CC BY
109Establishing an effective peer support program for reading
remediation
Osias Kit T. Kilag https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0845-3373 okkilag 12@gmail .com
ECT Excellencia Global Academy Foundation, Inc., Cebu, Philippines
Ana Lissa B. Canubas https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3633-2379 [email protected] Lariz Mae R. Uy https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9588-5125 l [email protected] Jhon Rey M. Balicoco https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8631-6959 j honrey.balicoco071 @deped.gov.ph Schools Division of Toledo City, Cebu, Philippines
Evelyn B. Lumando https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1194-6833 [email protected] Department of Education, Philippines
Sheryl D. Delima https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7567-7759 [email protected] Pau Excellencia Global Academy Foundation, Inc., Cebu, Philippines
Abstract: A study was conducted on the second grade non-readers in Toledo City's division. Eight pupils comprised up the cases. Three of them were Pantawid Pampamilyang Pilipino (4Ps) participants and they all came from low-income homes. The standard Philippine Informal Reading Inventory, a technique for evaluating the students' reading ability, was used to identify the extent of their reading difficulties. Pronunciation, omission, identification, mispronunciation, substitution, recognition, and non-readers were among the reading difficulties. Peer mentoring as a reading remediation and instruction eliminates non-readers and other reading problems in the school, according to a theory that the researcher developed as a result of the improvements made by the mentees. A peer mentoring plan was also developed by the researchers as assistance to the reading remediation program of the elementary school. In order to thoroughly examine the disability, look for correlations of the
disability, and discover the underlying reasons of the reading handicap, it is imperative that all students from Grade Two up to Grade Six be diagnosed through a complete analysis of causality.
Keywords: effective reading program, peer support, reading comprehension, reading remediation
Introduction
Every school strives for excellence, but there are many obstacles, overwhelming difficulties, overwhelming commitments, and worries for everyone in the learning community. However, educators cannot deny the reality that, despite their best efforts to stay current with the rapidly changing realities in the educational system, they continue to face a wide range of issues in the academic sphere, particularly since the launch of the Every Child a Reader program. In some cases, they are even blind to the real scenarios in the educational system (Sasan, 2021).
A unique technique should be incorporated into the reading curriculum to enhance reading abilities. It is thought that unless reading skills are taught more effectively and reinforced in intermediate and junior high school, the reading abilities of weak readers will not improve and may even deteriorate unless the teacher takes the following actions: (1) diagnose each student's reading skills to determine the level of the material that the students can read and comprehend; (2) diagnose each student's reading skills to identify which specific ones from the overall list of skills have been mastered; and (4) provide instruction in these skills at the appropriate level of difficulty (Basawapatna, et al., 2013).
Tools for reading instruction can be created or used. A helpful instrument for evaluating students' reading skills in the classroom is the Philippine Informal Reading Inventory (Phil-IRI). By employing graded tales followed by comprehension tests of various lengths, it can provide teachers with information on the degree of students' performance. The pupils' weaknesses can easily be recognized. The reading selections range in difficulty from Grade 1 to Grade 6. Following each grade-level passage are five to seven comprehension questions. The three dimensions of the inquiries are literal, interpretive, and applied. The applicable dimensions encompass the important questions (Sasan and Baritua, 2022).
Peer mentoring is an important strategy in reading remediation. Ursache (2020) identified this as an intervention program where students learned to value people who had taught them and they developed a value for gratitude. Teachers were less concerned, especially when bright students helped slow learners. The students' reading difficulties were significantly improved by this intervention.
The researcher would like to think that encouraging every child to read will improve or lessen both student and school performance. Although the program may
seem unattainable, every instructor is encouraged to accept and actively embrace it. They are questioned over the proverb "reading maketh a full man (Sasan, 2021).
A Philosophical Stance
The philosophical stance seeks to investigate the philosophical underpinnings of this investigation. Ontology, epistemology, axiology, rhetoric, and methodology are all covered (Ponterotto, 2005). The investigation must be conducted from a philosophical standpoint in order to offer a foundation for the perceptual perspective, as well as guidance on what to look for and how to methodologically explain the phenomenon. In this work, ontology is viewed as a subjective, multifaceted reality. As numerous realities exist in any given context because the researcher and participants each create their own realities, the researcher participates in the scenario and makes sense of the various interactions. As a result, it is claimed that the veracity of participant quotations and themes serves as proof of various viewpoints.
The underlying presumption behind remedial reading through peer mentoring is called epistemology. It keeps track of how the researcher and those being investigated interact. The researcher and individuals being researched interact in this study, and the relationship is reflected in the findings. The researcher makes an effort to close the gap between herself and the subject of her investigation (objective separateness). The researcher uses the classroom as a setting, spends time with the participants, facilitates the procedures and actions that must be taken, and serves as a consultant to the peer mentors.
The study's axiological assumption is that subjective values are unavoidable and desirable, and it poses the question, "What is the role of values in inquiry?" This indicates that the study sees a nature that is value-laden (Sasan and Rabillas, 2022). When values are openly discussed and prejudices are exposed and acknowledged, this is referred to as "positioning." This implies that both participant interpretation and personal interpretation are reported.
The language used is engaging and personal, in line with the rhetorical presupposition. In contrast to qualitative research, where natural phenomena are not controlled, this also incorporates the use of operational definitions of terminology. There are numerous definitions stated in the book, as well as numerous definitions gleaned from the informants (Sasan, et al., 2022).
It has been noticed that methodological assumptions are non-quantifiable, subjective, have developing interpretations, possess insider knowledge, are context-bound or contextualized, seek understanding (pattern), and are product and process focused (Kilag, et al., 2022). In qualitative research, it is essential to adopt a philosophical attitude that includes ontology, epistemology, axiological assumptions, rhetorical assumptions, and methodological assumptions.
Methodology
Design
The study used the multiple case study method and was qualitative in nature. Inductive reasoning was significantly used in handling a variety of data sources from interviews and observations of instances or informants to conduct in-depth research and study of the issues involved (Yilmaz, 2013).
Instruments
The researcher served as the primary instrument for gathering data through oral reading assessments, document examinations, behavior observation, and interviews with mentors and mentees.
The reading recognition level of students with reading disabilities, reading difficulties, instructional needs, and independent reading needs was assessed using the Philippine Informal Reading Inventory (Phil IRI). Additionally, it served as a foundation for deciding on the appropriate approach or technique for improvement.
The data that provided each student's personal background was kept in the Learner's Information System (LIS). It contains information such as the learner's reference number (LRN), birthday, address, and mother language. The Pupils at Risk of Dropping Out (PARDO) program was another resource for information on the parents' educational backgrounds, financial situation, engagement in extracurricular activities, emotional and personal adjustment, the child's nutritional state, and other crucial details. These tools were utilized to identify additional elements that contributed to the students' current reading proficiency. Information Gathering and
Analysis
Multiple sources of information, including observation and interviews conducted using a structured interview guide, were employed to acquire the data for the case study. This method of data gathering allowed for the classification of the cases and the creation of a thorough description of all their actions. The improvement or changes in the mentees' reading recognition level were based on their attendance and collaboration with their mentors throughout the scheduled tutoring session.
The researcher chose the instances for the study in part to give an in-depth overview of each case and the issues that needed to be addressed. Utilizing observation, interviews, and Phil-IRI, data was gathered.
The researcher sought the principal's approval for the study during research preparation. The techniques and their intended use were well explained. The benefits of the study for the instructor and the students as mentees were also explained to the teacher adviser.
The adviser planned a meeting with the parents of potential participants to explain the study's purpose and methodology. The researcher requested their cooperation with reference to the mentees' attendance.
The mentors and the researcher were given time to discuss the study's guidelines and methodology. The mentors and the advisor participated in a demonstration teaching. This taught them the proper method for instructing their mentees utilizing the series of lessons that the researcher had self-prepared. The mentees witnessed the same demonstration. The true mentors were the observers; the researcher only served as an intermediary. Trial runs were conducted to gauge the mentors' level of preparedness. Additionally, during the mentoring sessions, the mentees read and wrote the words from each lesson. They had to practice this at home as homework.
The tutorial's time and location were determined. The time slot for mentoring was from 12:30 to 1:00 PM. as both parties' spare time. Given the mentees' limited attention span, 30 minutes was the permitted time. Each mentee was given a pair of mentors to work with in shifts. Because they were members of the Special Science Class, this arrangement allowed the mentors to fulfill other personal duties.
The mentees' observations and development were meticulously recorded by the researcher. The mentors and mentees were occasionally met and interviewed to gather useful data that was then examined.
Result and Discussion
PRESENTATION OF CASES
Case A, the oldest of three children, was born on August 20, 2007. They are Brgy residents. The school is located at distance of 12 kilometers. His parents are both high school grads, yet the family is not well off. He is a beneficiary of the Pantawid Pampamilyang Pilipino Program (4Ps), which aims to end hunger and poverty as well as provide universal access to basic education. Every year, the beneficiaries receive a grant of 2000 pesos for their educational expenses.
Case B
He was born on April 7, 2007, and neither of his parents had a high school diploma. Due to his malnutrition, he frequently fell asleep in class. The family is from a low socioeconomic background.
Case C
His parents are from a modest socioeconomic background and both graduated from high school. His birthday is October 1st, 2007.
Case D
Case D. has a healthy nutritional condition. His mother went to college, whereas his father only completed high school. They have an average socioeconomic standing. Every day, he travels less than a kilometer to get to school.
Case E
The eldest of three boys, Case E, has a father who works as a fish vendor. Every day, Case E must ride a motorcycle or bicycle five kilometers to school. Their home
is quite a distance from the school, which made it difficult for him to attend every day.
Case F
Both of the parents had high school diplomas. The family is thought to be in extremely poor financial standing. He is a recipient of The Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program (4Ps).
Case G
Case G was born to low socioeconomic level parents on August 8, 2007.
Case H
On July 14 of last year, she was born. Her parents failed to complete high school. They are in the low-income category. Case H's teachers and schoolmates admired her for always keeping things tidy and orderly.
Case I
A recipient of the government's Pantawid Pampamilyang Pilipino Program (4 Ps). Her parents were college graduates, but they were from a low social and economic class. Her birthday is November 15, 2006.
Case J
Case J, who resides with her parents, was born on December 2, 2006. Her parents had both completed high school. She is a beneficiary of the government's Pantawid Pampamilyang Pilipino Program (4Ps), due to her poverty.
Case K
On April 15, 2007, Case K was born. Her parents had both completed high school. They're poor.
Case L
Case L's birthdate is 20 June 2007. During school hours, she must take a tricycle a distance of four kilometers to get to the school.
Case M
Case M was born on July 21, 2007. She commutes to school on a tricycle everyday.
Case N
His home is located five kilometers from the school.
Case O
Case O is a healthy child. She was born on May 17, 2007, making her seven years old. Both parents are from low-income families and neither has completed high school.
Summary
Eight pupils made up the cases. As evidenced by the parents' primary source of income, the cases originated from low-income families. The participants included those who had received the 4Ps. Most of the time, they had to walk to school.
READING DIFFICULTIES OF THE CASES
The researcher performed an interview and noted the reading challenges in each case. She conducted interviews with the class adviser, the mentors, and the mentees. During the mentoring meetings, the researcher also recorded her own observations of the mentees. Case A is when:
I truly don't know how to read first, he admitted. I frequently argue with kids. Because I don't receive any follow-up at home, I am unable to remember everything the mentor taught me. I can currently recognize and sound out letters and simple words. I would really appreciate another mentor.
His mentor shared the following from his interactions with the mentee:
When mentoring, he is easily sidetracked by anything. When anyone was staring at us, he wouldn't read. His reading issues include repetition, omission, and mispronunciation. I have to play with him to begin during mentoring time. The names of the sounds and letters came first in our course. He can currently read simple words and consonant blends only imperfectly. I'm glad I was able to assist him.
When asked about the mentee, his teacher responded as follows:
He is a mama's boy who does not like to see his mother alone. He wasn't paying attention in the classroom since he was talking to his seatmate. He always shows up and is very respectful.
The researcher had noticed that case A was labeled as a non-reader during the selection of the non-readers. His other issues included incorrect word pronunciation and the lack of consonant blends. He belonged to the frustration level.
Case A wasn't read because no one could check in on him at home. His reading issues included word mispronunciation, repetition, and omission. He had trouble listening. In the classroom, he was talkative.
Case B
Case B's reading challenges as follows:
I frequently forget letter sounds. With the assistance of my mentor, I was able to identify them and pronounce them correctly. Since I was never provided an allowance or any other kind of provision, I always missed class and so forgot my studies. Three syllables words and above are impossible for me to read. How I wish my mentor would always be there for me.
The mentor gave the following account of his meeting with the mentee:
My mentee consistently missed class. He frequently objected to reading and instead replaced a word he had read, asking me to say it first before he followed. We often meet three times per week. Due to his absences, he had a tendency to forget the prior lessons. I provide students vocabulary to practice at home. He currently recognizes several letters by sound and name. The remaining reading difficulties were omission and mispronunciation. I wasn't happy with his improvement because,
with regular attendance at school, he could perform even better. This summer, he needs follow-up at home desperately.
The Case B advisor clarified that:
The student was consistently absent from class. Although they were informed and asked to meet with me, the parents never showed up at the school. He was frequently observed dozing off inside the lecture. He never spoke out in class or at other activities.
The researcher concluded that Case B's reading difficulty was brought on by his frequent absences from class. He substituted the words being read in place of refusing to read. He wanted to hear his guru say the words first, so he did. Due to absenteeism and a lack of follow-up, he could not recollect the previous lessons. He didn't read, at all.
Case B was able to recognize and pronounce the letters thanks to the mentoring program. Less progress was made as a result of his absences. He wanted to keep the mentoring program going.
Case C
He recounted his difficulty reading in the following way as a mentee:
Reading in English was quite challenging for me. I am unable to make the sound "f." How I wish I was a good reader and could comprehend what I read. I was slowly taught how to read by my mentor in sixth grade. I'm grateful that a mentor guided me.
Reading in English was quite challenging for me. I am unable to make the sound "f." How I wish I was a good reader and could comprehend what I read. I was slowly taught how to read by my mentor in sixth grade. I'm grateful that a mentor guided me.
The following passage was the mentor's explanation:
My mentee speaks clearly and loudly. On occasion, he refused to read and substituted a letter for a word. He's extremely fidgety. To make sure he was familiar with the word, I allowed him to say it several times. He can already read basic words like mum, tax, top, and many others as the mentoring program advances. His ongoing issue is omission. He receives assignment words to practice at home. I'm pleased with his development. He still required ongoing oral reading follow-up.
His advisor told the following story:
His mother always accompanied him to school. While the lesson was in session, he continued to wander around. When asked to write or read, he produced a lot of excuses. To his classmates, he was constantly boasting. His frustration level was at a high degree.
Case C was chosen for peer mentoring, according to the researcher, because of his reading difficulties. The reading issues included omissions and difficulties
pronouncing words, particularly those with the "F" sound. Additionally, he changed the letters in a certain word.
Case C experienced issues with omission, letter insertion into a word, and refusal to read. He had trouble appropriately producing or pronouncing the letter F.
He was able to read simple three- and two-letter words owing to the mentoring program. He was constantly asked to read a passage that had a number of words or phrases. His tasks were checked in order to determine his progress. Case D
The mentee took his reading issues very seriously. He stated: As soon as I met my mentor, I felt embarrassed. My mentor instructed me not to be humiliated and advised that we should collaborate. I was constantly having trouble identifying letters like J, K, B, and D. The mentor worked really hard to assist me, and I was able to identify every letter of the alphabet. Although I read slowly, I was able to, and I want to help my younger brother learn to read as well.
The mentor also explained his observations about the mentee assigned to him. He is shy. He was really quiet and unwilling to read when we first met. In order to begin our mentorship session, I became friends with him. He struggled with issues like repetition and pronounciation errors. He showed such a strong desire to master reading, which is why I am motivated to instruct him. I went over with him the sounds of each vowel and consonant letter. He reads all of our previous lessons at each session. He found it challenging to read long words with consonant blends, even simple words. As his coach, I was really pleased with his reading development. His advisor made the following observation and stated it: The parents have no problem dropping by their child's school. Since the start of first grade, the report card has not been signed. He would rather bother his peers than pay attention to his teacher. It is very hard to let him write. He belonged to the degree of annoyance.
The researcher had noted Case D's extreme shyness when choosing the mentees. When urged to read, he resisted since he found it difficult to acclimatize. He struggled to recognize letters, which resulted in incorrect letter recognition. Case E Case E's mentee described his difficulty with reading as follows: My mother wasn't assisting me at home, so I struggled to read. I was unable to understand the letters, sounds, or meaning. I did not read. Thanks to my mentor's assistance, I can now read, although very slowly. Now I get what I was reading. His mentor offered the following insight into his own reading challenges: Teaching a Grade 2 student who refuses to answer questions is very challenging. I utilized my persuasive skills to win his friendship as we went along. He began to smile the following few days and mentorship got under way. I found that he had omission, pronunciation issues, and a refusal to speak words when reading. I first
assisted him in becoming comfortable with the letters and their sounds. Slowly, he picked up reading, but he started to pay attention to every class. He spoke in the CVC and CVCV pattern. He occasionally resisted saying words that were challenging. He deserved a reward for his progress, which made me happy to have been his mentor.
Due of the distance between their home and school, the mentor's teacher described how the mentee was consistently absent. He said in a gentle voice. In school, he looked after his younger brother. Some letters of the alphabet, notably F, P, V, and W, are difficult for him to pronounce.
The researcher had noticed the desire of the mentee to improve himself by correcting his reading difficulties of making omission of letters, mispronunciation of words and his refusal to spell out and pronounce the words correctly as taught or corrected. He hated difficult words and tried to omit them. These were noticed by the mentors which became the subject matter of mentoring the mentee. He was classified as a frustration level.
Case F
The researcher had seen the mentee's motivation to better himself by fixing his reading problems, such as omitting letters and pronouncing words incorrectly, as well as his refusal to type out and enunciate the words as taught or corrected. He tried to omit difficult terms since he detested them. These were observed by the mentors and used as the mentee's topic matter for mentoring. He was rated as having level of frustration.
The mentor made the following observation to the mentee, in his words:
It was difficult for a child to learn to read, but pleasurable for someone who is ready to teach someone who cannot read. My mentee had trouble reading because of substitution, inversion, and mispronunciation. I persuaded him to read for pleasure. He was instructed to blend the letters together after giving each one a sound. We met at least four times every week because he occasionally had to miss out. He is able to sound out and recognize letters, although he finds it challenging to read some words with consonant blends. He had made a lot of progress but need more work.
The mentor's teacher said the following:
He occasionally misses class and is the only undernourished student in the group. The parents are quite helpful. He always forgets his previous teachings while being exceedingly dutiful. He needed pleasant reminders all the time.
The scientist had her findings. She noted that the primary reason the mentee was a non-reader was that he occasionally missed class, which made it difficult for him to read. He belonged to the frustration level.
Case G
I had trouble distinguishing and recognizing the proper sounds of ng, sh, ch, and th. I was later able to understand the pattern as a result of on-going mentoring. After
reading those words, the formed, I had acknowledged that I like reading and had anticipated getting reading assistance from other mentors.
The mentor gave him this assignment:
He can initially recognize some letters, but they are quickly lost. The youngster had an extremely limited attention span since he was often distracted. His reading issues included repetition, pronouncing words incorrectly, and omission. Normally, I pronounce the term and introduce the letter.
After letting him repeat the word numerous times to ensure that he understood it, the next step was to introduce another word. By fusing the letter sounds, he is now able to recognize simple words. Although he can comprehend what he has read, he still need continual follow-up. I did my best, but with more practice, he'll do even better.
The mentor was sincere in his recognition of the mentee's challenges and offered his advice to assist Case G. He suggested that more mentoring sessions be held for the mentee's growth.
The teacher was extremely picky about the parental assistance provided. She cried out:
If called, his parents would be more than happy to pick him up from school. Due to his inability to distinguish some letters, he writes poorly in school. Although he is constantly there, he simply responds, "I forgot, ma'am," when asked about his assignment.
The researcher had observed that Case G had trouble with the sounds sh, ch, and th. When he was mentored, he was progressively able to read simple words, though not very quickly. Despite this, he was still able to comprehend what he was reading. Next time, he planned to enroll in another mentoring program. He belonged to the frustration level.
Case H
The mentee acknowledged that she struggled to read. She uttered:
I was itching to read. But it was difficult for me to read words with several syllables. I felt incredibly grateful to my mentor for teaching me how to read. Due to the fact that I can now read on my own, my mother was also quite pleased.
Conclusion
Reading deficiencies, reading disabilities, reading retardation, and reading underachievers can all be remedied through the use of peer mentorship. Peer mentoring involves students who are viewed as high performers based on their co-curricular and academic accomplishments, and who, when adequately acknowledged, encouraged, and trained, will eventually make good mentors.
Peer mentorship, as a reading remediation and intervention, "eliminates nonreaders and other reading difficulties in the school," according to the researcher's theory.
In the school where the peer mentorship program was being implemented, the theory was used as a guide to address reading issues.
References
Ajibade, S. S. M., Dayupay, J., Ngo-Hoang, D. L., Oyebode, O. J., & Sasan, J. M. (2022). Utilization of Ensemble Techniques for Prediction of the Academic Performance of Students. Journal of Optoelectronics Laser, 41(6), 48-54.
Basawapatna, A. R., Repenning, A., Koh, K. H., & Nickerson, H. (2013, August). The zones of proximal flow: guiding students through a space of computational thinking skills and challenges. In Proceedings of the ninth annual international ACM conference on International computing education research (pp. 67-74).
Kilag, O. K. T., Ignacio, R., Lumando, E. B., Alvez, G. U., Abendan, C. F. K., Quinanola, N. M. P., & Sasan, J. M. (2022). ICT Integration in Primary School Classrooms in the time of Pandemic in the Light of Jean Piaget's Cognitive Development Theory. International Journal of Emerging Issues in Early Childhood Education, 4(2), 42-54.
Ponterotto, J. G. (2005). Qualitative research in counseling psychology: A primer on research paradigms and philosophy of science. Journal of counseling psychology, 52(2), 126.
Sasan, J. M., & Baritua, J. C. (2022). Distance learning as a learning modality for education during the COVID-19 pandemic. Science and Education, 3(8), 35-44.
Sasan, J. M., Barquin, A. M. E., Alestre, N. A., Librea, A., & Zamora, R. M. (2022). Karl Marx on technology and alienation. Science and Education, 3(9), 228233.
Sasan, J. M. V. (2021). The Social Contract Theories of Thomas Hobbes and John Locke: Comparative Analysis.
Sasan, J. M. V., & Kilag, O. K. Oplan Tabang: Church Driven Housing Project. Available at SSRN 4191501.
Sasan, J. M., & Rabillas, A. R. (2022). Enhancing English proficiency for Filipinos through a multimedia approach based on constructivist learning theory: a review. Science and Education, 3(8), 45-58.
Ursache, A., Kiely Gouley, K., Dawson-McClure, S., Barajas-Gonzalez, R. G., Calzada, E. J., Goldfeld, K. S., & Brotman, L. M. (2020). Early emotion knowledge and later academic achievement among children of color in historically disinvested neighborhoods. Child development, 91(6), e1249-e1266.
Yilmaz, K. (2013). Comparison of quantitative and qualitative research traditions: Epistemological, theoretical, and methodological differences. European journal of education, 48(2), 311-325.
