My research contributes a fresh perspective to understanding the underlying ideological assumptions about literacy in low-income homes by challenging widespread myths about literacy in these families. Some dominant misconceptions are perpetuated by the media and uncritically accepted as truths by educators. These include the notion that families living in low-income circumstances are a homogeneous group, the children lack family support for education, the children show reduced levels of motivation for learning compared to their middle class counterparts, the culture of low-income families is adverse to educational achievement, the parents are lazy and give little attention to schooling and the families participate in few literacy activities.

There are also direct implications from this research for community literacy practitioners. The rich detail concerning not only the literacy activities, but also parental attitudes, beliefs and values about literacy and education, provides a much-needed basis from which literacy practitioners may inform their practice. Case study methodology provides truthfulness in representation and makes the research report less esoteric and more accessible to a wider audience (Cohen & Manion, 1994). This will encourage literacy practitioners to formulate their own opinions from the implications of the study.

Further, information gathered may be added to the body of knowledge that policy makers can draw upon to help them understand how the middle class position drives classroom dynamics and to develop policies to better serve students. Just as Fagan (1998) points out in his study, I believe that "politicians would do well to read [this study] and listen to the 'messages' that originate from the people."