Implementation of Reading Programs of Reading Coordinators in Public Elementary Schools in Pangasinan Division II: Input for Leveled Reading Toolkit
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.23016706Keywords:
reading program implementation, reading coordinators, reading intervention, leveled reading, literacy, public elementary schoolsAbstract
This study assessed the implementation of school-based reading programs in public elementary schools in Pangasinan Division II during School Year 2023–2024 and used the findings as input for a leveled reading toolkit. A quantitative descriptive-survey design was employed with 150 reading coordinators and 60 school heads. Multi-stage sampling was used to identify participating municipalities and respondents. Data were gathered through a researcher-developed questionnaire-checklist validated by four education specialists and pilot-tested among 30 respondents; the instrument demonstrated excellent internal consistency for level of implementation (Cronbach’s α = .981) and challenges encountered (α = .975). Frequency counts, percentages, weighted means, and the inferential procedures reported in the results—Kruskal-Wallis H, Mann-Whitney U, and chi-square tests—were used to analyze the data. Most schools implemented programs focused on reading intervention and enhancement for non-readers and developmental strategies (63.3%). Reading coordinators and school heads both rated overall implementation as moderately implemented (M = 3.38 and M = 3.18, respectively). Major challenges included lack of parental involvement (50.0%), limited time and resources among teachers (32.7%), and limited community support and partnerships (73.3%). Significant differences were found across reading-program types for teaching strategies and overall implementation, and between reading coordinators and school heads for learning resources, assessment techniques, enabling mechanisms, and overall implementation. Student-related and school/community-related challenges were significantly associated with overall implementation. The findings indicate a need to strengthen differentiated instruction, access to appropriate reading materials, assessment and monitoring, parent-community participation, and teacher capability. A leveled reading toolkit tailored to learners’ age and reading ability is therefore recommended to support more responsive and sustainable school-based reading intervention.
Downloads
References
Cadime, I., Ribeiro, I., Cruz, J., Cosme, M. D., Meira, D., Viana, F. L., & Santos, S. (2022). An intervention in reading disabilities using a digital tool during the COVID-19 pandemic. Frontiers in Psychology, 13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.862383
Desimone, L. M. (2009). Improving impact studies of teachers’ professional development: Toward better conceptualizations and measures. Educational Researcher, 38(3), 181–199.
Flippo, R. F. (2014). Assessing readers: Qualitative diagnosis and instruction (2nd ed.). Routledge.
Foorman, B. R. (2016). Introduction to the special issue: Challenges and solutions to implementing an effective reading intervention in schools. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 154, 7–10.
Foorman, B. R., Francis, D. J., Winikates, D., Mehta, P., Schatschneider, C., & Fletcher, J. M. (2021). Early interventions for children with reading disabilities. In Components of effective reading intervention (pp. 255–276). Routledge.
Frankel, K. K., & Pearson, P. D. (2016). Reading interventions. In What is new in literacy teaching? Weaving together time-honored practices with new research.
Graham, S., Liu, X., Aitken, A., Ng, C., Bartlett, B., Harris, K. R., & Holzapfel, J. (2018). Effectiveness of literacy programs balancing reading and writing instruction: A meta-analysis. Reading Research Quarterly, 53(3), 279–304.
Grabe, W., & Stoller, F. L. (2002). Teaching and researching reading. Pearson Education.
Guthrie, J. T., & Wigfield, A. (2000). Engagement and motivation in reading. In M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 3, pp. 403–422). Erlbaum.
Hulme, C., & Snowling, M. J. (2013). Learning to read: What we know and what we need to understand better. Child Development Perspectives, 7, 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdep.12005
Kazakoff, E. R., Macaruso, P., & Hook, P. (2018). Efficacy of a blended learning approach to elementary school reading instruction for students who are English learners. Educational Technology Research and Development, 66, 429–449.
Meniado, J. C. (2016). Metacognitive reading strategies, motivation, and reading comprehension performance of Saudi EFL students. English Language Teaching, 9(3), 117–129.
O’Brien, B. A., Habib, M., & Onnis, L. (2019). Technology-based tools for English literacy intervention: Examining intervention grain size and individual differences. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 2625.
Omar, S., & Bidin, A. (2015). The impact of multimedia graphic and text with autistic learners in reading. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 3(12), 989–996.
Wasik, B. A., & Slavin, R. E. (2008). Preventing early reading failure with one-to-one tutoring: A review of five programs. Reading Research Quarterly.
Wanzek, J., & Wexler, J. (2016). Intensive reading interventions for struggling readers. [Source manuscript reference].
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
How to Cite
