This is NOT my work, but I did enjoy the article. Click the title above or use this link: http://www.dukegiftedletter.com/articles/vol6no1_talent2.html
Tapping Talent
Developing Mathematical Talent: Advice to Parents
Volume 6 / Issue 1 / Fall 2005
Mathematically talented students often show an early interest in and facility with numbers. For example, they may learn to tell time at age two and begin adding and subtracting long before they enter kindergarten. Anecdotes shared by parents about their precocious youngsters are helpful in identifying these students initially, but the objective information determined from an appropriate assessment is essential in determining the extent of their abilities and providing them with a challenging level of mathematics.
Although IQ testing is useful, it doesn’t provide enough specific information to pinpoint students’ abilities in math. Grade-level tests are not advanced enough and don’t accurately gauge these abilities. Students need to take an above-level test, such as university talent searches offer, to measure their mathematical reasoning. The tests are called “above-level” because they have been developed for older students. They determine what mathematical concepts students do and do not know, and this information is useful for good curriculum planning.
Options for Math-Talented Students
Based on the results of the testing, a student’s abilities can be matched to the curriculum level. A variety of programs may be implemented for math-talented students:
Enrichment within the regular classroom. The teacher presents challenging and interesting content that may or may not be related to the topics covered in the regular class.
Curriculum compacting within the regular classroom. Students who demonstrate mastery on pretests are permitted to work on more complex topics assigned by the teacher.
Independent study projects. Talented students who complete their work early or who have mastered the content presented in class can work on a math-related project on their own.
Pull-out enrichment programs. Students are taken out of the regular classroom to attend a special class. The teacher provides challenging math work but does not accelerate the student in mathematics.
Acceleration. Students may advance one or more grade levels in math.
Individualized instruction. Working one-on-one or in a small group with a teacher, a student moves systematically through a predetermined curriculum.
Ability grouping. Talented students meet together to study mathematics. This may or may not result in acceleration.
Distance-learning programs. Students can enroll in computer-based or correspondence distance-learning programs. This work can occur either in or outside school.
The Diagnostic Testing —> Prescriptive Instruction Model
Developed by the late Julian C. Stanley at Johns Hopkins University, this model was designed to match the level and pace of mathematics instruction to students’ abilities and achievements. In this individualized program, students go through several steps:
They take an above-level aptitude test to assess their mathematical abilities.
They take a diagnostic pretest that measures their specific achievements in mathematics.
The test proctor readministers items that the student missed, skipped, or did not have time to answer. The student’s
mentor then analyzes the information from this step to clarify what the student does and does not understand.
The mentor works with the student on the topics that he or she has not yet mastered. This prescriptive instruction is the heart of the model.
The student takes a posttest to demonstrate mastery.
This model has been carefully researched and shown to be extremely useful for teaching math-talented students. Since the student is required to demonstrate mastery of each topic before moving ahead, unsuspected gaps in knowledge are not a concern. Students appreciate that the model is tailored to their individual needs and allows them to move at a pace that is appropriate for their own development and maturity.
Acceleration
Sixty years of research clearly demonstrates that acceleration is an effective option for talented students. Not only are accelerated students more challenged academically, but they are more satisfied socially, because they are placed with their intellectual peers.
When students skip a grade or move ahead only in math, challenging them in mathematics every year from then on calls for long-term planning. To prevent students from exhausting their high-level math options before completing high school, they might be transported to a different building for math class, work with tutors individually, participate in a distance-learning program, or take a college math class while still in high school.
Issues of credit and placement are important. The student should be given the appropriate credit or placement for work completed at a satisfactory level. So, for example, a sixth-grader who takes a high school math course should receive high school credit or appropriate math sequence placement for the work completed.
Outside-of-School Resources
Math clubs and competitions allow students to interact with other mathematically inclined children. Competitions include the Mathematical Olympiads for Elementary and Middle Schools, MATHCOUNTS, the American Mathematics Competitions, and the American Regions Mathematics League. University-based campus or distance learning programs such as those offered by Duke, Johns Hopkins, Northwestern, and Carnegie Mellon Universities, the University of Denver, and other institutions unite exceptionally talented students with teachers who can offer them exciting, stimulating mathematics.
In addition, many familiar games have strong mathematical components. These include Battleship, checkers, chess, Connect-Four, dominoes, MasterMind, Othello, and Pente. These are all great games for teaching logical thinking and practicing mathematical reasoning.
Parents as Advocates for Their Math-Talented Children
Many schools do not have specific programs in place for mathematically talented students. It is often up to the parents to call attention to their children’s needs and to encourage school personnel to make educational accommodations for them. What can you do to be an advocate?
Become informed: learn what has worked and what has not worked for other families, find out what the research says, and so forth.
Obtain an assessment of your child’s abilities and achievements. The objective information from the testing, combined with representative work samples and classroom performance information, provides the data that school personnel need to make decisions about appropriate programming for your child.
Making changes for your child, such as moving him or her into a different classroom or getting different enrichment materials, is relatively easy. Changing a whole educational program in a school district is much more difficult and time-consuming. However, the efforts that result in short-term changes for your child may result in long-term benefits for other mathematically talented students.
—Ann Lupkowski-Shoplik, PhD
Ann Lupkowski-Shoplik is director of the Carnegie Mellon Institute for Talented Elementary and Secondary Students (C-MITES) at Carnegie Mellon University.
Monday, October 8, 2007
ARTICLE - Math - Eight considerations for Mathematically Talented Youth
This was very interesting. I can't put the link here, because it's an "active server page" and the link keeps changing. If you click the title above, you will go to the GT-CyberSource.org web site, which has a lot of information. The following article is NOT my work.
Eight considerations for mathematically talented youth
Author(s): Julian Stanley, Ann Lupkowski, Susan Assouline
Source: Prufrock Press, Inc.; Gifted Child Today March/April 1990 Vol. 13, pp. 2-4
Since its founding by Julian C. Stanley in 1971, the Study of Mathematically Precocious Youth (SMPY) at Johns Hopkins University has strongly advocated subject-matter acceleration for students who are extremely talented in mathematics. SMPY staff members have conducted many research studies showing the benefits of such acceleration (e.g., Brody & Benbow, 1987; Brody, Lupkowski, & Stanley, 1988).
Although helping talented students move faster in an attempt to find a good "fit" between their high abilities and the school mathematics curriculum is favored, it should be noted that acceleration has been misused. Too often students speed through textbook after textbook. This constitutes an abuse of acceleration and inhibits studying mathematics in depth.
Many practitioners advocate the use of enrichment because it enables students to study mathematics in greater breadth than in the regular math class. While enrichment activities may relieve boredom, enrichment alone does not provide the substantive, continuous, hierarchical stimulation needed by students extremely talented in mathematics. For example, one mathematics enrichment program requires students to complete numerous "problem-solving" worksheets. Whereas problem-solving and other enrichment activities are of value for all students, they are not the optimal means of attaining in-depth programming for extremely talented students. For these students, a systematic accelerated curriculum, balanced with appropriate enrichment activities, provides the speed and depth needed.
This article focuses on how accelerative and enrichment options complement each other to provide appropriate challenges for talented students. The following eight important points are presented for parents, teachers and mathematically talented students to consider in planning an educational program:
1. Allow extremely talented elementary students time to develop the mathematical maturity needed to study algebra. Often parents and educators contact SMPY about mathematically brilliant youths in the age range 4-11 or so and they mention having the child study algebra right away. They usually are urged to go more slowly because students that young, no matter how brilliant, are unlikely to have a thorough background and firm foundation in general mathematics, the structure of the number system, arithmetical problem solving, or even Piagetian formal operative thinking.
2. Extremely few elementary students will have the necessary cognitive structures already well enough developed enough to do more abstract mathematics such as second and third year algebra, geometrical proofs, trigonometry, analytic geometry, and calculus effectively and in ways that will give them intellectual satisfaction. They may be like the person who can walk fairly well on his hands, but greatly prefers to use his feet, when not demonstrating mastery of the acrobatic stunt. For example, a child who excels at computation may use this mechanical skill to solve difficult problems without understanding the underlying concept. Mathematics as a stunt to please parents or educators is not likely to inculcate in the doer a love for the subject. Too much too early can cost the youngster pleasure in the subject, and the nation promising mathematicians or scientists. The authors have seen that happen a number of times.
3. For the mathematically brilliant youth, acceleration may provide the best educational option. Although in points 1 and 2 the reader is cautioned against rushing into fairly abstract mathematics, acceleration may be the option of choice for the extremely mathematically talented youth. For a small percentage of children, moving ahead in mathematics and related subjects such as physics and computer science more rapidly than their classmates is the only way to provide the best fit for their educational needs.
Identification of Other Abilities
Identification of exceptional mathematical talent usually occurs in conjunction with the identification of other abilities. Some mathematically apt boys and girls have much better verbal ability, mathematical ability, special relations ability, nonverbal reasoning ability, etc., than do others. These are relevant to the pace and level of subject matter ideal at a given age. Also quite important and somewhat distinct from the above is tested intelligence ("IQ"), especially as measured at age 6-8 or so by a skilled tester using individually administered tests. The central office of many sizable school systems is usually equipped to provide achievement, aptitude, and intelligence testing, but parents, as taxpayers, may have to insist that an assessment be done. Otherwise, private, certified psychologists (who should usually have a Ph.D. degree) may be needed. This type of assessment can be rather expensive, but it may be worth the cost, especially when the psychologist helps parents and educators develop an individualized educational plan. SMPY advocates testing that results not only in identification of strengths, but also in specific educational programming.
Accelerative options may include entering school early, skipping an entire grade or advancing in math only. (For 13 ways to accelerate, see Benbow, (1979.) An excellent way to advance fast but efficiently in a subject is SMPY's individually-paced and mentor-guided program (Lupkowski & Assouline, in preparation; Lupkowski, Assouline, & Stanley, submitted; Stanley, 1978, 1979, 1986). Called the Diagnostic Testing-Prescriptive Instruction (DT-PI) model, it can be applied at any age level and provides an efficient mechanism for challenging extremely talented youth. Employing the DT-PI model in elementary school leads to the first course in algebra without undue haste.
4. The mathematically brilliant youth should be kept on a steady diet of highly satisfying mathematics at his or her appropriate level of mental functioning. This does not necessarily mean racing through the standard sequence in truncated periods of time. There is no need to study mathematics intensely every day; one weekly two-hour session with a mentor may provide the challenges and stimulation an unusually talented student needs. Pacing of this sort helps avoid a situation in which a student will not have the opportunity to study mathematics for long periods of time.
In addition to having students do mathematics continually, SMPY encourages them to seek balanced learning experiences. Activities in other academic areas (also in sports, art, music, drama, dance, student government, community service, etc.) should supplement accelerated mathematics.
5. The talented elementary student who moves ahead extremely fast in the mathematical sequence is likely to be catapulted beyond the offerings of the school system long before he or she graduates from high school. Usually, the youth who hurries ahead in mathematics will have to slow down too much at some phase, perhaps not even taking mathematics courses until at the right grade level to resume the sequence. However, if there is an excellent college nearby where the secondary student can readily take regular college courses part-time without jeopardizing his or her high school education, this may not be a problem.
Conventionally, the progression is Algebra I-III, geometry, trigonometry, analytic geometry, at least two courses of calculus, linear algebra, differential equations, probability theory and statistics, and the various branches of "pure" mathematics such as analysis, higher algebra, mathematical logic, number theory, and topology.
6. Teachers, mentors, clubs, and competitions can enrich an accelerated mathematics curriculum for talented youths. Skilled mathematics teachers can offer supplemental problems that are more advanced than typical students can handle. A mathematics mentor can enrich or supersede the youth's mathematics curriculum and provide suitable pacing. The books by Lenchner (1983) and Saul, Kessler, Krilov, and Zimmerman (1986) and issues of Arithmetic Teacher and Mathematics Teacher are good places to begin finding challenging problems for talented students.
Participation in clubs and contests offers students an enriching opportunity to develop their mathematical maturity and a chance to meet other mathematically talented students. A mathematically talented youth should consider every opportunity to hone his or her talents in competitions, from the Mathematical Olympiads for Elementary Schools and Mathcounts in junior high school to striving to become a member of the United States team in the annual International Mathematical Olympiad, and other major international events. In addition to moving ahead in mathematics and other subjects, students can study and understand the material at a deeper level than is typical. One young man who participated in the International Mathematical Olympiad said, "The whole thing has given me a much stronger feeling for math,...a very strong foundation of elementary math. Stronger in some ways, probably, than many mathematicians who didn't spend so much time in elementary math" (Dauber, 1988, p. 10).
7. Summer programs offer varied opportunities for able students to forge ahead in mathematics. The truly mathematically talented youngster whose special abilities are recognized early should be made ready by age 12 or 13 to complete precalculus--i.e., through analytic geometry--quickly and well. This may be accomplished by attending one of the regional, residential three- or six-week summer programs conducted in various parts of the country by Johns Hopkins University, Duke University, Northwestern University, the University of Denver, Iowa State University, Arizona State University, California State University at Sacramento, the University of Wisconsin at Eau Claire, and other universities, colleges, or state departments of public instruction. Following the completion of precalculus excellently, the student fortunate enough to be in or near a high school that offers a good Advanced Placement Program Level BC calculus course may consider enrolling in it, even though far younger than the typical high school senior in such courses. This usually works well.
8. There are more-advanced "pure" mathematics institutes for students aged about 14-18. Two such programs are Professor Arnold E. Ross's famed one each summer at the Ohio State University in Columbus and the excellent one at Hampshire College in Amherst, Massachusetts. They require considerable love for mathematics and eagerness to immerse oneself in it (eat, sleep, and breathe mathematics) for a long period of time--six to eight weeks. This is not for everyone who finds regular school mathematics easy, but it is the golden opportunity for a few dedicated young students.
The goals for these youngsters are proper pacing, proper sequencing, plenty of stimulation, time for planning and contemplation, appropriately planned challenges, and continual reinforcement of worthwhile achievements. These goals can be accomplished best without unseemly haste. Don't plunge the quite-young student precipitously into algebra, set theory, number theory, or the like. Let those subjects come in the natural sequence as his or her talents unfold. Take the long view that leads to steadily increasing achievement and deep intellectual satisfaction.
Qualifying Scores for Summer Programs
A student younger than 13 with no formal training in algebra who earns a score of 500 or above on the mathematical portion of the SAT probably has the cognitive skills needed to master algebra and the courses that follow. A score of 500 is the 49th percentile for college-bound male high school seniors and the 64th percentile for college-bound females. The summer programs mentioned in Point 7 usually require students to earn this score in order to attend.
Students who participate in these accelerative programs need to make inquiries regarding high school credit for the special summer classes as well as the availability and scheduling of high school courses to compliment the courses completed in the summer program. Before taking one of the summer mathematics courses, students must be certain that it will be possible for them to continue with mathematics throughout high school in the school system, or at a local college, or with a mentor. The professionals of SMPY also encourage students to supplement their mathematics education by taking courses in physics, computer science, chemistry, and biology.
References
Benbow, C.P. (1979). The components of SMPY'S smorgasbord of accelerative options. Intellectually Talented Youth Bulletin, 5(10), 21-23.
Brody, L.E., & Benbow, C.P. (1987). Accelerative strategies; How effective are they for the gifted? Gifted Child Quarterly, 31, 105-110.
Brody, L.E., Lupkowski, A.E., & Stanley, J.C. (1988). Early entrance to college: A study of academic and social adjustment during the freshman year. College and University, 63, 347-359.
Dauber, S.L. (1988). International Mathematical Olympiad. The Gifted Child Today, 11(5), 8-11.
Lenchner, G. (1983). Creative problem solving in school mathematics. Boston: Houghton-Midlin.
Lupkowski, A.E., & Assouline, S.G. (in preparation). Jane and Johnny Love Math.
Lupkowski, A.E., Assouline, S.G. & Stanley, J.C. (submitted). Beyond testing: Applying a mentor model for young mathematically talented students.
Saul, M.E., Kessler, G.W., Krilov, S., & Zimmerman, L. (1986). The New York City contest problem book. Palo Alto: Dale Seymour Publications.
Stanley, J.C. (1978). SMPY's DT-PI mentor model: Diagnostic testing followed by prescriptive instruction. Intellectually Talented Youth Bulletin, 4(10), 7-8.
Stanley, J.C. (1979). How to use a fast-pacing math mentor. Intellectually Talented Youth Bulletin, 5(6), 1-2.
Stanley, J C. (1986). Fostering use of mathematical talent in the USA: SMPY's rationale. In A.J. Cropley, K.K. Urban, H. Wagner, & W. Wieczerkowski (Eds,), Giftedness: A continuing worldwide challenge (pp. 227-243). New York: Trillium Press. (Also appeared in the Journal of the Illinois Council for the Gifted. 1986, 5, 18-24.)
Permission Statement
Permission to reprint this article has been granted to the Davidson Institute for Talent Development by Prufrock Press.
This article is provided as a service of the Davidson Institute for Talent Development, a 501(c)3 nonprofit operating foundation, which nurtures and supports profoundly intelligent young people and to provide opportunities for them to develop their talents and to make a positive difference. For more information, please visit http://www.davidson-institute.org, or call (775) 852-3483.
Eight considerations for mathematically talented youth
Author(s): Julian Stanley, Ann Lupkowski, Susan Assouline
Source: Prufrock Press, Inc.; Gifted Child Today March/April 1990 Vol. 13, pp. 2-4
Since its founding by Julian C. Stanley in 1971, the Study of Mathematically Precocious Youth (SMPY) at Johns Hopkins University has strongly advocated subject-matter acceleration for students who are extremely talented in mathematics. SMPY staff members have conducted many research studies showing the benefits of such acceleration (e.g., Brody & Benbow, 1987; Brody, Lupkowski, & Stanley, 1988).
Although helping talented students move faster in an attempt to find a good "fit" between their high abilities and the school mathematics curriculum is favored, it should be noted that acceleration has been misused. Too often students speed through textbook after textbook. This constitutes an abuse of acceleration and inhibits studying mathematics in depth.
Many practitioners advocate the use of enrichment because it enables students to study mathematics in greater breadth than in the regular math class. While enrichment activities may relieve boredom, enrichment alone does not provide the substantive, continuous, hierarchical stimulation needed by students extremely talented in mathematics. For example, one mathematics enrichment program requires students to complete numerous "problem-solving" worksheets. Whereas problem-solving and other enrichment activities are of value for all students, they are not the optimal means of attaining in-depth programming for extremely talented students. For these students, a systematic accelerated curriculum, balanced with appropriate enrichment activities, provides the speed and depth needed.
This article focuses on how accelerative and enrichment options complement each other to provide appropriate challenges for talented students. The following eight important points are presented for parents, teachers and mathematically talented students to consider in planning an educational program:
1. Allow extremely talented elementary students time to develop the mathematical maturity needed to study algebra. Often parents and educators contact SMPY about mathematically brilliant youths in the age range 4-11 or so and they mention having the child study algebra right away. They usually are urged to go more slowly because students that young, no matter how brilliant, are unlikely to have a thorough background and firm foundation in general mathematics, the structure of the number system, arithmetical problem solving, or even Piagetian formal operative thinking.
2. Extremely few elementary students will have the necessary cognitive structures already well enough developed enough to do more abstract mathematics such as second and third year algebra, geometrical proofs, trigonometry, analytic geometry, and calculus effectively and in ways that will give them intellectual satisfaction. They may be like the person who can walk fairly well on his hands, but greatly prefers to use his feet, when not demonstrating mastery of the acrobatic stunt. For example, a child who excels at computation may use this mechanical skill to solve difficult problems without understanding the underlying concept. Mathematics as a stunt to please parents or educators is not likely to inculcate in the doer a love for the subject. Too much too early can cost the youngster pleasure in the subject, and the nation promising mathematicians or scientists. The authors have seen that happen a number of times.
3. For the mathematically brilliant youth, acceleration may provide the best educational option. Although in points 1 and 2 the reader is cautioned against rushing into fairly abstract mathematics, acceleration may be the option of choice for the extremely mathematically talented youth. For a small percentage of children, moving ahead in mathematics and related subjects such as physics and computer science more rapidly than their classmates is the only way to provide the best fit for their educational needs.
Identification of Other Abilities
Identification of exceptional mathematical talent usually occurs in conjunction with the identification of other abilities. Some mathematically apt boys and girls have much better verbal ability, mathematical ability, special relations ability, nonverbal reasoning ability, etc., than do others. These are relevant to the pace and level of subject matter ideal at a given age. Also quite important and somewhat distinct from the above is tested intelligence ("IQ"), especially as measured at age 6-8 or so by a skilled tester using individually administered tests. The central office of many sizable school systems is usually equipped to provide achievement, aptitude, and intelligence testing, but parents, as taxpayers, may have to insist that an assessment be done. Otherwise, private, certified psychologists (who should usually have a Ph.D. degree) may be needed. This type of assessment can be rather expensive, but it may be worth the cost, especially when the psychologist helps parents and educators develop an individualized educational plan. SMPY advocates testing that results not only in identification of strengths, but also in specific educational programming.
Accelerative options may include entering school early, skipping an entire grade or advancing in math only. (For 13 ways to accelerate, see Benbow, (1979.) An excellent way to advance fast but efficiently in a subject is SMPY's individually-paced and mentor-guided program (Lupkowski & Assouline, in preparation; Lupkowski, Assouline, & Stanley, submitted; Stanley, 1978, 1979, 1986). Called the Diagnostic Testing-Prescriptive Instruction (DT-PI) model, it can be applied at any age level and provides an efficient mechanism for challenging extremely talented youth. Employing the DT-PI model in elementary school leads to the first course in algebra without undue haste.
4. The mathematically brilliant youth should be kept on a steady diet of highly satisfying mathematics at his or her appropriate level of mental functioning. This does not necessarily mean racing through the standard sequence in truncated periods of time. There is no need to study mathematics intensely every day; one weekly two-hour session with a mentor may provide the challenges and stimulation an unusually talented student needs. Pacing of this sort helps avoid a situation in which a student will not have the opportunity to study mathematics for long periods of time.
In addition to having students do mathematics continually, SMPY encourages them to seek balanced learning experiences. Activities in other academic areas (also in sports, art, music, drama, dance, student government, community service, etc.) should supplement accelerated mathematics.
5. The talented elementary student who moves ahead extremely fast in the mathematical sequence is likely to be catapulted beyond the offerings of the school system long before he or she graduates from high school. Usually, the youth who hurries ahead in mathematics will have to slow down too much at some phase, perhaps not even taking mathematics courses until at the right grade level to resume the sequence. However, if there is an excellent college nearby where the secondary student can readily take regular college courses part-time without jeopardizing his or her high school education, this may not be a problem.
Conventionally, the progression is Algebra I-III, geometry, trigonometry, analytic geometry, at least two courses of calculus, linear algebra, differential equations, probability theory and statistics, and the various branches of "pure" mathematics such as analysis, higher algebra, mathematical logic, number theory, and topology.
6. Teachers, mentors, clubs, and competitions can enrich an accelerated mathematics curriculum for talented youths. Skilled mathematics teachers can offer supplemental problems that are more advanced than typical students can handle. A mathematics mentor can enrich or supersede the youth's mathematics curriculum and provide suitable pacing. The books by Lenchner (1983) and Saul, Kessler, Krilov, and Zimmerman (1986) and issues of Arithmetic Teacher and Mathematics Teacher are good places to begin finding challenging problems for talented students.
Participation in clubs and contests offers students an enriching opportunity to develop their mathematical maturity and a chance to meet other mathematically talented students. A mathematically talented youth should consider every opportunity to hone his or her talents in competitions, from the Mathematical Olympiads for Elementary Schools and Mathcounts in junior high school to striving to become a member of the United States team in the annual International Mathematical Olympiad, and other major international events. In addition to moving ahead in mathematics and other subjects, students can study and understand the material at a deeper level than is typical. One young man who participated in the International Mathematical Olympiad said, "The whole thing has given me a much stronger feeling for math,...a very strong foundation of elementary math. Stronger in some ways, probably, than many mathematicians who didn't spend so much time in elementary math" (Dauber, 1988, p. 10).
7. Summer programs offer varied opportunities for able students to forge ahead in mathematics. The truly mathematically talented youngster whose special abilities are recognized early should be made ready by age 12 or 13 to complete precalculus--i.e., through analytic geometry--quickly and well. This may be accomplished by attending one of the regional, residential three- or six-week summer programs conducted in various parts of the country by Johns Hopkins University, Duke University, Northwestern University, the University of Denver, Iowa State University, Arizona State University, California State University at Sacramento, the University of Wisconsin at Eau Claire, and other universities, colleges, or state departments of public instruction. Following the completion of precalculus excellently, the student fortunate enough to be in or near a high school that offers a good Advanced Placement Program Level BC calculus course may consider enrolling in it, even though far younger than the typical high school senior in such courses. This usually works well.
8. There are more-advanced "pure" mathematics institutes for students aged about 14-18. Two such programs are Professor Arnold E. Ross's famed one each summer at the Ohio State University in Columbus and the excellent one at Hampshire College in Amherst, Massachusetts. They require considerable love for mathematics and eagerness to immerse oneself in it (eat, sleep, and breathe mathematics) for a long period of time--six to eight weeks. This is not for everyone who finds regular school mathematics easy, but it is the golden opportunity for a few dedicated young students.
The goals for these youngsters are proper pacing, proper sequencing, plenty of stimulation, time for planning and contemplation, appropriately planned challenges, and continual reinforcement of worthwhile achievements. These goals can be accomplished best without unseemly haste. Don't plunge the quite-young student precipitously into algebra, set theory, number theory, or the like. Let those subjects come in the natural sequence as his or her talents unfold. Take the long view that leads to steadily increasing achievement and deep intellectual satisfaction.
Qualifying Scores for Summer Programs
A student younger than 13 with no formal training in algebra who earns a score of 500 or above on the mathematical portion of the SAT probably has the cognitive skills needed to master algebra and the courses that follow. A score of 500 is the 49th percentile for college-bound male high school seniors and the 64th percentile for college-bound females. The summer programs mentioned in Point 7 usually require students to earn this score in order to attend.
Students who participate in these accelerative programs need to make inquiries regarding high school credit for the special summer classes as well as the availability and scheduling of high school courses to compliment the courses completed in the summer program. Before taking one of the summer mathematics courses, students must be certain that it will be possible for them to continue with mathematics throughout high school in the school system, or at a local college, or with a mentor. The professionals of SMPY also encourage students to supplement their mathematics education by taking courses in physics, computer science, chemistry, and biology.
References
Benbow, C.P. (1979). The components of SMPY'S smorgasbord of accelerative options. Intellectually Talented Youth Bulletin, 5(10), 21-23.
Brody, L.E., & Benbow, C.P. (1987). Accelerative strategies; How effective are they for the gifted? Gifted Child Quarterly, 31, 105-110.
Brody, L.E., Lupkowski, A.E., & Stanley, J.C. (1988). Early entrance to college: A study of academic and social adjustment during the freshman year. College and University, 63, 347-359.
Dauber, S.L. (1988). International Mathematical Olympiad. The Gifted Child Today, 11(5), 8-11.
Lenchner, G. (1983). Creative problem solving in school mathematics. Boston: Houghton-Midlin.
Lupkowski, A.E., & Assouline, S.G. (in preparation). Jane and Johnny Love Math.
Lupkowski, A.E., Assouline, S.G. & Stanley, J.C. (submitted). Beyond testing: Applying a mentor model for young mathematically talented students.
Saul, M.E., Kessler, G.W., Krilov, S., & Zimmerman, L. (1986). The New York City contest problem book. Palo Alto: Dale Seymour Publications.
Stanley, J.C. (1978). SMPY's DT-PI mentor model: Diagnostic testing followed by prescriptive instruction. Intellectually Talented Youth Bulletin, 4(10), 7-8.
Stanley, J.C. (1979). How to use a fast-pacing math mentor. Intellectually Talented Youth Bulletin, 5(6), 1-2.
Stanley, J C. (1986). Fostering use of mathematical talent in the USA: SMPY's rationale. In A.J. Cropley, K.K. Urban, H. Wagner, & W. Wieczerkowski (Eds,), Giftedness: A continuing worldwide challenge (pp. 227-243). New York: Trillium Press. (Also appeared in the Journal of the Illinois Council for the Gifted. 1986, 5, 18-24.)
Permission Statement
Permission to reprint this article has been granted to the Davidson Institute for Talent Development by Prufrock Press.
This article is provided as a service of the Davidson Institute for Talent Development, a 501(c)3 nonprofit operating foundation, which nurtures and supports profoundly intelligent young people and to provide opportunities for them to develop their talents and to make a positive difference. For more information, please visit http://www.davidson-institute.org, or call (775) 852-3483.
ARTICLE - Gifted Program Evaluation in Progress
This is an interesting article to read if you want to see how a school system in Andover, MN, made changes to "their" AIG program. They kept an online log. I think it is well-written. It's something you might want to read when you just sit for a moment, but not necessarily "high priority".
This is not my work. To see the article in its original context, click the title above to copy/paste this link into your browser: http://www.gifted.uconn.edu/nrcgt/newsletter/fall00/fall003.html
Text:
Gifted Program Evaluation in Progress
Darla-Gail Bohn
Andover, MN
Introduction
One of the most important, and most challenging aspects of the gifted coordinator's duties is program design. This task can be a large and daunting one. Many questions face the evaluator. How should the task of program evaluation begin? What information should be collected? Are there standards for a good gifted program? Where should the effort be focused? (see Fetterman, 1993; Renzulli, 1975). What follows are one district's answers to those questions. We reviewed current program policies and practices as a way to conduct an informal evaluation that would allow us to make decisions throughout the school year. The process is documented month-by-month to illustrate the steps of gathering input and making decisions. This small district is located in a suburb of Minneapolis, MN. It is comprised of one high school, one middle school, and two elementary schools. There is an elementary gifted coordinator (.60 full-time equivalent [FTE]), a middle school gifted coordinator (.33 FTE), and a high school advanced placement coordinator (less than .20 FTE).
August/September
The first step in the process was to look at the current program. We began with the identification process. The procedure being used consisted of a matrix system that assigned points to three pieces of information gathered about students. Parent and classroom teachers completed a very simple yes/no checklist of student characteristics. Also included on the matrix were the scores from the Cognitive Abilities Test (Thorndike & Hagen, 1993). Points were totaled and compared to the required minimum score needed for inclusion in the gifted program. Only students referred by a teacher or parent were tested at the end of first grade. The gifted coordinator had sole responsibility for identifying the students.
The gifted program at the elementary level was a pullout for identified students in grades 2-4. Identified students were clustered with one teacher at each grade level in one elementary building and dispersed among several teachers at the other building. Students in each grade level were scheduled to meet with the gifted coordinator every other day for a period of 50 minutes.
The next task was to identify the goals of the program. This proved to be more elusive. The program lacked written goals; however, a search of the district's records uncovered two pertinent documents. The first was the district board policy requiring the individual sites to develop procedures for identifying students for inclusion in the gifted program.
The second document was the final recommendation of the district-wide Gifted Education Study Group. This group consisted of parents, staff, and administrators from grades K-12. They met over an extended period, read current literature in the gifted field, and discussed the merits and applications for this district. The end result was a document that gave clear direction to the overall gifted program.
The resulting philosophy/mission statement was over 4 years old and had not been implemented. The study group provided valuable information regarding the district's focus for the program, but required updating. The opinions and suggestions of both staff and parents needed to be collected.
As part of the informal evaluation process, a brief written survey was given to all elementary teachers and parents of identified elementary students. Each group was asked to list positive outcomes of the program, as well as possible changes. Teachers were asked to indicate how the coordinator could help them in their classroom and what goals/outcomes they felt were important for the program. Parents were asked to list possible discussion topics for monthly parent meetings and to provide any other input they wanted to share. Four teachers from each building responded to the survey. Seventeen of the 56 families in the program responded.
A common thread found in the answers of both parents and staff was the positive response to the challenge the students received in the program, particularly within the math curriculum. Both groups also mentioned the positive effects on students:
spending time in small groups reading and discussing challenging novels;
participating in Junior Great Books (The Great Books Foundation, 1992) and Omnibus (Rogers, 1989) with parent volunteers; and
working with Challenge Math (Haag, Kaufman, Martin, & Rising, 1986), which requires manipulating math concepts and using different number base systems.
Several teachers wanted activities for the students to do after they completed other assignments. Parents asked for curriculum changes within the classroom instead of an add-on to an already full day. There was concern about students participating in the pullout program and returning to the classroom to make up work.
Parent responses for discussion topics were very revealing. The majority requested help with the social/emotional needs of gifted students. Parents wanted to know how they could help their child reduce anxiety, deal with perfectionism, and cope with underachievement and lack of motivation. Our direct response to these requests was to provide monthly parent meetings offering information and discussion on topics selected from this list.
While this information was being collected, the elementary and middle school gifted coordinators met to discuss the issues of continuity between their two programs. A meeting with the superintendent and the building administrators was requested and scheduled for early October.
October
The administrative meeting involved the three gifted coordinators, principals from the four buildings, the coordinator of teaching and learning, and the superintendent. Each participant was asked to respond to a few questions in preparation for the meeting. The questions included commenting on the current identification/placement process, the program as it currently existed, possible future program directions, and suggestions for moving forward in implementing those directions. Responses were varied. Three of nine participants had formal training in gifted education, each having earned a Master's degree in that field. Responses centered on the need to have a defensible identification process matched to services. Of particular concern was the need for all teachers to differentiate curriculum within their classroom. For example, some teachers believed students were spending too much time reading the basic chapter on the Boston Tea Party when they could be delving into the perspectives of the participants in the event. Their findings could then be presented to the class in a multimedia format. Because these teachers were also parents of gifted children, the need for parental communication and involvement was also seen as vital to the success of the gifted program.
Comments and concerns of the other members included everything from the desire to have good public relations within the community, to concerns with the elite nature of gifted programming, to the lack of funding, and to the unwillingness of some staff members to differentiate curriculum.
After much discussion, we developed a plan to help each member proceed in an organized and cohesive fashion. Some participants had specific concerns for their building; others were not convinced that change was necessary. In the past, parents raised concerns about the lack of continuity in the district. All agreed that this needed to change.
The identification process needed revision at all levels, particularly at the elementary level where initial placement generally occurs. All principals were asked to incorporate professional development opportunities on best practices and programs in gifted education through their site-based management teams. They were also asked to check on the status of differentiation at each site. Additionally, the elementary coordinator was asked to work with the coordinator of teaching and learning to begin revision of the elementary service model.
November
The administrative team met again in mid-November for a progress update. Professional development opportunities were being discussed at middle and high school levels, but at the elementary level there was little progress. High school course offerings were changing to incorporate advanced placement classes for the next school year. At the middle school, there were opportunities for a variety of co-curricular activities, including geography contests, spelling bees, and authors' conferences.
At the elementary level, progress was being made on redesigning the service delivery model. There were 13 identified students. One teacher chose to retain the pullout model for 7 identified students. Another teacher volunteered to use the resource model with 6 identified students. The resource model was designed to meet specific needs of a cluster of gifted students by providing resources and activities to extend and enrich grade level objectives and course materials. Extension activities were completed in the classroom, while other students worked on concepts they needed to master. In this way, the gifted program would be part of the students' day-not an add-on of curriculum that did not connect with regular curriculum. The intent was to give the other staff members a living example of what this model would look like. Six identified students remained in the classroom. The elementary gifted coordinator set aside 30 minutes every other day to focus on these resource students. Much of that time was spent preparing activities for these students to complete within their classrooms. Activities were prepared to enhance the curriculum, requiring performance at higher levels. Time was also available to introduce activities, conference with students as they worked on long-term assignments, and provide individual help with research and study skills. Classroom teachers and the elementary gifted coordinator collaborated closely on this model. The beauty of this arrangement was the flexibility it offered classroom teachers to include students not formally identified as gifted. Teachers could also exclude identified students from particular activities based on individual needs.
While progress was being made in several areas, identification for inclusion in the program was still a big concern. Several local districts were contacted to develop a good sense of how comparable districts were identifying students. After reviewing these processes, members assigned to this task made preliminary recommendations. The first recommendation was to delay the administration of the Cognitive Abilities Test (CogAT) until the end of grade 2. The elementary gifted coordinator would work within each grade 2 classroom providing whole group lessons in thinking skills and would keep problem-based assessment logs on students. The CogAT would be administered to all grade 2 students to be as inclusive as possible in the initial screening.
The next recommendation was to include the Kranz Talent Identification Instrument (Kranz, 1981) as a screening tool. This instrument asks teachers to identify talent areas in academics, arts, and motor skills. The third recommendation was to replace the current checklists with Renzulli scales (Renzulli, Smith, White, Callahan, & Hartman, 1976). The Renzulli scales offer additional information because each characteristic is rated on a one to four scale instead of with a simple yes or no. Both teachers and parents would be given instruction on how to complete the scale. The final recommendation was to involve a team, instead of just the gifted coordinator, to review each student's portfolio to determine the best match for services within the program.
There was some concern with these recommendations. Change can be difficult; it was certainly true in this situation. Over the next few months, there would be limited success with the acceptance of these recommendations.
January
We convened an advisory group consisting of teachers representing each grade level. It was a joint committee with teachers from both elementary buildings. It took a great deal of encouragement to find a representative from each grade level. Many teachers were already very busy and the gifted program was not a high priority. Eventually, the Gifted Advisory Group convened, including one representative from grades 1, 2, and 3, and two representatives from grade 4.
February
The Gifted Advisory Group met for the first time. The elementary gifted coordinator, coordinator of teaching and learning, and one elementary principal attended the meeting. The elementary gifted coordinator shared concerns with the identification process. The group reviewed screening and identification techniques other districts were using. They also studied the National Association for Gifted Children gifted program standards (NAGC, 1998). The idea of making these changes was very difficult for some, while not as difficult for others.
Within days following the initial meeting it was decided to disband the group and meet with the teachers separately at each building. Two meetings with grades 1 and 2 teachers were scheduled for March.
March
The first meeting was held at one building. With the input of grade 1 and 2 teachers, the overall plan was articulated and organized as a paragraph form. Two weeks later, a meeting was held at the other elementary building. Teachers' input was gathered; the articulated plan resulting from the Gifted Advisory Group was not shared with them. This group of teachers was extremely concerned about making any changes; therefore, presenting an articulated plan was not advisable. We scheduled another meeting with building representatives.
April
The elementary coordinator returned to the first building to present the articulated plan, using a flow chart, and provided a rationale for suggested changes. Each staff member was given a copy of the plan to review. We received very limited, but positive feedback.
May
The site-based decision making team at one elementary school approved the new identification process. Unfortunately, the staff at the other building was still very concerned about potential changes. A second meeting with them proved to be impossible to schedule. The school year ended with a split decision between the two buildings with no final determination of the district plan to identify new students.
Final Words
Program design and implementation are challenging, but rewarding tasks. Finding the identification procedure and program model that is right for your own district is vital, but it takes time. There can be many stumbling blocks along the way, both from fellow staff members and administrators. Our district is halfway there to implementing an identification process that should be more inclusive. We made baby steps in demonstrating how differentiation within the classroom can be done. We still need to work on professional development for this to be fully realized. As with any change within a school district, the key is to have administrative support and a few willing teachers who can help you model proposed changes. The ultimate goal is to provide programming and service opportunities matched to students' needs that are also linked to the overall goals and management of the district.
Documenting the progression of ideas and suggestions for possible changes in the current gifted and talented programs and services in this one district was certainly an effective method of using informal evaluation techniques to make decisions. Keeping a monthly log aided the decision-making process. Ideas and suggestions need to emerge from meetings with administrators, teachers, and parents to ensure a commitment to implementing the most defensible and appropriate opportunities for bright youngsters.
References Fetterman, D. M. (1993). Evaluate yourself (RBDM 9304). Storrs, CT: University of Connecticut, The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented.
The Great Books Foundation. (1992). Junior Great Books. Chicago, IL: Author.
Haag, V., Kaufman, B., Martin, E., Rising, G. (1986). Challenge: A program for the mathematically talented. Menlo Park, CA: Addison-Wesley.
Kranz, B. (1981). Kranz talent identification instrument. Moorhead, MN: Moorhead State College.
National Association for Gifted Children. (1998). Pre-K-Grade 12 gifted program standards [Brochure]. Washington, DC: National Association for Gifted Children.
Renzulli, J. S. (1975). A guidebook for evaluating programs for the gifted and talented. National/State Leadership Training Institute on the Gifted and Talented. Ventura, CA: Office of the Ventura County Superintendent of Schools.
Renzulli, J. S., Smith, L. H., White, A. J., Callahan, C. M., & Hartman, R. K. (1976). Scales for Rating the Behavioral Characteristics of Superior Students. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
Rogers, K. (1989). Omnibus units. Minneapolis, MN: Junior League of Minneapolis.
Thorndike, R. L., & Hagen E. P. (1993). Cognitive abilities test. Itasca, IL: Riverside Publishing.
This is not my work. To see the article in its original context, click the title above to copy/paste this link into your browser: http://www.gifted.uconn.edu/nrcgt/newsletter/fall00/fall003.html
Text:
Gifted Program Evaluation in Progress
Darla-Gail Bohn
Andover, MN
Introduction
One of the most important, and most challenging aspects of the gifted coordinator's duties is program design. This task can be a large and daunting one. Many questions face the evaluator. How should the task of program evaluation begin? What information should be collected? Are there standards for a good gifted program? Where should the effort be focused? (see Fetterman, 1993; Renzulli, 1975). What follows are one district's answers to those questions. We reviewed current program policies and practices as a way to conduct an informal evaluation that would allow us to make decisions throughout the school year. The process is documented month-by-month to illustrate the steps of gathering input and making decisions. This small district is located in a suburb of Minneapolis, MN. It is comprised of one high school, one middle school, and two elementary schools. There is an elementary gifted coordinator (.60 full-time equivalent [FTE]), a middle school gifted coordinator (.33 FTE), and a high school advanced placement coordinator (less than .20 FTE).
August/September
The first step in the process was to look at the current program. We began with the identification process. The procedure being used consisted of a matrix system that assigned points to three pieces of information gathered about students. Parent and classroom teachers completed a very simple yes/no checklist of student characteristics. Also included on the matrix were the scores from the Cognitive Abilities Test (Thorndike & Hagen, 1993). Points were totaled and compared to the required minimum score needed for inclusion in the gifted program. Only students referred by a teacher or parent were tested at the end of first grade. The gifted coordinator had sole responsibility for identifying the students.
The gifted program at the elementary level was a pullout for identified students in grades 2-4. Identified students were clustered with one teacher at each grade level in one elementary building and dispersed among several teachers at the other building. Students in each grade level were scheduled to meet with the gifted coordinator every other day for a period of 50 minutes.
The next task was to identify the goals of the program. This proved to be more elusive. The program lacked written goals; however, a search of the district's records uncovered two pertinent documents. The first was the district board policy requiring the individual sites to develop procedures for identifying students for inclusion in the gifted program.
The second document was the final recommendation of the district-wide Gifted Education Study Group. This group consisted of parents, staff, and administrators from grades K-12. They met over an extended period, read current literature in the gifted field, and discussed the merits and applications for this district. The end result was a document that gave clear direction to the overall gifted program.
The resulting philosophy/mission statement was over 4 years old and had not been implemented. The study group provided valuable information regarding the district's focus for the program, but required updating. The opinions and suggestions of both staff and parents needed to be collected.
As part of the informal evaluation process, a brief written survey was given to all elementary teachers and parents of identified elementary students. Each group was asked to list positive outcomes of the program, as well as possible changes. Teachers were asked to indicate how the coordinator could help them in their classroom and what goals/outcomes they felt were important for the program. Parents were asked to list possible discussion topics for monthly parent meetings and to provide any other input they wanted to share. Four teachers from each building responded to the survey. Seventeen of the 56 families in the program responded.
A common thread found in the answers of both parents and staff was the positive response to the challenge the students received in the program, particularly within the math curriculum. Both groups also mentioned the positive effects on students:
spending time in small groups reading and discussing challenging novels;
participating in Junior Great Books (The Great Books Foundation, 1992) and Omnibus (Rogers, 1989) with parent volunteers; and
working with Challenge Math (Haag, Kaufman, Martin, & Rising, 1986), which requires manipulating math concepts and using different number base systems.
Several teachers wanted activities for the students to do after they completed other assignments. Parents asked for curriculum changes within the classroom instead of an add-on to an already full day. There was concern about students participating in the pullout program and returning to the classroom to make up work.
Parent responses for discussion topics were very revealing. The majority requested help with the social/emotional needs of gifted students. Parents wanted to know how they could help their child reduce anxiety, deal with perfectionism, and cope with underachievement and lack of motivation. Our direct response to these requests was to provide monthly parent meetings offering information and discussion on topics selected from this list.
While this information was being collected, the elementary and middle school gifted coordinators met to discuss the issues of continuity between their two programs. A meeting with the superintendent and the building administrators was requested and scheduled for early October.
October
The administrative meeting involved the three gifted coordinators, principals from the four buildings, the coordinator of teaching and learning, and the superintendent. Each participant was asked to respond to a few questions in preparation for the meeting. The questions included commenting on the current identification/placement process, the program as it currently existed, possible future program directions, and suggestions for moving forward in implementing those directions. Responses were varied. Three of nine participants had formal training in gifted education, each having earned a Master's degree in that field. Responses centered on the need to have a defensible identification process matched to services. Of particular concern was the need for all teachers to differentiate curriculum within their classroom. For example, some teachers believed students were spending too much time reading the basic chapter on the Boston Tea Party when they could be delving into the perspectives of the participants in the event. Their findings could then be presented to the class in a multimedia format. Because these teachers were also parents of gifted children, the need for parental communication and involvement was also seen as vital to the success of the gifted program.
Comments and concerns of the other members included everything from the desire to have good public relations within the community, to concerns with the elite nature of gifted programming, to the lack of funding, and to the unwillingness of some staff members to differentiate curriculum.
After much discussion, we developed a plan to help each member proceed in an organized and cohesive fashion. Some participants had specific concerns for their building; others were not convinced that change was necessary. In the past, parents raised concerns about the lack of continuity in the district. All agreed that this needed to change.
The identification process needed revision at all levels, particularly at the elementary level where initial placement generally occurs. All principals were asked to incorporate professional development opportunities on best practices and programs in gifted education through their site-based management teams. They were also asked to check on the status of differentiation at each site. Additionally, the elementary coordinator was asked to work with the coordinator of teaching and learning to begin revision of the elementary service model.
November
The administrative team met again in mid-November for a progress update. Professional development opportunities were being discussed at middle and high school levels, but at the elementary level there was little progress. High school course offerings were changing to incorporate advanced placement classes for the next school year. At the middle school, there were opportunities for a variety of co-curricular activities, including geography contests, spelling bees, and authors' conferences.
At the elementary level, progress was being made on redesigning the service delivery model. There were 13 identified students. One teacher chose to retain the pullout model for 7 identified students. Another teacher volunteered to use the resource model with 6 identified students. The resource model was designed to meet specific needs of a cluster of gifted students by providing resources and activities to extend and enrich grade level objectives and course materials. Extension activities were completed in the classroom, while other students worked on concepts they needed to master. In this way, the gifted program would be part of the students' day-not an add-on of curriculum that did not connect with regular curriculum. The intent was to give the other staff members a living example of what this model would look like. Six identified students remained in the classroom. The elementary gifted coordinator set aside 30 minutes every other day to focus on these resource students. Much of that time was spent preparing activities for these students to complete within their classrooms. Activities were prepared to enhance the curriculum, requiring performance at higher levels. Time was also available to introduce activities, conference with students as they worked on long-term assignments, and provide individual help with research and study skills. Classroom teachers and the elementary gifted coordinator collaborated closely on this model. The beauty of this arrangement was the flexibility it offered classroom teachers to include students not formally identified as gifted. Teachers could also exclude identified students from particular activities based on individual needs.
While progress was being made in several areas, identification for inclusion in the program was still a big concern. Several local districts were contacted to develop a good sense of how comparable districts were identifying students. After reviewing these processes, members assigned to this task made preliminary recommendations. The first recommendation was to delay the administration of the Cognitive Abilities Test (CogAT) until the end of grade 2. The elementary gifted coordinator would work within each grade 2 classroom providing whole group lessons in thinking skills and would keep problem-based assessment logs on students. The CogAT would be administered to all grade 2 students to be as inclusive as possible in the initial screening.
The next recommendation was to include the Kranz Talent Identification Instrument (Kranz, 1981) as a screening tool. This instrument asks teachers to identify talent areas in academics, arts, and motor skills. The third recommendation was to replace the current checklists with Renzulli scales (Renzulli, Smith, White, Callahan, & Hartman, 1976). The Renzulli scales offer additional information because each characteristic is rated on a one to four scale instead of with a simple yes or no. Both teachers and parents would be given instruction on how to complete the scale. The final recommendation was to involve a team, instead of just the gifted coordinator, to review each student's portfolio to determine the best match for services within the program.
There was some concern with these recommendations. Change can be difficult; it was certainly true in this situation. Over the next few months, there would be limited success with the acceptance of these recommendations.
January
We convened an advisory group consisting of teachers representing each grade level. It was a joint committee with teachers from both elementary buildings. It took a great deal of encouragement to find a representative from each grade level. Many teachers were already very busy and the gifted program was not a high priority. Eventually, the Gifted Advisory Group convened, including one representative from grades 1, 2, and 3, and two representatives from grade 4.
February
The Gifted Advisory Group met for the first time. The elementary gifted coordinator, coordinator of teaching and learning, and one elementary principal attended the meeting. The elementary gifted coordinator shared concerns with the identification process. The group reviewed screening and identification techniques other districts were using. They also studied the National Association for Gifted Children gifted program standards (NAGC, 1998). The idea of making these changes was very difficult for some, while not as difficult for others.
Within days following the initial meeting it was decided to disband the group and meet with the teachers separately at each building. Two meetings with grades 1 and 2 teachers were scheduled for March.
March
The first meeting was held at one building. With the input of grade 1 and 2 teachers, the overall plan was articulated and organized as a paragraph form. Two weeks later, a meeting was held at the other elementary building. Teachers' input was gathered; the articulated plan resulting from the Gifted Advisory Group was not shared with them. This group of teachers was extremely concerned about making any changes; therefore, presenting an articulated plan was not advisable. We scheduled another meeting with building representatives.
April
The elementary coordinator returned to the first building to present the articulated plan, using a flow chart, and provided a rationale for suggested changes. Each staff member was given a copy of the plan to review. We received very limited, but positive feedback.
May
The site-based decision making team at one elementary school approved the new identification process. Unfortunately, the staff at the other building was still very concerned about potential changes. A second meeting with them proved to be impossible to schedule. The school year ended with a split decision between the two buildings with no final determination of the district plan to identify new students.
Final Words
Program design and implementation are challenging, but rewarding tasks. Finding the identification procedure and program model that is right for your own district is vital, but it takes time. There can be many stumbling blocks along the way, both from fellow staff members and administrators. Our district is halfway there to implementing an identification process that should be more inclusive. We made baby steps in demonstrating how differentiation within the classroom can be done. We still need to work on professional development for this to be fully realized. As with any change within a school district, the key is to have administrative support and a few willing teachers who can help you model proposed changes. The ultimate goal is to provide programming and service opportunities matched to students' needs that are also linked to the overall goals and management of the district.
Documenting the progression of ideas and suggestions for possible changes in the current gifted and talented programs and services in this one district was certainly an effective method of using informal evaluation techniques to make decisions. Keeping a monthly log aided the decision-making process. Ideas and suggestions need to emerge from meetings with administrators, teachers, and parents to ensure a commitment to implementing the most defensible and appropriate opportunities for bright youngsters.
References Fetterman, D. M. (1993). Evaluate yourself (RBDM 9304). Storrs, CT: University of Connecticut, The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented.
The Great Books Foundation. (1992). Junior Great Books. Chicago, IL: Author.
Haag, V., Kaufman, B., Martin, E., Rising, G. (1986). Challenge: A program for the mathematically talented. Menlo Park, CA: Addison-Wesley.
Kranz, B. (1981). Kranz talent identification instrument. Moorhead, MN: Moorhead State College.
National Association for Gifted Children. (1998). Pre-K-Grade 12 gifted program standards [Brochure]. Washington, DC: National Association for Gifted Children.
Renzulli, J. S. (1975). A guidebook for evaluating programs for the gifted and talented. National/State Leadership Training Institute on the Gifted and Talented. Ventura, CA: Office of the Ventura County Superintendent of Schools.
Renzulli, J. S., Smith, L. H., White, A. J., Callahan, C. M., & Hartman, R. K. (1976). Scales for Rating the Behavioral Characteristics of Superior Students. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
Rogers, K. (1989). Omnibus units. Minneapolis, MN: Junior League of Minneapolis.
Thorndike, R. L., & Hagen E. P. (1993). Cognitive abilities test. Itasca, IL: Riverside Publishing.
ARTICLE - Dare County Schools 2007 Growth Reports
This is NOT my work - it's posted on the Dare County Schools web site.
I personally think "showing growth" needs to be revised the minute "No Child Left Behind" is no longer in effect. How do top students who consistently score in the high percentiles on EOG and other standardized tests, possibly show "growth"? Especially for students scoring in the 99th percentile of the students tested...they can't score any higher! Anyway, here's how Dare County Schools stacked up on "growth":
The link can be found by clicking the title of this article (above) or by pasting this in your browser - http://www.dare.k12.nc.us/moxie/schools/DCS-measures-up.shtml
Dare County Schools measure up on state standardized tests
Posted Thursday, September 6, 2007
Ten of eleven schools in Dare County have earned recognition in North Carolina’s standardized testing program. Schools qualify for recognition based on growth and overall composite scores.
Students at two schools, Manteo High School and Kitty Hawk Elementary School, scored at least ten percent higher than would be required by the growth formula, earning designation as a “high growth” school.
“To measure growth,” explained Superintendent Sue Burgess, “the state administers pretests and post tests. There is a growth formula which determines if students made at least one year of academic progress during a single school year.” Other factors, such as the dropout rate, are included in the growth formula.
The schools which met “expected growth” were: Cape Hatteras Elementary School, First Flight Elementary School, Nags Head Elementary School, Manteo Elementary School, First Flight Middle School, First Flight High School, and Dare County Alternative School. “We are pleased that ten schools met or exceeded expectations for growth,” said Burgess. “Cape Hatteras Secondary was close, but didn’t quite make it.”
In addition to growth, schools are measured by their composite performance scores. At the elementary and middle school levels, the composite performance score is the average of all end-of-grade (EOG) tests in subjects at the grades tested. At the high school level, the composite performance score is an average of end-of-course (EOC) tests administered by the state. A composite score indicates the average number of students who were at or above grade level in the tested subjects.
Elementary composite scores were as follows: Cape Hatteras Elementary School – 77.8; First Flight Elementary School – 79.7; Kitty Hawk Elementary School - 89.5; Manteo Elementary School – 72.8; and Nags Head Elementary School – 79.4. Cape Hatteras, First Flight, Manteo and Nags Head qualified as Schools of Progress for having composite scores above 70 percent and less than 80 percent. Kitty Hawk was named a School of Distinction for having a composite score above 80 percent and less than 90 percent.
Both First Flight Middle and Manteo Middle Schools were named Schools of Distinction with composite scores of 88.7 and 80.8, respectively.
Composite scores at the high school level were as follows: Cape Hatteras – 72.7; Manteo – 72.3; and First Flight – 75.3. Manteo and First Flight were named Schools of Progress. Despite its comparable composite score, Cape Hatteras was not eligible for that designation because it didn’t meet the growth requirement.
“Teachers and students have worked hard and deserve this recognition,” stated Burgess, who added that teachers and administrators at the ten schools which made growth will receive performance bonuses from the state.
I personally think "showing growth" needs to be revised the minute "No Child Left Behind" is no longer in effect. How do top students who consistently score in the high percentiles on EOG and other standardized tests, possibly show "growth"? Especially for students scoring in the 99th percentile of the students tested...they can't score any higher! Anyway, here's how Dare County Schools stacked up on "growth":
The link can be found by clicking the title of this article (above) or by pasting this in your browser - http://www.dare.k12.nc.us/moxie/schools/DCS-measures-up.shtml
Dare County Schools measure up on state standardized tests
Posted Thursday, September 6, 2007
Ten of eleven schools in Dare County have earned recognition in North Carolina’s standardized testing program. Schools qualify for recognition based on growth and overall composite scores.
Students at two schools, Manteo High School and Kitty Hawk Elementary School, scored at least ten percent higher than would be required by the growth formula, earning designation as a “high growth” school.
“To measure growth,” explained Superintendent Sue Burgess, “the state administers pretests and post tests. There is a growth formula which determines if students made at least one year of academic progress during a single school year.” Other factors, such as the dropout rate, are included in the growth formula.
The schools which met “expected growth” were: Cape Hatteras Elementary School, First Flight Elementary School, Nags Head Elementary School, Manteo Elementary School, First Flight Middle School, First Flight High School, and Dare County Alternative School. “We are pleased that ten schools met or exceeded expectations for growth,” said Burgess. “Cape Hatteras Secondary was close, but didn’t quite make it.”
In addition to growth, schools are measured by their composite performance scores. At the elementary and middle school levels, the composite performance score is the average of all end-of-grade (EOG) tests in subjects at the grades tested. At the high school level, the composite performance score is an average of end-of-course (EOC) tests administered by the state. A composite score indicates the average number of students who were at or above grade level in the tested subjects.
Elementary composite scores were as follows: Cape Hatteras Elementary School – 77.8; First Flight Elementary School – 79.7; Kitty Hawk Elementary School - 89.5; Manteo Elementary School – 72.8; and Nags Head Elementary School – 79.4. Cape Hatteras, First Flight, Manteo and Nags Head qualified as Schools of Progress for having composite scores above 70 percent and less than 80 percent. Kitty Hawk was named a School of Distinction for having a composite score above 80 percent and less than 90 percent.
Both First Flight Middle and Manteo Middle Schools were named Schools of Distinction with composite scores of 88.7 and 80.8, respectively.
Composite scores at the high school level were as follows: Cape Hatteras – 72.7; Manteo – 72.3; and First Flight – 75.3. Manteo and First Flight were named Schools of Progress. Despite its comparable composite score, Cape Hatteras was not eligible for that designation because it didn’t meet the growth requirement.
“Teachers and students have worked hard and deserve this recognition,” stated Burgess, who added that teachers and administrators at the ten schools which made growth will receive performance bonuses from the state.
ARTICLE - Advocacy for Academically Talented Students
I REALLY like this article on what we as parents can/should do to advocate for our children. This is not my work. The link to this article is:
http://www.cmu.edu/cmites/advocacy.html
Text: (This information is taken from the "Advocacy" chapter of the book, Developing Mathematical Talent, by Susan G. Assouline and Ann Lupkowski Shoplik published by Prufrock Press.)
Reprinted from C-MITES News, Fall 2002
It's the beginning of the school year, and you've decided that this is the year that you are going to ask your child's school to provide a more challenging educational program for your son or daughter. Where should you start?
We advise parents to concentrate on adapting the current situation so that their child's needs are met in a timely manner, rather than trying to overhaul the school system. However, parents should also recognize that their efforts at advocacy may have a positive impact on programs provided for other academically talented students in future years. We suggest the following:
Become an informed advocate. Find out what options might be appropriate for your child now, and in the future. What resources are available to you? Become informed about organizations, individuals, books, and programs that focus on talented youth. Use your knowledge to plan a program for your child in cooperation with teachers and administrators.
Obtain an objective assessment of your child's abilities and achievements. This objective assessment will be essential to help you discern what types of programs and curriculum would be appropriate for your child. This assessment might be completed by your school district's school psychologist or by a private psychologist. Effective advocacy results from matching this objective information with the available resources within a school.
Set the tone for a positive partnership between parent and teacher. At the beginning of the school year, think about what you can do as a parent to ensure your child has a good year in school. Get to know your child's teacher early in the school year. Regularly attend parent-teacher organization meetings, open house nights, and parent-teacher conferences. Volunteer in your school. Help your child to solve problems in class him/herself rather than always calling the teacher. Go to the teacher first if there is a problem, rather than approaching the principal or superintendent first.
Include your child in the decision-making process. Discuss options with your child. Of course, the younger the child, the more you will need to make the decisions. However, by the time students are in 6th or 7th grade, they can be fairly active participants in decision-making. When the child is involved in these discussions, it is imperative to present a positive attitude toward the school. Parents can show their children how to approach their teachers and begin the process of shifting from parent-led advocacy efforts to student-initiated advocacy.
Keep good records. Take notes, keep copies of letters, and maintain a record of what has happened and the conversations and agreements you have had. Save test results (from standardized and teacher-made tests), and also save samples of your child's work (dated, with your child's age).
Your efforts to make changes for your own child may have a long-term beneficial impact on younger students. You want to take care of your child's needs for appropriate challenge as expediently as possible. At the same time, consider how your efforts may improve the programs, curriculum, teacher training for future students.
For example, "Arthur's" parents advocated conscientiously for their son to be sure that he would be challenged in mathematics. They paid for a tutor to work with their son, and they spent many hours discussing his case with school personnel. Several years after Arthur had moved on to the middle school, his parents could see that the elementary school was now making adjustments for students who came after Arthur. They realized their efforts had resulted in positive changes for many other students. Arthur's parents paid for an individualized program that eventually became a school-sponsored accelerated class for mathematically talented students who followed Arthur.
Walk the fine line between not being a nuisance and not waiting too long to intervene. Be concerned about earning a reputation of the parent who is always unhappy with the school. Balance that concern with advocating appropriately for your child. One parent realized that her daughter hadn't learned much over the past year while she was waiting for school personnel to respond to her many requests for changes in her daughter's educational program. Since the student had mastered so much of the grade-level material, she was allowed to leave the classroom to go to the library where she did most of the data entry to change the library from a card-catalogue system to a computer-catalogue system. The student's mother reflected, "Well, she did learn a lot about computers this year." However, the parent also expressed regret that she hadn't been more vocal in articulating that the program accommodation should have matched the student's academic strengths in mathematics.
If all else fails, find out about your options for due process. What are the proper channels in your school and in your district for requesting a change to your child's educational program? When requesting a change in your child's educational program, start with your child's teacher and principal. If you are not satisfied, contact the school district superintendent and state department of education with your questions.
Contact outside experts for assistance. Find out about local, state, and national gifted education advocacy groups. They generally have members who can give you valuable advice and information about specific resources and the best way to navigate the local system. For example, the Pennsylvania Association for Gifted Education (Tel.: (215) 616-0470. Web site: www.penngifted.org) is an invaluable resource for parents.
If you choose to change schools, write a letter to the school board explaining why. The central administrators of a district need to be aware of your concerns and actions.
Be willing to compromise. This is also known as "choose your battles." You won't get everything you want right away for your child.
Sometimes things won't go your way. Students may not be stimulated or engaged by the curriculum every minute of every day, but it will not harm the child if a parent does not react every time a child says he/she had a boring day in school. Decide when it's important for you to intervene and when it's acceptable that your child is in a less-than-ideal situation.
Find and recognize positive developments. Teachers and administrators appreciate being told, "Good job!" They appreciate it even more when parents take the time to put their positive comments in writing.
The Parent-Teacher Conference
Occasionally, you will need to attend a meeting with school personnel to discuss your child's situation. Before the meeting, gather the appropriate information:
Bring samples of the work your child has done and be prepared to discuss why these samples demonstrate a need for more advanced material. Include both work your child has done in school and outside of school. Consider bringing examples of "recreational" academic books your child has used, computer software used at home and information about outside- of-school programs or activities in which he or she has participated.
Gather test results and be prepared to discuss why the test results demonstrate a need for more advanced material.
Be prepared to discuss the child's attendance in school (example, child has excellent attendance) and how that might have an impact upon programming/curricular decisions.
Keep the tone of the meeting positive. For example, start off the meeting with a positive comment ("My daughter really enjoyed the group activity in language arts last week.").
Make a list of points you would like to discuss at the meeting.
Find and recognize positive developments. Teachers and administrators appreciate being told, "Good job!" They appreciate it even more when parents take the time to put their positive comments in writing.
On the day of the conference or meeting, arrive on time. Enter the conference confidently and positively. As you speak with the teacher, be specific about your concerns and give specific examples of child's behavior. Explain what you have tried at home. Ask for suggestions on ways "we" (parent and teacher) can work together to improve the situation. When the teacher speaks, show through your comments and your body language that you are listening to what the teacher has to say. During the conference, try to achieve consensus on a plan of action.
If you are uncomfortable or dissatisfied with a suggestion, offer that you would like time to reflect and think about the implications. Send a follow-up letter, make a phone call, or have a second conference.
After the conference, send a thank-you note to the teacher for taking the time to discuss your child's educational progress with you. Make arrangements for a follow-up phone call or another conference, if needed.
Conclusion
Remember that you are your child's primary advocate. Don't feel defensive about being a "pushy" parent; you're not pushing your child when you ask a teacher to provide more challenging work for him or her to do. And if you don't advocate for your child, who will?
References
DeVries, A. R. (1996). Another school year: Off to the right start! Parenting for High Potential,1(1), 7.
Karnes, F. A., & Marquardt, R. G. (2003). Gifted education and legal issues. In N. Colangelo & G. A. Davis, (Eds.) Handbook of gifted education (3rd ed.) Needham Heights, MA : Allyn & Bacon.
Rogers, K. B. (2002). Reforming gifted education: Matching the program to the child. Scottsdale, AZ: Great Potential Press.
http://www.cmu.edu/cmites/advocacy.html
Text: (This information is taken from the "Advocacy" chapter of the book, Developing Mathematical Talent, by Susan G. Assouline and Ann Lupkowski Shoplik published by Prufrock Press.)
Reprinted from C-MITES News, Fall 2002
It's the beginning of the school year, and you've decided that this is the year that you are going to ask your child's school to provide a more challenging educational program for your son or daughter. Where should you start?
We advise parents to concentrate on adapting the current situation so that their child's needs are met in a timely manner, rather than trying to overhaul the school system. However, parents should also recognize that their efforts at advocacy may have a positive impact on programs provided for other academically talented students in future years. We suggest the following:
Become an informed advocate. Find out what options might be appropriate for your child now, and in the future. What resources are available to you? Become informed about organizations, individuals, books, and programs that focus on talented youth. Use your knowledge to plan a program for your child in cooperation with teachers and administrators.
Obtain an objective assessment of your child's abilities and achievements. This objective assessment will be essential to help you discern what types of programs and curriculum would be appropriate for your child. This assessment might be completed by your school district's school psychologist or by a private psychologist. Effective advocacy results from matching this objective information with the available resources within a school.
Set the tone for a positive partnership between parent and teacher. At the beginning of the school year, think about what you can do as a parent to ensure your child has a good year in school. Get to know your child's teacher early in the school year. Regularly attend parent-teacher organization meetings, open house nights, and parent-teacher conferences. Volunteer in your school. Help your child to solve problems in class him/herself rather than always calling the teacher. Go to the teacher first if there is a problem, rather than approaching the principal or superintendent first.
Include your child in the decision-making process. Discuss options with your child. Of course, the younger the child, the more you will need to make the decisions. However, by the time students are in 6th or 7th grade, they can be fairly active participants in decision-making. When the child is involved in these discussions, it is imperative to present a positive attitude toward the school. Parents can show their children how to approach their teachers and begin the process of shifting from parent-led advocacy efforts to student-initiated advocacy.
Keep good records. Take notes, keep copies of letters, and maintain a record of what has happened and the conversations and agreements you have had. Save test results (from standardized and teacher-made tests), and also save samples of your child's work (dated, with your child's age).
Your efforts to make changes for your own child may have a long-term beneficial impact on younger students. You want to take care of your child's needs for appropriate challenge as expediently as possible. At the same time, consider how your efforts may improve the programs, curriculum, teacher training for future students.
For example, "Arthur's" parents advocated conscientiously for their son to be sure that he would be challenged in mathematics. They paid for a tutor to work with their son, and they spent many hours discussing his case with school personnel. Several years after Arthur had moved on to the middle school, his parents could see that the elementary school was now making adjustments for students who came after Arthur. They realized their efforts had resulted in positive changes for many other students. Arthur's parents paid for an individualized program that eventually became a school-sponsored accelerated class for mathematically talented students who followed Arthur.
Walk the fine line between not being a nuisance and not waiting too long to intervene. Be concerned about earning a reputation of the parent who is always unhappy with the school. Balance that concern with advocating appropriately for your child. One parent realized that her daughter hadn't learned much over the past year while she was waiting for school personnel to respond to her many requests for changes in her daughter's educational program. Since the student had mastered so much of the grade-level material, she was allowed to leave the classroom to go to the library where she did most of the data entry to change the library from a card-catalogue system to a computer-catalogue system. The student's mother reflected, "Well, she did learn a lot about computers this year." However, the parent also expressed regret that she hadn't been more vocal in articulating that the program accommodation should have matched the student's academic strengths in mathematics.
If all else fails, find out about your options for due process. What are the proper channels in your school and in your district for requesting a change to your child's educational program? When requesting a change in your child's educational program, start with your child's teacher and principal. If you are not satisfied, contact the school district superintendent and state department of education with your questions.
Contact outside experts for assistance. Find out about local, state, and national gifted education advocacy groups. They generally have members who can give you valuable advice and information about specific resources and the best way to navigate the local system. For example, the Pennsylvania Association for Gifted Education (Tel.: (215) 616-0470. Web site: www.penngifted.org) is an invaluable resource for parents.
If you choose to change schools, write a letter to the school board explaining why. The central administrators of a district need to be aware of your concerns and actions.
Be willing to compromise. This is also known as "choose your battles." You won't get everything you want right away for your child.
Sometimes things won't go your way. Students may not be stimulated or engaged by the curriculum every minute of every day, but it will not harm the child if a parent does not react every time a child says he/she had a boring day in school. Decide when it's important for you to intervene and when it's acceptable that your child is in a less-than-ideal situation.
Find and recognize positive developments. Teachers and administrators appreciate being told, "Good job!" They appreciate it even more when parents take the time to put their positive comments in writing.
The Parent-Teacher Conference
Occasionally, you will need to attend a meeting with school personnel to discuss your child's situation. Before the meeting, gather the appropriate information:
Bring samples of the work your child has done and be prepared to discuss why these samples demonstrate a need for more advanced material. Include both work your child has done in school and outside of school. Consider bringing examples of "recreational" academic books your child has used, computer software used at home and information about outside- of-school programs or activities in which he or she has participated.
Gather test results and be prepared to discuss why the test results demonstrate a need for more advanced material.
Be prepared to discuss the child's attendance in school (example, child has excellent attendance) and how that might have an impact upon programming/curricular decisions.
Keep the tone of the meeting positive. For example, start off the meeting with a positive comment ("My daughter really enjoyed the group activity in language arts last week.").
Make a list of points you would like to discuss at the meeting.
Find and recognize positive developments. Teachers and administrators appreciate being told, "Good job!" They appreciate it even more when parents take the time to put their positive comments in writing.
On the day of the conference or meeting, arrive on time. Enter the conference confidently and positively. As you speak with the teacher, be specific about your concerns and give specific examples of child's behavior. Explain what you have tried at home. Ask for suggestions on ways "we" (parent and teacher) can work together to improve the situation. When the teacher speaks, show through your comments and your body language that you are listening to what the teacher has to say. During the conference, try to achieve consensus on a plan of action.
If you are uncomfortable or dissatisfied with a suggestion, offer that you would like time to reflect and think about the implications. Send a follow-up letter, make a phone call, or have a second conference.
After the conference, send a thank-you note to the teacher for taking the time to discuss your child's educational progress with you. Make arrangements for a follow-up phone call or another conference, if needed.
Conclusion
Remember that you are your child's primary advocate. Don't feel defensive about being a "pushy" parent; you're not pushing your child when you ask a teacher to provide more challenging work for him or her to do. And if you don't advocate for your child, who will?
References
DeVries, A. R. (1996). Another school year: Off to the right start! Parenting for High Potential,1(1), 7.
Karnes, F. A., & Marquardt, R. G. (2003). Gifted education and legal issues. In N. Colangelo & G. A. Davis, (Eds.) Handbook of gifted education (3rd ed.) Needham Heights, MA : Allyn & Bacon.
Rogers, K. B. (2002). Reforming gifted education: Matching the program to the child. Scottsdale, AZ: Great Potential Press.
ARTICLE - Challenging Gifted Readers
The link to this complete article is: http://resources.prufrock.com/GiftedChildInformationBlog/tabid/57/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/184/Challenging-Gifted-Readers.aspx
I have copied the article here, just in case the link gets broken or the article gets moved (EVERY link in this article was broken - that's why I copy and/or print stuff that I think is important). This is NOT my work.
Saturday, June 02, 2007 - by Carol Fertig
Do you have a child who is an excellent reader, but is not picking up books on her own? Do you wish you had a way to help your student choose books that will enrich his life? Do you want to give a gift of a book to a precocious reader, but don’t know where to start?
In many districts, school librarians no longer exist. In efforts to cut costs, aids with little training often replace these import figures in student education. Yet librarians, parents, and teachers are so important in guiding precocious readers to appropriate choices. In order to maintain interest in reading, students often need help in finding books that inspire them.
Debbie Abilock points out in Lighting the Gifted Reader’s Journey—the Parent-Librarian Partnership (*link and text below) ways in which parents can support and encourage school librarians and how the librarian’s knowledge of books can be used to point young readers in the right direction.
Rita Soltan advises other librarians how to advise gifted readers in her article titled Precocious Readers (**link and text below). She recommends that first librarians find out areas of interest to the young person. Next, those interests should be matched to books that contain at least some of the following criteria:
Language that is rich, varied, precise, complex and exciting
A story that is open-ended and inspires contemplative behavior
A book that will leave the reader with as many questions as answers
Fiction complex enough to allow interpretive and evaluative behavior
Non-fiction that helps a student build problem-solving skills and develop methods of productive thinking
Characters that are portrayed as intelligent, talented, resourceful, and/or inventive
In Challenging Gifted Readers (***link and text below), Patricia Austin discusses reading elements that challenge strong readers, including language, structure, perspective or point of view, ambiguous endings, and content. Reading well-written books about professional role models is also important, especially if the books enable readers to view the work of a scientist, historian, activist, or other contributor to society. In addition, books with gifted protagonists help bright readers better see their own lives, struggles, and feelings mirrored in the characters. While gifted readers may not naturally gravitate towards these books, adults can certainly steer them in that direction. Austin goes on to elaborate on each of these elements and also provides an annotated bibliography of suggested books. Suggested grade levels are provided.
Bertie Kingore has some excellent reading discussion questions for young people—even very young learners in Reading Instruction for the Primary Gifted Learner. These questions will help students to think about their thinking.
What can you tell me about your reading?
What did you think was easy to do and hard to do?
What changes would you want to make?
What is the most important thing you learned from this?
What do you do when you are reading and you find a word you do not know?
When might it be a good idea to reread something?
Why do you think that is so?
How did the author cause you to infer/conclude that?
What evidence can you use to support that?
If you did not know, what would you do to get the most information?
*Debbie Abilock: Lighting the Gifted Reader’s Journey—the Parent-Librarian Partnership
Link: http://www.geniusdenied.com/articles/Record.aspx?NavID=13_32&rid=10584
Text: I was browsing the children’s section at my local Borders when I heard, “Not this—you’re too advanced for these,” and watched an earnest young mother close an oversized picture book and point her preadolescent daughter toward the teen section. As the girl slowly turned her eyes from Harriet Tubman’s expressive stare and walked toward the splashy display of edgy young-adult novels, I resisted an impulse to pull her back. To lay open those dramatic double-spread paintings of Tubman’s determined face and to read aloud the lyrical story of a courageous journey to freedom by the light of the North Star. I paused. The girl obeyed her mother. I left as she immersed herself in a mélange of gossipy girls and crossover adult titles.
But the moment sticks. For, as one independent bookstore after another closes and schools divert funds from their libraries so they can focus their resources on test failures, the reading guidance available to parents and children is more often from a paperback’s back cover than from an educator’s knowledge of the just-right book for a particular reader.
Increasingly, remarkable readers are guided on their intellectual journey by the consensus of social networks, marketing directors selling formulas novels with media tie-ins, or generic award lists. An educator’s expertise is being replaced by anecdotal opinions on Amazon, tips from My Space “friends,” mass-retailers’ display shelves of high-volume titles, and impersonal “best” lists issued by various education organizations.
Some self-sufficient gifted readers find and read books across many genres and topics while others soak up everything about a particular topic, such as dinosaurs or the Civil War. As a long-time school librarian, I’ve seen books returned all soggy because they could not be put aside for a bath, and watched a boy navigate a crowd, without lifting his eyes from a compelling book. Such independent readers rarely ask adults for help, yet they can flounder silently. They usually exhaust their classroom’s offerings within the first months of school and, without guidance or opportunity, turn to rereading favorites or to Internet browsing. While both have merit—rereading can deepen understanding and increase fluency, and the Internet does contain a variety of treasures—a steady diet of shallow, predictable reading deadens sensibilities and curiosity. Online text bytes lack extended logical analysis and are devoid of the fully developed characters and lyrical language that feed curious, imaginative minds.
The reading habit tends to decline with age. A recent national Yankelovich survey of parents and primary guardians reports that high-frequency readers (reading for fun every day) declines from 40 percent of 5-8 year olds to 29 percent of 9-11 year olds, and that the percentage continues to decline through age 17. (www.scholastic.com/aboutscholastic/news/reading_survey_press_call_2.pdf).
Aliterate gifted readers (those who can read but choose not to) are an emerging phenomenon. However, families have an important ally within their school and in the community—the librarian. In the Yankelovich study, high-frequency readers cite librarians and parents as the two most important influences on their reading choices. With professional training in children’s and young-adult literature, librarians have the expertise to match your child with just the right book. They serve as your co-advocate in today’s inhospitable climate of flawed skill-and-drill reading instruction. Unlike the classroom’s textbooks and controlled-vocabulary chapter books, which have been selected to support average and struggling readers, the library’s selection policy favors wide-ranging resources for diverse learners of all ages—an ideal intellectual playground for the highly able reader. The school librarian can be a source of information and inspiration for gifted students and their parents. Here are some tips on how you can work with the school librarian to ensure that your child selects challenging reading material at a developmentally appropriate level.
Create connections. If you are able to volunteer in the library, do it. Budget cutbacks may have resulted in the loss of support staff; your services shelving or mending books frees the librarian to spend quality time with children. If you cannot volunteer during the day, consider staffing a book fair before school, joining a Friends of the Library group, or helping organize an author visit one evening. Volunteering also gets you access, which can open doors to advocacy.
Milk the moments. When you have the librarian’s ear, describe your child’s reading preferences and ask for suggestions. If your child visualizes connections and constructions, suggest that the school library acquire adult books about Rube Goldberg, architecture, patents, and inventions. Ascribed reading levels are less important than motivation; librarians know that contraption-loving kids will pour over books way beyond their age-level. If your child puzzles over patterns and problems, look for authors like Paul Fleischman, Dianna Wynne Jones, and Ellen Raskin. Even if you don’t read adolescent novels, become familiar with and learn to discriminate among authors; hand your teenager Cynthia Voigt’s Bad Girls rather than an inferior copy-cat book on bullying or other hot-button issues. Again, your librarian can name highly regarded authors.
Value mastery. When children drive themselves to master a particularly difficult reading selection, they readily focus, persist, and make an effort for pure pleasure. If asked, even young readers may be able to articulate the metacognitive strategies (rereading, reading ahead, questioning the text) that have enabled them to understand a challenging passage. The reward is in unlocking the meaning. However, if a child is taught that the reward for reading is achieving a good grade, winning points, or receiving doting praise, then his or her effort and focus will drop when the pay-off is achieved. Therefore, parents should emphasize mastery for pleasure and be prepared to voice concern if a teacher or librarian over-emphasizes the quantity of books read or if the school institutes competitive reading-incentive programs.
Investigate enrichment. Librarians around the country have instituted special activities to serve gifted readers, such as mentoring an after-school poetry club and an in-school literature discussion program using both volunteers and classroom teachers. Anticipating the drop among male readers during middle school, still another librarian created an online book blog in which boys, their fathers, and male teachers discuss their favorite books (www.aptosjr.pvusd.net/guysread/). Your school librarian will be interested to learn about programs in other schools that can enrich the lives of highly-able readers.
Support curricular programs and services. School librarians are long-time advocates of curricular modifications such as interdisciplinary learning and independent research projects that nourish gifted students. While these well-known programs require additional teacher-librarian planning time and administrative support, even small modifications in the library schedule can support passionate readers. For example, research shows that sustained silent reading (SSR) periods of 15-30 minutes advance the motivation and skill of all readers, especially when students choose their own reading material. And, with your help, your school librarian can institute a “flexible access” period during which individual students from any class can browse and exchange resources on any day, not just once a week at library time. Five to ten parent volunteers can staff the library on a rotating basis during the first or last half-hour of each school day to facilitate open access to the library’s resources.
Develop a strong relationship with your school librarian—your goals are aligned. Together you can light the journey of your gifted reader with the constancy of the North Star.
Debbie Abilock, a consultant, speaker and author, has over 25 years experience with gifted students as a school librarian, curriculum coordinator and school administrator. She is the Editor-in-chief of Knowledge Quest, the print journal of the American Association of School Librarians, and co-founder of NoodleTools, Inc., which develops teaching software to assist students and support teachers and librarians throughout the process of library research.
**Rita Soltan: Precocious Readers
http://www.mlaforum.org/volumeI/issue1/precocious.html
Text: Rita Soltan, Head of youth Services, Baldwin Public Library (Birmingham), soltanri@baldwinlib.org
MLA Fall Conference November 7, 2001
Recommending children's literature and providing readers' advisory is a constant responsibility for youth services librarians. We take on this role in a variety of ways, from creating and producing recommended reading lists by grade level, subject matter, and curriculum needs to working one on one with our young patrons and their parents. More often than not, we are on the lookout for reluctant readers, be it children who read well but aren't interested or children who struggle to get through a chapter. However, in providing service to a complete community, we also must remember the gifted child, one I like to call the precocious reader. What criteria can we use to offer the best reader's advisory for this child? How does a gifted child learn and develop interests that we can nurture through his/her reading? Roxanne Reschke, Consultant in Learning Services Differentiated Instruction for Oakland Schools provided a clear overview on the learning needs of the gifted child and strategies for selecting literature for this part of the community we serve.
It must first be noted that Michigan, unlike other states, does not mandate gifted education in its public schools. This eliminates the requirement to identify gifted students and has created three islands of thought on how to approach or address these children in a curriculum. The first "island" is that of doing nothing because these children will make it by means of their own abilities, regardless. The second "island" is that of using the standardized IQ exam for identification where scoring beyond a certain point level is a requirement. The third "island" involves the understanding of what Howard Gardner calls "the theory of multiple intelligences" - that we can possess intelligence in eight different ways: verbally, mathematically or through logic, visually, kinetically, musically, through an understanding of nature, and with two emotional intelligences: self-intelligence and interpersonal intelligence.
Gifted children possess certain characteristics that will affect their reading interests and needs. They generally show a wide overall knowledge or some advanced interest in one or more fields. They very often possess a large vocabulary, read well and widely, and display a long attention span. This fosters exposure to a breadth of reading material that will develop critical reading skills and the opportunity to pursue a subject in depth. Gifted kids tend to be more sensitive and feel more comfortable with their true peers, people not necessarily of the same age but of the same interests. It is also important to remember that while most gifted children share the characteristics mentioned, each child is also unique in terms of experience, interests, personality, and expression of abilities.
So what can we as children's librarians do specifically for the precocious readers and parents who enter our libraries? First, try to get an idea of what the child's interests are as you would with all readers' advisory requests. Next, try to incorporate some of the following criteria for selecting literature for a gifted reader.
Language should be rich, varied, precise, complex and exciting
Story should be open-ended and inspire contemplative behavior
Book should leave the reader with as many questions as answers
Fiction should be complex enough to allow interpretive and evaluative behavior
Non-fiction should help students build problem-solving skills and develop methods of productive thinking
Also remember that these youngsters love to read about people to whom they can relate. Characters that are portrayed as intelligent, talented, resourceful, and/or inventive within a well-developed plot sequence will be more intriguing to the child. Biographies of people with the same interests and who were considered gifted before and during their accomplished lives are also good suggestions. Try a wide variety of non-fiction exposure for the child interested in an in-depth study of a topic. When appropriate, suggest participation in discussion groups either through the library or their community, or by joining an author study group. In addition, websites designed for the gifted and talented and their educators can provide suggested reading lists, such as that at the Center for Talented Youth at Johns Hopkins University (http://www.jhu.edu/~gifted/).
Suggested Bibliography
Baskin, B.H., & Harris, H. (1980). Books for the gifted child. New York: R.R. Bowker.
Center for Talented Youth at Johns Hopkins University (http://www.jhu.edu/~gifted/).
Clark, B. (1997). Growing up gifted. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.
Gardner, H. (1993). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. New York: Basic Books.
Gardner, H. (1999). Intelligence reframed: Multiple intelligences for the 21st century. New York: Basic Books.
Hauser, P., & Nelson, G.A. Books for the gifted child (Vol. 2). New York: R.R. Bowker.
National Research Center for Gifted & Talented at University of Connecticut (http://www.gifted.uconn.edu/nrcgt.html).
***Patricia Austin: Challenging Gifted Readers
http://www.ala.org/ala/booklinksbucket/giftedreaders.pdf
Text: Gifted children tend to live in a world of ideas. They often have amazing stores of knowledge that leave adults asking, “Where did you learn that?” Chances are they learned it from television, the Internet, and from books. Several elements are at play in a book that will challenge a gifted child. Those elements include language, structure, perspective or point of view, ambiguous endings, and content. Books that provide professional role models and books with gifted protagonists may also hold appeal for the bright child.
Children will not necessarily gravitate toward books that contain these elements, however. Teachers, parents, and librarians often need to steer young people toward books that will cognitively challenge them. In evaluating language as a criterion for books for gifted readers, the vocabulary should be rich, precise, and varied. When considering structure, the challenging book does not necessarily go from beginning to middle to end. Rather, time sequences may be juggled, and the process of reading becomes the art of constructing the whole from the puzzle pieces provided.
Perspective or point of view can offer challenges with gifted children will want to provide them with professional role models, especially pertinent in the areas of science and history. Reading well-written accounts that enable readers to have an inside view of the work of a scientist, historian, or activist may open doors for their future.
Besides titles with role models for potential future occupations, gifted children need to read books with gifted protagonists. Although some of these titles are not difficult to read from a structural or language standpoint, they will nonetheless attract bright readers who may see their own lives, struggles, and feelings mirrored in the characters. What is important to acknowledge is that good books are good books.
(You can copy/paste the link into your browser to see the books she recommends)
****Bertie Kingore: Instruction for the Primary Gifted Learner
http://www.bertiekingore.com/readinginstruction.htm
Text: Differentiating reading instruction to match the individual differences and readiness levels of all children is a demanding task facing teachers. Advanced and gifted readers have the ability to read beyond grade level, and thus, they risk receiving less instructional attention when concerned teachers struggle to meet the needs of students performing below grade level. While it is critical that all children receive the support necessary to read at least at grade level, students who have achieved this goal must be challenged to continue developing advanced proficiencies. We would be remiss if we failed to make appropriate provisions to accommodate the needs of at-risk readers. We are equally remiss if we do not offer appropriate instructional differences that respond to the needs of gifted learners.
Teachers require support and strategies to challenge advanced readers at their highest readiness level and most appropriate pace within the diversity of a classroom that includes a wide range of abilities. The Advanced Academic Division of the Texas Education Agency created a task force to investigate the reading needs of gifted students and produced a publication, Reading Strategies for Advanced Primary Readers, designed to provide teachers with alternatives and replacement tasks to use in differentiating lessons for advanced readers. This book of interactive, practical strategies includes compacting, tiered assignments, flexible grouping, graphic organizers, thinking prompts, and vocabulary techniques assembled from teaching experiences based upon research and responses to the nature and needs of gifted learners. (Contact Evelyn Hiatt or Ann Wink at for more information about the process or materials from this reading initiative.) This article incorporates some of the recommendations of that task force.
For decades, educators assumed that children who read early or at advanced levels had been pushed by a well-intending adult.The accompanying conventional wisdom has been that these students plateau and read at grade level by third or fourth grade. Indeed, advanced readers who are limited to a grade-level reading program can regress in their pace of progress. However, when advanced readers are taught with resources and instruction commensurate with their needs and abilities, regression need not take place. By eliminating work on skills already mastered and progressing through the language arts curriculum at an accelerated pace, students generally continued to extend their reading proficiency (Gentry, 1999; Kulik & Kulik, 1996).
The lack of challenging materials is one factor that discourages the continued reading development of advanced readers. However bright students may be, they are less likely to demonstrate advanced or gifted performance if learning experiences are limited to the regular, grade-level reading curriculum. Duke (2000) found informational texts almost nonexistent in first grade classrooms, yet gifted readers demonstrate a voracious appetite for nonfiction. Chall and Conard (1991) continue to research the match of text difficulty to reader readiness. They found that the reading texts for advanced readers "...provided little or no challenge, since they were matched to students' grade placements, not their reading levels." Chall, who also researched text difficulty in 1967 and 1983, noted that "This practice of using grade-level reading textbooks for those who read two or more grades above the norm has changed little through the years, although it has been repeatedly questioned" (111).
Another factor that discourages the continued reading development of advanced readers is educators' attitudes regarding gifted students right and need to learn differently. Adjusting instruction to match the needs of gifted readers involves more than flexibility in methods and materials; it requires a belief that each child has the right to progress as rapidly as he or she is capable. Teachers must be committed to responding to the reading interests and needs of learners that extend beyond grade level. Indeed, Jackson and Roller (1993) commented that the most sophisticated, enthusiastic, and precocious readers are those children who have driven their parents and teachers to keep up with them. Consider the Staff Discussion Questions posed here. The insuing information may prove enlightening and productive toward change.
Staff Discussion Questions: Advanced Readers
Schools determined to meet the needs of their brightest readers may find these questions a useful focus when assessing attitudes and most appropriate strategies.
1. What does the term "advanced reader" or "gifted reader" mean to you?
2. How do we identify advanced readers or advanced potential in reading?
3. What instructional needs do you think are unique to advanced children?
4. How do we challenge advanced children academically in this school?
5. Which social and emotional factors are crucial to consider when challenging advanced readers?
6. What are the classroom management implications?
7. What grouping considerations do we need to address?
8. What human and material resources can we draw upon?
9. What additional resources are needed to ease implementation?
10. How might we appropriately inform and involve parents of advanced readers in this learning partnership?
Assessment
Assessment is a key component when instructing advanced readers. Assessment guides advanced instructional objectives and documents that an appropratie pace and level of learning has occurred. Reading instruction that matches the individual differences and readiness levels of all children involves preassessment, authentic analysis of reading comprehension, students' self-assessments of learning, and the development of portfolio products that substantiate advanced performance.
Preassessment. Preassessment is vital when addressing advanced reading needs. Results from preassessments must be employed to guide teachers' use of curriculum compacting, tiered assignments, and flexible groups. Preassessment is needed to accomplish the following:
• Determine students' instructional reading levels and skill needs.
• Group students flexibly by readiness and the skills that need to be learned.
• Analyze students' application of reading strategies.
• Provide information for selecting and pacing appropriate instructional materials.
Types of assessment that can be used as preassessments are:
• Checklists,
• Interest inventories,
• Observations,
• Performance tasks,
• Process interviews,
• Reading tests,
• Records of independent reading,
• Running records,
• Students' self-evaluations,
• Teachers'-selected reading samples, and
• Writing samples.
Reading comprehension. Comprehension of the gifted primary reader should largely be assessed authentically. A test in which students list the name of the main character and bubble-in the main idea limits the gifted student's opportunities to demonstrate more advanced interpretations. Comprehension tasks are more likely to engage high-level thinking when they require students to generate responses rather than choose among descriptors, as in a forced-choice response. Oral summaries via tape recorders, creation of a hyper-studio stack for use by other students, reading/writing logs, and other creative, open-ended options provide broader opportunities to demonstrate comprehension depth and complexity.
Metacognition. As children read in school, they need to be guided in their development of metacognitive or self-monitoring strategies so that these important skills become an internalized part of their regular reading behavior (Cecil, 1995). Metacognition is referred to as thinking about thinking. It invites children to bring their thinking to a conscious level and provides a window that increases adults' understanding of students' behaviors. A parent reported that her gifted second-grade daughter did not want to participate in a discussion about a book she had immensely enjoyed, because "I have already discussed it with myself." Since gifted readers are so consciously involved in introspection, teachers should continually analyze students' behaviors and talk with them to make sense of what is occurring in learning situations. (Abilock, 1999)
Teachers prompt metacognitive responses through reflective questions, such as the following. Children respond orally to these metacognitive questions or write brief responses to explain their thinking. The last four questions approach a more complex interpretation particularly appropriate for advanced and gifted students.
Metacognitive Questions
• What can you tell me about your reading?
• What did you think was easy to do and hard to do?
• What changes would you want to make?
• What is the most important thing you learned from this?
• What do you do when you are reading and you find a word you do not know?
• When might it be a good idea to reread something?
• Why do you think that is so?
• How did the author cause you to infer/conclude that?
• What evidence can you use to support that?
• If you did not know, what would you do to get the most information?
Self-assessment through rubrics. Rubrics increases students' responsibility for their own learning when they assess their work before it is graded or shared with others. Rubrics are guidelines to quality. They provide a clearer view of the merits and demerits of students' work than grades alone can communicate. Rubrics show students how they are responsible for the grades they earn rather than to continue to view grades as something someone gives them.
The criteria on a rubric should inform students what attributes to include in a product to demonstrate their understanding of the information they acquire. Each level should communicate to students what to do to achieve at a higher level. Criteria must accent content rather than just focus on appearance and how to complete the product. With advanced and gifted learners, the emphasis should include depth and complexity, as exemplified by the following chart. Teachers fill in their preferred grade scale or an evaluation scale, such as less than expected, appropriate work, very well done, and outstanding work as the level of proficiency develops from low to higher.
Complexity
Too simple or not appropriate
Simple information; limited critical thinking
Information showscritical thinking; compares and contrasts
Beyond expectations; analyzes from multiple points of view
Content depth
Needs more information or more accurate information
Needs to add depth or elaboration
Covers topic well; develops information beyond facts and details
Precise; in-depth; supports content
Teachers continue to be pleasantly surprised at the accuracy of students' self-assessments. When clear targets are provided through rubrics, most students understand what to do to achieve. After modeling and successful experiences with multiple rubrics, some gifted learners may be able to develop their own rubrics and other methods to assess their independent reading and study projects.
Portfolios. Portfolios offer a concrete record of the development of students' talents and achievements during a year or more. In classrooms where all students develop portfolios, the portfolio process enables each student to be noticed for the pace of learning growth and the level of products he or she produces. In this manner, portfolios increase inclusion instead of exclusion by providing multiple opportunities for children from every population to demonstrate talents and gifted potential. Portfolio assessment allows schools to honor the diversity of students and discover the strengths of each learner.
Primary-aged children can learn to be responsible for organizing and managing a portfolio of their work that documents agreed-upon criteria. Children learn to file their selected work in the back of their portfolio so it approximates a chronological order and clarifies growth over time. Increasing emphasis on students' self-reflections and making judgments about their products is one of the values of portfolios for all children.
Values of Portfolios for Advanced and Gifted Children
• Products can be assessed for a level of depth and complexity appropriate for advanced-level products.
• Products can demonstrate all areas of giftedness.
• The portfolio can be shared with parents or other professionals to document the growth and achievements of gifted students.
• Portfolios provide examples of superior work for gifted students to share among themselves as models to challenge ever-increasing levels of excellence.
However, portfolios will not document achievements of advanced and gifted children if they are limited to grade-level tasks. Only to the degree that portfolios include children's highest levels of performance on a wide array of challenging, beyond grade-level tasks can the portfolio process substantiate gifted-level work. Negotiate together a short list of response products advanced students can select among to demonstrate their interpretation and understanding when they finish reading fiction or nonfiction text.
Gifted Readers Like...
A classic study by Dole and Adams (1983), surveyed gifted students to elicit their perceptions of the most important attributes of good reading materials. A summary of those findings is included here.
• Sophisticated beginning-to-read books
• Nuanced language
• Multidimensional characters
• Visually inventive picture books
• Playful thinking
• Unusual connections; finding patterns and parallels within and among books
• Abstractions and analogies
• A blend of fantasy and non-fiction
• Extraordinary quantities of information about a favorite topic
• Books about gifted children
Use this information as a guide to prepare questions for surveying gifted students in your class or even all of the gifted students in your school. What do they most like or dislike about reading? What do they most want in books and stories? What makes them pick up a book and want to read it? We can better customize reading instruction to challenge advanced readiness levels and motivate gifted learners when we understand how to more closely match their preferences and interest.
The result of ignoring gifted readers is educationally and emotionally unjust to these children. The Gifted Reader's Bill of Rights is posed here to prompt your thinking about the reading rights and needs of gifted students.
The Gifted Reader's
Bill of Rights
The right to read at a pace and level appropriate to readiness without regard to grade placement.
The right to discuss interpretations, issues, and insights with intellectual peers.
The right to reread many books and not finish every book.
The right to use reading to explore new and challenging information and grow intellectually.
The right for time to pursue a self-selected topic in depth through reading and writing.
The right to encounter and apply increasingly advanced vocabulary, word study, and concepts.
The right to guidance rather than dictation of what is good literature and how to find the best.
The right to read several books at the same time.
The right to discuss but not have to defend reading choice and taste.
The right to be excused from material already learned.
___________ References ___________
Abilock, D. (1999). Librarians and gifted readers. Knowledge Quest, 27, 30-35.
Cecil, N. (1995). The art of inquiry: Questioning strategies for K-6 classrooms. Winnipeg, MB, Canada: Peguin Publishers.
Chall, J. & Conard, W. (1991). Should textbooks challenge students? The case for easier or harder textbooks. New York: Teachers College Press.
Dole, J. & Adams, P. (1983). Reading curriculum for gifted readers: A survey. Gifted Child Quarterly, 27.
Duke, N. (2000). 3.6 minutes per day: The scarcity of international texts in first grade. Reading Research Quarterly, 35, 202-224.
Gentry, M. (1999). Promoting student achievement and exemplary classroom practices through cluster grouping: A research-based alternative to heterogeneous elementary classrooms. Storrs, CT: The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented.
Kingore, B., Ed. (2002). Reading Strategies for Advanced Primary Readers. Austin: Texas Educational Agency. In press.
Kingore, B. (2002). Assessment: Time-saving procedures for busy teachers, 3rd ed. Austin: Professional Associates Publishing.
Kulik, J. & Kulik, C. (1996). Ability grouping and gifted students. In Colangelo, N. & Davis, G., Eds. Handbook of gifted education, 2nd ed. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Bibliographies of Books for Gifted Readers
Halstead, J. (2002). Some of my best friends are books, 2nd ed. Dayton, OH: Ohio Psychology Press.
Kingore, B. (2001). Gifted kids, gifted characters, & great books. Gifted Child Today, 24 (1), 30-32.
Polette, N. (2001). Non fiction in the primary grades. Marion, IL: Pieces of Learning.
Polette, N. (2000). Gifted books, gifted readers. Englewood, CO: Libraries Unlimited, Inc.
I have copied the article here, just in case the link gets broken or the article gets moved (EVERY link in this article was broken - that's why I copy and/or print stuff that I think is important). This is NOT my work.
Saturday, June 02, 2007 - by Carol Fertig
Do you have a child who is an excellent reader, but is not picking up books on her own? Do you wish you had a way to help your student choose books that will enrich his life? Do you want to give a gift of a book to a precocious reader, but don’t know where to start?
In many districts, school librarians no longer exist. In efforts to cut costs, aids with little training often replace these import figures in student education. Yet librarians, parents, and teachers are so important in guiding precocious readers to appropriate choices. In order to maintain interest in reading, students often need help in finding books that inspire them.
Debbie Abilock points out in Lighting the Gifted Reader’s Journey—the Parent-Librarian Partnership (*link and text below) ways in which parents can support and encourage school librarians and how the librarian’s knowledge of books can be used to point young readers in the right direction.
Rita Soltan advises other librarians how to advise gifted readers in her article titled Precocious Readers (**link and text below). She recommends that first librarians find out areas of interest to the young person. Next, those interests should be matched to books that contain at least some of the following criteria:
Language that is rich, varied, precise, complex and exciting
A story that is open-ended and inspires contemplative behavior
A book that will leave the reader with as many questions as answers
Fiction complex enough to allow interpretive and evaluative behavior
Non-fiction that helps a student build problem-solving skills and develop methods of productive thinking
Characters that are portrayed as intelligent, talented, resourceful, and/or inventive
In Challenging Gifted Readers (***link and text below), Patricia Austin discusses reading elements that challenge strong readers, including language, structure, perspective or point of view, ambiguous endings, and content. Reading well-written books about professional role models is also important, especially if the books enable readers to view the work of a scientist, historian, activist, or other contributor to society. In addition, books with gifted protagonists help bright readers better see their own lives, struggles, and feelings mirrored in the characters. While gifted readers may not naturally gravitate towards these books, adults can certainly steer them in that direction. Austin goes on to elaborate on each of these elements and also provides an annotated bibliography of suggested books. Suggested grade levels are provided.
Bertie Kingore has some excellent reading discussion questions for young people—even very young learners in Reading Instruction for the Primary Gifted Learner. These questions will help students to think about their thinking.
What can you tell me about your reading?
What did you think was easy to do and hard to do?
What changes would you want to make?
What is the most important thing you learned from this?
What do you do when you are reading and you find a word you do not know?
When might it be a good idea to reread something?
Why do you think that is so?
How did the author cause you to infer/conclude that?
What evidence can you use to support that?
If you did not know, what would you do to get the most information?
*Debbie Abilock: Lighting the Gifted Reader’s Journey—the Parent-Librarian Partnership
Link: http://www.geniusdenied.com/articles/Record.aspx?NavID=13_32&rid=10584
Text: I was browsing the children’s section at my local Borders when I heard, “Not this—you’re too advanced for these,” and watched an earnest young mother close an oversized picture book and point her preadolescent daughter toward the teen section. As the girl slowly turned her eyes from Harriet Tubman’s expressive stare and walked toward the splashy display of edgy young-adult novels, I resisted an impulse to pull her back. To lay open those dramatic double-spread paintings of Tubman’s determined face and to read aloud the lyrical story of a courageous journey to freedom by the light of the North Star. I paused. The girl obeyed her mother. I left as she immersed herself in a mélange of gossipy girls and crossover adult titles.
But the moment sticks. For, as one independent bookstore after another closes and schools divert funds from their libraries so they can focus their resources on test failures, the reading guidance available to parents and children is more often from a paperback’s back cover than from an educator’s knowledge of the just-right book for a particular reader.
Increasingly, remarkable readers are guided on their intellectual journey by the consensus of social networks, marketing directors selling formulas novels with media tie-ins, or generic award lists. An educator’s expertise is being replaced by anecdotal opinions on Amazon, tips from My Space “friends,” mass-retailers’ display shelves of high-volume titles, and impersonal “best” lists issued by various education organizations.
Some self-sufficient gifted readers find and read books across many genres and topics while others soak up everything about a particular topic, such as dinosaurs or the Civil War. As a long-time school librarian, I’ve seen books returned all soggy because they could not be put aside for a bath, and watched a boy navigate a crowd, without lifting his eyes from a compelling book. Such independent readers rarely ask adults for help, yet they can flounder silently. They usually exhaust their classroom’s offerings within the first months of school and, without guidance or opportunity, turn to rereading favorites or to Internet browsing. While both have merit—rereading can deepen understanding and increase fluency, and the Internet does contain a variety of treasures—a steady diet of shallow, predictable reading deadens sensibilities and curiosity. Online text bytes lack extended logical analysis and are devoid of the fully developed characters and lyrical language that feed curious, imaginative minds.
The reading habit tends to decline with age. A recent national Yankelovich survey of parents and primary guardians reports that high-frequency readers (reading for fun every day) declines from 40 percent of 5-8 year olds to 29 percent of 9-11 year olds, and that the percentage continues to decline through age 17. (www.scholastic.com/aboutscholastic/news/reading_survey_press_call_2.pdf).
Aliterate gifted readers (those who can read but choose not to) are an emerging phenomenon. However, families have an important ally within their school and in the community—the librarian. In the Yankelovich study, high-frequency readers cite librarians and parents as the two most important influences on their reading choices. With professional training in children’s and young-adult literature, librarians have the expertise to match your child with just the right book. They serve as your co-advocate in today’s inhospitable climate of flawed skill-and-drill reading instruction. Unlike the classroom’s textbooks and controlled-vocabulary chapter books, which have been selected to support average and struggling readers, the library’s selection policy favors wide-ranging resources for diverse learners of all ages—an ideal intellectual playground for the highly able reader. The school librarian can be a source of information and inspiration for gifted students and their parents. Here are some tips on how you can work with the school librarian to ensure that your child selects challenging reading material at a developmentally appropriate level.
Create connections. If you are able to volunteer in the library, do it. Budget cutbacks may have resulted in the loss of support staff; your services shelving or mending books frees the librarian to spend quality time with children. If you cannot volunteer during the day, consider staffing a book fair before school, joining a Friends of the Library group, or helping organize an author visit one evening. Volunteering also gets you access, which can open doors to advocacy.
Milk the moments. When you have the librarian’s ear, describe your child’s reading preferences and ask for suggestions. If your child visualizes connections and constructions, suggest that the school library acquire adult books about Rube Goldberg, architecture, patents, and inventions. Ascribed reading levels are less important than motivation; librarians know that contraption-loving kids will pour over books way beyond their age-level. If your child puzzles over patterns and problems, look for authors like Paul Fleischman, Dianna Wynne Jones, and Ellen Raskin. Even if you don’t read adolescent novels, become familiar with and learn to discriminate among authors; hand your teenager Cynthia Voigt’s Bad Girls rather than an inferior copy-cat book on bullying or other hot-button issues. Again, your librarian can name highly regarded authors.
Value mastery. When children drive themselves to master a particularly difficult reading selection, they readily focus, persist, and make an effort for pure pleasure. If asked, even young readers may be able to articulate the metacognitive strategies (rereading, reading ahead, questioning the text) that have enabled them to understand a challenging passage. The reward is in unlocking the meaning. However, if a child is taught that the reward for reading is achieving a good grade, winning points, or receiving doting praise, then his or her effort and focus will drop when the pay-off is achieved. Therefore, parents should emphasize mastery for pleasure and be prepared to voice concern if a teacher or librarian over-emphasizes the quantity of books read or if the school institutes competitive reading-incentive programs.
Investigate enrichment. Librarians around the country have instituted special activities to serve gifted readers, such as mentoring an after-school poetry club and an in-school literature discussion program using both volunteers and classroom teachers. Anticipating the drop among male readers during middle school, still another librarian created an online book blog in which boys, their fathers, and male teachers discuss their favorite books (www.aptosjr.pvusd.net/guysread/). Your school librarian will be interested to learn about programs in other schools that can enrich the lives of highly-able readers.
Support curricular programs and services. School librarians are long-time advocates of curricular modifications such as interdisciplinary learning and independent research projects that nourish gifted students. While these well-known programs require additional teacher-librarian planning time and administrative support, even small modifications in the library schedule can support passionate readers. For example, research shows that sustained silent reading (SSR) periods of 15-30 minutes advance the motivation and skill of all readers, especially when students choose their own reading material. And, with your help, your school librarian can institute a “flexible access” period during which individual students from any class can browse and exchange resources on any day, not just once a week at library time. Five to ten parent volunteers can staff the library on a rotating basis during the first or last half-hour of each school day to facilitate open access to the library’s resources.
Develop a strong relationship with your school librarian—your goals are aligned. Together you can light the journey of your gifted reader with the constancy of the North Star.
Debbie Abilock, a consultant, speaker and author, has over 25 years experience with gifted students as a school librarian, curriculum coordinator and school administrator. She is the Editor-in-chief of Knowledge Quest, the print journal of the American Association of School Librarians, and co-founder of NoodleTools, Inc., which develops teaching software to assist students and support teachers and librarians throughout the process of library research.
**Rita Soltan: Precocious Readers
http://www.mlaforum.org/volumeI/issue1/precocious.html
Text: Rita Soltan, Head of youth Services, Baldwin Public Library (Birmingham), soltanri@baldwinlib.org
MLA Fall Conference November 7, 2001
Recommending children's literature and providing readers' advisory is a constant responsibility for youth services librarians. We take on this role in a variety of ways, from creating and producing recommended reading lists by grade level, subject matter, and curriculum needs to working one on one with our young patrons and their parents. More often than not, we are on the lookout for reluctant readers, be it children who read well but aren't interested or children who struggle to get through a chapter. However, in providing service to a complete community, we also must remember the gifted child, one I like to call the precocious reader. What criteria can we use to offer the best reader's advisory for this child? How does a gifted child learn and develop interests that we can nurture through his/her reading? Roxanne Reschke, Consultant in Learning Services Differentiated Instruction for Oakland Schools provided a clear overview on the learning needs of the gifted child and strategies for selecting literature for this part of the community we serve.
It must first be noted that Michigan, unlike other states, does not mandate gifted education in its public schools. This eliminates the requirement to identify gifted students and has created three islands of thought on how to approach or address these children in a curriculum. The first "island" is that of doing nothing because these children will make it by means of their own abilities, regardless. The second "island" is that of using the standardized IQ exam for identification where scoring beyond a certain point level is a requirement. The third "island" involves the understanding of what Howard Gardner calls "the theory of multiple intelligences" - that we can possess intelligence in eight different ways: verbally, mathematically or through logic, visually, kinetically, musically, through an understanding of nature, and with two emotional intelligences: self-intelligence and interpersonal intelligence.
Gifted children possess certain characteristics that will affect their reading interests and needs. They generally show a wide overall knowledge or some advanced interest in one or more fields. They very often possess a large vocabulary, read well and widely, and display a long attention span. This fosters exposure to a breadth of reading material that will develop critical reading skills and the opportunity to pursue a subject in depth. Gifted kids tend to be more sensitive and feel more comfortable with their true peers, people not necessarily of the same age but of the same interests. It is also important to remember that while most gifted children share the characteristics mentioned, each child is also unique in terms of experience, interests, personality, and expression of abilities.
So what can we as children's librarians do specifically for the precocious readers and parents who enter our libraries? First, try to get an idea of what the child's interests are as you would with all readers' advisory requests. Next, try to incorporate some of the following criteria for selecting literature for a gifted reader.
Language should be rich, varied, precise, complex and exciting
Story should be open-ended and inspire contemplative behavior
Book should leave the reader with as many questions as answers
Fiction should be complex enough to allow interpretive and evaluative behavior
Non-fiction should help students build problem-solving skills and develop methods of productive thinking
Also remember that these youngsters love to read about people to whom they can relate. Characters that are portrayed as intelligent, talented, resourceful, and/or inventive within a well-developed plot sequence will be more intriguing to the child. Biographies of people with the same interests and who were considered gifted before and during their accomplished lives are also good suggestions. Try a wide variety of non-fiction exposure for the child interested in an in-depth study of a topic. When appropriate, suggest participation in discussion groups either through the library or their community, or by joining an author study group. In addition, websites designed for the gifted and talented and their educators can provide suggested reading lists, such as that at the Center for Talented Youth at Johns Hopkins University (http://www.jhu.edu/~gifted/).
Suggested Bibliography
Baskin, B.H., & Harris, H. (1980). Books for the gifted child. New York: R.R. Bowker.
Center for Talented Youth at Johns Hopkins University (http://www.jhu.edu/~gifted/).
Clark, B. (1997). Growing up gifted. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.
Gardner, H. (1993). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. New York: Basic Books.
Gardner, H. (1999). Intelligence reframed: Multiple intelligences for the 21st century. New York: Basic Books.
Hauser, P., & Nelson, G.A. Books for the gifted child (Vol. 2). New York: R.R. Bowker.
National Research Center for Gifted & Talented at University of Connecticut (http://www.gifted.uconn.edu/nrcgt.html).
***Patricia Austin: Challenging Gifted Readers
http://www.ala.org/ala/booklinksbucket/giftedreaders.pdf
Text: Gifted children tend to live in a world of ideas. They often have amazing stores of knowledge that leave adults asking, “Where did you learn that?” Chances are they learned it from television, the Internet, and from books. Several elements are at play in a book that will challenge a gifted child. Those elements include language, structure, perspective or point of view, ambiguous endings, and content. Books that provide professional role models and books with gifted protagonists may also hold appeal for the bright child.
Children will not necessarily gravitate toward books that contain these elements, however. Teachers, parents, and librarians often need to steer young people toward books that will cognitively challenge them. In evaluating language as a criterion for books for gifted readers, the vocabulary should be rich, precise, and varied. When considering structure, the challenging book does not necessarily go from beginning to middle to end. Rather, time sequences may be juggled, and the process of reading becomes the art of constructing the whole from the puzzle pieces provided.
Perspective or point of view can offer challenges with gifted children will want to provide them with professional role models, especially pertinent in the areas of science and history. Reading well-written accounts that enable readers to have an inside view of the work of a scientist, historian, or activist may open doors for their future.
Besides titles with role models for potential future occupations, gifted children need to read books with gifted protagonists. Although some of these titles are not difficult to read from a structural or language standpoint, they will nonetheless attract bright readers who may see their own lives, struggles, and feelings mirrored in the characters. What is important to acknowledge is that good books are good books.
(You can copy/paste the link into your browser to see the books she recommends)
****Bertie Kingore: Instruction for the Primary Gifted Learner
http://www.bertiekingore.com/readinginstruction.htm
Text: Differentiating reading instruction to match the individual differences and readiness levels of all children is a demanding task facing teachers. Advanced and gifted readers have the ability to read beyond grade level, and thus, they risk receiving less instructional attention when concerned teachers struggle to meet the needs of students performing below grade level. While it is critical that all children receive the support necessary to read at least at grade level, students who have achieved this goal must be challenged to continue developing advanced proficiencies. We would be remiss if we failed to make appropriate provisions to accommodate the needs of at-risk readers. We are equally remiss if we do not offer appropriate instructional differences that respond to the needs of gifted learners.
Teachers require support and strategies to challenge advanced readers at their highest readiness level and most appropriate pace within the diversity of a classroom that includes a wide range of abilities. The Advanced Academic Division of the Texas Education Agency created a task force to investigate the reading needs of gifted students and produced a publication, Reading Strategies for Advanced Primary Readers, designed to provide teachers with alternatives and replacement tasks to use in differentiating lessons for advanced readers. This book of interactive, practical strategies includes compacting, tiered assignments, flexible grouping, graphic organizers, thinking prompts, and vocabulary techniques assembled from teaching experiences based upon research and responses to the nature and needs of gifted learners. (Contact Evelyn Hiatt or Ann Wink at
For decades, educators assumed that children who read early or at advanced levels had been pushed by a well-intending adult.The accompanying conventional wisdom has been that these students plateau and read at grade level by third or fourth grade. Indeed, advanced readers who are limited to a grade-level reading program can regress in their pace of progress. However, when advanced readers are taught with resources and instruction commensurate with their needs and abilities, regression need not take place. By eliminating work on skills already mastered and progressing through the language arts curriculum at an accelerated pace, students generally continued to extend their reading proficiency (Gentry, 1999; Kulik & Kulik, 1996).
The lack of challenging materials is one factor that discourages the continued reading development of advanced readers. However bright students may be, they are less likely to demonstrate advanced or gifted performance if learning experiences are limited to the regular, grade-level reading curriculum. Duke (2000) found informational texts almost nonexistent in first grade classrooms, yet gifted readers demonstrate a voracious appetite for nonfiction. Chall and Conard (1991) continue to research the match of text difficulty to reader readiness. They found that the reading texts for advanced readers "...provided little or no challenge, since they were matched to students' grade placements, not their reading levels." Chall, who also researched text difficulty in 1967 and 1983, noted that "This practice of using grade-level reading textbooks for those who read two or more grades above the norm has changed little through the years, although it has been repeatedly questioned" (111).
Another factor that discourages the continued reading development of advanced readers is educators' attitudes regarding gifted students right and need to learn differently. Adjusting instruction to match the needs of gifted readers involves more than flexibility in methods and materials; it requires a belief that each child has the right to progress as rapidly as he or she is capable. Teachers must be committed to responding to the reading interests and needs of learners that extend beyond grade level. Indeed, Jackson and Roller (1993) commented that the most sophisticated, enthusiastic, and precocious readers are those children who have driven their parents and teachers to keep up with them. Consider the Staff Discussion Questions posed here. The insuing information may prove enlightening and productive toward change.
Staff Discussion Questions: Advanced Readers
Schools determined to meet the needs of their brightest readers may find these questions a useful focus when assessing attitudes and most appropriate strategies.
1. What does the term "advanced reader" or "gifted reader" mean to you?
2. How do we identify advanced readers or advanced potential in reading?
3. What instructional needs do you think are unique to advanced children?
4. How do we challenge advanced children academically in this school?
5. Which social and emotional factors are crucial to consider when challenging advanced readers?
6. What are the classroom management implications?
7. What grouping considerations do we need to address?
8. What human and material resources can we draw upon?
9. What additional resources are needed to ease implementation?
10. How might we appropriately inform and involve parents of advanced readers in this learning partnership?
Assessment
Assessment is a key component when instructing advanced readers. Assessment guides advanced instructional objectives and documents that an appropratie pace and level of learning has occurred. Reading instruction that matches the individual differences and readiness levels of all children involves preassessment, authentic analysis of reading comprehension, students' self-assessments of learning, and the development of portfolio products that substantiate advanced performance.
Preassessment. Preassessment is vital when addressing advanced reading needs. Results from preassessments must be employed to guide teachers' use of curriculum compacting, tiered assignments, and flexible groups. Preassessment is needed to accomplish the following:
• Determine students' instructional reading levels and skill needs.
• Group students flexibly by readiness and the skills that need to be learned.
• Analyze students' application of reading strategies.
• Provide information for selecting and pacing appropriate instructional materials.
Types of assessment that can be used as preassessments are:
• Checklists,
• Interest inventories,
• Observations,
• Performance tasks,
• Process interviews,
• Reading tests,
• Records of independent reading,
• Running records,
• Students' self-evaluations,
• Teachers'-selected reading samples, and
• Writing samples.
Reading comprehension. Comprehension of the gifted primary reader should largely be assessed authentically. A test in which students list the name of the main character and bubble-in the main idea limits the gifted student's opportunities to demonstrate more advanced interpretations. Comprehension tasks are more likely to engage high-level thinking when they require students to generate responses rather than choose among descriptors, as in a forced-choice response. Oral summaries via tape recorders, creation of a hyper-studio stack for use by other students, reading/writing logs, and other creative, open-ended options provide broader opportunities to demonstrate comprehension depth and complexity.
Metacognition. As children read in school, they need to be guided in their development of metacognitive or self-monitoring strategies so that these important skills become an internalized part of their regular reading behavior (Cecil, 1995). Metacognition is referred to as thinking about thinking. It invites children to bring their thinking to a conscious level and provides a window that increases adults' understanding of students' behaviors. A parent reported that her gifted second-grade daughter did not want to participate in a discussion about a book she had immensely enjoyed, because "I have already discussed it with myself." Since gifted readers are so consciously involved in introspection, teachers should continually analyze students' behaviors and talk with them to make sense of what is occurring in learning situations. (Abilock, 1999)
Teachers prompt metacognitive responses through reflective questions, such as the following. Children respond orally to these metacognitive questions or write brief responses to explain their thinking. The last four questions approach a more complex interpretation particularly appropriate for advanced and gifted students.
Metacognitive Questions
• What can you tell me about your reading?
• What did you think was easy to do and hard to do?
• What changes would you want to make?
• What is the most important thing you learned from this?
• What do you do when you are reading and you find a word you do not know?
• When might it be a good idea to reread something?
• Why do you think that is so?
• How did the author cause you to infer/conclude that?
• What evidence can you use to support that?
• If you did not know, what would you do to get the most information?
Self-assessment through rubrics. Rubrics increases students' responsibility for their own learning when they assess their work before it is graded or shared with others. Rubrics are guidelines to quality. They provide a clearer view of the merits and demerits of students' work than grades alone can communicate. Rubrics show students how they are responsible for the grades they earn rather than to continue to view grades as something someone gives them.
The criteria on a rubric should inform students what attributes to include in a product to demonstrate their understanding of the information they acquire. Each level should communicate to students what to do to achieve at a higher level. Criteria must accent content rather than just focus on appearance and how to complete the product. With advanced and gifted learners, the emphasis should include depth and complexity, as exemplified by the following chart. Teachers fill in their preferred grade scale or an evaluation scale, such as less than expected, appropriate work, very well done, and outstanding work as the level of proficiency develops from low to higher.
Complexity
Too simple or not appropriate
Simple information; limited critical thinking
Information showscritical thinking; compares and contrasts
Beyond expectations; analyzes from multiple points of view
Content depth
Needs more information or more accurate information
Needs to add depth or elaboration
Covers topic well; develops information beyond facts and details
Precise; in-depth; supports content
Teachers continue to be pleasantly surprised at the accuracy of students' self-assessments. When clear targets are provided through rubrics, most students understand what to do to achieve. After modeling and successful experiences with multiple rubrics, some gifted learners may be able to develop their own rubrics and other methods to assess their independent reading and study projects.
Portfolios. Portfolios offer a concrete record of the development of students' talents and achievements during a year or more. In classrooms where all students develop portfolios, the portfolio process enables each student to be noticed for the pace of learning growth and the level of products he or she produces. In this manner, portfolios increase inclusion instead of exclusion by providing multiple opportunities for children from every population to demonstrate talents and gifted potential. Portfolio assessment allows schools to honor the diversity of students and discover the strengths of each learner.
Primary-aged children can learn to be responsible for organizing and managing a portfolio of their work that documents agreed-upon criteria. Children learn to file their selected work in the back of their portfolio so it approximates a chronological order and clarifies growth over time. Increasing emphasis on students' self-reflections and making judgments about their products is one of the values of portfolios for all children.
Values of Portfolios for Advanced and Gifted Children
• Products can be assessed for a level of depth and complexity appropriate for advanced-level products.
• Products can demonstrate all areas of giftedness.
• The portfolio can be shared with parents or other professionals to document the growth and achievements of gifted students.
• Portfolios provide examples of superior work for gifted students to share among themselves as models to challenge ever-increasing levels of excellence.
However, portfolios will not document achievements of advanced and gifted children if they are limited to grade-level tasks. Only to the degree that portfolios include children's highest levels of performance on a wide array of challenging, beyond grade-level tasks can the portfolio process substantiate gifted-level work. Negotiate together a short list of response products advanced students can select among to demonstrate their interpretation and understanding when they finish reading fiction or nonfiction text.
Gifted Readers Like...
A classic study by Dole and Adams (1983), surveyed gifted students to elicit their perceptions of the most important attributes of good reading materials. A summary of those findings is included here.
• Sophisticated beginning-to-read books
• Nuanced language
• Multidimensional characters
• Visually inventive picture books
• Playful thinking
• Unusual connections; finding patterns and parallels within and among books
• Abstractions and analogies
• A blend of fantasy and non-fiction
• Extraordinary quantities of information about a favorite topic
• Books about gifted children
Use this information as a guide to prepare questions for surveying gifted students in your class or even all of the gifted students in your school. What do they most like or dislike about reading? What do they most want in books and stories? What makes them pick up a book and want to read it? We can better customize reading instruction to challenge advanced readiness levels and motivate gifted learners when we understand how to more closely match their preferences and interest.
The result of ignoring gifted readers is educationally and emotionally unjust to these children. The Gifted Reader's Bill of Rights is posed here to prompt your thinking about the reading rights and needs of gifted students.
The Gifted Reader's
Bill of Rights
The right to read at a pace and level appropriate to readiness without regard to grade placement.
The right to discuss interpretations, issues, and insights with intellectual peers.
The right to reread many books and not finish every book.
The right to use reading to explore new and challenging information and grow intellectually.
The right for time to pursue a self-selected topic in depth through reading and writing.
The right to encounter and apply increasingly advanced vocabulary, word study, and concepts.
The right to guidance rather than dictation of what is good literature and how to find the best.
The right to read several books at the same time.
The right to discuss but not have to defend reading choice and taste.
The right to be excused from material already learned.
___________ References ___________
Abilock, D. (1999). Librarians and gifted readers. Knowledge Quest, 27, 30-35.
Cecil, N. (1995). The art of inquiry: Questioning strategies for K-6 classrooms. Winnipeg, MB, Canada: Peguin Publishers.
Chall, J. & Conard, W. (1991). Should textbooks challenge students? The case for easier or harder textbooks. New York: Teachers College Press.
Dole, J. & Adams, P. (1983). Reading curriculum for gifted readers: A survey. Gifted Child Quarterly, 27.
Duke, N. (2000). 3.6 minutes per day: The scarcity of international texts in first grade. Reading Research Quarterly, 35, 202-224.
Gentry, M. (1999). Promoting student achievement and exemplary classroom practices through cluster grouping: A research-based alternative to heterogeneous elementary classrooms. Storrs, CT: The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented.
Kingore, B., Ed. (2002). Reading Strategies for Advanced Primary Readers. Austin: Texas Educational Agency. In press.
Kingore, B. (2002). Assessment: Time-saving procedures for busy teachers, 3rd ed. Austin: Professional Associates Publishing.
Kulik, J. & Kulik, C. (1996). Ability grouping and gifted students. In Colangelo, N. & Davis, G., Eds. Handbook of gifted education, 2nd ed. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Bibliographies of Books for Gifted Readers
Halstead, J. (2002). Some of my best friends are books, 2nd ed. Dayton, OH: Ohio Psychology Press.
Kingore, B. (2001). Gifted kids, gifted characters, & great books. Gifted Child Today, 24 (1), 30-32.
Polette, N. (2001). Non fiction in the primary grades. Marion, IL: Pieces of Learning.
Polette, N. (2000). Gifted books, gifted readers. Englewood, CO: Libraries Unlimited, Inc.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)