Home literacy practices for preschoolers: a scoping reviewABSTRACT
Purpose To map studies describing family literacy practices carried out with pre-school children.
Research strategies Consultation of Lilacs, EMBASE, PubMed, Scopus, LiVIVO and gray literature databases. Registration on the Open Science Framework (OSF) platform. Search strategies: “Child, Preschool”, “home literacy”, “Early Intervention Educational” and “Family”.
Selection criteria The acronym PCC was used: Population (Studies with preschoolers); Concept (family literacy practices); Context (family environment).
Data analysis Two authors carried out the identification and extraction of data: authors, year of publication, population, objective and the family literacy practices carried out with preschoolers.
Results For the final synthesis of the scoping review, 29 studies were included. Informal practices appeared most frequently.
Conclusion
The informal practice of reading books was the most described, followed by shared reading and teaching writing.
Keywords:
Preschool; Parents; Language; Learning; Early Intervention Educational
RESUMO
Objetivo Mapear os estudos que descrevem as práticas de literacia familiar realizadas com crianças pré-escolares.
Estratégia de pesquisa Consulta nas bases de dados da Lilacs, EMBASE, PubMed, Scopus, LiVIVO e literatura cinzenta. Registro na plataforma Open Science Framework (OSF).
Estratégia de pesquisa “Child, Preschool”, “home literacy", “Early Intervention Educational” e "Family”.
Critérios de seleção Foi utilizado o acrônimo PCC: População (Estudos com pré-escolar); Conceito (práticas de literacia familiar); Contexto (ambiente familiar).
Análise dos dados Dois autores realizaram a identificação e extração dos dados: autores, ano de publicação, população, objetivo e as práticas de literacia familiar realizadas com os pré-escolares.
Resultados Para a síntese final da revisão de escopo foram incluídos 29 estudos. As práticas informais apareceram com mais frequência.
Conclusão A prática informal de leitura de livros foi a mais descrita, seguida da leitura compartilhada e o ensino da escrita.
Descritores:
Pré-Escolar; Pais; Linguagem Infantil; Aprendizagem; Estimulação Precoce
INTRODUCTION
Family literacy is a set of resources and practices that a child experiences with their parents or caregivers. They encompass formal activities to teach them to read and write (e.g., recognize the alphabet, read and write words, and identify phonemes) and informal activities (e.g., experiences lived with the family that promote future learning, namely: interaction, outdoor play, various games, and music)(1,2).
These practices are fundamental to strengthening family bonds and stimulating activities that help them prepare, from an early age, for the initial years of childhood education(1-3).
Early childhood education includes nursery school and preschool. In most cases, it represents the first separation of children from their caregivers to incorporate them into structured socialization(3,4).
Considering this process, preschool is the period that precedes literacy, divided into two axes: nursery school, which covers the age range from 0 to 3 years and 11 months, and preschool, which includes children from 4 to 5 years and 11 months(4-6).
The learning rights stated in the Brazilian National Common Curriculum Base for preschoolers in early childhood education include spending time together, playing, participating, exploring, expressing, and knowing themselves. The concept that links education and care during this period has been gradually consolidated, understanding caregivers as inseparable from the educational process(4).
Considering sociocultural and socioeconomic differences, children begin preschool with different academic skills, and one of the key factors influencing these differences is the family environment. Thus, daycare centers and preschools should learn about children’s experiences at home and in the community and articulate them with the pedagogical approach(7). A stimulating family environment can help children develop cognitive and linguistic skills based on brain plasticity(6,7).
Caregivers’ participation has significant and lasting effects on preschoolers’ early learning, not only on the initial academic results of preschool but also on the development of reading and writing when children begin to learn them(8).
The quality of the family literacy environment may be associated with socioeconomic and educational indicators. However, research has indicated differences between sexes, favoring female children in home literacy environments, especially in book reading and formal literacy activities(9).
Brazil established the Family Literacy Program in 2020, which recognizes the family as a key player in children’s educational success. The program includes guidelines for "fostering and promoting scientific research on family literacy and its impact on numeracy and literacy acquisition"(1). The World Health Organization (WHO) has also cited concern, encouragement, and promotion of literacy practices, with recommendations for children under 5 years old, encouraging reading and storytelling with caregivers as alternatives to screen time to promote children’s health and development(10).
The 2022 Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) report highlighted the importance of recognizing the family as an essential actor in educational development and strengthening the partnership between school and family, aiming to involve parents in their children's learning process(11). The document points out that students with better academic performance frequently report their families’ active participation in their learning activities(11). Regarding reading results, student performance decreased by 10 points, which further emphasizes the need to promote and encourage family practices that contribute to learning in the early stages of development(11).
Besides the assumptions mentioned above, studies indicate that improving education may be associated with reducing socioeconomic inequalities and that the lack of investment in education can have short- and long-term consequences for children and society. Hence, it is paramount to develop and implement measures that emphasize the importance of education, knowledge, and research(12).
Thus, understanding the importance of the family environment for learning and the positive impacts that promoting family literacy can bring to society and the scientific community – a topic that is little discussed and researched in Brazil –, this study aimed to map, through a scoping review, the studies that describe family literacy practices with preschoolers.
METHODS
This scoping review was registered in the Open Science Framework (OSF)(13), developed according to the methodology of the Joanna Briggs Institute Reviewers’ Manual(12), and reported according to the guidelines of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses – Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR)(14).
Eligibility criteria
The PCC acronym was used to determine the eligibility of articles to be included in this study:
-
Population (P): Studies with preschoolers (0 to 5 years and 11 months).
-
Concept (C): Family literacy practices.
-
Context (C): Family environment.
Inclusion and exclusion criteria
The review included observational and experimental studies that described family literacy practices (i.e., activities with preschoolers [aged 0 to 5 years and 11 months] in the family environment). It excluded secondary studies, books, case reports, case series, letters, opinion articles, technical articles, and guidelines.
Research sources and search strategy
Five databases were searched electronically: EMBASE, LIVIVO, Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS), National Library of Medicine (PubMed), and Scopus. Additional literature sources, such as the Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations, were also searched. Keywords from Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) and Health Sciences Descriptors (DeCS), along with the Boolean operators AND and OR, were used to develop search strategies and conduct database searches. All sources were searched on March 2, 2024, and updated in March 2025.
Selection
The Rayyan web application(15) was used to manage and document the review process. Next, duplicate articles were excluded, and two authors (MDOF and BA) began the blind, independent review. Articles were first selected by analyzing titles and abstracts, and then two authors (MDOF and BA) read the full articles.
In both phases, articles not meeting the eligibility criteria were excluded. Disagreements during the independent reviews were discussed among the reviewers; if they persisted, the third author (SCFOL) reviewed the articles and applied her majority opinion.
Data extraction and storage
Two authors identified and extracted data, which included authors, year of publication, population, objective, and family literacy practices with preschoolers.
Analysis and presentation of results
The data were presented in figures and tables.
RESULTS
Selection of primary studies
The database search strategy retrieved 1,092 references, totaling 1,075 after removing duplicates. The title and abstract reading phase excluded 1,032 articles that did not meet the eligibility criteria. Hence, 43 studies were selected for full-text reading, which excluded 14 studies, resulting in 29 studies included for the final synthesis of the scoping review (Figure 1).
Characteristics of the studies
The included studies were published between 2001 and 2023 in various journals. All articles were published in English and conducted in different countries, including the United States (75.86%)(16-37), Slovenia (3.44%)(38), Chile (3.44%)(39), Greece (3.44%)(40), Australia (10.34%)(41-43), and China (3.44%)(44) (Figure 1).
The participants’ ages ranged from 9 months to 5 years and 11 months. All studies included both sexes. Sample sizes ranged from 20 to 11,173 participants. Only observational and experimental studies were selected.
All 29 studies cited family literacy practices; of these, 16 (55.17%) described formal and informal practices, 11 (37.96%) cited informal practices, and two (6.8%) reported only formal practices.
Informal activities appeared more often among family literacy practices. Twenty (68.96%) studies described the informal practice of reading books, followed by shared reading, cited in 10 (34.48%) studies, and teaching to write, mentioned in 10 (34.48%) studies.
Regarding informal practices, three (10.34%) studies cited storytelling as an activity, four (13.79%) articles mentioned singing songs, two (6.89%) studies cited playing, 10 (34.48%) cited shared reading, 20 (68.96%) mentioned reading to children, two (6.88%) reported using games with letters and numbers and talking to the child about how their day was, and seven (24.13%) cited coloring/drawing, reading before bed, teaching colors and shapes, and going to the library(16,17,19-21,27,30,33,35,38,43) (Table 1).
The following practices were cited in 1 (3.44%) study(16,17,19-21,27,30,33,35,38,43): talking to the child about the book's illustrations, answering the child's questions, complimenting them, connecting reading content to daily life activities, making toys, watching videos together, playing with puzzles, going to the movies, going to the zoo, having a picnic, and reading the Bible, magazines, and newspapers (Table 1).
Regarding formal practices, 10 (34.48%) studies cited writing words, two (6.88%) cited teaching to read, teaching the alphabet, doing school activities, and teaching the letters’ names, five (17.20%) studies cited rhyme production, and one (3.44%) study mentioned teaching to write their names and identifying graphemes and phonemes(16,18,21,23,42) (Table 1).
The literacy practices cited in these studies were carried out by parents, with the mother figure predominating in both formal and informal activities.
DISCUSSION
This scoping review compiled data regarding family literacy practices with preschoolers, which the studies described here classify as formal and informal. Formal practices are related to teaching the letters’ names and sounds, reading words, and writing. These activities are associated with alphabet recognition in preschool, developing predictive skills for written language(16,17).
Informal practices refer to activities that stimulate children's development and will later be associated with the skills necessary for formal learning to read and write. The reviewed studies described practices such as shared reading, storytelling, visits to the library, singing, making their own toys, drawing, and watching videos together(16,20,21,23,38).
There is a relationship between informal practices and oral language skills, as exemplified by the studies of Dulin et al.(27), Bingham et al.(20), Puranik et al.(18), Marjanovič-Umek et al.(38), Skwarchuk et al.(16), Hindman and Morrison(21) and Kim(24), who investigated informal practices and their impacts on language(16,17,20,21,27,38). The articles presented practices such as reading books, offering books to children, shared reading, and activities with music, and related these activities to better performance in cognitive assessments and impacts on vocabulary, phonological awareness, and word reading(16,20,21,38).
The study by Riser et al.(17) with 10,400 preschoolers of indigenous descent emphasized the association of positive results on a cognitive scale with informal practices from the perspective of activities related to their own culture, through storytelling and songs(17). Literacy practices were also associated with income and maternal education level.
Informal practices were also described in the study by Roopnarine and Dede Yildirim(19), which aimed to compare maternal and paternal participation in the family environment. Only one of the five countries surveyed in this study had more active participation of fathers in free play, storytelling, and toy making; in the other countries, mothers were much more likely to engage in these practices. Moreover, storytelling and play with mothers were significantly and positively associated with letter identification(19).
The involvement of mothers in literacy practices and their consequences to children's development was explored in the study by Bingham et al.(20), which verified the quality of shared reading between mother and child. Moreover, the studies by Hammer et al.(29), Tsirmpa et al.(40), Burgess(22) and Dulin et al.(27) found greater involvement of the maternal figure in doing activities(27,29,40). This may be associated with the culture of mothers caring for children – when we examine studies that portray the primary caregiver, the maternal figure is highlighted as more active in this care(44,46,47).
Regarding formal practices, studies by Puranik et al.(18), Skwarchuk et al.(16), Hindman and Morrison(21), Hood et al.(42) and Kim(24) correlated activities involving writing with their consequences for incipient learning to write, as well as the impacts on oral language and reading skills(16,18,21,23,42). The research by Puranik et al.(18) also emphasized the correlations between parental education and children's letter writing, spelling, and spontaneous writing skills.
Kim(24) study examined formal and informal practices and their consequences to learning to read words and pseudowords. The comparison between preschoolers doing formal activities, such as teaching the letters’ names, found that those exposed to reading performed better in reading(24).
In Perry et al.(28) research, which aimed to verify preferences between formal and informal activities, parents reported preferring informal practices focused on play, involving board games, drawing, and reading books in a playful way with variations in vocal intonations.
Despite the preference for informal activities, parents reported supporting the development of their children's knowledge of numbers and vocabulary through activities such as repetitive counting and practice of letter and sound associations(28). Furthermore, parents identified literacy activities as tools to convey a moral message or guide children toward good behavior(28).
Tsirmpa et al.(40) research observed parents' beliefs regarding the types of practices that should be carried out with preschoolers. It found that more conventional parents believed that children should be familiar with letters and numbers and be able to recognize and write some of them. In contrast, parents who favored facilitative education believed that fine motor skills, visual perception, and hand-eye coordination should be worked on, as well as oral language, to promote the learning of written language.
Regarding the education level, studies by Riser et al.(17), Puranik et al.(18) and Skwarchuk et al.(16) observed an association between literacy practices, better performance in language assessments, and the parents’ education level(16-18,22,40). They also found that parents with a higher education level considered the family as a primary factor in preschoolers’ teaching-learning process, while parents with a lower education level believed that the school is primarily responsible for teaching children(40).
In contrast to the studies cited above, the research by Förster and Rojas-Barahona(39) and Burgess(22) found no difference between education levels and activities involving reading(22,39). On the other hand, socioeconomic income was associated with a greater availability of resources such as books, letter games, and toys(25,26).
Furthermore, all studies included in the review cited the informal practice of reading books and the impacts of family literacy practices on children's development. When compared with findings in the literature, several studies emphasize family participation as essential for educational success and linguistic and social development; thus, these data are in agreement(48,49).
Moreover, 27 of the 29 studies included in the review were carried out in developed countries(16-37). This data may be related to these countries’ greater concern with children’s development and education, since children out of school or who drop out of school are among the most important social problems in the world, especially in low- and middle-income countries.
According to Article 26 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, countries need to provide everyone with access to free education and invest significant resources in educational facilities. However, this review found only one study conducted in a developing country, which may be related to the school dropout rate mentioned in the study above and associated with educational indicators in developing countries.
Thus, the continuation of research aimed at exploring aspects of family literacy is paramount. Moreover, experimental studies that observe the results of literacy activities with socially vulnerable families can contribute to education, reduce school dropout rates, and improve educational indicators in developing countries.
Regarding the limitations of the present study, it is possible to highlight methodological aspects of the articles found, such as the absence of a control group in the intervention studies and the random distribution of participants. As for the observational studies, the use of semi-structured interviews with open-ended questions to investigate the types of practices may have compromised the results compared to those that used validated protocols.
CONCLUSION
The mapping of practices with preschoolers shows the predominance of informal practices. The most cited activity was reading books, followed by shared reading. Furthermore, playing together, making their own toys, drawing, coloring, singing, listening to music, and going on outings were activities reported by caregivers. Teaching to write was the most described formal practice. Finally, there is a consensus on the importance of the family environment in children's learning and the relationship between family literacy practices and the development of oral language and, subsequently, written language.
Supplementary Material
Supplementary material accompanies this paper.
Legenda S1
Legenda S2
This material is available as part of the online article from https://DOI: 10.1590/2317-1782/e20250148en
-
Study conducted at Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte – UFRN - Natal (RN), Brasil.
-
Financial support:
nothing to declare.
-
Data Availability:
Research data is available in the body of the article.
-
Use of artificial intelligence-assisted technology
The authors declare that no artificial intelligence tools were used in the research reported here or in the preparation of this article.
References
- 1 Brasil. Ministério da Educação. Secretaria de Alfabetização. Conta pra mim: guia de literacia familiar. Brasília: MEC; 2019.
-
2 Biggs EE, Arserio AP, Robison SE, Ross ME. Home literacy environment and interventions for children with intellectual and developmental disabilities: a scoping review. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2023;66(6):2118-40. https://doi.org/10.1044/2023_JSLHR-22-00334 PMid:37267447.
» https://doi.org/10.1044/2023_JSLHR-22-00334 -
3 Melhuish EC. Preschool matters. Science. 2011;333(6040):299-300. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1209459 PMid:21764739.
» https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1209459 -
4 Brasil. Ministério da Educação. Conselho Nacional de Educação. Diretrizes Curriculares Nacionais da Educação Básica [Internet]. Brasília: MEC; 2013 [citado em 2017 Out 16]. Disponível em: http://portal.mec.gov.br/index.php?option=com_docman&view=download&alias=13448-diretrizes-curiculares-nacionais-2013-pdf&Itemid=30192
» http://portal.mec.gov.br/index.php?option=com_docman&view=download&alias=13448-diretrizes-curiculares-nacionais-2013-pdf&Itemid=30192 -
5 Morais AG, Silva A, Nascimento GS. Ensino da notação alfabética e práticas de leitura e escrita na educação infantil: uma análise das três versões da base nacional comum curricular. Rev Bras Educ. 2020;25:2-25. https://doi.org/10.1590/s1413-24782020250018
» https://doi.org/10.1590/s1413-24782020250018 - 6 Queiroga BAM, Rosal AGC, Braga T, Melo JKO, Capellini SA. Desempenho cognitivo-linguístico de pré-escolares em diferentes contextos educacionais. Rev CEFAC. 2023;25(4):1-8.
-
7 Napolii AR. The home literacy and numeracy environment in preschool: cross-domain relations of parent: child practices and child outcomes. J Exp Child Psychol. 2018;166:581-603. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2017.10.002 PMid:29102840.
» https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2017.10.002 -
8 Dias NM, Pontes JM, Silva LDPD, Mecca TP. Relations between theory of mind and family environment among Brazilian preschool children. Appl Neuropsychol Child. 2022;11(3):471-9. https://doi.org/10.1080/21622965.2021.1892494 PMid:33689507.
» https://doi.org/10.1080/21622965.2021.1892494 -
9 Højen A, Schmidt ASM, Møller IS, Flansmose L. Unequal home literacy environments between preschool-age boys and girls predict unequal language and preliteracy outcomes. Acta Psychol. 2022;230:103716. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2022.103716
» https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2022.103716 - 10 OMS: Organização Mundial da Saúde. Diretrizes da OMS sobre atividade física, comportamento sedentário e sono para crianças menores de 5 anos. Genebra: OMS; 2019.
- 11 Brasil. Instituto Nacional de Estudos e Pesquisas Educacionais Anísio Teixeira. Notas sobre o Brasil no Pisa 2022. Brasília: Inep; 2023.
- 12 Peters M, Godfrey C, McInerney P, Munn Z, Trico A, Khalil H. Scoping. reviews. In: Joanna Briggs Institute, editor. JBI manual for evidence synthesis. Adelaide: JBI; 2020.
-
13 OSF: Open Science Framework. Home literacy practices for preschoolers: scope review [Internet]. 2024 [citado em 2024 Jun 9]. Disponível em: https://osf.io/kedfs/
» https://osf.io/kedfs/ -
14 Tricco AC, Lillie E, Zarin W, O’Brien KK, Colquhoun H, Levac D, et al. PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): checklist and explanation. Ann Intern Med. 2018;169(7):467-73. https://doi.org/10.7326/M18-0850 PMid:30178033.
» https://doi.org/10.7326/M18-0850 -
15 Rayyan. Intelligent systematic review [Internet]. 2024 [citado em 2024 Jun 9]. Disponível em: https://www.rayyan.ai/
» https://www.rayyan.ai/ -
16 Skwarchuk SL, Sowinski C, Lefevre JA. Formal and informal home learning activities in relation to children’s early numeracy and literacy skills: the development of a home numeracy model. J Exp Child Psychol. 2014;121:63-84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2013.11.006 PMid:24462995.
» https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2013.11.006 -
17 Riser QH, Rouse HL, Choi JY, Ku S. The contribution of home literacy context to preschool academic competencies for American Indian and Alaska Native Children. Child Youth Care Forum. 2020;49(2):303-23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10566-019-09529-1
» https://doi.org/10.1007/s10566-019-09529-1 -
18 Puranik CS, Phillips BM, Lonigan CJ, Gibson E. Home literacy practices and preschool children’s emergent writing skills: an initial investigation. Early Child Res Q. 2018;42:228-38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2017.10.004
» https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2017.10.004 - 19 Roopnarine JL, Dede Yildirim E. Paternal and maternal engagement in play, story telling, and reading in five Caribbean countries: associations with preschoolers’ literacy skills. Merrill Palmer Q. 2018;2(7):132-45.
-
20 Bingham GE, Jeon H-J, Kwon K-A, Lim C. Parenting styles and home literacy opportunities: associations with children’s oral language skills. Infant Child Dev. 2017;26(5):e2020. https://doi.org/10.1002/icd.2020
» https://doi.org/10.1002/icd.2020 -
21 Hindman AH, Morrison FJ. Differential contributions of three parenting dimensions to preschool literacy and social skills in a middle-income sample. Merrill Palmer Q. 2012;58(2):191-223. https://doi.org/10.1353/mpq.2012.0012
» https://doi.org/10.1353/mpq.2012.0012 -
22 Burgess SR. Home literacy environments (HLEs) provided to very young children. Early Child Dev Care. 2011;181(4):445-62. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004430903450384
» https://doi.org/10.1080/03004430903450384 -
23 Boudreau D. Use of a parent questionnaire in emergent and early literacy assessment of preschool children. Lang Speech Hear Serv Sch. 2005;36(1):33-47. https://doi.org/10.1044/0161-1461(2005/004) PMid:15801506.
» https://doi.org/10.1044/0161-1461(2005/004) -
24 Kim YS. The relationship between home literacy practices and developmental trajectories of emergent literacy and conventional literacy skills for Korean children. Read Writ. 2009;22(1):57-84. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-007-9103-9
» https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-007-9103-9 -
25 Myrtil MJ, Justice LM, Jiang H. Home-literacy environment of low-income rural families: association with child- and caregiver-level characteristics. J Appl Dev Psychol. 2019;60:1-10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2018.10.002
» https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2018.10.002 -
26 Chen C, Chen S, Wen P, Snow CE. Are screen devices soothing children or soothing parents?Investigating the relationships among children’s exposure to different types of screen media, parental efficacy and home literacy practices. Comput Human Behav. 2020;112:106462. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106462
» https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106462 -
27 Dulin MS, Loveall SJ, Mattie LJ. Home-literacy environments and language development in toddlers with Down syndrome. Front Psychol. 2023;14(1):1143369. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1143369 PMid:37457096.
» https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1143369 -
28 Perry NJ, Kay SM, Brown A. Continuity and change in home literacy practices of Hispanic families with preschool children. Early Child Dev Care. 2008;178(1):99-113. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004430701482191
» https://doi.org/10.1080/03004430701482191 -
29 Hammer CS, Rodriguez BL, Lawrence FR, Miccio AW. Puerto Rican mothers’ beliefs and home literacy practices. Lang Speech Hear Serv Sch. 2007;38(3):216-24. https://doi.org/10.1044/0161-1461(2007/023) PMid:17625048.
» https://doi.org/10.1044/0161-1461(2007/023) -
30 Schick AR, Melzi G. Print-related practices in low-income Latino homes and preschoolers’ school-readiness outcomes. J Early Child Literacy. 2016;16(2):171-98. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468798415592009
» https://doi.org/10.1177/1468798415592009 -
31 Sawyer B, Cycyk LM, Sandilos L, Hammer C. ‘So many books they don’t even all fit on the bookshelf’: an examination of low-income mother’s: home literacy practices, beliefs and influencing factors. J Early Child Literacy. 2018;18(3):338-72. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468798416667542
» https://doi.org/10.1177/1468798416667542 -
32 Gonzalez JE, Acosta S, Davis H, Pollard-Durodola S, Saenz L, Soares D, et al. Latino maternal literacy beliefs and practices mediating socioeconomic status and maternal education effects in predicting child receptive vocabulary. Early Educ Dev. 2017;28(1):78-95. https://doi.org/10.1080/10409289.2016.1185885
» https://doi.org/10.1080/10409289.2016.1185885 -
33 Lin J, Litkowski E, Schmerold K, Elicker J, Schmitt SA, Purpura DJ. Parent-educator communication linked to more frequent home learning activities for preschoolers. Child Youth Care Forum. 2019;48(5):757-72. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10566-019-09505-9
» https://doi.org/10.1007/s10566-019-09505-9 -
34 Reese L, Gallimore R. Immigrant latinos’ cultural model of literacy development: an evolving perspective on home-school discontinuities. Am J Educ. 2000;108(2):103-34. https://doi.org/10.1086/444236
» https://doi.org/10.1086/444236 -
35 Eutsler L, Trotter J. Print or iPad? Young children’s text type shared reading preference and behaviors in comparison to parent predictions and at-home practices. Lit Res Instruction. 2020;59(4):324-45. https://doi.org/10.1080/19388071.2020.1777229
» https://doi.org/10.1080/19388071.2020.1777229 -
36 DesJardin JL, Stika CJ, Eisenberg LS, Johnson KC, Ganguly DH, Henning SC. Home literacy experiences and shared reading practices: preschoolers with hearing loss. J Deaf Stud Deaf Educ. 2023;28(2):189-200. https://doi.org/10.1093/deafed/enac050 PMid:36617254.
» https://doi.org/10.1093/deafed/enac050 -
37 Li H, Corrie LF, Wong BKM. Early teaching of Chinese literacy skills and later literacy outcomes. Early Child Dev Care. 2008;178(5):441-59. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004430600789365
» https://doi.org/10.1080/03004430600789365 -
38 Marjanovič-Umek L, Hacin K, Fekonja U. The quality of mother-child shared reading: its relations to child’s storytelling and home literacy environment. Early Child Dev Care. 2019;189(7):1135-46. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004430.2017.1369975
» https://doi.org/10.1080/03004430.2017.1369975 -
39 Förster MCE, Rojas-Barahona CA. Disadvantaged preschool children from rural areas: the importance of home practices and nursery attendance in the development of early literacy skills / niños preescolares vulnerables de sectores rurales. Cultura y Educación. 2014;26(3):476-504. https://doi.org/10.1080/11356405.2014.973668
» https://doi.org/10.1080/11356405.2014.973668 -
40 Tsirmpa C, Stellakis N, Lavidas K. Beliefs of parents of preschool children about literacy: facilitative and conventional approaches. Eur Early Child Educ Res J. 2021;29(4):519-32. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350293X.2021.1941169
» https://doi.org/10.1080/1350293X.2021.1941169 - 41 Jay J, Rohl M. Constructing a family literacy program: challenges and successes. Int J Early Child. 2005;37(3):57-78.
-
42 Hood M, Conlon E, Andrews G. Preschool home literacy practices and children’s literacy development: a longitudinal analysis. J Educ Psychol. 2008;100(2):252-71. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.100.2.252
» https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.100.2.252 -
43 Haney M, Hill J. Relationships between parent‐teaching activities and emergent literacy in preschool children. Early Child Dev Care. 2004;174(3):215-28. https://doi.org/10.1080/0300443032000153543
» https://doi.org/10.1080/0300443032000153543 -
44 Matsuda Y, McCabe BE, Behar-Zusman V. Mothering in the context of mental disorder: effect of caregiving load on maternal health in a predominantly hispanic sample. J Am Psychiatr Nurses Assoc. 2021;27(5):373-82. https://doi.org/10.1177/1078390320907693 PMid:32102585.
» https://doi.org/10.1177/1078390320907693 - 45 van Bysterveldt AK, Westerveld MF. Children with Down syndrome sharing past personal event narratives with their teacher aides: A pilot study. Int J Disabil Dev Educ. 2017;64(3):249-69.
-
46 Ergün S. The relationship between caregiver burden and self‐care agency of pregnant women with 0-6‐year‐old children. Nurs Open. 2022;9(2):1052-9. https://doi.org/10.1002/nop2.1142 PMid:34846100.
» https://doi.org/10.1002/nop2.1142 -
47 van Niekerk K, Stancheva V, Smith C. Caregiver burden among caregivers of children with autism spectrum disorder. S Afr J Psychiatry. 2023;29:1-9. https://doi.org/10.4102/sajpsychiatry.v29i0.2079
» https://doi.org/10.4102/sajpsychiatry.v29i0.2079 -
48 Troller-Renfree SV, Hart ER, Sperber JF, Fox NA, Noble KG. Associations among stress and language and socioemotional development in a low-income sample. Dev Psychopathol. 2022;34(2):597-605. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954579421001759 PMid:35256040.
» https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954579421001759 -
49 Farkas C, Álvarez C, Cuellar MDP, Avello E, Gómez DM, Pereira P. Mothers’ competence profiles and their relation to language and socioemotional development in Chilean children at 12 and 30 months. Infant Behav Dev. 2020;59:101443. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infbeh.2020.101443 PMid:32276086.
» https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infbeh.2020.101443
Edited by
-
Editor:
Aline Mansueto Mourão,
Research data is available in the body of the article.
