Involving Latino families in literacy.

Abstract

This qualitative study reports on the family literacy component of a reading improvement program conducted as a partnership between an elementary school and university along the Texas-Mexico border. Family participants were 100 percent Latino and 99 percent economically disadvantaged. Findings report on the families' aspirations for their children's literacy development as well as suggestions families have for the program.

Reading for me is fundamental. It is a way to grow culturally, and overall will open doors for all he [my child] wants to do in the future. [Parent comment]

Purpose

The paper reports findings from an on-going partnership between a community university located along the Texas-Mexico border and a public elementary school. The partnership, called the Evening Reading Improvement Program, involves preservice teachers assessing and tutoring early childhood students in literacy, graduate educational leadership majors guiding the program, and both the undergraduate and graduate students working closely with families to improve the children's literacy skills. This paper focuses on the evolving family involvement component of the program. Families' aspirations for their children are explored along with their views of Spanish and English literacy at home and at school and their recommendations for the program.

Perspectives

According to the sociocultural perspective, social and cultural contexts mediate learning (Moll, 1994; Vygotsky, 1986). This is particularly true of literacy learning, which varies across cultures as well as functions and purposes, creating multiple literacies and discourses (Au & Raphael, 2000; Gee, 2001). Families play a critical role in the social and cultural context of young children's developing literacy both at home and at school (Purcell-Gates, 2000; Rogers, 2001). The families involved in this research came from low income, Latino, and Spanish-speaking backgrounds. Researchers such as Valdes (1996) argue that school-based family involvement programs often view these families from a deficit perspective. Valdes asserts that the programs try to force school values and needs onto the families rather than valuing their diversity. The current researchers recognize the vast funds of knowledge (Moll, 1994) and the diverse forms of literacy (Au & Raphael, 2000) that families have, but they also acknowledge the need for the students to succeed in a school atmosphere in which standards and high stakes testing prevail. Paratore, Melzi, and Krol-Sinclair (1999) argue that it is possible for a family literacy program to respect cultural and linguistic diversity and at the same time prepare families for the literacy demands of United States public schools.

Program Description

The Evening Reading Improvement Program has two components: 1) a tutoring component and 2) a family literacy component. Each semester, university preservice teachers enrolled in undergraduate bilingual and English as a second language reading courses meet after school hours on the partner elementary school's campus to conduct tutorials once a week for ten weeks. University preservice teachers are matched to Latino elementary students ranging in age from three to seven years old. A high degree of Spanish profiency was required of the university preservice teachers enrolled in the bilingual reading course but not of those preservice teachers enrolled in the English as a second language course. Families/parents participate in the project each semester through their attendance at a parent orientation session, two family literacy nights, and a conference night in which parents receive information on their child's reading progress and celebrate participation in the program. Families are also invited to stay for all tutoring sessions. The content of the family literacy nights was determined by the graduate educational leadership students under the direction of the faculty overseeing the program.

Setting and Participants

The research was conducted at a public elementary school spanning grades prekindergarten (3-year-olds) to fifth grade. The school is 100 percent Latino and 99 percent economically disadvantaged. About 59 percent of the students are classified as limited English proficient. An average of 45 elementary school students in grades prekindergarten through first grade and their families participate in the program each semester, which represents about 25 percent of the children in those grades. Families live in the neighborhood surrounding the school which is approximately 1 mile from the Texas-Mexico border and consists of a mix of second generation or more Latino families and recent immigrants from Mexico. Family participation includes mothers, fathers, grandparents, aunts, uncles, older siblings, and neighbors. No transportation is provided to or from the program so families must walk or find other transportation to bring their children. Spanish is the dominant language of most parents.

Methods

Data for the study came from family responses to surveys and focus groups conducted from 2002 through 2004. Approximately 90 family members completed surveys across two academic semesters and 32 members participated in focus groups across four semesters. Focus groups consisted of 6-8 volunteer family members per semester and were conducted primarily in Spanish by one of the researchers. The focus group discussions gave the researchers an opportunity to better understand the perspectives of the families and to use follow-up questions when responses were unclear (Williams & Katz, 2001).

The open-ended survey questions and focus group transcriptions were analyzed using a qualitative research methodology. Each of the three researchers searched separately for patterns in the data concerning family perspectives regarding literacy and then categorized the data according to the patterns that emerged (Creswell, 2003; Merriam, 1998). Researchers then met weekly to discuss and reflect on the program and their analysis, thus providing a peer check of the analysis (Carspecken, 1996). Multiple data sources and peer checks were used to triangulate the findings and to add to the credibility of the study (Patton, 1990). The findings are divided into two parts: 1) what was learned from the families about themselves and 2) what was learned about setting up a family involvement program. Three areas of significance to the families that evolved from the data were the importance of literacy, their growing sense of self-efficacy and confidence, and the value of language and culture.

Importance of Literacy

The families realized the importance of literacy and school success and conveyed this information to their children both directly and indirectly. They directly told their children that the only way to get ahead in life is to be able to read well. One family member said, "A person who does not read in school is not going to advance." In addition, the families conveyed the importance of school in more indirect ways. For example, they brought the children to the Evening Reading Improvement program at 4:30 pm each week, even though no transportation was provided. In addition, they reported keeping track of their children's school progress and making sure they completed their school homework. A mother said, "I always try to be involved a lot because I want to know about the progress of my daughters. I always try to stay on top of them."

Self-efficacy and Confidence

The families expressed more confidence in their ability to interact with school personnel and to assist their children at home in ways that would increase school success as a result of the family involvement program. A parent said: "It helped me to feel more confident, helping my son again. I'm able to come see him, and visit with the teacher, and afterwards go home and help him with his school work." They also felt that they had the capacity and responsibility to help not only their own children but also their children's friends and neighbors. A mother said:

   In one way or another, as mothers we are able to do it [help our
   children succeed]. And not only our children but also their friends
   and neighbors. Many times they go to friends' houses to do their
   homework and that's how we get involved. We need to be aware and
   make sure they are doing their homework. We also need to be there
   in case they have any questions. We are capable. Everyone is
   capable.

Although families were already involved in their children's literacy development in many ways, they wanted to learn more strategies to help their children succeed in school. They were interested in specific activities that they could do with their children at home. The families reported that they learned new practices by attending the family involvement nights during the program. One mother said she wasn't in the habit of reading with her children, but now it is a normal part of their routine. "I wasn't accustomed to the reading habit because it was very difficult for me at the beginning, and now I see it as something normal." Another parent was used to reading with her child, but read very rapidly. This changed after her experience in the program.

   Before I used to read a book or something rapidly so I could finish
   it quickly. Now, I read more slowly. At times, I ask him what he
   thinks it says here or what the animal or child is going to do.

Families also appreciated receiving materials that they could use at home with their children. For example, one parent stated, "He is learning the letters with the materials given to us."

Language and Culture

The Latino families wanted their children to maintain their Spanish language and culture. They were aware that efforts must be made to maintain the native language in the home and at school.

   For example, at home we speak only Spanish. We understand the
   English language, but we speak only in Spanish so my children
   won't forget it.... The Spanish is important so he doesn't lose
   the culture that one has taught him.

The families said that it was difficult for them to find materials in Spanish. Even when they did find Spanish children's books, they were often translations of English books rather than books originally written in Spanish. Although the families wanted to maintain their children's Spanish language and Latino culture, they also recognized the importance of English development for their children's future success. As one family member put it, "At home, my daughter only speaks Spanish. Well, it is good they learn another language because this will open more doors. Right?" Another parent shared that both she and her daughters are learning English. "I am taking English classes, and in that way I am demonstrating to my girls that we need to learn English to understand everything."

Program

In addition to learning more about the families in the program, we also learned about the program itself. At first, we were most concerned about presenting activities to families that would help improve the children's school literacy success. As the program evolved, we became more concerned about making these activities culturally and personally relevant to the families. For example, families and children made edible ladybugs. The children then told stories about their ladybugs, which are considered good luck in the border culture. We also included traditional

Latino rhymes, finger plays, and jump rope chants in our oral language lessons. Many of the parents remembered doing the rhymes and chants when they were children. "I liked it when we sang. This was my favorite part with the tutors, and then we can do it at home." We realized from the beginning that all presentations and materials should be in Spanish and English. We learned that it is best to have Spanish and English presentations in separate rooms because translations are long and tedious. Families selected the language of presentation attended. We also discovered that persons making academic presentations to the families in Spanish need both knowledge of literacy concepts and specialized Spanish language ability to be effective and answer questions.

As the program evolved, we also developed a model for family literacy nights. The children in the program went to the classrooms with their tutors while the adults stayed in two large rooms for instruction. The sessions began with an overview of the activity or strategy for the evening, an explanation of its importance to literacy development, and a demonstration of the strategy. Then, the families participated in hands-on experiences while the instructors answered questions. The families also shared literacy strategies they used at home. Finally, the adults went to the classrooms to do similar activities with their children. A family member said, "I enjoy the activities that you teach to us and then we go to the classroom with the children. This is my favorite part." The program is on-going. We have learned that by listening to families we can continue to improve the program, the families' involvement, and their children's literacy development.

Importance of the Study

The findings of this on-going research support other research that has been done with similar families. For example, Delgado-Gaitan (1996) found that families that participate in family involvement programs become more confident in their interactions with the schools and in their abilities to support their children's literacy development at home. This study also found that families reported understanding specific strategies that they could use at home to support their children's literacy achievement. The results also support other studies that have found non-mainstream families value their children's literacy development (Auerbach, 1995). The families in the current study strongly supported their children's literacy development. This was revealed in the surveys and focus groups as well as their participation in the program, which required returning to the school with their children at 4:30 pm once a week. The families especially responded well when the program built on the families' knowledge and culture as a springboard for new ideas and skills supporting previous research by Goldenberg (2001).

In addition to providing support for previous research, this study offers a different model for family involvement and literacy programs. The program is a collaboration involving an elementary school and a university. It models specific literacy development strategies and provides opportunities for families to practice these strategies with their own children in a supportive environment. Rasinski (2002) reports that families desire more specific information on how to help their children with reading and writing in the home. The on-going nature of the program provides a forum in which families can express their ideas and concerns separate from the public school program. Family involvement has been shown to be one of the ways to improve literacy achievement for all students (Delgado-Gaitan, 1996; Paratore, Melzi, & Krol-Sinclair, 1999). The federal government required family involvement in the passage of the No Child Left Behind Act (U.S. Department of Education, 2002). Yet, the increasing diversity of the schools makes family involvement more challenging than ever before. Therefore, our study is an addition to the literacy literature in the area of family involvement, specifically that of low-income, Latino families.

References

Au, K. H. & Raphael, T. E. (2000). Equity and literacy in the next millennium. Reading Research Quarterly, 35, 170-180.

Auerbach, E. R. (1995). Which way for family literacy: Intervention or empowerment? In L. M. Morrow (Ed.). Family literacy connections in schools and communities (pp. 11-28). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Carspecken, P. F. (1996). Critical ethnography in educational research: A theoretical and practical guide. New York: Routledge.

Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches (2nd Edition). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Delgado-Gaitan, C. (1996). Protean literacy. Washington, DC: Falmer Press.

Gee, J. P. (2001). A sociocultural perspective on early literacy development. In S. B. Neuman and D. K. Dickinson (Eds.). Handbook of early literacy research (pp. 30-42). New York: Guilford Press.

Goldenberg, C. (2001). Making schools work for low-income families in the 21st century. In S. B. Neuman and D. K. Dickinson (Eds.). Handbook of early literacy research (pp. 211-231). New York: Guilford Press.

Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Moll, L. C. (1994). Literacy research in community and classrooms: A sociocultural approach. In R. B. Ruddell, M. R. Ruddell, & H. Singer (Eds.). Theoretical models and processes of reading (4th ed., pp. 179-207). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Paratore, J. R., Melzi, G. & Krol-Sinclair, B. (1999). What should we expect of family literacy? Experiences of Latino children whose parents participate in an intergenerational literacy project. Newark, DE: International Reading Association and Chicago: National Reading Conference.

Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Purcell-Gates, V. (2000). Family literacy. In M. L. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.). Handbook of reading research: Volume III (pp. 853-870). Mahway, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Rasinski, T. V. (2001). A focus on communication with parents and families. In R. F. Flippo (Ed.), Reading researchers in search of common ground (pp. 159-166). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Rogers, R. (2001). Family literacy and the mediation of cultural models. In J. V. Hoffman, D. L. Schallert, C. M. Fairbanks, J. Worthy, & B. Maloch (Eds.). Fiftieth yearbook of the National Reading Conference (pp. 96-114). Chicago: National Reading Conference.

U.S. Department of Education, Office of Elementary and Secondary Education, (2002). No Child Left Behind: A Desktop Reference. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education.

Valdes, G. (1996). Con respeto: Bridging the distances between culturally diverse families and schools: An ethnographic portrait. New York: Teachers College Press.

Vygotsky, L. (1986). Thought and language. (A. Kozulin, Trans. & Ed.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. (Original work published 1934)

Williams, A. & Katz, L. (2001). The use of focus group methodology in education: Some theoretical and practical considerations. The International Electronic Journal for Leadership in Learning, 5(3). Retrieved July 25, 2004, from http://www.ucalgary-ca/~iejll

Michelle Abrego, University of Texas-Brownsville

Renee Rubin, University of Texas-Brownsville

John A. Sutterby, University of Texas-Brownsville

Michelle Abrego, Ed.D., is an assistant professor in the School Specialties Department, and Renee Rubin, Ed.D., and John Sutterby, Ph.D., are assistant professors in the Curriculum and Instruction Department in the School of Education at the University of Texas at Brownsville.