It’s how you start and how you finish That Matter!

Report
Jan W. Lanham, PhD
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
Entry Age Requirements
Early Entry Policies
Brigance Screening—Ready with Enrichments
CIITS Initiatives
KY Core Academic Standards/Curriculum
Mapping
KY System of Interventions (KSI)/RTI
Changes in Restraint/Seclusion Regulations
KPREP Testing Analysis and Instructional
Generalizations
District Empowerment/Charter Initiatives
PGES—Teacher and Principal



KRS 158.030 states that "[a]ny child who is five (5) years of age, or who
may become five (5) years of age by October 1, may enter a primary
school program, as defined in KRS 158.031, and may advance through
the primary program without regard to age in accordance with KRS
158.031(6)."
KRS 158.031(1) states that students must complete the primary school
program (from beginning of enrollment in school through the end of
third grade) before they may enter fourth grade. However,KRS
158.031(6) states that "A school district may advance a student through
the primary program when it is determined that it is in the best
educational interest of the student. A student who is at least five (5)
years of age, but less than six (6) years of age, and is advanced in the
primary program may be classified as other than a kindergarten
student…if the student is determined to have acquired the academic and
social skills taught in kindergarten as determined by local board policy
in accordance with the process established by Kentucky Board of
Education administrative regulation."
It is logical to infer that by providing an option for
younger students to opt-in to early entry it was
not the intention of the new law to further limit
appropriate access to instructional opportunities
for students once they are in. If the students are
attending, the ADA for those students must
follow, regardless of age. Just as kindergarten
students who are accelerated may be classified as
P2 (1st grade students) for purposes of ADA,
early entry students must be classified as
kindergarten students for ADA. Failure to do so
will guarantee that NO district will be in a
position to enroll early entry students.
As the screening process is developed, it is imperative to
consider that we should not be expecting early entry
students to perform YEARS ahead of their peers. Entry
cutoff dates are arbitrary and it is inappropriate to expect
that students must already read fluently, compute fluently,
write well, and be leagues more mature than their peers
just to gain entry to a kindergarten classroom where (in
most cases) they will be expected to spend the year
learning to identify sounds and letters, some basic sight
words, count and write letters, and participate in
exploratory and socializing activities. In most cases,
parents might appeal for admission for a child who is days
or weeks from the cutoff, making it artificially limiting to
expect that the student be years beyond their peers just t
gain access.
Free—Access to early entry should not
perpetuate the myth that gifted equates with
privilege
Well-publicized—should not be a well-kept
secret
Easy to get to—limit barriers to the decisionmaking process so parents with limited
resources may effectively advocate for their
child
Students who demonstrate readiness early will
learn habits of underachievement that may
haunt them for a lifetime. We need to
develop policies and regulations that remove,
rather than create, barriers to quality
education in Kentucky.
1. Decisions around early entry must be based on multiple sources of data,
with careful attention to parent input, and with emphasis on inclusion,
rather than exclusion. Parents of young children have seen them
perform and react in a range of settings that can inform predictions
about school performance. Use parent survey data that will give
background about task persistence, interests, learning styles, social
interactions, etc. (Brigance parent rating form could be a part of this
process). Checklists regarding G/T preschool behaviors should also be
helpful.
2. Require/authorize early administration of Brigance to those seeking
early entry (before school starts) and expect a performance of >80.00
on an "off-level" test. For example, the 4 year old student would be
screened on the 5 year old screener (or even the K-1 screener). That
would give a measurable indicator of the student readiness to thrive in
the school environment and could give information regarding
instructional strengths/needs. This would be cost effective as it is a test
that is already going into place and would not establish an unrealistic
bar. The goal of this early admission process is not to identify students
as gifted at this age. It is to determine whether the student
demonstrates a readiness that would be well-served by including them
into a primary program.
3. Inform districts/administrators/teachers about the characteristics
of gifted students beyond their ability to read or write early. By
focusing on only screener data, we will be only finding those
students who can already do what kindergarten is going to teach
them. It is important to include elements in the search that allow us
to also find students with a broader ability base. As we look at some
of the indicators as characteristics of gifted children (ie. is very
sensitive, is concerned about fairness and justice, is highly creative,
tends to question authority), it is important to note that these may
read as "immature" to an unaware adult. It is important to
understand that for those qualities--increased age will not minimize
the impact. That child/adult may always cry easily or balk when a
rule or action is perceived as illogical or unjust. A quality classroom
in which the student is able to put those characteristics into the
context of group and individual activities and concerns will be
imperative to establishing a positive focus. BEWARE OF
CHARACTERIZATIONS THAT JUST CLASSIFY THE STUDENT AS
IMMATURE.






Policy in place?
Procedures in place?
How is it publicized?
How is equitable access assured?
How is focus on readiness rather than
calendar maintained?
What can be done to improve access to
school for young students?
Barriers to Continuous
Progress:
Failure to use evidence of
prior mastery to modify
instruction
Possible Outcomes—
Promotion of Habits of
Underachievement; Loss of
Motivation
Practice/Trend
Emphasis on common
content, process,
lesson to reflect
standard coverage
/mastery.
Emphasis on
mapping processes
that dictate universal
pacing—everyone in
the same place at
the same time.
Development of single
assessments/common
products to reflect
standard mastery.
Barriers to Progress
Alternatives
Limits/penalizes
differentiation and
focuses teacher
planning/instruction
on middle levels.
Emphasize clearly defined
mastery criteria; use preassessment and diagnostic
instruction based on
performance data;
Limits/penalizes
differentiation and focuses
teacher planning/instruction
on middle levels.
Limits/penalizes
differentiation and focuses
teacher planning/instruction
on middle levels.
Assure instructional
density—build maps
around multiple
standards with openended products &
processes that will
promote differentiation
Develop range of products
/student performances to
reflect standard mastery at
high levels.

Each component has
anchor standards
and/or practices that
are intended to be the
basis for CCR; By
approaching those at a
“global” planning level,
many quality activities
can be used to practice
and refine skills
Literacy/Reading Anchor 1 Read closely
to determine what the text says
explicitly and to make logical inferences
from it; cite specific textual evidence
when writing or speaking to support
conclusions drawn from the text.


Beware of focus on
deconstructed “pieces”
that do not allow for
broad applications and
deeper understandings:
Beware of common
planning and
assessments that fail to
acknowledge what
students can already do.
CCSS Math. Practice MP1
Make sense of problems
and persevere in solving
them.
Choose activities, products, and performances that
support progress through multiple standards with
opportunity to extend UPWARD.
Determine the theme of a story, drama, or
poem from details in the text, including
how characters in a story react to
challenges or how the speaker in a poem
reflect on a topic; summarize a text.





Link with listening/speaking standards
Link with writing standards
Link with standards building skills with
comparisons, analysis of point of view, author
choices, etc.
Link with informational reading standards
Link with relevant content standards—
historical fiction, content poetry, key
vocabulary
KY System of Interventions (KSI)/RTI
RTI Addresses the Academic and
Behavior Needs of All Students!


Universal screeners and
ongoing monitoring are
expected to establish
baselines and to get true
pictures of student
performance.
Levels of intervention are
matched to student
needs as progress is
monitored.
Talent Pool/High Potential/GT
Students Needs May Represent
both Deficits and Strengths to be
Addressed


Establishing a strength
profile provides invaluable
information to guide
planning and instruction.
Due to asynchronous
development of G/T
students, Tier I and Tier II
interventions will be
necessary to address both
strengths and deficits.
RTI is a school
improvement model!!



Requires improved
teacher capacity to
address students as
individuals.
Requires building
capacity to use data
effectively to diagnose
strengths/needs and to
measure effectiveness of
interventions.
Requires MORE than the
adoption of a program or
“system”.
Potential for better
instruction for ALL,
including Gifted students.



Breaking down the barriers
posed by “everyone on the
same page” instruction
benefits GT students, too.
As long as the measures
used to gather the data
have no ceiling, measuring
progress for ALL is a reality.
The range of needs of
students, both academically
and behaviorally, requires
improved teacher capacity
and use of multiple forms
of intervention!



Focus on
remediation/Focus on
deficits
Low ceilings on
screeners, assessments,
and product models
Focus on “enrichment”
rather than meaningful
progress
Barriers:



Focus on continuous
progress for all,
including students
demonstrating mastery;
focus on strengths
Choose assessments and
models with high ceilings
to reflect student
performance ranges
Build interventions on
standards continuum
Alternatives:




CIITS is a multi-phase, multi-year
project designed to provide resources
Teacher access to Kentucky academic
standards and directly linked, aligned,
high-quality, multi-media instructional
resources designed to engage students
in learning and reinforce the standards
being taught.
Formative assessments creation based
on particular standards with the help of
a test item bank containing more than
11,000 items; Can identify learning
gaps exist so that they can more easily
design instructional experiences to
meet individual student needs and
adjust their instruction in support of
learning – the hallmarks of formative
assessment.
Aggregate and student-level
demographic, program and
performance information to gauge
student progress toward Kentucky’s
goal of every student being proficient.



Could be used for preassessments? Key will
be teacher response to
the data!
Establishes proficient
as the statewide goal.
Limited benefits for
primary students?



Lesson planning tool and
scheduler to help teachers
manage standards-based
instruction in their
classrooms. Teachers may
also share instructional
resources they design
through CIITS.
Interim assessment data –
K-Prep, ACT, and other test
data will be uploaded into
the system.
PD 360—targeted
professional development,
resources, and follow-up


Opportunity for sharing of
resources; potential for true “big
picture” curriculum and
instruction development;
Oversight for quality control???
Be vigilant about the
inclusion/awareness of GT
needs in each facet of CIITS
resource development
Opportunity to increase access
to meaningful professional
development matched to
teacher needs; Instructional
Differentiation resources ARE
available at the beginning level;
Imperative to build
differentiation from STANDARDS
rather than activities!!! GT needs
must be considered within each
indicator!!




Focus on deficits/search for
“quick fixes”
Lack/loss of meaningful
writing instruction across
the curriculum
Low payoff for high
performing students
Statistical difficulty of
measuring adequate growth
when students are already
at high levels




Balance analysis with focus on
strengths and needs;
acknowledge that meaningful
progress requires sustained
commitment to quality
instruction
Increase emphasis on writing
process and practice with
writing standards at high levels
Maintain adequate
instructional attention on
students already
demonstrating mastery
Monitor progress at school
level to credit growth
(minimally 1 month growth of
1 month instruction, no matter
where they start)



Early Entry/Early Exit—
earning college credit in
high school
“Seat time” requirements
reduced in favor of
demonstrations of
mastery; increased
student ownership in
success
“Traditional” and “direct
instruction” interpreted
as sameness




Assure quality of
offerings—AP/IB have
universal transferability; not
true of all dual credit
Develop supports for
students who may lack
executive function skills
Support balance of orderly
learning community and
differentiated instruction
Assure equal access to
quality programming for
ALL




Temper implementation of “new” initiatives to
minimize the potential barriers progress of high
ability students.
Build teacher and parent understanding of causes
and impact of underachievement; build capacity in
changing habits
Build teacher and parent awareness of
characteristics of gifted students and the impact of
those characteristics on instructional planning and
delivery
Work to help build capacity of all as they work to
increase differentiation opportunities that promote
continuous progress

similar documents