1. Dr. Elissa F. Brown Rutgers Gifted Education Conference 11/19/2015 elissabrown21@gmail.com

2. We, as educational leaders, need to redefine equity.

4. 4

5. Notes on Gifted Education Priorities in your school/district Notes on other Education Priorities in your school/district

6.  Don’t worry about the gifted students, they’ll be fine on their own. They basically teach themselves.  I don’t want the gifted students in my class, because I don’t want to deal with those parents.  My GT students won’t be able to come to you (pull-out resource) today because we are preparing for the state test.  All my teachers know how to differentiate

7.  No Child Left Behind refocuses attention on low end learners  Standards movement has become assessment-driven  Equity and Excellence still viewed as dichotomies  Tensions between tradition and innovation  Racial disparities have not abated (closing the gap)  Competing values between standardization and personalization

8.  Poor children arrive at school less prepared.  80,000 students per grade (K-5) qualify for free or reduced lunch and perform in the top quartile academically.  Data reveal a 13 point gap in reading scores between low income-high achieving vs. higher income peers as they progress throughout elementary school

10. E. Brown, Hunter College, 2014

11.  Common coherent elements  Consensually derived from the disciplines and education  Consonant with many strategies of differentiation and creativity  Teacher latitude in implementation  Represent “ real world ” vision of adult competencies

12.  Lack of piloting and revision  Lack of translation models  Lack of consonant assessments  Lack of consistent translation from national projects  Politicization and resultant polarities

13. What ought to beWhat is Responsible for ensuring quality of gifted identification, program, advocacy Do not have direct supervision of teachers, respond to multiple principals, & psychologists typically won’t test GT Assumption around knowing best practices and current research, extending and enriching CC standards Often not certified or licensed in gifted. Limited PD, hard to know “who to call”, Which curriculum to be employed, pedagogical strategies Parents want “the best”Schools comply with appropriateness Pressure for GT program to be “different”Define “different” Need resources; human capital and materials Limited or no funding Ensure comprehensive, oversight, & delivery of coherent program (documents, procedures, outcomes) No mandate/external pressure or priority Teacher & CoordinatorAll things to all people

14. SupportsBarriers Rich resources in the form of museums, libraries, universities, and research laboratories abound in urban settings, along with the human capital to make them superb learning laboratories for a city’s best students at different stages of development. Resources in the urban community frequently are not easily accessed, many times due to psychological rather than physical distance for poor and minority families. Cities offer a critical mass of students required for program development, which helps to justify need and provides easier implementation. School environments in urban centers may be bureaucratic and rigid, thwarting attempts to innovate for any population.

15. SupportsBarriers Urban settings offer a palette on which comprehensive programs and services can be effected, offering a scope and sequence of alternative pathways for curriculum design and development for the best learners in these contexts Although choices abound in urban education, choices may not be well understood by families who lack the data to make the right decisions based on their child’s giftedness. Multiple ethnicities can create barriers in cities that prohibit the positive mixing of diverse groups and make gifted education a political rather than an educational issue.

16.  Philosophy--- Inclusive? Exclusive? Continuum of services spanning both?  Definition?– What does it mean to be gifted in your division? Does this allow for equal access for all learners?  Goals for your program?---What are you seeking to accomplish in your program?

17. Gifted Education General Education Special Education Curriculum Evaluation Instructional Processes Philosophy & Goals Materials/Resources Identification/Assessment Program Administration Grouping Strategies Teacher Training Advocacy

18. Program Management Identification Personnel Preparation Program & Service Provisions

20. Education should ask more of gifted children than that they be walking memory banks. They must also be problem solvers and creative thinkers; and they will not reach that goal by passively soaking up more information. -James J. Gallagher

21.  Student profile and identification linked to relevant services  Levels of giftedness matched to the level of course rigor  Amount of contact time necessary for growth

22.  Counseling Support  Bibliotherapy  Developing Emotional Intelligence  Service Learning

23.  Assessment of strengths, values, and interests  Course-taking in mathematics and science  Opportunities for mentorships/internships  Access to AP, IB, and/or dual enrollment

24. Professional Development Change in CLASSROOM PRACTICES Change in STUDENT LEARNING Change in TEACHERS’ ATTITUDES & BELIEFS Guskey, T. R. (2000). Evaluating professional development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press

25. Alignment is an even stronger predicator of student achievement on standardized tests than are socioeconomic status, gender, race, and teacher effect. (Elmore & Rothman, 1999; Mitchell, 1998; Wishnick, 1989) 25

26.  Insert District mission statement  District Strategic  Goal 1:  District Strategic  Goal 2:  District Strategic  Goal 3: Aligned with school district’s strategic mission and goals

27. “Collateral victims are a society and economy that thereby fail to make the most of latent human capital. It’s not elitist to pour more resources into educating our brightest kids. In fact, the future of the country may depend on it.” -Chester E. Finn President, Thomas B. Fordham Institute