Gifted programs and services: what are the nonnegotiables?

Telecommunications Options

A final avenue for acceleration should be in the realm of telecommunications. Advanced courses can now be provided technologically in ways not possible a decade ago. School policy needs to reflect these new alternatives to teaching and learning, especially for advanced students who can profit greatly from them. Several universities offer on-line courses that are tailored to younger students, such as the Stanford Education Program for Gifted Youth computer-based program in mathematics. Other universities, such as Ball State University, beam advanced courses to rural Indiana schools through their telecommunications link. Talent search universities, including Northwestern University, Johns Hopkins University, and Duke University, provide on-line learning opportunities to students across the country. Independent study opportunities with university faculty and research project work conducted globally can now be a part of student learning beyond the classroom.

Flexible Grouping

Given this research on the positive use of various grouping models with gifted students (Gentry, 1999; Rogers, 2001), it is critical that school districts attend to this facet of a support structure in evolving programs. The range of alternatives extends from within-class flexible grouping and differentiated assignments to opportunities for special classes or schools and independent grouping options such as mentorships and internships. The use of within-class grouping is nonnegotiable for serving gifted learners at all levels of schooling. For example, at the elementary level, many classrooms are heterogeneous and inclusive. Such settings typically provide little differentiation or challenge for the gifted learner and may not be as beneficial for any group as within-class flexible grouping practices. A recent study (Westberg & Daoust, 2003) suggests that differentiation practices in regular classrooms have not improved in 10 years, even with targeted professional development in this area. Thus, appropriate grouping needs to occur to promote the use of differentiation to a greater degree. At the secondary levels, the norm for honors and even advanced placement grouping is across high-ability and gifted ranges. Consequently, the pace of the class and the opportunity for more in-depth work may be lost to gifted students as the teacher struggles to cover all of the material with everyone. Even special classes designated for gifted students require more use of flexible grouping approaches to meet the range of student needs.

In-class grouping, according to student capacity, provides teachers with alternative ways to handle certain aspects of learning. For example, differentiating paper assignments by group allows advanced students both more latitude and depth potential for their work. Differentiating readings by group may have the same effect. More in-class writing practice may be given to groups already skilled at peer critique. All of these approaches to vary within-group work can help the teacher ensure that each student receives appropriate levels of instruction.