<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=us-ascii"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><div><div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; ">Sally hit the nail on the head. There is a difference between a teacher monitoring all students, as the administer suggests, and actually using that data to alter instruction in a meaningful way to affect growth. Teaching as usual and watching test scores or other means of progress monitoring is not going to lead to academic growth. There has to be learner-centered interventions to affect change, and those look very different for gifted students than they do for general education students. <div><br></div><div>In terms of what measurements will the GIS use to show the benefit of gifted programs - pullouts or otherwise, the first thing that comes to mind are SLOs. For all of the grumbling everyone is doing with regards to OTES and SLOs, for the first time, we really now have a state endorsed way for all teachers to demonstrate their impact on kids. The outcomes from a well-crafted SLO are either going to break gifted programs that are fluff and in name only or they will provide hard evidence supporting well-designed programs led by quality staff. Now, I am not naive enough to think that data can't be manipulated a bit, and there are some issues that will arise with finding/designing assessments to demonstrate above level growth. But, the SLO is one opportunity for gifted specialists to show why their work is so important.<div><br></div><div><br><div apple-content-edited="true">
<div style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: medium; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><div>Colleen Boyle, Ph.D.</div><div>Gifted Coordinator and Educational Consultant</div><div>Columbus, OH</div><div><a href="mailto:boyleconsulting@me.com">boyleconsulting@me.com</a></div><div><br></div><div>Specialities:</div><div><div>Educational Psychology</div><div>Gifted Education and Psychology</div><div>Educational Administration</div></div><div><br></div><div><br></div></div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
</div>
<br><div><div>On May 26, 2013, at 2:00 PM, <a href="mailto:ms118rbts@aol.com">ms118rbts@aol.com</a> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=US-ASCII" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<meta name="GENERATOR" content="MSHTML 9.00.8112.16484">
<div style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 10pt; " id="role_body" bottommargin="7" leftmargin="7" rightmargin="7" topmargin="7"><font id="role_document" size="2" face="Arial">
<div>I would reply that yes, we will be pulling students to meet their
educational needs.
<div></div>
<div>Common Core (page 4 of LA & Math) states," The standards set grade
specific standards but do not define the intervention methods or materials
necessary to support students who are well below or well above grade level
expectations." </div></div>
<div> </div>
<div>While classroom teachers will "monitor all the students multiple times
a year", monitoring is meaningless unless multiple pre-assessments are
done to determine starting points of every student, with resulting
appropriate curriculum and instructional adjustments. GISs will be
pre-assessing, adjusting instruction and documenting growth on <em>above
grade level</em> standards. Holding students to grade level
standards limits growth and is based on the least important data
point...the child's chronological age.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Sally</div>
<div> </div>
<div> </div>
<div> </div>
<div> </div>
<div>
<div>In a message dated 5/25/2013 11:15:04 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
<a href="mailto:giftedtchr@aol.com">giftedtchr@aol.com</a> writes:</div>
<blockquote style="BORDER-LEFT: blue 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px"><font style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" size="2" face="Arial">Someone
I know (a GIS), asked his/her administrators to consider <br>clustering gifted
students next year as one way to help affect academic <br>growth in these
students, and to try to avoid conflict with "specials" <br>on the days he/she
meets with gifted students. He/she received the <br>following note and
question (which has been paraphrased) from one of <br>his/her administrators.
<br><br>If you received a similar note & question, how would you
reply? How <br>should he/she
reply?<br><br>------------------------<br><br>Teachers at AnyName Elementary
School are very aware of growth, using <br>the new report card measures, and
as we progress, we monitor all <br>students multiple times each year.
Which brings me to the gifted <br>program in our school. Are we still
going to have gifted intervention <br>specialists pulling students out
of the regular classrooms on a regular <br>basis. If so, what measurements
will you be able to show me with <br>progress
monitoring?<br><br><br><br>_______________________________________________<br>Ohiogift
mailing
list<br><a href="mailto:Ohiogift@lists.service.ohio-state.edu">Ohiogift@lists.service.ohio-state.edu</a><br><a href="https://lists.service.ohio-state.edu/mailman/listinfo/ohiogift">https://lists.service.ohio-state.edu/mailman/listinfo/ohiogift</a><br></font></blockquote></div></font></div>_______________________________________________<br>Ohiogift mailing list<br><a href="mailto:Ohiogift@lists.service.ohio-state.edu">Ohiogift@lists.service.ohio-state.edu</a><br><a href="https://lists.service.ohio-state.edu/mailman/listinfo/ohiogift">https://lists.service.ohio-state.edu/mailman/listinfo/ohiogift</a><br></blockquote></div><br></div></div></div></div><br></body></html>