Reading Diagnostics to Enhance Learners (Rdel): A Diagnostic Test in Reading Comprehension for Grade 7 Students

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

This study responds to the need of identifying underlying factors on why there are still students who belong to frustration level. This motivates the researcher to focus on diagnostic test development and validation on reading comprehension. In New Lambunao Integrated School, a diagnostic test is rarely used. Instead, reading teachers proceed to utilize the curriculum guide and directly employ suggested activities from the CG developed by the DepEd. However, it is so hard to just presume reasons behind the incidence of learner’s low reading comprehension level and particular strategies to be applied.

METHODS

The researcher developed a diagnostic test for the Grade 7 students in reading comprehension with the collaboration of the experts in the field of reading such as teachers, master teachers, and supervisors. The passages were adapted from the existing literatures by contextualizing them and considering their readability and grade level. Comments and suggestions of the evaluators were utilized. Moreover, this study used multiple-choice item test. To determine the reliability, split-half method was used. Three sets of evaluators were asked to validate the test through a five rating scale to determine whether the diagnostic test is acceptable in terms of content, presentation, and appropriateness.

RESULTS

This study found out that the test was reliable and valid for Grade 7 learners and can be used to diagnose their reading comprehension difficulties. The researcher ensured that all the competencies are included in the test to cover the whole year’s lessons. The researcher ensured that the passages were all contextualized and in the students' grade level. The test was reliable with roe=0.84 described as Highly Positively Correlated. The F-value was 20.339 and a p-value of 0.000. This meant that there was a significant difference in the evaluation ratings of the evaluators. The ratings of Group 1 were significantly different from Group 2 and 3. While group 2 ratings were not significantly different from Group 3.

DISCUSSIONS

Since the F-value is 20.339 and p-value is 0.000, it is safe to say that the ratings of the different sets of evaluators differ from each other: some are low and some are high. This supports Kane (2013) who emphasized that ratings vary with each other depending on the expertise of the evaluators who interpret them.