Family Literacy Bags

This article was downloaded by:[Alerta - Chile 2005/2006 Consortium]On: 3 May 2008Access Details: [subscription number 778577076]Publisher: Taylor & FrancisInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Early Child Development and CarePublication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t713640830

An Evaluation of Family Literacy Bags as a Vehicle forParent InvolvementMartha Dever a; Diane Burts ba Department of Elementary Education, 2805 Old Main Hill, Utah State University,Logan, UT, 84322-2805.b School of Human Ecology, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA, 70803.

Online Publication Date: 01 August 2002

To cite this Article: Dever, Martha and Burts, Diane (2002) 'An Evaluation of FamilyLiteracy Bags as a Vehicle for Parent Involvement', Early Child Development andCare, 172:4, 359 — 370

To link to this article: DOI: 10.1080/03004430212721URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03004430212721

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf

This article maybe used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction,re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or distribution in any form to anyone is expresslyforbidden.

The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will becomplete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug doses should beindependently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings,demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with orarising out of the use of this material.

http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t713640830

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03004430212721

http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf

Dow

nloa

ded

By:

[Ale

rta -

Chi

le 2

005/

2006

Con

sorti

um] A

t: 22

:51

3 M

ay 2

008

Early Child Development and Care, 2002, Vol. 172(4), pp. 359–370

An Evaluation of Family Literacy Bags as aVehicle for Parent Involvement

MARTHA T. DEVERa,{ and DIANE C. BURTSb

aDepartment of Elementary Education, 2805 Old Main Hill, Utah State University, Logan, UT,84322-2805; bSchool of Human Ecology, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA, 70803

(Received 24 January 2002)

Early childhood scholars concur that books and interactive reading between adults and children stronglysupport children’s reading achievement. Furthermore, they argue for the importance of involving familiesin their children’s education. The Family Literacy Bags (FLB) project described and evaluated here, is aparent involvement and education innovation designed to engage children and their families in readingbooks at home. To meet the diversity of family needs, some of the FLB contained materials in bothSpanish and English. Findings from this inquiry conducted in four primarily rural, middle class schooldistricts in the west, suggest that the FLB project encouraged home book reading in families. Furthermore,parents learned effective ways to read and discuss books with their children, new information aboutavailability of various books, and information about their children’s developing language skills. Childrendemonstrated an initial and sustained interest in the FLB project. Suggestions for further research andparent education are discussed.

Key words: Parent involvement; Literacy bags; Family

In the landmark text Becoming a Nation of Readers, the authors note, ‘‘the single most

important activity for building the knowledge required for eventual success in reading is

reading aloud to children’’ (Anderson, Hiebert, Scott and Wilkinson, 1985, p. 23). Fur-

thermore, early childhood scholars concur that books and interactive reading between adults

and children is critical (Adams, 2000; Bus, Van Ijzendoorn and Pellegrini, 1995; Dever,

2001; Neuman, 1997; Ramos and Krashen, 1998), and advocate involving parents in their

children’s education (Barbour, 1998=99; Dever, 2001; Neuman, 1996). High frequency of

home picture book reading supports children’s: (a) readiness to benefit from formal literacy

instruction, (b) ability to attend to text and school learning, (c) print knowledge, and (d)

motivation for literacy learning (Robinson, Larson and Haupt, 1995; 1996).

Many parents foster a home environment that supports their children’s school achievement.

These parents may participate in their children’s education by coming to school, performing

tasks at home to assist the teacher, accompanying the class on field trips, and=or attending

parent workshops. Other parents, however, may not have the resources or the inclination to

support their children’s success in school in these ways. For example, time for many parents

{ To get more information or to order the FLB guidebooks, contact Dr. D. Ray Reutzel, Director; 6515 Old MainHill; Utah State University, Logan, UT, 84322-6515.* Corresponding author. Tel.: 435-797-0394; Fax: 435-797-0372; E-mail: [email protected]

ISSN 0300-4430 print; ISSN 1476-8275 online # 2002 Taylor & Francis LtdDOI: 10.1080/0300443022000004666

Dow

nloa

ded

By:

[Ale

rta -

Chi

le 2

005/

2006

Con

sorti

um] A

t: 22

:51

3 M

ay 2

008

is consumed with providing the necessities for their children, leaving little time to assist at

school. Others have negative memories of their own school experiences and find school to be

an uncomfortable place. A third reason that parents may not be greatly involved in their

children’s education is their belief that teachers are the absolute authority, a view common

among Hispanic parents, for example. Teachers teach and parents nurture; thus, engaging in

formal teaching is considered by some as an interference (Espinosa, 1995). Related to

reading at home, many parents indicate that they lack high-quality reading materials and

knowledge of the reading process and are thus unable to support their children’s reading

success at home (Brock and Dodd, 1994).

To address diverse family needs, Epstein (1995) advocates a variety of ways to involve

parents in their children’s education. One way, learning at home, involves supplying parents

with information and materials to work with their children at home. Many early childhood

educators have developed programs for learning at home (Barbour, 1998=99; Burts and

Dever, 2001; Dever, 2001; Fisher, 1998; Kokoski and Patton, 1997). For example, to

encourage parents and children to talk and write at home, Fisher’s students took turns taking

Mr. Bear home for the night and, with their parents assistance, wrote about their experiences

in Mr. Bear’s journal. Kokoski and Patton provided science and math activities for children to

take home in special backpacks. Barbour developed the Home Literacy Bags that are very

similar to the Family Literacy Bags described here.

The Family Literacy Bags (FLB) project is grounded in the research and professional

literature on early literacy learning and parent involvement and education. Each FLB con-

tains high-quality children’s books and a guidebook for parents to read and talk about the

books with their children. In this article, we describe how families responded to the FLB

project that was implemented in one city and three rural school districts in the western United

States. Three of the four districts were experiencing an increase in numbers of nonnative

English speaking families, primarily Spanish-speaking.

All kindergarten teachers in the four districts were given enough FLB to use in their

classrooms so that each child could take a bag home approximately every third week. The

general purpose of the project was to encourage and support home book-reading and dis-

cussions, other book related activities, and for kindergarten children to demonstrate initial

and sustained interest in and enthusiasm for using the FLB at home.

Home Book-Reading

Early shared reading has been linked to later language growth and reading achievement, and

early childhood scholars argue for the importance of parents’ reading to their children (Ortiz,

Stowe and Arnold, 2001). Schools have the opportunity to positively impact children’s

achievement when they support parents as educators (Barbour, 1998; Berger, 1995; Dever,

2001) and acknowledge the critical importance of time spent reading with more literate

others, to children’s literacy learning (Oglan and Elcombe, 2001). Neuman (1997) asserts,

‘‘engaging parents and children in mutual activities that include book reading, but are not

limited to it, may constitute the richest potential for supporting children’s early literacy

development’’ (p. 119).

Research indicates that children who are read to from birth have an advantage over

children from homes where reading is less prominent (Oglan and Elcombe). For example,

scholars (Purcell-Gates, McIntyre and Freppon, 1995; Sulzby, 1985) have found that reading

to preschoolers advances their linguistic development and assists them to develop a schema

for written narrative language.

360 M. T. DEVER AND D. C. BURTS

Dow

nloa

ded

By:

[Ale

rta -

Chi

le 2

005/

2006

Con

sorti

um] A

t: 22

:51

3 M

ay 2

008

Robinson et al. (1995; 1996) assessed the impact of taking home high-quality picture

books on reading behaviors of pre-k and kindergarten children from low and middle SES

groups. In their study, children demonstrated an increased interest in books at school, and the

number of books read at home increased. In addition, the amount of time spent with books

increased in both middle and low SES homes. The researchers concluded that innovations to

increase home book reading are worthy of exploration. Furthermore, Ortiz et al. (2001)

suggest that innovations to increase children’s interest in books need to be explored.

Koskinen, Blum, Bisson, Phillips, Creamer and Baker (2000) examined the effects of a

book-rich classroom, home-based reading, and home-based reading with audio taped books

with native and nonnative English speakers. They found increased reading comprehension

with the book-rich condition, with and without the home-based reading component. How-

ever, they found that home-based rereading of books increased students’ reading motivation

and promoted parental involvement. In addition, they found the audio tape condition pro-

vided particular benefits for children learning to speak English.

Programs to support reading and discussing books at home have been developed and

implemented (Barbour, 1998=99; Dever, 2001). In two such programs, bags containing high-

quality children’s books along with suggested extension activities for children and their

parents to do together were sent home with children. Barbour noted that this simple strategy

for supporting literacy development is one way to reach all types of families, even those who

typically do not participate in school-based events (e.g., low SES, nonnative English

speakers). She also reported that the project was successful in bringing about mutual

family=school support and promoting children’s learning. Furthermore, it became a family

affair involving siblings, grandparents, and other family members.

Findings from both studies (Barbour, 1998=99; Dever, 2001) suggest that children were

eager to take the books home, were enthusiastic about their experiences with the books and

activities, and talked about the books at school. In addition, availability of high-quality lit-

erature and materials made it easier for single and working parents to become meaningfully

involved in their children’s learning, and parents made time for reading to their children

(Barbour). Many parents noted that having books at home reminded them to read to their

children and gave them new information about the breadth of children’s literature available.

They also indicated that they learned about effective ways to read with their children (Dever).

Family Literacy Bags Project Description

In general, the purpose of the Family Literacy Bags (FLB) project was to engage parents in

learning at home activities focusing on literacy. More specifically, the project was designed

to: (a) increase parental involvement in book reading and related activities (e.g., number of

books read, time spent reading, and time spent engaged in book related discussions and

activities), (b) increase children’s involvement in book reading and related activities with

other family members (e.g., extended family, older siblings), and (c) for kindergarten children

to demonstrate initial and sustained interest in and enthusiasm using the FLB at home.

Building on a pilot study (Dever, 2001), data were collected to determine whether the

families used the FLB and the nature of their experiences with them.

The FLB were distributed to all kindergarten teachers in one city and three rural school

districts in the western United States. Each bag contained 3 high-quality children’s books of

varying reading=developmental levels and genres, along with extension activities (some

included writing) focused around a theme (e.g., buttons, change, gardening). With the

exception of common household items such as pencils, all materials needed for the extension

activities were included in the bags.

FAMILY LITERACY BAGS 361

Dow

nloa

ded

By:

[Ale

rta -

Chi

le 2

005/

2006

Con

sorti

um] A

t: 22

:51

3 M

ay 2

008

Each bag also contained a parent guidebook with information and guidelines for reading

and discussing the books with children. These were explained to parents at Back to School

Night. For example, parents were reminded of the importance of regular reading with their

child, to read so that the child can see the text and illustrations, to allow the child to select the

book(s) to be read, and to re-read books at the child’s request. Guidelines for book discus-

sions included open-ended questions specific to each book. Also included were suggested

activities to extend the theme of the bag. Some of the FLB contained materials in Spanish

and English (Fig. 1 is an example of a FLB.). Each teacher received 10 FLB per session of

kindergarten s=he taught to ensure that each child in the class could take a FLB home for one

week every third week.

Teachers participated in an in-service meeting at the beginning of the school year prior to

implementation of the project. The in-service focused on: (a) parent involvement in general

and other strategies for involving parents representing diverse populations (b) the FLB as a

specific parent involvement strategy (c) maintenance and use of the FLB, and (d) conducting

action research to evaluate the FLB and to guide practice.

METHODS

Participants

All of the kindergarten teachers (N¼ 65) in one city (N¼ 14) and three rural school districts

(N¼ 51) in the western United States participated in this project. The subjects of this study

were 2,340 families with whom these teachers worked (500 from city schools and 1840 from

rural schools). Families in the geographic area are primarily white, middle-class, and

FIGURE 1 Family literacy bag.


Dow

nloa

ded

By:

[Ale

rta -

Chi

le 2

005/

2006

Con

sorti

um] A

t: 22

:51

3 M

ay 2

008

members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Later Day Saints. Although the area is relatively

homogenous, it is experiencing an increase in cultural and linguistic diversity, primarily

native Spanish-speakers. For example, in the largest of the four districts the number of

Hispanic children attending school increased from 3.3% of the total in 1995 to 7% of the total

in 2000. In addition, Hispanic children represent the largest minority population of children

with Native American, Asian, and African American children combined making up less than

one percent of the total population (Chad Downs, personal communication, August 13,

2001). The major employers in the geographic area are a major state university, the school

districts, and manufacturing companies.

Data Collection and Analysis

Four data sources were used to describe the extent and nature of literacy behaviors related to

the FLB project. Information was obtained from parents and teachers and quantitative and

qualitative methods were used to analyze the data.

Pre- and Post-Reading Books at Home Questionnaire (available in Spanish and English)

Parents were asked by teachers to complete a one-page questionnaire prior to distribution of

the FLB at the beginning of the school year and again at the end of the school year after using

the FLB. This measure was used to ascertain parents’ reading habits with their kindergarten

child including: (a) frequency, (b) amount of time spent reading, (c) person(s) reading with

the child, (d) quality and variety of books, and (f) frequency of book discussions they have

with their child.

Most respondents completed the pre-Reading Books at Home Questionnaire during the

initial parent teacher conference at the beginning of the school year which yielded a return

rate of 72% (N¼ l712). The post-survey was sent home to all participating families in late

March with reminders sent twice in April yielding a 42% return rate (N¼ 1010). Dependent

t-tests and Effect Sizes were calculated on the pre- and post- surveys to identify statistically

or practically significant mean differences in parents’ home reading behaviors.

Parent FLB Evaluation Form (available in Spanish and English) Parents completed an FLB

Evaluation form, included in the bags, each time they were sent home. Respondents indicated

the degree (none, some, all) to which: (a) they enjoyed the books, (b) they re-read the books,

(c) they enjoyed the extension activities, and (d) the information in the guidebook was

helpful. A systematic random sample (N¼ 442) of the 2653 FLB Evaluation forms returned

was selected for analysis. The selection was made by numbering the total returned surveys,

randomly selecting a number between one and six (number two was drawn from a cup), then,

beginning with the second survey, selecting every sixth survey thereafter (to obtain ap-

proximately 15% of the total). Percent of responses in each category were calculated on the

likert scale items on the FLB Evaluation form. Respondents also provided written comments

about their experiences with the FLB which were qualitatively analyzed.

Teacher’s Qualitative Survey At the end of the school year, teachers responded to open-

ended questions regarding what they viewed as strengths and weaknesses of the FLB project.

Specifically, teachers were asked to indicate what they liked about the project, what they

found challenging, what they will continue to do in the future, and what they will do dif-

ferently in the future. Sixty-six percent (N¼ 43) of the Teacher’s Qualitative Surveys were

returned. The responses to open-ended questions were qualitatively analyzed.


Dow

nloa

ded

By:

[Ale

rta -

Chi

le 2

005/

2006

Con

sorti

um] A

t: 22

:51

3 M

ay 2

008

Teachers’ Anecdotes Teachers recorded anecdotes throughout the school year including

students’ and parents’ responses to the FLB project. They wrote their own reflections as well.

Responses to the open-ended questions of the Parent FLB Evaluation form, the Teacher’s

Qualitative Survey, and teachers’ anecdotes provided insight into the families’ experiences

with the FLB project. These data were analyzed using the constant comparative method. Data

analysis was on-going as categories were identified and refined. An audit trail was created as

units of analysis were isolated, compared with other units, and categorized based on common

characteristics.

Trustworthiness was ensured with the use of peer examiners and referential adequacy.

First, two research assistants served as peer examiners to determine whether the coding

scheme made sense and note consistency in the coding. Only seven discrepancies were

identified during this process. These discrepancies were discussed and consensus reached on

how they should be coded. In addition, after data analysis was competed, one research

assistant analyzed an archived data set to further verify the utility of the coding scheme.

Utility of the coding was confirmed with no discrepancies noted.

RESULTS

The purpose of project was to: (a) increase parental involvement in book reading and related

activities (e.g. number of books read, time spent reading, and time spent engaged in book

related discussions and activities), (b) increase children’s involvement in book reading and

related activities with other family members (e.g. extended family, older siblings), and (c) for

kindergarten children to demonstrate initial and sustained interest in and enthusiasm using

the FLB at home. Quantitative and qualitative data were collected to determine the extent to

which the purpose of the project was met.

Results indicate that families used the FLB and that they enjoyed and engaged in book

reading and related activities found in the FLB. Data indicate that they engaged in book

reading more than the related activities. Figure 2 shows the percent of responses in each

category indicating the extent to which books were read and re-read, the activities were

enjoyed, and the guidelines were helpful. For example, most respondents (82%) enjoyed all of

the books in the bag while just under half (45%) enjoyed all of the activities. These data

suggest the families used the FLB fairly extensively.

Dependent t-tests and Effect Sizes were calculated on the Pre- and Post-Reading Books at

Home Questionnaires where parents characterized reading behaviors at home. While all

means increased from the beginning to the end of the school year, none increased at a sta-

tistically or practically significant level. This suggests that families were already engaging in

reading at home at the onset of this inquiry. For example, families were reading 3–5 times per

week as indicated by the pre- and post-surveys (X̄¼ 3.2; X̄¼ 3.4 respectively). Respondents

were reading 3–4 books per week as indicated by the pre- and post-surveys (X̄¼ 3.3; X̄¼ 3.4

Enjoyedbooks

Read booksmore than once

Enjoyedactivities

Informationhelpful

All 82% 31% 45% 58%Some 17% 42% 44% 35%None 1% 24% 8% 3%No response 3% 3% 4%

FIGURE 2 Family participation in FLB project.


Dow

nloa

ded

By:

[Ale

rta -

Chi

le 2

005/

2006

Con

sorti

um] A

t: 22

:51

3 M

ay 2

008

respectively). Based on the pre- and post- surveys, respondents were spending about 30

minutes to an 1 hour per week reading (X̄¼ 2.2; X̄¼ 2.4 respectively). We can conclude,

however, that the FLB project contributed to continued reading at home based on the data

presented in Figure 2 as well as the qualitative findings.

The qualitative data serve to enrich our understanding of responses to the FLB by pro-

viding insight into how families used them. Four major themes emerged from the qualitative

data obtained from the Parent FLB Evaluation forms, the Teacher Qualitative Survey, and

teacher’s anecdotal notes. The theme, Organization, related to the overall structure and

contents of the FLB including the selection of the items to be included and the thematic

organizational structure. Information emerged as a theme encompassing things parents

learned from using the FLB including information about reading and interacting with chil-

dren as well as things they learned about their child. Also included under the category

Information, are units of analysis that related to content of the books and guidebooks in the

FLB. A third theme, Engagement, encompassed statements about parents and children’s

interest in the project. Finally, the theme Opportunity included statements about the quality of

the time spent and time for interaction between parents and children.

Organization

In general, parents responded favorably to the organization of the FLB. One parent summed

it by saying, ‘‘Everything is kept together – even things for the activities. I didn’t have to buy

anything like paper plates, etc.’’ Others expressed appreciation for the ‘‘hands on materials,’’

‘‘ . . . the assortment of books,’’ the ‘‘ . . . new and different’’ books, or simply stated, ‘‘I like

all the thing have [sic] in the bag.’’

The use of themes as an organizational structure was also positively received. Parents noted,

‘‘I liked how it had a theme;’’ and, ‘‘wonderful books, all different yet with a common link.’’ A

parent noted the usefulness of the theme approach as a teaching tool commenting, ‘‘It is very

nice to have the units already formed. We can spend the whole week reinforcing that subject.’’

The inclusion of Spanish materials along with the English materials received mixed re-

actions. Some nonSpanish speaking parents enjoyed sharing the Spanish and English ma-

terials with their children. Comments included, ‘‘[The children] liked trying to read the

Spanish translation’’; and ‘‘It was fun to see the same books in Spanish’’; Some also noted it

as a benefit to Spanish speakers. ‘‘I think having the Spanish version of the book is a good

thing for those who speak the language.

Most Spanish-speaking families appreciated having the books and materials in their native

language. A response translated from Spanish noted, ‘‘If I want to read books in Spanish it’s

good because I don’t understand much reading him [sic] in English.’’ Another commented in

English, ‘‘I learned and my family read in the both language [sic].’’

Some native English-speaking parents did not appreciate the inclusion of Spanish mate-

rials. When asked if there was anything they did not like about the FLB, one parent com-

mented, ‘‘Spanish book – cannot read Spanish.’’ Others elaborated, ‘‘I don’t like having to

keep track of Spanish books, etc. when they don’t apply to my child;’’ and, ‘‘We do not like

getting both Spanish and English books – there are too many books to worry about. Please

send English only.’’ Another commented,

Would be easier to have separate English and Spanish book bags–more to keep stuffing back into the bag thatwe don’t use and to keep track of. He keeps asking me to read the Spanish version. I had to keep telling him thatI don’t speak Spanish.

Spanish-speaking parents expressed different reasons for responding negatively to the

inclusion of Spanish materials in the bags. One teacher shared a concern a Hispanic parent’s


Dow

nloa

ded

By:

[Ale

rta -

Chi

le 2

005/

2006

Con

sorti

um] A

t: 22

:51

3 M

ay 2

008

concern noting that some stories loose meaning when they are translated into Spanish. One

Spanish-speaking parent was concerned that his=her children needed to learn English and felt

the inclusion of Spanish materials was inappropriate. This parent commented,

I do not understand why books in Spanish have been sent to us. We do not have any language problems. Wewant our child develops [sic] his best potentials. If we force him to read in Spanish, I am afraid he would be atdisadvantage. My child need to learn English vocabulary at school. Spanish for him is not very important (hespeaks Spanish and read and write it [sic]). I want Spanish has been taught [sic] at home by parents and Englishbe taught at school. I am not against you send us books in Spanish but always with the English version.

Information

Three sub-themes emerged from this category: (a) information related to learning about

reading and doing reading related activities with children, (b) information about the child,

and (c) information related to the content of the books.

Information related to learning about reading and doing reading related activities Data

indicate that parents learned various things ranging from acquainting themselves with the

diversity of available children’s books to the many ways to interact with children during

book reading. Some parents appreciated learning about the variety of children’s books

available. Parents noted, ‘‘It was fun reading new books,’’ and they expressed appreciation

for ‘‘becoming familiar with new stories.’’ One parent noted, ‘‘We read some books that

we probably wouldn’t have.’’ Furthermore, parents learned that there are books available

to help children learn. One commented, ‘‘I guess what I liked most was that until these

books came home, I didn’t really know there were books you could read and learn about

math and counting etc.’’

Although we have noted that most families in this inquiry read at home, a teacher shared,

‘‘ . . . parents report really appreciating the ideas and helps.’’ Parents indicated that the

guidebooks included, ‘‘good questions for discussion,’’ that ‘‘[they] liked all the suggestions

on how to present the book;’’ and that the ‘‘activities were fun.’’ This parent added, ‘‘My son

liked the idea of making his own book.’’

Other parents learned the importance of (or were reminded of) making book reading

interactive. One noted, ‘‘The suggested activities were helpful. We learned to be more in-

teractive instead of just reading the book.’’ Others indicated, ‘‘I need to think more creatively

and not just plough through a book to get to the end;’’ and, ‘‘It made me realize that I needed

to do more than just read a book to my kids.’’

The discussion questions helped parents make reading more interactive. They commented,

‘‘I liked how it was more than just reading a book. It gave questions to discuss so my child

was able to really think about what we read;’’ and, ‘‘It’s important to discuss material that you

read with your child.’’ After enjoying a FLB of Tomie de Paola books, a parent indicated

having learned something new noting, ‘‘We read together but I rarely ask questions or come

up with activities that correlate with the stories. It was nice to have the questions and

activities provided to give me some ideas.’’ Another parent indicated s=he would generalize

the information on discussing books to other reading situations noting, ‘‘The suggested

activities and questions help to give me ideas of the types of things to discuss.’’

Information about the child The FLB project led parents to learn new things about their

children. One parent commented, ‘‘[the project] gave me a chance to have more insight into

the way my child thinks. I learned more about my child.’’ Another parent was ‘‘ . . . amazed at

how much my child remembered after reading the books just once. That memory expanded


Dow

nloa

ded

By:

[Ale

rta -

Chi

le 2

005/

2006

Con

sorti

um] A

t: 22

:51

3 M

ay 2

008

as each book was read again and again.’’ Another noted that his=her daughter, ‘‘ . . . could

answer all the questions easily. She knew the meaning of faithful and responsibility.’’

Information related to the content of the books Parent reaction to the content of the books

was overwhelmingly positive. One positive comment related to the vocabulary in the book.

‘‘[I think] the vocabulary in the snake book was hard but it was good to teach new words.’’

Other positive comments related to the theme of specific FLB or books. One parented

observed, the ‘‘Little Red Hen made my child realize that she has to work sometimes to get

things accomplished.’’ Several comments referred to a FLB with a theme having to do with

emotions. For example, one parent noted, ‘‘[The book] helps the child realize his different

moods.’’ Another observed that, ‘‘The stories all presented feelings in a different and creative

way which encouraged different ways of looking at and discussing feelings with my child.’’

Another simply noted, ‘‘I liked the theme – teaching kids that they are special.’’

Content of some books were judged by parents as too difficult or to have inappropriate

content. A parent noted, ‘‘I think some of the books were a little too hard for a 5-year-

old to understand.’’ Other observations included, ‘‘I didn’t really like the math in both

books. I think most of it was over my child’s head;’’ ‘‘My children didn’t understand all

of the Knots on a Counting Rope and My Great Aunt Arizona;’’ and, the ‘‘Dr. Seuss book

is [sic] too deep for kindergarten level.’’ Negative comments about specific books were

quite idiosyncratic.

Engagement

The category Engagement encompasses any units of analysis that demonstrated children’s

engagement and interest in the books and=or related activities. Some comments simply

indicated the FLB experience was enjoyable while others related to the content of books.

Comments about engagement with the content of the books were both negative and

positive.

One teacher shared, ‘‘The kids love taking [FLB] home. They can’t wait for their turn.’’

A teacher declared her favorite thing about the project was, ‘‘children being sad that they

didn’t get one [this week].’’ None of the teachers noted that the children tired of taking

the FLB home.

Generally, parents’ comments were consistent with teachers’; one noted, ‘‘My children

enjoy story time and having new books to read.’’ Similarly, others noted, ‘‘The books were

fun and interesting to both my child and myself;’’ and, ‘‘It was fun to read new books.’’ One

parent suggested the project provides an opportunity to ‘‘stimulate our child’s interest in

reading at this time in her life.’’

The content of the books was interesting to many families. Parents noted, ‘‘stories were

easy to stay along with – kids stayed interested throughout the whole book;’’ and, ‘‘the

pictures and story content kept my child’s interest well.’’ One commented on a FLB of Eric

Carle books noting, ‘‘We really enjoyed this author’s books.’’

While children seemed to maintain enthusiasm for the project, one teacher noted, ‘‘[The

project] started out wonderfully but, parents tire of it as the year goes on. They don’t want

one more thing to do with their child [that comes from school]. They are tired of homework

too.’’ Another teacher reported that a parent in her classroom sent the artifacts created from

the FLB experience back to school ‘‘ . . . as if it were homework.’’ She explained to the parent

that such accountability was unnecessary.

Parents’ had a few negative responses regarding their children’s engagement with the

books. One parent noted, ‘‘My daughter didn’t follow along with Puddles very well.’’ Others

noted that ‘‘two of the books were kind of lacking and the illustrations were confusing;’’ and,


Dow

nloa

ded

By:

[Ale

rta -

Chi

le 2

005/

2006

Con

sorti

um] A

t: 22

:51

3 M

ay 2

008

‘‘Some books are below the child’s interest level.’’ Some did not find the suggested activities

engaging. One parent simply noted, ‘‘Some of it was annoying because of the ‘busy work’.’’

Opportunity

The category Opportunity encompasses units of analysis related to opportunities provided by

the project. Generally, parents found opportunities to interact with their children around book

reading and time to read and engage in book-related activities. Comments related primarily

to the quality of time spent in book reading and related activities and opportunities to teach

the child.

One teacher said she felt, ‘‘ . . . parents are really reading more to their children because of

[the FLB].’’ Parents noted that they liked ‘‘being able to spend some time reading with [their

children]’’ and having ‘‘ . . . a good reason to spend quiet quality time with our child.’’

Another said, ‘‘It reminded me how important it is to spend time with my child.’’ Many

parents made similar comments.

A few parents indicated that the FLB provided the opportunity to teach their child. One

shared, ‘‘We like the opportunity to discuss different emotions with our daughter.’’ Similarly,

‘‘[the project] gives us time to spend with our children and helps us to ask good questions.’’

As Figure 2 indicates, parents were more likely to read to their children than to engage in

reading related activities. One parent commented. ‘‘We often don’t have time for the activity

as we usually read before bed.’’ Another parent indicated, ‘‘we did not do the activities this

time but will make it a point to do them next time.’’

DISCUSSION

The first goal of this project was to increase parental involvement in book reading and related

activities. In general, families indicated they did use the FLB which suggests that the project

encouraged reading and interacting with books at home. Furthermore, families learned some

things about reading with their child. While families generally engaged in regular reading at

home prior to the project, parents were reminded to (or learned to) make book reading

interactive and they expanded their understanding of effective ways to accomplish this. For

example, both parents and teachers indicated that the guiding discussion questions assisted

parents’ and children’s discussions of books.

Other findings suggest that parents learned of new book titles and they learned that books

can be used to teach children concepts. Some indicated that the theme approach enabled them

to discuss a topic (feelings, for example) in depth. Finally, parents garnered information

about their children in the context of the FLB project including their children’s varied in-

terests and developing skills.

Although not wide-spread, the negative reaction to the inclusion of Spanish materials was

prominent enough that it is worth discussing. Parent education should highlight the im-

portance of acknowledging and valuing families from diverse cultural backgrounds. Avail-

ability of books in the language of others provides a rich opportunity to learn about others.

Learning to value our differences is perhaps worth the inconvenience of keeping track of

books and materials in two languages.

With both Spanish and English books available, Spanish-speaking families learn that their

native culture and language are valued. Children continue to learn in their native language as

they become increasingly proficient with English. Similarly, English-speaking parents can

capitalize on this opportunity to learn about the language of their Spanish-speaking neigh-


Dow

nloa

ded

By:

[Ale

rta -

Chi

le 2

005/

2006

Con

sorti

um] A

t: 22

:51

3 M

ay 2

008

bors. They can talk with their children about how all children enjoy stories and that many

stories are written in more than one language.

The second project goal addressed increasing children’s involvement in book reading and

related activities with other family members. The data suggest that various family members

were already engaged in reading with the children. Unlike Barbour (1998=99), no increase in

involvement by other family members was found in this project.

The final project goal was to create initial and sustained interest in and enthusiasm for

using the FLB on part the children. The positive response of parents and teachers about

children’s enthusiasm for taking home a FLB indicate children’s initial interest in the FLB.

Furthermore, there is no indication that children became tired of taking the FLB home

suggesting their interest was sustained. However, some parents became weary of children

bringing home ‘‘homework,’’ including FLBs, a finding that has two implications. First,

perhaps teachers should critically analyze homework expectations to be certain that the

homework merits asking busy families to spend precious time on it. Studies (Ortiz et al.,

2001; Robinson et al. 1995, 1996, 1997) suggest that reading at home is a valuable activity

and might take priority over other activities. Second, teachers need to promote the FLB

project as an enjoyable family activity and not a laborious homework task.

The findings from this inquiry are consistent with other research findings (Barbour,

1998=99; Dever, 2001; Ortiz, 2001; Robinson et al. 1995, 1996, 1997) that suggest

innovations such as the FLB project encourage parents to read with their children. Fur-

thermore, these findings extend our understand of what families learn via home book reading

projects and how they can provide a vehicle for parent education.

These data were collected in a predominately rural, middle class area where reading at

home was already valued. Further research is needed to address potential benefits and ef-

fective ways to implement the FLB project with parents who have limited literacy skills,

inadequate understanding of how to read with their children, and little time to spend reading.

Further research is also needed to determine whether there is a causal effect between

innovations such as the FLB project and children’s reading achievement.

Acknowledgments

The Family Literacy Bags project was made possible by a Goals 2000 grant in Utah (USA)

and the Emma Eccles Jones Center for Early Childhood Education at Utah State University.

References

Adams, M. J. (2000) Beginning to Read. Thinking and Learning about Print. Cambridge, MS: The MITPress.

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

Barbour, A. C. (1998=99) Home literacy bags promote family involvement, Childhood Education, 75(2), 71–75.Berger,E. H. (1995) Reaching for the stars: Families and schools working together, Early Childhood Journal,

23, 119–123.Brock, D. R., and Dodd, E. L. (1994) A family lending library: Promoting early literacy development, Young

Children, 49(3), 16–21.Burts, D. C., and Dever, M. T. (2001) Engaging teacher education students in an authentic parent education

project, The Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education, 22(2), 59–62.Bus, A. G., Ijsendoorn, M. H. V. and Pellegrini, A. D. (1995) Joint book reading makes for success in learning

to read: A meta-analysis on intergenerational transmission of literacy, Review of Educational Research,65(1), 1–21.

Dever, M. T. (2001) Family literacy bags: A vehicle for parent involvement and education, Journal of EarlyEducation and Family Review, 8(4), 17–28.

Epstein, J. L. (1995) School=family=community partnerships: Caring for the children we share, Phi DeltaKappan, 76(9), 701–712.


Dow

nloa

ded

By:

[Ale

rta -

Chi

le 2

005/

2006

Con

sorti

um] A

t: 22

:51

3 M

ay 2

008

Espinosa, L. M. (1995) Hispanic Parent Involvement in Early Childhood Programs (ERIC Clearinghouse onElementary and Early Childhood Education). Urbana, IL.

Fisher, B. (1998) Joyful Learning. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.Kokoski, T. M. and Patton, M. M. (1997) Beyond homework: Science and mathematics backpacks,

Dimensions of Early Childhood, 25(2), 11–16.Koskinen, P. S., Blum, I. H., Visson, S. A., Phillips, M. S., Creamer, T. S., and Baker, T. K. (2000) Book

access, shared reading, and audio models: The effects of supporting the literacy learning of linguisticallydiverse students in school and at home, Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(1), 23–36.

Neuman, S. B. (1996) Children engaging in storybook reading: The influence of access to print resources,opportunity, and parental interaction, Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 11, 495–513.

Neuman, S. B. (1997) Guiding young children’s participation in early literacy development: A family literacyprogram for adolescent mothers, Early Child Development and Care, 127–128, 119–129.

Oglan, G. R., and Elcombe, A. (2001) Parent to parent: Our children, their literacy. Urbana, IL: NationalCouncil of Teachers of English.

Ortiz, C., Stowe, R. M. and Arnold, D. H. (2001) Parental influence on child interest in shared picture bookreading, Reading Research Quarterly, 16(2), 263–281.

Purcell-Gates, V., McIntyre, E. and Freppon, P. A. (1995) Learning written storybook language in school: Acomparison of low-SES children in skills-based and whole language classrooms, American EducationalResearch Journal, 32(3), 659–685.

Ramos, F. and Krashen, S. (1998) The impact of one trip to the public library: Making books available may bethe best incentive for reading, The Reading Teacher, 51(7), 614–615.

Robinson, C. C., Larsen, J. M. and Haupt, J. H. (1995) Picture book reading at home: A comparison of HeadStart and middle-class preschoolers, Early Education and Development, 6, 241–252.

Robinson, C. C., Larsen, J. M. and Haupt, J. H. (1996) The influence of selecting and taking picture bookshome on the at-home reading behaviors of kindergarten children, Reading Research and Instruction,35(3), 249–259.

Sulzby, E. (1985a) Children’s emergent reading of favorite storybooks: A developmental study, ReadingResearch Quarterly, 20, 458–481.


Documents

Family Literacy Bags