Mapping the alignment of DepEd’s grade 10 reading curriculum, PISA reading literacy, and NCTE’s adolescent literacy framework

Clicks: 1
ID: 286068
2022
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal

Ranked #2,954 of 3,757 articles by views in Malay Journal

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 3,757 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
In 2018, the result of PISA which was administered to selected adolescent learners from 79 participating countries called the attention of educational leaders, policymakers, and teachers all over the world. The Philippines, as a new participating member in this assessment, yielded a dismal result in reading, ranking the lowest in the assessment together with other domains such as mathematics and science. Looking into the results of the PISA 2018, specifically in the reading domain, the Filipino learners who participated in the assessment were identified as learners with reading skills lower than the minimum level of proficiency, which is approximately in Level 2 according to PISA’s standards. The results of PISA-18 in reading show that most Filipino learners who participated were able to locate information in the text but obtained low mastery of questions requiring higher-order thinking skills. The present study scrutinized the Department of Education’s curriculum guide, learner’s material, and policies through content analysis, viewing it under the integrated lens of PISA-2018’s Reading Literacy Framework and the National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE)’s Adolescent Reading Literacy Framework. The goal was to map the alignment of the content of these documents with the existing frameworks concerning adolescent literacy. Specifically, the present research attempted to describe the similarities and differences of the following: (1) English Curriculum Guide (ECG) compared with PISA-18’s reading framework; (2) English Learners’ Manual (ELM) compared with PISA-18’s reading framework; (3) the Department of Education (DepEd)’s policies in reading with NCTE’s Adolescent Literacy framework and; (4) the alignment of the curriculum and learners’ material to PISA-18 (OECD, 2018). Using Bengtsson's (2016) Content Analysis Framework, the researcher analyzed the content of the documents through codes, classifying the process of analysis into two namely: manifest and latent analysis. Manifest analysis, also known as the surface structure, classified the coded data according to the criteria present in the PISA-2018 and NCTE’s adolescent literacy framework; while latent analysis or the deep structure allowed the intercoder to categorize the gathered data based on their perceived theme or subtheme they are to be classified. To yield reliable data, an intercoder and a validator contributed to the empirical process of content analysis. Moreover, Cohen’s Kappa Reliability Formula is used as the metric to identify or verify the level of agreement between two coders in qualitative papers. Based on the findings, the curriculum should be aligned appropriately to distribute reflecting, evaluating, locating, and understanding processes. Concerning
Reference Key
persistent_1760657477_68f18045ac625 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Camba Jr., Arnel M.
Journal Malay Journal
Year 2022
DOI
DOI not found
URL
https://animorepository.dlsu.edu.ph/etdm_deal/11
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.