The Influence of Synthetic Phonics Instruction in Enhancing Word Recognition of Thai Primary School Students

Authors

  • Thanyathon Lakthong

    Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, Maha Sarakham University, Maha Sarakham 44000, Thailand
  • Apisak Sukying

    Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, Maha Sarakham University, Maha Sarakham 44000, Thailand
  • Nithipong Yothachai

    Faculty of Education and Human Development, Chaiyaphum Rajabhat University, Chaiyaphum 36000, Thailand

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.30564/fls.v7i6.9756
Received: 28 April 2025 | Revised: 14 May 2025 | Accepted: 21 May 2025 | Published Online: 8 June 2025

Abstract

The present study aimed to investigate the effects of synthetic phonics instruction on word recognition skills and students’ attitudes toward vocabulary learning. Vocabulary is a fundamental element of English learning and affects all language skills. Traditional methods emphasize memorization and grammar-translation, while learning in Thailand has restricted students to a small vocabulary. Forty primary school students participated in a quasi-experiment with two groups receiving either traditional, book-based or synthetic-based phonics instruction during eight treatment weeks of a ten-week schedule. Quantitative results showed that the experimental group performed better than the control group on receptive and productive word recognition, with statistically significant improvements in phonological awareness, working memory and decoding. Supporting qualitative evidence from focus group interviews revealed that students adopted favorable attitudes toward synthetic phonics instruction by becoming more engaged, confident, and motivated in vocabulary learning. However, a few learners of low proficiency tended to feel anxious about competitive tasks, thus implying the importance of adapting instruction to students and creating a positive classroom environment. The overall findings tend to affirm that synthetic phonics is an active and attractive method to promote word recognition and vocabulary acquisition among young EFL learners. The findings of this study offer practical implications for EFL professionals, indicating the importance of providing a balance of structured instruction and tailored individualized support to promote not only academic but also emotional success in language learning.

 

Keywords:

Synthetic Phonics; Word Recognition; Phonemic Awareness; Spelling; Thai Primary School Learners

References

[1] Laufer, B., 1998. The development of passive and active vocabulary in a second language: Same or different? Applied Linguistics. 19(2), 255–271.

[2] Nation, I.S.P., 2022. Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, United Kingdom.

[3] Webb, S., Nation, P., 2017. How vocabulary is learned. Oxford University Press: Oxford, United Kingdom.

[4] Sukying, A., Nontasee, W., 2022. The acquisition order of vocabulary knowledge aspects in Thai EFL learners. World Journal of English Language. 12(5), 306. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5430/wjel.v12n5p306

[5] Schmitt, N., 2000. Vocabulary in language teaching. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, United Kingdom.

[6] Sukying, A., 2018. Investigating receptive and productive affix knowledge in EFL learners. In: Hirsh, D. (ed.). Explorations in second language vocabulary research. Peter Lang: New York, USA. pp. 183–218.

[7] Laufer, B., Ravenhorst-Kalovski, G.C., 2010. Lexical threshold revisited: Lexical text coverage, learners' vocabulary size and reading comprehension. Reading in a Foreign Language. 22(1), 15–30.

[8] Nation, I.S.P., 2006. How large a vocabulary is needed for reading and listening? Canadian Modern Language Review. 63(1), 59–82.

[9] Bisson, M.J., Van Heuven, W.J.B., Conklin, K., et al., 2015. The role of verbal and pictorial information in multimodal incidental acquisition of foreign language vocabulary. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology. 68(7), 1306–1326. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2014.979211

[10] Teng, F., 2016. The effects of word exposure frequency on incidental learning of the depth of vocabulary knowledge. GEMA Online Journal of Language Studies. 16(3), 53–70. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17576/gema-2016-1603-04

[11] National Institute of Educational Testing Service (Public Organization), 2024. Primary Schools Annual Report. Available from: https://www.niets.or.th/en/catalog/view/3133 (cited 06 January 2025).

[12] Afzal, N., 2019. A study on vocabulary-learning problems encountered by BA English majors at the university level of education. Arab World English Journal. 10, 81–98.

[13] Alharbi, B., 2022. Saudi teachers' knowledge of critical thinking skills and their attitudes towards improving Saudi students' critical thinking skills. Problems of Education in the 21st Century. 80(3), 395–407.

[14] Binmadnee, P., 2016. The comparison of vocabulary learning strategies among high school students in three southern border provinces of Thailand and Malaysia. Journal of Business and Social Review in Emerging Economies. 2(1), 61–70.

[15] Bintz, W.P., 2011. Teaching vocabulary across the curriculum. Middle School Journal. 42(4), 44–53.

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

[17] Hunt, M., Feng, J., 2016. Improving vocabulary of English language learners through direct vocabulary instruction. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Chinese American Educational Research and Development Association; 7–8 April 2016; Washington, DC, USA. pp. 1–18.

[18] Futrakul, K., 2022. Developing English listening and pronunciation skills through synthetic phonics teaching principles using jolly phonics teaching approach. Valaya Alongkorn Review Journal. 12(3), 229–244.

[19] Chu, M.C., Chen, S.H., 2014. Comparison of the effects of two phonics training programs on L2 word reading. Psychological Reports. 114(1), 272–291.

[20] Min, C., Sukying, A., 2024. Investigating the role of word knowledge components in Chinese L2 writing ability. 3L: Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies. 30(4), 1355–1373.

[21] Nagy, W., Scott, J., 2000. Vocabulary processes. In: Kamil, M.L., Mosenthal, P.B., Pearson, P.D., et al. (eds.). Handbook of reading research, Vol. III. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: Mahwah, USA. pp. 269–284.

[22] Bravo, M.A., Cervetti, G.N., Hiebert, E.H., et al., 2008. From passive to active control of science vocabulary. Proceedings of the 56th Annual Meeting of the National Reading Conference; November 28–December 1 2008; Chicago, IL, USA. pp. 122–135.

[23] Vygotsky, L.S., 1987. The collected works of LS Vygotsky: Problems of the theory and history of psychology. Springer Science & Business Media: New York, USA.

[24] Nontasee, W., Sukying, A., 2021. The learnability of word knowledge aspects in Thai EFL high school learners. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies. 17(1), 34–55. DOI: https://doi.org/10.52462/jlls.3

[25] Matwangsaeng, R., Sukying, A., 2023. The effects of morphological awareness on L2 vocabulary knowledge of Thai EFL young learners [Doctoral dissertation]. Mahasarakham University: Maha Sarakham, Thailand.

[26] Coxhead, A., Byrd, P., 2007. Preparing writing teachers to teach the vocabulary and grammar of academic prose. Journal of Second Language Writing. 16(3), 129–147.

[27] Kouti, M., 2021. A reading instruction for a first year middle school class. El-Wahat Journal for Research and Studies. 14(3), 1224–1234.

[28] Johnston, R.S., Watson, J.E., 2005. The effects of synthetic phonics teaching on reading and spelling attainment: A seven year longitudinal study. Scottish Executive: Edinburgh, United Kingdom.

[29] Johnston, R.S., McGeown, S., Watson, J.E., et al., 2012. Long-term effects of synthetic versus analytic phonics teaching on the reading and spelling ability of 10-year-old boys and girls. Reading and Writing. 25, 1365–1384.

[30] Sumalee, P., Sukying, A., 2024. The effects of derivational suffix instruction on English vocabulary knowledge in Thai high school learners. REFLections. 31(2), 335–352. DOI: https://doi.org/10.61508/refl.v31i2.272906

[31] Koonpornpen, O., Penruksa, C., 2023. Using the synthetic phonics method on the development of read-aloud ability by English words for prathomsuksa 3 students of Ketpichaiwitthaya School Saraburi Province. Research and Development Journal Suan Sunandha Rajabhat University. 15(2), 37–45.

[32] Nensiri, W., Sukavatee, P., 2018. Developing E-materials for teaching synthetic phonics to elementary students. Journal of Studies in the English Language. 13(2), 119–157.

[33] Prongkitsanuluck, N., Adipat, S., Imsa-ard, P., 2022. The development of vocabulary acquisition for Thai kindergarteners through digital storytelling (DST). Journal of Roi Kaensarn Academi. 7(7), 149–160.

[34] Newhouse, J., 2024. What do five-and six-year-old pupils think reading is? Exploring perceptions of reading among children learning to read using systematic synthetic phonics [Doctoral dissertation]. UCL (University College London): London, United Kingdom.

[35] Zsargo, L., 2021. Learning to read in the era of systematic synthetic phonics as prime: young children's views on their experiences [Doctoral dissertation]. University of Huddersfield: Huddersfield, United Kingdom.

[36] Attia, E.A., 2020. The effect of a multisensory synthetic phonics programme in developing automatic word recognition and spelling among young learners. Educational Sciences. 28(1), 73-117. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21608/ssj.2020.244169

[37] Mantei, J., Kervin, L., Jones, P., 2022. Examining pedagogies for teaching phonics: lessons from early childhood classrooms. The Australian Educational Researcher. 49(4), 743–760. DOI: https://doi.org.10.1007/s13384-021-00454-8.

[38] Webb, S., 2005. Receptive and productive vocabulary learning: The effects of reading and writing on word knowledge. Studies in Second Language Acquisition. 27(1), 33–52.

[39] Webb, S., 2009. The effects of receptive and productive learning of word pairs on vocabulary knowledge. RELC Journal. 40(3), 360–376.

[40] Shapiro, S.S., Wilk, M.B., 1965. An analysis of variance test for normality (complete samples). Biometrika. 52(3–4), 591–611.

[41] Cohen, J., 1988. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, 2nd ed. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: Hillsdale, USA. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203771587

[42] Jamaludin, K.A., Alias, N., Khir, R.J.M., et al., 2016. The effectiveness of synthetic phonics in the development of early reading skills among struggling young ESL readers. School Effectiveness and School Improvement. 27(3), 455–470. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09243453.2015.1069749.

[43] Crawford, M., Raheel, N., Korochkina, M., et al., 2024. Inadequate foundational decoding skills constrain global literacy goals for pupils in low- and middle-income countries. Nature Human Behaviour. 9(1), 74–83.

[44] Moats, L.C., 2019. Phonics and spelling: Learning the structure of language at the word level. In Kilpatrick, D., Joshi, R.M., Wanger, R. (eds.). Reading Development And Difficulties: Bridging the Gap Between Research and Practice. Contemporary Books: Chicago, IL, USA. pp. 39–62.

[45] Price-Mohr, R.M., Price, C.B., 2018. Synthetic phonics and decodable instructional reading texts: How far do these support poor readers? Dyslexia. 24(2), 190–196.

[46] Magnussen, E., Sukying, A., 2021. The impact of songs and TPR on Thai preschoolers' vocabulary acquisition. THAITESOL Journal. 34(1), 71–95.

[47] Ponsamak, N., Sukying, A., 2023. Utilizing Facebook input to enhance vocabulary knowledge in young EFL learners. English Language Teaching. 16(12), 68–80.

[48] Nontasee, W., Sukying, A., 2023. Multiple aspects of word knowledge in Thai EFL students: The hierarchical acquisition and relationships. GEMA Online Journal of Language Studies. 23(1), 17–39. DOI: http://doi.org/10.17576/gema-2023-2301-02

[49] Sukying, A., 2022. A taxonomy of English affix acquisition in EFL learners. In: Hirsh, D. (ed.). Research Perspectives in Language and Education. Peter Lang: New York, USA. pp. 49–82.

[50] Dubiner, D., 2017. Using vocabulary notebooks for vocabulary acquisition and teaching. ELT Journal. 71(4), 456–466.

[51] Gardner, B., 2012. Habit as automaticity, not frequency. European Health Psychologist. 14(2), 32–36.

[52] Mungsanti, K., Sukying, A., 2025. Effects of phonics instruction on Thai EFL primary students' word reading ability. Mahachulagajasara Journal. 16(1), 244–257.

[53] Lapp, D., Flood, J., 2015. Differentiating visual, communicative, and performative arts instruction in well-managed classrooms. In: Flood, J., Health, S.B., Lapp, D. (eds.). Handbook of Research on Teaching Literacy Through the Communicative and Visual Arts, Volume II. Routledge: New York, USA. pp. 565–570.

Downloads

How to Cite

Lakthong , T., Sukying, A., & Yothachai, N. (2025). The Influence of Synthetic Phonics Instruction in Enhancing Word Recognition of Thai Primary School Students. Forum for Linguistic Studies, 7(6), 650–666. https://doi.org/10.30564/fls.v7i6.9756

Issue

Vol. 7 , Iss. 6 (July 2025)

Article Type

Article

License

Copyright © 2025 Thanyathon Lakthong , Apisak Sukying, Nithipong Yothachai

Creative Commons License

This is an open access article under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) License.