University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

The home environment and Latino preschoolers' emergent literacy skills

(USC Thesis Other)

The home environment and Latino preschoolers' emergent literacy skills

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content

THE HOME ENVIRONMENT AND LATINO PRESCHOOLERS’
EMERGENT LITERACY SKILLS

by

Carlyn Janet Carter

A Thesis Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
MASTER OF ARTS
(PSYCHOLOGY)

December 2007

Copyright 2007 Carlyn Janet Carter

Table of Contents

List of Tables
List of Figures
Abstract

The Home Environment
Emergent Literacy Skills in English Speaking Children
Oral Language Skills
Phonological Processing
Print Knowledge
Emergent Literacy in Spanish-English Bilingual
Children
The Home Learning Environment
Socio-Economic Factors
Literacy Habits
Parent Involvement
Maternal Motivation
Task-value of Reading
General Self-efficacy
Parenting Self-efficacy
Expectations
Aims
Methods
Participants
Child Measures
Maternal Measures
Procedures
Results
Discussion
References

iii
iv
v

1
3
3
4
5

5
6
7
8
9
9
10
11
11
11
14
14
14
15
17
20
21
28
31

ii

List of Tables

Table 1: Summary of the Factor Analysis (Principal
Axis Factoring)

Table 2: Ranges, means, and standard deviations for
demographic information

Table 3: Means and Standard Deviations of the
Measured Variables of Interest

Table 4: Correlations among the Maternal Motivation,
HLE, and Emergent Literacy Skills Variables

23

25

26

28

iii

List of Figures
Figure 1: Reading Motivation Model
Figure 2: Path Model of Maternal Motivation, HLE and
Emergent Literacy Skills

3

29

iv

Abstract
This mixed-methods study focused on Latino children's emergent literacy
skills and the relation to their home environments. The first aim was to measure
the effects of mothers’ perceived motivation to teach their children to read on the
children’s emergent literacy skills measured at the beginning of the preschool
year. The second aim was to investigate child-parent reading behaviors in the
home as a function of mother’s perceived motivation. These two aims were
addressed with a sample of 225 Latino children who were enrolled in head start
programs and their mothers. The results from the structural equation modeling
indicated that mothers who were motivated to teach their children to read
provided a richer home literacy environment, which in turn yielded higher
emergent literacy skill scores for the children. This study reaffirms the importance
of parental and home influences on children's early skill development both in
terms of providing print materials and parents' involvement in specific reading-
related activities. It also suggests that efforts to involve parents in a meaningful
way and helping parents to engage in key reading-related activities at home might
increase print access. Finally, this study documented the strong parental
aspirations for their children’s success, in contrast to some past perceptions that
these parents are unconcerned with their children’s academic success.

v

1
The Home Environment and Latino Preschoolers’ Emergent Literacy Skills
Many low income and ethnic minority enter public school poorly prepared
and consequently, are at high risk for school failure. A possible contributing
factor to children’s lack of school readiness is the support children receive from
their home environment. On the other hand, some children do succeed yet it
remains unclear what aspects of the home environment make a difference in
children’s pre-literacy skill development and their later school success.
Therefore, the aim of this proposed study is to examine home environment factors
that may influence the development of children’s emergent literacy skills.
Research shows that pre-literacy skills are strong predictors of later academic
performance. Children who do not have a firm foundation in pre-literacy skills
are at risk for reading and school failure later.
The home environment is particularly important to examine because,
theoretically it can be manipulated to optimize children’s overall learning
experiences and can provide them with resources specific to their needs. A
common view is that learning in the home starts from birth; however, families
vary in their attitudes toward their responsibility for supporting their children’s
early literacy development, their motivation for doing so, and their perceived self-
efficacy. Previous studies suggest that parents play a pivotal role in shaping their
children’s learning environment by selecting appropriate activities, reading
materials, and toys (Baker & Scher, 2002; Rogoff, 1998). Moreover, the early
acquisition of literacy skills has been associated with parents’ own reading

2
abilities, literacy habits, and motivation. Unfortunately, financially disadvantaged
families may not be able to afford these resources. Ethnic minority children from
different linguistic and cultural backgrounds seem to have the most risk factors in
their home learning environments.
The broad goal of the proposed study is to examine the characteristics of
children’s home environments and how they are associated with their basic skill
levels at initial entry to their preschool at age four. More specifically, the first aim
is to measure the effects of mother’s perceived motivation on children’s emergent
literacy skills measured at the beginning of the preschool year (time 1). The
second aim is to investigate child-parent reading behaviors in the home as a
function of mother’s perceived motivation. Mother’s reading behaviors,
motivation, and self-efficacy were measured via questionnaires. Children’s
emergent literacy skills were measured using standardized assessments
administered at the outset of the preschool year. The model below (Figure 1) was
used to address these aims.

3
Figure 1
Reading Motivation Model
HLE
Literacy
Skills
Task
Values
Parents'
Lit. Habits
Parent
Involvement
Child
Interest
Oral
Language
Phonological
Awareness
Print
Knowledge
Parenting
Efficacy
Usefulness
Attainment
Intrinsic

Emergent Literacy Skills in English Speaking Children
Research has isolated three key emergent literacy skills, which are
precursors to children's success in learning to decode: oral language, phonological
processing, and print knowledge (Whitehurst & Lonigan, 2000).
Oral Language Skills. As a crucial emergent literacy skill, oral language forms the
foundation for children's early reading abilities. Individual differences in oral
language skills early on are correlated with later differences in reading abilities
(Butler, Marsh, Sheppard & Sheppard, 1985; Scarborough, 1989; Share, Jorm,
MacLean, & Mathews, 1984). Children who develop oral language skills and
large vocabularies also have higher reading scores (Bishop & Adams, 1990;
Pikulski & Tobin, 1989). The National Research Council recognized the
significance of vocabulary size as a vital oral language skill (Snow, Burns, &

4
Griffin, 1998). In addition, increasing young children's oral language skills and
vocabulary could prevent most reading problems (see also NICHD, 2000).
Poor language skills are specific to low-income households because they
often have less developed vocabularies than children from families with higher
incomes (Ninio, 1980; McCormick & Mason, 1986). English language learners
(ELLs) who first language is other than standard English also experience
difficulties in developing these precursor skills and have lower rates of literacy
than do English speaking and more economically advantaged children (Alexander
& Entwisle, 1988).
Phonological Processing. Research on phonological processing skills in
young children has linked these skills to literacy acquisition (Adams, 1990;
Wagner & Torgesen, 1987). According to Whitehurst and Lonigan (2000),
phonological processing involves developing a sensitivity to the sounds in spoken
language. Three phonological processing skills necessary for the development of
reading are: phonological sensitivity, phonological access, and phonological
memory (Wagner & Torgesen, 1987).
Phonological sensitivity refers to the ability to detect and manipulate
sounds in oral language, such as identifying words that rhyme, blending syllables
or phonemes together to form a word, or deleting syllables or phonemes from a
spoken word to form a new word (Anthony, et al., 2000). For English-speaking
monolingual children, phonological sensitivity begins with and awareness of large

5
units of sounds and progresses to smaller and more abstract units (Lonigan et al.,
1998).
Phonological memory refers to short-term memory for sound-based
information. Phonological memory allows an individual to devote more cognitive
resources to decoding and comprehension by enabling the individual to maintain
an accurate representation of the phonemes associated with the letters of a word
while decoding Lonigan et al., 1998). Phonological access refers to the efficiency
of retrieval of phonological information from permanent memory, which
determines the ease of decoding (Whitehurst & Lonigan, 2001).
Print Knowledge. Knowledge about letters and the conventions and
functions of print are known as print knowledge. The ability to recognize and
distinguish letters, is one of the best predictors of later reading performance
(Adams, 1990). Print knowledge allows children to manipulate sound units. It also
influences the development of phonological sensitivity before and after children
are taught to read. Children with a vast print knowledge perform better at reading
and comprehending the stories they read (Tummer, Herriman, & Nesdale, 1988).
Emergent Literacy in Spanish-English Bilingual Children
Bilingualism is defined as the ability to speak and read in two languages.
At the individual level, it is categorized into two types: simultaneous and
sequential. Simultaneous bilingualism refers to those who acquire two languages
at the same time, or learners of two first languages. They have exposure to two
languages and are living in homes where they communicate in both languages

6
(Hammer et al., 2003). Sequential bilinguals acquire one language after the other,
not at the same time (Watson, 1991). This is typical of most children who grow
up in Latino communities in the United States. They typically speak Spanish in
the home and in the community, yet are not extensively exposed to English until
they go to school.
At the social or cultural level, bilingualism is categorized into additive and
subtractive. This is based on the effect a second language has on the retention of
the first language (Lambert, 1975). Additive bilinguals can encounter a second
language and develop simultaneously in both languages (Gonzalez & Shallert,
1997) or they can learn the second language as enrichment while their native
language skills stay about the same (Lambert, 1975). This is typical of children
who are raised in Spanish-speaking countries and learn English as a second
language in school. Subtractive bilinguals acquire the second language but only at
the expense of the native language. Unfortunately, many children of immigrant
individuals in the United States experience subtractive bilingualism. With these
children, the native language lacks social and academic support and the dominant
culture influences which language is instead supported (in this case, English). The
present study will examine a sample of sequential bilinguals in a subtractive
environment. To understand factors that may contribute to differences in
children's baseline emergent literacy skill development, our model considers
aspects of the home learning environment, and mother’s perceived motivation.

7
The Home Learning Environment
The home learning environment is essential for understanding within-
group differences in reading success. The combination of parent-child reading
activities and parents’ modeling of literacy-related behaviors in the home seem to
improve the emergent literacy skills of children (Hart & Risley, 1995; Walker,
Greenwood, Mart & Carta, 1994). The recent Early Childhood Longitudinal
Study (NCES, 2004) documented three family risk factors for children’s academic
achievement: when the primary language of the home is other than English, when
the household income is below the poverty line, and maternal education levels are
low. The more of these risk factors children have in their home literacy
environments, the more likely they will lag behind their same age peers. This
negative effect is especially accentuated if more than one factor is present and the
disadvantages become greater from kindergarten to the early elementary school
years.
Socio-Economic Factors. Many poverty related issues can lower chances
of children’s school success. For example, one study found that within the Latino
population, children’s letter achievement scores were lower for economically
disadvantaged children than for middle or upper class children (Stipek & Ryan,
1997). Minority children from low SES families began school with poorer
academic skills than more advantaged families and had difficulty catching up with
their more advantaged peers (Goldenberg, Reese, & Gallimore, 1992). The
reading difficulties that low SES children experienced were associated with poor
language skills, including print awareness, phonological awareness, oral language,

8
and story comprehension. SES has also been associated with aspects of the home
literacy environment. For example, in a study of low SES families Farver et al.
found that there were less reading materials in the home, more maternal stress,
and larger than average family sizes. Thus, because parents shape the
environment by selecting appropriate activities, reading materials, and toys
(Baker & Scher, 2002; Rogoff, 1998), disadvantaged families may lack resources
that are vital during the preschool years.
Literacy Habits. Children’s opportunities to participate in educational
activities in their homes may be related to their parents’ literacy habits (Heath,
1982). The common consensus of earlier research was that parents’ frequency of
reading for pleasure, the quality of their reading materials, and their value and
enjoyment of reading were related to children’s oral vocabulary and reading skills
(Clark, 1976; Durkin, 1966; Hansen, 1969). Perhaps adults’ perceptions of
reading are conveyed to their children through discussion and/or modeling.
Recent studies have found that the combination of parents’ literacy habits and the
types of literacy materials that are in the home, which may or may not be read
directly by the children in the home, are associated with the development of
children’s literacy skills (Elliot & Hewison, 1994). Farver et al. (2005) found
mothers' perceived parenting stress was directly associated with children's reading
scores and social functioning. The high perceived parenting stress might affect the
home literacy environment, which in turn may be associated with lower emergent

9
literacy scores and social functioning. Still, the findings highlight within-group
variations in the home literacy environments of low SES Latino families.
Parent Involvement
A qualitative analysis by Bus, van IJzendoorn, and Pellegrini (1995)
showed that parent-child joint book reading was one of the most important
activities for developing skills needed for reading success. The amount of literacy
socialization in the home was positively correlated with children’s basic reading
competencies (Serpell, Sonnenshein, Baker, & Ganapathy, 2002). Not only is
reading to children necessary for the development of literacy skills, but the social
interaction between parent and child can have an impact. The quality and quantity
of reading interactions between a parent and child are essential for the
socialization of literacy and proficiency in tests of literacy skills. Until recently,
most studies have stressed the frequency of reading as an indication of adequate
literacy development (Scarborough & Dobrich, 1994). More recently, however,
an emphasis on the quality of these reading interactions has been emphasized.
Senechel and Le Fevre (2002) found that parent involvement in teaching children
about reading and writing words was related to the development of early literacy
skills. These early literacy skills directly predicted word reading at the end of
grade 1 and indirectly predicted reading in grade 3.
Maternal Motivation
Very little is known about mothers’ reading motivation and the academic
functioning of their pre-school-aged children. However, school-aged children
have been studied extensively with regard to intrinsic motivation and extrinsic

10

motivational influences (i.e. peers, teachers, and peers). Children younger than
grade school are rarely studied regarding motivation and academic functioning.
Some recent studies on reading motivation, however, have been conducted with
children younger than those in first grade (Serpell et al., 2002; Sonnenschein &
Munsterman, 2002; Baker & Scher, 2002), showing that mothers do in fact
influence children’s motivation and consequent reading skills at this age.
Task-value of Reading. Components of maternal motivation include role
involvement, task values and efficacy. Task value is very simply the importance
one places on the exposure to and completion of a specific task (Battle et al.,
1965, 1966). Maternal task value refers to the level of importance a mother places
on the task. In this case, the child’s ability to read is the task the mother rates
based on a series of questions. It appears that parents who place a high value on
reading may get a similar response from their children, especially when the value
is associated with a pleasurable experience. In one recent study Baker and Scher
(2002) found that children whose parents said that reading for pleasure was
important scored higher scores on a reading motivation scale. Parents may shape
their children’s interests by providing an environment that fits individual interests.
If the child is interested in reading and the parent fails to provide supporting
materials (books, etc.), then the child may shift focus or adapt to the lack of
stimulation instead of gaining interest in literacy activities.
General Self-efficacy. General maternal self-efficacy is the willingness to
act based on one’s confidence and perception of ability (Bandura, 1997).

11

Alternatively, self-efficacy is defined as the individuals’ perception of his or her
current competence at a given activity (Eccles et al., 1983). The Self-efficacy
scale (Sherer & Adams, 1983) is the most recent and reliable test of self-efficacy
to date. It measures the one’s willingness to initiate behavior, his or her
willingness to expend effort in completing the behavior, and his or her persistence
in the face of adversity.
Parenting Self-efficacy. Although general self-efficacy is vital, parenting
self-efficacy is a separate and almost more important measure to examine when
looking at parent-child reading interactions. Parenting self-efficacy determines
one’s ability to raise and/or teach their children. The Parental Self-efficacy scale
measures perceptions of one’s effectiveness as a parent (Izzo, Weiss, Shanahan, &
Rodriguez-Brown, 2000). This measure has been previously used with first-
generation Mexican immigrant mothers (Izzo, 2000; Izzo et al., 2000) and with
Head Start families from diverse ethnic backgrounds (Machida, Taylor, & Kim,
2002).
Expectations. Belief in one’s ability or self-efficacy is distinguished
conceptually from expectancies for success, with ability beliefs focused on
present ability as expectancy focused on the future (Wigfield & Eccles, 2000).
Bandura (1997) comprehensively addressed expectancies in his discussion of self-
efficacy. He distinguished between efficacy expectations, or the individual’s
belief that he or she can accomplish a task, and outcome expectancies, or the
belief that a given action will lead to a given outcome, which was also noted

12

earlier by Pajares (1996). Bandura continued to argue that specific measures of
belief (in this case, expectations of success) predict behavior best. Though his
measurements are quite specific, they veer from the larger model of motivation
and only focus on beliefs. Still, his recognition of these constructs has contributed
to modern conceptions of motivation and other researchers have emphasized
expectancies as well.
In young readers, parents are still the most important influence and their
perceptions of their child’s abilities are highly related to the child’s actual
measured abilities. Thus, it appears that maternal reading motivation, including
beliefs of efficacy, value, expectations, task-value, and role, all can affect the
quality of the home learning environment and may also facilitate the development
of early literacy skills. In addition, these may be life-long results. In Fredrick’s
(2002) longitudinal study, the parents’ initial ratings of their children’s abilities
were associated with the mean level differences and variations in children’s
beliefs about their abilities over time.
Since Atkinson’s original conception of the model, many modern studies
show that a child must have both confidence in one’s abilities and value the thing
he or she is doing in order to achieve well (Eccles, Blumenfeld, & Wigfield,
1984). Wigfield and Eccles (2000), found that expectations and task values are the
most important components of motivation to achieve. Interestingly, some studies
have strengthened the notion that children tend to value tasks in which they can
succeed (e.g., Battle, 1966; Chapman & Tunmer, 1995; Eccles et al., 1983; Eccles

13

& Wigfield, 1995; Wigfield and Eccles, 2000), explaining an consistent finding
that task value improves achievement. This also explains the bidirectional
relationship (or snowballing effect) that achievement and task value have. It is
possible that expectancies for success and actual achievement have the same
bidirectional relationship. The present study was informed by all of these
conceptual models. Still, the theoretical framework primarily came out of
Wigfield and Eccles (2002)
Expectancy-Value Theory of Achievement Motivation. This article aimed
to explain why a child is motivated to achieve and the authors found that
expectancies for success and subjective task values are the most important. The
present theoretical model aims to answer the question: what can mothers do in
order to motivate the child to achieve (namely to achieve high scores on emergent
literacy assessments). Or in other words: how can the mother shape her child early
on, in order to maximize his or her literacy skills and school readiness? The
current model assumes that the mother’s perceived motivation to teach her child
to read will influence the home literacy environment, which will in turn influence
the child’s emergent literacy skills. These children were examined at initial entry
to their preschool at age four, which is a time when parent-child book reading is
most crucial (Bus, van IJzendoorn, and Pellegrini, 1995).
Recent studies have shown that within a low-income population, white mothers
read to their children more than do Hispanic or African American mothers (e.g.
Raikes et al.), adding to the deficit model of minority families. Because some

14

studies (Greaney & Hegarty, 1987; Neuman, 1986) suggest that what parents do
in the home is a better predictor of a child’s interest than SES, which is typically
considered the major disadvantage in the home learning environment, the current
study aims to explore the advantageous and valuable aspects of maternal
motivation and the home literacy environment within a Latino population in a
metropolitan area.
Aims. The first specific aim was to measure the effects of maternal
motivation on children’s emergent literacy skills measured at the beginning of the
preschool year (time 1). The second specific aim was to investigate child-parent
reading behaviors in the home as a function of maternal motivation. An SEM
model was used to conceptualize the broad research goal and to test the specific
paths between variables.
Methods
Overview
This study represents an analysis of data that were collected in a large 5-
year intervention designed to increase the early literacy skills of low income
Latino and African American preschool children. The current study analyzed a
subset of the data that were collected with the Latino families in years 2 and 3
who completed the questionnaires.
Participants
The participants were 225 Latino preschoolers and their mothers. The
children ranged in age from 37-60 months (M = 50.77, SD = 4.84; 199 males, 167

15

females) and were enrolled in several Head Start centers in a large metropolitan
west-coast city. The language of the home was primarily Spanish, although
children attended head start programs where English was the dominant language
of instruction. Eighty-three percent the mothers reported speaking only Spanish
in their homes, whereas 17% reported speaking both languages in their homes. All
of the Latino children were born in the U.S., whereas only 16% of their parents
were U.S.-born. Most parents were born in Mexico (63%) or Central America
(31%), and they immigrated to the U.S. from one to 45 years ago (mothers: 1 - 35
years; M = 17.99; SD = 7.03; fathers: 1- 45 years; M = 18.81; SD = 6.64).
Child Measures
Oral Language. Children’s oral language was assessed with the 68-item
Expressive Communication subscale of the Preschool Language Scale 4 (PLS-4;
Zimmerman, Steiner, & Pond, 1992) Children are asked to respond to direct
questions using pictures and objects (e.g., A child is shown a picture of gloves
and asked Why do we wear gloves?;) For the ages tested, Cronbach’s alphas
reported in the test manuals ranged from .92 to .95.
Phonological Awareness and Print Knowledge Skills. Children’s
phonological awareness and print knowledge were measured using the blending,
elision, and print knowledge subtests of the Preschool Comprehensive Test of
Phonological and Print Processing (P-CTOPPP; Lonigan, Wagner, Torgesen, &
Rashotte, 2002). The P-CTOPPP is the development version of the Test of

16

Preschool Early Literacy (TOPEL; Lonigan, Wagner, Torgesen, & Rashotte,
2007). The tasks are presented in groups of three items that increase in level of
difficulty from word blending and elision, syllable blending and elision, to sub-
syllable blending and elision. Children are asked to either point to a picture
(multiple-choice) or verbally generate the target word (free-response). They are
given two practice items and receive feedback on both practice items and the first
three test items only. The blending subtest consists of 21 items: 9 are multiple
choice and 12 are free response. Children were asked to blend words, syllables,
and phonemes to create real words (e.g., English: What word do these sounds
make: Bas - ket?; blending alpha = .83). The elision subtest consists of nine
multiple choice and nine free-response items where children are asked to remove
phonemes, syllables, or half of a compound word, and to determine the word that
remained (e.g., Say candy. Now, say candy without “dee”; elision alpha = .81).
Print Knowledge was measured using the P-CTOPPP print awareness
subtests. The print/processing/knowledge subtest consists of four picture-based
multiple choice items measuring knowledge of print concepts (e.g. “These are
pictures of a book. Which one shows the name of a book?”), letter discrimination
(e.g. “which one is a letter?”), word discrimination (e.g. “which can you read?”),
letter-sound identification (e.g. “Which one makes the /t/ sound?”), and four free
response letter-sound identification tasks (e.g. “what sound does this letter
make?”).

17
Phonological Access was measured using the P-CTOPPP rapid naming
subtests. In this task, children are presented with a sheet of paper with pictures of
four common objects (a car, a ball, a tree, and a dog) placed in four rows of six
pictures each. The position of the pictures varies from row to row. The child is
asked to name all the pictures on the card (starting from the left-hand side and
working toward the right) as fast as possible without making any errors or
skipping items. The same task is repeated with a different arrangement of items.
Their performance is timed in seconds and errors are pointed out and recorded,
though the timing is not interrupted to do so.
Phonological Memory was measured using the P-CTOPPP word span and
non-word repetition subtests. In the word span task, children are asked to repeat
increasing numbers of common words presented in sets of three (i.e. three single
words, then three items of two words each, etc.). Reponses are scored as correct
or incorrect, and testing is discontinued when the child gives three incorrect
responses within a three-item set. The non-word repetition task consists of the
presentation of made up words presented in increasing length, which the child has
to repeat. Responses are scored as incorrect or correct and testing ceases when the
examinee gives four consecutive incorrect responses.
Children’s Cognitive Ability. Cognitive Ability was assessed using the
Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale, 4
th
Edition (Thorndike, Hagen, & Sattler,
1986). The test includes the copying, pattern analysis, and bead memory subtests.
Maternal Measures

18
Each mother completed a demographic questionnaire, a Home Literacy
Environment Questionnaire, the General Self-Efficacy subscale of the Self-
Efficacy Scale (Sherer & Adams, 1983), and a Literacy-Related Task-Values
Scale (Wigfield & Eccles, 2000). The demographic questionnaire was completed
by the children’s primary caregiver and included questions about the parents’
occupation, education level, household composition, home language use, and
parent’s reading habits (Farver, unpublished measure). Demographic
Questionnaire. Each mother completed a demographic questionnaire, a Home
Literacy Environment Questionnaire, the General Self-Efficacy subscale of the
Self-Efficacy Scale (Sherer & Adams, 1983), and a Literacy-Related Task-Values
Scale (Wigfield & Eccles, 2000). The demographic questionnaire was completed
by the children’s primary caregiver
and included questions about the parents’ occupation, education level, household
composition, home language use, and parent’s reading habits (Farver, unpublished
measure).
The Home Literacy Environment Questionnaire. The Home Literacy
Environment Questionnaire (Lonigan & Farver, 2002) was patterned after the
survey developed by Payne, Whitehurst, and Angel (1994). During the pilot
phases of our work, the layout and organization of the questionnaire was
simplified to facilitate comprehension by adults with limited education and a
Spanish language version was developed. The resulting questionnaire does not
represent a conceptual or empirical advance over the existing measure but was
optimized for use with this specific sample. The questions were based on

19

conceptualizations as validated by Burgess et al. (2002). Two bilingual bicultural
individuals, using a standard forward and back translation method, completed
Spanish translations. Two translations were made separately and then compared
for accuracy. Disagreements were discussed and modifications were made
accordingly. Thirteen items were rated on a 7-point scale (1 = never; 7 = daily).
These included aspects of parents’ modeling of literacy activities (e.g., how often
do you read for fun and pleasure? α = .88), parents’ involvement in literacy-
related activities (e.g., how many times per week do you read to your child? α =
.84) and children’s interest in literacy (e.g., how many times per week does your
child ask to be read to? α = .83). Mothers were also asked to indicate the age in
months when they began reading to their child.
Parenting Self-Efficacy. To examine mothers' views of their effectiveness
as parents, mothers completed the Parental Self-Efficacy Scale (Izzo, Weiss,
Shanahan, & Rodriguez-Brown, 2000). This scale is comprised of five items
(e.g., “When things are going badly between my child and me, I keep trying until
things begin to change," and “I feel sure of myself as a mother.”) rated on a 4-
point scale (1=never; 4=always). This scale yielded a total score with a high
score indicating high parenting self-efficacy (α=. 67). Each mother had a
parenting self-efficacy score, which was a sub-scale of self-efficacy, one
independent variable of the model. This measure has been previously used with
first-generation Mexican immigrant mothers (Izzo, 2000; Izzo et al., 2000) and

20

with Head Start families from diverse ethnic backgrounds (Machida, Taylor, &
Kim, 2002). The inter-item reliability for the English version of this subscale was
(α= .80).
Literacy-Related Task-Values Scale. Mothers' literacy-related task-values
were assessed using a measure adopted from Wigfield and Eccles (2000) and
modified for this sample. Mothers’ were asked to rate the usefulness, attainment
value, and intrinsic value of literacy-related tasks they may or may not carry out
with their children. First, four items (e.g., “Compared to most of your other
parenting activities, how useful is it that you read with your child?”) were rated
on a 5-point scale (1=not at all useful; 5= very useful) and the total score created
the usefulness subscale. Second, the attainment value or the importance mothers’
ascribe to several literacy-related tasks were rated on a 5-point scale (1= not
important; 5 very important) and the total score of four items (e.g., “Compared to
most of your other parenting activities, how important is it for you to be good in
reading with your child?”) were computed to create the attainment subscale. The
intrinsic value or their interest in engaging in these literacy-related tasks with their
children were also rated on a 5-point scale (1= boring 5= interesting) and the sum
of four items (e.g., “How much do you like reading with your child?”) created the
intrinsic value subscale. The three subscales yielded a total score of literacy-
related task value, with a high score indicating high literacy-related task values
(α=. 90). The three subscales were summed to yield a total score of literacy-
related task values, which was one independent variable in the model. The

21

unmodified version of this measure has been previously used with lower to
middle class elementary school children (Wigfield, Eccles, Yoon, Harold,
Arbreton, & Blumenfeld, 1997).
Procedures
Parents were informed about the project and their written consent was
obtained during meetings held at the preschool centers. The preschool staff and
parents were told that we wanted to learn about children’s readiness for school.
Participation in the study was voluntary and was limited to children who were not
receiving resource help for speech and language delays.
Data were collected by a trained research team made up of graduate and
undergraduate psychology students who were bilingual. In late October, after the
preschool enrollment was finalized and children were familiar with the setting and
the research assistants, all children were administered assessments. Across all
assessments, children’s responses were scored as correct = 1 or incorrect = 0.
Credit was given only if the child produced the correct answer in the language
being assessed. Within each skill area, tasks were summed to create composite
scores for the blending, elision, and print knowledge sub-tests of the P-CTOPPP.
Results
Preliminary Analyses
This study used both descriptive and inferential statistics to explore the
relationships among the selected variables. SPSS version 15.0 was used to
analyze quantitative data for the following statistical procedures: (a) descriptive

22

statistics, which included means and standard deviations of demographic
variables; (b) a reliability analysis, using a .70 cutoff as a criteria; and (c) a
correlation analysis to show the relationships between parents’ motivation to
teach reading, home literacy factors and their children’s emergent literacy skills.
SPSS AMOS 7 was used to perform a structural equation model (SEM) to
determine if mother’s perceived motivation and home factors predicted children’s
emergent literacy skills.
Exploratory Factor Analysis. This variable reduction procedure was
performed in order to examine the number of factors that emerged from the Home
Literacy Environment Questionnaire that would potentially show a strong
correlation with both mother’s perceived motivation factors and emergent literacy
factors. Specifically, an exploratory analysis was performed to assess the
dimensionality of the home literacy environment, with the intent to explore the
underlying factor structure of a set of measured variables. The 23 items used to
measure the home literacy environment correlate fairly well and none of the
correlation coefficients are particularly large. The KMO statistic was .889. A
value close to 1 indicates that patterns of correlations are relatively compact, so
the factor analysis yielded distinct and reliable factors. The 23 factors were
aggregated into the three domains based on the conceptual framework (Table 1).

23

Table 1
Summary of the Factor Analysis (Principal Axis Factoring)

The 23-factor solution accounted for 57.3% of the variance. The factors
contributed to the three domains in the following way: Parent Involvement,
Factors 1-6 and 19-23, 29.9% of variance; Child Interest, Factors 7-12, 17.8% of
variance; and Parent Literacy Habits, Factors 5, and 13-19, 9.6% of variance
(Table 1).
Factor Parent
Involvement
Child Interest Parent Lit.
Habits
1 0.815
2 0.779
3 0.769
4 0.609
5 0.552 0.432
6 0.513
7 0.790
8 0.775
9 0.742
10 0.694
11 0.648
12 0.604
13 0.644
14 0.631
15 0.617
16 0.567
17 0.651
18 0.619
19 0.494 0.535
20 0.676
21 0.648
22 0.604
23 0.419
Total 0.625 0.709 0.587
Cumulative
% Variance
Explained
29.879 42.794 48.136

24
Descriptive statistics. As stated earlier, the children ranged in age from 37-
60 months (M = 50.77, SD = 4.84; 199 males, 167 females). The language of the
home was primarily Spanish, although children attended head start programs
where English was the dominant language of instruction. Eighty-three percent the
mothers reported speaking only Spanish in their homes, whereas 17% reported
speaking both languages in their homes. All of the Latino children were born in
the U.S., whereas only 16% of their parents were U.S.-born. Most parents were
born in Mexico (63%) or Central America (31%), and they immigrated to the U.S.
from one to 45 years ago (mothers: 1 - 35 years; M = 17.99; SD = 7.03; fathers: 1-
45 years; M = 18.81; SD = 6.64). Family size ranged from x to y (M= 5.43;
SD=1.89), mothers lived in the US from X to Y years (M= 13.97; SD=8.01). The
age when mothers began reading to their children ranged from X to Y (M= 13.15
mos; SD=12.34). Mothers and fathers’ education levels ranged from 0 to 7 (0=
none, 1= grade school, 2= to 8
th
grade, 3= some high school, 4= high school grad,
5= some college; M= 3; SD=1.56).

25

Table 2
Ranges, means, and standard deviations for demographic information
Variable Range M S.D.
Children’s Age 37-60 mo. 50.46 4.91
Family Size 2-12 people 5.43 1.89
Mother’s years
living in U.S
1-32 13.97 8.01
Age mothers began
reading to their
children
1-48 mo. 13.15 12.34
Mother’s age when
moved to U.S.
(immigrants)
1-35 years 18
yrs.
6.94
Mother’s level
education
1-7 3 1.56
Father’s education 0-7 years 3 yrs. 1.51
Number of children
in home (including
child participant)
1-7 children 2.62 1.32

Ranges, means and SD's for the Variables. Table 3 shows the ranges,
means and standard deviations for the variables of interest. The numbers represent
scores on a measure. Each was measured on a different numerical scale, so the
standard deviations are more of interest than the means. Oral language had the
most variance (10.434), with print knowledge (6.399) and child interest (6.477)

26

falling closely behind. Phonological awareness (5.839), parent literacy habits
(5.215), and parent involvement (5.613) also displayed a good amount of
variance. The remaining variables had scores that were mostly within two points
of the average score.
Table 3
Means and Standard Deviations of the Measured Variables of Interest

Intercorrelations among the variables. Correlations were computed
amongst the maternal motivation, home literacy factors, and children’s emergent
literacy skills. As shown in Table 4, the emergent literacy skills subscales were
positively and moderately correlated with one another, ranging from r=.446,
p<.01 to r=.608, p<.01. The task values subscales were all moderately correlated
Variable Range M S.D.
Oral
Language
0-66
points
9.87 10.43
Print
Knowledge
0-35
points
9.31 6.40
Phonological
Awareness
2-38
points
15.61 5.84
Parenting
Efficacy
13-25
points
22.40 2.54
Task Values
(Intrinsic)
7-20
points
17.64 2.32
Task Values
(Attainment)
4-20
points
17.45 2.73
Task Value
(Usefulness)
6-20
points
18.23 2.56
Parent
Literacy
Habits
0-18
points
11.16 5.22
Child Interest 0-29
points
20.74 6.48
Parent
Involvement
0-30
points
16.87 5.61

27
as well. They ranged from r=.466, p<.01 to r=.509, p<.01. Parenting efficacy
was positively correlated with the task value variables, but the coefficients were
small (from r=.212, p<.01 to r= .11, p<.05). This means that they are related but
they do measure distinctly different constructs. The home literacy environment
subscales were positively and moderately correlated with one another, ranging
from r=.374, p<.01 to r=.622, p<.01.
Table 4
Correlations Among the Maternal Motivation, HLE, and Emergent Literacy Skills
Variables
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10.
1. Oral
Language
- .
2. Print
Knowledge
.446** -
3.
Phonological
Awareness
.60** .454** -
4. Parenting
Efficacy
.098 .067 .037 -
5. Task
Value
Intrinsic
.108* .207** .095 .212** -
6. Task
Value
Attainment
-.023 .015 .019 .110* .486** -
7.Task
Value
Usefulness
.025 .106* .056 .150** .466** .509** -
8. Parent
Literary
Habits
.161** .085 .098 .135* .221** .131* .159** -
9. Child
Interest
.058 .104* .026 .226** .173** .144** .218** .374** -
10. Parent
Involvement
.189** .203** .107* .225** .257** .111* .193** .450** .622** -
** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level.
*Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level.

28

Relations among mothers’ motivation and children’s emergent literacy skills
To address the question of how Latino mothers’ motivation to teach
literacy and their home literacy practices relate to their children’s emergent
literacy skills, a structural equation analysis was performed. The analyses
evaluated the interrelationships among mother’s perceived motivation, home
literacy environment and emergent literacy skills. Two sets of analyses were
carried out: testing a null model, where nothing is related and testing a model with
constraints that fit the hypotheses. Figure 2 shows the results of the Structural
equation analysis, testing the model with constraints that fit the hypotheses.
Figure 2
Path Model of Maternal Motivation, HLE and Emergent Literacy
Skills
.00
ParentEffic
.50
Useful
.50
Attain
.47
Intrinsic
Task
Values
.14
HLE
.73
Parent
Involvement
.05
Child
Outcomes
.61
Oral
Language
.59 Phonological
Awareness
.34
Print
Knowledge
.52
Child
Interest
.28
Parents'
Literacy Habits
.71
.71
.68
.29 .22
.53
.85
.72
.78
.77
.58
e5
e6
e7
e8
e9
e10
e1
e2
e3
e4
.23
D2 D1

29
Two paths were specified (from task values [latent] and parenting efficacy
[measured]) to one latent variable, Home Literacy Environment (HLE). Another
causal effect was specified between the HLE and the pre-literacy skills, which
is a latent variable defined by three measures. This model showed an acceptable
fit to the data, chi square (n = 386) = 68.37, p < .001, df =33, CFI = .960, RMSEA
= .053. See Table 3 for a more thorough view of these standardized regressions
(R^2), including standard errors, critical regions, and significance. To assess the
significance of the causal paths leading to the HLE, the decrement in model fit
was calculated after the paths were individually constrained to be equal to zero.
This constraint was also applied to the paths from HLE to the child outcomes,
which were the three pre-literacy skills: oral language, print knowledge and
phonological awareness.
Discussion
The results of the analysis of covariance structures, or structural equation
model, showed significance. In fact, all paths were significant below the p=.05
level and the model fit was sufficient, meaning the model was conceptualized in a
sufficient way. Nevertheless, not all of the paths were strong. The model does
show that aspects of mother’s perceived motivation influenced the home literacy
environment in this population. The mother’s task values of reading accounted for
5.39% of the variance and the parenting efficacy accounted for 4.80% of the
variance in the home learning environment. The factor loading between HLE and
the child outcomes, pre-literacy skills, was .22, accounting for 4.69% of the
variance.

30
These results suggest that there may be other factors than the mothers'
perceived motivation that influence the home literacy environment. There are
several possible explanations. First, the mother's actual motivation to teach her
child to read could be an antecedent. In the present study, only the mother’s
perception was measured. This may not correlate exactly with actual motivation
to teach her child to read, as social desirability may play a role in the way the
mother answers the questionnaire. Another possible determinant of the home
literacy environment or the child’s emergent literacy skills directly, is the child’s
internal or intrinsic motivation to learn to read.
The results showed that parents’ direct involvement in and encouragement
of literacy-related activities was associated with both school readiness skills, also
known as pre-literacy skills. In addition, the results showed that these activities in
the home environment resulted from the mother’s perceived maternal motivation.
These findings illustrate how parents can be instrumental in preparing
their young children for school by being proactive in their efforts and by altering
aspects of their home environment that are within their capability to change.
These results are consistent with Machida, Taylor and Kim’s 2002 study, which
showed that maternal beliefs predict the extent of involvement in home learning
activities. They were also consistent with Senechal and LeFevre’s (2002) results,
which show that parental reports of home literacy experiences were a significant
predictor of phonological awareness, one of the present study’s measures of
emergent literacy skills.

31
The major limitation of the current study was that the child's motivation to
learn to read (referred to as reading motivation in the literature) was not measured
directly. Future directions of this research should focus on the mediating effect of
a measured child’s reading motivation between the home literacy environment
and these pre-literacy skills. The direct relationship between the child’s intrinsic
motivation and the emergent literacy skills should also be considered. Child’s
intrinsic motivation to read may indeed prove to be more important than maternal
motivation for his or her child to read.
Another limitation is that by looking at the information in a quantitative
way (using means to report the behavior of the group), many of the individual
cases are not explained. These findings show that there is much variability in
family practices and child outcomes. The current study provided evidence to
further challenge the myth that children from low-income backgrounds are not
exposed to literacy-related activities, and that their parents have little time or
inclination to provide them with learning experiences that contribute to academic
achievement. Future studies should examine the individual differences in the
families. The focus should be to use families that provide the richest home
learning environment as an example for interventions and to look at these cases in
a qualitative manner.

32
References

Adams, M. J., (1990). Beginning to read: Thinking and learning about print.
Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Alexander, K.L. & Entwisle, D.R. (1988). Achievement in the first 2 years of
school: Patterns and process. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child
Development, 53 (2, Serial No. 218).

Allington, R. L. (1984). Content, coverage, and contextual reading in reading
groups. Journal of Reading Behavior, 16, 85-96.

Anthony, J.L., Lonigan, C.J., Burgess, S.R., Driscoll-Bacon, K., Phillips, B.N., &
Cantor, B. G. (2000). Structure of preschool phonological sensitivity:
Overlapping sensitivity to rhyme, words, syllables, and phonemes. Journal of
Experimental Child Psychology, 82, 65-92.

Atkinson, (1963). Mathematical Models in Research with Children
Richard C. Atkinson . Monographs of the Society for Research in Child
Development, 28, 145-157.

Baker, S. & Scher, D. (2002). Beginning reader’s motivation for reading in
relation to parental beliefs and home reading experiences. Reading Psychology,
23, 239-269.

Baker, S. & Wigfield, A. (1999). Dimensions of children’s motivation for
reading and their relations to reading activity and reading achievement. Reading
Research Quarterly, 34, 452-477.

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W. H.
Freeman /Times Books/ Henry Holt & Co.

Battle, E. (1966). Motivational determinants of academic competence. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 4, 534-542.

Brown, A. J., Palincsar, A. S., & Purcell, L. (1986). Poor readers: Teach, don’t
label. In U. Neisser (Ed.), The school achievement of minority children: New
perspectives (pp. 105-143). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Burhans, K. K., & Dweck, C. S. (1995). Helplessness in early childhood: The role
of contingent worth. Child Development, 66, 1719-1738.

Byrne, B., Olson, R. K., Samuelsson, S., Wadsworth, S., Corley, R., DeFries, J.
C., & Willcutt, E. (2006). Genetic and environmental influences. Journal of
Research in Reading, 29, 33-49.

33
Chapman, J. W., & Tunmer, W. E. (1995). Development of young children’s
reading self-concepts: An examination of emerging subcomponents and their
relationship with reading achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87,
154-167.

Bus, A., van Ijzendoorn, M. H., & Pellegrini (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- 21.

Clark, M. M. (1976). Young fluent readers: what can they teach us? London:
Heinemann Educational Books.

Durkin, D. (1966). Children Who Read Early. New York: Teacher’s College
Press.

Eccles, T. F. Adler, R. Futterman, S. B. Goff, C. M. Kaczala, J. L. Meece and
Midgley, C. Expectancies, values, and academic behaviors. In: J. T. Spence,
Editor, Achievement and achievement motivation, W. H. Freeman, San Francisco
(1983), pp. 75–146.

Eccles, J. S., & Wigfield, A. (1995). In the mind of the actor: The structure of
adolescents’ achievement task values and expectancy- related beliefs. Personality
and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21, 215-225.

Elliot, J. A. & Hewison, J. (1994). Comprehension and interest in home reading.
British Journal of Educational Psychology, 64, 203-220.

Farver, J. M., Xu, Y., Eppe, S., & Lonigan, C. (2006). Home environments and
young Latino children’s school readiness. Early Childhood Research Quarterly,
21, 196-212.

Fordham, S. (1996). Blacked out: Dilemmas of race, identity and success at
Capital High. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Frome, P. & Eccles, J. (1998). Parents’ Influence on Children’s Achievement-
Related Perceptions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 74, 435-452.

Graham, S. (1994). Motivation in African Americans. Review of Educational
Research, 64, 55-118.

Guthrie, J. T., Wigfield, A., & Paris, S. G. (ED); Stahl, Steven A. (ED; 2005).
Roles of Motivation and Engagement in Children’s Reading Comprehension
Assessment. Center for improvement of early reading achievement (CIERA), pp.
187-213. Mahwah, NJ, US: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers. Xvii, pp.
420.

34
Guthrie, J. T., Wigfield, A., Perencevich, K., Guthrie, J. (ED; 2004). Scaffolding
for Motivation and Engagement in Reading. Motivating reading comprehension:
Concept-oriented reading instruction, pp. 55-86. Mahwah, NJ, US: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates, Publishers. Xvi, pp. 326.

Hansen, H. S. (1969). The impact of home literacy environment on reading
attitude. Elementary English, 46, 17-24.

Harter, S. (1990). Causes, correlates and the functional role of self-worth: A life-
span perspective. In R. J. Sternberg & J. Kolligian (Eds.), Competence considered
(pp. 67-97). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Haylou-Thomas, M., Harlaar, N., Dale, P. S., & Plomin, R. Genetic and
environmental mediation of the prediction from preschool language and
nonverbal ability to 7-year reading. Journal of Research in Reading, 29, 50-74.

Heath, S. B., (1982). What no bedtime story means: Narrative at home and
school. Language in Society, 11, 49-78.

Izzo, C., Weiss, L., Shanahan, T., & Rodriguez-Brown, F. (2000). Parental self-
efficacy & social support as predictors of parenting practices & children’s
socioemotional adjustment in Mexican immigrant families. Journal of Prevention
& Intervention in the Community, 20, 197-213.

James, W. (1892). Psychology: The briefer course. New York: Holt, Rinehart &
Winston.

Leibham, M. E., Alexander, J. M., Johnson, K. E., Neitzel, C. L., & Reis-Henrie,
F. P. (2005). Parenting behaviors associated with the maintenance of
preschoolers’ interests: a prospective longitudinal study. Applied Developmental
Psychology, 26, 397–414.

Lonigan, C. J., Burgess, S. R., Anthony, J. L., & Barker, T. A. (1998).
Development of phonological sensitivity in two- to five-year-old children. Journal
of Educational Psychology, 90, 294-311.

Machida, S., Taylor, A.R., & Kim, J. (2002). The role of maternal beliefs in
predicting home learning environments in Head Start families. Family relations:
Interdisciplinary Journal of Applied Family Studies, 51, 176-184.

McGill-Frazen, A., Lanford, C. & Adams, E. (2002). Learning to be literate: a
comparison of five urban early childhood programs. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 94, 443 – 464.

Morais, J., Cary, L., Algeria, J. & Bartelson, P. (1979). Does awareness of speech
as a sequence of phones arise spontaneously? Cognition, 7, 323-343.

35

Ninio, A. (1980). Picture book reading in mother-infant dyads belonging to two
subgroups in Israel. Child Development, 51, 587-590.

Oakes, J. (1990). Opportunities, achievement, and choice: Women and minority
students in science and mathematics. In C. Cazden (Ed.), Review of
research in education (Vol. 16; pp. 153-222). Washington, DC: American
Educational Research Association.

Oka, E. & Paris, S. (1986). Patterns of motivation and reading skills in
underachieving children. In S. Ceci (Ed.), Handbook of cognitive, social, and
neuropsychological aspects of learning disabilities (Vol. 2). Hillsdale, NJ:
Erlbaum.

Ogbu, J. U. (1994). From cultural differences in cultural frame of reference. In P.
M. Greenfield & R. R. Cocking (Eds.), Cross-cultural roots of minority child
development (pp. 365-391). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Parjares, F. (1996). Self-efficacy beliefs in academic settings. Review of
Educational Research, 66, 543-578.

Parsons, Kaczala, & Meece (1982). Socialization of achievement attitudes and
beliefs: classroom influences. Child Development, 53, 322-339.

Raikes, H. et al (2006). Mother-child bookreading in low-income families:
correlates and outcomes during the first three years of life. Child Development,
77, 924-953.
Scarborough, H.S., & Dobrich, W. (1994). On the efficacy of reading to
preschoolers. Developmental Review, 14, 245-302.

Scher, D., Baker, L. & Mackler, K. (1997). Home and family influences on
motivations for reading. Educational Psychologist, 32, 69-82.

Segal, M. A study of maternal beliefs and values within the context of an
intervention program. In I. E. Sigel (Ed.), Parental belief systems: The
psychological consequences of children. Hillsdale. New Jersey: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates Publishers.

Serpell, Sonnenshein, Baker, & Ganapathy (2002). Intimate culture of families in
the early socialization of literacy. Journal of Family Psychology, 16, 391-405.

Sherer & Adams, (1983). Construct validation of the Self-Efficacy Scale.
Psychological Reports, 53, 899-902.

Snow, C. E., Burns, M. S., & Griffin, P. (Eds.). (1998). Preventing reading
difficulties in young children. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.

36

Sonnenschein, S. & Munsterman, K. (2002). The influence of home –based
reading interactions on 5-year-olds’ reading motivations and early literacy
development. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 17, 318-337.

Stipek, D. J. & Ryan, R. H. (1997). Economically disadvantaged preschoolers:
Ready to learn but further to go. Developmental Psychology, 33, 711-723.

Turner, J. C. (1995). The influence of classroom contexts on young children’s
motivation for literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, 30, 410-441.

Wang, J. & Guthrie, J. T. (2004). Modeling the effects of intrinsic motivation,
extrinsic motivation, amount of reading, and past reading achievement on text
comprehension between U.S. and Chinese students. Reading Research Quarterly,
39, 162-186.

Wagner, R. K. & Torgesen, J. K. (1987). The nature of phonological processing
and its causal role in the acquisition of reading skills. Psychological Bulletin, 101,
192-212.

Watterson, K. J. (2001). Head Start parent education participation: A study of
motivating factors. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences
& Engineering. 62, 1605.

Whitehurst, G. J. & Lonigan, C. J. (1998). Child development and emergent
literacy. Child Development, 69, 848-872.

Whitehurst, G. J. & Lonigan, C. J. (2001). Emergent literacy: Development from
prereaders to readers. Handbook of early literacy research.

Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J.S. (2000). Expectancy-value theory of achievement
motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 68-81.

Wigfield, A., & Guthrie, J. T. (1997). Relations of children’s motivation for
reading to the amount and breadth of their reading. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 89, 420-432.

Wigfield, A., Guthrie, J. T., Tonks, S. & Perencevich, K. C. (2004). Children’s
motivation for reading; Domain specificity and instructional influences. Journal of
Educational Research. 97, 299-309.

Wigfield, A., Harold, R., Freedman-Doan, C., Eccles, J., Arbreton, A, &
Blumenfeld, P. (1997). Change in Children’s Competence Beliefs and Subjective
Task Values Across the Elementary School Years: A 3-Year Study. Journal of
Educational Psychology. 89, 451-469.

Abstract (if available)

Abstract This mixed-methods study focused on Latino children's emergent literacy skills and the relation to their home environments. The first aim was to measure the effects of mothers' perceived motivation to teach their children to read on the children's emergent literacy skills measured at the beginning of the preschool year. The second aim was to investigate child-parent reading behaviors in the home as a function of mother's perceived motivation. These two aims were addressed with a sample of 225 Latino children who were enrolled in head start programs and their mothers. The results from the structural equation modeling indicated that mothers who were motivated to teach their children to read provided a richer home literacy environment, which in turn yielded higher emergent literacy skill scores for the children. This study reaffirms the importance of parental and home influences on children's early skill development both in terms of providing print materials and parents' involvement in specific reading-related activities. It also suggests that efforts to involve parents in a meaningful way and helping parents to engage in key reading-related activities at home might increase print access. Finally, this study documented the strong parental aspirations for their children's success, in contrast to some past perceptions that these parents are unconcerned with their children's academic success.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Emergent literacy skills and home literacy environment of Latino children who live in poverty

PDF

Latino parental aspirations and literacy practices related to children's reading engagement

PDF

Relationships among cortical thickness, reading skill, and print exposure in adult readers

PDF

Neurobiological correlates of skilled and disabled reading

PDF

The association between peer victimization and school functioning in Latino children

PDF

Perceived discrimination and Latino youth adjustment: examining the influence of relinquished control and immigration status

PDF

School to Work Program as a contributor to adult literacy skill development

PDF

Literacy practices of 1.5 generation Korean American parents with three to five year old children

PDF

Supporting the professional development of early childhood educators: a case study of an emergent literacy intervention project

PDF

Perceptions of dementia among Latinos

PDF

Can infants discriminate between declaratives and interrogatives?

PDF

A qualitative analysis on Latino parents' beliefs regarding their middle school child's motivation

PDF

Psychological correlates of certainty strength: measuring the relative influence of evidence, opinion of personal contacts & importance to self-identity

PDF

Media literacy education: a qualitative inquiry into the perspectives teachers hold about teaching media literacy

PDF

P-center perception in children with developmental dyslexia: do low level auditory deficits underlie reading, spelling, and language impairments?

PDF

The nature of middle-class Latino/a students' cultural capital in a fifth-grade classroom's reading and writing activities

PDF

The parent voice: an exploratory study to understand Latino parent involvement in schools

PDF

The successful African American Parenting (SAAP) Program: an evaluation of a culturally sensitive parenting intervention

PDF

Marital conflict and parenting: moderating effects of ethnicity and parent sex

PDF

The role of critical literacy and the school-to-prison pipeline: what was learned from the life histories and literacy experiences of formerly incarcerated young Latino males

Asset Metadata

Creator Carter, Carlyn Janet (author)

Core Title The home environment and Latino preschoolers' emergent literacy skills

School College of Letters, Arts and Sciences

Degree Master of Arts

Degree Program Psychology

Publication Date 10/22/2007

Defense Date 08/15/2007

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag emergent literacy,Motivation,OAI-PMH Harvest,shared bookreading

Language English

Advisor Farver, Jo Ann M. (committee chair), Lickel, Brian (committee member), Manis, Franklin R. (committee member), Rueda, Robert S. (committee member)

Creator Email ccarter@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-m881

Unique identifier UC1330954

Identifier etd-Carter-20071022 (filename),usctheses-m40 (legacy collection record id),usctheses-c127-557184 (legacy record id),usctheses-m881 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-Carter-20071022.pdf

Dmrecord 557184

Document Type Thesis

Rights Carter, Carlyn Janet

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Repository Name Libraries, University of Southern California

Repository Location Los Angeles, California

Repository Email cisadmin@lib.usc.edu