Washington § 28A.300.770 Highly capable students—Identification procedures.

Washington Statutes

§ 28A.300.770 — Highly capable students—Identification procedures.

Washington § 28A.300.770

Title 28ACOMMON SCHOOL PROVISIONS

Ch. 28A.300SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION

This text of Washington § 28A.300.770 (Highly capable students—Identification procedures.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Washington primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Wash. Rev. Code § 28A.300.770 (2026).

Text

(1)The superintendent of public instruction must require school districts to have identification procedures for their highly capable programs that are clearly stated and implemented by school districts using the following criteria:

(a)Districts must use multiple objective criteria to identify students who are among the most highly capable. Multiple pathways for qualifications must be available and no single criterion may disqualify a student from identification;

(b)Highly capable selection decisions must be based on consideration of criteria benchmarked on local norms, but local norms may not be used as a more restrictive criteria than national norms at the same percentile;

(c)Subjective measures such as teacher recommendations or report card grades may not be used to screen out a s

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

(1) The superintendent of public instruction must require school districts to have identification procedures for their highly capable programs that are clearly stated and implemented by school districts using the following criteria:

(a) Districts must use multiple objective criteria to identify students who are among the most highly capable. Multiple pathways for qualifications must be available and no single criterion may disqualify a student from identification;

(b) Highly capable selection decisions must be based on consideration of criteria benchmarked on local norms, but local norms may not be used as a more restrictive criteria than national norms at the same percentile;

(c) Subjective measures such as teacher recommendations or report card grades may not be used to screen out a student from assessment. These data points may be used alongside other criteria during selection to support identification, but may not be used to disqualify a student from being identified; and

(d) To the extent practicable, screening and assessments must be given in the native language of the student. If native language screening and assessments are not available, a nonverbal screening and assessment must be used.

(2) The superintendent of public instruction must disseminate guidance on referral, screening, assessment, selection, and placement best practices for highly capable programs. The guidance must be regularly updated and aligned with evidence-based practices.