Nevada Education Department outlines changes to Read by Grade 3 assessment options

The Senate Committee on Education convened on June 1, 2025, to discuss significant changes to student assessment protocols in Nevada, particularly concerning the Read by Grade 3 Act. The meeting focused on the implications of allowing school districts to opt for alternative assessments while ensuring compliance with federal mandates under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA).

Key discussions highlighted the role of the Nevada Department of Education (NDE) in overseeing these assessments. Officials clarified that while districts may choose different assessment tools, the NDE will maintain oversight to ensure that all students, especially those requiring additional support, are adequately assessed. This oversight is crucial to ensure compliance with federal laws designed to protect students' educational rights.

The conversation also touched on the current use of the Measures of Academic Progress (MAP) assessment and its effectiveness compared to other tools like I Ready. Some educators expressed concerns about the redundancy of multiple assessments, suggesting that the current system may lead to over-assessment without providing clear benefits to student learning.

State Superintendent Steve Canavero explained that the MAP assessment is used to identify students who qualify for additional services under the Read by Grade 3 Act. He emphasized the need for a standardized approach while allowing districts the flexibility to choose assessments that meet state criteria. The committee discussed the potential for a pilot program to test new assessments, with the goal of ensuring that any changes would not disrupt the educational process.

The meeting concluded with a call for support for Assembly Bill 386, which aims to provide districts with more options for student assessments while ensuring that all necessary standards are met. The committee's discussions underscored the importance of balancing flexibility in assessment choices with the need for rigorous oversight to protect student interests. Further steps will involve rule-making processes to establish cut scores for any new assessments adopted by districts.