Ute Pass BOCES

Serving the Special Needs of Cripple Creek - Victor, Manitou Springs and Woodland Park School Districts

Gifted Education

The Exceptional Children’s Educational Act (ECEA) requires the Ute Pass BOCES, and its member districts (Cripple Creek-Victor, Manitou Springs, Woodland Park) to identify and serve students between the ages of five and twenty-one, whose aptitude or competence in abilities, talents, and potential for accomplishment in one or more domains are so exceptional or developmentally advanced that they require special provisions to meet their educational programming needs.

A student may be identified in one or more of these domains (areas):

General or Specific Intellectual Ability

Intellectual ability is exceptional capability or potential recognized through cognitive processes (e.g., memory, reasoning, rate of learning, spatial reasoning, ability to find and solve problems, ability to manipulate abstract ideas and make connections).

Specific Academic Aptitude

Specific academic aptitude is exceptional capability or potential in an academic content area(s) (e.g., a strong knowledge base or the ability to ask insightful, pertinent questions within the discipline). All academic areas should be considered. 

Visual Arts, Performing Arts, Musical, Dance or Psychomotor Abilities (Talent Aptitudes)

Visual arts, performing arts, musical, dance or psychomotor abilities are exceptional capabilities or potential in talent areas (e.g., art, drama, music, dance, body awareness, coordination, and physical skills).

Creative or Productive

Thinking Creative or productive thinking is exceptional capability or potential in mental processes (e.g., critical thinking, creative problem solving, humor, independent/original thinking, and/or products).

Leadership Abilities

Leadership is the exceptional capability or potential to influence and empower people (e.g., social perceptiveness, visionary ability, communication skills, problem solving, inter and intra-personal skills, and a sense of responsibility).

Portability

Portability means that a student’s identification in one or more categories of giftedness transfers to any district in the state. Gifted programming must continue according to the receiving district’s programming options. Portability of identification is a part of the student’s permanent record and Advanced Learning Plan and will be transferred with entire student file when requested from another school.  When a file is received for a student that transferred into a school within AU, the school will notify their respective gifted educator as soon as possible.

Upon notification that a student has been identified as Gifted in another district, the school will review the Identification and Advanced Learning Plan within 45 days to determine if the Body of Evidence meets the state Identification criteria.  Parents will be notified by the Gifted Teacher of their Identification status and Advanced Learning Plan programming and services within 60 days. 

The rule for portability does not apply to students moving into Colorado from another state. However, the receiving school should review the student’s records for evidence of giftedness, and then determine whether additional assessment is necessary to confirm if the student meets Colorado criteria for gifted identification. Districts should also be aware of the parameters within the Military Compact Agreement for identified gifted students moving to Colorado as a result of a military transfer.

The Interstate Compact on Educational Opportunity for Military Children created legislation to ease school-to-school transfers for military children. The intent of the Compact is to minimize the disruption in education when a military child is forced to move as a result of a transfer or deployment. The Compact states:

The receiving state school shall initially honor placement of the student in educational programs based on current educational assessments conducted at the school in the sending state or participation/placement in like programs in the sending state. Such programs include, but are not limited to: 1) gifted and talented programs; and 2) English as a second language (ESL). This does not preclude the school in the receiving state from performing subsequent evaluations to ensure appropriate placement of the student.

Assessment 

Assessment is the process of gathering information using appropriate tests, instruments and techniques. The information is gathered for a specific purpose such as screening, classification or selection, curriculum planning or diagnosis, program planning and progress evaluation.

The purpose of assessment is to gather information relevant to making a decision. The gifted identification process focuses on research-based assessment practices to ensure multiple pathways to identification are available. Not all gifted students demonstrate the same profile of potential and/or ability. Gifted abilities are manifested in a variety of ways; therefore, multiple pathways to identification must be explored through the use of a variety of types and sources of assessment.

Assessment means methods, tools, and data collected as a body of evidence (BOE) for use in identification and programming. [C.R.S. 22-20- 202(5)]

Body of Evidence

A body of evidence should consist of quantitative and qualitative measures to determine if a student meets the criteria for gifted identification and to build a student profile of strengths and interests.  Quantitative assessment provides numerical scores or ratings that can be analyzed or quantified.  Qualitative assessment provides interpretive and descriptive information about certain attributes, characteristics, behaviors or performances. The former is considered objective, while the latter is considered subjective.

Quantitative

• Norm-referenced test (e.g., cognitive and achievement)
• Criterion-referenced test (e.g., state assessment and curriculum based measures)

Qualitative

• Rubric
• Performance
• Observation
• Checklist
• Interview

While some of the data in a body of evidence will be used to meet the criteria for gifted identification, other data or information may be used to build a learner profile for the purpose of developing appropriate programming options.

Criteria are the rules for evaluating a level of exceptionality for identification assessment. The 95^th percentile ranking and above describes the rule for demonstration of exceptionality on a standardized, nationally-normed test or observation tool. A performance assessment that indicates exceptionality compared to age mates includes a rating that exceeds expectations or demonstrates distinguished/advanced command. Performance indicators may include criterion-referenced tests, portfolio or observation. Criterion-referenced data may be used as qualifying evidence if the student’s performance level exceeds grade-level expectations or if “up-level” assessments are used.

Criteria are not cut-off scores. Typically, cut-off score terminology is used in reference to practices that eliminate students from access to further identification assessment because a single test result or score did not provide evidence at the exceptional level. Colorado does not adhere to cut-off score practices. Review teams should continue to explore additional data to reveal student strengths.

A variety of measures are contained within a body of evidence. A measure is the tool; a metric is the numeric result of using that measure. A cognitive test is an example of a measure that assesses general intelligence. This test provides a metric to express a level of cognitive ability.

Collection of data for a body of evidence includes, but is not limited to assessment results from multiple sources and multiple types of data (i.e., qualitative and quantitative data about achievement, cognitive ability, performance, parent and teacher input, motivation and observations of gifted characteristics/behaviors). The body of evidence contains data to identify the strength area(s) according to the definition of gifted children, and also informs decisions about appropriate programming services.

A body of evidence may consist of the following assessments:

Cognitive Tests

Cognitive tests are designed to measure a student’s general intellectual ability. Such tests do not measure specific academic aptitude in various content areas such as reading or math. Many general intelligence tests and checklists include items that assess both fluid reasoning, such as analogies, block designs, and pattern arrangements, and crystalized abilities, such as mathematics problems, vocabulary, and comprehension of reading passages.  In the AU’s, all 2^nd grade students are screened in the Spring of that year and all 6^th grade students are screened in the fall of that year.  Any students that transfer into the schools grade 3-8 will be screened.  The Cognitive Abilities Test (CogAT) is the AU’s tool for initial screening.  Additional cognitive measures may be used if the data obtained is not clear or there is a need for additional data.

When only cognitive ability assessment data meets criteria in a body of evidence (95th percentile or above), the team may determine that the student is identified with general or specific intellectual ability. This exception to the typical body of evidence is critical in identifying students with exceptional ability who may not yet be performing academically or demonstrating strong interests in the school environment. This student might lack motivation or have gaps in learning thereby requiring additional guidance and educational support services. Although the criteria for identification may be met by cognitive assessment data, a comprehensive body of evidence is still collected and examined to determine a student’s strength area and academic and affective needs for goal setting and programming as recorded on an Advanced Learning Plan (ALP). This general intellectual identification meets the condition of portability.

If a student scores at the 95th percentile or above on the composite of CogAT, but does not score at the 95th percentile or above on one or more of the separate batteries, it is recommended to consider providing the student a different cognitive or intellectual assessment that is perhaps untimed, administered individually or an instrument that approves the use of a composite score to measure exceptionality.

Creativity Tests

Assessment data from standardized, norm-referenced creativity tests are used to determine if a student demonstrates gifted ability in the area of creativity. Creative aptitude is demonstrated by a student scoring 95th percentile or above on norm-referenced creativity tests (e.g., Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking [TTCT], Profile of Creative Abilities [PCA]).

Some students who do not achieve qualifying scores on cognitive or achievement tests may still demonstrate many characteristics of giftedness. Many gifted traits and behaviors are evidence of the high level of creativity typical of many gifted students. To aid in identifying students who do not score at or above the 95th percentile on cognitive or achievement measures, creativity tests may be useful in building a body of evidence for formal identification, because these tests add validity to the observed creative characteristics. A score at the 95th percentile or above on a creativity test is not required for identification in the arts areas.  These assessments will be used to build a body of evidence when a student exhibits creativity significantly above that of their peers.

Achievement Tests

Assessment data from standardized, criterion- and norm-referenced tests are utilized to determine if a student demonstrates exceptional ability in a specific academic area. Specific academic aptitude areas include reading, writing, math, science, social studies, and world language. Some assessments that can be used for this but not limited to: PARCC, CMAS, NWEA Maps, Star reading and math.  Specific talent aptitude areas include visual arts, performing arts, music and dance. Specific academic and talent aptitude is demonstrated by a student scoring at the advanced/distinguished level on criterion-referenced assessments and/or 95th percentile or above on norm-referenced achievement tests. Districts may use alternative achievement tests to determine advanced academic competence.

If a student does not demonstrate exceptional general intellectual ability from a cognitive assessment, but does demonstrate exceptional abilities in a specific academic area, the identified gifted educator will start observing and collecting data over time and not moving to formal gifted identification based on achievement data collected from just one grade level. Students who are identified as gifted in the Specific Academic Aptitude area who do not demonstrate exceptional general intellectual ability are not identified until multiple achievement data points support the academic determination.

For example:  When a young child (kindergarten-third grade) demonstrates specific academic potential without a qualifying cognitive score, differentiated pace and depth of instruction can be used to build additional data over time to identify exceptionality. The Colorado READ Act requires that teachers assess the 10 Gifted Identification Guidebook 2016 literacy development of all kindergarten-third grade students. Data from these reading competency tests are used to determine if a student has a significant reading deficiency and may be included in a student learning profile, but are not used as qualifying data for gifted identification. Assessments utilized to progress monitor student achievement or diagnose an academic deficiency are often defined as diagnostic instruments. Diagnostic assessments or skill inventories measure proficiency of grade level foundational skills. Diagnostic and inventory assessments are not intended to measure exceptional abilities in a specific content area. Therefore, these instruments are not used as qualifying data.

Behavior Observation Scales

Gifted students often demonstrate characteristics that lead to a referral for the gifted identification process. Through the use of these norm-referenced behavior observation scales, educators and parents can identify outstanding talent by observing students in one or more settings that enable them to display their abilities. Characteristics such as leadership, motivation, memory, reasoning, creativity and sense of humor are measured in observation scales. Such measures add valuable information to the body of evidence and focus on more than the academic aptitude measured by many traditional tests students encounter in school.

Norm-referenced observation scales are used as qualifying data for gifted identification. These scales are a valid and reliable way for educators and parents to evaluate gifted behavior characteristics. Examples of qualifying measures are the Scales for Identifying Gifted Students (SIGS), Gifted Evaluation Scale (GES), and the Gifted Rating Scales (GRS). The SIGS provides a norm-referenced scale for parents to complete. The parent scale may be used as qualifying data.

Other methods of obtaining information on gifted characteristics may also be utilized to develop a student profile. Informal tools, such as an interview or checklist, can provide beneficial information to better understand a student’s strengths and interests.

Observation of Potential in Students (TOPS). Research-based practices have been created for teachers to implement when observing student behaviors during specific planned experiences. Data from these scales are used to determine students who might require additional assessments and/or to develop a talent pool. Data collected from a KOI or TOPS provide information for the student profile but are not used as qualifying data for identification.

It is important to note that some educators have particular stereotypical expectations of how gifted students should perform, therefore, [eliminating] certain students who do not demonstrate the more typical gifted characteristics.  If these types of data are collected, it is important that one recognize that different genders, cultures, races, ethnicities, and social classes have different ways of communicating that may impact an observer’s/interviewer’s perspective on what behaviors constitute giftedness.

Performance Evaluation

Gifted ability is often not measured on a specific assessment, but rather demonstrated through some type of performance. Identifying a student with exceptional abilities in a content area or a talent area such as art, music, theater, dance, psychomotor, creativity or leadership requires an evaluation of performance. There are many types of performance data that might be utilized to develop a body of evidence. These may include:

• Juried Performance: Students often participate in events within school or outside of school that are judged and evaluated. Students receive some type of rating based on their performance. Data from a valid and reliable juried performance may be considered as qualifying evidence if the jury consists of a team of experts in their field. An example of such a performance would be a student selected for a statewide choral group or debate team.
• Contest/Competition: Many contests and competitions are available to students within school or outside of school. Top placement in a regional, state or national competition may be considered as a qualifying measurement for gifted identification. An example of such a performance would be a student finishing first in a state science fair or Future Business Leaders of America (FBLA) categorical competition.
• Portfolio: Over time, some students develop a portfolio of work that might be evaluated by a team of experts in the field. The advanced/distinguished rating of a portfolio may be considered as qualifying evidence for gifted identification. A valid and reliable rubric is used in the evaluation of a portfolio to ensure consistency and equal opportunity. An example would be a collection of a student’s art work throughout elementary school and the portfolio being evaluated by a committee of district art teachers and local artists.
• Classroom Performance: Classroom teachers are often critical in providing qualitative data about a student’s performance within the classroom. As the curriculum experts, teachers can identify those students working above their same-age peers. Evidence of above grade-level performance builds a student’s profile. An example of this might be a fourth-grade student who has already demonstrated mastery of fourth and fifth grade math standards and has successfully completed all the pre-algebra modules from an online math program. Advanced classroom performance must be measured through examples of above grade-level work. Earning an “A” in a class does not necessarily indicate exceptional performance. Grades lack standardization and are influenced significantly by students' motivation, classroom behavior, personal appearance, and study habits. Further, teachers' knowledge of students' IQ scores, income, SES, area of residence, and family structure contribute to stereotypes by teachers that are frequently characterized by low and negative expectations (Ford, 2013).

Screening

Screening means an assessment method that uses a tool(s) to determine if the resulting data provide evidence of exceptional potential in an area of giftedness. Screening tools may be qualitative or quantitative in nature, standardized and/or normative. Screening data are part of a body of evidence for making identification and instructional decisions.

A student may enter into a screening through many different entry points.

• Identification is not just a moment in time or the use of data from one assessment. Referrals for gifted screening may include but are not limited to:
  • Universal Screening CoGat
  • MTSS/RtI
  • Test Data
  • Performance and observations
  • Checklists
  • Anecdotal Records
  • Questionnaires
  • Interview

Referrals

ECEA Rules state an identification team has a timeline of no more than 30 school days after a referral is received to determine whether a student will be formally identified or if more time is needed to continue with identification assessment. The team’s decision should be communicated to the parent, student and other educators. This does not mean an identification determination must be made within 30 days; rather all stakeholders should receive information on intended next steps of the identification process within this timeline.

A referral made for possible gifted identification does not necessarily led to the automatic administration of specific assessments. The identification team will carefully consider the referral, examine current student assessment data and determine appropriate next steps. This may or may not include administering additional tests.