CR4YR/CR4LL

Changing Results for Young Readers (CR4YR) is a BC Ministry of Education funded inquiry project designed to "increase the number of BC children who are engaged, successful readers". The initiative uses current research and an understanding of what fosters reading success. Year 1 Projects include approximately 5 release days for working on inquiries and for developing knowledge in the content/research that supports changes in teaching to better meet students' needs. Having completed a Year 1 project, teams are invited to extend their work during a Year 2 or 3 project. These involve fewer release days, but are scaffolded in order to provide the support necessary to be sustainable and self-running in the long-term. A key feature of these projects is 'colleague visits'. Each school will host a 'learning round' with teachers from the other school(s).

2016-2017: With carried over Ministry funding, we supported three different Changing Results for Literacy Learners (CR4LL) projects, with nine different inquiry questions.

Elementary - Year 1:

Nesika: How does the acquisition of students' oral language support their confidence, engagement and development in reading and writing?
Lac La Hache: What effects will one on one conferencing and using a reading recovery model have on reading achievement?
Mountview: How will implementing various structures provide time and space for small group or individual work for diverse students?

Elementary - Years 2+:

Inquiry 1: What are the appropriate resources/tools to engage each individual student to help them create juicy, meaningful writing?
Inquiry 2: To what extent will teaching instructional word work foster independence and risk-taking in reading and writing?
Inquiry 3: What framework will best allow for accelerated growth of my struggling readers?

Late Literacy - Years 2+:

Lake City Secondary-Columneetza: What conferring tools and structures make conferring more meaningful for students and teachers?

2015-2016: With carried over Ministry funding, we supported three different projects, with nine different inquiry questions.

Intermediate - Year 1:

Cataline: How will conferring lead to more student engagement and reflective responses (descriptive language and the inclusion of personally-relevant information) in Literacy activities?
Lake City Secondary-Columneetza: To what extent would implementing a 30 minute daily “silent writing/journal writing” time improve student writing fluency and skills?
Marie Sharpe: To what extent will using explicit instruction and frameworks improve the students’ ability to become better independent risk takers in literacy?
Nesika: To what extent will providing structured A/B partner work opportunities improve students' reading engagement?
150 Mile: To what extent does using peer collaboration strategies, after reading, improve comprehension and engagement?

Primary - Years 2/3:

Cataline: How does providing more organized and structured writing opportunities in our classroom create independent writers who write with more meaning and detail?
Chilcotin Road: How do we best use our human resources/structures to meet the needs of our diverse learners?

Late Literacy - Years 2/3:

Lake City Secondary-Columneetza: Does teaching student writing through daily conferencing access students’ thinking skills, and therefore improve adolescences’ reading skills?
Nesika: How does conferring with students about their reading improve engagement, stamina and individual students’ skills?

2014-2015: With Ministry of Education funding, we supported four different projects, with 12 different inquiry questions.

Late Literacy - Year 1:

There are five teams working in the Late Literacy Year 1 Project. The Late Literacy Projects allow us to extend our work with Primary teachers into Intermediate classrooms and Secondary Schools. The teams this year are located in Lake City Secondary, Mountview Elementary, Lac La Hache, Distance Ed and Nesika Elementary.

Lake City Secondary (Columneetza): Will teacher/student conferencing improve cognitive fluency especially written & oral communication?
Mountview Elementary: How does the intentional teaching of text features support student book choice for independent reading?
Lac La Hache: What differences do I notice in student's reading comprehension through explicitly teaching and modelling critical thinking [during literature circles]?
Distance Ed: How do literature circles run through an online program affect the comprehension and oral language skills of distance education students?
Nesika Elementary: How does conferencing with students about their reading improve their engagement and stamina?

Late Literacy - Years 2/3:

We have two teams, from Lake City Secondary (Columneetza) and Cataline Elementary, participating this year.

Cataline Elementary:

What differences will I notice in my classroom practices and in my students’ reading when I confer with them in daily purposeful conversations that are productive, authentic and relevant? What differences will the students and I notice in their abilities to respond to what they have read?

Analysis: I have noticed improved levels of engagement during individual conferring, on task behavior during read to self and more participation by students during whole group discussions. Students are probing and going deeper with their thinking. At the beginning of the school year the students would just do a simple retelling of what they had read. Now the students are more likely to share their thoughts and opinions about their reading selections. Following the last whole class reading assessment I noticed students were able to describe in their own words what was going on with their thinking. They were better able to explain what reading strategies they were using; “I was using my schema.”, “I thought about what I was reading.”, If I didn’t understand something I would go back and reread.”, “I visualized.”, and “I wonder why……?” Even my weaker readers were able to explain some aspect of their reading. The students were also better able to explain word skills strategies; “I chunked parts of the word” and “I would go back and reread and think about what would fit in there .” They were fewer responses of “sounding out”.

I noticed changes over time in their written responses – more students were able to response in written format. In the beginning when I provided sentence starters the quality of their written responses improved. It wasn’t just about retelling, but the students were able to respond with more personal reflections. This enabled them to broaden their thinking.

The students understand the importance of being an active, wise reader. During individual conferences I noticed that students are using more strategies. There is progress in every student and a sense of urgency/purpose to their reading. (Teacher 1)

Reflection: I believe the strategy of conferring is so important. It provides an opportunity for the teacher to learn more about the needs of their students, it also gives the student an opportunity to have a one on one time with the teacher. During this time they feel important and it gives them an opportunity to have quality, uninterrupted conversations with the teacher about their reading and thinking.

This process of collaboration is still a new framework to use and it will come more naturally in time; it takes time and there is a need to build relationships. It made me realize how important it is to collaborate for consistency continues for the students. We get better at this process and sometimes it takes to the end before you know what you should have done. (Teacher 2)

I believe the strategy of conferring is the best possible teaching practice I can use to improve the reading skills of my students. Conferring helps me to pinpoint individual student’s strengths and areas of improvement. It drives my instructional practices and helps me to stay focused! It also makes me really listen during individual conferences to what the student is saying and wondering. I also feel that it enables me to establish a relationship with every student in my classroom. Every child deserves some special one-on-one time with their teacher. During this time it gives the student an opportunity to have quality, uninterrupted conversations with me about their reading and thinking.

I need to confer with students daily. Having 30 students in a class makes it difficult to confer with all students equally. It is important to spend time with each student. Next year I want to focus more on the metacognitive part of their thinking. I also want to explore the use of interactive reading journals. (Teacher 1)

Lake City Secondary (Columneetza):

What adaptations or accommodations can be made so that the learning needs of all students are met?
Analysis: Providing adaptations and accommodations predominantly allowed us to meet the students’ learning needs. We know this because quantitatively students achieved success on their chapter tests and writing samples. Qualitatively, students were more engaged in their learning (writing and reading), had greater ownership of their learning through choice and using that choice independently and successfully, and showed more confidence in their abilities to tackle reading non-fiction text, and to produce various forms of written text.
Reflection: I want to be more intentional and metacognitive about my practice – why do I do what I do? Talking and sharing about what we’re doing clarifies what we’re doing and allows us to adjust and lead us forward in our practice. I’d like to continue with this work in September, but be more intentional in the data collection. It was interesting to me that the students wanted to help me become a better teacher – they were very accommodating to our learning process. I need more conferring time with my team at the school and more data collection strategies at the beginning of the process. (Teacher 1)

I really valued the time we get to talk with other teachers. In the business of a regular day, the deep thinking/collaborating does not happen. I appreciate the great ideas of the positive master teachers and the enthusiasm that the teachers/leaders have for educating. I am inspired every time we meet. I learned how important inquiry planning is and how much room I have for improvement. I hope I get another formal opportunity to practice this important skill. As a result of my explicit teaching, I did notice my students were more confident in their writing, shared a common language, and were more engaged. (Teacher 2)

I’d like to be more involved in the process because I found I was no help to classroom teachers because of being at both campuses. It was extremely difficult to meld our times together. If I continue next year, I would perhaps focus on the same topic but use the support/modified as an attachment to the overall data and inquiry. I was thinking about all the re-teaching I do in Support and it would be excellent to look at it from that aspect. Being a person who comes and goes from the classes, instead of being stuck in the pull-out of support situation, would be beneficial for all. The ability to be involved in the class’s time seems to be what is lacking in my practice at this moment. (Teacher 3)

I learned that meetings have to be formalized beyond the team if the team is new. I think there needs to be time made to get to know the other members or there is more difficulty to begin a joint project. Accountability alone is not enough, we need to have a relationship. I was excited about viewing these classroom lessons. I felt badly that I couldn’t return the trust by modeling something. I think we have to have some similar goals to begin the process – this is easier now that our relationships are established. (Teacher 4)

Primary - Year 1:

There are 3 school teams participating in this project: 150 Mile Elementary, Cataline Elementary and Chilcotin Road Elementary. Each is working on a different inquiry question:

150 Mile Elementary:

To what extent will teaching 'Read to Self' build engagement and stamina in our students during 'Independent Reading".

Cataline Elementary:

How will teaching self-regulation strategies to students help develop their stamina for literacy activities?

Chilcotin Road Elementary:

What is the role of “Good Fit” books in furthering students reading development? What do I notice when struggling readers have ‘Good Fit’ books readily available? How do we know precisely what book is best for each child?

Primary - Years 2/3:

We have two teams, from Marie Sharpe Elementary and Nesika Elementary, participating this year.

Marie Sharpe Elementary:

To what extent will implementing clear learning intentions and using explicit instruction within an instructional framework improve student independence?
Analysis: Implementing clear learning intentions and using explicit instruction within instructional framework greatly increased students’ independence. Our students’ writing has increased in volume and stamina. The reading and writing has been integrated within the classroom to foster more ideas coming from the students and not from the teacher. Our students are becoming more confident in their learning, cooperative skills and abilities. With our clear instructions and learning intentions within a framework our students are able to work independently to complete tasks. Using the “Zones of Regulation” program has helped our students understand and regulate their behavior in the classroom thus being active, engaged learners.
Reflection:
- Having a framework works to help keep students focused and on task.
- Students can work independently or in small groups to complete the tasks given for an ever increasing period of time. Using the frameworks (Zones of Regulation, literacy and math centers, Guided Math and Daily 5) has given the students a better understanding of their expected behavior and increased their independence.
- We all would like to work on increasing our (teachers) ability to do more observations, anecdotal reports and video-recording of our students to gather data to support and improve learning for all.

Nesika Elementary:

Will the implementation of the Daily 5 Framework build student independence and stamina in literacy and allow time for the teacher to work with students on specific learning needs?
Analysis: Creating a variety of task oriented activities has greatly improved students’ engagement and stamina. We know this because stamina has increased from less than 5 minutes of independent work to 25 minutes in May. Reading levels have gone up by an average of 4 levels. Students are able to write independent sentences and they are using book language. They are engaged with the writing. When compared to the previous year where class structure was teacher-driven, paper and pen driven and with little choice, to this framework with lots of choice, student driven and hands on, students have shown greater stamina and increased engagement and further progress. Spreading the learning centers around the classroom and allowing movement has allowed increased stamina and engagement too. Reading to self is an area of great growth as they have just right books available.

Photos and videos show students working independently on a learning task while the teacher is working with a small group (uninterrupted) on a focused learning task. One will hear students communicating about their task, laughing and working through questions. Excitement is apparent to finish task and move to the next activity. Evidence of growth using math profile assessment, school wide write and letter sounds and names is very apparent.

It is noted by teachers, parents and administrators that the students in these classes are excited to come to school, to participate in different activities, to have choice, to read to their teacher, to work with each other within a routine, to have the ability to move around, have choice of books, and to use iPads to learn. It is noted that negative behaviours are non-existent during these activity blocks. Students show great confidence and self-esteem in this growing independence.