And Monday's Back to the Chalkface? A Guide for Programme Development
Dr Tracy Riley
Massey University
Presentation for the Marlborough Principal's Association Conference, 9–11 August 2000
Good morning! Well, we're nearing the end of yet another conference. And if you're like me, your head is buzzing with ideas, things you may not have ever thought about, an energy that results in determination to make changes – and pronto! But let's face reality ... we've been out of our offices for several days and when Monday comes there will be phone calls to return, e-mails to answer, deadlines to meet, meetings to attend. Conferences have that affect – they fill us with even more good intentions than we arrived with. So where do we go from here?
This morning I'd like to share with you some ideas about gifted education – some practical strategies schools might consider for "making it happen" for our gifted kids in New Zealand. I'll begin by briefly exploring the principles of differentiation, moving from there to programming possibilities. Finally, I'd like to share with you a "plan" for putting the theory into practice, creating a differentiated education for our gifted students.
Perhaps the first principle of education for any child is to tailor their educational experiences to their individual strengths and interests. Ideally, this is what all of us as educators want – a celebration of individuality. Carol Tomlinson (1999, p. 48) gives us eight principles of differentiation – for everyone. These are:
- The teacher is clear about what matters in subject matter.
- The teacher understands, appreciates, and builds upon student differences.
- Assessment and instruction are inseparable.
- The teacher adjusts content, process, and product in response to student readiness, interests, and learning profile.
- All students participate in respectful work.
- Students and teachers collaborate in learning.
- Goals of a differentiated classroom are maximum growth and individual success.
- Flexibility is the hallmark of a differentiated classroom.
Now that sounds pretty good to me! And, indeed, if we implemented all of those principles in all of our classrooms, we wouldn't have to think twice about the needs of gifted children. But I'd contend that in many instances – and possibly for very justifiable reasons – we don't differentiate for individuals, but quickly fall into a one-size-fits-all pattern. Let me tell you from experience, for most of us one-size-doesn't-fit-all!
For gifted children, tailoring of the curriculum to fit their needs requires differentiation at all levels. And not simply quantitative, more of the same, differentiation – but qualitative differentiation. We must examine three crucial factors within their education and radically change those. These are:
- Content – what is taught or learnt: the concepts, information, ideas, and facts within the curriculum.
- Processes – how the content is taught or learnt: how new material is presented, activities students are involved in, and teaching methods.
- Products – how learning is evidenced by gifted and talented students: tangible or intangible results of learning, reflective of "real" solutions to "real" problems (Ministry of Education, 2000, p. 36).
A natural transformation ensuing from these changes is a totally different learning environment – one which is truly learner-centred, flexible, psychologically safe, and tolerant of lots of activity. Teachers shift from being sources of knowledge and know-how, so to speak, to being facilitators of learning. Teaching swings from a perhaps traditional role of directing to one of guiding.
The tools for differentiation for gifted students are enrichment and acceleration, with enrichment being a horizontal outreach from the standard curriculum and acceleration being a vertical, up the ladder, approach to the curriculum. Ideally, these two should work together, complementing each other. Good enrichment is complemented by acceleration and vice versa. Each approach has its advantages and disadvantages – but like any good, working partnership when used in tandem it seems that a balance is struck. Acceleration is enrichment's "better-half" and vice versa.
These two approaches to meeting the needs of gifted education only work when content, processes, and products are differentiated and can be delivered through a wide range of provisions. For gifted students, a continuum of opportunities should be available which extend from the regular classroom to special programmes outside of school. The array of possibilities is endless as this diagram illustrates.
(Ministry of Education, 2000, p. 40)
Taking into account principles of differentiation, enrichment, and acceleration, and a continuum of provisions, the most logical next step is putting these threads together to create a differentiated education for gifted students. The pragmatics of programme development require schools to move beyond theory and directly into practice in the design and implementation of comprehensive learning opportunities for the gifted. This is perhaps the most difficult hurdle, and certainly a primary concern of schools: how do we make it work?
Schools should take an approach to programme development and implementation that is long-term and involves the whole school community – administrative and teaching staff, Boards of Trustees, parents/whanau, other community members, and perhaps gifted students themselves. While schools may elect to create a committee to direct or steer the gifted programme, input should be sought from all interested parties. This ensures that the gifted programme is owned by the entire school community, and thus, hopefully reflective of their goals for gifted students.
It is advisable to establish a committee to direct the development and implementation of the school's gifted programme. Often a school's gifted programme evolves from the work of an individual staff member; however, this may lead to resistance from other staff members to be involved, a short-term programme life, or even teacher burnout. To ensure longevity and support, the school should decide what individuals can and should contribute to orchestrating programme planning. In creating a committee, schools should think about administrative and teaching expertise, cultural considerations, and parental and community involvement. Selection of committee members should include criteria such as willingness and enthusiasm, interest, expertise, and leadership capabilities. The committee may comprise:
- members of the administration and/or Board of Trustees,
- teaching staff representative of various levels and/or curriculum areas,
- parents/whanau of gifted students,
- community members with experience and/or interest in gifted students,
- gifted students, dependent upon age and experience.
The purpose for the committee should be to establish a working plan for programme development and implementation. This plan should set the parameters around the tasks to be undertaken. Additionally it should specify who is responsible for what tasks. A time line may be established, as well. This working plan is simply a framework, giving direction. Within the plan, schools might consider the following steps:
- Needs analysis
- Programme development
- Programme implementation
- Evaluation and revision
I'd like to discuss each of these steps further.
Step 1: Needs analysis
The first step is for schools to analyse their needs, to determine where we are at and where we are heading. If a close examination of current practices and future directions is not undertaken, then gifted programmes may quickly become fragmented, one-off additions to the total school picture. Ideally, gifted education should be woven into the whole fabric of the school, as part of the tapestry created for all students in that environment.
Undertaking a needs analysis requires schools to examine the following:
- Student needs: Asking questions, such as "What is the concept of giftedness within our school context?" and "How do we identify our gifted students?" starts a discussion of what the strengths and interests of the gifted population are. From there, schools should consider the unique learning needs of the gifted population.
- Student opportunities: Once giftedness has been contextually defined and student learning needs established, schools should examine the current provisions in place for students. Individual teachers need to reflect upon classroom practices, staff in its entirety need to examine the curriculum and other school wide opportunities. The current state of affairs should serve as the foundation of future ventures. By examining student opportunities already in place, schools can begin to recognise the gaps and address those.
- Professional strengths and interests: Schools also need to consider the staff strengths and interests, as well as professional needs. By identifying the potential contributions of all staff, schools may discover a wealth of programming possibilities. Schools also begin to unearth the professional development needs in this aspect of the analysis.
- Resources: In developing programmes schools should also consider not only human resources, but also physical and financial resources. Looking closely at what is currently available by way of materials and finance gives a more accurate picture of future possibilities. Schools should also consider community resources, tapping into an often overlooked support for programme development.
- Community and parental contributions: Analysing the contributions and expectations of parents and the community at large, gives schools another view of programming possibilities. Establishing a baseline of available expertise and community-based provisions allows schools to maximise these potential resources and also avoids "re-inventing the wheel". Seeking input from parents and whanau regarding their vision for gifted students, as well as appropriate provisions, can only lead to wider support for and involvement in the school's programmes.
- Policy: Finally, schools should analyse current policies for gifted students. Perhaps there is one in place or a need for the development of one. In the case of the former, staff should critically evaluate its implementation and perhaps make adjustments where needed. If a policy is not in place, staff should consider the development of one, its components, and subsequent implementation. Additionally schools may find that gifted students are addressed implicitly in other policies, such as those related to barriers to learning or students with special needs.
From the starting point of a needs analysis, schools begin to discover not only the holes or gaps in adequately meeting the needs, but also the positive provisions already in place. Only in moving from strength to strength, can schools provide a comprehensive, differentiated education for gifted students.
Step 2: Programme development
Following from a needs analysis, schools should begin the task of making decisions about the goals and design of additional opportunities for students and staff. At this stage, schools should thoroughly explore all possibilities by visiting other schools, reading books and journals, seeking expert advice, searching the Internet, attending conferences – gathering as much information as possible. A natural tendency for schools may be to act quickly, getting programmes into place, but if the provisions are not thoroughly investigated and well-researched, the provisions may prove flimsy and inadequate. Gifted education has an established history behind it, in New Zealand and abroad, with many programmes and practices that are proven to work. There is no reason for schools to operate in the dark. Schools may choose to adopt or replicate existing programmes available from other schools and commercial sources; modify or revise these existing programmes to suit their specific needs; or develop their own approaches to programming.
The programme development goals should be prioritised. Schools should establish a 2–3 year plan of implementation. Additionally, schools should be realistic in setting goals, considering practicalities such as staff involvement, professional development, time lines, and resources. Determining the scope of programme development, over a long period of time, allows schools to focus on priorities. Consequently, it may be useful to prioritise by levels or curriculum areas, gradually creating a comprehensive programme for gifted students.
Programme development goals should address:
- policy creation or revision, reflective of current practices and future directions and encompassing: the rationale, purposes, and guidelines,
- programme design and structure,
- professional involvement and development,
- community involvement,
- resourcing, and
- programme evaluation.
These goals should be put into writing and made available as discussion documents for the entire school community.
Step 3: Programme implementation
Once consensus has been established and support garnered for the developmental aspect of the programme, it is time to put words into action! This may feel like a shot in the dark or leap of great faith, for an assumption is made that the intended programme will match the delivered programme. For this reason some schools may chose to field test or try out a programme with the intent of evaluating it and making revisions. This is the most complex step undertaken because it involves transforming written plans into real action and creating change for teachers and students.
Important components of this stage include:
- professional development: awareness, responsibilities;
- resources, both physical and human: selection, costs, evaluation;
- a flexible work plan: outlining responsibilities and charting progress;
- programme monitoring; and
- allowance for adjustments and adaptations.
During the early phases of programme implementation it is crucial that schools gather feedback from all those involved: teachers, parents/whanau, community members, and students. That feedback should impact each of the above considerations with the purpose of enhancing the opportunities for gifted students, not starting all over again.
Step 4: Evaluation and revision
One of the most neglected areas of gifted education is evaluation; however, it is indeed essential in order to move programmes forward in a positive direction, making well-informed decisions. A thorough examination of every aspect of gifted programmes, from definitions to instructional practices, should be undertaken, with the involvement of the entire school community. Asking pertinent questions related to programme development and implementation, should lead schools to revision or modification – for the benefit of gifted students. If used for this purpose, the final step should feed back into steps two and three (development and implementation), creating a circular pattern. Gifted programmes that truly meet the needs of children, through qualitatively differentiated educational experiences, are constantly evolving.
Whew! A lot to think about. I guess my best bit of advice for you would be to take your time, think, reflect. As educators we often want instant ideas, recipes for classrooms, quick solutions – but let me assure you that from my experiences in cooking, the instant stuff just isn't the same. The meals I remember and try again and talk about well after the dishes are washed are the ones that I planned carefully, gathered all the right ingredients for, took my time preparing. So when you head back to the chalkface on Monday, take with you what you've learned over these last few days. But don't feel guilty for slowly implementing them. Because I'm sure you will – and Dr Seuss would probably agree when he says "Kid you'll move mountains! Today is your day!"
References
Ministry of Education. (2000). Gifted and talented students: Meeting their needs in New Zealand schools. Wellington: Learning Media.
Seuss, Dr. (1990). Oh, the places you'll go! New York: Random House.
Tomlinson, C.A. (1999). The differentiated classroom. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.