What does the evidence really say about effective literacy teaching?

Abstract

This paper is shaped by the question: What does the evidence really say about effective literacy teaching? The studies reviewed come from a systematic meta-analysis of randomised control (RCT) design studies, and other closely related relevant research available in English. The aforementioned question was applied to the areas of reading accuracy and phonics; reading comprehension; reading fluency; spelling; and educational technologies. Findings in the area of reading accuracy and phonics suggest that although the evidence exists on the positives results of phonics instruction, more research is needed on the different approaches (e.g. synthetic, analytic). Eight strategies in reading comprehension are briefly explored. It is concluded that the research in this area is relatively weak, as few RCT studies exist in this domain. Similar findings were evident in the area of reading fluency, and spelling. The research in the area of educational technologies proved to be the weakest explored. Of the few studies found, the research seems to imply that educational technologies do not enhance the reading success of the learner. However, recent and more rigorously designed research highlight preliminary results in this area that appear to show promise.