CHAPTER 1

BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY

Introduction

Reading literacy is a skill, which is the root of all processes of learning.

That is why, it is observed that reading performance especially pupils in the

primary grades must be constantly monitored and evaluated. It also plays a

vital role in ones’ success in school because it can be one of the most

rewarding, preoccupation of the individual his horizons. Reading is one of the

most important skills in English that an individual must need to learn. It

serves as a tool to every pupil to learn the different subject because pupils have

a difficulty in reading, he may encounter also difficulties in some subject areas.

According to some authors states that attitudes and motivation play a

big role in reading (Cambria & Guthrie, 2010; Seitz, 2010). Reading itself is

considered to be “the mother of all skills” (De Guzman, Donisa, & Sabio, 2010).

Grabe (2002) states that one of the most important skills in academic

settings is reading ability in a second language (L2) as new information is

learned, and alternative explanations and interpretations about this

information are obtained through reading.

Similarly, Anderson (2003) states that reading is the most important skill

to master in order to ensure success in learning.

The Philippine Informal Reading Inventory (PIRI) is an initiative of the

Bureau of Elementary Education – Department of Education that directly

addresses its thrust to make every Filipino child a reader. It is anchored on the

flagship program of the DepEd “Every Child A Reader Program” (ECARP), its

1
goal is to enable every Filipino child to communicate both in English and

Filipino through effective reading instruction.

Thus, a child’s success and throughout life depends in large part on the

ability to read. The significance of knowing the factors affecting reading

performances, having good condition resources including time, manageable

class size, materials and other learning opportunities will enable the teachers

of ensuring that all pupils learn to read. 

Statement of the Problem

As a concerned teacher, the researcher decided to study to obtain this

degree to better understand the Reading Performances of Public Elementary

Pupils in Cotabato City School Year 2017 – 2018. Specifically, this study aims

to answer the following questions:

1. What is the extent of the resources of the reading program of the DepEd

in terms of:

(a) Manpower Resources (b) Administrative Support (c) Instructional

Support?

2. What is the extent of the pedagogical approaches used by the teachers in

terms of:

(a) Directive Instruction (b) Transactive Instruction (c) Transformative

Instruction?

3. What is the level of reading performances of pupils in Public Elementary

in Cotabato City?

2
 Conceptual Framework of the Study

Reading is one of the four macro skills taught in an English language

classroom, which requires a response from the reader through summarizing

the main facts based on what was read (Zintz&Maggart, 1986, in Blay et.al,

2009).Reading is not just extracting meaning from the text but a process of

connecting to the information given by the text. Reading in this sense, is a

communication between the reader and the text (Grabe, 1988 in Villanueva,

2006). Reading is essential to life. And reading with comprehension is the chief

justification why we read, understanding what the text is all about (Lastrella,

2010).Reading comprehension is a complex balance between recognizing

printed symbols and interpreting the meaning behind the symbols (Dennis,

2011).

There is a growing body of evidence supporting the concept that a

reader’s background knowledge about what he is reading is one of the most

critical factors in determining whether a student will understand what he is

reading or not (Hirsch,E.D. (2006); Kamhi, A.,(2007). To continue to make

progress in learning, as well as fuel self concept and motivation, students

should participate in regular classroom experiences appropriate to their

cognitive and maturational levels, including interesting and cognitively

challenging books presented orally or on tape (Worthy, 1996).

According to Dole et al. (1991), in the traditional view of reading, novice

readers acquire a set of hierarchically ordered sub-skills that sequentially build

toward comprehension ability. Having mastered these skills, readers are viewed

3
as experts who comprehend what they read. Readers are passive recipients of

information in the text. Meaning resides in the text and the reader has to

reproduce meaning.

According to Nunan (1991), reading in this view is basically a matter of

decoding a series of written symbols into their aural equivalents in the quest

for making sense of the text. He referred to this process as the 'bottom-up' view

of reading.

Goodman (1967; cited in Paran, 1996) presented reading as a

psycholinguistic guessing game, a process in which readers sample the text,

make hypotheses, confirm or reject them, make new hypotheses, and so forth.

Here, the reader rather than the text is at the heart of the reading process.

INPUT PROCESS OUTPUT

 Manpower Pedagogical Factors Affecting

resources approach: the Level of

 Administrative a. Directive Reading

support instruction Performances in

 Instructional b. Transactive English of Public

support instruction Elementary Pupils

c. Transformative in Cotabato City

FEEDBACK

4
 FIGURE 1 “Schematic Diagram of the Conceptual Framework of the

Study”

Significance of the study

The findings of the study may serve as a guide to the school

administrators by possible planning a reading assessment as baseline

information in planning and designing a functional reading program in the

public elementary school.

The teachers in public elementary will also benefit from the results of the

study to increase the pupils’ reading rates without reducing comprehension.

The findings may guide them to use any of the instruction in reading to

measure the pupils’ reading rates and to know the techniques on how to

improve the reading ability of pupils and how they could properly use them on

their actual classroom teaching.

The pupils will also benefit from the results of the study. They will be

encourage and may trigger their willingness in reading their lesson.

Finally, the results of this study may help other researchers who will

conduct similar study to this. They will be provided with data and other related

information relevant to their research.

Scope and Limitation of the Study

The study is focus in determining the reading performances of public

elementary pupils in Cotabato City for the School Year 2017 – 2018.

5
 Specifically this study is limited only to 120 Grade II and Grade III

Teachers as respondents. There was 120 pupils to orally read the prepared

passage.

Definition of terms

There are several terms to be defined in this study which shows as

follows:

Administrative support – Refers to a person responsible for providing

various kinds of administrative assistance.

Directive instruction – Refers to an instructional approach in which

teachers follow a step-by-step, lesson- by-lesson approach to teaching that has

already been written for them. What the teachers say and do is prescribed and

scripted, and accompanied by a pre-specified system of rewards.

Frustration – Refers to the pupils’ shows withdrawal from reading

situations by refusing to read. This is the lowest level in reading.

Independent – Refers to the highest level in reading at which a pupil can

read independently and with ease without the help or guidance of the teacher.

Instructional – Refers to the level in reading at which the pupil can

profit from instruction

Instructional Support – Refers to the materials given by the school

supplies in particular school.

Manpower Resources – Refers to the teachers resources available that

can be apply in teaching reading.

6
 Pedagogical Approach – Refers to the overall perspectives used to plan

and implement one or more instructional strategies.

Reading Performance – Refers to the performance of the pupils where

related to their literacy and numeracy development.

Transactive Instruction – Refers to the process of creating situations

whereby pupils are able to interact with the material to be learned in order to

construct knowledge.

Transformative Instruction – Refers to the pupils' active engagement in

developing knowledge and skills, critical thinking, higher-order skills, and

communication are facilitated by the instructor.

7
 CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURES AND STUDIES

This chapter presents literature and studies related to this investigation

taken from the books and websites. These materials provided valuable

information for the conceptualization of the framework.

Manpower Resources

One of the most significant factors in student academic success is the

teacher-principal relationship (Downey, 2004; Glickman, et al., 2009; Hoy and

Miskel, 2005; Protheroe, 2009; Ubben, et al., 2011). According to Edgerson

and Kritsonis (2006), although teacher-principal relationships can vary among

schools and even among teachers, they nonetheless affect student

achievement.

Many contemporary educational reform efforts have increased scrutiny of

public schools, leading to calls for greater accountability and increased student

performance (Apple, 2006; Grubb, 2009). Initiatives now becoming fixtures in

the educational landscape, such as school choice, standardized testing, and

voucher programs have been interpreted by some researchers as detrimental to

the strength of the American public school system, weakening public education

8
by calling unfettered attention to its flaws while simultaneously spreading

resources more thinly (Apple, 2006; Ravitch, 2010; Rose, 2009; Zhao, 2009).

Administrators must be familiar with available resources to support the

diverse needs of students, families and staff and must know how to access

additional support in order to ensure appropriate education for all students

and support for teachers. For example, leaders can make sure English as a

Second Language and bilingual programs are effectively supported (DiPaola,

Walther-Thomas, 2003). They can make special education concerns integral

when planning for professional development, distribution of materials, books,

classroom space and equipment. They can ensure that special education is not

put at the end of the line as an afterthought (CEC, 2000).

Administrative Support

The support of the administrator contributes greatly to the self-efficacy of

special education teachers (Otto & Arnold, 2005). One of the most significant

tasks of a school administrator is to exhibit an understanding of the role of

special education teachers (Otto & Arnold). Additionally, Otto and Arnold state

special educators feel less isolated from other teachers when conversations

with an administrator are noteworthy. Billingsley (2004) maintains that strong

administrative support serves to in further developing special education

teachers who desire to grow professionally and seek ways to positively impact

student achievement.

Administrators must be familiar with available resources to support the

diverse needs of students, families and staff and must know how to access

9
additional support in order to ensure appropriate education for all students

and support for teachers. For example, leaders can make sure English as a

Second Language and bilingual programs are effectively supported (DiPaola,

Walther-Thomas, 2003). They can make special education concerns integral

when planning for professional development, distribution of materials, books,

classroom space and equipment. They can ensure that special education is not

put at the end of the line as an afterthought (CEC, 2000).

Good leaders encourage others to be leaders and help bring out those

qualities. Therefore, if teachers attend a conference or workshop, have them

share their knowledge with the rest of the staff when they return. Leaders can

have experienced teachers work together to solve an instructional problem

(Spitz, 2003).

(Leithwood, Seashore Louis, Anderson, and Wahlstrom, 2004) make two

important claims. First, "leadership is second only to classroom instruction

among all school-related factors that contribute to what students learn at

school". Second, "leadership effects are usually largest where and when they

are needed most”. Without a powerful leader, troubled schools are unlikely to

be turned around. The authors stress that "many other factors may contribute

to such turnarounds, but leadership is the catalyst”.

The decisions that school leaders make and how they make them have a

direct impact on working conditions. Teachers often complain that decisions

affecting them are usually made without their knowledge. Leaders need to

involve teachers in making decisions. For example, leaders can involve staff in

10
departmental scheduling, student scheduling and duty assignments (Price,

2003).

          Every school should have a mission statement and a vision based on

shared values and beliefs. Leaders can engage all stakeholders in the process

of developing the mission statement and vision for the school that provides

focus and direction for all involved. (DiPaola, Walther-Thomas, 2003). If the

school already has a mission and vision, revisit them occasionally with the

stakeholders involved. Good leaders encourage others to be leaders and help

bring out those qualities. Therefore, if teachers attend a conference or

workshop, have them share their knowledge with the rest of the staff when they

return. Leaders can have experienced teachers work together to solve an

instructional problem (Spitz, 2003).

Leaders also must ensure that teachers have adequate resources and

materials to do their jobs. (Darling-Hammond, 2003; Ingersoll and Smith,

2003). Sufficient common planning time should be built into the schedules of

classroom teachers and specialists so they can address instructional needs and

classroom concerns (DiPaola and Walther-Thomas, 2003). In addition,

maintaining consistent procedures and schedules is important. Clearly

explaining changes beforehand will avoid chaos and stress on everyone,

especially new teachers (Public Education Network, 2003). 

Teachers have expressed the need for support in the form of performance

assessments and evaluations. Leaders should structure formal evaluations

around the needs of the teachers. Rather than covering every item on an

evaluation checklist, a leader can schedule observations to focus on only a few

11
skills at a time (Colley, 2002). Leaders can encourage teachers to choose an

area of improvement and, with the principal, decide how to show evidence of

growth in this area (Spitz 2003). Leaders can make sure they respect the

learning curve for new teachers, and they can put the teacher’s manual and

standards documents into understandable language that is relevant to the way

teachers are going to teach (Feiman-Nemser, 2003).

Finally, school leaders must be proactive in developing and implementing

a plan to ensure that all staff develops culturally responsive practices needed

to work with diverse students and their families (Kozleski, Sobel, and Taylor,

2003). School leaders also should establish an expectation that all staff will

learn how to work with students with disabilities and provide opportunities for

them to do so (Scherer 2003).

Instructional Support

It is believed that the core business of school is learning and teaching,

and the mission from beginning to end is about students. So it is imperative

that the school head makes a difference in quality of teaching and learning in

school and, ultimately, in the quality of life of students (Richard, 2008).

However, from several research works, it is found that school heads influence

student achievement by shaping the school’s instructional climate and

instructional organization. According to Reed et. al. (2001), school heads in

lower performing school are more likely to modify their leadership focus and

emphasis on improving test scores. However school heads in higher performing

schools seemed to focus on educating the whole child rather than simply

12
concentrating on raising test scores. Then, Lashway (2002) described

important behaviors for developing effective instructional leaders to include

making students and adult learning a priority, setting high expectations, and

aligning instruction to standards.

School heads must know academic content and pedagogical techniques.

They must work with teachers to strengthen skills. They must collect, analyze,

and use data in ways that fuel excellence. They must rally students, teachers,

parents, local health and social service agencies, youth development groups,

local business, and other community residents and partners around the

common goal of raising student performance. School heads in high-performing

school place less pressure on their teachers to perform well on standardized

tests, even though high-stakes testing is still a concern. Modifications to the

curriculum and teaching practices are more likely to occur in low-performing

schools (Reed et al., 2001).

High-performing schools focus on using varying types of data such as

standardized scores as well as progress monitoring in order to guide school

programs and instruction (Snipes et al., 2002; Togneri& Anderson, 2003).

Effective school heads have certain qualities that influence the teaching

and learning in classroom. Instructional leaders are good at improving teaching

and learning in terms of the school mission and goals. Hence, a good school

head mastering the instructional leadership strategies is important in leading a

school to be a high-performing one. The school leader needs to be an

instructional leader and communicate views on what is considered good

teaching, as well as expectations for instructional practices, grading and

13
student achievement. Administrators should share, model and encourage best-

practice experimentation. Giving immediate feedback through comments or

notes and being available for short, spontaneous counselling sessions are seen

by teachers as being very supportive (Colley 2002). For special educators,

school leaders should have a working knowledge of IDEA and NCLB so they

can communicate with staff, families and the community regarding special

education issues (DiPaola, Walther-Thomas, 2003).

Principal’s role in developing staff members has been on instructional

leadership, which emphasizes the principal's role in providing guidance that

improves teachers' classroom practices. Philip Hallinger's instructional

leadership model has been the most researched. It consists of three sets of

leadership dimensions—defining the school's mission, managing the

instructional program, and promoting a positive learning climate—within which

10 specific leadership practices are delineated (Leithwood, Seashore Louis,

Anderson, &Wahlstrom, 2004).

Instructional leadership, the review finds that researchers also are

paying close attention to what is being termed a leader's emotional intelligence

—his or her ability and willingness to be "tuned in" to employees as people.

"Recent evidence suggests that emotional intelligence displayed, for example,

through a leader's personal attention to an employee and through the

utilization of the employee's capacities, increases the employee's enthusiasm

and optimism, reduces frustration, transmits a sense of mission and indirectly

increases performance (McColl-Kennedy & Anderson, 2002)" (Leithwood,

Seashore Louis, Anderson, &Wahlstrom, 2004).

14
 An instructional specialist helps colleagues implement effective teaching

strategies. This help might include ideas for differentiating instruction or

planning lessons in partnership with fellow teachers. Instructional specialists

might study research-based classroom strategies (Marzano, Pickering, &

Pollock, 2001); explore which instructional methodologies are appropriate for

the school; and share findings with colleagues.

Interactions (both formal and informal) between teachers and

administrators, a natural part of the teacher principal relationship, are meant

to improve instruction, but often lack definition, purpose, and focus in efforts

to meet the accountability demands of the No Child Left Behind legislation

(Daly & Chrispeels, 2008).

Directive Instruction

The congressionally-mandated National Reading Panel Report (National

Institute of Child Health and Human Development [NICHD], 2000) changed the

direction of reading instruction in our schools in grades K–3. Now a focus is

placed on the five elements of reading, including phonemic awareness, phonics,

fluency, vocabulary, and text comprehension (Armbruster, Lehr, & Osborn,

2006). Comprehensive core reading programs provided in general education

classrooms typically include these important elements.

Teachers have a profound impact on how many their students learn.

“Although it seems simplistic and obvious, teachers of reading ‘teach’; that is,

students do not become independent learners through maturation” (Rupley,

Blair, & Nichols, 2009,). Students do not learn simply by the passage of time-

15
they must receive instruction. Teaching requires carefully planned

teacher and student interactions. Students qualify for reading

remediation because they are academically behind their peers. Their

learning must be accelerated in order for them to catch up, so teachers must

do more in less time. The most effective and efficient way of shortening

the learning time for these students is through the direct and explicit teaching

of skills. Consider the following: As educators, we all have the same goal: to

help our students make the maximum possible academic gains in a positive,

respectful environment that promotes their success and nurtures their desire

to learn. One of the greatest tools available to us in this pursuit is explicit

instruction-instruction that is systematic, direct, engaging, and success

oriented.

Direct instruction is helpful not only when discovery is impossible, but

when discovery may be inaccurate, inadequate, incomplete, or inefficient

(Archer & Hughes, 2011). Therefore, in explicit instruction, teachers become

fully responsible for student learning but gradually relinquish this

responsibility to students as they become successful (MarchandMartella &

Martella, 2009). Teachers program for student success and are intentional with

their instruction rather than leaving students to discover what to do on

their own. Thus, instruction “moves from teacher modelling, through

guided practice using prompts and cues, to independent and fluent

performance by the learner” (Rosenshine, 1986).

Reading Mastery was originally called DISTAR (Direct Instruction System

for Teaching Arithmetic and Reading). This program includes Levels I, II, and

16
a Fast Cycle I/II program as well as Levels 3-6 (referred to as Reading Mastery

Classic). This program teaches students "learning to read" (phonemic

awareness, phonics, and fluency) and "reading to learn" (vocabulary and

comprehension) skills. Reading Mastery Plus provides a broader language-arts

focus (with emphasis on reading, writing, spelling, and language) and includes

seven levels (K-6). The K (kindergarten) feature is unique to the Reading

Mastery Plus program. Teach Your Child to Read in 100 Easy Lessons is a

modified version of Reading Mastery that can be purchased at most

bookstores. It is designed for parents to teach their young children to read at

approximately the 2.0 grade level (The University of Kansas Lawrence, Kansas)

Horizons were designed to address various criticisms of Reading

Mastery-Horizons uses regular type as compared to altered orthography (print)

as well as an earlier introduction of spelling and capital letters. It

includes Levels A, B, Fast Track A-B, and Fast Track C-D. Horizons also teach

important "learning to read" and "reading to learn" skills. Journeys is

comparable to the expanded Reading Mastery Plus program in that it is an

integrated language arts program using Horizons as its base reading program

as compared to Reading Mastery in the Reading Mastery

Plus program. Journeys include Levels K-3. Funnix is a CD-ROM program that

includes two levels ideal for beginning readers. Funnix was adapted from

the Horizons reading program.

If students struggle in "learning to read" or "reading to learn" skills, then

Corrective Reading is recommended. Corrective Reading includes two strands

Decoding and Comprehension and four levels per strand. The Reach System is

17
an integrated, comprehensive language arts program that includes Corrective

Reading as well as other DI programs including Spelling through

Morphographs and Reasoning and Writing.

Reading Mastery, Reading Mastery Plus, Horizons, and Journeys are typically

seen in elementary school classrooms. These basal reading programs are ideal

for use in schools that adopt research-validated core reading programs

spanning the grades (allowing a seamless "pipeline" of instruction to occur from

one grade to the next). However, more often than not, these programs have

been dubbed "special education programs" and are seen in resource and self-

contained room settings. These DI reading programs are appropriate for

elementary-age children with and without disabilities who are above, at, or

below grade level in their reading performance. Programs typically span one

academic year.

Funnix and Teach Your Child to Read in 100 Easy Lessons are often

seen in home or tutorial situations. They are geared for parents to use with

their young children in teaching them to read for the first time (as compared to

reading remediation). However, Teach Your Child to Read in 100 Easy

Lessons has been used with struggling readers in tutorial situations.

Reading is, without a doubt, the most important skill to learn in school.

Reading opens the doors to so many options in our lives; without it, we are

rendered almost powerless. The National Reading Panel (NICHD, 2000) noted

five elements of effective reading instruction. These include phonemic

awareness, phonics, and fluency (referred to as "learning to read" skills) and

18
vocabulary building and comprehension (referred to as "reading to learn"

skills). DI reading programs include the key elements of reading instruction.

Phonemic awareness. DI reading programs involve phonemic awareness

activities. Phonemic awareness is defined as the ability to identify and

manipulate the individual sounds in spoken words (remember, "if you can do it

in the dark, its phonemic awareness"). This is not to be confused with phonics

instruction that involves manipulating sounds in written words (thus, you

cannot do phonics instruction "in the dark" because you have to see what is

written). An example of phonemic awareness instruction in Reading Mastery

Plus, Level K, Lesson 105 is shown.

Phonics instruction. DI reading programs include an emphasis on

explicit and systematic phonics instruction. Explicit instruction means that

clear information is provided for teachers to show students how to perform a

task, to have students practice this task with feedback, and then to have

students practice the task on their own over time. Systematic instruction

means that clear sequencing is provided to ensure that students are

successful. DI reading programs make use of synthetic phonics (teaching

phonics explicitly in isolation and then practicing skills in connected text),

blending (saying each sound without stopping between the sounds), and saying

words the fast way.

Transactive Instruction

Teachers who teach reading are doing more than teaching decoding

skills. They must also teach comprehension of the text. The transactional

19
theory of reading was developed by Louise Michelle Rosenblatt. According to

Rosenblatt, the reader and the text transact with one another, each affecting

the other. The meaning of the text changes depending on the reader's

background knowledge and personal reflections. The transactional theory can

be used in reading instruction to deepen comprehension of a text by asking

readers to make connections, make predictions and visualize meaning (Melissa

Gagnon, 2010).

Teaching with transactional theory starts with teachers reading aloud

and modelling for their students how skilful readers think as they read. From

hearing teachers read and think aloud, students learn how good readers create

meaning from the text. Students learn to think of comprehension as a form of

problem solving. They see the teacher strategically work through the text,

pausing to clarify confusing passages, to make inferences based on clues in the

text, and to form predictions about what may happen next. Later, through

guided practice, the teacher helps the student work through the same type of

problem solving to comprehend other text (David Raudenbush,2008).

Wells and Chang-Wells outlined major transactive principles. First,

learning entails an active process of sense-making in which understanding is

shaped through interaction with the environment, rather than through the

transmission of objective and enduring truths. Secondly, knowledge is a

cultural artefact, produced by human beings and shared among communities.

The process of education involves more than the transmission of knowledge

from informed sources to naïve participants. Teachers are not living textbooks;

students not sponges, clean slates, or empty vessels (Morgan and Saxton 6).

20
Rather, both teachers and students are participants in the social construction

of shared understandings and awareness. In other words, education must be

thought of in terms not of transmission of knowledge but of transaction and

transformation (Chang-Wells and Wells).

Teaching is the process of creating situations whereby students are able

to interact with the material to be learned in order to construct knowledge.

Constructivism is an educational philosophy consistent with this view. Here,

knowledge is not passively received; rather, it is actively built up or constructed

by students as they connect their past knowledge and experiences with new

information (Santrock, 2004). And just as each student’s past knowledge and

experiences are different, so too is the interpretation, understanding, and

meaning of the new information that each ultimately constructs.

Teachers are not expected to pour knowledge into the heads of learners;

rather, they assist learners in their construction of knowledge by creating

experiences where students’ old information can transact with new information

to create meaningful knowledge (knowledge that is connected to something

students already know). Academic achievement from a constructivist

perspective is seen as students’ ability to use this knowledge to solve real-world

problems or to create products or performances that are valued in one or more

cultural settings (Andrew Johnson, 2015).

According to Reutzel (2006), best practice for transactional strategies

instruction requires a teacher to complete these three steps: "select a 'family' of

comprehension strategies to teach, explicit teaching of each and all strategies,

and gradual release of responsibility over time”. It is important that each

21
strategy is explicitly taught and modelled separately at first before students can

begin to use all of the strategies together. Reutzel (2006) recommends teaching

seven specific reading comprehension strategies including "activate

background knowledge, text structure, prediction, questioning, imagery,

monitoring, and summarizing". Again, these reading comprehension strategies

are meant to be taught separately at first, but they should not be taught in

isolation. It is most effective when each strategy is taught and modelled with

the use of a text (Brown, 2008).

Transformative Instruction

Transformative Reading Instruction was developed by the Milwaukee

Succeeds partners to improve students’ reading achievement and increase the

number of students reaching proficiency by third grade. It was piloted at Gwen

T. Jackson (Jackson) School from January 2014 - June 2014 and implemented

at Jackson and Clarke Street School (Clarke) during the 2014-15 school year.

During the 2015-2016 school year, TRI continued at Clarke and Jackson and

expanded to Doctor George W. Carver Academy of Mathematics and Science

(Carver), Forest Home Avenue School (Forest Home), and Rogers Street

Academy (Rogers), as well as Milwaukee Academy of Science, and St.

Catherine’s Catholic Elementary School. TRI is not a one-size fits all program,

but rather a cohesive set of proven practices that are implemented in schools

in alignment with the vision of the school principal.

TRI creates readers by providing intensive evidence-based professional

development and coaching to K-2 teachers on foundational reading and social

22
emotional skills; this professional development and coaching is aligned with

tutoring, family engagement workshop, and experiential learning (Audrey

Borland, 2015-16).

(Rosenblatt, 1996) state that reading is not a guessing game, some kind

of treasure hunt where teachers reward the student who can rescue the

“original” meaning of a text. Moreover, there is no such thing as original

meaning that needs to be salvaged from incorrect or misguided interpretations.

One cannot say that reading is not about getting meaning, though. People do

read to get information and to expand their knowledge. However, much of the

meaning of reading has to do with assigning meaning. Reading is an interactive

process and meaning is constructed as a result of the dialogue between a text

and a reader.

Reading has been used in classrooms both as a tool for language

development and as a way of supplementing and extending content area

knowledge (Rudman, 1993; Smallwood, 2004). In order to develop the ability to

read, learners need to be taught not only to understand what is presented in a

text (comprehension), but to activate their previous knowledge, make

comparisons and connections (analysis), and create new knowledge (synthesis).

For Freire (2002), literacy is a political act. In a democratic society,

schools serve as the place where students learn to become informed citizens.

Schools empower learners toward participation and action by teaching them

how to listen, how to identify alternatives, how to consider possibilities and

how to search for multiple possible answers. From this perspective, reading is a

libertarian activity and not an action of conformity (Freire, 1992). In and

23
outside the classroom, the political awareness that one gain through assigning

meanings to the knowledge one brings into the school leads further to the

dissemination of that knowledge and to the production of new knowledge.

The teaching of reading is an appropriate vehicle for teachers to help

learners develop critical thinking skills (Krashen, 2004), a way to enable

students to develop reasoning and argumentative skills, and a means to learn

to express their opinions in socially acceptable ways (Naiditch, 2006).

Reading Performance

Performance reading, or fluent oral reading, can be practiced when

young students join in a repeated reading of a book with memorable phrases or

sound effects and added gestures, or when older students plan how to read

passages of a book with expression for an audience. Fluent oral reading has

three aspects: accuracy, or reading the words in a text without error in

pronunciation; automaticity, or reading the words in a text correctly and

effortlessly; and prosody, or reading with appropriate expression and phrasing

to reflect the meaning of a passage.

Research has shown that fluent oral reading learned through

performance reading leads not only to engagement in and enjoyment of reading

for students, but to reading comprehension (Rasinski & Hoffman, 2003), and it

is one of the goals established in the research report of the National Reading

Panel (NICHD, 2000).

Reading and Academic Performance

24
 The relationship between reading ability and academic performance

seems like a logical connection since textual information is prevalent in our

society. Espin and Deno (1993) found that a relationship exists between basic

reading literacy and student academic success. Their study involved 121 tenth-

grade students in a rural school in a small mid-western community. Their

study was based on the connection between a

student’s reading measure and that student's score from a classroom study

task, grade point average, and achievement test results. Another recent study

focusing on secondary students was conducted by Cromley (2009). This study

focused specifically on reading and proficiency in science with an international

perspective and included several countries, including the United States.

Cromley found that there was a very high correlation between reading

comprehension and science proficiency, with the mean for all of the nations

being.

25
 CHAPTER III

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This chapter presents the research design, respondents, sampling

strategy, research instrument, validation and reliability of the instrument, data

gathering procedure and statistical treatment of data.

Research Design

The study will utilize a descriptive survey method. This type of research

is use to determine the reading performance of selected pupils in Cotabato

City.

The survey questions to teachers and the passage in reading will use to

bring out the reading performance of selected pupils at the different schools in

Cotabato City.

Respondents of the Study

26
 In this study, the researcher will utilize the selected 120 Grade II and

Grade III Teachers and 120 pupils as respondents in public elementary of

Cotabato City Schools Division of the subject of investigation.

Sampling Technique

To get the number of respondents from total number of population, the

researcher will make use of the Gray (1989) 20%.

To enable all respondents to have the chance of being selected, the

researcher will utilize the lottery sampling technique (Choosing a random

sample only works well with small population, as it is simply impractical for

use with larger population (Marvick, 2015).

Research Instrument

The instruments use in this study has 3 parts. The part 1 was the

School/Supports on Reading Program survey questionnaires which contain the

manpower resources, administrative support and instructional support and the

part 2 was the Pedagogical Approaches used by Teachers which include the

directive instruction, trasactive instruction and transformative instruction..

The items used in the questionnaires are subject to several revisions. First, the

items will submit for critiquing by some co-teachers. This was done to correct

some statements and solicit suggestions for the refinement of the items in the

questionnaires. After revising some items, the questionnaires will submit to the

research adviser for another criticism and comments. After soliciting all the

suggestions, the researches present the questionnaires to the thesis panellists

during this thesis final defence. The last instruments use in this study is the

27
passage entitled “Party Time” for grade 2. The passage is taken from the Phil –

IRI form (2016 – 2017). Through stories and passage will measure the reading

comprehension level, word recognition and comprehension ability as well as

the reading speed in informally assess quantitatively and qualitatively. In order

to facilitate the scoring and recording of the oral reading of the respondents a

stopwatch use to measure the total time elapse in minutes to complete the oral

reading passage from the story read.

Data Gathering Procedure

As part of protocol procedure, the researcher will send a permission

letter to the office of the school division superintendent to conduct survey.

Then, after the approval, the researcher will distribute the questionnaires

to the targeted respondents. And three days later, the answered questionnaire

will be retrieved.

Statistical Treatment of Data

To be obtained out of the descriptive survey method will be consolidated

and tabulated with the application of Central Limit theorem and the following

Statistical computations will also be employed:

1. Arithmetic Mean (x) will determine the average of all variables found

in this study.

28
 CHAPTER IV

PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA

This section presents the analysis and interpretation of data gathered in

referenced to the statement of the problem of the study.

Table 1

Mean Rating on the Extent of Resources of the Reading Program on Manpower

Resources

Manpower Resources Mean Description

1. Facilitate pupils to read every day 3.34 Satisfactory

including reading for pleasure.

2. School heads established/ implement a 3.33 Satisfactory

reading recognition program.

29
 3. Teachers integrate the books of the shared 3.48 Very Satisfactory
reading Program into lessons and activities.

4. Teachers work with librarian to develop 3.40 Satisfactory

pupils’ interest in reading program.

5. Talk to parents in order to strengthen 3.27 Satisfactory

the reading program.

6. Provide a print rich environment in 3.08 Satisfactory

the classroom.

7. Continue to grow professionally in 3.34 Satisfactory

the reading instruction.

8. School heads and teachers established a 3.04 Satisfactory

functional “Reading Hub” program in the school.

9. Provide parents with an updates on 2.72 Satisfactory

reading status of their children.

10. Consolidate the reading activities of pupils. 3.40 Satisfactory

Table 1 continued…

11. Make a written report on the progress 2.66 Satisfactory

of pupils reading.

12. Encourage pupils to have attitude of 3.12 Satisfactory

“Book it” and other reading program.

13. Read to students frequently. 2.87 Satisfactory

Overall Mean 3.15 Satisfactory

Legend:

3.46-4.00 - Very Satisfactory

2.46-3.45 - Satisfactory
1.46-2.45 - Less Satisfactory
1.00-1.45 - Poor

The data presented in Table 1 shows that the respondents rated “very

satisfactory” on the item got the highest mean (3.48) stating that they integrate

the books of the shared reading program into lessons and activities. It implies

30
that respondents are always using books in their teaching learning process in

reading program.

The respondents rated “satisfactory” (3.40) on the items stating that they

work with librarian to develop pupils’ interest in reading program and

consolidate the reading activities of pupils (3.40). These means that they have

mini library in the classroom that result to effective in integrating reading

program and to be followed in strengthening the reading activities of pupils.

The items stating that they facilitate pupils to read everyday including reading

for pleasure and continue to grow professionally in the reading instruction

were the respondents rated “satisfactory” (3.34). Therefore, respondents were

also looking for better in their profession to have the efficient outcome in aiding

pupils to read every day.

Furthermore, the respondents rated “satisfactory” on the following:

School head established/implement a reading recognition program (3.33) and

talk to parents in order to strengthen the reading program (3.27). These were

indicating that there were collaboration between the school head, teachers and

parents regarding to the reading program in the school.

Likewise, the respondents rated “satisfactory” (3.12) the items on

encourage pupils to have attitude of “Book it” and other reading program,

provide a print rich environment in the classroom (3.08) and school heads and

teachers established a functional “Reading Hub” program in the school (3.04).

These imply that respondents were more productive in having another idea in

implementing the reading program in their school/classroom.

31
 Similarly, the respondents rated “satisfactory” (2.87) on the items, read

to pupils frequently provide parents with an updates on reading status of their

children (2.72) and make a written report on the progress of pupils reading

(2.66). These signify that respondents suit the development of the pupils in

terms of consulting the parents and having a record book in tracing the pupils’

development in reading program.

Lastly, the overall mean rating (3.15) on extent of resources of the

reading program on manpower resources which interpreted “satisfactory”. This

result shows that both school head and teachers were sufficient in having

another resource to be used in reading program not only in school but also

outside the school.

Many contemporary educational reform efforts have increased

scrutiny of public schools, leading to calls for greater accountability and

increased student performance (Apple, 2006; Grubb, 2009). Initiatives now

becoming fixtures in the educational landscape, such as school choice,

standardized testing, and voucher programs have been interpreted by some

researchers as detrimental to the strength of the American public school

system, weakening public education by calling unfettered attention to its flaws

while simultaneously spreading resources more thinly (Apple, 2006; Ravitch,

2010; Rose, 2009; Zhao, 2009).

Table 2

Mean Rating on the Extent of Resources of the Reading Program on

Administrative Support

32
 Administrative Support Mean Description

1. The school heads schedule large 2.85 Satisfactory

uninterrupted blocks of time for
reading and literacy instruction.

2. The school head talk with teachers about 2.50 Satisfactory

monitoring their pupils’ time on tasks.

3. The school head schedule time for team 3.04 Satisfactory

planning and learning

4. The school heads ensure that reading resources 3.03 Satisfactory

are available and accessible to all.

5. The school head establish budget that give priority

to reading and allow for classroom resources,
time for teamwork and professional 3.04 Satisfactory
development for the classroom.

6. School heads monitor teachers reading program. 3.20 Satisfactory

7. School heads provide opportunities for pupils 3.10 Satisfactory

to discuss a common text that has been read.
Table 2 continued…

8. School heads provide parents and stakeholders

with access to reading materials that their 2.99 Satisfactory
children can use at home.

9. School heads establish processes for 3.20 Satisfactory

communicating the reading expectation
to parents.

10. Monitor the progress of children in special 3.4 Very

program who are at risk of not learning to read. Satisfactory

Overall Mean 3.03 Satisfactory

Legend:

3.46-4.00 - Very Satisfactory

2.46-3.45 - Satisfactory
1.46-2.45 - Less Satisfactory
33
1.00-1.45 - Poor

Table 2 illustrate that the respondents rated “very satisfactory” (3.46) on

the item stating monitor the progress of children in special program who are at

risk of not learning to read, which obtained the highest mean. This tells that

school head is focusing more on the development of slow readers’ pupils and to

have another initiative in the pupils’ outcome in learning how to read.

Moreover, the respondents rated “satisfactory” (3.20) on the items that

the school heads monitor teachers reading program and school heads establish

processes for communicating the reading expectation to parents. These specify

that school heads supervise clearly the teachers and parents about the reading

program in related to the learning process of the pupils.

In similar manner, the respondents rated “satisfactory” (3.10) on the

items that school head provide opportunities for pupils to discuss a common

text that has been read and also the school head schedule time for team

planning and learning (3.04). Likewise, stating the school head establish

budget that give priority to reading and allow for classroom resources, time for

teamwork and professional development for the classroom (3.04). These implied

that school head has the time table to organize the needing resources in the

particular assessment to the pupils’ needs, classroom development in terms of

learning on how the pupils read and understand what they read.

Furthermore, the respondents rated “satisfactory” (3.03) on the items

that the school heads ensure that reading resources are available and

accessible to all, school heads provide parents and stakeholders with access to

reading materials that their children can use at home (2.99), the school heads

34
schedule large uninterrupted blocks of time for reading and literacy instruction

(2.85) and school heads talk with teachers about monitoring their pupils’ time

on tasks (2.50). These means that school heads were guarantee that both

classroom and at home has the available materials to use by the pupils in

reading and also school heads informed teachers to supervised their pupils

regarding their progress in reading and literacy.

Generally, the mean rating on the extent of resources of the reading

program on administrative support was 3.03 which interpreted “satisfactory”.

This result shows that the school heads provide necessary equipments to

strengthen the resources needed in reading program in school.

Accordingly, Administrators must be familiar with available resources to

support the diverse needs of students, families and staff and must know how

to access additional support in order to ensure appropriate education for all

students and support for teachers. For example, leaders can make sure

English as a Second Language and bilingual programs are effectively supported

(DiPaola, Walther-Thomas, 2003).

Table 3

Mean Rating on the Extent of Resources of the Reading Program on

Instructional Support

Instructional Support Mean Description

1. The principal reduce or eliminate unnecessary 3.17 Satisfactory

interruptions during instructional times.

2. The principal ensure that children who are at 3.01 Satisfactory

risk of not learning to read have optimal
access to interventions.

35
 3. The school heads visit classrooms to 3.36 Satisfactory
observe reading instructions.

4. The school heads review individual classroom 2.84 Satisfactory

time tables to ensure that teachers provide
effective literacy blocks.

5. School Heads are knowledgeable 2.48 Satisfactory

about the components reading instructions and
framework necessary for supporting it.

6. The school heads ensure that reading resources 2.90 Satisfactory

are available and accessible to all.

7. School heads model effective instructional 2.64 Satisfactory

strategies in reading.

8. School heads help teachers to establish 2.64 Satisfactory

routines that allow for effective literacy
instructions.

9. Form professional learning teams focused 2.62 Satisfactory

on reading and assessment.

10. Ensure that literacy remains priority in 2.39 Less

the everyday operations of school.

Satisfactory

Table 3 continued…

Overall Mean 2.80 Satisfactory

Legend:

3.46-4.00 - Very Satisfactory

2.46-3.45 - Satisfactory
1.46-2.45 - Less Satisfactory
1.00-1.45 - Poor

Table 3 reveals that the respondents rated “satisfactory” (3.36) on the

items stating the school heads visit classrooms to observe reading instructions,

the principal reduce or eliminate unnecessary interruptions during

36
instructional times (3.17) and the principal ensure that children who are at

risk of not learning to read have optimal access to interventions (3.01). This

implies that the respondents observed that the school heads supervise the

teachers instructional materials used in reading and lessen the pointless

intervention and also checked the pupils in need of centre of attention in

learning how to read.

Moreover, the respondents rated “satisfactory” (2.84) on the items: The

school heads review individual classroom time tables to ensure that teachers

provide effective literacy blocks, school heads are knowledgeable about the

components reading instructions and framework necessary for supporting it

(2.48) and the school head ensure that reading resources are available and

accessible to all (2.90). This means that the respondents observed that the

school heads monitor more often the time on task of the teachers and

conversant to the element of reading instructions. They also observed that

school heads make sure reading resources were reachable in their school.

Similarly, the respondents rated “satisfactory” (2.62) on the items to form

professional learning teams focused on reading and assessment and school

heads model effective instructional strategies in reading (2.64), in which the

same mean in item stating school heads help teachers to establish routines

that allow for effective literacy instructions (2.64). These indicate that school

heads reproduced a replica in terms of teaching strategies and a usual output

in terms of efficiency in literacy instructions. School head also organized some

teachers to make an attention on reading and assessment.

37
 Furthermore, the respondents rated “less satisfactory” (2.39) on the item

stating to ensure that literacy remains priority in the everyday operations of

school. In this item, it shows that school head shorten the reminders about

literacy is must be in daily routine in teaching.

Generally, the mean rating on the extent of resources of the reading

program on instructional support was 2.80 which interpreted “satisfactory”.

This result shows that respondents perceive that instructional supports were

accessible in any ways.

It is believed that the core business of school is learning and teaching,

and the mission from beginning to end is about students. So it is imperative

that the school head makes a difference in quality of teaching and learning in

school and, ultimately, in the quality of life of students (Richard, 2008).

However, from several research works, it is found that school heads influence

student achievement by shaping the school’s instructional climate and

instructional organization.

Table 4

Mean Rating on the Extent of Teachers Pedagogical Approach on Directive

Instruction

Directive Instruction Mean Description

1. Used question and answer exercise. 2.85 Satisfactory

2. Apply dictation by choosing a grade 3.09 Satisfactory

appropriate passage and read it aloud.

38
 3. Allow pupils to take turn reading section 2.98 Satisfactory
of passage, play or dialogue aloud.

4. Allow pupil self-correction by giving a 3.18 Satisfactory

second chance of the mistakes.

5. Motivate and encourage pupils to an opportunity 3.03 Satisfactory

to ask their own questions to the other pupils or to
the teacher to develop “conversation practice”.

6. Motivate and guide pupils to write a passage in 2.97 Satisfactory

their own words.

7. Introduced verbally the reading elements, process, 3.11 Satisfactory

and others to pupils with care and enunciation.

8. Facilitate and encourage pupils to repeat each 3.36 Satisfactory

element of reading 5-20 times.

9. Correct pupils if necessary, pointing to mouth 3.27 Satisfactory

to show proper shaping of lips, tongue
and relationship to teeth.

10. Involved timed oral reading fluency assessment. 3.35 Satisfactory

Overall Mean 2.97 Satisfactory

Legend:

3.46-4.00 - Very Satisfactory

2.46-3.45 - Satisfactory
1.46-2.45 - Less Satisfactory
1.00-1.45 - Poor

Table 4 shows that the respondents rated “satisfactory” (2.85 on the

items stating that the used of question and answer exercise), apply dictation

by choosing a grade appropriate passage and read it loud (3.09) and allow

pupils to take turn reading section of passage, or dialogue aloud (2.98). These

means that the respondents perceive that pupils like better when having a

discussion and let their pupils read the passage.

39
 Further, the respondents rated “satisfactory” (3.18) on the items to allow

pupil self-correction by giving a second chance of the mistake, motivate and

encourage pupils to an opportunity to ask their own questions to the other

pupils or to the teacher to develop “conversation practice” (3.03) and motivate

and guide pupils to write a passage in their own words (2.97). These imply that

respondents allow pupils to do the corrections of their mistakes and a freedom

to express their own language to practice the conversation between the teacher

and pupils or pupil and to the other pupil. Respondents encourage also the

pupils to have a freedom of writing of their own passage.

Likewise, the respondents rated “satisfactory” (3.11) on the items that

introduced verbally the reading elements, process and others to pupils with

care and enunciation, facilitate and encourage pupils to repeat each element of

reading 5-20 times (3.36), correct pupils if necessary, pointing to mouth to

show proper shaping of lips, tongue and relationship to teeth (3.27) and

involved timed oral reading fluency assessment (3.35). This indicate that

respondents explain the reading elements to pupils and allow pupils to do

practice learn the reading elements in 5-20 times. Respondents also do the

correction proper to the pupils by using the lips, tongue and relationship to

teeth and engage also the timed oral reading fluency assessment.

Lastly, the mean rating on the extent of teachers’ pedagogical approach

on directive instruction was 2.97 which interpreted “satisfactory”. This result

shows that respondents suit the pupils by using the directive instruction in

teaching learning process in reading.

40
 Teachers have a profound impact on how many their students learn.

“Although it seems simplistic and obvious, teachers of reading ‘teach’; that is,

students do not become independent learners through maturation” (Rupley,

Blair, & Nichols, 2009,). Students do not learn simply by the passage of time-

they must receive instruction. Teaching requires carefully planned

teacher and student interactions. Students qualify for reading

remediation because they are academically behind their peers. Their

learning must be accelerated in order for them to catch up, so teachers must

do more in less time. The most effective and efficient way of shortening

the learning time for these students is through the direct and explicit teaching

of skills. Consider the following: As educators, we all have the same goal: to

help our students make the maximum possible academic gains in a positive,

respectful environment that promotes their success and nurtures their desire

to learn. One of the greatest tools available to us in this pursuit is explicit

instruction-instruction that is systematic, direct, engaging, and success

oriented.

Table 5

Mean Rating on the Extent of Teachers Pedagogical Approach on Transactive

Instruction

Transactive Instruction Mean Description

1. Introduced new vocabulary words. 2.96 Satisfactory

41
 2. Point out the new words while showing 2.97 Satisfactory
pictures such as: animals, person, etc.

3. Explain interesting facts that the lesson or 2.81 Satisfactory

book contains for pupils to comprehend.

During Reading Activities:

4. Assess the comprehension of pupils. 3.04 Satisfactory

5. Guide the pupils understanding of the materials 3.10 Satisfactory

(contains).
6. Used levelled or guided questions to help 2.38 Less
pupils to interpret what they are reading. Satisfactory

7. Ask pupils to compare and contrast the 2.83 Satisfactory

information’s from the books they have read.

8. Guide pupils on how to use what they have 2.61 Satisfactory

read and what they know to build meaning.

9. Help pupils to understand meaning of new 2.84 Satisfactory

Table 5 continued…

information in what they read.

10. Give greater emphasis on the exploration 2.57 Satisfactory

of attitudes and values of reading.

Overall Mean 2.81 Satisfactory

Legend:

3.46-4.00 - Very Satisfactory

2.46-3.45 - Satisfactory
1.46-2.45 - Less Satisfactory
1.00-1.45 - Poor

Table 5 shows that the respondents rated “satisfactory” we(2.96) on the

items that introduced new vocabulary words, point out the new words while

showing pictures such as: animals, person, etc. (2.97) and explain interesting

facts that the lesson or book contains for pupils to comprehend (2.81). These

indicate that the respondents perceived that viewing new words to pupils add
42
more interesting details to the lesson and makes the pupils motivate to explore

and figure out the contain of the lesson or book they had read.

Moreover, the respondents rated “satisfactory” (3.04) that the items:

During activities: assess the comprehension of pupils, guides the pupils

understanding the materials contain (3.10) and ask pupils to compare and

contrast the information’s from the books they have read (2.83). These mean

that respondents do assessment through the pupils when having activities

such as explaining the use of the materials they have been using in activity.

Respondent prefer to let pupils to do the compare and contrast from the books

they have read.

Similarly, the respondents rated “satisfactory” (2.61) on the items to

guide pupils on how to use what they have read and what they know to build

meaning, help pupils to understand meaning of new information in what they

read (2.84) and give greater emphasis on the exploration of attitudes and

values of reading (2.57). These imply that respondents assist pupils on how the

pupils will understand the new content of the text they have read and how they

will apply it in real life situation. Respondents also focus towards the attitude

of the pupils in reading.

Furthermore, the respondents rated “less satisfactory” (2.38) on the item

to use levelled or guided questions to help pupils to interpret what they are

reading. This indicate that this instruction used by the teacher were not totally

applicable in helping pupils to interpret what they are reading.

In general, the mean rating on the extent of teachers’ pedagogical

approach on transactive instruction was 2.81 which interpreted “satisfactory”.

43
This result shows that the pupils are well managed in using the transactive

instruction in reading.

Teachers who teach reading are doing more than teaching decoding

skills. They must also teach comprehension of the text. The transactional

theory of reading was developed by Louise Michelle Rosenblatt. According to

Rosenblatt, the reader and the text transact with one another, each affecting

the other. The meaning of the text changes depending on the reader's

background knowledge and personal reflections. The transactional theory can

be used in reading instruction to deepen comprehension of a text by asking

readers to make connections, make predictions and visualize meaning (Melissa

Gagnon, 2010).

Table 6

Mean Rating on the Extent of Teachers Pedagogical Approach on

Transformative instruction

Transformative Instruction Mean Description

1. Understand the reading ability of pupils by 2.76 Satisfactory

conducting assessment before intervention.

Table 6 continued…

2. Ask pupils to respond to a specific class 2.66 Satisfactory

experience on reading through reflection.

3. Ask pupils to observe and interprets events 2.71 Satisfactory

or reading using their own new knowledge.

4. Used authentic assessment of pupils reading ability. 2.73 Satisfactory

5. Leads pupils to self actualization. 3.15 Satisfactory

44
 6. Help pupils to discover their full potential in reading. 3.13 Satisfactory

7. Employ diverse ways of teaching – learning process. 3.22 Satisfactory

8. Applies cooperative grouping on pupils to 3.04 Satisfactory

strengthen reading practice.

9. Lead pupils to explore the community to 2.84 Satisfactory

take in the learning process.

10. Checks the extent of pupils’ application 2.83 Satisfactory

of the lessons in reading.

Overall Mean 2.90 Satisfactory

Legend:

3.46-4.00 - Very Satisfactory

2.46-3.45 - Satisfactory
1.46-2.45 - Less Satisfactory
1.00-1.45 - Poor

Table 6 shows that the respondents rated “satisfactory” (2.76) on the

items stating to understand the reading ability of pupils by conducting

assessment before intervention, ask pupils to respond to a specific class

experience on reading through reflection (2.66) and ask pupils to observe and

interprets events or reading using their own new knowledge (2.71). These mean

that respondents ensure pupils receive immediate feedback from their teacher.

Further, the respondents rated “satisfactory” (2.73) on the items to use

authentic assessment of pupils reading ability, leads pupils to self-

actualization (3.13) and help pupils to discover their full potential in reading

(3.22). These imply that the respondents assure learners in their construction

of knowledge by creating experiences where pupils’ can transact with new

information to create meaningful knowledge in reading.

45
 Likewise, the respondents rated “satisfactory” (3.22) on the items to

employ diverse ways of teaching – learning process, applies cooperative

grouping on pupils to strengthen reading practice (3.04), lead pupils to explore

the community to take in the learning process (2.84) and checks the extent of

pupils’ application of the lesson in reading (2.83). These indicate that

respondents used various instructions in teaching - learning process and

encourage pupils to have social learning to helps them build a more

meaningful understanding of the passage they read. Respondents also assist

the pupils to discover new learning in their community and ensure the level of

pupils’ outcome in the lesson in reading.

Lastly, the mean rating on the extent of teachers’ pedagogical approach

on transformative instruction was 2.90 which interpreted “satisfactory”. This

result shows that using transformative instruction in teaching reading by the

respondents, it will satisfy the pupils learning in reading.

Transformative Reading Instruction creates readers by providing

intensive evidence-based professional development and coaching to K-2

teachers on foundational reading and social emotional skills; this professional

development and coaching is aligned with tutoring, family engagement

workshop, and experiential learning (Audrey Borland, 2015-16). Reading has

been used in classrooms both as a tool for language development and as a way

of supplementing and extending content area knowledge (Rudman, 1993;

Smallwood, 2004). In order to develop the ability to read, learners need to be

taught not only to understand what is presented in a text (comprehension), but

46
to activate their previous knowledge, make comparisons and connections

(analysis), and create new knowledge (synthesis).

Table 7

Speed Level of Pupils in Public Elementary in Cotabato City

Speed level f %

Slow 33 27.5

Average 53 44.17

Fast 34 28.33

Total 120 100

Table 7 results was related to the Philippine Informal Inventory (PIRI), an

initiatives of Bureau of Education, Department of Education that directly

addresses its thrust to make every Filipino child a reader. It is anchored on the

flagship program of the DepEd “Every Child a Reader Program” (ECARRP). Its

goals is to enable evry Filipinochild to communicate both in English and

Filipinothrough effective reading instruction.

Table 7 cover the Speed Level of grade 2 pupils in Public Elementary in

Cotabato City. To find the level of reading performance of pupils, we used the

Phil – IRI format and it will start in finding the speed level in reading. The first

item in speed level is the slow reader. In 120 respondents, 33 were belonged to

slow reader. Therefore, their reading speed rate as “slow”. While the second

item in speed level is the average reader. The 53 respondents were able to get

the rate of “average” in their reading speed. Another one in the item in speed

47
level is the fast reader. Only 34 respondents were belonged to fast reader. This

implies that their reading speed rate as “fast”.

Table 8

Comprehension Level of Pupils in Public Elementary in Cotabato City

Comprehension level f %

Frustration 53 44.17

Instructional 43 35.83

Independent 24 20

Total 120 100

Table 8 shows the comprehension level of the respondents. The 53

respondents rate as “frustration”. This means that most of the respondents

were not able to understand clearly the passage that they have read. While 43

respondents in comprehension level rate as “instructional”. This indicates that

through instruction, they can get the correct answer in answering the passage

questions. The last item in comprehension level, only 24 respondents rate as

“independent”. This means that out of 120 respondents, few were totally

understand the questions ask in the passage they have read.

Table 9

Level of Reading Performances of Pupils in Public Elementary in Cotabato City

Reading level f %

Frustration 67 55.83

Instructional 35 29.17

48
 Independent 18 15

Total 120 100

Table 9 revealed the reading level of 120 respondents in which this level

was divided into 3 levels. The 67 respondents were belonged to the

“frustration”. This means that the 67 respondents show withdrawal from

reading situations by refusing to read. Another one is that the reading level of

the 35 respondents were belonged to the “instructional”. This implies that the

35 respondents can profit from instruction. Lastly, the 18 respondents were

able to qualify as “independent”. This indicates that the 18 respondents can

read independently and with ease without the help or guidance of the teacher.

In General, the factor that affects the level of reading performance of the

pupils is the miscue of the respondents in reading the passage such as

mispronunciation. The pupil attempts to pronounce the word but produces a

nonsense word rather than the real one. The word recognition error also is the

substitution in which the pupil substitutes a real word that is incorrect and

the refusal to pronounce. This means that the pupil neither pronounces the

word nor attempts to do so. Another one is the insertion. This means that the

pupil inserts a word or a series that does not appear in the text. There is also

the omission in which the pupil omits a word or continuous sequence of words

in the text but continuous to read. Repetition of words also makes the pupil’s

error in reading. The pupil repeats one or more words that have been read.

Groups of adjacent words that are repeated count as one repetition. And the

last error that affect the reading performance of pupil is that the reversal. The

pupil reverses the order of the words or letters.

49
 CHAPTER V

SUMMARY, CONCLUSION, AND RECOMMENDATION

This chapter presents the summary of findings, conclusion and

recommendations of the study.

50
 Summary of Study

This study aims to determine the reading performances of public

elementary pupils in Cotabato City School Year 2017 – 2018.

Specifically, this study sought to find the answers on the following questions:

3. What is the extent of the resources of the reading program of the DepEd

in terms of:

(b) Manpower Resources (b) Administrative Support (c) Instructional

Support?

4. What is the extent of the pedagogical approaches used by the teachers in

terms of:

(a) Directive Instruction (b) Transactive Instruction (c) Transformative

Instruction?

3. What is the level of reading performances of pupils in Public Elementary

in Cotabato City?

Summary of Findings

The findings that emerged from statistical analysis of the data gathered from

the respondents were summarized as follows:

1. The mean rating on the resources of the reading program on manpower

resources was 3.15 which interpreted “satisfactory”. The mean rating on

the resources of the reading program on administrative support was 3.03

which interpreted “satisfactory”. The mean rating on the resources of the

reading program on instructional support was 2.80 which interpreted

“satisfactory”.

51
2. The mean rating on the pedagogical approaches used by the teachers in

terms of directive instruction was 2.97 which interpreted “satisfactory”. The

mean rating on the pedagogical approaches used by the teachers in terms

of transactive instruction was 2.81 which interpreted “satisfactory”. The

mean rating on the pedagogical approaches used by the teachers in terms

of transformative instruction was 2.90 which interpreted “satisfactory”.

3. Result on the level of reading performances of pupils. 67 or 56% of the

pupils were belonged to frustration. 35 or 29% of pupils were belonged to

instructional and 18 or 15% of the pupils were belonged to independent.

Conclusion

Based on the findings of this study, the researcher concluded that there

is a disparity in the actual test results of pupils’ reading level and the teachers

perceive on pedagogical approach and resources of reading program. Awhile

the level of reading performance of pupils is generally insufficient, the perceived

on pedagogical approach and resources of reading program used as rated by

the teachers’ the result is overall satisfactory.

Recommendations

Based on the findings and conclusions of the study, the following

recommendations are offered:

52
 1. School administrators and English language supervisors may plan and

implement seminar and training programs which mainly focused on the level of

reading performance of the pupils.

2. Elementary English teachers may provide extra effort by giving

emphasis on how they can increase their pupils’ level in reading.

3. Elementary English teachers may consider the use of pedagogical

approach as a guide to hasten their pupils’ level in reading.

4. To avoid disparity of the actual test results of the pupils’ reading level

and the pedagogical approach and resources of reading program used by the

teachers, it is recommended that the future researchers who wish to conduct

similar study may include the factor that affects the level of reading

performance of the pupils in the survey questionnaires.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Andrew Johnson (2013). Human Being, Professor of Literacy

Archer, A. L., & Hughes, C. A. (2011). Explicit instruction: Effective and

efficient teaching. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.

Audrey Borland (2015-2016) – Milwaukee Succeeds

53
Billingsley, B. (2004). Promoting teacher quality and retention in special
education.
Journal of Learning Disabilities, 37(5), 370-376.

Colley, A.C. (2002). What can principals do about new teachers’

attrition? Principal, March 2002, 22-24.

Council for Exceptional Children. (2000). Bright futures for exceptional

learners. An agenda to achieve quality conditions for teaching and learning.
Reston, VA.

Cromley, J. (2009). Reading achievement and science proficiency: International

comparisons
from the programme on international student assessment. Reading Psychology,
30, 89
118.

Darling-Hammond, L. (2003). Keeping good teachers: Why it matters, what

leaders can do. Educational Leadership, May 2003, Vol. 60, No. 8, 6-13.

David Raudenbush. How to Use the Transactional Theory to Teach Reading

DiPaola, M. F. and Walther-Thomas, C. (2003). Principals and special

education: The critical role of school leaders (COPPSE Document No. 1B-7).
Gainesville, FL: University of Florida, Center on Personnel Studies in Special
Education.

Eric Digests: Transactional Theory in the Teaching of Literature

Espin, C., & Deno, S. (1993). Performance in reading from content area text as
an indicator of
achievement. Remedial & Special Education, 14(6), 47.

Feiman-Nemser, S. (2003). What new teachers need to learn. Educational

Leadership, May 2003, Vol. 60, No. 8, 25-29.

Freire, P. (1992). Pedagogia da esperança: Um reencontro com a pedagogia do

oprimido. São Paulo, SP: Editora Paz e Terra S/A.

Freire, P. (2002). Pedagogia do oprimido. São Paulo, SP: Editora Paz e Terra
S/A.

Ingersoll, R.M. and Smith, T.M. (2003). The wrong solution to the teacher
shortage. Educational Leadership, May 2003, Vol. 60, No. 8, 30-33.

54
Kozleski, EB.,Sobel, D, and Taylor, S.V. (2003). Embracing and building
culturally responsive practices. Multiple Voices, September 2003, Vol. 6, No
1, 73-87.

Krashen. S. (2004). The power of reading: Insights from the research. Westport,
CT: Heinemann.

Marchand-Martella, N. E., & Martella, R. C. (2009). Explicit instruction. In W. L

. Heward (Ed.), Exceptional children (9thed.) (pp. 196–198). Columbus, OH:
Pearson/Merrill.

Marzano, R., Pickering, D., & Pollock, J. (2001). Classroom instruction that

works. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Melissa Gagnon,How to Use the Transactional Theory to Teach Reading

Morgan, Norah, and Juliana Saxton, (2006). Asking Better Questions. 2nd ed.

Markham: Pembroke.

Naiditch, F. (2006). The pragmatics of permission: A study of Brazilian ESL

learners. Dissertation Abstracts International 67-05A.

National Commission on Excellence in Elementary Teacher Preparation for

Reading Instruction (2003). Prepared to Make a Difference. Newark, DE:
International Reading Association.

Otto, S., & Arnold, M. (2005). A study of experienced special education

teachers’
perceptions of administrative support. College Student Journal, 39(2), 253-
260.

Price, M.J. (2003). Are you a moral booster or buster? in Keeping Good
Teachers. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum
Development. Scherer. M. (Ed.).

Public Education Network. (2003). The Voice of the New Teacher. Washington,

DC.

Rosenshine, B. V. (1986). Synthesis of research on explicit teaching.

Educational Leadership, 43(7), 60–69.

Rudman, M. K. (Ed.). (1993). Children’s literature: Resources for the classroom.

Norwood, MA: Christopher-Gordon.

Rupley, W. H., Blair, T., R. & Nichols, W. D. (2009). Effective reading

instruction for struggling readers: The role of direct/explicit teaching. Reading
& Writing Quarterly, 25(2), 125–138.

55
SC Edu: Using Transactional Strategies to Support Sense Making

Scherer, M. (2003). Keeping Good Teachers. Alexandria, VA: Association for

Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Smallwood, B. A. (2004). Children’s literature for adult ESL literacy.

Washington, DC: National Clearinghouse for ESL Literacy Education.

Spitz, F. (2003). Sharing knowledge, sharing leadership in Keeping Good

Teachers. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum
Development. Scherer. M. (Ed.) 180-189.

The Center for Comprehensive School Reform and Improvement. September,

2005.

The Role of Principal Leadership in Improving Student Achievement.

Washington, DC: Author.

Vtaide: Teaching Children to Appreciate Literature

Wells, Gordon, and Gen Ling Chang-Wells (1992). Constructing Knowledge

Together. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann,.

Appendix A

Letter Permission to the Division Superintendent

March 23, 2018

56
CONCEPCION F. BALAWAG, Ph. D., CESE
Schools Division Superintendent
Cotabato City

Madam:

Greetings of Sajahatra!

With the intention to finish my Masteral Degree at the Shariff Kabunsuan College,

may I be allowed to conduct survey to the selected public elementary schools here at

Cotabato City.

The data to be obtained will be needed in my study entitled: READING

PERFORMANCES OF THE PUBLIC ELEMENTARY PUPILS IN COTABATO CITY.

Hoping for your approval on this request.

Thank you very much.

Very truly yours,

(Sgd) RAYHANA M. ABDULLAH

Researcher

Noted:

(Sgd) DIDO G. BALAWAG, ED. D.

Adviser

APPROVED:

(Sgd)DR. CONCEPCION F. BALAWAG AL-HADJA, CESE

Schools Division Superintendent

Appendix B

Letter Permission to the School Principals

57
March 23, 2018

THE PRINCIPALS
Division of Cotabato City
Cotabato City

Sir/Madam:

Greetings of Sajahatra!

With the intention to finish my Masteral Degree at the Shariff Kabunsuan

College, may I be allowed to conduct survey to the selected public elementary

schools here at Cotabato City.

The data to be obtained will be needed in my study entitled: READING

PERFORMANCES OF THE PUBLIC ELEMENTARY PUPILS IN COTABATO

CITY.

Hoping for your approval on this request.

Thank you very much.

Very truly yours,

(Sgd) RAYHANA M. ABDULLAH

Researcher

Noted:

(Sgd) DIDO G. BALAWAG, ED. D.

Adviser
Appendix C

58
 QUESTIONNAIRE

(Survey Questionnaire for the Grade 2 and Grade 3 Teachers)

Dear Respondents:

Greetings of Sajahatra!

The undersigned is currently working on her thesis entitled: READING

PERFORMANCES OF THE PUBLIC ELEMENTARY PUPILS IN COTABATO
CITY, for the degree of Master of Arts in Education major in Educational
Administration and Supervision.

In this connection, the undersigned is requesting to you to answer the

questionnaire to establish validity of her study.
Please do not leave any item unanswered. Rest assured that the gathered data
will be kept confidentially.

Thank you very much.

Very truly yours,

(Sgd) RAYHANA M. ABDULLAH

Researcher

Noted:

(Sgd) DIDO G. BALAWAG, ED. D.

Adviser

Appendix D

NAME: __________________________________

59
SCHOOL: _________________________________

Part I - School/Supports on Reading Program.

Direction: Kindly read each statement thoroughly and encircle your

appropriate answer from the given choices below.

4- 3.46-4.00 – Very Satisfactory

3- 2.46- 3.45 – Satisfactory

2- 1.46-2.45 - Less Satisfactory

1- 1.00-1.45 – Poor

A.) Manpower Resources (Teachers, School Heads & Personnel).

1. Facilitate students to read everyday including

reading for pleasure. 4 3 2 1
2. School heads established/ implement a reading
recognition program. 4 3 2 1
3. Teachers integrate the books of the shared
reading Program into lessons and activities. 4 3 2 1
4. Teachers work with librarian to develop pupils’
interest in reading program. 4 3 2 1
5. Talk to parents in order to strengthen the
reading program. 4 3 2 1
6. Provide a print rich environment in the
classroom. 4 3 2 1
7. Continue to grow professionally in the reading
instruction. 4 3 2 1
8. School heads and teachers established a
functional “Reading Hub” program in the school. 4 3 2 1
9. Provide parents with an updates on reading
status of their children. 4 3 2 1
10. Consolidate the reading activities of pupils.
4 3 2 1
11. Make a written report on the progress of pupils
reading. 4 3 2 1
12. Encourage pupils to have attitude of “Book it”
and other reading program. 4 3 2 1
13. Read to students frequently.
4 3 2 1

60
B.) Administrative Supports on Reading Program

1. The school heads schedule large uninterrupted

blocks of time for reading and literacy 4 3 2 1
instruction.
2. The school head talk with teachers about
monitoring their pupils’ time on tasks. 4 3 2 1
3. The school head schedule time for team
planning and learning 4 3 2 1
4. The school heads ensure that reading
resources are available and accessible to all. 4 3 2 1
5. The school head establish budget that give
priority to reading and allow for classroom 4 3 2 1
resources, time for teamwork and professional
development for the classroom.
6. School heads monitor teachers reading
program. 4 3 2 1
7. School heads provide opportunities for
students to discuss a common text that has 4 3 2 1
been read.
8. School heads provide parents and
stakeholders with access to reading materials 4 3 2 1
that their children can use at home.
9. School heads establish processes for
communicating the reading expectation to 4 3 2 1
parents.
10. Monitor the progress of children in special
program who are at risk of not learning to 4 3 2 1
read.

C.) Instructional Supports

1. The principal reduce or eliminate

unnecessary interruptions during 4 3 2 1
instructional times.
2. The principal ensure that children who are at
risk of not learning to read have optimal 4 3 2 1
access to interventions.
3. The school heads visit classrooms to observe
reading instructions. 4 3 2 1
4. The school heads review individual classroom
time tables to ensure that teachers provide 4 3 2 1
effective literacy blocks.
5. School Heads are knowledgeable about the
components reading instructions and 4 3 2 1
framework necessary for supporting it.

61
 6. The school heads ensure that reading
resources are available and accessible to all. 4 3 2 1
7. School heads model effective instructional
strategies in reading. 4 3 2 1
8. School heads help teachers to establish
routines that allow for effective literacy 4 3 2 1
instructions.
9. Form professional learning teams focused on
reading and assessment. 4 3 2 1

10. Ensure that literacy remains priority in the

everyday operations of school. 4 3 2 1

Part II- Pedagogical Approaches used by Teachers

A.) Directive Approach

The teachers:

1. Used question and answer exercise.

4 3 2 1
2. Apply dictation by choosing a grade
appropriate passage and read it aloud. 4 3 2 1

3. Allow students to take turn reading section of

passage, play or dialogue aloud. 4 3 2 1
4. Allow student self-correction by giving a
second chance of the mistakes. 4 3 2 1

5. Motivate and encourage pupils to an

opportunity to ask their own questions to the 4 3 2 1
other pupils or to the teacher to develop
“conversation practice”.
6. Motivate and guide pupils to write a passage
in their own words. 4 3 2 1
7. Introduced verbally the reading elements,
process, and others to pupils with care and 4 3 2 1
enunciation.
8. Facilitate and encourage pupils to repeat
each element of reading 5-20 times. 4 3 2 1
9. Correct pupils if necessary, pointing to mouth
to show proper shaping of lips, tongue and 4 3 2 1
relationship to teeth.
10. Involved timed oral reading fluency 4 3 2 1
assessment.

62
 B.) Transactive Approach
The teachers:

1. Introduced new vocabulary words.

4 3 2 1
2. Point out the new words while showing
pictures such as: animals, person, etc. 4 3 2 1
3. Explain interesting facts that the lesson or
book contains for pupils to comprehend. 4 3 2 1
During Reading Activities:

4. Assess the comprehension of pupils.

4 3 2 1
5. Guide the pupils understanding of the
materials (contains). 4 3 2 1
6. Used levelled or guided questions to help
pupils to interpret what they are reading. 4 3 2 1
7. Ask pupils to compare and contrast the
information’s from the books they have read. 4 3 2 1
8. Guide pupils on how to use what they have
read and what they know to build meaning. 4 3 2 1
9. Help pupils to understand meaning of new
information in what they read. 4 3 2 1
10. Give greater emphasis on the exploration
of attitudes and values of reading. 4 3 2 1

C.) Transformative Approach

The teachers:

1. Understand the reading ability of pupils by

conducting assessment before intervention. 4 3 2 1
2. Ask pupils to respond to a specific class
experience on reading through reflection. 4 3 2 1
3. Ask pupils to observe and interprets events or
reading using their own new knowledge. 4 3 2 1
4. Used authentic assessment of pupils reading
ability. 4 3 2 1
5. Leads pupils to self actualization.
4 3 2 1
6. Help pupils to discover their full potential in
reading. 4 3 2 1
7. Employ diverse ways of teaching – learning
process. 4 3 2 1
8. Applies cooperative grouping on pupils to
4 3 2 1
63
 strengthen reading practice.
9. Lead pupils to explore the community to take
in the learning process. 4 3 2 1
10. Checks the extent of pupils’ application of
the lessons in reading. 4 3 2 1

Appendix E
Phil-IRI Form

Reading Level : ______________

64
Name : __________________________ Grade & Section __________________
Speed : _________ Minutes Score : __________________
Level : _________________________ Level : ___________________________

GRADE LEVEL PASSAGE RATING SHEET

Direction: Read the selection silently. Record your reading time

as soon as you finish reading. Read the questions

and encircle the letter of your answer.

Party Time

It’s party time! The grade 2 pupils are drinking

juice. Some children hold glasses. Some boys drink
from bottles and mugs. Some girls sip from cups.
Teacher holds a big pitcher of orange juice.
Suddenly, Ferdie shouts, “Look, we are drinking
orange juice of different shapes.”
The pupils laugh.
Teacher says, “Don’t laugh, children. Ferdie is
just giving his observation. Juice is liquid.”
“You see,” says Ferdie, “liquid takes the shape of
its container. Liquid has no shape of its own.”
“That’s a good lesson, Ferdie!” exclaims Teacher.

Grade II
No. of words: 88
Questions:

1. What did the teacher have in the big pitcher?

a. juice

65
 b. milk
c. water
d. coffee

2. Who used cups in drinking juice?

a. some teachers
b. some visitors
c. some boys
d. some girls

3. What was Ferdie’s observation about liquid?

a. Liquid has no weight.

b. Liquid has no color.
c. Liquid has its own shape.
d. Liquid has no shape of its own.

4. Why did the pupils laugh?

The pupils laugh because of __________

a. Ferdie’s joke.
b. Ferdie’s lesson.
c. Ferdie’s expression.
d. Ferdie’s observation.

5. How did the teacher feel about Ferdie’s observation?

a. angry
b. happy
c. sad
d. ashame

6. Which word describes Ferdie?

a. vibrant
b. conversant
c. observant
d. extravagant

7. How can you be like Ferdie?

66
 a. I will look for reasons why things happen.
b. I will show off that I know something.
c. I will make noise.
d. I will spend time with my classmates.

CURRICULUM VITAE

A. Personal Profile

Name : Rayhana M. Abdullah

67
Address : College, Cotabato City

Birth Place : Parang, Maguindanao

Date of Birth : March 24, 1992

Civil Status : Married

Tribe : Iranun

Religion : Islam

Husband : Alibashier A. Maguid

Children : Alihana Mirhaj A. Maguid

B. Educational profile

Elementary : Parang Central School

Parang Maguindanao
SY 1999 -2005

Secondary : Ampatuan National High School

Ampatuan Maguindanao
SY 2005-2009

Tertiary : Mindanao State University-Maguindanao

D.O.S Maguindanao
SY 2009-2014

Course : Bachelor of Elementary Education

major in General Education

Graduate Studies : Master of Arts in Education major in

Educational Administration and Supervision
Shariff Kabunsuan College, Inc.
Sarmiento, Parang, Maguindanao
SY 2016-2018

C. Professional Experience

Asst. Librarian : AMA Computer College

Magallanes, Cotabato City

SY 2014-2015
68
Sub. Teacher I : Muamad Elementary School
Biniruan, Cotabato City

Sub. Teacher I : Bubong Elementary School

Kalangenan 2, Cotabato City

Sub. Teacher I : Datu Siang Central School

Tukananas, Cotabato City

Sub. Teacher I : J. Marquez Elementary School

Extension, Cotabato City

Permanent Teacher I : Tamontaka Central School

Tamontaka, Cotabato City
SY 2016-present

D. Eligibility

Licensure Examination for Teacher (LET)

Davao City

E. Training

 K To 12 Curriculum and Instructional Designing Using Innovative

Strategies for Elementary Grade, Mindanao State University-
Maguindanao, 09/15/2014- 03/06/2014

 Girls Scouts of the Philippines, Deped Division of Cotabato City,

08/12/2016- 08/14/2016

 Coordination on Zero Garbage in School and Community, Deped Division

of Cotabato City, 08/31/2016- 08/31/2016

 Teacher Induction Program, Deped Division of Cotabato City,

09/08/2016- 09/10/2016

 District VI Mid-Year Performance Review and Evaluation, Deped Division

of Cotabato City, 10/24/2016- 10/28/2016

 MAPEH 3rd and 4th Quarter Test Paper Workshop, Deped Division of
Cotabato City, 12/10/2016- 12/11/2016

69
70