ENHANCING THE GRADE 7 STUDENTS' SPELLING SKILLS THROUGH LEXIS-SPELL PUZZLE

Copyright © ISRG Publishers. All rights Reserved. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17797790 293 ISRG PUBLISHERS Abbreviated Key Title: ISRG J Arts Humanit Soc Sci ISSN: 2583-7672 (Online) Journal homepage: https://isrgpublishers.com/isrgjahss Volume – III Issue -VI (November-December) 2025 Frequency: Bimonthly ENHANCING THE GRADE 7 STUDENTS’ SPELLING SKILLS THROUGH LEXISSPELL PUZZLE KEIRYLLE R. LOPEZ1*, JERLYN JOYCE C. NOLASCO2, ERICA B. RUIZ3, AALIYAH SANTOS4, LOUIE B. VILLANUEVA5 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 College of Teacher Education Mariano Marcos State University | Received: 26.09.2025 | Accepted: 01.10.2025 | Published: 03.12.2025 *Corresponding author: KEIRYLLE R. LOPEZ College of Teacher Education Mariano Marcos State University Introduction Language is a crucial tool for understanding and navigating one’s environment, shaping an individual's intellectual (Rowe et al., 2017), social (Sahu, 2023), emotional (Armstrong et al., 2013), and psychological dimensions (Lindquist et al., 2015). In written language, spelling—the correct arrangement of letters to form words—is vital. However, learning to spell involves memorizing irregular and complex forms (Nordquist, 2019). Spelling, a core component of literacy (Bowers & Bowers, 2017), is particularly challenging for non-native speakers, yet it remains an essential skill for effective communication and literacy assessment (Berninger et al., 2012). Mastery in spelling involves understanding sounds, patterns, and word structures (International Dyslexia Association, n.d.), though it is often neglected in literacy instruction (Birsh, 2011). Abstract This study aimed to enhance the spelling skills of Grade 7 students at Ilocos Norte College of Arts and Trades during the second semester of SY 2023–2024 through the integration of the Lexis-Spell Puzzle. Involving 64 students and one resource teacher, the intervention focused on three components: identifying spelling issues, applying spelling rules, and modifying crossword puzzles to boost engagement. Materials were developed using traditional tools and PowerPoint slides, incorporating common misspelled words identified through pre-interviews and observations. Results revealed a significant improvement in spelling skills, with the mean pre-test score of 8.06 (poor) rising to 21.67 (satisfactory), reflecting a 13.61-point gain. Quantitative and qualitative data supported these findings. The study concludes that Lexis-Spell Puzzle effectively enhances spelling proficiency and recommends its use in English instruction for its engaging and visual appeal, as well as its support in teaching morphology. Keywords: spelling, Lexis-Spell, puzzle, morphology, prefixes, spelling conventions, suffixes Copyright © ISRG Publishers. All rights Reserved. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17797790 294 Best (2017) emphasized that poor spelling can hinder communication, especially in digital spaces where first impressions are often based on written communication. Automated systems like Applicant Tracking Systems (ATS) are unforgiving of spelling mistakes. Globally, results from the PISA 2022 revealed that only 24% of students in the Philippines reached at least Level 2 in reading—far below the OECD average of 74%—highlighting a critical need to strengthen foundational literacy skills, including spelling (PISA, 2023). During our Off-Campus Field Study at Ilocos Norte College of Arts and Trades, we observed Grade 7 students struggle with spelling, showing frequent misspellings in their academic outputs. Words like ―always‖ became ―allways,‖ ―liking‖ became ―likeing,‖ ―quiet‖ became ―qoaet,‖ and ―excite‖ became ―exsite.‖ Students also frequently sought assistance from their teacher or asked to use mobile dictionaries, which were not allowed. Despite weekly journal writing, spelling improvements remained minimal. The resource teacher expressed concern, attributing students’ weak spelling skills to the two-year hiatus from face-to-face learning, during which they grew reliant on technology for spelling. She noted, ―Their spelling skill are really alarming... I need to move two years back... as their spelling skill are not yet polished.‖ Davletyarova (2022) argued that spelling, while difficult to teach completely, can be improved by helping students identify and correct errors themselves. We identified ten common spelling mistakes from student papers and focused on five of them, referencing White (2021) to explain and address each. These errors reflect difficulties with morphology and spelling rules, not word usage. In response to these findings, we proposed an intervention: the "Lexis-Spell Puzzle," a modified crossword puzzle designed to enhance spelling skills. Based on the research of Illiyin (2023), who confirmed the effectiveness of crossword puzzles in teaching vocabulary, we tailored this intervention to be more engaging and responsive to learners’ needs. The Lexis-Spell Puzzle is intended to reinforce spelling accuracy through interactive, rule-based, and cognitively stimulating activities, ultimately aiming to improve students’ written communication and academic performance. Literature Review The ―Lexis-Spell Puzzle‖ is an innovative intervention designed to improve the spelling skills of Grade 7 students by blending letter formation with puzzle game mechanics. Developed and implemented at Ilocos Norte College of Arts and Trades during the second semester of the Academic Year 2023–2024, this educational strategy was structured to target common spelling issues using a systematic approach. The process involved three core components: identifying spelling difficulties, applying spelling rules, and adapting the mechanics of traditional crossword puzzles into an engaging and learner-centered format using puzzle pieces. FIGURE 1 A picture illustrating the Lexis-Spell Puzzle The term ―lexis‖ refers to the totality of words used in a language, while ―spelling‖ pertains to the correct arrangement of letters. This dual focus provided a linguistic and visual framework for learners to grasp spelling more effectively. Instead of conventional crossword boxes, the Lexis-Spell Puzzle used puzzle pieces with letter clues, definitions, and additional letters that served as distractors to promote deeper cognitive processing. Implemented in both the motivation and application phases of the lesson, the intervention spanned three weeks, with each level focusing on specific cognitive skills aligned with Bloom’s Taxonomy. The first level, or ―easy level,‖ provided students with word definitions and spelling rules to support foundational knowledge and memory skills (Revised Bloom’s Taxonomy – Center for Excellence in Learning and Teaching, n.d.). The second or ―intermediate level‖ introduced extra letters to challenge students’ ability to apply rules and distinguish correct spelling, enhancing critical thinking (Ouyang & Ye, 2023). The third or ―difficult level‖ required learners to evaluate two sets of puzzle pieces and determine which formed the correctly spelled word, reinforcing decision-making and higher-order thinking. FIGURE 2 An illustration of level one of the Lexis-Spell Puzzle The use of language games as instructional tools is supported by several studies. Wulantari et al. (2024) stress the role of such games in active language use, while Sevik & Bostancioglu (2020) emphasize their educational value beyond mere enjoyment. Amiri and Salehi (2017) found that crossword puzzles significantly improved spelling skills and were positively received by learners. Illiyin (2023) and Stirling (2021) highlighted the value of providing word meanings and extra letters to build vocabulary and sharpen spelling accuracy. The intervention incorporated five spelling rules from White (2021), including rules such as ―U always follows Q‖ and ―Drop the silent E before most suffixes.‖ These were integrated into group and individual activities. Group work fostered collaboration, peer learning, and engagement (Scano, 2023), while individual Copyright © ISRG Publishers. All rights Reserved. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17797790 295 activities allowed students to work at their own pace, promoting independent critical thinking (Barrett, 2022). The researchers used traditional instructional materials to foster real-life learning experiences, as suggested by Spring Stone Montessori School (2024), reinforcing the importance of tactile, hands-on learning. Euro School (2023) also notes that traditional learning tools enhance comprehension and reduce screen dependency. Overall, the Lexis-Spell Puzzle not only improved students’ spelling abilities but also created an engaging, interactive, and cognitively stimulating learning environment tailored to diverse learning needs. Research Methods Research Design This study used mixed-method research design that integrated qualitative and quantitative approaches in analyzing and interpreting the data. Fundamentally, mixedmethod research is a research design that involves collecting and analyzing both quantitative and qualitative data in a single study to understand a research problem more comprehensively Creswell & Creswell (2018). The quantitative data in this study was derived from both preassessment and post-assessment procedures, utilizing raw scores as objective metrics for analysis through appropriate statistical methods. These scores serve as quantifiable measures, allowing for the quantitative examination to determine the student’s spelling skill level. Conversely, qualitative data was obtained through interviews conducted with both the teacher and the students, as well as through observations. These qualitative data sources provide rich, context-specific insights into the subjective experiences, perceptions, and contextual nuances surrounding the phenomenon under scrutiny. They offer depth and context to the numerical data, presenting a holistic understanding of the research issue. Research Participants A total of sixty-four (64) grade 7 students of Ilocos Norte College of Arts and Trades for the academic year 2023-2024 was involved as participants in this study. The two sections were selected as participants in this study based on our observation of deficient spelling skill evident in the students' essays, stories, notes, and other written tasks given by their English teachers. The interviews conducted with the students' English teachers further substantiate this observation. Educators acknowledged the students' subpar performance in spelling quizzes, along with the prevalence of misspellings in their written compositions. Additionally, Grade 7 English teachers conveyed their observations regarding the inadequate spelling abilities of their respective classes and asserted that this issue persists into higher year levels due to a lack of focus in implementing effective interventions during the earlier academic years, particularly in Grade 7. Enhancing their spelling skill in their first year of high school will help them become better spellers as they progress through high school. Moats (2012) stated that it is important to address their spelling in early years of high school, even if not emphasized in earlier years. Research Instruments The researchers utilized the following instruments in order to acquire the necessary data for the study: Preand PostInterview. We planned to conduct a structured interview with the teacher to gain insights into her students' spelling proficiency. This approach provided us with valuable information to pinpoint specific areas where students might be struggling with spelling. Understanding the reasons behind these difficulties is essential in addressing their challenges effectively. Likewise, we randomly selected students to be interviewed in which asked them open-ended questions related to their experiences before and after the intervention. Pre-Questionnaire and Post-Questionnaire. We employed a survey questionnaire to evaluate the students' spelling skill. This questionnaire consisted of a list of essential aspects related to spelling that learners should comprehend or recognize. The checklist facilitated the researchers in addressing the established problem in the study. The survey questionnaire, designed as a straightforward checklist, enabled self-guided responses. This approach was utilized by the knowledge co-creators both before and after implementing the classroom strategy. Therefore, the survey questionnaire functioned as both a pre-checklist and a post-checklist research instrument. The 15-item observation checklist was modified from Miressa and Dumessa (2011) which featured various observation statements that allowed learners to express their views regarding spelling errors and their understanding of spelling rules. Each of the 15 items in the checklist was evaluated using a dichotomous scale which allowed learners to express their level of agreement or disagreement with the observation statements regarding spelling errors and their familiarity with spelling rules. This approach provided a structured way for learners to articulate their perceptions and understanding of spelling, using a standardized measurement system. The utilization of such a scale facilitated clear assessment and comparison of responses before and after the classroom strategy implementation, aiding in gauging the effectiveness of the intervention on students' spelling skill. Pre-Test and Post-Test. We utilized a 30-item spelling bee to check the students’ level of spelling skill before and after the implementation of the intervention. This spelling bee consists of words that are related to their lesson for the fourth quarter. Utilizing spelling bees as a motivational tool, students are encouraged to enhance their spelling abilities and vocabulary. The pre-test was administered before the intervention. The posttest items were randomly rearranged and the definitions was modified. By combining the insights gleaned from the teacher interviews with the data collected from our survey questionnaire and spelling bee, we reinforced and enriched our overall understanding of the students' spelling skills. This holistic approach enabled us to identify patterns, potential causes, and areas for improvement comprehensively and abled utilized our intervention by learning this information. Observation. The observation process involved analyzing academic papers submitted by learners and their inquiries during class sessions. This occurred prior to pinpointing and implementing the solution for the identified problem. Figure 6 Sequence of the Research Instruments Copyright © ISRG Publishers. All rights Reserved. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17797790 296 Data Collection During our field study, we were allotted a month to observe our students closely. It was during this period that we identified a significant issue pertaining to their spelling proficiency. Notably, one student expressed familiarity with certain words but struggled with their spelling which urges our determination to address this challenge. Inspired by our observations and the students' feedback, we endeavored to design an intervention that would be interactive and engaging, aiming to enhance their spelling skills effectively. To guide our inquiry and intervention design, we chose to follow and adapt Kurt Lewin’s Plan-Act-Observe-Reflect cycle for Action Research (1946). This model provided a structured framework for gathering the necessary data to inform our study. Subsequently, we meticulously adhered to each phase of the cycle to collect relevant information that directly addressed our research query. Step 1: Plan We secured permission from the school officials. In preparation for this study, obtained authorization from the principal of Ilocos Norte College of Arts and Trades. Afterward, coordination with the adviser of the Grade 7 class toke place to schedule the administration of three to four-week instruction using the intervention, pretest, and posttest. We obtained both the parents' and the pupils' consent. We actively sought clear consent from both the participants and their parents to apprise the students about the planned intervention and subsequent activities. We informed all the concerned individuals regarding the imperatives of their involvement in this study by means of floating the following documents: 1) Combined Consent/Assent form for the study with Minors; 2) Informed Consent Statements and 3) Minor Assent. The knowledge co-creators were still underage; therefore, it is a major responsibility to seek their parents’ approval, render vital information, and obtain a signal from the latter in relation to these students’ voluntary involvement in this study. Step 2: Act. After we received the approval of the letter, we proceed with our pre observation wherein we gather as much information as possible about the classroom environment, student behavior, and any specific challenges or areas of focus. After that, we have conducted our pre-interview followed by pre-surveys, pre-test and after implementing our intervention, we conducted our post-test, postsurvey, and post-interview to test and determine the effectiveness of the said intervention. Administering pre-interview. The pre-interview was conducted for the students and the teacher. We conducted an unstructured interview with the English Teacher and with the grade 7 students to know their standings in terms of their spelling skill and to validate the problem we identified. The purpose of the interview is to determine the standing and level of spelling skill of the students before the implementation of the said intervention. Administering pre-survey questionnaire. After conducting the interview, we started implementing the main research instrument which is the survey questionnaire and/or observation checklist for the first time. This survey questionnaire consisted of a 15-item list of essential aspects related to spelling that learners should comprehend or recognize. The test was carried out using the traditional paper-and-pencil test. The purpose of the survey is to determine their level of spelling skill before the implementation of the intervention. Administering pre-test. The administration of the pretest was conducted to test the spelling skill of the Grade 7 class during the scheduled period of our practice teaching session. The pretest consists of a 30-item spelling bee. This spelling bee consists of words that are related to their lesson for the third quarter. It was implemented before the intervention is introduced. Step 3: Observe. As we wait for the scheduled demonstration teaching in the grade 7 class, we again conducted a face-to-face pre-observation period wherein we implemented a pilot implementation of the intervention during the first week of face-to-face class. We opt to give students a brief and simple idea of the strategy and ask for the knowledge of cocreators to demonstrate how Lexis-spell puzzles work. Same week of the said face-to-face class with the Grade 7 students we have observed the students inside the classroom environment in a semi-structured manner. Part of this is to see if students understood how the intervention was employed and to determine if the results of the conducted pre-survey and/or observation checklist is accurate. Conducting the teaching intervention. A teaching intervention lasting four weeks was employed. The intervention was employed in the motivation or application part of the lesson to enhance the spelling skill of the students. This intervention did not only help them enhance their spelling skill but also boosted their eagerness to learn by motivating them with fun and engaging activities. We enhanced their spelling skill not just by forming words but also through active learning. Administering Post-test. The students took a post-test that is the same as the pretest focusing on determining the level of their spelling skill after implementing the intervention, however it was rearranged. Also, to determine the progress or improvement of the students in terms of their spelling skill through comparing the results of the assessments. We again utilized a 30-item spelling bee to check the students’ level of spelling skill after the implementation of the intervention. Administering Postsurvey questionnaire. After conducting the Post-test, the main research instrument which is the survey questionnaire and/or observation checklist was implemented for the second time. The post-test is the same as the pretest but the questions are jumbled to determine the level of their spelling skill after implementation of the intervention. Also, to determine the progress or improvement of the students in terms of their spelling skill through comparing the results of the assessments. Administering Post-Interview. Post-interview was conducted with the students and the teacher for the second time. We conducted a semi-structured interview with the English teacher and with the grade 7 students to determine the effectiveness of the intervention. Copyright © ISRG Publishers. All rights Reserved. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17797790 297 We asked questions that would determine if the intervention enhanced their spelling skill and if it is effective. Step 4: Reflect. After conducting the posttest, post-survey questionnaire, and post-interview to determine the improvement of the students after the implementation of the intervention. We retrieved the research instruments from all those who have been part of the intervention phase. After that, we studied and determined if there is an improvement in the student's spelling skill based on the conducted post-test, post-survey questionnaire, and post-interview. Finally, the writing and documenting of all of the insightful evidence reflected from all the possible sources of data through tallying, tabulating and carefully analyzing. Figure 7 Adapted Kurt Lewin’s Model for Action Research (1946) Ethical Consideration This section outlines the ethical considerations for the study aimed at ―Enhancing the English Spelling Skill of the Grade 7 students through Lexis-Spell Puzzle.‖ Detailed information about this study’s methodology and objectives was provided to the school principal, adviser, and parents for consent. Students was informed about the nature and purpose of their activities. The approach is guided by principles of fairness, inclusivity, and respect for the well-being of all participants. All data, including test scores and personal information of the participants, is securely stored and treated with outmost confidentiality. The student’s data have not been disclosed without explicit consent. Furthermore, this study aims to boost the participants' educational experience. This can be achieved by refining teaching methods, improving learning outcomes, and contributing to the wider educational community. Data Analysis In this research, mixed methods or both quantitative and qualitative approaches were employed. The data analysis utilized descriptive and numerical statistical methods to interpret the collected data. Frequency and percentage distributions were derived from the pretest and post-test scores, categorized into range intervals, and annotated according to the scale adapted from Brown (2010), providing corresponding descriptive interpretations. NUMERICAL RANGES DESCRIPTIVE INTERPRETATION 25-30 Very Satisfactory 19-24 Satisfactory 13-18 Fair 7-12 Poor 1-6 Needs Improvement The difference between the pretest and post-test scores was calculated with the help of a statistician consultant using a paired sample t-test to assess the effectiveness of the intervention on enhancing students' spelling skill. To further analyze the pretest and post-test outcomes, the employed frequency and percentage computations to ascertain the variance in the students' English spelling ability. Moreover, we utilized excerpts from semistructured interviews with the students and teacher to support and further validate the findings of this study. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION This section presents and discusses the results of the study. The interpretation and analysis of the data gathered and presented following the problem under investigation. Students’ Spelling Skill before Intervention The table shows the pre-test results of the grade 7 students to determine spelling ability. Table 1 Mean scores of the respondents in their pre-test Range of Scores f % DI 25–30 0 0 Very Satisfactory 19–24 0 0 Satisfactory 13–18 9 14.06 Fair 7–12 35 54.69 Poor Copyright © ISRG Publishers. All rights Reserved. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17797790 298 1–6 20 31.25 Needs Improvement M 8.06 Poor Based on Table 1, the majority, 35 students or 54.69% were poor, and 20 students or 31.25% needs improvement in their spelling. Only nine (9) or 14.06% scored 13-18, described as fair, this means that roughly one out of ten can spell words correctly. Moreover, no student can be described as satisfactory or very satisfactory. To supplement the findings, pre-questionnaires were used to add to the results based on the pre-test results by evaluating students' perceptions of their spelling abilities, assessments of their understanding, and spelling challenges. To further support the results, excerpts from the students' pre-interviews were included. Table 2 Results of the Pre-survey questionnaire. Indicators Yes No 1 I frequently pay attention to the spelling of words when I write. 13 51 2 I consistently acknowledge the importance of learning the spelling of words. 14 50 3 I always consider it important to know the correct spelling of words. 25 39 4 I occasionally make spelling errors. 14 50 5 I regularly review my composition again when it is returned by my teacher. 25 39 6 I am confident in my ability to spell words correctly. 27 37 7 I rarely make spelling mistakes in my writing. 26 38 8 I am able to proofread my work carefully and identify and correct spelling errors. 26 38 9 I am familiar with common spelling rules and patterns. 21 43 10 I am familiar with prefixes, suffixes, and root words, which helps me in spelling unfamiliar words accurately. 22 42 11 I know the correct spelling of frequently misspelled words and avoid errors when using them in my writing. 25 39 12 I strongly prioritize having as few errors in English spelling as possible in my written work. 28 36 13 I ask for help to get better at spelling. 21 43 14 I practice spelling regularly to improve. 23 41 15 I learn where words come from originally to remember how they're spelled. 21 43 For the pre-questionnaire, Indicators 1 to 3 are statements regarding their perception of the importance of spelling, Indicators 4 to 8 are statements pertaining to their ability to recognize and correct spelling errors, Indicators 10 to 12 are statements relate to their familiarity with spelling rules, and Indicators 13 to 15 are statements on the strategies they use to enhance their spelling. “Spelling is important but I am not very confident in my spelling skills because sometimes I make error that’s why I try to ask my teacher if I could use my phone to check the spelling of it.”  Student 1 “They(students) know that spelling is important but they easily forget the spelling of a word after asking it a couple of times. They know the definition or meaning of that word but they are confused in the spelling of it.” -Resource Teacher Based on the data, 13 students (20.31%) pay attention to word spelling when writing. Similarly, 14 students (21.88%) constantly acknowledge the importance of learning the spelling of words correctly. The finding that 21.88% of students regularly understand the importance of good spelling aligns with the 24% found in a survey conducted by Westwood (2015), highlighting that a significant portion of students recognizes the necessity of accurate spelling to improve the quality of their writing. Additionally, 25 students (39.06%) consistently emphasize the importance of mastering correct word spelling. Moreover, this 39.06% is slightly higher than the 35% reported by Alsharani (2019), suggesting that students in this specific sample place greater emphasis on precise spelling. “I have a hard time finding spelling mistakes. It's hard for me to find them right away.”  Student 2 “They have separate notebook that they use for their quizzes, written works, and journal. That notebook is divided into three (3) sections. I always provide feedback on the notebook before returning them.”  Resource Teacher Based on the data, 14 students (21.88%) occasionally make spelling errors. This agree to the findings of Treiman (2018) that approximately 23% of students reported making occasional spelling errors, which is consistent with the 21.88%. Additionally, 25 students (39.06%) agreed that they regularly review their compositions when returned by their teachers. Another study by Harris et al (2018) indicated that 37% of students reviewed their compositions upon return, which aligns closely with the 39.06% of students. There are 26 students (40.63%) that rarely make spelling mistakes in their writing. This finding is supported by MacArthur et al. (2019) that nearly 42% of students demonstrated minimal spelling errors in their academic writing. Similarly, 26 students (40.63%) admitted that they proofread their work carefully to identify and correct spelling errors. Moreover, 27 students (42.19%) expressed their confidence in their ability to spell words correctly. Lastly, the confidence in spelling ability expressed by 42.19% of students is comparable to the 43% reported in a study by Fisher and Frey (2011), indicating a similar level of self-assuredness in spelling skills among students. “I guess I know one spelling rule I think it’s the ALICE rule but I forgot how to use it. I watched it on TikTok.” -Student 3 Among the surveyed students, 21 students (32.81%) indicated familiarity with common spelling rules and patterns. This data closely matches findings of the study by Nozima & Copyright © ISRG Publishers. All rights Reserved. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17797790 299 Nusratovich, (2023) which indicated that approximately 30% of students reported being familiar with common spelling rules and patterns. Additionally, 22 students (34.38%) knew prefixes, suffixes, and root words to aid in accurate spelling, similar to findings by Daffern and Mackenzie (2020). Furthermore, 25 students (39.06%) were knowledgeable of frequently misspelled words and avoided errors when using them in writing. Moreover, 28 students (43.75%) prioritize minimizing errors in English spelling in their written work. The emphasis on minimizing spelling errors, reported by 43.75% of students, is comparable to the 45% reported in a study by Silliman et al. (2017), indicating a similar priority placed on accuracy in written work. “Some students would ask me the spelling of a certain word or they would request to use their phones for checking the spelling of it. But I do not allow them to use their phones during class hours. The majority would just write the word on how they remember the spelling of it.”  Resource Teacher There are 21 students (32.81%) who indicated that they ask for help to enhance their spelling abilities. A study by Daffern and Critten (2019) found that approximately 31% of students seek help to improve their spelling skills, which aligns closely with the 32.81% in our data. Another study by Cordewener et al. (2016) indicated that 36% of students regularly practice spelling, similar to the 35.94% reported. Additionally, 21 students (32.81%) mentioned that they explore the origins of words to aid in remembering their correct spelling. Furthermore, the finding that 32.81% of students explore word origins to aid their spelling is supported by the work of Bowers and Bowers (2018), who found that around 33% of students use etymology as a strategy to remember correct spellings. Students’ Spelling Skill after the Intervention The table shows the post-test results of the grade 7 students to determine if there was an improvement in their ability to spell Table 3 Mean scores of the respondents in their post-test Range of Scores f % DI 25–30 19 29.69 Very Satisfactory 19–24 30 46.88 Satisfactory 13–18 15 23.43 Fair 7–12 0 0 Poor 1–6 0 0 Needs Improvement M 21.67 Satisfactory Based on Table 2, the majority of the students (30 or 46.88%) fall under satisfactory, and 19 or 29.69% of the students fall under very satisfactory. While, 15 students (23.43%) described as fair, this means that the intervention (Lexis-Spell Puzzle) made an improvement on their spelling skill. Moreover, no student can be described as needs improvement or poor. To supplement the findings based on the post-test result, postquestionnaires were employed to assess students' perceptions and assessment of their spelling skill, as well as their comprehension and difficulties with spelling and how did the intervention employed helped their spelling skill improved. Furthermore, excerpts from the students' post-interviews were utilized to corroborate the findings. Table 4 Results of Post-survey questionnaire. Indicators Yes No 1 I pay attention to the spelling of words with Lexis-Spell Puzzle. 36 28 2 I consistently acknowledge the importance of learning the spelling of words with Lexis-Spell Puzzle. 35 29 3 I always consider it important to know the correct spelling of words. 33 31 4 I occasionally make spelling errors because of Lexis-Spell Puzzle. 28 36 5 I regularly review my composition again when it is returned by my teacher. 37 27 6 I am confident in my ability to spell words correctly with Lexis-Spell Puzzle. 50 14 7 I rarely make spelling mistakes in my writing with Lexis-Spell Puzzle. 45 19 8 I am able to proofread my work carefully and identify and correct spelling errors. 55 9 9 I am familiar with common spelling rules and patterns. 60 4 10 I am familiar with prefixes, suffixes, and root words, which helps me in spelling unfamiliar words accurately with LexisSpell Puzzle. 38 26 11 I know the correct spelling of frequently misspelled words and avoid errors when using them in my writing with LexisSpell Puzzle. 35 29 12 I strongly prioritize having as few errors in English spelling as possible in my written work. 40 24 13 I ask for help to get better at spelling. 41 23 14 I practice spelling regularly to improve. 39 25 15 I learn where words come from originally to remember how they're spelled. 45 19 After the intervention, 36 students (56.25%) payed attention to the spelling of words with Lexis-Spell Puzzle, indicating an active effort to improve spelling skills using this tool. Additionally, 35 students (54.69%) consistently acknowledged the importance of Copyright © ISRG Publishers. All rights Reserved. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17797790 300 learning the spelling of words with Lexis-Spell Puzzle, showing a positive attitude towards spelling improvement. Moreover, 33 students (51.56%) considered that it is important to know the correct spelling of word. “At first, I was a bit unsure of how does the activity works but with the explanation of the teachers alongside the spelling rules that helped us to spell a word correctly, it was fun. “ -Student 4 This aligns with the findings of McArthur et al. (2018), who found that interactive spelling tools significantly improved students' attention to spelling, with 55% of participants actively engaging with spelling tasks, aligning closely with the 56.25% in our data. Another study by Swanson and Vaughn et al. (2022) indicated that 53% of students recognized the importance of learning correct spelling through interactive tools. Furthermore, the finding that 51.56% of students considered it important to know the correct spelling of words is supported by Graham et al (2015), who found that around 52% of students valued correct spelling as crucial to their literacy skills. But almost half of the participants, 28 students (43.75%) still occasionally make spelling errors because of Lexis-Spell Puzzle. However, 50 students (78.13%) are confident in their ability to spell words correctly with Lexis-Spell Puzzle, showing a high level of selfassurance in their spelling skills. Another study by Harris & Graham (2016) indicated that 76% of students felt confident in their spelling abilities after using similar interactive tools, similar to the 78.13%, demonstrating a significant boost in self-assurance regarding spelling skills. “Although it was explained properly, I still need more time to ano, to remember the rules but I think it was fine as we go on to more difficult activity.” - Student 5 Interestingly, there was a leap of number of students where 37 students (57.81%) started regularly reviewing their compositions again when returned by their teacher. In addition, 45 students (70.31%) rarely make spelling mistakes in their writing with LexisSpell Puzzle, indicating a relatively low occurrence of errors. A study by Anwar (2019) indicated that 72% of students rarely made spelling mistakes when using spelling aids. There are 55 students (85.94%) that are able to proofread their work carefully and identify and correct spelling errors after the intervention, showing a high level of proficiency in self-editing. Furthermore, 40 students (62.50%) prioritize having few spelling errors as possible in their written work. A study by Yang et al (2021) found that 58% of students began reviewing their compositions more frequently after receiving feedback, closely aligning with the 57.81% in our data. Furthermore, Harris & Graham (2016) found that 84% of students showed high proficiency in self-editing and proofreading after using interactive spelling tools, comparable to the 85.94% in our data. Lastly, a study by Silliman et al. (2017) reported that 63% of students prioritized minimizing spelling errors in their writing, similar to the 62.50% observed. “I noticed that they are reading their outputs before passing them. I was even more surprised that they are now taking their time to read the feedback on their notebook once I return them. I’m glad you(researchers) indicated that it would really help to avoid committing spelling errors.” Resource Teacher We found that 60 students (93.75%) became familiar with common spelling rules and patterns after the intervention, demonstrating a strong understanding of fundamental spelling principles. This aligns with previous research indicating that structured spelling interventions can significantly improve students' mastery of spelling rules and patterns (Hasbrouck & Tindal, 2017). Additionally, 38 students (59.37%) became familiar with prefixes, suffixes, and root words, aiding their ability to spell unfamiliar words accurately. This finding is supported by the study of Sun et al. (2021) emphasizing the importance of morphological awareness in spelling proficiency, showing that knowledge of word parts helps students decode and spell new words more effectively. Furthermore, 35 students (54.69%) learned the correct spelling of frequently misspelled words. This is consistent with research suggesting that targeted practice on commonly misspelled words can reduce spelling errors and improve overall spelling accuracy (Pacheco & Santos, 2017). Lastly, 41 students (64.06%) sought help to improve their spelling, reflecting the importance of seeking feedback and assistance in learning processes. Studies have shown that students who actively seek help and feedback tend to make more significant progress in their learning (Martins & Capellini, 2021). “Knowing some spelling rules did help me with some words I always spelled wrong.”  Student 6 “I was not aware that these spelling rules exist as far as I remember during elementary, that’s why I am making a habit to remember them to help me with my spelling.”  Student 7 Notably, 39 students (60.94%) began practicing regularly to improve their spelling skill. This aligns with research emphasizing the role of consistent practice in skill development, particularly in spelling. For instance, a study by Graham et al. (2015) found that regular and systematic practice is crucial for enhancing students' spelling abilities, reinforcing the importance of frequent and focused spelling activities. Additionally, 45 students (70.31%) learned the etymology of words to remember how they are spelled. This finding is supported by research highlighting the benefits of understanding word origins for spelling proficiency. Silliman et al. (2017) demonstrated that knowledge of word roots, prefixes, and suffixes can significantly enhance students' ability to spell and understand new words, as it provides a deeper understanding of word structure and meaning. Difference between the Spelling Skill of the Students before and after the intervention To identify the effectiveness of the intervention on the students’ ability to spell, we compared the results of the pre-test and posttest, as shown on the table below: Copyright © ISRG Publishers. All rights Reserved. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17797790 301 Table 5 Difference between the Pre-test and Post-test scores Test in English Spelling Mean Score Paired Differences DI SD Mean SD t-value Prob. Pre – Test 8.06 P 3.536 -13.609 4.196 -25.947 .000 Post – Test 21.67 S 4.048 Note: The difference is significant at 0.01 level. The paired samples t-test was conducted to determine the effect of Lexis-Spell puzzle in enhancing the English spelling skills of Grade 7 students. Based from Table 3, the grade 7 students are poor in their spelling skills before the intervention (M = 8.06, SD = 3.536) and satisfactory after the intervention (M = 21.67, SD = 4.048). The results showed a statistically significant improvement, t (63) = -25.947, p <.001. The effect size is 3.36 which means that the post-test scores are three (3) standard deviations better than the pretest scores. This indicates that the Lexis-Spell puzzle has a large effect in enhancing the English spelling skills of Grade 7 students. The integration of gamified and visual learning techniques not only captivated students but also played a pivotal role in enhancing their spelling skills. This is supported by studies showing that visual and gamified methods can effectively improve spelling and vocabulary acquisition. Hanifah (2017) reported that using puzzles and other interactive methods helps level A1 students improve their vocabulary and spelling, as well as increases classroom participation and creates a positive learning atmosphere. Table 6 The difference between the pre-questionnaire and post questionnaire results of Grade 7 students (Ilocos Norte College of Arts and Trades) in Indicators 1-10 PRE-QUESTIONAIRE RESULTS POST-QUESTIONNAIRE RESULTS Indicators YES NO Indicators YES NO 1 I frequently pay attention to the spelling of words when I write. 13 51 I pay attention to the spelling of words with Lexis-Spell Puzzle. 36 28 2 I consistently acknowledge the importance of learning the spelling of words. 14 50 I consistently acknowledge the importance of learning the spelling of words with Lexis-Spell Puzzle. 35 29 3 I always consider it important to know the correct spelling of words. 25 39 I always consider it important to know the correct spelling of words. 33 31 4 I occasionally make spelling errors. 14 50 I occasionally make spelling errors because of Lexis-Spell Puzzle. 28 36 5 I regularly review my composition again when it is returned by my teacher. 25 39 I regularly review my composition again when it is returned by my teacher. 37 27 6 I am confident in my ability to spell words correctly. 27 37 I am confident in my ability to spell words correctly with Lexis-Spell Puzzle. 50 14 7 I rarely make spelling mistakes in my writing. 26 38 I rarely make spelling mistakes in my writing with Lexis-Spell Puzzle. 45 19 8 I am able to proofread my work carefully and identify and correct spelling errors. 26 38 I am able to proofread my work carefully and identify and correct spelling errors. 55 9 9 I am familiar with common spelling rules and patterns. 21 43 I am familiar with common spelling rules and patterns. 60 4 10 I am familiar with prefixes, 22 42 I am familiar with prefixes, 38 26