Thesis on family literacy with LEP adults and reflective journal keeping

Throughout this discussion, terms such as family literacy, intergenerational literacy, and children’s literature/picture books will recur. Family literacy is a term with a broad definition; its interpretation varies depending on how one believes family literacy should be administered, or evaluated. Indeed, Thomas and Skage (1998) captured the essence of attempting to define family literacy when they wrote that this task “may be compared to trying to capture a wide landscape with a single camera shot”(p. 5). Yet also throughout this project, it will become transparent that family literacy is not a new idea. “It is rooted in the long history of the family as a venue for the transmission of knowledge, skills, and values from older to younger generations, including, but by no means limited to, those relating to literacy” (Handel, 1999, p. 11). Federal guidelines define literacy services as:

Services that are of sufficient intensity in terms of hours, and of sufficient duration, to make sustainable changes in a family and that integrate all of the following activities: (a) Interactive literacy activities between parents and their children, (b) Training for parents regarding how to be the primary teacher for their children and full partners in the education of their children, (c) Parent literacy training that leads to economic self-sufficiency, and (d) An age-appropriate education to prepare children for success. (As cited on www.famlit.org/media/pfacts.html#ncfl)

Although these bring with them the authoritative phrase “federal,” these guidelines do not represent everyone’s views on what family literacy is, nor how its services should be administered.

These guidelines coincide only in part with others’ interpretations of family literacy, such as Handel’s (1999). Her wide interpretation of what a program may consist of is as follows. “Programs range from small community programs focused on book reading, to school-based programs grounded in research such as the [Family Reading] Partnership [the family reading program she developed], to comprehensive programs such as Even Start and the [NCFL] programs that involve participation for many hours per week” (p. 137). The Ohio Family Literacy Task Force definition is that “family literacy is an approach to intergenerational learning focused on the whole family and the whole person within the family… Family literacy can range from parent (and/or other significant adult) and child interaction to more intense, comprehensive programming” (Sapin & Patak, 1998, p. 4).

Other experts agree that there is a range, but argue that there also exists a bottom-line of sorts—one that, if crossed, creates a program that is simply not comprehensive enough in their opinion to pass as family literacy. Certain experts look disapprovingly on programs that merely ask parents to read to children, and then categorize this activity as meeting family literacy needs. These arrangements, they argue, are incomplete and do not merit the family literacy label (Shanahan, Mulhern, & Rodriguez-Brown, 1995). In Gadsen’s (1994) review of various conceptual issues facing the field of family literacy, she points out the following.

[The definition of family literacy] as currently used to describe programs, is relatively new, although the basis for much of the discussion is derived from a variety of domains (e.g., early reading/emergent literacy and parent-child relationships). Recent references to the concept are either located in larger discussions of family support efforts or embedded in the ability of programs to compensate for the inability of low-literacy parents to assist their children’s performance in school. (p. 2)

Many different fields, therefore, claim a piece of the “family literacy pie,” yet few agree on what the term means.

For the purposes of this project, strong emphasis will be placed on Auerbach’s (1990) definition, which is more broad and encompassing. It includes practices that are typically thought of when discussing family literacy (i.e. reading to/with children, talking with children), yet it is not limited to those only. It also includes the following:

(1) Adult family members working independently on reading and writing, (2) Using literacy to address family and community concerns, (3) Addressing parents’ childrearing concerns through family literacy classes, (4) Supporting the development of the home language and culture, and (5) Interacting with the school system on parents’ terms. (p. 35)

More recent reports, such as Handel’s evaluation of her Parent Reader workshops (1999), and Paratore’s evaluation of the eight-year Intergenerational Literacy Project carried out in Massachusetts (2001), give depth to family literacy as a concept, and are aiding the field to become more advanced, and seemingly less “new,” as Gadsen (1994) states, as well as less fragile before critics.

Beyond all the varying definitions, however, it is critical to remember that all of these programs have people’s lives at their core. Weinstein-Shr and Quintero (1995) underscored this by insisting that although these terms (family literacy and intergenerational literacy) “have different meanings to different people, most who use them agree that the relationships between children and adults are important, and that [they] profoundly affect the meaning of literacy as well as the development of specific literacy…practices” (p. 5). In an excellent review of some successful family literacy projects, Neuman, Caperelli, and Kee’s (1998) article—written in cooperation with the Barbara Bush Foundation for Family Literacy—draws this conclusion relative to how program participants described family literacy:

Family literacy was not a narrowly defined concept consisting of basic reading skills. In contrast, literacy was viewed more broadly as a cultural concept, a way of thinking, behaving, and responding to one’s environment. Consequently, the great variability among programs (no one size fits all) reflected the specific needs of the participants and the community. (p. 246)

After extensive research, one may be likely to side with a more encompassing definition such as Taylor’s (1997), and believe that defining family literacy must be done by those whom the programs affect. Outsiders and experts alone cannot be the ones determining these definitions. Respect must be given to “local definitions of problems, needs, resources, and preferred courses of action” (Taylor, p. 4). For the purposes of this project, this broad combination of definitions will be accepted as constituting family literacy. No one particular definition is going to be proclaimed throughout this project as acceptable because that is not in alignment with the stated purpose of the project. By presenting a multitude of definitions, I intend to allow the readers to decide which approach and definition best fits the needs of their program and curriculum.

The term intergenerational literacy overlaps with family literacy. In general, the former encompasses programs and philosophies in which more than one generation is included in the learning. Typically parents with their children, grandparents, and other influential adults/caretakers are known to participate in these programs. Paratore (2001) perhaps has the most ownership over the term, since her major project of the past eight to ten years is entitled the Intergenerational Literacy Project (ILP). Intergenerational literacy projects, and Paratore’s work in particular, are “based on the premise that as parents improve their own literacy, the skills and knowledge will promote literacy learning among their children” (p. 46). Most often curriculum surrounds activities that these adults can do with their children or grandchildren to cultivate literacy. Typically when the term intergenerational literacy appears, reference is being made to what the adults are learning as they participate, and is not limited to how they relate to the children in the program or class.

Throughout this project, the terms picture books and children’s literature will include the following criteria.

[This includes] any book that appears in picture book format. Such books have in common a number of characteristics: they are usually thirty-two pages long, although they may be as short as twenty-four and as long as forty-eight pages; pictures appear on every page or double page spread…text is relatively brief. (Bishop & Hickman, 1992, pp. 2–3)

Sometimes the books may even be shorter than twenty-four pages. There is an almost undiscovered power that lies in using picture books in ESL teaching—a power that stems from the inseparable nature in this genre between the text and the illustrations; together they work to tell stories effectively. This combination supports ESL learners tremendously.

[Previous] | [Next]