VANTASSEL-BASKA AND BROWN 4 AN ANALYSIS OF Chapter GIFTED CURRICULUM MODELS

BY JOYCE VANTASSEL-BASKA AND ELISSA F. BROWN

Much of as a field rests on the approaches that are used to serve gifted students in schools and other con- texts. Consequently, the importance of programmatic and cur- riculum models cannot be overestimated. The purpose of this chapter is to systematically review existing program/curriculum models in the field and to determine the evidence for their use and their effectiveness with gifted populations. Although origi- nally conceived as a study more than a decade ago, the models contained herein have been updated with more recent research support as it has become available and as related work on appro- priate curriculum for the gifted has been conceptualized.

History of Curriculum Models

The history of curriculum development for the gifted has been fraught with problems, similar to the general history of cur- riculum development in this country. Some of the most success- ful curriculum models for gifted learners have been developed

107 VanTassel-Baska and Brown 108 METHODS ANDMATERIALS FORTEACHINGTHEGIFTED thought toprovide steppingstonestosuccessfulcollegework because important resenting thehighestlevels ofacademicattainmentavailable. Theseprograms are (IB) program andtheCollegeBoard’s Advanced Placement (AP)program asrep Baska, 1998).Many educatorsworldwideperceive theInternational Baccalaureate students(VanTassel-based onaccelerationprinciplesforadvanced secondary difference paradigmforcurricula employed bothinandoutofschool. to centerfar more on individual differences among the giftedthan onthe group gifted populations. One might argue that today’s of differentiation views tend of thisfield, incorporatedattention todifferences betweentory giftedandnon modified basedonthegroup. Chiefdifferentiation approaches, earlyinthehis couldbe used inself-containedclassesbecausethelevel ofcontentinstruction and implementationofbothaccelerative andenrichmentapproaches, typically current curriculum of models research,are grounded development,in a history independent interest andaself-modulatedpace(VanTassel-Baska, 1995).Thus, oflearningthatpromotedof autodidacticismandtutorialsalsoencouragedaview enabled brightstudentstoprogress attheir own rates.Early educationalexamples Oden (1947),Pressey (1949),andearlydevelopers ofrapidlearning classesthat Hollingworth’s earlywork inscope,purpose, anddelivery. of ideas. In fallshort curriculardevelopment efforts somerespects, contemporary promote the role ofgroup through discussionandconversation about ative people isinsocietalprogress by havingstudentsstudybiographies,andto to discover connectionsabouthow theworldworked andwhattherole ofcre Deweyian progressivism, sheorganized curriculum units thatallowed students ulum templateforNew York City’s self-contained classes.Strongly influenced by the giftedemanatedfrom theearlywork ofHollingworth (1926)andhercurric highly valued inthesemodels. of studentwork through alsoistypically high-qualityproducts andperformances to thelearningenterprise,withcontentchoicesbeingmore incidental.Evidence see process skills,suchascriticalthinkingandcreative problem solving,ascentral tothedevelopment ofhighability.structs alsotendto Theseenrichmentviews account principlesofcreativity, con motivation, andindependenceascrucial that addressesthe gifted, a view a broader conception of giftedness, taking into ofcurriculumdevelopmentcited inthischapterascribetoanenrichedview for ing beyond, orinlieuof, traditionalacademics.Most ofthecurriculummodels alongthewayformostapt. process isbothacceleratedandshortened curricula attheK–12level are organized topromote readiness forcollegeandthe development forthegiftedmaybeseenasa“design down” model,where all levels of such work. Thus, one approachthey constitute the entry to curriculum Accelerative approaches to learning owe much to the work of Terman and Most oftheenrichment-orientedapproaches tocurriculum development for Alternatives abound, however, tothisviewpoint andtendtofocusonlearn ------Instructional Planning and Evaluation 109 - - - - - : The model : The model had to : The model had (Bruner, 1970) would (Bruner, : The model had to have rele have to had model The : (Lipman, Sharp, & Oscanyan, & Oscanyan, (Lipman, Sharp, : The model had to be utilitarian Man: A Course of Study Man: Models Curriculum Education of Gifted Analysis . Still others might be excluded because they were lim were they because excluded be might others Still . : The model had to be flexible with respect to the age respect to the age : The model had to be flexible with Subjects for Analysis Subjects Philosophy in the Classroom Philosophy Definition of a Curricular Model: Model: of a Curricular Definition Junior Great Books Great Junior in tutorials, as well as large classes. in tutorials, as well for the gifted/talented learner features differentiated Incorporates to the particular needs of the had to spell out ways in which it responded gifted for curriculum and instruction. in that it was easily applied to all major areas of school-based learning. areas in that it was easily applied to all major K–12 applicability to would have elements central The be applied. would to which it groups students. high school as well as for -age work children, gifted settings grouping and schools across Applicable would need to work in multiple locations and learning settings. It vance A framework for curriculum design and development A framework curriculum and designing an appropriate a system for developing provide of such a As such, it had to identify elements for the target population. a curriculum product. these elements interacted in how design and show and usable in all content areas Transferable » » » » » At a second stage of the process, the researchers were interested in comparing interested were the researchers a second stage of the process, At If models met this definition, they were included in the study. Obviously, Obviously, included in the study. were met this definition, they models If » » » » » One of the issues in the field of gifted education rests with the differences rests with the differences the field of gifted education of the issues in One the selected curriculum models according to criteria found in the curriculum lit the selected curriculum models according to be important These criteria, taken together, indicators of effectiveness. erature ited to particular grade levels, such as AP or IB programs. Originally, 20 models Originally, programs. to particularor IB ited as AP such grade levels, 11 yielding structure, definitional the to according sifted then and identified were models for continued analysis. Criteria Used to Assess Model Effectiveness some well-known curricula such as curricula some well-known with the target population in mind. because it was not developed be excluded focused in one sub because they be excluded models would curricular Other such as only, ject area or 1980) between a program model and a curricular model. Several of the models that were that were of the models and a curricular model. Several model a program between for cut both ways: They met the criteria in this study could be said to researched Others framework. program as a broad but they also worked a curricular model, the organizing principle. The opera with curriculum as clearly developed were was one that had the of a curricular model used for the study tional definition components: following VanTassel-Baska and Brown 110 METHODS ANDMATERIALS FORTEACHINGTHEGIFTED ria employed were: constituted thebasisforyieldingoverall effectiveness ofthemodel.Thecrite » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » target populations. been conductedtodocumenttheeffectiveness ofthecurriculumwith Research impact) use (student learning evidence to support riculum thatisteacher-developed. paper Evidence ofuseinteacher-developed curricula(planningandorganizingon evidence ofeffectiveness over atleast3 years withagiven studentcohort. Longitudinal evidenceofeffectiveness withgiftedstudents using aprogressive development ofskillsandconceptapproaches. Evidence of scope and sequence considerations curricula andtoalltypesofgiftedlearnersatstages development. Comprehensiveness tionship toothercurricularemphasesinschools. Relationship toschool-basedcore curricula Research Council,1996). Association & National Councilof Teachers of English, 1996; National for theAdvancement ofScience,1989,1993;International Reading relationship tothenationalcontentstandards (e.g.,AmericanAssociation Alignment orrelationship tonationalstandards boundaries) Systemic (operational inrespect toelements,input,output,interactions, and years. Sustainability employed invarious schools. Evidence ofapplicationmodelinpractice tation. Ease ofimplementation training packagesothatpractitionerscanlearnhow toimplementit. Teacher training componentforuseofthemodel lum inimplementation. Teacher receptivity ities, assessment,andresources). and show evidenceof curriculumdesignfeatures (goals,objectives, activ ucts based on the model have been evaluated by appropriate audiences Quality ofcurriculumproducts basedonthemodel translated intoteachingsegments. Application toactualcurriculum(products inuse) ): Themodelshows evidenceofbeingusedtoorganizecur anew : Themodelisdefinableasasystem. : Themodelhasbeeninoperationschoolsforatleast3 : Teachers have commentedpositively onthecurricu : Themodelappliesbroadly toallareas anddomainsof : Themodelshows evidenceoffeasibleimplemen : Themodelhasadefined rela : The model has been applied : Themodelcanbeseen : Themodelhasadefined : Themodelhasadefined : Thecurriculumprod : Themodelhasbeen : Themodelhas : Studies have ------Instructional Planning and Evaluation 111 - - Discussion Methodology Models Curriculum Education of Gifted Analysis Each of the models is discussed in the following sections according to the sections according Each of the models is discussed in the following Although the curriculum study used established research procedures for procedures established research Although the curriculum study used The approach employed to carry four around organized out the study was employed The approach and curriculum efforts of the gifted education field since the mid-1970s, and both accelera division in the field between the persistent programmatic also represent than a more each of these models has Moreover, and enrichment approaches. tive and implementation behind it. development, decade of research, criteria used to assess effectiveness. The two programmatic models are described programmatic models The two criteria used to assess effectiveness. program defined the major Renzulli, because both have Stanley and first, those of meta-analytic techniques to arrive at effect sizes were not used, rendering the not used, were at effect sizes meta-analytic techniques to arrive remains to be conducted on the study still A follow-up findings cautionary. evidence to ascertain the integrity of the yielded research models that have seven of the findings. the power designs and research Limitations of the Study No attempt generated. clear limitations to the findings are there investigation, except studies reported of the various was made to judge the technical adequacy Consequently, problem. clear a was group comparison of lack or size sample where respond directly about their work. Several of the developers sent additional data sent additional of the developers Several about their work. directly respond based on this new their work, information. and suggested changes in the rating of of the criteria for judgment of the work interpretations The original developers’ and studies. ideas of key the incorporation by the text in been acknowledged have last 20 years would be found in this limited year search. After such material was After such search. found in this limited year would be last 20 years to ensure developer it was decided to contact each model’s located for each model, phase of the This had been overlooked. or technical data research that no available a telephone call up by querystudy took 5 months, utilizing a written followed the findings, using asked to corroborate were All developers to nonrespondents. did not of the developers Three earlier. the same checklist of criteria described tional searches were made in the broader literature. Once models were selected, models were Once literature. made in the broader were tional searches for Abstracts ERIC and Psychological of both a review II constituted Phase The 1990 onward. published from data about the models and program research be contemporaryhad to that the models determined in currently and researchers roughly the written about in models therefore, be judged effective; to use in order phases. Phase I constituted the search for models that fit the definition described. that fit the definition models for search the I constituted phases. Phase addi for potential models. Moreover, reviewed texts were comprehensive Several VanTassel-Baska and Brown 112 METHODS ANDMATERIALS FORTEACHINGTHEGIFTED and difficult testing instrument thattapsintohigh-leveland difficulttestinginstrument verbalandmathematical ment over thelifespan.Major principlesofthemodelinclude(a)useasecure The StanleyModelofTalent IdentificationandDevelopment Identification Program at Duke . course mate Strong useofarticulated riculum guidesforteaching Advanced Placement coursesdeveloped atthe Talent in the summer and areacademic year programs. the cur Especially noteworthy been developed by talent search staffat various sitesand by individual teachers of theUnited States andinselectedforeign countries.Curriculum materialshave paced classes(Lynch, 1992).Theuseofthemodelhas been extensive across all 1991). Other studieshave focusedmore specificallyonstudentgainsfrom fast- to demonstratehow theseprocesses affectindividualstudents(Brody & Stanley, ties (Benbow &Arjmand,1990).Casestudyresearch alsohasbeenundertaken 1976), andthelong-termpositive repeated impactsofaccelerative opportuni a clearrationalefortheuseofaccelerationinintellectual development (Keating, advanced work inanarea by precocious students(Stanley, Keating, &Fox, 1974), studies consistentlyhave focusedonthebenefitsofaccelerationforcontinued their profiles atseventh gradepredicting future career clusters. Findings ofthese andthetiltof of thetop1%sampleincomparisontolessablecohorts, Recent studiesbasedontheSMPYlongitudinaldatahighlightcreative output with more chapters,andbooksaboutthemodel. than300publishedarticles, grams inseveral disciplinestoqualifiedstudents. andorganizationsalsooffer residential andcommuter academicpro ACT. year. Almost150,000gifted students do soevery Thesecentersandother in these talent searcheseighth gradecanbyparticipate taking the SAT orthe and by developing fast-pacedacademicprograms. Gifted studentsinseventh and provided educationalfacilitationby utilizingaccelerationorcurricularflexibility youth by othersatJHU.For thestudentsidentified by thetalentsearchers, SMPY (i.e., atalentsearch). In 1980, thetalentsearch wasextendedtoverbally gifted the conceptofsearching foryouth whoreason exceptionally well mathematically since 1986atIowa State University. From 1972through 1979,SMPYpioneered September of 1971at Johns Hopkins University and has been continued (JHU) adoptions by localschooldistrictsthathave establishedfast-pacedclasses. The modelhasbeendevelopedwithsome atkeyuniversity sitesacross thecountry various otherformsofacceleration;and(d)curriculumflexibilityinallschooling. acceleration andfast-pacedclassesincore academicareas, aswell asadvocacy for for anappropriate (c)theuseofsubjectmatter level ofchallengeininstruction; approach (DT-PI) in teaching gifted students through special classes, allowing reasoning to identify students; (b) a diagnostic testing-prescriptive instructional The overall purposeofthe Stanley modelistoeducateforindividualdevelop The research work ofSMPY hasbeen strong during the pastfour decades, The Study of Mathematically Precocious in officiallystarted Youth (SMPY) - - - - - Instructional Planning and Evaluation 113 - - - - - Models Curriculum Education of Gifted Analysis Longitudinal data, collected during the past 20 years on 300 highly gifted Longitudinal data, collected during the past 20 years Because the model is content-based, it aligns well with the newwith Common well aligns it content-based, is model the Because The SMPY model has proven to be highly sustainable, exhibiting strong rep to be highly sustainable, exhibiting strong The SMPY model has proven The model does not have a formal training component, although selection of a formal training component, although have The model does not During the entirety of its years of operation, the model has been well received received model has been well of operation, the years of its the entirety During gaps or loss of interest (Swiatek, 2000). (Swiatek, gaps or loss of interest to the in respect model of the Stanley the viability demonstrated students, have other instruments calibrated to provide off-level assessment. A recent review of recent assessment. A off-level other instruments calibrated to provide continues to mount an summer programs university talent search the data from argument for the benefits that accrueto students in academic, social, impressive longi of review 2006). A (Olszewski-Kubilius, learning of areas emotional and of results tudinal studies on acceleration continues to demonstrate the positive consequences, such as knowledge practices and the lack of negative accelerative hensive, including all of the 26 Advanced Placement course strands. Scope and Placement including all of the 26 Advanced hensive, of learning. has been articulatedsequence work 7–12 in some areas for grades for grades a guide for educational options has developed University Northwestern that use online for modules curriculum designed has University Duke while 5–12 and the underlying abilities assessed on the SAT to focus on topics that relate represents core curricula on an accelerated and streamlined level. The model is The level. on an accelerated and streamlined curricula core represents 3–12 who reason grades in students it addresses that in comprehensive totally not on spatially gifted studies Some mathematically and verbally. well exceptionally recommended, been and have conducted been have also levels at those students spa a student’s based on contemporary of knowing on the helpfulness research compre are areas 2009). Curriculum & Benbow, Lubinski, tial ability (Wai, from those countries routinely attend summer programs at talent search universi at talent search programs attend summer those countries routinely from States. ties in the United arts. English/language and The mathematics in (CCSS) Standards State Core (NGSS). SMPY Science Standards Generation to the Next model also aligns well primary understand but difficult for selection. The model is easy to considerations of the philosophies. The application based on prevailing to implement in schools summer settings where most successful is in afterschool and model that has been of a high school honors class in 3 weeks. students complete the equivalent students searches, in countries that do not conduct talent Even lication capacity. less receptive based on their conservative attitudes toward accelerative practices accelerative conservativetheir on based toward attitudes receptive less highly gifted students in subject areas. and the emphasis on and school each university in out carefully carried process teachers is a rigorous secondaryhighly gifted expertisewith Content setting. work and students are rials are employed on the way to Advanced Placement coursework and testing coursework and Placement the way to Advanced on employed rials are These language. foreign including areas, the verbal and science, mathematics, in specialists. and content professionals practicing by been reviewed have materials been have schools groups; client major the constitute who students and parents by VanTassel-Baska and Brown 114 METHODS ANDMATERIALS FORTEACHINGTHEGIFTED (1947) longitudinalstudywithrespect toitslongevityandexceeds itwith regard with 6,000studentsinthesample.Thisstudyalready rivals Terman and Oden’s A 50-year follow-up study(1972–2022)isinprogress at Vanderbilt University need forassistanceineducationaldecisionmaking(Lubinski &Benbow, 1994). benefits ofaccelerative study, early identificationof astrong talent area, andthe types ofenrichmentexperiences: Types I,II,andIII. Type IIIenrichmentusually mastered content,andalternative work issubstituted.Third, theSEMoffersthree that is,theregular ofpreviously curriculum ismodified by eliminatingportions pool students. Second, curriculum compacting is provided to all eligible students; First,kinds ofservices. interest andlearningstyleassessments are usedwithtalent ing intheiracademicschoolwork tobeconsidered. include a student in the talent pool, enabling those students who are underachiev parent nomination). High achievement test scores and IQ scores automatically mitment, aswell asalternative pathwaysofentrance(e.g.,self-nominationand tests, teachernominations, assessments ofpotentialforcreativity andtaskcom tial studentsisidentifiedthrough a variety ofmeasures, includingachievement throughout thecountry. the SEM(Renzulli &Reis, 1985,1997,2014),whichhasbeenwidelyadopted suburban, andurban)sizes. Thefield-tests resultedin the development of wasinitiallyfield-testedin11schooldistrictsof various types(rural, of services Door Identification Model (Renzulli, Reis, & Smith, 1981).Thiscombination a more flexibleapproach toidentifyinghigh-potentialstudents, the Revolving bined thepreviously developed Enrichment Triad Model (Renzulli, 1977)with and fieldtesting by botheducatorsand researchers (Renzulli, 1988). It com The Renzulli SchoolwideEnrichmentTriad Model (Ferriman-Robertson, Smeets, Lubinski, &Benbow, 2013). of preferences forcareer fieldsthatsetthestage for outstandingaccomplishment tified atage13. Moreover, otheranalysesofthisdatasethave uncovered patterns of books,andnature andextentofawards, favoring themostablestudentsiden at prestigious institutions,tenure levels atuniversity, number ofpatents,number in thetop5%,theyfoundsignificantdifferences ineducationlevels, attendance ments ofthetophalf1%inSAT scores andcomparingthemtothose predictive ofadultcreative production atage38.By analyzingtheaccomplish Benbow (2008)demonstratedthatthetalentsearch mechanismhasbeen highly to understandingthetalentdevelopment process atwork. Once studentsare identifiedforthetalentpool,theyare eligible forseveral In theSEM,atalentpoolof15%–20%above-average ability/high-poten The Schoolwide Enrichment Model (SEM) evolved after 15 years of research In arecent 25-year follow-up studyofthesegraduates,Park, Lubinski, & ------Instructional Planning and Evaluation 115

------of school of

Models Curriculum Education of Gifted Analysis Several studies have examined the use of the model with underservedwith model the of use the examined have studies pop Several Delcourt (1988) investigated characteristics related to creative/produc characteristics related Delcourt (1988) investigated Evaluation studies have been conducted in 29 school districts on the percep studies have Evaluation One comparative case study (Heal, 1989) examined the effects of SEM in rela in SEM of effects the examined 1989) (Heal, study case comparative One Type I Enrichment consists of general exploratory consists I Enrichment such as guest experiences Type underachieving learners, suggesting its emphasis on creative thinking as an anti thinking underachieving learners, suggesting its emphasis on creative dote to underachieving behavior. ulations. Emerick (1988) investigated underachievement patterns of high- underachievement (1988) investigated ulations. Emerick (1985, 1988) examined highly able students with learn potential students. Baum needs. Findings ing disabilities, identifying both characteristics and programmatic (Ford, Two authors effects of the model with these populations. suggest positive about the use of the model with minority theorized 2000) have 1999; Johnson, ined the effects of the SEM on student creative productivity. Results indicated Results indicated productivity. creative ined the effects of the SEM on student SEM in the study projects in independent became involved that students who and outside in- both products creative own their initiated often more prod multiple creative addition, In in the comparison group. than did students linked to self-efficacy. ucts were tions of the model with parents, teachers, and administrators. Researchers docu Researchers teachers, and administrators. tions of the model with parents, when the model student work change in teacher attitudes toward mented positive is used. behavior in 18 high school students who consistently engaged in firsthand tive exam (1986) also topics within or outside school. Starko on self-selected research 1981) or the SEM program as compared to no intervention as compared (Karafelis, 1986; 1981) or the SEM program participating of students or comparison groups in control 1986). Because Starko, various not used, it is difficult to attribute alternate or comparison models were to participation in the SEM. results learner assumes the role of a firsthand inquirer: thinking, feeling, and acting like thinking, of a firsthand inquirer: role learner assumes the or pro as advanced pursued at a level with involvement a practicing professional, and age. of development level the student’s given fessional as possible, labeling. of perceptions students’ on strategies or models enrichment other to tion 1981; Reis, (Delisle, comparisons using within-model results report studies Other and fields of knowledge not ordinarily covered in the regular curriculum. Type II regular curriculum. in the covered not ordinarily and fields of knowledge instructional includes Enrichment designed purposefully materials methods and and communication, feeling, research, of thinking, the development to promote the of level the most advanced III Enrichment, Type processes. methodological activities and artisticwhich the in productions as investigative model, is defined is more appropriate for students with higher levels of ability, interest, and task interest, ability, of levels students with higher for appropriate is more commitment. use of audio- centers, and the interest field trips, demonstrations, speakers, topics, ideas, to expose students to newvisual materials designed and exciting VanTassel-Baska and Brown 116 METHODS ANDMATERIALS FORTEACHINGTHEGIFTED (Reis &Purcell, 1993).Anotherstudydemonstratedthatstudents( were as high or higher on in-grade standardized tests than noncompacted peers spend timeon Type IIIproject work. Results demonstrateknowledge scores that are capableofrapidlyprogressing through regular schoolcurriculuminorder to ented studentsare met,the studentswilldevelop intoautonomouslearnerswho students ingradesK–12(Betts &Knapp, 1980). Astheneedsofgiftedandtal to meetthediverse cognitive, emotional,andsocialneedsofgiftedtalented The BettsAutonomousLearnerModel the country. Foundation toreplicate hisRenzulli Academy program atothersitesthroughout Hartford, CT. In 2012,Renzulli received agrantaward from theJack Kent Cooke porated intothework oftheRenzulli schoolin Academy inanelementary enhance fluency. Thesecurricularemphases,alongwithothers, have been incor McCoach, Jacobs, &Coyne, 2008)hassuggested thatdifferentiated taskscan tings. Research onreading achievement withlow-income students(Reis, Eckert, levels in low-income this approach enhance learning at the elementary port set als thatemphasize real-world problem solvingandusethestrategiesthatsup (Gavin etal.,2007)hassuggestedthat theuseofmathmateri interventions reading andmathematicseducationin Title Ischools.Research oneffective math related totheSEMspanningaperiodof15years. 1999. In 1994, Education of the Gifted especially enthusiasticaboutthemodel.Aspecialvolume ofthe national standards.be alignedwithnew Bothteachersandselectedstudentsare offers ascopeandsequencewithin Type IIactivities,andhasthepotentialto Connecticut. Renzulli perceives that the model is closely linked tocore curricula, nationally. Annualsummertrainingonthemodelisavailable attheUniversity of ant trainingforlaterproductivity. current project work. Moreover, the Type IIIprocess asimport appeared toserve in high school, remained in major fields of study in college, and were satisfied in dents inthesamplemaintainedsimilaroridenticalcareer goalsfrom theirplans conducted with18and9students,respectively. Thesestudiesshowed thatstu test scores (Reis, Westberg, Kulikowich, &Purcell, 1998). utilizing curriculum compacting strategies resulted in no decline in achievement Compacting studieshave soughttodocumentthefactthatgiftedstudents The Autonomous Learner Model for the Gifted and Talented was developed More recent work ontheuseofSEMmodelhasbeeninarea of The SEMmodeliswidelyusedinsomeformschoolsnationallyandinter Two 1988; Hébert,SEM longitudinal studies (Delcourt, 1993) have been Gifted ChildQuarterly was devoted to Renzulli’s work, including the model, in published an article reviewing researchpublished anarticle Journal forthe N =336) ------Instructional Planning and Evaluation 117

- - - - Models Curriculum Education of Gifted Analysis Evidence of research based on multiple intelligences translated into practice based on multiple of research Evidence Multiple intelligences (MI) as a curricular approach was built on a multi- a on built was approach curricular a as (MI) intelligences Multiple Regardless of the paucity of research on this model, it is one of the most of the paucity of research Regardless One of the criteria used for assessing the appropriateness of a curriculum for assessing the appropriateness of the criteria used One students over at least 3 years has not been documented, although some research some research has not been documented, although at least 3 years students over of has been conducted on incorporating multiple intelligences with other forms 1994). & Rogers, Nielson, curricular models (Maker, has been documented (Brand, 2006; Latham, 1997; Smith, Odhiambo, & El & El Odhiambo, 2006; Latham, 1997; Smith, has been documented (Brand, how of the research, 1996). Most & Banks, Summey, 2000; Strahan, Khateeb, diffi about the model are generalizations therefore, groups; lacks control ever, with gifted cult to infer (Latham, 1997). Longitudinal evidence of effectiveness dimensional concept of intelligence (Gardner, 1983). Seven areas of intelligence areas 1983). Seven (Gardner, dimensional concept of intelligence added intelligence eighth an with work, published original the in defined were (b) logical/mathematical, (c) verbal/linguistic, (a) are 1999. They in Gardner by (f) musical/rhythmic, (e) bodily/kinesthetic, (d) visual/spatial, interpersonal, (g) intrapersonal, and (h) naturalistic. the model applies broadly to all curricular domains and ages of learners; however, to all curricular domains and ages of learners; however, the model applies broadly limiting one of accelerated learning, thereby it does not incorporate any features aspect of its comprehensiveness. Multiple Intelligences Gardner’s widely recognized and used in the United States (Betts, 1986). Teachers have have Teachers 1986). (Betts, States the United in and used recognized widely at on its implementation. The model has been employed commented positively teacher training and in other countries. Formal States selected sites in the United timeline suggests a 3-year design Its occurs in 3- and 5-day segments annually. in that of comprehensiveness does contain a degree for model implementation. It by presenting guidelines for developing a process-based scope and sequence, as and sequence, scope process-based a developing for guidelines presenting by 1986). & Neihart, for gifted learners (Betts programs as independent study well twice-exceptional with volume on work been included in a The model also has (Kiesa, for this population for programming framework gifted learners as a strong 2000). model is the evidence of research to support learn its use with gifted and talented of research model is the evidence to regard with has been shown evidence of effectiveness date, no research To ers. with gifted learn learning impact or longitudinal effectiveness student this model’s as a result been produced guides have curricular units and several ers; however, the model and described article of its ideas. One of the dissemination reviewed are responsible for the development, implementation, and evaluation of their own their own of and evaluation implementation, for the development, responsible are orientation, (b) dimensions: (a) major into five The model is divided learning. (e) in-depth (d) seminars, and activities, (c) enrichment development, individual study. VanTassel-Baska and Brown 118 METHODS ANDMATERIALS FORTEACHINGTHEGIFTED holds widespread appealformanyeducatorsbecauseitcanbeadaptedany materials hasbeenproduced andmarketed baseduponMItheory. Thisapproach strategies.Aplethoraofcurricular opment, andasawaytoassessinstructional schools, inidentifyingindividual differences, forcurriculum planninganddevel Robinson-Wyman, 1986): gifted students. Theyare (Feldhusen for secondary organizing opportunities & and accelerationoptions,witheachcomponentdesigned toactasaguidefor level. It atthesecondary enrichment has11componentssupporting services independent activities(Feldhusen &Kolloff, 1986): ment modelthatmoves studentsfrom simplethinking experiences tocomplex It evolved intotheThree-Stage Model by 1979. It isprimarilyanordered enrich students, was first introduced as acourse design for university students in 1973. Secondary ModelforGiftedandTalented Youth Elementary GiftedLearnersandThePurdue The PurdueThree-Stage EnrichmentModelfor model. data collectioninorder tomakevalid empiricalinferences aboutthevalue ofthe have been reported (Gardner, 1999).Newer studiesstilllackqualitycontrol in to monitor implementation of MI in classrooms nationally where positive impacts implementation qualityare strong,project leadingtoanew specifically designed as awaytopromote talentdevelopment foralllearners. remains primarilyaconceptionofintelligenceappliedbroadly toschoolsettings in New York City. Although the model has been readily adapted to curricula,it sites forthemodelare theKey SchoolinIndianapolis, IN,andtheAtlas Project does require teachertraining,financial resources, andtime. Best-known project learner, subjectdomain,orgradelevel. Themodelisnoteasytoimplementand The multiple intelligences approach has been usedin the formationof new » » » The Purdue Secondary Model isacomprehensive structure forprogramming » » » The conceptofathree-stage model,initiated by Feldhusen andhisgraduate Developer concernsaboutapplicationfidelityoftheideasand variability in » » » » » » Advanced Placement courses, seminars, counseling services, independent studyskills. Stage IIIallows students to apply research skills in the development of Stage IIprovides development increative problem solving,and skills, Stage Ifocusesonthedevelopment ofdivergent andconvergent thinking - - Instructional Planning and Evaluation 119 - - - - - component cul component utilizes component utilizes product process is perceived to be the relation is perceived Content Models Curriculum Education of Gifted Analysis career education, career and programs, vocational extraschool instruction. honors classes, honors classes, acceleration, math/science languages, foreign arts, cultural experiences, » » » » » » » » Teacher training has been conducted throughout the United States, initially initially States, the United training has been conducted throughout Teacher Research evidence could not be found to support of this the effectiveness Research The Kaplan Grid is a model designed to facilitate the curriculum developer’s the curriculum developer’s Grid is a model designed to facilitate The Kaplan The application and implementation of either the elementary of either and implementation The application or secondary » » » think creative of enhancement to regard with gains documented has Research » » » » » through the National/State Leadership Training Institute and now independently independently now and Institute Training Leadership the National/State through to implement it. Thousands so that practitioners can learn how the developer by model with a target population. The quality of the curricular products that have have that curricular products the of quality population. The target a with model in the literature; based upon this model has not been reported been produced at both state implementation of the approach has been extensive there however, and local levels. construct content, The model uses the components of process, such a curriculum. a theme. around organized and product of individuals and the needs and interests displays of power various ship between including societies (Kaplan, 1986). The and groups, The skills, and basic skills. thinking, research productive minates the learning into a mode of communication. of development. The Kaplan Grid one can and how curriculum differentiated task of deciding what constitutes a 1994). Teacher training has accompanied the site implementation of both the Teacher 1994). it is difficult to ascertain the degree elementary and secondary however, models; a scope and model utilizes Neither Indiana. application beyond of widespread model in terms of apply as a comprehensive sequence, and neither may be viewed stages or all learners, gifted of all types the curriculum, of areas to all broadly ing ing and self-concept using the Three-Stage Enrichment Model for Elementary for Model Enrichment Three-Stage the using self-concept and ing docu 1984), and one study was conducted Feldhusen, & (Kolloff Students Gifted & Feldhusen, gains of the elementarymenting limited long-term (Moon program 1994). & Dillon, Feldhusen, 1994; Moon, & Feldhusen, (Moon to be sustainable they appear yet not conclusive, models are VanTassel-Baska and Brown 120 METHODS ANDMATERIALS FORTEACHINGTHEGIFTED itself, noprovisions are explicitlymadeforacceleratedlearning. ers, butitdoesnotcontainascopeandsequence.Additionally, withinthemodel intended asadevelopmental frameworkforcurriculumplanninggiftedlearn of teachershave developed their own curricula based upon the model. The grid is a theory ofhumanintelligencecalledtheStructurea theory ofIntellect developed by The MeekerStructure ofIntellectModel strong emphasisinitsrelationship tocore subjectdomains. at least 3 years is not known. It is not comprehensive in nature, yet it does have a Some trainingexistsforitsapplication.Thesustainabilityofthematrixmodel for vidual teacher-developed curriculum,andteachershave beenreceptive toitsuse. organizing anddeveloping classroom-level curricula.There isevidenceofanindi validity oftheprocess are inprogress. (Maker, Rogers, Nielson, &Bauerle, 1996).Studies toevaluate thelong-term study hasshown thatuseofthematrixenhancesprocess ofproblem solving a variety of settings;however, todate,theresults have notbeenpublished.Apilot a learner’s problem-solving abilities. gences (Maker etal.,1994): incorporates acontinuumoffive problem typesforusewithineachoftheintelli assessing problem solvinginmultipleintelligences.Theproblem-solving matrix ment ofitsproblem-solving component. The Discover project isaprocess for (Maker, 1982).Additional work onthemodelprimarilyrepresents anenhance set ofdescriptive criteria that may beused to develop classroom-based curricula and product dimensionsofanappropriate curriculumforthegifted,represents a The MakerMatrix The Structure of Intellect model(SOI)forgiftededucation wasbasedupon School systemsinseveral stateshave appliedthematrixasaframeworkfor Research involving onproblem 12classrooms typescurrently in isunderway The project typicallyisused by teachersforcurricularplanningandassessing » » » » The Maker Matrix, developed to categorize content, process, environmental, » » » » for creating asolution. lem, discover themethodforsolvingproblem, andestablishcriteria Type V problems are ill-structured, andthelearnermustdefineprob ing andestablishingevaluation criteriafor thesolution;and Type IVproblems are defined,butthelearnerselectsamethodforsolv solve them andhave arangeofacceptableanswers; Type III problems are structured but allow for a range of methods to Type IandIIproblems require convergent thinking; ------Instructional Planning and Evaluation 121 - - - curriculum of , supports students in discov is the basis for all other curricula other all for basis is the , serves to help students think about themselves core curriculum core Models Curriculum Education of Gifted Analysis curriculum of connections curriculum of identity , also derives from the core curriculum. Its purpose is to extend students’ students’ purpose is to extend curriculum. Its the core from , also derives The PCM assumes that the assumes that PCM The The Parallel Curriculum Model (PCM) is a model for curricular planning Model (PCM) is a model for curricular Curriculum Parallel The Although now dated, SOI offered a means of understanding students by students a means of understanding dated, SOI offered Although now Studies of the model do not include effectiveness data (Meeker, 1976); rather, 1976); rather, data (Meeker, effectiveness of the model do not include Studies parallel, the their own to it relates within the context of a particular discipline—to see how as a catalyst for self-definition curriculum of identity uses The curriculum lives. builds from the core curriculum and has students exploring those connections the core builds from parallel, the interdisciplinaryintra- and for both The third studies. practice The curriculum of application. understandings and skills in a discipline through student expertise discipline. The last practice promotes as a practitioner of a given and it should be combined with any or all of the three other parallels. It is the is other parallels. It of the three or all with any be combined it should and National, state, discipline. by a given foundational curriculum that is defined It dimension. this in reflected be should standards district school local and/or subjects and grade levels. within relevant establishes the basis of understanding The second parallel, the It disciplines of knowledge. among and between ering the interconnectedness based upon the composite work of Tomlinson and colleagues (2002). The heu Tomlinson of based upon the composite work that can be used singly or in four dimensions, or parallels, ristic model employs the curriculum curriculum, the curriculum of connections, combination: the core of practice, and the curriculum of identity. Training materials included mini-lesson plans for group teaching and self-help for group materials included mini-lesson plans Training 1969). instructionmodules for individualized with selected students (Meeker, Curriculum Model The Parallel design. SOI has been used successfully in selected sites for identification with cul used successfully in selected sites for design. SOI has been multiethnic for screening 1983) and (Hengen, students turally diverse 1985). gifted students (Bonne, disadvantaged It contained a teacher-training of their intellectual abilities. delineating profiles designed to train one SOI ability at a time. component that used teacher modules implemented the model. Those sites have used it for identifying students or for used it for identifying Those sites have implemented the model. entity. viewtraining teachers to as a nonfixed intelligence criteria, as a means on findings for its use as identification they primarily focus program for overall about a gifted child, or as a means for organizing information Guilford (1967). SOI describes 90 kinds of cognitive functions organized into functions organized 90 kinds of cognitive SOI describes (1967). Guilford theory into the SOI applies Guilford’s abilities. and product content, operation, a system and applies as is definable The model and training. of assessment areas at varying types of gifted learners to all but due to stages, broadly developmental actually only a few and emphasis on cognition, sites have its comprehensiveness VanTassel-Baska and Brown 122 METHODS ANDMATERIALS FORTEACHINGTHEGIFTED ricular unitsandguideshave beenproduced asaresult ofawidedissemination regard tothismodel’s usewithgiftedornongifted learners;however, several cur in employing allor elements ofthePCMshouldbematchedtostudentneeds. and self-understanding.Theauthorssuggestthatthelevel ofintellectualdemand & Chisson,1980);however, no longitudinalstudieshave beenconducted. enhances academicskilldevelopment onstandardized achievement tests(McLean with young children. Additionally, there isevidence thattheuseofmodel action research todemonstratethemodel’s effectiveness inan English setting ative andcriticalthinking(Schlichter&Palmer, 1993),andRodd (1999)used PowerSecondary isamodelforgrades7–12. 1986): multiple talents. Talents Unlimited features four major components (Schlichter, ment ofamodeltobeemployed inhelpingteachersidentifyandnurture students’ by Guilford, authored themultipletalenttheory, whichprecipitated thedevelop of intelligence. Taylor, Ghiselin, Wolfer, Loy, & Bourne (1964), also influenced Talents UnlimitedtotheSecondaryPower The SchlichterModelsforTalents UnlimitedInc.and by NAGC. regular classroom use,aswell asaseriesof“trainer oftrainer” offerings,sponsored the employing schooldistrict.Implementation sessionshave beenoffered forboth the PCMtypicallyrequires 2 daysandmaybeadjusteddependingontheneedsof degree ofteachertraining.Professional development ontheimplementationof level. The model,although flexible, isnot easyto implementanddoes require a educators because itcanbeadapted for anylearner, subjectdomain,orgrade levels and guided by authors of the model. The model holds appeal for many creation ofcurricularunitscurrently isbeingdesignedby practitionersatvarious by the effort National Associationfor Gifted Children (NAGC). Additionally, the To date,noresearch-based evidenceofeffectiveness hasbeenshown with Research hasdocumentedgainsusingthemodelindeveloping students’ cre Talents Unlimited Inc. istheK–6model,and Talents Unlimited tothe » » » » Talents Unlimited wasbaseduponGuilford’s (1967)research onthenature » » » » an evaluation systemforassessingstudents’ thinkingskillsdevelopment. trainingprogram forteachers;and an in-service materials; model instructional decision making,andplanning; ability thatincludeproductive thinking,communication,forecasting, a descriptionofspecificskillabilities,ortalents,inadditiontoacademic - - - Instructional Planning and Evaluation 123 ------Models Curriculum Education of Gifted Analysis There is not a packaged teacher training or staff development component, in is not a packaged teacher training or staff development There An initial study has shown the effectiveness of the triarchic model with stu with model triarchic the of effectiveness the shown has study initial An Sternberg’s Triarchic Componential Model is based upon an information an upon based is Model Componential Triarchic Sternberg’s The model has been used most effectively as a classroom-based approach with approach a classroom-based as effectively most used been has model The Staff development and teacher training constitute a strong component of the component a strong training constitute and teacher development Staff part because the model is based upon a theory of intelligence rather than a delib model with is a systemic but not a comprehensive It erate curriculum framework. some applications in selected classrooms. Descriptions of teacher-created curricula and instructional instrumentation of teacher-created pro Descriptions along discipline-specific lines of organized limited but clearly are cesses were imple summer program model beyond of the curriculum Sustainability inquiry. mentation and pilot settings is not known. studies is the validation of the Sternberg Triarchic Abilities Test (STAT) and its (STAT) Test Abilities Triarchic of the Sternberg studies is the validation Other stud components. on specific triarchic utility for finding students strong Grigorenko, & Torff, 2002; Sternberg, & Sternberg, Jarvin, ies (Grigorenko, instructional in classrooms 1998a, 1998b) focus on the use of triarchic processes suggest slightly stronger at the elementary Results and middle school levels. thinking approaches. and critical traditional over instructioneffects for triarchic dents learning psychology in a summer program (Sternberg & Clinkenbeard, & Clinkenbeard, (Sternberg in a summer program dents learning psychology as studies using psychology has been conducted in work recent 1995). More continue to show of students. Students the curriculum base with larger samples linked to measuring ability pro are when assessment protocols patterns growth Primary to these 1996). Grigorenko, & Ferrari, Clinkenbeard, files (Sternberg, The performance component processes are used in executing the executive prob the executive used in executing The performance are component processes component is The knowledge-acquisition lem-solving strategies within domains. and transferring new information. The interaction used in acquiring, retaining, within any given the individual and his or her environment and feedback between to occur. development cognitive context allows Sternberg’s Triarchic Componential Model Triarchic Sternberg’s com model, three the In 1981). theoryprocessing of intelligence (Sternberg, process used in thinking. The executive processes the mental ponents represent making, and monitoring performance.component is used in planning, decision Education’s National Diffusion Network. Network. Diffusion National Education’s in practice than for the gifted it less differentiated all learners, thus rendering some of the other models. model. Teachers may become “certified” as Talents Unlimited trainers. Due to the trainers. Unlimited Talents as become “certified” may Teachers model. applicable has widespread Unlimited Talents on teacher training, emphasis strong implementation of its Part and worldwide. States the United across student use and membership in the U.S. Department of funding of success came as a result VanTassel-Baska and Brown 124 METHODS ANDMATERIALS FORTEACHINGTHEGIFTED content, (b)high-level process andproduct work, and(c)intra-interdisci cifically developed forhigh-abilitylearners. It hasthree dimensions:(a)advanced VanTassel-Baska’s Integrated CurriculumModel offers trainingannually. There isastrong relationshiptocore subject domains, in 30states,andTheCollege of Center for William and Gifted Mary Education integral componentoftheICM model. Training workshops have beenconducted study aswell. changes inteacherbehaviorsforusingdifferentiated strategies were notedinthis (Little, Feng, VanTassel-Baska, Rogers, &Avery, 2007).Moreover, positive cantly impactscriticalthinkingandcontentmastery, usingcomparisongroups learning increases withmultiple unitsemployed (VanTassel-Baska etal.,2002). cessful withlow-income students,canbeusedinallgrouping paradigms,andthat curriculaoverlanguage arts 3years. Baska, Avery, Little,&Hughes, 2000)asaresult ofusingtheICM scienceand tude, studentmotivational response, andschooldistrictchange(VanTassel- O’Neill, 2005).Anearlierstudyhaddocumented positive changeinteacheratti curriculum tobebeneficialandeffective (Feng, VanTassel-Baska, Quek, Bai,& increasing achievement patterns,andthemajorityofstakeholders reported the and persuasive writing.Repeated exposure over a2–3year perioddemonstrated levels incritical enhanced at significant and educationally important reading suburban schooldistrictsuggestthatgiftedstudentlearningingrades3–5was time ofusingthe unitsforgiftedlearnersina William languagearts andMary grouping approach employed. in science(VanTassel-Baska, Bass, Ries,Poland, &Avery, 1998),regardless ofthe ulum significantlyenhancesthecapacityforintegratinghigherorder process skills using theproblem-basedsciencecurric scienceunitsembeddedinanexemplary VanTassel-Baska, Zuo, Avery, &Little,2002).Other studieshave shown that groups not usingthem(VanTassel-Baska, Johnson, Hughes, &Boyce, 1996; mental gifted classesusing the developed curricular units in comparison togifted have beendemonstratedforexperi and linguisticcompetencyinlanguagearts significant growth analysisandinterpretation, persuasive writing, gainsinliterary units withgiftedpopulationswithinavariety ofeducationalsettings.Specifically, socialstudies,andscience. frameworks andunderlyingunits inlanguagearts, from theJacob K.Javits Program, usedtheICMtodevelop specificcurricular conceptdevelopment andunderstanding. plinary VanTassel-Baska, withfunding The VanTassel-Baska (1986) Integrated Curriculum Model (ICM) wasspe Teacher traininganddevelopment intheuseofspecificteaching models isan Research ontheuseofsocialstudiesunitssuggestedthatunitsignifi dataacross settingssuggestedthatitissuc A subanalysisofthelanguagearts Findings from a6-year longitudinalstudythatexaminedtheeffects over Research theeffectiveness ofthesecurricular hasbeenconductedtosupport ------Instructional Planning and Evaluation 125

- - - - , a reading comprehension comprehension , a reading with students from low-income back low-income with students from Jacob’s Ladder Jacob’s Models Curriculum Education of Gifted Analysis Jacob’s Ladder Jacob’s As an outgrowth of Project Athena, Athena, of Project As an outgrowth More recent Javits grants assessed the effectiveness of the ICM units in grants assessed the effectiveness Javits recent More There is evidence of broad-based application, but some questions remain but some questions application, is evidence of broad-based There The ICM units are moderately comprehensive in that they span grades K–10 in that they span grades moderately comprehensive The ICM units are studies support the use of critical thinking in 2007), suggesting growth 2006; Stambaugh, (French, grounds process. in the reading as enhancing interest as well comprehension and reading teachers (VanTassel-Baska et al., 2008). teachers (VanTassel-Baska thinking to higher order order lower students from intended to move program was 2004), French, & Stambaugh, artslanguage the in skills (VanTassel-Baska, the implementation I schools. Supporting Title for use in designed and developed Two to aid teachers in implementation. was a series of workshops of the program higher on both the frequency of use and effective use of differentiated strategies use of differentiated of use and effective higher on both the frequency remained strategies for teacher use of differentiation gains Growth 2 years. across of note, experimental teachers who had used the Also year. stagnant in the third demonstrated sig commensurate training and received curriculum for 2 years experimental over first-year strategies nificantly enhanced use of differentiated of interest. In Project Athena, the language artson both stu findings Athena, program, Project In of interest. students Experimental promising. dent learning and teacher learning appeared students in both critical thinking and com did significantly better than control using the from gains significant growth registering with all groups prehension (VanTassel-Baska, or ethnic background gender, of ability, curriculum regardless significantly teachers scored 2009). Experimental & Brown, Feng, Bracken, using multiple content area units. Data on student impact have been collected have student impact on Data units. area content using multiple nationally. than 150 classrooms more from language arts at the elementary and science at the primary level with low- level variable I schools using critical thinking as one outcome Title income learners in abroad. abroad. of fidelity the and units, teaching the of implementation of ease the regarding of concern in many settings. Some an area teachers remains by implementation developer The curricula. own their developing for models as units the use districts Network Curriculum part a National of that 100 school districts are reported in language arts and K–8 in science. Social studies units are now available for available now studies units are in language arts in science. Social and K–8 in grades available now units of study in math are Selected grades 2–10 as well. curriculum school and district has been used for specific 3–8. The ICM model and Korea, Japan, Zealand, Canada, New in Australia, and planning development schools international and States the United in districts as selected well as Taiwan, as well as national standards alignment. The curricula based on the model was based on the model The curricula alignment. standards as national as well charts template. Alignment as a work have the national standards using developed language arts in both work and and state standards for national been completed science. VanTassel-Baska and Brown 126 METHODS ANDMATERIALS FORTEACHINGTHEGIFTED ings that relate to several areas of interest. Student learning gains have been strong, dents (Swanson, 2006). results forbothteachersandstu suggestedthatenhancedlearningalsoaccrued treatments ornotreatments. Althoughthe Talents Unlimited Model has some some evidenceofeffectiveness with giftedpopulations incomparisontoother Stanley, SEM,Feldhusen, ICM,Sternberg, and Talents Unlimited modelsallhave approach employed.might beattributedtothe curricular orinstructional The studies. Of those,sixofthemodelsemployed comparisongroups where treatment Regrettably, nostudiesorevidenceofapplicationwere found. at theschoollevel, butnotatthelevel ofcurriculum units orcoursesofstudy. of analysis,exemplified theprogrammatic framework modelasasupraorganizer tice withgiftedlearners.The Tannenbaum model,dropped atthesecondlevel been conductedtodate,however, toshow thebenefitsofsuchmodelsinprac titioners asdesignsforteacher-madematerials.No studiesofeffectiveness have former were theKaplanGrid andtheMaker Matrix, bothheavilyusedby prac in nature andwere intendedasadefiningframework inschools. Examples ofthe ondifferentiationget started intheirclassroom; others were more programmatic models were more organizationalthancurricularinnature, whichhelpsteachers models tooneanother, usingthesamecriteriaasbasisforcomparison.Some for thegifted. multiple countriesasamodelfordesignanddevelopment ofqualitycurriculum are reported tobeusedinall50states.Internationally, themodelisbeingusedin levels. primary Clarion withstrong results, especiallyforenhancingtheteachingofscienceat Baska, 2013a). Two otherJavits grantsalsousedthescienceunitsfrom Project individual differences (Stambaugh, Bland, & VanTassel-Baska, 2010; VanTassel- key areas thatincludecriticalthinking,creative thinking,andaccommodationto teachers have demonstratedlearninggainsinusingdifferentiation strategiesin dimensions witheffectsizes rangingfrom .3–.6(Kimetal.,2012). Additionally, the project learning gainsinthese has demonstrated significant and important increases, andscienceconceptlearninggains.Using quasi-experimentaldesigns, with studentsdemonstratingcriticalthinkingincreases, scienceachievement Project scienceprogram, find hasproduced important Clarion,theprimary In anotherJavits grantthatusedthe units, William languagearts andMary Only seven modelsshowed evidenceofhavingbeenthefocusresearch ofthecurricularmodelanalysisalsowastocompare part the An important Studies ofeffectiveness are ongoinginclassrooms nationally. Thecurricula Key Findings - - - - Instructional Planning and Evaluation 127 - - Conclusions Models Curriculum Education of Gifted Analysis A strong body of research evidence exists supporting the use of advanced body of research A strong Curricula organized around higher order processes and independent study independent and processes order higher around organized Curricula Data on curricular and instructional Data clearly favor practices with the gifted Evidence for the translation of these curricular models into effective practice practice curricular models into effective for the translation of these Evidence This conclusion has not changed much in the past 30 years (Colangelo, Assouline, has not changed much in the past 30 This conclusion meta-analytic studies continue to con 1979). Moreover, 2004; Daurio, & Gross, over enrichment in tandem with firm the superior learning effects of acceleration curricula in core areas of learning at an accelerated rate for high-ability learners. areas curricula in core effective. enrichment-oriented models are evidence also exists that more Some consistent. Even longitudinal studies, such as those of Feldhusen and the SEM, and the SEM, longitudinal studies, such as those of Feldhusen consistent. Even to clear student gains. relevant limited evidence of outcomes produced have such as lack of comparison and other confounding variables, Limited sample size less credible. these studies also render groups, although the approach to content acceleration may vary. Although both the Although both to content acceleration may vary. although the approach elements of acceleration within them, only the and ICM models have Stanley impact of accelerated study model has empirically demonstrated the clear Stanley time. on learning over studies across findings the fewyielded are nor impacts, student of studies have focused on the design of talent trajectories that suggest curricular interventionsfocused on the design of talent trajectories the use of cutting across stages of development, for gifted learners at different 2013b). models (VanTassel-Baska, of language arts, science, and mathematics, in the subject areas work advanced varies considerably. Seven models have training packages that provide staff devel staff packages that provide training models have Seven considerably. varies models explicitly consider scope only four whereas opment for implementation, within their consider scope and sequence and Renzulli Betts and sequence issues. one stage to another; for Renzulli, from in the movement it is Betts, models. For scope- developed and ICM both have II activities. Stanley Type it occurs within has work recent More work. Placement and-sequence models linked to Advanced search and development originated by Stanley continues to provide important continues to provide Stanley originated by and development search the beyond going well longitudinally, process development insights on the talent utility to the field of gifted education in terms of greater other models described curriculum. beyond evidence of effectiveness, much of the research base is on nongifted populations. is on nongifted base research of the much of effectiveness, evidence continue to be of these models evidence that some is also there years, recent In primarythe of work the on based schools, and by developer employed actively newwith associates, her or The his studies. efficacy to subjected being curriculum for talent the SEM and the ICM. The model description are models that fit that VanTassel-Baska and Brown 128 METHODS ANDMATERIALS FORTEACHINGTHEGIFTED statistically,(Walberg, significant 1991). Despite thelackofconvincing research a powerful treatment effect,meaningthatthegainsare educationally, as well as and problem solving,accelerationnotonlyshows gainsbutalsohas performance parison tootherstrategies,suchasindependentstudy, various modesofgrouping, grouping thegifted(Kulik &Kulik, 1993;Rogers, 2002;Swiatek, 2000).In com upon whichschoolsneedtofocusare: erations forschoolsinmakingcurriculardecisions.The fundamentalquestions for giftedlearners. These criteriaare consid important curricular interventions in This chapterhasdelineatedasetofcriteriaforconsidering thestateofart need tobemadewithasenseofwhatworks forourbestlearnersinschools. Implications forSchools needs tobeundertaken. learning outcomesingiftedprograms usingdifferent curricular approaches clearly with giftedstudentsinschoolprograms. More research ondifferential student studies, inorder tobuildabaseofdeeperunderstandingaboutwhatworks well studies testing these models, as well as to replicatecurricular intervention existing directionthe gifted.Thus,animportant forfuture research wouldbetoconduct that can make claims about the efficacy of enriched approaches to curriculum for realize theirpotentialimpactsover time. that schools need to apply curricular models faithfully and thoroughly in order to employed inanycurriculum usedinschool-basedprograms forthegiftedand evidence strongly suggeststhatcontent-basedaccelerative approaches shouldbe must proceed carefully in deciding on curricula for use in gifted programs. The based practiceiscriticaltodefensiblegiftedprograms; therefore, practitioners proclaiming itseffectiveness. from thetruth. Nothing couldbefurther Research- model is writtenaboutand used enthusiastically, such popularityissufficientfor research andpracticeingiftededucation. Too frequently, itisassumedthatifa General Implications ity andare usedextensively inschools. theiruse,several ofthe enrichmentmodelsenjoyto support widespread popular » » » Decisions aboutcurricularapproaches andtheirimplicationsforclassrooms In thearea ofresearch, itisclearthatthere isalimitedbaseofcoherent studies Several implicationsmightbe drawnfrom thesefindings, related toboth » » » school staff? Is training in the use of differentiated curricular materials available for Are differentiated classroom materials available touseinimplementation? ible isit? approach? What isthenature andextentoftheevidencehow cred Do gifted students show evidence of learning as a result of the curricular - - - - Instructional Planning and Evaluation 129

- - - —Bess B. Worley II Worley B. —Bess Models Curriculum Education of Gifted Analysis Teacher Statement Teacher I recommend this chapter to all educators in the field of gifted education, as this chapter to all educators in the field I recommend This chapter also emphasized the caution with which educators should educators which with the caution also emphasized chapter This I found the chapter to be helpful because it provided a clear and concise to be helpful because it provided I found the chapter I first read this chapter during a time when I was both working with elemen with was both working a time when I this chapter during read I first well as parents and others interested in the program and curricular models used in in the program interested and others as parents well useful information provide The authors gifted education program. a community’s well as guidelines models used in the field of gifted education as about prominent and curricular models that might other programs for evaluating and procedures be implemented with gifted students. embrace new models and theories. After reading this chapter, I became more I became more this chapter, embrace new models and theories. After reading behind instructional strategies and cur in the research of and interested aware me to ask for more encouraged teaching. It riculum materials I incorporate into for meeting the with gifted students or appropriateness evidence of effectiveness needs of gifted students. of gifted education. Specifically, it emphasized the research evidence for each of research the emphasized it Specifically, of gifted education. students. The evidence with gifted and their effectiveness the models discussed to my instructional positively in this chapter contributed decision- presented curriculum accelerative more influencing me to incorporate by making process and interests. to student ability and instructional related strategies assigned from the previous edition of this text for a graduate course that cov this text for a graduate course that edition of the previous assigned from instructional various in gifted education implemented strategies and models ered programs. and curriculum models in the field overview of the most widely used program tary gifted and talented students and pursuing a master’s degree in education with in education with degree tarypursuing a master’s talented students and and gifted chapter was one of many gifted and talented education. This a specialization in VanTassel-Baska and Brown 130 METHODS ANDMATERIALS FORTEACHINGTHEGIFTED 2. 1. 6. 5. 4. 3. What modelsappeartoworkwithspecialpopulations?Why? Based onresearch evidence,whatmodelsappeartobemostsuccessful? helping curricularmodelsbecomeinstitutionalized? How can professional development in the field become more influential in ing toyourunderstandingoftheircharacteristicsandneeds? What features across modelsare criticalto employinacurriculum,accord with giftedstudents? Why doyouthinktheresearch baseissolimitedoncurricularinterventions What modelslackresearch studiesofeffectiveness? DISCUSSION QUESTIONS - Instructional Planning and Evaluation 131 Models Curriculum Education of Gifted Analysis —http://www.gifted.uconn.edu/sem Teacher Resources Teacher —http://www.cfge.wm.edu Education Integrated Curriculum Model (ICM), College of William and Mary, Center for Gifted for Gifted Center and Mary, William (ICM), College of Model Curriculum Integrated Websites Model Schoolwide Enrichment VanTassel-Baska and Brown 132 METHODS ANDMATERIALS FORTEACHINGTHEGIFTED American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1993). American AssociationfortheAdvancement ofScience.(1989). Emerick, L.(1988). Delisle, J.R.(1981). M. A. B. (1988). Delcourt, Daurio, S.P. (1979).Education enrichment versus acceleration: A review oftheliterature. Colangelo, N.,Assouline,S.G.,&Gross, M.(2004). Bruner, J.(Ed.). (1970). Brody, L.E.,&Stanley, J.C.(1991). Young collegestudents:Assessingfactors thatcon Brand, S. T. (2006).Facilitating emergentliteracyskills:Aliterature-based multipleintel Bonne, R.(1985). Betts, G. T., &Neihart, M.(1986).Implementing self-directed learningmodelsforthe Betts, G.,&Knapp, J.(1980).Autonomous model. learningandthegifted:Asecondary Betts, G. T. (1986).Theautonomous learnermodelforthegiftedandtalented. In J.S. Benbow, C.P., &Arjmand,O.(1990).Predictors ofhighacademicachievement in Baum, S.(1988).Anenrichmentprogram forgiftedlearningdisabledstudents. Baum, S.(1985). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. doctoral dissertation). Universitydoctoral dissertation). ofConnecticut,Storrs. factors relating tothereversal oftheacademicunderachievement pattern tion University ofConnecticut,Storrs. schoolstudents:Amulti-casestudy ior insecondary and enrichment In W. C.Gregory, S.J.Cohn,&C.Stanley (Eds.), Development. Belin &Jacqueline N.Blank International CenterforGifted Education and Talent back America’s brighteststudents Center. gifted children tribute tosuccess.In W. T. Southern &E.D.Jones (Eds.), ligence approach. School District #19. gifted andtalented. Ventura Superintendent ofSchoolsOffice. In A.Arnold(Ed.), (pp. 27–56).Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press. Renzulli (Ed.), Journal ofEducational Psychology, 82, mathematics andscienceby mathematicallytalentedstudents:Alongitudinalstudy. Child Quarterly, 32, Connecticut, Storrs. tion studyofdescriptive behaviors literacy. (Unpublished University doctoraldissertation). ofConnecticut,Storrs. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Identifying multi-ethnicdisadvantaged gifted (pp. 130–148) Learning disabledstudentswithsuperiorcognitive abilities:AvalidaLearning (pp. 13–63).Baltimore, MD:Johns Hopkins University Press. Systems andmodelsfordeveloping programs forthegiftedandtalented Academic underachievement amongthegifted:Students’ perceptions of The Revolving Door Identification Model:Correlates of creative produc Journal ofResearch inChildhoodEducation, 21, Gifted ChildQuarterly, 30, 226–230. Man: Acourseofstudy. Secondary programsSecondary forthegifted Characteristics related to high levels of creative/productive behav . New York, NY: Teachers CollegePress. References (Vol. 1). (Unpublished University doctoraldissertation). of 430–431.

Iowa City:University ofIowa, TheConnie Newton, MA:Education Development 174–177. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). A nationdeceived: How schoolshold Educating thegifted:Acceleration . Brooklyn, NY: Community (pp. 29–36) Science forallAmericans. Academic acceleration of Benchmarks for science 133–149. . Ventura,CA: (Unpublished Gifted - - - - -

Instructional Planning and Evaluation 133 - - - - . New . New 566–585. Contemporary Contemporary . New York, NY: NY: York, . New Dissertation Abstracts Dissertation Abstracts 22–28. Systems and models for develop Systems 117–124. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. NY: York, New Current Directions in Psychological in Psychological Directions Current (4), 45–61. Roeper Review, 16, Review, Roeper Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of Teachers Council of IL: National Urbana, (pp. 56–68). Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Creative CT: Center, 56–68). Mansfield (pp. . New York, NY: World Book. World NY: York, . New Systems and models for developing programs for the programs for developing and models Systems for the programs for developing and models Systems Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 18, of the Gifted, for the Education Journal 78–83. Identification and enhancement of giftedness in Canadian in and enhancement of giftedness Identification Models Curriculum Education of Gifted Analysis 167–208. Gifted children Gifted The nature of human intelligence. The nature 10. (pp. 126–152). Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press. Learning Creative CT: Center, 126–152). Mansfield (pp. Press. Learning Creative CT: Center, Mansfield 153–179). (pp. Quarterly, 27 Quarterly, Education Teacher Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences Frames Intelligence reframed: Multiple intelligences for the 21st century Multiple reframed: Intelligence Student perceptions of labeling the gifted: A comparative case study anal of labeling the gifted: A comparative perceptions Student Roeper Review, 27, Review, Roeper 346–351. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 23, of the Gifted, for the Education Journal . Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Gifted Association for Gifted at the annual meeting of the National presented . Paper (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Connecticut, Storrs. doctoral dissertation). University (Unpublished ing programs for the gifted and talented ing programs Learning Press. Standards for the English language arts. for the English Standards English. risk) at promise. ysis productivity. school experiences in creative Indians LA. Orleans, New Children, (2007). Project M3: Mentoring mathematical minds: A research-based curriculum curriculum minds: A research-based mathematical M3: Mentoring (2007). Project for talented elementary students. syllabi. samples, three chic theory settings, three of intelligence: Three 27, Psychology, Educational with gifted and potentially gifted learners in grades 3, 4, and 5. with gifted and potentially gifted learners 66, International, Books. Basic Books. Basic NY: York, students, cognitive abilities, vocational interests, and lifestyle preferences matter matter preferences and lifestyle interests, vocational abilities, students, cognitive performance, choice, and persistence. for career Science, 19, potential. nal assessment of gifted students’ learning using the Integrated Curriculum Model Model Curriculum learning using the Integrated students’ nal assessment of gifted and Mary language artsWilliam and science of the and perceptions (ICM): Impacts curriculum. graduate among the gifted and top math/science hypothesis: Even the threshold Education. In J. S. Renzulli (Ed.), (Ed.), J. S. Renzulli In Education. talented gifted and (Ed.), J. S. Renzulli In Education. gifted and talented Kaplan, S. (1986). The Kaplan grid. In J. S. Renzulli (Ed.), Renzulli (Ed.), In J. S. Kaplan, S. (1986). The Kaplan grid. Hollingworth, L. (1926). Hollingworth, (1996). of English. Teachers Council of Association, & National Reading International students (at of the education Improving Schoolwide enrichment: M. (2000). G. Johnson, Heal, M. M. (1989). Heal, at graduation: The long-term impact of elementary (1993). Reflections P. T. Hébert, (1983, November). T. Hengen, Grigorenko, E. L., Jarvin, L., & Sternberg, R. J. (2002). School-based tests of the triar R. J. (2002). School-based L., & Sternberg, E. L., Jarvin, Grigorenko, (1967). J. P. Guilford, Gardner, H. (1983). Gardner, H. (1999). Gardner, A. M. Spinelli, & L. J., S. L., Sheffield, J. L., Carroll, M., Adelson, T. M. K., Casa, Gavin, Ford, D. Y. (1999). Renzulli’s philosophy and program: Opening doors and nurturing Opening philosophy and program: (1999). Renzulli’s Y. D. Ford, Program Comprehension Ladder Reading (2006). A pilot study of the Jacob’s H. French, Feng, A. X., VanTassel-Baska, J., Quek, C., Bai, W., & O’Neill, B. (2005). A longitudi & O’Neill, W., C., Bai, J., Quek, VanTassel-Baska, A. X., Feng, (2013). Beyond P. C. D. & Benbow, S., Lubinski, Smeets, K. F., Ferriman-Robertson, Feldhusen, J. F., & Kolloff, M. B. (1986). The Purdue Three-Stage Model for Gifted Gifted for Model Three-Stage Purdue The M. B. (1986). & Kolloff, J. F., Feldhusen, Gifted for Model Secondary Purdue A. (1986). The Robinson-Wyman, & J. F., Feldhusen, VanTassel-Baska and Brown 134 METHODS ANDMATERIALS FORTEACHINGTHEGIFTED Moon, S.,&Feldhusen, J.F. (1994).Theprogram foracademicandcreative enrichment Meeker, M.(1976). Meeker, M.(1969). McLean, J.E.,&Chisson,B.S.(1980). Maker, C.J.,Rogers, J.A.,Nielson, A.B.,&Bauerle, P. R.(1996).Multiple intelligences, Maker, C.J.,Nielson, A.B.,&Rogers, J.A.(1994). Multiple intelligences:Giftedness, Maker, C.J.(1982). Lynch, S.J.(1992).Fast-paced highschoolsciencefortheacademicallytalented:Asix- Lubinski, D.,&Benbow, C.P. (1994).Thestudyofmathematicallyprecocious youth: The Little, C.A.,Feng, A.X., VanTassel-Baska, J.,Rogers, K.B.,&Avery, L.D.(2007) Lipman, M.,Sharp, A.M.,&Oscanyan, F. F. (1980). Latham, A.S.(1997).Quantifying MI’s gains. Kulik, J.A.,&Kulik, C.-L.(1993).Meta analyticfindingsongrouping programs. Moon, S. M.,Feldhusen, J.F., & Dillon, D.R.(1994). Long-termeffectsofanenrich Kiesa, K.(2000). Keating, D. P. (Ed.). (1976). Karafelis, P. (1986). Kolloff, M. B., & Feldhusen, J. F. (1984). Theeffects of enrichment on self-concept and Kim, 400). Norwood, NJ:Ablex. Beyond Terman: Contemporary longitudinal studies of giftedness and talent (PACE): Afollow-up study10years later. In R.Subotnik &K.D. Arnold(Eds.), Research Association,San Francisco, CA.Retrieved from ERICdatabase(ED121010) No. EC082519).Paper presented attheannualmeetingofAmericanEducational Merrill. findings for1979–80. the Gifted, 19, problem solving,anddiversity inthegeneral classroom. diversity, andproblem solving. year perspective. and talent K. D.Arnold(Eds.), first three decadesofaplanned50-year studyofintellectualtalent. In R. Subotnik & 272–284. A studyofcurriculumeffectiveness insocialstudies. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press. Child Quarterly, 36, 38–48. ment program basedonthePurdue Three-Stage Model. Johns Hopkins University Press. University ofConnecticut,Storrs. levels ofcognitiveof studentswithvarying ability creative thinking. s11165-011-9218-5 K–third gradestudents. L. (2012). Project Clarion: Three in title I schools among years of science instruction students

K. H., VanTassel-Baska, J.,Bracken, B.A.,Feng, A., T., Stambaugh, T., &Bland, . Gilsum, NH:Avocus. (pp. 375–400).Norwood, NJ:Ablex. 437–460. Uniquely gifted:Identifying andmeetingtheneedsoftwice-exceptional The effects of the tri-art The effectsofthetri-art drama curriculumonthe readingcomprehension A paradigm forspecialeducationdiagnostics:Thecognitive area The structure ofintellect: Its interpretation anduses Curriculum development forthegifted Gifted ChildQuarterly, 36, Gifted ChildQuarterly, 28, 73–77. Mobile, AL:Mobile CountyPublic Schools. Beyond Terman: Contemporary longitudinalstudiesofgiftedness Intellectual talent:Research anddevelopment. Research inScienceEducation, 42, Teaching Exceptional Children, 27 Talented unlimitedprogram: Summary ofresearch ,55 147–154. 53–57. (Unpublished doctoraldissertation). . Rockville, MD:Aspen. Gifted ChildQuarterly, 51, Philosophy intheclassroom. Journal fortheEducation of Gifted ChildQuarterly, 813–829.doi:10.1007/ (1), 4–19. . Columbus,OH: Baltimore, MD: (1), 84–85. (pp. 375– (Report Gifted

38, - .

Instructional Planning and Evaluation 135

- - - - (pp. (pp. Journal for Journal Columbus, Gifted Child Gifted Washington, Washington, 350–354. The typologies of success Psychological Science, 19, Psychological Systems and models for developing and models for developing Systems 648–649. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). (Unpublished Thinking smart: A premiere of the talents Thinking smart: A premiere Childhood Education, 75, Childhood Education, 299–314. Waco, TX: Prufrock Press. TX: Prufrock Waco, Waco, TX: Prufrock Press. Press. TX: Prufrock Waco, . . Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press. Learning Creative CT: Center, Mansfield The Schoolwide Enrichment Model: A comprehensive Model: A comprehensive Enrichment The Schoolwide Model: A comprehensive Enrichment The Schoolwide Model: A comprehensive Enrichment The Schoolwide National standards. science education National . Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press. Learning Creative CT: Center, . Mansfield 147–170. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press. Press. Learning Creative CT: Center, Mansfield (2nd ed.) ed.) (3rd Storrs: Bureau of , University of University Research, of Educational Bureau Storrs: Models Curriculum Education of Gifted Analysis Technical report of research studies related to the Revolving to the Revolving studies related of research report Technical Serving gifted learners beyond the traditional classroom Serving gifted learners traditional the beyond Phi Delta Kappan, 62, Delta Phi . Scottsdale, AZ: Great Potential Press. Potential . Scottsdale, AZ: Great The Enrichment Triad Model: A guide for developing defensible pro Model: A guide for developing Triad Enrichment The Educational acceleration: Appraisal and basic problems. and basic problems. Appraisal acceleration: Educational Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press. Learning Creative CT: Center, Mansfield Re-forming gifted education: How parents and teachers can match the match can teachers and parents How gifted education: Re-forming An analysis of the productivity of gifted students participating in programs participatingstudents gifted of programs in productivity the of analysis An 123–129. Journal of Educational Research, 101, Research, of Educational Journal ful and unsuccessful students in the core subjects of language arts,language of subjects science, mathematics, the core in students and unsuccessful ful and social studies using the theory of multiple intelligences in a high school environment program to the child program (Ed.), J. S. Renzulli In and gifted programs. stream for the gifted and talented. programs unlimited model. plan for educational excellence plan for educational excellence plan for educational excellence elementary in one English approach school. Door Identification Model. Identification Door Connecticut. of identifying the gifted. plan for educational excellence. the Education of the Gifted, 16, of the Gifted, the Education say? What does the research test scores: compacting and achievement 42, Quarterly, for the gifted and talented grams University of Connecticut, Storrs. University and atti comprehension, fluency, reading practices to increase enrichment reading tudes. elementary by curriculum compacting process. teachers in the classroom who have commensurate degrees for scientific creativity. for scientific creativity. degrees commensurate who have 957–961. Press. University State Ohio OH: The door identification model using the revolving DC: National Academies Press. Academies DC: National (Ed.) J. VanTassel-Baska Press. TX: Prufrock Waco, 13–33). Smith, W., Odhiambo, E., & El Khateeb, H. (2000, November). H. (2000, November). Khateeb, E., & El Odhiambo, W., Smith, Schlichter, C. (1986). Talents unlimited: Applying the multiple talent approach in main the multiple talent approach unlimited: Applying Talents C. (1986). Schlichter, (1993). R. (Eds.). W. C. L., & Palmer, Schlichter, Renzulli, J. S., & Reis, S. M. (1997). J. S., & Reis, Renzulli, S. M. (2014). J. S., & Reis, Renzulli, thinking skills: An critical and creative children’s young J. (1999). Encouraging Rodd, (2002). K. Rogers, Renzulli, J. S., Reis, S. M., & Smith, L. (1981). The Revolving-Door Model: A new way Revolving-Door L. (1981). The S. M., & Smith, J. S., Reis, Renzulli, S. M. (1985). J. S., & Reis, Renzulli, Reis, S. M., Westberg, K. L, Kulikowich, J. M., & Purcell, J. H. (1998). Curriculum J. H. (1998). Curriculum J. M., & Purcell, K. L, Kulikowich, Westberg, S. M., Reis, J. S. (1977). Renzulli, (1988). J. S. (Ed.). Renzulli, Reis, S. M., Eckert, R. D., McCoach, D. B., Jacobs, J. K., & Coyne, M. (2008). Using M. (2008). Using J. K., & Coyne, D. B., Jacobs, S. M., Eckert, R. D., McCoach, Reis, and strategies used J. H. (1993). An analysis of content elimination S. M., & Purcell, Reis, Pressey, S. L. (1949). S. L. (1949). Pressey, (1981). M. S. Reis, National Research Council. (1996). Council. (1996). Research National In talent. in developing programs role of summer The (2006). P. Olszewski-Kubilius, among people differences (2008). Ability C. P. D., & Benbow, G., Lubinski, Park, VanTassel-Baska and Brown 136 METHODS ANDMATERIALS FORTEACHINGTHEGIFTED Stambaugh, T. (2007). Next steps: An impetus for future directions in research, pol VanTassel-Baska, J.(2013a).Project Clarion.In C.M.Adams &K.L.Chandler(Eds.), VanTassel-Baska, J.(1998). VanTassel-Baska, J. (1995). A study of life themes in Charlotte Brontë and Virginia VanTassel-Baska, modelsfortalentedstu J.(1986).Effective curriculum andinstruction Tomlinson, C.A.,Kaplan,S.N.,Renzulli, J.S.,Purcell, J.,Leppien,&Burn, D. Terman, L. M., &Oden, M.H.(1947). Taylor, C. W., Ghiselin, B., Wolfer, J.,Loy, L.,&Bourne,L.E.,Jr. (1964). Swiatek, M. A.(2000). A decadeof longitudinal research on academic acceleration Swanson, J.(2006).Breaking through assumptions aboutlow-income, minoritygifted Strahan, D., Summey, H., & Banks, N. (1996). Teaching to diversity through multiple Sternberg, R.J., Torff, B.,& Grigorenko, E.L.(1998b). Teaching triarchically improves Sternberg, R.J., Torff, B.,& Grigorenko, E.L.(1998a). Teaching forsuccessfulintelli Sternberg, R. J., Ferrari, M., Clinkenbeard, P., & Grigorenko, E. L. (1996). Identification, Sternberg, R.,&Clinkenbeard, P. R.(1995).The triadicmodelappliedtoidentify, teach, Sternberg, ofintellectualgiftedness. R.(1981).Acomponentialtheory Starko, A.J.(1986). Stanley, J.C.,Keating, D.,&Fox, L.(1974). Stambaugh, T., Bland, L.,& VanTassel-Baska, J.(2010). poverty Stambaugh (Eds.), icy, andpracticeforlow-income promising learners.In J. VanTassel-Baska & T. Research Association,Bowling Green, KY. in Tennessee 116) Effective program populations models for giftedstudents from underserved Woolf. dents. high-ability learners (2002). University Press. USOE Cooperative Research Project, No. 621).Salt LakeCity:University ofUtah. andotherbasicresearch findings ofeducationfrom psychology of atheory through thestudyofmathematicallyprecocious youth. students. in Middle Level Education Quarterly, 19 intelligences: Student andteacherresponses improvement. toinstructional school achievement. gence raisesschoolachievement. model. andassessmentofgiftedchildren: validationinstruction, ofatriarchic Aconstruct and assessgiftedchildren. Quarterly, 25, Storrs. tivity and self-efficacy and development Symposium, Iowa City. Project Clarionfollow-up. . Waco, PrufrockTX: Press. Gifted ChildQuarterly, 30, . Washington, DC:National AssociationofGifted Children. Roeper Review, 18, Gifted ChildQuarterly, 40, The parallel curriculum:Adesigntodevelop highpotentialandchallenge Gifted ChildQuarterly, 50, . Paper presented attheannualmeetingofMid-South Educational 86–93. The effectsofthe Revolving Door Identification Modelon creative produc . Baltimore, MD:Johns Hopkins University Press. . Washington, DC:National AssociationforGifted Children. Overlooked gems:Anational perspective onpromising studentsof (Unpublished University doctoral dissertation). of Connecticut, Journal ofEducational Psychology, 90, Excellence ineducatingthegifted 14–19. Paper presented attheannualUniversity ofIowa Wallace Roeper Review, 17, Phi Delta Kappan,79, 164–169. 129–137. 11–24. The giftedchildgrows up. (2), 43–65. Mathematical talent:Discovery, description, 255–260. . Denver, CO:Love. 667–699. Roeper Review, 24, Innovation inschools:The 374–384. Stanford, CA:Stanford (Final Report, Gifted Child Development 141–144. (pp. 103– Research - - - - Instructional Planning and Evaluation 137 - - - (pp. (pp. Gifted Gifted Journal Journal 30–44. Journal for the Education for the Education Journal

Jacob’s Ladder reading comprehen reading Ladder Jacob’s Waco, TX: Prufrock Press. TX: Prufrock Waco, 7–37. Effective teaching: Current research Current teaching: Effective 817–835. Gifted Child Quarterly, 46, Child Quarterly, Gifted 244–272. Using the Common Core State Standards for English for English Standards State the Common Core Using Models Curriculum Education of Gifted Analysis 200–211. 461–480. . Williamsburg, VA: College of William and Mary, Center for Gifted Center for Gifted and Mary, William College of VA: Williamsburg, . arts learners. and advanced with gifted

Journal of , 101, Psychology, of Educational Journal Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 33, of the Gifted, for the Education Journal gifted student learning in the language arts. solidifies its impor knowledge psychological years of cumulative fifty Aligning over tance. (Eds.), Walberg & H. J. Waxman H. C. In CA: McCutchan. 33–62). Berkeley, language arts learners. with gifted curriculum effectiveness 19, of the Gifted, sion program Education. national study of science curriculum effectiveness with high ability students. with high ability students. curriculum effectiveness national study of science 42, Child Quarterly, I scho Title ability of students in elementary and reasoning comprehension reading ols. language Mary and William schools. units on of the The impact the implementation: 23, Gifted, of the for the Education Wai, J., Lubinski, D., & Benbow, C. P. (2009). Spatial ability for STEM domains: ability for STEM (2009). Spatial C. P. D., & Benbow, J., Lubinski, Wai, base. teaching and instruction: Assessing the knowledge H. (1991). Productive Walberg, VanTassel-Baska, Stambaugh, T., & French, H. (2004). H. (2004). & French, T., Stambaugh, VanTassel-Baska, & Little, C. A. (2002). A curriculum study of L. D., L., Avery, J., Zuo, VanTassel-Baska, VanTassel-Baska, J., Bracken, B., Feng, A., & Brown, E. (2009). A longitudinal study of A., & Brown, B., Feng, J., Bracken, VanTassel-Baska, the of study A (1996). N. L. Boyce, E., & C. Hughes, T., D. Johnson, J., VanTassel-Baska, VanTassel-Baska, J. (ed.). (2013b). J. (ed.). VanTassel-Baska, of C. E. (2000). An evaluation Hughes, D., Little, C. A., & L. J., Avery, VanTassel-Baska, L. D. (1998). A D. L., & Avery, G. M., Ries, R. R., Poland, J., Bass, VanTassel-Baska,