Science Foundational Literacy as a Predictor of Science Achievement among Senior High School Students in Saint Louis College of Solano, Inc.

This study determined whether science foundational literacy predicts the science achievement of senior high school students in Saint Louis College of Solano, Inc.. Specifically, it examined the level of science achievement and science foundational literacy in terms of science reading comprehension, science vocabulary, ability to interpret science concepts, and science numeracy. The study employed a quantitative descriptive-correlational research design involving 190 senior high school students selected through stratified random sampling. Data were gathered using a researcher-made instrument entitled the Science Foundational Literacy Diagnostic Test (SFLDT), which consisted of 80 multiple-choice items distributed across the four domains of science foundational literacy. The instrument underwent expert validation prior to administration. Mean, standard deviation, Pearson Product-Moment Correlation, and Multiple Linear Regression Analysis were used to analyze the data.
Findings revealed that the respondents demonstrated a “Very Satisfactory” level of science achievement. Among the domains of science foundational literacy, science reading comprehension was interpreted as “High,” while science vocabulary, ability to interpret science concepts, and science numeracy were interpreted as “Moderate.” Furthermore, all domains of science foundational literacy showed significant positive relationships with science achievement. Regression analysis revealed that science reading comprehension and science numeracy significantly predicted science achievement, whereas science vocabulary and ability to interpret science concepts did not significantly predict science achievement. The study concludes that science foundational literacy, particularly science reading comprehension and science numeracy, plays a significant role in improving students’ science achievement. The findings highlight the importance of strengthening literacy-based and numeracy-centered instructional strategies to enhance students’ scientific understanding and academic performance in science.

science education, science reading comprehension

1. Addido, J., Borowczak, A. C. B., & Slater, T. F. (2026). Impact of conceptual understanding, teaching experience, and parental education on science achievement: TIMSS data analysis. European Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 14(1), 28–46. https://doi.org/10.30935/scimath/17622 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Aghaziarati, A., Nejatifar, S., & Abedi, A. (2023). Artificial Intelligence in Education: Investigating Teacher Attitudes. AI and Tech in Behavioral and Social Sciences. https://doi.org/10.61838/kman.aitech.1.1.6 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Almaraz-López, C., Almaraz-Menéndez, F., & López-Esteban, C. (2023). Comparative study of the attitudes and perceptions of university students in business administration and management and in education toward artificial intelligence. Education Sciences. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13060609 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Aninag, R. S., Cajindos, R., & Torres, J. B. (2021). Predictors of science performance of senior high school students. The Asian Journal of Education and Human Development (AJEHD). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Annuš, N. (2024). Education in the age of artificial intelligence. TEM Journal. https://doi.org/10.18421/tem131-42 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Arora, J. (2026). A study of educational development in science: A global to regional perspective. International Journal of Advanced Academic Studies, 8(2), 181–187. https://doi.org/10.33545/27068919.2026.v8.i2b.1901 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Asio, J. M. R., & Gadia, E. D. (2024). Predictors of student attitudes towards artificial intelligence: Implications and relevance to higher education institutions. International Journal of Didactical Studies, 5(2), 27763. https://doi.org/10.33902/ijods.202427763 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Ayodele, J. B. (2014). Effects of numerical ability, instructional strategy and student engagement on chemistry achievement of senior secondary school students. International Journal of Education and Research, 2(3), 1–10. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Ayanwale, M. A., & Sanusi, I. T. (2023). Perceptions of STEM vs. non-STEM teachers toward teaching artificial intelligence. IEEE AFRICON 2023, 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1109/AFRICON55910.2023.10293455 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Artificial Intelligence (AI) in academic research. (2024). A multi-group analysis of students’ awareness and perceptions using gender and programme type. https://doi.org/10.37074/jalt.2024.7.1.9 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Brickman, P., Gormally, C., Armstrong, N., & Hallar, B. (2012). Effects of inquiry-based learning on students’ science literacy skills and confidence. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 6(2), Article 16. https://doi.org/10.20429/ijsotl.2012.060216 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Cano, F., García, C., Berbén, A. B. G., & Justicia, F. (2014). Learning approaches, academic self-concept, and academic achievement in high school students. Revista de Psicodidáctica, 19(2), 409–425. https://doi.org/10.1387/RevPsicodidact.10232 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Cervetti, G. N., Barber, J., Dorph, R., Pearson, P. D., & Goldschmidt, P. G. (2012). The impact of an integrated approach to science and literacy in elementary school classrooms. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(5), 631–658. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21015 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Cooper, G., & Cowie, B. (2010). Improving science education through literacy development. In C. M. Rubie-Davies (Ed.), Educational psychology concepts, research and challenges (pp. 183–200). Routledge. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Cooper, G., Thomas, D. P., Prain, V., & Fraser, S. (2022). Associations between Australian students’ literacy achievement in early secondary school and senior secondary participation in science: Accessing cultural and science capital.International Journal of Science Education, 44(10), 1549–1564.https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2022.2086317 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Cromley, J. G., Snyder-Hogan, L. E., & Luciw-Dubas, U. A. (2010). Reading comprehension of scientific text: A domain-specific test of the direct and inferential mediation model. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(3), 687–700. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019118 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Cromley, J. G. (2009). Reading comprehension and science achievement: A review of the literature and implications for instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(3), 687–700. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019452 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Cromley, J. G. (2009). Reading comprehension of scientific text: A domain-specific test of the direct and inferential mediation model of reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(3), 687–700. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019118 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Darayseh, A. A. (2023). Acceptance of artificial intelligence in teaching science: Science teachers' perspective. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 4, 100132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2023.100132 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Davies, D., Collier, C., Howe, A., & McMahon, K. (2012). A matter of interpretation: Developing primary pupils’ enquiry skills using position-linked datalogging. Research in Science & Technological Education, 30(3), 347–360. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2012.738420 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Davis, R. O. (2024). Korean in-service teachers’ perceptions of implementing artificial intelligence education. International Journal of Information and Education Technology. https://doi.org/10.18178/ijiet.2024.14.2.2042 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Doblon, M. G. B. (2023). Senior high school students’ multiple intelligences and their relationship with academic achievement in science. Integrated Science Education Journal, 4(1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.37251/isej.v4i1.298 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Dorsah, P., Amponsah, M. O., & Kwarteng, K. O. (2018). The influence of core mathematics on integrated science achievement among junior high school students. Journal of Education and Practice, 9(12), 123–131. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Department of Education. (2023). MATATAG curriculum guides. https://www.deped.gov.ph/matatagcurriculumk147/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Erikson, J. A., Alt, M., Pyarelal, A., & Kapa, L. L. (2025). Science vocabulary and science achievement of children with language/literacy disorders and typical language development. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 56(1), 118–141. https://doi.org/10.1044/2024_LSHSS-24-00025 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Fakhar, H. (2024). Artificial intelligence from teachers’ perspectives and understanding: Moroccan study. International Journal of Information and Education Technology. https://doi.org/10.18178/ijiet.2024.14.6.2111 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Farillon, L. M. F. (2022). Scientific reasoning, critical thinking, and academic performance in science of selected Filipino senior high school students. Journal of Ultimate Research and Trends in Education, 4(1), 50–62. https://doi.org/10.31849/utamax.v3i3.8242 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Fang, Z. (2012). Language correlates of disciplinary literacy. Topics in Language Disorders, 32(1), 19–34. https://doi.org/10.1097/TLD.0b013e31824501de [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Fang, Z., & Wei, Y. (2010). Improving middle school students’ science literacy through reading infusion. The Journal of Educational Research, 103(4), 262–273. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220670903383051 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. Fissore, C., Floris, F., Fradiante, V., Marchisio, M., & Sacchet, M. (2024). From theory to training: Exploring teachers' attitudes towards artificial intelligence in education. International Conference on Computer Supported Education. https://doi.org/10.5220/0012734700003693 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. Gal, M. B. (2020). Performance of senior high school students in spiral progression approach of the K to 12 science curriculum. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. Ghimire, A., Prather, J., & Edwards, J. (2024). Generative AI in education: A study of educators' awareness, sentiments, and influencing factors. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2403.15586 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

33. Gunter, D. W. (2021). Is AI in your future? https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-7998-5589-7.CH006 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

34. Hajam, K. B., & Gahir, S. (2024). Unveiling the attitudes of university students toward artificial intelligence. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 52, 335–345. https://doi.org/10.1177/00472395231225920 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

35. Iddrisu Mohammed, M., Amedeker, M. K., & Coffie, I. S. (2025). Perceived determinants of academic achievement in integrated science among senior high school students in Ghana. https://doi.org/10.51244/IJRSI.2025.1210000190 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

36. Jannah, A. R., & Sukaesih, S. (2020). Scientific literacy profile of students at SMPN 1 Belik. Journal of Biology Education, 9(2), 209–218. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

37. Jufrida, J., Kurniawan, W., & Pratiwi, Y. (2019). The relationship between scientific literacy and science learning achievement. Journal of Education and Learning, 13(2), 269–273. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

38. Jurecki, K., & Wander, M. C. F. (2012). Science literacy, critical thinking, and scientific literature. Journal of Geoscience Education, 60(2), 100–105. https://doi.org/10.5408/11-221.1 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

39. Karasinski, C. (2016). Comprehension of narratives, non-fiction, and complex syntax as predictors of science achievement. Speech, Language and Hearing, 19(4), 203–210. https://doi.org/10.1080/2050571X.2016.1187465 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

40. Katsantonis, A., & Katsantonis, I. G. (2024). University students’ attitudes toward artificial intelligence. Education Sciences, 14(9), 988. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14090988 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

41. Kismiantini, K., Setyawan, A., & Suryadi, D. (2022). The relationship between scientific literacy and science learning achievement. Journal of Education and Learning, 16(2), 269–275. https://doi.org/10.11591/edulearn.v16i2.20423 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

42. Konecki, M., Baksa, T., & Konecki, M. (2024). Teachers' perception of AI and their attitudes towards AI. International Conference on Computer Supported Education. https://doi.org/10.5220/0012739300003693 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

43. Krajcik, J. S., & Sutherland, L. M. (2010). Supporting students in developing literacy in science. Science, 328(5977), 456–459. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1182593 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

44. Lazaroff, E., & Vlach, H. A. (2022). Children’s science vocabulary uniquely predicts individual differences in science knowledge. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 221, 105427. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2022.105427 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

45. Lucas, M., Zhang, Y., Bem-haja, P., & Vicente, P. N. (2024). The interplay between teachers’ trust in artificial intelligence and digital competence. Education and Information Technologies. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-12772-2 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

46. Maerten-Rivera, J., Ahn, S., Lanier, K., & Franklin, C. (2010). Effect of students’ mathematics achievement on science achievement. School Science and Mathematics, 110(7), 336–344. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.2010.00043.x [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

47. Mbajiorgu, N. M., & Ali, A. (1998). The effect of concept mapping on students’ achievement in biology. Journal of the Science Teachers Association of Nigeria, 33(1–2), 43–50. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

48. Mintz, Y., & Brodie, R. (2019). Introduction to artificial intelligence in medicine. Minimally Invasive Therapy & Allied Technologies, 28, 73–81. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645706.2019.1575882 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

49. Nabilah, S., Muslim, M., & Rusyati, L. (2024). Analysis of high school students’ literacy using the PISA framework. Proceedings of International Conference on Education, 2(1), 687–693. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

50. Nuraenah, I., Miarsyah, M., & Adisyahputra. (2019). The correlation between English proficiency and reading comprehension with scientific literacy skills. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 243, 012057. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/243/1/012057 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

51. Olatoye, R. A., & Aderogba, A. A. (2011). Performance of senior secondary school science students in aptitude test. Journal of Emerging Trends in Educational Research and Policy Studies, 2(6), 431–435. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

52. O’Reilly, T., Wang, Z., & Sabatini, J. (2019). How much knowledge is too little? Psychological Science, 30(9), 1344–1351. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797619862276 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

53. O’Reilly, T., & McNamara, D. S. (2007). Impact of science knowledge and reading skill on science achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 44(1), 161–196. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831206298171 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

54. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2023). PISA 2022 results. https://doi.org/10.1787/53f23881-en [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

55. Peter Bacchetti, Charles E. McCulloch, Mark R. Segal, Rejoinder, Biometrics, Volume 64, Issue 2, June 2008, Pages 592–594, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-0420.2008.01004_5.x [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

56. Preeth, A. M., & K. G., V. B. (2024). Attitude toward artificial intelligence and tech anxiety among working professionals. Indian Journal of Artificial Intelligence and Neural Networking. https://doi.org/10.54105/ijainn.d1089.04040624 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

57. Reed, D. K. (1994). Relationship between reading comprehension and science achievement. Journal of Educational Research, 87(5), 294–300. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.1994.9941250 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

58. Reed, D. K., Petscher, Y., & Truckenmiller, A. J. (2017). Contribution of general reading ability to science achievement. Reading Research Quarterly, 52(2), 253–266. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.158 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

59. Research Highlights in Mathematics and Computer Science. (2023). Mathematics and numeracy skills as predictors of science achievement. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

60. Roo, A. K., Ardasheva, Y., Newcomer, S. N., & Vidrio Magaña, M. (2020). Contributions of tracking, literacy skills, and attitudes to science achievement. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 23(9), 1108–1124. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2018.1434125 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

61. Rubas, J. (2023). College academic performance in science-related programs and senior high school strands. Education Mind, 2(1), 35–44. https://doi.org/10.58583/Pedapub.EM2303 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

62. Sachdeva, A. (2023). Artificial intelligence in dentistry: A literature review. Biomedical Journal of Scientific & Technical Research. https://doi.org/10.26717/bjstr.2023.51.008050 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

63. Seema, P. V. (2024). Developing scientific literacy to promote 21st century skills. Journal on School Educational Technology, 20(1), 1–4. https://doi.org/10.26634/jsch.20.1.21018 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

64. Shanahan, C., & Shanahan, T. (2012). Disciplinary literacy and why it matters. Topics in Language Disorders, 32(1), 7–18. https://doi.org/10.1097/TLD.0b013e318244557a [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

65. Shabani, K., Khatib, M., & Ebadi, S. (2011). Implications of Vygotsky’s ZPD in teacher education. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 29, 1549–1554. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.11.396 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

66. Shabani, K., Khatib, M., & Ebadi, S. (2010). Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development. English Language Teaching, 3(4), 237–248. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v3n4p237 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

67. Shirin, A. (2022). Artificial intelligence technology on teaching-learning. Embedded Selforganising Systems. https://doi.org/10.14464/ess.v9i4.553 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

68. Shtulman, A., & McCallum, K. (2014). Cognitive reflection predicts science understanding. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 143(3), 1247–1252. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0034615 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

69. Siswandari, P., Nais, M., & Rahmawati, F. (2025). Understanding science-contextualized numeracy. Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan IPA, 11(10), 471–478. https://doi.org/10.29303/jppipa.v11i10.12666 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

70. Suh, W., & Ahn, S. (2022). Development and validation of a scale measuring student attitudes toward artificial intelligence. SAGE Open, 12(2), Article 2. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440221100463 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

71. Sutrisna, N., & Anhar, A. (2020). Analysis of scientific literacy skills. ICoBioSE 2019 Proceedings, 149–156. https://doi.org/10.2991/absr.k.200807.032 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

72. Susongko, P. (2021). Assessment of literacy and numeracy of Indonesian students. BIS-HSS Proceedings. https://doi.org/10.4108/eai.18-11-2020.2311684 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

73. Taylor, I., Sonful Coffie, I., Agyei, S., & Ackah, J. E. (2021). Teachers and students perception of low academic performance in integrated science. Asian Journal of Education and Social Studies, 22(3), 29–41. https://doi.org/10.9734/ajess/2021/v22i330535 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

74. Turiman, P., Omar, J., Daud, A. M., & Osman, K. (2012). Fostering 21st century skills through scientific literacy. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 59, 110–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.09.253 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

75. Uygun, D. (2024). Teachers' perspectives on artificial intelligence in education. Advances in Mobile Learning Educational Research. https://doi.org/10.25082/amler.2024.01.005 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

76. Van Laere, E., Aesaert, K., & Van Braak, J. (2014). The role of home language in science achievement. International Journal of Science Education, 36(16), 2772–2794. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2014.936327 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

77. Vo, A., & Nguyen, H. (2024). Generative AI and ChatGPT in language learning. Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice, 21(6), 199–218. https://doi.org/10.53761/fr1rkj58 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

78. Wahyuni, S., Miarsyah, M., & Adisyahputra. (2018). Achievement motivation and scientific literacy correlation. Jurnal Pendidikan Sains, 6(2), 30–37. https://doi.org/10.17977/jps.v6i2.11680 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

79. Warnaningtyas, M., Sulisworo, D., & Toifur, M. (2025). Numeracy, verbal skills, and learning motivation as predictors of academic success. JPPI (Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan Indonesia, 11(1), 15–29. https://doi.org/10.29210/020254661 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

80. Yasin, R., & Parisu, C. Z. (2025). Visual media as a driver of interest in learning natural science. International Journal of Management and Education in Human Development, 5(01), 1553–1557. https://ijmehd.com/index.php/ijmehd/article/view/316 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

81. Young, J. (2024). The rise of artificial intelligence in education. International Journal of Innovative Research and Development. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Green Synthesis of Calcium Oxide Nanoparticles from Pigeon Eggshells for Cement Composites
• Needs Analysis: Development of an Interactive Digital Storybook in Teaching Mixtures and their Characteristics among Grade 6 Learners
• Thickness Dependent Structural, Optical, Electrical and Gas Sensing properties of ZnO thin film
• Forensic Chemistry Laboratory Works from Home: Challenges Encountered by Criminology Students During the Conduct of their Laboratory Activities at Home
• The Concept of Wellness Club and How it Differs from the Present Gym?