Handbook on Assessments for Gifted Learners

Identification, Learning Progress, and Evaluation

Susan K. Johnsen, Joyce VanTassel-Baska, Susan K. Johnsen, Joyce VanTassel-Baska

• Editore: Routledge
• Anno: 2022
• ISBN:
  9781000601282
• Edizione: 1
• Argomento: Education
• Categoria: Inclusive Education

This essential handbook is a comprehensive and systematic examination of the assessment of gifted and advanced students and their programs, and a must-have resource for coordinators and directors at state and local levels.

Handbook on Assessments for Gifted Learners explores issues associated with building an effective identification system, clarifies and interprets the need for targeted learning progress assessments for gifted learners, and discusses program evaluation, assessments, and processes used to gauge programs' success. Engaging chapters written by both academic and practitioner experts provide research-based, practical ideas for identifying and measuring the progress of gifted and advanced learners. Readers will benefit from informed recommendations stemming from current research conducted specifically for this text.

CHAPTER 1Using Assessment as a Framework for Standards-Based Program Development in Gifted Education

Susan K. Johnsen and Joyce VanTassel-Baska

DOI: 10.4324/9781003285991-1

Importance of Assessments

The first area of assessment that is critical to the field is that of identification—who are the gifted? The problem of identification has haunted the field since its nascent grass roots emergence in the 1970s. Problems related to the inclusion of underrepresented groups, the need for early identification, the need for matching or aligning identification to program options, and the need to examine specific domain abilities for inclusion in programs all gathered force during this period. There were later cries even for abandoning identification altogether (see Borland, 1985).

Yet identification has still retained its prominence as one of the first major steps in program development (VanTassel-Baska & Baska, 2020) for several reasons. One of these is its power in finding the most promising students to be served in different domains. With the advent of Talent Searches at major universities nationwide, the field could now efficiently find high achieving students who represented a continuum of ability in verbal and mathematical areas who scored at the 95–99^th percentile on grade level achievement measures but who also demonstrated advanced cognitive ability in these subject areas 2–6 years beyond their placement. Thus the use of achievement tools in concert with off-level aptitude measures became popular for finding students who were gifted in those areas. Because the program was voluntary and external to the school district, it never gained ground as a universal approach to identification even though 100,000 seventh graders are still assessed each year and provided programming through multiple options both online and in person.

In addition to the power of identification for finding top learners in math and English language arts, systems have also been developed that prove to be useful in finding students strong in the cluster areas of science and spatial areas (see Lubinski, 2016) leading to programs in robotics, LEGOs, and STEM that address these types of abilities more directly. Arts abilities are assessed through multiple measures, including a portfolio of products and performances and teacher recommendation. Less common have been protocols for identifying leadership as a talent area separate from advanced content indicators. More routinely, school districts have selected the content areas for learning within which they wish to serve the gifted—typically ELA and math (Siegle et al., 2016).

Finally, identification has been an important tool in designing programs that match the specialized abilities of students found in a particular locale. A school district that has a cluster of math whizzes at 4^th grade clearly needs a set of curriculum experiences planned along the continuum from 4^th grade through high school to ensure their optimal educational opportunity. Knowing who and where they are as well as how advanced they are has become important planning data for program developers. Thus identification has become the trigger for further program development across the sequence of schooling years.

Over the past 40 years, learning assessments have assumed greater importance at the national, state, and local levels. Since the publication of A Nation at Risk (National Commission on Excellence in Education, 1983), states have demanded more rigorous expectations and measurable benchmarks for student achievement. The passage of the No Child Left Behind Act and the subsequent Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) have required students to be taught to high academic standards that prepare them to succeed in college and careers and have mandated statewide assessments that measure students’ progress toward those high standards (U.S. Department of Education, 2015). Moreover, ESSA requires states to submit plans that improve the skills of teachers, principals, or other school leaders to identify students with specific learning needs (e.g., children with disabilities, English learners, students who are gifted and talented, and students with low literacy levels) and provide instruction based on the needs of these students (U.S. Department of Education, 2017). In their plans, some of the states have described methods for meeting the specific needs of gifted students that incorporate differentiated assessments. For example, the Kansas Department of Education (2018) uses a Multi-Tier System of Supports (MTSS) framework to identify and address the needs of all students, including those who are gifted and talented. Using the MTSS framework, educators use data to monitor academic, behavioral, and social emotional learning needs and make decisions that inform instructional decision making. The Illinois Department of Education (2017) also emphasizes supporting the social and emotional development as well as differentiated instruction. Similarly, the South Dakota Department of Education (2018) supports schools in implementing individualized education opportunities described as Mass Customized Learning. Using formative assessments, teachers are encouraged to allow students to work at their own pace to address their academic needs and interests. Under ESSA, all states are required to submit plans to the federal government, showing how they will assess students’ progress, with most states explicitly addressing how educators should be supported in providing effective, differentiated instruction to gifted learners (Kaul & Davis, 2018). States and local districts now have opportunities to develop and implement assessments that identify and examine the learning progress of gifted students.

The last area of assessment that has gained prominence as programs have developed and grown is program evaluation. How do we know that the program is doing what it was designed to do? How do we assess stakeholder satisfaction with the program? How do we know that all parts of the program (e.g., identification, instruction) are working effectively? These questions can only be answered through an annual assessment of the operational gifted program. Thus the importance of evaluation as a part of the program development mechanism has been shown (VanTassel-Baska & Hubbard, 2019). Its importance is at least three-fold in providing the following:

• A report card to school districts internally on the progress made by both students and the program itself in the area of advanced learning so that changes may be made for improvement.
• An accountability to the community on important services provided to top students in the district; an ongoing record of accomplishment of students and schools in different realms of excellence is provided, trophies and awards that testify to the school’s prowess in learning provisions.
• A tool for judging how future funds might best be allocated for program stability or expansion.

All of these reasons provide an important purpose for regular evaluations of gifted programs to be conducted. Improvement of gifted programs is not possible in the absence of data that provide educators with the knowledge of current practice. Best practice may be assessed by using the national standards developed for the field and analyzing any given program against those standards.

Assessment Standards in Gifted Education

The NAGC Pre-K to Grade 12 Programming standards (NAGC, 2019a) offer guidance in all three areas of assessment that this book examines: identification, learning progress, and evaluation. (See Appendix A for an alignment between the standards.) The standards are organized into six areas: Learning and Development, Assessment, Curriculum Planning and Instruction, Learning Environments, Programming, and Professional Learning. Within each of these areas, evidence-based practices have been identified and linked to specific student outcomes. In this way, educators can determine the effectiveness of the practice by assessing students’ growth in academic, social and emotional, and psychosocial areas.

Identification

Identification is the process of finding students who have needs for or would benefit from advanced programming or services to develop their gifts and talents (NAGC, 2019b). In the area of identification, the first student outcome focuses on the student’s access to the identification process so that each campus is proportionally represented (NAGC, 2.1, p. 8). Access is influenced by these evidence-based practices: (a) educators’ instructional activities that encourage students to express characteristics and behaviors associated with giftedness; (b) parents/guardians understanding of gifted characteristics and the need for programming; and (c) the use of universal screening and multiple indicators across mult...