The Extent, Nature and Effectiveness of Planned Approaches in ...

• A practical option for small or rural schools (Hoover, 1993).• Eases scheduling of ‘outside’ provisions, such as withdrawal or pull-out programmes(Winebrenner & Devlin, 2001).• One teacher has responsibility for ensuring that the level and pace of instruction is appropriatefor gifted and talented students (Hoover, 1993).• Allows for flexible within ability grouping (Hoover, 1993) and eliminates concerns regardinginflexible ‘tracking’ (Winebrenner & Devlin, 2001).• Allows for use of strategies like cooperative learning more effectively for the gifted andtalented, since they can be more homogeneously grouped (Winebrenner & Devlin, 2001).• Compatible with the inclusive education model in that teachers are able to more closely aligninstruction to educational needs of gifted and talented students (Winebrenner & Devlin, 2001).• General improvement in achievement for all students, when the cluster group of gifted andtalented students is kept small and manageable (Winebrenner & Devin, 2001) and generalimprovement in teaching by way of gifted education pedagogy and its influences on generaleducation (Gentry, 1999).• Gifted and talented students are more likely to choose more challenging tasks when otherstudents will also be eligible (Winebrenner & Devlin, 2001).• Teachers no longer have to deal with the strain of trying to meet the needs of just oneprecocious student in a class (Winebrenner & Devlin, 2001).• Cluster grouping can be helpful as a means of compacting the curriculum for the group ofgifted students within the class so that unnecessary repetition of basics is replaced withappropriate enrichment and accelerated learning (Kennedy, 1995).• As cluster grouping allows gifted and talented students to receive all instruction within theirregular classroom, it eliminates the class disruption caused when gifted and talented studentsleave for instruction in pullout and resource programmes (Hoover & Sayler, 1993).• Teachers using cluster grouping are more likely to plan appropriate tasks and activities toengage their larger number of gifted and talented students (Kennedy, 1995). As these teachershave clearly stated responsibilities to provide appropriate instruction for their gifted andtalented learners, these students will benefit from the documented advantages of abilitygrouping (Kulik & Kulik, 1991; 1992).• Cluster grouping is a realistic option for schools who wish (for whatever reason) toappropriately cater for the needs of their gifted and talented students in heterogeneous ratherthan homogeneous classrooms (Hoover & Sayler, 1993; Rogers, 1993).• Provides a full-time, cost-effective programme for gifted students (Winebrenner & Devlin,2001).• Cluster grouping is less likely to alienate gifted students from ethnic minority groups as clusterplacement within a mixed-ability class increases the potential for these students to havecultural peers in the same class.Potential Weaknesses• Could result in ‘more of the same’ if teacher is not professionally trained, committed to, andsupported in gifted education (Hoover, 1993).• May be difficult to implement at intermediate and secondary levels (Hoover, 1993).• Parental pressure to have children placed in cluster grouped classrooms (even if the childrenare not placed in ‘the cluster group’) (Winebrenner & Devlin, 2001).91