Fact check on Nevada story
Thank you for sharing this further affirmation.
A brief summary of points made in the lengthy fact-checker article:
- As of 2013, Nevada did not have a Statewide Longitudinal Student Database
(although mandated in 2009, for funds accepted beginning in 2005; therefore State was not compliant).
- State of Nevada collected data from districts, but stored less data than districts made available.
- State of Nevada directed parent to get data from local district.
- However errors can be introduced when moving data from one system to another; parent wanted data collected by State.
- State of Nevada claimed that extracting data by a unique identifier would compromise security...
although a unique identifier for each student is mandated.
- State of Nevada claimed that it could not verify that the requester was the parent of the student whose data was being requested, therefore denied the request.
- State of Nevada offered an estimate of $10K to develop programming
(although it is apparent that such system functionality should have existed, and should have been developed with funds accepted since 2005).
These posts about data collection relate to the OP's concern that his/her child would
receive a grade for each class and be expected to master the material
I agree with ConnectingDots, that in general a gifted child may typically miss some classroom instruction without grades being negatively impacted. I will go further to say that remaining in a class for which the student knows the material may result in boredom and zoning out due to lack of mental stimulation... therefore attending the class instruction may result in a trend of lowering grades.
