I Do, We Do, You Do (IDWYD) Phonics-Based Approach: Its Efficacy in Letter and Sound Recognition among Kindergarten Learners
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.65339/ijsair.V2.I2.389Keywords:
Alphabet Knowledge, Constructivist Theory, IDWYD Phonics-Based Approach, Kindergarten Learners, Letter and Sound Recognition, Literacy Development, Phonemic Awareness, Scaffolding, Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development, Weekly PerformanceAbstract
This study examined the effectiveness of the “I Do, We Do, You Do” (IDWYD) phonics-based approach in improving letter and sound recognition among kindergarten learners in the Arakan West District. Anchored on Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development and Constructivist Theory, the study investigated learners’ recognition performance, retention, weekly progress, significant differences across assessment periods, implementation challenges, and proposed instructional interventions. A pre-experimental research design without a control group was employed involving 342 kindergarten learners and kindergarten teachers from 11 elementary schools. Quantitative data were gathered using the adapted EGRA ARATA instrument focusing on alphabet knowledge and letter-sound recognition, while qualitative data were obtained through teacher interviews. Frequency and percentage distribution, mean, standard deviation, percentage change analysis, and paired samples t-test were used to analyze quantitative data, whereas thematic analysis was utilized for qualitative responses. Findings revealed that learners initially demonstrated low proficiency in letter and sound recognition, with an overall pre-test score of 18.71%. Following the implementation of the IDWYD phonics-based approach, the post-test score increased to 56.73%, reflecting a 38.31% improvement. Weekly monitoring further showed sustained passing performance throughout the 12-week intervention, peaking at 92.40% during Week 8. Statistical analysis confirmed significant differences in learner performance across intervention periods. However, retention declined after the intervention, indicating the need for continuous reinforcement and long-term literacy support. Qualitative findings identified challenges related to short attention span, language barriers, developmental gaps, limited instructional resources, and large classroom sizes. Proposed interventions included differentiated instruction, technology integration, audio-lingual methods, immediate feedback, and parental involvement. The study concluded that the IDWYD phonics-based approach effectively improved letter and sound recognition and phonemic awareness among kindergarten learners, although sustained retention remained a challenge. The findings support the integration of systematic phonics instruction, scaffolded learning, and home-school collaboration in early literacy programs. The study aligns with Sustainable Development Goal 4 (Quality Education) by promoting evidence-based literacy instruction and foundational reading development, and with SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities) through addressing literacy disparities among diverse learners. The study contributes to educational and community sustainability by strengthening foundational literacy competencies, supporting instructional improvement, and encouraging collaborative literacy support among schools, teachers, and families.
References
Aiken, J., Miller, S., & Thompson, R. (2021). Foundations of reading instruction: Guided practice and independent application. Journal of Educational Literacy, 15(2), 45–58.
Amadi, E. A. (2019). Bottom-up theory and phonics instruction: Implications for beginning reading. European Journal of Applied Linguistics Studies, 1(2).
Aquino, L. N., Mamat, N., & Mustafa, M. C. (2017). Comparing the kindergarten curriculum framework of the Philippines and Malaysia. Southeast Asia Early Childhood Journal, 6, 27–40.
August, D., & Shanahan, T. (2017). Developing literacy in second-language learners: Report of the National Literacy Panel on Language-Minority Children and Youth. Routledge.
Barratt-Pugh, C., & Rohl, M. (Eds.). (2020). Literacy learning in the early years. Routledge.
Bauml, M. (2023). I Do, We Do, You Do: Teaching map skills in early grades. Social Studies and the Young Learner, 36(2), 28–32.
Bravante, M., & Holden, K. (2020). Linguistic hurdles in phonetic instruction: A study of the Philippine landscape. Asia-Pacific Education Review, 22(4), 112–125.
Brown, C. S. (2014). Language and literacy development in the early years: Foundational skills that support emergent readers. Language and Literacy Spectrum, 24, 35–49.
Bustos-Orosa, M. A. (2021). Systematic letter-sound activities in Philippine kindergarten settings. Philippine Journal of Education Research, 34(1), 88–102.
Byrnes, J. P., & Wasik, B. A. (2019). Language and literacy development: What educators need to know. Guilford Publications.
Caviness, C. (2021). Teachers perception of explicit phonics instruction as a tool to improve oral language skills for children learning English as a second language. Trevecca Nazarene University.
Clemens, N. H., Lai, M. H., Burke, M., & Wu, J. Y. (2017). Interrelations of growth in letter naming and sound fluency in kindergarten and implications for subsequent reading fluency. School Psychology Review, 46(3), 272–287.
Colé, P., Duncan, L. G., & Blaye, A. (2014). Cognitive flexibility predicts early reading skills. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 565.
Collins, G., Wolter, J. A., Meaux, A. B., & Alonzo, C. N. (2020). Integrating morphological awareness in a multilinguistic structured literacy approach to improve literacy in adolescents with reading and/or language disorders. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 51(3), 531–543.
Creswell, J. W. (2014). A concise introduction to mixed methods research. SAGE Publications.
Deagon, J. (2021). I do, we do, you do Home Economics: Explicit instruction connecting content with ideology. Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal, 11(4), 135–150.
Dilgard, C., Hodges, T. S., & Coleman, J. (2022). Phonics instruction in early literacy: Examining professional learning, instructional resources, and intervention intensity. Reading Psychology, 43(8), 541–575.
Ehri, L. C. (2022). Mastery of phonemic awareness: Moving beyond simple recognition. Reading Research Quarterly, 57(1), 15–30.
Ehri, L. C., & Flugman, B. (2018). Mentoring teachers in systematic phonics instruction: Effectiveness of an intensive year-long program for kindergarten through 3rd grade teachers and their students. Reading and Writing, 31, 425–456.
Estrella, M. R. (2022). Readiness of DepEd teachers to teach reading. International Journal of Research and Review, 9(5).
Foorman, B., et al. (2016). Foundational skills to support reading for understanding in kindergarten through 3rd grade (NCEE 2016-4008). National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance.
Gove, A., Mora, A., & McCardle, P. (Eds.). (2017). Progress toward a literate world: Early reading interventions in low-and middle-income countries. John Wiley & Sons.
Gunderson, L., D'Silva, R. A., & Odo, D. M. (2019). ESL (ELL) literacy instruction: A guidebook to theory and practice. Routledge.
Haggerty, N. K. (2022). Examining the online implementation of the evidence-based sound partners reading intervention on a measure of phonics skills of kindergarten and first grade students with reading difficulties (Doctoral dissertation, University of Hawai'i at Manoa).
Herring, A. (2023). The importance of early reading interventions in the early grades.
Hu, X., & Du, H. (2023). A pilot study: The impact of phonics instruction application on phonemic awareness within reading and vocabulary abilities of elementary school English teaching. English Language Teaching, 16(6), 186–186.
Khan, M., & Khan, R. (2021). Phonological awareness and phonics instruction: Inclusive practice that benefits all kinds of learners. Asia Pac. J. Dev. Differ, 8, 173–185.
Kilat, C. M. (2019). The importance of knowledge base among kindergartner teachers on language structure in teaching reading effectively. JPAIR Multidisciplinary Research, 38(1), 157–176.
Lau, A. S., Gonzalez, J. C., Barnett, M. L., Kim, J. J., Saifan, D., & Brookman-Frazee, L. (2017). Community therapist reports of client engagement challenges during the implementation of multiple EBPs in children’s mental health. Evidence-Based Practice in Child and Adolescent Mental Health, 3(4), 197–212.
Llord, B. (2017). The influence of trauma on internal integration: An approach-avoidance analysis in disaster relief operations (Doctoral dissertation, University of Arkansas). Graduate Theses and Dissertations.
Marques, C., Sucena, A., Garrido, C., & Lousada, M. L. (2023). Early predictors of reading success in first grade. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, 1140823.
Masser, J. S. (2020). Explicit modeling in early literacy professional development and instructional coaching (Doctoral dissertation, University of Oregon).
Mitchell, D., & Sutherland, D. (2020). What really works in special and inclusive education: Using evidence-based teaching strategies. Routledge.
Moran, M., & Senseny, A. (2016). Parents' perceptions of their child's reading ability. Journal of Education and Practice, 7(11), 139–146.
Mozenter, S. J. (2020). “You're not even reading!”: How one first-grade class negotiated identity and belonging in reading partnerships. Stanford University.
Norman, A. (2023). Educational technology for reading instruction in developing countries: A systematic literature review. Review of Education, 11(3), e3423.
Roberts, G. J., et al. (2022). The state of current reading intervention research for English learners in grades K–2: A best-evidence synthesis. Educational Psychology Review, 1–27.
Roberts, K. L., & Rochester, S. E. (2023). Learning through everyday activities: Improving preschool language and literacy outcomes via family workshops. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 23(4), 495–528.
Roberts, T. A., Vadasy, P. F., & Sanders, E. A. (2018). Preschoolers’ alphabet learning: Letter name and sound instruction, cognitive processes, and English proficiency. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 44, 257–274.
Sapaqueña Jr., A. E., Futalan, M. C. Z., & Despojo, G. (2018). Literacy intervention strategies for increasing kindergarteners’ letter sound fluency and word recognition: A proposed intervention (Doctoral dissertation, Foundation University).
Sitthitikul, P. (2022). Effects of multiple intelligences-based instruction on English achievement and learner autonomy of Thai tertiary students. The Journal of AsiaTEFL, 19(4), 1250–1266.
Skilton-Sylvester, P. (2020). Where's the grapple? Lesson planning in the age of “I Do, We Do, You Do”. Journal of Teacher Action Research, 7(1).
Street, B. V. (2014). Social literacies: Critical approaches to literacy in development, ethnography and education. Routledge.
Torgerson, C., Brooks, G., Gascoine, L., & Higgins, S. (2019). Phonics: Reading policy and the evidence of effectiveness from a systematic ‘tertiary’ review. Research Papers in Education, 34(2), 208–238.
Watson, R., Snowden, A., & Stenhouse, R. (2015). Emotional intelligence and nurse recruitment: Rasch and confirmatory factor analysis of the Trait Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire Short Form. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 71(12), 2936–2949.
Wyse, D., & Bradbury, A. (2022). Systematic phonics instruction and decoding skills: A critical review. Review of Education, 10(1), e3322.
Xu, C., & Pu, K. (2023). Development of a two-photon fluorescent prob for imaging hydrogen sulfide ($H_2S$) in living cells and zebrafish. Analytical Methods, 15(16), 1948–1952.
Xu, Y., Chin, C., Reed, E., & Hutchinson, C. (2014). The effects of a comprehensive early literacy project on preschoolers’ language and literacy skills. Early Childhood Education Journal, 42, 295–304.
Zhao, J., Zhao, P., Weng, X., & Li, S. (2014). Do preschool children learn to read words from environmental prints? PLOS ONE, 9(1), e85745.
