Gifted Education in Virginia is very much a balancing act between local school boards, localities, and the willingness of teachers to go above and beyond for our children.  I am very pleased that my child has flourished in our county program for gifted education.  As a concerned parent I was very disappointed to hear about proposed changes to the guidelines for gifted education in Virginia.  Specifically, I am opposed to the changes to 8VAC20-40-60 (Local plans) and 8VAC20-40-70 (the repeal of the funding language) listed below.

The proposed revision of 8VAC20-40-60 (Local plans) states that the local plan will  no longer be submitted to the Department of Education (DOE) for approval, and will instead be approved annually by the local school board.  This change is detrimental for several reasons:

1.  The only quality control and outside review of a division plan is through the approval process by the DOE.  Without DOE apporval, no central authority will be responsible to confirm that the plan is in compliance with regulations.

2.  Educators and community stakeholders invest significant time and effort to create a 5-year plan and in the process seek peer review from other gifted education colleagues.  To shift this process to the local level will eliminate the productive insights that emerge from this peer review.

3.  It is not productive to develop a plan on an annual basis.  The local advisory committee is given  the responsibility to review annually the local plan to determine effectiveness and submit recommendations in writing to the superintendent and school board.

4.  As a whole, school board members are not considered experts in the field of gifted education and will not be able to provide feedback for gifted program plans.

The proposed revision of 8VAC20-40-70 (State Funds) states that repeal of the funding language which previously stated "State funds administered by the Department of Education for the education of gifted students shall be used to support only those activities identified in the school division's plan as approved by the Board of Education" is seriously problematic for the following reasons:

1.  Currently, Standards of Quality (SOQ)  Basic Aid Funding for gifted education supports the state share of one full-time equivalent instructional position (FTE) per 1,000 students in adjusted average daily membership (ADM) of a school division.

2.  What happens to the funds that were intended for gifted program services?  In the absence of this regulatory language protecting the funding for gifted program services, funds could be used for other purposes which could reduce the quality of gifted programming in many school divisions.

I ask that you look at these two extremely pivotal issues in gifted education in Virginia and ask yourself if you would want your gifted learner to be shortchanged by these two changes in policy.  Please vote "NO" on these two revisions and continue to keep gifted education in Virginia a priority. 

Thank you for your time.