| Measurable Outcome (SMART Goal) |
Professional Development |
Budget |
Monitoring |
Results
(End of Year) |
| By June 2026 at least 80% of K-5 students will score at or above a Level 3 in ELA on the FAST PM 3 Assessment, increasing proficiency by 2% points from a 68% to a 69%. |
Training in Science of Reading provided by the ELA department. Teachers will learn how to effectively utilize Magnetic Reading to improve 2026 science scores. Science of Reading training will be provided through Professional Learning Community events. |
$7,769.63
|
Weekly walkthroughs will take place and will be compared to Benchmark Unit Scores to ensure that small group differentiation is occurring. |
|
Evidence-based Interventions/Strategies |
| Evidence-based Intervention/Strategy 1 |
The literacy coach will model components of the Science of Reading, Magnetic Reading lessons, Coach for Success test taking strategies, along with daily differentiated reading small groups to teachers. This will be monitored monthly. |
| Person(s) Responsible |
Administration, Coaches, and Teachers. |
| Deadline |
6/3/2026
|
| Evidence-based Intervention/Strategy 2 |
Best practices will be shared at Professional Learning Communities for peer observation and collaboration of effective strategies. |
| Person(s) Responsible |
Administration, Coaches, and Teachers |
| Deadline |
6/3/2026
|
| Evidence-based Intervention/Strategy 3 |
Daily differentiated small group instruction will take place focusing on grade level ELA standards |
| Person(s) Responsible |
Teachers, Coaches, Administration |
| Deadline |
6/3/2026
|
|
Mid-Year Reflection |
| Progress: Is desired progress being made to accomplish the intended outcome for the Area of Focus by the end of the school year? |
Yes
|
| Evidence: Provide evidence of the implementation challenges the school encountered during the Fall semester. Describe the changes made to address these challenges. |
| During the fall semester challenges were encountered related to consistent implementation of evidence based reading instruction and meeting diverse student needs. Evidence included benchmark and progress monitoring data as well as walkthrough observations indicating limited small group instruction. To address these challenges, the master schedule was adjusted to include daily intervention blocks, provide professional development in structured literacy and differentiated instruction, and implementation of regular coaching cycles and data chats. These changes strengthened instructional consistency and improved targeted support for students. |
| Evidence-based Interventions/Strategies: What was each Intervention/Strategy’s identified strengths and weaknesses? |
| Strengths included strong teacher commitment to literacy, use of multiple data sources to guide instruction, growing implementation of structured literacy practices, effective small group instruction, ongoing professional development, and strong administrative support. Weaknesses included inconsistent instructional practices across classrooms, impacts to intervention time, and need for improved progress monitoring and differentiation within small group. |
| New Actions: Describe any new actions that are needed to accomplish the intended outcome for the Area of Focus. |
| McNab has implemented a school wide structured literacy framework through Science of Reading, provided ongoing professional development and coaching, strengthened progress monitoring systems, increased data-driven collaboration, and enhanced family engagement and literacy to improve student reading outcomes. |
| Additional Reflections (optional): Please add any additional reflections for this Area of Focus. |
| At this time our data is trending up in ELA. In PM 2 in grades 3rd-5th we averaged 53% proficient, which is a 17% increase in ELA proficiency from PM 1. Our goal is to increase proficiency to the 75% or higher. |
| Measurable Outcome (SMART Goal) |
Professional Development |
Budget |
Monitoring |
Results
(End of Year) |
| The percent of students in grades 3-5 cohort in 2024-2025 who demonstrated grade-level performance or above on the PM3 Florida Assessment of Students Thinking (FAST) Math will increase from 73% in June of 2025 to 75% in June of 2026. |
Training of the district math model to effectively teach a 60 minute math block. Additional training will occur through Professional Learning Communities. Math coach will teach how to find data within SAVVAS and how to utilize it to push student math scores to proficiency and beyond. |
|
SAVVAS Topic Assessments as well as classroom observations by coaches. |
Based on 2025 Math FAST PM3, we project a 2% increase from 73% to 75% in proficiency on the 2026 Math FAST PM3 contributing to our school maintaining the status of an “A”. |
Evidence-based Interventions/Strategies |
| Evidence-based Intervention/Strategy 1 |
Math coach will model the district math model to facilitate teaching a 60-minute math block efficiently and effectively while utilizing small groups to differentiate using weekly data. |
| Person(s) Responsible |
Administration, Coaches, and Teachers. |
| Deadline |
6/2/2026
|
| Evidence-based Intervention/Strategy 2 |
Best practices will be shared at Professional Leaning Communities for peer observation and collaboration of effective strategies. |
| Person(s) Responsible |
Administration, Coaches, and Teachers |
| Deadline |
6/3/2026
|
|
Mid-Year Reflection |
| Progress: Is desired progress being made to accomplish the intended outcome for the Area of Focus by the end of the school year? |
Yes
|
| Evidence: Provide evidence of the implementation challenges the school encountered during the Fall semester. Describe the changes made to address these challenges. |
| During the fall semester, challenges ere identified with consist math instructional delivery and meeting diverse student needs. Evidence included benchmark and progress monitoring data showing gaps in number sense, fluency, and problem, as well as walk through data indicating limited small group instruction to address these challenges, schedules were adjusted to include daily intervention blocks, professional development was provided, along with standards based instruction and math discourse, coaching cycles were implemented, and progress monitoring and data-driven instruction were strengthened . |
| Evidence-based Interventions/Strategies: What was each Intervention/Strategy’s identified strengths and weaknesses? |
| Strengths included strong teacher commitment, data-driven instruction, collaborative planning, use of manipulatives, coaching support, and increased student engagement. Weaknesses included inconsistent differentiation, foundational skill gaps, impacts to intervention time, and challenges meeting diverse learner needs. |
| New Actions: Describe any new actions that are needed to accomplish the intended outcome for the Area of Focus. |
| Ongoing professional development and coaching will be provided, along with strengthening progress monitoring and data chats, increase of instructional walkthroughs, expansion hands-on learning, and enhancement of family engagement to improve student math outcomes. |
| Additional Reflections (optional): Please add any additional reflections for this Area of Focus. |
| Our data is trending upward in Math. For PM 2 we are at 38% proficiency, which is a 24% increase from PM1. Our goal is to be at 75% or higher by June 2026 on Math PM 3. |
| Measurable Outcome (SMART Goal) |
Professional Development |
Budget |
Monitoring |
Results
(End of Year) |
| The percent of students in the 5th grade 2024-2025 cohort who demonstrated grade-level performance or above on the NGSSS Science Assessment will increase from 67% in June of 2025 to 69% in June of 2026. |
Teachers will learn how to effectively utilize the District's new science curriculum, Discovery Education, to improve 2026 science scores. |
|
Science BOY and MOY assessments, the science department’s micro assessments, and classroom walk-throughs. |
Based on the 2025 NGSSS Science Assessment, we project a 2% increase, from 67% to 69% in proficiency on the 2026 NGSSS Science Assessment contributing to our school maintaining the status of an “A”. |
Evidence-based Interventions/Strategies |
| Evidence-based Intervention/Strategy 1 |
Science coach will model components of an effective science block through the science department’s direction while supporting small groups based on quarterly data. |
| Person(s) Responsible |
Administration, Coaches, and Teachers. |
| Deadline |
6/3/2026
|
| Evidence-based Intervention/Strategy 2 |
Best practices will be shared at Professional Leaning Communities for peer observation and collaboration of effective strategies. |
| Person(s) Responsible |
Administration, Coaches, and Teachers |
| Deadline |
6/3/2026
|
|
Mid-Year Reflection |
| Progress: Is desired progress being made to accomplish the intended outcome for the Area of Focus by the end of the school year? |
Yes
|
| Evidence: Provide evidence of the implementation challenges the school encountered during the Fall semester. Describe the changes made to address these challenges. |
| During the fall semester, challenges were identified in consistent delivery of hands-on, standards-aligned science instruction. Evidence included walkthrough data and assessment results showing limited lab activities and gaps in scientific reasoning and vocabulary. To address these challenges, schedules were adjusted to protect science instructional time, increased access to lab materials, professional development and inquiry-based instruction were provided, coaching cycles were implemented, and progress monitoring practices were strengthened. |
| Evidence-based Interventions/Strategies: What was each Intervention/Strategy’s identified strengths and weaknesses? |
Strengths included strong teacher engagement, increased hands-on instruction, collaborative planning, administrative support, and growing student interest. Weaknesses included inconsistent lab implementation, limited science instructional time, gaps in scientific reasoning and vocabulary, and limited progress monitoring.
|
| New Actions: Describe any new actions that are needed to accomplish the intended outcome for the Area of Focus. |
| Implementation will include protected daily science instructional time, provide ongoing professional development and coaching, increase access to lab materials and technology, strengthen progress monitoring, conduct instructional walkthroughs, integrate literacy and math skills, and expand family engagement to improve science achievement. |
| Additional Reflections (optional): Please add any additional reflections for this Area of Focus. |
| Our data in Science is showing an upward trend. Last year for PM 3 we were 68% proficient in Science. For our mid-year science assessment, we are averaging 61% proficiency. Our goal for June 2026 on science PM 3 is to be at 75% or higher. |