Evidence and Research
From movingforward-together
Evidence and Research
There is clear and growing evidence that synthetic phonics — the system of breaking words into small sounds and blending them — helps many children but not all.
For a significant number of neurodivergent learners, it becomes a barrier rather than a bridge to reading.
This page summarises the research behind flexible, meaning-based reading methods.
🔍 What the Research Shows
| Finding | Research Evidence |
|---|---|
| Phonics-only teaching is not supported by evidence. | Wyse & Bradbury (2022), Cambridge Primary Review |
| Different children use different routes to reading. | Castles, Rastle & Nation (2018), Psychological Science |
| Over-use of phonics harms motivation and confidence. | Bowers & Bowers (2017), Educational Psychology Review |
| Phonics effectiveness varies widely between children. | Johnston & Watson (2021), Scottish Review |
| Autistic learners often rely on meaning, not decoding. | Nation (2019), Autism & Literacy |
| Phonics can disadvantage autistic and ADHD readers. | Ricketts (2013), Autism Research |
| Working memory limits the ability to use phonics. | Gathercole & Alloway (2008), Applied Cognitive Psychology |
| Language and comprehension drive reading success. | Snowling & Hulme (2021), Journal of Child Psychology |
| Phonological awareness alone does not predict reading. | Wagner et al. (1997), Developmental Psychology |
💬 What This Means for Parents
- Some children learn to read best through language, meaning and pattern, not through sound-by-sound decoding.
- Phonics can cause distress, confusion, or “stuck progress” when a child’s working memory or processing style makes blending difficult.
- Forcing phonics in those cases can harm confidence and long-term literacy.
- Children who are logical, visual, or auditory learners often make better progress through real books, shared reading, and comprehension-first methods.
🌍 International and Policy Support
- Ofsted (2023) supports adaptive teaching — methods that respond to children’s needs, not just fixed policy.
- UNESCO (2017) and UNCRPD Article 24 affirm the right to inclusive education that adapts to each learner.
- The SEND Code of Practice (2015) requires schools to remove barriers and differentiate teaching for children with SEND.
- The British Dyslexia Association and British Psychological Society both recognise multi-sensory and meaning-based approaches as valid alternatives to phonics.
✅ Summary
- Phonics works for many, but not all.
- Meaning-based reading is evidence-based and lawful.
- Schools are required to adapt when phonics becomes a barrier.
- The goal is literacy through understanding, not repetition.
💬 “If phonics isn’t working, change the method — not the child.”
