Curriculum Development for Gifted
Learners
Component-Sequence 1-105-302-0534
Foreword
The information presented in this packet is designed for the teacher
enrolled in the Gifted Endorsement Class- Curriculum Development for
The Gifted Learner through Miami-Dade County’s Center for Professional
Learning. The compiler, Melissa Keller, has reproduced all of the material
for educational purposes. According to copyright law, all material is used
“fairly,” expressly for this course and not for commercial use. This booklet
is the research of the instructor, Melissa Keller.
In the Table of Contents, each work is cited (most pages have the internet
web address printed on it).
Enjoy!
1
Part 1:
Curriculum and
Differentiation
2
Miami Dade County Public Schools Advanced Academics
Gifted Education Programs
Elementary
Gifted Education Programs provide qualitatively different programs designed to meet the needs
of gifted students K-12. Gifted Education is defined by State Board Education rule 6A-6.03019
as one who has superior intellectual development and is capable of high performance. Eligibility
under State Board Rule includes a documented need for the program, a majority of gifted
characteristics, and an intelligence quotient in the superior range. Additional eligibility criteria
are available for limited English proficient students and students from low socio-economic
families. Curriculum components include: enrichment, acceleration, alignment with the Sunshine
State Standards (SSS)/Competency Based Curriculum (CBC), Gifted Program Goals and
Objectives, and Gifted Program Standards. The gifted education program is available in all
schools in the District through resource, content, full time and consultation services. All M-DCPS
elementary, middle, and senior high schools provide gifted program services.
http://advancedacademicprograms.dadeschools.net/elementary/index.htm
Secondary
Gifted Education Programs provide qualitatively different programs designed to meet the needs
of gifted students K-12. Gifted Education is defined by State Board Education rule 6A-6.03019
as one who has superior intellectual development and is capable of high performance. Eligibility
under State Board Rule includes a documented need for the program, a majority of gifted
characteristics, and an intelligence quotient in the superior range. Additional eligibility criteria
are available for limited English proficient students and students from low socio-economic
families. Curriculum components include: enrichment, acceleration , alignment with the
Sunshine State Standards (SSS)/Competency Based Curriculum (CBC), Gifted Program Goals
and Objectives, and Gifted Program Standards. The gifted education program is available in all
schools in the District through resource, content, full time and consultation services. All M-DCPS
elementary, middle, and senior high schools provide gifted program services.
http://advancedacademicprograms.dadeschools.net/secondary/index.htm
What do the following terms mean to you?
1. enrichment
2. acceleration
3. differentiation
4. compacting
3
Changing Teaching Practices: Using curriculum differentiation to
respond to students’ diversity (Handbook)
United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization, 2004
Unit 1: Curriculum Differentiation and our Students
Page 13: What is curriculum?
Curriculum is what is learned and what is taught (context); how it is delivered (teaching-learning
methods); how it is assessed (exams, for example); and the resources used (e.g., books used
to deliver and support teaching and learning). Often we, as teachers base our curriculum
content, the “formal curriculum,” on a prescribed set of educational outcomes or goals. Because
this formal curriculum may be prescribed by authority, teachers feel constrained and often
implement it rigidly. Teachers feel that they cannot make changes to or decisions about this
type of prescribed curriculum including the predetermined textbook selection. As a result
teachers are bound to teaching from the textbook and to the “average” group of students. In
many countries teachers do this because the system has content-loaded examinations that
students must pass and teacher success is measured by students’ performance on these
examinations. We will also consider the informal or ‘hidden’ curriculum – the ‘unplanned’
learning that occurs in classrooms, in the school compound or when the students interact
together with or without the teacher present. It is important that we are aware of the informal
curriculum as it can be used to reinforce formal learning; for example with students being
encouraged to extend their learning out of class through extra curricular activities and
homework. It is important that students are encouraged to see this as ‘their’ work and not a
chore to be done because the teacher says so.
As you think about curriculum, let’s consider some questions and reflect upon
them.
 What is curriculum?
 What are you expected to cover in the curriculum?
 Why is curriculum one of the biggest challenges to inclusion?
 Why is it that some learners are not considered able enough to be using the same
curriculum?
 Is it appropriate to reduce the curriculum?
 How do you perceive curriculum and its transaction in the classroom?
 What factors influence curriculum?
Your answers:
4
Page 14- What is the content of the curriculum and how can we modify it?
The Content. Before we make decisions on how we are going to teach, and what we need to
modify, we first need to identify the content. Content is what we teach. Content is what the
student is expected to learn, that is, to know, understand or be able to do. It includes facts,
concepts, and skills that students will acquire within their learning environment. Sometimes
teachers are able to select the content to suit the students’ needs. Sometimes it is the authority
of the school that has prescribed the content of the curriculum; sometimes it is a combination of
teacher and authority. Because of curriculum demands and time constraints, it is often a
challenge for the teachers to select content which is based on:
 being meaningful,
 students needs and interests,
 the environment, and
 more than just learning facts.
 We know that for many teachers, content is simply what is prescribed by the department
of education.
 In curriculum differentiation, teachers are encouraged to modify the content to some
extent to help students reach the outcomes.
Page 15- What other components of the curriculum can we modify?
With content selected, and changed as necessary, we can consider other components that we
may want to modify for any individual student or for a group of students.
Curricular Components—Teachers can modify the:
Methods of
Presentation
>>>
How new information is presented to
students. For example, does the teacher
introduce the topic or do the students
introduce it to each other in pair work?
Methods of Practice
and Performance
>>>
What methods and/or activities are used by
students in order for them to understand the
content in their own terms.
>>>
Methods of Assessment
How students show understanding of what
they are learning or have learned.
Page 16-17 What do we need to know to differentiate the curriculum?
The Students’ Individual
&
The Teachers’ Individual
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
• needs
• abilities
• interests
• backgrounds of experience
• learning/teaching modalities and styles
5
GT-Models (updated December 2003)
The ERIC Clearinghouse on Disabilities and Gifted Education (ERIC EC)
E-mail: webmaster@hoagiesgifted.org
Internet: http://eric.hoagiesgifted.org
Is there a listing of what are considered to be the "best practices" for teaching students
who are gifted?
When attempts are made to evaluate the impact of a particular school environment, such as the
resource room, or ability grouping, or a particular instructional method such as creative problem
solving, the range and diversity of results is striking. It is clear that resource rooms work well
sometimes, and not at all well at others. The enrichment triad (Schoolwide Enrichment) is a
great success in some places and a disappointment in others. Merely placing youngsters in a
particular setting, or providing them with a particular set of activities, does not necessarily lead
to success. Changing the learning environment without changing the content of lessons seems
nonproductive and leads many gifted students to say that "school is boring." Further, much of
the curriculum that is designed with gifted students in mind is designed on an "ad hoc" basis,
without benefit of scope and sequence, and with little apparent justification. (Gallagher, 1993).
On the other hand, a well-constructed program that brings gifted students together and provides
them with an intellectually stimulating and important set of ideas, together with giving them
practice to use their own ability to problem-find and problem-solve, seems to yield very tangible
results. Projects such as the National Curriculum Project for High Ability Learners at The
College of William and Mary have provided evidence that a focused, high-powered, and
integrated curriculum can bring about significant student learning gains in core areas of
curriculum content. Ideally, such a curriculum should be the cornerstone of any services offered
to students who are gifted or talented, or who, because of their abilities, have the potential for
an extraordinary level of achievement.
Some effective practices included in this FAQ are listed below. This list is a representative
sampling of effective practices, selected because they represent a broader view of intelligence
and giftedness than traditional models.







General Information on Effective Practices
Accelerated School Project
Multiple Intelligences
Schoolwide Enrichment Model
Talent Development
Talents Unlimited
Triarchic Model
Following are links to related Internet resources and Internet discussion groups, as well as
selected citations from the ERIC database and the search terms we used to find the citations.


Internet Resources (http://www.hoagiesgifted.org/eric/faq/gt-urls.html)
Internet Discussion Groups (http://www.hoagiesgifted.org/eric/gifted.html)
6
Florida Department of Education
May 20, 2005
Service Delivery Models for Students who are Gifted
Gifted education is one of the five endorsement areas provided in exceptional student education. The gifted
education endorsement supports the academic coverage required for the subject and content of the course taught.
The courses listed under Exceptional Student Education - Gifted are designed to meet the needs of students
identified as gifted. The content of these courses is different from basic education courses in the same areas.
Programs for students who are gifted encompass instructional and related services that provide significant
adaptations in curriculum, methodology, materials, equipment, or the learning environment (Rule 6A-6.0311,
Florida Administrative Code (FAC)). The required teacher certification for serving gifted students is dependent upon
the composition of the class when: (1) all students in the class are identified as being gifted and (2) gifted students
are receiving gifted services through co-teaching, support facilitation, content mastery or learning lab (“limited pullout”), and consultation models.
Co-teaching - A classroom in which two teachers, a teacher of the gifted and a general education teacher, share
responsibility for planning, delivering, and evaluating instruction for all students in a class, some of whom are gifted
and some of whom are not. In order to be considered co-teaching, this delivery system is provided whenever a class
is taught by two teachers and must continue for the entire class period. The requirement is gifted endorsement for
the teacher of the gifted.
Support facilitation - The gifted teacher provides support for the gifted students’ achievement in the general
classroom. Support facilitators may work and move among two or more basic education classrooms working with
the general education teachers and students identified as gifted as needed. Frequency and intensity of support varies
based upon students’ and/or general educators’ need for assistance. The requirement is gifted endorsement for
the teacher of the gifted.
Content mastery or learning lab (“limited pull-out”) - Direct content instruction is primarily provided by the
general education teacher in a general education classroom. Individual support for students identified as gifted is
provided by the teacher of the gifted in a content mastery or learning lab center when additional support is needed
for a specific and defined time-limited task (students would not be scheduled on a regular basis, only as needed).
The requirement is certification for the academic subject and content of the course and the gifted
endorsement for the teacher of the gifted.
Consultation - General education teachers and teachers of the gifted meet regularly to plan, implement, and monitor
instructional alternatives designed to ensure that the gifted student achieves successful accomplishment of gifted
goals in the general education classroom. All teachers providing support to students via consultation are required to
maintain a record of the teachers, courses, and gifted students to whom they are providing services and a log of
service provided. It is expected that consultation occurs at least once monthly, or more frequently if needed. The
requirement is gifted endorsement for the teacher providing the consultation. Best practice includes
certification for the level of the students.
Resource room or self-contained - Teachers of the gifted would provide total instruction and focused services in
these models in which all of the students being served are students who are gifted. The setting for this service
delivery model is other than the general education classroom for a period(s) of the school day. The requirement is
certification for the academic coverage for subject and content of the course and the gifted endorsement for
the teacher of the gifted.
Issues related to using an inclusion model to provide service for gifted students may be answered by review of the
co-teaching, support facilitation, or consultation guidelines or by referring to ERIC Digest E607, “Cluster Grouping
of Gifted Students: How to Provide Full-Time Services on a Part-Time Budget” by Susan Winebrenner and Barbara
Devlin. This document is available at www.eric.ed.gov.
7
http://www.hoagiesgifted.org/eric/faq/gt-model.html
FindArticles > Theory Into Practice > Spring, 2005 > Article > Print friendly
Gifted programs and services: what are the nonnegotiables?
Joyce Van Tassel-Baska
This article focuses on the "nonnegotiables" of gifted programs and services, emphasizing the importance of appropriately differentiated
curriculum, instruction, materials, and assessment procedures. Differentiation is discussed in the context of providing acceleration and
grouping as basic policy provisions in gifted programs--within which a curriculum base that is advanced, in-depth, complex, creative, and
challenging may be offered. Alignment with content standards is also suggested as a way to promote connection to general curriculum
reform. Ideas about creating an optimal match between the learner and the curriculum-delivery system are explored. The use of advanced
resources, including technology, is described. Two inquiry-based instructional techniques are delineated, specifically problem-based learning
and question-asking techniques. The article ends with an emphasis on the need for quality teaching for the gifted population and for
collaborative support between home and school in promoting talent development.
IN AN ERA OF NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND (NCLB), one population has been neglected. It is the gifted and talented learner whose needs call for
educational attention. Yet every school needs to have basic provisions in place to assure the educational development of these students in the
domains of learning for which the school has responsibility. Most schools mission statements proclaim the intention of educating every child to
the level of his or her potential, yet many times these words have no translation value for gifted students as they sit bored in classrooms
where their instructional level exceeds by years their age-peers. Thus, there is a real need to consider nonnegotiable options for this
population, regardless of age or grade considerations, as well as general program organizational approaches employed to effect sound service
delivery. There is a wide variety of ways that educators can assist in the talent development process of advanced learners.
Overview of School-Based Talent Development
For schools to respond effectively to gifted learners' needs, certain nonnegotiable talent development emphases must be in place, such as
accelerative practices coupled with the use of technology options and opportunities. Schools also need to ensure that differentiated practices
are in place in all subject areas, at both the elementary and secondary levels. Such practices require the design of differentiated units of
study, differentiated curriculum resources, instructional differentiation, and the use of appropriate assessment tools to judge authentic
learning for gifted students. A key support for these emphases is quality teaching, where the instructor skill and ability is optimally matched
to the learner. Schools must also accept that these students require services beyond what they can provide. Thus, access to advanced
opportunities outside of school is a facilitative role for schools to perform on behalf of their most gifted learners.
Accelerated Study
One of the nonnegotiable curriculum policy initiatives that school districts might enact on behalf of all gifted students would be one that
addresses acceleration. Acceleration assumes that different students of the same age are at different levels of learning within and across
learning areas, thus necessitating diagnosis of learning level and prescription of curriculum at a level slightly above it. The government
publication Prisoners of Time (National Education Commission on Time and Learning, 1994) documented the importance of recognizing time
as the crucial variable in learning, citing an understanding that many researchers have had for several decades: "If experience, research, and
common sense teach nothing else, they confirm the truism that people learn at different rates in different ways with different subjects" (p. 1).
Understanding that students have differences in learning rates for different subject areas in different kinds of material at different stages of
development is crucial to patterns of effective curriculum and instruction.
Flexibility in schooling, however, has been one of the most difficult tasks for public schools to enact in responding to students with special
needs. Various components need to be considered in developing such a policy at the school district level. One such component should allow
for early entrance and early exit procedures for students at various stages of development. Many gifted children are academically ready for
school before they are at the "magic age," and others develop more rapidly than age peers, once they are in a schooling environment. Early
access to high school eliminates the holding pattern of the middle-school years so common in many contexts around the country. Specifically,
early college entrance can be accomplished by those already academically proficient in high school subject matter. One of the advantages of
the new standards movement (including NCLB) is a clear way to document mastery levels in each area of schooling, thus allowing students
who are ready to move forward to do so.
Content Acceleration
Another indication of curriculum flexibility involves the offering of content-based acceleration practices at all levels of schooling and in all
subject areas. In the last 20 years, schools have become more open to ideas of math acceleration but not to other subject areas (Benbow &
Stanley, 1996). For gifted learners with precocious abilities in verbal, scientific, and artistic areas, such pathways are also crucial to enhanced
learning and development at their natural rate of progression in school. Not only is there a limit on subject areas to be considered for
8
accelerative practices, there also is often a perception that rate should be capped at 6 months or a year to reduce or prevent students from
getting out of step with the school curriculum or other students their age (Olszewski-Kubilius, 2003). Both of these practices are faulty, based
on 80 years of research showing the positive outcomes of such accelerative opportunities on enhanced learning, motivation, and
extracurricular engagement of accelerated learners (Jones & Southern, 1991; Swiatek & Benbow, 1991).
Acceptable forms of acceleration in operation at the high school level include the hallmark secondary programs of The College Board
Advanced Placement (AP) Program and the International Baccalaureate (IB) Program. Both of these initiatives offer students the opportunity
to engage in college-level work while still in high school and reward their diligence with college placement or credit for work done during the
high school years (VanTassel-Baska, 2001). Such a model needs to be available to students at all stages of development, such that evidence
of advanced work brings credit toward the next level of the educational experience.
For secondary schools, dual enrollment courses at local 2-year and 4-year colleges would also be important. Many highly capable students
may wish to sample college early, although not actually attend full-time. Dual enrollment offers a wonderful opportunity for this early
academic and socialization process to occur. Students may take one to two classes away from campus, or sometimes arrangements are made
for dual enrollment courses to be delivered on-site. Currently, 22 states have dual enrollment policies, encouraging local districts to take
advantage of the opportunity for students to gain access to higher education while still in high school (Olszewski-Kubilius, 2003). These
courses are then banked for college and will automatically be credited for a student attending a public college in the same state. Often, the
equivalent of freshman year in college may be credited. For students and schools in rural areas of a state, dual enrollment provides a strong
alternative to AP and IB, which are often not possible to implement in small schools, due to lack of interested faculty or sufficient numbers of
ready students.
Grade-Level Acceleration
Another approach to acceleration for students who are advanced in all areas of the curriculum is grade-level acceleration. Such practices can
be handled through early entrance policies but need to be broadened to consider stages of schooling beyond the naturally occurring transition
years. For students showing more than 2 years of advancement in all school subjects, grade level acceleration may be a good decision.
Obviously, each case should be considered individually. More concern is, surprisingly, voiced about this well-documented and researched
practice than is warranted (Rogers, 2001). Grade acceleration, at critical points of schooling, can do much to counter boredom and
disenchantment with school among our best learners (Gross, 2003).
Telecommunications Options
A final avenue for acceleration should be in the realm of telecommunications. Advanced courses can now be provided technologically in ways
not possible a decade ago. School policy needs to reflect these new alternatives to teaching and learning, especially for advanced students
who can profit greatly from them. Several universities offer on-line courses that are tailored to younger students, such as the Stanford
Education Program for Gifted Youth computer-based program in mathematics. Other universities, such as Ball State University, beam
advanced courses to rural Indiana schools through their telecommunications link. Talent search universities, including Northwestern
University, Johns Hopkins University, and Duke University, provide on-line learning opportunities to students across the country. Independent
study opportunities with university faculty and research project work conducted globally can now be a part of student learning beyond the
classroom.
Flexible Grouping
Given this research on the positive use of various grouping models with gifted students (Gentry, 1999; Rogers, 2001), it is critical that school
districts attend to this facet of a support structure in evolving programs. The range of alternatives extends from within-class flexible grouping
and differentiated assignments to opportunities for special classes or schools and independent grouping options such as mentorships and
internships. The use of within-class grouping is nonnegotiable for serving gifted learners at all levels of schooling. For example, at the
elementary level, many classrooms are heterogeneous and inclusive. Such settings typically provide little differentiation or challenge for the
gifted learner and may not be as beneficial for any group as within-class flexible grouping practices. A recent study (Westberg & Daoust,
2003) suggests that differentiation practices in regular classrooms have not improved in 10 years, even with targeted professional
development in this area. Thus, appropriate grouping needs to occur to promote the use of differentiation to a greater degree. At the
secondary levels, the norm for honors and even advanced placement grouping is across high-ability and gifted ranges. Consequently, the
pace of the class and the opportunity for more in-depth work may be lost to gifted students as the teacher struggles to cover all of the
material with everyone. Even special classes designated for gifted students require more use of flexible grouping approaches to meet the
range of student needs.
In-class grouping, according to student capacity, provides teachers with alternative ways to handle certain aspects of learning. For example,
differentiating paper assignments by group allows advanced students both more latitude and depth potential for their work. Differentiating
readings by group may have the same effect. More in-class writing practice may be given to groups already skilled at peer critique. All of
these approaches to vary within-group work can help the teacher ensure that each student receives appropriate levels of instruction.
9
Special class grouping of gifted learners by subject area has historically been the most utilized approach to grouping at the secondary level,
whereas pull-out by program focus has predominated at the elementary level (Gallagher & Gallagher, 1994; VanTassel-Baska, 1998). Special
class grouping is one of the primary ways to deliver differentiated curriculum. Without such grouping arrangements, it is much more difficult
to differentiate. Research has shown that 84% of time in heterogeneous classroom settings is spent on whole-class activities, with no
attention to differentiating for gifted students (Archambault et al., 1993). Moreover, special classes are the context within which good
acceleration practices for individual students can be applied, as the level of the class, by necessity, needs to be more advanced in content.
Many schools have provided special grouping for mathematics and language arts but not for science and social studies (VanTassel-Baska &
Feng, 2003). Again, it is critical that a grouping policy apply to all relevant academic subjects, where size of school can allow for such
clustering to be formed. Students advanced in all areas need the opportunity to interact with others at their ability levels and to advance
academically at a rate and pace consonant with their abilities. Such a situation can typically only occur in a specialized group setting.
Grouping for more independent types of work is also a critical part of a grouping policy at all levels. Students may select among options
geared to providing them with more personalized opportunities for intellectual growth, whether through a well-designed independent project
or through work in a professional setting or through an optimal match with an adult in an area of expertise in which the student is interested.
Each of these types of arrangements call for schools to adopt a policy that allows for one-on-one interactions with the community at large as
well as more individualized use of school time.
Differentiated Curriculum
Differentiation for gifted students recognizes the interrelated importance of curriculum, instruction, and assessment in defining the term. A
differentiated curriculum is one that is tailored to the needs of groups of gifted learners or individual students, and provides experiences
sufficiently different from the norm to justify specialized intervention, delivered by a trained educator of gifted learners using appropriate
instructional and assessment processes to optimize learning.
Curriculum design is one major component of a differentiated curriculum for gifted students, because it delineates key features that constitute
any worthwhile curriculum. What is important for these students to know and be able to do at what stages of development? A nonnegotiable
in a curriculum for gifted learners is a sound design that links general curriculum principles to subject matter features and gifted-learner
characteristics. A well-constructed curriculum for gifted learners has to identify appropriate goals and outcomes. How do planned learning
experiences focus on meaningful experiences that provide depth and complexity at a pace that honors the gifted learner rate of advancement
through material? The curriculum for the gifted student must also be exemplary for the subject matter under study, meaning that it should be
standards-based and, thus, relevant to the thinking and doing of real-world professionals who practice writing, engage in mathematical
problem-solving, or do science for a living. Moreover, it should be designed to honor high-ability students' needs for advanced challenge, indepth thinking and doing, and abstract conceptualization. General criteria questions to ask in judging appropriate differentiation for gifted
learners are:
1. Is the curriculum sufficiently advanced for the best learners in the group?
2. Is the curriculum complex enough for the best learners, by requiring multiple levels of thinking, use of resources, or variables to
manipulate?
3. Is the curriculum sufficiently in-depth to allow students to study important issues and problems related to a topic under study?
4. Is the curriculum sufficiently creative to stimulate open-ended responses and provide high-level choices?
Differentiated Curriculum Resources
Curriculum differentiation must also address the need for careful selection of materials for use in classrooms serving gifted and promising
learners who may not yet be identified as gifted. These materials should go beyond a single text as resource, provide advanced readings,
present interesting and challenging ideas, treat knowledge as tentative and open-ended, and provide a conceptual depth that allows students
to make interdisciplinary connections. High quality technology resources that meet the same criteria should be used as an important part of
integrated learning.
It is useful for schools to appoint a materials selection committee who can review materials in each subject area, with an eye to principles of
differentiation and exemplary content (VanTasselBaska, 2004). The following list provides a few guiding questions that should influence the
process:
1. Does the material address the goals and outcomes of the curriculum framework?
2. Is the material differentiated for gifted learners in respect to advancement, complexity, and creativity?
10
3. Is the material well-designed in respect to emphasizing research-based strategies, such as concept mapping, metacognition,
and articulation of thinking?
4. Is the material aligned with standards in the relevant subject area, or easy to align?
A more complete review form may be found in another publication (VanTassel-Baska & Little, 2003). The materials selection committee may
rate each material reviewed and make decisions for use based on the data collected.
Instructional Differentiation
Instructional approaches that foster differentiated responses among diverse learners include those that are inquiry-based, open-ended, and
employ flexible grouping practices.
Problem-Based Learning
One example of an effective inquiry-based model is problem-based learning (PBL) that has the learner: (a) encounter a real-world problem
sculpted by the teacher out of key learning to be acquired in a given subject, (b) proceed to inquire about the nature of the problem as well
as effective avenues to research about it, and (c) pursue sources for acquiring relevant data. The instructional techniques needed by the
teacher include high-level questioning skills, listening skills, conferencing skills, and tutorial abilities to guide the process to successful
learning closure in a classroom. PBL also requires the use of flexible team grouping and whole class discussion. Problem resolution requires
student-initiated projects and presentations, guided by the teacher. Thus, effective instruction must include the selection of a few core
teaching models that successfully highlight the intended outcomes of the curriculum.
Higher Level Questioning Techniques
The use of high-level questions is also a key way to ensure that gifted students are being challenged. Many questioning models have been
employed to promote higher level thinking, including the simple Problem Based Learning model.
Assessment Differentiation
Just as differentiation involves careful selection of core materials and curriculum that underlies them and the deliberate choice of highpowered instructional approaches, it also requires the choice of differentiated assessment protocols that reflect the high level of learning
attained. High-stakes assessments, such as the Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT), AP exams, and even state assessments required by NCLB, are
the standardized symbols of how well gifted students are doing in comparison to others of their age. Secondary schools, to be considered high
quality, must produce students who score at the top levels on these nationally normed instruments. Yet deep preparation for success on these
tests rests in individual classrooms. Even strong learners like gifted students cannot do as well as they could without adequate preparation in
relevant content-based curriculum archetypes. The use of assessments as planning tools for direct instruction in each relevant subject area is
a key to overall improvement in student performance. Administrators responsible for the review of teacher lesson plans need to know how
such assessment models can be converted into work in classrooms. Curriculum directors and departments need to spend planning time on
strategies for incorporating such elements. Because assessments are a reality of NCLB and viewed by our society as crucial indicators of
student progress in school, we need to make them work for us rather than against us in the public arena.
In addition to standardized measures being employed to assess student learning, it is also crucial that more performance-based tools be
employed to assess individual growth and development. In tandem with more standardized measures, performance-based tools provide a
more complete picture of individual progress toward specific education goals. For gifted learners, in particular, the quality of performance on
such measures may be a better indicator of deeply mastered skills and concepts than paper-and-pencil measures, because performancebased assessments require students to articulate an understanding of the learning process, often by providing responses that may have
multiple parts or are open-ended (VanTasselBaska, Johnson, & Avery, 2002).
A final consideration in the use of alternative assessment approaches with gifted learners involves providing rubrics for assessment at the
time the assignment is given so that students can understand expectation levels required for any given assignment at conception rather than
at the end. This approach also ensures that criteria for judgment are both well-defined by the teacher and well-understood by the student.
Quality Teaching
Core knowledge and skills for teachers who work with gifted students might be a long list indeed, but focusing it on nonnegotiables may make
it more manageable. What are the critical requirements for identifying high-quality teachers of gifted learners? First of all, teachers of gifted
learners need to be lifelong learners themselves, open to new experiences and able to appreciate the value of new learning and how it applies
11
to the classroom. Second, they need to be passionate about at least one area of knowledge that they know well, and be able to communicate
that passion and its underlying expertise to students. This would imply deep knowledge in a subject area, coupled with the ability to use the
skills associated with that knowledge domain at a high level. Third, they need to be good thinkers, able to manipulate ideas at analysis,
synthesis, and evaluation levels with their students within and across areas of knowledge. Such facility would imply that they themselves
were strong students in college and scored well on tests of reasoning, like the SAT and the Graduate Record Exam. Fourth, teachers of gifted
students must be capable of processing information in a simultaneity mode, meaning that they need to be able to address multiple objectives
at the same time, recognize how students might manipulate different higher level skills in the same task demand, and easily align lower level
tasks within those that require higher level skills and concepts.
Teacher-directed differentiation for gifted students has no meaning if teachers cannot perform these types of tasks and evidence these skills.
To develop and demonstrate these skills, teachers of gifted students need in-depth preparation through an endorsement or certification
program of studies at a university. Sustained professional development is also necessary in areas of program delivery.
Access to Advanced Opportunities External to Schools
Although local schools play a critical role in educating students, they can be even more effective when coupled with outside community
resources that supplement learning. One such program model is the Saturday and Summer Enrichment programs offered by local universities.
These initiatives tend to be enrichment-oriented and allow area gifted students to use their leisure time pursuing topics of academic interest
such as poetry, computers, chemistry, and architecture under the direction of a highly qualified instructor. Because these programs usually
charge tuition, it is often necessary for schools to disseminate information to parents to make them aware of such services. Also offered by
universities are the Talent Search programs, usually targeted to academically able middle-school students who qualify based on SAT scores.
Often offered during the summer, and including a residential component, many of these programs provide accelerated content equivalent to
high school coursework.
Other activities which involve the community include mentorships and internships. The former involves selecting an individual who can serve
as a role model to a student and establishing a one-on-one relationship. This connection helps a student understand how an adult mentor
experiences and processes the world, with the relationship built on some area of mutual interest. Internships or job-shadowing opportunities
involve placements in community settings, usually for a period from 2 weeks to a full term, depending on the situation. The purpose is to help
the student explore the real world, and to see the work habits and task demands that accompany certain professions. Both of these
alternatives are highly relevant for gifted students, particularly for the extremely gifted child or adolescent who may feel very different from
the norm and may have time available to explore different work environments or career options as a result of program or content
acceleration. Mentorships and internship opportunities are most common in scientific research settings, although museums and governmental
offices are prime placements as well, depending on the interests and aptitudes of students.
Conclusion
All of these nonnegotiable options are crucial to the development of talent, but rarely can be accomplished by the schools alone. An active
partnership with families is required to ensure that students receive the right opportunities at the right time in the right degree of intensity.
There are no magic rules to assist in this process as it is highly individuated and dependent on the domain of talent, the level of student
aptitude and interest, and the developmental stage of the talent itself. The talent development process is vulnerable to being stalled,
thwarted, and even shut down at key stages of children lives. Our society cannot afford to neglect its most able students and their potential
contributions.
References
Archambault, F. X., Westberg, K. L., Brown, S. W., Hallmark, B. W., Zhang, W., & Emmons, C. (1993). Classroom practices used with gifted third and fourth grade students. Journal for the
Education of the Gifted, 16, 103-119.
Benbow, C. P., & Stanley, J. C. (1996). Inequity in equity: How "equity" can lead to inequity for high-potential students. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 2, 249-292.
Gallagher, J. J., & Gallagher, S. A. (1994). Teaching the gifted child. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Gentry, M. L. (1999). Promoting student achievement and exemplary classroom practices through cluster grouping: A research-based alternative to heterogeneous elementary classrooms. (Report
No. RM9918). Storrs, CT: National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED429389).
Gross, M. (2003). Exceptionally gifted children. London: Taylor & Francis.
Jones, E. D., & Southern, W. T. (1991). The academic acceleration of gifted children. New York: Teachers College Press.
National Education Commission on Time and Learning. (1994). Prisoners of time. Washington, DC: Author.
Olszewski-Kubilius, P. (2003). Special summer and Saturday programs for gifted students. In N. Colangelo & G. A. Davis (Eds.), Handbook of gifted education (pp. 219-228). Boston: Allyn &
Bacon.
Rogers, K. B. (2001). Re-forming gifted education: How parents and teachers can match the program to the child. Scottsdale, AZ: Great Potential Press.
Swiatek, M. A., & Benbow, C. P. (1991). Ten-year longitudinal follow-up of ability-matched accelerated and unaccelerated gifted students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, 528-538.
VanTassel-Baska, J. (1998). Excellence in educating the gifted (3rd ed.). Dener, CO: Love.
VanTassel-Baska, J. (2001). The role of advanced placement in talent development. Journal for Secondary Gifted Education, 12, 126-132.
VanTassel-Baska, J. (2004). The case for a systems approach to curriculum differentiation. Tempo, 1, 5-24.
VanTassel-Baska, J., & Feng, A. (Eds.). (2003). Designing and utilizing evaluation for gifted program improvement. Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.
VanTassel-Baska, J., Johnson, D., & Avery, L. D. (2002). Using performance tasks in the identification of economically disadvantaged and minority gifted learners: Findings from Project STAR.
Gifted Child Quarterly, 46, 110-123.
VanTassel-Baska, J., & Little, C. (Eds.). (2003). Content-based curriculum for high-ability learners. Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.
Westberg, K. L., & Daoust, M. E. (2003, Fall). The results of the replication of the classroom practices survey replication in two states. The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented
Newsletter, 3-8.
Joyce VanTassel-Baska is the Executive Director and Jody and Layton Smith Professor in Education at the Center for Gifted Education of the College of William and Mary.
Requests for reprints can be sent to Joyce VanTassel-Baska, Center for Gifted Education, The College of William and Mary, P. O. Box 8795, Williamsburg, VA 23187. E-mail: jlvant@wm.edu
12
COPYRIGHT 2005 The Ohio State University, on behalf of its College of Education
COPYRIGHT 2005 Gale Group
Differentiation: Definition and Description for Gifted and Talented
http://www.gifted.uconn.edu/nrcgt/newsletter/spring98/sprng985.html
Susan T. Dinnocenti
University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT
Educational terms often become buzzwords communicated through various media and
professional conversations. Within these dialogues, misconception replaces the intended
meaning that results in confusion or lack of implementation for necessary strategies that benefit
high ability students.
Differentiation cannot become another buzzword! Rather, it must be accurately defined and
described so that pedagogical strategies and classroom environments are appropriate for gifted
and talented students.
Differentiation Defined . . .
Three components that are most notably associated with differentiation are: content--what is
being taught; process—how it is being taught; and product—tangible results produced based on
students' interests and abilities. In the last few years, researchers have added to the content,
process, and product definition by addressing the teacher's role, evaluation methods, and the
goals of differentiation.
Tomlinson (1995) emphasizes that in differentiating the curriculum, teachers are not dispensers
of knowledge but organizers of learning opportunities. To provide optimal learning opportunities
the classroom environment must be changed to accommodate the interests and abilities of the
learner. Another dimension included in classroom differentiation involves assessing student
performance. Riley (1997) states that when differentiating, appropriate evaluation methods
should be utilized including rubrics, portfolios, and checklists based on the products created.
Renzulli's (1997) Five Dimensions of Differentiation include the aspects previously addressed,
while defining goals of what each dimension should include for a truly differentiated approach.
Goals related to the five dimensions are:
content-
put more depth into the curriculum through organizing the curriculum concepts and
structure of knowledge;
process-
use many instructional techniques and materials to enhance and motivate learning
styles of students;
product-
improve the cognitive development and the students' ability to express themselves;
classroom- enhance the comfort by changing grouping formats and physical area of
environment;
teacher-
use artistic modification to share personal knowledge of topics related to curriculum
as well as personal interests, collections, hobbies, and enthusiasm about issues
surrounding content area.
13
Differentiation Described . . .
The following description paints a picture of what a differentiated classroom resembles.
Within the content area, representative topics are explored and webbed, with open-ended
questions that probe into a particular field of knowledge (Renzulli, 1997). For example, under
the study of Health, a representative topic would be childhood obesity explored by the discussion
of whether obesity is a result of genetic or dietary factors. This type of content exploration
supports Slocumb and Monaco (1986) who state that, "Curriculum must allow for students to
discover the bridges between ideas and fields of study and the paths to new learning" (p. 32).
Pedagogical strategies or processes used to stimulate thinking would include but not be limited
to problem-based learning, Socratic method, simulations, independent study (both guided and
unguided), and higher-level thinking questions. According to Maker (1982), higher-level
thinking questions are necessary for critical thinking skills to be grasped by students to respond
to curriculum content at higher levels. These processes are illustrated in classrooms where Future
Problem Solving activities (researching, brainstorming, identifying an underlying problem, and
developing an action plan) are used or where the training of how-to skills is utilized to motivate
independent investigations of real world problems.
Products associated with a differentiated approach reflect both the learners' expression and the
applied skills of a field of study. These products can be achieved through exposure to learning
opportunities developed within the classroom or through the external environment (Passow,
1982) such as agencies, museums, TV, radio, community organizations, and mentorships or
apprenticeships. A student's product related to childhood obesity may be a newly designed diet
for children developed with the aid of hospital dieticians. Another would be an exercise program
that takes into consideration the genetic predisposition of children generated with the knowledge
and assistance of an exercise physiologist.
When differentiation is occurring in a classroom environment there is a combination of interest
and learning centers, study areas, computer stations, and work areas for artistic and scientific
discoveries. Some students may need the use of other school learning areas (e.g., library, gym,
auditorium, lab) if the topic being investigated requires additional resources or environments that
allow for freedom of movement.
Most importantly, the teacher extends him/herself by becoming part of the learning exploration
through direct personal experiences, an opinion or belief that sparks a curiosity or confrontation
with knowledge, or by modeling the love of learning as the process unravels.
Passow (1982) states that differentiation is essential for gifted students to develop their unique
gifts and talents. "Teachers responsible for these students must have an appropriate base of
knowledge and skills to meet these needs, and should enjoy working with these students"
(Coleman & Gallagher, 1995, p. 32).
Educators of the gifted and talented have the task of developing and utilizing the five dimensions
of differentiation in a consistent and progressive manner to truly address the needs of highly able
learners and direct them into choices that challenge their potential. Differentiation is the
14
necessary strategy by which gifted and talented children "realize their contribution to self and
society" (Marland, 1971, p. ix).
References
Coleman, M. R., & Gallagher, J. J. (1995, September/October). Appropriate differentiated
services. Gifted Child Today, 32-33.
Maker, C. J. (1982). Curriculum development for the gifted. Rockville, MD: Aspen.
Marland, S. P., Jr. (1971). Education of the gifted and talented. Washington, DC: U.S.
Government Printing Office.
Passow, A. H. (1982). Differentiated curricula for gifted/talented: A point of view. In S. Kaplan,
A. H. Passow, P. H. Phenix, S. Reis, J. S. Renzulli, I. Sato, L. Smith, E. P. Torrance, & V. S.
Ward, Curricula for the gifted (pp. 1-21). Ventura, CA: National/State Leadership Training
Institute on the Gifted/Talented.
Passow, A. H. (1986). Reflections on three decades of education of the gifted. Roeper Review, 8,
223-226.
Renzulli, J. S. (1988). The multiple menu model for developing differentiated curriculum for the
gifted and talented. Gifted Child Quarterly, 32, 298-309.
Renzulli, J. S. (1997, July). Five dimensions of differentiation. Keynote presentation at the 20th
Annual Confratute Conference, Storrs, CT.
Riley, T. L. (1997, January/February). Tools for discovery: Conceptual themes in the classroom.
Gifted Child Today, 30-33, 50.
Slocumb, P. D., & Monaco, T. (1986, November/December). Differentiating the curriculum.
Gifted Child Today, 30-34.
Tomlinson, C. A. (1995). How to differentiate instruction in mixed-ability classrooms.
Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Westberg, K. L., & Archambault, F. X., Jr. (1997). A multi-site case study of successful
classroom practices for high ability students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 41, 42-51.
15
Part 2:
Models for Differentiation
16
The Learning Place The State of Queensland (Department of Education, Training and
the Arts) 2007. http://www.learningplace.com.au/deliver/content.asp?pid=15056
Models of Provision - Maker Model
June Maker (1982, 1986) proposed that four areas of curriculum development need to be
modified in order to differentiate the curriculum for gifted students. These four areas are:




Content
Process
Product
Learning Environment
Content
Gifted students need to experience content to a greater depth, complexity and abstractness
than their age level peers. Content needs to be differentiated in the following ways:





Abstractness - an emphasis on concepts, relationships to key concepts, and
generalisations, rather than simple facts and examples.
Complexity - relationships within and between concepts, rather than considering
factors separately.
Variety - involves content beyond the scope of normal curriculum. May include more
detailed text, contact with experts and real life research opportunities.
Inter- and intra-personal - study of and with other people, especially to meet the
socio-emotional needs of gifted students who more readily link content with the life
experiences of real people.
Use of field-specific methods of inquiry - includes procedures used by experts.
Process and Product
Gifted students have the ability to use variety, creativity, abstractness and complexity in the
processes that they use to learn.
It is necessary for them to use higher order thinking skills and active decision-making.
Products need to accurately reflect all the modified processes.
Process and product-development needs can be differentiated in the following ways:





Higher order thinking - involves both critical and creative thinking to supply
cognitive challenge. Should have dimensions of problem solving, decision making,
evaluation, synthesis, analysis, intuitiveness, imagination and creativity.
Open-endedness - open rather than closed tasks encourage exploration of topics
rather than the search for a single definitive answer.
Group interaction - the opportunity to work with students of like mind engenders
both cooperation and stimulation.
Variable pacing - encourages students to move beyond simple content and on to
manipulation and exploration of concepts.
Variety of learning processes - meets the needs of students to experience work
using their optimum learning style/intelligence.
17





Metacognition - encourages students to consider their thoughts and the ways in
which they learn.
Choice - encourages students to take responsibility for their own learning, the
presentation of material learnt and their evaluation.
Validity - problems are real and relevant to the student and the activity, involving
manipulation and original thought rather than regurgitation. Evaluation is
meaningful, uses real life criteria and involves an element of personal assessment.
Real audiences - uses an audience (mentors, peers, parents, experts etc) that
recognizes the value of the task and the learning.
Purposeful deadlines - encourages time management skills and realistic planning.
Learning Environment
Gifted students require a learning environment that allows them to extend their skills in a
climate of supported risk-taking, exploration, rigor and encouragement.
A positive learning environment can be developed by the use of:






Student-centred - focuses on the student's interests, input and ideas rather than
those of the teacher.
Encouraging independence - tolerates and encourages student initiative.
Open - permits new people, materials, ideas and things to enter, and non-academic
and interdisciplinary connections to be made.
Accepting - encourages acceptance of others' ideas and opinions before evaluating
them.
Complex - includes a rich variety of resources, media, ideas, methods and tasks.
Highly mobile - encourages movement in and out of groups, desk settings,
classrooms and schools.
18
Curriculum Compacting
What does the term ‘compacting the curriculum’ mean?
There are six key steps to curriculum compacting:
• identifying the outcomes
• pre-testing the outcomes
• eliminating the areas of repetition
• streamlining the learning experiences
• offering enrichment, extension and/or acceleration - matching student need to intervention
• documenting the process.
[Source: Module Five: Curriculum Differentiation for Gifted Students by Bronwyn MacLeod
Core Module 5A - Part 2© 2004 Department of Education, Science and Training
© 2004 Gifted Education Research, Resource and Information Centre (GERRIC), The University of New South Wales (UNSW) ]
How do you incorporate curriculum compacting into unit planning?
In this section, you are encouraged to begin the process of curriculum differentiation and curriculum
compacting by mapping a unit of work that you will teach in the near future.
Curriculum compacting, developed by Dr. Joseph Renzulli and Linda Smith in 1978, is a differentiation
strategy that is extremely beneficial to many gifted and high ability students. It is a process by which
students are pre-assessed to determine what parts of the curriculum they have already mastered. When
those areas of knowledge and skills are identified, these students are not required to complete the gradelevel work. Instead, they work on alternate activities.
Curriculum compacting is a particularly important strategy for gifted and other high-ability students
because they often come to school already knowing much of the grade level material. If these students
are not challenged with new or different content, they waste time in school, do not learn important study
skills, and do not grow as learners.
How Does Curriculum Compacting Work?
The first step in curriculum compacting is to identify the content, skill areas, standards, or benchmarks
students have mastered. Compacting works particularly well in subjects or topics that are easily pretested such as math, spelling, grammar, vocabulary, and map skills. Questions in these subjects
generally require one right answer. It is easy, therefore, to determine who knows the information and who
does not.
In order to use curriculum compacting successfully, it is important to learn exactly what students know
and what they need to learn. Pre-assessment determines knowledge mastery. Often a pre-assessment is
a pretest, but it can also be a classroom observation, a short discussion with the student, a checklist of
what the student knows, or even a brainstorming session.
Prior to the pre-assessment, the teacher determines the requirement for mastery. For example, mastery
might be 90% or higher on a pretest or no more than one mistake in a writing sample. In a discussion, the
teacher might use his or her professional judgment to decide if the student has mastered a certain topic.
After mastery is determined and documented, the next step is to choose alternate activities. Many
teachers are concerned that they do not have appropriate alternate activities for high ability students.
However, there are a multitude of resources. The teacher's editions of many textbooks suggest activities
for advanced learners. Supplemental books that focus on activities to develop higher level thinking skills
are excellent sources for alternate activities. Independent study in an area of interest is another
19
possibility. Finally, the students themselves often have ideas of what they would like to do, how they
would like to do it, and what product will result and represent the learning.
Do the alternate activities need to be in the same subject in which the student has compacted out? This is
the teacher's decision. It may be that a math teacher wants students to work only on math compacting
activities. Another teacher may decide that an activity in any subject area is appropriate. Either approach
is acceptable. An essential factor to remember is that compacting activities should never be drill and
practice worksheets covering skills and content the student already knows.
'Nuts and Bolts' of Compacting
Most teachers and parents like the strategy of curriculum compacting, but they are often unaware of what
exactly occurs when this method is used. Below are practical ideas and suggestions for implementation.
* The teacher meets with compacting students to decide with them on which alternate activity or activities
they will work.
* Some type of a time line is established, including when the students will meet with the teacher again
and when the alternate activity is due. Compacting students can work independently or together, but it is
important that they touch base with their teacher often.
* The score that determines mastery is also the score that goes in the grade book. Students may receive
extra points, if necessary, for compacting activities, but they should not be penalized with a lower grade if
they work on a more challenging activity and do not get a high score. Gifted students are sometimes
reluctant to work on alternate activities because they think a possible lower score will negatively affect
their grades. Steps must be taken to ensure that does not happen.
* Sometimes compacting students from several classrooms are grouped together for an alternate activity
and work with one of the grade level teachers while the rest of the students are working with other
teachers at the same grade level. This functions well if all teachers at a grade level are targeting the
same skills and content at the same time.
* The most important rule for a compacting student is: "The one choice you never have is the choice to do
nothing!" This is because learning time is so valuable. Therefore, it is important that it never be wasted.
* Each student should be responsible for keeping his/her own compactor folder with the work in it. This is
a good way for disorganized gifted students to learn skills in organization, and it gives them practice in
taking responsibility for their own work and their own learning.
* Parents need to discuss and show interest in their child's compactor activities. However, parents should
not pressure their child to compact out of the grade-level work every time. Even gifted students have
some academic weaknesses. Most gifted children compact out some of the time and usually in a specific
subject. Very few compact out all of the time or in every subject.
What Does the Research Say?
Dr. Karen Rogers (2002) cites current studies that found 75-85% of average and above average
elementary school students can pass subject pretests with 92-93% accuracy. The United States
Department of Education's National Excellence Report (1993) found that gifted and talented elementary
school students knew 35-50% of the entire curriculum in the five major subject areas at the very
beginning of the school year. Renzulli and Reis (1992) directed a comprehensive national study that
found elementary teachers could eliminate 40-50% of the regular curriculum for the top 10-15% of
20
students with no negative effects on their achievement. Based on these studies, curriculum compacting is
a viable strategy for the Education Plan.
Rogers (2002), however, cautions against too much compacting. When students compact in all academic
areas, they can become stressed due to the fast pace of their learning. We need to remember that our
gifted children, like all children, need time to reflect, think, relax their brains, and sometimes slow their
pace. We want our gifted children to make significant academic gains. However, they must balance their
social and emotional needs with their academic and intellectual needs. The "Pieces of Information" article
in the next FGN newsletter will focus on that balance.
Resources
Pieces of Learning is one of the leading publishers of enrichment materials for and about gifted and
talented children. Student activities in many of the Pieces of Learning resources are excellent to use as
alternate activities for curriculum compacting. Visit online at www.piecesoflearning.com or call 1-800-7295137 to request a free catalog.
In Australia, Hawker Brownlow Education is your best resource for a wide range of educational materials.
Visit their website at www.hbe.com.au or call (03) 9555 1344 for more information.
Coil, C. (2006). Keys to Successtul Districtwide Differentiation: Training, Time, Practice, and Sharing. EZine, Vol. 2, 3. www.carolyncoil.com. http://www.carolyncoil.com/ezine21.htm
21
Autonomous Learner Model (source Ministry of Education, Wellington, New Zealand Programmes:
Principles and practiceshttp://www.tki.org.nz/r/gifted/handbook/stage2/prog_auto_e.php)
Autonomous Learner Model
Developed by Betts in 1985, this model focuses primarily on meeting the cognitive,
emotional, and social needs of year 1–13 gifted and talented students through the
development of autonomy and lifelong learning.
The aim of the model is to give students the content, process, and product know-how that
enables them to take responsibility for developing, implementing, and evaluating their own
learning. As illustrated in the following diagram, the model has five interactive dimensions.
Diagram 6: Autonomous Learner Model – text version
Description: The diagram is a pentagon. In the centre are the words Autonomous
learner.Each of the five segments has a heading and a list of aspects, as follows:
Orientation:
 Understanding giftedness, talent, intelligence, and creativity
 Group-building activities
 Self/Personal development
 Programme and school opportunities and responsibilities
Individual development:
 Inter/Intra-personal learning skills
 Technology
 College [university] and career involvement
 Organisational skills
 Productivity
22
Enrichment activities:
 Explorations
 Investigations
 Cultural activities
 Service
 Adventure trips
Seminars:
 Futuristic
 Problematic
 General interest
 Advanced knowledge
 Controversial
In-depth study:
 Individual projects
 Group projects
 Mentorships
 Presentations
 Assessment
Explanations of segments of model
Orientation gives students and teachers an opportunity to develop a foundation for the
programme. In this dimension, students are introduced to the structure of the programme,
including the activities and their own responsibilities. A unique aspect of this model is that it
also encourages an investigation of concepts of giftedness, including group-building and
self-understanding exercises.
Individual development serves as a launching pad for giving students the cognitive,
emotional, and social skills, and concepts and attitudes they need for lifelong autonomous
learning. This dimension is very much process oriented
Enrichment activities are designed to allow students to explore a variety of concepts and ideas.
The intent of this dimension is to spark student interest, encourage the discovery of their strengths,
and begin to unearth their passions. Content differentiation is the key element.
Seminars serve as an avenue for groups of students to each research a topic and present a
seminar to other students. The seminars are designed to include three components:



presentation of factual information
group discussion and/or activity
bringing closure to the issue.
Students plan, present, and evaluate the seminars, shifting the responsibility for
learning from the teacher to themselves.
In-depth study is the most demanding and challenging dimension of the model, with small
groups or individual students being given the freedom to pursue their own areas of interest.
Students themselves determine:





what they will learn
how they will learn it
what resources are needed
how they will evidence their learning through a self-selected product
how they will evaluate the entire learning process.
23
A contract is used to support this dimension. In-depth study integrates the other dimensions
of the model.
Enrichment Triad Model(Source: Ministry of Education, Wellington, New Zealand Programmes:
Principles and practiceshttp://www.tki.org.nz/r/gifted/handbook/stage2/prog_triad_e.php)
Enrichment Triad Model
Developed by Renzulli, the Enrichment Triad Model is perhaps the most widely used
curriculum model in gifted education. Its development began in 1977, and since that time
the model has been incorporated within the Schoolwide Enrichment Model (Renzulli and
Reis, 1985), an approach to gifted education that enhances the regular classroom
programmes with a number of the previously discussed provisions.
Initially intended for primary schools, the model has also been adapted for secondary
schools in the Secondary Triad Model (Reis and Renzulli, 1986). Since the Enrichment Triad
Model serves as the base for each of these adaptations, it is more closely examined here.
The model consists of three interrelated types of enrichment:
o
o
o
Type I – general exploratory activities (enrichment)
Type II – group training activities (process)
Type III – individual and small-group investigations of real problems (product).
Type I
Type I enrichment offers students a wide range of experiences and activities in order to
introduce a variety of topics. These may be facilitated through any number of outlets,
including:




printed materials
electronic media
field trips
guest speakers.
Type I moves students beyond the regular curriculum to potentially exciting areas of
interest.
Type II
Type II enrichment is designed to give students the skills necessary to carry out
investigations and develop a range of thinking and feeling processes. Renzulli and Reis
(1986) suggest these include:








creative thinking
problem solving
critical thinking
decision making
affective processes
research skills
communication skills
how-to-learn skills.
24
Type II enrichment enables students to "deal more effectively with advanced, differentiated
content" (Riley, 1996, page 188).
In adaptations of this curriculum model, types I and II enrichment are offered to all
students.
Type III
Type III enrichment, however, is perhaps most suitable for gifted and talented students.
Within this aspect of the model, students investigate real problems as individuals or small
groups. They become producers of knowledge rather than consumers, actively formulating a
problem, designing research, and presenting a product.
Renzulli emphasises that students should emulate professional investigators and select
appropriate audiences for final products.
These three types of enrichment are not sequential in nature but tend to flow freely from
one to the other. As illustrated in the following model (Diagram 5), students might move
from a type I activity to type III, and from there back into type II.
Example of non-sequential interaction of activity types in Enrichment Triad Model
Imagine a classroom of students listening to a storyteller (type I). During the storytelling, a
group of students shows obvious enthusiasm and interest and so spends an additional hour
learning storytelling techniques (type II).
Consequently, one student decides that she'd like to create her own story to share at the
city's storytelling festival (type III). In writing the story, she discovers she needs more
information about her chosen topic (type I), and then considers the design of a costume
(type II).
Although the Enrichment Triad Model offers a firm base for gifted programmes, with an
array of supporting practice and research, a valid criticism is that the model's focus is
predominately on enrichment.
However, when used within a schoolwide plan or in conjunction with other provisions,
acceleration opportunities can also be offered. The model is flexible, practical, and appealing
to teachers and students alike.
Bloom’s Taxonomy
Read through the activities for your level of teaching and identify which of Bloom’s strategies is
represented by each.
1. In your own words, describe the physical and emotional attributes of
adolescence.
2. Create a multimedia presentation that exposes the prevalent stereotypes of
adolescence.
3. List the different methods scientists might use to study adolescence.
4. Adolescence is the most important stage of development. Do you agree or
disagree? Why or why not?
5. Use a fl owchart or other graphic organiser to model the changes, which occur
during adolescence.
6. Examine the ways in which two different cultural groups view adolescence. How
are these views similar or different?
25
Bloom's Taxonomy (same source as above two- TKI)
(http://www.tki.org.nz/r/gifted/handbook/stage2/prog_blooms_e.php)
While not intended as a model for gifted education programmes, Bloom's Taxonomy has
been adapted as a suitable framework for such programmes. The taxonomy is "designed
with the purpose of providing a set of criteria that can be used to classify educational
objectives at various levels of complexity" (Maker and Nielson, 1995, cited in Riley, 1996, page 194).
Suitable for any subject area or age level, the taxonomy focuses on intellectual behaviours
within the six areas shown in this diagram (Bloom, 1956).
Bloom's Taxonomy
THEORY
Level
Knowledge
Behaviours
Requires no
transformation of
information and may be
referred to as rote recall
Comprehension Low level of
understanding, making
use of information and
enabling student to
restate ideas
PRACTICE
Activities
Products
Locate, match,
identify, listen,
observe
Tapes, diagrams,
models
Research, ask,
discover
Books, magazines,
videos, newspapers
Application
Using previously learned List, construct, teach,
ideas, procedures or
paint, report, sketch,
theories in a new context experiment,
manipulate, interview,
stimulate
Diary, puzzle, map,
diorama, scrapbook,
collection, sculpture,
model, illustration
Analysis
Breaking down a whole
Classify, categorise,
into its elements or parts separate, compare,
contrast, advertise,
survey, dissect
Graph, questionnaire,
chart, commercial,
diagram, report
Synthesis
Putting together parts to
form a whole
Combine, invent,
compose, hypothesise,
role-play, create,
write, imagine, infer
Cartoon, poem, story,
play, song, pantomime,
recipe, invention,
article, video, web page
Evaluation
Making judgments or
placing values upon
something for a given
purpose
Judge, evaluate,
discuss, debate,
decide, recommend,
choose
Self-evaluation, group
discussion, mock court
trial, conclusion, review
While some contend that all students are capable of each of these processes, educators
often advocate that for gifted and talented students, more time and greater attention should
be spent at the higher levels, effectively inverting the triangle, as illustrated in the following
diagram.
26
Socratic Seminars
How to Create and Use Socratic Seminars
Table of Contents
Definition of Socratic Seminars
Purpose of Socratic Seminars
Advantages of Socratic Seminars
Steps for Socratic Seminars
Rules and Roles for Socratic Seminars
Management Tips for Socratic Seminars
Options for Assessing and Evaluating Student Work in Socratic Seminars
Bibliography
Definition of Socratic Seminars
A Socratic Seminar is a scholarly discussion of an essential question in which student opinions
are shared, proven, refuted, and refined through dialogue with other students. In classes of more
than fifteen students, the fishbowl format for Socratic seminars should be used. In this format,
the teacher or seminar leader facilitates the discussion. Only half the class, seated in an inner
circle, participates in the discussion at one time. The other half of the class, seated in an outer
circle, consists of the students who act as observers and coaches. Every student's participation is
graded.
Purpose of Socratic Seminars
In a Socratic Seminar, participants seek to answer an essential question and gain deeper
understanding of laws, ideas, issues, values, and/or principles presented in a text or texts through
rigorous and thoughtful dialogue
Advantages of Socratic Seminars








Provides opportunities for critical readings of texts
Teaches respect for diverse ideas, people, and practices
Enhances students' knowledge and research base
Creates a community of inquiry
Develops critical thinking, problem solving, speaking, and listening skills
Clarifies one's ideas, ethics and values
Maximizes student participation
Encourages divergent thinking
27
Using Multiple Intelligences(Source: Virginia Journal of Education
http://www.veaweteach.org/articles_vje_detail.asp?ContentID=2083
Posted 03/18/2006 by Darryl Helems and
Amanda G. Gibson)
We all have a variety of academic strengths and weaknesses and we can all identify areas outside of academics where we may have
“special” talents. But how can those talents be transformed into academic success? One possibility is through the theory of Multiple
Intelligences (MI), proposed by Howard Gardner in 1983 and well researched by educators since. The MI theory can help clarify the
various areas of talent that all students have, and by understanding some of the theory’s basic components, we can be equipped to
implement a variety of classroom strategies to work with the skill levels and talents children bring to school. Our primary focus here
will be on how to implement successful classroom strategies in working with gifted students; however, the strategies discussed are
applicable for use with any students.
Defining Gifted Students
An individual is considered gifted when he or she presents certain characteristics or behaviors more significantly than individuals in
the general population. The domains can include intellectual ability, specific academic ability, creative/productive ability,
psychosocial/leadership ability, and visual/performing arts ability. The Virginia Department of Education has defined gifted students
as those “whose abilities and potential for accomplishment are so outstanding that they require special programs to meet their
special needs.” As indicated, “giftedness” takes into consideration a variety of skills and abilities and it is our contention that
Gardner’s theory of multiple intelligences can assist in providing useful classroom strategies to work with gifted students.
An Overview of Gardner’s Theory
To understand the teaching strategies that go along with Gardner’s theory, it is first important to understand some basics of MI
theory. After attending the Copenhaver Institute for teachers two summers ago and reading Gardner’s Intelligence Reframed, it was
hard to control our enthusiasm for wanting to get back in the classroom and apply some of the strategies Gardner discussed. He
talked about his theory in depth, but cautioned that he had not developed this theory specifically for schools and we should be
guarded in how we use it in the classroom. Gardner’s theory has implications for the development of many great strategies for the
classroom, but he asks educators to be thoughtful as you label students, create assessments and implement curriculum. He
recommended that school staff members attend conferences that focus on MI ideas, join a network of schools that are devoted to
exploring the implications of MI theory, and plan and execute practices and programs that grow out of the MI theory and
approaches. To assist in developing classroom strategies, we must answer Gardner’s question, “How is the child smart?” rather than
“How smart is the child?”, which is often what you hear in our society. What guidelines are there to answering Gardner’s question?
To begin answering this question we must first understand the areas of intelligence that Gardner proposes. They are:
1.) verbal/linguistic: the verbal or written ability to effectively use and understand various word forms and meanings;
2.) logical/mathematical: the ability to use and understand various mathematical concepts;
3.) visual/spatial: the ability to form a mental model of a spatial world, object or pattern;
4.) musical: the ability to demonstrate an understanding the physical and emotional components in music;
5.) bodily kinesthetic: the ability to solve problems using parts of the body and mastering body movements for an expressive
purpose;
6.) interpersonal: ability to show an understanding of the emotions of other people;
7.) intrapersonal: ability to accurately understand yourself and be able to notice and make distinctions among other’s moods,
temperaments, motivations and intentions;
8.) naturalistic: ability to react to the environment and make judgments about survival.
28
After reading these descriptions, we all can probably think of students we work with who display talents in some of these areas, but
most likely not in all of them. By realizing that all students may have their own individualized areas of giftedness we can begin to
develop lessons that help emphasize the strengths in every student.
Class Strategies
It’s in the classroom that teachers must interact with students and apply sound assessment and teaching and learning strategies
inspired by the MI theory with gifted and other students. The following is a brief sample of some strategies that we have observed to
be successful in working with gifted students (many are techniques you may already be using).
• To successfully implement any MI classroom strategy we must first get to know our students through various assessment
methods. These can include questionnaires asking students about their learning styles, intelligences and other questions that will
help you get to know your students.
• Using this information we can then engage our learners into a topic through various entry points that are connected roughly with
the specific intelligences. This does not mean you have to cover a topic seven different ways. Instead, utilize a variety of entry
points throughout the year so that everyone’s intelligences are focused on. An example would be to use a narrative entry point, in
which a teacher would enter a topic through a story. An example of this would be the reading of Out of the Dust, by Karen Hesse, to
begin a study of the Great Depression. This is the story of a young Oklahoma girl who tragically loses her mother and learns how to
find happiness with her father during lean economic times. Another example would be to use the entry point from the
quantitative/numerical perspective in which students would enter the topic through numbers and/or patterns. You could do this by
having your students do a simulation of the stock market, buying and selling mock stocks, and then studying how the crash of the
stock market led to the Great Depression.
• Gardner also challenges students and teachers to come up with instructional analogies using information from material they
already understand that can be applied to a less familiar topic. An example of this would be having the students compare the
architecture of their own community to the architecture of Greece.
• The use of authentic assessment is vital in a MI-inspired classroom. Teachers and students must be the key users. Some examples
of these assessments can be logs and journals, graphic organizers, observational checklists, video samples, rubrics, miscue analyses
and portfolios. These types of assessments showcase learning through a variety of outlets.
• Flexible grouping can also be used to meet the word study needs of individual students. Gifted students as well as other learners
study word groups appropriate to their level of orthographic understanding. They study Latin and Greek affixes, and teachers can
create entry point lessons with these units that utilize a variety of the intelligences. With the help of students, teachers can create
literature circle groups in which the students choose novels according to their interests. Gifted students work together or they may
work with an interest group with a combination of different types of learners.
• Using the Internet as a place for students to research topics of interest to them is a great outlet for gifted students to extend their
knowledge on a particular topic on independent and group projects. Gifted students particularly enjoy developing multi-media
presentations on an individual basis as well as in groups, which taps into utilizing the various intelligences. Students have the world
at their fingertips through the use of the Internet, e-mail and chat forums.
29
• Learning centers can be a great way to meet the needs of your gifted learners. Each year you can add new interest centers the
students could choose to go to that correspond to their specific interests. This is a way for teachers to continue to assess them as
learners.
As we pointed out, these ideas are probably things you have been doing and thus should validate your approach to teaching. Or the
suggested strategies may provide a new twist to an idea that you have previously used with your students.
Challenges
Just as our personalities differ, so do our individual academic talents. Since gifted learners come to us with a variety of strengths, it
would seem most appropriate to incorporate a system of learning that uses various forms of intelligence. Often teachers may find it
difficult to motivate gifted learners using traditional methods of teaching; incorporating a MI approach may help teachers develop
strategies that can easily be incorporated in the existing classroom, don’t require extensive reorganization, and will motivate gifted
learners. Many educators can tell you that you also need to make things as personally meaningful as possible if you want to
motivate gifted learners. By being able to identify specific talents using the areas identified by Gardner, teachers will be able to
make learning more personal for all their students.
Once you have identified specific talents a student may have, the challenge becomes how to provide meaningful instruction in a
manner that does not require gifted learners to be constantly removed from their regular classroom programs. Gifted students may
enjoy being challenged intellectually, but many also enjoy social interactions with their peers, and pulling students from the regular
classroom to provide instruction may cause students to be less motivated. Therefore, incorporating MI strategies into the regular
classroom setting to motivate gifted learners could be the best option. Teachers should therefore work collaboratively with gifted
coordinators to discuss classroom strategies and embrace the assistance they provide. Finally, with so much emphasis from the No
Child Left Behind law and funding going to helping weaker students reach state standards, new programs and strategies for working
with gifted students may often get overlooked. Therefore, teachers will have to continue to do their best to motivate and challenge
the gifted learner by making information meaningful and applicable to the talents they exhibit.
Conclusion
The classrooms of today are not a one-size-fits-all environment. By using multiple approaches during the teaching process, you can
encourage students to become more engaged in the learning process and thus gain more benefit from teacher instruction. As
teachers we must be willing to be innovative, flexible and sensitive to ensure that all students are challenged and motivated. By
incorporating multiple intelligences strategies into the classroom, gifted students can be challenged and motivated without having to
be pulled out of class and miss some of the social interactions they desire and require. The use of multiple strategies also
encourages student curiosity and self-awareness and allows a broader look into gifted students, allowing them to grow emotionally
as well as academically. This approach also allows teachers to be able to teach beyond what is written in a textbook and provides for
variations in assessment approaches that go beyond scores on standardized assessments. All students are different in their
approach to learning, just as all teachers are different in the instructional methods they feel comfortable using in their classrooms.
By incorporating some of the strategies discussed here, as well as others that focus on the various talents Gardner proposes, the
ability to make a connection with all students is raised and the result is higher achievement for everyone.
Helems is a school psychologist and Gibson the gifted program coordinator, both for Salem City Schools. Both are also regional
faculty members for Mary Baldwin College.
30
Intelligence Report- Sternberg’s Styles of Thinking
Teacher Magazine 1/1/95
http://www.teachermagazine.org/tm/articles/1995/01/01/4stern.h06.html?print=1
On paper, Celia fell somewhere in between. She was good on almost every traditional measure of success but not
outstanding on any one. But rather than fall somewhere in the middle of her class at Yale, Celia proved to be a standout.
Her talent was adapting well to the demands of her new environment and figuring out what was expected of her. She was,
in other words, "street smart,'' Sternberg says.
Most educators know students like Alice, Barbara, and Celia. Sternberg, however, coupled his experiences with these
students with extensive readings in psychology and other fields and came up with what he calls his "triarchic theory of
intelligence.'' In simple terms, it holds that intellectual ability takes different shapes--not all of which are captured by the
traditional means schools use to measure it.
In addition to Alice's analytical kind of intelligence, Sternberg suggests, people also possess creative intelligence, which
allows them to cope with novelty, and practical intelligence, which enables them to apply what they know to everyday
situations.
Sternberg is neither the first nor the most well-known psychologist to say that intelligence takes on many forms and
functions. Harvard psychologist Howard Gardner's "theory of multiple intelligences,'' for example, has met with much more
receptive audiences in schools across the country. Both theories, though provocative, are not universally accepted.
Together, however, they have opened up broader ways for educators to think about what it means to be smart and how
they can help students reach their fullest potential.
The classical view holds that intelligence is an inborn trait that remains fixed over time and can be measured by means of
an "intelligence quotient''--or "IQ''--test. Even as a boy, Sternberg questioned this long-held belief. His disenchantment
began when the school psychologist administered an IQ test to his 5th grade class. Seeing the other children move quickly
from one item to another, Sternberg panicked and fared poorly on the exam. When the test was administered the next
year, Sternberg was sent from his 6th grade classroom to take it with a group of 5th graders. Less intimidated by these
younger students, he breezed through the test, and his score improved considerably.
"I guess a lot of what I do comes from my own insecurities,'' the 44-year-old psychologist says now. In fact, he has spent
the last 20-odd years exploring the subject.
What he has come up with suggests that intelligence is not fixed but, rather, something that is mediated through the
environment and can be taught and enhanced. IQ tests, he says, measure only one form of intelligence--a form that is key
to success in school but not necessarily key to success in the real world.
31
"Both Sternberg and Gardner are 'contextualists,' '' says Stephen Ceci, a Cornell University psychologist. "Both believe what
we call intelligence isn't all inside the head. Much of it is outside the head, and the environment changes the way people
deploy their intelligence.''
Gardner's multiple-intelligence theory holds that intelligence takes seven different forms: linguistic, musical, logicalmathematical, spatial, bodily-kinesthetic, intrapersonal, and interpersonal.
Sternberg, however, suggests that musical ability and other such traits are really talents. He presents a more multilayered
approach to the concept. "His theory is the most ambitious of all the theories of intelligence,'' Ceci says, "because he took
into consideration a number of different corpora of scientific knowledge--cognitive science, developmental psychology,
psychometrics.''
Beyond his three intellectual abilities--analytical, creative, and practical--Sternberg says people have preferences in how
they use those skills and how they govern their thought processes. This is what Sternberg calls his theory of "mental selfgovernment.''
Like the different aspects of government, people have different styles of thinking, he says. One individual, for example,
might be "legislative'' in that he or she tends to think in terms of creating, formulating, imagining, and planning. Another's
tendencies may be more "executive'' or concerned with implementing and doing. Still others may tend toward the "judicial''
and prefer to evaluate and compare.
Sternberg takes the analogy even further, saying that the four major forms of government--monarchic, hierarchic,
oligarchic, and anarchic--offer ways to think about how different people govern their thought processes. An individual with
"monarchic'' tendencies, for example, focuses on one thing at a time and sticks with it until it's done. The individual who
tends toward the "hierarchic'' does well at assigning priorities to multiple tasks. The "oligarchic'' form of mental selfgovernment allows for dealing with multiple goals, all of which are equally important. And, finally, the "anarchic'' thinking
style favors multiple, flexible approaches and trying almost anything.
An individual's form of mental self-government can also lean to the "conservative'' or "liberal.'' He or she may be "global''
and focus on the forest, or "local'' and focus on the trees. He or she might prefer to be a "producer'' or "consumer'' of
knowledge. A person may also have a combination of thinking styles, and those inclinations may vary over time and in
different contexts.
But schools, Sternberg says, tend to reward only one kind of intellectual ability, analytical, and one kind of thinking style,
the executive. What's more, he says, teachers tend to reward those students whose intellectual styles best match their own.
32
In one experiment designed to test that theory, Sternberg and his Yale colleague, Elena Grigorenko, selected 28 teachers
from four different kinds of schools, ranging from a Catholic high school to a public elementary school. Using a
questionnaire, the researchers first assessed the teachers' thinking styles. The survey asked the teachers to indicate the
degree to which they agreed with such statements as "I want my students to develop their own ways of solving problems''
or "I like to follow instructions when I am teaching.'' Students' thinking styles were evaluated twice by different teachers
using another questionnaire. Finally, students evaluated their own thinking styles using a third questionnaire developed for
that purpose.
In classrooms where teachers' styles were more legislative, the most successful students, the researchers found, were those
with similar tendencies. Teachers with judicial styles tended to give the highest grades to judicial students, and the highestachieving students in executive-minded teachers' classes were themselves executive in orientation. "It's important for
teachers to understand themselves,'' Sternberg says. "You have to first understand your own take on the world.''
Sternberg and other researchers have also completed preliminary studies looking at intelligence in a different light: Do
students learn better when taught to their intellectual strengths?
To tackle that question, they focused on 65 11th and 12th graders from the mid-Atlantic region who were spending the
summer at Yale taking a general psychology course. All had been identified as gifted using a test developed with the
"triarchic theory'' in mind. In the mornings, the students attended the same general lecture. In the afternoons, however,
they went to sections taught in different ways. One section emphasized analytical thinking, another creative thinking, and a
third practical thinking. Students were given assessments, however, that equally emphasized all three kinds of abilities.
As Sternberg's hypothesis suggests, students judged to be gifted in creative and practical ways fared better when placed in
sections that matched their abilities--even on test items that were not compatible for them. The analytically gifted students,
however, did worse in sections suited to their skills. (Sternberg speculates that those students might have been less
motivated because they had always done well in school.)
The basic message, Sternberg says, is this: "If you're taught in a style that's not a good fit, the conclusion you draw--and
maybe your teacher as well--is that you're not competent.''
Sternberg has continued to mine other aspects of his theory over the years. Working with Gardner, Wendy Williams, and
other researchers at Yale and Harvard, he has perfected a program to teach middle school students how to hone their
practical intelligence, what Sternberg calls "tacit knowledge.'' The program, known as "Practical Intelligence for Schools,'' is
scheduled to be published next year by HarperCollins. "Teachers have a wide array of expectations for students, many of
which are never explicitly verbalized,'' he writes in a 1991 paper. "If students cannot figure out what these implicit
expectations are, their performance in school may suffer year after year.''
33
Sternberg's explorations of intelligence and other human qualities have been chronicled in hundreds of articles and books.
He was named one of the top 100 scientists in the country in 1984 by Science Digest and was selected as an outstanding
American under 40 by Esquire magazine two years later. He headed the American Psychological Association in 1993 and has
won 10 other distinguished awards from his peers.
But for all the accolades, Sternberg's is not the household name in schools that Gardner's has become. Ceci, the Cornell
psychologist, says that's because Gardner has been more deliberate in translating his theory for teachers and promoting it.
"He is most mindful of the needs of educators,'' he says.
Gardner himself says he has less patience for what he calls the ground rules of psychology. "I'm a psychologist but don't
identify myself with the sort of intelligence mafia,'' he says. In fact, Gardner eschews intelligence testing of any sort,
triarchic or otherwise.
But Gardner doesn't dismiss the work of his colleague Sternberg. "From the point of view of the average teacher, the
differences between us are less than the differences between us and the old view,'' he says. "We are united in opposition to
a view that is 100 years old.''
Still Sternberg's ideas on intellectual development have begun to reach a number of educators. One is Betsy Ratner, a
teacher of gifted elementary students in Milford, Conn., who thinks Sternberg's theory is easier to understand than
Gardner's. "When I put it Bob's way, in three parts,'' she says, "it's just more simplistic for me to comprehend how it all
comes together.''
But from his vantage point just beyond the educational mainstream, Sternberg is wary of what he calls the "bandwagon
approach'' to school reform. "Now there's a big rush to performance assessment, and it really drives me nuts because who
are you benefiting now?'' he asks. "You're benefiting the kids who are more legislative, more liberal.''
"What you'd ideally do as a teacher is teach in different ways and help kids understand what they do well,'' he says, "but
also understand the things they don't do well and work with students to try to figure out strategies for compensation and
remediation.''
--Debra Viadero
34
TALENTS UNLIMITED
The Talents Unlimited approach to education was developed by Dr. Calvin Taylor. Dr. Taylor
researched the thinking skills that people needed in order to be successful in the world of work.
This educational approach provides a unique way of delivering the existing curriculum that can be
used in all grades and all curriculum areas. It provides a common language for thinking skills, creates
risk takers, and places emphasis on thinking. The students learn higher level thinking skills through
the Talents Unlimited Program. Here, the emphasis is on the development of thinking abilities which
are important to success in the work-a-day world and in school. These thinking abilities include:
Productive Thinking: Students think of many, varied, and unusual ideas. It this
context "unusual" means a "one-of-a-kind" idea. The emphasis is on how many
different ideas students can develop as a whole class.
Communication: There are six types of Communication Behavior.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Give many, varied, single words to describe something.
Give many, varied, single words to describe feelings.
Think of many, varied things that are like another thing in a special way.
Let others know that you understand how they feel.
Make a network of ideas using many, varied, and complete thoughts.
Tell your feelings and needs without using words.
Forecasting: Students are asked to of many,varied and unusual ideas to examine
cause and effect by answering one of two questions,
1. What might have caused...?
2. What might happen if...?
Decision Making: Students learn the steps of the decision making process.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
List the Alternatives.
Develop Criteria Questions (to guide in choosing between alternatives).
Weigh the Criteria Questions (not every question is equally helpful!).
Use the Criteria Questions to make the Decision.
Support the decision with many, varied reasons.
Planning: Students learn the steps necessary to develop a comprehensive plan to
carry out a decision.
1.
2.
3.
4.
List the materials needed.
List the steps to carry out the action.
Think of the many, varied, and unusual problems that might occur.
Think of many, varied, and unusual improvements to avoid or address those
potential problems.
35
Future Problem Solving Program- Summary
Schools require an effective model to teach
critical and creative thinking, problem solving
and decision-making. Few elementary, middle
and high schools offer problem solving in the
curriculum even though it is a standard or
goal in almost every state. Future Problem
Solving is an excellent vehicle to teach
problem solving strategies across the
curriculum while promoting the development
of student leadership skills.
The Future Problem Solving Program (FPSP)
is a nonprofit educational corporation
administering creative problem solving
activities for students in grades K-12. FPSP
stimulates critical and creative thinking skills
and encourages students to develop a vision
for the future. Recognizing the world as an
interdependent global community, the Future
Problem Solving Program involves over
250,000 students annually from the United
States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand,
Korea and other countries
The Future Problem Solving Program features
several curricular as well as co-curricular
opportunities to engage students in problem
solving including Team Problem Solving,
Community Problem Solving (CmPS),
Scenario Writing and Action-based Problem
Solving (AbPS). Students or teams participate
in one of three divisions in competitive FPS
components: junior division - grades 4-6,
middle division - grades 7-9 and senior
division - grades 10-12.
The Future Problem Solving Program meets
standards for curriculum and instruction,
language arts, social studies, science, the
arts, math, geography, civics, technology, life
skills and behavioral studies. The Future
Problem Solving Program provides
opportunities for students to develop and
exercise the skills necessary to meet and
exceed these standards through research and
investigation of student selected topics
relevant to their world. Each year FPS topics
are selected from three strands: business and
science and technology, and
social and political issues.
The opportunities provided to students in both
content and skill areas are the motivation for
teachers and coaches who implement FPSP
in their schools. This document is a summary
version of a more comprehensive document
demonstrating the alignment of curriculum
standards, based on National Curriculum
Standards and the National Association for
Gifted Children (NAGC) Curriculum and
Instruction Standards, and the Future
Problem Solving Program’s six-step problem
solving model.
Using both primary and secondary resources,
students conduct research on selected topics
and then use the six-step problem solving
model to address the problem or need area.
The model is integral in all FPSP components.
1. Identify Challenges – generate
challenges or issues related to the
future scene or need area.
2. Select an Underlying Problem – focus
on one problem area.
3. Produce Solution Ideas – generate
solution ideas to the underlying
problem.
4. Generate and Select Criteria – create
criteria to evaluate the merit of the
best solution ideas.
5. Apply Criteria to Solution Ideas –
evaluate the solution ideas using
criteria to rank order the solution
ideas.
6. Develop an Action Plan – based on the
highest scoring solution idea, develop
an action plan explaining how the
solution will work and describing how the
problem will be solved.
http://www.fpspofct.org/
36
Part 3:
Products and Assessment
37
Differentiated Instruction- Product Modifications
Academically gifted students should be allowed to demonstrate what they have learned in a variety
of rigorous and authentic ways. Adaptations of the typical student products to include more
creative or more academically rigorous evaluations of student learning include those described
below.
Create/Demonstrate

Encouraging the expression of additional examples, new and original alternatives and
relationships or possible solutions to problems and ideas.
Real Problem


Real Problem investigations
Real Audience for student products
Alternative demonstrations of knowledge





performance
spoken
visual
written
constructed
The following list of learning evaluation products below may serve as a guideline for planning
product modifications for academically gifted learners.
Performance Products
Skits
Theatrical performances
Athletic events
Puppet shows
Demonstrations
Poetry reading
Experiments
Legislative bills
Role playing
Vocal performances
Dances
Dramatic monologues
Film/videos
Improvisations
Rallies
Campaigns
Debate
Advertisements
Choral readings
Newscasts
Mock trials
Simulations
Eulogies
Auctions
D. J. shows
Narrations
Guided tours
Speeches
Poetry readings
Interviews
Teaching lessons
Songs
Demonstrations
Announcements
Comedy routines
Panel discussions
Sermons
Oral reports
Forums
Radio plays
Storytelling
Oral histories
Videos
Diagrams/charts
Simulations
Instrumental performances
Mimes
Comedy performances
Readers' Theatre
Manners and Protocol
Spoken Products
Lectures
Sales promotions
Committee meetings
Master of ceremonies
Celebrity introductions
Dedication ceremonies
Town criers
Book talks
Monologues
Visual Products
Maps
38
Slide shows
Computer creations
Sculptures
Table settings
Advertisement
Puppets
Calendars
Musical scores
Book jackets
Athletic skills
Blueprints
Timelines
Sketches
Graphs
Collages
Ice sculptures
Demonstrations
Book pictures
Cartoons
Travel brochures
Photos
Clothing
Graphic designs
Painting
Pamphlets
Brochures
Books
Speeches
Surveys
Charts
Debates
Radio programs
Instructions
Journals
E-pals
Simulations
Recipes
Critiques
Yearbooks
News articles
Poetry
Marketing plans
Comic strips
Jokes and riddles
Slogans
Songs / lyrics
Questionnaires
Invitations
Story boards
Greeting cards
Grants
Scripts
Guidebooks
Calendars
Theatrical scenery
Sculptures
Relief maps
Habitats
Bridges
Inventions
Foods
Vehicles
Fitness trails
Microscopes
Aqueducts
Terrariums
Transportation alternatives
Gardens
Dioramas
Shelters
Collections
Telescopes
Pottery
Working models
Ant farms
Buildings
Toys
Games
Books
Sun dials
Solar collectors
Bird/bat houses
Diagrams
Mobiles
Set designs
Experiments
Caricatures
Silk screens
Graphic layouts
Models
Pottery
Written Products
Banners
Articles
Skits
Plays
Postcards
Telegrams
Crossword puzzles
Jingles
Summaries
Lists
Fast note-taking
Budgets
Proposals
Editorials
Essays
Constructed Products
Multi-media presentations
Circuit boards
Greenhouses
3-D figures
Computer programs
Documentaries
Exhibitions
Museums
Ice castles
Graphs
Furniture
Instruments
Robots
Machines
Source: Rapid City Public Schools, South Dakota http://www.rcas.org/tag/differentiation_defined.htm
39
Rubrics and Open-Ended Questions- Last Modified November 21, 2002
(Source: The Cape May County Educational Technology Training Center, NJ
http://www.capemaytech.net/ettc/links/rubricandOEQ.htm)
HANDOUT LINKS
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Analytic vs. Holistic Rubrics - www.teachervision.com/lesson-plans/lesson-4524.html
Advantages of Rubrics - www.teachervision.com/lesson-plans/lesson-4521.html
Ideas and Rubrics - intranet.cps.k12.il.us/Assessments/Ideas_and_Rubrics/ideas_and_rubrics.html
Designing a rubric - http://edservices.aea7.k12.ia.us/framework/rubrics/designing.html
Open-Ended Questions - www.pbs.org/teachersource/mathline/assessment/assessment0499.shtm
Characteristics of Open-ended Questions - www.heinemann.com/math/about.cfm
PowerPoint PResentations, Rubrics and OEQ www.foundationcoalition.org/powerpoints/2002rubriccaso.ppt
What Is a Rubric?
Assessment Glossaries - www.mde.k12.ms.us/acad/id/curriculum/ss/ssag.htm and
marcopolo.mde.k12.ms.us/downloads/social_studies/ss_assessment_glossary.pdf
Selecting tasks for Performance Assessment intranet.cps.k12.il.us/Assessments/Ideas_and_Rubrics/Assessment_Tasks/assessment_tasks.html
Advantages of Rubrics - www.teachervision.com/lesson-plans/lesson-4521.html
Analytic vs. Holistic Rubrics - www.teachervision.com/lesson-plans/lesson-4524.html
Ideas and Rubrics - intranet.cps.k12.il.us/Assessments/Ideas_and_Rubrics/ideas_and_rubrics.html
Basics of Rubrics - www.njpep.org/Workshops/Rubrics.html
Just What Is a Rubric? - www.middleweb.com/CSLB2rubric.html
Rubrics in the Classroom - edservices.aea7.k12.ia.us/framework/rubrics/index.html
Rubric to Assess Rubrics - www.idecorp.com/assessrubric.pdf
What Is a Rubric (RubiStar)? - rubistar.4teachers.org/whatis.shtml
What's Wrong--and What's Right--with Rubrics - www.ascd.org/safeschools/el9710/pophamrubric.html
Some Good Examples - score.rims.k12.ca.us/sub_standards/alt_assessment_res_on_web.html
Using Rubrics in Middle School (good for High School too) - www.middleweb.com/rubricsHG.html
Rubric basics - www.rubrics.com/
40
What is an Open-Ended Question?
Open-Ended Questions - www.pbs.org/teachersource/mathline/assessment/assessment0499.shtm
Characteristics of Open-ended Questions - www.heinemann.com/math/about.cfm
Teaching Strategies and Open-Ended Questions www.jhu.edu/gifted/teaching/strategies/analysis/openendedquestions.htm
How to Use Rubrics for Open-Ended Questions (OEQ)
Constructing Rubrics for OEQ workshop notes www.foundationcoalition.org/powerpoints/2002rubriccaso.ppt
Using a rubric to Score OEQ - www.heinemann.com/math/rubric.cfm
Very general problem and rubric - pals.sri.com/tasks/9-12/KeepItHot/rubric.html
General
Blank Rubric Grid (printable) - www.teachervision.com/tv/printables/rubricgrid.pdf
Custom Problem-Based Learning Rubric Creator - www.4teachers.org/projectbased/checklist.shtml
Discovery School (Kathy Schrock) list of rubric sites - school.discovery.com/schrockguide/assess.html
Generalized Rubric for OEQ - www.bgsu.edu/colleges/edhd/programs/ASPEN/31b.html
NJ State Test Rubrics - peoplespublishing.com/standards_help/NJ/NJrubrics.html
Other Assessment Types (list of links) - www.teachervision.com/lesson-plans/lesson-5815.html
Problem of the Week example rubric - www.middleweb.com/CSLB2pow.html
RubiStar Rubric Creator - rubistar.4teachers.org/index.shtml
Rubric Bank (Chicago Public Schools) intranet.cps.k12.il.us/Assessments/Ideas_and_Rubrics/Rubric_Bank/rubric_bank.html
Rubric Builder (create rubric online) - landmark-project.com/classweb/tools/rubric_builder.php3
Rubric Samples - www.sdcoe.k12.ca.us/score/actbank/trubrics.htm
TeacherVision Links - www.teachervision.com/tv/curriculum/assess/rubrics.html
Teachnology list of rubric articles - www.teach-nology.com/currenttrends/alternative_assessment/rubrics/
Teachnology List of Rubric Makers - teachers.teach-nology.com/web_tools/rubrics/
List of rubrics - www.teachervision.com/lesson-plans/lesson-6364.html
41
Lists examples - www.rubrics.com
Listed as for gifted students – the example rubrics would be good for any student www.adifferentplace.org/rubrics.htm
Many good examples - www.odyssey.on.ca/~elaine.coxon/rubrics.htm
Awesome Library Rubric links - www.awesomelibrary.com/cgi-bin/search-aw1e.cgi?terms=rubrics&search=Go
English/Language Arts
Fiction Writing Basic Rubric example - www.teachervision.com/lesson-plans/lesson-4531.html
Teacher Description and Example of rubric (poetry)www.geocities.com/Athens/Atrium/5852/Ap/Rubrics.html
Reading Rubrics - www.ed.gov/databases/ERIC_Digests/ed355253.html
NJ related rubrics - www.njpep.org/Assessment/HSrubrics/LALandMath.html
Math and Science
Assessment Strategies to Facilitate Performance on External Tests (includes section on rubrics)www.pbs.org/teachersource/mathline/assessment/external.shtm
Characteristics of Open-Ended Questions - www.heinemann.com/math/about.cfm and
www.heinemann.com/math/reasons.cfm
Open-Ended Assessment in Math - www.harbourlight.com/open_math/
Open-Ended Activities (list – middle school and some secondary topics) www.nku.edu/~mathed/mori.html
Open-Ended Math Problems from Franklin Institute - www.fi.edu/school/math2/index.html
PALS assessment list - www.pals.sri.com/
Scientific Report Rubric Example - edweb.sdsu.edu/triton/tidepoolunit/Rubrics/reportrubric.html
Scored Discussions for Upper Level Students Thinking Aloud About Mathematics www.sedl.org/scimath/compass/v02n02/scored.html
Teacher Description and Example - www.lalc.k12.ca.us/uclasp/cspucla/past_articles/question_assessment.htm
Using Rubrics for the Science Classroom www.geocities.com/Athens/Delphi/1993/rubrics/teresa/rubrics.htm
Making lab activities more open-ended www.exploratorium.edu/IFI/resources/workshops/lab_activities.html
42
NJ related rubrics - www.njpep.org/Assessment/HSrubrics/LALandMath.html
History/Social Studies
Oral History Guidelines (OEQ examples) - www.aana.com/archives/society/oh_guidelines.asp
Using Alternative Assessments To Improve the Teaching and Learning of History www.ed.gov/databases/ERIC_Digests/ed412170.html
Welcome to Rubrician.Com, the official website for links to rubrics. This site was designed for educators,
teachers, parents, students and evaluators - www.rubrician.com/socialstudies.htm
Nice list of rubrics - www.njpep.org/Assessment/Rubrics.htm
Career/Technical
Career And Technical Education www.unity.k12.wi.us/highschool/Technology%20Education/TechEd.html
General list with some career/technical links - www.odyssey.on.ca/~elaine.coxon/rubrics.htm
Career Internet sites - includes some rubric links - www.state.sd.us/deca/DWCP/links/career.htm
Other Examples
Music Examples - members.iglou.com/dgruth/Question.htm
Art Examples - www.goshen.edu/art/ed/rubric3.html
Project-Based Learning for the World Language Classroom (includes rubrics) users.ncia.net/~jjandjoc/2002.pdf
43
Student Product Assessment Form (SPAF)
http://www.gifted.uconn.edu/sem/pdf/spaf.pdf
Joseph S. Renzulli
Sally M. Reis
Rationale Underlying This Assessment Form
The purpose of this form is to guide your judgment in the qualitative assessment of
various types of products developed by students in enrichment programs. In using the
instrument three major considerations should always be kept in mind. First, the evaluation
of more complex and creative types of products is always a function of human judgment.
We do not think in terms of percentiles or standard scores when we evaluate paintings,
architectural designs or the usefulness of a labor-saving device. We must consider these
products in terms of our own values and certain characteristics that indicate the quality,
esthetics, utility, and function of the overall contribution. In other words, we must trust our
own judgment and learn to rely upon our guided subjective opinions when making
assessments about complex products.
A second consideration relates to the individual worth of the product as a function of
the student’s age/grade level and experiential background. For example, a research project
that reflects an advanced level investigation and subsequent product by a first grader
might not be considered an equally advanced level of involvement on the part of a sixth
grader. Similarly, the work of a youngster from a disadvantaged background must be
considered in light of the student’s overall educational experiences, opportunities and
availability of advanced level resource persons, materials and equipment.
The third consideration relates to the most important purpose of any evaluation—
student growth and improvement. This assessment instrument should be used to guide
students toward excellence and therefore we strongly believe that it should be shared and
discussed with students before the product is started. In other words, we believe the
instrument should be reviewed with students during the early planning stages of the product.
Students should have the opportunity to know and fully understand on what basis their
final products will be assessed.
Instructions for Using the Assessment Form
Although most of the items included in the form relate directly to characteristics of the
final product, it will be helpful if you also have access to any planning devices that have
been used in the development of the product. Such planning devices might consist of
logs, contracts, management plans, proposals or any other record keeping system. A
planning device can help you to determine if pre-stated objectives have been met by
comparing statements of objectives from the planning device with the final product. If
such a planning device has not been utilized or is unavailable, you may want to request
that the student complete a form that will provide you with the necessary background
information. It is recommended that some type of planning device accompany all products
that are submitted for rating. If it can be arranged, you may also want to interview the
student who completed the product.
page 1
Permission to reproduce this page granted by Creative Learning Press, Inc.
44
Student Product Assessment Form (SPAF)
In using the Student Product Assessment Form it will sometimes be necessary for you
to do some detective work! For example, in determining the diversity of resources, you
may need to examine footnotes, bibliographies or references and materials listed on the
planning device. You may also want to have the student complete a self-evaluation form
relating to the completed product. This form may help to assess task commitment and
student interest.
The Student Product Assessment Form can be used in a variety of ways. Individual
teachers, resource persons or subject matter specialists can evaluate products
independently or collectively as members of a team. When two or more persons evaluate
the same product independently, the average rating for each scale item can be calculated
and entered on the Summary Form. When used in a research setting or formal evaluation
situation, it is recommended that products be independently evaluated by three raters.
One of these ratings should be completed by the teacher under whose direction the product
was developed. A second form should be completed by a person who has familiarity with
the subject matter area of the product. For example, a high school science teacher might
be asked to rate the work of an elementary grade student who has completed a sciencerelated
product. The third rater might be someone who is independent of the school
system or program in which the work was carried out.
Item Format
At first glance the items on the assessment form may seem to be long and complicated,
but they are actually quite concise. Each item represents a single characteristic that is
designed to focus your attention. The items are divided into the following three related
parts:
1. The Key Concept. This concept is always present first and is printed in large type.
It should serve to focus your attention on the main idea or characteristic being
evaluated.
2. The Item Description. Following the Key Concept are one or more descriptive
statements about how the characteristic might be reflected in the student’s product.
These statements are listed under the Key Concept.
3. Examples. In order to help clarify the meanings of the items, an actual example of
students’ work is provided. The examples are intended to elaborate upon the
meaning of both the Key Concept and the Item Description. The examples are
presented following each item description.
Important Note: The last item (No. 9) deals with an overall assessment of the product.
In this case we have chosen a somewhat different format and examples have not been
provided. When completing the ratings for Item No. 9 you should consider the product as
a whole (globally) rather than evaluating its separate components in an analytic fashion.
Permission to reproduce this page granted by Creative Learning Press, Inc.
page 2
45
Student Product Assessment Form (SPAF)
Some of the items may appear to be unusually long or “detailish” for a rating scale but
our purpose here is to improve the clarity and thus inter-rater reliability for the respective
items. After you have used the scales a few times, you will probably only need to read the
Key Concepts and Item Descriptions in order to refresh your memory about the meaning
of an item. Research has shown inter-rater reliability is improved when items are more
descriptive and when brief examples are provided in order to help clarify any
misunderstanding that may exist on the parts of different raters.
Non-Applicable Items
Because of the difficulty of developing a single instrument that will be universally
applicable to all types of products, there will occasionally be instances when some of the
items do not apply to specific products. For example, in a creative writing project (poem,
play, story) either the Level of Resources (No. 3) or Diversity of Resources (No. 4) might
not apply if the student is writing directly from his/her own experiences. It should be
emphasized however, that the non-applicable category should be used very rarely in most
rating situations.
How to Rate Student Products
1. Fill out the information requested at the top of the Summary Sheet that accompanies
the Student Product Assessment Form. A separate Summary Sheet should be filled out
for each product that is evaluated.
2. Review the nine items on the Student Product Assessment Form. This review will
help to give you a “mind set” for the things you will be looking for as you examine
each product.
3. Examine the product by first doing a “quick overview” of the entire piece of work.
Then do a careful and detailed examination of the product. Check () pages or
places that you might want to reexamine and jot down brief notes and comments
about any strengths, weaknesses or questions that occur as you review the product.
4. Turn to the first item on the Student Product Assessment Form. Read the Key
Concept, Item Description and Example. Enter the number that best represents
your assessment in the “Rating” column on the Summary Sheet. Enter only whole
numbers. In other words, do not enter ratings of 3 1/2 or 2 1/4. On those rare
occasions when you feel an item does not apply, please check the N/A column on
the Summary Sheet. Please note that we have only included an N/A response
option for Item 9a on the Overall Assessment.
5. Turn to the second item and repeat the above process. If you feel you cannot
render a judgment immediately, skip the item and return to it at a later time. Upon
completion of the assessment process, you should have entered a number (or a
check in the N/A column) for all items on the Summary Sheet.
6. Any comments you would like to make about the product can be entered at the
bottom of the Summary Sheet.
Permission to reproduce this page granted by Creative Learning Press, Inc.
page 3
46
Student Product Assessment Form
Summary Sheet
Name(s) _____________________________________ Date __________________
District ____________________________ School ___________________________
Teacher ___________________________ Grade ________________ Sex ______
Product (Title and/or Brief Description) ______________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
Number of weeks students worked on product ________________________________
Factors
Rating*
Not
Applicable
1. Early Statement of Purpose ....................................
2. Problem Focusing ...................................................
3. Level of Resources .................................................
4. Diversity of Resources ............................................
5. Appropriateness of Resources ...............................
6. Logic, Sequence and Transition .............................
7. Action Orientation ...................................................
8. Audience .................................................................
9. Overall Assessment ................................................
A. Originality of the Idea ........................................
B. Achieved Objectives Stated in the Plan ............
C. Advanced Familiarity with the Subject ..............
D. Quality Beyond Age/Grade Level ......................
E. Care, Attention to Detail, etc. ............................
F. Time, Effort, Energy ..........................................
G. Original Contribution .........................................
______
______
______
______
______
______
______
______
______
______
______
______
______
______
______
______
_________
_________
_________
_________
_________
_________
_________
_________
_________
_________
_________
_________
_________
_________
_________
_________
Comments:
Person completing this form: _____________________________________________
*Rating Scales:
Factors 1-8:
Factors 9A-9G:
5-To a great extent
5=Outstanding
3-Somewhat
4=Above average
1-To a limited extent
3=Average
2=Below average
1=Poor
Permission to reproduce this page granted by Creative Learning Press, Inc.
page 4
47
Part 4:
Practice
48
Practice- Planning a Unit
Content:
1. What content standards will the unit cover?
2. What skills do you want the students to learn?
Process:
3. What lessons will achieve your goals?
4. What content modification for gifted students will you use to maximize learning?
5. What will be the format of your lessons? (i.e. discussions, student presentations, teacher-led,
individual assignments, cooperative lessons)
How are the concepts going to be presented to the students?
6. Are the concepts or skills to be presented relevant to students’ needs,
interests and experiences?
7. How can the concepts or skills be made relevant to students?
Product:
8. What will be the end product?
9. How will you assess the product?
49
http://www.nagc.org/uploadedFiles/About_NAGC/Awards/NAGC%20Rubric.doc
NATIONAL ASSSOCIATION FOR GIFTED CHILDREN
CURRICULUM AND INSTRUCTION DIVISION
RUBRIC FOR RATING OUTSTANDING CURRICULUM MATERIAL
Date ______________ Evaluator ______________ Grade______ Score _______/48
Title ___________________________________ Submitter ____________________
Category: G/T
Classroom k-3
4-8
9-12
I.
Clarity of Objectives
1. Objectives are not stated
2. Objectives are discernible, but vague or confusing; assumptions need to be made
by the reader
3. Objective are reasonably clear; reader is fairly confident he/she understands what
students need to know and be able to do
4. Objectives are clearly stated, specific, and unambiguous
II.
Nature of the Objectives
1. The majority of objectives are concerned with details, basic skills, and factual
knowledge
2. Objectives for learning incorporate major concepts and sophisticated skills within
in field of study
3. Objectives for learning incorporate concepts, principles, cognitive skills,
methodologies, and dispositions within a field of study
4. Objectives for learning incorporate concepts principles, cognitive skills,
methodologies, and dispositions that can be transferred across disciplines
III.
Evaluation Components
1. The student evaluation component is missing or not explicitly stated
2. The assessment model included only paper and pencil evaluation instruments (i.e.,
tests, quizzes).
3. The assessment model includes at least two different approaches to evaluation
design
4. The assessment model includes at least three different evaluation measures
including, for example, student portfolios, observational checklists of student
behaviors, product evaluation, or self or peer evaluation
50
IV.
Learning Activities
1. No student learning activities are described
2. At least two different types of learning activite4s are described
3. At least three different types of student learning activities are described.
Many of these involve active cognitive engagement or hands-on learning
4.At least three different types of learning activities are described. The
majority of these activities involve constructivist learning, problem solving, research,
investigation, cognitive engagement, and/or hands-on learning
V.
Instructional Strategies
1. The instructional strategies are not explicitly stated or described
2. The instructional strategies are described. Strategies involve direct
instruction or self-study
3. At least two different instructional strategies are described. At least one of
These strategies involves inductive teaching, concept based teachings, teacher-asfacilitator, high-level questioning, Socractic questioning. Or teacher as mentor
4. At least three different instructional strategies are described. At least one of these
strategies involves inductive teaching, concept based teachings, teacher-asfacilitator, high-level questioning, Socractic questioning. Or teacher as mentor
VI.
Student Product and Assignments
1. Fewer than two kinds of student products or assignments are described
2. The author describes at least three different kinds of student projects or
assignments. The majority of these assignments involve convergent
thinking, recall, and practice
3. The author describes at least three different kinds of student products or
assignments that are embedded in the lesson plans. The majority of these
assignments involve open-ended assignments that are subject to personal
interpretation or accommodate varying levels of expertise
4. The author describes at least three different kinds of student products or
assignments. The majority of these assignments involve open-ended
assignments, development of creative products, or the development of
products related to real-world applications or problem solving. These
products are closely aligned with other curriculum components.
VII. Resources
The unit contains:
1. Resources derived solely from textbooks
2. Two or three resources of one type, i.e., texts, books, articles are used in
this unit
3. Three or more varied resources, including print and non-print materials,
i.e., books, video tapes, audio tapes, hands-on materials, software,
internet sources are used in this unit
4. Four or more varied resources and realia, including primary source
material, are used in this unit
51
VIII. Nature of Differentiation
1. No opportunities for differentiation are evident
2. Some open-ended activities are included in the unit
3. This unit allows for at least two of the following adjustments: pacing,
depth, breadth, level of abstraction, level of complexity, degree of
generalization, or talent development
4. Activities and assignments that accommodate the learning needs of high
achieving students are explicitly described. At least three or more of the
adjustments (listed above) are included
IX.
Opportunities for Talent Development
1. The unit includes none of the activities listed below
2. The unit includes at least one of the activities listed below
3. The unit includes at least two of the activities listed below
4. The unit includes at least three of the activities listed below
o Opportunities for “kid watching” and “talent spotting:
o Opportunities for students to engage in some activities aligned with their
individual strengths, preferences, or interests
o Opportunities to foster the connection between unit activities and potential
career fields, leadership opportunities, or real-world applications
o Opportunities to interact with role models, community resources, mentors,
or professionals in the field
o Opportunities to explore advanced content in that field
o Opportunities to acquire the skills, methodologies, and dispositions of the
practicing professional in that field
o Opportunities to investigate real-world problems and to develop authentic
products and services in that field
X.
Alignment of Curricular Components
1. No lesson plans are evident or fewer that three lesson plans were
developed for this curriculum unit , or the lesson plans contained fewer
that three of the components listed below, or the plans were not explicit
enough for other educators to follow
2. The curriculum unit contains more than three lessons. Each lesson
describes at least three of the following instructional components:
objectives, assessment, introduction, teaching strategies, learning
activities, products, resources, differentiation strategies, and talent
development activities
3. The curriculum unit contains more that three lessons. Each lesson
describes at least five of the components listed above. Most of the
components are sequenced and aligned (related to each other)
4. The curriculum unit contains more that three lessons. Each lesson
describes at least five components mentioned above. All the components
52
XI.
are sequenced and closely aligned (rely strongly on each other to
accomplish lesson objectives).
Evidence of Effectiveness
1. No evidence of effectiveness provided
2. The unit has been used at least once with students; anecdotal evidence is
included
3. The unit has been used more than once. Evidence that supports general
student growth was gathered and provided
4. The unit has been taught more than once. Developers describe a
systematic effort to assess growth and change in gifted education
students.
XII Ease of Use by Other Educators
1. Vital curriculum components are missing
2. Most curriculum components are evident, but some are not
described in enough detail to foster ease of use by other educators
3. Most curriculum components are evident. Components are explicit,
well-sequenced, and easy to follow
4. Most curriculum components are evident. Components are explicit,
well-sequenced, and easy to follow. Field test suggestions for
planning and implementation are included.
TOTAL SCORE: ______________________/48
53
Part 5:
Internet Resources
54
Internet Resources
1. Great website for Differentiated Instruction:
URL: http://www.internet4classrooms.com/di.htm
2. Changing Teaching Practices: Using curriculum differentiation to respond to students’
diversity. United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization, 2004.
URL: http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0013/001365/136583e.pdf
URL: http://old.nagc.org/divisions/curricul/rubric.pdf
3. Hoagies Gifted Curriculum Resources:
URL: http://www.hoagiesgifted.org/curriculum_resources.htm
URL: http://www.hoagiesgifted.org/differentiation.htm
4. NEAG Center for Gifted Education and Talent Development
URL: http://www.gifted.uconn.edu/
Curriculum Compacting (Renzulli and Reis):
URL: http://www.gifted.uconn.edu/sem/semart08.html
5. The ERIC Clearinghouse on Disabilities and Gifted Education (ERIC EC)
URL: http://www.hoagiesgifted.org/eric/index.html
6. Ministry of Education Handbook for Schools: Gifted & talented: Meeting their needs
in New Zealand schools:
URL: http://www.tki.org.nz/r/gifted/handbook/
7. Socratic Seminars:
URL: http://www.fcpsteach.org/docs/Socratic%20Seminars-Directions.doc
URL: http://www.greece.k12.ny.us/instruction/ela/SocraticSeminars/overview.htm
8. Talents Unlimited
URL:
http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/0000019b/80/14/f
5/05.pdf
9. Future Problem Solving Program
URL: http://www.fpspi.org/
10. National Association for Gifted Children
URL: http://www.nagc.org/
11. Module Five: Curriculum Differentiation for Gifted Students by Bronwyn MacLeod
Core Module 5A - Part 2© 2004 Department of Education, Science and Training
© 2004 Gifted Education Research, Resource and Information Centre (GERRIC), The University of New South Wales
URL: http://www.dest.gov.au/NR/rdonlyres/1D2D4398-E169-4B8E-BAA304ADAFE68F99/5470/Module5_PRIMARY.pdf
55