This article is a response to claims made by proponents of “science of reading” and “structured literacy” reading instruction approaches, in regard to their effectiveness with emergent bilingual students. The author argues that the strong knowledge base generated from studies examining the dynamic literacy practices of emergent bilingual students should also be included in reading curriculum, assessment, and teacher education decisions. First, the author provides an overview of the contributions and limitations of the knowledge base associated with the science of reading, in relation to bilingual learners. The author explains that the complexity of the instructional, demographic, and sociocultural realities of emergent bilinguals in the United States requires solutions informed by various vantage points and perspectives. Second, the author summarizes family literacy research in households of Latinx bilingual children, documenting parents’ and children’s advocacy efforts, emergent biliteracy practices, and tensions in grappling with English‐dominant instruction in schools. Finally, the author summarizes research extending oral reading assessment procedures to analyze emergent bilingual students’ miscues and retellings. The author cautions against the implications of critiques of the three‐cueing systems and miscue analysis, by explaining how language‐related perspectives, including translanguaging, can help expand miscue analytic approaches. This expansion can help teachers and families understand how emergent bilinguals draw from their multiple language and literacy resources in decoding and retelling. Implications for teacher preparation and professional development are included throughout.

No abstract

This article features the literacy practices, resources, and strategies reported and observed in two households, by Latina mothers and their children in elementary school. Drawing on asset‐based frameworks (funds of knowledge, transnational literacies, and family language policies), the analysis presents case studies of two households, featuring the perspectives and practices of mothers and children who participated in a community‐based family literacy program. Findings center on issues of access to texts and technology, views on academic literacy practices, and selection of educational resources that promote bilingualism, biliteracy, and transnational understandings of culture and inequality. Implications for text selection, inclusion of bilingual language practices, and collaboration with families in equitable home‐school partnerships are described.

No abstract