Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums Learning Environments GIEP too vague?

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