Homelit on Emergent literacy and Literacy in The Relationship between Home Literacy Practices and Developmental Trajectories of Emergent Literacy and Conventional Literacy Skills for Korean Children

  • Published on
    08-Apr-2018

  • View
    212

  • Download
    0

Transcript

1The Relationship between Home Literacy Practices and Developmental Trajectories of Emergent Literacy and Conventional Literacy Skills for Korean Children Young-Suk Kim Florida State University & Florida Center for Reading Research In press in Reading and Writing: An interdisciplinary Journal. 2Abstract Previous studies with English-speaking families in the North American context demonstrated that home literacy practices have positive influences on childrens literacy acquisition. The present study expands previous studies by examining how home literacy practices are related to growth trajectories of emergent literacy skills (i.e., vocabulary, letter-name knowledge, and phonological awareness) and conventional literacy skills (i.e., word reading, pseudoword reading, and spelling), and by using data from Korean children and families (N = 192). The study revealed two dimensions of home literacy practices, home reading and parent teaching. Frequent reading at home was positively associated with childrens emergent literacy skills as well as conventional literacy skills in Korean. However, children whose parents reported more frequent teaching tended to have low scores in their phonological awareness, vocabulary, word reading and pseudoword reading after accounting for home reading. These results suggest a bidirectional relationship between home literacy practices, parent teaching in particular, and childrens literacy skills such that parents adjust their teaching in response to their childs literacy acquisition. Furthermore, cultural variation in views on parent teaching may explain these results. Word Count: 178 Key words: Emergent literacy skills, Home literacy practices, Korean, Literacy development, Preschool 3Introduction Numerous studies have established the importance of language skills (e.g., vocabulary), metalinguistic skills (e.g., phonological awareness), and emergent literacy skills (e.g., letter-name knowledge) to childrens literacy acquisition (Adams, 1990; Hart & Risley, 1995; Snow, Burns, & Griffin, 1998; Whitehurst & Lonigan, 1998). One of the important sources of developing these skills is language and literacy environment at home. The home provides the earliest learning environment for developing vocabulary (Hart & Risley, 1995) and providing exposure to print and letters (Lonigan & Whitehurst, 1998). Thus, understanding how the home literacy environment contributes to the development of important language and emergent literacy skills is critical in promoting successful literacy acquisition as well as preventing reading failure. One of the home literacy activities that has received much theoretical and empirical attention is parental story book reading to children (Dickinson & Tabors, 2001; Ewers & Brownson, 1999; Jordan, Snow, & Porche, 2000; Snchal, LeFevre, Hudson, & Lawson, 1996; Snchal, LeFevre, Thomas, & Daley, 1998; Snchal, 2006a). Despite its proven positive effect on childrens language and literacy skills, however, its effect has shown to be modest (Bus, van IJzendoorn, & Pellegrini, 1995). Thus, it has been suggested that, in addition to book reading, overall home literacy orientation should be examined in order to account for the influence of other literacy related activities in the home on childrens language and literacy skills achievement. For instance, Snchal and her colleagues (1998) investigated how parent book reading and parent teaching are differentially related to childrens oral and written language skills. These previous studies have provided us with a fairly good understanding of how home literacy practices contribute to childrens language skills and literacy acquisition. 4However, little is understood about how home literacy practices are related to developmental trajectories of childrens language and emergent literacy skills as well as conventional literacy skills. Furthermore, our understanding of these relationships is limited to the linguistic and cultural contexts in North America. The present study fills this gap in the literature by using a longitudinal design with four waves of data on Korean-speaking children and their families. This study expands on previous studies in two ways: (1) it investigated the relationship of home literacy practices to growth trajectories of important language and emergent literacy skills vocabulary, letter name knowledge, and phonological awareness and three conventional literacy skills word reading, pseudoword reading, and spelling; and (2) it examined a non-English speaking population, using data from Korean-speaking families. In this paper, vocabulary, phonological awareness, and letter-name knowledge are referred as emergent literacy skills for parsimony although theoretically they are distinctive skills (see Snow, 1983; Whitehurst, Epstein, Angell, Payne, Crone, & Fischel, 1994). Background and Context Much evidence indicates that childrens exposure to literacy-related activities at home is important for childrens literacy acquisition (Bus et al., 1995; Dickinson & Tabors, 2001; Scarborough & Dobrich, 1994; Scarborough, Dorich, & Hager, 2001). The relationship between literacy practices at home and childrens literacy acquisition is mediated by several important emergent literacy skills phonological awareness, vocabulary, and letter-name knowledge (Whitehurst et al., 1994; Snchal, 2006a; Snchal et al., 1998). In particular, it is argued that phonological awareness, which is enhanced through childrens vocabulary knowledge and letter-name knowledge, mediates 5the relationship between home literacy practices and literacy development (Foy & Mann, 2003). Studies provide some support for this hypothesis. First, language and literacy environments at home influence development of childrens phonological awareness (Burgess, 2002; Raz & Bryant, 1990; Snchal et al, 1998). Second, it has been hypothesized that childrens vocabulary growth is responsible for childrens growth in phonological representations. Thus, children who have a rich language environment (through oral input or book reading) in preschool and at home are expected to develop vocabulary, which in turn stimulates growth in phonological representations (Metsala & Walley, 1998; Walley, Metsala, & Garlock, 2003). Indeed, studies with English-speaking children have shown that children with larger vocabularies tended to have more highly developed phonological awareness (Burgess & Lonigan 1998; Lonigan, Burgess, & Anthony, 2000; McBride-Chang, Wagner, & Chang, 1997; Metsala, 1999). It is also postulated that childrens development of phonological awareness can be triggered by their exposure to print and literacy acquisition (Morais, Cary, Alegria, & Bertelson, 1979; Morais, 1993; Tunmer & Hoover, 1992) such as letter-name knowledge. Tunmer and Hoover (1992) suggested that in order for children to develop phonological awareness, they must be exposed to certain language and print activities rhyming and sound analysis games, letter games, and shared reading interactions that focus their attention on the structural features of language. Exposure to print (through book reading) and letter names provides children with an opportunity to connect spoken language to printed words, promoting childrens sensitivity to individual sounds. In particular, childrens knowledge of letter names may be critical for the development of phoneme awareness (Bowey, 1994; Burgess, 2002; Burgess & Lonigan, 1998; Foulin, 2005; Johnston, Anderson, & Holligan, 1996), and some suggested a reciprocal relationship 6between letter-name knowledge and phoneme awareness (Burgess & Lonigan, 1998; Foy & Mann, 2003). Although previous studies have revealed much information about precise mechanisms for the relationship between home literacy practices and literacy development (for example, Foy & Mann, 2003; Snchal et al., 1998; Snchal, 2006a), these studies have been limited to cross-sectional examinations or prediction of changes from two data points using longitudinal data. For example, the Home-School Study followed 83 English-speaking low-income children longitudinally from 3 years old until their elementary school years (Dickinson & Tabors, 2001). The Home-School Study showed that childrens home language and literacy environment prior to school entry was strongly associated with their literacy skills in kindergarten. Specifically, childrens vocabulary, emergent literacy skills (e.g., writing concepts, letter recognition, print concepts, and sounds in words), and narrative production were predicted by their exposure to rare words, extended discourse, and literacy experiences at home and at preschool. Furthermore, Snchal (2006a) showed that the two aspects of home literacy practices, parent teaching and home reading, in kindergarten and grade one were related to different aspects of literacy skills in grade four, respectively. Although informative, these longitudinal studies investigated how earlier home language and literacy environment is related to childrens later literacy outcomes, thus not examining how individual differences in home language and literacy environment are related to initial/final level and rate of growth of various emergent literacy and conventional literacy skills over time. Furthermore, it is an open question to what extent these previous findings with primarily English-speaking children and their families can be generalized to different linguistic and cultural contexts. Some evidence from studies conducted with parents 7speaking a non-English language suggests cultural/linguistic variation in the frequency and type of parentchild literacy activities (Bruck, Genesee, & Caravolas, 1997; LeFevre, Clarke, & Stringer, 2002; Leseman & de Jong, 1998) as well as parent beliefs and expectations about academic skills (Stevenson, Lee, Chen, Stigler, Hsu, & Kitamaura, 1990). For example, French-speaking parents in Canada tended to read to and teach their children less frequently than English-speaking parents (LeFevre et al., 2002). Furthermore, different interactional styles were observed during parent-child joint book reading among immigrants from different linguistic and cultural backgrounds in the Netherlands (Leseman & de Jong, 1998). It is important to consider cultural variation in literacy-related activities at home in the investigation of childrens literacy development because childrens home environment is embedded in a larger social and cultural context (Leseman & de Jong, 1998). Social beliefs, values, and attitudes determine many aspects of daily life, including differences in interactional styles, characteristics of interpersonal instruction, and guidance by the parents (Rogoff, 1990; Rogoff, Mistry, Gnc, & Moiser, 1993). Furthermore, literacy events are culture specific (Scollon & Scollon, 1981) such that variation in the types of home literacy activities across cultural contexts is largely influenced by prevailing child-rearing beliefs and literacy models. Therefore, aspects of previous findings from North America may reflect particular cultural practices and beliefs in that region and may not extend to a different cultural context. Thus, it is necessary to extend our understanding about the relationship of home literacy practices to childrens emergent literacy and conventional literacy skills in a linguistic/cultural context other than English-speaking families in North America. 8 Data from Korean-speaking families may offer unique insights into the relationship of home literacy practices to emergent literacy and conventional literacy skills because of some distinct linguistic characteristics of the Korean language and the cultural context of Korea that differ from previously studied ones. The Korean language has an alphabetic writing system, called Hangul, and its orthography is transparent. Furthermore, the phonotactic and phonological structures of the Korean language is such that Korean-speaking children tend to organize a syllable into body and coda units (e.g., segmenting cat into ca-t) compared to English-speaking childrens tendency to organize a syllable into onset and rime (e.g., segmenting cat into c-at) (Kim, Y.-S., 2007a; Yoon & Derwing, 2001). The Korean letter names have highly consistent phonological patterning (i.e., the names have CVVC patterns) and a transparent relationship with letter sounds, potentially providing children with easy access and clear cues for inducing letter-sound relationships. Culturally, the modern Korean society is highly influenced by Confucian thoughts and values in many aspects of daily life (Chung, 1995). Because Confucian institution was the primary locus for educating the elite group in the traditional Korean society and education is viewed as the key pathway for social mobility in modern Korea, education has been highly regarded in Korea. In particular, early childhood education has received much attention in recent years and almost 95 percent of children receive some type of early childhood education before formal schooling (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, 2004). Furthermore, according to the Confucian philosophy, teachers are highly respected. Korean parents tend to believe that schools and teachers are primarily responsible for childrens learning process and literacy acquisition (Kim, M. & Kwon, 2002) and teachers are the authorities in all matters related to the education of children (Yang & McMullen, 2003). For example, Korean parents of primary school children in 9America tended to accept the teachers' opinions regarding their childs academic or classroom behavior issues without openly questioning them (Yang & McMullen, 2003). In Korea literacy instruction usually begins in preschool and children are expected to have acquired fundamental literacy skills before entering elementary school (kindergarten is not part of formal education). The predominant approach to early literacy instruction in Korea is whole language or whole word instruction in which a whole word is presented to children as a unit (Kim, Y.-S., 2007a). The researchers informal observations and consultation with teachers and directors of the preschools that participated in the present research study confirmed this. No explicit and systematic instruction of the alphabetic principle (phonics or phonological awareness) was observed in the classrooms of the participating preschools. Present Study Building on previous studies with English-speaking children, this study investigated how home literacy practices are related to developmental trajectories (i.e., childrens status at the end of the study and rate of growth) of emergent literacy skills (i.e., vocabulary, letter-name knowledge, and phonological awareness) and conventional literacy skills (i.e., word reading, pseudoword reading, and spelling), using longitudinal data on Korean children. The following questions guided this study. Research Question 1. Do Korean children who are exposed to more frequent literacy activities at home tend to have a higher final status and faster rate of change in their emergent literacy skills such as vocabulary, letter-name knowledge, and phonological awareness? Research Question 2. Do Korean children who are exposed to more frequent literacy activities at home tend to have a higher final status and faster rate of change in their 10conventional literacy skills (i.e., word reading, pseudoword reading, and spelling)? If so, are Korean childrens home literacy environments positively related to the growth trajectories of their conventional literacy skills even after accounting for the effects of emergent literacy skills? Research Design Sites and Sample Data were collected from five preschools in two metropolitan cities in South Korea, two preschools in Seoul and three preschools in Daegu. The total sample was 215 four- and five-year old children from low to low-mid socioeconomic family backgrounds1. In the present article data from 192 children who had provided information on home literacy practices were used. Among the 192 children, 110 children participated in the study from the first wave of data collection and 82 children joined in the second wave. Teachers at each site reported no hearing or visual difficulties for the sampled children. Table 1 displays the sample childrens average age and gender distribution at each wave. At first wave, children were approximately 56 months old (ranging from 50 to 64 months), on average, and 55% were boys. The overall attrition rate for the larger sample (N = 215) was 34% and attrition appears to be random (see Appendix A). The evident attrition was due primarily to school transfers that took place during the change in academic year that occurred between the third and fourth wave of data collection. Some children continued in their existing preschool for a second year, while others transferred to another preschool or a kindergarten. 11Procedures Data were collected four times, each in the beginning, middle, end of the first year of preschool, and three months into the second year of preschool. Because identical instruments were administered for emergent literacy and conventional literacy skills in all the four waves of data collection, the order of items and the order of options within items were randomized on each occasion of measurement to minimize practice effects (the exceptions were in the vocabulary and spelling measures). The assessment battery was individually administered to each child in a quiet room in two sessions, each taking approximately 30-35 minutes. The spelling task was group-administered. The home literacy practices were measured on a single occasion (see below). Measures Because there were no standardized instruments that measure language and literacy skills in Korean, instruments were developed and piloted with children of similar background and age. The instruments include age-appropriate measures of emergent literacy and conventional literacy measures. The internal-consistency reliability for each measure was estimated by Cronbachs alpha. Table 1 displays descriptive statistics for each measure in the study. Outcomes Outcome measures included emergent literacy and conventional literacy skills in Korean. In the first research question the emergent literacy skills were outcome variables. In the second research question, conventional literacy skills were outcomes, while emergent literacy skills were control predictors. All these variables were time-varying in the analysis. 12Emergent Literacy Skills Phonological awareness. Four oddity tasks were used to measure syllable, body, rime, and phoneme awareness, respectively. Evidence indicates that Korean-speaking children find the body (e.g., segmenting cat into ca-t) to be more accessible than the rime (e.g., segmenting cat into c-at) (Kim, Y.-S., 2007a, 2007b; Yoon & Derwing, 2001). Therefore, in this study both body awareness and rime awareness tasks were included. In these tasks, children were asked to select odd words (words that have different sounds) in the target phonological unit from among three words (see Kim, Y.-S., 2007b, for more details about oddity tasks). For example, in the body awareness task, a child was asked to select one word that has a different sound in the body unit among three words (e.g., /ka/, /kam/, /tul/). In order to reduce memory burden, corresponding pictures were presented with each word. All the words in the oddity tasks were common Korean words that students encounter in everyday interactions. Directions for the phonological awareness tasks were presented orally. Children were asked to repeat each stimulus word to ensure their correct perception of items. Each task had two practice items and 15 test items. The students received feedback and explanations on their responses for the practice items. For the first two test items, correct answers were provided without feedback. Each item was scored dichotomously (i.e., right or wrong) to provide a total maximum score of 15 in each task. The Cronbachs alpha was estimated to be .90 for syllable awareness, .85 for rime awareness, .89 for body awareness, and .87 for phoneme awareness, respectively. Principal components analysis yielded clear one component for the four oddity tasks in waves 1, 3, and 4, and two components in wave 2. Thus, the total score of phonological awareness tasks (total maximum score = 60) was created for each wave and 13used in the analysis. Means and standard deviations of total scores are displayed for each wave in Table 1. In fitting multilevel models for change, these phonological awareness scores were logit-transformed (for more information see the description for conventional literacy skills below). Receptive vocabulary. The receptive vocabulary measure, the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test-Revised (PPVT-R, Dunn & Dunn, 1981), was modified to suit the Korean context based on the researchers pilot work. The instrument contains 66 vocabulary words of increasing difficulty. The Cronbachs alpha was .90. As Table 1 presents, childrens average vocabulary increased over time steadily from 34 words in the first wave to 48 words in the last wave. Letter-name knowledge. This measure contains 40 Korean letters (10 simple and 11 complex vowels, and 19 consonants) that are arranged in a random order. Children were asked to say the name of each letter. The Cronbachs alpha was .96. As Table 1 displays, children knew approximately 12 letter names in the beginning of the first year of preschool, on average, which increased to 25 letter names approximately three months into the second year of preschool. Exploratory analysis showed that there were a few children whose letter-name knowledge was approaching a ceiling at the first wave. Therefore, childrens scores on the letter-name knowledge task were also logit-transformed (see the equation below). Conventional Literacy Skills Word recognition. This task measures childrens ability to read real words in Korean. The measure contains 60 high frequency real words2 of increasing difficulty with two practice items. The child is asked to read aloud each of the words. Each item was scored dichotomously to provide a total maximum score of 60. Cronbachs alpha was .98. 14Table 1 shows that children read about 12 words accurately at first wave, on average, with large variation around the mean (SD = 18.14). Pseudoword reading. This task measures childrens decoding skills. Fifty pseudowords of increasing difficulty were created based on Korean phonotactic rules (rules of allowable sound sequences). Children were told that the words in this task were not real. It had two practice items. Each item was scored dichotomously to provide a total maximum score of 50. Cronbachs alpha was .98. As shown in Table 1, at first wave children were able to read about five pseudowords correctly, on average, with large variation around the mean (SD = 10.88). Spelling. This task assesses childs ability to spell words (encode sounds graphically). It includes 16 real words and 4 pseudowords. Each item was scored dichotomously to provide a total maximum score of 20. Cronbachs alpha was .73. As expected, spelling was difficult for children of this age such that there was a floor effect, particularly at first wave (M = 1.09, SD = 2.28). Sixty-three percent of the children (n = 69) scored zero at first wave. Exploratory analysis to examine empirical growth trajectories of the sample children over time suggested that there were a few children who approached the maximum possible score in word reading even in the first wave, while many children floored at zero in the pseudoword reading and spelling tasks at this wave. Therefore, the conventional literacy skills outcomes were logit-transformed before fitting multilevel models for change in order to prevent childrens predicted scores from lying outside their allowed minima and maxima (see equations in Appendix C for example). 15Primary Question Predictors Family literacy practices. A parental survey was developed, based on previous studies in English, which contained questions on family literacy practices. This questionnaire was distributed, on a single occasion, to parents just before the third wave of data collection, approximately 10 months into the first year of preschool. Nine items were used as indicators of family literacy practices (see Appendix B). These questions asked parents to report how often they engaged in selected literacy practices, including (1) how often they teach Hangul, the Korean alphabet/literacy, to their child, (2) how many childrens books they own at home, (3) how often family members read books and magazines, (4) how often family members read books with their children, (5) how often family members read books to the child, (6) how often their child reads books at home, (7) how many books (including picture books) their child reads on their own, (8) how often they help their child with homework, and (9) how often they visit either a library or a bookstore with their child. All the items were rated on a scale from 1 (e.g., not done at home) to 5 (e.g., every day) except for one question which had a scale from 1 to 6 (question 6; see Table 2). Cronbachs alpha was .79. Table 2 shows that parents in the sample taught their children about Korean alphabet letters and literacy once a week, on average, and helped their child with homework, about three to four times a week. Families in the study owned an average of 60 to 100 childrens books, the number of books being distributed almost uniformly. Family members read books with, and to, their child about once a week while they visited a library or bookstore approximately once a month. Parents estimated that their child read about five books (including picture books) per week, on average. 16In order to find out how these nine indicators of home literacy practices were interrelated, principal components analysis and cluster analysis of items were conducted, which yielded two components: home reading and parent teaching. In the present study, results from cluster analyses were used (variance explained = .50). The teaching component included the frequency of parents teaching Hangul and helping with homework while the home reading component included the rest. Thus, these two components were included in subsequent analyses to describe home literacy practices and these two composites were standardized (M = 0, SD = 1). These two components were positively correlated (r = .32, p < .001). Age. The childs age in months was used as a time variable. This was centered at 77 months, the oldest age of any child in the final wave. Thus, the intercept was predicted childrens performance at the final wave. Control Variables Parental education. Parents highest level of education was included because it has been shown to be highly correlated with childrens literacy development for English-speaking children (e.g., Bryant, MacLean, Bradley, & Crossland, 1990), for Korean-speaking children (Kim, Y.-S., 2007a), and with book reading quality (Leseman & de Jong, 1998). Either parents highest level of education was classified in the following categories: middle school education (6%), high school education (47%), junior college education (31%), four-year college education (14%), and graduate level (3%). In the analysis, parental education was represented by a set of dummies (high school completion was omitted to provide the reference category). Male. The childs gender was represented by a dichotomous predictor that indicated whether the child was male (1 = male; 0 = female). 17Cohort status. Because 110 children participated in the study in the first wave while 82 children joined the study in the second wave, in all of the researchers analyses a dichotomous control predictor was included to distinguish between the two cohorts (1 = child participated from the first wave onwards; 0 = otherwise). Preschool. A vector of dichotomous predictors was included to represent the fixed effects of attendance at each of the five different preschools, in order to control for all observed and unobserved differences in outcome due to site (Preschool A was omitted to provide the reference category). Data Analysis Analyses were conducted by fitting multilevel models for change (Singer & Willett, 2003), using SAS PROC MIXED. Residuals were examined to confirm that the usual linearity, normality, and homoscedasticity assumptions were adequately met at both level-1 and level-2. In order to address the first research question, the following model was fitted for the letter-name knowledge outcome, for example. where 21100120102 ,00~),0(~ NandNiiij Notice that, in taking logits of Y, both the numerator and denominator started within the logarithmic transformation to avoid infinities, by adding one sixth (1/6) in each case, as recommended by Tukey (1977). The relationship between home literacy practices and growth trajectories of each outcome was examined by the main effect of home reading and ( )ijijiiijiijiidaidaiiiiijijijAgeAgehingParentTeacAgeadingHomeeschoolationParentEducMaleCohorthingParentTeacadingHomeAgeYYLog +++++++++++++=++1012110605040302011000**RePrRe614061 18parent teaching as well as their interactions with the time variable, Age. Specifically, the growth parameters, 01 and 02 , represent differences in elevation in the letter-name knowledge outcome for those who differ by one unit in time-invariant home reading and parent teaching. The interaction terms between the time variable, Age, and home literacy practices, 11 and 12 , examined whether the rate of change in the outcome differed by the level of home reading or parent teaching. None of the interactions between home literacy practice predictors (as well as control variables) and Age were statistically significant, thus not retained in the final model. The level-1 residual, ij , represents the portion of child is outcome at age j that is not predicted by predictors in the model. The level-2 residuals, 0i and 1i, represent the deviations of the individual growth parameters from their population averages (final status and rate of change, respectively). Model specifications for the second research questions are found in Appendix B. Results Research Question 1. Do Korean children who are exposed to more frequent literacy activities at home tend to have a higher final status and faster rate of change in their emergent literacy skills such as vocabulary, letter-name knowledge, and phonological awareness? Table 3 presents a taxonomy of fitted multilevel models for each emergent literacy outcome (i.e., vocabulary, letter-name knowledge, and phonological awareness), predicted by home reading and parent teaching after accounting for the effects of control variables. The results showed that the reported frequencies of home reading and parent teaching were indeed related to the final status of childrens emergent literacy skills. However, the direction of the relationships differed for home reading and parent teaching. The frequency 19of home reading was positively related to final status of all the three emergent literacy skills (Models 1 for each outcome, ps < .05), indicating that children who were engaged in reading activities at home more frequently had higher average scores at the end of the study in their phonological awareness, letter-name knowledge, and vocabulary. The results remained unchanged whether or not parent teaching was controlled for (see Models 1 and 3). In contrast, parent teaching was not related to any of the emergent literacy skills (see Models 2), after controlling for background variables. However, when frequency of home reading was controlled for (Models 3), the frequency of parent teaching was negatively related to childrens final status in phonological awareness (p = 0.0005) and vocabulary (p = 0.02) such that more frequent parent teaching was associated with lower scores at the end of the study in phonological awareness and vocabulary. The rate of change in the three emergent literacy outcomes did not differ as a function of the level of home reading and parent teaching interactions between age and home reading and parent teaching were not statistically significant. Research Question 2. Do Korean children who are exposed to more frequent literacy activities at home tend to have a higher final status and faster rate of change in their conventional literacy skills (i.e., word reading, pseudoword reading, and spelling)? If so, is Korean childrens home literacy environment positively related to the growth trajectories of their conventional literacy skills even after accounting for the effects of the emergent literacy skills? The second question of interest is whether the two dimensions of home literacy practices are positively associated with the three conventional literacy skills in Korean (i.e., word reading, pseudoword reading, and spelling). Table 4 shows results for each 20conventional literacy outcome (i.e., word reading, pseudoword reading, and spelling). Both home reading and parent teaching were related to childrens final status in word reading and pseudoword reading skills (ps < 0.001). However, the direction of the relationships were opposite such that while frequency of home reading was positively related to final status in word reading and pseudoword reading, frequency of parent teaching was negatively associated with them (see Models 1). In addition, neither home reading nor parent teaching was related to spelling (ps > .14). Again, the rate of change in the three conventional literacy outcomes did not differ as a function of the level of home reading and parent teaching. The results remained the same when both home reading and parent teaching were in the model jointly (Models 1, Table 4) or respectively (models not shown). Furthermore, the relationships between home literacy practices and conventional literacy skills remained statistically significant even after accounting for the effects of childrens letter-name knowledge, vocabulary, and phonological awareness in addition to the other control variables (see Models 2, Table 4). That is, while children whose parents reported more frequent home reading tended to have higher/elevated scores in word reading and pseudoword reading skills, children whose parents reported more frequent teaching tended to have lower scores in word reading and pseudoword reading, after controlling for childrens background characteristics and the three emergent literacy skills. When the outcome was spelling, neither home reading nor parent teaching was statistically significant after controlling for childrens background characteristics and the three emergent literacy skills. Figure 1 graphically represents how home reading and parent teaching were related to word reading (see Figure 1-a) and pseudoword reading (see Figure 1-b), after accounting for the other aspect of home literacy practice (i.e., home reading or 21parent teaching), the three emergent literacy skills, and the control variables. Each line in Figure 1 represents an average growth trajectory in word reading and pseudoword reading for children who were engaged in home reading and parent teaching frequently (90th percentile) vs. less frequently (10th percentile) across sites. Figure 1 shows the positive relationship of home reading and the negative relationship of parent teaching to the fitted growth trajectories in literacy skills; children who had more frequent home reading had higher predicted scores in word reading and pseudoword reading across the times while children whose parent taught more frequently had lower predicted scores in word reading and pseudoword reading. In fact, the children who were engaged in frequent home reading did not differ from those whose parent taught them less frequently in the predicted word reading and pseudo word reading skills. Similarly, the predicted growth trajectories of word reading and pseudoword reading were indistinguishable for children who were engaged in less frequent home reading from those who had frequent parent teaching. Also notice that, as expected, all the three emergent literacy skills were positively related to each literacy outcome (ps < 0.05) after accounting for control variables, home reading, and parent teaching. However, phonological awareness was not related to spelling once both letter-name knowledge and vocabulary were in the model. Finally, it appears that home reading covaried with the three emergent literacy skills in predicting literacy outcomes such that the coefficients of home reading became about half in size once phonological awareness, letter-name knowledge, and vocabulary are in the model (Models 3) while the coefficients of parent teaching remained relatively unchanged. 22Discussion The primary goal of the present study was to investigate the relationship of home literacy practices to trajectories of growth in emergent literacy and conventional literacy skills in Korean. This study showed that home literacy practices in the Korean context are multi-dimensional; two primary dimensions, home reading and parent teaching, were positively related (r = .32). These two dimensions also have been identified from English- families (Snchal, 2006a; Snchal et al., 1998; Teale, 1986) although these previous studies reported that home teaching and parent reading were not related (Snchal, 2006a; Snchal et al., 1998). The discrepant results may be attributed to different measures used for home reading. Snchals study (1998) used parents familiarity with childrens literature (i.e., Title Recognition Test) as a measure of home reading whereas this study used parents report of frequency of reading-related activities at home. Snchal et al. (1996) reported that parents reports of frequency of home literacy practices are not robust predictors of child outcomes and thus cautioned that parents responses to questions regarding home reading activities may be biased, particularly given that story book reading is a highly valued activity. However, it is not clear how this may have affected the findings in this study because little is known about how storybook reading is valued in the Korean context. Overall, the results of the present study suggest the importance of a future study in order to provide an accurate picture of home literacy practices and childrens literacy development in the Korean context using multiple instruments. This study was one of the first to examine the relationship between home literacy practices and growth trajectories of important emergent literacy and conventional literacy skills. The results showed that the two aspects of home literacy practices, home reading and parent teaching, were related to childrens achievement in emergent literacy and 23conventional literacy skills at the end of the study, but were not related to the rate of growth in the emergent and conventional literacy skills. These findings of the present study confirm the importance of home reading for emergent literacy skills vocabulary (Ewers & Brownson, 1999; Jordan et al., 2000; Snchal, 2006a; Snchal, LeFevre, Hudson, & Lawson, 1996), letter-name knowledge (Frijters, Barron, & Brunello, 2000), phonological awareness (Foy & Mann, 2003; Snchal et al., 1998) and conventional literacy skills (i.e., word reading and pseudoword reading) in Korean. The positive association of the frequency of home reading with childrens vocabulary, letter-name knowledge, and phonological awareness confirms that childrens exposure to and experiences with print may enhance these important language and emergent literacy skills (Snchal, 2006a). Previous studies with English-speaking families in the United States and French-speaking Canadian families demonstrated that shared book reading in particular can be a source of vocabulary learning (Ewers & Brownson, 1999; Snchal, 2006a) because childrens books in English tended to contain more rare, academic words than those found in television or conversations (Hayes & Ahrens, 1988). Furthermore, mothers may use richer and more varied vocabulary during shared reading (Hoff-Ginsberg, 1991; Snow & Ninio, 1986). Childrens experience with print also provides opportunities for a child to recognize letters, thus enhancing their letter-name knowledge. The positive relationship between home reading and phonological awareness replicates what has been found with English-speaking parents (Foy & Mann, 2003), suggesting that exposure to print may enhance childrens phonological awareness. This relationship appears to be moderated by vocabulary and letter-name knowledge to some extent as vocabulary and letter-name knowledge were positively related to phonological awareness (models not shown) while home reading still remained positively associated with phonological 24awareness after controlling for vocabulary and letter-name knowledge. Thus, reading-related activities at home enhance phonological awareness, vocabulary, and letter-name knowledge, building the foundation for conventional literacy skills. It appears that the three emergent literacy skills moderate, but do not completely mediate, the relationship between home reading and literacy skills as home reading was positively related to Korean childrens word reading and decoding skills even after accounting for the effects of the three important emergent literacy skills (i.e., letter name knowledge, vocabulary, and phonological awareness). This indicates that frequent exposure to book reading and print at home may help children with their literacy acquisition, beyond the effects of the three emergent literacy skills, by promoting their understanding of letter-sound relationship, familiarizing them with its orthographic representations, and facilitating childrens acquisition of the decontextualized nature of written language (Purcell-Gates, 1991; Snow, 1983). These findings support benefits of reading at home for childrens literacy development in Korean, implicating the importance of encouraging Korean parents to engage in reading-related activities with their children frequently. The findings of this study also suggest that phonological awareness does not completely mediate the relationship between home literacy practices and literacy acquisition, because both childrens letter-name knowledge and vocabulary size predicted the three conventional literacy skills in Korean after controlling for childrens phonological awareness. This suggests that, although letter-name knowledge and vocabulary are related to phonological awareness (see also Kim, Y.-S., 2007c), each of them makes a unique positive contribution to literacy development beyond phonological awareness. In particular, due to the consistent phonological patterning of Korean letter names and the transparent relationship between letter names and letter sounds in Korean (Kim, Y.-S., 2007c), frequent 25experience with print at home may critically facilitate Korean childrens induction of letter sounds from letter names beyond phonological awareness. The null effect of home reading on childrens spelling skills was unexpected given previous findings with English-speaking kindergarteners (Snchal et al., 1998). This may have been a consequence of the difficulty of spelling for the young children in the sample and the effects may have been thus obscured due to reduced variability in the spelling task. Furthermore, the dichotomous measurement of childrens spelling skills may not have been sensitive enough to capture the children's emergent spelling skills. Given that young children go through continual developmental progression in spelling skills (Ehri, 2000), a future study should use a more fine-grained multiple scale for assessing childrens spelling skills (see, for example, Snchal et al., 1998). In contrast to the results of home reading and despite a positive association with home reading, the frequency of parent teaching was negatively associated with childrens phonological awareness, vocabulary, and reading skills in Korean (i.e., word reading and pseudoword reading), once home reading was controlled for. In other words, once the frequency of home reading and childrens background characteristics were held constant, children whose parents taught them more frequently at home tended to have lower average scores at the end of the study in phonological awareness, vocabulary, word reading, and pseudoword reading in Korean. These results differ from previous findings with English-speaking and French-speaking families (Evans, Shaw, & Bell, 2000; Snchal 2006a; Snchal et al., 1998) and from the results of a meta-analysis of home teaching intervention studies, which revealed positive effects of parent teaching on childrens emergent literacy and conventional literacy skills (Snchal, 2006b). 26However, the negative associations may not suggest the actual negative effects of parent teaching on childrens development of vocabulary, phonological awareness, and literacy skills in Korean. Instead, the results in the present study may indicate those children whose parents tended to engage in explicit teaching at home. Specifically, Korean parents in the sample may have adjusted their teaching according to their childs progress in literacy acquisition and tended to teach their children more frequently when they deemed that their child was struggling with literacy acquisition, thus requiring additional help at home. Therefore, although parents who read to and with their children more frequently also tended to teach their children more frequently, once home reading was held constant, those children who received more frequent parent teaching may be lagging behind in important emergent and conventional literacy skills. This suggests a potential bidirectional relationship between home literacy practices, frequency of parent teaching in particular, and childrens literacy acquisition. For example, a previous study reported that middle-class English-speaking mothers tended to adjust their teaching strategies and interaction patterns in joint book-reading to childrens level of language and literacy competence (Pellegrini, Brody, & Siegel, 1985). There are two potential related support/explanations for this speculation. The first potential explanation is the timing of data collection on home literacy practices. Information on home literacy practices was collected nearly 9-10 months (just before the third wave of data collection) after these children had been exposed to systematic literacy instruction. Thus, by this time, childrens progress or struggles with literacy acquisition must have been evident to parents and teachers. For example, in the third wave children were able to read 36 words correctly, on average, with large variation. In order to test the plausibility of childrens progress in literacy acquisition influencing parental teaching, it 27was examined whether the frequency of parent teaching is predicted by the level of childrens literacy skills prior to the measurement of home literacy practices (waves 1 and 2). The results showed that childrens word reading and pseudoword reading skills prior to the measurement of home literacy practices was negatively associated with parent teaching, after controlling for home reading (models not shown) such that children who had lower word reading and pseudoword reading scores in waves 1 and 2 tended to have parents who reported more frequent teaching at home. These results provide some support that indeed the parents in the sample may have been adjusting the frequency of their teaching at home according to their childs literacy achievement. In addition, the cultural model of literacy acquisition in Korea may explain this speculation. As Korean parents tend to believe that childrens learning process and literacy acquisition are primarily schools and teachers responsibility (Kim, M. & Kwon, 2002), parents may be less likely to engage in explicit instruction on literacy per se at home, unless they are informed by the teacher about or realize their childs needs for extra attention in literacy acquisition. In particular, as achieving fundamental literacy skills before entrance to elementary school is critical in Korea and teachers are believed to be the authorities in all matters related to the education of children (Yang & McMullen, 2003), Korean parents may pay close attention to teachers feedback on their childs progress in literacy acquisition. Teachers who participated in the study noted that they communicated with childrens parents frequently, particularly with those whose children appear to struggle with the curriculum, thus are in need of extra help for their literacy skills and homework. In addition, Korean mothers tended to seek frequent contact with their child's teachers to request advice from teachers and inquire about their childs homework (Yang & McMullen, 2003). 28Therefore, the findings in the present study may have resulted from qualitatively different attitudes towards (or views on) parent teaching between Korean parents and English-speaking parents in North America. English-speaking parents in North America may engage in teaching alphabet letters and literacy skills, and help with homework without an apparent sign of their childs struggle while Korean parents may see their teaching responsibility primarily for remediative help. Teale (1986) showed that many of low-income American parents engaged in teaching literacy regularly without an apparent sign or explicit information of their childs struggle with literacy acquisition. The results of the present study suggest the importance of expanding our knowledge base about the relationship between home literacy environment and literacy acquisition. First, the relationship between home literacy practices and childrens literacy acquisition may be bidirectional such that while literacy practices at home influence childrens literacy skills achievement, childrens progress in literacy skills may in turn influence literacy activities at home. In order to confirm this, future studies should measure literacy-related activities at home, explicit teaching in particular, on multiple occasions over time starting before childrens exposure to systematic instruction in literacy, and continuing into childrens literacy acquisition. It should be noted that in the present study although childrens emergent literacy and conventional literacy skills were assessed on multiple occasions, home literacy practices were surveyed only on a single occasion. Thus home literacy environment was treated to be time-invariant. Furthermore, we cannot disentangle whether the negative relationship between frequency of parent teaching and childrens literacy skills is due to different cultural expectations on teaching and/or due to the time when the data were collected. It could very well be that these two factors conduced the results in this study. 29Second, it is also important to expand the investigation of the relationship between home literacy practices and literacy skills to a variety of linguistic and cultural contexts. As parental engagements in literacy-related activities at home are largely influenced by discourse and culture of a larger society, it will be critical to incorporate culture-specific characteristics in home literacy models. For example, a future study should investigate Korean parents beliefs on and attitudes toward home literacy practices and childrens literacy acquisition, and specific home reading and teaching activities they engage in. Furthermore, a future study should investigate whether the findings from this study can be expanded to families from middle or upper socio-economic backgrounds in Korea. 30End notes: 1 It should be noted that the statement on childrens socioeconomic backgrounds was based on preschool directors knowledge of the neighborhoods that the children lived in, and parents education level. The information on parents income level and occupation was not collected in this research due to its sensitive nature in the Korean context. 2 The words on the word recognition task included various syllable type combinations of 11 one-syllable words, 22 two-syllable words, 19 three-syllable words, and 8 four-syllable words. The number of letters ranged from two to 12. In oral Korean four syllable types are allowed (V, CV, VC, CVC) while additional CVCC syllable structure is allowed in written language. 31Appendix A Sample means, standard deviations, and t statistics for testing differences in selected outcome and predictor variables at study onset for participants who contributed all four waves of data (n = 87) versus those who contributed only the first wave of data (n = 8). Mean (SD) Those contributing four waves of data Those contributing first wave of data t-statistic (p-value) Parent education 3.52 (0.92) 4.25 (1.5) -1.51 (.14) Vocabulary 34.02 (7.00) 30.63 (8.73) 1.29 (.40) Letter-name knowledge 11.24 (8.99) 13.13 (10.27) -.56 (.58) Phonological awareness 16.59 (10.05) 18.25 (12.58) -.44 (.66) Word recognition 11.33 (17.75) 15.63 (17.83) -.65 (.51) Pseudoword reading 5.15 (10.86) 8.13 (13.17) -.73 (.47) Spelling .98 (1.91) .88 (1.13) .15 (.88) 32Appendix B: Questions used to measure home literacy practices in the study How often do you teach your children Hangul? (1) do not teach Hangul at home (2) once or twice a month (3) once a week (4) 3-4 times a week (5) everyday Approximately how many childrens books are there in your home? (1) less than 10 (2) 20-50 (3) 60-100 (4) 100-150 (5) more than 200 How often do your family members read books, newspapers, and magazines? (1) do not read at home (2) once or twice a month (3) once a week (4) 3-4 times a week (5) everyday How often do your family members read books, newspapers, and magazines with your child? (1) do not read at home (2) once or twice a month (3) once a week (4) 3-4 times a week (5) everyday How often do your family members read books to your child? (1) do not read to child at home (2) once or twice a month (3) once a week (4) 3-4 times a week (5) everyday How often does your child read at home on his/her own? (1) does not read at home (2) once or twice a month (3) once a week (4) 3-4 times a week (5) everyday Approximately how many books (including picture books) do you estimate your child reads in a typical week? (1) S/he does not read at home (2) one book (3) about 5 books (4) about 10 books (5) about 15 books (6) more than 20 books 33 How often do you help your child with his/her homework? (1) do not help with homework (2) once or twice a month (3) once a week (4) 3-4 times a week (5) everyday How often do you take your child to a library or a bookstore? (1) do not go to a library or a bookstore (2) once or twice a month (3) once a week (4) 3-4 times a week (5) everyday 34Appendix C: Equations for the second research question The first part of the second research question was addressed by fitting the following model, for word reading outcome, for example; where 21100120102 ,00~),0(~ NandNiiij The second part of the second research question addressed the relationship between home literacy practices and each conventional literacy outcome after controlling for the three emergent literacy skills. The following model was fitted for word reading outcome, for example; where 21100120102 ,00~),0(~ NandNiiij Note that while constant 1/6 remained constant for each outcome (on the recommendation of Tukey, 1977), the maximum score in the denominator change for each logit-transformed outcome. For example, for word reading, the value in the denominator is 60, for pseudoword reading 50, and spelling 20. The growth parameters, 20 , 30 , 40 , represent differences in elevation in each outcome for those who differ by one unit in phonological awareness, vocabulary, and letter-name knowledge after accounting for the effects of home literacy practices and ( )ijijiiijiijiidaidaiiiiijijijAgeAgehingParentTeacAgeadingHomeeschoolationParentEducMaleCohorthingParentTeacadingHomeAgeYYLog ++++++++++++=++1012110605040302011000**RePrRe616061( )ijijiiijijijijijijijiijiidaidaiiiiijijijijijijAgeAgeledgeLetterKnowAgeVocabularyAgeessicalAwarenPhonoAgehingParentTeacAgeadingHomeeschoolationParentEducMaleCohorthingParentTeacadingHomeledgeLetterKnowVocabularyAwarenessicalPhonoAgeYYLog +++++++++++++++++++=++1070605012110605040302014030201000***log**RePrRelog616061 35control variables. The growth parameters, 01 and 02 , represent differences in elevation in the literacy outcome for those who differ by one unit in time-invariant home reading and parent teaching, after controlling for the three emergent literacy skills and control variables. 11 and 12 , the interaction terms between the time variable Age and home literacy practices, examined whether the rate of change differed by the level of home reading or parent teaching. 50 , 60 , and 70 represent interactions terms between the time variable Age and three emergent literacy skills, respectively, in order to examine whether the rate of change differ by the level of each emergent literacy skill. The residual, ij , represents the portion of child is outcome at age j that is not predicted by predictors in the model. The level-2 residuals 0i and 1i represent the deviations of the individual growth parameters from their population averages (final status and rate of change, respectively). Interactions between predictors and Age were not statistically significant, thus not retained in the model. 36References Adams, M. J. (1990). Beginning to read: Thinking and learning about print. Cambridge: MIT Press. Bowey, J. A. (1994). Phonological sensitivity in novice readers and nonreaders. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 58, 134-159. Bryant, P. E., MacLean, M., Bradley, L. L. & Crossland, J. (1990). Rhyme and alliteration, phoneme detection, and learning to read. Developmental Psychology, 26, 429- 438. Bruck, M., Genesee, F., & Caravolas, M. (1997). A cross-linguistic study of early literacy acquisition. In B. Blachman (Ed.), Foundations of reading acquisition and dyslexia (pp. 145162). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Burgess, S. R. (2002). The influence of speech perception, oral language ability, the home literacy environment, and pre-reading knowledge on the growth of phonological sensitivity: A one-year longitudinal investigation. Reading and Writing: An interdisciplinary journal, 15, 709-737. Burgess, S. R., & Lonigan, C. J., (1998). Bidirectional relations of phonological sensitivity and prereading abilities: Evidence from a preschool sample. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 70, 117-141. Bus, A. G., van IJzendorn, M. H., & Pellegrini, A. D. (1995). Joint book reading makes for success in learning to read: A meta-analysis on intergenerational transmission of literacy, Review of Educational Research, 65, 1-21. Chung, E. Y. J. (1995). Confucian ethics in contemporary. Korean culture, 16, 12-19. Dickinson, D. K., & Tabors, P. O. (Eds.) (2001). Beginning literacy with language: Young children learning at home and school. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes 37Publishing. Dunn, L. M., & Dunn, L. M. (1981). Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test-Revised. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Services. Ehri, L. (2000). Learning to read and learning to spell: Two sides of a coin. Topics in Language Disorders, 20, 19-36. Evans, M. A., Shaw, D., & Bell, M. (2000). Home literacy activities and their influence on emergent literacy skills. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 54, 65-75. Ewers, C. A., & Brownson, S. M. (1999). Kindergartners' vocabulary acquisition as a function of active vs. passive storybook reading, prior vocabulary, and working memory. Reading Psychology, 20, 11-20. Foy, J. G., & Mann, V. (2003). Home literacy environment and phonological awareness in preschool children: Differential effects for rhyme and phoneme awareness. Applied Psycholinguistics, 24, 59-88. Foulin, J. N. (2005). Why is letter-name knowledge such a good predictor of learning to read? Reading and Writing, 18, 129155. Frijters, J. C., Barron, R. W., & Brunello, M. (2000). Direct and mediated influences of home literacy and literacy interest on prereaders oral vocabulary and early written language skills. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 466-477. Hart, B., & Risley, T. R. (1995). Meaningful differences in the everyday experience of young American children. Baltimore: P. H. Brookes. Hayes, D. P., & Ahrens, M. (1988). Vocabulary simplification for children: A simple case of motherese? Journal of Child Language, 15, 395410. Hoff-Ginsberg, E. (1991). Mother-child conversation in different social classes and communicative settings. Child Development, 62, 782-796. 38Johnston, R. S., Anderson, M., & Holligan, C. (1996). Knowledge of the alphabet and explicit awareness of phonemes in pre-readers: The nature of the relationship. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 8, 217234. Jordan, G. E., Snow, C. E., & Porche, M. V. (2000). Project EASE: The effect of a family literacy project on kindergarten students early literacy skills. Reading Research Quarterly, 35, 524-546. Kim, M., & Kwon, H. (2002). The differences in attitudes toward emergent literacy of children among teachers, mothers, and fathers in kindergartens and daycare centers in Korea. Reading Improvement, 39, 124-147. Kim, Y.-S. (2007a). Phonological awareness and literacy skills in Korean: an examination of the unique role of body-coda units. Applied Psycholinguistics, 1, 69-94. Kim, Y.-S. (2007b). Cat in a hat or cat in a cap? An investigation of developmental trajectories of phonological awareness for Korean children. Manuscript submitted for publication. Kim, Y.-S. (2007c). The foundation of literacy skills in Korean: The relationship between letter-name knowledge and phonological awareness and their contribution to literacy skills in Korean. Manuscript submitted for publication. LeFevre, J., Clarke, T., & Stringer, A. P. (2002). Influences of language and parental involvement on the development of counting skills: Comparisons of French- and English-speaking Canadian children. Early Child Development and Care, 172, 283300. Leseman, P. P. M., & de Jong, P. F. (1998). Home literacy: Opportunity, instruction, 39cooperation and social-emotional quality predicting early reading achievement. Reading Research Quarterly, 33, 294318. Lonigan, C. J., Burgess, S. R., & Anthony, J. L. (2000). Development of emergent literacy and early reading skills in preschool children: Evidence from a latent-variable longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology, 36, 596-613. Lonigan, C. J., & Whitehurst, G. J. (1998). Relative efficacy of a parent and teacher involvement in a shared-reading intervention for preschool children from low-income backgrounds. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 13, 262290. McBride-Chang, C., Wagner, R. K., & Chang, L. (1997). Growth modeling of phonological awareness. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 621-630. Metsala, J. (1999). Young childrens phonological awareness and nonword repetition as a function of vocabulary development. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 3-19. Metsala, J. L., & Walley, A. C. (1998). Spoken vocabulary growth and the segmental restructuring of lexical representations: Precursors to phonemic awareness and early reading ability. In J. L. Metsala & L. C. Ehri (Eds.), Word recognition in beginning literacy (pp. 89120). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Morais, J. (1993). Phonemic awareness, language and literacy. In R. M. Joshi & C. K. Leong (Eds.), Reading disabilities: Diagnosis and component processes. Dordrecht: Kluwer. Morais, J., Cary, L., Alegria, J., & Bertelson, P. (1979). Does awareness of speech as a sequence of phones arise spontaneously? Cognition, 7, 323331. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (2004). Early childhood education and care policy in the republic of Korea. OECD Country Note. 40 Retrieved October 14, 2004 from http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/42/43/33689774.pdf Pellegrini, A. D., Brody, G. H., & Sigel, I. (1985). Parents book-reading habits with their children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 77, 332-340. Purcell-Gates, V. (1991). Ability of well-read-to kindergartners to decontextualise/recontextualize experience into a written-narrative register. Language and Education, 5, 177-188. Raz, I. S., & Bryant, P. (1990). Social background, phonological awareness and childrens reading. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 8, 209-225. Rogoff, B. (1990). Apprenticeship in thinking. Cognitive development in social context. New York: Oxford University Press. Rogoff, B., Mistry, J., Gnc, A., & Moiser, C. (1993). Guided participation in cultural activity by toddlers and caregivers. Monographs of Society for Research in Child Development, 58. Scarborough, H. S., & Dobrich, W. (1994). On the efficacy of reading to preschoolers. Developmental Review, 14, 245302. Scarborough, H. S., Dorich, W., & Hager, M. (2001). Preschool literacy experience and later reading achievement. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 24, 508-511. Scollon, R., & Scollon, S. (1981). Narrative, literacy, and face in interethnic Communication: Advances in discourse processes. Norwood, NJ: Ablex. Snchal, M. (2006a). Testing the home literacy model: Parent involvement in kindergarten is differentially related to Grade 4 reading comprehension, fluency, spelling, and reading for pleasure. Scientific Studies of Reading, 10, 59-87. 41Snchal, M. (2006b). The effect of family literacy interventions on children's acquisition of reading: From kindergarten to grade 3. A meta-analysis review for the National Center for Family Literacy. Retrieved January 5, 2007 from http://www.nifl.gov/partnershipforreading/publications/html/lit_interventions/index.html Snchal, M., LeFevre, J., Hudson, E., & Lawson, P. (1996). Knowledge of storybooks as a predictor of young childrens vocabulary. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 520536. Snchal, M., LeFevre, J., Thomas, E. M., & Daley, K. E. (1998). Differential effects of home literacy experiences on the development of oral and written language. Reading Research Quarterly, 33, 96-116. Singer, J. D., & Willett, J. B. (2003). Applied longitudinal data analysis: Modeling change and event occurrence. New York: Oxford University Press. Snow, C. E. (1983). Literacy and language: Relationships during the preschool years. Harvard Educational Review, 53, 165-189. Snow, C. E., Burns, M. S. & Griffin, P. (Eds.) (1998). Preventing reading difficulties in young children. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. Snow, C. E., & Ninio, A. (1986). The contracts of literacy: What children learn from learning to read books. In W. H. Teale & E. Sulzby (Eds.), Emergent literacy: Writing and reading (pp. 116138). Norwood, NJ: Ablex. Stevenson, H.W., Lee, S., Chen, C., Stigler, J.W., Hsu, C., & Kitamaura, S. (1990). Contexts of achievement. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 55(12, Serial No. 221). Teale, W. H. (1986). Home background and young childrens literacy development. In W. 42Teale & E. Sulzby (Eds.), Emergent literacy: Writing and reading (pp. 173206). Norwood, NJ: Ablex. Tukey, J. W. (1977). Exploratory data analysis. London: Addison-Wesley. Tunmer, W. E. & Hoover, W. (1992). Cognitive and linguistic factors in learning to read. In P. B. Gough, L. C. Ehri & R. Treiman (Eds), Reading Acquisition (pp. 175-224). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Walley, A. C., Metsala, J. L., & Garlock, V. M. (2003). Spoken vocabulary growth: Its role in the development of phoneme awareness and early reading ability. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 16, 5-20. Whitehurst G. J., & Lonigan, C. J. (1998). Child development and emergent literacy. Child Development, 69, 848-872. Whitehurst, G. J., Epstein, J. N., Angell, A. L., Payne, A. C., Crone, D. A., & Fischel, J. E. (1994). Outcomes of an emergent literacy intervention in head start. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86, 542-555. Yang, H., & McMullen, M. B. (2003). Understanding the relationships among American primary-grade teachers and Korean mothers: The role of communication and cultural sensitivity in the linguistically diverse classroom. Early Childhood Research & Practice, 5, retrieved November 29, 2006 from http://ecrp.uiuc.edu/v5n1/yang.html Yoon, Y.-B., & Derwing, B. L. (2001). A language without a rhyme: Syllable structure experiments in Korean. Canadian Journal of Linguistics, 46, 187-237. 43Table 1. Number of children (by gender) and sample means (standard deviations) of childrens age, emergent literacy skills, and conventional literacy skills, by wave. Wave 1 Wave 2 Wave 3 Wave 4 Number of children (number of boys) 110 (61) 189 (97) 167 (86) 134 (75) Variable Mean (SD) Min - Max Wave 1 Wave 2 Wave 3 Wave 4 Childrens age 56.59 (3.61) 61.76 (3.61) 65.65 (3.64) 69.57 (3.69) Emergent literacy skills Phonological awareness 17.23 (10.68) 21.02 (10.74) 22.34 (11.66) 26.33 (11.30) 0-56 Letter-name knowledge 11.46 (9.71) 15.70 (11.56) 18.04 (11.04) 24.49 (10.92) 0-40 Vocabulary 33.80 (7.73) 41.31 (9.17) 44.41 (8.34) 47.58 (8.36) 11-63 Literacy Skills Word Reading 11.96 (18.14) 25.11 (21.82) 36.18 (21.93) 42.75 (19.56) 0-60 Pseudoword reading 5.05 (10.88) 10.82 (16.13) 18.33 (18.52) 26.73 (19.73) 0-50 Spelling 1.09 (2.28) 2.68 (3.17) 4.62 (4.21) 6.35 (4.41) 0-17 44Table 2. Sample means and standard deviations of family literacy practices indicators Family literacy practices Mean (SD) Min-Max Frequency of teaching Hangul 3.31 (1.35) 1-5 Number of childrens booksa 3.45 (1.22) 1-5 Frequency of family reading 3.72 (1.29) 1-5 Frequency of reading with child 2.94 (1.31) 1-5 Frequency of reading to child 3.31 (1.16) 1-5 Number of books child reads a weekb 2.98 (1.11) 1-6 Frequency of childs own book reading 3.40 (1.20) 1-5 Frequency of helping homework 3.80 (1.32) 1-5 Frequency of visiting library or bookstore 1.87 (0.69) 1-4 Unless otherwise noted, the categories for frequency were as follows: (1) this activity does not occur at home, (2) once a month, (3) once a week, (4) three to four times a week, (5) everyday a The categories for the number of childrens books were as follows: (1) less than 10, (2) 20-50, (3) 60-100, (4) 100-150, (5) more than 200 b The categories for the estimation of the number of books (including picture books) that child read a week were as follows: (1) The child does not read at home, (2) 1, (3) 5, (4) 10, (5) 15, (6) more than 20 45Table 3. Fitted multilevel models for change in which phonological awareness, vocabulary, and letter-name knowledge are predicted by home reading, parent teaching, and age (in months), controlling for gender, parent education, entering cohort, and fixed effects of preschool Note. ~ p < .10, * p < .05, ** p < .01, *** p < .001 Outcome Logit phonological awareness Logit letter-name knowledge Vocabulary Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Fixed effects Final status Intercept 0.05 -0.008*** 0.09 1.72** 1.61** 1.72** 54.81*** 54.46*** 55.02*** Home reading 0.34*** 0.46*** 0.45* 0.44* 2.70** 3.42*** Parent teaching -0.12 -0.24*** 0.17 0.03 -0.57 -1.51* Control variables Entering cohort 0.43* 0.37 0.39~ 0.12 0.12 0.13 1.28 1.27 1.09 Male -0.31** -0.32** -0.31** -0.34 -0.37 -0.34 -0.35 -0.50 -0.37 Middle school -0.47 -0.50~ -0.43 -1.76** -1.83** -1.76** -2.03 -2.54 -1.88 Junior college -0.02 0.10 0.02 -0.29 -0.18 -0.29 -0.06 0.95 0.16 Four year college 0.12 0.28 0.02 0.64 0.92* 0.65 -0.11 1.28 -0.72 Graduate school 0.73 0.85* 0.67~ 0.38 0.65 0.39 1.10 2.29 0.73 Preschool B 0.06 0.10 0.05 0.08 0.13 0.08 0.01 0.05 -0.06 Preschool C 0.14 0.13 0.13 -0.01 0.02 -0.01 0.15 0.29 0.16 Preschool D 0.23 0.28 0.06 -0.34 -0.15 -0.32 0.71 0.64 -0.34 Preschool E -0.38~ -0.33 -0.46* -0.52 -0.40 -0.51 1.33 1.36 0.83 Rate of change Age 0.06*** 0.06*** 0.06*** 0.14*** 0.14*** 0.14*** 1.01*** 1.02*** 1.00** Variance components Level 1 Within-person 0.50*** 0.56*** 0.50*** 1.35*** 1.33*** 1.35*** 29.48*** 29.39*** 29.51*** Level 2 Final status 0.63** 0.50* 0.57** 3.46*** 3.39*** 3.46** 42.07*** 40.99*** 40.81*** Rate of change 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 Covariance 0.01 0.001 0.01 0.05 0.00 0.01 0.07 -0.04 0.08 Goodness-of-fit -2LL 1500.9 1561.9 1489.0 2218.2 2243.8 2218.2 3985.0 4037.5 3979.8 46Table 4. Fitted multilevel models for change in which word reading, pseudoword reading, and spelling are predicted by home reading, parent teaching, and age (in months), controlling for phonological awareness, vocabulary, and letter-name knowledge in addition to gender, parental education, entering cohort, and the fixed effects of preschool. Note. ~ p < .10, * p < .05, ** p < .01, *** p < .001 Outcome Logit word reading Logit pseudoword reading Logit spelling Model 1 Model 2 Model 1 Model 2 Model 1 Model 2 Fixed effects Final status Intercept 5.83*** 1.84*** 2.65*** -0.37 0.55*** -1.69*** Home reading 1.11*** 0.59** 1.17*** 0.67*** 0.25 0.01 Parent teaching -0.63** -0.48** -0.53** -0.42** -0.15 -0.08 Phonological awareness 0.26** 0.19* 0.08 Letter-name knowledge 0.50*** 0.58*** 0.21*** Vocabulary 0.05*** 0.03** 0.03*** Initial cohort -0.32 -0.52 0.39 0.13 0.39 0.27 Male -1.35*** -1.03*** -1.28*** -0.91*** -0.94*** -0.77*** Middle school -2.08* -0.93 -1.65* -0.67 -1.07* -0.71 Junior college -0.26 -0.07 -0.32 -0.09 -0.03 0.04 Four year college 0.72 0.59 0.70 0.40 0.39 0.31 Graduate school 0.62 0.20 1.06 0.65 -0.33 -0.19 Preschool B -0.00 0.06 -0.05 -0.05 -0.01 -0.06 Preschool C 0.29 0.31 1.32 1.25** 0.54 0.44 Preschool D -0.76 -0.59 -0.52 -0.29 -1.00** -0.95** Preschool E -1.31~ -0.78~ -0.85 -0.38 -1.02** -0.89*** Rate of change Age 0.35*** 0.20*** 0.29*** 0.15*** 0.18*** 0.11*** Variance components Level 1 Within-person 1.40*** 1.65*** 1.86*** 1.75*** 0.61*** 0.66*** Level 2 Final status 8.38*** 4.55*** 8.67*** 5.75*** 3.61*** 2.27** Rate of change 0.02*** 0.01** 0.01* 0.01** 0.01*** 0.01** Covariance 0.21** 0.16** 0.22** 0.22** 0.13*** 0.09*** Goodness-of-fit -2LL 2462.4 2325.5 2469.5 2293.6 1870.3 1768.7 47Figure 1. Predicted age-trajectories of word reading and pseudoword reading for prototypical students with high (90th percentile) and low frequency (10th percentile) of home reading and parent teaching (all emergent literacy skills and control variables, including the fixed effects of site, have been set to their respective sample means). (a) Word reading outcome (b) Pseudoword reading outcome 010203040506050 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77Age in monthsPredicted word readingHigh home reading Low home readingHigh parent teaching Low parent teaching0102030405050 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77Age in monthsPredicted pseudoword readingHigh home reading Low home readingHigh parent teaching Low parent teaching

Recommended

View more >