Goal 2 Module 3

MODULE 2.3

ALIGNMENT

 

Objectives

  1. Explain why it is important for services and assessments to align.
  2. Explain how to align services using appropriately matched assessments.
  3. Explain how alignment fits within the overall CASA criteria.
  4. Assess to what extent your services align with your identification system.

 

Learning Tasks

  1. Watch Goal 2 Module 3 Video
  2. Complete Goal 2 Module 3 Application Activity (recommended)
  3. Read Goal 2 Module 3 Additional Resources (recommended)

GOAL 2 MODULE 3

Watch the following video over aligning identification and services.

 

 

GOAL 2 MODULE 3

Watch the following video over aligning identification and services.

 

 

Goal 2 Module 3 Application Activity

  • Examine your district's identification process and your district's program services and goals.
  • Create an alignment chart that shows the assessment(s) used and the corresponding service and placement provided. You may use the template below:
Assessment
 
 
 
Criteria or Cut Off Score
 
 
What the Assessment Measures (Content Area)
Student Service (Content Area)
 
 
Student Service (Level of Need)
 
 
Corresponding Program Goal That Matches the Assessment
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  • As you review your completed chart, respond to the following questions:
    • How aligned are your assessments and services to specific domains? How aligned are your assessments and services to the various levels of need (acceleration vs an hr a week)?
    • What additional CASA criteria do you need to consider when aligning services in your district?
    • What are your next steps, if needed, for aligning your services to your assessment domains and levels of need?

 

Download the Goal 2 Module 2b Application Activity

 

Goal 2 Module 3 Additional Resources

Abrami, P., Bernard, R. M., Borokhovski, E., Wade, A., Surkes, R. T., & Zhang, D. (2008). Instructional interventions affecting critical thinking skills and dispositions: A Stage 1 meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 78(4), 1102-1134. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654308326084

Benbow, C. P. (2012). Identifying and nurturing future innovators in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics: A review of findings from the study of mathematically precocious youth. Peabody Journal of Education, 87(1), 16-25. https://doi.org/10.1080/0161956X.2012.642236

Gubbins, E. J., Siegle, D., Ottone-Cross, K., McCoach, D. B., Langley, S. D., Callahan, C. M., Brodersen, A. V., & Caughey, M. (2021). Identifying and serving gifted and talented students: Are identification and services connected? Gifted Child Quarterly, 65(2), 115–131. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1290828.pdf

Park, G., Lubinski, D., & Benbow, C. P. (2008). Ability differences among people who have commensurate degrees matter for scientific creativity. Psychological Science, 19(10), 957–961. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02182.x

Wai, J., Lubinski, D., Benbow, C. P., & Steiger, J. H. (2010). Accomplishment in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) and its relation to STEM educational dose: A 25-year longitudinal study. Journal of Educational Psychology,102(4), 860-871. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019454

Worrell, F., & Erwin, J. (2011). Best practices in identifying students for gifted and talented education programs. Journal of Applied Psychology, 27(4), 319-340. https://doi.org/10.1080/15377903.2011.615817

 

NEXT STEPS

After completing this module, you'll proceed to Module 4: Sensitivity.

 

 

 

This work was supported by a grant from the U.S. Department of Education (award number S206A200007 – 21) as part of the Jacob K. Javits Gifted and Talented Students Education Program. The contributors to this site include Kiana Johnson, Lindsay Lee, Matt Makel, Matthew McBee, Betsy McCoach, Scott Peters, & Tamra Stambaugh.