Close
About
FAQ
Home
Collections
Login
USC Login
Register
0
Selected
Invert selection
Deselect all
Deselect all
Click here to refresh results
Click here to refresh results
USC
/
Digital Library
/
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
/
The role of storybook reading in a twilight preschool head start program
(USC Thesis Other)
The role of storybook reading in a twilight preschool head start program
PDF
Download
Share
Open document
Flip pages
Contact Us
Contact Us
Copy asset link
Request this asset
Transcript (if available)
Content
THE ROLE OF STORYBOOK READING IN AN URBAN TWILIGHT
PRESCHOOL HEAD START PROGRAM
by
Hilda S. Baca-Fetcenko
_____________________________________________________________
A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION
August 2009
Copyright 2009 Hilda S. Baca-Fetcenko
ii
DEDICATION
In loving memory of my parents, Adelito and Aurora, for teaching me the
real meaning of courage, strength, and resilience.
iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
To my dissertation chair, Dr. Eugenia Mora-Flores, for her unending support
and patience that led me back on the path to the completion of this dissertation. To
my committee members, Dr. Margo Pensavale and Dr. Lilia Sarmiento, for their
guidance, meaningful feedback, and valuable time.
To the USC Doctoral Support Center, Dr. Ilda Jimenez y West and Dr. Linda
Fischer, for their faith in me to start anew and believe that I can accomplish my goal.
To my husband, David, for your loving support and understanding
throughout the many years it took for me to complete the dissertation.
To my brother, Luis, for teaching me the true meaning of courage and that it
is never too late to start over.
To my many doctors, Dr. Neil Barth, Dr. Diane Koch, Dr. Fran Baumgarten,
for their extraordinary health care. Thank you for treating the human side of cancer.
To my guiding lights, Dr. Jack M. Cohen, Larry Lodwick, Dr. Jose Lalas, and
Frances Kusumoto, for teaching me to believe in myself. To you I am eternally
grateful.
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Dedication ii
Acknowledgements iii
List of Tables vi
List of Figures vii
Abstract viii
Chapter One: Overview of the Study 1
Introduction 1
Purpose of the Study 5
Research Questions 7
Theoretical Framework 8
Significance of the Study 10
Limitations of the Study 13
Overview of the Study 14
Definition of Terms 14
Chapter Two: Literature Review 17
Introduction 17
Head Start 20
Theoretical Basis of the Research 23
From Readiness to Emergent Literacy 28
Effective Practice and Pedagogy 52
Preschool Policies and Practices 60
Alternative Programs 64
Conclusion 65
Chapter Three: Research Design and Methodology 68
Introduction 68
Study Design 69
Sample and Population 71
Unit of Study 73
Teacher Interviews 73
Associate Director Interview 74
Classroom Observations 74
Instrumentation 79
Document Analysis 81
Data Analysis Procedures 81
v
Ethical Considerations 82
Validation of Findings 83
Conclusion 84
Chapter Four: Results 85
Introduction 85
School Demographics 93
Classroom Demographics 95
Characteristics of a Twilight Program 97
What Role Does Storybook Reading Play in Children’s Readiness? 112
Emergent Reading of Favorite Storybooks 113
Conclusion 126
Chapter Five: Conclusions, Recommendations, and Suggestions for 129
Further Research
Introduction 129
Implications 130
Oral Language 134
Recommendations for Reading in the Preschool Classroom 135
Recommendations for Parental Participation 137
Future Research 137
Closing 138
References 140
Appendices 148
Appendix A: Promotional Materials 148
Appendix B: Invitation Letter and Parent Permission Form 149
Appendix C: Information Sheet 152
Appendix D: Teacher Interview Protocol 156
Appendix E: Director Interview Protocol 157
Appendix F: Observation Protocol 158
Appendix G: Developmental Domains 160
Appendix H: California Preschool Learning Foundations. Language 161
and Literacy: Reading
Appendix I: NAEYC. Early Childhood Program Standards and the 162
Accreditation Standards with the Creative Curriculum for Preschool
Appendix J: Desired Results Profile Revised 164
Appendix K: Continuum of Children’s Development in Reading 166
Appendix L: Language and Communication Development 168
Developmentally Appropriate Practice
Appendix M: Classification Scheme for Emergent Reading of 171
Favorite Storybooks
vi
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Awareness and Exploration 78
Table 2: The 2009 Poverty Guidelines for the 48 Contiguous States 88
and the District of Columbia
Table 3: Summary of Interviewee Background 94
Table 4: Demographics of Participating Children 96
Table 5: Classification Scheme for Emergent Reading of Favorite 121
Storybooks
Table F1: Observation Protocol 158
Table G1: Developmental Domains 160
Table H1: California Preschool Learning Foundations Language and 161
Literacy
vii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Categories of Storybook Reading 80
Figure 2: Percentage of Students Engaged in Noted Literacy Activities 104
Figure 3: Frequency of Teachers Involvement in Noted Activites 105
Figure 4: Oral Language Development 123
Figure 5: Reading Readiness Themes with Strategies 128
Figure M1: Classification Scheme for Emergent Reading of Favorite 171
Storybooks
viii
ABSTRACT
This study set out to examine the use of storybook reading in the twilight
preschool classroom as reading readiness. The focus of the study was on the
teaching of storybook reading and the impact, if any, it had on preschool children
attending the twilight program. The site for the study was the Head Start program at
a major research university. The research was conducted at one of the five sites,
Gardens Child Development Center, over a period of two months.
Teachers and the Associate Director were interviewed to gather information
about their experiences working with preschool aged children and their training in
storybook reading. Eight classroom observations were conducted during storybook
reading time. Each classroom observation lasted a period of 30-45 minutes. The
focus of the classroom observations was to provide an insight of the classroom
environment, emergent reading strategies, child participation and engagement,
teacher behaviors, child’s reading behaviors, and a continuum of the child’s reading
and oral language development.
Each child in the study participated in one developmental assessment:
Sulzby’s Categories of Storybook Reading. The assessment, Sulzby’s Categories of
Storybook Reading, was selected to look within emergent reading in order to identify
and describe the range of strategies readers use.
Gardens Child Development center believed in the practice of reading to
children as a tool for supporting reading development. Based on statements made by
the teachers and the Associate Director, storybook reading was considered a
ix
significant part of their program and in children’s reading readiness. However,
observations did not support these findings. And where there was evidence of
student’s reading readiness, storybook reading alone could not be seen as having a
significant impact. Through rich oral language environments as evidenced at
Gardens child development center, children will be eager and ready to learn to read.
1
CHAPTER ONE:
OVERVIEW OF THE STUDY
Introduction
Background of the Problem
The early education system in the nation has experienced remarkable growth
providing over 900,000 children nationwide access to one of many early childhood
programs (Gov Track, 2007). This includes about three-fourths of young children
from birth to age five nationwide in a preschool program. These programs operate
under a number of support systems, from public to private to Head Start (Gov
Track). Beginning in the 1960’s, early childhood education was proposed as a way to
ameliorate the poor scholastic performance of many children from traditionally
disadvantaged groups. Before that time, tests on measures of intellectual ability
were largely attributed to genetics (Lubeck, 1994.) Disadvantaged or children raised
in poverty are more likely to enter society without the skills necessary to compete
effectively in the labor market. Recent studies have found that investing in high-
quality early childhood development can positively impact children, their families,
taxpayers, and the government (Lynch, 2005).
California has 550,234 children ages three to five not yet in kindergarten, but
are enrolled in preschool/childcare (both public and private) (Lopez, 2004). With
close to half of the state’s children ages three to five enrolled in preschool/childcare,
as expected, children whose families tend to be in lower income groups (such as
Latinos, African Americans, and Native Americans) primarily attend public
2
preschool/childcare. Established by Proposition 10 in 1998 California developed a
preschool for all systems, which follows the recommendation of the Universal
Preschool Task Force of 1998 and the Master Plan for Education of 2002. The
Master Plan for Education provides a long-term vision for an education system that
is available to every Californian and that focuses on both learner needs and outcomes
(Alpert, Alquist, & Strom-Martin, 2002). The plan is meant to serve as a framework
for state and local policy-makers to guide the decisions made for educators. The
Education Commission of the States, found that other states have taken significant
steps toward adopting or expanding universal preschool programs including Arizona,
Illinois, Iowa, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, New York, North Carolina, South
Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Oklahoma, Vermont, and Virginia. These states have
already or are in the process of adopting a version of the early learning quality
improvement system to assess program quality support to provide higher quality
early development programs.
According to the Early Learning Quality Improvement Act, Senate Bill 1629
(2008), research confirms the social and economic benefits of early childhood
education for children and their families, as well as society. Children who attend
effective preschool programs are better prepared for kindergarten and beyond. They
have higher cognitive and language skills in their first years of elementary school.
Plus, they are less likely to repeat a grade or drop out of school and are more likely
to go on to college. These educational benefits are especially evident for low-
income and English language learners (Cooper & Moore, 2008).
3
The National Institute for Early Education Research found that California’s
state-funded preschool programs meet only 4 out of the 10 benchmarks for quality.
Benchmarks for quality as identified by the National Institute for Early Education
Research (2007) are defined as The Quality Standards Checklist which represent a
set of minimum criteria needed to ensure prekindergarten programs, especially when
serving disadvantaged children, but is not intended as an exhaustive catalog of all
features of a high-quality program. The 10 quality benchmarks include:
1. Early learning standards
2. Teacher degree
3. Teacher specialized training
4. Assistant teacher degree
5. Teacher in-service
6. Maximum class size
7. Staff-child ratio
8. Screening/referral and support
9. Meals
10. Monitoring
Because of this dramatic finding the State Superintendent of Public Instruction P-16
Council and the Governor’s Committee on Education Excellence has currently taken
on the charge to reform our existing public preschools to create the high-quality
experience that children need to be ready to read and ready to learn.
4
Statement of the Problem
The goal of a Preschool Program is to provide comprehensive and quality
early childhood education services to young children. The National Association for
the Education of Young Children (2002) defines early childhood as a distinct period
of life that has value in itself as well as creating foundations for later years.
Literature supports programs for young children from low-income families on the
grounds that such programs have long-term benefits for many participants. For
example, the Perry Preschool Program in Ypsilanti, Michigan made the case that
children who attended the project's preschool program were less likely than others to
experience difficulties in life. They were more likely to finish high school, attend
college, and hold jobs (Berrueta-Clementt et al., 1984). Such evidence has
consistently been cited to support policy initiatives for the development or expansion
of preschool programs. Policy initiatives are the catalyst for high quality preschool
for all.
According to the California Dropout Research Project (CDRP) (2008), a
strong connection exists between high school graduates and children who attend
preschool. In the recent policy brief, high-quality preschool is identified as one of
the top five significant interventions proven to raise the rate of high school
graduation. Children in a nationally recognized preschool program have a 44 percent
higher rate of high school completion than those who did not attend preschool
(Schweinhart & Weikart, 1997).
5
The Twilight Preschool Program is available at one of five centers of a larger
Early Childhood Education Program operated by a major urban university. Although
the center is successful in meeting the needs of parents working or going to school
by offering an evening Twilight Head Start Program, little or no research has been
done in this area. Little is known about the Twilight Preschool Program and how
reading readiness varies for the children who attend the evening program also, if how
and when the instruction and curriculum vary based on the time of day or evening it
is delivered. To examine the effectiveness of the reading readiness practices at the
Twilight Head Start Program, I have chosen to focus on Storybook reading to
determine if it is a component of a high-quality preschool program. Storybook
reading is defined by Teale and Sulzby (1985) as “reading” by children who are not
yet reading from print. Children who learned to read (and write) before formal
instruction have often been described as “teaching themselves to read” from favorite
storybooks. This study will examine how storybook reading develops over time as a
key element of reading readiness and how to explain this phenomenon within the
urban setting in a Twilight Preschool Head Start Program.
Purpose of the Study
Children come into the world eager to learn (National Research Council,
2001). In 1992, the first National Education Goals Panel established National Goals
focused on the early childhood years: “By the year 2000, all children in America
will start school ready to learn” (Bredekamp, Knuth, Kunesh, & Shulman, 1992).
We want to believe that from the time of birth, all children are ready to learn.
6
However, what we do or don’t do as individuals, educators, and collectively as
society can impede a child’s success in learning (Bredekamp et al., 1992).
According to the RAND Study (2008), low income and minority children
could benefit most from quality preschool programs but that they are the least likely
to be enrolled in good early development programs. In the report, RAND California
Preschool Study, researchers estimate that only 15% of those who could benefit most
are in high-quality programs that prepare them for success in K-12 schools.
Researchers surveyed 2,000 California parents of three- and four-year olds,
interviewed more than 700 state providers, and observed 250 child care and
preschool centers. They found that just under half of three and four year olds in
economically disadvantaged families are in preschool programs that lack quality
compared to 70% of children who are in quality preschools. Based on this study, the
researchers found that an estimated 59% of preschool-age children in California are
receiving public or private early care and education.
The study also found that parental education levels played a role in preschool
education with only 45% of children whose mothers did not finish high school
enrolled in preschools. Whereas, 80% of children enrolled have mothers who have a
graduate or professional degree. Access was also found to be an issue for Black,
Hispanic, and low-income parents who reported the most difficulty finding the care
they wanted. The lead researcher of the study, Lynn Karoly, believes there’s room
for both increased participation for underserved groups and improvement in the
7
quality of the programs. The information is now available to make significant
changes in access and high quality preschool programs.
The purpose of this study is to examine the kindergarten reading readiness of
preschool children attending an urban twilight program. The focus of the study will
be on the teaching of storybook reading and the impact, if any, it will have on
preschool children attending the twilight program. Originally, this study was
conducted by Sulzby in 1985 with five-year old children from a suburban middle-
class midwestern town. Sulzby applied a holistic approach with an analysis system
based on a comparison of two study groups of children. Elster followed Sulzby’s
study in 1994, which included four and five year old children in a Head Start
Program from a low-income small mid-western city. Elster adapted Sulzby’s
assessment, Categories of Storybook Reading, by conducting a microanalysis system
of emergent readings. My contribution to the research lies in the use of the same
instrument, Categories of Storybook Reading, with three and four year old twilight
preschool Head Start Program children from a low-income urban setting.
Research Questions
This proposed qualitative study aims to develop an increased understanding
of reading readiness in a twilight preschool Head Start program. This study will
focus on examining the classroom practice of storybook reading, which may be a
readiness skill in the development of emergent reading. Specifically, this study will
address the following research questions:
8
1. What is the nature of storybook reading in a Twilight Preschool
Program?
2. What role does storybook reading play in children’s readiness?
The advent of preschool programs that meet the scheduling needs of parents
who work non-traditional shifts is relatively new. Little research has looked at either
the nature of these “twilight” programs or their impact on children’s kindergarten
reading readiness relative to traditional programs.
Theoretical Framework
This study will utilize Sulzby’s Categories of Storybook Reading and
Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development to describe and provide a rationale for
storybook reading as a reading readiness skill in Preschool classrooms. Sulzby’s
Categories of Storybook Reading, known as The Classification Scheme for Emergent
Reading of Favorite Storybooks, found sorting out oral and written language
relationships in activities like storybook reading with adults and found what they are
learning can be detected by asking them to “read” to an adult from familiar or
“favorite books” (Sulzby, 1985). Research has shown that children who learned to
read (and write) before formal instruction have often been described as “teaching
themselves to read” from favorite storybooks (Sulzby).
The storybook classification scheme is based upon a number of theoretical
premises (Sulzby, 1985, 1988; Sulzby & Teale, 1987; Valencia, 1991):
9
1. It assumes that children become literate long before they are reading
from print and that such emergent literacy can be observed through
children’s everyday interactions with print.
2. It assumes that emergent literacy is based upon social interactions
with important people, such as parents and teachers and with
storybooks.
3. It assumes that children are acquiring both oral and written language
simultaneously and interrelatedly and that children are constantly
figuring out the oral and written language relationships used in their
particular culture.
4. It assumes that children emergently acquire all of the aspects of
conventional literacy and that they reorganize these aspects into a
coordinated, flexible, integrated system which enables them to figure
out print independently
Vygotsky’s main hypothesis was that teaching is only effective when it points to the
pathway for development. Van Der Veer and Valsiner (1991) found that Vygotsky
believed the school child has to learn to transform an ability “in itself” into an ability
“for himself.” This led to his main hypothesis: teaching is only effective when it
points to the road for development. Thus, the zone of proximal development became
that road for development. Vygotsky (1991) mentions that in the past researchers
used to think that one cannot start teaching children unless they have reached a
certain level of development. Also, a threshold for teaching certain subjects had to
10
be met prior to teaching that subject. The way to determine if the child was ready to
begin various subjects was to ask the child to independently solve some specific task
or test. For example, the mother tongue is best learned at an early age while
mathematics should probably be learned later. Thus, Vygotsky turned to the domain
of intelligence testing and the concept of the zone of proximal development (Van
Der Veer & Valsiner). The zone of proximal development of the child is the
distance between his actual development, determined with the help of independently
solved tasks, and the level of the potential development of the child, determined with
the help of tasks solved by the child under the guidance of adults and in cooperation
with his more intelligent partners (Vygotsky, 1933). This connects with the work of
storybook reading because Vygotsky’s research is based on the social interaction of
the adult and the child.
The frameworks of Sulzby and Vygotsky will guide this study, along with the
research questions, to examine the effect of storybook reading and whether
storybook reading has a significant impact on learning and development in a Head
Start preschool classroom.
Significance of the Study
We can, and should, be creating a preschool system that provides quality
programs for everyone. Public preschools should be built the same way we
constructed our highway system: the same road available to all Americans, rich or
poor (Merrow, 2002). The U.S. Census Bureau (2004) found that in 2003, 19.8% of
all children under the age of six, one out of every five kids or some 4.7 million
11
children nationwide, were living in poverty. This is up from 18.5%, or 43 million
children in 2002. Poor children who fail in school are more likely to enter adulthood
without the skills necessary to become productive members of society. These
children will be less likely to help sustain our public retirement benefits, Social
Security, known to us as one of the most challenging problems we face as a society.
The consequences of childhood poverty on our nation’s collective economic health
and well-being are profoundly negative (Danziger & Haveman, 2001; Karoly,
Greenwood, Everingham, Hoube, Kilburn, Rydell, et al., 1998 in Lynch, 2005). The
significance of this study is found in the larger social issues of poverty and the drop
out crisis.
One consequence of poverty leading to children failing in school is the drop
out crisis in California. Based on the recent policy brief from the California Dropout
Research Project (CDRP), one in four students, including more than 40% of African
American students and more than 30% of Latino students, drop out before graduating
from high school. The CDRP has identified high-quality preschool as one of the
most powerful and proven interventions to set children on the right course toward
their high school diploma (Atkin, 2008). Graduating from high school has important
social and economic consequences not only for the graduates themselves but for
taxpayers and society. Graduates earn more than dropouts, are less likely to be
involved in crime, and rely less on welfare supports. As a results of quality
preschool programs high school graduates save taxpayers’ money by increasing their
own earning capacity and reducing government expenditures on social services.
12
According to Rothstein (2006) low-income and minority children can benefit
fully from good schools only if they enter these schools ready to learn. He claims
that lower-class children’s early childhood experiences should provide an intellectual
environment comparable to what middle-class children experience. An intellectual
environment rich in language where well-educated adults are teachers and role
models. Heckman (2005) agrees that learning is a dynamic process and is most
effective when it begins at a young age and continues through adulthood. He
believes we cannot afford to postpone investing in children until they become adults
and that starting to invest in children before school age is the answer. Recent studies
of early childhood investments have shown remarkable success to further indicate
that the early years in a child’s life are important for early learning. Early childhood
investments of high quality have lasting effects (Heckman). He posits that what we
need are substantial improvements in early learning which run parallel to significant
improvements in the skill levels of American workers, especially those not attending
college.
Early childhood plays a key role in human development, especially the
learning that takes place during this period. Thus, the selection of three and four year
old preschool children for this study is critical. Researchers have learned a great deal
about how children become readers long before formal schooling begins. As a result
many ways of assessing children’s reading readiness development have surfaced.
When this research is completed, a research tool for describing children’s attempts
for emergent reading will evolve to help teachers understand development. It is my
13
goal that this study will support early childhood education teachers to further
develop their abilities to use knowledge about children’s emergent literacy in their
day-to-day teaching.
Limitations of the Study
This study will be conducted at a selected preschool, which offers “twilight”
services for families. Since twilight services are a relatively new concept with little
research to compare my findings, the participating preschool will limit the study.
Another limitation of this study is that I am limited to the number of subjects
who voluntarily participate in the survey and interviews. The study is predicated on
three assumptions. First, I assumed that the subjects of the study and the interview
will respond to the survey truthfully. Second, I believe that the teachers are
implementing storybook reading readiness as intended. Last, I will accept that the
interpretations of the teachers are accurate.
My professional experiences in the classroom may impact the study. During
the years I spent as a classroom teacher, I worked primarily with first grade children.
I planned reading readiness instruction and read many storybooks to and with
children. My experience with reading readiness is formed by these interactions with
children and I have a preconceived opinion of when and how the skills necessary for
the development of reading occur. I will attempt to remain open minded as I interact
with preschool aged children and collect data from their storybook reading.
14
Overview of the Study
In Chapter One I described the importance of this study as a focus on
examining reading readiness skills in the development of emergent reading with the
focus of how emergent literacy impacts learning. In Chapter Two, I will present the
review of the literature as a research base for this study. Chapter Three is a thorough
explanation of the research design, methods, and instruments. In Chapter Four, I will
present the data from multiple measures. The summary, conclusions, findings, and
suggestions for further research will be presented in Chapter Five.
Definition of Terms
Readiness. A predetermined set of capabilities children need before entering
school (Neuman & Dickinson, 2002). The instrument will be used to determine if
the preschool children are “ready” for Kindergarten.
Reading Readiness. The term “reading readiness” has many definitions but
usually it implies that children become ready for formal reading at different times as
a result of different rates of maturing and that there is a stage at which the child is
not yet a reader (Stallman & Pearson, 1990 in Clay, 1991).
Emergent Literacy. Evolving nature of children’s understandings as they
move toward conventional reading and writing (Neuman & Roskos, 1998). This
term will be used to describe the children’s literacy in the case study.
Head Start. A Federally funded program established in the 1960s to help
children overcome the cognitive, social, emotional, and physical deficits that
frequently accompany growing up in an economically disadvantaged home (Cotton,
15
Conklin, YEAR). This federal program will be mentioned throughout the case study,
since it provides preschool for low-income families participating in the “twilight”
program.
Storybook Reading (students). “reading” storybooks by children who are not
yet reading from print (Sulzby, 1985).
Storybook Reading (teachers). reading storybooks aloud by teachers to
children (Sulzby, 1985).
Twilight Program. Head Start Preschool Program services to parents who are
working or going to school . This time of day will be used associated with the
parents work shift of the children in the case study.
Developmentally Appropriate Practice. Adopted by NAEYC Governing
Board in July 1996, the position statement defines developmentally appropriate
practice as the outcome of a process of teacher decision making that draws on at least
three critical, interrelated bodies of knowledge:
1. what is known about child development and learning-knowledge of
age-related human characteristics that permits general predictions
within an age range about what activities, materials, interactions, or
experiences will be safe, healthy, interesting, achievable, and also
challenging to children;
2. what is known about the strengths, interests, and needs of each
individual child in the group to be able to adapt for and be responsive
to inevitable individual variation; and
16
3. knowledge of the social and cultural contexts in which children live to
ensure that learning experiences are meaningful, relevant, and
respectful for the participating children and their families (Bredekamp
& Copple, 1997).
17
CHAPTER TWO:
LITERATURE REVIEW
Introduction
The purpose of this literature review is to examine how young children are
being prepared in the area of emergent literacy and what appropriate experiences and
effective instructional practices are being implemented in the Twilight Head Start
Preschool Program. In 2008, Jack O. Connell stated in his Message from the State
Superintendent of Public Instruction in the California Preschool Learning
Foundations, young children are naturally eager to learn, however, not all of them
are ready for school. According to the National Association for the Education of
Young Children (1998), ensuring that children are ready for successful school
experiences is one of the most pressing issues in early childhood policy and practice.
This study will examine the nature of “twilight” programs and their impact on
children’s kindergarten emergent literacy relative to traditional programs. In this
study I will examine the emerging literacy of preschool children attending a twilight
program. There is a lack of research on this topic, specifically research devoted to
the children of parents working non-traditional hours. The key factors that will be
discussed in this literature review are:
1. What is the nature of storybook reading in a Twilight Preschool
Program?
2. What role does storybook reading play in children’s readiness?
18
This chapter begins with a brief history and current status of Head Start. I
then provide a theoretical basis of the research that guided the choice to measure
Emergent Literacy. A summary of significant research studies from Readiness to
Emergent Literacy is found in this chapter based on the initial research questions.
Next, this chapter identifies key factors in Effective Practice and Pedagogy.
Preschool policies and practices are included in this chapter to address the need for
meaningful early learning experiences. This chapter concludes with a look at
alternative Preschool programs and what they offer to young children.
As previously mentioned, the California Research Bureau (2004), Census
2000, California has 1.17 million children, aged three to five, who are not yet in
kindergarten. The ethnic/racial composition of these children is as follows: Latino
children are the largest group (46%), White children second (34%), Asian and
Pacific Islander children third (9%), African American children fourth (6%), children
of multiple races fifth (4%), and Native American children sixth (0.5%). California
has 550,234 children ages three to five who are not yet in kindergarten, but who are
enrolled in preschool/childcare (both public and private). Of the children enrolled:
41% is White, 36% is Latino, 10% is Asian, 8% is are African American, 5% is of
multiple races, and 0.5% is Native American. With close to half of the state’s
children ages three to five enrolled in preschool/childcare, as expected, children
whose families tend to be in lower income groups (such as Latinos, African
Americans, and Native Americans) primarily attend public preschool/childcare.
Children whose families receive higher incomes like Whites and Asians are more
19
likely to attend private preschool/childcare. Preschool/childcare enrollment rates
vary considerably by ethnic group. At the higher end are White and African
American children with 58 and 56%, respectively, enrolled in preschool/childcare
(Lopez, 2004). At the lower end are Latinos with only 37% of the children in
preschool/childcare. Currently, California ranks 37th relative to other states with
respect to preschool/childcare enrollment rates (Lopez). To increase the number of
children enrolling in preschool/childcare, the state would need to address the issues
facing California’s very young children.
Researchers have found that low income and minority children could benefit
most from quality preschool programs. Lynn Karoly (2008) the lead researcher of
the RAND California Preschool Study claims, there is room to both increase
participation for underserved groups and to raise the quality across the board. This
new report finds that it is low income and minority children who are least likely to be
enrolled in good early development programs. Only 15% of those children who
could benefit most are in high-quality programs that prepare them for success in
Kindergarten-12
th
grade. Half of three and four year olds in economically
disadvantaged homes are in preschool programs of any quality, compared to 70% of
children from homes that are more financially secure (Lopez, 2004).
The RAND Study of California Preschools, Room for Improvement in the
Use of High-Quality Preschool Programs for California’s Children (2008) discusses
five key findings and four implications for preschool-aged children. In brief, the
implications include:
20
1. Participation in high-quality center-based programs is low for groups
of children who could benefit the most.
2. There is scope for expanding the use of center-based programs by
underserved groups.
3. There is scope for raising quality across the board.
4. Quality initiatives need to focus on elements that are key to
kindergarten readiness.
A more extensive explanation of the RAND Study, key findings and implications,
can be found in the Conclusion.
Head Start
All children must start school ready to benefit from the learning experiences
they will have there (Goldberg, 2002).
Since 1965, Head Start, a federally funded program based on a federal
government education initiative, has provided children from low-income families
with free access to early childhood education programs. Most statewide early
education programs followed Head Start’s lead and targeted children of low
socioeconomic status or children who were at “risk.” The role of Head Start is to
provide an array of educational and social services to children and their families.
According to Cotton and Conklin (1989) Head Start programs were designed to
foster the general well being of children and enhance school readiness so that they
might gain the full benefit of their school experiences and be more successful in life
generally. A meta-analysis of 75 Head Start research studies, found that Head Start
21
produced immediate, meaningful gains in all areas of cognitive development, as well
as in social behavior, achievement motivation, and health status. However, cognitive
and socioemotional gains in Head Start appeared to fade gradually (Zill & Resnick,
2006). Thus, the need for more studies and inquiry on the cognitive and
socioemotional gains is warranted to identify and establish best practices that will
not fade gradually.
Recently, Congress reauthorized an estimated cost of $7.4 billion for fiscal
year 2008 (Goldfarb, 2007), which George W. Bush supported in his 2007 budget
proposed at a cost of $6.8 billion (Office of Health and Human Services, n.d.). Pre-
K Now, a Washington, D.C. based nonprofit organization, estimates that federal
spending on pre Kindergarten nearly doubled between 2005 to 2007, from $2.4
billion to $4.2 billion. The impact of not having these readiness skills has lasting
implications.
Critical Elements of a Twilight Preschool Head Start Program
At the Urban setting where I will be conducting this study, a variety of early
childhood education services are offered to up to 600 children and their families.
Founded in 1970, under the School for Early Childhood Education at a major
research Institution, the Head Start Program includes five centers, which serve low-
income families residing within the parameters of this major research education
institution. Families can choose from one of the following preschool services:
home-based, part-day, full-day, evening and twilight services. A total of five centers
is available for families to choose from but only three offer twilight services.
22
Twilight services are defined as an early childhood education program, which
is offered to parents who are working or going to school, Monday thrrough Friday,
from 4:00p.m.-7:30p.m. The Twilight Head Start Program and the other four centers
are funded by a combination of federal and state funds. These funds include a grant
from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for
Children and Families, and a grant from the State Department of Education, Child
Development Division State Preschool.
Forty-two percent of the current staffing is comprised of residents from the
community and parents of the children enrolled in the preschool program. For every
six children there is a minimum of one full-time, qualified staff member. Weekly and
monthly supportive supervision includes planning, professional development, and
time for reflection. Staff trainings are held quarterly to assist with the management
of classrooms and families. Annual self-assessments are held which provide
feedback to the university and state and federal agencies about the program’s quality,
federal and state program compliance, and the implementation of developmentally
appropriate practice. The critical elements of a Twilight Head Start Preschool are:
• Providing services to low-income children and families based on their
needs and schedules,
• Exceptional curriculum programming,
• Parent and community participation, and
• Ongoing professional development for staff.
23
This study will focus on examining the classroom practice of storybook reading,
which may be a reading readiness skill in the development of emergent reading. My
goal is to identify patterns of young children’s emergent storybook reading behaviors
when asked to read to an adult.
Theoretical Basis of the Research
My perspective of emergent literacy is built upon the two-primary sources
from developmental theory: the theories of both Jean Piaget and Lev Vygotsky.
Piaget conducted a program of naturalistic research that has profoundly affected our
understanding of child development. With a background in both biology and
Philosophy, he was primarily interested in how knowledge developed in human
organisms. He called his general theoretical framework “genetic epistemology.”
Piaget stressed development as a limiting case and showed that young children’s
concepts are their own constructions. Children construct ideas about reading and
writing that are not taught to them, are not modeled for them, and are not yet
conventional (Teale & Sulzby, 1986). The major theme of Vygotsky’s theoretical
framework is that social interaction plays a fundamental role in the development of
cognition. His theory was an attempt to explain consciousness as the end product of
socialization.
These developmental theories apply to my study based on Sulzby’s belief that
emergent literacy must account both for the individual child’s invention and
exploration. Sulzby and Teale (2003) mention in their review of the literature on
storybook reading that the studies, were typically conducted within a Vygotskian
24
framework and that it has been assumed that children internalize patterns from social
interaction. Thus, critical for this study, the social interaction theory of Vygotsky
becomes an important tool to describe adult-child interactions with literacy. In this
chapter, I will discuss each developmental theory in isolation and then link the
theories to my study.
Piaget’s Theory of Development
Piaget’s ability to actually listen to what children were saying led to a
lifetime study of how children view the world. He was fascinated with how they
organized and reorganized their thinking about the world around them. Although
Piaget is interested in what children know, his chief concern is how children come to
know. Combining his ingenious tasks with physical materials, plus his penetrating
questions, Piaget altered our knowledge of how children within the confines of his
studies think and learn. Children of like age groups responded in ways that were
remarkably similar to each other and remarkably different from adult responses and
expectations (Piaget, 1960). Piaget noticed patterns in children’s responses to
intellectual tasks (Piaget). Piaget set his sights to explain these patterns.
In the 1920s little was known about the complex functioning of the brain.
Piaget could only infer internal, mental differences from his observations of
children’s thinking in action. With 35 published books and numerous articles on the
topic, Piaget obviously explained these external differences with ideas that made
sense to him. Hence, Piaget’s Stages-Levels of Children’s Thinking was introduced
25
based on the patterns that he observed repeatedly in different situations. Piaget
categorized levels of children’s thinking into four major stages:
1. sensori-motor (0-2 years) which is the period of sensory input and
coordination of physical actions
2. preoperational (2-7 years) this is the period of representational and
prelogical thought
3. concrete operational (7-11 years) is the time a child has concrete
logical thought,
4. formal operational (11-15 years) which is the period of unlimited
logical thought (Piaget, 1960).
Piaget’s stage concept findings are as follows:
• All children must pass through the concrete operational stage to reach
the formal operational stage but the rate at which children pass
through these stages does vary from child to child
• Some children reach the later stages at an earlier age than average
• Some children hesitate in the earlier stages for some time
• Some children never develop the mental abilities that characterize the
later stages
The order in which children pass through these developmental stages does not vary.
Piaget believed that intellectual development is continuous, although simultaneously
marked by discontinuity of distinctly novel ways of thinking at each stage (Piaget).
He states, there are no discrete, static stages that appear on a regular basis, rather,
26
there are overlapping stages of continuous development. This study examines the
influence these stages of development may have on reading readiness and emergent
literacy.
Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development
Vygotsky described thinking and learning in terms of developmental
processes. He conducted a comparative study of school children’s scientific and
everyday concepts, in which he explored the developmental processes in solving
problems (Vygotsky, 1987). Scientific concepts include tasks that require the
establishment of causal dependencies between facts and concepts from a content
area, whereas, everyday concepts are defined as tasks that require the establishment
of similar relationships between concepts and facts from everyday life (Vygotsky).
Vygotsky’s research led to the finding that scientific and everyday concepts do not
show identical levels of development.
In scientific concepts, we encompass higher levels of thinking than in
everyday concepts. Vygotsky’s subjects performed a task of completion of a
sentence cut off at the word “because” or “though”, the rate of success for scientific
concepts is consistently higher than it is in tasks based on everyday concepts.
Phrases are broken off in the middle, for example, if a child saw a bicyclist fall in the
street, he would never say that the bicyclist fell and broke his leg because they took
him to the hospital, but this is what actually occurred on a regular basis throughout
the study. The finding here demonstrated that the child lacked understanding of
causal relationships and used this relationship in speech earlier than he acquired
27
conscious awareness of it. Also, this finding lead to the conclusion that the
development of scientific and spontaneous concepts take opposite paths (Vygotsky,
1987). Spontaneous concepts develop from below to above, from the more
simplistic to the more difficult, while scientific concepts develop from above to
below, from the more difficult to the more simplistic. Vygotsky surmised that the
developmental paths taken by the child’s spontaneous and scientific concepts can be
schematically represented as two lines moving in opposite directions. In terms of
literacy development, while scientific and everyday concepts move in opposite
directions in development, these processes are internally and profoundly connected
to one another. The zone of proximal and actual development is considered by
Vygotsky to be the link between these two lines of development. Scientific concepts
restructure and raise spontaneous concepts to a higher level, forming their zone of
proximal development. What a child is able to do in collaboration today, he will be
able to do independently tomorrow (Vygotsky).
Vygotsky described the zone of proximal development as an opportune area
for growth, but one in which children are dependent on help from others (McGee &
Richgels, 1996). It is a time when an adult or an older child must give advice and
direction for the child to succeed within this zone of learning. By internalizing this
advice or direction they are to ultimately perform a task independently. According
to McGee and Richgels when children are working in their zone of proximal
development they complete some parts of a task and adults or an older child
performs the task the child cannot do alone. In this way children can accomplish
28
tasks that are too hard for them to complete on their own. An important part of
helping children complete tasks is through the talk of an adult or older child. This
talk by an adult or older child is called scaffolding. Scaffolding talk gives advice,
directs children’s attention, alerts them to the sequence of activities, and provides
information for completing the task successfully (McGee & Richgels).
The developmental theories of Piaget and Vygotsky link to my study in the
following ways. First, in contrast to Piagetian view, my study will show that literacy
is not acquired in a universal sequence of stages. Children are learning about letters,
sounds, words, and comprehension simultaneously and in a variety of ways. Second,
my study will demonstrate, based on Vygotsky’s zone of proximal development, that
there is an organizing nature of conventional adult literacy that children are exposed
to in social interaction (Teale & Sulzby, 1986). Ferreiro and Teberosky (1982)
stressed the importance of the conventional model for providing children with
conflictive situations that lead to further development. And third, emergent literacy
must encompass the whole child. The child learns content in a social context and the
affective part of learning is just as important as the content (Teale & Sulzby). Thus,
in my study, the interaction and rapport with the child and the adults while in the
process of storybook reading will be a unit of analysis.
From Readiness to Emergent Literacy
For the purpose of this study, I will begin by providing a historical
explanation of the terms readiness and emergent literacy. Then, I will identify
29
several of the pioneers’ who defined and shaped the areas of readiness and emergent
literacy. Also, I will focus specifically on research and theory relevant to this study.
Readiness
The concept of readiness has been elusive and debated over two decades
(Kagan, 1990). Readiness is defined as the knowledge, skills, and characteristics
children should learn/develop during their preschool years. The term “reading
readiness” has many definitions but usually implies that children become ready for
formal reading at different times as a result of different rates of maturing, and that
there is a state at which the child is not yet a reader (Stallman & Pearson, 1990 in
Clay, 1991). Clay states, one consequence about the term readiness concept is that
the education system, the schools and the teachers expect all children to get to where
the program starts before they are ready for formal instruction and some will be
identified as “not ready.” If the concept of emerging literacy is accepted, then the
school’s program should begin where each child is and take his learning on from that
point.
Mathews (1966), showed that the literature on learning to read and write can
in fact be traced back many centuries. The modern research from the 1800s to the
20
th
century had its beginnings with the work of Iredell (1898) and Huey (1908).
Iredell wrote about the parallels between young children’s oral language
development and literacy development and about the importance for literacy learning
of what occurs in the preschool years. Meanwhile, Huey wrote an entire chapter in
Psychology and Pedagogy of Reading devoted to “Learning To Read at Home.” It
30
was in this chapter that he too stressed the importance of experiences in the early
years and asked for “natural ways” of ushering young children into literacy. At this
time in terms of reading readiness, the general belief was that literacy development
did not begin until the child encountered formal instruction in school (Teale &
Sulzby, 1986).
Betts (1946) and McCall (1923) found that massive numbers of children
failing initial reading instruction served as an impetus for educators to consider other
ways of viewing beginning reading instruction. A change in thinking began in the
1920s as a result of the literature and it was at this point that educators started to look
more closely at the “period of preparation” in the years of early childhood and
kindergarten. Although readiness had been discussed for years prior to this time,
now it was being applied specifically to reading, hence the concept of reading
readiness was born. The Report of the National Committee on Reading published in
1925 Yearbook of the United States National Society for the Study of Education
contained the first explicit reference to reading readiness (Colheart, 1979 in Teale &
Sulzby, 1986). This began a debate among researchers on how to define reading
readiness. One group of educators believed reading readiness was the result of
maturation or neural ripeness, while the second group believed that appropriate
experiences could accelerate readiness.
From the 1920s to the 1950s, Arnold Gesell influenced work in child
development. Basically, he saw development as being controlled by maturation.
Gesell (1925, 1928, 1940), believed progress in motor or cognitive skills was the
31
result of neural ripening or intrinsic growth with behaviors unfolding automatically.
Durkin (1968) found that data on motor development in children were generalized
beyond their original context to support a maturationalist theory of cognitive
development. In 1964, Hunt surmised that changes in children’s thinking were seen
to be akin to anatomical or motor development starting from the inside and
proceeding outward, largely unaffected by the environment. Holdaway (1979)
believed readiness was timed by the internal “clock” of the learner and that the
learning begins with immersion in an environment in which the skill is being used in
purposeful ways. Bruner (1983) summarized this line of work by saying that for
Gesell, the developmental question largely boiled down to when things got better or
faster or stronger, or more controlled. However, in academic and public sectors,
Gesell and the maturationalits’ viewpoint was the dominant one of the time. The
maturationalists’ believed readiness was the result of neural ripening or the mental
processes necessary for reading would unfold automatically at a certain point of
development. The implications for educators were, if the child is not ready, wait and
do not rush the child into reading.
During the 1930s and based on the popularity of the maturationalist
viewpoint, the “mental-age concept of readiness” was made popular by the
progressive education movement and opened the door for the “postpone and wait”
recommendation. The neural ripening/mental-age/delay instruction orientation would
continue through the next four decades. Twelve Metropolitan Readiness Tests were
published between 1930-1943 and were primarily used as an indicator to measure
32
when children had the mental maturity to begin reading. If a child scored low in any
of the test areas, then intervention was planned in that area, thus methods textbooks
for teachers began to include a section on how to work with these children. The test
areas included subtests entitled Perception: Similarities; Perception: Copying;
Vocabulary; Sentences; Numbers; Information; and the Draw-a-Man test (Teale &
Sulzby, 1986). Since the first publication of a reading-readiness book as part of a
basal series of reading in 1935, the idea of making available some type of reading-
readiness materials has caught on rapidly (Betts, 1946).
In the 1950s and 1960s the shift from reading readiness as maturation toward
readiness as the product of experience occurred. By 1968, Durkin wrote, the
literature still shows some remnants of the maturational concept of readiness, but, as
a whole, articles and books are now dominated by the opposite conception
highlighting the contribution of environmental factors. Or to put the characterization
of the current scene in the framework of the nature-nurture debate, today the
spotlight happens to be on nurture (Teale & Sulzby, 1986).
From Sputnik in 1957 to increased research on young children in 1960 by
notable psychologists, such as Kagan, Bruner, Brazelton and others at Harvard
University, interest increased in infancy research. Infancy research demonstrated
that preschoolers knew more than they had been given credit for and that the early
years was a time that they could be learning many skills. Bloom’s (1964) analysis of
multiple longitudinal study went even further. He concluded that the majority of
human intellectual development takes place before the age of five, with 50% of the
33
intelligence measured at the age of 17 being developed by age four. Parallel with
Bloom’s work, Bruner’s 1960 book, The Process of Education, was interpreted as
teaching the subjects “downward in the grades”, as a spiral, but also had implications
for teaching reading. Bruner suggested that more of an emphasis should be placed
on getting children ready to read as soon as possible, rather than sitting back and
waiting.
The 1960s comprised of many social issues but one issue known as the
“black movement” shed light on the emphasis on environmental factors. Supporters
of social equality argued that Black children, as well as, other minority children
came from backgrounds that were culturally disadvantaged that would ultimately put
them at risk for educational failure. The delay until they are ready approach to
readiness would not help these children overcome their cultural disadvantage. Early
intervention was regarded as a key in helping achieve equality for all children (Teale
& Sulzby, 1986). These events shed light on the War on Poverty and the
development of the federal Head Start Program. Programs such as Head Start were
tied to the new emphasis on doing something about environmental factors early in
the child’s life so that reading development could be facilitated in a discovery-
oriented approach. In the school system, the reading readiness program and the idea
of the need to teach prerequisites for reading became fixed. The reading readiness
program had its beginnings in the 1960s and prevailed until the 1980s as the
dominant approach to beginning literacy instruction.
34
According to Teale and Sulzby (1986), the idea of reading readiness was a
good concept that got applied in a bad way. They also suggest that the reading
readiness program was built upon a logical analysis of literacy skills from an adult
perspective rather than upon a developmental perspective. It is their belief that
research and theory focus on reconceptualizing reading readiness by recognizing
developmental perspectives. Developmental perspectives take into account
children’s thinking as being “different” from adult thinking and to provide
instruction in accordance with a child’s developing knowledge. Yaden, Rowe, and
McGillivray (2000) concurred with Teale and Sulzby by joining the debate in
determining how children’s first encounters with print should be called prereading,
reading readiness, emergent literacy, or early literacy. They believed their view of
the terminology existed not in just a new term for the same concept but this would
definitely shift the significance of research in theory, practice, and research.
In 1990, at a summit meeting attended by the President of the United States
and the National Governors, concern for the readiness of America’s children was
expressed. The result of this meeting is the first national goal on readiness: “By the
year 2000, all children in America will start school ready to learn” (Kagan, 1990).
This goal calls attention to the importance of the early years of schooling and of our
collective responsibility to make the most of those years. From this goal emerged
three objectives for communities and schools to adhere to:
35
1. Provide disadvantaged and disabled children with access to high
quality and developmentally appropriate preschool programs designed
to help prepare them for school.
2. Recognize that parents are children’s first teachers and encourage
them to spend time daily to help their preschool children learn;
provide parents with training and support.
3. Enhance prenatal health systems to reduce the number of low
birthweight babies; ensure that children receive the nutrition and
health care they need to arrive at school with healthy minds and
bodies. (Katz, 1991, p.15)
The readiness debate continued with fervor. Kagan (1990) showed that the main
issue debated was the extent to which development and learning are determined by
the biological processes involved in growth versus the experiences children have
with parents, peers, and their environments. Again, similar to the early 1920s, there
were two positions about the concept of readiness, those who emphasize internal
developmental processes versus those who emphasize experience. Supporters of
internal developmental processes deemed that the passage of time during which
growth occurs causes the child to be able to benefit from formal instruction. The
second set of supporters take the position that innate growth processes and
experiences contribute to children’s learning (Kagan). Also, they believed that
virtually all human beings were born with a powerful built-in disposition to learn.
However, Kagan stresses what children learn, how they learn, and how much they
36
learn depends on many factors. Most importantly, the factors of a child’s physical
well-being and the emotional and cognitive relationships with caregivers.
Based on Kagan’s work, the term readiness broadened to reflect preparation
for school in general. The school readiness goal reflected two major concerns about
the education of very young children. The first concern is that many young children
live in poverty in single-parent households, have limited proficiency in English,
especially academic English, drug abuse of parents, have poor nutrition, and do not
have adequate health care. The second concern includes high rates of retention in
kindergarten and primary grades, delayed entry into school, separate transition
classes, and the use of standardized tests to determine children’s readiness.
Kagan (1990) offers that reaching the school readiness goal would involve
two strategies. One strategy focused on supporting families in their efforts to help
their children get ready for school. The second strategy concentrated on helping
schools be responsive to the wide range of development levels, backgrounds,
experiences, and needs children bring to school. Katz (1991) identifies the
commonly used term readiness to mean readiness to learn to read, however
children’s social development and intellectual backgrounds should also be taken into
account. Katz and McClellan (1991) claim social readiness and intellectual
readiness are important factors in getting children ready for school. They define
social readiness as children being more likely to cope successfully with their first
school experience if they have had positive experience in being in a group away
from their home and familiar adults. Intellectual readiness was defined as children
37
are more likely to feel competent in school if they can understand and use the
language their peers and the adults use in school. The national goal that all children
will enter school ready to learn by the year 2000 was instrumental in shaping the
content of early learning standards. The development of Early Learning Standards
will be discussed further in detail in the section Effective Practice and Pedagogy.
Research overwhelmingly indicated the need to reconceptualize the term reading
readiness, however the terms reading readiness and emergent literacy may be used
interchangeably in this study. The next section demonstrates the shift to a new
developmental perspective.
Emergent Literacy
Sulzby (1989) describes emergent literacy as “the reading and writing
behaviors that precede and develop into conventional literacy.” Emergent literacy is
defined as the skills, knowledge, and attitudes that are considered to be the
developmental precursors to reading and writing, and more broadly, to school
achievement (Whitehurst & Lonigan, 1989), and the environments that support these
developments (e.g. shared book reading; Lonigan, 1994; Whitehurst et al., 1998).
Current inquiry into emergent literacy represents a rather broad range of research
methodologies and multiple perspectives.
The term emergent literacy first appears in volume one of the Handbook of
Reading Research. Mason’s (1986) chapter was called, “Early Reading from a
Developmental Perspective,” which demonstrated a shift from the term readiness to
emergent literacy. The term emergent literacy evolved in the early 1980s in part
38
from Marie Clay’s (1966, 1967) influential research and from increasing references
to emergent literacy in books and articles (Sulzby & Teale, 1996). During this
period, other research was introduced that did not use the term, emergent literacy,
but still contributed to what young children are learning about print related to reading
and writing, and print prior to schooling. Many terms were being used in the field,
such as, meta-linguistic awareness, print awareness, early literacy, concepts about
print, and literacy before schooling and there was a need to unify the research under
one common term. Hence, emergent literacy became that term. This term is now
found as a descriptor in research databases, in volumes aimed at researchers and
teachers, and since 1985 appears as a topic in highly regarded reading research
yearbooks, 34
th
Yearbook of the National Reading Conference in 1985 and as invited
research in the 36
th
Yearbook, and the lead chapter in the 13
th
Review of Research in
Education. Emerging Literacy also appears as a chapter title in Becoming A Nation
of Readers (Anderson, Hiebert, Scott, & Wilkinson, 1985), a report that presents
leading experts’ interpretation of both current knowledge of reading and the state of
the art and practice of teaching reading. In their chapter, Anderson, et al. argue that
reading must be seen as part of a child’s general language development and not as a
discrete skill isolated from listening, speaking, and writing. Notably, these examples
in the use of the term, emergent literacy, in the field represent a paradigm shift in the
literature and guiding research.
In 1986, Teale and Sulzby decided to utilize the term emergent literacy, to the
best of their knowledge a notion first developed by Marie Clay (1966) in her doctoral
39
dissertation research. Marie Clay was a pioneer in examining young children’s
reading and writing development. In 1967, Clay began her research with five year-
old children in New Zealand. Her main objective was to provide better descriptions
of the early reading behaviors of children so that children with reading difficulties
could be identified as early as possible (Teale & Sulzby, 1986). The five year-olds
received deliberate instruction in reading, but the method used was one which
stressed fluency, meaning and learning as one reads, with only slight attention to
letter-sound associations and learning a basic sight vocabulary (Clay, 1967). This
early research showed that young children could engage in important reading
behaviors such as visual sensitivity to letter and word forms, appropriate directional
movements, self-correction, and synchronized matching of spoken word units with
written word units (Teale & Sulzby). Clay concluded, “There is nothing in this
research that suggests that contact with printed language forms should be withheld
from any five-year-old child on the ground that he is immature.” Clay’s research also
contained considerable references to preschool reading experiences and
demonstrated how her thoughts on reading development during the early years
differed from the traditional concept of reading readiness.
Clay (1972) stated, “It is the need to transform preschool skills into the new
ways of responding that makes early reading behavior a matter of learning and
discredits the ‘growth from within’ concept of readiness.” In the first edition of her
book, Reading: The Patterning of Complex Behaviour, Clay avoided terms such as,
“preparation for reading”, “reading readiness training” or “prereading.” However,
40
Clay’s rejection of prereading and readiness indicated that becoming literate implies
discontinuities in development because it requires the child to develop new ways of
responding. There are important continuities between what she termed the child’s
emergent literacy (Clay, 1966) behaviors and those behaviors employed when the
child is able to read independently. Clay’s work continues in early literacy
development with the book What Did I Write? in 1975. Although the book is about
reading, the inclusion of writing samples from young children prompts the
discussion of writing and reading in early literacy development. In 1972, Clay
publishes Reading: The Patterning of Complex Behaviour, which emphasizes the
importance of the early childhood period in the development of literacy. In
particular there is an increased interest for researchers and teachers to examine what
children do with books and reading and writing, even though children cannot yet
read in the conventional sense. Finally, in this book the process of distinguishing
between an emergent literacy approach to literacy development in early childhood
and reading readiness approach was evident (Teale & Sulzby, 1986).
At the same time that Clay was conducting her research, Yetta Goodman was
examining the reading processes of beginning readers in the United States
(Goodman, 1967). Upon completion of her doctoral dissertation research with first
graders, Goodman found that even children who would be described as “at risk” for
becoming competent readers had knowledge about many aspects of reading: They
knew how to handle books and they understood the directionality of written language
and the function of print in a book (Teale & Sulzby, 1986). Later, Goodman said “It
41
slowly became obvious to me that children’s discoveries about literacy in a literate
society such as ours must begin much earlier than at school age.” The studies of Clay
and Goodman inspired others in the field interested in child development and
education to investigate reading and writing of very young children.
According to Teale and Sulzby, (1986, 1989, 1991) the study of emergent
literacy includes the skills, knowledge, and attitudes that are presumed to be
developmental precursors to conventional forms of literacy. This study focuses on
the emergent literacy of preschool children. Furthermore, it focuses on the role
storybook reading plays in children’s emergent literacy in an urban setting while
enrolled in a twilight preschool program.
The Nature of Storybook Reading
Teale and Sulzby (1986) defined storybook reading as “reading” by children
who are not yet reading from print. Children who learned to read (and write) before
formal instruction have often been described as “teaching themselves to read” from
favorite storybooks (Sulzby, 1985). Sulzby, and other researchers of the time,
wanted to know how storybook reading develops over time prior to conventional
reading and how to explain this phenomenon. Hence, Sulzby’s longitudinal study
came forth to attempt to answer this and other related questions in literacy learning.
Sulzby asked 24 four to six year old children to “read” one of their favorite
storybooks at the beginning and at the end of kindergarten. Two main studies were
conducted in total but for the purposes of this study I will describe only the first
study and one separate study from the second main study. I decided to use these
42
studies because the first study was conducted with Kindergarten children and the
second separate study was conducted with a cross section of children from two-four
years old and this gave me enough comparison data to use as a model. Therefore,
using all of the four separate studies would have given me redundant data. In the
first study the children were from a suburban, mid-western town, from a middle-
class socioeconomic status, in public school kindergarten, and 5.5 being the average
age. The second study comprised of children who participated in a total of four
separate studies conducted over a year’s time with approximately three months
between each session. I have chosen to use only the first separate study. These
children were also from a suburban, mid-western city, but were ages two-four years
old, and from a private day care. Only eight children took part in both studies.
Sulzby based her study on the following theoretical assumptions:
• Children become literate long before they are reading from print
• Emergent literacy is based upon social interactions with parents,
teachers, and storybooks
• Children acquire oral and written language simultaneously
• Children emergently acquire all aspects of conventional literacy
which enables them to figure out print
In both studies, patterns of behavior were observed by conducting beginning and end
of the school year interviews on “general knowledge” about written language.
Children were observed by the same interviewer on a regular basis before the study
began. Children were asked to pick their favorite book to read to the interviewer, but
43
it had to be from among the books the teacher had read previously. Assessment of
children’s storybook reading was based on Categories of Storybook Reading. This
assessment is a tree structure of categories found in Figure 1. It is a classification
scheme for emergent reading of favorite storybooks and measures picture-governed
attempts and print-governed attempts. Sulzby found that at the beginning of
kindergarten most children produced story-like readings that were governed
primarily by the pictures. About half of these story-like readings had oral language
form, for example, labeling of pictures rather than written language form. At the end
of kindergarten, even though children had retained their relative rank of story reading
complexity, most had advanced to a more complex level of emergent reading, such
as, readings governed by pictures using written language form. Findings of this
study began to describe young children’s reading behaviors in a new way. Sulzby
(1985) uncovered developmental trends within children’s holistic interactions with
storybooks during the period preceding and leading up to conventional reading. The
four findings that concluded the study were:
1. At least 10 types of reading behavior have been described thus far.
The behaviors indicate that children develop tremendously through
interacting with storybooks. The patterns that were found further
indicate that children progress from treating individual pages of
storybooks as if they are discrete units to treating the book as the unit,
using speech that builds a story across the book’s pages.
44
2. The behaviors described in these studies appear to have some stability
across storybooks.
3. The behaviors appear to be developmental in that the patterns differ
predictably from 2-3-4 and 5 year old children.
4. Most important, the development that was observed in these studies
appears to make sense in light of theoretical ideas about general and
language development and the findings of other current research.
Like Sulzby (1985), Elster (1994) focused on multiple readings and talk
strategies present within emergent readings of preschool children. Elster modified
Sulzby’s holistic emergent reading scale. He applied a microanalysis system at the
level of speech unit to 36 Head Start children, four and five years old. The goals of
Elster’s study were to:
1. Illuminate emergent reading before it becomes governed by print
showing the sources of information, which exist prior to alphabetic
knowledge which form the basis of alphabetic reading.
2. Describe factors which influence shifting strategies within emergent
readings
3. Look within early readings or development to identify and describe
the range of strategies readers use.
45
4. Show that emergent reading is a dynamic process involving moment
to moment deployment of attention to a variety of information
sources.
5. Go beyond holistic ratings and microanalyze individual readings.
Three classrooms of Head Start children from a low-income, midwestern city
participated in the study. Children were asked to select a book that had been read
previously by the teacher of the classroom to read to a familiar researcher. Each
child was taped individually, using procedures and prompts suggested by Sulzby
(1985). Analysis of the data showed that emergent readings suggested the following
findings:
• Emergent readings were rarely seamless but rather sequences of
“episodes” that included various reading and talk strategies.
• Readings dominated by narrative and written-like language had more
difficult strategies than non-narrative readings. Children accumulated
a repertoire of strategies.
• Rather than abandoning old strategies they develop new ones such as,
the major strategy a child used while reading to an adult was oral
language monologue but switched to oral dialogue to ask questions or
seek help when she could not continue reading the pictures or text.
• Qualitative analysis revealed several book settings, and reader factors
that contribute to changing strategies within readings. Five patterns
of shifts were identified, they are: 1) building momentum shifts from
46
dialogue to monologue and from nonnarrative to narrative. Three
book patterns were identified. They include 2) attention to
illustrations, resulting in nonnarrative talk such as, labeling and
commenting to following the action, 3) attention to predictable text
patterns, 4) attention to changes in print format, and finally 5) child-
initiated interaction with an adult listener during reading.
• Analysis of emergent readings and the kind of speech unit supports a
view of emergent reading at any given stage of development as a
combination of multiple readings and talk strategies.
Elster’s goal was to adapt and extend the holistic analysis system created by Sulzby
to a microanalysis of emergent readings. My goal in this study is to further adapt
and extend the work of Elster and Sulzby to examine the nature and role storybook
reading has on the critical elements of a reading readiness twilight preschool
program.
The Role of Storybook Reading
Whitehurst and Lonigan (1998) suggest in their review of the literature and
evidence of emergent literacy that emergent literacy consists of two distinct domains,
inside-out skills (phonological awareness, letter knowledge) and outside-in skills
(language, conceptual knowledge). They propose that these two distinct and
different domains are not the product of the same experiences and appear to be
influential at different points in time in the reading process. Therefore, they define
emergent literacy as the acquisition of literacy based on a continuum rather than as
47
an event that happens when children start school or as an all-or-nothing
phenomenon.
Whitehurst (1996) developed a structural equation model to explain how
children’s emergent literacy skills evolve over time and how children’s literacy
acquisition for a group of 200 four year-old Head Start children followed until they
were seven years old. Based on Whitehurst’s model, there are some important
conclusions regarding inside-out and outside-in skills. First, inside-out emergent
literacy skills are critical to reading acquisition for a low-income population as they
are for the socioeconomically heterogenous samples that had been studied previously
(Share, MacClean, & Mathews, 1984). Whitehurst (1998) states that letter
knowledge, phonological sensitivity, and emergent writing are the strongest
predictors of reading at the end of first grade. Second, there is strong continuity
between outside-in emergent literacy skills, for example, receptive and expressive
language, from preschool into the early school years and similarly strong continuity
between inside-out emergent literacy skills and measures of conventional literacy,
such as, spelling, word decoding, and comprehension. Third, from preschool to first
grade when reading involves mainly learning to decode words, outside-in and inside-
out emergent literacy skills become increasingly independent. As the focus shifts
from decoding to comprehension in second grade, language skills (outside-in) play a
significant role in reading. Fourth, the main effects of the literacy environment on
children’s emergent literacy skills are indirect through their effects on children’s
language skills (Whitehurst). And finally, in the home, the model identifies only
48
number of siblings as a developmental precursor to inside-out emergent literacy
skills. Whitehurst’s findings clearly demonstrate that the experiences that lead to the
development of inside-out skills are not the same as those that lead to the
development of outside-in skills and that early differences in these areas are
relatively stable over time.
Martinez and Teale (1989) contributed to the research by arguing that
children learn from the texts of storybook time. They suggest that notable research
in the past decade by Cochran-Smith (1984), Heath (1982), Snow (1983), and Sulzby
and Teale, (1987) determine in addition to the author’s words being read aloud,
considerable discussion and social interaction about the book occurs among the
participants during storybook reading. Furthermore, Martinez and Teale hypothesize
that teacher storybook reading style will directly affect children’s literacy learning
because they believed, as Vygotsky (1978) did that thinking is internalized through
social interaction. The authors focused their study on the effect of teacher storybook
time. Although, this study focuses on the teacher, I decided to include it in my study
because it supports the research on storybook reading, the focus of talk, and the
important goal of understanding the child’s experience with literature in the
classroom.
According to Martinez and Teale (1989), the interest for the study began with
the observation that storybook reading is a classroom activity advocated for
preschool and primary classroom practice in virtually every language arts, reading,
and early childhood methods book. The author’s conducted a survey of the San
49
Antonio metropolitan area and found that among kindergarten teachers, reading
aloud is an almost universal daily practice. Hence, they decided to conduct their own
study to find out if three classroom kindergarten teachers had distinctive storybook
reading styles. In total, each teacher read four narrative storybooks to her class but
the findings from this study will focus on only one of the storybook readings. Three
questions about story features helped illuminate differences in teacher storybook
reading style:
1. How extensively did the teachers focus on important story
information?
2. What portions of the story did the teachers emphasize?
3. What were the categories of important story information that the
teachers emphasized?
Data was organized in a summary chart, which included the following topics:
• Initiator of discussion
• Focus of information discussed
• Main type of information discussed
• Main strategies used to direct discussion
• Orchestration of discussion
• Overall observations
Findings from the study showed that the three teachers diverged dramatically
on the issue of the importance of the story information they chose to discuss. The
kinds of information the teachers encourage their students to discuss during the
50
storybook reading experience can clearly affect children’s storybook reading
development. Martinez and Teale (1989) have identified six types of information
that teachers discuss especially important, which include:
1. Textually explicit
2. Pictorially explicit
3. Background
4. Inferential (text based) inference, reader based inference, value
judgment inference, summary inference, predictive inference)
5. Personal association (relating something from the story to the
listener’s personal life)
6. Identification (getting the listeners to place themselves in the story
situation)
This information revealed an important difference in the three teachers’
storybook reading styles because through the internal response components of stories
the reader/listener gains insight into a character’s motivations, and this information
ties the pieces of a story together (Martinez & Teale, 1989). Another finding was the
type of information teachers chose to discuss with their students and different aspects
of the stories. For example, one teacher stopped periodically to invite the children to
predict upcoming events. Another teacher led her children through a reasoning
strategy, which involved putting together pieces of information to arrive at an
inference.
51
The author’s found that these differences in the focus of their teacher talk
contribute to divergent storybook reading styles which also contribute to the
differences in the child’s orientation to the storybook. One teacher engaged her
students in a more systematic discussion of important information in the story while
another focused on unimportant information rather than important information from
the story. The teachers placed different emphasis during the storybook reading, with
only one teacher emphasizing important information the majority of the time. This
one teacher took her students systematically through key important information in
each episode during the story reading itself and again following the reading when she
reviewed the story. This key information included both what was happening and
why it was happening (Martinez & Teale, 1989).
Another key finding of the study was that one teacher in particular
consistently highlighted during the storybook reading the key story events. The key
story events highlighted initiating events, attempts, consequences and character goals
including internal responses. Martinez and Teale (1989) believe that by highlighting
these key events the teacher may directly facilitate the development of the children’s
general sense of story structure, which would, in turn, help the children process
subsequent stories. A suggestion by Martinez and Teale is that teachers develop an
understanding of how features of storybook reading style affect children’s literacy
development and then use this information to connect their practices with the ways in
which they hope to effect children’s literacy learning and in this way become more
reflective practitioners.
52
In conclusion, the authors found that storybook reading events are clearly
interactive and the adult storybook reader plays a key role in mediating the text for
children. This study surmised that different adults mediate stories in different ways
and that different results will be accomplished when different readers mediate the
same story. Thus, creating a different storybook reading experience for the children
listening to the story (Sulzby & Teale, 1996, 2003). These studies examined
demonstrate the related factors in the teaching and learning of storybook reading in a
preschool classroom.
Effective Practice and Pedagogy
In 1995, the National Association for the Education of Young Children
(NAEYC) reaffirms its position on school readiness as a commitment to promoting
universal school readiness. NAEYC believes it is the responsibility of schools to
meet the needs of children as they enter school and to provide whatever services are
needed to help each child reach his or her fullest potential. The NAEYC position
statement states:
1. School readiness requires access to opportunities
2. School readiness must be flexibly and broadly defined
3. Kindergarten entry should be based on chronological age, not on
mastery of skills
4. Schools must be ready to help children learn
Maxwell and Clifford (2004) defined school readiness involves more than
just children. In the broadest sense, is about children, families, early environments,
53
schools, and communities. Children are not innately ready or not ready for school.
Their skills and development are strongly influenced by their families and through
their interactions with other people, oral language development, and environments
before coming to school.
Oral Language Development in Preschool
The role of oral language development in preschool is a skill that contributes
to children’s reading readiness. Optimal oral language development occurs when
children have numerous opportunities to use language in interactions with adults and
each other, both one-on-one and in small groups (Neuman, 2002). Teachers can
facilitate oral language development by reading aloud to children, asking questions,
and responding to children’s questions. According to Snow, Burns, and Griffin
(1998) found that one group of for-year-olds had heard approximately 13 million
words spoken, while another had heard more than 45 million words spoken. The
authors concluded, by the age of four, extraordinary differences among children may
already have surfaced. Children who enter Kindergarten with large vocabularies
tend to exhibit better listening comprehension, word recognition, and reading
comprehension later on (Clay, 1975). Thus, the inclusion of oral language
development in the classroom observation is important to this study because it is
those skills that are deemed to be critical to future reading success.
Early Learning Standards
Although standards-based education has been a part of K-12 education,
standards that rely primarily on the learning and development of very young children
54
are a new endeavor. As little as five years ago, only a handful of states had standards
focusing on expectations for young children’s outcomes. States across the country
have responded by creating early learning standards. These standards were
documents that stated expectations for children’s learning and development prior to
entry into kindergarten. They were based on what children should know and be able
to do rather than traditional guided practice of recommended or required features of
programs.
In 2005, Scott-Little, Kagan, and Frelow conducted a content analysis of 46
early learning standards collected nationwide. Only early learning standards that
addressed children’s development between the ages of three to five years of age were
included in the content analysis. The content analysis was completed to determine if
specific areas of development were addressed within the standards documents.
Essentially, the standards of each state were examined to obtain a reflection of how
states are conceptualizing children’s readiness for school and the degree to which
they were linked to the K-12 standards. The authors sought to answer the following
questions:
• What domains of children’s development and learning have been
included in the early learning standards?
• What specific elements of development have been included within the
development domains addressed within the early learning standards?
The content analysis stems from the need for an analytic framework that
would be widely accepted in the field and that would be applicable to an array of
55
approaches to be used by states to articulate standards. The National Education
Goals Panel (NEGP, 1995) description of readiness was selected as the analytic
framework. It states that readiness was developed from a comprehensive review of
child development of early childhood literature, involved extensive input and peer
review from numerous experts within the field, and articulated aspect’s of children’s
development known to be associated with later school success (Scott-Little et al.
2006). Once the analytic framework was in place, the research team was asked to
study the NEGP (1995) definition and develop a list of skills, knowledge, and
abilities described within the document for each of the five domains: physical well-
being and motor development, social and emotional development, approaches toward
learning, language and communication development, and cognition and general
knowledge. This process resulted in 36 indicator categories across the five domains
used to code the 46 early learning standards. The research team analyzed the data to
determine the degree to which each of the five domains had been addressed in the
standards and the degree to which individual indicator categories within the domains
had been addressed. The results of the content analysis found that the domain with
the highest percentage of standards items was cognition and general knowledge,
followed by language and communication development. Overall, each of the 46
early learning standards addressed these two domains can be found in Appendix G.
The previous study is influential in the creation of the California Preschool
Learning Foundations. The goal of the California Preschool Learning Foundations
(2008) was to strengthen preschool education and school readiness and close the
56
achievement gap in California. This document, it is believed, will be instrumental in
improving the early learning development of very young children in the state. It
focuses on the skills and knowledge that most children can be expected to
demonstrate in a high-quality preschool program upon the completion of their first or
second year. At this time, all 50 states in the nation have developed preschool
standards documents with many aligning their early learning standards with their
kindergarten content standards. California has published volume 1 of the document,
which includes early learning standards for Social-Emotional Development,
Language and Literacy, English-Language Development, and Mathematics. The
Language and Literacy: Reading Standards can be found in Appendix H. Thus,
mention of the previous study and the document is relevant to my study because it
brings us to the current status of preschool education for the children and teachers
involved in my study.
Developmentally Appropriate Practice
NAEYC (1997) defines developmentally appropriate practice as resulting
from the process of professionals making decisions about the well-being and
education of children based on at least three important kinds of information or
knowledge:
1. what is known about child development and learning, knowledge of
age-related human characteristics that permits general predictions
within an age range about what activities, materials, interactions, or
57
experiences will be safe, healthy, interesting, achievable, and also
challenging to children;
2. what is known about the strengths, interests, and needs of each
individual child in the group to be able to adapt for and be responsive
to inevitable individual variation; and
3. knowledge of the social and cultural contexts in which children live to
ensure that learning experiences are meaningful, relevant, and
respectful for the participating children and their families.
These descriptors of developmentally appropriate practice were not meant just for
young children but are applicable throughout the life span.
According to Katz and Chard (1989 in Bredekamp & Kopple, 1997) the 12
principles of developmentally appropriate practice are based on a broad-based
review of the literature on early childhood education which they recommend be used
to guide and inform decisions for developmentally appropriate practice. The
following is a list of the principles:
1. Domains of children’s development, physical social, emotional, and
cognitive are closely related. Development in one domain influences
and is influenced by development in other domains.
2. Development occurs in a relatively orderly sequence, with later
abilities, skills, and knowledge, building on those already acquired.
3. Development proceeds at varying rates from child to child as well as
unevenly within different areas of each child’s functioning.
58
4. Early experiences have both cumulative and delayed effects on
individual children’s development. Optimal periods exist for certain
types of development and learning.
5. Development proceeds in predictable directions toward greater
complexity, organization, and internalization.
6. Development and learning occur in and are influenced by multiple
social and cultural contexts.
7. Children are active learners, drawing on direct physical and social
experience as well as culturally transmitted knowledge to construct
their own understandings of the world around them.
8. Development and learning result from interaction of biological
maturation and the environment, which includes both the physical and
the social worlds that children live in.
9. Play is an important vehicle for children’s social, emotional, and
cognitive development, as well as a reflection of their development.
10. Development advances when children have opportunities to practice
newly acquired skills as well as when they experience a challenge just
beyond the level of their present mastery.
11. Children demonstrate different modes of knowing and learning and
different ways of representing what they know.
59
12. Children develop and learn best in the context of a community where
they are safe and valued, their physical needs are met, and they feel
psychologically secure.
Although this is a comprehensive list of principles to guide and inform
developmentally appropriate practice, the list is by no means complete to describe
and explain child development. Hence, educators can use the list as fundamental
ideas when making decisions about their practice.
Bredekamp and Kopple determined the guidelines for making decisions about
developmentally appropriate practice are based on the understanding of the nature of
development and learning during the early childhood years, from birth through age
eight. The following guidelines address five interrelated dimensions of early
childhood professional practice: creating a caring community of learners, teaching to
enhance development and learning, constructing appropriate curriculum, assessing
children’s development and learning, and establishing reciprocal relationships with
families (Bredekamp & Kopple, 1997). Teachers must integrate the many
dimensions of their knowledge base, must know about child development and the
implications of this knowledge base for how to teach the content of the curriculum
and instruction to apply developmentally appropriate practice. Furthermore, teachers
must know what to teach and how to adapt the curriculum and instruction to
children’s individual strengths, needs, and interests.
This case study will examine how storybook reading develops over time as a
key element of reading readiness and how to explain this phenomenon within the
60
urban setting in a Twilight Preschool Head Start Program. Developmentally
appropriate practice will be used as the lens the researcher uses to observe to
understand the children’s reading readiness in storybook reading and the relationship
between reading readiness and subsequent learning.
Preschool Policies and Practices
According to Roskos and Vukelich (2006) early literacy policy is a new topic
in the field of early childhood policy. The author’s claim that through a number of
initiatives, the timing is right for change in early literacy. Based on a considerable
amount of research that indicates early exposure to oral language and reading
readiness skills for example, phonological awareness, this places children at an
advantage for later reading achievement (Harrt & Risely, 1995; Snow, Burns, &
Griffin, 1998; Shonkoff & Phillips, 2000 in Roskos & Vukelich, 2006). Curricular
changes in early childhood education begin with the 1998 Head Start reauthorization.
It is this reauthorization that brought early literacy pedagogy to the forefront creating
the Early Reading First policy initiative, a component of the No Child Left Behind
Act of 2001. Meanwhile, early literacy pedagogy was increasingly incorporated in
standards-based education reform. Between 2000 and 2003 the number of states
with early reading standards had more than doubled from 16 to 34 states (Neuman,
Roskos, Vukelich, & Clements, 2004 in Roskos & Vukelich). Another Head Start
reauthorization occurred in 2003, which included even more early reading initiatives
such as, Good Start, Grow Smart and Early Reading First.
61
In 2002, Good Start, Grow Smart was outlined by the president as an early
learning plan that addressed three major areas of early childhood education. First,
strengthen Head Start and other child care programs. Second, partner with states to
improve early childhood education. Finally, provide information to teachers,
caregivers, and parents. At about the same time, NAEYC and the National
Association of Early Childhood Specialists in State Departments issued a joint
statement on early learning content standards titled Early Learning Standards:
Creating the Conditions for Success (2002). These early learning standards
described four factors of quality early learning standards, including (a) supportive
systems, (b) significant content, (c) informed inclusive processes, and (d)
appropriate, ethical implementation (Roskos & Vukelich, 2006). Early Reading First
was also established in the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. It was designed to
prepare children to enter Kindergarten with the necessary skills to be successful in
school. The skills include cognitive, language, and early literacy skills especially for
those children at risk or with disabilities or limited in English proficiency.
Early literacy policy is primarily based on the publication of Learning To
Read and Write: Developmentally Appropriate Practices for Young Children and
three significant research reports. The book, Learning To Read and Write:
Developmentally Appropriate Practices for Young Children, was a joint statement of
the International Reading Association (IRA) and the NAEYC. In 1998, it was
considered a breakthrough in the evolution of early literacy as a recognized domain
of development from birth to 8 years of age. Not only did the research summarize
62
developmentally appropriate practice but it also provided benchmarks for early
literacy learning from preschool to grade three.
The National Research council published a synthesis of early reading
research, titled Preventing Reading Difficulties in Young Children (Snow, Burns, &
Griffin, 1998). This research report identified early risk factors, such as vocabulary
deficits that significantly increased chances for children’s reading failure considered
a condition already linked to broader social and economic problems for example,
crime, poverty, and joblessness (Roskos & Vukelich, 2006). Two more significant
early learning reports commissioned by the National Research council From
Neurons to Neighborhoods, coauthored by Shonkoff and Phillips, in 2000 and Eager
to Learn by Bowman, Donovan, and Burns in 2001 were published on learning to
read and write but also for learning in general. From Neurons to Neighborhoods
synthesized scientific knowledge about the nature of early development and the role
of early experiences while Eager to Learn reviewed and synthesized the knowledge
base on early childhood pedagogy. The three reports, Preventing Reading
Difficulties in Young Children, From Neurons to Neighborhoods, Eager to Learn
created a strong case for high-quality early childhood education and care for all
children.
According to Roskos and Vukelich the reauthorization of Head Start in 1998
and 2003 differ in emphasis. The reauthorization of 1998 focused on phonemics,
print, oral language, vocabulary, appreciation of books, and numeracy, along with
children’s emotional development. The reauthorization of 2003 streamlined the
63
descriptions to prereading, language skills, and numeracy skills instruction using
scientifically based programs that promote school readiness. Supporting children’s
social development was described in reference to the development of teacher
competence to ensure school readiness.
In conclusion, this synopsis of the documented history of early literacy policy
that began in K-12 standards-based reform in the 1980s and 1990s can be described
as defining moments in early education. These federal initiatives and programs
attempted to guide early childhood in a new direction. The content, early learning
standards, ensuring a scientific research base, and assessment all played a larger role
in determining school readiness of children and program effectiveness. Another key
policy idea that was critical for all other federal initiatives and programs to occur
was intensive professional development for teachers. Change was required on a
pedagogical level, which ensured teachers were knowledgeable about early literacy
development and learning. Teachers needed to be sufficiently skilled to create the
kinds of learning conditions that get results, but not just results for just a few
children but for all children (Roskos & Vukelich, 2006). At the time, professional
development made sense as a policy implementation tool, however, it faced
disappointing operational challenges. Sufficient expertise of professional
development on such a large scale, resource issues, and utilizing differentiated
instruction to meet the range of needs of the undereducated proved to be challenging.
64
Alternative Programs
The advent of preschool programs that meet the scheduling needs of parents
who work nontraditional shifts is relatively new. Little research has looked at either
the nature of these “twilight” programs or their impact on children’s kindergarten
readiness relative to traditional programs. Lubeck (1989) notes research on
programs and curriculum models identify 3 generic types. The first type is the
Traditional Preschool that was historically a part-day program for middle-class
children. Today, this type of program is characterized as a teacher who is indirect,
an environment that is carefully planned allowing children to learn through active
exploration and discovery with an emphasis on learning at one’s own pace and an
appreciation for developmentally appropriate practice. The second generic type of
preschool is called The Academic Preschool. This program shares many
characteristics of the traditional preschool but offers many aspects of public school
such as, teacher directed instruction, clear goals and expectations, tight scheduling,
and the teaching of skills for school success (Lubeck, 1990). Academic programs for
preschool children, such as Head Start, usually offer efforts to help low-income
children catch up to their middle-class peers. A major concern among early
childhood educators is that these types of programs will become junior
kindergartens. The third generic type of preschool program is a hybrid form that has
been able to blend aspects of the Traditional and Academic Preschool Programs
primarily by including both structured and unstructured activities.
65
Evidence for the extension of schooling for younger children is increasing,
especially public school-based programs for threes and four year olds seem to be
increasing. Lubeck (1990) raised the following critical questions, should programs
be part of general social services to families, and thus housed in departments of
human resources or social services? Or should they be educational programs for the
young and, therefore, governed by departments of education? And is the principal
objective of a program the provision of care while parents work, or the creation of
opportunities for children to develop socially and emotionally or to be prepared for
formal schooling? Who should be served and what type of program should be
offered are critical questions that need further research to be answered.
Conclusion
California has 550,234 children ages three to five who are not yet in
kindergarten, but are enrolled in preschool/childcare (both public and private). With
close to half of the state’s children ages three to five enrolled in preschool/childcare,
as expected, children whose families tend to be in lower income groups (such as
Latinos, African Americans, and Native Americans) primarily attend public
preschool/childcare. The RAND Study of California Preschools, Room for
Improvement in the Use of High-Quality Preschool Programs for California’s
Children (2008), indicates how low income and minority children could benefit most
from quality preschool programs but that they are least likely to be enrolled in good
early development programs. The key findings from the RAND Study certainly can
66
point us in the right direction of how to meet the needs of all preschool-aged
children. The RAND key findings include:
• Use of center-based early care and education (ECE) is the norm for
California families with three- and four-year-olds.
• These programs fall short on some quality benchmarks, particularly
those for the promotion in thinking and language skills.
• All groups of children in center-based ECE experience quality
shortfalls.
• The groups of children in school readiness and later school
achievement are the least likely to participate in high-quality center-
based ECE programs that will help them succeed in kindergarten and
beyond.
• There is plenty of room for improving the quality of preschool for all
children – and for raising preschool-participation rates for children
who could benefit the most.
A review of the literature from reading readiness to emergent literacy studies and the
progress of policy and current research have demonstrated that the education of our
very young children is a top priority. Yet, the research in the area of storybook
reading in a twilight program leaves us with many challenges of teaching storybook
reading in an Urban twilight preschool classroom. Educators need more information
on effective ways to teach storybook reading to our youngest children in a variety of
67
educational settings. Further research is needed in this area to focus on a high
quality preschool education for all children.
This study will examine some of the challenges of emergent literacy with the
purpose of adding to the current research. As a result of the literature review, the
research base has been established for this study in the area of storybook reading in
an Urban Twilight preschool Head Start Program.
68
CHAPTER THREE:
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY
Introduction
The early education system in the nation has experienced remarkable growth
creating a trend that serves over 900,000 children nationwide to gain access to one of
many early childhood programs (Gov Track, 2007). California has 550,234 children
ages three to five who are not yet in kindergarten, but who are enrolled in
preschool/childcare (both public and private). With close to half of the state’s
children ages three to five enrolled in preschool/childcare, as expected, children
whose families tend to be in lower income groups (such as Latinos, African
Americans, and Native Americans) primarily attend public preschool/childcare.
Researchers have found that low income and minority children could benefit most
from quality preschool programs.
The Head Start Preschool Program, a federally funded program based on a
federal government education initiative, has provided children from low-income
families with free access to early childhood education programs. The advent of
preschool programs that meet the scheduling needs of parents who work
nontraditional shifts is relatively new. Little research has looked at either the nature
of these “twilight” programs or their impact on children’s kindergarten readiness
relative to traditional programs.
The purpose of this study was to examine the reading readiness of preschool
children attending a twilight program in a Head Start Preschool Program. The focus
69
of the study was on the teaching of storybook reading and the role, if any, it had on
preschool children attending the twilight program. The twilight program in this
study was operated by a large research university in a highly impacted urban area in
Southern California.
This chapter describes the methodological design, sample, population,
instrumentation, data collection, and data analysis process of the proposed study.
The following research questions will guide the investigation:
1. What is the nature of storybook reading in a Twilight Preschool
Program?
2. What role does storybook reading play in children’s readiness?
In the next section of this chapter, the study design and samples are
described. Also, a thorough review of the instrumentation will be defined and
described.
Study Design
This case study involved a descriptive case study of a preschool Head Start
program. A descriptive case study is an appropriate design for this study because it
allows the researcher to explore a program in depth (Creswell, 2003). A case study
is an in-depth analysis of a single case or multiple cases. By conducting one study I
was able to provide rich thick descriptions. Rich thick descriptions is a strategy used
to describe multiple sources of information, such as the observations and interviews
that I conducted in my study. Through this data collection a description of the case
70
emerges. Data analysis was completed as a description of an in-depth study of a case
(Creswell, 1998).
This case study utilized qualitative methodologies, which included one-on-
one storybook readings with children ages three to four, interviews with teachers and
the Director of the program, classroom observations, and document analysis of one
developmental storybook reading assessment. I chose to conduct a Qualitative study
(focus groups and interviews) for several reasons. First, Qualitative methods are best
suited for face-to-face, one on one, and in-person interviews which allow access to
data and conditions that cannot be observed by the researcher. Second, the
informants can provide historical information and this allows the researcher to gain
entry to the research site. This is useful when the informants cannot be directly
observed and enables the researcher to obtain the language and words of the
informants (Creswell, 1994).
According to Patton (2002), a case study is defined as a research strategy,
which investigates a phenomenon within a real-life context. This case study
examined the nature of “twilight” programs and their role in children’s preschool
emergent literacy development. In this case study, the focus was on storybook
reading in a preschool classroom. This study included one-on-one reading with
children, interviews with teachers and the Associate Director of the preschool, and
classroom observations, A qualitative approach allowed the researcher to enter the
classroom and listen to children read to gather data on how children’s storybook
reading affects reading readiness.
71
Sample and Population
Site Selection
The purpose of this study was to take an in depth look at storybook reading as
an effective reading readiness practice in a twilight preschool classroom. I chose to
study the “twilight” preschool because little research has looked at either the nature
of these “twilight” programs or their role in children’s kindergarten reading readiness
relative to traditional programs. The advent of preschool programs that meet the
scheduling needs of parents who work non-traditional shifts is relatively new.
The site for the study was the Head Start program at a major research
university. The program runs a total of five child development centers serving
approximately 600 low-income children and families through, home-based, part-day,
full-day, evening and twilight services in a large urban city.
The program that was the subject of the study was the twilight preschool
program. The traditional day program enrolls 148 children, and operates from
7:30a.m.-3:00p.m., Monday thru Friday. The full-day program is offered to parents
who are working or going to school and is offered through a combination of Head
Start and State Preschool funding. Financial support is offered through a variety of
community agencies and qualifying families are identified by state and federal
guidelines. The evening program enrolls 65 children and operates from 4:00p.m.-
7:30p.m., Monday thru Friday. The Extended Evening Program addresses the needs
of families working or going to school in the evening. The promotional materials for
72
the program located in Appendix A, state that children participate in a full range of
indoor and outdoor activities and a rich curriculum in the evening hours.
According to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services,
Administration for Children & Families (2008), there are six steps in the State and
Federal Guidelines to qualify for Head Start. The first step and major criteria to
qualify for free Head Start services is income. The family gross income must not
exceed 100% of federal poverty guidelines. Currently, this means a family of four
may not make more than $20,650.00 however, this amount changes every year.
Second, children in out-of-home placements, foster care or in relative foster care, are
counted as having no income, so they are automatically eligible for Head Start
Preschool. The third step, by law, ten percent of the slots in a Head Start Preschool
must be reserved for children with special needs that have Individualized Education
Plans. In step four, the child must be at least three years old and no more than five to
participate in Head Start Preschool. Step five states that there is no citizenship
requirement thus, children of undocumented immigrants that have proof of income
may qualify for Head Start Preschool. And last, the sixth step states by law, 10% of
children participating in Head Start Preschool may be over income. This means that
over income parents have a chance of being accepted in a Head Start Preschool.
Some programs encourage peer models, over income peers, as part of their program.
To begin the study I first contacted the Director of the school by phone and
made an appointment to introduce myself and the study. Then, I asked the Director
for permission to contact the “twilight” classroom teachers in person. Next, I met
73
the teachers in person and introduced myself and explained the study. Finally, I
asked the teachers for their assistance in narrowing down the 65 children in the
program to 15 children to participate in the study. I asked the teachers to select the
children randomly based on gender and age.
Unit of Study
According to Patton (2002), often individual people, clients, or students are
the unit of analysis and this means that the primary focus of data collection will be
on what is happening to individuals in a setting and how individuals are affected by
the setting. This study examined the reading readiness of preschool children
attending a twilight program in a Head Start Preschool Program. The focus of the
study was on the teaching of storybook reading and the role, if any, it had on
preschool children attending the twilight program. With the assistance of the
teachers, the researcher developed the unit of analysis from one purposeful sample of
15 children. Children were selected for the sample group based on their age and
gender. Data for this study was collected through interviews and document analysis.
Teacher Interviews
Teachers were interviewed using the protocol in Appendix D to gather
information about their experiences working with preschool aged children and their
training in storybook reading. Teachers for the twilight program were invited to
participate in a 30-minute interview with the researcher. With the permission of the
Associate Director of the program, the researcher made a presentation at a staff
meeting to the teachers about the study and invited their participation. There was a
74
minimum of one full-time qualified teacher for every six children enrolled in the
“twilight” program. Teachers were invited to participate in the interview, with a
total of approximately ten teachers to be interviewed. Of course, participation in the
study was entirely voluntary, thus teachers to be interviewed were chosen from those
who were willing to participate.
Teacher interviews were useful to describe the role storybook reading plays
in individual preschool classrooms. The interview with the Associate Director
served to investigate if storybook reading indeed has an impact on the preschool
program.
Associate Director Interview
The Associate Director of the program was interviewed in a one-on-one
setting. I called the Associate Director by phone and made an appointment for an
initial meeting to introduce myself and the study. At that time, I asked for
permission to make contact with the teachers either individually in person or as a
group at a teacher’s meeting. Then, I arranged for a mutually agreed upon date for
the Associate Director’s interview. The Associate Director was asked interview
questions from Appendix E. The Associate Director oversees five Early Childhood
Education school sites, however, each location has a site supervisor on duty.
Classroom Observations
Eight classroom observations were conducted during storybook reading time.
Each classroom observation lasted a period of 30-45 minutes. Observations took
place on Tuesdays and Fridays for a period of four weeks. The focus of the
75
classroom observations was to provide an insight of the classroom environment,
emergent reading strategies, child participation and engagement, teacher behaviors,
child’s reading behaviors, and a continuum of the child’s reading and oral language
development. A tally count process was used to track observations with supporting
evidence. The classroom observation protocol was based on two sources. The first
source was adapted from the Continuum of Children’s Development in Reading on
exploration and awareness as children explore their environment and build the
foundation for learning to read and write (Neuman, Copple, & Bredekamp, 2000).
The continuum refers to goals for children’s reading development that describe what
children can do and what the teacher can do. The second source is Language and
Communication Development from Developmentally Appropriate Practice (Neuman
& Copple, 1997). This source was selected to be included in this study in order to
focus on oral language development. The goals for children are listed here:
Awareness & Exploration
Children can:
• enjoy listening to and discussing story books
• understand that print carries a message
• engage in reading and writing attempts
• identify labels and signs in their environment
• participate in rhyming games
• identify some letters and make some letter sound matches
76
• use known letters or approximations of letters to represent written
language (especially meaningful words like their name and phrases
such as “I love you” (Neuman et al., 2000, p.72)
What teachers do is listed here:
• share books with children, including Big Books, and model reading
behaviors
• talk about letters by name and sounds
• establish a literacy-rich environment
• reread favorite stories
• engage children in language games
• promote literacy-related play activities
• encourage children to experiment with writing
(Neuman et al., 2000, p.72).
Oral Language Development: Children
• show a steady increase in vocabulary, ranging from 2,000 to 4,000
words; tend to overgeneralize meaning and make up words to fit
needs
• use simple sentences of at least three or four words to express needs
• may have difficulty taking turns in conversation; change topics
quickly
• pronounce words with difficulty; often mistake one word for another
77
• like simple finger plays and rhymes and learn words to songs that
have much repetition
• adapt speech and style of nonverbal communication to listeners in
culturally accepted ways but still need to be reminded of context
• ask many who, what, where, and why questions but show confusion in
responding to some questions (especially why, how, and when)
• use language to organize thought, linking two ideas by sentence
combining; overuses such words as but, because, and when; rarely
make appropriate use of such temporal words as but, before, until, or
after
• can tell a simple story but must redo the sequence to put an idea into
the order of events; often forget the point of a story and are more
likely to focus on favorite parts. (Bredekamp & Kopple, 1997, p. 73)
78
Table 1: Awareness and Exploration
Awareness & Exploration
Children Can
Tally Observation/
Evidence
• enjoy listening to and discussing story books
• understand that print carries a message
• engage in reading and writing attempts
• identify labels and signs in their environment
• participate in rhyming games
• identify some letters and make some letter-sound matches
• use known letters or approximations of letters to represent written language
(especially meaningful words like their name and phrases such as “I love you:)”
Oral Language Development
Children can
• shows a steady increase in vocabulary, ranging from 2,000 to 4,000 words; tends
to overgeneralize meaning and make up words to fit needs
• uses simple sentences of at least three or four words to express needs
• may have difficulty taking turns in conversation; changes topics quickly
• pronounces words with difficulty; often mistakes one word for another
• likes simple finger plays and rhymes and learns words to songs that have much
repetition
• adapts speech and style of nonverbal communication to listeners in culturally
accepted ways but still needs to be reminded of context
• asks many who, what, where, and why questions but shows confusion in
responding to some questions (especially why, how, and when)
• uses language to organize thought, linking two ideas by sentence combining;
overuses such words as but, because, and when; rarely makes appropriate use of
such temporal words as but, before, until, or after
• can tell a simple story but must redo the sequence to put an idea into the order of
events; often forgets the point of a story and is more likely to focus on favorite
parts
What teachers do
• share books with children, including Big Books, and model reading behaviors
• talk about letters by name and sounds
• establish a literacy-rich environment
• reread favorite stories
• engage children in language games
• promote literacy-related play activities
• encourage children to experiment with writing
Adapted from the Continuum taken from: Learning To Read and Write: Developmentally Appropriate Practices
for Young Children (2000) by Susan Neuman, Carol Copple, Sue Bredekamp, and Developmentally Appropriate
Practice in Early Childhood Programs (1997), Sue Bredekamp and Carol Copple.
Note: A table also found in Appendix F will be created to explain the date and duration of classroom
observations, the goals of reading development, and the evidence observed during storybook reading time.
79
Instrumentation
The purpose of this study was to take an in depth look at storybook reading as
an effective reading readiness practice in a twilight preschool classroom. Each child
in the study participated in one developmental assessment: Sulzby’s Categories of
Storybook Reading. The assessment, Sulzby’s Categories of Storybook Reading, was
selected to look within emergent reading in order to identify and describe the range
of strategies readers use. The instrumentation consists of 11 subcategories, the
highest of which is reading independently from print (Valencia, 1991). A
successively branching tree structure is used in Figure 1, Categories of Storybook
Reading, to illustrate the categories of storybook reading. The two major categories
are Picture-Governed Attempts and Print-Governed Attempts. Subcategories branch
out from these two major categories to create 11 categories total. Within this
framework, each reading attempt is characterized in accordance with what the child
seems to be treating as the source of the message: print or picture (Sulzby, 1985).
Sulzby’s Categories of Storybook Reading was originally designed to be used
with children’s readings of favorite storybooks or books that children request parents
read to them again and again including those that children often correct their parent’s
misreadings or omissions. In particular, it was designed for the books that children
begin to “read” emergently or long before they are reading from print. Sulzby
(1985), originally used this assessment to present patterns of behavior observed in
children’s favorite storybook reading attempts, or re-enactments, beginning with the
least mature re-enactments and moving to independent reading from print, thus
80
development over time. I used the instrumentation in this study to examine the
emergent readings of the children in the twilight preschool.
Figure 1: Categories of Storybook Reading
*This figure includes independent reading attempts only; the child is making reading attempts without
dependence upon turn-taking reading or interrogation by the adult.
81
Document Analysis
A secondary source of data was document analysis. The documents I
examined included those documents used by teachers to guide instructional planning.
The documents included the mission and vision of the program, program overview,
components of a successful program, and any instructional materials teachers used to
teach storybook reading.
Data Analysis Procedures
The process of data analysis involved making sense out of text data and
moving deeper and deeper into understanding the data, representing the data, and
making an interpretation of the larger meaning of the data (Creswell, 2003). The
following steps were used to evaluate the data in this case study. First, I organized
and prepared the interview data for analysis by transcribing the interviews. Second, I
read through all of the transcriptions of the content of the interviews to review and
identify common ideas and emerging themes. Third, I began a detailed analysis with
a coding process. Coding is the process of organizing the data into “chunks” before
bringing meaning to those “chunks” (Creswell). In this step I took the interview data
and segmented it into categories and labeled it based on the actual language of the
interviewee. Step four involved using the coding process to generate a description of
the setting or people as well as categories or themes for analysis (Creswel). In step
five, I conveyed the descriptive information about the participants in a table. As the
final step in data analysis, I made interpretations and drew conclusions from the
interview data.
82
Data from teachers was collected via semi-structured interviews and focused
on their perceptions of what the children experience in emergent literacy through the
preschool program. Interviews occurred at the site and lasted up to 45 minutes and
were tape-recorded. The taped interviews and the group interview responses were
transcribed. I used the coding process to generate a description of the setting or
people as well as categories or themes for analysis (Creswell, 2003). Triangulation
of classroom observations, interviews, and assessment results were used to
corroborate evidence and describe my study.
The researcher focused on the research questions to gather specific
information during the interviews. The research questions guided the data coding
process. Narratives were used to communicate the data in this case study.
Ethical Considerations
The Institutional Review Board (IRB) rules, regulations, and procedures were
followed to obtain the highest ethical standards for this study. An information sheet
about the study was given to all participants (Appendix B). This information sheet
was used to ensure that the participants understood that it was their right to
participate voluntarily and the right to withdraw at any time so that the individual
was not being coerced into participation (Creswell, 2003). The information form
also included the nature and the purpose of the study, dangers and obligations of the
study, and that their participation would in no way affect their employment.
83
Validation of Findings
According to Creswell (2003), proposal developers need to convey the steps
they will take in their studies to check for accuracy and credibility of their findings.
The strategies include: triangulation, member-checking, rich-thick description,
clarify the bias, present negative or discrepant information, prolonged time in the
field, peer debriefing, and an external auditor. I used the following strategies to
validate the findings of the study:
• Triangulated different data sources of information and examined
evidence from the sources and used it to build a coherent justification.
I used classroom observations, interviews, and assessment results.
• Clarified the bias the researcher brought to the study. This self-
reflection created an open and honest narrative that resonated well
with readers.
• Presented negative or discrepant information that runs counter to the
themes. Because real life was composed of different perspectives that
do not always coalesce, discussed contrary information adds to the
credibility of an account for a reader.
• Used peer debriefing to enhance the accuracy of the account. This
process involved locating a person (a peer debriefer) who reviewed
and asked questions about the qualitative study so that the account
resonated with people other than the researcher.
84
Conclusion
This chapter described in detail the research procedures that I utilized in this
study. The area of examination, unit of analysis, research design, study population,
and data collection procedures were discussed in detail. Also, the process that I used
to validate the findings of the study was described. The next chapter provides a
detailed description of the findings.
85
CHAPTER FOUR:
RESULTS
Introduction
Gardens Child Development Center has served children from low-income
families in South Los Angeles since 2003. This center is one of five centers operated
by a large research institution with a 35-year history in the neighborhood. Federal
and state funding are available to run the five centers. Grants from the United States
Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and
Families and from the State Department of Education, Child Development Division
State Preschool fund the Head Start program. Over 4,000 neighborhood children and
families have benefited from access to an early childhood education. Located in a
low-cost housing complex, the center works in collaboration with the residents to
serve 20 children from the immediate area and does accept children from the
surrounding neighborhood. The center has provided early childhood education
services through full-day and twilight services. Although, the center is successful in
meeting the needs of parents working or going to school by offering an evening or
twilight program, little or no research has been done in this area. Little is known
about the Twilight Preschool Program and how reading readiness varies for the
children who attend the evening program. This study examined how storybook
reading develops over time as a key element of reading readiness and how to explain
this phenomenon within the urban setting in a Twilight Preschool Head Start
Program.
86
In this chapter the research questions are used as a guide to organize the data
and content. The classroom observations and interviews are described in depth using
a narrative format.
Gardens Child Development Center
Found behind a gated low-income housing community is Gardens Child
Development Center. Nestled within a high activity neighborhood sits the one
building preschool. The building is a charming small house converted into a
preschool. A gated playground sits in front of the house complete with tricycles,
games, balls, and other equipment. The school has only a few rooms: large
classroom, adult and child bathrooms, and kitchen creating an open, warm, and
welcoming environment. All meals are delivered daily by a private university in an
urban area. Hot meals are a staple at the preschool with the children sitting family
style to eat snack or dinner. An office is located at the main entrance of the school.
Jose, the family advocate, sits in the office ready to greet all visitors with a warm and
friendly smile and handshake. The office is separated from the large open classroom
area by a counter where parents stop to ask Jose questions or use the on-line
computer. The classroom is separated into centers or learning stations. Centers
include: the kitchen, computer station, rug area where children use blocks or other
manipulatives, block area, classroom library, painting area, and teacher tables. In
between the centers are teacher tables where the children have snack and dinner or
come to complete a project with either the teacher or a parent volunteer. Neuman
and Roskos (2002), found in extensive observations of four year-old children that
87
they acted “as if” they were reading and writing on their own and with others during
ongoing activities. Ongoing activities included engaged in reading recipes, checking
out books, writing and organizing literacy activities during their free play.
Recognizing children’s natural interests in literacy-like activities, it makes sense to
consider how environments might be constructed to support and extend literacy.
Furthermore, Bredekamp and Kopple (1997) state that reading is an outcome that
results from the continual interplay of development and learning.
The following daily schedule is posted throughout the classroom:
Our Day
4:00pm Arrival
4:10pm Group Meeting
4:25pm Snack
4:40pm Choice/Small Group/Outside Time
5:30pm Choice/Small Group/Outside Time
6:20pm Storytime
6:45pm Dinner
7:00pm Tooth brushing
7:30pm Home
Parents begin to arrive at 7:15pm to pick up their children. Some parents are still
dressed in their work clothes others arrive with one or two younger siblings in tow.
The atmosphere of the center is friendly, interactive, warm, and relaxed. The
teachers and staff call children “my friend” rather than by name. Children are
88
friendly, smiling and happy to be there. When I would arrive for my observations
and visits, the children would walk right up to me without hesitation and speak to
me, ask me questions, or invite me to their center.
The entire staff to operate the small preschool consists of one supervisor, two
classroom teachers, one family advocate, and parent volunteers. The supervisor
hours overlap from the day program into the twilight program, which makes her
available to assist with the daily functions of the school. The teachers hours are from
1:00pm-7:00pm. Although, the children do not arrive until 4:00pm, they arrive early
to plan and prepare for the day’s activities. Enrollment at the school is strictly
adhered to with the total number of students never above 20 students per program.
Families must apply to the federal and state funded program and must show proof of
income. Based on the following source, Federal Register (2009), the guideline
figures shown represent annual income.
Table 2: The 2009 Poverty Guidelines for the 48 Contiguous States and the District
of Columbia
Persons in family Poverty guideline
1 $10,830
2 14,570
3 18,310
4 22,050
5 25,790
6 29,530
7 33,270
8 37,010
For families with more than 8 persons, add $3,740 for each additional person.
89
Jose, the family advocate assists with the negotiation of the paperwork and keeps all
records up to date and on file.
Parent Involvement
Parents volunteer in the classroom on a regular basis and attend parent
meetings. A variety of responsibilities are available for parent volunteers, such as
reading to children, engaging children at one of the many learning centers, assisting
with snack time, helping with outdoor activities, and talking and working with
children through an activity. Parent meetings or Parent and Child Together Time
(PACT Time) and Parent/Teacher Meetings are held on a monthly basis. A research
synthesis on family literacy programs notes that “documented research consistently
supports the finding that participants in family literacy programs are benefited by
increased positive literacy interactions in the home between parent and child as a
correlate of their participation” (Tracey, 1994, as cited in Snow, Burns, & Griffin,
1998). The goal of the meetings is to provide quality parent and child time together
as they participate in the scheduled learning activities. The agenda and activities are
prepared by the classroom teachers, who also facilitate the meeting. The researcher
was able to attend one of the PACT Meetings and found the meeting to be both
informative and productive. A sample agenda includes the following:
Agenda
1. Welcome
2. Song: Slippery Fish
Story: Jellies
90
Take Home Activity: Making Fish Shapes
3. Upcoming Events:
12/3/08 Kid Space: 9:00am-1:30pm
Twilight - 8:15am-1:30pm
12/10/08 CPC Meeting @ 3pm
Special Guest: Home Safety
12/11/08 Field Trip: Fire Station: 4:00pm-5:00pm
Twilight – 3:30pm-7:00pm
12/18/08 Field Trip – McDonald’s: 4:00pm-5:00pm
Twilight – 3:30pm-7:00pm
12/22/08 - 1/05/08 – Winter Break
1/6/08 Return from Winter Break
1/7/09 Next PACT time – 6pm
4. Volunteers are needed daily in the classroom as well as for all field
trips. If you are interested please let the teachers know.
Reminder all volunteers must have a current TB test on file with us.
5. Extra clothes to leave in the classroom.
6. Parent Monthly Input Forms
7. Open Discussion-Still collecting aluminum cans for recycling
8. Closing
Although attendance at the PACT meetings is an expectation of enrollment in
the Head Start program, parents willingly participate in all of the activities and use
91
this time to socialize with the other families. Parents are highly regarded in the
program as partners in their child’s education and treated with care and respect by
the teachers and staff.
A Family Advocate, Jose, is on staff to mediate the enrollment process. Jose
is the first person parents communicate with when inquiring about the Head Start
program, their eligibility, and the completion of all paperwork. He is bilingual,
personable, and very flexible. An example of his flexibility is demonstrated by the
many times he helps the teachers either transition activities or read a storybook to the
children as the teachers prepare for the next activity. Also, he is a single parent with
his own child enrolled in the Twilight Program, so this contributes to his ability to
understand and assist the parents. The children gravitate to Jose and genuinely like
him and his playful personality.
Classroom Literacy Program
Throughout the classroom there is evidence of literacy in the form of learning
centers, alphabet and number charts, word charts, two classroom libraries, and a
listening center. Goldenberg (2002) considers a literate environment as an effective
instructional practice to promote emergent and beginning literacy for all children.
He states, literate environments are those in which print is used for diverse and
interesting purposes, including opportunities for student choice and ample time for
looking at books and reading or “pretend reading.” Children’s work samples are
highly regarded and are posted in the classroom until they are taken home by the
child or given directly to the parent. The teachers send work samples home on a
92
regular basis and ask parents to reinforce learning by praising their child and posting
their work at home.
The National Association for the Education of Young Children does not
endorse a specific curriculum. However, it does recommend curriculum in
developmentally appropriate programs base decisions about curriculum content on
the age and experience of the learners. Bredekamp and Kopple (1997) define
developmentally appropriate curriculum as curriculum that provides for all areas of a
child’s development: physical, emotional, social, linguistic, aesthetic, and cognitive.
At Garden Child Development Center, the HighScope Curriculum was replaced by
The Creative Curriculum for Preschool: Theory and Research in September 2008.
The alignment of the NAEYC Early Childhood Program Standards and the
Accreditation Standards with the Creative Curriculum for Preschool can be found in
Appendix I. The comprehensive curriculum is an approach used to set up a
preschool program by working with children and families in five specific focus
areas. Five components, how children develop and learn, the learning environment,
what children learn, the teacher’s role and the family’s role determine the
organizational structure for the curriculum. The curriculum is a scientifically based,
research-validated comprehensive curriculum with guidance on teaching literacy,
mathematics, science, and social studies. Research on learning and the brain,
learning and resiliency, and child development are the foundation of the Creative
Curriculum approach. The research base of the program includes the work of
Abraham Maslow, Lev Vygotsky, Erik Erikson, Jean Piaget, Howard Gardner, and
93
Sara Smilansky. Child development is the research base of the Creative Curriculum
Program. Maslow’s work focuses on basic needs, Erikson’s research centers on
emotions, Vygtsky’s emphasis was social interaction, and Smilansky’s work
discusses play, yet all share the common strand of how these areas influence
learning. Piaget’s research was integrated to include logical thinking and reasoning.
The Multiple Intelligences research by Gardner was included to include modalities of
learning. The classroom teachers attended two weeks of training for up to four hours
per day and follow-up training of two times per year. Assessment of the children is
conducted specifically in developmental skills using the Desired Results
Developmental Profile Revised three times per year. The Desired Results Profile
Revised is a State mandated assessment for children participating in child
development programs and can be located in Appendix J. The goal of the
assessment is to encourage child development programs to improve program quality.
In addition to the Creative Curriculum for Preschool program the teachers
take daily anecdotal notes on the children. The teachers use 3x5 cards to observe
and write what the child says, what they do, what they are working on, or what
questions they ask. The anecdotal notes are used as the content for the teacher’s
write up for each student when they meet with parents.
School Demographics
To examine the nature of storybook reading in a Twilight Preschool Program
and its role in children’s readiness, three interviews were conducted with the
Associate Director and two teachers.
94
Table 3 summarizes the interviewees’ background. The descriptive
information includes years of experience in the Twilight Program, years of
experience in preschool field, the highest degree earned, field of specialization in
education, and work experience.
The associate director had taken many child development classes and has
worked in preschool starting as a teacher. As an associate director, she has been
involved in developing curriculum and supervising staff. Teacher A started working
as a babysitter for toddlers and preschoolers in high school. In college, she was a
student teacher. Once she graduated, she worked as a lead teacher. She earned her
bachelor’s degree in applied art. Teacher B has worked with children from ages
eight to fifteen years of age for five years and is working on her associate degree.
Table 3: Summary of Interviewee Background
Interviewee
Years of
Experience
in Twilight
Program
Years of
Experience
in Field
Degree Field
Work
Experience
Associate
Director
2 and a half 17 Master’s
Early
Childhood
Teacher/
Director
Teacher A 9 months 8 Bachelor’s Theater
Nanny/
Lead
Teacher
Teacher B 8 months 5
Associate
(in
progress)
Early
Childhood
95
Classroom Demographics
Two classroom preschool teachers participated in this study. Both teachers
work in whole group, small group, or one on one settings with the seventeen children
who participated in this study. The teachers are responsible for creating and posting
lesson plans based on The Creative Curriculum for Preschool: Theory and Research
in the classroom for the weeks’ activities. The Lead Teacher has been employed at
Garden Child Development Center for nine months but has eight years of work
experience as a nanny with preschool-aged children. She has a Bachelor’s Degree in
Theater Arts. The Associate Teacher has worked at the center for eight months with
five years of experience working with preschool aged children. Currently, she is
enrolled at a local college earning an Associate’s Degree in Early Childhood. Both
teachers recommended children for the study, of which 17 from the class were
selected at random to participate.
Table 4 indicates the demographics of the participating children.
The 17 preschool children participating in this study were from ages three to
five. Twelve children were four years old, four children were three years old, and
only one was five years old. The largest number of families, ten children, was
Spanish speakers, who designated themselves of Hispanic ethnicity. Five families
designated English as their primary language with three choosing Hispanic and two
choosing Black as their ethnicity. Only one child spoke Russian and was of Russian
ethnicity. There were more boys than girls participating in the study, ten boys and
seven girls respectively. The longest amount of time in the program is one year, six
96
months to two years beginning in 2007. Fourteen children entered the program in
2008 and have been in the program for six months or less with the least amount of
time at .4 months. Based on classroom observations and assessment conducted on
these children, the following findings were reported to answer the research questions.
Table 4: Demographics of Participating Children
Subject Age Language Ethnicity Gender Length in Program
1 4 English Hispanic Male >6 months (9/2008)
2 4 English Black Male >6 months (9/2008)
3 3 Spanish Hispanic Female >6 months (9/2008)
4 3 Spanish Hispanic Male >6 months (9/2008)
5 4 Spanish Hispanic Male >6 months (9/2008)
6 4 Spanish Hispanic Female >6 months (9/2008)
7 4 Spanish Hispanic Female >6 months (9/2008)
8 4 Spanish Hispanic Female >6 months (9/2008)
9 4 Russian Russian Male >6 months (9/2008)
10 4 English Hispanic Male >6 months (9/2008)
11 5 English Black Male 1 year 6mos. (9/2007)
12 4 Spanish Hispanic Female 2 years (10/2007)
13 3 Spanish Hispanic Male >5 months (10/2008)
14 4 English Black Male >6 months (9/2008)
15 4 Spanish Hispanic Male 2 years (9/2007)
16 4 English Hispanic Female >6 months (9/2008)
17 3 Spanish Hispanic Female .4 mos. (12/2008)
Note. N = Number of Participants; Age = Participant’s Age; Language = Participants’ Native
Language, Ethnicity= Participants’ Primary Ethnicity
97
Characteristics of a Twilight Program
Twilight preschool programs are uncommon in the field of early childhood
education. For this reason, initial data analysis included a look into the
characteristics of a twilight program to better understand the role of storybook
reading on reading readiness.
Nontraditional hours
The Twilight Program offers parents the opportunity to enroll their child in a
preschool program in the evening while they are either working or attending classes.
The interview with the Associate Director revealed some of the historical
background about the development of the preschool. The Associate Director shared:
The Twilight Program was developed originally at the location during the
Clinton Administration, from my understanding this is the history I got, and it
was designed so that families could go out and get their training and it
wouldn’t have to worry about their children and they offered ESL classes to
families so that while they were in training the kids had something to do. It
also provided a way to reach the majority of children in the community in the
service area without a lot of space, so how do we reach those children and so
we already had full day programs so we decided to add on twilight programs
to make sure that we could reach as many families as possible.
The Associate Director also added:
The benefits that all the children get are the same, there is no benefit that a
child in the day gets that a child in the twilight program doesn’t receive.
Again, it benefits our program by allowing us to provide competent services
to more families than if we just offered them to the few in the day program
and it expands it because I think we’re trying to reach like 15,000 children,
something like that, that are in our community, that are low-income so if
that’s the case then we’re only reaching 443 of them, we’re still not reaching
all the children in the area but at least we’re reaching more than we could.
98
Teacher B shared:
The twilight program is different because they provide like different
opportunities to parents. For example, there are cases. Some other parents
tell us that they prefer the twilight program because they give them a chance
to be at home with the their other siblings. If they have older siblings, they
go to school like from 8 to 2. And then that time preschoolers are at home
and then from 2 to 4, their twilight schedules let parents have time to spend
time with oldest. You know, various times that they spend time with
different child. Another difference, shorter time. We do have to do other
things like in smaller amount time. For example, their choice time they play
in different areas. We have to make smaller time. For example, the
traditional program has, I believe, our traditional program has an hour and
fifteen minutes. Our twilight program is just like 45 minutes. So it does cut
off some other times that we are with kids. Some other things that they have
are the same. They come in. They play for a while. Then, we do like a
group meeting, which is a circle time. Then they have snack. They do a have
choice task area. They have outside time as well. They have lunch. For us,
it’s dinner, but for the other program, it’s lunch. It’s like the same kind of
setting in different time and have departure. A lot of things that they have are
similar things. There are things that are different as well.
Length of daily program
Based on the research done by the overseeing research institution, the
operating hours were modified to meet the needs of the community. The Associate
Director continued to report:
The Twilight Program when I arrived was an evening program and it ran until
9:30 in the evening, from 3:30 to 9:30. We looked at the fact that it was a
very difficult program to fill so we cut back the hours, instead of 6 hours to 3
and a half hours and we put some of the children in another program option,
so we could reach the family still but could also fill the program option. We
also did some research on the family and the need for a twilight program
maybe somewhere else and it turns out that there was a need at the Garden
Center site which is in a housing community so we decided that that would
be a good place to open a twilight program as well and take some children
from another twilight program and put them there so we could fill our
program.
99
Also, the Associate Director discussed:
I think the twilight program can again be beneficial especially if a family has
to work at night or they have extended hours of work. A lot of people work
odd hours so if you’re a nurse you have to go in and work in the evening then
you have the option of having someone take care your child and also get the
services, the same benefits that the child in the day would get so I think it’s 3
and a half hours that if you want your child in a program in a Head Start
program prior to going to school it’s a great program for that.
Literacy assessment
Although storybook reading was used consistently in the preschool
classroom, there was no specific assessment in place to evaluate or measure whether
storybook reading was making a difference in the literacy of the children’s reading
readiness. Teacher B reported:
We don’t really have a tool for just storybook reading But overall all we
have which is called DRDPR where goes by measures. There is a measure
that the child is interested in literacy and they are able to identify print, so
that one we just try to focus on 3 to 5 years old. They are not able to read a
word. So they read through pictures. They are able to tell a story. So from
there, we are able to say to the child they are like emerging or they are
building on it. Or they are already able to read some words because some of
the ones that are four right now, they are already able to read the word, cat or
dog or small words like that.
The Associate Director shared:
We don’t really assess students’ storybook reading but we assess literacy
skills whether the children are familiar with words or letters or types of
literacy if they understand the comprehensiveness of what’s being read. We
use an assessment tool called the Desired Results Developmental Profile
Revised and it is State mandated for all of our programs but not for all of our
programs but we do use it across the board because it was just easier to use
one assessment tool, so we do use that. And we are currently using Creative
Curriculum as our curriculum tool, there’s an emphasis on literacy and how
literacy is brought into the classroom.
100
Socialization
During the twilight preschool hours, children were observed in small group
instruction, in centers interacting with other children, and on the playground with
groups of children. Teacher A shared:
The kid spends only three and half hours and so they are not at school all day.
So they still spend time with their parents and come to school spend time
with friends. I think the main purpose, I think, socialization. Kids socialize,
you know, get little many routines going before you know, they go to
different settings where they are all day.
Teacher B reported:
One of the benefits that I see here, a lot of parents work during the day. We
just have a couple of a few who work at night. When one works at night, the
other works day. So, that that’s where the program works out. Like I say
that’s what gives them a chance to have their child involved in a preschool
setting and have them be social.
Both Teacher A and Teacher B commented on the social aspect of the preschool
environment and how valuable it was for the children’s development.
Where socialization and anecdotal record keeping are characteristics found in
traditional day programs, changes in hours of operation and duration made the
twilight program unique. These changes were made for the benefit of the families in
the school and to open the doors for other families who may work non-traditional
hours. The program of study described in the classroom demographics and literacy
program were standard to most preschool programs. However, this study sought to
find out how a traditional practice such as storybook reading was implemented and
ultimately its impact on students readiness.
101
What is the Nature of Storybook Reading in a Twilight Preschool Program?
This research question aimed at understanding how storybook reading played
a role in a Twilight Preschool Program. The researcher wanted to gain an in-depth
look at storybook reading as a component of a high-quality preschool program.
Yaden et al. (2000) found that although there was by no means unanimous
agreement among researchers on the nature of literacy-learning processes, there was
general excitement in the field concerning the possibility of uncovering the
planfulness behind young children’s unconventional scribbles and their early
attempts at reading. This study observed both student and teacher storybook reading
practices. To better understand the researchers perspective on storybook reading the
following section provides a brief overview of the definition of storybook reading.
This section is followed by the nature of storybook reading in a twilight program.
Storybook Reading
In the original study Sulzby (1985) found four developmental trends within
children’s holistic interactions with storybooks during the period preceeding and
leading up to conventional reading. First, storybook reading of favorite books
created patterns that indicated children progressed from treating individual pages of
storybooks as if they are discrete units to treating a book as the unit. Children were
using speech that builds a story across the book’s pages and that once children were
weaving stories across the book’s pages, this speech can be seen to have
characteristics more appropriate either to oral or to written language. A second
finding from Sulzby’s study described the behaviors children demonstrated during
102
storybook reading. The children appeared to have some behaviors that were stable
based on conceptual rather than stimulus-response patterns to a particular book while
reading storybooks. Third, important development is occurring prior to formal
instruction. The children’s behaviors appear to be developmental in that the patterns
differ predictably from two to three to three to four, and four to five year old
children. Finally, most importantly, was that the development observed seemed to
make sense in light of the theoretical ideas about general and language development
and the findings of other current research of the time.
This study set out to examine the use of storybook reading in the twilight
preschool classroom as reading readiness. I found that storybook reading, although a
regularly scheduled time in the child’s daily program and viewed by the teacher’s
and Associate Director as a necessary strategy, was not in isolation a predictor of
reading readiness. What I found occurring in the preschool classroom was regular
reading by the teacher to set the tone for the day’s activities. While reading the
storybook the teacher would ask questions about the cover of the book, ask the
children to make predictions, and discuss some sight words but the instruction did
not go any further. Also, storybook reading was mainly used as “storytime” during
transitions as children prepared for their next activity. No actual independent
storybook reading by the children was observed, other than if children decided to go
to the reading library center, which was rare. In addition, teachers did not interact
meaningfully with children and storybooks. They engaged students in what is
considered a traditional read aloud as opposed to storybook reading. This finding
103
was based on the data presented in the following section. What should be noted is the
minimal amount of time spent engaging students with text. Reading to children was
not a priority. However, literacy rich practices by children were observed often.
Storybook Reading in a Twilight Program
Eight classroom observations were conducted during storybook reading time.
Sulzby (1985) determined that young children’s emergent storybook reading is an
important part of literacy development and that it can be studied by direct
observation. Although, the researcher originally planned to observe for 30-45
minutes the visits lasted up to 2 hours per day for an overall total of 16 hours of
observation. The focus of the classroom observations was to understand the role of
storybook reading and its nature, how it was being implemented and used. The
classroom observation protocol (Appendix F) was based on two sources. The first
source was adapted from the Continuum of Children’s Development in Reading
(Appendix K) on exploration and awareness as children explore their environment
and build the foundation for learning to read and write (Neuman, Copple, &
Bredekamp, 2000). The continuum refers to goals for children’s reading
development that describes what children can do and what the teacher can do. The
second source was Language and Communication Development from
Developmentally Appropriate Practice (Neuman & Copple, 1997) (Appendix L).
This source was selected to include in this study in order to focus on oral language
development. The categories on the observation protocol were then used as codes
for analyzing the data.
104
The chart below presents the percentages of the children’s observed
behaviors during the observations.
Figure 2: Percentage of Students Engaged in Noted Literacy Activities
Classroom observations noted that children participated and demonstrated reading
readiness practices. Based on the research by Justice, Pullen, and Pence (2008)
young children may have little actual contact with print during storybook reading
interactions, a finding that seems paradoxical given the nature of the activity. Data
from the chart reveal that 34%, almost half, of the children was engaged in reading
and writing practices. Identifying letters and making letter-sound matches was
105
completed by 21% of students but only 1% understands that print carries meaning.
Although, 14% of the children can identify labels and signs, no children or 0%
actually use known letters. According to Suzby (1985) the child’s orally produced
“reading attempts” often contain features of written language, which are not in the
written text itself.
The same continuum was used to observe teachers’ behaviors in the
classroom. The teachers were friendly, warm, and showed enthusiasm for teaching
preschool aged children. Participating teachers demonstrated knowledge and
understanding of reading readiness as they worked collaboratively and utilized the
curriculum to lesson plan. The chart below presents the percentages of time teachers
are engaged in the noted behaviors.
Figure 3: Frequency of Teachers Involvement in Noted Activites
106
The data from the chart shows 30% of the teachers’ time was spent
encouraging children to write. Justice et al. (2008) cite Snow (1991) research on
“direct contacts with print” in which she states, shared storybook reading represents
a salient early childhood routine in which direct contact with print is a prominent, if
not unavoidable, feature. Based on the researchers observation notes, teacher B
encouraged the children’s writing development during a center where students were
asked to glue leaves they collected in the yard that evening. Children were instructed
to glue their leaves on the construction paper while the teacher took dictation about
the leaves as a quote. An example quote from the activity was, “The leaves are
dancing.” Twenty-nine percent of what teachers do in the classroom was to establish
a literacy-rich environment. Posted around the room were alphabet charts, two
libraries with a variety of books, and learning centers. Fourteen percent of the
teachers’ time is spent talking about letters. According to Justice, et al. (2008) adults
can deliberately promote more explicit print contact for the child and, by doing so,
can accelerate children’s development of print knowledge.
Children engaged in language games 9% of the time. Songs were used as
language games in the classroom, such as “Itsy Bitsy Spider”, the alphabet song,
sounds to actions, and rhyming songs were the most common. Seven percent of the
time teachers engaged children in literacy-related play activities. These activities
included activities at the computer station, which asked the children to match sounds
to letters. Puzzles and blocks at the rug station were available to give children
problem-solving opportunities. Another literacy-related play activity was
107
accomplished when children go outside for their daily walk. The teacher engages the
children in discussions based on what they see in the environment. For example,
based on my observation, when the students were walking outside and they saw a
police car, the teacher asked who drives in that car? Expecting the children’s
response to be, a policeman. If children choose the art center, they are instructed to
paint a picture then the teacher labels the picture for them with a quote about the
picture. An example quote observed by the researcher was, “This is my mommy.”
Sulzby (1985) found that the acquisition of literacy can involve a transition from oral
language to written language.
All of the above literacy activities comprised of 89% of the preschool day.
Storybook reading was only conducted 11% of the time.
The Nature of Storybook Reading
Based on observations and interviews the nature of storybook reading in a
Twilight Program consists of teachers reading stories aloud. It usually occurred in
whole group settings at the beginning of the program. The Associate Director
explained during an interview with the researcher how storybook reading played a
role in the preschool program and was essential for children’s self-esteem, social,
and emotional skills. She explained the following:
The teachers are, I don’t want to say required but it’s beneficial, they
understand the benefits of reading storybooks to children. So, we want to
make sure our storybooks are developmentally appropriate and the types of
storybooks our children that the teachers read with children are a mass of
array of books um…we have books from different cultures, we have
culturally diverse books, we have books on um…sanity, things we have
books that might attract a mental health issue for the child, help a child
108
through an issue, mommy had a baby or a family member died or it could
address self-esteem issues for the child, so we try to pick books that go across
a large scale or there’s the classics like “Hats For Sale” or “Where The Wild
Things Are”, you know just the classics for children, those are great books
that will last forever.
Children learn how to adapt to their environment socially and emotionally through
storybook reading of different issues and areas of study. Storybook reading was
used as a way to introduce themes and set the stage for the days learning.
Teacher A commented:
For example when the child arrives at 4 o’clock, we give the child a chance
to read a book on their own for a couple of minutes while we’re waiting for
the children to get to class. When it’s a group time we decide to read a book
about what we are going to do in a small group. Let’s say we gonna draw a
pumpkin and then. So for during a circle time or group meeting time, we
choose a book that have to do with a pumpkin.
Teacher B added:
When it’s group time we decide to read a book about what we are going to do
in a small group. So if for circle time or group meeting time, we choose a
book that have to do with a pumpkin. We try to get the book to them during
group time to relate to the topic of the small group activity.
Additionally, storybook reading was used as a way to teach children Concepts about
Print. The researcher noted that when the teacher is reading a storybook she tracks
the letters and asks the children, “Can you tell me what letter this is?” or children
sing the alphabet song to name the letters of the alphabet. Teacher B shared:
First I introduce things to children that apply to the book. It is important for
them to know the parts of the book, like the back cover and front cover and
find the pages. They know that every page has a number. Author, has a title.
When it comes to the reading we focus on both the picture and the words
because through the words, they get more vocabulary. Through the pictures
they are able to identify objects that they probably have never seen. You
109
know be able to tell “this is this,” “this is that”. You know transform the
vocabulary.
The teachers used picture books to teach the children how to make predictions,
identify words, and build vocabulary. Teacher A said: “We try to read them picture
books. I prefer to read them a book with pictures and have them tell me about the
pictures. I ask them, ‘what’s gonna happen?’ ‘What’s going on in the picture?’”
In summary, the nature of storybook reading included the use of books to
teach children Concepts about Print, for social and emotional development and to
develop comprehension skills.
A common storybook reading practice of repeated readings was not observed.
The researcher did not observe teachers re-reading favorite stories to the children as
noted by 0% on the chart but the teachers explained how often they get requests from
the children to reread favorite stories. Teacher A shared: “We have books about
Elmo. It’s an everyday thing that somebody says. ‘Read this book.’ Next day ‘read
this book,’ the same book, a couple of times a day.”
The children want to hear the same books over and over again, but their
requests are not followed through. However, it was observed and expressed in an
interview that the children themselves often engage in repeated readings of the same
book. Teacher A explained:
Well, transition time, they always go get the same book. I noticed that.
“Read this read this.” I just read it two minutes ago. They say, “I have this
book at home.” “Read it again read it again” “again, again, again, again.”
110
Therefore, repeated readings were not a teacher observed behavior but it was by the
children. This can help in the development of reading readiness skills.
Based on this data, storybook reading by teachers played a minor role in the
reading readiness of preschool children at the Gardens Child Development Center
twilight program. Teachers encouraged children to write and engaged children in
language games, songs, and literacy-related play the majority of the time. Therefore,
storybook reading alone cannot be seen as having a direct impact on reading
readiness but a combination of all of the reported literacy rich activities. This
finding, however, was not consistent with the data collected from teacher and
associate director interviews. There was a common belief that storybook reading did
indeed have an impact on students reading readiness.
Impact of Storybook Reading on a Readiness Program
During an interview with the researcher the Associate Director mentioned the
impact storybook reading had on children learning how to use print. She said the
following regarding storybook reading and the impact it has on the preschool
program:
Storybook reading is beneficial number one because it has print and it gets
children familiar with print and words and letters and things like that.
Another part of storybook reading is it’s a story that comes alive because of
the page because of the pictures on the page, so storytelling is great and
especially but you could tell a story from a book even if you don’t read the
print but it familiarizes children with print and that there are words that are
associated and it tells a story, that first impact of storytelling.
Attention was given to the use of pictures to make meaning of the text. The
Associate Director shared:
111
They’re kind of taught by having all types of story books number one and the
types of story books that are there and the children get familiar again with the
print and the pictures to an appreciation for art as well and storybooks and
learning about books. How to turn pages is a very important skill as well left
to right, so everything is left to right so it really prepares them for reading in
the long run as well as other skills, math and comprehension and everything
else.
Teachers used the pictures to ask questions so that the children could describe what
they see and make predictions. I observed that the children were able to read very
few words or relied on the prompting of the teachers’ questions to make sense of the
pictures. Teacher A said:
I prefer to read them picture books and have them tell me about what they see
in the picture an um…if there is something that I want them to learn out of it,
I will tell them. “What do you see?” “What do you think is gonna happen?”
Um…”Is it gonna happen like this?”
Overall, though interviews stressed the importance of storybook reading and all of
the skills that are taught and learned from it, a small percentage of the preschool day,
11%, was spent on storybook reading. When the teachers did do storybook reading
it included:
• Community building,
• Framing the task of the day,
• Facilitating transitions, and
• Working on isolated skills, for example, concepts about print
The nature of storybook reading was spent mainly on literacy tasks, which were an
extension of reading the storybook. Furthermore, I could not fully answer this
research question because storybook reading was so minimal and for this reason I
112
found a combination of skills, especially oral language, were used to teach reading
readiness.
What Role Does Storybook Reading Play in Children’s Readiness?
I observed children’s ability to use the pictures to retell the story on a regular
basis. The children retold a story, although not based on the written words, it was
elaborate and included most of the story grammar elements of characters, setting,
plot, and conclusion. A few studies (Doake, 1981; Haussler, 1982; Holdaway, 1979;
Rossman, 1980; Schiekedanz, 1981; Sulzby, 1981) have examined children’s
independent functioning as they attempt to read books to an adult. Some of these
studies found that when children attempt to read the same book over time their
reenactments sound more and more like the actual book being attempted (Sulzby,
1985). Teacher B shared:
They are not able to read a word. So they read through pictures. They are
able to tell a story. So from there, we are able to say to the child they are like
emerging or they are building on it. Or they are already able to read some
words because some of the ones that are four right now, they are able to read
the word, cat or dog or small words like that.
Students engaging in these reading behaviors are making steps towards reading
readiness.
Assessment of Storybook Reading
In order to determine the students reading readiness the Classification
Scheme for Emergent Reading of Favorite Storybooks (Sulzby, 1985, 1988)
(Appendix M) was administrated to examine the patterns of reading behaviors while
children were reading favorite books. The assessment used Categories of Storybook
113
Reading divided into two types of reading attempts: Picture-Governed Attempts and
Print-Governed Attempts. This study and the data collected was based on Sulzby’s
original study in 1985 to determine the impact of the above on their reading
readiness.
Eighteen students originally participated in the study but during the
assessment two were absent and one refused to read, which left a total of 15 children
assessed. The assessment took place in the playground outside the classroom on two
days from 4:00-7:00pm. Children were asked by the researcher to choose a book
from the classroom library that the teacher had previously read. The researcher asked
the children, “read your story to me” and focused on the child’s ability to read the
story.
The data the researcher collected was from children’s attempts to read their
favorite storybook. The data is presented by the Categories of Storybook Reading
with scripted examples of the children’s reading attempts.
Emergent Reading of Favorite Storybooks
Picture-governed attempts and print-governed attempts were classified
according to categories of storybook reading for independent reading developed by
Sulzby (1985).
Refusals. Refusals is defined as children literally refusing to try to read until
they learn more about the reading process. Often, these children are determined to
be less proficient than other children but in reality they need to know more before
they attempt to read. One three year old girl and one three-and-a-half year old boy
114
simply refused to read. They did not have any understanding of concept of print and
did not try to use pictures for independent reading attempts.
Attempts Governed by Pictures, Stories Not Formed
Labeling and commenting and following the action are the least mature
reading attempts. This section presented the reading attempts of four children who
used labeling and commenting attempts using mainly pictures.
Labeling and commenting. According to Sulzby (1985), labeling and
commenting occurs when a child reads or re-enacts a book through labeling, the
child will turn to a page, point to a pictured object, and then give its name or
descriptor: “Doggie,” “Horse,” or in the child’s example below, “elephant.”
Commenting refers to giving information about the labeled or highlighted item:
“looking,” or even a fuller sentence: “He is looking.” Two three year old children
attended to only pictures to tell a story through labeling what they saw in the pictures
as they read the book Elmer (McKee, 1968). Don turned the pages of the book and
pointed to the pictures but only described the picture and not the story. Don said, in
the end, “That’s it” to end the story. Les began to make a story after the researcher’s
much urging to talk about the storybook. She started to read the book backwards.
She labeled an object in English, but commented what the object was doing in
Spanish. Les pointed to a pictured object to name it: “elephant,” He used
commenting on what the elephant was doing: “Esta mirando.” (He is looking).
115
Adult: Dime lo que esta pasando. Que esta pasando en el dibujo?
Child: Elephant
Adult: Elephant. OK. Que hace el elephant?
Child: Esta mirando
Translation into English
Adult: Tell me what is happening. What is happening in the picture?
Child: Elephant
Adult: Elephant Ok. What is the elephant doing?
Child: He is looking.
A four year old, Lesly, used gestures while telling a story. She held the book
in both hands and showed it around as she saw her teachers doing that. She
considered the researcher as her audience for storytelling. In Spanish, she utilized
pictures to label characters in pictures: “nino,” “nina,” “y otra nina,” “y otro nino.”
She used an adjective “otro/a” (“another”) to distinguish one girl/boy from another
girl/boy in a picture. This situation is an example of her using a specific label rather
than a general label.
Lesly gave her own name to the title of the book. Her title, “Se Baño” was
not similar to the original title, I Love Colors (Miller, 1999). She pointed to a
pictured baby on the cover page and labeled it to give a title to the book. She
repeatedly commented on a particular character, baby’s action in Spanish: “Se baño,”
“Se baño,”…”Se baño”. In English this means that she took a bath. She touched
items in pictures as though she was reading.
Following the action. Children who gave this kind of re-enactment acted as if
the action in the picture was occurring in the present. Their speech was distinctive
and paired with an indicating finger that often seemed to trace action in the pictures:
116
“He’s talking.” “He’s painting.” The verbs used were typically in present tense. In
I Love Colors (Miller, 1999) four year old Des’s focus was on one character’s action.
He used present progressive and present tenses to describe the current actions of a
baby from pictures: present progressive (“is happening,” “is talking” and “are
painting”) and present (has). His reading heavily depended on what the baby was
doing and wearing. His storytelling was contextualized to pictures. The
conversation was held in Spanish.
Adult: Dime lo que dice, que esta pasando?
Child: _______ (indecipherable) estan con la pelota
Adult: y que hace?
Child: el la lleva la pelota al carro
Adult: si
Child: y mira lo que saco!
Adult: que saco?
Child: _______ (indecipherable) con los huesos…
Adult: que hace? Que hace con los huesos?
Child: esta platicando _______ (indecipherable) ella y estan pintando
todo y agua
Adult: Hm….
Child: el tiene un muñeco
Translation into English
Adult: Tell me what it says. What is happening?
Child: _______ (indecipherable) They are with the ball.
Adult: And what do they do?
Child: He takes the ball to the car.
Adult: Yes.
Child: And look what he found.
Adult: What did he find?
Child: _______ (indecipherable) with the bones
Adult: What does he do? What does he do with the bones?
Child: He is talking _______ (indecipherable) Her and they are
painting everything and water
Adult: Humm..
Child: He has a doll.
117
Attempts Governed by Pictures, Stories Formed (Oral Language-Like)
The present data indicated that four children made dialogic storytelling
attempts and three children monologic storytelling attempts. These are the observed
types of oral language-like attempts with the present data.
Dialogic storytelling. This form of storytelling can contain “labeling and
commenting” and “following the action” but most often the child may give dialogue
for the characters in pictures by creating “voices” for the characters. The dialogue
will rarely make sense to the listener and will appear disjointed. A four year old,
Blanca turned the book I Love Colors (Miller, 1999) to face the researcher and made
a dialogic conversation using pictures with the researcher. She created a story by
using her personal experiences such as her family, Halloween, and herself. Her
language was contextualized to the pictures that she was looking at. She used
pictures of the baby doing everyday things, such as taking a bath, laughing, and
sitting. According to Wasik, Bond, and Hindman (2006) dialogic reading is a
method of reading picture books in which children are provided with multiple
opportunities to talk and engage in conversation while the adult becomes an active
listener, asks questions, adds information, and promotes the child’s use of descriptive
language.
A four year-old boy, Jorge read the title as “Sharing Toys” which he created.
He started a storytelling with labeling and then his speech became a little faster.
Based on whatever picture he saw, he created a dialogue as “It’s time to share toys,”
118
“It’s time to share lots of toys,” then, “It’s time to eat,” then, “It’s time to play in the
snow,” then “It’s time to play in the snow.”
Monologic storytelling. In this form of storytelling the listener can
understand the complete storytelling. The story is context-dependent, assuming that
both the child and the adult can see he pictures in the book. Syntax and phrases used
are appropriate to a story told face-to-face even though the child tells it as a
monologue (Sulzby, 1985). A four year old boy, Roy, continued to look at the
pictures and descried what was happening in the book Dinosaur Roar (Strickland,
1997). His words were contextualized to the pictures: different sizes of dinosaur.
His description was also based on the pictures. After the description, he said “The
end.” He contextualized “Activity” to tell a story using present progressive verbs
such as “doing,” “singing,” and “walking.”
Child: Dinosaur and dinosaur. There’s little big dinosaur. Doing um..singing.
And that dinosaur gonna eat him. Trying to ______(indecipherable) and then
gonna get him ______(indecipherable). There was a bigger dinosaur. And
there was a little______(indecipherable) dinosaur. There was a little dinosaur
got to walk. He got it. He is stronger. And the green dinosaur is bigger.
(Middle portion deleted)
Child: There is a little bigger dinosaur that got a ball. There is a green
dinosaur with blue dinosaur was bigger. ______(indecipherable).
A four year old, Albert, started a book backwards and turned pages
backwards as well. He told a story in storytelling intonation with details. His details
were based on pictures. He continued to refer to the pictured content. He read in
Spanish.
119
A five year old girl Jennifer, started a story saying, “Once upon a time…”
She pointed at pictures of a birthday party hat and cake and created a story with the
pictures content. She finished the story with “end” an oral language-like attempt:
“The end.” This was another clue distinguishing storybook reading from storybook
telling.
A four year old boy, Robert, rotated a book to tell a story. He made a
monologic story in both English and Spanish. Although he looked at the pictures, he
did not track the pictures to create a story. He simply taped on the pictures and said
a few words. Instead, he used the picture content to explain what it was.
Attempts Governed by Pictures, Stories Formed (Written Language-Like)
The present data indicated that four children made monologic storytelling
attempts. These are the observed types of written language-like attempts with the
present data.
Refusing to read based on print awareness. Refusals is defined as children
literally refusing to try to read until they learn more about the reading process.
Often, these children are determined to be less proficient than other children but in
reality they need to know more before they attempt to read. One four year old girl,
Cynthia, presented concept of print with indication of directionality, left to right and
top to bottom. When she started reading, she asked the researcher to help her to
understand the meaning of the storybooks by asking, “What it says here?” She read
some of the words such as frog. When she looked at the pictures, she fluently
described the frog playing in the sun. Suddenly, she refused to read more words by
120
saying that “That’s it.” She paid sporadic attention to print. She read a few words
and then talked about the story by using pictures.
Reading Aspectually. Before the child becomes an independent reader, she or
he often starts to focus on one or two aspects about print to the exclusion of the other
aspects. These aspects may be new or old items of attention to the child. A four
year old, Steve, focused on using a few words such as eyes and bananas, which were
both pictures in the story to read a story. The boy paid attention to print and words.
He was concentrating on words, but not meaning from the text. What he was reading
did not make sense.
Reading strategies imbalanced. According to Sulzby (1985), this type of
attempt seems to be more like independent reading than aspectual reading but it is
still not sufficiently integrated nor strategically flexible. This reader may omit
unknown words continuously or substitute other known words. Also, this reader
may rely on predicted or remembered text rather than actual written text. A four
year old girl, Michelle read a book quickly without using strategies and by omitting
unknown words excessively. Only a few words were correct: baby, bath. She
substituted unknown words for known words: book, big. Often, she sounded out
words excessively: baby, baby, baby. She did not try to correct the words that she
read. goed, runned.
Reading independently. The child who is reading independently may read
word for word at times but may make many miscues. However, when the reader
corrects the miscues a wider range of knowledge and understanding of reading was
121
occurring. A four year old girl, Kim read fluently. Making self-corrections and
substituted a phrase. She was less text-bound, but focused on gaining the meaning
from the text. Overall, the children displayed a wide range of emergent “reading
readiness behaviors”. The table below summarizes the impact of storybook reading
and other observed literate behaviors on children’s reading readiness. The table
represents the data collected from storybook reading with 15 children.
Table 5: Classification Scheme for Emergent Reading of Favorite Storybooks
Reading Attempt Type Major
Categories (and
Subcategories)
A. Attempts Governed by Print 4
Reading independently
Reading with strategies imbalanced (2)
Reading aspectually (1)
Refusing to read based on print awareness (1)
B. Attempts Governed by Pictures, Stories Formed 6
1.Written language-like
Reading verbatim-like story
Reading similar-to-original story
Reading and story-telling mixed
2. Oral language-like
Monologic story-telling (4)
Dialogic story-telling (2)
C. Attempts Governed by Pictures, Stories Not Formed 5
Following the action (1)
Labeling and commenting (4)
D. Refusals 2
122
Six children, the greatest number, were able to read a storybook by attempts
governed by pictures, stories formed in an oral language-like way. Four of the six
children were able to tell monologic story-telling whereas only two of the children
demonstrated dialogic story-telling. Five children were able to read storybooks by
attempts governed by pictures, stories not formed. Labeling and commenting was
accomplished by four of the children while only 1 child was able to follow the
action. Four of the 15 children made attempts governed by print but with reading
strategies imbalanced. Two children refused to read but were included in the table.
Based on this data the children were indeed developing reading readiness skills
based on Sulzby’s classification scheme. Though they were at different levels there
was evidence of reading development. However, since storybook reading did not
play a major role in the literacy program at Gardens child development center, these
results cannot be attributed to storybook reading. What the researcher did notice
through data collection was the apparent role of oral language in the reading
readiness of the children.
Oral Language
The researcher found oral language development to have a significant role in
the reading readiness of the children. Children who do not develop strong oral
language skills in the early years find it difficult to keep up with their peers. They
start to fall behind even before they start school (Snow, Burns, & Griffin, 1998).
The Observation Protocol, adapted from the Continuum of Children’s Development
in Reading Awareness and Explorations Goals for Preschool, Neuman (2000) was
123
used for this study. Included in the adapted version the Continuum was a section on
Oral Language Development from Developmentally Appropriate Practice in Early
Childhood Programs, NAEYC (1997). The chart below presents the percentages of
the children’s observed behaviors of oral language development during the
observations.
Figure 4: Oral Language Development
124
The data from the chart shows 39% of the children’s time was spent using
simple sentences. This data shows that from ages three to five children are
experiencing phenomenal growth in language development. Children are speaking
from three to four words to phrases and simple songs to using fuller more complete
sentences. According to Vukelich, Christie, and Enz (2002) children at this language
level are at the 47-month Language Milestone suggesting children can be understood
by strangers most of the time. Wong and Fillmore (1976) describe this stage in
language development as a time when children chunk a few content words long
before they know what they mean. They call these prefabricated chunks telegraphic
speech. For example, “put paper” to convey “I want to put the paper on the table.”
Based on the researchers observation notes, children communicated with the teacher
or each other in situations usually related to play, such as in the kitchen center or in
the art center. Some examples of their oral language include, “ We go to beach.”
“Pack your plates.,” “I gonna make one too.” Roskos, Tabors, and Lenhart (2004)
state it is not enough for children to “pick up” language on their own. Adults need to
make plans and set goals. In making plans, adults consider what children already
know and can do and take steps to further their oral language comprehension. When
purposeful, they set clear learning goals for children and deliberately engage them in
activities that help them explore and use language (Roskos, et al., 2004). Fifteen
percent of the children’s time in oral language development was spent using
language to organize thought. Children would link two ideas together by sentence
125
combining, such as “What you doing? How many blocks do you have?” and “What
is this?, Where’s the milk?”
Although the atmosphere was friendly and cooperative, children had
difficulty taking turns. Fourteen percent of the time children had difficulty taking
turns and switched topics rapidly. Based on the researcher’s observations, children
would ask questions that were unrelated to the task. For example, while the teacher
was reading a story a child shouted out, “Do you like cookies?” Asking who, what,
where, and why questions was very common in the preschool classroom. Thirteen
percent of children’s oral language development was devoted to this type of
questioning. Roskos, Tabor, and Lenhart (2004) discuss asking and answering
questions as oral language development are signs in seeking, noticing, and
incorporating new and more complex experiences into prior experiences. The
authors posit that the questions children ask signal what’s going on in the children’s
minds while invisible mental schemas are busily being organized and built. They go
on to state that, questions indicate children’s skill in monitoring comprehension
through their questions and we can see that children are either following along and
getting it or not engaged. The researcher observed children asking many questions
throughout the evening. Questions ranged from, “Who are you?” to “What doing?”
and “What is this.” Although, the children ask many questions, sometimes they
show confusion in responding to some questions. For example, Jose, the family
advocate, asked one child, “Who am I?” The child hesitated and could not respond
with Jose’s name but instead said, “friend.”
126
Children adapted speech and style of nonverbal communication to listeners in
culturally accepted ways but still needed to be reminded of the context eleven
percent of the time. The majority of the children use Spanish and English
interchangeably. They may begin a sentence in Spanish and complete it in English.
An example observed by the researcher includes, “Donde vamos?, we go!” Five
percent of the children’s oral language development was spent pronouncing words
with difficulty often one word was mistaken for another. Based on the researchers
observation notes, children demonstrated this action by stating, “That don’t go
there.” rather than “That doesn’t go there.” Another example includes, “We don’t
got no milk?” rather than “We don’t have milk.” The least amount of time, 3%,
observed by the researcher was children engaged in simple finger plays and rhymes
where words are learned to songs that used repetition. Although, children were
engaged daily in songs and rhyme they were not repetitious in nature. The songs
they were engaged in were the alphabet song, Itsy Bitsy Spider, or songs with
actions. Though Oral Language was not the focus of this study, based on
observation it played a significant role in the daily program of the children.
Conclusion
This chapter has examined the significant findings and themes that emerged
during classroom observations, assessment of storybook reading with children, and
teacher and Associate Director interviews. Although storybook reading did play a
role in the reading readiness preschool program, there was a lack of frequency and
quality implementation. The teachers stated that they were using storybook reading;
127
however, classroom observations did not confirm this finding. In addition, the nature
of storybook reading as explained by the teachers and associate director are not in-
line with the literature on storybook reading. The children were only getting
Concepts About Print skills, which were not providing in depth literacy skills, such
as repeated readings to support the development of emergent literacy. In the end, it
was really a combination of the literacy rich activities taking place in the preschool
program that had an impact on students reading readiness. Figure 5 represents a
summary of the findings in terms of what I observed as holistically influencing
reading readiness in a Twilight Program.
In Chapter 5 further examination of the findings will be discussed and
recommendations for further research and practice will be presented.
128
Figure 5: Reading Readiness Themes with Strategies
129
CHAPTER FIVE:
CONCLUSIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS, AND SUGGESTIONS
FOR FURTHER RESEARCH
Introduction
The purpose of this chapter is to discuss and interpret the major findings and
provide recommendations for future research in the area of reading readiness and
storybook reading. Based on the research conducted at Gardens Child Development
Center, classroom observations showed evidence of collaboration among teachers for
curriculum and lesson planning and maintaining a print-rich literacy environment.
Teacher A and Teacher B followed the same daily schedule and worked
collaboratively as a team. The literacy environment was arranged specifically for
small group instruction in learning centers. Parent and Child Together Time (PACT)
invited parents to act as partners in the daily routine of the classroom and they were
encouraged to volunteer on a regular basis at the preschool.
Both teachers demonstrated a good understanding of the preschool program,
curriculum, and reading readiness skills. These skills included reading storybooks,
providing opportunities for oral language development through play centers, using
pictures to tell stories, songs and rhymes, and on-going play. An extensive body of
research supports the implementation of these types of activities to promote
emergent literacy development. Although the curriculum was relatively new to both
teachers, they demonstrated the knowledge and skills to teach the program. Bowman
et al. (2001) found that curricula that work with children’s emergent understandings
130
and provides the concepts, knowledge, and opportunities to extend those
understandings, has been used effectively in the preschool years.
Implications
Early literacy researchers, Sulzby and Teale (1996) defined storybook
reading as “reading” by children who are not yet reading from print. Children who
have learned to read (and write) before formal instruction have often been described
as “teaching themselves to read” from favorite storybooks (Sulzby, 1985). Yaden et
al. (2000) in their extensive research on emergent literacy found that storybook
reading has continued to remain a major area of research over the last decade and
that questions about its actual efficacy for later literacy achievement have arisen
more and more.
Classroom observations revealed that there was a scheduled time for
storybook reading in the child’s daily schedule, at the beginning of the day, but it
usually takes on the role of “storytime.” There is limited shared interaction with the
book and targeted literacy skills. Interviews with the teachers revealed that the
teachers received very little specific professional development on how to read and
teach reading readiness skills using a storybook. Based on the research found in
Eager To Learn (2001) one of the features of a quality early childhood program is the
professional development of teachers. Frequent and quality professional
development was directly related to the quality of early childhood programs. In turn,
program quality was seen as a predictor of developmental outcomes for children.
131
The Associate Director shared that storybook reading was a priority at the
preschool but stated that storybooks were mainly used to teach socio-emotional
skills. Another feature of a quality program states, social competence and school
achievement are influenced by the quality of early teacher-child relationships, and by
teachers’ attentiveness to how the child approaches learning. Hence, it is the
responsive interpersonal relationship between teacher and child that leads to social
competence and not storybook reading.
There was no formal assessment of storybook reading. Teachers take
anecdotal notes about the children throughout the day to assist the teachers with the
individual needs of the children. Though this is a good assessment practice, research
in the area of child development supports a combination of varied assessment
practices to do a better job of tracking students’ development at this age. Bowman et
al. (2001) state assessment of young children poses greater challenges than people
generally realize and the first five years of life are a time of incredible growth and
learning, but the course of development is uneven and sporadic. The status of a
child’s development can change very rapidly and therefore recommend knowledge
of assessment procedures (observation/performance records, work sampling,
interview methods) that can be used to inform instruction. Preschool teachers need
to be knowledgeable about early childhood development and how to monitor it daily
and over longer periods of time.
A quality preschool program ensures qualified and prepared teachers work
with young children. It is their passion, knowledge, skills, and expertise that drive
132
the curriculum. Bowman et al. (2001) found that each group of children in an early
childhood education and care program should be assigned a teacher who has a
bachelor’s degree with specialized education related to early childhood (e.g.,
developmental psychology, early childhood education, early childhood special
education). Achieving this goal will require a significant public investment in the
professional development of current and new teachers. Teachers need to understand
storybook reading and how it can make a difference in children’s reading readiness
by participating in professional development, such as professional learning
communities to attain in depth knowledge. Also, that the Associate Director act
more as an on-site supervisor and provide hands-on professional development. This
recommendation is a critical component of preservice preparation. It should be
supervised, relevant, and an internship experience, in which new teachers receive
ongoing guidance and feedback from a qualified supervisor (Bowman et al.).
According to Bowman et al. (2001) teacher education programs should
require mastery of information on the pedagogy of teaching preschool-aged children.
This recommendation includes the literacy environment and the knowledge of how
to organize the classroom effectively. Yaden et al. (2000) claim that although
Goodman (1986) identified the exposure to environmental print as one of the main
“roots” of literacy, other studies-operating with outcome-based assumptions-have
been unable to find strong relationships between environmental print recognition and
conventional reading ability. In their meta-analysis of emergent literacy they cite
that Stahl and Murray (1993) found that children’s exposure to logos did not
133
facilitate their word recognition ability. Also, children are better served by
observing and experiencing the reading and writing of connected discourse
decontextualized from physical (such as signs and containers) and pictorial contexts
(Purcell-Gates, 1996). She discovered an average of less than one instance of actual
reading and writing per hour in 20 low-income families. Based on observations of
the classroom at Gardens Child Development Center the environment was print-rich
with children’s work samples posted throughout the classroom. This gave the
children the opportunity to see their work on display and to be recognized for a job
well done. Children took their class work home on a daily basis and parents were
encouraged to hang their work up at home.
The classroom was set up in small learning centers. The centers were utilized
by children during their choice time. Children went to the center of their choice but
based on classroom observation children appeared to choose the center with a hands-
on emphasis. Morrow (1991), found in her study of 35 middle-class kindergarten
classrooms, many school settings in the early 1990s were not well designed to
facilitate literacy behaviors. In her sample, few literacy materials were easily
available for children’s use and teachers did little to promote voluntary literacy
activities during play. These finding evoked considerable interest on the part of
educational researchers in developing literacy-enriched play centers by adding
theme-related literacy props (e.g., stamps, envelopes, appointment books, and phone
books for an “office” play center) Yaden et al. (2000). Gardens child development
center was a good example of the importance of literacy play centers, mainly
134
because it led to students engaging in purposeful talk throughout the day. As children
interacted with one another at the play centers, or in transition from one center to
another, they were using a great deal of oral language.
Oral Language
Based on classroom observations and the observation protocol, oral language
played a significant role in the reading readiness of the children. The children were
engaged in conversation in English and Spanish during literacy play centers and at
the teacher table. According to Bredekamp and Copple (1997), NAEYC recommend
the following developmentally appropriate practice for language and
communication; that teachers encourage children’s developing language and
communication skills by talking with them throughout the day, speaking clearly and
listening to their responses, and providing opportunities for them to talk to each
other. Teachers need to engage individual children and groups in conversations
about real experiences, projects, and current events. They need to encourage children
to describe their products or ideas and respond attentively to children’s verbal
initiatives. Based on classroom observations children were very comfortable
walking around the classroom interacting with one another and the teacher. The
children were very verbal and did not hesitate to speak and participate. Roskos et al.,
(2004) state that children thrive in conditions that nurture their language discoveries,
their different uses of language, and their first attempts to read and write. These
conditions are created when you engage children in meaningful conversations, assist
135
them in meeting new learning challenges, and offer them opportunities for practice
that are engaging and worthwhile.
Recommendations for Reading in the Preschool Classroom
Whitehurst and Lonigan (2002) state that learning to read is a key milestone
for children living in a literate society. The authors claim, reading skills provide a
critical foundation for children’s success. Hence, reading readiness should be the
focus of all early childhood programs. Teachers must be knowledgeable and trained
on the Foundations for Learning and understand how to implement the curriculum
program. Assessment should be consistent and focus on a reading readiness
approach, specifically storybook reading.
Gardens Child Development center believed in the practice of reading to
children as a tool for supporting reading development. Based on statements made by
the teachers and the Associate Director, storybook reading was considered a
significant part of their program and in children’s reading readiness. However,
observations did not support these findings. And where there was evidence of
student’s reading readiness, storybook reading alone could not be seen as having a
significant impact. It would be interesting to see how much more students would
benefit from a more frequent and careful implementation of storybook reading
practices.
Teachers should read more storybooks to and with children. Based on the
NAEYC Developmentally Appropriate Practice (1997), children should have
numerous opportunities to read or hear high-quality children’s literature and
136
nonfiction for pleasure and for information; discuss readings; draw, dictate; and
write about their experiences.
Holdaway (1979) stated by far the most surprising and significant aspect of
preschool book-experience, however, is the independent activity of these very young
children with their favorite books. Almost as soon as the infant becomes
familiarized with particular books through repetitive readings, he begins to play with
them in reading-like ways. Thus, teachers should encourage children to read more,
especially repeated readings of favorite books because the findings of this study
showed that a holistic literacy program which includes repeated readings would
enhance children’s reading readiness.
Roskos et al. (2004), claim after repeated readings, individual children can
learn to read familiar books on their own. They claim that as a result of instruction
that occurs in shared reading, children gain knowledge about books and print.
Shared reading is an instructional approach with tremendous educational potential
for helping children meet oral and early literacy expectations. Children learn basic
skills of book handling and make progress in tracking print as the source of the
message. Typically, shared reading occurs in a classroom using a big book that is
read aloud. The big book allows all the children to participate actively in the choral
reading of the story because the text is large enough for the whole class to see. At
Gardens Child Development center children requested repeated readings often. This
was noted both through observations and teacher’s statements during interviews. It
137
would benefit the children if the teachers would honor the students’ requests and
reread many of their favorite storybooks.
Recommendations for Parental Participation
Based on classroom observations and research, parents engaged in storybook
reading with their children as part of PACT. According to Roskos et al. (2004) the
single most important activity for nurturing learning in children is to read quality
books to them. They go on to state that when you read to children using shared
reading techniques you help them learn new words and ideas. With this experience
parent and child can read and talk about the book. Larger gains were observed for
children whose parents read to them every day. Smaller gains were observed for
children whose parents read to them only once or twice a week or not at all (Zill &
Resnick, 2006). At Garden Child Development Center parents are invited to attend a
monthly PACT meeting. Parent and child attend the meeting together and listen to
school information and announcements, listen to music, and hear a story. My
recommendation for PACT time is to engage parents in storybook reading with their
child to improve reading readiness. Parents should be viewed as partners in their
child’s education, expected to volunteer on a regular basis, and be required to attend
reading strategy-based PACT meetings.
Future Research
Conducting this study with a larger sample would be beneficial to address the
needs of larger student population. With a larger sample size, findings can be
138
generalized to more preschool programs. In addition, expanding the study to more
schools could identify additional strategies that support reading readiness.
This study gave a qualitative look at storybook reading and its role in
developing reading readiness. Issues of fidelity in the implementation of storybook
reading is necessary as a follow up study to identify “storybook” reading as a key
element in a quality preschool program. In addition, a comparative study between
classrooms that use storybook reading with fidelity and those who do not use it
would help determine impact. A study that can look at reading readiness and
storybook reading from a quantitative perspective can better determine causality and
significant impact.
Closing
Children come into the world eager to learn. The first five years of life are a
time of enormous growth of linguistic, conceptual, social, emotional, and motor
competence (Bowman et al., 2001). From a young age children are active
participants in that growth by exploring their environment and learning to
communicate. There can be no question that the environment in which a child grows
up has a powerful impact on how the child develops and what the child learns
(Bowman et al.). With the growing number of children under 5 years old, we must
be prepared to offer our youngest children quality preschool programs.
The RAND Study (2008) focused on issues of preschool use and program
quality. Four of the six key findings showed the need to raise preschool program
quality. The other two key findings focused on use and participation. One of the key
139
findings directly related to readiness and later school achievement states; the groups
of children with the largest gaps in school readiness and later achievement are the
least likely to participate in high-quality center-based programs that will help them
succeed in kindergarten and beyond (RAND, 2008). Neuman (2006) claimed that
from the beginning, the playing field is not equal. Early childhood education should
start in the toddler years with high professional-to-child ratios so that adults can
engage in what she describes as rich interactions that are necessary to allow children
to be adequately prepared. Zill and Resnick (2006) found in their study of emergent
literacy and low-income children that to improve children’s emergent literacy scores
in Head Start, programs should focus their recruitment efforts on identifying families
who are the neediest and the most severely disadvantaged. Gardens Child
Development center has made tremendous efforts to open its doors to more families
by offering non-traditional hours to fit the work day. And more importantly they
offer a high quality preschool program filled with literacy rich activities and play
centers that promote oral language development.
It is my hope that the findings presented in this study will help all educators
with the task of creating high quality preschool programs. Through rich oral
language environments as evidenced at Gardens Child Development Center, children
will be eager and ready to learn to read.
140
REFERENCES
Adams, M.J. (1998). Beginning to read, thinking and learning about print. Boston:
MIT Press.
Alpert, D., Alquist, A., & Strom-Martin, S. (2002). The California Master Plan for
Education California Department of Education.
Barr, R. (1984). Beginning reading instruction: From debate to reformation.
Handbook of Reading Research, (Vol. I). New York: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates.
Barr, R., Kamil, M.L., Mosenthal, P., & Pearson, D. (1991). Handbook of reading
Research (Vol. II). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Belfield, C.R., & Levin, H.M. (2007). The return on investment for improving
California’s high school graduation rate. California Dropout Research
Project.
Berrueta-Clement, J., Schweinhart, L., Barnett, W., Epstein, A., & Weikart, D.
(1984). Changed lives: The effects of the Perry Preschool Program on youths
through age 19. (Monographs of the High/Scope Educational Research
Foundation, 8.) Ypsilanti, MI: High/Scope Press.
Braunger, J., & Lewis, J.P. (2001). Building a knowledge base in reading.
International Reading Association.
Bredekamp, S., & Copple, C. (1997). Developmentally appropriate practice in
early childhood programs. National Association for the Education of Young
Children (NAEYC).
Bredekamp, S., Knuth, R.A., Kunesh, L.G., & Shulman, D.D. (1992). What does
research say about early childhood education. North Central Regional
Educational Laboratory (NCREL), Oakbrook.
California Preschool Learning Foundation, Volume 1. (2008). California
Department of Education, Sacramento.
Chall, J. (1967). Learning to read, The great debate. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Clay, M.M. (1975). What Did I Write? Beginning writing behavior. Heinemann
Educational.
141
Clay, M.M. (1991). Becoming literate, The construction of inner control. Heinemann
Education.
Clay, M. (1995). The early detection of reading difficulties. London: Heinemann.
Clay, M.M. (2003). Child development. Handbook of Research On Teaching The
English Language Arts. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Cotton, K. (2000). The schooling practices that matter most. Northwest Regional
Educational Laboratory.
Creswell, J.W. (1994). Research design, qualitative & quantitative approaches.
Sage Publications.
Creswell, J.W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design, Choosing among
five traditions. Sage Publications.
Dickinson, D.K., & Neuman, S.B. (2006). Handbook of early literacy, Volume 2.
The Guilford Press.
Dickinson, D.K., & Tabors, P.O. (2001). Beginning literacy with language.
Brookes Publishing.
Eager to learn, educating our preschoolers (2001). National Research Council.
Eager to learn, educating our preschoolers introduction (2000). Center for the
Improvement of Early Reading Achievement (CIERA).
Early Learning Quality Improvement Act SB 1629 (Steinberg). Preschool California.
http://www.preschoolcalifornia.org
Elster, C. (1994). Patterns within preschoolers’ emergent readings. Reading
Research Quarterly, 29(4), 402-418.
Epstein, A., Schweinhart, L.J., & McAdoo, L. (1996). Models of early childhood
education. Highscope Press.
Farstrup, A.E., & Samuels, S.J. (2002). What research has to say about reading
instruction (3
rd
ed.). International Reading Association.
Ferreiro, E., & Teberosky, A. (1979). Literacy before schooling. Heinemann
Educational Books.
142
Fink, A., & Kosehoff, J. (1998). How top conduct surveys, A step-by-step guide (2
nd
ed.). Sage Publications.
Goldberg, C. (2002). Making schools work for low-income families in the 21
st
century. Handbook of Early Literacy Research.
GovTrack u.s. H.R. 1429-110
th
Congress (2007). Head Start for School Readiness
Act, GovTrack.u.s. (database of federal legislation)
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h110-1429&page-command-
print (accessed Dec. 5, 2007).
Holdaway, D. (1979). The foundations of literacy. Ashton Scholastic.
Hyson, M. (2003). Preparing early childhood professionals, NAEYC’s standards
for progress. National Association for the Education of Young Children.
Johnson, L.J., LaMontagne, M.J., Elgas, P.M., & Bauer, A.M. (1998). Early
childhood education, blending theory, blending practice. Paul H. Brookes
Publishing.
Justice, L.M. Pullen, P.C., & Pence, K. (2008). Influence of verbal and nonverbal
references to print on preschoolers’ visual attention to print during storybook
reading. Developmental Psychology, 44(3), 855-866.
Kagan, S.L. (1990). Readiness 2000: Rethinking rhetoric and responsibility. Phi
Delta Kappan, 72, 272-279.
Kantor, R., Miller, S.M., & Fernie, D.E. (1992). Diverse paths to literacy in a
preschool classroom: A sociocultural perspective. Reading Research
Quarterly, 27(3), 185-201.
Karoly, L.A., Ghosh-Dastidar, B., Zellman, G., Perlman, M., & Fernyhough, L.
(2008). Prepared to learn: The nature and quality of early care and
education for preschool-age children in California. RAND Labor and
Population.
Labinowicz, E. Teaching (1980). The Piaget primer, thinking, learning, Dale
Seymour Publications.
Lally, J.R., Mangione, P.L.L.. & Greenwald, D. (2006). Concepts for care. WestEd.
Lopez, E.S., & de Cos, P.L. (2004). Preschool and childcare enrollment in
California. California Research Bureau.
143
Lubeck, S. (1989). Four-Year-Olds and public schooling? Framing the question.
Theory into Practice, 28, 3-10.
Lubeck, S. (1990). Four-Year-Olds and public schooling. ERIC Clearinghouse on
Elementary and Early Childhood Education Urbana, IL.
Lynch, R.G. (2005). Early childhood investment yields big payoff. WestEd.
Mallory, B.L., New, R.S. (1994). Diversity & developmentally practices, Challenges
for early childhood education. Teachers College Press.
Martinez M.G., & Teale, W.H. (1989). Classroom storybook reading: The creation
of texts and learning opportunities. Theory Into Practice, 28(2), 126-135.
McDonald-Connor, C., Morrison, F.J.,& Skominski, L. (2006). Preschool
instruction and children’s emergent literacy growth. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 98(4), 665-689.
McGee, L.M., & Richgels, D.J. (1996). Literacy Beginnings (2
nd
ed.). Allyn and
Bacon.
Mooney, C.G. (2000). AniIntroduction to Dewey, Montessori, Erikson, Piaget, &
Vygotsky. Redleaf Press.
National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC). (1995). School
readiness.
National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC). (1995). On
early learning standards.
National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC). (1995). On
curriculum, assessment, and program evaluation.
National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC) and the
National Association of Early Childhood Specialists in State Departments of
Education (NAECS/SDE) (2002). Early Learning Standards, Creating
Conditions for Success.
National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC) (1993). A
Conceptual Framework for Early Childhood Professional Development.
National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC) (2003). Early
Childhood Curriculum, Assessment, and Program Evaluation Building an
Effective, Accountable System in Programs for Children Birth through Age 8
144
National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC) (1992).
Guiding Principles for the Development and Analysis of Early Childhood
Public Policy
National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC) (1993). A
Conceptual Framework for Early Childhood Professional Development.
National Institute for Early Education Research. The State of Preschool 2007. State
Preschool Yearbook. Rutgers Graduate School of Education.
Neuman, S.B. (2002). How can I help children get ready for reading? Early
Childhood Educator Academy. United States Department of Education.
Neuman, S.B. (2002). What the research reveals, foundations for reading instruction
in preschool and primary education. Early Childhood Educator Academy.
Neuman, S.B., Copple, C., & Bredekamp, S. (2000). Learning to read and write:
Developmentally appropriate practices for young children. National
Association for the Education of Young Children.
Neuman, S.B., & Dickinson, D.K. (2002). Handbook of early literacy research.
The Guilford Press.
Neuman, S.B., & Roskos, K. (1998). Children achieving, Best practices in early
literacy. International Reading Association.
Neuman, S.B., & Roskos, K.A. (2007). Nurturing knowledge, theory and practice.
Scholastic.
Owocki, G. (2001). Make way for literacy! Teaching the way young children learn.
National Association for the Education of Young Children.
Patton, M.Q. (2002). Qualitative Research & Evaluation Methods (3
rd
ed.). Sage
Publications.
Pearson, D., Barr, R., Kamil, M.L., & Mosenthal, P. (1984). Handbook of reading
research (Vol. I). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Piaget, J., & Inhelder, B. (1969). The psychology of the child. Basic Books.
Prekindergarten learning development guidelines (2000). California Department of
Education.
145
Preschool English learners, principles and practices to promote language, literacy,
and learning (2007). California Department of Education.
Reardon, K. (2008). A broader, bolder approach to education. Retrieved July 12,
2008, from http://www.boldapproach.org
Reesse, E., & Cox, A. (1999). Quality of adult book reading affects children’s
emergent literacy. Developmental Psychology, 35(1), 20-28.
Rieber, R.W., & Carton, A.S. (1987). The collected works of Vygotsky, Volume 1.
Plenum Press.
Roskos, K., Christie, J.F., & Richgels, D.J. (2003). The essentials of early literacy
instruction. National Association for the Education of Young Children
(NAEYC).
Rothstein, R. (2006). Reforms that could help narrow the achievement gap. WestEd.
Schweinhart L.J., & Weikart, D.P. (1997). Lasting differences, The High/Scope
preschoolcurriculum comparison study through age 23. High/Scope Press.
Schweinhart L.J., Barbes, H.V., & Weikart, D.P. (1993). The High/Scope Perry
preschool study through age 27. The High/Scope Press.
Scott-Little, C., Kagan, S.L., & Frelow, V.S. (2006). Conceptualization of readiness
and the content of early learning standards: The intersection of policy and
research? Early Childhood Research Quartery, 21, 153-173.
Serpell, R., Baker, L., & Sonnenschein, S. (2005). Becoming literate in the city, The
Baltimore early childhood project. Cambridge University Press.
Snow, C.E., Burns, S., & Griffin, P. (1998). Preventing reading difficulties in young
children. National Academy Press.
Strickland, D.S. (2004). The role of literacy in early childhood education. The
Reading Teacher, 58(1), International Reading Association.
Strickland, D.S., & Morrow, L.M. (1989). Emerging literacy: Young children learn
to read and write. International Reading Association.
Strickland, D.S., & Morrow, L.M. (2000). Beginning reading and writing. Teachers
College Press.
146
Sulzby. E. (1985). Children’s emergent reading of favorite storybooks: A
developmental study. Reading Research Quarterly,
Sulzby, E., & Teale, W.H., (1996). Emergent literacy. Handbook of reading research
(Vol. II). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Sulzby, E., & Teale, W.H. (2003). The development of the young child and the
emergence of literacy. Handbook of research on teaching the English
language arts. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Teale, W.H., & Sulzby, E. (1986). Emergent literacy. Ablex Publishing.
Valencia, S.W. (1991). Assessment of emergent literacy; Storybook reading. The
Reading Teacher, 44(7).
Van Der Veer, & Valsiner, J. (1991). Understanding Vygotsky: A quest for
synthesis. Blackwell Publishers.
Vygotsky, L.S. (1987). The collected works of L.S. Vygotsky (Vol. 1), Problems of
general psychology. Plenum Press.
Wasik, B.A., & Bond, M.A. (2006). The effects of a language and literacy
intervention on head start children and teachers. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 98(1), 63-74.
Weikart, D.P., Deloria, D. J., Lawser, S.L., & Wiegerink, R. (1993). Longitudinal
results of the Ypsilanti Perry preschool project. The High/Scope Press.
Whitehurst, G.J., & Lonigan, C J. (1998). Child development and emergent literacy.
Child Development, 69(3), 848-872.
Whitehurst, G.J., & Lonigan, C J. (2003). Emergent literacy: Development from
prereaders to readers. Handbook of Early Literacy Research. Guilford Press.
Wolfe, P., & Nevills, P. (2004). Building the reading brain, preK-3. Corwin Press.
Yaden, D.B., Rowe, D.W., & MacGillivray, L. (2000). Emergent literacy: A matter
of (polyphony) of perspectives. In M.L. Kamil, P.Mosenthal, D. Pearson, R.
Barr, (2000). Handbook of reading research, Volume III. Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates.
147
Zepeda, M., Rothstein-Fisch, C., Gonzalez-Mena, J., & Trumbull, E. (2006).
Bridging cultures in early care and education. Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates.
Zill, N., & Resnick, G. (2006). Emergent literacy of low-income children in head
start: Relationships with child and family characteristics, program factors,
and classroom quality. Handbook of Early Literacy Research (Vol. 2).
Guilford Press.
148
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A:
PROMOTIONAL MATERIALS
149
APPENDIX B:
INVITATION LETTER AND PARENT PERMISSION FORM
October 10, 2008
Dear Parent or Guardian,
My name is Hilda Baca-Fetcenko. I am a Lecturer at California State University,
Dominguez Hills and doctoral student at the University of Southern California. I am
conducting research as part of my degree in Teacher Education in Multicultural
Societies, and would like to invite your child to participate in my study.
I am writing to you because I have chosen to study storybook reading for preschool
children enrolled in the twilight program. If your child is enrolled in the twilight
program and you decide to allow your child to participate, your child will be asked to
read a storybook and answer questions related to the storybook. The reading will
take place within eight observations/visits to the classroom and should last about 30
minutes. The session will be recorded as notes so that I can accurately reflect on
what is discussed. The notes will only be reviewed and transcribed by me. They will
then be destroyed.
Your child may feel uncomfortable answering some of the questions. Your child
will not have to answer any questions your child does not wish to answer. Although
you probably won’t benefit directly from participating in this study, it is my hope
that this study will assist educators in identifying the most effective strategies for the
reading readiness of preschool children. My interest lies in the impact and role
storybook reading has on the reading readiness of your child.
Participation is confidential. Study information will be kept in a secure location in
my home office. The results of the study may be published or presented at a
professional conference, but your child’s identity will not be revealed. Participation
is anonymous, which means that no one will know what your child’s answers are.
Involvement in the interview will not affect your child’s overall performance or
evaluation in class or participation in the twilight program.
I will be happy to answer any questions you have about the study. You may contact
me at (562) 433-7004 or hfetcenko@csudh.edu or my faculty advisor, Dr. Eugenia
Mora- Flores at (323) 240-3991 or moraflor@usc.edu if you have study related
questions. If you have any questions about your rights as a research participant, you
may contact the Protection of Research Subjects at the University of Southern
California (213) 821-5272.
150
Thank you for your consideration. If you would like your child to participate, please
complete the attached Parental Permission Form. Sign the attached form and return
it to your child’s teacher.
With kind regards, With kind regards,
_______________________________ _____________________________
Hilda Baca-Fetcenko Director
262 Bennett Ave. Long Beach, CA 90803
(562) 433-7004 or hbaca@csudh.edu
151
Parental Permission Form
Study Title: The Role of Storybook Reading in Twilight Preschool Head Start
Program
Researcher: Hilda S. Fetcenko
I have read the information contained in the invitation letter about the above titled
study, which describes what my child will be asked to do if (s)he wants to participate
in the study; and,
□ Yes – I give permission for my child to participate in the study.
-OR-
□ No – I do not give permission for my child to participate in the study.
__________________________________________ _________________
Parent/Guardian Signature Date
__________________________________________ _________________
Child’s Name Age
152
APPENDIX C:
INFORMATION SHEET
153
154
155
156
APPENDIX D:
TEACHER INTERVIEW PROTOCOL
Note: The interview will begin with my giving the focus group a brief introduction
about myself and my study. Next, I will explain that while the interview will be tape
recorded, their responses will be strictly confidential. Further, I will let them know if
there is something they would like to say off tape, they may let me know and I will
shut off the tape recorder for their comment.
Background
1. How long have you taught at this school?
2. How many years have you worked with preschool children and in what
capacity?
3. What is your highest degree earned? What experiences have you had that
prepare you to work with preschool children?
Research Question #1
What are the critical elements of a twilight program in Head Start?
4. Describe the twilight program. How is the twilight program different from the
traditional program? How is the twilight program the same as the traditional
program?
5. How does the twilight program benefit working parents?
6. What assessment do you use to assess children’s storybook reading?
Research Question #2
What impact does storybook reading have on the critical elements of a
readiness program?
7. How often are storybooks read in the classroom?
8. When do children read storybooks to the teacher?
9. How often do children ask for repeated readings of a favorite storybook?
Research Question#3
What role does storybook reading play in children’s readiness?
10. Describe your process of reading a storybook to children. Do you focus on
the pictures, print, or both?
11. When reading a storybook to children, what reading readiness skills do you
teach? How do children demonstrate these reading readiness skills when they are
reading a storybook?
12. What are some of the biggest challenges when reading storybooks to
children?
157
APPENDIX E:
DIRECTOR INTERVIEW PROTOCOL
Note: The interview will begin with my giving the interviewee a brief introduction
about myself and my study. Next, I will explain that while the interview will be tape
recorded, their responses will be strictly confidential. Further, I will let them know if
there is something they would like to say off tape, they may let me know and I will
shut off the tape recorder for their comment.
Background
1. How long have you been the Director of this preschool?
2. Prior to becoming Director, what educational experiences led you to this
position?
3. How has your educational background prepared you to become Director of a
preschool?
Research Question #1
What are the critical elements of a twilight program in Head Start?
4. Describe the twilight program. How was the twilight program developed?
What role did you have in developing the twilight program?
5. How important is this program to your overall preschool program?
6. Why should someone enroll their child in the twilight program?
Research Question #2
What impact does storybook reading have on the critical elements of a
readiness program?
7. Are all preschool teachers required to read storybooks to children? If so, how
often and what kinds of books are used?
8. How are teachers prepared to teach storybook reading?
9. Does the preschool program assess student’s storybook reading? If so, what
assessment do you use?
Research Question#3
What role does storybook reading play in children’s readiness?
10. What readiness skills are taught?
11. How are these readiness skills taught using storybooks?
12. Do you think storybook reading plays a role in the readiness of the preschool
program? If so, how?
158
APPENDIX F:
OBSERVATION PROTOCOL
(Adapted from the Continuum of Children's Development in Reading Awareness and
Explorations Goals for Preschool)
Table F1: Observation Protocol
Awareness & Exploration
Children can
Tally Observation/
Evidence
• enjoy listening to and discussing story books
• understand that print carries a message
• engage in reading and writing attempts
• identify labels and signs in their environment
• participate in rhyming games
• identify some letters and make some letter-sound
matches
• use known letters or approximations of letters to
represent written language (especially meaningful
words like their name and phrases such as “I love
you:)”
Oral Language Development
Children can
• shows a steady increase in vocabulary, ranging from
2,000 to 4,000 words; tends to overgeneralize meaning
and make up words to fit needs
• uses simple sentences of at least three or four words to
express needs
• may have difficulty taking turns in conversation; changes
topics quickly
• pronounces words with difficulty; often mistakes one
word for another
• likes simple finger plays and rhymes and learns words to
songs that have much repetition
159
Table F1, continued
• adapts speech and style of nonverbal communication to
listeners in culturally accepted ways but still needs to be
reminded of context
• asks many who, what, where, and why questions but
shows confusion in responding to some questions
(especially why, how, and when)
• uses language to organize thought, linking two ideas by
sentence combining; overuses such words as but,
because, and when; rarely makes appropriate use of such
temporal words as but, before, until, or after
• can tell a simple story but must redo the sequence to put
an idea into the order of events; often forgets the point of
a story and is more likely to focus on favorite parts
What teachers do
• share books with children, including Big Books, and
model reading behaviors
• talk about letters by name and sounds
• establish a literacy-rich environment
• reread favorite stories
• engage children in language games
• promote literacy-related play activities
• encourage children to experiment with writing
Adapted from the Continuum taken from: Learning To Read and Write:
Developmentally Appropriate Practices for Young Children (2000) by Susan
Neuman, Carol Copple, Sue Bredekamp, and Developmentally Appropriate Practice
in Early Childhood Programs (1997), Sue Bredekamp and Carol Copple.
160
APPENDIX G:
DEVELOPMENTAL DOMAINS
Table G1: Developmental Domains
161
APPENDIX H:
CALIFORNIA PRESCHOOL LEARNING FOUNDATIONS
LANGUAGE AND LITERACY: READING
Table H1: California Preschool Learning Foundations Language and Literacy
162
APPENDIX I:
NAEYC EARLY CHILDHOOD PROGRAM STANDARDS AND THE
ACCREDITATION STANDARDS WITH
THE CREATIVE CURRICULUM FOR PRESCHOOL
Alignment of the NAEYC Early Childhood Program Standards and
Accreditation Standards (Standards 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, and 9: Relationships,
Curriculum, Teaching, Assessment of Child Progress, Families, and Physical
Environment) With The Creative Curriculum® for Preschool and Other
Publications in The Creative Curriculum® System
The Creative Curriculum for Preschool is a comprehensive curriculum that guides
teachers in designing a preschool program in which children learn important skills
and content, and develop social competence. The Creative Curriculum shows
teachers how to set up a classroom and structure a day, what kinds of experiences to
provide for children, how to work with children at different developmental levels,
and how to involve families in the program. It shows teachers how to guide learning
in literacy, math, science, social studies, the arts, and technology while also
supporting children’s social/emotional development. Curriculum and assessment are
linked by use of The Creative Curriculum for Preschool Developmental Continuum
Assessment System.
The Creative Curriculum system includes curriculum, assessment, implementation
and evaluation, and professional development. Because The Creative Curriculum
system does not address NAEYC Standards 5, 6, 8, and 10 (Health, Teachers,
Community Relationships, and Leadership and Management) they are not included
in this alignment.
1. Relationships 2
2. Curriculum 6
3. Teaching 17
4. Assessment of Child Progress 26
7. Families 30
9. Physical Environment 33
Alignment © 2007 Teaching Strategies, Inc., www.TeachingStrategies.com
163
Resources (* = Material also available in Spanish)
Curriculum Assessment, Implementation, and Parent Information
* The Creative Curriculum for Preschool Literacy: The Creative Curriculum
Approach
Mathematics: The Creative Curriculum Approach
The Creative Curriculum Literacy Kits
The Creative Curriculum Math Kits
The Creative Curriculum Study Starters: a step-by-step guide to project-based
investigations in science and social studies. (Vol. 1: Boxes, Rocks, Ants, Clothes,
Flowers, Buildings, Balls; Vol. 2: Chairs and Things to Sit On, Wheels, Water Pipes,
Trash & Garbage, Shadows, Exercise).
* The Creative Curriculum for Preschool Developmental Continuum Assessment
System
* The Expanded Forerunners of The Creative Curriculum Developmental Continuum
for Ages 3–5
A Trainer’s Guide to The Creative Curriculum for Preschool, Volume 1: Getting
Started
A Trainer’s Guide to The Creative Curriculum for Preschool, Volume 2: Literacy
* Note: The accompanying Workshop Handbook for training participants is available
in both English and Spanish.
* The Creative Curriculum for Preschool Implementation Checklist
* A Parent’s Guide to Preschool
The Creative Curriculum® LearningGames®
Using The Creative Curriculum® LearningGames® With Families: A Teacher’s
Guide
Primary References
Dodge, D. T., Colker, L. J., & Heroman, C. (2002). The Creative Curriculum for
Preschool. Washington, DC: Teaching Strategies, Inc.
National Association for the Education of Young Children. (2006). NAEYC Early
Childhood Program Standards and Accreditation Criteria. Washington, DC: author.
Retrieved October 10, 2007 from http://www.naeyc.org/academy/standards/
164
APPENDIX J:
DESIRED RESULTS PROFILE REVISED
California Department of Education
Child Development Division
Desired Results Developmental Profile — Revised (DRDP-R)
Information Page
Preschool Instrument
(Age 3 to Kindergarten)
Date of assessment (mm/dd/yyyy)
Child Information
1. Child's name
2. Child's classroom
3. Birth date (mm/dd/yyyy)
4. Initial date of enrollment (mm/dd/yyyy)
5. Does this child have an Individualized Education Program (IEP) or an
Individualized Family Service Plan (IFSP)?
Yes No Don't know
Accommodations/modifications?
Yes (describe) No Don't know
Observer Information
6. Agency/Site name
7. Your name
8. Title
9. Did another adult assist you with evaluating this child?
Yes (role/relation) No
For the following questions, check all that apply:
English Spanish Other (specify)
10. Child's home language(s)
11. What language(s) do you speak with this child?
12. If you do not speak the child!s home language, did anyone assist you who does
speak it?
Yes (role/relation) No
165
Additional Comments:
Instructions: Complete an information page for each child. Then make two copies.
Use one for the initial assessment and one for the second assessment. Enter the date
of the assessment on each page.
166
APPENDIX K:
CONTINUUM OF CHILDREN'S DEVELOPMENT IN READING
Children explore their environment and build the foundations for learning to read
and write.
Children can
• enjoy listening to and discussing story books
• understand that print carries a message
• engage in reading and writing attempts
• identify labels and signs in their environment
• participate in rhyming games
• identify some letters and make some letter-sound matches
• use known letters or approximations of letters to represent written language
(especially meaningful words like their name and phrases such as " I love
you")
What teachers do
• share books with children, including Big Books, and model reading behaviors
• talk about letters by name and sounds
• establish a literacy-rich environment
• reread favorite stories
• engage children in language games
• promote literacy-related play activities
• encourage children to experiment with writing
167
What parents and family members can do
• talk with children, engage them in conversation, give names of things, show
interest in what a child says
• read and reread stories with predictable texts to children
• encourage children to recount experiences and describe ideas and events that
are important to them
• visit the library regularly
• provide opportunities for children to draw and print, using markers, crayons,
and pencils
This list is intended to be illustrative, not exhaustive. Children at any grade will
function at a variety of phases along the reading/writing continuum.
168
APPENDIX L:
LANGUAGE AND COMMUNICATION DEVELOPMENT
DEVELOPMENTALLY APPROPRIATE PRACTICE
Language and Communication Development - Widely Held Expectations
For 3-year-olds
• shows a steady increase in vocabulary, ranging from 2,000 to 4,000 words;
tends to overgeneralize meaning and make up words to fit needs
• uses simple sentences of at least three or four words to express needs
• may have difficulty taking turns in conversation; changes topics quickly
• pronounces words with difficulty; often mistakes one word for another
• likes simple finger plays and rhymes and learns words to songs that have
much repetition
• adapts speech and style of nonverbal communication to listeners in culturally
accepted ways but still needs to be reminded of context.
• asks many who, what, where, and why questions but Shows confusion in
responding to some questions (especially why, how, and when)
• uses language to organize thought, linking two ideas by sentence combining;
overuses such words as but, because, and when; rarely makes appropriate use
of such temporal words as before, until, or after
• can tell a simple story but must redo the sequence to put an idea into the
order of events; often forgets the point of a story and is more likely to focus
on favorite parts
For 4-year-olds
• expands vocabulary from 4,000 to 6,000 words; shows more attention to
abstract uses. usually speaks in five- to six-word sentences .
• likes to sing simple songs; knows many rhymes and finger plays
169
• will talk in front of the group with some reticence;
• likes to tell others about family and experiences
• uses verbal commands to claim many things; begins teasing others
• expresses emotions through facial gestures and reads others for body cues;
copies behaviors (such as hand gestures) of older children or adults.
• can control volume of voice for periods of time if reminded; begins to read
context for social cues
• uses more advanced sentence structures, such as relative clauses and tag
questions ("She's nice, isn't she?") and experiments with new constructions,
creating some comprehension difficulties for the listener
• tries to communicate more than his or her vocabulary allows; borrows and
extends words to create meaning
• learns new vocabulary quickly if related to own experience ("We walk our
dog on a belt. Oh yeah, it's a leash-we walk our dog on a leash")
• can retell a four- or five-step directive or the sequence in a story
For 5-year-olds
• employs a vocabulary of 5,000 to 8,000 words, with frequent plays on words;
pronounces words with little difficulty, except for particular sounds, such as l
and th
• uses fuller, more complex sentences ("His turn is over, and it's my turn now")
• takes turns in conversation, interrupts others less frequently; listens to another
speaker vestiges of egocentrism in speech, for instance, in assuming listener
will understand what is meant (saying "told me to do it" without any referents
for the pronouns)
• shares experiences verbally; knows the words to many songs.
• likes to act out others' roles, shows off in front of new people or becomes
unpredictably very shy.
170
• remembers lines of simple poems and repeats full sentences and expressions
from others, including television shows and commercials.
• shows skill at using conventional modes of communication complete with
pitch and inflection.
• uses nonverbal gestures, such as certain facial expressions in teasing peers.
• can tell and retell stories with practice; enjoys repeating stories, poems, and
songs; enjoys acting out plays or stories
• shows growing speech fluency in expressing ideas
171
APPENDIX M:
CLASSIFICATION SCHEME FOR EMERGENT READING
OF FAVORITE STORYBOOKS
Figure M1: Classification Scheme for Emergent Reading of Favorite Storybooks
*This figure includes independent reading attempts only; the child is making reading attempts without
dependence upon turn-taking reading or interrogation by the adult.
Abstract (if available)
Abstract
This study set out to examine the use of storybook reading in the twilight preschool classroom as reading readiness. The focus of the study was on the teaching of storybook reading and the impact, if any, it had on preschool children attending the twilight program. The site for the study was the Head Start program at a major research university. The research was conducted at one of the five sites, Gardens Child Development Center, over a period of two months.
Linked assets
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
Conceptually similar
PDF
A father, a son, and a storybook: a case study of discourse during storybook reading
PDF
Effective reading instruction for English learners
PDF
Reading prereferral intervention: developing, implementing and monitoring
PDF
The knowledge, skills, motivation and organizational factors that teachers need to support African American boys in public preschool: an evaluation study
PDF
Play, read, learn: building young Black males literacy skills through an activity-based intervention
PDF
Social reproduction theory and parental involvement in Head Start: investigating the parent's perspective
PDF
Mentoring outcomes in education: the perceived impact for mentors in induction programs
PDF
Evaluating the implementation of 21st century skills and learning
PDF
An analysis of the selection and training of guiding teachers in an urban teacher education program
PDF
The role of music in the English language development of Latino prekindergarten English learners
PDF
Examining the applications of data-driven decision making on classroom instruction
PDF
Developing an educational framework to guide the design of faith-based adult small group video curriculum programs
PDF
Response to intervention: factors that facilitate and impede the process of implementation for administrators of Head Start preschools
PDF
The perceived effectiveness of dual language programs at the middle school level
PDF
Math and science academy literacy instruction: student study strategies, self-perception as readers, and reading achievement
PDF
The home environment and Latino preschoolers' emergent literacy skills
PDF
The benefits and challenges of early childhood education programs on kindergarten readiness
PDF
The impact of high teacher turnover rates have on high quality early childhood programs: an evaluation study
PDF
Linking theory and practice in teacher education: an analysis of the reflective-inquiry approach to preparing teachers to teach in urban schools
PDF
The use of culturally relevant authentic materials and L1 in supporting second language literacy
Asset Metadata
Creator
Baca-Fetcenko, Hilda S.
(author)
Core Title
The role of storybook reading in a twilight preschool head start program
School
Rossier School of Education
Degree
Doctor of Education
Degree Program
Education
Publication Date
08/06/2009
Defense Date
06/24/2009
Publisher
University of Southern California
(original),
University of Southern California. Libraries
(digital)
Tag
headstart,OAI-PMH Harvest,Preschool,storybook reading,twilight preschool
Language
English
Contributor
Electronically uploaded by the author
(provenance)
Advisor
Mora-Flores, Eugenia (
committee chair
), Pensavalle, Margo T. (
committee member
), Sarmiento, Lilia (
committee member
)
Creator Email
broom_hildy@hotmail.com,hfetcenko@csudh.edu
Permanent Link (DOI)
https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-m2503
Unique identifier
UC1208753
Identifier
etd-Fetcenko-3112 (filename),usctheses-m40 (legacy collection record id),usctheses-c127-183439 (legacy record id),usctheses-m2503 (legacy record id)
Legacy Identifier
etd-Fetcenko-3112.pdf
Dmrecord
183439
Document Type
Dissertation
Rights
Baca-Fetcenko, Hilda S.
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
Tags
headstart
storybook reading
twilight preschool