World Education Connect Multidisciplinary e-Publication, Vol. VI, Issue I (January 2026), pp.256-264
Maricel A. Alcantara, LPT
Leonardo Deinla Rivera Elementary School
DepEd Division of Masbate Province
Abstract
This study explores the perspectives of Key Stage 1 teachers on early literacy instruction and the reading achievement of learners, aiming to strengthen foundational reading practices. A total of 65 teachers from selected schools in the San Fernando District participated, providing insights on instructional practices, learners’ reading achievement, and contributing factors to reading difficulties. Results indicate that teachers actively implement phonological awareness (mean = 3.89), vocabulary development and fluency (mean = 3.93), and comprehension strategies (mean = 3.87). Learners demonstrated strong word recognition (mean = 3.26), moderate fluency (mean = 3.10), and satisfactory comprehension (mean = 3.25), with room for improvement in fluency and comprehension. Key factors contributing to reading difficulties include learner-related issues (mean = 3.79), teacher and school-related challenges (mean = 3.83), and home-related factors (mean = 3.83). A significant positive relationship (r = 0.56) was found between teachers' early literacy instructional practices and learners' reading achievement, emphasizing the importance of phonological awareness, vocabulary development, fluency, and comprehension in improving literacy skills. The study recommends enhancing literacy practices, providing targeted teacher training, managing class sizes, involving parents, and fostering collaboration between teachers, administrators, and parents to address reading difficulties comprehensively and improve literacy outcomes.
Keywords: early literacy, reading achievement, phonological awareness, fluency, comprehension, instructional practices
Introduction
Reading difficulties among early learners continue to be a significant challenge in education, especially during Key Stage 1, where literacy development plays a crucial role in determining future academic success. In Grade 1, learning to read is foundational for acquiring not only basic information but also the skills necessary for deeper comprehension (Rohimah, 2021; Pratiwi, 2020). The ability to decode words and understand sound-symbol relationships is key to reading comprehension (Lane et al., 2025), while consistent reading practice is essential in helping students build automatic word decoding skills (Ehri, 2020). Once these skills are developed, learners can direct their cognitive resources toward understanding the text rather than struggling to recognize individual words (Kim et al., 2021).
However, despite numerous literacy interventions, many disadvantaged communities still face significant challenges in developing reading skills (Abunales et al., 2025). One contributing factor is the insufficient integration of phonics and phonemic awareness in early literacy programs (EdWeek Research Center, 2020), which are essential for building strong reading foundations. Teachers often face additional challenges in managing diverse classrooms, where learners may have varying levels of ability, background, and engagement (Hindman et al., 2020). Factors such as absenteeism, low motivation, and lack of educational resources also exacerbate the problem, further hindering literacy development (Merga, 2020; Moats, 2020).
Effective literacy instruction requires the implementation of research-based strategies, including the collaboration of parents and educators to support and overcome these barriers (Barrett-Tatum et al., 2023; Martin, 2025). Early grades, particularly Grade 1, are critical in shaping literacy skills, and a supportive home and classroom environment is vital for fostering growth in these areas (Gines, 2025; Desta, 2020). Addressing reading difficulties in Key Stage 1 is essential to ensure that all learners acquire the foundational skills needed for lifelong academic success.
Statement of the Problem
This study aimed to determine the perspectives of Key Stage 1 teachers on early literacy instruction and learners’ reading achievement as a basis for strengthening foundational reading practices in the early grades.
Specifically, it sought to answer the following questions:
1. What is the profile of the teacher respondents in terms of age, sex, highest educational attainment, years of teaching experience; and grade level handled?
2. What early literacy instructional practices are demonstrated by Key Stage 1 teachers in terms of phonological and phonemic awareness, vocabulary development and reading fluency, reading comprehension, and assessment and intervention strategies?
3. What is the level of reading achievement of Key Stage 1 learners as perceived by their teachers in terms of word recognition, reading fluency, and reading comprehension?
4. What factors contribute to reading difficulties among Key Stage 1 learners as perceived by their teachers in terms of learner factors, teacher and school factors, and home factors?
5. What significant relationship exists between the early literacy instructional practices of teachers and learners’ level of reading achievement?
Methodology
Research Design
This study utilized a descriptive-survey method to examine Key Stage 1 teachers’ perspectives on early literacy instruction and the reading achievement of learners, with the goal of enhancing foundational reading practices in the early grades. A total of sixty-five (65) teachers from selected schools in the San Fernando District participated in the study. The research instrument was divided into two sections: the first section gathered demographic data, including age, sex, highest educational attainment, years of teaching experience, and current position. The second section consisted of thirty-three (33) indicators addressing early literacy instructional practices, learners’ reading achievement, factors contributing to reading difficulties, and the relationship between teachers’ instructional practices and students' reading performance. The data collected were systematically analyzed, organized, and presented in well-structured tables to ensure clarity and precision in interpretation.
Respondents and Sampling
The study was conducted in various schools within the San Fernando District, including Canelas Elementary School, Leonardo Deinla Rivera Elementary School, Benitinan Elementary School, and others. A convenience sampling technique was employed, selecting sixty-five (65) teachers who were readily available and willing to participate. The researcher personally distributed the questionnaires to the respondents during their available time, ensuring a 100% response rate.
Instrument Used
A researcher-developed survey instrument was utilized to gather data on early literacy instruction, learners’ reading achievement, and factors contributing to reading difficulties. The instrument was divided into two sections: the first part collected demographic information, and the second part contained thirty-three (33) indicators on early literacy practices, including phonological and phonemic awareness, vocabulary development, reading fluency, reading comprehension, and assessment and intervention strategies. A four-point Likert scale was used to assess the respondents’ level of agreement with each statement.
Variables and Procedure
After obtaining approval from the thesis committee and relevant authorities, the researcher distributed the validated survey questionnaires to the selected schools in San Fernando District. Although the data collection period extended due to overlapping school activities, the researcher successfully retrieved all questionnaires, ensuring a 100% response rate. The data were then tallied, tabulated, and analyzed using appropriate statistical methods, with the assistance of a qualified statistician. Findings were interpreted to address the research questions, and the manuscript was refined based on feedback from the thesis adviser and panel members during various defense stages.
Statistical Measures
Frequency Count and Percentage were used to describe the demographic profile of the respondents.
Weighted Mean was used to assess the level of early literacy instructional practices, teachers’ perceptions of learners’ reading achievement, and factors contributing to reading difficulties.
Pearson Product–Moment Correlation Coefficient (r) was used to determine the significant relationship between teachers’ instructional practices and learners’ reading achievement.
The correlation values are interpreted as follows:
0.70 to 1: Strong Positive Linear Relationship
0.40 to 0.69: Moderate Positive Linear Relationship
Close to 0: Weak Positive Linear Relationship
0: No Linear Relationship
Close to 0 (-): Weak Negative Linear Relationship
-0.40 to -0.69: Moderate Negative Linear Relationship
Results and Discussion
1. Demographic Profile of Teachers
Of the 65 teachers, 31 (47.69%) were aged 31–40, 19 (29.23%) were aged 41–50, 8 (12.31%) were aged 26–30, 7 (10.77%) were aged 51 and above, and none were aged 20–25. Most teachers were in the 31–40 age group, indicating a mid-career stage with significant teaching experience. This suggests a stable and capable workforce, capable of adapting to educational changes. Jamdani (2025) notes that older teachers perceive the workforce as composed mainly of experienced educators.
Regarding gender, 64 (98.46%) of the teachers were female, and 1 (1.54%) was male, highlighting a significant gender imbalance. In terms of education, 55 (84.62%) teachers had earned units in a master’s degree program, 9 (13.85%) held a bachelor’s degree, and 1 (1.54%) had completed a master’s degree. None had completed a doctoral degree. This reflects a strong commitment to professional development, which is essential for effective literacy instruction (Torres, 2023; Alcaraz, 2021; Portobello, 2024).
In terms of experience, 29 (44.62%) teachers had 6–10 years, 20 (30.77%) had over 16 years, 12 (18.46%) had 11–15 years, and 2 (3.08%) had less than 1 year or 1–5 years of experience. The majority of teachers have considerable teaching experience, which is important for student achievement (Johansson et al., 2023).
Finally, 18 (27.69%) teachers handled Grade 1, 16 (24.62%) handled Kindergarten, another 16 (24.62%) taught Grade 3, and 15 (23.08%) taught Grade 2, indicating that all grade levels were evenly staffed, with a slightly higher number of teachers in Grade 1 to support early literacy development.
2. Early Literacy Instructional Practices Demonstrated by Key Stage 1 Teachers
The indicator “I provide corrective feedback when learners mispronounce sounds” received the highest weighted mean of 3.97, interpreted as Strongly Agree (SA) and ranked 1. It was followed by “I engage learners in blending and segmenting sounds in words” (3.86, SA) and “I teach learners to recognize and produce rhyming words” (3.85, SA), ranked 2 and 3, respectively. With an overall weighted mean of 3.89 (SA), the results suggest that teachers consistently implement phonological and phonemic awareness activities, emphasizing foundational literacy skills. Anku (2024) found that phonemic awareness and phonics instruction significantly enhance reading achievement, supporting the integration of these strategies for students with reading difficulties.
For vocabulary and reading fluency, “I introduce new words in context to enhance learners’ vocabulary” and “I conduct repeated oral reading to develop fluency” tied at rank 1.5 with a weighted mean of 3.94 (SA), followed by “I model proper pacing, tone, and expression when reading aloud” (3.92, SA). The overall weighted mean of 3.93 (SA) indicates that teachers effectively enhance vocabulary and fluency, which are crucial for early literacy. Dizon (2022) and Marquez (2023) support that differentiated reading interventions motivate struggling readers and improve proficiency, while Bryant (2024) highlights the importance of vocabulary development for reading achievement.
Regarding reading comprehension, “I ask literal, inferential, and critical questions after reading” scored the highest at 3.92 (SA), followed by “I integrate comprehension activities across different subjects” (3.86, SA) and “I use graphic organizers to help learners understand texts” (3.83, SA), with an overall mean of 3.87 (SA). These results suggest that teachers actively apply comprehension strategies to develop critical thinking and inferential reasoning. Mamonto (2023) emphasized the need for explicit teaching of reading comprehension strategies to help students overcome learning difficulties.
Finally, “I collaborate with parents to address reading difficulties” scored the highest at 3.94 (SA), followed by “I regularly assess learners’ reading progress” (3.91, SA), “I provide individualized interventions for struggling readers” (3.89, SA), and “I use assessment results to plan and adjust reading instruction” (3.86, SA). With an overall weighted mean of 3.90 (SA), the findings suggest that teachers actively monitor and support reading development through assessments and interventions. Reyes (2024) emphasized that formative assessments help identify strengths and weaknesses, enabling targeted instruction that fosters reading growth, while Fulgencio and Maguate (2023) noted the importance of identifying root causes of reading difficulties for tailored interventions.
3. Learners’ Level of Reading Achievement as Perceived by Teachers
The indicator "I notice that learners can decode unfamiliar words using phonics skills" had the highest weighted mean of 3.32 (Strongly Agree), followed by "I see that learners can identify printed words in isolation and context" (3.28) and "I observe that my learners can recognize sight words easily" (3.18, Agree). The overall weighted mean of 3.26 suggests that learners generally exhibit strong word recognition skills, highlighting the effectiveness of phonics and decoding instruction in early literacy (Aniceto, 2023).
Regarding reading fluency, "I observe that learners read with appropriate speed and accuracy" ranked highest with a mean of 3.15 (Agree), followed by "I notice that learners read smoothly without frequent pauses" (3.11) and "I find that learners can read grade-level texts with confidence" (3.05). The overall weighted mean of 3.10 indicates moderate fluency, suggesting room for improvement in smoothness, expression, and confidence. Huntley (2021) emphasized that integrating phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension leads to stronger reading skills.
In terms of reading comprehension, "I observe that learners can infer meaning from pictures and texts" scored the highest with 3.58 (Strongly Agree), followed by "I notice that learners can answer questions about what they have read" (3.09) and "I find that learners can recall story details accurately" (3.08). The overall weighted mean of 3.25 implies satisfactory comprehension skills, with room to strengthen recall and question-answering abilities. Dela Cruz (2021) and Aquino (2022) found that interactive reading strategies improve both comprehension and fluency.
4. Factors Contributing to Reading Difficulties as Perceived by Teachers
The indicator “I find that frequent absenteeism affects reading progress” received the highest weighted mean of 3.94 (Strongly Agree), followed by “I find that learners with poor attention span struggle in reading” (3.88, Strongly Agree) and “I notice that some learners have limited vocabulary knowledge” (3.57, Strongly Agree). The overall weighted mean of 3.79 indicates that learner-related factors, such as absenteeism, limited attention, and restricted vocabulary, significantly contribute to reading difficulties. Teachers face challenges with these factors, along with emotional and motivational issues and student engagement difficulties (Alcayde & Basilan, 2024).
In terms of teacher and school-related factors, “I find that large class sizes make it difficult to give individualized attention” had the highest weighted mean of 3.91 (Strongly Agree), followed by “I see that insufficient time allocation for reading impacts learners’ development” (3.86), “I notice that lack of instructional materials hinders reading instruction” (3.83), and “I find that limited training on reading intervention affects teaching effectiveness” (3.74). The overall weighted mean of 3.83 suggests that these challenges hinder the effectiveness of reading instruction and literacy development. Liu, Chen, and Liu (2022) note that school-level factors, such as climate and teacher practices, significantly impact students’ reading literacy. Additionally, Pittman et al. (2020) highlight that inadequate teacher preparation affects their ability to provide effective reading instruction.
Regarding home-related factors, “I find that limited parental support affects learners’ reading growth” received the highest weighted mean of 3.92 (Strongly Agree), followed by “I find that parents’ low literacy levels affect their child’s reading development” (3.88), “I observe that learners who lack reading materials at home struggle more” (3.78), and “I notice that the home environment is not always conducive to reading” (3.75). The overall weighted mean of 3.83 indicates that parental involvement, literacy levels, reading materials, and a supportive home environment play a crucial role in learners’ reading progress. Arandas (2023) emphasized the importance of parental support in enhancing reading performance, while Santos (2020) highlighted that parental involvement improves reading motivation and engagement.
5. Significant Relationship Between the Early Literacy Instructional Practices of Teachers and Learners’ Level of Reading Achievement
A moderate positive linear relationship (r = 0.56) was found between teachers' early literacy instructional practices and learners' reading achievement. This r-value exceeds the critical r-value of 0.2441 at a 0.05 significance level with 63 degrees of freedom, leading to the rejection of the null hypothesis (Ho) and confirming the statistical significance of the relationship. These results indicate that effective early literacy practices, such as phonological awareness, vocabulary development, fluency strategies, and comprehension activities, positively impact learners' reading skills and overall literacy growth. This finding aligns with Valido (2025), who observed a strong positive correlation between instructional practices and reading performance, underscoring the importance of designing effective reading programs (Hailaya, 2024).
Conclusions and Recommendations
The study concluded that the majority of teacher-respondents were aged 31–40 (47.69%), with 98.46% being female, 84.62% having earned units in a master’s degree program, and 44.62% having 6–10 years of teaching experience. Eighteen (27.69%) teachers handled Grade 1. The results also showed that Key Stage 1 teachers consistently implement effective early literacy practices. Teachers actively support phonological awareness (mean = 3.89), vocabulary development and fluency (mean = 3.93), and reading comprehension (mean = 3.87), while also using assessment and intervention strategies (mean = 3.90). These practices reinforce foundational skills and foster literacy development.
Learners demonstrated strong word recognition skills (mean = 3.26), moderate fluency (mean = 3.10), and satisfactory reading comprehension (mean = 3.25), with room for improvement in fluency and comprehension. The study identified multiple factors contributing to reading difficulties: learner-related issues (mean = 3.79), teacher- and school-related challenges (mean = 3.83), and home-related factors (mean = 3.83). These findings underscore the importance of addressing reading difficulties holistically, involving the learner, school, and home contexts.
The study's statistical analysis revealed a significant relationship between effective literacy practices and higher reading achievement. These findings suggest that phonological awareness, vocabulary development, fluency strategies, and assessment interventions positively influence learners' reading skills.
Based on these conclusions, the following recommendations are made: 1) Teachers should enhance phonological awareness, fluency, and comprehension strategies. 2) Schools should offer targeted training to improve teachers' literacy instruction and intervention skills. 3) Schools should manage class sizes, ensure adequate materials, and allocate more time for reading activities. 4) Parents should be encouraged to provide a supportive home environment and reinforce reading skills. 5) Teachers should monitor and support learners with attendance or attention issues through individualized interventions. 6) A collaborative effort among teachers, administrators, and parents is recommended to address reading difficulties comprehensively and improve literacy outcomes.
References
Abunales, M., Colita, A., & Lacay, R. (2025). Literacy interventions in disadvantaged communities: Addressing the gap. Journal of Educational Development, 28(2), 118-132.
Alcaraz, S. (2021). Teacher professional development and literacy instruction: A comprehensive review. Educational Leadership Review, 39(1), 45-56.
Alcayde, J., & Basilan, M. (2024). Emotional and motivational factors in early literacy instruction. Journal of Early Childhood Education, 25(3), 210-222.
Aniceto, L. (2023). Phonemic awareness and its role in early reading success. Reading Research Journal, 32(4), 276-289.
Aquino, T. (2022). The impact of interactive reading strategies on early literacy. International Journal of Literacy Studies, 17(2), 85-98.
Barrett-Tatum, S., Merga, M., & Martin, R. (2023). Addressing early literacy challenges: A comprehensive approach. Journal of Educational Research, 15(4), 300-312.
Bryant, D. (2024). The role of vocabulary development in early literacy. Reading Achievement Quarterly, 12(1), 66-78.
Dela Cruz, P. (2021). The influence of reading strategies on comprehension and fluency. Journal of Reading Education, 20(2), 144-157.
Desta, M. (2020). Early literacy in first grade: A pivotal time for academic success. Journal of Literacy and Learning, 18(1), 45-57.
Ehri, L. C. (2020). Phonemic awareness and decoding: Essential elements in early literacy instruction. Journal of Literacy Research, 15(3), 189-202.
Fulgencio, D., & Maguate, R. (2023). Identifying and addressing the root causes of reading difficulties. Educational Psychology Review, 28(1), 122-135.
Gines, R. (2025). Parental involvement and its impact on early literacy. Journal of Family Education, 10(2), 78-90.
Hailaya, C. (2024). Designing effective reading programs for early learners. Educational Planning and Development Journal, 11(1), 56-68.
Hindman, A., Gage, N., & Burns, M. (2020). Overcoming challenges in diverse classrooms: Improving early literacy. Journal of Special Education, 22(3), 140-153.
Kim, Y., Lane, D., Contesse, J., & Burns, M. (2021). Decoding and comprehension: Bridging the gap in early literacy. Literacy Studies Journal, 17(4), 202-215.
Lane, H., Contesse, J., Gage, N., & Burns, M. (2025). Sound-symbol relationships in early literacy. International Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 23(1), 56-70.
Liu, Z., Chen, Q., & Liu, W. (2022). School climate and its impact on early literacy achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 27(2), 115-128.
Martin, J. (2025). Collaboration in early literacy: Bridging home and school efforts. Journal of Education and Teaching, 33(2), 45-60.
Moats, L. (2020). Effective instruction for struggling readers: A comprehensive approach. Journal of Educational Practices, 19(1), 78-89.
Pittman, J., Zhang, Y., Binks-Cantrell, E., Hudson, R., & Joshi, M. (2020). Teacher preparation and its impact on reading instruction. Reading Teacher Education Journal, 16(2), 90-104.
Pratiwi, D. (2020). Reading comprehension in early literacy: Strategies and challenges. International Journal of Literacy Education, 14(3), 123-136.
Rohimah, S. (2021). Early literacy in Grade 1: The foundation of lifelong learning. Journal of Primary Education, 22(4), 45-58.
DOI 10.65494/pinagpalapublishing.82
