differentiated curricula for the...

Differentiated Curriculafor the Gifted/Talented

A Point of View

A paper prepared by A. Harry Passoan to reflect the majority opinion of the Curriculum Councilsponsored by the National/State Leadership Training Institute on the Gifted/Talented (N/S-LTI-G/T).

The Marland Report (1971) stated that gifted and talented children"require differentiated educational programs and/or services beyond thosenormally provided by the regular school program" if they are "to realizetheir contribution to self and society." (p . ix) The panel which advisedCommissioner of Education Marland established three characteristics for adifferentiated educational program :

1 . A differentiated curriculum that promotes higher cognitive processes ;

2 . Instructional strategies that accommodate both curriculum contentand the learning styles of gifted and talented children ; and

3 . Special grouping arrangements appropriate to particular children,i .e ., special classes, honor classes, seminars, resource rooms, and thelike . (p . x)

The Marland Report is one of several statements on curriculum differenti-ation to have emerged in the decades since programs began for gifted andtalented children, and yet, questions persist. What is an appropriately differ-entiated curriculum for the gifted/talented? What issues affect the develop-ment and implementation of such a differentiated curriculum?

In this paper, the N/S-LTI-G/T Curriculum Council attempts to respondto these questions . We do so by drawing on alternative philosophies, research,and theories, and by stating our own positions. In this, our intent is to pro-vide a framework to serve as a point of departure for clarifying or extendingthinking about the nature of differentiated curricula. We suggest a set ofprinciples for curriculum differentiation, which might also indicate theappropriateness of curricula already in existence.

A Point of View

In addition to formulating principles, we address several key issues fre-quently raised concerning the development and use of differentiated curricula.In connection with these issues, we set forth the position of the CurriculumCouncil - but also present alternative positions, so that the reader can arriveat his/her own position .

What philosophy underlies programs for gifted and talented children?

At one level, the philosophy underlying programs for the gifted/talentedis essentially the same as that for all students in a democracy - i.e ., that eachchild should receive educational experiences appropriate to his/her individualabilities, interests, and learning styles . Individual uniqueness should be re-spected and provided for, and every effort should be made to adapt learningexperiences to the wide variety of student needs .

Though gifted/talented education overlaps with education for all chil-dren - since "all children" includes the gifted and talented - planners forthe gifted must formulate a clear response to the perennial question : "Whyisn't this good for all children?" Only when we can clearly indicate the un-usual and unique aspects of the curriculum and instruction which we seekcan we defend differentiated curricula for gifted/talented children .

The basic objective for gifted/talented education is thus the same as thatfor other children - differing only, as Sumption, Norris and Terman (1950)put it, "in the greater emphasis placed on creative effort, intellectualinitiative, critical thinking, social adjustment, social responsibility, and thedevelopment of unselfish qualities of leadership." (p . 278) While these sameobjectives are desirable for all students, they are essential for the gifted/talented if they are to achieve maximum self-realization .

The philosophy which underlies differentiated education is one whichasserts that gifted/talented individuals, like all others, possess unique needswhich can only be addressed through appropriately designed curricula . Theultimate object - to enable gifted/talented students to become optimallyproductive and capable members of society - is, of course, an educationalgoal for all individuals . Nonetheless, the potential of the gifted/talented foroutstanding, creative, socially valuable contributions represents a differentorder of productivity . The Educational Policies Commission (1955) ponderedthis dilemma in the context of comprehensive schools :

To educate the gifted at the expense of educating the vast majorityof American children would deny American principles . Nevertheless, toneglect the gifted would equally deny American principles, and alsoendanger national welfare by a wastage of talent . How to care for allyoung people effectively in comprehensive high schools posed seriousproblems for educators and citizens. alike . (p . 52 . Emphasis added .)

Our philosophy of gifted/talented education is one providing for equalityof educational opportunity, with the proviso, however, that equality ofeducational opportunity cannot be attained by identical educational exper-iences . As Passow (1955) wrote:

In terms of ability, equality of educational opportunity does not

Differentiated Curricula

mean identity . Where ability is concerned, equality consists of providingequally well for all kinds and levels of individual differences. Nor needwe fear that in making special provisions for these children with out-standing potential, an intellectual or artistic elite will be created. Ifthe school sees itself as a hothouse for democracy, it will view theemerging citizens under its jurisdiction as whole people with differencesin needs, abilities, and interests . The school's problem is to cultivateboth the development of special aptitudes and the values, skills, andknowledge which will equip every youth - including those who aretalented - to function adequately in a democratic society. (p . 165)

What are differentiated curricula?Given our philosophy, the concept of curriculum differentiation is basically

not unique to gifted/talented education. Differentiating curricula for thegifted/talented is essentially a process of individualizing curricula to bettermatch individual and group learning needs, abilities, and styles . For thegifted/talented, "differentiated curriculum" denotes sets of specialized learn-ing experiences which develop the unique abilities of students identified as"gifted/talented." A differentiated curriculum embodies recognition ofdiffering learning rates, styles, interests, and abilities . Curriculum differentia-tion aims at eliciting learner responses commensurate with gifts or talents .We are arguing that to focus on the curricular needs of gifted/talented

children in order to design adequate and appropriate educational experiencesfor them is a necessity and represents an integral aspect of planning for therealization of the individuality of all students . The development of differ-entiated curricula for the gifted/talented involves the modification of someaspects of standard curricula, and the provision of opportunities which maybe quite unique .

In this document, we look at curriculum differentiation required forgifted/talented individuals with unique needs, abilities, and potentials . Webelieve that focusing on this uniqueness does not imply that children notidentified as gifted/talented do not also require differentiated curricula .Rather, we are suggesting that adequate and appropriate curricula for gifted/talented learners will have qualities which differentiate such curricula fromprograms provided for other students .Our focus is on the factors that make curricula adequate and appropriate

for gifted/talented individuals. It is necessary, to begin with, to indicate howspecial curricula for the gifted/talented differ from standard curricula .Though curriculum differentiation is required for all learners, this documentfocuses on curricula differentiated for gifted/talented learners . Since gifted/talented children and youth have special characteristics and needs requiringspecial educational experiences, it is this special or differentiated curriculumon which we focus . Though many children may benefit from "enriched"educational experiences, gifted/talented children need curricula designed forthem which are consonant with their developmental and learning needs.Specific curriculum goals for the gifted/talented may not be readily attain-able or even suitable for other children at the same developmental stage - oreven at later stages .

A Point of View

When we speak of differentiated curricula for the gifted/talented, we donot limit our usage to enrichment or acceleration of the so-called regularcurriculum. Rather, we are concerned with eliciting what might be called a"gifted response," the result of interactions between the predispositions thestudent brings to the learning situation and the richness of the situationitself. As Passow (1958) pointed out :

Enrichment is not a trait of a subject or an activity but comes fromthe interaction of the individual with his environment which resultsin opening up newer and broadening experiences . Enrichment ofeducation does not simply involve a change in the nature or content ofa course or two, although these may open up possibilities . Rather,it enlists the total educational environment in the creation of a climateconducive to exploration and originality. It calls for flexibility topermit broadening and deepening of experiences, to extend personneland material resources, and to build an atmosphere which motivatespeak performance . (p . 220)

Thus, the conventional approaches to enrichment and acceleration, in ourview, are the means which facilitate "gifted responses ." Developing a differ-entiated curriculum involves fashioning an environmental setting, providinghuman and material resources, and arranging teaching and facilitating strate-gies so that "gifted responses" will occur more readily . An appropriatelydifferentiated curriculum will increase the likelihood of high quality learninginteractions - the "stuff" of curriculum and instruction - as shown byresulting products and performances .

The principles which follow are those we believe govern the design of adifferentiated curriculum, creating appropriate opportunities for gifted/talented learners .

Principles

Listed below are seven "guiding principles" of curriculum differentiationfor gifted/talented children . We call these "guiding principles" not becausewe are ready to defend them as primary or general truths, but because theyare useful for curriculum planners - providing guidance for decisions regard-ing the selection of content, instructional strategies, resources, and theorganization ofteaching and learning. These "guiding principles" are tentativestatements expressing our beliefs at this time, which the N/S-LTI-G/TCurriculum Council will continue to revise and refine .

1 . The content of curricula for the gifted/talented should focus onand be organized to include more elaborate, complex, and in-depth study ofmajor ideas, problems, and themes that integrate knowledge with and acrosssystems of thought.

In this context, elaborate refers to curriculum content with a broadperspective that encourages a variety of conceptual connections both insideand outside the particular discipline under study . Complex refers to curricularcontent extending beyond the scope of the regular curriculum, allowing thelearner to apply highly abstract learning to concrete situations .

-


Differentiated curricular experiences should provide students with :

a . Opportunities for interaction with major systems of thought,incorporating many concepts, generalizations, principles, and theoriesrelated to significant issues and problems .

b . Exposure to conflicting ideas and theories of the past and future aswell as the present, in order to extend and deepen comprehension .

c . Opportunities to apply knowledge to multiple levels of understandingand varied situations and events .

d . Opportunities to acquire and apply basic learnings from the disci-plines studied, including the epistemologies of the disciplines .

e . Exposure to varied belief systems and value constructs .

f . Opportunities for understanding the prevailing unresolved issues andproblems within an area of study .

g . Environmental conditions encouraging original contributions .

h . Opportunities for applying knowledge derived from one disciplinein new areas of study and investigation .

2 . Curricula for the gifted/talented should allow for the developmentand application of productive thinking skills to enable students to reconcep-tualize existing knowledge and/or generate new knowledge.


a . Opportunities to reconceptualize knowledge and develop skills intoforms considered innovative by criteria set by persons with meaning-ful perspectives on the area of study.

b. Opportunities to develop skills into communication forms appro-priate to varied audiences .

3 . Curricula for the gifted/talented should enable them to explore con-stantly changing knowledge and information and develop the attitude thatknowledge is worth pursuing in an open world.


a . Opportunities to explore the frontiers of knowledge.

b. Opportunities to acknowledge varied responses to issues and prob-lems without relinquishing or negating one's own response excepton the basis of evidence .

c . Opportunities to develop methods and skills of consensus, com-promise, and concession for the reconciliation of differences - andinsights as to when such methods and skills are appropriately used .

d . Opportunities to understand the role perception plays in the analysisand interpretation of issues, and how a personal point of view isdeveloped .

_

A Point of View

4. Curricula for the gifted/talented should encourage exposure to,selection, and use ofappropriate and specialized resources.

Differentiated curricular experiences should provide students with :a. Opportunities to identify and use multi-level and varied resources

appropriate to the study.b. Opportunities to comprehend concepts of data reliability and

validity and distinctions between primary, secondary, and tertiarydata sources .

c. Opportunities to acquire and use specific techniques of investigationthat are relatively unique to various disciplines.

d . Opportunities to develop skills and understandings needed to useadvanced information systems technology .

e. Opportunities to broaden one's insights into the nature of an appro-priate learning environment and to understand that the entire worldoffers possibilities for learning .

f.

Opportunities to develop the procedures and skills needed to identifyand employ the services of experts as resources for, study.

5. Curricula for the gifted/talented should promote self-initiated andself-directed learning and growth.

Differentiated curricular experiences should provide students with :a . Opportunities both to develop problem identification skills and to

explore problems independently .b . Opportunities to design and undertake investigations with an under-

standing of the relationship of time-management skills to the effec-tive conduct of independent study.

c. Opportunities to understand the self as learner, developing insightsinto one's strengths, weaknesses, interests, styles, and preferences .

d . Opportunities to explore one's capacities and preferences for groupas well as individual tasks .

6. Curricula for the gifted/talented should providefor the developmentofself-understandings and the understanding of one's relationship to persons,societal institutions, nature, and culture.

Differentiated curricular experiences should provide students with:a. Opportunities to develop an understanding of personal giftedness

given general concepts of giftedness .b . Opportunities to comprehend the social role and value of the

gifted/talented .c . Opportunities to develop a personal philosophy of life .d . Opportunities to participate in and comprehend appropriate roles of

leadership and followership .


e. Experiences which nurture an appreciation of how and what one cancontribute to disciplines, people, and situations .

7. Evaluations of curricula for the gifted/talented should be conductedin accordance with prior stated principles, stressing higher-level thinkingskills, creativity, and excellence in performance and products.

Differentiated curricular experiences should provide students with :a. Evaluation procedures and instruments other than traditionally

accepted standardized measures.b . Clearly delineated criteria appropriate to the individual and the

nature of the learning experience.c. Opportunities to develop skills necessary for critiquing one's own

performances/products and those of peers.d. Assessment procedures and methods measuring learning outcomes

against specifically designed criteria .

e. Opportunities to accept and use critical feedback in a productivemanner.

All aspects of the instructional process - the objectives, content, teaching-learning strategies, resources, settings, organization, personnel, and evaluativestrategies - can be differentiated to create a better match between the needsand characteristics of the gifted/talented individual and his/her learningopportunities. The seven "guiding principles" listed above are intended tofurnish help with the many decisions needed to create optimal learningconditions .Persistent Questions

Persons concerned with designing and implementing appropriate educationfor gifted/talented children face a number of persistent questions whichcannot be avoided . TheN/S-LTI-G/T Curriculum Council feels that educatorsof the gifted/talented must consider these questions and arrive at their ownpositions. We try to state the issues, provide our position, and help thereader arrive at his/her own position.What is the role of the regular or basic curriculum for the gifted/talented?Providing the essential skills, knowledge, and understandings representing

the common core needed by all students if they are to function adequatelyin our society, the basic curriculum is also needed to provide the foundationon which advanced conceptualization, creativity, and productive behaviorcan develop. Thus, though the regular or basic curriculum varies from schoolto school, it is generically education for all, including the gifted .

However, the knowledge, skills, and understandings offered by the basiccurriculum need not necessarily be presented to the gifted/talented in thesame way as for other children and youth. Gifted/talented learning oftendoes not follow typical learning patterns, while gifted/talented learningcapacities often differ from those of other students . Consequently, basic

10

A Point of View

curricula should be presented to the gifted/talented when readiness is indi-cated even if this requires deviation from the "standard" curriculum in . aparticular setting.

At times, the gifted/talented will not need to pursue certain activitiesbecause they have already achieved appropriate levels of proficiency. Some-times the gifted/talented will need to pursue elements of the basic or regularcurriculum earlier or more rapidly than usual if they are to develop theirspecial talents . The principle of readiness for learning, based on individualdevelopmental patterns and needs, governs the adaptations of the regularcurriculum needed for the gifted/talented, just as for all learners .

This does not mean that all gifted/talented students will readily masterall aspects of the basic or regular curriculum . Like other students, gifted/talented may have irregular achievement patterns, varying in abilities, inter-ests, motivations, persistence, etc. As a consequence, a question is oftenraised as to whether gifted/talented youngsters should be limited in enrich-ment or acceleration opportunities if they are not uniformly outstandingin all regular curricular achievement areas .

We would argue, on the contrary, that gifted/talented students shouldnot be barred from pursuing more advanced, complex, and sophisticatedstudies simply because they have not attained proficiency in all aspects ofthe basic or regular curriculum. Deferring the introduction and pursuit ofadvanced learning processes under such circumstances can be punitive, andcan inhibit the development of individual potential . A youngster motivatedto write a poem or an essay who has deficiencies in spelling or grammarshould be encouraged to write creatively, expressing his/her unique ideaswhile, at the same time, being helped to master the necessary basic skills inthe context of the task in which he/she is engaged. The program shouldteach to the strengths of the individual student and, concurrently, shouldhelp him/her overcome weaknesses .

A child may have strength in language arts but relative weakness in mathe-matics, science, or some other area . A student with problems in languagearts, for instance, should not be barred from a differentiated mathematicsprogram if mathematics happens to be a strength . Clearly, the student'sstrengths should be nurtured while, at the same time, he/she is helped toattain desirable levels of proficiency in other areas.

The basic or regular curriculum is comprised of essential basic learnings,but the extent to which a child is able to undertake higher-level thinking orproduce something original without some predetermined level of masteryover all aspects of the regular curriculum is not entirely clear. What is re-quired is considerable flexibility in dealing with youngsters who might nothave attained high-level proficiency in some areas but still seem quite capableof excelling in other areas, as manifested by their performances and products .

There are various formal and informal procedures available to assessindividual proficiency (in terms of level, pace, and style) so that modifi-cations can be made for mastery of basic curricula while facilitating partici-pation in appropriately differentiated curricula .


The basic or regular curriculum is the common set of skills and under-standings needed to function adequately in society . There are probablyminimal levels of mastery required for all learners, but the potential acqui-sition of such proficiency varies considerably . No one would argue that achild who has already mastered a particular skill should repeat routinelearning activities involving that skill . If a child is a rapid learner, thinksdivergently, or is able to reconceptualize information, then the regularcurriculum must be modified to take that into account . If a child has un-usual potential in some specialized area, then he/she should participate incurricular experiences which nurture that potential . The acquisition ofbasic skills and knowledge should be modified accordingly .

This issue is related to larger issues : Whether there is a common core ofgeneral education; what constitutes "required" curricular experience ; what"elective" opportunities should be provided ; and what individualization ofinstruction means . Also, it should be noted that curriculum planning takesplace at various macro and micro levels . There are "macro" questions con-cerning the overall scope, sequence, and balance of the curriculum, and"micro" questions concerning specifics within particular parts of the curricu-lum. What balance, for example, should there be between the humanities,sciences, and other disciplines at the secondary level? Within an area (say,the humanities), how should the curriculum be differentiated for studentswith special talent and interest, contrasted to students with special humani-ties talent, but special interests elsewhere?

There are, in sum, many issues concerning the regular curriculum and theways in which it may or may not vary for students identified as gifted/talented . The Curriculum Council's position is that the basic or regularcurriculum should furnish adequate, appropriate learning opportunities forstudents with outstanding potential ; that the curriculum should furnish abasic general education with a sound liberal foundation for such learners ;that the regular curriculum should serve as the base for extensions andexpansions ; and that it should not be a deficit model in terms of shoring upa weak general curriculum .

Why are differentiated curricula based on sound principles essential forgifted/talented?

In brief, sound principles are needed because individual learners differwith respect to a variety of characteristics . When individuals are presentedwith the same curricula, the resulting learnings are hardly the same. Similarlearning experiences do not yield identical learning .

With respect to the principles of curriculum differentiation - in determin-ing whether a particular learning opportunity is appropriate for the gifted/talented or whether it is equally appropriate for all - one should ask threequestions :

Would all children want to be involved in such learning experiences?

Could all children participate in such learning experiences?

Should all children be expected to succeed in such learning experi-ences?

1 2

A Point of View

Our philosophical position that appropriate educational experiencesshould be provided for all students implies that individuals have differingneeds, interests, abilities, and learning styles, all of which require differentkinds of learning experiences . We agree that there is "Nothing as unequal asthe equal treatment of unequals." Recognition of individual differencesbetween and among students reinforces the idea that not all learners can orshould participate in similar learning engagements, or experience the samecurricula . Each child is entitled to the most appropriate education accordingto his/her needs, interests, and abilities . The operant term is appropriate :Curricular modifications are required by differences in abilities, learningstyles, task commitments, and perseverance . A curriculum guided by theprinciples of curriculum differentiation proposed above is far more likely toprovide appropriate learning experiences for students identified as gifted/talented than a less structured curriculum.

The principles of differentiated curricula specify curricular characteristicswhich are desirable for all learners, but essential for gifted/talented learners .This, of course, is a significant difference .

The scientifically gifted/talented student who is a potential scientistrequires opportunities to acquire understandings, attitudes, and skills essen-tial for a creative, productive scientist . These are the opportunities whichdifferentiate curricula for all gifted/talented learners .

We are not advocating that gifted/talented learners be given more re-sources - only different resources . If an advanced science experience essen-tial for the development of the potential scientist is offered, would non-gifted students want to be involved in such an experience? Could non-giftedstudents who might want to be involved profit from such an experience?Should we expect the non-gifted to be successful in this advanced program?In the case of the gifted/talented for whom we see such an advanced scienceexperience as essential, the would/could/should/ criteria all merit an affirm-ative response . For the non-gifted, even if some want to participate, theywould not profit in the same ways and to the same extent - that is, if theexperience were properly designed and implemented - nor should we expectthe same kind or level of success .

The issue has been stated differently - should youngsters be given theright to fail? If the response is affirmative, another question follows : Issuch an approach defensible in terms of its cognitive and affective conse-quences? Success and failure, of course, are relative and qualitative terms.

The richest possible experiences are desirable for all learners . Such exper-iences, desirable for all, are essential, we contend, for gifted/talented learners(in order for them to develop their special gifts and talents) . Without regularcurricula, there would be learning gaps and inadequate bases for the develop-ment of further skills . But gifted/talented students must master unusuallycomplex systems of knowledge, as well, to perform well at advanced educa-tional levels ; without such attainment, nurturance of their special gifts andtalents will be impeded .

1 3


As one ascends the educational ladder, issues of desirability and essenti-ality are less and less debated . At the graduate or professional school, forexample, where the student develops a special field, there is no argumentthat all students should be admitted or that all students should learn every-thing which comprises the postgraduate curriculum . At this level, the com-mitment to an education differentiated according to abilities, motivations,and interests is widely accepted. As one descends the educational ladder,however, there is less differentiation, with more common core courses andexperiences - though even these common core experiences may be offeredin differentiated settings . The gifted/talented force us to think about issuesof differentiation in terms of desirability and essentiality at every level .

We subscribe to the concept that each individual should use his powers todeal with increasingly complex operations and processes . One differentiatesbetween the gifted and the non-gifted not because complex laws and process-es are inherently better than other laws and processes, but rather becausesome individuals are less capable of dealing with advanced, higher-orderlearnings . We believe that each learner should be enabled to fulfill his/herpowers to the maximum.

When is instructional acceleration an appropriate curricular modificationfor the gifted/talented?

Instructional acceleration refers to the provision of educational experi-ences at an earlier age, or in less time, than usual. Acceleration may occurthrough compacting the regular or basic curriculum (e.g ., compressing whatis normally a three-year course into two or fewer years), promoting studentsrapidly, moving learning activities to lower levels (e.g ., shifting ninth-gradealgebra to the seventh grade), or providing experiences that allow for greaterdepth or breadth of learning by using more advanced resources . The student'sabilities, achievements, interests, and learning styles determine his/her readi-ness for instructional modifications, including accelerated pacing . In addition,curriculum content must be considered in order to determine the instruc-tional pacing appropriate for the learner .

A caution regarding acceleration is that educational planners must seethat students not move through curricular experiences at such a rapid pacethat they do not attain desired and essential mastery, or, equally importantly,are not able to enjoy the richness and robustness of particular learningexperiences . Gifted/talented students need time to reflect on particularlearning experiences, to "play around" with ideas and information, to savorlearning. The enriching dimensions of an experience may come about throughacceleration - i.e ., earlier exposure to ideas, concepts, and knowledge - butgifted/talented students also need time to apply characteristics enablingthem to interact with curricular substance and yield richer, more penetrating,more divergent insights and understandings .

Questions are often phrased in terms of acceleration vs . enrichment. Webelieve that the question requires better statement . Increasing the pace oflearning, decreasing the time spent on certain kinds of routine activities,i .e ., saving time, in our view, creates opportunities for enrichment and

14

A Point of View

enriches learning in and of itself. The concepts - acceleration and enrich-ment - are not mutually exclusive or in conflict but are, in fact, usuallyinteracting . Enrichment results from acceleration, either because moreadvanced learnings are made possible by the time saved by acceleratedpacing or because students are exposed earlier to more advanced learningexperiences .

As pointed out above, acceleration has sometimes been criticized forpushing the learner too rapidly, making it impossible for him/her to take thetime needed to reflect, savor, play around with ideas, and create . Anothercriticism is that acceleration constantly requires instruction, rather thanarranging conditions which would encourage application and creation .Critics also suggest that acceleration does not provide sufficiently for self-selection and choice .

This question is related to the issue of appropriate instruction and differ-entiation . At times, instruction should differ in tempo or pace - comingmore rapidly or at an earlier age. Sometimes, however, instruction shoulddiffer in depth and/or breadth - enabling deeper probing, using moreadvanced resources, following interests wherever they may lead . Finally,instruction may also differ in nature - providing content and/or processesnot normally part of the curriculum or extending the regular curriculum .

These three forms of differentiated instruction are not discrete or mutuallyexclusive . Instruction designed to increase the tempo or pace may, indeed,result in greater breadth and depth, or in differences of nature and kind .But the distinction is meaningful nonetheless .

There is a difference between moving the youngster up to the next levelof traditional biology and moving him/her into a deeper study of DNA.There is a difference between acceleration of an administrative nature andacceleration of an instructional nature . The question might better be re-stated as : "When is acceleration appropriate as a means of enriching anddifferentiating education for gifted/talented?"

We would, of course, argue that students should not be forced to spendtraditional blocks of time simply to facilitate academic bookkeeping. Rather,youngsters should be kept in the educational system for no longer than isnecessary for them to achieve the goals which have been set by or for them.The gifted/talented should not be kept in school simply to comply withtraditional matriculation patterns . Acceleration may make it possible forgifted/talented students to be served better in other learning environmentsmore appropriately related to their developmental needs, interests, andabilities . The question is how to determine the exit level of the student .We are less concerned with exiting from school than with exiting fromtraditional learning settings . Students learn from the world as well as fromschool experiences .

What is the role of the teacher of the gifted/talented in differentiatingcurricula?

The teacher of the gifted/talented is often called a facilitator of learning

1 5


or a manager of resources . He/she is clearly not just a dispenser of informa-tion . Perhaps the teacher is best described as the person responsible forarranging the conditions for learning .

In particular content areas or disciplines, teachers must have both theknowledge and the repertoire of skills needed to share this knowledge.

In some instances, especially going up the educational ladder, the needsand insights of gifted/talented students exceed those of the teacher . How-ever, the teacher's maturity, broader perspective, and insights based onexperience enable him/her to instruct the gifted/talented even when thestudent may "know more" about a particular topic .

Teachers of gifted/talented students cannot abdicate responsibility forthe teaching/learning process . Different instructional goals and varyingprogram designs necessitate different teaching strategies and styles . Theteacher of the gifted/talented should be able to use a large number of strate-gies and skills to best serve the instructional demands of the gifted/talented .Making curricular decisions and encouraging self-directed learning are amongthe skills most conducive to fostering the development of gifted/talentedlearners .

Some view teaching the gifted/talented as simply a matter of "getting outof their way," letting them "do their own thing." We believe, however,that the teacher's role is more subtle . He/she must have a repertoire ofinstructional strategies, insights into resources, and understandings of how tostimulate gifted/talented children and youth to engage in appropriate learningactivities . The teacher should help define broad parameters for individualinvestigations and other self-directive pursuits .

A teacher cannot be expected to be an expert in all areas in which gifted/talented learners manifest their abilities . Teachers must have some knowledgeof the structure of a discipline, how persons in that discipline frame prob-lems, and how inquiry proceeds. Teachers need to be able to help youngstersunderstand what it is that specialists do, and how. The teacher's role involveshelping the learner with problem definition and problem. focusing . This rolewill vary with program design, classroom situations, and the particular needsand characteristics of gifted/talented learners .

What are the differential characteristics of the teacher of the gifted? The"job description" will depend on the school's definition of giftedness, itsprogram and administrative design, the age-grade level of the youngsters,and curricular demands. Teachers must acquire insights into the origins,qualities, potential, attitudes, drives, and achievement of the gifted tocounter misconceptions and stereotypes concerning such students . Teachersmust reflect on their own attitudes toward giftedness - their own abilityto accept divergency, nonconformity, and unconventional behaviors andattitudes, allowing the freest possible exchange of ideas and the widestvariety of solutions to problems.

The teacher of the gifted must have a realistic awareness of the greatrange of exceptionalities and the broad sweep of different capabilities . The

16

A Point of View

teacher of the gifted/talented must have experiences which enable him/herto understand gifted children and accept them, with their warts as wellas their beauty spots . The teacher must be flexible, able to inspire confi-dence and grasp the nature and techniques of inquiry . The teacher musthave a sound knowledge base, tolerance for new and different ideas, awillingness to permit students to proceed on their own, and a concept ofexcellence which he/she can communicate to the students .

A teacher with constantly expanding horizons of mastery and appre-ciation, ever deepening insights into a discipline ; one whom students wouldrespect and even emulate - such a teacher will probably be effective withgifted/talented students. In sum, the teacher of the gifted/talented mustprovide a role model for his/her students . For, in the end, it is crucial thatteachers of the gifted/talented should instill a love of learning and creating,and inspire the pursuit of excellence, by modeling these qualities .

What is the role of teachers in the development of curricula for thegifted/talented?

The question of who should and who can develop curriculum for thegifted/talented depends, at least in part, on what level of planning is con-sidered . At one level, curriculum development requires expertise, speciali-zation, and sophistication which most teachers do not possess . Few teachersare sufficiently specialized and few possess the necessary resources to designan advanced curriculum, say, in mathematics or biological sciences . Thosecurricula are usually developed by specialized educators with resourcesmade available to them by a publishing company or funding agency, forexample . On the other hand, teachers do have the knowledge, specialization,and pedagogical insights to adapt and adopt various curricula prepared byspecialists . In fact, unless such curricula are adapted by knowledgeable,skilled teachers, they are usually found wanting in many respects whenimplemented locally .

Even the various curriculum "models" for the gifted - such as Renzulli'sEnrichment Triad, Meeker's adaptation of Guilford's Structure of theIntellect, and Williams' Total Creativity Program, which are of a differentorder from such programs as BSCS Biology for the Gifted or MathematicsEducation for Gifted Students (MEGS) - only provide frameworks withinwhich teachers can function . A teacher may not be sufficiently grounded ina discipline to create an advanced curriculum, but the specific strength ofteachers is in their ability to adapt and modify curricula so that they functionin particular settings with particular populations . Teachers can be trainedto understand the conceptual designs of various curricular models, usingtechnical assistance to develop appropriate and effective curricula .

This kind of teacher involvement in curriculum development is absolutelyessential . It gives teachers a stake in the adaptation process, and inspires theacquisition of skills and knowledge needed for program implementation .Rather than continuously reinventing the wheel, staff members can studyavailable models, enhancing their own insights through the adaptationprocess .

1 7


The development of individual learning experiences within a frameworkor model is, of course, the major function of the classroom teacher . It is theteacher who creates the environment within which the gifted/talentedengage in learning experiences .

The adaptation process itself brings about a sense of involvement and"ownership." It involves teachers in the decision-making process so thatthey can subsequently implement programs more effectively. It requiresthem to make decisions within their areas of expertise . They do not haveto pretend to be subject-matter specialists beyond their range of competence.A faculty which decided to develop and implement a creativity trainingprogram in major subject areas (i.e ., language arts, sciences, social studies)would then seek out materials and programs adaptable to their local needs.Having decided, for example, that the Purdue Creative Thinking Programmight be useful for the proposed creativity training, staff would then modify,adapt, and implement the Purdue program in the context of the particularpopulation and setting, consonant with the school's general curricularofferings .

The teacher's role in curriculum development involves decision-makingfor specific settings - what to include, what to exclude, and how to modifythe learning experiences and resources . To make sound decisions, teachersmust know their students and how they differ from .the non-gifted. Teachersmust understand various different curricular and instructional models .

Often, teachers are intuitively effective with gifted/talented childrenbut unable to explain why. Part of staff development should thus involvecritiquing programs and practices so that insights can be shared. Additionally,teachers need to be able to relate curricular experiences designed and imple-mented under the rubric of gifted/talented education with other curricularexperiences, and to interact with other teachers so that responsibility forgifted/talented education is perceived as a school-wide responsibility, ratherthan that of one or a few staff members . Balance, articulation, scope andsequence are provided only if the curriculum for the gifted/talented isperceived in the context of general school responsibility for the educationof all, and not as an isolated activity .

What is the role of commercial materials in a curriculum for gifted/talented students?

It is highly unlikely that any prepackaged collection of learning activitiesand resource materials will be totally adequate in meeting the diverse - educa-tional needs of the gifted/talented . No set of commercial materials, thus,should be viewed as the curriculum; instead, materials and activities shouldbe used as resources supplementary to a well-designed curriculum .

Commercially published materials should be selected with reference to theusual criteria, plus such additional criteria as the following : (a) high degreeof compatibility with program goals and stated learner objectives ; (b) highdegree of transferability to other learning situations ; (c) relevance for thegifted/talented in terms of such variables as vocabulary, comprehension,and conceptual level ; and (d) relationship to the basic principles of differ-entiated curricula .

18

A Point of View

Materials should not be used as "time fillers." Rather, such materialsshould contribute to the substantive learning experience, augmenting theteaching-learning process and curricular activities .

What grading practices are appropriate for the gifted/talented?

Any grading procedure used should "credit" the learner with what he/shehas learned and/or applied . The operant principle is quite simple : Gifted/talented students should not be penalized for participating in programs andactivities more appropriate for them. Grades should not be assessed onlyagainst restricted gifted/talented populations, but against the total popula-tion . Grading should be defined in terms of mastery in relation to the gifted/talented program . Mastery, not the grade, should be related to what thegifted/talented are capable of achieving .

There are two major purposes for grading. One is to relate the performanceof individuals to their reference group(s), and the second is to communicatethe degree of mastery achieved by the individual . Grades for gifted/talentedshould be determined by the quality and level of their performance definedin relationship to their gifted/talented peers, and in terms of standards ofexcellence established by performers/producers in the field .

The gifted/talented tend to exacerbate an already difficult situation : itis virtually impossible to capture achievement in a single grade. One possi-bility is to provide three grades : (a) compare the child with his/her immedi-ate age peers in the class with respect to his/her product or performance ;(b) compare the child with respect to the gifted/talented population onhis/her product or performance ; and (c) compare the child with respect tothe total population . Thus, the gifted/talented child's products and perform-ance can be compared with three different reference groups - his/herpeers, gifted/talented peers, and the total population. Another possibilityis to weight the grades earned in a gifted/talented program more than thoseearned in the normal or regular program, on the assumption that gifted/talented achievement is at a higher standard than would be expected for thenon-gifted in the same subject, course, etc .

Both the processes and products of learning should be assessed, usinginstruments and procedures that (a) reflect the expertise of specialists inthat field and (b) provide feedback from appropriate audiences .

In programs designed specifically for the gifted/talented, both the methodfor determining grades and the actual assignment of grades should be modi-fied to reflect what giftedness means, and what is expected for students soidentified . Inappropriate grading procedures can have a significant negativeimpact on student participation in various programs. Students who perceivethat they are penalized by the grading system for involvement in a gifted/talented program may well avoid such involvement .


Notes

3 .

4 .

5 .

Marland, Sidney P. Jr . Education of the Gifted and Talented, Volume I .

Washington, D.C . : U. S. Government Printing Office, 1971 .

Sumption, Merle R. ; Norris, Dorothy ; and Terman, Lewis M. "SpecialEducation for the Gifted Child," The Education of ExceptionalChildren, edited by Samuel A. Kirk. 49th Yearbook of the NationalSociety for the Study of Education, Part II . Chicago : University ofChicago Press, 1950 .

Educational Policies Commission .

Public Education and the Future ofAmerica. Washington, D.C . : National Education Association, 1955 .

Passow, A. Harry. "Talented Youth : Our Future Leaders," TeachersCollege Record, 57 :164-171, December 1955 .

Passow, A. Harry. "Enrichment of Education for the Gifted," Educationfor the Gifted, edited by Nelson B . Henry. 57th Yearbook of theNational Society for the Study of Education, Part II . Chicago : Uni-versity of Chicago Press, 1958 .

differentiated curricula for the...

Documents