| Measurable Outcome (SMART Goal) |
Professional Development |
Budget |
Monitoring |
Results
(End of Year) |
| By June 2026, student achievement in 3rd through 5th grade will increase by 6% for the lowest quartile students as determined the Florida Assessment of Student Thinking Progress Monitoring Period 3. |
Provided throughout the school year by the Literacy Coach. |
|
Area will be monitored though various progress monitoring tools including assessments, teacher observations, and district assessments. |
|
Evidence-based Interventions/Strategies |
| Evidence-based Intervention/Strategy 1 |
Systematic and Explicit Phonics instruction daily following a science of reading approach. (Effect size .6) |
| Person(s) Responsible |
Angela Gibson |
| Deadline |
5/29/2026
|
| Evidence-based Intervention/Strategy 2 |
Vocabulary Instruction that includes teaching word meanings through multiple exposures, explicit explanations, and engaging contexts (morphology, word learning strategies). Effect size .67 |
| Person(s) Responsible |
Angela Gibson |
| Deadline |
5/29/2026
|
| Evidence-based Intervention/Strategy 3 |
Meta-Cognitive Strategy Instruction that includes modeling and teaching students to think about their own thinking while reading (monitoring understanding, self-questioning, using fix-up strategies). (Effect Size .6) |
| Person(s) Responsible |
Angela Gibson |
| Deadline |
5/29/2026
|
|
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? |
No
|
| 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, the school experienced challenges in consistently aligning small-group instruction to the Science of Reading, particularly in delivering targeted lessons that matched students’ specific skill gaps. In response, adjustments were made to strengthen data-driven grouping, refine lesson planning to focus on foundational reading skills, and provide clearer guidance and support to teachers to ensure instruction was more intentional and aligned to student needs. |
| Evidence-based Interventions/Strategies: What was each Intervention/Strategy’s identified strengths and weaknesses? |
| Coaching sessions provided targeted, job-embedded support for teachers, strengthening instructional practices and increasing alignment to evidence-based literacy strategies. However, implementation varied based on teacher readiness and time constraints. The full implementation of the intervention block, Hawk Hustle, allowed for dedicated time to address student skill gaps and deliver targeted instruction, though challenges included scheduling consistency and the need for continued progress monitoring to ensure interventions were meeting student needs. |
| New Actions: Describe any new actions that are needed to accomplish the intended outcome for the Area of Focus. |
| After reviewing PM2 data, targeted support will be provided to teachers whose classrooms did not demonstrate the expected student growth. This will include instructional coaching, classroom push-in support, and collaborative planning to strengthen implementation of evidence-based practices and improve student outcomes. |
| Additional Reflections (optional): Please add any additional reflections for this Area of Focus. |
| Ongoing conversations with teachers are focused on analyzing learning gains and refining targeted instruction to better meet student needs. These collaborative discussions support continuous improvement and reinforce the use of data to guide instructional decisions. |
| Measurable Outcome (SMART Goal) |
Professional Development |
Budget |
Monitoring |
Results
(End of Year) |
| By June 2026, our goal is to achieve an 80% or higher proficiency rate for students in Kindergarten, 1st grade, and 2nd grade, as measured by the Florida Assessment of Student Thinking Progress Monitoring Period 3. |
Provided throughout the school year by the Literacy Coach. |
|
Area will be monitored though various progress monitoring tools including assessments, teacher observations, and district assessments. |
|
Evidence-based Interventions/Strategies |
| Evidence-based Intervention/Strategy 1 |
Systematic and Explicit Phonics instruction daily following a science of reading approach. (Effect size .6) |
| Person(s) Responsible |
Angela Gibson |
| Deadline |
5/29/2026
|
| Evidence-based Intervention/Strategy 2 |
Direct Instruction in Phonics and Phonemic Awareness. (Effect Size .59) |
| Person(s) Responsible |
Angela Gibson |
| Deadline |
5/29/2026
|
| Evidence-based Intervention/Strategy 3 |
Providing timely, specific, actionable feedback on decoding provided during small group instruction. . |
| Person(s) Responsible |
Angela Gibson |
| Deadline |
5/29/2026
|
|
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? |
No
|
| Evidence: Provide evidence of the implementation challenges the school encountered during the Fall semester. Describe the changes made to address these challenges. |
| Challeges that Heron Heights have faced were k/1 centers were not science of reading based. Second grade had difficulty implementing targeted standards based instruction. |
| Evidence-based Interventions/Strategies: What was each Intervention/Strategy’s identified strengths and weaknesses? |
| We used a PLC model to work on science of reading based centers. In second grade we implmenented targeted planning sessions based on the standards. |
| New Actions: Describe any new actions that are needed to accomplish the intended outcome for the Area of Focus. |
| Ongoing monitoring of the science of reading based centers. Ongoing planning and discussions around the standards. |
| Additional Reflections (optional): Please add any additional reflections for this Area of Focus. |
| Literacy and Math coach are working side by side with teachers and modeling lessons. |