Agenda Item
1. Superintendent's Report ~ Motion Toward Equity in Gifted Education ~ Updated 5.2.2024
Summary: Presented by: Dr. Devon Q. Horton, Superintendent
Dr. Norman Sauce III, Chief of Student Services, Division of Student Services
Motion Towards Equity in
Gifted Education
Superintendent's Report
May 6, 2024
Strategic Plan Alignment
Six Systems for an Effective School Environment
SYSTEM 1 SYSTEM 2
Standards and Curriculum Effective Use of Data
SYSTEM 3
SYSTEM 4
Collaborative Planning
Progress Monitoring and
and Instructional Practices for
Analysis of Student Work
Deeper Learning
SYSTEM 5 SYSTEM 6
Academic and Behavioral Instructional Feedback
Support and Professional Learning
DCSD Gifted-Identified Enrollment – April 2024
Provide data or exemplars that support effective
practices around ensuring equity
As of
December
2023
Category Option A Option B
Student must have a qualifying score Student must qualify in three of the four categories
in the mental ability AND
achievement categories. (Georgia Department of Education SBOE Rule 160-4-2-.38:
Education Programs for Gifted Students)
Mental Ability • Grades K-2: 99th percentile composite score on a nationally • Grades K- 12: ≥96th percentile composite on a nationally normed mental ability tests
age normed mental ability test OR 96th percentile on a component score on a nationally age normed mental ability
• Grades 3-12: ≥96th percentile composite score on a tests
nationally age normed mental ability test
Achievement • Grades K-12: ≥90th percentile Total Reading, Total Math, or • Grades K-12: ≥90th percentile Total Reading, Total Math, or Complete Battery on a
Complete Battery on a nationally normed achievement test nationally normed achievement test
• Grades K-12: Superior product/performance with a score ≥90th percentile on a scale of
1-100, as evaluated by a panel of three or more qualified evaluators
Creativity • Evaluation data required • Grades K-12: ≥90th percentile on composite score on a nationally normed creativity
test
• Grades K-12: Rating scales used to qualify student creativity must equate to the 90th
percentile
• Grades K-12: Superior product/performance with a score ≥90th percentile on a scale of
1-100, as evaluated by a panel of three or more qualified evaluators
Motivation • Evaluation data required • Grades 6-12: Two-year average of a 3.5 GPA on a 4.0 scale in regular core subject of
mathematics, English/language arts, social studies, science, and full year of world
languages
• Grades K-12: Rating scales used to qualify student motivation must equate to the 90th
percentile
• Grades K-12: Superior product/performance with a score ≥90th percentile on a scale of
1-100, as evaluated by a panel of three or more qualified evaluators
Georgia Department of Education SBOE Rule 160-4-2-.38 Education Programs for Gifted Students: Evaluation and Eligibility Chart
https://lor2.gadoe.org/gadoe/file/0743d1c8-66c9-423e-822d-e3a23844195f/1/2023-2024%20Georgia%20Department%20of%20Education%20Resource%20Manual%20for%20Gifted%20Education%20Services.pdf
Georgia Department of Education SBOE Rule 160-4-2-.38 Education Programs
for Gifted Students: Evaluation and Eligibility Chart
GADOE Gifted Resource Manual
● In option A and B, information shall be gathered in each of the four categories.
● At least one of the criteria must be met by a score on a GADOE approved nationally normed reference test.
● Any data used to establish eligibility in one category shall not be used to establish eligibility in another category.
● If a rating scale is used to evaluate creativity, a rating scale shall not be used to evaluate motivation.
● If a rating scale is used to evaluate motivation, a rating scale shall not be used to evaluate creativity.
● Any piece of information used to establish eligibility shall be current within two years.
● Local school systems must establish policies in regards to the use of data gathered and analyzed by private
entities.
Examples of Students Who Warrant Additional Gifted Screening (SY24):
• 12,402 students (not gifted-identified) scored in the 75th – 89th percentile on MAP (Reading
or Math) that would warrant additional screening for Achievement domain in SY24.
• 12,521 students (not gifted-identified) were rated in the 90th percentile on both the
Creativity and Motivation domains of the Renzulli instrument that would warrant further
evaluation in the Mental Ability domain in SY24.
• With this SY24 baseline: 24,923 students (not gifted identified) were close to earning gifted
identification in one or more domains of giftedness. DCSD's current practices did not provide
additional screening for these students in SY24.
• According to GADOE FTE Categories and Weights: Each Gifted-identified student
earns 1.7267 FTE per gifted segment
Increase access for more students to be considered more often for gifted
education by:
• Add additional screening options:
• Additional screening in the Achievement domain, using the Iowa Test of Basic Skills
(ITBS), for students who scored at least the 75th – 89th percentile in Reading or Math
on the Fall or Winter MAP
• Additional screening using the Cognitive Abilities Test (CogAT) for Mental Ability
domain for students who scored at least the 90th percentile in both Creativity and
Motivation on the Renzulli instrument, who are not already gifted-identified
Increase access for more students to be considered more often for gifted
education by:
• Expand usage of MAP results to Fall, Winter, and Spring for gifted consideration for all
students in grades K-11
• Strengthen fidelity of the usage of the Renzulli instrument for Creativity and Motivation
domains from Kindergarten through 11th grade
• Provide professional learning and education for staff and parents/guardians on
the characteristics of giftedness, gifted identification process, and gifted services
Assessment Type Category Current Implementation Proposed Implementation
Northwest Measure of Academic Achievement • Review of Fall MAP results for • Usage of MAP results from Fall,
Progress (MAP) grades K-10 for gifted consideration Winter, and Spring
Provide effective strategies (instructional, evidence,
• Review of Winter MAP results for
grades K-2 for gifted consideration
for consideration for all
students in grades K-11
and/or
Iowa Test of Basic Skills (ITBS) Achievement that
research-based) ensure
• Not utilized – no secondary option in• schools
equity
currently utilized for Achievement
Students who cored at least
th
75 – 89 percentile in th
through the lens ofdomain
your department Reading or Math from Fall or
Winter MAP results
• Spanish version for multi-
language learners
Cognitive Abilities Test (CogAT) Mental Ability • Students who met the 90th percentile • Students who scored at least in
or higher in reading or mathematics 90th percentile in both
from the Fall MAP Creativity and Motivation from
the Renzulli administration
Renzulli for Creativity and Motivation Creativity and • Homeroom Teachers will complete the • Strengthen fidelity of the
Motivation observation tool for all students in usage of Renzulli in grades K-
grades K-11 who have not been 11
identified as gifted
Naglieri Nonverbal Abilities Test (NNAT) Mental Ability • Students who need further evaluation No Changes
Torrance Test for Creative Thinking to obtain a second or third domain to
Creativity
(TTCT) qualify for GADOE’s gifted education
Gifted Evaluation Scale (GES) Motivation criteria
Grade Point Average (GPA) Motivation
Evaluations Glossary
• MAP – Northwest Measure for Academic Progress
• ITBS – Iowa Test of Basic Skills
• CogAT - Cognitive Abilities Test
• NNAT - Naglieri Nonverbal Abilities Test
• TTCT - Torrance Test for Creative Thinking
• GES – Gifted Evaluation Scale
• GPA – Grade Point Average
Number of DCSD Teachers with Gifted Endorsement
(As of May 1, 2024)
Area 1 Elementary 370
Area 2 Elementary 263
Area 3 Elementary 132
Area 4 Middle 341
Area 5 High 435
Area 6 Horizon 255
Area 7 Specialty 158
TOTAL 1,954
Delivery Models in DCSD: GADOE approves delivery models for services for gifted-
identified students- which require a gifted-endorsed teacher.
GADOE Gifted Resource Manual
Resource Class Advanced Content Cluster Grouping
Only gifted-identified students Students are homogeneously Identified gifted students
grouped based on achievement are placed as a group
are served. Content and pacing
(recommended 6-8
are differentiated such that the and interests. May include
students) into an
learning activities are clearly students who are not identified otherwise heterogeneous
not appropriate for typical as gifted, but who demonstrate classroom, amongst other
students at that grade level. exceptional ability and students not identified as
motivation in a particular content gifted
(i.e. Pull-out class)
(i.e. Mixed-ability class)
area. (i.e. AP or IB class)
Delivery Models
Elementary School Middle School High School
• Cluster* • Cluster • Advanced Content
• Resource • Advanced Content* o Advanced
Placement (AP)*
• Advanced Content o International
Baccalaureate (IB)
*most common model used in DCSD to serve gifted-identified students at this level
Professional learning opportunities to promote
giftedness and instructional support.
• Summer professional learning - three weeks of choice sessions:
teachers compensated for participation
• Gifted endorsement program- 200-hour program: September
through May
• Full-day professional learning - offered during the school year:
pre-planning and PL days
• Vendor support – for school staff to accompany assessments
Professional learning opportunities to promote
giftedness and instructional support.
• School-based support – On site, Administrator requests for tailored
school support: PLCs, faculty meetings, collaborative planning, etc.
• Parent information sessions – Various district-wide parent information
sessions on giftedness
• Gifted resources – are available in SharePoint. A full repository of gifted
education PL sessions, resources, and other materials in Canvas.
Relevant Research References
• The gifted-identified disproportionality within DCSD is similar to other school systems
nationwide that serve a diverse array of learners, especially students of color (Floyd, 2012;
D’Orio, 2017).
• School districts around the country that have shown promise addressing disproportionality in
their gifted populations have changed their practices with their gifted referral processes,
eligibility instruments, staff trainings, communications, understandings of cultural proficiency,
and through opening multiple identification pathways (Floyd, 2012; D’Orio, 2017; Burney and Cross,
2006; Elhoweris, et al, 2005; Ford, 1998; Ford, 2007; Ford, et al, 2008; Baldwin, 2002; Frasier, 1994; Frasier,
1997).
Relevant Research References
• In a typical public classroom, there are 27 students
whose academic performance spans five grade
levels (Hertberg-Davis, et al., 2006).
• High-ability learners received no differentiated
instruction in 84% of the activities (Reis et al., 1993).
Citations
• Baldwin, A.Y. (2002). Culturally diverse students who are gifted. Exceptionality, 10 (2), 139-147.
• Burney, V., & Cross, T. (2006). Impoverished students with academic promise in rural settings: 10 lessons from Project Aspire. Gifted Child Today, 29 (2), 14-21.
• D'Orio, W. (December 2017). Opening Doors to Diversity in Gifted Education. Education Update, 59 (12), 2-6. association of supervision and curriculum development.
• Elhoweris, H., Mutua, K., ALsheikh, N., & Holloway, P. (2005). Effect of children’s ethnicity on teachers’ referral and recommendation decisions in gifted and talented
programs. Remedial and Special Education, 26 (1), 25-31.
• Floyd, E. C. (2012). A descriptive study of educators gifted referral efficacy using Frasier’s TABs in a predominately African American rural Alabama school district (Doctoral
dissertation, University of Georgia).
• Ford, D. Y. (1998). The underrepresentation of minority students in gifted education: Problems and promises in recruitment and retention. Journal of Special Education, 32, 4-
14.
• Ford, D.Y. (2007). Teacher referral as gatekeeping: Cultural diversity training is one key to opening gifted education doors. Gifted Education Press Quarterly, 21(3), 2-5.
• Ford, D. Y., Grantham, T. C. & Whiting, G. W. (2008). Culturally and linguistically diverse students in gifted education: recruitment and retention issues. Exceptional Children,
74 (3), 289-306.
• Frasier, M. M. (1997). Gifted minority students: Reframing approaches to their identification and education. In N. Colangelo & G. A. Davis (Eds.), Handbook of gifted
education (2nd ed.). Massachusetts: Allyn & Bacon.
• Hertberg-Davis, H.L. and Brighton, C.M. (2006). Principals’ influence on middle school teachers’ responses to differentiation. The Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 17
(2), 90-102.
• Reis, S., Westberg, K., Kulkiowich, J., Caillard, F., Hébert, T., Plucker, J., Purcell, J., Rogers, J., & Smist, J. (1993). Why not let high ability students start school in January: The
curriculum compacting study (Research Monograph 93106). Storrs: University of Connecticut, National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented.
Questions & Answers