Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the K 2 Reading Screening topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bassett Unified recommends Amplify MClass DIBELS as Senate Bill 114 screener; board to act before June 30
Summary
District staff recommended the Amplify MClass (DIBELS & Lectura) screener to meet California’s SB 114 requirement to screen K–2 students for reading difficulties; the recommendation is advisory and the board did not take final adoption action at the meeting.
Bassett Unified staff recommended using the Amplify MClass (DIBELS and Lectura) screener to meet California Senate Bill 114 requirements and said the board will need to adopt a screening instrument before June 30, 2025.
The district presentation outlined the law’s timeline and the local decision process. “Under this law, districts are required to adopt a screener at a public meeting before 06/30/2025,” a staff presenter said, summarizing the mandate and the district’s obligations for parent notice and follow-up. The presenter recommended MClass with DIBELS and MClass Lectura from Amplify Learning because the team judged it research‑based, familiar to staff, available in English and Spanish, and suitable for one‑on‑one administration.
Why it matters: SB 114 (effective 01/01/2024) requires universal screening of kindergarten through second grade students for early signs of reading difficulties, including dyslexia, and creates timelines for parental notification and reporting. Districts that do not adopt a state‑approved screener could fail to meet that LEA deadline; staff told the board they were bringing a recommendation so the board could act before the June 30 deadline.
What presenters described: District staff said the State Board of Education convened an expert panel that produced a list of approved screeners. The presenter listed the four state‑approved instruments discussed with Bassett staff: Mira Learning’s Mira (K–2, English/Spanish), Amplify’s MClass DIBELS and MClass Lectura (K–2, English/Spanish), Stanford’s ROAR (grades 1–2, English only), and a UCSF Dyslexia Center product (K–2, English/Spanish). The presenter said the district did not evaluate ROAR because it does not include kindergarten or Spanish translations, and that the local team of early literacy TOSAs and educational services staff used a rubric (research basis, reporting, data integration and fit for students) and an anonymous survey to reach a unanimous recommendation.
What the recommendation would require: Staff described operational requirements tied to SB 114: notify parents at least 15 days before screening; screen K–2 annually beginning in the 2025–26 school year; and share results and next‑step intervention plans with parents within 45 days after screening. The presenter emphasized that screening results do not by themselves determine special education or Section 504 eligibility but may inform referrals for additional evaluation.
Board questions and comments: Board members expressed support and asked about cultural bias, older students, and next steps. “Was there any comments or information given to us about that?” Board Member Norma Gonzalez asked about cultural bias in the DIBELS instrument. The presenter said the team was assured the Spanish translation was not word‑for‑word and that the district asked vendors questions about cultural and linguistic appropriateness but did not recall detailed counseling specifically on cultural bias. Board Member Dolores Rivera spoke from personal experience on dyslexia: “Dyslexia is, a real thing. Right. It it does affect them in their journey.” Another board member asked whether older students could be tested; staff replied the law mandates K–2 but the chosen product can be used through sixth grade if the district later elects to screen older students.
Next steps: Staff told the board the district was “bringing this information so that the board can take action before June 30.” At this meeting staff presented a formal recommendation but did not record a formal board adoption of a single vendor on the public record. Staff said they will return with the formal adoption item for the board to vote on before the statutory deadline.
Implementation details and constraints: The presenter said the team valued one‑on‑one teacher‑administered assessment to improve accuracy, data integration with district systems, and availability in Spanish. They noted the screening will prompt evidence‑based literacy supports, such as tutoring, RTI/MTSS interventions and progress monitoring where needed. The staff presentation also noted staff familiarity with DIBELS in special education practice as a reason for recommending MClass.
