Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Early Literacy topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Division outlines literacy plan under Virginia Literacy Act; county reports reduced ‘high‑risk’ counts

Buchanan County Public Schools Board · August 14, 2024
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

District reading staff described implementation of the Virginia Literacy Act, use of approved core/supplemental programs (HMH, UFLY, Lexia, Ignite), the new VEIL screener and required 2½ hours/week intervention for students identified as high-risk; staff reported countywide identified students down to 117 from nearly 200.

Ruth Tester, the division reading and dyslexia advisor, summarized the district’s plan to implement the Virginia Literacy Act and described the instructional programs and screening tools the division will use. “So I'm Ruth Tester, and I'm the division reading dyslexia advisor for the county,” she said, and then outlined required program components and training.

Tester and other staff said the district will use the approved HMH core reading program with supplemental K–2 foundational curriculum UFLY, Lexia Core5 and Ignite for intervention. The district will administer the VEIL (Virginia Language and Learning Screening) to K–3 students three times a year, and any student identified as high risk will receive an intervention reading plan and 2½ additional hours of targeted instruction weekly.

Staff reported district-level improvement: the count of students identified as high-risk in K–3 declined to 117 districtwide from a higher starting figure (staff characterized the earlier total as nearly 200). Tester presented school-by-school percentages showing declines, for example a 16% decrease at Hurley and double-digit decreases at several elementary sites. Board members asked for a follow-up update; staff agreed to return with more data at a fall meeting (possible November update request).

Board members discussed tradeoffs involved with intervention time and pulling students for additional instruction; staff said interventions will be teacher-directed and integrated with core instruction rather than solely computer-based methods.