Photos by Susie Fitzhugh Office of Advanced Learning:

Stephen Martin- sbmartin@seattleschools.org Supervisor

Roger Daniels drdaniels@seattleschools.org Consulting Teacher

Mary Mills mamills@seattleschools.org Curriculum Specialist

Matt Okun mjokun@seattleschools.org Consulting Teacher

Diann Sanusi dsanusi@seattleschools.org Secondary Support Specialist

How to Address Disproportionality

in HC Programs

Highly Capable (HC) or “Gifted” programs in urban centers have historically suffered from an under-representation of students of color; especially those of African-American, Hispanic and Native American heritage. SPS and many Districts nationwide have experimented with a variety of approaches to combat disproportionality especially for culturally, linguistically, economically diverse (CLED) populations.

Disproportionality in HC in SPS

White = OVER-represented

African American= UNDER-represented

Hispanic= UNDER-represented

Asian= UNDER-represented

Discuss with your elbow partner/partners:

What are some of the causes of disproportionality in HiCap

programs?

Disproportionality in Seattle

In Seattle, CHALLENGES Include:

• Changes in District demographics• High numbers of referrals from certain demographic groups• Low “ “ “ “ “ “ “• Negative attitudes/preconceptions of

• Teachers• Administrators• Parents

Statistics: Nationwide:

• 7.47 percent of all White students • 9.9 percent of Asian students • 3.04 percent of African American students• 3.57 percent of Hispanic students • 4.86 percent of American Indian students

are identified as gifted.

Data from National Academy of Sciences

http://www.nea.org/assets/docs/HE/EW-TruthInLabeling.pdf

Statistics: HC Students by Race

•7.47 percent of all White students nationally

•In Seattle 12.5%

•3.04 percent of African American students nationally

•In Seattle, less than 1%

HC program eligibility: Approximately

•70% White•10% Asian•10% Multiracial•10% African American, Native American, Pacific

Islander, and Hispanic combined

Total SPS Enrollment by Grade and Race

District Enrollment by Fed7 Code

Fed7

School

Year

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Asian 10012 8782 8529 8254 7915

Black 9904 8822 8737 8530 8216

Hispanic 5950 6266 6512 6494 6419

Multi-Racial 3293 3790 4366 4822

Native American 703 505 420 377 337

None Stated 2 1 29

Pacific Island 68 262 268 248 247

White 21857 21934 22753 23690 24368

Grand Total 48496 49864 51010 51988 52324

2015-16 Total SPS Enrollment: 52,324

White = 46% and RISING UP 10% past 5 years

Multiracial= 9% and RISING UP 50% past 5 years

African American= 15% and FALLING DOWN 15% “ “ “

Asian= 15% and FALLING DOWN 21% “ “ “

Hispanic= 12% and FALLING DOWN 7% “ “ “

School Year 15-16

% of Total SPS

Enrollment

% Referred to AL % HC + AL eligible

Asian 15.1 10.2 12.6

Black 15.7 3.6 2.5

Hispanic 12.3 4.6 4.6

Multiracial 9.2 12.9 10.5

White 45.7 66 69.6

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

9000

10000

ABHIMP White ALL

Growth In AL Eligibility Numbers

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

0.00%

10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

50.00%

60.00%

70.00%

80.00%

ABHIMP White

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

71.770.2 70.7 70.2 69.5 68.8

28.229.8 29.3 29.8 30.5 31.2

2011 2102 2013 2014 2015 2016

Percentage of White Students vs. Students of Color in AL

White Non-white

Growth Data by Race From SY 15-16 to 16-17

% increase in

HC

Grades 1-8

% increase in

AL + HC

Grades 1-12

Asian 2 4

Black 11 9

Hispanic 7 12

Multiracial 11 13

White 4 5

TOTAL 5 6

Newly Identified HC students in 14-15 and 15-16

Referred/

Tested

HC Eligible HC eligible % HC eligible

incl.

appeal

HC eligible

incl.

appeal %

White14-15 3486 366 10.5% 529 15.2%

African Am

14-15

249 12 4.8% 14 5.6%

White 15-16 2764 216 7.8% 383 13.9%

African Am

15-16

167 * 3.6% * 4.2%

.

How Has SPS Begun to Address Disproportionality in HC Programs?

1. Identification

2. Program Model/Services

3. Professional Development

4. Community Engagement and Communication

1. Identification

a) Each and every referred student tests for eligibility; there are no longer any pre-qualifications at all

b) 2nd grade “universal testing” using the CogAT screening form at all Title One elementary schools

c) Invitations for continued screening extended to parents of students demonstrating high potential on the CogAT screening form (K-2)

d) Parent rating scale is 1 of 5 or more “data points” in eligibility process

e) “Special consideration” in the eligibility process as noted in our Superintendent Procedures and practiced by the MSC (multidisciplinary selection committee)

f) Collaboration with the Rainier Scholars Program so that we can contact their applicants to generate referrals for previously unidentified high potential students of color

2. Program Models/Services

a) Highly Capable Cohort (HCC) = Self-contained

(Approx. 75% of eligible HC students)

b) Served at neighborhood school

(Approx. 25% of eligible HC students)

3 Elementary Schools are HCC sites: One is 100% HCC

4 Middle Schools are HCC sites: All 4 are Comprehensive MS

2 High Schools are HCC sites: Both are Comprehensive HS

c) HC and Spectrum Eligible students served at every school through Advanced Learning Opportunities (ALO)

3. Professional Development

a) Differentiation workshops at the central office & satellite sites

b) Presentations on culturally responsive pedagogy, as well as the relationship between social justice and SPS HiCap programs;offered and implemented at the building level based on collaboration with the SPS Dept. of Equity and Race Relations

c) Outreach to school principals and teachers through workshops and conferences to expose them to the characteristics of gifted students to enhance identification skills

d) Direct assistance through curriculum alignment and planning sessions with teachers

4. Community Engagement and Communication

a) Eligibility forms and first day packet announcement (translations in 7-9 languages)

b) Website information, videos, and announcements disseminated to local and social media outlets

c) Site visits and PowerPoint disseminated re: identification and referral

d) AL representation on the Equity and Race Advisory Committee (ERAC)

e) AL representation on the Southeast Seattle Education Consortium (SESEC)

f) AL representation at PTSA meetings, Community Meetings, and Equity Panels at school sites

How Has SPS Begun to Address Disproportionality in HC Programs?

1. Identification

2. Program Model/Services

3. Professional Development

4. Community Engagement and Communication