Effects of School Learning Recovery Continuity Plan (LRCP) Program on the Reading Proficiency Level of the Struggling Readers: A Mixed-Method Study

This study examined the effectiveness of the Learning Recovery and Continuity Plan (LRCP) in improving the reading proficiency of Grade 10 struggling readers in a public secondary school setting. An embedded mixed-methods research design was used. The quantitative data were obtained from the Group Screening Test (GST) and the Philippine Informal Reading Inventory (Phil-IRI) pre-test and post-test results component serving as the primary strand, and the qualitative data were gathered through surveys, semi-structured interviews, and Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) with teacher-implementers, which were components providing supportive and explanatory insights.
Respondents were selected through cluster and purposive sampling. Forty (40) struggling readers per academic year were identified as learner-respondents, while 40 teacher-implementers participated in the survey. Additionally, six (6) teachers were interviewed, and another six (6) participated in FGDs due to their direct involvement in LRCP implementation.
Results revealed significant improvement in the learners’ reading proficiency, with a notable increase in the number of students achieving independent reading levels after the implementation of the LRCP. The results highlight the effectiveness of structured reading interventions, continuous assessment, and consistent instructional support. However, the study also identified several implementation challenges, including increased teacher workload, insufficient training, limited instructional materials and administrative support, student absenteeism, and inadequate parental involvement. These factors were found to affect the efficiency and sustainability of the program implementation.
In conclusion, the study affirms that the LRCP is an effective intervention in improving reading proficiency among struggling readers. Nevertheless, its sustainability and long-term effectiveness require strengthened institutional support, continuous professional development for teachers, adequate instructional resources, and improved collaboration among stakeholders.

Embedded mixed-methods design, Learning Recovery and Continuity Plan (LRCP), reading proficiency

1. Balilah, M., Babgi, M., Alnemari, W., & Binjabi, A. (2020). A proposed frameworkto develop, describe, and evaluate peer-assisted learning programs. Advances in Medical Education and Practice. https://doi.org/10.2147/AMEP.S282582 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Prentice-Hall. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101 https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Brown, T., Smith, R., & Lee, K. (2023). Reading intervention strategies and student outcomes in primary education. Journal of Literacy Research, 55(1), 45–62. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Byl, E., Struyven, K., Meurs, P., et al. (2015). Peer-assisted learning as a tool for facilitating social and academic integration. Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education, 1759–667X. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Carbado, J. R. O. (2020). Reading proficiency level of students: Basis for reading intervention program. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://www.researchgate.net [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Casingal, C. P. (2022). Efficacy of Phil-IRI and remedial classes for Filipinos at the intermediate level. Journal of Sustainable Business, Economics and Finance, 1(2), 47–59. https://doi.org/10.31039/josbef.2022.2.3.22 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Chard, D. J., Vaughn, S., & Tyler, B. J. (2002). A synthesis of research on effective interventions for building reading fluency with elementary students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 35(5), 386–406. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Chilpili, L. (2016). Factors leading to poor reading performance among Grade two learners: A case of selected schools in Chibombo District (Unpublished thesis). University of Zambia. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (4th ed.). SAGE Publications. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Darling-Hammond, L. (2017). Teacher education around the world: What can we Learn from international practice? European Journal of Teacher Education, 40(3), 291–309. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2017.1315399 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Department of Education. (2018). Philippine Informal Reading Inventory (Phil-IRI) Manual. Department of Education. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Dongil, K., Yeji, A., et al. (2020). A meta-analysis of single-subject reading Intervention studies for struggling readers using improvement rate difference (IRD). Heliyon. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e05024 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Durda, T., Artelt, C., et al. (2020). Proficiency level descriptors for low reading proficiency: An integrative process model. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11159 020 ss09834-1 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Frankel, K. K., et al. (2025). Teachers’ perspectives on the structure of Reading Intervention Class in secondary schools: A meta-Analysis of qualitative research. Elsevier, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2025 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Gagno, A. (2022). Sustaining and Improving Reading Ability: The Impact of an Eight Week Reading Program on the Phil.IRI Result of Elementary learners. Philippine E-Journals Vol.6 no. 2 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Hassan, M. (2024). Cluster sampling – Types, Methods, and Examples. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Hamoc, J. V. (2023). Learning recovery: Teachers’ strategies and challenges. Asian Journal of Advanced Multidisciplinary Researchers, 3(2). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Hodgson, Y., Benson, R., & Brack, C. (2015). Student conceptions of peer assisted learning. Journal of Further and Higher Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2014.938262 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Jackaria, P. (2022). Elementary teachers’ experiences and instructional challenges during the return to school after COVID-19 closure in the Philippines. International Research Journal of Science and Technology, Education, and Management, 2(2), 216–225 https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6955920 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Jaffal, F. M. A. (2014). The effect of repeated reading strategy on oral reading fluency of a fourth-grade student with reading difficulties (Thesis). United Arab Emirates University. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Prentice-Hall. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Kusdemir, Y., & Bulut, P. (2017). The relationship between elementary school students’ reading comprehension and reading motivation. Journal of Education and Training Studies. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Lockspeiser, T. M., O’Sullivan, P., Teherani, A., & Muller, J. (2008). Understanding the experience of being taught by peers: The value of social and cognitive congruence. Advances in Health Sciences Education 13(3), 361–372. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Johns, J. L. (2012). Basic reading inventory (12th ed.). Kendall Hunt Publishing. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Maceda, L. M. (2024). Factors affecting learners’ reading proficiency among rural elementary schools. International Journal of Advance Multidisciplinary Studies, 4(5). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Magno, C. (2022). Planning for learning recovery: The Philippine experience. Center for Learning and Assessment Development Asia. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Melgar, A. M. G. (2020). Peer-assisted learning in higher education: Towards an integrated conceptual framework for theory and practice. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. McLeod, S. A. (2023). Jerome Bruner’s theory of learning and cognitive development. Simply Psychology. https://www.simplypsychology.org [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. Monobe, G., Bintz, W. P., & McTeer, J. S. (2017). Developing English learners’ reading confidence with whole-class repeated reading. The Reading Teacher. https://doi.org/10.1002/trtr.1642 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. Moswane, A. P. (2019). Teachers’ challenges in teaching reading to English first additional language learners: A case study (Doctoral dissertation). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. Nanah, E. Y., Ekpo, S. S., Inyon, A. U., & Koroye, T. (2018). Challenges of teaching reading skills and pupils’ reading effectiveness in public primary schools. Equatorial Journal of Education and Curriculum Studies, 3(1), 15 22. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

33. National Center for Education Statistics. (2021). The Nation’s Report Card: Reading 2021. U.S. Department of Education. https://www.nationsreportcard.gov/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

34. National Reading Panel. (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction (NIH Publication No. 00-4769). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

35. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. Nurhayati, W. A. D., & Fitriana, W. M. (2018). Effectiveness of summarizing in teaching reading comprehension for EFL students. IJOLTL, 3(1), 33–50. https://doi.org/10.30957/ijoltl.v3i1.403 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

36. Panol, R. F., et al. (2021). Parental involvement in students’ completion of learning tasks in science. International Journal of Research in Multidisciplinary Studies, 7(5), 1–7. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

37. Parra, J. E., Velasco, C. Q., Angeles, R. B., & Luis, L. F. (2023). Impact of repeated reading strategy in the development of reading fluency of struggling readers in Grade 7. International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

38. Pelagio, R. B. (2025). Teacher’s Perspective on the Phil.IRI Reading Program: Analyzing Challenges, Impacts and Opportunities for Improvement in Flora District in Elementary Schools. International Journal for Multidisplinary Research, Volume 7, Issue 3, May-June 2025. https://doi.org/10.36948/ijmr.2025.v07i03.44181 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

39. Pereyra, A. (2025). Enhancing the Reading Comprehension Skills of Grade 4 Pupils in Selected Schools in Catanuan I District Through the use of Pre Teaching vocabulary and repeated reading methods, Enverga University [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

40. Reed, D. K. (2023). Reading intervention in middle schools: Challenges and suggested approaches. Middle School Journal, 54(5), 42–51. https://doi.org/10.1080/00940771.2023.2254176 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

41. Rosanes, A., et.al., (2022). Project I Read: An evaluation of the Reading Intervention Program. Ascendens Asia Journal of Multidisciplinary Research Abstracts. Vol.3,No.26 (2019) [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

42. Rosano, D. A., Conjusta, G. R., Gallardo, J. B., & Sindingan, L. F. (2025). Teaching remedial reading: Content area teachers’ difficulties and needs. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 24(2), 153–169. https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.24.2.8 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

43. Sabacajan, B. T., & Morados, A. N. (2023). Basic education learning continuity plan (BE-LCP) implementation: Challenges and opportunities. International Journal of Multidisciplinary: Applied Business and Education Research. https://doi.org/10.11594/ijmaber.04.03.19 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

44. Samuels, S. J. (2002). Reading fluency: Its development and assessment. In A. E. Farstrup & S. J. Samuels (Eds.), What research has to say about reading instruction (3rd ed., pp. 166–183). International Reading Association. Snow, C. E., Burns, M. S., & Griffin, P. (Eds.). (1998). Preventing reading difficulties in young children. National Academy Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/6023 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

45. Suhaimi, I. (2018). The effect of repeated reading strategy on reading fluency: The case of students with reading difficulties. Journal of Koulutus. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

46. Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (2003). Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research. SAGE Publications. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

47. Tolentino, Q. J. T. (2024). The implementation of basic education learning continuity plan (BE-LCP): Opportunities, challenges, and effects on school performance. Ignatian International Journal for Multidisciplinary Research. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.13952983 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

48. Thorndike, E. L. (1932). The fundamentals of learning. Teachers College, Columbia University. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

49. UNESCO. (2021). Learning recovery: Getting all students back on track. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

50. UNESCO. (2023). Global education monitoring report: Literacy and learning recovery. UNESCO Publishing. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

51. UNICEF. (2023). The role of families in supporting children’s learning. UNICEF. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

52. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

53. Wheer, S. (2014). Learning theories: Jerome Bruner on the scaffolding of learning. Teach Thought. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

54. World Bank. (2021). The state of global learning poverty: 2021 update. World Bank. https://www.worldbank.org/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Middle Transport Corridor: Soil and Maize Contamination