Southwest Washington Education (K-12)

"The past was erased, the erasure was forgotten, the lie became the truth." - George Orwell

You are here: Home / Testing / iReady Testing….What is it and is it useful or just another waste of time? Updated October 20, 2020

By Leave a Comment

iReady Testing….What is it and is it useful or just another waste of time? Updated October 20, 2020

Update: October 20, 2020

Several more articles that you may find useful:

https://mathexchanges.wordpress.com/2018/06/14/why-iready-is-dangerous/ 

https://tultican.com/2019/11/23/i-ready-sells-50-years-old-education-failure/   

Update: December 29, 2018

The Vancouver school district is moving to introduce iReady testing…in kindergarten! Yes…the 5 year olds will be asked to use a computer to complete the testing. In addition the district is planning on giving the iReady test…MONTHLY! Why? So they can train children for the SBAc annual test. So they will dramatically expand testing in the name of “gaming” the SBAc to try and improve falling testing scores. No matter that the iReady and SBAc have no value or validity. Please…Please reach out to your local school district and tell them…yes tell them…to stop this testing and focus on teaching rather than testing them into oblivion.

Are you ready for iReady?

Update: We were just apprised of a new study on iReady. Here’s the link so you can download the .pdf file: i-Ready Are You_

If you don’t want to take the time to ready the study here’s the author’s synopsis:

During this study, I had several findings. They are that a) students had more negative experiences and off task behaviors than positive experiences and on task behaviors when using i–Ready, b) positive experiences do not lead to on task behaviors, c) i-Ready does not provide opportunities for student choice, and d) i-Ready does not support the development of 21st century skills.

iReady is a testing system that consists of a set of tests and support materials designed to work with Common Core. Complete details can be found at Curriculum Associates website: http://www.curriculumassociates.com/default.aspx

In a nutshell what is it? According to their website: It’s Adaptive Growth Measure & Diagnostic. A single K–12 adaptive Diagnostic for reading and mathematics that pinpoints student needs down to the sub-skill level, and ongoing progress monitoring shows whether students are on track to achieve end-of-year targets.

We came across iReady when it was presented by the Battle Ground School District Administration in a public work session. It was part of their “data” discussion. The way it was presented it appeared to be preferable to the Common Core SBAc annual test. We emailed the presenter after the workshop to ask some questions about testing and iReady. Following is that interchange:

  • SBAc vs i-Ready: For local use and potential positive impact on learning at the student level my impression is that i-Ready has some value whereas SBAc has little. Isn’t SBAc really a measure of how states compare to each other?

I agree that i-Ready can have a potential impact on learning. I disagree that SBA has little impact. In just two years it has helped to define the rigor, the integration with current technologies in English Language Arts and Math, and the major shifts in our new learning standards.

  • Is any of the I-Ready data accessible by the public and if so how? No, this data is only to teachers. They do communicate results to parents in coordination with Parent Conferences.

  • Based on your slides it appears the following tests occur:

    • Summative: SBAc (ELA/Math); EoC; Measure of Progress

    • Intermittent: I-Ready Diagnostic (3x/year); SBAc Interim (1x?)

    • Classroom Assessments: State CBAs; District written assessment

    • Formative: Observations; SBAc/i-Ready; Course Tests; Quizzes. 

    • Is it reasonable to assume that the number of assessments (not including course quizzes/tests = 8 to 10 (or more)?

       No. On average, over all grade levels, the total number of summative or intermittent assessment would be closer to 3 per student, per year.

Next we turned to teachers who have actually used iReady to get their feedback and impressions. As you read the following input from teachers the reality is different from the presentation and claims:

1. Not developmentally or technologically appropriate for students in first grade (though there has been talk of starting kinders on it at my school). This is more evident with the population of students who don’t have computers at home.
2. Over half the students in first grade rush through the test which results in either a red or yellow rushing hand, which means you need to retest them. The test is supposed to take 45 minutes or so to take, but you obviously need to make 2 or 3 trips to the computers to complete the diagnostic. Math and reading are separate so….
3. Students (even in first grade) have to click on tabs in order to read and compare multiple stories. You need to spend time teaching them how to take this test, as they are able to click and answer at any time. The problem is, the instructional video your supposed to show students is difficult to locate. About 25% of teachers at my school have been able to use this video.
4. The Diagnostic test starts out difficult and then becomes easier which negatively impacts students in the lower grades (they become frustrated or just don’t care anymore) which results in false data.
5. You have to provide additional face to face assessments to pinpoint specific needs of students. The reports will say students need help in Phonics, yet they’ll pass a nationally recognized phonics assessment. If you don’t teach phonics the way the test tests them, they’ll show up a grade or 2 behind. (you have to teach the 6 syllable types)
6. The assessment weighs comprehension heavily, so if students struggle to read, they may appear lower academically than they are.
7. The voice reading to you at lower levels can be difficult to understand. Sometimes I can’t understand it. This especially impacts ELL students.
8. Sometimes the possible answers are difficult to choose between, even teachers don’t know the correct choice.
9. The older kids find the interface to be baby-ish.
10. There are brain breaks which are mini video games. The kids will either 1)rush through the test to play the game or 2) Get so frustrated with the game that it negatively impacts their ability to take the test. By the way, it’s the same game for students at all levels, whether they take the test in kindergarten or high school.
11. They break students out into groups for you and provide lessons for interventions, but these are stand alone lessons, not units and most students who need intervention can’t grasp a concept in one or two lessons.
12. They have individualized lessons, but only if your school district purchases them. Even then, it’ll make kids complete lessons far below their capabilities, which is frustrating (and probably embarrassing) for students.
13. No one is supposed to look at this test while kids are taking it!
Thoughts:
iReady is yet another testing system owned by a private company selling the test and the materials to use to train students to do well on the test. The Common Core SBAc test is also owned by a private company selling the test and materials to train to score better on the test. Common Core is a privately owned set of guidelines as well. Is there a theme? Multiple parties appear eager to sell new teaching materials with special testing and training materials so the students can score better so the adults feel better. All of these tests do NOTHING to help and much to hurt.
This is a money game pure and simple. The only useful testing is homework; coursework testing and classroom assessments done by teachers. Everything else is to help adults measure themselves (their district or the State) to like groups and so they can either gloat or go to the taxpayers and ask for more money because someone else is testing higher because they are spending more money. If we were to take the money and time spent on testing prep and testing and use it in the classroom we might actually make some headway in improving education simply because we have more teaching time and the needs of the student are handled by the only person who really knows what needs to be done…the teacher.

Leave a Reply