Parents and teachers urge caution on I-Ready use; parent recounts long IEP fight

At the Dec. 8 Cincinnati Board of Education meeting, public commenters urged the district to address special-education delays and to reconsider how it uses the I-Ready assessment.

A parent, Danny Burris, told the board his children waited years to receive appropriate IEP services for ADHD and autism, saying he had to escalate requests to district leadership and send certified letters to principals before services were addressed.

Kathy Berlue, an alumna and Walnut Hills alumni-board member, asked the board to review the district’s use of the I-Ready diagnostic for selective-admission processes after hearing—by her account—that fewer students from inner-city schools met the new I-Ready criteria than under the prior Iowa test, a change she said could reduce access to selective programs.

Julie Sellers, president of the Cincinnati Federation of Teachers, provided an extended evidence-based critique of I-Ready. Sellers told the board that I-Ready is an adaptive, computer-based screening tool sensitive to student effort and testing conditions and should not be treated as a single-source, high-stakes measure. She cited independent reviews (including ESSA findings) noting limited validation for I-Ready’s reading and math diagnostics, recommended using I-Ready as one data point alongside teacher observation and other assessments, and urged further consultation with teachers and the district’s Education Initiative Panel before placing diagnostic scores on report cards.

The board acknowledged the concerns and Vice President Bolton and staff offered to provide written responses and further discussion in January.