Home⇛Psychology and Education: A Multidisciplinary Journal⇛vol. 42 no. 7 (2025)

Teachers’ Reading Strategies and the Reading Abilities of Key Stage 1 Learners With Learning Challenges

Colita Abunales | Sherralyn Lacay

Discipline: Education

 

Abstract:

Reading proficiency in the early grades is foundational to a child’s academic success and long-term educational outcomes. It serves as the doorway to learning across all subject areas, enabling learners to engage meaningfully with school content and build confidence in their abilities. However, in many disadvantaged and underserved communities, young learners continue to struggle with reading despite the implementation of various instructional strategies designed to support literacy development. Rural areas like the Second District of Eastern Samar face challenges that contribute to ongoing literacy gaps. As a result, Key Stage 1 learners are at increased risk of falling behind, making it difficult to meet grade-level reading expectations essential for future academic success. Thus, this study aimed to examine the extent of implementation of evidence-based reading strategies among Grade 2 teachers and their relationship to the reading performance of learners with identified learning challenges. Employing a quantitative descriptive-correlational research design, the study focused on six instructional approaches: phonics-based instruction, sight word reading strategies, multisensory approaches, guided and shared reading, scaffolding strategies, and the use of assistive technology and digital resources. Data were collected through validated teacher surveys and reading assessments using the Comprehensive Rapid Literacy Assessment (CRLA).Findings revealed that all six strategies were consistently applied in classrooms, with phonics-based instruction and scaffolding strategies receiving the highest mean implementation mean scores of 3.78. The CRLA results showed that 97% of Grade 2 classes were classified as “Grade Ready,” indicating strong reading proficiency levels. However, correlational analysis revealed that only sight word reading strategies demonstrated a statistically significant but weak positive relationship with learners reading performance with r value of 0.369 and p value of 0.035. The overall correlation between the combined use of all strategies and reading performance was negligible. These results suggest that while the consistent use of reading strategies exists, their direct influence on learner reading performance may be shaped by broader contextual and instructional factors. The study recommends strengthened professional development programs, focused integration of sight word instruction, tiered intervention systems, and reflective teaching practices to enhance literacy instruction and learner outcomes. This research contributes to the growing body of literature on effective early literacy practices in resource-constrained educational settings.



References:

  1. Barnes, E., Anderson, K. L., & T Yurkewecz. (2023, January 1). Examining Guided Reading Practices in Kindergarten Classrooms. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/374551227_Examining_Guided_Reading_Practices_in_Kindergarten_Classrooms
  2. Barrett, P., Treves, A., Shmis, T., Ambasz, D., & Ustinova, M. (2019). The Impact of School Infrastructure on Learning A Synthesis of the Evidence. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED604388.pdf
  3. Binti Yaacob, H., & Mohd Rashid, S. M. (2024). The Teaching Practice of Primary School Malay Language Teachers in Basic Reading Skills: A Literature Review. International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development, 13(4). https://doi.org/10.6007/ijarped/v13-i4/23643
  4. Birsh, J. R., & Carreker, S. (2018). Multisensory teaching of basic language skills (4th ed.). Paul H. Brookes Publishing. https://brookespublishing.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/Birsh_4e_excerpt.pdf?srsltid=AfmBOoqZ5Hfdd8fZCINO1KIWwk9TiVBYUkzS9QuObPAO
  5. Burns, A. (2022, March 4). Teachers’ Voices 8: Explicitly supporting reading and writing in the classroom. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/359003980_Teachers
  6. Campado, R. J., Toquero, C. M. D., & Ulanday, D. M. (2023). Integration of assistive technology in teaching learners with special educational needs and disabilities in the Philippines. International Journal of Professional Development, Learners and Learning, 5(1), ep2308. https://doi.org/10.30935/ijpdll/13062
  7. Castles, A., Rastle, K., & Nation, K. (2018). Ending the Reading Wars: Reading Acquisition From Novice to Expert. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 19(1), 5–51. https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100618772271
  8. Coyne, M. D., McCoach, D. B., Ware, S., Austin, C. R., Loftus-Rattan, S. M., & Baker, D. L. (2019). Racing Against the Vocabulary Gap: Matthew Effects in Early Vocabulary Instruction and Intervention. Exceptional Children, 85(2), 163–179. https://doi.org/10.1177/0014402918789162
  9. Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). Sage Publications.
  10. Dinoro, A., J-roel Semilla, Dangdang, G., Ma. Faye Fajardo, Evedanie Beldad, Dominguez, E., Grageda, C., & Tero, J. (2023). Assessment of the Reading Strategies in the Philippine Basic Education. Asia Research Network Journal of Education, 3(2), 59–73. https://so05.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/arnje/article/view/267017
  11. Echavez, R., Artemio Echavez, J., Comaling, M. C., Obiasada, V., Baquiran, M., & Kilag, O. K. (2024). Literacy Disparities and Educational Challenges in the Philippines: A Systematic Review. International Multidisciplinary Journal of Research for Innovation, Sustainability, and Excellence(IMJRISE), 1(2), 164–169.https://risejournals.org/index.php/imjrise/article/view/118
  12. Ehri, L. C. (2005). Learning to read words: Theory, findings, and issues. Scientific Studies of Reading, 9(2), 167–188.
  13. Eisnor, L. (2022). Orthographic Mapping: a Tool for Success in Reading, Vocabulary Word Knowledge, Meaning, and Self Teaching in the Primary Grades (p. 163).https://scholarworks.gvsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1196&context=gradprojects
  14. Fountas, I. C., & Pinnell, G. S. (2017). Guided reading: Responsive teaching across the grades. Heinemann.
  15. Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2019). How to design and evaluate research in education (10th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.
  16. Gough Kenyon, S. M., Palikara, O., & Lucas, R. M. (2018). Explaining Reading Comprehension in Children With Developmental Language Disorder: The Importance of Elaborative Inferencing. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 61(10), 2517–2531. https://doi.org/10.1044/2018_jslhr-l-17-0416
  17. Johnston, R., & Watson, J. (2014). Teaching Synthetic Phonics. Learning Matters. https://api.pageplace.de/preview/DT0400.9781473908895_A24082239/preview-9781473908895_A24082239.pdf
  18. Lane, H. B., Contesse, V. A., Gage, N. A., & Burns, M. K. (2025). Effect of an Instructional Program in Foundational Reading Skills on Early Literacy Development of Students in Kindergarten and First Grade. Reading Research Quarterly, 60(1). https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.607
  19. Latson, R. (2022). Effects of Scaffolding on Reading Comprehension Effects of Scaffolding on Reading Comprehension. https://scholarworks.waldenu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=14112&context=dissertations
  20. Mustafa Gazioğlu, & Neslihan Karakuş. (2023). The impact of multisensory learning model-based tale-telling on listening skills and student opinions about it. Frontiers in Education, 8. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2023.1137042
  21. National Reading Panel. (2000). Teaching Children to Read: An Evidence-Based Assessment of the Scientific Research Literature on Reading and its Implications for Reading Instruction. American Speech, 88(1). https://doi.org/10.1215/00031283-2322610
  22. Ogirima, O., Onyiyeche, O., & Bunmi, O. (2017). Teachers’ attitude and competence in the use of assistive technologies in special needs schools. 10(4). https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1164985.pdf
  23. Okolo, C. M., & Bouck, E. C. (2007). Research about assistive technology: 2000–2006. What have we learned?. Journal of Special Education Technology, 22(3), 19–33.
  24. Otaiba, A., Folsom, J. S., Schatschneider, C., Wanzek, J., Greulich, L., Meadows, J., Li, Z., & Connor, C. M. (2025). Predicting First-Grade Reading Performance from Kindergarten Response to Tier 1 Instruction. Exceptional Children, 77(4), 453–470. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ931148
  25. Paige, D. (2020). Reading Fluency: A Brief History, the Importance of Supporting Processes, and the Role of Assessment. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED607625.pdf
  26. Raffoul, S., & Jaber, L. (2023). Text-to-Speech Software and Reading Comprehension: The Impact for Students with Learning Disabilities. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology / Revue Canadienne de l’Apprentissage et de La Technologie, 49(2), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.21432/cjlt28296
  27. Rupley, W. H., Nichols, W. D., Rasinski, T. V., & Paige, D. (2020). Fluency: Deep Roots in Reading Instruction. Education Sciences, 10(6), 155. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci10060155
  28. Saharuddin, M. H., Nasir, M. K. M., & Mahmud, M. S. (2025). Exploring Teachers’ Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge in Utilising Artificial Intelligence (AI) for Teaching. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 24(1), 136–151. https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.24.1.7
  29. Salem, A. A. M. S. (2016). Scaffolding Reading Comprehension Skills. English Language Teaching, 10(1), 97. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v10n1p97
  30. Snow, C., & Matthews, T. (2016). Reading and Language in the Early Grades Reading and Language in the Early Grades. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1118540.pdf
  31. Snowling, M. J., & Hulme, C. (2019). Annual research review: Reading disorders revisited—The critical importance of oral language. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 60(5), 545-568.
  32. Sun, Y., Wang, J., Dong, Y., Zheng, H., Yang, J., Zhao, Y., & Dong, W. (2021). The Relationship Between Reading Strategy and Reading Comprehension: A Meta-Analysis. Frontiers in Psychology, 12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.635289
  33. Suryani, I., Utami Dewi, & Mohamed Muhibu Chuma. (2023). Scaffolding Strategies to Support English Language Learning in Reading Comprehension: A Case Study. Child Education Journal, 5(1), 24–35. https://doi.org/10.33086/cej.v5i1.3790
  34. Syahputri, D. (2019). The Effect of Multisensory Teaching Method on The Students’ Reading Achievement. Budapest International Research and Critics in Linguistics and Education (BirLE) Journal, 2(1), 124–131. https://doi.org/10.33258/birle.v2i1.192
  35. Tolentin, C. (2023). Implementation and Challenges of Reading Intervention Programs in Face-to-Face Classes. Psychology and Education: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 14(2), 153-168. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8402809
  36. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
  37. Wood, D., Bruner, J. S., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 17(2), 89–100. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.1976.tb00381.x

Tools


Copyright © 2025  KITE Digital Educational Solutions |  Exclusively distributed by CE-Logic