f Introducing Technology to Immigrant Families to Support Early Literacy Development and Two-Generation Learning

References

1. Baker A J.L;Piotrkowski C. S.Brooks-Gunn J. (1999) The home instruction program for preschool youngsters (HIPPY). The Future of Children, 9(1, 116–133.
   [Google Scholar]
2. Bridges MCohen S.Fuller B. (2012) Abriendo puertas: Opening doors to opportunity— A national evaluation of second-generation trainers. Retrieved from http://fles.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED538864.pdf.
3. Burnett C (2010) Technology and literacy in early childhood educational settings: A review of research. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 10, 247–270.
   [Google Scholar]
4. Caspe M (2003) Family literacy: A review of programs and critical perspectives. Harvard Family Research Project. Retrieved from http://www.hfrp.org/publications-resources/browse-our-publications/family-literacy-a-review-of-programs-and-critical-perspectives.
5. Chase-Lansdale P. L.Brooks-Gunn J. (2014) Two-generation programs in the twenty-first century. The Future of Children, 24(1, 13–39.
   [Google Scholar]
6. Chera PWood C. (2003) Animated multimedia “talking books” can promote phonological awareness in children beginning to read. Learning and Instruction, 13, 33–52.
   [Google Scholar]
7. Crosnoe R (2010) July), Two-generation strategies and involving immigrant parents in children’s education. Paper presented at the Young Children in Immigrant Families and the Path to Educational Success roundtable meeting at the Urban Institute. Washington, DC.
   [Google Scholar]
8. De Gaetano Y. (2007) The role of culture in engaging Latino parents’ involvement in school. Urban Education, 42, 145–162.
   [Google Scholar]
9. de Jong M. T.Bus A. G. (2004) The efficacy of electronic books in fostering kindergarten children’s emergent story understanding. Reading Research Quarterly, 39, 378–393.
   [Google Scholar]
10. Fairlie R. W (2007) Explaining differences in access to home computers and the Internet: A comparison of Latino groups to other ethnic and racial groups. Journal of Electronic Commerce Research, 7, 265–291.
    [Google Scholar]
11. Fillmore L.W (1991) When learning a second language means losing the frst. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 6, 323–346.
    [Google Scholar]
12. Gadsden V.L (2002) Current areas of interest in family literacy. Review of Adult Learning and Literacy, 3, 248–267. Retrieved from http://ncsall.net/index.html@id=571.html.
    [Google Scholar]
13. Goldenberg L.BLight D. (2009) Lee y seras: Evaluation report. New York, NY. Education Development Center, Inc. Retrieved from http://www.doe.virginia.gov/school_fnance/procurement/early_learning_providers_pd/doe-pdo-2015-11-6/scholastic_inc_original_proposal_part_11_of%2015_d_i_1_2_of_6.pdf.
    [Google Scholar]
14. Gonzalez NMoll L. C.Tenery M. F.Rivera A.Rendon PGonzales R.Amanti C (1995) Funds of knowledge for teaching in Latino households. Urban Education, 29, 443–470.
    [Google Scholar]
15. Gruendel J.M. (2014) Two (or more) generation frameworks: A look across and within.. Washington, DC:. The Aspen Institute.
    [Google Scholar]
16. Hsieh H.FShannon S. E. (2005) Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15, 1277–1288.
    [Google Scholar]
17. International Reading Association (2009) New literacies and 21st-century technologies: A position statement of the International Reading Association. Retrieved from https://www.literacyworldwide.org/docs/default-source/where-we-stand/new-literacies-21st-century-position-statement.pdf?sfvrsn=6.
18. International Reading Association & the National Association for the Education of Young Children (1998) Learning to read and write: Developmentally appropriate practices for young children. Retrieved from https://www.naeyc.org/fles/naeyc/fle/positions/PSREAD98.PDF.
19. Kroll S (2005) The biggest snowman ever.. (Bassett. J., Illus.) New York, NY:, Scholastic.
    [Google Scholar]
20. Korat OShamir A. (2007) Electronic books versus adult readers: Effects on children’s emergent literacy as a function of social class. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 23, 248–259.
    [Google Scholar]
21. Lee S. J.Vaught S. (2003) “You can never be too rich or too thin”. Popular and consumer culture and the Americanization of Asian American girls and young women Journal of Negro Education, 72, 457–466.
    [Google Scholar]
22. Lopez M. H.Gonzalez-Barrera A.Patten E. (2013) Closing the digital divide: Latinos and technology adoption. Pew Research Center. Retrieved from http://www.pewhispanic.org/2013/03/07/closing-the-digital-divide-latinos-and-technology-adoption.
23. Moje E. B.Lewis C. (2007) Examining opportunities to learn literacy: The role of critical sociocultural literacy research. In. InC LewisEnciso P. E.Moje E. B.Eds Reframing sociocultural research on literacy: Identity, agency, and power. New York, NY, Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
24. Moll L. C.Amanti C.Neff D.Gonzalez N. (1992) Funds of knowledge for teaching: Using a qualitative approach to connect homes and classrooms. Theory Into Practice, 31, 132–141.
    [Google Scholar]
25. Murillo L. A. (2012) Learning from bilingual family literacies. Language Arts, 90, 18–29.
    [Google Scholar]
26. National Association for the Education of Young Children & The Fred Rogers Center for Early Learning and Children’s Media at St. Vincent College (2012) Technology and interactive media as tools in early childhood programs serving children from birth through age 8 (Position statement). Retrieved from http://www.naeyc.org/fles/naeyc/PS_technology_WEB.pdf.
27. Olsen L (1997) Made in America: Immigrant students in our public schools. New York, NY, New Press.
    [Google Scholar]
28. Ono HZavodny M. (2008) Immigrants, English ability, and the digital divide. Social Forces, 86, 1455–1479.
    [Google Scholar]
29. Ovando C. J.Combs M. C.Collier V. P. (2005) Bilingual and ESL classrooms: Teaching in multicultural contexts. (4th ed.) New York, NY, McGraw-Hill.
    [Google Scholar]
30. Saldana J.Omasta M. (2018) Qualitative research: Analyzing life. Thousand Oaks, CA, SAGE.
    [Google Scholar]
31. Shanahan T.Mulhern M.Rodriguez-Brown F. (1995) Project FLAME: Lessons learned from a family literacy program for linguistic minority families. The Reading Teacher, 48, 586–593.
    [Google Scholar]
32. Song K (2016) Nurturing young children’s biliteracy development: A Korean family’s hybrid literacy practices at home. Language Arts, 93, 341–353.
    [Google Scholar]
33. Pierre R. G.St.Layzer J. I.Barnes H. V. (1995) Two-generation programs: Design, cost, and short-term effectiveness. The Future of Children, 5(3, 76–93.
    [Google Scholar]
34. InSuarez-Orozco C.Abo-Zena M. M.Marks A. K.Eds 2015) Transitions: The development of children of immigrants. New York, NY, New York University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
35. Tsai J. H. (2006) Use of computer technology to enhance immigrant families’ adaptation. Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 38, 87–93.
    [Google Scholar]
36. Warschauer M.Matuchniak T. (2010) New technology and digital worlds: Analyzing evidence of equity, access, use, and outcomes. Review of Research in Education, 34, 179–225.
    [Google Scholar]
37. Weinstein G (1998) Family and intergenerational literacy in multilingual communities. Center for Adult English Language Acquisition Retrieved from http://www.cal.org/caela/esl_resources/digests/Famlit2.html.
    [Google Scholar]
38. Yosso T. J. (2005) Whose culture has capital? A critical race theory discussion of community cultural wealth. Race, Ethnicity, and Education, 8, 69–91.
    [Google Scholar]