Table 1.

1 Presents the data based on the Level of Reading

Comprehension as Reflected in the Pre-Test Mean Scores of Control
Group in Terms of Literal
Based on Table 1, the pre-test mean scores of the control group in terms of literals in the reading
comprehension of Grade 6 Faith students at Baluarte Elementary School can be described by the
students in the control group. It shows that 10 students got a score ranging from 8 to 10, with a mean
range of 2.33 to 3.00, which means 58.8% of the respondents have a high level of reading
comprehension. In the level of average reading comprehension, 6 students got a score ranging from 5-7
with a mean range of 1.67–2.32, which means 35.3% of the participants belong in the level of average
reading comprehension. Meanwhile, in the level of lowest reading comprehension, only 1 student got a
score ranging from 1-4 with a mean range of 1.00–1.66, which means 5.9% of the respondents have the
lowest reading comprehension.

The overall mean for the control group's reading comprehension is 2.53, indicating that, on average, the
group falls within the "high reading comprehension" level. In terms of literal, it signifies that they
received a high score in the multiple choice test during the pre-test among the control group.

Reading comprehension is key to students’ success in school, as well as in life (Wijekumar et al., 2019).
Especially in the critical period of late elementary education, developing appropriate skills to
comprehend expository texts becomes increasingly important (Keresteš et al., 2019).

REF.

Wijekumar, K., Meyer, B. J., Lei, P., Beerwinkle, A. L., and Joshi, M. (2019). Supplementing teacher
knowledge using web-based Intelligent Tutoring System for the Text Structure Strategy to improve
content area reading comprehension with fourth- and fifth-grade struggling readers. Dyslexia 1–
17. doi: 10.1002/dys.1634
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/feduc.2023.1066837/full#h14

Keresteš, G., Brkovic, I., Siegel, L. S., Tjus, T., and Hjelmquist, E. (2019). Literacy development
beyond early schooling: a 4-year follow-up study of Croatian. Reading Writing 32, 1955–1988.
doi: 10.1007/s11145-018-9931-9 https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11145-018-9931-9

Table 1.2 Presents the data based on the Level of Reading Comprehension as Reflected in the

Pre-Test Mean Scores of Control Group in Terms of Inferential

The table above shows that only 2 students got a score ranging from 4-5 with a mean range of 2.33–
3.00, which means 11.8% of the respondents have a high level of reading comprehension. In the level of
average reading comprehension, 12 students got a score ranging from 2–3, with a mean range of 1.67–
2.32, which means 70.6% of the respondents belong in the level of average reading comprehension. In
the level of low reading comprehension, only 3 students got a score ranging from 0 to 1, with a mean
range of 1.00 to 1.66, which means 17.6% of the respondents belong to the low reading comprehension
level. This data illustrates the control group's reading comprehension levels on a pre-test, emphasizing
inferential interpretation.

The overall mean for the control group's reading comprehension is 2.06, placing it within the "average
reading comprehension" level. This implies that the respondents in the control group demonstrated an
average level of reading comprehension during the pre-test in terms of inferential because only two of
them received a score of 4-5 and many of them can recite what they read in the story but not perfectly
and received a score ranging 2-3, consequently falling under the average reading comprehension level.

Nurhayati: 2019) argued that the method of recitation is a method of teaching by requiring students
to make resumes with their own sentences. With this method of recitation students will dare to
write in his own way, responsible with the results of his writing and will always remember with the
material that is taught. So recitation means students quote or take their own parts of the lesson
from certain books, then self-study and practice until it is ready as it should be.
Ref.
Nurhayati, N. (2019). Application of Recitation Methods to Improve Learning Outcomes. Journal of
Education. http://jurnal.untad.ac.id/jurnal/index.php/JKTO/article/download/7107/5713

Table 1.3 reflects the level of reading comprehension in the control group based on pre-test mean
scores and critical interpretation.

Based on the table above, in the reflection part, there are 8 students who got a score ranging from 4-5,
with a mean range of 2.33–3.00. This group makes up 47.1% of students categorized as having high
reading comprehension. On the other hand, in the average reading comprehension level, 7 students got
scores ranging from 2–3, with a mean range of 1.67 to 2.32, which means 41.2% of the respondents
belong to the level of average reading comprehension. In the low reading comprehension level, only 2
students got a score ranging from 0 to 1 and a mean range of 1.00 to 1.66, which means 11.8% of the
respondents belong in the lowest reading comprehension level.

The overall mean for the control group in terms of critical is 1.71. This implies that the respondents, in
terms of critical reading comprehension, fall below the average reading comprehension level across all
participants because they struggle to reflect what they read.

Kusiak-Pisowacka (2020) stated that improving critical reading skills is a main part of reading
instruction, particularly reading texts directed to more advanced learners. Critical reading is an
essential requirement for effective involvement in modern social life, wherever reading printed
texts and online texts is a daily activity.
Ref.
Kusiak-Pisowacka, M. (2020). Developing critical reading skills: A coursebook evaluation study.
Symposia Melitensia. https://www.um.edu.mt/library/oar/handle/123456789/53747

Table 1.4 presents the data based on the level of reading comprehension in the experimental group
based on pre-test mean scores and literal interpretation.

The table shows that 77.8% of the respondents, or 14 students, fall into the "high reading
comprehension" level, with scores ranging from 8 to 10 and a mean range of 2.33 to 3.00. In the
"average reading comprehension" level, 16.7% of the respondents, or only 3 students, got a score
ranging from 5 to 7 and a mean range of 1.67 to 2.32. Only 5.6%, or only 1 student, are in the "Low
Reading Comprehension" level, scoring 1 to 4 with a mean range of 1.00 to 1.66.

The overall mean for reading comprehension in the experimental group based on pre-test mean scores
in terms of literal is 2.94, which falls within the "high reading comprehension" range. This implies that, in
multiple choice test, the students in the experimental group have strong reading comprehension skills.

Open-ended multiple choice questions, consisting of an open answer format, allow participants to
answer in a free and individual way. However, this free format requires high output demands in terms of
linguistic skills to formulate appropriate responses (Weigle et al., 2013; Calet et al., 2020).

Ref.

Weigle, S. C., Yang, W., and Montee, M. (2013). Exploring reading processes in an academic reading test using
short-answer questions. Lang. Assess. Q. 10, 28–48. doi: 10.1080/15434303.2012.750660
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/15434303.2012.750660

Table 1.5 presents the data based on the Level of Reading Comprehension as Reflected in the Pre-Test
Mean Scores of Experimental Group in Terms of Inferential

Specifically, the data shows that 11.1% of the participants have high reading comprehension, which
means only 2 students got scores ranging from 4 to 5, with a mean range of 2.33 to 3.00. In the average
reading comprehension level, 72.2% of the participants got scores ranging from 2 to 3, with a mean
range of 1.67 to 2.32. This category has the highest frequency, with 13 students in total. Meanwhile, in
the low reading comprehension level, 16.7% of the participants got scores ranging from 0 to 1, with a
mean range of 1.00 to 1.66. This category has a frequency of only 3 students in total.

The overall mean score of experimental group in reading comprehension in terms of inferential is 1.94,
putting them in the average range. These data implies that the majority of the experimental group in
terms of inferential had ordinary reading comprehension skills, with a smaller proportion having high or
low reading comprehension ability.

A meta-analysis by Elleman (2017) observed that reading interventions that focus on inference-making
increase inferential reading comprehension of students across grade levels and also improve literal
comprehension for struggling readers.

Ref.

Elleman, A. M. (2017). Examining the impact of inference instruction on the literal and inferential
comprehension of skilled and less skilled readers: a meta-analytic review. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 109, 761–781. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000180.

Table 1.6: presents the data based on the Level of Reading Comprehension as Reflected in the Pre-Test
Mean Scores of Experimental Group in Terms of Critical

The data shows that 16.7% of respondents were considered to have high reading comprehension,
scoring between 4 and 5 with a mean range of 2.33 to 3.00. This implies that only 3 students in the
experimental group were capable of comprehending the reading materials. Another 22.2% of
participants scored between 2 and 3, with a mean range of 1.67 to 2.32. This shows that 4 students had
an average level of reading comprehension. Meanwhile, 61.1% of the participants scored between 0 and
1, with a mean range of 1.00 to 1.66. This shows that 11 students in the experimental group struggled to
understand and comprehend what they read because of their low reading comprehension. During the
pre-test, the experimental group in term of critical appeared to have a low level of reading
comprehension.

Overall, the data show that the majority of the experimental group in terms of critical had a low level of
reading comprehension, with an overall mean score of 1.50. This emphasizes the need for interventions
or methods to improve the experimental group participants' reading comprehension skills.

The impediment to addressing this perplexing poor reading comprehension problem is to use
reading strategies to establish a valid meaning negotiation between the reader and the text
(Elleman & Oslund, 2019).

Elleman, A. M., & Oslund, E. L. (2019, March 1). Reading Comprehension Research: Implications
for Practice and Policy. Policy insights from the behavioral and brain sciences. Retrieved
November 20, 2023, https://doi.org/10.1177/2372732218816339

Table 2.1 Present the data based on the Control Group Post-Test Mean Scores and their Level of

Reading Comprehension when Exposed to Conventional Approach in Terms of Literal

When exposed to the Conventional Approach, the students in the control group displayed various level

of reading comprehension, as shown by their post-test mean scores. Notably, 64.7% of respondents or

11 students have a high level of reading comprehension, with a mean score of 2.33-3.00 and a score

ranging 8-10. Meanwhile, 23.5% of respondents or 4 students demonstrated average comprehension,

with scores ranging from 5-7 and a mean range of 1.67-2.32. On the other hand, 11.8% of the

respondents or only 2 students have a poor reading comprehension, with scores ranging from 1-4 and

a mean range of 1.00-1.66.

The overall mean score for the control in the post-test when exposed to the conventional approach in
terms of literal was 2.53, demonstrating a general proficiency in reading comprehension. It implies the
majority of students in the control group in terms of literal did well, with a significant percentage
obtaining high levels of comprehension and a smaller portion demonstrating average or poor levels of
comprehension.

According to Rues, K. (2019), reading comprehension should be viewed on a multi-faceted continuum

that considers the student’s skill level in decoding words, their willingness to take on a text, and their
exposure to the content.

Ref.

Rues, K. (2019, October 15). To Foster Confidence and Motivation in Young Readers, Consider This.
EdSurge. https://www.edsurge.com/news/2019-10-08-to-foster-confidence-and-motivation-in-young-
readers-consider-this

Table 2.2 Presents the data based on the Control Group Post-Test Mean Scores and their Level of

Reading Comprehension when Exposed to Conventional Approach in Terms of Inferential

The control group post-test mean scores were categorized by levels of reading comprehension when
exposed to the conventional approach in terms of inferential. The data shows that in the high reading
comprehension level, 29.4% of the respondents, or 5 students, got scores ranging from 4 to 5, with a
mean range of 2.33 to 3.00. Moving to the average reading comprehension level, 64.7% of the
respondents, or 11 students, got scores ranging from 2 to 3, with a mean range of 1.67–2.32. On the
other hand, 5.9% of the respondents, or only 1 student in the low reading comprehension level, got a
score ranging from 0 to 1, with a mean range of 1.00 to 1.66.
The overall mean for the control group post-tests in reading comprehension in terms of inferential is
2.24, providing a comprehensive average across all participants. These imply variations in
comprehension levels within the control group, highlighting the impact of the conventional approach on
different individuals.

According to (Hong, Ma, Lin, & Yuan-Hsuan, 2020). Having good reading comprehension skills is very
important because these skills are not only helpful academically, but also professionally and
personally. Having excellent reading comprehension skills is also believed to increase students'
enjoyment and effectiveness of reading. More importantly, good reading comprehension enables
students to express thoughts, ideas, and feelings, which helps them become well-integrated citizens in
the long run.

Ref.

Hong, H.-Y., Ma, L., Lin, P.-Y., & Yuan-Hsuan Lee, K. (2020). Advancing third graders’ reading
comprehension through collaborative Knowledge Building: A comparative study in Taiwan.
Computers& Education, 157, 103962. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103962

Table 2.3 shows the Control Group Post-Test Mean Scores and their Level of Reading Comprehension
when Exposed to Conventional Approach in Terms of Critical

The data result shows that in control group 23.5% of the respondents have a higher level of reading
comprehension, which means only 4 students got the score ranging 4-5 with a mean range of 2.33-3.00.
In the level of average reading comprehension 29.4% of the respondents got the score ranging to 2-3
and with a mean range of 1.67-2.32. This level has a frequency of 5 students in total. Meanwhile, the
level of low reading comprehension 47.1% of the respondents got the lowest score ranging 0-1 with a
mean range of 1.00-1.66. This level has a frequency of 8 students in total.

The control group average reading comprehension over-all mean is 1.76. This average shows the
combined performance of all control group participants and provides an overall measure of their
reading comprehension ability.

In summary, these findings suggest that the conventional approach used in the control group did not
lead to significant improvements in reading comprehension. The majority of students had average or
low reading comprehension, emphasizing the need for alternate educational approaches to improve
their reading skills.

Academic reading is efficient when specific techniques maintain the reader’s attention and
enthusiasm. Students must consistently seek to enhance their reading skills and know how to
implement the strategy (Louiza & Fadhila, 2022). In addition, teachers must provide clear training
on the skills and encourage students to embrace critical thinking.
Louiza, C., & Fadhila, A. (2022). Metacognitive awareness and perceived use of reading strategies in
academic reading comprehension: case of Algerian EFL students. El-Quari ‘e Journal of Literary and
Linguistic Studies, 5(1), 750-763.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/372632028_A_mixed_method_study_on_the_metacognitiv
e_awareness_of_reading_strategies_used_by_Saudi_EFL_students

Table 2.4 Presents the data based on the Experimental Group Post-Test Mean Scores and their

Level of Reading Comprehension when Exposed to PQ4R Strategy in Terms of Literal

The data shows that 77.8% of the respondents, or 14 students, achieved high reading comprehension
scores ranging from 8–10 with a mean range of 2.33–3.00 after being exposed to the PQ4R strategy. The
average reading comprehension level constitutes 22.2% of the respondents, or only 4 students, with
scores ranging from 5-7 with a mean range of 1.67–2.32. The data for the low reading comprehension
group is not provided.

The overall mean for the experimental group post-test when exposed to PQ4R strategy in terms of literal
is 2.78. It implies the majority of students in the experimental group in terms of literal did well, with a
significant percentage obtaining high levels of comprehension and a smaller portion demonstrating
average or poor levels of comprehension.

Fauziah (2021) indicated that PQ4R strategy helps learners have a better understanding of written
language. This encourages them to focus on organizing the data in their minds and making it relevant. It
leads to many areas of active learning and deeper information processing.

Ref.

Fauziah, N. A. (2021). The effect of using pq4r (preview, question, read, reflect, recite, review) in
teaching reading comprehension. In Prosiding Seminar Nasional Pendidikan Universitas Subang
(SENDINUSA), 3(1), 317-322. https://ejournal.unsub.ac.id/index.php/sendinusa/article/view/1325

Table 2.5 presents the data based on the experimental post-test mean scores and the level of reading
comprehension for an experimental group exposed to the PQ4R strategy, interpreted in terms of
inferential.

The data indicates that after exposure to the PQ4R strategy, 44.4% of the experimental group, or 8
students, achieved high inferential reading comprehension levels, scores ranging from 4-5 with a mean
range of 2.33–3.00. In the average reading comprehension level, 22.2% of the respondents, or 4
students, got a score ranging from 2–3 with a mean range of 1.67–2.32. On the other hand, 33.3% of the
respondents, or 6 students, exhibited low comprehension, with a score ranging from 0 to 1, with a mean
range of 1.00 to 1.66.

The overall mean for the experimental group post-test in the level of reading comprehension when
exposed to the PQ4R strategy in terms of inferential is 2.11. This implies that the experimental group, in
terms of inferential, falls below the average level of reading comprehension when exposed to the PQ4R
strategy.

Moreover, Marisa, Monalisa, and Abadi (2019) pointed out that PQ4R is used to help learner understand
and remember what they read. It enables learners in the learning process in class with reading activities.
The basic idea behind teaching reading is that it is the most vital basic to develop comprehension of the
reading material or text.

Ref.

Marisa, T., Monalisa, M., & Abadi, A. (2019). The effect of PQ4R method toward student‘s reading
comprehension on the eighth grade students of Madrasah Tsanawiyah Negeri 1 Kota Jambi (Doctoral
dissertation, Uin Sulthan Thaha Saifuddin Jambi.)

https://suijer.journals.ekb.eg/article_305880_8c292ff5816a1a2764fa47f5a02cc618.pdf

Table 2.6 Presents the data based on the Experimental Group Post-Test Mean Scores and their

Level of Reading Comprehension when Exposed to PQ4R Strategy in Terms of Critical

The data indicates that, following exposure to the PQ4R strategy, 55.6% of the respondents, or 10
students, achieved high critical reading comprehension scores ranging from 4-5 with a mean range of
2.33–3.00. 38.9% of the respondents, or 7 students, belong to the level of average reading
comprehension, with a score ranging from 2–3 with a mean range of 1.67–2.32, while 5.6% of the
respondents, or only 1 student, belong to the level of low reading comprehension, with a score ranging
from 0–1 and a mean range of 1.00–1.66.

The overall mean for the high-reading comprehension group is 2.50. It implies that a substantial portion
of the experimental group attained a high level of critical reading comprehension, emphasizing the
effectiveness of the PQ4R strategy in fostering critical interpretation skills.

Eka, As1, and Yuliana (2018) prove that PQ4R strategy has successfully increased the students’ reading
comprehension.

Furthermore, Salem AlSereidi (2019) emphasized the significance of critical reading as a key demand
that learners need to perform well in the world and more essentially have an active role in creating and
producing the knowledge rather than being consumers of the knowledge that is creating consistently
and continuously all over the world.

Ref.

Eka, M. D., As1, I., & Yuliana. (2018). The effect of using PQ4R (preview, question, read, reflect, recite,
review) strategy on EFL students’ reading comprehension achievement. Research in English and
Education(READ),3(1),17-24
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/330584142_The_Impact_of_PQ4R_Strategy_Use_on_EFL_St
udents'_English_Reading_Comprehension

Salem AlSereidi, M. A. (2019). Exploring critical reading experience in English of Emirati 11th grade
students .PhD United Arab Emirates University. https://scholarworks.uaeu.ac.ae/all_dissertations/107.

Table 3.1 Presents the Extent of Effectiveness in the Utilization of the Level of the PQ4R

Strategy in the Aspects of the Level of Reading Comprehension

Based on the table above, the mean reading comprehension scores for the literal in the control

group post-test results is 2.53, which falls under the (HRC) High Reading Comprehension

category. The mean score in inferential is 2.24, which corresponds to (ARC) Average Reading

Comprehension, and the mean score in critical is 1.76, which belongs to (LRC) Low Reading

Comprehension. The overall mean for the post-test control group is 2.18, which corresponds to

(ARC) Average Reading Comprehension. This means that the control group had the highest

level of reading comprehension in the literal aspect, followed by the inferential aspect, and the

lowest level of comprehension in the critical aspect.

In comparison to the control group, the experimental group, which used the PQ4R strategy, had
a little higher mean scores in all aspects of reading comprehension. The experimental group
had a mean score of 2.78 for the literal aspect, which is referred to as "HRC," a mean score of
2.11 for the inferential aspect, which is referred to as "ARC," and a mean score of 2.50 for the
critical aspect, which is also referred to as "LRC." These findings indicate that using the PQ4R
strategy improved reading comprehension in all aspects.
When the overall mean scores for both groups were compared, the experimental group had a higher
mean score of 2.46, categorized as "ARC," compared to the control group's overall mean score of 2.18,
also categorized as "ARC." This indicates that the experimental group using the PQ4R strategy achieved
a higher level of reading comprehension than the control group.

Finally, the data show that using the PQ4R strategy in the experimental group enhanced reading
comprehension in all aspects—literal, inferential, and critical. These imply that using the PQ4R strategy
can help improve reading comprehension abilities.

Ref.

Holt, P. (2023, September 22). Enhancing Your Study Habits with PQ4R. E-Student. https://e-
student.org/pq4r-study-method/

Table 4.1 Presents the Independent Samples T-Test on the Significant Difference Between
Exposure to the PQ4R and the Conventional Approach

Based on the data in the table above, the Independent Samples T-Test found a significant difference
between PQ4R exposure and the Conventional Approach.

The literal reading of the data implies that there is no significant difference between the Conventional
Approach and the PQ4R Strategy, with the conventional approach having a mean of 2.53 and the PQ4R
Strategy having a mean of 2.78. The t-test result (-1.252) and p-value (0.219) show that the observed
difference is not statistically significant.

Also, the inferential interpretation indicates that there is no statistically significant difference between
the Conventional Approach and the PQ4R Strategy, with the conventional having a mean of 2.24 and the
PQ4R Strategy having a mean of 2.11. The t-test result (-0.337) and p-value (0.630) confirm that the
observed difference is not statistically significant.

Furthermore, the critical interpretation indicates that there is no statistically significant difference
between the two, with the Conventional Approach having a mean of 1.76 and the PQ4R Strategy having
a mean of 2.11. The t-test result is (-0.069) and the p-value is (0.246), suggesting that there is no
statistically significant difference.
A p-value of less than 0.05 is required for a result to be declared significant at a conventional level.
Because all of the p-values in the table are more than 0.05, the observed differences between the two
strategies cannot be considered statistically significant.

Based to the t-tests and p-values in the table, there is no statistically significant difference between
exposure to the PQ4R and the Conventional Approach.

Ref.

Rahmadia, P., & Fatimah, S. (2020, December 10). THE EFFECT PQ4R STRATEGY AND READING
MOTIVATION FOR STUDENTS READING COMPREHENSION. Anglo-Saxon : Jurnal Ilmiah Program Studi
Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris. https://doi.org/10.33373/as.v11i2.2693

Reem Hassan Al-Qawabeh, R. H., & Aljazi, D. A. A. (2018, April 10). The Effectiveness of Using PQ4R
Strategy in Teaching Reading Comprehension in Arabic Language Subject among Ninth Grade Students’
Achievement in Jordan. World Journal of Educational Research, 5(2), 159.
https://doi.org/10.22158/wjer.v5n2p159