Jay Ann C. Mirador (Author)
Abstract: This study determined the integration of literature in teaching English for Academic and Professional Purposes to the Grade 11 students of Joroan High School in Tiwi Albay, School Year 2023-2024. Specifically, it answered the following sub-problems: 1) What is the performance of the control and experimental group in the pre-test along using knowledge of text structure to glean the information he/she needs; outlining reading texts in various disciplines; using appropriate critical approaches in writing a critique such as formalism, feminism etc.; and writing an objective and or balanced review of critique of a work of art, an event or a program?; 2) What is the performance of the control and experimental group in the post-test?; 3) Is there a significant difference in the performance of the control and experimental group in the pre and post-test?; 4) What are the least mastered skills of the experimental group in the post-test?; and 5) What learning plan may be proposed to address the least mastered skills in the post-test? The null hypothesis that there is no significant difference on the performance of the control and experimental group in the pre and post-test was tested at 0.05 level of significance using t-test. This study utilized the experimental method of research. The subjects were sixty-six (66) Grade 11 Senior High School students of Joroan High School that were randomly chosen by the researcher. The researcher established two (2) groups of subjects. Each group is composed of thirty-three (33) students. The first group was the control group and the second was the experimental group. The statistical measures used include the mean, percentage, variance and t-test. The salient findings of the study revealed that the control group has a performance which is beginning in all four (4) areas tested. The performance level in outlining reading texts in various discipline was 53.60; in writing an objective and or balanced review of critique of work of art, an event or a program with 48.50; and using knowledge of text structure to glean the information he/she needs and using appropriate critical approaches in writing a critique such as formalism, feminism etc. with both 46.40. Likewise, the performance of the experimental group is also in the beginning stage with the following performance level: in outlining reading texts in various discipline was 50.90; followed by using appropriate critical approaches in writing a critique such as formalism, feminism etc. with both 44.20; and using knowledge of text structure to glean the information he/she needs as well as writing an objective and or balanced review of critique of work of art, an event or a program both with 43.30. The performance in the post-test of the control group revealed that the students performed with a description of approaching proficiency in outlining reading texts in various discipline with a performance level of 80.00. The rest of the areas tested were still in the beginning stage although with higher performance levels such as in using knowledge of text structure to glean the information he/she needs with 69.40; writing an objective and or balanced review of critique of work of art, an event or a program with 67.00 and using appropriate critical approaches in writing a critique such as formalism, feminism etc. with 65.10. The test of significance of the difference on the performance between the control and experimental groups in the pre-test and post-test showed that the mean obtained in the control group in the pre-test is 18.18 while on the experimental group is 27.85 with a mean difference of 9.67. The variance computed for the control group has a value of 2.35 while in the experimental group is 1.67. The t-computed value is 27.71 which is higher than the critical value of t at 0.05 level of significance of 1.65. In the post-test, the control group has a mean of 28.15 while the experimental group has a value of 31.30 with a mean difference of 3.15. The variance obtained in the control group has a value of 2.02 while in the experimental group is 1.53. The computed t-value is 9.79 which is higher than the critical value of t at 0.05 level of significance which is 1.65. Learning plans may address the two (2) least mastered skills in the post-test of the experimental group.
Keywords: Integration of literature, Language teaching, English for Academic and Professional Purposes, Text structure, Outlining
DOI: https://doi.org/10.69651/PIJHSS0402204
Read the full text
Recommended citation
Mirador, J. A. C. (2025). Integration of literature in language teaching. Pantaō International Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 4(2), 2196–2205. https://doi.org/10.69651/PIJHSS0402204
References
Aebersold, J. A. & M. L. Field, (2007). From reader to reading teacher: Issues and strategies for second language classrooms. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Aina, J. K., A. G. Ogundele & S.S. Olamipekun, (2013). Teaching the English language. American Journal of Educational Research, Vol. 1, No. 9.
Akhondi, M., F. A. Malayeri& A. A. Samad, (2011). How to teach expository text structure to facilitate reading comprehension. The Reading Teacher, Vol. 64, No. 5.
Ali, S., (2014). The reader-response approach: An alternative for teaching literature in a second language. Journal of Reading, Vol. 37, No. 4.
Al-qadi, M. J. & I. M. M., (2022). Naser. Lexical relation presentations in the views of usage-based cognitive semantics: The case of Antonymy, Synonymy, And Polysemy. Journal of Positive School Psychology, Vol 10.
Barnet, Sylvan, Morton Berman & William Burto, (1993). An introduction to literature. Canada: Little, Brown and Company.
Barzani, S. H. H., (2020). The perceptions of EFL teachers and students on the use of short stories to enhance reading comprehension. Asian EFL Journal, Vol. 27, No. 3, 2020.
Bautista, Ma. Lourdes S., (2000). Defining standard Philippine English: Its status and grammatical features. Manila: De La Salle University Press.
Bereiter, C. & M. Scardamalia, (2007). The psychology of written composition. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.
Borlongan, Ariane M., (2017). Contemporary perspectives on Philippine English. The Philippine ESL Journal, Vol. 19.
Broto, Antonio S., (2008). Statistics made simple. Manila, Philippines, National Bookstore.
Carrell, P. L., (2005). Awareness of text structure: Effects on recall. Language Learning, Vol. 42, No. 2, 2005
Carrell, P. L. & J. C. Eisterhold, (2013). Schema theory and ESL reading pedagogy. TESOL Quarterly, Vol. 17, No. 4.
Collie, J. & S. Slater, (1987). Literature in the language classroom; A resource book of ideas and activities. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Crytal, David, (2013). English as a global language. 2nd Edition, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Culler, Jonathan, (1997). Literary theory: A very short introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Danielson, L. M., (2000). The improvement of student writing. What research says. Journal of School Improvement, Vol. 23, No. 5.
Driscoll, M. P., (2005). Psychology of learning for instruction, 3rd edition. Boston, M.A.: Allyn & Bacon.
Dwivedi, R. & R. Chakravarthy., (2015). Problems encountered by rural students in writing English: Role of English teacher. International Journal on Studies in English Language and Literature, Vol. 3, No. 7.
Ferris, D., (2018). Students’ views of academic aural/oral skills: A comparative needs analysis, TESOL Quarterly, Vol. 32, No. 2.
Gavins, J., (2007). Text world theory: An introduction. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Goldhaber, D. D. & E. Anthony, (2003). Teacher quality and student achievement. New York: ERIC.
Gonzales, Andrew & Wilfredo Alberca, (2008). Philippine English of the mass media, preliminary edition. Manila: De La Salle University Research Council.
Good, Carter V., (1963). Introduction to educational research. New York: Meredith Publishing Company, Inc.
Griffiths, C., (2016). Strategies for developing English language writing skills- overall and individual perspectives. The Asian EFL Journal Quarterly, Vol. 18, No. 3.
Gurrey, P., (2006). Teaching English as a foreign language. London: Longmans.
Hall, G., (2015). Literature in language education. New York: Macmillan.
Harris, K. R. & S. Graham, (2016). Making the writing process work: Strategies for composition and self-regulation. Cambridge, MA: Brookline Books.
Hedge, T., (1988). Writing. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
Hedge, T., (2000). Teaching and learning in the language classroom. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
Hiebert, E. H. & H. A. E. Mesmer, (2013). Upping the ante of text complexity in the Common Core State Standards: Examining its potential impact on young readers. Educational Researcher, Vol. 42, No. 1.
Jiang, X. & W. Grabe, (2007). Graphic organizers in reading instruction: Research findings and issues. Reading in a Foreign Language, Vol. 19, No. 1.
Kabilan, M., M. & F. Mara, (2010). Engaging learners’ comprehension, interest, and motivation to learn literature using the reader’s theatre. English Teaching: Practice and Critique. Vol. 9. No. 3.
Katz, B. & S. Chard, (2009). Engaging children’s minds: The project approach. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
Kellogg, R. T., (2014). The psychology of writing, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Khaki, N., (2014). Improving reading comprehension in a foreign language: Strategic reader. Reading Matrix, An International Online Journal, Vol. 14, No. 2.
Lazar, G., (2013). Literature and language teaching, New York: Cambridge University Press.
Leech, G. N., (1981). Style in fiction. London: Longman.
Leon, J. A. & M. Carretero, (2005). Intervention in comprehension and memory strategies: Knowledge and use of text structure. Learning and Instruction, Vol. 5.
Llamzon, Teodoro A., (2009). Standard Filipino English. Philippines: Ateneo University Press.
Majid, Z. A., (2003). The effectiveness of outline in writing quality on selected for. ELT Journal, Vol. 5, No. 7.
May, J. P., (2005). Literature and critical theory. Reading and writing for understanding. New York: Oxford University Pres.
Mc Rae, J., (2001). Literature with a small i. London: Macmillan Publishers Ltd.
Meyer, B. J. F., (2005). Prose analysis: Purposes, procedures, and problems. In B. K. Britton & J. Black (Eds.), Understanding expository text: A theoretical and practical handbook for analyzing explanatory text. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Mizener, B. H. & R. L. Williams, (2009). The effects of student choices on academic performance. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, Vol. 11, No. 2.
Monika, S., (2016). Creativity in foreign language teaching. Journal of Education Culture, Vol. 16.
Moody, H. L. B., (2017). School certificate literature. West African Journal of Education. Vol. 11, No. 2.
Narad A. & B. Abdullah, (2016). Academic performance of senior secondary school students: Influence of parental encouragement and school environment. Rupkatha Journal on Interdisciplinary Studies in Humanities Special Issue, Vol. 3, No. 2.
Nunan, D., (1989). Designing tasks for the communicative classroom. Cambridge University Press.
Richard, J. C. & R. Schmidt, (2002). Longman dictionary of language teaching and applied linguistics (3rd Ed). USA: Longman.
Rustia, Charess D. et al., (2023). Effectiveness of digital storytelling in teaching literature. Cognizance Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies, Vol. 3, Issue No. 2.
Sanchez, Custodiosa A., (1986). Methods and techniques of research. Rex Bookstore, Manila Philippines.
San Jose, A., (2015). Strategies in teaching literature: Students in focus. International Journal of Education and Research, Vol. 3, No. 4.
Shin, M. H., (2019). Study of English teaching method by convergence of project-based learning and problem-based learning for English communication. Journal of the Korea Convergence Society, Vol. 10, No. 2.
Shoemaker, B., (2009). Integrative education: A curriculum for the twenty-first century. Oregon School Study Council, Vol. 33, No. 2.
Siegel, Sidney et al., (1998). Non-parametric Statistics for behavioral sciences. New York, McGraw-Hill Company.
Singh, A., (2021). Data science and human behavior interpretation and transformation. Journal of Learning and Teaching in Digital Age, Vol. 6, No. 1.
Spack, R., (2015). Literature, reading, writing and ESL: Bridging the gap. TESOL Quarterly, Vol. 19.
Walsh, K., (2001). Teacher education reconsidered: Stumbling for quality. Baltimore: Abell Foundation.
Yopp, R. H. & H. K. Yopp, (2012). Young children limited and narrow exposure to informational text. The Reading Teacher, Vol. 65, No. 7.