Singapore Teaching Package

Module 3: Curriculum Strategies

Definitions

Curriculum development is founded on curriculum study, and is its applied branch. Its objective is the betterment of schools through the improvement of teaching and learning. Its characteristic insistence is that ideas should encounter the discipline of practice and that practice should be principled by ideas. The curriculum development movement is an attack on the separation of theory and practice (Stenhouse, 1975, p. 3).

Three mainstream American definitions:

Curriculum is all of the planned experiences provided by the school to assist pupils in attaining the designated learning outcomes to the best of their abilities. (Neagley and Evans, 1967, 2)

Curriculum is the planned composite effort of any school to guide pupil learning toward predetermined learning outcomes. (Inlow, 1966, 7)

In view of the shortcomings of the currently popular definition, it is here stipulated that curriculum is a structured series of intended learning outcomes. Curriculum prescribes (or at least anticipates) the results of instruction. (Johnson, 1967, 130)

An alternative proposed by Stenhouse:

A curriculum is an attempt to communicate the essential principles and features of an educational proposal in such a form that it is open to critical scrutiny and capable of effective translation into practice. (Stenhouse, 1975, 4)

Stenhouse suggests the following guidelines for developing curriculum proposals:

A minimum curriculum should provide a basis for planning a course, studying it empirically and considering the grounds of its justification. It should offer:

A In planning:

1 Principles for the selection of content - what is to be learned and how it is to be taught. 2 Principles for the development of a teaching strategy - how it is to be learned and taught. 3 Principles for the making of decisions about sequence. 4 Principles on which to diagnose the strengths and weaknesses of individual students and differentiates the general principles 1, 2, and 3 (above) to meet individual cases.

- 1 - B In empirical study:

1 Principles on which to study and evaluate the progress of students. 2 Principles on which to study and evaluate the progress of teachers. 3 Guidance as to the feasibility of implementing the curriculum in varying school contexts and on different pupils and an understanding of the causes of variation. 4 Information about the variability of effects in differing contexts and on different pupils and an understanding of the causes of the variation.

C In relation to justification:

A formulation of the intention or aim of the curriculum which is accessible to open scrutiny. (Stenhouse, 1975, 5)

Five conceptions of curriculum: roots and implications for curriculum planning

Different orientations to curriculum and what is defined as knowledge will result in different kinds of curriculum with very different learning outcomes. Eisner identified five major orientations.

1 Development of cognitive processes • Primarily concerned with the refinement of intellectual operations. • Central problem of curriculum as that of sharpening the intellectual process and developing a set of cognitive skills that can be applied to learning anything. • Process-oriented in two senses: a) providing content independent skills applicable to a variety of situations b) understanding the processes by which learning occurs. • Sees the learner as an interactive and adaptive element in the system. • Focuses on the child and illustrates the way in which assumptions about how children learn influence the development of educational programs.

2 Curriculum as Technology • Like cognitive theory, focuses on process. Concerned with developing a technology of instruction, not with curriculum content. The focus is less on the learner or the material, than on effectively packaging and presenting the problem to him/her. • Curriculum technologists see curriculum as an input to supply and demand and talk in terms of industrial systems accountability and systems analysis. • Do not take into account the conditions that effect retention and transfer of knowledge. • Learner is not seen as either a problematic or dynamic element in the system. If a perfect way of choosing the information can be designed, learning will be effective.

3 Self actualisation • Can also be described as ‘Curriculum as consumatory experience’. Focuses sharply on content: what is taught. • Value-saturated referring to personal purpose and the need for personal integration. • Is child-centred, with education as an enabling process that provides the means to personal liberation and development. Focuses on helping the individual discover things for him/herself. • Regard education as entering every aspect of the child's life: tend to be very critical of previous educational models.

- 2 - • The curriculum is seen as an end in itself. As a stage in the life-process, education would provide both content and the tools for further self-discovery.

4 Social Reconstruction • Strong emphasis on the role of education within the larger social context. Social reconstructionists stress societal needs over individual needs. • Primary concern of the educator is social reform and responsibility to the future of society. • Examines curriculum in terms of its relation to social issues of the day. Schooling is a means through which society can re-invent itself. • It foresees enormous changes in society and asks that the curriculum provide the tools for survival in an unstable and changing world - survival oriented bias.

5 Academic rationalism • Most traditional, enabling students to participate in Western culture by providing access to the greatest ideas and objects man has created. • To become educated means to be able to read and understand those works that the great disciplines have produced. • To construct a curriculum that includes practical concerns such as driving or home-making duties dilutes the quality of education and robs students of the opportunity to study subjects that reflect man's enduring quest for meaning. • An emergent aspect of the model is an orientation to the structure of knowledge - a re- thinking of the traditional disciplines in an effort to determine what it is about their respective content that distinguishes them from each other. • By digging into the structural bases of the disciplines, the structure of knowledge question is bringing a new and sophisticated concern with process into a traditionally content -saturated conceptualisation of education. The structure of knowledge orientation is a dynamic new development within a very old field.

Three fallacies of curriculum theory: 1 Formalism: believes that the major goal of school should be how children learn. To argue that the form of education is the most important aspect of schooling is to disregard the very concepts and criteria that make enquiry important in the first place.

2 Content: Preoccupied with the importance of what rather than how students learn. The disposition to become a creator as well as a consumer of intellectual and artistic products is frequently hampered by those who perpetuate the content fallacy.

3 Universalism: Leads to the perpetual search for the 'best' curriculum as though there were one program that would be best for everyone of a particular age regardless of other characteristics. Very conservative - operates when we see how seldom discussions about curriculum produce actual change, rather than a re-ordering of the current system.

- 3 - Designing a Curriculum Package

A curriculum package is rarely developed in isolation; it is usually located in the larger context of an educational system, which has some general aims or outcomes of education. Within the larger framework, there may also be subject discipline or learning area objectives or outcomes, all of which need to be taken into account in developing a rationale for the curriculum package. In some contexts, professional groups or employers may also have an input to the desired outcomes for students or trainees.

Skilbeck (1976) suggests that the following factors constitute the situation or context which affects the development of a curriculum package:

External:

• Cultural and social changes and expectations, including parental expectations, employer requirements, community assumptions and values, changing relationships (e.g. between adults and children) and ideology.

• Educational system requirements and challenges (e.g. policy statements, examinations, local authority expectations or demands and pressures, curriculum projects, educational research).

• The changing nature of the subject matter to be taught.

• The potential contribution of teacher support systems (e.g. teacher training institutions, research institutions).

• Flow of resources into the school.

Internal

• Pupils: aptitudes, abilities and defined educational needs.

• Teachers: values, attitudes, skills, knowledge, experience, special strengths and weaknesses, roles.

• School ethos and political structure: common assumptions and expectations including traditions, power distribution, authority relationships, methods of achieving conformity to norms and dealing with deviance.

• Material resources including plant, equipment and potential for enhancing these.

• Perceived and felt problems and shortcomings in the existing curriculum. (Skilbeck, 1976, 80-81)

What is Different for Education of Gifted and Talented Students?

Rogers (2007) produced a synthesis of the research covering instructional management options, instructional delivery techniques, and curriculum adaptation strategies is an attempt to aid school system administrators and educators to identify which practices will best fit their respective settings rather than see the research as a more generalised set of “best practices” that every school should implement. Key points: - 4 -  Gifted and talented learners need daily challenge in their specific areas of talent  Opportunities should be provided on a regular basis for gifted learners to be unique and to work independently in their areas of passion and talent  Provide various forms of subject-based and grade-based acceleration to gifted learners as their educational needs require  Provide opportunities for gifted learners to socialize and to learn with like-ability peers  For specific curriculum areas, instructional delivery must be differentiated in pace, amount of review and practice, and organisation of content presentation Rogers, K.B. (2007)

How best to meet these challenges tended to polarise around acceleration or enrichment. It is not necessarily the case that it has to be entirely one or the other, but should be tailored to the needs of the individual and their level of ability in specific areas. The case for acceleration is made passionately by Colangelo, Assouline & Gross (2004).

Davis, Rimm & Siegle (2011:126) define acceleration as “any strategy that results in advanced placement or potential credit”, whereas enrichment is defined as “strategies that supplement or go beyond standard grade work, but do not result in advanced placement or potential credit”. Enrichment refers to "learning activities providing depth and breadth to regular teaching according to the child's abilities and needs" (Townsend, 1996:362). Enrichment activities are normally in addition to and different from the regular classroom activities by way of offering challenge.

1. Early admission to kindergarten 10 .Mentoring 2. Early admission to first grade 11. Extracurricular Programs 3. Grade skipping 12. Correspondence courses 4. Continuous progress 13. Early graduation 5. Self-paced instruction 14. Concurrent/Dual enrolment 6. Subject-matter acceleration/Partial 15. Advanced placement acceleration 16. Credit by examination 7. Combined classes 17. Acceleration in College 8. Curriculum compacting 18. Early entrance to Middle School, High 9. Telescoping curriculum School or College

Figure 1: Types of Acceleration (Davis, Rimm & Siegle ,2011:126)

Differentiation There are multiple ways of differentiating the curriculum. Whether the approach is acceleration, enrichment or a combination of the two, the general consensus is that differentiation is a requirement that has potential benefit for all students. The Ministry of Education (NZ) emphasises the need for cultural considerations, in the design and provision of both acceleration and enrichment programs:

In selecting and developing programmes for gifted and talented learners, it is essential to cater for students from all cultures. Firstly, content should be considered. Schools should encourage and enable learners to select topics of study that are culturally relevant. For Māori students, this could mean an in-depth study of the Treaty of Waitangi or a research of waiata tawhito and waiata composition.

- 5 - Secondly, process must be considered. For Māori learners, the mentor approach is particularly appropriate, especially if the mentor chosen is Māori. Where mentors are from a cultural group that is different from the mentee, be sure they are culturally sensitive. The use of pull-out or withdrawal programmes must also be considered carefully. If the learner is removed from a culturally safe, comfortable environment and placed in a situation where they are the sole Māori, Tongan, or Samoan, the gifted provision may do more harm than good. Thirdly, the product must be considered. Addressing a real audience is an important product component, and is particularly relevant for Māori students. Bevan-Brown (1996) identified "being of service" as an integral component of Māori giftedness. For example, the previously mentioned Treaty of Waitangi study could involve research to support an iwi submission to the Waitangi Tribunal, and the waiata composed during waiata research could be taught to a group and performed at a school concert.

http://www.tki.org.nz/r/gifted/handbook/stage2/cul_consid_e.php

Enrichment Regular classroom Special programs Acceleration  Individual  Flexible  After-school education plans (IEPs) grouping programs  Learning centres  Special classes  Holiday programs  Curriculum  Early entrance compacting  Private tuition  Pull-  Group/independ out/withdrawal  Club/associatio ent study ns  Mentorships  Grouping  School  Concurrent networking  Consulting enrolment teacher  Competitions  Integrated curriculum  Clubs, electives,  Correspondence cluster groups school  Virtual instruction

Individual strengths and weaknesses

Figure 2: Qualitative differentiation – a continuum of provisions for gifted and talented students. http://www.tki.org.nz/r/gifted/handbook/stage2/prog_cont_pop_e.php (downloaded 19/10/2010)

The United States Curriculum Council of the National Leadership Training Institute on the Gifted Talented (1986), identified the following principles to guide differentiation for gifted and talented students:

- 6 - 1. Present content that is related to broad-based issues, themes, or problems.

2. Integrate multiple disciplines.

3. Present comprehensive, related, and mutually reinforcing experiences.

4. Allow for in-depth learning of a self-selected topic.

5. Develop independent or self-directed study skills.

6. Develop productive, complex, abstract and/or higher order thinking skills.

7. Focus on open-ended tasks.

8. Develop research skills and methods.

9. Encourage the development of products that challenge existing ideas and [that] produce 'new' ideas.

10. Encourage the development of products that use a variety of techniques, materials, and forms.

11. Encourage the development of self-understanding, that is, recognising and using one's abilities, becoming self-directed, and appreciating likenesses and differences between oneself and others.

12. Evaluate student outcomes by using appropriate and specific criteria through self-appraisal and through criterion-referenced and/or specialised instruments. (United States Curriculum Council of the National Leadership Training Institute on the Gifted Talented, 1986)

The Schoolwide Enrichment Model

The Schoolwide Enrichment Model (SEM) is a detailed blueprint for total school improvement that:  allows flexibility for each school to develop its own unique programs based on local resources, student demographics, and school dynamics as well as faculty strengths and creativity;  promotes both challenging and enjoyable high-end learning across a wide range of school types, levels and demographic differences;  allows schools to develop a collaborative school culture that takes advantage of resources and appropriate decision-making opportunities to create meaningful, high-level and potentially creative opportunities for students to develop their talents.

These developments include:  a focus on concept rather than skill learning;  the use of interdisciplinary curriculum and theme-based studies;  student portfolios, performance assessment;  cross-grade grouping, alternative scheduling patterns; and  opportunities for students to engage in more challenging and demanding roles that require hands- on learning, first-hand investigations, and the application of knowledge and thinking skills to complex problems.

In Type I enrichment  students are exposed to a wide variety of disciplines, topics, occupations, hobbies, persons, places, and events that would not ordinarily be covered in the regular curriculum;  experiences frequently are organised and planned by an enrichment team consisting of parents, teachers, and students;

- 7 -  activities might include visiting speakers, mini-courses, demonstrations, or performances, or developing a resource base of films, slides, videotapes, or other print or non-print media.

In Type 2: Enrichment consists of materials and methods designed to promote the development of thinking and feeling processes. Some Type II training is general, and is usually carried out both in classrooms and in enrichment programs. Training activities include the development of:  creative thinking and problem solving, critical thinking, and affective processes;  a wide variety of specific learning how-to-learn skills;  skills in the appropriate use of advanced-level reference materials; and  written, oral, and visual communication skills.

In Type III: Enrichment involves students who become interested in pursuing a self-selected area committing the time necessary for advanced content acquisition and process training in which they assume the role of a first- hand inquirer. The goals of Type III enrichment include:

 providing opportunities for applying interests, knowledge, creative ideas and task commitment to a self-selected problem or area of study,

 acquiring advanced level understanding of the knowledge (content) and methodology (process) that are used within particular disciplines, artistic areas of expression and interdisciplinary studies,

 developing authentic products that are primarily directed toward bringing about a desired impact upon a specified audience,

 developing self-directed learning skills in the areas of planning, organization, resource utilization, time management, decision making and self-evaluation,

 developing task commitment, self-confidence, and feelings of creative accomplishment. http://www.gifted.uconn.edu/sem/semexec.html (Downloaded 20/10/2010)

The Enrichment Triad model focuses on increasing opportunities for “creative productive” learning as outlined in Figure 3:

- 8 - Figure 3: The Enrichment Triad Model. http://www.gifted.uconn.edu/sem/semexec.html Downloaded 20/10/2010)

Chandler (2008) represents the curriculum decision making challenge around three key clusters:

What is taught

Curriculum

What is learned Assessment Instruction How it is delivered

Figure 4: Gifted Learner Needs (Chandler, 2008) - 9 - Program and Curriculum Findings for G&T Students

 Enhanced use of critical and creative thinking and students centred work produces higher academic achievement across years (Moon & Feldhusen, 1994; Delcourt, 1994; Van Tassel Baska et al, 2004)

 Compacting and grouping studies continue to suggest the benefits of both approaches (Rogers, 2007; Reis et al, 1998; Gentry and Owen, 1999)

 Enhanced motivation occurs where students have used student-centred approaches, especially underachievers (Renzulli & Reis, 2007; Baum, 1998)

Instructional Strategy Studies  The use of instructional approaches that match aptitudes produces stronger learning effects for the gifted (Rogers, 2007; Sternberg 2006)

 Using triarchic instruction that corresponds to analytical and practical task demands enhances learning in selected areas (Grigorenko, Jarvin &Sternberg, 2002)

 Using inquiry-based approaches to learning enhances motivation and achievement (Gallagher, Stepien & Rosenthal, 1992; Van Tassel Baska et al, 1998)

Figure 5: Paul’s Reasoning Wheel (Paul, 1993)

Assumptions

Point of Concepts/Idea View s

Issue/Problem Implications/ Consequence Data/ s Evidence

Purpose Inferences /Goals

- 10 - Elements of the Wheel of Reasoning

 What is the problem? (Issue/Problem)  Why are we reasoning about it (Goal or Purpose)  What are the points of view?  What evidence supports the points of view? (Experiences/ Data)  What are the important concepts or ideas?  What are the assumptions that people make?  What are the inferences that we can make?  What would be the consequences or implications of different actions? (Paul, 1993)

Paul-Elder Critical Thinking Framework

Critical thinking is that mode of thinking – about any subject, content, or problem – in which the thinker improves the quality of his or her thinking by skillfully taking charge of the structures inherent in thinking and imposing intellectual standards upon them (Paul and Elder, 2001). The Paul-Elder framework has three components:

1. The elements of thought (reasoning)

2. The intellectual standards that should be applied to the elements of reasoning

3. The intellectual traits associated with a cultivated critical thinker that result from the consistent and disciplined application of the intellectual standards to the elements of thought

Figure 6: Graphic Representation of Paul-Elder Critical Thinking Framework

http://louisville.edu/ideastoaction/what/critical-thinking/paul-elder-framework (Downloaded 290/10/2010)

- 11 - Figure 7: Science Curriculum Framework (Chandler, 2008)

The Problem Process Concept Using Scientific Understanding Research Systems Content

Learning Science

Understanding systems  All systems have identifiable elements and boundaries  All systems experience input and provide output  Systems are characterised by the nature of their internal interactions  Systems display predictable behaviours (Sher, 2004 in Van Tassel Baska & Stambaugh, 2006: 162)

Developing Scientific Inquiry Skills  Explore a scientific area  Identify a meaningful problem for investigation  State a hypothesis  Work through a pre-planned experiment or demonstration, or aid in the development of an experiment  Make appropriate observations  Create a simple graph or chart; label diagrams appropriately  Record data in an appropriate format  Analyse experimental data through data tables or graphs  Evaluate experiment results on light of the original problem  Make predictions about similar problems  Communicate using posters, oral communications and brief lab reports. (Van Tassel Baska & Stambaugh, 2006: 163)

- 12 - Figure 8: Wheel of scientific Investigation and Reasoning

- 13 - Figure 9: Social Studies Curriculum Framework (Chandler, 2008)

The Social/Historical Context

Concept Process Reasoning Understanding Using Social Systems, Cause Science Research and Effect processes Content Document Analysis

Government History Learning Social Studies Content and Habits of Mind Economics Geography

- 14 - Figure 10: Language Arts Curriculum Framework (Kimberley Chandler, 2008)

The Literature

Concept Process

Understanding Change Using the Reasoning process

Content

Linguistic Literary analysis Learning competency and interpretation Language Arts Content and Skills Oral Persuasive writing Communication

- 15 - Judging the Curriculum In line with Skilbeck’s principles of studying the curriculum empirically, and being able to justify the design and implementation, Van Tassel-Baska and Stambaugh set out the following criteria:

Appropriateness for gifted learners: Is the curriculum based on a clear assessment of the abilities and needs of gifted learners? Diversity: Are there provisions for alternative means to attain ends within a specified curricular framework? Openness: Are there opportunities for non-prescribed curricular responses? Integration: Is there an integrative use of cognition and emotion as well as the curriculum dimensions of advanced content, higher-level processes, and concepts in the curriculum? Substantive learning: Is there a focus on significant subject matter, skills and products that are consequential to the learner and the discipline? Independence: Are there provisions for self-directed learning? Complexity: Is there a provision for the study of systems knowledge, underlying principles and concepts, and key theories? Transfer: Are there provisions for transfer of learning within and across domains of knowledge? Depth: Are there provisions for students to study ideas and apply skills to targeted problems and issues? Choice: Are there provisions for students to make decisions regarding activities and tasks to be completed and how they might be done? Creativity: Do activities and projects require creative processes to be employed? Peer interaction: Do gifted learners have opportunities to learn from other students who share abilities and interests? Self and social understanding: Are opportunities to develop and examine personal and societal values and beliefs included in the curriculum? Communication skills: Are oral and written skills to dialogue, share and exchange ideas included? Timing: Is the appointment of instructional time consistent with characteristics of gifted learners for shorter and longer periods? Multiple resources: Is there provision for the utilisation of a variety of material and human resources in the learning process? Accelerated-advanced pacing: Is there provision for speed of student apprehension of review material and new material? Continuity: Does the well-defined set of learning experiences span K-12? Economy: Is there evidence that the curriculum has been compressed and streamlined to match the learning capacity of the students? Challenge: Are there sufficient provisions for advanced levels of learning that require learners to stretch for understanding? Figure 11: Judging the Curriculum (Source: Van Tassel-Baska and Stambaugh, 2006: 43)

Rimm’s (1977) model structures program evaluation in a relatively easy-to-follow way, and ties it to the initial program plan (See Figure ) The components within each of the three steps of the model reflect specific areas that should be evaluated. Evaluation data will present a comprehensive picture of the success and impact of the gifted program, and should be brought together and fed back to the decision makers for further planning and modification.

Task: Apply the Framework to your own program or scheme of work.

- 16 - Decision Makers

Input (Resources) Process (Activities) Outcome (Objectives)

General cognitive Identification methods achievement Personnel Teacher inservice Specific skills Books and Materials achievement Teaching techniques Equipment and organisation Student attitudes

Facilities Enrichment activities Student behaviours Parent involvement Student products

Parent-community attitudes

Evaluation

Figure 12: Framework for the Evaluation and Monitoring of a Gifted Program. (Source: Davis et al, 2011:486)

- 17 - References Baum, S. (1998). An enrichment program for gifted learning disabled students

Bevan-Brown, J. (1996). "Special abilities: A Māori perspective". In D. McAlpine and R. Moltzen (eds), Gifted and Talented: New Zealand Perspectives (pp. 91–109). Palmerston North, NZ: Massey University E.R.D.C. Press.

Chandler, K. L. (2008). Essentials of Curriculum for the Gifted, Keynote Presentation, ECHA 2008 Conference, Prague, CR, September 19, 2008.

Colangelo, N., Assouline S.G., & Gross, M. (2004). A nation deceived: How schools hold back America’s brightest students, Vols 1 &2. Iowa City IA: University of Iowa.

Davis, G.A., Rimm, S.B., & Siegle, D. (2011). Education of the Gifted and Talented, 6th Ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.

Delcourt, M. A., Loyd, B. H., Cornell, D. G., & Goldberg, M. D. (1994). Evaluation of the effects of programming arrangements on student learning outcomes. Charlottesville, VA: NRC/GT.

Gallagher, S., Stepien, W., & Rosenthal, H. (1992). The effects of problem-based learning on problem solving. Gifted Child Quarterly, 36(4), 195-200.

Gentry, M., & Owen, S. V. (1999). An investigation of the effects of total school flexible cluster grouping on identification, achievement, and classroom practices. Gifted Child Quarterly, 43(4), 224-243.

Grigorenko, E. L., Jarvin, L., & Sternberg, R. J.(2002). School-based tests of the triarchic theory of intelligence: Three settings, three samples, three syllabi. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 27, 167–208.

Inlow, Gail, M. (1966). The Emergent in Curriculum. New York: John Wiley.

Johnson, Mauritz Jr. (1967). Definitions and models in curriculum theory, Educational Theory 17, 127- 140.

Moon, S. M., & Feldhusen, J. F. (1994). Program for Academic and Creative Enrichment (PACE): A follow-up study ten years later. In R. F. Subotnik & K. D. Arnold (Eds.), Beyond Terman: Contemporary longitudinal studies of giftedness and talent (pp. 375-400). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

Neagley, R. L. & Evans, N. D. (1967). Handbook for Effective Curriculum Development. Englewood Cliffs N.J.: Prentice-Hall.

New Zealand Ministry of Education. (2010). Handbook for Schools. Gifted and talented students: meeting their needs in NZ schools. http://www.tki.org.nz/r/gifted/handbook/stage2/prog_cont_pop_e.php

Paul, R. (1993). Critical thinking: What every person needs to know to survive in a rapidly changing world. Sonoma State University, CA: USA.

Paul, R. & Elder, L. (2001). Critical Thinking. Tools for Taking Charge of Your Learning and Your Life. Upper Saddle River: NJ: Prentice Hall. http://louisville.edu/ideastoaction/what/critical-thinking/paul- elder-framework (Downloaded 290/10/2010)

- 18 - Reis , S. M., Gentry, M. & Maxfield, L.R. , (1998). The application of enrichment clusters to teachers’ classroom practices, Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 21, 310-334.

Renzulli, J. S., & Reis, S. M. (2007). A computerized strength assessment and Internet based enrichment program for developing giftedness and talents. In Kirsi Tirri (Ed.), Values and Foundations In Gifted Education. New York: Peter Lang Publishers. Pp. 141-155.

Renzulli, J. S., & Reis, S. M. (1997). The schoolwide enrichment model: A how-to guide for educational excellence. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press. http://www.gifted.uconn.edu/sem/semexec.html

Rogers, K.B. (2007). Lessons learned about educating the gifted and talented: A Synthesis of the research on educational practice, Gifted Child Quarterly, 51, 4, 382 – 396.

Sher, B. (2004). Guide to key science Concepts (2nd ed.) Williamsburg, VA: The College of William and Mary, Center for Gifted education.

Skilbeck, M. (1976). School based curriculum development and teacher education policy, in Teachers as Innovators, Paris: OECD, pp 80-81.

Sternberg, R. J. (2006). Recognizing neglected strengths, Educational Leadership, 64 (1), 30–35.

Stenhouse, L. (1975). An Introduction to Curriculum Research and Development. London: Heinemann Educational.

Townsend, M. A. R. (1996). "Enrichment and Acceleration: Lateral and Vertical Perspectives in Provisions for Gifted and Talented Children". In D. McAlpine and R. Moltzen (eds), Gifted and Talented: New Zealand Perspectives (pp. 361–376). Palmerston North, NZ: Massey University E.R.D.C. Press.

United States Curriculum Council of the National Leadership Training Institute on the Gifted Talented (1986). Programs for the Gifted and Talented.

Van Tassel-Baska, J., Bass, G., Reis, R,. Poland, D., & Avery, L.D. (1998). A national study of science curriculum effectiveness with high ability students, Gifted Child Quarterly, 42, 200-211.

Van Tassel-Baska , J., & Subotnik, R. (2004). World class talent development: What does it look like and what does it mean for the future of gifted education? A paper presented for the National Association of Gifted Children, Denver CO, November 6.

Van Tassel-Baska , J., & Stambaugh, T. (2006). Comprehensive Curriculum for Gifted Learners, 3rd Edn. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.

- 19 -