School Improvement Plan for Student Achievement (SIPSA) - Literacy
Pineland 2014-2015


In Halton, we recognize the importance of monitoring the “Right Work”. The School Effectiveness
Framework (p. 8) suggests ongoing monitoring methods such as:
  • discussing the School Improvement Plan at staff, division, department and/or Professional
  • Learning Community meetings,
  • planning professional learning based on the specific actions/strategies in the
  • School Improvement Plan,
  • assessing progress according to established checkpoints and timelines,
  • collaborative analysis of a wide range of student data, and
  • reflecting on targets and the results of instruction to determine the next steps.
Schools that align the professional learning plan and resources to address student learning need (SIPSA) and implement the professional learning plan with fidelity - deeply, consistently and over time - should expect to influence student learning. We are not losing sight of student learning; simply stepping back in the transfer process to ensure that the professional learning is taking root. Only when this occurs, can we be sure that there will be an impact on student learning.
source: Heather Gataveckas, Coordinator of Research







The SIPSA Process


Who was involved?
Margaret Nimigan (principal), Jan Farquhar (vice-principal), Kenda Capaldi (Junior Teacher), Elyse Bly (Primary Teacher), Terri-Lynn Puckerin (SERT), Jennifer Warford (ELL), Wendy Wright-Pettersen (IPL)
How were urgent student learning needs identified?
Examination of Grade 3 and 6 EQAO results reveals that our Junior students have improved in reading and writing; overall 96% achieved Level 3 or higher in Reading, and 90% achieved Level 3 or higher in Writing. ~Also, a greater percentage of this cohort of students achieved at Level 3 or higher in Grade 6 than they had in Grade 3. ~Grade 3 Writing results are similarly strong; 88% at Level 3 or higher in 2013 and 92% at Level 3 or 4 in 2014. ~
However, Grade 3 results show a decrease in reading achievement; in 2013. 87 % of students achieved Level 3 or higher in Reading, whereas in 2014 76% achieved Level 3 or 4 in Reading.
Over the past 5 years, Board and Province results show a steady increase in reading scores, but our results over the past 5 years have been variable. ~
Our school-collect data also shows a need in Reading. ~Only 53% of Kindergarten students reached their expected PM Benchmark level in 2013/14 and this percentage continues to drop through the primary grades to a low of 10% at grade 3 (K - 53%, 1 - 36%, 2 - 12%, 3 - 10%)
Finally, there is a gender gap; only 24% of Level 3 or higher students were boys, whereas 32% of girls achieved Level 3 or 4.


Goal Identified in 2014-2015 SIPSA
If we implement effective guided literacy instruction (e.g., groupings and instructional foci informed by data wall observations, running records, gradual release of responsibility) then we will increase the number of primary students who reach the expected PM Benchmark/GB+ for their grade and our Level 2 students will move to Level 3 or 4 on EQAO (showing growth in our numbers of students achieving Level 3 or 4 in a more consistent manner.) ~
Indicator(s) from the SEF related to this goal - please reference specific components and indicators (e.g., 1.3, 2.2, 4.2).
  • Indicator 4.2 - instructional practices are strategically used to meet the diverse learning needs of students
  • Indicator 4.5 - students are grouped and regrouped, frequently and flexibly; - student work is analyzed to identify ways to differentiate instruction and assessment
  • What student work/evidence will help us monitor our progress?
  • running records, taken during guided literacy instruction and PM Benchmark and GB+ Assessments
  • classroom data folders that track progress as well as current student placement
  • 2015 Primary EQAO data
  • membership and progress in various intervention groups (ie. ELL, Lexia, LLI)
  • students independently choose to read and write with a variety of texts and tools (e.g., choosing a variety of “just right” texts) -track via teacher checklists, anecdotals, running record observations, coloured data wall chart, guided reading lesson planners
  • students use critical skills to think more deeply about the texts they read (e.g., identify and applying appropriate reading strategies) --track via teacher checklists, anecdotals, running record observations, coloured data wall chart, guided reading lesson planners
  • In what ways will our professional learning help us reach our goal?
  • Professional learning will include:
  • Book club ~focussed on Guiding Readers: Making the Most of the 18 Minute Guided Reading Lesson for FI and English teachers
  • LLI Training and implementation of the Green Kit
  • PD on consistent use of classroom data folders, Running Records, Guided Reading folders, teacher moderation to determine consistent assessment of reading responses
  • Collaborative Inquiry focus as a staff
  • On-going discussions around the use of Daily 5/ Les 5 au quotidien to facilitate guided reading/practice happening in the classroom
  • Where are we at this point?
  • Varying degrees in proficiency and confidence in structuring and using guided reading lessons
  • Primary Division data wall is updated twice a year (used to identify students of need and not necessarily to inform instruction and groupings)
  • Daily 5 is consistently implemented across the Division
  • Understanding of GB+ and Guided Reading is varied, particularly in Grade 1 and 2 FI

What are our next steps?
  • Establishing consistent practices via the Book club
  • CI focus on Guided Reading and the use of the Data wall, including opportunities to discuss strategies that move students forward, even possibly moderated marking.
  • Primary Guided Reading Institute - Lead teachers who attended to share the learning with other primary FI staff
  • LLI training and sharing of knowledge to implement the program in Grade 1 with target groups across the school
  • Literacy Night to include the community and help parents understand how to help their children with reading strategies (e.g., All Star reading)
  • Who has a role to play (e.g., school staff, students, parents, resource staff, community partners)?
  • Margaret Nimigan & Kenda Capaldi (leading CI)
  • Tracy Carne & Terri Puckerin (Lead LLI and Book Club)
  • Josée Duckett & Elyse Bly & Jan Farquhar (Lead GB+ and Guided Practice in FI)
  • Jen Warford & Terri Puckerin (Family Literacy Night, Monitoring the data)
  • Wendy Wright-Pettersen (IPL)
  • School Council (aligning funds with Guided Reading - e.g., Prompting Guides for all Grade 1 classes, Poster and help with Literacy Night)
  • In what ways will we continue to monitor our progress?
Who will monitor and when?
What will we monitor?
  • Target LLI students will be tracked (Terri and Tracy)
  • Fall Report Card “Progressing With Difficulty” students tracked for improvement in Semester 1 and 2 Report Cards (All teachers and Administration)
  • Tracking the GB+ data for Primary classrooms (All Primary and Grade 4 FI teachers and Administration)
  • PMB Data Folders and Wall tracking
  • Monitoring Funding (Margaret)
  • review of actions in schools
  • 8 days (connected to MYP, K-3 Literacy); monitoring (who are we going to target?)
  • Prompting Guide, Emergent Wheel, Continuum, F&P behaviours, When Readers Struggle, data folders at the table
  • Updates and information sharing at staff meetings. At staff meetings teacher share samples of student work and artifacts that meet the goals outlined above. The culture of learning and collaborative inquiry is built into staff meetings.