I've been tryng to advocate for a subject acceleration in math for my 6 year old for a while. Last fall, they tested her, and used the IAS. She was at the beginning of first grade at the time, scored 99% on the end of first grade exam, but scored 69% on the end of second grade exam. They denied her, because they said the IAS requires a 75% on the second grade exam (which seems unfair, because she would still be bored if she knew 75% of what they were planning on teaching her).

My point and question is this. I was just doing some research on the Iowa Acceleration Scale to further advocate for next year, and realized that it is a WHOLE GRADE ASSESMENT. If she scores 34 or fewer poins, a single subject acceleration should be considered (and is what we are going for). They are ruling single subject acceleration out because she did not score above 60 points, presumably because of the 69 on the achievement test.

Has anyone had experience with the IAS and know what exactly the scale for the AAAA is? And has anyone had it used for single subject acceleration?

Our placement option plan calls for getting 10+ points on the AAAA, can anyone tell me how that breaks down? I requested a copy of her file, and the scale is not in there, nor was I ever asked to participate in the scale, which I believe is part of the criteria for the scale (that a parent be on the "team").

IAS comes with a wonderful 'manual' that is worth ordering and keeping as a reference.

Most of what you are saying makes no sense, which could be that you are confused, but could easily be that the school folks who are using the scale are confused.

Don't know what the AAAA is,

As far as I can tell, this is totally untrue.

I mean logically, if your child is scoring 99% on an end of year test at the begining of the year, then nothing fancy is needed to bump her up to the next level.

I would try to put on my least hostile face, and head back to the school and ask them to answer every question you have until it starts to make sense.

Keep posting and we'll try and help. Buy the manual, it's a great little book!

Grinity

Oh yeah - it's coming back to me now!
So did they even do above level testing or an individual IQ test? Hard to score on AAAA if the school hasn't done all the possible testing, yes?

Grinity

Yes, I know I make no sense, but I promise its of no fault of my own. I had unsuccessfully argued that since she scored 99%, there was no reason for her to remain in first grade. But they insist that she has to score a 75% in the grade level she would be placed in, so that she is successful and doesn't struggle. Trust me, I know it makes no sense, you are preaching to the choir. She has to stay at the grade level where she is bored in, and can only advance if she will be bored there, too.

The AAAA is the Academic Ability, Aptitude and Achievment part of the Scale.

The other parts are the
School and Academic Factors
Developmental Factors
Interpersonal Skills
Attitude and Support


The "official criteria" for subject acceleration for my district says:
------------------------------------
Academic Ability, Aptitude and Achievement (AAAA) Subtotal score <10 points and/or Grand Total score<60 points

Components of this score include:
Quantitative:
-Full Scale IQ =115+
-Two years above grade level on achievement test in reading and/or math in subject(s) to be accelerated with a score of 75 percentile of higher (ex: a 2nd grader would take a 4th grade test and score in the 75% or higher.)
-On grade level achievement test score of 95 percentile or higher in subjects to be accelerated.
-------------------------------

No, the <10 points is not a typo, that is how it is written there. I am trying to figure out if the people responsible for educating my children don't know the difference between a < or > or if its actually <10 points, because the criteria for Whole Grade advancement is 10+ points.

http://aig.ucps.k12.nc.us/documents/plan_standard4.pdf
page 46 of 66 "k-8 services acceleration option"

First, Thank you so much for all your help. I am gearing up for a meeting next week, and want to have all my ducks in a row.
-testing is less than a year ago,so still current (last 12 months) but not really applicable since now we have to test for achievement in other grade levels.
-Apparently, they DID NOT do any aptitude or ability test. Because (from email sent minutes ago):

The first step in evaluating a student for AIG acceleration services is to do an achievement test on grade level. **** met the criteria for that, so we proceeded with the next step--an above-grade-level test. However, she did not meet the critieria on that level so we were unable to continue the process. Because both of these tests are necessary components of the Iowa Acceleration Scale, we were unable to proceed further. That is why there are no Iowa Accerlation Scale results in her folder, only the scores of the first two rounds of her evaluation. I hope that helps.

--------------
-from the way I read the district criteria, they probaly did mean <10 points, because it is in the section for subject acceleration, whole grade level does require >10 points. On the calculation on the IAS, it says "....(if) the AAAA subtotal score is <10, do not consider whole-grade acceleration". Which then leaves the door open to subject acceleration, as a Grand total of 34 or fewer points actually recommends the consideration of single-subject acceleration.

-so from my understanding, they never did an IAS, as the district requires. they simply did a "component" of the score, and ruled it out based on that. Is this what you both gather???

-

The scale says "do not consider WHOLE-GRADE ACCELERATION"... as the whole manual and book is written to determine whole grade acceleration, not single subject. We don't want whole grade.

but I gather that you are reading my district's policy to read that IN ADDITION to the IAS, they require a full IQ of 115+ (which would be no problem) AND a 75% of the accelerated grade level achievement...... ok, I can see that.... sort of.

I was reading it that they were merely explaining that the IAS would involve those factors, as they stated "Components of this score include"..... and then also include developmental factors, interpersonal skills, etc, but do not indicate what they have to be, but imply that the IAS will score that.

This is their GT program.... I realize math in elementary isn't supposed to be challenging, and I have 2 older ones in the "normal" GT program, that always needed but lacked "challenge". But this is different... she can help the older two with their homework.

I'm not too worried about her making a 75% this year. Everything she had known she had absorbed, nobody had really taught her. But there were things she wasn't exposed to, such as geometry and measurement, that she couldn't possibly have known. this year I made an effort to exposed her to a little bit more of that, so I think she will do fine. Now I am going to go for a 2 year acceleration. I know she could do it if I sat with her for two days and taught her the material.... just seems so counter productive to have to teach her math when all i want is for the school to actually teach her.

Yup - that's what I read. I don't agree with their critieria for the above level test, and I would guess that it's based on a misreading of IASmanual of some kind. Will you be able to convinse them that their policy is wrong? Seems like an unproductive tack to take. Buy the manual, read the manual, understand the manual, then slowly guide the school.

In the meanwhile, this is one of those situations where I would be sorely tempted to 'have some fun learning Math' with DD so that when she is retested she scores as high as possible. They aren't playing fair, so why should you?

I do agree with Dottie, that getting an IQ test, from school or privately from someone who can act as an advocate, is a great next step.

Love and More Love,
Grinity

Looks like our posts crossed!
Anyway - if DD is helping the older gifted sibs with their homework (even in jest) you might want to think about IQ testing and a full grade skip even more.

Check out - http://www.hoagiesgifted.org/highly_gifted.htm

Have a great weekend,
Grinity

Oh! Oh!
Look around your district's website for something called 'scope and sequence' - basically a list of what they expect their x grader to know.

Or just do a weekend with Aleks.com
Smiles,
Grinity

Agree. What finally drove us to outside testing was the juxtaposition, within a short time, of learning that DS5 had been helping a fourth-grade girl with her math homework, and hearing from our K teacher that DS5 was "just where he needed to be" (I don't fault her at all for an honestly held opinion, and our son likes to fly under the radar at times, but that was pretty much the triggering event for us).

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 .

One other important point that is on page 40 it states...
" above level testing is ONLY required for the assessment of aptitude and is not required in the assessment of ability or achievement."

HELLO! We wish you the best of luck in your efforts! Our recommendation is to provide a full presentation with research, references, highlighted excerpts, as well as specific examples of your child's work. It's a LOT of work...but...

BACKGROUND: We are currently vigorously advocating for our DYS DS9 for acceleration 4th to 6th grade. He has WISC-IV FSIQ 153. "Our" (parents) scored IAS was a 74. We are supposed to get the "teacher" view this Thursday. We have had several meetings, have made some progress, but it has been extremely difficult and stressful. We remain hopeful for the outcome...

QUESTION: Does anyone know where I can find a list of the states, school districts, countries, etc., that use the IOWA scale? In an appendix to "A Nation Deceived" (www.nationdeceived.org), there is a mention of 103 schools that responded to a study, and a table lists Australia and 12 US states specifically. In the preface to the IAS-3 Manual, there is the following statement:

"...since 1998, it has been used for successful acceleration decisions with hundreds of students in school districts throughout the United States, as well as in other countries."

However, a list or specific number of states, schools, school districts, etc., was not listed anywhere that I can find in the manual or through online research.

Any ideas?

Thanks, and again, best of luck to you or anyone else currently advocating for their children!

Kevin

I agree Dottie, but if that is their only reason for her NOT progressing further, it may help somewhat. We too, did what the pp mentioned with mega research, portfolio, full presentation etc. definitely helped. Showing we weren't clueless as to what we mentioned helped. In other words, pointing out that you understand the IAS so they can't pull one over on you is important. The IAS is not an end all for anyone, it's a scale that makes a suggestion, not an end result. That's the important think to remember.

Also, the reason we had to point it out was because our school had never done it before and were trying to do unneccessary things that were way out there.

Hi Kevin - welcome!
I have an idea - in the past the lead researcher for IAS has been very kind and helpful - I would email:

I'm guessing that your school would like to be able to phone some neighboring schools to get advice on how the darn scale is supposed to work. But what ever your purpose is, please share it with Dr. Asouline. Even if she can't give you a list, she may be able to help in some other way, such as offering to contact the school, or contacting a local school and asking them to contact your school. Who knows?

Good luck and Welcome!
Grinity

Thanks Grinity! Great idea. I will email her right now...

They are definitely missusing the IAS. On another document from the district, there is a direct contradiction... says >10 points for subject acceleration, where the other one says <10 points. I'm pretty sure that in writing the district document, someone figured the <10 points had to be a mistake, since it doesn't make sense to use it the way they are using it:
they list the IAS as a "criteria", requiring <10 points..... well, that would be every kid who requested subject acceleration.... correct?
They must have decided to just change it to >10 points (instead of consulting the IAS)... which also makes no sense, since that is the criteria for whole level advancement.

I've emailed the director, just to let her know of the mistake, because such an error on a legal document disturbs me. Since the document contradicts itself, there is no current official policy, so I feel I just took 2 steps back.

I agree, you are better off without clear cut policies in place.. it gives you more freedom. I agree, if you know as much as you can and remain polite, but not a push-over, you can go far (but only as far as THEY are willing to let you. Unfortunately, sometimes that is no where and you need to weigh your options all around, even if that means possibly a different school.)

Just a little update: I was able to get her a self paced acceleration... without it being an "official" acceleration into a different classroom. So instead of sending her to 3rd grade math, which I was reluctant to do anyway, they are excusing her from her 2nd grade curriculum and letting her do Aleks on her own.

She's loved it. Only problem is that she's blown through 3rd grade math on Aleks in 3 weeks. She tested out of most of it initially, so I'm hoping 4th grade will be at a slower pace.