Which
of the following statements do you believe to be true?
"Gifted,"
or "exceptional" children do require changes in instructional
delivery, curriculum enhancement, enrichment and expansion of educational
program, and social and emotional support within the school setting.
Additionally, gifted students and their parents need support
at home and in the community to ensure appropriate development of
their talents and skills.
What
is the history of Gifted Education in the United States?
What
is the definition of 'gifted" or "exceptional" child?
The U. S. Department of Education (DOE) uses this definition
of giftedness. Gifted and talented
children are those identified by professionally qualified persons
who by virtue of outstanding abilities are capable of high performance.
Children capable of high performance include those with demonstrated
achievement and or potential ability in any of the following areas
singly or in combination:
-
General
intellectual ability
-
Specific
academic aptitude
-
Creative
or productive thinking
-
Leadership
ability
-
Visual and performing arts
-
Psychomotor
ability
While
this definition was first formed in 1972 in a congressional report,
the implementation of this definition has varied in the last 30 years.
Funding and support for gifted programs has also varied over
time leading to multiple program delivery models and levels of funding.
In
our early years in American schooling little attention was given to
gifted students. Interest
increased with the advent of compulsory attendance laws with some
schools in Elizabeth, New Jersey and St. Louis, Missouri beginning
tracking for gifted and slow learners in the 1870's.
It was not until the 1920's that more cities such as Los Angeles,
Cincinnati, Manhattan and Cleveland began classes for the gifted.
When
Alfred Binet and his colleague T. Simon were hired by the French government
to devise a test to identify dull children, they developed a series
of tests measuring a variety of attributes. These included reaction
time, ability to name colors, perceive differences in weights, memory,
judgment, reasoning, comprehension, and the ability to pay attention.
The last five of these measures matched teachers' judgment
of intelligence. Using
Binet's work, Lewis Terman modified the Binet-Simon tests to produce
in 1916 the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale. This test created the
now familiar concept of mental age.
The greater the discrepancy, positive or negative, between
chronological age and mental age, the greater the need for alterations
in educational programming. The test was revised in 1937,1960, and
1986 Terman used this scale to identify and follow approximately 1500
gifted children from the 1920's through the 1950's, creating the first
systematic wide sample of gifted behavior.
Gifted
education proceeded through the 1950's with little modification leading
to either tracking models or benign neglect in most schools and systems.
The launching of Sputnik in 1957 caused a series of actions
to address what was seen as a massive failure of the American education
system. Acceleration
and ability grouping, particularly in math and science became prevalent,
as well as curricular modifications in Mathematics, Physics, and Biology.
These
early models were narrowly focused and traditional in delivery, and
stressed academics above all.
Recent theorists propose that giftedness is not a monolithic
construct but has various aspects.
Robert Sternberg posited a triarchic theory of human intelligence
in 1985. Sternberg's
model describes three main kinds of giftedness; analytic, synthetic,
and practical. Conventional
intelligence tests capture analytic skills well, but do not give adequate
measures of synthetic or practical skills.
He developed the Sternberg Triarchic Abilities Test, published
by Psychological Corporation to measure these skills.
The
social and emotional needs of gifted children was first highlighted
by the work of Lena Hollingsworth, who noted that the regular school
environment did not meet the needs of highly gifted youngsters, often
leading to apathy, boredom and difficulties in peer relationships.
Another
view held by Howard Gardner and others is the theory of multiple
intelligences (MI theory).
Originally proposed by Gardner in his 1983 book Frames of
Mind, MI theory is similar to Sternberg's theory in that it holds
that intelligence is best described as a series of competencies rather
than one number or score. These
competencies are described as seven intelligences: linguistic,
logical-mathematical, spatial, musical, bodily-kinesthetic,
and two areas of personal understanding, interpersonal and
intrapersonal. In
a later book, Gardner added one more, emotional intelligence. There
are several projects underway that use MI theory to guide practice.
Among these are Harvard's Project Zero, Indianapolis' KEY School,
and Project Spectrum to name a few.
Gardner's theory has significantly influenced assessment practices,
fueling the authentic assessment movement as an alternative to standardized
norm-referenced assessments.
One
of the more influential theorists on program delivery today is Joseph
Renzulli. Renzulli's
early work focused on a triad of attributes, above average ability,
task commitment, and creativity.
His later model, the school wide enrichment model, became popular
because it is inclusive, affecting many students in the school, while
being highly effective with gifted students.
It provides gifted students with an enhanced educational model.
He describes an organizational and service delivery model which has
three components: Type I enrichment (general exploratory experiences),
Type II enrichment (group training activities), and Type III enrichment
(individual and small-group investigations of real problems).
Organizational elements include enrichment planning teams,
needs assessments, staff development, materials selection, and program
evaluation. Some of the
service delivery components are lessons to promote development of
thinking processes, procedures to modify the regular curriculum, and
curriculum compacting.
Curriculum
compacting is a process where the regular curriculum is adapted to
meet the needs of the advanced student by eliminating or modifying
work that may be mastered at a level that matched the student's ability,
eliminating busywork or repetition.
It allows the accelerated learner to have proficiency in the
base curriculum while finding time for more appropriate challenging
curriculum. This strategy
has now become one of the most widely used instructional models for
gifted learners. Like Gardner, Renzulli advocates a multidisciplinary
approach to giftedness and designed the Learning Styles Inventory
to help guide teachers in planning learning experiences that address
the different styles of students.
These
studies on intelligence and gifted education have helped to shape
the curriculum process. Another
major influence has been the question of nature versus nurture with
regard to the definition of giftedness.
Nature is defined as heredity and genetics, while nurture refers
to environment. Current
thought is captured in Clark's suggestion that giftedness is "a dynamic
process in which a person's innate ability is in constant and continuous
interaction with the environment and that this results in whole brain
function known as intelligence."
The
question that we are left to ponder is whether children who are raised
in a less nurturing and rich environment may have the potential for
giftedness, but are inhibited by their environment. We know that clearly giftedness exists in every racial, cultural
and economic situation, but some children, particularly minority and
poor children, are "underidentified
and underserved". Service
may be the key to uncover these hidden treasures.
How are services delivered?
There
are several basic models of service delivery for gifted students:
self-contained classrooms, pullout classrooms, individual classroom
modifications, resource rooms, schoolwide enrichment models, consulting
teacher services for students in individual classrooms, adjunct service
models and special schools.
Self
contained classrooms can be for all or part of a day and are appropriate
at all levels. The curriculum
and instruction is designed to meet the needs of gifted learners.
The staff should be trained in gifted strategies and out of
level resources should be available.
There will still be heterogeneity within the identified gifted
population and consequently individualization of instruction is appropriate.
The special class does allow students to be challenged to their
full potential and to interact with others of like ability, which
has been found to be a key element for highly capable students.
In
a pullout model, students leave their regular classroom for a specified
period of time for specialized instruction and then return to spend
the remaining time in the regular classroom.
An advantage is thought to be that students are able to work
in areas of interest commensurate with their ability level.
The delivery can be seminars, field trips, special classes,
resource room etc. It
has been found that the time spent in the regular classroom is generally
not individualized to meet the needs of the gifted student.
The students are frequently asked to make up work they have
missed in addition to the "special curriculum".
Teachers must work closely to make this an advantageous experience
for the gifted students.
Another
variation on the pullout model is combining it with cluster grouping.
Cluster grouping occurs within the regular classroom where
identified students are assigned to the same room and the teacher
is expected to modify the curriculum and instruction to meet their
needs. It allows students to remain in the regular classroom, have
access to others of like ability and reduces the need for pullout.
It does require a teacher who has been trained in differentiation
of curriculum and the needs of gifted learners.
Cross-grade
grouping could be another model for grouping students.
In this model several age-grade groups are combined in one
classroom. This allows
for a range of resources and pacing of instruction and reduces the
lock step age placement. When
team teaching and looping are added to this model it can provide a
viable alternative for instructional grouping of gifted students.
Resource
rooms are used to enrich the curriculum.
Students frequently have a minimal amount of time in the resource
room, thus reducing the depth and breadth of study.
Students come and go from the regular classroom.
As an only option, the experience can be minimal for the gifted
students. Combined with
others, it can enhance the learning and provide options for teachers
who are seeking to develop special talents or interests of students.
The
school wide enrichment model, which is generally attributed to Renzulli,
can impact the education of all students in the schools.
All students can benefit from resident experts in specific
curriculum areas, both through school wide activities and classroom
extensions. In addition, students who are identified as needing additional
depth and breadth of learning can assemble in small study groups or
ultimately with a mentor or advocate.
The model assumes that giftedness can be developed and is directly
connected to specific aspects of gifted behaviors.
This model can be used in conjunction with any of the other
models to best meet the needs of identified gifted students, especially
when the curriculum compacting component of this model is effectively
used. This allows the
gifted student to move ahead at a pace commensurate with his or her
own ability.
Resource
teachers who provide additional support for highly capable students
can impact the entire classroom through demonstration, curriculum
modification and the introduction of advanced or alternative materials.
While the teachers are assigned to assist students who are
operating above level, they can also influence the professional development
of colleagues and serve as a mentor and teammate for curriculum integration
and accommodations.
A
group of adjunct programs that are found include mentors, tutors,
internships, and independent study.
These focus on special interests of gifted students, are generally
in conjunction with the regular classroom and can offer an enriching
experience.
An
additional option is the special school model.
This is recommended for highly capable/gifted students. It allows for interaction with others of high ability, the
curriculum and instruction is focused.
Some
parents seek alternatives to the traditional school model offered
in public or private settings.
They may want to consider home schooling options or virtual
school such as the on-line classes currently available.
In addition, there are programs at many colleges and universities
for the very precocious gifted students.
The entry criteria are stringent, however highly gifted students
may be operating at a cognitive level that can only be met through
college level course work.
While
this represents the broad definition of models of service for gifted
students there are numerous adaptations for delivery.
The program selected should evolve into an integral part of
the district's educational delivery system and should be regularly
reviewed to determine effectiveness and appropriateness of delivery.
Gifted students need a planned, articulated and coordinated
program. It
should provide challenge for the students and all of the stakeholders
should be a part of the decision making for structure and content.
A well-defined and clearly structured program that can demonstrate
academic difference for gifted students has the potential of longevity
and stability in the community.
How
are students identified?
Studies
of giftedness clearly indicate that there are multiple categories
of ability. A critical
element in the assessment and service for students is to have a well-defined
match between the two. Even
then, discovering this population can be a difficult task.
Not all students match the common definition and if we believe
that giftedness exists in all cultures, the identification process
must be both quantitative and qualitative in nature.
Assessment
of students for inclusion in special classes or for receipt of special
services usually takes several steps. The first step is identification.
Initial identification usually is made by the classroom teacher or
may be made by the parent. Characteristics
noted may include strong verbal skills, creativity, leadership or
unusual demonstration of potential.
The critical focus is to provide guidelines for characteristics
of potential that match the proposed program delivery model.
Sometimes an adult outside the family or classroom counselor
or principal may note evidence of strong intellectual processing.
In
some districts there is a district wide screening process, usually
involving administration of a group test of cognitive processing.
These instruments can assess a wide variety of capabilities,
aptitudes, or scholastic abilities, including abstract thinking skills,
academic skills, artistic ability, creative thinking/creativity, general
acquired knowledge, intellectual ability, leadership, motivation,
nonverbal/verbal reasoning, and problem solving ability.
If that is not available, other standardized data is gathered
and reviewed by a district team to determine whether the student demonstrates
potential for inclusion or further assessment for the gifted program.
Since
the best assessment is based on multiple measures, the data gathered
may include classroom based evidence of superior work, submission
of a student writing sample, attendance, report cards, teacher and/or
parent referral sheets which include questions focusing on the gifted
traits that match the program model.
Clarity of definition of what should be included in the packet
to be submitted and criteria and rubrics for the committee to judge
the work will build trust around the identification process.
It is critical to communicate clearly with all parties and
reduce the mystery that can surround the process of identification
of gifted students. Parent
meetings are very helpful during the course of the process so that
they understand what type of student would most benefit from inclusion
in the program.
This
usually leads to the second step. The referral process typically involves
a meeting with the parent and parental permission for individual testing.
There are times when the evidence is not clear enough to make
a decision or there are discrepancies in the data available due to
language culture of learning style. One alternative is to administer an individual instrument
to the student. At this
time we are fortunate to have alternatives, including nonverbal measure
s that can fairly identify the intellectual potential of the child.
Individual testing determines whether or not the student's
cognitive processing abilities are sufficiently different from the
norm (description) to benefit from classroom modification.
Common
tests used include the following.
Examples
of specific tests include the Cognitive Abilities Test (COGAT), Gifted
and Talented Evaluation Scales (GATES), the Iowa Tests of Basic Skills,
Scales for Rating the Behavioral Characteristics of Superior Students,
the Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children (K-ABC), or Raven's Progressive
Matrices.
Some
states have developed their own assessments; for example, ASSETS:
A Survey of Students' Educational Talents and Skills has been developed
by the Grand Rapids Public Schools in Michigan. This usually leads
to the second step, referral. The referral process typically involves
a meeting with the parent and parental permission for individual testing.
Individual testing determines whether or not the student's
cognitive processing abilities are sufficiently different from the
norm (description) to benefit from classroom modification.
Most
of the group tests are not considered IQ tests. Like all assessments,
IQ tests vary in what they measure. However, IQ tests are usually
given individually; those that are given individually are generally
the most comprehensive and most reliable. The Wechsler Intelligence
Scale for Children (WISC) and the Stanford-Binet are examples of individually
administered tests. A licensed psychologist or practitioner administers
these tests to individuals, not to groups.
Giftedness
can be expressed in a variety of behaviors and goes beyond language
and logic. It requires
carefully planned subjective assessment for identification and all
ethnic groups have gifted individuals. But identification of bilingual
and minority students has long been an issue in gifted education and
the Universal Nonverbal Intelligence Test (UNIT) recently published
by Riverside is designed to provide a fair comprehensive assessment
of general intelligence with an entirely nonverbal administration.
Other tests such as the Test of Nonverbal Intelligence (TONI) or System
of Multicultural Pluralistic Assessment (SOMAS) have been developed
to be used with bilingual and/or multicultural populations.
Many
programs use a variety of parent and teacher checklists or recommendations,
peer/student recommendations, and other checklists or rating scales
of behavioral characteristics. Such lists must be used with care to
make sure they are valid and appropriate for their intended use with
the district's student population.
One of the oft-cited reasons for under-representation of minority
students in gifted programs is teacher and parent failure to identify
these underrepresented groups because their profile may not mirror
that of the more modal middle class gifted student.
In
addition to the more traditional assessments, much work has been done
recently in the area of alternative assessment of gifted students.
These can include gathering data in the classroom as to a child's
progress over time in the area of critical thinking, ability to grasp
new ideas quickly or observations of how a student operates within
a group. Seeking identification
from outside sources or students who appear to think differently,
are considered leaders or who demonstrate unique skills can lead to
uncovering a potentially gifted student.
While these are time consuming measures, they do provide information
that is otherwise unavailable and can be combined with some of the
traditional measures to determine appropriateness of placement.
Additional
specific information on tests is located at the ERIC Clearinghouse
on Assessment and Evaluation, Riverside Publishing Co. (http://www.riverpub.com),
Harcourt Educational Measurement (http://www.HEMWEB.com)
and Educational Testing Service.
What
do teachers need to know about gifted students?
A
key feature of any program's effectiveness is staff development.
This is particularly true in serving the needs of gifted students
because their needs are so diverse. Gifted students classroom needs
may range from intense instructional support for a learning disability
to curriculum compacting for academic acceleration.
The same student might be in need of support in one area and
six or more years advanced in another.
Staff
development should include one or more courses on the diverse learner
– including identification and characteristics, curriculum integration,
and how to modify the curriculum to accommodate the wide range of
individual needs. In
addition, teachers need to understand the unique emotional and social
needs of gifted learners and their requirement for time with learners
of like ability.
All
teacher preparation programs should include a course on the needs
and characteristic of gifted learners.
These students are enrolled in t he regular program and may
choose not to enroll in a gifted program so the delivery of an appropriate
curriculum is the role of the classroom teacher.
Teachers
who are assigned to programs designated for gifted learners must have
additional training in curriculum, instructional strategies and standards
for these uniquely different learners.
The opportunity for study groups, action research and networking
would greatly enhance the resource base for teachers of the gifted.
How
can adults help the gifted student?
Teachers
who serve gifted students generally move to the role of guide.
Students come with basic knowledge and understand how to gain
and apply information. It
is the teacher's role to provide the avenue for good education.
Teachers
should consider:
-
seeking
outside resources, including the talents of parents and relatives
-
seeking
out of level materials from contiguous schools, including students
who are willing to mentor or share knowledge
-
accessing
local gifted advocacy groups
-
encouraging
parents to be a part of the great school community
-
seeking
a network of colleagues for curriculum and instruction support
-
helping
students make their own sense
-
sharing
the teaching with the students
-
offering
high expectations
-
teaching
the whole child
-
practicing
flexible grouping to meet the individual needs of the learners
Parents
should consider:
-
seeking
local parent groups for support of gifted education
-
becoming
active in the community support for giftedness
-
being
an advocate for all children with special needs
-
being
an educated advocate for their child
-
building
open communication with school
-
listening
carefully to their child
-
talking
about expectations and what they mean
-
permitting
their child their own individuality
-
allowing
their child to take risks while guiding them in good decision
making
-
allowing
the child to discover his or her own individuality
-
dealing
with issues of perfectionism by setting realistic standards
-
helping
the child to balance cognitive excellence and emotional needs
-
encouraging
the child to show
emotion and delight for the world around them
-
providing
a safe haven for the child when they are feeling especially different
and vulnerable
-
modeling
socially appropriate behavior
-
enjoying
their child as an individual
Administrators
should consider:
-
understanding
program expectations
-
being
supportive of the educational model
-
being
an advocate for children to learn at his or her own level
-
accessing
appropriate resources to match the curriculum
and instruct for the gifted learners
-
allowing
for unique delivery of the curriculum that allows children to
question, seek answers and share information
-
coaching
staff in a manner that encourages diversity, creativity and high standards
-
bridging
the gap that can exist between staff and parents
-
openly
celebrating the success of all students
-
supporting
equity of educational services so that all children's' needs are
met
-
modifying
policies and procedures to support a differentiated classroom
-
learning
the qualities of a high quality, differentiated classroom
What
are some qualities to look for in a strong program for gifted education?
Based
on the work of Joyce Van-Tassel-Baska, there are several indicators
of a quality program for gifted.
It is her contention that these can also be used as a guide
to review the effectiveness of the program.
The program would include the following:
-
written
philosophy, goals, and anticipated outcomes for students
-
multiple
options at and across grade levels
-
utilizes
modified scheduling and differentiated staffing to achieve its
goals
-
utilizes
multiple criteria for identification, appropriate instrumentation,
and a process for ongoing admissions
- comprehensive
across years of schooling
-
curriculum is articulated across years of schooling
- teachers
are selected according to key characteristics and receive training
to work with gifted
- uses
diverse and multiple resources including the community to carry
out its goals
-
models
used respond to the needs of the students in the particular setting
- instructional
emphasis is on problem solving, higher level thought processes,
inquiry based discussion and student generated high quality products
- as
a parent education component and an ongoing school/community awareness
component
- curriculum
development is an ongoing effort that actively involves teachers
in the process
- implementation
is monitored and revisions are made as needed in the context
In
assessing or visiting programs for gifted students,
parents would be encouraged to ask questions around these elements
of a quality program developed by VanTassel-Baska. Many program reviews
are conducted based on this list.
Gifted
students are a vital resource for themselves, their families and their
community. Our
quest is for excellence and to guarantee that identified gifted students
will experience equitable opportunities for quality education.
It is the job of each of us to practice advocacy, vigilance,
and informed involvement. These
students are learners with special needs for educational and instructional
accommodations and many adults must be directly involved to assure
that this will happen.
References
Baldwin,
Alexinia (2000) Which is More Important to Intelligence: genes
or environment? Boulder: Open Space Communications.
Bloom,
Benjamin S., ed., et al. (1985) Developing Talent in Young People.
New York:Ballentine.
Clark,
Barbara (1992) Growing Up Gifted. New York: Macmillan
Press.
Ford,
Donna (1996) Reversing Underachievement among Gifted Black Students:
Promising Practices and Programs. New York: Teachers
College Press.
Gardner,
Howard (1983) Frames of Mind; the Theory of Multiple Intelligences.
New York: Basic Books.
Gardner,
Howard (1999) Intelligence Reframed : Multiple Intelligences for
the 21st century. New York: Basic Books.
Hollingsworth,
Lena (1926) Gifted Children, their Nature and Nurture.
New York: Macmillan.
McCallister,
Corliss Jean and Meckstroth, Elizabeth (2000) In What Way Can We
Nurture One's Native Intelligence. Boulder: Open Space
Communication.
Miles,
William (1981) Research and Issues in Gifted and Talented Education:
Washington, D.C.: ERIC
Renzulli,
Joseph and Reis, S. (1985) The Schoolwide Enrichment Model: A Comprehensive
plan for educational excellence. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative
Learning.
Renzulli,
Joseph and Smith, L. (1978) The Learning Styles Inventory: A measure
of student preference for instructional techniques. Mansfield
Center, CT: Creative Learning.
Renzulli,
Joseph (1998) A Rising Tide Lifts All Ships, Developing the Gifts
and Talents of All Students. Educational Leadership 80(2) 104-111.
Smutny,
Joan (1998) The Young Gifted Child: Potential and Promise:
An Anthology. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press.
Sternberg,
Robert (1985) Beyond IQ: a Triarchic theory of human intelligence.
New York: Cambridge University Press.
Terman,
Lewis and M. Oden (1925) Studies of Genius: Mental and physical
traits of a thousand gifted children. Stanford, CA: Stanford
University Press.
Tomlinson,
Carol Ann (1999) The Differentiated Classroom: Responding to the
Needs of all Learners. Alexandria: ASCD.
VanTassel-Baska,
Joyce (1994) Comprehensive Curriculum for Gifted Learners.
Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Wolf,
Dennie Palmer (1988) "Opening up assessment," Educational
Leadership, 45(4), 24-29.
Websites:
http://ericec.org
About
the Authors:
Jill Hearne, Ph. D. is currently consulting nationally in the
area of Standards-Based Reform.
She also is an adjunct professor at several Northwest universities.
Dr. Hearne consults and presents for a variety of groups and organizations,
including the Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction for
Washington State (OSPI) and various school districts around the country.
She has served in many capacities in education; as Coordinator
of Assessment and Director of Elementary Education for Seattle Public
Schools, as Principal in the Seattle and Federal Way School Districts,
as researcher at the University of Washington, as Equity Specialist
at the state level and as Adjunct Professor for Western Washington
University, the University of Washington and the University of Alaska.
Jill
is currently active in many professional organizations and has published
in the areas of equity and school reform.
Her current involvement includes serving as a judge for the
U.S. Department of Education's Blue Ribbon Awards, as well as active
participation in the Washington and American Educational Research
Association. jilhearne@aol.com
Barbara
Maurer, M.Ed. is currently Director of Teaching and Learning at
the Puget Sound Educational Service District in Washington.
Her studies included gifted education and educational administration.
Ms.
Maurer has worked in the area of gifted education for 25 years in
public education as a teacher, program designer, manager and curriculum
consultant.
She has designed and delivered innovative curriculum models
for gifted students, which have been copied by others.
She has worked in Seattle Public Schools and the Highline School
District in Washington State and currently does much staff development
in the area of gifted education and standards and assessment.
Barbara's
work is infused with a passion for gifted education and she is an
advocate for students and teachers and an advisor for parents.
She has advanced that commitment by serving on the Board of
Northwest Gifted Child Association, Washington Association of Talented
and Gifted, Washington Council for Honors and Advanced Placement and
the State Advisory for Gifted Education.
In addition, she serves as adjunct faculty for several Northwest
universities.
Her
vision is that programs for gifted students will be an integral part
of the educational delivery model in school systems. Bmaurer@psesd.wednet.edu
Copyright
© October 2000 New Horizons for Learning
This
area of the website is sponsored by the
You
are here: