Early conceptualizations of the HLE have often focused on shared reading frequency and similar items that were collected via parent questionnaires (Bus et al., 1995). However, reducing the HLE to a set of few variables could underestimate the role of HLE in early literacy development (Burgess, Hecht, & Lonigan, 2002; Lehrl, Ebert, & Rossbach, 2013). Understanding how specific components of the HLE affect different early literacy skills during early childhood can inform targeted interventions in the HLE (Burgess et al., 2002). For the evaluation of the HLE’s overall impact on early literacy skills (including oral language skills), different models of the HLE have been proposed that include diverse facets such as the amount and variety of literacy resources and activities at home, quality of shared reading, parental language and reading skills, and their literacy beliefs and attitudes (e.g., Burgess et al., 2002; Sénéchal & LeFevre, 2002).
Children’s literacy interest and screen time are also considered to be key variables in reading development (Frijters, Barron, & Brunello, 2000; Hume, Lonigan, & McQueen, 2015; Skwarchuk, Sowinski, & LeFevre, 2014). Literacy interest explains unique variance over and above the formal HLE in decoding precursors and early reading skills (Frijters et al., 2000). In addition, there is some evidence that shared reading activities precede an increase in children’s literacy interest, and that interest in reading versus print are two separate constructs that are not correlated (Hume et al., 2015). Concerning screen time, a longitudinal study found that kindergarten children who watch more than three hours of TV per day spend less time reading books in their leisure time and show a decelerated growth
of reading skills in primary school (Ennemoser & Schneider, 2007). By contrast, less than two hours of daily screen time apparently have no negative effect on the language and reading development of children who are older than three years (Zimmerman & Christakis, 2005).
Components of the HLE can be divided into environment resources and exposure to literacy activities (see Figure 3.1). The latter includes passive HLE (model learning) and active HLE (shared reading, TV time). In addition, Sénéchal & LeFevre’s (2002) conceptualization of the HLE distinguishes formal teaching of writing and reading from shared storybook reading. Many studies have found that differences in the active HLE explain variance in early literacy and language skills over and above parent SES, literacy resources, and the passive HLE (e.g., Burgess et al., 2002; Sénéchal et al., 1996). This finding is consistent with the bioecological model of human development (Bronfenbrenner & Morris, 2006), positing that reciprocal interactions between active children and the persons and objects in their immediate environment are the main driving force of development. Therefore, more recent reading acquisition research has focused more on the active HLE than on the other components.
Figure 3.1. Components of the home literacy environment (Burgess et al., 2002;
Sénéchal & LeFevre, 2002)
Overall Home Literacy Environment (HLE) Limiting Environment/Resources
Parent Education + Occupation Educational Aspirations
Interactive HLE/Literacy Interface
Exposure to Literacy Activities and TV
Passive HLE Model Learning: Reading + TV Active HLE Shared Reading TV time Teaching Reading + Writing
The Home Literacy Model (Sénéchal & LeFevre, 2002; Sénéchal & LeFevre, 2014; see Figure 3.2) has been particularly influential. The model proposes that there are two independent parental influences that shape the home literacy environment: Shared reading activities between parents and children, called informal home literacy environment, support the development of oral language skills, such as vocabulary. By contrast, parental teaching of reading and writing skills, called the formal home literacy environment, supports the development of decoding precursors, such as letter knowledge and phonological awareness.
Figure 3.2. Home Literacy Model (adapted from Sénéchal & LeFevre, 2002).
© 2002 by the Society for Research in Child Development, Inc. Adapted with permission.
The aim of the Home Literacy Model is to describe which specific parental activities and early literacy experiences support the acquisition of oral language skills and precursors of decoding skills in young children (Sénéchal & LeFevre, 2002). Evidence from longitudinal studies that were conducted in different cultures (e.g. Chen, Zhou, Zhao, & Davey, 2010; Hood, Conlon, & Andrews, 2008; Lehrl et al., 2013; Sénéchal & LeFevre, 2014) supports this proposed dichotomy. For example, a five- year longitudinal study with English-speaking children found that informal and formal home literacy activities were not correlated (Sénéchal & LeFevre, 2002), and that storybook exposure of kindergarten children predicted vocabulary develop- ment and comprehension skills at the beginning of grade 1, which in turn predicted reading comprehension at the end of grade 3 (Sénéchal & LeFevre, 2002). In the
Kindergarten Parent Teaching Reading + Writing Parent Shared Reading
Oral Language Storybook
Exposure Decoding Precursors Reading Skills Beginning of Grade 1
End of Grade 1 End of Grade 3 Reading Skills
same study, parental teaching of reading and writing skills during kindergarten predicted precursors of decoding at the end of grade 1, which in turn predicted reading comprehension in grade 3.
Overall, the Home Literacy Model (Sénéchal & LeFevre, 2002, 2014) is a parsimonious model whose proposed concurrent and longitudinal relationships between activities and early literacy outcomes can be tested with a reasonable effort. Evidence from numerous cross-sectional and longitudinal studies and from different cultures support this model. However, from the perspective of Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological theory (Bronfenbrenner & Morris, 2006), the model also has several shortcomings. In particular, shared reading as a proximal process that drives oral language development seems to be underspecified. First, characteristics of child, adult, and book as literacy agents, their bivariate relationships, and their interplay should be taken into consideration. For example, motivation for leisure time reading in primary school declines during the first grades, exacerbating individual differences in reading skills (Wigfield, Gladstone, & Turci, 2016). A more differentiated understanding of how children’s engagement during shared storybook reading can be enhanced could help to identify approaches for supporting reading motivation in primary school or even before. Second, even though different oral language skills on the word, sentence, and text level are highly correlated before school entry (Language and Reading Research Consortium, 2015b), there is some evidence that lower versus higher level language skills are each unique predictors of reading comprehension (Catts, Herrera, Nielsen, & Bridges, 2015; Lepola, Lynch, Laakkonen, Silvén, & Niemi, 2012; Kim, 2014; Silva & Cain, 2015). Therefore, a model of HLE’s effects on oral language should distinguish these two sets of language skills, and studies should investigate how they are related to shared reading.