The Classroom Practices Survey was conducted by The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented (NRC/GT) to determine the extent to which gifted and talented students receive differentiated education in regular classrooms. Six samples of third and fourth grade teachers in public schools, private schools and schools with high concentrations of four types of ethnic minorities were randomly selected to participate in this research. The major finding of this study is that third and fourth grade classroom teachers make only minor modifications in the regular curriculum to meet the needs of gifted students. This result holds for all types of schools sampled. It also holds for classrooms in different parts of the country and for different types of communities. Implications of these findings for researchers and gifted education specialists are discussed.

The Classroom Practices Observational Study conducted by The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented (NRC/GT) examined the instructional and curricular practices used with gifted and talented students in regular elementary classrooms throughout the United States. This article describes the procedures used in this study and the results obtained from systematic observations in 46 third or fourth grade classrooms. The observations were designed to determine if and how classroom teachers meet the needs of gifted and talented students in the regular classroom. Two students, one gifted and talented and one average ability student, were selected as target students for each observation day. The Classroom Practices Record (CPR) was developed to document the types and frequencies of differentiated instruction that gifted students receive through modifications in curricular activities, materials, and teacher-student verbal interactions. Descriptive statistics and chi-square procedures were used to analyze the CPR data. The results indicated little differentiation in the instructional and curricular practices, grouping arrangements, and verbal interactions for gifted and talented students in the regular classroom. Across five subject areas and 92 observation days, the observed gifted and talented students experienced no instructional or curricular differentiation in 84% of their instructional activities.

No abstract

This study examined the effects of curriculum compacting on the achievement test seores of a national sample of 336 high ability students from second through sixth grade heterogeneous classrooms in rural, suburban, and urban settings. Curriculum compacting is a strategy for eliminating curricular material that students have already mastered and replacing it with more appropriate learning activities. Teachers from three treatment and control groups in this experimental study selected one to two students from their classes who demonstrated superior ability and advanced content knowledge prior to instruction. They were able to eliminate between 40%-50% of curricula for these students across content areas. Pre and post student achievement was examined using the Iowa Test of Basic Skills, and out-of-grade-level (one grade higher) tests were used to guard against ceiling effects. The results indicated that the achievement test scores of students whose curriculum was compacted did not differ significantly from students whose curriculum was not compacted. These findings from a national study minimize teachers' fears about declines in students' achievement test scores due to compacting.

Including opportunities for students to conduct independent investigations is a mainstay of gifted education programs and services. When carefully designed and skillfully facilitated, students’ interest-based, independent study experiences result in increased intrinsic motivation, growth in 21st-century critical and creativity skills, greater self-efficacy toward research and creative productivity, and authentic learning experiences. Successful and meaningful investigations occur when teachers guide students through four stages of the independent study process: interest focusing, problem focusing, product focusing, and audience focusing. Progression through these stages leads to real-life learning experiences with lasting effects for students.

No abstract

Teachers encourage students to develop inventions, organizations sponsor invention contests, and publishers sell guidebooks on inventing. Only a few studies have examined the relationship between these materials or opportunities to invent and students' inventiveness. The purpose of this experimental study was to provide an instructional unit on the invention process and to investigate the degree to which training influenced students' inventiveness. Students in the experimental group received eight lessons that were designed to provide training in the invention process and encourage the development of inventions, and students in the control group received one introductory lesson and opportunity to develop inventions. Using the Invention Evaluation Scale, experts assessed three aspects of students' inventions: originality, technical goodness, and aesthetic appeal. Regression analyses indicated that group membership was a significant predictor of the quantity of inventions, but not a significant predictor of the quality of students' inventions.

In this study, three levels of staff development were provided to elementary teachers to train them in a technique called curriculum compacting. Teachers in 20 school districts across the country were randomly assigned by district to one of three treatment groups that received different levels of staff development. After receiving training in curriculum compacting (a procedure that enables teachers to eliminate previously mastered curriculum and substitute more challenging alternatives), teachers were able to eliminate between 42% and 54% of the content for the high-ability students they selected. Teachers in Treatment Group 3, who received the most intensive staff development, completed the highest rated compactor forms. The majority of the teachers in the study were enthusiastic about the process of modifying curriculum for high-ability students, reinforcing Guskey's (1986) model of the process of teacher change.