Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums Parenting and Advocacy I didn't sign the NORA

Thank you so much for your compliments. Man is it hard lol! I just received the new GIEP yesterday. It's not great. There is still so much work to be done. Without saying it out loud the district has really dug its heels in on properly subject accelerating dd in reading and has no mention of a math goal at all. The document takes a small step toward being more specific but ultimately misses the mark. I am currently cobbling together my written response and it looks like we're in for another meeting. This one makes me even more nervous than the last - though, when I'm honest, I'm not really sure what I am nervous about. Every time I receive a new GIEP I go back to advocacy binder and compare and contrast, do some more research and come out even more confident than I was the first time that I am not being unreasonable. It is a long road, but I'm glad I have to you all to travel with me.
indigo - I have noticed this sort of behavior already when they point to DD's one missed math question as a reason she's not exceeding despite her 93%ile scores on the KTEA - I agree she is not in a position to grade skip, but teaching her multiplication won't preclude her learning addition...
I recently requested a copy of her educational record and the guidance counselor informed me that I already had copies of everything. I asked for the full report from her tests and they said the tests themselves were copyrighted, so the scores I have are all there is to give - this doesn't feel right to me, as I have seen sample reports online that are many pages long and have great detail - the only information I have is scale-composite score-percentile rank- qualitative description alongside a 2 paragraph explanation of how she performed during the testing (was she nervous, did she make any comments on the material). During our meeting, the school psychologist was able to look up grade equivalencies so I know that information is at least available.
Looks like I need to send some more emails.

It may be that they did not write up any additional narrative on the formal testing. The sample reports you've seen online are likely the ones generated by report-writing software--which many professionals prefer not to use, as they are hardly rich in clinical interpretation. Anything else is generated by a professional from the scores you've already been provided, and therefore not part of the student record if they choose not to generate it. Grade/age equivalencies can be looked up, but it's not best practice to use them for any high-stakes decision-making, as the tests are not designed for such use.

I mention this just so you fight the battles that are worth fighting--of which I think you already have sufficient!

I agree the grade/age equivalencies are essentially useless, but since the district still has not provided any insight as to her instructional levels I am trying to work with the information I have. I am happy to hear there is no secret report that they are withholding lol.
As a side note, does anyone have any experience combatting the argument that "our district is so great that the nationally normed tests aren't reflective of the material being used in the classroom - all our kids perform above average." This seems to be the most pervasive obstacle to obtaining acceleration. Any pointers you have would be great. Thanks!

Sigh. Pervasive everywhere! To that, my preferred response would be placement/end-of-unit/end-of-course testing using the actual curriculum employed by the district. If a student performs at a level on the actual core curriculum that is comparable to that routinely used to determine grade-advancement, then equity would demand that the student in question be considered to have mastered that grade level of material. E.g., if all other seventh-graders are considered to have passed math if they demonstrate cumulative mastery of the curriculum with a grade of 70 (in this case, using, say, the end-of-course test as a proxy for course grades), then a student who can pass the end-of-course test with a 70% should advance to the eighth grade math course. And if the average student completes the course with a grade of 85, then go ahead, use 85% as the cut score. Best would be if they actually had the end-of-course test score for the lowest passing student, but they might not have that data. And if they don't have any of that student data (which would be troubling from another angle, which there's no need to go into here), then, as 70% is widely considered mastery level (e.g., in standards-based grading systems), I'd suggest that cut score.

Thanks aeh - my biggest hurdle with that testing is math. In reading, DD will surely pass out based on that criteria. But I've been trying to explain to the district that DD is also gifted in math, but should not be expected to self teach the subject matter in order to be provided compaction (and eventual acceleration because of the compaction). The very purpose of compaction is identifying her aptitude and rate of acquisition while realizing she has not been presented the material before.

UPDATE: The school emailed this week and mid-month we are headed to an IEP facilitation. I am both hopeful and terrified, but either way, there should be progress. I'll keep you posted

Hello!
It is amazing how cooperative the school can be with a facilitator sitting in the room! We won't have the final document until sometime this week, so we'll see it if contains everything that was promised during the meeting, but for now, I'm going to take our victory lap!
They added start/stop levels to the goals, assessment timelines and how many, a PLEP synopsis with instructional levels in each subject area and how they were determined, agreed to pretesting in math, above level textbooks in every subject, differentiated homework, spelling lists, and vocab. They agreed to regularly send home the rubrics and assessments so that we could stay in the loop and added CDT testing 3x a year in reading to stay on top of her levels. It feels like a dream come true.
The best part is that we meet again in October so we get to take this GIEP for a trial run before we meet next year.
Thank you all sooooo much for your help - I would have never dreamed we'd make it this far and I certainly wouldn't have had the courage of my convictions without your support.

Excellent!

As part of successful advocacy, next steps customarily include writing a friendly, factual letter of understanding, summarizing decisions made and agreed upon at the meeting. This written confirmation documentation often helps to avoid undue procrastination and/or failure to implement.

If the facilitator was an advocate hired by you to represent your child's interests, you may wish to discuss this step with your facilitator/advocate. If the facilitator was provided by the school to assist with creating the IEP, you may wish to include him/her on the distribution list for the letter of understanding.

Nice work, TT!

I suspect it wouldn't go over well to bring this up with your school officials -- but for your own information so that you can evaluate for yourself the school's claims of being above average, it might be interesting to look up your school district at: How Effective Is Your School District?


In the end what matters to you is what they do for your kid, not what the school district may or may not be doing statistically for kids on average.

But more data may help you gauge how well they know their own performance.

I realize this is an old thread, but in regards to how to answer the school's insistence that its curriculum is so good that all the students are advanced, I think that's an easy answer. Every student is entitled to a year's growth in every subject. Regardless of where other students are academically, your student should have measurable growth, and that is where the subject begins and ends. It has nothing to do with other students.