Virginia Regulatory Town Hall
Agency
Department of Education
 
Board
State Board of Education
 
chapter
Regulations Governing Educational Services for Gifted Students [8 VAC 20 ‑ 40]
Action Revision of regulations school divisions must meet in their gifted education programs, K - 12
Stage Proposed
Comment Period Ended on 9/26/2008
spacer
Previous Comment     Next Comment     Back to List of Comments
9/19/08  11:13 am
Commenter: Agnes Jones, parent

Do NOT Adopt...Take Steps Forward, Not Backward!
 

I am the parent of a gifted student and I also serve on the HCPS Gifted Advisory Council.  I wanted to voice my opinion on the proposed regulations regarding gifted programs and funding, specifically concerning:

* 5-year Plan Development - a 5 year plan allows the opportunity for initiatives to be implemented, regulated and monitored effectively.  Goals can be viewed, set & measured on a long-term basis which allows for more accurate planning.  Annual plans have a short-term focus and could result in drastic changes from year to year.  Local plans should continue to be developed on a 5 year basis!!

* DOE approval of plans - a 5 year plan should be submitted and reviewed by the Department of Education to ensure that the regulations are being followed.  School board members are not necessarily experts in gifted education and may not be best suited to create/approve these plans.  Local 5 year plans should continue to be approved by the DOE!!

* Funding - the gifted funding section which states that funding administered by the DOE for the education of gifted students be used only to support those activities identified in the 5 year plan as approved should be reinstated.  This language is needed to protect funds for gifted services.  Removing this language could lead to these funds being used for other purposes and all involved, teachers...parents...students...the community...etc., would suffer!  Language protecting the funding for gifted programs should be reinstated!!

Please DO NOT ADOPT THE PROPOSED REGULATIONS!  Doing this would be putting the gifted program in the position to take steps backward...not forward!

Sincerely,

Agnes Jones

CommentID: 2316