1. Administration and Supervision of Gifted Programs Weekend 2 February 22-23, 2013 http://aea11gt.pbworks.com/Admin-of-GT-Programs

2. Agenda  Welcome and Introductions  Review of Syllabus and Final Project Requirements  Discussion of Reflections  Identification thoughts  Differentiated Program  Home Play  Closure

3. Course Outcomes  To deepen understanding of the components of comprehensive gifted and talented programming  To determine the extent to which g/t services are infused in the total education program  To construct and/or improve a written comprehensive gifted and talented program plan  To determine how to set priorities for g/t programming and students served  To identify and use data necessary to provide, drive, and improve g/t programming

4. Group Norms  Talk freely - think out loud  Questions establish a culture of curiosity  Freedom to change your mind  Connect to Iowa Core, previous learning and district initiatives  Support one another in the learning

5. Home Play  Write/revise/evaluate identification plan for district,  Read Chapter 16, 17, & 9 of Purcell and Eckert.  Read “Lessons Learned” – Karen Rogers article  Journal your thoughts, connections, agreements or disagreements over the reading assignment.  Complete the differentiated program and inservice design sections of the Self-Audit Reflection Tool.  Plan to share with the class and plan to respond to at least 2 others reflections.  Share GT Mission/Philosophy with GT Advisory and/or Administrative Team

6. Gifted and Talented Identification What is it? Why do it? What then?

7. The Target Population  Definition of “gifted”  Multiple Criteria used/analyzed

8. Iowa Code Requires… …valid and systematic procedures, including multiple selection criteria for identifying gifted and talented students from the total student population

10. Starting the Process  Screening –Use existing data sources  Nomination/Referral –Who may/should refer? –How will they do it? –How will they know they can?

11. Digging Deeper  What stands out about the child?  What more do you need to know? –Cast a wider net –No single piece of data screens a child “in” or “out”  Are the criteria valid for the construct being measured?  How will you analyze the information?  At what point can you make a decision with confidence?  Notification

14. What are the Tools/Criteria?

15. Activity  Consider the list of multiple criteria  Identify which area(s) of giftedness for which each would be a valid criterion to consider.  Are all the criteria appropriate at all grade spans?  Add other examples at the bottom.

17. SA/RT  What do the sections of the identification section of SA/RT tell us about best practices in identification?

18. Some Things to Ponder  Once identified, always identified?  Procedure for staffing out?  Your questions?

19. What’s one important take-away about identification?

20. Placement  Which children need which services?  Not about assigning a label  According to need

21. Programming: Art and Science

22. Comprehensive Program Design …a thoughtful, unified service delivery plan that has a singular purpose: to identify the many, varied ways that will be used to meet the needs of high- potential students…formulated by a variety of stakeholders, including faculty, administration, and parents. --Purcell & Eckert, p. 74

23. Purcell & Eckert, p. 78-9

24. Differentiated Program SA/RT  Review the results  Identify 1-3 priority areas  Consider alignment with areas in Managing Complex Change Managing Complex Change

25. Gifted Services …studies consistently have demonstrated that gifted students who receive any level of service achieve at higher levels than their gifted peers who receive none. (Delecourt, Loyd, Cornell, & Goldber, 1994; Kulik, 2003) Critical Issues in Gifted Education: What the Research Says, p. 321

26. Levels of Service  Integrated Classroom Support  Cluster Grouping  Pull-Out Programs  Special Classes for the Gifted  Special Schools

27. …most of the research conducted to date indicates that gifted students in separate classes or special schools outperform their gifted peers in all other settings. (Delecourt, et. al., 1994) Critical Issues in Gifted Education: What the Research Says, p. 329

28. Program Model …deliberately planned system that facilitates interaction of gifted youth with curriculum to produce learning…programs are designed with a particular purpose in mind: to deliver content more quickly, more extensively, or more complexly to fit the learners’ precocity and interest. ( Feldhusen,1998a, p. 211) Best Practices in Gifted Education: An Evidence-based Guide, p. 215-6

29. Types of Program Models  Particular class settings –Cluster grouping –Full-time gifted programs –Magnet schools  Within regular classrooms –Change nature of curriculum –Add enrichment  In addition to the school schedule –Mentoring –Great Books –Clubs/organizations

30. Key Questions Do we develop a program and find the kids to fit the program? OR Do we find the kids with unmet needs and develop programming options to meet those needs?

31. A Common Perspective Gifted Student Teacher of Gifted

32. Gifted Student A Shift in Perspective Teacher of Gifted Classroom Teacher ESL Teacher Special Ed. Teacher Specials Teacher Counselor Community Member

33. Chapter 12 (IAC) Requires “…a qualitatively differentiated program to meet the students’ cognitive and affective needs.” Cognitive Affective

35. Affective Needs  High-Potential Learners –Usually possess healthy psychological development –Affective development differs from age- peers by intensity or degree –Are more self-confident about ability to succeed –Are more intrinsically motivated to succeed

36. Meeting Social & Emotional Needs  Academic Provisions –Opportunity to learn w/others of similar interest, ability, and drive –Appropriate level of challenge in the regular classroom –Flexible pacing through curriculum

37. Meeting Social & Emotional Needs  Help Coping With –Heightened sensitivity –Perfectionism –Peer relationships –Asynchronous development –Situational stressors –College and career planning

38. Meeting Social & Emotional Needs  Twice Exceptional –Greater frustration due to discrepancies –More at risk for adjustment problems –Appropriate interventions result in better coping skills Purcell & Eckert p. 113

39. Programming Options What opportunities exist in your context to meet identified student needs?

40. Programming Options  Instructional Management - how gifted learners may be organized for instruction –Individualization –Grouping –Acceleration --Purcell & Eckert, p. 209

41. Programming Options  Instructional Delivery - ways in which gifted learners need to be taught –Teaching to learner preferences –Teaching to qualitative learning differences --Purcell & Eckert, p. 210-11

42. Programming Options  Curriculum Differentiation –Content modifications –Process modifications –Product modifications --Purcell & Eckert, p. 211-12

44. Considerations Do/Are the programming options  Align with –Mission/Philosophy (Vison, Beliefs)? –Program Goal(s)?  Address areas of giftedness served?  Address both cognitive and affective domains?  Feasible given resources?  Comprehensive in nature?

45. Developed by Ashley Meyer, Colfax-Mingohttp://www.aea11.k12.ia.us/gifted/ITAG

46. Matching Programming to Need  Go back to the Case Studies (p. 2-12) you looked at earlier  Discuss –Needs of the student –Services provided –Do the two align? –What else might be provided?

47. Matching Programming to Need  Choose one of your students  List key characteristics and needs  Identify services currently provided  Do services match/address characteristics and needs?  What else needs to be provided?

49. PEPs: The Bridge A quality PEP… …should be a tool that drives services for identified gifted students. …should be a living document and revised as necessary. …is a communication tool between students, teachers, and parents. …is an individual gifted student planning document based on need. …should be used to measure the effectiveness of services provided.

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

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

52. In-service Design …whatever teachers become professionally, the process is not finished when they complete their teacher education program at age 21. Learning to teach well is a lifetime endeavor. The growth of understanding and skill in teaching terminates only when we do. --Eisner, 2002

53. Inservice Design  Professional learning –Teacher of gifted –Gen. ed. Teachers –Counselors –Administrators –School board –Parents –Community

55. - 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.

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

57. 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

58. TAG ESL SpEd TAG GenEd Fine Arts GenEd

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

60. 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?

61. 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)

62. 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?

63. Home Play  See page 7 of syllabus  Article critique  Due March 9 –Google docs/site –Hard copy sent to Mary Schmidt 9291 Lakewood Pointe Drive Norwalk, IA 50211