Examines reading levels in intermediate pupils, indicating a need for intervention.
This study determined the reading level of intermediate pupils of Tagaytay Elementary School for the school year 2019-2020. The findings revealed that out of 76 pupil-respondents, in the word recognition area, 28 or 37% were at the frustration level, 27 or 36% were at the instructional level, and only 21 or 27% were at the independent level. On word recognition, the intermediate pupils were at the frustration reading level. In the Phil IRI Pre-test result in reading comprehension, out of 76 pupil-respondents, 41 or 54%, were in the frustration level; 21 or 28% were in the instructional level; and 14 or 18%, were in the independent level. In the second part, the results obtained in the Phil-IRI pre-test showed that more intermediate pupils were at the frustration level. There was a reading intervention action plan proposed and a book entitled “On your mark, get set… READ!” based on the results of the study. For the Phil-IRI pre- and post-test results of the intermediate pupils in the area of word recognition level, the following were found: In the frustration reading level, from 37%, it decreased to 20%; in the instructional reading level, from 36%, it increased to 43%; and for the independent reading level, from 27%, it successfully increased to 37% for Phil IRI pre- and post-test results of Intermediate pupils in the area of reading comprehension level. For the frustration reading level, it decreased from 58% to 32%; for the instructional reading level, it increased from 28% to 42%; and for the independent reading level, it increased from 18% to 26%. The statistical comparison proved that there was a significant difference in the Phil-IRI pre- and post-test results of the intermediate pupils. From word recognition to reading comprehension, there was an improvement after the reading intervention was implemented.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Manzanillo Janelle P. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: