Continuous School Improvement Plan

Professional Learning Community (PLC) Implementation Summary: Transforming Content Meetings

• This summary outlines the critical steps we are taking at Robert E. Aylor Middle School to transition our traditional content meetings into highly effective Professional Learning Communities (PLCs), based on the Solution Tree model. This collaborative, cyclical process is designed to ensure instructional alignment, clarity of expectations, and the effective use of data to improve student learning.
• Rationale for the Transition & Guiding Principles
  • The goal of transforming content meetings is not only to address the four critical questions of a PLC but also to drive systemic improvements in instructional quality and equitable outcomes.
• Core Goals:
  • Improve Tier 1 Instruction (First Best Instruction): Elevate the quality of initial teaching so that more students learn grade-level standards the first time.
  • Improve the professional practice of ALL adults.
  • Ensure more students learn grade level standards and above - in every school, every team, and every classroom (aligned with inclusion and equity).
• PLC's Four Critical Questions:
  • What is it we want all students to learn?
  • How will we know if they have learned it?
  • What will we do when they don't learn it?
  • What will we do when they already know it?
• Supporting Professional Learning Initiatives (Aylor MS CSIP Goals)
  • The shift to high-performing PLCs is supported by targeted, ongoing professional learning designed to elevate Tier 1 Instruction and improve the practice of all adults, directly aligning with CSIP goals and the Division's Strategic Plan (IGNITE 2030).
  • Institutional Framework
• Professional Learning (PL) is provided by administrators, reading and math specialists, instructional coaches, and secondary content supervisors, occurring during PL days, team meetings, and content PLCs. This framework is grounded in:
  • Why? - The Opportunity Myth (addressing equity gaps and access to grade-level work)
  • What? - Strategic Plan: IGNITE 2030 (vision and long-term goals)
  • How? - Effective Schools Framework (operationalizing best practices)
  • Monitoring - Continuous School Improvement Plan (CSIP) and Division Assessment Matrix
• Disciplinary Literacy Focus (Reading Specialist)
  • PL for all staff focuses on explicit instruction and disciplinary literacy, ensuring all teachers are equipped to teach reading skills within their content area. Scheduled sessions include:
  • November 20, 2025: Fluency Focus
  • December 18, 2025: Using Morphology to Build Vocabulary
  • January 29, 2026: Using Mentor Texts and Think Alouds
  • February 26, 2026: Analyzing, Evaluating, and Justifying (Using Text Evidence)
  • March 26, 2026: Summarizing Text
  • April 30, 2026: Making Logical Inferences
• Mathematics Instructional Focus (Math Specialist)
  • The math specialist works with math teachers during content PLCs and department meetings on high-impact instructional methods:
  • Use the CRA (Concrete, Representational, Abstract) representation models of instruction.
  • Use explicit instruction techniques within daily lesson plans.
  • Use number talks/reasoning routines, quick checks, rich math tasks, & Desmos to encourage student discourse.
  • Provide opportunities for students to use multiple representations or pathways toward a solution.
  • Use a math workshop model to provide differentiated instruction using small group instruction based upon student needs in class.
  • Identify and attend professional learning related to Math Workshop, Number Talks, Just- in-Time Quick Checks, Desmos, and/or EDIA.

Collaborative Content Planning Protocol: The Unit Design Cycle

• Our PLC teams use a structured, cyclical Unit Planning process to ensure all students achieve grade-level success. The cycle includes three phases:
• Clarity, Alignment, and Pacing: Teachers identify essential standards, break them into measurable learning targets, develop proficiency scales, and agree on pacing to ensure smooth progression through each unit.
• Assessment and Planning First Best Instruction: Teams design pre-assessments, ongoing formative checks, and end-of-unit common assessments. These tools guide high-quality instruction and ensure students master each learning target.
• Data Analysis, Intervention, and Continuous Improvement: Teachers regularly review student data, celebrate strengths, identify learning gaps, and plan interventions or enrichment. This ensures equity and supports all learners, while monitoring inclusion and achievement goals.
• The process uses the Teacher Analysis of Common Assessments (TACA) Protocol and promotes collaboration across grade levels, keeping the focus on continuous improvement and student success.

Conclusion: Collaboration vs. Planning

• It is critical to distinguish between Collaboration (data analysis, reviewing student work, celebrating success) and Planning (designing lessons, creating materials). Both are important. The PLC content meeting time must be protected for collaboration (Phase 3), while dedicated planning time (Phase 2, Step 4) must be secured to design the First Best Instruction for the next learning targets.
• The comprehensive collaboration culminates in a fully developed Unit Plan that includes: Essential Standards, Proficiency Scales, a Common Formative Assessment, pre-assessment data, agreed-upon pacing, and a bank of formative checks and shared instructional strategies. This shift ensures collective responsibility for student achievement and equity.

Professional Learning Community (PLC) Implementation Summary: Transforming Content Meetings

• This summary outlines the critical steps we are taking at Robert E. Aylor Middle School to transition our traditional content meetings into highly effective Professional Learning Communities (PLCs), based on the Solution Tree model. This collaborative, cyclical process is designed to ensure instructional alignment, clarity of expectations, and the effective use of data to improve student learning.
• Rationale for the Transition & Guiding Principles
  • The goal of transforming content meetings is not only to address the four critical questions of a PLC but also to drive systemic improvements in instructional quality and equitable outcomes.
• Core Goals:
  • Improve Tier 1 Instruction (First Best Instruction): Elevate the quality of initial teaching so that more students learn grade-level standards the first time.
  • Improve the professional practice of ALL adults.
  • Ensure more students learn grade level standards and above - in every school, every team, and every classroom (aligned with inclusion and equity).
• PLC's Four Critical Questions:
  • What is it we want all students to learn?
  • How will we know if they have learned it?
  • What will we do when they don't learn it?
  • What will we do when they already know it?
• Supporting Professional Learning Initiatives (Aylor MS CSIP Goals)
  • The shift to high-performing PLCs is supported by targeted, ongoing professional learning designed to elevate Tier 1 Instruction and improve the practice of all adults, directly aligning with CSIP goals and the Division's Strategic Plan (IGNITE 2030).
  • Institutional Framework
• Professional Learning (PL) is provided by administrators, reading and math specialists, instructional coaches, and secondary content supervisors, occurring during PL days, team meetings, and content PLCs. This framework is grounded in:
  • Why? - The Opportunity Myth (addressing equity gaps and access to grade-level work)
  • What? - Strategic Plan: IGNITE 2030 (vision and long-term goals)
  • How? - Effective Schools Framework (operationalizing best practices)
  • Monitoring - Continuous School Improvement Plan (CSIP) and Division Assessment Matrix
• Disciplinary Literacy Focus (Reading Specialist)
  • PL for all staff focuses on explicit instruction and disciplinary literacy, ensuring all teachers are equipped to teach reading skills within their content area. Scheduled sessions include:
  • November 20, 2025: Fluency Focus
  • December 18, 2025: Using Morphology to Build Vocabulary
  • January 29, 2026: Using Mentor Texts and Think Alouds
  • February 26, 2026: Analyzing, Evaluating, and Justifying (Using Text Evidence)
  • March 26, 2026: Summarizing Text
  • April 30, 2026: Making Logical Inferences
• Mathematics Instructional Focus (Math Specialist)
  • The math specialist works with math teachers during content PLCs and department meetings on high-impact instructional methods:
  • Use the CRA (Concrete, Representational, Abstract) representation models of instruction.
  • Use explicit instruction techniques within daily lesson plans.
  • Use number talks/reasoning routines, quick checks, rich math tasks, & Desmos to encourage student discourse.
  • Provide opportunities for students to use multiple representations or pathways toward a solution.
  • Use a math workshop model to provide differentiated instruction using small group instruction based upon student needs in class.
  • Identify and attend professional learning related to Math Workshop, Number Talks, Just- in-Time Quick Checks, Desmos, and/or EDIA.

• Collaborative Content Planning Protocol: The Unit Design Cycle
  • The collaborative work of the PLC teams will center on a rigorous, cyclical Unit Planning process, utilizing the Teacher Analysis of Common Assessments (TACA) Protocol for continuous improvement.
• Phase 1: Clarity, Alignment, and Pacing (The Foundation)
  • This phase ensures all teachers are aligned on what must be taught, how mastery is defined, and when it must be taught.
  • Determine Essential Standards: Identify the small set of power standards that are durable, leverageable, and necessary for success in the next course/grade level.
  • Essential standards must be defined at each grade level or content area.
  • Unwrap Standards into Learning Target Progressions: Break down the Essential Standards into specific, measurable daily learning targets that progress logically through the unit. This provides clarity for both instruction and student self-assessment.
  • Create Proficiency Scales: Develop clear rubrics that define what proficiency looks like and articulate the learning progression from foundational knowledge to advanced application.
  • Determine Pacing & Vertical Alignment: Agree on a shared timeline for instruction. Pacing serves as the "runway" to ensure standards are taught fully and allows teams to proactively check prerequisite skills required for upcoming units (Look at the grade level bands from VDOE with English teachers to check for prerequisite skills).
• Phase 2: Assessment and Planning First Best Instruction (The Action)
  • This phase establishes data checkpoints and focuses on planning the high-quality instruction (Tier 1) linked to the identified targets.
  • Create Pre-Assessment: Design a brief assessment linked to the proficiency scale to gauge students' prior knowledge before the unit begins (answering PLC Question 4).
  • Design Team-Generated Formative Checks: Create quick, frequent, common formative checks (e.g., exit tickets, short quizzes) directly tied to specific learning targets to provide immediate, actionable data (answering PLC Question 2).
  • Create an End-of-Unit Common Formative Assessment (CFA): Develop a high-quality, common assessment that mirrors the cognitive demands and content of the Essential Standards to measure mastery.
  • Plan First Best Instruction: Determine when the team will plan First Best Instruction linked to the next learning targets, ensuring all instructional methods are optimized for deep engagement and mastery.
• Phase 3: Data Analysis, Intervention, and Continuous Improvement
  • This phase focuses on using student learning evidence to drive instructional adjustments and meet the equity goals of the school.
  • Monitoring SMARTIE Goals: All PLCs will monitor SMARTIE goals (I for Inclusion and E for Equity) to ensure that all student groups, especially those in need of targeted support, are learning grade-level standards. All students have an entry point.
  • Frequent Learning Checks: Continuously ask: "Are the kids learning and how do I know?" Check along the way, essential standard by essential standard.
  • Grade-Level and Vertical Collaboration Meetings: Use dedicated meeting time for the following structure:
    • Analyze the Evidence: Review evidence of student learning (within the last 5 days), always starting with student strengths.
    • Execute the TACA Protocol: Identify which learning targets and which specific students did not achieve proficiency.
    • Make a Plan (RTI): Develop shared strategies for re-teaching, remediation, and enrichment (answering PLC Questions 3 and 4).
    • Agree to Next Steps: Agree to the next learning targets and formative checks for understanding that will land at collaboration.
• Conclusion: Collaboration vs. Planning
  • It is critical to distinguish between Collaboration (data analysis, reviewing student work, celebrating success) and Planning (designing lessons, creating materials). Both are important. The PLC content meeting time must be protected for collaboration (Phase 3), while dedicated planning time (Phase 2, Step 4) must be secured to design the First Best Instruction for the next learning targets.
  • The comprehensive collaboration culminates in a fully developed Unit Plan that includes: Essential Standards, Proficiency Scales, a Common Formative Assessment, pre-assessment data, agreed-upon pacing, and a bank of formative checks and shared instructional strategies. This shift ensures collective responsibility for student achievement and equity.

• Student Attendance data
  • 6th grade - 3.92%
  • 7th grade - 5.66%
  • 8th grade - 5.01%
  • Overall - 14.60% (need to remain under 15%)

1. Overall School Performance

The overall absentee rate for the first quarter is 14.60%.

Status: The school is currently meeting the attendance goal, as the overall rate remains below the target of 15%.

Implication: This indicates that, as a whole, student attendance is being successfully maintained above the critical threshold, which is crucial for maximizing instructional time and academic progress.

2. Grade-Level Attendance Trends

The absentee rates vary noticeably across the middle school grades.

Lowest Absence (Strength): 6th Grade has the best attendance record at 3.92%. This suggests a strong transition or effective initial attendance monitoring for the youngest cohort.

Highest Absence (Area of Concern): 7th Grade has the highest absentee rate at 5.66%. This grade level is contributing the most to the overall 14.60% rate and should be the primary focus for targeted attendance intervention strategies.

Moderate Absence: 8th Grade is slightly lower than 7th grade at 5.01%, but still represents the second-highest source of absences.

3. Key Findings:

Maintain Overall Goal: Continue current monitoring efforts, as the overall school attendance is currently sustainable ($\mathbf{14.60\%}$ vs. $\mathbf{15\%}$ goal).

Target 7th Grade: Instructional and administrative efforts should focus on identifying and addressing the specific causes of absence in the 7th-grade cohort (5.66%). This could involve phone calls, parent meetings, or utilizing incentives.

Investigate Transition: The jump in absentee rate from 6th Grade (3.92%) to 7th Grade (5.66%) suggests that the transition into 7th grade, or the increasing maturity/responsibilities of older students, may be a contributing factor that needs exploration.

4. Action Steps:

Implement Virginia’s ALL-IN Tutoring twice/week in the AM for 30 min/each in math and English. Families will have the autonomy to select the day, subject, and teacher for tutoring. Tutoring will be capped at 5 students per session and will cover current material for that week. Three hours of tutoring will erase one absence from a student's attendance record. Tutoring will begin January 13th. 

• Quarter 1 discipline data:
  • Overall number of students: 931
  • Overall number of office referrals: 196
  • Tier III (6+ referrals): 4 (0.4%)
  • Tier II (2-5 referrals): 26 (3%)
  • Tier I (0-1 referrals): 901 (97%)
  • Zero referrals: 850 (91%)

Robert E. Aylor Middle School exhibits a strong culture of positive behavior, confirmed by the discipline data. 97% of the student body falls into Tier I (0-1 referrals), with 91% of all students having zero office referrals in the quarter. This alignment with the E-Impacts survey (94.42% reported not struggling with externalizing behavior) validates the school's success in managing typical classroom behaviors.

The focus for intervention is highly concentrated on the 3% of students (30 students) who are in Tier II or Tier III. These students are responsible for the vast majority of the administrative workload (196 total referrals) and require the most immediate and intensive support.

1. School-Wide Behavioral Health (Tier I Strength)
   1. The data strongly indicates that Aylor is operating with excellent universal behavior supports (Tier I).
   2. Analysis: Our Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports (PBIS - Spartan “SpeaRRR”it) framework appears highly effective at the universal level. The 91% of students with zero referrals confirms the self-reported data from the E-Impacts survey, which showed high respect and low externalizing behavior. This high Tier I percentage allows the school to strategically allocate resources to higher tiers.
2. Areas of Focus (Targeted and Intensive Support)
   1. The 3% of the student population who require Tier II or Tier III support represent the primary opportunity for administrative and instructional intervention.
   2. Analysis:
   3. Tier III (Intensive): The 4 students in Tier III must be the immediate focus of the behavior intervention team. Their referral rates suggest complex, chronic needs that require Functional Behavioral Assessments (FBAs) and comprehensive Behavior Intervention Plans (BIPs).
   4. Tier II (Targeted): The 26 students in Tier II are candidates for targeted, small-group interventions, such as Check-In/Check-Out (CICO), social skills groups, or restorative practice circles. These interventions should focus on the underlying triggers for the most common 2-5 offenses.
3. Recommendations for Integration and Action
   1. Cross-Reference Data with E-Impacts: Immediately cross-reference the names of the 30 students in Tier II and Tier III with their E-Impacts survey responses. This will help identify if their behavior is correlated with low self-reported "Engaged in School" (60.9%), or difficulty being "Able to Regulate Emotions" (80.19%).
   2. Prioritize Tier II/III Interventions:
   3. Tier III: Ensure all 4 students have current, well-implemented FBA/BIP plans in place, aligned with their core skill deficits identified in E-Impacts (e.g., emotion regulation).
   4. Tier II: Launch two distinct small-group interventions for the 26 students: one focused on emotional regulation skills and the other on connection/engagement strategies within the school environment.
   5. Maintain Universal Strengths (Tier I): Continue strong school-wide PBIS messaging and acknowledgements. The success with the 97% of the student body should be celebrated and maintained.
   6. School counselors and administrators have been working collaboratively with specific students, their families, and their teachers to address these concerns.

• E-Impacts Survey Data (October 2025)
  • 98% of students completed the survey
  • 95% of teachers completed the survey
• Students reported: 
  • 80.99% of students reported attention and academic stability
  • 87.69% of students reported positive peer relationships
  • 94.42% of students reported they do not struggle with externalizing Behavior
  • 83.7% of students reported they do not struggle with Internalizing Behavior
  • 97.91% of students report they are respectful to others 
  • 91.3% of students reported they do not experience bullying behavior 
  • 60.9% of students reported they are engaged in school 
  • 80.19% of students reported they are able to regulate their emotions 

The E-Impacts survey demonstrates a remarkably healthy and safe social environment, with high student reports of positive peer relationships, low externalizing behaviors, and near-universal respect for others (97.91%). The high completion rates (98% student, 95% teacher) suggest high data reliability.

However, a significant gap exists between these strong social scores and core academic-related well-being. Student engagement in school is the most critical area of concern, reported by only 60.9% of students. Furthermore, academic stability, attention, and emotional regulation show scores hovering around the 80% mark, suggesting a need for targeted interventions to connect positive social climates to effective learning environments.

1. Survey Reliability and Participation
   1. The high participation rates across both students and staff indicate a strong commitment to the early identification process, lending significant credibility to the findings.
2. Areas of Exceptional Strength (Positive Social Climate)
   1. The data strongly suggests a positive and safe social environment is being fostered within Aylor Middle School. All indicators related to behavioral control and social relationships are above 87%, indicating a high degree of success in developing prosocial behaviors.
3. Areas of Concern (Engagement and Academic Readiness)
   1. The data points related to a student’s internal state, focus, and connection to the learning process are significantly lower than the social indicators, revealing a major challenge in motivational and academic well-being.
4. Action Steps
   1. Based on this analysis, the primary focus for improvement should be on elevating student engagement and strengthening foundational self-regulation skills.
   2. Prioritize Student Engagement:
   3. Action: Implement targeted professional development for teachers focused on high-yield engagement strategies, such as choice-based learning, inquiry projects, and relevance-based curriculum connections.

Goal: Shift instructional design to be more student-centered, increasing the 60.9% engagement rate to at least 75% by the mid-year assessment.

Integrate Self-Regulation and Attention Strategies:

Action: Integrate short, explicit SEL lessons on emotional regulation and metacognition (self-awareness of learning/attention) into daily advisories or homeroom periods.

Goal: Address the 19% of students struggling with Attention and Academic Stability and the 20% struggling with Emotional Regulation by providing them with practical coping and focusing mechanisms. Our school counselors have been working directly with students individually and in small group sessions.

Leverage Social Strengths:

Action: Capitalize on the strong positive peer relationships (87.69%) by using cooperative learning structures (e.g., pair-share, collaborative project work) in academic settings. This can help boost engagement by making learning a shared, social activity.