Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pp. Just to clarify I said iready was a higher quality form of screen time than videos, not a high quality form of education.

Videos on a screen are used for whole group, is iReady whole group? No. So you are comparing apples to oranges, it’s also not a great form of ‘differentiation.’ It’s lazy, and kids do not deserve for that to be more than a tiny slice of the differentiation pie.

As was mentioned above, kids have always finished early and needed work to fill the time until the class was done. When I was a kid, that often meant word problems on flash cards, reading in the back of the room, or extra print outs of worksheets. So in that scenario, I think iReady (or programs like it) are better. Obviously small groups and time with a teacher or other activities are great, but there will always be time when that isn't an option.

There are other things to do besides iReady if you have an early finisher. Also if the child already knows everything you have just taught what should be happening is they should be working on something a little different in the first place, then often times there’s no need for such a task.
I am a younger millennial and my teacher wouldn’t just give me sheets in the back of the room, I’d get pulled out with other kids who were ahead, among other things.

I feel parents in higher achieving schools should expect that from the school. That is why we lose kids to charter schools, who I get play by another set of rules despite being ‘public’ schools. We don’t want to focus just on the students who need the most support, we have to support them all.
And note, I’m not saying iReady is trash but it doesn’t help me differentiate.

My kids' school (Title 1) did pull kids out for enrichment as well as support, and sometimes let groups go into older classrooms as well. But with classrooms of +/-25 kids, those type of groups cannot be happening all of the time, so there will be some down time where independent work is necessary. It sounds like you are an educator, and I agree that iReady should not be the only way you differentiate, but if it isn't being used to give your higher kids more challenging problems and your kids who are struggling more remedial practice, then you are probably using it wrong?
I hope in the future kids will be grouped based on what content they are learning instead of by age, but that won't happen anytime in the near future.

No, I’m not using iReady incorrectly, it’s idiot proof. I am saying I utilize other tools and methods that have proven to show more results.
Also we tried to group by skill but DCPS considers this a ‘bad practice’ to use outside of it seems special education.

I am hoping we are utilizing tech for teachers to support students, not using tech as a crutch to teach skills because we don’t know how to make time.

To note I’m not blaming other teachers or parents. DCPS needs to do a better job leading and supporting, instead of buying every boxed SEL and tech program it thinks is going to fill the gaps.

I'm actually pretty pleased with iReady's differentiation and curious what more you think DCPS schools could/would possibly offer to kids who are solidly ahead. Your posts have a lot of buzzwords but are totally light on specifics ("other tools and methods"... like?). It's just not realistic that high achievers are getting pullouts more often than once a week per subject at current staffing levels.

+1
Was a teacher for 10+ years and I agree

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pp. Just to clarify I said iready was a higher quality form of screen time than videos, not a high quality form of education.

Videos on a screen are used for whole group, is iReady whole group? No. So you are comparing apples to oranges, it’s also not a great form of ‘differentiation.’ It’s lazy, and kids do not deserve for that to be more than a tiny slice of the differentiation pie.

As was mentioned above, kids have always finished early and needed work to fill the time until the class was done. When I was a kid, that often meant word problems on flash cards, reading in the back of the room, or extra print outs of worksheets. So in that scenario, I think iReady (or programs like it) are better. Obviously small groups and time with a teacher or other activities are great, but there will always be time when that isn't an option.

There are other things to do besides iReady if you have an early finisher. Also if the child already knows everything you have just taught what should be happening is they should be working on something a little different in the first place, then often times there’s no need for such a task.
I am a younger millennial and my teacher wouldn’t just give me sheets in the back of the room, I’d get pulled out with other kids who were ahead, among other things.

I feel parents in higher achieving schools should expect that from the school. That is why we lose kids to charter schools, who I get play by another set of rules despite being ‘public’ schools. We don’t want to focus just on the students who need the most support, we have to support them all.
And note, I’m not saying iReady is trash but it doesn’t help me differentiate.

My kids' school (Title 1) did pull kids out for enrichment as well as support, and sometimes let groups go into older classrooms as well. But with classrooms of +/-25 kids, those type of groups cannot be happening all of the time, so there will be some down time where independent work is necessary. It sounds like you are an educator, and I agree that iReady should not be the only way you differentiate, but if it isn't being used to give your higher kids more challenging problems and your kids who are struggling more remedial practice, then you are probably using it wrong?
I hope in the future kids will be grouped based on what content they are learning instead of by age, but that won't happen anytime in the near future.

No, I’m not using iReady incorrectly, it’s idiot proof. I am saying I utilize other tools and methods that have proven to show more results.
Also we tried to group by skill but DCPS considers this a ‘bad practice’ to use outside of it seems special education.

I am hoping we are utilizing tech for teachers to support students, not using tech as a crutch to teach skills because we don’t know how to make time.

To note I’m not blaming other teachers or parents. DCPS needs to do a better job leading and supporting, instead of buying every boxed SEL and tech program it thinks is going to fill the gaps.

I'm actually pretty pleased with iReady's differentiation and curious what more you think DCPS schools could/would possibly offer to kids who are solidly ahead. Your posts have a lot of buzzwords but are totally light on specifics ("other tools and methods"... like?). It's just not realistic that high achievers are getting pullouts more often than once a week per subject at current staffing levels.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pp. Just to clarify I said iready was a higher quality form of screen time than videos, not a high quality form of education.

Videos on a screen are used for whole group, is iReady whole group? No. So you are comparing apples to oranges, it’s also not a great form of ‘differentiation.’ It’s lazy, and kids do not deserve for that to be more than a tiny slice of the differentiation pie.

As was mentioned above, kids have always finished early and needed work to fill the time until the class was done. When I was a kid, that often meant word problems on flash cards, reading in the back of the room, or extra print outs of worksheets. So in that scenario, I think iReady (or programs like it) are better. Obviously small groups and time with a teacher or other activities are great, but there will always be time when that isn't an option.

There are other things to do besides iReady if you have an early finisher. Also if the child already knows everything you have just taught what should be happening is they should be working on something a little different in the first place, then often times there’s no need for such a task.
I am a younger millennial and my teacher wouldn’t just give me sheets in the back of the room, I’d get pulled out with other kids who were ahead, among other things.

I feel parents in higher achieving schools should expect that from the school. That is why we lose kids to charter schools, who I get play by another set of rules despite being ‘public’ schools. We don’t want to focus just on the students who need the most support, we have to support them all.
And note, I’m not saying iReady is trash but it doesn’t help me differentiate.

My kids' school (Title 1) did pull kids out for enrichment as well as support, and sometimes let groups go into older classrooms as well. But with classrooms of +/-25 kids, those type of groups cannot be happening all of the time, so there will be some down time where independent work is necessary. It sounds like you are an educator, and I agree that iReady should not be the only way you differentiate, but if it isn't being used to give your higher kids more challenging problems and your kids who are struggling more remedial practice, then you are probably using it wrong?
I hope in the future kids will be grouped based on what content they are learning instead of by age, but that won't happen anytime in the near future.

No, I’m not using iReady incorrectly, it’s idiot proof. I am saying I utilize other tools and methods that have proven to show more results.
Also we tried to group by skill but DCPS considers this a ‘bad practice’ to use outside of it seems special education.

I am hoping we are utilizing tech for teachers to support students, not using tech as a crutch to teach skills because we don’t know how to make time.

To note I’m not blaming other teachers or parents. DCPS needs to do a better job leading and supporting, instead of buying every boxed SEL and tech program it thinks is going to fill the gaps.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pp. Just to clarify I said iready was a higher quality form of screen time than videos, not a high quality form of education.

Videos on a screen are used for whole group, is iReady whole group? No. So you are comparing apples to oranges, it’s also not a great form of ‘differentiation.’ It’s lazy, and kids do not deserve for that to be more than a tiny slice of the differentiation pie.

As was mentioned above, kids have always finished early and needed work to fill the time until the class was done. When I was a kid, that often meant word problems on flash cards, reading in the back of the room, or extra print outs of worksheets. So in that scenario, I think iReady (or programs like it) are better. Obviously small groups and time with a teacher or other activities are great, but there will always be time when that isn't an option.

There are other things to do besides iReady if you have an early finisher. Also if the child already knows everything you have just taught what should be happening is they should be working on something a little different in the first place, then often times there’s no need for such a task.
I am a younger millennial and my teacher wouldn’t just give me sheets in the back of the room, I’d get pulled out with other kids who were ahead, among other things.

I feel parents in higher achieving schools should expect that from the school. That is why we lose kids to charter schools, who I get play by another set of rules despite being ‘public’ schools. We don’t want to focus just on the students who need the most support, we have to support them all.
And note, I’m not saying iReady is trash but it doesn’t help me differentiate.

My kids' school (Title 1) did pull kids out for enrichment as well as support, and sometimes let groups go into older classrooms as well. But with classrooms of +/-25 kids, those type of groups cannot be happening all of the time, so there will be some down time where independent work is necessary. It sounds like you are an educator, and I agree that iReady should not be the only way you differentiate, but if it isn't being used to give your higher kids more challenging problems and your kids who are struggling more remedial practice, then you are probably using it wrong?
I hope in the future kids will be grouped based on what content they are learning instead of by age, but that won't happen anytime in the near future.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pp. Just to clarify I said iready was a higher quality form of screen time than videos, not a high quality form of education.

Videos on a screen are used for whole group, is iReady whole group? No. So you are comparing apples to oranges, it’s also not a great form of ‘differentiation.’ It’s lazy, and kids do not deserve for that to be more than a tiny slice of the differentiation pie.

As was mentioned above, kids have always finished early and needed work to fill the time until the class was done. When I was a kid, that often meant word problems on flash cards, reading in the back of the room, or extra print outs of worksheets. So in that scenario, I think iReady (or programs like it) are better. Obviously small groups and time with a teacher or other activities are great, but there will always be time when that isn't an option.

There are other things to do besides iReady if you have an early finisher. Also if the child already knows everything you have just taught what should be happening is they should be working on something a little different in the first place, then often times there’s no need for such a task.
I am a younger millennial and my teacher wouldn’t just give me sheets in the back of the room, I’d get pulled out with other kids who were ahead, among other things.

I feel parents in higher achieving schools should expect that from the school. That is why we lose kids to charter schools, who I get play by another set of rules despite being ‘public’ schools. We don’t want to focus just on the students who need the most support, we have to support them all.
And note, I’m not saying iReady is trash but it doesn’t help me differentiate.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pp. Just to clarify I said iready was a higher quality form of screen time than videos, not a high quality form of education.

Videos on a screen are used for whole group, is iReady whole group? No. So you are comparing apples to oranges, it’s also not a great form of ‘differentiation.’ It’s lazy, and kids do not deserve for that to be more than a tiny slice of the differentiation pie.

As was mentioned above, kids have always finished early and needed work to fill the time until the class was done. When I was a kid, that often meant word problems on flash cards, reading in the back of the room, or extra print outs of worksheets. So in that scenario, I think iReady (or programs like it) are better. Obviously small groups and time with a teacher or other activities are great, but there will always be time when that isn't an option.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pp. Just to clarify I said iready was a higher quality form of screen time than videos, not a high quality form of education.

Videos on a screen are used for whole group, is iReady whole group? No. So you are comparing apples to oranges, it’s also not a great form of ‘differentiation.’ It’s lazy, and kids do not deserve for that to be more than a tiny slice of the differentiation pie.

Anonymous wrote:Pp. Just to clarify I said iready was a higher quality form of screen time than videos, not a high quality form of education.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kids went to a title 1 DCPS and later a non-title 1 DCPS elementary school.

In my anecdotal experience there was more screen time at the non-title 1, but the screen time was of higher quality. At the title 1 DCPS there were teachers, mostly specials teachers (library, music), playing videos as part of their lecture. At the non-title 1 DCPS there was more time spent on learning apps like iready, particularly for differentiation. I think my child may have spent up to an 1 hour or more per day on iready at the non-title 1 DCPS based on the number of units completed.

My children did not attend aftercare, but other parents at the title 1 DCPS complained that the amount and quality of the screen time (i.e movies) was the worst during aftercare (in comparison my understanding is there is no screen time at the non-title 1 DCPS aftercare, different providers).

I am not posting the exact schools because it would be identifying.

Lol @iReady being considered ‘differentiation.’ I’m switching to a non-title 1 school, they don’t even have to try.

What does this mean?

Of course iReady allows for differentiation -- it's adaptive. My kid was able to work way above grade level in math, and iReady could tell exactly where he was in eag sub-category (one grade up in one, three grades up in another).

And what does it mean that a non-title 1 doesn't have to try? We are at one -- there is still a wide range of ability (though the floor is higher). Teachers still have to differentiate.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kids went to a title 1 DCPS and later a non-title 1 DCPS elementary school.

In my anecdotal experience there was more screen time at the non-title 1, but the screen time was of higher quality. At the title 1 DCPS there were teachers, mostly specials teachers (library, music), playing videos as part of their lecture. At the non-title 1 DCPS there was more time spent on learning apps like iready, particularly for differentiation. I think my child may have spent up to an 1 hour or more per day on iready at the non-title 1 DCPS based on the number of units completed.

My children did not attend aftercare, but other parents at the title 1 DCPS complained that the amount and quality of the screen time (i.e movies) was the worst during aftercare (in comparison my understanding is there is no screen time at the non-title 1 DCPS aftercare, different providers).

I am not posting the exact schools because it would be identifying.

Lol @iReady being considered ‘differentiation.’ I’m switching to a non-title 1 school, they don’t even have to try.

Anonymous wrote:My kids went to a title 1 DCPS and later a non-title 1 DCPS elementary school.

In my anecdotal experience there was more screen time at the non-title 1, but the screen time was of higher quality. At the title 1 DCPS there were teachers, mostly specials teachers (library, music), playing videos as part of their lecture. At the non-title 1 DCPS there was more time spent on learning apps like iready, particularly for differentiation. I think my child may have spent up to an 1 hour or more per day on iready at the non-title 1 DCPS based on the number of units completed.

My children did not attend aftercare, but other parents at the title 1 DCPS complained that the amount and quality of the screen time (i.e movies) was the worst during aftercare (in comparison my understanding is there is no screen time at the non-title 1 DCPS aftercare, different providers).

I am not posting the exact schools because it would be identifying.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Giving devices to elementary school children is an excellent way to destroy their attention spans. Don't complain when they won't read a book.

I have read only 10 books in my life. There are so many other ways to get information. Books are boring, the world is not.

Adults who brag about not reading is so strange.