Connecting with Families and the Community
From From Birth For Life
In Canada’s multicultural mosaic the exact nature of a child’s home literacy experiences varies depending on their economic, cultural, and linguistic background. As a result, each child enters the child care or school setting with a unique framework. To successfully foster the language and literacy development of all children, practitioners need to understand and embrace the cultures and characteristics of their community. By partnering with parents and the community, practitioners can draw on the myriad of daily learning experiences that can foster language and literacy development, such as such as talking with parents, reading street signs, playing family games, singing songs and watching siblings do homework. These experiences contribute to many aspects of language and literacy development, including learning the relationship between letters and sounds, the orientation of words on a page, and the structure of oral narratives (Nutbrown, Hannon, & Morgan, 2005). The previous sections have primarily focused on the roles of ELCC centres and practitioners. The following section focuses on how individual family and community factors impact language and literacy development and how ELCC practitioners can help families engage in personally meaningful language and literacy practices.
Family
Some parents or caregivers may find it challenging to support emerging literacy at home. They may not be familiar with the Anglo-European literacy practices that reflect the cultural background underlying the majority of early literacy research and that are generally the norm in ELCC settings. Other parents may have limited literacy skills because they left school early, or due to a learning disability. Finally, some parents may simply not have the resources (e.g., financial, knowledge, etc.) to devote to fostering literacy in the home. Children whose parents have limited education or economic resources are generally exposed to less vocabulary on a day-today basis than their more affluent peers (Hart & Risley, 1992). Children affected by poverty may also take part in fewer joint activities with their parents and may be exposed to simpler texts than their peers (Baker & Scher, 2002; Hart & Risely, 1992). However, economic and social circumstances do not determine children’s language and literacy outcomes. Practitioners can reassure parents that they can support their children’s language and literacy development, regardless of the parent’s reading ability or access to resources.
There are many different family literacy programmes available across the country, including Books for Babies programs, which are available in some provinces and can be found at the following websites:
http://www.nald.ca/booksforbabies
http://www.famlit.ca/
http://www.bcpl.gov.bc.ca/books4babies
and Parents as Literacy Supports(PALS) http://www.2010legaciesnow.com/pals/
Parents’ attitudes towards reading and writing and their views about education play a role in children’s literacy development (Purcell-Gates, 2000; Senechal & LeFevre, 2002). Children whose parents who are motivated and interested in literacy activities are more enthusiastic about literacy and generally achieve higher reading scores (Cook, 1980; Baker & Scher, 2002; Weigel, Martin, & Bennett 2006). Some ways that parents demonstrate an interest in literacy includes telling stories, going for family trips to the library or sharing books with other families, sending and receiving emails, reading for work or pleasure, and offer bought or homemade books as gifts. ELCC practitioners can support families by recognizing and highlighting family literacy practices.
The term family literacy has two meanings: (a) literacy practices within families and (b) literacy programmes involving families (Nutbrown et al, 2005). Children’s literacy practices within the home can include watching siblings do homework, playing with letter magnets, singing songs, helping send cards or emails, watching educational television and shared reading. Family literacy practices may draw on home languages (e.g., Urdu, Spanish or Mandarin) or on cultural practices (e.g., drumming circles for Aboriginal children). Each activity influences children’s language and literacy development, and fosters a unique set of language skills. For example, children learn about the alphabet and print from reading alphabet books, parental coaching in writing letters, and other formal print activities; whereas vocabulary knowledge and oral comprehension can be fostered through shared storybook reading and other informal print activities (Sénéchal & LeFevre, 2002).
Siblings may act as important language models for each other (Brody, 1998; Gregory, 2001; Volk, 1999). Older siblings can act as a bridge between the school and home literacy practice (Williams & Gregory, 2001). During pretend play, older siblings may model school-related behaviours and activities, thereby providing younger siblings with a glimpse of what to expect in school (Gregory, 2001). They may also scaffold their younger siblings counting, writing, reading and oral language ability through games and pretend play. In turn, younger siblings provide their older siblings with opportunities to practice school-related behaviours and expressive language skills in a relaxed setting (Gregory, 2001). The second definition of family literacy refers to programmes involving families that support parents, caregivers and children in achieving literacy goals. Family literacy programmes take many forms, from structured classes provided over weeks or years to informal community resource centres. They often have the following features: (1) they highlight the ways literacy is used at home, at ELCC centres, and in the wider world; (2) they enhance the language and literacy knowledge of family members; and (3) they highlight the relationship between activities in the home and in other settings (Phillips and Sample, 2005). These programmes may differ dramatically from location to location and can focus on improving parent’s literacy, children’s literacy, or both. They can take place in homes, community centres, ELCC centres or schools, and the workers may be early childhood educators, adult educators, nurses, librarians, teachers or volunteers. Parents may attend alone, they may attend with their children and other family members, or they may bring their children but take part in separate activities. In general, the programmes positively impact emergent literacy skills, however, it remains unclear how large an impact the programmes make, and which programme characteristics are crucial for making that impact (Nutbrown et al., 2005). There are also concerns that some family literacy programmes are not designed to incorporate or acknowledge literacy practices that occur in the home and community (Auerbach, 1989; Cairney, 2002), choosing instead to focus on school literacy. These programmes may even view the parenting techniques of people from non-dominant cultures or classes as incorrect, inferior and in need of fixing (Auerbach, 1989).
Multilingualism
Many children in Canada grow up in multilingual home and community environments, which influence their language and literacy development. Multilingualism refers to children who speak, understand, or read in two or more languages. Some bilingual children have a well developed home language and become bilingual as they learn a second language (e.g., English or French). For example, a Chinese- Canadian child in Calgary may be exposed to one language in their home and community (e.g., Cantonese), and a new language in school (e.g., English). Other children live in homes and communities that are bilingual and they develop both languages simultaneously. For example, a child in Montreal may have similar language and literacy experiences in English and French in their home, school and community.
Children learning more than one language have a similar rate of language development as children learning only one language (Pearson & Fernández, 1994). They begin by cooing as infants and over time they learn to use words, phrases and sentences. Children learn more words in the language they hear most often and fewer words in the language they hear less often (Pearson, Fernández, Lewedeg, & Oller, 1997). With more exposure they will learn more and more vocabulary and grammar in the new language. Throughout the preschool years, multilingual children may use the vocabulary and grammar from both their languages during a single conversation. This behaviour is called code-mixing (Nicoladis & Genesee, 1997). For example, a child may combine English and French words in single sentence, such as “doggy parti” rather than “doggy gone” or “chien parti.” Or, the child may respond in English when the rest of the conversation was in French. Code-mixing is a very typical behaviour for bilinguals, and there are large differences in the amount of code-mixing individual children use (Nicoladis & Genesee, 1997). As children grow older and develop a more conscious awareness of language they may begin code-switching. Codeswitching also involves using two or more languages in conversation, but it is done intentionally (Nicoladis & Genesee, 1997).
As with monolinguals, the language knowledge of multilinguals is influenced by language experience. A child who speaks English primarily in school and Cantonese at home will learn more school-related vocabulary in English (e.g., recess, classmate, assignment), and more home-related vocabulary in Cantonese (e.g., gaa mou [chores], zam tau [pillow], juk gong[bathtub]) ( Pearson & Fernández, 1994). For children who speak a minority language (i.e., not English or French) the social context may negatively influence their minority language development. There is a phenomenon called “subtractive bilingualism” which occurs when children lose or have diminished ability in their first language after they begin acquiring the majority language (Fillmore, 1991). Subtractive bilingualism may result from a combination of reduction in language experience (e.g., the child stops speaking the home language with family and friends), lack of community support or opportunity to practice, as well as negative perceptions of home culture and language (Fillmore, 1991). Subtractive bilingualism is a developmental concern because maintaining home language skills has a positive impact on social, emotional and education outcomes later in the child’s life (Kohnert, Yim, Nett, Kan, & Duran, 2005). Given the plethora of languages spoken across Canada it is unrealistic to expect that ELCC practitioners will be able to support the development of the home language of all the children in their care. However, practitioners can inform parents about the importance of maintaining the home language, and underscore the potential value of providing home language enrichment (Koh28 nert et al., 2005).
There are also some Canadian children who speak and hear non-standard English dialects in their homes and communities. Two examples of nonstandard English dialects found in Canada are Aboriginal English and Newfoundland English (Ball et al., 2006). The term non-standard is important because it implies that dialects may differ, but that they are all equally valid languages. The standard English dialect familiar to most Canadians from the national media is just one of many forms of the English language. However, the public perception in Canada is that the standard Canadian English dialect (e.g., CBC English) is better in some way than other dialects as it has been given prestige through support from the government, media and schools. Children who speak Standard English as a second dialect are learning a new form of their language. This is not always acknowledged, which can be harmful to children. Sometimes children who speak Standard English as a second dialect develop spoken and written language fluency problems (Ball et al., 2006). They are also at risk of being misdiagnosed with language or learning disabilities (Ball et al., 2006). When children acquire a second or third language, often the objective is that of becoming fluent in a standard dialect. Difficulties arise when children are confronted with non standard dialects. For instance, English native speaking children in French immersion may learn France’s French but be at a loss with French Canadian dialect. A Chinese child raised in Newfoundland may find it difficult to speak to his or her classmates when his or her family moves to Toronto.
ELCC practitioners and parents can support both standard and non-standard English language learning. For example, in Australia, where members of the Aboriginal community speak a non-Standard English dialect, some school systems use bi-dialectical (e.g., two dialects) teaching strategies in the primary and elementary years. Bi-dialectical education differs from English as a Second Language education, because it focuses on the similarities and differences between standard and non-standard English, rather than on vocabulary. In bi-dialectical education children are encouraged to think about when and how to switch between the two dialects (Berry & Hudson, 1997). The effectiveness of these programmes has not been clearly established. However, ELCC practitioners may consider drawing on home language skills as part of building a foundation for language and literacy.
Aboriginal children
Aboriginal children grow up with a unique language and literacy experience, and understanding the social and historical context in which they grow up is a foundation for supporting learning. Canada’s Anglo-European majority has repeatedly tried to assimilate Aboriginal people into the majority culture.
In this resource kit the term 'Aboriginal' is used to describe individuals who self-identify as First Nations, Métis or Inuit.
Assimilation often occurred through the education system, most notably, through the residential school programme. In addition, many Aboriginal communities are struggling to maintain their language and their cultural histories. It is estimated that that there are fifty Aboriginal languages spoken in Canada (Norris, 1998). Nearly ten other Aboriginal languages have been lost over the past century and, only three languages — Algonquian, Inuktitut, – and Athapaskan – are currently spoken by enough people to be considered completely safe from extinction (Norris, 1998). Therefore, fostering home language development is critical for the survival of the languages and the cultures.
Oral language plays a key role in Aboriginal culture. Storytelling and ceremonies are traditional methods for communicating knowledge and history (Greenwood, 2005). Oral language continues to be a major characteristic of communication in day-to-day life (e.g., personal visits, word-of-mouth, talking on the phone) (Dunn, 2001). These strong oral traditions support language development, and tight-knit communities can join together to support children’s growth (Dunn, 2001). However, many Aboriginal children are also impacted by poverty, health issues, and restricted access to services, which weakens language and literacy development (Dunn, 2001). If practitioners become aware of the factors that jointly influence Aboriginal children’s language growth and draw on the strengths of the community, they can successfully foster language and literacy skills. Another unique characteristic of Aboriginal cultures and languages is they use different methods of discourse (or way of communicating), which can influence language and literacy development (Ball et al., 2006; Dunn, 2001). There is an oral tradition and stories passed down from generation-to-generation may be used to indirectly convey information, rather than explicitly state answers. For example, an Elder who is asked, “What do you think Aboriginal students and educators ought to know about Aboriginal education?” may not respond with a straight answer (Hare, 2005). Instead he may tell a series of stories that demonstrate the principles of Aboriginal education and the way Aboriginal children should learn, such as through “good talking” and “good walking” (Hare, 2005).
At home, Aboriginal children may be encouraged to be good listeners. This differs from ELCC and school settings where children are often encouraged to talk and respond to questions. Answering questions directly, particularly in larger groups, may be diffi cult for Aboriginal children because they may not use that form of discourse at home (Ball et al., 2006; Epstein & Xu, 2003). Due to cultural misunderstandings, Aboriginal children are sometimes inappropriately referred for formal diagnostic assessments (Ball et al., 2006).
ELCC practitioners can engage in dialogue with parents, community members and elders to learn more about Aboriginal culture and their community practices. Visiting with parents and inviting community members into the ELCC program can help build trust (Timmons, 2006). The parents and grandparents of today’s preschoolers and school-age children may have been impacted by the residential school programmes. As a result, they may have a reasonable distrust of ELCC centres and schools. Elders’ knowledge about Aboriginal culture, language and history is a resource in developing ELCC centre material and in programme planning (Battiste, 2002). In return, ELCC practitioners can share information about the relationship between language and literacy, or about observations of the child in the ELCC centre. By exchanging this information, parents, caregivers, and ELCC practitioners can work proactively together to support language and literacy growth and development.
