This document was provided to the Madison Board of Education and administrators in May 2015 to highlight continued issues with the implementation of Advanced Learner instruction in the schools.
May 2015 Update
Challenges and Barriers to Implementing Effective Advanced Learner Instruction
from the perspective of different stakeholder groups
Students
* Instruction at advanced level is not part of school experience on a consistent basis
* K-8 students spend a lot of time “waiting” to be given work that is challenging for them
* 9-12 students often discouraged from taking Honors or AP courses or encouraged based on non-
academic factors (escaping behavior issues in standard courses)
* Low expectations for students from underrepresented backgrounds (low-income, African-
American, Latino) and peer pressure to not excel in academics
* Often not grouped with learning peers as needed in order to meet the needs of other students first
(need to spread ALs out to “balance classrooms” or to “provide role models for other students”.)
Teachers
* Goal of getting students to grade level remains the driving force of instruction
* The wide range of student levels in every classroom makes it difficult to meet all needs
* Skills and experience in meeting AL needs varies greatly.
* Effectiveness of grade level teaming and differentiated instruction varies greatly.
* Transfer of student information between grades is inconsistent or non-existent resulting in a
“restart” from grade level no matter how far above grade level an advanced learner may be.
Parents
* Getting student needs met remains overly dependent on parent advocacy
* Feel isolated and ostracized when advocating for advanced learner needs
* Needing to continuously “prove” that their student requires more academic challenge can create
an adversarial relationship with school staff
Principals
* Philosophy about advanced learners still appears to be the driving force behind school level
advanced learning implementation (inclusion in SIPs, staff PD and overall school communication)
* Lack of district consensus on what is expected for advanced learners at the school level and how
to effectively implement and communicate changes
* Recognizing that strong support for AL-IRT’s is needed for them to be effective in their role and
be active participants in school decision-making processes
Advanced Learning- Instructional Resource Teachers
* No authority for ensuring that advanced instruction or classroom placements/peer-grouping
occur consistently
* Not consistently viewed as part of the school building staff. Role in school dynamics (SBLTs and
decision-making processes) is unclear and inconsistent.
* Skills and experience as teachers and/or instructional coaches vary greatly.
* Strongly advocating for instructional changes can be difficult to balance with building relationships
with classroom teachers and school staff.
Advanced Learning Director
* Legacy of resistance to support, fund and grow advanced learning within MMSD.
* Insufficient infrastructure, resources and vision for consistently providing AL instruction.
* Need to balance the slow pace of organizational change with the urgency families have for
student needs to be met this year
* Instability of AL staff, allocations and school placements has led to confusion and slow progress.
Administration
* Preference for giving schools latitude in implementing AL instruction creates confusion about
expectations and inconsistency in outcomes. This allows a legacy of resistance to continue.
* Communication of advanced learning instruction as a district priority is not clearly visible outside
of district level meetings and central administration planning
* Existence of Excellence Gap has not been addressed as another form of opportunity gap.
Board of Education
* Advanced learning instruction not perceived as integral to the district responsibilities compared
with other priorities.
* Have not publicly discussed the importance of the excellence gap as part of the achievement gap
* Have not instituted accountability measures to demonstrate the district’s commitment to having
the AL policy be carried out with fidelity in every school.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notable improvements since 2013
* Advanced Learning/TAG Policy approved by the Board of Education
* Integration of AL Director under Teaching and Learning structure
* Advanced Learning staff school-based; 0.5 FTE per school an important minimum
* With DPI Compliance ruling, district has acknowledged that DPI Compliance is minimum
* TAG/AL as a subgroup for district data reporting
Notable barriers that remain despite new AL Policy and new AL Plan
* Apathy and misperceptions about advanced learner needs continue
* Continued narrow focus on outliers, lack of broad talent development strategy
* Despite DPI Compliance ruling, implementation of consistent advanced learning instruction at the
school level is still needed
* Success of implementation relies on the effectiveness of one 0.5 FTE (or less) per school.
Recommendations
* An accountability structure requiring schools to report which advanced instruction
methods/curricula they have chosen at every grade level in different subjects to visibly
demonstrate they are providing advanced instruction to students
* Support and strengthen the critical role of the AL-IRTS in the schools
* Create an Advanced Learning Toolkit to help schools gain knowledge and skills in advanced
learning instruction and differentiation
* Task force guided by nationally recognized AL/TAG experts to examine best practices for
advanced learners that also includes the development of a comprehensive talent development
model to address the Excellence Gap
Madison Partnership for Advanced Learning (MPAL) Edited by C. Gomez Schmidt, D. Mahaffey, V. Bier
May 2015 Update
Challenges and Barriers to Implementing Effective Advanced Learner Instruction
from the perspective of different stakeholder groups
Students
* Instruction at advanced level is not part of school experience on a consistent basis
* K-8 students spend a lot of time “waiting” to be given work that is challenging for them
* 9-12 students often discouraged from taking Honors or AP courses or encouraged based on non-
academic factors (escaping behavior issues in standard courses)
* Low expectations for students from underrepresented backgrounds (low-income, African-
American, Latino) and peer pressure to not excel in academics
* Often not grouped with learning peers as needed in order to meet the needs of other students first
(need to spread ALs out to “balance classrooms” or to “provide role models for other students”.)
Teachers
* Goal of getting students to grade level remains the driving force of instruction
* The wide range of student levels in every classroom makes it difficult to meet all needs
* Skills and experience in meeting AL needs varies greatly.
* Effectiveness of grade level teaming and differentiated instruction varies greatly.
* Transfer of student information between grades is inconsistent or non-existent resulting in a
“restart” from grade level no matter how far above grade level an advanced learner may be.
Parents
* Getting student needs met remains overly dependent on parent advocacy
* Feel isolated and ostracized when advocating for advanced learner needs
* Needing to continuously “prove” that their student requires more academic challenge can create
an adversarial relationship with school staff
Principals
* Philosophy about advanced learners still appears to be the driving force behind school level
advanced learning implementation (inclusion in SIPs, staff PD and overall school communication)
* Lack of district consensus on what is expected for advanced learners at the school level and how
to effectively implement and communicate changes
* Recognizing that strong support for AL-IRT’s is needed for them to be effective in their role and
be active participants in school decision-making processes
Advanced Learning- Instructional Resource Teachers
* No authority for ensuring that advanced instruction or classroom placements/peer-grouping
occur consistently
* Not consistently viewed as part of the school building staff. Role in school dynamics (SBLTs and
decision-making processes) is unclear and inconsistent.
* Skills and experience as teachers and/or instructional coaches vary greatly.
* Strongly advocating for instructional changes can be difficult to balance with building relationships
with classroom teachers and school staff.
Advanced Learning Director
* Legacy of resistance to support, fund and grow advanced learning within MMSD.
* Insufficient infrastructure, resources and vision for consistently providing AL instruction.
* Need to balance the slow pace of organizational change with the urgency families have for
student needs to be met this year
* Instability of AL staff, allocations and school placements has led to confusion and slow progress.
Administration
* Preference for giving schools latitude in implementing AL instruction creates confusion about
expectations and inconsistency in outcomes. This allows a legacy of resistance to continue.
* Communication of advanced learning instruction as a district priority is not clearly visible outside
of district level meetings and central administration planning
* Existence of Excellence Gap has not been addressed as another form of opportunity gap.
Board of Education
* Advanced learning instruction not perceived as integral to the district responsibilities compared
with other priorities.
* Have not publicly discussed the importance of the excellence gap as part of the achievement gap
* Have not instituted accountability measures to demonstrate the district’s commitment to having
the AL policy be carried out with fidelity in every school.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notable improvements since 2013
* Advanced Learning/TAG Policy approved by the Board of Education
* Integration of AL Director under Teaching and Learning structure
* Advanced Learning staff school-based; 0.5 FTE per school an important minimum
* With DPI Compliance ruling, district has acknowledged that DPI Compliance is minimum
* TAG/AL as a subgroup for district data reporting
Notable barriers that remain despite new AL Policy and new AL Plan
* Apathy and misperceptions about advanced learner needs continue
* Continued narrow focus on outliers, lack of broad talent development strategy
* Despite DPI Compliance ruling, implementation of consistent advanced learning instruction at the
school level is still needed
* Success of implementation relies on the effectiveness of one 0.5 FTE (or less) per school.
Recommendations
* An accountability structure requiring schools to report which advanced instruction
methods/curricula they have chosen at every grade level in different subjects to visibly
demonstrate they are providing advanced instruction to students
* Support and strengthen the critical role of the AL-IRTS in the schools
* Create an Advanced Learning Toolkit to help schools gain knowledge and skills in advanced
learning instruction and differentiation
* Task force guided by nationally recognized AL/TAG experts to examine best practices for
advanced learners that also includes the development of a comprehensive talent development
model to address the Excellence Gap
Madison Partnership for Advanced Learning (MPAL) Edited by C. Gomez Schmidt, D. Mahaffey, V. Bier