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

meaningful professional development, teachers are able to effectively cater for this group of learnersin the regular class.An Australian study (Knight & Becker, 2000) extends earlier American studies (Feldhusen, 1997; VanTassel-Baska, 1997) in regard to regular class provisions for gifted and talented students. Whereas theAmerican studies report from teacher perspectives, the study by Knight and Becker documents studentperceptions of their academic and emotional needs, with the aim of informing regular class teachershow best to cater for their gifted and talented students. In all of these studies it was found that lack ofchallenge in the classroom caused the gifted students to lose motivation and self-esteem. It seems clearthen, that underachievement occurs when teachers do not differentiate the curriculum for their giftedstudents, thus the challenge must come for schools to provide an environment that caters for all itsstudents (Knight & Becker, 2000). According to Eyre (1997) “differentiation is recognising individualdifferences and trying to find institutional strategies which take account of them” (p.38). Thereforeschools need a workable system which is flexible enough to accommodate individual need (Eyre,1997).Ho (2002) conducted a small qualitative study that compared the behaviour, interaction and schoolperceptions of three gifted and talented primary school children in two different New Zealandclassroom settings – a heterogeneous regular school classroom and a homogeneous classroom in aone-day school for gifted children. While the study found possible benefits of homogenous groupingfor gifted and talented children, it seems too that class size may have been a contributing factor, withthe smaller class size in the homogeneous class having a more positive impact on student achievementthan in the regular school class where the number of students was almost doubled.Keen (2003) reports on a study that was conducted over a two year period, involving gifted andtalented students, their parents and educators from 68 centres and schools in three different regions ofNew Zealand. While the majority of gifted students in this study accepted classroom programmes,albeit unenthusiastically, as “providing the necessary bread and butter of their learning,” somestudents also desired “jam on the bread” through greater flexibility of classroom approach, and greateropportunities for open-ended challenge (p. 16). Keen cautions that “New Zealand’s educationalsystem, multicultural in its ideals, faces challenges in recognising and fostering giftedness in diversesocio-economic and ethnic settings” (p. 4).Furthermore the findings from Phase Four of Keen’s (2002a) New Zealand study suggest effectiveoutcomes for students will only occur when there is a whole-school ethos and commitment to giftededucation. To achieve this, the following factors must be present:• Leadership (the principal sets the tone and direction for the school);• Good staff communication and professional development (majority of the staff must supportgifted initiatives);• Gifted education must be timetabled and budgeted for; and• A coordinator is required, along with a gifted and talented committee to support theimplementation of gifted policy initiatives.Moltzen’s (2000a) recommended principles and practices for gifted and talented students are worthnoting, given that he developed them in accordance with accepted New Zealand classroom practice:1. Use a learner-centred approach to providing for special abilities;2. Offer programmes that are both qualitatively and quantitatively different;3. Ensure programme coordination;4. Provide opportunities for choice, the pursuit of individual interest areas and independentwork;68