Reading Comprehension and Mathematics Word Problem Solving Among College of Education Students of Isabela State University Towards Development of Strategic Program Plan
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.65141/sjter.v3i1n4Keywords:
Reading comprehension, Mathematical word-problem solving, Newman’s Error Analysis, Literacy–Numeracy integration, Teacher EducationAbstract
This study examined the relationship between reading comprehension and the ability to solve mathematical word problems among first-year College of Education (CED) students at Isabela State University–Echague. Specifically, it assessed students’ performance across five reading comprehension dimensions—literal, inferential, critical, creative, and valuing/application—and their problem-solving ability using Newman’s Error Analysis, which includes reading, comprehension, transformation, process skills, and encoding errors. A descriptive-correlational research design was employed involving 76 purposively selected respondents. Data were gathered using a reading comprehension test and a mathematics word-problem solving test, and analyzed using frequency, percentage, mean, standard deviation, Pearson correlation, t-test, and one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA). Findings revealed that students demonstrated proficient to excellent reading comprehension, particularly in the critical dimension (4.21) and valuing/application dimension (4.36), while the creative dimension was only at a developing level (2.93). In contrast, students exhibited poor performance across all stages of mathematical word-problem-solving, with transformation (1.00) and process skills (1.01) identified as the most critical weaknesses. Correlation analysis showed that most relationships between reading dimensions and mathematical performance were weak and not statistically significant, indicating a gap in the transfer of reading skills to mathematical contexts. Significant differences were observed when grouped according to sex, while differences across academic programs were generally not significant, except in the literal dimension. The findings suggest that reading comprehension skills alone may not sufficiently explain students’ mathematical word-problem-solving performance. Consequently, a strategic course plan integrating reading comprehension and mathematical problem-solving strategies was developed to address identified gaps. The study recommends the adoption of integrated literacy–numeracy instruction, differentiated teaching approaches, and explicit training in problem representation and metacognitive strategies to improve students’ academic performance and teaching readiness.
Downloads
References
Aguila, M. A. (2020). Effectiveness of the SQRQCQ strategy in solving mathematical word problems among secondary students. Philippine Journal of Education Research, 15(2), 45–58.
Anderson, J. R. (2015). Cognitive psychology and its implications (8th ed.). Worth Publishers.
Ball, D. L. (2008). Content knowledge for teaching: What makes it special? Journal of Teacher Education, 59(5), 389–407.
Bernardo, A. B. I., Cordel, M. O. II, Lapinid, M. R. C., Teves, J. M. M., Yap, S. A., & Chua, U. C. (2024). Challenges in mathematics and reading instruction in Philippine basic education. Philippine Educational Research Journal, 18(1), 44–59.
Boctot, I. R., Enriquez, D. M., & Yurango, C. P. (2025). Reading comprehension and mathematical problem-solving skills among Filipino learners. Asian Journal of Educational Research, 12(1), 55–72.
David, C. C., Albert, J. R. G., & Vizmanos, J. F. V. (2020). Factors affecting reading comprehension performance among Filipino students. International Journal of Education and Literacy Studies, 8(3), 65–73.
Department of Education. (2018). National mathematics achievement assessment report. Department of Education.
Department of Education. (2019). Philippine reading literacy framework. Department of Education.
Department of Education. (2023). Higher Order Thinking Skills Professional Learning Packages (HOTS-PLPs). Department of Education.
Education For All 2015 National Review Report: Philippines. (2015). Retrieved from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0023/002303/230331e.pdf
Grabe, W. (2009). Reading in a second language: Moving from theory to practice. Cambridge University Press.
Hijada Jr., R. (2022). Reading comprehension and mathematics problem-solving performance among elementary pupils. Philippine Journal of Educational Measurement, 11(2), 56–70.
Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy: An overview. Theory Into Practice, 41(4), 212–218.
Mayer, R. E. (2002). Rote versus meaningful learning. Theory Into Practice, 41(4), 226–232.
National Association for the Education of Young Children. (2020). Developmentally appropriate practice in early childhood programs. NAEYC.
National Economic and Development Authority & United Nations Development Programme (2014). Philippines fifth progress report on the Millennium Development Goals. Pasig City, Philippines: National Economic and Development Authority.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2023). PISA 2022 results: What students know and can do. OECD Publishing.
Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2014). Critical thinking: Tools for taking charge of your professional and personal life (2nd ed.). Pearson Education.
Philippine News Agency. (2023). Philippine education challenges reflected in PISA 2022 results. Philippine News Agency.
Pólya, G. (1945). How to solve it. Princeton University Press.
Robinson, K. (2011). Out of our minds: Learning to be creative (2nd ed.). Capstone.
Romorosa, M. (2024). Teacher-centered instruction and student learning outcomes in Philippine classrooms. Philippine Journal of Teacher Education, 9(1), 21–39.
Rosenblatt, L. M. (1978). The reader, the text, the poem: The transactional theory of the literary work. Southern Illinois University Press.
Sadker, D. M., & Zittleman, K. (2009). Teachers, schools, and society (9th ed.). McGraw-Hill.
Schoenfeld, A. H. (1985). Mathematical problem solving. Academic Press.
Snow, C. (2002). Reading for understanding: Toward a research and development program in reading comprehension. RAND Corporation.
Torres, A. (2011). Analysis on why boys do poorly: Philippines case study. Unpublished manuscript
UNESCO. (2021). Global education monitoring report 2021. UNESCO Publishing.
