In the last year, I've learned a lot of educational jargon like "cluster" and "matrix." If only "matrix" were as exciting as it sounds. It's actually just a fancy word for the cocktail of test scores, recommendations, and school work portfolio that results in a score that determines whether or not a given student is admitted into the gifted program.
As we discovered last year when AJ had a bad testing day, the matrix in our school district has included 2nd grade OLSAT scores, teacher and parent recommendations and a portfolio of work. This sounds good in theory, but the OLSAT scores were so heavily weighted that the other things didn't really make any difference. The district knew there was a problem, but hadn't been able to put through changes. Last year only one person in our school tested into the program the normal way. AJ got in because we had him privately tested. Several other children who should be in there were not. The school said they'd retest in January when the next testing cycle began, but most of us think that is far too late. Kids should not have to wait for appropriate material.
I knew something was up when we went to the gifted program orientation meeting a couple of weeks ago and they mentioned offhand that the district would not be using the OLSAT anymore.
Today I got a call from the mother of one of the kids who, like AJ, had been informally identified but hadn't met the OLSAT requirement. I've been helping her navigate the advocacy process for her son. She heard from the gifted teacher that instead of waiting until January, they'd be using the MAP scores and, where necessary, administering the ITBS (Iowa Test of Basic Skills) and it would be happening in the next week or two. The ITBS was what I had asked for for AJ last spring. I knew they could do it -- they administered it to all the kids who'd been identified (all two of them at AJ's school). There's no reason other than money that they couldn't do it for others. I even offered to pay for it, but was told it wasn't an option. I'm glad they've come to their senses. I'm not sure what changed to make this possible, but it's definitely a step in the right direction. So it sounds like AJ's challenge class will be getting a little bigger. I'm not sure how he'll feel about that, but I think this is a very good thing.
I know this is not all due to my work. I also know the work I've done in the last year -- in advocating for AJ and others, in taking the time to get to know the curriculum policy makers, in teaching others how to advocate for their kids -- would not have gotten this far this fast if the school hadn't recognized the problem and been willing to change. But nevertheless, it feels like a personal victory. The schools may still think of me as a pain in the ass, but at least I'm a pain in the ass who got something done.
Showing posts with label OLSAT. Show all posts
Showing posts with label OLSAT. Show all posts
Tuesday, October 6, 2009
Thursday, September 17, 2009
Orientation
Tonight, Mr. Spy and I attended an orientation for all parents of students in our school district's gifted program. The program was run by our district's Curriculum Director, who was one of the people I spoke with by phone last year when we were trying to deal with last spring's testing debacle, and the two gifted coordinators -- Mrs. C who teaches at AJ's school, another elementary school, and the middle school; and The Cheerleader, who teaches at the other two elementary schools and the junior high.
For the most part, we didn't hear much that we didn't know, mainly because we have beensuch pains in the ass so involved with the program at AJ's school since kindergarten and because I am nosy and ask a lot of questions. Neither of the gifted teachers was particularly good at public speaking -- the meeting was wildly disorganized, despite its powerpoint presentation. The Cheerleader reminded me very much of Reese Witherspoon's character in Legally Blonde -- hyper perky and very wide-eyed with a high squeaky voice. At one point, she actually said she had been a cheerleader and I had to literally bite my tongue to keep from laughing. But the curriculum director is smart and said some interesting things about district-wide policy and its devotion to challenging all children. This and the program itself, which is well-integrated with the general curriculum, reassured me that it will be less of a target for cuts when the budget gets slashed next month.
The most exciting thing we heard about was the math program. They begin the acceleration process in third grade so that by next year, they are doing 5th grade curriculum. By the time they get to sixth grade, they are doing algebra. By the time they start high school, they'll be a full two years ahead of the traditional curriculum.
The other thing that sounds great is that they have a stand-alone gifted class starting in grades 5-8 when the four elementary schools consolidate into first the middle school and then the junior high. But we knew about that already.
One more item of interest was thrown out there: the school has dropped the use of the OLSAT, the test that gave us so much trouble last spring. They didn't say why. It might be because of the problems we and others encountered. Or it might be a financial issue. In any case, I am glad to see it go.
For the most part, we didn't hear much that we didn't know, mainly because we have been
The most exciting thing we heard about was the math program. They begin the acceleration process in third grade so that by next year, they are doing 5th grade curriculum. By the time they get to sixth grade, they are doing algebra. By the time they start high school, they'll be a full two years ahead of the traditional curriculum.
The other thing that sounds great is that they have a stand-alone gifted class starting in grades 5-8 when the four elementary schools consolidate into first the middle school and then the junior high. But we knew about that already.
One more item of interest was thrown out there: the school has dropped the use of the OLSAT, the test that gave us so much trouble last spring. They didn't say why. It might be because of the problems we and others encountered. Or it might be a financial issue. In any case, I am glad to see it go.
Thursday, June 11, 2009
Second Grade wrap-up
Yesterday was AJ's last day of second grade. I think we were all ready for it. The last month or so has been tough on all of us.
AJ came home with a pile of old projects and a report card stuffed with test scores. The report card was...not great. Many of his marks slipped from the last report card, mostly in the category of "learning/social characteristics," which is the non-academic stuff. AJ has definitely struggled this year with his classroom behavior. He has had a particularly hard time keeping himself focused in the face of the many distractions of a small classroom crammed with 26 kids. But he also, apparently, has had motivation issues. We've seen it at home too. A lot of it is, I think, boredom. But he's also balking at more challenging work, not wanting to work too hard. In the past, such reticence has often been based on a sense of social isolation, wanting to do the same thing everyone else is doing. But this time, it seems to be more about fear of failure or sometimes just plain laziness. It's a behavior we'll need to watch carefully. At the moment, we're addressing it by reiterating our expectations that he try his best.
The distraction issue is something I'd like to work on over the summer, to find ways of keeping him more focused. One of the things I've notice about AJ, and about many kids his age, especially boys, is that he concentrates better when he is moving. When he works on his homework, he is often moving around or fidgeting with something and he does well. He can't do this in the classroom. We need to help him channel his energy.
The test scores were another matter. We finally got the official notice of the OLSAT. We also got the report on the ISEL, the individually administered state standard test. The results of both were a little puzzling. For the ISEL, which is an achievement test, AJ was in the 100th percentile in most areas. But his lowest area -- noticeably lower -- was verbal comprehension. This was the same area that had given AJ the most trouble on the OLSAT, an aptitude test, where it was also the only percentile below the 90s. AJ took the ISEL last year too and the score was more than 10 percentage points lower than the last time he took the test -- a significant difference. But that isn't the weird part. The weird part is that verbal comprehension was his highest score on the WISC, at the very top of the range at 99.9th percentile. What accounts for this drastic difference between tests? I know it's probably not fair to compare the tests in this way. But still, what is the reason for a nearly 20 percentage point difference between his scores in the same area? I wish I knew.
Has anyone else experienced such anomalies?
We still have one more round of test results, for the ITBS, due in sometime this month. Then we're off the hook for a while.
In addition to all his projects, he brought home a book of letters to him, one from each member of his class, his teacher and her aid. They've been working on these letters for months. Each child got the chance to be the "Star Student" for the day and got to make a poster and get up in front of the class and talk about their favorite things. Then the rest of the class wrote letters in response. The letters from the students were wonderful and sweet. But the one from his teacher made my day because she wrote it in a code for him to decipher. I was thinking about how hard they both struggled to understand each other at the beginning of the year. The code was perfect and AJ loved it. She's done a good job of trying to figure him out.
Over the next few weeks, AJ will be busy with sports and piano lessons and camps, including two weeks at the camp for gifted kids he attended last summer. I was, unfortunately, too late to sign him up to get the fabulous physics teacher he had last summer, who this year is teaching their most popular computer gaming course. But he'll be taking art, science and geometry, and he's very excited about it all.
AJ came home with a pile of old projects and a report card stuffed with test scores. The report card was...not great. Many of his marks slipped from the last report card, mostly in the category of "learning/social characteristics," which is the non-academic stuff. AJ has definitely struggled this year with his classroom behavior. He has had a particularly hard time keeping himself focused in the face of the many distractions of a small classroom crammed with 26 kids. But he also, apparently, has had motivation issues. We've seen it at home too. A lot of it is, I think, boredom. But he's also balking at more challenging work, not wanting to work too hard. In the past, such reticence has often been based on a sense of social isolation, wanting to do the same thing everyone else is doing. But this time, it seems to be more about fear of failure or sometimes just plain laziness. It's a behavior we'll need to watch carefully. At the moment, we're addressing it by reiterating our expectations that he try his best.
The distraction issue is something I'd like to work on over the summer, to find ways of keeping him more focused. One of the things I've notice about AJ, and about many kids his age, especially boys, is that he concentrates better when he is moving. When he works on his homework, he is often moving around or fidgeting with something and he does well. He can't do this in the classroom. We need to help him channel his energy.
The test scores were another matter. We finally got the official notice of the OLSAT. We also got the report on the ISEL, the individually administered state standard test. The results of both were a little puzzling. For the ISEL, which is an achievement test, AJ was in the 100th percentile in most areas. But his lowest area -- noticeably lower -- was verbal comprehension. This was the same area that had given AJ the most trouble on the OLSAT, an aptitude test, where it was also the only percentile below the 90s. AJ took the ISEL last year too and the score was more than 10 percentage points lower than the last time he took the test -- a significant difference. But that isn't the weird part. The weird part is that verbal comprehension was his highest score on the WISC, at the very top of the range at 99.9th percentile. What accounts for this drastic difference between tests? I know it's probably not fair to compare the tests in this way. But still, what is the reason for a nearly 20 percentage point difference between his scores in the same area? I wish I knew.
Has anyone else experienced such anomalies?
We still have one more round of test results, for the ITBS, due in sometime this month. Then we're off the hook for a while.
In addition to all his projects, he brought home a book of letters to him, one from each member of his class, his teacher and her aid. They've been working on these letters for months. Each child got the chance to be the "Star Student" for the day and got to make a poster and get up in front of the class and talk about their favorite things. Then the rest of the class wrote letters in response. The letters from the students were wonderful and sweet. But the one from his teacher made my day because she wrote it in a code for him to decipher. I was thinking about how hard they both struggled to understand each other at the beginning of the year. The code was perfect and AJ loved it. She's done a good job of trying to figure him out.
Over the next few weeks, AJ will be busy with sports and piano lessons and camps, including two weeks at the camp for gifted kids he attended last summer. I was, unfortunately, too late to sign him up to get the fabulous physics teacher he had last summer, who this year is teaching their most popular computer gaming course. But he'll be taking art, science and geometry, and he's very excited about it all.
Wednesday, May 20, 2009
Testing, testing and more testing
AJ had his WISC testing yesterday, which I've written about more anecdotally here. AJ took the WISC-IV and got a score clearly in the gifted range. Even better, he had a great time. It was as if a switch was flipped and his brain went into high gear afterwards. He's been extra fun to be around ever since.
I dropped off the score sheets at AJ's school right when school let out at 3:15. Within 30 minutes, I received an email from the gifted teacher saying she wanted to schedule AJ for Iowa testing. This meant that AJ's WISC scores were substituted for the anomalous OLSAT scores. One more battle completed. One more round of testing to go.
I didn't realize from talking to anyone -- not the gifted teacher, nor the classroom teacher, nor the principal, nor the curriculum director -- that there was another round of testing for identification. Although, I'm not entirely surprised, as the gifted teacher had said something about Iowa testing next year if he qualified. If I'd know that there was another round, I would have pushed for him to do Iowa testing (also known as ITBS or Iowa Test of Basic Skills) at the school earlier.
The ITBS is an achievement test, rather than an aptitude test like the OLSAT. Most schools we've investigated seem to use a combination of aptitude and achievement testing for gifted identification. AJ's school district gives all students the OLSAT in second grade and then pulls those students whose OLSAT scores qualify them for the program and adminsters the ITBS only to them. When I was a kid, everyone took the ITBS. The achievement tests that AJ's school administers to everyone are much less comprehensive. I'm sure that the decision to do it this way is all about economics.
I am slightly nervous for AJ taking the ITBS because, like the OLSAT, it is a color-the-bubble test. It is an "off level" test (or, at least, that's the way AJ's school does it), which means some of the questions will probably deal with concepts AJ doesn't know. But AJ has traditionally done well on these types of tests. And since the rest of the identified kids have already taken the test, AJ will be in a room by himself with the gifted teacher, so there will be fewer distractions than usual -- probably best for him. There are a few sample pages available on the web, which I plan to show him, just to give him an idea of what to expect, and I will prep him for the procedures, including telling him that some of the questions will probably be about things he hasn't learned yet. But I don't plan to do much. My goal is to make him comfortable in the testing room, to to help him cram.
AJ's testing will take place over the next two weeks. Thanks to his alert classroom teacher, who let us know about the OLSAT problem as soon as she knew herself, we were able to work both within the school system and also to acquire independent outside testing in time to get the ITBS done before the end of the school year. I have already written to tell her how very grateful we are for her help. As hard as this process has been, is, I feel we have been very lucky with our teachers.
But our schools, like the rest of the country, are suffering financially. Yesterday, an article appeared in the local paper quoting our district superintendent saying that they are looking at closing another school next year as one way to balance the budget. Our classes are already 26 students and up, even in kindergarten. The rooms aren't even big enough to hold any more students. So while one battle appears to be winding down, another one is just beginning. There are more letters to write.
I'm still working on post of general advice for effective public school advocacy. Additionally, the psychologist who administered AJ's WISC test gave us a 25 page resource guide for parents of gifted children, including organizations, support groups, publications and websites. Some of these are local for us, but some are national. I plan on investigating as many as I can over the coming weeks and writing about them here, so stay tuned!
I dropped off the score sheets at AJ's school right when school let out at 3:15. Within 30 minutes, I received an email from the gifted teacher saying she wanted to schedule AJ for Iowa testing. This meant that AJ's WISC scores were substituted for the anomalous OLSAT scores. One more battle completed. One more round of testing to go.
I didn't realize from talking to anyone -- not the gifted teacher, nor the classroom teacher, nor the principal, nor the curriculum director -- that there was another round of testing for identification. Although, I'm not entirely surprised, as the gifted teacher had said something about Iowa testing next year if he qualified. If I'd know that there was another round, I would have pushed for him to do Iowa testing (also known as ITBS or Iowa Test of Basic Skills) at the school earlier.
The ITBS is an achievement test, rather than an aptitude test like the OLSAT. Most schools we've investigated seem to use a combination of aptitude and achievement testing for gifted identification. AJ's school district gives all students the OLSAT in second grade and then pulls those students whose OLSAT scores qualify them for the program and adminsters the ITBS only to them. When I was a kid, everyone took the ITBS. The achievement tests that AJ's school administers to everyone are much less comprehensive. I'm sure that the decision to do it this way is all about economics.
I am slightly nervous for AJ taking the ITBS because, like the OLSAT, it is a color-the-bubble test. It is an "off level" test (or, at least, that's the way AJ's school does it), which means some of the questions will probably deal with concepts AJ doesn't know. But AJ has traditionally done well on these types of tests. And since the rest of the identified kids have already taken the test, AJ will be in a room by himself with the gifted teacher, so there will be fewer distractions than usual -- probably best for him. There are a few sample pages available on the web, which I plan to show him, just to give him an idea of what to expect, and I will prep him for the procedures, including telling him that some of the questions will probably be about things he hasn't learned yet. But I don't plan to do much. My goal is to make him comfortable in the testing room, to to help him cram.
AJ's testing will take place over the next two weeks. Thanks to his alert classroom teacher, who let us know about the OLSAT problem as soon as she knew herself, we were able to work both within the school system and also to acquire independent outside testing in time to get the ITBS done before the end of the school year. I have already written to tell her how very grateful we are for her help. As hard as this process has been, is, I feel we have been very lucky with our teachers.
But our schools, like the rest of the country, are suffering financially. Yesterday, an article appeared in the local paper quoting our district superintendent saying that they are looking at closing another school next year as one way to balance the budget. Our classes are already 26 students and up, even in kindergarten. The rooms aren't even big enough to hold any more students. So while one battle appears to be winding down, another one is just beginning. There are more letters to write.
I'm still working on post of general advice for effective public school advocacy. Additionally, the psychologist who administered AJ's WISC test gave us a 25 page resource guide for parents of gifted children, including organizations, support groups, publications and websites. Some of these are local for us, but some are national. I plan on investigating as many as I can over the coming weeks and writing about them here, so stay tuned!
Friday, May 1, 2009
Holding Pattern
We're at the end of the line with the school district, for the moment anyway. And yet, the news is, I think, cautiously positive. Mr. Spy and I each spoke this morning with the district Director of Curriculum, who is, among other things, in charge of admission policy for the gifted program. I'm finding that talking to everyone, from the teachers on up, tends to result in their talking very fast over you, as if to anticipate problems before they happen. They all use the, "I understand -- I'm just like you" kinds of lines. These are mostly defensive, but still well-meaning. For the most part, anyway. And I don't think it's necessarily a conscious manipulation. I do think, however, that as a parent-advocate, you need to know how to push through it. Otherwise, when you get out of the conversation, you are left scratching your head and saying, "What just happened?"
Good point number one -- every single person we've dealt with, from the classroom teacher to the district administrators -- has done when that said they would when they said they would do it. This is huge. It means good communication in the district. It means they're taking us seriously.
Good point number two -- the Curriculum Director is talkative, but she is also friendly and smart and we were largely in agreement on matters of educational philosophy. However, she still couldn't tell us what we wanted to hear. But she didn't say no either.
We heard more about the district's reevaluation of the criteria for gifted program admission that our school principal had mentioned last week. It is not just an idea, it's actually happening and it's supposed to be in place this fall. The new policy will add two more criteria and take the weight off the one test. They're still trying to figure out what criteria will be included and in what weighting. They will likely include test scores, portfolio, teacher recommendations and parent recommendations. The goal is to get more kids what they need. It also sounds like the district may be reevaluating the pull-out program. The C.D. is on the fence about it. She has been looking at districts that use a gifted label, but not a gifted program and focus on training and supporting classroom teachers. I think this is a great direction, if it works. What we want is not a label, but the extra challenge AJ needs. But when there is a label, when there is a pull-out program, we need that too. Because if we don't, he is unlikely to get what he needs. When there is a pull-out program, teachers rely on it.
The C.D. seemed to think that it was likely that AJ would be included by the new criteria, especially since he's only 1 point away by the old criteria. But she can't promise -- there are others who, like us, are advocating for their kids. She promised to get him what he needs in the classroom and to call her any time if I needed help. But she couldn't guarantee the pull-out. All she could do is say it looked likely. If we want guarantees, the only thing left is testing -- assuming the test scores are high enough. And so we will be spending the $500 to have him tested later this month and hope it helps.
One thing that worries me slightly, though, is that we're getting mixed messages about how much the test scores will help. The gifted teacher had told us that they will substitute the private testing for the OLSAT score. But that's not what the C.D. said. She said it would be included in the things they look at, although she also said that it was the only thing that really has made a difference in the past. This does not sound like a guarantee to me either, but at least it sounds promising.
While we didn't get what we'd hoped to get, we did get what we expected to hear, more or less. And now we know to focus our energies on learning about the IQ testing on May 19.
I hope all these stories about the process are not too tedious to read. My hope is that others can learn from our experience, that it will help others learn how to advocate for their kids. Since we have a lull in the process, I'm working on a more general post on advocacy and another one on how to approach IQ tests with your kids. I would love to hear some more voices on this subject. If you're interested in posting here on these or other subjects of giftedness, please email me at harri3tspyATgmailDOTcom.
Good point number one -- every single person we've dealt with, from the classroom teacher to the district administrators -- has done when that said they would when they said they would do it. This is huge. It means good communication in the district. It means they're taking us seriously.
Good point number two -- the Curriculum Director is talkative, but she is also friendly and smart and we were largely in agreement on matters of educational philosophy. However, she still couldn't tell us what we wanted to hear. But she didn't say no either.
We heard more about the district's reevaluation of the criteria for gifted program admission that our school principal had mentioned last week. It is not just an idea, it's actually happening and it's supposed to be in place this fall. The new policy will add two more criteria and take the weight off the one test. They're still trying to figure out what criteria will be included and in what weighting. They will likely include test scores, portfolio, teacher recommendations and parent recommendations. The goal is to get more kids what they need. It also sounds like the district may be reevaluating the pull-out program. The C.D. is on the fence about it. She has been looking at districts that use a gifted label, but not a gifted program and focus on training and supporting classroom teachers. I think this is a great direction, if it works. What we want is not a label, but the extra challenge AJ needs. But when there is a label, when there is a pull-out program, we need that too. Because if we don't, he is unlikely to get what he needs. When there is a pull-out program, teachers rely on it.
The C.D. seemed to think that it was likely that AJ would be included by the new criteria, especially since he's only 1 point away by the old criteria. But she can't promise -- there are others who, like us, are advocating for their kids. She promised to get him what he needs in the classroom and to call her any time if I needed help. But she couldn't guarantee the pull-out. All she could do is say it looked likely. If we want guarantees, the only thing left is testing -- assuming the test scores are high enough. And so we will be spending the $500 to have him tested later this month and hope it helps.
One thing that worries me slightly, though, is that we're getting mixed messages about how much the test scores will help. The gifted teacher had told us that they will substitute the private testing for the OLSAT score. But that's not what the C.D. said. She said it would be included in the things they look at, although she also said that it was the only thing that really has made a difference in the past. This does not sound like a guarantee to me either, but at least it sounds promising.
While we didn't get what we'd hoped to get, we did get what we expected to hear, more or less. And now we know to focus our energies on learning about the IQ testing on May 19.
I hope all these stories about the process are not too tedious to read. My hope is that others can learn from our experience, that it will help others learn how to advocate for their kids. Since we have a lull in the process, I'm working on a more general post on advocacy and another one on how to approach IQ tests with your kids. I would love to hear some more voices on this subject. If you're interested in posting here on these or other subjects of giftedness, please email me at harri3tspyATgmailDOTcom.
Monday, April 20, 2009
Mixed Results
So. The meeting. It was about what I expected. Maybe even a little better, although not as good as I'd hoped. Here's the rundown.
The Bad:
We got a lot of information, but unfortunately, we were not able to get much of a breakdown of AJ's scores -- just a verbal and a math. No explanation. AJ really did not do well on the OLSAT. Or at least that's how it looked to me, although the gifted teacher said that for most kids, these would be really good scores. They're just not good enough for these purposes. And here's the weird part. The thing he really didn't do well on was the verbal section. In every other test he's taken, including the previous aptitude testing, his verbal scores were off the charts high -- 99.98-100th percentile on everything. That I was not expecting, and it speaks even more to the fact that this was a bad test-taking experience. I don't trust the scores at all.
Unfortunately, the school district thinks highly enough of the test that the scores on the OLSAT count twice as much as teacher recommendations and work portfolio (the other components of the "matrix" used to determine admission candidacy) combined. AJ missed the cutoff for the program by one point in both math and language and it's solely based on the OLSAT. Even if he has the maximum scores in all other areas (which have not yet been determined), which seems likely, he will not meet the qualifying numbers. So while the school district is following the letter of Illinois law, which states that gifted programs must use at least three different methods of evaluating each child for the program, the weighting of the test means they are not following the spirit of the law. There is no way to counteract a bad test.
The good:
The gifted teacher is on our side. She is not a fan of the OLSAT for this purpose, she thinks AJ belongs in the program, and she wants to help us.
Next year, he will take the COGAT, which is a much more in-depth and reliable test. Unfortunately, that will not happen until spring. A lot of kids in the past have not qualified via the OLSAT but have qualified on the COGAT (shouldn't that be telling the district something about the testing cocktail?), so AJ would definitely not be alone.
The school district can't retest (there is a narrow window for administration of the OLSAT), but they will accept Stanford-Binet or WISC scores from private testing in place of the OLSAT.
Time is not a big factor. All AJ's teachers and the gifted teacher think this is a glitch and that he belongs in the gifted cluster. The teachers have a lot of say in the classroom organization so we have all but a guarantee that he will be in the right class. Even if we are unable to get done what we need to until the next school year starts, they can add him to the program as soon as the paperwork comes through.
The plan:
However, if we don't deal with either the district policy or the testing, he won't get the pullout program, which is an hour a week each for reading and math and supplements the regular curriculum. The gifted teacher can't fight the test scores. The best she can do is make sure he maxes out every other category, but because of the way the test is weighted, it's not enough to reach the cutoff because of the weighting of the test scores. I can see why AJ's teacher said she'd never known a kid who didn't meet the minimum OLSAT requirements get into the program. It's not mathematically possible.
So we're going to pursue this on two fronts. I will talk first to the school principal (who is probably not going to be able to help, but who needs not to be leapt over) and then to the district director of curriculum about waiving the cutoff, hopefully tomorrow. Since AJ's only down by one point and we have a lot of other evidence, that might work. However, the gifted teacher, after looking up the aptitude test that AJ took last year, which she had not previously heard of (Kaufman Brief Intelligence Test or KBIT-II, done in conjunction with KTEA-II) didn't think it was comprehensive enough to replace the OLSAT scores, so if they're not willing to waive the rules, the only way we can get him into the program is if he has qualifying scores from another test. This means time and expense on our part, but it's worth it if we have to. So I will also be making an appointment for AJ with a psychologist Siren recommended for additional testing.
We still haven't talked to AJ about this. We're going to have to eventually, I think. But it doesn't seem the right time.
The Question:
So if AJ's kindergarten, first and second grad teachers all recommend him without reservation for the program, as does the gifted teacher -- the people who actually work with him regularly -- why can't the school district make an exception?
Because they're still bureaucrats at heart, I guess. More fun and games ahead.
The Bad:
We got a lot of information, but unfortunately, we were not able to get much of a breakdown of AJ's scores -- just a verbal and a math. No explanation. AJ really did not do well on the OLSAT. Or at least that's how it looked to me, although the gifted teacher said that for most kids, these would be really good scores. They're just not good enough for these purposes. And here's the weird part. The thing he really didn't do well on was the verbal section. In every other test he's taken, including the previous aptitude testing, his verbal scores were off the charts high -- 99.98-100th percentile on everything. That I was not expecting, and it speaks even more to the fact that this was a bad test-taking experience. I don't trust the scores at all.
Unfortunately, the school district thinks highly enough of the test that the scores on the OLSAT count twice as much as teacher recommendations and work portfolio (the other components of the "matrix" used to determine admission candidacy) combined. AJ missed the cutoff for the program by one point in both math and language and it's solely based on the OLSAT. Even if he has the maximum scores in all other areas (which have not yet been determined), which seems likely, he will not meet the qualifying numbers. So while the school district is following the letter of Illinois law, which states that gifted programs must use at least three different methods of evaluating each child for the program, the weighting of the test means they are not following the spirit of the law. There is no way to counteract a bad test.
The good:
The gifted teacher is on our side. She is not a fan of the OLSAT for this purpose, she thinks AJ belongs in the program, and she wants to help us.
Next year, he will take the COGAT, which is a much more in-depth and reliable test. Unfortunately, that will not happen until spring. A lot of kids in the past have not qualified via the OLSAT but have qualified on the COGAT (shouldn't that be telling the district something about the testing cocktail?), so AJ would definitely not be alone.
The school district can't retest (there is a narrow window for administration of the OLSAT), but they will accept Stanford-Binet or WISC scores from private testing in place of the OLSAT.
Time is not a big factor. All AJ's teachers and the gifted teacher think this is a glitch and that he belongs in the gifted cluster. The teachers have a lot of say in the classroom organization so we have all but a guarantee that he will be in the right class. Even if we are unable to get done what we need to until the next school year starts, they can add him to the program as soon as the paperwork comes through.
The plan:
However, if we don't deal with either the district policy or the testing, he won't get the pullout program, which is an hour a week each for reading and math and supplements the regular curriculum. The gifted teacher can't fight the test scores. The best she can do is make sure he maxes out every other category, but because of the way the test is weighted, it's not enough to reach the cutoff because of the weighting of the test scores. I can see why AJ's teacher said she'd never known a kid who didn't meet the minimum OLSAT requirements get into the program. It's not mathematically possible.
So we're going to pursue this on two fronts. I will talk first to the school principal (who is probably not going to be able to help, but who needs not to be leapt over) and then to the district director of curriculum about waiving the cutoff, hopefully tomorrow. Since AJ's only down by one point and we have a lot of other evidence, that might work. However, the gifted teacher, after looking up the aptitude test that AJ took last year, which she had not previously heard of (Kaufman Brief Intelligence Test or KBIT-II, done in conjunction with KTEA-II) didn't think it was comprehensive enough to replace the OLSAT scores, so if they're not willing to waive the rules, the only way we can get him into the program is if he has qualifying scores from another test. This means time and expense on our part, but it's worth it if we have to. So I will also be making an appointment for AJ with a psychologist Siren recommended for additional testing.
We still haven't talked to AJ about this. We're going to have to eventually, I think. But it doesn't seem the right time.
The Question:
So if AJ's kindergarten, first and second grad teachers all recommend him without reservation for the program, as does the gifted teacher -- the people who actually work with him regularly -- why can't the school district make an exception?
Because they're still bureaucrats at heart, I guess. More fun and games ahead.
Monday, March 2, 2009
Testing 1-2-3
This week, all the second graders at AJ's school are taking the Otis Lennon School Ability Tes, or OLSAT. The OLSAT is not an IQ test, but it is often used as an entrance exam to gifted programs. It is the only aptitude testing that AJ's school uses. Third and fourth graders take a state achievement test.
The school uses the OLSAT to determine tracking and special services. Starting in third grade, students are clustered with others at their level within their classroom. Those performing well below or well above the norm will get special services. AJ's scores on this exam will determine whether he gets into the gifted program next year.
I'm not concerned about that. I'm sure he'll do well enough to get in, and even if for some reason he didn't, we have enough paperwork to get him in the back door. But I did want to make sure he knew how to take the test.
This will be AJ's first experience with standardized testing. I would like it to be a good one, for his sake. He will expect to do well. His teacher hasn't said anything about the test, what to expect, how to take it. I wanted to make sure AJ knew how to handle the mechanics -- finding directions when they are at the top of each page instead of by each problem (a known issue for him), coloring in the circles accurately, what an analogy problem question. But I wasn't sure if I should. I don't want to pressure him. I honestly don't think this test is all that important in the general scheme of things (if he does well, it will help; if he doesn't, it probably won't hurt much). I also don't want to prep him if we're not supposed to. In the end, I decided to walk him through the basics. I really don't know much about the test, so I don't think I could possibly give away much.
What would you do?
The school uses the OLSAT to determine tracking and special services. Starting in third grade, students are clustered with others at their level within their classroom. Those performing well below or well above the norm will get special services. AJ's scores on this exam will determine whether he gets into the gifted program next year.
I'm not concerned about that. I'm sure he'll do well enough to get in, and even if for some reason he didn't, we have enough paperwork to get him in the back door. But I did want to make sure he knew how to take the test.
This will be AJ's first experience with standardized testing. I would like it to be a good one, for his sake. He will expect to do well. His teacher hasn't said anything about the test, what to expect, how to take it. I wanted to make sure AJ knew how to handle the mechanics -- finding directions when they are at the top of each page instead of by each problem (a known issue for him), coloring in the circles accurately, what an analogy problem question. But I wasn't sure if I should. I don't want to pressure him. I honestly don't think this test is all that important in the general scheme of things (if he does well, it will help; if he doesn't, it probably won't hurt much). I also don't want to prep him if we're not supposed to. In the end, I decided to walk him through the basics. I really don't know much about the test, so I don't think I could possibly give away much.
What would you do?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
