Gifted & Talented Education · North Carolina

North Carolina AIG Education: Article 9B Statutory Mandate, Six 2024-Revised AIG Program Standards Approved July 11, 2024, the Three-Year Local Plan Cycle (2025-2028), Differentiated Education Plans, and NCDPI’s Equity and Excellence Call to Action

Q: How does North Carolina address equity in gifted identification?

Equity is a structural priority in NC's AIG framework. NCDPI's Equity and Excellence Call to Action for Gifted Education is integrated into the 2024 revised AIG Program Standards, with Standard 1 (Student Identification) explicitly emphasizing 'equitable and research-based procedures.' The Article 9B definition explicitly states that gifted students 'come from all cultural, ethnic, and socioeconomic groups' — meaning identification processes must find gifted potential across all populations rather than concentrating identification in dominant demographic groups. NC LEAs are expected to address equity through universal screening practices, multiple criteria identification (preventing single-test gates that may systematically under-identify), structured nomination processes that don't depend solely on parent advocacy, culturally responsive evaluation approaches, and active recruitment of diverse populations for AIG services. The 2024 revised standards heightened the equity emphasis based on documented under-representation of historically marginalized populations in NC AIG programs.

North Carolina’s framework rests on Article 9B of the NC General Statutes (N.C.G.S. §115C-150.5 through §150.8, passed in 1996), which mandates identification and services for gifted education K-12 and requires every Local Education Agency (LEA) to develop a three-year local AIG plan approved by the local school board and submitted to the State Board of Education and NCDPI. The 2024 revised AIG Program Standards \u2014 approved July 11, 2024 \u2014 establish six standards: Student Identification, Comprehensive Programming, Differentiated Curriculum and Instruction, Personnel and Professional Development, Partnerships, and Program Accountability. Each identified student receives a Differentiated Education Plan (DEP) reviewed annually with parents.

Start Your Free 30-Day Trial Schedule a Demo Download the Alignment Summary

Article 9B

N.C.G.S. \u00a7115C-150.5\u2013\u00a7150.8 (1996) \u2014 mandates identification and services for K-12 gifted education statewide

6 AIG Standards

2024 revised standards approved July 11, 2024: Identification, Programming, Curriculum, Personnel, Partnerships, Accountability

3-Year Cycle

local AIG plan revised every three years; current cycle 2025-2028 implementing 2024 standards

K-12

comprehensive programming continuum across all grade levels with annual DEP review for every identified student

The defining structural choice

North Carolina’s Framework: A Statutory Mandate with Six-Standard State Oversight \u2014 One of the More Structured G/T Frameworks Among States

North Carolina’s AIG framework is structurally distinctive among Southeastern state gifted frameworks. Unlike states with permissive G/T frameworks (no mandate, local choice) or simple identification mandates without programmatic oversight, North Carolina combines a statutory mandate with detailed state-level oversight through the AIG Program Standards:

Statutory Mandate

Article 9B (1996)

Article 9B mandates identification and services for K-12 gifted education in every NC LEA. Districts cannot opt out. Every LEA must operate an AIG program; every identified student must receive differentiated services. The mandate has been in place since 1996.

State Standards

Six 2024 AIG Program Standards

The State Board of Education adopted six AIG Program Standards on July 11, 2024 \u2014 the framework guiding 2025-2028 local AIG plan development. Standards span identification, programming, curriculum, personnel, partnerships, and accountability.

Three-Year Plan Cycle

Local Board + State Board Review

Every LEA develops a three-year AIG plan implementing the six standards. The plan is approved by the local school board, then submitted to the State Board of Education and NCDPI for review and comment. Current cycle: 2025-2028.

Why this structure matters operationally. NC’s combination of statutory mandate + state standards + structured plan cycle creates real accountability without prescribing program specifics at the district level. LEAs make their own choices about service models, identification criteria, and program design \u2014 but must implement all six standards and document their approach in the three-year plan submitted for State Board review. The framework reflects NC’s gifted education tradition since the 1996 statutory mandate, with the 2024 standards reflecting current best practices and NCDPI’s Equity and Excellence Call to Action.

Article 9B verbatim definition

The AIG Definition: General Intellectual Ability AND/OR Specific Academic Fields, with Performance OR Potential

Under Article 9B (N.C.G.S. §115C-150.5), North Carolina defines AIG students as those who:

“perform, or show the potential to perform, at substantially high levels of accomplishment compared to their peers. AIG students may demonstrate high performance in general intellectual ability, specific academic fields, or both, and they require differentiated educational services beyond those typically provided in the regular school program. Gifted students come from all cultural, ethnic, and socioeconomic groups.”

Four structural features are operationally important:

Performance OR potential

The definition uses both demonstrated performance ("perform") AND underlying capacity ("show the potential to perform"). This dual framing supports identification of high-achieving students AND students whose underlying potential exceeds their current achievement \u2014 important for English Learners, twice-exceptional students, and students from underserved backgrounds whose demonstrated performance may be suppressed by educational opportunity gaps.

"Substantially high levels"

The threshold is substantially high levels of accomplishment compared to their peers. The "compared to peers" language matters operationally \u2014 districts make eligibility determinations based on within-context comparison rather than fixed national thresholds. Students whose performance significantly exceeds peers warrant identification.

General intellectual ability AND/OR specific academic fields

The definition explicitly recognizes two qualifying paths: general intellectual ability across content areas, OR specific subject-area aptitude in fields like reading/language arts or mathematics. Districts use specific identification codes (AR for Academically Gifted in Reading, AM for Math, AG for both Academically Gifted, IG for Intellectually Gifted, AI for both Academically and Intellectually).

"All cultural, ethnic, and socioeconomic groups"

The definition explicitly states gifted students come from all populations. This is the equity principle in the statutory definition itself \u2014 driving NCDPI’s Equity and Excellence Call to Action and shaping the 2024 revised AIG Program Standards. Identification processes must find gifted potential across all populations rather than concentrating identification in dominant demographic groups.

The 2024 revised standards

The Six AIG Program Standards: Approved July 11, 2024 by the State Board of Education

The 2024 revised NC AIG Program Standards establish six standards guiding local AIG plan development for the 2025-2028 cycle. The State Board of Education approved the standards as official policy on July 11, 2024 \u2014 reflecting current best practices, NCDPI's Equity and Excellence Call to Action, and lessons learned from prior plan cycles.

Standard 1 \u2014 Student Identification: The LEA identifies AIG students through equitable, comprehensive, and research-based procedures. The standard emphasizes universal screening practices, multiple criteria identification, structured nomination and referral processes, culturally responsive evaluation approaches, and active recruitment to find gifted potential in all populations \u2014 not only those who self-refer or are nominated by parents.

Standard 2 \u2014 Comprehensive Programming: The LEA provides a K-12 continuum of services that addresses the academic, intellectual, social, and emotional needs of gifted students. The continuum spans cluster grouping, pull-out programs, subject acceleration, grade acceleration, curriculum compacting, advanced courses (honors, AP, IB, dual enrollment), and individualized investigations. Most students receive multiple service types simultaneously, calibrated to their identified needs.

Standard 3 \u2014 Differentiated Curriculum and Instruction: The LEA employs challenging, rigorous, and relevant curriculum and instruction adapted to the NC Standard Course of Study (NCSCOS). Differentiation spans content (what is taught), process (how it is taught), product (how students demonstrate learning), and learning environment. Standard 3 is the operational core of AIG service delivery \u2014 differentiation is a primary daily responsibility of classroom teachers.

Standard 4 \u2014 Personnel and Professional Development: The LEA recruits and retains AIG-licensed teachers (or teachers with gifted education endorsement) to design and implement gifted education services. Professional development is provided to all educators serving AIG students \u2014 including general education teachers, AIG-specific personnel, and school administrators. The standard addresses both AIG specialist roles (Gifted Education Specialists or AIG Facilitators) and broader staff capacity building.

Standard 5 \u2014 Partnerships: The LEA fosters partnerships with parents/families, community stakeholders, institutions of higher education, and other educational entities. Partnerships span family engagement in identification and DEP development, community programs that extend beyond regular curriculum, higher education partnerships (NC Governor’s School, NC School of Science and Math, dual enrollment, university gifted programs), and cross-LEA collaboration on best practices.

Standard 6 \u2014 Program Accountability: The LEA monitors program effectiveness through systematic data collection, stakeholder feedback, and continuous improvement processes. Standard 6 spans data collection on identification rates by demographic group, program participation patterns, student outcomes, parent and student satisfaction, and program evaluation findings that inform the next three-year plan cycle. The accountability standard is the closing loop on the framework \u2014 evaluation findings inform plan revision.

The three-year plan cycle

The Local AIG Plan Cycle: How Article 9B and the AIG Standards Reach Every Classroom

Article 9B requires every LEA to develop a three-year AIG local plan describing how the LEA will implement each of the six AIG Program Standards. The plan cycle creates the operational connection between state policy and classroom practice:

Plan development: The LEA AIG Director (or AIG Coordinator) leads plan development with input from AIG Facilitators and Specialists, classroom teachers, school administrators, parents, students, and community stakeholders. Many LEAs convene structured stakeholder feedback sessions and use NCDPI templates aligned to the six standards.

Local school board approval: The plan is presented to the local school board for review and approval. Board approval is a public-facing accountability mechanism \u2014 plans become formal district policy and are typically published on district websites for community access.

State Board submission and review: The board-approved plan is submitted to the State Board of Education and NCDPI for review and comment. NCDPI staff review plans against the six AIG Program Standards, providing feedback that LEAs use to strengthen implementation.

Three-year implementation: The plan is implemented over the three-year cycle. AIG personnel coordinate identification cycles, DEP development, programming delivery, professional development, and stakeholder engagement consistent with the plan’s commitments.

Data collection and program evaluation: Throughout the three-year cycle, the LEA collects data on identification rates by demographic group, program participation, student outcomes, and stakeholder feedback. Program evaluation findings inform the next plan cycle.

Plan revision: At the end of the three-year cycle, the LEA develops the next three-year plan \u2014 informed by prior cycle evaluation, current best practices, and any updates to the AIG Program Standards. The current cycle is 2025-2028; the next plan cycle will be 2028-2031.

DEP and IDEP

The Differentiated Education Plan: Where State Standards Meet Each Student’s Annual Programming

What the DEP documents

The DEP articulates differentiated services across four dimensions: content (what is taught), process (how it is taught), product (how students demonstrate learning), and learning environment. The plan documents specific service models the student will receive (cluster grouping, pull-out, subject acceleration, etc.), goals for the year, and progress monitoring approach.

Annual review with parents

The DEP is reviewed and signed annually with classroom teachers, gifted education staff, administrators, and parents/guardians. The annual review evaluates progress against goals, considers updated assessment data, and adjusts services. The signed DEP is placed in the student’s cumulative record.

IDEP for individualized planning

The Individualized Differentiated Education Plan (IDEP) is used when a student’s needs require more individualized planning than the standard DEP \u2014 highly gifted students whose needs exceed typical AIG programming, twice-exceptional students with disability-related considerations, or students whose pace requires substantial acceleration. The IDEP follows the same review cadence with deeper individualization.

School transition support

The DEP supports school transitions \u2014 elementary to middle, middle to high. As students move between schools and grade bands, the DEP documents the services that have been working and informs the receiving teachers about student needs. Transition planning is built into the annual review cycle.

Equity and Excellence Call to Action

NCDPI’s Equity and Excellence Call to Action: Embedded in the 2024 Standards Revision

NCDPI’s Equity and Excellence Call to Action for Gifted Education is integrated into the 2024 revised AIG Program Standards. The Call to Action responds to documented under-representation of historically marginalized populations in NC AIG programs and shapes how the six standards are implemented:

Universal screening practices: Standard 1 emphasizes universal screening that considers all students for gifted potential \u2014 not only students whose families know to request screening or whose teachers nominate them. Universal screening prevents systematic under-identification of students from low-income, English Learner, and culturally diverse populations.

Multiple criteria identification: Identification through multiple criteria prevents single-test gates that may systematically under-identify students whose abilities are masked by language barriers, cultural differences in test-taking strategies, or educational opportunity gaps. Multiple criteria approaches use cognitive ability tests, achievement tests, creativity assessments, behavioral observations, portfolio review, and structured nomination together.

Culturally responsive evaluation: Standards emphasize culturally responsive evaluation approaches \u2014 instruments validated for diverse populations, evaluators trained in cultural competence, and recognition that giftedness manifests through different behaviors and demonstrations across cultural contexts. The 2024 revision strengthens this emphasis based on field guidance.

Demographic data collection: Standard 6 program accountability includes systematic data collection on identification rates by race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status, English Learner status, and disability. Disparities in identification rates inform LEA program improvement and the next three-year plan cycle.

Talent development for non-identified students: Many LEAs operate flexible enrichment groups for non-identified students who demonstrate high potential or specific talents. These talent-development opportunities create pathways toward eventual formal identification while serving students whose abilities are emerging.

Real challenges

What North Carolina LEA AIG Coordinators Struggle With

These are the operational challenges we consistently hear from NC LEA AIG directors, facilitators, and specialists:

Three-year plan cycle preparation

The 2025-2028 cycle required all LEAs to develop new plans implementing the 2024 revised standards. Plan development involves stakeholder engagement, alignment to all six standards, internal review, board approval, and State Board submission. AIG Directors balance plan development with ongoing operational responsibilities. Districts that maintain year-round documentation infrastructure produce stronger plans than those that compress development into the final months before submission.

Equity in identification

NCDPI’s Equity and Excellence Call to Action raised expectations for equitable identification. LEAs face documented disparities in identification rates by race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and English Learner status. Building universal screening, multi-criteria identification, and culturally responsive evaluation requires structural change in identification infrastructure \u2014 substantial work for districts that previously relied on referral-based identification.

Annual DEP review at scale

Every identified AIG student receives an annual DEP review with parents. For larger LEAs (Charlotte-Mecklenburg, Wake County, Guilford County) with thousands of identified students, annual DEP review is a substantial logistical undertaking. AIG Facilitators coordinate scheduling, document preparation, parent communication, and signed plan filing across many students.

Six-standard implementation across small LEAs

Small and rural LEAs face different challenges than urban and suburban districts. Smaller districts may have part-time AIG personnel covering multiple schools, fewer resources for specialist programming, and limited capacity for stakeholder engagement at the scale larger districts manage. Implementing all six standards requires creative resource allocation and strategic prioritization.

Platform tools mapped to North Carolina's framework

What Renzulli Learning Provides: Mapped to Article 9B, the Six AIG Standards, and the Three-Year Plan Cycle

Each tool maps to specific North Carolina statutory and regulatory requirements:

Renzulli Profiler — Standard 1 Multi-Criteria Identification Across General Intellectual and Specific Academic: A 20\u201330 minute strength-based interest and learning style inventory available in 20+ languages through the Global Profiler. The Profiler captures interests across general intellectual ability and specific academic fields \u2014 the two qualifying paths under Article 9B. Multilingual access is critical for NC’s growing English Learner populations and supports the equitable identification Standard 1 requires under NCDPI’s Equity and Excellence Call to Action.

Cebeci Test of Creativity (CTC) — Standard 1 Equitable Identification Through Validated Creativity Evidence: A validated, standardized creativity assessment (US Patent 12,087,176) measuring fluency, flexibility, originality, and elaboration with scored output. The CTC supports Standard 1’s emphasis on equitable identification by providing scored evidence for students whose abilities may be masked by language barriers or cultural differences in conventional academic measures. Particularly valuable for districts addressing identification disparities documented in NCDPI demographic data.

Leadership Assessment — Standard 1 Multi-Criteria Identification + Standard 2 Comprehensive Programming: Provides scored evidence of leadership characteristics. While Article 9B’s explicit definition centers on intellectual ability and specific academic fields, the broader AIG framework recognizes social-emotional dimensions of giftedness that connect to leadership development. The Leadership Assessment supports districts that include leadership in their multi-criteria identification.

Executive Function Assessment (EFA) — Twice-Exceptional Identification Under Standard 1: Measures self-regulation, planning, working memory, and metacognition. The EFA supports identification of twice-exceptional students whose disability may suppress demonstrated achievement \u2014 directly supporting Article 9B’s "performance OR potential" framing. Particularly valuable for IDEP development for 2E students who require more individualized planning than the standard DEP provides.

Enrichment Database — Standard 2 Comprehensive Programming + Standard 3 Differentiated Curriculum: Over 40,000 interest-matched, SEM-aligned activities. The enrichment database delivers content for the K-12 continuum Standard 2 requires \u2014 supporting cluster grouping, pull-out programs, subject acceleration, individualized investigations, and embedded differentiation across grade bands. Activities address Standard 3’s four differentiation dimensions (content, process, product, learning environment) adapted to the NC Standard Course of Study.

Project-Based Learning (PBL) Tools — Standard 3 Rigorous and Relevant Curriculum + Standard 5 Partnerships: SEM-based investigations producing authentic student products. PBL projects deliver the rigorous and relevant curriculum Standard 3 requires \u2014 with student-driven projects across academic content domains. Project work supports Standard 5 partnerships when projects connect to community organizations, higher education partners, or real-world stakeholders.

Personal Success Plan (PSP) — DEP Documentation + Standard 6 Program Accountability + Three-Year Plan Cycle: A student-driven goal and progress tracker. PSP records consolidate identification evidence, DEP service delivery, and progress against goals. For DEP/IDEP annual review, PSP records provide structured documentation supporting the conversation with parents about progress and adjustment. For Standard 6 program accountability, PSP records aggregate into program-level data on participation patterns, student outcomes, and demographic identification rates. For three-year plan cycle development, PSP records provide the evaluation evidence that informs the next plan.

Side-by-side alignment

How Renzulli Learning Aligns with North Carolina’s AIG Framework

Article 9B 2024 AIG Program Standards Three-year plan cycle DEP/IDEP framework Equity and Excellence Call to Action

North Carolina Statutory or Regulatory Requirement	Renzulli Learning Contribution
Standard 1 Student Identification Equitable, multi-criteria identification across general intellectual ability and specific academic fields	Profiler contributes interests across general intellectual and specific academic domains; CTC provides validated creativity evidence with non-verbal/culture-independent design supporting equitable identification; Leadership Assessment contributes behavioral evidence; EFA surfaces twice-exceptional potential. Together these tools provide multi-criteria evidence for the equitable identification Standard 1 requires.
Standard 2 Comprehensive Programming K-12 continuum addressing academic, intellectual, social, and emotional needs	Enrichment database (40,000+ activities) delivers content across the K-12 continuum supporting cluster grouping, pull-out programs, subject acceleration, and individualized investigations. PBL tools deliver substantive Type III investigations producing authentic products. The platform scales across grade bands consistently.
Standard 3 Differentiated Curriculum and Instruction Adapted to NC Standard Course of Study; content/process/product/learning environment	Enrichment database activities address all four differentiation dimensions adapted to NCSCOS. PBL tools support student-driven differentiation through interest-based projects. Together these tools deliver the rigorous, relevant, differentiated curriculum Standard 3 requires.
Standard 4 Personnel and Professional Development Qualified, well-trained educators; AIG specialist support	Platform supports both AIG specialist roles and broader staff capacity \u2014 with structured infrastructure that AIG Facilitators can use to support classroom teachers in differentiation. Documentation and reporting features reduce administrative burden so AIG personnel can focus on teaching and learning.
Standard 5 Partnerships Families, communities, higher education, stakeholders	PSP creates structured documentation that supports parent communication and DEP review. PBL projects connect to community organizations and real-world stakeholders. Multilingual Profiler supports family engagement across NC’s diverse communities including substantial Spanish-speaking populations.
Standard 6 Program Accountability Monitoring effectiveness, stakeholder feedback, continuous improvement	PSP aggregates identification evidence, DEP service delivery, and student outcomes into structured documentation. PSP records inform program evaluation, demographic analysis of identification rates, and the next three-year plan cycle development.
DEP/IDEP Annual review with parents Differentiated services across content/process/product/environment	PSP documents goals, services, and progress informing the annual DEP review conversation with parents. PSP records support both standard DEPs and individualized IDEPs for highly gifted, twice-exceptional, or substantially accelerated students.

From North Carolina educators

What Implementation Looks Like in North Carolina LEAs

“The 2024 standards revision raised the bar across all six standards \u2014 particularly identification equity. We’re building universal screening practices and multi-criteria identification that find gifted potential in students whose families haven’t historically advocated for AIG identification. The three-year plan cycle gives us the structure to make systematic change. Web-based platform infrastructure means we can scale identification, DEP documentation, and program accountability across our schools without doubling administrative work \u2014 turning the AIG Program Standards into operational reality rather than aspirational policy.”

AIG Director · Central North Carolina school district

For larger North Carolina LEAs Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools (CMS), Wake County Public Schools (WCPSS), Guilford County Schools (GCS), and other large LEAs serve substantial AIG populations across many schools. Multi-school identification under Standard 1, K-12 programming continuum across elementary/middle/high, annual DEP review at scale, and three-year plan development with stakeholder engagement across diverse communities are operationally substantial. Web-based platform delivery provides infrastructure consistency across schools while preserving school-level adaptation.

For smaller North Carolina LEAs Small, rural, and small-city LEAs across the state \u2014 from coastal communities to mountain districts \u2014 often have part-time AIG personnel covering multiple schools. Implementing all six AIG Program Standards requires creative resource allocation. Web-based platform delivery means a single AIG Director or part-time Facilitator can scale identification, DEP documentation, and program accountability across schools without specialist staffing at every site.

Frequently asked questions

North Carolina AIG Education: Common Questions

Questions North Carolina AIG Directors, Facilitators, classroom teachers, and parents ask most often:

What does Article 9B require for gifted education in North Carolina?

Article 9B of the NC General Statutes (N.C.G.S. §115C-150.5 through §115C-150.8), passed in 1996, mandates identification and services for gifted education K-12 in North Carolina. Article 9B provides the state definition for Academically or Intellectually Gifted (AIG) students and requires every Local Education Agency (LEA) to develop a three-year AIG local plan with specific components. The local plan must be approved by the local school board and subsequently submitted to the State Board of Education and Department of Public Instruction (NCDPI) for review and comment. Article 9B is the current legislation mandating identification and services for gifted education K-12 in North Carolina. The statute creates a structured, monitorable framework that distinguishes North Carolina from states with permissive or non-mandate gifted frameworks \u2014 every NC LEA must operate an AIG program with state oversight.

How does North Carolina define academically or intellectually gifted students?

Under Article 9B (N.C.G.S. §115C-150.5), North Carolina defines AIG students as those who perform, or show the potential to perform, at substantially high levels of accomplishment compared to their peers. AIG students may demonstrate high performance in general intellectual ability, specific academic fields, or both \u2014 and they require differentiated educational services beyond those typically provided in the regular school program. The definition emphasizes both demonstrated performance AND potential, supporting identification of students whose underlying ability may exceed their current achievement. Gifted students come from all cultural, ethnic, and socioeconomic groups \u2014 a principle that has driven NCDPI’s Equity and Excellence Call to Action for Gifted Education and shaped the 2024 revised AIG Program Standards. The "general intellectual ability AND/OR specific academic fields" framing means students may be identified through either path: general intellectual ability across content areas, OR specific subject-area aptitude in fields like reading/language arts or mathematics.

What are the six 2024 AIG Program Standards?

The 2024 revised NC AIG Program Standards, approved as State Board of Education Policy on July 11, 2024, establish six standards that guide local AIG plan development for the 2025-2028 cycle: Standard 1 \u2014 Student Identification (equitable and research-based procedures including screening, referral, and identification of K-12 students from all populations); Standard 2 \u2014 Comprehensive Programming (K-12 continuum of services addressing academic, intellectual, social, and emotional needs of gifted learners); Standard 3 \u2014 Differentiated Curriculum and Instruction (rigorous and relevant learning experiences adapted to the NC Standard Course of Study with content, process, product, and learning environment differentiation); Standard 4 \u2014 Personnel and Professional Development (qualified, well-trained educators across general education and specialized AIG roles); Standard 5 \u2014 Partnerships (collaboration with families, communities, higher education, and stakeholders); and Standard 6 \u2014 Program Accountability (monitoring effectiveness, stakeholder feedback, continuous program improvement, and reporting). The six standards function as both the framework for local AIG plan development and the criteria for State Board review of submitted plans.

What is the three-year local AIG plan cycle?

Article 9B requires every NC Local Education Agency (LEA) to develop a three-year AIG local plan describing how the LEA will implement each of the six AIG Program Standards. The plan cycle works as follows: the LEA develops the plan with input from AIG personnel, classroom teachers, school administrators, parents, and community stakeholders; the local school board approves the plan; the approved plan is submitted to the State Board of Education and NCDPI for review and comment; the plan is implemented over the three-year cycle; the LEA collects data on implementation; and the LEA develops the next three-year plan informed by the prior cycle’s evaluation. The current cycle is 2025-2028, with plans submitted in 2025 implementing the 2024 revised AIG Program Standards. The three-year cycle balances continuity in program design with regular opportunities for refinement based on evolving best practices, demographic changes, and program evaluation findings.

What is a Differentiated Education Plan (DEP) and how does it differ from an IDEP?

Under the NC AIG framework, each identified gifted student receives a Differentiated Education Plan (DEP) \u2014 a student plan that articulates the differentiated curriculum and instruction services that match the student’s identified needs. The DEP is developed and reviewed annually with parents/guardians to ensure effective programming, provide a continuum of services, and support school transitions. The DEP documents content differentiation (what is taught), process differentiation (how it is taught), product differentiation (how students demonstrate learning), and learning environment differentiation. The Individualized Differentiated Education Plan (IDEP) is used when a student’s needs require more individualized planning than the standard DEP provides \u2014 for example, highly gifted students whose needs exceed typical AIG programming, twice-exceptional students with disability-related considerations, or students whose pace requires substantial acceleration. Both DEP and IDEP are reviewed and signed annually by classroom teachers, gifted education staff, administrators, and parents, with the signed plan placed in the student’s cumulative record.

How does North Carolina address equity in gifted identification?

Equity is a structural priority in NC’s AIG framework. NCDPI’s Equity and Excellence Call to Action for Gifted Education is integrated into the 2024 revised AIG Program Standards, with Standard 1 (Student Identification) explicitly emphasizing "equitable and research-based procedures." The Article 9B definition explicitly states that gifted students "come from all cultural, ethnic, and socioeconomic groups" \u2014 meaning identification processes must find gifted potential across all populations rather than concentrating identification in dominant demographic groups. NC LEAs are expected to address equity through universal screening practices, multiple criteria identification (preventing single-test gates that may systematically under-identify), structured nomination processes that don’t depend solely on parent advocacy, culturally responsive evaluation approaches, and active recruitment of diverse populations for AIG services. The 2024 revised standards heightened the equity emphasis based on documented under-representation of historically marginalized populations in NC AIG programs.

What types of services do North Carolina LEAs provide AIG students?

Under Standard 2 (Comprehensive Programming) and Standard 3 (Differentiated Curriculum and Instruction), NC LEAs provide a K-12 continuum of services. Common service models include cluster grouping (placing AIG students together in regular classrooms with teachers trained in gifted pedagogy); pull-out programs with Gifted Education Specialists; subject acceleration in specific content areas; grade acceleration for students whose pace exceeds same-age peers; curriculum compacting (compressing or eliminating content the student has already mastered); enrichment clusters and small-group instruction; tiered assignments adjusting depth and complexity; advanced courses including honors, AP, IB, and dual enrollment; participation in NC School of Science and Math (NCSSM) and NC Governor’s School; and individual independent studies. Service models vary across LEAs based on local context (urban / suburban / rural), grade band, and student needs. The continuum approach means most students receive multiple service types simultaneously, calibrated to their individual identified needs through their DEP.

How does Renzulli Learning support North Carolina’s AIG framework?

Renzulli Learning provides instruments and content aligned to North Carolina’s Article 9B and 2024 AIG Program Standards. The Renzulli Profiler captures interest depth, learning patterns, and motivation \u2014 supporting Standard 1 multi-criteria identification with strength-based qualitative evidence. The Cebeci Test of Creativity provides scored creativity evidence supporting equitable identification across diverse populations. The Leadership Assessment provides scored behavioral data; the Executive Function Assessment supports identification of twice-exceptional students whose performance may be suppressed by co-occurring conditions. The 40,000+ activity enrichment database delivers content for Standard 3 differentiated curriculum and Standard 2 comprehensive programming \u2014 supporting cluster grouping, pull-out programs, subject acceleration, and individual enrichment across the K-12 continuum. The Personal Success Plan documents identification, DEP/IDEP services delivered, and student progress \u2014 supporting Standard 6 program accountability with structured documentation that informs three-year plan revision and State Board review.

Official sources

North Carolina AIG Education Resources

All identification, DEP/IDEP, and three-year AIG plan decisions should reference primary NCDPI sources. Renzulli Learning is designed to complement \u2014 not replace \u2014 your district’s identification process under Standard 1 or your three-year AIG plan implementation across all six standards.

Custom District Alignments

Need a custom alignment for your LEA’s 2025-2028 AIG plan, six-standard implementation, equitable Standard 1 identification, or DEP/IDEP documentation?

+1 (203) 680-8301

Six-Standard AIG Plan Documentation · Equitable Identification Evidence · DEP/IDEP Annual Review Records

Explore Renzulli Learning’s gifted and talented alignment for neighboring states:

All States G&T Alignment Virginia G&T South Carolina G&T Tennessee G&T Georgia G&T West Virginia G&T

Ready to Build Year-Round Documentation Infrastructure That Operationalizes Your 2025-2028 AIG Plan and the Six 2024 AIG Standards?

Start a 30-day free trial with full platform access \u2014 no credit card required. Or schedule a free QuickStart with a consultant who knows the Article 9B statutory mandate, the 2024 revised AIG Program Standards, the three-year local AIG plan cycle (2025-2028), the DEP/IDEP annual review framework, and NCDPI’s Equity and Excellence Call to Action \u2014 from Charlotte-Mecklenburg and Wake County to small mountain and coastal LEAs.

Start Your Free Trial Schedule a Demo Download the Alignment Summary

Call +1 (203) 680-8301 · Email [email protected]

Title-1

Title-2