This study investigated the extent to which third graders (n = 84) from predominantly low-socioeconomic status families had access to books matched to their reading levels in their homes. On average, students showed home visitors books that fell within the Common Core State Standards’ recommended text difficulty range for Grade 3 (mean Lexile = 587L). However, students who passed a state-mandated reading test (‘good readers’) had books with reading demands well below their reading levels. In contrast, students who failed a state-mandated reading test (‘poor readers’) had books with reading demands well above their reading levels. Findings suggest that poor readers would have limited opportunities to experience successful independent reading in the home, while good readers may find minimal challenge in the books accessible in the home. Findings have implications for efforts dedicated to increasing students’ access to books.
AikensNLBarbarinO (2008) Socioeconomic differences in reading trajectories: The contribution of family, neighborhood, and school contexts.Journal of Educational Psychology100(2): 235–251.
2.
AllingtonRLMcCuistonKBillenM (2015) What research says about text complexity and learning to read. Reading Teacher68(7): 491–501.
3.
AmendumSConradiKHiebertE (2017) Does text complexity matter in the elementary grades? A research synthesis of text difficulty and elementary students’ reading fluency and comprehension. Educational Psychology Review30(1): 1–31.
4.
AmendumSJConradiKLiebfreundMD (2016) The push for more challenging texts: An analysis of early readers’ rate, accuracy, and comprehension. Reading Psychology37(4): 570–600.
5.
BenjaminR (2012) Reconstructing readability: Recent developments and recommendations in the analysis of text difficulty. Educational Psychology Review24(1): 63–88.
6.
BjorkELBjorkRA (2011) Making things hard on yourself, but in a good way: Creating desirable difficulties to enhance learning. In: GernsbacherMAPewRWHoughLM, et al. (eds) Psychology and the Real World: Essays Illustrating Fundamental Contributions to Society. New York: Worth Publishers, pp. 56–64.
7.
BradleyRHCorwynRFMcAdooHP, et al. (2001) The home environments of children in the United States part I: Variations by age, ethnicity, and poverty status.Child Development72(6): 1844–1867.
8.
BurgessSRHechtSALoniganCJ (2002) Relations of the home literacy environment (HLE) to the development of reading-related abilities: A one-year longitudinal study. Reading Research Quarterly37(4): 408–426.
9.
ChinTPhillipsM (2004) Social reproduction and child-rearing practices: Social class, children’s agency, and the summer activity gap. Sociology of Education77(3): 185–210.
10.
Compton-LillyCCaloiaRQuastE, et al. (2016) A closer look at a summer reading program: Listening to students and parents. Reading Teacher70(1): 59–67.
11.
ConstantinoR (2005) Print environments between high and low socioeconomic status communities.Teacher Librarian32(3): 22–25.
12.
DickinsonDNeumanSB (2006) Handbook of Early Literacy Research: Volume II. New York: Guilford Press.
13.
DzaldovBSPetersonS (2005) Book leveling and readers. Reading Teacher59(3): 222–229.
14.
EastmanPD (1968) The Best Nest. New York: Random House Inc.
15.
EdwardsPA (2011) Access to books makes a difference.Reading Today28(6): 16.
FitzgeraldJElmoreJKoonsH, et al. (2014) Important text characteristics for early-grades text complexity.Journal of Educational Psychology107(1): 4–29.
18.
FulmerSMD’MelloSKStrainA, et al. (2015) Interest-based text preference moderates the effect of text difficulty on engagement and learning. Contemporary Educational Psychology41: 98–110.
19.
GottfriedAWSchlackmanJGottfriedAE, et al. (2015) Parental provision of early literacy environment as related to reading and educational outcomes across the academic lifespan. Parenting: Science and Practice15(1): 24–38.
HooverHDDunbarSBFrisbieDA, et al. (2003) The Iowa Tests, Guide to Research and Development, Forms A and B. Itasca: Riverside Publishing.
23.
JudgeS (2013) Longitudinal predictors of reading achievement among at-risk children. Journal of Children & Poverty19(1): 1.
24.
KatzirTLesauxNKKimY (2009) The role of reading self-concept and home literacy practices in fourth grade reading comprehension.Reading & Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal22(3): 261–276.
25.
KimJSGuryanJ (2010) The efficacy of a voluntary summer book reading intervention for low-income Latino children from language minority families.Journal of Educational Psychology102(1): 20–31.
26.
KimJSGuryanJWhiteTG, et al. (2016) Delayed effects of a low-cost and large-scale summer reading intervention on elementary school children’s reading comprehension. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness9(1): 1–22.
27.
KinneyJ (2007) Diary of a Wimpy Kid. New York: Scholastic, Inc.
28.
KintschW (1991) The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension: A construction-integration model. Advances in Psychology79: 107–153.
29.
LesauxNK (2012) Reading and reading instruction for children from low-income and non-English-speaking households.The Future of Children22(2): 73–88.
30.
Lowry L (1993) The Giver. New York: Houghton Mifflin.
31.
MbellaKZhuMKarkeeT, et al.; North Carolina Department of Public Instruction (2016) The North Carolina Testing Program Technical Report 2012–2015. English language arts/reading assessments (ELA) End of Grade 3-8 and End-of-Course English II. Available at: www.ncpublicschools.org/docs/accountability/testing/technotes/mathtechreport1215.pdf (accessed 27 February 2020).
32.
MesmerHACunninghamJWHiebertEH (2012) Toward a theoretical model of text complexity for the early grades: Learning from the past, anticipating the future. Reading Research Quarterly47(3): 235–258.
33.
MesmerHAHiebertEH (2015) Third graders’ reading proficiency reading texts varying in complexity and length: Responses of students in an urban, high-needs school. Journal of Literacy Research47(4): 473–504.
MolSEBusAG (2011) To read or not to read: A meta-analysis of print exposure from infancy to early adulthood.Psychological Bulletin137(2): 267–296.
41.
MyersWD (2001) The Greatest: Muhammad Ali. New York: Scholastic, Inc.
42.
NationK (2007) Children’s reading comprehension difficulties. In: SnowlingMJHulmeC (eds) The Science of Reading: A Handbook (pp. 209–226). Malden: Blackwell.
43.
National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, Council of Chief State School Officers (2010) Common Core State Standards for English Language Arts & Literacy in History/Social Studies, Science, and Technical Subjects. Appendix A: Research Supporting Key Elements of the Standards Glossary of Key Terms, Washington D.C.
RechtDRLeslieL (1988) Effect of prior knowledge on good and poor readers’ memory of text.Journal of Educational Psychology80(1): 16–20.
46.
ReedDKKershaw-HerreraS (2016) An examination of text complexity as characterized by readability and cohesion. The Journal of Experimental Education84(1): 75–97.
SaenzTIFelixDM (2007) English-speaking Latino parents’ literacy practices in Southern California. Communication Disorders Quarterly28(2): 93–106.
49.
SantoroLEBakerSKFienH, et al (2016) Using read-alouds to help struggling readers access and comprehend complex, informational text. Teaching Exceptional Children48(6): 282–292.
50.
ScarboroughHSDobrichW (1994) On the efficacy of reading to preschoolers. Developmental Review14(3): 245–302.
51.
SchmittSASimpsonAMFriendM (2011) A longitudinal assessment of the home literacy environment and early language.Infant and Child Development20(6): 409–431.
52.
SénéchalMLeFevreJ (2002) Parental involvement in the development of children’s reading skill: A five-year longitudinal study. Child Development73(2): 445–460.
53.
SeussDr (1957) The Cat in the Hat. New York: Random House.
54.
SeussDr (1960a) Green Eggs and Ham. New York: Random House.
55.
StennerABurdickHSanfordE, et al. (2006) How accurate are Lexile text measures?Journal of Applied Measurement7: 307–322.
56.
TaylorMD (1987) The Gold Cadillac. New York: Dial Books.
57.
VygotskyL (1978) Mind and Society. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
58.
WhiteTGKimJS (2008) Teacher and parent scaffolding of voluntary summer reading.The Reading Teacher62(2): 116–125.
59.
WhiteTGKimJSKingstonHC, et al. (2014) Replicating the effects of a teacher-scaffolded voluntary summer reading program: The role of poverty. Reading Research Quarterly49(1): 5–30.
60.
WilliamsonGLFitzgeraldJStennerAJ (2013) The common core state standards’ quantitative text complexity trajectory: Figuring out how much complexity is enough. Educational Researchers42(2): 59–69.
61.
WolfeMWSchreinerMERehderB, et al. (1998) Learning from text: Matching readers and texts by latent semantic analysis. Discourse Processes25(2–3): 309–336.
