"
Skip to Content
Version 1.1 – Updated August 2021

Phonics instruction

Overview

  • Influence: Phonics instruction
  • Domain: Curricula
  • Sub-Domain: Reading, writing and the arts
  • Potential to Accelerate Student Achievement: Potential to accelerate
  • Influence Definition: A form of instruction that stresses the acquisition of letter-sound correspondences in reading and spelling. It involves teaching children the sounds made by individual letters or letter groups (for example, the letter “c” makes a k sound), and teaching children how to merge separate sounds together to make it one word (for example, blending the sounds k, a, t makes CAT).

Evidence

  • Number of meta-analyses: 13
  • Number of studies: 536
  • Number of students: 22,316
  • Number of effects: 2,090
  • Effect size: 0.57

Meta-Analyses

Meta-Analyses
Journal Title Author First Author's Country Article Name Year Published Variable Number of Studies Number of Students Number of Effects Effect Size
Unpublished Thesis Gassler USA A meta-analysis of classroom studies that have compared code-emphasis to non-code-emphasis first grade reading methods. 1992 Word vs. non-word interventions 52 0 63 0.35
Journal of Educational Psychology Bus & van IJzendoorn Netherlands Phonological awareness and early reading: A meta-analysis of experimental training studies 1999 Phonological awareness training 70 5,843 1,484 0.73
Review of Educational Research Ehri, Nunes, Stahl, & Willows USA Systematic phonics instruction helps students learn to read: Evidence from the National Reading Panel’s meta-analysis. 2001 Systematic phonics instruction 34 0 66 0.41
Education Policy Analysis Archives Camilli, Vargas, & Yirecko USA "Teaching children to read": The fragile link between science and federal education policy 2003 Phonics instruction 40 0 40 0.24
Research Report: DfES Publications Torgerson, Brooks, & Hall England A systematic review of the research literature on the use of phonics in the teaching of reading and spelling 2006 Phonics instruction 19 0 20 0.27
Unpublished Thesis Sherman USA A meta-analysis of interventions for phonemic awareness and phonics instruction for delayed older readers 2007 Phonemic awareness and phonics instruction 26 1,358 88 0.26
Education and Urban Society Jeynes USA A meta-analysis of the relationship between phonics instruction and minority elementary school student academic achievement 2008 Phonics for minority students 22 5,000 22 0.23
British Journal of Educational Psychology Adesope, Lavin, Thompson, & Ungerleider Pedagogical strategies for teaching literacy to ESL immigrant students: A meta-analysis. 2011 Systematic phonics instruction with ESL students 14 1,647 14 0.40
Reading Research Quarterly Piasta & Wagner USA Developing early literacy skills: a meta-analysis of alphabet learning and instruction 2011 Alphabet learning on outcomes 63 8,468 82 0.43
Review of Educational Research Weiser & Mathes Using encoding instruction to improve the reading and spelling performances of elementary students at risk for literacy difficulties: A best-evidence synthesis 2011 Encoding instruction 11 0 11 0.78
Plos One Galuschka, Ise, Krick, & Schulte-Korne all Effectiveness of treatment approaches for children and adolescents with reading disabilities: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials 2014 Phonic + Phonemic awareness programs 22 0 37 0.32
Review of Educational Research Garcia & Cain Spain Decoding and reading comprehension: A meta-analysis to identify which reader and assessment characteristics influence the strength of the relationship in English 2014 Decoding on reading comprehension 110 0 110 2.20
Studies in Psychology and Behavior Pan, Deng, Lin, & Liu China A meta-analysis of the relationship between Chinese students' English phonological awareness and reading achievement. 2019 Phonological awareness & achievement 53 0 53 0.77
TOTAL/AVERAGE 536 22,316 2,090 0.57

Confidence

The Confidence is the average of these four measures, each divided into five approximately equal groups and assigned a value from 1 to 5 based on the following criteria:

  • Number of Meta-analyses
    • 1 = 1
    • 2 = 2–3
    • 3 = 4–6
    • 4 = 7–9
    • 5 = 10+
  • Number of Studies
    • 1 = 1–10
    • 2 = 11–50
    • 3 = 51–200
    • 4 = 201–400
    • 5 = 400+
  • Number of Students
    • 1 = 1–2,500
    • 2 = 2,501–10,000
    • 3 = 10,000–20,000
    • 4 = 20,000–100,000
    • 5 = 100,001+
  • Number of Effects
    • 1 = 1–100
    • 2 = 101–300
    • 3 = 301–600
    • 4 = 601–1,200
    • 5 = 1,200+
Confidences
Number of Meta-Analyses Number of Studies Number of Students Number of Effects Overall Confidence
Confidence Factor 5 5 4 5 5
Back to top