Gentlepeople,

This letter is based on my statement to the Northern Virginia hearing on the proposed changes to regulations governing gifted services. I urge you to adapt the proposed changes before you adopt them.

I am the mother of two children in the Arlington Public Schools, and am accompanied by them at this hearing. They have each been identified as gifted in language arts, social studies, science, and mathematics. I am a past co-chair of the Gifted Services Advisory Committee, which is a school board appointed advisory committee. I am also co-founder of the Arlington Coalition for Challenging Education (ACCE). ACCE is an independent advocacy group with the principal objective of ensuring that each student in the Arlington Public Schools is challenged effectively. I have also performed independent research on gifted education. I speak in my personal capacity.

Need to enhance gifted education

We need to be focused on enhancing gifted education. Current research makes it clear that implementation of the No Child Left Behind legislation has resulted in gifted children being short-changed and frequently neglected. This trend must be reversed.

Although Virginia provides more services than many other states, our gifted children are still not challenged consistently within current programs. Unfortunately, the proposed regulations are likely to further weaken gifted services.

Keep five-year evaluations at the state level

The proposed regulations have several drawbacks. Key among these is the proposal to end state-level evaluation of five-year gifted services plans and instead to substitute annual evaluations at the local level. Five-year programs are key to ensuring long-term planning. State-level evaluation is critical, both to ensure high standards and to increase the likelihood that best practices will be shared throughout the Commonwealth. In this regard, I associate myself with comments from Arlington Public Schools, the Virginia Association for the Gifted, and others.

Adopt and implement effective testing of gifted students

I differ from some of these groups, however, with respect to the proposed annual evaluation of the intellectual and academic growth of gifted students. Some commentators have opposed this idea, saying that the testing regime is not capable of providing this information. But current assessments, such as the Standards of Learning (SOL) tests are capped at such low levels that it is impossible to determine whether gifted students are making progress, let alone the level of that progress. Students who begin the year reading above grade level, for example, will likely do extremely well on the SOL tests, regardless of whether they actually make any progress that year.

We need to implement adaptive testing programs that measure students’ proficiency at the beginning and end of each school year, so that we can determine whether they are making appropriate progress. Other states have implemented growth models that would allow such evaluation. We can and should do so as well. I encourage you to retain the provision requiring annual evaluation of the intellectual and academic growth of gifted students and to work toward its full implementation. 

Thank you for this opportunity to advocate increased support for gifted students throughout the Commonwealth. Please do not leave these children behind!