Closing the Gap: Supporting P4–P5 Learners Through Implementation Research on Roots to Rise

• In Event: From Constraints to Change: Data-Driven Approaches to Transform Early Literacy

Proposal

Building Tomorrow (BT) delivers community-powered foundational learning to primary school-aged learners in Uganda. Its signature program, Roots to Rise (R2R), adapts the Teaching at the Right Level methodology to the Ugandan context. R2R serves P1–P5 learners, delivered in schools by BT-trained teachers and in community spaces by BT-trained Community Education Volunteers. Instruction is targeted to learners’ ability rather than age or grade and integrates Universal Design for Learning and social-emotional learning approaches to ensure inclusivity and responsiveness. R2R has reached over 800,000 learners, with nearly 90% advancing at least one learning level and over 64% achieving grade-level minimum proficiency within a 40-hour cycle (Building Tomorrow, 2025).

This panel presents findings from an implementation research study exploring why P4–P5 students reached minimum proficiency at lower rates than younger grades and how the program could be adapted to better support them. P4–P5 learners are developing more advanced comprehension skills and often face the largest gaps in reaching grade-level targets. Strengthening their foundational reading, writing, and math skills is critical, as without these, students are less likely to progress, face a higher risk of dropping out, and encounter long-term barriers to academic success and future employment.

Our research began with an in-depth review of existing data to identify potential influencing factors and determine what additional data were needed to understand how interventions function in practice. We considered variables such as contact hours, facilitator support, implementation fidelity, and availability of materials. In the first learning loop, we tested whether providing a story booklet and a one-day training on differentiated instruction for teachers of P4–P5 students would increase the proportion of students reaching minimum proficiency the end of a 40 day cycle. While the initial 8-week test showed no significant effect, we iterated the booklet, aligning it with a detailed phonics scope and sequence. Building on this, we explored key questions: What additional insights into student ability can EGRA provide compared to ASER, and are the measures aligned? What strategies are facilitators using to support P4–P5 learners, and what do they see as the main reasons students fail to reach minimum proficiency? Why do facilitators believe learners struggle during lessons, what support do facilitators themselves need, and is the level of lessons appropriate for these students?

At CIES, we will present findings from EGRA assessments, classroom observations, and qualitative interviews. These provide a detailed view of P4–P5 students’ knowledge gaps, facilitators’ strategies and perspectives, and the effectiveness of differentiated classroom activities. Each new insight from this research points to the next important question and contributes to understanding what works for learners in our context, including the how and why. We look forward to sharing how these findings have strengthened implementation and to supporting others in applying similar iterative research approaches to better understand and improve their own programs, across different contexts and at scale.

Author

• Whitney Warren, Building Tomorrow