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

cooperative team approach is helpful because it allows an evaluation to be worked out together andevaluation tasks to be shared” (p. 54). If a school is utilising a schoolwide approach to gifted educationthis will be easily accomplished. Furthermore, the evaluation needs to incorporate those people bothwithin and outside of the school who are involved or impacted: parents and whänau; communitymembers; and gifted and talented students. By including many different stakeholders in the evaluationprocess, there is potential for gaining and building networks of support both within and outside of theschool and this better ensures that the evaluation findings and recommendations will be implemented(Tomlinson & Callahan, 1994).Tomlinson and Callahan (1994) recommend that schools establish an evaluation steering committee,and though this committee might incorporate those individuals with a vested interest in giftededucation, they believe that it is also of value to include others in order to gain varied perspectives.They also recommend the inclusion of ‘qualified evaluators’ – individuals with experience andknowledge in the evaluation process, but also understandings of gifted education. The roles andexpectations of the members of this team should be clearly defined and confidentiality must beassured.The evaluation of a comprehensive programme for gifted and talented students will potentiallygenerate a multitude of questions, and these different questions will be of greater or lesser importanceto different stakeholders (Reid, 1996). For example, teachers might want to know the impacts uponstudents’ learning, parents might be most concerned about their child’s social and emotional welfare,or the Board of Trustees might query the financial viability. However, as the National Association forGifted Children in the United States (2003) points out, “The primary stakeholders in gifted educationare the students” (no page given). If that is the case, then the greatest measures of programmeeffectiveness will be the affective, cognitive, and cultural outcomes for gifted and talented students.Therefore, evaluation of gifted and talented programmes measures two elements in conjunction withone another: the outcomes for students and the programme’s effectiveness (Taylor, 2000). These twoelements are linked because the outcomes for gifted and talented students contribute to the overalleffectiveness of the programme. Taylor (2000) provides an adaptation of Rimm’s evaluation modelwhich combines programme evaluation and student assessment by evaluating input (i.e., resources),process (i.e., identification and differentiated programmes), and output (i.e, student and schoolachievement of goals and objectives). These elements work together and their analysis should lead todecision-making about future programme initiatives and directions. Taylor (2000) providescomprehensive forms for utilising this model and incorporating an action plan into the evaluation.Three important considerations in the assessment of outcomes for gifted and talented students areidentified by Callahan and Moon (2003): the goals and objectives of the programme; the philosophicalintegration or segregation of the curriculum for gifted and talented learners; and the programme modelof delivery (i.e., withdrawal programmes, mentorships, etc). They also discuss the importance ofensuring that the assessment measures are tied to important cognitive and affective outcomes, as wellas ensuring that the types of assessment tools are appropriate given the purpose and nature of theoutcomes. Van Tassel-Baska (2002) adds to these the importance of using multiple and variedmeasures of assessment which incorporate both long-term and short-term outcomes assessment.Winebrenner (2000) and Van Tassel-Baska (2002) also state that the method and nature of assessmentshould be decided upon at the time of designing the outcomes, and Callahan (2001c) advocates thatthese should be openly communicated with gifted and talented students, ensuring they are aware of thecriteria for assessment.Callahan and Moon (2003) believe that for some student outcomes traditional forms of assessment areappropriate. For example, if the purpose in assessment is to determine students’ recall of knowledgeand comprehension of ideas, they suggest a ‘paper and pencil’ assessment as appropriate. Taylor(personal communication, December 10, 2003) reports that in New Zealand teachers are utilising themany different assessment tools intended for all students, for example the Assessment Resource Banksdeveloped by the New Zealand Council for Educational Research, as pre- and post-assessment forgifted and talented students. Van Tassel-Baska (2002) stresses the importance of using pre- and post-143