Sociocultural+Contexts+and+Literacy+Development

Summary of Findings
Carlos' Summary of findings

Recommendations
Carlos' Recommendations Jennifer's Recommendations NLP Recommendations

Putting Recommendations into Practice
Carlos' Recommendations into Practice Jennifer's Recommendations Putting it into Practice by Mei Jessica's Putting Recommendations into Practice

Part III Sociocultural Contexts and Literacy Developments Chapter 11 // By Claude Goldenberg, Robert S. Rueda, and Diane August // The chapter looks at research on the influences of sociocultural factors on language-minority children’s literacy outcomes in either the first or second language, which includes children’s homes, communities, cultures, backgrounds, and etc. They are analyzed in relation to cultural characteristics and demands of the schools children attend. These demands are behavioral, affective, or cognitive expectations. The chapter examines influences on literacy development by looking at these six items: 1. What is the influence of //immigration// (generation status and immigration circumstances)? 2. What is the influence of differences in //discourse// and //interaction characteristics// between children’s home and classrooms? 3. What is the influence of //other sociocultural characteristics// of students and teachers? 4. What is the influence of //parents and families?// 5. What is the influences of policies at the //district, state, and federal levels?// 6. What is the influence of //language status or prestige//? ·  As a whole, there is modest support showing that culturally relevant materials promote literacy and reading comprehension. **4.** **What is the influence of //parents// and //families//?** ** 5. ****What is the influences of policies at the //district, state, and federal levels?//** ·  When policies and practices recognize the value of more than one language, lower status language, minimizes the negative effects of language minority students in achieving high literacy levels in the high status language. One of the recommendation is that school should look for ways to engage parents in children’s literacy development; schools should actively seek ways to collaborate with parents for children’s academic benefit.
 * SUBMITTED BY JENNIFER LAM **
 * Sociocultural Influences on the Literacy Attainment of Language-Minority Children and Youth **
 * __ Introduction __**
 * __ Summary of Findings __**
 * 1) ** What is the influence of //immigration// (generation status and immigration circumstances)? **
 * No evidence that undocumented immigration status actually has a discernible impact on literacy outcomes.
 * Undocumented status is not necessarily an obstacle to creating conditions in the home that promote at least early literacy development for language-minority children (Monzo & Rueda, 2001).
 * Immigration processes associated with the family becoming integrated into a new country, such as parents’ satisfaction with the adaptation process, were unrelated to the children’s reading motivation- their valuing reading and reading self-concept (Monzo & Rueda, 2001).
 * In a study of Refugee Southeast Asians (most disrupted schooling), showed that the trauma they experienced did not influence literacy outcomes, but the time in the United States, age of arrival, and parent education predicted reading achievement ( Ima & Rumbaut, 1989).
 * In a study of the effects of generation status (1st generation students, 2nd generation students, and 3rd generation) on student literacy attainments, the results do not support the proposition that generation status has an impact on students’ English literacy achievement (Buriel & Cardoza, 1988).
 * In conclusion, undocumented immigration and refugee experience does not impede literacy achievements. Literacy outcomes are more likely to be the result of home (and school) language and literacy opportunities.
 * 2. What is the influence of differences in //discourse// and //interaction characteristics// between children’s home and classrooms? **
 * When instructional interaction was compatible with interaction patterns in the children’s native culture, the students demonstrated “ much higher levels of achievement related behaviors” (Au & Mason, 1982).
 * Instructional interactions that were part of KEEP program contributed to higher levels of student academic achievement and contributed somewhat to higher levels of measures student reading achievement (Au & Mason, 1982).
 * Code switching occurred far less in children’s writing than in their speaking (Huerta-Macias & Quintero, 1992).
 * Minimizing the interaction gap between the home and school might help promote higher levels of literacy attainment by removing obstacles to interaction and making the classroom more familiar and comfortable.
 * 3. What is the influence of //other sociocultural characteristics// of students and teachers? **
 * Culturally unfamiliar text can interfere with comprehension and literacy growth.
 * Familiarity of the text content has been known to increase understanding, but cultural familiarity and its effects on literacy is still not clear.
 * Text language has a greater impact on students’ performance than cultural familiarity, but both can influence students’ reading comprehension.
 * Students and teachers who speak the same first language seem to connect in a positive way but students’ English reading accuracy improved in 1 out of 3 grades studied.
 * Dialogue journals prompted a longer response because students are able to select their topic (more relevant to themselves) and were more successful in communicating their ideas. But the students’ mechanical writing skills did not appear to improve.
 * Garcia-Vazquez’s study of acculturation and achievement failed to link greater acculturation would lead to higher literacy levels.
 * Differences were found in Kennedy and Park’s study with Asians Americans spending twice as much time doing homework than Mexican American. They suggest this difference may be due to cultural and SES differences.
 * Aarts and Verhoeven’s study of Turkish speakers: home stimulation, parents’ motivation, and children’s self-esteem had a bigger impact than sociocultural orientation to literacy.
 * Language minority parents are willing to help (and have the ability) their children succeed academically. Often schools underestimate the value of these parents’ contribution and do not take advantage of the ready resource.
 * More home literacy experiences are generally associated with better literacy outcomes, but findings are not consistent.
 * Home experiences in first and second language are positively correlated to success in first and second language respectively. But home experiences in first and second language were negatively correlated, although weakly, to success in the other language.
 * 6. What is the influence of //language status or prestige//? **
 * Insufficient evidence to draw conclusions that relative language status and prestige influences students’ first and second language literacy outcomes.
 * __ Recommendations __**
 * __ Putting Recommendations into Practice __**
 * Back to school meeting & conferences- teacher train the parents how to read to their kids through demonstration. Teach the parents that it is okay to stop in the middle of the text and ask questions; questioning techniques; how to break down words; use the pictures for clues; picture walk; revisit text; use the text as a tool for writing.
 * Literacy Nights- students and their families attend reading event, where teacher reads to all students in different grade levels.
 * Scary Spooky Story Night
 * Reading on the Green

=Chapter 12 – The Socio-cultural Context in Which Children Acquire Literacy= Submitted by Sergio Espinoza and Jessica Saikley Full Narrative Summary Recommendations Putting recommendations into practice The Socio-cultural context in which children acquire literacy raises numerous ethical and pedagogical issues because of the sheer magnitude of the variables/factors involved. The studies presented in chapter 12 do not report any outcome data nor do they include technical data. The studies only include informative descriptive data on socio-cultural factors. The Hypothesis in the research suggest that there is an influence of these socio-cultural factors on student literacy outcomes. In addition, cognitive, affective and social development are affected by socio-cultural backgrounds. Schools must also be aware of the home-school discrepancies, discontinuities and conflicts that arise from different experiences and expectations that language minority children face. The studies were finally trying to find evidence that bridging discontinuities or accommodating socio-cultural differences by teachers and schools can yield improved literacy and school experiences. The factors the research focuses on, that are related to literacy development of language minority students included:
 * Differences in discourse and interaction characteristics (3 studies)
 * Other socio-culturally related factors (10 studies)
 * Parents and families (5 studies)
 * District, state and federal policies (1study)
 * Language status or prestige (6 studies)

Differences in discourse and interaction characteristics

 * 3 studies examined how discourse or interaction patterns vary between home and school settings(Xu, 1999; Gregory, 1998; Au, 1980).
 * All three studies found discontinuities between home and school discourse and interaction patterns (ie. use of only 2nd language at school, teacher-student discourse patterns that decreased the adult-child interactions, less opportunity for student rehearsal of appropriate responses and isolated skill practices).
 * Fewer discrepancies when an explicit attempt to match home discourse and classroom instruction was made.

Other Sociocultural Characteristics of Students and Teachers

 * Studies focused on the role of socialcultural characteristics of students and teachers.
 * 10 studies at elementary and middle school level. In the studies teachers allowed students to self select reading and writing experiences that were relevant to them (social dimension), ability to select language of preference to express themselves, and an attempt to craft curriculum aligned with cultural concepts (cultural dimension).
 * All factors examined were not explicitly instructional, rather the were more intertwined.
 * Opportunities for students and teachers to bring sociocultural and personal elements into the classroom curriculum and instruction.
 * Alienation was experienced by some of the culturally different children when no effort to integrate them was made
 * Numerous studies demonstrated the socio-cultural sensitivity by teachers.
 * The possibility exist for motivation, purpose, and interaction to occur in classrooms even if the native language is not used.
 * Studies do not provide a definitive answer to the issue that classroom socio-cultural accommodations actually help children develop literacy skills.

Recommendations

 * All factors examined were not explicitly instructional, rather they were more intertwined.
 * More opportunities for students and teachers to bring socio-cultural and personal elements into the classroom curriculum and instruction are needed.
 * Alienation was experienced by some of the culturally different children when no effort to integrate them was made.
 * Studies do not provide a definitive answer to the issue that classroom socio-cultural accommodations actually help children develop literacy skills.
 * Numerous studies demonstrated the socio-cultural sensitivity by teachers.
 * The possibility exist for motivation, purpose, and interaction to occur in classrooms even if the native language is not used.
 * Over all, further research is needed.

**Parents and Families**

 * Five studies examined the potential inflience of parents and faniles on literacy. Three of the studies looked at home values, beliefs, and attitudes, as well as language and literacy experiences at home and at school (Huss, 1995; Huss-Keeler, 1997; Volk and De Acosta, 2001); one study examined home values, belief, and attitudes (Gregory, 1994); and one examined language and literacy experiences at home and at school (Mulhern, 1997).
 * In contrast, with the teacher’s beliefs, students were actively engaged in literacy activities in their first and second languages at home **(Volk & De Acosta, 2001; Huss, 1995). **
 *   Literacy was found belonging to a religious community (Gregory, 1994; Huss, 1995; Volk and De Acosta, 2001)
 *   With respect to more pedadogical practices, literacy practices in homes tended to be more “rigid and formal,” such that the meaning of texts were seen as inherent and not open to negotiation (Gregory, 1994).
 *   Literacy activities were social interactions involving at least one other person at home, and in some instances, in school (Volk and De Acosta, 2001).
 *   It appears from the studies that many of these misunderstandings are a result of cultural differences (Huss-Keeler, 1997).
 *  Parents play an important role in influencing literacy development (Mulhern, 1997).
 * Students' own motivation and dedication affect their literacy development (Mulhern 1997).

**Policies at the District, State and Federal Levels**

 * Researches could only locate one study on the influence of state and federal policies on first- and second-language literacy outcomes (Stritikus, 2001).
 * Study indicates that state and federal policies play out differently in classrooms than they were envisioned to do – a host of other factors, “the local school context, the teachers’ political and ideological views, pedagogical reactions to the new policy, and their instructional histories, is likely to play a large role in determining the nature of instruction,” (Stritikus, p. 305)

Language Status and Prestige

 * Three studies focused on environments supportive of the first language (Clark, 1995; Manyak, 2001; Reyes et al., 1993); and two studies focused on negative attitudes about first-language use (Moll & Diaz, 1987; McCollum, 1999). A sixth study examined the role that the school as well as the wide-community play in students' language use (Lotherington et al., 1998).
 * <span style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">When teachers value students’ first language it tends to be accepted by students in the class (Clark, 1995; Manyak, 2001; Reyes et al., 1993).
 * <span style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">When teachers fail to value it, students are less likely to have a positive attitude about it and in schools where peers with the most status speak the second language, students tend to value that language, students are influenced by the status of peers (McCollum, 1999).
 * <span style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Value placed on the first language may not be sufficient to promote first-language literacy development (Lotherington et al., 1998).
 * <span style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><span style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman'; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA">Studies suggest that any potential effects of language prestige cannot be evaluated without consideration of related sociocultural variables, such as, SES, ethnicity, and cultural differences

<span style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">__Recommendations__
<span style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">
 * Findings caution against overgeneralizing individuals' attributes on the basis of nominal group (e.g., cultured or ethnic) membership.
 * <span style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Studies show that it is plausible that the teachers’ beliefs about the value of biliteracy and their use of both languages in the classroom helped create an additive language-learning environment where children felt comfortable communicating in two languages (Clark 1995; Manyak, 2001).
 * <span style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> <span style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">There needs to be a link between school literacy practices and community resources so that students' literacy in their first language will gain equal status and prestige (Mccollum, 1999; Lotherington et al., 1998).
 * <span style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><span style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Studies would benefit from information about the relative frequency of writing in English and Spanish for these students as well as others in the classroom, and how it changed over time to help make the case that conferring status on both languages helps promote biliteracy.

__Putting Recommendations into Practice__
<span style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> <span style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> =<span style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Chapter 11 Sociocultural Influences on the Literacy Attainment of Language-Minority Children and Youth =
 * <span style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">One study (Mulhern, 1997), documents the importance of helping parents understand the kind of instruction children are receiving in school so that misunderstandings do not arise do not arise when children work at home. One way of creating consonance between home and school may be by teachers modeling an activity and involving both parents and students.
 * <span style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Huss-Keeler (1997) document how even one home visit altered teachers’ perceptions of parents’ interest in their children’s learning despite parents’ lack of English proficiency.
 * <span style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Several authors propose that professional development aimed at clarifying these cultural differences and providing a forum for discussion about them should be an important component of a school’s program to ameliorate any misunderstandings between home and school-community.
 * <span style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Interventions chracterized as "bilingual zone of proximal development" as a way of differentiating instruction. For example, in one study (Moll & Diaz, 1987) teachers spoke Spanish as needed to clarify meaning of the English text, and the students were encouraged to express themselves in English or Spanish. By the third lesson, students were able, with bilingual assistance, to answer comprehension questions required of English monolingual readers at grade level.

Submitted by Mei Ling Han The following is a summary of Chapter 11 of the National Literacy Panel is titled //Sociocultural Influences on the Literacy Attainment of Language-Minority Children and Youth.// Its authors, Claude Goldenberg, Robert S Rueda, and Diane August, reviewed research on sociocultural factors that may influence language-minority children’s literacy in first and second language. The authors respond to these six questions: The studies reviewed showed that an undocumented immigration status did not have an impact on the students’ literacy development. In Monzo and Rueda’s (2001) case studies and Goldenberg’s (1987) report, they showed that undocumented status was not an obstacle that had a negative effect on the children’s literacy outcome. Refugee status which is somewhat like immigration also did not seem to have an effect on literacy. The factors that predicted literacy achievement for these refugee students with disrupted school experiences were their time in the United States, age of arrival, and parent education. In Buriel and Cardoza’s study, they examined the effect of generation status, first, second and third generation, on Mexican/Chicano/Mexican American high school students. Their findings did not support generation status having an impact on the students’ literacy achievement in reading and vocabulary. In Au and Mason’s (1981) study of the Kamehameha Early Education Project (KEEP), the authors found when instructional interaction was compatible with the interactions of the students’ native Hawaiian culture, the students showed a higher level of achievement behaviors than with traditional teaching formats. The behaviors they measured were academic engagement, topical and correct responses, number of idea units expressed, and logical inferences. Tharp (1982) examined KEEP’s effects on students’ reading, measuring their actual achievements. He found that the KEEP program did produce a modest effect on student reading achievement. From these two studies on the KEEP program, the authors concluded that the instructional interactions contributed to higher levels of academic engagement, and the program contributed to somewhat higher level of measured student reading achievement. Huerta-Macias and Quintero (1992) reported their study of four Spanish children used code switching, using both English and Spanish in the same sentence orally. Their parents and teachers also used code switching but the children’s writing showed much less code switching than their oral communication even though it is prevalent in their surroundings. This showed that the children’s writing is not reflective of their linguistic environment. These studies along with others suggest that how minority children interact at homes and in their communities may not be what is expected in school. They may need to interact with teachers and other students in ways that are unfamiliar or strange to them. Minimizing the differences between home and school by making the school more comfortable and familiar will close this gap, and make learning and literacy more accessible for these students. In this section, the authors further divided the category into three subsections: Does culturally relevant or meaningful reading material have an impact on literacy outcomes? What is the impact of culturally meaningful material vs. the language used in the text? What about other socioculturally related factors’ impact on literacy? Three findings are found. A conclusion offered is that schools should foster parents’ engagement in their child’s literacy development even though the recommended language the parents should use to engage their child has not been clearly identified by the research reviewed. This section had only two studies; Shannon (1995) and Brunell and Linnakyla (1994) which examined the influence of policies on literacy outcomes. In the United States, English is seen as a prestigious language; while other languages are not. In Shannon’s counterhegemonic study, the teacher explicitly assigned prestige to speaking, writing and reading in Spanish to see if this would overcome the status effect of English over other languages. At the end of the year-long study, there was increased use of Spanish, students believe learning Spanish helped them, and students valuing bilingual education. Weaknesses however were found. They include limited reported data from the children in the class, teaching practices were confounded with the promotion of bilingual education, and limited evidence available regarding the children’s actual literacy growth. The second study of issues of language policy is Brunell and Linnakyla’s (1994) study in Finland where both Finnish and Swedish have equal status. Even though Finnish is the majority group’s language, there are schools offering education in both languages. The Swedish students achieve high literacy competing well with the Finnish majority language students. Both studies looked at how policies and practices can influence student literacy outcomes. But since there are only two studies, there is not enough data to draw any firm conclusions. In this section, the authors reviewed the impact of language status for language-minority students’ literacy attainment. In the United States, Spanish is has a lower status than English. Findings of literacy achievements differences between Spanish- and English-speaking students were substantial compared to those of Brunell and Linnakyla’s study of Finnish and Swedish students. But how Brunell and Linnakyla arrived at the 3-4% difference cited between Swedish and Finnish students is not clearly shown. One other study was examined, Lam’s (2000) case study of a teenage Chinese immigrant who had difficulties acquiring writing and speaking in conventional English. His ESOL classes left him feeling alienated and marginalized. He found his voice through the internet and made great strides in improving his written English, and plans to improve his oral English through a public speaking class. However, the student’s improvements could not be corroborated by another source. In summary, language status might influence the literacy achievement. Being a low-status language speaker might have negative effects on motivation and learning which lowers literacy achievements. More research is needed before a firm conclusion can be drawn. 1. One of the conclusions drawn from this chapter is parents have an impact in their child’s literacy development. Teachers, school administrators, and school districts can take the initiative to show parents how they can engage their child in at home literacy practices. 2. Students with inadequate English proficiency will face greater difficulties with the content of the written material. The student needs to be exposed to a wide variety of written materials such as: fiction and nonfiction, textbooks, newspapers, magazines, and correspondences. 1. School districts can organize a series of parent workshops in which they can demonstrate how they can interact with their child through literacy. They can be coached how to ask questions which will lead their child to a discussion, ask the child for predictions, explain words in the text, or talk about feeling evoked by the text. Older siblings can be encouraged to read to their younger brothers and sisters. Teachers can invite parents to the class to read to their child or have their child read to them. Teachers can have books on tape/CD for children to check out for home use. They can listen to the tape/CD together as a family activity. After reading a story, teachers can have the children create their own book with an alternate ending, and then share it in class and at home. 2. Having a variety of printed material available is beneficial to all children but especially to children who are trying to improve their English proficiency. Many times, reading from textbooks is viewed as work. Giving students access to other reading materials may take away the “work” mentality and give reading a more enjoyable slant. Having age appropriate magazines such as National Geographic Kids may make reading more fun for elementary students. The children are exposed to a different genre and style of writing; and their understanding is supported by pictures, photos, and diagrams. The teacher can build up a collection for the class, and then allow the children to check them out for home use. The teacher can also ask the students if they go to the local library. If the parents are not knowledgeable about how the library system works, teachers or parent workshops can help bridge the gap. Informing the parents about the library can open up a great reading resource for their children.
 * What is the influence of //immigration// (generation status and immigration circumstances)? **
 * What is the influence of differences in //discourse and interaction characteristics// between children’s homes and classrooms? **
 * What is the influence of //other sociocultural characteristics// of students and teachers? **
 * The term cultural content is not defined.
 * As a whole, there is modest support showing that culturally relevant materials promote literacy and reading comprehension.
 * Culturally unfamiliar text can interfere with comprehension and literacy growth.
 * Familiarity of the text content has been known to increase understanding.
 * But cultural familiarity and its effects on literacy is still not clear.
 * Text language has a greater impact on students’ performance than cultural familiarity, but both can influence students’ reading comprehension.
 * Studies in this area seem to share no common ground in collecting and interpreting data on how other sociocultural factors affect language minority students’ learning.
 * Chilora’s and Harris’ Chiyao/Chichewa study examined the relationship between students’ and teachers’ home language with reading and comprehension.
 * Their findings: Students and teachers who speak the same first language seem to connect in a positive way but students’ English reading accuracy improved in 1 out of 3 grades studied.
 * Reyes examined 10 6th grade Latino students on two writing activities which differ in //meaningfulness// and //cultural relevance// using dialogue journals and literature logs.
 * Reyes’ findings: Dialogue journals prompted a longer response because students are able to select their topic (more relevant to themselves) and were more successful in communicating their ideas. But the students’ mechanical writing skills did not appear to improve.
 * Garcia-Vazquez’s study of acculturation and achievement failed to link greater acculturation would lead to higher literacy levels.
 * Differences were found in Kennedy and Park’s study with Asians Americans spending twice as much time doing homework than Mexican American. They suggest this difference may be due to cultural and SES differences.
 * Aarts and Verhoeven’s study of Turkish speakers: home stimulation, parents’ motivation, and children’s self-esteem had a bigger impact than sociocultural orientation to literacy.
 * What is the influence of //parents and families//? **
 * 1) Language minority parents are willing to help (and have the ability) their children succeed academically. Often schools underestimate the value of these parents’ contribution and do not take advantage of the ready resource.
 * 2) More home literacy experiences are generally associated with better literacy outcomes, but findings are not consistent.
 * 3) Home experiences in first and second language are positively correlated to success in first and second language respectively. But home experiences in first and second language were negatively correlated, although weakly, to success in the other language.
 * What is the influence of policies at the //district, state and federal levels//? **
 * What is the influence of //language status or prestige//? **
 * Recommendations **
 * Putting Recommendations into Practice **