IMPROVING READING COMPREHENSION

THROUGH THE USE OF HIGHER ORDER THINKING ACTIVITIES

I - Proponent:

DESIREE O. LABIO

II - Background of the Study:

The area of focus for my project is improving Reading Comprehension Through the Use of
Higher Order Thinking Skill Activities. Without the solid foundation of reading skill the researcher feels
the children will be struggle hard throughout their schooling and adult life. By learning the best
comprehension strategies and how to best teach these strategies to the pupils, the researcher hopes to
provide the solid foundation needed to succeed . Although the school's NAT result has meet or exceed
its expectation, still the researcher has a thought of a way to improve it. In reading class, the grade three
pupils scored84%, but the scores dropped in the 4th grade. So the researcher concludes that the pupils
score decreases because of the pupils have very poor higher - order thinking skills to increase reading
test scores and develop meaningful reading experience to the pupils.

III - Statement of the Problem:

As the researcher of this research, I have found out that many of my pupils in grade III are able
to read fluently, but still have difficulty in answering the "how" and "why" questions. I am hoping that by
incorporating higher order thinking skills my pupils would be able to transfer and make connections to
reading. This is important in order for a child to be successful. I feel that incorporating reading strategies
and showing students how to reflect about what they have read, would improve their reading
comprehension and to become life-long learners. I am looking forward to working on this area of
concern, and sharing my findings with my co-teachers.

IV- Significance of the Study:

The study will be deemed important for the proper recognition of the improving Reading
Comprehension Through the use of higher - order thinking activities on the academic Performance of
the grade III pupils, Likewise, the findings of this research may prove useful to the following, to wit;

Pupils. Having a clearer view and firsthand experience of the teacher's performance, this will
further enhance pupil's knowledge of the importance of mastering the basic skills of their competencies
so they will make an effort to do best. This may lead to better enthusiasm and develop good study habit.

Teachers. This study may heighten their awareness in identifying the learning tasks that are well
developed as well as the least. This may further be a motivating factor to adapt measures and new
strategies for the improvement of instructions in reading.

Parents. The result of this study will serve as bird's eye view of the parent to know the
needs of their children with regards to improving their reading comprehension.
 School Administrator and Supervisors. Results of this investigation may encourage administrators
and supervisors help their teachers upgrade their teaching performance in improving reading
comprehension through closer supervision and faculty development and training programs.

Department of Education Camarines Sur Specially Ragay District. With the use of the
results of the study, any educational upliftment will benefit the municipality of Ragay as it may improve
the quality of working force of the municipality or the quality of life of their respective constituents.

Curriculum Planners. The findings of this study may assists the planners in the proper
selection of methods, techniques, and strategies that need to be reinforced.

Community.The result of this study may benefit the community in as much they know
that the teachers of their children are equipped with the necessary tools and competence in teaching
them.

Researcher Himself. This may serve as inspiration in teaching his pupils above and
beyond his capacity.

Future Researcher. The information and insights that will be gained from this study may
serve as guide for other researcher in framing their conceptual framework and design and at the same
time encourage them to conduct lateral studies within their area of preferences.

V- Scope of the Study

The general focus of the present study was on the Improving Reading Comprehension
Through the use of Higher Order Thinking Skills Activities of the grade III pupils in Baya Elementary
School, District of Ragay, Division Of Camarines Sur.The study covered the PHIL-IRI assessment result of
the school year 2011-2012 utilizing the post -test. The aspect s in Improving Reading Comprehension
that the present study will look into the different reading strategies. Predicting, making connections,
visualizing, Inferring, questioning, and summarizing are shown on this research to improve reading
comprehension.

VI - Research Design
 A. Methodology
This study employ the pre-Experimental one shot case study. According to De Jesus
the pre experimental one shot case study is a design in which a single group is only studied
once, subsequent to a treatment is the instruction of reading strategies . It is important to
teach the strategies by naming the strategy and how it should be used, modelling trough think aloud
process, group practice, partner practice and independent use of the strategy.
The second tool used was the Phil-Iri test administered to the pupils in the grade II
pupils in the first week of July, 2011. This tool used to determine student growth in reading
comprehension.
The teacher observation checklist was used by the researcher to gather data
throughout the intervention. This tool provides information of changes on how well his pupils
understand and use reading comprehension strategies over time.

B. Sampling Design

Purposive sampling was employed in selecting pupils - respondent of the study. The

pupils who were selected were enrolled in the third grade class for the school year 2011-
2012.

C. Description of Instrument Data and Gathering Form.

The Metacomprehension Strategy Index had a total of 25 questions divided into three parts
that asked about the strategies pupils used to help them better understand the story. Part I of MSI is
consist of statement about the strategies used prior to reading a story, Part II of the MSI consist of
statement about the strategies used while reading a story, and the part III of the MSI consist of
statement about the strategies used after reading the story.

VI - Work Plan

Pre - Implementation

Date Activities

_______________ _________________

_______________ _________________
 During Implementation

_______________ _________________

_______________ _________________

Post - Implementation

_______________ ________________

_______________ ________________

Proposed Budget:

Expected Expenses Proposed Budget

* Computer's Ink Php. 1, 606.00

* Bond paper Php. 108.00

Prepared by:

_________________

Teacher- I

Noted:

_______________________

School Head

Recommending Approval:

______________________ ___________________

Public Schools District Supervisor ES - I English

Approved:

___________________________________

Asst. Schools Division Superintendent

Victoria Reyes Elementary School

Dasmarias City

An Action Research on the Effectiveness of Differentiated Instruction In Teaching English for Grade Four
Classes

By

Mary Joy V. Olicia

Researcher

I. Introduction

Like Science and Math, English is a difficult but an important subject because the curriculum considers it
as a tool subject needed to understand the different content subjects. Basically, it is concerned with
developing competencies in listening, speaking, reading, writing, and viewing. Speaking includes skills in
using the language expressions and grammatical structures correctly in oral communication while
writing skill includes readiness skills, mechanics in guided writing, functional and creative writing (K to
12 Curriculum Guide for Grade 4).

The K to 12 Basic Education Curriculum aims to help learners understand that English language is
involved in the dynamic social process which responds to and reflects changing social conditions. It is
also inextricably involved with values, beliefs and ways of thinking about the person and the world
people dwell. The curriculum aims that pupils are given an opportunity to build upon their prior
knowledge while utilizing their own skills, interests, styles, and talents.

However, teachers find difficulties in teaching different kinds of pupils with different intellectual
capacities, talent or skills, interest, and learning styles especially in heterogeneous groupings of pupils.
This situation calls for teachers to create lessons for all pupils based upon their readiness, interests, and
background knowledge. Anderson (2007) noted that it is imperative not to exclude any child in a
classroom, so a differentiated learning environment must be provided by a teacher.
Differentiated instruction is based on the concept that the teacher is a facilitator of information, while
students take the primary role of expanding their knowledge by making sense of their ability to learn
differently (Robinson, Maldonado, & Whaley, 2014).

Wilson (2009) argued that differentiated instruction is the development of the simple to the complex
tasks, and a difference between individuals that are otherwise similar in certain respects such as age or
grade are given consideration. Additionally, Butt and Kusar (2010) stated that it is an approach to
planning, so that one lesson may be taught to the entire class while meeting the individual needs of
each child.

According to Tomlinson (2009), DI as a philosophy of teaching is based on the premise that students
learn best when their teachers accommodate the differences in their readiness levels, interests, and
learning profiles. It sees the learning experience as social and collaborative. The responsibility of what
happens in the classroom is first to teacher, but also to the learner (Subban, 2006). Additionally, DI
presents an effective means to address learners variance which avoids the pitfalls of the one-size-fits-all
curriculum. Stronge (2004) and Tomlinson (2004b) claimed that addressing student differences and
interest enhance their motivation to learn and make them to remain committed and to stay positive as
well.

Stravroula (2011) conducted a study in investigating the impact of DI in mixed ability classrooms and
found out that the implementation of differentiation had made a big step in facing the negative effects
of socio-economic factors on students achievement by managing diversity effectively, providing
learning opportunities for all students. The positive change in students achievement had shown that
differentiation can be considered as an effective teaching approach in mixed ability classrooms.

Furthermore, Servilio (cited by Robinson, 2014) studied the effectiveness of using DI to motivate
students to read and found out that an average of 83.4% of the students grades improved in reading,
12.5% remained the same, and 41% of the grades decreased.

As educator, the teacher-researcher was motivated to conduct this action research on the effectiveness
of DI in teaching English on Grade Four pupils for a week-long lesson. She also she wanted to know the
effect of this method on the academic performance of the pupils from results of the diagnostic and
achievement test.

II. Statement of the Problem

This study determined the effectiveness of conducting DI to Grade Four English class. Specifically, it
answered the following.

1. What is the performance of the two groups of respondents in the pretest?

1.1. Control group

1.2. Experimental group

2. What is the performance of the two groups of respondents in the posttest?

1.1. Control group

1.2. Experimental group

3. Is there a significant difference between the pretest scores of the control and experimental group?

4. Is there a significant difference between the posttest scores of the control and experimental group?

5. Is there a significant difference between the pretest and posttest scores of the control and
experimental group?

III. Hypotheses

The following null hypotheses were tested at 0.05 level of significance.

There is no significant difference between the pretest result of the experimental and control group.

There is no significant difference between the posttest result of the experimental and control group.

There is no significant difference between the pretest and posttest result of the experimental and
control group.

IV. Methodology
This action research utilized the experimental design since its main purpose was to determine the
effectiveness of DI and its possible effect to the mean gain scores on achievement of pupils on a one-
week lesson in Grade 4 English.

Two groups were taught the same lessons for one week. The control group was taught using the single
teaching with similar activities approach while the experimental group was taught using DI with three
sets of activities and three sets of evaluation and facilitation for the three groupings of pupils for the
one-week duration. Two regular sections were included in the study out of the five Grade 4 sections that
the school have.

Both groups were given the diagnostic test on Friday, September 25, 2015 to identify the classification of
pupils whether they belong to the above average group, average group, and below average group. The
achievement test was administered on Monday, October 5, 2015 the following week using parallel
teacher-made tests. The number of pupils was again identified to know whether there was change in
their classification. The results of the pretest and the posttest were compared to determine whether
using DI is effective or not.

Data Gathering

After seeking the approval from the principal, the teacher-researcher started the experiment for a week.

The scores of both the pretest and the posttest were taken and these data were coded, tallied, and were
statistically treated using the mean, standard deviation, and t-test of significant difference.

The mean and the standard deviation were used to determine the level of performance of control and
experimental groups and the classification of pupils, while the t-test was employed to determine the
significant difference of the mean scores on pretest and posttest of both groups.

V. Results and Discussions

The following are the results and the analysis done from the data.

A. Performance of the Two Groups of Respondents in the Diagnostic Test (Pretest)

The result of the pretest of the two class groups is presented in Table 1.
Diagnostic scores reveal that the control group has a mean of 11.76 (Sd=4.06) while the experimental
group reported a mean score of 12.07 (sd=3.56) which is a little higher.

Table 1

Pretest Results of the Control and the Experimental

Groups Prior to the Experiment

Groups N Mean Standard Deviation

Control Group 49 11.76 4.06

Experimental Group 51 12.07 3.56

The variance results of 4.06 and 3.56 are not that big which signify that both classes are heterogeneous;
meaning the pupils were of differing level of intelligence. This is indeed a good baseline since the results
suggest that the two sections included in the study are almost the same in the manner that the scores
are scattered. This means that the pupils grouping are mixed as to their abilities.

Tomlinson (2009) claimed that pupils differences should be addressed and the two groups became an
ideal grouping for which the experiment was conducted concerning DI.

B. Performance of the Two Groups of Respondents in the Achievement Test (Posttest)

Table 2

Pretest Results of the Control and the Experimental

Groups Prior to the Experiment

Groups N Mean Standard Deviation

Control Group 49 13.82 3.53

Experimental Group 51 16.45 2.34

The level of performance of the two groups in the posttest is presented in Table 2.

The experimental group of pupils who were exposed to DI obtains a mean score of 16.45 (Sd=2.34) while
the control group who were taught using the traditional method obtain a mean score of 13.82
(Sd=3.53).

The result showed that the posttest scores of the experimental groups taught with DI is remarkably
better as compared to those which were taught the traditional approach. Looking at the standard
deviation scores, it signifies that the variance of the experimental group was smaller than that of the
control group which suggest that the pupils intellectual ability were not scattered unlike in the pretest
result.

The finding is supported by Stravroulas (2011) study on DI where was able to prove that DI is effective
as it positively effects the diverse pupils characteristics. Stronges (2004) contention that DI can enhance
motivation and performance also supports the result.

C. Classification of Pupils in the Control and Experimental Group Based on the Pretest and Posttest
Scores Results

MORE FROM TEACHERPH

TEACHING & EDUCATION

DepEd Statement on the proposed House probe on DO 38

Oct 28, 2017

TEACHING & EDUCATION

DepEd Official Statement on the killing of Kian Loyd Delos Santos

Aug 19, 2017

TEACHING & EDUCATION

DepEd proposes 2018 budget for inclusive, nurturing learning environment

Aug 15, 2017

TEACHING & EDUCATION

DepEd pushes for signing of Safe Schools Declaration

Aug 15, 2017

Table 3

Classification of Pupils Before and After the Differentiated Instruction

Classification of Pupils Before and After the Differentiated Instruction

Table 3 presents the grouping of the pupils both in the control and in the experimental group As per
classification of students based on the mean and standard deviation results, a majority of the pupils
were on the average group for the control and experimental group prior to the treatment. However,
after the experiment, there was a big increase in number of pupils for the average group for the control
group and a larger number now belongs to the above average group. There were no pupils reported to
be in the below average group for both the control and the experimental group.

Data suggest that both approach in teaching increased the achievement but remarkable increase was
noted in the group taught with DI.

D. Classification of Pupils in the Control and Experimental Group Based on the Pretest and Posttest
Scores Results

Table 3.1

Classification of Pupils Before and After the Differentiated Instruction

Classification of Pupils Before and After the Differentiated Instruction 1

Table 3.1 shows that as per classification of students based on the mean and standard deviation results,
a majority of the pupils were on the average group for the control and experimental group prior to the
treatment of using DI to the experimental group.

It could be noticed that the percentages of classification are not far from each other. The idea presented
by Tomlinson (2009) that differences of pupils should be addressed by the teacher in the classroom is
good and according to Robinson, et.al, the teachers are the best facilitators of learning for pupils of
diverse background and abilities.
Table 3.2

Classification of Pupils After the Differentiated Instruction

Classification of Pupils After the Differentiated Instruction

Table 3.2 presents that after the experiment, there was a big increase in number of pupils for the
average group for the control group and a larger number now belongs to the above average group.
There were no pupils reported to be in the below average group for both the control and the
experimental group.

Data suggest that both approach in teaching increased the achievement but remarkable increase was
noted in the group taught with DI. This improvement in the classification or grouping of pupils in both
groups assumes the principle that both groups who are taught by the same teacher with the same
lesson could normally have a change in aptitude especially if the teacher has addressed the differences
as averred by Anderson (2007). However, the notable changes in the experimental group is surely
brought about by the DI exposed to them as supported by Stravroula (2011), Subban (2006), and
Stronge (2004). With the DI, the teachers approach to the teaching and the activities may have affected
very well the acquisition of the learning competencies as was mentioned by Wilson (2009). Specifically
however, in English, the contentions of Sevillano (cited by Robinson et al, 2014) directly supports the
result.

E. Results of Significant Difference Between the Pretest Scores of the Control and Experimental Group

Table 4

Significant Difference Between the Pretest Scores of the Control Group and Experimental Group

Significant Difference Between the Pretest Scores of the

Table 4 presents the significant difference in the pretest scores of the two groups.
The computed t-ratio of 0.8109 is lesser than the tabular of 1.9845 at 98 degrees of freedom. Hence the
hypothesis of no significant difference is accepted. There is no significant difference in the pretest scores
of the class groups.

This result is good since the baseline data prior to the use of DI suggest that the pupils have similar
intellectual abilities which will be very crucial for trying out the experiment in the teaching approach.
The data suggest that the groups are very ideal for the experiment since they possess similarities prior
to the experiment.

F. Significant Difference Between the Posttest Scores of the Control and Experimental Group

Table 5 presents the significant difference of the posttest scores between the control and the
experimental group.

Table 5

Results of Post-test the Control and Experimental Group

Results of Post-test the Control and Experimental Group

From the data, it is very clear that the difference in scores in the achievement favor the experimental
group which was taught using DI. Hence, it is safe to say that DI is effective based on the data generated.

G. Significant Difference Between the Pre-test and Post-test Scores of the Control and Experimental
Group

Table 6

Significant Difference Between the Pretest and Posttest Scores of the Control and Experimental Group

Significant Difference Between the Pretest and Posttest Scores 21

Table 6 presents the comparison of the pretest and post test scores of the control and the control
groups.

Clearly, for the control, there is no significant difference as signified by the computed t coefficient of
0.09 which is lesser than the tabular value of 1.9850 using 96 degrees of freedom. However, for the
control group, it is very obvious that the calculated t-ratio of 1.02 is greater than the tabular value of
1.9840. Hence, the hypothesis of no significant difference between the pretest and posttest scores for
the control group is accepted but is rejected for the experimental group.

The results are very significant since the group exposed without DI did not report difference in score
unlike in the group taught using DI which showed significant difference. This then makes it safe to
conclude that DI is effective in teaching English.

VI. Findings

The following are the findings of this action research.

The mean scores of both control (11.76, Sd=4.06) and the experimental (12.07, Sd=3.56) groups do not
significantly differ based on the t-coefficient result of 0.8109 which is lesser than the tabular of 1.9845
at 98 degrees of freedom.

The mean scores of the control (16.45, Sd=2.34) and the experimental (13.82, Sd=3.53) significantly
differ which favor the use of DI from the t-ratio of 3.423 is greater than the tabular value of 1.9845 at
0.05 level of significance using 98 degrees of freedom.

During the pretest, majority of the pupils are average (control group, 35 or 71.43% and 37 or 72.55%).
After the treatment, however, majority of the pupils in the control group became average (34 or
69.39%) and above average (35 or 68.63%).

There is no significant difference between the control groups pretest and posttest scores based on the
computed t coefficient of 0.09 which is lesser than the tabular value of 1.9850 using 96 degrees of
freedom but significant difference exists for the experimental group as signified by the calculated t-ratio
of 1.02 is greater than the tabular value of 1.9840 using 98 degrees of freedom.

VII. Conclusions

Based on the findings, the following are the conclusions.

The pretest scores of the control and the experimental group do not differ significantly.

The posttest scores of the groups significantly differ resulting to higher scores for the experimental
group.
No significant difference exists in the pretest and posttest scores of the control group, but significant
difference is noted for the experimental group.

There is an improvement in the groupings of pupils both in the control and experimental group but
significant improvement was shown for the pupils taught using DI.

Use of DI is effective considering the higher scores of the experimental group compared to the control
group.

VIII. Recommendation

Based on the above findings and conclusions, the following recommendations are suggested.

DI should be used in teaching pupils in English especially in heterogeneous classes because it improved
their classroom performance.

Teachers should be given in-service trainings on DI for them to gain more knowledge and clear
understanding of the approach.

Although tedious on the part of the teachers, they should be encouraged to prepare and use DI to
motivate pupils to participate in class discussions.

This action research should be continued.

IX. References:

Anderson, K. M. (2007). Tips for teaching: Differentiating instruction to include all students. Preventing
School Failure, 51(3), pp. 49-54. Retrieved from Education Research Complete database. (Accession No.
24944365)

Butt, M. & Kausar, S. (2010). A comparative study using differentiated instructions of public and private
school teachers. Malaysian Journal of Distance Education, 12(1), pp. 105-124. Retrieved from Education
Research Complete database. (Accession No. 78221508)

K to 12 Curriculum Guide, www.deped.gov.ph

Robinson, L., Maldonado, N., & Whaley, J. (2014). Perceptions about implementation of differentiated
instruction: Retrieved October 2015 http://mrseberhartsepicclass.weebly.com/

Stravroula, V. A, Leonidas., & Mary, K. (2011). investigating the impact of differentiated instruction in
mixed ability classrooms: Its impact on the quality and equity dimensions of education effectiveness.
Retrieved October 2015 http://www.icsei.net/icsei2011/Full%20Papers/0155.pdf
Stronge, J. (2004). Teacher effectiveness and student achievement : What do good teachers do? Paper
presented at the American Association of School Administrators Annual Conference and Exposition, San
Francisco, California.

Subban, P.(2006). Differentiated Instruction: A research basis. International Education Journal, 7(7), pp.
935-947.

Tomlinson, C. A., (2009) Intersections between differentiation and literacy instruction: Shared principles
worth sharing. The NERA Journal, 45(1), 28-33.Retrieved from Education Research Complete database.
(Accession No. 44765141)

Tomlinson, C. A. (2004a). Differentiation in diverse settings. School Administrator, 61(7), 28-33

Wilson, S. (2009). Differentiated instruction: How are design, essential questions in learning,
assessment, and instruction part of it? New England Reading Association Journal, 44(2), pp. 68-75.
Retrieved from Education Source database. (Accession No. 508028374)

Download Sample Action Research About Education (.docx) Available in our Facebook Group Files
Family, Individual, Community and School (FICS) Analysis of Students-At-Risk of Dropping Out (SARDO):
Groundwork for Villarica High School's Dropout Reduction Program (DORP) for School Year 2017-2018
Researcher: Desiree O. Labio

Abstract: This study entitled Family, Individual, Community, and School (FICS) Analysis of Students-at-
Risk of Dropping Out (SARDO): Groundwork for San Miguel National High Schools Drop-Out Reduction
Program (DORP) for School Year 20132014 was conducted to determine the factors that influenced the
students at risk of dropping out and assess if the interventions initiated by the school authorities have
been effective in addressing the needs and concerns of the students. The investigation utilized the
Family, Individual, Community, and School (FICS) Analysis to identify the SARDOs and for the evaluation
of the School-Initiated Intervention (SII), SWOT analysis was used.

34. Of the 128 identified SARDOs, majority are males across Grade/Year levels outnumbering the
females by a 1:5 ratio. The most number of male SARDOs are Grade VII while the most number of
female SARDOs are Grade VIII. Based on the FICS analysis, across all Grade/Year levels, 62.0 percent of
the cases are individual-related followed by family-related cases at 32.0 per cent then community-
related cases at 4.0 per cent and the least among these, school-related cases at 2.0 per cent. The most
frequent individual-related reason is lack of interest in ones studies while the least frequent reasons are
the presence of unhealthy recreational facilities near the school campus and lack of parental interest in
their childs education.
35. With respect to the school-initiated intervention utilized for each SARDO, the most frequent is
consultation with the parents and also, regular monitoring of the student. The SWOT analysis of the
School-Initiated Interventions (SII) implied that these are helpful and useful to the SARDO on a case-to-
case basis if the school authorities and the parents collaborate consistently toward the common goal of
helping and supporting him. Further fine tuning of the Guidance and Counseling program is
recommended as well as sourcing out financial support from potential benefactors for the enhancement
and upgrading of its activities and program