READING PROFICIENCY OF GRADE ONE PUPILS IN THE SELECTED

SOUTH DISTRICT SCHOOLS, DIVISION OF GUIHULNGAN CITY

Melba T. Paciencia
Teacher III, Melanio T. Vergara Elementary School, Philippines
https://orcid.org/0009- 0003-0373-9177

Abstract:

This study assessed the reading proficiency of 141 Grade One pupils in the South District of Guihulngan City Division,
Negros Oriental, during the 2016-2017 school year to develop a proposed Remediation and Enrichment reading
program. The study employed a descriptive research design using the Early Grade Reading Assessment (EGRA) as
the data collection tool. Pupils were classified by age, sex, average family monthly income, and distance of school
from home. Analysis utilized Frequency Count, Percentage Scoring, Weighted Mean formula, and Z-test. Results
indicated significant correlations between reading proficiency and age, sex, and family income, while distance from
school negatively impacted most areas of reading proficiency except listening comprehension. This suggests a need
for targeted interventions to enhance reading skills, particularly in disadvantaged geographic contexts.

Keywords: Reading proficiency, Grade One pupils, Remediation and Enrichment program, Early Grade Reading
Assessment (EGRA)

Introduction:

Nature of the Problem

The nature of the problem revolves around the prevalence of non-readers among Grade One pupils in the South
District of Guihulngan City Division. Despite the Department of Education's efforts to improve literacy skills through
the implementation of programs like the Early Grade Reading Assessment (EGRA) and the Every Child a Reader
Program (ECARP), a significant number of pupils struggle with foundational reading skills. This issue is critical as
reading proficiency is fundamental for academic success in all subject areas. Early interventions are necessary to
address the gaps in reading ability among young learners, as deficiencies at this stage could have long-term effects
on their academic progress and overall learning outcomes. Understanding the reading proficiency level of these
pupils, as well as the factors influencing it, is vital for developing targeted enrichment and remediation programs.

Current State of Knowledge

Research on early literacy development highlights the importance of early reading proficiency as a predictor of future
academic success. The Department of Education has implemented several initiatives to address literacy gaps, such
as EGRA, which assesses key reading skills like orientation to print, letter sound knowledge, and reading
comprehension. Studies on early literacy interventions suggest that targeted reading programs, when implemented
at a young age, can significantly improve reading outcomes. However, challenges such as lack of parental
involvement, socioeconomic barriers, and limited access to learning resources continue to hinder efforts to achieve
universal reading proficiency. In the context of the Philippines, research shows that early literacy programs are
essential, yet the effectiveness of these interventions can vary depending on the implementation quality and support
from teachers and school administrators.

Theoretical Underpinnings

This study is anchored on several foundational theories of reading, including Schema Theory, Mental Model Theory,
and Proposition Theory (Gunning, 1996). Schema Theory emphasizes the interaction between a reader's prior
knowledge and the new information they encounter in texts. According to this theory, comprehension occurs when
readers relate new content to their existing knowledge structures or schemas. For Grade One pupils, this means that
their ability to understand new reading materials depends on the strength and extent of their previous reading
experiences.

Objectives

39
This study assesses the reading proficiency level of the Grade One Pupils in the South District of Guihulngan City
Division, School Year 2016 – 2017 as basis in formulating a proposed Enrichment reading program. It specifically
seeks to answer in terms of the following variables:
1. What is the profile of the pupils in terms of: a. age; b. sex; c. average monthly family income; and d. distance of
home from school 2. What is the level of the reading proficiency of Grade One Pupils according to the following areas?
a. orientation to print; b. letter name knowledge; c. letter sound knowledge; d.initial sound identification; e. familiar
word reading; f. invented word decoding; g. oral passage reading; h. reading comprehension; i. listening
comprehension; and j. Dictation 3. What is the level of reading proficiency of the Grade One pupils when grouped
according the aforementioned variables? 4. Is there significant difference in the level of reading proficiency of Grade
One pupils when grouped and compared according to the afformentioned variables? 5. Based on the results of the
study, what are remedial and enrichment reading program could be formulated?

Methodology:

The study's methodology-related components, such as the research design, respondents, research instrument, data
collection process, and ethical issues, are described in this part.

Research Design

This study employed a descriptive research design to examine the reading proficiency levels of Grade One pupils in
the South District of Guihulngan City Division for the School Year 2016–2017. The descriptive approach was chosen
because it allows for a detailed examination of the present conditions and relationships among variables (Bueno,
2016). Specifically, this study used the Early Grade Reading Assessment (EGRA) as the primary tool for measuring
pupils' reading proficiency. Data were gathered, tabulated, analyzed, and interpreted to determine the pupils' reading
abilities and to inform the development of a proposed enrichment reading program.

Respondents

The respondents of this study were Grade One pupils from five selected elementary schools in the South District of
Guihulngan City Division. The schools were purposively selected to ensure a manageable sample size. The total
population of respondents was 141 pupils, distributed across the five schools. The purposive sampling technique was
used to select participants who were appropriate for the objectives of the study, given that the sample size was
manageable, and the focus was on specific characteristics related to reading proficiency.

Procedures

Data Collection

Following the distribution of the EGRA tool, the researcher personally retrieved the completed assessments to ensure
data completeness and accuracy. The process was done efficiently to avoid disruptions to the pupils' regular school
activities. All data were collected within a specified timeframe to facilitate prompt analysis.

Data Analysis and Statistical Treatment

The study used descriptive statistics, including frequency counts and percentage scoring, to describe the respondents'
demographic profiles and performance on each EGRA component. The weighted mean was used to determine the
pupils' overall reading proficiency level, classified into three categories: Independent (83–100%), Instructional (50–
82%), and Frustration (Below 50%). A Z-test was employed to analyze significant differences in reading proficiency
based on demographic factors.

Ethical Considerations

The study ensured ethical compliance by obtaining informed consent from the school head, teachers, and parents.
Confidentiality was maintained by anonymizing respondent identities, and the study ensured that no harm or
discomfort was caused during the assessments. All participants were treated with respect, and ample time was given
to complete the tests.

Results and Discussion:

This section presents the data gathered that were further treated, presented, analyzed, and interpreted to
carry out the objectives of this study. All these are made possible by following certain appropriate procedures to give
the exact data and solution to each specific problem.

40
Table 1. Profile of the Respondents
Variable Category Frequency Percentage
Younger (below 8years) 45 31.9
Older (8 years old and
Age 96 68.1
above)
Total 141 100.0
Sex Male 77 54.6
Female 64 45.4
Total 141 100.0
Low (below 10,000) 78 55.3
Average Monthly Family
High (10,000 and above) 63 44.7
Income
Total 141 100.0
Near (below 5 kilometers) 81 57.4
Distance of School from Far (5 kilometers and
60 42.6
Home above)
Total 141 100.0
A total of 141 pupils were surveyed for this study on the level of grade 1 pupils in the South District of
Guihulngan Division, Guihulngan City, Negros Oriental, School Year 2016-2017 as basis for remediation and
enrichment reading program. Four (4) variables were used in determining the profile of the respondents namely:
Age, sex, Average Monthly Family and Distance of School from Home. When grouped according to age, 45 Grade
One pupil or 31.9% belong to the younger group 6 years and below, while 96 or 68.1% belong to the older 7 years
old and above. In terms of sex of the pupils, 77 or 54.6% are male while 64 or 45.4% are female. In terms of
Average Monthly Family Income 78 or 55.3% are lower 8,000 and below while 63. or 44.7% are higher 9,000 and
above. In terms of Distance of School from Home 81 or 57.4% near 2kms and below while 60 0r 42.6% far 3 kms.
and above.

Table 1 shows that the profile of the respondents in terms of the variables of age, sex, average monthly
family income and distance of school from home. With regards to age 45 respondents or 31.9% belong to the younger
group (6 years old and below) and 96 or 68.1% of the Grade One pupils belong to the older group (7 years old and
above). This means that there were more respondents from the older group participating in the study.

As to sex, Grade One pupils were group into “male” and “female”. The table reveals that bigger number is
represented by male, which is 77 or 54.6%, while there are only 64 Grade One pupil’s female or 45.6 %. This means
that there are more male respondents participated in this study. With regards to average monthly family income, all
those who has a family monthly income with 9,000 pesos above were considered with “higher monthly famil y
income”, while those with a monthly income of 8, 000 pesos was considered “lower monthly family income”. The
table reveals that 78 or 55.3% has a “higher monthly income”, while those who has 63 or 44.7% belongs as “lower
monthly family income”. Finally, as to the distance to school from home, 81 or 57.4% of Grade one pupils belongs
to the “near school” (2 kms and below) and 60 or 42.6% belongs to the “far school” (3 kms and above).

Table 2. Level of the Reading Proficiency of Grade One Pupils

Areas Mean Interpretation
Orientation to Print 82.09 Instructional
Letter Name Knowledge 85.82 Independent
Letter Sound Knowledge 85.46 Independent
Initial Sound Identification 84.04 Independent
Familiar Word Reading 81.21 Instructional
Inverted Word Decoding 82.27 Instructional
Oral Passage Reading 85.56 Independent
Reading Comprehension 82.96 Instructional
Listening Comprehension 85.25 Independent
Dictation 64.51 Instructional
Overall Mean 82.08 Instructional

The Level of the Reading Proficiency of Grade One pupils obtained an overall mean score of 82.08,
interpreted as “Instructional”. When items were considered individually, there are five (5) areas that are interpreted
as “Independent”. (1) “Letter Name Knowledge” with a mean score of 85.82. (2) “Oral Passage Reading” with a mean
score of 85.56. (3) “Letter Sound Knowledge”, with a mean score of 85.46. (4) “Listening Comprehension” with a
mean score of 85.25. (5) “Initial Sound Identification” with a mean score of 84.04. All the rest of the areas obtained
instructional mean scores. The overall mean score is interpreted as “Instructional”.

41
Table 3. Level of the Reading Proficiency of Grade One Pupils According to Age
The level of the reading proficiency of Grade One pupils according to age, younger pupils yielded an overall
Younger Older
Areas
Mean Interpretation Mean Interpretation
Orientation to Print 83.07 Independent 81.64 Instructional
Letter Name Knowledge 80.00 Instructional 88.54 Independent
Letter Sound Knowledge 80.00 Instructional 88.02 Independent
Initial Sound Identification 82.22 Instructional 84.90 Independent
Familiar Word Reading 77.78 Instructional 82.81 Instructional
Inverted Word Decoding 84.44 Independent 81.25 Instructional
Oral Passage Reading 86.67 Independent 85.04 Independent
Reading Comprehension 81.89 Instructional 83.46 Independent
Listening Comprehension 87.11 Independent 84.38 Independent
Dictation 62.20 Instructional 65.59 Instructional
Overall Mean 80.56 Instructional 82.79 Instructional
mean score of 80.56, interpreted as “Instructional”, while older pupils obtained overall mean score of 82.79,
interpreted as “Instructional.” When items were taken individually in the category of younger, items number 1, 6, 7
& 8 are interpreted as “Independent”. Such as follows, “listening Comprehension” with the highest mean score of
87.11, “Oral Passage” with a mean score of 86.67, “Inverted Word Decoding” with the mean score of 84.44, and
“Orientation To Print” with the mean score of 83.07. All the rest of items were interpreted as “Instructional”. On the
other hand, in older category there were 6 areas, interpreted as “Independent” such items as numbered 2, 3, 4, 6,
7 & 8, obtained the mean scores of 88.54, 88.02, 85.04, 84.90, 84.28 & 83.46. The rest of the items were interpreted
as “Instructional”. This reveals, that the Grade One younger and older pupils has the same overall interpretation as
“Instructional”.

Table 4. Level of the Reading Proficiency of Grade One Pupils According to Sex
Male Female
Areas
Mean Interpretation Mean Interpretation
Orientation to Print 81.88 Instructional 82.34 Instructional
Letter Name Knowledge 86.36 Independent 85.16 Independent
Letter Sound Knowledge 86.36 Independent 84.38 Independent
Initial Sound Identification 84.42 Independent 83.59 Independent
Familiar Word Reading 81.17 Instructional 81.25 Instructional
Inverted Word Decoding 80.52 Instructional 84.38 Independent
Oral Passage Reading 83.97 Independent 87.47 Independent
Reading Comprehension 81.58 Instructional 84.61 Independent
Listening Comprehension 82.60 Instructional 88.44 Independent
Dictation 62.73 Instructional 66.66 Instructional
Overall Mean 81.18 Instructional 83.16 Independent
The level of the reading proficiency of Grade One pupils according to sex. Male category has three items
interpreted as “Independent”, as follows; “Letter Knowledge”, “Sound Knowledge” & “Initial Sound Identification”,
obtained the overall mean score of 81.18 and interpreted as “Instructional”. While the female category, yielded the
overall mean score of 83.16, interpreted as “Independent”. This implies that the Grade One pupils, female shows the
greater proficiency in reading than male.

Table 5. Level of the Reading Proficiency of Grade One Pupils According to Average Monthly Income
Lower Higher
Areas
Mean Interpretation Mean Interpretation
Orientation to Print 71.88 Instructional 94.73 Independent
Letter Name Knowledge 81.41 Instructional 91.27 Independent
Letter Sound Knowledge 80.13 Instructional 92.06 Independent
Initial Sound Identification 81.41 Instructional 87.30 Independent
Familiar Word Reading 75.00 Instructional 88.89 Independent
Inverted Word Decoding 74.36 Instructional 92.06 Independent
Oral Passage Reading 78.41 Instructional 94.41 Independent
Reading Comprehension 75.64 Instructional 92.02 Independent
Listening Comprehension 77.44 Instructional 94.92 Independent
Dictation 53.77 Instructional 77.81 Independent
Overall Mean 75.10 Instructional 90.71 Independent
Table 5 shows, that the result of the reading proficiency of Grade One pupils according to lower monthly
income. Item numbers 2 and 4, have the same highest mean score of 81.41 and interpreted as “Instructional”, while
the lowest average monthly income obtained a mean score of 53.77, interpreted as “Instructional”. In the higher

42
monthly income, the highest mean score is 94.92 under “Listening Comprehension “and interpreted as
“Independent”, while the Lowest mean score is 77.81 under “Dictation” and interpreted as “Independent”. This
implies that, the lower monthly income of the family of Grade One pupils cannot be a factor for lower reading
proficiency.

Table 6. Level of the Reading Proficiency of Grade One Pupils According to Distance of School From Home

Near Far
Areas
Mean Interpretation Mean Interpretation
Orientation to Print 82.38 Instructional 81.70 Instructional
Letter Name Knowledge 89.51 Independent 80.83 Instructional
Sound Knowledge 93.83 Independent 74.17 Instructional
Initial Sound Identification 88.89 Independent 77.50 Instructional
Familiar Word Reading 84.57 Independent 76.67 Instructional
Inverted Word Decoding 87.65 Independent 75.00 Instructional
Oral Passage Reading 86.19 Independent 84.72 Independent
Reading Comprehension 84.15 Independent 81.35 Instructional
Listening Comprehension 84.94 Independent 85.67 Independent
Dictation 65.79 Instructional 62.78 Instructional
Overall Mean 84.84 Independent 78.35 Instructional
Table 6 shows, that the distance of school from home of the near in school category, only one of the areas
is interpreted as “Instructional” with the mean score of 82.38 and the overall mean score obtained 84.84 ,while in
the category of far to school from home, there were two areas interpreted as “Independent” the “Listening
Comprehension” with the mean score of 85.67 and “Oral Passage Reading” with the mean score of 84.72. This
implies, that there is a greater chance for Grade One pupils with the near to school distance to improve their reading
skills compared to those who live far from school.

Table 7. Difference in the Level of Reading Proficiency of Grade One Pupils in Terms of Orientation to
Print According to Variables
Sig
Variable Category Mean Z p-value Interpretation
level
Younger 83.07
Age .311 .756 Not Significant
Older 81.64
Male 81.88
Sex -.107 .915 Not Significant
Female 82.34
Average Family Lower 71.88 .05
-5.93 .000 Significant
Monthly Income Higher 94.73
Distance of Near 82.38
School from .157 .875 Not Significant
Far 81.70
Home
As shown in the given table 7, in the level of reading proficiency of Grade One pupils in terms of orientation
to print according to age, results showed that there is “No significant” difference since the p-value .756, which is
greater than the sigma p-value of .05. Thus, the null hypothesis which states that “No significant” difference in the
extent of level of reading proficiency of Grade One pupils in terms of orientation to print according to age is
“accepted”.
In addition to this, the result of variable according to sex showed that “No significant” difference since the
p-value .915 which is greater than the sigma p-value of .05. Thus, the null hypothesis which states, there is “No
significant” difference in the extent of level of reading proficiency of Grade One pupils in terms of orientation to print
according to sex is “accepted”.
Also, the result of variable according to distance of school from home showed that there is “No significant”
difference since the p-value .875, which is greater than the sigma p value of .05. Thus, the null hypothesis which
states, there is “No significant” difference in the extent of level of reading proficiency of Grade One pupils in terms
of orientation to print according to distance of school from home is “accepted”.
On table 8, the statistical results revealed that there is a significant difference between those lower and
higher average family monthly income. It states that there is a “significant” difference since the p-value .593, which
is lesser than the sigma value of .05. Thus, the null hypothesis states that there is a “Significant difference in the
extent of level of reading proficiency of Grade One pupils in terms of orientation to print according to average family
monthly income” is “rejected”.

43
 It also revealed that the variable distance of school from home matters on reading proficiency of Grade
One pupils in terms of “orientation to print”, compared to lower family income. It shows that the monthly income
varies or differs whether higher or lower.
This implies that the lower family monthly income would affect the reading proficiency of Grade One pupils.
There is a need to educate the parents with regards to maximizing the monthly family income by looking for other
means or augmentation of livelihood.

Table 8. Difference in the Level of Reading Proficiency of Grade One Pupils in Terms of Letter Name
Knowledge According to Variables
Sig
Variable Category Mean Z p-value Interpretation
level
Younger 80.00
Age -1.81 .072 Not Significant
Older 88.54
Male 86.36
Sex .271 .787 Not Significant
Female 85.16
.05
Average Family Lower 81.41
-2.25 .026 Significant
Monthly Income Higher 91.27
Distance of School from Near 89.51
1.96 .050 Significant
Home Far 80.83
Table 8 shows in the level of reading proficiency of Grade One pupils in terms of letter name knowledge as
to age. There is “No significant” difference since the p-value is -1.81, which is greater than the sigma value of .05.
Thus, the null hypothesis states that there is “No significant” difference in the extent of level of reading proficiency
of Grade One pupils in terms of letter name knowledge according to age is “accepted”.
In addition to this, the result of variable according to sex showed that there is “No significant” difference
since the p-value is .787, which is greater than the sigma p-value of .05. Thus, the null hypothesis which states that
there is “No significant” difference in the extent of level of reading proficiency of Grade One pupils in terms of
orientation to print according to sex is “accepted”.
On Table 7, the statistical results revealed that there is a “Significant” difference between those lower and
higher average family monthly income. It showed that the p-value -2.25, is lesser than the sigma p-value of .05.
Thus, the null hypothesis states that there is a” significant” difference in the extent of level of reading proficiency of
Grade One pupils in terms of orientation to print according to average family monthly income is “rejected”.
Also, the result of variable according to distance of school from home showed that there is a “significant”
difference since the p-value .875, is lesser than the sigma value of .05, thus, the null hypothesis which states that
there is “Significant difference” is “rejected”.
It also revealed that the variable near distance to school from home matters on reading proficiency of Grade
One pupils in terms of letter name knowledge, compared to far distance to school from home. It showed that the
there is a variation of significance of the distances, if it is near or far. There is a need for the parents of the
respondents to be aware of this variable to make them sensitive to time management.

Table 9. Difference in the Level of Reading Proficiency of Grade One Pupils in Terms of Letter Sound
Knowledge According to Variables
Sig
Variable Category Mean Z p-value Interpretation
level
Younger 80.00
Age -1.69 .093 Not Significant
Older 88.02
Male 86.36
Sex .444 .658 Not Significant
Female 84.38
.05
Average Family Monthly Lower 80.13
-2.73 .007 Significant
Income Higher 92.06
Distance of School from Near 93.83
4.68 .000 Significant
Home Far 74.17
Table 9 shows the level of reading proficiency of Grade One pupils in terms of letter sound knowledge
compared to age. The results showed that there is “No significant” difference since the p-value -1.69, is greater than
the sigma value of .05. Thus, the null hypothesis states that there is “No significant” difference in the extent of level
of reading proficiency of Grade One pupils in terms of letter sound knowledge according to age is “accepted”.
In addition to this, the result of variable according to sex showed that there is “No significant” difference
since the p-value .444, is greater than the sigma value of .05. Thus, the null hypothesis states that there
is “No significant” difference in the extent of level of reading proficiency of Grade One pupils in terms of letter sound
knowledge according to sex” is “accepted”.
Furthermore, Table 9 revealed that there is a “Significant” difference between those lower and higher
average family monthly income. It shows that there is “significant” difference since the p-value -2.73, is lesser than

44
the sigma value of .007. Thus, the null hypothesis which states that “there is a significant difference in the extent of
level of reading proficiency of Grade One pupils in terms of letter sound knowledge according to average family
monthly income” is “rejected”.
Also, the result of variable according to distance of school from home showed that “significant” difference
since the p-value -468, is lesser than the sigma value of .05. Thus, the null hypothesis states that there is a
“Significant” difference is “rejected”.
It also revealed that the variable higher average family monthly income matters on reading proficiency of
Grade One pupils in terms of letter sound knowledge, compared to lower family income. It shows that the monthly
income varies or differs, whether higher or lower. In addition, the variable distance of school from home matters.
This implies that the nearer the distance of a school from home is more advantageous to pupils with regards to
reading proficiency.

Table 10. Difference in the Level of Reading Proficiency of Grade One Pupils in Terms of Initial Sound
Identification According to Variables
Sig
Variable Category Mean Z p-value Interpretation
level
Younger 82.22
Age -.511 .610 Not Significant
Older 84.90
Male 84.42
Sex .168 .867 Not Significant
Female 83.59
.05
Average Family Monthly Lower 81.41
-1.21 .229 Not Significant
Income Higher 87.30
Distance of School from Near 88.89
2.35 .020 Significant
Home Far 77.50
Table 10 shows the level of reading proficiency of Grade One pupils in terms of initial sound identification
according to age. The results showed that there is “No significant” difference since the p-value -.511, which is greater
than the sigma value of .05. Thus, the null hypothesis states that there is “No significant” difference in the extent of
level of reading proficiency of Grade One pupils in terms of initial sound identification according to age is “accepted”.
In addition to this, the result of variable according to sex showed that there is “No significant” difference
since the p-value .168, is greater than the sigma value of .05. Thus, the null hypothesis states that there is “No
significant” difference in the extent of level of reading proficiency of Grade One pupils in terms of initial sound
identification according to sex is “accepted”.
On the same table, the statistical results revealed that there is “No significant” difference since the p-value
.229, is greater than the sigma value of .05. Thus, the null hypothesis states that “There is no significant difference
in the extent of level of reading proficiency of Grade One pupils in terms of initial sound identification according to
average family monthly income” is “accepted”.
Also, the result of variable according to distance of school from home showed that there is a “significant”
difference since the p-value 2.35, which is lesser than the sigma value of .05. Thus, the null hypothesis which states
that there is “Significant” difference is “rejected”. It also revealed that the variable near distance to school from
home matters on reading proficiency of Grade One pupils in terms of initial sound identification as compared to far
distance. This implies that Grade One pupils who live a near distance have the advantage of enhancing their reading
skills under the area of initial sound identification.

Table 11. Difference in the Level of Reading Proficiency of Grade One Pupils in Terms of Familiar Word
Reading According to Variables
Sig
Variable Category Mean Z p-value Interpretation
level
Younger 77.78
Age -.982 .328 Not Significant
Older 82.81
Male 81.17
Sex -.017 .987 Not Significant
Female 81.25
.05
Average Family Monthly Lower 75.00
-2.97 .004 Significant
Income Higher 88.89
Distance of School from Near 84.57
1.65 .102 Not Significant
Home Far 76.67
Table 11 shows the level of reading proficiency of Grade One pupils in terms of familiar word reading
according to age. The results showed that there is “No Significant” difference since the p-value .328, is greater than
the sigma value of .05. Thus, the null hypothesis which states the there is “No significant” difference in the extent of
level of reading proficiency of Grade One pupils in terms of familiar word reading according to age is “accepted”.
In addition to this, the result of variable according to sex showed that there is “No significant” difference
since the p-value is .987 is greater than the sigma p-value of .05. Thus, the null hypothesis states that there is “No

45
significant” difference in the level of reading proficiency of Grade One pupils in terms of familiar word reading
according to sex is “accepted”.
On the other hand, on table 11 the statistical results revealed that there is “No significant difference” since
the p-value is .987 is greater than the sigma p-value of .05. Thus, the null hypothesis states that there is no
“significant” difference in the level of reading proficiency of Grade One pupils in terms of familiar word reading
according to sex is accepted.
Also, the result according to average family income showed that there is “significant” difference since the
p-value -297 is lesser than the sigma p- value of .05. Thus, the null hypothesis which states that there is “significant”
is “rejected”. It also revealed that the variable near distance of school from home on reading proficiency of grade
one pupils in familiar word reading according to distance of school from home showed advantage to Grade One pupils.
This implies that parents will be more sensitive with regards to the distance of their children to school
affecting their reading performance.

Table 12. Difference in the Level of Reading Proficiency of Grade One Pupils in Terms of Inverted Word
Decoding According to Variables
Sig
Variable Category Mean Z p-value Interpretation
level
Younger 84.44
Age .460 .646 Not Significant
Older 81.25
Male 80.52
Sex -.593 .554 Not Significant
Female 84.38
.05
Average Family Monthly Lower 74.36
-2.79 .006 Significant
Income Higher 92.06
Distance of School from Near 87.65
1.96 .050 Significant
Home Far 75.00
Table 12 shows the area of level of reading proficiency of Grade One pupils in terms of inverted word
decoding according to age. The results showed that there is “No significant” difference since the p-value .646, is
greater than the sigma value of .05. Thus, the null hypothesis states that there is “No significant” difference in the
extent of level of reading proficiency of Grade One pupils in terms of inverted word decoding according to sex is
“accepted”.
In addition, the result of variable to age showed that there is “No significant” difference since the p-value.646
is greater than the sigma p-value is .05. Thus, the null hypothesis which states that there is “No significant” difference
in the level of reading proficiency of Grade One pupils in terms of inverted word decoding according to sex is
“accepted”.
On the other hand, the statistical results revealed that there is no significant difference since the p-value
.554, is greater than the sigma p-value of .05. The null hypothesis which states there is “No significant” difference
in the level of reading proficiency of Grade One pupils in terms of inverted word decoding is “accepted”.
Moreover, the results in the average family income states that there is” Significant” difference since the p-
value -.297 which lesser than the sigma p-value of .05. The null hypothesis which states that there is “Significant”
difference in the level of grade one pupils in terms of inverted word decoding is “rejected”.
Lastly, the results revealed that the distance of school from home which states “significant difference in the
level of Grade One pupils since the p-value -.196 is lesser than the sigma value of .05. The null hypothesis which
states that there is a “Significant” difference in the level of Grade One pupils in terms of inverted word decoding is
“rejected”.
This implies that there is a need for the parents to be made aware of the effect of the distance to their
pupils’ reading performance and find ways and means to address the need.

Table 13. Difference in the Level of Reading Proficiency of Grade One Pupils in Terms of Oral Passage
Reading According to Variables
Sig
Variable Category Mean Z p-value Interpretation
level
Younger 86.67
Age .413 .680 Not Significant
Older 85.04
Male 83.79
Sex -.951 .343 Not Significant
Female 87.47
.05
Average Family Lower 78.41
-4.66 .000 Significant
Monthly Income Higher 94.41
Distance of School Near 86.19
.396 .693 Not Significant
from Home Far 84.72
Table 13 reflects the level of reading proficiency of Grade One pupils in terms of oral passage reading
according to age. The result showed that there is “No significant” difference since the p-value is .683 is greater than
the sigma value .05. Thus, the null hypothesis which states that there is “No significant” difference in the level of
Grade One pupils in terms of age is “Accepted.”

46
 In addition to this, the result revealed according to sex showed that there is “No significant” difference since
the p-value .343 which is greater than the sigma value of .05. The null hypothesis which states there is “No
significant” difference in the level of reading proficiency of Grade One pupils when it terms of sex is “Accepted”.
The results revealed the level of reading proficiency according to average family income showed that there
is “significant” difference since the p-value is -.496 is lesser than the sigma value of .05. The null hypothesis which
states there is “significant” difference in the level of reading proficiency of Grade One pupils when it terms of average
family monthly income is “rejected”.
Finally, the results revealed that the level of reading proficiency according to the distance of school from
home reflected that there is “Significant” difference since the p-value .693, which is greater than the
sigma value of .05. The null hypothesis which state “Significant” difference in the level of reading proficiency
according to distance of school from home is “accepted”. It implies that the parents would find ways and means to
respond to this need after they are made aware of it.

Table 14. Difference in the Level of Reading Proficiency of Grade One Pupils in Terms of Reading
Comprehension According to Variables
Sig
Variables Category Mean Z p-value Interpretation
level
Younger 81.89
Age -.374 .709 Not Significant
Older 83.46
Male 81.58
Sex -.770 .442 Not Significant
Female 84.61
.05
Average Family Lower 75.64
-4.44 .000 Significant
Monthly Income Higher 92.02
Distance of School from Near 84.15
.707 .481 Not Significant
Home Far 81.35
Table 14 presents the level of reading proficiency of Grade One pupils in terms of reading comprehension
across various factors. The results show no significant difference based on age, with a p-value of .709, greater than
the sigma value of .05. This supports the acceptance of the null hypothesis, indicating that age does not significantly
affect the pupils' reading comprehension proficiency. Likewise, no significant difference is observed based on sex,
with a p-value of .442, also exceeding the .05 threshold, leading to the acceptance of the null hypothesis that sex
does not influence reading comprehension proficiency.
However, when examining the variable of average family monthly income, a significant difference is noted,
as the p-value of .444 is less than the sigma value of .05. This results in the rejection of the null hypothesis,
suggesting that family income levels do impact reading comprehension proficiency. Lastly, the distance of the school
from home does not show a significant effect on reading comprehension, as reflected by a p-value of .481, which is
greater than .05. Consequently, the null hypothesis is accepted, implying that the distance between home and school
does not significantly affect pupils' reading comprehension abilities.

Table 15. Difference in the Level of Reading Proficiency of Grade One Pupils in Terms of Listening
Comprehension According to Variables
Sig
Variable Category Mean Z p-value Interpretation
level
Younger 87.11
Age .657 .512 Not Significant
Older 84.38
Male 82.60
Sex -1.51 .134 Not Significant
Female 88.44
.05
Average Family Monthly Lower 77.44
-4.83 .000 Significant
Income Higher 94.92
Distance of School from Near 84.94
-.185 .853 Not Significant
Home Far 85.67
Based on Table 15, the analysis of Grade One pupils' reading proficiency in terms of listening comprehension
reveals varying outcomes based on different variables. Firstly, the study finds no significant difference in reading
proficiency related to age (p = .512, greater than .05), supporting the acceptance of the null hypothesis that age
does not significantly affect listening comprehension skills. Similarly, there is no significant difference based on sex
(p = 1.34, greater than .05), also leading to the acceptance of the null hypothesis in this regard.
However, significant differences emerge when considering average family income (p = .483, less than .05).
This rejects the null hypothesis, indicating that family income levels significantly impact reading proficiency in
listening comprehension among Grade One pupils. Conversely, the distance of the school from home shows no
significant difference (p = .853, greater than .05), leading to the acceptance of the null hypothesis. This suggests
that the proximity of the school to home does not hinder students' listening comprehension abilities. These findings
underscore the influence of socioeconomic factors like family income on early literacy skills, highlighting potential
areas for targeted support and intervention in educational settings.

47
Table 16. Difference in the Level of Reading Proficiency of Grade One Pupils in Terms of Dictation
According to Variables
Sig
Variable Category Mean Z p-value Interpretation
level
Younger 62.20
Age -.556 .499 Not Significant
Older 65.59
Male 62.73
Sex -.688 .493 Not Significant
Female 66.66
.05
Average Family Lower 53.77
-4.49 .000 Significant
Monthly Income Higher 77.81
Distance of School Near 65.79
.522 .602 Not Significant
from Home Far 62.78
Table 16 presents the level of reading proficiency of Grade One pupils in terms of dictation according to
various factors. The results indicate that there is no significant difference in dictation proficiency based on age, with
a p-value of .499, which is greater than the sigma value of .05. Consequently, the null hypothesis, which states that
age does not significantly affect reading proficiency in dictation, is accepted. Similarly, there is no significant
difference according to sex, as the p-value of .449 also exceeds the .05 threshold, leading to the acceptance of the
null hypothesis that sex does not influence dictation proficiency.
However, a significant difference is observed when analyzing average family income, as the p-value of .449
is less than the sigma value of .05. This leads to the rejection of the null hypothesis, suggesting that family income
does play a role in dictation proficiency. On the other hand, the distance of the school from home does not show a
significant effect, with a p-value of .602, greater than .05, resulting in the acceptance of the null hypothesis. Despite
this, the findings imply that the distance between home and school may still indirectly affect the pupils' reading
proficiency, warranting the need for parental awareness and potential intervention.

Conclusion:
Among all areas considered there is a significant difference in the reading proficiency level of the Grade One
pupils. Results showed that only distance from home to school showed a significant effect in all areas except listening
comprehension. The farther the distance of the pupils from home to school the greater is the effect because children
living far from school have to wake up early and come home late so that they don’t have time to read their books
and study their lessons.

Acknowledgment

The author would like to express her massive appreciation to the people who undoubtedly supported for the
completion of her work. Without their contribution, this would not have been possible. To the following persons whom
the author wishes her heartfelt and profound gratitude: To Dr. Emiliano Sama, Campus Director of STI-West Negros
University, for his undying support to achieve his purpose as much as possible; To Mr. Rolan Antiñero for his
inspirational advice, undying support and motivation in believing the author to reach her ambition in life; To Dr.
Mario A. Dejito for his kindness in editing the thesis writing to make it successful; To her beloved husband, for his
continued support and motivation. If it were not for his confidence to the author, she would not have the conviction
to begin her journey in pursuit of a masters degree; To
her son and ever supportive parents for their moral support extended to her to achieve such goal and ambition;
Above all, to the Almighty God for giving her the courage, determination, strengths and hope to make this study a
successful one.

References:

Brown, L. M. (2017). Reading Comprehension Instruction in Elementary Schools: A Synthesis of Research.

Campbell, l.Campbell,C. , & Dickinson,D. (1999),Teaching and Learning through the multiple intelligence (Second
Edition) Needham Heights: Allyn and Bacon
Chavez,Gemma Baco (2010). Oral Reading in English of Grade Two Pupils in Matuog Elementary school,Tayasan,
Negros Oriental, as measured by the Phil-IRI (Philippine Informal Reading Inventory) during the School Year
2010-2011. Unpublished Master’s Thesis.Cebu Technological University, Moalboal Campus.
Davis B.Sumara,D., & Luce-Kapler,R. (2000).Engaging Minds: Learning and Teaching in a Complex World.Mahwah:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates,Publishers.
Heilman,et al. (1993).Principles and Practices of Teaching Reading Ohio, Charles Merill Publishing Co.
Johnson, S. A. (2019). Developing Reading Fluency in Young Children: A Comprehensive Review of Best Practices.
Mc Adamis,S. (2001). Teachers Tailor Their Instruction to Meet a Variety of Student Needs.Journal of Staff
Development, 22 (2),1-5.
Mclirath,D.A. , and Huitti,W., G. (1995). The Teaching-Learning Process: A Discussion of models.Valdosta State
University.
Parker, D. H. (1997) Reading Laboratory 2.A Student Record Book (Silver ed.) Quezon City: Abiva Publishing House.
Regional Memorandum Number 427, Series of 2013.

48
Republic Act 10533 otherwise known as “An act Engancing the Philippine Basic Education System by strengthening
its Curriculum and Increasing the Number of Years for Basic Education,Appropriating Funds.
Rueda,R. Goldenberg,C., and Gallimore, R. (1992).Rating Instructional Conversations: A guide on national Centre
for Research on Cultural Diversity and Second Language Learning.Unpublished Dessertation, Marywood
University.
Sabordino, Elna B. (2002). English Teachers’ Instructional Practices and their Students’ Preferences.Cebu Normal
Univerity,Cebu City.
Smith, J. R. (2018). Enhancing Early Literacy Skills in Primary Grades: A Meta-Analysis.
Understanding.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Bio-notes:

Melba T. Paciencia is an educator with a Bachelor's in Elementary Education from Saint Francis College and a Master's
in Education from STI-West Negros University. She has two years of teaching experience, currently serving in the
Guihulngan City Division. She passed the Licensure Examination for Teachers (LET).

49