Improving Child Care for Reading Success
Many young children spend a substantial part of their days in the care of someone other than a parent. More than 13 million infants, toddlers, and preschoolers receive regular care from adults other than their parents-roughly six out of 10 children under age six who are not enrolled in kindergarten (U.S. Department of Education, OERI, 1996).
According to the University of Michigan's Institute for Social Research, the average number of hours spent per week by children ages three to five in school settings nearly doubled from 11.5 hours in 1981 to 20 hours in 1997 (Hofferth, 1998).
The U.S. Department of Labor has projected the need for nearly 300,000 new child care workers between 1996 and 2006, making the occupation among the ten fastest-growing in the nation.
These statistics give us important information for winning the war against illiteracy. For some children, the support of parents and elementary school teachers is not enough.
Architects of reading success
Many early care and education providers need assistance with basic skills and training to fulfill their potential. We must acknowledge that these Americans are not just children's caretakers. They are architects of foundations that are critical for reading and academic success.
Many studies have established that high-quality early care and education lay the foundation for school success by enhancing cognitive and language development, as well as social and emotional competence (National Institute for Child Health and Development, 1997).
More specifically, the 1998 National Research Council report found that early childhood programs can contribute to the prevention of reading difficulties. These programs contribute by providing young children with enriched, research-based literacy environments, and by identifying and removing possible obstacles to reading success.
Unfortunately, fulfilling the promise of early education is easier to imagine than to realize. Access to this care, as well as the quality of care, varies greatly. Children from low-income families, who are most apt to benefit from early intervention, are the least likely to attend preschool. In fact, the preschool participation gap between rich and poor has actually widened over the past two decades (National Education Goals Panel, 1997).
When we fail to make the most of this important period in young children's lives, we set the stage for later difficulties with learning to read.
More children in child care
The opportunities for early care and education to help-or hinder-America's victory in the war against illiteracy have multiplied with the expansion of child care services.
Much of this demand has been fueled by the tremendous expansion of women's roles in the workforce. The percentage of mothers of infants and toddlers working outside the home has nearly tripled from 21 percent in 1965 to 59 percent in 1994 (Shore, 1997).
But even among households in which the mother is not employed, one-third use regular child care for their youngest children (U.S. Department of Education, OERI, 1996). Preschoolers spend an average of 35 hours a week in child care if their mothers work outside the home, and 20 hours per week if their mothers are not employed (Shore, 1997).
Child care starts early: 45 percent of infants under age 1 are regularly cared for by someone other than a parent, most by a relative in a private home.
As babies grow, their chance of being cared for by non-parental adults also grows, from 50 percent of 1-year-olds to 84 percent of 5-year-olds. Similarly, the percentage cared for outside of private homes grows from 11 percent of 1-year-olds to 75 percent of 5-year-olds (U.S. Department of Education, OERI, 1996).
Thus, an enormous potential exists for early childhood providers to influence later reading success.
Choices in child care
Individual and cultural preferences influence family choices about the use of early childhood programs. More than six out of ten Black children (66 percent) and White children (62 percent) receive supplemental care and education, compared with 46 percent of Hispanic children.
There are also wide income differences in families' child care patterns: only half of all households with incomes of $30,000 or less use child care, compared with three-quarters of households with incomes of $50,000 or more (U.S. Department of Education, 1996).
Besides influencing whether families use child care at all, income also influences the type of care that families select. This has significance for the war against illiteracy: the care families choose makes a difference.
In addition to having greater access to regulated care, higher-income families are much more likely to use center-based care-nursery schools, child care centers, and preschools-than are lower-income families (National Education Goals Panel, 1995; West et al., 1995).
In low-income neighborhoods, the supply of any kind of regulated child care, whether in centers or family child care homes, is usually inadequate (Siegel & Loman, 1991).
This lack of options increases the number of poor children in unlicensed family child care or relative care (Fuller & Liang, 1995; Love & Kisker, 1996). Research shows that, in general, unlicensed care arrangements are of lower quality than licensed centers or homes (Cost, Quality and Child Outcomes Study Team, 1995; Kontos et al., 1994).
Among those who offer services in a private home, 50 percent of non-regulated providers have been found to offer inadequate care, compared with about 13 percent of regulated providers (Families and Work Institute, 1994).
Advantages of center-based care
Although many families prefer family child care arrangements for their home-like atmosphere and small numbers of children, center-based care is the preference of most families for their older, preschool children (Leibowitz et al., 1988).
Because centers are designed to serve larger groups of children, they often offer greater resources for preschoolers' literacy development, such as books, tapes, and computers.
Additionally, a recent multi-site study found that center care is associated with better cognitive and language outcomes and a higher level of school readiness, compared with outcomes in other settings of comparable quality (National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, 1997b).
But not all center-based care is equal. Children who attended centers that met professional guidelines for child-staff ratios, group sizes, and teacher education had better language comprehension and school readiness than did children enrolled in centers without these standards.
But the doors to high-quality early care and education are often closed to low-income families, either because of cost or location. These barriers result in many poor children entering school without the early educational choices available to their affluent classmates, placing them at greater risk of reading difficulties.
Low funding, low quality
Child care providers have struggled to satisfy the demand for services. Unfortunately, this struggle has resulted in the chronic, twin calamities of low wages and high employee turnover.
The under-funding of early care and education-including fees, subsidies, and donations-is acknowledged to be the chief cause of low quality (Gomby et al., 1996; National Education Association, 1998).
Both parents and child care teachers bear the burden of the current inadequate funding system. Clearly, parent fees put high-quality early care and education out of reach for many working families. Yet, this system also perpetuates low salaries, which fail to attract and retain highly skilled teachers.
The impact is negative for all involved-child care providers, families, and children-and ultimately, for our nation as well. Low-quality early care and education put children's development at risk, including the development of abilities associated with reading success.
In 1989, a national study reported that the quality in most child care centers was "barely adequate" (National Center for the Early Childhood Workforce, 1989).
In 1999, the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) found that fewer than 10 percent of American youngsters ages 3 and under are likely to receive "excellent" care (Booth, 1999).
About 20 percent of child care centers are estimated to provide unsafe and unhealthy care (Shore, 1997). The 1995 Cost, Quality, and Child Outcomes Study found that child care at most centers is poor to mediocre, and almost half of infant and toddler care may be detrimental.
The recent NICHD study found that 61 percent of child care arrangements-including centers, family child care homes, in-home sitters, and relative care-to be poor to fair quality (Booth, 1999).
Six for Success!
- High staff-child ratios
- Small group sizes
- Adequate staff education and training
- Low staff turnover
- Curriculum emphasizing child-initiated, active learning
- Parent involvement
Source: National Education Association, 1998
Quality of early childhood teachers
Whether they work in child care, preschool, or public school, research consistently shows that the quality of teachers is the key to quality education. This is especially true in the early years.
A national study found that when child care providers had more years of education and more college-level early education training, they provided more sensitive, developmentally appropriate care to children (Cost, Quality and Child Outcomes Study Team, 1995).
Higher education and specialized training also allow early childhood teachers to do a better job of advancing children's language skills, a key predictor of later reading success (Whitebook et al., 1990).
But not all child care teachers get the professional preparation they need. In a study for the U.S. Department of Education, 93 percent of child care teachers reported having some child-related training, but only 36 percent had formal, college-level teacher preparation, and only 24 percent held a credential from a professional organization.
Among home-based providers, only 64 percent reported any child-related training and just 6 percent were accredited by a professional organization (Kisker et al., 1991).
Early childhood teachers find little incentive under current state requirements to prepare themselves better to support literacy development. The National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC) recommends that all early care and education teachers have formal training at the bachelor's level, but most states require that child care workers hold only a high school diploma.
Just as improvements in child-staff ratios and class size benefit all areas of children's development, more professional training opportunities and higher standards for early childhood teachers would enhance children's growth, including their preparation to be successful readers.
Efforts to improve
Small but promising steps have been taken to enhance the professional preparation of early childhood teachers. One study showed that even a modest increase in high-quality training can benefit children.
These researchers found that even 18 to 36 hours of training for family child care providers resulted in improved caregiving environments and stronger relationships between adults and children(Galinsky et al., 1995).
However promising, this level of preparation does not approach what is needed to provide our youngest children with the foundations for healthy development. More comprehensive approaches to training can strengthen the early childhood work force.
The Council for Early Childhood Professional Recognition offers a Child Development Associate (CDA) credential, which is used as one of the standards in the licensing of child care teachers and center directors in 46 states and the District of Columbia. The credential calls for a high school diploma, 120 hours of training in specified categories, and 480 hours of experience, along with a formal assessment procedure.
With leadership from Wheelock College's Center for Career Development in Early Care and Education, many states are developing more coherent early childhood training systems, with increased collaboration between higher education institutions and community partners.
These promising trends are consistent with recommendations by experts in the field. The Not By Chance report (Kagan & Cohen, 1997) summarizes four years of discussions by early childhood and policy experts. They recommend that every person employed in early care and education programs hold an individual license to practice, based on demanding standards of education and training.
In the literacy area alone, the 1998 National Research Council's report sets forth a long list of in-depth knowledge and skills that all early childhood educators must have if children are to enter school ready to become successful readers.
The Orton Dyslexia Society calls for all preschool and kindergarten teachers to be able to, at minimum: stimulate oral expressive language, language comprehension, and print awareness; foster phonological awareness and recognition of the links between sounds and letters; and identify language problems of children at risk for reading difficulty.
One-shot workshops and minimal training requirements will not be enough to produce the skilled professionals needed to support children's language and literacy development.
Only by rejecting business as usual and facing up to these many challenges can we take advantage of the tremendous opportunities to improve child literacy through early care and education. Policymakers and early childhood administrators can work actively to support child care teachers and to bolster their contributions to reading success.
Click the "References" link above to hide these references.
Alexander, K. & Entwisle, D. (1996). Early Schooling and Inequality: Socioeconomic Disparities in Children's Learning. In Falmer sociology series, ed. J.S. Coleman, 63-79. London: Falmer Press.
Andrews, J. & Mason, J.M. (1986). How Do Deaf Children Learn about Reading? American Annals of the Deaf., 131:210-217.
Archibold, R.C. (1998). Getting Tough on Teachers. The New York Times, November 1.
Arnold, C. (1997). Read with Me: A Guide for Student Volunteers Starting Early Childhood Literacy Programs. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education, National Institute on Early Childhood Development and Education. ECI 97-9017.
Azer, S. & Eldred, D. (1998). Training Requirements in Child Care Licensing Regulations, June. Boston: The Center for Career Development in Early Care and Education, Wheelock College.
Azer, S. & Caprano, K. (1997). Data on Child Care Licensing. Boston: The Center for Career Development in Early Care and Education, Wheelock College.
Baker, C., Serpell, R., & Sonnenschen, S. (1995). Opportunities for Literacy Learning in the Homes of Urban Preschooolers. In Family Literacy: Connections in Schools and Communities, ed. C.M. Morrow, Newark, Del.: International Reading Association.
Baker, L., Scher, D., & Mackler, K. (1997). Home and Family Influences on Motivations for Reading. Educational Psychologist, 32(2):69-82.
BeautyTech. (1999). State Board Reciprocity. BeautyTech Online, March 12.
Blakes-Greenway, D. (1994). Increasing Parental Involvement in the Preschool Program by Offering Alternative Communication Strategies Between Parents and School Staff. Unpublished practicum, Nova Southern University, Ft. Lauderdale, Fla.
Blank, R., Manise, J., Braithwaite, B., & Langesen, D. (1999). State Education Indicators with a Focus on Title I, 1998. Washington, D.C.: Council of Chief State School Officers. February.
Booth, C.L., (1999). National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Study of Early Child Care. Paper presented at the symposium of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, Anaheim, Calif.
The Boston Globe. (1998). Toward Better Teachers. Editorial, June 23.
Boyer, E.L. (1991). Ready to Learn: A Mandate for the Nation. Princeton, N.J.: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. Lawrenceville, N.J.: Princeton University Press.
Bryant, J. (1999). Evaluation of PBS Ready to Learn Service, an unpublished survey analysis. Institute for Communications Research, University of Alabama.
Cervantes, H.T., Baca, L.M., & Torres, D.S. (1979). Community Involvement in Bilingual Education: The Bilingual Educator as Parent Trainer. National Association for Bilingual Education Journal, 3(2):73-82.
Cohen, P.A., Kulik, J.A., and Kulik, C.L.C. (1982). Educational Outcomes of Tutoring: A Meta-analysis of Findings. American Educational Research Journal, 19:237-248.
Commission of Education of the Deaf. (1988). Report to Congress and the President. Washington, D.C.
Cost, Quality and Child Outcomes Study Team. (1995). Cost, Quality and Child Outcomes in Child Care Centers. Department of Economics, University of Colorado. Denver: Author.
Council of Chief State School Officers. (1998). Young Children and the Arts: Making Creative Connections. A Report of the Task Force on Children's Learning and the Arts, Birth to Age Eight. Goals 2000 Arts Education Partnership, June. Washington, D.C.
Council for Exceptional Children. (1997). Reading Difficulties vs. Learning Disabilities, CEC Today, 4(5), November/December.
Cummins, J. (1979). Linguistic Interdependence and the Educational Development of Bilingual Children. Review of Educational Research, 49: 222-251.
Cummins, J. (1989). Empowering Minority Students. Sacramento: CABE.
D'Agostino, J.,Wong, K., Hedges, L., & Borman, G. (1998). The Effectiveness of Title I Parent Programs: A Multilevel Analysis of Prospects Data. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, April.
Darling-Hammond, L. (1996). The Quiet Revolution: Rethinking Teacher Development. Educational Leadership, 53(6):4-10.
De La Rosa, D. & Maw, C. E. (1990). Hispanic Education: A Statistical Portrait 1990. Washington, D.C.: National Council of La Raza.
Dickinson, D.K., ed. (1991). Bridges to Literacy: Children, Families, and Schools. Blackwell Press.
Dodge, D.T. & Colker, L.J. (1996). The Creative Curriculum for Early Childhood. 3rd edition. Washington, D.C.: Teaching Strategies, Inc.
Dwyer, Piontek, Seager, DiMartino & Graham. (1998). The Massachusetts Literacy Study: Report of Phase 1 Findings. Providence, R.I.: Northeast and Islands Regional Educational Laboratory at Brown University.
Ebener, R., Lara-Alecio, R., & Irby, B. (1997). Supportive Practices among Low-Income Parents of Academically Successful Elementary Students in Even Start Programs. ERIC Clearinghouse on Reading, English, and Communication. ED40511, Indiana University. Educational Testing Service. (1995). The Pennsylvania State Literacy Survey. Adult Literacy in Pennsylvania: Author.
Education Commission of the States. (1997). Compulsory School Age Requirements. Education Commission of the States Clearinghouse. Denver: Author.
(1997). Early Childhood Education Programs. Education Commission of the States Clearinghouse. Denver: Author.
(1997) State Characteristics: Kindergarten. Education Commission of the States Clearinghouse. Denver: Author.
Education Trust Inc. (1998). Dispelling the Myth: High Poverty Schools Exceed Expectations. Draft. In collaboration with the Council of Chief State School Officers.
Elley, R. (1992). How in the World Do Students Read? Hamburg: The Hague International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement.
Espinosa, L.M. (1995). Hispanic Parent Involvement in Early Childhood Programs. ERIC Digest. Clearinghouse on Elementary and Early Childhood Education. EDO-PS-95-3, May.
Espinosa, L. & Lesar, S. (1994). Increasing Language-Minority Family and Child Competencies for School Success. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, April 4.
Families and Work Institute. (1994). The Study of Children in Family Child Care and Relative Care. New York: Author.
Federal Interagency Forum on Child and Family Statistics. (1997). America's Children: Key National Indicators of Well-Being. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.
Ferreiro, E. & Teberosky, A. (1982). Literacy Before Schooling. Portsmouth, N.J.: Heinemann.
Fingeret, H.A., (1990). Let Us Gather Blossoms Under Fire...Paper presented at a conference on literacy for a global economy: A Multicultural Perspective. El Paso, Texas, February 21.
Fleischman, H.L. & Hopstock, P.J. (1993). Descriptive Study of Services to Limited English Proficient Students. Arlington, Va.: Development Associates, Inc.
Fletcher, J.M. & Lyon, G.R. (1998). Reading: A Research-Based Approach. In What's Gone Wrong in America's Classrooms, ed. W.M. Evers, 49-90. Stanford, Calif.: Hoover Institution Press.
Foorman, B. et al. (1998). The Role of Instruction in Learning to Read: Preventing Reading Failure in At-risk Children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90: 37-55.
Fuller, B. & Liang, X. (1995). Can Poor Families Find Child Care? Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University.
Fuller, B., Eggers-Pierola, C., Holloway, S.D., Liang, X., & Rambaud, M. (1994). Rich Culture, Poor Markets: Why Do Latino Parents Choose to Forego Preschooling? Washington, D.C.: American Educational Research Association and National Science Foundation.
Galinsky, E., Howes, C., & Kontos, S. (1995). The Family Training Care Study: Highlights of Findings. New York: Families and Work Institute.
Gambrell, L.B. & Coulso, D. (1998). Reading Is Fundamental: 1998 Delaware Running Start Initiative. University of Maryland Research Report.
General Accounting Office. (1998). Child Care: Use of Standards to Ensure High Quality Care. (GAO.HEHS-98-223R). Washington, D.C.: Author.
Graves, M. F. & Slater, W. H. (1987). Development of Reading Vocabularies in Rural Disadvantaged Students, Intercity Disadvantaged Students and Middle Class Suburban Students. Paper presented at the American Education Research Association conference. Washington, D.C.
Gomby, D., Larner, M., Terman, D., Krantzler, N., Stevenson, C., & Behrman, R. (1996). Financing Child Care: Analysis and Recommendations. The Future of Children: Financing Child Care, 6(2):5-25.
Goodlad, J. (1997). Producing Teachers Who Understand, Believe and Care. Education Week, 16(48):36-37.
Hanson, R., Siegel, D., & Broach, D. (1987). The Effects on High School Seniors of Learning to Read in Kindergarten. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association. Washington, D.C.
Hart B. & Risley, T.R. (1995). Meaningful Differences in the Everyday Experiences of Young American Children. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co.
Hart, P.D. (1994). Graph for survey in Learning to Read, Reading to Learn: The First Chapter in Education. The American Federation of Teachers and Chrysler Corporation survey, p.1.
Haselkorn, D. & Harris, L. (1998). The Essential Profession. Belmont, Mass.: Recruiting New Teachers, Inc.
Hayes, D. P. & Grether, J. (1969). The School Year and Vacations: When Do Students Learn? Revision of a paper presented to the Eastern Sociological Association Convention, New York.
Hayes, D.P. & Ahrens, M.G. (1988). Vocabulary Simplification for Children: A Special Case of "Motherese"? Journal of Child Language, 15(2):395-410.
Hess, R.D. & Holloway, S. (1984). Family and School as Educational Institutions. In Review of Child Development Research, ed. R.D. Parke, 179-222. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Heyns, B. (1987). Schooling and Cognitive Development: Is There a Season for Learning? Child Development, 58:1,151-1,160.
Hiebert, E.H., Pearson, D., Taylor, B., Richardson, V., and Paris, S.G. (1997). Every Child a Reader. A series of pamphlets prepared for the Center for the Improvement of Early Reading Instruction. Ann Arbor, Mich.
Hofferth, S. C. (1998). Healthy Environments, Healthy Children: Children in Families. Ann Arbor, Mich.: University of Michigan Institute for Social Research.
Interagency Commission on Learning Disabilities. (1987). Learning Disabilities: A Report to the U.S. Congress. Washington, D.C.
International Reading Association/The National Association for the Education of Young Children. (1998). Learning to Read and Write: Developmentally Appropriate Practices for Young Children: A Joint Position Statement. Washington, D.C., and Newark, Del.: Authors.
Juel, C. (1988). Learning to Read and Write: A Longitudinal Study of Fifty-four Children from First through Fourth Grade. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80:437-447.
Kagan, S.L. & Cohen, N.E. (1997). Not by Chance: Creating an Early Care and Education System for America's Children. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University, The Bush Center for Child Development and Social Policy.
Kagan, S.L. (1995). Normalizing Preschool Education: The Illusive Imperative. In Changing Populations/Changing Schools: Ninety-fourth Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, eds. E. Flaxman & A.H. Passow, 840-101. Chicago: National Society for the Study of Education.
Karoly, L.A., et al. (1998). Investing in Our Children. Santa Monica, Calif.: RAND.
Karweit, N., Ricciuti, A., & Thompson, B. (1994). Summer Learning Revisited: Achievement Profiles of Prospects' First Grade Cohort. Draft document. Cambridge, Mass.: Abt Associates.
Kisker, E.E., Hofferth, S.L., & Phillips, D.A. (1991). Profile of Child Care Settings Study: Early Education and Care in 1990, submitted to the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Planning, Budget and Evaluation (Princeton, N.J.: Mathematica Policy Research Inc., 1991) and unpublished tabulations, 1992.
Klass, P., MD. (1998). Sense and Dispensability: My Patients Want More Than a Medical Diagnosis-And So Do I. The Washington Post, November 29.
(1998). Children and Books at a Crossroads. Speech delivered to the National Symposium of the National Children's Book and Literacy Alliance, Boston, October 9.
Kontos, S., Howes, C., Shinn, M., & Galinsky, E. (1994). Quality in Family Child Care and Relative Care. New York: Teachers College Press.
Lally, R.J. (1997). Brain Research, Infant Learning, and Child Care Curriculum. Unpublished paper prepared for the Child Care Information Exchange.
Landerholm, E., Rubenstein, D., & Losch, M. (1994). Involving Parents of Young Children in Science, Math and Literacy Activities. Unpublished manuscript, Northeastern Illinois University, Chicago.
Leibowitz, A., Waite, L., & Witsberger, C. (1988). Child Care for Preschoolers: Differences by Child's Age. Demography, 27:112-133.
Lewis, M.C. (1993). Beyond Barriers: Involving Hispanic Families in the Education Process. Washington, D.C.: National Committee for Citizens in Education.
Liberman, I.Y. & Shankweiler, D. (1991). Phonology and Beginning to Read: A Tutorial. In Learning to Read: Basic Research and its Implications, eds. L. Rieben and C.A. Perfetti. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
Liontos, L.B. (1992). At-Risk Families & Schools: Becoming Partners. Eugene, Ore.: ERIC Clearinghouse on Educational Management. ED 342 055.
Love, J. & Kisker, E. (1996). What Choices Do They Have? The Supply of Center-based Child Care in Low-income Neighborhoods. Princeton, N.J.: Mathematica Policy Research Inc.
Lyon, G.R. (1998). Overview of Reading and Literacy Initiatives. Prepared statement to the Committee on Labor and Human Resources, U.S. Senate, April 28.
(1997). Report on Learning Disabilities Research. Prepared statement to the Committee on Education and the Workforce, U.S. House of Representatives, July 10.
(1996). Learning Disabilities. In The Future of Children: Special Education for Students with Disabilities, 6:54-76.
Lyon, G.R., Vaassen, M., & Toomey, F. (1989). Teachers' Perceptions of Their Undergraduate and Graduate Preparation. Teacher Education and Special Education, 12: 164-169.
Macias, R.F. (1998). How Many School-Aged Limited-English-Proficient Students Are There in the U.S.? How Many in Each State? NCBE No. 1. Washington, D.C.: National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education.
McCormick, S. (1999). Instructing Students Who Have Literacy Problems. 3rd edition. Columbus, Ohio: Prentice-Hall.
McCutchen, D., Harry, D., Cunningham, A., Cox, S., & Covill, A. (1998). Subject-Matter Knowledge of Teachers of Beginning Reading. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, Calif., April.
McInerney, M., Riley, K., & Osher, D. (1998). Technology to Support Literacy Strategies for Students Who Are Deaf. Chesapeake Institute of the American Institutes for Research.
The McKenzie Group Inc. (1999). Student Achievement and Accountability Systems in Urban Districts. Draft. Washington, D.C.: The McKenzie Group.
Miller, M.L. & Shontz, M.L. (1997). Small Change: Expenditures for Resources in School Library Media Centers, FY 95-96. School Library Journal, October.
Moats, L.C. (1995). The Missing Foundation in Teacher Education. American Educator. American Federation of Teachers, summer.
Moats, L.C. & Lyon, G.R. (1996). Wanted: Teachers with Knowledge of Language. Topics on Language Disorders, 16(2):73-86.
Moss, M. & Puma, M. (1995). Prospects: The Congressionally Mandated Study of Educational Growth and Opportunity. First Year Report on Language Minority and Limited-English-Proficient Students. Cambridge, Mass.: Abt Associates.
Murnane, R. (1975). The Impact of School Resources on the Learning of Inner City Children. Cambridge, Mass.: Ballinger.
NAEP 1998 Reading Report Card: See U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, National Center for Education Statistics, 1999. The NAEP 1998 Reading Report Card for the Nation.
NAEP 1996 Trends Report: See U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, National Center for Education Statistics, 1997. NAEP 1996 Trends in Academic Progress.
Nathenson-Mejia, S. (1994). Bridges between Home and School: Literacy Building Activities for Non-native English Speaking Homes. The Journal of Educational Issues of Language Minority Students, 14 (winter):149-164.
National Association of Elementary School Principals. (1998). Best Ideas for Reading from America's Blue Ribbon Schools: What Award-Winning Elementary and Middle School Principals Do. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Corwin Press.
National Center for Early Childhood Development and Learning. (1998). NCDEL Kindergarten Transitions, July.
National Center for the Early Childhood Workforce. (1989). Executive summary for The National Child Care Staffing Study. Washington, D.C.: Author.
National Center for Family Literacy. (1996). The Power of Family Literacy, 2nd edition. Louisville, Ken..:National Center for Family Literacy.
National Education Association. (1998). Promoting Quality in Early Care and Education: Issues for Schools. Washington, D.C.: Author.
National Education Goals Panel. (1997). Special Early Childhood Report. Washington, D.C.: Author.
(1995). Data Volume for the National Education Goals Report. Volume 1: National Data. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.
National Governors Association. (1996). Improving Services for Children in Working Families, a report prepared for the Center for Best Practices. Washington, D.C.: Author.
(1998). Early Childhood Activities in the States, 1996-1998. Results of a survey by the National Governors Association. Washington, D.C.: Center for Best Practices.
National Household Education Survey, 1996: See U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, National Center for Education Statistics, 1995.
National Institute for Child Health and Human Development. (1997a). Mother-Child Interaction and Cognitive Outcomes Associated with Early Child Care. Early Child Care Research Network: Author.
(1997b) NICHD Study of Early Child Care: The Relationship of Child Care to Cognitive and Language Development. Presented at the Society for Research in Child Development meeting, April 3-6, 1997. Washington, D.C.
National Institute for Literacy. (1998). Fast Facts on Literacy & Fact Sheet on Correctional Education. Washington, D.C.: National Institute for Literacy.
National Research Center on English Learning & Achievement. (1998). Effective Early Literacy Instruction: Complex and Dynamic. English Update: 1(8), spring.
National Research Council. (1998). Preventing Reading Difficulties in Young Children. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
Needlman, R., Fried, L., Morley, D., Taylor, S., & Zuckerman, B. (1991). Clinic-based Intervention to Promote Literacy. American Journal of Diseases of Children, 145:881-884, August.
Neuman, S.B. (in press). Books Make a Difference: A Study of Access to Literacy. Reading Research Quarterly. July/August/September 1999.
New York Times. (1997). Teaching Johnny to Read. January 25.
Nicolau, S. & Ramos, C. L. (1990). Together Is Better: Building Strong Relationships between Schools and Hispanic Parents. New York City: Hispanic Policy Development Project.
Nicolau, S., Ramos, C., & Palombo, B. (1990). Dear Parents: In the United States...It's Our School Too. New York City: Hispanic Policy Development Project. (English version: ED-325-541; Spanish version: ED-325-542.
Office of Technology Assessment, U.S. Congress. (1993). Adult Literacy and New Technologies: Tools for a Lifetime. OTA-SET-550. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.
Olsen, C.R. (1979). The Effects of Enrichment Tutoring upon Self-concept, Educational Achievement, and Measured Intelligence of Male Under-achievers in an Inner-city Elementary School. Palo Alto, Calif.: Unpublished paper.
Orton Dyslexia Society. (1997). Informed Instruction for Reading Success: Foundations for Teacher Preparation. Baltimore: Orton Dyslexia Society.
Padden, C. & Hanson V. (1999). Transitions in Skilled Reading in Signing Deaf Children. In The Signs of Language Revisited: An Anthology in Honor of Ursula Bellugi and Edward Klima, eds. K. Emmorey, and H. Mahwah-Lane, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum & Associates.
Padden, C. & Ramse, K. (1998). Reading Ability in Signing Deaf Children.
Topics in Language Disorders, 18:30-46.
Pelavin, S. & David, J. (1977). Evaluating Long-term Achievement: An Analysis of Longitudinal Data from Compensatory Education Programs. Menlo Park, Calif.: Stanford Research Institute.
Pianta, R.C., & Cox, M.J. (in press). The Transition to Kindergarten: Research, Policy, Training, and Practice. Baltimore: Paul Brookes.
Rack, J.P., Snowling, M.J., & Olson, R.K. (1992). The Non-word Reading Deficit in Developmental Dyslexia: A Review. Reading Research Quarterly, 27:29-53.
Recruiting New Teachers Inc. (1998). The Essential Profession: A National Survey of Public Attitudes Toward Teaching, Educational Opportunities and School Reform. Belmont, Mass.: November 17.
Reisner, E., Petry, C., & Armitage, M. (1990). A Review of Programs Involving College Students as Tutors or Mentors in Grades K-12. Washington, D.C.: Policy Studies Associates.
Riley, J. (1996). The Teaching of Reading. London: Paul Chapman.
Risko, V.J., Peter, J.A., & McAllister, D. (1996). Conceptual Changes: Preservice Teachers' Pathways to Providing Literacy Instruction. In Growing Literacy, eds. E.G. Sturtevant and W.M. Linek, 104-119. Commerce, Texas: College Reading Association.
Risko, V.J. & Kinzer, C.K. (1997). Videodisc, Case-based Reading Instruction in Pre-service Reading Education. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Rock, D. (1993). A Preliminary Look at the "Summer Learning Deficit" of First-Graders. Unpublished manuscript.
Sauerwein, K. (1999). State Weeds Out Old, Inaccurate Books at Schools. Los Angeles Times, May 30.
Scarborough, H.S. (1998). Early Identification of Children At-risk for Reading Disabilities: Phonological Awareness and Some Other Promising Predictors. In Specific Reading Disability: A View of the Spectrum, eds. B.K. Shapiro, P.J. Accardo, and A.J. Capute, 77-121. Timonium, Md.: York Press.
Schwartz, W. (1996). Hispanic Preschool Education: An Important Overview. ERIC Clearinghouse on Urban Education. EDO-UD-96-2. Number 113, July.
Shaywitz, S.E., Shaywitz, B.A., Fletcher, J.M., & Escobar, M.D. (1990). Prevalence of Reading Disability in Boys and Girls: Results of the Connecticut Longitudinal Study. Journal of the American Medical Association, 264:998-1002.
Shaywitz, S.E., Escobar, M.D., Shaywitz, B.A., Fletcher, J.M., & Makuch, R. (1992). Evidence that Dyslexia May Represent the Lower Tail of a Normal Distribution of Reading Ability. New England Journal of Medicine, 326:145-150.
Shaywitz, S.E., Fletcher, J.M., & Shaywitz, B.A. (1996). A Conceptual Model and Definition of Dyslexia: Findings from the Connecticut Longitudinal Study. In Language, Learning and Behaviour Disorders, eds. J. H. Beichtman, N. Cohen, M.M. Konstantareas, and R. Tannock, 199-223. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Shaywitz, B.A., et al. (1997). The Yale Center for the Study of Learning and Attention: Longitudinal and Neurobiological Studies. Learning Disabilities: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 8:21-30.
Shore, R. (1997). Rethinking the Brain: New Insights into Early Development. New York City: Families and Work Institute.
Siegel, G. & Loman, A. (1991). Child Care and AFDC Recipients in Illinois: Patterns, Problems, and Needs. St. Louis, Mo.: Institute of Applied Research.
Slavin, R.E., Karweit, N.L., & Madden, N.A. (1989). Effective Programs for Students At Risk. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Snow, C. & Tabors, P. (1996). Intergenerational Transfer of Literacy in Family Literacy: Directions in Research and Implications for Practice, eds. L.A. Benjamin and J. Lords. Washington, D.C.: Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education.
Smart Start Evaluation Team. (1999). North Carolina's Smart Start Initiative: 1998 Annual Evalution Report. Chapel Hill, N.C.: Frank Porter Graham Child Development Center at University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill.
Snow, C. E. & Ninio, A. (1986). The Contracts of Literacy: What Children Learn from Learning to Read Books. In Emergent Literacy: Writing and Reading. Norwood, N.J.: Ablex.
Torgeson, J., Wagner, R., & Rashotte, C. (1997). The Prevention and Remediation of Severe Reading Disabilities: Keeping the End in Mind. Scientific Studies in Reading, 1:217-234.
U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, National Center for Education Statistics. (1999). Teacher Quality: A Report on the Preparation and Qualifications of Public School Teachers, NCES 1999-080, by Lewis, L., Parsad, B., Carey, N., Bartfai, N., Farris, E., Smerdon, B., and Greene, B., project officer. Washington, D.C.
(1999). The NAEP 1998 Reading Report Card for the Nation. NCES 1999-459, by Donahue, O.L., Voelkl, K.E., Campbell, J.R., and Mazzeo. J., Washington, D.C.
(1997). NAEP 1996 Trends in Academic Progress. Washington, D.C.: National Center for Educational Statistics. By Campbell, J.R., Voekl, K.E., and Donahue, P.L.
(1996). Child Care and Early Education Program Participation of Infants, Toddlers, and Preschoolers. Statistics in Brief. NCES 95-824. Washington, D.C.: Author.
(1996). Reading Proficiency and Home Support for Literacy. NAEP facts 2(1). NCES 96-814R. Washington, D.C.: Author.
(1996). Reading Literacy in the United States: Findings from the IEA Reading Literacy Study. Washington, D.C.: Author.
(1996). National Household Education Survey, 1995. Washington, D.C.: Author.
(1994). National Household Education Survey, 1991 and 1993. Family-Child Engagement in Literacy Activities: Changes in Participation between 1991 and 1993. Statistics in Brief. NCES, December 1994.
(1993). Dropout Rates in the United States: 1993. NES 940669, by McMillen, M., Kaufman, P., & Whitener, S. Washington, D.C.
U.S. Department of Education. (1999). Promising Results, Continuing Challenges: The Final Report of the National Assessment of Title I. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education.
(1998). Baby Boom Echo Report III. A Back to School Special Report on the Baby Boom Echo: September 8, 1998. Washington, D.C.: Author.
(1998). Longitudinal Evaluation of School Change and Performance: Some Preliminary Findings from First Two Years. Draft. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education.
(1998). Office of Bilingual Education and Minority Languages Affairs. OBEMLA Data from Special Issues Analysis Center: Author.
(1997). Prospects: Student Outcomes Final Report. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education.
(1996). Reading: The First Chapter in Education. Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services and National Center to Improve the Tools of Educators. Washington, D.C.: Author.
(1992). Office of Special Education Programs. Deaf Policy Guidance. Washington, D.C.: 57 Fed. Reg. 49274, October 30.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (1997). Child Care Bureau Frequently Asked Questions. Washington, D.C.: Administration for Children and Families.
U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. (1999a). Occupational Employment Projections to 2006. Silvestri, G.T., Monthly Labor Review, November 1997, Table 3, 77.
(1999b). Usual Weekly Earnings of Wage and Salary Workers, First Quarter 1999. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office.
(1998). Occupational Employment Statistics: 1997 National Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office.
U.S. General Accounting Office. (1998). Child Care: Use of Standards to Ensure High Quality Care. A report prepared for the Hon. Sander Levin, the Hon. Fortney "Pete" Stark, the Hon. Matthew Martinez, and the Hon. George Miller, U.S. House of Representatives. GAO HEHS-98-223R.
University of Colorado, Boulder. (1999). Overview: Marion Downs National Center for Infant Hearing. Boulder, Colo.: Marion Downs.
Utah State University. (1999). Fact Sheet: Universal Newborn Hearing Screening. Logan, Utah: National Center for Hearing Assessment and Management.
Vellutino, F.R., Scanlon, D.M., Sipay, H., & Denckla M. (1996). Cognitive Profiles of Difficult-to-remediate and Readily Remediated Poor Readers: Early Intervention as a Vehicle for Distinguishing between Cognitive and Experiential Deficits as Basic Causes of Specific Reading Disability. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88:601-636.
Wells, C.G. (1985). Preschool Literacy-Related Activities and Success in School. Literacy, Language, and Learning. London: Cambridge University Press.
West, J., Wright, D., & Hausken. (1995). Child Care and Early Education Program Participation of Infants, Toddlers and Preschoolers. Washington, D.C.: National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Department of Education.
Whitebook, M., Howes, C., & Phillips, D. (1990). The National Child Care Staffing Study. Oakland, Calif.: National Center for Early Childhood Workforce.
Withrow, F. (1989). Literacy and the Hearing Impaired: Living, Moving, Dynamic Text. Washington, D.C., ED-353-734.
Young, K.T., Davis, K., & Schoen, C. (1996). The Commonwealth Fund Survey of Parents with Young Children. New York: The Commonwealth Fund.