Leonia board hears outside audit calling for clearer gifted-and-talented program, multiyear rollout for 2026–27

A consultant presented an audit of Leonia’s gifted and talented (G&T) offerings and recommended a multiyear modernization that would clarify identification, increase transparency to families and phase implementation for the 2026–27 school year.

The consultant, Donna, told the Leonia Board of Education on the evening the audit shows “differentiation in place” but found that parents — particularly at Anna C. Scott Elementary School — were uncertain whether a coherent G&T program exists. She said the district currently meets baseline legal compliance but needs a clearer, documented program and communications plan. “You have differentiation in place. You have processes in place,” Donna said, “but your community is really requesting a program where they know which students are identified.”

The report, which summarized surveys and interviews with staff, parents and administrators, recommended establishing site-level G&T committees at Anna C. Scott, Leonia Middle School and Leonia High School, developing a multiple-measures identification matrix, providing sustained professional development for teachers, and publishing an explicit program page on the district website with eligibility and appeals procedures. Donna proposed beginning administrator-level work in summer, holding committee work through the next school year, and launching a districtwide program in 2026–27, with pilots possible earlier.

Parents at the meeting reinforced the audit’s findings. Christine Kang, a parent, urged the board to involve parents “in a more ongoing manner” and asked whether the state-required coordinator had been filed; Acting Superintendent Dr. Karamanos said the former coordinator was Dr. Martinez and that a new coordinator will need to be identified when the district next undergoes monitoring. Parent Jin Park asked how younger children (kindergarten–grade 2) would be identified; Donna said the audit recommends adding a cognitive skills assessment (often started in second grade) and that the district should use multiple measures — benchmarks, performance and aptitude — in identification.

Administrators and teachers contributed details the audit used: the middle school has an established accelerated-math and portfolio model that administrators described as articulate and well defined; the high school’s AP and academy offerings drew praise and were cited in the report’s demographic review. At the elementary level, Donna said she found uneven implementation across classrooms and recommended clarifying the use of “Global Citizens” time and repurposing it to support tiered services. “Modernize the elementary and middle school gifted and talented program to ensure all high level-ability students receive appropriate challenges,” she recommended.

Board members asked about committees, scope and budget. Donna said committee membership should include administrators, teachers, the assistant superintendent, the superintendent and parent representatives and that detailed staffing decisions (for example, whether to fund a dedicated pull-out teacher) would be balanced against budget realities. Business administrator Eric Tomasiewicz and the acting superintendent noted the district is in budget season and emphasized the need to phase professional development and curriculum work so teachers are not overwhelmed.

The consultant provided summary figures from her review (she said roughly 86 survey participants) and cited AP exam participation and performance at the high school — noting that 72 high-school seniors took at least one AP exam and that 58 percent of those scored a 3 or higher on at least one test — as evidence of strong high-school offerings. She repeatedly stressed planning, training and communication as prerequisites to a sustainable rollout.

The board did not take a formal vote to adopt any of the audit’s recommendations during the meeting; members approved placing the audit on the agenda for further committee consideration and discussed establishing a district goal and an action plan with timelines and budget impacts. Acting Superintendent Dr. Karamanos and Donna said they would return with more detailed implementation steps and that the education committee would review survey data and next steps. Donna indicated she would be available to continue as a staff developer if the district requests it.

The community urged transparency: parents asked for public access to the full survey results and frequent updates rather than intermittent summaries. Multiple parents and board members said they want the district to lay out “who, what, how and how much” — i.e., a named coordinator/point person, clear deliverables, a communications schedule and the projected budget impacts — ahead of major decisions.

Next steps discussed at the meeting included starting administrator training over the summer, forming G&T committees at each school in the fall, developing a multiple-measures identification matrix, and finalizing program details for potential districtwide implementation in 2026–27. The board’s education committee will review the audit findings and survey summaries and produce follow-up recommendations for future board meetings.