Methods and Materials for Teaching the Gifted

Jennifer H. Robins, Jennifer L. Jolly, Frances A. Karnes, Suzanne M. Bean, Jennifer H. Robins, Jennifer L. Jolly, Frances A. Karnes, Suzanne M. Bean

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2021
• ISBN:
  9781000494594
• Edition: 5
• Topic: Bildung
• Subtopic: Bildung Allgemein

The completely revised and updated fifth edition of Methods and Materials for Teaching the Gifted:

• Provides a comprehensive examination of the most current research and best practices in the field of gifted education.
• Addresses identification, twice-exceptionality, and culturally and linguistically diverse learners.
• Includes chapters related to designing curriculum and differentiating instruction.
• Covers developing critical and creative thinking, as well as encouraging talent development.
• Features chapter authors who are recognized researchers, practitioners, and leaders in the field of gifted education.

The chapters are organized to promote critical thinking and discussion about each topic. This text is a complete resource curated for a wide range of K-12 educators and those working with inservice and preservice educators and administrators.

SECTION III
GIFTED STUDENTS IN THE CLASSROOM

DOI:10.4324/9781003236610-10

Chapter 8
Designing Curriculum for Gifted Learners

DOI:10.4324/9781003236610-11

TAMRA STAMBAUGH

Guiding Questions

1. What does an appropriate curriculum for gifted students entail?
2. What does one need to consider when designing curriculum for gifted students?
3. How might a curriculum for gifted learners differ from curriculum in the general education classroom?
4. Why are models, frameworks, and content-specific processes important to consider in curriculum design for gifted learners?
5. How does a child's context and prior learning impact curriculum design?
6. What is the primary purpose or goal for designing curriculum for gifted learners?

A seasoned teacher just accepted a new position as a teacher of the gifted on the condition that she finish her certification in gifted education. Her next class is curriculum and instruction, but she has not taken it yet, and her new job starts before the class begins. She already knows a lot about teaching and has attended several workshops about differentiation. She has also worked closely with the teacher of the gifted in her building, which got her excited about teaching gifted students.

During many of the district workshops she has attended, speakers have discussed the importance of adding choice and accommodating learning styles as part of differentiation. She also noticed how the students in her general classroom returned to class with a lot of arts and crafts projects after attending gifted class. She is concerned because gifted students are not making academic gains based on district-provided value-added growth reports. She is ready to write her first unit for the gifted and has looked on Pinterest and Teachers Pay Teachers for inspiration. She found some really fun activities she thinks her gifted students will like, including choice boards, creative art and building projects, and independent study options. Better yet, the activities do not overlap with the content standards being taught in the general classroom. What is her next step?

When designing curriculum for gifted students, educators must first consider the question: Do gifted learners need a different or differentiated curriculum and design? This may sound like a simple question. There is merit to a specialized design, but when do gifted students need a differentiated curriculum, and why? What is known about gifted learners and the development of expertise that necessitates a differentiated curriculum? Do all gifted students need a different or differentiated curriculum all of the time? What does “different” mean, and how is “different” different from “differentiated”? Should a curriculum for the gifted veer from core content areas or build upon what is being taught in the general classrooms and key content standards?

There are many thoughts and philosophies regarding these questions. How curriculum is designed for gifted learners is determined based on the purpose or goal for services and what students need at a given point in time based on their precocity in a specific area and interest. For example, if a student is interested in and excels in math, that student should not be placed in a specialized class that focuses on literary analysis, even if the curriculum resources used were supported by evidence. The match between a student’s ability and performance levels in a content domain must match the differentiated services provided. Does this mean a specialized curriculum for each student? Not necessarily. It does, however, mean that educators must pay attention to students’ gifts and talents in order to best match the curriculum to their needs.

Subotnik et al. (2011) discussed how talent is developed into elite performance and highlighted the developmental nature of this process. Students must be exposed to and take advantages of opportunities that develop their abilities and interests before they can embark on curriculum endeavors that move them toward expertise. But, how is this implemented in schools? How can educators design curriculum for gifted learners when their levels of opportunity, exposure, interest, and abilities differ within the same grade, or when some students are ready for more elite performance in math, for example, at earlier ages than others who have the ability but have not yet had the opportunity?

Dai and Chen (2013) outlined three different paradigms of gifted education: the gifted child paradigm, the talent development paradigm, and the differentiated paradigm. Each paradigm is defined by answering who is served, what definition of gifted and subsequent characteristics are being targeted, how services are implemented and measured within this measure, and why services are provided or necessary. According to Dai and Chen, the gifted child paradigm looks at serving gifted students in a global way, focusing on general intelligence and critical thinking. In a talent development paradigm, students are identified and served based on domain-specific performance, understanding that not all students may be gifted or need services in each domain. The goal of talent development is creative productivity in a particular area of strength. The differentiation paradigm is more contextual and emphasized most during schooling as students are preassessed and provided appropriate interventions based on the level of mastery of curriculum standards. The paradigm in which a school district operates has direct implications for who is served and how curriculum is designed and delivered. Often state identification policies dictate the what and who of a paradigm, but districts should be able to determine the how and why within their own particular context. For example, if a district is mandated to identify students based on IQ only (gifted child paradigm), it can still work within a talent development paradigm by examining the performance of students with high IQs in specific content domains to gauge the level and types of services that need to be provided. Understanding who is going to be identified and why they are being identified is important to know and understand before considering curriculum design and differentiation.

Regardless of the paradigm, there seems to be agreement that gifted students need productive experiences, resources, and opportunities matched to their level of understanding in order to grow and develop for a particular purpose. Hattie’s (2009) meta-analyses highlighted this idea. He found a .70 effect size when teachers teach a “Goldilocks” curriculum, meaning students experience a curriculum that is not too easy, not too hard, but just right for their particular level of readiness. Vygotsky’s (1978) zone of proximal development also suggests that learning (active tense) takes place when students are able to perform a task with help, versus a learned (past tense) task that they can do independently. Perhaps one of the reasons some gifted students perform well on state assessments but do not show growth gains is because they are doing tasks they are already know and could do before a unit was taught. Instead, they should have the opportunity to engage in tasks in areas of strengths and interests for which they need support from those with more content expertise in order to move to the next level of content acquisition. So, how do educators respond through curriculum design? What else needs to be considered?

Considerations When Designing a Curriculum for Gifted Learners

Do gifted students need a different curriculum? What is the difference between different curriculum/instruction and differentiated curriculum/ instruction, and how does this matter in curriculum design? Some educators argue that a curriculum for gifted learners is good for all students. Usually they are suggesting that all students need exposure to higher level thinking skills, content matched to their area of strength, choice, instruction at an appropriate level, opportunities to pursue interests, and exposure to opportunities that extend the curriculum. Are these components really part of a gifted curriculum? Choice, context, independent study, critical and creative thinking skills, extensions based on interests, and practicing habits of a discipline are not reserved for gifted learners. Many times, however, that is what is perceived based on observations of gifted education services or by those who operate from a gifted child paradigm that focuses on extensions beyond the curriculum and higher level thinking skills. A curriculum for the gifted encompasses so much more. So, what do we know about gifted student learning that is important to consider when developing a curriculum for them?

Academically advanced students benefit from accelerated instruction, development of expertise through exposure to conceptual thinking, domain-specific focused processes in an area of strength, access and opportunity to advanced and consistent work in middle and high school, and attention to students’ context and intra- and interpersonal or affective skills. Each are discussed in more detail in the following sections.

Acceleration

One of the most effective, well-researched, and least-used strategies in gifted education is acceleration: “Acceleration means matching the level, complexity, and pace of the curriculum with the readiness and motivation of the student” (Colangelo et al., 2004, p. 5). The pacing and complexity of instruction may be adjusted based upon the rate at which a student can learn and understand increasingly complex information. Acceleration can be content-based or grade-based (Assouline et al., 2015). There are many forms of acceleration, such as curriculum compacting (e.g., excusing students from what they already know so that they can pursue more in-depth study in an area of strength); subject-specific acceleration (e.g., allowing a student to take third-grade math in second grade); or grade-skipping (e.g., skipping an entire grade through early entrance to kindergarten or first grade, early graduation, or skipping second grade and going directly to third grade). There have been multiple studies on acceleration, including several meta-analyses that show important and positive effects of acceleration on academics (Assouline et al., 2015; Colangelo et al., 2004; Rogers, 2007; Steenbergen-Hu & Moon, 2011) and no differences or slightly positive effects of acceleration on a social-emotional development (Rogers, 2007; Steenbergen-Hu & Moon, 2011).

VanTassel-Baska (1986) included accelerated/advanced content as part of her Integrated Curriculum Model (ICM) and explained how important accelerated/advanced content is for curriculum design. The other two components of the model are advanced processes with authentic products of the discipline, and intra- and interdisciplinary concepts. Several units of study have been designed using this model over the past 30 years with important and significant learning gains reported (see VanTassel-Baska &...