Popular Boards

Carole Torgerson, Greg Brooks, Louise Gascoine | Research Papers in Education | (2018)

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.

Tags

Sample Definition And Size

The study is a systematic 'tertiary' review, meaning it synthesizes existing systematic reviews and meta-analyses on phonics instruction. It does not involve primary participants; instead, it includes all relevant systematic reviews and meta-analyses identified in the literature. The exact number of reviews/meta-analyses included is not specified in the abstract but is described as 'all the relevant systematic reviews and meta-analyses.' ([durham-repository.worktribe.com](https://durham-repository.worktribe.com/output/1339781/phonics-reading-policy-and-the-evidence-of-effectiveness-from-a-systematic-tertiary-review?utm_source=openai))

Study Type

Systematic 'tertiary' review (a review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses). ([durham-repository.worktribe.com](https://durham-repository.worktribe.com/output/1339781/phonics-reading-policy-and-the-evidence-of-effectiveness-from-a-systematic-tertiary-review?utm_source=openai))

Conflicts Of Interest

No conflicts of interest are declared in the abstract or metadata available. ([durham-repository.worktribe.com](https://durham-repository.worktribe.com/output/1339781/phonics-reading-policy-and-the-evidence-of-effectiveness-from-a-systematic-tertiary-review?utm_source=openai))

Results Summary

The review provides an up-to-date overview of the results and quality of research on phonics instruction. It reports that 10 of the 12 meta-analyses reviewed showed significant benefits of systematic phonics on at least one reading measure, with effect sizes ranging from small to moderate. The remaining two meta-analyses showed positive but non-significant effects. The authors conclude that systematic phonics instruction should be included in teaching for younger readers, though the evidence is not clear enough to determine which phonics approach is best. ([link.springer.com](https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10648-019-09515-y?utm_source=openai))