The gifted child in the regular classroom.

The following was the first article ever published in the Roeper Review, volume 1, issue 1, 1978, pp. 3-6. Readers can see that 25 years ago we faced many of the same concerns we see in the literature today. Following this article, Dr. Cheryll Adams, director of the Center for Gifted Studies and Talent Development at Ball State University, provides a perspective on the changes that have occurred since Dr. Mulhern's article appeared in 1978. We hope you will enjoy this retrospective.--The Editors

Recently, Professor Julian Stanley (1977) of Johns Hopkins University was quoted as recommending that gifted children be allowed to zoom along at their own high speeds. Elsewhere in the literature it is possible to find recommendations for just about any educational schema as being suitable for academically gifted youngsters. These suggestions will range from intellectually elite schools to "pull-out" programs and after school enrichment programs. Most of these recommendations have two things in common--first, they fail to address the everyday needs of a typically bright youngster in a school setting that approximates the vast majority of the public schools in this country. Second, they often require pupil expenditures that are considerably higher than the average per pupil expenditures in the district. Consequently, they tend to be of little or no value to classroom teachers who are providing the education for these children.

The purpose of this article is threefold. First, to what extent can a classroom teacher use easily accessible information to identify academically gifted students? Second, what are the implications of "giftedness" with respect to the student's classroom learning needs? Third, what are realistic classroom goals for the teacher in the education of the students? It is oriented toward the typical elementary classroom with its limited resources and the district where it takes two years or more before an individually administered I.Q. test is given to a student.

As this topic is considered, let us be guided by the words of Dr. Taffel, principal of the Bronx High School of Science:

   Our educational system has
   been built on the false assumption
   that a bright youngster, if
   no specific provision is made
   for him, will raise the level of
   the others in the class. This just
   doesn't happen. Unless his talent
   is recognized and provided
   for by a program that is truly
   challenging, that talent will
   simply deteriorate. Many
   bright students who are set
   adrift in a general school population
   that operates on an academic
   level lower than their
   capabilities just merge and
   become indistinguishable from
   their less-able classmates as
   the years go on. (Horwitz,
   1974, p.17)

Who Are the Academically Gifted?

Over the past 50 years, many attempts have been made to identify academically gifted children and to differentiate among them. Group-administered I.Q. tests as well as the individually administered Wechsler and Stanford-Binet tests have been assigned important roles in this task. Frequently, the "gifted" have been classified as attaining an I.Q. of 125 or above on the various scales with some variation allowed for the different tests. Further, the "very gifted" have been identified as having an I.Q. of 150 or above on the Stanford-Binet or an equivalent score. The limitations posed by the exclusive use of these tests are obvious to us today and the objections are many:

* The tests are an index of only verbal and nonverbal understanding.

* The tests are in part a measure of what is known rather than the potential for knowing.

* The tests are racially and/or linguistically biased.

* A student's creativity is not measured by the tests.

* Talents other than academics are not measured by the tests.

However, the I.Q. test remains as perhaps the most widely accepted index of one's academic giftedness at the elementary school level. In the later stages of adolescence and early adulthood, one's achievements may outweigh one's I.Q. as an index of giftedness, but exceptional accomplishment is infrequently found at the grade school level.

The literature is by no means a conclusive source of information on the topic. Torrance's work, which in many respects is a contribution comparable to that of Terman's, has made many attempts at identification. In 1971, he cited "identity" as a major problem for gifted youngsters. Torrance suggests that the gifted student needs "freedom to wander, to experiment, to risk, to find out what is possible, to discover one's limits, and to decide what fits" (p. 155). In addition, he refers to the "creative" paradox which is a duality of the unique and the universal, and the role of ethnic identity which introduces still another element into the "identity" problem. It is obvious that the home and the classroom need to work in harmony if the gifted child is to be identified and develop his/her talents.

Isaacs (1972) cites examples of extremely able readers when they enter school as a dimension of giftedness. His reference to reading research that reports gifted early readers are capable of maintaining early gains points to an unmet need in many classrooms and schools--a reading program that meets the needs of the child who is reading when he/she enters kindergarten or first grade.

Terman's (1925-1959) long studies of gifted children are still relevant and appropriate today. His studies provided evidence that the intellectually gifted child is often gifted in many other areas as well. Physically they are apt to develop earlier and to walk at an early age. They do well in physical endeavors and are accepted by their classmates.

Roe's (1953) work in the 1950's was an attempt to identify characteristics of scientists. In addition to an extremely high I.Q. (in the 150 range) she cites the following characteristics:

* a general need for independence

* happy, and intent

* stable and sensitive

* strong egos

* intellectually and learning oriented

* community oriented

* personality is comparative to creative artists or authors.

In addition, some of Brandwein's work (Brandwein, Watson, & Blackwood, 1958) suggests that the characteristics of persistence and questing are critical in the background of a scientist.

One of the major shortcomings of the early research on the academically gifted was the failure to relate the creative dimension to intellectual talent. As a result, many of the studies included students who were intellectually gifted but oftentimes conforming. The research on creativity sparked by Guilford's work for the Air Force during World War II opened up this research dimension during the 1950's and 60's. Students were then classified in terms of their creativity as well as their intellectual ability. Khatena (1977) reports on his development of a teacher administered and interpreted checklist of 50 items which provides a measure of a child's creativity. The checklist measures six areas of creativity: Environmental Sensitivity, Initiative, Self-Strength, Intellectuality, Individuality, and Artistry.

Of special interest is the identification of academically talented youngsters who may not be readily identified due to racial, cultural, and linguistic inhibitors. Although some work has been done (Briscoe, 1976), there is a dearth of definitive material available to practitioners on the identification of the academically talented among minority children. Obviously some of these youngsters will be identified using the same criteria as is used with the majority, but special consideration must be given to the identification of all of the students.

Although the research has served to sharpen our skill in the identification of the academically gifted children, it is designed to serve organized programs rather than individual classroom teachers. However, it is possible to generalize from the research and the use of the following profile is a means to identify the academically gifted students in a classroom.

* I.Q.: A composite score of 115 or above on any group-administered I.Q. test with a score of 125 or above on either the verbal or nonverbal scale.

* Achievement Tests: A composite score at the 95th percentile or higher on any group-administered achievement tests.

* Special Talent: Evidence of distinguished student achievement in learning, performance, or artistic production.

* Reading: Evidence of early reading and/or exceptional ability in reading.

* Persistence: Evidence of the student's quest for something and willingness to pursue it to completion.

* Creativity: Evidence of student's ability to be ingenious and flexible. May be measured on any one of several scales of creativity.

A Profile of a student that reflects this pattern is for all practical purposes that of a student who could benefit from a program designed for the academically gifted. It there is an element of doubt about a particular child, compare his/her chronological age with that of the class average. If the student is younger than the class average, then include that child also.

What Are Some Common Learning Characteristics of the Academically Gifted?

A group of students with a range of I.Q. scores from 125 to 180 and a creativity index from low to high will obviously have as great a range of difference within the group as they will with youngsters of average ability. It must be remembered that the academically gifted youngsters learn survival skills very early in schools and they can learn poor study habits. The academically gifted student who has never learned to do certain learning tasks will need assistance in overcoming these and other limitations.

First, an academically gifted child will learn more quickly and will probe more deeply into the topic than will his/her average ability classmate. Horwitz (1974) classifies these children as high in abstract thinking and independent thought and judgment. She states:

   Their interests at a very early
   age extend beyond the self and
   they are likely, even in elementary
   school, to display keen concern
   with morality, problems of
   international relations and world
   peace. Their curiosity is avid.
   They read more than average
   children, have much longer
   attention spans and apply themselves
   with enthusiasm to self-directed
   projects. (p. 20)

Second, an academically gifted child will display greater independence and self initiative than will his/her average ability classmates. McCarthy (1977) reports of her research on high achieving as contrasted with low achieving gifted pupils which found the high achieving were more field independent, more creative in divergent production tasks, and more interested in academic achievement. Of further interest is her report that teachers could successfully differentiate the frequency with which high achieving and low achieving gifted pupils would exhibit behaviors reflecting competency in basic skills, creative thinking, a positive self-image and leadership qualities.

Third, an academically gifted child will read more and display a greater interest in reading than will his/her average ability classmates. Stevens (1977) reports differences between gifted boys and girls at the intermediate grade level with respect to their recreational reading book choices. She found that the girls read slightly more books than the boys (3.74 to 3.13); reading increased with the advance in grades except for 6th grade boys; the boys read twice as many nonfiction books as did the girls, and that boys and girls purchased 31% of their favorite books while they obtained 21% from the school library.

Fourth, an academically gifted child will transfer learning from one area to another more easily than will his/her average ability classmates. Sullivan and Skanes (1971) in a study of transfer of learning between bright and dull students of the same mental age found that the younger, brighter students showed greater positive transfer of learning than did the older, duller students. Transfer was expressed as a "change in performance on one task with change resulting from practice on another" (p. 292). The implications indicate that bright students can and do transfer their learning from one task to another more easily and readily than do dull students.

The academically gifted youngster learns more quickly, displays more interest in subjects, transfers his knowledge from one field to another more easily, reads more, and has a greater sense for independent learning than does the average student.

Academically Gifted in the Regular Classroom

It is perhaps ironic that much of the funding for the academically talented is under handicapped legislation. In some classrooms, being academically gifted is as much of a handicap as being mentally or emotionally retarded. However, much of what the classroom teacher faces is beyond his or her control. A class of 30 or more students whose I.Q. scores range from 60 to 150 does not offer the teacher an opportunity for creative programming. A classroom teacher cannot realistically individualize a program to that extent, maintain control and certify that every child can pass assessment tests in mathematics and reading. A rational approach to the classroom placement of youngsters is imperative so that the ability range in a classroom can be handled through three reading groups or possibly four in order to assure a quality education for all children. It is obvious that administrators and others responsible for the placement of students must develop greater insight into the meaning of "mainstreaming" of both the academically gifted and the limited ability youngsters if education is to take place in the classroom.

In the foreseeable future, programmatic responsibility for the academically gifted in the public schools will rest with the classroom teacher. It is important, therefore, that classroom plans take into account the enrollment of these children in the regular classroom. In the following section, subject area goals and objectives are identified for classroom teachers working with academically gifted students. Further, each subject area is classified into priority areas. These goals and objectives are not intended exclusively for the academically gifted but rather, they are a natural extension of the classroom program and appropriate for a broad ability range of students within a classroom. However, they do permit individualization of the program and the development of challenging classroom encounters for the academically gifted.

Priority One

These subject areas lend themselves most easily to enrichment activities for the academically gifted. Individualization and/or small group work are characteristic of most classroom instructional programs in these areas and therefore are more easily modified. Further, the classroom teacher has more direct program control of the curriculum in these areas.

The Reading Program. Reading offers a wide range of individual activities including enrichment and recreational activities, an interrelationship with all other subjects, and a readily available resource in the classroom library, the school library, and the public library. Although it is important to expand the scope of the reading program to accommodate the students, it is necessary to maintain a basic skill development as an integral part of the program. Further, balance must be maintained between skill development and "recreational" reading.

As a start, it is possible to develop goals similar to those listed below for the top reading group. This will enable the students and the teachers to break the pattern of sameness:

1. Develop a variety of learning activities that utilize reading as one of the primary sources of information.

2. Promote a broadened base for leisure reading title selection.

3. Expand the skill development program to include an emphasis on literary analysis and appreciation.

4. Expand the free reading time available to the students.

The Language Arts Program. One of the characteristics that typically sets an academically gifted student apart is his or her high verbal ability. In addition to a modification of the reading program, the total language program including vocabulary development, writing skills, story writing and reports, must be expanded to create a greater challenge for the students. Although vocabulary development is most often a part of the basic reading program, as that program is individualized, steps must be taken to maintain vocabulary development. The current programs in writing skills, or more accurately grammar activities, do little to promote accurate language usage. Standards of language accuracy are important for all youngsters, but it is possible to go further with the gifted and to hold them to higher standards of accuracy. This coupled with greater opportunities for story writing can provide the students with a regular outlet for creativeness.

Although small group activity may be necessary in order to implement these goals, they are designed as enrichment goals to the total class language program:

1. Individualize vocabulary development activities utilizing advanced grade lists.

2. Create an environment for story writing and story telling and have the students develop at least one story a week.

3. Promote accurate language usage through expanded grammar study and the implementation of accuracy standards for all written work.

The Social Studies Program. This part of the elementary curriculum lends itself to a broader range of enrichment activities than any other part of curriculum. First, the program is an integration of all the social sciences and students can be referred to original source documentation in history, geography, sociology, political science, cultural anthropology, and economics as a means of enrichment. Second, it lends itself to small group activities as well as individual study reports. During classroom work sessions, the teacher is able to form small groups for special enrichment activities and direction on a temporary basis without disrupting the total class activity. Third, a wide range of independent study skills, group leadership skills, reading, writing and vocabulary skills, dramatization, and report writing can be promoted on an individualized basis.

1. Develop leadership and human relations skills through group work.

2. Develop self-directed learning through a broad spectrum of independent learning activities (George, 1972).

3. Utilize primary and secondary source documents as a means to obtain first hand information on current problems and topics of interest.

Integrated Arts Program.

Although very few schools are organized on an integrated arts basis, it is realistic to view the art, music and drama parts of the program as an integral whole. It is through this phase of the program that individual creativity can be encouraged and developed. In addition to the regularly scheduled classroom program in this area, the following objective is a realistic goal for the academically gifted:

1. The development of learning opportunities in reading, language, and social studies that permit student utilization of art, music and drama as a means of expression.

Priority Two

In no way does this priority classification relegate the following subjects to a lesser position or value in the curriculum. Rather, it is a reflection of the limitation placed on a teacher with respect to acceleration and the use of funds to enrich the classroom program. In order to implement this aspect of the program, the teacher needs the support of the administration, a district program, and funds for implementation.

The Mathematics Program.

Although there are a variety of enrichment activities that can be conducted within the classroom, mathematics lends itself ideally to acceleration (Koukeyan, 1977). In part this is due to the "practice and repetition" that is included in the program, two activities that academically gifted youngsters are in less need of than the average student. The bright youngster who may only need the practice value of five examples does ten because that is the class assignment and then because he/she finishes early, may be assigned an extra ten examples- all under the guise of "enrichment." However, an accelerated program in mathematics must be an organized part of the district comprehensive program.

1. Design a mathematics program so that students are ready to enter Algebra I by the beginning of the seventh grade.

2. Promote expanded study of mathematics through the use of algebra-based problems, insight into the processes of mathematics and its use in other fields of study.

The Science Program. The science program is often the biggest void in the self-contained classroom setting and, as a result, all students miss out on a significant part of their academic development. However, it is possible to organize good science programs in the elementary schools with a broad range of enrichment activities for the academically gifted. Such a program most often is designed around the special interests and abilities of a teacher(s) rather than as a common element in self-contained classrooms. Some middle schools have overcome the problem through a modified departmental system and this seems to be a realistic approach. Science is a hands-on, laboratory-oriented course and as such it lends itself easily to enrichment activities.

Although these objectives are somewhat beyond the control of the classroom teacher, the district or the building administrators must provide the leadership if science is to be a quality program that is challenging to all students.

1. The science program is a hands-on, laboratory-oriented course.

2. Specially prepared personnel teach the science course.

3. Provision is made for enrichment activities.

In the meantime, the classroom teacher needs to organize a program reflecting these goals insofar as it is possible. After-school programs in conjunction with local engineering groups, universities or environmental/ naturalist groups may offer the potential scientist some sorely needed assistance.

Summary

In the final analysis, it is the classroom teacher who is key to the educational development of all students in the classroom, including the academically gifted. Although well organized programs in the public schools for the academically gifted can benefit both the students and the teachers, more often than not the programs create more administration and greater pressures on the classroom teachers. Resources, when they become available, should be used to enrich the classroom program, enabling the teacher to better provide a quality program for all students. This can result in a classroom learning environment that:

* Demands excellence

* Fosters creativity

* Requires critical thinking

* Poses "real" problems

* Promotes self-directed learning

* Permits individual pacing

* Encourages self-identity

* Rewards risk taking

* Allows "dreaming"

REFERENCES

Brandwein, P. F., Watson, F. G., & Blackwood, P. E. (1958). Teaching high school science: A book of methods. New York: Harcourt, Brace and World.

Briscoe, D. B. (1976). A rationale, design and assessment of a program for intellectually-gifted minority children. Dissertation Abstracts International, 37(02), 792A.

George, J. C. (1972). Language arts for the gifted. Elementary English, 49, 582-584.

Horwitz, E. L. (1974). Educating the gifted child. Gifted Child Quarterly, 18, 17-21.

Isaacs, A. F. (1972). Keeping giftedness turned on may be elementary. Gifted Child Quarterly, 16, 143-145.

Khatena, J. (1977). Facilitating the creative functions of the gifted. The Gifted Child Quarterly, 21 (2), 218-227.

Koukeyan, B. (1977). Evaluation of a vertical-horizontal enrichment program for the math-gifted students fourth, fifth and sixth grades. Dissertation Abstracts International, 37(09), 5587A. (UMI No. 7704835)

McCarthy, D. A. (1977). Differences in the performance of high-achieving and low-achieving gifted pupils in grades four, five, and six on measures of field dependence-field independence, creativity, and self-concept. Dissertation Abstracts International, 38(01), 181A.

Roe, A. (1953). The making of a scientist. New York: Dodd Mead.

Stanley, J. (1977, April). Newsletter. Michigan Association for the Academically Talented.

Stevens, M. E. (1977). The recreational reading book choices of gifted children in grades four, five, and six in Dade County, Florida Public Schools. Dissertation Abstracts International, 38(04), 1878A. (UMI No. 7721907)

Sullivan, A. M. & Skanes, G. R. (1971). Differential transfer of training in bright and dull subjects of the same mental age. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 41, 287-293.

Terman, L. (1925-1959). Genetic studies of genius. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Torrance, E. P. (1971). The gifted child's major problem. Gifted Child Quarterly, 15, 147-155.