READING COMPREHENSION PROFILE AMONG INTERMEDIATE PUPILS:

BASIS FOR AN INTERVENTION PROGRAM

CENBY EPPIE G. GAYTOS

cnbg314@gmail.com
SALVIE JOY E. TANQUI-ON
Salviejoytanquion@gmail.com
DAISYRIE GRACE L. LIMBOY
Daisyriegracelimboy@gmail.com
JAZMAINE P. MAQUE
jazmainemaque07@gmail.com
DENNIS JADE S. ORTENEZ
norvieeannlumagbas@gmail.com
BEVERLY D. DADO-ACON
esggaytos@gmail.com
November 2019

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3505765

 ABSTRACT

GAYTOS, CENBY EPPIE G., TANQUI-ON, SALVIE JOY et al. “READING

COMPREHENSION PROFILE AMONG INTERMEDIATE PUPILS: BASIS FOR
INTERVENTION PROGRAM” (Eastern Samar State University – Guiuan Eastern
Samar, May 2019). pp.60

Factors in reading have a big effects to the child’s reading comprehension.

However, there has been a little investigation of the factors in reading comprehension
that explains its results. This study was designed to examine the profile of the
respondents in each factors. Factors in reading comprehension is categorized into
six (6) namely: Working memory, Vocabulary, Prior Knowledge, Word Recognition,
Reading Strategies and Motivation to Read.

This study used the descriptive research method considering that this
investigation focuses and describes the profile of the respondents in factors affecting
reading comprehension in which was been participated by 99 respondents of Grades
IV, V, and VI of Bungtod Elementary School. The survey questionnaire that has been
used to evaluate the profile of the respondents was adapted and revised from the
study entitled ―Assessing Factors Affecting the Students Reading Comprehension‖ by
Habmatu Walga Adaba (2016). The results of the instrument were combined to get
the respondents profile in terms of the factors affecting reading comprehension.

The questionnaire is composed of 36 items in all; working memory is

composed of 10 items, and vocabulary is composed of 4 items, then prior knowledge
is composed of 5 items, moreover word recognition is composed of 4 items,
furthermore reading strategies is composed of 6 items , and lastly motivation to read
is composed of 7 items.

After the retrieval of the data from the respondents, it was treated as follows:
in getting the perception of working memory, vocabulary, prior knowledge, word
recognition, reading strategies and motivation to read frequency counts, percentage,
and means were used and interpreted accordingly to the scale that has been given.

Based on the profile of the respondents, it was revealed that the factors that
got the highest mean of 3.2 is working memory while the factors that got the lowest
mean of 2.8 is motivation to read.

Based on the finding of the study it is recommended that pupils may read
more learning materials such as books magazines, newspapers, comics, and other
printed materials to improve their reading comprehension, so that they may perform
better in school. For the parents, they may broaden their understanding about the
importance of the profile in reading comprehension among intermediate pupils. It is
also a must for teachers to help their pupils to improve their reading comprehension
with the use of intervention program.

Keywords: reading comprehension, working memory, vocabulary, reading

strategies, word recognition, motivation to read

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3505765

 Chapter I

INTRODUCTION

Reading is an activity performed to develop an understanding of a subject or

topic. Reading is an essential skill that individuals need to process in order to be

successful in life. Reading keeps individuals informed. Reading is both a receptive

and active process. It is a dynamic process in which the reader is reaching for

connections of ideas in the text. Reading requires the utilization of many mental

processes as information as collected, processed and analyzed. Also, it is a source

of enjoyment for individuals (Li and Wilhelm, 2008).

Reading comprehension is a complex, multiple task ability. These processes

were divided into two equally difficult main types: lower- level and higher- level

processes (Grabe and Stoller, 2002). The lower level abilities include recognition,

graphophonic and others, while the higher level abilities included syntactic, semantic

and other processes. To be able to comprehend what is read, a person needs to be

familiar with texts structure and topic, aware of reading strategies, how to these

strategies in the processes of material and word recognition (Pang, 2008).

Reading comprehension is defined as ― a thinking process by which a reader

selects facts, information or ideas from printed materials; determines the meanings

the author intended to transmit; decide how they relate to previous knowledge ; and

judge their appropriateness and worth for meeting the learner’s own objective‖

Veeravagu, et al (2010: 206).

Rahmani (2011) found that students that utilized that a note-taking strategy

with graphic organizers performed considerably better than did students using their

conventional notes. Graphic notes and outlining organizes the ideas and key points,

showing their relationships. This provides a map for students to follow as they review

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3505765

their notes. Similarly, one key with note-taking and comprehension is that students

must review their notes (Robinson et al. 2006)

Reading comprehension according to Basaraba (2013) is a complex process

that requires different building-blocks skills.

The school where the research was conducted and observed is Bungtod

Elementary School. Therefore, the researchers performed the study to determine if

an intervention program is needed to improve the reading comprehension of the

pupils.

Statement of the Problem

This study was designed to determine the profile among intermediate

pupils in reading comprehension.

More especially this study sought to answer this problem:

1. What is the profile of the respondents in terms of the following;

1.1 Working Memory;

1.2 Vocabulary;

1.3 Prior Knowledge;

1.4 Word Recognition;

1.5 Reading Strategies;

1.6 Motivation to Read;

2. What recommendations maybe offered to improve the reading

comprehension of pupils?

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3505765

Significance of the Study

Results of this study may provide teachers with objective data on which to

base their efforts to improve the reading comprehension of pupils of different age

levels; to help pupils develop reading rates appropriate to each kind and difficulty of

materials; and to imply remedial techniques to overcome faulty reading habits of

pupils.

It is further expected that this study would encourage educators to develop

a reading program that would be relevant to the needs of the young children today.

To the Students. This will make them improve reading comprehension

and help hone their reading skills.

To the Teachers. Insights from this study may provide useful information

to the faculty particularly on the reading comprehension profile among intermediate

pupils.

To School Heads. It’s their duty to ensure that there should be regular

professional development opportunities available to their teaching staff. To ensure

the pupils’ success in reading comprehension, they rely on administrators to pass on

their knowledge and be effective advocates for the benefit, not only their student but

also in the whole academe.

To the Parents. Parents who read with their children can help get them

interested in reading at an early age and help model good reading habits. Parents

can now rely on this researcher’s findings as their source on reading instruction and

use their understanding of the findings to identify other tools to help the children

develop better reading skills.

To the Future Researchers. This study will provide information to the

other researchers who are interested to study about reading comprehension profile

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3505765

among intermediate pupils. This may also refer to its results for some relevant

information that may serve as guide in their own study.

Scope and Delimitation of the Study

The problem was concerned with the profile among intermediate pupils on

reading comprehension.

This study aims to identify the profile of factors in reading comprehension

of a pupil’s namely: Working Memory, Vocabulary, Prior Knowledge, Word

Recognition, Reading Strategies, Motivation-to-read.

The study was conducted in Bungtod Elementary School because the

researchers observed significant deficiencies on the reading comprehension of the

pupils and at the same manner this said school were not given enough attention

compared to other bigger schools.

The locale was also chosen because the said school has a small

population which would help the researchers conduct the study on the allotted time

required.

Definition of Terms

The following terms were defined below for better understanding of

this research which involved conceptual and operational meaning.

Comprehension. Is the process of simultaneously extracting and

constructing meaning through interaction and involvement of written language

(Edward Wilson, 2002). In this study, it is the state as to how the students understand

what he/she read.

Reading. Is a complex cognitive process of decoding symbols for the

intention of deriving meaning (reading comprehension) and/or constructing meaning.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3505765

In this study, it is the mastery of basic cognitive process to the point where they are

automatic so that attention is freed for the analysis of meaning.

Reading Comprehension. Is the ability to gain meaning from what is read.

Reading comprehension requires various reading skills (i.e., word recognition,

fluency, lexical knowledge, pre-existing knowledge) to be undertaken rapidly so that

the reader may gain knowledge from text (Pressley, 2000; Birsch, 2011). In this study

reading comprehension is the act of understanding what you are reading.

(K12reader.com)

Reading Strategies. Is a process of constructing meaning by interacting with

text with a plan selected deliberately by the reader to accomplish a particular goal or

to complete a given task. (Pars,Lipson,& Wixson,1983). In this study, reading

strategies are strategies that good readers use while reading such as predicting,

inferring, and summarizing. In the case of reading, if a person is unable to read

proficiently while others around them can, over time their beliefs in their ability to read

will be negatively impacted (Grusec, 1992; Solheim, 2011).

Working Memory. Is defined as a cognitive processing store with limited

capacity. It provides resources to process information while retrieving the same or

different information (Swanson, Zheng, & Jerman, 2009). For instance, remembering

a person’s phone number while trying to find their address. In this study, working

memory is defined as learning by remembering and internalizing.

Prior Knowledge. Is defined as a student’s content knowledge related to the

domain (i.e., math, science, and social studies) studied prior to direct instruction from

the teacher (Gurlitt & Renkl, 2010). In this study, is the learning someone gained

from past experiences.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3505765

 Chapter II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDIES

Related Literature

This chapter presents the literature in foreign and local regarding the problem.

Research and studies done by different persons all over the world are mentioned

here, and everyone agreed that reading comprehension skills of pupils at present

must be given full attention because it does affect their performance in class and

with their future endeavors.

Reading Comprehension

Many educators in the USA believe that children need to learn to analyze text

(comprehend it) even before they can read it on their own and comprehension

instruction generally begins in pre-kindergarten or kindergarten but other USA

educators consider this reading approach to be completely backward for very young

children, arguing that the children must learn how to decode the words in a story

through phonics before they can analyze the story itself.

Fielding and Pearson (2003) defined reading comprehension as the level of

understanding of a writing. Proficient reading depends on the ability to recognize

words quickly and effortlessly. If word recognition is difficult, students use too much

of their processing capacity to read individual words, which interferes with their ability

to comprehend what is read.

Gear (2006), stated that developing positive reading comprehension skills at

an early age can greatly impact a student’s ability to approach new and complex

concepts in many different subject areas. English teachers can use a variety of

different methods to approach and explain new vocabulary and reading

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3505765

comprehension concepts to their students. Instilling in children a love of reading and

developing constructive reading skills is the corner stone to a complete education.

Reading comprehension is intentional thinking during which meaning is

constructed through interaction between text and the reader (Durkin, 1993).

Reading comprehension is the construction of the meaning of a written text

through a reciprocal interchange of ideas between the reader and the message in a

particular text (Harris and Hodges, 1995).

Reading comprehension is thinking guided by print (Perfetti, 1995).

Reading comprehension is the process of simultaneously extracting and

constructing meaning through interaction and involvement with written language. It

consists of three elements: the reader, the text, and the activity or the purposes of

reading (Rand Reading Study Group, 2002)

Comprehension is the level of understanding one has a written word or

printed text. Comprehension begin early in children. To find a child level of

comprehension after reading they should be asked open-ended questions.

Parker and Hurry (2007) describe four reading strategies that improve children

reading comprehension, which are generating question about the text,

predicting, clarifying and summarizing. These strategies must be used

consistently in the classroom to help students learn how to better

comprehended text or passages. Listening comprehension begins at a very

young age and preschool children are able to answer question about what

was read to them.

Comprehension is more than a linguistic skill, it is also a general cognitive

skill (Walter, 2007). Walter’s work utilized Gernsbacher’s Structure Building

Framework (SBF) which is composed of three processes. These processes are

laying a foundation for a mental structure, mapping new information onto the

developing mental structure, and shifting to build a new substructure. These mostly

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3505765

automatic, unconscious processes utilize ―memory nodes‖, as referred to by

Gernsbacher, as building blocks in the development of comprehension. These

memory nodes are activated through (a) information in the input, (b) the

comprehender's world knowledge, and (c) the comprehender’s language knowledge

(Walter, 2007)

Grabe and Stoller (2002) indicated that reading ability is more then just

phonemic awareness and phonic skills and that vocabulary size need to be

addressed by teachers.

Koda (2005) stated that that there are numerous, diverse ways of

conceptualizing how reading comprehension can be measured. Different formats of

test will measure different aspects of comprehension. Testing will be discussed in

more detail later, but the measurement of reading comprehension is a challenging

task.

Related Studies

Reading difficulties are a major problem within the United States for both

children and adults. According to the National Association of Adult Literacy (NAAL),

30 million adults, aged 16 and above, need help to complete a job application (U.S.

Department of Education, 2003).

According to the California Department of Education, approximately 83% of 10th

grade students without disabilities who took the California High School Exit Exam in

2013 passed it compared to 40% of 10th grade students with disabilities. These

reading difficulties transcend high school and persist into adulthood where the

median age of adults who enroll in adult literacy programs is 31 years with the

majority between the ages of 16 and 24 years (Mellard & Patterson, 2008).

A study shows that it is through wide and frequent reading of printed materials

that students in grades 3 through 8 increase their general word recognition,

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3505765

vocabulary, and spelling performance period. It’s a matter of reading volume.

Reading a lot is one of the most powerful methods of increasing fluency, building

vocabulary, and improving comprehension. Even the findings of the American

National Reading Panel support the fact that the best readers read the most and the

poor readers read the least (Cunningham and Stanovich. 1988).

Statistics says that there is progress in the reading skills of the country’s

students but it’s not something to be happy about. A 66.33 MPS is still a rather low

score. In fact, it’s ―near mastery level‖(C. Z. Borja. 2007)

In 2007, Bureau of Elementary Education, attributed ―reading problem‖ as the

main hindrance for the poor performance of students in the NAT. ( Quijano.2007)

A study conducted to know just how good our student’s in reading this days.

The results of the National Achievement Test (NAT) administered to public schools

gave some answers.

The Department of Education reports that there has been a 21.36 percent

increase in NAT results from 2006 to 2009. The 2009 NAT revealed a rise in mean

percentage score (MPS) of only 66.33 percent from 54.66 percent in 2006, which

equates to an improvement of 11.67 percent. Additionally, the percentage gains were

in all subject areas and point to a steady improvement in the primary education of the

country’s public school system.

Poor reading comprehension also has implication on an individual’s level of

participation in society. Those who read more tend to involve themselves more in

current issue, cultural, political and public affairs.

Proficient readers are also more inclined to be active in community and

charity work. They engage themselves in noble causes and make better informed

decisions. The very first attempt to evaluate the reading abilities of the Filipino

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3505765

children was made by Martinez as part of educational survey on the status of

education in the Philippines. Reading text which is one part of the survey included

skills in paragraph reading, sentence meaning, and vocabulary. The result of the test

showed that pupils were poor in reading comprehension. The reading ability of the

Filipino children was in general 2 years behind of that American children. The survey

revealed that the main cause of poor achievement of Filipino children in reading was

due to English as a foreign language and the textbook used by the Filipino children.

Generally, many types of individual comprehension strategy instructions

appeared to be successful in improving readers’ ability to construct meaning from

text. With the observed success of various individual strategy application, there were

several reviews of this growing body of scientific literature. In the study of Pearson

and Gallagher in 1983, they categorized cognitive strategies by what teachers need

to do to teach reading effectively and subdivided these strategies into pre- reading,

during reading and post- reading activities.

Theoretical Framework

This study is anchored on the theory that was developed by Kintsch which is

known as Kintsch’s Construction Integration (CI) model and Schema Theory by Jean

Piaget.

The Construction Integration model is a cognitive processing model that

thoroughly describes how readers comprehend, and is one of the most highly cited

comprehension models (Deshler, Hock, & Catts, 2006). The theory identifies both

cognitive and affective processes that affect reading comprehension and, while the

theory itself will not be tested in this study, the model will be applied and extended by

testing the relative importance of the factors since Kintsch does not rank them.

Additionally, motivation-to-read was further explained through Guthrie’s Engagement

Model of Reading (Guthrie, 2008).

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3505765

 According to Fritschmann, Deshler, & Schumaker, (2007) Students use a

variety of reading strategies to analyze and comprehend what they are reading,

which include summarization, inference, and prediction. Reading strategies allow

struggling readers to actively engage with the text and aid in comprehension.

Kintsch (2013) asserts that to comprehend text, a reader needs to create a

mental representation of what was read, which is dependent upon the goals,

interests, and experience of the reader, and based upon the reader’s lexical and

background knowledge.

Kintsch describes the situation model as a mechanism that connects a

reader’s prior knowledge to new knowledge, and it allows the reader to create a

mental representation of the situation described in the text. Since a reader’s prior

knowledge is used to create the situation model, a reader is able to retrieve the

information from long-term memory to use in new situations enabling deep

understanding (Kintsch, 2005).

Kintsch and Kintsch (2005) note that there are both learner and text factors

that impede reading comprehension, which teachers can mitigate by teaching

reading strategies.

Teaching students to monitor their own understanding as they are reading is

another strategy that can aid comprehension. Further they assert that text complexity

also may impede a student’s understanding (Kintsch & Kintsch, 2005). Additionally,

students fail to use reading strategies which can help aid reading comprehension

(Jitendra & Gajria, 2011).

Denton et al. (2011) posit that reading instruction for elementary pupils with

reading deficits requires teaching in word analysis and reading comprehension that

would include instruction in reading strategies to increase reading comprehension.

Reading comprehension has also been shown to improve when students

have an expansive understanding of words—both functional and content-area

vocabulary (Kamil,et al. 2008).

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3505765

 (Kintsch & Mangalath, 2011). Reading requires students to read fluently as

well as understand the meaning of words. If either of these skills are lacking,

comprehension diminishes. There is strong evidence to support explicit vocabulary

instruction as a means to increase reading comprehension, which is needed in all

content area classes.

Sadeghi (2007) looked at reading comprehension as related to two main

factors, internal and external factors. Internal factors, related to reader, were things

such as cognitive abilities and strategies, background knowledge, and affective

characteristics. External factors were identified as text modality, text characteristics,

time and place of reading and others.

Schemas are the basic building blocks of such cognitive models, and enable

as to form a mental representation of the world. Piaget defined schema as the

building of intelligent behavior- a way of organizing knowledge (Mcleod, 2015).

Schema is a cognitive framework or concept that helps organize and interpret

information. It is both the category of knowledge as well as the process of acquiring

that knowledge (Cherry, 2017).

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3505765

 Chapter III

METHODOLOGY

This chapter presents the methodologies which includes research

design, research locale, respondents of the study, research instrument and data

collection procedure.

Research Design

The researchers used the descriptive research method. Considering that this

study focused on the reading comprehension profile among intermediate pupils as

the basis for an intervention program in Bungtod Elementary school.

Locale of the Study

The study was conducted at Bungtod Elementary School which is located in

the Municipality of Guiuan Eastern Samar. The researchers chose the population of

Grade four, five and six pupils who have difficulties in reading comprehension.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3505765

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3505765
 Figure 1: Map of Guiuan showing the Research Locale of the study.

Respondents of the Study

The Respondents of this study was the Grade IV, V, and VI pupils enrolled in

Bungtod Elementary School in the school year 2018 – 2019. The total number of

pupils enrolled in Grade IV was thirty-three pupils, in Grade V was thirty-three pupils

and Grade VI was thirty-three pupils with the total number of 99 respondents. In our

study, we choose Grade IV,V and VI pupils as our respondents because we

observed that this Grade Levels was more prone on reading activities.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3505765

Research Instrument

The researchers have used survey questionnaire to measure the reading

comprehension in intermediate pupils. The researchers used survey questionnaire

that was adopted from the study of Habmatu Walga Adaba (2016) Assessing Factors

Affecting the Students’ Reading Comprehension. International Journal of Language

and Linguistics. Vol. 4, No.5, 2016, pp 165 to 182., and modify and reword to fit the

purpose of the study.

The survey questionnaire contains of thirty-six (36) items answerable by

checking the desired ordinal rating scale numbered 4 to 1 with the description of

Always, Sometimes, Rarely, and Never.

The result of the survey was interpreted based on the following numerical values.

Scale Interpretation

4 Always

3 Sometimes

2 Rarely

1 Never

Data Gathering Procedure

The researchers have presented a letter of communication to Bungtod

Elementary School asking permission for the conduct of the study. When approved,

the researchers have distributed the survey questionnaires to the Grade IV, V and VI

pupils as the respondents of the study. To ensure that the respondents will answer

the questionnaire correctly, the researchers gave instructions and humbly accepted

questions for clarification. The researchers personally distributed questionnaires for

an immediate retrieval in order to immediately come up with the results of the study.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3505765

 The questionnaire are categorized into six (6), Working Memory, Vocabulary,

Prior Knowledge, Word Recognition, Reading Strategies, Motivation to Read. The

survey is answerable by checking the desired ordinal rating scale numbered 4 to 1

with the description of Always, Sometimes, Rarely, and Never.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3505765

 Chapter IV

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

This chapter presents the answers to the research question posed in this

study based on the data gathered.

Profile of the Respondents on Pupil’s Working Memory

This section answered the questions regarding the profile of the respondents

in terms of pupil’s Working Memory.

Specifically, the table covers the profile of the respondents in Pupil’s Working

Memory with their corresponding mean score and interpretation as perceived by

each respondents.

Table 1. Perception of Respondents on Working Memory

Statement Mean Scale Interpretation

1. When I read a story or other information I 3.09 Always Very Good
understand it.
2. If a book is interesting I don’t care how hard it is 3.05 Always Very Good
to read.
3. I like to read about new things. 3.45 Always Very Good
4. I like it when the questions in books make me 2.98 Sometimes Good
think.
5. I read to learn new information. 3.19 Always Very Good
6. I enjoy a long, involved story or fiction book. 3.25 Always Very Good
7. I can concentrate what I am reading if there is 3.43 Always Very Good
no one bothering me.
8. I can understand what I am reading when the 3.39 Always Very Good
place is silent.
9. I always try to finish my reading on time. 2.84 Sometimes Good
10. Finishing every reading assignment is very 3.29 Always Very Good
important.
TOTAL 3.2 Sometimes Good

Legend:
Range Scale Interpretation
3.26 – 4.0 Always Very Good
2.5– 3.25 Sometimes Good
1.76 – 2.50 Rarely Fair
1.0 – 1.75 Never Poor

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3505765

 As shown in Table 1, the staement number 3 states that, ―I like to read about

new things‖ got the means score of 3.45 with the scale of Always and was interpreted

as Very Good; this was the highest mean score. Statement number 9 states that, ―I

always try to finish my reading on time‖ got the mean score of 2.84 with the scale of

Sometimes as Good. This is the lowest mean score.

Overall Perception on Pupil’s Working Memory

The overall perception on pupils working memory as shown on table 1 the

respondents shared the same reflection of the pupil’s working memory often

experienced by the pupils of Bungtod Elementary School. Moreover the overall mean

score is 3.2 classified as Sometimes and interpreted as Good.

Working Memory

10%

51% Very Good

39% Good
Fair
Poor

Figure 2. Distribution of Respondents according to Working Memory

Based on the figure above it was revealed that 51% of 99 respondents

considered Working Memory as Very Good which means majority of the pupils

remembered and internalized the lesson well, 39% considered as Good which means

that the pupils were able to remember the lesson, and 10% considered Fair which

mean somewhat remembered the lesson.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3505765

Profile of the Respondents on Pupil’s Vocabulary

Table 2. Perception of Respondents on Vocabulary

Statement Mean Scale Interpretation

1. I use dictionary when I can’t understand 2.9 Sometimes Good

words

2. I emphasize grammar in reading. 2.7 Sometimes Good

3. I like reading English Textbooks. 3.2 Sometimes Good

4. I usually learn difficult things by reading. 2.8 Sometimes Good

OVERALL MEAN 2.9 Sometimes Good

Legend:
Range Scale Interpretation
3.26 – 4.0 Always Very Good
2.5– 3.25 Sometimes Good
1.76 – 2.50 Rarely Fair
1.0 – 1.75 Never Poor

The table covers the profile of the respondents in Pupil’s Vocabulary with their

corresponding mean score and interpretation as perceived by each respondents.

As shown in Table 2 below, the statement number 3 states that, ―I like reading

English Textbooks‖ got the means score of 3.23 with the scale of Sometimes and

was interpreted as Good; this was the highest mean score. Statement number 2

states that, ―I emphasize grammar in reading‖ got the mean score of 2.76 with the

scale of Sometimes as Good. This is the lowest mean score.

Overall Perception on Pupil’s Vocabulary

The overall perception on pupils Vocabulary as shown on table 2 the

respondents shared the same reflection the pupil’s Vocabulary often experienced by

the pupils of Bungtod Elementary School. Moreover the overall mean score is 2.9

classified as Sometimes and interpreted as Good.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3505765

 Table 3. Distribution of Respondents According to Vocabulary

Category Frequency Percentage

Very Good 28 29%

Good 44 44%

Fair 23 23%

Poor 4 4%

TOTAL 99 100%

Based on the table 3, it was revealed that 44% of 99 respondents were Good

in Vocabulary. That means almost half of the respondents were aware of their

grammar and understanding of words. It also numbered that 29% of the respondents

were considered as Very Good which means they used the words and correct their

own grammar, 23% of the respondents respond as Fair because they somewhat

understand the words and can check the grammar and 4% responded as Poor since

more pupils were fun in playing.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3505765

 Profile of the Respondents on Pupil’s Prior Knowledge

The table covers the profile of the respondents in Pupil’s Prior Knowledge

with their corresponding mean score and interpretation as perceived by each

respondents.

Table 4. Perception of Respondents on Prior Knowledge

Statement Mean Scale Interpretation

1. When I don’t understand a word I use the

information I have already read to help me 3.0 Sometimes Sufficient
understand.
2. I know that I will do well in reading. 3.1 Sometimes Sufficient
3. I have favorite subjects that I like to read
3.4 Always Highly Sufficient
about.
4. I make pictures in my mind when I read. 3.0 Sometimes Sufficient
5. When I read I try to see the pictures in my
3.1 Sometimes Sufficient
head.
OVERALL MEAN 3.1 Sometimes Sufficient
Legend:

Range Scale Interpretation

3.26 – 4.0 Always Highly Sufficient

2.5– 3.25 Sometimes Sufficient

1.76 – 2.50 Rarely Less Sufficient

1.0 – 1.75 Never Not Sufficient

As shown in Table 4, the statement number 3 states that, ―I have favorite

subjects that I like to read about‖ got the means score of 3.46 with the scale of

Always and was interpreted as Highly Sufficient; this was the highest mean score.

Statement number 4 states that, ―I make pictures in my mind when I read‖ got the

mean score of 3.07 with the scale of Sometimes as Sufficient. This is the lowest

mean score.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3505765

Overall Perception on Pupil’s Prior Knowledge

The overall perception on pupils Prior Knowledge as shown on table 4 the

respondents shared the same reflection the pupil’s Prior Knowledge often

experienced by the pupils of Bungtod Elementary School. Moreover the overall mean

score is 3.1 classified as Sometimes and interpreted as Moderately Responsive.

Prior Knowledge
1%

5%

Highly Sufficient
38%
56% Sufficient
Less Sufficient
Not Sufficient

Figure 3. Distribution of Respondents according to Prior Knowledge

Based on the figure above it was revealed that 56% of 99 respondents were

Highly Sufficient which means that most of the pupils were fully capable to apply their

past experiences and learnings, 38% considered pupils Prior Knowledge as

Sufficient means that the pupils were capable of applying their past experiences or

knowledge and 5% considered as Less Sufficient which means that the pupils were

somewhat capable to apply their past experiences and 1% considered as Not

Sufficient it means that pupils were not able to relate their past experiences and

knowledge.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3505765

Profile of the Respondents on Pupil’s Word Recognition

The table covers the profile of the respondents in Pupil’s Word Recognition

with their corresponding mean score and interpretation as perceived by each

respondents.

Table 5. Perception of Respondents on Word Recognition

Statement Mean Scale Interpretation

1. I understand the text when I read simple
3.2 Sometimes Good
words.
2. I don’t like reading something when the
2.7 Sometimes Good
words are too difficult
3. I turn back and see the words I already
3.0 Sometimes Good
read.
4.I understand unfamiliar words by
2.8 Sometimes Good
analyzing the sentences.
OVERALL MEAN 2.9 Sometimes Good

Legend:

Range Scale Interpretation

3.26 – 4.0 Always Very Good

2.5– 3.25 Sometimes Good

1.76 – 2.50 Rarely Fair

1.0 – 1.75 Never Poor

As shown in Table 5 below, the statement number 1 states that, ―I understand

the text when I read simple words‖ got the means score of 3.2 with the scale of

Sometimes and was interpreted as Good; this was the highest mean score.

Statement number 2 states that, ―I don’t like reading something when the words are

too difficult‖ got the mean score of 2.7 with the scale of Sometimes as Good. This is

the lowest mean score.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3505765

Overall Perception on Pupil’s Word Recognition

The overall perception on pupils Word Recognition as shown on table 5 the

respondents share the same reflection the pupil’s Word Recognition often

experienced by the pupils of Bungtod Elementary School. Moreover the overall mean

score is 2.9 classified as Sometimes and interpreted as Good.

Table 6. Distribution of Respondents According to Word Recognition

Category Frequency Percentage

Very Good 31 31%

Good 43 44%

Fair 23 23%

Poor 2 2%

TOTAL 99 100%

Based on the table above, it was revealed that 44% of 99 respondents were

Good which means that majority of the pupils were able to recognized simple and

unfamiliar words, 31% of the respondents considered Word Recognition as Very

Good which means that pupils were able to understand what they read through

recognizing both simple and unfamiliar words, 23% responded that it is Fair which

means that pupils were not fully able to recognize words and 2% considered it as

Poor it means that the pupils were not able to recognize the words and understand

the text.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3505765

Profile of the Respondents on Pupil’s Reading Strategies

The table covers the profile of the respondents in Pupil’s Reading Strategies

with their corresponding mean score and interpretation as perceived by each

respondents.

Table 7. Perception of Respondents on Reading Strategies

Statement Mean Scale Interpretation

1. I understand the text when I read it loud. 2.9 Sometimes Good

2. I easily understand the sentences when I read it
3.2 Sometimes Good
slowly.
3. I actively participate in group tutoring to improve
3.1 Sometimes Good
my reading comprehension skill.
4. I find the story or written information difficult to
3.0 Sometimes Good
understand, I use strategies to help me understand.
5. I use illustrations on titles to help me figure out
2.9 Sometimes Good
what a story is about.
6. I understand the text when I read it silently. 3.0 Sometimes Good
OVERALL MEAN 3.0 Sometimes Good
Legend:

Range Scale Interpretation

3.26 – 4.0 Always Very Good

2.5– 3.25 Sometimes Good

1.76 – 2.50 Rarely Fair

1.0 – 1.75 Never Poor

As shown in Table 7, the statement number 2 states that, ―I easily understand

the sentences when I read it slowly‖ got the means score of 3.2 with the scale of

Sometimes and was interpreted as Good; this was the highest mean score.

Statement number 1 states that, ―I understand the text when I read it loud.‖ got the

mean score of 2.9 with the scale of Sometimes as Good. This is the lowest mean

score.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3505765

Overall Perception on Pupil’s Reading Strategies

The overall perception on pupils Reading Strategies as shown on table 7 the

respondents share the same reflection the pupil’s Reading Strategies often

experienced by the pupils of Bungtod Elementary School. Moreover the overall mean

score is 3.0 classified as Sometimes and interpreted as Good.

Reading Strategies

0%
21%

42% Very Good

Good
Fair
37% Never

Figure 4. Distribution of Respondents according to Reading Strategies

Based on the figure above it was revealed that 42% of 99 respondents were

Very Good which means that they are effectively capable in using strategies in

reading, 37% considered as Good for they are aware of the reading strategies, 21%

considered as Fair that the pupils were somewhat capable in using strategies in

reading and 0% considered as Poor.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3505765

Profile of the Respondents on Pupil’s Motivation To Read

The table covers the profile of the respondents in Pupil’s Motivation to Read

with their corresponding mean score and interpretation as perceived by each

respondents.

Table 8. Perception of Respondents on Motivation to Read

Statement Mean Scale Interpretation

1. I am willing to read the text when there is a

2.3 Rarely Less Motivated
reward.
2. I read to improve my grades. 3.2 Sometimes Motivated
3. If the teachers discusses something interesting Highly
3.3 Always
I might read about it. Motivated
4. I like having the teacher say I read well. 3.1 Sometimes Motivated
5.It is important for me to see my name on a list 3.1 Sometimes Motivated
of good readers.
6. I visit the library often with others. 1.8 Rarely Less Motivated
7. I am willing to work hard to read better than
2.7 Sometimes Motivated
others.
OVERALL MEAN 2.8 Sometimes Motivated
Legend:

Range Scale Interpretation

3.26 – 4.0 Always Highly Motivated
2.5– 3.25 Sometimes Motivated
1.76 – 2.50 Rarely Less Motivated
1.0 – 1.75 Never Not motivated

As shown in Table 8, the statement number 3 states that, ―if the teachers

discusses something interesting I might read about it‖ got the means score of 3.3

with the scale of Always and was interpreted as Highly Motivated; this was the

highest mean score. Statement number 6 states that, ―I visit the library often with

others‖ got the mean score of 1.8 with the scale of Rarely as Less Motivated. This is

the lowest mean score.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3505765

Overall Perception on Pupil’s Motivation to Read

The overall perception on pupils Motivation to Read as shown on table 8 the

respondents share the same reflection the pupil’s Motivation to Read often

experienced by the pupils of Bungtod Elementary School. Moreover the overall mean

score is 2.8 classified as Sometimes and interpreted as Motivated.

Table 9. Distribution of Respondents According to Motivation to Read

Category Frequency Percentage

Highly Motivated 14 14.1%

Motivated 58 58.5%

Less Motivated 28 28.2%

Not Motivated 0 0%

TOTAL 99 100%

Based on the table above, it was revealed that 58% of 99 respondents were

Motivated because the teacher uses different strategies and techniques for the pupils

to be interested to the topic, 28% of the respondents considered as Less Motivated it

means that some pupils were just focusing only one strategies used by the teacher,

14% responded that it is Highly Motivated it means that they used and understand

the strategies and techniques used by the teacher and 0% considers it as Not

Motivated.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3505765

 Chapter V

SUMMARY, CONCLUSION, AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This chapter presents the summary of findings, the conclusions, and the

recommendation of the study.

Summary of Findings

This study basically dealt on the profile of the respondents in Reading

Comprehension: Basis For An Intervention Program in Bungtod Elementary School.

Specifically, this study sought answers to the following questions:

1. What is the profile of the respondents in terms of the following:

1.1 Working Memory;

1.2 Vocabulary;

1.3 Prior Knowledge;

1.4 Word Recognition;

1.5 Reading Strategies;

1.6 Motivation to Read;

2. What recommendations may be offered to improve the reading

comprehension of pupils?

This study includes the Grades IV, V and VI pupils in Bungtod Elementary School. To

determine the respondents profile in terms of working memory, vocabulary, prior

knowledge, word recognition, reading strategies and motivation to read, each

respondents were requested to share their views regarding the factors affecting

reading comprehension using the question taken from Habmatu Walga Adaba (2016)

Assessing Factors Affecting the Students’ Reading Comprehension.

After the accomplished questionnaires were retrieved, these were treated as follows.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3505765

In describing the profile of the respondents in terms of factors affecting reading

comprehension frequency counts, percentages and means more used.

On the Profile of the Respondents

After retrieving the questionnaire and gathering the data of information, the

profile of the respondents in terms of their Working Memory with the mean score of

3.2 was revealed and interpreted as "good". Which means that the pupils were able

to understand and remember informations about what they have read. Second, the

profile of the respondents in terms of their Vocabulary with mean score of 2.9 was

revealed and interpreted as "Good". Which means that the pupils were aware of their

grammar and understanding of words. Third, the profile of the respondents in terms

of their Prior Knowledge with mean score of 3.1 was revealed and interpreted as

"sufficient". Which means that the pupils were able to use their prior knowledge as a

guide for their lessons and reading activities. Fourth, the profile of the respondents in

terms of their Word Recognition with mean score of 2.9 was revealed and interpreted

as "Good". Which means that the pupils were able to recognize simple and unfamiliar

words. Fifth, the profile of the respondents in terms of their Reading Strategies with

mean score of 3.0 was revealed and interpreted as "Good". Which means that the

pupils were aware of the reading strategies that are effective for them. Lastly, the

profile of the respondents in terms of their Motivation to Read with mean score of 2.8

was revealed and interpreted as "Motivated". Which means that the pupils were

interested in reading activities.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3505765

Conclusions

In the light of essential findings of this study, positive insights were drawn. It is

evident that Reading Comprehension Profile Among Intermediate Pupils: Basis for an

Intervention Program.

It was revealed that the factor that got the highest mean of 3.2 is Working

Memory while the factor that got the lowest mean of 2.8 is Motivation to Read, which

means that these factors have an impacts to the pupils reading comprehension.

The overall result of this particular study will provide the stakeholders of Bungtod

Elementary School a reading comprehension profile of the pupils which can become

their basis for establishing an intervention program.

Recommendations

The following recommendations were drawn based on the findings of the study.

An intervention program should be established to improve the reading

comprehension of the intermediate pupils.

1. For the pupils, as the center of educative process they may read more learning

materials such as books, magazines, newspapers, comics and other printed

materials that are both educational and enjoyable to read for them to improve

their Reading comprehension so that they may perform better in school.

2. For the parents, they may broaden their understanding about the importance of

the factors affecting reading comprehension.

Working Memory- should provide educational materials for the enhancement

of their reading comprehension ability.

Vocabulary- should encourage her child to allot some time watching

educational movies.

Prior Knowledge- to promote their prior knowledge, parents can offer bed

time stories and storytelling activities.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3505765

 Word Recognition- provide reading materials which interest them (comics,

fairytales, fables, nursery rhymes).

Reading Strategies- parents should offer storytelling activities.

Motivation to Read- parents should encourage their children to read of an

educational materials instead of playing whole day.

3. For the teachers, they should help their pupils to adopt the factors affecting

reading comprehension.

Working Memory- the teacher should include more activities such as drills,

games, includes puzzle, jigsaw and riddles.

Vocabulary- teacher should give a spelling activity for their vocabulary

building.

Prior Knowledge- teacher give example which is relevant to pupils daily

experience.

Word Recognition- teacher should provide reading materials which interest

them. (comics, fairytale, fables, bible stories, nursery rhymes)

Reading strategy- should use books that have pictures or illustration, use of

dictionary, practice oral and silent reading.

Motivation-to-read- teacher should employ positive reinforcement such as

appraisal, rewards or provide books that capture their interest.

4. For the school, they should provide more reading materials and more reading

activities for the students to build a higher comprehension and should find

possible way in order to enhance pupil’s reading ability.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3505765

 REFERENCES

Amanda Morin (n.d). Working memory. Retrieved from [SpeechLanguage-

resource.com/working-memory-activities.html]

Courtney Montgomery. (2016). How to improve reading comprehension.

[English-for students.com/reading-comprehension-A.]

Dahlin,K.I.(2011). Effects of working memory training on reading in children

with special needs. Reading and writing. Retrieved from [www. Research
gate.net/publication/226302644_effects_of_Working_memory__training_on_
Reading_in_Childtren_with_Special_Needs/amp]

Denton, C.A., Fletcher.J.M., Wexler,J.,Vaughn,S.,Cirino, P.T.Francis,D.J. (2011).

The relations among oral and silent reading fluency and
comprehension in middle school: Implications for identification and
instruction of Students with reading difficulties. Scientific Studies of
Reading, 15(2), 109-135. Doi:10.1080/10888431003623546

Derek Hughes (n.d.). Teaching sequence of event: Activities and games

[www.Teacherversion.com/reading-comprehension/sequencinglesson]

Deshler, D.D., Hock, M., F., & Catts, H.W. (2006) Enhancing outcomes for
struggling adolescent readers. IDA Perspectives, 1-8.

Deshler, D. D., & Hock, M. F. (2007). Adolescent literacy: Where we are, where
we need to go. In M. Pressley, A. Billman, K. Perry, K. E. Reffitt, & J.
Reynolds (Eds.), Shaping literacy achievement: Research we have,
research we need (pp.98-128). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Dewitz,P,Jones,J.,and Leahy,S. (2009). Comprehension strategy instruction in

core reading programs. Reading research quarterly, 44 (2),102-126

Ellie Williams. Academic performance retrieved from [work.chron.com/meaning-

academic-performance.17332.html]

Emily Bannister (2017). Paint me a picture. Retrieved from

[Gametreasury[Gametreasury.blogspot.com/2009/11/paint-me-a-picture]

Fritschman,N.S., Deshler, D.D.,& Schumaker,J.B. (2007). The effects of instruction

in an inference strategy on the reading comprehension skills of
adolescents with disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly,30.254-262

Grabe,W, and Stoller, F.L. (2002). Teaching and researching reading.

Harlow,Essex: Pearson Education.

Habmatu Walga Adaba (2016) Assessing factors affecting the student’s

reading comprehension. International journal of language and
linguistics.Vol.4,No.5,2016,pp165 to 182.

Kamil,M.L.,Borman,G.D.,Dole,J.,Kral,C.C., Salinger,T.,Torgesen,J.,& Institute of

education Sciences (ED),N.2008. Improving adolescent literacy:Effective

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3505765

 classroom and intervention practices. IES Practice Guide.NCEE 2008
4027. National Center for Education Evaluation and regional Assistance.

King K. (2008). Reading strategies. Retrieved from

[Edu/offices/academicresources/writingcenters/studyskils/textbookreadingstra
tegies/ finding the main idea.aspx]

Kintsch,W.(2013).Revisiting the construction-integration model of text

comprehension and its implications for instruction. In
D.E.Alverman,N.J.Unrau,& R.B. Rudell (Eds.), theoretical models and
processes of reading (pp.807-839).Newark,DE.: International Reading
Association.

Kintsch,W.& Mangalath,P. (2011). The construction of meaning. Topics in

Cognitive Science, 3,346-370

Kintsch,W.&Kintsch,E. (2005). Comprehension.In S.Paris & S. Stahl (Eds.),

Children’s reading comprehension and assessment. (pp. 71-
92).Mahwah,Nj: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Koda,K.(2005). Insights into second language reading a cross-linguistic

approach.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Liz Oppelt (2017). Activities to help Students Improve Their Working Memory.

Masteravhandling%20%20Reading%20%comprehension_%20Elin%20Jord02679
9_1_1.pdf

MerriamWebster.(2016)/retrievedfrom[www.meriamwebster.com/dictionary/academi]

MedineNet,Inc. (2015). Definition of working memory. Retrieved from www.

Medicinenet.com/script/maiarticlekey=7143

Pars, Lipson,& Wixson (1983). Reading statregy-meaning. Retrieved from [www.

Eduplace.com/rdg/res/literacy]

Sarah Young. (2015). Classroom activities that increase student engagement.

Retrieved from [www.Readinghorizons.com/blog/14-classroom-activities-that-
increase-studentengagement]

Rudell (Eds.) (n.d.). Theoretical models and processes of reading.

Newark,DE.: International Reading Association.

Swanson, Zheng, & Jerman, (2009). Working memory,short-term memory, and

reading disabilities a selective meta-analysis of literature. Retrieved
from www.researchgate.net/publication/24171647_Working_Memory_Short-
TermMemory_and_Reading_Disabilities_A_Selective_MetaAnalysis_of_the_
Literature

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3505765