Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Curriculum Adoption topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Rochester presenters recommend phased adoption of i-Ready math and StudySync ELA
Summary
At the May 13 Rochester City School District board meeting, staff recommended a phased rollout of i-Ready mathematics (15 schools in phase 1) and StudySync for ELA after pilot reviews; board members pressed for comparative data, budget clarity and parent access to materials before a May 22 vote.
The Rochester City School District on May 13 presented a recommended curriculum adoption plan that would phase in the i-Ready mathematics curriculum in 15 elementary schools this fall and replace ELA materials with StudySync after a multi-stage pilot and review.
District curriculum staff said the math adoption emphasizes conceptual instruction and student discourse over solely computational skills. "The same principles that you use, that you used to call in the old days engineering by design that nowadays we call inquiry ... So the difference is that you're looking at conceptual math versus computational math," one presenter said during the overview.
The presentation said 15 schools will begin phase 1 of the math adoption, with the 15 pilot schools serving as model classrooms and "turnkey" resource centers for later cohorts. Staff described a cohort-based professional development plan that will train teacher leaders and administrators during the summer, use pre- and post-assessments, and host ongoing cohort meetings to share implementation practices.
District staff also recommended StudySync for ELA after piloting several options. The presentation cited 303 pilot student surveys and 26 pilot teachers systemwide; staff said students reported StudySync felt "clear, helpful, and engaging," and that StudySync provided extended writing time, vocabulary development and novel choices for units.
Board members and parent representatives raised several questions. Commissioner Griffin said, "There has been a lot of complaints about I Ready," and asked for side-by-side comparisons with other curricula and the rubric used to evaluate vendors. The presenter replied that the committee applied vendor pilots, a rubric, and an internal application of the New York University scorecard and that materials "completely align to the next generation standards." She said the district would share the rubric and supporting documents with board members and that commissioners would have access to the competing curricula before any vote.
On family access and languages, the presenter said family resources in the selected curricula are available in Spanish and English and that the district’s existing translation services can provide additional language access; a parent representative confirmed she saw live links to materials in both languages.
The presentation discussed costs for manipulatives and materials but did not specify a total contract price in the public remarks; staff noted a curricular adoption budget line has been dedicated for next year. Commissioners asked staff to add a board question about which budget line will fund the adoption and how the contract would be maintained under future budget pressures.
Staff emphasized that curricula are inputs within the district’s broader effort to improve student outcomes and that adoption is not a panacea: "A curriculum doesn't solve all the issues ... a curriculum has to be adaptive and flexible and guaranteed," a presenter said. The superintendent and staff described supports including instructional coaches, teacher leaders, model classrooms, and ongoing professional development.
The board was told a formal vote is planned after board members have had a chance to review full materials; a date of May 22 was mentioned for an upcoming vote window. Staff said pilot comparisons, the rubric, and sample materials will be posted for commissioners and the public.
