Chapter 1

INTRODUCTION

Background of the Study

Children learn new vocabulary with great agility and speed, but their learning is

dependent on the range of words they are exposed to. Being a second language, English in

whatever level gets by in school and social transactions regardless of structural slips.

Identifying scapegoats for the often-repeated “deterioration” of English offers no solution

at all. If the culprits of poor English, which means below standard English, include

educational fixtures such as the socio-cultural tolerance of English, bilingual education and

the status of English as a second language, then concerned individuals should pick up the

cudgels to restore English at a respectable level. Certainly, culprits cannot exclude non-

English teachers from English teachers, nor educational managers and textbook writers.

For Go (2005), the guiltiest party would be the students who refuse to learn by

themselves to improve their command of English as medium of their own learning.

Consequently, educators have to do something instead of parrying the bombardment on the

deterioration of English among our students who sooner or later become professionals as

teachers of English.

Richness in English vocabulary, adeptness in saying or expressing thoughts in

English through well-structured sentences, enough fluency in spoken English, and

confidence in speaking English almost characterize what is to be referred to as “good” in

English. In his site (http://www/wsu.educ/-brians/errors), Brians (2006) conducted a study

on errors in English. He argued based on his findings that the concept of language is

unclear.

1
 He focused his concern only with the deviations from the standard use of English

language. His study also found out that English language learners encounter errors in

learning the language especially in grammar, vocabulary and reading comprehension areas.

Alvaera, et al. (2009), in their research, believed that the insignificant relationship

of teaching approach with student achievement suggests that there is inefficiency or poor

quality of teaching in the public schools. Ghrib’s (2004) findings on the speaking

difficulties highlight that among the reasons, pronunciation ranked third, following

vocabulary and meaning and grammar, which, in fact, are closely related to verbalizing

one’s thoughts.

The National Reading Panel’s (NICHD, 2001) data that having students encounter

vocabulary words often, and in various ways, can have a significant effect on the

development of increased reading vocabulary (NICHD, 2001). Although not a surprising

finding, it does have direct implications for instruction. Students should not only repeat

vocabulary terms while learning them, but they should also learn words that frequently

appear in many texts and contexts (to reinforce the retention of these words’ meanings and

expand the value of time spent in vocabulary instruction).

Ideal vocabulary instruction will also have effects that carry over and benefit

students in the reading of materials that is new to them. Such instruction includes words

that students encounter frequently in language usage. Biemiller (2003) stated that “children

need this body of familiar words so that they can read new and even advanced text”.

According to literacy expert Beck, “vocabulary means learning meanings of new

words” and it can also mean “words that a reader recognizes in print” (Beck, McKeown,

& Kucan, 2008). Although these meanings are easy to grasp, delving into them a little

2
deeper exposes some complexities. There may be gradations of word knowledge that range

from no knowledge to “rich decontextualized knowledge of a word” (p. 792), and to what

degree does word recognition extend to variations of a word or word parts?

To help address these important issues, literacy experts generally agree that a

systematic and multifaceted approach to vocabulary and word-building skill instruction is

necessary. Specific components include (a) providing students with direct instruction of

keywords and word-learning strategies, (b) exposing students to extensive and vocabulary-

rich reading, and (c) creating an environment that encourages students to develop a “word

consciousness,” described as interest in and curiosity about words (Graves, 2006; Yopp &

Yopp, 2007).

The single greatest reason that vocabulary and word-skill development is important

is because of its significant impact on comprehension. This is true in terms of general

vocabulary development as well as for the development of content or academic

vocabulary, which is word knowledge used with texts that are valued in school (Brozo &

Simpson, 2007) or the words “necessary to learn and talk about academic subjects”

(Kieffer & Lesaux, 2007).

Studies supporting the strong relationship between vocabulary and comprehension

are extensive and date back to the mid-1940s. Subsequent studies (Snow, Tabors,

Nicholson, & Kurland, 1995) confirm similar findings for very young children and go so

far as to suggest that kindergarten students’ vocabulary knowledge is also a powerful

predictor of students’ reading comprehension in later years. Some experts claim the

relationship holds as much as four years later (Wagner et al., 1997), whereas others believe

it may extend to high school years (Cunningham & Stanovich, 1997). The strong

3
relationship between vocabulary knowledge and reading comprehension is reaffirmed by

the RAND Reading Study Group (2002) and leads other researchers to emphasize this

significance for content texts that expose students to new and specialized words (Harmon,

Hedrick, & Wood, 2005). In sum, students need general and specialized word knowledge

to support their comprehension, and ongoing instruction is necessary.

The studies conducted by Brians (2006) and Ghrib’s (2004) directly indicated that

vocabulary was one of the difficulties of the students. Similarly, the present research will

tackle vocabulary skills as the main variable and will explore the effectiveness of an

activity set in improving the skills of the students. On the other hand, the work of Alvaera,

et al. (2009) focused on the relationship of teaching approach with student achievement.

The present research will not try to establish relationship between vocabulary skills and

teaching performance.

In the San Julian-Sta. Maria High School, many students have not developed the

genuine desire to be good English speakers. As per the first periodic test, results indicated

that Grade 9 students averaged 18.26. Averaging 37.37%, students are categorized as

“beginning” as per the K to 12 grading system in their test scores. Meanwhile, their average

grades for the first quarter indicate that they had “approaching proficiency” performance.

Being an English teacher, the researcher takes into consideration the attention that should

be given to the low-performing students who registered the lowest performances in test

scores and quarterly grades. His observations and experiences with the students suggest

that their performance in written tests, quality of their outputs, and performance during

class discussions are affected by their ability to use English vocabulary. These premises

4
prompted the researcher to conduct this action research which aims to address the

vocabulary skills of Grade 9 students.

Accordingly, numerous types of approaches, techniques, exercises and practice

have been introduced into the field to teach vocabulary. Moreover, Nation (2001) makes

clear that vocabulary learning strategies are one part of language learning strategies which

in turn are part of general learning strategies. As well, Oxford (1990) observes that

language learning strategies encourage greater overall self-direction for learners. Self-

directed learners are independent learners who are able to assume responsibility for their

own learning and gradually gaining confidence, involvement and proficiency. Thus,

students need training in the vocabulary learning strategies they need most. Research has

shown that many learners do use more strategies to learn vocabulary, especially when

compared to such integrated tasks such as listening and speaking.

Yet Schmitt (1997) claims that they are mostly inclined to use basic vocabulary

learning strategies. This in turn makes strategy instruction an essential part of any foreign

or second language program. However, a greater knowledge of vocabulary learning

strategies could be very useful in supporting teachers to plan their lessons more effectively

and give guidance to students in adopting successful strategies. Over the decades, many

researchers have made an effort not only to classify, but also gather, these strategies in

order to support learners’ learning.

According to Berrabah (2014), the importance of vocabulary in language

acquisition goes uncontested. It is evident that vocabulary is indispensable for successful

(understanding and interacting) communication in any language. However, the evolution

5
towards recognition of the importance of lexical competence within second and /or foreign

language learning has gained interest.

Proficiency in reading is fundamental to success in school and in society.However,

national literacy rates are not keeping up with increasing demands for competence in

literacy skills (Britto et al., 2006). The goal of reading instruction is for children to become

self-regulating monitors of what they read.

Numerous instructional factors influence whether or not children are able to

comprehend text. Explicitly teaching children to use comprehension strategies has been

shown to improve text comprehension. Explicitly teaching word meanings has also been

demonstrated to mediate reading comprehension. Based on expectations for levels of

proficiency on standardized assessments that evaluate what children know and can do with

grade level text, in addition to jobs that require sophisticated knowledge to complete job

related tasks, it has become increasingly important to address reading comprehension

earlier than when children reach the upper elementary grades. In conjunction with

addressing reading comprehension, it is important to investigate factors that influence

comprehension, such as vocabulary.

Vocabulary instruction has been identified as an essential element of reading

instruction (NRP, 2000). Like comprehension instruction for children in primary grades,

vocabulary instruction has not received attention the way other reading instructional

methods have (Biemiller & Slonim, 2001), despite its influence on reading comprehension.

Readers must understand words in order to comprehend text. Some interventions with

children in both primary and elementary grades have shown that vocabulary instruction

increases word knowledge (Biemiller, 1999; Brett et al., 1996; Coyne et al., 2004).

6
 Traditional methods of instruction, such as copying definitions from a dictionary or

attempting to use a new word in a meaningful sentence have been demonstrated to be

ineffective in promoting vocabulary growth (Nagy, 1988). Superficial learning of word

meanings also contributes little to text comprehension (Beck & McKeown, 1991; Nagy,

1988). Several effective methods have been developed for teaching word meanings and,

more importantly, for promoting deeper understanding of words. Direct instruction of word

meanings and word learning from storybooks will be discussed in the following sections.

According to Stahl and Fairbanks (1986), direct instruction of vocabulary has

demonstrable effects on vocabulary learning and comprehension. However, they maintain

that vocabulary instruction should include more than definitions in order to improve

reading comprehension. Dictionary definitions provide inadequate explanations of word

meanings (McKeown, 1993). Beck, McKeown, and Kucan (2002)argue that the teachers

should carefully select appropriate words to teach students in order to contribute to

students’ vocabulary development. According to Beck et al. (2002), the primary

consideration in choosing words should be “the nature of the words themselves.” They

suggest that words “should be selected from the portion of word stock that comprises

sophisticated words of high utility for mature language users and that are characteristic of

written language” (p. 253, Beck & McKeown, 2007).

In academic circles, the place of vocabulary in language learning has been

significantly revised over the last decade and current academic thinking is very much at

odds with much classroom and textbook practice. Far from being an element which is

merely incidental to language learning, current thinking advocates that vocabulary may be

crucial to the development of language performance overall. In a recent version of

7
generative grammar, the Minimalist Program (Chomsky, 1995), the differences between

languages are seen to be mainly lexical in nature and this leads Cook (1998) to suggest that

the Minimalist Program is lexically-driven.

The properties of the lexical items shape the sentence rather than lexical items being

slotted into pre-existent structures. The task the language learner faces, therefore, is

principally one of learning the vocabulary of the foreign language. The acquisition of

vocabulary items in sufficient quantity triggers the setting of universal grammatical

parameters. This approach is reflected in the Lexical Learning Hypothesis (Ellis, 1997)

according to which vocabulary knowledge is indispensable to the acquisition of grammar.

One of the outcomes of the recent academic interest in vocabulary has been the

development of ways for describing and testing vocabulary knowledge, which are both

principled and systematic. Recently developed methods allow normalized data to be

produced so the growth of a foreign language lexicon over the course of learning can be

modelled. With this information it becomes possible to measure the contribution of

vocabulary knowledge to language development and confirm whether the close

relationship between vocabulary growth and language level exists in practice.

The relationship between vocabulary knowledge and reading comprehension is

consistently strong and has been recognized as a contributing factor for academic success

through studies going back to the 1920s (NICHD Report of the National Reading Panel

2000; RAND Reading Study Group 2002; Whipple 1925). It is both a major component of

a language development program for students who are learning English as another

language (Nation 2001) and a major stumbling block for those learning how to talk, write,

and read in the language used in schools and books (Cummins 2000; Scarcella, 2002).

8
 Riankamol (2008) investigated English vocabulary learning strategies adopted by

English gifted students of Triam Udomsuksa School in the first semesterof the academic

year 2008. The subjects were twenty seven students who was studying in English gifted

program at Triam Udomsuksa School. The purpose of the survey is to find most and least

frequently used vocabulary learning strategies usedby the English gifted students. An

instrument used in this survey study was a 25-item questionnaire adapted from Schmitt’s

taxonomy for vocabulary learning strategies. The data was analyzed by using frequency,

percentages, and means. The mean score indicated that the use of Metacognitive strategies

are most frequently used by English gifted students who are considered high proficient

students in English. And the least frequently used vocabulary strategy was “I learn words

by listening to vocabulary CDs.” in Cognitive strategies. However, the findings will be

advantageous to teachers to develop effective vocabulary teaching and to provide students

with successful vocabulary learning strategies.

Butler (2007) examined the effects of vocabulary-focused instruction and

strategies-focused instruction on the vocabulary development and comprehension skills of

students in primary grades who are adequate decoders, but non-proficient comprehenders.

Vygotsky’s theory of learning and development, Pearson and Gallagher’s gradual release

of responsibility model, metacognition, and Stanovich’s interactive-compensatory model

of reading served as theoretical guides for this study. A pretest-posttest design was

employed. Second and third grade students (N=60) in two groups received 32 sessions over

eight weeks, of either vocabulary-focused instruction or strategies-focused instruction.

Students in the vocabulary-focused group received instruction similar to Text Talk, and

students in the strategies-focused group received instruction similar to reciprocal teaching.

9
A series of analyses of covariance revealed no statistically significant differences between

groups on measures of expressive vocabulary, receptive vocabulary, reading

comprehension, listening comprehension, and on a researcher-created target vocabulary

measure. An analysis of covariance did reveal a statistically significant difference between

groups on a passage comprehension measure, favoring the vocabulary-focused group.

Pearson product moment correlation coefficients revealed moderate to robust correlations

of the measures.

Schatschneider, Buck, Torgesen, Wagner, Hassler, Hecht, and Powell-Smith

(2003) conducted a study to identify the major reading, cognitive, and linguistic skills that

contribute to individual differences in performance on the reading portion of the Florida

Comprehensive Assessment Test (FCAT) at third, seventh, and tenth grades. Two hundred

participants were administered tests that measurea variety of reading, language, and

cognitive skills. Results indicated that in third grade, reading fluency was the dominant

factor in explaining variability in test performance. In seventh grade, reading fluency and

verbal knowledge similarly explained variability in test performance individual

differences. However, by 10thgrade, verbal knowledge and reasoning was clearly

dominant factor in explaining variability in test performance on the FCAT.

Marulis, et al. (2000) conducted a meta-analysis which examined the effects of

vocabulary interventions on pre-K and kindergarten children‘s oral language development.

The authors quantitatively reviewed 67 studies and 216 effect sizes to better understand the

impact of training on word learning. Results indicated an overall effect size of .88,

demonstrating on average, a gain of nearly one standard deviation on vocabulary measures.

Moderator analyses reported greater effects for trained adults in providing the treatment,

10
combined pedagogical strategies that included explicit and implicit instruction, and author-

created measures compared to standardized measures. Middle and upper-income at-risk

children were significantly more likely to benefit from vocabulary intervention than those

students also at risk and poor. These results indicate that although they might improve oral

language skills, vocabulary interventions are not sufficiently powerful to close the gap—

even in the preschool and kindergarten years.

Mamaradlo (2011) proposed the use of module-based review sessions in improving

the test performance of the Grade VI pupils in Science 6. Pre-test and post-test results

showed that majority of the pupils were “poor” in their test performance in Science 6. The

post-test results of the Grade VI pupils showed that on general, majority of the pupils

progressed in their test performance. The computed t (0.40667) being less than the critical

value for t (1.66) at df = 96 for a one-tailed (directional) t-test with a α = 0.05 suggested

that the module-based review sessions are effective in improving the test performance of

the Grade VI pupils in Science 6 in the three (3) least-learned skills.

The researcher (Gamboa, 2015) proposed the use of a learning material to improve

the reading comprehension of Grade 8 students. Results revealed that show that there is a

significant difference between the pre-test scores (M = 9.779, SD = 3.4.239) and the post-

test scores (M = 27.307, SD = 7.175) of the students in the reading comprehension skill

test; t(139) = -28.420, p = 0.000. These results suggest that the students perform much

better in the post-test than that of the pre-test. Thus, the program use of the learning material

is very much effective in improving the reading comprehension skills of the students as

substantiated by a very high negative mean difference (MD = -17.529). This finding points

out that the use of the learning material contributed to the improvement in reading

11
comprehension skills of the Grade 8 students. The learning material covered eight (8) skills

which were selected by the researcher based on the least-learned skills in English 8 as

indicated by the students’ test scores.

Conceptual Framework

This action research established the effectiveness of an activity set in vocabulary

development in improving the vocabulary skills of selected Grade 9 students.

Figure 1. Paradigm of the Study

Statement of the Problem

This study was guided by the following questions:

1. What instructional supervisory roles do the school heads of the school in the Cluster 2

of DepEd Tarlac Province?

2. To what extent do school heads carry out the instructional supervisory activities in the

school?

3. How effectively do school heads’ instructional supervisory role influence students’

academic achievement?

4. What challenges do school heads face in carrying out their instructional supervisory

roles?

5. How could the school heads’ instructional supervision be improved based on the

findings of this study?

Significance of the Study

12
 This study hopes to contribute to improvement of performance of the

supervision role of school heads and the Department of Education. The study will be a

tool of learning for the above agent of education because they are involved in one way or

another in instructional supervision in the schools. The school heads will be challenged to

improve their ways of motivating, supporting and directing teachers and allocating more

of their time in instructional supervision. The study is hoped to help principals reinforce

those supervisory activities that positively influence student’s academic achievement.

The DepEd can also use the findings of this study to determine the areas that require

attention particularly during the formulation of policies relating to internal supervision in

schools. The department could further use the findings to improve their in-service programs

for school heads and teachers in cognizant to students’ academic performance. The

challenges that school heads face while carrying out instructional supervision will also be

known and be addressed by the department thus providing insights for the in-service

training of school heads. The research will also help them plan workshops or in-service

courses that will help school heads learn or acquire new ways of helping teachers develop

their instructional skills for improvement of academic achievement in secondary schools.

Teachers will also benefit from the result of the study by getting insights regarding

instructional supervisory roles that school heads have been entrusted to perform in their

schools to support motivate and stimulate them. The study will enable the teachers know

what to expect from their school heads and take initiative to seek for those services from

their school heads.

Students will also benefit from the results of the study as a result of improved

supervisory roles of the school heads. The students will be able to cover the syllabus on

13
time, understand each subject well as a result of quality teaching through improved

teaching methodologies of teachers. The students will also be keen to set targets of their

performance as a result of consistent monitoring of their academic achievement. They

would benefit from quality instructional time which would be realized as a result of

observance of punctuality by teachers which would spill over to the students.

The findings will also benefit future researchers who will undertake the same

course. In this area of study there are suggested areas for researchers to study in order

enrich knowledge in this field. This would further improve the quality of education through

better learning and teaching strategies. Other researchers would be motivated to study the

problem in other learning institutions that would add to the existing data in order to further

improve the quality of education through better learning and teaching strategies.

Chapter 2

METHODOLOGY

Research Design

14
 This researcher used a mixed method research approach and employed both

quantitative and qualitative research. Cross-sectional survey and naturalistic

phenomenology designs was used.

Cross-sectional survey design is a method that involves asking a large group of

people at one point, such as principals’ teachers and students questions about a particular

issue. The purpose of the survey is to describe existing conditions, identify the standards

against which existing conditions can be compared, and investigate the relationships that

may exist between events. (Creswell, 2013). The cross-sectional design was used in order

to establish opinions and knowledge about how instructional supervisory role of the school

heads influence students’ academic achievement.

Naturalistic phenomenology design was also used in this study. Phenomenology is

the study of the world as it appears to individuals when they lay aside the prevailing

understandings of those phenomena and revisit their immediate experience of the

phenomena Gall, Gall, & Borg (2007). The main characteristics of phenomenology are

participants’ experiences and their interpretations. The researcher constructs an overall

description of the meaning and the essence of the experience. Document analysis is one of

the instruments used by naturalistic phenomenology design to collect data. (Macmillan

2014). The document analysis guide was used to collect data from teachers’ professional

records, master time table and instructional materials. The use of questionnaires, interview

guides and document analysis to collect data helped to facilitate wider understanding of the

problem under study. The instruments gave comprehensive analysis of the research

questions.

Sources of Data

15
 The target respondents will come from four (5) public schools in Cluster 2 of the

Province of Tarlac. All-in-all four (5) schools heads, and ten (10) head teachers will

participate as respondents for the instructional supervisors. Fifty-eight (58) randomly

selected teachers will participate as teacher-respondents and one hundred sixty-eight (168)

randomly selected grade 10 students will participate as student-respondents.

Probability and non-probability sampling procedures were used to select the sample

sizes in this study. Automatic inclusion was used to select the school heads from the

sampled schools. This sampling technique shall be used to allow all the six (6) school heads

of the six (6) schools to participate in the study.

The Slovin’s formula was used to determine the sample size for the teacher- and

students-respondents. The sample size will be conducted with a 5% margin of error. The

Slovin’s formula is written as:

𝑁
𝑛=
1 + 𝑁𝑒 2

where:

𝑛 is the sample size

𝑁 is the population size

𝑒 is the margin of error

Stratified random sampling shall be used to select teachers from the delimited

schools. The selection of teacher-respondents shall be random, and the teachers will not be

selected as per departments or subjects because instructional supervision cuts across all

departments. There would be no variation in relation to departments or subjects. All-in-all

___ number of teachers will participate as teacher-respondents.

16
 To select the students-respondents, the researcher shall first conduct a normative

selection to ensure that the academic performance of the student-respondent is distributed

normally. Only students in the normal distribution shall be considered as respondents. This

shall be done to remove statistical bias such as outliers or data that are very far from the

mean of the distribution. Afterwards stratified random sampling was also employed to get

students-respondents from each of the delimited schools. All-in-all, ____ number of

students shall participate in the study as student-respondent.

The table below shows the distribution of respondents.

Instrumentation and Data Collection

Tools for Data Analysis

CHAPTER 3

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

17
This part contains the discussion of the results based on the SOP…….
one-to-one correspondence with the number of sub-problems in the
SOP.
Given the following SOPs:
1 . What is the performance of the Grade 5 pupils before and after the
use of graphic organizers?
2 . Is there a significant difference between the performance of the
Grade 5 pupils before and after the use of graphic organizers?

Sub-sections in Chapter 3 will be:

Performance of the Grade 5 pupils Before and After the Use of Graphic
Organizers (for SOP number 1)
<DISCUSSIONS>
Difference Between the Performance of the Grade 5 pupils Before and
After the Use of Graphic Organizers (for SOP number 2)
< DISCUSSIONS >

The PRESENT-SHOW-DISCUSS is followed in the presentation of

tables/figures/plates.
Example:
Performance of the Grade 5 pupils Before and After the Use of Graphic
Organizers
<PRESENT the figure> Figure 3.1 presents the test scores of the
Grade 5 pupils before the use of graphic organizers.
<SHOW the figure>

18
<FIGURE TITLE>(in the case of tables, the TABLE TITLE is placed
above the table)

<DISCUSS and analyze the contents of the figure (for tables,

avoid table reading)> < include at least 4 cross-references>

CHAPTER 4

19
 SUMMARY, CONCLUSSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Summary

Please consider the following to be included in the

summary:

Research objectives
SOP in paragraph form
Summary of the methodology
Salient findings (including the results of the hypothesis
testing)

Conclusions
20
Pls consider the following:

Present brief, generalized statements deduced from the

findings to answer the general and sub-problems

Observe the alignment of the research problems to the

conclusion….. briefly worded and directly answering in
sequential order the research problems

Conclusion is not a restatement of the findings and free from

any misleading impression, bias or unfair and incorrect
generalization

It must be stated in paragraph form

Recommendations

21
Pls consider the following:

Acceptable and relevant suggestions that offer solutions

to the problems or issues presented in the study based
from the conclusions

Present in number not in a paragraph form

22
 Bibliography

• Include all materials used and reviewed by the

researcher
• Use the APA format

Example:

Jen-Wei Chang & Hung-Yu Wei. (2016). Exploring

Engaging Gamification Mechanics in Massive Online
Open Courses. Journal of Educational Technology &
Society, 19(2), 177-203. Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org/stable/jeductechsoci.19.2.177

All studies need to be indicated to avoid pligiarism

Appendix A

23
Letter to Schools Division Superintendent

24
 Appendix B

Letter to Validators of the Questionnaire

25
 Appendix C
Letter to the Respondents of the Study

26
 Appendix D
Research Instrument

27
 Appendix E
Questionnaire in Establishing the Content
Validity of the Questionnaire

28
 Appendix F

Content Validation of the Instrument

29
CURRICULUM VITAE

30