m

Anonymous wrote:Had to beg my child’s teacher for my dc’s score. DC scores were substantially lower than the 4th grade assessment given last year in reading and math.

Never heard from the teacher last year about any problems and dc always had 3s/4s on work.

I'm sure your kid isn't the only one. Virtual learning was useless for many kids, so they have forgotten more than they have learned.

Had to beg my child’s teacher for my dc’s score. DC scores were substantially lower than the 4th grade assessment given last year in reading and math.

Never heard from the teacher last year about any problems and dc always had 3s/4s on work.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My spring DS’s are lower than my winter ones, so mine decreased as well, and I was really upset. The test are so long and boring I always end up just trying to finish quickly.

Upper ES child ended up with HS Statistics questions. Asked teacher, teacher said guess. Hard to care what score was when that happens, doesn't seem too reliable.

Our third grader ended up with math questions using exponents. He asked us what they were (he wrote down an example of the number in the question), we told him and he was bummed he didn't know because those would have been easy to solve. (shrugs)

This is actually a marker of a good test--they have a high ceiling. Your kids got those problems because it's adaptive and they correctly solved the problems of prior content. The test then shoots them a question at a higher level, if they get it correct they continue to get problems at that level. If they don't it drops back down until they do. The resulting score isn't a percentile of correct answers, it's an equation formulated on a relationship of question difficulty and accuracy.

Anonymous wrote:PP who flipped out about the Iready curriculum - I really thought they were trying to replace the whole curriculum with Iready- some districts in the country have! If it is just an intervention, I would be concerned that what the intervention kids need is actually more experience with concrete materials not a computer screen to make math more engaging and more easily understood, BUT as my kid is fine and no one in the county would listen to me anyway- I
ll be quiet and not run in a panic to Redfin. Thanks for the clarification- and yes sadly, I mean this seriously.

My understanding is they just use it as an assessment. Kids who need an intervention based on the assessment results have a range of recommendations--not iready. So no need to panic. As an assessment it's not bad--we've gotten my daughter's results and I thought they were informative. The problem is it's fairly time-consuming. But actually, running through a lot fundamental problems is really good for solidifying learning, so in some ways it's better to have this periodically than classroom instruction. Kids learn quite a lot through doing assessments--sometimes more than sitting through classroom instruction where there are a lot of distractions etc. I don't think of test-taking on foundational material as lost time. I think it's way better than having a teacher individually administer DRA because then there really is a lot of lost time while the other kids are getting tested. Students have work to do but it's generally not as intensive as taking a test.

I wasn't sure what to make of the test because the students only have access to their scores. I found this norm table which provides the percentiles for each score, which was very helpful. I thought my 2nd grade daughter was advanced before the test and she scored 95 percentile in both Math and Reading. It's certainly not the end all be all. I just kinda take it for what it's worth-another tool to help assess my kids performance. Besides, I think kids need to get comfortable with a variety of standardized tests from early.

https://i-readycentral.com/download/?res=5571&view_pdf=1

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My spring DS’s are lower than my winter ones, so mine decreased as well, and I was really upset. The test are so long and boring I always end up just trying to finish quickly.

Upper ES child ended up with HS Statistics questions. Asked teacher, teacher said guess. Hard to care what score was when that happens, doesn't seem too reliable.

Our third grader ended up with math questions using exponents. He asked us what they were (he wrote down an example of the number in the question), we told him and he was bummed he didn't know because those would have been easy to solve. (shrugs)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Devil's advocate for the test. FCPS needs someone or something external to show them the current situation is not working. I think at our school it has revealed that across the board the curriculum has gotten soft. Many kids are testing below where they should on iReady. As a parent, I think the curriculum at my kids' school is very, very weak. One of my kids picks things up super fast so he gets all of it. My other kid needs repetition, reinforcement and explicit teaching versus implicit and the school does none of those things with math or language arts. And it shows in iReady. The curriculum is weak compared to many publics across the country and iReady is given nationally so its metrics for success are national standards. FCPS is lagging way behind my friends' school districts in other areas and the iReady has shown it.

I agree completely. Even in the AAP forum, a lot of posters said that their AAP children were at or below grade level in iready. Of course, those parents still seemed to think that their kids needed to be in their own special gifted program and segregated from the gen ed kids.

It really seems like the majority of parents are pissed off about iready because they don't like seeing that their children are at or below grade level.

Bright children scoring below grade level indicates a failure of those children’s teachers to educate them.

BS. There are many reasons other than teaching kids score lower than expected. Mine flies through the test to play games when he is done.

Oh please. The games are really lame. And the teachers are notified if the kids go faster than expected.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Devil's advocate for the test. FCPS needs someone or something external to show them the current situation is not working. I think at our school it has revealed that across the board the curriculum has gotten soft. Many kids are testing below where they should on iReady. As a parent, I think the curriculum at my kids' school is very, very weak. One of my kids picks things up super fast so he gets all of it. My other kid needs repetition, reinforcement and explicit teaching versus implicit and the school does none of those things with math or language arts. And it shows in iReady. The curriculum is weak compared to many publics across the country and iReady is given nationally so its metrics for success are national standards. FCPS is lagging way behind my friends' school districts in other areas and the iReady has shown it.

I agree completely. Even in the AAP forum, a lot of posters said that their AAP children were at or below grade level in iready. Of course, those parents still seemed to think that their kids needed to be in their own special gifted program and segregated from the gen ed kids.

It really seems like the majority of parents are pissed off about iready because they don't like seeing that their children are at or below grade level.

Bright children scoring below grade level indicates a failure of those children’s teachers to educate them.

BS. There are many reasons other than teaching kids score lower than expected. Mine flies through the test to play games when he is done.

I am actually going to try to bribe my 5th grader and see how he does. Will try to force him use scratch paper and not rush through. I will report back in a couple weeks lol.

Anonymous wrote:He rushed through it because he was allowed to work play games at the end. Or at least that is what my kid admitted to doing.

My kid did that on MAP testing.

Anonymous wrote:My spring DS’s are lower than my winter ones, so mine decreased as well, and I was really upset. The test are so long and boring I always end up just trying to finish quickly.

Upper ES child ended up with HS Statistics questions. Asked teacher, teacher said guess. Hard to care what score was when that happens, doesn't seem too reliable.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Devil's advocate for the test. FCPS needs someone or something external to show them the current situation is not working. I think at our school it has revealed that across the board the curriculum has gotten soft. Many kids are testing below where they should on iReady. As a parent, I think the curriculum at my kids' school is very, very weak. One of my kids picks things up super fast so he gets all of it. My other kid needs repetition, reinforcement and explicit teaching versus implicit and the school does none of those things with math or language arts. And it shows in iReady. The curriculum is weak compared to many publics across the country and iReady is given nationally so its metrics for success are national standards. FCPS is lagging way behind my friends' school districts in other areas and the iReady has shown it.

I agree completely. Even in the AAP forum, a lot of posters said that their AAP children were at or below grade level in iready. Of course, those parents still seemed to think that their kids needed to be in their own special gifted program and segregated from the gen ed kids.

It really seems like the majority of parents are pissed off about iready because they don't like seeing that their children are at or below grade level.

Bright children scoring below grade level indicates a failure of those children’s teachers to educate them.

My spring DS’s are lower than my winter ones, so mine decreased as well, and I was really upset. The test are so long and boring I always end up just trying to finish quickly.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Devil's advocate for the test. FCPS needs someone or something external to show them the current situation is not working. I think at our school it has revealed that across the board the curriculum has gotten soft. Many kids are testing below where they should on iReady. As a parent, I think the curriculum at my kids' school is very, very weak. One of my kids picks things up super fast so he gets all of it. My other kid needs repetition, reinforcement and explicit teaching versus implicit and the school does none of those things with math or language arts. And it shows in iReady. The curriculum is weak compared to many publics across the country and iReady is given nationally so its metrics for success are national standards. FCPS is lagging way behind my friends' school districts in other areas and the iReady has shown it.

I agree completely. Even in the AAP forum, a lot of posters said that their AAP children were at or below grade level in iready. Of course, those parents still seemed to think that their kids needed to be in their own special gifted program and segregated from the gen ed kids.

It really seems like the majority of parents are pissed off about iready because they don't like seeing that their children are at or below grade level.

Exactly. That has been a huge issue with PARCC as well. People want their children to attend college but don't actually care about their kids getting a strong education to prepare for it.