Scott County Schools report strong I-Ready gains; district outpaces state and nation
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
District presenters said end-of-year I-Ready diagnostics show most grade levels met typical growth, with Georgetown Middle up 123% toward typical growth and district green placement rising substantially in math and reading compared with state and national averages.
Scott County Board of Education officials on June 13 reviewed end-of-year I-Ready diagnostic results and a professional development plan that district staff say show meaningful student progress across grade levels.
Presenters told the board that most grade levels met or exceeded the I-Ready typical growth benchmark in mathematics and reading. Georgetown Middle School posted 123% toward its typical growth goal and Garth Elementary 122%; Scott County Middle School’s median was reported at roughly 167% toward typical growth. Districtwide, the presenter reported green placement in math rose from about 20% in the fall to 54% in spring; in reading green placement rose from 34% to 61%.
Wendy, the staff presenter for the I-Ready review, framed those results as validation of the district’s first-year work implementing I-Ready math and expanded reading supports. She outlined follow-up supports planned for next year: three dedicated elementary PLC days with an I-Ready professional learning representative, continued cohort-based professional learning, full implementation of illustrative math at middle school and Algebra I, and continued use of CommonLit 360 at the middle level.
The board heard that, by the presenter’s account, the district’s spring green-placement percentages exceeded both state and national averages: Scott County reported ~53% green placement in math versus 48% at the state level and 47% nationally; in reading the district reported 61% versus 55% statewide and 51% nationally. Presenters cautioned that I-Ready norms changed year over year, which complicates direct year-to-year comparisons, and they described stretch-growth goals (30–35% target) versus typical-growth expectations (70% target).
District leaders said the results will guide targeted professional development and continued use of multi-tiered supports. The presentation closed with an invitation for board members to review the detailed charts and to ask district staff for follow-up on grade- or school-level questions.
The board had no further questions and moved on to the agenda’s business items.