|
Louella Freeman
Macquarie University
Sandra Bochner
Macquarie University
The main aim of the Bridging the Gap project was to encourage Indigenous families to use a home book-reading program to minimise the disadvantage often experienced by their children when learning to read. The project was implemented in Western Sydney by Aboriginal Education Assistants (AEAs) from the Indigenous Catholic Education Unit within the Catholic Schools Office, Parramatta Diocese, NSW, with 22 children and their families in Terms 2 and 3 of the school year. The program used shared-book reading to help the children become actively involved in the reading process. At post-test, the children's mean reading age was higher than their mean chronological age, and there were increases in listening comprehension, phonemic awareness and receptive language. The project had a positive impact on the children's self-esteem, interest in books, experiences with books at home, and home-school links. The project also had a positive impact on the role of the AEAs within the Indigenous Education Unit and their support of the literacy needs of Indigenous children in the first year at school.
Introduction
There is evidence that children from socially and culturally diverse homes, including children from Indigenous backgrounds, are ‘at risk' of difficulties in learning to read (Lonigan, 2004; Zubrick, 2006). These difficulties arise, in part, because teachers of early literacy often assume that children beginning school are familiar with books and have appropriate language skills. This assumption can cause problems for children who lack the experiences with written language and books that are prerequisites for literacy (Purcell-Gates, 1996) and for those whose first language is not Standard Australian English, including Indigenous children who speak English as a second language or dialect (Turnbull, 2002). This report describes a project that aimed to use a home book-reading program to ‘bridge the gap' between the children's experiences with books at home and reading instruction at school. The children were given books, and family members were shown how to read these books with the children. The program also provided an opportunity for effective links to be developed between Indigenous parents and school-based Aboriginal Education Assistants (AEAs).
In many classrooms, the instructional strategies used to develop literacy skills are not consistent with the educational, social and cultural needs of Indigenous children and their families (National Review of Education for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander People, 1995). For example, teachers often lack the competencies required to help Indigenous families develop the skills and confidence needed to support children when they are learning to read. When urged by teachers to read with their children, parents may feel anxious, bewildered and unsure how to translate the teacher's suggestions into practice. Teachers misunderstand this uncertainty, unconsciously condemning Indigenous students to literacy failure from the point of school entry.
Introducing Indigenous families to book-reading techniques is one way to counteract both the perception and the reality of school failure. It can also contribute to developing positive relationships between teachers and Indigenous families by linking children's literacy experiences at home with the goals and objectives of the school's reading curriculum. Explicitly and systematically encouraging children to become actively involved in the reading process through interactive or shared-book reading (Al Otaiba, 2004) has been identified as the single most important activity in preparing children for success in literacy at school (Bryant & Wasik, 2004; Center, 2005; Lonigan, 2004). Shared book reading fosters children's awareness of the connections between spoken words and print. Attention is focused on the content or meaning of text (listening comprehension), learning about words (e.g. identical, long and short words), the sounds in words and letters (e.g. rhyme and alliteration), the alphabet, print, and the conventions of print (e.g. knowing the front from the back of a book) (Center, 2005). These strategies are particularly important for children whose families lack basic literacy skills, do not read books with their children, or lack the resources to buy or borrow books.
Programs for educationally disadvantaged children
Research has identified a strong positive link between early (emergent) and later literacy skills. This association is particularly significant for children from educationally disadvantaged homes who often lack the prerequisite skills needed for satisfactory progress in early literacy. Factors that contribute to children's progress in learning to read include developing listening comprehension and deciphering print (Center, 2005). Listening comprehension can be fostered through reading text interactively. Here, the story is linked to children's background knowledge, new vocabulary is discussed, and children are encouraged to predict what the story is about and later retell it. The skills needed to decipher print include understanding the concepts of ‘word' and ‘sentence' and recognising short, long and identical words, rhyme, alliteration, phonemes, and compound words (Center, 2005). Children at risk of delays in learning to read can be helped by encouraging literacy-related activities at home. Such activities can include teaching parents about literacy and increasing children's exposure to books through shared reading. The use of alphabet books and games increases letter knowledge, creating links between reading experiences at home and at school (Lonigan, 2004, p. 67; see also Britto, Brooks-Gunn & Griffin, 2006; Burgess, Hecht & Lonigan, 2002; Lonigan, 2006; Mansell, Evans & Hamilton-Hulak, 2005; Purcell-Gates, 2004; Senechal, Lefevre, Thomas & Daley, 1998; Senechal, 2006).
Studies of early literacy confirm that the skills children need to succeed at school begin to develop well before school entry. A number of programs designed to help educationally at-risk children acquire prerequisite literacy skills during infancy and early childhood have been based on this finding. Head Start and Early Head Start, early intervention programs for infants, toddlers and preschoolers from low-income families that began in the United States in the 1960s as part of the ‘war on poverty' (see Lazar & Darlington, 1982; Love et al., 2005; Zigler & Styfco, 2000), are examples of such programs. Similar programs include the Even Start Family Literacy Program (ESFL) (Alamprese, 2004; Fuligni & Brooks-Gunn, 2004; Wasik & Herrmann, 2004) and The Home Instruction Program for Preschool Youngsters (HIPPY) (Westheimer, 2003).
Examples of programs developed in Australia include the Mt. Druitt Early Childhood Project based on the Head Start model (Braithwaite, 1983; Healey, 1988) and, more recently, programs funded through the Australian Government's Early Childhood–Invest to Grow initiative within the Stronger Families and Communities Strategy (FaCSIA, 2006). These programs provide a combination of school- or centre- and home-based services that aim to assist children and families in the years prior to school entry (birth-five years) or during the early school years. Their particular goal is to improve long-term outcomes for children who are educationally at risk.
Educational disadvantage and Indigenous people
It is generally accepted that indigenous people—including Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in Australia, Maori in New Zealand and Inuit in Canada—are often educationally disadvantaged as a result of a complex array of factors. In Australia, this disadvantage is evident in results for Indigenous and non-Indigenous students reported in Overcoming Indigenous Disadvantage, 2007 (SCRGSP, 2007, p. 31, p. 33). These results show that the proportion of Indigenous students who did not achieve national benchmarks set for reading, writing and numeracy over the period 1999 to 2005 was consistently higher than for all students. In 2005, the proportion of year 3 Indigenous students failing to achieve the benchmarks in reading was 22.0 per cent compared with 7.3 per cent for all students, 26 per cent compared with 7.2 per cent in writing, and 19 per cent compared with 5.9 per cent in numeracy. Equivalent figures for year 5 were 37 per cent compared with 13 percent, 26 per cent compared with 7 percent and 34 per cent compared with 9 per cent.
Among the factors identified as contributing to the success of projects concerned with overcoming the educational disadvantage of many Indigenous children (McRae et al., 2000), six are relevant for projects like Bridging the Gap:
- The employment of Indigenous staff.
- Access to an appropriate budget.
- Development of positive partnerships between school and community.
- Community trust in the Aboriginal Education Assistants, leading to increased community involvement in school events.
- Parental enjoyment of the group sessions.
- Children mixing with others and having fun doing new activities.
During the planning stage of the program described here, efforts were made to incorporate these factors into the design of the project.
The Bridging the Gap project
The aim of the Bridging the Gap project was to enhance the early literacy skills of Indigenous kindergarten children through a home shared-book reading program designed to:
- foster child-family interactions with books at home
- bridge the gap between children's literacy experiences at home and the school's reading curriculum.
The program also provided an opportunity for positive relationships to be developed between Indigenous parents and school staff.
The project was funded by a grant from the Australian Government Department of Education, Science and Training (DEST) Innovative Projects to Support Improved Literacy and Numeracy Outcomes of Educationally Disadvantaged Students. It was implemented in conjunction with Jarara, the Indigenous Catholic Education Unit within the Catholic Schools Office (CSO), Parramatta Diocese, NSW. The home book-reading program was designed by the Chief Investigator, a literacy specialist from Macquarie University, and implemented by four Aboriginal Education Assistants (AEAs) from Jarara.
Method
Participants
The experimental group comprised 19 Indigenous children and their families. Most of the children attended CSO schools in the Parramatta area and the others were at government schools but attended a homework centre operated by Jarara. The proposed design of the study included a matched non-participating control group to be located in kindergarten classes within the Parramatta region. However, there were not enough Indigenous children identified in the local schools to form this group. As an alternative, a non-equivalent contrast group was formed comprising 15 children in their second year at school. Several of these children had siblings in the experimental group, so there was some overlap between participating families.
Assessment
Both quantitative and qualitative procedures were used to evaluate the project. All the tests were administered individually to the children by the Chief Investigator or a research assistant.
Two standardised tests were used in the study: the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test-Revised (PPVT-R) (Dunn & Dunn, 1995), a test of receptive language, and the Waddington Diagnostic Reading Test (WDRT) (Waddington, 1998), a test of reading comprehension. The PPVT-R was given at pre- and post-test. The WDRT was given only at the post-test on the grounds that a reading test could be distressing for children who were newly enrolled in school and had not yet received formal instruction in reading.
Non-standardised tests were used to assess the specific aspects of literacy targeted by the program. Listening comprehension was assessed using Picture Book Sequencing (12 items) based on Cain (1996), Picture Book Structured Retell (12 items) based on Wasik, Bond and Waclawiw (1995), and Short Story Structured Retell (14 items) based on Field and Walsh (1989). Other tests included Phonemic Awareness (24 items) from Tangel and Blachman (1995), and two tests adapted from Clay (1993): Letter Identification (26 items) and Concepts About Print (8 items).
Qualitative assessment included structured interviews with parents and children, conducted by the AEAs, and analysis of information collected as part of the intervention process.
Materials
At the start of the program, the AEAs gave each child a kit containing a tape-recorder, dice, tokens, a large storage box, stickers to decorate the box, pencils and Stories are fun, a booklet which set out guidelines for the reading and other activities to be completed over the intervention period. At each fortnightly visit over the 20 weeks of the project, the children were given a book (e.g. Bangu the flying fox; Moonglue; Hello kangaroo), audio-tape, game and associated activity. One of the books was a picture dictionary. The AEAs, with assistance from several parents, had selected 10 books from a collection of 25 on the basis of their appeal to Indigenous children and families. The AEAs also helped to design the games used in conjunction with each book.
Following discussion with the AEAs, a Tutor notebook was prepared that covered the procedures to be followed each fortnight with the families. The Tutor notebook included instructions on the specific book-reading skills to be taught to parents and a checklist that reminded the AEAs to explain any new book-reading procedures, review the new game and alphabet letters, and discuss any problems raised by the parents.
Procedure
Procedure
Prior to the start of the school year, the Chief Investigator conducted a professional development program for the AEAs. The parent interview was role-played and the specific book-reading strategies to be introduced to parents during the intervention were studied. These strategies included vocabulary extension; encouraging an interest in books, print and the alphabet; activating prior knowledge before story reading; listening to the story and asking questions during story reading; reviewing and retelling the story and applying it to their own experiences.
Resources needed for implementation of the project were ordered. Permission was obtained from the publishers to reproduce illustrations from two of the books. The AEAs arranged for each of the story books to be read aloud and recorded on audio-tape by a member of the Indigenous community. Several Year 7 Indigenous students were asked to illustrate some of the books for the jigsaw puzzles and the Stories are fun booklets. A letter of informed consent was prepared, to be read and discussed with the parents during first contact. Approval to undertake the project and permission to conduct research in schools within the Diocese of Parramatta was obtained from the Ethics Review Committee (Human Research) at Macquarie University and the Director, Religious Education and Educational Services.
By the start of Term 2, 2001, all program materials (books, audio-tapes, games, etc.) had been assembled and parental informed consent forms signed. Interviews of parents in both the experimental and contrast groups and the pre-testing of the children were completed, and implementation of the program proceeded as planned. One AEA was responsible for 14 families, with the other AEAs responsible for the remaining eight families. The program was delivered over a 20-week period in Terms 2 and 3. Where the AEAs worked as educational assistants in the children's schools, the meetings with parents took place at the school, in the family home or at another location. Children attending the homework centre and their parents initially met as a group at the centre, but the centre closed after the first three meetings and the remaining meetings were held at the home of one of the parents.
At the first visit, the family was given the project kit and the first book together with the associated audio-tape and game. Children were encouraged to decorate the storage box and parents were shown how to help their child record how often they read the book and how much they liked using the smiley chart in the Stories are fun booklet. The routine for subsequent visits with families followed a similar format. The AEA brought a book, audio-tape and game, and modelled the selected book-reading strategy as outlined in the Tutor notebook. Any questions raised by the parents were discussed. Following completion of post-testing, each parent received a report on their child's progress and Jarara was notified about those children who might need extra help.
The excitement felt by everyone at the start of the program is evident in comments recorded following the first meeting with parents at the homework centre:
The program started on 21 May. Children were very excited about the books and games. They enjoyed decorating their box with stickers. When children were leaving they took the box with the books and games and left the tape recorder for the mother—AEAs thought this was a good sign as they thought children would be more interested in the tape recorder. The parents were very apprehensive to start with as they thought they would have to read the books and were worried that this might be too difficult for them. In fact, two days after the distribution of the kits, two of the five parents telephoned the AEAs asking if they could get the next book immediately!
Results
Both quantitative and qualitative information was collected during the implementation of the program. However, results reported here focus primarily on data derived from quantitative assessments of children in the experimental group.
Given the nature of the population being tested (i.e. children at risk of difficulties in learning to read), it would be expected that delays would be evident in language and reading scores, relative to age-equivalent scores, on the PPVT-R and WDRT. As expected, the mean age-equivalent on the PPVT-R at pre-test was 57.9 months compared with a mean chronological age of 64.2 months. At post-test, the mean age-equivalent on the PPVT-R was 65.8 months with a mean chronological age of 71 months (see Table 1). The average change between pre- and post-test in PPVT-R scores was 7.7 months. Expressed as a percentage of the children's mean chronological age at the time of the pre-test, their mean pre-test score on the PPVT-R was 90.5 per cent, and 92.3 per cent by the post-test. This suggests that over the intervention period there was a small reduction in the gap between mean age equivalent on the PPVT-R and chronological age. The mean WDRT age equivalent score for the children (the WDRT was administered at post-test only) was 76.2 months (mean chronological age of 71 months). The WDRT reading age of 14 of the children (75%) was at or above their chronological age, with eight (42%) six months or more above their chronological age, while five of the children (26%) had a WDRT reading age up to five months below their chronological age.
Three sub-tests were used to assess listening comprehension: Picture Book Sequencing (comprising 12 items), Picture Book Structured Retell (12 items) and Story Book Structured Retell (14 items). When scores for these three tests were combined (38 items), the mean score for listening comprehension was 21.2 at pre-test and 29.9 at post-test. When expressed as the percentage of total possible scores, the mean percentage score was 61.7 at pre-test and 88.1 at post-test (see Table 2). Mean scores (expressed as a percentage of the total possible score) for the three individual tests used to assess listening comprehension were: Picture Book Sequencing, pre-test 61.7 per cent, post-test 88.1 per cent; Picture Book Structured Retell, pre-test 65 per cent, post-test 82.5 per cent; and Book Structured Retell, pre-test 53 per cent, post-test 77.5 per cent. In planning the assessment of listening comprehension, it was anticipated that these three tasks represented an increasing level of difficulty. The mean percentage scores cited here suggest that, as expected, the Story Book Structured Retell was the most difficult task for the children to complete.
At the time of the pre-test, the children achieved a mean percentage score on the test of phonemic awareness (24 items) of 73 per cent, rising to 92.5 per cent at the post-test. Eight of the children answered all items correctly. Clearly, by the end of the intervention period, almost all had mastered the phonemic awareness skills needed to identify different sounds within words. The children were less competent in letter identification. Their mean percentage score for the 26 items on this test was 55.8 per cent, rising to 83.5 per cent at the post-test. However, one child still recognised only four letters by the post-test. On the other hand, most of the children were familiar with the eight items on the concepts about print test prior to the intervention program; nine children answered all the items correctly at the pre-test and by the post-test, 18 could do the task with no errors.
There was marked variability in the various test scores achieved by individual children. For example, one child's age equivalent PPVT-R score increased by 27 months between pre- and post-test. Her score on listening comprehension also improved (she already scored well on phonemic awareness and letter identification). Another child's age-equivalent PPVT-R score increased by 21 months, and three children's scores increased by 12 to 15 months. Individual scores on the WDRT also varied widely. The highest score was gained by a child whose WDRT reading age (96 months) was 25 months above his chronological age. His PPVT-R score was 50 at pre-test, rising to 72 at post-test (chronological age 64 and 71 months respectively). His listening comprehension score (particularly picture book sequencing) increased over the intervention period, he made no errors on the test of phonemic awareness at either pre- or post-test, and he identified all but one of the letters of the alphabet correctly at post-test (15 letters at pre-test). Interestingly, this child's teacher was not aware of his reading ability.
The reading age of one child was markedly lower than the rest of the group, and his age-equivalent pre- and post-test PPVT-R scores were below his chronological age. This boy had the lowest score on the letter identification task at both pre- and post-tests, but his performance on the other tests in the second assessment period was similar to that of the other children.
Interviews with experimental group parents conducted as part of the assessment process provided qualitative data on the impact of the program on children and families. Of particular interest are changes in the strategies the parents reported using over the intervention period when reading with their children. In the pre-test interview, almost half of the parents said they simply read the book, looked at the pictures, and asked questions about them. More than half (58%) pointed to single words. Some encouraged the child to point to words or attempt to read them, and one suggested that the child ‘sound out' words. One parent, whose child (discussed earlier) showed the largest change in pre- and post-test scores on the PPVT-R and scored highly on the WDRT, reported that she attempted to teach spelling when reading to her child: ‘If she brings a book home, [I] get her to spell ‘the': ‘t-h-e'. . . I read, then spell the word while pointing.' This child's pre-test score on the listening comprehension tasks was below average and her post-test performance was average, but she made almost no errors on the phonemic awareness and letter identification tasks at both pre- and post-tests.
In the post-test interview, the parents described a more complex set of strategies for reading with their children. All but one made some reference to the title of the book, and several also looked at the cover and asked predictive questions. All now asked questions about what they had read, and one noted that the child also asked questions. More than half of the parents and a few of the children now pointed to words and letters as they read, while almost half of the children tried to read the book too, or repeated the parent's words. The parents also now checked the child's understanding of the story by asking questions, encouraging the child to retell what had happened or relate parts of the story to their own and the family's experiences.
When parents in the contrast group interviews were asked to demonstrate how they read to a child, most began by looking at the title and the cover of the book before reading the text, looking at the pictures and talking about them. More than half pointed to words as they read, and a third asked questions. One parent (who also had a child in the experimental group) encouraged her child to repeat the words as she pointed to them. Only two parents talked to the child about the story's topic.
The AEAs reported that participation in the project had been a great learning experience. They liked the inclusion of Koori stories in the books used in the program. All agreed that the storage box was good for keeping the books clean and organised, as well as giving the child a sense of ownership of the materials. The idea of using audio-tapes to support parent book-reading was good, though some commented that the books should be read by experienced readers with a pace that was not too quick and left enough time for the child to turn the page.
While the AEAs and parents liked the home visits (the AEAs felt it was ‘more personal' to meet the parents at home), the group format that began in the homework centre also seemed to have been very effective. It gave parents an opportunity to share ideas and experiences about the program and watch others working with their children, while the children could watch others modelling appropriate behaviour for the different activities. A sense of camaraderie evolved among the homework centre parents, even though their children attended different schools. All found participation in group activities an unusual experience. Delivering the program to the small group of parents was efficient, with one AEA working with five families at the same time rather than one at a time. The group intervention model, together with the involvement of Indigenous staff and members of the children's community, was consistent with the factors identified by McRae et al. (2000) as contributing to the progress of Indigenous children in the first years at school.
Discussion
Quantitative assessment of the children's receptive language suggested a slight reduction in the gap between their age-equivalent test scores and chronological age over the intervention period, although there was wide variation in the scores of individual children. The receptive language skills of many of the children remained below the level expected for their chronological age.
Two interesting trends are evident in the children's pre- and post-test listening comprehension scores:
- Children who reported that they had lots of books at home achieved higher listening comprehension scores at the pre-test than children who said they did not have many books at home.
- The greatest change in listening comprehension was achieved by children who did not have many books at home.
This pattern of change, where the most gains are seen among children who received the least stimulation prior to intervention, is frequently encountered in early childhood intervention programs. Participation in a program such as Bridging the Gap provides an opportunity for at-risk children to ‘catch up' prior to formal instruction in reading. The gains that can be achieved by environmentally advantaged children are often more limited.
By the end of the intervention, almost three-quarters of the children's WDRT reading ages were at or above their chronological age, although some children in the group continued to be at risk in literacy. Positive changes in non-standardised aspects of early literacy occurred in letter identification and listening comprehension, two areas in which the children scored poorly at pre-test.
The project had a number of important features. The focus was to help parents to implement shared reading of age-appropriate books as a means of linking children's literacy experiences at home with the school's early reading program. The books, games, audio-tapes and tape-recorder used in the program became the property of the children and their families. Qualitative assessment conducted within the study suggested that the books and other resources provided as part of the program were very important for both children and parents, particularly those parents who did not read or did not enjoy reading. The children's self-esteem was enhanced by their ownership of these resources. Parents were taught a range of shared-reading techniques that were previously unfamiliar to most of the group, some of whom were themselves weak or non-readers. The project provided an opportunity for positive ongoing interaction between the AEAs and the families of Indigenous students, both at school and (in some cases) at home. Previously, Indigenous parents often became involved with the AEAs only as a result of problems at school. Members of the local Indigenous community also participated in the project, selecting the books to be used in the program, illustrating some stories, and recording the stories on audio-tape.
Conclusion
Overall, results reported from implementation of the Bridging the Gap project suggest that the project had a positive impact on children's experiences with books at home; on child-parent interactions with books; on home-school links; and on the children's early literacy skills, their self-esteem, interest in books and attitude to school. It also had a positive impact on Jarara and the AEAs, particularly in the provision of support for Indigenous children's acquisition of literacy in the first year at school and beyond. The project provided a model which, with some modifications, could be implemented more widely by the AEAs to help young Indigenous children and their families in the early stages of learning to read.
Some specific findings from the project can be identified. For example, the resources used in similar programs should be developed in consultation with members of the children's family and community. Audio-tapes should be of high quality and recorded under carefully controlled conditions. Well-known identities, as well as family members, could be approached to record the stories on audio-tape, and the stories could include books published through Indigenous agencies.
Programs such as Bridging the Gap are particularly important for children from Indigenous backgrounds who often arrive at school lacking the knowledge and skills needed to progress satisfactorily. Alternative models that should be evaluated include a group format, which may be more cost-effective than intervention delivered individually. Other possible models include programs for four-year-olds provided either individually at home or in a group setting in the months prior to school entry.
The long-term impact of initiatives such as the project described here can be demonstrated only through continued monitoring of children's progress in literacy and related areas of the curriculum across the school years. Such studies can be difficult to implement because of a number of factors. For example, variables that can affect the progress of an intervention program include unintentional changes over time in the program being implemented, the cost of conducting longitudinal research, and inevitable delays in publishing results. Data reported from studies of the long-term outcome of programs such as Head Start (e.g. Love et al., 2005; Zigler & Styfco, 2000) demonstrate the difficulties associated with longitudinal research, but also the value of such research reports for those involved in the provision of intervention programs. These studies add to our accumulating knowledge and understanding of the strategies that are effective in supporting the progress of children who are at risk of failure in aspects of literacy within the regular school system.
Bridging the Gap has continued to operate in Western Sydney, funded by the Catholic Schools Office, Parramatta Diocese. In 2007, the AEAs participated in professional learning seminars, conducted by the Chief Investigator, on reading acquisition and how to teach children to read. They are now implementing individual intervention programs to at-risk Indigenous students (Kindergarten to Year 6).
References
Alamprese, J. A. (2004). Understanding adult education in family literacy programs. In B. H. Wasik (Ed.), Handbook of family literacy (pp. 253-269). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Al Otaiba, S. (2004). Weaving moral elements and research-based practices in inclusive classrooms using shared book reading techniques. Early Child Development and Care, 174(6), 575-589.
Braithwaite, J. (1983). Explorations in early childhood education. Hawthorn, Victoria: ACER.
Britto, P. R., Brooks-Gunn, J., & Griffin, T. M. (2006). Maternal reading and teaching patterns: Associations with school readiness in African American families. Reading Research Quarterly, 41(1), 68-89.
Bryant, D., & Wasik, B. H. (2004). Home visiting and family literacy programs. In B. H. Wasik (Ed.), Handbook of family literacy (pp. 329-346). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Burgess, S. R., Hecht, S. A., & Lonigan, C. J. (2002). Relations of the home literacy environment (HLE) to the development of reading-related abilities: A one-year longitudinal study. Reading Research Quarterly, 37(4), 408-426.
Cain, K. (1996). Story knowledge and comprehension skill. In C. Cornoldi & J. Oakhill (Eds.), Reading comprehension difficulties
Center, Y. (2005). Beginning reading: A balanced approach to literacy instruction in the first three years at school. Crows Nest, NSW: Allen & Unwin. (pp. 167-192). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Clay, M. M. (1993). Reading recovery: A guidebook for teachers in training. Portsmouth, NH: Heineman.
Dunn, L. M. & Dunn, L. M. (1995). Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test-Revised. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Services.
Department of Families, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs (FaCSIA) (2006). Stronger families and communities strategy (SFCS) 2004-2009: Communities for children. Retrieved 24 October 2006, www.facs.gov.au/facsinternet.nsf/aboutfacs/programs/sfsc-communities
Field, H. & Walsh, J. (1989). Learning to listen and remember – A story-telling program. Sydney: Macquarie University Special Education Centre.
Fuligni, A. S. & Brooks-Gunn, J. (2004). Early childhood intervention in family literacy programs. In B. H. Wasik(Ed.) Handbook of family literacy (pp. 117-136). Mahwah, NJ: Laurence Erlbaum.
Healey, M. (1988). Home-based teaching in Mount Druitt. In M. Pieterse, S. Bochner, & S. Bettison (Eds.), (1988). Early Intervention for children with disabilities (pp. 207-217). Sydney: Macquarie University.
Lazar, L. & Darlington, R. (1982). Lasting effects of early education: A report of the consortium for longitudinal studies. Monographs for the Society for Research in Child Development, 47(2 & 3, Serial No. 195).
Lonigan, C. J. (2006). Development, assessment, and promotion of literacy skills. Early Education and Development, 17(1), 91-114.
Lonigan, C. J. (2004). Emergent literacy skills and family literacy. In B. H. Wasik, (Ed.), Handbook of family literacy (pp. 57-81). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Love, J. M. K., Kisker, E. E., Ross, C., Raikes, H., Constantine, J., Boiller, K., Brooks-Gunn, J., Chazan-Cohen, R., Tarullo, L. B., Brady-Smith, C., Fuligni, A. S., Schochet, P. Z., Paulsell, D., & Vogel, C. (2005). The effectiveness of early Head Start for 3-year-old children and their parents: Policy and programs. Developmental Psychology, 41(6), 885-901.
Mansell, J., Evans, M. A., & Hamilton-Hulak, L. (2005). Developmental changes in parents' use of miscue feedback during shared book reading. Reading Research Quarterly, 40(3), 294-317.
McRae, D., Ainsworth, G., Cumming, J., Hughes, P., Mackay, T., Pr, K., Rowland, M., Warhurst, J., Woods, D., & Zbar, V. (2000). What works? Explorations in improving outcomes for Indigenous students. Canberra: Australian Curriculum Studies Association and National Curriculum Service.
National Review of Education for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander People (1995). Final report. Canberra: DEET.
Purcell-Gates, V. (1996). Stories, coupons, and the TV guide: Relationships between home literacy experiences and emergent literacy knowledge. Reading Research Quarterly, 31(4), 406-428.
Purcell-Gates, V. (2004). Family literacy as the site for emerging knowledge of written language. In Wasik B. H. (Ed.), Handbook of family literacy (pp. 101-115). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
SCRGSP (Steering Committee for the Review of Government Service Provision) 2007. Overcoming Indigenous Disadvantage: Key Indicators 2007. Canberra: Producivity Commission.
Senechal, M., Lefevre, J., Thomas, E. M., & Daley, K. (1998). Differential effects of home literacy experiences on the development of oral and written language. Reading Research Quarterly, 33(1), 96-116.
Senechal, M. (2006). Testing the Home Literacy Model: Parent involvement in kindergarten is differentially related to Grade 4 reading comprehension, fluency, spelling, and reading for pleasure. Scientific Studies of Reading, 10(10), 59-87.
Tangel, D. M., & Blachman, B. A. (1995). Effect of phoneme awareness instruction on the invented spelling of first-grade children: A one year follow-up. Journal of Reading Behaviour, 27(2), 153-185.
Turnbull, D. (2002). Monitoring second language development using the bandscales for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander learners. Brisbane: Education Queensland, Bandscales for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Learners Project.
Waddington, N. J. (1998). Waddington diagnostic reading and spelling tests: A book of diagnostic procedures for children with learning difficulties. Inglefarm, SA: Waddington Educational Resources.
Wasik, B. H., Bond, M. A., & Waclawiw, I. (1995). Early learning: Teacher's manual for prekindergarten and kindergarten. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University.
Wasik, B. H., & Herrmann, S. (2004). Family literacy: History, concepts, services. In B. H Wasik (Ed.), Handbook of family literacy (pp. 3-22). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Westheimer, M. (2003). Parents making a difference: International research on the Home Instruction for Preschool Youngsters (HIPPY) program. ERIC Document Reproduction Services, No. ED 476 912.
Zigler, E, & Styfco, S. J. (2000). Pioneering steps (and fumbles) in developing a federal preschool intervention. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 20(2), 67-70.
Zubrick, S. (2006). Improving the educational experiences of Aboriginal children and young people. Western Australian Aboriginal Health Survey Volume 3. Perth: Curtin University of Technology.
Australian Journal of Early Childhood – Volume 33 No 4 December 2008, pp. 9–16.
Don't forget, Australian Journal of Early Childhood is tax deductible for early childhood professionals
You can read more from this issue of the Australian Journal of Early Childhood now.
AJEC is changing its name ...
To reflect its diverse readership and commitment to international early childhood debate,
the Australian Journal of Early Childhood will soon be changing its name to
the Australasian Journal of Early Childhood. Follow the link to learn more. |
If you liked this article, you can 'social bookmark' it with others who might be searching for good content on early childhood. This means you can share your favourite webpages with others, or just keep an online list of your bookmarks so you can access them on any computer.
Read more about social bookmarks
|
|
