Home⇛Psychology and Education: A Multidisciplinary Journal⇛vol. 49 no. 7 (2025)

Developing a Sustainable Extension Program to Enhance English Reading Proficiency

Jay Anne Rose Manila

Discipline: Education

 

Abstract:

Learning the English language requires proficiency in various aspects, including decoding, vocabulary, reading fluency, and comprehension. However, many students struggle to achieve proficiency in these areas, which can hinder their ability to fully engage with and understand written material. Thus, this study investigated the level of reading proficiency among 12th-grade HUMSS students, the factors that influence their proficiency, and the ways in which these factors influence their proficiency. The study employed an explanatory sequential design to gain a more holistic understanding and a richer exploration of the issue. Aside from the students, this was also participated in by the parents and teachers. Quantitative data were gathered through standardized instruments, while in-depth interviews and focus group discussions were conducted to collect qualitative data. Descriptive statistics were utilized to determine the level of reading proficiency. The interviews were transcribed and analyzed using Miles and Huberman's (1984) analytical framework to identify the factors that influence reading proficiency and their mechanisms of influence. Results revealed that decoding and reading skills were high, vocabulary skills were moderate, and comprehension skills were low. Moreover, four main factors influencing reading proficiency were identified: socio-economic, learning environment, background knowledge, and motivation and interest. These factors have influenced the participants positively and negatively. Furthermore, the study proposed a Sustainable Program of Extension for English Language Reading. It concludes that learners' reading proficiency is moderately developed, with strengths in decoding and fluency, but weaknesses in vocabulary and comprehension, and is influenced positively and negatively by different factors.



References:

  1. Ahmadi, M. R. (2013). The relationship between students' reading motivation and reading comprehension. Journal of Education and Practice, 4(18). https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/document?repid=rep1&type=pdf&doi=0c5ef150aa4d08d5be5bbc58b81ff05899c0bdff
  2. Ahmadi, M. R., & Gilakjani, A. P. (2011). Reciprocal teaching strategies and their impacts on English reading comprehension. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 2(10), 2053–2060. https://doi.org/10.4304/tpls.2.10.2053-2060
  3. Akbari, Z. (2015). Current challenges in teaching/learning English for EFL learners: The case of junior high school and high school. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 199, 598–603. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.07.553
  4. Alghamdi, Y. (2016). Negative effects of technology on children of today. [Unpublished manuscript]. Oakland University.
  5. Alshumaimeri, Y. (2005). The effects of reading method on the comprehension performance of Saudi EFL students. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 4(1), 185–195. https://www.iejee.com/iejee/article/download/123/123/reading-approach-study.pdf
  6. Astika, I. G. (2016). Vocabulary learning strategies of secondary school students. IJOTL-TL: Indonesian Journal of Language Teaching and Linguistics, 1(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.30957/ijoltl.v1i1.1
  7. Au, J. M. (2001). The effect of print access on reading frequency. Reading Psychology, 22(3), 225–248. https://doi.org/10.1080/027027101753170638
  8. Barton, M. (2021). The Barton English Vocabulary Test. English Current. https://www.englishcurrent.com/english-vocabulary-test/
  9. Beck, I. L., & McKeown, M. G. (2001). Inviting students into the pursuit of meaning. Educational Psychology Review, 13(3), 217–238. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016629906004
  10. Bernhardt, E. B. (1983). Three approaches to reading comprehension in intermediate German. The Modern Language Journal, 67(2), 111–115. https://doi.org/10.2307/328281
  11. Bhatti, R., & Sarwar, M. (2022). Effects of gadgets on students' academic performance at secondary level in Islamabad. Sukur IBA Journal of Computing and Mathematical Sciences, 6(1), 77–94. https://doi.org/10.30537/sjcms.v6i1.1109
  12. Bostock, J. (2024). Importance of reading: Why reading is such an important English language skill. Preply. https://preply.com/en/blog/the-importance-of-reading-english-more-often-and-more-widely/
  13. Budiu, R., & Nielsen, J. (2021). How many participants for quantitative usability studies: A summary of sample-size recommendations. Nielsen Norman Group. https://www.nngroup.com/articles/summary-quant-sample-sizes/
  14. Cabalo, R., Carado, D., Tria, M. M., Neri, R. I., Racho, J., & Cabalo, E. (2019). Factors affecting pupils' reading proficiency in multigrade classes among rural elementary schools. International Journal of Social Science and Management Studies, 2(2). https://www.ijsmsjournal.org/2019/volume-2%20issue-2/ijsmsv2i2p114.pdf
  15. Cadiz-Gabejan, A. M., & Quirino, M. C. (2021). Students' reading proficiency and academic performance. International Journal of English Language Studies, 3(6), 30–40. https://doi.org/10.32996/ijels.2021.3.6.4
  16. Cano, J. E., De la Calle-Cabrera, A. M., Hervás-Gómez, C., & López-Meneses, E. (2020). Socio-family context and its influence on students' PISA reading performance scores: Evidence from three countries in three continents. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 20(2), 50–62. https://doi.org/10.12738/estp.2020.2.004
  17. Creswell, J. W. (2010). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (2nd ed.). SAGE Publications. (The provided text cites Creswell, J. W., & Clark, V. L. P., 2010, but the full reference list includes Creswell, 2010, and Creswell & Clark, V. L. P., 2010. I used the individual citation for Creswell as it appears in the text).
  18. Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Mixed methods procedures. In Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed., pp. 213–246). SAGE Publications, Inc. (The in-text citation is for Creswell, et.al, 2018, which is corrected here).
  19. Dimitriadis, G., & Kamberelis, G. (2006). Theory for education (Adapted from Theory for Religious Studies, by William E. Deal and Timothy K. Beal). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203958933
  20. Duke, N. K., Pearson, P. D., Strachan, S. L., & Billman, A. K. (2003). Essential elements of fostering and teaching reading comprehension. In What research has to say about reading instruction (4th ed.).
  21. Ehri, L. C. (2013). Orthographic mapping in the acquisition of sight word reading, spelling memory, and vocabulary learning. Scientific Studies of Reading, 18(1), 5–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888438.2013.819356
  22. Fowler, F. J. (2014). Survey research methods (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.
  23. Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1989). Fourth generation evaluation. Sage Publications.
  24. Hedge, T. (2003). Teaching and learning in the language classroom. Oxford University Press.
  25. Ilyasovna, N. A. (2020). The importance of English language. International Journal on Orange Technologies, 2(1), 22–24. https://www.neliti.com/publications/333378/the-importance-of-english-language
  26. Imam, O., & Abulon, E. L. (2014). Reading comprehension skills and performance in science among high school students in the Philippines. Asia Pacific Journal of Educators and Education, 29, 81–94. http://web.usm.my/apjee/APJEE_29_2014/Art%205(81-94).pdf
  27. Kang, Y. (2011). Reading fluency vs. oral language comprehension in predicting reading comprehension of Korean EFL learners. Korean Journal of Applied Linguistics, 27(4), 81–102.
  28. Kim, D. (2020). Learning language, learning culture: Teaching language to the whole student. ECNU Review of Education, 3(3), 519–541. https://doi.org/10.1177/2096531120936693
  29. Kim, S., & Lee, S. (2020). Effects of COVID-19 on preferences for private dining facilities in restaurants. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 45, 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhtm.2020.07.008
  30. Kinney, D. W., & Forsythe, J. L. (2005). The effects of the arts IMPACT curriculum upon student performance on the Ohio fourth-grade proficiency test. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 164, 35–48.
  31. Kuhn, M. R., Schwanenflugel, P. J., & Meisinger, E. B. (2014). Aligning theory and assessment of reading fluency: Automaticity, prosody, and comprehension. Reading Research Quarterly, 45(2), 230–251.
  32. Limone, P., & Toto, G. A. (2021). Psychological and emotional effects of digital technology on children in COVID-19 pandemic. Brain Sciences, 11(9), 1126. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci11091126
  33. Lovett, M. (2012). Teaching struggling readers foundational reading skills. The Dyslexia Foundation. https://dyslexiafoundation.org/teaching-struggling-readers-foundational-reading-skills/
  34. Luo, J. P. (2013). Action research on improvement of reading comprehension of CET4. English Language Teaching, 6(4), 89–96. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v6n4p89
  35. Madrid, M. (2012). Philippine Informal Reading Inventory (Phil Iri). Department of Education. https://www.slideshare.net/slideshow/philippine-informal-reading-inventory-phil-iri-12786035/12786035
  36. Mayer, R. E. (2017). Using multimedia for e-learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 33(5), 415–423. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12197
  37. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. SAGE Publications
  38. Parrish, N. (2020). Five ways to support students who struggle with reading comprehension. Edutopia. https://www.edutopia.org/article/5-ways-support-students-who-struggle-reading-comprehension
  39. Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.
  40. Piaget, J. (1970). Science of education and the psychology of the child. Orion Press.
  41. Piaget, J. (1980). The psychogenesis of knowledge and its epistemological significance. In M. P. M. L. Varma (Ed.), Psychological studies. Oxford University Press.
  42. Pseudoword Decoding Tool. (2009). The Rector and the Board of Visitors of the University of Virginia. https://literacyprofessionaldevelopment.weebly.com/uploads/1/6/2/4/16241452/psuedoword.pdf  
  43. Rao, P. S. (2018). The importance of English in the modern era. Asian Journal of Multidimensional Research, 8(1), 7–19. https://www.indianjournals.com/ijor.aspx?target=ijor:ajmr&volume=8&issue=1&article=001
  44. Rasinski, T., & Padak, N. (2016). Alternative text types to improve reading fluency for competent to struggling readers. International Journal of Instruction, 9(4), 163–176. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1086966
  45. Ricketts, J., Nation, K., & Bishop, D. V. M. (2007). Vocabulary is important for some, but not all reading skills. Scientific Studies of Reading, 11(3), 235–257. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888430701344306
  46. Rumelhart, D. E. (1980). Schemata: The building blocks of cognition. In R. J. Spiro, B. C. Bruce, & W. F. Brewer (Eds.), Theoretical issues in reading comprehension: Perspectives from cognitive psychology, linguistics, artificial intelligence, and education (pp. 33–58). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  47. Saville-Troike, M. (2006). Introduction second language acquisition. Cambridge University Press.
  48. Sereyrath, E. (2022). Challenges of English language learning and teaching in Cambodia: A case study of Kith Meng Brasat High School. Cambodian Journal of Educational Research, 2(1), 16–29. http://www.cjered.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/CJER_Vol2_No1_Eang-Sereyrath.pdf
  49. Servalos, N. J. (2023, December 7). PISA: Philippines 5 to 6 years behind. Philippine Star Global. https://www.philstar.com/headlines/2023/12/07/2317043/pisa-philippines-5-6-years-behind  
  50. Singhal, M. (2001). Reading proficiency, reading strategies, metacognitive awareness and L2 readers. The Reading Matrix, 1(1). https://www.asian-efl-journal.com/articles/singhal/
  51. Singhal, M. (2003). A comparison of L1 and L2 reading: Cultural differences and schema. The University of Arizona. http://ereserve.library.utah.edu/Annual/LING/5942/Vooge/compar.pdf
  52. Snowling, M., & Hulme, C. (2011). Reading comprehension, decoding skills and oral language. The English and Foreign Languages University Journal, 2(2), 1–13.
  53. Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. In S. Gass & C. Madden (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 235–253). Newbury House.
  54. The University of Utah. (2022). University of Utah Reading Clinic. https://www.uurc.utah.edu/
  55. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
  56. Vygotsky, L. S. (1981). The genesis of higher mental functions. In J. V. Wertsch (Ed.), The concept of activity in Soviet psychology. M. E. Sharpe.
  57. Wills, H., & Kincaid, C. (2023). Curriculum influences on growth in early reading fluency for students with academic and behavioral risks: A descriptive study. Remedial and Special Education, 44(6), 415–429. https://doi.org/10.1177/10634266030110040301
  58. Wood, D., Bruner, J. S., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines, 17(2), 89–100. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.1976.tb00381.x
  59. Yang, Z. (2018). The evidence of different learning environment learning effects on vocabulary size and reading comprehension. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 1914. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01914
  60. Yuntao, W., Zaleha, I., & Mohd Ridhuan, T. (2019). Non-English major students' perception of factors influencing English proficiency in China. English Language Teaching, 12(4), 157. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v12n4p157
  61. Yusun, P., & Kang, K. (2014). Decoding skills vs. reading fluency in Korean high school EFL learners' reading comprehension. English Teaching, 69(4), 123–143. https://doi.org/10.15858/engtea.69.4.201412.123

Tools


Copyright © 2026  KITE Digital Educational Solutions |  Exclusively distributed by CE-Logic