Reading Fluency Instruction Practices and Oral Reading Facilitation of Key Stage 1 Teachers in Bayombong, Nueva Vizcaya
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.65339/ijsis.V1.I3.185Keywords:
Reading Fluency Instruction, Oral Reading Facilitation, Key Stage 1 Teachers, Fluency Progress Monitoring, Early Literacy InstructionAbstract
This study examined the relationship between reading fluency instruction practices and oral reading facilitation among Key Stage 1 teachers in Bayombong, Nueva Vizcaya. Drawing on the Science of Reading, Simple View of Reading, and Active View of Reading, the study employed a quantitative, predictive-explanatory survey design using a researcher-made questionnaire administered to Key Stage 1 teachers. Findings revealed that reading fluency instruction practices were implemented to a great extent (WM = 3.95), while oral reading facilitation was demonstrated at a high level (WM = 4.08). Explicit modeling and decoding support were prominent instructional practices, while confidence-building and learner encouragement emerged as the strongest facilitation dimension. However, systematic progress monitoring, guided repeated reading, and comprehension checking required improvement. A significant positive relationship was established between reading fluency instruction practices and oral reading facilitation (r = .687, p < .001). Regression analysis revealed that the instructional dimensions collectively explained 54.5% of the variance in oral reading facilitation, with fluency progress monitoring emerging as the strongest significant predictor. The findings informed the development of a Fluency-Responsive Oral Reading Support Framework emphasizing systematic monitoring, guided practice, explicit instruction, and comprehension-oriented support. The study recommends targeted teacher professional development, structured reading interventions, and further evaluation of the proposed framework. The study aligns with Sustainable Development Goal 4 (Quality Education) and has potential relevance to SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities) by informing responsive foundational literacy instruction. Its potential sustainability contribution lies in informing teacher professional development, promoting inclusive reading practices, and supporting continuous improvement in school-based literacy programs.
References
British Educational Research Association. (2024). Ethical guidelines for educational research (5th ed.). https://www.bera.ac.uk/publication/ethical-guidelines-for-educational-research-fifth-edition-2024
Canuto, P. P., Lumidao, Y., Ballagan, A., Calya-en, P., Jr., Laoyan, R. K., & Oplas, A. (2024). Enhancing elementary students’ oral reading fluency through repeated reading and Big Books. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 23(4), 376–393. https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.23.4.20 DOI: https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.23.4.20
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2023). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (6th ed.). SAGE Publications. https://au.sagepub.com/en-gb/anz/research-design-international-student-edition/book280802
Department of Education. (2023a). MATATAG curriculum: Language curriculum guide, Grade 1. Department of Education.
Department of Education. (2023b). MATATAG curriculum: Reading and literacy curriculum guide, Grade 1. https://www.deped.gov.ph/matatagcurriculumk147/
Department of Education. (2023c). Screening and evaluation tools for the evaluation and selection of reading resources for the National Reading Program (DepEd Memorandum No. 064, s. 2023). https://www.deped.gov.ph/2023/?cat=6
DeVellis, R. F., & Thorpe, C. T. (2021). Scale development: Theory and applications (5th ed.). SAGE Publications. https://us2.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/scale-development/book269114
Domingue, B. W., Dell, M., Lang, D., Silverman, R., Yeatman, J., & Hough, H. (2022). The effect of COVID on oral reading fluency during the 2020–2021 academic year. AERA Open, 8. https://doi.org/10.1177/23328584221120254 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/23328584221120254
Duke, N. K., & Cartwright, K. B. (2021). The science of reading progresses: Communicating advances beyond the simple view of reading. Reading Research Quarterly, 56(S1), S25–S44. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.411 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.411
Filderman, M. J., Didion, L., Austin, C. R., Payne, B., Silvert, C., & Wexler, J. (2025). Teacher professional development for reading: A review of the state of the research. Reading Research Quarterly, 60(4), Article e70054. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.70054 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.70054
Garver, M. S., & Williams, Z. (2024). Key driver analysis with relative weight analysis: A two-step approach. International Journal of Market Research, 66(6), 711–728. https://doi.org/10.1177/14707853241251719 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/14707853241251719
Gedik, O., & Akyol, H. (2022). Reading difficulty and development of fluent reading skills: An action research. International Journal of Progressive Education, 18(1), 22–41. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1332254.pdf DOI: https://doi.org/10.29329/ijpe.2022.426.2
Hudson, A. K., Moore, K. A., Han, B., Koh, P. W., Binks-Cantrell, E., & Joshi, R. M. (2021). Elementary teachers’ knowledge of foundational literacy skills: A critical piece of the puzzle in the science of reading. Reading Research Quarterly, 56(S1), S287–S315. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.408 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.408
Maki, K. E., & Hammerschmidt-Snidarich, S. (2022). Reading fluency intervention dosage: A novel meta-analysis and research synthesis. Journal of School Psychology, 92, 148–165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2022.03.008 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2022.03.008
Mizumoto, A. (2023). Calculating the relative importance of multiple regression predictor variables using dominance analysis and random forests. Language Learning, 73(1), 161–196. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12518 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12518
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2023). PISA 2022 results (Volume I and II): Country notes, Philippines. https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/pisa-2022-results-volume-i-and-ii-country-notes_ed6fbcc5-en/philippines_a0882a2d-en.html
Rice, M., Lambright, K., & Wijekumar, K. (2024). Professional development in reading comprehension: A meta-analysis of the effects on teachers and students. Reading Research Quarterly, 59(3), 424–447. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.546 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.546
van der Velde, M., Molenaar, B., Veldkamp, B. P., Feskens, R., & Keuning, J. (2024). What do they say? Assessment of oral reading fluency in early primary school children: A scoping review. International Journal of Educational Research, 128, Article 102444. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2024.102444 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2024.102444
Wolters, A. P., Kim, Y. S. G., & Szura, J. W. (2022). Is reading prosody related to reading comprehension? A meta-analysis. Scientific Studies of Reading, 26(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888438.2020.1850733 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10888438.2020.1850733
World Bank. (2022). Philippines learning poverty brief. https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/099000207152223103/pdf/IDU002b5536c0db4104ec3087d809906ec2eae56.pdf
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Mylen C. Veloso (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal the right of first publication. All articles are published under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) License. This license permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution, and reproduction in any medium or format, including for commercial purposes, provided that appropriate credit is given to the original author(s) and the journal, a link to the license is provided, and any changes made are indicated.
