School District of Haverford Township

Elementary Gifted Program Inquiry

June 14 2011

Gifted Inquiry Committee

Purpose:

Identify key issues regarding the delivery of gifted education services at the elementary level

Identify considerations for the 2011-2012 school year.

Gifted Inquiry Committee

Facilitator: Jim LoGiudice Board Members: Maxine Murdoch Administration: Valerie Burnett

Patti Giambuzzi Lillian FinleyJim Goldschmidt Jessica Gondek

  Amy Eisen ( Intern)  Psychologist Catherine Kucowski 

Special Counsel Natalie Habert, Esq.

Principals: Susan Mingey LynnewoodDan Horan Manoa

 Teachers Carol Taylor Chestnutwold

Sharon Donnelly CoopertownLaurie Ardoline LynnewoodJennifer Weller Chatham Park Barrie Butler Manoa

 

Parents Kris Zborowski Chatham Park

Amy Dodds Coopertown

Stephanie Wingate Chestnutwold 

Nature, Vision and Purpose

What is the nature, of the vision, purpose, structure and underlying goals that drive service delivery for gifted students?

• Clearly define leadership and commitment for gifted programming

• Offer curriculum enrichment for students• Meet the unique needs of students through

Differentiated instruction• Challenge and support academically advances students

to move them forward in their learning• Problem solving, higher order thinking, and working in

groups of academically talented learners

Screening and Identification

What are the clear and defined screening and evaluation criteria and procedures in place for identifying the gifted?

 • 89% of parents are aware of the District’s process for

screening and identification of gifted• 94% of teachers understand the District’s process for

referring students to the gifted program • Explore the process followed to collect teacher

recommendations during screening• Define when we reevaluate students for continued

eligibility• Define how we identify gifted under-achievers

Present Education Levels

To what extent do we identify accurate present education levels?

 • A lot of information provided for present education levels • Need for more teacher comments• More information about reading skills• Reporting of present education levels according to consistent

measures• Student self-assessment of academic levels• Revise current teacher data collection form and revise as needed• Administrative direction to complete forms• Seminar teachers use PLC to improve writing of present ed. levels• Look at methods to collect information efficiently (GMADE,

GRADE assessments)

Coordination and Integration

In what ways are services for the gifted coordinated and integrated with regular education curriculum and classroom learning?

 • 90% of teachers indicate they provide differentiated instruction• 87% of teachers agree that gifted students are offered DI in all

areas• 74% of teachers collaborate with the gifted support teachers • Provide co-planning time• Provide ideas for extension activities for specific content taught

in regular education• Coordinators and seminar teachers work on curriculum and do-

teaching• Improve communication among parents, teachers administration

Professional Development

What professional strategies and staff development are used to keep all teachers up to date and to support differentiation of instruction for the gifted in booth regular education and enrichment classes?

  

• Ability to use Professional Learning Communities to share information • 84 % of teachers indicate a need for professional development around

gifted learners• Provide collaborative planning time with seminar teachers• Provide instructional strategies for general education teachers • Other than test scores, what information in important for sharing

regarding gifted learners   

Data gathering activities•Who are the gifted- current research•Legal requirements under Chapter 16 •Parent Survey•Teacher Survey•Parent focus groups•Student focus groups•Review of GWRs for screening and

assessment data•Review of GIEPs for present education

levels•Site Visits

GIEP Present Education LevelsPositives findings Inconsistent findings

• Ability data included • Curriculum test and unit

scores• Grades • Instructional levels,

ranges for reading and math

• Progress on past goals• Some GIEPs include

teacher comments

• IQ score reports, descriptive categories

• Identification of specific academic skills

• Consistent measurement of instructional levels

• Measurable progress indicators

• Teacher comments from original GWR or missing

• Little connection to Present Education Levels and GIEP goals

Essential Questions• What is the nature of the vision, purpose, structure and

underlying goals that drive service delivery for the gifted?

• What are the clear and defined screening and evaluation criteria and procedures in place for identifying the gifted?

• In what ways are services for the gifted coordinated and integrated with the regular education curriculum and classroom learning?

• To what extent do we identify accurate academic present education levels?

• What professional strategies and staff development are used to keep all teachers up to date and to support differentiation of instruction for the gifted in both their regular and enrichment classes?