into "high performance- organisations inwhich teachers, students and management collaboratein higaer order decision making and management ofthe learning process. This will happen, it ishypothesised, when schools realise that they can nolonger provide graduates with "assembly line-

1 4 16


mentalities for new. "high performance" workplaces.Instead, they must provide "high performance"mentalities for "high performance" work.

Following the WELL Strategy, greater investmentsin workforce education and more opportunity forlifelong learning provide the fulcrum for economic andeducational reform. The WELL Strategy addressescalls for educational reform in the schools throughreform of education for adults. Because most adultsare in the workplace. the WELL Strategy takes anapproach that stimulates the creation of a new worldof work in which employees are empowered, educatedand trained to operate at a much higher level of skillsthan is currently the case. The WELL Strategy plansfor a positive cycle to occur such that, as the skills ofthe workforce are improved, there is demand byworkers for more intellectually demanding workplacesthat entail more collaboration and more shareddecision-making with management. Then, it isanticipated that, as there is a shift away from the"assembly line" mentality in the workplace, there willbe a corresponding demand for a reduced "assemblyline" mentality in the schools.

In short, workforce education is hypothesised tolead to greater productivity in the workplace.homeplace. and schoolplace. It is a rather grandhypothesis. but the preliminary evidence reviewed

; earlier suggests that it is an hypothesis worthy offurther consideration.

ReferencesBusiness Council for Effective Literacy 1993.

January). News in brief: Federal funding for literacy inFY93, New York, Business Council for EffectiveLiteracy, p. 2.

California Workforce Literacy Task Force 1990.November ). Cal:fornw's Workforce for the Year 2000:Improving Productivity by Expanding Opportunities forthe Education and Thaining of l'Iderserved Youth andAdults. California. Senate Publications Office, p. 15.

Commission on the Skills of the American Workforce1990, August ), America's Choice: High Skills or Low

Wages. Rochester. New York. National Centre onEducation and the Economy.

Johnston. William B. and Packer, Arnold (19871Wc- ;force 2000: Work and Workers for the 2IstCentury, Indianapolis. The Hudson Institute,

National Commission on Excellence in Education( 19831, .4 Nation at Risk: The Imperative forEducational Reform. Washington. us GovernmentPrinting Office,

Kirsch. Irwin and Jungeblut, Ann (1986), Literacy:Profiles of America's Young Adults, Princeton,Educational Testing Service.

Marshall, Ray and 'nicker, Marc ) 1992), Thinking fora Living: Education and the Wealth of Nations, NewYork, Basic Books.

Rosow. Jerome M. and Zager, Robert (1988), ThainingThe Competitive Edge. San Francisco, Jossey-Bass,

pp. 172-177.

Rosow. Jerome M. and Zager. Robert 11992).Job-Linked Literacy: Innovative Strategies at Work,Part II: Meeting the Challenge of Change: Basic Skillsfor a ('ompetitive 1Forkforce. Scarsdale, Work inAmerica Institute.

Secretary's Commission on Achieving Necessary Skills.1991. June). What Work Requires of Schools: ASCANS Report for AMERICA 2000, Washington, usGovernment Printing Office, p. 3.

L's Department of Education (1991, April), AMERICA2000: An Education Strategy, Washington. usGovernment Printing Office.

Van Fossen, Sandra and Sticht, Thomas G. . 1991.July . Teach the Mother and Reach the Child: Resultsof the Intergenerational Literacy Action Research Projectuf Wider Opportunities for Women. Washington. WiderOpportunities for Women.

Wheatley, A. 1992, February I Illiterate .4merican .

Workers Not Alone, Global Study Finds, San Diego,The San Diego Union Thbune.

I 7 15


Parent involvement in family literacy: an anti-povertyperspectiveRay Phillips

Ray Phillips is Director of the Newham Parents' Centre in the East End of Londonwhere he has been working since 1973. The Centre was formed in 1975 under parentcontrol to promote parent involvement in education. Still under parent control, theCentre now employs nearly forty staff most of whom are full-time and have grownup in the area. Ray Phillips has contributed to many confreences and publicationson parents in education.

"It has long been recognised that education i.s concernedwith the whole mari: henceforth it must be concerned withthe whole family...:Plowden Report: Children & their Primary Schools.1967:48)

IntroductionThe reminder by the Plowden researchers that

learning begins at home was accompanied by theinvocation that school should be 'cum parente' ratherthan 'in loco parentis'. This message has tended to fallon deaf ears. The formalism of state education has, forthe most part. insisted on a distance between homeand school that has inhibited co-operation betweenthe family and classroom. We need to recognise that.at the conception of compulsory state schooling.parents were generally regarded as the source ofproblems rather than opportunities.

"Notwithstanding the large sums of money we havevoted, we find a number of children badly taught, or utterlyuntaught, because there are too few schools and too manybad schools, and because there are large numbers of parentsin the country who cannot, or will not, send their children toschool.-Forster 18701

The Statist nas little time for the family hearth!In turn, this politics of separation has influenced the

stratification of the education service into primary.secondary, tertiary and adult. Allegiances are verticalrather than horizontal. This very institutional grainhas been challenged by the proponents of communityeducation seeking to introduce local, as well asnational, priorities and relevancies into the educationservice. Similarly, promoters of family literacy' mustne prepared to shift the narrowly national path ofeducational discourse. Out of this clash between localand national agendas. a wider definition of literacymust he embraced:

'Literacy as one of the supreme skills handed on byeducation, not simply to facilitate the everyday activity orpen up neu. realms of light entertainment, but literacy as a

means of discovering and enlarging the reader S sense ofI ife.-Jackson & Marsden 1962: 1991

Without such a critical definition, there is no middleground between narrow parochialism, on the onehand, and broad populism on the other.

In seeking to locate family literacy on this middleground, this paper will examine three key elements of'such an educational stratagem in the UK. Initially, weshall consider literacy programmes in the schools as afeature of the strategy against lingering poverty in themodern industrial state. Despite the mid-centurypromise of plenty and of "never having it so good".the ui is approaching the millennium with widespreadilliteracy and poverty. How much has the link betweenthe two been understood?

The second main concern of this paper will be toconsider some of the thcaretical contradictions foradult education in relocating educational attentionwithin the family. Already, we have noted the systemicbias of the educational establishment against thelocal. However, we have an equally ingrained aversionin mainstream social enquiry against the notion of'domestication'. Typically, the 'dornus' or home hasbeen viewed as the repository of' reaction andacquiescence rather than as the mainspring of anyradical revival.

Finally, the paper will develop a critique of parentalinvolvement by contrasting passive, consumeristmodels of 'parental choice' with activi3t partnershipstrategies which may form the basis of dynamic familyliteracy schemes. Such a movement may prove to be afitting testimony to the growing evidence of parentalinvolvement in literacy:

"The emphasis of earlwr work in the areas of readingand, to a lesser extent, number and parental involvementhas been on measurable skill acquisition at later stages.There is some evidence now that the perspective is

broadening to encompass both the acquisition of a rangeof literacy skills, and also adults. whether teacher orparents or both. helping equip children for LIFE-LONGLI TER

,Wolfendale 1992:421The setting of such an ambitious agenda offers the

prospect of a convergence of interests amongst adultsand children. Without this convergence, there is nofirm foundation on which to build family literacyprogrammes.

16 1 8

;NI

Parent involvement in family literacy

Illiteracy as poverty

The complacency of the Western World at the end ofthe Fifties was characterised by the conventionalwisdom of various, popular convergence theories thatpredicted an end to ideology - the last great socialbattles had been successfully fought! However, whenthe counting started in earnest in the Sixties theeuphoria was quickly punctured. Unexpectedlypoverty was rediscovered. First in the USA. withstudies such as that of Michael Harrington revealinz.the 'other' America ( Harrington. 1963. 1 there werethe social upheavals that led to President -Johnson'swar on poverty.

As the current inevitably crossed the Atlantic. thesame questions were being posed in the UK . A series ofstrategic reports proceeded to pierce Vie egalitarianmyth of equal opportunity. The Newson Report onsecondary education ( Newsom et al. 1963) was one ofthe first 'authorised' statements to deal in some detailwith education in the slums. Following closely on theheels of this study, the Plowden Report extended thesearchlight over primary education and, significantly.laid the foundations for a national programme ofpositive intervention:

"A possible assumption of the E.P..1. programme is thatthe most effect we point at which to break into the viciouspoverty circle is in early childhood. in the primary schoolor in the pre-school period : and this approach tends to leadto considerable emphasis on work with families, thusraising fundamental questions about me right of the state.through its agencies, to intervene in the relation betweenparents and children.-;Halsey et al, 19721

Here. we witness the same diffidence that led to theprevarication of the 19th century liberal reformists inintroducing compulsory schooling in England. Parentsare. traditionally, best kept at arms length!

A new, reformist orthodoxy was now taking rootEducational strategies were being developed to bridgethe previously separate private and public domains ofhome and school. Even commentators, who weregenerally sceptical on the grounds that educationalone cannot solve the problems of poverty, werewilling to offer credence to EPA aspirations:

"... the schools themselves could become, to a degree.centres of social regeneration: growth points of a new socialconsciousness among the poor, which might at last bringpoverty under attack from its sufferers. no less than fromthe all-too-small battalions of liberal welfare workers andsocial administrators.''Coates & Silburn. 1970:73:

What remained to be tested was the essential 'locus'of education. How far, if necessary, could the classroommove to one side? From the point of view of this paper.how far could the family assume a central role in anynovel pedagogy?

At least, there was now the possibility to pose suchquestions. The paradigm that allowed this discoursewas that of 'community development' which invitedcommunity education to be linked to wider goals ofsocial action. In policy terms, government linked theDES sponsored EP Programme to the CommunityDevelopment Programme initiated by the Home

Office. The emphasis was on partnership betweennational and local governments. Later, this partnershipwas shifted towards an extended liaison with thevoluntary sector under the Urban programme thatsurvived governments of various complexions for morethan two decades from the late Sixties. The culminationof this exercise in 'social engineering' is the present.targeted City Challenge Programme within which thescope for educational action is severely circumscribed.

Nevertheless, recognition of the role for parentalinvolvement within community development isevident in ti,? residual guidelines of the Inner AreaProgramme. now on ice. More significantly, CityChallenge areas have attracted up to a quarter of amillion pounds per annum for the raising of pupilachievement through support such as parentalinvolvement under the !WE GEST in-service supportand training programme. Government, therefore,remains committed to family-based strategies setwithin the framework of community regeneration. Letus briefly consider the position of one such urban areawhere I presently work.

As an East End area having suffered from thelong-term demise and eventual closure of the LondonDocks. the London Borough of Newham has beendirectly involved with all the above schemes of socialengineering. In addition to having been home of one ofthe short-lived Community Development Projects inCanning Town. Newham supports over 100 schools,all of which qualified under the EPA points scheme.Since 1973. there has been a well-documented.continuous history of parent activism in the schoolsthat was inspired by the earlier work of EPA activists 1

in Liverpool:'We have been encouraged by the work of such people as

Eric Midwinter. who has proved that it ts lack ofinformation, confidence and time that prevents workingclass parents from being involved in the education of thewchildren and Nirl' apathy or want of interest-.Newham Education Concern. 19741

From the early days of misunderstanding andhostility that typified relations between parents andLEA. two decades of strategically supported parentinvolvement have brought a working partnership totackle issues such as literacy in a multicultural urbanarea Phillips. 1989 A significant element of thisparent participation has coalesced around the NewhamParents Centre which is an integral part of Newham'ssuccessful bid to the DPE under the latest round of theGEST programme geared to the in-service support andtraining of workers in schools:

-The aims of this bid will be targeted at raisingachievement through enhancing parental involvement inschools and assisting parents in developing a supportiveclimate lor learning 0 borne. . The benefits will betwofold in creating higher expectations of parents andpositive study climates in the home for pupils. E (feet wehomework act iv it les will also enhance pupil achievement inbasic literacy and numeracy skills raising teacher andpupil expectationsNewham Council. 1992!

Some ol' the catalytic features of the Parents'Contre'-; involvement will be appraised in the laterstages of this paper.

1:4 17


A strength of the 'social engineering' approach tochange is that educational issues such as literacy aresituated within a wider framework of social action. Ofcourse, the theoretical and practical validity of thisframework may vary considerably:

"In 'community development' projects the more a regionor area is broken down into 'local communities' without thestudy of these communities both as totalities in themselvesand as parts of another totality (the area, region and soforth) - which in its turn is part of a still larger totality (thenation, as part of the continental totality) - the morealienation is intensified".Freire, 1971:1381

The relevance for the modern inthistrial state ofFreire's analysis of peasant-based economies mightusefully be tested in terms of community regenerationinitiatives like City Challenge focused oil areas wherepoverty and illiteracy are rife.

Pupil-linked educational strategies in Newham, forexample, are being set within East Londonsub-regional plans for economic renewal. In turn.these relatively local schemes are intended as leveragefor support and funding from the EuropeanCommunity. Directly involved in the control of thevarious delivery systems are pupils, parents, schoolgovernors, voluntary organisations and private sectoras well as governmental agencies such as the LocalCnuncil, City Action Team. 11-aining and EnterpriseCouncil. London Docklands Development Corpor-ation and Health Authority.

Given such an elaborate superstructure. there is aninevitable danger that management issues willpre-dominate over serious matters of context. andstyle with regard to any literacy programmes launched.Families would appear to be but minor players on thiscommunity development pitch. Hence there is a needfor a complementary anti-poverty perspective toreinforce the strengths and weaknesses of any socialengineering model emanating from such establishedstructures as the school. Still within the communitydevelopment paradigm, adult education offers oneway forward:

'Adult education must be seen, not simply as classes anddiscussions for the adult members of the community. butrather as an integral part of a whole series of activitiessponsored by a government, the local authority, voluntaryagencies, churches, residents' groups - which arecommunity-based and concerned with the localcommunity...'Lovett, 19711

Family strategies beyond domestication

Within much contemporary radical discourse onadult literacy. 'domestication' is a dirty word.Resonances of this usage can be traced in the expressionof certain popular attitudes towards 'domesticity' and'domestics'. Such dismissive language can be found inthe writings of Freire in pursuit of a pedagogy of theoppressed:

. to substitute monologue. slogans, and communiquesfor dialogue is to attempt to liberate the oppressed with theinstruments 01 domestication.-,Freire, 1971:521

Later in the same text, he discloses the grounds forhis pejorative use of 'domus':

"Homes and schools from nurseries to universities)exist not in the abstract but in time and space. Within the !

structures of domination they function largely as agencies !

which prepare the invaders of the future-.!Freire. 1971:1521

Prima facie, the home-school partnership hardlyappears as fertile ground for tackling illiteracy.

The weight of such a critique rests on the assumption :

that top-down influences within the social system 1

succeed in quashing any resistance from people oragencies below. The same determinism persuaded thede-schoolers to move away from the classroom. Hence,the struggle to build an effective educationalprogramme must identify an agency which is genuinelyaccountable to people on the ground.

Yet, this accountability presupposes that issueswhich are of real concern to everyman andeverywoman are taken seriously. Apart from themany macro-social examples of sexism that have fired ;

the feminist movement, there is much evidence thatimportant responsibilitie3 such as child-rearing - theessential domestic economy - have been trivialised bythe male-dominated media of social enquiry. Thisdomestic subject matter must be taken more seriouslyby the designers of literacy programmes if they arereally to start where people are 'at'.

Imposed hierarchies of value are also embedded inthe literature of 'disadvantage', 'deprivation', 'deficit'etc: .

"A contrast is drawn between the backgroundcharacteristic of a manual worker's child and the middleclass child. The former often suffers from the disadvantageof peer material conditions low income, poor housing,overcrowding , . limited parental education, lack ofstimulation in the home, restricted linguistic and socialskills, and lack of parental experience and ability in :

handling the school system to the child's advantage.Berthoud et al. 1981:2421So, even if we were to accept such questionable

assertions, what can the wretched manual worker do?!Such a string of negatives provicl.es no foundation for aprogramme. Until an i nd: v idual, or group of 1

individuals, develops an identity and a sense ofself-value there is no hope for conscious, forwardmovement. Such was the prerequisite realisation for a ,

viable parent movement in Newham:'We have consistently recognised the enormous pressure '

on the LEA. Yet, although we know that a borough likeNewham needs financial resources and educational plant,we have learned that a real and often unrecognised resourceis the parents''.;Newham Education Concern. 19741

Family strategies must, therefore, attachimportance to the home not in any condescending waybut through th promotion of empathy between the ;

partners involved.Solidarity, not sympathy, is a crucial tool in forging

personal and social development for any professionalworking in the field of poverty:

"Recently I attended a conference . . . where poverty wasthe theme. Eminent and earnest labour leaders spoke. Asthe day wore on I became eerily disturbed at the difference

182


in tone from such discussions in the Thirties. At last I hit it:they were talking not political economy but philanthropy.Partly. maybe, this tone crept in because they were talkingabout our poor black and brown brothers. Mostly. however.it was because their attitude toward poverty ts no longerpart of their fighting economic theory. As labour economiststheY do not have solidarity with TIIESE poor-Goodman. 1960:541

'fl.anslating such sentiments across the Atlanticinto an English adult education context, we mightusefully recall the Russell Committee's prescriptionfor a comprehensive system of provision:

'the cohesion and source of identity of a local communitydepends largely on the vitality of the groups that composeit: and .one of the functions of adult education will he toform and sustain such groupings and to promote theirinteraction. A local adult education service is a requtsite ofcommunity life-.:Russell. 1973: 211

As with the schooling initiatives discussed earlier inthis paper, the community development paradigmoffers a framework within which to considerfamily-based strategies for adult education.

During the late 1970s and early 1980s. the AdvisoryCouncil for Adult and Continuing Educationconsidered the scope for the development of statutoryand voluntary provision in a series of reports. .NCACEidentified the 'dispositional. institutional andsituational' barriers to access for adults seekingto benefit from the education service1982:60 Since that time, opportunities havearisen to address some of these issues throughgovernmental programmes at a European leveldesigned to combat unemployment ana poverty.Thus, schemes like the European Social Fund andEuropean Programmes to Combat Poverty havechannelled resources into adult education as wellas vocational adult training. In particular. theEuropean Commission's definition of poverty as'social exclusion' ofkrs a door for those seekingfunds to develop access strategies through adulteducation.

Family-based learning schemes may, indeed, attractmany adults back into the education service andcounter the process of 'marginalisation' which is sooften at the root of poverty. Taking the broaddefinition of literacy in our Introduction, we mightread into the work of ACACE an extensive challenge forfamily initiatives:

'The public education service offers relatively little inthe way of coherent practical programmes of parent andhealth educatton: and forms eq education designed toenable people to understand complex political questionsand the political process, to act as informed citizens in ademocratic society, to fulfil important civic roles at workand m the community, are all far less well developed thanin many other advanced crWACE. 1982:175:

Such is the agenda for adult empowerment! Out oft he critical and self-aware concern for everyday publicissues as they daily connect with everyday privatetroubles. a family learning strategy may providefoundations for a system of' popular education. 1 n themeantime. we must seek out and reline suitable

catalysts to bring about change. One possibility is the ,

tactic of parent involvement.

Parent involvement as a catalystParents have a 'dual interest' in education. Parentinvolvement is usually associated with the first concernof parents to offer support to their children in school.Much less often are parents recognised as having theirown secondary needs as adults to benefit directly fromthe education service. This is equally parentinvolvement in education. Ironically, it is those parentswith the greatest secondary need (often poor and'iescribed in the Russell Report as the 'minimally

schooled') who require the most support and ;

encouragement to involve themselves in the schooling ;

of their children. Unless parents have confidence intheir own ability, with resources at their disposal,then they cannot be much help to anyone else -including their children.

How, then, does this dual interest thesis enable us toconstruct a programme for family literacy? Eachinterest underpins a course of action which addresseskey issues raised in this paper. Parents helping theirchildren is a fundamental exercise in social engineeringand, as we have seen has been incorporated into manygovernment programmes of positive discrimination:whilst parents helping themselves is an increasinglyrecognised feature of adult education practice. A briefappraisal of different models of parent involvementwill reveal the extent to which this dual interest isrecognised as well as the degree to which family-basedlearning is facilitated.

For the moment, we shall consider models based onfour relatively familiar parent roles in education as:

consumerstudentmanagerpartner

Parents as consumersHere the 'domus has been replaced as the focal

point by the 'forum' as educational services arebought by parents in the market place. In this way.schooling is a commodity which is subject to thenormal economic forces of supply and demand:

"... it becomes, for anyone who for any reason sharesthat parental interest, a mandate of the most elementarypolitical prudence to strive to increase the influence of theparents - to shift the whole balance of power in theeducation econom% from the supply side to the demand

Flew. 1987: 151The key unit of currency in this system is that of

'parental choice'. I n a manner reminiscent ofarguments expressed earlier in this paper, critics ofconsumerism concentrate on the dangers of narrowparochialism:

-Parental choice. by sanctifying parenthood as thewnershtp of children, treats children not as present or

future citizens, with equal rights to education, but as theadiuncts to families which, in their social existences, havemarkedly unequal rtNources and powers.'( Tcs, 1981: 252'

21 19


Notwithstanding this fundamental controversywhich has been fanned by the publication of theParents Charter. consumerism has provided aninvaluable dynamic in opening up the professionalworld of education to the laity. In particular. agencieslike the Advisory Centre for Education have generateda wealth of literature and information on schoolingwhich has gone straight into the home. Often drawingon the lessons learned in programmes like EPA. ACEhas done much to generate a more enlightenededucational public from which families might emergewith confidence to participate in learning initiatives aswell as to help their children in school.

Parents as studentsNot surprisingly, consumer awareness hs been a

spur for many parents to return to education asstudents. However, with the emphasis often on legalrights, there is a danger that the pedagogy will beformal based on the transmission of given 'facts'. Toavoid the excesses of a narrow vocational trainingapproach. ways iiced to be found to replace theteacher-taught hierarci.y with an egalitarian systemof sharing information and experience. Such aframework based on dialogue rather than 'monologue'. to use Freire's terms is more conducive to aprogramme of family literacy seeking to promoteconfidence and assertiveness.

One adult education organisation which hashistorically encouraged student responsibility forcourse development is the Workers' EducationalAssociation. Set within community developmentobjectives, the Newham Branch has organised a rangeof street level courses on topics inf luding LearningBegins at Home. How the Council Works. WelfareRights. Know Your Body. Assertiveness Skills. Frenchand Kweyol. Women's Creative Writing andGoverning Schools. Often with creches attached.many 'classes' have attracted family groups. Keyfactors in drawing such support have been childcare.venue, timing and recruitment of tutors from theneighbourhood.

Parents as managersReforms inspired by the Taylor Committee and the

more recent introduction of Local Management ofSchools have given major impetus to the involvementof parents at school governing body level. However, inareas of poverty and the minimally schooled, like theEast End of London. the label of 'guvrior' is not aneasy one to wear. Very considerable efforts need to bemade to reduce the gulf between parent andrepresentative. The Newham Parents' Centre isespecially concerned to build bridges and give parentgovernors the confidence and competence to representtheir constituents.

Even so. an advocacy role built on genuine solidaritybetween representative and represented is worthnurturing as part of a family literacy strategy.Significantly, it was the WEA llitor in the LiverpoolEPA Project who highlighted the potential forfamily-based learning in a school context:

"Formal 'parental education was extremely difficultand viewed with some suspicion by local parents . . . . an

atmosphere of parental involvement or interest in widersocial issues was of more importance tn the child'seducational development than any direct parentalassistance. It was felt that if such parents could turn theirattention to the school system as a whole and gwe u the sortof critical appraisal they often give to other institutions.then the concept of a community school might become areality.'':Lovett. 1975:23

By combining the direct and indirect means ofparent support. we arrive at the more ambitiousmodel of parent involvement. namely : partnership.

Parents as partnersA crucial feature of the parent, pupil, teacher

partnership in education is that each party brings adistinctive contribution. In seeking to define a parentsupport role in education. the Newham Parents'Centre characterised the parents status in the followingtwo ways:

1. a parent is the first generalist and the first volunteer;2. a working class community is more familiar with therigours of mutual self-help than with the traditions ofindividualistic 'service'. . an inner-city area of urbanindustrial decline such as the East End Docklands Boroughof Newham. parenthood endures as one major source ofcollective social esteem.-:NECSA. 1981.

Fami'y literacy programmes sponsored by theCentre must necessarily take full account of this non-professional stance of the local parent.

The strategy adopted by the Centre in fosteringparent partnership in education is expressed in thedevelopment of three integrated areas of servicedelivery - resources. guidance, training. Each isdesigned to improve the effectiveness and efficiency ofparent involvement.

Resources strategy recognises that parents musthave ready access to educational materials ( old andnew technologies in order to deal confidently with thelearning situation. A fully retailing Education Shopopen six days a week with a broad range of stock,including literacy materials, is available for theresourcing of all initiatives. Apart from stock. theShop provides neutral, friendly space in which sensitiveeducational issues can be explored.

Guidance strategy involves the promotion of a24-hour Education Helpline, advice on educationalopportunities and a programme of educational leafletsin community languages. Furthermorti, parentadvocacy services are availabie for families withchildren who have special educational needs. Anadditional feature of this strategy is a volunteer-intensive befriending and counselling service for adults.

Training strategy comprises a wide-reachingprogramme of adult basic educat:on. pre-vocationaland vocational training with generous creche support.An extensive, street-level outreach programme usingsmall community sites is a key aspect of the scheme.Emphasis is placed on progression from small informalsessions to lengthy, part-time courses with nationalaccreditation.

Already, the Centre has gained experience of runningfamily literacy programmes under the title Parents

90 9 2


and Children Enjoy Reading (PACER). Enjoyment isthe key in bringing the generations together withprogression seen as an additional benefit. Parents havethe chance to identify and prepare materials as well asdetermine the course of the programme. Opportunitiesalso exist for parents and other volunteers to receivetraining in becoming tutors.

Undoubtedly, the most important feature of thisthree-fold strategy is that the Newham Parents'Centre is managed by local parents. In extending thepartnership approach to more general family literacyinitiatives, the same care will need to be taken toensure that. there is 'domestic', street-levelaccountability. Herein, lies empowerment!

Conclusion

This paper has set out to elucidate some of the issuesattendant on developing schemes of family literacy inEngland. In particular, we have examined some of thepolicy initiatives that have affected the climate ofopinion in recent years with regard to parentinvolvement. The parent contribution will be criticalin any delivery of family-based learning especially inthe areas of industrial decline on which we havefocused.

Finally, some words of caution from a colleague.Letta Mashishi. with whom I worked for somememorable weeks in the Black Township of Soweto.South Africa. On several Sundays. I participated inschooi meetings of sixty to one hundred parents andchildren who were reading together to improve theirEnglish. The time was 8.30am and there were severaldead black residents not far away from the shootingsof the night before. No one was in a hurry to leave, andthe parents and children were happy to take bookshome. Yet, as my memory fades. I still rememberLetta's fear:

'Funding agencies are now trying to br ioo prescriptwe.They would be better advised to listen to people on theground. l'iable structures at street-level need to be identifiedto avoid the danger of encouraging prescriptive handoutsthat last for no more than a year or two.-

La lutte continue!

Refeeences

ACA(E 1982 . ('ontinuing Education: From Polit ws toPractice. 60. 175

Berthoud. R. et al (1981), Poverty and the Developmentof Anti-Poverty Pilicy in the FE. 242

Centre for Contemporary Cultural Studies tCCCS); 1981), Unpopular Education. 252

Coates, K. & Silburn, R. (1970), In Rubinstein, D.Education for Democracy. 73

Flew. A. (1987). Power to the Parents. 15

Forster. W. E.1870 House of Commons Speech onEducation Bill

Freire, P. (1971). Pedagogy of the Oppressed. 52, 138. 152

Goodman. P. 1960), Growing Up Absurd. 54

Halsey, A. H. et al .1972; Educational Priority, 17

Harrington. M. 1963. . The Other America

Jackson. B. & Marsden. D. .1962, Education and theWorking Class. 199

Lovett. T. 1975 . Adult Education. CommunityDevelopment and the Working Class. 23

Lovett. T. 1971 , ('ommunity Adult Education

NECSA 1981), Application to Home Office for Funding

Newham Council 1992!, GEST Application. DFE

Newham Education Concern 1974. ) First AnnualReport

Newham Education Concern 1974 ;, Application forFunding

Newsom. J. H. et al 1963 . Half our Future

Phillips. R. 1989. The Newham Parents Centre. InWolfendale. S. Parental Involvement - this traces thesteady improvement of relations between theParents Centre and LEA.

Russell. L. .1973 Russell Report: Adult Education. APlan for Development. 14

Wolfendale. S. 1992 . Empowering Parents andThachers. 42

BEST COPY AVAILABLE

21


Techniques in family literacyKeith Topping

Keith Topping is Director of the M.Sc. in Educational Psychology and Director ofthe Centre for Paired Learning at the University of Dundee. He previouslydirected the Kirklees Paired Learning Project and is widely known as a trainer,researcher, writer and lecturer with specialisms in parent and peer tutoring anddisruptive behaviour. He has created a number of multi-media in-servicetraining and distance learning packages and written several books and numerousarticles.

It took some teachers a little while to accept thevalue of really involving parents in children's learning.As parents progressed from the role of teacher's aidewith menial tasks in school to that of home-basedpartner in helping children overcome learningdifficulties, doubts were voiced in staff common rooms.What could parents offer that teachers could not?

The answer, of course. is - many things - in manyareas of the curriculum. The first of these is simply theavailability of extra practice children who read forinstance.' at home get more practice at reading thanthose who do not. It is well established that practiceconsolidates a skill, promotes fluency and minimisesforgetting. The more you do it. the better you get andthe more you want to do it. However, it is importantthat the practice is positive - i.e. is practice at readingsuccessfully. Teachers have traditionally tried to keeperror rates during reading in check by using carefullystructured and graded reading schemes. But withclose support from parents, it becomes possible forerror rates to be kept low by the deployment of highlysupportive tutoring techniques, coupled with carefullyarticulated correction procedures.

In a busy classroom, children receive relevantfeedback about the correctness of their performancee.g. their attempt to decode a particular word or

figure out the meaning of a section of text) rather lateand often in a less than clear manner. In the luxury of aone to one situation with a another family member.feedback can be immediate, preventing thecompounding of error upon error. Of course. immediatefeedback will only help if it is supportive and positivein nature. Certainly, detailed guidance about thenature of parental feedback, particularly at the pointof an error, is essential to incorporate in all parentalinvolvement programmes.

Children with learning difficulties by definitionexperience little success they generate fewopportunities for the teacher to meaningfully offerthem praise. Teachers do not praise children as oftenas they would like to think they do. and the evidencesuggests that natural rates of parental praise forchildren reading are a little lower than those ofteachers, but not greatly so. In a parental involvement

programme, great attention is usually given to thedevelopment and application of parental praise. Thishas the big advantage of being offered by someonewho is a very major and important person in thechild's life - certainly far more important than theteacher. A teacher figures in a child's life for less than ayear. but parents are there more or less permanently.and have the advantage of association with tangiblereward& So the social reinforcement a parent dispensesfor success can be more powerful than the teacher'sattempts in the same direction, and can be given morefrequently and regularly if required) than a teachercan manage.

The fourth crucial advantage that a parent has as atutor at home is much greater scope for modelling ordemonstration of the required behaviour. Manychildren want to "be like- grown-ups, particularly themost significant grown-ups in their life, their parents.Thus where parents can demonstrate enthusiasm forbooks and appropriate and mature reading behaviour.the effect on the child is likely to be considerably moreprofound than that of innumerable verbal urgings inthe classroom. Modelling is likely to be more powerfulthe more the child feels emotionally involved with.and wants to be like. the model. It follows that thefather's role can be particularly crucial for boys, andone might assume that the greater incidence ofreading failure in boys in elementary school is partiallya result of the majority of elementary teachers beingfemale, although the research evidence is equivocal onthis point.

Thus, compared to teacher input, parental modellingis more powerful. parental reinforcement is morevaluable and can be more frequent. parental feedbackis more immediate, and practice is more regular. Nowonder the literature on parents as educators of theirown children is now so vast ( c.f. Topping, 1986). Theadvantages of parental involvement are potentially sogreat that effective teachers deliberately allocate asignificant proportion of their scarce professional timeto increasing the quantity and quality of parentaltutoring at home. No longer is it good enough toinvolve a few trusted female middle class parents as atoken gesture - the need is to involve a large

92 24

Techniques in family literacy

cross-section of parents of all genders, colours, races.socio-economic classes and linguistic backgroundstogether with grandparents. siblings, all the rest of thefamily and friends and neighbours as well! To achievethis, teachers must acquire or develop a range ofeffective helping and tutoring strategies designed foruse by non-professionals. which can be "given away"as part of the process of empowering the communityto help itself.

It is clear that parents have many strengths onwhich tutoring systems can be designed to capitalise.and our previous discussion has alluded to some of thefeatures necessary to engineer into any family literacyprogramme. Equally, good engineering implies theinbuilding of safety devices and routines, and care isrequired in this respect also. Certainly any attempt toget by in family literacy programmes by handing outrestricted and watered down aspects of traditionalteacher practice is doomed to failure in the long run.

Effective tutoring systems for family literacy mustbe extremely flexible and capable of wide applicationat the initiative of family members. All kinds oftutoring constellations will spring up once a familyhas been empowered father melt tutor son whothen tutors mother who then feels able to tutoryounger daughter except on the hard bits where sontakes over, for instance. Given this requirement. it isclear that tutoring systems which are dependent onspecific educational materials or equipment areunlikely to truly empower they will be too expensive.too restricted in scope and interest and always too likea welfare handout, risking creating dependency. Thereal challenge is to design tutoring systems which canbe used by anyone, anywhere, with any materialwhich is to hand and is of interest.

This may sound kind of challenging, but is certainlypossible. In this paper three such systems will bedescribed: Paired Reading, Cued Speiling and PairedWriting. In each case the method will be elaborated.its organisation in practice detailed and researchevidence on effectiveness briefly summarised.

Paired Reading (PR)

MethodThe child che!:Kes high interest reading material

irrespective of its readability level, from school, thecommunity library or home. Newspapers andmagazines are fine. There is no requirement to finishthe book, but if children keep changing in midstreammaybe they need to take more care choosing.

Families commit themselves to an initial trialperiod in which they agree to do at least 5 minutesPaired Reading on 5 days each week for about 8 weeks.This time can be found in any part of the day and thefrequency of usage enables them to become fluent inthe method and is sufficient for them to begin to seesome change in the child's reading. Grandparents.siblings, friends and neighbours can he encouraged tohelp, but must all use the same technique the targetchild is deliberately asked to quality control thetutoring they receive.

The usual advice about finding a relatively quietand comfortable place applies. It is important that

both members of the pair can see the book equallyeasily parents who get neck-ache get irritable!Likewise, the usual advice about talking about thebook :or whatever it is: applies, but in Paired Readingthe child is more likely to want to talk about a bookthey have chosen and talk is also more necessarygiven the !probably greater difficulty of the text, as acheck on comprehension.

A very simple and ubiquitously applicable correctionprocedurc is prescribed. When the child says a wordwrong, the tutor just tells the child the correct way tosay the word, has the child repeat it correctly and thepair carry on. Saying "No!" and giving phonic or anyother prompts is forbidden. However, tutors do notjump in and put the word right straight away therule is that tutors pause and give the child 4 or 5seconds to see if they will put it. right all by themselves.The exception to this rule is with the sprint reader.

who 5 seconds after making an error could be threelines along and have made more errors in this caseearlier intervention and a finger point from the tutorto guide racing eyes back to the error word isnecessary.

Praise for good reading is essential. Thtors mustlook pleased as well as saying "good" and othc.positive things. Praise is particularly required forgood reading of hard words, getting all the words in asentence right and putting wrong words right beforethe tutor does ,selfcorrectiorn. Nagging, fussing andcomplaining are forbidden, but PR does not rely onnegative commands for effectiveness theseundesirable behaviours are engineered out byengineering in incompatible positive behaviours.

So hov- is the child going to manage this difficultbook sheihe has chosen? Thtors support childrenthrough difficult text by reading together bothmembers of the pair read all the words out loudtogether, with the tutor modulating their speed tomatch that of the child, while giving a good model ofcompetent reading. The child must read every wordand errors are corrected as above.

When an easier section of text is encountered, thechild may wish to read a little without support. Thtorand tutee agree on a way for the child to signal for thetutor to stop reading together. This could be a knock,a sign or a squeeze. When the child signals, the tutorstops /Tiding out loud right away while praising thechild for being so confident. Sooner or later whilereading alone the child will make an error whichthey cannot self-correct within 4 or 5 seconds. Thenthe tutor applies the usual correction procedure andjoins back in reading together.

The pair go on like this, switching from readingtogether to reading alone to give the child just as muchhelp as is needed at any moment, according to thedifficulty of the text, how tired the tutee is, and so on.Children should never 'grow out of' reading together:t hey should always be ready to use it as they move ont o harder and harder books.

The framework of the technique is outlined inFigure 1. Of course there is nothing new about itsome elements of' longstanding practice have merelybeen put together in a particuiarly successful package.A few teachers have difficulty accepting the technique

9... 5


PAIRED READING

Tbtee chooses reading material within tutor's readability let el

ITutor and tutee discuss book initially and throughout reading .

Tutor and tutee read together aloud at tutee's pace

f'orrect reading

Praise

Any tutee error

Correction Procedure

1Tutor says word correctly and may point to error word,' :

Tbtee repeats Word correctly

Pair continue r.eading together

Tutee signals non-verbally to read alone

Tutor praises tutee for signalling, then is sdent

Tutee reads alone aloud

Correct reading of lord worej Increasing span of correct reading Selicorrection \ns error or delay notself-corrected within 5 seconds

Praise

'orrection procedure as aboveand pair return to reading together

Figure 1: reading.

for philosophical reasons. Forget that, just try it.Remember PR does not constitute the whole readingcurriculum, but is designed to complement it withoutinterfering with it. Further details will be found inTopping and Wolfendale 1985

OrganisationPR is widely used with children of all reading

abilities and it makes sense to try it out initially on arange of students rather than attempt to solve all yourworst reading problems overnight. This will also helpto avoid stigmatisation of your first effort. Choose asmall group of fairly well motivated families topractise on, but not so small or scattered that there isno sense of group solidarity or togetherness , aroundten would be good . Ensure that the children haveeasy and frequent access to a wide range of booksavailable for taking home.

Invite parents and all other potential tutors, to alaunch or training meeting, together with the childrenwho will be the tutees. since pairs are trained togetherfrom the outset. At this meeting, after an introductiondesigned to create an air of novelty and excitementsome people like to put on a little play about how Su'r

to do reading at home), training in the techniquecommences. Tell the group about the basic structureof the technique and give a demonstration of how todo it. The demonstration can be on video, live by roleplay between teachers or by a teacher with user-friendly child, or by a graduate pair from a previousprogramme. Demonstrate reading together andreading alone separately to start with, then in normal

alternation. Take especial care to highlight thecorrection procedure. the 4-5 second pause and lots ofpraise.

Now have the pairs co right ahead and practise thetechnique, offering them necessary spa, e and privacy.Remember that to practise readina .ogether at allsensibly the pair will need a book above the child'scurrent independent readability level, so it is highlydesirable to have the tutees choose books for thepractice in school before the meeting so you can keepan eye on this. Left to themselves, the children willchoose easy books for the purpose of making a goodimpression! As the pairs practice, circulate todiplomatically check on technique. offering furtheradvice, coaching or re-demonstration with theindividual child where necessaryand don't forget thepraise! Remember that you can't advise or coachunless you have tried out the technique yourself on afew tame children.

After the practice, feed back your observations tothe group, take questions, outline the day to dayoperation of the project, and offer refreshments ifappropriate. Pairs should keep a PR Diary, noting thedate, what was read. for how long, with whom and anycomments about hew well the child did. Some parentshave trouble thinking what to write in the lastcolumn, so some schools provide them with adictionary of praise children are always happy tooffer suggestions for this. The diary should be takeninto school each week by the child to show the teacher,who should add their own positive comment and signthe card officially. perhaps also issuing a new one for

26


the next week. This is a means for the child to get adouble dose of praise - and is also a mutualaccountability device, of course. You will also need toadvise pairs about the different places from whichthey may borrow books. Give pairs an easy readhandout to remind them of the technique and to showto other family members this may need to be in morethan one language . Some schools offer Paired Readingbadges, balloons, and other such nonsense beloved bychildren -all helping to advertise the programme. Youmay wish to have the pairs contract into theprogramme more or less formally.

When discussing diaries with children in the ensuingweeks, check if all is going weil. If it is not, you maywish to call the family into school tor a brief conferenceabout the programme and to see if they are still 'doingit right'. If you can find the time, a home visit is evenbetter. In all cases have the pair show you how theyare doing it and check the difficulty level of the bookschosen . these may be consistently too hard or tooeasy ..

After the initial period of commitment, gather thepairs together again for a feedback meeting. Tell themhow you think things have gone and seek theiropinions on the technique and organisation of theproject. Some present will say little and some will notattend. so you might also wish to have feedbackquestionnaires for the participants see Topping &Whiteley 1990 for examples:. You might wish to testthe children's reading before and after the project sovou can feed back the overall results to the group, butavoid giving out individual scores to parents as onescore is unlikely to accurately reflect the complexity ofwhat has occurred. You might want to offer the groupfurther targible indicators of the school's approval atthis point.

The main purpose of the meeting is to regenerateenthusiasm and group cohesion, since you do not wantanyone to think this is -the end-. Encourage eachfamily to say where they want to go from here: go Onwith PR 5 days a week, go on but only 2-3 days a week.go on with reading at home but in a different way. orstop for a rest and perhaps start again later. Childrenmay wish to go on keeping the diary and you will haveto decide how often you can find time to see this in thelonger run.

EffectivenessPaired Reading has been the subject of a very large

amount of research, starting in the UK and nowinternationally, and this has recently been reviewedby Topping & Lindsay 1992 .

Much of the evaluation has been in terms of gains onnorm-referenced tests of reading before and after theinitial intensive period of involvement. Publishedstudies do not always reflect the reality of ordinary lifein the classroom, but with PR it is possible to comparethe results of 60 published and therefore selectedstudies of projects with outcome data from 155unselected projects operated in one school district. Inthe published studies. involving a total of 1012children, for each month of time passed the averagePaired Reader gained 4.2 months in reading age foraccuracy and 5.4 months for comprehension. In the

155 unselected projects, involving 2372 children, foreach month of time passed the average Paired Readergained 3.3 months in reading age for accuracy and 4.4months for comprehension.

Of the published studies. 19 included control orcomparison groups, while of the unselected projects.37 included control groups. Although the controlgroups often also made gains greater than wouldnormally be expected. the PR groups on aggregate didfar better, although the differentic! ..,as greater in theselected projects.

But do these gains last? Published reports on fiveprojects with follow-up data are available, but of theunselected projects 17 included such evidence. In thelatter, up to 17 weeks after the initial project intensiveperiod. 102 children in 7 projects were still gainingover 2 months of reading age per chronological monthelapsed for both accuracy and comprehension. Atlonger term follow-up. 170 children in 10 projects werestill gaining well over 1 month of reading age permonth elapsed in both accuracy and comprehension.Thus it seems that while the initial startlingacceleration does not continue indefinitely, the gainscertainly do not 'wash out' subsequently, and follow-updata from control group projects confirms thisTopping, 1992.The data from the unselected projects further

suggested that well- organised projects yielded bettertest results, that participant children from lowersocio-economic classes tended to show higher gains.that horric visiting by teachers increased test scoresand that boys tended to accelerate more than girls.Also, second language Paired Readers acceleratedmore than first language Paired Readers in accuracybut less in comprehension while of course acceleratinga great deal more than non-Paired Readers of eithert ype

Taking another approach to evaluation, thesubjective views of parents. children and teachers inthe unselected projects have also been gathered, bystructured questionnaire enabling responses to besummarised Topping & Whiteley 19901. In a sampieof over 1000 parents. after PR 700 considered theirchild was now reading more accurately, more fluentlyand with better comprehension. Greater confidence inreading was noted by 780 of parents. Teachersreported better reading in the classroom in a somewhatsmaller proportion of cases about 8" less i. Of asample of 964 children. 95" felt that after PR theywere better at reading and 920 liked reading more.Eighty-seven per cent found it easy to learn to do.83° liked doing it and 70" said they would go ondoing it.

Paired Reading has also been used in an AdultLiteracy context, with spouses. friends, neighboursand workmates acting as tutors. The advantages ofbeing able to use more appropriate and more readilyavailable reading material and receive tutoring on alittle and often basis closely linked to everyday life areextremely important, especially for the majority ofadults with literacy difficulties who cannot or will notattend a class.

Scoble. Topping and Wigglesworth 1988 . reportedthe evaluation ol a six-week project of this type,

295


noting average gains of 10.4 months in reading age foraccuracy and 13 months for comprehension for thosestudents who could register on the scale at pre-test. Onmiscue analysis, most tutees showed a striking increasein self-correction. Once PR is applied in a morecomplex family literacy context, it soon becomes verydifficult to evaluate, since there are problemsestablishing who is doing what and with which and towhom.

Cued Spelling (CS)

MethodThe basic structure of the technique comprises 10

Steps, 4 Points to Remember and 2 Reviews, asillustrated in Figure 2. The ,10 Steps and 4 Pointsapply to every individual target word worked upon bythe pair, while the 'Speed Review' covers all targetwords for a particular session and the 'MasteryReview' covers all the target words for one week or alonger period if desired.

CUED SPELLING

I. speller che.I.e.: word

2.; rhea right "pelltne put in otare

3. F Rend the v. trn toautner ano lllll nu .

Chooses t tas

5 I CU, tocetner

13. ISpeller ants ( mu, worn

7.! {{viper v.,t eues speller Mn le% M"rn .

ti Speller slys t and writes ord

Remember

Helper cos PN pre, tnus Mr,

srs-ler enecics own Ile

re I. ungli:Pee 'main

9.1 speller Writes %OM Mit 'It a., ppnw,

1O.1 speller rcarl..ord

Each dets - speed RP, se.rites U,, uent. tor ricks taq awl st,s-h. I

rung words - CIO I1) 'rep. again

Each w.t. - la.ters Rea,A.speller write...Ws w01,1:. tor ...els 1.1 and s Ices n

DPride hat to ,to distal ssrong .nrns

Figure 2: Me ten swim

The child tutee chooses high interest target wordsirrespective of complexity Step 1 The pair check thespelling of the word, put a master version in theirCued Spelling Diary and usually also add it to the topof a piece of paper on which subsequent attempts willbe made. The pair then read the word out loudsynchronously, then the child reads the word aloudalone, ensuring tutee capability of accurate readingand articulation of the word.

The child then chooses Cues prompts or remindersito enable him or her to remember the written structureof the word. These Cues may be phonic sounds. letternames, syllables or other fragments or 'chunks' of

words, or wholly idiosyncratic mnemonic devices.Tutees are encouraged to consider and choose Cueswhich fit well with their own cognitive structures, i.e.make sense and are memorable to them. Tut's.although a parent ( tutor I might make suggestions orstimulate imagination, the decision on Cueing restswholly with the child.

Once Cues are decided upon, the pair say the Cuesout loud simultaneously (Step 5). The tutee then saysthe Cues out loud while the tutor writes the worddown on scrap paper to this 'dictation' thus the tuteeis provided with a demonstration or model of therequired behaviour. At Step 7. the tutor says the Cuesout loud while the tutee writes the word down. AtStep 8. the tutee says the Cues and writes the wordsimultaneously.

At Step 9. the tutee is required by the tutor to writethe word as fast as possible ( the tutee may or may notdecide to recite the Cues out loud at this Step, but maywell recite them sub-vocally ,. At Step 10, the tuteeagain reads the word out loud as a reminder of themeaningful context in which the target word hopefullyhas remained embedded.

The 4 Points cover aspects of the technique relevantto its practical application. At every attempt atwriting a target word, the tutor is required to cover upprevious attempts on the work paper, to avoid thepossibility of direct copying, although in fact sometutees prefer to do this themselves. Every time there isa written attempt on a target word, the tutee checksthe attempt and the tutor only intervenes if the tuteeproves unable to check his or her own attemptaccurately.

If tutees have written a word incorrectly, they areencouraged to cross it out very vigorously to assist itsdeletion from their memory. At an incorrect attempt,the correction procedure is merely that the pair returnto the Step preceding the one at which the error wasmade. Thtors are required to praiSe at various junctureswhich are specified quite clearly. These precise detailsof the nature of praise and the criteria for itsapplication are intended to promote higher frequencyand regularity of praise, as well as more effective useof it.

At the end of each tutoring session, there is a 'SpeedReview', wherein the tutor requires the tutee to writeall the target words for that session as fast as possiblefrom dictation in random order. The tutee thenself-checks all the words with the 'master version' inthe Cued Spelling Diary. Target words which areincorrect at Speed Review have the 10 Steps appliedagain. perhaps with the choice of different Cues. Infact. tutees make only a small proportion of errors atSpeed Review and the requirement to re-apply the 10Steps is not as onerous as it sounds.

At the end of each week, a 'Mastery Review' isconducted, wherein the tutee is required to write allthe target words for the whole week as fast as possiblein random order. No specific error correction procedureis prescribed for Mastery Review and it is left to thepair to negotiate for themselves what they wish to doabout errors. Many pairs choose to include failedwords in the next week's target words.

The technique has been designed and structured to

26 28


be highly interactive, but in operation presents asdemocratic rather than didactic. It is intended toprovide a framework to "scaffold" self-managedlearning. There is good evidence that spellersnaturalistically use a great variety of strategies in ahighly idiosyncratic manner, so any requirement touse a specific mnemonic strategy ubiquitously is likelymerely to further inhibit an already poor speller. Also.there is evidence that when children select their ownspelling words, they tend to choose more difficultwords but are as successful as with easier words chosenby adults. Work on mnemonic strategies hasemphasised the importance of meaningfulness to thesubject see Oxley & Topping. 1990, fcr relevantreferences:. Thus the Cued Spelling technique tits inwell with recent trends towards individualised andself-governed learning of spelling skills.

Cued Spelling features swift error correction andsupport procedures, in the hope ofeliminating the fearof failure. It is flexible and appropriate for a wide ageand ability range. The self-selection of target wordsand self-management of many of the procedures isdesigned to increase motivation. It incorporatesmodelling and praise. The Steps are finely task-analysed are in small incremental stages .. to reducefrustration on very difficult words but they can beworked through very quickly on easier words. The

1 nature of the activity should ensure high levels of timeon task. The emphasis in the later stages of thetechnique on speeded performance is of course drawnfrom the concept of 'fluency' found in precisionteaching. This aspect is included to promotegeneralisation over time and contexts, since otherwisethere is a danger that the tutee will merely havelearned spelling 'tricks' while continuing to spell thesame words incorrectly in the course of subsequentcontinuous free writing. While the method may seemcomplex on first reading, seven-year-old childrenhave been successfully trained in its use in about onehour.

OrganisationCued Spelling projects follow many of the

organisational guidelines for Paired Reading projects.Parents and children are trained together. .A talk onthe method is best accompanied with a demonstrationon video, since a live demonstration of cs often lacksclarity of small detail and tends to be less successful.An additional practical demonstration of Cueingusing a chaikboard and soliciting from the groupdifferent words and different cueing strategies for eachword is helpful in making the point that there are no"right" cueing strategies, only effective and ineffectiveones. Pairs are given a '10 Steps' chart see Figure 2to refer to while practising the method with thechild's own words ;chosen before the meeting , us;.(gthe paper, pencils and dictionaries provided.Individualised feedback and further coaching isprovided as necessary.

Cued Spelling Diaries are given to each pair, eachpage including space to write the master version of upto 10 words on all days of the week, together withboxes to record (laily Speed Review and weeklyNlasterv Review scores and spaces for comments from

tutor ( daily ) and teacher :weekly+. The pair are askedto use the technique on about five words per dayimplying a minimum time of 15 minutes) for 3 days

per week for the next 6 weeks. The children areencouraged to choose words from their school spellingbooks, graded free writing, relevant project work orspecial Cued Spelling displays of common problemwords, and collect these . in a cs "collecting book" sothey always have a pool of suitable words from whichto choose.

Thtees are asked to bring their cs Diaries intoschool once each week for the class teacher to view.Keep watch on the words chosen, since some childrenchoose words they already know while others chooseextremely difficult words of very doubtful utility inthis case you might need to prescribe a formula of "3for everyday use and 2 just for fun". Participatingchildren might receive a badge and parents a higherreadability information sheet with further ideas onCueing.

As Cued Spelling has been much used in a reciprocalpeer tutoring format, its use in family literacy insituations where both members of the pair are of equalspelling ability is entirely possible, although it is thenespecially important that the master version of theword is looked up in the dictionary and copiedcorrectly into the (s Diary. Thus a parent who is oflimited spelling ability could work with their child ofsimilar spelling ability or sibling tutoring could operatebetween children of similar or different ages. Inreciprocal tutoring, the fact that everyone gets to be atutor is good for the self-esteem of both members ofthe pair, who of course end up learning their partner'swords as well as their own.

EffectivenessThe initial reports on ('ued Spelling were of a

descriptive nature. Emerson ; 1988) reported on abrief project using the technique with four parentswho tutored their own children at home. Results atMastery Review were excellent. Scoble ( 1988) reporteda detailed case study of an adult literacy studenttutored by his wife using the technique. After tenweeks of Cued Spelling, a Masters- Review of all wordscovered in the preceding weeks yielded a success rateof 78" . Subsequently. Scoble 1989) reported on theprogress of fourteen similar pairs, most of whom had(Ione Paired Reading together first. The mostlong-st anding student had used the method for over ayear and usually achieved Speed Review scores of100°,, and Mastery Review scores of 90(. Harrison1989 ) reported on a similar project and its extension

to peer tutoring between adult literacy students in aclass situation.

In the event, however, the most popular applicationof Cued Spelling then proved to be in a peer tutoringformat. Oxley & Topping 1990 ) reported on a projectin which S seven and eight-year-old pupils weretutored by 8 nine-year-old pupils in the same verticallygrouped class in a small rural school. This cross-age,cross-ability peer tutoring project was found to yieldstriking social benefits and the children spontaneouslygeneralised peer tutoring to other curricular areas.Subjective feedback from both tutors and tutees was

.`9 27


very positive. The self-concept as a speller of both: tutees and tutors showed a marked positive shift

compared to that of non-participant children.especially so for the tutees. After six weeks, a total

' Mastery Review of all target words yielded averagescores of 66° correct, but a test session of up to 92items for such young children was considered ofdoubtful reliability. Results on two norm-referencedtests of spelling were equivocal, since although thescores of both tutees and tutors were strikinglyimproved at post-test, so were those of non- participantchildren in the same class.

Peer tutored Cued Spelling in a class-wide. same-age.same-ability reciprocal tutoring format was reportedby Brier ley, Hutchinson, Topping & Walker 19891.All pupils in the three first year mixed ability classes..aged 9 to 10 years) in a Middle school participated.Thtor and tutee roles changed each week. All thechildren were trained in a single group meeting. Aftersix weeks, a total Mastery Review of all words coveredyielded average scores of 8000. On a norm-referencedtest of spelling, the average gain for all children was0.65 years of spelling age during the six-week project.certainly many times more than normal expectations.Subjective feedback from the children was verypositive. 84"c of the children reporting feeling theywere better spellers after the project. Subsequently.peer tutored Cued Spelling was initiated by a numberof schools. especially in the reciprocal tutoring format,but few found time to evaluate it. A study of parenttutored Cued Spelling with children of eight years ofage and of the normal range of spelling abilityFrance. Topping & Revell. 19921 indicated that the

intervention appeared to be effective in differentiallyraising the spelling attainments of participants ascompared to non-participants who were more ablespellers, at least in the short term. Children felt CuedSpelling was easy to learn to do and that it improvedtheir spelling along a number of dimensions. However.they said they tended to become bored with it and haddifficulty finding enough words with which to use thetechnique.

It can be argued that any method involving extratime on task at spelling and extra valuable parentalattention and approval related to spelling might belikely to yield differential gains. A study by Watt &Topping 1992' compared Cued Spelling withtraditional spelling homework an alternativeintervention involving equal tutor attention andequal time on spelling tasks 1. compared the relativeeffectiveness of parent and peer tutored Cued Spellingand assessed the generalisation of the effect of CuedSpelling into subsequent continuous free writing. On anorm-referenced spelling test. Cued Spellers gainedover two months of spelling age for each chronologicalmonth elapsed, while the traditional spellinghomework comparison group of more able spellersgained only half a month of spelling age per month.The average score for parent tutored children at finalMastery Review of words used in the programme was930 correct. Parent and peer tutoring seemed equallyeffective.

Participating children returned questionnairesidentical to those used hy Oxley & Topping ; 1990. ) Of

these, 560 found it easy to think up good Cues whilethe rest thought it hard. but 87° now felt happierabout spelling in general and that their spelling wasbetter when writing, while 83"c felt they now didbetter at spelling tests. Ninety-one per cent reported ahigher rate of self-correction after doing Cued Spellingand the same proportion said they liked doing Cued !

Spelling, while 87" said they wished to go on doingCued Spelling. Parents returned feedback question-naires and 88°c reported a higher rate ofself-correction, confirming the feedback from thechildren, while 58°c reported noticing their childrenspontaneously generalise the use of Cued Spellingtechniques to other words. Three of the four teachersinvolved noted higher rates of self-correction of spellingin classwork and a general improvement in free writing.

Pre-post analysis of written work was based onsamples of writing from Cued Spellers and comparisonchildren. The average number of spelling errors perpage reduced from 8.5 to 4.62 for the Cued Spellersand from 3.7 to 2.1 for the comparison children, whoclearly had a lower error rate to start with and thushad less room for improvement. Generally, all but oneof the participants and all but one of the comparisonchildren were adjudged to have improved in quality qfwritten work one would of course expect children inschool to improve over time ). but the cs grouprecorded an average of 1.7 specific improvements perchild while the comparison group averaged 1.25.

Paired Writing

MethodWriting can be a lonely business and a blank piece of ;

paper waiting to be filled strangely daunting. PairedWriting is a framework for a pair working together togenerate or co-compose] a piece of writing for anypurpose they wish. The guidelines are designed tostructure interaction between the pair so that a higherproportion of time is spent on task hopefullyreducing dithering, head-scratching, staring out of thewindow and blind panic to a minimum.

There is great emphasis on continuity the pairstimulating each other to keep going at any threatenedhiatus. There is also constant inbuilt feedback andcross-checking what is written must make sense toboth members of the pair. The system is designed to besupportive and eliminate the fear of failure. Anxietyabout peripheral aspects of writing such as spelling or ;

punctuation should thereby be reduced to anappropriate level, and dealt with in an orderly way. Asthe "best copy" is a joint effort of the pair, criticism aswell as praise from external evaluators is shared.

Peer evaluation is incorporated, relieving thesupervising professional of the burden of gradinginnumerable scripts after the event (sometimes solong after that the feedback given is totally ineffective).Research shows that peer evaluation is at least aseffective as teacher evaluation.

Paired Writing usually operates with a more ablewriter : the helper and a less able one (the Writer] inthe pair. but can work with a pair of equal ability solong as they edit carefully and use a dictionary tocheck spellings. In this latter case, it is possible to

28 3 (1


reciprocate roles from time to time to add varietyhowever, this should not be too frequent and the tworoles should always be kept clearly separate.

The system may be used in creative writing orEnglish composition, or in descriptive or technicalwriting, or as part of cross-curricular work.employment or other life needs. A Paired Writingproject may be designed to mesh in with, or follow onfrom, direct instruction from a professional teacher onstructural aspects of the writing process or a PairedReading or Cued Spelling project, but the methodmay equally be used on an ad hoc basis as the needarises once pairs are trained and practised in its use.

The structure of the system consists of 6 Steps, 10Questions ( Ideas), 5 Stages ( Drafting) and 4 Levels; Editing), and is outlined in Figure 3. Helpers shouldnot be overly didactic, nor too supportive. Helpersare there to help Writers to help themselves. not to doeverything for them. As there are no "right answers-about what constitutes good writing. Helpers shouldavoid direct criticism of the Writer's efforts, butinstead make comments about their own subjectivereaction. e.g. "I find that bit hard to understand -canwe think of a clearer way to write it'?" More praise forgood bits than comment on doubtful bits is the rule.and praise must be given at least at the end of each step.

Step 1 is Ideas Generation. The Helper stimulatesideas by raising the stimulus words listed underQuestions with the Writer. not necessarily in the orderlisted. As the Writer responds. the Helper makesone-word notes. As this proceeds. the helper mightrecapitulate previous ideas before presenting the nextstimulus word. The Helper might also think up newstimulus words not listed.

Step 2 is Drafting. The notes should then beplaced where both members of the pair can easily seethem. Drafting then proceeds without concern foreither spelling or punctuation. However, legibility isdesirable, as is double spaced writing to allow fursubsequent editing. Most pairs will do better withlined paper. The Writer considers the notes anddictates. sentence by sentence, what he or she wishesto communicate. Generally a pair will choose one ofthe five Stages of Support to operate in for the session.For a 'harder' piece of writing, they are likely tochoose a low numbered: Stage. for an 'easier'assignment a higher numbered Stage. However.they might go back one stage or more whenencountering a particularly hard bit. In any event, ifthe Writer cannot proceed within 10 seconds. theHelper must go back a stage on that problem word togive more support. There is a great emphasis onkeeping going and not getting bogged down. Keepinggoing with more support is better than struggling for along time with less support.

Step 3 is Reading. The Helper then reads the draftout loud. with as much expression and attention topunctuation real or imagined as possible. while thepair look at the text together. The Writer then readsthe text out loud. If a word is read incorrectly, theHelper says that word correctly for the Writer.

Step 4 is Editing. The pair look at the draftt ogether and the writer considers where she he t hinksimprovements are necessary. The problem word.

PAIRED WRITING'do 1 IDEAS

II ..Wa Qtnstrolls11 give, Answers

II makes uneword note:

QUESTIONS

Who?Do"

1lah'%%here

%%hen!

- Vlriter tulleII - Helper tutor

1111AT NEXT' I

Bat "

PRAISE

DRAFT

Look at do,. note.-.tart a rough dratt

DON T sputhng

%%eller ...Is. a sentence Ann

,T1GE 1 s -TAGE %

11 It Ali III ant,- naro 1.11 unit, hard it "%is. now 1% writ,in Si, ; words in rough I: spaut ham it all

11 'sum. iii worn.

,tei

^, 4

P

II helps u 11 struggle,. ort worn tor more than lo seeOrld,...wads zoang ha. k -me on that word

READ

II nail, dr:01 Ast mini %lake it souna geod '

naostratt at ,oel 11 ri twat). %Ord, 1,4110 rOng

EDIT

it no..1.. at 1)ralt1% mark. where mtpros,

I %1E1NINGORDER

; Ii '1( T1 %Tics\

II do., di( ...idle I

11 ,ocgt-d, tlidIce.11 II diwowtI w Ihrtinnars

egoo-s-hances

BEST COPY

I -will% 11 414, hr-it si noon Irtim tuliteti tirml .

ot 40111tIldo, II dm% %rile or 11 pt. 11

EVALUATE

l'o.lothls I.-4 Ins another 11orKI)IT h see.

PRAISE

Figure 3: Paved UTUL112

phrase or sentence might be lightly marked withcoloured pen, pencil or highlighter. The most

BEST COPY AVAILABLE99


important criterion of need for improvement is whereMeaning is unclear. The second most important is todo with the organisation of ideas within the text or theOrder in which meanings are presented, whetherphrases or sentences. The next consideration is whetherSpellings are correct and the last whether PunctuatiOnis helpful and correct.

The Helper praises the Writer for completion of thisdemanding task, then marks any areas they feel theWriter has "missed", while bearing in mind thesubjective nature of some aspects of "quality- inwriting. The Writer then suggests changes, the pairdiscuss the best correction to make, and whenagreement is reached the new version is inserted in thetext (preferably by the Writen. Spellings over whichthere is the slightest doubt in the pair should bereferred to the dictionary.

Step 5 is Best Copy. The Writer :usually) thencopies out a 'neat' or 'best' version of the correcteddraft. Sometimes the Helper may write or type orword-process the piece, however, depending on theskill and stamina of the Writer.

Step 6 is Evaluate. The pair should inspect andconsider the best copy. Given the effort they haveexpended, they are likely to think their co-composedtext is really rather good, and be happy to congratulateeach other as members of a successful composing duet.However, external evaluation by more objectiveassessors is highly desirable. Peer evaluation is a usefulmutual learning experience, and assessment by anotherpair can proceed by reference to the criteriaencompassed in the Edit levels, again hopefully withpositive comments outnumbering negative.

As with Paired Reading, there is nothing new inthis, including as it does many of the traditionalelements of process writing. More complex versionswith more Editing options have been developed forolder children. but these are not appropriate for thosewith learning difficulties.

OrganisationFor training purposes and indeed subsequPritly

each pair must have a system flowchart, two pens orpencils, scrap paper. easy access to a dictionary of anappropriate level and good quality paper for the bestcopy. Most pairs will do best with lined paper. It isrecommended that the use of erasers is stronglydiscouraged. .A coloured pen or pencil for editingmight be found helpful.

At a training meeting participants should sit attables in their pairs. with a hard copy of the flowchartFigure . which could also be projected. Talking

through the flowchart should as always beaccompanied by a demonstration of the system inoperation, and the most visible way of doing this isusually by live role play between teachers writing onan acetate sheet which is continuously projected.Practice, monitoring and coaching follow. You maychoose to specify some simple topic for all pairs for thepractice. which should be common to all and preferablyfunctional, e.g. 'how to use a coin-operated telephone'or 'how you should brush your teeth'. Allow at least 40minutes and preferably one hour for the meeting.

After training, the system will need to be used as

frequently as possible for the next few weeks, to ensureconsolidation and promote fluency in its use andenable any problems to be picked up. An informalcontract regarding minimum frequency of usage shouldbe established -e.g. Paired Writing for 3 sessions of 20minutes per week for 6 weeks - and this can be tied inwith regular homework requirements.

EffectivenessTo date, the evaluations of Paired Writing have

been solely descriptive and anecdotal. The task ofevaluating quantitative and qualitative change inchildren's writing is an enormously time-consumingundertaking from a research point of view, and thedifficulty of checking if any changes endure in thelonger term even greater.

The objective of parent tutored Paired Writing is toproduce an increase in the quality and quantity ofwritten outputwhich generalises to the solo writingsituation and endures over time. Along the way parentwriting skills may also improve. Where tutors aresiblings, a more complex issue arises - is the finalproduct better than if the members of the pair workedseparately? If the abilities of the two are verydisparate, this may not be the case, and the altruism ofbrothers and sisters is rarely infinite.

Most of the usage of Paired Writing since its recentinception has been on a same-age cross-ability peertutoring basis in schools with classes of mixed abilitystudents. In this situation, it is clearly important thatthe ambitious objective of joint written productsbeing better qlan either member of the pair couldcreate alone is achieved, or a reversion to traditionalsolo writing in isolation is inevitable given theaccountability demands of the education system.Gratifyingly, in a majority of cases this is exactlywhat happens, and students mostly prefer thesociability and supportiveness of Paired Writing tothe traditional approach. Parent tutored PairedWriting has so far been largely confined to parentsworried about their child's learning difficulties.although the interpretation of learning difficulty hasbeen wide, so that the method has been used with 1

university students by parents worried aboutupcoming examination performances, for instance.The author would welcome information about anyPaired Writing projects..

Designing Tutoring SystemsThere is now an ever expanding wealth of knowledge

and experience about systems for tutoring bynon-professionals and from this it is possible to distil achecklist of engineering criteria likely to maximisesuccess. Those educators inventing their own localprocedures may find this helpful.

Objectives - what benefits the programme isexpected to have should be clearly articulated, notleast for marketing/recruitment and subsequentevaluation purposes. The programme must notinterfere with the regular school curriculum, butshould dovetail into it. while capitalising on thequalitative differences and advantages of familyliteracy tutoring as compared to school instruction.

.3 0 32


Keep the objectives modezt for your first attempt.Ability differential be clear with potential

volunteers (and yourself) about the degree of ceilingcompetence needed in the tutor and the feasible rangeof ability differential (if any in the pair. If tutorcompetence is in doubt there must be reference tosome acceptable master source to verify correctness,since overlearning of errors would leave the tuteeworse off than when they started.

Flexibility procedures should be applicablewithout major modification to participants of differentages and abilities with different life situations andneeds, different learning styles and different ambitions.and in different physical environments. Clearly, themore specific materials are deemed to be necessary.the less these flexibility requirements are likely to bemet. Likewise, the procedure should enable andfacilitate the tutee to deploy a range of strategies.rather than strait-jacketing them into a singleprofessionally preferred one. Activity shouldpreferably be varied and multi-sensory, withalternation between different styles of reading.listening, writing, speaking, and so on.

Interaction -procedures should involve responsiveinter-i activity from both members of the pair, since

if one declines into being merely a checker or passiveaudience motivation will soon evaporate. Theprocedure should promote a high rate of time on task.with an emphasis on keeping going - maintaining theflow of activity increases the number of learningopportunities and helps stave off anxiety.

Satisfaction likewise, both members of the pairmust gain some intrinsic satisfaction from the activity.since pure parental altruism will always expireeventually through boredom. Basically, it's got to befun.

Self-management - the tutee should have asubstantial degree of control over the process oftutoring and preferably over the curriculum contentand materials as well. 'Race control of the amount ofsupport offered by the tutor is especially valuable.Thtees should be able to exercise choice and initiative

deprived of the opportunity. they will never developthe skills.

Instructions - should be simple, clear and aboveall specific. Instructions are probably best given as aseries of finely task analysed steps. Parents like to betold what they have to do to be right, at least at thestart. Mostly they dislike wordy educationalphilosophising and vague and fuzzy open-endedstatements. Both tutor and tutee should be given veryclear interactive I job descriptions. since without thisthe process of tutoring can rapidly degenerate into amuddle. The provision of a simple visual map, chart orother cue to remind the pair of how it is all supposed towork may well be helpful.

Materials especially for children with learningdifficulties, the curriculum materials in use should beindividualised to match the tutee's needs and interests.but are they to be completely free choice, controlledchoice from ranges of difficulty or precisely specifiedby the professionals. or some continuum of these asthe tutoring develops? Are the materials requiredactually available and easy for regular access by pairs?

Does the tutoring procedure accommodate toprogression onto increasingly difficult materials? Haveyou specified what the pair will need to have availableby way of basic equipment ( pen. paper, dictionary?).and ensured it will be available?

Error control - the tutee should not feel as if theyare making many errors, since this is bad for morale. Ifthis is not controlled via tutee-, tutor- or teacher-selected materials, careful accommodation by thetutor to the tutee's natural pacing and the provision ofswift non-intrusive support must be a feature of thetutoring technique. without creating tuteedependency. Errors are potentially the major stresspoint in the tutoring relationship - but be alert toother possible causes of stress and fatigue in the system.

Error signalling-when an error is made, feedbackshould be swift that this is the case, but not soimmediate that the tutee has no opportunity to detectthe error themselves. Error signalling should bepositive and minimally interruptive.

Error correction - a swift, simple, specific andpreferably ubiquitously applicable error correctionprocedure must be clearly laid down, which is seen bythe tutee as supportive and draws minimum attentionto the error. There should be a strong emphasis on self-checking and self-correction, both higher order skillswhich need to be fostered. In a more general globalsense, peer evaluation could be incorporated.

Eliminate negatives - -don't say don't" -prescribe positive error signalling and correctionprocedures which are incompatible with the negativeand intrusive behaviours we all sometimes perpetrate.rather than giving tutorg a list of prohibitedbehaviours.

Accentuate positives be specific aboutrequirements for praise, including what to praiseespecially self-correction and initiative-taking ).

frequency, verbal and non-verbal aspects, and theneed for variety and relevance to the task. Deployindividual token or tangible rewards only if all elsefails. Some group acknowledgement of participationvia badges, certificates. etc might be valuable andacceptable, and is useful advertising.

Discussion emphasise that discussion by the pairis essential to promote and confirm full understandingby the tutee, and is genuine work, to avoid mechanicalconformity to the surface requirements of the task byeither member of the pair.

Modelling -ensure the tutoring procedure includesa demonstration of competence by the tutor whichmay be imitated (or improved upon) by the tutee.rather than over-reliance on verbal promptings. Thtorsshould also be encouraged to model more generaldesirable behaviours, such as enthusiasm for the topicin hand. Participant pairs will also serve as models forother pairs, and the project group should deliberatelybe kept in contact so that the social dynamic adds afurther dimension to motivation. Remember theco-ordinating professional must model continuingenthusiasm for the programme!

Raining - is essential, and should be done in vivowith both members of the pair present via verbal.visual and written inforrnation- giving bi-lingual ifnecessary coupled with a demonstration. immediate

1

331


practice, feedback, further coaching and subsequentmonitoring. 11.aining individual pairs is very costly.and well organised group training is as effective whilealso serving to develop group support and solidarity.You may need specially pre-selected materials orequipment for the training meeting.

Contrncting- Specify an initial trial period and bevery clear about the time costs for the pair should theyparticipate. Remember little and often will be mosteffective, especially with tutees with learningdifficulties. Expect pairs to clearly contract in toparticipation, which is of course voluntary but needsto be seen as total and not optionally partial. Ensurethere is mutual feedback about effectiveness andproposed improvements by the end of the trial period.Discuss continuation options and seek contractrenewal, possibly in a range of formats, by participants.At this point pairs should be increasingly confidentand capable of devising their own adaptations andcreating their own novelty, and should be increasinglyambitious.

Monitoring - Emphasise self-checking. Somesimple form of self- recording is desirable. and bothmembers of the pairshould participate in this. Periodicchecking of these records by the co- ordinatingprofessional is a minimal form of accountability ofhigh cost-effectiveness. This may need to besupplemented in at least some cases by verbal enquiryof one or both members of the pair andior directobservation of the pair and preferably othersupplementary tutors) in action, either in school or attheir home, in the first case either on an individualbasis or in a group setting.

Thrning from monitoring the process of tutoring toevaluating its products or outcomes, be clear as to theobjectives of evaluation, since there is little point indoing it for its own sake - what are you going to dowith the results? Feeding back to the participantsdata on their success might increase their motivation.Publicising the data might expand subsequentrecruitment or attract additional funding. How shouldyou review to what extent the curriculum content ofthe tutoring has actually been mastered and retainedin the longer term? Criterion-referenced tests closelyallied to the tutoring process are likely to give the

! most valid (and most impressive results, but anorm-referenced test in the same general area is amore stringent test of generalisation of skills acquiredthrough tutoring and might be construed as more"objective" by outsiders. You might also solicitsubjective feedback from the participants on aconsumer satisfaction basis, but design anyquestionnaire carefully to ask very specific questionsand avoid inbuilt positive bias, since in any case youwill benefit from the "grateful testimonials" effect.Also remember to make it easy to score and summarise!Comparison or control groups are great if you can getthem. Do try and save a little spare energy to collectlonger term follow-up data on at least a sub-sample, tocheck on wash-out of gains. However, also ensure theevaluation procedure does not overwhelm or stress theparticipants - or indeed yourself!

Generalisation and maintenance - you willneed to build in means for continuing review, feedback

and injection of further novelty and enthusiasm ifpairs are to keep going and maintain the use of theirskills. Again, the social dynamic of the group isimportant. You are likely also to need to consciouslyfoster their broadening the use of these skills todifferent materials and contexts for new purposes -allof this will consolidate the progress made, buildconfidence and empower the pair still further. Whenpairs have developed sufficient awareness of effectivetutoring to begin to design their own systems, youknow you have done a good job. As tutees themselvesrecruit a wider range of tutors, the tutee becomes evenmore central as quality controller of the tutoringprocess.

Wider alternativesOf course, some families will remain unreachable, at

least for now. Paradoxically, a school operating asuccessful family literacy programme can place themost disadvantaged children who are left out in a stillworse position relative to their peers who areparticipating in the programme. In this situation,many teachers feel compelled to arrange alternativeextra support for the most needy non- participantchildren. perhaps via volunteer adults coming intoschool or by giving up their own recess times to act assurrogate parents. Where any non-professionals aredeployed as tutors, all the engineering considerationslisted above apply. However, the organisationalcomplexity of fixing up a reliable rota of substituteparents who are available often enough to actuallymake a difference to the child's attainment should notbe underestimated.

Why not use the human resource ready at hand -other children? Peer tutoring has come a long wayfrom the old-fashioned ways of doing it. and well-engineered systems for tutoring by non-professionalsare often highly suitable for peer tutoring with onlyminor modification. I f appropriate methods aredeployed, both tutees and tutors gain in attainment -the tutors "learning by teaching". Further guidanceon organising peer tutoring successfully will be foundin Topping l988i.

We have focused on literacy here, and this is indeedan excellent place to start, but the possibilities areendless. A great deal of work has been done on parentand peer tutoring of mathematics, considerableattention has been paid to systems for developingtutee oracy, and interest is spreading rapidly intoother areas of the curriculum such as Science (see. forexample. the Paired Science pack by Croft & Topping,1992 ). Once you are practised with the basic principlesof engineering systems for non-professional tutoring,there is nowhere you cannot boldly go!

ReferencesBrierley, NI., Hutchinson. P.. Topping. K. & Walker.

C. 1989). Reciprocal Peer 'Ilitored Cued Spellingwith Ten Year Olds. Paired Learning 5. 136-140

('roft. S. & Topping. K. (1992), Paired Science -Resource Pack for Parents and Children. Dundee :Centre for Paired Learning. University of Dundee

32 34

Techniques, in family literacy

Emerson. P. 1988 . Parent Thtored Cued Spelling in aPrimary School. Paired Reading Bulletin 4. 91-92

France. L., Topping, K. & Revell, K. 1992 Parentnitored Cued Spelling, paper submitted for publication

Harrison. R. :1989 Cued Spelling in Adult Literacyin Kirklees. Paired Learning 5. 141

Oxley. L. & Topping, K. 1990) Peer-tutored CuedSpelling with Seven- to Nine-year-olds. BritishEducational Research Journal 16. ,1: 63-78

Scoble. J. 1988 Cued Spelling in Adult Literacy A

! Case Study. Paired Reading Bulletin 4. 93-96

Scoble, J. 1989). Cued Spelling and Paired Reading in' Adult Basic Education in Ryedale. Paired Learning 5.

57-62

Scoble, J.. Topping. K. & Wigglesworth. C. 1988Training Family and Friends As Adult LiteracyThtors, Journal of Reading 31. 5 410-417

Topping, N.J. :1986), Parents As Educators. London :Croom Helm: Cambridge. MA : Brookline

Topping, N.J. 1988), The Peer Tutoring Handbook:Promoting Co-operative Learning, London : CroomHelm: Cambridge. MA : Brookline

Topping. N.J. 1992). Short- And Long-TermFollow-up Of Parental Involvement In ReadingProjects. British Educational Research Journal 18.

Topping. N.J. & Lindsay. G. :1992). Paired Reading:A Review Of The Literature. Research Papers InEducation 7. 3) 1-50

Topping. K.J. & Whiteley, M. 1990) , ParticipantEvaluation Of Parent-Thtored And Peer-ThtoredProjects In Reading. Educational Research 32, 1

14-32

Topping. N.J. & Wolfendale. S.W eds.) 1985i.Parental Involvement In Children's Reading. London :Croom Helm: New York : Nichols

Watt. J.M. & Topping. N.J. 1992. ) Cued Spelling; AComparative Study Of Parent And Peer Tutoring, papersubmitted for publication

NoteThe Paired Reading and Paired Learning Bulletins areavailable on microfiche from ERIC 1985 ED285124.1986 ED255125. 1987 ED285126. 1988 ED298429. 1989ED313656 . as is the Ryedale Paired Reading AdultLiteracy Training Pack ED2908451. A Teacher'sManual and NTS( training video titled Paired Reading:Positive Reading Practice is available from the NorthAlberta Reading Specialists' Council. Box 9538.Edmonton. Alberta T6E 5X2. Canada. Details aboutthe Paired Science Pack are available from the authorat Centre for Paired Learning. Department ofPsychology. University of Dundee, ScotlandDD1 4HN.

:33


A typology of family and intergenerational literacyprogrammes: implications for evaluationRuth S. Nickse

Dr Ruth Nickse has had a hey role in developing theory and practice in familyliteracy work in the United States. When she was based at Boston University shefounded the Family Learning Centre, an urban storefront intergenerationalliteracy centre and Collaborations for Literacy, a model college work-studyintergenerational literacy tutoring programme. She has published an authoritativestudy on family literacy work, and is currently involved in the evaluation of thefederal Even Start programme.

Introduction

Family and intergenerational programmes are anexciting new idea in the delivery of literacy services toadults and children. It is estimated that there aremore than 500 programmes in existence across theUnited States, sponsored by federal and stategovernments, foundations, agencies. organisations.and increasingly. corporations. In terms of researchand evaluation work is at an early stage. With theproliferation and variety of programmes. it is difficultto identify and classify them - their titles can bemisleading. Projects that call themselves "family- or"intergenerational- programmes may not in fact.provide literacy services to the whole family, or acrossgenerations. For programme design, implementation.assessment, and evaluation purposes, it is importantto be able to distinguish programmes from one another.

This paper offers a typology to identify and classifyprogrammes by key components, and offers examplesof each type. A typology is useful for practitioners.researchers, and policy makers. It helps in planningprogrammes. in discussing them. and in training staff.Its use enables a clearer picture of the availability ofcommunity services for literacy development, increasescollaboration, and reduces redundancy in services.Since there are many ways to increase levels of literacyfor individuals, families, and communities, no singlemodel is necessarily better than another.

The four generic programme types offered havedifferent programme goals and characteristics. Eachlends itself to forms of evaluation. The paper describesa framework for decisions about evaluation withsuggestions for domains of measurement that may beappropriate for four generic types.

PurposeIncreasingly, family and intergenerational literacy

programmes are implemented as mechanismspurported to "break the cycle of illiteracy- whichcontinues to affect undereducated and educationallydisadvantaged families across the States. Programme

efforts are sponsored by both public and privateorganisations. with more than 500 such programmesthought to be in operation. To date, theoretical andconceptual efforts lag behind practice. This paperpresents four generic types of family /intergenerationalliteracy projects and describes key components ofeach. A framework for evaluation is presented withsuggestions for measurement domains for eachprogramme type.

This schema may be helpful in clearing away someof the mystique surrounding evaluation of theseprogrammes at the local level. Its purpose is toprovide a framework for programme staff to thinkthrough appropriate and realistic evaluation saategiesfor specific types of family and intergenerationalliteracy programmes.

BackgroundThere is but modest evidence to date that family

and intergenerational literacy programmes workNickse. 19901): Sticht. 19891. The most comprehensive

evaluation underway at present is that of Even Start,sponsored by the t s Department of Education. Detailsof this national evaluation are described elsewhereNickse. 1990): a report to Congress is due in 1993. Yet

sponsors are committing funds to this appealingapproach in hope that it will help ameliorate persistentilliteracy.

Federal legislation is the primary source of supportfor programmes. These include the Adult EducationAct ( Titles II and III : the Library and ConstructionAct Titles I and VI : the Head Start Act: the FamilySupport Act of 1988 Titlel V - A ; and severalprogrammes in the Elementary and SecondaryEducation Act: Chapter I. Even Start: Title VIIBilingual Education: and Title III, Part B. theFamily School Partnership Programme. States are asource of funding and a pioneer is Kentucky, with its ;

Parent and Child Education programme ( PACE I.The private sector also funds family and

intergenerational literacy programmes. Corporationspilot programmes Stride Rite. Nissan, Chrysler

34 3 6

A typology of family and intergenerational literacy programmes

; and Unions, too :e.g.. Amalgamated Clothing andTextile Workers. Sheet Metal Workers, the l'ANVIGM11;aining Centres,.

Organisations and community-based agenciesimplement programmes, including Wider Opportuni-ties for Women wow), and Ser. Inc., a nationalHispanic organisation. Volunteer literacy organisa-tions have been awarded funding including LiteracyVolunteers of America and Laubach Literacy.Foundations have taken leadership, including theMac Arthur Foundation. The new Barbara BushFoundation for Family Literacy supports 10programmes nationally: the Kenan Family llustsupports programmes in Kentucky and NorthCarolina. and also a new Centre for Family Literacy inLouisville. Toyota has just given this Centre :32million to expand its more than 100 programmeswhich are already operating in 27 states.

The largest demonstration of family andintergenerational literacy programmes is sponsoredby the t's Department of Education. Even Start, as itis titled, funds 122 programmes as money is available(this years' funding is 848 million). It is expectedthat, in the future. Even Start will become a state-administered programme.

How well founded are these investments. in a timeof budget constraints at the local, state, and nationallevel? With so many jumping on board the familyliteracy bandwagon, is this a signal that anothereducational fad is aborning. or a significant new stepin literacy service? Again, there is little evidence todate of programme effectiveness because programmesare new, some are unused to summative evaluation.and many are unable to afford evaluations even if theneed was recognised.

Besides a lack of evidence that programmes work.there is also a stranee mix of titles and names given tothere literacy services which confuse, rather thandescribe. programmes. Some label themselves as"family" literacy programmes but serve mostlymothers ( not fathers,: others serve mothers withoutkids present any or all of the time: still others usefoster grandparents to read to neighbourhood kids.So, what is a "family" and what is an "inter-generational" literacy project'? Is there really anydifference? Why should it matter what a proeramme iscalled?

The following Typology . Table 1 helps todistinguish one type from the other. It has proveduseful in identifying critical differences betweenprogramme types. It helps in defining programmegoals and expectations, and is thus useful in planningfor their evaluation.

A typology for family andintergenerational literacyprogrammes

Adoption of a classification system or typology canclarify programme components by describing keycharacteristics. A typology is useful for practitioners.researchers, and policymakers it helps in planningprogrammes, in discussing them, and in training staff.

It can be used to inventory literacy projects as a stepin community needs assessment to identify and classifyservices, helping to avoid costly redundancies t Nickse.1990a.b).

Of course, there are limitations to any typology ittends to simplify phenomena, which is both a strengthand weakness. There are programme examples ofmixed model types, and there is variation within eachtype. For example. Even Start programmes may all becalled "family" literacy programmes {Type 1) eventhough there is great variation among the programmesthemselves. Further, no single model or type isnecessarily better than another, assuming a needsassessment has preceded the design of the programmeand influences the practice. There are many avenueswithin communities to improved literacy for adultsand children.

TABLE I

Type of Intervention

Direct

;-Type of ! '-Target

DirectI ('hildren

Indirect I

.Idults

Indirect('hddren

Table I: npe of intervention. trom Nickse. II S. 1990

Key questions in using the Typology include these:who is the target population to be served'? Are theadult and child both present together for literacydevelopment any or all of the time'? Is the "family"component abstract indirect ) or concrete (direct )? Asan example, parent groups at a worksite learninghypothetically about reading to children with peerpractice constitutes an indirect component childrenand adults reading together constitutes a directcomponent.

Another key characteristic is that of therelationships of' the participants. Are the adults readingto the children also their parents or caretakers'? If so.the programme has at least one element of a "family"programme because the participants are related. Arethe adults reading to the children senior citizens froma neighbouring care facility or from a fostergrandparents programme, working as volunteers?This is more properly an "intergenerational"programme as individuals are not related. In Type 1programmes, the adults and children are related. inType 2 programmes, they may not be. Obviously, aprogramme with parent/child activities is both a"family" programme and an intergenerational one.

Each programme type has both primary and

:3 7 35


TABLE 2Typology for Family and Intergenerational Literacy Programmes

Ty Ire Examples of Features Examples of Concerns Examples

Type 1Parent:Child

Goal is positive. long-term lamal. interventionparent child: parent: child: activitiesintense. frequent participationhighly structured: formal instructionintegrated curriculumdirect instroction: dual curriculumn E. We stall teammonitored attendancededicated sitelong-term intervention

high time commitment necessarsretention in programmefacilities . i wi togethertransportation for familieschild care bur infants. toddlershigh degree ot collaborationsubstantial costs to inmate and maintain

Parental Child Education ..... I.,Kenan Trust -... 27 statesEven Start Programmes

Type 2Adult.Child

Goal is supplementary. for skill building and enpaymentnon-related adults and childrenlower level of intensity, participationless structured, more informalweekends, after school programmescollaborations none to manyadapted sitesshort-tertn intervention

no formal. Nu.tained liter:it, Instructionk-so intensive participationless parent child interactionpart-time staffingshort-term programmescosts to inmate and maintain

Fanuls Intergenerational EnglishLiteracy ,,.. ..Stride Rite vsMartin County LibraryCarnegie Library ...Nissan ..

Type 3AdultAlone

i loal is parent educationparentsdidults alone children present infrequently...r not at allworkshop formats: low intensitypeer instruction and practise"portable" curriculumparent networkingshort-term intervention

no supervised parent child interactionpart-time staffing: consultantsparent reports of programmes sure,.des elopmentath mapproprate acte. me.ma's be used li, parentscosts to initiate ana maintain

Parents Reading Programmes . plus

Linking Rome and Workplus

0 Family English LiteracyProgrammes

Type 4ChildAlone

Goal ts supplementary school related literacyfnprovement tor children

school-based children. at home parentsschool-linked programmeteacher supers isedtake-home materials for childrenshort-term intervention

narents nice'. I. no uterac .re.tructi.sn torihemseise.parent mas not provioc ,JIns.11 at i...me!or childparent may mit participate :n %sin-Kr:imps.rallies

Chrysler Corp ....Books and Lieyomi . ,

lots racy Curriculum Connection

Table 2: .1 Summary of Features. from NIckse. 115. l989a

secondary beneficiaries. For example. a Type 3programme for parents may indirectly benefit thechildren in that family, although they do not attendthe programme. Type 4 programmes for children mayindirectly benefit their parents. Types 1 and 2 benefitboth adults and children. but to a different degree.

Which type of programme is best for which type ofparticipants is a research question yet to be answered.

Features of Generic Types I, 2, 3, 4The targeted populations who participate in

programmes. whether Type 1. 2. 3 or 4. receivedifferent types of services which vary in a number offeatures. Table 2 summarises these for programmeTypes 1. 2. 3. and 4.

C'hief differences are programme goals, the durationand frequency of services, and the target beneficiariesof the programme. The intensity of participation inthe programme, the amount and nature of contactwhether direct or indirect: and the opportunity to

interact and practice new learnings varies. ManyType 3 and 4 are short-term supplementaryprogrammes. while Type 1 programmes are morelikely to require long-term participation. Type 2programmes can be organised over longer time periodsbut the hours of contact during a given time periodmay be brief, as in weekly two-hour tutoring sessionsfor adults. The activities offered may be a series ofevents rather than an integrated curriculum.

The intended beneficiaries of the services alsovaries. Type 1 programmes recruit parents and theirchildren : Type 2 programmes serve adults and children

in each, an adult. parent and a child are joint

beneficiaries. Type :3 programmes, however, serveparents without their children: and Type 4programmes serve children without their parents.Each h is a secondary beneficiary: in the case of Type:3, the children benefit from parents' participation: inType 4. the parents may benefit from the children'sparticipation.

There are inherent difficulties in the evaluation andcomparison of family and intergenerational literacyprogrammes due to their key features. Each generictype lends itself to some kind of evaluation, but thelevels of sophistication differ. The Typology is a basisfor asking questions about effectiveness. Whatmeasurement domains are appropt iate for a Type 1programme? Would these he appropriate for Types2.3, or 4? One way to approach these questions is toexplore possibilities using the characteristics of thefour programme types, applied to a model whichoutlines a framework for evaluation.

36

Summary of evaluation plans forfamily literacy programmes

Recent work of the Illinois Literacy ResourceCentre proposes an evaluation plan for family literacyprogrammes based on experiences in the evaluation of22 programmes in Illinois - Literacy Resource Centre.1990. : The plan is a developmental evaluationframework and is the result of work done by the( 'entre. combining and extending that of Weiss (1988and Jacobs 1988 in the evaluation of family educationprogrammes.

Briefly, the framework includes five levels of

. 3


evaluation. According to Jacobs "each requires greatereffort at data collection and tabulation, increased precisionut programme definition and a greater commitment to theevaluation process-. Each level or tier also fulfils adifferent purpose, uses different data gatheringtechniques. and promises information for particularaudiences. Although the tiers appear in sequence inTable :3, it is suggested by Jacobs that programmes useseveral tiers, moving from tier to tier (up and down) asappropriate, to document programme changes overtime. The levels (tiers) of assessment are illustrated inTable 3 and short descriptions follow:

TABLE 3.4,Levels of Evaluation Basic Research Questions

LevellTier Purpose Research Questions

Level l Pre-Implementationneeds assessment

Is there a need for tamilvmtergenerational literacyservices!

Level II Nceountability Who are Ise serving. and whatservices are we providing.'

Level III Programme Clarification 11055 van sve do a better lobserving our programmeparticipants '

Level IV Participants Progress Xre participants maKingidogress

Lei el V Programme Impacts What are the In! -rn effectsid' programme I i.ation.'

Table 3A: l.eccis cf Ecaluatton, adapted from 'Jacobs. :988

Level I Pre-Implementation: Known commonly as"needs assessment- this tier answers the question"What is the problem'?" Is there indeed, a need for'service'?

Level // Accountability: This is 'the programmeutilisation level, and is a response to the question"Who are we serving, and what services are weproviding?"

Level /// Programme Clarification: This is theformative or process clarification tier. The guidingquestion is "How can we do a better job serving ourparticipants'?"

Level /V Progress: Measurement of short-termobjectives answers the question "Are participantsmaking progress'?"

Level V Programme Impact: At this level, theprogramme is committed to an experimental orquasi-experimental approach to evaluate programmeeffects. The question is "What are the long-termeffects of programme participation?"

When these levels of evaluation are applied to thefour generic types of programmes. the possibilities forevaluation of Types 1-4 are apparent. Table 4illustrates this point.

Theoretically, Type 1 programmes offer the mostcomprehensive possibilities for the richest data about

TABLE 3BSummary of Evaluation Plan for Family Literacy Programmes

Purpose of AudiencesEvaluation

; Strategies,Tasks Types of Data to Dissemination of' CollectlAnalyse Findings

Programme Planning

LEVEL I - Needs Funding agencies.Assessment citizens. potential(Preimplimentation) Ism:manlyr:, document the needf.a. ;ads we.

I h.fine tarzet:woman:in. describe

, .crlu,-. rad henetits

Local demographics.' :vile, press coverage.

.ntemews. quantztise' :omit:dame

Summarx report ia key;Mines to agencies.aommunits leaders.press

Change at programmeplan on results at needsassessment

LEVEL II -Accountability(Programme I

Documentation)To determine who Nrams ing seri wes andwhat services an.provided

Funding agencies.programme pros tilers.participants

I). termint. nuraher ,a1 :nth, aiu.n. sers ed.1 portion o; population

...fled -.1). a -.Ts a,..111, usea

I

t ;unt individualsIslna -.cried. coilect

: and examine data on;.artwipantcharacteristics, review

1i ase records ot service

I usage

Formal presentationsto stall fundingagencies press

If tareeten population notserved. shange orrecruiting

LEVEL III -Formative Evaluation(Programmeclarification)

improve sers IVIN topartimant

Staff membersprocrarnmeparticipants. lundineagencies who rprogramme pros viers

.' Deus mine participant-atejact...n

1

,

1 Des elop questionnaires' regarding clientsatisfaction. personal

, interviews, phone calls

.

Stall meetings.participant me( t ales

Change service, based onresults

LEVEL IV -Programme Progress(Progress towardObjectives)"lli &let none itfairtimpanty an maktngidogress

Funame agencies. ommunit V.programme pn o tilers1-sternal re% ww. ommitm.

.

Ihicument participant

i

!t 'onstruct state,; ...intent analysss oti prograninui records.

st andardisedinstruments.

; interviews

Formal report.prasent at ion. at lo. alstate, and national. oraerences

\ Mils es aluation tobetter represent cia ntprogress

LEVEL V -Programme Impact1.0 determine iona term

. items of programmeparticipation

Programmt pros viersparticipants. externalre, [foyers

: Di termini hestI treatment 1 fleets., iiIng.tUrn1 edeef s

i -.Hera lontitudinalI lata on el ,mges in! participants. 4-moan: 'he effects tit differenti n atments

T., programmerammer.. to, id. state.ledenil agem asnseandiers

Recommend tweith.treatment tor greaterantowt

Table 313: Summar: alaatton Plan tor FOM/15 1,:teracx Programmes. trom Illunots Ixertal livsource Centre 199 I

BEST COPY AVAILABLE

el, 0I a 37


TABLE 4

Ty Pe ofProgramme -Assessment

Seed's Account-I Process Participant : Programmelability !Clarification I Progress Impact

Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Lem( 4 Level 5

Type 1Parent Child ITogether

Yes Yes Yes i Yes Yes

Type 2Adult CMd iTogether

Yes 11-s Yes Maybe Not likely

.

Type 3ParentAlone

Yes . Yes Yes Maybe

'

Nut likely

Type 4Child Alone i

Yes ' Yes

!

. Yes ;Maybe Not likely

Table 4: Possihdates for Evaluation of Pmeramme Tpes I - 4 at Env

Levels.

family literacy programmes. because all five levels 'ofevaluation are possible to implement. given theresources, willingness, and commitment to documenta programme with this precision. The Even Startnational evaluation, sponsored by the us Departmentof Education and contracted to Abt Associates Inc. ofCambridge. Massachusetts. with RMC Research,Portland. Oregon, is an example of the use of Level 5evaluation for family literacy programmes.

Type 2 programmes are less comprehensive, andmay be more suitable for evaluation at. Levels 1-3because of their briefer duration and less, intenseparticipation. Similarly. Type 3 programmes, becausethey serve parents only, lack detailed data on impactson children, who are secondary beneficiaries of thisprogramme type: Type 4 programmes. 1:ecause theydo not involve parents in literacy instruction for theirown sake, do not provide rigorous data for evaluatingchanges in parents' own literacy skills or onparent 'child interactions.

There is no implication here that evaluating aprogramme less than completely using Levels 1-5 is

"less good" rather, each generic programme typepresents opportunities for documenting someprogramme information. There is something to belearned from evaluation at each level, and within eachprogramme type, as long as the programme goals,outcomes, and characteristics are tuned to the purposesof the evaluation, and it is carefully conducted.

The content or domains; for measurement, alsomight be selected to "match" the characteristics ofthe evaluation level and the programme type. Somesuggestions follow in the next section. Participantfamilies should be involved in programme design earlyto co-determine desirable outcomes with staff.

Some suggested domains formeasurement

Depending on the programme type, measurementdomains can be identified at the programme andparticipant levels.

; Programme levelProgramme design/context. This domain

describes the plan or design of the programme, e.g..the target population: the community setting: and the

types of core and support services planned for orprovided.

Programme implementation/processes/inputs. This domain includes descriptions of theprogramme once it is implemented or operational, andmight describe these features. e.g. the programmeresources including staff and funding: the programmeprocesses of recruitment, instruction, and selection ofmaterials: attendance and participation strategies:retention strategies: staff development and in-servicetraining agendas: the types of services which supportthe programme such as transportation and child care:workshops or activities for parents: and assessment.particularly measures of participant satisfaction withthe programme.

Programme outcomes. Programme effects arethe short and long-term impacts and outcomes thatthe programme expects. e.g. outcomes of participantprogress such as the literacy development of adultsand children: increases in educational skills andexpectations: changes in behaviours, skills andattitudes at the individual, family, and communitylevel: and increases in personal skills and communityinvolvement for adults. For children, outcomes areoften expected to be better preparation for school, orbetter performance in school settings. Clearly, theoverall objectives of programmes should be helpingfamilies to better help themselves and others. Increasedliteracy is only one of the components of programmeswhich assists families toward this goal.

Participant levelAt the participant level, there are several

possibilities for data collection:Demographic information. Demographic

information describes participants clearly: data onethnicity: sex: ages: relationships of participants toeach other: prior educational levels of the family andits extended members: job experiences andemployment information: and data about the contextof the families' lives in their communities.

Literacy skills, environments, and attitudes.This content domain might include: knowledge aboutchildren's emergent literacy: the development ofliteracy in adults, parents and in the family: the uses ofliteracy at home: the uses of literacy in pre-school orschool programmes: access to literacy materials andliteracy events at home and in pre-school or schoolsettings: attitudes and values about education andschooling: and aspirations and expectations aboutliteracy held by individuals, families, and theircommunities.

Parent/child interactions. This domain mightevaluate the interactions between adult/parent andchild. This is a relatively difficult area for datagathering because it is complex and because it lacks avariety of instruments for use. The domain mightinclude parent teaching strategies. attitudes, values,and behaviours around the concept of the"parent-as-teacher": -the climate- of parentichildrelationships and their context: and specific literacyefforts, such as parent 'child storybook reading orother evidence of improved parent/child literacyinteractions, including mutual enjoyment.

38 0


Child personal characteristics/achievements.Characteristics of the child might int lu le cognitiveand linguistic development, psychomotor and socialdevelopment, and emergent literacy concepts.Achievements might indicate growth in this area.

Parent personal characteristics/achieve-ments. Here, evaluation might explore the parents asindividuals, apart but connected to. their roles asparents: for example. parentilearners' sense of self-esteem; their feelings of well-being and personalefficacy: measures of social isolation and maternaldepression: and other factors such as locus of control.Achievements might indicate growth in this area.Caution and restraint should guide explorations inthese areas since there is a tension between gatheringuseful information for programme effectiveness andinvasion of family privacy, a point to consider in thenext domain areas also.

Family characteristics, support and re-sources. Family characteristics, support andresources might include the psychological, economic.and social factors which impinge on families inprogrammes, and measures of coping. While not allparticipants in programmes are "at risk- families aproportion of programmes do work with them, forexample. Henan. PACE and the Even Startprogrammes. Levels of family stress; types of dailyhassles; sources of social support: access to resources;and conditions of families' home environments andcommunities are part of the context in which familiesexist. Since they are part of the gestalt within whichfamilies live and interact, this data is useful intailoring programmes to participants' needs.

Parenting behaviours and attitudes. An intentof many families and intergenerational literacy

programmes is to guide families toward successfulchild-rearing practices. Thus, concepts about childand adult development, attitudes about parentingand discipline, management of family matters, andaspirations and expectations for parenting are a partof this broad domain. Changes in parenting behavioursand attitudes as they are involved in the support ofliteracy development might be considered importantto evaluate.

Choices and more choicesThe content areas noted above are suggested as

possibilities and are certainly not exhaustive. Thequestion is. which domains might be evaluated in eachgeneric type'? Table 5 illustrates some suggestions fordata collection. It is based on data from theprogrammes cited in Table 2 as examples of eachgeneric type. It is not a statement that these levels ofevaluation are actually being used. Rather, it is ahypothetical example of what seems possible. usingthe schema presented here to evaluate "family- and"intergenerationalliteracy programmes.

Both formal and informal measures are desirable inthe evaluation of family and intergenerational literacyprogrammes because of their complex nature and themultiple outcomes expected for each generic type.

As Table 5 illustrates. Type 1 programmes offer thebest opportunity to evaluate outcomes over a longperiod of time. Changes in participants' on a variety ofvariables is possible with these intense. iong-termprogrammes. Evaluation at each of the Levels 1-5contributes to knowledge about the effects of familyliteracy programmes on parents and children. This isthe kind of evaluation that members of Congress and

TABLE 5

Generic Type Seed's AssessmentLevel I

AccountabilityLevel 2

Process ClarificationLevel 3

Participant ProAressLevel 4

. Programme Impact%Level 5

Ty pe IParent Child'-'amils. Llterne

demographicinformationprogramme.imgn context

umpieme :station.process anti mputsfamily. haracteristirs-apport. II ..11111,parentingrwhas murs.attitudes

0 partiespant-atisfaction

0 parent personalshararteret ics

0 child personal-haracterist ice

short Is rm I 11.1,literacy skills.nyironments.

.sttitudi S. hehay tour

programme autcomeslong aerm olects- parent child

s nteractions. - literacy skills.

attitudes. helms [ourparent Inc hehas soursand attitudes- parent s personal

characteristics- tamilv characteristics- parent child

aeluevements- s hildren's

as Mesa-mums

Type 2Adult ChildI ntergenerational

Literacy

demograpnicinformation

* programmedesign conte xt

implementation.proms, and inputs

part wipantsitedact ion

%lay he No

Type 3\ dult AloneParent Lucille,

denmeraphicinformationprogramnledesign conti xt

implementation.processs and input .faintlys haracteristirs.-.ippon resours. esparenting la Ims lour.at iitudes

participantsat issact ion

\ lax la No

Type 4child AloneChild Laurin,

demographicinlormationprogrammedesign (in-Ilex,

implementation.I racess_s and inputs

participant-anstact ion

\lax be No

.

Table 5: Su4Restea Measurement biimains tor Pam Us Literacy Pcistramme Tspi' I /

41 39


other policy makers want and need to make judgementsabout institutionalisation of programmes. Evaluationsare often multiyear studies, using random assignment.comparison groups. or other standards. They areusually externally directed :as in the case of EvenStart) and are expensive to conduct. A professionalgroup customarily undertakes evaluations at Level 5with the cooperation of the local programmes.

Programme Types 2.3. and 4 can provide informationon programme design and context, on implementationprocesses and inputs, and on participant satisfactionLevels 1. 2. and 3). Valuable information is gathered

which result in services better tailored to participants.Effective programmes are internally reflective, withstaff sensitive to nuances in programme climate. Thisorientation is necessary, and calls for a certain fluidityof response from staff. Constant tinkering andadjustment through successive approximation leadsto programme refinement and toward better servicesin Level 3 evaluations. This is an appropriate goal inand of itself. Without this knowledge, programmesmay fail to thrive since it is doubtful the servicesprovided truly fit participants' needs: on whichparticipants' satisfaction is based.

Whether Types 2.3. and 4 are able to gatherinformation at Level 4 depends on several factors: theduration, frequency and intensity of services: staffexperience with evaluation techniques: funding levels:and especially. time. Rich anecdotal information isavailable at Levels 2-4 and also at Level 5 .. Theprogramme staffs' willingness to incorporate moreobjective measurement means more real time inrecord keeping. Documentation burdens increase, andit is not unusual that staff resent taking time awayfrom providing direct services to keep records. Withshortages of personnel and individuals employedpart-time in service delivery, stall may decide thatevaluation at Levels 1-3 are sufficient for the audiencesthey must or wish to. satisfy. However, the challengeto gather data for Level 4 evaluations might beconsidered at some later date in the programmes life.

Programmes that choose to proceed to Level 4might benefit from the advice of an external, localevaluator who can form a collaboration with the staff. Ifprogramme replication is an objective, evaluators cansuggest strategies for data cellection that seem feasibleand appropriate. and help prepare the reports which areshared with outside audiences. The knowledge baseabout this fascinating approach to literacy improvementwill grow with careful and appropriate evaitiations.

ConclusionsEvaluating family interactions and the multiple

ellects on adults and children tests beyond the existingrepertoire of techniques Weiss and Jacobs. 1988 .

What is needed is a new battery of instruments andsome new approac hes to capture the unique effects offamily and intergenerational literacy programmes.

Family literacy practice is largely unchartedterritory, and there will be false starts and misleadingdata. However, without comprehensive data, we willnot know whether thi3 is truly a new and significantstep in literacy services, or just another complicated

educational fad. The danger is that policy decisionswill be made prematurely based on poor evaluationinformation: especially a concern when expectationsfor success are so high. A second danger is that, in aquest for data, programmes distort their services crfrighten away the very participants for whom servicesare developed. The message to staff is. use judgementwhen planning evaluation strategies, and tailor thestrategies to the programme type. At the evaluationlevel that is appropriate and feasible, do a careful jobof data collection: this strategy is defensible. Do notburden an effective part-time programme withambitious evaluations that are not possible to do well.which distort or modify the programme unduly, orwhich might result in a driving participants away,which is particularly possible when they have had novoice in the evaluation plan.

The suggestions proposed in this paper may guide i

local programmes to more satisfactory evaluation ;

procedures which are feasible and appropriate fordifferent programme types. If so. the author. who hashad many sleepless nights worrying about evaluationin a family and intergenerational literacy programme.will sleep more soundly herself!

ReferencesIllinois Literacy Resource Centre (19901, The Mechanics

of Success fi,r Pcuntiws: An Illinois Family LiteracyReport. Rantoul. Illinois Literacy Resource Centre.

Jacobs, F. 1988. The Five-tiered Approach toEvaluation: Context and Implementation. In i

Evaluating Famdy Programmes, Weiss. H. and Jacobs.F. Eds. Hawthorne. NY. Aldyne de Gruyter.

Nickse, R. S. 1990 Family and IntergenerationalLiteracy Programmes: An Update of the -Noises ofLiteracy... ERI(' C learinghouse for Adult. Career, andVocational Education. Centre on Education andTraining for Employment. Columbus. Ohio StateUniversity.

Nickse, R. S. 1989 The Noises of Literacy: An OverviewIntergenerational and Family Literacy Programmes.

ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 308415.

Nickse, R. S. 1990b Family Literacy and CommunityEducation: Prospects for the '90s. Journal ofCommand\ Education 3. no. 2. 12-18.

Nickse. R. S. I 990c. February. . Family LiteracyProgrammes: Ideas for Action, . Idult Learning. I. no.5. 9-13. 28-29 ERIC No. FA 403 363 .

Sticht, T. and McDonald. B. 1989. ) Makuig the NationSmarter: The I ntergenerational Thansfer of CognitiveAbility. San Diego. A. Applied Behavioural andCognitive Sciencer. Inc. Emu DocumentReproduction Service No. ED 309 279 .

Weiss. H. and Jacobs. F. 1988. Evaluating FamilyProgrammes, Hawthorne. NY. .Aldyne de Gruyter.

Note: An earlier version of this paper was developedfor presentation at the Intergenerational LiteracyConference at Thachers' College, Columbia University,NYc. March 15. 1991.

404 2

Available from:Adult Literacy & Basic Skills UnitKingsbourne House229/231 High HolbornLondonWC1V 7DA

Tel: 071-405 4017Fax: 071-404 5038

BEST COPY AVAILABLE

Price: £2.50 plus postage

,<

"":.c

C Adult Literacy & Basic Skills Unit,Kingsbourne House, 229/231 High Holborn,London WC1V 7DA

All rights reserved. No part of this publicationmay be photocopied, recorded or otherwisereproduced, stored in a retrieval system ortransmitted in any form or by any electronic ormechanical means without prior permission ofthe copyright owner.

Published March 1993ISSN 0 266-20989Design: Krishna Ramarnurthy

4 :I

Documents

ED 362 766 CE 064 881 TITLE FaiIly.Literacy. … · ED 362 766 TITLE INSTITUTION REPORT NO PUB DATE NOTE AVAILABLE FROM. PUB TYPE. EDRS PRICE DESCRIPTORS. IDENTIFIERS. ABSTRACT