Supporting children’s literacy development is a major concern within the international community. Literacy is seen as conditional for school success and for participation in an increasingly print-heavy world. However, the acquisition of literacy is not a simple question of teaching a child to read. The acquisition of the written mode of language occurs within a complex of sociocultural processes affecting the transformation of societies as well as the development of individuals (see Reference OlsonOlson, 2016). This basic idea has been elaborated by anthropological and sociological studies focusing on the effects of literacy on general modes of thinking, sociocultural transformations, and economic change (e.g., Reference Smith and Kumi-YeboahSmith & Kumi-Yeboah, 2015). Literacy thus contributes to individual empowerment and to social, economic, and political integration. Learning to read and write helps children to build knowledge and skills that are in turn refined throughout their schooling and career in preparation for full societal participation, including in the labor market and with sociopolitical institutions. Literacy provides the individual with opportunities for lifelong learning and tools to adapt to a constantly changing textual and digital world.
The importance of literacy draws attention to its distribution and prevalence around the world and to the consequences of being nonliterate. There is commonality across the globe. For one, children’s schooling and adult literacy programs are implemented to support literacy worldwide. However, these programs not only vary internationally but also in ways that are embedded in cultural contexts that diverge historically and systemically. The cognitive task of literacy learning is also similar across the world: Individuals are confronted with the task of acquiring implicit knowledge of how a writing system works – how the written word reveals meaning through a layer of graphic forms – and to make this knowledge explicit. Here too, however, there are differences. The cognitive task is mediated by a layer of graphic forms whose properties vary worldwide in both their appearance and the typological levels of language the graphs represent: morphemes, syllables, and phonemes. Each writing system encodes language in one way or another, often mixing levels. Thus, literacy is both an achievement shared across the world and also varies substantially in sociocultural contexts, including languages and writing systems. In this volume, we address this global variability of literacy and the biological and ecological factors explaining this variation. In this introductory chapter, we examine the worldwide distribution of literacy, its development as it relates to that of schooling, and the sources of individual variation in literacy outcomes. In the final chapter, we will explain the patterns and variations in literacy development around the world as described in the present volume.
1.1 Global Variation in Literacy Attainments
1.1.1 Defining Literacy
Beyond its conventional conception as a set of reading and writing abilities, literacy must also be understood as a means of identification, understanding, interpretation, creation, and communication in an increasingly digital, text-mediated, fast-changing world (United Nations, 2014). According to the UN Strategic Development Goals, literacy can be considered a driver for sustainable development; enabling greater participation in the labor market; better opportunities to ensure child and family health, nutrition, and wellbeing; and the general expansion of life chances. As such, literacy may not only contribute to human capital but also to the flourishing of the child. Literacy can be defined as a lifelong, context-bound set of practices in which an individual’s needs vary with time and place. Research has shown that the literacy practices through which individuals are socialized into various institutions can be extremely variable. Functionally, literacy not only involves the ability to read and write but also the ability to cope with literacy situations in everyday life. It comprises both literacy conventions and interrelated cultural and background knowledge. Literacy conventions are reflected in the types of documents that are used by social institutions such as letters, forms, legal briefs, political tracts, religious texts, expository texts, and narrative texts such as novels, comics, essays, and poems. Different types of documents may also call for different types of cultural background knowledge as well as different values and beliefs (e.g., Reference VerhoevenVerhoeven, 1994; Reference WagnerWagner, 1993). Accordingly, one could also speak of multiple literacies (cf. Reference StreetStreet, 2001), and therefore the importance of policies which enhance literacy education for all.
Literacy also reflects sociolinguistic positioning that specifically affects minority communities (cf. Reference FishmanFishman, 1999; Reference Mohanty, Mohanty and MisraMohanty, 2000; Reference Verhoeven, Kamil, Pearson, Moje and AfflerbachVerhoeven, 2010. In a multiethnic society, for example, minority groups may use various written codes serving at least partially distinct sets of functions. Given the privileges of power, the written code with the highest status is primarily used by societal institutions such as the government and courts, whereas the written code of the minority language(s) is left to be used for intragroup communication and to express one’s linguistic identity and ethnicity. Yet another written code may be used for religious practices. In light of such multilinguality, literacy competence must be understood in the context of language and cultural backgrounds as, for example, the multilingual and multicultural environments of children from ethnic minority communities. One must consider, therefore, whether an individual who is a member of an ethnic minority is literate in the ethnic group language, the language(s) of wider communication, or other language(s) (see Reference Butvilovsky, Escamilla, Gumina and Silva DiazButvilovsky et al., 2021). An expansion of the conventional concept of literacy needs to include such multi-scriptal learning.
1.1.2 Demographics of Literacy
People are considered literate when they can both read and write, with understanding, a short simple statement about their everyday life. During the past two decades, literacy rates worldwide have increased by 12 percent. It is estimated that the literacy rate of people aged fifteen and older is 86 percent. In the population ranging from fifteen to twenty-four years of age, 90 percent of females and 93 percent of males now have basic literacy skills worldwide. Despite these gains, 750 million adults throughout the world are still unable to read and write, with almost two thirds of these being female (UNESCO, 2017).
Census data make it clear that literacy rates vary greatly around the globe (e.g., see Figure 1.1; Reference SilbersteinSilberstein, 2021). The lowest literacy rates and greatest gender disparities are in low- and lower-middle income countries in sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia. Significant disparities in literacy attainments are also evident in countries with upper-middle-income economies like Brazil, India, and South Africa. It is estimated that, for example, more than a third of the population in India cannot read and write. Substantial variation in literacy levels is also reported within high-income countries. Data from periodic international surveys repeatedly demonstrate that substantial numbers of children in these countries leave school with significant literacy problems. As a case in point, the OECD “Programme for International Student Assessment” (PISA) evidenced in 2018 that 21.7 percent of fifteen-year-old pupils in Europe could be marked as underachievers in reading. This proportion of pupils failed to reach the minimum proficiency level necessary to participate successfully in society. What is more, the proportion of underachievers in reading has seen a steady increase in the past ten years (European Union, 2019).
Figure 1.1 Distribution of literacy throughout the world (see Reference Roser and Ortiz-OspinaRoser & Ortiz-Ospina, 2016)
Such demographics of literacy rates are important to track because low levels of literacy signal substantial costs. Reports from the World Bank, for example, clearly show that low literacy rates worldwide are associated with health problems and high crime rates (World Bank, 2019). Low rates are also associated with low incomes and low business profits, even more so in societies that are higher on the income scale (WLF, 2015). Increased awareness of the personal, social, and economic value of literacy has fueled a broader recognition of the need for increased investment in literacy programs. Initiatives to develop and implement regional literacy have resulted in substantial gains in literacy levels for new generations (Reference WagnerWagner, 2017), but clearly more needs to be done.
1.1.3 Moderators of Literacy
To begin with, literacy achievement is moderated by economic status. There is a high association of lower levels of literacy attainment with poverty, showing that literacy is bound up with unequal structures and poor economies (Reference StreetStreet, 2005). A substantial number of people with low literacy live in high-income countries (see UNESCO, 2017). In more than twenty low- and middle-income countries, the literacy rates are below 50 percent, with a large gender disparity. About two thirds of the low-literate population is female. In the lowest income communities, the proportion of literate women is estimated to be only about 20 percent. Schools can be seen as the main driver of literacy learning. Worldwide, 92 percent of children are enrolled in a primary school program and 84 percent are successful in completing it (UNESCO, 2019). Significant progress has been made toward achieving universal primary education. However, today’s world statistics show that more than 260 million children up to age twelve have never had a chance to participate in elementary education and are at risk of stunted literacy development. In the most resource-poor societies, more than 50 percent of all school-aged children are not enrolled in a school program. As a case in point, 19 percent of children in sub-Saharan Africa are not enrolled in primary school and 37 percent do not complete it. Poverty (within the country, and for the individual family) is one important obstacle to school access, generally associated with a lack of trained teachers, impoverished classes with few learning materials, and child absences due to poor health and sanitation facilities. In some places, children that come to school are too hungry, sick, traumatized, or exhausted to benefit from instruction (Reference WagnerWagner, 2011).
In parallel, an increasing societal demand for text-mediated activities has steadily increased the standards of literacy needed on a daily basis – higher levels of literacy skills have become more urgent for the individual. Rapid social and technological changes in the past decades have contributed to these increased demands (Reference Wickens and SandlinWickens & Sandlin, 2007). Also in parallel is the finding that even with the provision of compulsory primary education, many children do not reach a level of competence that is sufficient to cope with simplest everyday literacy demands. Literacy problems appear in various vulnerable groups, both Indigenous and non-Indigenous, urban and rural, mainstream and remote, newly arrived, native and settled (e.g., Reference Nag, Chiat, Torgerson and SnowlingNag, Chiat et al., 2014). A third parallel issue is with literacy problems among adults. In most high-income countries, the occurrence of such problems among adult citizens has historically been ignored. General educational policies have instead placed an emphasis on getting children into school and preventing school dropouts. Only in recent years has there been a realization that the establishment of a universal schooling system does not guarantee sufficient literacy attainments for all. Gradually, the need to support adult basic education with a literacy foundation is being recognized. One result of this recognition has been the publication of reports on parallel basic needs among adult populations in different countries (see Reference WagnerWagner, 2018).
1.2 Literacy Development across Languages and Writing Systems
Literacy is a broad concept. It includes the knowledge and skills for participation in cultural practices that use reading and writing. Because literacy builds on the foundation of learning to read, it is important to focus on what is involved in learning to read. The core achievement in all writing systems is learning how the written forms of a language map onto the forms and meanings of the spoken language. In terms of learning to write, the complementary core achievement is learning how the spoken forms of the language map onto the written forms of the language. However, much more effort is needed to develop reading and writing beyond these basic achievements. To focus on reading beyond functional literacy, we distinguish three main phases: (i) early literacy, which mainly involves the building of a mental lexicon along with an emergence of linguistic awareness; (ii) learning to read, which requires cracking the written code, and fluent reading with basic comprehension; and (iii) advanced literacy, with increased comprehension and interpretation skills. A similar range for writing should lead to the ability to write coherent and increasingly sophisticated texts.
The recognition of universals in the development of literacy gives rise to the proposal of a universal grammar of reading (see Reference PerfettiPerfetti, 2003) and writing (see Reference Berman and VerhoevenBerman & Verhoeven, 2002; Reference NagNag, 2021). Writing systems can be typologically classified on the basis of the language constituents they represent: morphemes, syllables, and phonemes. Writing practice can intermix these types, as when Japanese is written in both syllable-based kana and morpheme-based kanji. Because of the linguistic constraints on writing – all writing systems encode language, not just concepts – the development of literacy is universally grounded in both the language and the writing system (cf. Reference NagNag, 2021; Reference PerfettiPerfetti, 2003; Reference Verhoeven and PerfettiVerhoeven & Perfetti, 2017). Depending on the linguistic system and the system of orthography, the particulars of literacy development can be defined across languages and writing systems. Figure 1.2 shows how literacy development builds on the linguistic system and the writing system it represents. It should be acknowledged that from its early stages, reading fluency facilitates reading comprehension, and spelling facilitates writing.
Figure 1.2 Model of how literacy development builds on the linguistic system and the writing system it represents
1.2.1 Early Literacy Development
Early literacy development is grounded in the development of early phonological abilities, such as speech decoding and speech production, and the emergence of a mental (orthographic) lexicon. Words are the carriers of meaning and therefore closely tied to word decoding, reading comprehension, and writing. Lexical development involves the correct linking of word meanings to word forms. Children start by overgeneralizing words as referring to a relatively large class of objects, acts, or events (cf. Reference ClarkClark, 2004). As their conceptual knowledge increases, they learn to refine the meanings of words. They use information from the context to make inferences about the semantic boundaries of the underlying concept of a word form. The richer the environment, the faster this lexical development will proceed. The quantity and quality of early social interactions with language and the richness of the language input shape language-learning trajectories. It is therefore generally assumed that vocabulary acquisition proves particularly successful when words are being offered in a context-rich environment (Reference Rowe and WeislederRowe & Weisleder, 2020). Around one year of age, children develop a small number of lexical representations, which are holistic and undifferentiated (e.g., Reference JusczykJusczyk, 1997; Reference WalleyWalley, 1993). As the number of words in the mental lexicon increases, the lexical restructuring hypothesis assumes there is pressure to make finer phonemic distinctions to accommodate this increase (Reference Metsala, Walley, Metsala and EhriMetsala & Walley, 1998). As a result, lexical representations become more specified through early childhood. Thanks to the increasing numbers of highly specified phonological representations, children may become phonologically aware (Reference van Goch, McQueen and Verhoevenvan Goch, McQueen, & Verhoeven, 2014). They gradually develop a metalinguistic awareness in which implicit knowledge of both the functions and structure of language are made explicit. By making language the object of their thinking, children learn to explicate their implicit knowledge of the functions and structure of language. In this type of knowledge, the emphasis shifts from the communicative content of their language to its morphophonological makeup.
Notwithstanding the complexity of written language, many children know a great deal about literacy before formal instruction starts. Conditions that strengthen the relevance and purpose of literacy turn out to be quite important for its early development. In becoming literate, the development of phonological awareness is particularly important. Phonological awareness, the ability to consciously attend to the components of spoken words (e.g., syllables, the onset-coda parts of syllables, and phonemes), gives the child a head start in learning to map written and spoken language. This ability is expressed when children can divide words up into syllables or phonemes, recognize rhyme (end rhyme and alliteration), use phonemes to form words, and omit, add, or replace phonemes in words. However, attention to meaningless functional units of spoken language, in particular the smallest unit, namely the phoneme, proves to be very difficult for children. In rich home-literacy environments with abundant meaningful interactions with adults, children discover the uses and functions of print, and learn how script is mapped onto language. From interactive storybook reading, more than from choral reading or silent listening, they learn new vocabulary and gain insight into the coherence and cohesion of narrative and expository texts (see Reference Nag, Snowling and AsfahaNag, Snowling, & Asfaha, 2016; Reference Scarborough, Catts and KamhiScarborough, 2005). The interactions between symbols in their environment and literate others help children to learn that print carries meaning, that written texts may have various forms and functions, and that ideas can be expressed with (non)conventional writing.
Although encouraging, the influential functions of literacy environments should not overshadow the crucial role of direct instruction in learning to read. It is obvious that there are dramatic disparities in home and neighborhood environments that affect the availability of literacy-supporting activities, and this opportunity gap is found even within high-income countries like Japan, Norway, the United States, and the United Kingdom. Schooling has the potential and responsibility to directly provide such opportunities in the form of systematic instruction. Accumulated research evidence indicates that to be able to grasp the written code, to acquire automaticity in word decoding, and to internalize appropriate strategies for word to text integration, children need formal reading instruction with sequentially structured activities managed by a skilled teacher (see Reference Castles, Rastle and NationCastles, Rastle, & Nation, 2018; Reference McBrideMcBride, 2016; Reference Nag, Cain, Compton and ParrilaNag, 2017).
1.2.2 Learning to Read and Spell
In learning to read and spell, children are confronted with the task of acquiring implicit knowledge of how written language may reveal meaning through a layer of graphic forms. This involves learning how one’s writing system encodes one’s language. Writing systems involve minor but significant differences in the mapping of spoken units to written units (see Reference Verhoeven and PerfettiVerhoeven & Perfetti, 2017). Figure 1.3 demonstrates how language units are related to graphic units across different writing systems and orthographies. Mapping occurs at the level of morpheme, syllable, or phoneme, either singularly (e.g., the syllabic and alphabetic systems) or in some combination (e.g., the alphasyllabic and morphosyllabic systems). In the Chinese writing system, for example, characters map to single syllables that are also morphemes, thus a morphosyllabic mapping. By comparison, there is mixed mapping in the Indic writing system, in which different akshara may map to one or more syllables and one or more phonemes.
Figure 1.3 How writing systems map to languages
Cross-language research has shown that reading universally builds on language and that such universality accommodates properties of the writing system (Reference PerfettiPerfetti, 2003). This requires that children learn that words can be divided up in speech sounds that can be represented by written units (e.g., akshara: Reference Nag, Narayanan, Joshi and McBrideNag & Narayanan, 2019; letters: Reference Verhoeven, Leeuwe, Irausquin and SegersVerhoeven et al., 2016). Moreover, children must learn the inventory of orthographic units for a language (Reference Nag, Cain, Compton and ParrilaNag, 2017), and how these units map onto specific phonological and morphological units of the spoken language (Reference PerfettiPerfetti, 2003). As they acquire elementary decoding skills, children gradually learn to apply these skills with greater accuracy and speed in an increasingly automated process that recognizes multi-letter units (consonant clusters, and syllable- and morpheme-level strings) and whole words (Reference EhriEhri, 2005). Automatic word recognition enables the devotion of mental resources to the meaning of a text and thus allows learners to use reading as a tool for the acquisition of new information and knowledge (Reference Verhoeven and PerfettiVerhoeven & Perfetti, 2011). Spelling practice helps children to internalize relevant spelling rules in an efficient manner (Reference Bhide, Luo and VijayBhide et al., 2019; Reference Graham, Morphy and HarrisGraham et al., 2008) while text-reading practice produces gains in word-reading fluency, allowing cognitive resources to be redirected to reading comprehension (Reference Verhoeven and van LeeuweVerhoeven & van Leeuwe, 2008, Reference Verhoeven and Leeuwe2012). It has been widely suggested that by the end of the third grade, children must be able to read basic texts fluently in order to make the step to reading to learn (e.g., NEP, 2020; NICHD, 2000).
Systematic explicit approaches are effective for all writing systems. In the case of alphabetic scripts, a variety of systematic phonics programs has been implemented to teach children word decoding and spelling (see Reference Ehri, Nunes and WillowsEhri et al., 2001). Such programs generally begin by teaching the alphabetic principle explicitly and follow a prespecified series of phonic elements sequentially. Synthetic phonics is the most common such program: It directly teaches the correspondence between specific letters to specific phonemes. In analytic phonics, children are taught sets of words with partly shared pronunciations to make them aware of individual sounds in words without sounding out phonemes in isolation. In embedded phonics, the emphasis is on orthographic patterns to be encountered in the context of predictable text. In a meta-analysis, Reference Ehri, Nunes and WillowsEhri et al. (2001) concluded that children who had been enrolled in systematic phonics instruction outperformed their peers in unsystematic phonics or nonphonics programs on both word reading and word spelling. Systematic approaches are also effective for nonalphabetic writing systems. To prepare for Chinese reading, children are taught character recognition by systematically showing the visual, semantic, and phonological features of a set of characters (Reference McBride-Chang, Tong and ShuMcBride-Chang et al., 2008). For most Chinese children, formal reading instruction starts out with alphabetic reading; for example, on the Chinese mainland, Pinyin, a Roman alphabetic script representing the sounds of spoken Chinese, is used to lay the foundation for reading characters. In contrast, to prepare them to read Indic orthographies, children are taught to recite, write, and copy akshara families, which have been selected because they are phonologically related or are similarly high in frequency (Reference Nag, Cain, Compton and ParrilaNag, 2017). Irrespective of the type of decoding instruction, however, a strong oral-language foundation is essential (e.g., alphabetic: Reference Lervåg, Hulme and Melby-LervågLervåg, Hulme, & Melby-Lervåg, 2018; akshara: Reference Nag, Snowling, Quinlan and HulmeNag, Snowling et al., 2014).
1.2.3 Advanced Literacy Development
Literacy development is thus strongly dependent on the oral-language skills children have attained. Across different orthographies, research has shown that parallel gains in both word-reading accuracy and speed occur very rapidly after the outset of reading instruction, whereas a steady relationship between accuracy and speed of word decoding is maintained over the years (see Reference Verhoeven and PerfettiVerhoeven & Perfetti, 2017). The growth in word decoding implies that children learn to make strong connections between graphs and sounds in a growing variety of words, and that frequent retrievals of word forms result in increases in fluency and automaticity of word representations. With this transition, children go from partially specified to fully specified representations of written words, with the strength of the association between print and sound (or sound and print, for that matter) also becoming increasingly automated. With sufficient reading practice, words are recognized by sight and the direct route to word decoding, without the need for letter–sound conversion to be activated, becomes more important (Reference Coltheart, Rastle, Perry, Langdon and ZieglerColtheart et al., 2001). Successful reading practice and increased fluency of word identification facilitate the development of word-to-text integration, the continuously recurring basic comprehension process, generating a text model (verbal representation) and a situation model (conceptual representation) of the text which can be connected to the background knowledge of the reader. Figure 1.4 demonstrates how incremental word reading may facilitate word-to-text conversion, resulting into the construction of a text model and a situation model, both facilitating the elaboration of background knowledge.
Figure 1.4 Interactive processes in reading (from written text to background knowledge) and writing (from background knowledge to written text)
According to the so-called “simple view of reading”(Reference Hoover and GoughHoover & Gough, 1990), reading comprehension can be seen as the product of word decoding and listening comprehension. More specifically, the simple view claims that listening comprehension or the linguistic processes involved in the comprehension of oral language strongly constrain reading comprehension. Importantly, the fundamental components of comprehension – parsing sentences into their constituent components, drawing inferences within and between sentences to support integration, and recognizing the underlying meaning propositions within each section of text (microstructure), and the global gist (macrostructure) (see Reference Perfetti and StafuraPerfetti & Stafura, 2014) – are all properties of language comprehension, not reading. Thus, written language will be understood as well as spoken language when written words can be identified and when language comprehension skills are well developed. Research has shown both younger and poorer readers have more problems with these language-comprehension processes than older and better readers (e.g., Reference Cain, Barnes, Cain, Compton and ParrilaCain & Barnes, 2017; Reference WagnerQuinn & Wagner, 2018; Reference Snowling, Nash, Gooch, Hayiou-Thomas and HulmeSnowling et al., 2019; Reference Verhoeven and van LeeuweVerhoeven & van Leeuwe, 2008).
Once children have learned to use the basic written code, they increasingly experience the possibilities of written language use, and reading comprehension becomes more and more integrated with information processing related to distinct school subjects such as history, geography, and science. Major models of reading comprehension have evidenced that children learn to call on prior knowledge to construct new knowledge in these domains. Accordingly, literacy highly predicts the attainment of final school success in domains such as academic vocabulary and information-processing abilities. The use of incremental book series can lead to more proficient reading comprehension across languages and writing systems (McBride-Chang, 2004). In general, beyond reading practice, activities that drive deeper engagement with texts are to be recommended. Such engagement should lead the reader to use relevant knowledge and thus construct richer mental models of the text. Research has also shown that the advancement of literacy in the upper grades is highly dependent on literacy motivation (see Reference Guthrie, Humenick, McCardle and ChhabraGuthrie & Humenick, 2004). Consequently, high literacy levels are found to be associated with high levels of school motivation and school success (Reference Verhoeven and SnowVerhoeven & Snow, 2001).
Learning to write is a complex process that evolves over an extended period during the primary and secondary grades (Reference Berman and VerhoevenBerman & Verhoeven, 2002). Models of writing assume that the writing of texts involves multiple parallel processes focusing on transcription, planning of ideas generated from background knowledge, converting ideas into language, and writing and reviewing text (Reference Chenoweth and HayesChenoweth & Hayes, 2001; Reference Hayes and BerningerHayes, 2012). Figure 1.4 shows that writing involves reverse processes to reading: Starting from background knowledge, ideas are converted into text and written down via coherence-building strategies and word spelling. Once word spelling becomes automatic, resources can be allocated to high-level writing processes. Research has shown that subprocesses of writing are supported by the learner’s language skills, such as vocabulary and grammar; transcription skills, like handwriting, keyboarding, and spelling; and executive functions, such as inhibition control, cognitive flexibility, and working memory (e.g., see Reference Berninger, Winn, MacArthur, Graham and FitzgeraldBerninger & Winn, 2006). The development of writing additionally involves a shift in writing strategies. Beginning writers tend to use an associative step-by-step writing strategy in which ideas are written down as they come to mind, without organizing the conceptual content or linguistic form. More advanced writers tend to use a more complex knowledge-transforming strategy, which involves the ability to adjust the text content according to rhetorical and pragmatic goals (see Reference Berninger, Winn, MacArthur, Graham and FitzgeraldBerninger & Winn, 2006). In contemporary educational settings, Information Communications Technologies (ICT) offer additional ways of facilitating knowledge construction (cf. Reference Verhoeven, Schnotz and PaasVerhoeven, Schnotz, & Paas, 2009). Although ICT is increasingly being integrated into the school curriculum through the convergence of instruction of school subjects and networked technologies, the evidence base on what works and for whom is still to be developed.
1.2.4 Problems in Attaining Literacy
The development of literacy is obviously at risk for children with developmental dyslexia. Research in the past decades has provided ample evidence that children with dyslexia have problems with decoding and spelling words and that a phonological-processing deficit underlies these problems (Reference SeidenbergSeidenberg, 2017; Reference SnowlingSnowling, 2019). Brain-imaging studies have provided complementary evidence of early brain markers that predict reading outcomes and may yet help predict treatment outcomes (see Chapter 12). In alphabetic and alphasyllabic languages, poor readers tend to be less precise in phonemic discrimination, have problems in a variety of phoneme segmentation and awareness tasks (Reference Nag and SnowlingNag & Snowling, 2011; Reference Wagner, Torgesen and RashotteWagner, Torgeson, & Rashotte, 1994), and are slower in rapid naming of objects, digits, and letters (Reference Wolf, O’Brien and FawcettWolf & O’Brien, 2001), as well as in producing rhyming words (Reference Lundberg, Hoien and FawcettLundberg & Hoien, 2001). Failure to develop such aspects of language awareness can be considered early risk factors for developmental dyslexia, but the level of awareness that is critical for literacy development is dependent on the writing system. During the early stages of learning to read, a lack of phoneme awareness signals a risk for alphabetic reading, whereas for Chinese and alphasyllabic reading, reduced syllabic awareness is the more relevant signal. We thus observe a phonological component for developmental dyslexia across those languages with variation in the level of phonology that is encoded in the writing system (cf. Reference Verhoeven, Perfetti and PughVerhoeven, Perfetti, & Pugh, 2019). In addition, the research on dyslexia points to a biological source with genetic transmission, which at a very early age may result in a phonological deficit affecting learning to read (Reference GrigorenkoGrigorenko, 2022). In terms of the implications of this fact for global literacy, it is important to understand this: Despite a genetic component, the variability in reading achievement among poor readers and children with dyslexia is due to environmental factors that vary around the globe (Reference Nag and SkeideNag, 2022).
Obstacles to literacy vary with sociocultural and linguistic contexts. For example, it is important to take into account the sociolinguistic position of ethnic minorities when considering their literacy achievements (cf. Reference Geva and VerhoevenGeva & Verhoeven, 2000). Lexical, grammatical, and discourse abilities are critical for people from ethnic minorities who must learn to read and write in an unfamiliar (second) language. In fact, individuals acquiring literacy in a second language are faced with a dual task. Besides the written code, they must learn the grammatical and discourse competencies specific to the second language. In many cases children learning to read in a second language are less efficient in the target language than are native-language-speaking peers. Thus, it can be hypothesized that L2 learners have difficulty in using (meta)linguistic cues while reading. Limited oral proficiency in a second language may also influence the various subprocesses of reading (cf. Reference Droop and VerhoevenDroop & Verhoeven, 2003). With respect to word recognition and word spelling, there can be difficulties in the mediation of relevant phonological skills, resulting in a slow rate of acquisition of sound–symbol mapping rules. There can also be difficulties in the use of orthographic constraints due to a restricted awareness of phonotactic or phonological distribution rules in the second language. Furthermore, there may be differences between first- and second-language readers in the higher-order processes that follow the identification of words due to restricted lexical and syntactic knowledge, or limited background knowledge. These difficulties, as for first-language learners, impact reading and writing skills among L2 learners when parsing sentences into their constituents and finding the underlying propositions and vice versa.
1.3 Bio-ecological Markers of Literacy Development
On a global scale, the variation in literacy development can be explained by both innate child factors and environmental or ecological factors. A bio-ecological model highlighting the intermediate role of self-regulatory mechanisms in child development comes from Reference Bronfenbrenner and CeciBronfenbrenner and Ceci (1994). This model recognizes direct learner and environmental measures and mechanisms of learner–environment interaction, called proximal processes (cf. Reference Bronfenbrenner and BronfenbrennerBronfenbrenner, 2005). These processes originate from the family or educational institutions, through which biological potentials are transformed into self-regulatory functions that determine children’s social-communicative and cognitive growth. In this section, we first review the impact of learner characteristics, family support, educational support, and the role of sociopolitical context. We then describe an explanatory framework for the global variation in literacy.
1.3.1 Learner Characteristics
Genetics
As we noted above, some of the variation in literacy development and, specifically, developmental dyslexia can be attributed to genetic predispositions. Literacy development and literacy problems are at least partly dependent on the transmission of the genomic information of DNA sequences from one generation to the other (Reference OlsonOlson, 2016). The role of genetics in this intergenerational transmission has been evidenced in molecular genetic studies, behavioral genetic studies within twins and families, and more recently in imaging genetic studies. However, nongenetic factors play important roles in influencing gene functions and modifying heritability. In combination, the effects of these self-regulatory factors result in various phenotypes of literacy abilities (Reference Hoeft, Wang, Verhoeven, Perfetti and PughHoeft & Wang, 2019).
Executive Functioning
Neurobiological factors may not only affect literacy development directly, but also indirectly via learner executive functioning and language proficiency. Executive functions include sustained attention, working memory, inhibition, cognitive flexibility, and planning (Reference Lehto, Juujärvi, Kooistra and PulkkinenLehto et al., 2003; Reference Miyake, Friedman and Emerson.Miyake et al., 2000). There is research evidence that effortful control improves children’s metalinguistic awareness and early literacy skills (cf. Reference Goswami, Kamil, Rosenthal, Pearson and BarrGoswami, 2000). Furthermore, Reference ShareShare (2004) showed that the emergence of early literacy skills can be seen as a self-teaching device that builds on children’s self-regulated learning, which supports a growing phonological awareness and insight into the mapping principle of the writing system. Research highlights the importance of executive functions for reading comprehension after taking variance in decoding and language skills into account. It has also been found that working memory and planning uniquely contribute to reading comprehension whereas working memory and inhibition also support decoding (e.g., Reference Cutting, Materek, Cole, Levine and MahoneCutting et al., 2009; Reference Kieffer, Vukovic and BerryKieffer, Vukovic, & Berry, 2013).
Language Proficiency
Learners’ language proficiency can be seen as another prominent predictor of literacy development. Knowledge of word meanings, or in other words vocabulary skill, is particularly critical for advanced literacy skills, that is, reading comprehension and writing. Both the reading comprehension and writing of children and adults are supported by knowledge of words, which may include the precision of the reader’s orthographic, phonological, and semantic representations. According to the lexical-quality hypothesis (Reference Perfetti, Hart, Verhoeven, Elbro and ReitsmaPerfetti & Hart, 2001), both the quality of the reader’s lexical representations and the quantity of words in the mental lexicon affect reading comprehension and writing. Several studies testing the “simple reading view” show a clear word decoding by listening comprehension interaction for beginning versus proficient readers. The role of word decoding in the explanation of reading comprehension is found to be large for beginning readers while the role of listening comprehension is found to be more prominent for proficient readers (cf. Reference CarverCarver, 1993; Reference Tunmer and HooverTunmer & Hoover, 1993). In a similar vein, research testing the “simple view of writing” has evidenced that productive oral-language skills predict both the mechanics (handwriting and spelling) and higher-order-composition processes of writing (Reference Berninger, Vaughan and AbbottBerninger et al., 2002; Reference Pressley, Wharton-MacDonald and AllingtonPressley et al., 2001).
Second-Language Proficiency
Minority groups must often communicate in the dominant language of the majority environment to function in daily life. The dominant language is typically acquired as a second language. Importantly, minority children faced with the task of learning to read and write in a second language (L2) are confronted by a dual task: mastery of not only the basic written code for the second language but also the grammatical and discourse rules which characterize the second language. In many cases, minority children may have only a limited oral mastery of the second language – particularly when compared to their nonminority peers – which means that their use of oral cues from the second language to read and write may be limited as well. That is, limited oral proficiency in a second language may interfere with various literacy subprocesses. With respect to word decoding, for example, limited auditory discrimination of phonemes or tones may lead to slow acquisition of grapheme–phoneme correspondence rules or tone knowledge, and thus word decoding. Similarly, restricted lexical and syntactic knowledge may lead to problems with the parsing of sentences and the comprehension and production of written text (see Reference Chen, Dronjic and Helms-ParkChen, Dronjic, & Helms-Park, 2016; Reference Geva and VerhoevenGeva & Verhoeven, 2000).
1.3.2 Home Support
Socioeconomic Status
Socioeconomic status (SES) has a great impact on children’s school outcomes. A positive association between family wealth and background and children’s achievement has been universally evidenced (e.g., Reference Rolleston, James and AurinoRolleston, James, & Aurino, 2013). However, the magnitude of the association is dependent on the social context and education system. In general, the achievement gap between students from different backgrounds appears more pronounced in education systems where overall inequality (e.g., income inequality) is strong (see Reference Broer, Bai and FonsecaBroer, Bai, & Fonseca, 2019). For example, Reference Dolean, Melby-Lervag, Tincas, Damsa and LervagDolean et al. (2019) examined how SES is related to the development of reading skills in Roma children, who face severe poverty in comparison with mainstream children. They found that the Roma children had both poorer initial reading and a slower growth of their reading skills. They demonstrated that SES did explain growth in reading skills after controlling for other well-known cognitive and linguistic predictors of reading. However, the effects of SES on reading growth were partly mediated by school absence. This suggests that interventions directed to children facing severe poverty need to target both the quality of reading instruction and broader aspects of what prevents regular school attendance. In addition, a positive relationship between parents’ education level and children’s reading-comprehension achievement was found (Reference Dearing, Kreider, Simpkins and WeissDearing et al., 2006; Reference Hindman, Skibbe, Miller and ZimmermanHindman et al., 2010).
Language Exposure
Another important indicator of family support is language exposure in the family. Language input in and outside the home environment affects children’s L1 and L2 development (Reference Lesaux, Geva, August and ShanahanLesaux & Geva, 2006). Reference De CatDe Cat (2020) showed how various channels of language input in the home environment, such as communication between and with family members and communication with people outside the family, may influence children’s second-language development. Socioeconomic status interacted in complex ways with language exposure: Only above a certain level of exposure to the school language did the benefits of a more privileged background have a tangible impact on school-language proficiency. In a survey of studies on children’s literacy development in low- and middle-income countries, Reference Nag, Vagh, Dulay and SnowlingNag et al. (2018) concluded that a match between linguistic experience in the child’s home and the linguistic demands in the classroom is essential for academic progress. However, they found the home-language advantage to be context sensitive. Multiple risk factors, including feelings of unease and disempowerment, characterized a home- and school-language disconnection, and positive intervention effects following guided support were related to the amount of time spent on tutoring, and parents’ increased confidence to home tutor.
Home Literacy Environment
Research on the relationship between family characteristics and children’s literacy development has focused on how and to what degree the family creates an effective home-learning environment (Reference Dickinson and NeumanDickinson & Neuman, 2006; Reference Nag, Vagh, Dulay and SnowlingNag et al., 2018; Reference Puglisi, Hulme, Hamilton and SnowlingPuglisi et al., 2017). Parental literacy expectations enhance children’s reading-comprehension performance through literacy knowledge acquisition (cf. Reference Englund, Luckner, Whaley and EgelandEnglund et al., 2004). Furthermore, the supply of home literacy resources, such as the literacy environment and literacy materials available at home, contributes to children’s literacy-knowledge development (Reference Johnson, Martin, Brooks-Gunn and PetrillJohnson et al., 2008; Reference Strasser and LissiStrasser & Lissi, 2009). In a meta-analysis of fifty-nine studies Reference Dong, Wu, Dong and TangDong et al. (2020) examined the effects of home literacy environment (HLE) factors on children’s reading comprehension. They found a moderate positive correlation between HLE and children’s reading comprehension. Types of home literacy resources and parental involvement styles did not show a significant interaction effect between each HLE factor and children’s reading outcomes. However, literacy expectations and parent involvement had a significantly higher association with children’s reading comprehension than home literacy resources did.
The cross-national impact of home support on literacy development, including distributed home-tutoring roles in extended families, was evidenced by Reference Borgonovi and MonttBorgonovi and Montt (2012) in the context of PISA data. They generally found that reading to young children and reading at home enhanced literacy at preschool and in the primary grades, and that engaging older children in discussions had a significant impact on their advanced literacy development. Involved parents were found to be more receptive to language and more adept at planning, monitoring, and evaluation of literacy activities, which helped children learn how to learn throughout the literacy curriculum. Interestingly, they found that levels of parental involvement varied across countries and economies, suggesting that high-quality parental involvement may help reduce performance differences across socioeconomic groups. Finally, it is important to note that parental interactive literacy involvement may particularly support children’s literacy development in disadvantaged groups (Reference Johnson, Martin, Brooks-Gunn and PetrillJohnson et al., 2008; Reference Manz, Hughes, Barnabas, Bracaliello and Ginsburg-BlockManz et al., 2010; Reference Mendive, Lara, Aldoney, Perez and PezoaMendive et al., 2020; Reference SénéchalSénéchal, 2006) although not enough is known when parents cannot read or do not know the child’s school language (Reference Nag, Vagh, Dulay and SnowlingNag et al., 2018). From an intervention perspective, interventions that supplement school programmes with a home-based component targeting home tutoring, supply of materials, and/or parent–teacher meetings are becoming increasingly common. In studies that target the home environment through supply or skills training (e.g., library books, shared book-reading-skill training), results were promising. Most broad-based school/home/community interventions appear to have immediate effects on component skills of literacy and this effect is seen across preschool and the early grades (Reference Nag, Vagh, Dulay and SnowlingNag et al., 2018).
1.3.3 School Support
Language of Instruction
Due to continuous processes of migration, colonization, and decolonization, as well as of internationalization, the number of linguistic minorities continues to increase. For children of linguistic minorities, literacy can be taught in the home language and/or in the mainstream language spoken in the wider community. Answers to the questions of whether one or more languages are used for instruction, and which language and literacy abilities are educational objectives for minority children, depend on school policies. It can be argued that the acquisition of literacy will be facilitated when the instruction links up with the linguistic background of the child. Moreover, the child’s motivation and self-concept may increase if the instruction is given in the native language. Importantly, there can be linguistic transfer in bilingual reading instruction. Children who have learned the mapping principle for one language and its writing system do not have to start from scratch in another language and writing system: What they do have to learn is a new mapping code. With respect to the acquisition of academic language skills, Reference CumminsCummins (1979: 233) has hypothesized the role of interdependence to be as follows:
To the extent that instruction in a certain language is effective in promoting proficiency in that language, transfer of this proficiency to another language will occur, provided there is adequate exposure to that other language (either in the school or environment) and adequate motivation to learn that language.
The interdependence hypothesis predicts that optimal input in one language leads not only to better skills in that language but also to a deeper conceptual and linguistic proficiency that can clearly facilitate the transfer of various cognitive and academic language skills across languages. A high level of linguistic competence in the first language may thus enhance the development of the second language. However, if skills in the first language are not well developed and education in the early years is in the second language, the further development of the second language may stagnate (see also Reference Cummins and BialystokCummins, 1991). Importantly, most researchers currently accept the assumption of at least a partially overlapping organization of bilingual memory (Reference Durgunoglu and GoldenbergDurgunoglu & Goldenberg, 2011; Reference French and JacquetFrench & Jacquet, 2004) and the assumption of nonselective linguistic access, that is, the assumption that linguistic structures in both languages may be accessed simultaneously (Reference BialystokBialystok, 2001; Reference VerhoevenVerhoeven, 2007).
Classroom Resources
To improve the chances for universal literacy to be attained, providing basic education is a primary task. Classroom instruction presents children with a new set of interpersonal relationships and provide them with the opportunity to use language in a meaningful way and to receive feedback from professional teachers. It is essential to provide the child with continuous classroom resources while avoiding abrupt changes. To realize adequate education in functional literacy, appropriate curricula are needed. The pursuit of continuity in basic education requires that special attention is given to the transitional stages between preschool, junior or primary level, intermediate or middle-school level, and senior or secondary-school level. Close cooperation between preschool institutions in the area of home–school connections can help harmonize literary socialization (UNESCO, 2017). In the pursuit of continuity, the position of children from high-risk backgrounds requires more attention (Reference Thompson, Richardson, Newman and GeorgeThompson et al., 2019). This includes children from socioeconomically weak communities, ethnic minority groups, and those with specific reading and writing problems. Reference KoratKorat (2005) examined the link between socioeconomic status and classroom instruction on emerging literacy skills in prekindergarten children. Compared with their higher-SES peers, low-SES children had poorer emergent literacy knowledge. However, later word recognition and emergent writing were predicted by phonemic awareness, knowledge of letter names, and concept of print knowledge, and not by SES group.
Teacher Responsivity
Formal education is generally aimed at developing motivated, well-adjusted learners who are able to adapt to the changing demands and rules of the school system (see Reference Verhoeven and SnowVerhoeven & Snow, 2001). The attainment of literacy can be stimulated and extended by offering children a school environment where children can enhance the positive literacy experiences they have had prior to school (Reference Piasta and WagnerPiasta & Wagner, 2010). School effectiveness can be considered an important outcome measure of teacher responsivity. Effective literacy teaching presupposes a balance between instructive learning situations in which direct instruction and exercises are required and constructive learning situations in which routines and anchors are used to deal with the learning questions of students (Reference VerhoevenKinzer & Verhoeven, 2007. Instructive learning situations ensure that knowledge and skills are learned and automatized. These more closed learning situations provide a program-oriented education in which the emphasis is on working with methodical materials in which the subject matter is offered in a more or less fixed order. For example, for the alphabetic languages, especially English, direct phonics instruction has been shown to be highly effective when students need to learn and automatize skills (Reference Castles, Rastle and NationCastles et al., 2018).
Constructive learning situations offer children the opportunity to use their knowledge and skills and apply strategies in a meaningful context; they also lay the foundation for a learning community and contribute to the advancement of functional literacy (Reference Vágvölgyi, Coldea, Dresler, Schrader and NuerkVágvölgyi et al., 2016). Seen in this light, responsiveness is the main quality of a competent teacher. By showing how to attack the coding or decoding of words, or by modeling problem-solving strategies, the teacher may enable children to master reading comprehension and writing. Through recurrent practice, teachers may learn to attune to the specific needs of children with literacy problems. Indeed, the teacher’s educational level, teaching experience, language proficiency, and sociocultural orientation may have an impact on both their own responsiveness and the children’s literacy learning (Reference Lemberger and Reyes-CarrasquilloLemberger & Reyes-Carrasquillo, 2011; Reference Nag, Snowling and AsfahaNag et al., 2016).
1.3.4 Sociopolitical Context
To advance literacy as an integral part of lifelong learning and the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, UNESCO takes the following approaches to promoting literacy worldwide, with an emphasis on youth and adults: (1) providing quality basic education for all children; (2) building strong foundations through early childhood care and education; (3) scaling up functional literacy levels for youth and adults who lack basic literacy skills; and (4) developing literate environments. However, the worldwide support of literacy cannot be viewed without taking into account the sociopolitical context and the political will for system-wide change (e.g., Reference SilbersteinSilberstein, 2021). National surveys in societies anywhere on the development scale show that literacy practices are embedded in unequal structures of power (e.g., Reference Wickens and SandlinWickens & Sandlin, 2007). Even when literacy is viewed from an economic or technological point of view, its social context is important because it affects the engagement of cognitive processes, the outcome of economic measures, and individuals’ quality of life. This importance lies in both sociopolitical aspects of development and the concerns of different communities and individuals (Reference StreetStreet, 1994). Indeed, literacy practices occur within cultural and power structures in society and may function to serve those structures. Thus, literacy is a complex cultural and psychological process deeply affecting the transformation of societies and the development of individuals (e.g., Reference GoodyGoody, 1968).
From a sociopolitical point of view, the debate on bilingual education must also be evaluated. Policymakers across the world have looked on home language instruction as a temporary support for low-SES minority children. Their focus has been on bridging the mismatch in language use in the home and at school while aiming at higher results in the majority language. However, home language instruction can also be conceived as a cultural policy in which minority languages are valued in their own right. From a cultural perspective, home language instruction can be defined as a structural support for children with a nonnative home language, independent of socioeconomic background. Contribution to first-language learning is then an autonomous goal, while first-language proficiency is seen as a school subject and accordingly evaluated (cf. Reference Durgunoglu and GoldenbergDurgunoglu & Goldenberg, 2011).
1.3.5 Toward a General Explanatory Framework
To build a research agenda regarding the global variation in literacy we propose a general framework that organizes the systems that influence the development of literacy within larger sociocultural/economic/political contexts. In Figure 1.5, we show that literacy development involves gaining reading fluency and spelling to facilitate reading comprehension and writing, that it builds on language, and that child characteristics and home and school support factors combine to influence individual variation, within an indirectly influential sociopolitical context.
Figure 1.5 General explanatory framework for the global variation of literacy
The framework assumes that multiple influences are operating across the stages of literacy development. Importantly, as we noted before, reading comprehension builds on reading fluency, and text writing on spelling, from the early stages on. The more proximal influences (e.g., child characteristics, teacher support) are embedded in a set of human ethology contexts ranging across local communities to regional, national, and global economic and political structures. Because of this ethological embedding, these influences are not fully independent. As a case in point, there is continuous interaction between home-support and school-support factors in areas such as what is tutored and what is valued in each setting. It is thus necessary to examine not only the impact of isolated factors, but also the degree to which factors interact to affect literacy development.
1.4 The Present Volume
Cognitive and neurocognitive research has provided theoretical models for processes of literacy acquisition. In recent years, progress has come from a broadening of the research base to include literacy learning across languages and writing systems across country contexts. This progress has set the stage for the present goal of bringing together observations of the global variation in literacy development within cross-national, cross-linguistic and cross-writing systems perspectives. These perspectives allow considerations of literacy development in both its universal aspects and the variations that arise around the globe. The sources of variation – sociocultural, sociopolitical, socioeconomic, language background, educational opportunities – operate within regions and across regions.
In this volume, we bring together various perspectives on global variation while also aiming for a common framework to describe literacy development that recognizes demographic boundaries in the world, on the one hand, and its global variation as a function of bio-ecological markers on the other. In the first part of this volume (Part I), we draw attention to the wealth of recent research on variations in literacy development that arise across regions and that reflect multiple interrelated influences of individual, home, school, and societal factors. This regional focus includes literacy development in North America, Latin America and the Caribbean, Europe and Central Asia, sub-Saharan Africa, South Asia, East Asia, and the Pacific. The second part of the volume (Part II) brings together observations on the neurobiological and ecological markers related to global literacy as described in Part I. These include the role of writing systems, genetics, brain foundations, self-regulation, and sociocultural, contextual, teacher, and parental factors in global literacy development.
This volume closes with a final chapter highlighting the commonalities found in the research on the regional variations in global literacy development, and on the neurobiological and ecological factors explaining these variations.
