Fath

Fathers’ involvement in young

children’s literacy development:

implications for family literacy

programmes

Anne Morgan a , Cathy Nutbrown

*b and Peter Hannon

b

a Centre for Education Research, Sheffield Hallam University, UK;

b School of Education,

University of Sheffield, UK

Relatively few studies of family literacy programmes have investigated parents’ experiences and

whilst a number of such programmes have been specifically aimed at fathers, little is known about the

involvement of fathers in programmes which target both mothers and fathers. This article reports

fathers’ involvement in a family literacy programme and their home literacy practices with their

young children. The article provides a definition of family literacy and describes the context of the

study, which was carried out in socio-economically disadvantaged communities in a northern

English city. Fathers’ participation in their children’s literacy was investigated through interviews at

the beginning and end of the programme (n585) and home visit records made by teachers

throughout the programme. Quantitative and qualitative analysis of these data indicate that, while

fathers’ participation in the family literacy programme was not easily visible, almost all fathers were

involved to some extent in home literacy events with their children. During the programme, teachers

shared information about literacy activities and the importance of children having opportunities to

share literacy activities with their parents. Data indicate that fathers who were not mentioned by

mothers as having been involved in their children’s literacy were significantly more likely to be on a

low income than those who were reported as being engaged with their children in home literacy

activities. Fathers in the study were involved in providing literacy opportunities, showing recognition of

their children’s achievements, interacting with their children around literacy and being a model of a

literacy user. Although involved in all four of these key roles, fathers tended to be less involved in

providing literacy opportunities than mothers. While fathers and sons engaged in what might be

described as traditionally ‘masculine’ literacy activities, fathers were more often reported to be

involved with their children in less obviously gendered home literacy activities. The article concludes

with discussion of implications for involving fathers in future family literacy programmes.

Introduction

Much research has been carried out into the relationships between parental

involvement and children’s academic achievement and it is now widely accepted that

*Corresponding author. University of Sheffield, 388 Glossop Road, Sheffield S10 2JA, UK.

Email: [email protected]

British Educational Research Journal

Vol. 35, No. 2, April 2009, pp. 167–185

ISSN 0141-1926 (print)/ISSN 1469-3518 (online)/09/020167-19

# 2009 British Educational Research Association

DOI: 10.1080/01411920802041996

children whose parents are actively involved in their development are more likely to

succeed in school (Desforges & Abouchaar, 2003). Recently, however, it has been

acknowledged that studies using the term ‘parent’ often refer only to mothers

(Nichols, 2000; Fletcher & Daly, 2002; Nutbrown & Hannon, 2003) even though

there is a growing body of research into fathers’ involvement which has shown that

children whose fathers are involved benefit from higher academic achievement and

social and emotional well-being (Nord et al., 1997; Amato, 1998; Brooks, 2002;

Tamis-LeMonda & Cabrera, 2002; Tamis-LeMonda et al., 2004). The long-term

benefits of fathers’ involvement have also been investigated; one recent study found

that fathers’ involvement in their children’s education at age seven predicted

educational attainment by age 20 (Flouri & Buchanan, 2004).

The extent to which fathers are involved in their children’s early development has

been the subject of debate. Some contend that fathers’ involvement in housework

and child care is lacking (Hochschild, 1989; Thompson & Walker, 1989; Shelton,

1990) and that fathers tend to avoid such responsibilities (Walkerdine & Lucey,

1989); much of this literature is influenced by feminist theories. Some have argued

that women may be reluctant for their partners to become more involved in family

work and child care, fearing that they may lose their traditional power over home

activities (Polatnik, 1974; Lamb, 1997; Bonney et al., 1999). Others contend that

fathers’ involvement in children’s development is increasing, focusing on the

changing nature of fatherhood and the ‘new father’ image (Lamb et al., 1987; Lewis

& O’Brien, 1987) which emerged during the 1980s. The ‘new father’ is more

involved in family life than fathers of earlier generations; he assumes multiple roles,

including not only ‘breadwinner’, but also carer and educator. More recently, the

term ‘fatherhoods’ (Hobson, 2003) has been used to describe the increasingly

diverse ways fathers can be involved in families.

Family literacy studies of family members using literacy as part of their daily

routines (Heath, 1983; Taylor, 1983; Taylor & Dorsey-Gaines, 1988) show that

children’s early understanding of literacy is learned socially and culturally within

their family and community, and that the types of literacy experience children

encounter differ according to families’ social and cultural practices. Family literacy

practices have been studied using ethnography (Heath, 1983; Taylor, 1983; Taylor &

Dorsey-Gaines, 1988), interviews with parents (Weinberger, 1996; Nichols, 2000),

interviews with children (Nutbrown & Hannon, 2003), observation (Teale, 1986;

Minns, 1990; Purcell-Gates, 1996) and case studies of individual children

(Baghban, 1984; Bissex, 1990; Schickedanz, 1990; Whitehead, 2002). Taken

together, these studies provide insights into family literacy as the set of literacy practices

found within families (Hannon, 2000).

Family literacy programmes are educational programmes which focus on literacy,

and acknowledge, and make use of, learners’ family membership. Such programmes

have focused mainly on disadvantaged communities, since it is children from these

communities who are thought to have most difficulties with school literacy (White,

1982; Heath, 1983). Family literacy programmes are usually evaluated in terms of

literacy outcomes for children (Whitehurst et al., 1994; Wagner et al., 2002).

168 A. Morgan et al.

Participants’ views and experiences of programmes are rarely considered (Nutbrown

et al., 2005; Hannon et al., 2006).

The present study concerns fathers’ involvement with children’s home literacy

activities. It arose out of a study of children’s perspectives of family literacy in which 148

five-year-old children were interviewed. In that study, 39% of the children said that their

fathers shared some literacy activities with them at home (Nutbrown & Hannon, 2003).

Building on the children’s reports, we were interested in learning more about fathers’

literacy practices with their children, from the perspective of the adults involved,

especially in the light of conflicting reviews regarding the extent to which fathers

participate in such activities with their children. Some studies have reported reluctance

among fathers to read to their children (Solsken, 1992) and in the United States a survey

found that over 40% of fathers never read to their children (National Center for

Fathering, 1999). Possible explanations for this perceived reluctance have included the

suggestion that fathers’ involvement in family literacy practices often involves men

entering into practices that are valued and have already been established by mothers

(Nichols, 2000). It has also been suggested that such practices may not hold the same

value for men (Fletcher & Daly, 2002) and that mothers may have stronger beliefs than

fathers in their own ability to help to improve children’s reading skills (Lynch, 2002).

However, other studies have found that many fathers do engage in literacy

activities with their children (Ortiz et al., 1999; Nichols, 2000; Nutbrown &

Hannon, 2003, Nutbrown et al., 2005). The middle-class mothers in Nichols’s

(2000) study tended to delegate story reading to fathers, a finding which challenges

the assertion that mothers may be reluctant to encourage fathers to engage with their

children (Polatnik, 1974; Lamb, 1997; Bonney et al., 1999). It has been suggested

that fathers who engage in literacy activities with children strengthen relationships

with them in the process (Ortiz et al., 1999).

A number of studies have shown strong links between demographic variables and

father involvement. For example, fathers with higher education levels are more likely

to be involved with their school-aged children (Goldschieder & Waite, 1991; Blair et

al., 1994; Nord et al., 1997). On the other hand, Ortiz (1996), who explored fathers’

involvement in pre-school literacy activities, found only a weak relationship between

education and income and involvement in literacy practices. To explore further the

relationships between demographic variables and father involvement in pre-school

literacy activities, the study reported here investigated the extent of fathers’

involvement in socio-economically disadvantaged communities by comparing the

characteristics of fathers who were mentioned by mothers as being involved in their

children’s home literacy with those who were not mentioned.

One of the aims of the present study was to investigate the roles adopted by fathers

and to understand more about the types of home literacy activities in which they

engaged. Traditionally, the types of literacy activities pursued by men have

conformed to perceptions of masculinity; such as ‘Do-It-Yourself’ books, car

maintenance manuals and sports magazines about such interests as football or

biking. Where men’s chosen literacy activities reflect such interests they might, for

example, look through car manuals or football magazines, thus acting as powerful

Fathers’ involvement in literacy development 169

models for their children. Fathers may also share this type of reading material with their

children, particularly their sons, leading some to suggest that reading between fathers

and sons may be associated with masculine bonding (Biddulph, 1994; Nichols, 2000).

Fathers have also been found to engage with their children in literacy activities that are

not so obviously gendered, including reading environmental print and newspapers,

using dictionaries, reading maps and bedtime stories (Ortiz et al., 1999).

Programmes aimed at increasing father–child involvement in children’s literacy

development have been implemented in recent years with varying degrees of success

(Millard & Hunter, 2001; Green, 2003; Lloyd, 2004). Most have experienced

difficulties in recruitment and participation and, while some have been specifically

aimed at fathers, the role of fathers in family literacy programmes aimed at both

mothers and fathers remains under-researched. It remains the case that in most family

literacy programmes targeting mothers and fathers, the majority of participants are

women (Mace, 1998). It has been suggested that the under-representation of men in

such programmes may be due to practical reasons; the fact that most are provided

during the working day means they are less accessible to men (who are more likely to be

in full-time employment than women) (Cairney et al., 1995).

A further aim of the study reported here was to investigate the extent to which

fathers participated in a flexible family literacy programme (in terms of time and

location) where the primary participants were mothers and to identify and describe

the types of home literacy fathers shared with their children.

Setting for the research: a family literacy programme

The REAL (Raising Early Achievement in Literacy) Project family literacy

programme aimed to promote pre-school children’s literacy through the imple-

mentation and evaluation of a parental involvement programme. Ten teachers in a

north of England city worked with 80 families for the duration of the 18-month

programme. The project was based on the ORIM conceptual framework (Hannon,

1995; Nutbrown et al., 2005) in Figure 1, which views parents supporting their

child’s developing literacy through four key roles. They provide opportunities for

literacy: giving children pens and paper, joining the library, making a space in the

home where literacy can take place, placing books and writing equipment in an

accessible place. They can show recognition of the child’s achievements: displaying

some writing, discussing with the child what they have achieved, e.g. ‘you found all

those letters yourself didn’t you?’. Parents can share times of interaction with the

child in literacy activities: reading a book together, playing an alphabet puzzle,

writing a birthday card. Finally, and subtly important, parents can provide a model of

a user of literacy in everyday life: reading a recipe, doing a crossword, completing a

form, writing a note. Four strands of literacy formed the main focus of the REAL

project programme: environmental print, books, early writing and aspects of oral

language. The programme included a combination of home visiting by teachers and

group meetings. Teachers kept records of contacts with parents. There was also an

optional adult learning component leading to accreditation of parents’ learning.

170 A. Morgan et al.

A sample of 160 families with three-year-olds was drawn at random from

waiting lists of 10 schools in areas of social and economic disadvantage, ensuring

that families were representative of their communities. All schools were in electoral

wards above the national median on the Government’s index of multiple

deprivation, and five were in the most deprived 2% of such areas nationally.

The families whose children attended these schools were mainly white

monolingual. Families agreed to participate in a University research study on

the understanding that half of them, selected entirely at random, would be invited

to join a family literacy programme, with the remainder serving as the control. The

main outcomes of the family literacy programme for children and parents and the

views of the children who participated in the project have also been reported

elsewhere (Nutbrown & Hannon, 2003; Nutbrown et al., 2005, Hannon et al.,

2006). The study reported here draws on data which were collected from the

programme group only because a key source of data, the teachers’ records of home

visits and group meetings, was not available for the control group because they did

not participate in the programme.

Research questions and methods

The purpose of the study was to ascertain whether and to what extent fathers were

involved in their children’s early literacy development. The research questions were:

1. What is the extent of fathers’ involvement in a family literacy programme?

2. What is the extent of fathers’ involvement in family literacy practices?

3. What are the characteristics of fathers who are not mentioned by mothers as

involved in their children’s literacy?

Figure 1. The ‘ORIM’ framework used in designing the family literacy programme

Fathers’ involvement in literacy development 171

4. How do fathers participate in home literacy activities with their children?

5. How do mothers and fathers perceive the father’s role in children’s literacy?

There were two main sources of data: teachers’ records of home visits and group

meetings, and post-programme interviews.

Records of home visits and group meetings

Records of each home visit and all group meetings were kept by programme

teachers. The family literacy programme was designed to involve fathers as well as

mothers and the term ‘parent’ was used consistently in planning and implementa-

tion. However, in practice, perhaps because fathers tended to have more daytime

employment outside the home, teachers interacted more with mothers.

Teachers made notes of their conversations and interactions with families when

they recorded home visits. These were recorded in three parts: ‘review what

parents and child have been doing’, ‘focus on a planned aspect of literacy and

parent’s role’ and ‘anticipate what parent might do following the visit’. In the

‘review’ section, teachers asked parents (almost always mothers) what they had

been doing with their children around literacy since the last visit. They might talk

about a book which had been borrowed, or look through a page or two of a

scrapbook which the parent and child had been compiling together. In the ‘focus’

part of the home visit the teacher would offer some input which paid particular

attention to a strand of literacy and aspects of the parents’ role, for example, a

focus on environmental print might involve a walk to the local shops with a

camera, taking photographs of street and shop signs for later use. Before the

teacher finished each home visit he or she would ‘anticipate’ with the parent what

the parent and child might do together in the period between visits, such as, make

an alphabet snap game, visit the library, go on another ‘print walk’ and so on

(Nutbrown et al., 2005). Since this was a parental involvement programme,

teachers did not specifically ask what fathers had been doing—the aim was to find

out what experiences the child had shared with adults in the family. Information

about fathers’ involvement was usually volunteered rather than solicited, and it is

therefore likely that these data, if anything, underestimate the amount of literacy

going on between fathers and their children. Since the home visit notes generally

concerned conversations between mothers and teachers (rather than between

fathers and teachers), the voices of fathers rarely appeared directly. The records

do, however, provide evidence that many fathers were involved and offer valuable

insights into the ways in which, according to mothers’ reports, children’s fathers

were involved in their home literacy practices.

Interviews

At the conclusion of the programme, parents were interviewed by independent

interviewers; all were early childhood professionals who had experience of working

and talking with parents. They were not known to the parents and had pre-interview

172 A. Morgan et al.

training which included discussion of strategies for ensuring that parents were

comfortable during the interview experience, that they knew they could stop at any

time and the interviewers made it as easy as possible for parents to make negative

comments if they wished to. The interviewers reported that parents appeared to be

only too happy to participate in the interviews. Around 90% of the interviews were

conducted with mothers only, and about 10% of interviews included fathers as well.

No interviews were conducted with fathers only (Hannon et al., 2006). Family

characteristics (mothers’ and fathers’ socio-economic classification, mothers’

educational level and free school meal eligibility) were ascertained and family

literacy practices explored. Interviews were extensive but the study reported here

focused on the following questions which gave the respondent(s) the opportunity to

talk about father involvement in children’s literacy. Parents were asked: ‘Who reads

with your child?’, ‘Does anyone else read with him/her?’, ‘Who writes with him/her?’,

‘Who says nursery rhymes with him/her?’, ‘Who tells stories to him/her?’ and ‘Who

helps your child most with reading and writing at home?’ There were also questions

as to whether parents provided a model of literacy and who provided such models.

Analysis

Research question 1 asked: ‘What is the extent of fathers’ involvement in a family literacy

programme?’ Details of the number of fathers who visibly participated in the programme

were obtained by counting the number of fathers present at home visits or centre-based

meetings. To investigate research question 2, ‘What is the extent of fathers’ involvement in

family literacy practices?’ the two data sets (home visit records and interview responses)

were analysed in combination and separately, and reports of involvement noted. Chi-

squared analyses were used to investigate the significance of differences between

characteristics of fathers for whom there were reports of involvement and those for whom

there were few or no reports of involvement. This provided some answers to question 3,

‘What are the characteristics of fathers who appear to be minimally involved in their

children’s literacy?’ Research question 4, ‘How do fathers participate in home literacy

activities with their children?’ was addressed by analysing the extent to which fathers

participated in aspects of the parent’s role, as conceptualised by the ORIM framework

(Hannon, 1995; Nutbrown et al., 2005). The main analysis involved qualitative analysis of

data sets in combination, with the aid of a software package (NVivo), although interview

questions relating to interaction and modelling were also analysed quantitatively. Finally,

research question 5, ‘How do mothers and fathers perceive the father’s role in children’s

literacy?’ was answered using qualitative analysis, again using NVivo, of home visit

records.

The sample

This study was concerned with resident (or actively present) fathers’ involvement in

children’s literacy development. Since one of the main data sets (home visit records)

was based on mothers’ reports of family literacy practices, it was not possible to

Fathers’ involvement in literacy development 173

include absent fathers. Male partners who lived in the family home were also

included; for example, mothers typically spoke of partners, boyfriends and children’s

stepfathers—these men are considered, throughout this article, as ‘fathers’. At

interview, nine of the 80 families who participated in the REAL project were families

with a lone parent, always the mother; these families were excluded from the

analysis. Ten per cent of fathers were present at final interview with mothers; no

fathers were interviewed alone. One family had moved to another city by the end of

the programme; another two ‘disappeared’ and contact was lost (hence n568).

Results

1. What is the extent of father involvement in a family literacy programme?

Fathers’ visible participation in the programme was low. Fathers were more likely to

be involved in home visits than centre-based meetings; records showed that while

16% of fathers had been present during at least one home visit only 9% had attended

at least one group meeting or event. It is relevant to note, however, that in general,

centre-based meetings were not as attractive to parents (mothers or fathers) as home

visits; while all were happy to receive home visits, fewer parents (86%) attended one

or more centre-based meeting.

2. What is the extent of father involvement in family literacy practices?

Almost all fathers were reported to engage with their children around literacy to some

extent. Analysis of home visit records and interview data revealed that 93% of families

reported some literacy activity between fathers and children (in only five families was there

no reported involvement of fathers with their children). However, this analysis does not

give an indication of the extent to which fathers were involved, since it includes fathers who

may have engaged only sporadically in their children’s literacy. In interviews 77% of

fathers were mentioned as involved in their children’s literacy. For the remaining 23% (16)

there was no mention of involvement, even though 11 of them were noted (at least once

and in some cases up to three times), in home visit reports, to have had some involvement.

When asked ‘Who helps [child] most with reading and writing?’ 29% of families

interviewed said both mother and father helped with the same level of frequency,

while two-thirds said the mother helped most. (The remaining 4% said another

relative helped most, usually a grandparent or sibling. No respondents reported that

the father helped most.) This finding supports the contention that, while it is

typically mothers who assume primary responsibility for young children’s literacy

(Nichols, 2000), many fathers also play a role.

3. What are the characteristics of fathers not mentioned in interviews as involved in their

children’s literacy?

While the majority of fathers were reportedly involved in their children’s literacy to

some extent, we were interested in the 16 fathers (23%) for whom there was no

174 A. Morgan et al.

mention of involvement at final interview. No mention of involvement cannot be

taken, uncritically, as an indication of ‘no involvement’. What can be inferred,

however, is that either these fathers were not involved or that their involvement was

not salient from the perspective of the mothers interviewed.

We investigated the socio-economic characteristics of all the fathers in the study

using the National Statistics Socio-Economic Classification (NS-SEC) (National

Statistics Online, 2004). Results are shown in Figure 2, which shows that, though

the families were living in areas of social and economic disadvantage, just over half

of fathers (36) were classified in the higher socio-economic groups, 1 to 5. Slightly

less than half (30) were in groups 6 to 8, with the majority of fathers in the sample

being in group 6 (semi-routine occupations). Data for two fathers were missing. The

fathers not mentioned in interview as involved appeared twice as likely to be in

groups 6 to 8, as shown in Figure 3, but the difference fell short of statistical

significance, x 2 (1)53.52, p5.061.

The characteristics of fathers mentioned as involved and those not mentioned

were investigated further by exploring the relationship with children in receipt of free

school meals (an indicator of low family income). Of the 21% of children who

received free school meals, a high proportion had fathers who were not mentioned as

involved in their children’s literacy, as shown in Figure 4. This difference was

statistically significant, x 2 (1)54.28, p5.039, and suggests that fathers not

mentioned as involved in their children’s literacy were significantly more likely to

be on a low income than fathers who were reported to engage in literacy activities

with their children.

There were no significant differences in fathers’ involvement in relation to

mothers’ educational qualifications (x 2 (1)50.127, p5.722) or to mothers’ socio-

economic classification (x 2 (1)50.253, p5.615). We were also interested in whether

fathers’ likelihood of being mentioned was related to the gender of their children.

Figure 2. NS-SEC profiles of resident fathers in the study sample (n566)

Fathers’ involvement in literacy development 175

Fathers might be more likely to engage in literacy activities with daughters than sons,

since literacy is often perceived as a feminine pursuit. Although fathers who were not

mentioned were over twice as likely to be fathers of boys than girls (see Figure 5),

this was partly a result of there being slightly more boys in the sample than girls, and

the difference was not statistically significant (x 2 (1)51.11, p5.292).

4. How do fathers participate in literacy activities with their children?

Fathers’ involvement was analysed in relation to the ORIM conceptual framework

(Hannon, 1995; Nutbrown et al., 2005) shown in Figure 1.

(a) Providing literacy opportunities. Providing literacy opportunities refers to the ways

parents provide permission to engage in literacy activities and access to literacy

resources such as books, writing materials, literacy games and somewhere to write.

Figure 3. Fathers’ NS-SEC groupings and whether they are mentioned as involved in children’s

literacy (n566)

Figure 4. Receipt of free school meals and mention of fathers as involved in literacy activities

(n567)

176 A. Morgan et al.

While providing these opportunities might necessitate purchasing resources (books,

pens, paper), many such resources can be obtained for free (borrowing books from a

library, making use of print in the environment, providing envelopes from ‘junk mail’

for writing, providing somewhere for children to write and draw). In these data,

there were very few explicit examples of fathers providing literacy opportunities for

their children. This could be because, in these families, mothers were mostly

responsible for shopping (for food, clothes, toys and educational materials) and

therefore more likely to purchase such resources. There was only one explicit report,

from one teacher’s home visit notes, of a father providing his daughter with writing

materials, not from a shop, but from his place of work. The mother reported:

[Her] dad has brought her an old diary from work which she’s enjoying writing in.

The lack of examples of fathers providing opportunities for their children suggests

that it was mothers who selected and provided literacy resources; thereby

‘supervising’ opportunities for literacy activities (Nichols, 2000).

(b) Recognising children’s literacy achievements. This relates both to parents’

awareness of children’s literacy achievements and also to parents’ awareness that

literacy activities they involve their children in can enhance literacy development.

While there were few reports of fathers providing literacy opportunities for their

children, fathers were frequently reported as showing recognition of their children’s

literacy achievements around various strands of literacy. For example, they

recognised children’s achievements with books:

Mum reported how impressed Adrian’s dad is with how much he knows about books.

in writing:

Dad was there and was very pleased that over the summer Craig has learnt to write his

name.

Figure 5. Child’s gender and mention of fathers as involved in literacy activities (n568)

Fathers’ involvement in literacy development 177

Julian wrote a Christmas list at nursery and later that evening he recalled the list to his

daddy.

in phonological awareness:

He has nursery rhymes in a blue file and dad observed him singing each one to himself

as he turned the pages, ‘and he sang the right one on each page!’

and in ‘talk about literacy’:

Mark’s dad asked him to read the numbers off the back of the book, and Mark could

identify them.

Dad spent most of session with us and said how they played ‘I Spy’ a lot.

While these examples highlight fathers’ spoken recognition of their children’s

achievements, there were also examples of fathers recognising achievements through

their actions:

Angela found the letters from letter templates and drew around them and cut them out.

When the poster was finished Angela’s father put it up on the chimney breast. He said

he would transfer it to her bedroom later.

Angela’s father showed that he wanted to value his daughter’s achievement by

displaying the poster she had made. The following example also demonstrates a

father’s recognition through his actions, with the father using what might be

described as typically ‘masculine’ skills and resources to display his daughter’s work

more permanently:

Karen and dad had made the letters of her first name into a plaque following the last

visit and the dough we used to make her name, we had left it to go hard. Dad had

varnished it and stuck it on a piece of wood (already stained); put cord at the back and it

was hanging on her bedroom door! She proudly showed it to me when I went in.

(c) Interacting with children around literacy. Almost two-thirds (65%) of fathers were

reported to read with their children and almost half (45%) were reported to help

their children with writing. Though fewer fathers were reported to engage with their

children in oral language activities; almost a quarter (24%) sang nursery rhymes

together and 9% were said to have told stories to their children.

A number of reports of fathers and sons sharing literacy activities could be

interpreted as having what might stereotypically be viewed as subject matter of

‘masculine interest’. One teacher reported on such activities:

We spent a great part of the visit looking through Sheffield United programmes.

Andrew and his dad are keen fans and go to all the home matches together. Mum told

me Andrew recognised many of the players’ names in the programme. When he showed

me the programme he went through all the names and could even read them out of

sequence. He and dad sit and look through programmes together; they have quite a

collection. He also recognised sponsorship logos of opposing teams!

Another teacher was told of a father’s attempts to reinforce his son’s knowledge of

phonological awareness by modifying the lyrics of a nursery rhyme to fit with the

name of his football team’s home ground:

178 A. Morgan et al.

Dad has been singing nursery rhymes with Keith; last line of Baa baa black sheep to

‘One for the little boy who lives down Bramall Lane’ (dad is an ardent Sheffield United

fan). We recorded this on the tape.

There were no examples of fathers and daughters interacting around subject matter

which might be considered to be typically ‘masculine’, but the two examples above

suggest that some fathers may interact with their sons in ways which are compatible

with their notions of masculinity. These activities may reinforce boys’ perceptions of

masculine sex-role identities (Connolly, 2004). In contrast, there were no examples

of mothers interacting with children (girls or boys) around literacy activities relating

to their own interests, ‘feminine’ subject matter (such as fashion or home magazines)

or otherwise. Instead, they tended to focus on child-oriented literacy activities that

were often somewhat contrived. This is in contrast to the fathers in the examples

above, who engaged with their children in real literacy activities relating to their own

genuine interests.

While some fathers interacted with their children in what might be considered

more typically masculine ways, there were many examples of fathers interacting in

activities which were less obviously gender influenced. Fathers read to both sons and

daughters. For example, one mother of two girls said:

Their dad reads a story every night before they go to bed. Even when he comes home

from work he’s on the floor reading to them!

Teachers also made observations regarding fathers reading with their children:

As I left, Shaun was taking books to dad to read.

There were several examples of fathers and children writing together, such as:

Nancy had written a Mothers’ Day card with her dad.

On holiday he drew letters in the sand with dad.

They had collected small shells from holiday and there was a caption underneath:

‘Daddy and Bridget have been collecting shells at the seaside’. Also cut out pictures and

put initial sound underneath.

As already noted, relatively few fathers were reported to engage in oral language

activities with their children. However, home visit records provided some evidence

of fathers and children playing literacy games together, such as ‘alphabet snap’,

which enhances children’s understanding of phoneme/grapheme relationships:

Mum says that dad will enjoy playing alphabet snap with him ‘but Michael will have to

let him win!’

Sarah loves alphabet snap; mum says it has really helped her with recognising letters

and says she’s going to get some. Sarah has played a lot with dad.

There were two reports of oral language activities occurring on car journeys with

fathers, such as:

Mum said they practise nursery rhymes in the car. Dad makes his own words up, she

says. He changes the words to fit in with situation.

Fathers’ involvement in literacy development 179

Such activities increase children’s knowledge of nursery rhymes, thereby developing

their understanding of onset and rime (Goswami & Bryant, 1990). Other oral

language activities include storytelling; there was one report of a father telling stories

to his son:

Mum says she sometimes makes up stories but usually prefers to read them. She said

Andrew’s dad makes stories up more than her.

(d) Providing a model of a literacy user. Almost two-thirds (63%) of programme

fathers in this study modelled reading behaviour at home. Reported activities

included reading letters, maps, television guides, newspapers, special interest

magazines (relating to, for example, astrology, electronics, snooker and football),

reading library books, pop-music books and studying. Over half (54%) the fathers

provided a model of writing, with reported activities including paperwork, studying,

writing time-sheets, cheques, telephone messages, crosswords, letters, computing

and diary writing. Most of these activities are not necessarily stereotypically ascribed

to one gender or another and, generally, examples reported fathers acting as models

in similar ways to mothers; for example:

He’s been making photo-books of their holidays with dad—photographs with captions

underneath.

Mum told me dad often writes with Suzy; he’s been teaching her the alphabet and

numbers. Evidence of this is in one of the books mum showed me. Dad had been

writing a few sentences and Suzy had written hers underneath. Mum commented that

dad sits and helps Suzy a lot.

How do mothers and fathers perceive the father’s role in children’s literacy development?

In the majority of families, mothers were primarily responsible for young children’s

literacy, although most fathers were reported to play a significant role and, in 29% of

families, were said to assume equal responsibility. However, in two cases, mothers

reported reluctance on the part of fathers to become involved in literacy activities

with children. One mother said that her partner viewed sharing books with their

child as her role, and another implied this to be the case, saying that in her family, it

was unusual for her partner to read to his children. The teachers noted:

Mum commented that dad does not read; he will now spend time with Tina (although

he didn’t used to), but he puts videos on. He regards reading/teaching to be mum’s job!

They enjoyed the books. Dad even read ‘Alfie gets in first’ to Nancy—this is a rare

event.

There appeared to be a change in Tina’s father’s behaviour, however, and four

months later, the teacher wrote:

Mum reported that dad now reads books to Tina (previously dad regarded Tina’s

education as mum’s job).

180 A. Morgan et al.

Three mothers reported that fathers’ involvement in literacy activities with their

children was due to the fact that they themselves were not available, usually due to

work commitments. Teachers reported:

Mum said dad was doing more at night with him because she (mum) had to go out to

work at tea time.

Mum had been happy to read the stories and said that when she was at work and

couldn’t, dad had read them and everybody had really enjoyed them.

Mum is expecting her fourth child in about 5 weeks. I have told her we are having a

workshop session at the end of March; she will send dad with Karen if she is

unavailable!

While these examples suggest that the mothers viewed themselves as primarily

responsible for literacy activities, they also provide evidence of a practicality and

flexible sharing of roles within families.

Of the many fathers who frequently engaged in literacy activities with their

children, some had special routines, usually relating to specified reading times, as in

the following examples:

Shared ‘Jasper’s beanstalk’ with dad. Dad read it to her because he reads her bedtime

stories.

Mum and dad read stories to James. They all read together when older brother Thomas

reads his school book.

The findings described above in relation to fathers’ involvement in children’s literacy

are consistent with those reported by their children (Nutbrown & Hannon, 2003);

that is, while the interviews with children indicated that their mothers played a

prominent role in home literacy practices, many children also frequently mentioned

their fathers’ involvement with them.

Discussion and conclusions

The majority of fathers are reported to be involved in their young children’s literacy

development. This is a key finding of the present study; there were numerous reports

of shared literacy activity between fathers and their children in the duration from one

home visit to the next. Almost all fathers were reported to participate in literacy

activities with their children to some extent, and just over a quarter of parents said

that both mothers and fathers were equally involved in such activities. Only five

(7%) were not reported to be involved. Fathers were reported to be involved in all

four key aspects of the parent’s role; opportunities, recognition, interaction and

modelling. These findings corroborate the reports of the children in the study, who

said that they were involved with literacy activities with their fathers at home

(Nutbrown & Hannon, 2003). While this study challenges findings from other

research which suggests that fathers are not involved in their children’s home

literacy, the amount of fathers’ involvement may be lower than that of mothers.

Fathers’ involvement in literacy development 181

Mention of fathers as involved in literacy activities with pre-school children is associated

with socio-economic status. The second clear finding of this study is that fathers in

receipt of higher incomes are more likely to be mentioned as involved in literacy

activities with their children.

These findings carry with them two main implications for the future development

of family literacy programmes which aim to increase father participation.

(i) Family literacy programmes need to acknowledge that they are building on families’

existing knowledge, skills and cultures (Auerbach, 1989; Nutbrown & Hannon, 1997;

Nutbrown et al., 2005); this must include recognition of fathers’ contributions. The study

indicates that fathers are often involved in family literacy practices with their children,

although they are much less likely to be visible participants in family literacy programmes.

Researchers and practitioners need to be aware that just because fathers’ participation is

not highly visible it does not mean that it does not happen.

(ii) Family literacy programmes may need to review their modes of delivery in order to

increase fathers’ involvement. In this study, an emphasis on flexible home visiting was

more successful than centre-based meetings for encouraging father involvement;

indeed, centre-based meetings were poorly attended by fathers and mothers in

comparison to home visits. Home visits were arranged to fit in with the preferences

and needs of each family, with some taking place, on request, in the early evening.

All group meetings took place in the daytime as this fitted with the majority

preference. A flexible way of working was the key for all families involved in the

programme; the majority of mothers also preferred home visits to centre-based

meetings. A review of programme practices may need to examine the kinds of

activities in which fathers and mothers are asked to participate. We are not

suggesting that specific activities are designed ‘for fathers’; rather, we believe that in

order to take account of the diversity of interests and abilities within families a range

of activities and opportunities to share literacy with young children is explored with

all family members in mind.

Caution must be exercised in interpreting the findings of this study, which rely

heavily on mothers’ reports of fathers’ involvement, rather than data which allow

analysis of the fathers’ own voices; some have noted that mothers’ and fathers’

reports of their respective involvement may differ significantly (McBride & Mills,

1993; McBride & Rane, 1997). We can only speculate on how findings may differ if

fathers had been interviewed; perhaps further evidence of fathers’ involvement may

have been found, or it is possible that fathers may underestimate their level of

involvement. A further study would be necessary to answer this question. However,

the findings reported here are corroborated in a separate study of children’s

perspectives (Nutbrown & Hannon, 2003) that provided an insight into fathers’

involvement in family literacy practices and highlighted the need for future research

which should seek to involve fathers as informants. Although largely invisible to

outsiders, in many families the fathers’ presence in their children’s literacy became

apparent to teachers in the project. As one teacher commented:

Whatever Beth makes or does, she likes to show dad (although I have never met him).

He obviously takes a keen interest in activities she has done.

182 A. Morgan et al.

It is would be regrettable if educators, researchers and policy makers were to

underestimate this, often unseen, contribution of fathers to their young children’s

early literacy development.

References

Amato, P. (1998) More than money? Men’s contributions to their children’s lives, in: A. Booth

& A. Crouter (Eds) Men in families (London, Erlbaum).

Auerbach, E. (1989) Toward a socio-contextual approach to family literacy, Harvard Educational

Review, 59, 165–181.

Baghban, M. (1984) Our daughter learns to read and write (Newark, DE, International Reading

Association).

Biddulph, S. (1994) Manhood: a book about setting men free (Sydney, Finch Publishing).

Bissex, G. (1990) GYNS AT WRK: a child learns to read and write (Cambridge, MA, Harvard

University Press).

Blair, S., Wenk, D. & Hardesty, C. (1994) Marital quality and paternal involvement:

interconnections of men’s spousal and parental roles, Journal of Men’s Studies, 2, 221–237.

Bonney, J., Kelly, M. & Levant, R. (1999) A model of fathers’ behavioural involvement in child

care in dual-earner families, Journal of Family Psychology, 13, 401–415.

Brooks, S. (2002) Reaching fathers, Literacy Today, 32, 7–9.

Cairney, T., Ruge, J., Buchanan, J., Lowe, K. & Munsie, L. (1995) Developing partnerships: the

home school and community interface (Sydney, University of Western Sydney, Department of

Employment, Education and Training).

Connolly, P. (2004) Boys and schooling in the early years (London, RoutledgeFalmer).

Desforges, C. & Abouchaar, A. (2003) The impact of parental involvement, parental support and

family education on pupil achievement and adjustment: a review of literature. Brief no. 433

(London, DfES Publications).

Fletcher, F. & Daly, K. (2002) Fathers’ involvement in their children’s literacy development

(Newcastle, New South Wales, Family Action Centre, University of Newcastle, Australia).

Flouri, E. & Buchanan, A. (2004) What predicts fathers’ involvement with their children?

A prospective study of intact families, British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 21,

81–98.

Goldschieder, F. & Waite, L. (1991) New families, no families: the transformation of the American

home (Berkeley, CA, University of California Press).

Goswami, U. & Bryant, P. (1990) Phonological skills and learning to read (Hove, Erlbaum).

Green, S. (2003) Involving fathers in family literacy: outcomes and insights from the Fathers

Reading Every Day program, Family Literacy Forum & Literacy Harvest, Fall, 34–40.

Hannon, P. (1995) Literacy, home and school: research and practice in teaching literacy with parents

(London, Falmer Press).

Hannon, P. (2000) Rhetoric and research in family literacy, British Educational Research Journal,

26(1), 121–138.

Hannon, P., Morgan, A. & Nutbrown, C. (2006) Parents’ experiences of a family literacy

programme, Journal of Early Childhood Research, 3(3), 19–44.

Heath, S. B. (1983) Ways with words (London, Cambridge University Press).

Hobson, B. (2003) Making men into fathers: men, masculinities and the social politics of fatherhood

(Cambridge, Cambridge University Press).

Hochschild, A. (1989) The second shift: working parents and the revolution at home (New York, Viking).

Lamb, M. (1997) The role of the father in child development (3rd edn) (New York, Wiley).

Lamb, M., Pleck, J. & Levine, J. (1987) Effects of increased paternal involvement on fathers and

mothers, in: C. Lewis & M. O’Brien (Eds) Reassessing fatherhood: new observations on fathers

and the modern family (Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage).

Fathers’ involvement in literacy development 183

Lewis, C. & O’Brien, M. (1987) Reassessing fatherhood: new observations on fathers and the modern

family (London, Sage).

Lloyd, T. (2004) DIY dads and working with men. Available online at: http://www.fathersdirect.

com/fatherwork/inthefield/?page5news&sub50&id5657 (accessed 13 October 2004).

Lynch, J. (2002) Parents’ self-efficacy beliefs, parents’ gender, children’s reader self-perceptions,

reading achievement and gender, Journal of Research in Reading, 25(1), 54–67.

Mace, J. (1998) Playing with time: mothers and the meaning of literacy (London, UCL Press).

McBride, B. & Mills, G. (1993) A comparison of mother and father involvement with their

preschool age children, Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 8, 457–477.

McBride, B. & Rane, T. (1997) Role identity, role investments and paternal involvement: implications

for parenting programs for men, Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 12(2), 173–197.

Millard, E. & Hunter, R. (2001) It’s a man thing! Evaluation report of Community Education

Development Centre’s fathers and reading project. Coventry: CEDC.

Minns, H. (1990) Read it to me now! Learning at home and school (Buckingham, Open University

Press).

National Center for Fathering (1999) Fathers’ involvement in their children’s learning. Available

online at: http://www.nces.ed.gov/pubs98/fathers/ (accessed 30 September 2004).

National Statistics Online (2004) NS-SEC classification Available online at: http://www.statistics.

gov.uk/methods_quality/ns_sec/default.asp (accessed 25 November 2004).

Nichols, S. (2000) Unsettling the bedtime story: parents’ reports of home literacy practices,

Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 1(3), 315–328.

Nord, C., Brimhall, D. & West, J. (1997) Fathers’ involvement in their children’s schools

(Washington, DC, US Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and

Improvement). Available online at: www.nces.ed.gov (accessed 30 September 2004).

Nutbrown, C. & Hannon, P. (Eds) (1997) Preparing for early literacy education with parents: a

professional development manual (Nottingham, NES Arnold).

Nutbrown, C. & Hannon, P. (2003) Children’s perspectives on family literacy: methodological

issues, findings and implications for practice, Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 3(2),

115–145.

Nutbrown, C., Hannon, P. & Morgan, A. (2005) Early literacy work with families: policy, practice

and research (London, Sage).

Ortiz, R. (1996) Fathers’ contribution to children’s early literacy development: the relationship of

marital role functions, Journal of Educational Issues of Language Minority Students, 16.

Available online at: http://www.ncela.gwu.edu/pubs/jeilms/vol16/ (accessed 18 January

2005).

Ortiz, R., Stile, S. & Brown, C. (1999) Early literacy activities of fathers: reading and writing with

young children, Young Children, 54(5), 16–18.

Polatnik, N. (1974) Why men don’t rear children: a power analysis, Berkeley Journal of Sociology,

18, 45–86.

Purcell-Gates, V. (1996) Stories, coupons and the TV guide: relationships between home literacy

experiences and emergent literacy knowledge, Reading Research Quarterly, 31, 406–428.

Schickedanz, J. (1990) Adam’s righting revolutions (Portsmouth, NH, Heinemann).

Shelton, B. (1990) The distribution of household tasks: does wife’s employment status make a

difference?, Journal of Family Issues, 11, 115–135.

Solsken, J. (1992) Literacy, gender and work in families and in schools (Norwood, NJ, Ablex).

Tamis-LeMonda, C. & Cabrera, N. (2002) Multidisciplinary perspectives on father involvement:

introduction, in: C. Tamis-LeMonda & N. Cabrera (Eds) Handbook of father involvement:

multidisciplinary perspectives (Mahwah, NJ, Erlbaum).

Tamis-LeMonda, C., Shannon, J., Cabrera, N. & Lamb, M. (2004) Fathers and mothers at play

with their two- and three-year-olds: contributions to language and cognitive development,

Child Development, 75(6), 1806–1820.

Taylor, D. (1983) Family literacy: young children learning to read and write (London, Heinemann).

184 A. Morgan et al.

Taylor, D. & Dorsey-Gaines, C. (1988) Growing up literate: learning from inner city families

(Portsmouth, NH, Heinemann).

Teale, W. H. (1986) Home background and young children’s literacy development, in: W. H. Teale

& E. Sulzby (Eds) Emergent literacy: writing and reading (Norwood, NJ, Ablex).

Thompson, L. & Walker, A. (1989) Gender in families: women and men in marriage, work and

parenthood, Journal of Marriage and the Family, 51, 845–872.

Walkerdine, V. & Lucey, H. (1989) Democracy in the kitchen: regulating mothers and socialising

daughters (London, Virago).

Wagner, M., Spiker, D. & Linn, M. (2002) The effectiveness of the parents as teachers program

with low-income parents and children, Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 22(2),

67–81.

Weinberger, J. (1996) Literacy goes to school: the parent’s role in young children’s literacy learning

(London, Paul Chapman).

White, K. (1982) The relation between socioeconomic status and academic achievement,

Psychological Bulletin, 91, 461–481.

Whitehead, M. (2002) Dylan’s routes to literacy: the first three years with picture books, Journal of

Early Childhood Literacy, 2(3), 269–290.

Whitehurst, G., Epstein, J. & Angell, A. et al. (1994) Outcomes of an emergent literacy

intervention in Head Start, Journal of Educational Psychology, 86, 542–555.

Fathers’ involvement in literacy development 185