Why iReady testing for kids in AAP?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I teach Level 4. Some of them come in as much as 2 years below grade level. Kids aren’t equally advanced across all subjects.

It’s also helpful for beginning instructional groupings and identifying strengths/weaknesses. Also a good data point for reading comprehension levels.

Wow. That's alarming. I hope it's the rare exception who enters AAP at or below grade level. Shouldn't the vast majority of AAP kids be above grade level?

My DC has never read at or above grade level due to several LDs, but if he gets the reading in a different format (eg text to speech software or audio books), he is good to go.

[Anonymous]

It’s a crummy test and we don’t group kids by it at all. If they score below the 39th percentile they have to take it again later in the year. If they score above that, then they’re done for the year. It was not useful to me at all. I already know from classroom work who needs extra help and who shines. Spend all that money on lowering class sizes so more kids get more help and forget the computer crap.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s a crummy test and we don’t group kids by it at all. If they score below the 39th percentile they have to take it again later in the year. If they score above that, then they’re done for the year. It was not useful to me at all. I already know from classroom work who needs extra help and who shines. Spend all that money on lowering class sizes so more kids get more help and forget the computer crap.

That's basically what DC's teacher told us at the parent teacher conference, only more diplomatically. She said everyone in the class scored above 40th percentile, so they won't be taking it again.

From what I can figure out, below 40th percentile is pretty low. An indication for remedial help.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s a crummy test and we don’t group kids by it at all. If they score below the 39th percentile they have to take it again later in the year. If they score above that, then they’re done for the year. It was not useful to me at all. I already know from classroom work who needs extra help and who shines. Spend all that money on lowering class sizes so more kids get more help and forget the computer crap.

That's basically what DC's teacher told us at the parent teacher conference, only more diplomatically. She said everyone in the class scored above 40th percentile, so they won't be taking it again.

From what I can figure out, below 40th percentile is pretty low. An indication for remedial help.

I don't see why this is a crummy test--it's a universal screener to identify kids who are low-performers and more importantly the specific areas in which they have difficulties. It's not like the only result is a percentile--there's analytic information on what gaps in skills resulted in that percentile. I've seen the full reports--they look helpful and not overly technical. I think the hard part is knowing what targeted instruction will help provide remedial support best, but the schools typically have resources that support that and retesting sees if the strategies are working.

Sure AAP kids might not likely need it, but it can point to gaps that even they have (for instance, if you're approaching grade level and are in AAP that may be a signal for a hidden LD even though you don't fall to the 39%ile. It can be hard in the elementary grades to see LDs in high IQ kids because they have work-arounds that then become more obvious as the work becomes more challenging in upper elementary/middle/high school).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s a crummy test and we don’t group kids by it at all. If they score below the 39th percentile they have to take it again later in the year. If they score above that, then they’re done for the year. It was not useful to me at all. I already know from classroom work who needs extra help and who shines. Spend all that money on lowering class sizes so more kids get more help and forget the computer crap.

That's basically what DC's teacher told us at the parent teacher conference, only more diplomatically. She said everyone in the class scored above 40th percentile, so they won't be taking it again.

From what I can figure out, below 40th percentile is pretty low. An indication for remedial help.

40th percentile is still within the average percentile for most tests. Some define average as plus/minus 25% from the 50th percentile. So, 25th-75th percentiles is considered to be average. Some define average as one standard deviation above and below the 50th percential. So, for them, average is the 16th - 84th percentiles.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s a crummy test and we don’t group kids by it at all. If they score below the 39th percentile they have to take it again later in the year. If they score above that, then they’re done for the year. It was not useful to me at all. I already know from classroom work who needs extra help and who shines. Spend all that money on lowering class sizes so more kids get more help and forget the computer crap.

That's basically what DC's teacher told us at the parent teacher conference, only more diplomatically. She said everyone in the class scored above 40th percentile, so they won't be taking it again.

From what I can figure out, below 40th percentile is pretty low. An indication for remedial help.

I don't see why this is a crummy test--it's a universal screener to identify kids who are low-performers and more importantly the specific areas in which they have difficulties. It's not like the only result is a percentile--there's analytic information on what gaps in skills resulted in that percentile. I've seen the full reports--they look helpful and not overly technical. I think the hard part is knowing what targeted instruction will help provide remedial support best, but the schools typically have resources that support that and retesting sees if the strategies are working.

Sure AAP kids might not likely need it, but it can point to gaps that even they have (for instance, if you're approaching grade level and are in AAP that may be a signal for a hidden LD even though you don't fall to the 39%ile. It can be hard in the elementary grades to see LDs in high IQ kids because they have work-arounds that then become more obvious as the work becomes more challenging in upper elementary/middle/high school).

+1 I agree.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I teach elementary AAP and I have a couple of kids who scored at least a year below grade level in reading, as well as a couple who scored below in math. One scored below in both. The scores seem to be somewhat consistent with what i am seeing in class. I find it useful as a starting point for grouping kids.

In your opinion, do those kids belong in AAP? Isn't it hard to differentiate when you have kids who are several years above grade level, kids who are a year above grade level, kids who are on grade level, and kids who are below grade level all in the same class?

Different PP but another teacher who has found the same as the above. Yes, it’s hard. Especially since you get very little support because “they’re AAP, they’ll be fine.”

I have some kids who would be better served in gen ed. I can pass along feedback about the admission process, and I can be as candid as possible with parents about their struggles, but that’s about it. They’re my kids, so I support and teach them to the best of my ability. Some parents will pull them if they get enough 2s, others will pay for tutors four days a week, and a few will make the teacher’s life hell. That’s teaching.

[Anonymous]

I teach elementary AAP and I have a couple of kids who scored at least a year below grade level in reading, as well as a couple who scored below in math. One scored below in both. The scores seem to be somewhat consistent with what i am seeing in class. I find it useful as a starting point for grouping kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I teach elementary AAP and I have a couple of kids who scored at least a year below grade level in reading, as well as a couple who scored below in math. One scored below in both. The scores seem to be somewhat consistent with what i am seeing in class. I find it useful as a starting point for grouping kids.

In your opinion, do those kids belong in AAP? Isn't it hard to differentiate when you have kids who are several years above grade level, kids who are a year above grade level, kids who are on grade level, and kids who are below grade level all in the same class?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I teach elementary AAP and I have a couple of kids who scored at least a year below grade level in reading, as well as a couple who scored below in math. One scored below in both. The scores seem to be somewhat consistent with what i am seeing in class. I find it useful as a starting point for grouping kids.

In your opinion, do those kids belong in AAP? Isn't it hard to differentiate when you have kids who are several years above grade level, kids who are a year above grade level, kids who are on grade level, and kids who are below grade level all in the same class?

Different PP but another teacher who has found the same as the above. Yes, it’s hard. Especially since you get very little support because “they’re AAP, they’ll be fine.”

I have some kids who would be better served in gen ed. I can pass along feedback about the admission process, and I can be as candid as possible with parents about their struggles, but that’s about it. They’re my kids, so I support and teach them to the best of my ability. Some parents will pull them if they get enough 2s, others will pay for tutors four days a week, and a few will make the teacher’s life hell. That’s teaching.

How many kids are 2 or more years above grade level in your classes? My child is very underwhelmed by AAP, but he's also significantly above grade level.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I teach elementary AAP and I have a couple of kids who scored at least a year below grade level in reading, as well as a couple who scored below in math. One scored below in both. The scores seem to be somewhat consistent with what i am seeing in class. I find it useful as a starting point for grouping kids.

For the ones that are behind in reading, do they do better if they used audio books? Have they been tested for LDs or ADHD?
What grade do you teach? My children had a hard time with the rote math facts in the early grades, yet soared once they got into higher math. For one, a four function calculator accommodation in MS and HS was the ticket. He is currently majoring in math in college.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I teach elementary AAP and I have a couple of kids who scored at least a year below grade level in reading, as well as a couple who scored below in math. One scored below in both. The scores seem to be somewhat consistent with what i am seeing in class. I find it useful as a starting point for grouping kids.

In your opinion, do those kids belong in AAP? Isn't it hard to differentiate when you have kids who are several years above grade level, kids who are a year above grade level, kids who are on grade level, and kids who are below grade level all in the same class?

In my opinion - no, they do not belong in AAP. And yes, it is hard to differentiate and do it well with so many different levels. But general education teachers have to deal with a wide range of levels as well, quite possibly with a wider range than AAP teachers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I teach elementary AAP and I have a couple of kids who scored at least a year below grade level in reading, as well as a couple who scored below in math. One scored below in both. The scores seem to be somewhat consistent with what i am seeing in class. I find it useful as a starting point for grouping kids.

In your opinion, do those kids belong in AAP? Isn't it hard to differentiate when you have kids who are several years above grade level, kids who are a year above grade level, kids who are on grade level, and kids who are below grade level all in the same class?

In my opinion - no, they do not belong in AAP. And yes, it is hard to differentiate and do it well with so many different levels. But general education teachers have to deal with a wide range of levels as well, quite possibly with a wider range than AAP teachers.

How many are 2E?

[Anonymous]

PP- cogat does not measure IQ. Most kids in aap have never had their IQ tested.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I teach elementary AAP and I have a couple of kids who scored at least a year below grade level in reading, as well as a couple who scored below in math. One scored below in both. The scores seem to be somewhat consistent with what i am seeing in class. I find it useful as a starting point for grouping kids.

In your opinion, do those kids belong in AAP? Isn't it hard to differentiate when you have kids who are several years above grade level, kids who are a year above grade level, kids who are on grade level, and kids who are below grade level all in the same class?

In my opinion - no, they do not belong in AAP. And yes, it is hard to differentiate and do it well with so many different levels. But general education teachers have to deal with a wide range of levels as well, quite possibly with a wider range than AAP teachers.

How many are 2E?

There are always 1-2 2E students in every class, more often than not, those kids really do belong in the program. In the past few years, AAP has been watered down; the curriculum is less rigorous and is not challenging enough for the students that belong. It's really a shame.