Transcript Learning Enrichment and Acceleration Program

Learning
Enrichment and
Acceleration
Program
Kate Lanier
Gifted Education
Coordinator/Teacher
2012
The Gifted Services Umbrella:

K-12 screening and identification (CogAT/ITBS)

Parent/teacher referral/evaluation process

Differentiated Learning Plans:
 We currently have 75 identified students

K-8 Pull Out: Eight 60 to 90 minute blocks/week

Collaboration and Instructional Support


Ex. 7th-grade LA three 90 minute blocks/week
9-12: Mentoring; independent study; college ap. process;
field studies, etc… 9-12 is a work in progress!
The Gifted Services Umbrella:

Governor’s School
 CBGS
 Summer Residential
 Summer Regional

Odyssey of the Mind/Great Computer Challenge/Lego
Robotics: (Thank you Laurie, Daphne, Matt!)

National Geographic Bee (another work in progress!)

Coordination of Local Gifted Advisory Board

Gifted Services Budget and Purchases

Local Plan for the Education of the Gifted
Current Major Projects:




Creating program identity (LEAP)
Composing our definition, mission, and philosophy in
regards to giftedness
Refining/communicating the purpose of LEAP and
the referral process
Creating teacher and parent referral
packets/defining the steps of the ref process



Establishing a continuous and sequential K-8
instructional curriculum
Revamping/defining our Talent Pool process; working
towards data-driven selection



Packets, process steps, and informational brochures are
now at all three schools
Creating a primary chars rating scale
Dedicated pull out for 6-8
Defining high school services; establishing a for-credit
internship program
Current Major Projects:

MCPS’ Local Plan for the Education of the Gifted






Ours expired in 2010, but we are operating under an
extension.
New state regulations were published in 2010
Local Plan must be completely reworked to include the
Gifted Growth Model (a measurement of consistent in-class
differentiation and data-based student “improvement”)
Our current (old) local plan can be found at MCPS
homepage  Central Office  Instruction  Gifted
Education
New regs can be found on the DOE website under gifted
instruction.
I’d love your input!
Definition:
 MCPS
DEFINES gifted students as:
Students who demonstrate higher levels of
awareness, accomplishment, and understanding
when compared to others of the same age,
experience, and background, and who are able
to work at increased levels of complexity in and
outside of the traditional classroom.
Mission:
 The
MISSION of LEAP is to:
Provide students, whether identified as having
General Intellectual Aptitude, Specific Academic
Aptitude, or Visual/Performing Arts Aptitude, the
opportunity to participate in curriculum that
includes advanced content and pacing, problem
solving, higher level thinking, the creation of new
ideas and products, and a focus on issues and
themes across a wide scope of study areas.
Philosophy:
 MCPS’
is that:
PHILOSOPHY regarding gifted instruction
All students have the right to an education that challenges
them to reach their highest academic potential.
Gifted learners require higher-level, complex, and accelerated
instruction in order to experience continuous learning and
academic growth.
Furthermore, the quality of differentiated academic
opportunities offered will determine the level and quality of
gifted students’ responses to, and investment in, their learning.
An environment of increased expectations for the gifted
population will ultimately lead to meaningful, challenging, and
autonomous learning for all students.
Traits of Giftedness:
A HIGH ACHIEVER:
















Remembers the answers.
Is interested.
Is attentive.
Works hard to achieve.
Performs at the top of the group.
Learns with ease.
Needs 6 to 8 repetitions to master.
Enjoys the company of same age peers.
Understands complex, abstract humor.
Completes assignments on time.
Is receptive.
Enjoys school often.
Absorbs information.
Memorizes well.
Is pleased with own learning.
Gets A's.
Adapted from Differentiation: Simplified, Realistic,
and Effective by Bertie Kingore, PhD
A GIFTED LEARNER:
















Poses unforeseen questions.
Is curious.
Is selectively mentally engaged.
Knows without working hard.
Is beyond the group.
Already knows.
Needs 1 to 3 repetitions to master.
Prefers the company of intellectual equals.
Creates complex, abstract humor.
Initiates projects/ extends assignments.
Is intense.
Enjoys self-directed learning.
Manipulates information.
Guesses and infers well.
Is self-critical.
May not be motivated by grades
Formal Identification:
Realistically, giftedness exists in 10 to 15 percent of the
population. This means that in order to be statistically accurate,
roughly 8-10 students per grade level should be in LEAP.
 Evaluation
for gifted identification can begin in
several ways:





Screening of ITBS and CogAT scores (1st, 3rd, 5th,
and 7th)
Teacher referral
Self/peer referral
Parent/guardian referral
Other faculty or professional staff
Identification CRITERIA:

A +90th percentile is our most valuable GIA/SAA
identification criteria.




On either the ITBS or CogAT, we’d like to see 90th percentile or
above in order to identify.
To be considered GIA, we need to see +90th percentile across
the board. To be SAA, we need to see +90th percentile in one
area.
I also administer two clinical assessments, the Kaufman Brief
Intelligence Test and the Kaufman Test of Educational
Achievement. These can be quite helpful in strengthening a
student’s “portfolio” of evidence.
As annoying as the ITBS and the CogAT can be, they are our
best way to compare students on a national scale, and thus to
eliminate claims of bias in the identification process.
Identification CRITERIA:
 In
addition to test scores, a student’s “portfolio”
includes:
The parent/guardian behavioral checklist (I’d like to start using
the Kingore checklist we saw earlier).
 The Renzulli-Hartman Rating Scales for Rating Behavioral
Characteristics of Superior Students (one or more teachers)
 Classroom observation(s)
 Student interview
 Product portfolio
**It is important to know that the Virginia DOE decrees that no one
score/criterion can be used to lead to, or deny, eligibility for
services.

Process/Timeline:

Whether the evaluation process starts with a screening or
a referral, the next steps are as follows:










Consent for evaluation (if student was screened or referred by a
teacher/staff member.
Parent rating scale
Review of cumulative file and any ITBS/CogAT data
Renzulli-Hartman Scale
Clinical assessments (@ 2 hours of testing when completed)
Student observation(s)
Student interview
Product collection (if available)
Eligibility committee meeting
Consent or ineligibility letter
All told, this process takes between 75 and 90 days.
Talent Pool:

For students in K-2(3) who are demonstrating the desire,
ability, and need to work at expectation levels beyond
their peers

Aimed at strengthening students’ advanced skills in the
areas of idea analysis, topic evaluation, and creativity.

Must be guided by teacher recommendations and based
upon each grade’s benchmarks and expectations; this is
the best way to avoid overlooking or overburdening
students.

In January of grade 3, CogAT and ITBS will determine
which talent pool students will be evaluated for formal id.
Talent Pool Entrance:

Because academic and intellectual development is so widely
varied in the primary grades, Talent Pool pull-out does not
automatically follow students from one grade to the next, until
the transition from second to third grade.

Next fall, I will start a curriculum called Primary Educational
Thinking Skills (PETS). This is a sequential critical thinking program
that will allow for a reassessment every 9 weeks.

After observing and assessing students for four to six weeks each
fall, teachers in grades K-2 will be asked to identify Talent Pool
students using a Primary Gifted Characteristics Rating Scale.


A program that is both teacher recommendation and assessment
driven is the best way to satisfy concerned parents.
BUT, parents do, and will still, have the option to ask for a teacher
rating scale to be completed.
Talent Pool Entrance:

If we place a cap on Talent Pool group size (12 should be the
max in order for the program to be considered “small group”):
 Do
we allow a certain number of spots per
teacher?
OR
 Do
we compare rating scales and pull the
highest 10-12 overall?
The LEAP Experience:

Once a student is formally identified, a DLP is put in place.
 The DLP is aimed at 1)establishing parent-driven goals
and 2) identifying our instructional modifications.

Student receives weekly small-group instruction.
 The LEAP folder contains a WEEKLY LEAPS sheet that is
meant to communicate to parents and to provide
enrichment activities throughout the week.

Student DLPs are examined, evaluated, and updated
every year.

We currently do not have exit procedures, but we are
working on this. Students who are not reaching DLP goals,
and who are demonstrating the need to be in the regular
classroom should not be pulled out.
Discussion Items:
1) Is a LEAP “progress update” needed each semester?
2) How do we meet the state’s requirement that:
“Evidence that gifted education service options from kindergarten through twelfth grade
are offered continuously and sequentially, with instructional time during the school day
and week to (i) work with their age-level peers, (ii) work with their intellectual and
academic peers, (iii) work independently; and (iv) foster intellectual and academic
growth of gifted students.”
Narratives? Checklists? Copies of assignments? Will a classroom guide help?
(Hawthorne Gifted Intervention Manual)
3) Any suggestions for the gifted growth model? How do we show that gifted
students are increasing in performance outside of the whole-class grades/tests?
4) What’s working with LEAP? What’s not working?
5) What questions do you have? How can I help?