Background: Given the comprehensively documented literacy crisis in South Africa and the gaps in what is known about the effective teaching of reading and writing in schools, high-quality literacy research is a priority. Objectives: This article evaluates South African research from two annotated bibliographies on reading in African languages at home language level (2004–2017) and South African research on teaching reading in English as a first additional language (2007–2018). It also aims to provide guidelines for addressing these weaknesses. Methods: Examples of 70 quantitative and qualitative research studies from the annotated bibliographies were critically analysed, identifying key weaknesses in the research as a whole and examples of excellent quality. Results: Weaknesses evident in the research reviewed, suggested greater consideration is needed to lay sound methodological foundations for quality literacy research. Three methodological issues underlying local literacy research that require greater attention are research design, selection and use of literature and research rigour. High-quality research examples are referenced but, for ethical reasons, examples of what we consider to be flawed research are described generally. Guidelines are offered for addressing these pitfalls that, in our view, contribute to research of limited quality. Since many universities require submission of a journal article as a requirement for postgraduate students, preparation for such an article is considered. Conclusion: While this article is not intended to be a comprehensive guide, we hope it is useful to supervisors, postgraduate students and early career researchers currently undertaking, or planning to undertake, literacy research and to writing for publication.

中文翻译：

---

扫盲研究中的陷阱和可能性：南非扫盲研究述评，2004–2018年

背景：鉴于南非全面记录的扫盲危机以及在学校进行有效的读写教学方面所存在的空白，高质量的扫盲研究是当务之急。目标：本文从两个带注释的参考书目中评估了南非在本国语言水平上阅读非洲语言的研究（2004-2017年）和南非在英语作为第一附加语言教学方面的研究（2007-2018年）。它还旨在为解决这些弱点提供指导。方法：对批注书目中的70项定量和定性研究进行了严格分析，确定了整个研究中的主要弱点和卓越质量的例子。结果：所审查研究中明显的弱点，建议需要更多的考虑，为质量素养研究打下坚实的方法论基础。需要进一步关注的地方素养研究的三个方法学问题是研究设计，文献的选择和使用以及研究的严格性。引用了高质量的研究示例，但出于伦理原因，通常描述了我们认为是有缺陷的研究的示例。我们提供了解决这些陷阱的指南，我们认为这些指南有助于有限质量的研究。由于许多大学都要求提交期刊文章作为研究生的要求，因此考虑为此类文章做准备。结论：尽管本文并非旨在作为综合指南，但我们希望它对主管有用，