Content uploaded by Leah Gustilo
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Leah Gustilo on Aug 03, 2022
Content may be subject to copyright.
Modern Journal of Studies in English Language Teaching and Literature Vol. 3 Issue 1 June 2021
140
Reading and Writing Needs of Senior High School Students: The Case of
Filipino Students in the Philippines
Cielo May Urbano
cielo_urbano@dlsu.edu.ph
Ma. Angelica Gumangan
ma_angelica_gumangan@dlsu.edu.ph
Leah Gustilo, Ph.D.
leah.gustilo@dlsu.edu.ph
Ma. Pamela A. Capacete
ma_pamela_capacete@dlsu.edu.ph
De La Salle University, Manila, Philippines
Abstract
The present study sought to determine the current skills, competencies, and needs of the Senior
High School (SHS) students in a public school in Metro Manila, Philippines, regarding
academic reading and writing through needs analysis (NA). The NA uses two approaches: (1)
present situation analysis (PSA), with a purpose of pointing out the English proficiency of
students and their level in reading and writing in the second language at the onset of the course
(Dudley-Evans & St Johns, 1998; Robinson, 1991 as cited in Ibrahim, 2016), and (2) learning
needs analysis (LNA), which is referred to as, “what the learner needs to do to learn”
(Hutchinson & Waters, 1987 as cited in Ibrahim, 2016, p.2). The researchers conducted a
survey among 100 SHS students and triangulated the results through an item analysis of
Reading and Writing diagnostic test administered to the participants and interview sessions
with three English teachers, seven diagnostic test high scorers, and seven students with low
scores. For reading, researchers identified these skills to be the main struggles of SHS students:
(1) recognizing different patterns of development (comparison and contrast, definition,
description, narration, etc.) in texts; (2) evaluating the coherence, organization, grammar, and
mechanics of a text; (3) having poor vocabulary knowledge; and (4) identifying ways on how
to select and organize information. For writing, the main challenges are (1) lack of topic-
relevant background knowledge and topic-specific paper on texts, (2) insufficient knowledge
and practice on writing with proper citation, (3) incorrect grammar, (4) shallow vocabulary,
and (5) use of different patterns of development when writing. The present study recommends
explicit instruction, utilization of text-based approach, and inclusion of authentic and
collaborative tasks in teaching Reading and Writing in SHS in the Philippines.
Keywords: needs analysis; reading and writing skills; instruction preference; senior high school
________________
Corresponding Author: Angelica Gumangan
Author's Affiliation: Department of Education, Makati City
Email Address: ma_angelica_gumangan@dlsu.edu.ph
Modern Journal of Studies in English Language Teaching and Literature Vol. 3 Issue 1 June 2021
141
Introduction
To date, it is observable that 21st century learners are more culturally and linguistically diverse,
which may be attributed to the constantly changing world. Understanding towards literacy has
as well innovated as it is now regarded to be an integrated skill that leads to global
competitiveness. This view of literacy now takes more than being proficient and
knowledgeable in reading and writing in the language, but also being able to utilize multimodal
ways and use them simultaneously alongside other 21st century skills to succeed in the
information age (Kist, 2005; Kres, 2003; Gee & Hayes, 2011). Sensitive to the 21st century
literacy needs of the learners, the Department of Education in the Philippines had rolled out
the K to 12 curriculum which added two additional years in basic education—the Senior High
School (SHS). SHS offers general education subjects that students would not have otherwise
studied until after one or two years in college. One of which is the Reading and Writing course
that intends to develop skills in reading and writing, using materials beyond drama, fiction, and
drama (DepEd, 2013). Other language courses in the SHS are Oral Communication and English
for Academic and Professional Purposes (EAPP). These courses aim to develop and improve
Filipino learners’ 21st century literacy skills. They also seek to improve learner’s global
competitiveness.
In response to the inclusion of Reading and Writing as a course under the SHS program,
Jaca et al. (2019) investigated the perception of SHS teachers towards such course. From their
qualitative study, a number of concerns emerged leading to a recommendation of revisiting the
present curriculum. One of the important issues addressed in the present study are the topics
and targeted competencies in the Reading and Writing curriculum being “idealistic, complex,
and demanding" (Jaca et al., 2019, p.309), giving students very high expectations in the absence
of acknowledging their context. Additionally, it is necessary to note that beyond the Reading
and Writing curriculum, proficiencies in reading and writing has proven to be a struggle among
students for those skills are not readily available to ESL/ESL learners due to the complex nature
of those skills (Atanacio-Blas et al., 2018; Farkas & Jang, 2019; Graham, Harris, & Beard,
2019; Gustilo & Magno, 2015; Gustilo, 2013; Hall, 2012; Nueva, 2016; Nusrat, 2016; Sadeghi,
2007; Tenri Ampa & Quraisy, 2017). In this light, Pablo and Lasaten (2018) offered an
explanation to the situation explaining that the learners’ diversity in terms of their socio-
cultural background, coupled with their varied linguistic backgrounds, results to students’
difficulties in English. This reality, therefore, poses a problem in the instruction of academic
reading and writing for the SHS students in the Philippines. Nevertheless, Pablo and Lasaten
(2018) suggested that this problem may be addressed with teachers attempting to understand
the background of their students in relation to their experienced difficulties and the quality of
their outputs. Through this attempt, teachers’ choice of strategies for teaching reading and
writing may be better informed. With all these concerns, needs analysis comes undeniably
necessary.
Needs analysis for language curriculum
Needs analysis (NA) is viewed to be a crucial aspect of educational planning. In fact, Otilia
(2015) regarded NA to be the key in ensuring students’ meaningful learning, given that it serves
as the foundation from where curriculum content, methods, and materials for teaching are
generated. Furthermore, NA is believed to be an important aspect of well-developed and well-
prepared language curriculum. It is also a vital part of a language curriculum which focuses on
tasks (Juan, 2014; Long & Crookes, 1993; Long & Norris, 2000, as cited in Susanto, Syafiqiyah
& Ratih, 2015). To illustrate, results of NA help educators identify learners’ current language
Modern Journal of Studies in English Language Teaching and Literature Vol. 3 Issue 1 June 2021
142
proficiency in order to bridge the gap between their acquired literacy skills and expected skills
necessary to cope with the current digitization.
This requires students to be globally interconnected with information technology. This
also makes them aware of things that will prepare them for living and working in the 21st
Century- acquisition of new avenues of learning, knowledge, and skills(Kuhlthau, 2010). NA’s
implementation, therefore, provides an opportunity for curriculum developers and language
teachers to come up with informed decisions for a course, create learner-centered-teaching
materials and tasks, and develop fair assessments (Jordan, 1997; Juan, 2014). In sum, Widodo
(2017) claimed that it is NA, above all procedures, that allows the enhancement of a “ready-
made” curriculum through a close negotiation between the teacher and the learner on what
topics are to be taught and how such are to be taught realistically for optimal learning.
To illustrate, Wahyono and Puspitasari (2016), through their Present Situation Analysis
(PSA) and Target Situation Analysis (TSA), investigated the needs of students in reading for
academic purposes. These analyses provided the researchers insights on the learners’
expectations about the reading course, as well as their difficulties and experienced limitations
regarding the availability of materials. With these data, specific recommendations for
curriculum writers were generated. For one, suggestions as regards the time allotment for the
course and changes in the schedule were provided. Moreover, the necessity of further studying
students’ needs and weaknesses was noted.
Additionally, a number of local studies in the Philippines was conducted utilizing NA
as a basis for reading intervention or enhancement programs (Martizano, 2017; Pernito-Amor,
2018; Ventic & Eslit, 2018). Firstly, Martizano (2017) designed a contextualized reading
intervention program which focused on the reading difficulties of Grade 7 public school
students. REAL (Reading Assessments Across Levels), a reading intervention program created
based on the reading proficiency of junior high school students (Pernito-Amor, 2018). Finally,
Ventic and Eslit (2018) looked into the reading comprehension, vocabulary, and fluency
competence of Grade 12 senior high school students in Iligan City, Philippines. Through their
study, an enhancement program was designed to assist the Grade 12 students with their needs.
Overall, these local studies provide basis for the value of NA in designing reading programs
for students.
In the same light, Ampa and Quraisy (2018) conducted an NA among 330 fourth
semester students, focusing on their writing skills. Results of their NA provided empirical
decisions for the writing class, like ensuring focus on students’ exposure towards definition
texts and descriptive texts. In addition, findings of their study gave basis for recommending
explicit instruction of English language structure as part of the needs of students in the writing
class. Similarly, Nusrat (2016) utilized NA to develop the writing skills of ESL learners.
Specifically, she conducted an explanatory study that focused on the participants' perception
of writing and their actual writing performance. Resulting from her NA, Nusrat (2016)
concluded that teachers and curriculum writers should focus on fluency-oriented pedagogical
practices in order to maximize students’ development in writing.
Furthermore, Nueva (2016) illustrated the importance of using NA as a basis for a
language program, in her study’s case, a language intervention program. In particular, she
investigated the essays of 317 first-year college students in a university in Bukidnon,
Philippines, and utilized the error analysis as basis for an intervention program. From such
analysis, she strongly suggested the inclusion of a bridging program for students to meet the
ideal writing competency in the college level.
Moreover, in the work of Saeli and Cheng (2019) wherein they qualitatively
investigated Iranian learners’ L1 and L2 writing perception, one of their strongest conclusions
is the necessity of including different forms of NA in the writing classes to inform both teachers
and students alike with their actual L1 and L2 writing skills.
Modern Journal of Studies in English Language Teaching and Literature Vol. 3 Issue 1 June 2021
143
Finally, in Cunningham’s (2015) NA among Cambodian students, he sought to explore
students’ specific needs in developmental reading, writing, and grammar courses that were
offered in the participants’ school. His study offered notable results about students’ preference
on how grammar should be taught, students’ discomfort with the purpose of the texts they are
reading, and students’ difficulties with regard to their fluency and automaticity when writing.
More so, he recommended adopting a literature-and-text-based approach in teaching reading,
writing, and grammar to the students.
It is in this note that the researchers claim the necessity of conducting an NA particular
for the Reading and Writing course of the Philippines’ SHS program. For one, the value that
previous literature accord towards NA provides basis for utilizing such method to address the
gap mentioned in the study of (Jaca et al., 2019), together with the gap on ESL learners’ reading
and writing. Second, the observable lack of NA literature in the Philippine setting, particularly
in the language courses in the SHS level, indeed call for the present study to further inform
decisions for language curriculum and planning. As a result, the researchers gathered data and
conducted an NA for the SHS students in a public school in Metro Manila, Philippines. With
the end goal of addressing the discrepancy between the present competencies of senior high
school students and the literacy skills demanded from them under the K to 12’s Reading and
Writing curriculum guide, the present study aimed to answer the following questions:
1. What are difficulties of SHS students in writing and in reading?
2. What are the instruction preferences of SHS students for a Reading and
Writing course?
Framework of the Study
The principles of NA guided the present study; therefore, the prime is given on recognizing the
difficulties and preferences of learners (Sönmez, 2019). In particular, guided by the conclusion
of Sönmez (2019) about the lack of NA that makes use of both qualitative and qualitative needs
of students and teachers, the present study made sure to use both methods in collecting data.
Meaning to say, both qualitative and quantitative data were collated and used for this NA.
For the researchers to determine the reading difficulties of students, the researcher-
made questionnaires administered in the study and interview guides were framed from the work
of Sadeghi (2007). Sadeghi (2007) reiterated the internal and external factors that play in the
reading comprehension of L2 learners. Further, he identified that cognitive abilities and
strategies, background knowledge, and linguistic knowledge are internal factors that associate
to the reader himself/herself. External factors include variables influenced by text, context, and
even the writer (text-producer). For the purposes of the study, reader variables covering
students’ linguistic knowledge and background knowledge were measured in the researcher-
made questionnaire. In addition, observation of textual variables affecting students’ reading
were included in the study. Also, context variables possibly affecting students’ reading were
measured.
In determining the writing difficulties of the students, Gustilo and Magno’s (2015)
framing of writing predictors on their cognitive process framework was adopted. Through their
framework, topic knowledge, linguistic knowledge, text production, and writing experience
processes of the learners were explored to deduce students' difficulties in writing. It shall be
noted here that the measurement of writing predictors were also delimited to the prescribed
content of the K to 12 Curriculum guide provided by DepEd.
Finally, to gauge the preference of learners in terms of the teaching approach for
Reading and Writing, the text-based approach to teaching was used as a framework. This
framing is an attempt to explore the suggestion of Cunningham’s (2015) NA that a text-based
approach is deemed appropriate for a reading, writing, and grammar class. Therefore, in this
Modern Journal of Studies in English Language Teaching and Literature Vol. 3 Issue 1 June 2021
144
study, it is assumed that text-based approach to teaching which involved using authentic text-
types for instruction (Mickan, 2011) will fit the preference of learners and may, therefore, guide
the development of a syllabus for the course, Reading and Writing.
Methodology
Research Design
The language needs analysis in this present study used both quantitative and qualitative data.
This method makes sure that the matter at hand is seen in not only one lens but through multiple
lenses. This then permits a number of aspects of the phenomenon to be unveiled and realized
(Baxter & Jack, 2008). Quantitative data were employed in identifying the reading and writing
competency level of learners and in getting the frequency of errors in the diagnostic test.
Qualitative data include the opinions of the teachers and learners obtained through interviews
and document analysis of the diagnostic test. The data gathered from interviews and document
analysis were used as a form of triangulation on the quantitative analysis.
Participants
Two sets of participants were utilized in the present study. The first set of participants provided
the quantitative data for the study, therefore taking the whole population of a public grade 11
senior high school in Metro Manila, Philippines, totalling to 100 students, specifically 51
female students and 49 male students, who were also present at the time of the data collection.
There were three sections coming from General Academic Strands (GAS) and Accountancy,
Business, and Management (ABM) programs during the first semester of SY 2019-2020 which
comprised the 100 participants. The students’ ages ranged from 15-19 years old. For ethical
purposes, an Informed Consent Form (ICF) was given to the participanrts before proceeding to
the next stage, which is data gathering.
The second set of participants was composed of English senior high school female
teachers in the school and neighbouring school in the city who provided both quantitative and
qualitative data for the study. Teacher A has been teaching English subjects for eight years,
Teacher B for five years, and Teacher C for four years. The three teacher-participants were first
surveyed, then interviewed with regard to the perceived difficulties of their students. Likewise,
fourteen select students coming from the same first set of participants were interviewed about
their opinions on the difficulties they encounter in reading and in writing.
Instruments and Data Sets
The present study utilized three instruments for its NA, specifically: questionnaire, interview,
and diagnostic test.
(1) Perceived Reading and Writing Difficulty Questionnaire. This four-part, researcher-
made questionnaire aimed to measure the perceived difficulties of students when
reading and writing academic texts and their preferred teaching-learning strategies
employed inside the classroom. Items in the questionnaire were framed on the
discussions of Sadeghi (2007), Gustilo and Magno (2015), and Cunningham (2015).
Also, some items were adapted from the survey questionnaire utilized by Akyel and
Ozek (2010), and Cunningham (2015).
Modern Journal of Studies in English Language Teaching and Literature Vol. 3 Issue 1 June 2021
145
The first part covers the demographic profile of the students. The second part, which has
20 items, covers the perceived reading difficulties of the students. Items were categorized
as falling under content schema, textual schema, linguistic schema, and literacy in L1,
following the study of Sadeghi (2007).
The third part has 20 items covering the perceived writing difficulties of the
students. Items were categorized under writing experience, topic knowledge, linguistic
knowledge (discourse, genre conventions, grammar, spelling, and vocabulary), and
writing strategies following the study of Gustilo and Magno (2015). Finally, the last
part of the questionnaire measured the preferred teaching-learning strategies in a
Reading and Writing class which were categorized under text-based approach and
context variables (time, means, personal preferences/interests).
The responses were measured in a four-point Likert Scale: Strongly Disagree
(1), Disagree (2), Agree (3), and Strongly Agree (4) for each item. To ensure the
reliability of the items, Cronbach’s alpha was computed for each section of the
questionnaire. Cronbach’s alpha for reading is 0.85, 0.88 for writing, and 0.77 for
preferred teaching strategies, all interpreted to have good internal consistency.
(2) Interview. The interview guide for both the teachers and students is composed of five
items which focused on the perceived difficulty of students when reading and writing
texts, as well as the preferred teaching strategies of the teachers.
(3) Diagnostic Test. A teacher-made diagnostic test for reading and writing was
administered to the student participants. It is a 60-item test which covers grammar rules,
skills, and competencies required and enhanced when studying Reading and Writing
Course. Specifically, the course has three main content topics, namely: 1)Reading and
Thinking Strategies Across Text Types; 2) Text and Context Connections; 3)
Purposeful Writing in the Disciplines and Professions.
Procedure
The Perceived Reading and Writing Difficulty Questionnaire was administered on the first day
which lasted for half an hour. The following day, students answered a diagnostic test to gauge
their level of competencies in reading and writing. The students took fifty minutes to finish the
test. After scores were tabulated, 7 students who got the highest marks on the diagnostic test,
as well as 7 who got the lowest, were interviewed in order to collect extensive explanation and
perception on their experiences and difficulties on the subject matter. Each of the 14 students
participated for at least one 15-minute interview session.
Finally, the English teachers, likewise, were interviewed for thirty minutes each, about
their perceived difficulties from the students and language teaching strategies they employ.
Data Analyses
The researchers analysed three datasets for the study, namely, the results of the survey
questionnaire, diagnostic test scores, and interview data.
For the survey questionnaire, the researchers tabulated the questionnaire responses
using Microsoft Excel which computed the percentages and frequencies of student replies.
After which, the data were exported to a Comma Separated Values (CSV) file so that SPSS
could compute for the items’ Cronbach’s alpha, mean, and frequency distribution.
Consequently, the researchers made a table of frequencies and percentages in order to easily
identify the categories the skills in writing and reading which the students perceived to be the
most difficult.
Modern Journal of Studies in English Language Teaching and Literature Vol. 3 Issue 1 June 2021
146
To analyse the results of the diagnostic test, item analysis partnered with simple error
analysis was done. Further, Microsoft Excel was utilized to compute the items in which the
students made the most errors, and to as well identify items that may be categorized as easy,
average, and difficult items following the students’ responses.
Finally, content analysis was performed in the replies of the teachers and students in
the interviews after transcription. Emerging themes and patterns from the transcriptions were
noted and utilized for analysis against the processed quantitative data.
Results
Results of the triangulation approach using a survey questionnaire, teacher and students-
interview, and document analysis are summarized under three parts. The first section
summarizes the quantitative results of the NA with regard to the perceived difficulties of
students in reading and in writing and their preferred teaching and learning strategies generated
from the survey questionnaire. The second section, on the other hand, presents the qualitative
results of the NA, specifically the themes generated from the interviews among selected
students and teachers. Finally, the last section details the results of item analysis and frequency
of errors in writing and reading from results of the diagnostic test.
Survey results of the Needs Analysis
Reading Difficulties of Senior High School Students
Part 1 summarizes the results on the perceived difficulty of senior high school students when
reading texts. They are categorized into Content schema, Textual schema, Linguistic schema,
and Literacy in first language (L1).
Table 1
Reading difficulties of senior high school students concerning content schema
STATEMENTS
SD
D
A
SA
MEAN
DESCRIP
TION
RANK
F
%
F
%
F
%
F
%
I can easily
understand texts
written in the
context (setting) of
other countries.
2
2%
48
48%
49
49%
1
1%
2.49
Disagree
4
I can formulate
questions about
things I read from
texts.
3
3%
39
39%
45
45%
13
13%
2.68
Agree
12
Modern Journal of Studies in English Language Teaching and Literature Vol. 3 Issue 1 June 2021
147
I am familiar with
strategies to assess
the value of claims
within texts.
6
6%
31
31%
50
50%
13
13%
2.70
Agree
14
It is easy to discuss
things I have read
from texts.
2
2%
28
28%
50
50%
20
20%
2.88
Agree
18
My background
knowledge assists
me in reading texts.
0
0%
26
26%
54
54%
20
20%
2.94
Agree
20
SD = Strongly Disagree; D = Disagree; A = Agree; SA = Strongly Agree
Table 1 reveals that half of the students (50%) have difficulty understanding texts
written in the context (setting) of other countries. The reason for this may be explained by the
result regarding the importance of background knowledge in understanding texts. Seventy four
percent of the students agreed that their background knowledge assists them in reading texts.
If they do not have background knowledge of texts from other countries, learners would find
them difficult to read and comprehend. Moreover, 58% of the students can formulate questions
about things they read from texts, while 63% are familiar with strategies to assess the value of
claims within texts, Also, 70% of the students find it easy to discuss things that they have read
from texts. In general, students did not report reading difficulties concerning content schema.
Table 2
Reading difficulties of senior high school students concerning linguistic schema
STATEMENTS
SD
D
A
SA
MEAN
DESCRIPTION
RANK
F
%
F
%
F
%
F
%
It is easy for me
to comprehend
even long
sentence
structures in a
text
11
11%
47
47%
37
37%
5
5%
2.36
Disagree
1
I have no
difficulties
following the
grammatical
structure within
texts.
7
7%
59
59%
21
21%
13
13%
2.40
Disagree
2
I can infer the
meaning of
words I don’t
know.
9
9%
41
41%
37
37%
13
13%
2.54
Agree
6
Modern Journal of Studies in English Language Teaching and Literature Vol. 3 Issue 1 June 2021
148
I can
comprehend the
meaning of a
sentence even if
I don’t recognize
the grammar
rules.
4
4%
45
45%
40
40%
11
11%
2.58
Agree
8
I understand the
language rules
of texts I read.
7
7%
31
31%
50
50%
12
12%
2.67
Agree
10
I can read
sentences and
paragraphs
quickly.
3
3%
24
24%
57
57%
16
16%
2.86
Agree
17
I recognize most
of the words
instantly when I
read texts.
0
0%
30
30%
49
49%
21
21%
2.91
Agree
19
SD = Strongly Disagree; D = Disagree; A = Agree; SA = Strongly Agree
Concerning difficulties on linguistic schema when reading texts, Table 2 shows that 58% of
the students struggle to comprehend long sentence structures in texts. This result implies that
the longer the text, the little the focus, attention span, and comprehension of the students. It is
the first perceived difficulty of the students when reading texts. The second concerns
grammatical structure wherein 66% of the students disagreed that they do not have any
problems in grammar. Likewise, only 51% can understand the meaning of a sentence even if
they do not understand the grammar rules. It is also noticeable that only about 50% of the
participants can guess the meaning of unfamiliar words.
There arose three issues on linguistic schema: difficulties in reading longer texts,
grammar usage, and unfamiliar words. When solved, it could lead not only to enhanced reading
skills but also writing. When it comes to actual reading, it is still worth noting that 73% of the
participants can read sentences and paragraphs quickly.
Modern Journal of Studies in English Language Teaching and Literature Vol. 3 Issue 1 June 2021
149
Table 3
Reading Difficulties of Senior High School Students on Textual Schema
STATEMENT
SD
D
A
SA
MEAN
DESCRI
PTION
RANK
F
%
F
%
F
%
F
%
I can recognize
different patterns of
development
(comparison and
contrast, definition,
description,
narration, etc.) in
texts.
7
7
%
48
48%
38
38%
7
7%
2.45
Disagree
3
I can evaluate the
coherence,
organization,
grammar and
mechanics of a text I
read.
6
6
%
45
45%
41
41%
8
8%
2.51
Agree
5
I can easily identify
techniques in
selecting and
organizing
information (e.g.
brainstorming list,
graphic organizer,
topic outline,
sentence outline).
5
5
%
45
45%
38
38%
12
12%
2.57
Agree
7
I recognize the
author’s attitude and
purpose for writing
when I read.
3
3
%
42
42%
42
42%
13
13%
2.65
Agree
9
I can identify main
ideas and supporting
details in texts.
6
6
%
34
34%
47
47%
13
13%
2.67
Agree
11
Modern Journal of Studies in English Language Teaching and Literature Vol. 3 Issue 1 June 2021
150
I can effectively use
paragraph
headings/subtitles
when reading texts.
4
4
%
34
34%
51
51%
11
11%
2.69
Agree
13
My familiarity with
transitional markers
(e.g. then, now, so,
therefore, in
addition) assist my
reading.
6
6
%
32
32%
47
47%
15
15%
2.71
Agree
15
SD = Strongly Disagree; D = Disagree; A = Agree; SA = Strongly Agree
Table 3 presents the results on difficulties concerning textual schema. Results revealed
that 55% of the students disagreed that they can recognize different patterns of development
(comparison and contrast, definition, description, narration, etc.) in texts; 49 % can somehow
evaluate the coherence, organization, grammar, and mechanics of a text; and half of the
respondents agreed that they can easily identify strategies in selecting and organizing
information (e.g. brainstorming list, graphic organizer, topic outline, sentence outline), which
is, perhaps, why it is also difficult for them to recognize the author’s attitude and purpose for
writing the text material upon reading. These issues concerning textual schema have been
experienced by almost half of the participants.
Meanwhile, despite these struggles, at least more than half of them can identify main
ideas and supporting details in texts and are familiar with transitional markers (e.g. then, now,
so, therefore, in addition), which is why 70% can effectively use paragraph headings/subtitles
when reading texts.
Table 4
Reading Difficulties of Senior High School Students Relating to Literacy in L1
STATEMENTS
SD
D
A
SA
MEAN
DESCRIPT-
ION
RANK
F
%
F
%
F
%
F
%
I can effectively
use my L1 (e.g.
Tagalog) to
comprehend
English texts.
4
4%
31
31%
47
47%
18
18%
2.79
Agree
16
SD = Strongly Disagree; D = Disagree; A = Agree; SA = Strongly Agree
As Table 4 demonstrates, 65% of the students can effectively use their L1 to
comprehend English texts. Thus, L1 literacy cannot be considered as a hindrance in
understanding English texts.
Modern Journal of Studies in English Language Teaching and Literature Vol. 3 Issue 1 June 2021
151
Writing Difficulties of Senior High School Students
Part 2 summarizes the results for the perceived difficulty of SHS students when writing texts.
These difficulties are categorized into Writing experience, Topic knowledge, Linguistic
knowledge (discourse, grammar, genre conventions, spelling, and vocabulary), and Writing
strategies.
Table 5
Writing Difficulties of Senior High School Students Concerning Their Writing Experiences
STATEMENT
SD
D
A
SA
MEAN
DESCRIPTION
RANK
F
%
F
%
F
%
F
%
I have prior
writing
experience of
academic texts.
13
13%
46
46%
35
35%
6
6%
2.34
Disagree
3
I am familiar
with the
conventions
(formal
writing) of
academic texts.
4
4%
51
51%
36
36%
9
9%
2.50
Agree
9.5
SD = Strongly Disagree; D = Disagree; A = Agree; SA = Strongly Agree
Table 5 shows that 59% claimed they lack ample writing experience on academic texts.
In addition, only half of the respondents are familiar with the conventions (formal writing) of
academic texts. This result was backed up by students’ interview during which they attested to
their unfamiliarity with the conventions of academic texts and their lack of ample writing
experience.
Table 6
Writing Difficulties of Senior High School Students Concerning their Topic Knowledge
STATEMENT
SD
D
A
SA
MEAN
DESCRIP
T-ION
RANK
F
%
F
%
F
%
F
%
I have topic-relevant
(e.g. business, arts,
humanities,
sciences)
background
knowledge to assist
my writing.
11
11%
37
37%
45
45%
7
7%
2.48
Disagree
7
Modern Journal of Studies in English Language Teaching and Literature Vol. 3 Issue 1 June 2021
152
I can easily write
topic-specific
papers from texts I
have read.
10
10%
44
44%
33
33%
13
13%
2.49
Disagree
8
SD = Strongly Disagree; D = Disagree; A = Agree; SA = Strongly Agree
Table 6 shows how the SHS students lack topic-relevant background knowledge which
results in difficulty in writing topic-specific papers from texts they have read. In support of the
study of Fitzgerald and Shanahan (2000), this finding explains their difficulty in writing
without enough knowledge on texts read. They stated that (1) since they facilitate each other,
reading and writing skills intersect functionally, (2) reading and writing are reciprocal skills
with fundamental common process and knowledge, and (3) reading and writing are both
communicative acts.
Table 7
Writing Difficulties of Senior High School Students Concerning their Linguistic Knowledge
STATEMENT
SD
D
A
SA
MEAN
DESCRIPT-
ION
RANK
F
%
F
%
F
%
F
%
I am familiar with the
different citation styles
(e.g. APA, MLA, etc.).
18
18%
62
62%
19
19%
1
1%
2.03
Disagree
1
I can use grammatically
correct sentences
without thinking
carefully about the
rules.
7
7%
59
59%
27
27%
7
7%
2.34
Disagree
3
I can use the correct
vocabulary when I
write.
10
10%
53
53%
30
30%
7
7%
2.34
Disagree
3
I can use different
patterns of
development
(comparison and
contrast, definition,
description, narration,
etc.) when writing.
10
10%
50
50%
31
31%
9
9%
2.39
Disagree
5
I can write texts with
proper citations.
8
8%
54
54%
28
28%
10
10%
2.40
Disagree
6
I can effectively use
transitional markers
10
10%
41
41%
38
38%
11
11%
2.50
Agree
9.5
Modern Journal of Studies in English Language Teaching and Literature Vol. 3 Issue 1 June 2021
153
(e.g. then, now, so,
therefore) when
writing.
I am familiar with
strategies to search for
reliable references
when writing.
3
3%
50
50%
38
38%
9
9%
2.53
Agree
11
I can organize
information in a
paragraph.
7
7%
39
39%
45
45%
9
9%
2.56
Agree
12.5
I can efficiently
paraphrase texts that I
have read.
4
4%
48
48%
36
36%
12
12%
2.56
Agree
12.5
I can write sentences
and paragraphs quickly.
4
4%
43
43%
45
45%
8
8%
2.57
Agree
14
I can evaluate relevant
ideas/concepts when
writing.
1
1%
47
47%
41
41%
11
11%
2.62
Agree
15.5
I can write summaries
of texts I read.
9
9%
28
28%
48
48%
15
15%
2.69
Agree
18
I can describe my ideas
clearly when writing.
8
8%
26
26%
51
51%
15
15%
2.73
Agree
19
I can support my ideas
with clear details and
examples.
10
10%
22
22%
51
51%
17
17%
2.75
Agree
20
SD = Strongly Disagree; D = Disagree; A = Agree; SA = Strongly Agree
Table 7 shows that only 20% of the tested students are familiar with the different
citation styles (e.g. APA, MLA, etc.), which implies limited exposure to research and report
writing. Sixty six percent expressed their disagreement that they can use grammatically correct
sentences without thinking carefully about the rules. This is followed by 63% who cannot use
the correct vocabulary when writing, and another 60% who cannot use different patterns of
development (comparison and contrast, definition, description, narration, etc.) when writing.
All of these are necessary to be able to write effective academic texts, particularly research
papers, and these are where the writing difficulties lie upon.
On a lighter note, almost half of the students can effectively use transitional markers
(e.g. now, so, therefore) and are familiar with strategies to search for reliable references.
Moreover, these are some of the writing skills they possess: information organization (54%),
Modern Journal of Studies in English Language Teaching and Literature Vol. 3 Issue 1 June 2021
154
paraphrasing (48%), writing sentences and paragraphs quickly (53%), evaluating relevant ideas
(52%), summarizing (63%), describing ideas clearly (66%), and detailing (68%).
Table 8
Writing Difficulties of Senior High School Students Concerning Their Writing Strategies
STATEMENT
S
SD
D
A
SA
MEAN
DESCRIPT-
ION
RAN
K
F
%
F
%
F
%
F
%
It is easy for me
to plan
whenever I have
a text to write.
8
8%
31
31%
52
52%
9
9%
2.62
Agree
13.5
I can easily
revise the texts I
write.
2
2%
43
43%
44
44%
11
11%
2.64
Agree
16
SD = Strongly Disagree; D = Disagree; A = Agree; SA = Strongly Agree
As observed in Table 8, Many students are equipped with planning and writing
strategies. Sixty one percent find it easier to plan first before writing a text and 55% can easily
revise their own write-ups, although there is still a need to follow through on pre-writing,
writing, and post writing strategies for 39% and 45% of the population.
Preferred teaching-learning strategies of senior high school students
Part 3 summarizes the results obtained from the questionnaire which aimed at identifying the
preferred teaching-learning strategies of senior high school students when reading texts which
are categorized into Text-based approach and Context variables (time, means, personal
preferences/interests).
Table 9
Preference of Senior High School Students for Text-based Approach Instruction
STATEMENTS
SD
D
A
SA
MEA
N
DESCRIPT-
ION
RAN
K
F
%
F
%
F
%
F
%
I like knowing
about text structures
through a critiquing
of sample texts.
5
5%
53
53%
35
35%
7
7%
2.44
Disagree
2
Modern Journal of Studies in English Language Teaching and Literature Vol. 3 Issue 1 June 2021
155
I find incidental
(during
reading/amidst
discussions)
vocabulary
discussions helpful.
3
3%
43
43%
46
46%
8
8%
2.59
Agree
6.5
I appreciate noting
the organization of
ideas through text
samples.
5
5%
38
38%
49
49%
8
8%
2.60
Agree
8
I like studying
academic
conventions
through text
samples.
5
5%
35
35%
53
53%
7
7%
2.62
Agree
10
I find vocabulary
learning meaningful
when words are
chosen from the
texts we are
reading/writing.
1
1%
30
30%
43
43%
26
26%
2.94
Agree
14
I like to study
grammar as they
appear on the texts
we are
reading/writing.
2
2%
24
24%
50
50%
24
24%
2.96
Agree
15
SD = Strongly Disagree; D = Disagree; A = Agree; SA = Strongly Agree
Table 9 depicts the students’ general agreement on most of the text-based approaches
in teaching reading and writing in which providing learners with authentic and accurate text
samples will greatly help in the learning process. Still, it also pointed out that 58% of them do
not find having sample paper critiquing to be helpful as a way to know more about text
structures. This is partly because they lack actual experience of it in classroom practices.
Modern Journal of Studies in English Language Teaching and Literature Vol. 3 Issue 1 June 2021
156
Table 10
Preference of senior high school students concerning contextual variables
STATEMENT
SD
D
A
SA
MEA
N
DESCRIPT-
ION
RANK
F
%
F
%
F
%
F
%
I like reading
and writing
texts outside
the class hours.
11
11%
48
48
%
34
34%
7
7%
2.37
Disagree
1
I like reading
and writing
texts in the
morning.
7
7%
53
53
%
28
28%
12
12%
2.45
Disagree
3
I like searching
for texts inside
libraries.
15
15%
36
36
%
36
36%
13
13%
2.47
Disagree
4
I like reading
and writing
texts in the
afternoon.
10
10%
42
42
%
37
37%
11
11%
2.49
Disagree
5
I like reading
and writing
texts during
class hours.
7
7%
36
36
%
48
48%
9
9%
2.59
Agree
6.5
I like studying
professional
correspondence
s (resume,
application for
college, etc.)
through
examples.
8
8%
38
38
%
39
39%
15
15%
2.61
Agree
9
I like writing in
groups rather
than writing by
myself.
8
8%
32
32
%
42
42%
18
18%
2.70
Agree
11
I like to read
texts in print.
4
4%
34
34
%
42
42%
20
20%
2.78
Agree
12
I like to read
texts virtually
(using
electronic
gadgets).
4
4%
31
31
%
40
40%
25
25%
2.86
Agree
13
Modern Journal of Studies in English Language Teaching and Literature Vol. 3 Issue 1 June 2021
157
I like searching
for texts online
(using
electronic
gadgets).
5
5%
13
13
%
50
50%
32
32%
3.09
Agree
16
SD = Strongly Disagree; D = Disagree; A = Agree; SA = Strongly Agree
Table 10 reveals the students’ preferences and disagreement toward using different
contextual variables when teaching reading and writing. Majority of the students expressed
their liking on searching for texts online, and 65% of the respondents expressed their agreement
on reading virtually (both using electronic gadgets) in this digital age. However, there are 62%
who like to read in print, while 60% would prefer writing in groups than writing by themselves.
More than half of the respondents have expressed their interest in studying professional
correspondences (resume, application for college, etc.) through examples. It is also notable that
58% want reading and writing texts only during class hours since 52% do not want to do it in
the afternoon and 59% on not doing it outside class hours. These students go to school on a
morning shift but only 40% would still want to do it in the morning. Lastly, more than half of
the respondents are not interested in searching for texts inside libraries as everything is
available on the internet nowadays.
Interview results of the NA
The interview phase was conducted among three English teachers as well as 14 students, 7 of
whom got the lowest scores in the diagnostic test and 7 got the highest scores. In-depth
interview was done in order to enrich the discussion on the data collection for the needs analysis
and the development of Reading and Writing Syllabus.
As regards the results of the interview with the students, it is regrettably surprising that
only four of them are familiar with academic texts specifically book reviews, article critiques,
literature reviews, research reports, project proposals, position papers, and other professional
correspondences like the letter of application for college admissions and employment. Most of
them have not been exposed to academic texts like these nor have been given rich opportunities
to write academic texts during their junior high school years.
Regarding their perceived difficulty when reading texts, the teachers asserted that the
difficulty of students lies in their lack of utilization of various reading strategies in order to get
used in quick and articulate reading as well as extract relevant information from the text
material (See excerpt 1 below). Meanwhile, the students all agreed that their difficulties are
their inability to comprehend texts because of unfamiliar words.
Excerpt 1:
Teacher A: “For my Senior High School students, I am expecting that they are more
likely using skimming, scanning and using key words/points in reading. This will help
them finish the examinations (especially Reading Comprehension exams) in a shorter
period of time. Unfortunately, only few students are religiously using the skills
mentioned.”
As regards writing, the teacher respondents claimed that students’ difficulties are
caused by their low mastery on proper writing mechanics such as capitalization, punctuation,
spelling, and most especially grammar (See excerpt 2 below). All students declared grammar
usage as their number one difficulty. They also struggle in translating their ideas and thoughts
into words because of limited vocabulary and organizing their ideas (See excerpts 3-5).
Modern Journal of Studies in English Language Teaching and Literature Vol. 3 Issue 1 June 2021
158
Excerpt 2:
Teacher B: “There are many issues that even my Senior High School students encounter
when writing texts. Using of capital and lowercase letters, using space, using
punctuation marks properly, spelling, word choice, organization of ideas, grammar and
more.
Excerpt 3:
Student 2: “The most difficult part of writing texts in English for me is when I cannot
express my ideas smoothly because I cannot find the right words to use.
Excerpt 4:
Student 3: “I’m not good in grammar.”
Excerpt 5:
Student 4: “I want to write so many things. My thoughts get mixed up and it’s difficult.”
Furthermore, teachers prefer utilizing inquiry-based instruction on sample text material,
text-based approach in teaching reading and writing to help facilitate active learning, and
employ higher-order thinking skills as well as peer tutoring (See excerpt 6). As for the students,
for them to enhance their literacy skills, they are aware of the importance of reading a lot of
books, novels, and articles while immediately consulting the dictionary to arrive the meaning
of unfamiliar words. They also prefer to watch online tutorials and practice pre-writing
activities. These findings did reflect on the results of the survey questionnaire.
Excerpt 6:
Teacher A: Remedial classes. But definitely, establishing a good reading habit with
students can cure the problems. The program Readster of the Schools Division Office
of Malabon City is indeed helpful to most students that I have talked to. They had a
chance to hold and finish a novel. Then some became interested in reading more novels.
Being exposed with good and quality reading materials will help the students easily
acquire the necessary skills in reading and writing, then later on speaking L2.
Lastly, one of the teachers argued that among the competencies, still the most important
is the attitude of the learner which is reflected in their willingness to learn. “Giving interesting
and engaging activities/tasks will help the students overcome their Second Language/Foreign
Language Anxiety. No matter how hard you try to teach a student new words and/or concepts
using L2, you will never see an improvement if he or she is not willing to learn the language,”
she added.
Item analysis results from the diagnostic test
In the last phase of the triangulation approach, the researchers administered a 60-item teacher-
made diagnostic test which covers the application of reading and writing content lessons and
competencies stated in the Department of Education Reading and Writing Curriculum Guide:
Reading and Thinking Strategies across Text Types, Text and Context Connections (Critical
Reading), and Purposeful Writing in the Disciplines and Professions.
The result of the frequency of errors shows in Table 11 shows the evident mistakes
committed in the following lessons and competencies (arranged by ranks):
Modern Journal of Studies in English Language Teaching and Literature Vol. 3 Issue 1 June 2021
159
(1) Text and Context Connections (Critical Reading): Using Determining textual evidence to
validate assertions and counterclaims made about a text read (EN11/12RWS-IVac-10)—
Evaluating statement as an opinion or fact
(2) Reading and Thinking Strategies across Text Types: Distinguishes between and among patterns
of development in writing across disciplines (EN11/12RWS-IIIbf-3)— Determining cause and
effect in a given situation
(3) Purposeful Writing in the Disciplines and Professions: Identifies the unique features and
requirements in composing texts that are useful across disciplines (EN11/12RWS-IVdg-
12.2)— Writing a research report with proper citation
(4) Reading and Thinking Strategies across Text Types: Distinguishes between and among patterns
of development in writing across disciplines (EN11/12RWS-IIIbf-3.7)—Determining problem
and solution in a given situation
(5) Reading and Thinking Strategies across Text Types: Distinguishes between and among patterns
of development in writing across disciplines (EN11/12RWS-IIIbf-3.3)—Identifying definition
as a pattern of development in a given situation
Based on the data presented, learners have difficulty in the three content lessons and or
modules for the Reading and Writing course. The top five mistakes in the diagnostic test mostly
fall under the competency that intends to hone students’ ability to present idea by identifying
the patterns of paragaphh development across different discpilines.
Table 11
Reading and Writing Diagnostic Test
Frequency of Errors
Sections
Frequency
Percentage
ERROR
RANKING
Item
A
B
C
D
CR
E
CR
E
1
14
20
5
15
14
40
25.93%
74.07%
16
2
6
8
32
8
32
22
59.26%
40.74%
49
3
5
15
4
30
30
24
55.56%
44.44%
60
4
19
17
5
13
17
37
31.48%
68.52%
22
5
9
7
25
13
25
29
46.30%
53.70%
39
6
10
1
24
19
19
35
35.19%
64.81%
25
7
35
4
14
1
35
19
64.81%
35.19%
53
8
33
8
6
7
8
46
14.81%
85.19%
4
9
16
24
5
9
9
45
16.67%
83.33%
5
10
6
2
45
1
45
9
83.33%
16.67%
59
11
11
3
2
38
38
16
70.37%
29.63%
56
12
1
6
40
7
40
14
74.07%
25.93%
57
13
8
12
17
17
17
37
31.48%
68.52%
23
14
25
17
9
3
25
29
46.30%
53.70%
40
15
12
13
13
16
13
41
24.07%
75.93%
15
16
10
16
15
13
16
38
29.63%
70.37%
21
17
6
36
7
5
36
18
66.67%
33.33%
54
18
13
8
22
11
22
32
40.74%
59.26%
33
19
2
6
26
20
26
28
48.15%
51.85%
41
Modern Journal of Studies in English Language Teaching and Literature Vol. 3 Issue 1 June 2021
160
20
4
11
3
36
11
43
20.37%
79.63%
8
21
12
10
24
8
24
30
44.44%
55.56%
37
22
10
36
6
2
36
18
66.67%
33.33%
55
23
18
4
19
13
19
35
35.19%
64.81%
26
24
29
11
5
9
29
25
53.70%
46.30%
44
25
13
25
7
9
9
45
16.67%
83.33%
6
26
14
20
14
6
20
34
37.04%
62.96%
29
27
5
3
12
34
34
20
62.96%
37.04%
51
28
2
12
9
31
31
23
57.41%
42.59%
48
29
20
12
2
20
20
34
37.04%
62.96%
30
30
28
11
4
11
11
43
20.37%
79.63%
9
31
10
26
14
4
26
28
48.15%
51.85%
42
32
6
17
24
7
24
30
44.44%
55.56%
38
33
18
16
14
6
6
48
11.11%
88.89%
1
34
2
29
21
2
29
25
53.70%
46.30%
45
35
22
12
8
12
12
42
22.22%
77.78%
12
36
6
28
11
9
6
48
11.11%
88.89%
2
37
12
4
26
12
12
42
22.22%
77.78%
13
38
12
32
3
7
32
22
59.26%
40.74%
50
39
2
43
6
3
43
11
79.63%
20.37%
58
40
10
20
13
11
20
34
37.04%
62.96%
31
41
17
12
10
15
17
37
31.48%
68.52%
24
42
14
9
20
11
20
34
37.04%
62.96%
32
43
23
3
9
19
23
31
42.59%
57.41%
34
44
19
14
11
20
11
43
20.37%
79.63%
10
45
9
30
7
8
30
24
55.56%
44.44%
47
46
7
10
18
19
19
35
35.19%
64.81%
27
47
19
8
10
17
19
19
35.19%
35.19%
28
48
12
7
27
8
27
27
50.00%
50.00%
43
49
7
14
30
3
14
40
25.93%
74.07%
17
50
19
14
12
9
14
40
25.93%
74.07%
18
51
23
14
7
10
23
31
42.59%
57.41%
35
52
15
15
18
6
15
39
27.78%
72.22%
19
53
18
13
10
13
10
44
18.52%
81.48%
7
54
15
17
8
14
15
39
27.78%
72.22%
20
55
14
7
24
9
7
47
12.96%
87.04%
3
56
2
34
10
8
34
20
62.96%
37.04%
52
57
10
9
23
12
23
31
42.59%
57.41%
36
58
17
17
8
12
12
42
22.22%
77.78%
14
59
13
6
6
29
29
25
53.70%
46.30%
46
60
19
8
16
11
11
43
20.37%
79.63%
11
CR = Correct Response; E = Error
Modern Journal of Studies in English Language Teaching and Literature Vol. 3 Issue 1 June 2021
161
Discussion and Conclusions
The triangulation approach across three instruments of the study identified the difficulties of
the SHS students when reading and writing texts and their preferred teaching-learning
strategies. While the findings of the present study cannot be generalized due to the nature of
the study and limited sample size, still the present study can draw out tentative conclusions that
could be transferred to other contexts. The researchers concluded that the participants in this
present study are not well-versed in the conventions and process of writing academic texts,
specifically research reports, position paper, project proposal, and correspondence letters
which they need in order to pursue higher education and employment. This is caused by their
poor skills on two macro skills: reading and writing.
For reading skills, researchers identified the main problems or difficulties of the SHS
students in the study: (1) recognizing different patterns of development (comparison and contrast,
definition, description, narration, etc.) in texts; (2) evaluating the coherence, organization,
grammar, and mechanics of a text, having poor vocabulary knowledge; and (3) distinguishing
techniques in selecting and organizing information (e.g. graphic organizer, brainstorming list,
topic outline, and sentence outline). These findings explain why they are reluctant to read long
texts, especially those that were written in the context of foreign countries since they cannot
understand and make any connections from it. Simply put, students fail to grasp important
concepts when reading because they lack these skills. It follows then that possession of these
skills will help the learners organize and select information in a written text to achieve a
specific purpose. Also, when learners are able to organize and select information, it aids them
in reading comprehension and it deepens content knowledge and ideas needed in writing
academic texts. Knowledge of text structures and linguistic schema leads to an understanding
of the concepts and eventually purposeful writing.
As regards writing skills, the main challenges the learners experience in writing are the
following: (1) lack of topic-relevant background knowledge (due to poor reading
comprehension); (2) insufficient knowledge and practice on writing with proper citation,
incorrect grammar, shallow vocabulary, and insufficient knowledge and skills in writing
different patterns of development (comparison and contrast, definition, description narration,
etc.). These skills are vital in composing effective written texts which are important in various
fields.
In summary, learners lack writing experience on academic texts due to the limited topic
and linguistic knowledge and lack of writing strategies. The reading and writing courses in
senior high school must address these needs because even though the ability to read and write
no longer solely define literacy skills, they still have bidirectional development paths along the
way. Reading and writing are two aspects of literacy abilities that support each other in a mutual
manner (Grabe & Zhang, 2016). Not only that, reading and writing allow students to gain a
richer cognizance of the world, especially now in this digital age. Students need to be equipped
with various reading and writing competencies because SHS is a transition period for students,
and they need to be prepared for college-level academic rigor and future employment.
Finally, the needs analysis concluded the learners’ preference in teaching strategies for
reading and writing. Students want authentic academic text samples to learn conventions,
mechanics, structure, organization, grammar, and vocabulary. This result is in line with the
students’ preference on context variables—studying and familiarization of professional
correspondences (resume, application for college, etc.) through examples. Additionally,
learners prefer writing in groups with the availability of online resources during morning class
hours.
Modern Journal of Studies in English Language Teaching and Literature Vol. 3 Issue 1 June 2021
162
Researchers recommend explicit instruction using the textual approach in the teaching
of reading, writing, and comprehension strategies since it involves teaching one strategy at a
time. This allows students to practice and apply it while teachers provide clear feedback and
reviews. This will then lead to independent practice. An example of explicit instruction is
describing and clarifying a skill, strategy, or process in a direct and systematic way. Another
is teaching it in a meaningful way through the use of context CPDD, 2010 as cited in
singteach.edu).
On top of this, utilization of the text-based approach as the tool in explicit instruction
allows the learners to recognize relevant information within texts, patterns of development, and
evaluate the conventions and mechanisms of a text. Reading more text samples broadens their
topic knowledge across disciplines. In addition, identifying vocabulary words in the given text
material as well as incidental grammar teaching as they examine academic texts will increase
their confidence in the process of actual writing. More so, students will be exposed to various
academic texts and eventually learn proper citations and functional knowledge that will guide
them on their academic journey as they are expected to compose texts, write reviews and
research reports, present arguments, give judgments, formulate critical essays, and write office
correspondences.
One of the strongest recommendations of this paper is on the creation of a syllabus for
the subject Reading and Writing. The syllabus for this subject must be eclectic in approach to
cater students’ various learning styles and different language situations which allow the
learners to know more and use the language. The syllabus must be outcomes-based to assess
how much students have learned. And if an effective syllabus is created, teachers and textbook
writers may use that syllabus as a basis for writing modules or worktexts which will aid in the
learning of the senior high school students.
This paper also calls for further studies that explore the emerging needs of students in
the SHS in terms of language learning. This call to action is deemed important to gather
information on how teachers and other stakeholders can help in the development and
engancement of students’ 21st century skills. Further studies on the needs of the SHS students
will provide a clearer pathway on what should be done in their classes and what innovations
can be introduced to improve the reading and learning process.
Finally, the outcomes-based approach may be used to ensure focused teaching and
learning. Educators should give topics, activities, and assessment tasks aligned to the learning
outcomes of developing learners’ reading, thinking, critical reading, and purposeful writing in
order to address the gaps between their current literacy level and the expected 21st-century
skills. This outcomes-based approach must be integrated with the paradigms of authentic and
collaborative task-based teaching and learning which have been established in research as
having positive effects in students' learning. Task-based activities facilitate collaboration and
social interaction which lend support to the development of target life-long learning skills that
are needed by the learners beyond the walls of the classroom into real-world contexts. In
addition, outcomes-based collaborative tasks are, by design, student-centered, giving students
rich opportunities to practice and own the language while addressing authentic goals and
objectives inside or outside the classroom (Blancaflor, Mauleon, and Purpura, 2021).
Modern Journal of Studies in English Language Teaching and Literature Vol. 3 Issue 1 June 2021
163
References
Akyel, A. S., & Ozek, Y. (2010). A language needs analysis research at an English medium
university in Turkey. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2).
Ampa, A. T., & Quraisy, H. (2018). Needs analysis of the English writing skill as the base to
design the learning materials. In SHS Web of Conferences (Vol. 42, p. 00050). EDP
Sciences.
Atanacio-Blas, F., Meraña, M., F. Averion, R., Anne Badanoy, M., Lee De Leon, A., & Collene
Ragudo, Y. (2018). Articulated Difficulties of Grade 11 Students At Taytay Senior High
School (Tshs) in English Proficiency. PEOPLE: International Journal of Social Sciences,
3(3), 1186–1202. https://doi.org/10.20319/pijss.2018.33.11861202
Baxter, P., & Jack, S. (2008). Qualitative Case Study Methodology : Study Design and
Implementation for Novice Researchers Qualitative Case Study Methodology : Study
Design and Implementation, 13(4), 544–559.
Blancaflor, R., Mauleon, M., & Purpura, J. (2021). The Use of Task-Based Activities in
Improving Active Listening Comprehension Skills of Grade 8 ESL Students. Modern
Journal of Studies in English Language Teaching and Literature, 3(1).
Castillo, R. A. L., Culawit, A. C., Mapendan, S. A. M., & Plata, R. A. P. Academic Text
Reading Skills Of Senior High School Students Of Batangas City. Humanities, 10(20),
30.
Cunningham, R. C. (2015). Needs analysis for a developmental reading, writing, and grammar
course at a private language school in cambodia. Second Language Studies, 32 (1), 1-
68.
Department of Education. (2013). Reading and Writing Skills [Curriculum Guide].
https://www.deped.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/SHS-Core_Reading-and-
Writing-CG.pdf
Farkas, W. A., & Jang, B. G. (2019). Designing, Implementing, and Evaluating a School-Based
Literacy Program for Adolescent Learners With Reading Difficulties: A Mixed-Methods
Study. Reading and Writing Quarterly, 35(4), 305–321.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10573569.2018.1541770
Gee, J. P., & Hayes, E. (2011). Language and Learning in the Digital Age (1st ed.). Routledge.
Grabe, W., & Zhang, C. (2016). Reading-writing relationships in first and second language
academic literacy development. Language Teaching, 49(3), 339-355.
doi:10.1017/S0261444816000082
Graham, S., Harris, K. R., & Beard, K. (2019). Teaching Writing to Young African American
Male Students Using Evidence-Based Practices. Reading and Writing Quarterly, 35(1),
19–29. https://doi.org/10.1080/10573569.2018.1535775
Gustilo, L. E. (2013). An Analysis of Writer’s Performance, Resources, and Idea Generation
Processes: The Case of Filipino Engineering Students. Language Testing in Asia, 3
(2), 2229-0443.
Modern Journal of Studies in English Language Teaching and Literature Vol. 3 Issue 1 June 2021
164
Gustilo, L., & Magno, C. (2015). Explaining L2 Writing Performance through a Chain of
Predictors: A SEM Approach. The Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies,
3(2), 115–130.
Hall, L. A. (2012). Moving Out of Silence: Helping Struggling Readers Find Their Voices in
Text-Based Discussions. Reading and Writing Quarterly, 28(4), 307–332.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10573569.2012.702037
Ibrahim, A. S. E. M. (2016). ESP needs analysis: a case study of PEH students, University of
Khartoum. Sino-US English Teaching, 13(12), 905-923.
Jaca, C. A., Jaluague, J., Lonoy, C., Mendoza, E. L., Mercado, R., & Sandimas, P. (2019).
Teachers ’ Perspectives on the Reading and Writing Subject of the Senior High School
Curriculum. International Journal of Education and Research, 7(6), 309–322.
Jordan, R. R. (1997). English for academic purposes: A guide and resource book for
teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Juan, L. I. (2014). Literature Review of the Classifications of “Needs” in Needs Analysis
Theory. International Journal of Education and Literacy Studies, 2(3).
https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijels.v.2n.3p.12
Kist, W. (2005). New Literacies in Action: Teaching and Learning in Multiple Media
(Language and Literacy Series). Teachers College Press.
Kress, G. (2003). Literacy in the New Media Age (Literacies) (1st ed.). Routledge.
Kuhlthau, C. C. (2010). Guided inquiry: School libraries in the 21st century. School libraries
worldwide, 16(1), 17-28.
Martizano, J. (2017). Reading difficulties of grade 7 students. (Unpublished master’s thesis).
Philippine Normal University – Mindanao.
Mickan, P. (2011). Text-Based Teaching : Theory and Practice.
Nueva, J. C. (2016) Students’ Writing Needs: Basis for Language Intervention Program. CMU
Journal of Science Vol. 20, No.2, 30-43.
Nusrat, A. (2016). Developing ESL learners’ writing skills: a needs analysis. Journal of
Teaching and Education, 251-264.
Ng, C. H. (n.d.). Explicit Teaching of Reading Comprehension Skills and Strategies |
SingTeach | Education Research for Teachers. Https://Singteach.Nie.Edu.Sg/.
Retrieved June 28, 2021, from https://singteach.nie.edu.sg/issue58-contributions02/
Otilia, S. M. (2015). Needs Analysis in English for Specific Purposes. Analele Universităţii
Constantin Brâncuşi Din Târgu Jiu : Seria Economie, 2(1), 54–55.
Pablo, J. C. I., & Lasaten, R. C. S. (2018). Writing difficulties and quality of academic essays
of senior high school students. Asia Pacific Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, 6(4),
46-57.
Patahangi, Z., Susanto, H., Syafiqiyah, D., & Ratih, E. (2015). CLASS: 3 E.
Modern Journal of Studies in English Language Teaching and Literature Vol. 3 Issue 1 June 2021
165
Pernito-Amor (2018). Reading proficiency of junior high school students. (Unpublished
master’s thesis). Philippine Normal University- Mindanao.
Plakans, L., Liao, J., & Wang, F. (2019). “I should summarize this whole paragraph” : Shared
processes of reading and writing in iterative integrated assessment tasks. Assessing
Writing, 40(November 2018), 14–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2019.03.003
Sadeghi, K. (2007). The Key for Successful Reader-writer Interaction: Factors Affecting
Reading Comprehension in L2 Revisited. The Asian EFL Journal, 9(3), 198–220.
Saeli, H., & Cheng, A. (2019). Effects of L1 Writing Experiences on L2 Writing Perceptions:
Evidence From an English as a Foreign Language Context. Reading and Writing
Quarterly, 35(6), 509–524. https://doi.org/10.1080/10573569.2019.1579129
Seaboyer, J., & Barnett, T. (2019). New perspectives on reading and writing across the
disciplines, 4360. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2019.1544111
Sönmez, H. (2019). An Examination of Needs Analysis Research in the Language Education
Process. International Journal of Education and Literacy Studies, 7(1), 8.
https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijels.v.7n.1p.8
Tenri Ampa, A., & Quraisy, H. (2017). Needs Analysis of the English Writing Skill as the Base
to Design the Learning Materials. SHS Web of Conferences GC-TALE, 42, 1–6.
https://doi.org/10.1051/shsconf/20184200050
Tompkins, G., Campbell, R., Green, D., & Smith, C. (2014). Literacy for the 21st century.
Pearson Australia.
Ventic and Eslit (2018). Reading fluency, comprehension, and vocabulary competence of
senior high school students: basis for reading enhancement program.
Wahyono, E., & Puspitasari, D. (2016, January). Students’ need analysis of English reading
skills for academic purposes. In Proceeding of International Conference on Teacher
Training and Education (Vol. 1, No. 1).
Widodo, H. P. (2017). Approaches to Needs Analysis in ESP Curriculum Development. The
European Journal of Applied Linguistics and TEFL, 6(1), 127–146.
About the Authors
Cielo May S. Urbano is an English language teacher at Potrero National High School Senior
High School (SHS) Department where she has been teaching for three years. Aside from that,
she is the current SHS Research Coordinator of the same school and the School-Based
Management Coordinator as well. She received her Baccalaureate degree at the University of
the East- Caloocan where she took up Bachelor of Arts major in Communication Arts and
graduated cum laude. She is currently taking her graduate studies at De La Salle University
under the course Master of Arts in English Language Education with a specialization on Second
Language Education. Her research interests are on corpus linguistics, discourse analysis,
Computer-Mediated Communication, to name a few.
Modern Journal of Studies in English Language Teaching and Literature Vol. 3 Issue 1 June 2021
166
Ma. Angelica A. Gumangan is a graduate of Philippine Normal University with a degree of
Bachelor of Arts in Secondary Education, major in English with units in Reading. She is
currently studying at De La Salle University under the Master of Arts in English Language
Education for her graduate studies. She has been teaching for ten years now, five of which was
spent in the private school. She teaches English to junior high school students in a public school
in Makati City and Communication Skills to Alternative Learning System learners in the same
school. Her research interest includes corpus linguistics, language policy, language assessment,
and language teaching.
Leah Gustilo, Ph.D., is an associate professor and a Research Fellow in the Department of
English and Applied Linguistics in De La Salle University, She was involved in several
research projects funded by the British Council, Fund to Assistance for Private Education,
Philippines; Japan International Cooperation Agency, Philippines; Knowledge Channel
Foundation, Inc.; and University Research Coordination Office of De La Salle University. She
has published articles on Philippine English, online self-presentation, internet talk, use of
technology in the classroom, and ESL writing and assessment and has presented her research
works in conferences in Asia, USA, and Europe. She is actively involved in teacher training
as a resource person on topics such as research ethics, getting published, action research, and
language teaching and assessment.
Ma. Pamela A. Capacete is a Communication and Languages, and Research Instructor in
Senior high school. She also handles literature subjects in the same level. She is a graduate of
BSEd, Major in English, Magna Cum Laude, at Colegio de San Juan de Letran Calamba.
Currently, she is finishing the program, Master of Arts in English Language Education, in De
La Salle University – Manila. Her research interests include Language Curriculum, Language
Assessment, Discourse Analysis, and Teaching of Reading.
