Here it is:
Statement from Shirley Brandman, President of the Montgomery County Board of Education, and Patricia O’Neill, Vice President of the Board and Chair of the Policy Committee
“The Washington Post published a story today entitled ‘Montgomery Erasing Gifted Label’ that creates the impression that Montgomery County Board of Education has already made the decision to stop identifying students as gifted and talented. This is incorrect. The global screening process, as required by Policy IOA, Gifted and Talented Education, will be conducted for all second graders this year as it has in past years.
“It is correct that Montgomery County Public Schools is conducting a pilot program in two elementary schools—Burning Tree and Georgian Forest—that provides gifted and talented services to students without labeling students. The screening process at these schools—including assessments, staff surveys and parent surveys—is st ill conducted, but staff does not label students at the end of the process. Students in these two schools still receive the same opportunity for accelerated and enriched instruction as students in schools where the label is still used.
“MCPS has been engaging parent and community stakeholders in a robust discussion about the system’s policy on gifted and talented education and will continue to do so. This discussion and parental input will be important as the Board of Education’s Policy Committee considers revisions to the policy some time during 2009.
“It is true that among the options that will be considered is eliminating labeling in favor of a services-based model. In this model, students are still screened for their readiness for advanced work and parents are provided the recommendations from the screening so that they are fully informed of their children’s readiness to excel at a higher level. Students are then provided advanced work based on the results of the screening process, consultation with parents, and the ongoing assessment of students’ needs.
“The Board of Education’s Policy Committee will consider this and any other changes to Policy IOA as part its work. Parents and other stakeholders will be provided ample time for comment before any action takes place by the Board of Education.”
This is a major CYA message. What is going to happen to children with high intelligence and low or middling achievement? First, they won’t be identified (Although, the TerraNova is an achievement test, so perhaps they weren’t being identified anyway). Second, services are going to be based on achievement–it’s the only way it makes sense.
And math and reading are going to be the gateway achievements. If your child is excellent at science or history, it will be easy to push them out of the services by saying that he or her needs to accelerate in the math and reading first.
Bingo. Gifted does not necessarily equal achievement.
Gifted does not equal achievement, but achievement is an appropriate way to place kids for subject acceleration. If they already know the material, they can be placed a level up. The IQ-based tests may be more appropriate for classes that go at a different pace or in more depth, but achievement tests are appropriate for subject acceleration.
In many ways subject acceleration is a lower-cost option than gifted classes, and is often more successful (since many “gifted” classes are just feel-good entertainment without much academic content). Note: I’m not speaking of Montgomery County, since I have no experience of them, but of the all-too-common 1 hour/week “pullout”.
Thanks for posting, Kevin. And you’re right…I was a little hasty in my comment (shhh…I was checking my blog at work). I guess I was just thinking of the situation that I’ve found often arises when if a gifted child isn’t absolutely blowing away whatever (on grade-level, say) assessment measure they’re using, it’s used as a reason to not accelerate. Gifted kids aren’t always the ones that present as “model,” high achieving students.
I agree that grade-level achievement tests are a poor way to identify kids who need different education. Above-grade achievement tests are often useful, though, particularly for making acceleration decisions.
Discrepancies between achievement and ability tests should trigger an investigation into what the the cause of the discrepancy is, followed by appropriate intervention to bring achievement up where it ought to be (this may include therapy for learning disabilities).
Are there any ability tests regularly given in MCPS? How will the teacher know that they have a discrepancy? They are constantly testing achievement. In kindergarten, it is nicely mixed with learning, so it’s not overwhelming for the children.
There’s just the second grade global screening, which among other elements uses the Raven Progressive Matrices. A form of the SCAT is administered for testing into the Center programs, but the results aren’t shared with the parents…or the home school for that matter (that may have changed by now). Any other ability testing has to be done by the parents, such as a SCAT through CTY, or taking the SAT as a middle schooler.
Kevin you said “Discrepancies between achievement and ability tests should trigger an investigation into what the the cause of the discrepancy is, followed by appropriate intervention to bring achievement up where it ought to be (this may include therapy for learning disabilities).”
I agree, but if a gifted child meets general grade-level standards, there is little concern, and even fewer resources, to help that child reach his potential. A friend of mine is struggling with this with her gifted son who has executive function issues. He’s struggling, but not failing.
Given the discussion above it’s worth noting that my 10 y.o. is getting a B in his 5th grade enriched math class, but he’s also taking an enriched 6th grade math class in which he is a top-performing student. (Yes, both are every day at the same school, long story.) I think he’s not very motivated in the 5th grade class and just scraping by. He’s a bit more eager to meet the advanced challenges, though.