1 of 64

Recognizing and Supporting TAG Students

Angela Allen

Talented and Gifted Education Specialist

Office of Teaching, Learning, and Assessment

2024

1

Oregon Department of Education

2 of 64

My Journey

Attended Pre-K (Head Start) - 12 in Oregon public schools

Oregon Health Sciences University

Mouse Strain Differences in Oral Operant Ethanol Reinforcement under Continuous Access Conditions
Oral operant ethanol self-administration in 5-HT1b knockout mice

Multnomah County Inverness Jail - GED Instructor
Hillsboro School District

Math and engineering teacher for 13 years
Studio classroom
TAG TOSA

Oregon Department of Education (2015)

2

Oregon Department of Education

The goals for today include going over some basics including myths, misconceptions, realities, and social-emotional development and needs specific to gifted populations. I will be covering the those topics in an interwoven approach whereas other topics such as: TAG student profiles, identification, local norms, TAG statutes and OARs as well as next steps have their own dedicated section in this training. The segment covering identification is an introduction. There will be a separate training addressing identification rules and practices more in-depth simply because there is so much to cover with identification, it's worthy of its own presentation. We’ll do a high-level discussion of using local norms with specific examples, then cover our state laws and rules. And finally, we’ll end with some suggestions for district next steps.

3 of 64

Goals for Today

Learn about TAG Student Profiles

Review TAG Basics (myths, misconceptions, realities, SEL)

Discuss TAG Identification

Who?
Why?
Data

Supporting TAG students in the classroom

3

Oregon Department of Education

4 of 64

Perspective

4

Oregon Department of Education

5 of 64

Taking Inventory

“We have to ensure that who we are, doesn’t get in the way of their learning.”

Daughter of an immigrant
Daughter of a Native American
Collective and multigenerational cultures
Story telling
Feeling safe v. being safe (intuition and awareness)
Small working class town
Latchkey kid
ACES score = 7
Attended school in St. Prix, France, in 6th grade (EFL)

TAG
Perfectionist
Introvert
Attended 4 schools in 6 years
Chronic absenteeism - still graduated top 5% in class
Behavioral Neuroscience
Teen mom
Inverness jail
Cisgender
Code switch with ease
Negotiate identity with ease

5

Oregon Department of Education

6 of 64

Recognizing TAG Students

6

Oregon Department of Education

7 of 64

7

v

Oregon Department of Education

8 of 64

Gifted Profiles (handout)

8

Oregon Department of Education

This slide and next slide examines common gifted profiles published by George Betts. We’ll start with “The Successful” student which is the most common student profile we refer and identify in TAG. These kids achieve well, get good grades, make safe choices (to protect those good grades), they accept and conform, consume knowledge, and are well liked. Challenges are fear of failure, fixed mindset, and adults tend to overestimate their abilities and not only assume they’ll be fine on their own, but that mindset permeates the overall generalization that all TAG kids are like this and the second they don’t perform well or show gaps in knowledge or struggle, the legitimacy of their identification is questioned. In the “what do these students need” category – just to name a few, they need to engage in productive struggle, access to acceleration, and time with intellectual peers. Next we have the autonomous learner and this student has a growth mindset, works independently, confident, and resilient. One challenge I’ll highlight is they don’t always view academics as a top priority and yet, when a student isn’t achieving well or to the beliefs we feel they should, we can find ourselves wondering if this kid is actually TAG. These students need more support, not less which sounds contrary to being independent. They need support to pursue opportunities in their area of passion/interest along with guidance and direction especially when it comes to standards-based learning. Moving on to the creative student – these are kids who can be highly impulsive, have high energy, non conformer and stands up for convictions, and they have a strong sense of justice. They get bored easily and frustrated, may challenge the teacher, engage in power struggles and adults tend to underestimate their abilities and want them to conform. They need support for their creativity, less pressure to conform, affirmation of strengths, practice tact, flexibility, self-awareness and control, and often need direct instruction.

9 of 64

Gifted Profiles (handout)

9

Melissa Juskowiak - TTSD

Oregon Department of Education

The next set of profiles are the underground, the twice exceptional (referred to as 2e in gifted ed) and the at-risk. The Department does not use the term “At-Risk” to describe students, however, George Betts does and I’m not at liberty to change his work. Beginning with the Underground… these are students that want to go under the radar. Social acceptance is importance, perceived as average and successful, compliant, drops out of gifted/advanced classes. They have a hard time balancing academics and social expectations, taking risks, and connecting with the teacher or their class. They need college and career planning, gifted role models (similar to their personality), culturally responsive practices, and open discussions about hard topics. The twice exceptional student is perceived to be average or even below average, shows ability through work inconsistently, thinks more conceptually, and is often unorganized. They have learned helplessness, show extreme emotions, and underestimated in their own potential and seen for their disability above all else. These students need strength-based approaches while accommodating for their disability, coping strategies, and affirmation of gifted abilities. The final profile from Betts is the At-Risk student. These students are perceived as reckless and manipulative, has low academic achievement, inconsistent work, and critical of self and others. They tend to resist authority and extrinsic motivation based on teacher rewards, seen as troubled and/or depressed. They need safety and structure, short term goals, focus on growth and change rather than punishment and consequence, and academic coaching.

10 of 64

EL and Multilingual Students

•Strong desire to learn in English and their heritage language

•High interest in certain topics

•Quick grasp of new information

•Evidence of creative ability in problem solving or thinking

•Ability to see relationships and make connections

•Exceptional talent in areas valued by their culture

•Curiosity

•Persistence

•Keen power of observation

•Self-direction

•Take on leadership roles with other students from the same culture

•Ability to carry responsibilities well

•Richness in imaginary and informal language

Table from Special Populations in Gifted Education: Understanding Our Most Able Students from Diverse Backgrounds by Jaime A. Castellano and Andrea Frazier

•Eagerly shares culture

•Shows strong desire to teach peers words from heritage language

•Has a strong sense of pride in his or her cultural background

•Eagerly interprets and translates for peers and adults at high levels of accuracy

•Balances appropriate behaviors expected of the heritage culture and the new culture

•Possesses advanced knowledge of idioms and native dialects with ability to interpret and explain meanings in English

•Understands jokes and puns in English

•Had advanced sense of humor

•Functions at language proficiency levels above that of nongifted peers who are EL

•Ability to code-switch

•Possesses cross-cultural flexibility

•Has a sense of global community and an awareness of other cultures and languages

•Learns a second or third language at an accelerated rate

10

Oregon Department of Education

11 of 64

11

v

Oregon Department of Education

The next set of profiles are the underground, the twice exceptional (referred to as 2e in gifted ed) and the at-risk. The Department does not use the term “At-Risk” to describe students, however, George Betts does and I’m not at liberty to change his work. Beginning with the Underground… these are students that want to go under the radar. Social acceptance is importance, perceived as average and successful, compliant, drops out of gifted/advanced classes. They have a hard time balancing academics and social expectations, taking risks, and connecting with the teacher or their class. They need college and career planning, gifted role models (similar to their personality), culturally responsive practices, and open discussions about hard topics. The twice exceptional student is perceived to be average or even below average, shows ability through work inconsistently, thinks more conceptually, and is often unorganized. They have learned helplessness, show extreme emotions, and underestimated in their own potential and seen for their disability above all else. These students need strength-based approaches while accommodating for their disability, coping strategies, and affirmation of gifted abilities. The final profile from Betts is the At-Risk student. These students are perceived as reckless and manipulative, has low academic achievement, inconsistent work, and critical of self and others. They tend to resist authority and extrinsic motivation based on teacher rewards, seen as troubled and/or depressed. They need safety and structure, short term goals, focus on growth and change rather than punishment and consequence, and academic coaching.

12 of 64

12

v

Oregon Department of Education

The next set of profiles are the underground, the twice exceptional (referred to as 2e in gifted ed) and the at-risk. The Department does not use the term “At-Risk” to describe students, however, George Betts does and I’m not at liberty to change his work. Beginning with the Underground… these are students that want to go under the radar. Social acceptance is importance, perceived as average and successful, compliant, drops out of gifted/advanced classes. They have a hard time balancing academics and social expectations, taking risks, and connecting with the teacher or their class. They need college and career planning, gifted role models (similar to their personality), culturally responsive practices, and open discussions about hard topics. The twice exceptional student is perceived to be average or even below average, shows ability through work inconsistently, thinks more conceptually, and is often unorganized. They have learned helplessness, show extreme emotions, and underestimated in their own potential and seen for their disability above all else. These students need strength-based approaches while accommodating for their disability, coping strategies, and affirmation of gifted abilities. The final profile from Betts is the At-Risk student. These students are perceived as reckless and manipulative, has low academic achievement, inconsistent work, and critical of self and others. They tend to resist authority and extrinsic motivation based on teacher rewards, seen as troubled and/or depressed. They need safety and structure, short term goals, focus on growth and change rather than punishment and consequence, and academic coaching.

13 of 64

13

v

Oregon Department of Education

The next set of profiles are the underground, the twice exceptional (referred to as 2e in gifted ed) and the at-risk. The Department does not use the term “At-Risk” to describe students, however, George Betts does and I’m not at liberty to change his work. Beginning with the Underground… these are students that want to go under the radar. Social acceptance is importance, perceived as average and successful, compliant, drops out of gifted/advanced classes. They have a hard time balancing academics and social expectations, taking risks, and connecting with the teacher or their class. They need college and career planning, gifted role models (similar to their personality), culturally responsive practices, and open discussions about hard topics. The twice exceptional student is perceived to be average or even below average, shows ability through work inconsistently, thinks more conceptually, and is often unorganized. They have learned helplessness, show extreme emotions, and underestimated in their own potential and seen for their disability above all else. These students need strength-based approaches while accommodating for their disability, coping strategies, and affirmation of gifted abilities. The final profile from Betts is the At-Risk student. These students are perceived as reckless and manipulative, has low academic achievement, inconsistent work, and critical of self and others. They tend to resist authority and extrinsic motivation based on teacher rewards, seen as troubled and/or depressed. They need safety and structure, short term goals, focus on growth and change rather than punishment and consequence, and academic coaching.

14 of 64

14

v

Oregon Department of Education

The next set of profiles are the underground, the twice exceptional (referred to as 2e in gifted ed) and the at-risk. The Department does not use the term “At-Risk” to describe students, however, George Betts does and I’m not at liberty to change his work. Beginning with the Underground… these are students that want to go under the radar. Social acceptance is importance, perceived as average and successful, compliant, drops out of gifted/advanced classes. They have a hard time balancing academics and social expectations, taking risks, and connecting with the teacher or their class. They need college and career planning, gifted role models (similar to their personality), culturally responsive practices, and open discussions about hard topics. The twice exceptional student is perceived to be average or even below average, shows ability through work inconsistently, thinks more conceptually, and is often unorganized. They have learned helplessness, show extreme emotions, and underestimated in their own potential and seen for their disability above all else. These students need strength-based approaches while accommodating for their disability, coping strategies, and affirmation of gifted abilities. The final profile from Betts is the At-Risk student. These students are perceived as reckless and manipulative, has low academic achievement, inconsistent work, and critical of self and others. They tend to resist authority and extrinsic motivation based on teacher rewards, seen as troubled and/or depressed. They need safety and structure, short term goals, focus on growth and change rather than punishment and consequence, and academic coaching.

15 of 64

Checklists to Consider

1 1 _ Directly challenges authority

1 _ Directly challenges authority

2 _ Typically questions rules or policies

3 _ Argues

4 _ Appears “spaced out” in class; seems preoccupied

5 _ Is disruptive in class by being witty, sarcastic, or comical

6 _ Manipulates people

7 _ Seems to figure out what annoys people and then deliberately annoys them

8 _Controlling

_ Directly challenges authority

1 _

Adapted from Hillsboro School District

1 _ Poor test performance

2 _ Daily work frequently incomplete or poorly done

3 _ Superior comprehension and retention of concepts when interested

4 _ Vast gap between qualitative level of oral and written work

5 _ Exceptionally large repertoire of factual knowledge

6 _ Vitality of imagination, creative

7 _ Persistent dissatisfaction with work accomplished, even in art

15

Oregon Department of Education

16 of 64

Typical Social-Emotional Development and Needs

Paradox – Intense and Sensitive

Overexcitabilities (misdiagnosis – ADHD, ASD, and Psychosis)
Emotional Disorders
Self-Efficacy
Locus of Control
Mindset
Underachievement
Perfectionism
Coping Strategies

16

Oregon Department of Education

In gifted education, we address social emotional development and needs proportionately to academic needs. Dr. Tracy Cross has used the paradox of describing TAG students as, “the most intense and sensitive people you’ll ever know.” Probably the best illustrated example of what it looks or feels like to be both intense and sensitive is Dr. Dabrowski’s work with overexcitabilities. We can lead an entire professional development opportunity just examining overexcitabilities, however, considering time and focus today, I’ll provide a general overview. Overexcitabilites are innate intensities associated with a heightened responses to stimuli. There are 5 overexcitabilities – psychomotor (which shares many traits of ADHD and can be misdiagnosed). Essentially if all we know are characteristics of ADHD and never know many of those same characteristics could be a psychomotor overexcitability then all we see is ADHD. The student could be ADHD, or they could just be gifted, or of course, they could be both ADHD and gifted. If we don’t know, we don’t even consider that there may be an alternative pathway of diagnosis to consider. Similarly, the sensual overexcitability shares common characteristics of ASD (Autism Spectrum Disorder). The third overexcitability has been misdiagnosed for psychosis. If a student has an imaginational overexcitability, they’re often expressing what they have vividly imagine and because of the intensities usually involved, their imaginational overexcitability may be mistaken for psychosis. An intellectual overexcitability is characterized by effortless synthesizing, seeking to understand, and a passion to analyze. And finally, an someone with an emotional overexcitability has the capacity for deep relationships and can experience both great joy and pain in comparison to how experiences are felt by typical peers.

There’s quite a bit of consistent research in gifted education that indicates gifted populations have a 25% higher likelihood of experiencing emotional disorders such as anxiety and depression. Many gifted kids have a belief about self-efficacy and what they can or cannot do in terms of performance. Of course this can lead to underachievement academically and a fear of trying anything outside their comfort zone. An internal locus of control is more common in gifted populations as well as a fixed mindset, however we learned in the gifted profiles section of this presentation that there are some profiles of gifted students who have a growth mindset. Diane Heacox has estimated that up to 50% of gifted students engage in underachieving behavior. The cause or root of the behavior has many variables to consider, the most prominent factor is the infrequent learning opportunities (they didn’t engage in new learning that created a productive struggle). Other variables consider motivation, self-regulation, and self-perception. Perfectionism – not just perfectionism, but unhealthy and debilitating perfectionism. If they can’t be perfect, they may not try at all. Coping strategies in gifted education research includes suicide. Dr. Tracy Cross from William and Mary College researches suicide in gifted populations. Through his work, we’ve learned that for some gifted kids, the decision to complete suicide is not necessarily a manifestation of long term depression but rather an acute decision to end the predictable daily experiences that knowingly brings complex feelings and what can be described as existential crisis and a sense of detachment – or not feeling a sense of belonging. He has also said in his keynote speeches that gifted kids who can easily code switch from the gifted world to a typical peer well, struggle less with a sense of belonging.

17 of 64

Mindshift

“The rainbow just needs the perfect conditions to allow its brilliance to be expressed.” – Dr. Christopher Emdin

17

Oregon Department of Education

18 of 64

Check-In

How has your perception and understanding of TAG students changed?
There is often resistance to identifying TAG students, not only in Oregon, but nationally, why do you think there’s so much tension connected to TAG identification?

18

Oregon Department of Education

19 of 64

Identifying

19

Are you a talent scout or a deficit detective? - Del Siegle

Oregon Department of Education

20 of 64

Oregon’s Statute Definition of TAG Students

ORS 343.395(4) “Talented and gifted children” means those children who require special educational programs or services, or both, beyond those normally provided by the regular school program in order to realize their contribution to self and society and who demonstrate outstanding ability or potential in one or more of the following areas:

(a) General intellectual ability as commonly measured by measures of intelligence and aptitude.

(b) Unusual academic ability in one or more academic areas.

_______________________________________________________________________________

(c) Creative ability in using original or nontraditional methods in thinking and producing.

(d) Leadership ability in motivating the performance of others either in educational or noneducational settings.

(e) Ability in the visual or performing arts, such as dance, music or art.

20

Oregon Department of Education

Here is Oregon’s statute definition of talented and gifted students. The statute definition was created by Legislature. It reads, “Talented and gifted children means those children who require special educational programs or services, or both beyond those normally provided by the regular school program in order to realize their contribution to self and society and who demonstrate outstanding ability or potential in one or more of the following areas. I’ll pause here to explain why there are two areas written in black font and three areas of identification that are written in blue font. The top two written in black are “shall” categories – meaning, when we see the word “shall” in our statute or Oregon Administrative Rules that tells us what we have to do. It’s non-negotiable. So, in this case, districts have to identify students in the areas of general intellectual ability (what we commonly refer to as Intellectually gifted) and unusual academic ability (which is another way of describing academically talented students). The three categories written in blue are the “may” categories. Disticts may choose to identify students in those categories. It’s up to the district to decide and usually if they don’t already have programs and services to meet students needs who are identified with creative ability, leadership ability, or ability in the visual and performing arts, then they choose not to pursue identification in those areas.

What I’d like to point out here is that while the rules have been recently revised the statutes have not. The rules were revised to reflect and align with the statute definition. There’s no mention of the 97^th percentile as the threshold to describe “outstanding or unusual ability.” In fact, it just says they’re kids who require something – a program or service, typically instructional service, beyond what is typically provided in the regular school program, or in other words, regular school classroom instruction. Also, academic talent isn’t limited to reading and math. It’s open to all academic areas. So, the 97^th percentile as a threshold to define or determine who needs instructional services which is most commonly deployed as differentiated instruction, is removed from the state-level rules. Also, we removed the limitations of academic talent only being reading and math. It’s now possible to identify students as talented in Science or Social Science. A simple way to think about the difference between intellectually gifted and academically talented is thinking vs. knowledge. We have a lot of intellectually gifted students who are performing well on achievement-based assessments and that’s okay. That actually makes sense.

21 of 64

Oregon’s Definition of TAG Students (OAR)

Oregon Administrative Rule (OAR) 581-022-2325(1)(a)(b)

(a) This population of students demonstrates exceptional performance when compared to applicable developmental or learning progressions, with consideration given for variations in student's opportunity to learn and to culturally relevant indicators of ability.

(b) Students identified as talented and gifted require differentiated instructional services and/or programs designed to address their strengths and needs.

21

Oregon Department of Education

As we align statute and Oregon Administrative Rules which are adopted by the State Board to support the statutes passed by Legislature, we now use more current and widely used definitions that describes the population of students who demonstrates exceptional performance when compared to applicable development or learning progressions, with considerations given for variation in students’ opportunity to learn and to culturally relevant indicators. Another important designation in regards to identification is creating that connection to the services. Identification is the means to a service. It’s not a means to an end. We do not want state or district policies and practices that identify students and then we don’t do anything for them in terms of providing services to meet needs. With that in consideration, the students we’re identifying as talented and gifted require differentiated instructional services and/or programs designed to address their strengths and needs.

22 of 64

Local Talent

Highlights strengths and talents in a local and relevant context (environment, experience, age, culturally relevant indicators, etc.)
High performing in their building or district rather than the state or nationally
Provides more pathways to identification and instructional services
Readiness – foster and elevate growth by focusing on strengths and need
We use local norms in many capacities: sports, music, arts, leadership roles

22

Oregon Department of Education

23 of 64

NY Times: Money, Race and Success: How Your School District Compares

Detroit, MI

23

Oregon Department of Education

Using an interactive map published by the New York Times in 2016, we’ll apply local norms with context. In Detroit City School District, sixth grade students are performing on average about 2.3 grade levels below average. That means, if you have a sixth grader performing at grade level in Detroit City School District, they’re performing about 2 grade levels above many of their peers. Would a child in this context, need to have differentiated instruction to foster growth, potentially surpassing grade level performance? Is the student ready? In comparison to their peers, is a service needed? Since there are a lot of students who require strategic intervention and scaffolding to move toward grade-level standards, the students who are at grade level, require a different instructional strategy or service.

24 of 64

NY Times: Money, Race and Success: How Your School District Compares

Lexington, MA

24

Oregon Department of Education

Conversely, in Lexington, Massachusetts, sixth grade students are performing on average about 3.8 grade levels above average. Would we identify all students in this class as TAG? Do they all require differentiated instruction beyond the regular classroom program. Or, do the kids who are performing 6, 7, or even 8 years above average require services beyond the regular program or classroom? Since the average of student performance is so high, it is likely that the teacher is already providing above grade level curriculum to the entire class, but are there some who need access to something different in order to address their strengths and needs?

Using a personal experience, the district I moved from as a child in Oregon shows that students in that district perform about 1 year below average. In that district, I walked to read, math, and even band to have my academic and arts needs met. When I moved to another district, whose students perform about 1 year above average, my needs were met in the regular classroom. Where I had to walk to above grade level classes to have access to above average or grade level course work, in the new district I was attending, the classroom instruction for all students was designed at one year above average or grade level. It’s not that when I moved I suddenly wasn’t TAG anymore, it was just what the district offered as their regular program/classroom, met my needs. At the end of the second year I attended the new district, I was placed into above level coursework again. It took me a year to adjust and level up and it was only because the instructional strategies and services provided opportunities to foster growth. Oregon districts are doing a great job of meeting needs. I personally attended a small district in a town with a population of 2500 at the time as well as a large district – one of the largest in our state and both districts provided services that fostered growth and even in the 90s, used local norms and aligned their services to students. It’s easy sometimes to see our flaws, however, we have a lot to take pride in and celebrate.

25 of 64

Talent Development Meets Proximity

Mouse Strain Differences in Oral Operant Ethanol Reinforcement under Continuous Access Conditions May 1998 Alcoholism Clinical and Experimental Research 22(3):170

Oral operant ethanol self-administration in 5-HT1b knockout mice August 1999 Behavioural Brain Research 102(1-2):211-5

25

Oregon Department of Education

26 of 64

Missingness

Goal is 5-10% of your population is identified for the purpose of receiving services to foster growth through addressing strengths and needs
Underrepresented populations (culturally and linguistically diverse, twice exceptional, students experiencing poverty, historically and currently marginalized populations, including civil rights protected classes)
Social-emotional implications make it difficult to identify

26

Oregon Department of Education

27 of 64

Check-In

Any a-ha’s specific to identification?
What challenges do advanced students face in the classroom and throughout the school year?

27

Oregon Department of Education

28 of 64

Serving and Supporting

28

Oregon Department of Education

29 of 64

Identification is a Means to Service

"To identify exceptional individuals, to provide opportunity for their development, to stimulate them to their highest achievement...are both an obligation...and an opportunity. "Martin D. Jenkins (1950)

Instructional Services = classroom teacher provides instruction at the assessed rate and level that advances the student in learning progress and growth.

Pull-out programs = alternative schools, option schools, or daily/weekly direct instruction from an educator with a gifted education background

Intellectually gifted - served in all content areas
Academically talented (reading) - served in all classes where reading is the primary source of learning
Academically talented (math) - served only in mathematics

29

Oregon Department of Education

Martin D. Jenkins asserted, “To identify exceptional individuals, to provide opportunity for their development, to stimulate them to their highest achievement … are both an obligation and an opportunity.

When we’re talking about referring students to services eligibility, whether it’s special education, language development, 504 support, or gifted education we have to ask ourselves a few questions. 1. What is it we see that indicates a need for the services we’re referring students to? 2. What are we trying to measure or communicate when we apply percentile thresholds? And 3. Is it measuring what we want?

Rooting ourselves in service is a huge shift. The focus has been historically concentrated on identification rather than service. We seemingly lost what the purpose of identifying students was for.

The designation of students is all about the service that stems from the designation. The determination of eligibility is the means to service and service is the goal. Questions to consider as we’re processing and unpacking the use of percentiles to determine identification, or more importantly, the identification that leads to services to meet their needs are:

Is the percentile threshold measuring and communicating what we want as it relates to services we offering students if they’re identified?

Are the tools or methods we use to collect data measuring what we want?

What are our services? What does the district offer? What does the district do for TAG students?

Do our current practices focus on identification without a strong or clear connection to services?

Are we making students fit the service or the does our service fit the students?

Typically when we describe services in Oregon we’re referring to instructional services where the classroom teacher provides instruction at the assessed rate and level that advances the student in learning progress and growth. Some districts in Oregon offer pull-out programs where TAG identified students may choose to attend and alternative or option school designed to meet the social-emotional and academic needs of students. Other programs may be daily or weekly direct instruction from an educator with a gifted education background. Another common question regarding programs and services is who is served in what areas? If a student is identified as intellectually gifted, they’re served in all content areas. If a student is identified as academically talented in reading, they receive services in all classes where reading is the primary source of learning. If a student is identified in math, they only receive services in mathematics. And of course there are students identified in all three of those areas or a combination of the three areas.

30 of 64

OAR 581-022-2500 – Programs and Services

“The instruction provided to identified students shall be designed to accommodate their assessed levels of learning and accelerated rates of learning.”
Observed through classroom instruction

Rate

A measure of the pace at which the student is successfully progressing through the curriculum after being placed at the appropriate level. A student’s rate will vary depending on subject, interest, level of difficulty and point in the learning process

Level

The student’s instructional level in the curriculum and the place where the student will encounter knowledge and skills not yet learned or mastered. It more than an advanced grade level. It involves depth and complexity in thinking.

30

Oregon Department of Education

OAR 581-022-2500 covers programs and services for TAG students. The specific rule that addresses the assessed rate and level of learning, reads, “The instruction provided to identified students shall be designed to accommodate their assessed levels of learning and accelerated rates of learning. As a reminder, in rule and statute, the term, “shall” is non-negotiable. In this rule, instruction (provided by teachers) has to be designed to accommodate their rate and level of learning.

How do we define rate of learning? It’s a measure of the pace at which the student is successfully progressing through the curriculum after being placed at the appropriate level. A student’s rate will vary depending on subject, interest, level of difficulty and point in the learning process

Level

The student’s instructional level in the curriculum and the place where the student will encounter knowledge and skills not yet learned or mastered. It more than an advanced grade level. It involves depth and complexity in thinking.

31 of 64

Programs and Services (Examples)

Programs - schoolwide and/or classroom

Cluster grouping
Young scholars (Kaplan Icons - depth and complexity)
Schools designed for gifted learners
Acceleration (whole grade and subject)

*TAG instruction must occur during the school day, not just as an after-school enrichment program or weekly pull-out program.

Services - classroom

MTSS - Advanced Learners

Instruction
Grouping practices
Rate and Level
Formative assessment as a process
Differentiation (depth and complexity)
In lieu of…
Acceleration (standards)

31

Oregon Department of Education

As a reminder, TAG instruction – the assessed rate and level of learning, must occur during the school day. After school programs, lunch activities, field trips or even weekly pull-out programs do satisfy the expectation that students are receiving instruction frequently based on their learning evidence that indicates appropriate rate and level of learning.

Here are some specific examples of programs and services observed in classrooms throughout Oregon:

Programs - schoolwide and/or classroom

Cluster grouping

Young scholars (Kaplan Icons - depth and complexity)

Schools designed for gifted learners

Acceleration (whole grade and subject)

Services - classroom

Instruction

Grouping practices

Rate and Level

Formative assessment as a process

Differentiation (depth and complexity)

In lieu of…

Acceleration (standards)

32 of 64

The Margins

Meeting the needs of ALL students includes TAG students

100% meetings - do we talk about all students?

Highest scoring students make the lowest amount of gains – many students are not receiving challenging opportunities that fosters academic growth
“Gifted students have special needs; they are at risk of learning the least in the classroom.” Choice & Walker, 2017
Not meeting academic needs has social-emotional implications

Adapted from Nebraska MTSS Framework - Nebraska Department of Education

Callahan & Hertberg-Davis, 2012; Hughes & Rollins, 2009; Wright, Horn, & Sanders, 1997

32

Oregon Department of Education

33 of 64

MTSS , Talent Development, Academic Growth

Gifted is often seen, by educators and students as separate or “one more thing”

Responsive practices improves student outcomes - for all

Provides a framework to build capacity and efficacy of educators

33

Oregon Department of Education

34 of 64

Intervention = To Ensure Growth

34

Oregon Department of Education

35 of 64

Gifted and/or Talented students are NOT necessarily good at everything!

Source: Nebraska Department of Education

35

Oregon Department of Education

36 of 64

Source: Nebraska Department of Education

36

Oregon Department of Education

37 of 64

Check-In

What are some differentiation strategies needed for a students who earned the following scores on their unit pre-assessment?

88%
50%
13%

37

Oregon Department of Education

38 of 64

Data Collected

38

	I notice . . .	What do I do with this information?
Standard: Represent and analyze quantitative relationships between dependent and independent variables. Student data: exit ticket (3 problems); direct variation DOK 1 and 2 levels	16 students’ … 0/3 or 1/3 - need DOK 1 and 2 7 students ... 2/3 - need DOK 2 5 students ... 3/3 - 100% need DOK 3 4 students did not submit - need to complete to place in a group	Grouping: 4 groups of DOK 1 moving to DOK 2 2 groups of DOK 2 moving to DOK 3 1 group of DOK 3 1 group completing the exit ticket then placed in groups Differentiated instruction: Tiered lesson/assignment: Scaffolding, Proficiency, Excellence. Direct instruction for 4 groups (likely pull 2 groups at a time, or in CDL - breakout room of 16). Differentiated tasks: (varying DOK levels)

Oregon Department of Education

39 of 64

Data Collected - Non Example

39

	I notice . . .	What do I do with this information?
Standard: Represent and analyze quantitative relationships between dependent and independent variables. Student data: exit ticket (3 problems); direct variation DOK 1 and 2 levels	16 students’ … 0/3 or 1/3 - need DOK 1 and 2 7 students ... 2/3 - need DOK 2 5 students ... 3/3 - 100% need DOK 3 4 students did not submit - need to complete to place in a group	Inappropriate pairing Fixed grouping Whole group instruction that does not consider various rates and levels Repeated scaffolds that do not consider changing rates and levels Every student receives the same assignment, same problems to solve, and same number of problems to solve

Oregon Department of Education

40 of 64

Elementary Math Stations - 2nd Grade

Name: Xayda Date:

Must Do: Pattern Sheet

Choose From:

Problem Solving (tiered - front and back)
Doubles Practice (tiered - front and back)
Addition Practice (tiered - front and back)
Dreambox

You must complete choices 1-3 before getting on Dreambox.

40

Oregon Department of Education

41 of 64

High Leverage Instructional Practices

Research-based – Robert Marzano, John Hattie, Eric Jensen, Geneva Gay, Zaretta Hammond, Susan Winebrenner, Jaime Castellano, Dina Brulles, Charlotte Danielson, Margaret Heritage, Rick Wormeli …
Collaborative/cooperative learning
Feedback
Pre-assessments/formative assessment as a process
Higher order thinking
Students carry cognitive load (student-centered learning)
Independent vs. Dependent learners
Personalized, differentiated, accessible
Relevant/meaningful
Non-linguistic approaches
Intentional
Relationships/Intellectually safe environments

41

Oregon Department of Education

42 of 64

Instructional Strategies and Practices-

Rate and Level

Pre-Assessment
Grouping Strategies
Curriculum Compacting
Acceleration
Tiered Assignments
Student Agency
Success Criteria

42

Oregon Department of Education

43 of 64

Check-In

Share your understanding of differentiation and where it was developed
Share your “back pocket” moves

43

Oregon Department of Education

44 of 64

What is Differentiation?

What it is…

Offering choices that include a range of depth and complexity
Meets students where they are in the learning process to achieve maximum growth (and depth) in learning
For all students … for TAG students it’s specific to their assessed rate and level of learning.
In lieu of other work
Content, process, environment, and product

What it is not…

Choices in isolation - absent of depth and complexity/DOK
Multiple stations - same expectations for all
Engaging, but not rigorous
Activating interests without varying the DOK
An extra project or independent study
In addition to the standard or required work

44

Oregon Department of Education

45 of 64

Differentiation?

Gummy Toothpick Bridge (STEAM)

Goal: Retell texts using character, plot, setting

Directions: Create a paper bag character using the main character from the story. Use the puppet to retell the story

Paper Bag Characters (ELA)

Goal: Apply principles of engineering to a project

Directions: Make a bridge using toothpicks and gummy candy. The bridge that can hold the most weight wins.

Photo sources: https://www.pinterest.com/pin/32088216073601344/; https://www.pinterest.com.mx/pin/223350462748565832/;

http://creativecurriculum6117.pbworks.com/w/page/89250179/Cell%20Model; https://slideplayer.com/slide/6074864/

Adapted from Tamra Stambaugh, Eric Fecht, Vanderbilt University

Playdough parts of a cell (Science)

Goal: Label the parts of a cell and explain their function

Directions: Make a model of a cell. Label its parts and describe its function

Story problem cube (Math)

Goal: Solve problems using addition and subtraction

Directions: Make a cube with 6 different word problems, one on each side. The number of the cube face has to be the answer.

Do any of the following examples represent differentiation? Explain.

46 of 64

Preliminary Questions

Adapted from Harry Passow

Would every student want to do it?
Should every student do it?
Could every student do it?

Example: Students need to complete two of the four different learning centers specific to reading and summarizing texts.

The center is based on interests/strengths (write a song about the book, perform a dance, write a book review, create a book cover, etc.)?

Is this different or differentiated?

Source: Tamra Stambaugh, Eric Fecht, Vanderbilt University

46

Oregon Department of Education

47 of 64

Effort vs. Thought Effort

47

Adapted from Tamra Stambaugh, Eric Fecht, Vanderbilt University

Effort (DOK1)	Thought Effort (DOK 2+)
Recite the US presidents in order of term.	Which president had the most impact on the economy of the United States? World? (DOK4)
What is the water cycle?	How does the water cycle affect the world’s supply of usable water? What are the predictions for potable water in the future based on current economic, geographic, and populations trends?
How does the water cycle work?
What are the rules for determining sin, cos, and tan?	How do sin, cos, and tan relate to each other?

Oregon Department of Education

48 of 64

Effort vs. Thought Effort

48

Effort (DOK 1-2)	Thought Effort (DOK 3+)

Oregon Department of Education

49 of 64

General Examples

Create a ____ that ____ and ______. (Stambaugh 2015)

Example 1

Different and Effort –

Create a timeline of the 1870s

Differentiation and Thought Effort –

Create a timeline of the 1870s that includes three cause-effect relationships and shows how those relationships reflect ways that power has changed over time.

Source: Tamra Stambaugh, Eric Fecht, Vanderbilt University

49

Oregon Department of Education

50 of 64

General Examples Continued…

Example 2

Different and Effort - Create a new ending to the story.

�Differentiation and Thought Effort - Create a new ending to the story that includes symbolism and develops the theme of individuality.

�Example 3

Different and Effort - Write a journal entry from the perspective of one character.

Differentiation and Thought Effort - Write a journal entry from the perspective of one character that reveals their point of view on a significant experience in the story and reflects their language style/tone.

50

Oregon Department of Education

51 of 64

High Expectations for All

A Monster Calls

51

Oregon Department of Education

52 of 64

DOK 1- 3 Examples

Robert Kaplinsky

3 steps to increase

DOK

52

Oregon Department of Education

53 of 64

Differentiation For All with TAG Lens

53

Adapted from Tamra Stambaugh, Eric Fecht, Vanderbilt University

Differentiation for all (including TAG)	Differentiation specifically for TAG
Extensions to curriculum	Acceleration / Pacing
Higher Level Thinking	Whole to Part
Choice (with depth and complexity)	Multiple variables/perspectives
Grounding based on Pre and Formative Assessment	Curriculum compacting/acceleration
	Concepts across disciplines
	Complex and Integrated

Oregon Department of Education

54 of 64

Emerging Practices

54

Oregon Department of Education

55 of 64

Primary Grade Level

Student agency

Formative assessment as a process

Success criteria

Self-regulated Learning

Next steps include differentiation

55

Oregon Department of Education

56 of 64

Success Criteria

56

Oregon Department of Education

57 of 64

Different (not differentiated) Choices

57

Oregon Department of Education

58 of 64

Decomposition

58

Oregon Department of Education

59 of 64

Manipulatives

59

Oregon Department of Education

60 of 64

Self Assessment

60

Oregon Department of Education

61 of 64

Next Steps Based

on Learning Evidence

61

Oregon Department of Education

62 of 64

Permission to Have Prerogative

“I’ve never met a TAG kid who doesn’t do their work, but I’ve met plenty who don’t do mine.”

“There’s no comfort in the growth zone and no growth in the comfort zone.”

“We have to ensure that who we are, doesn’t get in the way of their learning.”

62

Oregon Department of Education

63 of 64

Micro Leads to the Macro

Moving forward…

What can you implement right now?

Heightened talent scout/identification lens
pre-assessment
grouping strategies
DOK
curriculum compacting
tiered assignments
providing real time feedback with higher order thinking questions

What is a goal for future differentiation development?

63

Oregon Department of Education

64 of 64

Thank you

angela.m.allen@ode.oregon.gov

64

Oregon Department of Education