Avon Grove principals outline yearlong goals focused on literacy, math and PBIS

Principals from Penn London Elementary, Abingrove Intermediate, Avon Grove Middle School and Avon Grove High School presented their 2024–25 academic and behavior goals at the district’s education committee meeting on Oct. 2.

The presentations set both achievement and growth targets and emphasized measurement and action steps. Penn London’s principal said kindergarten and first-grade ELA achievement should rise 8 percentage points from the fall baseline to spring, measured by aimsweb early literacy, and added a growth goal that 80% of K–1 students below benchmark meet individual growth targets. She said LinkIt, the district’s new data warehouse, will be a primary tool for data analysis: “We really think it's gonna be extremely helpful for not only teachers, but then specialists and administrators to be able to look at various data points and to analyze them to make instructional decisions,” the principal said.

Abingrove Intermediate’s goals were grade-differentiated in ELA and math and emphasized job-embedded professional learning, targeted coaching and partnerships with the Chester County Intermediate Unit and vendor partners for structured literacy training. The principal described voluntary coaching cycles for reading specialists that include in‑day classroom modeling and post‑observation debrief time to accelerate instructional changes.

At Avon Grove Middle School, administrators said they will use IXL as a more current proxy for PSSA outcomes, setting a fall-to-spring target of 75% of students performing above national norms in ELA and 80% at/above norms in math. The middle school also launched an advanced eighth-grade ELA course to provide additional rigor for high performers and introduced a weekly spiral review practice to shore up retention across grades.

Avon Grove High School’s goals prioritize maintaining or increasing student achievement and improving graduation outcomes. The high school team set a 4‑year cohort graduation target of 84% or higher and described expanded professional development for differentiated instruction and individualized plans for seniors who are off‑track.

Behavioral supports and PBIS were consistent themes. Multiple principals said the district is in year two of PBIS expansion and added student-focused metrics — for example, an elementary goal that 80% of students earn no more than two behavior log entries, and middle and high-school goals aiming to reduce after‑school detentions or discipline referrals by about 5% from baseline. Several principals described new or expanded Tier 2 interventions, including counselor check‑ins when students reach early indicators of risk, and collaboration with CCIU consultants to document Tier 2 fidelity practices.

Board members asked implementation questions about teaching behaviors (assembly expectations, cell‑phone norms), the cadence of IXL benchmarking (three times annually with embedded classroom skill checks), and how linkages across aimsweb, Exact Path and IXL will appear in district reports. Administrators said they will bring an annual student‑achievement report with charts and dashboards to the education committee in November to present baselines and trends.

District administrators said many of the goals were developed collaboratively with teachers and specialists using PSA, common assessment, Exact Path and report‑card data. The principals repeatedly described paired achievement and growth measures: an absolute attainment target and a complementary individual growth target, measured by the district’s benchmarking tools.

Looking ahead, principals emphasized continued monitoring via LinkIt, increased teacher coaching and targeted PLC work focused on specific reporting categories to accelerate student growth.