Classroom-Level Problem Solving
In many Ontario classrooms, screening data show risk for many students, often more than can receive limited intervention resources. In addition to focusing on individual student needs, we can reduce the need for more intensive intervention and help more students succeed through understanding the health and wellness of core instruction. The same steps of the collaborative problem solving process can be used when looking at data for a classroom or a grade to help use data to drive instructional improvements across a system.
We’ve outlined the steps below, but take a look at this helpful worksheet template that can guide this process.
Step 1: Identifying the Problem
We begin by looking at screening data to assess how well core instruction is meeting the needs of the whole class. Are at least 80% of students meeting grade-level expectations with core instruction alone? If not, we have a core instruction problem, not a student problem.
For example, a problem statement for Ms.Chen’s Grade 2 class is “At the middle of the year benchmark, 48% of students met benchmark for oral reading fluency – words correct.”
Step 2: Analyzing the Problem
Next, we dig deeper into the data from screening subtests (like phonemic awareness, decoding, and fluency) to identify patterns in foundational reading skills.
By asking “What is the skill that’s holding the majority of students back?” we can target instruction at the right place in the reading pathway. A common pattern that might be evident in Grade 2 is students struggling to read oral reading fluency texts accurately due to phonics and decoding difficulties.
In analyzing the problem, Ms. Chen might want to understand if her students are reading connected text accurately. She hypothesizes that while students are reading texts accurately (through evidence from ORF accuracy scores), her students are not receiving enough opportunities to practice reading texts orally.
Step 3: Developing a Plan
With a clear understanding of which foundational skill needs to be strengthened, the team creates a classroom-level plan to improve core instruction.
We ask:
- Instruction: What evidence-based routine will we use to explicitly teach this skill?
- Dosage: Do we need to increase instructional time or provide more practice opportunities?
- Engagement: How will we keep all students actively participating?
- Materials: What core and supplemental resources will support this skill?
- Grouping: How will we use small-group instruction or flexible grouping to target this skill?
We also set a specific goal for the next screening window, such as: “By the next screening window, 70% of students will reach the benchmark for oral reading fluency – accuracy.”
Ms. Chen might plan on a daily partner reading routine, setting a goal that the percentage of students reaching the ORF-WC benchmark will increase from 48% to 65% in the three week intervention period.
Step 4: Implementing and Evaluating the Plan
The final step is to implement the plan and track progress over time. We monitor two things: the fidelity of instruction (did we do what we planned?) and student progress (are we seeing improvement in the target skill?). This allows us to adjust the plan to ensure we’re meeting students’ needs.
Ms. Chen could examine her records to analyze how often her class received this fluency intervention, and repeat ORF data to understand how students responded to instruction.
