Parental support of emergent literacy in the final preschool year in Austria during COVID-19-induced lockdowns

ABSTRACT

The support of emergent literacy skills in preschool children has been considered highly important for the development of children’s competencies and their academic success in school. In addition to parents, preschool teachers are expected to support children’s emergent literacy skills with educational activities; this is specifically true for underperforming children. However, the COVID-19 pandemic and corresponding lockdowns, closures, and emergency care for preschool children impeded the development of children’s emergent literacy skills. As a result, parental support for children’s emergent literacy skills has come under scrutiny. With reference to Austria, the study aims to gain insights into parents’ self-reported perspectives on their implementation of behaviours to support emergent literacy skills and their justifications for their support or non-support during COVID-19-induced lockdowns through nine semi-structured interviews. The findings reveal that the parents interviewed indicated to support emergent literacy actively, passively, or hardly at all. Justifications referred to children’s interest but also to reservations about whether preschool is too early to focus on literacy emergence. The study may provide hints for pedagogical work in preschools in post-COVID-19 times.

KEYWORDS:

• Emergent literacy
• COVID-19-pandemic
• preschool
• parental support
• Austria

Introduction

Components of emergent literacy, such as phonological memory and awareness and knowledge of the standard print format and the alphabet, are considered essential competencies preschool¹ children need to acquire (Rachmani 2020; Whitehurst and Lonigan 1998). In particular, empirical evidence shows that emergent literacy skills relate to later reading competencies in school (Pagani et al. 2010; Duncan et al. 2007). Researchers have found children’s home life to be important in supporting emergent literacy skills (Burgess 2011; Lehrl 2018; Sénéchal, Whissell, and Bildfell 2017). Such support takes place in a ‘home literacy environment’ (Sénéchal, Whissell, and Bildfell 2017, 385; abbreviated HLE, e.g. Niklas et al. 2020), which refers to ‘areas of the home environment that expose children to print’ (Sénéchal, Whissell, and Bildfell 2017, 385). Research indicates that parents with lower socio-economic status (SES) and lower educational levels carry out fewer emergent literacy–related activities (e.g. reading to their children) compared to parents with higher SES and higher educational levels (Lehrl 2018). In addition, parental beliefs about emergent literacy (e.g. the belief that parents should take an active role in teaching emergent literacy at home) (Niklas et al. 2020) and parental self-efficacy (parents’ confidence in their ability to support their children’s skills) (Bojczyk, Haverback, and Pae 2018) have been positively related with parental in-home support of emergent literacy. Several studies have found associations between HLE during the preschool period and elementary school children’s emergent literacy skills (Inoue et al. 2018; Lehrl et al. 2020; Manolitsis, Georgiou, and Tziraki 2013; Sénéchal, Whissell, and Bildfell 2017).

In addition, preschools have been considered to be important environments for supporting children’s emergent literacy skills (Ulferts, Wolf, and Anders 2019; Smidt and Roßbach 2016). As with HLE, research has revealed positive relationships between the support of emergent literacy in preschools and children’s emergent literacy skills as well as their academic success (Howes et al. 2008; Lehrl and Smidt 2018; Sylva et al. 2006). During the transition to elementary school, preschool teachers are expected to provide emergent literacy activities to enhance children’s successful start in school, giving additional importance to the educational task of preschools (e.g. for the United States: National Association for the Education of Young Children 2022). This is also true in Austria, where emergent literacy activities (e.g. support of language, reading, writing) in the final year of preschool are explicitly outlined in a guideline (Charlotte Bühler Institut 2009). During the COVID-19 pandemic, however, Austrian preschools were closed for over two months in 2020 and 2021 (COVID-19-NotMV 2020; Laszewska, Helter, and Simon 2021). Many other countries have experienced school closures as well (UNICEF 2021).

Because children attending preschools did not receive educational support for emergent literacy skills from preschools during the closure time, greater emphasis has been placed on parental, at-home support of emergent literacy. Parental characteristics such as SES, educational background, and educational beliefs may be important in terms of the nature and extent of parental support at home (Kartushina et al. 2021; Read et al. 2021). This study picks up this issue with reference to Austria and aims to gain in-depth insights into parental support of emergent literacy and underlying rationales for supportive and non-supportive behaviours during COVID-19-induced lockdowns. To do so, we conducted nine qualitative semi-structured interviews with parents with varying characteristics (e.g. in SES and self-efficacy expectations). The parents were selected based on the results of a larger quantitative questionnaire survey in which they had previously participated. The findings may raise preschool teachers’ awareness of parents’ implementation and endorsement of in-home literacy support and inform strategies for optimising emergent literacy. Our results also provide a basis for future research on supporting emergent literacy in preschools post COVID-19.

Emergent literacy

Whitehurst and Lonigan (1998) define emergent literacy as ‘the skills, knowledge and attitudes that are developmental precursors to conventional forms of reading and writing […] and the environments that support these developments’ (849). Caspe (2009) identified two major inter-related components of emergent literacy: (1) Print-related skills, which comprise facets such as letter knowledge (e.g. identification of alphabetic characters, knowledge of the alphabet) and print conventions (e.g. print and writing direction from left to right); (2) Language-related skills, which comprise facets such as vocabulary, phonological awareness, and narratives. Research has shown that print- and language-related components of emergent literacy are related to reading competencies (Pagani et al. 2010; Duncan et al. 2007).

The preschool system and the COVID-19 pandemic in Austria

Austria maintains a pronounced separation between preschool and elementary education, with preschools emphasising primarily non-academic skills. Preschools in Austria are funded by both public and private sources, with a 93% attendance rate for children aged three to five. Since 2009, the final year of preschool (the year before school enrolment) has been compulsory. Preschool teachers are required to complete either a five-year vocational training programme or, for those with university entrance qualifications, a two-year training programme (Smidt 2018). Recently, some academic courses in early childhood education have been introduced as advanced training (Holzinger and Reicher-Pirchegger 2020). In 2009, the Austrian Government implemented a plan for preschool educational practice with six educational domains (emotions and social relations, ethics and society, language and communication, movement and health, aesthetics and style, nature and technology) (Ämter der Landesregierungen der österreichischen Bundesländer, Magistrat der Stadt Wien, and BMUKK 2009). The language and communication domain has been further elaborated in a separate document that outlines activities to support emergent literacy in greater detail. This document explicitly refers to the transition to school. It includes suggestions on a variety of emergent literacy practices, such as support for language acquisition and skills, bilingualism, and multilingualism, the implementation of print media and digital media, the observation and documentation of language development, and the quality-of-education aspects (e.g. adequate teacher–child ratio, respectful interactions with children) (Charlotte Bühler Institut 2009). However, empirical research on the implementation of this additional plan is not available (Smidt 2018).

The COVID-19 pandemic had an impact on preschool education in Austria. COVID-19 derives from a highly contagious virus whose spread is mitigated by social distancing (BMSGPK 2021). The government put area-wide lockdowns into place as one measure to limit physical interactions and create social distance. The first two lockdowns in Austria were in 2020 (16 March 2020–30 April 2020; 17 November 2020–6 December 2020). These demanded, in addition to curfews, the closure of all non-essential stores, schools and preschools, and care facilities in addition to social interaction restrictions (COVID-19-NotMV 2020; Laszewska, Helter, and Simon 2021). Children were allowed to attend preschool for emergency care only if their parents were employed in frontline services. During the third (26 December 2020–7 February 2021) and fourth (22 November 2021–11 December 2021) lockdowns, preschools remained open. However, parents were encouraged to keep their children at home if possible (Palfrader 2021). Based on these safety measures and further recommendations, parents (except those in frontline services) had to care for and nurture their children at home for at least 47 days in 2020, excluding weekends and public holidays.

To minimise regression in children’s educational development, efforts in Austrian preschools during the lockdowns focused on providing parents with recreational suggestions (e.g. games, songs, experiments) and preschool exercises for their children, as well as mental support and information about the pandemic. The extent to which this was implemented depended on the preschools’ teachers and management (Koch et al. 2020). In addition, working parents of children under 14 were granted paid special care time of up to three weeks per year. Conditions for using special care time included a child having COVID-19 or a child’s preschool being closed due to high infection rates (BMAW 2022). Aside from these supports for parents, the unfamiliar situation of caring for and nurturing children at home was exacerbated by pandemic-related difficulties (Steiber and Siegert 2021; Zartler et al. 2021). The closures triggered the worst economic downturn since World War II. Numerous people were reduced to short-time work (temporary reduction of working hours and pay due to economic difficulties) or working from home (WUG Redaktion 2021). Resulting consequences, such as financial problems, time and emotional resource constraints, the dual burden of work and childcare, and lack of grandparent support due to the higher risk of severe complications in people over 60 years of age, made parental support at home challenging (Steiber and Siegert 2021; Zartler et al. 2021).

Parental support of emergent literacy at home – the HLE

Definition and theoretical framework

HLE initially becomes relevant in the first months and years when children are infants and toddlers, although the majority of research focuses on preschool-aged children (Schmitt, Simpson, and Friend 2011). Based on definitions of emergent literacy, such as preliminary forms of the traditional modes of reading and writing (Whitehurst and Lonigan 1998) as well as print- and language-related components (Caspe 2009), HLE includes aspects such as the provision of appropriate materials, the number of children’s and adult books on hand, and reading and writing (Lehrl 2018; see also Burgess 2011). HLE can be categorised into three broad areas of children’s experience in literacy: interactions between children and their parents in situations involving reading and writing, print-related experiences children make on their own, and experiences based on model learning in which children observe their parents reading or writing themselves (Sénéchal, Whissell, and Bildfell 2017). In children’s early years, support of their emergent literacy is often seen as implemented without formal instruction (Whitehurst and Lonigan 1998).

Different theories, each with a specific focus but also complementing the others and thereby providing additional value, are the basis for a theoretical framework of HLE. By relying on Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems approach (Bronfenbrenner and Morris 2006), HLE can be understood as a microsystem characterised by patterns of activities and interactions between parents and their children. Those activities and interactions vary as a function of the characteristics of the parents and children involved (e.g. children’s interests and parents’ educational beliefs) and more distal factors, such as educational activities provided by preschool classes. Chen and Rivera-Vernazza (2022) consider the children’s preschool class a microsystem and refer to forms of cooperation and exchange between the HLE and the preschool class as ‘mesosystems’. Focusing more on parental decisions about their educational practices with Eccles’ expectancy-value theory (1983; see also Luplow and Smidt 2019; Jonkmann et al. 2010), we can assume that educational practices of parents are based on subjective cost–benefit calculations, with characteristics of the parents (e.g. SES, ability to provide support, educational aspirations), characteristics of the child (e.g. interests, competencies, self-concept), and characteristics of the social environment (e.g. neighbourhood appreciation of education) contributing to these subjective cost–benefit calculations. Related to the expectancy-value theory but focusing more on parental characteristics, Bourdieu’s theory of capital (1986) emphasises the importance of different forms of parental capital (e.g. social or cultural capital, such as social relations and books at home), which are assumed to influence parental educational practices. Focusing more on educational activities themselves, Vygotsky’s socio-cultural theory, in terms of concepts such as scaffolding and guided participation, emphasises a developmentally appropriate supportive role of adults (e.g. parents, preschool teachers) in their interactions with children (Bodrova and Leong 2018; Lehrl 2018; Siraj-Blatchford 2009).

Previous findings on HLE practices

Many studies have investigated relations between certain HLE practices and emergent literacy competencies. These provide information about what constitutes a good (and conversely a poor) HLE in terms of predicting children’s skills. Shared book reading between parents and children, elaboration of parental vocabulary and extent of conversations, frequency of reading aloud, and possession of books in the HLE are predictive for children’s competence development in oral and written language, with small to moderate effect sizes. In addition, HLE activities, such as learning and practising the alphabet and learning to write one’s name, have been shown to predict several children’s skills, including letter knowledge and decoding abilities (Lehrl 2018 for a summary of previous studies). In a review of 23 studies from 11 countries, Sénéchal, Whissell, and Bildfell (2017) found that home literacy activities were related to children’s emergent literacy skills, oral language skills, phoneme awareness, and readiness skills; they also provided some evidence for longitudinal effects. A more recent meta-analysis (Dong et al. 2020) found that parental involvement in literacy activities and resources at home had small to moderate effects on children’s reading comprehension; in addition, parental beliefs about children’s performance and parental educational background were also important for the development of children’s reading comprehension. Some studies focus on the characteristics of parents related to the HLE. Findings suggest that a lower SES of parents is associated with less frequent HLE practices (Burris, Phillips, and Lonigan 2019; Kolancali and Melhuish 2021; Wirth et al. 2020), although there is considerable variance among families with low SES (Burris, Phillips, and Lonigan 2019). Child characteristics such as gender, linguistic abilities, self-regulation, cooperation skills, and interest have also been found to be related to HLE practices, although findings are mixed (Rose et al. 2018; Silinskas et al. 2020).

With the emergence of COVID-19, research has increasingly focused on HLE under the conditions imposed by the pandemic. Read et al. (2021) examined parental activities that support emergent literacy (shared reading) during the COVID-19 pandemic in the US. The main finding was that the amount of parental support did not change. However, new forms of virtual reading on screens were introduced, especially by parents who lost access to institutional childcare. In a comparative study that included 13 countries (excluding Austria), Kartushina et al. (2021) found that children who experienced less passive screen time and whose parents read more during the pandemic showed greater progress in vocabulary development. Another study conducted in the US investigated parental views on distance learning. Findings revealed that parents were more involved in literacy-related activities than math-related ones. Davies et al. (2021) undertook a study on institutional childcare (toddlers) during the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK. The primary findings, based on parent reports, showed that children’s receptive vocabulary made greater progress if they continued to attend institutional childcare during the pandemic. The positive effects were more substantial for children from disadvantaged families.

Study aims

Previous research suggests that parents and preschool teachers play an essential role in supporting emergent literacy, influencing children’s academic achievement (e.g. Inoue et al. 2018; Lehrl and Smidt 2018). However, in some countries, such as Austria, support from preschool teachers has suffered significant losses due to the lockdowns and corresponding closures of preschools between 2020 and 2021 (Koch et al. 2020). During this period, international studies suggest, parents’ support of emergent literacy at home became even more important (e.g. Kartushina et al. 2021). Pertaining theories also raise awareness of the complexity of parents’ rationales for their educational practices (e.g. Eccles 1983). Our study takes up this issue with reference to Austria. It aims to gain in-depth insight into parental support of emergent literacy and underlying rationales during COVID-19-induced lockdowns through nine semi-structured interviews with parents with different characteristics (e.g. in terms of SES, self-efficacy expectations with regard to the support of emergent literacy). The following research questions will guide the semi-structured interviews:

1. Did parents support their children in emergent literacy during the COVID-19 lockdowns in Austria, and if so, how?

2. How did parents justify their support or non-support of their children in emergent literacy?

Methods

Participants

This study is part of a mixed-method longitudinal project, COVID-19 Pandemic and Parental Reading Support, funded by the Federal State of Tyrol (Smidt and Tiemann 2022). Based on an online survey of parents with children in the final year of preschool in Austria (N = 1.849), a sub-sample of mothers² of preschool children (n = 9) from Tyrol (n = 3), Upper Austria (n = 3), Vienna (n = 2), and Vorarlberg (n = 1) was selected for in-depth telephone interviews. The selection of the sub-sample of parents was based on the quantitative survey, using characteristics that are particularly relevant in the expectancy-value theory (Eccles 1983) and the capital theory of Bourdieu (1986): SES of the interviewed parent, provision of educationally relevant material in the household, and self-efficacy expectations of the interviewed parent (Table 1 provides detailed information). In addition, further characteristics are listed in Table 1 to describe the cases. Table 1 also includes the categorisation of parental behaviour based on qualitative content analysis, which will be described in detail in the results section.

Table 1. Profiles of the sample.

	Characteristics considered for the selection of cases			Further characteristics for the description of the cases
Pseudo-nym	SES of the interviewed parent	Provision of educationally relevant material in the household	Self-efficiency Expectations of the interviewed parent	Federal State	Number of people in household	Motive for status maintenance of the interviewed parent: How important is it to you that your child later achieves a similar or better school-leaving qualification than yourself?	Motive for status maintenance of the interviewed parent: How important is it to you that your child has a good or better job later on than you do?	Categorisation of parental behaviour based on qualitative content analysis
Emily	2	3	2	Vorarlberg	4 (2 children)	1	1	Passive support
Isabella	2	3	2	Vienna	4 (2 children)	3	3	Passive support
Sophie	3	5	2	Vienna	5 (3 children)	4	4	Passive Support
Olivia	0	2	0	Tyrol	3 (1 child)	4	4	Active Support
Jessica	1	0	1	Tyrol	4 (2 children)	3	3	Little/no support
Mia	0	3	1	Tyrol	4 (2 children)	4	4	Active support
Emma	1	2	0	Upper Austria	4 (2 children)	3	3	Little/no support
Hannah	1	5	2	Upper Austria	4 (2 children)	3	3	Passive support
Sarah	3	4	2	Upper Austria	4 (2 children)	2	3	Passive Support

Note.

SES of the interviewed parent, generated from variables of the online survey: highest level of education: qualification for university entrance (0 = no, 1 = yes), quotient of net income and number of persons in the household (0 = lower third, 1 = middle third, 2 = upper third).

Provision of educationally relevant material in the household, generated from variables of the online survey (each 0 = no, 1 = yes): dictionary in the household, books with poems in the household, library card in the household, artwork in the household, classic literature in the household, range: from 0 (lowest score) to 5 (highest score).

Self-efficacy expectations of the interviewed parent, generated from variables of the online survey (each 0 = barely or partially, 1 = good or very good): Being able to support children in (written) language, being able to support children in school preparation, range: from 0 (lowest score) to 2 (highest score).

Motive for status maintenance of the interviewed parent: 1 = not important, 2 = rather unimportant, 3 = important, 4 = very important.

Data collection

Data were generated through semi-structured interviews conducted in June and July 2021. This type of interview was chosen as it is characterised by a predefined, structured set of questions that allows for additional questions to capture the respondents’ perspectives (DeJonckheere and Vaughn 2019; Strübing 2018). The draft guideline contained seven predefined, open-ended questions applied in pre-tests (n = 6) and modified accordingly. While each interview started with the same introductory question (family structure, living circumstances), the order of the other questions was adapted during the interview process. The questions referred to the following main topics, which subsequently served as a basis for the generation of the upper categories within the evaluation (see the Data Analysis section): changes in everyday family life due to the pandemic, role of emergent literacy in the family, parental and institutional support for emergent literacy during lockdowns, and educational aspirations (Table 2). When respondents did not address content relevant to the study, the researchers asked individual, targeted follow-up questions on the support of specific components of emergent literacy (e.g. letter knowledge, vocabulary, phonological awareness).

Table 2. Guiding interview questions.

Guiding questions	Research interest
Since I don't have an impression of you and your family yet, can you give me a brief overview of your family?	Family structure, family members, living situation, parents’ work situation
Has the COVID-19 pandemic changed your life as a family? If so, how?	Daily life before and during the pandemic, changes in daily routine, organisation and implementation of preschool lessons at home, related challenges
What role do the topics of reading and writing and the upcoming start of school play for you?	Emergent literacy assessment, contact with preschool during the lockdowns, support from preschool
If you think of activities such as reading, writing, painting, etc. – how active is your child in these areas right now? And how do you see your role as a parent in promoting these skills?	Child's emergent literacy skills, level of support needed, parents’ support behaviour, parental resources in terms of support, existing materials to practice emergent literacy skills at home
What are your child's experiences with letters, narrative, and language comprehension in everyday life?
What would you like to see regarding your child’s school career and academic performance?	Educational aspirations, impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on child development
When you think about the last few months, what do you take away from this time?	Positive and negative achievements, conclusion

All interviews were performed over the phone at prearranged times. A specific criterion for telephone interviews is a time limit of 15–30 min (Brace 2018), which was met in this study with an average call duration of 25.7 min. All participants voluntarily signed a declaration of consent after being informed in detail about the project. In addition, the interviewees were allowed to revoke their consent without consequences at any time. Personal data were treated confidentially and anonymised after the study ended in consultation with a data protection officer.

Data analysis

The interviews were subjected to qualitative content analysis (Mayring 2020). We used MAXQDA 2020 software to implement this procedure. Each interview was conducted in an Austrian dialect, recorded, and transcribed before the analysis. Because the data was parsed for content, a smooth verbatim transcription was created, with the Austrian dialect reformulated into written German and pauses in speech or laughter omitted for readability’s sake. To illustrate relevant interview passages in this article (see Results section), we translated the respective examples into English.

Portions of the extensive interview material were selected for analysis to answer the research questions about parental support or non-support of emergent literacy in home learning settings and their justification thereof: First, the main topics directly referring to emergent literacy (role of literacy in the family, parental and institutional support for emergent literacy during lockdowns) were identified. Second, the remaining main topics not directly referring to emergent literacy (changes in everyday family life due to the pandemic, educational aspirations) were also considered for analysis when content relevant to emergent literacy occurred in these passages.

Qualitative content analysis aims to analyse texts systematically using a theory-driven category system created based on the material. This study’s category system uses a combination of structuring and summarising content analyses to collate and condense the data, respectively. The purpose of structuring is to specify the category system accurately so that an assignment from text material (i.e. main topics) to the categories is possible. To do so, we generated preliminary upper categories deductively (Table 3) by considering pertinent theoretical work: stressors (‘costs’, also related to ‘capital’ such as social networks that can provide support; particularly Bourdieu 1986; Eccles 1983), parental support (developmentally appropriate practices, subjective cost–benefit calculations, parental capital; particularly Bodrova and Leong 2018; Bourdieu 1986; Eccles 1983), preschool support (developmentally appropriate practices, collaboration with parents; particularly Bodrova and Leong 2018; Bronfenbrenner and Morris 2006), emergent literacy (components of emergent literacy, developmentally appropriate practices, subjective cost–benefit calculations, parental capital; particularly Bodrova and Leong 2018; Bourdieu 1986; Eccles 1983; Whitehurst and Lonigan 1998), and beneficial aspects (‘benefits’, also related to ‘capital’ such as social networks; particularly Bourdieu 1986; Eccles 1983). In a trial run, the content of two interviews was assigned step-by-step into the predefined categories, which were then adapted and modified in response.

Table 3. Deductive category application.

Category	Definition	Examples	Coding Rules
Stressors	Negative outcomes as a result of covid-related measures and parental challenges during the pandemic: e.g. fears, doubts, changes in everyday life	‘So, it's sometimes more the work, home office, childcare that was a bit challenging at times.’ (Jessica/l. 21)
Parental Support	Parental care as well as emotional and educational support behaviours related to their children during lockdown.	‘Nevertheless, we got up in the morning and thought of some program points, what we could do (…).’ (Emily/ll. 25)	Everyday childcare is assigned to this category, unless it is related with ‘Stressors’, ‘Positive Aspects’ or ‘Emergent Literacy’.
Preschool Support	Provision of craft, play, and learning incentives by preschool, facility contact opportunities, and parental evaluation of support provided.	‘They just kept us in the loop. And what they also did beautifully, they sent home suggestions for what we could do with the kids.’ (Sophie/ll. 73)
Emergent Literacy	Children's abilities, interests, and support requirements, as well as parental assistance in this area.	‘From an early age, we read a lot to the children, and we also have a lot of books at home and borrow books from the library.’ (Emily/ll. 40)	Parental support related to Emergent Literacy is assigned to this category.
Beneficial Aspects	Consequences of the pandemic and restrictions based on this, parents perceive as beneficial and things they can take away from this period.	‘That we appreciate everything a bit more so self-evident things with family and friends meet that one appreciates small things more (…).’ (Hannah/ll. 35)

In accordance with the principles of summarising content analysis, passages that contributed to answering the research question were summarised, generalised, and reduced so that subcategories inductively emerged: e.g. regular reading aloud (related to the upper category ‘Emergent Literacy’), doubts about parental teaching skills (related to the upper category ‘stressors’), and independence of the child (related to the upper category ‘beneficial aspects’). Passages with the same meaning were bundled (subsumption), and new categories (e.g. personal opinion on COVID-19, and demands on education policy) were constructed for portions of the text that could not be assigned to the existing categories. In addition, to avoid arbitrariness, coding rules were formulated when a clear assignment of text passages to codes was impossible (Mayring 2020).

Per Mayring’s (2016) general quality criteria for qualitative research, adherence to a documentation process as well as a rule-guided procedure occurred through a detailed description of the research process, which follows systematic procedural rules (see Data Collection and Data Analysis sections). Interpretations of results were supported by pertinent theoretical work (Bodrova and Leong 2018; Bourdieu 1986; Bronfenbrenner and Morris 2006; Eccles 1983) and empirical research (e.g. Davies et al. 2021; Read et al. 2021) (see Discussion section). The participants were interviewed in their familiar environment and had the option to set their own focus points. Cohen’s Kappa coefficient, used to measure intercoder reliability (McHugh 2012), was calculated based on two researchers’ double-coding of two interviews. The agreement was 82%.

Results

In this section, we aim to present a comprehensive overview of the study results. The selection of the following interview passages is based on the purpose of presenting a wide variety of interviewees’ opinions, perspectives, and experiences, organised according to the research questions (Mayring 2020). The number of interview passages chosen varies depending on how many are needed to illustrate the results.

Parental support behaviour

Based on the content analysis, interviewees’ supportive behaviours during COVID-19 preschool suspensions were categorised into parents who indicated active support, parents who indicated passive support, and parents who reported providing little or no support.³ There are noticeable differences in the provision of activities that support children’s emergent literacy skills (e.g. working with instructional materials, fixed periods for learning, and providing children with appropriate materials). Although all parents reported reading aloud regularly, only those characterised by the provision of active support indicated a conscious intention to support children’s reading before school entry.

Active support

These parents are characterised by the provision of active support, in terms of purposeful learning opportunities, during lockdowns. Implementation occurred through the collaborative elaboration of instructional materials provided by preschools or created independently and through the purchase of external preschool materials or the introduction of fixed periods dedicated to learning. These exercises include practising letters, writing names and words, and introducing reading skills. In addition, mothers stated that they learned poems with their children and purposefully read aloud to them. The following passage represents an example of actively supporting emergent literacy for illustration:

[Okay, and what was everyday life like for you with a preschool child at home?] Yes, we got up, had breakfast, then I just made sure we kept ourselves busy. I did some painting or handicrafts with her, or I ordered some preschool blocks and then did little preschool exercises with her. [ … ] We also used to study poetry [ … ]. (Olivia; 17 June 2021)

Passive support

Parents characterised by the provision of passive support were generally willing to support their children in emergent literacy and supply them with appropriate materials but did not actively support it. Respondents were classified into this support behaviour if their children had initiated or suggested the support. These parents provided their children practice in writing names and letters, went over preschool materials with them, or borrowed books from the library for them during COVID-19-induced lockdowns. The following passage exemplarily illustrates the child’s initiative:

[How do you approach reading and writing at home?] Actually, not at all. Actually, it’s rather that something comes from her. So, she has preschool blocks in which she has school exercises and notebooks in which she can write letters if she wants to. Yes, reading, we read aloud. [ … ] Yes, but to really consciously encourage, I mean, that flows into everyday life. (Isabella; 22 June 2021)

Little or no support

Some parents reported that they offered little or no assistance to support their children’s emergent literacy skills. Except for reading aloud, parents mentioned no specific support behaviours to encourage their children’s literacy:

[Okay, then, I’d like to know, also, in relation to the upcoming start of school: Which role does the topic of reading and writing play at home for him? So does it already play one at all?] He is not really interested in reading and writing or the letters. [ … ] He has just had a school entrance test, which showed that he has a small weakness in phonological hearing. [ … ] In preschool they already do such exercises, and I can imagine that he can’t do that very well because he missed it. We didn’t practice it explicitly at home. (Emma; 24 June 2021)

Parental justifications for support or non-support

Research has also examined mothers’ justifications for their supportive or non-supportive behaviours regarding emergent literacy. Different arguments were identified between parents who either actively support, passively support, or provide little to no support for emergent literacy (e.g. pandemic-related arguments, age of the child, measuring against other activities). However, all parents’ justifications were based on the child’s interests.

Active support

Parents who actively encouraged their children’s emergent literacy attributed this to their children’s high level of self-interest. Interviewees also justified implementing this supportive behaviour by the lack of support in preschools. Other strands of argumentation related specifically to the COVID-19 pandemic. Since institutional support was not available during the lockdowns, parents who had received support from a preschool took the preschool documents sent to them as a stimulus to actively support their children themselves:

[Then I have another question, and that is, what role does the topic of reading and writing play at home?] It’s very important, because she’s in preschool and is now starting school. She wants everything, so of course I must read everything to her and then write it down. [ … ] Unfortunately, we have a preschool teacher who basically doesn’t do that. So, they haven’t done a preschool sheet or anything preschool-like in the whole preschool time. (Olivia; 17 June 2021)

[Now let’s go back to reading and writing. What role does that play in your older child’s life and in connection with the upcoming start of school?] [ … ] and she is also very interested in learning to write, and we also got the preschool documents mailed to us, so we did that at home. [ … ] I’ve never thought about all the things she can already do [ … ]. (Mia; 24 June 2021)

Passive support

The passive support of emergent literacy skills is attributed, for example, to the idea that outdoor activities are more important for children in their final year of preschool. These parents also argued that specific and active support was unnecessary since such support occurs spontaneously in everyday life and play. Others mentioned that preschool children are too young to receive targeted support in emergent literacy. Despite these arguments, parents encouraged their children in this area, and attributed their encouragement to the children’s high level of self-interest. Passive support of emergent literacy is exemplified in the following:

[Now we also come to what you have just mentioned. What role does the upcoming start of school and, generally, the topic of reading and writing play for you?] [ … ] reading, writing, and arithmetic always come automatically during play. We learn that at home through play. I don’t promote that specifically. I promote getting dirty. (Sophie; 21 June 2021)

[How then do you see your role as a parent in this?] If she comes and wants to do that, then we are happy to do that with her, but we see it this way: if we teach her to read now or to write a lot of words, then that is simply already too far ahead of when she starts elementary school. (Emily; 23 June 2021)

[Under the topic of reading and writing and the upcoming start of school, what role does that play for you?] Well, she is very inquisitive herself and [ … ] she has known the letters for a while anyway. So, I’m not worried now because I have a motivated child who is looking forward to school, and yes, I have the feeling that she will manage school easily. (Isabella; 17 June 2021)

Little or no support

Parents who provided little or no support regarding emergent literacy during lockdowns considered outdoor activities more important. They also argued that the final year of preschool is too early for a targeted support of emergent literacy at home. In addition, these parents justified their lack of support behaviour by considering their child’s interests, which related to other areas, and suggestions not to overly encourage them in this area at that age. Examples of this support behaviour are provided below:

[We have a focus on reading and writing. What does that look like at your home?] So, he has always done preschool education in preschool, but last year we did nothing at all. The preschool teacher has sent an email [ … ] almost every day with things that you can do [ … ]. In the beginning I printed it out, but since the weather was always so nice, and my two kids are real outdoor kids, they always want to go outside, so I figured if it rained, we could go through that. So, we have actually done nothing in this regard. (Jessica; 17 June 2021)

[How do you see your role as a parent in this whole school readiness issue?] [ … ] I didn’t do much of that (support of emergent literacy) before. I’m an elementary school teacher myself, and when I went on maternity leave (end of 2020), they said you shouldn’t teach the kids so much yet. [ … ] He is more interested in numbers and arithmetic, which happens automatically anyway. They ask questions and already calculate things in their heads. (Emma; 24 June 2021)

Discussion

Previous research indicates the key role of parents and preschool teachers in supporting children’s emergent literacy skills. The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in a greater focus on parents and their support of children’s literacy skills, as preschool support suffered significant losses due to lockdowns and closures between 2020 and 2021. Taking up this situation, this study explored, through semi-structured interviews conducted in Austria, parents’ support of their children in emergent literacy during COVID-19-induced lockdowns and parents’ justifications for their supportive or non-supportive behaviour. Parents could be characterised by the provision of active, passive, or little/no support of their children’s emergent literacy skills, for which they offered diverse justifications.

Parental support of emergent literacy

Active support

Some parents emphasised active support by offering purposeful learning opportunities such as practising letters, writing names and words, and reading activities. Against the backdrop of research focusing on the predictive role of HLE activities, such as shared book reading or practising the alphabet, for children’s development in oral and written language (e.g. Lehrl 2018; Sénéchal, Whissell, and Bildfell 2017 for overviews), these parents obviously provide active support for activities considered essential to children’s academic performance. It must be noted, however, that, following Vygotsky’s developmental model (Bodrova and Leong 2018), no conclusions can be drawn about the quality of the HLE, as in the present study there is no information about the developmental appropriateness of such pedagogical activities. In addition, whether and how the amount of parental support for emergent literacy activities changed during the COVID-19 pandemic, which has become a focus of international research (Read et al. 2021), cannot be answered with the data we gathered. However, there are at least hints that parental support levels changed during the pandemic, as parents indicated in the interviews that they aimed to compensate for the loss of preschool support during the lockdowns (see also Davies et al. 2021 for positive effects of children attending institutional childcare during the pandemic period), partly explicitly pointing out that instructional materials provided by preschools were used. This underlines the importance of a collaboration between preschools and families, as highlighted in theoretical frameworks such as the ecological systems approach (Bronfenbrenner and Morris 2006), which implies that preschools can play an activating role by providing emergent literacy materials for use at home. This is likely to be especially true for the final year of preschool, when the transition to school and the support of emergent literacy have been considered relevant (Charlotte Bühler Institut 2009).

In addition to compensating for the loss of preschool support, another motivating factor for the mothers was their children’s interest in emergent literacy activities. Considering children’s interests is a key component of Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory (Bronfenbrenner and Morris 2006) and of Eccles’ expectancy-value theory (1983; see also Luplow and Smidt 2019). Interestingly, a closer look at the quantitative data of the survey indicated that the parents who provided more active support of emergent literacy had a comparatively low SES, low self-efficacy expectations (in terms of encouraging children’s emergent literacy and helping them to prepare for school), and were equipped with a comparatively low amount of educationally relevant material such as books, artwork, classical literature, and library cards (Table 1). Thus, following Bourdieu’s theory of capital (1986), these parents are actually not well equipped with relevant capital to support their children, and one would probably not expect active support of emergent literacy.

However, there are indications that another characteristic, specifically the motive for status maintenance, can be emphasised on the basis of Eccles’ expectancy-value theory (1983; see also Luplow and Smidt 2019; Jonkmann et al. 2010) as being potentially important to parents’ efforts to actively support their children. That is, although the parents did not explicitly refer to this in the semi-structured interviews, the responses of these parents in the quantitative survey provide hints that they place considerable value on their children achieving a better school-leaving qualification and a better occupation than they did themselves (Table 1). High educational aspirations, especially in conjunction with the pronounced interests of the children in emergent literacy, could therefore play a triggering role in the educational support of these parents.

Passive support

A somewhat different argument emerged among parents who emphasised passive support of emergent literacy. Like those who reported active support through offering emergent literacy-related learning opportunities, these parents referred to their child’s interest and motivation as spurring emergent literacy activities. However, notable diverging from parents who emphasised active support, passive-supporting parents did not report exerting special efforts to adequately support emergent literacy but relied on emergent literacy-related activities happening in everyday life without much impetus.

Parents provided different justifications for their passive support. Whether reasons for the apparent reluctance of some parents to actively support their children’s emergent literacy skills may lie in reservations they have about the importance of emergent literacy skills in preschool-aged children (as they pointed out that targeted support becomes more important at school age) cannot be answered, because no study findings on this are known. It can be noted, however, that there is a clear separation between preschool and school education in Austria (Smidt 2018). An alternative explanation for the fairly passive support of some parents also seems feasible. A closer look at the quantitative data of the survey indicated that the parents generally have, according to Bourdieu’s theory of capital (1986), some relevant capital to support their children (Table 1). Following Eccles’ (1983) expectancy-value theory, it would be conceivable in this context to consider that an adequate amount of parental capital together with a child’s high interest in emergent literacy may not necessarily lead to the active support of children. Parents might, after weighing efforts and benefits, initially trust in the child’s interest and (intrinsic) motivation in emergent literacy activities. This could also be suggested by the parents’ statement that support of emergent literacy happens ‘automatically’ during play; the material needed is available and can used by the children independently. In this context, following Schmidt and Smidt (2021), one could perhaps emphasise children’s self-education (German: ‘Selbstbildung’) in contrast to co-construction and instruction. However, if the children’s interest wanes and problems in the development of emergent literacy competencies are anticipated, these ‘well-equipped’ parents, it can be argued, see themselves as being able to actively support their child themselves if necessary.

Little or no support

Except for reading aloud, some parents claimed to offer comparatively little or no support for their children’s emergent literacy skills. These parents show some similarities with the parents who stated that they actively supported their children: the quantitative data of the survey indicated that the parents who provided little/no emergent literacy support also had comparatively low SES, low self-efficacy expectations, and a relatively small amount of educationally relevant material such as books, artwork, classical literature, and library cards at home. The motive for status maintenance was somewhat lower but still quite high (Table 1). In addition, like parents who emphasised passive support of emergent literacy but unlike parents who actively supported their children, the justifications the parents mentioned for their lack of engagement obviously referred to reservations about preschool children being too young for targeted support of emergent literacy. Interestingly, even a parent who is herself a school teacher argues along these lines. Her view may reflect the particularly pronounced separation between preschool and school education in Austria, which also becomes evident in terms of the different training and status of pedagogical staff (Smidt 2018).

However, a noteworthy difference from the two other groups of parents (active and passive support) was that the parents who provided little or no support explicitly mentioned their child’s lack of interest in emergent literacy activities. In this context, the parents interviewed referred to other activities (outdoor activities, math) that were preferred. This can be seen as a potential problem because pertinent scholarly work (e.g. Bronfenbrenner and Morris 2006; Eccles 1983; Jonkmann et al. 2010) raises awareness of the importance of children’s interests and motivation for learning outcomes (see also Smidt and Kraft 2019). In this context, reference can be made to the importance of preschool education. According to social-constructivist approaches grounded in Vygotsky’s model of development (Bodrova and Leong 2018), preschool teachers are expected to actively support children by scaffolding and arousing their interest in learning tasks (Bodrova and Leong 2018; Smidt 2012). The closures, emergency care, and other restrictions during the COVID-19 pandemic, it can be argued, eliminated this source of developmental support for a lengthy period, particularly for children who did not receive support at home. Findings from a study conducted in the UK (Davies et al. 2021) in which toddlers from disadvantaged families in particular benefitted in their emergent literacy skills if they continued to attend institutional childcare during the pandemic also point in this direction. However, information on the educational quality of such institutional childcare settings was not reported (Davies et al. 2021). In Austria, where the present study took place, there is also a lack of research on the quality of educational activities in preschools. A study conducted some months before the COVID-19 outbreak revealed some contradictory findings: Preschool teachers’ scaffolding positively related to children’s interactions with preschool teachers but negatively related to children’s interactions with peers. In addition, there were no associations between scaffolding and children’s task orientation (Smidt and Embacher 2020). The authors concluded that ‘preschool teachers should make better use of the potential of ‘scaffolding’ in terms of awakening a child’s interest in a task, supporting the child, following goals associated with specific tasks, highlighting task-related aspects that the child may fail to see alone, and helping the child manage disappointment and failure’ (Smidt and Embacher 2020, 878). As such, these findings may indicate that expectations about targeted support of emergent literacy directed at preschools in Austria should not be overestimated.

Study limitations and implications for educational practice and research

This study has some limitations. First, this is a qualitative study with a small sample; the findings are therefore not representative. Rather, this study’s objective is to convey depth rather than breadth of understanding of the field (Boddy 2016). Second, since the semi-structured interviews were conducted via telephone, a lack of trust between the interviewer and interviewee cannot be ruled out. However, having distance between the interviewer and interviewee can also be seen as an advantage as it may liberate the latter to share more detailed, honest information about private concerns and wishes with the interviewer (Schulz and Ruddat 2012). Third, it is noticeable that mothers only justify their different support behaviour with educational rationales, as it would be reasonable for parents to also rely on non-educational rationales (e.g. being unable to support their children). Future studies should probably have a stronger focus on non-educational rationales for parental behaviour. Fourth, since Austria’s specific preschool system was the subject of this study, parents’ reports on emergent literacy activities and their justifications cannot simply be compared with findings from other countries.

With regard to implications for pedagogical practice revealed by the in-depth information about parents’ active, passive, or little/no supportive behaviour and their justifications, this study provides a basis for pedagogical work in preschools in post-COVID-19 times. Because emergent literacy skills are related to later reading competencies in school (Duncan et al. 2007; Sénéchal and LeFevre 2002), transition to school should also be a focus. The first implication refers to communication practices between preschools and parents, which are also considered important from a theoretical point of view (‘mesosystem’, Bronfenbrenner and Morris 2006). More specifically, relying on Eccles’ expectancy-value theory (1983) and Bourdieu’s theory of capital (1986), preschool teachers should aim to gather information from parents about in-home support in general and emergent literacy in particular. They should ask parents how they view children’s interests in emergent literacy, they should ask how parents value emergent literacy, and they should aim to gather information about parental capital (e.g. support through social networks, use of books in everyday life). Preschool teachers can be viewed as experts who support children’s emergent literacy skills, arouse children’s interest in engaging in these activities, and establish dialogues with parents about the relevance of emergent literacy and ways to support children’s language, reading, and writing skills at home (National Association for the Education of Young Children 2022). The second implication refers to the quality of educational practices in preschools, which has been shown to be related to the development of children’s emergent literacy skills (e.g. Lehrl and Smidt 2018). Based on Vygotsky’s socio-cultural theory (Bodrova and Leong 2018), preschool teachers are expected to actively support children by scaffolding learning tasks, but the few studies that exist on this subject in Austria (done before Covid-19) have revealed potential for improvement on the quality of educational practices, particularly in terms of scaffolding with cognitively stimulating activities including tasks focusing on the support of emergent literacy skills (Smidt and Embacher 2020). This may have changed post COVID-19, because preschool teachers may be more sensitive to the need for targeted support for children in emergent literacy. Further research is needed to gain insight into this.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by the Federal State of Tyrol: [Grant Number F.30398].

Notes

1 Being aware that the national education systems use different terms for non-family educational settings for children up to school age and that translating these into English may be challenging (see, e.g., country profiles of Austria, the Netherlands, and Sweden [Schreyer and Oberhuemer 2017a; 2017b; 2017c]), we use the terms ‘preschool’, ‘preschool teacher’, and ‘preschool children’ for pragmatic reasons and readability. By ‘preschool’, we generally mean institutions usually attended by children from about three years of age until school enrolment (Smidt 2018). In a few cases where it is obvious that other age groups are referenced (e.g., infants, toddlers), we use other terms.

2 Based on valid information about the sex of the respondents (N = 1,308), 93% were female. Therefore, we decided to recruit only mothers for the guided interviews.

3 We are aware that the term ‘passive support’, in particular, could be interpreted negatively. However, this term (along with the terms ‘active support’ and ‘little/no support’) has only a descriptive function and is in no means intended to be pejorative.