I just had my first ever Kindergarten GIEP meeting - I felt good about the whole thing, until I started carefully going over the agreement. I understand that the "goals" section is supposed to be vague, but I feel like there are almost no specifics in the short-term or SDI sections either - no real timelines or specific mesurements. Can anyone with more experience weigh in and let me know if this is acceptable. Here are the three sections - sorry if this is a long post:

II. Goals and Outcomes:
A. Annual Goal:
Read and analyze developmentally appropriate texts at the current instructional and
independent reading level.
B. Short-Term Learning Outcomes:
Short Term Objective Objective Criteria Assessment Procedures Timeline
Given instructional-level reading
material, the student will apply higher
-level thinking skills to analyze,
synthesize and evaluate information
Complete
written and oral
responses to
literature with a
minimum score
of proficient
based on
teacher
established
rubrics.
Review of written
and verbal
responses
Established
rubrics
Teacher/Student
conferences
Teacher
observation
Bi-annually
C. Specially Designed Instruction (include this information for each annual goal)
SDI Projected Date
for Initiation
Anticipated
Frequency
Location Anticipated
Duration
Provide challenge and require complex
responses
Conferencing between student groups
and teacher
Flexible grouping
Small group instruction
Independent book conferencing with
teacher
Assistance provided when needed to
choose books for independent reading
that are on her independent reading
level
Guided reading instruction using
higher-level texts
Extension activities for comprehension
skills

A. Annual Goal:
To develop effective creative thinking and expression in both oral and written
communication
B. Short-Term Learning Outcomes:
Short Term Objective Objective Criteria Assessment Procedures Timeline
Generate, classify, and evaluate
ideas, objects, and /or events in
unique and/or new ways to construct
original projects that illustrate
solutions to real-life problems or
concerns.
Demonstrate
proficiency
evaluating ideas
and events in
unique ways as
well as
construct
original projects
Review of
solutions
developed
Review of work
products
Established
rubrics
Teacher/Student
conferences
Teacher
observation
Bi-annually
C. Specially Designed Instruction (include this information for each annual goal)
SDI Projected Date
for Initiation
Anticipated
Frequency
Location Anticipated
Duration
Student choice with clearly defined
outcomes
Conferencing between student groups
and teacher
Provide student with a variety of
presentation options
Facilitate problem-based or inquiry
learning
Flexible grouping
Small group instruction
Direct instruction in methods of
evaluating alternative solutions
Direct instructions in creative thinking
techniques
Differentiate tasks and assignments to
foster individual creativity
Opportunities to work, learn, and
problem-solve as a member of a group
Extension activities

A. Annual Goal:
Develop higher level thinking skills and apply to various situations and tasks.
B. Short-Term Learning Outcomes:
Short Term Objective Objective Criteria Assessment Procedures Timeline
Select and apply logical/critical
thinking skills to single and multiple
solution/open-ended problems
Demonstrate
proficiency
solving single solution
logic
problems and
when
developing
appropriate
and pragmatic
solutions to
open-ended
tasks
Review of written
and verbal
responses
Review of solutions
developed
Review of work
products
Established rubrics
Teacher/Student
conferences
Teacher
observation
Teacher review of
student’s written
and oral responses
to literature
Teacher-made
tests, Curriculum based
assessments,
Performance-based
assessments, &
Problem-solving
tasks
Bi-annually
C. Specially Designed Instruction (include this information for each annual goal)
SDI Projected Date
for Initiation
Anticipated
Frequency
Location Anticipated
Duration
Provide challenge and require complex
responses
Conferencing between student groups
and teacher
Apply higher order thinking skills
(application, analysis, evaluation, and
synthesis)
Small group instruction
Direct instruction in problem-solving
strategies
Direct instruction in methods of
evaluating alternative solutions
Direct instructions in creative thinking
techniques
Direct instruction in the use of
inductive and deductive thinking
Identify student’s interest for
compacting and substituting work


Thanks for your patience!

Hi,
I have a similar experience too. My kid is in 1st grade and I had his GIEP meeting last week. His GIEP was even more ambiguous. There were lots of jargons and the teacher did explain everything to me. However, I was not sure what they cover as part of the Gifted curriculum in specific. She also showed me a 2nd grade math book that he is currently independently working on and a few other math tiles and packets. The bottom line is there were no specifics with respect to the curriculum. However, I did not worry much as he would be moving to full time gifted classroom from 2nd grade where he would be learning 3rd grade CCSS.
I would, however, be interested to learn what many of these terms in GIEP mean.

Wow, I wouldn't be comfortable with that document either.

That's what I was afraid of! What should I be looking for? I want to be armed for our next meeting so that I don't keep going back and forth with them.

My only saving grace is that we are scheduling another meeting soon to talk about grade acceleration, so I am hoping to bring up my concerns then since they will have to rewrite the GIEP anyway. So I am trying to get prepared now, so I know what to expect.

It looks like they might be writing a cookie cutter GIEP to fit their program instead of writing an individual document to fit your child's individual needs.

In your document, is there a "Current Levels" or similarly themed section? In your opinion, is it complete as to current grade levels for different classes, leadership skills, etc? IMO, if the current levels section is done very well, the school often has no reasonable choice but to address them (once you point it out).

If it is not complete, request that they add information (and possibly do testing, not just IQ) until it is complete.

I have never done IEP/GIEP process so I'm not familiar with how the documents are written.

I would be looking for something I can hold the school accountable for.

Child will receive 30 minutes of individual instruction in reading per day during [class period] in the [classroom/pullout/library] to focus on [specific literacy goals].

Child will be provided with sequentially advancing curriculum in all subjects. Child may progress to subsquent levels after showing mastery by [specific score on specific assessment].

Child will be given [proctored or not? Take home or not?] classroom chapter tests as pre-tests. When Child scores equal to or greater than [specific score] on a pre-test s/he will be provided with [specific alternate curriculum or online resource] to work on [in classroom/library/etc].

Child will attend [subject] with [specific grade/classroom] during [class period].

The PLEP section is .... ok.....
Initially they tried to just include the WPPSI-IV and KTEA-3 with some teacher remarks, I pushed for more testing and the reading specialist provided some more information. It is not as thorough as I would like. I have made the point to them that I don't think she would test out of first grade because she hasn't had access to the material (like telling time) but with even a smidgen of prep she would pass by the end of the school year - hence our conversation about acceleration. They also mentioned she was advanced in Math, but never provided a goal for that topic. I signed the NORA in the first meeting just so that she would get "some" instruction while we figure out the kinks, but now I am regretting that. They seem open to more meetings at my request, but I want to be prepared. I know they are looking to add the results from the IOWA Scales to the PLEP so hopefully that helps a bit? I guess I'm just going to have to hammer them on specifics.

That was my feeling too - it is so far from what they provided I feel like I'm in for a fight.
Thanks for the help.

The talk in the meeting was all about how this school is so great at differentiating the instruction that these accommodations are things that we do for all of our students etc.... I tried to point out that even if she is in the "accelerated" group - she is still more advanced than those children (she is the only gifted student currently identified in her grade) And then we started talking acceleration. The problem I see with acceleration is that it is a bandaid - when she has access to higher level materials she will still progress faster than her peers meaning in a year or two we'd be looking at acceleration again?! That just seems crazy. We don't have the money for private school, so I really need to find a workable solution with the public school - I just don't know what to do with her, and it seems they don't either. They want to keep her as mainstream as possible and I'm stuck fighting for accommodations I can't even quantify

Try "continuous progress acceleration". Have you looked at "A Nation Deceived" book? It may help you prepare for meetings. The book is available as free PDF online.

When I was in this situation, I "afterschooled" my son with the school's learning targets. They were looking for holes. If they found a hole, they would not accelerate. So I looked for holes and provided material for him to fill any gaps. There were unintended consequences, but it might work in your situation.

Continuous progress acceleration is the dream - I am just not sure how it would be implemented. I have seen mention of "A nation deceived" all over the place - I guess it's time for me to start reading. We have been doing some work at home, and I think over the summer we will make a more concentrated effort - it just makes me nervous that she will be even more ahead, but I know it's all for the best.

Continuous progress acceleration is mplemented one semester at a time with whatever acceleration type is appropriate at the time. My son has had differentiation, an individual aide in the classroom to provide separate instruction, subject acceleration, compacting, advanced cluster, advanced pull-out, radical acceleration (3-grade skip) to get him access to high school classes, and currently homeschooling.

What does the future hold? I might put him back in public middle school when his classmates reach 6th grade (because the middle/high school automatically subject accelerates and he could get Calculus and Statistics there). I might put him in college radically early. I might homeschool him with every elective I can get my hands on. I might let him graduate high school early and put him in the workforce for a few years to save for college. I have no idea what is coming next. I don't know what will work and what won't. I'm making educated guesses for short-term, hoping for the best, and staying flexible to change what doesn't work.

That is the best any of us can do. Don't plan in advance. Just do whatever is the best of your options for the upcoming semester. Grade skips can be reversed, nothing is permanent. Be aware and responsive to your daughter's needs and you'll give her the best educational match available. (((Hugs)))

A Nation Deceived is the original report (2004), and the ten-year-follow-up is A Nation Empowered (2015). They are both conveniently found here.

Thank you so much for all the support! I read A nation deceived last night and am feeling a lot better about her need to accelerate. It sounds like you are in a dream school - I can't imagine getting that far with ours, but I sure am going to try. Last night I started looking into charter schools and I found one that looked fantastic, until I realized that there are no state protections for gifted ed in charter schools in PA I guess it doesn't matter if the program is good, but I really want her to find a "home", I don't want to continuously move her from school to school or grade to grade. I feel that accelerating her this year is a no-brainer, but I'm afraid that after a year or two she'll be ready for another grade skip She's really well rounded in her gifted-ness, both English and Math, so it seems strange to keep her in the same grade but subject accelerate in .... every class? Life gets so much easier at the high school and college level when there are more options for her. It's these elementary years that are so hard - and so important!!!! It's enough to make any mama crazy. I'll just wait and see what the IOWA scales show and talk with them about a continuous solution and see how far I get. I have no doubt that I'll be back to the boards in a week crying for more help lol.

Thanks a bunch indigo - good to see you again! I read/skimmed it last night and it is a fantastic resource!

Could you take a look at my initial post and let me know what your thoughts are about the GIEP they offered?

Thanks again!

Great! Glad to hear you found A Nation Deceived without me posting the link in this thread.

I glanced at the original post and had a difficult time making sense of it due to the spacing and the lack of bullets or some means to mark the start of a new idea. I thought of posting an edited version but did not due to:
1) lack of time to wade through the gobbledygook, and
2) equivocating about replicating something which could potentially be identifying to teachers at your school who may read this forum...

But, since you asked... here goes! Possibly with this attempt at a re-formatted GIEP more members may respond as well.

It seems the information was pulled from a chart or table format... Just guessing on how to assemble the pieces, not guaranteeing that this is assembled correctly...


II. Goals and Outcomes:

A. Annual Goal #1:
- Read and analyze developmentally appropriate texts at the current instructional and independent reading level.
This does not mention or document the instructional level, the independent reading level, or the gap between them.

B. Short-Term Learning Outcomes:
Short Term Objective
- Given instructional-level reading material, the student will apply higher-level thinking skills to analyze, synthesize and evaluate information
Objective Criteria
- Complete written and oral responses to literature with a minimum score of proficient based on teacher established rubrics.
Assessment Procedures
- Review of written and verbal responses: Established rubrics
- Teacher/Student conferences
- Teacher observation
Timeline
Bi-annually

C. Specially Designed Instruction (include this information for each annual goal)
SDI Projected Date for Initiation - Anticipated Frequency - Location - Anticipated Duration
The above information may provide some of the 5Ws (who, what, where, when, why, how) which would describe the student experience under this "Specially Designed Instruction".

- Provide challenge and require complex responses
Challenge - in what form? Raising instructional reading level?
Complex response - nebulous, subjective, and may involve differentiated task demands

- Conferencing between student groups and teacher How are the children grouped... by readiness and ability???
- Flexible grouping Cluster grouping by ability, reading level?
- Small group instruction Again, how are students grouped?
- Independent book conferencing with teacher
- Assistance provided when needed to choose books for independent reading that are on her independent reading level
- Guided reading instruction using higher-level texts
- Extension activities for comprehension skills
IMO, the "level" should be specified/documented. Out of 7 points provided, only two actually describe INSTRUCTION.

A. Annual Goal #2:
To develop effective creative thinking and expression in both oral and written communication

B. Short-Term Learning Outcomes:
Short Term Objective
- Generate, classify, and evaluate ideas, objects, and /or events in unique and/or new ways to construct original projects that illustrate solutions to real-life problems or concerns.
Objective Criteria
- Demonstrate proficiency evaluating ideas and events in unique ways as well as construct original projects LOL, some may say that is what I am doing here
Assessment Procedures
- Review of solutions developed
- Review of work products
- Established rubrics
- Teacher/Student conferences
- Teacher observation
Timeline
Bi-annually

C. Specially Designed Instruction (include this information for each annual goal)
SDI Projected Date for Initiation - Anticipated Frequency - Location - Anticipated Duration
- Student choice with clearly defined outcomes
- Conferencing between student groups and teacher
- Provide student with a variety of presentation options
- Facilitate problem-based or inquiry learning
- Flexible grouping
- Small group instruction
- Direct instruction in methods of evaluating alternative solutions
- Direct instructions in creative thinking techniques
- Differentiate tasks and assignments to foster individual creativity Not a fan of differentiated task demands.
- Opportunities to work, learn, and problem-solve as a member of a group
- Extension activities

A. Annual Goal #3:
Develop higher level thinking skills and apply to various situations and tasks.

B. Short-Term Learning Outcomes:
Short Term Objective
- Select and apply logical/critical thinking skills to single and multiple solution/open-ended problems
Objective Criteria
- Demonstrate proficiency solving single solution logic problems and when developing appropriate and pragmatic solutions to open-ended tasks
Assessment Procedures
- Review of written and verbal responses
- Review of solutions developed
- Review of work products
- Established rubrics
- Teacher/Student conferences
- Teacher observation
- Teacher review of student’s written and oral responses to literature
- Teacher-made tests, Curriculum based assessments, Performance-based assessments, & Problem-solving tasks
Timeline
Bi-annually

C. Specially Designed Instruction (include this information for each annual goal)
SDI Projected Date for Initiation - Anticipated Frequency - Location - Anticipated Duration
- Provide challenge and require complex responses
- Conferencing between student groups and teacher
- Apply higher order thinking skills (application, analysis, evaluation, and synthesis)
- Small group instruction
- Direct instruction in problem-solving strategies May be interesting?
- Direct instruction in methods of evaluating alternative solutions This sounds valuable.
- Direct instructions in creative thinking techniques
- Direct instruction in the use of inductive and deductive thinking
- Identify student’s interest for compacting and substituting work This may be valuable, if meaningful choices and options are given... may teach, encourage, and support student self-advocacy skills.

This document strikes me as a plain vanilla boiler plate which may be provided to each student at any ability level. Group work could be anything... including "count off 1-2-3-4... ones meet the the back corner, twos in the middle of the room... "

Most of the GIEP triggers my BS meter, therefore I will add a link to buzzwords. However I found two things which may be valuable in the 3rd goal.

Depending upon your State Laws and local school policies, a GIEP may not be required, or there may not be guidelines like those which exist for IEPs. Long story short, we may not like it, but the school may not be required to change it or provide further clarification or detail.

THANK YOU! I was in such a rush to post that I should have thought more about clear formatting. I appreciate the help.

The "groups" they assured me were by ability level, though I tried to point out that since she is the only identified gifted child in this grade level it is unlikely that even the "highest group" would be suitable. It's also disconcerting that it's not specified in writing anywhere.

I was afraid of exactly what you said - a vanilla standard with some BS thrown in. I just wanted to know exactly what I needed to push for clarification on. I plan on asking for copies of the "rubrics" they cite everywhere as their measure. I'm not sure if the timeline is changeable since the only hold GIEP conferences 2x per year (and as requested by a parent).

They said that we will review the GIEP yearly as required by law, but that the goals may endure through several years. I was hoping for more specific, organized plans, but I'm not sure if that is appropriate to ask for. To me the short term objectives and SDI's should be changing regularly - as one skill is mastered we can move on to the next. I am just having difficulty quantifing the document - its hard for me to hold them accountable when everything seems so ... wishy washy.

As for acceleration I have another question: Currently we are looking at a grade skip to address the fact that she is over 1 year ahead in all subjects. However, acceleration doesn't seem to address the pace issue. If my child learns faster than her peers - when she grade skips that seems to me, to be a bandaid, because she will continue to learn faster than her new peers and after a matter of time we'd be looking at another grade skip! Not to mention - she will have access to higher level materials in a higher grade, but the pace will still be the same slow progression. Is there some other form of acceleration I could reasonably request? Continuous progress acceleration sounds like a dream - but I have no idea how a public school could implement it without a teacher that caters to my child alone - which I know is not a reasonable request. That was the appeal of the mixed grade charter school I was looking into, but then we run into issues with gifted education not being mandated and she would lose out on the pull out program the public school offers, which does look valuable. This seems to be the most pressing issue. I just need to know what to ask for! If I had it my way she would be taught at a faster pace and progressively advanced topics - is that so hard?!? ::sigh::

You are welcome. I remember all-too-well the days of being in your shoes. I'm glad if sharing a little 20/20 hindsight can be beneficial.

Agreed. Ability grouping, if done within a gen-ed classroom amongst chronological-age peers most likely will not provide academic/intellectual peers for a gifted pupil. Research by Miraca Gross mentions the importance of academic peers and stimulating curriculum at the level frequently referred to as challenging, or as the student's zone of proximal development (ZPD).

That said, being the only child identified as gifted does not mean that she is the only gifted child... especially in kindergarten. The IQ of most children may not have been assessed yet... even though many of them may be regarded as being "smart" as compared with other kids or being "advanced" or "ahead" of chronological-age peers.

Agreed. The question to ask here may be: heterogeneous ability grouping (various levels of ability) or homogeneous ability grouping (similar abilities together).

This seems like a fair question and may reveal whether such rubrics exist, or possibly they are made up on-the-fly.

Prepare and request.

When is a goal not a goal? Possibly when it is a perennial goal?

In this case, it is possible that the same goals will be used for several years as a means to mark time until 3rd grade when gifted screening may take place and a gifted program may begin. (I am not endorsing this, just explaining what I anticipate may be their reasoning.)

One can ask... but first research your State Laws and school policies as these dictate what the school must do (and they do not need to do anything further).

Absolutely.

Possibly they want it that way. A number of parents will be very pleased with such a document and tout all the things the school is doing for their child. For some, this may be largely based on seeing a lot of words on a page which says "Gifted" (as in Gifted Individual Education Plan). For others, this may be based on having children who are slightly ahead of the curve and whose needs are being met with the tiny nudge here or enrichment there... or a grouping which actually does place them with academic/intellectual peers, because there simply are more children at their level in the classroom. The parents pleased with such a document are typically not parents of outliers.

This is correct. Pace remains an issue. However sometimes advancing a grade makes school tolerable (though far from a good fit). Sometimes posters refer to this as the "least-worst" option. It is also possible that a gifted child may advance into a classroom with another gifted child who may be a closer academic/intellectual peer than the child has in his/her classroom of chronological-age peers.

You may have already seen this article on the Davidson Database... Types of Acceleration: The concepts of combined classes, compacting curriculum, telescoping curriculum can be effective. They are not difficult to implement but in general the school as a whole needs to plan this, it would tend to involve grouping students from beyond one gen-ed classroom.

Somewhat similar to the computer-adaptive MAP tests, some online curricula adapt to student progress. These may also hold students in a level for silly mistakes or careless errors. Some online programs may perform a lot of data capture... how long a student was on a particular page, tracing where their eyes scanned, capturing keystrokes, etc.

Maybe, maybe not. It's more about placement and pacing than about being called "gifted". Dr. Donald Treffinger describes it well online at the website of Center for Creative Learning (CCL), as “Dear School People”.

If only I knew the magic words that would make others see what we see!
Basically you want to meet your child's educational/developmental needs for:
- academic/intellectual peers
- curriculum instruction, placement, and pacing in their zone of proximal development (ZPD)
so that your child learns work ethic, responsibility, coping with disappointment, self-worth stemming from the accomplishment of a challenging task, time-management skills, study skills, goal setting, decision-making and problem-solving skills, and sacrifice...
rather than learning to be always #1, an isolate, the one to knock down, the one to ask questions of, the one who cannot ask questions without negative commentary by others ("If you're so smart, why are you asking that?").

In the past it may have been difficult due to a dearth of:
1) a large body of anecdotal evidence (observation and lived experience) regarding the developmental trajectory of the gifted,
2) research studies and empirical evidence as to the needs of gifted individuals,
3) communication channels for broadly disseminating information about supporting and educating the gifted.

Now, it is only difficult because Common Core ushered in an era in which the educational goal is equal outcomes, which often means capping the growth of students at the top. Extensive data collection follows children through life and is used, in part, to evaluate whether teachers are effective enough at closing the achievement gaps and excellence gaps among pupils in their classrooms.

If your school seems like it wants to help but does not understand the needs of a gifted pupil, you may wish to mention the Davidson Educators Guild.

Whew! Thanks again indigo. It was relief to read some affirmations that I'm not crazy lol.
I'll wait for our meeting after the iowa scales and tackle the acceleration question then. Hopefully I can also tack on some more meaningful language in the GIEP at the same time.

I appreciate all the insight!
Thank god for those that came before me!

So the gifted coordinator randomly called me today to ask if I had any questions......
I told her I would like a copy of the rubrics that are mentioned so that I can better gauge the specificity of the document.
She said she'd be more than happy to send over a few "examples".
She then went on to explain that they have a million rubrics that all teachers have access to and that these are used for big projects, small projects, over arching goals etc...
She essentially explained that the GIEP is vague because the kids are hard to quanify and the GIEP would be difficult to pin down, whereas use of these rubrics will allow them to just move on to the next level.
She said this is a great district, they exceed the demands of the state, and they run a really great program.
I am both relieved and worried. I do truly believe her -- I think the program is much better than any other district - it was a big reason we moved here. I'm just nervous I'm going to have to keep chipping away at the need for specificity in the document. Rather than overwhelm them with my concerns I'm trying to focus on one issue at a time.
I guess I'll wait for the Iowa scales in regards to acceleration and she should be mailing me the rubrics today, so maybe they will help....

Remember that the goal is to meet your child's needs. While rubrics can be a stepping stone in that direction... overly focusing on them (or any other detail) may lead you off track and cause you to lose focus on meeting your child's needs.

You have made an inquiry, and received information. The information may not be to our liking but it does help to manage our expectations. You may wish to thank them and leave this topic for now.

When you receive sample rubrics, you may wish to add them to your advocacy documentation... along with a copy of the GIEP and notes about your phone call, etc. These pieces may be organized into a ring binder for your future reference.

The school may be great for populations with which they are familiar. Some say the "optimal" IQ is 120-125. Higher IQ than that (gifted 132+) is more rare (2% of the population). The higher one's IQ, the more rare in the population... the less familiar a school may be with these kiddos... and the more difficult it may be to find academic/intellectual peers.

When a school randomly calls, my concern is that they may have read a post on this forum and thought they recognized the parent/student/family. When the school poses an open-ended question, the parent's answer reveals what is on their mind and may match the subject of the post, confirming the identification. Be careful what you post, and feel free to go back and edit your posts as needed.

Thanks for your concern indigo - I'm not too worried about the school identifying our family in these forums, but it is something to keep in mind. As there is still much planning being done, I feel like this is a great time in the process to collect information and wait for our next meeting. We are definitely making progress and our relationships are good, so I am starting to feel more confident that we will get there eventually. Baby steps I guess. It's always good for me to come here for some perspective before I meet with the team again.