Research data.pdf - Primarily Learning

Canadian Study – Sumbler and Willows 1996 –
synthetic phonics (Jolly Phonics) classes compared
to whole language/eclectic classes.
large numbers of children, all 265 non reading, controlled and
equal comparison groups
After 6 months monitoring and testing:
Synthetic group – Av. reading – 8 months ahead of chronological
age
Eclectic group - Av. reading - same as chronological age
Synthetic group - Av. spelling – 5 months ahead of chronological
age
Eclectic group - Av. spelling – 16 months behind chronological
age
Synthetic group – Av. nonword reading – same as chronological
age
Eclectic group - Av. nonword reading – 2 months behind
chronological age
Only two activities were significantly related to subsequent reading
and spelling success: they were 'phonics' (which included all
phonics activities involving print) and letter formation (which
involved pronouncing letter-sounds while writing the letter shapes)

England - Stuart 1999 – Jolly Phonics compared to
holistic method (Big Books)
large numbers of children, 86% foreign language speakers, controls
and well matched comparison groups
tested after 12 weeks and one year later
Results at the end of 1 year 3 months:
Synthetic group – Av. reading – 11 months ahead
Big book group - Av. reading - 2 months ahead
Synthetic group - Av. spelling – 1 month ahead of chronological
age.
Big Book group - Av. spelling – 11 months behind chronological
age
Jolly Phonics children also significantly ahead on comprehension

Scotland- Johnston, R. and Watson, J (1998) –
Accelerating Reading Attainment: The
Effectiveness of Synthetic Phonics. Interchange 57.
The Scottish Office Education and Industry
Department. Copies can be obtained from the following website:
www.hmis.scotoff.gov.uk/riu
although slightly different to Jolly Phonics – the principles are the same.
large number of children, controls and good comparison groups.
three methods compared:
1. 'Analytic phonics' (letter-sounds taught by analysing the initial sounds
heard and seen in whole words)
2. 'Phonological awareness plus analytic phonics' (oral training in phoneme
and rhyme skills for first 10 minutes, followed by letter-sound teaching
identical to 'Analytic phonics' for the final 10 minutes)
3. 'Synthetic phonics' (introduced to letters and their sounds in isolation,
taught how to sound and blend all the letters in a printed word, and taught
how to segment oral words into sounds in order to spell using letters)
after 16 weeks:-
- Analytic phonics – Reading Av. - at age level
- Spelling Av. – 2 months below
- Phonological awareness plus analytic phonics
- Reading Av: at age level
- Spelling Av: 1 month below
- Synthetic phonics – Reading Av: 7 months above chronological age.
- Spelling Av: 9 months above chronological age.
after the testing, the first two sets of children were taught with synthetic phonics.
All the groups then ended up with much the same results for reading and
comprehension. However, the spelling was significantly higher for the original
synthetic group and this group also had no child more than a year below
chronological age, whereas the others did have a few.
the researchers concluded that it was not the pace but the method of letter-sound
teaching that was the crucial factor

Accelerating Reading and Spelling with Synthetic
phonics: A Five Year Follow Up – Scotland –
Johnston, R. and Watson, J
at the end of Primary 2 (English Year 1), the 264 children available
for testing who had been taught by the synthetic phonics method
(1998) were reading and spelling on average eleven months ahead
of chronological age
at the end of Primary 5 (English Year 4), the children who had
been taught by the synthetic phonics method were reading, on
average, 26 months ahead of chronological age
spelling and comprehension scores were significantly above
chronological age
boys in Primary 4 & 5 were a significant seven months ahead of
girls for reading
* www.scotland.gov.uk/library5/education/ins4-00.asp

A seven year study of the effects of synthetic
phonics teaching on reading and spelling
attainment
www.scotland.gov.uk/library5/education/ins17-00.asp
Word reading - 3 years 6 months ahead of chronological age
Spelling – 1 year 9 months ahead of chronological age
Reading comprehension - 3½ months ahead of chronological
age (Clackmannanshire children were from the most deprived 10% of the
population)
Boys reading 9.5 months ahead of girls

* St Michael's Primary School, Stoke Gifford –
a large primary with low entry assessment
94% achieved Level 4 (KS2 SATs) compared to 77%
nationally
65% achieved Level 5 (KS2 SATs) compared to 29%
nationally
No children below Level 3B (KS2 SATs) (including a child whose
intellectual ability was below the 1st percentile) compared to 7% Level 2
and below nationally
33.3% boys achieved Level 5 (KS2 SATs) compared to 11%
nationally
no significant difference in literacy between boys and girls;
no significant difference between children with summer birthdays and
others;
no children with English as an Additional Language on the SEN
register;
no significant difference in literacy skills between children eligible for
free school meals and others.
* If all schools followed the example of this synthetic
phonics school then most of our literacy problems in
schools would be solved.

Jolly Case Studies – at the end of one year of
schooling
Deerpark Primary, Clackmannanshire -
Av age: 5.9 Reading Age: 6.8 Spelling Age: 6.11
Birstall County J&I School, West Yorkshire -
Av age 5.5 Reading Age: 6.7
St Michael's Primary School, Stoke Gifford –
Av age: 5.4 Reading Age: 5.11 Spelling Age: 5.11
Our Lady of Lebanon College, Sydney -
Av Age: 5.8 Reading Age: 6.8 Spelling Age: 6.9