Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the K 12 Assessment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Oldham County presents winter i‑Ready snapshot showing gains and flagged middle‑school reading group
Summary
District staff told the board the second-year i‑Ready assessment shows year‑over‑year improvement across most grades in reading and math but highlighted an unexpected zero median growth result for a subgroup of middle‑school students already at or above grade level.
Dr. Smith, instructional presenter for Oldham County Schools, told the board on Jan. 27 that the district’s winter i‑Ready administration — given in December before winter break — shows broad year‑over‑year gains in both reading and math.
“The dotted line is the national median percentile,” Dr. Smith said as she reviewed district scatterplots comparing performance and growth. “One year ago we were somewhere in the 50 to 60 percentile range and you can see that all of those dots have moved over 1 column in our overall performance.”
Why it matters: the board heard that most grade levels moved from roughly the 50–60th percentile into the 60–70th percentile compared with the prior year, and principals are using the diagnostic data to regroup students for interventions.
Details: Dr. Smith said the district is using i‑Ready’s MyPath personalized lessons and that the district’s goal is about 30 minutes per week of targeted instruction. She reported grade‑level medians for math and reading and walked trustees through subgroup breakdowns by race, English‑learner status and special education support.
One subgroup drew particular attention: “If I was already at or above sixth grade and I was 1 of those 312 students … the middle student did not continue the trajectory of growth. It came back to us at 0,” Dr. Smith said, referring to the median (middle) student in the mid‑/above‑grade‑level band for grades 6–8 in reading.
Dr. Smith characterized that trio of zeros as a “flashing light” the district will investigate with middle‑school principals and teachers. She said staff will ask students about testing conditions and examine classroom practice and test engagement to explain why the median showed no growth for that particular group.
Board members asked for clarification about growth targets and timing. A board member asked whether midyear expectations vary; Dr. Smith replied: “We shoot at the middle point of the year, we shoot for 50% … that means you're on target.” She also described “stretch growth,” an aspirational target intended for students who are well behind.
Context and next steps: Dr. Smith said the winter test is a snapshot and that the district will monitor intervention group results and the April re‑administration to see whether the flagged group returns to expected trajectories. The presentation material and tables shown to the board separate students by start‑of‑year status (three or more levels behind, two levels behind, one level behind, early on grade level, mid/above), and principals will unpack results at the building level.
Ending: The board did not take action on instructional policy at the meeting; the presentation was an informational instructional session and staff will report follow‑up findings as principals review the flagged subgroup’s classroom data.
