Translating the Integrated Curriculum ModelInto Units of Study

TT ww ee nn tt yy - OO nn ee YY ee aa rr ss oo ff EE xx cc ee ll ll ee nn cc ee

When we consider the importance of differentiated curriculum forthe gifted, it becomes apparent that multiple and simultaneousapproaches to differentiation need to be applied. Gifted

students require advanced content, higher level skills and processes,product development opportunities, and the intellectual challenge ofdealing with real world issues, themes, and concepts that areinterdisciplinary in nature. The Integrated Curriculum Model designprovides all of these emphases in an integrated way, using contentstandards as a base but going beyond the standards in important ways.

To date, the Integrated Curriculum Model (ICM) has been translated intoa curricular framework and set of teaching units in the core contentareas of science, language arts, mathematics, and social studies. Thetranslation of the ICM was accomplished by developing a curricularframework with goals and outcomes, addressing each of its dimensionsin an integrated way.

Language arts In order to satisfy the need for advanced content, the language artscurriculum (Center for Gifted Education, 1999), developed for gradesK–12, used advanced literature selections that were two years beyondgrade reading level, used advanced language, and challenged studentsto develop multiple levels of meaning. The writing emphasis was onpersuasive essays that developed argument, which is a needed form ofwriting for much work in high school and all college level work. Use ofadvanced vocabulary and the mastery of English syntax at theelementary level was also stressed.

The process/product dimension of the curriculum was addressed byembedding the Elements of Reasoning developed by Paul (1992) andby using a research model developed to aid students in generatingoriginal work (Boyce, 1997). Products were encouraged through bothwritten and oral work.

The issue/theme dimension of the curriculum was explicated byfocusing on the theme of change as it applied to works of literatureselected for the unit, the writing process, language study, and learnersreflecting on their own changes in thinking and writing throughout theunit. Additionally, studying an issue of significance was emphasized asa part of the research strand for each unit. Six units have beendeveloped, validated, piloted, and revised using this framework (Centerfor Gifted Education, 1999; VanTassel-Baska, Zuo, Avery, & Little,2002).

ScienceThe translation of the ICM to science curriculum was driven by theoverarching theme of systems, which became the conceptualorganizing influence in each of the seven units of study (Center forGifted Education, 1997). Students learned the elements, boundaries,inputs, and outputs, as well as the interactions of selected systems.Through a problem-based learning approach, they also learned abouthow science systems interact with real-world social, political, andeconomic systems. In the newer primary level units, the concepts of

C e n t e r f o r G i f t e d E d u c a t i o nT h e C o l l e g e o f W i l l i a m a n d M a r y

Continued on page 2, Integrated Curriculum

by Dr. Joyce VanTassel-Baska

SYSTEMSSummer, 2009 P.O. Box 8795, Williamsburg, VA 23187-8795 Volume 18 Number 1

Newsletter

both systems and change are used toenhance schematic understanding of thecontent used. The six Project Clarion unitsrepresent an effort to use concepts as thecore learning approach in the unit, with PBLembedded as opposed to being central toimplementation.

The process/product dimension of thecurricular model was addressed throughengaging students in a scientific researchprocess that led them to create their ownexperiments and design their own solutions toeach unit’s central problem. Adaptations tothe research process were made for primarystudents although the same performance-based tool has been employed to assesslearning in this area.

The advanced content dimension wasaddressed by selecting advanced sciencecontent for inclusion in each unit andencouraging in-depth study of selectedcontent relevant to understanding the centralproblem of the unit. These units are beingused in classrooms across the country toincorporate the new science emphasis andhave been found successful in

heterogeneous settings, as well as with morerestricted groups (VanTassel-Baska, Bass,Reis, Poland, & Avery, 1998). The primarylevel Project Clarion units have also beenfound to be effective in heterogeneous Title Iclassrooms (Bland, VanTassel-Baska,Bracken, Feng, Stambaugh & Kim, underreview).

Social StudiesThe translation of the ICM to social studieswas also driven by the theme or concept ofsystems for several units, with the concepts ofchange and cause and effect explored inadditional units. The concept of systems wasapplied to understanding structures in society,such as economic and political systems; otherunits emphasized connected chains ofcauses and effects to help studentsunderstand multiple causation in history andto recognize that historical events were notinevitable.

As in the language arts units, theprocess/product dimension of the model wasaddressed through the embedded use ofPaul’s (1992) Elements of Reasoning, as wellas through a heavy emphasis on historical

analysis. Products included written and oralpresentations of research efforts and otheractivities.

The advanced content dimension wasaddressed through the selection of advancedreading materials, including many primarysource documents, as well as secondarysources and historical fiction, and throughearly introduction of advanced content skillslike historical analysis. Research findingssuggest that students grew in content,process skills, and concept attainment as aresult of exposure to a unit of study (Little,Feng, VanTassel-Baska, Rogers, & Avery,2007).

MathematicsThe concept used in several math units is thatof models, allowing students to understandthe physical properties of mathematicalmodels but also their conceptual componentsas well. Students learn to apply theirunderstanding of models to the natural worldaround them, seeing how the modelsrepresent the real world in important ways.

Continued on page 3, Integrated Curriculum

Integrated Curriculum(cont’d form page 1)

This issue of the Center’s Systems Newsletter will be the last one published under the aegisof Dr. JoyceVanTassel-Baska, the Center's founder and current Executive Director. As of thisAugust Dr. VanTassel-Baska will officially retire from the College of William and Mary and theCenter. We know that she will still be an integral part of the Center through what she hascreated here as well as through her continuing consulting, writing and research. It is onlyfitting, then, that this issue feature an interview with Dr. VanTassel-Baska about her thoughtson curriculum development, an article by her about curriculum and the Integrated CurriculumModel, as well as a brief piece on the Festschrift held in her honor at the College on March13, 2009.

Also included in this issue are dissertation abstracts from this year's graduating doctoralstudents and a few announcements about Center events.

From the Editor

2S

In This IssueTranslating the Integrated Curriculum Model Into Units of Study....................................................1

From the Editor.........................................................2

Executive Director’s Remarks..................................4

An Interview with Dr. Joyce VanTassel-Baska.........8

Leading Change: The Festschrift of Dr. JoyceVanTassel-Baska....................................................11

Dissertation Abstracts............................................13

For example, students can understand animaloverpopulation by graphing populationincreases across years and examine thegeographical areas where it has occurred. Inthis way, they can predict future populationtrends.

The process emphasis in the mathematicsunits is on the higher level skill of problem-solving coupled with its application toresearch skills and strategies as studentsgrapple with real world problems and thenattempt to set up investigations to answerquestions raised in the process of designing astudy. The math units focus on datacollection, analysis, interpretation andrepresentation in appropriate ways forrelevant audiences. Products emanating fromthese units emphasize the use of graphs,charts, and models to communicate findingseffectively.

The advanced content aspect of themathematics units focuses on higher levelmathematical thought in areas like placevalue and spatial reasoning. Theinterdisciplinary Models unit (linked toscience) emphasizes the use of logic,statistics and probability skills at advancedlevels for middle school students. Althoughthe units have been piloted and field-tested,to date, no studies of effectiveness have beendone.

Research-based Design ElementsWhile these national curricular projects forhigh-ability learners were developed with anunderstanding of appropriate curriculardifferentiation for gifted students, they alsodemonstrate the use of key design features ofcurricular reform strongly advocated by thenational standards projects (O’Day & Smith,1993) and the research-based learningstrategies emphasized by the NationalResearch Council (Bransford & Donovan,2005). Thus, the curricular projects employthe following emphases:

Meaning-based, in that the curriculumemphasizes depth over breadth, conceptsover facts, and is grounded in real-worldissues and problems that students care aboutor need to know. In science, students studythe implications of acid spills on interstate

highway systems. In language arts, theyrelate to how the impact of the treatment ofminorities in this country has changed over a60-year period. In social studies, studentsexamine documents within context andexplore the influence of various individualsand groups to understand the complexity ofhistorical events and decisions. Moreover, thepedagogy of the curriculum is constructivist inorientation, helping students to construct theirown meaning from the events, artifacts, andproblems studied.

Intradisciplinary and interdisciplinaryconnections through using overarchingconcepts, issues, and themes as majororganizers. Thus, students study systems ofcities, government, economies, andlanguage, as well as chemistry and biology.The concept of change in language arts isrelevant to literature, writing, and language,as well as to mathematics, art, and music andis taught through the use of archetypalconcept maps that allow students tointernalize their understanding of importantideas.

Metacognition, which requires studentreflection on learning processes. Studentsare involved in consciously planning,monitoring, and assessing their own learningfor efficient and effective use of time andresources. In social studies, for example,students pursue alternative paths to a real-world problem resolution in their particulararea of study through a deliberative groupprocess that engages them in metacognitiveskills.

Habits of mind, through cultivating modes ofthinking that resemble those of professionalsin various fields with respect to skills,predispositions, and attitudes. In science,curiosity, objectivity, and skepticism areopenly nurtured. In language arts, the modeof reflection and revision is consistentlyencouraged. In social studies, experiencesdevelop awareness of the complexity ofcausality, the importance of exploring bias,and the need to avoid present-mindednessand ethnocentrism.

Inquiry-based learning and problem solvingby having students take charge of their own

learning. In the problem-based science units,students find out what they know, what theyneed to know, and how to pursue importantknowledge in working on a real-world problemin small investigatory teams. In language arts,students team to discover how languagefunctions and is structured. In social studies,students work together to explore differentaspects of a culture or historical period andthen share their findings.

Technologies as integrative tools for thelearning process, from doing research via theInternet, to creating powerpoint presentationsand videos, to communicating with studentsand mentors around the world by e-mail. Theunits of study in each area incorporateactivities that require these applications.

Authentic assessments which tap into whatstudents know as a result of meaningfulinstruction. Using approaches like portfoliosand performance-based activities, the unitsengage learners in assessment as an activepart of the learning process.

The relationship of curriculum to giftedlearner characteristics

The implementation of any curricular model isbased on several considerations in the schoolsetting. Most important among them is thenature of the learner. For gifted and highability students, regardless of the richness ofthe core curricular base, there will be a needto address certain powerful characteristics

3

Integrated Curriculum(cont’d from page 2)

Systems is a newsletter published by:The Center for Gifted Education

427 Scotland StreetWilliamsburg, VA 23185

Postal Address: Center for Gifted Education The College of William and Mary

P.O. Box 8795Williamsburg, VA 23187-8795

Phone: 757-221-2362; Fax: 757-221-2184Web Address: www.cfge.wm.edu

email address: cfge@wm.eduExecutive Director: Dr. Joyce VanTassel-Baska

Systems Editor: Dawn BensonDesign/Layout/Technical Assistant: Sharron Gatling

Continued on page 6, Integrated Curriculum

4

This column marks my last as theExecutive Director of the Center forGifted Education at the College of

William and Mary. It is difficult to believe that22 years have passed since my arrival oncampus as an endowed chair, charged withcreating a center and a graduate program.The role was one where I was free to createwhat was possible in a historic place, both theCollege and its environs, that captured theinterest and desire of many educatorsworldwide and university personnel to beassociated with our efforts. Those effortshave always seen the importance of the talentdevelopment process on the individual acrossthe lifespan, whether she was a precollegiatelearner, graduate student, or educator. As Ileave the Center in the very capable hands ofDr. Tracy Cross, I want to share the advice Igave to our graduates at the luncheon in Mayat the Wren Building. The ideas reflect wellmy understanding of why I have beensuccessful during my tenure here.

What are the qualities one associates withbeing a successful professor? Brilliance?Absentmindedness? Wisdom in thought andaction? While these may apply to manyprofessors, they clearly do not apply to me.From the beginning, I entered highereducation on a mission to institutionalizegifted education as a legitimate field of study,to create opportunities for precollegiatelearners, and to conduct research anddevelopment projects that were meaningfuland lasting. I also thought I had something tosay about many topics, but especially whatwas appropriate curriculum, instruction, andassessment for gifted learners. Thus being a

professor was a platformfor my ideas, wishes,and dreams.

For all of you graduatesof our program whoaspire to a similar path,

success in higher education does not comeeasily or without cost. Perhaps the followingkey ideas may be of use to you as you movebeyond this place into your own careers.

1. Be a coach. My most importantpreparation for being a mentor to mystudents were the years I coached girls'basketball, track and tennis at the highschool where I taught. It was in thismilieu that I learned how to motivatepeople, how to understand and addressindividual differences, and how to havefun with students. It was here that Ihoned my teaching skills to be used inone-to-one situations where the goalwas clear, time was of the essence, andgrowth was a tangible entity to be soughtdaily.

2. Use time wisely. People often remarkthey don't have time to write as itrequires large periods of time when oneis not doing anything else. Ironically, Ihave found just the opposite to be true. Iencourage you to use downtime likeairline travel to write a talk, a grantproposal, or start or finish an article forpublication. Try to use time forsimultaneous purposes, such as giving atalk, converting it for publication, andmeeting with colleagues on a project.Through this approach, it is easier tojustify taking the time to travel for aconference or other educational event.Finally, analyze the time periods whenyou are most productive intellectuallyand set aside 2-3 hours each day topursue those types of tasks. For me,over the course of 27 years, it has beenearly morning from 5-8 am. Most of mybooks and articles have been writtenduring that timeframe.

3. Write every day. If you want to besuccessful as a productive scholar, thenbe sure you are writing at least a pageevery day. The act of doing it will

enhance your fluency, clarify yourthinking, and force you to elaborate yourideas. Moreover, consider all writing asargument, a way of taking a position andthen supporting it with evidence anddata. Using this model will help youbecome more effective in oral discourseas well since higher education demandsdefense of ideas in all venues, includingmeetings with colleagues.

4. Teach as if your hair is on fire. Teachingis an act that requires a sense ofurgency on the part of both teacher andlearner. Only so much time is availableto teach/learn important knowledge,skills, and attitudes. Yet the urgencymust be modulated with constructivistapproaches that enable the learner todiscover meaning on his own. Useproblem-based learning, simulations,and case studies to enhance yourstudents' learning. Another facet ofeffective teaching is using your researchagenda and your academic passions asa basis for promoting student learning.My most successful teaching hasemerged from involving my students inresearch on curriculum effectiveness,teacher use of differentiated strategies,and studies of low income learners-allpassions of mine for 30 years.

5. Expect to work 70 hours per week if youwant to excel; if you want to becompetent in your field, work 55 hoursper week. One of my mentors madeclear to me that putting in three extrahours per day, including weekends couldmake me an "academic star". While thetime may not have produced stardomper se, it has made me creativelyproductive. Using three hours per day todo research and write has been a highlyimportant way to think about using worktime and doing the same on weekends.

Continued on page 5, Executive Director

FFrroomm tthhee EExxeeccuuttiivvee DDiirreeccttoorrDr. Joyce VanTassel-BBaska

S

5

It is also a way to think about keeping upyour reading of important books andarticles in your field.

6. Have a planful research agenda.Developing your personal research plancan have long lasting effects on yourability to keep doing research in the faceof everyday tasks that can take over oreasier tasks that can drive out those thatare more challenging. Project yourresearch out across the years to tenureand beyond. What do I want toaccomplish in five years? What are mytopics of interest? What are mymethodological skills? What do I want todo alone and what do I want tocollaborate on? These questions arecentral to planning any substantiveresearch agenda.

7. Make your service work count towardacademic presentations and publications.As an educator in gifted education, it ismandatory that you do work with schoolsand even students themselves incampus-based programs that you orothers initiate. However, it is importantthat the work you do be recorded in away that would render it useful as amodel to others, useful to you as acontext for conducting research, andimportant to understanding a facet of thefield. My greatest regret was not takingmy own advice early in my career inToledo when I had a Title 3 three yearresearch and development project in lowincome high schools that wasgroundbreaking at the time yet I was notsavvy enough to see the need to write itup, report the research results, and dopresentations on the project. Be sureyou chronicle your work carefully.

8. Find and create role models for yourself.Much is made of the need to havementors in order to be successful, andcertainly the research suggests theirimportance in the sciences. However,there is evidence in the arts thatemulators will do just as well. Ineducation, we have many opportunitiesto meet people who can help us in someway, if only by their example, theirmessage, or by dint of their personality.Take advantage of these opportunitiesand convert them to positive use. I

learned a great deal from people whom Iobserved carefully for work habits,academic skills, and humane attitudes.

9. Don't be afraid to try things you don'tknow how to do. Paul Torrance wouldcall this trait "pushing the envelope", anessential aspect of creativity and oftesting your own limits. Too many peoplemust feel centered in a situation beforethey will take on a challenge. Dare to gobeyond your competencies at a giventime and test out unknown areas oflearning. Such risk-taking enhancesproblem-solving, how to access and useresources effectively, and causes you tobreak patterns and see/create new ones.Much of what I have accomplishedwould never have been done if I felt Ineeded to have mastery in relevantareas before I began to work in them.For example, I taught my first course ingifted before taking one formally myself.No one was harmed by the experience,and I grew tremendously in my ability toorganize material in this area of learning.

10. Love what you do. Freud has opined onthe twin influences of love and work asthe basis for human happiness. I believethat the two also need to be seen asone-love the work that you do with allyour heart, recognizing that it will neverbe done, that you are a Sisyphus, rollingthe rock back up the hill after a setback.Work in gifted education is notglamorous nor is it for the faint of heart.The challenges to the cause of giftedchildren are often daily, the argumentsagainst the effort often relentless,regardless of context, and the damagingstereotypes all around you-the trulygifted need no help, the same educationwill work for everybody, regardless ofdifferences in capacity to learn, andbringing up the bottom is important, evenif it means choking off the top. In order topersevere in a field that presents thesechallenges, you must be committed tothe needs of these students and bewilling to speak out on behalf of them atevery turn.

Current Graduates of William and Mary’sGifted Education ProgramBronwyn came to us from St. Louis, MO

where she was a high school French teacher.Dr. MacFarlane worked at the Center forGifted Education at The College of Williamand Mary in Virginia as a research assistantto Dr. Joyce VanTassel-Baska for 3 yearswhile earning her doctorate in educationalpolicy, planning, and leadership with dualspecializations in both gifted educationprogram administration and K-12 schooladministration. She received the 2008National Association for Gifted ChildrenOutstanding Doctoral Student Award; the2008 College of William and Mary School ofEducation Dean's Award for Excellence; the2007 College of William and Mary Excellencein Gifted Education Doctoral Award; and the2007 International P.E.O. Scholarship Award.She has published and presented at nationaland state conferences on research projects.Her dissertation was on examining the use ofdifferentiation in World Language APteachers' classrooms. She along with TamraStambaugh edited the Festschrift volume ofDr. VanTassel-Baska's work.

Valija came to us from Norfolk, VA where sheserved as a high school math teacher andgifted resources teacher after teaching 5years in New Jersey and established the APStatistics course. As a research assistant atthe Center, Valija has served as a good assetin curriculum development and is completinga math unit of study for piloting. She haspublished and presented on her work in bothstate and national venues. She has receivedthe Galfo Research Award and the KappaDelta Pi Achievement Award for the past 2years here at the college. Using the NELS/88database, her dissertation was on predictingsuccess among Black and White promisingacademic learners on talent developmentfactors. To prepare for her study she attendedspecial invitational workshops sponsored byAERA and attended a summer course offeredat the University of Michigan.

Katie Dolph is a cluster teacher in NorfolkPublic Schools where she also conductedher evaluation study of curriculum andinstructional practices used with giftedlearners. Katie has attended the programwhile working full time. She also has coached

Executive Director(cont’d from page 4)

Continued on page 5, Executive Director

through flexible implementation of a model.

There are many characteristics of gifted learners on which one mightfocus for a discussion of creating an optimal match between learner andcurriculum. Several lists have been discussed as a basis for curricularwork (e.g., Maker, 1982; VanTassel-Baska, 1994a). However, in studiesof curricula, it has become apparent that three characteristics remainpivotal for purposes of curricular planning and development: precocity,intensity, and complexity.

Precocity. The precocity of the learner is a key characteristic to considerin curriculum development. Gifted learners, almost by definition,evidence advanced development in some school-related curriculararea. The most commonly tested areas for such development are in theverbal and mathematical subject domains. Most students identified forgifted programs are at least 2 years advanced in one or both areas.Such evidence of advanced development provides a basis for curricularplanning at a more advanced level and the expectation that suchstudents can master new materials in one-third to one-half the time oftypical learners. For highly gifted learners, there is a powerful motivationto learn fast and move ahead.

Intensity. In addition to precocity, another key characteristic thatdeserves attention for curriculum development is the intensity of giftedlearners. This intensity may be manifested affectively in the realm of

emotional responsiveness when students reactstrongly to the death of a pet or the classroominjustice committed by a teacher. But, thischaracteristic also has saliency in the cognitiverealm. Students exhibit intensity through thecapacity to focus and concentrate for long periods

of time on a subject that fascinates them or an idea they find intriguing.Such a characteristic can just as quickly become dissipated inuninteresting busywork or lack of depth in the exploration even of asubject of interest. This characteristic, like precocity, needs curricularattention.

Complexity. The third learner characteristic of curricular interest iscomplexity, the capacity of gifted learners to engage in higher level andabstract thinking even at young ages. It also refers to their preferencefor hard and challenging work, often at levels beyond currentfunctioning. They also enjoy working on multiple levels simultaneously,such as when solving complex real-world problems that have manyparts and perspectives to study. Just as with precocity and intensity, thecharacteristic of complexity in the gifted demands curricularresponsiveness because it is openly desired by the learner and oftenindicated by his or her behavior in the classroom.

These three characteristics each dictate an approach to the curriculumthat honors the various facets of the gifted mind and personality. Whileother curricular models have addressed a particular facet of the giftedlearner, the Integrated Curriculum Model represents a fusion of severalapproaches such that the most powerful characteristics of the gifted aredirectly reflected in the curricular intervention.

Teacher knowledge, skills, and attitudes needed to address giftedstudent needs

Based on recent data confirming the significant role of teacher trainingin providing differentiated instruction for the gifted (Hansen &Feldhusen, 1994; Tomlinson et al., 1994) and the new teachereducation standards (Johnsen, VanTassel-Baska, & Robinson, 2008),

6

Continued on page 7, Integrated Curriculum

Integrated Curriculum(cont’d from page 3)

S

Executive Director(cont’d from page 4)

rowing and worked in the regular classroom.She wrote an article for the Festschrift volumeII based on her study of appropriateinstructional practices for the gifted.

Lisa Kaenzig was formerly a fulltime graduateassistant at The Center for Gifted Education,specializing in the development of one of ourtop social studies units- The Road to theWhite House. She has exercised herconsiderable political knowledge in the effort.She has done several presentations forparents in our SEP program on the

importance of career counseling and hasmaintained a strong interest in female talentdevelopment, leading to her dissertationstudy on the talent development processamong elite women scientists at top New YorkState institutions. Lisa has been working asan Assistant Dean at William Smith College inGeneva, New York for the past 3 years.

Kianga Thomas has been a part time studentin our program while a full time teacher of thegifted in both Newport News and Hamptonbefore taking his current position as Assistant

Professor at the College of Education atHampton University. He is a family man withsons Harrison and Hayden. Kianga hasreceived several awards (Virginia Associationof Chapter of Alpha Phi Alpha fraternities) forhis work with minority youth, a passion that heused to propel his dissertation study on therole of self efficacy, resilience, and leadershipon the success of African American malestransitioning to the university level. He haspresented his research at both state andnational conferences this year.

7

Integrated Curriculum(cont’d from page 6)

there is good reason to place gifted students with teachers who havereceived at least 12 hours of professional training. The benefits to giftedlearners become greater when a differentiated curriculum is handled bythose sensitive to the nature and needs of such students. Some trainingin the direct implementation of curricular materials to be used is alsodesirable. For example, in our experience with the Center for GiftedEducation materials, 3-5 days of training in the various approachesemployed in the materials have generally supported initialimplementation, depending on the experience of the teachers involved.

What teacher characteristics are essential for implementing content-based curricula with gifted learners? Obviously, knowing the contentarea being taught is a primary consideration, coupled with a deepunderstanding of how gifted students learn differently from otherstudents and even each other. Such a combination requires importanthuman characteristics in a teacher of the gifted, such as openness toexperience, a personal passion for learning, and a curiosity about howthe minds of these students work. Such characteristics must also bematched, however, by a strong grasp of the structure of the discipline inwhich one is teaching and the security to employ different methods asthey are required. Facilitating learning for these students must involvecareful questioning and probing, coupled with the regular presentationof challenging stimuli.

Access to high-quality, well-trained teachers in specific subject areaswho can provide challenge and nurturance for our best learners isclearly a critical issue in appropriate education of the gifted. Withoutthoughtful teachers, the best curricula will lie dormant in classrooms,unable to be energized and vivified by expert instruction. Teachers withonly strong management skills also will fail to excite the gifted if lack ofknowledge is apparent.

Conclusion

In order for gifted learners to perform at optimal levels, the educationalcontext must offer challenging opportunities that tap deeply intostudents’ psychological states (Csikszentmihalyi, Rathunde, & Whalen,1993), provide generative learning situations (VanTassel-Baska, 1998),and also demand high standards of excellence that correspond toexpectations for high-level creative productivity in any field (Ochse,1990). More than ever, the climate of a school for excellence matters ifcurricular standards are to be raised successfully for any student. Forgifted students in particular, such a climate must be in place to ensureoptimal development, positive attitudes toward learning, andengagement.

References

Bland, L. C., VanTassel-Baska, J., Bracken, B. A., Feng, A. X.,Stambaugh, T., Kim, K. H. (under review). Assessing ScienceReasoning and Conceptual Understanding in the Primary GradesUsing Multiple Measures of Performance: Project Clarion. .

Boyce, L. N. (1997). A guide to teaching research skills and strategiesfor grades 4–12. Williamsburg, VA: Center for Gifted Education,College of William and Mary.

Bransford, S., & Donovan, J. (Eds.). (2005). How students learn:Science in the classroom. Washington, D.C.: The NationalAcademies Press.

Center for Gifted Education. (1997). Guide to teaching a problem-basedscience curriculum. Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt.

Center for Gifted Education. (1999). Guide to teaching a language artscurriculum for high-ability learners. Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt.

Csikszentmihalyi, M., Rathunde, K., & Whalen, S. (1993). Talentedteenagers: The roots of success and failure. New York: CambridgeUniversity Press.

Hansen, J., & Feldhusen, J. (1994). Comparison of trained anduntrained teachers of the gifted. Gifted Child Quarterly, 38,115–123.

Johnsen, S., VanTassel-Baska, J. & Robinson, A. (2008) Implementingthe gifted education teacher standards in university programs,New York: Corwin Press.

Little, C. A., Feng, A. X., VanTassel-Baska, J., Rogers, K. A., & Avery, L.D. (2007). A study of curriculum effectiveness in social studies.Gifted Child Quarterly, 52, 272-284.

Maker, C. J. (1982). Curriculum development for the gifted. Rockville,MD: Aspen Systems.

Ochse, R. (1990). Before the gates of excellence: Determinants ofcreative genius. Cambridge, England: Cambridge UniversityPress.

O’Day, J. A., & Smith, M. S. (1993). Systemic reform and educationalopportunity. In S. H. Fuhrman (Ed.), Designing coherenteducational policy (pp. 250–311). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Paul, R. (1992). Critical thinking: What every person needs to survive ina rapidly changing world. Rohnert Park, CA: Foundation for CriticalThinking.

Tomlinson, C., Tomchin, E., Callahan, C., Adams, C., Pizzat-Timi, P.,Cunningham, C., Moore, B., Lutz, L., Robertson, C., Eiss, N.,Landrum, M., Hunsaker, S., & Imbeau, M. (1994). Practices ofpreservice teachers related to gifted and other academicallydiverse learners. Gifted Child Quarterly, 38, 106–114.

VanTassel-Baska, J. (1994). Comprehensive curriculum for giftedlearners (2nd ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

VanTassel-Baska, J. (Ed.). (1998). Excellence in educating gifted andtalented learners (3rd ed.). Denver: Love.

VanTassel-Baska, J., Bass, G., Ries, R., Poland, D., & Avery, L. D.(1998). A national study of science curriculum effectiveness withhigh-ability students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 42, 200–211.

VanTassel-Baska, J., Zuo, L., Avery, L. D., & Little, C. A. (2002). Acurriculum study of gifted student learning in the language arts.Gifted Child Quarterly, 46, 30–44.

8

(K) Many people consider you to be the“guru” of curriculum in gifted education. Whydid you choose curriculum as your emphasis?

(J) My background led me naturally to focuson curriculum. I’m a former secondaryteacher of English and Latin who was veryengaged in curriculum development when Iwas a teacher. I taught every high schoolgrade level in both subjects. Therefore, Itaught a total of eight different courses duringmy high school teaching career of seven anda half years. In addition, I also createdelectives and new courses of study, includinga course called World Literature and the Biblefor senior level students. I also taughtAdvanced Placement Literature.

When I became an administrator ofgifted programs in Toledo, I also was veryinvolved with curriculum development forgifted learners. I published two guides in myfirst three years; one on the world of the giftedK-6 for elementary teachers and the PhoenixProject curriculum guide for high schoolteachers which was an integratedinterdisciplinary curriculum with a guidancecomponent that was used in all three innercity high schools in Toledo at that time. So, inmy first ten years of work in education, I wasvery involved with curriculum development. Itcontinued to be a major part of my work inIllinois where I was involved in a federalcurriculum project using Adler’s Syntopiconfor organizing curriculum and designed anddeveloped four major units of study for thatproject. Then at Northwestern I had a grantfrom the Joyce Foundation to developcurriculum in math, science, and technologyfor high ability learners. So by the time I cameto William and Mary, I had a deeper level ofexperience with curriculum for the gifted thanmost people. Even though most people arenot aware of that history, it served me well forengaging in my Javits curriculum work here atWilliam and Mary.

(K) Why do you think it became such animportant area of endeavor for you?

(J) Partially it was myown sense that it was agood fit for my skills andinterests based on theexperiences that I’ve

described. However, I also saw curriculum asa weakness in terms of what was nothappening in gifted programs. People wereusing units on chocolate, for example, withgifted students and justifying it becausecontent doesn’t matter or so it was suggested.In addition to that, I think it’s fair to say thatthe Javits projects encouraged curriculumdevelopment, leading to our contracts todesign curriculum in science and languagearts. So it was a happy union of mybackground experiences and skills, coupledwith a need in the field, and the accessibilityof resources that really led The Center forGifted Education in this direction.

(K) How did you develop the IntegratedCurriculum Model?

(J) I started with a review of the literature in1986 as to what curriculum approaches wereeffective with gifted learners. The ICM grewout of my examination of research thatsuggested that advanced content was themost powerful approach that we had, followedby enrichment approaches that werepredominately focused on higher levelthinking and product development. There wasalso a scattered literature base oninterdisciplinary approaches, such asconcepts, issues or actual themes. Eventhough the literature base was uneven insupporting the efficacy of those threecomponents, they represented three verydistinct approaches to organizing curriculum

that could be justified by the evidenceavailable. My underlying thesis was alwaysthat we could get a richer curriculum if weutilized all three as opposed to utilizing onlyone approach. This model has worked quitewell over the past twenty years to designdifferentiated curriculum and to link the workto the content standards. So even though theICM model preceded the content standards, itin fact dovetailed with the design andalignment approach.

(K) Have you ever considered a revision to it?If so, what would it be?

(J) Well, I would revise it if I felt that in factthere was research suggesting that there wasanother approach to curriculum that isn’tcovered by the model that would be effective.I do believe that the model could beaugmented by a major emphasis on socialand emotional development and careerdevelopment. I think both of those areaswould be possible enhancements to the ICMin its current form. However, I do not see theneed to make the model more complex. Ifanything it is already too complex.

(K) How does knowing that materials youhave developed are used so widely and

An Interview with Dr. Joyce VanTassel-Baskaby Dr. Kimberley Chandler

Note: Kim Chandler (K); Joyce VanTassel-Baska (J)

Continued on page 9, An InterviewS

Dr. Kimberley Chandler (l) and Dr. Joyce VanTassel-Baska

9

An Interview(Cont’d from page 8)

impacted so many make you feel?

(J) I don’t spend a lot of time thinking about it.I certainly am pleased to know that childrenbenefit from being provided high-poweredand challenging curriculum. That makes mevery happy. Beyond that, my only wish wouldbe that more students could have thatopportunity. I wish that schools were moreopen to trying innovative curriculum andinstructional approaches that would allow thatto happen, not just for the gifted, but topromote high end learning across the board.

(K) What is the greatest barrier to providingexcellent curriculum for gifted students?

(J) Educational institutions are set up tomaintain the status quo and in the process ofmaintaining it they frequently overlookindividual differences. So at one level, I wouldsay that there is an institutional barrier justbased on how educational institutions areorganized. Beyond that, I would also say thatteachers, as a part of those educationalinstitutions, are charged to teach what hasbeen approved by their communities andthat’s a set scope and sequence of curriculumat every grade level. So if I were to say whatis the greatest barrier, it is this age-grade lockstep model of teaching and learning. This isnot the fault of teachers, but they become partof the problem when they feel that they do nothave enough power or control to makechanges in a curriculum diet that wouldbenefit a core group of learners or even justone. Moreover, we have not charged schoolswith optimizing learning for anybody. We haveonly charged them with providing a minimumthreshold of opportunities, and consequentlyit is the barrier of raising expectations tolevels that schools were never intended tohave to reach. When you think about theimplications of raising the expectationsof schools, that also becomes quitepersonalized in terms of raising thecompetence level of teachers in terms ofstretching their cognitive capacities and theircapacity to organize classrooms in flexibleways. So you have another barrier related toteacher readiness and teacher capacity todeliver more high- powered curriculumopportunities.

(K) Recognizing that teachers are alwaysgoing to write curriculum, what three thingswould you like for all teachers tounderstand/know/take into considerationwhen writing curriculum for gifted learners?

(J) Well I would hate to limit it to three things,because I think that curriculum developmentis a complex enterprise that requires workover time. Curriculum products get betterbecause people spend more time on themand try them out and learn from those try outshow to improve curriculum products. So oneof the basic issues that teachers need tounderstand is that curriculum has to bedesigned and tried out and revised, then triedout again beyond just their classrooms inorder to make claims about the quality of theproduct. Also teachers need to understandthat there is nothing magical in a curriculumthat is going to produce learning in giftedstudents if we are not really targeting thenature of the learning that we want to accrueand ultimately collecting data on whether ornot student learning has occurred as a resultof what’s gone on. Classroom-based actionresearch on student learning thus is animportant activity that teachers need toengage in. Probably the third most criticalunderstanding is curriculum design. Teachersneed to understand that a curriculum has tobe coherent and understandable by anyonewho reads it, showing the relationship of theelements of goals down to the level ofactivities and materials. Lastly, principles ofdifferentiation for gifted learners have to bewell internalized in order for teachers to do agood job in designing curriculum for theselearners.

(K) What do you believe is required for theappropriate implementation of exemplarycurriculum for advanced learners?

(J) I believe that what we do for advancedlearners ultimately ends up being treated asan innovation, since it’s not routinelyhappening in schools. What we know from theinnovation literature suggests that teachersneed to be well-prepared to teach acurriculum which means they need to betrained on it and the underlying principlesrelated to implementing that curriculum.That’s why our William and Mary training

model is one that is based on teaching-learning models that are imbedded in existinglesson plans. So teacher preparation withmaterials is critical.

The second feature that is critical is thesupport of administrators. Teachers need tofeel support whenever they are doinganything that involves innovation, andadministrators should be curriculum leadersin the building in terms of providing thatsupport which can take many forms, includingverbal, monetary, resources, or moral supportif the teacher is challenged by parents orpeers. Support may also come in the form ofshowcasing the work of teachers who arewilling to step out and do something that isinnovative. So the administrator is crucial as asupport structure.

I also think collegial support is important interms of curriculum implementation. A teacheris going to be more effective with curriculuminnovation if not just she at third grade isdoing it but if her colleagues at fourth and fifthgrade are also doing it and the other teacherin third grade across the hall is also doing it.There is value to having a critical mass ofteachers engaged in innovative curriculumimplementation. Where it is done at multiplegrade levels by multiple teachers you arelikely to have greater support in terms ofinnovation, and teachers in turn can supporteach other relative to the implementation.

I also think that there is a real need withimplementing new curriculum to haveadditional resources available to put toward

THE CENTER’S UPCOMING EVENTS

Summer Enrichment Program Session I - July 6-10, 2009Session II - July 13-17, 2009

Advanced Placement (AP) InstituteAugust 3-7, 2009

Continued on page 10, An Interview

10

the effort. By that I mean additional materialsthat may need to be purchased in the form ofbooks, guides, or computer softwareprograms that just make the implementationeasier for teachers.

Then the last area that I want to highlightwould be the absolute necessity of curriculummonitoring and follow-up beyond professionaldevelopment into classrooms to see that theinnovative strategies and curriculum arebeing implemented effectively and as theywere intended. Fidelity of implementation isone of our biggest problems in trying toinstitutionalize curriculum innovation. Unlessthe new curriculum becomes a part of teacherroutine, it may have a “short shelf life” in theclassroom.

(K) How has the standards movementimpacted curriculum for the gifted in bothpositive and negative ways?

(J) On the positive side, the new standardswould actually raise the level of expectationand challenge for gifted learners if teacherswere teaching to the standards as they wereintended. Because they were designed downfrom a conceptualization of a practicingprofessional, the activities, the habits of mind,and the skills were high level. The downsideof the standards only came about when thetranslation of them was hindered in two ways.First, it was hindered by insisting that we havefifty translations of a single set of high qualitynational standards. And in those fiftytranslations, the level of challenge wentdown, and the interpretation of the standardsbecame much more leveled than it shouldhave been. The second deterrent to effectiveimplementation of standards came aboutwhen high stakes testing in fifty states wasinstituted to try to assess learning. In theprocess, these assessments becamenarrower than the standards and lower level.Thus the instruction of teachers began tomatch up with the assessments and not withthe standards.

Another asset of thestandards was that theydefined what highschool graduates shouldknow and be able to do

in the new century. This marked the beginningof our focus on outcomes rather thanobjectives, a focus on high level performanceas opposed to a developmental progressionof skills, and an emphasis on the multipledimensions that are associated with learningrather than only a skill-based orientation.Knowledge, skills, and attitudes took front andcenter in terms of the new standards in a waythat they had not in the past. However, insome instances the translations of these highlevel outcomes became faulty. Individualstates did not carefully think through what theimplications were for what students were ableto do at given stages of development. Anexample would be here in Virginia where wehad students learning about China beforethey learned about their own country orbefore they learned about their neighborhoodbecause there was little attention todevelopmental progression.

(K) Today’s students are exposed to “bits andbytes” of information in their everyday lives.What implications for curriculum do youforesee as a result of multi-media influence?

(J) This is not just a curriculum question; it’s aquestion of “How will technology ultimatelyimpact educational delivery systems at allstages of development, everywhere?” And Idon’t really feel that I know the answer to that.I think that the role of technology hasexpanded already in ways that are wellbeyond our thinking, certainly, just a decadeago even. The attractiveness of onlinecourses for students K-12 has grownexponentially from early efforts like theStanford EPGY program to the OnlineLearning Links at Northwestern now tomultimedia opportunities like CTYOnlinethrough Johns Hopkins and other kinds oftelecommunication models. I think the futureof the education of the gifted will lie in thesekinds of options that will be available tofamilies of means. My concern is that it will beavailable to those who can afford it, not tothose necessarily who need it the most. Thereis also in the new technology an underlyingassumption that people are self-directed andindependent learners. And in my years ofworking with the gifted, I do not fundamentallybelieve nor do we have the data to show thatthat is the case in the majority of gifted

students. Many gifted students are satellitelearners who require a high-poweredinstructor who can motivate them and readythem to take on challenging learning tasks.They also require the interaction of peers whoare equally able and interested in the learningprocess. The lack of accessibility to both ofthose features in online learningenvironments, I believe, will continue tohinder the role of technology as the totalanswer to the educational needs of the gifted.

(K) What was the most interesting curriculumproject with which you have been involved?What made it interesting?

(J) I must confess that all curriculum projectsthat I have ever been engaged in have beeninteresting, because they have all been totallyabsorbing and challenging in their own right.But I would be less than candid if I did not saythat the project that I have enjoyed the mostover the years has been the development oflanguage arts curriculum because it is closestto my own background and content expertise.Both the original language arts units and theAthena Project which involved furtherdevelopment of new language arts materialsincluding Jacob’s Ladder and additionalNavigators were special.

(K) What one curriculum project have youmost wanted to do but have been unable todo so far?

(J) There are several actually. One isdeveloping concept-based curriculum inshorter units of study and hooking thoseconcepts to multiple subject areas. That to mewould be an interesting project. Anotherwould be an interrelated arts project, wherebyyou take the visual arts, music, and theperforming arts, and you weave themtogether in terms of helping students arrive atdeeper levels of thinking and feeling as wellas just doing the arts.

(K) Are there any areas that you believeshould be a focus for the field of giftededucation in the future?

(J) The field has to “grow up” in my view inS Continued on page 12, An Interview

An Interview(Cont’d from page 9)

11

Leading Change: The Festschrift of Dr. Joyce VanTassel-Baskaby Dr. Janice Robbins

*fest·schrift (f?st’shr?ft’) n A volume of learned articles or essaysby colleagues and admirers, serving as atribute to a scholar.

Colleagues and admirers of Dr. JoyceVanTassel-Baska joined together on March13, 2009 in celebration of the publication ofLeading Change: The Festschrift of Dr. JoyceVanTassel-Baska. The volume, dedicated toJoyce’s leadership in gifted education,includes 45 chapters as well as Joyce’spersonal reflections on her life and works. Atestimony to her influence in the field, theFestschrift includes the works of scholars,researchers, students, and practitioners in thefield of gifted education, each of whom hasbeen influenced by Joyce in some way. Thecombined voices of these outstandingeducators echo Dr. VanTassel-Baska’s firmbeliefs about the nature and needs of giftedlearners and her endless research on theirbehalf.

The celebration was a day-long event thatfeatured several panel discussions on variousareas of research in the field of giftededucation, including constructs that definegiftedness, inhibitors to giftedness and theinfrastructure of gifted education. TheFestschrift celebration was organized by twoof her former doctoral students, TamraStambaugh, now director of Programs forTalented Youth at Vanderbilt University inTennessee and Bronwyn MacFarlane, now anassistant professor at the University ofArkansas at Little Rock. Attendees at the day-long event travelled from across the countryto share in the latest research and thinkingabout the field of gifted education and itsfuture.

Among the chapter authors and participatingpanel members were James Gallagher, asenior scientist emeritus and former directorof FPG Child Development Institute at theUniversity of North Carolina, Charlotte;Camilla Benbow, dean of VanderbiltUniversity’s Peabody College of educationand human development; and Linda Brody,director of the Study of Exceptional Talent andco-director of the Diagnostic and CounselingCenter at the Johns Hopkins Center forTalented Youth. The number of Joyce’s

former students on the panel served as atestament to her on-going impact on the fieldthrough her mentorship and development oftheir individual talents. The day was alsointerspersed with personal reminiscencesfrom colleagues and former students aboutJoyce’s impact on their lives and careers ingifted education.

“The turn-out for the Festschrift wastremendous—scholars from universitiesacross the country, partners from state andlocal education agencies, and alumni in giftededucation,” said Virginia McLaughlin, dean ofWilliam & Mary’s School of Education.“Throughout their presentations and remarks,they acknowledged Joyce’s impact on theprofession and on their personal lives as well.In particular, participants noted Joyce’sleadership and advocacy in the areas ofcurriculum research and development,professional standards, and social justice.”

The academic portion of the day was followedby a dinner that was attended by over 80participants, many who stayed on from theday. Diners were entertained by a display ofpictures spanning Joyce’s life from age 3 tothe present. The pictures highlighted manyimportant events and people in Joyce’s life.Some attendees were surprised to seethemselves in those pictures and weretouched to see photos of Joyce and some ofher mentors such as Dr. Julian Stanley andDr. John Feldhusen. The evening concludedwith a number of toasts to Joyce thathighlighted the impact she has had on many.Two life-long friends as well as her daughter

shared extended reminiscences about Joyce.The final touch was a synthesis of her own lifeby Joyce and her thoughts on how she mighthave impacted individuals and the field ofgifted education.

The festschrift volume speaks clearly to thepassion and dedication Joyce has brought tothe field of gifted education for over years.She has instructed, guided, cajoled, directed,convinced, enlightened, and otherwiseinfluenced students, deans, principals,superintendents, association leaders, politicalfigures, and countless individuals who havewrestled with the ever-present question,“What do gifted learners need?” Chapters inthe Festschrift speak to topics close toJoyce’s heart including creativity, talentdevelopment, students of poverty andunderrepresented minority youth, twice-exceptional children, equitable assessment,the study of eminent people, and, of course,curriculum. Joyce’s work in articulating anddemonstrating the value of the IntegratedCurriculum Model is reviewed and detailed inseveral of the Festschrift chapters.

2009 marks the twenty-first year of the Centerfor Gifted Education. In a sense, the Centerhas come of age. The Center’s work inmultiple areas of gifted education, led byJoyce, has resulted in a national andinternational reputation for excellence.Researchers build upon the work she hascompleted. Leaders in the field cite herfindings in support of their own work.

Continued on page 12, Leading Change

Drs. Tamara Stambaugh, Joyce VanTassel-Baska, and Bronwyn MacFarlane

12

Teachers all over the world use the IntegratedCurriculum Model as incorporated into aware-winningunits of study. Hundreds of educators come toWilliamsburg every year to gain confidence andcompetence in the use of these units. As Joyceprepares to retire from the Executive Directorship ofthe Center and 44 years in education, she knows thatthe years of research and development she has ledwill continue to inspire teachers and their students forgenerations to come. Leading Change: The Festschriftof Dr. Joyce VanTassel-Baska, will remain a cleartestament and a constant source of the ripple effectsof her work. Well done, dear friend and colleague!

Leading Change(Cont’d from page 11)

terms of the issue of curriculum andinstruction. It has to come to grips with thefact that we should not be using curriculumwith the gifted, our very best learners, wherethere is no evidence base for theeffectiveness of its use. When I first came intothe field in the early 1970s, curriculum was aseries of activities made up by the teacherthat were differentiated for the gifted. And weare right back to that same notion in servingthe gifted in regular classrooms. It’s aregressive state that is troublesome in termsof what we could be doing, so I would hopethat the field would wake up to the fact thatwe have strong materials that could be builton for future projects and for future work.

We also need to realize that the world ofcurriculum for the gifted is wide open asopposed to narrow because of the standardsor because of the school- basedinterpretation of the standards. I would love to

see a return to the teaching of philosophy atgrades four, five, and six to gifted learners. Iwould love to see more of an emphasis onspatially-oriented subject matter, like robotics.I would love to see much more of anemphasis on the serious teaching of foreignlanguage in elementary and middle schools.These are all appropriate subject matter forgifted learners at the earlier stages ofdevelopment that would be of interest andagain growth-producing. Yet we havenarrowed the vision of curriculum for thegifted to being what individual teachers arecapable of delivering or what is tested on highstakes state assessments.

(K) Is there anything else you want to add interms of the focus of the field?

(J) I think that there is a huge need for moreresearch and development work in curriculumin all subject areas and at all requisite stages

of development. There is still a lot we don’tknow about what works at different levels forgifted learners.

(K) What are you going to do next?

(J) Well, that is a good question. I am notentirely sure. I think I will continue to consult.I will continue to write. I will continue to beactive in the field from the vantage point ofreading and attending conferences. Butwhere I will put the bulk of my creativeenergies I haven’t yet really decided. I thinkthat it will still take me a few months to settleinto a different schedule in order to determinethat. But I will say that I know there will be aneed to continue to write everyday and togive talks regularly, in order to continue to feelfluent in those two modes of communication.

An Interview(Cont’d from page 10)

Available through Prufrock Press

Honoring the leadership of Dr.Joyce VanTassel-Baska, this bookthat showcases 45 chaptercontributions from leading seniorscholars in gifted educationincludes major strands of workcentral to defining the field ofgifted education and discussesrelevant trends and issues thathave shaped or will shape thefield.

This comprehensive resourceoutlines three major sections:conceptions in gifted educationsuch as intelligence, creativity, andeminence; linkage of theory topractice through curriculum andinstruction, professionaldevelopment, and assessment; andthe infrastructure of gifted education that relies on research, policy, and leadershipdirections within and outside the field.

Continued on page 16, An Interview

The importance of science in our society continues to increase, asthe needs of the global culture and the problems of the world'sgrowing populations affect resources internationally (DeLisi,

2008; Fischman, 2007; Park, 2008). The need for qualified andexperienced scientists to solve complex problems is important to thefuture of the United States. Models of success for women in STEMdisciplines are important to improve the recruitment and retention ofwomen in academic science. This study serves as an examination ofthe facilitators and barriers -- including external factors and internalcharacteristics -- on the talent development process of successfulwomen academic scientists.

Since there are few studies relating specifically to the careerexperiences of successful women in academic science careers (Ceci &Williams, 2007; Wasserman, 2000; Xie & Shauman, 2003), a literaturereview was conducted that examined the (1) the gifted literature onwomen, including the eminence literature; (2) the higher educationliterature on women faculty and academic science, and (3) the literature

related to the internal characteristics and external factors that influencethe talent development process. The final section of the literature reviewincludes a literature map (Creswell, 2009) outlining the major studiescited in this chapter. The conclusion, based on a critical analysis of theliterature review, outlines the need for this study.

The current study utilizes the framework of Gagné'sdifferentiated talent development model for gifted individuals (Gagné,1985, 1991), to examine the themes cited in multiple studies thatinfluence the talent development process. Through a mixed-designmethodology (Creswell, 2009) that incorporates quantitative andqualitative analysis using a survey and follow-up interviews withselected participants, this study seeks to determine the effects ofinternal characteristics, external influences, significant events, andexperiences on the success of women scientists at elite researchuniversities in New York.

13

Continued on page 14, Talent Development

An Evaluation Study of the Curriculum and InstructionalApproaches Employed in the Norfolk Public Schools GiftedProgram by Katie Dolph, Norfolk Public Schools

William and Mary Gifted Program Dissertation Abstracts

The purpose of this study was to determine the degree to which theNorfolk Public Schools, Virginia, district elementary giftedgrouping model was aligned with the National Association for

Gifted Children Standards and its Local Plan for the Education of GiftedStudents in regards to curriculum and instruction, as well as to providedata on classroom instruction techniques and the curriculum currentlybeing used to provide gifted education services in the district.

The evaluation questions were 1) To what degree has theeighth recommendation of the 2005-06 evaluation study beenimplemented in the Norfolk Public Schools (NPS) district in regards tocurriculum and instructional practices? 2) Are there differences betweengifted resource teachers and cluster teachers in the use of differentiatedinstructional practices? 3) To what extent does the Local Educational

Plan for the Education of the Gifted (LEA) for Norfolk Public Schoolsalign with the Curriculum and Instructional NAGC standards?

Data were collected from gifted resource teachers and giftedcluster teachers via surveys and focus group interviews as well as aninterview with the Director of the Office of Gifted Education. It wasconcluded that differentiation is not being consistently used with giftedstudents and that the NPS LEA is not aligned with the NAGC Curriculumand Instruction standards. More research studies should focus on theeffects of differentiated instruction and curriculum on gifted students'learning. Longitudinal studies which focus on the long term benefits ofdifferentiated curriculum and instruction to gifted students are alsoneeded.

The Talent Development Process of Successful AcademicWomen Scientists at Elite Research Universities in New YorkStateby Lisa Kaenzig, William Smith College

14

A purposeful sample (n=94) was selected based onestablished criteria. Forty-one successful academic women scientistsare the study participants, representing a response rate of 43.6%.Findings include the important roles of parents, teachers, mentors andcollaborators on the talent development process of the participants. Theperception of the study participants was that there were multiplefacilitators to their talent development process, while few barriers wereacknowledged. The most important barriers cited by participants wereperceptions of institutional culture and sexism.

Implications for practice in both gifted and higher educationare suggested, based on the findings of the study. For gifted education,these suggestions include the need to provide parental educationprograms emphasizing the importance of intellectual engagement athome, providing dedicated time for science in primary education, andfostering science and mathematics opportunities, particularly for girlsand young women. Stressing the importance of hard work, persistenceand intelligent risk-taking are also important for encouraging girls in

science. For higher education, the study provides models of success ofacademic women scientists, outlines the importance of mentors andcollaborators, and emphasizes the critical role that institutions anddepartments play in facilitating or impeding women's careerdevelopment as academics.

The current study suggests several areas for further researchto continue the exploration of the talent development influences onacademic women scientists. Based on the findings of this study, futurerecommended studies include examining the differences ofgenerational cohorts; probing the roles of collaborators/mentorcolleagues; exploring differences for women from various ethnic andracial backgrounds; replicating the current study with larger populationsof women scientists; investigating the role of facilitative schoolenvironments; examining the patterns of influence of first generationsuccessful academic women, and evaluating matched pairs of male andfemale successful academics.

Talent Development(cont’d from page 13)

While research in gifted education has been conducted inspecific curriculum areas such as language arts, mathematics,science, social studies, and fine arts, there is a paucity of

literature connecting gifted and world language education. While worldlanguages historically were elective courses at the high school level,attracting college bound students, world language credit requirementsfor high school graduation or college admission have expanded,encouraging enrollment in Advanced Placement world languagecourses for a broader range of learners. Since Advanced Placementoptions are still the current face of gifted services at the secondary level,there is a need for differentiated pedagogy in AP classrooms forsecondary gifted learners, a need often not addressed (Hertberg-Davis,Callahan, & Kyburg, 2006). In most states AP teachers are not requiredto be trained in gifted education instructional practices, and theirperceptions toward gifted students are unknown.

This survey research study collected data from AdvancedPlacement world language teachers regarding their perceptions of highability world language students and self-assessed use of differentiatedinstructional approaches. Instrumentation included the Gagné andNadeau (1991) scale of teacher perceptions toward gifted students, theWilliam and Mary Classroom Observation Scale - Revised (VanTassel-Baska, Avery, Struck, Feng, Bracken, Drummond, & Stambaugh, 2005)which assessed teacher behaviors with respect to differentiationpractices, and a researcher-created questionnaire which collectedparticipant demographic data.

In this descriptive study, findings indicated teachers heldsomewhat positive attitudes toward providing needs and support forgifted students and the social value of gifted persons in society.Teachers held ambivalent attitudes about the instructional practice ofability grouping, the rejection of gifted students by others, and thepractice of actively advocating for gifted learners. Teachers reportedsomewhat negative attitudes toward the instructional practice ofappropriate acceleration. Findings further revealed limited teacher useof differentiated strategies in the AP classroom, limited teacher trainingin gifted education pedagogy, yet a positive relationship between highand low student achievement and teachers’ training background ingifted education.

Implications for practice from this study focus on the need forgifted education training for Advanced Placement world languageteachers on the characteristics of high ability students and differentiatedinstructional practices that are found to be effective for increasedstudent achievement. Specifically, professional development is neededfor teachers that address (1) differentiated curriculum for the gifted withan emphasis on remodeling AP curriculum to meet high ability studentneeds, and (2) the use of advanced instructional practices with specificinformation regarding effective delivery and classroom managementtechniques. Implications for research include the need for more studieson AP teachers' attitudes and practices in relation to gifted learners anda set of studies focusing on effective instructional practices for teachingworld languages.

Advanced Placement World Language Teacher Perceptions ofHigh Ability Students and Differentiated Instructionby Bronwyn MacFarlane, University of Arkansas at Little Rock

15

Part one of this study relied on archival data of an urban publichigh school to explain and compare the Advanced Placement(AP) and International Baccalaureate (IB) course taking patterns

and program exam performance of high school students who hadparticipated in the districts program for gifted learners, the ExtendedLearning Program (ELP), when in grades 4-8, with those that did not.

Adapting Gagne’s (2003, 2004) Differentiated Model ofGiftedness and Talent (DMTG) as a conceptual framework, part two ofthis study examined the intrapersonal and environmental catalystsaffecting the talent development process as perceived by seniors,enrolled in an AP or IB course. Seniors taking AP or IB and who hadparticipated in the Extended Learning Program, were asked for theirperceptions of the program's role in enhancing high-level performance

and creative interest.From archival data, former ELP students enrolled in more AP

and IB courses, had higher mean scores on AP and IB exams, earnedover 85% of the AP and IB awards, and were more likely to graduatewhen compared to non-ELP students.

ELP and non-ELP seniors attributed themselves as mostresponsible for their talent development process noting hard work andpersistence as necessary traits. Those who had participated in the ELPfound it offered opportunities to be with like peers, to work onchallenging and advanced curricula, and to better prepare for theacademic challenges ahead. Based on findings, recommendations forpolicy and practice, and suggestions for future research were provided.

An Exploratory Study of Factors that Relate to Academic SuccessAmong High-Achieving African American Malesby Kianga Thomas, Hampton University

This exploratory study explored three factors – self-efficacy,resiliency, and leadership – that relate to academic success inAfrican American male freshman college students. The study

explored how self-efficacy, resiliency, and leadership interrelate, how apilot group and study group differ in respect to self-efficacy, resiliency,and leadership, and how African American freshman males differ onthese factors in respect to key demographic variables.

The study utilized the Student Academic Success Scale(SASS), which was an instrument developed by the researcher in agraduate course. The instrument was administered to 104 participants.Descriptive statistics, correlation coefficients, and a one-way analysis ofvariance (ANOVA) were data analysis techniques used to interpret data.

Data revealed that participants perceive themselves ratherhighly on the SASS and that there were positive correlations among allthree variables. Furthermore, a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA)showed that freshmen male students perceive themselves higher on theSASS than students from a pilot group of upperclassmen. Lastly, anANOVA revealed that African American male freshmen who participatedin art programs rated themselves significantly higher on self-efficacyand leadership, while students who participated in mentorship orinternship programs rated themselves significantly higher on self-efficacy and resiliency.

Implications of this study indicate that there is a need todevelop mentorship and internship opportunities in the elementary,middle, and high school settings for African American males. Moreover,

future research should look closely at studying this group longitudinallyto evaluate perceptions over a period of time. Another implication forresearch suggests that comparing a group of African American collegemales at a Historically Black College or University to African Americanmales at a traditionally White institution on similar dimensions.

A Comparative Study of the Course Taking and PerformancePatterns of High Achieving Secondary Studentsby Joy Selberg, Salt Lake City Public Schools

What’s Happening at the Center

Graduating this year from the from the Educational Policy,Planning, and Leadership doctoral program are Dr. Katie Dolph,Dr. Lisa Kaenzig, Dr. Bronwyn MacFarlane, Dr. Valija Rose, Dr.

Joy Selberg, and Dr. Kianga Thomas. Graduates of the Curriculum andInstruction Program with a concentration in gifted education are MelissaBaldwin, Leslie Belvin, Marvin Lee, Christina Pace, and KimberleyThoresen.

Mihyeon Kim, a doctoral candidate at the Center received theExcellence in Gifted Education doctoral level award. Mihyeon iscurrently analyzing data with the intent of defending her dissertation thissummer.

Kimberley Thoresen received the Excellence in Gifted Education

master's level award. Kimberley will complete her thesis this summerand will begin teaching this fall in Prince William County, Virginia.

In July the staff and students of the Center will welcome the newexecutive director, Dr. Tracy Cross. Dr. Cross will be joining the facultyof the School of Education from Ball State University in Indiana wherehe served as the George and Frances Ball Distinguished Professor ofGifted Studies, and the Associate Dean for Graduate Studies,Research, and Assessment for Teachers College. Previously Dr. Crossserved as the Executive Director of the Indiana Academy for Science,Mathematics and Humanities, a public residential school forintellectually gifted adolescents. An interview with Dr. Cross waspublished in last fall's issue of Systems.

An Interview(Cont’d from page 12)

(K) Is there anything else that you would like to add?

(J) None of the curriculum work that has gone on here at William andMary would have been possible without the strong collaborators thatI’ve enjoyed working with over the years. This would include teacherslike yourself, Kim, and others who have been graduate students andhave been placed in a position of engaging in the curriculumdevelopment projects. But also staff people at the center with whom Ihave worked and who have added so much to the level of curriculumthat we have been able to put out. Beverly Sher, Dana Johnson, andLinda Boyce are the three who come to my mind as being extremely

powerful in really influencing that early work in very positive ways. Andthen, I would say in the last eight years or so, the collaborative work withBruce Bracken, Carol Tieso, and other staff members here at the Centerlike yourself, Tamra Stambaugh, Elissa Brown, and Catherine Little,have made our curriculum work stronger and more credible. (Photo byStephen Salpukas at the College of William and Mary.)