The Impact of PISA-Style Formative Assessments on the Critical Reading Literacy of Senior High School Students in Dolores National High School
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.65339/ijsis.V1.I3.216Keywords:
Critical Reading Literacy, Formative Assessment, Higher-Order Thinking Skills, PISA-Style Assessments, Quasi-Experimental Design, Senior High School, Trends, Networks, and Critical Thinking in the 21st CenturyAbstract
This study examined the effectiveness of integrating Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA)-style formative assessments into the Trends, Networks, and Critical Thinking in the 21st Century (TNCT) course to enhance the critical reading literacy of Senior High School students at Dolores National High School during the academic year 2025–2026. Anchored in the PISA reading literacy framework and formative assessment principles, the study employed a quantitative quasi-experimental pretest–post-test design involving 79 Humanities and Social Sciences (HUMSS) students, comprising 41 experimental and 38 control participants selected through purposive sampling. Data were collected using a researcher-developed, validated 50-item Critical Reading Literacy Assessment measuring locating information, understanding and interpreting, and reflecting and evaluating. The intervention incorporated authentic reading materials, including infographics, data matrices, and contrasting policy texts, supported by continuous diagnostic feedback. Results showed that the experimental group's overall mean score increased from 20.8 to 38.8, compared with 20.5 to 21.1 in the control group, with a statistically significant post-intervention difference reported (p < 0.01). Improvements were observed across locating information (+5.05), understanding and interpreting (approximately +7.10), and reflecting and evaluating (+6.05). The findings indicated that PISA-style formative assessments were associated with substantial improvements in higher-order critical reading competencies. The study recommended integrating diagnostic feedback, authentic assessment tasks, and structured instructional resources into TNCT instruction. The findings support Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 4, Quality Education, and relate to SDG 16, Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions, through the development of critical literacy and evidence-based reasoning. The study contributes to educational sustainability by informing continuous instructional improvement, institutional assessment practices, and the development of students' analytical competencies for informed civic participation.
References
Abejuela, H. J., Akut, K., Del Rosario, A. S., & Balane, C. (2023). Assessment of the reading curriculum in basic education in the Philippines context. International Journal of Language Education, 7(1), 26–41. https://doi.org/10.26858/ijole.v7i1.23641 DOI: https://doi.org/10.26858/ijole.v1i1.23641
Alonzo, D., & Resurreccion, R. (2023). Formative assessment in the Philippine classroom: Structural challenges and teacher adaptations. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 43(2), 201–216. https://doi.org/10.1080/02188791.2023.2185432
Ananiadou, K., & Claro, M. (2021). 21st century skills and competences for new millennium learners in OECD countries. OECD Education Working Papers, 41, 1–34. https://doi.org/10.1787/218525313524
Bernardo, A. B. I., & Mante-Estacio, M. J. (2023). Documenting the reading crisis in the Philippines: A meta-synthesis of standard literacy evaluations and empirical diagnostics. Journal of Asia TEFL, 20(2), 415–432. https://doi.org/10.18823/asiatefl.2023.20.2.11.415
Bonganciso, R. (2021). Effects of contextualized reading interventions on the reading comprehension skills of secondary students. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 17(1), 482–496. https://doi.org/10.17263/jlls.903498
Britt, M. A., Rouet, J. F., & Durik, A. M. (2023). Literacy in the digital age: Structural processing of multiple text typologies. Educational Psychologist, 58(1), 14–31. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2022.2154398
Cabigao, J. R. (2024). Scaffolded reading strategies and student autonomy in public senior high schools in the Philippines. Philippine Journal of Linguistics, 55(1), 89–106. https://doi.org/10.3126/pjl.v55i1.62341
Cho, B. Y., Woodward, L., & Li, D. (2021). Epistemic processing of continuous and non-continuous information spaces during critical reading. Reading Research Quarterly, 56(3), 511–534. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.321 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.321
Cohen, R. J., Swerdlik, M. E., & Sturman, E. D. (2013). Psychological testing and assessment: An introduction to tests and measurement (8th ed.). McGraw-Hill.
Corpuz, J. C., & Macaraan, M. L. (2025). Aligning institutional assessments with PISA metrics: A longitudinal intervention in regional high schools. Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 34(1), 112–129. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-024-00812-3
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Delgado, P., & Salmerón, L. (2023). The screen inferiority effect in high school students’ comprehension of multiple and non-continuous texts. Learning and Instruction, 85, 101745. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2023.101745 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2023.101745
Deoduco, F. G., Ramos, M. S., & Torres, L. K. (2024). Cognitive leveling of reading comprehension questions in senior high school regional modules in the Philippines. International Journal of Educational Development, 105, 102981. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2024.102981
Department of Education. (2016). Senior High School Academic Track—Humanities and Social Sciences (HUMSS) specialized subject curriculum guide: Trends, Networks, and Critical Thinking in the 21st Century (DepEd Order No. 42, s. 2016). Department of Education Pasig City. https://doi.org/10.26419/deped.order.2016.42
Durban, J. M., & Catalan, R. D. (2022). The K to 12 senior high school curriculum in the Philippines: Critical literacy implementation gaps. Journal of Research in Innovative Teaching & Learning, 15(2), 241–256. https://doi.org/10.1108/JRIT-01-2022-0005
Estacio, M. J. M., & Bernardo, A. B. I. (2024). Sociocultural and institutional determinants of reading literacy among Filipino learners: Insights from PISA microdata. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 36(2), 175–198. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-024-09411-x
Flores, M. G., & Santos, R. E. (2024). Efficacy of formative assessment feedback structures on the language literacy of public high school students. Philippine Educational Review, 62(1), 45–60. https://doi.org/10.46303/per.2024.3
Gatcho, A. R. G. (2026). The paradox of graduate programs in reading education in the Philippines amid a literacy crisis. Frontiers in Education, 11, 1721429. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2026.1721429 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2026.1721429
Greiff, S., Kyllonen, P., & Funke, J. (2024). Large-scale international assessments: PISA, TIMSS, and the structural metrics of 21st-century reading literacy. Educational Research Review, 42, 100582. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2023.100582 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2023.100582
Heritage, M., & Popham, W. J. (2021). Formative assessment in action: Scaffolding high-order cognitive outcomes. Harvard Education Press. https://doi.org/10.17763/hep.9781612509121
Ingram, J. (2022). PISA 2022: National report for England. Department for Education; GOV.UK. https://doi.org/10.26419/2023.pisa.eng
Kanniainen, L., Kiili, C., Tolvanen, A., Aro, M., & Leppänen, U. (2022). High school students' ability to evaluate author intent and identify source credibilities across multiple texts. Journal of Research in Reading, 45(3), 361–381. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9817.12392 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9817.12392
Lawshe, C. H. (1975). A quantitative approach to content validity. Personnel Psychology, 28(4), 563–575. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1975.tb001393.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1975.tb01393.x
Malipot, M. H. (2024). Curriculum modifications in the Department of Education: Assessing the transitional MATATAG and senior high school reading structures. Philippine Journal of Education Policy, 12(1), 15–32. https://doi.org/10.46743/pjep.2024.1012
Mo, J. (2026). How does PISA define and measure reading literacy? OECD Policy Brief Series on Student Assessment, 14(2), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1787/efc4d0fe-en DOI: https://doi.org/10.1787/efc4d0fe-en
Rouet, J. F., Britt, M. A., & Durik, A. M. (2020). RESOLV: A model of purposeful and critical reading in multiple-text information environments. Educational Psychologist, 55(3), 147–165. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2020.1791171
San Juan, E. A., & Reyes, F. C. (2025). Cognitive load optimization during standardized reading assessments in public secondary schools. International Journal of Cognitive Education, 13(2), 202–219. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41465-024-00311-5
Shiel, G. (2025). The PISA assessment of reading literacy. Educational Research Centre (ERC) Working Paper Series, 37(4), 80–95. https://doi.org/10.26419/erc.wp2025.04
Toledo, N. C., Marasigan, A. V., & Dimaculangan, J. E. (2025). Mapping the post-PISA landscape in Philippine public basic education: Systemic deficits and remedial trajectories. Journal of Education Policy, 40(3), 389–412. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680939.2024.2319087
Tuan, T. Q. (2026). Formative assessment practices and their effects on students' motivation and English achievement in Vietnamese high schools. Journal of Education and Teaching, 8(2), 112–128. https://doi.org/10.56433/jet.v8i2.865
Wiliam, D. (2021). Feedback on learning: Formative assessment loops as the core engine of pedagogical improvement. Frontiers in Education, 6, 658231. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2021.658231
Xuan, Q., Cheung, A., & Sun, D. (2022). The effectiveness of formative assessment for enhancing reading achievement in K-12 classrooms: A meta-analysis. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 990196. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.990196 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.990196
Yan, Z., King, R. B., & Haw, J. Y. (2021). Formative assessment, growth mindset, and achievement: Examining their relations in the East and the West. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 28(5), 676–702. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2021.1988510 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2021.1988510
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Joy Mercy P. Guerrera, Analyn G. Siscar, Dr. Estelita A. Madriaga (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.
