Beth Nyers
Fall, 2000
Dr. Marianne Dove
Winebrenner, Susan. (September
2000). Gifted Students Need an
Education, Too. Educational
Leadership, pp. 52 – 56.
Summary
In this recently published article, Susan Winebrenner describes the
reasons why gifted students need differentiated curriculum and how teachers can
implement several strategies to do this in mixed-ability classrooms.
She argues that because gifted students score well on assessment tests
their needs for an enriched curriculum are often overlooked.
She asserts that this is just as wrong as ignoring the needs of students
who score on the low end of the learning curve.
Winebrenner describes several reasons gifted students are neglected in
the regular classroom and how this harms their ability and desire to learn.
One reason educators have for ignoring the needs of the gifted student is
because keeping him/her on task with the regular curriculum can allow the
talented student to provide help to students who are struggling.
Winebrenner contends that this is an inappropriate strategy because
“the discrepancy in learning ability between students who struggle to learn
and gifted students is simply too wide to facilitate positive role modeling”.
Instead, the teacher should utilize students who are functioning well at
the appropriate grade level, who are capable, but not gifted, to help slower
students gain understanding. Winebrenner
argues that teachers are expected to create numerous differentiation adjustments
for low achieving students in modifying the amount of work, depth, complexity,
and content of the curriculum and by linking students’ learning styles and
interests to the prescribed learning tasks.
She believes these same strategies should be applied to challenge those
students who have already mastered the content area so that they can go beyond
where they presently are. Winebrenner alleges that unfortunately, those at greatest
risk of learning the least in
classrooms are those at the top range of ability because they rarely experience
learning challenges and may lose confidence in their ability to perform well
when confronted.
Winebrenner lists five ways gifted students learn differently from their
classmates. First, they learn new
material in less time. Second, they
tend to remember what they have learned which makes review painful. Third, they perceive ideas and concepts at more abstract and
complex levels than their peers. Often,
they become passionately interested in specific topics and have difficulty
moving on to other learning tasks until they are satisfied that they have
learned all they can about the topic. Finally, gifted students can operate on
many levels of concentration simultaneously meaning they can monitor classroom
activities without paying direct attention to them.
Winebrenner makes specific recommendations to help teachers differentiate
the curriculum for gifted students. She
describes Curriculum Compacting developed by Renzulli and Reis as one method.
This method consists of assessing a student’s knowledge of a content area
before it is taught to the class. This
preassessment should be open to all students regardless of whether they have
been identified as gifted. Students
who prove they have already mastered the material can then be provided with
extension activities. They receive
full credit for what they have already mastered and pursue their enrichment
activities during the time the class spends learning what (s)he already knows.
Another recommendation of Winebrenner is to design alternative learning
experiences. This can be achieved
by changing the content to a greater degree, the learning process to provide
depth and complexity appropriate to the student’s learning ability, the
product to create something of an advanced level, the learning environment
possibly to a different place outside the regular classroom where the student
can work more independently on self-directed activities, and the assessment
process where the student receives full credit for what (s)he has already
mastered.
A third method of differentiating the curriculum is to allow
differentiated pacing. If the
curriculum cannot be assessed beforehand because it is unfamiliar to all, gifted
students can work at their own pace allowing them to spend more time exploring a
topic of their choice.
Winebrenner asserts that teachers and students must work together to set
up standards for evaluating productivity, behavior, and products. These factors need to be documented in writing.
Teachers also need to find time to interact with these students so that
they do not feel abandoned in their pursuit of knowledge.
Winebrenner also makes suggestions to administrators to facilitate
differentiation for gifted students. She
recommends that they acknowledge the needs of gifted students.
Because these students fall as far from the center of the normal curve as
slow students do on the other end, they have the same needs for differentiation.
Administrators should facilitate gifted education training for staff. Most teachers have training in providing special services to
slow students, yet little, if any, training for helping the gifted.
Administrators can also arrange cluster grouping which assigns four to
six gifted students to the same otherwise heterogeneous class.
The teacher should have special training in differentiating the
curriculum for these students. The
administrator needs to communicate expectations so that teachers and students
understand that all students, even the most capable, will be exposed to
something new and challenging every day.
Gifted students need to realize
that they must demonstrate competencies that exceed those designated as basic.
Critique
Winebrenner offers some very valid and coherent ideas for challenging
gifted students. Her article is
extremely easy to follow and thorough in its recommendations.
She uses examples to describe the methods she is recommending, making
implementation more feasible.
A point I found interesting in Winebrenner’s article is that it is just
as important for gifted students to receive specialized services as it is for
slow students. I only wish I could
make administrators and legislators in Ohio believe this. We have neglected and spent far too little money on gifted
programs, especially in Ohio, for many years.
As we continue to be one of only sixteen states that still do not require
gifted services, we seem to be falling further behind in challenging our
brightest starts. I
hope to see some resolution
to the gifted services fiasco in Ohio in the near future, yet when I look back I
see a fight that has been waged for many years with no resolution.
It seems to be a tragedy that we continue to allow.
Winebrenner also asserts that gifted students should be held accountable for
showing gains from where they started, not minimum gains expected of all
students. I believe this is a valid
point and should be the goal of the teacher working with these students.
Gifted students need to be accurately assessed to know from where
they’re starting so we can see where they’ve gone.
Another point I found interesting in Winebrenner’s article is the
recommendation for cluster grouping in regular classrooms.
I have experienced cluster grouping as a Javits teacher in my elementary
school. We have taken some of our brightest students and grouped them
with teachers who have special training to provide them with challenges.
I have found this to work quite successfully and benefit the students who
are encouraged to read, write, and think in more complex manners than would
otherwise be expected of them.
Winebrenner’s
suggestions for differentiation provide useable procedures that can be explored
in greater detail if a person desires to implement them.
Renzulli’s Curriculum Compacting is a well-known tool for enriching
gifted curriculum. Some of the
other methods can be personally adapted to fit the needs of particular students.
This is intended to promote higher achievement levels.
Winebrenner seems
to accurately portray the picture of gifted education and where it needs to go.
She makes many practical suggestions in the hope of realizing some needed
changes in the treatment of gifted individuals.
Hopefully, some of her recommendations will be utilized to provide gifted
students with services they have every right to expect.
