Minutes from November 2017 SEPTA Meeting

Arlington Special Education PTA

Minutes from November 2017 SEPTA Meeting

Thursday, November 9, 2017, 7-8:30 pm

Syphax Education Center, 2110 Washington Blvd., Arlington, VA

Presentation by SEPTA President, Caroline Levy

Introduction of SEPTA Board members

Minutes from October 2017 meeting approved

Budget:  goal for Phantom Ball was $2000; we took in just over $2065

Mini-Grants:  received requests for $11,000.  We are working with APS to see if all requests can be met.

Fundraising:  VP of Fundraising Minerva Trudo is hard at work planning the online auction.  President, Caroline Levy, called for members to pass along any ideas for items that could be donated.

Next meeting:  December 11 Superintendent’s Chat.  There will be an opportunity for SEPTA members to ask questions, but the Superintendent’s Office asks for questions to be submitted in advance in case there is a question that requires a data-driven response.  Questions can be submitted up until the end of November.  SEPTA is also looking for students willing to talk about their experiences.  This was a big hit at last year’s Superintendent’s Chat.

On December 18, there will be In-Service training on cortical vision impairment, which is a condition wherein students may have trouble processing visual information.

On January 6, a Saturday, SEPTA is sponsoring an Unstuck and On Target workshop.

We’re still looking for a VP of Membership.  We are now up to 100 paid memberships, but we have over 900 list serve members:  Please become a member if you are not already!

Twice Exceptional Presentation

Introduction of Maria Araya Chanon, a teacher at Williamsburg who is available to provide a live Spanish language translation.

There are index cards on the tables to submit questions if you have them during the presentation.

Introductions of Janet Quantrille, APS Consultant, and Cheryl McCullough, APS Gifted Services Supervisor.

A Twice Exceptional or “2e” workgroup, with multiple stakeholders, was put together a few years ago to explore challenges with Twice Exceptional students.  They met monthly for about two years, with a mission to ensure appropriate services and to make sure students had a rigorous education, with coursework that builds on their strengths and makes sure their social and emotional needs are met.  Supports are often needed in the areas of social-emotional functioning, self-regulation, self-determination, and executive functioning.  Now all middle- and high-school students have social skills classes as an elective.  The specific “Belief Statements” underlying the program are summarized on the 2e website, which is accessible from either the Special Education page or the Gifted Services page.

They created and piloted a “Student’s Twice Exceptional Profile” last year, and prepared the profile for all fifth graders who had been identified as 2e.  One of the big things that needs to happen is that gifted students get to participate in the IEP process, but the profile is a separate document from the IEP – the idea was that the profile could be brought to the spring IEP meeting to help with planning for middle school.  It starts with a strength-based profile, then moves into interests and challenges.

355 2e students are currently identified across APS.  The workgroup would like to expand the profile to 8th grade next year if possible; they are planning to use it for fifth graders again.  In order to be identified as 2e, the student needs to have an IEP (that is a state requirement).

An audience member noted that the law does not require the IEP team to help the child live up to his or her full potential, but only to be on grade level, and so the question was raised, how do we encourage school staff to get a gifted or resource teacher involved?  Another audience member noted that it is not a separate classification, but if a student has an IEP and has been identified as gifted, then he or she is considered 2e.

The staff noted that there is an interest in expanding past just the IEP, which meets legal requirements, but really to build a strengths-based collaboration.  They will be doing ongoing professional development for teachers and administrators.  As one example, they work within the Arlington Tiered System of Support to collaborate and meet the needs of all students.  In general, ATSS uses data to identify students who need remediation or extensions of their learning.  Collaboration will be easier now that special education and gifted services are both part of the Learning and Instruction organization within APS.  There are ongoing conversations.

Resource teachers can serve as advocates for historically underserved populations.  On the 2e page, there are links to many resources, including a National Association of Gifted Children paper talking about 2e, and a bimonthly 2e newsletter that goes to special education staff and others, and may be shared as needed.

An audience member raised a question about “underachieving students” – which could be a student who has a high IQ score or other indicators of potential, but is not performing well in school.  The answer was that we want to break through to help the child be more exceptional in school.  Toward that goal, there is a parent night every fall at each school, where the resource teachers talk about the program.

How are 2e students identified as gifted?  There is a Local Plan for the Education of the Gifted, which speaks to moving from a pull-out model to an inclusive model.  The teacher is the primary deliverer of differentiated services, with support from resource teachers to help provide a rigorous program at the appropriate level of challenge.

The Naglieri nonverbal test in second grade is one way to find kids who may be underachieving.  Similarly, fourth graders take the Cognitive Abilities Test or CogAT, which can serve the same purpose.  Every second and fourth grader takes these tests.  Also, parents, teachers, or community members who know a student may submit a referral to start the screening process.

A question was raised about the need to include kids who don’t meet the state definition of 2e, but really should be considered 2e, for example if they have a 504 plan but not an IEP.  Staff answered that there should be continuous collaboration to ensure that kids can have access to the appropriate level of instruction.  The 2e label has to be used only for IEP students because of state requirements, but other students can benefit from collaboration.  There is an ongoing effort to continue to educate teachers on all these different learners, and how to work with them to help them meet their potential.

Another question was raised as to whether any accommodations a child may need for testing can be in place before the Naglieri test.  APS Director of Special Education, Paul Jamelske, responded that we need to look into whether to preview this issue with first grade case carriers, to make sure they can put accommodations in place for second grade as needed.

Another question was raised concerning continuity across academic years – the challenge when one year is good but the next is not so good.  The response was that the 2e profile is intended to help teachers and staff know what works for a student, across time.  This is also one of the purposes of ATSS.

An audience member asked whether kids in self-contained classrooms have the tests that are sometimes used to help screen 2e students.  Staff’s vision is that the tests should be given to all students, but there may be decisions made not to give the test if that is in the best interests of an individual student.

The documents referred to in the screening files reflect a holistic approach to identifying students as 2e:  a referral form, Gifted Behavior Commentary from the school team, testing, student work samples, and parent information form.  The parent information form is an opportunity to tell about the child and what he or she is doing at home.  The staff DOES look at it.

The Gifted Behavior Commentary gathers information in four categories, and can apply to academics or visual arts:  exceptional ability to learn, exceptional application of knowledge, creative/productive learning, and motivation to succeed.  The idea is to give teachers a more diverse way of understanding what being gifted means:  the child doesn’t have to show exceptionality in all four categories.

There is no 2e “program,” per se – it is more of a service model, where resource teachers should know about it regardless of the school.  A student who doesn’t do well on testing but is very talented at music or visual arts presents a good opportunity for a parent referral.  The student’s work product would then be a big focus of the screening.

Balancing the mainstream curriculum, special education needs, plus gifted opportunities or “extensions,” is very challenging.  There is no one simple answer, but we need to prioritize kid by kid, looking at data to drive instruction.  It is easier with collaboration, when everyone is working together.  It is not a “have or have not” system – hopefully teachers in the inclusive model are able to apply gifted services flexibly.

With respect to kids with strong behaviors or mental health issues, there is still a need for more staff development – understanding how to reach these kids and which accommodations may be helpful.  This task should be easier with the combined Department of Teaching and Learning.

Presentation from Kelly Mountain, Parent Resource Center

The PRC has a really nice library with books on both giftedness and twice exceptionality.  Also available are flyers for various upcoming programs.

Meeting adjourned.