Phonics: reading policy and the evidence of effectiveness from a systematic ‘tertiary’ review

Abstract Ten years after publication of two reviews of the evidence on phonics, a number of British policy initiatives have firmly embedded phonics in the curriculum for early reading development. However, uncertainty about the most effective approaches to teaching reading remains. A definitive trial comparing different approaches was recommended in 2006, but never undertaken. However, since then, a number of systematic reviews of the international evidence have been undertaken, but to date they have not been systematically located, synthesised and quality appraised. This paper seeks to redress that gap in the literature. It outlines in detail the reading policy development, mainly in England, but with reference to international developments, in the last 10 years. It then reports the design and results of a systematic ‘tertiary’ review of all the relevant systematic reviews and meta-analyses in order to provide the most up-to-date overview of the results and quality of the research on phonics.

[1]  S. Suggate,et al.  A Meta-Analysis of the Long-Term Effects of Phonemic Awareness, Phonics, Fluency, and Reading Comprehension Interventions , 2016, Journal of learning disabilities.

[2]  Jeanne Sternlicht Chall,et al.  Learning to Read: The Great Debate , 1967 .

[3]  Tracy A. Lavin,et al.  Pedagogical strategies for teaching literacy to ESL immigrant students: a meta-analysis. , 2011, The British journal of educational psychology.

[4]  K. Stanovich.  Progress in Understanding Reading: Scientific Foundations and New Frontiers , 2000 .

[5]  Steven A. Stahl,et al.  Systematic Phonics Instruction Helps Students Learn to Read: Evidence from the National Reading Panel’s Meta-Analysis , 2001 .

[6]  Insoon Han,et al.  Evidence-Based Reading Instruction for English Language Learners in Preschool through Sixth Grades: A Meta-Analysis of Group Design Studies , 2009 .

[7]  P. Lachenbruch.  Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (2nd ed.) , 1989 .

[8]  B. Sinha,et al.  Statistical Meta-Analysis with Applications , 2008 .

[9]  R. Glatter.  School choice and diversity in England: a brief overview of research and key issues in House of Commons Education and Skills Committee , 2003 .

[10]  Jim Rose,et al.  Independent review of the teaching of early reading : final report , 2006 .

[11]  R. Johnston,et al.  Accelerating the development of reading, spelling and phonemic awareness skills in initial readers , 2004 .

[12]  D. Langenberg.  Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction , 2000 .

[13]  S. Suggate.  Why what we teach depends on when: grade and reading intervention modality moderate effect size. , 2010, Developmental psychology.

[14]  Philip B. Gough,et al.  Decoding, Reading, and Reading Disability , 1986 .

[15]  周 義澄,et al.  Education and science , 1983 .

[16]  K. Schwippert,et al.  Progress in reading literacy in national and international context : The impact of PIRLS 2006 in 12 countries , 2012 .

[17]  Gregory Camilli,et al.  Meta‐Analysis and Reading Policy: Perspectives on Teaching Children to Read , 2006, The Elementary School Journal.

[18]  Jonathan Solity,et al.  Decoding the phonics screening check , 2017 .

[19]  D. Moher,et al.  Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. , 2010, International journal of surgery.

[20]  Xiao-Hua Zhou,et al.  Statistical Methods for Meta‐Analysis , 2008 .

[21]  Katharina Galuschka,et al.  Effectiveness of Treatment Approaches for Children and Adolescents with Reading Disabilities: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials , 2014, PloS one.

[22]  Employment,et al.  The National Curriculum : handbook for primary teachers in England , 1999 .

[23]  Marilyn Jager Adams,et al.  Beginning To Read: Thinking and Learning about Print. , 1991 .

[24]  K. Sherman.  A meta -analysis of interventions for phonemic awareness and phonics instruction for delayed older readers , 2007 .

[25]  Adetayo Kasim,et al.  Same difference? Understanding variation in the estimation of effect sizes from educational trials , 2016 .

[26]  Jacob Cohen.  Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences , 1969, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Research Design.

[27]  D. Hammill,et al.  The National Reading Panel’s Meta‐Analysis of Phonics Instruction: Another Point of View , 2006, The Elementary School Journal.

[28]  Gregory Camilli,et al.  Teaching Children to Read : The Fragile Link Between Science & Federal Education Policy , 2003 .

[29]  E. Marinus,et al.  Phonics training for English-speaking poor readers. , 2018, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[30]  Dominic Wyse,et al.  Synthetic phonics and the teaching of reading: the debate surrounding England's ‘Rose Report’ , 2007 .