Gifted and Talented Academy Session 4 April 5,

Agenda  Welcome  Written Plan Questions  Handshake Activity  Collaboration in Gifted Programming  PEPs and Student Goals/Outcomes  Managing Change

I saw the angel in the marble and carved until I set him free. --Michelangelo

Welcome Back!  Form mixed-district triads  Introduce yourselves  Share your team’s work on documenting a differentiated program  Discuss what you’ve learned  Identify one idea to share with the large group

Objectives  To deepen understanding of the components of comprehensive gifted and talented programming –To examine system-level factors affecting comprehensive programming  Collaboration –To create an intentional match between identified student need and programming and services  PEP’s  Student-level Outcomes

Comprehensive Programming Program Effectiveness: Program Evaluation/Audit PEP Goal Attainment Measuring/Reporting Student Growth Program Management: K-12 Written G/T Plan Parent/Community Support Use of Time/Calendars/Scheduling Staffing Patterns Programming & Services Responsive Services Individual Planning/PEPs Curriculum Programming Options System Support Foundation: Mission/Philosophy/Beliefs Conceptions/Definitions of Giftedness Iowa Code Gifted Program Standards and Goals Domains of Giftedness

Collaboration : What is it? Why would/should we do it? What role(s) does it play in comprehensive programming?

SUCCESSES & BARRIERS  Identify actual/perceived successes and/or barriers to effective collaboration  What practices lead to success?  How might you overcome barriers?

Collaboration between General & Gifted Education  District  Classroom  Rationale –Help one another reach common or shared goals –Learn from each other and improve effectiveness of the school –Gain strength through unity --Purcell & Eckert, p

Jigsaw  Form mixed-district triads  Determine number –1 most experience in gifted ed. –2 next most experience in gifted ed. –3 least experience in gifted ed.  Read assigned section  Share information  Discuss insights relevant to your context  Return to original team grouping and share

Guiding Assumptions  General & GT educators share common goals.  General & GT educators can learn from each other.  General & GT education programs gain strength through collaboration.  General & GT educators should work as a team to meet diverse student needs.  GT educators should act as leaders in the evaluation of services. --Purcell & Eckert, p. 228

Key Components Component12345 Mission & Planning Collaboration Professional Development Curricular & Instructional Integration

Team Activity  Download Self-Assessment from Wiki – Year-1# Year-1#  Log in to Google Docs –  Upload to Google Docs  Rename (include district name)  Share with team and me  Complete

Gifted Programming: A System View (ala Borland)  Instituted for a reason –Required by law in Iowa –Perceived deficiency in the way the system serves the gifted  Program for gifted (subsystem) is planned as an integrated system which serves greater educational purposes of the larger system (school or district)  Addresses educational needs the larger system is not meeting

The program for the gifted is, in a sense, remedial for the system, since it addresses needs within the system. --Borland, p. 48

“…the program for the gifted can enhance the effectiveness of the larger system only if it articulates well with the larger system and fills a recognized gap in it.” --Borland, p. 49

Talk at Your Table What implications does this system approach have for your gifted and talented programming?

Remediating the System  In what ways does your gifted and talented programming fill a void in the larger system?  What could be improved in your programming to better accomplish this goal of filling a gap the system itself can’t fill?  Where does collaboration fit?

Five “A”s Text Protocol  Form groups of four  Silently read p of “Lessons from Another Field” (stop at “Coteaching Models…”)  Highlight and write notes in the margins in answer to the following four questions: –What Assumptions do the authors hold? –What do you Agree with in the text? –What do you want to Argue with? –What parts of the text do you Aspire to? –What would you Ask?

- Marilyn Friend Speaking the Same Language Collaboration A style for interaction between co-equal parties voluntarily engaged in shared decision making as they work toward a common goal.

Ways To Collaborate: Using Familiar Language  Collaboration through Consultation  Collaboration through Co-Teaching  Collaboration through Reverse Consultation

Possible Teaming Options…  General Education Teacher - General Education Teacher (like grade levels, cross grade levels, content specialists)  General Education Teacher - TAG Teacher  TAG Teacher - Fine Arts Teacher  TAG Teacher - ESL Teacher  TAG Teacher - Special Education Teacher  TAG Teacher - TAG Teacher  TAG Teacher - Counselor  TAG Teacher - Community Members

TAG ESL SpEd TAG GenEd Fine Arts GenEd

Gifted Student Look Familiar? Teacher of Gifted Classroom Teacher ESL Teacher Special Ed. Teacher Specials Teacher Counselor Community Member

Collaboration Expectations  What do you expect of classroom teachers as collaborative partners?  What do you think classroom teachers expect of you as a collaborative partner?

Building Bridges: A Study of Collaboration  Compare classroom teachers’ expectations of enrichment specialists with enrichment specialists’ expectations of classroom teachers.  Discuss –What you notice about the two sets of expectations –What are the similarities and differences between these lists and yours –What you can do to better meet classroom teachers’ expectations (or change those that are unrealistic)

Opportunities multiply as they are seized. --Sun Tzu, Chinese general, author of The Art of War

What do you need to receive/give… …from/to administrators …from/to classroom teachers …from/to g/t colleagues …in the infrastructure …in the way of professional learning to make collaboration (district/building/classroom) more effective in your setting?

Personalized Education Plans  Not required by Iowa Code  Considered “best practice”  Chapter 59 –Suggested components

PEP Purpose The PEP is intended to empower the student to excel academically. --Institute for Educational Advancement peline.html

Personalized Education Plans  What is a PEP?  What should it do?  What does it actually do?  Who gets a PEP?  What information does an effective PEP include?  How individualized should it be?  Can a PEP be reasonable (in terms of time it takes to create and monitor) and effective?  How does/can a PEP fold into documentation for other initiatives (IDM, four year plans, ICC, etc.)

Sharing PEP Format and Thinking  Linda Telleen-Martens –ELP Coordinator & HS ELP Teacher, Ames  Tara Hofer –Elementary ELP Teacher, Ames  Sharing your examples and thinking  Samples – – ards/pep/02samplepephttp:// ards/pep/02samplepep

Systemic Change: How will you and others need to change thinking? Who is and isn’t comfortable with the change? What support do you need to manage the transition? How will others be supported?

First or second order? Do stakeholders perceive the change as… First-order ImplicationsSecond-order Implications an extension of the past?a break with the past? consistent with prevailing organizational norms? inconsistent with prevailing organizational norms? congruent with personal values? incongruent with personal values? easily learned using existing knowledge & skills? requiring new knowledge & skills?

Work Time  For next time –Complete Inservice Design and Staff Qualifications sections of Self Audit. –Complete or refine/review Identification, Differentiated Program, and Program Goals sections of written plan. –Make decisions about PEP use and present to advisory –Read Chapter 14 in text

Next Session  June 16-17, 2011  Room 18, Heartland AEA