Authors : Cynimae A. Espuertas; Christian Angel Rebucan; Arman D. Nuezca; Lleomar Japuz; Vina P. Antonio; Moonyeen Lilleth V. Antonio; Adelina O. Antonio

Volume/Issue : Volume 11 - 2026, Issue 5 - May

Google Scholar : https://tinyurl.com/4ve4ur6z

Scribd : https://tinyurl.com/2s4x35y8

DOI : https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/26May054

Note : A published paper may take 4-5 working days from the publication date to appear in PlumX Metrics, Semantic Scholar, and ResearchGate.

Abstract : This study explored the experiences of educators used the Marungko Approach to teach early reading skills at Catumbalon Elementary School in Valencia City, Bukidnon, Philippines. This qualitative descriptive study focused on identifying the challenges teachers faced, the strategies they used to overcome these challenges, their perspectives on the approach’s effectiveness, and its impact on the teaching and learning environment. Data were collected through semistructured interviews with seven purposively selected teachers directly applied the Marungko Approach in Grade 1 to Grade 3 classrooms. Findings revealed four main themes: challenges in implementation, strategies employed, perceived effectiveness, and influence on classroom dynamics. Challenges included learners’ varied preparedness, difficulty maintaining interest, diverse reading abilities, and large class sizes. Educators viewed the Marungko Approach as effective in developing foundational reading skills, boosting learner confidence, and providing structured instruction. Furthermore, the approach enhanced learner engagement, encouraged interactive and collaborative learning, and positively influenced classroom dynamics. These factors contributed to a supportive and motivating learning environment. The study concludes that the Marungko Approach is a practical and adaptable method for improving early literacy. The study concludes that continuous teacher training, manageable class sizes, incorporation of interactive materials, and strengthened parent-teacher partnerships to improve reading instruction. The study recommends that teachers conduct diagnostic assessments, use interactive tools and technology, emphasized repetition, and promoted parental involvement. Overall, The findings provide valuable insights for educators, school administrators, and policymakers seeking to enhance early literacy programs and support students’ reading development through effective teaching methods.

Keywords : Marungko Approach, Early Reading Skills, Teacher Experience, Challenges and Strategies, Effectiveness and Impact.

References :

1. Alauya, H., & Basmayor, E. (2023). Marungko Approach: A Strategy to Improve Beginning Reading Performance Among Learners. Scimatic: A Multidisciplinary Journal of Psychology and Education.
2. Abcede, C. C. (2017). The effectiveness of Marungko Approach in enhancing reading abilities of Grade 1 pupils. International Journal of Advanced Research in Management and Social Sciences, 6(6), 41–55.
3. Alvarez, P., & Chen, L. (2021). Effect of music and movement on early vocabulary learning in young children. Journal of Early Childhood Research, 19(2), 145–161.
4. Antoniou, A., Tsaroucha, D., & Panteli, P. (2024). Impact of class size on reading fluency and comprehension: A meta-analytic review. Frontiers in Psychology, 15, 1354072.
5. August, D., & Shanahan, T. (Eds.). (2006). Developing literacy in second-language learners: Report of the National Literacy Panel on Language-Minority Children and Youth. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
6. Balgua, M., et al. (2022). Effectiveness of the Marungko Approach in improving literacy skills in Zambales.
7. Bada, S. (2015). Constructivism Learning Theory: A Paradigm for Teaching and Learning. IOSR Journal of Research & Method in Education.
8. Bernabe, R. V. (2024). Effectiveness of Marungko Approach in Enhancing the Reading Performance Among Grade 1 Pupils of San Antonio Elementary School. Asian Journal of Education and Social Studies, 50(12), 510–521.
9. Boltron, M. T., & Ramos, A. L. (2022). Improving Beginning Reading Literacy through Marungko Approach. ASEAN Journal of Basic and Higher Education.
10. Bustos-Orosa, M., & Ferrer, M. (2013). A qualitative analysis of the decoding error patterns among Filipino beginning readers transitioning to the Marungko approach. International Journal of Research Studies in Education.
11. Cabañero, J., et al. (2024). Reading gains of primary learners exposed to structured phonics instruction. Journal of Education, Society and Behavioural Science, 37(2), 88–95.
12. Cabardo, J. R. (2020). Structured phonics instruction and decoding performance among Filipino early graders. Journal of Literacy Education, 5(2), 45–59.
13. Chand, S. (2024). Constructivism in Education: Exploring the Contributions of Piaget, Vygotsky, and Bruner. ResearchGate.
14. Castles, A., Rastle, K., & Nation, K. (2018). Ending the reading wars: Phonics and evidence-based practice.
15. Cherry, K. (2024). Piaget's 4 Stages of Cognitive Development Explained: Background and Key Concepts of Piaget's Theory. Very Well Mind.
16. Cortez, E. (2023). Marungko-Approach Game-based interventions and learner motivation in early reading programs. Slideshare.
17. Cheatham, J. P., & Allor, J. H. (2012). The influence of decodability in early reading text on reading achievement: A review of the evidence. Reading and Writing, 25(9), 2223–2246.
18. Cheung, A. C. K., & Slavin, R. E. (2013). The effectiveness of educational technology applications for enhancing reading achievement in K-12 classrooms: A meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 9, 88–113.
19. Chien, C.-H., et al. (2024). Teaching phonics and vocabulary through children's literature. Education Sciences, 15(6), 684.
20. Chiu, Y.-C., et al. (2021). Phonological awareness and phonics instruction: A meta-analysis. SAGE Open, 11(1).
21. Darling-Hammond, L., Hyler, M. E., & Gardner, M. (2017). Effective teacher professional development. Learning Policy Institute.
22. Day, R., Smith, L., & Alonzo, D. (2024). Engaging phonics: Digital tools and interactive games to improve reading outcomes. arXiv Preprint.
23. DepEd Tambayan. (2023). The Significance and Value of Marungko Approach in Child’s Reading Stage. DepEd Tambayan Education News.
24. De Belen, D. (2017). Using marungko approach in beginning reading.
25. Degamo, R. C., & Manalo, M. F. (2022). Phonemic mastery and reading fluency among Grade 2 learners in public schools. Philippine Journal of Education and Human Development, 14(1), 112–125.
26. Dimacial, L., & Lumapenet, H. (2023). MARUNGKO APPROACH: ITS IMPACT ON PUPILS' READING DEVELOPMENT. ResearchGate.
27. Ehri, L. C., Nunes, S. R., Stahl, S. A., & Willows, D. M. (2001). Systematic phonics instruction helps students learn to read: Evidence from the National Reading Panel’s meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 71(3), 393–447.
28. Filderman, M. J., et al. (2024). Evidence-based reading instruction in diverse settings. Large-scale Assessments in Education, 12, Article 7.
29. Frankel, K., Becker, B., Rowe, M., & Pearson, D. (2016). From “What is Reading?” to What is Literacy? ResearchGate.
30. Fullan, M. (2007). The new meaning of educational change (4th ed.). Teachers College Press.
31. Gambrell, L. B., Morrow, L. M., & Pressley, M. (2011). Best practices in literacy instruction (4th ed.). Guilford Press.
32. Guthrie, J., & Klauda, S. (2016). Motivation and engagement in early reading.
33. Guzman, R. D., & Pinca-Atutubo, M. (2023). Cooperative learning in the Marungko Approach: Effects on learner engagement. IRE Journals, 6(4), 22–27.
34. Hatcher, P. J., Hulme, C., & Ellis, A. W. (1994). Ameliorating early reading failure by integrating the teaching of reading and phonological skills: The phonological linkage hypothesis. Child Development, 65, 41–57.
35. Henderson, A. T., & Mapp, K. L. (2002). A new wave of evidence: The impact of school, family, and community connections on student achievement. Southwest Educational Development Laboratory.
36. Hernandez, R., Santos, P., & Liu, M. (2023). Using diagnostic reading assessments to guide instruction in diverse classrooms. Educational Research Quarterly, 46(1), 40–57.
37. Hughes, J. N. (2011). Longitudinal effects of teacher and student perceptions of teacher-student relationship qualities on academic adjustment. The Elementary School Journal, 112(1), 38–60.
38. International Literacy Association. (2024). Phonics and decoding: Skilled reading.
39. Kim, H., Sefcik, J. S., & Bradway, C. (2017). Characteristics of qualitative descriptive studies: A systematic review. Research in Nursing & Health, 40, 23–42.
40. Kim, S., & Zhou, Y. (2023). Game-based phonics activities and student engagement in low-resource classrooms. Asia-Pacific Education Review, 24(2), 101–117.
41. Kurt, S. (2021). Constructivist Learning Theory. Educational Technology.
42. Lampropoulos, G., Poulakis, M., & Karatrantou, A. (2022). Augmented reality and gamified environments in early literacy: Effects on engagement and performance. Education and Information Technologies, 27(6), 7555–7572.
43. Lee, A., & Tan, B. (2022). Leveled reading instruction based on diagnostic data improves primary literacy. Asia-Pacific Journal of Developmental Education, 9(3), 67–80.
44. Li, H., & Santos, R. (2021). Comparing technology-enhanced vs. traditional phonics instruction in multilingual classrooms. Journal of Digital Learning, 15(2), 93–108.
45. Lindsey, J. (2024). Phonological awareness vs. phonemic awareness: What’s the difference? Learning A-Z.
46. Mabuti, E., Labus, H., Hiyas, I., Padillo, G., Manguilimotan, R., & Capuno, R. (2024). Effectiveness Of Marungko Approach In Teaching Mother-Tongue-Based Language For Kindergarten Learners Using Online Classes. Journal for ReAttach Therapy and Developmental Diversities.
47. Malik, F., & Marwaha, R. (2023). Cognitive Development. National Library of Medicine.
48. Moats, L. C. (2009). Knowledge foundations for teaching reading and spelling. Reading and Writing, 22(4), 379–399.
49. 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. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.
50. Nguyen, H., & Hart, J. (2023). Long-term outcomes of stepwise phonics instruction and the role of monitoring. Journal of Educational Psychology and Practice, 33(2), 120–134.
51. Nugroho, N. (2021). The Importance of Reading Literacy. ResearchGate.
52. O’Reilly, M., Fernandez, C., & Lim, R. (2022). Reading confidence and classroom participation among early graders. International Journal of Primary Education Research, 18(4), 78–90.
53. Paganelli, A., et al. (2023). Short-cycle literacy interventions in pre-service teaching. Support for Learning, 38(2), 134–145.
54. Pagcaliwagan, J. M. (2022). Home-based literacy support and learner readiness: Implications for early reading instruction. Asia Academic Research Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, 10(1), 70–84.
55. Parkinson, J., & Smith, K. (2021). Effective grouping strategies for phonemic awareness in early readers. Educational Psychology Journal, 45(3), 98–112.
56. Perkins, L. R., et al. (2022). Reflective practice and literacy coaching: A relational approach. Frontiers in Education, 7, 1048716.
57. Peterson, L., & Albright, C. (2022). Structured phonics instruction and early literacy acquisition. Journal of Early Literacy Development, 28(1), 33–49.
58. Programme for International Student Assessment. (2023). PISA 2022 Results (Volume I and II) - Country Notes: Philippines. OECD.
59. Reyes, A. P., & Abulon, E. L. R. (2023). Multisensory phonics strategies and early literacy.
60. Rodriguez, A., & Kim, S. (2022). The effect of structured repetition on early reading fluency. International Literacy Review, 12(3), 44–59.
61. Rosala, M. (2022). How to Analyze Qualitative Data from UX Research: Thematic Analysis. Nielsen Norman Group.
62. Santos, R. (2015). Effects of Early Literacy Parent Training on Children's Decoding System.
63. Schwartz, S. (2024). The rise and fall of vibes-based literacy. The New Yorker.
64. Singh, P., Watson, J., & Herrera, L. (2024). Flashcard apps and digital presentations in phonics education. Journal of Educational Technology Integration, 19(1), 12–25.
65. Slavin, R. E. (2010). Cooperative learning: What makes groupwork work? In Hattie, J. & Anderman, E. M. (Eds.), International guide to student achievement (pp. 77–79). Routledge.
66. Smith, R. F. (2023). The Importance of Literacy in Education and Life. LinkedIn.
67. Snow, C. E., Burns, M. S., & Griffin, P. (Eds.). (1998). Preventing reading difficulties in young children. National Academy Press.
68. Tomlinson, C. A. (2014). The differentiated classroom: Responding to the needs of all learners (2nd ed.). ASCD.
69. Topping, K. J. (2005). Trends in peer learning. Educational Psychology, 25(6), 631–645.
70. Van Steensel, R., McElvany, N., Kurvers, J., & Herppich, S. (2011). How effective are family literacy programs? Results of a meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 81(1), 69–96.
71. Vela-Maina, A. (2023). Cognitive Development Definition & Examples. Study.com.
72. Wang, X., et al. (2024). The effects of technology-based literacy instruction on motivation and engagement. Educational Technology Research and Development, 72, 75–98.
73. Wright, J. (2015). Learning centers for literacy, math, and more. Scholastic Teaching Resources.