Martine van der Pluijm

158 Chapter 6 In the second study (Chapter 3), we examined the first prototype of the AHL program, by iteratively testing and making consecutive formative evaluations. This prototype comprised a series of five principles (later called Steps) and tools to build SFPs in support of child language development (see Figure 6.1). We investigated how the prototype could be modified to overcome the challenges experienced by participants in the classrooms of ten teachers in five schools. The main research question was: What modifications of the prototype are needed to contribute to sustainable SFPs directed at lower-educated parents and their young children’s oral language development? The results show that seven of the ten teachers implemented each of the five design principles of the prototype in their classroom. However, many of these teachers experienced problems gaining insight in the HLE of parents and their children [design principle 1] . They found that embedding the principles in school policy raised barriers due to a lack of the required conditions [design principle 2] . Teachers needed more individualized coaching to build reciprocal relationships [design principle 3], implement parent-child activities [design principle 4] , and to encourage parents to use language strategies [design principle 5] . In particular, explaining and modeling activities to parents were new to teachers. They needed support from colleagues and coaches to take the step toward applying these techniques. They also needed encouragement to stimulate bilingual parents and children to use their home language, which appeared necessary as many of these dyads hesitated to interact without this support. Our findings also showed that the realization of design principle 5 could be improved by reinforcing parental roles and preserving child initiatives. Directive interaction styles by parents resulted in less use of language by the child and less playfulness. Seven teachers found the prototype usable in the context of their work, and three teachers decided to stop after implementing design principle 3. They felt that the two last design principles, which focused on arranging parent-child activities in classrooms and on stimulating the use of language by parents and children in these activities, were not very relevant to their situation. Their classrooms had few parents who had attained education levels at or below primary school, or they thought that these principles were not applicable to their work as a grade 2 teacher. Furthermore, our findings show that parents gradually increased their participation in parent-child activities, showed more interactive behavior with their child and were positive about their participation in the program and its relevance for their role as parents at home. Finally, the school teams saw opportunities for continuing to work with the prototype. Nevertheless, we also observed practical problems such as insufficient preparation of teachers for working with parents during pre-service teacher education and a lack of the necessary time due to a shortage of teachers. After evaluating with teachers, parents, and principals, we decided to refine the principles (e.g., deemphasize the need to develop school policy). We developed additional design principles to strengthen teacher behavior directed at parental role development and prioritizing language use during parent-child activities. Teachers’ positive evaluations of the step-by-step personalized coaching led to the decision