Reading Program Implementation and Stakeholder Correlates in Philippine Elementary Schools: A Quantitative Study of the CLEAR Program in the Division of Tandag City

Reading proficiency deficits persist across Philippine elementary schools despite sustained national literacy initiatives. This study examined the implementation of the CLEAR (Catering Longer Enhancement Activities in Reading) Program in public elementary schools within the Division of Tandag City, Surigao del Sur, Philippines, and investigated the relationships among stakeholder profiles, program characteristics, and implementation quality. A descriptive-correlational design was employed involving 65 school personnel (school heads, reading coordinators, and teachers), 254 learners, and 134 parents from 24 public elementary schools, selected through complete enumeration and stratified proportional random sampling. A researcher-developed, validated survey instrument (Cronbach's α = .86) gathered data on the CLEAR Program profile across five dimensions and reading program implementation across six dimensions. Descriptive statistics, Pearson product-moment correlation (Pearson r), and an independent-samples t-test were employed. The CLEAR Program was generally assessed as Very High (M = 3.367), with student progress as its strongest dimension and resource allocation as the lowest. Reading program implementation was rated as Mostly Practiced (M = 3.285), with use of reading materials as the strongest component and logistics as the weakest. Among stakeholder demographic variables, only age (r = .250, p = .045) and training attendance (r = .256, p = .040) demonstrated significant relationships with specific implementation dimensions. By contrast, all five CLEAR Program profile dimensions were highly significantly correlated with all six implementation dimensions (r = .461–.744, all p < .001). No significant difference was found between school heads' and parents' perceptions of implementation (t = 0.49, p = .629). Program structural quality, rather than stakeholder demographic characteristics, is the primary driver of reading program implementation quality. Sustained professional development, targeted resource allocation, and strong early intervention mechanisms are essential for improving literacy outcomes among elementary learners in provincial Philippine settings.

reading program implementation, CLEAR Program

1. Akemoğlu, Y., Hinton, V., Laroue, D., & Jefferson, V. (2021). A parent-implemented shared reading intervention via telepractice. Journal of Early Intervention, 44(2), 190–210. https://doi.org/10.1177/10538151211032211 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Beach, R., & Philippakos, Z. A. (2021). Literacy instruction for all learners: Programs and frameworks for secondary schools. Guilford Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and design. Harvard University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Burgoyne, K., Whiteley, H., & Hutchinson, J. (2023). The impact of home literacy environments on reading achievement: A systematic review. Reading and Writing, 36(3), 401–424. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-022-10296-4 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

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

6. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. Plenum Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Department of Education. (2022). DepEd Order No. 45, s. 2022: Every Child a Reader Program (ECARP). Department of Education, Philippines. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Desimone, L. M., & Garet, M. S. (2015). Best practices in teachers' professional development. Psychology, Society, and Education, 7(3), 252–263. https://doi.org/10.25115/psye.v7i3.515 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. EDCOM II. (2025). Year two report: The state of Philippine education. Congressional Commission on Education, Republic of the Philippines. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Ehri, L. C. (2020). The science of learning to read words: A case for systematic phonics instruction. Reading Research Quarterly, 55(S1), S45–S60. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.334 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Epstein, J. L. (1995). School/family/community partnerships: Caring for the children we share. Phi Delta Kappan, 76(9), 701–712. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Epstein, J. L. (2018). School, family, and community partnerships: Preparing educators and improving schools (2nd ed.). Routledge. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Ertmer, P. A., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T. (2010). Teacher technology change: How knowledge, confidence, beliefs, and culture intersect. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(3), 255–284. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2010.10782551 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Estremera, M. (2024). The CoP theory in reading enhancement programme (REP) from pragmatic lens of language development. EIKI Journal of Effective Teaching Methods, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.59652/jetm.v2i1.151 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. FLEMMS. (2024). Functional literacy, education and mass media survey 2024 preliminary results. Philippine Statistics Authority. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Gersten, R., Newman-Gonchar, R., Haymond, K., & Dimino, J. (2020). What can we learn from teacher training and professional development in reading instruction? Journal of Learning Disabilities, 53(3), 181–194. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219419885339 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Jeynes, W. (2022). Parental involvement and academic success: A meta-analysis of the effect of parental involvement. Urban Education, 57(5), 829–856. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085920943499 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. OECD. (2023). Education at a glance 2023: OECD indicators. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/e13bef63-en [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Petscher, Y., Kim, Y. S. G., & Foorman, B. R. (2020). The importance of forecasting students' literacy achievement: Applications of core reading programmes. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 53(2), 108–122. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219419884166 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2020). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation from a self-determination theory perspective: Definitions, theory, practices, and future directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 61, Article 101860. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2020.101860 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Taber, K. S. (2018). The use of Cronbach's alpha when developing and reporting research instruments in science education. Research in Science Education, 48(6), 1273–1296. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-016-9602-2 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Tomas, M., Villaros, E., & Galman, S. (2021). The perceived challenges in reading of elementary pupils in the Philippines. Open Journal of Social Sciences, 9(5), 17–29. https://doi.org/10.4236/jss.2021.95002 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. UNESCO. (2023). Global education monitoring report 2023: Technology in education - A tool on whose terms? UNESCO Publishing. https://doi.org/10.54675/UZQV8501 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. UNESCO. (2024). The right to education: Leveraging technology responsibly. UNESCO Publishing. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Assessment of the Role of Artificial Intelligence in Repositioning TVET for Economic Development in Nigeria
• Teachers’ Use of Assure Model Instructional Design on Learners’ Problem Solving Efficacy in Secondary Schools in Bungoma County, Kenya
• “E-Booksan Ang Kaalaman”: Development, Validation, and Utilization of Electronic Book in Academic Performance of Grade 9 Students in Social Studies
• Analyzing EFL University Students’ Academic Speaking Skills Through Self-Recorded Video Presentation
• Major Findings of The Study on Total Quality Management in Teachers’ Education Institutions (TEIs) In Assam – An Evaluative Study