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

Table 7. School Roll.Ministry of EducationDatabase July 2002Respondents toQuestionnaireSchool Roll Frequency Percent Frequency Percent0-99 885 32.9 374 29.4100-199 532 19.8 238 18.7200-299 378 14.1 191 15.0300-399 286 10.6 145 11.4400-499 184 6.8 94 7.4500-599 160 6.0 95 7.5600-699 82 3.0 45 3.5700-799 33 1.2 16 1.3800-899 37 1.4 17 1.3900-999 16 .6 3 .2over 1000 95 3.5 54 4.2CorrespondenceSchool1 .0 1 .1Total 2689 100.0 1273 100.0COORDINATION OF GIFTED AND TALENTED EDUCATIONQuestionnaire respondents were asked to provide information regarding the school’s organisation andcoordination of gifted and talented education. There were two key questions: Who takes responsibilityfor the education of gifted and talented students? What written policies and procedures support theeducation of gifted and talented students? Close-ended and open-ended questions were posed so thatthe extent and nature of overall organisation and coordination could be determined.A Person Responsible for Gifted and Talented EducationRespondents in the majority of schools (72.6%) indicated that a person within the school takesresponsibility for gifted and talented education. Only 27.3% of schools have not allocated this role.When asked who had responsibility for gifted and talented education, an array of different individualsor groups of individuals was reported. Approximately 29% of respondents indicated that theresponsibility lies with the principal, and some of these signalled their dual role as a teachingprincipal. As one respondent stated:Sole charge … therefore responsible for everything!Approximately 24% of responding schools delegate responsibility to a teacher; 23% to the deputy orassociate principal; and 6% to staff working in special education (i.e., learning support coordinators,Resource Teacher of Learning and Behaviour – RTLB, Special Educational Needs Coordinator –SENCO). A team approach to responsibility was reported by 15%, who indicated that many of thesewere partnerships of dual combinations: principal and teacher; associate principal and teacher; specialneeds coordinator and principal; etc. Some schools reported teams of three or more and a very smallnumber stated “all staff.” Other individuals cited with responsibility (3%) were heads of department,gifted education coordinators, guidance counsellors, and teacher aides.Committee/Coordinating Team for Gifted and Talented EducationThe majority of schools (57.5%) reported that they do not have a committee or coordinating team forgifted and talented education. The remaining 541 schools, or 42.5% of the sample, do have acommittee or coordinating team. An examination of school types shows that 41.2% of primaryschools, 66.2% of intermediate schools, 47.0% of secondary schools, and 22.0% of other schools aretaking a team approach to coordination. Rural schools are far less likely to have a committee: 21.1%166