Nesika Elementary

2017-2018: Nesika's PLC will again be facilitated by Allison Bos this year. The area of focus for inquiry this year:

• Focus: Formative assessment; student ownership of learning (self-regulation)
• Checking: How do we know FreshGrade was a success at improving student ownership of learning? We sent home a survey to parents asking a variety of questions relating to the new form of reporting. Overall the results told us that a majority of parents liked FreshGrade as it kept them up to date on what is going on in their child’s classroom, as well as initiated conversations at home. For the parents who did not like it, we feel that most of the issues could be solved with parent information sessions, as it was clear by their answers that they did not fully understand the program. Others flat out do not like it and do not want to deviate from the traditional reporting. Some feel FreshGrade is a waste of everyone’s time.

At this point, I do not feel like we answered our question as this year was a steep learning curve for all involved, and we did not get a chance to delve into evaluating student ownership of learning. We will continue our inquiry into year 2 of our pilot project.

• Reflection: As we did not get into answering our question, teachers were asked to reflect on the implementation of FreshGrade. Overall, teachers liked FreshGrade but felt like there were a lot of kinks to work out. It was much more work than they were originally anticipating, and some felt many parents, and students were not looking at the feedback they were giving. They also felt it was double the work because they were consistently posting to the portfolio and felt they made it clear where the students were at. However, they were asked to write a formal report card 3 times during the year, which is what they have always done. They also felt there was not clear communication on expectations with the formal report. In the beginning, they were told there was only going to be one summative report at the end where marks (letter grades only) were to be put into MyEd, and everything else was to be done in the FreshGrade portfolio with levels, and not letter grades. Teachers were then expected to do report cards (with letter grades) that took as much time as the traditional MyEd report did, on top of the required assessment posts. Going forward, most teachers feel that if traditional report cards are expected (like they were this year), there also should not be the expectation for the full assessment posts, or the reporting piece has to change. All teachers feel we need to get rid of the traditional report card system, and how we were expected to report this year, is a different form of the same traditional report. Despite all the negatives, not a single teacher said they do not want to continue with FreshGrade next year, and most said they would be upset if they had to go back to using MyEd for reporting.

Positives from feedback – Teachers liked:

• how it allows for teachers to keep parents better informed of students’ work and evaluation of said work
• how it gives students an opportunity to take pride in their work and it feels like they are showcasing it
• gives students a portfolio of their work so they can look back and see their growth
• it allows for teachers to look at learning as a continuum instead of chunking term by term or year by year and reporting on what they worked on, and what they accomplished for the subject/assignment
• it allows parents to email teachers and some teachers felt like issues were dealt with quicker (some teachers did not like that parents now have their email)
• photos and videos of learning – often a photo tells more than a written report can
• the ease of passing on messages to parents about class activities
• it made sure that teachers were on top of marking and increased accountability
• parents can SEE why their child has gotten the mark.
• it brings the classroom home.
• parents can watch their child speak, play and learn in a second language!

Negatives/Suggestions from feedback –

• Traditional reporting is the biggest issue. One teacher said, “I did not like the feeling that I was reporting on assignments to the system. This means the blurbs or term comments at the end of traditional reporting periods and the end of the year report card. If I wanted the report card stress I would not have voted for using FreshGrade.”
• Taking pictures sometimes made me feel like I was not available to help students learn in the moment.
• Lack of technology is an issue. One teacher said, “Although I appreciate the new iPads, I feel like we can never have enough because when assignments are not uploaded during a designated time and additional time is given later, it feels like all the students have something to upload and panic when they don’t have an iPad”.
• Some teachers felt it took too long to upload and assess all the students work as not all kids (especially primary) are able to upload their own work.
• One teacher said, “the most aggravating part of this process was the constantly changing, unclear expectations. I continually felt rushed around report time as there was always a change in what needed to be done. Even a small change made it more stressful. It also felt like double the work, continually reporting and then writing a formal report each term.”
• The technology needs to be in place before diving into using FreshGrade. One or two iPads per class in not enough.
• It is unfortunate that Nesika had to put in approximately $5000 to upgrade our wireless, and we were not able to put that money into much needed devices to support FreshGrade. This expenditure is equivalent to approximately 10 iPads.
• One teacher commented, “If we need to have a report to go into the students file, then I would like to see it only be term comment plus strictly the marks. A summary of what was covered seems redundant and more work as all the information is already up in FreshGrade for parents to see.”
• Teachers would like to see a sample of what is expected for the reporting with direct, to the point emails explaining what is required. This email and sample a few weeks prior to a formal report would be beneficial.
• Parents need guidance on how to effectively comment on their child’s portfolio, and not just say, “Good job.”
• There are a lot of steps for students to log in. With the log in short cut in t-common, it cuts down on log ins on the computer, but with the steps involved with the iPad log in, it takes far too long for students to log in. This seems like wasted time, especially with the shortage of iPads.
• One teacher said, “FreshGrade lends itself wonderfully to the new curriculum, promoting self-reflection and parent/teacher/student feedback on assignments. I feel that having to report with letter grades or final marks throughout the year is counterintuitive and does not align with new curriculum expectations. My suggestion is if teachers report with MyEd to keep using that format; but if they choose to use FreshGrade, expectations should be altered slightly to reflect the newer style of assessment. For example, letter grades for intermediate at the end of the year only; formative and summative assessments based on a 1-2-3-4 scale throughout the year (which is equivalent to letter grades, but changes the wording to growth mindset language); having a minimum amount of posts (activities) for each subject, so as to include all aspects of curriculum covered that term; separating the three terms as usual, so as to give students and teachers a set amount of time to complete certain assignments and activities; having a minimum amount of reflection or feedback posts students and parents need to make on any particular assignments.”
• Another teacher said, “I felt there was a serious lack of communication from the director of instruction and the principal of technology to our staff. Our staff was not signed up for FreshGrade until after November break, which left us scrambling to make sure we were correctly and fairly assessing students with the new program. After communicating to our admin that intermediates would not be receiving letter grades until the end of the year, the director of instruction told staff and parents at an evening parent meeting to expect letter grades for each term. I felt completely blindsided and a bit cheated, as it had supposedly been clarified several times otherwise. It made teachers look like we didn't know what we were doing or talking about when having to correct previously confirmed information to parents and students.

2016-2017: Nesika's PLC will be facilitated by Allison Bos this year.

Inquiry 1: What will I notice in my Math classroom if I implement the Guided Math Framework?

• Analysis: All students have improved in knowledge of basic math facts and other concepts, some to a much greater degree than others. Now, teachers prepare a unit addressing the skill students are to learn, the concepts are taught, and then they are able to assess if students understand the concept when they meet in the small group. In the past, some students did not understand what to do, some did nothing at all, and some finished the worksheet very quickly and then wondered what to do next. With everyone working on the same concept but at their own level, the level of engagement has improved greatly. Students are enthusiastic about math. They stay engaged until it is time for cleanup.
• Reflection: Teachers would not go back to the old system. They feel like the students are having more fun, are more engaged and are learning more. Students are also learning more associated skills such as communication, collaboration, sharing, and writing. Teachers are happier because they feel they are doing a better job of teaching and it is more interesting for the teachers as well.

Inquiry 2: What difference does technology make in overall engagement, participation, and understanding?

• Analysis: Technology makes a positive difference in overall engagement in the activities in the classroom. Students were very engaged when using the iPad apps and were helpful to one another during group rotations when good sharing was demonstrated and students had positive attitudes when using them. Students will require more opportunities to share on iPads and to speak clearly and loudly enough for the audience to hear about their projects and work.
• Reflection: It’s okay to let students be independent with technology. Regular status checks and constructive feedback to students can help to keep the individuals and groups on task and accountable for their time. It is also important to continue to incorporate technology into teaching practice in order to meet the needs of the students and offer them alternate ways to show their learning.

Inquiry 3: How does pre-teaching writing skills or strategies improve students’ writing?

• Analysis: Pre-teaching writing strategies has provided students with the tools needed to become independent writers. Using small or whole group lessons has provided students with explicit tools needed in order to improve their writing skills.
• Reflection: Pre-teaching writing skills has made writers more independent and confident in their writing skills. By explicitly teaching students the skills necessary, it has allowed them to independently or nearly independently build upon their writing skills. It will be beneficial to continue to pre-teach writing strategies and use writing tools to assist students in making their writing more juicy and meaningful. Something that could change is after pre-teaching writing strategies with the whole class, bring together struggling writers and scaffold writing with this group.

2015-2016: Nesika's PLC will be facilitated by Sylvia Swift this year. The staff is tackling three different inquiries this year:

Problem Based Learning (Leah Moe, Shelley Barber, Kari Johnson, Allison Bos, DonnaLee Gunderson, Karen MacDonald, Kirsten Hamm, Melissa Therrien, Sylvia Swift, Yvonne Davis, Steve Carpenter, Frances McCoubrey)

• How will the use of student questions and ideas to guide our explorations together, lead to deeper engagement and learning?
• Analysis:

Teacher A: After completing 3 observation checklists for science lessons, 1 traditional lesson and 2 outdoor lessons, I concluded that student engagement ranged from very high to medium for all lessons. On self-assessments measuring on-task behavior, knowing what to do, and excitement and enthusiasm students responded frequently with all the time, most of the time and the occasional sometimes. The Action Step Matrix helped me to identify what worked and what needed to be changed. I now begin with an introduction of the topic or ask a question in the classroom that will provide a focus for the lesson outdoors. We explore, meet and debrief outside to share our observations. A game is planned to give students a chance to enjoy the outdoor space and also serves as motivation to complete given tasks. Students are required to record their observations in an Exploration Log (1/2 plain & lined notebook) either outdoors or when we return to the classroom. I also try to incorporate an element of risk during our time outdoors, for example, jumping off rocks, walking on ratchet straps.

Teacher B: I found the daily outdoor time in the forest has been wonderful for my class. Through observation, I have noticed that there is never even one child disengaged when they are permitted to use their own creativity to build things and invent games using their own imaginations. There is very little squabbling. When I impose my own plan of exactly what we are going to do in the forest, I notice that my idea is good for a while and most students are enthusiastic and on task for a certain time and then they lose interest and become somewhat disengaged.

Teacher C: Students seem really interested in what they are learning, are more engaged and have taken more ownership or responsibility for getting their work done. I know this by observing them as they are working, listening to their comments about what they are learning and by evaluating their finished projects. Classroom behavior is improved during project learning sessions as students are on task, enthusiastic about what they are learning, and keen to share what they are learning with me and others. Complaints about the work have decreased as students are interested in researching, recording and presenting their findings to an audience.

I would not say that student marks have not improved as the top students continue to perform well and the bottom students continue to struggle with their reading and reading comprehension, and recording their work in written form. Students do like being given the option of recording their findings, and presenting their work in picture form using technology like Adobe Voice and Haiku.

Data: Term 1: 72% Meeting Expectations, 28% Minimally Meeting Expectations

Term 2: 73% Meeting Expectations, 27% Minimally Meeting Expectations

Student Engagement Walkthrough Checklist: Positive Body Language – High, Consistent Focus – Medium, Verbal Participation – High, Student Confidence – Low to High and Fun and Excitement – Medium.

Teacher D: Results from engagement checklist:

Traditional Lesson- 53% on task, 47% off task

Project based lesson #1- 80% on task, 20% off task

Project based lesson #2- 69% on task, 31% off task

Teacher E: I have noticed more student engagement when working on their own questions and research. Stamina has also greatly improved since the beginning of the year. I know this because I have watched students get down to work and work hard for periods of time between 30 minutes and one hour without interruption and complaining.

• Reflection:

Teacher A: I am now committed to having Outdoor Education as part of my weekly practice. When students become accustomed to going outdoors it becomes less of an event and more of a learning experience. The work in their Exploration Log is more detailed and meaningful after an outing. Although their level of engagement may be high in the classroom, there are added benefits to going outside and providing experiences for all children to connect with nature and learn to respect the environment.

Teacher B: I think what has worked really well is allowing the students to use their own ideas and questions to guide their learning. They have created art projects using pitch as glue, built many types of structures, investigated insects, observed the daycare development and talked about how it felt to see the destruction. They have learned to share with the class when describing their project. They work/play together in wonderful harmony and collaboration when outdoors.

Teacher C: As a teacher I have become more interactive with my students and more open to allowing my students to work at their own pace, and to choose what they want to learn. This has taken a lot of pressure off of me and allowed me the freedom to transfer more of my responsibility for student learning over to my students. Being given choice has enabled my students to be more accountable for their learning.

Teacher D: Student engagement has changed with the implementation of project based learning. All four competencies of critical thinking, creativity, communication and digital literacy, and collaboration, as well as personalized learning can be found in engagement. Engagement can be described as a student’s active involvement in a learning activity (Christenson, Reschly, & Wylie, 2012). I know engagement in my classroom has changed based on the observation sheets of their involvement during project time. I observed students during a traditional lesson, as well as during project based lessons. The traditional lesson was done on a Tuesday morning, and the second project based observation was done on a Friday afternoon. Even on a Friday afternoon, students were more engaged than they were with the traditional lesson earlier in the week.

Project based learning has changed the fact that I spend less time planning. At the beginning I felt guilty that I didn’t have a lesson planned with a worksheet for students to complete, but after seeing how well projects work and how engaged students in my class are, I no longer feel guilty. I also feel I have more of a connection with my students because I am able to talk with each of my students every class, and not just when they were stuck on a question on a worksheet. Now that I am not planning every single social studies and science lesson, and marking endless assignments, I am able to give students more feedback on how they can improve their project. This is more beneficial to them than a mark out of 20 on a science worksheet.

I know things have changed with my students because every day I have students in the classroom before school asking if there is time to work on projects today. I have students asking to stay in at lunch to work on their project, and I also hear cheering when I let my students know it is time to switch to projects. They are also more independent, and because I know they are engaged, I let them work in the hall, or outside on the picnic tables, where they don’t always have direct supervision. In the past, I would have not let students out of my sight because I knew they would be fooling around, and not doing their work, but now (for the most part - there is still a certain degree of off task behaviour) I know students will be engaged and working as it is a topic that they chose because they were interested in it.

Teacher E: PBL increases my engagement in the subject area because there are a variety of topics being talked about, learned about and taught about (by the students). I have noticed a lack of grumbling and complaining from students. I plan to teach Socials projects and science projects, rather than teaching from the book as a result of participating in this inquiry.

French as a Second Language (Laura Seer, Nicole Ratko, Nathalie Easthope, Todd Routtu, Sylvia Swift, Yvonne Davis, Steve Carpenter)

• How will a focus on French vocabulary and modeling the use of style and form improve students writing?
• Analysis: Overall, student results from the SWW showed students in all classes moving toward the right on the Performance Standards for writing. In all classes, the number of students ‘Not Meeting’ expectations dropped in all four aspects. In addition, individual teachers provided observations:

Teacher A: Students reading levels have improved from the beginning year. In September, 43% of students where reading below grade level. In March, 34% where reading below grade level. Orally, at the beginning of the year, most students depended heavily on translating from English to French to maintain a conversation. In May, most are quite comfortable using French throughout the day without have to use English words to express themselves. We have gone 4 continuous days without a student speaking in English throughout the day! In writing, students have improved in their writing skills tremendously; especially in meaning, style and conventions.

Teacher C: Students are progressing with writing. They are able to construct basic sentences that make sense. Most are speaking French in carpet activities. GB+ My Ks are able to read basic sentences (aa level) but level 1 is still a little too challenging with the exception of a few who are at a level 1 comfortably.

Teacher E: I used Ma trousse d’ecriture. We focused on adding voice, introductions, conclusions, types of writing, and planning our writing. What I have noticed is when students are asked to write a more detailed story, they know what questions to answer while planning their writing. They also are starting to add additional details to their planning page to use in their writing. Although the introductions and conclusions were not always necessary easily identified in their writing, when doing a presentation some students would remember that they needed to add an introduction and a conclusion to the presentation. Students also began to show (discuss aloud) what type of writing would be best for the assignment given.

• Reflection:

Teacher A: The use of GB+ and the training with Yvette, where extremely beneficial for me as a teacher. They allowed me to closely examine how my students read and how I as a teacher can better help them. Reading, on a daily basis (with a buddy, individually and listening to myself read to them) has deepened their love of reading. Every student in my class looks forward to these moments. The school librarian can’t believe how much they love books! In turn, words, sentences structure and stories that they have read, have been rewritten and mimicked by them; improving their ability to write and express themselves as writers.

Teacher B: The way I present writing in a grade 1/2 class has changed. I model writing constantly in the classroom and provide students with writing prompts to help with structuring a sentence(s). I have created games and word work that helps the students be successful at making and writing their own sentence(s). I see this working because they are using these sentence structures from the games and word work in their own sentences and stories. Another thing that has changed has been a start of writing workshops with the use of cut up sentences. However, the writing workshops were not completely running hence this is a goal I would like to further next year.

Teacher C: Unfortunately due to absence, I have missed our PLC groups. However, I feel like by collaborating with more experienced teachers, I received more direction to develop reading strategies and how to teach writing. As a result, my students are progressing and seem to be enjoying the process of learning. Things seem to be more organized and I have a defined plan on where I want to go and the little benchmarks to make note of along the way.

My students’ French comprehension and verbal output is increasing. They are able to write basic sentences. We have started a little bit of the Reading Power strategies in story time with journal writing. Making connections to what we are reading in class.

• I saw a huge change in the class from our first write to the second.
• Students were able to form complete sentences using correct punctuation
• From a level that was almost below the lowest criteria, students were in general meeting expectations for their grade

Teacher D: Quite a bit has changed about me as a teacher after this collaborative inquiry. I teach writing better now; I explicitly use the Gradual Release of Responsibility model much more frequently which has resulted in much better writing pieces. The students are more independent and less anxious about writing, though there is always room for improvement there. Being able to sit in on a writing lesson in another teacher’s class allowed me to see how she gradually released responsibility and scaffolded her students’ writing projects.

The difference of having a collaborative inquiry vs. not having one is a big one for me. Talking to other teachers to see what they are doing in their classes and using that information for my planning and assessment (based on what they’ve already done in previous grades, or what is likely planned for students moving onto the next grade) has been extremely helpful.

Though our extreme focus shifted a few times, the writing/language/FSL/language acquisition inquiry this year has been invaluable. I am already using strategies in my teaching and will continue to consider all aspects of French language acquisition in the future.

Literacy (Leona Williams, Sharon Allan, Connie Burns, Lacey Nasuzny, Katelyn Odonnell, Sylvia Swift, Yvonne Davis, Steve Carpenter)

• How will incorporating the ‘Trait Crate’ into writing conferencing, assessing and student goal setting in to the framework of the Daily 5, improve the quality of the students writing?
• Analysis:

Teacher A: School wide write data-Beginning of year, 17/17 students used scribble writing and drawing that was not legible. May – 8/17 students used phonics, words and sentences, and their writing can stand alone. 2/17 students use a string letters together using phonics, but it is difficult to decipher. 7/17 students use strings of letters to represent their thoughts. Approaching -8 Meeting -9

Teacher B: My students wrote three School Wide Writes this year, assessing the categories of Meaning, Style, Form and Conventions. My class came out below grade level at the beginning of the year in all four areas. We began using the Trait Crate as a starter for our lessons and focused on Style, which was at 42%. We looked at creating a voice in our writing, and did weekly spelling tests on the most commonly used words in the English language. We also learned how to use our Writing Dictionaries to find and apply the correct spelling to our work.

During the first term we had individual writing conferences where students set their own goals. After I had marked their papers we met and discussed where each child should go next, and they edited their work on the computer. Some students only wrote one sentence, and others only one paragraph.

I began doing a "five-minute write" in which students were given "power triplets", meaning three key words on which to write. They were instructed to write for five minutes without stopping, and promised that I would not read what they had written unless they asked me to. They were told not to worry about being tidy or about conventions, and that they would have a chance to read their stories aloud if they wanted to. This took the fear out of writing for some of my students and they began to look forward to our sharing sessions.

The second term we had writing conferences where we determined where each student needed the most improvement. This was more productive than "showing that my writing is tidy", "showing that I double spaced my work", and other such goals that led to slightly improved writing.

The third term I set writing goals and conferred with the students, showing them why I chose their goals. Most of them agreed that their writing needed to improve mostly in those areas. I gave them more of a choice in topics, with some parameters, and began to see an improvement. Because they knew that I was going to hold them accountable by showing me where they met their goal in their writing assignments, they paid more attention to their writing.

Teacher C: 81% of my students are meeting or exceeding expectations in “Meaning”, 85% in “Style”, 95% in “Form” and 91% in “Conventions”.

Teacher D: 72% of my students are minimally meeting, meeting, or exceeding expectations in “Meaning”, 84% in “Style”, 76% in “Form” and 76% in “Conventions”.

• Reflection:

Teacher A: What has changed for me as a learner is that I will teach writing daily, separate from the daily 5, I felt they needed more guidance, and practice, and time for sharing daily, which the daily 5 prevented. I felt I could have been more effective with longer chunks of time to teach their daily lessons. It was very difficult to conference with one on one as many students required more support. I plan to use more dictation more often using sight words as we learn them. I felt the 2 students were capable of more, if I only had more time to spend with them. Students seemed to do better, when it is not a school wide write. The 8 students usually use punctuation in their regular writing but forgot in their school wide writing piece, but some others experimented with the conventions.

Teacher B: Providing individualized goals for the students and making them accountable to work on those areas made a big difference, as did having them do a good copy so as to learn from their mistakes. I put them in A/B partners after the good copy for peer editing, which was successful for improving their writing in only about half the class. Allowing some choice in topics motivated them. In the final term we practiced writing and improving on "one powerful sentence" as a regular writing assignment. The Trait Crate was helpful to reinforce the lessons when my own "bag of tricks" needed enhancement.

Teacher C: What has changed for you as a teacher? How do you know?”

• How I verbalize writing skills.
• Students are using the vocabulary I have taught them when it comes to all aspects of writing.
• Reading Recovery and Daily 5 have given my students more output and more quality in what they are writing.
• Students are more confident in their ability to write and to check their work.

2014-2015: Nesika staff is working with Steve Carpenter and Yvonne Davis on their inquiry question:

• How does creating a variety of goal oriented activities work to improve engagement and stamina in students?
• Analysis: Intermediate classes: 1) 20/23 students can self-regulate, 2) 16/24 students moved forward 6 months to 1 year in reading levels, 3) 18/20 on-task during ‘Read to Self’ (R2S); everyone moved 2-6 levels, 4) 18/24 generally on task-peer pressure worked well, 5) 22/27 reading independently; Overall: everyone was very happy and looking forward to going further into the framework next year.

Primary classes: 1) 14/17 Self-Regulate (SR) for 20 min R2S-16/17 are at grade level in Reading - It was mentioned this was due to the excellent support of the LST, 2) 18/21 can SR for 15-25 minute chunks of R2S- almost all were ME or AE with only 1 w/o movement due to LD-Teacher loved the large chunks of time for assessment, planning and conferencing with students, 3) FI-Majority can SR 10-30 minutes R2S- Everyone moved up 4-10 levels in reading except 2 with no growth. EA’s support is very important and helpful during R2S, 4) 9/21 can SR-Remainder feed off each other and if they are split up will have greater success next year-All K’s are at Level C-E (Grade 1), 10 Gr 1’s are E or higher having started at level A this year, better stamina during R2P, 5) 22/23 SR for 10 minutes or longer, 12/23 grade level, but there has been great movement by everyone, up to 14 levels in one case (Due to LST support according to classroom teacher) Lack of support at home for reading is the big stumbling block, 6) FI K-R2S 10 minutes for most 5 minutes for everyone, been working well when graphing the class’ success with the students, 7) FI Gr1 – 7-10 Independent reading for everyone-2-6 levels of improvement over the whole class

• Reflection: Sending photocopied books home over the summer for some of our vulnerable students to try to support continued reading growth.

Goals set to practice more formal assessment by a few of our teachers during the R2S parts of their day next year. More focus on LA during EA supported time when possible.

Writing independently was a struggle and may be a focus for next year.

Every teacher felt the Daily 5 structure, however they incorporated it in their own way, was a success. They are motivated to use it again next year with further alterations to fit their style and students. Reading growth has given us evidence that the structure, in conjunction with other supports, was a success in creating the ability for students to self-regulate while working/playing independently or in small groups towards a specific goal.

We will be looking at a new approach to get our collaboration time through whole staff afternoon meetings once a month and observations between staff members and our PLC Facilitator once a month with Administration support.