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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

full-time or part-time, differs in its structure, outcomes, and potential strengths and weaknesses, andso, the effects must be examined separately. As Slavin (1991) points out, “different ability groupingpractices have different achievement effects” (p. 68). Acknowledging this, Allan (1991) states that it isessential to examine the research related to ability grouping “according to type of grouping rather thanas one amorphous whole” (p. 62). Thus, rather than simply stop here with a description of the overalleffectiveness of, and general debate about, ability grouping, this review of the literature aims toexamine its effectiveness in relation to outcomes for gifted and talented students as it is employedacross the variety of provisions.A CONTINUUM OF APPROACHES TO PROVISIONSThe Ministry of Education (2000) recommends that schools provide a continuum of approaches for theeducation of gifted and talented students. These approaches should be qualitatively differentiated,enriched and accelerated, and always developed to match the individual learning needs of gifted andtalented students. There is no ‘one-size-fits-all’ solution to provisions for gifted and talented students,just as there are no two gifted and talented learners of the same cognitive, affective, or cultural ‘size orshape.’ Having a smorgasbord of opportunities allows for choice, flexibility, and variety (Freeman,2001) in the ways schools decide to best meet the needs of gifted and talented students, enabling aclose match between each individual student’s abilities and their educational opportunities. A word ofwarning, however, should be heeded: such flexibility could result in inconsistent and scatteredapproaches or such a vast menu of approaches that difficulty arises in deciding just what to provide(Robinson, 1999). As with definitions and identification, these decisions must be made within eachindividual school, contextualised within the school culture. Figure 3 below is an adaptation of thecontinuum of provisions presented in the Ministry of Education’s handbook (2000).Regular classroomprogrammesIndividual education plans (IEPs)Learning centresCurriculum compactingGroup/independent studyGroupingConsulting teacherIntegrated curriculumCorrespondence schoolEnrichmentAccelerationFlexible groupingSpecial classesEarly entrancePull-out/withdrawalMentorshipsConcurrent enrolmentCompetitionsClubs, electives, cluster groupsSpecial programmesAfter-school programmesHoliday programmesPrivate tuitionClubs/associationsSchool networkingOne-Day-a-Week providersIndividual Strengths, Interests, and QualitiesQUALITATIVE DIFFERENTIATION:A CONTINUUM OF PROVISIONS FOR GIFTED AND TALENTED STUDENTSFigure 3. A Continuum of Provisions for Gifted and Talented Students.This section of the review of the literature examines these approaches. It begins with an overview ofregular classroom programmes, including recommended strategies, and is followed by discussion ofschool-based provisions. For each strategy discussed, the national and international theory andresearch is utilised to provide an explanation, describe the cognitive and affective outcomes for giftedand talented students, outline the potential strengths and weaknesses of the provision, and to makerecommendations for effective translation of the theory into practice.64
EDUCATING GIFTED AND TALENTED STUDENTS IN INCLUSIVE REGULARCLASSROOMSAs previously discussed, a continuum of approaches to provisions is recommended for gifted andtalented students. These are described later in this review of the literature, and as it will show many ofthese approaches are theoretically-sound, research-driven, practically-plausible approaches. But, whenreading between the lines, it becomes clear that they are often ‘part-time solutions to full-timeproblems.’ The skills, abilities, strengths, and interests of gifted and talented students, just like thoseof all individuals, are present twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week. Exploring ideas in aresource room, working alongside a mentor, preparing for a competition, or being accelerated for onesubject, for part of one’s education, does not address these ever-present special abilities.Even when special provisions are in place, gifted and talented students continue to spend the majorityof their education in heterogeneous, mixed-ability classrooms. Gifted and talented students in thiscountry are mostly educated in regular classrooms in regular schools (Ministry of Education, 2000).This reflects New Zealand’s current philosophy of inclusive education, but has historically long beenthe case in this country (see for example, McAlpine & Moltzen, 1996). The decision to educate giftedchildren first and foremost in inclusive classrooms is “premised on the belief that their needs should bemet within mainstream classroom programmes” (Education Review Office, 1998a, p.12). It is thepreferred provision in most New Zealand schools (Moltzen, 2000a).However, overseas, and particularly in the United States, for many gifted and talented students this hasnot necessarily been the case. And so, when inclusive educational principles came to the fore,specialists in gifted and talented education, who have long advocated for special provisions for giftedand talented students, with many of these outside mainstreamed classrooms, reacted in several ways.Firstly, there has been the emergence of a philosophy that many gifted education principles andpractices, particularly those associated with differentiation, are applicable for all students (George,1997; Heacox, 2002; Renzulli, 1999; Tomlinson, 1999; 2001). Secondly, the ways in which teacherscan understand and address the needs of gifted and talented students within regular classrooms havebeen articulated (Smutny, Walker, & Meckstroth, 1997; Winebrenner, 2001). Finally, arguments wereput forward by educators of the gifted and talented that these students could not be well-served ininclusive classrooms (Benson & Brodsky, 1996; Cramond & Brodsky, 1996; Culross, 1997; Feldhusen& Moon, 1992; Martin, 1996; Shields, 1995; 1996; 2002; Tomlinson, 1995) – and naturally, thosearguments have been met with opposition (Oakes, 1985; Sapon-Shevin, 1994/95; 1996; Slavin, 1987;1992).Despite the unresolved controversy as to whether gifted students belong in inclusive classrooms, thefact remains that the philosophy of inclusion has laid the foundation for most education systemsworldwide. It is not the purpose of this section in the literature review to argue whether or not theneeds of gifted students are being met in the regular classroom or whether or not this is where theyshould be in the first place. Rather, the purpose is to discuss the principles of differentiation as theyapply to gifted and talented students in inclusive classrooms. This philosophy calls for differentiated,individualised learning opportunities for all students, in classrooms which respect diversity anddifference. As Renzulli (1999) states:…respect for the abilities, interests, and learning styles of all students, would: (1) guardagainst charges of elitism and undemocratic practice, (2) provide a flexible vehicle fordeveloping the talents of students who might otherwise go unrecognized, and (3) allow us tocontinue to serve our highest achieving students. In other words, a consistent democraticphilosophy of education for all students legitimizes differentiation for all students (no pagegiven).The principles of differentiation are indeed important considerations for all students, including giftedand talented students. However, recognition that one-size-doesn’t-fit-all, and responding to that with‘differentiation for all,’ is only of value to gifted and talented students when their uniqueness is putinto the formula. Otherwise, there is a danger that this philosophy could negate the need for otherprovisions for gifted and talented students – and this should not be the case. As Renzulli (1999) states,65
Page 1 and 2:
The Extent, Nature and Effectivenes
Page 3 and 4:
iii
Page 6 and 7:
AcknowledgementsThe research team w
Page 8 and 9:
viii
Page 10 and 11:
The Nature and Extent of Identifica
Page 12 and 13:
Table 28. School-Based Provisions:
Page 14 and 15:
policy (Ministry of Education, 2002
Page 17 and 18:
Introduction to the Literature Revi
Page 19 and 20:
national and international theory a
Page 21 and 22:
literature in relation to New Zeala
Page 23 and 24:
DEFINITIONS AND CHARACTERISTICSTher
Page 25 and 26: It is also important to remember th
Page 27 and 28: classroom. She further recommends t
Page 29 and 30: combination. The desirable approach
Page 31 and 32: identification and the opportunitie
Page 33 and 34: words, teacher identification in yo
Page 35 and 36: Tests of intelligence. Tests of int
Page 37 and 38: 2003). The bias reported in these t
Page 39 and 40: mentioned, it must be recognised th
Page 41: that ‘all parents think their chi
Page 46: The adaptations made to content, pr
Page 49 and 50: same time, relationships can be bui
Page 51 and 52: 6. The classroom has a comfortable,
Page 53 and 54: Freeman (1998) conceives enrichment
Page 55 and 56: egular classroom can also alleviate
Page 57 and 58: • These learners should have oppo
Page 59 and 60: learning there seems to be reluctan
Page 61 and 62: Swiatek (2002) concludes that the S
Page 63 and 64: Perhaps in the historical debate ov
Page 65 and 66: The New Zealand Curriculum recognis
Page 67 and 68: Stocktake Report to the Minister of
Page 69 and 70: The model reflects many of the prin
Page 71 and 72: • The establishment of learning g
Page 73 and 74: challenging for them” (Fielder et
Page 75: (1986) believe that if grouping is
Page 79 and 80: and exposure to higher level thinki
Page 81 and 82: 5. Ensure the student is equipped a
Page 83 and 84: • A documented programme for an i
Page 85 and 86: There are some suggestions that IEP
Page 87 and 88: Potential Weaknesses• Time consum
Page 89 and 90: always be concerned to protect stud
Page 91 and 92: Similar findings were reported by J
Page 93 and 94: Potential Strengths• Working in t
Page 95 and 96: Kaplan (1999) outlines the followin
Page 97 and 98: Potential weaknesses of learning ce
Page 99 and 100: Developed specifically as a model f
Page 101 and 102: earlier in this review of the liter
Page 103 and 104: • A practical option for small or
Page 105 and 106: programmes of this nature. Macleod
Page 107 and 108: have significant but varying positi
Page 109 and 110: • Missed instruction (Cox & Danie
Page 111 and 112: describe American secondary schools
Page 113 and 114: felt that instruction was more stud
Page 115 and 116: Recommendations for Effective Pract
Page 117 and 118: Outcomes for StudentsEarly entry is
Page 119 and 120: difficulties, Cornell et al. (1991)
Page 121 and 122: opportunities for acceleration and
Page 123 and 124: Burns and Lewis (2000) conducted a
Page 125 and 126: way, competitions allow students a
Page 127 and 128:
hundred and sixteen of these Olympi
Page 129 and 130:
her wings so that those special abi
Page 131 and 132:
programmes: establish a “definiti
Page 133 and 134:
determine what features are essenti
Page 135 and 136:
their responses (Harrison, 2003). O
Page 137 and 138:
ideas beyond the school curriculum,
Page 139 and 140:
• Narrow selection criteria inclu
Page 141 and 142:
Culture free and culture fair tests
Page 143 and 144:
In her examination of successful pr
Page 145 and 146:
potential (Torrance, 1984). Mentors
Page 147 and 148:
Provisions: ProblemsShortage of cul
Page 149 and 150:
content and context of learning is
Page 151 and 152:
concept/phenomenon, threat of isola
Page 153 and 154:
Similarly, Doidge (1990) recommends
Page 155 and 156:
cooperative team approach is helpfu
Page 157 and 158:
student outcomes is briefly discuss
Page 159 and 160:
a link between programme evaluation
Page 161 and 162:
• Community and parental contribu
Page 163 and 164:
Cathcart (1996) states that, “som
Page 165 and 166:
• Is passionate about discipline,
Page 167 and 168:
Whilst all of these are promising p
Page 169 and 170:
THE NATURE AND EXTENT OF IDENTIFICA
Page 171 and 172:
profiles or cumulative work folders
Page 173 and 174:
QuestionnaireThis purpose of the qu
Page 175 and 176:
questionnaire the quality of these
Page 177 and 178:
• Income Support Payments Receive
Page 179 and 180:
of these schools reported one, wher
Page 181 and 182:
Table 9. Written Policies and Proce
Page 183 and 184:
We are very much in our conception
Page 185 and 186:
Table 11. School-Based Concept or D
Page 187 and 188:
Some schools recognised the potenti
Page 189 and 190:
Table 12. Formal Identification by
Page 191 and 192:
The frequencies for this section ar
Page 193 and 194:
Table 17. Identification Methods: C
Page 195 and 196:
Table 19. Identification Methods: S
Page 197 and 198:
Summary: Formal Identification of G
Page 199 and 200:
Table 24. Community-Based Provision
Page 201 and 202:
Table 25. School-based Provision by
Page 203 and 204:
Provisions: Intellectual/Academic.
Page 205 and 206:
Table 31. Provisions: Gifted and Ta
Page 207 and 208:
primary schools are making schoolwi
Page 209 and 210:
Resource provision, staffing, is a
Page 211 and 212:
Case StudiesTo add richness to this
Page 213 and 214:
7. Measures to ensure identificatio
Page 215 and 216:
Table 36. Profile of School A.Overa
Page 217 and 218:
intelligences, inquiry learning, an
Page 219 and 220:
School B’s JourneyThis full prima
Page 221 and 222:
Table 38. Profile of School C.Overa
Page 223 and 224:
included. Teachers chose which acti
Page 225 and 226:
School D’s JourneyWhile it is dif
Page 227 and 228:
Table 40. Profile of School E.Overa
Page 229 and 230:
isks. As part of this inclusive phi
Page 231 and 232:
School F’s JourneyPrior to the pr
Page 233 and 234:
Table 42. Profile of School G.Overa
Page 235 and 236:
School electives and the annual sch
Page 237 and 238:
School H’s JourneyThe gifted and
Page 239 and 240:
School I’s JourneyThe journey for
Page 241 and 242:
Table 45. Profile of School J.Overa
Page 243 and 244:
community who may be able to suppor
Page 245 and 246:
IdentificationDuring the in-depth i
Page 247 and 248:
1. A talent detector form that asks
Page 249 and 250:
The process in one school for the i
Page 251 and 252:
Have an established gifted register
Page 253 and 254:
Withdrawal programmes. The ‘succe
Page 255 and 256:
It’s actually releasing children
Page 257 and 258:
Difficulties. Providing for gifted
Page 259 and 260:
Knowing that Mäori kids like team
Page 261 and 262:
To counteract the previously mentio
Page 263 and 264:
classroom teacher for inclusion in
Page 265 and 266:
additional funds for competitions,
Page 267 and 268:
classes during Enrichment. The coor
Page 269 and 270:
One of the main day to day operatio
Page 271 and 272:
The intermediate school teachers of
Page 273 and 274:
cluster programme, as well as press
Page 275 and 276:
not all students could participate,
Page 277 and 278:
levels of schooling, and overall or
Page 279 and 280:
The rationale for professional read
Page 281 and 282:
DiscussionThe purpose in this resea
Page 283 and 284:
Schoolwide organisation of gifted a
Page 285 and 286:
inclusive nature of giftedness and
Page 287 and 288:
provisions in their procedures. Mee
Page 289 and 290:
ConclusionsThis section of the rese
Page 291 and 292:
eflect the core principles of gifte
Page 293 and 294:
ReferencesAdams, C., & Cross, T. (1
Page 295 and 296:
Betts, G. (1985). Autonomous Learne
Page 297 and 298:
Callahan, C.M., Hunsaker, S.L., Ada
Page 299 and 300:
Cross, T. (1994). Alternative inqui
Page 301 and 302:
Feldhusen, J.F. (1997). Educating t
Page 303 and 304:
Freeman, J. (1998). Educating the v
Page 305 and 306:
Heller, K.A., & Schofield, N.J. (20
Page 307 and 308:
Kaufmann, F.A., Harrel, G., Milam,
Page 309 and 310:
Lewis, G. (2002). Alternatives to a
Page 311 and 312:
McGee, C., Jones, A., Cowie, B., Hi
Page 313 and 314:
Montgomery, W. (2001). Creating cul
Page 315 and 316:
Plunkett, M., & Harvey, D. (1995).
Page 317 and 318:
Renzulli, J.S. (1986). Systems and
Page 319 and 320:
Robinson, A. (1991). Cooperative le
Page 321 and 322:
Slavin, R.E. (1988). Synthesis of r
Page 323 and 324:
Timutimu-Thorpe, H. (1988). E awhi
Page 325 and 326:
Van Tassel-Baska, J. (2000). Theory
Page 327 and 328:
APPENDIX ALiterature Review Templat
Page 329 and 330:
Section 2: THEORY-BASED REFERENCES
Page 331 and 332:
APPENDIX BSchool Questionnaire20033
Page 333 and 334:
321
Page 335 and 336:
323
Page 337 and 338:
325
Page 339 and 340:
APPENDIX CInformation Sheets andInt
Page 341 and 342:
The Extent and Nature of Identifica
Page 343 and 344:
Page 345 and 346:
As compensation for your school’s
Page 347 and 348:
APPENDIX DConsent Forms335
Page 349:
show all

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

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?