Preschool teachers' perceptions about read-alouds as a means to support children's early literacy and language development

Purpose and research question

The Swedish government has identified a need for early childhood education so as to more systematically tie together play and learning and thus increase children's learning. As such, the role of the Swedish preschool teacher has been clarified in the Education Act and the national curriculum, and it has become more oriented towards children's development and learning. The curriculum for preschool (National Agency for Education, 2010, revised 2016) states, in particular, that preschool should put great emphasis on stimulating each child's language development and encourage and arouse the child's curiosity and interest in written language.

The present study seeks to contribute to the accumulated knowledge about early literacy instruction and aims to examine active Swedish preschool teachers’ thoughts and perceptions in terms of read-alouds as a tool to support children's language and literacy development. The central focus is on the following research question: ‘How and for what purpose do preschool teachers say that they organize read-alouds in preschool’? Organize here means arrange or implement. There was no intention to focus on instruction of first- or second-language learners but rather to talk broadly about the research question with the teachers.

In this text, the term ‘read-alouds’ refers to reading aloud from different text genres through the use of disparate qualities of reading style for various group sizes, and for a pleasurable and/or specific instructional activity. It could also be aligned with other aspects of classroom life, such as moving into and out of transitions. Since the study investigates teachers’ experiences and perceptions, the term is open for the teachers’ own definitions.

Swedish preschool

In Sweden, preschool is a non-obligatory stage in a child's education, but of all Swedish children aged between 1 and 3, 85% attend preschool. Children are enrolled, and parents pay a fee determined by the local municipality. Almost 97% of children aged 5 are enrolled in some kind of early childhood education programme (Samuelsson and Pramling, 2013). According to the curriculum (National Agency for Education, 2010, Revised 2016), preschool strives to help each child develop social and cognitive skills, the ability to use language and mathematics as well as motor skills. Furthermore, activities should provide science and technology learning opportunities, as well as opportunities to learn about the local environment. Core concepts are exploration and creativity.

The Swedish preschool has traditionally positioned itself against the knowledge tradition in school and been dominated by a holistic view and a vision of the child as a natural being (Vallberg Roth, 2001). Vallberg Roth states that preschool has viewed care as being core to its work, whereas learning and achievement have been considered domains associated with compulsory school.

Qualification as a Swedish preschool teacher requires the completion of a university-level programme that is between two-and-a-half and three years in duration, and which combines practice and theory. Courses focus on child development, family sociology and teaching methods.

Conceptual and theoretical framework

Play and practical-aesthetic activities have, in Western countries over the last decades, been seen as the most important of all activities for children because through these they will develop language and imagination as well as social and communicative skills (Broström, 2006). At the end of the nineties, the term learning was implemented in the preschool curricula of Scandinavian countries. As such, preschool education is moving towards a new paradigm in which both children and childcare workers have an active role (Broström, 2006). According to Broström, the content for teaching and learning in preschool is the shared topic on which the child and childcare worker focus: i.e. in this study, literacy and language-supporting activities.

Uljens' (1997) theory of didactics and Vygotsky's (1986) theories of learning that occurs within a social context has framed the current study and outlined the aims and research question. Three types of questions are consequential to the planning, implementation and evaluation of teaching, i.e. the didactic approach in teaching: what is to be taught and how and why this is to be taught (Uljens, 1997). These questions are of interest in this study when it comes to teaching in preschool. In teaching, the concept of the zone of proximal development by Vygotsky (1986) and scaffolding by Wood et al. (1976) are essential. Theories on socially influenced learning are useful for the analysis and interpretation of teachers' statements about didactic questions related to children's language and literacy learning.

The theoretical tool for the analysis derives from research-based arguments stating the necessity of reading aloud every day in preschool, as formulated by Shedd and Duke (2008). According to them, the teacher needs to plan read-aloud times and carefully select books that children find engaging and interesting so as to help in the development of children's language and literacy skills. Shedd and Duke indicate various factors that are essential in the selection of reading material: powerful illustrations, reflection of diversity in the classroom, variety in book type, books related to a current theme and books with high-quality text. Successful read-alouds rely on active engagement in reading on the part of both adult and child. Open-ended questions related to the text and pictures and contextualized as well as decontextualized text talk are highlighted as being important during read-alouds.

The design of the study

The study was designed in two parts as follows: 1. Read-alouds of fiction and non-fiction to different large groups of children in the age group of 3–4 years in preschool were filmed to be used as the basis for discussion in focus group conversations. The filmed teachers were interviewed shortly afterwards about didactic questions related to the read-aloud situation. The aim of the film sequences and interviews with the filmed teachers was that they would serve as material for the focus group discussions. 2. Three groups of five preschool teachers from different preschools in two municipalities participated in focus group conversations with a focus on read-alouds in preschool. The conversations were based on film sequences, interview material from the film sessions and other didactic questions (online Appendix 1). The focus group teachers were not involved in the video-filming but were expected to discuss and critically reflect on their own read-aloud practices as well as those of the filmed teachers. The film sequences provided a look into the filmed teachers' read-alouds and encouraged the informants to focus on and discuss the issue that was the purpose of each film sequence, i.e. the introduction and the ending of the read-aloud sessions. Video content enables research participants to focus on events in the film that might otherwise be overlooked (Pomerantz, 2005). The members of the focus groups were from different institutions and had not met previously, which was considered a strength or even an advantage since there was no predetermined order of discourse (Fairclough, 1992) that might have steered the direction or perspective of the conversation.

The conversations were led by a moderator (one of the authors; cf. Krueger, 2002) and focused on the introduction and the end of two of the films. Although the focus group informants were not involved in the film sequences themselves, the video-recorded read-aloud sequences were expected to trigger their thoughts, feelings and reflections as well as their reactions, which has been found to happen when viewing filmed events (e.g. Tobin and Davidson, 1990). In addition, the focus group teachers received a number of statements from the interviews with the filmed teachers to use as discussion points. During the conversations, the second author took notes (cf. Krueger, 2002). The focus group conversations provided the data for the present study.

Procedures and choices relating to the filming

Two preschool principals in two different municipalities, one rural and one large urban municipality in central Sweden, were asked whether any of their staff would like to volunteer for the filming of read-alouds as the basis for a read-aloud study. Three teachers, whose names were put forward by the principals, were contacted, and they agreed to participate. The authors filmed these teachers’ read-alouds of fiction text a total of four times and of non-fiction text one time during the spring of 2015 (online Appendix 2). Appearing in the films were a number of different large groups of children, all aged 3–4, most of whom had Swedish as their mother tongue. The preschools represented families with an average socio-economic background. The films of fiction text reading involved two small and two large group read-alouds, of which one was a ‘reading rest’ session. The non-fiction read-aloud film involved six children (online Appendix 2). All read-alouds were in Swedish.

Written consent was collected from the teachers and the parents of the children who participated in the films. Information on the consent form stated that the video-recorded read-alouds would be seen by others for discussion purposes (cf. Pomerantz, 2005). The information further stated that the material would be treated confidentially – i.e. that no names of the preschools, teachers or children involved would be given to the focus groups; that the material would be used for research purposes only; and that it was possible to terminate participation at any time during filming. The children were also asked for permission to be filmed during the read-alouds. The filmed teachers were briefly interviewed afterwards regarding the choice of book, the response of the children during the reading, the way children dealt with new words and concepts and the number of times they typically read the same book – i.e. once only or multiple times.

Procedures and choices in terms of the focus groups

To find informants for the focus groups who worked with children who were 3–5 years of age, preschool principals were contacted in one of the municipalities involved in the filming and another municipality in central Sweden – i.e. in one small and one large town. A greater number of preschool teachers reported an interest in participating, and the final selection was based on the strategy that the teachers would be from various preschools in the two municipalities. The 15 informants were contacted in early autumn 2015, and two focus groups of five participants were finally set up in the large town and one in the small town. In the preschools, Swedish was the principal language. Consent forms were collected, and all focus group participants were informed that the material would be kept anonymous and confidential and would only be used for research purposes. They were also told that they could withdraw from participating at any time without giving a reason. The integrity of those involved, both the children and the adults, was important throughout the process. Participants were asked in clear terms not to spread information about the content of the videos or focus group conversations. In order to retain anonymity, no names of informants or institutions have been given.

The focus group discussions were held once with each group in a centrally located room in the town hall of each municipality. Each focus group discussion lasted for about two hours. The focus group discussions were structured and divided into four phases: an initial phase of introductory questions, additional questions in an intermediate phase, a transition phase with key issues and a finishing phase of questions and discussion (cf. Krueger, 2002; online Appendix 1). The conversations were recorded using a dictaphone.

We informed participants in detail about the guidelines for the sessions (Krueger, 2002). In the initial phase of the focus group discussions, four film sequences of three minutes each were shown. One film sequence was from the start of the read-aloud with a small group of children (film 1), the second from the end with a larger group (film 2) and the third and fourth from the start and end of the read-aloud of the non-fiction text (film 5; online Appendix 2). The criteria for the choice of films 1 and 2 of reading fiction were that one was a small group and the other a ‘reading rest’ session. Only during the first sequence did the participants write down their spontaneous thoughts about the current read-aloud situation, which they then shared with each other and briefly discussed. The three other sequences were discussed based on didactic questions about read-alouds with children in preschool (online Appendix 1).

In the intermediate phase, the conversation expanded beyond the films. In the transition phase, participants were asked to read and discuss quotes from the interviews with the filmed teachers. The content in these quotes is very much in line with the focus group teachers' statements. In the closing phase, the participants were asked about their perceptions regarding the basis for read-alouds in preschool. Furthermore, there were questions about whether their knowledge resulted from experience, training or research literature, or whether instinct alone was involved.

Descriptions of the focus groups

The participants in focus group 1 were five preschool teachers from different preschools in an urban municipality in central Sweden (see Table 1). In those preschools were several children whose mother tongue was not Swedish. One of the teachers had worked in preschool for about four years, while the others had been in the profession for 8–35 years. In focus group 2, the five participants were from different preschools, and all but one worked in preschools in a municipality that had a high immigrant population – the same municipality as the informants in focus group 1. All but one of the teachers (who had one year of professional experience, but who had previously worked as a school teacher) in focus group 2 had 25–33 years of experience working in preschools. She was not a native Swedish speaker, unlike all the others in the three focus groups. In focus group 3, the five participants were from different preschools in a smaller city in central Sweden, three of whom worked in groups where the majority of the children had a mother tongue other than Swedish and two of whom worked with groups of children who had Swedish as their mother tongue. Of those teachers, one had worked in preschool for 33 years, while the others had between three and five years of experience working in the profession. The present study was initiated with the intention of learning about teachers' general thoughts and perceptions with regard to read-alouds as a tool to support children's language and literacy development. For this reason, we did not ask them to specify in detail the composition of their groups of children.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 1.

Description of the focus groups.

Focus group	Municipality	Children with other mother tongue than Swedish	Years of working in preschool	Teachers native Swedish speakers
1 (5 teachers)	A*	Several	One 4 years, the rest 8–35 years	All
2 (5 teachers)	A*	Majority	One 1 year, the rest 25–33 years	All but one
3 (5 teachers)	B**	Majority	One 33 years, the rest 3–5 years	All

Data-processing and analysis

The recorded conversations were transcribed by the researchers immediately following the focus group sessions (Krueger, 2002). This allowed for a return to both recorded and transcribed material to gain a deeper understanding of it and also an understanding of what was said from a holistic perspective (Kvale and Brinkmann, 2009). The notes that the second author took during the focus group conversations were used in the transcribing process to help with, for example, remembering who spoke and how the discussion went. It was important to ensure a true understanding of the statements and to be consistent in how interpretations were made.

The material was read through several times, and notes were taken to support recollections and enable thematization based on the teachers' statements about instruction, i.e. mutual experiences with the teachers, children and read-alouds. Similarities and differences were sought among the statements, and in conjunction with this, natural meaning units – that is to say, statements that gave an idea as to recurring thoughts – were established (cf. Kvale and Brinkmann, 2009). The text was looked through, and meaning units were written down, coded and entered into a coding matrix with headings that focused on didactic questions. The meaning units in the code groups were reviewed alongside the transcribed interviews, both to ensure that the text had been correctly understood and to check that the coding was reliable and in accordance with the purpose of the study. After careful consideration, the meaning units were sorted into six overall themes (Table 2).

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 2.

Examples of statements, the themes and the headings.

Examples of statements	Theme	Heading
“The days are so hectic and children spend long days at the preschool. Many do [read-alouds] so it's simply a method of trying to create a sense of peace one or more times during the day.” (Focus group 3)	Read-alouds for organizing daily activities	Read-alouds as an organizational issue
“It feels like you have to deal with a thousand issues every day, and it is so difficult to prioritize because there's not enough time for everything … so little unfortunately. It's only by chance that there is ever time for a book.” (Focus group 2)	Organizing read-alouds	Read-alouds as an organizational issue
“I believe that it is your own interest in reading that you want to bring to this job.” (Focus group 3)	The teacher's interest as a basis for read-alouds	Is dealt with separately
“That’s why I think it is so important to have groups of fewer children just because they might then dare to talk, and everyone should be allowed to speak.” (Focus group 2)	Read-alouds enable social development	Read-alouds as a tool to model positive social interaction
“Yes, and those moments you have to read, it's usually other [than the language] that is in focus; you deal with a theme or something.” (Focus group 1)	Read-alouds and theme work	Read-alouds as a tool to model positive social interaction
“Yes, but if you take the word “volume”. Well, volume could be something with ears but it could also be to measure something. It can mean different things in different contexts, so it makes sense for them to understand it when you read new words. That you explain that it can be different in different situations.” (Focus group 3)	Read-alouds for language development	Read-alouds as a means to develop children's literacy

The material was read through repeatedly to ensure that interpretations were properly made and analyses properly conducted. The themes were then sorted into three headings for presentation of the material: ‘Read-alouds as an organizational issue’, ‘Read-alouds as a tool to model positive social interaction’ and ‘Read-alouds as a means to develop children's literacy’, with the last having two sub-headings. The themes that go beneath the headings sometimes overlap. The teachers’ personal interest in reading did not fit beneath any heading and is dealt with separately. Table 2 provides examples of how the themes were sorted into headings. The findings will be presented, analysed and discussed on the basis of the conceptual and theoretical frameworks in the study. The presentation of findings is intended to provide a picture of what became apparent from the teachers’ reasoning and discussions; statements made by the focus groups are presented to exemplify what was said.

Read-alouds as an organizational issue

It appeared that the teachers used read-alouds to gather many children at a time, and they said it was used to free up staff. For example, teachers in all the focus groups talked about ‘reading rests’, which were described as being read-alouds in situations that involved the whole group. It appeared that in those situations, the purpose was not so much to convey the content of the book as it was to hold the group of children together so that the other teacher could, for example, plan the next activity. In focus group 2, they discussed the advantages and disadvantages of read-alouds as part of the routine. Two teachers described their insights into how difficult it is for children to sit still and listen to a read-aloud immediately after eating because they need to move. One of them said:

We have always thought and believed, ever since I began working in 1985, that of course they listen then. They can lie down, but they absolutely cannot lie still and listen, but they find it of course difficult to concentrate at a time when they are most tired. So it becomes no rest, reading rest, because it's enough for them to keep still and concentrate on listening. (Informant in focus group 2)

In focus group 2, one informant described how they organized the read-alouds:

If you think it is a very important moment for the children, then you at least need to try to structure the activity so that there are opportunities for the children to experience a few minutes of the read-alouds. For example, in my preschool, we also jumped back and forth and tried to structure the read-alouds, but finally we came to the conclusion (—) we don't let each other have a break directly after lunch as we have done before, but we divide the group into two, and they therefore get to experience read-alouds. (Informant in focus group 2)

Despite many of the informants' wishes, there may be long periods when the teachers do not read any books. These statements demonstrate that read-alouds with a purpose and as a means to stimulate children's language development were not easy to organize.

Read-alouds as a tool to model positive social interaction

The read-alouds were, as is apparent above, for the most part described as being reading to a large group of children without discussion of the content. On the other hand, teachers described how read-alouds were seen to be a functioning tool for working with different themes along with social interaction. The convention on the rights of the child, everybody's equal worth and democracy are examples of themes that were mentioned. In thematic work, some teachers stated that the children, in interaction with each other and based on the read-aloud text, could talk about the democratic foundations on which society is based:

We work very much on and talk about the value base, which can be found in different books. You can discuss the value bases in different families … and talk about the differences between people… . (Informant in focus group 3)

Read-alouds as a means to develop children's literacy

In all the focus groups, discussions were held about children's language development. Read-alouds were pointed out as being important because children learn to listen, create images in their minds, increase both their vocabulary and their language skills and have an outlet for their imagination. However, a picture developed showing that teachers use read-alouds as one educational tool among many, and that read-alouds are used to develop language for the most part when an opportunity arose.

All the focus groups stated how the teachers read the same book many times to the children mostly because ‘the children want to hear the same story despite knowing it off by heart’. In focus group 3, a reason for this repetition was said to be that the children feel safe when they recognize a story. Focus group 2 described the children's joy upon hearing the same story again and the way in which discussion about the book could be developed. The significance of repeated reading (Horst et al., 2011) for language development was not expressed explicitly; however, the groups did state that reading the same book many times increases children's understanding of the book.

Teachers in every focus group said that they explained words and concepts that were new to the children. Different methods for the explanation of words and terms were described. In focus group 1, an informant explained how she asks the children directly what they believe a word means ‘because once you have read the book, it may be too late’. Another explained how she usually reads the whole page and thereafter asks if anything is unclear. In all the focus groups, it appeared that the teachers sometimes change words and use others if they believe they are too difficult for the children:

Sometimes, I change words and use another word instead if I think it's too difficult and the kids do not need to learn it. Once we read about the ghost Laban who got sick and then he became the colour carnation (‘skär’ in Swedish, an old-fashioned word for pink). And I said pink instead. You adjust according to the situation… . (Informant in focus group 3)

The feeling among the focus groups was that children whose first language is Swedish do not need to build their vocabulary and language skills as much as second-language learners. This is contrary to prior research that shows a link between storybook reading and preschool children's vocabulary – all children learn more words through contextualized and decontextualized talk during read-alouds (e.g. Beck and McKeown, 2001, 2007). In focus group 3, one teacher stated that children who have another mother tongue have a greater need to develop their language skills:

I think that children with another mother tongue need to develop their language, whereas for children whose first language is Swedish, reading is more about listening and being able to concentrate. This is important for my children. (Informant in focus group 3)

Read-alouds and conversations about the read text

Even though conversation about read-alouds was pointed out as being important for the children, there was no consensus as to its function in terms of language and literacy development, i.e. that children learn new words, develop alphabet knowledge and phonological awareness, as well as reading comprehension, through talk during read-alouds.

Read-alouds of books within the children's areas of interest were highlighted in focus group 3 as being a good method to encourage conversation. In the same group, one teacher explained how she reads for 30 minutes a day to a smaller group of children and how it was always followed by a conversation about the text. She was one of those who had received in-service training about language development.

Another teacher from focus group 3 stated that it can be good for children simply to be quiet and listen:

Many children want to talk all the time. I think that's one reason why I sometimes say no, now you have to be quiet because now I am reading a story. There's also a difference if you have six or two children. If there are two children, it's more natural that you maybe want to speak more. But if there are six or eight children and they all want to talk the whole time, and especially if I am reading a book that means I have to jump from one page to another … it's hard… . (Informant in focus group 3)

Reading fiction and non-fiction texts

Reading non-fiction to large groups was felt to be difficult because non-fiction requires more discussion that centres on images and because non-fiction cannot be read from start to finish without the teacher having to stop to explain difficult words. The reading of non-fiction books generates more natural conversations, stated the informants.

It was obvious in all the focus groups that non-fiction books were seldom read in preschool and it was fiction books that were used. Focus group 1 stated that children do not request non-fiction books as often as they once used to. One informant in focus group 2 stated how often ‘a teacher will not want to read non-fiction as that would require more from the teacher especially when it is about facts that the teacher him- or herself is not interested in’. In that focus group, it appeared that, more often than not, it is the children themselves who request the reading of a non-fiction book:

It's not me who picks up a non-fiction book and says, ‘come, let's sit and look at this’, it is the children that say that I want you to read this or to look at this… . (Informant in focus group 2)

Limitations and further research

The study was small-scale and as such makes no claim to being comprehensive or generalizable; however, it does provide insights into the thoughts of this group of informants. The study was also limited in that it did not focus on emergent bilingualism and read-alouds, but dealt with read-alouds from a more general perspective. Had the focus been on multilingualism, further interesting themes might have become apparent. The method of selection procedures, implementation and analyses has been thoroughly described to increase the reliability of the study and to allow for valid arguments and discussions about the findings. The participating teachers were from various preschools, and their statements are highly consistent, which serves to increase the credibility of the study. Further empirical research about preschool teachers' instruction in terms of read-alouds needs to be conducted to secure assumptions and conclusions and to build on current research. In particular, there is a need for knowledge about preschool teachers' professional development and in-service training when it comes to book reading as a tool for language and literacy instruction.