This article discusses the potential positive and problematic influences of the National Early Literacy Panel (NELP; 2008) report on prekindergarten and kindergarten classroom instructional practice. The authors support the instructional importance of the majority of the foundational skills identified in the NELP report as having “clear and consistently strong relationships with later conventional literacy skills” but also detail a number of concerns about NELP-influenced instructional recommendations drawn to date, arguing that the NELP report is both insufficiently clear and overly narrow with respect to what preschool teachers should be focusing on instructionally in early literacy.
BeckI. L.McKeownM. G. (2001). Text talk: Capturing the benefits of read-aloud experiences for young children. Reading Teacher, 55, 10–20.
2.
CainK.OakhillJ. V. (2006). Profiles of children with specific reading comprehension difficulties. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 74(6), 683–696.
3.
Center for Education Policy. (2007). Choices, changes, and challenges: Curriculum and instruction in the NCLB era. Washington, DC: Author.
4.
ChallJ. S. (2003). Poor children’s fourth grade slump. American Educator, 27(1), 14–15.
5.
ChallJ. S.JacobsV. A.BaldwinL. E. (1990). The reading crisis: Why poor children fall behind. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
6.
Comprehensive School Reform Program Office, Office of Elementary and Secondary Education, U.S. Department of Education. (2002). Scientifically based research and the Comprehensive School Reform (CSR) Program. Washington, DC: Author.
7.
CunninghamA.ZibulskyJ.CallahanM. (2009). Starting small: Building preschool teacher knowledge that supports early literacy development. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 22(4), 487–510.
8.
DickinsonD. K.GolinkoffR. M.Hirsch-PasekK.NeumannS. B.BurchinalP. (2009). The language of emergent literacy: A response to the National Institute for Literacy Report on Early Literacy. Retrieved July 29, 2009, from http://nieer.org/psm/index.php?article=294
9.
DickinsonD. K.McCabeA.EssexM. J. (2005). A window of opportunity we must open to all: The case for preschool with high-quality support for language and literacy. In DickinsonD.NeumanS. (Eds.), Handbook of early literacy research (2nd ed., pp. 11–28). New York: Guilford.
10.
DickinsonD. K.NeumanS. (Eds.). (2005). Handbook of early literacy research (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford.
11.
DickinsonD.SpragueK. (2001). The nature and impact of early childhood care environments on the language and early literacy development of children from low-income families. In NeumanS.DickinsonD. (Eds.), Handbook of early literacy research (pp. 263–292). New York: Guilford.
12.
HeathS. B. (1983). Ways with words: Language, life, and work in communities and classrooms. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
13.
JuelC. (2010). Taking a long view of reading development. In McKeownM.KucanL. (Eds.), Bringing reading research to life (pp. 11–32). New York: Guilford.
14.
JuelC.BiancarosaG.CokerD.DeffesR. (2003). Walking with Rosie: A cautionary tale of early reading instruction. Educational Leadership, 60(7), 12–18.
15.
JusticeL. M.PenceK.BowlesR.WigginsA. K. (2006). An investigation of four hypotheses concerning the order by which 4-year-old children learn the alphabet letters. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 21, 374–389.
16.
JusticeL.VukelichC. (Eds.). (2008). Achieving excellence in preschool literacy instruction. New York: Guilford.
17.
McGeeL. M.RichgelsD. J. (2008). Literacy’s beginnings: Supporting young readers and writers. New York: Pearson.
18.
National Early Literacy Panel. (2008). Developing early literacy: Report of the National Early Literacy Panel. Washington, DC: National Institute for Literacy. Available at http://www.nifl.gov/earlychildhood/NELP/NELPreport.html
19.
National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. (2000). Report of the National Reading Panel. Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction (NIH Pub. No. 00–4769). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
20.
NeumanS.DickinsonD. K. (Eds.). (2001). Handbook of early literacy research. New York: Guilford.
21.
PacigaK. A.HoffmanJ. L.TealeW. H. (2010). The National Early Literacy Panel report and classroom instruction: Green lights, caution lights, and red lights. Manuscript submitted for publication.
22.
ParisS. G. (2005). Reinterpreting the development of reading skills. Reading Research Quarterly, 40(2), 184–202.
23.
ParisS. G. (2009). Constrained reading skills—So what? In LeanderK.RoweD. W.DickinsonD. K.HundleyM.JiménezR. T.RiskoV. J. (Eds.), 58th yearbook of the National Reading Conference (pp. 34–44). Oak Creek, WI: National Reading Conference.
24.
SnowC. E.BarnesW. S.ChandlerJ.GoodmanI. F.HemphillL. (1991). Unfulfilled expectations: Home and school influences on literacy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
25.
SnowC. E.BiancarosaG. (2003). Adolescent literacy and the achievement gap: What do we know and where do we go from here?New York: Carnegie Corporation of New York.
26.
TealeW. H. (2003). Questions about early literacy learning and teaching that need asking—And some that don’t. In BaroneD. M.MorrowL. M. (Eds.), Literacy and young children: Research-based practices (pp. 23–44). New York: Guilford.
27.
TealeW. H.LeuD. J.Jr.LabboL. D.KinzerC. (2002). The CTELL project: New ways technology can help educate tomorrow’s teachers of reading. Reading Teacher, 55, 654–659.
28.
TealeW. H.PacigaK. A.HoffmanJ. L. (2007). Beginning reading instruction in urban schools: The curriculum gap insures a continuing achievement gap. Reading Teacher, 61, 344–348.
