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

perhaps because, as identified in the United States by Reis and Renzulli (2003), “a major problemfacing our schools is the lack of curriculum differentiation and academic challenge for many of themost able students” (p.1). For example, Reis and Renzulli cite American research which indicates that78% to 88% of fifth and sixth grade (approximately ages 10-12) average readers were found to be ableto pass pre-tests on basic comprehension skills before engaging in instruction (Taylor & Frye, 1988,cited in Reis & Renzulli, 2003, p. 1). Also, the literature reports that gifted and talented students willsoon give up demonstrating to the teacher what they can do if they are going to then be asked to doextra work, or more of the same work (Winebrenner, 2001).Outcomes for StudentsWhile there is much written about curriculum compacting as an effective technique for meeting theneeds of gifted and talented students in regular classes, there are few empirical studies examining theoutcomes for students. However, of those studies that do, the results indicate that the practice ofcurriculum compacting can have positive outcomes for gifted and talented students.An international perspective. In a study of approximately 430 American classroom teachers, Reis,Westberg, Kulikowich, Caillard, Hebert, Plucker, Purcell, Rogers, and Smist (1993) investigated theeffects of curriculum compacting on students’ achievement, attitudes toward learning, and content areapreferences. The study included a control group of gifted and talented students who received nocompacting as well as treatment groups whose curriculum was compacted. Results showed that whenteachers had been given training in the use of curriculum compacting for gifted and talented students,they were able to eliminate 40-50% of traditional classroom material in one or more of the followingcurriculum areas: language arts; social studies; science; and mathematics. When teachers eliminatedthis percentage of the regular curriculum, there were no differences in the out-of-level postachievement test results between the treatment and control groups in the areas of mathematicalcomputation, reading, social studies, and spelling. In the areas of science and mathematics, however,the treatment group scored significantly higher on post-tests than did the control group.In terms of the attitudes of the students participating in the curriculum compacting study, Reis et al.(1993) found that when students’ curriculum was compacted in mathematics, they were more likely tobe interested in mathematics and express favourable attitudes towards learning in mathematics thatthose students in the control group who did not have their curriculum compacted.When teachers are involved in curriculum compacting they may require support and assistance inlocating additional appropriate resources and materials to substitute the regular work withappropriately challenging work (Reis et al., 1993). Other research in the area of curriculumcompacting indicates that this is the most difficult task in the compacting process (Reis & Purcell,1993 cited in Reis & Westberg, 1994). This points to the need for teacher professional developmentand support. In the Reis et al. study (1993), there was a direct link between staff development andsuccessful curriculum compacting. The more professional development staff received on curriculumcompacting, the more successful they were in implementing this strategy.Reis and Renzulli (2003) report that curriculum compacting, and in particular the curriculumcompacting form, does take energy and time, particularly when teachers first start using it. However,as teachers become familiar with the process, they report teachers’ beliefs that it saves them time inthe long term. Other benefits reported by Reis and Renzulli (2003) are that while teachers may initiallyuse the curriculum compacting form for a small number of gifted and talented students in their class,they found they were able to use it with a much wider range of their students.While curriculum compacting is an effective strategy for meeting the needs of gifted and talentedstudents in regular classes, Troxclair (2000) warns that it should not be used as the only strategy norused as a total package. Teachers in regular classrooms need to use a variety of differentiatingtechniques and use them in ways that benefit their students and programmes.Winebrenner (2003) suggests that teachers may not be convinced of the need to compact thecurriculum and provide differentiation until they recognise the value of challenge. While teachers must76