Skip To main content

Renzulli Learning

Menu

Title-1

Gifted and Talented Education · Wisconsin

Gifted Education in Wisconsin: A 1985 Mandate, Five Identification Domains, a Pupil Profile Requirement, the “In Place Of” Standard, and a 25% State Aid Enforcement Penalty

Wisconsin’s Standard T (§121.02(1)(t)) has required appropriate programming for gifted pupils since 1985. PI 8.01(2)(t)2 requires a board plan, a coordinator, K–12 identification across five domains, and a pupil profile from multiple equity-responsive measures. Non-compliance can trigger up to 25% state aid withholding. DPI’s Toolkit defines programming as “in place of, not in addition to” regular classroom work.

Start Your Free 30-Day Trial Schedule a Demo Download the Alignment Summary
1985
Standard T first mandated: one of the longest-standing G/T service requirements in the region
5
identification domains required K–12: general intellectual, specific academic, leadership, creativity, visual and performing arts
25%
of state aid the superintendent may withhold from districts failing to achieve compliance within the specified period
421
school districts served by 12 CESAs; “access” may be fulfilled through CESA partnerships, independent study, or postsecondary arrangements
The statutory and rule framework

Wisconsin’s Four-Layer G/T Legal Framework: Statute, Rule, Enforcement, and Definitions

Wisconsin’s gifted education framework is built from two statutes, one administrative rule, and a set of defined terms that give precise meaning to the obligations each layer creates. Together they form the most enforcement-backed G/T framework in the regional series.

Wis. Stat. §118.35
Programs for Gifted and Talented Pupils
§118.35(1) Definition: “Gifted and talented pupils” means pupils enrolled in public schools who give evidence of high performance capability in intellectual, creative, artistic, leadership or specific academic areas and who need services or activities not ordinarily provided in a regular school program in order to fully develop such capabilities.

§118.35(2): The state superintendent shall by rule establish guidelines for the identification of gifted and talented pupils. This delegation to rule is how PI 8.01(2)(t)2 gains its authority.

§118.35(3): Each school board shall ensure that all gifted and talented pupils enrolled in the school district have access to a program for gifted and talented pupils.

§118.35(4): The department shall award grants to nonprofit organizations, CESAs, UW System institutions, and school districts for services and activities not ordinarily provided in the regular school program. Mandatory: School Board Obligation
Wis. Stat. §121.02(1)(t) and PI 8.03
Standard T + Enforcement: 25% State Aid Withholding
§121.02(1)(t) “Standard T” (mandated 1985): Requires every school board to provide access to an appropriate program for pupils identified as gifted or talented. This is the primary enforceable school district standard.

PI 8.02 Compliance Audits: DPI may conduct an inquiry on receipt of a complaint and may on its own initiative audit a school district. Districts receive 90 days’ advance notice; written report within 60 days of on-site visit.

PI 8.03 Noncompliance: If not in compliance, state superintendent may develop a compliance plan (maximum 90 days). One extension allowed (maximum 1 year). If compliance is not achieved within the specified period: the state superintendent shall withhold up to 25% of state aid from the district. Enforcement: Up to 25% State Aid Withheld
PI 8.01(2)(t)2 and PI 8.001(1)
Administrative Rule: Plan, Coordinator, Identification, Pupil Profile
Required of every district board:

Establish a written plan for the G/T program and designate a coordinator. Identify pupils in kindergarten through grade 12 in five domains (general intellectual, specific academic, leadership, creativity, visual and performing arts). A pupil may be identified in one or more categories. The identification process must result in a pupil profile based on multiple measures. Tools must be appropriate for the specific purpose. The process and tools must be responsive to economic conditions, race, gender, culture, native language, developmental differences, and identified disabilities. Provide access without charge for tuition. Provide an opportunity for parental participation in identification and programming. Mandatory: Seven Specific Requirements
PI 8.001(1) and PI 8.01(2)(t)1.a
Defined Terms: What “Access” and “Appropriate Program” Mean
“Access” (PI 8.001(1)): An opportunity to study through school district course offerings, independent study, cooperative educational service agencies (CESAs), or cooperative arrangements between school district boards under s. 66.0301, and postsecondary education institutions.

“Appropriate program” (PI 8.01(2)(t)1.a): A systematic and continuous set of instructional activities or learning experiences which expand the development of the pupils identified as gifted or talented.

Both definitions are deliberate. “Access” is broad enough for small districts to use CESA partnerships or dual enrollment. “Appropriate program” sets a floor: the program must be systematic (not ad hoc), continuous (not one-time events), and developmental (expanding student capabilities, not merely enriching). Definitions with Legal Force
Why Wisconsin’s framework has real teeth: Unlike states where G/T obligations are merely advisory or tied to soft reporting requirements, Wisconsin’s Standard T sits within the same §121.02 school district standards framework that governs licensure, curriculum, and special education. Noncompliance in any §121.02 standard can trigger the PI 8.02 audit process and the PI 8.03 25% aid withholding penalty. This is the same enforcement mechanism that applies to failing to provide licensed teachers or required curriculum. G/T education in Wisconsin carries real legal and financial consequences for non-compliance.
PI 8.01(2)(t)2: five identification domains and the pupil profile

Identify K–12 Across Five Domains Using a Multi-Measure Pupil Profile Responsive to Every Student

Wisconsin’s identification requirement is more specific than most states. It requires: five defined domains, K–12 scope, multi-measure pupil profiles, equity-responsive tools and processes, and parental participation. Understanding each element is essential for compliance and for quality identification practice.

🧠

General Intellectual

Broad cognitive ability, reasoning, and problem-solving across domains; not limited to academic achievement

📚

Specific Academic

Advanced performance in one or more academic subject areas; may not generalize across all subjects

💡

Creativity

Innovative and original thinking; divergent problem-solving; creative products and processes

🏆

Leadership

Ability to motivate, direct, and guide others; organizational skills; interpersonal influence; community impact

🎭

Visual and Performing Arts

Exceptional talent in visual art, music, theater, dance, or other performance and artistic expression domains

A pupil may be identified as gifted or talented in one or more of these categories. This multi-domain approach prevents single-measure identification systems from missing gifted pupils whose abilities are concentrated in creativity, leadership, or arts rather than general intellectual or academic achievement.

The Pupil Profile: What the Rule Requires

The identification process shall result in a pupil profile based on multiple measures. PI 8.01(2)(t)2 lists the following measures as examples (not as an exhaustive list):

Standardized test data (cognitive ability, achievement, aptitude assessments that are valid and reliable)
Nominations (teacher, parent, peer, self-nomination; multiple nominators provide a fuller picture)
Rating scales or inventories (behavioral checklists of gifted characteristics; learning style inventories; interest surveys)
Products (student-created work demonstrating advanced capability in a domain: science fair projects, art portfolios, written compositions, inventions)
Portfolios (collections of student work over time showing growth, depth, and capability above grade-level peers)
Demonstrated performance (observed in-class or out-of-class performance; competition results; exhibition; audition; presentation evidence)
Equity responsiveness is part of the rule, not guidance: PI 8.01(2)(t)2 states that identification tools shall be responsive to factors such as, but not limited to, pupils’ economic conditions, race, gender, culture, native language, developmental differences, and identified disabilities. This is rule language, not a recommendation. A district that uses only a standardized test score in English to identify gifted pupils while serving students from Spanish-speaking, Hmong, or Somali immigrant families, or students with learning disabilities, is not meeting the rule’s responsiveness requirement. The DPI’s WiMLSS talent development framework explicitly addresses this: giftedness may look different across cultures and contexts, and systems must be designed to find gifted pupils who have been overlooked.
DPI Toolkit: “in place of, not in addition to” and nine program characteristics

The “In Place Of” Standard and Nine Key Characteristics of Effective Wisconsin G/T Plans

DPI’s Toolkit for Gifted Education is the primary program design resource for coordinators revising or developing their district’s G/T plan. It establishes both the “in place of” service standard and the nine characteristics that frame every effective plan:

The “In Place Of” Standard (DPI Toolkit, Characteristic 1 Appropriate): “The gifted and talented program should provide opportunities that are in place of, not in addition to, regular classroom instruction and activities.”

This is the most practically significant program design principle in Wisconsin’s guidance. It means gifted students should not be expected to complete all regular classroom work that they have already mastered and then do additional advanced activities on top. Instead, the advanced programming replaces the redundant content. DPI’s framing protects gifted learners from the dual burden of boredom (sitting through instruction they do not need) and overload (being penalized with extra work for being ahead). Districts that implement this correctly compact curriculum, eliminating mastered content, and substitute advanced learning experiences in its place.
1: Appropriate
In Place Of, Not In Addition To
Programming replaces regular instruction already mastered, protecting students from the dual burden of boredom and overload.
2: Comprehensive
The Whole Child
Addresses academic, social, and personal growth. Affective needs are not optional add-ons to a well-designed Wisconsin program.
3: Aligned
Statute, Rule, Standards, Research
Goals align with §118.35, §121.02(1)(t), PI 8.01(2)(t)2, NAGC Pre-K–12 Programming Standards, and current gifted education research.
4: Measurable
Specific Goals, Ongoing Evaluation
Goals must be specific enough for ongoing evaluation. Progress must be monitored during learning experiences so adjustments can be made.
5: Systemic
Schoolwide, K–12, Regular Day and Year
Integrated with schoolwide initiatives across all grade levels. Opportunities incorporated into the regular school day, not only special pull-out events.
6: Collaborative
All Staff, Not Just the G/T Coordinator
G/T programming is the responsibility of all staff members working together. The coordinator coordinates; classroom teachers implement.
7: Sustainable
Built Into Staffing and Funding Plans
Not dependent on specific personnel or funding sources. An integral part of the district’s long-term staffing and budget planning.
8: Responsive
To Local Student Demographics and Needs
Responsive to local student demographics, curriculum, community resources, and student needs. The plan reflects the actual students in the district.
9: Fluid
Flexible, Continuously Adapting
Flexible and continuously adapting to student need. Programs differ based on local needs; no one-size approach works across 421 districts.
The WiMLSS talent development approach

From “Gifted or Not” to Talent Development: Wisconsin’s Dynamic Identification Philosophy

DPI’s Gifted Education Toolkit and the Wisconsin Multi-Level System of Supports (WiMLSS) frame identification not as a one-time “in or out” decision but as an ongoing talent development process rooted in Gagne’s model of how abilities become talents through experience and support. This is one of the most sophisticated identification frameworks in the region.

The talent development approach has three practical implications for Wisconsin districts:

Universal screeners first. All students receive universal screening data. This data creates an initial picture. If the picture is clear, decisions about programming can be made. If the picture is unclear, targeted screeners provide additional information. The goal is a comprehensive pupil profile compiled from multiple sources over time, not a single threshold score.

Dynamic, not fixed. A student who is not identified at grade 2 may be identified at grade 5. A student with a learning disability whose giftedness is initially masked may become identifiable as the disability is accommodated. Students enter school with different early experiences, from different cultures, and with varying developmental trajectories. The identification system must be designed to find each of them.

Need-driven programming. Once a profile is compiled, the question is not “is this student gifted?” but “what curriculum comes next so that this student continues to grow?” Programming is calibrated to the identified need, monitored during implementation, and adjusted if the student is not growing as expected. This approach directly produces the “systematic and continuous” requirement of the “appropriate program” definition in PI 8.001.

The CESA access structure and its implications for small districts: Wisconsin’s definition of “access” explicitly includes cooperative educational service agencies (CESAs). This design is intentional: with 421 districts of vastly different sizes, a small rural district with 80 students cannot be expected to maintain a full G/T program in isolation. By defining access to include CESA partnerships, the rule allows small districts to fulfill their Standard T obligation through a regional CESA G/T program, independent study arrangements, dual enrollment in postsecondary courses, or cooperative programs with neighboring districts under s. 66.0301. Wisconsin’s $474,400 in 2024-25 G/T grants (awarded to 18 districts and agencies under §118.35(4)) also supports regional and CESA-based programming that smaller districts can access without a full local infrastructure.
The compliance enforcement chain

What Happens When a Wisconsin District Does Not Meet Standard T

The 25% state aid withholding penalty is not hypothetical. It is the statutory consequence of the PI 8.03 noncompliance process. Understanding the chain helps districts appreciate why compliance is both legally required and financially consequential.

1

Complaint Received or DPI Initiative

DPI may conduct an inquiry into compliance with the school district standards upon receipt of a complaint from any party. DPI may also initiate an audit on its own initiative. Either path leads to the same formal audit process.

2

On-Site Compliance Audit (90-Day Notice)

DPI notifies the school district board at least 90 days prior to beginning the on-site audit. Districts have time to prepare and document their G/T program before the audit begins.

3

Written Report Within 60 Days

DPI provides a written report to the school district board within 60 days of the end of the on-site visit. If the report indicates non-compliance, the school board or district electors may petition for a public hearing within 45 days.

4

Compliance Plan (Maximum 90 Days, One Extension to 1 Year)

If the state superintendent finds non-compliance, a compliance plan is developed specifying a time period of up to 90 days. The district may request one extension (maximum 1 additional year) with extenuating circumstances.

!

Up to 25% State Aid Withheld

“The state superintendent shall withhold up to 25% of state aid from any school district which fails to achieve compliance within the specified period.” (PI 8.03(6), Wis. Admin. Code.) This is mandatory language: “shall” not “may.” The financial consequence of sustained non-compliance is concrete and significant.

Platform tools mapped to Wisconsin requirements

What Renzulli Learning Provides: Supporting Every Layer of Wisconsin’s G/T Framework

Renzulli Profiler, Pupil Profile (Multiple Measures: Rating Scales/Inventories and Nominations) and Equity Responsiveness (PI 8.01(2)(t)2): Wisconsin’s pupil profile requirement explicitly includes rating scales, inventories, and nominations as required measure types. The Profiler is a structured student self-report inventory of interests, learning preferences, and engagement patterns, contributing both a student nomination (self-report) and an inventory measure to the required multi-measure profile. For equity responsiveness, the Profiler’s student self-report format reduces teacher referral bias that systematically underidentifies gifted pupils from low-income, non-English-speaking, and culturally diverse backgrounds. Students who do not display traditional “gifted behaviors” visible to teachers can still articulate their interests and engagement patterns through the Profiler.
Cebeci Test of Creativity (CTC), Creativity Domain Identification (PI 8.01(2)(t)2) and Pupil Profile (Standardized Assessment): Wisconsin’s five identification domains include creativity as a standalone category. The CTC provides scored, standardized creativity evidence that directly addresses the creativity domain in the identification process. Because creativity is a required identification domain (not an optional one), districts that use only academic achievement and cognitive ability tests are leaving a required domain unaddressed in their identification system. The CTC fills this gap with a purpose-specific creativity assessment that meets the rule’s requirement that tools be “appropriate for the specific purpose for which they are being employed.”
Leadership Assessment, Leadership Domain Identification (PI 8.01(2)(t)2) and Pupil Profile (Rating Scale): Leadership is one of Wisconsin’s five required identification domains. The Leadership Assessment provides scored behavioral evidence of leadership capability, directly serving the leadership domain requirement. As a rating-scale type instrument, it also qualifies as one of the specific measure types listed in the pupil profile requirement. For Wisconsin’s urban districts (Milwaukee, Madison, Racine) where student leadership often manifests in community organizing, peer mentorship, and family support roles rather than school-recognized activities, the Leadership Assessment’s behavioral focus can surface gifted leaders who remain invisible to academic identification alone.
Executive Function Assessment, Comprehensive Pupil Profile (Developmental Differences and Identified Disabilities: PI 8.01(2)(t)2) and Whole Child Programming (Toolkit Characteristic 2): Wisconsin’s identification tools must be responsive to developmental differences and identified disabilities. For twice-exceptional pupils (gifted and with a learning disability, ADHD, or other condition), the EFA provides self-regulation and metacognitive profile data that is the primary diagnostic tool for understanding where the disability may be masking giftedness in conventional assessments. For the comprehensive pupil profile, EFA data about a student’s self-regulatory strengths and challenges contributes an affective/executive dimension alongside the cognitive and creative measures. The Toolkit’s “Comprehensive” characteristic requires the program to address academic, social, and personal growth; the EFA directly supports the social and personal growth dimensions.
Enrichment Database, “In Place Of” Standard (Toolkit Characteristic 1) and “Appropriate Program” Definition (Systematic and Continuous): Wisconsin’s most operationally demanding program requirement is that services are in place of, not in addition to, regular work. The enrichment database delivers the advanced, interest-matched content that replaces redundant curriculum. When a student has mastered the regular classroom material in a domain, enrichment activities from the database serve as the curriculum replacement: deeper, more complex, and more creative than grade-level content. For the “appropriate program” definition (systematic and continuous), the database’s organized, curated library supports the kind of ongoing, connected learning experiences that make programming systematic rather than a series of disconnected activities.
Project-Based Learning (PBL) Tools, “Appropriate Program” Definition (Systematic, Continuous, Developmental) and Toolkit Characteristics 4 and 5 (Measurable, Systemic): The “appropriate program” definition requires a systematic and continuous set of experiences that expand development. PBL tools deliver exactly this: students engage in sustained, self-directed investigations that are connected across time (continuous), organized around genuine questions and products (systematic), and calibrated to each student’s current capability (developmental). PBL’s measurable products (student projects, presentations, original investigations) directly serve the Toolkit’s Measurable characteristic by generating concrete evidence of student growth that coordinators can present to boards, parents, and DPI auditors.
Personal Success Plan (PSP), Board Plan Documentation (PI 8.01(2)(t)2), Parental Participation, Measurable Goals (Toolkit Characteristic 4), and Compliance Evidence (PI 8.03): Wisconsin’s administrative rule requires three documentation elements that the PSP directly addresses: a board-approved plan, parental participation in identification and programming, and a program that can be monitored. The PSP generates individual student records that show who was identified, in which domain, using which measures, and what programming was provided. These records are the evidence a coordinator would present during a DPI compliance audit. Parental communication features in the PSP fulfill the rule’s requirement for parental participation opportunities. For the Toolkit’s Measurable characteristic, PSP activity logs and progress summaries provide the ongoing monitoring data that shows whether students are growing as expected or whether programming adjustments are needed.
Statutory and toolkit alignment

Wisconsin’s G/T Framework and Renzulli Learning: Side by Side

§118.35 §121.02(1)(t) PI 8.01(2)(t)2 DPI Toolkit 9 Characteristics
Wisconsin Requirement Renzulli Learning Contribution
§118.35(1) Definition
High performance capability in intellectual, creative, artistic, leadership, or specific academic areas; needs services not ordinarily provided		 Profiler (intellectual and academic interests), CTC (creative capability), Leadership Assessment (leadership capability), EFA (developmental profile) collectively address four of five capability domains. Enrichment database and PBL deliver the services “not ordinarily provided” that the definition requires.
§121.02(1)(t) + PI 8.03
Standard T: access to appropriate program; enforcement audit; 25% state aid withholding for non-compliance		 PSP generates the individual student service records that demonstrate an appropriate program (systematic and continuous) is in place. The PSP’s documentation is the evidence base a coordinator presents during a DPI compliance audit, making Standard T compliance demonstrable rather than merely asserted.
PI 8.01(2)(t)2: Plan and Coordinator
Board must establish a written plan; board must designate a coordinator		 PSP service maps and exportable summaries support plan development and update. The platform’s reporting tools give coordinators organized data about who has been identified, in which domains, and what programming is being delivered, enabling them to report to the board and to DPI.
PI 8.01(2)(t)2: Five Domains K–12
General intellectual, specific academic, creativity, leadership, visual and performing arts; one or more categories per pupil		 CTC (creativity domain), Leadership Assessment (leadership domain), Profiler (intellectual and academic interests), EFA (developmental profile across domains). Three of the five required domains have dedicated Renzulli instruments; the visual and performing arts domain and specific academic domain are served through enrichment database content.
PI 8.01(2)(t)2: Pupil Profile
Multiple measures: standardized test data, nominations, rating scales/inventories, products, portfolios, demonstrated performance; responsive to economic, racial, cultural, linguistic, developmental factors		 Profiler (inventory + student nomination), CTC (standardized creativity assessment), Leadership Assessment (behavioral rating scale), PBL products (products and demonstrated performance), EFA (developmental profile for twice-exceptional). All six measure types listed in the rule are addressed. The student self-report nature of Profiler and CTC reduces bias toward underrepresented students.
DPI Toolkit Characteristic 1
Appropriate: programming in place of, not in addition to, regular classroom instruction and activities; curriculum replacement not addition		 Enrichment database delivers the interest-matched advanced content that replaces mastered regular curriculum. PBL tools enable sustained investigations that substitute for grade-level content students have already demonstrated mastery of. Both tools are designed for curriculum replacement rather than supplementation, directly implementing the “in place of” standard.
DPI Toolkit Characteristics 2, 4, 8, 9
Comprehensive (whole child, affective); Measurable (ongoing evaluation); Responsive (local demographics); Fluid (adapting continuously)		 EFA addresses the whole-child affective dimension. PSP progress monitoring supports measurable, ongoing evaluation with adjustment when students are not growing as expected. Profiler interest and strength data makes programming responsive to each student’s local and individual context. All tools support continuous adaptation as student needs change.
Frequently asked questions

Wisconsin Gifted and Talented Education: Common Questions

Yes. Wis. Stat. §121.02(1)(t) (Standard T) has required school boards to provide access to an appropriate program for identified gifted pupils since 1985. Wis. Stat. §118.35(3) reinforces this by requiring every school board to ensure that all identified gifted pupils have access to a program. Non-compliance triggers the PI 8.02 audit process and, if compliance is not achieved within the specified period (up to 90 days plus one possible extension of up to 1 year), the state superintendent shall withhold up to 25% of state aid from the district under PI 8.03(6). The “shall” is mandatory language. This is the same enforcement mechanism applied to other §121.02 school district standards including licensure and required curriculum.
Under PI 8.01(2)(t)2, every district board must: (1) establish a written plan for the G/T program; (2) designate a coordinator; (3) identify pupils in kindergarten through grade 12 across five domains (general intellectual, specific academic, leadership, creativity, visual and performing arts); (4) use an identification process that results in a pupil profile based on multiple measures (including standardized test data, nominations, rating scales or inventories, products, portfolios, and demonstrated performance); (5) use tools appropriate to the specific purpose; (6) make the process and tools responsive to factors including economic conditions, race, gender, culture, native language, developmental differences, and identified disabilities; (7) provide access without charge for tuition to appropriate programming; and (8) provide an opportunity for parental participation in identification and programming. DPI’s Toolkit note references the Gifted and Talented Resource Guide at dpi.wi.gov/gifted as the primary planning resource.
DPI’s Toolkit Characteristic 1 establishes that an appropriate Wisconsin G/T program provides opportunities in place of, not in addition to, regular classroom instruction and activities. Practically, this means: when a gifted student has demonstrated mastery of the regular classroom content, the teacher compacts or eliminates the redundant instruction and substitutes advanced, differentiated learning experiences. The student is not required to complete all regular work and then do additional G/T work on top. Curriculum compacting is the most common classroom implementation: the teacher pre-assesses, identifies mastered content, provides credit for what the student already knows, and replaces that content with enrichment or advanced curriculum. This design protects the student from both boredom (sitting through already-mastered content) and overload (being penalized for ability with extra work).
Wisconsin’s definition of “access” (PI 8.001(1)) is deliberately broad: an opportunity to study through school district course offerings, independent study, cooperative educational service agencies (CESAs), or cooperative arrangements between school district boards under s. 66.0301, and postsecondary education institutions. Wisconsin has 12 CESAs serving all 421 districts. A small district may fulfill its access obligation by: participating in a CESA G/T program (some CESAs offer regional gifted programs); establishing a cooperative arrangement with neighboring districts; providing access to independent study with professional mentorship; or arranging dual enrollment in postsecondary coursework. DPI’s §118.35(4) grant program ($474,400 for 18 districts/agencies in 2024-25) also supports CESA and multi-district G/T programs that small districts can access.
Traditional gifted identification models treat giftedness as a fixed trait: students either are or are not gifted, and are identified (or not) at one point in time. Wisconsin’s DPI, through its WiMLSS toolkit and the talent development philosophy rooted in Gagne’s model, treats giftedness as dynamic: abilities become talents through experience and support over time. Practically, this means: universal screeners are used to gather initial data on all students; targeted screeners gather additional data where the initial picture is unclear; the resulting pupil profile is compiled over time from multiple sources; identification is not a one-time gate but an ongoing process; students who are initially missed can be identified later as their profile becomes clearer or as disabilities are accommodated. The rule’s requirement that identification occur in kindergarten through grade 12 (not only in a single grade window) reflects this dynamic philosophy: every grade is an opportunity to identify a student who was not visible in earlier grades.
Wisconsin Administrative Code PI 34 provides for two add-on (supplementary) licenses for gifted education: a Gifted and Talented Teacher add-on license and a Gifted and Talented Coordinator add-on license. Both are added to a base teaching or administrative license, not standalone licenses. Several University of Wisconsin institutions offer preparation programs for these add-on licenses, including UW-Stevens Point. CESA 1 and other service agencies also offer pathways. These add-on licenses support the Toolkit’s Sustainable characteristic: a district with licensed G/T personnel builds program capacity that is not entirely dependent on informal knowledge held by individual staff members.
Official sources

Wisconsin Gifted and Talented Education Resources

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

All States G&T Alignment Minnesota Iowa Illinois Michigan Indiana

Ready to Meet Standard T, Build a Compliant Pupil Profile, and Implement “In Place Of” Programming?

Start a 30-day free trial with full platform access, no credit card required. Or schedule a free QuickStart with a consultant who understands Wisconsin’s five identification domains, pupil profile requirements, and DPI Toolkit program characteristics.

Start Your Free Trial Schedule a Demo Download the Alignment Summary

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