James McHenry Elementary School Performance Plan

SCHOOL PROFILE

School Name:

JAMES MCHENRY ELEMENTARY

School Year:

2026

Area:

Area-1

Local Education Agency:

Prince Georges County Public Schools

Supervisor Name:

Williams, Wanda C

State School No.:

2013

Supervisor Email:

wandaw@pgcps.org

School Type:

04. Elementary School

Title I:

Yes

Grades Served:

0PK, 05

Community School:

Yes

Principal Name:

Thomas Rivers

State Identification:

CSI:No, TSI/ATSI:Yes

Principal Email:

Thomas.Rivers@pgcps.org

School Address:

8909 MC HENRY Ln, LANHAM,MD - , LANHAM MD 20706

School Vision:

James McHenry Elementary School will be a GREAT school, recognized for being a safe and supportive learning environment that sets the foundation for our students to become productive citizens in a global society.

School Mission:

To provide a rigorous education that empowers all students to be successful members of a diverse community.

SMART Goals

A targeted

aspiration that serves as the focal point for collective improvement efforts

Specific; Measurable; Achievable; Realistic; Timebound

Math- During the 2025-2026 SY, the percentage of students scoring proficient or higher will increase by 5 percentage points in grades 3rd through 5th as measured by the 2026 MCAP Mathematics assessment.

Baseline 2025:

3rd: 14.1%

4th: 2.6%

5th: 4.3%

Target 2025:

3rd: 20.1%

4th: 8.6%

5th: 12.3%

English Language Development-During the 2025-2026 SY, the proficiency level score for ELD students in Kindergarten - 5th grade students will increase by at least one or more proficiency level in writing on the writing domain of WIDA Access.

RELA/ELA-During the 2025-2026 SY, the percentage of students scoring proficient or higher will increase by 5 percentage points in grades 3rd through 5th as measured by the 2026 MCAP Reading assessment.

Baseline 2025:

3rd: 25.5%

4th: 18.1%

5th: 27.4%

Target:

3rd: 31.5%

4th: 24.1%

5th: 33.4%

Problem of Practice

One problem the school has chosen to address that will assist them in moving toward the overarching Smart Goal

The instructional pacing of intermediate teachers often slows down because teachers attempt to wait for most students to achieve mastery before moving forward. While this is an attempt to support struggling students, the practice of doing the math together inadvertently prevents students from experiencing productive struggle, a key element of deep learning. Consequently, students are not sufficiently exposed to all grade-level standards covered on the Benchmark and MCAP assessments, which can negatively impact their performance on these assessments.

Our Multilingual Learners (MLs) are not consistently advancing their English language proficiency, specifically in the writing domain, because classroom instruction lacks consistent and cohesive application of key English Language Development (ELD) strategies across all content areas. This gap also indicates the consistency to ensure that MLs receive multiple, daily exposures to academic vocabulary in every class and by the inconsistent implementation of the ELD Writing Toolkit during focused or small group instruction. As a result, ML students do not receive the necessary daily writing opportunities and structured language supports

Intermediate students are not consistently exposed to all grade-level standards assessed on Benchmark and MCAP assessments. Cycle assessment data is available, but teachers are not explicitly modeling or engaging students in routine and analytic writing, resulting in writing instruction being implemented inconsistently across classrooms.

required to develop their academic writing proficiency.

Change Idea

A specific, actionable idea or technique that school teams will use to address the SMART Goal

Maintain the rigor of the standards through high-quality small group instruction that prioritizes student exploration and academic discourse. Additionally, implement the math Curriculum-Instructional Model (CFPG) with fidelity.

The implementation of Key Focus ELD strategies ( Direct Vocabulary Instruction and Modified Graphic Organizers) across all content areas in order to improve student oral and written responses

We will shift away from slow, standards-limiting pacing and the neglect of explicit writing instruction in intermediate grades. Our new practice will mandate rigorous, standards-aligned pacing through the consistent monitoring and implementation of cycle assessments. This change is paired with a commitment to high-fidelity writing instruction, requiring teachers to model and integrate daily Routine and Analytic Writing across content areas.

Target

The AIM set to determine if the implementation of the change idea was successful

6 out of 6 teachers will implement 75% of the criteria listed on the Learning Walk Look-Fors as measured in the tool.

75% of the 34 teachers will show evidence 4 out of the 4 criteria from the ELD Strategies Look-Fors

6 out of 6 teachers will implement at least 75% of the criteria listed on the Curriculum Implementation Learning Walk Look-Fors as measured in the tool.

PI: 15% of students in grades 3-5 will score between 316 to 375 on Math Benchmark 1 Assessment IPI: Unit Milestone Assessments

Grade 3- Unit 3 ( 15% of students in grade 3 will score at least a 4 out of 6 points using the scoring guide found in the CFPG.

Grade 4- Unit 2 ( 15% of students in grade 4 will score at least 9 out of 11 points using the scoring guide found in the CFPG.

Grade 5 -Unit 2 ( 15% of students in grade 5 will score at least an 8 out of 10 points using

50% of ELD students will increase their writing assessment score by one rubric point from the BOY to the EOY writing assessment.

PI: 20% of students in grades 3-5 will score between 316 to 375 on Benchmark 2 Assessment.

IPI: Analytical Writing Grade 3- Quarter 3 Cycle 2 (20% of students will score at least a 3 or 4 on written expression.)

Analytical Writing Grade 4- Quarter 3 Cycle 2 (20% of students will score at least a 3 or 4 on written expression.)

Analytical Writing Grade 5- Quarter 3 Cycle 2 (20% of students will score at least a 3 or 4 on

the scoring guide found in the CFPG

written expression.)

Targeted Support and Improvement (TSI) / Additional Targeted Support and Improvement (ATSI)

This section is for state-identified schools only.

Identified Group(s)

Evidence-Based Strategy (EBS)

EBS Target

Economically Disadvantaged:Hispanic or Latino of any race:Multilingual Learners:Students with Disabilities

Strategy 1: Explicit Direct Vocabulary Instruction - Teachers provide direct, systematic instruction of academic and domain-specific vocabulary using evidence-based models such as visual supports, or graphic organizer (ie Frayer Model).

Strategy 2: Extended Discourse in Writing - Use evidence-based routines that explicitly teach sentence construction, transitions, and paragraph organization to strengthen written expression across content areas.

Strategy 3: Language-Rich Collaborative Learning (Academic Conversations) - Promote structured academic talk that builds vocabulary and deepens comprehension through oral language rehearsal before writing. Structured Turn and Talk to include sentence stems.

**Strategy 1: Explicit Direct Vocabulary Instruction** - Success will be measured through a combination of student assessment data, classroom observation data, student work samples, and student engagement metrics. Specifically, we'll look for an increase in the percentage of students meeting grade-level expectations on Quarterly Benchmark Assessments, i-Ready Vocabulary subtests, and Grade Level Cycle Assessments. Our classroom walkthroughs and formal observations will confirm the consistent use of explicit vocabulary routines by teachers, such as maintaining word walls, using visual aids, and employing vocabulary graphic organizers. Additionally, student work samples must demonstrate the accurate use of newly taught academic vocabulary within written responses. Finally, an increase in student engagement will be seen in greater student participation in vocabulary discussions and activities. The success indicator is for 70% of targeted subgroup students to demonstrate measurable growth in both vocabulary knowledge and application on formative assessments.

**Strategy 2: Extended Discourse in Writing** - Success in writing instruction will be measured through a multi-faceted approach, incorporating ELD and MCAP writing rubrics, progress monitoring, student feedback, and classroom observations. Specifically, improvement will be assessed using ELD and

MCAP writing rubrics to track growth in sentence construction, paragraph organization, and the appropriate use of academic vocabulary. To continuously track this development, Analytical Writing Task, and ELD Writing Assessments will be collected and analyzed for increased complexity and overall clarity. Classroom observations will ensure that lesson plans reflect daily writing routines and consistent, modeled sentence practice. The success indicator for this initiative is for 70% of students in targeted support and improvement (TSI) subgroups to demonstrate an increase of at least one performance level on the schoolwide ELD writing by both the midyear and end-of-year benchmarks.

**Strategy 3: Language-Rich Collaborative Learning (Academic Conversations)** - Success in promoting academic discourse will be measured by four key metrics, culminating in a specific success indicator. First, Classroom Learning Walks will be used to systematically document an increased use of academic vocabulary and complete sentences by students during classroom discussions.

This will include will assess the quality of student interaction, focusing on whether students are effectively engaging in accountable talk routines and appropriately using sentence stems. Student Work Samples will be analyzed to show a corresponding improvement in idea development and vocabulary usage within writing products, especially following structured oral practice.

Student participation Data collected during walkthroughs will confirm a measurable increase in student engagement in academic talk, with a particular focus on participation among Multilingual Learners (MLs) and Special

Education (SPED) students. The ultimate Success Indicator for this goal is to see an observable, overall increase in academic discourse during classroom visits, with at least 70% of targeted subgroup students participating in structured discussions.