Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you are a teacher that fills these HOPE worksheets, can you provide practical examples on what you noticed that caused you to assign a "Always" or "Almost Always" rating for one or more of these attributes:
(please provide practical examples what the student did in the classroom or said/asked the teacher )
Academic:
======
1) Performs or shows potential for performing at remarkably high levels.
6) Is eager to explore new concepts.
7) Exhibits intellectual intensity.
9) Uses alternative approaches or processes.
10) Thinks "outside the box.”
11) Has intense interests.

Social:
=====
2) Is sensitive to larger or deeper issues of human concern.
3) Is self-aware.
4) Shows compassion for others.
5) Is a leader within their group of peers.
8) Effectively interacts with adults or older students.

https://davis.agendaonline.net/public/Meeting/Attachments/DisplayAttachment.aspx?AttachmentID=238383&IsArchive=0

Items 1, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11 are Academic. Items 2, 3, 4, 5, 8 are Social. Academic subscore and Social subscore are compiled by student group - based on ethnicity, income group, etc.? Students are not compared as whole but within the subgroup they belong to? Is this how it works?
Is there a link to the entire HOPE administration manual?

Page 25 of the official HOPE manual requires teacher to rate students "as compared to other children similar in ... culture". Page 26 further elaborates "compare ... children from specific cultural groups to other children from the same cultural group" How is culture decided? is it a legally safer synonym for race/ethinicity, the only official classification on student record?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:http://www.harlan.k12.ky.us/pdf/Gifted&TalentedForms/HopeScaleDirections.pdf
No joke, HOPE is racist! Teachers are being forced to assess students based on their race:

"For example, when rating your students, try to compare those from low-income families to other children from low-income families, children from African-American families to other children from African-American families, (Asian Americans children to other Asian American children, White children to other White children), etc."

This link is from Kentucky? These are not the instructions FCPS teachers were given.

You can see an excerpt from HOPE scoring manual from post of this thread at 03/27/2024 14:40. In the HOPE manual it instructs "when rating your students, try to compare from low-income families to other children from low-income famillies, children from specific culture groups to other children from the same cultural group, girls to girls etc." The KY manual is merely an interpretation of the scoring manual. I don't see KY manual above made any unreasonable interpretation of cultural group.

That still isn't the instructions teachers were given. Teachers were just told to rate the children. They were discouraged from comparing students to other students and just focus on rating areas of strength compared to the average. Not the average of similar demographics, just "more than normal."

Teachers were specifically told to go by race/ethnicity, the only parameter that's officially on students record for vast majority of students. the low income categorization applies to only small percent of students. there is no field named culture on student's record.

I am saying this as a teacher who was trained: we were never told to judge by race/ethnicity. We were not told to only compare students to students with similar backgrounds. We were told "compare them to the average student." That was it.

Which school are you at?
It appears not all teachers received the same training. This is the official manual referenced during the training.
https://www.routledge.com/HOPE-Teacher-Rating-Scale-Involving-Teachers-in-Equitable-Identification-of-Gifted-and-Talented-Students-in-K-12-Manual/Gentry-Pereira-Peters-McIntosh-Fugate/p/book/9781618214522

There was no “training manual”. It was a 20 minute presentation and instructions logging in during a CLT and we were not told ANYTHING about race or ethnicity.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you are a teacher that fills these HOPE worksheets, can you provide practical examples on what you noticed that caused you to assign a "Always" or "Almost Always" rating for one or more of these attributes:
(please provide practical examples what the student did in the classroom or said/asked the teacher )
Academic:
======
1) Performs or shows potential for performing at remarkably high levels.
6) Is eager to explore new concepts.
7) Exhibits intellectual intensity.
9) Uses alternative approaches or processes.
10) Thinks "outside the box.”
11) Has intense interests.

Social:
=====
2) Is sensitive to larger or deeper issues of human concern.
3) Is self-aware.
4) Shows compassion for others.
5) Is a leader within their group of peers.
8) Effectively interacts with adults or older students.

https://davis.agendaonline.net/public/Meeting/Attachments/DisplayAttachment.aspx?AttachmentID=238383&IsArchive=0

Items 1, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11 are Academic. Items 2, 3, 4, 5, 8 are Social. Academic subscore and Social subscore are compiled by student group - based on ethnicity, income group, etc.? Students are not compared as whole but within the subgroup they belong to? Is this how it works?
Is there a link to the entire HOPE administration manual?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:http://www.harlan.k12.ky.us/pdf/Gifted&TalentedForms/HopeScaleDirections.pdf
No joke, HOPE is racist! Teachers are being forced to assess students based on their race:

"For example, when rating your students, try to compare those from low-income families to other children from low-income families, children from African-American families to other children from African-American families, (Asian Americans children to other Asian American children, White children to other White children), etc."

What exactly does this mean?
Is it like this: school committee puts students in different groups like
Black students: Williams, Johnson, Smith, Jones,...
Indian American student: Deepak, Amir, Krishna.....
East asian orgin: Chen, Zhang, Park, Cui,
Latino group: lopez, Perez, Garcia....
Whit: Smith, Hunter,.....
Then create and apply different standards for each group?
This sounds a lot of work. Is this the reason that the process takes so long?

Yes, thanks for your understanding why it takes so long.
Specifically, teachers are required to assign a comparative rating. Let's say a latino 3rd grade child is observed to perform above grade double digit division. So, for the "7. Exhibits intellectual intensity" item they would be receiving a "Always" rating. But later in the week, another latino kid in that same class was observed to be asking an even higher math level related question, say decimal division. Now the teacher is required to assign Always to this second child, and change first student's rating to Sometimes.

“To what degree does this student exhibit the behavior as compared to other children of similar age, background, experience, culture, and/or environment?”

This is absolutely false. We were taught no such thing. Doesn’t come in to it AT ALL. I have several friends who did central selection committee as well. There is NO demographic data there. NONE.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:http://www.harlan.k12.ky.us/pdf/Gifted&TalentedForms/HopeScaleDirections.pdf
No joke, HOPE is racist! Teachers are being forced to assess students based on their race:

"For example, when rating your students, try to compare those from low-income families to other children from low-income families, children from African-American families to other children from African-American families, (Asian Americans children to other Asian American children, White children to other White children), etc."

What exactly does this mean?
Is it like this: school committee puts students in different groups like
Black students: Williams, Johnson, Smith, Jones,...
Indian American student: Deepak, Amir, Krishna.....
East asian orgin: Chen, Zhang, Park, Cui,
Latino group: lopez, Perez, Garcia....
Whit: Smith, Hunter,.....
Then create and apply different standards for each group?
This sounds a lot of work. Is this the reason that the process takes so long?

Yes, thanks for your understanding why it takes so long.
Specifically, teachers are required to assign a comparative rating. Let's say a latino 3rd grade child is observed to perform above grade double digit division. So, for the "7. Exhibits intellectual intensity" item they would be receiving a "Always" rating. But later in the week, another latino kid in that same class was observed to be asking an even higher math level related question, say decimal division. Now the teacher is required to assign Always to this second child, and change first student's rating to Sometimes.

“To what degree does this student exhibit the behavior as compared to other children of similar age, background, experience, culture, and/or environment?”

This is absolutely false. We were taught no such thing. Doesn’t come in to it AT ALL. I have several friends who did central selection committee as well. There is NO demographic data there. NONE.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:http://www.harlan.k12.ky.us/pdf/Gifted&TalentedForms/HopeScaleDirections.pdf
No joke, HOPE is racist! Teachers are being forced to assess students based on their race:

"For example, when rating your students, try to compare those from low-income families to other children from low-income families, children from African-American families to other children from African-American families, (Asian Americans children to other Asian American children, White children to other White children), etc."

This link is from Kentucky? These are not the instructions FCPS teachers were given.

You can see an excerpt from HOPE scoring manual from post of this thread at 03/27/2024 14:40. In the HOPE manual it instructs "when rating your students, try to compare from low-income families to other children from low-income famillies, children from specific culture groups to other children from the same cultural group, girls to girls etc." The KY manual is merely an interpretation of the scoring manual. I don't see KY manual above made any unreasonable interpretation of cultural group.

That still isn't the instructions teachers were given. Teachers were just told to rate the children. They were discouraged from comparing students to other students and just focus on rating areas of strength compared to the average. Not the average of similar demographics, just "more than normal."

Teachers were specifically told to go by race/ethnicity, the only parameter that's officially on students record for vast majority of students. the low income categorization applies to only small percent of students. there is no field named culture on student's record.

I am saying this as a teacher who was trained: we were never told to judge by race/ethnicity. We were not told to only compare students to students with similar backgrounds. We were told "compare them to the average student." That was it.

Which school are you at?
It appears not all teachers received the same training. This is the official manual referenced during the training.
https://www.routledge.com/HOPE-Teacher-Rating-Scale-Involving-Teachers-in-Equitable-Identification-of-Gifted-and-Talented-Students-in-K-12-Manual/Gentry-Pereira-Peters-McIntosh-Fugate/p/book/9781618214522

There was no “training manual”. It was a 20 minute presentation and instructions logging in during a CLT and we were not told ANYTHING about race or ethnicity.

It appears not all teachers received the same training. This is the official manual referenced during the training.
https://www.routledge.com/HOPE-Teacher-Rating-Scale-Involving-Teachers-in-Equitable-Identification-of-Gifted-and-Talented-Students-in-K-12-Manual/Gentry-Pereira-Peters-McIntosh-Fugate/p/book/9781618214522

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:http://www.harlan.k12.ky.us/pdf/Gifted&TalentedForms/HopeScaleDirections.pdf
No joke, HOPE is racist! Teachers are being forced to assess students based on their race:

"For example, when rating your students, try to compare those from low-income families to other children from low-income families, children from African-American families to other children from African-American families, (Asian Americans children to other Asian American children, White children to other White children), etc."

This link is from Kentucky? These are not the instructions FCPS teachers were given.

You can see an excerpt from HOPE scoring manual from post of this thread at 03/27/2024 14:40. In the HOPE manual it instructs "when rating your students, try to compare from low-income families to other children from low-income famillies, children from specific culture groups to other children from the same cultural group, girls to girls etc." The KY manual is merely an interpretation of the scoring manual. I don't see KY manual above made any unreasonable interpretation of cultural group.

That still isn't the instructions teachers were given. Teachers were just told to rate the children. They were discouraged from comparing students to other students and just focus on rating areas of strength compared to the average. Not the average of similar demographics, just "more than normal."

Teachers were specifically told to go by race/ethnicity, the only parameter that's officially on students record for vast majority of students. the low income categorization applies to only small percent of students. there is no field named culture on student's record.

I am saying this as a teacher who was trained: we were never told to judge by race/ethnicity. We were not told to only compare students to students with similar backgrounds. We were told "compare them to the average student." That was it.

Which school are you at?
It appears not all teachers received the same training. This is the official manual referenced during the training.
https://www.routledge.com/HOPE-Teacher-Rating-Scale-Involving-Teachers-in-Equitable-Identification-of-Gifted-and-Talented-Students-in-K-12-Manual/Gentry-Pereira-Peters-McIntosh-Fugate/p/book/9781618214522

There was no “training manual”. It was a 20 minute presentation and instructions logging in during a CLT and we were not told ANYTHING about race or ethnicity.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:http://www.harlan.k12.ky.us/pdf/Gifted&TalentedForms/HopeScaleDirections.pdf
No joke, HOPE is racist! Teachers are being forced to assess students based on their race:

"For example, when rating your students, try to compare those from low-income families to other children from low-income families, children from African-American families to other children from African-American families, (Asian Americans children to other Asian American children, White children to other White children), etc."

This link is from Kentucky? These are not the instructions FCPS teachers were given.

You can see an excerpt from HOPE scoring manual from post of this thread at 03/27/2024 14:40. In the HOPE manual it instructs "when rating your students, try to compare from low-income families to other children from low-income famillies, children from specific culture groups to other children from the same cultural group, girls to girls etc." The KY manual is merely an interpretation of the scoring manual. I don't see KY manual above made any unreasonable interpretation of cultural group.

That still isn't the instructions teachers were given. Teachers were just told to rate the children. They were discouraged from comparing students to other students and just focus on rating areas of strength compared to the average. Not the average of similar demographics, just "more than normal."

Teachers were specifically told to go by race/ethnicity, the only parameter that's officially on students record for vast majority of students. the low income categorization applies to only small percent of students. there is no field named culture on student's record.

I am saying this as a teacher who was trained: we were never told to judge by race/ethnicity. We were not told to only compare students to students with similar backgrounds. We were told "compare them to the average student." That was it.

Which school are you at?
It appears not all teachers received the same training. This is the official manual referenced during the training.
https://www.routledge.com/HOPE-Teacher-Rating-Scale-Involving-Teachers-in-Equitable-Identification-of-Gifted-and-Talented-Students-in-K-12-Manual/Gentry-Pereira-Peters-McIntosh-Fugate/p/book/9781618214522

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:http://www.harlan.k12.ky.us/pdf/Gifted&TalentedForms/HopeScaleDirections.pdf
No joke, HOPE is racist! Teachers are being forced to assess students based on their race:

"For example, when rating your students, try to compare those from low-income families to other children from low-income families, children from African-American families to other children from African-American families, (Asian Americans children to other Asian American children, White children to other White children), etc."

This link is from Kentucky? These are not the instructions FCPS teachers were given.

You can see an excerpt from HOPE scoring manual from post of this thread at 03/27/2024 14:40. In the HOPE manual it instructs "when rating your students, try to compare from low-income families to other children from low-income famillies, children from specific culture groups to other children from the same cultural group, girls to girls etc." The KY manual is merely an interpretation of the scoring manual. I don't see KY manual above made any unreasonable interpretation of cultural group.

That still isn't the instructions teachers were given. Teachers were just told to rate the children. They were discouraged from comparing students to other students and just focus on rating areas of strength compared to the average. Not the average of similar demographics, just "more than normal."

Teachers were specifically told to go by race/ethnicity, the only parameter that's officially on students record for vast majority of students. the low income categorization applies to only small percent of students. there is no field named culture on student's record.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:http://www.harlan.k12.ky.us/pdf/Gifted&TalentedForms/HopeScaleDirections.pdf
No joke, HOPE is racist! Teachers are being forced to assess students based on their race:

"For example, when rating your students, try to compare those from low-income families to other children from low-income families, children from African-American families to other children from African-American families, (Asian Americans children to other Asian American children, White children to other White children), etc."

What exactly does this mean?
Is it like this: school committee puts students in different groups like
Black students: Williams, Johnson, Smith, Jones,...
Indian American student: Deepak, Amir, Krishna.....
East asian orgin: Chen, Zhang, Park, Cui,
Latino group: lopez, Perez, Garcia....
Whit: Smith, Hunter,.....
Then create and apply different standards for each group?
This sounds a lot of work. Is this the reason that the process takes so long?

Yes, thanks for your understanding why it takes so long.
Specifically, teachers are required to assign a comparative rating. Let's say a latino 3rd grade child is observed to perform above grade double digit division. So, for the "7. Exhibits intellectual intensity" item they would be receiving a "Always" rating. But later in the week, another latino kid in that same class was observed to be asking an even higher math level related question, say decimal division. Now the teacher is required to assign Always to this second child, and change first student's rating to Sometimes.

“To what degree does this student exhibit the behavior as compared to other children of similar age, background, experience, culture, and/or environment?”

Anonymous wrote:No offense, but the average SAT Scores of Education Major are low comparing with other majors.

https://www.businessinsider.com/heres-the-average-sat-score-for-every-college-major-2014-10

Test is not the only thing to measure people's knowledge and capability. But, most teachers were not academically advanced when they were students. Are there enough training for teachers to learn about gifted student's traits?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you are a teacher that fills these HOPE worksheets, can you provide practical examples on what you noticed that caused you to assign a "Always" or "Almost Always" rating for one or more of these attributes:
(please provide practical examples what the student did in the classroom or said/asked the teacher )
Academic:
======
1) Performs or shows potential for performing at remarkably high levels.
6) Is eager to explore new concepts.
7) Exhibits intellectual intensity.
9) Uses alternative approaches or processes.
10) Thinks "outside the box.”
11) Has intense interests.

Social:
=====
2) Is sensitive to larger or deeper issues of human concern.
3) Is self-aware.
4) Shows compassion for others.
5) Is a leader within their group of peers.
8) Effectively interacts with adults or older students.

https://davis.agendaonline.net/public/Meeting/Attachments/DisplayAttachment.aspx?AttachmentID=238383&IsArchive=0

Items 1, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11 are Academic. Items 2, 3, 4, 5, 8 are Social. Academic subscore and Social subscore are compiled by student group - based on ethnicity, income group, etc.? Students are not compared as whole but within the subgroup they belong to? Is this how it works?
Is there a link to the entire HOPE administration manual?

How does FCPS obtain parents income data?
And grouping by ethnicity? isn't this legally risky?

It says "compare those from low-income families to .... low-income families". Likely from the reduced/free lunch application.

I think the way is questionable. "For example, when rating your students, try to compare those from low-income families to other children from low-income families, children from specific cultural groups to other children from the same cultural group, girls to girls, etc."

The instruction suggest comparing Asian students against other Asian students, so a Latino "Always" turns into an Asian "often"? The effect would be establishing certain gender or culture group "bias" that disfavors certain groups esp. those Asian groups might have a small sample size?

I am not fan of the crazy TJ lawsuit parent group but this instruction seems to imply such bias is baked into the evaluation.

Anonymous wrote:It feels like the nevers are out of the way to be mean. Some of the questions are similar and the child got never then offen how is this possible to never think outside the box but often uses alternative approaches. lol I hOPE the committee sees the contradiction.