Republic of the Philippines

Department of Education
Region III
Schools Division of Meycauayan City
CITY OF MEYCAUAYAN VOCATIONAL SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL
Pag – asa St., Malhacan, Meycauayan City, Bulacan

R. E. A. C. T. Text Structure Intervention Program Proposal

I. Program Rationale

The program is structured based on the study of the proponent, “Acquiring Text Structure

Learning Competencies of Grade 11 Learners through Contextualized Teaching and

Learning (CTL) Approach”. The proponent would like to use contextualized teaching and

learning strategies to enhance patterns of development in writing across disciplines sub-

competencies or text structure reading and writing skills of the Grade 11 students. Patterns of

development in writing across disciplines is one of the learning competencies senior high school

students should learn or acquire in the Reading and Writing Skills Core Subject. Unfortunately,

there were sub-competencies under these patterns where students got a very low mastery according

to the result of the first quarter examination item analysis in Reading and Writing Skills, only three

(3) students from both grade 11 ICT and HE sections got the answers correctly in the description,

classification, and compare and contrast patterns of development in writing across disciplines

competencies questions. The sub-competencies mentioned under patterns of development in writing

across disciplines learning competencies are also classified as text structures. These text structures

are significant reading and writing competencies senior high school students should acquire in order

to prepare them for greater demands in reading and writing skills needed in applied subjects.

II. Program Objectives

The program aims to:

A. enhance text structure or patterns of development in writing across disciplines learning

competencies performance of the participants;

B. determine the effects of R.E.A.C.T. strategy in teaching text structure or patterns of

development in writing across disciplines learning competencies;

R. E. A. C. T. Text Structure Intervention Program Proposal 1

 C. distinguish the learning experiences of the students in the use of Contextualized Teaching and

Learning (CTL) Approach in teaching text structure or patterns of development in writing

across disciplines learning competencies; and

D. develop lifelong learners who construct knowledge for themselves through metacognitive

awareness of when and how to apply what they have learned based on their social context.

E. encourage teachers in the field to use contextualized teaching and learning approach in their

content areas.

III. Program Components

Text structure competencies will be taught using contextualized teaching and learning

strategy. Contextualization is an instructional approach that stresses social nature of learning is

central aspect of education (Lave & Wenger, 1991; Wenger, 1998). Based on this premise,

learning always takes place within a specific social context. The classroom, the teacher, the

culture of the school, and the broader community influence how people construct their

definition of education and what it can do for them (Street, 1999). They learn to develop an

identity within the community at the same time as they master new knowledge and skills. In

teacher-directed classrooms where there is little interaction among students, students may come

to see learning as something imposed by an “expert” rather than learning to see themselves as

lifelong learners who construct knowledge for themselves. This indicates that contextualization

approach transfers learning from one context to another more effectively when the learner

understands not only the facts but also the “big picture”—the underlying principles, patterns,

and relationships—that is acquired through the application of knowledge (Glaser, 1992;

Bransford, Brown, & Cocking, 1999; Greeno, Resnick, & Collins, 1997). It requires that a

learner develop not only content but also procedural knowledge, such as the metacognitive

awareness of when and how to apply what has been learned. This kind of knowledge can be

acquired only through practice (Pressley & Woloshyn, 1995; Hartman, 2001). As opposed to

traditional approaches, contextualized teaching and learning approach strives to emphasize

problem-solving and is anchored in teaching to students’ varied life contexts (Jameson-Meledy,

2015).

R. E. A. C. T. Text Structure Intervention Program Proposal 2

 IV. Program Strategies and Framework

REACT is one of strategies in contextualized teaching and learning approach as

proposed by Crawford (2001) and used in Texas Collaborative for Teaching Excellence (2007).

This strategy suggested that instruction based on contextual learning strategies should be

structured to encourage five essential components of learning: Relating, Experiencing,

Applying, Cooperating and Transferring, or REACT. According to Texas Collaborative

for Teaching Excellence (2007), Relating: linking the concept to be learned with something

the student already knows; Experiencing: hands-on activities and teacher explanation allow

the students to discover new knowledge; Applying: students apply their knowledge to real-

world situations; Cooperating: students solve problems as a team to reinforce knowledge and

develop collaborative skills; Transferring: students take what they have learned and apply it

to new situations and contexts.

This intervention program is designed using the REACT Strategy in teaching Text

structure Learning Competencies. The competencies included in the program are the description,

classification, and compare and contrast text structures. An intervention program proposal will

be structured to enhance these competencies.

The diagram below further explains and illustrates the program framework.

Contextualized Teaching
and Learning (CTL) Approach
(REACT Text Structure
Intervention Program)

RELATING

EXPERIENCING

APPLYING

COOPERATING
TRANSFERRING

Diagram 1: Framework of the REACT Text Structure Intervention Program for the
Contextualized Teaching and Learning (CTL) Approach

The diagram showed how the process how REACT Strategy is done in during the

implementation of the program.

R. E. A. C. T. Text Structure Intervention Program Proposal 3

 V. Program Beneficiaries

The participants of the study are the twenty (24) Grade 11 students, nine (9) from ICT and

fifteen (15) from HE sections who got 75 and below grade in Reading and Writing Skills in the first

quarter and a very low mastery according to the result of the first quarter examination item analysis

in Reading and Writing Skills.

VI. Program Implementation Process Matrix

Time Frame Activities Outputs

PRE – IMPLEMENTATION

I. Preparation, Consent Procedure

and Pre – Assessment
A. Intervention Program Proposal Validated Text Structure
Development Assessment
September B. Pretest and Post Test Validation Approved Intervention Program
to C. Intervention Program Proposal Proposal
October Submission and Approval Text Structure Instructional
2017 D. Compilation and Editing of Instructional Materials
Materials Signed Parental Assent or
E. Parental Assent or MOU MOU
F. Conduct Pretest Assessment Pretest Result

IMPLEMENTATION PROPER

II. REACT Text Structure Intervention

October Program Implementation
to A. Description Formative Assessments and
November B. Classification/Exemplification Activities Results
2017 C. Compare and Contrast Reflective Journal

POST IMPLEMENTATION

III. Post Assessment and Submission of Result

November A. Conduct Post Assessment Posttest Result
2017 B. Report Post Assessment Result Documentation Report
C. Documentation

Prepared by: Approved:

LEAH P. VILOG ELSILDA P. BUNAGAN

Proponent Principal II

R. E. A. C. T. Text Structure Intervention Program Proposal 4

 References

Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.). (1999). How people learn: Brain,
mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
(http://books.nap. edu/html/howpeople1/)
Carrell, P. L. (1985). Facilitating ESL reading by teaching text structure. TESOL Quarterly,
Crawford, L. Michael. 2001. Teaching Contextually: Research, Rationale, and Techniques for
Improving Student Motivation and Achievement. Texas: CCI Publishing, Inc.
Glaser, R. (1992). Expert knowledge and processes of thinking. In D. F. Halpern (Ed.),
Enhancing thinking skills in the sciences and mathematics. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Greeno, J. G., Resnick, L. B., & Collins, A. M. (1997). Cognition and learning. In D.
Berliner & R. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 15-46). New
York: Simon & Shuster Macmillan.
Hartman, H. J. (2001).Metacognition in learning and instruction: Theory, research and
practice. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Jameson-Meledy, K. (2015). Contextualized Learning: What does the research data say?
Citrus College Institute for Completion (IFC) Research Brief No. 1.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation.
Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Pressley, M., & Woloshyn, V. (1995). Cognitive strategy instruction that really improves
children’s academic performance. Cambridge, MA: Brookline Books.
Street, B. V. (1999). Literacy in theory and practice. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University
Press.
Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (Eds.). (2003). Handbook on mixed methods in the behavioral
and social sciences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Texas Collaborative for Teaching Excellence (2007). info@texascollaborative.org

R. E. A. C. T. Text Structure Intervention Program Proposal 5