iready math

[Anonymous]

Does iReady math has a common core and a non-cc versions, just curious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:FCPS has adopted ireadyd as the permanent replacement for DRA and MRA?

I'm very concerned that these tests may not reflect accurately where a child is truly at in math and reading.

Why do you think so?Have you seen the result analysis and area tested? Test is design to address all type of kids to get true assessment which MRA/DRA can not do. they only flaw I can think of is it can test only one grade advanced which I think FCPS wants it that way, otherwise we will have sleuth of parents asking for grade skipping!!

One of my kid's tests came back at 3 years above grade level....

Mine had a score that was 4+ years above grade level, but apparently the content of the test questions is capped at one grade above grade level. A 2nd grader with a score well above grade level just means that the 2nd grader has complete and utter mastery of 2nd and 3rd grade level materials, but it doesn't speak to how well that kid would handle 4th+ grade level materials.

Ok...re-read your statement. How can your child have a score that is 4+ years above grade level by the content of the test is capped at one grade above grade level????

Just taking this statement as written, one could believe that your 2nd grade (if this is the correct grade) had a test score that stated he/she were testing at a 6th grade (or higher) level, but then you state that the test only allows them to test up to a 3rd grade.

And wouldn't if a child is testing in a range mean that they can handle that grade level material (especially if this is math, reading is a bit of a different issue)? It is the rare child (and I mean very, very rare) who is in second grade and is testing mathematically at 4 grades above with little to no extra support.

It was as bad as that math program that they had the children do last year Dreambox, where simply because the children were able to race through the material because of the way it was presented meant that they were mastering the material equivalent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Mine had a score that was 4+ years above grade level, but apparently the content of the test questions is capped at one grade above grade level. A 2nd grader with a score well above grade level just means that the 2nd grader has complete and utter mastery of 2nd and 3rd grade level materials, but it doesn't speak to how well that kid would handle 4th+ grade level materials.

Ok...re-read your statement. How can your child have a score that is 4+ years above grade level by the content of the test is capped at one grade above grade level????

Just taking this statement as written, one could believe that your 2nd grade (if this is the correct grade) had a test score that stated he/she were testing at a 6th grade (or higher) level, but then you state that the test only allows them to test up to a 3rd grade.

And wouldn't if a child is testing in a range mean that they can handle that grade level material (especially if this is math, reading is a bit of a different issue)? It is the rare child (and I mean very, very rare) who is in second grade and is testing mathematically at 4 grades above with little to no extra support.

Huh? Re-read the bolded. The kid's score is 4+ years above grade level, based on this chart http://www.aps.edu/assessment/i-ready-documents/i-ready-placement-tables
He is well above the cutoff for "Level 5", and his score is higher than the highest on-grade level score for 6th graders. What does that mean? You would have to ask the people who created the scoring chart. I would imagine it's probably similar to the grade level equivalents given in many achievement tests. For your second point, yes, my child is a very, very rare child in that respect, and it is completely plausible that he is functioning that many grades above.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Mine had a score that was 4+ years above grade level, but apparently the content of the test questions is capped at one grade above grade level. A 2nd grader with a score well above grade level just means that the 2nd grader has complete and utter mastery of 2nd and 3rd grade level materials, but it doesn't speak to how well that kid would handle 4th+ grade level materials.

Ok...re-read your statement. How can your child have a score that is 4+ years above grade level by the content of the test is capped at one grade above grade level????

Just taking this statement as written, one could believe that your 2nd grade (if this is the correct grade) had a test score that stated he/she were testing at a 6th grade (or higher) level, but then you state that the test only allows them to test up to a 3rd grade.

And wouldn't if a child is testing in a range mean that they can handle that grade level material (especially if this is math, reading is a bit of a different issue)? It is the rare child (and I mean very, very rare) who is in second grade and is testing mathematically at 4 grades above with little to no extra support.

Huh? Re-read the bolded. The kid's score is 4+ years above grade level, based on this chart http://www.aps.edu/assessment/i-ready-documents/i-ready-placement-tables
He is well above the cutoff for "Level 5", and his score is higher than the highest on-grade level score for 6th graders. What does that mean? You would have to ask the people who created the scoring chart. I would imagine it's probably similar to the grade level equivalents given in many achievement tests. For your second point, yes, my child is a very, very rare child in that respect, and it is completely plausible that he is functioning that many grades above.

There is general misunderstanding on this board about Grade 5 and Level 5. They are not same. Achieving Level 5 does not mean your DC cleared Grade 5 math. Have you seen Grade 5 math?
If they wanted to indicate Grade 5 then they would use 'Grade' instead 'Level'.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
There is general misunderstanding on this board about Grade 5 and Level 5. They are not same. Achieving Level 5 does not mean your DC cleared Grade 5 math. Have you seen Grade 5 math?
If they wanted to indicate Grade 5 then they would use 'Grade' instead 'Level'.

Incorrect. If you look online for i-ready resources, they flat out will state that the placement level refers to the grade level skills that would be an appropriate instructional level for that child. They probably use 'Level" rather than 'Grade', because they're indicating that the child needs a different grade level of instruction and not that the child necessarily belongs in a different grade. FWIW, I have an older child in AAP math, and my 2nd grader can run laps around that child with respect to math. The kid legitimately does know everything through at least the 4th grade AAP curriculum and possibly the 5th grade one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Mine had a score that was 4+ years above grade level, but apparently the content of the test questions is capped at one grade above grade level. A 2nd grader with a score well above grade level just means that the 2nd grader has complete and utter mastery of 2nd and 3rd grade level materials, but it doesn't speak to how well that kid would handle 4th+ grade level materials.

Ok...re-read your statement. How can your child have a score that is 4+ years above grade level by the content of the test is capped at one grade above grade level????

Just taking this statement as written, one could believe that your 2nd grade (if this is the correct grade) had a test score that stated he/she were testing at a 6th grade (or higher) level, but then you state that the test only allows them to test up to a 3rd grade.

And wouldn't if a child is testing in a range mean that they can handle that grade level material (especially if this is math, reading is a bit of a different issue)? It is the rare child (and I mean very, very rare) who is in second grade and is testing mathematically at 4 grades above with little to no extra support.

Huh? Re-read the bolded. The kid's score is 4+ years above grade level, based on this chart http://www.aps.edu/assessment/i-ready-documents/i-ready-placement-tables
He is well above the cutoff for "Level 5", and his score is higher than the highest on-grade level score for 6th graders. What does that mean? You would have to ask the people who created the scoring chart. I would imagine it's probably similar to the grade level equivalents given in many achievement tests. For your second point, yes, my child is a very, very rare child in that respect, and it is completely plausible that he is functioning that many grades above.

There is general misunderstanding on this board about Grade 5 and Level 5. They are not same. Achieving Level 5 does not mean your DC cleared Grade 5 math. Have you seen Grade 5 math?
If they wanted to indicate Grade 5 then they would use 'Grade' instead 'Level'.

I'll have to re-read the explanation at the top of the page above the scores but I could've sworn it said that Level 3 would equate to Grade 3. My 3rd grade child did above average on the NNAT and Cogat in the last two years but did not score in the pool (just slightly below). She crushed this assessment and tested out for most of it and was at level 6 for one item. Still no desire to send her to a center and still no confidence in any of these tests.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Mine had a score that was 4+ years above grade level, but apparently the content of the test questions is capped at one grade above grade level. A 2nd grader with a score well above grade level just means that the 2nd grader has complete and utter mastery of 2nd and 3rd grade level materials, but it doesn't speak to how well that kid would handle 4th+ grade level materials.

Ok...re-read your statement. How can your child have a score that is 4+ years above grade level by the content of the test is capped at one grade above grade level????

Just taking this statement as written, one could believe that your 2nd grade (if this is the correct grade) had a test score that stated he/she were testing at a 6th grade (or higher) level, but then you state that the test only allows them to test up to a 3rd grade.

And wouldn't if a child is testing in a range mean that they can handle that grade level material (especially if this is math, reading is a bit of a different issue)? It is the rare child (and I mean very, very rare) who is in second grade and is testing mathematically at 4 grades above with little to no extra support.

Huh? Re-read the bolded. The kid's score is 4+ years above grade level, based on this chart http://www.aps.edu/assessment/i-ready-documents/i-ready-placement-tables
He is well above the cutoff for "Level 5", and his score is higher than the highest on-grade level score for 6th graders. What does that mean? You would have to ask the people who created the scoring chart. I would imagine it's probably similar to the grade level equivalents given in many achievement tests. For your second point, yes, my child is a very, very rare child in that respect, and it is completely plausible that he is functioning that many grades above.

There is general misunderstanding on this board about Grade 5 and Level 5. They are not same. Achieving Level 5 does not mean your DC cleared Grade 5 math. Have you seen Grade 5 math?
If they wanted to indicate Grade 5 then they would use 'Grade' instead 'Level'.

I'll have to re-read the explanation at the top of the page above the scores but I could've sworn it said that Level 3 would equate to Grade 3. My 3rd grade child did above average on the NNAT and Cogat in the last two years but did not score in the pool (just slightly below). She crushed this assessment and tested out for most of it and was at level 6 for one item. Still no desire to send her to a center and still no confidence in any of these tests.

I have issues with the basic test and poor question format. Has anyone viewed the sample questions? If you have a kid who is an "over thinker" they are more than likely dead in the water.
Some of the questions are, well ambiguous. A clock showing the time 8:30 with a girl standing by a bus. The question states: "what time did Sally start school"? I have one kid who will have no problem answering and has done exceptionally well on iready testing. I have another who would sit there for 15 minutes and say: well, if she gets on the bus at 8:30, then she would start school at 9am. She has to take the bus unless she lives close enough to walk, and most bus rides take at least 15 minutes and you are supposed to get there before the bell rings. She would click on the 9am option and get it wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
I have issues with the basic test and poor question format. Has anyone viewed the sample questions? If you have a kid who is an "over thinker" they are more than likely dead in the water.
Some of the questions are, well ambiguous. A clock showing the time 8:30 with a girl standing by a bus. The question states: "what time did Sally start school"? I have one kid who will have no problem answering and has done exceptionally well on iready testing. I have another who would sit there for 15 minutes and say: well, if she gets on the bus at 8:30, then she would start school at 9am. She has to take the bus unless she lives close enough to walk, and most bus rides take at least 15 minutes and you are supposed to get there before the bell rings. She would click on the 9am option and get it wrong.

I just found that sample question, and I think you're grasping. The question stated "What time did Mia go to school?" with a clock showing 8:30. There isn't ambiguity, except perhaps for kids with poor reading comprehension.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I have issues with the basic test and poor question format. Has anyone viewed the sample questions? If you have a kid who is an "over thinker" they are more than likely dead in the water.
Some of the questions are, well ambiguous. A clock showing the time 8:30 with a girl standing by a bus. The question states: "what time did Sally start school"? I have one kid who will have no problem answering and has done exceptionally well on iready testing. I have another who would sit there for 15 minutes and say: well, if she gets on the bus at 8:30, then she would start school at 9am. She has to take the bus unless she lives close enough to walk, and most bus rides take at least 15 minutes and you are supposed to get there before the bell rings. She would click on the 9am option and get it wrong.

I just found that sample question, and I think you're grasping. The question stated "What time did Mia go to school?" with a clock showing 8:30. There isn't ambiguity, except perhaps for kids with por reading comprehension.



https://www.google.com/amp/s/dezignzbydeb.wordpress.com/2016/09/11/i-readymore-like-i-scam-and-other-deceptions/amp/

[Anonymous]

^I'm sorry that your kids aren't as advanced as you would like to imagine that they are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:^I'm sorry that your kids aren't as advanced as you would like to imagine that they are.

Rude, much? Wow, you are a real bitch.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
There is general misunderstanding on this board about Grade 5 and Level 5. They are not same. Achieving Level 5 does not mean your DC cleared Grade 5 math. Have you seen Grade 5 math?
If they wanted to indicate Grade 5 then they would use 'Grade' instead 'Level'.

Incorrect. If you look online for i-ready resources, they flat out will state that the placement level refers to the grade level skills that would be an appropriate instructional level for that child. They probably use 'Level" rather than 'Grade', because they're indicating that the child needs a different grade level of instruction and not that the child necessarily belongs in a different grade. FWIW, I have an older child in AAP math, and my 2nd grader can run laps around that child with respect to math. The kid legitimately does know everything through at least the 4th grade AAP curriculum and possibly the 5th grade one.

# 1
Incorrect: I thought so too until I look in at the negative scenario.

Chart: http://www.aps.edu/assessment/i-ready-documents/i-ready-placement-tables

Look at Grade 7 Overall Math score , lowest score is 100 and corresponds to Level K. Do you think a 7th grader child scoring 100 is so bad in math that his/her skills are Kindergarten level? If so how did he managed to clear 1st,2nd ...6th grade? Is this even possible?
In the same scenario a kindergartner scoring 800 would be at Grade 3 math, better than 7th grader?

There are many kids in this forum who scores WISC of 130+. Here is modern IQ ranges for various occupations

http://www.iqcomparisonsite.com/occupations.aspx

Do you think this child is smarter than engineers/lawyers/doctors? These tests are relative to age hence Level 5 can not translate to Grade 5 math.


# 2

Read first paragraph last line

http://www.madison.kyschools.us/userfiles/1190/my%20files/understandingscores.pdf?id=561285

Scale Scores
Scale scores allow you to put everything on a single continuum so that you can compare across grade levels. Scale
scores are a metric indicating that a student has mastered skills up to a certain point, and still needs to work on
skills that come after that point. The scale score is a common language across grades and schools. When looking
at these scores, it’s important to note that the fi rst number in a scale score does not equate to a grade level. For
example, a scale score in the 500s does NOT mean that a student’s grade-level placement is fi fth grade.



Here is FCPS Grade 6 Math curriculum. Make your own assessment can second grader scoring 800 is fit to take Grade 6th Math?
https://insys.fcps.edu/PublicPOS/#/reportPanel/6/0

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
There is general misunderstanding on this board about Grade 5 and Level 5. They are not same. Achieving Level 5 does not mean your DC cleared Grade 5 math. Have you seen Grade 5 math?
If they wanted to indicate Grade 5 then they would use 'Grade' instead 'Level'.

Incorrect. If you look online for i-ready resources, they flat out will state that the placement level refers to the grade level skills that would be an appropriate instructional level for that child. They probably use 'Level" rather than 'Grade', because they're indicating that the child needs a different grade level of instruction and not that the child necessarily belongs in a different grade. FWIW, I have an older child in AAP math, and my 2nd grader can run laps around that child with respect to math. The kid legitimately does know everything through at least the 4th grade AAP curriculum and possibly the 5th grade one.

# 1
Incorrect: I thought so too until I look in at the negative scenario.

Chart: http://www.aps.edu/assessment/i-ready-documents/i-ready-placement-tables

Look at Grade 7 Overall Math score , lowest score is 100 and corresponds to Level K. Do you think a 7th grader child scoring 100 is so bad in math that his/her skills are Kindergarten level? If so how did he managed to clear 1st,2nd ...6th grade? Is this even possible?
In the same scenario a kindergartner scoring 800 would be at Grade 3 math, better than 7th grader?

There are many kids in this forum who scores WISC of 130+. Here is modern IQ ranges for various occupations

http://www.iqcomparisonsite.com/occupations.aspx

Do you think this child is smarter than engineers/lawyers/doctors? These tests are relative to age hence Level 5 can not translate to Grade 5 math.


# 2

Read first paragraph last line

http://www.madison.kyschools.us/userfiles/1190/my%20files/understandingscores.pdf?id=561285

Scale Scores
Scale scores allow you to put everything on a single continuum so that you can compare across grade levels. Scale
scores are a metric indicating that a student has mastered skills up to a certain point, and still needs to work on
skills that come after that point. The scale score is a common language across grades and schools. When looking
at these scores, it’s important to note that the fi rst number in a scale score does not equate to a grade level. For
example, a scale score in the 500s does NOT mean that a student’s grade-level placement is fi fth grade.



Here is FCPS Grade 6 Math curriculum. Make your own assessment can second grader scoring 800 is fit to take Grade 6th Math?
https://insys.fcps.edu/PublicPOS/#/reportPanel/6/0


iReady shows palcement level
Chart: http://www.aps.edu/assessment/i-ready-documents/i-ready-placement-tables

Look at page 2 second table. this is where the range falls. Either child is Early-Mid-Late-Above Grade (report does not say which grade)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Mine had a score that was 4+ years above grade level, but apparently the content of the test questions is capped at one grade above grade level. A 2nd grader with a score well above grade level just means that the 2nd grader has complete and utter mastery of 2nd and 3rd grade level materials, but it doesn't speak to how well that kid would handle 4th+ grade level materials.

Ok...re-read your statement. How can your child have a score that is 4+ years above grade level by the content of the test is capped at one grade above grade level????

Just taking this statement as written, one could believe that your 2nd grade (if this is the correct grade) had a test score that stated he/she were testing at a 6th grade (or higher) level, but then you state that the test only allows them to test up to a 3rd grade.

And wouldn't if a child is testing in a range mean that they can handle that grade level material (especially if this is math, reading is a bit of a different issue)? It is the rare child (and I mean very, very rare) who is in second grade and is testing mathematically at 4 grades above with little to no extra support.

Huh? Re-read the bolded. The kid's score is 4+ years above grade level, based on this chart http://www.aps.edu/assessment/i-ready-documents/i-ready-placement-tables
He is well above the cutoff for "Level 5", and his score is higher than the highest on-grade level score for 6th graders. What does that mean? You would have to ask the people who created the scoring chart. I would imagine it's probably similar to the grade level equivalents given in many achievement tests. For your second point, yes, my child is a very, very rare child in that respect, and it is completely plausible that he is functioning that many grades above.

There is general misunderstanding on this board about Grade 5 and Level 5. They are not same. Achieving Level 5 does not mean your DC cleared Grade 5 math. Have you seen Grade 5 math?
If they wanted to indicate Grade 5 then they would use 'Grade' instead 'Level'.

I'll have to re-read the explanation at the top of the page above the scores but I could've sworn it said that Level 3 would equate to Grade 3. My 3rd grade child did above average on the NNAT and Cogat in the last two years but did not score in the pool (just slightly below). She crushed this assessment and tested out for most of it and was at level 6 for one item. Still no desire to send her to a center and still no confidence in any of these tests.

I amd the PP with second paragraph. I just posted my thought one post above why I don't think that is the case.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

iReady shows palcement level
Chart: http://www.aps.edu/assessment/i-ready-documents/i-ready-placement-tables

Look at page 2 second table. this is where the range falls. Either child is Early-Mid-Late-Above Grade (report does not say which grade)

From the link you provided: Placement levels The placement level is the practical day-to-day language that helps teachers determine what level of skills to focus on with a particular student. Placement levels can be simply "Level 4," or can be ranked as early, mid, or late Level 4. Placement levels indicate where students should be receiving instruction, either online or in the classroom.

So, a fifth grader placing at "Level 5" and a third grader placing at "Level 5" would both be appropriately instructed using "level 5" materials.