Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Parental involvement in an experimental reading program, grades 2-7 Giffin, Ray 1987

You don't seem to have a PDF reader installed, try download the pdf

Item Metadata

Download

Media
[if-you-see-this-DO-NOT-CLICK]
UBC_1987_A8 G53.pdf [ 2.97MB ]
[if-you-see-this-DO-NOT-CLICK]
Metadata
JSON: 1.0078310.json
JSON-LD: 1.0078310+ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 1.0078310.xml
RDF/JSON: 1.0078310+rdf.json
Turtle: 1.0078310+rdf-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 1.0078310+rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 1.0078310 +original-record.json
Full Text
1.0078310.txt
Citation
1.0078310.ris

Full Text

PARENTAL  I N V O L V E M E N T I N AN E X P E R I M E N T A L R E A D I N G PROGRAM GRADES  2-7  by RAY  GIFFIN  -I  B.Ed. The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Dip.Educ. Queensland Teachers  C o l u m b i a , 1978 C o l l e g e , 1962  A T H E S I S SUBMITTED IN P A R T I A L FULFILLMENT T H E R E Q U I R E M E N T S FOR T H E D E G R E E MASTER  OF  OF  OF  ARTS  in T H E F A C U L T Y OF GRADUATE S T U D I E S Department We  accept to  of Language E d u c a t i o n this  thesis  the required  as conforming standard  U N I V E R S I T Y OF B R I T I S H March ©  COLUMBIA  1987  Ray G i f f i n ,  1987  32  In  presenting  degree  at  this  the  thesis  in  University of  partial  fulfilment  of  of  department publication  this or of  thesis for by  his  or  that the  her  representatives.  It  this thesis for financial gain shall not  Department The University of British Columbia 1956 Main Mall Vancouver, Canada V6T 1Y3  for  an advanced  Library shall make  it  agree that permission for extensive  scholarly purposes may be  permission.  DE-6(3/81)  requirements  British Columbia, I agree  freely available for reference and study. I further copying  the  is  granted  by the  understood  that  head of copying  my or  be allowed without my written  ABSTRACT  The  purpose  parental  of t h i s  involvement  controlling  study  was t o i n v e s t i g a t e t h e e f f e c t s o f  i n t h e r e a d i n g p r o g r a m a t home,  the e f f e c t s  of teacher  content  within  the school  between  this  reading  g a i n s were made w i t h i n  study  reading  and o t h e r s  instruction program.  and c u r r i c u l u m  A major d i f f e r e n c e  reviewed herein class  while  i s that  comparisons of  g r o u p s f o r c h i l d r e n who were  involved  i n a home r e a d i n g p r o g r a m a n d c h i l d r e n who were n o t  Involved  i n a home r e a d i n g p r o g r a m ,  school  curriculum  variables.  The s t u d y  W o u l d c h i l d r e n who r e g u l a r l y r e a d received  coaching test  between  intelligence  in reading  involved Eight  addressed  to their  c h i l d r e n who d i d n o t ? and r e a d i n g  t e a c h e r and  two q u e s t i o n s : ( 1 )  parents  a t home a n d  on a s t a n d a r d i z e d  <2> Can t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p  achievement  be u s e d  t o e x p l a i n the  a c h i e v e m e n t w h i c h may be r e g i s t e r e d by c h i l d r e n  i n a home r e a d i n g  program?  c l a s s g r o u p s r e p r e s e n t i n g g r a d e s two t o s e v e n a n d  consisting The  c o n t r o l 1Ing  demonstrate b e t t e r achievement  reading  gains  than  thus  of a total  students  i n each  o f 190 s t u d e n t s class  g r o u p were a r r a n g e d  performance u s i n g pre-treatment Reading Test  (1965).  Then  were u s e d  scores  students ii  i n the r e s e a r c h . i n order of  from a Gates-MacGi n i t i e  i n each  class  g r o u p were  assigned control  to either  the experimental  ( n o n home r e a d i n g )  a l t e r n a t e assignment. was  (home r e a d i n g )  group o r t h e  g r o u p , u s i n g a method o f c o n t r o l l e d  The O t l s - L e n n o n  Mental  Ability  also administered, with parental permission,  Test  (1967)  to the students i n  t h e e i g h t c l a s s g r o u p s s o t h a t t h e r e s u l t s c o u l d be u s e d a s a c o v a r i a t e measure w i t h p o s t - t r e a t m e n t another  a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of the Gates-MacGinit1e  P r e - t e s t i n g of reading a b i l i t y 1985.  Students  control  reading scores obtained  were a s s i g n e d a s d e s c r i b e d above t o e x p e r i m e n t a l Test  of Mental  i n September o f 1985. E x p e r i m e n t a l  with experimental  group c h i l d r e n  February  i n v o l v e d i n math a n d s p e l l i n g  this period.  P o s t - t e s t i n g of reading a b i l i t y  The  1986. A n a l y s e s  experimental  treatment  i n d i c a t e d by t h e f o l l o w i n g 1.  h a d made a d i f f e r e n c e .  and c o n t r o l  points difference after difference before Question  T h i s was  observations:  of the Gates-MacGin1 t i e Reading T e s t s  treatment  group  followed.  T-scores  experimental  2.  of data  Control  was c a r r i e d o u t a t t h e  one was a n s w e r e d by t h e f a c t  the experimental  i n t e r v e n t i o n began,  t a s k s a t home d u r i n g  Question  for  A b l 1 i t v ( 1 9 6 7 ) was  o f 1986.  c h i l d r e n were  of February  or  r e a d i n g t o p a r e n t s a t home, i n  O c t o b e r o f 1985 a n d c o n t i n u e d u n t i l  end  (1965).  was c a r r i e d o u t l n F e b r u a r y o f  groups and the Otis-Lennon  administered  Reading Test  from  t h a t t h e d i f f e r e n c e i n mean (1965)  g r o u p s was g r e a t e r a f t e r t h e  h a d b e e n a p p l i e d t h a n b e f o r e ; 2.92 T - s c a l e treatment  c o m p a r e d t o 1.27 T - s c a l e  points  treatment.  one was a l s o a d d r e s s e d  by t h e a n a l y s i s o f c o v a r i a n c e i ii  w h i c h was c o n d u c t e d u s i n g  Gates MacGinitie  scores  two o f t h i s r e s e a r c h .  of  t o answer q u e s t i o n  tables  4 a n d 5 wl11 show t h a t  between G a t e s - M a c G i n i t i e g r o u p s on t h e p o s t - t e s t the 3.  and  scores  As e x p e c t e d  r e l a t i o n s h i p between r e a d i n g scores.  two was a n s w e r e d  reading  scores  and c o n t r o l between  Gates-MacGinitie  there  was a h i g h l y  pre-test/post-test  (Pearson's r =  .6145)  i n t h e a f f i r m a t i v e by t h e f a c t  e x i s t e d between p o s t - t e s t  existed  . <P<0.05)  t h e e f f e c t s o f I.Q. were s t a t i s t i c a l l y  difference  the  test scores.  and Otis-Lennon  Question  f o r the experimental  o f c o v a r i a n c e was c o n d u c t e d u s i n g  Otis-Lennon  significant  a significant difference  measure  test  An e x a m i n a t i o n  measure which had not e x i s t e d  g r o u p s on t h e p r e - t e s t  An a n a l y s i s  when  scores  and O t i s - L e n n o n  that  controlled a significant  experimental  (p < 0.05) w h i c h h a d n o t e x i s t e d  and c o n t r o l  group  at the beginning of  study. The  r e s u l t s of t h i s study  p a r e n t s a t home  in listening  support  and encouragement  reading  ability.  earlier  studies  explain  differences  such  This that  a home r e a d i n g  drawn within  from  performance The  gains  to their children  study  supports  in reading program. i s that  cannot  gains  that  important  teacher  and c u r r i c u l u m  to explain  also  group  cannot result  conclusion  from  t o be  variables  differences  in reading  subjects.  generated  iv  them  of s i m i l a r  subjects  Another  f o r experimental  r e s u l t s of t h i s study  amongst  involving  i n the s t u d e n t ' s  the c o n c l u s i o n  achievement  be u s e d  that  r e a d and g i v i n g  d o e s make a d i f f e r e n c e  I.Q. d i f f e r e n c e s  t h i s study  the school  l e d t o the c o n c l u s i o n s  some r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s f o r  parental further  involvement  i n r e a d i n g programs and  research. Educators  r e a d i n g may  wish  to pursue  who these  are  some s u g g e s t i o n s  interested  i n the  r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s and  further.  v  for  t e a c h i n g of suggestions  ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS  The  writer  wishes  supervisor  of t h i s  throughout  each  advice  School  Dr. Kenneth  of this  i salso  on m a t t e r s  To  study,  stage  Appreciation  t o express h i s thanks  I e x t e n d my  f o r h i sv a l u a b l e a d v i c e  study.  extended  of s t a t i s t i c a l  the staff,  Slade,  t o the senior  t o Dr. Lee Gunderson analysis.  students and parents of Mackenzie thanks  for h i s  f o rtheir  Elementary  willing participation  ln this  project. Lastly Jamie,  a special  f o rtheir  thank  you goes  patience and support  study.  vi  t o my w i f e , o f my  Maureen,  involvement  and s o n ,  with  this  T A B L E OF  CONTENTS  ABSTRACT  11  ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS  vi  T A B L E OF C O N T E N T S  v i i  L I S T OF T A B L E S  CHAPTER I  ix  INTRODUCTION  AND  R E V I E W OF THE  LITERATURE  Preamble Why H a v e P a r e n t P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n t h e R e a d i n g Program? How H a v e P a r e n t s B e e n I n v o l v e d i n R e a d i n g Programs? The G e n e r a l P r o b l e m Q u e s t i o n s t o be A n s w e r e d by t h e S t u d y D e f i n i t i o n s of Terms II  METHOD AND  PROCEDURE  IV  1 3  .  5 14 15 15 17  Setting Subjects Materials Reading Achievement Intelligence Reading M a t e r i a l s Experimental Design P r o c e d u r e s — I n C h r o n o l o g i c a l Order Tabulating Results V e r i f i c a t i o n of Scores III  1  RESULTS  17 17 19 19 20 21 21 23 27 28 29  Test  of Research  Question  1  29  Test  of Research  Question  2  31  RECOMMENDATIONS  39  CONCLUSIONS,  D I S C U S S I O N AND  Conclusions R e l a t i n g t o the R e s u l t s of Research Question 1 Ca) D u r a t i o n o f t h e S t u d y <b) N o v e l t y o f t h e S t u d y ( c ) Energy and Commitment o f S c h o o l S t a f f vi i  40 41 41 42  <d> Comparing the Vocabulary and Comprehensive Gains on the Gates-MacGin1tie Reading Test Between the Experimental Group and the C o n t r o l Group (e) The E f f e c t of Teacher V a r i a b l e s Upon the R e s u l t s of P r e v i o u s S t u d i e s l n T h i s Subject Area C o n c l u s i o n s R e l a t i n g t o the R e s u l t s of Research Question 2 S u g g e s t i o n s f o r F u r t h e r Research C o n c l u d i n g Statement t o the Study BIBLIOGRAPHY APPENDICES  .1. 2. 3. 4.  L e t t e r to P a r e n t s Suggested Parent Support Group A c t i v i t i e s Monthly Reading N e w s l e t t e r . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Reading Record Form  viii  43 45 46 47 48 50 54 55: 58: 60 65  L I S T OF TABLES 1. 2. 3. 4.  5.  6. 7.  S u g g e s t i o n s Most F r e q u e n t l y Made f o r P a r e n t R e a d i n g Involvement C e l l S i z e s i n E x p e r i m e n t a l and C o n t r o l Groups a t the C o n c l u s i o n of the Research P o p u l a t i o n a n d Group Means f o r G a t e s - M a c G i n i t i e P r e - T e s t and Post T e s t S c o r e s ANCOVA T o t a l Read!ng P r e - T e s t . Gates-MacGin1t1e Scores as the C r i t e r i o n V a r i a b l e with Otls-Lennon I.Q. S c o r e s a s t h e C o v a r i a t e ANCOVA T o t a l R e a d i n g . G a t e s - M a c G i n i t i e P o s t T e s t Scores as the C r i t e r i o n V a r i a b l e with Otls-Lennon I.Q. S c o r e s a s t h e C o v a r i a t e P o p u l a t i o n a n d Group Means f o r G a t e s - M a c G i n i t 1 e P r e - T e s t and P o s t - T e s t V o c a b u l a r y S c o r e s P o p u l a t i o n a n d Group Means f o r G a t e s - M a c G i n i t i e P r e - T e s t and P o s t - T e s t Comprehension S c o r e s  ix  10 19 30  33  33 35 36  CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION AND  REVIEW OF  THE  LITERATURE  Preamble A recent educators  trend  t o t r y and  based  education  steps  to accomplish  as  of  get  their  policy  that school  organizing The with  School  these  The  society",  partnership accept child's  children.  teacher  the  notion  education.  Parents  stops  that  they  school taken  that s c h o o l s host  such  things  this  parent-teacher end  by  adopting  responsibility  that communication learning  of  of  F o r most p a r e n t s  and  involvement  school  p a r e n t s must  children",  have a duty  and  in c h i l d r e n  t h a t , "the  to take  an  i s seldom is a  form  lead parents  product  a  to g e n e r a l l y  interest  t e a c h e r s , however,  in  their  the  there.  have a l w a y s been a cheap s o u r c e  noneducational  formal have  t h a t , " t e a c h e r s and  education  for  activities.  often stated cliches and  been  in education  i n t e r v i e w s , and  better f a c i l i t a t e  i n the  involvement  Leaders  a d m i n i s t r a t o r s assume t h e and  has  i n v o l v e d i n the  suggesting  u n d e r l y i n g assumption  questioned.  education  b o a r d s have p u r s u e d  events  parents will  the  American  p a r e n t s more  t h i s by  "open h o u s e s " , p a r e n t  organizations.  of  in North  endeavours w i t h i n the 1  school  o f manpower f o r program.  A wide  variety  2  of  extra-curricular  help  and l i m i t i n g  acceptable List  (p.  The  a  feeling  supported. effective will  This the  ability  the  their  Richek,  stated own  child  variable,  i n student  to date.  t o t e a c h e r s can probably  demands o f t e a c h e r that parents  territory.  are real  c e r t i f i c a t i o n and  a r e laymen  The demands o f t i m e a n d  enough b u t t h e i d e a t h a t some  i n the teacher  training  I n v e s t i g a t e d the premise children  a t home.  process  cannot  that parents Other  s t u d i e s which  that c h i l d r e n  who r e a d  demonstrate  greater gains  i n v o c a b u l a r y and  over  a g i v e n p e r i o d than  to retest  who do n o t .  that hypothesis while  controlling  this  i n f l u e n c e of the c h i l d ' s  possible effects  and achievement  T h i s h a s n o t been Also,  to their  children  the d i f f e r e n t  learning  be  c a n be  h a v e shown  was d e s i g n e d  experimentation. reviewed  here  a t home w i l l  teacher  produce  training  teachers of their  study  in schools i s  when t h e y  t o teach  t e a c h i n g s h o u l d be l e f t  T h i s study  comprehension  clear  n o t be e x p e c t e d  i s acquired  be r e v i e w e d  parents  should  on a s p e c i a l i s t ' s  skill  of involvement  a n d a l a r g e number o f e d u c a t o r s .  to the i n c r e a s i n g  in teacher  magical  type  on t h e p a r t o f t e a c h e r s  encroaching money  to this  parental  30).  idea that  attributed  w o u l d be n o n e x i s t e n t w i t h o u t  ( 1 9 8 3 ) made t h i s p o s i t i o n  "... p a r e n t s  to read"  be  parents  t o most p a r e n t s  and Lerner  that,  activities  study  attempted  i n any c l a s s r o o m i n the r e s e a r c h  investigated  I.Q. c a n n o t  greater  r e a d i n g g a i n s made by c h i l d r e n  parents  a t home.  t e a c h e r s might  the h y p o t h e s i s  completely  who r e g u l a r l y  that  e x p l a i n the read  to their  3  Why  Have P a r e n t Why  do  school's  Participation  some e d u c a t o r s  reading  categorized  i n the  Reading  want p a r e n t s  t o become  p r o g r a m ? B a u c h , V i e t z e and  parent  involvement  Program? involved  Morris  in  the  ( 1 9 7 3 )  in r e a d i n g program  into  three  general  areas: 1.  For  the  s o l e purpose of  educational 2.  For  3.  To  Until  mutual  category,  to  i n so  real  doing  have y e t  instructional  to  language. causal  and Bing  Irvine  ( 1 9 7 9 )  preschool  acquisition  and  next  teachers  preschool ( 1 9 6 3 ) ,  at  educational  concerned with educational  school  parental  program.  help  third  program.  in these  c l o s e r to  great  the  are major p r e r e q u i s i t e s matters  involvement  majority  of  s t e p — d i r e c t parent  have r e c o g n i z e d  experiences  and  Brown and  between s p e c i f i c  in c h i l d r e n .  supported  years  the  the  f o r the  P e r h a p s the  take  as  in  teachers  and  participation  programs.  relationship  language a b i l i t y  to  g e t t i n g parents  issues.  F o r many y e a r s environment  attendance  are  role  children.  were m a i n l y  g a i n i n g support  they  and  in t h e i r  program.  T e a c h e r s need d i r e c t  educational  parents in  of  educators  parents  for their  educational  c o n t r o l and  learning.  and  the  times  that  Behavioural  facilitators  b e n e f i t to parents  support  recent  assisting  the  notion  significantly school  Gordon  on  the  the  ( 1 9 6 5 )  ( 1 9 7 2 ) ,  Klein  children's  p e r f o r m a n c e . Chomsky  of  identified  rearing practices  that parents'  affect  o f home  acquisition  Deutsch child  effect  ( 1 9 7 8 ) ,  actions  a  and and  during  language  ( 1 9 7 2 )  identified  five  4  specific  s t a g e s of  rapidity  with which  by  the  and  their  s t u d i e s which ability t o use  and  a  reading could  be  to  helping  the  fact  their  reading  be  the  aptitude  estimates,  with  that  an  of  a number  Teachers often  p a r e n t s can  but  play  t o become b e t t e r home  conclusion.  essential  for educators  of  language  children's  influenced  the  the  ability  their  learning  that  children  almost  invariably  from  programs.  the  some a s  evidence  established predisposition  i n an  pupil  felt  no  a very  more  to c a p i t a l i z e  mould  of  research role  becoming  in  involved  way. than  thirty-six  teaching  f a c t o r s and  home and  this  that  to  significant  r e a d e r s by  achievement  If almost  that  g r o w i n g body  organized  that  socioeconomic  i s gained  that  i s determined  on  Loban c o n c l u d e d  a t t r i b u t e d to school  knowledge  reading  language  that  s t u d i e s were s e e n by  c o r r e l a t i o n s of  this  theorized  i n 1963  (1976) c o n c l u d e d  l e a r n i n g can  school  Interests  (1978) r e p o r t e d  However, a s m a l l  programs at  reaching  reading  stages  language development  failure.  children  analyzed  in  these  observed  development.  these  broken.  McDonald of  study  came t o s c h o o l s u c c e s s or  She  expressive  in reading  r e s u l t s of  not  points  in  and  landmark  were r e t a r d e d  children  the  Anselmo  ability.  were d e f i c i e n t i n o r a l  The  and  parents.  reading  In  status  and  showed a p o s i t i v e r e l a t i o n s h i p between o r a l  receptive  to read.  language development  c h i l d r e n move t h r o u g h  socioeconomic  children  who  early  efforts.  scores  percent He  with  academic  Instructional  two-thirds  of  factors  a child's  community  i t would  seem  on  resources  to  family  support  5  School the  school  and  North  personnel  are also beginning  i s the centre America  i s producing  c a u s e d some r e s e a r c h e r s relationship  of involvement  reading  program.  Have P a r e n t s Vast  to  America,  in  have  Been  Involved  limited  level  of r e a d i n g  success that  clearly  Early  of  the p a r e n t s '  1965).  involvement  educational  Recent  i s directly  (Evans,  Vukelich,  on p a r e n t  learning directly  Lavin,  involvement school  While  trying  schools in  & McCoy,  1980).  areas  do  a t home a s do c h i l d r e n  (McKinney, to help  1975).  their  Some  c h i l d r e n at  t h i s may be t r u e  t o some  studies  cited  demonstrate.  research  that  school  1965;  (Grimmett  i t i s n o t an i n s u r m o u n t a b l e o b s t a c l e , a s o t h e r  here w i l l  showed  i n the  Programs?  experience  the knowledge and d i r e c t i o n  have  a n d I.Q., a n d t h e  c h i l d r e n i n these  family dwelling areas  Isles  about the  of c h i l d r e n i n i n n e r - c i t y  home i n a c q u i r i n g a c a d e m i c s k i l l s . extent  achievement  in Reading  f o r t h i s h a s been  single  lack  scores  often with  t h e same  suburban  parents  r e s u l t s which  long h e l d b e l i e f s  reading  that  i n the B r i t i s h  a n d i n s t r u c t i o n s by n o n - t e a c h e r s  the r e a d i n g  One e x p l a n a t i o n not  the n o t i o n  amounts o f money, t i m e a n d e n e r g y have b e e n s p e n t  improve  North  Research  some s u r p r i s i n g  to question  between s t u d e n t  effects  How  of l e a r n i n g .  to question  i n the r e a d i n g  values  and t h e i r  a f f e c t e d academic research  related  1971; She 1 t o n ,  reinforcement  achievement  has s i m i l a r l y  to their  program  (Bloom,  shown t h a t  parent  c h i l d r e n ' s achievement at  1973; B r o n f e n b r e n n e r ,  1974; C a s s i d y  1 9 7 8 ) . C h i l d r e n who become s u c c e s s f u l r e a d e r s  &  u s u a l l y come  6  to school  with  a varied  which  has  developed  t o match  their  experience.  basic  language p a t t e r n s from  their  families,  u n s t r u c t u r e d way. of  instruction  children  learn  For  reading  the  value  Sullivan  parents  designed  t o speak v e r y  and  their  adequately  Crosset,  they  can,  training,  1970;  trained  have n o t . help  t o use  a highly structured plan to speak, yet they  enter  home r e a d i n g  1972;  to  improve  schol.  investigated  projects. and  effective  teaching  a l l p o i n t out  their  most  Woods e t a l . , 1974,  specific  These a u t h o r s  these  i n an  t h a t home r e a d i n g p r o j e c t s a r e more  when p a r e n t s h a v e been t h a n when  vocabulary  h o w e v e r , some r e s e a r c h e r s h a v e  La  found  a  usually  before  to operate  Beaune,  and  Children learn  children  t r a i n i n g parents  1975  with  experience  embark upon  to teach  instruction,  of  McKinney,  Few  background of  techniques  that  parents  children's reading  performance. Other (Ketcham, child's are  investigators 1967;  Ketcham  Hubbard & S a l t ,  s e l f - c o n c e p t and  critical  of p a r e n t a l  factors  the  r e a d i n g a c h i e v e r s and  their  1.  Only  to  2.  Reading  i s a feminine  3.  College  i s only  4.  Girls  eggheads  do  Admittedly  not these  like  1975;  Revicki,  soc1al-emotiona1  i n the  (1967) o u t l i n e d  involvement  success  in r e a d i n g  1982)  comfort  feel  with  o f home r e a d i n g  that  the  the  family  programs.  f o l l o w i n g negative  views that  families  held:  typically  programs  low  read. occupation.  f o r those  who  need a c o l l e g e  can  afford i t .  education.  v i e w s h a v e been m o d i f i e d somewhat  over  the  past  7  nineteen  years  security  to f a c i l i t a t e  contends  that parents  qualities  in their  (1978) s u p p o r t right  than  their  children.  nature  personnel  and f e e l  Ketcham  to nurture  are teachers.  (1967)  these  C o o n s a n d Sugarman  that parents  t o make e d u c a t i o n a l  However, one w o u l d have  personnel.  have a g r e a t e r  decisions affecting  to bring  into question the  teachers  any f u r t h e r d e c i s i o n m a k i n g p o w e r s i n  social  and emotional  S t a t e s of America.  these  Gilmore  strength, while feelings  relationships  (undated) found  are inhibited  insecurity.  t i e s with  their  generally  children  c a n be u s e d  than  t o advantage  a n d memory a r e t h e p r i m e p r e r e q u i s i t e s f o r  and Gilmore  high  that underachievers  of these  s u f f e r e d f r o m weak  worth, and h i g h  in reading education, provides  forpractice  self  degrees of m o t i v a t i o n .  i n home r e a d i n g p r o g r a m s , e v e n  on t h e c h i l d ,  mental  a c h i e v e r s had s t r o n g egos, p o s i t i v e  of personal  involvement  that both  by low s e l f - c o n c e p t a n d s o c i a 1-emotiona1  noted  or not t r a i n i n g  attention  i n the United  programs.  Concentration  Parental  programs  w a r n i n g s t h e p o i n t h a s b e e n made t h a t p a r e n t s  activities  found  to give parents  home r e a d i n g  images,  (1970)  t h a t many a d m i n i s t r a t o r s a n d t e a c h e r s  do, a n d t h a t  learning  Indeed, C a l i g u r i  the view  t o "head s t a r t " such  little  than  contention  to support  have c l o s e r  ego  l e a r n i n g remains.  are in a better position  of school  not wish  regard  in  efficient  a n d s c o p e o f t h e d e c i s i o n s t o be made a n d t h e d e g r e e o f  evidence  Given  f o r a s t r o n g s e l f - c o n c e p t and emotional  children  this  school  involvement  did  but t h e need  tends  i f parents  have  to focus  and p o s i t i v e  feedback  8  and  builds  Gllmore can  feels  and  communication  that changes  students.  adolescents  their  children  other  verbal Wilby  entitled  Chan  Times Weekly,  supported  Experiment",  i n March  of  data  parents,  but  parents their  1981.  --  not  from  own  which  a l l social than  make n o t e s  Children read  children  from  the  during this  some m o t h e r s w i t h they  were a s k e d  parents noted the  a t arms  that  study  towards and  i n the  report  and  can  be  to a parent  and  t o how  Wilby the  they  a t home w i t h  length  is a tradition  and  other  effective In  the  the olds  parents  report  being  parents received their  r e a c t i o n s of  They were s u r p r i s e d when  r e a d i n g because,  "keeping  in English education".  b e l i e v e d that education  Belfield  for  could help  r e p o r t s on  school.  more  record cards  the m a t e r i a l  at  and  s i x to e i g h t year  to the  children  parents  professionals.  years p r i o r  reading.  Sunday  lacks hard  o b s e r v a t i o n by  England,  to help  The  article  for three  t e a c h e r s as  i t i s widely  experts.  in Rochdale,  on  appeared  qualified  t a k i n g home r e a d i n g m a t e r i a l  suggestions  in h i s  in reading  i n an  classes—  had  written.  true  middle-class, college-educated  Primary  and  the  to the  just  children  School  this point  Belfield  sign  t o be  the p a r e n t s ' b e h a v i o u r  While  i t does p o i n t  that parents  to  children  motivated,  c h i l d r e n ' s achievement  Belfield  teachers  been  child.  skills.  "The  t e a c h e r s of  There,  this  and  towards  into highly  (1981) found  the  (1981) f u r t h e r  experimental  students  i n Hong Kong. affected  between p a r e n t  in parental a t t i t u d e s  transform underachieving  productive of  involvement  experiments  s h o u l d be challenge  Wilby  left that  to  9  notion. not  The  being A  parent  trained  number o f  involvement  i s emerging to replace  educators  in school  Groberg  (1982) a l l found  parents  and  1.  2.  Parent will  an  although  the  parents  literature  (1969),  Becker  aspects  following  on  Goodson  (1982),  are  parent  and  and  to studies  reading performance.  in school  Hess  Becker  and  involving  Their  findings  points:  programs can  have p o s i t i v e  effects  achievement.  Involvement  have  (1978),  positive  in the  involvement  children's  Gordon  children's  summarized  Parent on  (1977),  hero  teachers.  programs.  Epstein  be  new  surveyed  Anselmo  could  the  have  (1975),  their  as  that  effect  i s o r g a n i z e d , s u s t a i n e d , and  i n Increased academic  widespread  performance  of  ch i 1 d r e n . Vukellch literature different model  (1984) r e p o r t s t h a t ,  from  1973  activities  for their  1983  parents  children"  made s u g g e s t i o n s a n d recommended most  to  notes  often"  "A  search  r e v e a l e d 37  a u t h o r s who  could provide  (p.472).  She  o f 'the  professional suggested  or behaviours  lists  that  "'Read  to your  (p.472)  (Table  1).  they  24 could  the most f r e q u e n t l y child,"  was  naturally  10  Table 1 S u g g e s t i o n s Most  Frequently  Made f o r P a r e n t R e a d i n g  No. Activity  or Behaviour  Be  t o your c h i l d  a good  Provide Build  14  magazines,  a reading  e t c . , f o r the c h i l d  atmosphere  a t home  (place, 1ibrary  Talk  and l i s t e n  a positive  including  praising  related, to  attitude  your c h i l d  e.g., l i b r a r y interest  trips,  opportunities Provide Be  in  area)  toward  contact  f o r reading that  are reading  or that  c a n be u s e d  capture  with paper  out s i m i l a r i t y  the environment  11  reading, 7  7 reading  i n the environment  aware o f y o u r c h i l d ' s  Point  time,  in reading  Read e n v i r o n m e n t a l s i g n s ;  13  7  experiences f o r children  stimulate  to read  t o your c h i l d  Exemplify  Provide  o f 24  22  l i t e r a t e model  books,  of times  suggested, out  Read  Involvement  5  and p e n c i l  4  interests  and d i f f e r e n c e s  4 in objects 4  11  These s u g g e s t i o n s experiences changes of  attitudes  of  success  socio-economic  are  before  these  has  a pilot  structured were  schools  some  t h e y may  exist  study  question  conducted  by  interviews with final  the  child's  elicited  year  The  of The  Scholfield into  the  c o r r e l a t e d with  the  child  school  "coaching"  of  T h i s was  (1980,  research  two  began  involved children  inner-city t o p i c s such child,  the  as  and  children  this  very  whether  pilot  was study  s t r o n g l y with  or  A t t i t u d e s of p a r e n t s  (hearing a c h i l d  is required  sixty-five  From  etc.,  parent  which  of  such  understood.  r e a d i n g to the  correlated  a  sex,  Hewison  at  reading attainment  read.  be  and  of  IQ,  research  i n 1979  and  comments t h a t  i s not  interviews covered  r e p l i e s which  indicators  among c h i l d r e n  nature  the p a r e n t s infant  cause  only  to  T h e i r 1980  Hewison  leisure,  reading attainment.  heard  to  i n home e n v i r o n m e n t s  using a standardized reading test.  one  be  i n f l u e n c e s can  r e a d i n g program.  to r e a d i n g .  and  observed  More s c i e n t i f i c  insights  children's play, discipline,  regularly  be  that being read  their  i n London, E n g l a n d .  assessed  Intuition  i n r e a d i n g when d i f f e r e n c e s  i n the  in t h e i r  listening  can  attitude  t h e work o f T i z a r d ,  open  on  Indeed, V u k e l i c h (1984) f u r t h e r  controlled.  produced  participation  they  v a l u e s which  v a r i a b l e s and  Recently  with  and  based  s t a t u s , kindergarten attendance,  statistically  1982)  and  while  (1981) r e s e a r c h s u g g e s t s  predictor  who  t e a c h e r s and  relationships.  Tobin's  as  largely  in reading a b i l i t y  other  family  of  are  not  the  mother  which  read) produced  better  12  readers.  test  A s e c o n d s t u d y was  d e v i s e d by  this serendipitous  finding.  junior  schools participated  format  to  mother's reading  the  pilot  study  Hewison, et Thirty  children  obtained  and  an  t h o u g h more r e f i n e d  Intelligence  f o r sample c h i l d r e n .  test  regularly  heard  with  the  pilot  study,  r e a d i n g s u c c e s s was  child  read,  not  w h e t h e r or  w h e t h e r she  read  "As  relationship  also  r e a d i n g s c o r e s and  strongly was  correlated.  0.37,  P  attainment  were of  some c o a c h i n g To  conducted causal  from  study  to account read  to  i n the  study  findings  i n 1982  was  London b o r o u g h  to  the  the  a highly  for  the  the  mother  child.  significant  I.Q.  coaching  that  again  and  in  this  I.Q.  were  the  two  I.Q.  superior  t h e i r p a r e n t s and  reading received  interesting fact! Tlzard,  w h i c h was  r e l a t i o n s h i p between a c t i v e This  not  c o r r e l a t i o n between  established  had  these  Also,  blserial  i t was  them". An  test  another  performance. schools  point  who  expected,  < 0.001).  insufficient  children  further  P  The  < 0.001. Y e t  differences  the  between  ( P e a r s o n ' s r = 0.54,  standardized  the s i g n i f i c a n t  a l . (1980) r e p o r t e d ,  study  a  the  home e n v i r o n m e n t  Hewison, e t .  existed  in  S i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n s were  i n the  associated  four  were  and  factor  of  a s p e c t s of  S c o r e s on  d i f f e r e n t a s p e c t s of  As  further  similar  in that  o b t a i n e d between a number o f r e a d i n g achievement.  from each  i n t h i s s t u d y , w h i c h was  l a n g u a g e b e h a v i o u r were a s s e s s e d . test  a l . (1980) to  conducted of  S c h o l f i e l d and  designed  parental in s i x  Harringay.  to  Hewison  investigate  help  and  reading  Infant  and  junior  Planned  intervention  in  13  reading  instruction  was b u i l t  into  this  ( c l a s s e s ) of c h i l d r e n  r e c e i v e parent  receive  extra teacher  help, with  control  groups.  findings their  T h i s study  children  read  help  these  quality  relationship  they  of c l a s s r o o m  research  relationship not  h a d no c o n t r o l  teaching  is  that  without  this  type  techniques Schofield  who r e a d  i s needed  between p a r e n t s  hearing  having  a n d Hewison  when  as  The r e s e a r c h e r s were  over  i f the v a r i a b l e s  of i n t e r v e n t i o n  t o be u s e d  following points:  experimental  such  variables  and d i d not r e a d  but t h i s  f o r most p r a c t i c a l  the parents  with  quick  as the  i n r e a d i n g and w i t h i n - c l a s s  a r e t o be u n d e r s t o o d  be i m p o r t a n t  groups  a t home a n d i m p r o v e d r e a d i n g a c h i e v e m e n t  comparisons of c h i l d r e n Further  groups  a t home a n d o t h e r  provided  m e a s u r e d by a s t a n d a r d i z e d r e a d i n g t e s t . to p o i n t out that  by h a v i n g  groups b e i n g matched  once a g a i n  showing a s i g n i f i c a n t  study  to parents.  that u n d e r l i e the lack of understanding  purposes.  What  produces r e s u l t s  may  i s significant and i t does so  r e c e i v e d any e l a b o r a t e t u t o r i n g i n listening  to their  (1982) summarized  their  children  read.  findings  i n the  Tizard,  14  1. N e a r l y  a l l parents  involved or  In I n n e r c l t y  in educational  largely  non-English  multi-racial  activities  even  3.  Most  attainment  parents  than  express  i f they  are non-literate  speaking.  2. C h i l d r e n who r e c e i v e p a r e n t a l h e l p reading  s c h o o l s c a n be  children  great  are s i g n i f i c a n t l y  better in  who do n o t .  satisfaction  In b e i n g  i n v o l v e d In t h i s  way. 4. T e a c h e r s  reported that  they  found  the c o n t a c t with  parents  worth-  while. 5.  Small  group  produce  instruction  reading  collaboration  improvement  with  6. C o l l a b o r a t i o n w i t h initial 7.  levels  The f a c t at  all,  i n r e a d i n g by s p e c i a l i s t comparable w i t h  t e a c h e r s d i d not  that produced  by  parents. p a r e n t s was s i g n i f i c a n t  of r e a d i n g  t h a t some p a r e n t s d i d not prevent  forchildren  at a l l  attainment. c o u l d not r e a d  Improvement  English,  or not read  l n the r e a d i n g s k i l l s of  t h e i r ch i 1 d r e n . The  General The  The  previously cited  effects  been  Problem  clearly  of parental  s t u d i e s l e a v e u n a n s w e r e d many  involvement  d o c u m e n t e d . The c a u s e s  i n home r e a d i n g p r o g r a m s have of observed  r e a d i n g p e r f o r m a n c e have n o t been c l e a r l y of  I.Q., home e n v i r o n m e n t ,  self all  concepts,  parental  and t h e i r  changes  established.  attitudes,  and language development  be i n v e s t i g a t e d  questions.  in student The e f f e c t s  developing better  on r e a d i n g a c h i e v e m e n t  correlation  with  reading  have  achievement,  15  in  a variety The  of s i t u a t i o n s  present  above, n o t a b l y 1982) been  with  research  involvement  on s t u d e n t  groups. by  1.  basis  achievement  the teacher source test  variable  h a s n o t been  of i n t e r f e r e n c e results  research within  parental  class  in relation  f o r experimental  sought  c o n t r o l l e d and  to control  to the  and c o n t r o l  the teacher  variable  groups.  t o be A n s w e r e d by t h e S t u d y  children  who r e a d  t o t h e i r p a r e n t s a t home on a  ( 5 - 15 m i n u t e s d a l l y ) on a s t a n d a r d i z e d  and r e c e i v e reading  regular  coaching demonstrate  test  than  children  better  who do n o t  t o p a r e n t s a t home?  2.  Can t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p  be  used  to explain  by c h i l d r e n  Definition  o f Terms  Parental  between  the gains  registered  read  that has  class  of academic  achievement read  In t h e r e s e a r c h  (1980,  C o m p a r i s o n s have n o t been made w i t h i n  comparing c h i l d r e n  Will  a n d Hewison  cited  class  The p r e s e n t  Questions  Schofield  of s t u d i e s  have been made between  be a m a j o r  comparison  described.  t o date comparisons of the e f f e c t s of  Therefore  could  h a s been  to replicate parts  t h e works o f T i z a r d ,  groups and s c h o o l s .  this  sought  one s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e .  reviewed  groups.  and c o n d i t i o n s ,  form.  achievement  i n r e a d i n g a c h i e v e m e n t w h i c h may be  involved  i n a home r e a d i n g  Involvement--hav1ng p a r e n t s  a t home a n d m o n i t o r  record  i n t e l l i g e n c e and r e a d i n g  reading a c t i v i t y  listen through  program?  to t h e i r  children  a home/school  16  Regular  Home R e a d i n g  Having  children  read o r a l l y  15 m i n u t e s a d a y , e v e r y  Gates-MacGinitie Parental  reinforcement reading  Suggested  Reading  to children  score  from  Test. parents provide  as they  read,  positive  helping with  v o c a b u l a r y and  and g e n e r a l l y d i s c u s s i n g the r e a d i n g m a t e r i a l .  procedures  f o r coaching  m e e t i n g and subsequent  parent  were made a t t h e i n i t i a l  meetings. that might  Newsletters  suggestions  as t o techniques  Suggestions  were made a s t o t h e f o l l o w i n g :  be u s e d  1.  C o r r e c t i n g word r e c o g n i t i o n e r r o s .  2.  Looking  f o r s i g n s of d i f f i c u l t y  the m a t e r i a l 3.  a t home, f o r 5 t o  a standardized reading test  Coaching—having  concepts  parents,  day o f t h e week.  Reading Achievement— the  to their  also  parent  provided  (See Appendix 3 ) .  the c h i l d  might  have  with  chosen.  D i s c u s s i o n of the s t o r y  as a volunteered a c t i v i t y  by t h e  ch i 1 d. 4. P r o v i s i o n o f p o s i t i v e 5.  Discussion of the c h i l d ' s teacher  I.Q.— the  feedback  r a t h e r than  difficulties  Test  with the  the c h i l d .  the d e r i v e d i n t e l l i g e n c e  Otls-Lennon  to the c h i l d .  of Mental  quotient score  Ability.  obtained  from  CHAPTER I I METHOD AND PROCEDURE  T h i s study involvement differing within time  was d e s i g n e d  a t home  effects  i n the r e a d i n g program w h i l e  of teacher  instruction  the s c h o o l ' s r e a d i n g program.  heard  their  children  read  made u s i n g G a t e s - M a c G i n i t i e and  t o i n v e s t i g a t e the e f f e c t s  control  Gates-MacGinitie ability  reading  tests  test  groups.  and c o n t r o l  reading  content  forbrief  p e r i o d s of  t o them a t home. C o m p a r i s o n s were  groups w i t h i n c l a s s  between e x p e r i m e n t a l  c o n t r o l l i n g the  and currculum  Parents  of parental  s c o r e s between  experimental  C o m p a r i s o n s were a l s o made  group p e r f o r m a n c e o n the :  in relation  a s m e a s u r e d by t h e O t i s - L e n n o n  t o t h e c h i l d r e n ' s mental  Mental  Ability  Test.  Setting The located  study  took  place  i n the townsite  George.  The s c h o o l  British  Columbia.  b a s e d on t h e lumber  i n Mackenzie Elementary  of Mackenzie  i s part  120 m i l e s  north  processing  which i s  of P r i n c e  of the P r i n c e George School  The t o w n s h i p h a s a p o p u l a t i o n and p u l p  School  District in  o f 7,000 a n d i s  industries.  Subjects A  total  exception  o f 190 s u b j e c t s was u s e d  of c h i l d r e n  i n the r e s e a r c h . With the  who were r e p e a t i n g a y e a r 17  a l l children in  18  grades  2 to 7  Of  190  the  September included This  of  discussed  to have  final  corresponding cell  of  sizes  i n the  part  In t h e  part  of  in February  t h e main  this  attrition  c a u s e of  control  f o r any  1986.  18%  o r 34  will  i s presented  control  in Table  groups at 2 below.  be was  Whenever  were  of  the  further due  to  an  the  eliminated.  a l w a y s r e m a i n e d e q u a l . A breakdown and  156  of  reason,  g r o u p was  study.  forms in  attrition  r e a d i n g r e c o r d forms. lost,  i n the  research,  r a t e of a p p r o x i m a t e l y  g r o u p s u b j e c t was subject  to take  signed permission  of d a t a  causes  IV b u t  non-return  the e x p e r i m e n t a l  research  analysis  The  in Chapter  experimental  the  were e l i g i b l e  them t a k e  attrition  subjects.  the c o n t i n u e d  in  1985  i n the  190  school  s u b j e c t s whose p a r e n t s  r e p r e s e n t s an  intial  way  in the  In  of c e l l  the c o n c l u s i o n of  this sizes  the  19  Table Cell  Sizes at  Division  Grade  1  7  2  2  in Experimental  the Conclusion  Expt.  and  Control  the  Research  Control  Grp.  of  Grp.  Groups  Total  8  8  16  6/7  11  11  22  3  5/6  8  8  16  4  4/5  11  11  22  5  4  10  10  20  6  3  10  10  20  7  2/3  12  12  24  8  2  8  8  16  78  78  156  Total  M a t e r i a 1s Reading Achievement. and  covariate  vocabulary carried  and  out  fo11owi ng  measure  For  of reading  comprehension,  using  1 eve 1s:  the purpose  of o b t a i n i n g  achievement  pre-testing  the Gates-MacGinitie  and  a  variate  i n the a r e a s of post-testing  Reading Tests  (1965)  was at  the  20  The  Primary  B - Grade  2  Primary  C  - Grade  3  Level  D  - Grade  4,  Level  E  - Grade  7  Gates-MacGinitie  Reading  Test  5,  was  and  6  s e l e c t e d f o r the  following  reasons: 1.  Normative  2.  Van  data  Roekel,  Yearbook. probably  existed  r e p o r t i n g i n the  f u n c t i o n best  reporting  i n the  commented  that,  data  on  (pp.  3-10).  The  George, and  "As  i s used and  intelligence achievement  provide 1. Vol.  survey of  Mental  Measurements  that, tests"  to other  (p.  these  1082).  Tests would provide  regularly are  by  very  School  tests,  the  usable  District with  (1969)  reading  vocabulary  familiar  tests Powell,  Measurement  general  in comprehension,  teachers  "...  Educational  compared  Reading  populations.  and  #57,  speed"  Prince  i t sa d m i n i s t r a t i o n  scoring.  Intel 1igence.  groups.  Journal  achievement  test  as  student  Seventh  v o l . I (1972) commented  Gates-MacGinitie  3.  f o r Canadian  The t o be  design used  gains which  The  Otis-Lennon  that measure  I t was  reviewed  I ( 1 9 7 2 ) by  of  as  the  study  a control  w e r e made by Mental  f o r the in Buros  Milholland,  in  Ability  Seventh who  f o r a measurement  interpreting  the  following /  called  experimental Test  of  reading and  ( 1 9 6 7 ) was  control  s e l e c t e d to  reasons: Mental  s t a t e d then  Measurements Yearbook that,  .  21  "The  c o n s t r u c t i o n and norming of t h i s  the  highest  Milholland with  level  commented  educational  scholastic  of current that,  criteria  aptitude"  test  standards"  "The t e s t and w i t h  bespeak  (p. 370).  correlates  other  i s suitable  f o r group a d m i n i s t r a t i o n .  3.  Teachers  needed only  a short  with  Reading M a t e r i a l s . included been  a wide  authorized  schools public  i n North libraries  range  orientation  general  session  Reading m a t e r i a l s used  of t e x t s from basal  America.  t o make  them  a d m i n i s t e r i n g and s c o r i n g the t e s t . i n the project  reading  and a p p r o v e d by M i n i s t r i e s  were  adequately  <p.371).  The t e s t  comfortable  Also,  measures of  2.  feel  adherence t o  s e r i e s which  of Eduction  f o r use i n  R e a d i n g m a t e r i a l s f r o m home,  a l s o used  at the reader's  and  have  s c h o o l , and  parent's  di s c r e t i on. Experimental The  Design  design  of t h i s  "quasi-experimental" prior  particular  (Campbell  study  could  and Stanley,  1963).  d i f f e r e n c e s among members o f t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l  g r o u p s due t o t h e l a c k o f random a s s i g n m e n t groups,  pre-test scores  were used data  be d e s c r i b e d  as a v a r i a t e measure  analysis.  presented  below.  A graphic  of reading  To a c c o u n t f o r and c o n t r o l  of s u b j e c t s  on t h e G a t e s - M a c G i n i t i e  as  Reading  achievement  to  these  Test(1965)  i n subsequent  r e p r e s e n t a t i o n of the research  design  i s  22  The  I n f l u e n c e of Program,  Parental  Involvement  Quasi-Experimenta1 190  students  grades Controlled  alternate  experimental total  test  or  control  1985  1985  October  1985  1985  group  1986  in  students  using a class  Control  students  students  Intro. Parent Invo1vement and Record Keep i ng February  Design  2-7  in order  95  95 s t u d e n t s Ot i s - L e n n o n Mental Abi.l i t y T e s t  95  of  Research  Reading  of  in each  class  list  Gates-MacGinitie  of  performance.  (High  to  to  scores.)  Exp. 95  September  group  scores, arranged  Low--February  Time 1ine September  assignment  i n the  totes group  students  95 s t u d e n t s Ot i s - L e n n o n Mental Abl11ty Test  r 95  students No i nvolvement of p a r e n t s  I  78 s t u d e n t s 78 s t u d e n t s GatesGatesMacGi n i t i e MacGini t ie Test Test Draw c o n c l u s i o n s r e g a r d i n g  Gates-MacGi n i t i e t e s t s of r e a d i n g are given at the the r e q u e s t of School Board O t i s - L e n n o n t e s t of Menta1 A b i 1 i t y w i l l be g i v e n t o a l l s t u d e n t s wi t h a p p r o v a l of the School Board/ Parent Consent T h e r e i s no exper imental i n t e r v e n t i o n i n the school. P a r e n t s of experimental group ch i 1 d r e n w i l l p r o v i d e the i n t e r v e n t i o n at home A d m i n i s t e r e d at the d i r e c t i o n of the School Board  questions  23  Procedures--In 1.  Chronological  February  Gates-MacGinitie the  school  testing  1985.  program.  this  test.  were  recorded  Data were c o l l e c t e d  reading  (grades  Teachers  on m a c h i n e  school  they  were used  scored  or control  group.  not included i n t h i s  take  part  September  1985.  or guardians  Parents  i n each  the answer to the  of eight c l a s s e s  groups.  T h i s was done by  of performance  a s s i g n i n g them  although  group Late  In September  who  they  on t h e  to the  repeating a were  f o r each  were  class.  for their  letter  i n the experimental  able  year to  c o n t a c t e d by t e l e p h o n e group  child  1985.  form  from  In the last  control  was or  group  parents d i d  the corresponding  the class  week  which  by a t e a c h e r  where  to participate  to  their  and matching  In t h e few c a s e s  was s e n t  group ( s e e  of the p r o j e c t and  s u b j e c t was a l s o removed September  o f 1985 a  d i d not r e t u r n the consent  The e x p e r i m e n t a l  give permission  3.  When  returned  C h i l d r e n who w e r e  the nature  i n the letter  researcher.  control  annual  f o l l o w e d and answers  i n order  assignment,  District's  sheets.  or control class  to a l l children in  the a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of  and the r e s u l t s  of c h i l d r e n  #1) o u t l i n i n g  was c o n f i r m e d not  with  o f 1985 when  i n the project.  involvement.  the  familiar  to assign subjects  were  contained  of the School  ( h i g h t o low) and a l t e r n a t e l y  experimental  Appendix  administered  s c o r a b l e answer  the s u b j e c t s i n each  test  parents  were  2 t o 7) t o e x p e r i m e n t a l  arranging  2.  were  i n February  D i r e c t i o n s f o r a d m i n i s t e r i n g were  h a d been machine  total  tests  1 t o 7) a s p a r t  sheets  (grades  Order  list.  of September, 1985,  24  the in  Otis-Lennon grades  two  permission.  Most  ability  review  the  by  teachers  with  teachers  test  test  teachers  Ability  to seven,  mental  that  Mental  before  Test  School  was  administered  District  had  not  and  care  and  administered was  taken  to a l l students  parental this  particular  in a staff  handbook's a d m i n i s t r a t i o n procedures  could  and  f o l l o w them c o r r e c t l y .  later  checked  These  for accuracy  of  meeting  and  to  tests  ensure  were  s c o r i n g by  to  scored  the  researcher. 4.  E a r l y October  meetings were h e l d to  Support  and  to e n l i s t  Group. and  This  the  school  for  the  project.  school,  to which and  association  with  meetings  2.  A of  the  3.  A  4.  Sharing  of  had  1985  the  as  in forming a  support,  parents  i n v o l v e d in a wide (see  liaison  and  evening,  a  group Parent  group  between  i n f o r m a t i o n , and  were  meetings invited  variety  Appendix  information  experimental  r e g u l a r monthly  group  parent  afternoon  of  parents  to serve  #2).  of The  in  ideas the  by  activities group's  in  monthly  involved:  the  content  of  the  next  parent  Parents—Chi1dren--Teachers" a  teacher  or  (see  newsletter—"Reading Appendix  c o m m u n i t y member on  #3).  some  aspect  education.  d i s c u s s i o n f o l l o w e d the of  2nd  during  to provide  project  p r e s e n t a t i o n by reading  help  a l l reading  typically  Together,  the  group  became  Identifying  school  g r o u p was  The  October  project to parents  community  newsletter,  On  in the  f u r t h e r e x p l a i n the  children  1.  1985.  parents'  presentation.  comments from  home r e a d i n g  record  sheets  25  and 5. of  the  other contacts with October  first  collected. through the  reading  1985,  and m e e t i n g s had  group  of  1985.  The In  completed  by  and  collected  project  p a r e n t s and  Teachers  forms  the  Over  respond  to parents  week  (basal  forms  forms  f o r t h e c o m i n g week the weekend  which  to every  of  following  2.  Teachers  would  answer  3.  Teachers  would  add  4.  Teachers  would  contact parents directly  appropriate Children  action.  were  always  specific  stickers,  returned a  form  or  never  encouraged  and  rewarded  returning  forms.  Each  reading  1985,  the #4) of  child's to  be  the  r e t u r n e d and  same issued  i n the experimental the r e t u r n e d forms  forms;  they were  by p a r e n t s .  encouraging when  a part  Monday, r e a d i n g r e c o r d  of  f o r the  never  comments.  necessary.  teachers would  was  reading record  had  to begin.  October,  Friday  and  basal  ready  questions asked  Punishment  completed  notified  form.  stamps,  not  been  ways:  sign  had  on  end  procedures for  readers at  check  would  who  of  child  Teachers  children  and  the  been  suitable  were  1.  With  the  the  had  (see Appendix  teachers would  i n any  By  to children  then  returned to school  collected  group.  was  the second  reading record  children  procedures  s e n t home r e a d i n g m a t e r i a l s level)  begins.  the purposes  outlined  s e n t home.  Members.  a l l necessary d a t a had  k e e p i n g d e v i c e s and  t o be  Group  intervention  experimentat1  Teachers  Mid-October  teachers  new  P a r e n t s of  record  materials  week.  In O c t o b e r ,  newsletters  prepared  6.  1985--Experimental  week  project.  Parent Support  the  project.  return  punished  forms  take  from  of  f o r not the  and  26  p r e v i o u s week w e r e added  appropriate  given  to the researcher  comments, stamps, a n d s t i c k e r s .  were  returned  from  c h a r t i n g the r e t u r n of forms  classroom control spelling record  to children  r o u t i n e s were  groups.  While  contaminating  effect  these  programs  pupils,  unethical home  theis  i n these  and control  was  likelihood  conditions their  provide  children. the control  involving  level  subjects of  stamps,  areas  parents.  f o r each  Apart  week,  f o r the experimental  groups were  and  i n v o l v e d i n math o r  c o u l d have had a p o s s i b l e  with  staff  the experimental A l s o , many  interest  a c a r r y over  by t h e s c h o o l  families  that parents one o f t h e i r  may h a v e u s e d Therefore,  would  groups with  be  i nthe  had children levels  and there  these  procedure  amongst  home  i n both  experimental  Under  t h e home r e a d i n g  alternative  reading f o r  i twould  question  i twas d e c i d e d  involvement  subjects  grade  children.  and into  that  group  groups at d i f f e r e n t  1985 t o November  of positive  and t h e i r  record  class  the forms  with a l l  the staff  to  assignments  parents.  7. O c t o b e r high  only  parents  to their  by i n c r e a s i n g p a r e n t a l  experimental  of  activity  i twas f e l t  with  Then  them a n d  a l s o r e q u i r e d the r e t u r n and c h a r t i n g of  i n t e r v e n t i o n program.  intervention  i n each  in control  to involve only  a strong  home  not d i f f e r e n t i a t e d  p r o j e c t s which  school  t o be t a k e n  Subjects  forms.  in  who a l s o s i g n e d  forms  1985. As t h e p r o j e c t p r o g r e s s e d  reinforcement  parents.  was m a i n t a i n e d  Incentives to children  f o r both  bookbags,  r e c o g n i t i o n at monthly  reading  f o r the return  i n c l u d e d w r i t t e n comments by t h e t e a c h e r s ,  bookmarks,  a  student  stickers,  27  assemblies, For  special  parents,  participation meetings, the  children  became more  monthly public  beginning  o f November children  was  given  Machine away  as part  f o rmachine  Tabulating For group 1.  As parents task  measure  children  parents'  f o rYour  were  The  meeting  Child".  not sending requested  reading  before  checking  basal  them.  assessment  were h a n d - s c o r e d  By t h e  home  to a l l subjects.  cross  were  a p r e s e n t a t i o n by t h e  District's  s c o r i n g and l a t e r  and c h i l d r e n  reading materials.  where p a r e n t s  sheets  their  tests  Again,  were  this  program. being  sent  by t h e r e s e a r c h e r .  Results  each  subect  the following  i n the experimental scores  Gates-MacGinitie  vocabulary  parent  t h e home r e a d i n g  of the School answer  monthly  The G a t e s - M a c G i n i t i e  as the variate  scorable  1986.  1985 t e a c h e r s  1986.  forms,  involved with  had summarized  except  record  rewards.  Reading Material  9. M i d - F e b r u a r y administered  with  time, e t c .  Group, b e i n g mentioned i n  w h i c h w a s made a t a m o n t h l y  "Selecting  with  and being  to se1f-se1ected  entitled,  readers  Support  intrinsic  newsletter  librarian  reading  assemblies,  1985 t o F e b r u a r y  to switch  reading  student  newsletter  comfortable  (free  comments on r e a d i n g  the Parent  considered  8. N o v e m b e r  encouraged  with  reading  were  activities  teacher  i n monthly  contact  monthly  class  were  total  and comprehension  administrations  of the test.  recorded  T-score  group  control  by t h e r e s e a r c h e r .  and grade  f o r the February These  and matching  served  equivalent  scores i n  1985 a n d F e b r u a r y  as variate  1986  and c o v a r i a t e  28  m e a s u r e s of 2.  A  reading  achievement.  " d e r i v e d I.Q."  the  Otis  the  interpretation  from  Lennon M e n t a l  experimental  and  Verification  of  Scores  of  Ability eading  control  and  entered  f o r both  of  Gates-MacGinitie  computer  file  Results compiled These the  the  which  from  Test.  1985  a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of  T h i s s e r v e d as  achievement  to e s t a b l i s h on  February  a control  g a i n s made by  checked  by  student 1985  the  accuracy  records.  and  February  R e a d i n g T e s t were u s e d  the O t i s  i n i t i a l 11y  the  original  Lennon T e s t  t e a c h e r s and  r e s u l t s were a l s o  statistical  September  for  the  Scores  sheets the  late  groups.  were v e r i f i e d  were o b t a i n e d  the  analyses  entered of  the  into data.  which  Machine s c o r e d 1986  to enter  Ability  checked  a computer  by  file  they answer  administrations results  h a n d s c r e e n i n g of  of M e n t a l  later  with  the  the  to a test.  were researcher.  t o be  used  in  CHAPTER I I I RESULTS The data  present  collected  chapter  to test  involved  156 s t u d e n t s  Children  were  treatment groups. parents  by c o n t r o l l e d  or a control  each  week.  The c o n t r o l  number  facts  o r math  record  standardized  reading  standardized  mental  of Research Question  experimental  to  their  class  groups  The  w i t h i n each  test.  groups were with  forms  of the eight  t o the school  groups data  forms  were  class  to their f o ra  t o the school  required to review parents  to a  s p e l l i n g and  a t home a n d t o r e t u r n each  week.  c o l1ected  Forthe  using  p r e - t e s t and p o s t - t e s t procedures and a ability  Question  1 focussed and control  test.  1 on r e a d i n g groups  The q u e s t i o n  parents  their  record  study  (Table 2 ) .  groups were r e q u i r e d t o read  drills  and control  reading  of the study.  a l t e r n a t e assignment  p e r i o d and t o return reading  experimental  Test  group  a n a l y s i s of the  a t home o n a r e g u l a r b a s i s , 5 t o 1 5 m i n u t e s d a i l y ,  month  spelling  located in eight  The e x p e r i m e n t a l  five  basic  the s t a t i s t i c a l  t h e two q u e s t i o n s  assigned  group  describes  achievement  a s measured by t h e G a t e s - M a c G i n i t i e  stated that  a t home w o u l d  of subjects i n  childre  demonstrate 29  who r e g u l a r l y  greater  reading  read  gains  30  than  children  experimental  who and  d i d not. control  Population  groups are  shown  Table Population  and  and  in table  and  the  3.  3  Group Means f o r  Pre-Test  group means f o r  Gates-MacGinitie  Post-Test  Scores  Standard Year  Group  No.  population  156  1985  Total  1985  Experimental  1985  Control  1986  Total  1986  Experimental  1986  Control  Five used would  population  different  to gather not  difference  be  8.25  78  53.17  8.39  78  51.90  8.11  156  52.01  8.48  78  53.47  8.55  78  50.55  8.41  the  purposes because  levels they  Gates-MacGinitie  achievement  possible to relate  grade  so  are  Deviation  52.53  forms of  reading  Mean T - S c o r e  scores  the  T-scores derived  test  f o r Grades 2 raw  were used  from  Reading Test  raw  scores for  scores  t o 7.  were It  across comparative  and  have  the  same  31  mean and can  be  standard  used  Table  d e v i a t i o n s at each  t o make a c r o s s g r a d e 3 shows t h a t  experimental  and  control  treatment  had  treatment  compared  relation  to  been  the T - s c a l e  points.  T h i s change  experimental  and  group r e c o r d e d  Further  with  and  of  analysis  control  of Research  I.Q.  question  s c o r e s as  2  scores asked  exist  Question  whether  i t s pre-test T-scale  the T - s c a l e  indicate  addressed  conducted  the  that  the  for  the  experimental  during  the  i s s u e of  the  the  using pre-test the  criterion  v a r i a t e measure.  difference  existed  on  between  the p r e - t e s t measure  and variable  T a b l e s 4 and  t h e p o s t - t e s t m e a s u r e of  the  relationship  experimental the  experimental  (p  experimental reading  <p  <0.357>.  2  f o c u s s e d on f o r the  on  Reading s c o r e s as  g r o u p s u b j e c t s on d i d not  the  In  group.  c o v a r i a n c e was  I.Q.  to  after  gains.  that a s i g n i f i c a n t  Question and  of  the  treatment.  g r o u p moved -1.35  positions  analysis  reading  they  experimental  in r e a d i n g achievement,  control  Gates-MacGinitie  <0.014) w h i c h Test  the  Otis-Lennon  indicate  the  the T - s c a l e  groups would  statistical  significance  control  a greater gain  p e r i o d , than  on  the  for  T-scale points  In r e l a t i o n  in r e l a t i v e  control  greater after  T-scale points before  the  Therefore,  i n mean T - s c o r e s  b e f o r e , 2.92  T-scale points.  on  post-test  g r o u p s was  t o 1.27  position  An  difference  a p p l i e d than  level.  comparisons.  Its pre-test position  g r o u p moved 0.3  study  the  grade  and  relationship  between  control between  reading  groups.  gains  The  intelligence  and  5  32  reading  achievement  achievement reading  c o u l d be  w h i c h may  be  level data  and  an  and  the  gains  in  children involved  reading i n a home  I.Q.  score  g r o u p s u b j e c t s . T h i s was  sources  could  f o r an  control  feel  a n a l y s i s of  f o r the  effects test  Otis-Lennon  test  as  results  shown  scores  in Tables  total  found  t o be  reading  and  .6145, w h i c h was  confidence  in u s i n g  a these  covariance. of  scores  the  Gates-MacGinit1e  f o r a l l experimental  a m e a s u r e of  using Gates-MacGinit1es  are  Otis-Lennon  calculated using  Otis-Lennon  where one  To  r e g i s t e r e d by  for Gates-MacGinitie  P e a r s o n ' s r was  control  to e x p l a i n  program?  Pearson's r  scores  used  I.Q.  an  as  the  a n a l y s i s of criterion  c o v a r i a t e was  4 and  5 below.  covariance  variable  conducted.  These  and  33  Table ANCOVA T o t a l  Source  Sum  Gates-MacGi n itie  of  4  Reading  Squares  Pre-Test.  DF  MS  F  Sig.  3984.020  1  3984.020  93.341  36.420  1  36.420  0.853  0 .357  Explai ned  4020.440  2  2010.220  47.097  0 .000  Residual  6530.400  153  42.682  covariate Main  Otis  Effects  Group  p  0 .0000  <0.05 Table ANCOVA T o t a l  Source  Sum  Gates-MacGi n it ie  of Squares  5  Reading  Post-Test.  DF  MS  F  Sig.  4618.893  1  4618.893  108.290  0.000  263.166  1  263.166  6.170  0.014  Exp 1ai n e d  4882.056  1  2441.030  57.230  0.000  R e s i dua1  6525.915  153  42.653  covariate Main  p  Otis  Effects  <0.05  34  An was  examination  of  a highly significant  pre-test/post-test was  of  difference reading the  I.Q.  effects  of  post-test A  the  then  7.  the  these  as  f set  at  results  was  at  the  .014  f o r the  on  scores.  scores. a  surprise the  control  pre-test scores. Table  reading  c o n v e r t i n g raw using  total  and  When  and  group With  5 shows t h a t ability,  used purely  the  when  the the  significant  scores  as  for  a descriptive  in vocabulary  tables provided  in  population,  experimental  occurred  g r o u p means a r e  during  shown  and  the  These grade e q u i v a l e n t  what c h a n g e s h a d  Population  The  significant  c o n t r o l l e d , was  t o be  t e c h n i c a l manual.  to see  level  there  level.  data  to grade s c o r e s  analyzed  study.  .05  treatment  c o n d u c t e d by  groups,  the  i n the  expected  reading  I.Q.  controlled  exist  were s t a t i s t i c a l l y  Gates-MacGinitie  control  of  d i d not  experimental  I.Q.  comprehension  were  between  Otis-Lennon  g r o u p between  f u r t h e r a n a l y s i s of  statistic  5 shows t h a t  e x i s t e d between p o s t - t e s t e x p e r i m e n t a l  s c o r e s , which  of  and  were s t a t i s t i c a l l y  significance  effect  4 and  relationship  scores  i n the main e f f e c t s  effects  of  Tables  scores and  the  length  in Tables  6  and  35  Table Population  and Group Means and  Post-Test  6  f o r Gates-MacGinitie Vocabulary  Scores  Vocabulary Year  Group  1985  Total  1985  Exper imental  1985  Control  Population  No.  Grade  Total  1986  Exper imental  1986  Control  Population  rounded  Score  Standard Dev i a t i o n  1.9  78  4.2  2.0  78  4.0  1.8  .2  156  5.3  4.4  78  5.8  5.8  78  4.8  2.3  Di ff e r e n c e  Scores  Mean  4.1  156  Di f f e r e n c e  1986  Pre-Test  o f f to nearest  1 .0  tenth  36  Table Population  7  a n d Group Means f o r G a t e s - M a c G i n i t i e and  Post-Test  Comprehension  Scores  Comprehension Year  Group  1985  Total  1985  Exper imental  1985  Control  No.  Population  Grade  Total  1986  Exper imental  1986  Control  Population  understood  4.5  5.4  78  3.7  1.2  .8  156  4.8  5.5  78  5.3  7.6  78  4.3  1 .2  to  1.0  the l i m i t a t i o n s they  can s e r v e  describe vocabulary  tenth.  i n the use of grade s c o r e s a r e w e l l  a purpose here  and comprehension  separately.  Also,  significance  to the s c o r e s r e p o r t e d  point exists  Dev i a t 1 on  Score  78  rounded o f f to the nearest  While  Standard  3.9  Di f f e r e n c e  Scores  Mean  4.1  156  Di f f e r e n c e  1986  Pre-Test  the r e s e a r c h e r  because test  used  t o a s s i g n any  6 and 7 but r a t h e r t o  out that a d i f f e r e n c e i n average grade score i n the p r e - t e s t and p o s t - t e s t s c o r e s  are being  performance  i s not s e e k i n g in Tables  they  performance  f o r the experimental  and  37  control  groups.  On group  the Gates-MacGin1tie  recorded  an  sub-test  i n c r e a s e o f 1.6 g r a d e  pre-test  and p o s t - t e s t r e s u l t s .  increase  o f 0.8 g r a d e  post-test on  results.  the vocabulary  score  s u b - t e s t w a s 0.2 g r a d e  formation  of the experimental  alternate  assignment  helped than  was  group  group  their  recorded  the post-test difference  comprehension  skill  control  during  great  i n c r e a s e o f 0.8 g r a d e  The c o n t r o l  s u b - t e s t w a s 0.8 g r a d e 1.0  treatment  the course  score  grade  d i d produce group  of the study  i n vocabulary.  score  skill  points group  their  The p r e - t e s t d i f f e r e n c e  was  treatment  the  p o i n t s between  f o r the experimental  as that produced  controlled  reported  of comprehension  score  that  on t h e 1985  p r e - t e s t and p o s t - t e s t r e s u l t s .  the experimental  was by  sub-test  on t h e c o m p r e h e n s i o n  group  group  The f a c t  of the study.  and p o s t - t e s t r e s u l t s .  Apparently  points.  the course  i n c r e a s e o f 0.6 g r a d e  groups  points while the  better vocabulary  an  an  t h e two  t o develop  pre-test  while  between  the experimental  an  groups  recorded  Apparently  recorded  two  score  their  p r e - t e s t and  s c o r e s makes these  group over  group  score  and control  Reading Test  the Gates-MacGinitie  experimental between  grade  the experimental  p o i n t s between  their  o f c l a s s members b a s e d  the experimental  On  1.0  more m e a n i n g f u l .  the control  The c o n t r o l  The p r e - t e s t d i f f e r e n c e  difference  differences  score  p o i n t s between  post-test  Gates-MacGinitie  of vocabulary  between the  score  point  points. some g a i n i n  when c o m p a r e d  to the  b u t t h e g a i n was n o t a s  38  From following 1.  The  the  2.  experimental  can  be  f o r the  The  significant  the  experimental  and  d i f f e r e n c e s between  presented  the  made. a greater gain  in total  T-scores  than  reading  the  3). d i f f e r e n c e in post-test  experimental  pre-test scores  3.  analyses  Gates-MacGinitie  a significant  reading scores  statistical  group r e c o r d e d  group d i d ( T a b l e  i n the  the  a s m e a s u r e d by  T h e r e was  exist  of  observations  achievement control  results  and  control  ( T a b l e s 4 and  Gates-MacGinitie  groups which d i d  5).  d i f f e r e n c e in p o s t - t e s t i n g r e a d i n g s c o r e s control the  group cannot  groups  be  ( T a b l e A and  attributed 5).  to  for  I.Q.  not  CHAPTER IV CONCLUSIONS, DISCUSSION, AND  The parent  present  involvement  children. British which  and  content  study  such  and c o n t r o l  dimension  and c l a s s r o o m  No r e s e a r c h  f o r the control  groups.  of classroom  effect  Variance  reviewed  of teacher  In t e a c h e r  curriculums  on t h e c o m p a r i s o n  as t h i s .  Therefore, within class  addressed  Would c h i l d r e n  variables between  a b i l i t i e s and  groups  comparison,  in a  pooled  i n the experimental  reading  the f o l l o w i n g questions.  who r e a d  to their  parents  demonstrate b e t t e r achievement test  than  children  Can t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p  They  39  were:  a t home a n d r e c e i v e on a s t a n d a r d i z e d  who do n o t ?  between  to  i n r e a d i n g c o u l d have a  o f whole c l a s s  were made i n ways d e s c r i b e d  study  coaching  2.  an a d d e d  variables  instruction.  i n the  (Chapter 2 ) .  This 1.  of their  c u r r i c u l u m v a r i a b l e s when m a k i n g c o m p a r i s o n s  across grades, design  the e f f e c t s of  s t u d i e s conducted  1982) w i t h  of teacher  in reading  manipulation  confounding  e t a l . (1980,  area had allowed  classroom  experimental  to replicate  f o r the control  in this  to investigate  a t home on t h e r e a d i n g p r o g r e s s  I s l e s by T i z a r d  called  their  was c o n d u c t e d  I t was d e s i g n e d  curriculum date  study  RECOMMENDATIONS  intelligence  and r e a d i n g  40  achievement  be u s e d  achievement  w h i c h may be r e g i s t e r e d  in  a home r e a d i n g  Conclusions  coaching reading  test  reading  who r e a d  than  to their  children  the treatment to parents  provided  g r e a t e r average gain  staff  i s s u e s such  of the study,  related  components o f r e a d i n g a b i l i t y groups.  The d e s i g n  Reading Test)  used  in this  differences studies  skills.  group.  them,  performance  While the  suggest  a n d commitment  i n the f i r s t  i n the vocabulary  some  research,  enabled  of parent  of the school  q u e s t i o n , was a and comprehension  f o r the experimental  and c o n t r o l  (Gates-MacGinitie  the r e s e a r c h e r involvement  t o draw  i n the  c a t e g o r i e s t e s t e d , namely V o c a b u l a r y  An a t t e m p t  was a l s o made t o d e t e r m i n e  i n r e a d i n g performance which  c o u l d be a t t r i b u t e d  from  as the d u r a t i o n of the study, the  the e f f e c t s  r e a d i n g p r o g r a m on s p e c i f i c  groups,  f o r the  the r e s u l t s  of the s t a n d a r d i z e d reading  some c o n c l u s i o n s a b o u t  Comprehension  in reading  to the control  Inherent  to increases  coaching  Reading T e s t s ,  and the energy  t o the experiment.  question  on a s t a n d a r d i z e d  f o r the experimental  q u e s t i o n was c o n f i r m e d ,  around  1  a t home a n d r e c i e v e  a t home a n d r e c e i v i n g  g r o u p when c o m p a r e d  research  novelty  parents  Questions  who do n o t .  a s m e a s u s e d by t h e G a t e s - M a c G i n i t i e experimental  Involved  program?  produced a s i g n i f i c a n t l y  discussion  by c h i l d r e n  demonstrate b e t t e r achievement  Evidently  first  in reading  R e l a t i n g t o the R e s u l t s of Research  Would c h i l d r e n  i.e.,  t o e x p l a i n the gains  to teacher  h a d been  variables?  cited  if  and the  in previous  Would d i f f e r e n c e s  41  in  r e a d i n g performance s t i l l  within  class  exist  in a replicative  study  where  c o m p a r i s o n s were made.  Di s c u s s i on (a) Duration  of study.  f i v e months and r a n from determinants students  into  district's end  of t h i s  annual  of February  obtained  a full  any  assessment  1986.  Given  and c o n t r o l  school in this  year study  that  groups  their  i f the treatment  the r e a d i n g program c o u l d produce  novel  of the study.  Would  p r o g r a m be s t r e n g t h e n e d When t h e p r o j e c t interest to  the c o n t r o l  children's reading  experience.  this  even  were  betwen  the s u b j e c t s s c h o o l , few i f  of r e a d i n g  of parents,  greater gains  ability. a t home,  f o r the  group.  Many p a r e n t s  had never  i n t h i s way b e f o r e feeling  and t h e i r  o r weakened o v e r  began p a r e n t s  i n the study.  Involvement  at the  h a d been a p p l i e d  i n an e l e m e n t a r y  maximum p o t e n t i a l  that continued  of  the experimental  even g r e a t e r d i f f e r e n c e s  in  their  and promotion  of the study  i s i t p o s s i b l e that  were s t u d e n t s  group over  The main  o f 1985 a n d t h e s c h o o l  the r e s u l t s  c o u l d be a r g u e d  with  the placement  i n September  It  (b) N o v e l t y  1986.  o f t e n motnhs? C o n s i d e r i n g t h a t  w o u l d have r e a l i z e d  experimental  t o a p e r i o d of  o f r e a d i n g w h i c h was c o n d u c t e d  c o u l d have p r o d u c e d  experimental  involved  groups  was l i m i t e d  1985 t o F e b r u a r y  frame were  i n a f i v e month p e r i o d  treatment  for  October  time  new c l a s s  The s t u d y  i n t r o d u c e and e x p l a i n the p r o j e c t ,  and they  involvement  a high  involved  found  a longer p e r i o d of  demonstrated  At the October  been  i ta  with the time?  degree of  2nd 1985 m e e t i n g o f p a r e n t s 48 p a r e n t s  of experimental  42  group c h i l d r e n student  were  body w h i c h  population parents, regular  was  in attendance. represented  Impressive  parent  contacted  by  permission  letter  t o have  officially  saying  that  parents'.  parents  their  notified  made many  and c h i l d r e n  little  children  attrition.  the school  part  project,  i n my  (c)Energy  which  with  children  Christmas  a n d commitment felt  The w e e k l y  these  reading,  these,  date,  not the r a t e of  a n a l y s i s of  homes t o e n c o u r a g e  t h e home r e a d i n g p r o g r a m .  h a d no t i m e before  single  Christmas  was t h e w o r s t readers  c o u l d have c o n t i n u e d  of school  staff.  with the  of the year.  In t h e s c h o o l  associated with  of d i s t r i b u t i n g  parents  to the  o f home  the remainder  In  a n d two  working  to cater  the p o p u l a t i o n  an e x t r a b u r d e n  task  Of  forms.  In o t h e r s ,  s t a b l e and they  their  at a later  r e v o l v e d round s h i f t w o r k  o p i n i o n , throughout  certainly  were  i n the study.  (an a t t r i t i o n  of r e c o r d  The p e r i o d j u s t  After  relatively  attended  group c h i l d r e n  of withdrawal  contacts with  to continue  of t h e i r  remained  research.  take  was a p r o b l e m .  school's request.  total  of ten  p o p u l a t i o n , who  of experimental  because of the nonreturn  teachers  to the average  18%) were n o t i n c l u d e d i n t h e f i n a l  working parents,  for  school  for a  of the s c h o o l ' s  ( s e e a p p e n d i x ) o r phone a n d a l l g i v e  some homes t h e l i f e s t y l e ,  who saw  when c o m p a r e d  T h i s meant s i x t e e n s t u d e n t s  Teachers  of attendance  under h a l f  i t was t h e s c h o o l ' s j o b t o t e a c h  approximately results  level  a s s o c i a t i o n meetings.  However, a l l p a r e n t s  one  just  r e p r e s e n t i n g the t o t a l monthly  This  and c o l l e c t i n g  setting  this reading  43  record  forms,  classroom, record  c h a r t i n g these  responding  forms,  materials project  to parents'  locating  During  were a l l time  the project teachers  agreed  associated with  children  a t home a n d i n c r e a s e d c o n t a c t  but  teachers  of  staff  sustain this  commitment the level  reading  reading  consuming  that  increased parental  glad  there  for, i fa full  between  parents  with  A high  degree to  involvement  program  their  and teachers,  be n e c e s s a r y  and s t a f f  year's  obvious  involvement  and leadership d r i v e would parent,  activities.  were  t o see the p r o j e c t end.  of student,  project called  on  a n d i n many w a y s a c t i n g a s p r o m o t e r s o f t h e  classrooms,  were  i n the  track of suitable  benefits  many  chart  comments a n d q u e s t i o n s  and keeping  forchildren,  In t h e i r  r e t u r n s on a w a l l  that  had been  implemented. A single  project coordinator  such  a project  i n a school  left  to the discretion (d)Comparing  Gates-MacGinitie control  group.  vocabulary  o r group  Reading Test a formal  and comprehension  It reading  in fact  would  be  ability  were  logical between  class  I t should  gains  gains  the experimental  research  question  on t h e  group  and the  regarding  by t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l  Reading Test  n o t be  teachers.  and comprehensive  between  g r o u p s on t h e G a t e s - M a c G i n i t i e comparisons  of schools.  of individual  the vocabulary  While  i s perhaps required to organize  and control  was n o t made,  made. t o assume  that  the experimental  differentiated and control  gains i n  groups  in this  44  research reading  w o u l d be ability  largely  comprehension  with  questioning Chapter  For  of  Obviously skills the  s c o r e s on  0.8  the  experimental compared  control  group.  do  1.6  of  e m p h a s i s was  to develop and  group t o an  recorded  an  i n c r e a s e of  Apparently  group, even  the  though  average  placed  on  In  were  group r e c o r d e d  an  the  twice  control  better  g a i n of  In  group.  vocabulary Comprehension  0.8  f o r the  i t was  not  treatment  grade  score the  d i d produce  experimental specifically  and  the  grade score p o i n t s f o r  experimental  ability  children  Reading Test  treatment.  0.6  because  p o s t - t e s t Vocabulary  developed  experimental  on  difference  comprehension.  experimental  group had  the  a  surprising  g r a d e s c o r e p o i n t s w h i c h was  in comprehension  control  no  Gates-MacGinitie the  experimental  points  the  and  g r a d e s c o r e p o i n t s r e c o r d e d by  as a r e s u l t  some g a i n  the  Vocabulary  i n c r e a s e of  increase  somewhat  also  of  largely  (see Appendix) to a s s i s t  word a t t a c k s k i l l s strategies  component  concentrated  t r u e t h e r e was  d i f f e r e n c e s between p r e -  Comprehension  average  t h i s was  instruction  or o t h e r  3 the  described.  While  p e r f o r m a n c e w h i c h was  p a r e n t s were g i v e n minimally  vocabulary  because p a r e n t a l coaching  word r e c o g n i t i o n . in  c o n f i n e d t o the  group  over  designed  to  so. It  gains  i s p o s s i b l e that  in comprehension  Heckleman's study  unison  retarded  the  ability  (1969) study r e a d i n g by  home r e a d i n g p r o g r a m a c t i v i t y similar  t o the  i n v o l v i n g unison a d u l t s and  readers produced  surprising  gains r e p o r t e d in  reading?  children  produced  who  In  Heckleman's  were c l a s s i f i e d  increases in vocabulary  and  as  45  comprehension  ability  vocabulary  or  story content  a holistic  activity  oral  even  which  reading practice  develops  the  though  t h e r e was  during  the  reading sessions.  skills  practice  of  reading a b i l i t y  The  their  t o some d e g r e e . S t a t i s t i c a l  I.Q.  d i f f e r e n c e s cannot  must  look  s e l f - c o n c e p t and  in reading,  The  the  Salt,  child's  determinants  of  exact  and  by  nature  studies not  1975;  reading success extent  p o s e d but  of  v a r i a b l e s were n o t  teacher  that  registered that  so  we  produces  to  Ketcham,  emotional  security  supported  by  i n f l u e n c e s can  a factor  Again study  and  perform  1967;  Revicki,  1982  are  this only  which  f o r the  research. be  The  determined  In s t u d i e s c i t e d  earlier  concern  in a comparative  a n a l y s i s of of  experimental t h a t had  the  test  teacher  results  research  clear  that  c o n t r i b u t e d to  group.  control  the  a formal  i t was  reading  the  as  1978;  average  a s s o c i a t e d with  improved  shown  in students  Sugarman,  v a r i a b l e s upon  area.  present  gains  word  results.  are  these  and  research.  subject  i n the  of  than  involvement  r e s e a r c h e r s such  Coons and  other  improvement  is  apparently  a n a l y s i s has  parental  s e l f - c o n c e p t and  effect  in t h i s  and  to e x p l a i n these  further controlled (e)The  f o r the  skills;  r e c e i v e d must h a v e  a d r i v e or d e s i r e  c o n t e n t i o n s made by  H u b b a r d and that  account  to reading p r a c t i c e  a stronger better  that c h i l d r e n  Reading  component  in t h i s study  recognition. reading  d i s c u s s i o n of  i n v o l v e s a number of  i n t h e ways u s e d  component  no  previous  question  was  teacher  differentiated  g r o u p and been  of  a key  results. variable  the  control  factor The and  of  difficulties  46  their  manipulation  ethical  questions  research  organized  areas  group  because  group  by  reading  also associated with  children group  were  concept  However,  with  and d i f f i c u l t  should  i n v o l v e d i n a home r e a d i n g  the  class  fact  should  that  be i g n o r e d ,  the research  conditions  to justify  adds more s t r e n g t h  experimental  treatment  which  were  the present  research  Conclusions Can  the relationship  achievement  which  results  of a  class  half  was a c c e p t e d . under that  be  of The  these i t was t h e  of teacher  variables in  involvement  a t home  related  i n reading and  gains.  be u s e d  The  into  i twould  that half  R e l a t i n g t o the R e s u l t s of Research  home r e a d i n g  i n these  h a s a n s w e r e d one more q u e s t i o n  of parental  achievement  a  thought  having  the difference.  reading  reading  staff  confirmed  the possible effects  corresponding  by  p r o j e c t and the other  controlling  the interaction  was r e l u c t a n t  involvement  to the conclusion made  was  of r e s u l t s  to parents  By  to  activity  so the alternative  questions  to parents of  a possible carry-over  the school  unethical  a n d some  In the present  The r e s e a r c h e r  b e n e f i t from p a r e n t a l  self  performance.  be  explained  a n d an a l t e r n a t i v e children.  obvious  this.  of p o s s i b l e contamination  children  improving  c u r r i c u l u m were  f o r the study  f o rcontrol  do t h i s  control  were  the reasons  experimental  to  of the reading  between  Intelligence  to explain the gains  Question  2  and reading in reading  may b e r e g i s t e r e d b y c h i l d r e n i n  program?  of the a n a l y s i s of covariance  presented  in Tables  4  47  and  5 i n Chapter  statistically post-test finding  controlled  experimental  because  data  than  2 i n a n e g a t i v e way.  and c o n t r o l  experimental  This  T h i s p r o v i d e d more h a d done  the experimental  i s more d e f e n s i b l e i n t h i s  and c o n t r o l  t h e same t e a c h e r  i n t h e same way.  between  g r o u p c o m p a r i s o n s were made  The c o n c l u s i o n t h a t  t h e same c l a s s w i t h  program  existed  group r e a d i n g s c o r e s .  h a d made t h e d i f f e r e n c e  instance because  difference  o f I.Q. were  previous research studies c i t e d  groups.  intervention  in  and c o n t r o l  the experimental class  t h a t when t h e e f f e c t s  a significant  answered q u e s t i o n  meaningful  within  3 indicated  g r o u p s u b j e c t s were  seated  t e a c h i n g t h e same r e a d i n g  The home r e a d i n g p r o g r a m was t h e o n l y  difference. Suggestions  f o r Further  This present research  Research  research study  i n the area  of parental  r e a d i n g programs of t h e i r ( a ) The e f f e c t s program over with  Involvement  elementary  of p a r e n t a l  school  involvement  a longer p e r i o d of time  similalr  progress  l e d t o some s u g g e s t i o n s  i n r e a d i n g over  a one y e a r  a t home w i t h t h e children.  a t home  i n the r e a d i n g  c o u l d be e x p l o r e d .  c o n t r o l s t o the present  study,  for further  designed  A  study,  to track  pupil  p e r i o d , o r l o n g e r , w o u l d be  interest ing. (b) P a r t i c u l a r different  grade  number o f c l a s s would enable  weightings levels  t o the e f f e c t s  c o u l d be made.  groups at primary  comparative  analyses  o f home r e a d i n g p r o g r a m s a t  A study  involving  and i n t e r m e d i a t e grade t o be made t o d e t e r m i n e  a  larger  levels i f gains  48  a r e more  likely  to occur  at c e r t a i n  (c)  This present  research suggests  the  relationship  between  concept,  grade  levels.  further  study  reading a b i l i t y  substantially  Influence  ( d ) No a t t e m p t  was made  control  g r o u p s who h a d been  school.  How w o u l d s u c h  a trained  (e) Attempts might the s i z e  could  practice  this  These  this  o f time  A study  be b e t t e r s e r v e d by  assistance  Optimum  Statement  spending  i s a relationship  i n these  types of  spend r e a d i n g t o t h e i r  sampling  times  children  teacher?  i f there  that c h i l d r e n  using a larger  question.  such  of c l a s s  and frequency  groups o f home  determined.  t o the Study  f o l l o w i n g c o n c l u s i o n s may be drawn  from  the f i n d i n g s of  research.  ( a ) Under will  learning  and  a s s i s t a n c e i nthe  r e a d i n g c o u l d p e r h a p s be more a c c u r a t e l y  Concluding The  they  of reading gains r e g i s t e r e d  a t home.  address  Would  the g a i n s i n  in experimental  learning  be made t o d e t e r m i n e  p r o g r a m s a n d t h e amount parents  receiving  t o compare  a home r e a d i n g p r o g r a m a f f e c t  reading d i f f i c u l t i e s ?  between  study  w h i c h were made by s t u d e n t s  with  Are these  a n d i s i t o n l y p a r e n t s who c a n  in the present  ability  time  self  them?  reading  extra  be made o f  and the s t u d e n t s '  ego s t r e n g t h , a n d s o c i a l - e m o t i o n a l c o m f o r t .  f a c t o r s p r e d i c t o r s of r e a d i n g a b i l i t y  with  might  certain  conditions reading practice  produce s i g n i f i c a n t g a i n s cannot  ( b ) The V o c a b u l a r y  gains  in reading a b i l i t y  be a t t r i b u t e d component  a t home w i t h  to intelligence  of r e a d i n g a b i l i t y  a parent  for children. alone.  a s m e a s u r e d on a  49  standardized nature.  test  i s most  The e x p e r i m e n t a l  Vocabulary  that  group  registered  also  Comprehension  trained  teacher  group  the control  by a home r e a d i n g p r o g r a m o f t h i s  registered  group d i d .  a small  gain  twice  However,  over  the gain i n the experimental  the control  group i n  ability.  ( c ) The n o t i o n to  affected  that  t h e t e a c h i n g o f r e a d i n g s h o u l d be e n t r u s t e d o n l y  p r o f e s s i o n a l s cannot  v a r i a b l e was c o n t r o l l e d  be t o t a l l y in t h i s  involvement  i n r e a d i n g a t home s t i l l  differences  in reading a b i l i t y  group c h i l d r e n  when t h e  research, parental  produced  between  when t h e e f f e c t s  supported.  significant  experimental  o f I.Q. were  and c o n t r o l  statistically  con t r o l i e d . (d) P a r e n t s only  s h o u l d be i n v o l v e d w i t h  because  they  a r e an u n t a p p e d s o u r c e  instruction  but because p a r e n t s  association  with  no  can have.  one e l s e  (e)  Involvement  which  with  shifting  of parents  emphasis  of support  have a v i t a l  a t home  further  f o r teacher  interest  i n and  i n the r e a d i n g program  i s a goal  by e d u c t i o n a l j u r i s d i c t i o n s numbers a n d t e a c h e r  i n the a l l o c a t i o n  p o i n t s t o the need  t h e community  c h i l d r e n ' s r e a d i n g not  c h i l d r e n ' s s c h o o l i n g and s e l f - c o n c e p t which  Fluctuations in pupil  government and  their  s h o u l d be p u r s u e d  America.  their  f o r greater  supply  of monetary  of t h e i r  coupled  r e s o u r c e s by  involvelment  at large i n the education  i n North  of parents  children.  BIBLIOGRAPHY Anselmo, Sandra. "Parent Involvement H o u s e . 50 ( 1 9 7 7 ) , 2 9 7 - 2 9 9 .  i n t h e S c h o o l s . " CI e a r i n g  Anselmo, Sandra. " I m p r o v i n g Home a n d P r e s c h o o l I n f l u e n c e s o n Language Development." The R e a d i n g T e a c h e r . 32 (November 1978), 139-143. B a u c h , J . P . , P.M. V i e t z e & V.D. in Parental P a r t i c i p a t i o n ? " (1973), 47-53.  Morris. "What M a k e s t h e C h i l d h o o d E d u c a t i o n . 50  Early  Difference  B e c k e r , H e n r y J a y , 8. J o y c e L . E p s t e i n . "Parent Involvement: Survey of Teacher P r a c t i c e s . " Elementary School J o u r n a l . (November 1982), 85-102.  A 83  Bing, Elizabeth. " E f f e c t o f C h i l d R e a r i n g P r a c t i c e s on D e v e l o p m e n t of D i f f e r e n t i a l C o g n i t i v e A b i l i t i e s . " C h i I d D e v e l o p m e n t . 34 (1963), 631-648. Bloom, Benjamin Deprivation.  Samuel. Contemporary Education for Cultural New Y o r k , NY: H o l t , R i n e h a r t a n d W i n s t o n , 1965.  Bronfenbrenner, Urle. "A R e p o r t o n L o n g i t u d i n a l E v a l u a t i o n s o f P r e s c h o o l P r o g r a m s . " R e p o r t N o . (OHD) 7 6 - 3 0 0 2 5 . Washington, D.C: Department o f H e a l t h , E d u c a t i o n and W e l f a r e , 1974. B r o w n , B.R., 8. M a r t i n D e u t s c h . "Some E f f e c t s o f S o c i a l C l a s s a n d R a c e on C h i l d r e n ' s L a n g u a g e a n d I n t e l l e c t u a l A b i l i t i e s : A New L o o k a t an O l d P r o b l e m . " Paper Read at S o c i e t y f o r Research in C h i l d Development, M i n n e a p o l i s , March 1965. Buros, Oscar, ed. The S e v e n t h M e n t a l M e a s u r e m e n t s Y e a r b o o k . Vol. I. The G r y p h o n P r e s s , H i g h l a n d P a r k , N . J . 1972. Caliguri, Urban  J.P. " W i l l P a r e n t s Take Over E d u c a t i o n . 6 ( 1 9 7 0 ) , 53-64.  Head S t a r t  Programs?"  C a m p b e l l , D.T., 8. J . C . S t a n l e y . E x p e r i m e n t a l and Q u a s l Experimental Designs f o r Research. C h i c a g o : Rand McNally, 1963. Cassidy, Jack & Carol Vukelich. Kids." The R e a d i n g T e a c h e r ,  "Survival Reading f o r Parents v o l . 31 ( M a r c h 1 9 7 8 , 6 3 8 - 6 4 1 .  and  Chan, Jimmy. " P a r e n t i n g S t y l e s and C h i l d r e n ' s R e a d i n g A b i l i t i e s : Hong Kong S t u d y . " J o u r n a l o f R e a d i n g 24 (May 1 9 8 1 ) 6 6 7 - 6 7 5 . 50  A  Chomsky, C a r o l . " S t a g e s i n Language Development and R e a d i n g Exposure" H a r v a r d E d u c a t i o n a l Review. 42, 1 ( 1 9 7 2 ) , 1.-33. ( E R I C D o c u m e n t E J 0 5 5 6 5 0 ) . C o o n s , J o h n E . , & S t e p h e n D. S u g a r m a n . E d u c a t i o n by C h o i c e : The C a s e f o r F a m i l y C o n t r o l . B e r k e l e y : U n i v e r s i t y of California Press, 1978. C r o s s e t , R o b e r t J . , J r . "The E x t e n t a n d E f f e c t o f P a r e n t s ' P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n T h e i r C h i l d r e n ' s B e g i n n i n g Reading Program: An I n n e r c l t y P r o j e c t . " D o c t o r a l D i s s e r t a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y o f C i n c i n n a t i , 1972. U n i v e r s i t y M i c r o f i l m s , No. 7 2 - 3 1 , 9 2 2 . (ERIC Document ED076946.) E p s t e i n , J o y c e L . , 8, H e n r y J a y B e c k e r . "Teachers' Reported P r a c t i c e s of P a r e n t a l I n v o l v e m e n t : Problems and P o s s i b i l i t i e s . " E l e m e n t a r y S c h o o l J o u r n a l . 83 (November 1 9 8 2 ) , 103-113. E v a n s , D a l e . "An I n s t r u c t i o n a l P r o g r a m t o E n h a n c e Parent-Pupil School I n t e r a c t i o n s . " ED)48342. A r l i n g t o n VA: E R I C D o c u m e n t Reproductions Service, 1971. G a t e s , A r t h u r J . , & W a l t e r H. M a c G l n i t i e . Gates-MacGinit1e . R e a d i n g T e s t s . Canadian Ed., T e a c h e r ' s Manual, F o r m s A - E , T h o m a s N e l s o n 8. S o n s L t d . , 1 9 7 9 . G i l more, John. P a r e n t a l I n f l u e n c e on A c a d e m i c A c h i e v e m e n t . N o r m l l n e , 2. New Y o r k : H a r c o u r t B r a c e J o v a n o v i c h , n . d . G o o d s o n , B a r b a r a D., 8, R o b e r t D. H e s s . P a r e n t s as Teachers o f Y o u n g C h i l d r e n : An E v a l u a t i v e R e v i e w o f Some Contemporary Concepts and Programs. Washington, D.C: Bureau of E d u c a t i o n a l P e r s o n n e l Development, Department of H e a l t h , E d u c a t i o n and W e l f a r e , 1975. Gordon, I r a J . Theory i n t o  "What Do We K n o w A b o u t P a r e n t s a s T e a c h e r s ? " P r a c t i c e . 11 ( 1 9 7 2 ) , 1 4 6 - 1 4 9 .  G o r d o n , I r a . "What D o e s R e s e a r c h S a y A b o u t t h e E f f e c t s o f P a r e n t a l I n v o l v e m e n t on S c h o o l i n g ? " Paper p r e s e n t e d at the Annual M e e t i n g of the A s s o c i a t i o n f o r S u p e r v i s i o n and C u r r i c u l u m Development, 1978. G r i m m e t , S a d i e , 8, May M c C o y . " E f f e c t s of P a r e n t a l Communication R e a d i n g P e r f o r m a n c e o f T h i r d G r a d e C h i l d r e n . " The R e a d i n g T e a c h e r . v o l . 33 (December 1 9 8 0 ) , 303-308. Groberg, D.C:  E.H. U.S.  Review of R e s e a r c h : 1965-1969. Washington, Government P r i n t i n g O f f i c e , 1969.  on  52  H e c k l e m a n , R.G. "A N e u r o l o g i c a l I m p r e s s M e t h o d o f R e m e d i a l Reading I n s t r u c t i o n . " A c a d e m i c T h e r a p y . 4:4 ( S u m m e r 1 9 6 9 ) , 2 7 7 - 2 8 2 . H e w i s o n , J . Home E n v i r o n m e n t a n d R e a d i n g A t t a i n m e n t : A Study o f C h i l d r e n l n a W o r k i n g C l a s s Community. U n p u b l i s h e d Doctoral D i s s e r t a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y of London, 1979. Hewison, Jenny, e t a l . "Parental Involvement and Reading Attai nment."British Journal of Educational Psychology, v o l . 50 (November 1 9 8 0 ) , 2 0 9 - 2 1 5 . Hubbard, Douglas, & John S a l t . "Family Support and t h e Young R e a d e r . " F o r u m f o r t h e D i s c u s s i o n o f New T r e n d s i n Educat i o n . ( S p r i n g 1975), 63-64. I r v i n e , David J . Parent Involvment A f f e c t s C h i l d r e n ' s C o g n i t i v e Growth. A l b a n y : S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y o f New Y o r k , D i v i s i o n o f Research, 1979. K e t c h a m , C l a y A. " T h e Home B a c k g r o u n d a n d R e a d e r S e l f - C o n c e p t w h i c h Relate t o Reading Achievement." Doctoral D i s s e r t a t i o n , Lehigh U n i v e r s i t y , 1966 D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s , 28 (2-A) ( 1 9 6 7 ) , 4 9 9 . (ERIC Document P 4 2 0 0 4 4 8 5 ) K l e i n , A n n E. "Parental i n e s s Development." 272-276.  Involvement In C h i l d r e n ' s R e a d i n g ReadR e a d i n g H o r i z o n s . 18 ( S u m m e r 1 9 7 8 ) ,  L a v i n , D a v i d E. "The P r e d i c t i o n o f A c a d e m i c P e r f o r m a n c e : A T h e o r e t i c a l A n a l y s i s i n Review of Research." New Y o r k , NY: R u s s e l l Sage F o u n d a t i o n , 1965. L o b a n , W a l t e r D. The Language o f E l e m e n t a r y Urbana, I L :National Council of Teachers  School C h i l d r e n . of E n g l i s h , 1963.  Matuszek, P a u l a . "Review o f Research i n P a r e n t Involvement i n E d u c a t i o n , I n t e r i m R e p o r t : Low S o c i o e c o n o m i c S t a t u s a n d M i n o r i t y Student Achievement Study." A u s t i n Independent School D i s t r i c t , Texas, J u l y 1977. (ED161980). M c D o n a l d , F r e d e r i c k M. "Report Teacher E v a l u a t i o n Study." 27 ( 1 9 7 6 ) , 3 9 - 4 2 .  on Phase I I o f t h e B e g i n n i n g Journal of Teacher Education.  M c K i n n e y , J o h n A. "The D e v e l o p m e n t a n d I m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f a T u t o r i a l Program f o r P a r e n t s t o Improve t h e R e a d i n g and Mathematics Achievement of Their C h i l d r e n . " ED113703. A r l i n g t o n , VA: ERIC Document R e p r o d u c t i o n S e r v i c e , 1 9 7 5 .  O t i s , A r t h u r S., & R o g e r T. L e n n o n . Otis-Lennon Test. H a r c o u r t , B r a c e J o v a n o v i c h , 1970. P o w e 1 1 , W i 1 1 i am R. Summer 1 9 6 9 , 6  i n Journal of ( 2 ) , 3-10.  Educational  Mental  Ability  Measurement,  R e v i c k i , D e n n i s A. The R e l a t i o n s h i p B e t w e e n S e l f C o n c e p t and Achievement: An I n v e s t i g a t i o n o f R e c i p r o c a l Effects New Y o r k : A m e r i c a n E d u c a t i o n a l R e s e a r c h A s s o c ! a t l o , 1982. R i c h e k , M a r g a r e t Ann, e t a l . R e a d i n g P r o b l e m s . C l i f f s , N J : P r e n t i c e - H a l l , I n c . , 1983.  Englewood  Shelton, Judith. "An A n a l y s i s o f a F a m i l y I n v o l v e m e n t Communication System i n a T i t l e 1 Elementary S c h o o l : F i n a l Report." ED082091, A r l i n g t o n , VA: ERIC Document R e p r o d u c t i o n S e r v i c e , 1973. S u l l i v a n , Howard J . , & C a r o l LeBeaune. " E f f e c t s of P a r e n t A d m i n i s t e r e d Summer R e a d i n g I n s t r u c t i o n . " Paper p r e s e n t e d at t h e AERA M e e t i n g , M i n n e a p o l i s , M a r c h 1 9 7 0 . ERIC Document R e p r o d u c t i o n S e r v i c e ED042831. T i z a r d , J a c k , et a l . " C o l l a b o r a t i o n Between T e a c h e r s and P a r e n t s i n A s s i s t i n g Children's Reading." B r i t i s h Journal of E d u c a t i o n a l P s v c h o 1 o g y . v o l . 52 ( F e b r u a r y 1 9 8 2 ) , 1-15. Tobin, Aileen. "A L o n g i t u d i n a l S t u d y o f t h e S o c i a l , P s y c h o l o g i c a l and I n s t r u c t i o n a l C o r r e l a t e s of E a r l y R e a d i n g Achievement." U n p u b l i s h e d d i s s e r t a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y o f D e l a w a r e , N e w a r d , DE, 1981. Van  R o e k e l , B y r o n H. "A R e v i e w o f t h e G a t e s - M a c G i n 1 t 1 e Reading T e s t . " The S e v e n t h M e n t a l M e a s u r e m e n t Y e a r b o o k . Vol. 1. O s c a r B u r o s ( e d . ) The G r y p h o n P r e s s , H i g h l a n d P a r k , NJ, 1972.  Vukelich, Carol. "Parents' Role i n the Reading Process." The R e a d i n g T e a c h e r , v o l . 3 7 , ( F e b r u a r y 1 9 8 4 ) , 4 7 2 - 4 7 7 . Wilby, Peter. "The B e l f i e l d (March 29th, 1981).  Experiment."  Sunday  Times  Weekly.  W o o d s , C a r o l , e t a l . "The E f f e c t o f t h e P a r e n t I n v o l v e m e n t Program on R e a d i n g R e a d i n e s s S c o r e s . " M e s a , AZ: Mesa P u b l i c S c h o o l s , 1974. ( E R I C Document E D 1 0 4 5 2 7 ) .  APPENDIX 1 LETTER TO PARENTS  BOX 160. 32 HEATHER CRESCENT. M.'C^'-^E. B.C. - PHONE 997-3230  September 2 3 , 1985 Dear Mr. and Mrs.  ,  Your son/daughter , has been chosen to take part in some research that I am conducting into the influence of Parental Involvement in the Reading Program. I am trying to determine to what extent parental involvement, at home, in l i s t e n i n g to children read and "coaching" them in c e r t a i n ways, w i l l help to improve their c h i l d ' s reading scores on tests that the school d i s t r i c t gives in schools each year. The project involves the following: 1) Parents w i l l be required to attend monthly planning and instructional meetings at the school, to learn methods of "coaching" t h e i r c h i l d r e n . These methods are very simple, require no special t r a i n i n g and are not time consuming. 2) Parents w i l l be required to keeD a record of time spent in listening t h e i r c h i l d r e n read and in "coaching" them. 3) Parental consent is required to have t h e i r c h i l d take a group paper test of mental a b i l i t y — t h e Otis Lennon test of Mental A b i l i t y . Results w i l l be available to individual parents o n l y . In reports that students w i l l be identified by numbers and only I w i l l have the master w i l l be destroyed at the conclusion of the research.  to  pencil and {kS minutes). I write,.' l i s t which  Your p a r t i c i p a t i o n in this research w i l l be helpful in that it could identify better ways for parents to help their children at home. A l s o , your c h i l d should benefit from your interest and inovlvement in t h e i r reading program. The results of this experiment for your c h i l d *i11 be communicated to you at the conclusion of the research. P a r t i c i p a t i o n in this research is voluntary and you may withdraw at any time by notifying me.  2  56-  Page 2 S e p t . 23,  1985  I am s e e k i n g y o u r c o - o p e r a t i o n in w c r k i n j w i t h y o u r c h i l d t o h e l p i n t h i s research. Y o u w i l l f i n d i t an i n t e r e s t i n g a n d r e w a r d i n g e x p e r i e n c e in t h a t y o u w i l l know t h a t y o u h a v e h e l p e d y o u r c h i l d t o b e c o m e ' a b e t t e r r e a d e r . Please c o m p l e t e t h e form below and r e t u r n i t t o your c h i l d ' s t e a c h e r . I f you have any q u e s t i o n s , p l e a s e c a l l me a t t h e s c h o o l  .  Yours  sincerely,  Ray G i f f i n , Principal.  RG/sml  I  1  • for  [  g i v e my  consent  do n o t g i v e my  consent  my c h i l d ,  t o p a r t i c i p a t e i n the research o u t l i n e d above. I ( C h i l d ' s name) have read and understand t h e procedures o f t h e r e s e a r c h and a l s o understand that my c h i l d may b e w i t h d r a w n f r o m t h e r e s e a r c h a t a n y t i m e . Such w i t h d r a w a l w i l l n o t a f f e c t , i n a n y way, my c h i l d ' s r i g h t t o f u r t h e r t e a c h i n g , t h e c l a s s s t a n d i n g , or p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n future research p r o j e c t s .  S i gned (Parent o r Legal  Guardian)  APPENDIX 2 SUGGESTED PARENT SUPPORT GROUP ACTIVITIES  PARENT SUPPORT GROUP  I terns f o r c o n s i d e r a t i o n i n t h e r e a d i n g  1)  project relating to:  News 1 e t t e r  N e w s l e t t e r t o go home o n c e a m o n t h . Comments on s o l v i n g s p e c i f i c r e a d i n g p r o b l e m s . Sample p a r e n t comments. Sample c h i l d r e n ' s comments. B o o k s t h a t c h i 1 d r e n / p a r e n t s recommend. Number o f r e t u r n s f o r g r o u p s - b e s t i n s c h o o l . How t o c h o o s e t h e " r i g h t " b o o k . Variety in reading m a t e r i a l s . Children i l l u s t r a t e a favourite story. S u g g e s t e d b o o k l i s t s - by a g e - by s u b j e c t . S u g g e s t i o n o n when and w h e r e t o r e a d . I n c l u d e book r e p o r t s from c h i l d r e n . M e n t i o n names o f c h i l d r e n who h a v e i m p r o v e d c o n s i d e r a b l y . Inform p a r e n t s o f next meeting d a t e . Record t h e ideas t h a t p a r e n t s get as a r e s u l t o f t h e reading,program. L i s t t h e names o f p a r e n t s u p p o r t g r o u p members who c a n a c t a s contact people. 2)  Other  Actions  One d a y a w e e k , r e a d t h e n e w s p a p e r . Summarize a s t o r y read i n w r i t i n g . Have p a r e n t r e a d t o t h e c h i l d w i t h t h e c h i l d f o l l o w i n g i n t h e b o o k . C u l t i v a t e an i n t e r e s t i n r e a d i n g p o e t r y . If the p r o j e c t i s s u c c e s s f u l , get other schools i n v o l v e d . Have a m e e t i n g w i t h p a r e n t s a n d c h i l d r e n . Have someone t a k e y o u r p l a c e when y o u c a n ' t h e a r y o u r c h i l d r e a d . Use c a b l e c h a n n e l t o a d v e r t i s e m e e t i n g s - r a d i o - M a c k e n z i e T i m e s . Phoning Committee. P o s t O f f i c e B u l l e t i n Board - m e e t i n g p l a c e and t i m e s . Encourage c h i l d r e n t o g e t and use l i b r a r y c a r d s . Regular meetings f o r parents. I n c e n t i v e s f o r b o t h p a r e n t s and c h i l d r e n . I n c e n t i v e s f o r c h i l d r e n who b r i n g b a c k r e a d i n g s h e e t s o n t i m e . Acknowledge c h i l d r e n through a s s e m b l i e s , n e w s l e t t e r s , e t c . Have c h i l d r e n r e a d t o p a r e n t g r o u p i f t h e y f e e l c o m f o r t a b l e . P a r e n t s c o u l d i n i t i a t e a c h a r t a t home t o k e e p t r a c k o f t i m e s r e a d . Make n o t e o f w o r d s c h i l d r e n h a v e t r o u b l e w i t h a n d make f l a s h c a r d s .  APPENDIX 3 MONTHLY READING NEWSLETTER  RECORD CARDS  Your c h i l d w i l l b r i n g home a r e c o r d c a r d b e c a u s e we need t o know how much time they spend r e a d i n g a t home each week and how y o u f e e l about y o u r c h i l d ' s reading.  —  o  1  r w 3 <®  ^ r / ' s l i n q Fur l o t  —  ' :  P l e a s e complete t h e r e c o r d c a r d each time y o u h e a r y o u r c h i l d r e a d and have them r e t u r n i t t o t h e s c h o o l on t i m e .  R e a d i n g T o g e t h e r - V o l . 1, No. 1 Oct. A, 1985  WHY?  WHEN?  C h i l d r e n who r e a d a t home w i t h a c a r i n g a d u l t become b e t t e r r e a d e r s .  They need l o t s  of p r a i s e and encouragement.  They need to know that you're proud of t h e i r reading. They need your s p e c i a l  interest.  They need t o e n j o y r e a d i n g  with you.  will  whenever you both want t o . day i s f i n e .  Find a comfortable, quiet  5 to 15 minutes a  place.  S i t c l o s e t o your c h i l d , and pay a t t e n t i o n t o t h e i r reading. You may l i k e t o d i s c u s s the s t o r y a f t e r w a r d s , b u t only i f you b o t h want t o .  WHAT?  P a r e n t meetings and more of these n e w s l e t t e r s are planned t o t e l l you more about r e a d i n g .  We w i l l send home m a t e r i a l t h a t i s a t t h e r i g h t l e v e l , o r y o u r c h i l d can choose something from home, the s c h o o l l i b r a r y , or the p u b l i c l i b r a r y .  The l i b r a r i a n s w i l l h e l p them t o f i n d a book t h a t ' s r i g h t f o r them.  You w i l l l e a r n how t o p i c k a s u i t a b l e book f o r your c h i l d and how t o h l e p them w h i l e they read.  YOUR PUBLIC LIBRARY AND THE SCHOOL READING PROGRAM HOW READING MATERIALS  By p r o v i d i n g a wide range o f r e s o u r c e s f o r y o u r and y o u r c h i l d .  Your c h i l d can choose r e a d i n g m a t e r i a l s from t h e school l i r a r y ,  the p u b l i c l i b r a r y , o r h o o k s and  magazines t h a t they have a t home. invited  a book w i t h t h e i r c h i l d — 1 2 : 3 0 - 1 : 0 0 3:00-3:30 p.m. should read  WHO  rhymes t h a t a r e s u i t a b l e f o r  Once a g a i n the s c h o o l l i b r a r i a n c a n f o r reading m a t e r i a l s ,  As a g e n e r a l r u l e i f a c h i l d makes more f i v e mistakes  than  on a page the m a t e r i a l i s t o o  c a n I c o n t a c t a t the p u b l i c Any o f t h e l i b r a r y Doreen, o r L i s a .  t o the c h i l d and t a l k about s t o r y  h e l p you w i t h s u g g e s t i o n s  difficult.  t o choose  parents  k i n d o f r e s o u r c e s are a v a i l a b l e ? Resource books f o r a d u l t s w i t h i d e a s , games, and b o o k l i s t s , a complete range o f books f o r c h i l d r e n o f a l l ages and a t a l l r e a d i n g l e v e l s , a r e l a x i n g r e a d i n g atmosphere, h e l p f u l library staff.  p.m. o r  F o r grade one c h i l d r e n  books and n u r s e r y t h a t age.  WHAT  Parents are  t o d r o p i n t o the s c h o o l l i b r a r y  c a n the p u b l i c l i b r a r y a s s i s t you i n h e l p i n g y o u r c h i l d i n the r e a d i n g program?  WHEN  library?  staff—Janice,  i s help a v a i l a b l e ? Any time d u r i n g r e g u l a r l i b r a r y h o u r s — Tuesday t o Thursday 12-9 p.m., F r i d a y and Saturday 12-5 p.m. I f a m o r n i n g would be more c o n v e n i e n t , o r i f you w i s h t o r e s e a r c h some r e s o u r c e b o o k s , e t c . , you may c a l l J a n i c e H a l l a t the l i b r a r y (997-6343) a f t e r 9 a.m. Tuesday t o F r i d a y .  APPENDIX 4 READING RECORD FORM  Class Subject C h i l d ' s Name  Work C o v e r e d FRIDAY  Time WEEKEND  Time MONDAY  Time TUESDAY  Time WEDNESDAY  Time THURSDAY  Time -  Record Sheet  Division  Parent's  • '  Dates •  Comments/Signature  to  Teacher'5  Comments/ S ionature  

Cite

Citation Scheme:

    

Usage Statistics

Country Views Downloads
United States 4 1
Venezuela 2 0
Ukraine 2 0
India 2 0
Russia 2 0
France 1 0
City Views Downloads
Unknown 7 6
Ashburn 4 0
New Delhi 2 0

{[{ mDataHeader[type] }]} {[{ month[type] }]} {[{ tData[type] }]}
Download Stats

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0078310/manifest

Comment

Related Items