While the jury is still out on which approach educators should endorse for promoting literacy, Braunger and Lewis (1997) found the types and forms of literacy that are often practised in low-income homes are incongruent with literacy of the school. One general result was that the low–income parents stress the importance of learning to mechanically decode words, while literacy specialists focus more on reading as a process of constructing meaning through the dynamic interaction of the reader, the text and the context.

Braunger and Lewis (1997) in their comprehensive report offer a summary of practices that they claim to hinder children's development as readers. Their list includes such actions as emphasizing phonics only and no whole language; drilling letters, sounds and words in isolated contexts one at a time; insisting on correct spelling of all words they can read; promoting perfection in oral reading; reducing the emphasis on comprehension and interpretation of text; and overusing workbooks and worksheets. These were all activities that became apparent in my data collection with the parents interacting with their children in the present study.

A key finding of this study was that teachers felt the education system was in a state of flux based on their perception that they were being continually asked by those in power from the Department of Education, as well as their school administrators to implement new curriculum and continually change course. They claimed that no sooner had one program been introduced and implemented, that a new one was following with limited support offered to the teachers to get it up and running effectively. It is well recognized that with school–based reform, school staff may take on tasks for which they may not be prepared. Thus, they need more support to work effectively. The teachers in this study complained that there was sometimes a poor fit between district level in–service training and what the staff needed.