Family Literacy: Program effects and implementationquality Roel van Steensel KohnstammInstituteforEducational Research University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Goal • Short overview of recent review studies oneffects of familyliteracy programs. • Discussimplicationsfor research, practice, and policy.
Some context • The role of the home environment: • Childrenlearnfromexploring, observing and taking part in literacyactivities at home (Teale & Sulzby, 1986).
Some context • The role of the home environment: • Childrenlearnfromexploring, observing and taking part in literacyactivities at home (Teale & Sulzby, 1986).
Some context • The role of the home environment: • Childrenlearnfromexploring, observing and taking part in literacyactivities at home (Teale & Sulzby, 1986).
Some context • The role of the home environment: • Childrenlearnfromexploring, observing and taking part in literacyactivities at home (Teale & Sulzby, 1986).
Some context • There is variability in frequency and qualityof literacyactivities at home. • Thisvariability is related to: • Socio-economic status. • Ethnic/cultural background. (E.g., Bus, Leseman, & Keultjens, 2001; Van Steensel, 2006) • However, there is no 1-to-1 correspondence (Van Steensel, 2006)
Some context • To stimulate the quality of the home literacy environment • Family literacy (FL) programs Parent-childactivities Parent training
Family literacy research • Past two decades: various studies intoeffects of FL programs. • Meta-analyses (quantitativereviews of effect studies). • Review of reviews (Van Steensel et al., 2012).
Observation 1 • FL programs are effective (seealsoCarpentieri et al., 2011) …
Observation 1 • FL programs are effective (seealsoCarpentieri et al., 2011) … • Butnotfor all families. Small(er) effectsfor: • African-American/Hispanicchildren (Manz et al., 2010). • At-riskchildren (Mol et al., 2008; Van Steensel et al., 2011).
Observation 1 • Possibleexplanations: • Programs (mainlyshared reading) assumeinteractionskillsthatmaynotbe present. • Programs maynotreflect the value system of participating families. • Sénéchal & Young (2008): effectsforat-riskchildren of a skills-basedapproach.
Observation 2 • We knowlittleaboutimplementationquality of FL programs and itsrelationwith program effects.
Observation 2 • Implementationquality/program fidelity (Powell & Carey, 2012): • Delivery: is the intended content offered and how? Frequency and quality of parent training. • Receipt: is the intended content received and how? Parents’ attendance and understanding of training. • Enactment: is the intended content transferred to children? Frequency and quality of parent-childactivities.
Observation 2 • Meta-analysis Van Steensel et al. (2011): • 12 of 30 studies providedinformationonimplementationquality. • Mostlysuperficialmeasures. • Only 1 study: systematicobservations of activities. • No analysis of moderating effects of implementationquality. • Paradox: implementationquality is likely to becrucial!
Implications • For research: • We need to know more aboutimplementationquality, particularly in at-risk families, and howit is related to program effects. • We need to know more aboutwhat types of programs are (in)effectiveforwhat types of families and why. • We need to conduct more studies on a European level. SeealsoCarpentieri et al. (2011).
Implications 2. For practice and policy: • Invest in FL programs and tune FL activities to activities in (early) education. • Maximizeculturalvalidity: (mainstream) educational goals of FL programs shouldbeconnectedwith families’ valuesystems and programs shouldbetuned to families’ languagesituation. • Involvecommunities in program development and implementation as well as in reachingparents. Seealso: Blok et al. (2006), Carpentieri et al. (2011), Manz et al. (2011), Van Steensel et al. (2012).
Examplefrom the Netherlands • Large-scale research project around “Earlyeducation at home” (VVE Thuis) program: • Program: • For toddlers and kindergarteners. • Combinedfamily- and school-based program. • Materials in Dutch as well as in home language. • Support byteachers and (to someextent) byethniccommunity support staff. • Research (2012-2016): • Studyinto program effects. • Studyintoimplementationquality and moderating effects. • Intensifying program withICT-basedactivities.
Thankyou! Contact: RvanSteensel@kohnstamm.uva.nl
References Blok, H., Fukkink, R. G., Gebhardt, E. C., & Leseman, P. P. M. (2005). The relevance of delivery mode and other programme characteristics for the effectiveness of early childhood intervention. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 29, 35–47. Bus, A., Leseman, P., & Keultjes, P. (2000). Joint book reading across cultures: A comparison of Surinamese-Dutch, Turkish-Dutch, and Dutch parent-childdyads. Journal of Literacy Research, 32, 53-76. Carpentieri, J., Fairfax-Cholmeley, K., Litster, J., & Vorhaus, J. (2011). Family literacy in research: Using parental support initiatives to enhance literacy development. London: NRDC, Institute of Education. Manz, P. H., Hughes, C., Barnabas, E., Bracaliello, C., & Ginsburg-Block, M. (2010). A descriptive review and meta-analysis of family-based emergent literacy interventions: To what extent is the research applicable to low-income, ethnic-minority or linguistically-diverse young children? Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 25, 409-431. Mol, S. E., Bus, A. G., De Jong, M. T., & Smeets, D. J. H. (2008). Added value of Dialogic parent-child book readings: A meta-analysis. Early Education and Development, 19, 7-26. Powell, D. R., & Carey, A. J. (2012). Approaches to program fidelity in family literacy research (pp. 387-400). In B. H. Wasik (Ed.), Handbook of Family Literacy. Second Edition. New York, NY: Routledge. Sénéchal, M., & Young, L. (2008). The effect of family literacy interventions on children’s acquisition of reading from kindergarten to Grade 3: A meta-analytic review. Review of Educational Research, 78, 880-907. Teale, W., & Sulzby, E. (1986). Emergentliteracy: Reading and writing. Norwood, NJ: Ablex. Van Steensel, R. (2006). Relations betweensocio-cultural factors, the home literacy environment, and children’sliteracydevelopment in the firstyears of primaryeducation. Journal of Research in Reading, 29, 367-382. Van Steensel, R., Herppich, S., McElvany, N., & Kurvers, J. (2012). How effective are family literacy programs for children’s literacy skills? A review of the meta-analytic evidence (pp. 135-148). In B. H. Wasik (Ed.), Handbook of Family Literacy. Second Edition. New York, NY: Routledge. Van Steensel, R., McElvany, N., Kurvers, J., & Herppich, S. (2011). How effective are family literacy programs? Results of a meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 81, 69-96.
