1

Running head: UNIVERSITIES AND FIRST-YEAR STUDENT NEEDS IN LITERACY

Literature Review

First-Year Students Literacy Needs at Universities

Jennifer Salazar

Sonoma State University

 COMMUNITY AND COLLABORATION 2

586 Literature Review

Introduction

Literacy growth is important for students educational career to evolve. There are various

aspects English courses use to implement growth. One crucial component is first-year students

needs in literacy development. This leads to an important question. How do universities foster

the needs of first year students in English reading programs? This question seems to be essential

for new college students who are working to improve their literacy at a collegiate level. First

year students literacy is critical. It is the beginning of their reading and writing career and the

building blocks for the rest of their development in English courses. Research suggests collages

attempt to support in depth reading. To support this, I took information from articles on both

composition courses and synthesized the findings on reading and writing. This topic should be

investigated further to better understand the research and studies in this field. For instance,

Brown, a researcher (2015) did a study on a collegiate reading program. In the study, it mentions

Dana Goia, a poet and former Chairman of National Endowment for the Arts agreed on the

importance of reading. Goia (2004) mentions America can no longer take literacy for granted.

The goal of this literature review is to explore and raise awareness of the process it takes to

support literacy, resources given to the students to aid and guide them through the reading

program, and contributions put toward students growth that enable them to improve their

literacy for the rest of their college academia life.

Methods
 COMMUNITY AND COLLABORATION 3

The articles used for this literature review were extracted from EBSCOO and JSTOR database

and then narrowed down from essentially 300 articles to 100. The articles were specifically

searched by using the search engine using these key words: first-year students, college, reading

programs, and literacy. Narrowing down articles was difficult because not many focused just on

reading programs in English courses for first-year students. I then synthesized information from

articles by using common themes in the research. The articles were then organized in these three

categories:

1. Placement of students into reading/writing programs

2. Resources given to students in the program

3. Common themes programs had to foster the needs of the students

After filtering through the articles, 2-3 focused on writing exams and entry level tests t place

students into their programs. The next few articles focused on resources given to students such

as: online courses, e-textbooks, and library support. Around 5-7 articles reviewed what programs

do for students. from the research given, I gathered common themes in the programs that

fostered the needs of first-year students. Each article chosen supported the main question in this

literature review to help others better understand what is being done for college students entering

their first-year of college level reading and writing courses.

The Foundations of Creating English Reading Programs for First -Years

Giving students the proper support and guidance is essential for a successful reading program.

Reading programs are a work in progress. If schools are to further reading programs and evolve,

researchers suggest looking closely at what these schools are doing to place students into first-
 COMMUNITY AND COLLABORATION 4

year programs. In the article by Elliot et, al (2012) the authors discuss writing courses for first-

years and the placement process. According to the article, there is a lot of money going into

programs to align high school writing expectations with college level courses. Pike et, al (2011)

discuss similarly the efforts put into programs. The point of discussion leans on themed learning

programs and what it does for communities and first-year students. Barnhisel et, al (2012) asks,

what does freshman comp actually do? The answer is simple, knowing what the priorities of

programs are is the foundation being built for the program. Many universities believe structure

and common core would include sentence-structure and the typical parts of writing like

grammar, passive versus active voices, and more. As these are essentials in writing lessons,

should they be the core focus?

Placement of writing courses generally depends on an exam taken by students after high school

to see where the students are in their reading and writing. The study conducted by Elliot et, al

(2012) explores the validation and effort put into writing tests used to place students into

programs. Researchers confirmed the importance and commonality of studies designed to assist

placement test scores and high school grades with college achievement. Pike et, al (2011) also

suggests the fact that students are not randomly assigned to first-year programs is not surprising

given logistic, political, economic, and ethical concerns about the use of random assignment in

higher education. It enables students to align their previous knowledge and giving them a chance

to grow by placing them in programs specific for their literacy needs.

Having well developed testing methods and premeditated placing is essential for first-year

students. Research suggests being assigned into reading programs is key. It is the foundation into

their reading program experience. Their growth depends heavily on placement and what will

foster their previous knowledge and where they are future focused. The process is tedious when
 COMMUNITY AND COLLABORATION 5

it comes to putting these programs together, but they are composed to benefit the students and

their literacy growth.

Resources Given to First-Year Students

Library Support

Students need multiple resources to aid them in their developmental stages of literacy. One

resource found in every university, but not always obvious, is the library. Libraries are

commonly overlooked when resources are being sought. MacKay (2015) reviews services in

academic libraries. They play a small role, but commonly a vital one in aiding students in

reading and writing. One program called, Dal Reads, started in 2009 as a unity reading or

community reading with the purpose to provide a book club experience for a large group. The

goal of Dal Reads (Dalhousie University) is to get students, faculty, and staff to read and discuss

the material. Another resource many reading programs use are online tools.

Online Tools

For programs to exponentially grow, it is essential for researchers to look deeper into other

research being conducted and finding common themes. Sandberg (2011) describes the digital age

to be a major influencer in reading programs today and continues to be researched and sought out

by schools. The author references Eshet- Alkalai and Chajut (2009) as defining the digital age as

the ability to demonstrate a range of cognitive and emotional skills in using digital technologies.

It is clear to the authors that the evolution of online reading and research is nonlinear. Mixed

emotions are being shown by educators when they find out their reading programs will be guided
 COMMUNITY AND COLLABORATION 6

by technology. Educators and students may have previous experience and are able to manipulate

the course around it, while others are foreign to e-reading and have multiple worries and

anxieties about how to proceed. Dobler (2015) mentions a common goal among educators is to

guide students toward independent learning where they can digest, understand, analyze, and

solve problems. Sanders (2014) conducted research at Fort Hayes State University and their use

of online use for graduate classes and the reading specialist program. The university felt it was

important to evaluate online programs and shape them to be as successful as possible. The staff

put together some important questions to evaluate and help provide a better online platform for

the students. A prominent belief Sanders (2014) covers in his study, is support. The author

suggests that guidance is crucial for the online courses. If educators and faculty members are

confident in their program, the implementation will flow better. When a program is being

planned, and implemented it is helpful as research suggests that putting together the

requirements, assignments, readings, and times are essential for students to be able to understand

and follow.

Researchers, Hamer and McGrath (2010) found that readers preferences varied. Their research

suggests students felt it was easier to follow along on paper compared to a screen. It was easier

for them to remember information on paper rather than online. This information shows some

obstacles with having online reading programs. Sandberg (2011) found multiple researchers who

had found a large percentage of students preferred paper to technology.

If educators are to meet this goal, one way to accomplish this is to be active and thoughtful in

process. Sandberg (2011) overviewed past literature and previous experience as an educator to

further investigate reading online and how to help students. Sandberg makes a point to say it is
 COMMUNITY AND COLLABORATION 7

important for instructors to know theory and practice of online reading. Another key tool is

having strategies to take back to the classroom.

E-Textbooks

Universities are constantly adding multiple platforms for reading and writing. Various ways of

implementing reading are on the rise, as previously mentioned in Sandbergs study (2011)

technology in reading programs is on the rise. A secondary platform evolving is e- textbooks.

Dobler (2015) references the simple truth that with technology emerging and growing, shifts in

reading habits, preferences, and strategies also follow. When teachers have previous experience

with e-reading, they can share their experiences to guide students on the process of reading via e-

book, and find more effective ways to incorporate writing.

A constant change in technology is ways to access the information needed. Researchers suggest

the e-book is a familiar version of a textbook, but rather in digital form. E-books have a spot for

students to take notes, providing them with a tool to write while reading the text. This platform

may be easier for some students and still give them a way to connect their writing to their text.

This is helpful to aid students in the reading experience. By implementing technology in younger

years in schools, Dobler makes the point they will build curiosity to e-books and grow with this

technology. As they get older they will have a stronger relationship with it and feel more

confident in its use. The authors concluded, specifically Sandberg (2011) that students will need

to change to keep up with the evolution of reading programs online. Learning through

technology can be engaging for students. The articles suggest it is continuing to change over the

years. Educators are finding this phenomenon with technology to be a process rather than a

single event. Patience is important while working with technology as it takes time to learn and
 COMMUNITY AND COLLABORATION 8

implement on both ends. Seemingly, this form has been beneficial to first-year students and has

aided them in their literacy success.

First-Year Programs at Universities and Common Themes

Common Books

English reading courses have multiple benefits and concentrations to make for a successful

program for first-years, one aspect is common books. Ferguson et, al (2014) collected surveys

and interviews on a reading program on common book programs (CBP) for first-year students.

Nipissing University in Ontario, Canada, formulated a common reading book, also called,

Common Book, Common Ground in 2010. It was one of the first in Canada to be created in

terms of reading programs. Social media, power points, and other platforms were used to support

the program at Nipissing. Benz et, al (2013) discusses common book themes and how it

contributes to first-year composition English writing courses. In their program, they discuss an

essential part of first-year student needs, the text. The text choice is narrowed down to three

options by faculty and staff members on the committee. As the website from Dominican

University states, Gunnings Mental Model Theory generally evolves when one reads a fiction

novel. The readers essentially build a movie in their head about the main character. The novel

choice is important because it allows professors to prepare themselves to better guide students

through the process of reading and writing. Implementing the book is essential for first-year

students to get a grasp on what they need to know. Ferguson et, al (2014) suggested other

researchers such as Boaz (2005, 2006) found 54% of students claimed the book was

implemented in their classes.

 COMMUNITY AND COLLABORATION 9

The content is important for students to grasp and understand. Generally, reading programs

implemented in English courses that are successful, encourage and peak students interest.

Ferguson et, al (2014) discovered the year that students had the easiest and shortest readings

cumulated the highest level of student satisfaction. Researchers also found cons to the common

core. Thorne (2015) suggests with common reading, the core curriculum disappears and causes

dividers for students to read and discuss. Providing goals can help first-year students steer in the

direction toward success.

Goals

Secondly, having goals for first-year student programs is essential for the outcome of the

program. Benz et, al (2013) discuss Common Reading Experiences (CREs), which have many

goals for students. Some of the goals include: student engagement, establishing expectations for

students, developing community, and promoting literacy. Hensley and Davis (2016) conducted

research on a program called Academic Success Program (ASP). This program was produced in

Western Carolina University in 1975. The goal was to allow freshman to get an early start and

enable them to get credits out of the way so they could participate in study abroad programs or

internships. It is implied by the author that student support is aimed in the SLC program by

helping students accomplish academic goals. Thorne (215) would suggest common reading goals

to be hard for those at different levels. Students will have a hard time reading and writing if they

are unable to connect with the first part of the process, the reading. Implementing activities may

help students better understand the material. Barnhisel et, al (2012) decided in their study that

process-based learning was the goal of their program. The stages of writing are recognized by

many institutions. It is said that process-writing is essential and slow-embraced outside of

writing programs. Why is process based implementation important? There are pros of this
 COMMUNITY AND COLLABORATION 10

strategy, as it helps each developmental stage of writing to be supported by the flow it brings

when learning each aspect before moving onto the next. The conclusion of Sanders (2014)

reveals universities are continuing to work on goals with creativity in hopes of attracting more

students for enrollment and keeping them interested in the academia. Deeper reflection by

students and instructors can be beneficial to better the program as it is key when building a

community, everyone feels supported and working together to grow and evolve.

Activities

Thirdly, most English reading courses add in activities such as games and writing to tie in with

the novel. Benz (2013) suggests most programs have first-year composition (FYC) and other

writing courses that are tied in. Getting the text right can be essential for students to connect on

some level to piece together their writing so they are implementing their understanding of the

novel. As mentioned before, Gunning (1996) would agree with his schema theory, meaning they

draw and process reading sometimes based on past experiences. Essentially, to add in writing

components, students must first understand what they are reading. Research points out programs

have multiple elements to support first-year students. Thorne (2015) looks at the reading

materials and how they are laid out and what they do for students. One of the first aspects Thorne

inspected was if reading was required. Schools asked for group participation or essays to be

written to measure their reading progress. The researchers intended for all grade levels to read

the book.

Activities also benefit students by aiding them in multiple ways to digest the material in the

program. Hensley and Davis (2016) suggested in their study that the program offered students to

live on campus and join in on activities, and university-sponsored programs. According to

 COMMUNITY AND COLLABORATION 11

previous research, colleges invite the author to come speak to the students to connect them to the

activities and writing. Research suggests that activities are evolving and often incorporated in

English reading programs.

Collaboration and Community

The last theme found in research gathered on English Reading Programs, is a sense of

collaboration and community. As Benz et, al (2013) discusses the program being an effective

way for CRE and FYC to enhance resources and collaboration among the school community.

The University of Texas at Arlington implemented the CRE, also known as the One Book

Program. It ran a course of 6 years and connected with other courses like English 1301. The class

emphasized reading and writing relationships. Wepner and Quatroche (2011) mention having a

shared vision, commitment, caring, positive interaction, and power sharing are just a few ways

that are promising.

Reading experiences provide commonality between parties. As mentioned on the Dominican

University website, having a discussion on the text may create commonalities and ideas to be

incorporated into the curriculum. This supports Gunnings theory on reading, also known as the

Schema Theory, where students draw from past experiences to new ones (Peters, n.d.).

Discussing the material gives them a chance to share past experiences and work in collaboration

to connect to new ideas and themes. The benefits of having a common reading enables students

to have an ice-breaker and shared story to create opportunities to share as first-year students.

Some concerns of the program researched by MacKay (2015) fell on students not feeling

engaged because they had no say or contribution to the book selection, which was chosen outside

of the university. This could pose an issue to the development of the program and the success of
 COMMUNITY AND COLLABORATION 12

it. The conclusion led the authors to realize reaching out to other programs would help the

university expand their knowledge and come up with other ways to take collaboration and

community to the next level. Other beneficial contributions are self-efficiency, efficacy, and a

consistent understanding that learning never ends. Hensley and Davis (2016) describe multiple

departments where faculty were involved with the planning process to ensure a successful

program. It is both academic and socially focused. Some of the benefits are due to the program

being smaller, giving students a personal aspect and creating a space for them to connect deeper

with faculty, activities, classmates, and the program.

Learning communities contribute to these programs in various ways. Barnhisel et, al (2012) felt

learning communities offer the chance to help students integrate what they are learning in their

classes. Learning communities that include first-year writing classes also present a valuable

opportunity to help faculty learn across disciplines. Coming together to encourage self-grow is a

powerful tool and in the end benefits the students and faculty. It appears in the research students

are responding to these programs in a positive manner and the key to students overall

appreciation are smaller amounts rather than overloading them with information and activities.

Too much academia may overwhelm first-year students, leaving them less confident in their

abilities to be successful and work together. Thorne (2015) suggests there are multiple ways to

put together successful reading programs, even if they pose obstacles and barriers. This research

helps others better understand the pros and cons of reading programs and how to better

implement them. Having staff who work together to better understand the problems, and better

the program shows community and collaboration are top priority.

Limitations
 COMMUNITY AND COLLABORATION 13

Overall, the reading programs are a work in progress. The articles point out the problem with

reading programs is when being built, the staff must remember to work within their contexts to

make the right decisions for their specific programs. These programs must have advocates to

keep the programs structured and successful. When reading programs are strong the students are

benefiting from a well-rounded program. There is a resentment students place on developmental

reading classes. It is important for educators to be mindful of students attitudes toward their

levels of reading. By encouraging students during reading, it gives students confidence in

participating in class discussion. Creating community and collaboration is essentially the glue to

the programs created for first-year students.

Conclusion

It is apparent throughout research in the literacy world, reading programs are on the rise and how

they are being implemented is constantly being analyzed and changed. Building an environment

fostering first-year student needs has various benefits for educators and students. This paper

highlights researchers and studies that have taken literacy and reading/ writing programs by

synthesizing the foundations, resources and common themes found in the articles to support

literacy development for first-year students in college.

In depth, the literature review expands on how universities support resources, guidance, and

growth. The research on literacy is vast but has the potential to continue to expand and refine.

There is plenty of room for further research and studies to be implemented to put together strong

programs for students to improve their literacy. The needs of first-year students are crucial and

should be accommodated by universities in order to strengthen and build students academia,

specifically in reading and writing.

 COMMUNITY AND COLLABORATION 14

References

Benz, B., Comer, D., Juergensmeyer, E., & Lowry, M. (2013). WPAs, Writing Programs and the

Common Reading Experience. WPA: Writing Program Administration - Journal Of The

Council Of Writing Program Administrators, 37(1), 11-32.

Brown, K. (2014). The Potential of Common Reading Programs for Revamping Education

Programs. Kentucky English Bulletin, 63(2), 46-49

Dobler, E. (2015). e-Textbooks. Journal Of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 58(6), 482-491.

doi:10.1002/jaal.391

Elliot, N., Deess, P., Rudniy, A., & Joshi, K. (2012). Placement of Students into First-Year

Writing Courses. Research in the Teaching of English, 46(3), 285-313. Retrieved from

http://0-www.jstor.org.iii.sonoma.edu/stable/41583597

Eshet-Alkalai, Y., & Chajut, E. (2009). Changes over time in digital literacy.

Cyberpsychology & Behavior, J2(6), 713-715. doi:10.1089/cpb.2008.02

Ferguson, K., Brown, N., & Piper, L. (2014). "How Much Can One Book Do?": Exploring

Perceptions of a Common Book Program for First-Year University Students. Journal Of

College Reading & Learning, 44(2), 164-199.

Greg Barnhisel, Evan Stoddard, & Jennifer Gorman. (2012). Incorporating Process-Based
 COMMUNITY AND COLLABORATION 15

Writing Pedagogy into First-Year Learning Communities: Strategies and Outcomes. The

Journal of General Education, 61(4), 461-487. doi:10.5325/jgeneeduc.61.4.0461

Hensley, G., & Davis, L. K. (2016). It's Better in the Summer: Building a Successful Transition

to College and Fostering Student Success. Summer Academe, 102-13.

Hitchens-Smith, C. E., Ortlieb, E. T., & Cheek, J. H. (2011). Perceptions of Struggling Readers

Enrolled in a Developmental Reading Course. Global Education Journal, (1), 23-4

MacKay, M., & Tarulli, L. (2015). Dal Reads. Reference & User Services Quarterly, 54(3), 16-

18.

Peters (n.d.). In Dominican Universitys online database. Retrieved from

http://www.dominican.edu/academics/education/about/madaliennepeters

Pike, G., Hansen, M., & Lin, C. (2011). Using Instrumental Variables to Account for Selection

Effects in Research on First-Year Programs. Research in Higher Education, 52(2), 194-

214. Retrieved from http://0-www.jstor.org.iii.sonoma.edu/stable/41483779

Sandberg, K. (2011). College Student Academic Online Reading: A Review of the Current

Literature. Journal Of College Reading & Learning, 42(1), 89-98.

Sanders, K. J. (2014). Building a Quality Online Reading Specialist Program. Journal Of

Reading Education, 39(2), 32-34.

Thorne, A. (2015). Common Reading Programs: Trends, Traps, Tips. Academic Questions,

28(2), 135-146. doi:10.1007/s12129-015-9497-9

 COMMUNITY AND COLLABORATION 16

Wepner, S. B., & Quatroche, D. J. (2011). How Are Colleges and Universities Preparing

Reading Specialist Candidates for Leadership Positions in the Schools?. Reading Horizons,

51(2), 103-118.