Young learners: the home literacy environments of Australian four-year-olds.

Brown, P. Margaret ; Byrnes, Linda J. ; Raban, Bridie 等

This study investigated the home literacy environments (HLEs) of 4-year-old children attending an early childhood program prior to school entry and the association between the HLE and children's interests in and attitudes to literacy. One hundred and thirty-eight parents and 140 children participated in the study. Parents completed a questionnaire and children were interviewed. Results showed that, generally, these parents created "somewhat rich" literacy environments, and that traditional literacy (as opposed to techno-literacy) materials predominated. Frequency of the parents' own reading was positively associated with the frequency with which parents read to their children. Richness of parents' reading habits was positively associated with the frequency with which parents read to their children, but not necessarily associated with the children's own interests in or orientation to literacy.

Keywords: parent and child, child voice, parent involvement, literacy

**********

From birth, children are immersed in a world full of objects, happenings, and people, and through their interactions with and within their worlds, they seek to uncover meanings. The driving force behind this immersion is the child becoming part of the cultural group. In doing so, children seek to learn the group's customs and rituals and acquire skills so that they can operate in the group (Rogoff, 2003; Vygotsky, 1978). All cultural groups share meanings that are conveyed not only through behavior but also, in the case of human groups, almost exclusively through the use of symbols that best express those meanings. There are many symbolic forms that children notice and seek to understand. Of these, the spoken and written forms of language are the most critical for communication within and across groups.

Family Literacy Practices

Young children are supported in their acquisition of language by family members. Family members communicate with infants in ways that help children to "break the code." Family members capitalize on children's interest in the written word and scaffold their learning (Whitmore, Martens, Goodman, & Owocki, 2004). It is now widely held that it is within the family context that most children acquire an early understanding of literacy before they reach school age (Weinberger, 1996). All families have literacy practices (see, e.g., Auerbach, 1989; Feiler & Webster, 1998; Whitmore et al., 2004) and seek to imbue within their children those they most value. These practices are transmitted not just by parents, but also by siblings, grandparents, and extended family members and friends (Gregory, 2001) and are typically enmeshed within the daily lives of the family (Auerbach, 1989). Cambourne (1988) further suggested that seven conditions underpin young children's literacy development: (1) immersion in written language, (2) demonstration and modeling of literate behavior, (3) expectations that children will become literate, (4) children taking responsibility for their own learning, (5) parents accepting approximations of children's literacy attempts, (6) employing literacy in their everyday lives, and (7) receiving positive feedback about their attempts. Given the uniqueness of the daily lives of families, these practices and conditions are not necessarily similar or standard across all families.

What is standard, however, is that each family's practices aim to support the child's literacy development (Auerbach, 1989). They are purposeful and reflect the family's literacy needs (Whitmore et al., 2004). The literacy medium used in families is not always the same. Meaning may be created and expressed through print and other symbol systems. For example, some families routinely use literacy activities, such as story book reading, singing rhymes, and storytelling. These practices are usually referred to as traditional literacy activities. Other families tend to favor activities that support their everyday activities and, as Saracho (2007) noted, help children to understand the world in which they live. Examples of these may include logos, shop and toy catalogs, bus timetables, fast-food outlet menus, and television programs. These practices are often referred to as environmental literacy activities. Other families have embraced new technologies, such as computers and mobile phones, that combine print-based materials and expressive and receptive devices, such as image processing, hypermedia systems, and speech recognition programs (Pirrie, 1999). This type of literacy has been described by Marsh (2004) as "technoliteracy." Families do not necessarily use only one type of literacy practice. Most families are more likely to use all three modes of literacy to varying degrees.

A number of studies have investigated particular aspects of family literacy practices and their links with young children's later literacy achievement. Most of these studies have investigated traditional literacy practices, such as story book reading. For example, Weigel, Martin, and Bennett (2006) collected data from 85 U.S. parents and their preschool children and found indicators of positive associations between parental literacy habits and parental reading beliefs, parental reading beliefs and parent-child literacy and language activities in the home, and parent-child literacy activities and children's print knowledge and interest in reading. Harris, Loyo, Holahan, Suzuki, and Gottlieb (2007) obtained similar results in their study of 600 mothers. They used structural equation modeling to predict reading ability in young children and found a positive association between access to books and affirmative attitudes about the benefits to be gained through reading to children.

In a longitudinal study of 168 middle- and upper-class English-speaking children in Canada, Senechal and LeFevre (2002) also found a strong benefit for children who had access to books, reporting an association between children's experience with books and their development of vocabulary and listening comprehension skills and, in turn, their reading ability, in Grade 3.

In addition, they found a relationship between parents consciously teaching children about reading and writing words, and the development of early literacy skills. In another U.K. study, Weinberger (1996) investigated predictors of literacy in 42 children and found significant factors at entry into school associated with literacy outcomes at age 7 (as defined by the level of book being read): (1) having a favorite book at age 3, (2) being read to by parents at least once each day, (3) being read story books, (4) knowing nursery rhymes, (5) having access to library books, (6) looking at books on their own at nursery school, (7) knowing the names of some of the letters of the alphabet, (8) being able to write their first name, and (9) copying a paragraph of text.

Roberts, Jurgens, and Burchinal (2005) attempted to find an association between (1) four specific measures of family literacy practices (the frequency of shared book reading, maternal book reading strategies, children's enjoyment of reading and maternal sensitivity); (2) a global measure of the quality and responsiveness of the home environment; and (3) children's early literacy skills between ages 3 and 5. The participant group consisted of 72 African American children and their mothers/carers. Although some significant associations were found with individual measures, the global measure of quality and responsiveness, rather than discrete practices, was found to be the strongest predictor of children's early literacy skills.

These studies all support the importance of preschool children's access to books. Not surprisingly, then, in terms of particular practices undertaken by parents, the impact of story book reading on later literacy outcomes has been closely scrutinized. For example, Bus, van Ijzendoorn, and Pellegrini (1995) undertook a quantitative meta-analysis of studies investigating the frequency with which books are read to preschoolers. They found a relationship between parents reading to preschoolers and language growth, early literacy, and reading achievement. They also noted a particular link between book reading and the development of written language. Contrary to results from a number of studies published subsequently (e.g., Natsiopoulou, Souliotis, Kyridis, & Hatzisavvides, 2006; Weinberger, 1996), Bus et al. found that family socioeconomic status did not have an impact on the effect of book reading.

Parental Beliefs

Other researchers have examined connections between mothers' literacy beliefs and preschool children's literacy development. Weigel et al. (2006), for example, collected data from 79 mothers and found two quite distinct views of literacy learning. One group, known as "facilitative" mothers, actively engaged their children in learning through providing opportunities for growth in vocabulary, knowledge, and morals. In contrast, "conventional" mothers believed more strongly that it was the role of the school to educate their children and so provided fewer growth opportunities for their child. Essentially, then, depending on their beliefs about the role of adults (parents and teachers) in children's literacy acquisition, each group of mothers engaged in different literacy activities with their children, with the children of facilitative mothers typically growing up in homes that were more literacy enriching. Weigel and colleagues found that this had implications for later outcomes, with the children of facilitative mothers being more interested in reading, and more knowledgeable about print.

In contrast, few research studies have investigated environmental or "techno-literacy" family literacy practices. One example of techno-literacy practices comes from the work of Marsh and Thompson (2001), who, in a U.K. study of 18 families and their 3- and 4-year-old children, found that much of the children' s reading concentrated on popular cultural and media texts.

The above studies seem to imply at least two things. First, family literacy practices and parental beliefs are associated with particular literacy outcomes for children. That is, different environments may lend more or less support to a child's developing literacy, and this can occur through intentional parental support and also though simple exposure and exemplars. However, this work has focused primarily on traditional forms of literacy. Contemporary home literacy practices may now include environmental and techno-literacy activities, and the impact of these on children's development has yet to be fully explored. Given this, it is possible that these newer forms of literacy enrich the home literacy environment. Two major questions can then be asked: Is it possible to define and measure the richness of families' literacy environments? And, in what ways might the relative richness of the home literacy environment influence the child's interests and attitudes toward literacy?

METHOD

Participants

The study reported here comprises data collected from the first of three cohorts of parents and children in the Young Learners' Project (funded by the Australian Scholarships Group and the Australian Research Council Project No. LP LP0883437). The larger study follows children from 4-year-old preschool into the first year of formal schooling. The participants in Cohort 1 were 138 parents and 140 children (there were two sets of twins, so 140 questionnaires were completed by the parents and 140 interviews undertaken with the children). The children were attending 4-year-old preschool in the Melbourne metropolitan area in the state of Victoria, Australia. Overall, the child sample included children in 15 rooms in six different preschool centers. Ages of the children at the commencement of the study ranged between 3 years, 7 months and 5 years, 5 months. This range of ages, though somewhat wide, is common in Victorian 4-year-old preschool programs. The younger children will turn 4 during the year, and others may possibly repeat the preschool year before going to school. There were 69 girls and 71 boys in the sample. The parents completing the questionnaires were 127 mothers and 11 fathers. Ninety-five percent of the parents lived with a spouse or partner; 82% were born in Australia; and English was the main language spoken in 95% of the homes. Seventy-eight percent of these parents had a university, or equivalent, qualification. Eighty-six percent of the children lived with their siblings, and 50% were the first-born child.

Data Collection

The data collection took place in the first 6 months of the preschool year. Parents completed a questionnaire about their views, attitudes, and practices toward literacy to provide a description of their home literacy environments. The questionnaire had three sections, which focused on parents' own literacy habits and preferences, their literacy habits with their child, and their child's own independent literacy habits and preferences. Another section focused on the parents' connections with their child's educational program. The data from the first three sections are reported here. In terms of the parents' own literacy habits, they were asked about (1) the main language in which they read; (2) the frequency (daily, several times a week, once a week, occasionally, never) and duration (20 minutes or less, 21 to 40 minutes, 41 to 60 minutes, more than 60 minutes) of their reading; and (3) the types of materials they read (traditional, environmental, or new technology--defined below). A similar set of questions was asked in relation to their reading with their child and their child's independent reading.

The children were interviewed (using a schedule named the ORIENT, which was developed specifically for this project to measure young children's orientation to literacy [Byrnes & Brown, 2007]) by one of the researchers at the center they attended and at a time arranged with their preschool teacher to avoid disruption to the program. In the ORIENT, children were presented with four exemplars of each of the above types of reading materials (traditional [a story book, a nonfiction book, a birthday card, and a young children's magazine], environmental [a McDonald's menu, a ToysRUs catalog, a bus timetable, and a poster of a popular child's movie: Cars], and new technology [a mobile telephone and a computer]). To match the parents' questions, children were asked if they liked to send or receive texts, play games on the computer, look up information on the computer (e.g., look at the website of a toy store), or share information with others (e.g., send e-mails); and asked which of them they liked to use. The children were then asked four other questions:

"Do you like looking at books?"

"Are you looking forward to learning to read?"

"Is it going to be easy for you to learn to read?"

"Do you think you will be good at reading?"

Although reading and writing were a focus of the questionnaire and the child interview, only the results relating to reading are analyzed and reported here.

Parents who gave their permission for themselves and their child to participate in the study were given the questionnaire by their child's preschool teacher; they were asked to return the completed questionnaire, in a sealed envelope, to the relevant preschool teacher. Of the 153 parents who agreed to participate, 140 questionnaires were completed and returned, representing a return rate of 92%. For data analysis, only matched responses in the parent questionnaires and child interview questions were used, because some participants did not respond to every question.

Data Analysis

Simple frequency counts were used for the descriptive data. Where associations between variables were under scrutiny, two statistics were used. Chi squared analyses were computed on frequency data. To check the strengths of any associations found, the phi coefficient was used for simple 2 x 2 tables and Cramer's V was used for more complex tables (see Kinnear & Gray, 2004). Pearson product-moment correlations were used on interval data. For all statistical analyses, only significance levels of less than 0.05 are reported.

RESULTS

On average, for how many minutes per day did the parents read for pleasure?

For this item, the parent selected either 20 minutes or fewer per day, between 21 and 40 minutes per day, between 41 and 60 minutes per day, and more than 60 minutes per day. As Figure 1 shows, the majority of parents (56.9%) reported that, on average, they read for between 21 and 40 minutes per day, with few parents (7.3%) reading for greater than 60 minutes.

Was the frequency with which the parents read for pleasure associated with the frequency with which they read to their children?

We hypothesized that the frequency of parent reading for pleasure would be positively associated with the frequency with which they read to the children. A cross-tabulation showed a positive association between these two variables ([chi square] = 228.25, n = 138, df = 2, p = .000). Cramer's V indicated that this association was strong.

How rich were the parents' reading preferences?

This variable was defined in two ways--the types of materials they read, cross-referenced with the frequency with which they read these types. There were three types of reading materials: traditional, environmental, and new technology, and for each type there were four examples, giving a total of 12 cells to be completed by each parent. Parents also indicated whether they read daily (a score of 2), sometimes (a score of 1), or never (a score of zero) for this range of reading materials. The total maximum score for this question was therefore 24. Initially, we looked at the group percentage distribution of scores for the three types of reading materials, and these are shown in Figure 2.

[FIGURE 1 OMITTED]

[FIGURE 2 OMITTED]

[FIGURE 3 OMITTED]

As Figure 2 shows, the overwhelming majority of the parents reported that they read materials from the three types on a daily basis: traditional (91.4%), environmental (76.3%), and new technology (80.6%). Second, we calculated a score out of 24 for each respondent. This yielded a distribution that was slightly skewed toward the upper end of scores. The range of scores was from 3 to 22, with a mean of 15.7, a mode of 16, a median score of 16, and a standard deviation of 3.71. These two results suggest that almost all of the parents in this study read broadly, but the true distinction among the parents was the mean duration of reading for pleasure per day, rather than the type of materials they read.

From the above sets of data three categories were established, representing an estimate of the richness of the parents' reading habits. These were termed high, medium, and low. The high category included those with a score greater than 18, as these parents would have read all three types of materials, and the majority of these would have been on a daily basis. The low category comprised those with a score of 12 or less. These parents either read a range of materials infrequently or read frequently a very specific type of material. Finally, the medium category comprised those respondents with a score greater than 12 and less than 18, and these respondents read a broad range of materials relatively frequently. Figure 3 gives the distribution of these percentages.

Figure 3 shows that almost one third (32.6%) of the parents were classified as high in terms of the richness of their reading habits, with more than half (53.6%) of the parents' habits being medium rich.

Was richness of parents' reading habits associated with the frequency with which they read to their children?

We hypothesized that the richness of parents' reading habits would be positively associated with the frequency with which parents read to their children. A cross-tabulation was conducted to determine whether these two variables were positively associated. Cramer's V was used to check the strength of any associations found. The analysis showed that a statistically significant association was found between the variables ([chi square] = 8.904, n = 138, df = 2, p = 0.06). Cramer's V indicated a medium-strength association.

Was richness of parents' reading habits associated with the variety of literacy activities they engaged in with their children?

Using a Pearson product-moment correlation, we examined the relationship between the richness of parents' reading habits and the total number of different forms of literacy activities they engaged in with their children. This statistic showed a positive relationship between these two variables (r = .55, p < .001).

Was richness of parents' reading habits associated with the children's orientation to literacy?

We hypothesized that the richness of the parents' reading habits would be positively associated with the children's orientation to literacy. Children's orientation to literacy was determined by using their responses to four items in the child interview (ORIENT). These items related to their level of enjoyment of reading, their anticipation about learning to read, the ease with which the children considered they would learn to read, and their motivation to read. Positive responses to these questions were given a score of 1 and negative responses a score of 0. Children scoring 0 to 2 were categorized as low orientation and those with scores of 3 or 4 were categorized as high orientation. A cross-tabulation indicated no association between the variables.

Were the literacy activities that parents engaged in associated with those they engaged in with their children?

To investigate this, Pearson product-moment correlations were computed for the three literacy activity types: traditional, environmental, and techno-literacy. The results of this analysis showed significant correlations between these variables. For traditional literacy activities, a medium-strength correlation between the parents' preference and what they engaged in with their child was found (r = .470, p = .000). Similarly, for environmental literacy activities, a medium-strength correlation between the parents' preference and what they engaged in with their child was found (r = .469, p = .000). For techno-literacy activities, a medium-strength correlation was found (r = .495, p = .000).

Was the variety of literacy activities that parents shared with their children associated with the children's own literacy preferences?

To investigate this association, a Pearson product-moment correlation was conducted on these two variables. No significant correlation was found.

DISCUSSION

This study investigated the habits of parents when reading for pleasure, the frequency and types of literacy activities they engaged in with their children, and the children's own interests and orientation to literacy. Results show that, overall, these parents tended to pass on their own literacy practices to their children, and this finding is consistent with those from other studies (see e.g., Auerbach, 1989; Feiler & Webster, 1998; Whitmore et al., 2004).

More than one half of the parents read for pleasure between 21 and 40 minutes per day, and it is likely that these routines provide an exemplar for their children. Around 80% also reported that they read traditional, environmental, and new technology materials on a daily basis, thereby demonstrating to their children that meaning is not confined to print on paper alone, but also can be gleaned from other forms of presentation. This is an interesting finding, which highlights the diversity of literacies to which many children in this study were exposed on a daily basis. Indeed, family literacies are not just traditional literacies that have well-researched links to later literacy achievements (see e.g., Harris et al., 2007; Weigel et al., 2006), but also literacies whose links to later literacy may not be as well defined yet may support children's everyday learning.

Another noteworthy finding was that the parents' literacy preferences were mirrored in the types of literacy activities in which they engaged with their children. Scrutiny of the distributions of these scores indicated that the preferences of the parents in the current study were slightly positively skewed toward traditional literacies. Interestingly, however, this skew was not replicated in the distribution of traditional scores with their children, A similar pattern emerged for techno-literacies. Although there was a normal distribution of scores for parents' preferences for environmental print, this was negatively skewed in relation to the activities they did with their children. This possibly suggests that techno-literacies are gaining ground alongside traditional literacies in terms of parents' preferences and also in relation to how they engage their children in literacy. Thus, it is not surprising that many children commented on their enjoyment when working on the computer. As one child mentioned, "Um ... I can I can be happy and if I if I am on the computer writing sometimes or on the email. I might be really happy. I know a lot of words." Another commented on the shared experience of working on the computer: "I like to do it with my mum or dad or my uncle or aunt or my grandma or grandpa on the computer."

In this study, we found that the parents in this sample did more than simply model literacy behaviors--they gave their children intentional support, with the group of parents with richer literacy habits reporting two distinct behaviors. First, they read more frequently to their children than did the other parents, and second, they shared their favored literacy activities with their children. If we take into account these characteristics of routine exposure, provision of exemplars, and intentional support, it is apparent that these children are exposed to literacy-rich home environments by parents who share characteristics with the facilitative mothers in the Weigel et al. (2006) study; these mothers typically provided enriching literacy environments for their children.

If this is so, it is of interest to note the lack of associations we found between the parent variables (the richness of parents' personal reading activities and those they share with their children) and the child variables (their orientation to literacy and their literacy choices). Perhaps it is the case that young children have inconsistent preferences. Although they may enjoy shared and independent literacy activities, they may not be certain about the notion of a favorite activity, or perhaps what is favorite is the immediate rather than a past or situation-specific activity, such as story reading at bedtime. It is also possible that the different literacy materials used for the child interview (such as the mobile phone) may have been viewed by the children as toys that could be used as props in pretense, rather than as materials for engaging in literacy, thus possibly confounding the results.

What is interesting from these analyses is the lack of relationship between these young children's own sense of themselves as readers and their parents' interest in reading, and their reading habits. This group of parents could be considered as a fairly literate group. These children's responses, in part, may be due to their young age. During the years before school, prior to any formal literacy teaching, young children are clearly exploring their literate environments in a number of ways (Clay, 1998). However, they may not consider themselves as "readers" during this time, rather appreciating this as a shared activity they enjoy, with parents taking the lead and with little expectation that the children are required to do anything other than to experience the satisfaction of shared time together, enjoyed by both parties. What will be interesting to see is when these children are followed up into formal school with the opportunities for overt "teaching," by teachers and by parents, whether this influences these children's reading development.

In essence, the parents in this sample, through simple exposure or exemplars, and intentional support, envelop their children in symbols (print and other forms) that express meaning within their family and wider cultures. For many of these families, this is part of their daily lives (Auerbach, 1989), is significant, and mirrors the literacy interest of family members (Whitmore et al., 2004). Although these practices are unique across families, they aim to imbue within children a unique family literacy heritage. For many of these families, this heritage upholds the value of reading being an enjoyable daily activity that is individual and can be shared with others. It also promotes a view that reading is not restricted to the so-called traditional literacies but includes a wide range of materials, such as junk mail, Web-based information sites, and mobile phone texts, not all of which are print based.

DOI: 10.1080/02568543.2012.712086

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors wish to acknowledge the parents, children, and teachers who participated in this research and members of the Young Learners' Project who assisted in data entry and read proofs of this article. Further details of the study and its researchers can be found at www.edfac.unimelb. edu.au/younglearners.

REFERENCES

Auerbach, E. R. (1989). Toward a social-contextual approach to family literacy. Harvard Educational Review, 59(2), 165-181.

Bus, A. G., van Ijzedndoorn, M. H., & Pellegrini, A. D. (1995). Joint book reading makes for success in learning to read: A meta-analysis on intergenerational transmission of literacy. Review of Educational Research, 65(1), 1-21.

Byrnes, L. J., & Brown, P. M. (2007). ORIENT: A scale to measure children's orientation to literacy. Unpublished interview schedule, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.

Cambourne, B. (1988). The whole story: Natural learning and the acquisition of literacy in the classroom. Auckland, New Zealand: Ashton Scholastic.

Clay, M. M. (1998). By different paths to common outcomes. York, ME: Stenhouse.

Feiler, A., & Webster, A. (1998). Success and failure in early literacy: Teachers' predictions and subsequent intervention. British Journal of Special Education, 25(4), 189-195.

Gregory, E. (2001). Sisters and brothers as language and literacy teachers: Synergy between siblings playing and working together. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 1, 301-322.

Harris, K. K., Loyo, J. J., Holahan, C. K., Suzuki, R., & Gottlieb, N. H. (2007). Cross-sectional predictors of reading to young children among participants in the Texas WIC program. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 21, 254-268.

Kinnear, P. R., & Gray, C. D. (2004). SPSS 12 made simple. Hove, England: Psychology Press.

Marsh, J. (2004). The techno-literacy practices of young children. Journal of Early Childhood Research, 2(1), 51-66.

Marsh, J., & Thompson P. (2001). Parental involvement in literacy development: Using media texts. Journal of Research in Reading, 24, 266-278.

Natsiopoulou, T., Souliotis, D., Kyridis, A., & Hatzisavvides, S. (2006). Reading children's books to the preschool children in Greek families. International Journal of Early Childhood, 38(2), 69-79.

Pirrie, A. (1999). "Supposing": Reading between the lines: An allegorical account of contemporary debates on literacy acquisition. British Journal of Educational Studies, 47, 348-363.

Roberts, J., Jurgens, J., & Burchinal, M. (2005). The role of home literacy practices in preschool children's language and emergent literacy skills. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 48, 345-259.

Rogoff, B. (2003). The cultural nature of human development. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Saracho, O. N. (2007). Hispanic families as facilitators of their children's literacy development. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 6(2), 103-117.

Senechal, M., & LeFevre, J. (2002). Parental involvement in the development of children's reading skill: A five-year longitudinal study. Child Development, 73, 445-460.

Vygotsky, L. (1978). Cole, M. (Ed). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press

Weigel, D. J., Martin, S. S., & Bennett, K. K. (2006). Mothers' literacy beliefs: Connections with the home literacy environment and pre-school children's literacy development. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 6(2), 191-211.

Weinberger, J. (1996). A longitudinal study of children's early literacy experiences at home and later literacy development at home and school. Journal of Research in Reading, 19(1), 14-24.

Whitmore, K. F., Martens, P., Goodman, Y. M., & Owocki, G. (2004). Critical lessons from the transactional perspective on early literacy research. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 4, 291-325.

P. Margaret Brown and Linda J. Byrnes

The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia

Bridie Raban

The University of Melbourne and Australian Council for Educational Research, Melbourne, Australia

Linda Watson

University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom

Submitted January 17, 2011; accepted June 30, 2011.

This research was funded by the Australian Research Council (Project No: LP0883437) in conjunction with its partner organization, the Australian Scholarships Group.

Address correspondence to Dr. Linda J. Byrnes, Melbourne Graduate School of Education, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC 3010, Australia. E-mail: lhyrnes@unimelb.edu.au