EDG 554 Module 3 Discussion Board Posting

1. How does the broadening of our ideas about the characteristics of gifted students shape
our decisions for how we identify students, establish programming options, and design
curriculum?
Gifted students are not a homogenous group of students who can be served with a single

change to curriculum and structure. There is no single conception of giftedness (Reis et al.,

2015) and because of the varied needs and characteristics of this special population, the

programs that serve these students have to be carefully designed to maximize student potential

and support student growth, in the talent domain as well as the social and emotional health of

students as a whole child.

The first step in designing and establishing programs for gifted students is identifying the

students the program intends to serve. Green (2015) affirms that identification practices should

be matched with the goals of the program. (Reis et al., p. 95). According to Renzulli (1978)

gifted behaviors reflect an interaction between above average ability, high levels of task

commitment, and high levels of creativity (in Reis et a., p. 71) therefore an identification process

needs to consider each of these attributes. Giftedness can develop in many forms and domains,

including academic, creative, and physical and “a new generation of researchers has argued that

giftedness is a multidimensional construct incorporating a variety of traits, skills, and abilities,

and manifesting in manifold ways” (Reis et al., 2015, p. 71). Identifying students strictly based

on IQ scores is not sufficient to recognize the varied forms that giftedness can take. A

comprehensive identification process, such as the one used in Renzulli’s Schoolwide Enrichment

Triad Model (Vantassell-Baska & Brown, 2015) allows all students to be considered for

inclusion.
 While gifted students have unique social and emotional characteristics, research shows that,

as a group, their risk for psychological problems is comparable to their average ability peers.

However, “When troubling social and emotional traits do occur in gifted students, they often are

the result of a poor fit between the individual and his or her academic or social environment”

(Gross, 2002; Neihart, 2002 as cited in Reis et al., 2015, p. 75). The fit between a child and her

environment is important for healthy development of gifted students so schools must consider

how they will appropriately match students with programs or preferably, how they will develop

programs that meet the needs of their students. Poor fit seems to be most apparent in “children

with exceptionally high IQ scores, that is, IQs over 160, and students gifted in the visual arts and

writing” (Gross, 2002; Hollingworth, 1926, 1942; as cited in Reis et al., 2015, p. 76). One

takeaway from these findings is to design magnet programs that attract students with similar IQs

or talent domains so that they can be with others like them who understand their deep passions,

dreams, and work and learning styles. While students should not be limited to only working with

like students, this would serve to create a community of support for gifted students who may

otherwise feel isolated.

2. How would you propose modifying the learning environment to meet the cognitive,
psychological, and social-emotional needs of highly capable students?
On modification to the learning environment to meet the cognitive needs of highly capable

students is to provide advancement and acceleration opportunities. Swiatek (2015) reviewed

longitudinal studies which “demonstrate the positive results of accelerative practices and the lack

of negative consequences, such as knowledge gaps or loss of interest” (as cited in Vantassel-

Baska & Brown, 2015, p. 114). In addition, Vantassel-Baska & Brown (2015) wrote that “The

evidence strongly suggests that content-based accelerative approaches should be employed in

any curriculum used in school-based programs for the gifted and that schools need to apply
curricular models faithfully and thoroughly in order to realize their potential impacts over time”

(Vantassel-Baska & Brown, 2015, p. 123). To make acceleration possible, schools and programs

have to be flexible with student grouping and credit earning so that students can move through

curriculum at a rate that is appropriate for their ability instead of being limited by age and seat-

time constraints. Schools also need to provide advanced classes, such as AP, IB, or Running

Start options for students who have exceeded the regular curriculum and/or are advanced in a

specific subject but are not ready for advanced classes in all subject areas. Programs should

consider models outside of a traditional 6 period day such as project-based learning or

Montessori as ways to provide for individualized acceleration.

Acceleration will challenge advanced students as well as connect them with other students

with similar abilities. Connecting gifted students with others who are like them reduces feelings

of isolation and increases a feeling of belonging which is important for our social and emotional

health.

For students with disabilities, the environment should “focus on developing the child’s gift,

and provide an environment that values individual differences” (Baum, 1990, as cited in Reis et

al., 2015, p. 86) because findings “indicated that as educators diminish the attention to and

importance of the disability and concentrate instead on the gifts, many twice-exceptional

students can become creatively productive” (Reis et al., 2015, p. 91). In essence, programs need

to create supportive environments that value each student and take care to acknowledge their

strengths and weaknesses and work to capitalize on student strengths. To accomplish creating

this supportive environment, teachers need to take time learning about each student and

developing projects, curriculum, and resources that best meet their needs.

3. What characteristics and/or features would you expect to be found in curricular models
that are advocated for the gifted? This question is important because when a school
 selects district curriculum for its students, how would we say that curriculum for the
gifted should differ from what they purchase?
I would expect that curricular models that are advocated for the gifted would focus on deep

understanding and applications of content over covering standards at a surface level. Curricular

models that are advocated for the gifted should teach students research and communication skills

so students can explore their interests and develop projects that explain their findings. The

models need to give students as much choice in what and how they learn as is feasible. The

Stanley Model, which advocates for flexibility and acceleration opportunities, has been in use for

decades and “the model has been well received by parents and students who constitute the major

client groups; schools have been less receptive based on their conservative attitudes toward

accelerative practices and the emphasis on highly gifted students in subject areas” (Vantassel-

Baska & Brown, 2015, p. 113). Renzulli’s School Wide Enrichment Model, focuses on in-depth

study and curriculum compacting, has been enthusiastically supported by teachers and selected

students (Vantassel-Baska & Brown, 2015, p. 116).

In addition to challenging students academically, curricular models advocated for gifted

students need to address the unique needs of this population including their social and emotional

growth and see the child as more than her gift. While the behaviors and traits associated with

gifted students do not correlate with increased psychological problems,

some research demonstrates that some traits, such as a tendency to be emotional, to question

authority, and to take little interest in detail, may be seen in a negative light by parents,

educators, and peers of creative children and may lead to behaviors considered inappropriate

(Reis et al., 2015, p. 79).

Curricular models need to flex with these behaviors and harness these traits for good while also

teaching students appropriate behaviors as needed. I had a student who responded emotionally
to any perceived injustice, large or small, which often resulted in her getting sent out of class.

Her feelings were valid and important, but her behaviors did not help her accomplish her goals.

We were able to work with her to respond to these same situations so that she could articulate her

concerns and work towards solutions rather than just feeling anger or sadness. Any curricular

model advocated for gifted students must incorporate leadership and social responsibility at a

foundation.

4. How do the ideas found in the readings this week square with your beliefs and values
regarding human nature and its potential?
This week we read about curricular and program models designed for gifted students. A

consistent theme I found throughout each model was the importance of individualization and

maximizing potential. Individualization seems counter to community and connection, but it can

help students find others with the same passions and goals because each person can choose their

own path. Individualizing the curriculum shows care for each student and a consideration of

their needs, but it has to be done with a broader perspective and wholistic view that the choices

students make impact the world at large. How can your interests and skills be applied to better

your community? Further, maximizing potential assumes that people will use their gifts and

talents for good which is my outlook on human nature. We would not develop potential if we

thought the result would be destructive.

5. After exploring the models, which 2 models are you interested in analyzing for your
final course project? You might want to consider exploring those that are most
unfamiliar to you or may provide direction for your program.
The two models that I am interested in analyzing are Betts Autonomous Learner Model and

the Level of Services Model. From my brief exploration of the Level of Services Model it seems

similar to the PBIS program by providing students who need services what they need while not

feeling compelled to provide the same level of service to all students. This model seems like
something that could be adapted to my current work environment. The Betts Autonomous

Learner Model is interesting to me because the focus is on teachering students how to become

learners and researchers instead of focusing on the content that they will be researching. This

model, therefore, could be used across contents and encourage cross-content collaboration.

References:
Reis, S. M., Sullivan, E. E., & Renzulli, S. J. (2015). Characteristics of gifted learners: Varied,

diverse, and complex. In F.A. Karnes & S. M. Bean (Eds.), Methods and materials for

teaching the gifted (4th ed., pp. 69-103). Prufrock Press.

Vantassel-Baska, J. & Brown, E. F. (2015). An analysis of gifted education curriculum models.

In F.A. Karnes & S. M. Bean (Eds.), Methods and materials for teaching the gifted (4th

ed., pp. 107-138). Prufrock Press.