Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums Identification, Testing & Assessment Iowa Acceleration Scale for Subject Acceleration

Dottie.. yes, we are doing "gallon man" this week.

She is in the highest level of reading she is "allowed" to be in her grade, but her teacher says she is working on comprehension, so she is where she is supposed to be. I'm choosing to trust her, even though I don't know if I completely agree with it. She can read anything she picks up, she reads the bible with fluency, althought I don't know about comprehension, as I have to have someone explain it to me, and I have a college degree in english I'm not sooo worried about reading, thought, as she's not bored with it, and her teacher allows her to do her level reading for assignments, and when she's done with that quickly, she can pick out a chapter book of her choice, so I feel that reading is "self directed", so I am ok with it.

She is already the youngest in her class, and I'm not comfortable with her social skills, so I am ruling whole grade advancement out.....I think.

I'll do private testing for IQ if I see I need to. It looks like if she does get a 75%, they will have to do IQ testing to complete the IAS. If she doesn't get 75%, it doesn't matter what her IQ is, they won't advance her, so I don't see the point. I know she's gifted, I just have to jump through their hoops.

Grinity... I was thinking of buying the manual, but I have read everything available online on it, and Dottie has given some of the information I was needing. My first hurdle is obviously the 75% on the fourth grade math test, and then after that, the manual will be my foe, not my friend, as I have another child in the receiving grade. I could fight the district on the 75%.... but that will do me no good, as I can't make them go back and undo the lost year. And Dottie read it that she needed the 75%, so maybe that is an additional criteria to the IAS and they just have poor word choices?

I agree that jumping through their hoops is the best path, but if that fails, it's pretty shocking how when the outside professional step up the previous 'rules' are sometimes forgotten. Not a definite by any means, but there can be some 'shock value' that works in one's favor sometimes.

As for her being the youngest already and her social skills being 'weak' that is sometimes the best reason for a full skip. Why? Well, there is a lot of 'trial and error' and practice in developing social skills, and you want your DD to have lots of experiences to be able to develop social skills. If her classmates are operating, say, 3 years below her intellectually, then how many meaningful and motivating opportunities will she have in the course of the day to develop social skills? In a room with older children, who get her jokes, who like to play what she likes to play, she may have more of a chance to progress in the social skills department.

If she has issues with social skills, then address the issues, but don't sacrifice academics for them.

A good read is:
http://www.accelerationinstitute.org/nation_deceived/

click 'get report' to get a free download.

Smiles,
Grinity

I have the third edition of the IAS. We used it and were successful with our attempts. I think if you get yourself a copy, you could gear up to show them that their conception of the 75% is misunderstood. In reality, the 75% is a key component, but your child can still receive 2 points on that section for her score. 50%-74%, I believe receives 2 points. If less than 10 for that section then WHOLE GRADE is not recommended but they are still supposed to see what total score is and are encouraged to continue with the rest of the scale. The FINAL score is what they need to be looking at and based on the total score will say, single subject, enrichment etc. should be considered. I would challenge their understanding in a non-attacking manner and see if you can't get them to complete it to see the total final score. By quoting the exact verbage of how the IAS is to be used can be to your advanatage. What we did was do a "mock score" out of the sample one in the book at home so we could gauge what we thought they would score for certain things and see where her total score might come out. Even without one whole section of the AAAA we were still an excellent candidate. We did have to argue some points of their understanding of interpretation of the IAS verbage, but they had never used it before. In the end, our attempts were successful, so I can only encourage you to be VERY PREPARED in a non-threatening manner when presenting your side but I think you have a valid point. Without completing the scale, they are not using the tool in the way it was meant to be utilized. If you google it, you can find some samples of the form if you don't have the manual, but I would strongly encourage you to get yourself a copy. We were able to quote it in multiple ways and get it worked out the way we wanted.

This is an interesting point and one I recall thinking about when dd12 was skipping. She took the EXPLORE, which was +4 years above level at the time, but the school would have given the exact same # of points to a +1 year test. Thus, she could have gotten the same # of points for a 5th grade ITBS as she did for getting 75th percentile + on an 8th grade test. Does version three of the IAS address how many grade levels above the test should be?

OP, does your school policy require the above level test to be a certain amount of grades ahead? It's sounding like +2 is their policy which, like Dottie said later, it is nice that they have some consistent policy. However, it also sounds like they are using the IAS in a manner in which it wasn't intended -- to rule in our out subject acceleration based on a small part of the scale. I might try contacting one of the authors of the scale in your instance and inquire if s/he would be willing to give some insight in how best to use the scale when seeking subject acceleration and then, like bh14 suggested, try to bring about some changes in the district policy if you can do that without putting yourself in an adversarial position.

I guess that's why I'm not too keen on using achievement data in isolation. It seems like her school is relying a little too heavily on achievement data although I guess that above level achievement data is technically aptitude. I have one kid who seems to learn everything but math by osmosis and who has always scored highly on achievement and aptitude tests even when instruction is inadequate. My other kiddo, while she has other issues as well, is more reliant on being taught something in school or through my supplementing or her achievement scores get a lot more erratic.

These types of tests seem a lot more subject to what has been taught not what the child is capable of doing if properly placed. It seems to leave a lot of room for kids of pushy parents and high achievers to get accelerated while able but underachieving kids wind up with nothing. That's why I'm more on board with the suggestion of trying to change the district policy. It seems truly silly not to even consider IQ if the achievement piece isn't in place. I'd rather see it the other way around -- not to consider the achievement if the IQ isn't there (although that probably isn't totally fair either).

I'm sure that 2e plays into my younger one's scoring as well. She actually got a higher score on the EXPLORE math in 4th grade than the 4th grade math achievement test.

I haven't read the whole thread, but I'd like to point out that there's a difference between getting 75% of the questions on an end of year test correct and scoring in the 75th *percentile* on that same test.

It was the ITBS, so that is percentile. I understand the difference, but not sure how that would affect the outcome. I'm just focused on the fact that she didn't do well because she had had NO exposure to measurement. I agree that IQ should have been a major factor, as the issue should be if she could pick up quickly on things she didn't know. I'm sure she didn't even show her potential on multiplication and division, because it didn't go that high.

I would gladly dispute them not taking an IQ test even though that is a major factor of the IAS. However, in my eyes, it all comes down to a badly worded document, I think they are still following their "intent", as misguided as that might be.... like others said, at least they have a policy.

"Components of this score include:"

To me, component means one of several, not a criteria. And "this score" I would think refers back to the IAS. BUT... I'm hesitant to take on that battle, then just have the district reword it what they obviously mean, which should just remove that line and list those other lines as additional "criteria". They obviously can't just use the IAS scale and accelarate anyone that scores <10 points, as that would be everybody.

In addition, I want to leave my options open. Her teacher was AMAZING this year and pretty much gave her gradelevel assesments in Nov, which she aced, so she let me send workbooks in let her work independently. I would prefer a situation like that rather than for "subject acceleration", rather than what they usually do with putting her in a 3rd grade math class. I just feel that it should be our goal for her to advance one academic year, as is the right of every other child (at least in "goal"). If she places 75% in grade 3 test, that means she will only advance 25% of a grade level in a whole year?
....Or as somebody pointed out, would already be above 75% of the incoming 4th graders, but those 75% are allowed to move to 4h grade.... and she has to stay in 3rd and sit through things she's mostly already mastered?? REALLY??

My ultimate goal is to get them to agree to curriculum compacting, and let her learn at her own pace, just don't know how to get them to do that, and if that is just a distant dream.

This is the email i am going to send in response to the earlier email sent to me by the school in my previous post. Feel free to critique:

I have read the IAS, and do not read anywhere where a 75% on an achievement test is a criteria for the IAS, it is merely a "component". The IAS gives 2 points for a 75% score 2 levels above, but also gives 1 point for a 50-75% score. In addition, it weighs the Ability portion much higher, as it gives 6 points for a very high IQ test, which was never done on ***. The point of that is obviously to see if she would have the capacity to absorb what will be taught.

In addition, Standard 4, Practice H of the Local AIG plan states that a score of <10 points on the AAAA or a Grand Total Score of <60 points are a criteria for Subject Acceleration. It requires more than 10 points on the AAAA or more than 60 points only for Grade Advancement.

I believe that the way you are interpreting Practice H, and perhaps even the intent of it, is to require 75% on an achiement test in addition to the IAS. But as the AIG plan is currently written for 2010-2013, an IAS is the only criteria, and that has not been completed for ***.

Remeber that the 1 point is per EACH SUBJECT that she received 50-75% on that. Even if she did that on 4-5 subjects, that's 4-5 points and it says (not to exceed 8 points), so she would surely still get a high rating if they actually would just complete the IAS.

I would suggest something along these lines "As stated on page X of the IAS, X edition, a score of 50-74% on each subtest of the following test (insert), merits a score of 1 point, which would give X an total of X for this portion of the IAS. Without completing the entire IAS, we strongly feel that this useful tool is not being utilized for its intended purpose. One cannot accurately gauge whether or not X is a suitable candidate without using the scale with its intended purpose. It states on page 38 of the 3rd edition of the IAS, that a student who scores between 50-74% on an above-level test has a high level of aptitude for that area. A score at or above 75% indicates the student has an exceptional aptitude in that area. On page 39, it states that on an above level test a score of 50-74% on an above level test is a good indication of aptitude and above 75% on an above level test is indicative of exceptional aptitude but BOTH cases are indicative that a student is ready for more advanced work.

Anywhere were you can DIRECTLY quote the text to point out the misinterpretations in their understanding is to your advantage.

That is what we had to do, and as I stated before, we were successful with our attempts .