OFFICE OF INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAMS AND SERVICES Summary of State Board of Education Agenda Items December 15-16, 2005

Transcription

1 OFFICE OF INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAMS AND SERVICES Summary of State Board of Education Agenda Items December 15-16, 2005 OFFICE OF ACADEMIC EDUCATION Office of Curriculum and Instruction 10. Approval to revise the proposed Regulations for the Gifted Education Programs in Mississippi 2005 and resubmit for public comment under the Administrative Procedures Act process Executive Summary The purposes of these regulations are to: 1. Provide guidance to local district personnel in the development of the identification process; 2. Provide guidance to local school districts for programming options for the local gifted program; 3. Provide information on appropriate endorsements for teachers, and all other personnel involved in working with the local gifted program; and 4. Provide information to assist local districts in satisfying minimal requirements for compliance. Based upon comments received during the APA process, the following changes were made: Under Identification of Intellectually Gifted Students: o Changed the Phase I and Phase II Assessment Criteria from 95 th percentile to the current standard of 90 th percentile (pages 8-9). o Changed the Potentially Disadvantaged minimum for individual test of intelligence from 90 th percentile to 85 th percentile to be consistent with the change in the Assessment Criteria (page 10). o Changed the Potentially Disadvantaged minimum for additional measures from 95 th percentile to 90 th percentile to be consistent with the change in the Assessment Criteria (page 10). Under Identification of Academically Gifted Students: o Changed the Assessment Criteria from 95 th percentile to the current standard of 90 th percentile (page 14). Back-up material attached Recommendation: Approval 1

2 Proposed Gifted Education Programs Regulations APA Summary of Ratings and Comments SCORE AVERAGE Item # Item # Item # Item # Item # Numbers of respondents: Teachers 146 Administrators 33 Coordinators 15 Professors 4 Other Are the regulations appropriate for the gifted program? 1. I think they are excellent! 2. Most are! Some are not! 3. Yes 4. Uping the requirements from the 90 th percentile to the 95 th percentile will drastically lower the number of gifted students and teachers needed as well. (5 people used this exact same wording). 5. The regulations are quite appropriate for the gifted program. They are grounded in research and represent best practices in many areas, including curriculum, class size, and identification. These regulations will be a tremendous help to districts as they seek to meet the special needs of our gifted population. 6. Yes. 7. Very appropriate. 8. Yes! 9. I have concerns regarding the twice exceptional category: is student who would benefit too open ended. 10. I feel like these regulations will truly help in setting appropriate standards for our Program; they are understandable and put everything into perspective for teachers and administrators. 11. Over the past twenty years, we have reduced the minimum scores and dumbed down our standards. 12. The proposed regulations clarify the processes for referral, assessment, and placement for serving gifted students. 13. Yes, the regulations address all areas of the gifted program. 14. Regarding identification and assessment, the new regulations would greatly reduce our numbers. 15. Changing the assessment criteria to at or above the 95 th percentile would adversely affect the Canton Public School District. 16. Smaller class sizes are an asset to Gifted Education. Gifted students need to be in small groups so they can get better individual attention and feel comfortable enough to express their 1

3 giftedness. Please consider this when discussing class size. 17. I am extremely concerned with the Assessment Criteria of 95 th percentile. This requirement might totally remove the Gifted Education Program from these two schools. 18. I believe that there are a few loopholes wherein the State tries to find ways to hinder this program. 19. Very clear process for referral and identification. 20. The proposed regulations clarify the processes for referral, assessment, eligibility, placement, and procedures for serving gifted students. They also give consideration to those students who are twice exceptional and disadvantaged. 21. For the most part. 22. Yes, the regulations are appropriate for the gifted program. 23. I am concerned about class size limitations. Will funding be available to support class sizes between 4 and 9 in grades 2-8? It doesn t seem reasonable to limit gifted classes to 9, but allow sped classes to reach a capacity of In the section on twice exceptional, please do not establish a provisional status. The child qualifies and should never lose the ruling. Districts and parents can determine level of services without revoking an eligibility. 25. The number of students per teacher and per class should not change. We should be allowed to teach Blue Print curriculum in all classes. It makes sense. 26. No, minorities will be shut out. It will ruin the program in my district. 27. While the regulations help to clarify issues that have been lacking in the past, there is more that can be done to make the program more appropriate for the needs of gifted children. Acceleration, whether for the whole grade or subject area, is not addressed in a manner that makes it accessible to many students. Also, parents are still denied the right to due process and mediation. The regulations do not address the inclusion of students under Too many students for one classroom. 29. Yes, however, requiring students to score at or above the 95 th percentile will reduce my district s gifted population by half. Most of our students score between the 90 th and 95 th percentiles. 30.Yes. The higher standards assure the placement of highly intelligent students in the classes. 31. As a teacher in JPS, I believe regulations should be made on a school district basis. 32. At the referral stage for intellectually gifted, it might become very time consuming to get the person who initiated the referral to sign the referral form. 33. Need to consider district with large minority populations. 34. These regulations represent the strong commitment MDE has for our gifted student population. 35. A larger class size would prohibit teachers from being able to do the types of activities effectively used in the program. 36. I do feel however, that a minimum score of 125 on an IQ test is a little high. I think going back to the 121 would be more appropriate. 37. I especially like that the document recognizes that gifted children need an enriching curriculum that provides qualitatively different educational experiences not available in the regular classroom. This differentiation makes gifted programs more appropriate for these students. 38. Yes. Agree with the 95 th percentile. 39. It is perfect. It challenges the children in positive ways. A big plus for me is that the teachers are accessible. 40. Thanks to everyone for doing a great job. Thanks for your time and hard work. 41. Yes, and definitely needed! 42. The new identification criteria will restrict student access and will prove detrimental to program. 43. Please support the regs as presented on October 20, Class size must be low to accomplish program objectives. 44. Limited class size is beneficial. 45. Small class sizes are important. 46. I think small classes are a good idea. 2

4 47. Maintaining a small class size is important to retain program integrity. 48. There seems to be an increase from the 90 th to the 95 th percentile on some instruments used in the assessment stage. I have several questions about this area for our district. 2. Are the regulations clearly stated? 1. These new regulations clear up any questions that anyone might have had. 2. Yes. 3. Very clear. 4. The regulations are clearly stated and easy to understand. 5. Yes, very. 6. Yes! 7. Very clear. 8. The wording is very clearly stated, and can be adopted for information packets for parents and students. 9. Yes, the regulations are clearly stated. 10. The revised regulations have addressed the need for the gifted program and what is more important, the needs and rights of the students placed in the program. 11. Yes, but I do not agree that students should be screened at 95 th percentile, it should remain at the 90 th percentile. 12. Do like the in-state and out-of-state clarifications. 13. The revised regulations have clarified things that were vague in the old regulations. The wording is so clearly stated that it can be adopted in information packets provided to parents and teachers. The stated procedures for addressing placement of students with in-state and out-of-state eligibility will assist school personnel in explaining the guidelines to parents and expediting the process. 14. For the most part. 15. The following issues are not stated clearly: The use of Standard Error of Measure is not used consistently at every area of identification. There is no explanation of why it is used in some places and not in others. The classification of Potentially Disadvantaged is not well defined. The classification of At-Risk is not well defined. In the program option of dual enrollment there is no mention of whether this applies to Community and Junior Colleges. In the program option of mentorship there is no statement regarding the award of credit for participation in the mentorship arrangement. Under the statements regarding the Instructional Management Plan there is a statement regarding in-class counseling for gifted students. Teachers of the gifted usually do not possess degrees in school counseling. It is not clear what is meant by in-class. 16. More detailed than in the past. 17. Parental notification, does this mean the exact score will be reported in writing, or just the qualify or does not qualify. 18. Exception is annual reassessment. Is this only for those that are not progressing. 19. Clarification on subtracting the standard error of measurement. Will rounding be permitted or will the student be required to make the next higher point. 20. I don t think teachers should teach benchmark skills. 3

5 3. Are the identification criteria clearly stated and easy to understand? 1. Very clear. 2. Yes. 3. The identification criteria are clearly stated and easy to understand. 4. Yes. 5. Yes, very clear. 6. Yes! 7. Do we need to include a statement regarding the Confidence Level since the higher the Confidence Level, the lower the Standard Error of Measure. 8. Clearly stated extremely helpful procedures. 9. Yes, I especially like the wide range of students that need special considerations are listed. 10. As a parent, the identification criteria were presented in such a way that I understood the value of the program for my child s academic growth. 11. Each time that I fill out paperwork for a student to be tested, I will have no trouble understanding the questions. 12. Current class meets the needs of students. The diverse characteristics of these learners require minimal pupil teacher ratio. 13. I finally understand twice exceptional students. 14. Extremely clear. Consideration of the margin of error that is given to students whose scores might not reflect their true potential is a welcome addition. The issue of twice exceptional students has also been addressed with extremely helpful procedures. 15. For the most part. 16. Extremely so. 17. Which standard error of measurement (68%, 90%). It should be stated. 18. Yes, but I am not sure that we are using the multi-factored identification process as well as possible. 19. In Phase I assessment criteria the achievement test scores should not be raised to the 95 th percentile. 20. Can the PPDS go into the cum folder? 21. What are the scores at the superior range for the checklist? 22. As a teacher of the gifted who is responsible for screening gifted students, I appreciate the step by step explanation. I find it easy to follow and understand. 23. Yes, I especially like that a wide range of students that need special considerations are listed. 24. I am so thankful to have clarification for many questions about identification. 25. I believe that the former criteria was rigorous enough. Increasing the score needed to pass the group intelligence test may leave many potential program candidates unidentified. 26. Yes! Changes to identification criteria were needed! No more 119 s. 4. What are the strengths of the revised regulations? 1. More in-depth. 2. Higher standards bring Mississippi in line with other states. These standards appear to identify truly gifted individuals, although using SEM just about maintains the status quo. 3. Mostly consistent with what we are used to. 4. Clearly stated in a step by step format. 5. We won t have but a handful of students being served by gifted. 6. Protects students who are low achieving intellectually gifted students. Allows for exceptional students (twice-exceptional) students to have an opportunity to participate. 7. One of the major strengths of this document is the small class size. During my twenty-eight years of teaching gifted I have taught classes that range in size from five students to eighteen students. It has been my experience that once you have more than eight or ten students in a class, the integrity of instruction suffers tremendously. One truly cannot meet the special needs 4

6 of gifted students, either through individual, small group, or group instruction, when the class is too large. Another strength of the document is that portion of the identification procedure that speaks to twice exceptional students. This is a growing population, and districts will really benefit from having some direction in this area. 8. Anyone can pick up the regulations and understand them. 9. Easily understood by anyone. 10. Clear and concise statements. 11. Format and wording. 12. Sets higher standards for admission while allowing for disadvantaged students. 13. Increased rigorous requirements for eligibility, raising Mississippi s standards closer to the national level. 14. Small class size is very important and necessary in the gifted program so that teachers can meet the important needs of these students. It s impossible to study in-depth topics with discussions and experimentation if class size is too large. 15. Targets those who are gifted. 16. As a parent, I am in favor of keeping the gifted programs limited to ten per class. To have more would greatly dilute the effectiveness of the program. 17. Issues that have come up through the years have been addressed and clarified. 18. Smaller class size is important to fully meet the needs of these students. 19. One of the major strengths of the revised regulations is that grades 2-8 should be in the range of 4-9 students per class. 20. One major strength is the ability to focus on each individual student with the smaller class of 4 to Smaller classes play a major part in the success of Gifted Education. 22. One of the major strengths is the ability to focus on individual student needs with the smaller class sizes (4-9). 23. In order for exceptional students to reach their potential, the revised regulations have clarified the issues of homework, classwork, and class size. The program also provides intellectual and academic growth for students that shows mastery beyond the benchmarks set for their grade level in the regular classroom. 24. The identification process is a strength. Classwork/homework policy is acceptable. 25. One major strength is the ability to individualize instruction due to the class size. The new regulations clarify this. 26. Small class size is protected under the regulations which is essential to working effectively with intellectually gifted students. 27. Small class size. Curriculum standards should go over and beyond regular grade level benchmarks. 28. Small class size is beneficial so that the special needs of the gifted may be met. 29. The small class size enables the students to receive the special attention they deserve. 30. The policy of homework and classwork will help defend the rights of these students. 31. Issues that have come up through the years have been addressed and clarified in these revised regulations. Inclusion of the policy related to homework and classwork will help defend the rights of all gifted students, and the suggested class size will allow the individual attention that will encourage these students to develop their true potential. 32. Homework/classwork this should be handed to every regular education teacher. 33. Clarity, especially for administrators and non-practitioners. 34. Regulations are detailed. 35. Assessing disadvantaged students and class size. 36. The increased requirements for program qualification. 37. On behalf of the nearly 100 member Madison County Association for Gifted Students, we appreciate the commitment to our children s education especially the commitment to keeping our class sizes reasonable and thus retaining the ability to adequately teach a gifted program. This is the most critical issue for our parents, and many have called to express their concern that class sizes grow no larger so that our children s needs and abilities continue to be addressed and nurtured. Although we re a fairly new group, we ve done enough research to understand just how crucial small class size is to a successful special needs program. Parents 5

7 also greatly appreciate the regulation concerning homework. Several parents have expressed great concern that this regulation remain in place and that it is enforced. Our parents sometimes feel besieged, like we must fight for the gifted program every year when we know that the special needs of Mississippi s gifted children are as critically important as any other special needs program. Thank you for helping to ensure that the proposed regulations reflect a commitment to our children. 38. The strengths of the regulations are that they are very clear and precise. 39. The revised regulations are more clearly stated. They provide clear direction for the programs. 40. Raises the entry level for eligibility to an appropriate level. 41. I like the old ones better. 42. Everything about GEP in one place. 43. The revisions that have been made go a long way to strengthening the current program. 44. It states that a gifted teacher should not have more that 60 minutes of planning time. Is there a minimum amount of planning time? Most of us don t have enough because of other duties. 45. Addition of twice exceptional eligibility and homework/classwork regulations. 46. The class size. If the class is any larger the teacher will not be able to meet the needs of her students appropriately and the program will lose all integrity. 47. The procedure for identification of intellectually gifted students and the small class size. 48. Small class size and that teachers were allowed input. 49. The small class size is a strength. 50. I really like the need to address socio-emotional, as well as career needs and appreciation for the visual and performing arts. 51. We agree that students should not have to make-up classwork that has been mastered. 52. We agree that class size should remain small (4-9 students) and think that this should be enforced. 53. The strength of the regulations for me lies in the clarification of the various component parts. Basically, the revised regulations reflect responsible, reliable rumination and rhetoric! 54. We want variety taught, not stringent benchmarks like the regular education program. 55. I strongly approve of the benefits to each individual child associated with having a SMALL student to teacher ratio. Small classroom sizes is a benefit to the goal of the program developing individual giftedness. 56. I have two classes of 10, two classes of 9, and a class of 5 and I can see significant advantages the smaller class provides our students. 57. It is great that all children are given an equal opportunity to be identified. 58. Much clearer language. Provisions for twice exceptional and disadvantaged outlined better. Class size statement spells out acceptable number of students. 59. Small groups. 60. Clearly stated, succinct, all areas addressed. Small class size is a strength. 61. The inclusion of all areas of giftedness. 62. Small class size is one of the strengths. 63. Small class size must be maintained in order to serve the needs of the gifted. 64. Must have small class size to keep the strength of the gifted program. Another is raising the criteria for placement. 65. Small class size allows for more one on one attention. 66. Small class size. Raising the criteria for placement in the program. 67. Small class size is a definite strength of the new regulations. I know for a fact from my own experiences. 68. Addresses the fact that students in grades 2-8 are not required to make-up classwork missed. 69. I strongly believe that class size in the gifted program should be kept as small as possible to facilitate learning. 70. Higher standards for eligibility and small class size. If a higher number of students were placed in the class, the integrity of the program would be greatly compromised. 71. Small class size, more stringent criteria to qualify for the program. 72. Small class size is important, as well as high standards for inclusion. 73. I am in favor of the smaller class ratio. This allows the teacher to interact more with the students. 6

8 74. Small class size. It is imperative that class size remain small! 75. Small class size is a strength. 76. Small class size is a strength as well as raising the criteria for placement in the program. 77. Organization. 78. Please keep gifted classes small. 79. Keep class size below ten students. 80. Small class size. (: 81. The regulations address the needs of Twice-Exceptional Students and Potentially Disadvantaged Gifted. 82. Programming options are well stated. The procedural safeguards are well stated. 83. They speak to smaller class sizes, all grounded in research, and benefit the twice exceptional student. 84. Small class size, higher standards. 85. Additional clarification for each type of gifted student. 86. Small class size. 87. Small class size is one strength. Another strength is raising the criteria for placement. 88. Small class size is a major strength. I feel that the gifted students have earned and deserve the advantages that a small class provides. 89. Small class size and criteria for placement. 90. Small class size that allows for individualization of instruction based on student interests and advanced content (best practice according to research in gifted education). 91. Small class size. 92. The smaller class sizes are a definite strength. Having ten or fewer students makes it possible for me to meet each child s unique needs. I can also tailor my lesson plans around the interests of my students. Independent study would be extremely difficult with larger numbers. 93. Small class size and raising the standards. 94. Smaller class size is a strength of the new regulations. 95. Continued small classes for gifted. 96. I strongly agree with a full scale score of 95 th percentile or above to qualify. 97. The identification process of twice-exceptional students are an asset to the regulations. 98. The potentially disadvantage gifted criteria. 99. Mississippi is a leader in gifted education for the nation. Providing a small class environment for intellectually gifted students best serves their unique needs Smaller class size is essential! This is not the typical classroom and is not designed to be Small class size and raising the criteria for the program It is important that students be given a chance to show their creativity Must have small class size to keep the strength of the gifted program Teacher Units, annual self-evaluation, GEP Contact Person, and assessment time Small class size is one of the strengths. Another strength in the revised regulations is raising the criteria for placement. Please do not raise the class size I believe my child responds well to the smaller class size and the lower student to teacher ratio. It keeps him challenged Small class size and higher standards for inclusion Having small classes is one of the strengths and making the selection process more rigorous Small class size is a strength of the new regulations. After having taught gifted education for several years, I totally agree with the class size section These regulations boldly support the research by upholding small class size, the number one factor in providing for the individual needs and strengths of gifted students Small class size is emphasized, and this is vitally important Small class sizes so that the individual needs of the gifted students are being served Smaller class size is important to fully meet the needs of the students Small class size is a definite strength. You cannot teach the gifted effectively without small classes Class size needs to stay small. That is one reason we let our son stay in the program Small class size is a strength and raising criteria for placement One primary strength I see is the small class size. I think this is extremely important to meet 7

9 the individual needs of gifted students. I m glad a Carnegie Unit is satisfied in grades I m also glad planning time is outlined clearly The regulations clarify problem areas such as class size and homework stipulations Small class size is one of the strengths. Another strength is raising the criteria for placement in the program Small class size I was pleased with the class size recommendation of maintaining 4-9 students in grades 2-8. This is very important to program effectiveness The strength is maintaining the small class size The gifted class size of 4-9 students (2-8 program) is most appropriate for the gifted student that is to receive educational instruction that is different from and in addition to the regular educational services. The class size for secondary instruction of 7-14 students as well as appropriate for the 9-12 student and also a strength in the revised regulations There are many strengths shown in the revised regulations; however, the most important strength refers to the small number of students in each gifted class. This small ratio of teacher per students in the classroom enables the teacher to address the students gifts and talents while engaging the student in active learning through meaningful instruction. Another strength takes into consideration that the referral criteria for the Academically Gifted designates pertinent academic achievement in an academic area, such as English The small class size is one of the biggest strengths of the gifted program Gifted class size should not exceed 8 students, and students should not be taught benchmarks in these classes or be required to make up work. Otherwise, the objectives of this program will be threatened Very thorough The small class size is one of the biggest strengths in the regulations Mandatory small classes Maintaining small classes The small class size (10 & under) must be maintained for the differentiated learning to continue Maintaining small classes Maintaining small classes Maintaining small class sizes allows students to interact more freely and teachers to instruct more effectively Identification criteria, class size for 2-8 suggested at 4-9 but overall numbers served has jumped I appreciate having more information in writing. It will be helpful when challenged by administrators to be able to show that we don t just make things up It is a concise blueprint to follow Accountability Yearly Report Small class size; criteria for placement Small class size and raising entry requirements Small class size is most important strength, along with keeping placement criteria high Small class size is one of the strengths Small class size is one of the strengths. Another strength in the revised regulations is raising the criteria for placement in the program. 5. What areas of the revised regulations need clarification? 1. I think the IMP and things after should come before the identification procedure. 2. Can assessments from the referral stage apply to Phase I of assessment? 3. Revised regulations are okay in general. GEP Program Standards are too much for the amount of funding. 4. How can the district ensure that parents understand their rights. 5. No part of the document needs clarification. 6. None at this time. 8

10 7. None. 8. Nothing. 9. The coordinator does not need a gifted endorsement. Already too hard to find quality. 10. I think it is clear. 11. No clarification needed. 12. The regulations make it more difficult to locate students in poverty stricken areas such as the Delta. 13. Gifted classes should remain 12 or less. At this, 12 at one time is too many students with different learning styles to accommodate. About 8 is a good class size, especially in small rooms. 14. Funds should be available to purchase materials needed for these classes. 15. Percentile and superior range are questionable for entrance into PEAK. 16. Please review class size. In talking with gifted teachers many feel that they accomplish more with class size in the range. They believe that the slightly larger size allows for more interaction and cooperative grouping. 17. I understand that each state has different criteria, but most who are tested do qualify. A reciprocal agreement would save time and money. 18. How to identify the artistically or creatively gifted students. 19. What an IMP is and seeing an example of one. 20. I would prefer not to allow SEM consideration. 21. Does each teacher do referrals or is someone other than the gifted teacher assigned the duties of referrals? The regulation is not clear as to who is given time to do referrals. 22. Maybe add a table of contents and appendix of commonly used forms and checklists. 23. Suggestion to revise area regarding behavior/short attention span. This should not be a problem to the point it interferes with the learning of other students. 24. A listing of approved measures, tests, and score required, which could possibly be updated on the webpage. 25. I have read the revised regulations and have a clear understanding of them. 26. How much leeway do districts have in setting the local minimal criteria higher? Shouldn t all districts state-wide strive for continuity in their assessment procedures? 27. Potentially twice exceptional, does this provisional status apply to ADHD? 28. Homework/classwork needs to be clarified. 29. What are the approved subtests. 30. Referral process. 31. Under the section for academically gifted eligibility ruling, it is much too vague to say that IG students need not be AG in order to participate in the AG program but that available data shall be reviewed to determine the probability that the student will be successful in the academic placement. Our problem in AG is that we have so many IG students whose strengths are in an area other than English. They need the drill and instruction of a regular English class, especially those in English I and II, who are expected to take the state English test and show AYP. Their graduation is dependent on passing the test, and the teacher is held accountable for their AYP. Without more specific guidelines regarding the placement of these students in high school English, we are forced to allow them to remain in gifted English I and II when we know they would be better served in a regular English class. This has been a real problem for us since the state test became the main focus for English I and II, and the gifted program at my school has come under rather seething criticism because many of the IG students fail to excel on the test. Under AG referral criteria, numbers 3 and 4: rarely do we have at the high school level and appropriate group or test less that has been administered within the last 12 months. This regulation would effectively preclude AG referrals at the high school level. 32. No clarification is needed. 33. The regulations appear to me to be about as clear as they can be to meet the needs of the various gifted programs. 34. In my estimation, the new regulations are clear and concise. 35. I am sure that sound reasoning supports this view of make-up classwork missed when scheduled to be in the gifted classroom, but I am concerned that the wording in this section might be excessively applied outside the intent of the regulations. 9

11 36. In-class counseling for gifted students, socio-emotional needs of gifted students, affective needs of gifted students, and the needs of gifted at-risk students. I am certain that these needs are significant within this population. I must ask, however, do not certain children across the overall population have the same needs? 37. Class size in grades 2-8 should be in the range of 4-9 students. Despite the best intent, I am quite amazed that, in this time of actual budget crisis throughout this state, it is suggested that one teacher be allowed to teach only 4-9 children in one class. This is most unacceptable. 38. None. 39. I think the regulations are clear. 40. None. 41. Why teachers will not teach benchmarks and students will not be required to make up missed work were deleted from the former regulations. 42. Homework can be interpreted as Yes you have to make up or No it s not necessary. Our district teachers usually require all work to be made up by our students it s a problem area for us! 43. Homework/classwork may not be required is unclear. 44. The standards use for assessment. 10

12 Regulations for the Gifted Education Programs in Mississippi 2005 Hank M. Bounds, Ph.D., State Superintendent of Education Susan M. Rucker, Ed.D., Executive to the State Superintendent Kristopher J. Kaase, Ph.D., Associate State Superintendent of Academic Education Judy Couey, Bureau Director, Office of Curriculum and Instruction Trecina Green, Division Director, Office of Curriculum and Instruction Conrad Castle, Ph.D., Gifted Program Specialist Mississippi Department of Education P.O. Box 771 Jackson, MS Telephone: Fax:

13 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We wish to thank the members of the committee for their input, guidance, and contributions in developing this document. The new regulations would not have been possible without their assistance. Dr. Conrad Castle Kaye Dyess Mandy Goldman Melissa Grantham Gail Hammond Heather Houston Dr. Susan Johnstone Lynn Morris Teresa Mosley Dr. Linda Mucha Jean Prather Amy Rogers Melissa Rogers Deborah Thompson Dee Triggs Dr. Mike Vinson Gifted Program Specialist, Mississippi Department of Education Superintendent, West Jasper Schools Milken Award Winner, 2004, and Teacher of the Gifted, Lauderdale County Gifted Program Coordinator and Teacher of the Gifted, Madison County Schools Teacher of the Gifted, Rankin County Schools and Board of Directors, National Association for Gifted Children Doctoral Student in Gifted Education, University of Southern Mississippi Gifted Program Coordinator and School Psychologist, Tupelo Public Schools Teacher of the Gifted, Lamar County Schools Licensed Examiner, Jackson Public Schools Gifted Program Coordinator, Harrison County Schools Executive Director, Mississippi Association for Gifted Children Milken Award Winner, 2004, and Teacher of the Gifted, Lamar County Schools Teacher of the Gifted, Covington County Schools Gifted Program Coordinator, Moss Point Schools Teacher of the Gifted, Harrison County Schools Executive Director, Mississippi Association for School Administrators

14 TABLE OF CONTENTS State Definitions 1 Purpose 2 Procedural Safeguards 2 Local Survey Committee 3 Student Identification Processes 3 Identification of Intellectually Gifted Students 5 Identification of Academically Gifted Students 12 Identification of Artistically Gifted Students 16 Identification of Creatively Gifted Students 21 Parental Permission for Placement 25 Out-of-State Gifted Eligibilities 26 Annual Reassessment 26 Homework/Classwork 27 Mission/Philosophy Statement 27 Instructional Management Plan 27 Class Size 28 Programming Options 28 Funding of Gifted Teacher Units 32 Planning Time 33 Assessment Time 33 Proposal for Gifted Program 34 Annual Self-Evaluation of the Local GEP 34 GEP Contact Person 34 Loss/Reduction in Funding 35

15 The Mississippi Gifted Education Act of 1989, as amended in 1993, mandates that each public school district within the state provide gifted education programs for intellectually gifted students in grades 2-6. All local public school districts may have gifted education programs for intellectually gifted students in grades 7-12, artistically gifted students in grades 2-12, creatively gifted students in grades 2-12, and/or academically gifted students in grades 9-12, subject to the approval of the State Board of Education. STATE DEFINITIONS Intellectually Gifted Children shall mean those children and youth who are found to have an exceptionally high degree of intelligence as documented through the identification process. Academically Gifted Children shall mean those children and youth who are found to have an exceptionally high degree of demonstrated academic ability as documented through the identification process. Artistically Gifted Children shall mean those children and youth who are found to have an exceptionally high degree of creativity and an exceptionally high degree of ability in the visual arts as documented through the identification process. Creatively Gifted Children shall mean those children and youth who are found to have an exceptionally high degree of creativity and an exceptionally high degree of ability in the performing arts as documented through the identification process. Gifted Education Programs (GEP) shall mean special programs of instruction for intellectually gifted children in grades 2-12, academically gifted children in grades 9-12, artistically gifted children in grades 2-12, and/or creatively gifted children in grades 2-12 in the public elementary and secondary schools of this state. Such 1

16 programs shall be designed to meet the individual needs of gifted children and shall be in addition to and different from the regular program of instruction provided by the district. PURPOSE To ensure that gifted children who demonstrate unusually high potential as described in the above definitions are identified and offered an appropriate education based upon their exceptional abilities. Because of their unusual capabilities, they require uniquely qualitatively different educational experiences not available in the regular classroom. These uniquely different programs are required to enable gifted students to realize their abilities and potential contributions to self and society. PROCEDURAL SAFEGUARDS All data collected as part of the identification process are protected by the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA). Parents must be notified of their rights under FERPA. It is the obligation of the local district to ensure that parents understand these rights. All information/data collected as part of the identification process shall be placed in an individual eligibility file for each student. These files and the information contained therein shall not be placed in the student s cumulative record folder. The files shall be maintained in a separate locked storage facility/file cabinet, and access to the information shall be restricted to those personnel working directly with the identification process, working directly in the gifted education program, or that have a documented need to know. 2

17 Once the referral process begins, parents must be informed of the information/data that is collected. Parents shall have access to these records. Each district shall have a policy that establishes the process that parents shall adhere to when requesting to access these files. Parents shall be made aware of their rights to an explanation of the results of the Assessment Team Report. LOCAL SURVEY COMMITTEE (LSC) Each district shall establish an LSC for the GEP. The LSC shall be involved in determining a student s eligibility for an intellectually gifted, artistically gifted, creatively gifted, and/or academically gifted program. The LSC shall include, but is not limited to, gifted education teachers and administrators. It may include regular education teachers, school psychologists or psychometrists, and parents. It should include a special education teacher when a student is being considered for an eligibility under the twice-exceptional criteria. The LSC may be a building level committee which is responsible for students enrolled at that school, a district level committee which is responsible for student enrolled in the entire district, or a combination of the two. STUDENT IDENTIFICATION PROCESSES The student identification processes are separated into six steps for each of the four different eligibility categories: Intellectually, Artistically and Creatively Gifted for students in grades 2-12, and Academically Gifted for students in grades The six steps are: referral, (LSC) review, parental permission for testing, assessment, assessment report, and the eligibility ruling by the LSC. 3

18 When the district is developing identification procedures, the following shall be considered: The identification process shall consist of a combination of subjective and objective measures to determine eligibility for the gifted programs. No single evaluation method or instrument adequately identifies students who are gifted. Thus, a multi-factored identification process must be followed to insure a fair evaluation of each individual student. The identification process shall provide an equitable opportunity for the inclusion of students who are culturally diverse, underachieving, disabled under IDEA guidelines, physically handicapped, ADD/ADHD, as well as students who exhibit classroom behavior such as extreme shyness, short attention spans, disruptiveness, continual questioning, and anxiety. Throughout the identification process, close attention and careful consideration shall be paid to all information available and collected on each individual student and how that information dictates the kinds of instruments and measures that should be used to correctly assess that student. All instruments administered and measures must have been validated for the specific purpose for which they are being used. Hearing, vision, and general physical examinations are suggested but are not required. District personnel shall make decisions as to which measures will be used during the referral process and what the local minimal acceptable criteria will be for each measure. This information must be documented in writing at the district level. District personnel 4

19 shall make decisions as to which measures will be used during the assessment process and whether the minimal acceptable criteria set in regulations will be used, or if a higher minimal acceptable criteria will be used. The assessment criteria and minimal acceptable criteria to be used shall be documented in writing in the district s Gifted Education Program Proposal submitted to the Office of Gifted Education Programs at the Mississippi Department of Education (MDE) and approved by the State Board of Education (SBE). Identification as gifted in one area does not automatically make a student eligible for services in one or more of the other areas of giftedness in Mississippi. However, a student with an Intellectually Gifted eligibility ruling may be served in an Academically Gifted program in grades 9-12 without obtaining an Academically Gifted eligibility ruling. Since not all intellectually gifted students are also academically gifted, and since many intellectually gifted students are not high academic achievers in all academic areas, careful consideration shall be given as to the appropriate placement in the academically gifted program. IDENTIFICATION OF INTELLECTUALLY GIFTED STUDENTS NOTE: Throughout the identification process, district personnel shall be careful to select measures that target the student s strengths. Referral A student may be referred by a parent, teacher, counselor, administrator, peer, self, or anyone else having reason to believe that the student might be intellectually gifted. The person initiating the referral shall sign the referral form and date it. District personnel shall collect the data required to satisfy the district s referral criteria. The Jacob Javits Act 5

20 (PL sec. 9101) declares that intellectual ability and academic ability are two distinct and separate areas of performance. Accordingly, while grades and/or achievement test scores might be an indicator of giftedness, neither grades nor achievement test scores shall eliminate a student from the identification process for the intellectually gifted program. Grades and/or achievement test scores are more appropriately an indicator of academic giftedness. Many intellectually gifted students are not going to be high achieving, teacher pleasing students. All measures collected throughout the identification process shall be selected based upon the strengths of the individual student being considered. Once a referral form has been initiated, signed and dated, only the LSC or parents can stop the identification process. Referral Criteria A student shall satisfy two of the following criteria at this level before moving forward in the identification process: NOTE: A group screening measure will assist in identifying some students from underrepresented populations. However, a group screening measure shall not be the sole determining factor used to eliminate a student from the identification process at the referral stage. 1. group measure of intelligence that has been administered within the past twelve (12) months, 2. published characteristics of giftedness measure, 3. published measure of creativity, 4. published measure of leadership, 6

21 5. achievement test scores, 6. existing measure of individual intelligence that has been administered within the past twelve (12) months, and/or 7. other measures that are documented in the research on identification of intellectually gifted students. Each district shall establish the local minimal acceptable criteria on each measure used at this stage. Documentation of the measures and minimal acceptable criteria for each shall be maintained in a written document approved by the local school board. This document shall be distributed to district administrators, school counselors, and teachers, and shall be available to parents at each school site. LSC Review Once the referral data has been collected, the LSC shall review all the data and make one of the following recommendations: 1. the student has satisfied minimal criteria on at least two measures and should move forward to the assessment stage, or 2. the student has not satisfied minimal criteria on at least two measures, however, the LSC feels strongly that additional data should be collected and the student reconsidered at that time, or 3. the student has not satisfied minimal criteria on at least two measures and the identification process should stop. Potentially Disadvantaged Gifted At this point district personnel shall make the decision as to the possibility that the student could possibly be eligible for consideration as disadvantaged gifted. If it is 7

22 believed that the student might be disadvantaged, then the Potentially Disadvantaged Intellectually Gifted Checklist should be completed for possible use during the assessment process. The potentially disadvantaged gifted category makes provisions for certain factors that exist that may put the student at a disadvantage when inappropriate instruments are used during the assessment process. Assessment Once the LSC has determined that a student should move forward to the assessment phase, district personnel shall review all data available on the student before deciding which measures are most appropriate to be used during assessment. After reviewing the information available, district personnel shall collect measures from at least three of the categories of assessment measures. A student shall satisfy minimal state criteria on measures from at least three categories before moving forward in the process. Districts may elect to set the local minimal criteria higher than the criteria stated in regulations. Parental Permission for Testing At this time, if parental permission for testing has not been obtained, district personnel shall obtain written parental permission for testing. Phase I Assessment Criteria 1. A full scale score at or above the 90 th percentile on a normed group measure of intelligence. 2. A score at or above the superior range on a normed characteristics of giftedness checklist. 3. A score at or above the superior range on a normed measure of creativity. 4. A score in the superior range on a normed measure of leadership. 8

23 5. A score at or above the 90 th percentile on a normed measure of cognitive abilities. 6. A score at or above the 90 th percentile on total language, total math, total reading, total science, total social studies, or the composite on a normed achievement test. 7. Other measures as approved by the SBE on the district s Gifted Education Program Proposal. A student who has satisfied the minimal acceptable criteria on any three of the above measures shall move forward to the individual test of intelligence. Phase II Assessment Criteria Once it has been determined that a student has satisfied minimal criteria on three measures from Phase I of assessment, the student shall move forward to the second phase of assessment, the individual test of intelligence. All individual tests of intelligence shall be administered by a licensed examiner. In no case will the examiner be related to the student being tested. The examiner shall review all available data on the student, whether or not it satisfies minimal identification criteria, and use that information to select the most appropriate test of intelligence. No more than one individual test of intelligence shall be administered to the student without an appropriate waiting period between administrations. The examiner shall provide a signed and dated report of the test administration to include testing conditions, scores on all subtests or subscales, and the strengths and weaknesses of the student. A student must score at or above the 90 th percentile composite/full scale or the 90 th percentile on approved subtests in order to satisfy eligibility criteria. 9