The Board writes in its public statement “that the district program is fully compliant; the criticisms are primarily related to individual preferences, not compliance.”  This is not true.  The many issues that PAGE has raised, and will continue to raise until action is taken, are related to the non-compliance and shortcomings of the district’s identification process and program.  We summarize them here: 1.        Policy 2464 defines gifted and talented pupils “as those exceptionally able pupils who possess or demonstrate high levels of ability when compared to their chronological peers in the district.” Our current identification matrix, an enrichment matrix created years before the current law and policy went into effect, has the goal of finding only those students who demonstrate academic excellence.  There is no mechanism for finding gifted students who “possess . . . high levels of ability” but may not be working up to their ability for a variety of reasons. A large group falling within this rubric are the twice-exceptional students – gifted students whose learning abilities are masked by a learning disability, such as ADD, ADHD, auditory processing issues, dyslexia or dysgraphia.  Our district has no mechanism to capture these special education students who may do poorly on performance checklists. 2.       Policy 2464 further states that gifted and talented students are those “who require modification of their educational program if they are to achieve in accordance with their capabilities.  The Board will develop appropriate curricular and instructional modifications to be used for gifted and talented pupils indicating content, process, products and learning environments.”  To date, there is no written program and the district’s repeated response is that our differentiated curriculum satisfies all the needs of this policy as each teacher has the ability to modify their students’ programs according to their needs. Our first contention is that there need to be consistent, defined opportunities for gifted students who have been identified.  The curriculum currently includes some sporadic enrichment opportunities, but there is no mechanism in place for their consistent implementation.  It is left up to the individual teacher to determine the frequency of the enrichment (subject to the limitations of the part-time enrichment specialist) and the children who qualify for each opportunity.  There is no “program.” The New Jersey Core Curriculum Standards recommend the use of clustering (grouping students of like ability together in a classroom), curriculum compacting (consolidating curriculum), adapting instructional learning (provide more challenging or abstract resources), and acceleration (grade skipping or increasing the pace of curriculum) to address the needs of gifted students.  Why is our district refusing to implement any of these curriculum adaptations, particularly since they can be done at no additional cost to the taxpayer? The policy and law call for modification of gifted students’ learning environment.  We do not believe giving a child extra handouts to work on in their classroom is modifying their “learning environment.”  Regrouping children for core subjects, such as math, would be a way to modify their learning environment, giving them opportunities for instructional learning at their level with their academic peers. 3.       The policy states “The Superintendent will develop procedures, using multiple measures, for an ongoing identification process  and appropriate educational challenges for gifted and talented pupils in Kindergarten through grade eight.”  The district’s response is that we have the enrichment identification matrix and an “intensive kindergarten screening processes, which the team uses to flag students who may have great potential.” As noted above, our identification matrix was not created to find the right groups of students, and therefore cannot. Our identification matrix does not use multiple measures, such as achievement test scores, grades, student performance or products, intelligence testing, parent/student/teacher recommendations and other appropriate measures for grades K-3.  The sole measure is teacher recommendation, contrary to the state requirement. We do not identify students until the end of kindergarten.  The state law requires modifications of programming starting in kindergarten.  If we don’t identify them until the end of the school year, how can we address their academic needs during the school year?     4.       “The educational program offered to gifted and talented pupils will encourage and challenge them in the specific areas of their abilities, but will not replace the basic instructional program of the various grades of this district.” Our matrix is incapable of finding the gifted child who excels in one area such as math or the language arts.  They do not look for students who are just “math gifted” or just “language arts gifted.”  In order to be identified, the students must fulfill a matrix that requires them to be an across-the-board gifted student in all areas of study.  Are we not failing the child who is gifted in math or gifted in language arts?