Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Instruction topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
District MPSS report shows mixed fidelity; trustees press on i-Ready use, access and resourcing
Summary
Officials reported baseline fidelity for Tier 1 instruction (math 72%, ELA 69%), inter-rater agreement improvements and that fewer than half of below-grade students meet the i-Ready 30-minute/week fidelity threshold; trustees pressed for ROI, access (Chromebook) and clearer resource accounting.
District leaders presented a monitoring update on Multi-Tiered Systems of Support (MTSS), reporting mixed implementation fidelity and prompting trustees to demand follow-up data on outcomes and resourcing.
Dr. Nelson, who led the MTSS presentation, described the district's alignment to the Ohio Department of Education integrated MTSS model and shared baseline measures from learning walks: math fidelity at 72% and ELA at 69%. She also described inter-rater agreement on observation ratings that began at roughly 0.44, dipped to 0.25, then rose into the low–mid 0.6 range after calibration work.
Officials used i-Ready participation as a measurable Tier 2 fidelity indicator. They reported that, for students identified below grade level, about 42% used the individualized i-Ready pathway in ELA with the district's fidelity threshold (at least 30 minutes per week and 70% post-lesson accuracy) and nearly 48% did so in math. Dr. Nelson said those who meet the fidelity thresholds tend to outperform peers over time, and that the district is running an academic return-on-investment analysis to show longer-term effects.
Trustees pressed on three topics: how fidelity is measured, whether i-Ready should be required, and whether the system is adequately resourced. Board members pushed for longitudinal data: "Of the kids who start out in red in August, how many are out of red by May?" one trustee asked. Presenters said i-Ready reports can produce cohort trend data and that students who meet minimum time and performance thresholds have repeatedly exceeded typical growth, but conceded site-by-site reporting and aggregation for all interventions are more complex.
Trustees also asked about access barriers. Several members asked whether students have sufficient Chromebook or home access so i-Ready can be used outside class time; district staff said access varies and that the district is studying participation barriers while also attempting to schedule intervention time during the school day.
On resourcing, officials said the district spends about $5 million annually on curriculum and materials tied to Tier 1–3 implementation (example purchases named included HMH and Curriculum Associates math resources) and that planned procurements/RFPs will reassess material choices and total investment in the coming fiscal cycle; staff said further investment may be required to sustain fidelity at scale.
After extended questioning, the board recorded a roll-call vote in favor of accepting the guardrail one (support intervention systems) monitoring report. Trustees asked staff to return with the requested longitudinal outcome measures, clearer fidelity definitions that reconcile observation- and student-level measures, and a resource map that shows where MTSS-related dollars are allocated by school and program.
The board then moved to executive session for personnel matters and adjourned the public meeting.
