Friends:
This session we requested three bills: SB 933 and SB 934 which were sponsored in the Senate by Senator Kathleen Taylor and HB 3420, which was sponsored in the House by Representative Emily McIntire.
SB 934 states that anyone who knows a student—parents, teachers, or community members—can refer them for TAG assessment. While most districts already allow this, state law is unclear, and at least one district now requires teachers to submit the referrals. ?Research show conclusively that this barrier causes gifted students, particularly students from underrepresented backgrounds, to be overlooked. It’s not surprising that the more hoops a family has to jump through, the more intimidating the process becomes for them.?
?SB 934 would standardize best practices across the state and reduce unnecessary paperwork for teachers. After referral students would still be assessed for TAG services by a trained team.
Some teachers who were interviewed about referring students by the Oregon Department of Education remarked that that early assessment is inappropriate or even that all students will “level out” by third grade. In fact, early identification is important to prevent disengagement from school and to ensure that students in lower-income schools retain their initial competencies.
?I was astonished when the OEA objected to SB 934 , claiming that it would open the floodgates and a huge crowd of parents would rush to refer their children because, “every parent thinks their child is gifted” (a claim contradicted by research).?? Moreover, they said, those parents would then KEEP referring the same children for assessment over and over again during a single school year.
This scenario seems very unlikely to me.? I don’t know many parents who want to have their children tested over and over.? Moreover, if they are unhappy with the results of the initial assessment, they already have the right to appeal.
We have agreed to an amendment that removes 8 words from the end of section 3 which says districts must “accept recommendations throughout the school year and … provide screenings as needed throughout the school year.”?Last I heard, the ODE is planning withdraw its opposition.
SB 933 is a more challenging project because it is likely to have a significant fiscal impact statement.? If it passes the Senate Education Committee, it would go to the Joint Ways and Means Education Subcommittee and then the full Joint Ways and Means committee.? That’s a lot of legislators to explain a complicated bill to.? Constituent input would be very helpful, so if anyone wants to learn more, they are welcome to contact me.
SB 933 calls the state Department of Education to create a report card compiling TAG information AND for the Department to report student learning gains broken down by ability on the OSAS, instead of reporting just scores.? An achievement test score tells you (more or less) what a student has learned since the day they were born; an achievement test gain tells you what they have learned during one school year. If you want actionable information on ways to improve curriculum and instruction, you need data on gains. And it needs to be in a format that people can understand.
SB 933 has been opposed by COSA and the OSBA.? They assert that it places too big a burden on school districts because of all the extra reports.? In fact, the Department of Education already has most of the data—I am just asking them to compile it differently and/or report it differently.? Right now, I ask them for some of this data every year, and then I compile it by hand despite my own ineptitude.?
Although this bill is identical to a bill from the 2023 session that included a small fiscal impact statement (1 data clerk), this time, the Department of Education contacted Sen. Taylor’s office and said it would incur a very large fiscal impact.? After that, Sen. Taylor’s staff and I met with the staff at the Department to see if we could find out what was causing the problem.
Sen. Taylor’s staff and I have developed amendments that we hope will reduce the agitation at the Department without completely undermining the bill.? They have just been drafted and should be released within the next few days.
When the bill was originally drafted in 2022/3, the TAG page on the State Report Card contained a breakdown of identifications: Math, ELA, Intellectual, and “district option” (visual/performing arts, creativity and leadership).? That breakdown disappeared when the new TAG id rule passed and the Department told us it no longer has that information so we removed it from the bill.
We are reducing the request for FTE to TAG administrators and the TAG identification committee (taking out classroom teachers and reducing the reports on student achievement gains to the 25 largest districts (redactions would make many of the district level reports for small districts uninformative), and removed a requirement for parent survey data.
Districts will be required to provide data for the report card “where available.”
HB ?3420 will be a challenge.? However, if we never ask for the investment we really need, our chances of getting state funding remain at zero.
This bill would allocate 1% of the State School Fund—approximately $50 million per year—for TAG programs. This is a modest but crucial investment compared to other programs, such as English Language Learners ($244 million) and Special Education ($1.55 billion).? It would create a dramatic impact on the services provided to all our students.
Funding would be distributed as follows:
- 25% to the Oregon Department of Education for technical support and grants
- 25% to regional service districts to help small and rural schools
- 50% directly to districts, based on overall student enrollment (not the number of identified TAG students)
This funding model ensures that all districts, especially smaller ones with fewer resources, can provide meaningful TAG services. Currently, more than half of Oregon districts spend very little or nothing on TAG programs.
The legislature is happy to dish out hundreds of millions of dollars chasing chip factories and other pet projects but has allocated one dime to TAG services since the last remnant was cut in 2002 after a promising start. ?
It is possible that the shocking NAEP and state test results would make an impact, but all I have seen in media reports is that the results show that too many students are below proficient.? As long as people just look at “proficient/not proficient” the learning of students at both ends becomes invisible. ?If we can pass SB 933, the impact of the current service levels on students who exceed standards will become more evident
Testimony in favor of that bill would make a huge difference.?Legislators who support this bill have begged me to find others who will support it. ?Please plan to show up if/when it is heard (you can testify virtually and submit testimony online). Meanwhile, please contact the representatives on the House Education Committee and ask them to support a public hearing for this bill.? Here is a list.
Chair | |
Vice-Chair | |
Vice-Chair | |
Member | |
Member | |
Member | |
Member | |
Member | |
Feel free to contact me if you have any questions.? You can find more information on our website at
Margaret
?
Margaret DeLacy, President
Oregon Association for Talented and Gifted
?
OATAG provides information at no cost to support Oregon students, educators and families. Your OATAG membership is essential for this to continue.
?
