I. General Information
School Name: Capitol Hill Elementary
School District: SD#41 Burnaby
Inquiry Team Members: Christina Croft – christina.disalvo@burnabyschools.ca
Nicole Quin – nicole.quin@burnabyschools.ca
Janet Lieu – janet.lieu@burnabyschools.ca
Elysha Fong – elysha.fong@burnabyschools.ca
Bavan Arora – Bavandeep.arora@burnabyschools.ca
Kara Sewell – kara.sewell@burnabyschools.ca
Carla Brancati – carla.brancati@burnabyschools.ca
Susan.Cox – susan.cox@burnabyschools.ca
Lindsey Bogunovic – Lindsay.bogunovic@burnabyschools.ca
Liane Karvelis – liane.karvelis@burnabyschools.ca
Stephanie Lundrigan – stephanie.lundrigan@burnabyschools.ca
Inquiry Team Contact Email: stephanie.lundrigan@burnabyschools.ca
II. Inquiry Project Information
Type of Inquiry: Numeracy & Literacy Project
Grade Levels Addressed Through Inquiry: Primary (K-3)
Curricular Areas Addressed: Language Arts – Literacy, Language Arts – Oral Language, Language Arts – Reading
Focus Addressed: Literacy, Formative assessment, Self-regulation
In one sentence, what was your focus for the year? Our focus was improving literacy practice in the primary grades by making it more intentional and more inclusive.
III. Spirals of Inquiry Details
Scanning: Most of the students involved in this project are very young. For many of the learners, self-regulation is a major factor. However, they are certainly able to say who they know believes in them at the school. They also do want to do well and have a sense of where they are going with their learning. For the students who are requiring the greatest amount of support with their learning, the answers to these questions also provide some insight. Both the First Peoples Principal of Learning and the OECD Seven Principles were considered in the Scanning as well as the Taking Action parts of this project. We wanted the learning to be hands on and engaging. Play was an important factor as was the opportunity to work with a friend. It was important that all students felt connected and in charge of their learning. Story needed to have a huge part of this project – many of these students were involved in Year 1 of this project where the Story Workshop and oral language were the focus. We needed to presume competence for each learner and continue to work through challenges. As mentioned previously, assessment played a continual and important role.
Focus: We were hoping to improve literacy (reading) outcomes for our students. We were concerned with the literacy acquisition of five Indigenous students in grades 1 and 2. We had been tracking them for the past year. We also wanted to make sure that any literacy intervention did not make them feel singled out or less than. We wanted to deliver targeted instruction that met their specific assessed stretches while continuing to make sure they felt like strong and capable members of their classroom community.
Hunch: There was room at school to build on our capacity in providing focused literacy intervention at the primary level that was evidence-based and driven by assessment. We also had hunches about the capacity that could be gained from the primary teachers collaborating on sharing their knowledge and experience and developing new understandings about reading instruction.
New Professional Learning: We explored formative assessment and its importance in driving instruction. We utilized a variety of assessments targeting phonemic awareness, concepts of print, and decoding fluency. We collaborated in a variety of ways – large group and small group. We really came to recognize the value in collaboration and sharing professional understandings.
Taking Action:
• We assessed each student for letter knowledge, concepts of print, phonemic awareness, phonics, decoding/fluency and reading comprehension.
• Using this data, we grouped the grade one and two students (three combined classes) into six different groups. These small groups would move to an appointed area four days a week from 11:15 to 12:00. This was to prevent anyone from feeling that they were being singled out. In these smaller groups, they would receive explicit instruction in their area of stretches indicated by the assessment. They would also participate in engaging learning activities.
• We had plans to group the grade two/three and grade three classes in a similar fashion, but when we looked at the data, over ninety percent of the students were reading at a proficient level. After rich conversations, it was decided not to create groups, students would stay in their classrooms with the exception of a few students who continued to receive targeted intervention.
• Students were assessed frequently to make sure the instruction was useful
• Students were assessed using the EPRA and some of the same methods from September in January and again in May.
• In April, the kindergarten students were assessed using the EPRA and then the phonemic awareness screener. A small group intervention was created four days a week for 25 minutes.
Checking:
• In the somewhat narrow sense of improving literacy outcomes, we did make a significant difference for a great many of our learners. However, in terms of overall literacy there is still a great deal of work we can be doing to support our learners.
• There continues to be a small number of students going into grade 2 and 3 levels who continue to require significant support in literacy acquisition. Looking at the work they did and the work we did, we have arrived at a new hunch that their learning is different than that anticipated in a typical literacy program (e.g the scope and sequence provided by Heggerty and/or UFLI). They have made progress however, it is not linear and it is very unique to each student. We have realized that it is vitally important to stay in tune with each student’s learner and carefully monitor their growth. Again, the idea of presuming competence and holding high expectations is so important.
• Along with the anecdotal evidence we collected each day, we also used the assessment data from the start of the year, in January, and, in May. This allowed us to see where progress occurred and where new intervention is needed.
• We are satisfied with the collaborative work the educators carried out together. It was rewarding and professionally fulfilling to share and work toward this joint goal.
Reflections/Advice: We were reminded of the importance of creating a plan and collaborating to see it through. We were reminded of the power of collaboration and the important role it plays in education. We can achieve more by working together than we can individually.
It is hoped that this inquiry will continue in September and that the first step will be assessing each learner to get an accurate sense of what they truly need to progress. The advice for other schools would be to spend the time getting to know each other and making a concrete plan to follow. Assessment needs to have a major role. Working together to improve the literacy outcomes of the smallest learners is an important project to embark on as the entire school will benefit eventually. This may mean a refocusing on money and resources.