Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Literacy Education topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
District data shows high counts in dyslexia screening; board hears literacy interventions
Summary
Raleigh County elementary director told the board that 478 K–3 students did not meet dyslexia cut scores in the tested sample and said second grade phonics weaknesses will be the focus of targeted interventions using UFLI and other supplemental curricula.
Ms. Blankenship, Director of Elementary and Early Childhood (speaker 9), told the board that the district administers I-Ready diagnostics and follows up with a dyslexia screener for students who do not meet cut scores. She reported that, in the sample reviewed for this meeting, 478 students did not meet the cut score out of 2,781 students tested across K–3.
"So for with second grade, we went back and looked and we feel like we are really weak. It was phonics and vocabulary and comprehension," Blankenship said, identifying second grade as an area of immediate concern and saying the district plans deeper work to intervene.
Blankenship described tools already in use, including UFLI in small group instruction, tier 2 and tier 3 interventions, and screening approaches that distinguish students with existing IEPs from those identified by the dyslexia screener. She explained that many students already receiving special education services may test above cut scores because they are already receiving supports, while other students who did not meet the cut scores are receiving SAT (intervention) services.
Board members pressed for additional breakdowns. One member noted the jump in the number of students identified for testing from 40 to roughly 232 in a grade cohort and asked for follow-up data about how many of those students later qualified for an identified disability. Blankenship agreed to provide more detailed statistics on qualification rates and earlier identification.
The board discussed curricular strength as a contributing factor: members noted concerns about adopted curriculum and about pandemic-era effects on early-childhood development, and asked staff to examine whether screening and earlier identification procedures can be improved to catch students sooner.
Next steps recorded in the meeting included a request for Blankenship to return with a breakdown of how many screened students ultimately tested as having a qualifying disability and for continued work on phonics-focused interventions.
