School District of Haverford Township Elementary Gifted Program Inquiry

1. School District of Haverford Township Elementary Gifted Program Inquiry June 14 2011

2. 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.

3. Gifted Inquiry Committee Facilitator: Jim LoGiudice Board Members: Maxine Murdoch Administration: Valerie Burnett Patti Giambuzzi Lillian Finley Jim Goldschmidt Jessica Gondek   Amy Eisen ( Intern) Psychologist Catherine Kucowski  Special Counsel Natalie Habert, Esq. Principals: Susan Mingey Lynnewood Dan Horan Manoa Teachers Carol Taylor Chestnutwold Sharon Donnelly Coopertown Laurie Ardoline Lynnewood Jennifer Weller Chatham Park Barrie Butler Manoa Parents Kris Zborowski Chatham Park Amy Dodds Coopertown Stephanie Wingate Chestnutwold

4. 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

5. 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

6. 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)

7. 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

8. 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

9. 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

10. GIEP Present Education Levels Positives 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

11. 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?