Savannah‑Chatham committee hears district literacy update; officials cite LETRS rollout, new screeners and midyear gains

The Savannah‑Chatham County Academic Excellence Committee received a detailed literacy update March 19 from district staff outlining state requirements, teacher training and early assessment results as the district implements the science of reading.

The presentation, led by Ms. Goldman, a district literacy official, summarized three state laws or proposals shaping the work, the district’s rollout of LETRS professional learning and HMH instructional materials, the state’s selection of AMIRA as a universal screener, and midyear assessment changes the district is using to track third‑grade reading. "This work is tied to our strategic priority number 1 related to students, their growth and achievement for choice filled futures," Ms. Goldman said.

Why it matters: Third‑grade reading proficiency is a central district key performance indicator and a stated predictor of later outcomes. Committee members pressed staff for clarity on how different tests and measures relate to each other, what counts as a reading deficiency, and how interventions and potential retention policy would be applied.

Most important facts

- State requirements and bills: Staff described two laws already driving the work — House Bill 538 (the Georgia Early Literacy Act) and Senate Bill 48 (the Georgia dyslexia law) — and said House Bill 307, which would consolidate those requirements, was pending in the legislature. Ms. Goldman said the legislative session ends April 4 and the district is watching for final action.

- Screeners and reporting: The district confirmed the AMIRA screener was selected at the state level and that the state will provide the AMIRA screener free to districts; staff said they are awaiting implementation details. The presentation also referenced the district’s use of I‑Ready and EMIRA (the universal screener referenced in state law) for local monitoring.

- Assessment snapshots: On state GMAS reading metrics, staff cited third‑grade results of about 58% at or above grade level for the 2024 year and said the district’s 2026 goal is 65%. Using I‑Ready Lexile measures, staff reported growth for third grade from 47% at or above grade level at the start of the year to 60% at midyear.

- LETRS and professional learning: The district said just over 1,000 teachers began LETRS last year; more than 900 had completed the end‑of‑unit‑1 posttest with an average score of 92 (the pretest average was reported as 56). The district is training roughly 40 facilitator trainers and said almost 100 administrators completed a LETRS administrators pathway. District staff said they have extended LETRS beyond K–3 to K–5 and to pre‑K early‑childhood modules.

- Curriculum, coaching and technology: The district reported broad rollout of HMH curriculum supports (about 900 K–5 elementary teachers and 325 secondary teachers participating in HMH teacher modules), on‑site coaching visits from HMH, and on‑demand Coachly coaching for teachers. In a video excerpt, fifth‑grade teacher Latoya McDonald described Coachly support and district slides showed her class reduced the share of students two grade levels or more below from 78% to 34% and raised students on grade level from 17% to 33%.

- Targeted interventions: Staff described an RTI framework aligned to the laws, vetting of intervention materials using a state rubric, and named Wilson Just Words and Lexia Core5 for specific tiered supports (Wilson for older students still needing foundational phonics; Lexia for ESOL/adaptive intervention). Staff said they have developed decision trees and parent‑notification protocols tied to screening results.

Discussion and unanswered items

Committee members repeatedly asked for clarity about how different measures relate: GMAS (an annual, statewide ELA assessment that combines reading and writing), Lexile scores pulled from the GMAS reading and vocabulary portion, I‑Ready Lexile estimates used for interim monitoring, and the state’s universal screener requirements. Ms. Goldman cautioned the measures are not interchangeable and recommended triangulating data.

Members raised retention and promotion policy questions: several members argued for stronger interventions (including expanded summer or intensive offerings) and clearer criteria before any retention decisions. Ms. Goldman said promotional decisions are made by school‑level committees that consider multiple factors and emphasized that retention without targeted intervention is not best practice. Dr. Watts framed the timeline for impact: "This is a long game. This is not something that I'm coming out of the gate saying we're gonna have this grand growth or, you know, increase in proficiency," he said.

Community partnerships and family engagement

District staff described partnerships with United Way (Reading Buddies), Love Mentors, Georgia Southern (training for volunteers), Live Oak Public Libraries (student play card and contests), Curtis V. Cooper Health Centers (books and Little Free Libraries tied to wellness visits), and an Innovative Approaches to Literacy grant that includes Beanstack reading supports and free books for identified schools. Staff also described coordination to channel volunteer interest through established programs so volunteers receive consistent training and materials.

Next steps and monitoring

Staff said the AMIRA implementation details remain pending, the third AMIRA/EMIRA screening window runs April 8–May (district said it will report those results), and the district is conducting program evaluations of I‑Ready, LETRS and HMH implementation and teacher feedback. The district also plans to align instruction to new state ELA standards that roll out next school year. Ms. Goldman said the district is analyzing return on investment, implementation fidelity, and teacher feedback to inform adjustments.

Administrative note

The committee approved the meeting agenda by motion moved by Miss Hall and seconded by Miss Campbell; staff recorded a voice vote with no opposition reported. No formal policy changes or retention rules were enacted at the meeting.

Taper: Committee members requested additional future briefings on promotion/retention criteria, family and adult literacy outreach, and plans to scale intensive summer or midyear interventions for students identified as significantly behind.