Running Head: HOME TO SCHOOL CONNECTIONS

Home to School Connections:

Successful Practices to Bridge the Gap

Kate Bolibaugh

The College of Saint Rose

Introduction:

Classrooms in America are changing; they are vastly different from what they were

just a mere twenty years ago, due in part to an influx of immigrants and refugees. Many

families come to the United States to seek a healthier, safer and prosperous life for their

children, most by choice but some to seek just what the name implies; political or religious

refuge. In most cases, the parents of these children value education and have high

aspirations for their children academically. According to data provided by Kids Count

under the Annie E. Casey foundation; if immigration continues in the same patterns, by the

year 2015, thirty percent of the student population in our nation’s schools will be primarily

immigrants and refugees (Kids Count, 2007). Because of the huge changes in the

demographic profile of schools, there has been a flood of English Language Learners

(ELLs). ELLs – children whose native language is not English do not only have differing

languages but different cultures and socioeconomic backgrounds. A common denominator

these children share is the need to improve their English communication skills, to include,

speaking, reading and writing.

It is always the goal of educators to engage parents and create a viable partnership

between school and home for all students; including immigrant/refugee and non-

immigrant/refugee students. Collaborative relationships between parents and schools

with specific activities to encourage and promote that familial and school collaboration

need to be fostered. The Head Start Program is a prime example of a family literacy

program. Head Start began as a way to develop children's social ability through a program

that included; health, nutrition, education, social services, and a parent involvement
HOME TO SCHOOL CONNECTIONS 2

component (Head Start, 2011). In a study conducted on the effects of early Head Start,

before children enter kindergarten, Love (2010) found that combining home and center-

based services, with more emphasis on home-centered literacy activities, is more beneficial

for children’s literacy development and the overall home environment. It was discovered

too, that the nature of the parent and child interaction at home, is more crucial than how

long or how intensive their participation. The main conclusion is if programs begin early

and continue until children enter kindergarten, and maintain high quality and intensity of

services in centers, and at home, they have the best chance of making real differences in the

lives of children and families (Love, 2010).

When parents of ELLs attempt to become more involved and active participants in

their child’s schooling, they sometimes face obstacles. These obstacles include a parent’s

tentativeness to become involved in their child’s school because of a lack of understanding

of the nature of schooling in the United States and expectations for their involvement.

Another obstacle is due to culture and language diversity. Parents may experience

discomfort participating in school-related activities with American-born teachers and

parents, particularly when they are not fluent in English. Sometimes teachers mistake this

apprehension for disinterest (Dyson, 2001).

Children’s families are their first teachers and have a crucial influence on their

development. Researcher Panferov (2010) has found a multitude of benefits from family

engagement in children’s education and shows that timing is important. Family

engagement has a more positive impact if it begins early in a child’s educational journey.

She also believes that family engagement is even more crucial for children who are
HOME TO SCHOOL CONNECTIONS 3

considered ELLs. Educational expectations in the United States might be different than

what families’ have experienced, and that communication in and of itself might be difficult

because of the language barriers. Educational programs need to be designed to include and

serve both children and families – most especially for those whose native language is not

English. It is vital to have parents involved with their child’s educational experience,

connecting their school community to their home environment. This research summary

will take a look at some successful practices that have engaged families in their child’s

learning, both in and out of the classroom that aid in literacy achievement. These findings

can be implemented and modified effectively in the Refugee & Immigrant Support Services

of Emmaus (RISSE) facility to aid in bridging the gap between school and home for children

and families.

Research Review:

There is a scientifically substantiated link between children's early home literacy

experience and their later intellectual growth—a link that exists regardless of a child's race

or cultural background. Researchers; Wagner, Torgenson, Rashotte, Hecht, Baker and

Burgess (1997) found that there are staggering contrasts in the amount of interaction

between parents and children. These differences in the amount of early family literacy

experience translate into striking disparities in the children's later vocabulary growth rate,

vocabulary use, and IQ test scores. As children move through the early elementary grades,

they begin to deviate in their reading experience and skill with a large difference between

good and poor readers. This disparity may partly reflect differences in reading experience

and practice at home (Wagner, et al, 1997).

Engaging parents as advocates for school success in the home is particularly

important for ELLs. Tapping into the experiences of ELL parents in their own lives about

schooling and literacy is a resource educators can use to increase parental involvement.

Panferov (2010) found that there needs to be a partnership between parents, teachers and

students to promote and motivate students to succeed and parents need to have the ability

to advocate for their children and their literacy development. ELL parents offer insight into

ways to develop this advocacy that is culturally relevant to each family’s own learning

experiences (Panferov 2010).

Strategies proven successful and helpful for these parents were regular written and

spoken communications – most especially in the parent’s first language. Messages included

both positive information about their student and the negative – they weren’t centered on

the negative aspect - the goal being an open line of communication between parents and

schools. Providing resources in multiple languages is critical, as is showing the value of all

languages, and the continued use and respect of the language. As teachers, educators, and

school administrators understand the stories of ELL students and their parents it will

increase parental involvement and enrich the educational experience for all (Panferov,

2010).

In 1996, a federally supported family literacy program in an urban community in

Central Texas, made an attempt to bridge the gap between families and a child’s education.

The program worked collaboratively with a large university as well as an independent

school district. Parents and children involved in this action research study all displayed

limited English proficiency. Several objectives included were; introducing community

literacy programs, Graduate Equivalency Diploma (GED) programs, various adult learning

activities to create a second chance for parents to learn, improve the home literacy

environment and create a positive influence on children’s learning (Liu, 1996).

The Center for Alternative Programs, which was a division of the school district,

took on the responsibility of training adults in reading and writing English and most

parents took advantage of the GED assistance program. They offered their programs in the

evening because most participants worked during the day and because of the collaboration

with the university, were able to offer childcare for parents as that was issue. The program

ran two evenings a week for three hours each night. Parents brought both their school-

aged and preschool-age children who were accompanied by undergraduate and graduate

tutors, and parents were with their own instructors (Liu, 1996).

Each night, they followed a specific schedule the consisted of the following activities:

6:00-6:30 – Reading and writing assessments

6:30-7:00 – Homework and reading activities

7:30-8:00 – Interaction among parents, children, tutors and coordinators

8:00-9:00 – Lesson plans

Liu discussed the roles of each of the participants and the benefit they received as

being part of the program. Most parents were interested in obtaining GED certificates.

Parents preparing for the GED exam worked in their own classroom with a staff member

from the Center for Alternative Programs while their children were in the care of

undergraduate tutors. The children received academic support in the form of tutoring and
HOME TO SCHOOL CONNECTIONS 6

homework help also teaching them reading and writing skills. Parents were informed of

their children’s learning through interaction with tutors, and the program coordinator

during a scheduled time each night. This communication allowed the parents to better

understand the education process and gradually, they were able to understand their role as

involved parents. The most crucial thing parents learned was how to interact with their

child’s teacher (Lui, 1996).

Preschool children were given ample time to verbally interact with tutors and

become exposed to children's books, manipulatives, and games. Children participated in

read alouds, instructed on phonemic awareness and taught how to write their own names.

They were also instructed to draw their own pictures and talk about them and encouraged

to share the activities with parents during the interaction period. For school-age children,

finishing homework was their priority as participants. Through homework help and

administering assessments, tutors were able to diagnose children's strengths and

weaknesses in the literacy and content areas and subsequently, literacy learning activities

were developed for each student based on the first-hand information received. The

children selected books from the center’s library and they were required to read the books

to their parents and siblings at home so that a stronger literacy bond would be established

in the family (Liu, 1996).

A writing activity consisting of photo story writing was quite successful at the

center. Families were loaned a Polaroid camera to take home along with film and were

asked to take photographs (ten photos) of family members, friends and pets doing what

they typically do on any given day. Families were given freedom to choose whatever
HOME TO SCHOOL CONNECTIONS 7

situation they were familiar with and would like to include in their photos. Six out of ten

pictures were selected by both students and tutors in order to write stories. Students then

discussed each photo with their tutors and were asked, "What would you like to say about

this picture?" or, "What is going on here?" or, "Can you tell me something interesting about

this?" From the conversation, students were expected to verbalize, generate, organize, and

finally write ideas. This activity provided an opportunity to elicit parent involvement.

Engagement in these activities enabled them to know about their children's literacy

achievements in a consistent manner. For parents who had little literacy education, this

activity was also beneficial (Liu, 1996).

The family literacy program was designed to actively involve both ELL children

and their parents in literacy attainment. This program highlighted the two-way responsive

learning/teaching interaction between families and educators by actively involving all the

parties. The parents and children taught the tutors many valuable lessons about the

complexity of the learning process, human relations, and family involvement. The tutors’

understanding of the function of family literacy will result in a future commitment to

involve families for the purpose of streamlining the learning process of children and

families (Liu, 1996).

Harper, Platt, and Pelletier (2001) of the Department of Human Development and

Applied Psychology, at the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, University of Toronto,

evaluated the effects of a Family Literacy program on the early English reading

development of speakers of English as a first language (EL1s) and EELLs. They discovered

ELL children who participated in the program along with their parents exhibited significant
HOME TO SCHOOL CONNECTIONS 8

gains in literacy when compared to EL1 students who did not participate with their

families. Specifically, ELL students demonstrated significantly greater gains in their ability

to infer meaning from print compared to EL1 students who did not receive the

intervention. In addition, ELL children who participated in the program showed

significantly larger gains in their knowledge of the alphabet compared to EL1 students

(Harper, et al, 2001, pp 1002-1003).

Harper et al, enlisted parents and students from several different schools hosting a

Family Literacy program during the school’s lunchtime. Families were assigned at random

and given a Fall or Spring placement and a third group was assigned a no-program control

group because parents were working or had other scheduling conflicts – this enabled all

families who were interested in participation to do so. Each section of research was nine

weeks in duration. Both parents were invited to participate in the program with their

child, however in most cases only the mother participated and they met once a week for

ninety minutes during the school’s scheduled lunch period (Harper et al, 2011, pp 996-

997).

Each session focused on a specific topic which was related to early language and

literacy. A session typically started with a greeting for everyone and parents and children

were able to return books they had previously borrowed or they might play quiet games

together. Participants came together on the carpet for a read aloud or song and a story led

by one of the facilitators that included a discussion of some key features of the story and

children’s questions regarding the story. Families then broke-out into sessions in which

children engaged in literacy activities that concentrated on the topic for that week with a
HOME TO SCHOOL CONNECTIONS 9

facilitator. In another room, parents discussed ways to support their children’s literacy

development related to the topic for that week with the other facilitator. Each session

ended with children sharing their activity with their parents and a goodbye song for

families. These are some of the topics that were taught and discussed during the nine

weeks:

Session 1: Choosing Books for Young Children

Session 2: Talk to Your Child

Session 3: Get It Write.

Session 4: Reading All Around Us.

Session 5: Read to Me and Help Me Become a Reader.

Session 6: Narrative and Storytelling.

Session 7: Thinking About Words and Sounds

Session 8: Letter Names and Sounds..

Session 9: Fun With Math and Celebration.

According to pre and post- test analysis, ELL students made significantly larger

gains than EL1 students, specifically in the areas of; conventions and meaning. For the sake

of this summary, the researcher will only discuss the specifics of three topics:

In Session 4, Reading All Around Us, parents were taught strategies to encourage

their child’s understanding of print in their community and to help children make the

connection between signs, labels, logos, and words. Children made a sign for their home

and talked about the meanings of different community signs.

Session 5 was titled; Read to Me and Help Me Become a Reader, with emphasis on

making books a part of everyday life and reading for pleasure being encouraged.

Facilitators had parents read to their children in their native language and/or in English to

keep reading alive in their home. Simultaneously, parents learned about the different

genres of books and what they enjoy with their children.

In Session 6, Narrative and Storytelling, parents learned how to effectively read a

story to their child by asking questions and engaging them in discussion throughout the

reading and at the end of the story. Families learned how much more exciting and

engaging a story can be when expression is added to the read-aloud (Harper et al, 2011, pp

997-1001).

This study provides the evidence necessary to support the need for a family literacy

program for families of ELLs. The research displays the disparity between those learning

English as an additional language compared to children who are native English speakers

(Harper, et al., 2011, pp 1005-1006).

Researchers; Koskinen, Blum, Bisson, Phillips, Creamer and Baker (1997), looked at

the impact on reading motivation, comprehension and fluency through use of book-rich

classrooms and home re-reading, both with and without audio-books. This quasi-

experimental study looked at two variables – literacy conditions and English-language

ability, using three experimental and one control group. Participants consisted of 162 first-

graders who spoke English as a second language as well as native English-speaking

students. The conditions encompassed:

(1) Small-group shared reading in a book-rich environment at school and re-

reading of books with audiotapes at home.

(2) Small-group shared reading in a book-rich environment in school and rereading

of books (without audiotapes) at home

(3) Small-group shared reading in a book-rich environment in school

(4) Unmodified reading instruction in school (control).

The findings concluded enhanced comprehension and fluency for those students in

book-rich classrooms with the added component of home based re-reading and the audio-

books. In addition, home-based re-reading with audio-tapes increased students' reading

motivation and stimulated familial involvement Koskinen et al, 1997).

Teachers used multi-level books with small group shared reading, and added

recordings of the books. Each day, students chose a book and audiotape to take home for

repeated reading. This program lasted for seven months. Teachers observed the audio

models at home were an interesting and worthwhile reading activity for both ELLs and

native English speakers. Teachers noted that students who brought audio-books home

were generally more apt to choose to read a book in their fee time and often wanted to

listen to books repeatedly. Families noted that the student benefited from the program

along with the family from listening and learning to speak English. Family members

became more aware of their child’s reading as well as their own (Koskinen et al, 1999).
HOME TO SCHOOL CONNECTIONS 12

Implications for Instruction:

Liu’s research, discussed a program in which, ELL parents attended GED

preparation classes while children attended tutoring sessions. Their three hour schedule

was broken down into specific tasks for children that consisted of; Reading and writing

tasks, homework and reading activities, interaction with parents, children, tutors and

lesson plans while parents attend GED preparation classes (Liu, 1996). This same model

could easily be used in the RISSE center by changing the GED preparation classes to English

for Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL) instruction for parents during the after school

program while children are with their tutors.

By providing that half hour of scheduled interaction time between parents, children,

tutors and coordinators, parents can be kept abreast about their child’s learning and their

child’s literacy achievements in a consistent manner. It can provide an opportunity for

parents to better understand their child’s educational process as well as the protocol

regarding just how parents are expected to interact with educators in the United States. It

affords parents the opportunity to express their desire to be informed and involved

without fear of language barriers or ignorance as to educational procedure.

A specific activity that would work extremely well at the RISSE Center that Liu

describes was the implementation of the photo story writing project. She notes the use of

Polaroid Instant Cameras which would not be practical for the RISSE center given the

advances in technology since 1996, but can easily be modified. Most families have

cellphones that have camera capabilities that could be used in lieu of the cameras. In the

case of a particular family not having cellphone access or camera capabilities, the center
HOME TO SCHOOL CONNECTIONS 13

could provide inexpensive digital cameras or disposable cameras for loan. Children and

their parents can take the cameras home and take photographs of their daily lives; the

people in their families, their pets, toys they play with or tools they use every day.

With computer access at the center, along with a printer, students can select

photographs to be used to tell their family story. During their tutoring sessions, students

can create books by tutors asking questions such as; "What would you like to say about this

picture?" or, "What is going on here?" or, "Can you tell me something interesting about

this?" Depending on student responses, students can generate, organize, and verbalize

ideas to put on paper. These books can be co-created with parents and shared during the

interaction section of the afternoon. They could be presented at an Open House; there are

multitudes of ways to use these books and elicit the help of parents. Through discussing,

describing, writing, and reading these picture stories, parents can acquire writing skills and

literacy along with their children, empowering both the student and parent (Liu, 1996).

In the research publication by Harper et al, their focus was on a program that took

place over a nine week period during the students’ lunchtime. The research showed that

ELL students had tremendous strides in their literacy development when their parents and

or family members actively participated in this program with them. Since the RISSE center

is primarily an after school program and a summer program, it would need to be adapted

to fit into one (or both) of those parameters but could easily be done and would not have to

be restricted to only nine weeks.

The ninety minutes sessions could take place, during the afterschool program. Just

as with the research model, parents and children would meet together with facilitators for
HOME TO SCHOOL CONNECTIONS 14

a welcome period during which parents can select and return books that are jointly read

with students at home. All participants would then meet on the floor to share a read aloud

– that could be led by a facilitator but could eventually be modified to allow for parents as

readers too. Parents and children would then go to their individual breakout sessions

where the children could be engaged in literacy related activities that focus on the week’s

topic with tutors. Parents would be in an adjacent room discussing ideas and strategies to

help and support their child’s literacy development related to the week’s topic as well.

Ideas for topics of discussion and activity include:

1. Choosing Books for young children - parents learn about the variety of books that

are accessible to their children and come to understand that certain books teach

skills. Parents are taught how to select books that are appropriate for their child’s

age and interests. Children will also self-create their own picture and word books.

2. Talk to Your Child - parents are taught that talking with their children increases

their child’s vocabulary and aid in their language development. They are given the

tools to help children in building conversation and language into everyday

experiences. Children are engaged in nursery rhymes and songs to extend language

experiences, make an “I Spy” telescope, and play the guessing game that helps build

vocabulary and letter recognition. This activity can easily be carried over to home.

3. Get it Write - Tutors outline the stages of early writing and show parents how

pictures and scribbles turn into lines and letters. Parents will learn how they can

help their children strengthen their fine motor skills needed to write letters.
HOME TO SCHOOL CONNECTIONS 15

4. Reading All Around Us – a great way in which to introduce labeling and signs to

parents and for them to encourage their child’s understanding of print in their

community and make the connection between the signs and logos to meaning.

Children can make a sign for their home and discuss the meanings of different signs.

5. Read to Me and Help Me Become a Reader – emphasizes the importance of books

and everyday reading for pleasure. Tutors/Teachers encourage parents to read to

their children in both their native language and English to keep reading alive in their

home.

6. Narrative and Storytelling - learn how to read a story effectively to children by

asking questions and engaging in discussion throughout the reading process as well

as at the end of the story. All participants learn how much more exciting a story can

be when expression is added to the read aloud.

7. Thinking About Words and Sounds - tutors/teachers talk about how a child’s

interest in reading can be maintained by making language fun and finding new

words and sounds with games and activities. Parents learn to make silly sounds,

rhymes and songs to teach children. Children learn to take turns, communicate and

read instructions by making a memory game, parents talk about how these skills

relate to early reading.

8. Letter Names and Sounds. - learn how crucial it is to teach children the names of the

letters of the alphabet, in addition to the sounds letters make to reinforce the

relationship between the two. Games and stories are shared that highlight letters

and names.
HOME TO SCHOOL CONNECTIONS 16

9. Fun With Math - learn that math is also an important factor of their child’s early

literacy development and tutors/teachers give parents ways in which math can be

related to everyday tasks at home or in the community. An example– asking a child

to count items put into the grocery cart or how long it takes to get from one place to

the next. Children are taught about patterns by making their own patterned

butterfly (Harper et al, 2011).

This kind of activity would afford parents the opportunity to truly take ownership of

their child’s literacy development. It is an empowering process and beneficial for all the

participants. Parents are learning right alongside children, children are proud of their

accomplishments and parents can see it all unfolding in front of them and know that

they have been a part of it.

Integrated into the suggestions from Harper, could be Koskinen et al’s practice of

shared reading and the use of audio-books at both home and center. Volunteers at the

RISSE center could create audio recordings (digitally…as tape recordings are somewhat

outdated) of books to be “checked-out” by families. They can make two recordings of each

story, one slowly and the second at a more fluent pace. Each week, families check out

books and return them when they come for their weekly ESOL and tutoring programs.

Conclusion:

I am embarrassed to say that I have had a tendency to fall into the trap of believing

that because the parents of ELL students were not actively involved in their child’s

education in the classroom at school, they were disinterested in their education and even in

some cases, disinterested in the child’s overall well-being. I have come to realize is that
HOME TO SCHOOL CONNECTIONS 17

because of cultural differences, some parent’s do not always know the proper procedures

or protocol when it comes to how to interact with schools, teachers and administrators.

How much is too much interaction, how much is too little? Do I step in or don’t I. Not

knowing is intimidating. Of course, there is also the language barrier and parent’s

reluctance to try and communicate with teachers but are afraid of not being understood or

not understanding.

By making parents active participants in their child’s learning, it goes a long way to

bridging that gap between school and home or the RISSE Center and home. By continuing

to reach out to parents and making concerted efforts to engage them in a safe and judgment

free environment, children will excel, build confidence in themselves, and increase

learning. Because parents will also see these positive changes in themselves the benefits of

creating those home to school connections are far reaching.

References:

Dyson, L. L. (2001). Home-school communication and expectations of recent Chinese

immigrants. Canadian Journal of Education, 26(4), 455-476. doi:10.2307/1602177

Harper, S, Platt, A, Pelletier, J. (2011). Unique effects of a family literacy program on the

early reading development of English language learners. Early Education and

Development, 22:6, 989-1008

Koskinen, P.S., Blum, I.H., Bisson, S.A., Phillips, S.M., Creamer, T.S,, & Baker, T.K.. (1997).

Book access, shared reading, and audio models: The effect of supporting the literacy

learning of linguistically diverse students in school and at home. (Reading Research

Report). Athens, GA; National Reading Research Center, Universities of Georgia an

Maryland.

Koskinen, P.S., Blum, I.H., Bisson, S.A., Phillips, S.M., Creamer, T.S,, & Baker, T.K.. (1999).

Shared reading, books and audiotapes: Supporting diverse students in school and at

home. The Reading Teacher, Volume 52:5 430-444

Lui, P. (1996). Limited English proficient children’s literacy acquisition and parental

involvement: A tutoring/family literacy model. Reading Horizons, Volume 37, 60-74.

Love, J. (2010). Effects of early head start prior to kindergarten entry: the importance of

early experience. Society for Research on Education Effectiveness, 596-613.

Panferov, S. (2010). Increasing ELL parental involvement in our schools: learning from the

parents. Theory into Practice, Volume 49(2), 106-112.

Unknown. (2011, January 15). Head Start History: 1965 to Present. Pennsylvania Head

Start Association: Retrieved September 10, 2012, from

http://www.paheadstart.org/UserFiles/File/General_History.pdf

Unknown (2007). The Anne E. Casey foundation 2007 kids count data book. Retrieved from

http://www.aecf.org/~/media/Pubs/Topics/Child%20Welfare%20Permanence/

Permanence/2007KIDSCOUNTDataBookStateProfilesofChildWell/

databook_2007.pdf

Wagner, R. K., Torgesen, J. K., Rashotte, C. A., Hecht, S. A., Baker, T. A., Burgess, S. R., et al.

(1997). Changing relations between phonological processing abilities and word-

level reading as children develop from beginning to skilled readers: a 5-year

longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology, 33, 468-479.