Board of Education Elections: Jane Pierobon
I have sent each Rochester Community Schools Board of Education candidate questions about Advanced & Gifted Education. Here are the questions and Jane Pierobon‘s responses.
1) Do you believe the opportunities and education that exist for advanced and gifted students in Rochester Community Schools are sufficient? Why or why not?
2) What role do you believe the Board of Education should have in recommending or implementing gifted education options in our district?
3) What changes do you believe should be made to best meet the needs of high achievers based on your understanding of the surrounding community, the current finances, and the needs of RCS students?
4) What role should parents have in determining gifted education options for our district?
5) Should gifted education options be implemented district-wide or at the option of the principals and teachers?
6) Are you a supporter of the International Baccalaureate program and would you work to convert one or more elementary, middle, and high schools in RCS to the IB program?
————–
1) Do you believe the opportunities and education that exist for advanced and gifted students in Rochester Community Schools are sufficient? Why or why not?
RCS can definitely do more for Gifted and Talented students. We need to see the “Pyramid of Intervention” used consistently for all our students in the district.
2) What role do you believe the Board of Education should have in recommending or implementing gifted education options in our district?
The Gifted and Talented programs can be looked at by the school board but there must be collaboration with curriculum and finance.
3) What changes do you believe should be made to best meet the needs of high achievers based on your understanding of the surrounding community, the current finances, and the needs of RCS students?
First, our district needs to use the” Pyramid of Intervention” consistently. Second, we need to gather actual data to determine how many gifted and talented children are actually in the district. When Troy established their own IB program, it was clear that they had a large and well defined population that fell into that category.
4) What role should parents have in determining gifted education options for our district?
Parents are the first adults to notice “talent” but as we all think our children are fabulous, a non-partial board, specializing in this area of “gifted and talented” must have input regarding each student being considered.
5) Should gifted education options be implemented district-wide or at the option of the principals and teachers?
District wide decisions; Pyramids of Intervention from teachers.
6) Are you a supporter of the International Baccalaureate program and would you work to convert one or more elementary, middle, and high schools in RCS to the IB program?
I support the International Academy. I think it is a remarkable program. To convert to an International Baccalaureate would take detailed data, detailed processes and financial support.
Troy built a new middle school and converted the original school into the middle and high school International Baccalaureate. A wing in one of their elementary schools is International Baccalaureate.
Thank you for reading Rochester SAGE! Together we can make a difference for gifted children!
Rochester SAGE - Supporting Advanced & Gifted Education 
I’m reluctant to be critical of her answers, given that she is the only member of the slate who had enough respect for SAGE to respond.
So, I’ll just comment that “Pyramid of Intervention” is the Emperor’s New Clothes.
It is merely differentiation with a different fad-ish name.
“Intervention Strategies”, such as the success room program at McGregor, are examples of how a committed program works. This was started before POI… and the board decided NOT to implement it district-wide.
As a parent, you really have no interaction with this POI. The teacher and the district assures you that it’s happening, and you will hear lots of buzzwords, but you will not see very much in the way of tangible actions.
More of the “do an extra worksheet” approach that the district has followed for far too long.
POI has had some success with students who are struggling. One example I’ve used is the Title I program at McGregor, that have helped at-risk students read at grade level – and over 4 years improved the number of K-1 students “reading at grade level” from 33% to 88%.
This is a basic program that works: Identify students’ educational needs, where they’re struggling, and provide the support and resources to make them successful. Let’s use this simple model and apply it elsewhere. It’s the same model that can be applied to G&T, too.
Why not? Because we can’t afford it? Our district is spending *more* than ever before. Certainly we can find a way to provide the education support our kids need while we spend millions and millions more each year!
The Title I program you mention is the “Success Room” at McGregor. It was started before the whole POI fad, and is now touted as an example of POI.
That program is indeed good, but it is an example of educational leadership by the principal, and has nothing to do with the tale they attempt to weave about POI.