impact report on the jolly phonics project

IMPACT REPORT ON THE JOLLY PHONICS PROJECT

8/1/15 A Summary of the Jolly Phonics Project Impact Data

This document provides a summary of the research findings from

literacy skills tests conduced with pupils in the different states in

Nigeria that are implementing Jolly Phonics. It also provides

summaries of other research studies on synthetic phonics from

around the world, particularly those involving Jolly Phonics.

Impact Report on the Jolly Phonics Project

Page 1

Impact Report on the Jolly Phonics Project A S U M M A R Y O F T H E J O L L Y P H O N I C S P R O J E C T I M P A C T D A T A

INTRODUCTION

The Jolly Phonics Project involves training, resourcing and supporting early grade teachers from across Nigeria in the synthetic phonics method using Jolly Phonics. Under the project to date, 21,644 teachers and head teachers from 15 State have been trained in Jolly Phonics with 953,184 pupils potentially benefitting. The programme started in Akwa Ibom State with a pilot study in 2006, which grew into the full-state rollout in the 2010-2011 academic year and quickly spread to full rollout in Cross River State from the 2012-2013 academic year. In the 2013-2014 academic year, Zamfara, FCT, and Benue States initiated the project and then it spread to Enugu, Anambra, Edo, Imo, Kebbi, Jigawa, Nasarawa, Bayelsa, Rivers and Plateau States in the 2014-2015 academic year. Throughout this period a number of pilot studies have also been carried out. An average of 1,443 teachers have been trained in each state, although this ranges from 112 teachers in Edo State to 5,842 teachers in Cross River State.

This report summarises research findings on the synthetic phonics method, particularly where Jolly Phonics has been used, from around the world as well as collating the impact data from the Jolly Phonics Project. It demonstrates that the synthetic phonics method has been repeatedly proven to be effective in teaching early grade literacy skills, even for children learning English as an additional language (EAL), and that, similar to these findings, the Jolly Phonics Project has been having a significant positive impact on the early grade reading and writing skills of pupils from across Nigeria. The recommendations are therefore that: 1) the project should be extended to more schools and 2) increased follow-up efforts should be made to ensure that the teachers that have already been trained are effectively implementing the method in their classrooms.

WHAT IS SYNTHETIC PHONICS?

Synthetic phonics uses a part-to-whole approach, where children are rapidly taught the individual letter/sound correspondences as well as how to blend the sounds to read whole words and segment the sounds to write words. They are also taught irregular words that are not entirely decodable. There are 40+ sounds in the English language and the teaching of these usually starts with the most common sounds so that, within just a few weeks of teaching, children are able to read hundreds of words.

WHAT IS JOLLY PHONICS?

Jolly Phonics is the top international synthetic phonics literacy teaching resource that is easy for teachers to use and is interactive for pupils. It teaches letter sounds, letter formation, blending, segmenting and “tricky words” through stories, songs and actions that make learning to read and write both memorable and fun.

Reach of the Project:

15 States

21,644 Teachers

953,184 Pupils


Page 2

RESEARCH FINDINGS FROM AROUND THE WORLD

Extensive research and reviews from across the world have persistently proven the effectiveness of the synthetic phonics method for teaching early grade reading and writing. In 2000, after conducting a meta-analysis of all existing peer reviewed research on the early grade reading since the 1970s, the US National Reading Panel concluded that systematic phonics instruction was the most beneficial method for beginning reading instruction and, more specifically, that synthetic phonics had greater effect sizes, particularly in the early stages.1 Similarly, in 2006, the “Rose Report”, an independent review of the teaching of early reading and writing across schools the UK, argued that: ‘…the practice seen by the review shows that the systematic approach, which is generally understood as ‘synthetic’ phonics, offers the vast majority of young children the best

and most direct route to becoming skilled readers and writers’.2

There have indeed been a significant number of research studies that have proven the effectiveness of the synthetic phonics method, conducted in a range of different contexts around the world. For example, in India, a research study conducted in 2004-2005 in 20 private unaided English medium schools sited in the low income areas of the city of Hyderabad, found that, over a six month period, the reading ages of children taught using Jolly Phonics improved on average by 1 year and 1 month, which was above their mean chronological age, but only increased by 7 months for those not using Jolly Phonics.3 Overall, the study found that children taught with Jolly Phonics outperformed children

taught using other methods on a range of reading and spelling tests. Moreover, research has also proved that synthetic phonics is more effective than other systematic phonics approaches. In Scotland, a research study compared the impact of the synthetic phonics method with the analytic phonics method, and also with the analytic phonics method containing some additional phonemic awareness activities, on the reading and spelling skills of Primary 1 pupils.4 At the end of Primary 1, the synthetic phonics group were, on average, reading and spelling 7 months ahead of their chronological age, which was around 7 months ahead of the other two groups in reading and 8-9 months ahead in spelling. The study also found that these gains continued throughout primary school, with pupils taught using synthetic phonics performing, on average, 3 years 6 months ahead of their chronological age at the end of Primary 7.

Moreover, this research has also demonstrated that synthetic phonics is effective for children learning English as an additional language (EAL). For example, a study of 112 5-year olds in inner-city London, where 86% were EAL pupils, which compared synthetic phonics teaching using Jolly Phonics with other methods, found that, on the Schonell spelling test, the Jolly Phonics group scored significantly better than the non-Jolly Phonics group and, in terms of raw scores, they spelled almost twice as many words correctly as the

1 National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD), Report of the National Reading Panel: Teaching children to read, (Washington, DC: NICHD, 2000) 2 J. Rose, Independent review of the teaching of early reading, (UK Department for Education and Skills, 2006) 3 P. Dixon, I. Schagen & P. Seedhouse, ‘The impact of an intervention on children's reading and spelling ability in low-income schools in India’ (2011) 22 School Effectiveness and School Improvement: An International Journal of Research, Policy and Practice 4, 61-482 4 R. Johnston & J. Watson, The Effects of Synthetic Phonics Teaching on Reading and Spelling Attainment: A seven year longitudinal study, (Institute of Education 2005)

‘Synthetic phonics… offers the vast majority of young children the best and most direct route to becoming skilled readers and writers’ -Rose (2006)

‘Early concentration on teaching phoneme awareness and phonics can radically improve reading and spelling standards in… second language learners’

-Stuart (1999)


Page 3

non-Jolly Phonics group.5 It was therefore concluded that: ‘Early concentration on teaching phoneme awareness and phonics can radically improve reading and spelling standards in inner city second language learners’

Further, this research has shown that the synthetic phonics method is particularly effective when it is taught with pre-primary level children, even where they are EAL pupils. For example, a study in Canada conduced in 2001 that compared 68 Kindergarten children, many of whom were EAL pupils, that were taught for 9 weeks with synthetic phonics (using Jolly Phonics materials), with 50 Grade 1 children who had been taught with a traditional approach, with no explicit reading instruction during Kindergarten, made the following findings: ‘The kindergarten classes showed significant gains in phonological processing, including phonological memory, and reading decoding skills, in only 9 weeks. The grade 1 students, on the other hand, after an entire academic year, clearly demonstrated a serious reading lag, with one class significantly more affected than the other one. These students, graduates of traditional kindergartens and traditional approaches to minority language students,

are in a serious lag mode at the start of their academic lives.’ 6 This suggests that it is in fact essential for EAL pupils to begin to be taught synthetic phonics from the pre-primary level. Moreover, the US National Reading Panel found that: ‘The effects of systematic early phonics instruction were significant and substantial in kindergarten and the 1st grade, indicating that systematic phonics programs should be implemented at those age and grade levels.’

Moreover, synthetic phonics has been found to be particularly effective for girls. For example, in a recent analysis conducted by the UK Department for Education in Primary 1 classes, it was discovered that girls outperform boys on phonics tests administered in all schools when taught with synthetic phonics.7 Further, in the study conducted in India discussed

above, girls tended to out-performed boys on a number of reading and spelling tests.

5 M. Stuart, ‘Getting ready for reading: Early phoneme awareness and phonics teaching improves reading and spelling in inner-city second language learners’ (1999) British Journal of Educational Psychology 69, 587–605; M. Stuart, ‘Getting ready for reading: A follow-up study of inner city second language learners at the end of Key Stage 1’ (2004) British Journal of Educational Psychology 74, 15–36 6 Y. Huss, Early Reading for Low-SES Minority Language Children: An Attempt to ‘Catch Them before They Fall’, (Folia Phoniatr Logop, 2001) 7 Department for Education (DfE), Phonics screening check and key stage 1 assessments: England 2014, (DfE, 2014)

‘The effects of systematic early phonics instruction were significant and substantial in kindergarten and the 1st grade, indicating that systematic phonics programs should be implemented at those age and grade levels.’

-National Reading Panel (2000)

Summary of Results from Around the World

• Synthetic phonics has repeatedly been found to be the most effective method for improving early grade literacy skills, even in comparison to other systematic phonics approaches.

• Synthetic phonics is just as effective for pupils learning English as an additional language. • Synthetic phonics is most effective when it is introduced at the pre-primary level. This is even the case

for pupils learning English as an additional language. • Synthetic phonics is particularly effective for girls.


Page 4

THE JOLLY PHONICS PROJECT FINDINGS

This section sets out the research finding from a number of States within which the Jolly Phonics Project has been implemented. These states are Akwa Ibom, Cross River, Zamfara. Results from the 2014-2015 academic year from all project states are currently being collated and analysed so further impact data will be available by the end of September 2015.

Akwa Ibom State

Akwa Ibom State was the first state to implement Jolly Phonics in government schools. This began in 2006 when the University of Uyo undertook a pilot study in five government primary schools. Primary 1 teachers received 2 days of Jolly Phonics training, with one follow up refresher training half way through the school year. Using a total sample size of 168 primary 1 pupils, half (84) were taught with Jolly Phonics and the remaining pupils (84) were taught with conventional methods. After 36 weeks of implementation, the results were gathered and comparisons made between the Jolly Phonics and control groups. The pupils were tested with the Revised Burt Reading Test (1974), which sets a standard for the amount of words a child might identify at a given age. This is known as their Chronological Reading Age (RA). The differences in reading age between pre-test and post-test, as well as the gain in reading age were then recorded.

The pilot study results found considerable improvements in the reading ages of pupils exposed to Jolly Phonics, ranging from 3 months up to 2 years and 5 months. For the control schools, pupils only made up to 3 months improvement at most. On average, there was a gain of 6 months for the Jolly Phonics schools compared to less than 1 month for the control schools. This pilot study therefore demonstrated for the first time that Jolly Phonics was effective in improving the English reading abilities of early grade pupils in Nigeria and that it was much more effective than conventional methods that were in use in government schools across the country.

Table 1: Range of Reading Age Improvements for Jolly Phonics and Control Primary 1 Pupils in Each School in the 2006 Pilot Study in Akwa Ibom State

Jolly Phonics Pupils Control Pupils

School 1 4 – 9 months 0 months

School 2 3 -11 months 0 months

School 3 3 months – 1 year & 2 months 0-3 months

School 4 3 months - 1 year & 5 months 0-3 months

School 5 3 months – 2 years & 5 months 0-3 months

The differences in the results of the Jolly Phonics and control pupils are visualised clearly in Figure 1, which shows the percentage of pupils showing an improvement in their reading age.


Page 5

Figure 1: Percentage of Primary 1 Pupils that Made Improvements in their Reading Age in the Jolly Phonics and Control Groups in the 2006 Akwa Ibom State Pilot Study

Following the successful pilot study, Jolly Phonics was rolled out in all primary schools in Akwa Ibom State from 2010 and since then there have been numerous trainings, continued monitoring and mentoring and several other activities aimed at providing follow-up support and encouragement to teachers. In 2010, six focus schools were selected from the different senatorial zones in order to measure the impact of the project, with the Burt Reading Test being administered at the beginning and the end of each academic year since with the different year groups involved with the project. Overall, the results show that the gain experienced by Primary 1 pupils continues to increase year upon year. Figure 2 shows the mean gain experienced by Primary 1 pupils after 1 year of learning with Jolly Phonics, showing the improvements from 2007, 2012 and 2014. The graph also shows the gain for the control group in the pilot study in order to demonstrate the drastic improvements that have been made in government primary schools since Jolly Phonics was brought to Akwa Ibom State. The results show that typical child in Primary 1 now makes an average gain of 8.53 months, compared to less than 1 month for children using conventional methods.

Figure 2: Mean Gain in Reading Age Months for Control Primary 1 Pupils and Jolly Phonics Primary 1 Pupils in 2007, 2012 and 2014 in Akwa Ibom State

65 65 64

100 96

0 0

14

29

77

0

20

40

60

80

100

School 1 School 2 School 3 School 4 School 5

Experiment Group

Control Group

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

P 1 Control Schools P 1 Jolly Phonics Schools 2007

P 1 Jolly Phonics Schools 2012

P 1 Jolly Phonics Schools 2014

Gai

n in

Mon

ths


Page 6

This reading ability is corroborated by data gathered through an external evaluation of the project carried out in 2014 regarding the ability of Primary 2 children to read a sentence from a storybook. Results from 6 schools (60 children) showed that 66% of children could read part or all of a sentence, with the remaining children either having no reading ability or making attempts to say the sounds in words, but blending unsuccessfully.

This external evaluation of the project also included interviews with 60 children from 6 focus schools. The pupils were all extremely positive about Jolly Phonics, highlighting that it is very child-centred. A sample of these interviews that were carried out by the external evaluator is found in table 2 below.

Table 2: Sample of Pupil Interview Data from the External Evaluation in Akwa Ibom State

1. (Male, 6)

2. (Female, 7)

3. (Female, 6)

4. (Male, 8)

5. (Male, 6)

6. (Female, 8) 7. (Female, 7)

8. (Male, 8)

9. (Female, 7) 10. (Male, 10)

Do

you

enjo

y le

arni

ng

phon

ics?

Do

you

enjo

y th

e ph

onic

s cl

ass?

Do

you

enjo

y bl

endi

ng,

coun

ting

the

soun

ds,

dict

atio

n?

Wer

e yo

u ab

le to

rea

d be

fore

Jol

ly p

honi

cs w

as

intr

oduc

ed to

you

?

Are

you

abl

e to

rea

d no

w?

Wha

t do

you

like

mos

t in

Jolly

pho

nics

less

on?

Will

you

like

to c

ontin

ue

with

lear

ning

with

Jol

ly

phon

ics?

Why

?

Is J

olly

pho

nics

sim

ple

or

diff

icul

t? If

dif

ficu

lt, w

hat

was

dif

ficu

lt?

1. (Male, 6) Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Stories Yes; To know many things Simple.

2. (Female, 7) Yes Yes Yes No Yes Counting Sounds Yes; It is an opportunity to learn

Simple, but long words are hard

3. (Female, 6) Yes Yes Yes No Yes

Songs and the action/dance accompanying the songs

Yes; to read better Simple

4. (Male, 8) Yes Yes Yes No Yes Songs Yes; to learn more Simple

5. (Male, 6) Yes Yes Yes No Yes Games Yes; to know how to write Simple

6. (Female, 8) Yes Yes Yes No No Blending Yes; to know how to read Simple

7. (Female, 7) Yes Yes Yes No Yes Songs Yes; to learn more Simple

8. (Male, 8) Yes Yes Yes No Yes Songs Yes; to learn more Simple, but diagraphs are hard.

9. (Female, 7) Yes Yes Yes No Yes Songs Yes; to learn more Simple

10. (Male, 10) Yes Yes Yes No Yes Stories Yes. No idea why Simple

It is interesting to note that the table above shows that all but one child interviewed believed they could read, and all children felt they could not read before Jolly Phonics was introduced to them. Most children find Jolly Phonics ‘simple’ and all enjoy the Jolly Phonics class. Such positive attitudes have been shown through other projects to have an impact on attendance as pupils and parents send their children to school in order to access Jolly Phonics. This has been revealed through case studies taken from Zamfara and Jigawa State.


Page 7

Cross River State

A pilot study involving Primary 1 pupils conduced in three urban and three rural schools in 2011-2012 in Cross River State demonstrated that, after just one academic year, pupils taught using Jolly Phonics by a teacher that had received just two days of training performed significantly better on a range of Early Grade Reading Assessment (EGRA) tests than pupils taught using conventional methods. This shows that Jolly Phonics is effective in improving early grade reading and writing standards. Then, in 2015, after the project had been implemented across the state and further training and support was provided to teachers, Primary 1 pupils from these schools significantly outperformed even the Jolly Phonics group from the 2011-2012 pilot study. This shows that follow-up support and refresher training is vital for achieving the greatest possible impact. The differences in the performance of the three groups can be seen clearly in Figure 1 below. No assessments were conducted in the 2012-2013 and 2013-2014 academic years due to a lack of available funding.

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%

2012 Non-Synthetic Phonics 2012 Synthetic Phonics 2015 Synthetic Phonics

Summary of the Results from Akwa Ibom State

• Since 2006, results on the Burt Reading Test have persistently shown that Primary 1 pupils taught using Jolly Phonics perform much better than pupils taught using conventional methods. This shows that Jolly Phonics is effective in improving early grade literacy skills, particularly in comparison to conventional methods that were previously in place. This effectivenss was confirmed in an external evaluation carried out in October 2014.

• Gains in reading age have increased year-on-year since 2010. This is a result of continued monitoring and mentoring, refresher training, the establishment teacher networks and the implementation of other activities aimed at supporting and enthusing teachers. This shows that, after the initial provision of training and materials, follow-up support for teachers is very important.

• Interviews with pupils carried out by an external evaluator showed that they were very enthusiastic about Jolly Phonics and confident in their reading abilities as a result.


Page 8

Figure 3: Comparison of the mean scores for the three groups sampled in Cross River State

For the 2015 group, the standardised Burt Reading Test was also conducted in order to assess how good the results in fact are. The scores that pupils achieve on the test are converted to reading ages. It was expected that the pupils’ reading ages would be below their actual chronological ages as the test was standardised in the UK where pupils start to learn to read and write earlier, where there are fewer EAL pupils and where there are fewer other contextual challenges. Table 1 demonstrates that the mean reading age for the pupils was 6 years, which is 18 months below their mean actual age. However, one might argue that, because of the reasons listed above, this mean chronological reading age is in fact very good.

Table 3: Mean Scores and Reading Ages on Burt Reading Test for Each Focus School in Cross River State in 2015

School Location Mean Score N Std. Deviation

Mean Chronological Reading Age Mean Actual Age

1.0 Rural 5.59 22 8.639 5 years 5 months 7 years 10 months

2.0 Urban 15.29 24 10.573 5 years 11 months 7 years 8 months





Total N/A 16.55 141 17.991 6 years 0 months 7 years 6 months

The table shows that the mean scores for the different schools vary quite substantially. For example, the mean score in school 1 is 5.59 and in school 3 it is 29.05, representing a difference in reading age of 1 year and 3 months. Thus, the results were broken down into location (urban/rural) and whether pupils had English as a first or additional language in order to determine whether these were contributing factors in the schools’ results. First, although the urban schools (Mean Score=18.308, Reading Age = 6 years 1 month) performed slightly better than the rural schools (Mean Score=14.689, Reading Age = 5 years 11 months), there was no statistically significant difference in the results10. This suggests that school location does not necessarily determine how well teachers and pupils perform with Jolly Phonics. Indeed, school 3, which was the best performing school, was a rural school. The Figure 2 demonstrates the difference between the mean scores for the different schools and details if they are urban or rural schools.

8 SD=15.68 9 SD=20.13 10 t(139)=1.197, p=0.233


Page 9

Figure 4: Comparison of the Mean Burt Reading Test Scores for the Six Focus Schools in Cross River State in 2015

Second, although the children with English as a first language (Mean Score=19.5511, Reading Age = 6 years 2 months) performed slightly better than pupils with English as an additional language (Mean Score=16.0312, Reading Age = 5 years 11 months), there again was no statistically significant difference in the results13, suggesting that having English as an additional language is not necessarily an indicator of poorer performance on English early grade literacy assessments where pupils have been taught using Jolly Phonics. Indeed, the boxplot below, detailing the range of scores for the two different groups, demonstrates that there were more individual pupils scoring very highly in the EAL group than there were in the first language group.14

Figure 5: The range of results on the Burt Reading Test for EAL pupils and English as a first language pupils in Cross River State in 2015

11 SD=17.65 12 SD=18.13 13 t(137)=0.837, p=0.404 14 Represented by * or O on the chart.

0 5

10 15 20 25 30 35

1 - Rural 2 - Urban 3 - Rural 4 - Rural 5 - Urban 6 - Urban Total

Mea

n Sc

ore

School


Page 10

Zamfara State

In Zamfara State, 11 random schools have been chosen in order to assess the impact of the project full rollout. Assessments were conducted with 10 Primary 1 pupils and 10 Primary 2 pupils from each school towards the beginning of the academic year in November 2013 and then again at the end of the academic year in July 2014. It was expected that the Primary 1 pupils would be taught using Jolly Phonics from November 2013 to July 2014, as all Primary 1 teachers had been trained in Jolly Phonics, however, the Primary 2 pupils should not have been taught using Jolly Phonics at any point. Data from the 2014-2015 academic year will be available within the coming months but unfortunately was not ready in time to form part of this report.

First, the mean scores of the Primary 1 pupils at the beginning of the year were compared with the results of the Primary 1 pupils at the end of the academic year in order to establish whether improvements had been made within that cohort over the academic year. It was found that the pupils performed significantly better than their baseline scores on all of the literacy skills tests that were administered, demonstrating that Jolly Phonics helped to improve the English literacy skills of Primary 1 pupils.

Second, the results of the Primary 1 pupils at the end of the year were compared with the results of the Primary 2 pupil from the start of the year, in order to establish whether there was any improvement in regards to the pupils in the previous cohort. The Primary 2 pupils were at a slight advantage as they were assessed around 3 months later in their academic life than the Primary 1 pupils were. Despite this, it was found that the Primary 1 pupils performed significantly better than the Primary 2 pupils on all of the literacy skills tests. The table below provides the mean overall percentage on each test administered for the three groups and it clearly shows the difference between the groups.15

15 It must be noted that pupils in the early primary grades are not necessarily expected to achieve 100% on the tests, particularly on the Burt Reading Test that provides a chronological reading age of up to 14 years and 3 months. Currently, there are no set agreed targets for Primary 1 and 2 pupils on these tests.

Summary of Results from Cross River State

• Primary 1 Pupils taught using Jolly Phonics for one academic year significantly outperformed Primary 1 pupils taught using conventional method on a range of Early Grade Reading Assessment (EGRA) tests. This demonstrates that Jolly Phonics is effective in improving the reading and writing skills of early grade pupils.

• The results of children taught using Jolly Phonics increased even further where trained teachers were provided with further follow-up support in the use of the method. This demonstrates that the provision of training and materials alone may not be enough; teachers need follow-up support in order to teach the method effectively.

• The mean reading age of Primary 1 pupils taught using Jolly Phonics for one academic year was 6 years. This is excellent given that the test used was standardized in the UK where pupils start to read and write earlier, where there are less EAL pupils and where there are less contextual challenges. This shows that pupils in Nigeria can perform just as well as pupils in the UK when they are taught using Jolly Phonics.

• There was no significant different in the results of pupils in urban and pupils in rural schools, demonstrating that Jolly Phonics works even in rural schools were there are greater challenges.

• There was no significant difference in the results of pupils that had English as a first language and EAL pupils. This shows that Jolly Phonics is just as effective for EAL pupils as it is for non-EAL pupils.


Page 11

Figure 6: Mean % Scores on the different tests and overall for the three sample groups in Zamfara State

However, the Primary 1 Endline results are still relatively poor. For example, the mean score for the Burt Reading Test (1.49) is below the minimum score necessary (2) to be provided with a chronological reading age. It was discovered that these low results were because the method had not been implemented in most of the Primary 1 classes for the full period expected, for various reasons, including a number of teachers being transferred to other classes or schools. Thus, the results from schools that definitely implemented the method for the expected period were pulled out in order to provide a fairer evaluation of the impact of Jolly Phonics on English early grade literacy skills in Zamfara State.

It was again found that the Primary 1 pupils at the end of the year were significantly better than the results of the Primary 1 and Primary 2 pupils at the beginning of the year but, this time, the mean score on the Burt Reading Test for the Primary 1 pupils at the end of the year was 6.65, which correlates to a reading age of 5 years and 6 months. Again, one might argue that this reading age is good for EAL pupils in the challenging Zamfara context. Furthermore, results from pupils in Primary 2 classes where Jolly Phonics was implemented because the trained Primary 1 teacher had been transferred to that class are very similar, with a mean reading age of 6.68, which again correlates to 5 years and 6 months chronological reading age. These scores and reading ages are detailed in the table below.

Table 4: Mean scores and Reading Ages of Primary 1 and 2 Pupils Taught with Jolly Phonics for just over Two Terms

Year Group Mean Score Mean Chronological Reading

Age

Primary 1 6.65 5 years 6 months

Primary 2 6.68 5 years 6 months

Total 6.67 5 years 6 months

0.00% 0.20% 0.40% 0.60% 0.80% 1.00% 1.20% 1.40% 1.60% 1.80%

% Score for Letter Sounds Test

% Score for Burt Reading Test

% Score for Sentence Reading

Test

% Score for Word Writing

Test

Total % Score for all Tests

Primary 1 Baseline Primary 1 Endline Primary 2 Baseline


Page 12

Federal Capital Territory (FCT)

In the 2013-2014 academic year in FCT, Primary 1 pupils taught using Jolly Phonics for just a five month period had a mean improvement of 11 months on their reading age, whereas pupils taught using conventional methods only improved by 4 months in this period, despite them having the same mean reading age in February when the intervention started. This is a difference of 7 months, demonstrating that Jolly Phonics is much more effective than conventional methods in improving early grade reading. The mean reading age of the Jolly Phonics pupils was 6 years 2 months, which is particularly good for Primary 1 pupils. Then, in the 2014-2015 academic year, pupils taught using Jolly Phonics for the full academic year had a mean reading age of 6 years and 5 months at the end of the year, which amounts to an increase of 3 months on the results of pupils in the previous cohort. This demonstrates that, when taught from earlier in the academic year, Jolly Phonics is more effective. Table 5 and Figure 7 below show these results clearly.

Table 5: Mean scores and Reading Ages of Primary 1 Pupils in the Different Groups in FCT

Group No. Pre Test Score (Feb

2014)

Pre Test Reading Age

Post Test Score

Post Test Reading Age

Score Change Reading Age Change

Control 80 3.10 5 years 3 months

9.21 5 years 7 months

6.11 4 months

2013-2014 Jolly Phonics

160 3.09 5 years 3 months

20.9 6 years 2 months

17.81 11 months

2014 – 2015 Jolly Phonics

120 N/A N/A 24.27 6 years 5 months

N/A N/A

Summary of Results from Zamfara State

• A random sample of Primary 1 Pupils that should have been taught using Jolly Phonics for just under one academic year, on average, made significant improvements in a range of literacy skills tests, despite many of the schools not implementing the programme as expected. This shows that Jolly Phonics improves English early grade literacy skills, even in very challenging contexts.

• These Primary 1 pupils also performed significantly better on the skills tests than pupils in the previous cohort, despite this control group being assessed around 3 months later in their academic journey. This shows that Jolly Phonics is more effective than conventional methods that had previously been in use.

• The mean reading age of Primary 1 and 2 pupils taught using Jolly Phonics for one academic year was 5 years 6 months. This is excellent given that the test used was standardised in the UK where pupils start to read and write earlier, where most pupils have English as a first language and where there are much less contextual challenges. This shows that, despite the challenging context, Jolly Phonics works.


Page 13

Figure 7: Mean Scores and Score Change on the Burt Reading Test for the Different Groups in FCT

Plateau State

In Plateau State, ECCD, Primary 1 and head teachers were trained in January-March 2015. However, just after this the schools were closed for elections, for the school holidays and then because the teachers were on strike due to a lack of pay. In effect, teachers who had been trained in Jolly Phonics had only approximately 4-6 weeks to implement what they were taught before the post tests were administered and there was a long period after the training where teachers were not able to practice what they had been taught, meaning that they are likely to have forgotten some of it. Thus it was expected that the results would be particularly low.

In order to evaluate whether there had been any improvements in the pupils’ reading and writing abilities, six schools were chosen as focus schools, three Jolly Phonics and three control schools, and literacy skills tests were administered with ECCD and Primary 1 pupils at the start of the project period in February and then at the end of the academic year in July. As expected, the results on the Sentence Reading and Dictation tests for both year groups were very low, with only very minimal changes in the scores, and on the Burt Reading Test there were only very minimal improvements in the mean scores of the ECCD pupils. These results are therefore not detailed in this report. However, there were in fact significant changes on the Letter Sounds Test mean scores for both the ECCD Jolly Phonics and Primary 1 Jolly Phonics pupils and significant changes on the Burt Reading Test mean scores and reading ages for Primary 1 pupils. On the letter sounds test, the mean score change for ECCD pupils was 4.04 and for Primary 1 pupils it was 5.25. On the Burt Reading Test there was a mean score change of 2.63, which correlates to a reading age change of 2 months. Thus, it is clear that Jolly

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Pre Test Score (Feb 2014)

Post Test Score Score Change

Control

2013-2014 Jolly Phonics

2014 – 2015 Jolly Phonics

Summary of Results from FCT

• Pupils taught using Jolly Phonics, over just a 5 month period, made 11 months gain in their mean reading age and pupils taught with Jolly Phonics for one full academic year had a mean reading age of 6 years and 5 months, which is excellent for Primary 1 pupils These results demonstrate that Jolly Phonics is very effective.

• Pupils taught using Jolly Phonics performed much better than children taught using conventional methods as this group only increased by 4 months in the 5 month period, demonstrating that Jolly Phonics is more effective than conventional methods.

• . This again shows that pupils ta


Page 14

Phonics was beginning to improve the early grade literacy skills of ECCD and Primary 1 pupils in Plateau State, despite there being significant challenges affecting the project implementation. Moreover, these results are particularly impressive when compared to the control schools’ results, where there were only very minimal changes, if any at all. This again shows that Jolly Phonics is more effective than conventional methods. All of these results are detailed in the following tables and charts.

Figure 8: Mean Score Changes on the Letter Sounds Test for ECCD and Primary 1 Pupils in Plateau State

Table 6: Burt Reading Test Results for ECCD and Primary 1 Pupils in Plateau State after Only 4-6 Weeks of Teaching

Pre Test Score Pre Test Reading

Age Post Test Score

Post Test Reading Age

Score Change

Reading Age Change

P1 Control 0.08 No Reading Age 0.34 No Reading Age 0.14 No Change

P1 Jolly Phonics 2.00 5 years 3 months 4.63 5 years 5 months 2.63 2 months

Figure 9: Mean Score Changes on the Burt Reading Test for Primary 1 Pupils in Plateau State

0 0.5

1 1.5

2 2.5

3 3.5

4 4.5

Score Change

ECCD Control ECCD Jolly Phonics

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

Score Change

Primary 1 Control Primary 1 Jolly Phonics

0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

3.00

Score Change

Control

Jolly Phonics


Page 15

UNIVERSAL LEARNING SOLUTIONS’ PILOT STUDIES IN OTHER COUNTRIES

Universal Learning Solutions has recently conducted pilot studies on Jolly Phonics in a number of other African and South Asian countries. All of the results have once again demonstrated that it is effective for improving early grade literacy skills. The boxes below provide a summary of the findings from Cameroon, Ghana and Nepal. All of these pilots involved a comparison between early grade children that had been taught using Jolly Phonics and early grade children that had been taught using conventional methods. All of the pupils and schools were chosen at random and the academics involved with administering the assessments were completely independent.

Cameroon

Summary of results:

• In all five assessed literacy skills, children taught using Jolly Phonics improved their reading and writing ability considerably more that pupils in the control schools over the course of the pilot. This is demonstrated in the chart below.

• Children taught using the Jolly Phonics method on average improved their reading age by 11 months after only using the programme for 6 months. In the controls schools pupils on average made no improvement in their reading age.

• The Jolly Phonics programme was shown to be effective for all student groups (gender, ECD experience, poverty levels, urban/rural and language spoken at home).

Summary of Results from Plateau

• Despite only being implemented for 4-6 weeks due to school closures, ECCD and Primary 1 pupils taught with Jolly Phonics made improvements in their means scores on the Letter Sound Test and Burt Reading Test, with Primary 1 pupils adding two months to their reading age. This shows that Jolly Phonics quickly gives children early grade literacy skills.

• Pupils taught using Jolly Phonics performed much better than children taught using conventional methods despite only being implemented for a few weeks. This shows that Jolly Phonics is much more effective than conventional methods.


Page 16

Ghana

Summary of results:

• In all 5 assessed literacy skills, children exposed to Jolly Phonics improved considerably more than pupils in the control schools in both Kindergarten 1 and Primary 1. For example, children taught using Jolly Phonics in Primary 1 on average had a reading age 10 months higher than those in the control schools.

• The Jolly Phonics programme was shown to be effective for all student groups (gender, ECD experience, poverty levels, urban/rural and language spoken at home).

• The programme was also found to have increased levels of enthusiasm in the teaching and learning of literacy among pupils, teachers and parents and subsequently led to examples of increased pupils’ attendance and enrolment at schools using the programme.

• Even though the Jolly Phonics programme is designed and focused on teaching children to read and write in English, the teachers at the schools involved in the pilots also successfully used the programme in teaching local language.


Page 17

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The research findings from around the world and in Nigeria have repeatedly demonstrated the effectiveness of the synthetic phonics method, particularly using Jolly Phonics materials. Overall, it can be said that:

• Synthetic phonics, particularly where Jolly Phonics is used, is more effective than all other methods in improving English early grade reading and writing.

• In Nigeria, it is most effective where teachers are provided with further follow-up support and training.

• It is just as effective for pupils learning English as an additional language (EAL). • It is most effective when implemented at the pre-primary level, even with EAL pupils. • It works even in the most challenging contexts. • It is particularly effective for girls. • It rapidly increases early grade literacy skills so has an impact even if it is only taught for a few

weeks.

As a result, two recommendations are made: 1) the project should be extended to more schools and 2) increased follow-up efforts should be made to ensure that the teachers that have already been trained are effectively implementing the method in their classrooms.

Nepal

Summary of results:

• Pupils taught using the Jolly Phonics approach made more progress across all literacy skills tested compared to those pupils not taught using this approach.

• The teaching of the Jolly Phonics approach caused improvement for all students (gender, language and ECCD experience).

• Jolly Phonics resulted in improved student engagement and enjoyment, improved learning environment, wider promotion of English at the schools and increased interest from parents/care-givers


Page 18

REFERENCES

Department for Education (DfE), Phonics screening check and key stage 1 assessments: England 2014, (DfE, 2014)

P. Dixon, I. Schagen & P. Seedhouse, ‘The impact of an intervention on children's reading and spelling ability in low-income schools in India’ (2011) 22 School Effectiveness and School Improvement: An International Journal of Research, Policy and Practice 4, 61-482 Y. Huss, Early Reading for Low-SES Minority Language Children: An Attempt to ‘Catch Them before They Fall’, (Folia Phoniatr Logop, 2001) R. Johnston & J. Watson, The Effects of Synthetic Phonics Teaching on Reading and Spelling Attainment: A seven year longitudinal study, (Institute of Education 2005) National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD), Report of the National Reading Panel: Teaching children to read, (Washington, DC: NICHD, 2000) J. Rose, Independent review of the teaching of early reading, (UK Department for Education and Skills, 2006) M. Stuart, ‘Getting ready for reading: Early phoneme awareness and phonics teaching improves reading and spelling in inner-city second language learners’ (1999) British Journal of Educational Psychology 69, 587–605; M. Stuart, ‘Getting ready for reading: A follow-up study of inner city second language learners at the end of Key Stage 1’ (2004) British Journal of Educational Psychology 74, 15–36

impact report on the jolly phonics project

Documents