Mountview Elementary

2017-2018: Craig Munroe, Principal, is guiding the PLC at Mountview this year. The inquiry focus this staff is pursuing is:

• Focus: Self-regulation
• Checking: At this point our student surveys indicate most students have a solid grasp on what the 4-5 Zones of Regulation are and can self-identify what zone they are in upon request. Note we tried to make it more simplified, in many instances, for the lower grades (Primary) by only having 4 Zones rather than 5 Zones as yellow and orange zone could be lumped together. Given this was our first year that indicator was held as a success. Also, the self-managing strategy of deep breathing was well established across all grades and is in place for most students upon request. Unfortunately for us the deep breathing self-management strategy still needs to be requested rather than being utilized after or during conflict.

Another big strategy that was unexpected in helping self-regulate was having students decide what ‘size’ of problem they were dealing with in an effort to de-escalate. This still needs to be part of a teacher conversation, but the hope is to continue with this line of inquiry for next year to develop each student’s capacity for building perspective.

Student survey in the Winter (February) indicated approximately 35% of students were starting the day in the Blue Zone (tired, no energy) prompting us to send out parent information on sleep requirements for children and healthy eating habits in newsletters. The same survey also indicated that approximately 4-5% of students were elevated after Recess and Lunch. This data compared with our Spring (June) survey with similar %’s of students starting the day in the blue zone and students in the orange or red zones after recess and lunch. The blue zone data will lead to discussions in the Fall on how to ‘wake’ our students up.

Anecdotal reports from teachers indicate that we have established a firm foundation and that we should expect to see more student self-regulation next year as they apply their knowledge. We were expecting small results as we build knowledge and skill sets both with staff and students. The chapter readings and lessons from the book, “The Zones of Regulation” book by Leah M. Kuypers were good but we did do lessons out of order to address specific requests for support. It must also be noted that many lessons had to be modified/adapted to be more applicable to Primary and Intermediate Grade students, one lesson did not fit all. Office referral data showed no significant change from Term1 through Term 2 and Term 3. I do not know what to make of that.

• Reflection: We plan to continue the same inquiry for next year in the hopes of building more knowledge and skills for both staff and students. Requests for more visible and larger school-based posters as well as including the Zones as part of our daily announcements. Teachers asked for more and newer resources to augment those we currently have would be great to include for next year.

We need to focus some efforts on how to inquire about getting students to better utilize the self-regulation strategies and skill sets independently. This will be an area of focus for next year for our inquiry as we delve deeper. Building student independence is key for second year gains to match expectations.

Although we did not expect huge gains in the first year for student behavior we have been pleasantly surprised by the modest retention of Zones knowledge by our students. Establishing our knowledge base of what self-regulation is, what the zones are, and 2 simple strategies was good for both staff and students however application and implementation needs work for both staff and students. Larger, more accessible strategy posters throughout the school will be implemented for next year to assist.

For other schools with similar interests I would suggest patience throughout the process and a more profound presence of the self-regulation program throughout the school might facilitate implementation.

2016-2017: Georgina Riding continues as the PLC Facilitator at Mountview this year.

• To what extent will using the teaching structures of UDL improve students’ writing quality?
• Analysis: In select ELL student results, there was a significant improvement in writing quality (from 2.5 to 4). All teachers that responded to my survey noted that a number of things were consistent from the Fall of 2016 to the Spring of 2017:
  • They all used UDL strategies in their classrooms, mostly in Reading, Writing and Math
  • The measurement tool was our School Wide Writes and all teachers noted an improvement in almost all of their students from the Fall to the Spring.
  • The improvement noted above was not only in the raw scores but also in stamina and print quality.
  • Not all students’ SWW scores went up, especially the ones in the Minimally Meeting area, but the quality of the writing was better. If we used the 2.5 scale then their scores would have gone up also.
  • They noted that they did use UDL strategies just prior to the SWW in the Spring, but are not sure if the use of these right before the write, or throughout the year, or even at all, could have contributed to the higher scores on students’ SWW.
  • Teachers did note that the introduction of UDL strategies did change their teaching in that they used some new strategies, along with their old tried and true methods, when teaching, in all subject areas.
  • Some teachers wondered if in fact it was just simply the maturity of the students that can account for the improvement in their performance.
• Reflection: We found that after gaining a basic understanding of UDL, teachers recognized that many of their current teaching practices involved the same principles. This realization made teachers feel more confident and less anxious about incorporating UDL strategies.

At the beginning of the year teacher groups met in weekly sessions to dig deeply into UDL language. Following this initial focus, groups met every second week. We felt that by starting in a more concentrated way, it would be easier to retain new learning and move the inquiry forward.

2015-2016: Georgina Riding is guiding the PLC at Mountview this year. The inquiry questions this staff is pursuing are:

Primary: To what extent will learning and following one running record style lessen the time need to appropriately group students for literacy lessons?

• Analysis: The primary teachers were happy with the on-line course on completing running records. They also appreciated the practice time I created each week for them by taking their class at ½ hour times so they could pull students and complete a running record.
• Reflection: After a very slow start (late October) I really enjoyed the projects. I think everyone who participated learned something.

Intermediate: To what extent will following the SIOP model improve students' curricular vocabulary (with an emphasis on math).

• Analysis: One teacher reported that the modeling and demonstration he participated in would be a good use for vocabulary building.
• Reflection: After a very slow start (late October, because we weren’t given our extra teacher until then and teachers didn’t know who would be in their class) the intermediate teachers settle on their topic. The end-of-year teachers survey indicated that they were appreciative of the level of help with the topic.