Continuous School Improvement Plan

Literacy Walkthroughs & Data Analysis:
The first round of literacy walkthroughs (Core Actions 1–3) showed strong implementation of grade-level complex texts (100%) and text-dependent questions (92%), but lower student engagement (60%). Data has been entered into KickUp and will guide professional learning and coaching cycles focused on increasing student engagement and ownership of learning.

Collaborative Planning & Coaching Cycles:
K–5 teams have established structured collaborative planning routines centered on ELA standards, HQIM (HMH Into Reading), and Core Action 3 (student engagement). Planning sessions emphasize shared reading strategies, opportunities for students to think and respond across modalities, and embedding higher-level questioning into instruction and assessments.

Professional Learning & Alignment:
Professional development this year has focused on The Opportunity Myth themes—grade-level work, strong instruction, engagement, and high expectations—along with scaffolding strategies and cognitive depth in literacy instruction. Building-level PD and division sessions are reinforcing Tier 1 literacy practices and consistent implementation across grade levels.

Data Meetings: 
Leadership teams met with grade levels to review VALLS and Lexia data, identify students at high risk, and create targeted small groups for additional reading support.

Literacy Walkthroughs & Data Analysis:
Completed the second round of literacy walkthroughs focused on Virginia ELA Core Actions 1–3, with data entered into KickUp and analyzed to inform collaborative planning, professional learning, and coaching cycles; findings showed strong implementation of grade-level complex texts (94%) and text-dependent questions/tasks (88%), while identifying student-to-student discourse and questioning (48%) as a key area for growth within student engagement (72%). 

Collaborative Planning & Coaching Cycles:
Collaborative planning teams in grades K–5 are implementing the HMH Into Reading Comprehension Instructional Framework within literacy instruction, incorporating engagement strategies and support from returning ESL teachers; next steps include increasing student opportunities for listening, speaking, reading, and writing, embedding scaffolded questioning to promote higher-level thinking, and continuing targeted literacy coaching for teachers. 

Professional Learning & Alignment:
Professional development continued to emphasize the four key principles from The Opportunity Myth—maximizing instructional time, planning and designing learning experiences, using HQIM, and creating a conducive learning environment—which were embedded into collaborative planning and daily instruction, strengthened through countywide High-Impact Instruction training, and reinforced through ongoing professional learning and reflective practice. 

Data Meetings: 
Mission Control meetings were held for grades K–5 to review midyear VALLSS data, analyze student growth from the beginning of the year, and reflect on instructional practices during the Launch and Learn block. 

Literacy Walkthroughs & Data Analysis:
March and April literacy walkthroughs using Virginia TNTP protocols showed consistent implementation of HMH Into Reading and continued growth in K–2 foundational skills, reflected in improved VALLSS outcomes; next steps include strengthening explicit instruction, questioning, scaffolding, student application of skills, cold-read practice, high expectations for all learners, and the development of common unit assessments to improve outcomes, particularly in grades 3–5. 

Collaborative Planning & Coaching Cycles:
April collaborative planning sessions with grade-level teams, coaches, Title I Reading Specialist, and administrators focused on HMH Into Reading pacing, the Comprehension Instructional Framework, shared reading, vocabulary/morphology, learning walk feedback, and SOL/VGA test prep, while literacy coaching cycles supported individual teachers and are shifting toward increased coaching, peer observations, and video-based reflection to strengthen Tier 1 instruction and teacher-selected professional learning goals aligned to student data. 

Professional Learning & Alignment:
ELA collaborative planning and Tier 1 data meetings were held regularly with maintained agendas, notes, and instructional resources, supported by administrative monitoring and data review, with findings consistently indicating Tier 1 instruction as a continued area of need guiding ongoing Literacy Committee action steps, follow-up support, and future instructional focus. 

Data Meetings: 
The IST and CSIP team and all staff reviewed VALLS and SOL Data. Comparisons for growth were made. Data was shared with teachers for both their individual classroom and grade level.   Data indicated growth in all grade levels except for 3rd grade.

Walkthroughs & Focus Areas:
Quarter 1 math walkthroughs were planned and focus areas for Tier 1 instruction were discussed using the KickUp walkthrough document; walkthroughs will begin in Quarter 2.

Collaborative Planning & Coaching Cycles:
Structured math planning routines are established—weekly for grades 3–5 and every three weeks for K–2—emphasizing HQIM materials, small group supports, and scaffolding through the Van de Walle CRA model.

Professional Learning & Data Analysis:
Staff engaged in math professional development on curriculum updates, pacing, iReady implementation, and Wayground assessment creation. The math committee analyzed Beginning-of-Year iReady data and emphasized strengthening academic vocabulary and math strategy development.

Data-Driven Instruction:
Leadership and grade-level teams reviewed iReady and VKRP data, identified Tier 2 and 3 student groups, and developed targeted instructional plans to support student growth in math.

Walkthroughs & Focus Areas:
Classroom walkthroughs across most settings informed collaborative planning through data-based reflection, and upcoming district math walkthroughs (grades 3–5) will focus on explicit instruction and the CRA sequence to guide future planning, instruction, and assessment development. 

Collaborative Planning & Coaching Cycles:
Planning and coaching cycles supported K–2 implementation of Number Strings with Rekenreks and emphasis on math discourse, while grades 3–5 focused on backward design, analysis and creation of formative assessments (including use of smaller quizzes for targeted support), alongside ongoing structured science planning cycles (K–2 every 3 weeks; grades 3–5 weekly) integrated with math/science collaboration. 

Professional Learning & Data Analysis:
Monthly district math meetings focused on Building Thinking Classrooms and Number Strings are used to guide building-level professional learning and classroom modeling, while assessment practices have shifted from Wayground to Formative to better align with online testing and provide immediate, actionable feedback through improved reporting for teachers and students. 

Data-Driven Instruction:
During Mission Control, Math Committee Meetings, and Collaborative, we have reviewed the iReady Math Diagnostic data. 1-5 teams analyzed the data with a focus on 2023-2024 Standards report in iReady. The teams reflected on standards that were taught to proficiency and how well their students performed.
 

Walkthroughs & Focus Areas:
Walkthroughs were conducted by the Math Advisory committee. Feedback was provided and the discussion drove collaborative planning topics to help support instruction.

Collaborative Planning & Coaching Cycles:
Planning and coaching cycles supported K–2 implementation of Number Strings with Rekenreks and emphasis on math discourse, while grades 3–5 focused on backward design, analysis and creation of formative assessments (including use of smaller quizzes for targeted support), alongside ongoing structured science planning cycles (K–2 every 3 weeks; grades 3–5 weekly) integrated with math/science collaboration. 

Professional Learning & Data Analysis:
The purchase of additional “Building Thinking Classrooms” books and VNPS’s have driven more PD opportunities in our PLC.  Teachers have been using the provided sponge activities and reviewing standards.

Data-Driven Instruction:
During Mission Control, Math Committee Meetings, and Collaborative, we reviewed iReady Math Diagnostic data, Formative Unit Assessment Data and SOL results.  Growth and positives were highlighted and shared with staff.  

Science Learning Walks:
Quarterly science walkthroughs focused on student-to-student discourse, use of HQIM resources (FOSS, Discovery Ed), and grade-level materials. Data showed increased use of hands-on investigations, with next steps to deepen student sense-making discussions through strategies like Sharing Ideas (K–2), Agree/Disagree (3–5), and See, Think, Wonder (K–5).

Planning & Coaching Cycles:
Coaching and planning cycles emphasize alignment, use of phenomena, and preparing for lessons that engage students in the sense-making process. K–2 teams plan on a three-week rotation, while grades 3–5 meet weekly for science and math integration.

Professional Learning & Data Focus:
Science data revealed weaknesses in applying knowledge, particularly in the Earth and Space Systems strand. Professional learning addressed increasing student discourse and vocabulary use, and providing more opportunities for students to apply science content in authentic contexts.

 Science Learning Walks:
Science learning walks aligned to The Opportunity Myth and high-impact instruction showed consistent implementation of science instruction (100%), HQIM use (100%), and grade-level materials (100%), with strong but developing rigor (80%) and an emerging K–5 “See, Think, Wonder” culture, while next steps focus on increasing student sense-making discourse through structured strategies such as K–2 Sharing Ideas and 3–5 Agree/Disagree routines. 

Planning & Coaching Cycles:
Teacher preparation, planning, and coaching cycles continue to emphasize high-impact instructional practices—including maximizing instructional time, designing learning experiences, using HQIM, and strengthening classroom environments—while maintaining structured planning cycles for K–2 science every three weeks and weekly Science/Math collaboration for grades 3–5. 

Professional Learning & Data Focus:
Instructional practice shifted from Wayground to Formative for assessment design to better align with online testing and provide immediate feedback and reporting, while science coordination meetings focused on applying the data cycle across content areas and sharing instructional resources (including vertical math articulation, science and engineering practices progression, science and SEP rubrics, social studies guidance, and Virginia performance quality tools) with grade-level teams. 

Science Learning Walks:
Science learning walk data showed strong implementation of HQIM (100%), rigor (100%), and grade-level materials (100%), with science instruction occurring in 83% of observed lessons and a growing K–5 “See, Think, Wonder” culture; next steps focus on increasing student sense-making discourse through K–2 Sharing Ideas and 3–5 Agree/Disagree routines, with walks conducted in limited, teacher-selected sessions. 

Planning & Coaching Cycles:
Teacher preparation, planning, and coaching cycles continue to emphasize high-impact instructional strategies, including maximizing instructional time, designing learning experiences, using HQIM, and strengthening classroom environments, while maintaining structured planning cycles for K–2 science every three weeks and weekly Science/Math collaboration for grades 3–5. 

Professional Learning & Data Focus:
Overall Science SOL scores were at 40.23%. This is not what we had hoped.  However, upon analyzing the data, students scored higher on 5th grade science standards than on 4th grade.  This shows that our instruction this year improved as students were better able to use scientific reasoning to answer SOL questions.  

Attendance Monitoring & Incentives:
A list of chronically absent students from 2024–25 was created for ongoing monitoring. Attendance incentives were implemented—480 students earned pizza coupons in September, 444 in October, and 489 received quarterly “Awesome Attendance” brag tags.

SST & PBIS Team Collaboration:
SST and PBIS teams meet monthly to support student attendance and behavior. PBIS Tier 1 and Tier 2 supports include monthly assemblies, rewards, and individual Rocket Ticket incentives; September’s reward was extra recess, and October’s was a popcorn party.

Professional Learning on Behavior Support:
Staff received professional learning in August and September on PBIS systems, crisis response, and behavior management strategies, reinforcing consistency in expectations and consequences across classrooms.

Behavior Data & Student Engagement:
Reflection sheets decreased from 81 in September to 52 in October, showing progress in behavior reflection. Over 100 students have completed personal goals displayed on the school’s goal-setting bulletin board.

SST & PBIS Team Collaboration:
In January and February, PBIS expectations were reinforced through schoolwide and classroom reviews, with monthly incentives including Jersey/Game Day and a yo-yo assembly following a Jeopardy-based rule review, while participation remained high with only a small number of students unable to attend due to behavior (3 in January and 9 in February). 

Professional Learning on Behavior Support:
The school leadership team met with the resource teachers to review student intervention behavior plans and ways that the administrative team can help support teachers and students.  This was due to the increased number of discipline referrals and behavior calls for assistance during these resource times. 

Behavior Data & Student Engagement:
From November through January, a small and decreasing number of students were unable to participate in PBIS rewards due to behavior (10 in November, 9 in December, 3 in January), while Rocket Tickets continued to incentivize positive behavior through recognition opportunities such as assisting with morning announcements and participating in grade-level Jeopardy activities.
 

Attendance Monitoring & Incentives:
Four hundred seventy five students received pizza coupons for good attendance during fourth quarter. Four hundred seventy nine students earned brag tags for good attendance.  Thirteen students participated in an Attendance Lunch Bunch.  Thirty five students were awarded for their perfect attendance during the school year.   Despite these incentives, our overall chronic absenteeism rate went up for the school year. 

SST & PBIS Team Collaboration:
SST meetings focused on identifying students needing ongoing and external supports, including sibling groups and those transitioning due to housing changes, while reviewing yearly data and planning transition support; PBIS committee maintained monthly agendas, reinforced schoolwide expectations through a Jeopardy review activity, and implemented end-of-year incentives such as Neverending Kickball and Extra Recess.

Professional Learning on Behavior Support:
The behavior matrix was updated and reshared. The staff relooked at what was considered classroom managed behavior and office managed behavior. Teachers of students that had a behavior intervention plan were given feedback on the classroom environment by the environmental checklist that was completed. Division Level support was also given by Behavior Support Staff. 

Behavior Data & Student Engagement:
Redbud students earned over 10,000 Rocket Tickets and participated in 200+ wheel spins to reinforce positive behavior, while behavior data showed a reduction in students losing rewards from March (17) to April (5) alongside a decline in reflection sheets and office referrals; overall, 443 reflection sheets were issued to 133 students, and the PBIS committee will use this data to target additional supports for students with higher rates of infractions. 

Back to School Night Attendance:
Attendance logs show strong family participation—230 attendees for K–2 and 125 attendees for grades 3–5 Back to School Nights.

Family Engagement Night Planning:
Based on Title I survey feedback, Family Engagement Nights are being redesigned to better meet family needs. The next event will align with the Book Fair and feature hands-on K–5 science lessons for families.

Community Partnerships & Feedback:
Volunteers from SU and MHS, along with regional library representatives, will support activities and literacy outreach. Families will receive FCPS resource QR bookmarks, and feedback from the event will inform future Family Engagement Night planning through the CSIP and Family Engagement Committee.

Family Engagement Night:
A second family engagement event titled “All About Resources” was held on February 25, 2026.  547 people attended this night.  The focus was for students to show what they are learning in their resource classes and to provide parents resources to support their students in both literacy and math.

Planning & Feedback:
Feedback was used to make decisions regarding the two family engagement nights held during the second and third quarter.  Changes that were made were received very positively and made the nights run smoothly while engaging all members of families in attendance.  We will continue to use feedback from these nights to make adjustments to future events.  

Family Engagement Night: 
Our third and final family engagement night was held in April.  Carnival in Full Bloom brought over 730 family members to our outdoor carnival where parents and students participated in both indoor and outdoor activities designed to show parents easy activities they can do with their students at home using everyday games and materials to review skills learned throughout the school year.  This event brought our school community together in a huge way and allowed them to build relationships with other families and staff members.  

Community Partnerships & Feedback:
Volunteers and community partnerships continued at all of our nights and included multiple groups through Millbrook High School, the library, area food trucks, and other partnerships that helped our nights be successful.