Annotated Bibliography

Annotated Bibliography

Annotated Bibliography

Gregory, E. (2016). Learning to read: A third perspective. Prospects, 46(3–4), 367–377.

Eve Gregory’s article titled “Learning to read: A third perspective” is about how children can learn new things without misinterpreting the concepts. She argues that learning to read is a controversial process. Although linguistics helps in grabbing an understanding of any particular phenomenon, its learning should not be left for schools and other linguistic institutions. In her comparative analysis of the views of psychologists and linguists, she argues that both linguists and psychologists should formulate a proper definition of what they mean by ‘literacy learning'. Her views about the earning process are supported by facts, but she has overemphasized on the role of psychologists in learning phonics. Her methodology is based on scientific evidence, but she could also have explained this by case studies or qualitative analysis. Her ethnographic references in the article are enough for supporting the facts, but she could have explained the facts by referring to the examples of other studies of linguistics.

Treiman, R. (2018). What research tells us about reading instruction? Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 19(1), 1–4

‘Research tells us about reading instruction’ by Rebecca Treiman provides an in-depth study about why the learning strategies for reading must be customized. She argues that every child are not participatory and participation can just assure the understanding of the subject being taught. She has critically analyzed the fact about how children can learn phonics without being part of the reading wars. She has also based her opinions on psychological studies. Her article is an interesting read for parents, educators and research scholars in the policy-making area. In writing about the reading instructions, she has many time avoided writing about phonics. It shows that her intent to prioritize the reading strategies over learning about phonics. She has not completely explained the viewpoints of the proponents of the phonics and the proponents of language instructions. This has resulted in the upbringing of kind of some flawed arguments, which could otherwise be more explanatory and general.

Phajane, M. H. (2014). Introducing beginning reading using the phonics approach. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 5(10), 477.

Masello Hellen Phajane in his article titled ‘Introducing beginning reading using phonics approach' provides information about facts which impinge on the development of reading skills. He argues that reading skills are most affected by not having an understanding of phonics. He argues that these hurdles should be lowered in order to promote better reading abilities. The writer has based his paper on his assumptions of how to teach learning phonics from the very start. The case study presented in the article about the South African village proves that learning abilities can be better made by inducting phonics into that. Although the article is based on the qualitative findings, its sampling methodology limits the scope of the findings. Phajane’s arguments about the goals of phonics are not reflected in the case study presented in the article. In addition to the lack of qualitative application of the case study, the article has many where diverted from the key research aspects decided in the start.

Glazzard, J. (2017). Assessing reading development through systematic synthetic phonics. English in Education, 51(1), 44–57.

Jonathan Glazzard has analyzed the outcomes of the synthesis of phonics with the development of reading. His article titled ‘Assessing reading development through synthetic phonics’ is about how phonics play its part in reading development. Glazzard has evaluated the effectiveness of both synthetic and analytic phonics. He argues that the variety of assessment mechanisms adopted by various schools helps in finding the gap in children's knowledge. Based on his argument about assessing the gap in children's knowledge, he argues that a detailed framework is needed to test the development of children's knowledge. Besides lacking cohesion between its supposed thesis and his analysis, the article has widened the scope which is contrary to its title. A major part of the article is about differentiating between synthetic and analytic phonics. Different to his findings it is right to argue that a more general framework of analysis should have been adopted for the purpose of assessing reading development in children. The narrative literature review is also lacking as mentioned in the abstract.

Wyse, D., & Goswami, U. (2008). Synthetic phonics and the teaching of reading. British Educational Research Journal, 34(6), 691–710.

‘Synthetic phonics and the teaching of reading' by Dominic Wyse and Usha Goswami is about how phonics serve in developing the reading abilities. In their article, a UK based case study has been presented. Their findings are suggestive of the facts that English learners cannot avoid the importance of the use of phonics in their learning. They have argued that English schools in many countries put in place discrete synthetic phonics programs. They have presented evidence which supports the change in the process of synthesis of phonics. Their findings are more kind of suggestive in nature. The critical analysis of the article suggests that authors have avoided expanding the debate from school to institutional level learning places. Since they analyzed a particular case study related to the UK, therefore the results cannot be applicable generally. Lastly, the suggestive tone of the findings reflects the narrow nature of the study.

Soler, J. (2017). The politics of the teaching of reading. Literacies and Language Education, 1–13.

Janet Soler's article ‘The Politics of the teaching of reading' is about the discords among academicians in synthesizing phonics and reading. The author is of the view that political discords at the upper level have impacted on the nature of the classrooms. These public concerns, according to him are too valid. He writes that the media portrayal of such issues have been so derogatory that it has impacted negatively on curriculum designing. According to his opinion, the school level teaching about phonics and reading is so vulnerable to public and media-driven controversies. His article is a relevant read about understanding how politics affects the school curriculum designing, but it is not in a complete sense related to actual curriculum designing. There is a difference in how the author has presented the political narrative surrounding phonics and reading methodology and what the reading strategies are in place in the schools.