A waiting period, and two sides of readiness

Language, in this telling, makes a person more fully human. It is a tool not only for communication but for seeing the world. To grow that capacity, literacy education is asked to begin in early childhood, when language is developing quickly, and in situations that are familiar and meaningful. Being able to use and to read written language is treated as important in a knowledge society, and as something that has to work inside a social and cultural setting.

From the late 1920s into the 1930s, a reading-readiness view was widely received, and early childhood was treated as a period of preparation for reading. One side, drawing on Gesell’s maturation theory, held that the intellectual processes needed for reading unfold of themselves at a certain moment of development, and that early training of young children has no effect on the skill finally acquired. That maturationist view was dominant from the 1920s to the 1940s. Even in those years, some held that readiness was not only a matter of waiting, but something that could be taught.

A second side, which became firm in the 1960s and was still widely accepted into the 1980s, treated readiness as a result of experience rather than of neural maturation alone. Environmental factors could predominate, and children could be prepared, as far as possible, so that foundational skills for reading could be taught. Twenty years of reading research, discussed with Teale and Sulzby in 1986, had by then led many to conclude that the readiness view was theoretically and practically inadequate, and had posed a substantial challenge to both behaviourist and maturationist theory. Those twenty years are left with that 1986 discussion, not treated as a later official finding.

Literacy that has already begun

In 1986, Teale and Sulzby began to use the term emergent literacy in order to mark a clear line between the theoretical and practical assumptions of the readiness view and newer views of literacy. In that theory, the knowledge needed for reading is already in the child, and is formed through interaction with the world outside. “Emergent” marks a continuing process: early reading and writing, and the knowledge around them, are not a fixed state but something still becoming. The process is said to begin at birth and to run through a life. Literacy includes both reading and writing, which stand in a dynamic relation and develop together.

In 1989, Teale and Sulzby set out several points to keep in view. First, most young children live in a society that reads and writes, so learning for reading and writing should start early in life; meeting letters early is the first step in that course, and by two or three a child often notices signs, signals, and logos at home and in the community. Second, literacy should be seen as a necessary part of learning in ordinary life. A child who watches an adult read a newspaper, or consult a cookbook while cooking, comes to see why literacy is needed. Print such as books, magazines, newspapers, and letters also develops a sense of written language; how much of that print a child meets varies by family, community, and culture, more than by any single formal lesson, and children grasp the importance of such materials through daily experience.

Third, children develop knowledge of what written marks do by actually writing, and by being in situations where what they have written serves a function, so that both the function and the form of writing become clearer. Fourth, a metacognitive and metalinguistic sense of written language develops knowledge of print. That sense shows itself when a child can say, out loud, that they are analysing how written language works. In the Korean example, a child picks friends’ name cards and says that they all share the same two letters, pointing at each; the same noticing can be heard when a child selects cards for Sara, Sami, and Lisa and says that the same letters appear in each name. It also shows itself when a child can talk about how written language works, and can answer questions such as whether they know how to read and write, whether they can find a way to read alone, or why people read and write at all. In a rich literacy environment, and through many such situations, basic knowledge gathers, and a sense of written language appears little by little.

What an early classroom is for

The ability to use written language for communication is also called literacy in a slightly different key: the capacity to understand and to use the written language of a particular culture, including awareness and attitude toward reading and writing, and a sense of the meaning and value those acts have in daily life. Acquiring that capacity — to read and to understand, and to put one’s own meaning into writing — is treated as a base for a fully human life. It is not a skill that is finished on a single day. The foundations learned before entrance to elementary school are treated as important for later schoolwork. Children, through reading and writing, also grow a power to think and a power to communicate.

Much has been discussed about how young children should be taught to read and write. A sound literacy education, in this telling, should respect a child’s development and interests, and at the same time offer a foundation for fluent reading and writing. The direction in an early-childhood setting is not to teach letters as such, but to include a natural print environment in the plan, to build a rich language setting, and to present it in a functional and meaningful context.

Why readiness and emergence are held apart

One view asks a child to wait, or to be prepared, until reading can begin. The other treats reading and writing as already under way in the signs on a street, in a newspaper on a table, and in a name a child can point to. The same Korean report, at fuller length, is on CampusDown.

Sources

1. Essay comparing a reading-readiness view and an emergent-literacy view in early-childhood literacy education (Korean source page).
2. Teale and Sulzby, 1986, on the term emergent literacy, and on twenty years of reading research as a challenge to readiness, behaviourist, and maturationist assumptions. Teale and Sulzby, 1989, on points to keep in view from an emergent-literacy standpoint. Teale, 1986, on reading and writing developing together. Gesell’s maturation theory, as cited for the neural-maturation side of readiness.
3. Lee Shin-hee, Kim Myeong-sun, and Son Seung-hee, 2013, on using written language in a social and cultural context. Lee Cha-suk, 1992, and Goodman, 1986, on literacy as the use of written language for communication. Smith, 1984, on literacy inside a particular culture. Lee Ji-yeong, 2008, on literacy as a base for a human life. Im Yang-geum, 2005, on foundations learned before elementary school.
4. Cooper, 1997; Gee, 1991; and Guthrie and Greaney, 1991, as cited on the Korean page. A Korean classroom example of a child comparing friends’ name cards for shared letters, retold here with comparable names.

Last updated: 14 November 2026