Taylor Elem - principal promoted

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It will be interesting to see what she does in Gifted office. The director position was created and the former Supervisor was rolled up into that position, with no job description or job posting from what I can tell. Then, a former principal with gifted education background has been in the job for a year and the word on the street was that she has been under scrutiny for treating him so badly he had to be moved out to avoid a lawsuit.

Anyone friendly with her that can get pull out I gifted restored?

Her goal is not to reinstate a pull-out model. As an RTG during the transition from pull-out to push-in services, she has supported the talent development model from the beginning. Pull-out services are inequitable, exclusionary, and outdated. Yes, many districts still use this model, but it doesn't mean they are at the forefront of education for doing so. The days of students visiting a resource room once a week for a special activity with a small group are long gone in many districts, including APS. Today, a much broader range of students has access to the same high-quality activities and resources.

Where it once took an entire grading period to complete a Project M3 math unit in a pull-out setting, students can now finish the same unit—and more—in just a few weeks. Classroom teachers are using the high quality, researched based curriculum units that are woven into their pacing guides. Many parents are too focused on the "exclusivity" of the pull-out model without realizing that their children are receiving the same lessons in a more time-efficient and equitable environment. It is baffling to me that any parent would be satisfied with their child receiving an hour a week of "extension" and think their gifted child was adequately being challenged.

Classroom teachers are fully occupied trying to reach the high need and SOL challenged students; the gifted “curriculum” are some extra worksheets they can use when they finish their work before the rest of the class — or they can use this iPads which many choose because, you know, the siren call of screens vs some lame worksheet.

The very fact you are pushing a screed about pull-out being inequitable already shows how your true motivation. It’s not about helping gifted children, as you allude to a broader range of students, ie not gifted. So meanwhile ADHD kids get their SE needs met with pull out services, APS has decided the Gifted SE students aren’t special enough to get something similar. Why not have executive skills and small groups for all students, not just ones with IEPs?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It will be interesting to see what she does in Gifted office. The director position was created and the former Supervisor was rolled up into that position, with no job description or job posting from what I can tell. Then, a former principal with gifted education background has been in the job for a year and the word on the street was that she has been under scrutiny for treating him so badly he had to be moved out to avoid a lawsuit.

Anyone friendly with her that can get pull out I gifted restored?

Her goal is not to reinstate a pull-out model. As an RTG during the transition from pull-out to push-in services, she has supported the talent development model from the beginning. Pull-out services are inequitable, exclusionary, and outdated. Yes, many districts still use this model, but it doesn't mean they are at the forefront of education for doing so. The days of students visiting a resource room once a week for a special activity with a small group are long gone in many districts, including APS. Today, a much broader range of students has access to the same high-quality activities and resources.

Where it once took an entire grading period to complete a Project M3 math unit in a pull-out setting, students can now finish the same unit—and more—in just a few weeks. Classroom teachers are using the high quality, researched based curriculum units that are woven into their pacing guides. Many parents are too focused on the "exclusivity" of the pull-out model without realizing that their children are receiving the same lessons in a more time-efficient and equitable environment. It is baffling to me that any parent would be satisfied with their child receiving an hour a week of "extension" and think their gifted child was adequately being challenged.

That sounds lovely, but... what's actually happening in my experience is that kids with a good grasp of the material are given the option to do additional worksheets, read a book, or play quietly on their ipads. There's very little pushing in, particularly when the teacher is new and has a wide range of abilities present and large class size to deal with.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It will be interesting to see what she does in Gifted office. The director position was created and the former Supervisor was rolled up into that position, with no job description or job posting from what I can tell. Then, a former principal with gifted education background has been in the job for a year and the word on the street was that she has been under scrutiny for treating him so badly he had to be moved out to avoid a lawsuit.

Anyone friendly with her that can get pull out I gifted restored?

Her goal is not to reinstate a pull-out model. As an RTG during the transition from pull-out to push-in services, she has supported the talent development model from the beginning. Pull-out services are inequitable, exclusionary, and outdated. Yes, many districts still use this model, but it doesn't mean they are at the forefront of education for doing so. The days of students visiting a resource room once a week for a special activity with a small group are long gone in many districts, including APS. Today, a much broader range of students has access to the same high-quality activities and resources.

Where it once took an entire grading period to complete a Project M3 math unit in a pull-out setting, students can now finish the same unit—and more—in just a few weeks. Classroom teachers are using the high quality, researched based curriculum units that are woven into their pacing guides. Many parents are too focused on the "exclusivity" of the pull-out model without realizing that their children are receiving the same lessons in a more time-efficient and equitable environment. It is baffling to me that any parent would be satisfied with their child receiving an hour a week of "extension" and think their gifted child was adequately being challenged.

Classroom teachers are fully occupied trying to reach the high need and SOL challenged students; the gifted “curriculum” are some extra worksheets they can use when they finish their work before the rest of the class — or they can use this iPads which many choose because, you know, the siren call of screens vs some lame worksheet.

The very fact you are pushing a screed about pull-out being inequitable already shows how your true motivation. It’s not about helping gifted children, as you allude to a broader range of students, ie not gifted. So meanwhile ADHD kids get their SE needs met with pull out services, APS has decided the Gifted SE students aren’t special enough to get something similar. Why not have executive skills and small groups for all students, not just ones with IEPs?

Unfortunately, there's not enough personnel to support small groups for all students with any type of regularity. Class sizes are in the upper 20s in a lot of cases with one full time teacher. In Virginia, gifted is not classified as special education. In APS, the large number of identified gifted students would make it next to impossible to ever consider reverting back to a pull out model. We have 1 special education teacher per grade level in our APS ES, but there's always been 1 RTG/AA Coach.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It will be interesting to see what she does in Gifted office. The director position was created and the former Supervisor was rolled up into that position, with no job description or job posting from what I can tell. Then, a former principal with gifted education background has been in the job for a year and the word on the street was that she has been under scrutiny for treating him so badly he had to be moved out to avoid a lawsuit.

Anyone friendly with her that can get pull out I gifted restored?

Her goal is not to reinstate a pull-out model. As an RTG during the transition from pull-out to push-in services, she has supported the talent development model from the beginning. Pull-out services are inequitable, exclusionary, and outdated. Yes, many districts still use this model, but it doesn't mean they are at the forefront of education for doing so. The days of students visiting a resource room once a week for a special activity with a small group are long gone in many districts, including APS. Today, a much broader range of students has access to the same high-quality activities and resources.

Where it once took an entire grading period to complete a Project M3 math unit in a pull-out setting, students can now finish the same unit—and more—in just a few weeks. Classroom teachers are using the high quality, researched based curriculum units that are woven into their pacing guides. Many parents are too focused on the "exclusivity" of the pull-out model without realizing that their children are receiving the same lessons in a more time-efficient and equitable environment. It is baffling to me that any parent would be satisfied with their child receiving an hour a week of "extension" and think their gifted child was adequately being challenged.

Classroom teachers are fully occupied trying to reach the high need and SOL challenged students; the gifted “curriculum” are some extra worksheets they can use when they finish their work before the rest of the class — or they can use this iPads which many choose because, you know, the siren call of screens vs some lame worksheet.

The very fact you are pushing a screed about pull-out being inequitable already shows how your true motivation. It’s not about helping gifted children, as you allude to a broader range of students, ie not gifted. So meanwhile ADHD kids get their SE needs met with pull out services, APS has decided the Gifted SE students aren’t special enough to get something similar. Why not have executive skills and small groups for all students, not just ones with IEPs?

Unfortunately, there's not enough personnel to support small groups for all students with any type of regularity. Class sizes are in the upper 20s in a lot of cases with one full time teacher. In Virginia, gifted is not classified as special education. In APS, the large number of identified gifted students would make it next to impossible to ever consider reverting back to a pull out model. We have 1 special education teacher per grade level in our APS ES, but there's always been 1 RTG/AA Coach.

Let say that half the class is gifted. That 50 students per grade. So a 1 hr pull out class, 20 kids per class would be 3 classes per grade. There is no K gifted, so it could easily be one grade per weekday.

Why is this not feasible? My gifted cohort was about 20 kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It will be interesting to see what she does in Gifted office. The director position was created and the former Supervisor was rolled up into that position, with no job description or job posting from what I can tell. Then, a former principal with gifted education background has been in the job for a year and the word on the street was that she has been under scrutiny for treating him so badly he had to be moved out to avoid a lawsuit.

Anyone friendly with her that can get pull out I gifted restored?

Her goal is not to reinstate a pull-out model. As an RTG during the transition from pull-out to push-in services, she has supported the talent development model from the beginning. Pull-out services are inequitable, exclusionary, and outdated. Yes, many districts still use this model, but it doesn't mean they are at the forefront of education for doing so. The days of students visiting a resource room once a week for a special activity with a small group are long gone in many districts, including APS. Today, a much broader range of students has access to the same high-quality activities and resources.

Where it once took an entire grading period to complete a Project M3 math unit in a pull-out setting, students can now finish the same unit—and more—in just a few weeks. Classroom teachers are using the high quality, researched based curriculum units that are woven into their pacing guides. Many parents are too focused on the "exclusivity" of the pull-out model without realizing that their children are receiving the same lessons in a more time-efficient and equitable environment. It is baffling to me that any parent would be satisfied with their child receiving an hour a week of "extension" and think their gifted child was adequately being challenged.

Classroom teachers are fully occupied trying to reach the high need and SOL challenged students; the gifted “curriculum” are some extra worksheets they can use when they finish their work before the rest of the class — or they can use this iPads which many choose because, you know, the siren call of screens vs some lame worksheet.

The very fact you are pushing a screed about pull-out being inequitable already shows how your true motivation. It’s not about helping gifted children, as you allude to a broader range of students, ie not gifted. So meanwhile ADHD kids get their SE needs met with pull out services, APS has decided the Gifted SE students aren’t special enough to get something similar. Why not have executive skills and small groups for all students, not just ones with IEPs?

Unfortunately, there's not enough personnel to support small groups for all students with any type of regularity. Class sizes are in the upper 20s in a lot of cases with one full time teacher. In Virginia, gifted is not classified as special education. In APS, the large number of identified gifted students would make it next to impossible to ever consider reverting back to a pull out model. We have 1 special education teacher per grade level in our APS ES, but there's always been 1 RTG/AA Coach.

Let say that half the class is gifted. That 50 students per grade. So a 1 hr pull out class, 20 kids per class would be 3 classes per grade. There is no K gifted, so it could easily be one grade per weekday.

Why is this not feasible? My gifted cohort was about 20 kids.

Generally, the AA teacher has an office or is sharing a room with multiple staff members, not a full-fledged classroom. Also, 20 kids is not a small group. That schedule also allows for zero collaboration among staff members, among other issues. Sounds like a simple solution coming from someone who does not work in a school and understand how scheduling, co-planning and logistical nuances of a school work. Also, 1 hour for a blanket label of "gifted" kids? To work on which subject area? Some kids are specifically identified in math and others ELA. Some may just be science or social studies. Not enough time in the week for one staff member to meet with 50 kids per grade level who are identified across different subject areas.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It will be interesting to see what she does in Gifted office. The director position was created and the former Supervisor was rolled up into that position, with no job description or job posting from what I can tell. Then, a former principal with gifted education background has been in the job for a year and the word on the street was that she has been under scrutiny for treating him so badly he had to be moved out to avoid a lawsuit.

Anyone friendly with her that can get pull out I gifted restored?

Her goal is not to reinstate a pull-out model. As an RTG during the transition from pull-out to push-in services, she has supported the talent development model from the beginning. Pull-out services are inequitable, exclusionary, and outdated. Yes, many districts still use this model, but it doesn't mean they are at the forefront of education for doing so. The days of students visiting a resource room once a week for a special activity with a small group are long gone in many districts, including APS. Today, a much broader range of students has access to the same high-quality activities and resources.

Where it once took an entire grading period to complete a Project M3 math unit in a pull-out setting, students can now finish the same unit—and more—in just a few weeks. Classroom teachers are using the high quality, researched based curriculum units that are woven into their pacing guides. Many parents are too focused on the "exclusivity" of the pull-out model without realizing that their children are receiving the same lessons in a more time-efficient and equitable environment. It is baffling to me that any parent would be satisfied with their child receiving an hour a week of "extension" and think their gifted child was adequately being challenged.

Classroom teachers are fully occupied trying to reach the high need and SOL challenged students; the gifted “curriculum” are some extra worksheets they can use when they finish their work before the rest of the class — or they can use this iPads which many choose because, you know, the siren call of screens vs some lame worksheet.

The very fact you are pushing a screed about pull-out being inequitable already shows how your true motivation. It’s not about helping gifted children, as you allude to a broader range of students, ie not gifted. So meanwhile ADHD kids get their SE needs met with pull out services, APS has decided the Gifted SE students aren’t special enough to get something similar. Why not have executive skills and small groups for all students, not just ones with IEPs?

Unfortunately, there's not enough personnel to support small groups for all students with any type of regularity. Class sizes are in the upper 20s in a lot of cases with one full time teacher. In Virginia, gifted is not classified as special education. In APS, the large number of identified gifted students would make it next to impossible to ever consider reverting back to a pull out model. We have 1 special education teacher per grade level in our APS ES, but there's always been 1 RTG/AA Coach.

We could go back to tracking, or a light version of it. When I was in late elementary we switched classes for reading and math based on ability so kids could get instruction at the level they needed. That works a lot better than pretending one teacher can handle all ability levels at the same time and meet them where they are at.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It will be interesting to see what she does in Gifted office. The director position was created and the former Supervisor was rolled up into that position, with no job description or job posting from what I can tell. Then, a former principal with gifted education background has been in the job for a year and the word on the street was that she has been under scrutiny for treating him so badly he had to be moved out to avoid a lawsuit.

Anyone friendly with her that can get pull out I gifted restored?

Her goal is not to reinstate a pull-out model. As an RTG during the transition from pull-out to push-in services, she has supported the talent development model from the beginning. Pull-out services are inequitable, exclusionary, and outdated. Yes, many districts still use this model, but it doesn't mean they are at the forefront of education for doing so. The days of students visiting a resource room once a week for a special activity with a small group are long gone in many districts, including APS. Today, a much broader range of students has access to the same high-quality activities and resources.

Where it once took an entire grading period to complete a Project M3 math unit in a pull-out setting, students can now finish the same unit—and more—in just a few weeks. Classroom teachers are using the high quality, researched based curriculum units that are woven into their pacing guides. Many parents are too focused on the "exclusivity" of the pull-out model without realizing that their children are receiving the same lessons in a more time-efficient and equitable environment. It is baffling to me that any parent would be satisfied with their child receiving an hour a week of "extension" and think their gifted child was adequately being challenged.

Classroom teachers are fully occupied trying to reach the high need and SOL challenged students; the gifted “curriculum” are some extra worksheets they can use when they finish their work before the rest of the class — or they can use this iPads which many choose because, you know, the siren call of screens vs some lame worksheet.

The very fact you are pushing a screed about pull-out being inequitable already shows how your true motivation. It’s not about helping gifted children, as you allude to a broader range of students, ie not gifted. So meanwhile ADHD kids get their SE needs met with pull out services, APS has decided the Gifted SE students aren’t special enough to get something similar. Why not have executive skills and small groups for all students, not just ones with IEPs?

Unfortunately, there's not enough personnel to support small groups for all students with any type of regularity. Class sizes are in the upper 20s in a lot of cases with one full time teacher. In Virginia, gifted is not classified as special education. In APS, the large number of identified gifted students would make it next to impossible to ever consider reverting back to a pull out model. We have 1 special education teacher per grade level in our APS ES, but there's always been 1 RTG/AA Coach.

We could go back to tracking, or a light version of it. When I was in late elementary we switched classes for reading and math based on ability so kids could get instruction at the level they needed. That works a lot better than pretending one teacher can handle all ability levels at the same time and meet them where they are at.

We are never getting that again. I will take what I can get with a gifted label.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It will be interesting to see what she does in Gifted office. The director position was created and the former Supervisor was rolled up into that position, with no job description or job posting from what I can tell. Then, a former principal with gifted education background has been in the job for a year and the word on the street was that she has been under scrutiny for treating him so badly he had to be moved out to avoid a lawsuit.

Anyone friendly with her that can get pull out I gifted restored?

Her goal is not to reinstate a pull-out model. As an RTG during the transition from pull-out to push-in services, she has supported the talent development model from the beginning. Pull-out services are inequitable, exclusionary, and outdated. Yes, many districts still use this model, but it doesn't mean they are at the forefront of education for doing so. The days of students visiting a resource room once a week for a special activity with a small group are long gone in many districts, including APS. Today, a much broader range of students has access to the same high-quality activities and resources.

Where it once took an entire grading period to complete a Project M3 math unit in a pull-out setting, students can now finish the same unit—and more—in just a few weeks. Classroom teachers are using the high quality, researched based curriculum units that are woven into their pacing guides. Many parents are too focused on the "exclusivity" of the pull-out model without realizing that their children are receiving the same lessons in a more time-efficient and equitable environment. It is baffling to me that any parent would be satisfied with their child receiving an hour a week of "extension" and think their gifted child was adequately being challenged.

Classroom teachers are fully occupied trying to reach the high need and SOL challenged students; the gifted “curriculum” are some extra worksheets they can use when they finish their work before the rest of the class — or they can use this iPads which many choose because, you know, the siren call of screens vs some lame worksheet.

The very fact you are pushing a screed about pull-out being inequitable already shows how your true motivation. It’s not about helping gifted children, as you allude to a broader range of students, ie not gifted. So meanwhile ADHD kids get their SE needs met with pull out services, APS has decided the Gifted SE students aren’t special enough to get something similar. Why not have executive skills and small groups for all students, not just ones with IEPs?

Unfortunately, there's not enough personnel to support small groups for all students with any type of regularity. Class sizes are in the upper 20s in a lot of cases with one full time teacher. In Virginia, gifted is not classified as special education. In APS, the large number of identified gifted students would make it next to impossible to ever consider reverting back to a pull out model. We have 1 special education teacher per grade level in our APS ES, but there's always been 1 RTG/AA Coach.

Let say that half the class is gifted. That 50 students per grade. So a 1 hr pull out class, 20 kids per class would be 3 classes per grade. There is no K gifted, so it could easily be one grade per weekday.

Why is this not feasible? My gifted cohort was about 20 kids.

Generally, the AA teacher has an office or is sharing a room with multiple staff members, not a full-fledged classroom. Also, 20 kids is not a small group. That schedule also allows for zero collaboration among staff members, among other issues. Sounds like a simple solution coming from someone who does not work in a school and understand how scheduling, co-planning and logistical nuances of a school work. Also, 1 hour for a blanket label of "gifted" kids? To work on which subject area? Some kids are specifically identified in math and others ELA. Some may just be science or social studies. Not enough time in the week for one staff member to meet with 50 kids per grade level who are identified across different subject areas.

Meeting every other week could match the subject matter. Gifted cohorts meet up year after year, so even the infrequent times you all know each other, know the routine, and the work can build slowly.

20 is smaller than any of my kids current classrooms.

This sounds like a bunch of make-work: scheduling, co-planning and logistical nuances

Also, if the gifted teacher is delivering the lessons, they will need to do less coordination.

1 hr a week is infinitely greater than the 0 hrs they get now. So not bad.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It will be interesting to see what she does in Gifted office. The director position was created and the former Supervisor was rolled up into that position, with no job description or job posting from what I can tell. Then, a former principal with gifted education background has been in the job for a year and the word on the street was that she has been under scrutiny for treating him so badly he had to be moved out to avoid a lawsuit.

Anyone friendly with her that can get pull out I gifted restored?

Her goal is not to reinstate a pull-out model. As an RTG during the transition from pull-out to push-in services, she has supported the talent development model from the beginning. Pull-out services are inequitable, exclusionary, and outdated. Yes, many districts still use this model, but it doesn't mean they are at the forefront of education for doing so. The days of students visiting a resource room once a week for a special activity with a small group are long gone in many districts, including APS. Today, a much broader range of students has access to the same high-quality activities and resources.

Where it once took an entire grading period to complete a Project M3 math unit in a pull-out setting, students can now finish the same unit—and more—in just a few weeks. Classroom teachers are using the high quality, researched based curriculum units that are woven into their pacing guides. Many parents are too focused on the "exclusivity" of the pull-out model without realizing that their children are receiving the same lessons in a more time-efficient and equitable environment. It is baffling to me that any parent would be satisfied with their child receiving an hour a week of "extension" and think their gifted child was adequately being challenged.

Classroom teachers are fully occupied trying to reach the high need and SOL challenged students; the gifted “curriculum” are some extra worksheets they can use when they finish their work before the rest of the class — or they can use this iPads which many choose because, you know, the siren call of screens vs some lame worksheet.

The very fact you are pushing a screed about pull-out being inequitable already shows how your true motivation. It’s not about helping gifted children, as you allude to a broader range of students, ie not gifted. So meanwhile ADHD kids get their SE needs met with pull out services, APS has decided the Gifted SE students aren’t special enough to get something similar. Why not have executive skills and small groups for all students, not just ones with IEPs?

Unfortunately, there's not enough personnel to support small groups for all students with any type of regularity. Class sizes are in the upper 20s in a lot of cases with one full time teacher. In Virginia, gifted is not classified as special education. In APS, the large number of identified gifted students would make it next to impossible to ever consider reverting back to a pull out model. We have 1 special education teacher per grade level in our APS ES, but there's always been 1 RTG/AA Coach.

Let say that half the class is gifted. That 50 students per grade. So a 1 hr pull out class, 20 kids per class would be 3 classes per grade. There is no K gifted, so it could easily be one grade per weekday.

Why is this not feasible? My gifted cohort was about 20 kids.

Generally, the AA teacher has an office or is sharing a room with multiple staff members, not a full-fledged classroom. Also, 20 kids is not a small group. That schedule also allows for zero collaboration among staff members, among other issues. Sounds like a simple solution coming from someone who does not work in a school and understand how scheduling, co-planning and logistical nuances of a school work. Also, 1 hour for a blanket label of "gifted" kids? To work on which subject area? Some kids are specifically identified in math and others ELA. Some may just be science or social studies. Not enough time in the week for one staff member to meet with 50 kids per grade level who are identified across different subject areas.

Meeting every other week could match the subject matter. Gifted cohorts meet up year after year, so even the infrequent times you all know each other, know the routine, and the work can build slowly.

20 is smaller than any of my kids current classrooms.

This sounds like a bunch of make-work: scheduling, co-planning and logistical nuances

Also, if the gifted teacher is delivering the lessons, they will need to do less coordination.

1 hr a week is infinitely greater than the 0 hrs they get now. So not bad.

Ah, the pull-out model—where gifted students get to feel “special” for 60 minutes every other week while the rest of their cognitive, academic, and emotional needs are politely ignored by the classroom teacher who passes off the responsibility to the "gifted teacher". What a progressive vision for 2025!

Meeting every other week isn’t an instructional model—it’s a scheduling compromise dressed up as a solution. Research consistently shows that gifted students require consistent, integrated, and differentiated instruction to thrive (see NAGC, Tomlinson, etc.). Biweekly enrichment sessions might make for lovely reunions and an excuse for kids to miss their normal class, but they don’t exactly address asynchronous development or the need for daily academic challenge.

Yes, 20 students is likely smaller than your kid’s general ed class. That doesn’t mean it’s optimal for gifted instruction. Ability grouping works when it’s flexible, needs-based, and supported by research-based curriculum—not when it’s a "playdate" for the high-achievers club.

And the idea that pull-out requires less coordination? That's funny. Only if your definition of coordination excludes actual alignment with the core curriculum. Spoiler alert-- effective gifted instruction doesn’t happen in isolation when the "gifted teacher" is the gatekeeper. It requires collaboration, scaffolding, and yes, logistical planning. Anyone who has worked in a school knows that teacher schedules change all the time. A specific time for a pull out may work one week, but the next week there might be a class field trip, an assembly or a a holiday. Then, the every other week pull out turns into once this month and the classroom teacher is left in the dark as to what resources to use with their gifted students because the AA teacher no longer has flexibility in their schedule to offer coaching, resources or time to provide professional learning.

You’re right about one thing: 1 hour > 0 hours. But setting the bar at “marginally better than nothing” isn’t exactly a bold educational philosophy. Gifted students deserve more than one single teacher in an entire school who knows the pedagogy and best practices to add rigor to instruction.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It will be interesting to see what she does in Gifted office. The director position was created and the former Supervisor was rolled up into that position, with no job description or job posting from what I can tell. Then, a former principal with gifted education background has been in the job for a year and the word on the street was that she has been under scrutiny for treating him so badly he had to be moved out to avoid a lawsuit.

Anyone friendly with her that can get pull out I gifted restored?

Her goal is not to reinstate a pull-out model. As an RTG during the transition from pull-out to push-in services, she has supported the talent development model from the beginning. Pull-out services are inequitable, exclusionary, and outdated. Yes, many districts still use this model, but it doesn't mean they are at the forefront of education for doing so. The days of students visiting a resource room once a week for a special activity with a small group are long gone in many districts, including APS. Today, a much broader range of students has access to the same high-quality activities and resources.

Where it once took an entire grading period to complete a Project M3 math unit in a pull-out setting, students can now finish the same unit—and more—in just a few weeks. Classroom teachers are using the high quality, researched based curriculum units that are woven into their pacing guides. Many parents are too focused on the "exclusivity" of the pull-out model without realizing that their children are receiving the same lessons in a more time-efficient and equitable environment. It is baffling to me that any parent would be satisfied with their child receiving an hour a week of "extension" and think their gifted child was adequately being challenged.

Classroom teachers are fully occupied trying to reach the high need and SOL challenged students; the gifted “curriculum” are some extra worksheets they can use when they finish their work before the rest of the class — or they can use this iPads which many choose because, you know, the siren call of screens vs some lame worksheet.

The very fact you are pushing a screed about pull-out being inequitable already shows how your true motivation. It’s not about helping gifted children, as you allude to a broader range of students, ie not gifted. So meanwhile ADHD kids get their SE needs met with pull out services, APS has decided the Gifted SE students aren’t special enough to get something similar. Why not have executive skills and small groups for all students, not just ones with IEPs?

Unfortunately, there's not enough personnel to support small groups for all students with any type of regularity. Class sizes are in the upper 20s in a lot of cases with one full time teacher. In Virginia, gifted is not classified as special education. In APS, the large number of identified gifted students would make it next to impossible to ever consider reverting back to a pull out model. We have 1 special education teacher per grade level in our APS ES, but there's always been 1 RTG/AA Coach.

Let say that half the class is gifted. That 50 students per grade. So a 1 hr pull out class, 20 kids per class would be 3 classes per grade. There is no K gifted, so it could easily be one grade per weekday.

Why is this not feasible? My gifted cohort was about 20 kids.

Generally, the AA teacher has an office or is sharing a room with multiple staff members, not a full-fledged classroom. Also, 20 kids is not a small group. That schedule also allows for zero collaboration among staff members, among other issues. Sounds like a simple solution coming from someone who does not work in a school and understand how scheduling, co-planning and logistical nuances of a school work. Also, 1 hour for a blanket label of "gifted" kids? To work on which subject area? Some kids are specifically identified in math and others ELA. Some may just be science or social studies. Not enough time in the week for one staff member to meet with 50 kids per grade level who are identified across different subject areas.

Meeting every other week could match the subject matter. Gifted cohorts meet up year after year, so even the infrequent times you all know each other, know the routine, and the work can build slowly.

20 is smaller than any of my kids current classrooms.

This sounds like a bunch of make-work: scheduling, co-planning and logistical nuances

Also, if the gifted teacher is delivering the lessons, they will need to do less coordination.

1 hr a week is infinitely greater than the 0 hrs they get now. So not bad.

Ah, the pull-out model—where gifted students get to feel “special” for 60 minutes every other week while the rest of their cognitive, academic, and emotional needs are politely ignored by the classroom teacher who passes off the responsibility to the "gifted teacher". What a progressive vision for 2025!

Meeting every other week isn’t an instructional model—it’s a scheduling compromise dressed up as a solution. Research consistently shows that gifted students require consistent, integrated, and differentiated instruction to thrive (see NAGC, Tomlinson, etc.). Biweekly enrichment sessions might make for lovely reunions and an excuse for kids to miss their normal class, but they don’t exactly address asynchronous development or the need for daily academic challenge.

Yes, 20 students is likely smaller than your kid’s general ed class. That doesn’t mean it’s optimal for gifted instruction. Ability grouping works when it’s flexible, needs-based, and supported by research-based curriculum—not when it’s a "playdate" for the high-achievers club.

And the idea that pull-out requires less coordination? That's funny. Only if your definition of coordination excludes actual alignment with the core curriculum. Spoiler alert-- effective gifted instruction doesn’t happen in isolation when the "gifted teacher" is the gatekeeper. It requires collaboration, scaffolding, and yes, logistical planning. Anyone who has worked in a school knows that teacher schedules change all the time. A specific time for a pull out may work one week, but the next week there might be a class field trip, an assembly or a a holiday. Then, the every other week pull out turns into once this month and the classroom teacher is left in the dark as to what resources to use with their gifted students because the AA teacher no longer has flexibility in their schedule to offer coaching, resources or time to provide professional learning.

You’re right about one thing: 1 hour > 0 hours. But setting the bar at “marginally better than nothing” isn’t exactly a bold educational philosophy. Gifted students deserve more than one single teacher in an entire school who knows the pedagogy and best practices to add rigor to instruction.

Classroom teachers are already ignoring gifted. There are no incentives or punishments tied to neglecting them, unlike the huge pressure to take SOL scores, and ESL gap closing. So they focus on what determines the career progression, knowing gifted students will excel at the water down curriculum and instruction fine.

There is no need to coordinate with core curriculum; they can focus on independent topics and projects.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It will be interesting to see what she does in Gifted office. The director position was created and the former Supervisor was rolled up into that position, with no job description or job posting from what I can tell. Then, a former principal with gifted education background has been in the job for a year and the word on the street was that she has been under scrutiny for treating him so badly he had to be moved out to avoid a lawsuit.

Anyone friendly with her that can get pull out I gifted restored?

Her goal is not to reinstate a pull-out model. As an RTG during the transition from pull-out to push-in services, she has supported the talent development model from the beginning. Pull-out services are inequitable, exclusionary, and outdated. Yes, many districts still use this model, but it doesn't mean they are at the forefront of education for doing so. The days of students visiting a resource room once a week for a special activity with a small group are long gone in many districts, including APS. Today, a much broader range of students has access to the same high-quality activities and resources.

Where it once took an entire grading period to complete a Project M3 math unit in a pull-out setting, students can now finish the same unit—and more—in just a few weeks. Classroom teachers are using the high quality, researched based curriculum units that are woven into their pacing guides. Many parents are too focused on the "exclusivity" of the pull-out model without realizing that their children are receiving the same lessons in a more time-efficient and equitable environment. It is baffling to me that any parent would be satisfied with their child receiving an hour a week of "extension" and think their gifted child was adequately being challenged.

Classroom teachers are fully occupied trying to reach the high need and SOL challenged students; the gifted “curriculum” are some extra worksheets they can use when they finish their work before the rest of the class — or they can use this iPads which many choose because, you know, the siren call of screens vs some lame worksheet.

The very fact you are pushing a screed about pull-out being inequitable already shows how your true motivation. It’s not about helping gifted children, as you allude to a broader range of students, ie not gifted. So meanwhile ADHD kids get their SE needs met with pull out services, APS has decided the Gifted SE students aren’t special enough to get something similar. Why not have executive skills and small groups for all students, not just ones with IEPs?

Unfortunately, there's not enough personnel to support small groups for all students with any type of regularity. Class sizes are in the upper 20s in a lot of cases with one full time teacher. In Virginia, gifted is not classified as special education. In APS, the large number of identified gifted students would make it next to impossible to ever consider reverting back to a pull out model. We have 1 special education teacher per grade level in our APS ES, but there's always been 1 RTG/AA Coach.

Let say that half the class is gifted. That 50 students per grade. So a 1 hr pull out class, 20 kids per class would be 3 classes per grade. There is no K gifted, so it could easily be one grade per weekday.

Why is this not feasible? My gifted cohort was about 20 kids.

Generally, the AA teacher has an office or is sharing a room with multiple staff members, not a full-fledged classroom. Also, 20 kids is not a small group. That schedule also allows for zero collaboration among staff members, among other issues. Sounds like a simple solution coming from someone who does not work in a school and understand how scheduling, co-planning and logistical nuances of a school work. Also, 1 hour for a blanket label of "gifted" kids? To work on which subject area? Some kids are specifically identified in math and others ELA. Some may just be science or social studies. Not enough time in the week for one staff member to meet with 50 kids per grade level who are identified across different subject areas.

Meeting every other week could match the subject matter. Gifted cohorts meet up year after year, so even the infrequent times you all know each other, know the routine, and the work can build slowly.

20 is smaller than any of my kids current classrooms.

This sounds like a bunch of make-work: scheduling, co-planning and logistical nuances

Also, if the gifted teacher is delivering the lessons, they will need to do less coordination.

1 hr a week is infinitely greater than the 0 hrs they get now. So not bad.

Ah, the pull-out model—where gifted students get to feel “special” for 60 minutes every other week while the rest of their cognitive, academic, and emotional needs are politely ignored by the classroom teacher who passes off the responsibility to the "gifted teacher". What a progressive vision for 2025!

Meeting every other week isn’t an instructional model—it’s a scheduling compromise dressed up as a solution. Research consistently shows that gifted students require consistent, integrated, and differentiated instruction to thrive (see NAGC, Tomlinson, etc.). Biweekly enrichment sessions might make for lovely reunions and an excuse for kids to miss their normal class, but they don’t exactly address asynchronous development or the need for daily academic challenge.

Yes, 20 students is likely smaller than your kid’s general ed class. That doesn’t mean it’s optimal for gifted instruction. Ability grouping works when it’s flexible, needs-based, and supported by research-based curriculum—not when it’s a "playdate" for the high-achievers club.

And the idea that pull-out requires less coordination? That's funny. Only if your definition of coordination excludes actual alignment with the core curriculum. Spoiler alert-- effective gifted instruction doesn’t happen in isolation when the "gifted teacher" is the gatekeeper. It requires collaboration, scaffolding, and yes, logistical planning. Anyone who has worked in a school knows that teacher schedules change all the time. A specific time for a pull out may work one week, but the next week there might be a class field trip, an assembly or a a holiday. Then, the every other week pull out turns into once this month and the classroom teacher is left in the dark as to what resources to use with their gifted students because the AA teacher no longer has flexibility in their schedule to offer coaching, resources or time to provide professional learning.

You’re right about one thing: 1 hour > 0 hours. But setting the bar at “marginally better than nothing” isn’t exactly a bold educational philosophy. Gifted students deserve more than one single teacher in an entire school who knows the pedagogy and best practices to add rigor to instruction.

Classroom teachers are already ignoring gifted. There are no incentives or punishments tied to neglecting them, unlike the huge pressure to take SOL scores, and ESL gap closing. So they focus on what determines the career progression, knowing gifted students will excel at the water down curriculum and instruction fine.

There is no need to coordinate with core curriculum; they can focus on independent topics and projects.

That's a disappointing blanket statement about classroom teachers. That is not what I've observed across three APS elementary schools. Yes, there are a few duds, but I've seen some solid collaboration and differentiation in many classrooms. Making a generalized statement like that is intellectually dishonest.

[Anonymous]

I think it's intellectually dishonest to act like a teacher is able to offer consistent, integrated, and differentiated instruction to advanced kids when they have a class of 25 kids that includes 1 desk flipper, 4-5 semi-feral boys, 2 kids that barely speak English, a few more that are higher level ELLs and various other kids with IEP mandated needs. That's what my kid's 4th grade class looks like this year. The gifted kids get a an optional worksheet that is never reviewed or explained.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think it's intellectually dishonest to act like a teacher is able to offer consistent, integrated, and differentiated instruction to advanced kids when they have a class of 25 kids that includes 1 desk flipper, 4-5 semi-feral boys, 2 kids that barely speak English, a few more that are higher level ELLs and various other kids with IEP mandated needs. That's what my kid's 4th grade class looks like this year. The gifted kids get a an optional worksheet that is never reviewed or explained.

This really nailed it

But it comes down incentives.

There are high-stakes incentive for teachers to focus on SOL scores and achievement gaps for ESL students because of Federal and State NCLBH and All Student initiatives.

There is no accreditation at risk if you neglect your gifted kids.

[Anonymous]

Any bets on who will be new principal? When does the student families find out who was selected?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I very much doubt any parent who describes the IEP or 504 process at Hamm as smooth and/or who waited until middle school to help their child. But then I see where a parent who describes kids finally get assistance as an onslaught as compared to a history of ignoring kids or sending them to a different school (seriously, PP? seriously?) probably would rather their own child was "normal."

Also, you can google accommodations, 504s, IEPs for elementary school kids. But you didn't do that when your kid needed them because you were ableist. So there's that.

Are none of you able to read my posts? I was saying that to someone who had been teaching for 20 years, the landscape had changed considerably and it could feel like an onslaught. It wasn’t my own impression.

Anyways, my kid did great in elementary school, it was no problem and had the highest ratings on standard base grading, high scores on SOL‘s, it was easy. But then when you get to middle school and the necessity of tracking homework and projects and actual test that matter, it became apparent the disorganization and executive function was

We are at HBW, and I suspect the fact that we have a counselor, i.e. a teacher who has a smaller subset of students may make it easier for our IEP to be met. I don’t know how it is at Hamm.

our psychologist was very clear that the school must provide the services, it’s the law and once you show up with the testing, they just check through the list of accommodations hard by law. What does the principal have to do? I just don’t understand?

I know that there are pullouts for social skills, we do not have experience with that, executive function, coaching, and then they do things like your kid at the front of the class and let them have tools to help them focus in class. I just don’t see where the principal gets involved.

So you've never had trouble getting your kid what they need at school. But others have. Why is that so hard for you to grasp?

It's hilarious that you think schools always follow the law automatically. They don't.

I’m asking at Taylor what services they are having trouble getting? It seems like for elementary school it’s pretty low hanging fruit.

DP. What is that based on though? You don’t seem to know what services would/could be available in elementary school so how would you know if it’s low hanging fruit? And also the person who started here might as well post her kids name if she’s just going to post the specific service they had trouble with. It’s not that big a school and the principal was only here since 2022.

I asked broadly what services. They told me to Google it. I did. I listed those services and don’t see why a principal would be involved in moving a kid to the front of the class or getting an organization binder.
They can list their bit along with other bits to be anonymous.

This seems willfully obtuse. Of course the principal isn't providing any services/accommodations. But they, or the assistant principal, are part of the IEP/504 meetings where services/accommodations are decided.

I wish I was being difficult

So the principal is part of the IEP team, yes I mentioned that in a prior post. But what is their role, their job is not implementing the IEP so what were Pp complaining about her performance for their IEP execution, when it falls to the SE teachers and coordinator.

You have a lot to learn.

Today’s daily on adhd

https://www.nytimes.com/audio/app/2025/06/17/podcasts/the-daily/adhd-diagnosis-prescriptions.html?referringSource=sharing