This article hones what is meant by ‘emergent comprehension’. The authors define emergent comprehension as the period when young children, prior to conventional reading, engage in meaningful experiences that stimulate the development and use of meaning-making strategies with potential to affect later reading comprehension. The construct ‘emergent comprehension’ reflects the theoretical line the authors drew from meaning making, viewed primarily via theories of child development, to reading comprehension as conceived by the RAND model, a commonly accepted conception of comprehension. A vignette from a three year longitudinal study of very young children’s literacy learning, illustrates the authors’ conceptions. The vignette, one of more than 100 collected in the first year of the study, is interpreted via the three dimensions of the RAND model as well as relevant research and theories from the child development literature. This new model contributes to a life-long theory of reading development (Alexander, 2006) as well as theories of emergent literacy (Clay, 1966).
Adamson, L.B., Bakeman, R. and Deckner, D.F. ( 2004) ‘The Development of Symbol-infused Joint Engagement’ , Child Development75: 1171-87.
2.
Alexander, P.A. ( 2006) ‘The Path to Competence: A Lifespan Developmental Perspective on Reading’, Journal of Literacy Research37: 413-36.
3.
Berghoff, B. and Harste, J.C. ( 2002) ‘Semiotics’, in B.J. Guzzetti (ed.) Literacy in America: An Encyclopedia of History, Theory, and Practice, pp. 580-1. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC: CLIO.
4.
Chi, M.T.H. and Koeske, R.D. ( 1983) ‘Network Representation of a Child’s Dinosaur Knowledge’, Developmental Psychology19: 29-39.
5.
Clay, M.M. ( 1966) ‘Emergent Reading Behaviour’, Doctoral Dissertation , University of Auckland Library.
6.
Clay, M.M. ( 2001) Change Over Time in Children’s Literacy Development . Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
7.
DeLoache, J.S. ( 2005) ‘The Pygmalion Problem in Early Symbol Use’ , in L.L. Namy (ed.) Symbol Use and Symbolic Representation: Developmental and Comparative Perspectives , pp. 47-67. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
8.
Dole, J.A., Duffy, G.G., Roehler, L.R. and Pearson, P.D. ( 1991) ‘Moving from the Old to the New: Research on Reading Comprehension Instruction’, Review of Educational Research61: 239-64.
9.
Engeström, Y. ( 1999) ‘Activity Theory and Individual and Social Transformation’ , in Y. Engeström , R. Miettinen and R. Punamäki (eds) Perspectives on Activity Theory, pp. 19-38. New York: Cambridge University Press.
10.
Ferreiro, E. ( 1990) ‘Literacy Development: Psychogenesis’ , in Y. Goodman (ed.) How Children Construct Literacy: Piagetian Perspectives, pp. 12-25. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
11.
Fivush, R. ( 2008) ‘Remembering and Reminiscing: How Individual Lives are Constructed in Family Narratives’, Memory Studies1: 49-58.
12.
Flewitt, R. ( 2006) ‘Using Video to Investigate Preschool Classroom Interaction: Education Research Assumptions and Methodological Practices’ , Visual Communication5: 25-50.
13.
Gresham, F.M. and Elliott, S.N. ( 1990) Social Skills Rating System. Boston, MA: Pearson Publishers.
14.
Hall, N.,Larson, J. and Marsh, J. (eds) ( 2003) Early Childhood Literacy: An International Handbook of Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE .
15.
Hill, S.E. and Nichols, S. ( 2006) ‘Emergent Literacy: Symbols at Work’ , in B.S. Saracho and O.N. Saracho (eds) Handbook of Research on the Education of Young Children, 2nd edn, pp. 153-65. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
16.
International Reading Association - National Institute of Child Heath and Human Development (IRA-NICHD) (2005) International Reading Association - National Institute of Child Heath and Human Development Conference on Early Childhood Literacy Research: A Summary of Presentations and Discussions, prepared by C.M. Connor and P.J. Tiedemann, International Reading Association, URL (consulted November 2005): http://www.reading.org/resources/issues/reports/ira-nichd_conference.html
17.
Johnston, P.H. ( 2004) Choice Words: How our Language affects Children’s Learning. Portland, ME: Stenhouse .
18.
Kress, G. ( 1997) Before Writing: Rethinking the Paths to Literacy . London: Routledge: Taylor/ Francis Group.
19.
Lewis, M. ( 1999) ‘Social Cognition and the Self’, in P. Rochat (ed.) Early Social Cognition: Understanding Others in the First Months of Life, pp. 81-98. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
20.
Lipson, M.Y. ( 2003) ‘The Challenge of Comprehension Instruction’ , The New England Reading Association Journal39: 1-6.
21.
Massey, C. and Gelman, R. ( 1988) ‘Preschoolers’ Ability to Decide whether Pictured Unfamiliar Objects can Move Themselves’, Developmental Psychology24: 307-17.
22.
Namy, L.L. and Waxman, S.R. ( 2005) ‘Symbols Redefined’, in L.L. Namy (ed.) Symbol Use and Symbolic Representation: Developmental and Comparative Perspectives, pp. 269-77. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
23.
National Reading Panel (NRP) (2000) Teaching Children to Read: An Evidenced-Based Assessment of the Scientific Research Literature on Reading and its Implications for Reading Instruction . Washington, DC: National Institute of Child Health and Human Development and US Department of Education.
24.
Neuman, S. ( 2001) ‘The Role of Knowledge in Early Literacy’ , Reading Research Quarterly36: 468-75.
25.
New London Group (1996) ‘Pedagogy of Multiliteracies: Designing Social Futures’, Harvard Educational Review66: 60-92.
26.
Paris, S.G. ( 2005) ‘Re-interpreting the Development of Reading Skills’ , Reading Research Quarterly40: 184-202.
27.
Paris, S. and Paris, S.G. ( 2003) ‘Assessing Narrative Comprehension in Young Children’ , Reading Research Quarterly38: 36-76.
28.
Piaget, J. ( 1952) The Origins of Intelligence in Children. New York: Norton.
29.
Piaget, J. ( 1985) The Equilibration of Cognitive Structures: The Central Problem of Intellectual Development, trans. T. Brown and K. Thampy . Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
30.
Rakoczy, H., Tomasello, M. and Striano, T. ( 2005) ‘How Children Turn Objects into Symbols: A Cultural Learning Account’, in L.L. Namy (ed.) Symbol Use and Symbolic Representation: Developmental and Comparative Perspectives, pp. 69-97. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
31.
RAND Reading Study Group (2002) Reading for Understanding: Toward an R and D Program in Reading Comprehension . Santa Monica, CA: RAND, URL (consulted September 2007): http://www.rand.org
32.
Rochat, P. and Callaghan, T. ( 2005) ‘What Drives Symbolic Development?: The Case of Pictorial Comprehension and Production’, in L.L. Namy (ed.) Symbol Use and Symbolic Representation: Developmental and Comparative Perspectives, pp. 25-46. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
33.
Rochat, P. and Striano, T. ( 1999) ‘Social-cognitive Development in the First Year’ , in P. Rochat (ed.) Early Social Cognition: Understanding Others in the First Months of Life. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
34.
Rose, J. ( 2006) Independent Review of the Teaching of Early Reading: Final Report. Nottingham: Department for Education and Skills.
35.
Shanahan, T. ( 2005) ‘Understanding Early Literacy through Current Large Scale Studies’, paper presented at the 55th Annual National Reading Conference in Miami, December.
36.
Sroufe, L.A., Egeland, B., Carlson, E.A. and Collins, W.A. ( 2005) The Development of the Person: The Minnesota Study of Risk and Adaptation from Birth to Adulthood. New York : Guilford Press.
37.
Street, B. ( 1995) Literacy in Theory and Practice. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.
38.
Sulzby, E. ( 1985a) ‘Kindergartners as Writers and Readers’ , in M. Farr (ed.) Advances in Writing Research. Vol. 1: Children’s Early Writing Development , pp. 127-99. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
39.
Sulzby, E. ( 1985b) ‘Children’s Emergent Reading of Favorite Storybooks: A Developmental Study’, Reading Research Quarterly20: 458-81.
40.
Sulzby, E. and Teale, W. ( 1996) ‘Emergent Literacy’, in R. Barr, M.L. Kamil , P.B. Mosenthal and P.D. Pearson (eds) Handbook of Reading Research, Vol. 2, pp. 727-57. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
41.
Tomasello, M., Carpenter, M., Call, J., Behne, T. and Moll, H. ( 2005) ‘Understanding and Sharing Intentions: The Origins of Cultural Cognition’, Behavioral and Brain Sciences28: 675-735.
42.
van den Broek, P., Kendeou, P., Kremer, K., Lynch, J., Butler, J., White, M.J. and Lorch, E.P. ( 2005) ‘Assessment of Comprehension Abilities in Young Children’, in S.G. Paris and S.A. Stahl (eds) Children’s Reading Comprehension and Assessment, pp. 107-30. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
43.
Vygotsky, L.S. ( 1978) Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
44.
Wells, G. ( 1999) Dialogic Inquiry: Towards a Socio-cultural Practice and Theory of Education. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
45.
Werstch, J.V. ( 1991) Voices of the Mind: Sociocultural Approach to Mediated Action. Boston, MA: Harvard University Press.
46.
Whitehurst, G.J. and Lonigan, C.J. ( 2001) ‘Emergent Literacy: Development from Prereaders to Readers’, in S.B. Neuman and D.K. Dickinson (eds) Handbook of Early Literacy Research, pp. 11-29. New York: Guilford Press.
47.
Whitmore, K., Martens, P., Goodman, Y.M. and Owocki, G. ( 2004) ‘Critical Lessons from the Transactional Perspective on Early Literacy Research’, Journal of Early Childhood Literacy4: 292-325.
