¹Karla Mae J. Silva,²Jasper M. Del Valle, EdD PhD,³Cecilia Q. Velasco, EdD

¹Academic Coordinator of Bixby Knolls Preparatory, Inc.- San Antonio, Quezon, Philippines

²Faculty of San Pablo City Integrated High School-San Pablo City, Philippines

³Faculty of Laguna State Polytechnic University-San Pablo City Campus, Philippines

DOI : https://doi.org/10.58806/ijsshmr.2023.v2i6n22

Google Scholar Download Pdf
ABSTRACT

The study aimed to use the read aloud strategy in the enhancement of the Reading Literacy Program of the school. It specifically determined the reading levels of the pupils based on their Lexile scores using the Scholastic Reading Inventory (SRI); their mean scores in terms of comprehension, vocabulary, and fluency using the researcher-made test; their Lexile growth, and the significant difference between the mean scores from the researcher-made pre-test and post-test. A one-group pre-test and post-test design was utilized, wherein a total of 44 students in grades 4-6 were used as participants. The instruments used were the Scholastic Reading Inventory (SRI) assessments adopted from the Reading Literacy Program and the researcher-made tests for comprehension, vocabulary, and fluency. Results revealed that there is a significant difference between the mean pre-test and post-test scores from the researcher-made tests, indicating that the use of reading aloud as a strategy is effective in enhancing the Reading Program. Thus, the hypothesis “there is no significant difference between the mean percentage scores of pre-test and post-test of pupils” is not sustained.

KEYWORDS:

Read Aloud Strategy, Lexile scores, Lexile growth, Scholastic Reading Inventory, Literacy

REFERENCES

1) Carroll, J. and Breadmore, H. (2019). Theories of Early Literacy Development.https://theeducationhub.org.nz/theories-ofearly-literacy-development/

2) OECD. (2014). Reading for Change: Performance and Engagement across Countries: Results from PISA 2000. Paris: OECD.

3) Department of Education (2018). PISA 2018 National Report of the Philippines.Retrieved Nov 22, 2021 from https://www.deped.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/PISA-2018-Philippine-National-Report.pdf

4) Yazon, A., Callo, E., Buenvinida, L. (2019). Learning Guide in Methods of Research

5) Scholastic Asia. (2015). Instructions for Administering the Electronic (Online) Scholastic Reading Inventory (SRI) Assessment.https://www.ousd.org/cms/lib07/ca01001176/centricity/domain/93/instructions_forgiving_sri_assessmentv2-0-revised-september2015.pdf

6) Trelease, J. (2016). The Read-Aloud Handbook. UK: Penguin.www.trelease-on-reading.com

7) San Juan, R. (2019). Philippines lowest in reading comprehension among 79 countries. https://www.philstar.com/headlines/2019/12/03/1974002/philippines-lowest-reading-comprehension-among-79-countries

8) Albright, L. K., & Ariail, M. (2015). Tapping the potential of teacher read alouds in middle schools. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy,vol/issue: 48(7), pp. 582-591.

9) Kalb, G., & Van Ours, J. (2014). Reading to young children: a head-start in life. Economic of Education Review 40, 1-24. http://doi.org.libproxy.murdoch.edu.au/10.1016/j.econedurev.2014.01.002

10) National Center for Education Statistics. (2014). NAEP state comparisons .Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/statecomparisons/

11) Canoy, M., J.C. van Ours, & F. van der Ploeg. (2016). The economics of books. in Ginsburgh, A., & Throsby, D. (Eds.), Handbook of the Economics of Art and Culture, (721-761). Amsterdam: Elsevier.

VOlUME 02 ISSUE 06 JUNE 2023