THANK YOU! I was in such a rush to post that I should have thought more about clear formatting. I appreciate the help.
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.
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.
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.
It's also disconcerting that it's not specified in writing anywhere.
Agreed. The question to ask here may be: heterogeneous ability grouping (various levels of ability) or homogeneous ability grouping (similar abilities together).
I plan on asking for copies of the "rubrics" they cite everywhere as their measure.
This seems like a fair question and may reveal whether such rubrics exist, or possibly they are made up on-the-fly.
hold GIEP conferences 2x per year (and as requested by a parent).
Prepare and request.
They said that we will review the GIEP yearly as required by law, but that the goals may endure through several years.
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.)
I was hoping for more specific, organized plans, but I'm not sure if that is appropriate to ask for.
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).
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.
Absolutely.
I am just having difficulty quantifing the document - its hard for me to hold them accountable when everything seems so ... wishy washy.
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.
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.
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.
Is there some other form of acceleration I could reasonably request?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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”.
I just need to know what to ask for!
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?").
If I had it my way she would be taught at a faster pace and progressively advanced topics - is that so hard?!? ::sigh::
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.
