Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Academic Programs topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
District administrators report academic and behavioral progress across elementary, middle and high schools
Summary
Building leaders updated the committee on midyear progress toward the Accelerated Growth and Achievement Plan, citing tools such as AIMSweb, Exact Path and IXL, MTSS and PBIS implementation, student engagement initiatives and targeted supports for English learners.
Building administrators from each of Avon Grove’s four schools reported midyear progress on goals tied to the district’s Accelerated Growth and Achievement Plan for 2024–25, focusing on two areas: high‑quality academics and supportive learning environments.
Elementary (Penn London): The school established baselines for AIMSweb progress monitoring, continued grade‑level data pods under an MTSS framework, and piloted “math pods” (teacher‑led professional groups) to design instruction. Administrators reported collaboration with local preschools and attendance at an IU workshop regarding supports for English learners.
Elementary (second presenter — grades 2–5): Staff reported use of Exact Path and AIMSweb diagnostics to drive differentiated small‑group instruction. New‑teacher supports and schoolwide professional learning on decoding were highlighted. The school plans a spring resource fair for parent engagement and has a student stakeholder group to co‑design PBIS incentives.
Middle school (Avon Grove Middle School): Leaders reported use of IXL diagnostics for ELA and math; between September and December they reported an average 4% increase in students performing above grade level in ELA and a 5% reduction in students well below grade level. The administration described PBIS implementation (Grove Bucks) with 33,378 Bucks redeemed through mid‑January and advisory activities that produce peer‑created instructional videos for expected behaviors. The ELL/LEP team has shifted to more push‑in co‑teaching for tier‑1 instruction; administrators noted they are temporarily down one ELL teacher, requiring flexible assignment of specialists.
High school: Staff reported marking‑period data and in‑school supports including instructional specialists for in‑schedule intervention, large building data teams, and professional development on Tier‑1 strategies and EL instruction. The high school’s PBIS school store, the “Devil’s Den,” opened Jan. 8 and the building has recorded about 111,000 PBIS points so far this year. The school also emphasized attendance and late‑to‑class interventions and a Communities and Schools staff member (John Truman) running student groups and attendance efforts.
Why it matters: Administrators tied progress monitoring to instructional decisions, with PLCs and learning walks used to identify whether pacing, fidelity to programs (Foundations/phonics), or professional learning are the appropriate responses to gaps. Leaders emphasized that data are used to generate questions that drive instructional adjustments rather than replace classroom practice.
Next steps and follow up: Administrators will report again at the May education committee meeting. Individual schools plan continued use of diagnostics (AIMSweb, Exact Path, IXL), ongoing PBIS incentives and periodic surveys or interim diagnostic administrations to provide time to respond before the year ends.
Ending: Committee members praised the building leadership teams and asked staff to continue documenting outputs and changes generated by the prior plan so the board can see what was accomplished.
