EFFECTIVENESS OF THE CLAVERIA APPROACH ON THE READING PROFICIENCY OF STRUGGLING GRADE 1 PUPILS

Authors

  • Melody Uba Apayao State College Author

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.64358/48ygws26

Keywords:

Keywords: Claveria Approach, reading proficiency, struggling readers, Grade 1 pupils, intervention

Abstract

This study examined the effectiveness of the Claveria Approach in improving the reading proficiency of struggling Grade 1 pupils. Specifically, it aimed to determine the level of reading proficiency of the learners before and after the implementation of the intervention, and to identify whether there is a significant improvement in their reading skills. A quasi-experimental research design was utilized in this study. The participants were selected Grade 1 pupils identified as struggling readers from Alem Elementary School. A teacher-made reading assessment tool was used to measure the learners’ reading proficiency in terms of letter recognition, phonemic awareness, word reading, and comprehension. Pre-test and post-test scores were gathered and analyzed using appropriate statistical methods. The Claveria Approach, which focuses on systematic and explicit instruction in phonics, blending, and decoding skills, was implemented over a specified period. Findings revealed that the learners’ reading proficiency significantly improved after the intervention. The results indicated that the Claveria Approach was effective in enhancing the basic reading skills of struggling readers. Based on the findings, it is recommended that teachers adopt the Claveria Approach as an intervention strategy for beginning readers. Further studies may also be conducted to explore its effectiveness in other grade levels and contexts.

References

Adams MJ. Beginning to read: Thinking and learning about print. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 1990.

Bandura A. Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall; 1986.

Bruner JS. Toward a theory of instruction. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; 1966.

Department of Education. Every Child a Reader Program (ECARP) Manual. Pasig City: Department of Education; 2018.

Ehri LC. Systematic phonics instruction helps students learn to read: Evidence from the National Reading Panel’s meta-analysis. Rev Educ Res. 2001;71(3):393-447.

Fountas IC, Pinnell GS. Guided reading: Responsive teaching across the grades. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann; 2017.

Gambrell LB. Seven rules of engagement: What’s most important to know about motivation to read. Read Teach. 2011;65(3):172-178.

Guthrie JT, Wigfield A. Engagement and motivation in reading. In: Kamil ML, Mosenthal PB, Pearson PD, Barr R, editors. Handbook of Reading Research. Vol. 3. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 2000. p. 403-422.

Lyon GR. Reading development, reading difficulties, and reading instruction. Educ Res. 1998;31(3):3-14.

National Reading Panel. Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction. Washington, DC: National Institute of Child Health and Human Development; 2000.

Piaget J. The origins of intelligence in children. New York: International Universities Press; 1952.

Rasinski TV. Repeated reading and reading fluency in beginning readers. Educ Leadersh. 2012;69(6):70-74.

Samuels SJ. The method of repeated readings. Read Teach. 1979;32(4):403-408.

Snow CE, Burns MS, Griffin P. Preventing reading difficulties in young children. Washington, DC: National Academy Press; 1998.

Southeast Asia Ministers of Education Organization. SEA-PLM 2019 Main Regional Report. Bangkok: SEAMEO Secretariat; 2020.

UNESCO. Global education monitoring report 2020: Inclusion and education – all means all. Paris: UNESCO Publishing; 2020.

Vygotsky LS. Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; 1978.

Downloads

Published

2026-03-31