Home Literacy Environment and Preschool Children's Reading Skills and Interest

This article was downloaded by: [University College London]
On: 09 June 2015, At: 06:02

Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered
office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Early Education and Development

Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/heed20
The Home Literacy Environment and

Preschool Children's Reading Skills and
Interest
a b a
Lay See Yeo , Winston W. Ong & Charis M. Ng
a
Nanyang Technological University
b
National Library Board
Published online: 20 Feb 2014.
Click for updates
To cite this article: Lay See Yeo , Winston W. Ong & Charis M. Ng (2014) The Home Literacy
Environment and Preschool Children's Reading Skills and Interest, Early Education and Development,
25:6, 791-814, DOI: 10.1080/10409289.2014.862147
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10409289.2014.862147
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the
“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,
our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to
the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions
and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,
and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content
should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources
of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,
proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or
howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising
out of the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &
Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-
and-conditions
Downloaded by [University College London] at 06:02 09 June 2015
Early Education and Development, 25: 791–814
Copyright © 2014 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
ISSN: 1040-9289 print/1556-6935 online
DOI: 10.1080/10409289.2014.862147
The Home Literacy Environment and Preschool

Children’s Reading Skills and Interest
Lay See Yeo

Winston W. Ong
National Library Board
Charis M. Ng
Research Findings: This study explored the association between the home literacy environment
(HLE), conceptualized as comprising parents’ reading beliefs and home literacy practices, and
preschoolers’ reading skills and reading interest. It also identified factors in the HLE that predict
emerging reading competence and motivation to read. A total of 193 children age 6 years from
14 preschools across Singapore and their parents participated in the study. The parents completed
a reading belief inventory, a family literacy activity inventory, and a demographic questionnaire
that surveyed the child’s reading interest. The children were administered a battery of standardized
literacy tests. The study found a moderate relationship between the HLE and children’s reading
competencies and a strong relationship between the HLE and children’s reading interest. When par-
ents’ education level and children’s age were controlled, hierarchical multiple regression analyses
found that family literacy activities contributed more unique variance to children’s reading outcomes
and reading interest than did parents’ reading beliefs. Active parental involvement was the strong-
est component of the HLE, with parent–child engagement in reading and writing emerging as the
best predictor of both the child’s emerging reading skills and reading interest. With respect to read-
ing beliefs, parents’ efficacy in supporting literacy development before their child attended school
positively predicted reading competence, as did parents’ affect and verbal participation in fostering
reading interest. However, verbal participation negatively predicted Singapore children’s reading
competence. Practice or Policy: The implications of the results were discussed.
Opportunities to engage in reading at home and in school are important to children’s initiation
to the world of print, their reading interest, and reading achievement (Baker & Scher, 2002;
Whitehurst & Lonigan, 2001). The home literacy environment (HLE) is especially vital during
the preschool years in fostering children’s reading development. Early in their learning journey,
children look to parents or caregivers, their first teachers, as role models who will shape their
own attitude toward reading. Parents’ beliefs about reading and the HLE they create have a major
Winston W. Ong is currently at SingHealth, Singapore. Charis M. Ng is currently at MCYC Community Services
Society, Singapore.
Correspondence regarding this article should be addressed to Lay See Yeo, PhD, National Institute of Education,
1 Nanyang Walk, 737616, Singapore; E-mail: laysee.yeo@nie.edu.sg
792 YEO, ONG, AND NG
impact on children’s ability to read and learn. Children’s early reading experiences in turn deter-
mine whether reading will be pursued as a pleasurable activity in its own right.
In the past 20 years, there has been growing and compelling research evidence that the devel-
opment of individual differences in literacy skills emanates from the myriad degrees of literacy
exposure differentially accessed through the home environment. For example, research sug-
gests that experiential factors (i.e., active parental effort that directly engages children in lit-
eracy activities) other than book exposure explain the development of individual differences in
children’s literacy performance (Burgess, Hecht, & Lonigan, 2002; Evans, Shaw, & Bell, 2000;
Sénéchal & LeFevre, 2002). More important, these early individual differences in literacy skills
are relatively stable once formal reading instruction begins (Sénéchal & LeFevre, 2002). Without
the benefit of, and even despite, interventions, children who begin behind their peers in early
reading development tend to stay behind (Torgesen, 2005). In light of the long-term sequelae of
early literacy development, the imperative to identify specific factors in the HLE that support
literacy acquisition becomes critical for parents and caregivers who aspire toward optimal learn-
ing and future success for their children.
THE HLE
The conceptualization of the HLE has evolved and developed in complexity over the years. In ear-
lier years, the HLE was conceptualized as a family’s socioeconomic status (i.e., parents’ education
and income), with research findings indicating that children from families of lower socioeco-
nomic status scored poorer on reading tests and showed lower interest in literacy (Dickinson &
Snow, 1987). Socioeconomic status invariably subsumed values, attitudes, and opportunities,
which directly contributed to individual differences in literacy development. Hence, the HLE
was subsequently conceptualized in terms of specific activities related to literacy and language
development, in particular shared book reading.
In recent years, however, research has converged to suggest that the HLE is better conceptual-
ized as a multifaceted and complex concept that transcends socioeconomic status or any single
literacy activity. It embraces a variety of attitudes, activities, resources that are interlinked; how-
ever, different components of the HLE have been found to be associated with different aspects of
preschool children’s literacy and language abilities (Burgess et al., 2002; Sénéchal & LeFevre,
2002). According to Phillips and Lonigan (2009), the
HLE is better defined as encompassing variables such as literacy artifacts, functional uses of literacy,
verbal references to literacy, library use, parental encouragement and value of reading, parental
teaching of skills, child interest, parental modeling of literacy behaviors, parental education, and
parental attitudes toward education. (p. 147)
This richer and more comprehensive conceptualization of the HLE appears to center on two
key aspects: (a) what parents believe about literacy and their role in developing their children’s
literacy skills and (b) what parents do to support literacy development.
Parents’ beliefs about their role in their children’s literacy and language abilities constitute an
important component of the HLE (DeBaryshe, 1995; Weigel, Martin, & Bennett, 2006). It can
be argued that parental beliefs about the value of reading and ways of encouraging their children
to read guide the literacy opportunities they make available to their children. Studies have found
positive associations between parental reading beliefs and parent–child engagement in literacy
and language activities (DeBaryshe, 1995; Weigel et al., 2006).
HLE AND CHILDREN’S READING SKILLS AND INTEREST 793
Home literacy activities constitute another essential component of the HLE. It is useful in
conceptualizing the HLE to make a distinction between informal activities and formal activities,
as they impact different areas of literacy development. Informal activities (e.g., shared book
reading) focus on the meaning attached to print rather than print per se (Sénéchal & LeFevre,
2002). Informal activities support the development of language, vocabulary, narrative under-
standing, and reading comprehension. They reinforce what Whitehurst and Lonigan (2001)
termed outside-in domain skills that are required for reading success. In contrast, formal activi-
ties focus on the print per se (e.g., labeling letter names and identifying letter sounds; Sénéchal &
LeFevre, 2002). They build inside-out domain skills (Whitehurst & Lonigan, 2001), which
include alphabet knowledge, word decoding, and phonological awareness.
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE HLE AND CHILDREN’S READING SKILLS
Home Literacy Activities
The literature has established a clear relationship between children’s performance in literacy
development and parents’ reading-related activities. This association continues to be supported
by research in the past few years. A recent Finnish study indicated that the frequency of parental
teaching of reading positively influenced the development of children’s reading skills in kindergar-
ten (Silinskas et al., 2012). The more parents taught their children to read during kindergarten, the
stronger the children’s letter knowledge and word decoding. However, by first grade, the frequency
of parental teaching of reading no longer led to improvement in children’s reading skills. This may
suggest that a critical window exists in early childhood during which children are more primed to
optimally acquire foundational reading skills that will ease their entry into formal schooling.
Two recent studies in the United States underlined the contributions of parental teaching to
children’s literacy skills. Hindman and Morrison (2012) found that parents’ teaching about let-
ters and sounds was associated with alphabet knowledge, whereas shared reading was margin-
ally linked to vocabulary. Newland et al. (2011) found that the frequency of writing activities
with preschool children promoted their acquisition of literacy skills. In Australia, Hood, Conlon,
and Andrews (2008) found that parental teaching practices in the home were related to preschool
letter identification and that they were more important than storybook reading in fostering emer-
gent literacy skills. Similarly, Weigel et al. (2006) found that parent–child engagement in literacy
and language activities was associated with growth in the child’s print knowledge.
Yet other studies suggest that more important than the frequency of reading to children is the
quality of child-directed interactions in the reading experience. In fact, the interactive nature of
sharing books with children has been found to have greater predictive power than the frequency of
shared book reading in increasing children’s literacy skills (Bingham, 2007; Newland et al., 2011).
Parents’ Reading Beliefs
Parental reading beliefs are defined as the attitudes parents hold about their child’s literacy and
language development (Weigel, Martin, & Bennett, 2005). Several studies have explored the role
of parents’ beliefs in children’s literacy acquisition (DeBaryshe, 1995; Weigel et al., 2006). In an
earlier study, DeBaryshe (1995) found that parental beliefs highly predicted the extent to which
parents exposed their children to joint book reading and the quality of the parent–child reading
interactions. A recent U.S. study that examined maternal literacy involvement with preschool
children revealed that mothers who felt efficacious about their effort toward contributing to their
children’s literacy development were more likely to engage in pleasurable parent–child reading,
which advanced their children’s literacy skills (Newland et al., 2011).
Weigel et al. (2006) highlighted the central role of parental literacy beliefs in children’s
acquisition of emerging reading and writing skills. Parents who value the importance of literacy
development and perceive that they have a key role to play in supporting their children’s literacy
development are more inclined to create a stimulating home environment where children are
actively engaged in literacy-related activities. In fact, the study found that children’s emergent
writing skills were more strongly and directly linked to parents’ reading beliefs than the literacy
activities they provided at home.
LITERACY ENVIRONMENT AND CHILDREN’S READING INTEREST
Although there is a copious amount of research on the influences of the literacy environment in
the development of early reading, not much research activity has focused on children’s reading
motivation and its contributing factors. What experts do know from existing research is that par-
ents’ positive belief in reading as a fun activity contributes significantly to children’s motivation
in reading (Baker & Scher, 2002; DeBaryshe, 1995).
Weigel et al. (2006) found that children were more interested in reading when they engaged
in literacy and language activities with their parents. Another U.S. study by Baker and Scher
(2002) showed that children’s reading interest was not significantly related to gender, socio-
cultural background (e.g., family income), the frequency of shared reading, or library visits. A
major contributing factor to children’s reading motivation was parents’ modeling of reading as a
pleasurable activity. In addition, the frequency of reading skills books that focused on basic letter
knowledge and letter sounds was negatively associated with the children’s reading motivation,
presumably because of its resemblance to drills that had no meaningful context. Findings from
a Canadian study (Martini & Sénéchal, 2012) concurred in indicating that child interest in read-
ing was related not to parents teaching the ABCs but rather to the teaching of advanced reading
skills. Reading motivation is important because research has demonstrated that children’s inter-
est in literacy predicted early literacy skills (Frijters, Barron, & Brunello, 2000).
A BRIEF BACKGROUND ON SCHOOLING IN SINGAPORE
Brief information on schooling in Singapore is warranted to set the stage for the research
study. Singapore was a British colony from 1819 to 1963 and achieved independence in
1965. Her colonial heritage led to English being instituted as the language of instruction in
all schools. Singapore’s population of 5 million inhabitants is multiracial: 74.1% Chinese,
13.4% Malay, 9.2% Indian, and 3.3% other. Most children in Singapore attend preschool
from ages 3 to 6 and commence first grade (Primary One) the year they turn 7. Owing to an
education policy that emphasizes bilingualism, children are exposed to two languages in pre-
school: English as a first language and the mother tongue (i.e., the language spoken at home)
as the second language (Yeo, 2013). English is the medium of instruction from the first
day in preschool, although most children typically speak their mother tongue and/or Singlish
(Singapore English) at home. Children are expected to begin first grade having the ability to
understand spoken English, ask simple questions (e.g., “why” and “what”), read the letters
of the alphabet, recognize frequently used words (e.g., at), count up to at least 10, do simple
addition, and recognize basic shapes (Toh & Teng, 2013). These demands necessitate a strong
head start in literacy to prepare children for formal schooling. Parents and educators need to
understand how best to create learning environments that will facilitate the development of
early reading and other literacy skills.
LEARNING TO READ IN A MULTILINGUAL CONTEXT
In Asian countries, English is a foreign language. Schools in China and Hong Kong adopt
English as an additional language or a second language. Schools in Singapore teach English as
a first language and also use English as the medium of instruction for all subjects except Mother
Tongue. The HLE in Asian countries is unique because children may be read to in English while
the language spoken at home is usually the native tongue. Of interest is how being in a multilin-
gual environment affects reading development in young children.
There is very encouraging research that shows the positive impact of parent–child shared
reading in the context of English as a foreign language on Chinese kindergartners. For exam-
ple, in Hong Kong, dialogic reading in which parents were trained to prompt their child to say
something about their storybook, to evaluate and expand on the child’s response, and to repeat
the prompt led to gains for Cantonese-speaking children in English word reading and also in
both English and Chinese phonological awareness (Chow, McBride-Chang, & Cheung, 2010).
Research has also demonstrated that phonological processing skills in a nonalphabetic language
like Chinese can be transferred to the learning of English, which is an alphabetic language
(Chow, McBride-Chang, & Burgess, 2005).
Not speaking English as a home language does not preclude parents from successfully creat-
ing a rich HLE for the children. In Taiwan, Mandarin-speaking parents effectively learned to
engage and discuss books with their children through the use of literacy bags that came supplied
with picture books, literacy instructions, and strategies for asking critical questions and extend-
ing learning from books (Huang, 2013). Hands-on support and the availability of ready-to-use
resources equip parents with the interaction tools they need to create an HLE that fosters chil-
dren’s English language and reading development.
THE PRESENT STUDY
Although research into early literacy development and its relation to the home environment
abounds in many parts of the developed world, it is surprisingly lacking in Singapore, a place
that is recognized for having one of the best educational systems in the world (Ministry of
Education, 2010). To our knowledge, no empirical research in Singapore has been published on
the relationship of the HLE and children’s early reading skills. No local study has examined the
relationship between parental reading beliefs and children’s reading development and interest.
The limited research in Asian countries such as Taiwan suggests that Asian parents, unlike their
Western counterparts, tend to adopt a more formal approach to literacy learning. Chinese par-
ents, for example, may regard parent–child reading not as enjoyment but rather as preparatory
steps toward getting their children ready for primary school (Wu & Honig, 2010). This too may
be true of Singapore, where English is the language of school rather than of home for most
children. The present research study was undertaken to investigate what parents in Singapore
believe about reading and how it correlates with their reading practices and their children’s read-
ing development. Of interest too was whether the research outcomes in the existing literature
on the links between early literacy development and the HLE research would apply in an Asian
context of children acquiring reading skills in a multilingual social environment. In sum, the
present study examined the relationships between the HLE, specifically family literacy activities
and parental beliefs about reading, and preschool children’s reading skills and reading interest. It
explored factors within the HLE that predict children’s emerging reading competencies as well
as their interest in reading.
The research questions were as follows:
1. What is the relationship between the home environment (i.e., parents’ beliefs and
practices in reading) and children’s reading competence?
2. What is the relationship between the home environment (i.e., parents’ beliefs and
practices in reading) and children’s reading interest?
3. What components in the home environment (i.e., parents’ beliefs and practices in
reading) predict children’s reading competence?
4. What components in the home environment (i.e., parents’ beliefs and practices in
reading) predict children’s reading interest?
5. Are there differences in parents’ beliefs and practices in reading and children’s read-
ing competence in relation to home language?
METHODOLOGY
Procedures for Data Collection
Ethics clearance and approval for this study were obtained from the Nanyang Technological
University Institutional Review Board, Singapore. Letters with information about the study were
sent to preschools recommended by the funding government ministry as well as preschools
with which the researchers had had previous contact. Principals from seven kindergartens and
seven child care centers consented to participate in this study. All parents signed consent forms.
Children gave verbal assent.
The parents completed the two parental survey questionnaires at home and returned them to
the researchers through the class teachers. All of the questionnaires were designed to be self-
explanatory; thus, no facilitator was required for their completion. The language and literacy
assessments were administered by two research assistants who were master’s-level students
trained in the administration of standardized psychoeducational tests. They were supervised
by the first author. The children were assessed individually in their preschools; the average
assessment time was 40 min.
Participants
A total of 200 kindergarten Year 2 children and their parents were sampled. Of these, 7 children
with special needs were omitted from the analysis, leaving a total of 193 children and 193 par-
ents in the final sample. The kindergarten Year 2 participants were from seven child care centers
and seven kindergartens. Of the children, 52.3% (n = 101) were boys and 47.7% (n = 92) were
girls, with a mean age of about 6 years, 0 months (SD = 3.63 months; range = 66–82 months).
Moreover, 81.3% were Chinese (n = 157), 2.6% were Malays (n = 5), 9.8% were Indians (n = 19),
and 6.2% were reported as other (n = 12). The ethnic distribution reflected the general population
composition in Singapore, except for Malays, who were underrepresented.
Of the parents, 72% were female (n = 139) and 28% were male (n = 54). They ranged in age from
19 to older than 50 years old. Most of the parents were 31–40 years old (66.8%) or 41–50 years
old (26.4%). In terms of the dominant language used at home, 15.5% spoke English only (n = 30),
12.4% spoke Mother Tongue only (n = 24), and 4.1% spoke other languages (n = 8). Among them,
61.6% (n = 119) spoke English and their Mother Tongue, and 6% (n = 12) spoke a combination of
other languages at home. In terms of their highest level of education, 11.4% of parents (n = 22)
had a postgraduate degree, 48.2% (n = 93) a bachelor’s degree, 14.5% (n = 28) a diploma, 2.6%
(n = 5) A levels, 20.2% (n = 39) O levels, and 3.1% (n = 6) below O levels qualifications.
Instruments
Child Measures
Wechsler Objective Reading and Language Dimensions—Singapore (WORLD

Singapore). The WORLD (Rust, 2000) is a Singapore adaptation of the Wechsler Individual
Achievement Test (WIAT). It is an individually administered test of literacy and language skills.
Standardized on 1,397 Singapore children ages 6 to 12 years in 1999, it is the only assessment
tool for measuring children’s reading and language skills that has local norms. It comprises five
subtests: Basic Reading, Reading Comprehension, Spelling, Listening Comprehension, and Oral
Expression. WORLD Singapore has been the instrument of choice in local literacy research
(e.g., Lee, Ng, Ng, & Lim, 2004). For this study, the Cronbach’s alpha was .90.
WIAT-III Pseudoword Decoding Subtest. The WIAT-III (PsychCorp, 2009) is an indi-

vidually administered instrument used to assess the achievement of children ages 4 through 19
years. Only the Pseudoword Decoding Subtest of the WIAT-III was used to assess children’s
word decoding skills. It required children to read aloud a list of pseudowords that increase in
difficulty. It was included to assess the children’s word attack skills. As these are not real words,
the children were not able to read them from memory but needed to demonstrate facility in using
their knowledge of phonics to decode the words.
Parent Measures
Parent Reading Belief Inventory (PRBI). The PRBI is a 30-item inventory adapted from
the original inventory by DeBaryshe and Binder (1994). This adapted instrument was used in
a Taiwanese study on mothers’ beliefs about reading aloud with preschoolers (Wu & Honig,
2010) and was deemed culturally appropriate for use in Singapore. It measures parents’ beliefs
about resources and approaches by which parents help their young children acquire emergent lit-
eracy skills. Each item is rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale (1 = strongly disagree, 2 = disagree,
3 = agree, 4 = strongly agree). Higher scores denote stronger beliefs in reading and developmen-
tally appropriate reading practices for children.
As the original 42-item PRBI could not be accessed, the 32-item Taiwanese version of the
PRBI (Wu & Honig, 2010) was adapted for use in this study. To examine the factor structure of
the PRBI, we subjected the 32 items of the Wu and Honig (2010) scale to a principal component
analysis with varimax rotation using PASW Version 18. Thirty items that had item loadings
above .40 were retained. Two items that did not load onto any factors were removed. These 30
items were organized into seven factors that best reflected Singapore parents’ reading belief
responses. Factor names were given the labels used by the original PRBI (DeBaryshe & Binder,
1994; see Table 1). However, one of the factors, affect-positive, was dropped following the
removal of two weaker items. The seven factors accounted for 64.6% of the variance. Their
eigenvalues exceeded 1 and explained 35.4%, 8.6%, 5.4%, 4.3%, 3.9%, and 3.5% of the vari-
ance, respectively.
The adapted PRBI with 30 items for this study had a Cronbach’s alpha of .93. Cronbach’s
alphas for the seven subscales in the new PRBI were as follows: verbal participation (.84),
affect (.87), knowledge (.88), efficacy 1—parental role in general (.79), efficacy 2—parental
role before school (.61), reading instruction (.61), and environmental input (0.63).
Family Literacy Activities Inventory (FLAI). The FLAI was adapted from the Home
Literacy Practices Inventory (Wu & Honig, 2010). It consists of 19 items that measure literacy
activities in the home. Items are rated on a 4-point Likert-type scale with responses ranging
from “never—not done this at all,” “seldom—about once a month,” “sometimes—about 2 to 3
times a month,” to “often—4 or more times a month.” An example of an item that measures the
frequency of parental literacy-related practices is “I take my child to the library or bookstore”
(see Table 2).
The 19 items of the FLAI were subjected to principal component analysis using PASW
Version 18. A principal component analysis with oblique (promax) rotation revealed the presence
of four components with eigenvalues exceeding 1, explaining 35.2%, 9.4%, 8.2%, and 6.2% of
the variance, respectively. The 17 items that had loadings above .40 were retained. Two items that
did not load onto any factors were excluded from the data analysis. Table 2 presents the factor
loadings for the FLAI. The four factors accounted for 59% of the total variance. The FLAI for the
study sample had a Cronbach’s alpha of .88. Cronbach’s alphas for the various subscales in the
new FLAI were as follows: parent engaging child in reading and writing (.84), parent modeling
reading and writing (.77), going to the bookstore (.74), and going to the library (.84).
Child’s demographics and home reading behaviors and interest. The parents com-
pleted a questionnaire that provided demographic information about the child. The last six items
of the questionnaire, which measured the child’s reading behaviors and interest at home, used a
4-point Likert-type scale. Parents were asked to check each item ranging from “never/seldom,”
“sometimes,” “often,” to “always” (e.g., “When being read a book, my child appears to be inter-
ested” and “My child looks at books by him/herself”). The home reading behavior and interest
measure had a Cronbach’s alpha of .90.
TABLE 1
Factor Loadings for the Parent Reading Belief Inventory and the Items Under Each Factor
Item Descriptor Loading
Factor 1: Verbal participation

10 I have good memories of being read to when I was a child. .839
19 When we read, I want my child to help me tell the story. .684
20 I ask my child a lot of questions when we read. .667
21 When we read, I want my child to ask questions about the book. .662
22 When we read, we talk about the pictures as much as we read the story. .514
25 When we read, I have my child point out different letters or numbers that are printed in .481
the book.
26 I try to make the story more real to my child by relating the story to his or her life. .414
Factor 2: Affect
13 I have to scold or discipline my child when we try to read. .830
14 I don’t read to my child because he or she will not sit still. .818
12 My child does not like to be read to. .792
8 I find it boring or difficult to read to my child. .743
9 I enjoy reading with my child. .570
Factor 3: Knowledge
17 Reading helps children be better talkers and better listeners. .860
27 Stories help build my child’s imagination. .800
28 My child learns lessons and morals from the stories we read. .798
29 Reading helps children learn about things they never see in real life .769
(e.g., Eskimos and polar bears).
16 Children learn new words, colors, names, etc. from books. .696
30 My child learns important life skills from books (e.g., how to follow a cooking recipe, how to .613
protect themselves from strangers).
18 My child knows the names of many things he or she has seen in books. .572
Factor 4: Efficacy 1—parental role in general
7 Children do better in school when their parents also teach them things at home. .860
6 Parents need to be involved in their children’s education. .824
5 I play the most important role in my child’s learning. .813
3 My child learns many important things from me. .417
Factor 5: Efficacy 2—parental role before school
2 There is little I can do to help my child get ready to do well in school. .784
4 I would like to help my child learn, but I don’t know how. .706
15 I read to my child whenever he or she wants. .484
Factor 6: Reading instruction
24 My child is too young to learn about reading. .813
23 Parents should teach children how to read before they start school. .671
Factor 7: Environmental input
32 Children inherit their language ability from their parents. It’s in their genes. .927
31 Some children enjoy reading and some don’t. Parents do not have much influence over this. .515
Data Analysis
All results obtained were analyzed quantitatively using PASW Statistics Version 18 (PASW
18.0). An alpha value of .05 was used for all statistical tests.
The first two research questions concerned the relationship between the home environ-
ment (i.e., parents’ beliefs and home reading activities) and children’s reading competency
TABLE 2
Factor Loadings for the Family Literacy Activities Inventory and the Items Under Each Factor
Item Descriptor Loading
Factor 1: Parent engaging child in reading and writing

12 I teach my child how to read words. .982
10 My child and I look at or read picture books/storybooks/magazines together. .770
13 I teach my child how to write words, such as his or her name, or simple words like dog or cat. .754
19 My child is scribbling, attempting to write or pretending to write. .649
18 My child looks at books or magazines by himself or herself. .617
11 My child and I read informational material (e.g., menus, signboards, advertisements) together. .585
17 My child asks to be read to or look at books. .558
Factor 2: Parent modeling reading and writing
8 I do sustained writing on paper for at least 10 minutes in my child’s presence. .926

9 I do sustained writing on electronic devices for at least 10 minutes in my child’s presence. .811
7 I read a textbook or report for myself in the child’s presence. .677
6 I read a magazine or newspaper in the child’s presence. .523
Factor 3: Going to the bookstore
4 I buy storybooks for my child. .844
3 I buy books for myself. .799
2 I take my child to the bookstore. .664
5 I read a book for leisure in the child’s presence. .471
Factor 4: Going to the library
15 My child asks to go to the library. .938
1 I take my child to the library. .934
and interest, respectively. Pearson product–moment correlation analysis was conducted to

examine the strength and direction of the relationships between the independent and depend-
ent variables.
The third and fourth research questions concerned how different components in the home
environment predicted children’s reading outcome and reading interest, respectively. Hierarchical
multiple regression analysis was conducted with the measures of parental beliefs and families’
literacy activities to determine the variance in children’s reading outcomes on the WORLD and
WIAT assessment. For each regression model, the child’s age and parent’s education level were
entered in the first step of the regression to control for the potential influence of these demo-
graphic variables on the child’s reading outcomes. In the second step of the analysis, the family
literacy activities (FLA) variables were entered into the model. In the third step of the analysis,
the parental reading beliefs (PRB) variables were entered. The same statistical procedure was
conducted to determine which components in the home environment contributed to the child’s
reading competencies and reading interest, respectively.
The fifth question examined whether differences existed in parents’ beliefs, home reading
practices, children’s reading competence, and children’s reading interest in relation to home
language. Comparisons were made among only three language groups: English only, Mother
Tongue only, and English and Mother Tongue. The analysis was conducted using one-way anal-
ysis of variance and Bonferroni post hoc tests. In terms of effect size, values of .01, .06, and .14
for eta-squared were interpreted as small, medium, and large effects, respectively (Tabachnick &
Fidell, 2007).
RESULTS
The Relationship Between HLE and Reading Outcomes
In this study, the HLE was conceptualized in terms of FLA and PRB. Overall, results indicated a
significant and positive relationship between the HLE and children’s reading competencies. FLA
was moderately associated with word reading, reading comprehension, and reading composite
(total) scores (rs = .41, .37, and .40, respectively, ps < .01; see Table 3). Among the FLA factors,
parents engaging the child in reading and writing had the strongest correlation with basic read-
ing (r = .47), reading comprehension (r = .41), and composite reading scores (r = .46). Going to
the library was found not to be related to nonword decoding ability. Parent modeling of reading
and writing had very modest associations with all of the reading outcome measures (.24–.28).
Associations between going to the bookstore and all reading outcome measures were small
(.20–.21); those between going to the library and reading outcomes (except for decoding) were
also unremarkable (.16–.18).
Similarly, PRB was moderately associated with word reading, reading comprehension, and
reading composite (total) scores (rs = .30,.28, and.31, respectively, ps < .01). Beliefs about verbal
participation when reading to the child and about parents’ general role in the child’s education
were not related to any of the reading competencies. Parents’ beliefs about their role and sense of
efficacy in preparing the child for formal schooling had the strongest associations with reading
and comprehension (.39–.41). Parents’ beliefs about appropriate affect when reading to the child
also were moderately related to reading and comprehension (.35–.37). In fact, only these two
beliefs showed a significant, albeit small, relationship to word decoding (.19–.20). Other beliefs
about knowledge that reading brings and environmental input had small correlations with read-
ing and comprehension.
The Relationship Between HLE and Reading Interest
The children’s reading interest was measured by parent report on the Home Reading Behavior
Scale. Parents reported observing positive reading behaviors in their children at home. The mean
frequency of occurrence was between 3.08 to 3.37 (i.e., ratings from “always” to “often”) for
the child showing interest when being read to, looking at books independently, asking to be read
to, and asking questions during reading (see Table 4). There were strong correlations between
children’s reading interest and FLA and PRB (rs = .63 and .61, respectively).
In terms of literacy activities, children’s reading interest was most strongly correlated with
parents engaging the child in reading and writing (.67; see Table 5). It was moderately associ-
ated with parents modeling reading and writing (.48) but was less strongly linked to visits to the
library (.32) or bookstore (.34). With respect to reading beliefs, children’s reading motivation
had the strongest association with parents’ affect when reading with the child (.62). All other
802
TABLE 3
Correlations Between the Home Environment and Children’s Reading Outcomes
Measure 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
1. WORLD Basic Reading —

2. WORLD Reading Comprehension .91** —
3. WORLD reading composite .99** .97** —
4. WIAT-III Pseudoword Decoding .76** .67** .74** —
5. Family literacy activities .41** .37** .40** .29** —
6. Parent engaging child in reading and .47** .41** .46** .32** .84** —
writing
7. Parent modeling reading and writing .28** .26** .27** .24** .83** .56** —
8. Going to the bookstore .20** .21** .21** .16* .75** .45** .53** —
9. Going to the library .18* .16* .18* .10 .54** .29** .33** .32** —
10. Parental reading beliefs .30** .28** .31** .17* .54** .57** .37** .41** .18* —
11. Verbal participation .09 .05 .08 .07 .41** .35** .34** .36** .16* .78** —
12. Affect .35** .36** .37** .19** .51** .58** .30** .34** .23** .77** .41** —
13. Knowledge .22** .22** .23** .13 .42** .42** .29** .33** .16* .85** .69** .53** —
14. Efficacy 1—parental role in general .13 .08 .11 .08 .33** .37** .22** .25** .08 .69** .43** .42** .54** —
15. Efficacy 2—parental role before school .39** .40** .41** .20** .38** .44** .26** .23** .12 .69** .37** .58** .45** .42** —
16. Reading instruction .19** .22** .21** .07 .32** .33** .17* .33** .07 .62** .42** .44** .49** .38** .35** —
17. Environmental input .19** .16* .19** .13 .23** .34** .15* .11 −.04 .48** .18* .38** .24** .28** .44** .26** —
Note. WORLD = Wechsler Objective Reading and Language Dimensions—Singapore; WIAT = Wechsler Individual Achievement Test.
*p < .05. **p < .01.
TABLE 4
Descriptive Statistics for the Home Reading Behavior Measure
Item Min Max M SD
1. When being read a book, my child appears to be interested. 1 4 3.37 .826

2. My child looks at books by himself or herself. 1 4 3.11 .874
3. My child asks to be read to or to look at books. 1 4 3.08 .935
4. My child asks me questions when he or she reads. 1 4 3.11 .880
5. My child expresses his opinions when he or she is read to. 1 4 2.93 .949
6. When my child has free time, reading is an activity he or she does. 1 4 2.52 .913
beliefs about reading were significantly related to children’s reading interest, specifically with
verbal participation, knowledge that reading brings, and parental role in preparing the child for
school showing healthy associations (.44–.48).
Factors in the HLE That Predicted Reading Competence
Hierarchical multiple regression analyses indicated that child’s age, parent’s education level,
FLA, and PRB were all significant predictors of children’s reading competence and accounted
for 37% of the variance. FLA contributed 10.5% of unique variance to reading competence after
child’s age and parent’s education were controlled. PRB contributed another 6.3% of unique
variance to reading competence after child’s age, parent’s education, and FLA were controlled
(see Table 6). Engaging the child in reading and writing as a home literacy activity was the best
predictor of the child’s reading competencies, with a significant beta value of .324, p < .001, R2
change = .105, F(6, 186) = 13.77, p < .001. Parents’ belief about the role they played in getting
their child ready for first grade was also a significant positive predictor of children’s reading
competence (β = .257, p < .001). What is interesting is that parents’ belief about verbal participa-
tion was a significant but negative predictor of children’s reading competence (β = –.197, p < .05)
as well as reading comprehension (β = –.23, p < .01).
Factors in the Home Environment That Predicted Reading Interest
Hierarchical multiple regression analysis indicated that the child’s age, parent’s education level,
FLA, and PRB were all significant predictors of children’s reading interest, accounting for a
total variance of 58.5%. FLA contributed 33.6% of unique variance to children’s reading interest
after child’s age and parent’s education were controlled. After child’s age, parent’s education,
and FLA were controlled, PRB contributed an additional 9.4% of unique variance to children’s
reading interest (see Table 7). Engaging the child in reading and writing as a home literacy activ-
ity was the best predictor of the child’s reading interest, with a significant beta value of .359,
p < .001, R2 change = .336, F(6, 186) = 29.87, p < .001. Parents’ reading beliefs, such as affect
and verbal participation, were also significant positive predictors of children’s reading interest
(β = .253, p < .01; β = .150, p < .05, respectively).
804
TABLE 5
Correlations Between the Home Environment and Children’s Reading Interest
Measure 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
1. Home reading interest —

2. Family literacy activities .63** —
3. Parent engaging child in reading and .67** .84** —
writing
4. Parent modeling reading and writing .48** .83** .56** —
5. Going to the bookstore .34** .75** .45** .53** —
6. Going to the library .32** .54** .29** .33** .32** —
7. Parental reading beliefs .61** .54** .57** .37** .41** .18* —
8. Verbal participation .44** .41** .35** .34** .36** .16* .78** —
9. Affect .62** .51** .58** .30** .34** .23** .77** .41** —
10. Knowledge .48** .42** .42** .29** .33** .16* .85** .69** .53** —
11. Efficacy 1—parental role in general .33** .33** .37** .22** .25** .08 .69** .43** .42** .54** —
12. Efficacy 2—parental role before school .44** .38** .44** .26** .23** .12 .69** .37** .58** .45** .42** —
13. Reading instruction .34** .32** .33** .17* .33** .07 .62** .42** .44** .49** .38** .35** —
14. Environmental input .30** .23** .34** .15* .11 −.04 .48** .18* .38** .24** .28** .44** .26** —
*p < .05. **p < .01.

TABLE 6
Summary of Hierarchical Regression Analysis for Specific Components in the Home
Environment That Predict Children’s Reading Competence
Step Predictor variable β R2 ∆R2 F change
1 Child’s age and parent’s education .203 .203 24.209**

Child’s age .197**
Parent’s education .144*
2 Family literacy activities .308 .105 7.022**
Parent engaging child in reading and writing .324**
Parent modeling reading and writing −.008
Going to the bookstore −.003
Going to the library .047

3 Parental reading beliefs .370 .063 2.546*
Verbal participation −.197*
Affect .015
Knowledge .114
Efficacy 1—parental role in general −.132
Efficacy 2—parental role before school .257**
Reading instruction .056
Environmental input −.060
*p < .05. **p < .01.
TABLE 7
Summary of Hierarchical Regression Analysis for Specific Components in the Home Environment
That Predict Children’s Reading Interest
Step Predictor variable β R2 ∆R2 F change
1 Child’s age and parent’s education .155 .155 17.428**

Child’s age −.010
Parent’s education .092
2 Family literacy activities .491 .336 30.646**
Parent engaging child in reading and writing .359**
Parent modeling reading and writing .124
Going to the bookstore −.099
Going to the library .104
3 Parental reading beliefs .585 .094 5.815**
Verbal participation .150*
Affect .253**
Knowledge .079
Efficacy 1—parental role in general −.051
Efficacy 2—parental role before school −.003
Reading instruction .012
Environmental input .015
*p < .05. **p < .01.

TABLE 8
Descriptive Statistics for Reading, Home Reading Behavior, Family Literacy
Activities, and Parental Reading Beliefs by Dominant Home Language
English Mother tongue English and mother

Variable (n = 30) (n = 24) tongue (n = 119)
Reading competence
M 32.57 17.42 28.34
SD 15.48 14.23 16.21
Home reading behavior
M 3.06 2.58 3.13
SD 0.85 0.61 0.67
Family literacy activities

M 2.98 2.65 3.08
SD 0.64 0.59 0.46
Parental reading beliefs
M 3.21 2.95 3.25
SD 0.37 0.30 0.32
The Relation of Home Language to Parents’ Beliefs and Practices in Reading

as well as Children’s Reading Competence and Reading Interest
With respect to the HLE, there were no significant differences in the ways in which parents
from English-only and bilingual homes endorsed reading beliefs and family literacy activities
(see Table 8). However, parents who spoke only Mother Tongue engaged in significantly fewer
family literacy activities compared to parents who spoke both their mother tongue and English
at home, F(2, 170) = 7.22, p < .001, with a medium effect size (η2 = .08). They also ranked lower
in reading beliefs relative to both English-only and bilingual parents, F(2, 170) = 7.99, p < .001,
with a medium effect size (η2 = .09).
In terms of child outcomes, children from English-only and bilingual homes were compara-
ble in their reading competence and reading interest. Significant differences emerged between
children who spoke only Mother Tongue at home and their peers from English-only as well
as bilingual homes. The children from English-only and bilingual homes demonstrated greater
reading proficiency, F(2, 170) = 6.57, p < .002, with a medium effect size (η2 = .07). English-only
and bilingual children also demonstrated greater reading interest, F(2, 170) = 6.38, p < .002, with
a medium effect size (η2 = .07).
DISCUSSION
The results indicated that the HLE, conceptualized as comprising family literacy activities and
parents’ beliefs about reading, had positive and significant connections to preschool children’s
emerging reading competencies and their reading motivation. Parents who were more involved
in home literacy activities and who had reading beliefs that were developmentally appropri-
ate for their children tended to have children demonstrating higher reading capabilities. These
findings are not surprising given the ample literature indicating that significant correlations
exist between the HLE and preschool children’s language and literacy development (Bus, van
Ijzendoorn, & Pellegrini, 1995; Sénéchal & LeFevre, 2002; Whitehurst & Lonigan, 2001). More
important, family literacy activities appeared to explain more of the individual differences in
reading outcomes than did parents’ reading beliefs, suggesting that what parents do in the home
to foster literacy matters more than what they believe about reading.
Home Literacy Activities
In terms of family activities that support reading development, the findings suggest that it is not
particularly helpful for parents simply to bring their children to the library or to bookstores or
even to model reading at home. Direct engagement of the child in reading activities seems to be
required for facilitating reading skills and interest in children. In fact, the most important finding
of the study is the salience accorded to role of parents’ active involvement early in the child’s
literacy journey. Its role in providing the groundwork for enabling preschool children to gain the
mechanics of reading cannot be underestimated (Sénéchal & LeFevre, 2002). Also, parent–child
engagement in reading is the strongest predictor of children’s emerging reading abilities and
their reading motivation.
In this study, parents’ engagement of the child in reading at home included interactions in
which parents directly taught their children how to read words, how to write their own name
and simple words, and also how to read storybooks or informational materials. Consistent with
the research, it is the active components in the HLE that facilitated early literacy. Going to the
library did not seem to further children’s decoding skills, presumably because visits to the library
might not have included participation in the libraries’ literacy programs. Our finding echoes
the Burgess et al. (2002) study, which found that only the “active HLE” elements (p. 413) con-
tributed statistically significant unique variance to literacy outcomes. Likewise, Sénéchal and
LeFevre (2002) found that parental involvement in teaching about reading and writing words
was related to the development of early literacy skills. Parent teaching is particularly important
for the acquisition of word decoding skills, an index of early reading ability (Burgess et al.,
2002), because decoding is a skill that requires a more specialized approach, such as the appli-
cation of phoneme–grapheme correspondence. A study found that 5-year-old children were
more able to decode words when their parents focused on teaching specific decoding strategies
(Dickinson & Tabors, 1991). Parents’ active engagement of the child in reading in the early years
is important in light of longitudinal research that suggests that parents’ teaching about literacy
in kindergarten directly predicted alphabet knowledge in kindergarten and reading fluency in
fourth grade (Sénéchal, 2006). These findings are important also because they support the idea
that an effective way to improve reading development for young children is to focus on the types
of home literacy activities engaged in by parents and children.
Parents’ Beliefs About Reading
Besides home literacy activities, the other aspect of the HLE—parents’ beliefs—also plays a
vital role in influencing children’s reading skills and reading interest. Unlike the Weigel et al.
(2006) study, which found parents’ general reading beliefs to play a central role in children’s
literacy and language development, our study found only specific parental reading beliefs to
be associated with children’s various reading outcomes. In the Singapore context, where entry
into first grade is regarded as the start of formal schooling, two beliefs stood out as particularly
important when it came to influencing children’s reading skills: (a) parents’ sense of efficacy in
getting their child ready for school and (b) parents’ affect when they read with their child. First,
the more parents felt that they were able to support their child’s early reading development,
the more likely they were to read to their children and teach them how to read, the stronger the
children’s reading skills. These findings are congruent with those in Dickinson and DeTemple’s
(1998) study, in which children ages 3 to 5 in the United States displayed more signs of emer-
gent literacy when their mothers showed greater awareness of the importance of reading to them
before they were enrolled in kindergarten. Second, when parents showed positive affect, such as
displaying enjoyment instead of scolding or disciplining their child when they read together, the
children were reported to exhibit stronger emerging reading skills. When children observe that
their parents enjoy and value reading to them, they have a positive role model that reading is a
pleasurable activity. This finding supports research that highlights the critical role that positive
affect and modeling play in supporting the development of early reading skills (Wu & Honig,
2010). It is important that children learn very early in their literacy encounters that reading can
be immensely enjoyable.
In the area of children’s reading interest, motivation to read was strongly related to family
literacy activities and to parents’ reading beliefs. This bears similarity to DeBaryshe’s (1995)
finding that mothers’ beliefs have a direct effect on children’s interest in reading. As with devel-
oping reading competencies, parental engagement of the child in reading and parents’ affect
during reading appeared to be prominent factors in promoting the child’s reading interest. The
key takeaway point is about communicating pleasure in reading. Pleasurable interactions with
books stimulate interest in reading. The interaction around books should communicate positive
affect as part of the experience of learning to read. Parents who make reading enjoyable by being
responsive and conveying delight during the times spent reading to their children ignite a love
for and desire to read, which then builds literacy skills (Bingham, 2007; Newland et al., 2011).
Some studies suggest that the amount of shared reading before the onset of formal schooling has
a lasting association with reading motivation (Sénéchal, 2006). Young children, therefore, can be
provided a key that continually opens up a world of joy that reading offers if they are initiated
enthusiastically into reading early in life.
Predictors of Reading Competence
After we controlled for child’s age and parent’s education level, parents’ engagement of their
child in reading and writing as a home literacy activity was the strongest predictor of the child’s
reading competence. This result is congruent with the findings in many other studies (Burgess
et al., 2002; Bus et al., 1995; Lonigan & Whitehurst, 1998; Sénéchal & LeFevre, 2002; Weigel
et al., 2006). This finding is not surprising given our typical assumptions that the more parents
engage their child in reading and writing, the more they provide scaffolding for the child who
is learning to read and write. In addition, the child will become a more proficient reader with
practice. Greater print exposure results in more experience in word recognition as well as in
reading comprehension and vocabulary building (Hood et al., 2008). It is important to note that
these family literacy activities should include formal teaching practices (e.g., teaching the child
to read and write words) as well as informal reading practices (e.g., looking at picture books).
What is interesting is that other family literacy activities, such as parents modeling read-
ing and writing to their child and visiting the bookstore and library with their child, did not
significantly predict greater reading competence in this study, although they have been dem-
onstrated in other research studies to predict children’s language and literacy development
(Burgess et al., 2002; Sénéchal & LeFevre, 2002; Weigel et al., 2005). It is possible that
these discrepancies are due to the fact that those studies did not use word reading and read-
ing comprehension outcomes as direct measures but instead measured children’s receptive
and expressive language development and print knowledge. The inconsistent findings could
also possibly be attributed to the difference in children’s age in these studies. For instance,
in Weigel et al.’s (2005) study, the sampled children were 3 years old, whereas children in
this study had a mean age of about 6 years old. This may suggest that at different stages of
development, children require different levels and types of family literacy activities in order
to acquire reading skills. The frequency of parents visiting libraries and bookstores with their
child does not communicate how they can make a difference to children’s reading skills.
Some research studies have suggested that it is the quality of the literacy activities parents
share with their children instead of the frequency of such activities that makes a difference in
children’s reading development (Weigel et al., 2006).
Another predictor of children’s reading competence when child’s age, parent’s education, and
family literacy activities were held constant was parents’ efficacy pertaining specifically to their
role in preparing their child for school. These results suggest that parents who believe that there
is little they can do to help their child get ready for formal schooling and/or believe that they do
not know how to help their child to learn even though they wish to are more likely to have chil-
dren with lower reading competence. It is possible that when parents believe that they have little
or no control over their children’s education, they may avoid engaging their children in reading
and writing activities and fail to see a role for themselves in educating their children (Bandura,
Barbaranelli, Caprara, & Pastorelli, 1996). Our study showed that parents’ general efficacy did
not predict children’s reading competence. Parents’ efficacy needs to be very specific in the con-
text of promoting their child’s reading development. Our findings suggest that parents need to
believe that they have the necessary skills sets to teach their child to read or that they can access
resources to help their child acquire reading skills. Very important is the fact that this also needs
to happen before entry into first grade.
Parents’ belief in verbal participation was a significant but negative predictor of children’s
reading competence and reading comprehension. This is surprising and contrary to previous
research findings that show active discussion about stories and open-ended questioning to be
positively associated with children’s gains in vocabulary and literacy skills (DeBaryshe &
Binder, 1994). There are several possible explanations for this. First, the findings focused spe-
cifically on parents’ beliefs or perceptions about verbal participation and its link to children’s
reading. One explanation could reside in the parents’ circumscribed expectation of their role
in developing their children’s reading skills. It is possible that in the context of a highly com-
petitive education system in Singapore, parents are more focused on the formal, inside-out
domain skills of reading (i.e., alphabet knowledge, word decoding, and phonological aware-
ness; Whitehurst & Lonigan, 2001). They are more anxious to adopt a teaching role when read-
ing to their children and may perceive time spent in verbal discussion as an opportunity cost to
teaching decoding and achieving accuracy in word recognition. In Hong Kong, where English is
learned in a foreign-language context, the emphasis tends to be on the printed word rather than
on verbal exchange (Cheung & Ng, 2003). The same phenomenon may be observed in multi-
cultural Singapore, where English is a non-native language. Second, Singaporean parents who
speak only their mother tongue may conceivably lack the English oral language proficiency
and confidence to discuss stories with their children; therefore, engaging their children in book
discussion takes a back seat. In a Hong Kong study that examined the reading acquisition of
kindergartners, Chow et al. (2010) noted that
verbal interactions between parents and their child might be less frequent and less sophisticated in
second-language contexts, especially in a foreign-language context, than in a first language one,
owing to the parents’ and their child’s lower proficiency in a second language. (p. 296)
Third, the differences in findings across studies could also be attributed to the measures used.
Verbal participation could contribute to receptive and expressive language competencies rather
than to word recognition and comprehension, which were measured in this study.
Predictors of Reading Interest
In the present study, parent–child engagement in reading and writing as a home literacy activity
was the strongest predictor of the child’s reading interest after we controlled for the child’s age
and parent’s education level. There is ample evidence in the literature that children were more
interested in reading when parents engaged them in literacy and language activities (Weigel
et al., 2006; Whitehurst & Lonigan, 2001).
Parents’ reading beliefs, such as affect and verbal participation, were also significant predic-
tors of children’s reading interest. Although there is a paucity of similar studies with which to
make comparisons, the findings of this study are reassuring. The results highlight the fact that
as parents demonstrate positive affect when reading to the child (e.g., joy in sharing a book) or
engage in active discussions about stories, the child tends to develop a positive interest in read-
ing. The results suggest that affective bonds between parent and child as well as the quality of
parent–child interactions pertaining to reading can have a powerful stimulating effect on young
children’s reading interest.
The Influence of Home Language
It appears that a home environment in which English is spoken either as the dominant language or
as one of two languages provides Asian children with an advantage over children who speak only
their mother tongue. English-only or bilingual children have a higher proficiency in reading and a
stronger interest in reading than Mother Tongue–only children. The critical ingredient is speaking
English in the HLE. An earlier research study in Singapore that examined the transition of kinder-
garten children to first grade found that speaking English at home was associated with stronger aca-
demic grades and less need for additional learning support in school (Yeo & Clarke, 2006). Hence,
a literacy environment that provides exposure to the language of instruction used in school is a
valuable asset for learning to read and developing an interest in reading for Singaporean children.
Implications
This study contributes to the literature by providing additional evidence that emphasizes the
importance of taking into consideration the multiple components of the HLE on children’s read-
ing competence and interest. Understanding the HLE facilitates the design of more effective and
lasting interventions that support reading development (Burgess et al., 2002). In terms of prac-
tical significance, this study informs educators and others who design and implement literacy
programs that greater mileage in terms of promoting emerging reading skills can be obtained by
giving focus to elements in the HLE that are malleable and amenable to change. For example,
parents can be guided in how they can communicate positive affect when reading to their chil-
dren. At the national level, policymakers can implement programs that equip parents with the
know-how to engage their child in literacy activities at home.

However, it is crucial that policymakers and educators understand parents’ beliefs about lit-
eracy in general and reading in particular. This can lead to a better appreciation of why parents
create the HLE they do. Cultural diversity can cause parents not to engage in certain types of
activities that are important for children’s reading development. Understanding these beliefs
will direct intervention efforts toward optimal approaches parents can adopt in the home toward
developing their children’s reading ability. No intervention that seeks to change one aspect of
the HLE for the benefit of children is likely to succeed in the absence of parental beliefs that
support it.
Limitations
There are a few limitations in this study. First, parents provided reports on their child’s reading
interest and all measures related to the HLE. Self-reports are notoriously open to social desir-
ability biases and impression management. We did not obtain data on reading interest directly
from the children. Hence, it is possible that the stronger associations we found between family
literacy activities and children’s reading interest but not reading outcomes were attributable to
the subjective influence of parents’ self-reports. Second, parent–child engagement in reading in
the home, one of the factors on the FLAI, had items that covered both formal and informal lit-
eracy activities. The existing research has become increasingly more precise in its differential
attribution of specific literacy competencies to certain types of formal and informal literacy-
related activities. Our instrument was comparatively less sensitive in its ability to sieve out
the fine nuances surrounding the connections that exist between specific reading skills and the
nature of the literacy activities, whether formal (e.g., the teaching of reading skills) or informal
(e.g., shared book reading). Third, the study focused on only a limited number of components
of the HLE. Weigel et al. (2006) argued that examination of other aspects of the HLE might
reveal different findings. Parents’ reading beliefs about teaching specific reading skills that are
considered an important orientation in other research studies were not measured (Evans, Fox,
Cremaso, & Mckinnon, 2004). Fourth, our data were drawn from kindergarten Year 2 children
from a convenience sample. Some of the participating preschools were invited based on recom-
mendations by the Ministry of Social and Family Development; hence, the findings cannot be
generalized to other preschool populations (or to different age groups) in Singapore or other
cultural contexts.
CONCLUSION
This study extends the research on the impact of the HLE on preschool children’s reading out-
comes with reference to an Asian population. That parents’ effort to foster their children’s read-
ing development needs to be intentional is an important outcome suggesting that active elements
in the HLE are most effective in promoting emerging reading competencies in young children.
Regardless of national or cultural boundaries, in any country where children reside, the HLE will
undoubtedly have an early and potentially lasting influence on reading and language develop-
ment. It is therefore important that parents be encouraged and empowered to create an active
HLE earlier rather than later to support their child’s literacy development.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The perspectives offered in this article are the authors’ and should not be regarded as representa-
tive of views held by Nanyang Technological University, National Library Board, SingHealth, or
MCYC Community Services Society, Singapore.
FUNDING
This research study is supported by a grant from the Early Childhood Research Fund (ECRF),
Ministry of Social and Family Development, Singapore.
REFERENCES
Baker, L., & Scher, D. (2002). Beginning readers’ motivation for reading in relation to parental beliefs and home reading
experiences. Reading Psychology, 23, 239–269. doi:10.1080/027027102900061346
Bandura, A., Barbaranelli, C., Caprara, G. V., & Pastorelli, C. (1996). Multifaceted impact of self-efficacy beliefs on
academic functioning. Child Development, 67, 1206–1222. doi:10.2307/1131888
Bingham, G. (2007). Maternal literacy beliefs and the quality of mother-child book-reading interactions:
Associations with children’s early literacy development. Early Education and Development, 18, 23–49.
doi:10.1080/10409280701274428
Burgess, S. R., Hecht, S. A., & Lonigan, C. L. (2002). Relations of the home literacy environment (HLE) to the devel-
opment of reading-related abilities: A one-year longitudinal study. Reading Research Quarterly, 37, 408–426.
doi:10.1598/RRQ.37.4.4
Bus, A. G., van Ijzendoorn, M. H., & Pellegrini, A. D. (1995). Joint book reading makes for success in learning to
read: A meta-analysis on intergenerational transmission of literacy. Review of Educational Research, 65(1), 1–21.
doi:10.3102/00346543065001001
Cheung, H., & Ng, L. (2003). Chinese reading development in some major Chinese societies: An introduction. In C.
McBride-Chang & H.-C. Chen (Eds.), Reading development in Chinese children (pp. 3–17). Westport, CT: Praeger
Press.
Chow, B. W.-Y., McBride-Chang, C., & Burgess, S. (2005). Phonological processing skills and early reading abili-
ties in Hong Kong Chinese kindergarteners learning to read English as a second language. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 97(1), 81–87. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.97.1.81
Chow, B. W.-Y., McBride-Chang, C., & Cheung, H. (2010). Parent-child reading in English as a second language:
Effects on language and literacy development of Chinese kindergarteners. Journal of Research in Reading, 33(3),
284–301. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9817.2009.01414.x
DeBaryshe, B. D. (1995). Maternal belief systems: Linchpin in the home reading process. Journal of Applied
Developmental Psychology, 16(1), 1–20. doi:10.1016/0193-3973(95)90013-6
DeBaryshe, B. D., & Binder, J. C. (1994). Development of an instrument for measuring parental beliefs about reading
aloud to young children. Perceptual & Motor Skills, 78, 1303–1311. doi:10.2466/pms.1994.78.3c.1303
Dickinson, D. K., & DeTemple, J. (1998). Putting parents in the picture: Maternal reports of preschoolers’ literacy as a pre-
dictor of early reading. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 13(2), 246–261. doi:10.1016/S0885-2006(99)80037-4
Dickinson, D. K., & Snow, C. E. (1987). Interrelationships among prereading and oral language skills in kindergarten
from two social classes. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 2(1), 1–25. doi:10.1016/0885-2006(87)90010-X
Dickinson, D. K., & Tabors, P. O. (1991). Early literacy: Linkage between home, school, and literacy achievement at age
5. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 6(1), 30–46. doi:10.1080/02568549109594820
Evans, M. A., Fox, M., Cremaso, L., & Mckinnon, L. (2004). Beginning reading: The views of parents and teachers of
young children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(1), 130–141. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.96.1.130
Evans, M. A., Shaw, D., & Bell, M. (2000). Home literacy activities and their influence on early literacy skills. Canadian
Journal of Experimental Psychology, 54(2), 65–75. doi:10.1037/h0087330

Frijters, J. C., Barron, R. W., & Brunello, M. (2000). Direct and mediated influences of home literacy and literacy interest
on pre-readers’ oral vocabulary and early written language skill. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 466–477.
doi:10.1037/0022-0663.92.3.466
Hindman, A. H., & Morrison, F. J. (2012). Differential contributions of three parenting dimensions to preschool literacy
and social skills in a middle-income sample. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 58(2), 191–223. doi:10.1353/mpq.2012.0012
Hood, M., Conlon, E., & Andrews, G. (2008). Preschool home literacy practices and children’s literacy development:
A longitudinal analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(2), 252–271. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.100.2.252
Huang, S. (2013). The use of literacy bags promotes parental involvement in Chinese children’s literacy learning in the
English language. Language Teaching Research, 17(2), 251–268. doi:10.1177/1362168813475950
Lee, K., Ng, S.- F., Ng, E.- L., & Lim, Z.- Y. (2004). Working memory and literacy as predictors of performance on alge-
braic word problems. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 89(2), 140–158. doi:10.1016/j.jecp.2004.07.001
Lonigan, C. J., & Whitehurst, G. J. (1998). Relative efficacy of a parent and teacher involvement in a shared-reading
intervention for preschool children from low-income backgrounds. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 13(2),
262–290. doi:10.1016/S0885-2006(99)80038-6
Martini, F., & Sénéchal, M. (2012). Learning literacy skills at home: Parent teaching, expectations and child interest.
Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 44(3), 210–221. doi:10.1037/a60026758
Ministry of Education. (2010). Infosheet on Singapore highlighted in latest McKinsey report on “How the world’s
most improved school systems keep getting better” (Press release). Retrieved from http://www.moe.gov.sg/media/
press/2010/12/singapore-highlighted-in-mckinsey-report.php
Newland, L. A., Gapp, S. C., Jacobs, G. M., Reisetter, M. F., Syed, D. C., & Wu, C.-H. (2011). Mothers’ beliefs and
involvement: Links with preschool literacy development. International Journal of Psychology: A Biopsychosocial
Approach, 9, 67–90.
Phillips, B. M., & Lonigan, C. L. (2009). Variations in the home literacy environment of preschool children: A cluster
analytic approach. Scientific Studies of Reading, 13(2), 146–174. doi:10.1080/10888430902769533
PsychCorp. (2009). Wechsler Individual Achievement Test–Third Edition. San Antonio, TX: Pearson.
Rust, J. (2000). WORLD Singapore. London, UK: The Psychological Corporation Limited.
Sénéchal, M. (2006). Testing the home literacy model: Parent involvement in kindergarten is differentially related to
Grade 4 reading comprehension, fluency, spelling, and reading for pleasure. Scientific Studies of Reading, 10(1),
59–87. doi:10.1207/s1532799xssr1001_4
Sénéchal, M., & LeFevre, J.-A. (2002). Parental involvement in the development of children’s reading skills: A five-year
longitudinal study. Child Development, 73, 445–460. doi:10.1111/1467-8624.00417
Silinskas, G., Lerkkanen, M.-K., Tolvanen, A., Niemi, P., Poikkeus, A.-M., & Nurmi, J.-E. (2012). The frequency of
parents’ reading-related activities at home and children’s reading skills during kindergarten and Grade 1. Journal of
Applied Developmental Psychology, 33, 302–310. doi:10.1016/j.appdev.2012.07.004
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.
Toh, K., & Teng, A. (2013, March 12). Parents want more done to level playing field at P1. The Straits Times, p. Home B3.
Torgesen, J. K. (2005). Recent discoveries on remedial interventions for children with dyslexia. In M. Snowling &
C. Hulme (Eds.), The science of reading: A handbook (pp. 521–537). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Weigel, D. J., Martin, S. S., & Bennett, K. K. (2005). Ecological influences of the home and the child-care center on pre-
school-age children’s literacy development. Reading Research Quarterly, 40(2), 204–233. doi:10.1598/RRQ.40.2.4
Weigel, D. J., Martin, S. S., & Bennett, K. K. (2006). Contributions of the home literacy environment to preschool-
aged children’s emerging literacy and language skills. Early Child Development and Care, 176(3&4), 357–378.
doi:10.1080/03004430500063747
Whitehurst, G. J., & Lonigan, C. J. (2001). Emergent literacy: Development from pre-readers to readers. In S. B. Neuman
& D. K. Dickinson (Eds.), Handbook of early literacy research (pp. 11–29). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Wu, C.-C., & Honig, A. S. (2010). Taiwanese mothers’ beliefs about reading aloud with preschoolers: Findings from the
Parent Reading Belief Inventory. Early Child Development and Care, 180, 647–669. doi:10.1080/03004430802221449
Yeo, L. S. (2013). Transition to the first year of school in Singapore. In S. E. Elliott-Johns & D. H. Jarvis (Eds.),
Perspectives on transitions in schooling and instructional practices (pp. 27–48). Toronto, Canada: University of
Toronto Press.
Yeo, L. S., & Clarke, C. (2006). Adjustment to the first year in school: A Singapore perspective. European Early
Childhood Education Research Journal, 14, 55–68.

Home Literacy Environment and Preschool Children's Reading Skills and Interest

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Home Literacy Environment and Preschool Children's Reading Skills and Interest

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

This article was downloaded by: [University College London]

On: 09 June 2015, At: 06:02

Early Education and Development

The Home Literacy Environment and

Click for updates

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10409289.2014.862147

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

The Home Literacy Environment and Preschool

Lay See Yeo

National Library Board

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE HLE AND CHILDREN’S READING SKILLS

Home Literacy Activities

Parents’ Reading Beliefs

activities they provided at home.

LITERACY ENVIRONMENT AND CHILDREN’S READING INTEREST

A BRIEF BACKGROUND ON SCHOOLING IN SINGAPORE

LEARNING TO READ IN A MULTILINGUAL CONTEXT

THE PRESENT STUDY

Procedures for Data Collection

Wechsler Objective Reading and Language Dimensions—Singapore (WORLD

WIAT-III Pseudoword Decoding Subtest. The WIAT-III (PsychCorp, 2009) is an indi-

Item Descriptor Loading

Factor 1: Verbal participation

Item Descriptor Loading

Factor 1: Parent engaging child in reading and writing

8 I do sustained writing on paper for at least 10 minutes in my child’s presence. .926

and interest, respectively. Pearson product–moment correlation analysis was conducted to

The Relationship Between HLE and Reading Outcomes

The Relationship Between HLE and Reading Interest

1. WORLD Basic Reading —

Item Min Max M SD

1. When being read a book, my child appears to be interested. 1 4 3.37 .826

Factors in the HLE That Predicted Reading Competence

Factors in the Home Environment That Predicted Reading Interest

1. Home reading interest —

*p < .05. **p < .01.

Step Predictor variable β R2 ∆R2 F change

1 Child’s age and parent’s education .203 .203 24.209**

Going to the library .047

*p < .05. **p < .01.

Step Predictor variable β R2 ∆R2 F change

1 Child’s age and parent’s education .155 .155 17.428**

*p < .05. **p < .01.

English Mother tongue English and mother

Family literacy activities

The Relation of Home Language to Parents’ Beliefs and Practices in Reading

Home Literacy Activities

Parents’ Beliefs About Reading

Predictors of Reading Competence

Predictors of Reading Interest

The Influence of Home Language

know-how to engage their child in literacy activities at home.

Journal of Experimental Psychology, 54(2), 65–75. doi:10.1037/h0087330

You might also like