Home literacy environment profiles of children with language impairment: associations with caregiver- and child-specific factors

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Numerous studies suggest a positive relationship between the home literacy environment (HLE) and children's language and literacy skills, yet very little research has focused on the HLE of children with language impairment (LI). Children with LI are at risk for reading difficulties; thus, understanding the nature and frequency of their home literacy interactions is warranted. AIMS: To identify unique HLE profiles within a large sample of children with LI, and to determine relevant caregiver- and child-specific factors that predict children's profile membership. METHODS & PROCEDURES: Participants were 195 kindergarten and first-grade children with LI who were receiving school-based language therapy. Caregivers completed a comprehensive questionnaire regarding their child's HLE, and the extent to which their child engaged in shared book reading, were taught about letters, initiated or asked to be read to, and chose to read independently. Caregivers also answered questions regarding the highest level of maternal education, caregiver history of reading difficulties, and caregiver reading habits. Children completed a language and literacy battery in the fall of their academic year. OUTCOMES & RESULTS: Latent profile analyses indicated a three-profile solution, representing high, average and low frequency of the selected HLE indicators. Multinomial regression further revealed that caregivers' own reading habits influenced children's profile membership, as did child age and language abilities. CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS: These results highlight the considerable variability in the frequency of home literacy interactions of children with LI. Future work examining relations between familial reading practices and literacy outcomes for children with LI is warranted.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 27 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.