Gender differences in reading outcomes at age 10 depend on the type of phonics teaching received in early literacy programmes¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r? · q2
Currency · newest study 2012 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? The pattern of boys' versus girls' word reading, spelling and reading comprehension differed depending on whether children were taught by synthetic or analytic phonics. → Johnston 2012 q2 i? Under analytic phonics, boys' spelling and reading comprehension were inferior to girls', a pattern not seen under synthetic phonics. → Johnston 2012 (2)

Evidence¶

Johnston 2012¶

Johnston, R.S., McGeown, S. & Watson, J.E. (2012). Long-term effects of synthetic versus analytic phonics teaching on the reading and spelling ability of 10 year old boys and girls. Read Writ. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-011-9323-x

q2 · i? · causal · r?

The article's comparison of 10-year-olds taught by the two phonics methods reports that "The boys taught by the synthetic phonics method had better word reading than the girls in their classes".

"The boys taught by the synthetic phonics method had better word reading than the girls in their classes, and their spelling and reading comprehension was as good."

Johnston 2012 (2)¶

Johnston, R.S., McGeown, S. & Watson, J.E. (2012). Long-term effects of synthetic versus analytic phonics teaching on the reading and spelling ability of 10 year old boys and girls. Read Writ. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-011-9323-x

q2 · i? · causal · r?

The article's comparison under analytic phonics reports boys "performed as well as the girls in word reading" but "had inferior spelling and reading comprehension".

"with analytic phonics teaching, although the boys performed as well as the girls in word reading, they had inferior spelling and reading comprehension"

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Gender — moderator: an instructional effect differs by group

Related Claims¶

• GenAI function, intervention duration, publication year, and gender were not significant moderators of GenAI's motivational effect — the general claim this finding bears on, with the studies behind it
• Under analytic phonics teaching, boys matched girls in word reading but had inferior spelling and reading comprehension — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• Boys taught by synthetic phonics showed better word reading than girls in their classes, with spelling and reading comprehension as good as the girls' — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• The group taught by synthetic phonics showed better word reading, spelling, and reading comprehension overall than the analytic phonics group — related
• Early synthetic phonics teaching that emphasises blending letter sounds showed no evidence of impairing reading of irregular words — related
• Instruction that includes systematic phonics leads to better spelling and reading outcomes than instruction that does not — related