Family Literacy:
Program effects and
implementation quality
Roel van Steensel
Kohnstamm Institute for Educational Research
University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Goal
• Short overview of recent review studies on
effects of family literacy programs.
• Discuss implications for research, practice, and
policy.
Some context
• The role of the home environment:
– Children learn from exploring, observing and
taking part in literacy activities at home (Teale &
Sulzby, 1986).
Some context
• The role of the home environment:
– Children learn from exploring, observing and
taking part in literacy activities at home (Teale &
Sulzby, 1986).
Some context
• The role of the home environment:
– Children learn from exploring, observing and
taking part in literacy activities at home (Teale &
Sulzby, 1986).
Some context
• The role of the home environment:
– Children learn from exploring, observing and
taking part in literacy activities at home (Teale &
Sulzby, 1986).
Some context
• There is variability in frequency and quality of literacy
activities at home.
• This variability is related to:
– Socio-economic status.
– Ethnic/cultural background.
(E.g., Bus, Leseman, & Keultjens, 2001; Van
Steensel, 2006)
• However, there is no 1-to-1 correspondence (Van
Steensel, 2006)
Some context
• To stimulate the quality of the home literacy
environment
• Family literacy (FL) programs
Parent-child activities
Parent training
Family literacy research
• Past two decades: various studies into effects
of FL programs.
• Meta-analyses (quantitative reviews of effect
studies).
• Review of reviews (Van Steensel et al., 2012).
Observation 1
• FL programs are effective (see also Carpentieri
et al., 2011) …
Observation 1
• FL programs are effective (see also Carpentieri
et al., 2011) …
• But not for all families. Small(er) effects for:
– African-American/Hispanic children (Manz et al.,
2010).
– At-risk children (Mol et al., 2008; Van Steensel et
al., 2011).
Observation 1
• Possible explanations:
– Programs (mainly shared reading) assume
interaction skills that may not be present.
– Programs may not reflect the value system of
participating families.
• Sénéchal & Young (2008): effects for at-risk
children of a skills-based approach.
Observation 2
• We know little about implementation quality
of FL programs and its relation with program
effects.
Observation 2
• Implementation quality/program fidelity
(Powell & Carey, 2012):
– Delivery: is the intended content offered and
how? Frequency and quality of parent training.
– Receipt: is the intended content received and
how? Parents’ attendance and understanding of
training.
– Enactment: is the intended content transferred to
children? Frequency and quality of parent-child
activities.
Observation 2
• Meta-analysis Van Steensel et al. (2011):
– 12 of 30 studies provided information on
implementation quality.
– Mostly superficial measures.
– Only 1 study: systematic observations of activities.
– No analysis of moderating effects of implementation
quality.
• Paradox: implementation quality is likely to be
crucial!
Implications
1. For research:
a. We need to know more about implementation
quality, particularly in at-risk families, and how it is
related to program effects.
b. We need to know more about what types of programs
are (in)effective for what types of families and why.
c. We need to conduct more studies on a European
level.
See also Carpentieri et al. (2011).
Implications
2. For practice and policy:
a. Invest in FL programs and tune FL activities to
activities in (early) education.
b. Maximize cultural validity: (mainstream) educational
goals of FL programs should be connected with
families’ value systems and programs should be tuned
to families’ language situation.
c. Involve communities in program development and
implementation as well as in reaching parents.
See also: Blok et al. (2006), Carpentieri et al. (2011), Manz
et al. (2011), Van Steensel et al. (2012).
Example from the Netherlands
• Large-scale research project around “Early
education at home” (VVE Thuis) program:
– Program:
•
•
•
•
For toddlers and kindergarteners.
Combined family- and school-based program.
Materials in Dutch as well as in home language.
Support by teachers and (to some extent) by ethnic
community support staff.
– Research (2012-2016):
• Study into program effects.
• Study into implementation quality and moderating effects.
• Intensifying program with ICT-based activities.
Thank you!
Contact:
RvanSteensel@kohnstamm.uva.nl
References
Blok, H., Fukkink, R. G., Gebhardt, E. C., & Leseman, P. P. M. (2005). The relevance of delivery mode and other programme
characteristics for the effectiveness of early childhood intervention. International Journal of Behavioral
Development, 29, 35–47.
Bus, A., Leseman, P., & Keultjes, P. (2000). Joint book reading across cultures: A comparison of Surinamese-Dutch, TurkishDutch, and Dutch parent-child dyads. Journal of Literacy Research, 32, 53-76.
Carpentieri, J., Fairfax-Cholmeley, K., Litster, J., & Vorhaus, J. (2011). Family literacy in research: Using parental support
initiatives to enhance literacy development. London: NRDC, Institute of Education.
Manz, P. H., Hughes, C., Barnabas, E., Bracaliello, C., & Ginsburg-Block, M. (2010). A descriptive review and meta-analysis
of family-based emergent literacy interventions: To what extent is the research applicable to low-income, ethnicminority or linguistically-diverse young children? Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 25, 409-431.
Mol, S. E., Bus, A. G., De Jong, M. T., & Smeets, D. J. H. (2008). Added value of Dialogic parent-child book readings: A
meta-analysis. Early Education and Development, 19, 7-26.
Powell, D. R., & Carey, A. J. (2012). Approaches to program fidelity in family literacy research (pp. 387-400). In B. H. Wasik
(Ed.), Handbook of Family Literacy. Second Edition. New York, NY: Routledge.
Sénéchal, M., & Young, L. (2008). The effect of family literacy interventions on children’s acquisition of reading from
kindergarten to Grade 3: A meta-analytic review. Review of Educational Research, 78, 880-907.
Teale, W., & Sulzby, E. (1986). Emergent literacy: Reading and writing. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Van Steensel, R. (2006). Relations between socio-cultural factors, the home literacy environment, and children’s literacy
development in the first years of primary education. Journal of Research in Reading, 29, 367-382.
Van Steensel, R., Herppich, S., McElvany, N., & Kurvers, J. (2012). How effective are family literacy programs for children’s
literacy skills? A review of the meta-analytic evidence (pp. 135-148). In B. H. Wasik (Ed.), Handbook of Family
Literacy. Second Edition. New York, NY: Routledge.
Van Steensel, R., McElvany, N., Kurvers, J., & Herppich, S. (2011). How effective are family literacy programs? Results of a
meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 81, 69-96.