What one public school’s reading program tells us about fixing literacy
Learning is built on reading. However, for most Filipino learners, this foundation is already shaky even before they enter high school.
In Grade 7 classrooms, learners can pronounce words but cannot fully understand them, not because they lack intellect, but because they lack comprehension. These learners get promoted, are assessed, and are expected to perform, yet they cannot lay their hands on the most basic tool of learning.
This is the quiet literacy crisis in this country: rarely dramatic, frequently invisible, but very significant.
An assessment of almost 500 Grade 7 students in a public school showed that one in five students was classified at the frustration level when they started school, which means they could not understand the English texts suitable for their grade level. Almost half of them needed the teacher to constantly remind them to understand what they were reading.
The implications of this are far-reaching, extending beyond English classrooms. Reading is the doorway to all other subjects. A student unable to understand directions, word problems, or reference books is basically shut out of education, regardless of how hard they try and how motivated they are.
Following the completion of a structured English reading program for one month, a reevaluation of the students showed improvement across all sections. Not one student remained a nonreader. The number of frustration-level readers drastically reduced, with some sections eliminating this category. More students attained proficiency levels in reading and were on their way to becoming independent readers. The reality that is revealed is that reading failure is not a student problem but a system problem.
When struggling readers are not provided with help in the early grades, the problem gets worse. As students enter junior high school, the struggle to read is often mistakenly attributed to laziness or a lack of discipline, rather than recognizing that many students have been left behind by a system that continued to move forward without them.
There is also a perception that by Grade 7, it is too late to intervene. Improvement is still possible, even at the secondary level, when intervention is intentional, structured, and responsive to learner needs.
However, it also highlights the problem of isolated success. If close to a quarter of Grade 7 students are starting the school year with a frustration level of reading, the problem of literacy is being passed on instead of solved. This is a problem that should not rely on schools being proactive or teachers having to work beyond their already busy schedules.
The penalty for a lack of reading proficiency can be severe. Students who do not read well are often at risk of disengaging from their education, achieving poorly in all subjects, and eventually leaving school. By contrast, students who can read well become more confident learners, more active participants in class, and better prepared for life.
Educational debates are often initiated by infrastructure, digitalization, or changes in the curriculum. These are all important. But without literacy, nothing positive will come out of these. A tablet computer will not be of much use to a student if he or she cannot read the text on the screen.
Literacy is not a subject to be passed; it is a prerequisite for learning anything at all. When schools make reading a nonnegotiable priority, students react positively. Progress may not be instantaneous, nor may it be consistent. However, it will be genuine and quantifiable. What is needed is the commitment to do so early, often, and systematically. If the objective of education is to see that no learner is left behind, then the mandate must be to start with making sure that no child moves through the education system as a nonreader.
Mhel Cedric D. Bendo,
cedricbends@gmail.com
For letters to the editor and contributed articles, email to opinion@inquirer.net
