advanced academic programs advisory committee
TRANSCRIPT
ADVANCED ACADEMIC PROGRAMS ADVISORY COMMITTEE
ANNUAL REPORT TO THE SCHOOL BOARD
SCHOOL YEAR 2020-2021
APPROVED BY THE COMMITTEE ON MAY 11, 2021
1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Advanced Academic Programs Advisory Committee (AAPAC) advises the Fairfax County Public Schools (FCPS) School Board on the needs of advanced learners and the programs offered to meet those needs. Committee membership includes citizen and citizen group representatives; teacher and principal representatives; a student representative; and the coordinator of Advanced Academic Programs (AAP). For the 2020-21 school year, the Committee received the following charge from the Board:
The external program review of equity in AAP services (2019-20 school year) provided several recommendations that will require stakeholder input in a timely manner. AAPAC stakeholder representatives will receive updates and provide timely feedback on the progress of recommended changes.
Given the reliance of this year’s charge on AAP Office efforts to implement the May 2020 external program review recommendations, the Committee decided to focus their work on program review recommendations in three areas:
1. Clarification of the goals of Advanced Academic Programs; 2. Expansion of frontloading opportunities, including the Young Scholars model and Local
Level IV programs; and 3. Revisions to the screening process to maximize equitable identification practices for the
AAP continuum of services. Specifically, the Committee devoted each of four meetings to four topics:
1. Understanding the goals of AAP, discussing ideas to clarify these goals for all stakeholders, and making recommendations to increase equitable access to AAP services;
2. Reviewing the Young Scholars model, its role in increasing access to AAP opportunities for students from underrepresented groups, and making recommendations regarding fidelity of implementation and program accountability;
3. Examining the Local Level IV program model, its role in providing access to AAP curriculum and instruction for students in their neighborhood schools, and making recommendations regarding fidelity of implementation and program accountability; and
4. Learning about the current holistic screening process, how it can promote more equitable identification of students from underrepresented groups, and making recommendations for future adjustments.
The Committee’s work, and consequently its recommendations, were informed by multiple resources and a broad range of voices from various stakeholder groups. The Committee gathered information from principals and AARTs about implementation of the Young Scholars model; heard from principals, AARTs and AAP teachers about expansion of Local Level IV programs; and reviewed composite screening portfolios to better understand the holistic screening process. The Committee’s review of the four topics above resulted in several ideas for improvement and multiple suggested recommendations.
2
Two consistent themes emerged in the Committee’s review of these four topics: (1) the importance of the role of the AART in implementing the Committee’s recommendations, and (2) the benefits of partnering with the Equity Office to facilitate district wide understanding related to equity goals in AAP. Consequently, the Committee is making two overarching recommendations:
● To fund a 1.0 FTE Advanced Academic Resource Teacher (AART) in every elementary school and a .5 FTE AART in every middle school; and
● To increase partnership between the AAP Office and the Equity Office to support the implementation of the Committee’s recommendations regarding AAP goals, the Young Scholars model, Local Level IV programs, and the holistic screening process.
The implementation of the Committee’s recommendations requires having a full-time AART to serve as an expert resource in every building, supporting teachers in increasing access to challenge and enrichment for all students. This lead recommendation supports the implementation of all other recommendations in this report and echoes previous AAPAC findings; in fact, AAPAC has included this recommendation in each of its last four reports. Furthermore, the continued FCPS focus on providing equitable access to AAP services would benefit from deeper collaboration between the AAP and Equity Offices in this work. In summary, based on the Committee’s work this year, we offer two overarching recommendations (A and B) and additional recommendations in four key areas:
Number Area Recommendation
A AART Position
Increase staffing to include at least 1 AART in every elementary school and .5 AART in every middle school to support implementation of other recommendations
B Equity Office Partnership
Increase the partnership between the AAP and Equity Offices to support implementation of other recommendations
1 Program
Goals Reinforce program goals through accountability tools, early pipeline opportunities, teacher professional development, and communication
2 Young
Scholars Model
Make as a division wide priority, the expansion of the Young Scholars model to all schools and implementation fidelity across schools, through data collection, data use, monitoring, professional development, and communication
3 Local Level
IV Programs
Develop a centralized, measurable and consistent approach to the implementation of Local Level IV services, through program standards, oversight, and professional development
4 Screening
Process
Continue division use of a holistic screening process with multiple data point components to allow multiple opportunities for students to demonstrate areas of talent, including a rating scale that provides equitable and objective student information
3
The Committee would like to emphasize that our work revealed many excellent practices already being implemented throughout FCPS. We believe that attention to the report’s recommendations will only improve equitable opportunities for all children in the elementary and middle school grades to access enriching learning experiences. Still, we must acknowledge the challenges that FCPS and the FCPS School Board face in considering these recommendations as the division continues to grapple with the impacts of an unprecedented public health emergency. This report presents these six recommendations in greater detail, first the four topical recommendations in the order they were addressed by the Committee, and then the two overarching recommendations that will make the implementation of the topical recommendations possible. We encourage readers to review the tables following the recommendations that detail for each topic (1) an overview; (2) its contribution to equity; (3) the external program review recommendations; (4) the FCPS status of each recommendation; and (5) the Committee’s review. We hope that this supplementary information will serve to strengthen the reader’s understanding of our recommendations.
RECOMMENDATIONS AAPAC recommends that FCPS consider the following recommendations based on our review of the AAP office’s efforts to respond to the external program review findings in four areas: program goals, the Young Scholars model, expansion of Local Level IV programs, and the screening process. In addition, we are making two overarching recommendations regarding the AART position and the Equity Office, based on repeated themes throughout our work. These overarching recommendations follow discussion of the four topical recommendations. For each high-level recommendation, the Committee has included a rationale and suggestions for what implementation of the recommendation might look like division wide and in schools.
RECOMMENDATION 1: Reinforce program goals through accountability tools, early pipeline opportunities, teacher professional development, and communication The external program review recommended that FCPS clarify the goals of Advanced Academic programming to help stakeholders (i.e., students, teachers, principals, district administrators, School Board members) better understand program goals. In the 2020-21 school year, FCPS has been communicating consistently the dual objectives in AAP―talent development for all students and differentiation to meet the advanced learning needs of students through the continuum of services. By developing the talents of all students through rigorous instruction and meeting advanced learners’ needs through differentiation (“students by name and by need”), Advanced Academic Programs also addresses the equity goal of identifying and serving underrepresented populations. AAP does so through frontloading enrichment opportunities, professional development on instructional depth and complexity, and multiple opportunities provided in the
4
continuum of services. A comprehensive and accessible communication plan provides support in educating stakeholders about how FCPS meets the VA Regulations Governing Educational Services for Gifted Students, raising awareness about the importance of talent development for all students, and eliminating any misconceptions that advanced programming is not necessary. The Committee reviewed quotes from the literature on the importance of talent development, differentiation, and serving underrepresented populations in gifted education (see Appendix C) and then discussed how these program goals contribute to equity and could be made clearer to all FCPS stakeholders. As a result of this discussion, the Committee is making the broader recommendation that FCPS reinforce Advanced Academic Program goals through accountability tools, early pipeline opportunities, professional development, and enhanced communications. We are also making specific suggestions for implementation of this recommendation. Suggestions for Implementation:
● Use district resources (i.e., planning and pacing guides, access to rigor guides) to support district- and school-level accountability for AAP services, by setting district and teacher goals and shaping professional development.
● Expand consultation with the Equity Office to provide training on how to better understand student diversity and how to create relationships in classrooms through the Cultural Proficiency Modules.
● Continue to provide teacher training on identification and differentiation, to include “differentiating up” to meet the needs of advanced learners; consider collaborative team growth goals in order to reach all teachers.
● Strengthen efforts to improve the pipeline of AAP opportunities (e.g., higher level thinking skills, creative curriculum, project-based learning) for all students.
● Enhance communication about AAP goals that is clear, concise, actionable and relevant to all stakeholders, including students. – Reinforce AAP program goals, the continuum of services, professional development, and
monitoring through customized communication and outreach plans that are developed for and delivered to the various stakeholders.
– Provide communications early in the education process and develop grade level specific communications that address availability of AAP services and transitions between levels (elementary to middle to high school).
– Consult with the Equity Office in developing communication content and delivery methods to further ensure all stakeholders receive AAP information in a consistent and timely manner throughout the division and the county.
5
RECOMMENDATION 2: Make as a division wide priority, the expansion of the Young Scholars model to all schools and implementation fidelity across schools, through data collection, data use, monitoring, professional development, and communication. Young Scholars, FCPS’s comprehensive talent development model aimed at closing excellence gaps, has received considerable nationwide recognition as a pioneer program that nurtures and develops academic potential among historically underrepresented students. While the program is considered instrumental in the substantial increase in African-American and Hispanic students’ eligibility for Level IV advanced academic services countywide over the past decade1, advocates and researchers agree that the program has significant untapped potential to make a much broader impact. For example, the external program review found inconsistencies in Young Scholars’ professional development and program implementation throughout FCPS at the county and school levels. The success of the program is rooted in its collaborative nature and the interdependent work of school-level administrators, teachers, AARTs, and district office coordinators. Together, these professionals create opportunities to identify, engage, and empower students and an environment for students to study advanced concepts and think at a higher level through projects, hands-on exploration, and consistent extensions to the general education program. The Young Scholars model is currently being implemented in approximately 100 elementary schools, including all Title I schools. These elementary school programs feed into almost every FCPS middle school, and the model is being implemented in some secondary schools but has not been tracked by number. The AAP Office suggested several possibilities for strengthening elementary and secondary implementation of the model to build off of program expansion in SY2021-22. At its October 27 Work Session, the FCPS School Board asked the AAP Office to address two priorities regarding the implementation of the Young Scholars model:
● Provide additional extracurricular opportunities for Young Scholars; and ● Use the Young Scholars Model Implementation Rubrics for elementary and secondary
schools to support school goal-setting and improved fidelity of implementation. AAPAC advocated for strengthening and expanding the Young Scholars program in its 2017-18 charge (AAPAC Report, 2018) and 2019-20 report (AAPAC Report, 2020). The Committee continues to agree with the dedicated experts in FCPS as well as the researchers on the external program review team that FCPS should make it a priority to expand the Young Scholars model and consistently implement it across the division with higher levels of intensity and fidelity. This will
1 Plucker et al. (2020) reported increases of 186% and 322% in Level IV services respectively, from 2008 to 2018.
6
require a concentrated effort including: a full-time AART in every elementary school, relevant professional development for all K-2 teachers and leaders, and strong administrative support at the school and division levels (Plucker et al., 2020).2 Revisiting the Young Scholars model again this year, the Committee surveyed AARTs and heard from elementary and middle school principals who are implementing the program in their schools. Based on these survey and interview comments (see Appendix D), and the external review report findings, the Committee’s broader recommendation this year is to make the expansion of the Young Scholars model to all schools and implementation fidelity across schools a division wide priority, through data collection, data use, monitoring, professional development, and communication. We also present more detailed suggestions for implementation of this recommendation in schools and division wide. Suggestions for Implementation:
● Encourage central office leadership to advocate for and support school participation in the Young Scholars model.
● Team with the Equity Office to develop more Young Scholars training materials and provide training to all teachers at the beginning of each school year.
● Support the collection and use of data about the Young Scholars model to identify what is working well, make revisions as needed, monitor student progress, and promote the model throughout the division.
● Fully utilize the existing Implementation Rubric to monitor the implementation of the Young Scholars model throughout the division and share these data with all stakeholders.
● Encourage data sharing within each region to support vertical articulation for Young Scholars moving from elementary to middle school to facilitate identification of Young Scholars for middle school honors courses.
● Provide training for all school staff (e.g., instructional coaches; reading/math resource teachers; administrators; SPED, ESOL, and classroom teachers) on the Young Scholars model to create a team of committed professionals within each school.
● Create a system of support, training and resources to encourage shared responsibility among all teachers for the identification of Young Scholars and for the provision of AAP curriculum to these students.
● Develop a communication plan to raise awareness about and participation in the Young Scholars program, directed at school administrators, teachers, parents/guardians, and students.
2 From the external review report: "FCPS should significantly improve its long-term approach to achieving equity in advanced learning by frontloading learning opportunities, early and often . . . strengthen the frontloading provided by the Young Scholars program (Recommendation 3) and coordinate AAP talent development efforts with other division- and community-wide efforts to mitigate the effects of poverty and inequality. The review team believes this to be the most important intervention if FCPS is serious about achieving equity in advanced programs. Given that this is a long-term intervention, efforts to improve Young Scholars should be put into place as soon as possible. Increase resource allocations of personnel (AARTs in Title 1 schools) and funding for summer programming as needed to create a more intensive intervention." (Plucker et al., 2020, pp. 43 and 45)
7
RECOMMENDATION 3: Develop a centralized, measurable and consistent approach to the implementation of Local Level IV services through program standards, oversight, and professional development. Local Level IV services provide an important option for advanced learners who need the challenge of a full-time advanced academic curriculum in all four core content areas and do not want to leave their local school. These programs also provide access to deeper learning curriculum experiences for more students regardless of identification for advanced academic services. The external program review recommended that FCPS increase the use of frontloading strategies to promote equitable access to rigorous instruction for all students. They maintained that the continued expansion of Local Level IV programs to additional schools is an important part of this equity strategy, although not without implementation challenges.3 Currently FCPS has launched Local Level IV programs in 67 elementary schools and has a three-year plan to bring Level IV services to 45 additional elementary schools; 10 schools are slated to begin Local Level IV programs in SY 2021-22. Schools preparing to launch Level IV services receive many supports from central office:
● School leaders at expansion schools receive professional learning sessions on community engagement, grouping models, AAP curriculum overview, differentiation, and collaborative team learning (CLT) practices (SY 2020-21);
● New grade 3 teachers at expansion schools will receive 3 days of intensive training at the June 2021 AAP Summer Institute;
● Grade 3 and 4 teachers will receive quarterly cohort support days during SY 2021-22; and ● Pending budget approval, 1.0 AARTs at new Local Level IV schools and an AAP specialist
will provide more personalized support for new Local Level IV teachers and school-based leaders.
The external program review recommended that FCPS continue to strive for implementation fidelity to the Local Level IV program model and employ accountability tools to improve
3 From the external review report: "Even principals who recommended creating Local Level IV programs in each school – and there were many – noted that this will be a major cultural and instructional change in some schools. They emphasized that such a change would place a great deal of collective responsibility on school and division leaders (and create space issues for many); principals would need to ensure Level IV programs have qualified teachers in the classrooms; central office staff will need to evaluate the programs on a regular basis; regional superintendents would need to hire and train principals with oversight of Local Level IV programs in mind and would be required to evaluate principals on those responsibilities; and central office leaders would need to support the development and maintenance of the Local Level IV [programs] through the recruitment of qualified teachers and professional development before placement. Given administrator attitudes toward and expertise in advanced education, the review team is not fully convinced this is feasible in the short-term." (Plucker et al., 2020, pp. 43-44).
8
consistency of implementation across schools. The Committee convened a panel of principals, teachers and AARTs from schools that already have Local Level IV programs and schools planning to launch new Local Level IV programs in SY 2021-22, to discuss the challenges in implementing high-quality Local Level IV services in their schools (see Appendix E). Based on the many school voices heard during this panel (N=12 staff), the Committee is making the recommendation that FCPS develop a more centralized, measurable and consistent approach to the implementation of Local Level IV programs, including program standards, oversight and professional development, with some specific ideas of how this broad recommendation might look division wide and in schools. Suggestions for Implementation:
● Support monitoring of Local Level IV programs within schools by principals and across schools by central office/regions in order to hold schools accountable for fidelity of program standards.
● Include guidance and oversight in the monitoring process that specifies staffing, training, resources, grouping practices, and implementation timelines as well as a rubric describing what a high-quality Local Level IV program should look like.
● Ensure that all instructional staff in Local Level IV schools receives professional development in using the AAP curriculum (e.g., pacing guides, resources) and in scaffolding as well as extension practices for managing a differentiated classroom, to support program fidelity and provide access to rigorous instruction for all students.
● Collect system wide data to evaluate the implementation and impacts (academic and social-emotional) of Local Level IV programs on both identified students and their home-school peers.
● Encourage Local Level IV schools to write School Improvement and Innovation Plan (SIIP) goals around access to rigor through the use of AAP curriculum resources, thus holding schools accountable to the community for Local Level IV implementation.
● To encourage staff and community buy-in, educate all stakeholders (e.g., administrators, parents, and teachers) about the implementation of Local Level IV programs including the benefits of neighborhood connections, increased access to AAP curriculum, and similarities to Level IV Centers.
● Develop a clear Collaboration Learning Teams (CLT) protocol that involves the entire school team (administrators, AARTs, classroom teachers, instructional coaches, special education and ESOL teachers) in Local Level IV program implementation and promotes learning about AAP.
● In supporting expansion of Local Level IV programs to additional schools, include support for implementation of the Young Scholars model at the same schools, as there is overlap in the goals and training associated with both efforts.
9
RECOMMENDATION 4: Continue division use of a holistic screening process with multiple data point components to allow multiple opportunities for students to demonstrate areas of talent, including a rating scale that provides equitable and objective student information. The AAP Office currently uses a holistic approach to screening that incorporates information from a variety of sources to identify students whose academic needs cannot be met in the regular classroom. The external program review commended FCPS for its use of universal screening in considering all grade 2 students for identification to receive AAP Level II-IV services. They also noted current screening practices that may contribute to the underrepresentation of some student populations in Advanced Academic Programs and recommended that some aspects of the current screening protocol be reviewed and reconsidered: for example, shifting from the use of national norms to local building norms, revising the current rating scale4, and additional guidelines to increase equity in work samples and referrals. While FCPS pilots the use of local norms to identify students for Local Level IV services during SY2020-21, they are reviewing best practices regarding the use of rating scales, work samples, and referrals. The Committee reviewed sample screening portfolios (composite portfolios based on actual students, de-identified—see Appendix F) to better understand the holistic screening process and then discussed ways to ensure that this process is objective and equitable. This discussion resulted in one broad recommendation that the division continue to employ a holistic screening process with multiple components to allow multiple opportunities for students to demonstrate areas of talent, including a rating scale that provides equitable and objective student information. In addition, the Committee made specific suggestions regarding the implementation of rating scales. Suggestions for Implementation:
● Partner with the Equity Office to ensure a valid rating scale that supports equitable and objective ratings.
● Select a rating scale that continues to showcase all student strengths, including academic, creative, and leadership potential.
● Ensure fidelity of school-based training for teachers on how to use rating scales to evaluate student strengths objectively and without implicit bias.
4 The findings of the external review are somewhat mixed regarding the use of the Gifted Behaviors Rating Scale. On one hand, the GBRS has been found to capture essential information for identifying strengths and contribute to documenting talents of students in historically underrepresented groups. On the other hand, there has not yet been statistical analysis of its validity and reliability as an assessment tool for identifying advanced learners.
10
RECOMMENDATION A Increase staffing to include at least 1.0 FTE AART in every elementary school and .5 FTE AART in every middle school to support implementation of recommendations around program goals, the Young Scholars model, Local Level IV expansion and the screening process. A consistent theme in the Committee’s examination of the external review recommendations in four areas is the need for additional AART staffing at both the elementary and middle school levels in order to support the successful implementation of these recommendations. This has been the lead recommendation of this Committee for the last four years and was strongly endorsed by the external review team in their report. The external program review cited several findings regarding the importance of the AART role in supporting quality AAP services. They found that:
● Full-time AARTs are highly valued by principals, especially the assignment of full-time AARTS in every Title I school;
● An AART has several roles in supporting high-quality AAP services, including coaching for access to rigor for all students (Level I), working with teachers to support Level II services (increased frequency in areas of specific academic strength), providing Level III services (weekly services in multiple content areas), leading schoolwide implementation of the Young Scholars model, and working as a schoolwide instructional coach for “differentiating up”;5
● A full-time AART is especially critical to the consistent implementation of the Young Scholars model; and
● The assignment of AARTs to the master schedule inhibits their potential to fully support the Young Scholars model, as well as other local school AAP services.
Plucker and his colleagues summarized the importance of the AART: Consequently, the external program review made several recommendations regarding the AART position. Broadly they recommended increasing the number of AARTs with the five-year goal of
5 As AAPAC reported last year, the role of the AART has changed significantly over time, shifting from itinerant teacher working only with identified students, to a coach, co-teacher, instructional leader, and family liaison. AARTs now support teachers and families in deeper ways that require relationships, access, and time as they support screening and identification practices, schoolwide talent development, and family engagement. (AAPAC Report, 2020)
The “quality of local services ― and therefore support for equity ― appears to depend heavily on each school’s AART.” (Plucker et al., 2020, p. 39)
11
placing at least 1.0 FTE in each elementary school and additional AARTs in large Title I schools, recognizing in particular their value in implementing the Young Scholars model:
● Place an AART in each middle school with Local Level IV services; ● Exclude the AART position from the master schedule; ● Support efforts to improve Young Scholars including increasing AART positions in Title I
schools; ● Focus the AART job description on supporting equitable access to and achievement in
advanced learning experiences; and ● Continue and strengthen professional development for AART staff given their importance to
the success of advanced academic programs in every school.
Given the strong support for the AART position, both in previous AAPAC reports and by last year’s external review, FCPS has developed a three-year plan for increasing AART staffing at elementary schools that are currently centrally staffed with a 0.5 FTE to a 1.0 FTE. For the 2019-20 SY, the FCPS Board increased AART staffing in each Title I school to 1.0 FTE in an effort to reduce any inconsistencies and inequities in AAP services. This three-year expansion plan presented at the October 27 2020 Board work session as well as the FCPS FY 2022 Proposed Budget includes a Year 1 budget proposal to fund:
● An additional 18 1.0 FTE AARTS for remaining elementary schools (which would bring an additional 36 schools to 1.0 FTE); and
● Four (4) FTE middle school AARTs (which would staff 8 middle schools with a .5 AART).
In summary, an increase in AART staffing was supported by previous AAPAC reports, was endorsed by the external review experts and is currently in the proposed FY 2022 budget. Still this committee strongly believes that this recommendation is important enough to once again include it in our report. We recommend that FCPS continue the expansion of AART positions to all elementary (1.0 FTE) and middle schools (0.5 FTE) to support equity goals related to AAP services and programs. Here are some specific suggestions for implementing this recommendation in relation to our other recommendations.
Suggestions for Implementation:
Provide a full-time AART in every elementary and at least a half-time AART in every middle school:
● To coach and co-teach to support talent development, differentiation, and equity of access for underrepresented populations.
● To support the identification of Young Scholars and bridge the transition from elementary to middle school for identified scholars.
● To support the expansion and implementation of Local Level IV programs with fidelity. ● To support the holistic screening and identification process.
Note: The above list is specific to the role of the AART in supporting this report’s recommendations and does not include all that they do to facilitate AAP service delivery in schools.
12
RECOMMENDATION B Increase the partnership between the AAP and Equity Offices to support implementation of our other recommendations, especially around program goals, the Young Scholars model and identification processes. As the Committee reviewed the many ideas for recommendations to support the external program review findings, another theme emerged. It became obvious that many of the suggestions for supporting equity in AAP services could be more effectively and efficiently implemented through greater collaboration between the AAP and Equity Offices. This was especially apparent in specific recommendations under three of the four topics reviewed:
● Under program goals, expand consultation with the Equity Office to provide training on how to better understand diversity and how to create relationships in classrooms through the Cultural Proficiency Modules; and consult with the Equity Office in developing communication content and delivery methods to further ensure all stakeholders receive AAP information in a consistent and timely manner throughout the division and the county
● Under the Young Scholars model, team with the Equity Office to develop more Young Scholars training materials and provide training to all teachers at the beginning of each school year.
● Under the screening process, partner with the Equity Office to ensure a valid rating scale that supports equitable and objective ratings; and ensure fidelity of school-based training for teachers on how to use rating scales to evaluate student strengths objectively and without implicit bias.
This partnership and collaboration makes sense from a division wide perspective. Equity is at the center of every FCPS initiative and the Strategic Plan, and equity was clearly at the center of the external program review, aptly titled, “Achieving Equity in FCPS Advanced Academic Programs.” Schools frequently report that they are overwhelmed in addressing so many division wide goals and initiatives. Coherent and explicit messaging that tie together initiatives with a common purpose will support schools in strategic work. There is clearly an overlap in district wide equity goals to affirm students’ identities and strengths and the AAP goal to develop talent with an asset-based lens. Without a doubt, some of the equity messages around AAP could be amplified through such a collaboration with the Equity Office. Examples include: partnering on professional learning for talent development and the Young Scholars model and partnering in the selection of a rating scale to be used in the holistic screening process for the AAP continuum of services (Levels II–IV).
13
THE COMMITTEE’S PROCESS
The Committee’s work this year was influenced by the nature of its charge and circumstances of the pandemic that required virtual meetings. The charge stipulated that the Committee provide the AAP office with stakeholder feedback on recommendations from the external program review. The external review made recommendations in five areas. AAPAC’s planning committee, in conjunction with the AAP office, selected recommendations in the three areas where stakeholder input would be most useful: program goals, screening, and frontloading. Under frontloading, the external review recommended that FCPS focus on fidelity of implementation with respect to the Young Scholars model and the expansion of Local Level IV services. Consequently, the Committee decided to focus this year’s efforts on four topics that have important equity implications for the provision of AAP services:
• Program goals,
• Frontloading through the Young Scholars model,
• Frontloading through the expansion of Local Level IV services, and
• The screening process.
Monthly committee meetings were planned to cover each of these topics (see Appendix B). And since meetings were held virtually, it was especially important to ensure that members had sufficient understanding of each topic so that small and whole group discussions would result in ideas for how to implement the external program review recommendations. For each topic, we planned a meeting that would cover: an overview of the topic, its contribution to equity, the external program review recommendation, its implementation status in FCPS, and opportunities for Committee members to review the topic from multiple perspectives.
The table below illustrates the sources the Committee drew upon to better understand each topic and to draft possible recommendations.
Topic/Sources
Small Group Breakout
Discussions
Whole Group Discussion
Padlet – Individual Member
Comments
School Voice
Program Goals (December)
✓ ✓
Young Scholars (January)
✓ ✓ ✓ Principal clips, AART survey
Local Level IV (February)
✓ Principal/Teacher panel
Screening (March)
✓ ✓
14
The resulting discussions generated ideas for how to implement each of the external review recommendations, either in small groups or by individuals responding to key questions using a virtual interactive tool known as “Padlet.” For two of our topics, the Young Scholars model and Local Level IV expansion, the Committee also heard from school staff involved in their implementation (principals, AARTs, AAP teachers), through surveys, brief video-taped interview clips, or panels. Each meeting’s discussion as well as the AART survey and the principal/teacher panel generated several ideas for possible recommendations on that topic.
In order to reach consensus on the most important recommendations to bring forward in this report, the planning committee compiled all of the ideas suggested as possible recommendations under each topic, and sorted them by keyword/categories. At our April meeting, members reviewed the possible recommendations for each topic and voted on the ones considered most important to include in this report. This process resulted in consensus around a high-level recommendation for each topic and more specific ideas for how each recommendation could be implemented division wide and in schools.
The Committee’s review process for each of the four topics is detailed in the four tables that follow.
15
Topic What the Reader Should Know About Program Goals
Description
“The [overarching] goal of Advanced Academic Programs is to identify and serve students with advanced academic needs that cannot be met in the regular classroom.” (Plucker et al., 2020, p. 42). FCPS articulates this goal through two approaches: talent development and differentiation to meet the needs of advanced learners. Talent development strategies include: 1) instructional opportunities to use AAP strategies and curriculum to develop Portrait of a Graduate attributes and identify emergent talent; 2) identifying and exploring interest areas, and 3) attention to underrepresented populations through the Young Scholars model. Differentiation within AAP is represented in four levels of service: Level I - Tier I access to AAP curriculum and strategies; Level II - Increased access to AAP curriculum and strategies plus academic peer group for subject-specific strengths; Level III - Increased access to AAP curriculum and strategies plus academic peer group, part-time in multiple subjects; and Level IV - Increased access to AAP curriculum and strategies plus academic peer group, full time in all four subject areas. Differentiation strategies include: 1) meeting the needs of advanced learners “by name and by need”, (e.g. faster pace, reduced scaffolding, increased complexity or abstraction); and 2) ensuring access to research-based curriculum designed for advanced learners as well as an academic peer group.
Contribution to Equity
By developing the talents of all students through rigorous instruction and meeting advanced learners’ needs through differentiation (“students by name and by need”), Advanced Academic Programs can also address the equity goal of identifying and serving underrepresented populations for AAP services. The Young Scholars model exemplifies talent development targeted for underrepresented populations.
External Review Recommendation
The external review recommended that the goals of AAP programming and the levels of service within FCPS be clarified. Each level of AAP service should be based on meeting particular student needs that cannot be met elsewhere. Cluster grouping and acceleration should be expanded to challenge a wider range of students and Local Level IV services should also be expanded to provide greater access to advanced learning in all buildings. (Plucker et al., 2020, pp. 42, 45)
Current Status in FCPS
Effective efforts to achieve this goal must be based on ensuring the goal is embraced across all staff at all levels of FCPS. Students who are served at Level IV have a wide range of needs, suggesting that a mismatch between needs and students remains. This points to the lack of agreed upon goals for AAP services throughout the division. (Plucker et al., 2020, p. 42)
Committee Review
The Committee reviewed quotes from the literature on the importance of talent development, differentiation, and serving underrepresented populations in gifted education (see Appendix C). We then discussed how talent development and differentiation can contribute to equity and could be made clearer to all FCPS stakeholders. As a result of this discussion, members brainstormed several ideas about how to clarify program goals and how best to ensure equity in the delivery of AAP services.
Resulting AAPAC Recommendation
Reinforce program goals through accountability tools, early pipeline opportunities, teacher professional development, and communication.
16
Topic What the Reader Should Know About the Young Scholars Model
Description
Young Scholars is a nationally recognized model designed to find and nurture advanced academic potential in students from historically underrepresented populations. Students are identified in the early grades and provided with opportunities to work with advanced curriculum, in preparation for advanced level coursework at the elementary and secondary levels. Key features of a successful Young Scholars program: strong school leadership, a schoolwide focus, and program ownership; a growth mindset to “teach up” and support students’ access to higher level curriculum; professional development for school leaders and teachers; parent partnerships; and extracurricular opportunities (e.g., elementary and middle school summer and afterschool programs; Student Achievement Grants in high school).
Contribution to Equity
“In FCPS, frontloading is best exemplified through the Young Scholars program.” As a frontloading strategy, YS is designed to increase representation of diverse students in K-12 Advanced Academic Programs. Frontloading exposes all students to advanced/enriched programming. Through this exposure, frontloading provides all students the opportunity to have their talent developed at an earlier age. “FCPS is often discussed in gifted education circles as a leader in talent development efforts to mitigate the effects of inequality on gifted education equity through its Young Scholars program.” (Plucker et al., 2020, pp. 16, 20)
External Review Recommendation
Regarding the Young Scholars program, the external review found that while “intended to provide frontloading, its implementation was inconsistent throughout the division and limited in intensity.” They recommended that FCPS increase funding to support implementation of the YS model with fidelity to the model’s key features and hold teachers and schools accountable for its implementation. “Over the next 3 years, strengthen the frontloading provided by the YS program . . . The review team believes this to be the most important intervention if FCPS is serious about achieving equity in advanced programs. Increase resource allocations of personnel (AARTs in Title I schools) and funding for summer programming as needed to create a more intensive intervention. All classroom teachers in FCPS should have an understanding of the program and how best to support participating students.” (Plucker et al., 2020, pp. 24, 45, 46)
Current Status in FCPS
The Young Scholars model is now in approximately 100 elementary schools, feeding into all middle schools. The AAP Office has developed several resources to support the YS model, including an Implementation Rubric that details what a high-quality program should look like and YS elementary and secondary Google sites to support multiple entry points for school professional development. At the October 27th School Board work session, staff proposed strengthening the YS model by expanding extracurricular opportunities for Young Scholars, and improving fidelity to model integrity using the Implementation Rubrics and school goal setting. The proposed 2021-22 budget includes funds to support a K-12 YS specialist position and after-school or summer opportunities for Young Scholars.
Committee Review
AAPAC reviewed a summary of responses (N=37) to a survey of AARTs at YS schools on the successes and challenges of implementing a Young Scholars program and how teachers and schools are holding themselves accountable for YS implementation. The Committee also heard from 6 elementary and 2 middle school principals about their implementation of the YS model, where they had experienced success and why (see Appendix D). This resulted in a discussion of improving the implementation of the YS model division wide, including accountability tools.
Resulting AAPAC Recommendation
Make as a division wide priority, the expansion of the Young Scholars model to all schools and implementation fidelity across schools, through data collection, data use, monitoring, professional development, and communication.
17
Topic What the Reader Should Know About Local Level IV Expansion
Description
Local Level IV services provide an important option for advanced learners who need the challenge of full-time advanced academic curriculum in four content areas and do not want to leave their local school. These programs also provide access to deeper learning curriculum experiences for more students regardless of identification for advanced academic services. Key components of the model include: cluster grouping (at least 6-8 students) to ensure an academic peer group; classroom teachers trained on the AAP units and resources in the Level IV planning and pacing guides; teachers with or pursuing an AAP endorsement; scaffolds and supports to ensure that all students in a class have a level of challenge that sustains continuous growth; CLTs that address the needs of all teachers at each grade level, including quarterly vertical CLT meetings; and monitoring by school leaders for fidelity of implementation and teacher training.
Contribution to Equity
The provision of Level IV services in local schools allows students from underrepresented populations to receive services in their neighborhood community school and offers the opportunity for rigorous instruction to other children not identified for Level IV services. Principals and teachers interviewed by the external review team “believe that delivering Level IV services in local schools is conducive to equity in participation in advanced academics.” The external review team noted that using local norms and providing teachers training and support in differentiation “will help advance equity over time.” (Plucker et al., p. 38, 43)
External Review Recommendation
The external program review recommended that FCPS increase frontloading opportunities. “Over the next 5 years, expand Local Level IV services into every elementary and middle school, with accompanying review and support for high level implementation.” They noted inconsistencies across schools and recommended that FCPS focus on implementation fidelity, training and support for Local Level IV teachers in differentiation, and greater accountability for Local Level IV implementation (principal monitoring; central office evaluation, teacher recruitment and professional development; and regional superintendent oversight). (Plucker et al., 2020, pp. 43-44)
Current Status in FCPS
Piloted in SY 2013-14 at Beech Tree ES, Local Level IV services are currently provided in 67 elementary schools. FCPS is planning expansion to an additional 45 elementary schools (starting in grade 3) over the next three years, including 10 schools that will launch programs in SY 2021-22. Preparation for expansion includes sessions for school leaders (SY 2020-21) on community engagement, grouping models, AAP curriculum overview, and best practices in differentiation and collaborative learning teams. In addition, grade 3 teachers new to the program will receive 3 days of intensive training at the June 2021 AAP Summer Institute and grade 3 and 4 teachers will receive quarterly cohort support days (SY 2021-22). Pending budget approval, staffing will include 1.0 AARTs in schools new to Local Level IV, an AAP specialist to provide more personalized support for new Local Level IV teachers, and curriculum materials to support Local Level IV expansion.
Committee Review
The Committee received an update on the status of Local Level IV programs in FCPS and heard from a panel of 12 principals, teachers and AARTs serving in schools that have implemented a Local Level IV program or are planning to in SY 2020-21. The panel discussed the benefits of the Local Level IV model, implementation challenges, and possible recommendations focused on implementation fidelity and accountability for implementation (see Appendix E).
Resulting AAPAC Recommendation
Develop a centralized, measurable and consistent approach to the implementation of Local Level IV services, through program standards, oversight, and professional development.
18
Topics What the Reader Should Know About the Screening Process
Description
The screening process employs a universal, holistic approach. The FCPS approach is not to label students as “gifted” or “not gifted”, but rather to match students to the level of AAP service that is needed at that time considering availability of academic peer group and individual student strength areas. The process is holistic in that it relies on multiple data points considered collectively rather than separately. No components of the portfolios are weighted, nor are any components barriers to student eligibility. Files include: progress reports; Gifted Behaviors Rating Scale (GBRS) completed by local school committee; ability testing and achievement test information if available; referral forms; work samples from opportunities to engage in critical and creative learning experiences; and an optional parent questionnaire. The process is universal in that all students are considered for the screening pool based on tests administered to all first and second graders and rating scales completed by teachers on all K-5 students annually.
Contribution to Equity
“There are several best practice strategies that have been found to increase equity within advanced academic programs. These strategies include the use of multiple criteria for identification (i.e., holistic) and universal screening,” both key characteristics of the FCPS approach to screening. (Plucker et al., 2020, p. 20)
External Review Recommendation
The external review suggested several revisions to the screening system over the next two years: discontinue the grade 1 NNAT administration; reduce the influence of the parent referral component; reconsider use of the GBRS; examine the initial universal screening cutoff score; limit the use of student work samples from home; reconsider the appeal process; limit retesting to cases of demonstrated need; and review central identification procedures. “The review team views these identification improvements to be necessary but not sufficient for achieving equity in advanced programs.” (Plucker, et al., 2020, p. 45). The AAP Office sought AAPAC input on three screening process components: referrals, rating scales, and work samples.
Current Status in FCPS
The AAP Office is in the process of making changes to the holistic screening process recommended by the external program review and consistent with VDOE regulations governing gifted and talented programs. In response to the recommendation that FCPS discontinue use of the Gifted Behaviors Rating Scale (GBRS), the AAP Office is considering replacements and will have to go through an RFP process with potential changes in SY 2022-23. FCPS will begin implementing the recommendation that screening files only include work samples generated at school in SY 2021-22 when students have returned to in-person instruction five days a week. The inclusion of awards and certificates in screening portfolios was discontinued in SY 2020-21. And finally, in response to the recommendation that local norms be used to create the second grade pool, FCPS is currently piloting the use of local building norms in schools that provide Level IV services (both local and center-based) and will have data to make that decision for SY 2021-22.
Committee Review
Committee members reviewed three sample screening files to better understand the holistic screening process (how the screening committee reviews data holistically to match students to services) and the role that referral forms, rating scales, and work samples play (see Appendix F). These sample portfolios were composite files created with components from various past screening files in order to protect student confidentiality. Their review led to a discussion of the relative value of each component in the holistic screening process; the benefits of holistic, case study consideration of multiple data points; and possible recommendations to ensure that the process is objective and equitable.
Resulting AAPAC Recommendation
Continue division use of a holistic screening process with multiple data point components to allow multiple opportunities for students to demonstrate areas of talent and include a rating scale that provides equitable and objective student information.
19
CONCLUSION
The 2019-20 external program review by Drs. Plucker, Callahan, Dixson, and Peters resulted in several quality recommendations to improve equity across all four levels of FCPS Advanced Academic Program (AAP) services. As the AAP Office set out to implement these recommendations beginning in SY 2020-21, they sought feedback and input from the AAP Advisory Committee on four topics: (1) the clarification of program goals; (2) the implementation of the Young Scholars model; (3) the expansion of Local Level IV programs; and (4) the holistic screening process.
Based on the Committee’s review of these four topics, we are in general agreement with the external program review findings. Moreover, we are making two overarching recommendations that will go a long way in supporting equitable access to AAP services: (1) increase the number of AART positions division wide with a five-year goal of at least 1.0 FTE AART position in every elementary school and a .5 AART position in every middle school; and (2) increase the partnership between the AAP and Equity Offices. Together these two lead recommendations will make possible the implementation of the Committee’s more specific recommendations under the four topics reviewed. We hope that FCPS and the School Board will consider AAPAC’s six report recommendations as they develop and approve the next FCPS Local Plan for the Gifted (2021‒2026).
20
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The Committee would like to thank the following schools, staff and Board members for contributing to this year’s work and the resulting report:
● Principals, teachers and AARTs who participated in the Local Level IV panel: – Raechel Acosta, Clermont ES – Felicia Drake, Cardinal Forest ES – Leslie Grumbach and Lindsay Trout, Terraset ES – Teresa Khuluki, Wolftrap ES – Jesse Kraft, Josie Manie, and Sushmita Roy, Coates ES – Maureen Lopez and Sarah Natalie, Beech Tree ES – LaRhonda Peterson and Chris Roseler, Bucknell ES
● Principals who responded to questions about the Young Scholars program in their schools:
– Stephanie Almquist, Herndon ES – Rebecca Forgy, Parklawn ES – Justine Klena, Herndon MS – Katie Madigan, Glasgow MS – David Pietzman, Greenbriar East ES – Erica Riley, Stenwood ES – Kristen Rucinski, Gunston ES – Jill Stewart, Lake Anne ES
● Staff who supported Committee meetings and provided information on AAP curriculum and
strategies: – Noel Klimenko, Director of PreK-12 Curriculum and Instruction – Kirsten Maloney, Coordinator of Advanced Academic Programs – AAP educational specialists: Beth Baldwin, Lori Bedsole, Kelly Brown, Margot Dickey,
Jeff Lonnett, Lyn Malvin, and Rebecca Small. ● The 37 AARTs who completed the Young Scholar surveys ● School Board member Tamara Derenak-Kaufax who attended AAPAC meetings to learn
more about our work and to provide relevant School Board updates.
21
APPENDICES
A. References
B. Overview of AAPAC Meetings for SY 2020-21
C. Quotes from Gifted and Talented Literature that Support Program Goals
D. Quotes that Support the Young Scholars Model:
1. From AART Survey
2. From Principal Interview Video Clips
E. Quotes from the Local Level IV Principal/Teacher/AART Panel
F. Screening Process – Sample Portfolio
22
Appendix A: References Advanced Academic Programs Advisory Committee (2018). Advanced academic programs advisory
committee annual report to the Fairfax County School Board: SY 2017-2018, May 2018. Advanced Academic Programs Advisory Committee (2020). Advanced academic programs advisory
committee annual report to the Fairfax County School Board: SY 2019-2020, June 2020. Brody, L. E. (2017). Meeting the individual educational needs of students by applying talent search
principles to school settings. In J. A. Plucker, A. N. Rinn and M. C. Makel (Eds.), From Giftedness to Gifted Education: Reflecting Theory in Practice. Waco, TX: Prufrock Press, Inc.
Davis, J. L. (2010). Bright, Talented and Black: A Guide for Families of African American Gifted Learners.
Goshen, KY: Great Potential Press, Inc. Dixson, D. (2020). Intersections of culture, context, and race with poverty: Implications for services for
gifted learners from low-income backgrounds. In T. Stambaugh & P. Olszewski-Kubilius (Eds.), Unlocking Potential: Identifying and Serving Gifted Students from Low-income Households (pp. 27–46). Waco, TX: Prufrock Press, Inc.
Fairfax County Public Schools (2020). FY2022 Proposed Budget, December 2020. National Association for Gifted Children (2020.) NAGC denounces racism and stands for social justice.
June, 2020. Retrieved from https://www.nagc.org/about-nagc/media/press-releases/nagc-denounces-racism-and-stands-social-justice
Noguera, P., Darling-Hammond, L., & Friedlaender, D. (2015). Equal Opportunity for Deeper Learning.
Students at the Center: Deeper Learning Research Series. Boston, MA: Jobs for the Future. Peters, S. J., Rambo-Hernandez, K., Makel, M. C., Matthews, M. S., & Plucker, J. A. (2017). Should millions
of students take a gap year? Large numbers of students start the school year above grade level. Gifted Child Quarterly, 61(3), 229–238.
Plucker, J.A.; Callahan, C.; Dixson, D.; and Peters, S. J. (2020). Good progress but challenges remain:
Achieving equity in Fairfax County Public Schools Advanced Academic Programs. Report to the Fairfax County School Board, May 5, 2020.
Plucker, J. A., & Peters, S. J. (2016). Excellence Gaps in Education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education
Press. VanTassel-Baska, J., Hubbard, G., & Robbins, J. (2020). Differentiation of instruction for gifted learners:
Collated evaluative studies of teacher classroom practices. Roeper Review, 42(3), 153–164. Virginia Department of Education (2012). Code of Virginia, Chapter 40: Regulations governing
educational services for gifted students. Revised, June 2012. Wells, A. (2020). Achieving Equity in Gifted Programming: Dismantling Barriers and Tapping Potential.
Waco, TX: Prufrock Press, Inc.
23
Appendix B: Overview of AAPAC Meetings for SY 2020-21
Month Focus of AAPAC Meeting
Please note: Focus of monthly meetings subject to change depending on timing of work progress around recommendations.
October Asynchronous choices to get connected/familiar with the AAP External Program Review:
● Watch School Board work session from AAPAC 2019-20 SY Report (10/13/2020)
● Read the AAP External Program Review (Board Docs 5/18/2020) ● Watch School Board work session on FCPS Staff Response to External
Review (10/27/2020)
November Introductions, Responses to October tasks, Unpacking the charge for SY 2020-21
December Recommendation #1 (Goals) – Goals of AAP in FCPS
January Recommendation #3 (Frontloading) – Young Scholars – review the model and suggest ideas for accountability
February Recommendation #3 (Frontloading) – Levels IV (local and center) – review data about, comparison of two, review plan for expansion and suggest ideas for accountability
March Recommendation #2 (Screening Updates) – Review of gifted screening holistic approach to match students to services (focus on rating scales, works samples, referrals) Last ¼ of meeting: Discuss report approach & development
April Final determination of the report recommendations
May Review draft report for final edits and vote regarding committee approval
Discuss suggestions for next year’s charge
24
Appendix C In order to better understand the goals of FCPS Advanced Academic Programs, the Committee reviewed quotes from the literature that support each of the three program goals: talent development, differentiation, and equity/underrepresented groups.
Quotes that Support Goal of Talent Development
Access to Deeper Learning
“To the degree that deeper learning remains unavailable to students of color and children of low-income families, America will never be able to solve its equity dilemma.” (Noguera et al., 2015)
The Roles of Nature and Nurture
“Increasingly we have begun to realize that it is the interaction of (nature and nurture) (i.e. of numerous personal traits influencing and being influenced by a variety of experiences) that leads to high achievement.” (Linda Brody, 2017)
Talent Does Not Develop in Isolation
In talent spotting, the goal is to provide exposure. Through academic behavioral observations, teachers are able to gain insight into a student’s more comprehensive set of skills and abilities. … In order to give appropriate consideration for placement into gifted programs, all students (especially students from underrepresented backgrounds) benefit from deliberate, well-thought-out talent development programming. (April Wells, 2020)
Reasons to Broaden View from Achievement Gaps and Work on Closing Excellence Gaps
The emphasis placed on minimum competency is manifested in state accountability systems, how test results are interpreted and used, and how teachers are evaluated. When advanced achievement and closing excellence gaps are not considered educational priorities, it should not be surprising that high-ability students and their education receive relatively little attention.
Overall rates of advanced performance within the U.S. are low relative to other industrialized countries, and excellence gaps are big, and by some estimations, growing. Contrary to the belief that “a rising tide raises all ships,” progress on shrinking minimum competency gaps does not translate into shrinking excellence gaps.
Getting all students working up to basic grade-level achievement is an ethical requirement and certainly has economic benefits; but a society of students working at grade level with little advanced achievement will not be an economic growth and innovation machine.
Failing to address excellence gaps will almost certainly cause them to grow over the long term … Knowledgeable, well-resourced families will often find extra support needed to develop their talents while their less-supported peers do not get that support. (Plucker & Peters, 2016)
25
Quotes that Support Goal of Differentiation
How Schools Fail Gifted Students
“Early in American history, students were educated at home or in small schools that allowed them to progress at their own pace. Relatively few of those students enrolled in college, but those who did were typically quite a bit younger than students who enter college today, having been allowed to progress as rapidly as they wished through a pre-college curriculum. As the student population grew and universal education became a goal, schools were organized into grades on the basis of age so that larger numbers of students could be educated in an organized way. But the assumption that students of the same age should all learn the same content at the same pace is faulty; a grade spans an age range of a full 12 months or more … This formula also denies individual differences in cognitive abilities, learning rates, and content knowledge within an age group, and students who process information faster than their age peers can quickly outpace the curriculum if no accommodations are made.” (Linda Brody, 2017)
Should Millions of Students Take a Gap Year? Large Numbers of Students Start the School Year above Grade Level “Every classroom will have some degree of variation in students’ ZPDs, necessitating what has come to be called differentiated instruction. A long-standing and related concern in gifted education circles is that many school administrators and general education teachers believe that advanced learners will be fine on their own—that being retaught grade-level content below gifted students’ ZPDs is not a concern because these students somehow will learn anyway. Consistent with the Connor et al. (2009) findings, this suggests that greater student heterogeneity likely makes it harder to adjust instructional levels precisely for all students. … Evertson et al. (1981) found that teachers focused most of their effort on the lowest achieving students, even though this led to average- and high-achieving students being less likely to show learning gains.” (Peters, Rambo-Hernandez, & Makel, 2017)
A Study of the Likelihood of Differentiation with Various Grouping Strategies
“When the teacher had to manipulate an instructional grouping approach for advanced learners, differentiation rarely occurred. Whole class instruction or small group work without differentiation for advanced learners was the norm for elementary and middle school cluster-grouped classrooms. The needs of advanced learners were addressed more frequently and effectively in grouped classes using replacement or supplemental curricula.” (Van Tassel-Baska, Hubbard & Robbins, 2020)
26
Quotes that Support Goal of Equity/Underrepresented Groups
Bright, Talented, & Black
“Educating African American gifted children and youth is not a new concept. More than a century ago, in 1906, Dr. William Edward Burghardt Du Bois, a noted writer, civil rights leader, and co-founder of the NAACP, proposed a plan called “The Talented Tenth,” which called for Black communities to work together to recognize, nurture, and provide a specially designed education for their most intellectually talented children.
While Du Bois was the first to draw attention to the intellectual gifts of Black children, he was not alone as a leader in the movement to examine the intellectual strengths of Black people in the early 20th century. In the 1930s, researchers Martin Jenkins and Dr. Paul Witty were among the first to study gifted youngsters in depressed Black neighborhoods. As a pioneer in this field, Dr. Jenkins’ research resulted in the first papers written about being Black and gifted in the U.S. He later went on to become president of Morgan State College in Baltimore in 1948. (Joy Lawson Davis, 2010)
Poverty and Disparate Impacts of Out-of-School Experiences “Students from higher socioeconomic backgrounds are more likely to participate in academic summer programs (Redford et al., 2018). As a result, they generally enter the following school year with slightly more academic skills and less summer loss than their peers from lower socioeconomic backgrounds, putting them in position to better understand and master academic material in the school year ahead (Rambo-Hernandez & McCoach, 2015). Over time this can lead to different learning trajectories and subsequently meaningful learning differences across important academic outcomes (Olszewski-Kubilius et al., 2017). Thus, underrepresented students from low-income backgrounds are probably more likely to qualify for GATE programs the earlier in their schooling careers they are evaluated and served compared to later in their academic careers, which is fairly typical for gifted programming (Callahan et al., 2013).” (Dante Dixson, 2020)
NAGC Denounces Racism and Stands for Social Justice The field of gifted education has a checkered past regarding the promotion of equity. Over the past several decades, NAGC and its members have focused considerable energy to right these historical wrongs by addressing inequities and promoting opportunities for all children. We are committed to diversity, equity, supporting underserved populations, and have advocated that giftedness knows no boundaries. But we need to do much more. The time for action is now. We must do our part to confront systemic and institutional racism. Action is being taken now on collecting and developing resources that address the issues of racism and racial injustice for gifted students. (NAGC, 2020)
27
Appendix D-1
Quotes that Support the Young Scholars Model from AART Survey
What are successes of implementing the Young Scholars model in your school and to what do you attribute the success? “One success is that teachers are stronger with identification because that has been a focus at the school for the past few years. We have been working, both within AAP and general education, on a strengths-based approach to each student when discussing students. This allows for conversations around how giftedness and academic strengths present differently for different populations of students.” “Allowing other staff to help mentor and support these students has been a vital help. Our STEAM teacher and others really enjoy working with these students, and fostering opportunities before and after school for teachers and staff to connect has been very successful.” “The success of implementing the Young Scholars Model at [school] has everything to do with it being a major component of our school culture. Each staff member values all students, and is constantly seeking ways to help differentiate for them. This means that when any staff member encounters a student who may be an English Language Learner, who is acquiring the language at a rapid pace, or as student who does not have many resources at home, can be resilient enough to create/explore to extend their own learning, would be "brought to the table" as a potential Young Scholar. This is an ongoing process”
What barriers have there been (that you overcame or that still exist) that have made implementing the YS model a challenge? What would help? “While we have been successful at identifying and nurturing potential in students, the YS Model is seen primarily as the responsibility of the AART.” “We need to work on involving staff as stakeholders throughout the YS model, not just in identification processes. We used to be successful in this area as many of our teachers had taken the YS Class, but we have a very new staff since then, and our staff would benefit from additional professional development on the YS Model.” “One challenge has been when students see the learning experiences that the Young Scholars participate in, they ask if they could be a Young Scholar too. It's hard to find the right words to explain why one student is a Young Scholar while another student isn't. A challenge is when we identify a Young Scholar in 1st or 2nd grade and in spite of our interventions, the student does not continue on the academic trajectory in upper elementary grades. It's the realization that the school and teachers are only one variable in the lives of our Young Scholars. A challenge has been as an AART who is teaching an Advanced Math class as well as CCT and Level III lessons to consistently get to the Young Scholars on a consistent basis, especially the 1st and 2nd graders.”
28
How is your school holding itself/teachers accountable for Young Scholars implementation?
“We have created a team of teachers interested in this work, so that it is not solely on the shoulders of the AART.” “Our teachers understand the importance of nurturing gifted potential in Young Scholars, as it is the culture of our school building. Our teachers hold themselves accountable to refer students as Young Scholars at any time during the school year. This way they can catch them early in order to provide interventions for them. The element of trust between the AART and Classroom Teachers is the foundation at our school, and there is a mutual understanding which values the Young Scholars Model.”
What other thoughts would you like to share about how we can strengthen division wide implementation of the Young Scholars model?
“I think the more we can involve all stakeholders in the Young Scholars model, the more successful we will be. It is important that instructional coaches, reading/math resource teachers, administrators, SPED, ESOL, and classroom teachers have an understanding of YS. I know this presents the challenge of time for professional development, but the YS model is successful when there is a team of committed professionals within a school. “
“I think YS training should be part of all those training videos teachers do at the beginning of each year. Maybe AAP could make more training materials for teachers - the way the equity department makes videos for the equity lead to use to train staff. Finally, I think we need help collecting data on YS beyond what is on the Implementation Rubric - something like the data we collected for the YS class. I think YS needs to become more embedded in the system, so that it's something EVERYONE talks about all the time, not just the AAP [office] or the AART, and not just at screening meetings.”
29
Appendix D-2 Quotes that Support the Young Scholars Model
from Principal Interview Video Clips The Committee reviewed recorded videos from school leaders who shared with us what factors are most powerful in implementing robust programs exemplifying the Young Scholars Model. Below are quotes that encapsulate the key driving forces that support successful implementation.
One thing that is important for the leadership team to keep in mind about school implementation of the Young Scholars Model is around staffing. I prioritize staffing a full time AART this school year. This role is so important for a large elementary school, I couldn't imagine implementing this model without a full time AART in a school of nearly 900 students. The AART provides the important PD around curriculum for staff for level I and Level II services. She delivers Level II services for students, provides additional learning experiences for our Young Scholars, and facilitates the identification process. This role is vital and I am so grateful for my incredible AART.
Staff understands that it is a schoolwide effort to identify students that fit the Young Scholars profile. Everyone from our specialist to our classroom teachers to Advanced Academics Resource Teacher to our counselors work hard to find the students that fit that profile. We support them in different ways, such as cluster grouping, morning meetings check-in, and pre-pandemic, we had the opportunity to provide a yearlong after-school program, supported by the community and a grant, where we provided programming, after school snacks and transportation. I believe we were able to make this happen because the work aligns with our school improvement work.
Our Young Scholars participate in weekly lessons with our Advanced Academic Resource Teacher. During these lessons, students engage with AAP curricula, CCT (Creative and Critical Thinking) strategies and PBS (Project-Based Learning).
There are so many students that have the potential to be a scholar, so we should be looking for potential, and looking in areas and listening in different ways than we would for a traditional student. [...] We should be nurturing, and we should understand that they may not present their ability or desire or need in a traditional manner. But we should nurture that, that's our job.
30
The Young Scholars Model is one of the most basic ways we can start to address the systemic issues regarding the identification of underrepresented populations, and we need to start that as early as possible.
Our Advanced Academic Resource Teacher joins our collaborative teams to talk about the Young Scholars Program and share what it means and how to identify students as Young Scholars. And that conversation not only happens with teams, but with individual teachers, as we're going through our MTSS process. Another big piece is the action that we have taken to provide all students in Tier 1 instruction access to an AP resource in math and literacy every quarter for the past few years. That has been our school improvement innovation plan and we monitor that not only beginning, middle and end of year, but our teachers also take surveys and do reflections as they are collecting evidence on students. Having all of our students access those resources provides teachers the opportunity to see students thrive, and to also collect that evidence so that when we are talking about students and reflecting on next steps, they're able to have those conversations with our team.
Our school uses reports and verification from the elementary school course selection to ensure that identified young scholars, all of them are signed up for at least one honors course. We also monitor our young scholars, assessment data, grades and social emotional health throughout the year to ensure that they are being successful in these challenging classes.
In the Herndon Pyramid over the years we have been very intentional about looking at Young Scholars during the transition and promoting Honors enrollment […] Our tool and information that we use in order to identify students who have that spark and are definitely going to be successful in our middle school honors sections is through looking at our Young Scholars who are coming to us from the elementary school.
31
Appendix E
Quotes from the Local Level IV Principal/Teacher/AART Panel
What is most powerful or beneficial about Local Level IV? “The most powerful, beneficial thing about Local Level IV in my mind is without question the ability to offer this curriculum to the children who need it while they get to stay in their community school, in their neighborhood school. I am a firm, firm, firm believer in the power of a neighborhood school and that everybody should be able to get what they need at their neighborhood school.”
“Access and opportunity for kids right in house and having staff members who are well-versed in AAP curriculum and strategies at three grade levels are benefits to all the staff.”
“And also for the teachers to be able to develop a deeper understanding of differentiation to meet students by name and need.”
How can school leaders implement and support a high-quality Level IV program? “The thing people really need to understand about, really any program that we do, is that any time you implement a program, you need to be reflective of your practice. You need to be open to new ideas and you need to go back, evaluate what is working, evaluate what is not, and make changes when you see things that need to be fixed. […] You are seeing new students in front of you. Kids are constantly changing. Our communities are constantly changing. You need to be reflective of your practices. And you need to go back and say to your community, I know we have always done X, Y and Z, but we need to change it.”
How can teachers meet the diverse needs of students in a class of mixed ability? “What is most important is that we recognize it takes an entire team to effectively differentiate for students. The entire CLT and that can include the administrators, the AART, of course, classroom teachers, but also instructional coaches and special education teachers, because we do have twice exceptional students, and ESOL teachers because we do have language learners who are also capable of performing at a higher level.”
How do teachers collaborate to enhance the quality of the AAP services?
“One of our school improvement goals is focused on providing more access to AAP resources for all students, so we have a team of teachers in our building who meet monthly to provide professional development to our teachers around AAP resources and how we can get them into the hands of all students. And that has been a really powerful discussion in our grade level CLTs on how we can use different resources across the curriculum”
32
How can school leaders prepare their schools (staff and community) to launch a new Local Level IV program next year?
“We had to really work closely with the AAP office and our full time AART […] to really create this timeline so we could start with 3rd grade in the fall. One of my 3rd grade teachers already had the certification in gifted education, so she already had one nugget in her back pocket. […] We made sure we included all of our stakeholders in our conversation before we even brought it to the community.”
“But there are two things that we really wanted to keep in the forefront of our mind as we have been planning is, what do we need to do to prepare our teachers to be ready to implement that Local Level IV program with fidelity? Because that was a question that parents had. What is going to be the difference for our children staying here or going to the center? So that is the piece that we are working on now, to make sure that we have the professional development in place for our staff so that they are able to implement with fidelity.”
“I was a firm believer in finding a way to give every single child what they needed in their neighborhood school. So, if that was a severely disabled child, if that was a twice-exceptional child, an ESOL child, and/or a gifted child. […] What is at your school that makes people want to stay? And then you reassure them and give them the trust and build on the trust that you already have that this is going to be done with fidelity. And they are going to get that Level IV curriculum and they are going to be able to stay at their neighborhood school. It is not that you are giving something up to be able to stay at your school, it is being able to get that same curriculum.”
“And so we have a real simple graphic that we would share with parents, especially at the beginning. And it seemed like a foreign concept that a child who qualified would stay at their neighborhood school. And we just addressed it head on. It is the same curriculum, like we have these graphics. Who is in the class? What is the same? What is different about the center versus the local program?”
“Trust and transparency […] The other thing is getting people excited.”
“With teachers it means before you even start, getting them, encouraging them to go to the academy classes and to start that endorsement. That generates their excitement around it. And then the second piece is reminding everyone that there is differentiation in every one of our classes. So, it makes teachers better.”
“We take such pride in knowing our children and saying hey, we see the way you ask questions. We see how you think … and it allows us to invite them in. And when you do it with that much thorough thoughtful relationship-based thinking, you get it right. And it is just awesome to see those kids have that opportunity.”
What are the roles of AARTs?
“I have been working really closely with the admin team and planning, going to a lot of meetings, learning and planning for what our Local Level IV will look like. My involvement has really been in three areas identified. One is communication. So, I have been involved in presentations for staff and the community in sharing about the Local Level IV. With the staff a little bit as a cheerleader and a counselor.”
“I think the most important is building teacher capacity. And this has not just been this year, but over the years. And I think that is why this has come up a lot lately, the full-time AART, not just once we have started the Local Level IV, but leading up to it.”
33
“I am working with CLTs, doing a lot of coaching, co-teaching. And this is not just for 3rd grade that is going to start next year, but all of our teachers and with an emphasis on those primary grades. You know, so that our students have those opportunities and build their skills so that by the time they are in 3rd grade we are going to have more to identify and who are going to benefit and access the curriculum in 3rd grade even more. So, I would say that is probably the main emphasis of my position, working with teachers and building capacity.”
“Well, in addition to our teachers becoming certified, the AAP institutes are incredible. And just the deep dives into different pieces of the curriculum. The offerings on how to differentiate for ELLs or twice exceptional. The variety and availability of all of these courses being taught by our colleagues who have expertise in certain areas, has been incredible.”
How do we ensure accountability for fidelity of implementation? “The success of our program is entirely because of the dedication of the administration. And it would not happen without the strength of the administration and clear messaging, clear expectations. We are a Local Level IV. We tell our parents we are giving them, their children the same curriculum as the center down the road. We will provide that and that is the expectation. So, that commitment has to be there at every single school so I guess it depends on every principal at each school.”
“And I think there is so much of a parent education piece that we can do a better job of, to ensure that families understand that these resources and the methodologies that our teachers are being trained in […] are good for everybody. They will benefit everybody and every child will rise, whether it is in a Level IV program or not. They will rise when more advanced curriculum resources are presented to them.”
“I just urge this committee and also the larger community of FCPS, in terms of looking at the Level IV program and how we think about AAP going forward to really work more on parent education, because I think that’s where so much of this concern comes from is a lack of understanding.”
34
Appendix F: Screening Process – Sample Portfolio
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43