There is a wide variety of ways that educators
can assist in the talent development process of advanced learners. Yet
every school needs to have basic provisions in place to assure the educational
development of these students in the domains of learning for which the
school has responsibility. Most school mission statements proclaim the
intention of educating every child to the level of his or her potential,
yet many times those words have no translation value for the gifted as
they sit bored in classrooms where their instructional level exceeds by
years their age-peers sitting in the next seat. Thus there is a real need
to consider nonnegotiable options for this population regardless of age
or grade considerations as well as general program organizational approaches
employed to effect sound service delivery.
One of the most important curriculum policy
initiatives that school districts might enact on behalf of all students
would be one that addresses acceleration. Acceleration assumes that different
students of the same age are at different levels of learning within and
across learning areas, thus necessitating diagnosis of learning level
and prescription of curriculum at a level slightly above it. The government
document Prisoners of Time (National Education Commission on Time and
Learning, 1994) documented the importance of recognizing time as the crucial
variable in learning, an understanding that Bloom had several decades
ago: "If experience, research, and common sense teach nothing else,
they confirm the truism that people learn at different rates in different
ways with different subjects." Understanding that students have differences
in learning rates for different subject areas in different kinds of material
at different stages of development is crucial to school patterns of curriculum
and instruction. Flexibility in schooling, however, has been one of the
most difficult tasks for public schools to enact in responding to students
with special needs.
Various components need to be considered in
developing such a policy at the school district level. One such component
should allow for early entrance and early exit procedures for students
at various stages of development. Many gifted children are academically
ready for school before they are at the "magic age" and others
develop more rapidly than age peers, once they are in a schooling environment.
Access to high school early eliminates the holding pattern of the middle
school years so common in many contexts around the country. Early college
entrance can be accomplished by those already academically proficient
in high school subject matter. One of the advantages of the new standards
movement is a clear way to document mastery levels in each area of schooling,
thus allowing students ready to move forward to do so.
Another indication of curriculum flexibility
involves the offering of content-based acceleration practices at all levels
of schooling and in all subject areas. In the last 20 years, schools have
become more open to ideas of math acceleration but not to other subject
area advancement. For gifted learners with precocious abilities in verbal,
scientific, and artistic areas, such pathways are crucial to enhanced
learning and development at their natural rate of progression in school.
Not only is there a limit on subject areas to be considered for accelerative
practices, there also is often a perception that rate should be capped
at six months or a year so as not to allow students to get too out of
step with the school curriculum or other students their age. Both of these
practices are faulty, based on 80 years of research showing the positive
outcomes of such accelerative opportunities on enhanced learning, motivation,
and extracurricular engagement of accelerated learners.
Acceptable forms of acceleration in operation
at the high school level include the hallmark secondary programs of the
College Board Advanced Placement Program (AP) and the International Baccalaureate
(IB) Program. Both of these programs offer students the opportunity to
engage in college-level work while still in high school and reward their
diligence with college placement and/or credit for work done during the
high school years. Such a model needs to be available to students at all
stages of development, such that evidence of advanced work brings credit
toward the next level of the educational experience.
For secondary schools, dual enrollment courses
at local community and 4-year colleges would also be important. Many highly
able students may wish to sample college early although not actually attend
fulltime. Dual enrollment offers a wonderful opportunity for this early
academic and socialization process to occur. Students may take 1-2 classes
away from campus or sometimes arrangements are made for the dual enrollment
course to be delivered on-site. Currently, 22 states have dual enrollment
policies, encouraging local districts to take advantage of the opportunity
for students to gain access to higher education while still in high school.
These courses are then banked for college and will automatically be credited
for a student attending a public college in the same state. Often, the
equivalent of freshman year in college may be credited. For students and
schools in rural areas of a state, dual enrollment provides a strong alternative
to AP and IB, often not possible to mount in small schools due to lack
of interested faculty or sufficient numbers of ready students.
Another approach to acceleration for students
advanced in all areas of the curriculum is simple grade level acceleration.
Such acceleration can be handled through early entrance policies but needs
to be broadened to consider stages of schooling beyond the naturally occurring
transition years. For students showing more than two years advancement
in all school subjects, grade level acceleration may be a good decision.
Obviously, each case should be considered individually but more concern
is voiced about this well-documented and researched practice than is warranted.
Grade acceleration at critical points of schooling can do much to counter
boredom and disenchantment with school among our best learners.
A final avenue for acceleration should be in
the realm of telecommunications. Advanced courses can now be provided
technologically in ways not possible a decade ago. School policy needs
to reflect these new alternatives to teaching and learning, especially
for advanced students who can profit greatly from them. Several universities
offer on-line courses, many tailored to younger students such as the Stanford
Education Program for Gifted Youth (EPGY) computer-based program in mathematics.
Other universities such as Ball State beam advanced courses to rural Indiana
schools through their telecommunications link. Independent study opportunities
with university faculty and research project work conducted globally can
now be a part of student learning beyond the classroom.
Grouping
Given the current research on the positive use of ability grouping with
the gifted (Kulik & Kulik, 1992; Rogers, 1998), it is critical that
school districts attend to this facet of a support structure in evolving
programs. The range of alternatives extends from within-class flexible
grouping and differentiated assignments to opportunities for special classes
or schools and independent grouping options such as mentorships and internships.
The use of within class grouping is critical
at all levels of schooling. At the elementary level, many classrooms now
are heterogeneous and inclusive. Such settings typically provide little
differentiation or challenge for the gifted learner and may not be as
beneficial for any group as within-class grouping approaches. At the secondary
levels, the norm for honors and even advanced placement grouping is across
high ability and gifted ranges. Consequently, the pace of the class and
the opportunity for more in-depth work may be lost to gifted students
as the teacher struggles to cover all of the material with everyone. In-class
grouping according to student capacity provides teachers alternative ways
to handle certain aspects of learning. For example, differentiating paper
assignments by group allows advanced students both more latitude and depth
potential for their work. Differentiating readings by group may have the
same effect. More in-class writing practice may be given to groups already
skilled at peer critique. All of these approaches to vary "within
group" work will help the teacher ensure that each student receives
appropriate levels of instruction.
Special class grouping of gifted learners by
subject area has historically been the most utilized approach to grouping
at the secondary level while pull-out by program focus has predominated
at the elementary level. Special class grouping is one of the primary
ways to deliver differentiated curriculum. Without such grouping arrangements,
it is much more difficult to do so. Research has shown that 84% of time
in heterogeneous classroom settings is spent on whole class activities,
with no attention to differentiating for the gifted (Archambault, Westberg,
K. L., Brown, Hallmark, Zhang, & Emmons, 1993). Moreover, special
classes are the context within which good acceleration practices for individual
students can be applied, as the level of the class by necessity needs
to be more advanced in content. Many schools have provided special grouping
for mathematics and language arts, but not science and social studies.
Again, it is critical that a grouping policy apply to all relevant academic
subjects, where size of school can allow for such clustering to be formed.
Students advanced in all areas need the opportunity to interact with others
at their ability levels and to advance academically at a rate and pace
consonant with their abilities. Such a situation can typically only occur
in a specialized group setting.
Grouping for more independent types of work
is also a critical part of a grouping policy at all levels. Students may
select among options geared at providing them more personalized opportunities
for intellectual growth, whether through a well-designed independent project
or through work in a professional setting or through an "optimal
match" with an adult in an area of expertise in which the student
is interested. Each of these types of arrangements calls for schools to
adopt a policy that allows for one-on-one interactions with the community
at large as well as more individualized use of school time.
Differentiated curriculum
Differentiation for the gifted recognizes the interrelated importance
of curriculum, instruction, and assessment in defining the term. A differentiated
curriculum is one that is tailored to the needs of groups of gifted learners
and/or individual students and provides experiences sufficiently different
from the norm to justify specialized intervention, delivered by a trained
educator of the gifted using appropriate instructional and assessment
processes to optimize learning.
Curriculum design is one major component of
a differentiated curriculum for the gifted since it delineates key features
that constitute any worthwhile curriculum. A well-constructed curriculum
for the gifted has to identify appropriate goals and outcomes. What is
important for these students to know and be able to do at what stages
of development? How do planned learning experiences focus on meaningful
experiences that provides depth and complexity at a pace that honors the
gifted learner's rate of advancement through material? The curriculum
for the gifted must also be exemplary for the subject matter under study,
meaning that it should be standards-based and thus current in the thinking
of real world professionals who practice writing, mathematical problem-solving
or do science for a living. Moreover, it should be designed to honor high
ability student needs for advanced challenge, in-depth thinking and doing,
and abstract conceptualization.
The new standards require more attention to
helping educators develop advanced tasks that address the standards, organize
the standards across grade levels to ensure an emphasis on higher level
skills and concepts, and provide opportunities for depth of exploration
of concepts across sets of standards. Of less help is creating whole new
courses or units that are outside the intent of the standards.
Curriculum differentiation must also address
the need for careful selection of materials for use in classrooms serving
gifted and high ability learners. These materials should go beyond a single
text as resource, provide advanced readings, present interesting and challenging
ideas, treat knowledge as tentative and open-ended, and provide a conceptual
depth that allows students to make interdisciplinary connections. Hopefully,
each classroom would also have high quality technology resources that
would meet the same criteria.
Instructional approaches that foster differentiated
responses among diverse learners include those that are inquiry-based,
open-ended, and employ flexible grouping practices. An example of an effective
inquiry-based model would be problem-based learning (PBL) that has the
learner encounter a real world problem sculpted by the teacher out of
key learnings to be acquired in a given subject, proceed to inquire about
the nature of the problem as well as effective avenues to research about
it, and sources for acquiring relevant data. The instructional techniques
needed by the teacher include high level questioning skills, listening
skills, conferencing skills, and tutorial abilities in order to guide
the process to successful learning closure in a classroom. PBL also requires
the use of flexible team grouping and whole class discussion. Problem
resolution requires student-initiated projects and presentations, guided
by the teacher. Thus effective instruction must include the selection
of a few core teaching models that successfully highlight the intended
outcomes of the curriculum. Administrators must ensure that teachers have
the opportunity to learn such models deeply and well.
Just as differentiation involves careful selection
of core materials and curriculum that underlies them and the deliberate
choice of high powered instructional approaches, it also requires the
choice of differentiated assessment protocols that reflect the high level
learning attained. High stakes assessments such as the Scholastic Aptitude
Test (SAT), Advanced Placement exams, and even state assessments are the
standardized symbols of how well students are doing in comparison to others
of their age. Secondary schools, in order to be considered high quality,
must be producing students scoring at the top levels on these nationally
normed instruments. Yet deep preparation for success on these tests rests
in individual classrooms. Even strong learners like the gifted cannot
do as well as they could without adequate preparation in relevant content-based
curriculum archetypes. Thus the use of these assessments as planning tools
for direct instruction in each relevant subject area is a key to overall
improvement in student performance. Administrators responsible for the
review of teacher lesson plans need to know how such assessment models
are being converted into work in classrooms. Departments need to spend
planning time on strategies for incorporating such elements. Since such
assessments are a reality and viewed by our society as crucial indicators
of student progress in school, we need to make them work for us rather
than against us in the public arena.
In addition to standardized measures being employed
to assess student learning, it is also crucial that more performance-based
tools be employed to assess individual growth and development. In tandem
with more standardized measures, they provide a more complete picture
of individual progress toward specific education goals. For gifted learners,
in particular, the quality of performance on such measures may be a better
indicator of skills and concepts deeply mastered than paper and pencil
measures.
A final consideration in the use of alternative
assessment approaches with gifted learners involves attention to teaching
students the rubrics for assessment at the time the assignment is given
so that students can understand expectation levels required for any given
assignment at conception rather than at the end. This approach also ensures
that criteria for judgment are both well-defined by the teacher and well-understood
by the student.
Quality teachers
Core knowledge and skills for teachers who work with the gifted might
be a long list indeed, but focusing it on nonnegotiables may make it more
manageable. What are the critical requirements for identifying high quality
teachers of the gifted? First of all, teachers of the gifted need to be
lifelong learners themselves, open to new experiences and able to appreciate
the value of new learning and how it applies to the classroom. Secondly,
they need to be passionate about at least one area of knowledge that they
know well and be able to communicate that passion and its underlying expertise
to students. This would imply deep knowledge in a subject area coupled
with the ability to use the skills associated with that knowledge domain
at a high level. Thirdly, they need to be good thinkers, able to manipulate
ideas at analysis, synthesis, and evaluation levels with their students
within and across areas of knowledge. Such facility would imply that they
themselves were strong students in college and scored well on tests of
reasoning like the Scholastic Aptitude Test and the Graduate Record Exam.
Fourth, teachers of the gifted must be capable of processing information
in a simultaneity mode, meaning that they need to be able to address multiple
objectives at the same time, recognize how students might manipulate different
higher level skills in the same task demand, and easily align lower level
tasks within those that require higher level skills and concepts.
Teacher-directed differentiation for the gifted
has no meaning if teachers cannot perform these types of tasks and evidence
these skills.
In order to develop and demonstrate these skills, teachers of the gifted
need a master's degree and two years of teaching in regular classrooms.
Furthermore, sustained coherent inservice programs are important in maintaining
and expanding teacher expertise.
Access to advanced opportunities external
to schools
While local schools play a critical role in educating students, they can
be even more effective when coupled with outside community resources that
supplement learning. One such program model is the Saturday and/or Summer
Enrichment programs offered by local universities. These programs tend
to be enrichment oriented and allow area gifted students to use their
leisure time pursuing topics of academic interest such as poetry, computers,
chemistry, and architecture under the direction of a highly qualified
instructor. Because these programs usually charge tuition, it is often
necessary for schools to disseminate information to parents in order to
make them aware of such services. Also offered by universities are the
Talent Search programs, usually targeted to academically able middle school
students who qualify based on SAT scores. Often offered during the summer,
including a residential component, many of these programs provide accelerated
content equivalent to high school course-work.
Other activities which involve the community
include mentorships and internships. The former involves selecting an
individual who can serve as a role model to a student, and establishing
a one-on-one relationship. This connection helps a student understand
how an adult mentor experiences and processes the world, with the relationship
built on some area of mutual interest. Internships and/or job shadowing
opportunities involve placements in community settings, usually for a
period from two weeks to a full term, depending on the situation. The
purpose is to help the student explore the real world and to see the work
habits and task demands that accompany certain professions. Both of these
alternatives are highly relevant for gifted students, particularly for
the extremely gifted child or adolescent who may feel "very different"
from the norm and may have time available to explore different work environments
or career options as a result of program or content acceleration.
All of these nonnegotiable options are crucial to the development of talent but rarely can be done by the schools alone. An active partnership with families is required to ensure that students receive the right opportunities at the right time in the right degree of intensity. There are no magic rules to assist in this process as it is highly individuated and dependent on the domain of talent, the level of student aptitude and interest, and the developmental stage of the talent itself. Consequently, it is crucial that educators are sensitive to the parental perspective as each of these options is activated. Public and private education are a necessary but not sufficient catalyst for talent to thrive.
Archambault, F. X., Westberg, K. L., Brown, S. W., Hallmark, B. W., Zhang, W., & Emmons, C. (1993). Classroom practices used with gifted third and fourth- grade students. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 16, 103-119.
- Kulik, J. A., & Kulik, C. L. (1992).
Meta-analytic findings on grouping programs. Gifted Child Quarterly,
36, 73-77.
National Education Commission on Time and Learning (1994). Prisoners of time. Washington, DC: Author.
Rogers, K. B. (1998). Using current research to make "good" decisions about grouping. NASSP Bulletin, 82 (595), 38-46.- Back to Articles on Gifted Education Issues
