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.

Is she an 8th grader? In my understanding I ready goes all the way up through 8th grade material so kids "finish" iReady when they get through that.

I have a very above grade elementary schooler. Like he is working 3 grade levels up in both math and reading comprehension, and iReady is the only thing he gets in school that actually pushes him. He loves his iReady time. His scores show him working at the right level.

You do need to master the material before you can move on, and some kids get so bored they can't do it and then get stuck and get even more bored.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hate that kids must play a video game "Brain Break" in the middle of their test. That is completely unsupported by neuroscience. Also, doing math with a pencil and paper is much better for learning than doing it on a computer. There is a clear link between the introduction of EdTech and falling test scores. That's why many countries around the world, like Sweden and Norway, are moving away from EdTech.

Also, you may have noticed a wide variation in your kid's test scores on iReady. Your kid's score goes up, it goes down, it's not linear. That's because it's not scientific.

My kid's iReady test scores have been completely linear for 5 years. It only goes up, for both reading and math.

My ADHD kid’s scores go up and down, though their EOY scores are linear. All of my NT kid’s scores (BOY, MOY, EOY) are linear.

Anonymous wrote:I hate that kids must play a video game "Brain Break" in the middle of their test. That is completely unsupported by neuroscience. Also, doing math with a pencil and paper is much better for learning than doing it on a computer. There is a clear link between the introduction of EdTech and falling test scores. That's why many countries around the world, like Sweden and Norway, are moving away from EdTech.

Also, you may have noticed a wide variation in your kid's test scores on iReady. Your kid's score goes up, it goes down, it's not linear. That's because it's not scientific.

My kid's iReady test scores have been completely linear for 5 years. It only goes up, for both reading and math.

Anonymous wrote:You also need to advocate to remove I-Ready scores from teacher’s TAS scores as well. I have to have 80% of my students meet or exceed their stretch goal (go read what I-Ready says about stretch goals). If I have a student well below level or well above level, the content they are being assessed on is essentially I-Ready content. If kids don’t do those lessons, they won’t make the stretch goal. So yes, they will need to do lessons in class. When I didn’t have that goal, we didn’t do lessons, just the diagnostics.

As a parent I also really wish this wasn’t the case. I see such a difference in how the EOY test is administered vs the BOY and MOY ones. My kid gets rushed through the earlier ones. For the EOY, DC gets several days if they need it and they are encouraged to take their time. Totally different than the earlier ones. Their school also does special small groups before the EOY to teach some of the iready material that hasn’t come up in class. And the school also does tons of awards and prizes for making goals for EOY. It feels like the teachers deliberately hold back on teaching some the iready-specific stuff until May so that they can show growth. It works because my DC always does the best percentile-wise in the EOY. But I don’t like how differently it’s handled. It feels like they are manipulating the scores because that’s how they are being evaluated. I can’t blame them if that’s the incentive but I wish it weren’t the case.

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.

I hate that kids must play a video game "Brain Break" in the middle of their test. That is completely unsupported by neuroscience. Also, doing math with a pencil and paper is much better for learning than doing it on a computer. There is a clear link between the introduction of EdTech and falling test scores. That's why many countries around the world, like Sweden and Norway, are moving away from EdTech.

Also, you may have noticed a wide variation in your kid's test scores on iReady. Your kid's score goes up, it goes down, it's not linear. That's because it's not scientific.

Anonymous wrote:You also need to advocate to remove I-Ready scores from teacher’s TAS scores as well. I have to have 80% of my students meet or exceed their stretch goal (go read what I-Ready says about stretch goals). If I have a student well below level or well above level, the content they are being assessed on is essentially I-Ready content. If kids don’t do those lessons, they won’t make the stretch goal. So yes, they will need to do lessons in class. When I didn’t have that goal, we didn’t do lessons, just the diagnostics.

I agree using iReady scores for TAS scores is problematic.

However I will say that my kid always meets her stretch goals without doing additional iReady content. I get why teachers think having kids drill the iReady lessons is more likely to result in higher iReady scores, but you definitely can teach kids outside iReady and then see major progress on the diagnostic tests. And this is for a kid who is above grade level. I always hear people saying above grade level kids have to do iReady to hit stretch goals because it's the only way to get them work targeted to their level. It's not true.

Anonymous wrote:You also need to advocate to remove I-Ready scores from teacher’s TAS scores as well. I have to have 80% of my students meet or exceed their stretch goal (go read what I-Ready says about stretch goals). If I have a student well below level or well above level, the content they are being assessed on is essentially I-Ready content. If kids don’t do those lessons, they won’t make the stretch goal. So yes, they will need to do lessons in class. When I didn’t have that goal, we didn’t do lessons, just the diagnostics.

+1

I know this is why many teachers, even ones who expressly tell me they don’t like iReady, still have kids practice on the app. It’s also inequitable in so many ways to have some teachers have student test scores attached to their job security while others do not.

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.

You also need to advocate to remove I-Ready scores from teacher’s TAS scores as well. I have to have 80% of my students meet or exceed their stretch goal (go read what I-Ready says about stretch goals). If I have a student well below level or well above level, the content they are being assessed on is essentially I-Ready content. If kids don’t do those lessons, they won’t make the stretch goal. So yes, they will need to do lessons in class. When I didn’t have that goal, we didn’t do lessons, just the diagnostics.

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.

I'm the PP and yes, I should have said differentiation. DCPS doesn't track really but they use a lot of methods for differentiation in elementary school, including small groups according to levels. They will also sometimes send a kid testing way above grade level into a higher grade for that subject, or in once case I know of a school that created a multi-grade reading group for advanced readers in 2nd and 3rd that they did while classmates worked on phonics reinforcement. All of this is based on iReady scoring.

My kids are in elementary, but we have friends whose kids are in or entering MS EOTP (so not Deal or Hardy), and to the extend that these school do any form of tracking for math, iReady scores are their best tool for identifying which kids are ready for Algebra or Geometry. One great thing about iReady diagnostics is that once your child is in DCPS for several years, you can track trends, which means you can look at whether above-grade level kids just recently made a big jump versus a kid who has been consistently above grade level for 5 years, which can help understand whether a kid is truly ready for higher level work.

Parents getting iReady scores promptly is also a huge benefit in a school system that is not always transparent. I see parents complaining about getting CAPE scores months later but who cares? iReady is a better measure and you generally get them within days or, at most, a couple weeks of your kid taking their diagnostics. Fall and spring parent-teacher conferences are scheduled explicitly to follow on beginning and middle of the year iReady diagnostics so that you can discuss them with your child's teacher. Your child's diagnostic scores for the whole year are also published in their report card and are WAY more informative than the number grade given for reading and math. If your kid's teacher isn't providing the individual iReady scores in addition to the composite score in the report card, you should ask for it (but I'm pretty sure teachers are required to provide the detailed scores without being asked). This is one thing DCPS actually does well and I cannot believe some short-sighted parents are actually arguing to get rid of iReady. Talk about throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Idiotic.

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.

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.

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.

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.