Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Gifted And Talented topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
District review finds CAST admission, gender and impact gaps; board asks for options
Summary
A task force reviewed the CAST (gifted/accelerated) magnet program, reporting uneven academic effects, low acceptance rates among invited students, and gender imbalance; the board asked for costed options and parent/stakeholder outreach.
A Provo School District committee presented findings March 28 from a review of the CAST (magnet accelerated) program and offered options ranging from strengthening the current magnet model to moving services to school‑based, district‑supported models.
The committee, led by Judy Rose with teacher and principal representatives, summarized program history, assessment changes and admissions patterns. CAST currently serves fourth through sixth grades at Provo Peaks and Sunset View. The committee said the district moved away from the CogAT this year and instead used existing third‑grade NWEA math and Acadience/Acadience-style reading cutoffs (committee used an approximate 80th percentile cut) to reduce testing burden and save costs.
Data presented raised several concerns: CAST invitations required multiple rounds to fill classes (the district extended offers down to roughly the 70s percentile in recent years to reach target enrollments); acceptance rates for invitations have been around 30–39 percent in recent years, with many students invited but declining (large declines attributed in part to DLI/dual language program enrollment choices); male students qualify and accept at higher rates, producing a persistent boy/girl imbalance; and district analyses showed CAST enrollment did not consistently produce higher proficiency or growth on statewide or NWEA measures compared with similarly eligible students who declined the program.
Presenters identified strengths — accelerated math, social belonging for some students, and blended science classes — but also challenges: access barriers (lack of busing), inconsistent curriculum expectations between CAST sites, narrow reach (only a small subset of students receive services), and limited evidence of improved academic outcomes. The committee noted three of six required CAST teachers had completed the gifted and talented endorsement and three were in progress; one of the two sixth‑grade teachers had the level‑2 math endorsement required to teach accelerated math.
Principals’ feedback favored returning services to home schools, but the committee highlighted tradeoffs including equity and teacher training needs. Board members asked for two practical next steps: (1) a cost comparison showing what it would take to revamp CAST into a more cohesive, district‑run magnet versus shifting services to school‑based models, and (2) stakeholder materials (two-option proposals) to prompt parent, staff and student feedback before the board considers changes.
Ending: The board requested a short set of costed options and a timeline for stakeholder engagement; the committee said it would return with scenarios and recommended implementation steps for follow‑up review later this year.
