Storyboards as multimodal scaffolds in reading and language arts: a convergent mixed-methods study across grades 2-7 in Ecuador

Abstract

Comprehending a text in an additional language asks young readers to juggle several things at once: vocabulary, narrative structure, sequencing, inference, and memory. This study looked at how a storyboard strategy was implemented in Reading and Language Arts across Grades 2-7, and how much instructional value teachers and students perceived in it. Carried out as a convergent mixed-methods institutional case study in Manta, Ecuador, the research combined structured classroom observations of five teachers, a 24-item Likert-scale survey answered by 100 students, and two complementary semi-structured interview protocols applied to the same five teachers. The observation checklist covered 35 indicators across six dimensions; survey results were summarized through means and favorable-response percentages, and interview data were analyzed thematically and brought together with the quantitative findings in a joint-display matrix. All five teachers scored 140 out of 140 points on the observation protocol, showing fully consolidated implementation in the lessons observed. Students, for their part, responded very favorably overall (M = 4.63/5; 95.1% favorable). Reading comprehension and the overall-assessment items reached the maximum mean (M = 5.00), followed by narrative elements (M = 4.76), visual organization (M = 4.52), motivation and participation (M = 4.50), autonomy and collaboration (M = 4.44), and vocabulary (M = 4.15). Teachers repeatedly linked the storyboard to comprehension, retention, vocabulary growth, and the organization of narrative information, while pointing to time, text length, materials, and uneven participation as manageable constraints during implementation. Taken together, the findings position the storyboard as a feasible, adaptable strategy that was very well received across the school. Since the study did not include a comparison group or a pretest-posttest measure, the evidence speaks to implementation consistency and perceived educational value rather than to a causal effect on reading performance.