Advanced Learning Task Forces' Recommendations
Advanced Learning Task Forces
Report & Recommendations
August 2014
The Advanced Learning Task Forces met for more than 50 hours during the 2013-2014 school year to studyidentification and service delivery models for Highly Capable students. They found that many aspects of our Highly Capable/Accelerated Progress Program work well and do not require changes. The task forces believe the current delivery model should remain in place with the recommendations below providing additional opportunities and direction to enhance equity of access to Highly Capable services.
This task force was not asked to address Advanced Learning programs beyond those for Highly Capable students. The task force recognizes, however, that Spectrum and ALOs are a valued aspect of Advanced Learning, and the District should continue to address the opportunities for advanced learners beyond students identified as Highly Capable. Enhancing those opportunities will ultimately benefit all students.
RECOMMENDATION 1: Maintain existing delivery model.
The District should maintain the fundamental elements of the delivery model, which were affirmed by the task forces, including self-contained classrooms for Grades 1-5; self-contained LA/SS and science classrooms in Grades 6-8; guaranteed pathways to regional sites with a concentration of students to form minimum cohort sizes;guaranteed seats at designated high schools for those who are identified as Highly Capable by eighth grade; and significantly advanced and accelerated learning opportunities. Additionally, the District should maintain the APP/Highly Capable Advisory Council.
RECOMMENDATION 2: Define the Advanced Learning Office’s role in services, programs and curricula.
The Advanced Learning office should provide guidance and oversight on: (1) consistent alignment of scope and sequence, curriculum and instructional materials for Highly Capable sites ; (2) specific mechanisms for evaluating AL programs and services, with metrics and checkpoints; and (3) programs and services that emphasize rigorous and fast-paced instruction that is deep and appropriately accelerated, providing differentiation without a ceiling. The District should provide adequate staffing and funding to allow AL to fulfill this recommendation.
RECOMMENDATION 3: Enhance the Advanced Learning Office’s role in professional development.
The Advanced Learning office should ensure that teachers and principals receive (1) professional development on the academic and social/emotional needs of Highly Capable learners, including twice-exceptional children, with appropriate recognition and validation for the training that staff receives; (2) regularly scheduled time for teacher collaboration across Highly Capable sites; and (3) professional development for secondary counselors on theacademic and social/emotional needs of HC students.
RECOMMENDATION 4: Improve communication from the Advanced Learning office.
The Advanced Learning Office should review its communication strategies with SPS families, teachers and administrators. This could include: streamlining and clarifying existing communications; finding additional ways to reach out to the families of all students who demonstrate potential (especially those from under-represented groups) about Advanced Learning; and giving increased emphasis to communicating the application, testing andappeals processes to ensure that all families understand all Advanced Learning opportunities.
RECOMMENDATION 5: Enhance equity in access to Highly Capable and Advanced Learning services and programs.
The District should provide additional pathways for identification of students who need Highly Capable servicesat all grade levels. In addition to teacher nomination and parent nomination, the District should investigate testing all kindergarten and/or second-grade students with an unbiased, non-verbal, cognitive screener (such as theCogAT screening form). In addition, the District should design and implement plans to support students who demonstrate potential for high achievement, especially those from under-represented groups (including special education and high-poverty students), through talent development initiatives. Details of administration and implementation would be developed jointly by the Advanced Learning office and the Equity and Race Relationsdepartment.
RECOMMENDATION 6: Expand Advanced Learning opportunities.
Elementary:
The District should ensure that all elementary schools have a Highly Capable plan, offering clear and consistent options and supporting teachers (through professional development and appropriate curriculum) in their implementation of these plans districtwide. Those services will be provided to those Highly Capable-identified students who elect to stay in their neighborhood schools. The District should ensure all HC-identified kindergartners receive services beginning mid-year in their neighborhood schools.
Middle school:
The District should investigate strategies for allowing students demonstrating advanced performance in a single subject area to be placed in advanced classes. Further, the Advanced Learning office will guide implementation of the aligned HC Humanities curriculum in HC middle schools.
High school:
The District should consider, in addition to the current high school programs: 1) developing and/or expanding college-level options, such as Advanced Placement (AP), International Baccalaureate (IB),Running Start, independent study, and early graduation at more neighborhood high schools. 2.) reviewingthe IBX program at Ingraham with the potential to expand it to other IB schools; 3) examining additional internship or mentorship opportunities.
RECOMMENDATION 7: Rename the Accelerated Progress Program.
The District should change the name of the Accelerated Progress Program (APP) to Highly Capable Cohort(HCC), within Highly Capable Services. Students identified as eligible for HCC should be designated as "HighlyCapable" rather than the current "Academically Highly Gifted.” This change would align with state language and eliminate the acronym confusion between APP and AP. The name change would also align with Superintendent Procedure #2200, which defines Service as “a supplementary support to basic education that is required by federal, state, or local law and/or regulations.” It specifies, “Required services are Special Education, English Language Learners, and Highly Capable students, as defined by the state.” Procedure #2200 specifically defines Program as an educational opportunity that is not mandated.
NOTE: Consider HCC to designate the self-contained Highly Capable Cohort. And HCC/APP for use in transitional documents (web site, forms, etc.)
Comments
On the other hand, I suspect the only thing that will be implemented by the district staff is changing the name from APP to HCC. Changing the name is easy, highly visible, and has the appearance of doing something without actually having to do anything. I'm not sure much more will come of this other than a name change.
That said implementing the WAC means there will be change in EVERY school. So David, much more is going to change and to do that AL (now already HC) has to oversee that including professional development, program monitoring and etc. I believe they are roughly doubling their staff, yeah! The other recs for SpEd/race/$/ELL inclusion and single domain in middle school are where we are going to have to fight. I say bring it on! Write your Board members, go to meetings and make sure these go through. I will. Also, I will fight for rigor for all. What about y'all?
3inAPP
However, will the there be two levels of HC in the future, those that must stay at their neighborhood school and some subset that qualifies for self-contained?
That's certainly been the trend in other districts with contentious self-contained AL programs. Is this a foreshadowing of such a change.
Bill
We already have advanced learning services for students who are not identified as highly qualified. Are you seeing something in the recommendations that suggests we might add a third intermediate level?
Usually when someone describes APP as contentious they are indicating their lack of support for the program. I don't think of it as contentious. Most parents and teachers I know see the need for the program.
If that's true, I can only guess that you spend most of your time around other APP parents and teachers, because that's not the case around our fair city in general.
I say this not to antagonize, because I think you are one of the bright spots here on this blog, but if you spend time in various schools around the city, especially areas where students are more likely to be struggling than bored, you'll find a very different attitude. There is a great deal of animosity for APP, especially the self-contained nature. I myself have spent more than my share of time trying to explain why APP is not just a good thing for the advanced kids, but for everyone, but it's difficult for people to understand.
I'm pleased with most of the recommendations, but I have little faith that the district will do a good job of implementation (or un-implementing their horrible mistakes in recent years). The district seems hellbent on eliminating Spectrum and watering APP down to nothing. Regardless of this paper, I'm not optimistic.
Look at rec #1 APP is still APP but called HCC with the hope of broadening the reach to those that have been slipping through the cracks. Nothing is watered down. In fact there is work towards more merrit. And yeah LA/SS has changed but that changed with the splits and the loss of Ms. Shadow.
The Robinson's gave us a gift which was to think about each child as a work in progress. Now how do you deal with 50K in that manner? You don't. UCDS is paid 3x per kid and they barely make it with a 20th of the population. SCD will tell you they are close but in all reality they are just a cash register school. No one teaches IPP in this district.
Seattle has a ton of high IQ kids which is not a blessing or a curse. But these kids need service and just like any high need population, that service should be cost effective, scalable and overseen. Right now it is just cost effective. ((APP kids bring in more $ than other kids and yet require less in services throughout their k-12 time (not including identification which really has been paid for by the state). In fact, many have been tutors and student teachers before that was frowned on.))
These recommendations move us closer to the other two. Scalable and overseen; aren't they the same thing? Without one you can't have the other. 'Do it my way' principals have jeopardized the program's integrity post splits.
Moving forward TM,WMS,JAMS will have new administration hired by the old (sic intended) Soup ... Who knows. But with these recommendations we contain this mess. So much energy is expended over the handful of bad APP classes. But we are going to expand and our s&%@ sandwich is turning into a hoagie.
Rigor and depth should be what ever class offers. Thankfully that is now the law of the State. I will fight to insure the common sense recommendations move forward.
3inAPP
Thank you also to Director Peaslee for her comments at the Compassionate School Conference and reported in the Seattle Times:
"The most important thing we can do for our students is make our schools work for them-not for us, not for the data-cllectors but for our children."
Thank you for your kind words.
Maybe I am living in a bubble. An unusually high proportion of the students in my immediate neighborhood (and extended family) are highly capable. I see a lot of controversy here about APP - but I think that's because people are much more likely to take the time to complain about something they don't like than to write in support of something that doesn't affect them and that they aren't paying much attention to.
I too am concerned about implementation: Having staff available to monitor services offered and to create curriculum is great. I don't see anything that gives them the authority to compel principals to maintain program consistency though - and that is the problem. As long as the JAMS principal can create mixed APP/Spectrum classrooms and can decide whether to provide blocked APP LA/SS classes we can't count on any improvements.
boring board
What would it take? Can it be crowdsourced?
You can call Peaslee out for the community meetings but bell times? Testing? Student data collection? Native American program? She has been front and center on these and they affect all students.
boring board
I do agree with Ann D that, at this point, it would be better to develop an advanced learning program from the "bottom up". The district politics preclude the administration from effectively serving the students based on what I have observed.
-IfaprogramworkskillitSPSpolicy
NEmom
-IfaprogramworkskillitSPSpolicy
Which school had Spectrum eliminated by the District? I don't recall the District directing the closure of any Spectrum program. In fact, the District is going to have to create some - at the new middle schools and at elementary schools in the new middle school service areas.
This recommendation appears to contradict Recommendation #6 that calls for HC services for students outside the program. It also appears ignorant of the plans for a different delivery model at Fairmount Park.
Recommendation #2: Role of AL office.
Just what do they think the AL office can do if a school chooses something out of alignment with scope and sequence, curriculum, or instructional materials? The AL office has no authority to direct schools to do anything. I do like the requirement that they evaluate programs and services, but again, what consequences for programs that don't meet the benchmarks?
Recommendation #5: More equitable access. There are some parent/guardian approvals required for universal testing - and an expense. The talent development recommendation is a bit too vague to be effective and, again, the AL office and the ERR office lack any authority for implementation.
Recommendation #6: HC Services.
Here are the recommendations that contradict Recommendation #1. Like so many others, they will be impossible to implement, or, more precisely, impossible to assure. The people responsible for making it happen, the AL office, will have no authority to make it happen. Consequently, it won't happen.
It seems that all kids, once identified and once the parents have indicated that they will move the child to APP the next fall, should start receiving appropriate instruction for the remainder of the year. Not only would this help the child in the short-term, but it might translate into an easier transition to APP in the fall and less catch-up/repetition for the APP class.
It's a pretty common question from incoming APP families: how do I get my child ready for the advanced work? I believe that they shouldn't have to. The neighborhood school has about 6 months with that child prior to the transfer - why not start acclerating then, or let the child walk a grade up to math for the rest of the year? (and this is mostly rhetorical - I know the answers - class sizes already too big, no room for a student to walk to next grade's class, no teachers available for pull-out...) It just seems odd to think that only Kindergartners would benefit from such an approach.
Charlie there are no teeth you are right but if the Sup and Area Directors say it... The schools will fall in step. Now that is a very large if. In addition, they are rec's from a task force formed by a prior sup. Asked for by at least one former BD.
3inAPP
But if anyone who was on the Task Force wants to chime in and say that indeed, the committee discussed and intends for #6 to apply at all grade levels, great!
3inAPP
How much has changed based on the recommendations of the 2007 (!) review of APP? Very, very little. The program has split, and will split again, still without a defined curriculum, despite suggestions from the 2007 program review.
SPS had posted two new positions for AL, so maybe there will be some work on curriculum, site alignment, and differentiation for newly identified students, but I'm not sure where it leaves this year's students.
waiting
3inAPP
8/19/14, 10:08 AM
reposting for
-anonymous poster
Kay
Self-contained Spectrum has been replaced with nothing.