Screens/Tech in Schools: iReady

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hate EdTech and DCPS should absolutely NOT cancel their iReady contract.

The primary purpose of iReady in DCPS is diagnostic and for tracking. Kids do iReady tests at the beginning, middle, and end of each year to help teachers identify where they are and how well they are learning. This is also how many teachers assign small groups to ensure kids are with peers at a similar level, or customize assignments to ensure kids are being appropriately challenged.

If DCPS cancels iReady without a diagnostic replacement, teachers will have no objective way to measure this. Parents will also be completely in the dark. It would be incredibly shortsighted to get rid of it without a replacement lined up.

What most of you object to is using iReady for learning and I agree, but schools and teachers actually have more leeway than you think on this point. So do parents. My kids don't do iReady homework assignment, for instance. If a teacher comments on this, I tell them we limit EdTech and believe kids learn better with pencil and paper, and teachers have actually provided written assignments when I say this. We also supplement at home if we think they need it. But we've also had teachers who intentionally don't use iReady in the classroom for learning, and my kids have been at two different schools -- one that pushed iReady hard every day and one that uses it mostly for diagnostics and sometimes to help kids who are below grade level close the gap.

If DC really wants to get rid of iReady, we should investigate alternative programs, like MAP for diagnostic testing and tracking.

I was told by many people in DC that tracking was inequitable.

What an unhelpful comment. Also, PP is not describing tracking anyway — small groups are different. And my kid’s school definitely uses iready to assign the small groups.

What a poor practice that school is implementing.

How else do you suggest schools identify students levels in order to group them for differentiated learning?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also, just to add that of all the digital platforms used by my Dcps middle school, Iready is the only one that actively teaches remedial skills. Delta math is sort of up to the teacher but typically follows grade level content, Zearn pretty strictly follows the grade level content. All of them have weaknesses though and are probably overused

But iReady doesn’t align with grade level content taught in DCPS. Kids are tested on stuff they aren’t learning in class. So what’s the point?

In addition to reinforcing remedial math, I know kids (including mine) who genuinely learn a lot of above-grade-level math through iReady.

And as a PP said, it's used as a primary diagnostic tool three times a year.

I don't love EdTech and think schools should eliminate many of the programs, but iready is actually one of the more useful programs. I would eliminate every other app before going after iReady in elementary.

Counter point- my kid learning nothing from iready. She’s maxed out the score according to data and she still has to practice when she finishes all other work. That isn’t differentiation, it’s busy work.

It's not possible to max out an iReady score because they will just give your kid higher level questions until they find her level. My kid's reading score in 3rd is equivalent to a 7th grade reading level. He "maxed out" the iReady 3rd grade content but the test adapts to find his true level, which is helpful for identifying books appropriate for his level.

If your child "has" to do iReady in class when she finishes other work, that's a teacher problem, not an iReady problem. But also you can get around it. I've told teachers I don't want my kid doing iReady when he finishes work early. We send in books for him to read or request math puzzles for him to work on, and they've always been fine with this. I've also taught my kid not to rush through work -- take time and review things, rather than rushing through only to get stuck doing iReady. He'll rewrite paragraphs and double check math, these are useful skills. Other kids rush in order to "play on the iPad" (i.e. do iReady). They aren't doing a good job with their non-iReady assignments either, they are just addicted to screens. That's a parenting issue.

The reading diagnostic will max out on content when a kid starts out at least three grade levels above on the BOY. It then gives them the same or similar questions for the following two diagnostics. Although it’s possible to get a score that fits into a grade level more than three above, the content and the descriptions in the reports max out at three above. So my fifth grader gets a score that doesn’t appear in the norms tables until 10th grade but they get 8th grade content on the diagnostic. And then they get the same questions on the diagnostic all year. A little silly but I also understand nobody is super worried about my kid in this circumstance.

The actual solution to this is to exempt kids who max out the reading diagnostic from taking the test after BOY. My middle school kids got the SAME PASSAGES for three years and it taught them to blow off the stupid test.

Ughhhh

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I hate EdTech and DCPS should absolutely NOT cancel their iReady contract.

The primary purpose of iReady in DCPS is diagnostic and for tracking. Kids do iReady tests at the beginning, middle, and end of each year to help teachers identify where they are and how well they are learning. This is also how many teachers assign small groups to ensure kids are with peers at a similar level, or customize assignments to ensure kids are being appropriately challenged.

If DCPS cancels iReady without a diagnostic replacement, teachers will have no objective way to measure this. Parents will also be completely in the dark. It would be incredibly shortsighted to get rid of it without a replacement lined up.

What most of you object to is using iReady for learning and I agree, but schools and teachers actually have more leeway than you think on this point. So do parents. My kids don't do iReady homework assignment, for instance. If a teacher comments on this, I tell them we limit EdTech and believe kids learn better with pencil and paper, and teachers have actually provided written assignments when I say this. We also supplement at home if we think they need it. But we've also had teachers who intentionally don't use iReady in the classroom for learning, and my kids have been at two different schools -- one that pushed iReady hard every day and one that uses it mostly for diagnostics and sometimes to help kids who are below grade level close the gap.

If DC really wants to get rid of iReady, we should investigate alternative programs, like MAP for diagnostic testing and tracking.

AFAIK no one is saying get rid of it and do absolutely nothing for diagnostic assessment. DCPS should take on deciding on that, based on the suggestions already put forth by teachers, parents, and other community members and experts in addition to their own research — and not punt the task into another year.

Diagnostics might have been the primary purpose for it, but it’s not always what it looks like in practice, and the harms are stacking. Ferebee / DCPS itself has acknowledged that in some schools the use is absolutely excessive. They can already see this … yet they want to take another year to “observe.”

[Anonymous]

Can we use it just 3x a year for diagnostics, not as a routine classroom thing, and somehow pay less money?

[Anonymous]

Looks like the Council is taking it up https://bsky.app/profile/maustermuhle.bsky.social/post/3mnrzpdehgk22

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Looks like the Council is taking it up https://bsky.app/profile/maustermuhle.bsky.social/post/3mnrzpdehgk22

What bullshit.

[Anonymous]

Deal teachers just had an internal survey showing they want to dial back computer use.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Deal teachers just had an internal survey showing they want to dial back computer use.

That's great!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can we use it just 3x a year for diagnostics, not as a routine classroom thing, and somehow pay less money?

+1000

Why can’t we do this? Get the data but then have students learn without iReady lessons? It’s ridiculous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Looks like the Council is taking it up https://bsky.app/profile/maustermuhle.bsky.social/post/3mnrzpdehgk22

What bullshit.

Do you know how much your kid is looking at screens during the school day? Whatever the admin tells you, double that time and that’s how long little kids stare at screens. That’s bullsh**t.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Looks like the Council is taking it up https://bsky.app/profile/maustermuhle.bsky.social/post/3mnrzpdehgk22

Does anyone know if it passed?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hate EdTech and DCPS should absolutely NOT cancel their iReady contract.

The primary purpose of iReady in DCPS is diagnostic and for tracking. Kids do iReady tests at the beginning, middle, and end of each year to help teachers identify where they are and how well they are learning. This is also how many teachers assign small groups to ensure kids are with peers at a similar level, or customize assignments to ensure kids are being appropriately challenged.

If DCPS cancels iReady without a diagnostic replacement, teachers will have no objective way to measure this. Parents will also be completely in the dark. It would be incredibly shortsighted to get rid of it without a replacement lined up.

What most of you object to is using iReady for learning and I agree, but schools and teachers actually have more leeway than you think on this point. So do parents. My kids don't do iReady homework assignment, for instance. If a teacher comments on this, I tell them we limit EdTech and believe kids learn better with pencil and paper, and teachers have actually provided written assignments when I say this. We also supplement at home if we think they need it. But we've also had teachers who intentionally don't use iReady in the classroom for learning, and my kids have been at two different schools -- one that pushed iReady hard every day and one that uses it mostly for diagnostics and sometimes to help kids who are below grade level close the gap.

If DC really wants to get rid of iReady, we should investigate alternative programs, like MAP for diagnostic testing and tracking.

AFAIK no one is saying get rid of it and do absolutely nothing for diagnostic assessment. DCPS should take on deciding on that, based on the suggestions already put forth by teachers, parents, and other community members and experts in addition to their own research — and not punt the task into another year.

Diagnostics might have been the primary purpose for it, but it’s not always what it looks like in practice, and the harms are stacking. Ferebee / DCPS itself has acknowledged that in some schools the use is absolutely excessive. They can already see this … yet they want to take another year to “observe.”

I mean suggesting we cancel the contract would eliminate its use for diagnostic purposes.

If the problem is the non-diagnostic uses, you could pass a policy tomorrow that told schools they couldn't use individual devices at all until at least 3rd grade, and restricted the use of iReady for teaching purposes (no iReady for homework assignments, no rewards for doing more iReady). They could also restrict the use of iReady scores in teacher IMPACT evaluations until they've decided whether or not the district will continue with iReady or replace it with something else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can we use it just 3x a year for diagnostics, not as a routine classroom thing, and somehow pay less money?

+1000

Why can’t we do this? Get the data but then have students learn without iReady lessons? It’s ridiculous.

It's fine to only use iReady for diagnostics, but it's foolish to think that getting rid of iReady lessons will magically result in less screentime.

You need better policy around technology use as a whole and you need to fund things that will enable teachers to do differentiation and small groups without the need for screens.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can we use it just 3x a year for diagnostics, not as a routine classroom thing, and somehow pay less money?

+1000

Why can’t we do this? Get the data but then have students learn without iReady lessons? It’s ridiculous.

We can. Many teachers already do. My kid has had several teachers who don't use iReady at all in instruction. We can keep iReady for diagnostic purposes and just pass policy that eliminates it as a form of teaching/homework/classroom busywork. The same way the district banned phones and watches in classrooms last year. You can change how the product is used immediately without cancelling the contract and eliminating the diagnostic use.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can we use it just 3x a year for diagnostics, not as a routine classroom thing, and somehow pay less money?

+1000

Why can’t we do this? Get the data but then have students learn without iReady lessons? It’s ridiculous.

It's fine to only use iReady for diagnostics, but it's foolish to think that getting rid of iReady lessons will magically result in less screentime.

You need better policy around technology use as a whole and you need to fund things that will enable teachers to do differentiation and small groups without the need for screens.

+1, most of my kid's screen time in class isn't iReady. It's used pretty minimally at my kid's school already. I'm more concerned with other tech use like:

- Kids having access to messaging apps and inappropriate content on school issued devices, or kids figuring out how to hack these devices to watch YouTube or engage in other tech consumption during school that is not appropriate

- Overuse of Youtube in classrooms for activities that could be done tech free (i.e. the use of YouTube in ECE and early grades for things like learning letters, colors, Spanish or French language instruction, etc.) Made worse when the kids are also exposed to a lot of advertising via YouTube.

- Use of AI in school technology, including predictive text in writing programs

- Use of programs like Epic for reading content instead of investing in print materials

That's off the top of my head. iReady is really not the biggest issue with tech and screens in schools. Some schools are likely overusing it and they need to be reigned in -- I support that. But very little iReady use is actually required by the district beyond the diagnostic testing. If you addressed the problem of incentives by addressing the use of iReady testing in teacher IMPACT scores, you could mostly fix the overuse problem without touching the contract.