Close
About
FAQ
Home
Collections
Login
USC Login
Register
0
Selected
Invert selection
Deselect all
Deselect all
Click here to refresh results
Click here to refresh results
USC
/
Digital Library
/
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
/
Teachers’ perceptions and implementation of instructional strategies for the gifted from differentiation professional development
(USC Thesis Other)
Teachers’ perceptions and implementation of instructional strategies for the gifted from differentiation professional development
PDF
Download
Share
Open document
Flip pages
Contact Us
Contact Us
Copy asset link
Request this asset
Transcript (if available)
Content
Running head: INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 1
TEACHERS’ PERCEPTIONS AND IMPLEMENTATION OF INSTRUCTIONAL
STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED FROM DIFFERENTIATION PROFESSIONAL
DEVELOPMENT
by
Jennifer Lynn Harrison
A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION
December 2015
Copyright 2015 Jennifer Lynn Harrison
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 2
Dedication
This dissertation is dedicated to my husband, Joe Svoboda, who encouraged and
supported me throughout this process, and who has always believed that I can do anything I put
my mind to.
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 3
Acknowledgements
I would like to acknowledge Dr. Sandra Kaplan, my dissertation chair and advisor, whose
expertise and patience saw me through this process. I would additionally like to acknowledge
my committee members, Dr. Mora-Flores and Dr. Hasan, for their time and support.
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 4
Table of Contents
Dedication 2
Acknowledgements 3
List of Tables 6
Abstract 7
Chapter One: Introduction 9
Statement of the Problem 9
Purpose and Significance of the Study 19
Research Questions 20
Professional Development Framework 20
Methodological Overview 22
Nature of the Study/ Research Design 22
Population 23
Instrumentation/Research Procedure 24
Survey 24
Observations 25
Data Analysis 25
Assumptions 25
Limitations 25
Delimitations 26
Definitions 26
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature 29
Overview 29
Historical Perspective on Teacher Preparation and Professional Development 29
Normal Schools 30
Liberal Arts 32
Professionalizing Education 33
Professional Development 34
Effective Professional Development 37
Professional Development for Educators of the Gifted 40
Available Training 40
Current Status 41
Current Law 42
Importance of Professional Development for Educators of the Gifted 44
Differentiated Curriculum and Instruction 45
Teacher Choice, Characteristics, and Efficacy 47
Conclusion 50
Chapter Three: Research Methods 52
Introduction 52
Professional Development Framework 52
Nature of the Study/ Research Design 54
Research Setting 55
Population 58
Instrumentation/Research Procedure 59
Survey 59
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 5
Observations 60
Data Analysis 60
Survey Instrument/Pilot Study 60
Summary 61
Chapter Four: Findings 62
Overview 62
Context 63
Teacher Demographics 65
Professional Development Opportunities and Activities Provided for Teachers 67
Similarities and Differences between Professional Development Provided to Regular
Education Teachers and Teachers of the Gifted 70
Findings 71
Teachers Perceptions of Professional Development 71
Confidence in Ability to Implement Instructional Strategies Learned 75
Frequency of Implementation 78
Areas of Focus Connected 80
Comparison of Regular Education Teachers and Gifted Education Teachers 82
Limitations 84
Summary 85
Chapter Five: Conclusions and Reccomendations 87
Introduction 87
Problem 87
Purpose 88
Research Questions 89
Methodology 89
Summary of Findings 90
Professional Development Opportunities 90
Perceived Effectiveness of Professional Development 92
The Perception of Professional Development on Decision Making 93
Discussion of Findings 94
Implications 97
Future Research 98
Conclusion 99
References 100
Appendix A: Teacher Questionnaire 111
Appendix B: Classroom Observation Protocol 116
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 6
List of Tables
Table 1: Core Features of Professional Development 21
Table 2: Core Features of Professional Development 53
Table 3: Standard 4: Instructional Strategies and Their Relationship to Professional
Development Conducted 57
Table 4: Teacher Demographics 66
Table 5: Illustration of Teacher Competencies to be Acquired, Three-Year Professional
Development Plan 68
Table 6: Professional Development Opportunities 70
Table 7: Perceptions of Professional Development: Reponses of Agree or Strongly Agree 73
Table 8: Confidence in Ability to Implement Instructional Strategies Learned: Reponses of
Confident or Very Confident 76
Table 9: Summary of Classroom Observations: Elements of Implementation 77
Table 10: Frequency of Implementation: Number of Teachers That Answered Daily
or Weekly 79
Table 11: Summary of Regular Education Teachers Perceived Confidence, Perceived
Frequency, and Observed Frequency 80
Table 12: Summary of Gifted Education Teachers Perceived Confidence, Perceived
Frequency, and Observed Frequency 81
Table 13: Similarities and Differences: Teachers Perceived Impact of Professional
Development 84
Table 14: Core Features of Professional Development as Related to the Study 95
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 7
Abstract
The primary purpose of this study was to analyze the professional development program
at one transitional kindergarten through eighth grade school undergoing a system-wide, major
programmatic change. Specifically, how the school organized its professional development
opportunities, the frequency in which teachers implemented new learning from the professional
development, and how the teachers perceived that these opportunities impacted their classroom
instruction.
This study was a quantitative case study. In this study, perceptions of professional
development and its impact on teacher instruction and student achievement were analyzed by
conducting the following: (1) survey questionnaires with participating teachers, and (2)
classrooms observations.
The setting for this study was a newly formed K-8 magnet school, with a magnet focus of
differentiated instruction, located in a K-8 school district in an urban area in southern California.
The population in the 2013-2014 school year consisted of approximately 900 students, of which
approximately 360 were GATE identified, 40 were identified as special education receiving RSP
services and/or Speech services, and the remaining 500 were regular education students. The
school employed 34 teachers; 1 RSP teacher, 1 Speech teacher, 1 Intervention teacher, 12 GATE
teachers, and 19 regular education teachers.
Research suggests that successful professional development follows these steps:
1. Teachers experience professional development
2. The professional development increases teachers’ knowledge and skills, changes their
attitudes and beliefs, or both.
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 8
3. Teachers use their new knowledge, skills, attitudes, and beliefs to improve the content
of their instruction, their approach to pedagogy, or both.
4. The instructional changes that the teachers introduce to the classroom boost their
students’ learning (Desimone, 2011).
The data showed that all teachers that participated in the professional development and
completed the survey believed their knowledge and skills had increased. All implemented their
new knowledge, to varying degrees and with varying frequency.
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 9
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
Statement of the Problem
Several U.S. surveys report, “improving the quality of teaching is the most important way
to improve public education” (Sowder, 2007). It is, therefore, understandable why there is a
large focus on which professional development options to pursue. Considering salaries are
typically 80-85% of the general budget in a school district, with teachers making up a large
percentage of the membership of staff in a district, coupled with intuition and empirical research
that tells us that students’ achievement depends substantially on the teacher they are assigned to,
it is further understandable why the highest quality professional development is continually
sought by schools and school districts (Wayne & Youngs, 2003). When determining how to
improve the K-12 education system, and provide better instruction for the students therein, an
approach often taken by researchers and policymakers is to focus on the teachers (Wayne &
Youngs, 2003). According to Guskey (1986), “High quality staff development is a central
component in nearly every proposal for improving education” (p. 5). It has been determined that
when studying educational reforms, and their defined changes to the educational and
instructional program, specific types of professional development, including content, opportunity
for practice, and time, yield better results in enacting these changes (Ball & Cohen, 1999).
Professional development is considered a necessary component in deepening teachers’
knowledge of the content and curriculum, as well as in developing their teaching practice and
skills (Desimone, Porter, Garet, Yoon & Birman, 2002). Further, professional development
serves to alter the professional practices, beliefs, and understandings of those participating
toward a mutually articulated end (Griffin, 1983, Webster-Wright, 2009).
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 10
Although the call for increased commitment to teacher learning has grown exponentially
in the past two decades, prior to that time the way in which teachers learned their craft and what
the field knew about how teachers learn hadn’t changed much (Wilson & Berne, 1999). New
teachers start out in their college programs taking methods courses in education departments and
content courses in specific discipline departments. Some participate in student teaching, while
some participate as interns on the job. Practicing teachers also have a variety of learning
opportunities. Some participate in full or part-day professional development conducted by their
district. Others participate in self-selected professional development through masters programs,
summer workshops, and through professional organizations. Learning also takes place during a
given day, through opportunities in the classroom, conversations with colleagues, and ideas
gleaned from passing by another’s classroom (Ball & Cohen, 1999; Borko, 2004; Boyd,
Goldhaber, Lankford, & Wyckoff, 2007; Feiman-Nemser, 1990). Due to the rapid growth in the
development and use of online learning resources and opportunities in education, some teachers
are turning to online education, as individuals as well as in professional learning communities
(Walker et al, 2012). Peer coaching as a form of professional development, while often under
recognized, is an additional opportunity for faculty members to work together to improve their
teaching practice, and has been documented as providing benefits to the participants (Huston &
Weaver, 2008). Teachers’ opportunities for professional growth can also be happenstance,
random, and unpredictable (Wilson & Berne, 1999). According to Wilson and Berne (1999), “In
sum, teacher learning has traditionally been a patchwork of opportunities- formal and informal,
mandatory and voluntary, serendipitous and planned- stitched together into a fragmented and
incoherent ‘curriculum’” (p. 174). In a society that is changing rapidly, there is consensus
among professionals that undergraduate education is no longer where one may stop, it is only the
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 11
beginning of being a life-long learner that extends to the end of one’s professional career
(Webster-Wright, 2009).
The variance noted in professional development related to general education is also noted
in professional development for the field of gifted education and teacher preparation to work
with gifted students. According to Gallagher (2000), “The unthinkable thought is [with regards
to Special Personnel Preparation for Teachers of Gifted Students] that such preparation is often
haphazard and superficial, consisting of a summer workshop here, a three day conference there,
hardly justifying the term [GATE] specialist’ (p. 8).
Teachers are unprepared to meet the needs of gifted and talented students (State of the
Nation in Gifted Education, 2011). According to the NAGC State of the Nation in Gifted
Education (2011):
Well-trained professionals are indispensable to identify and properly serve high-potential
and high-achieving learning. Without trained teachers and program administrators, even
significant investments in other resources and services may fail to attain meaningful and
sustained results. Despite this connection, the majority of teachers (in this study) did not
receive coursework in their college preparation programs. (p. 3)
It is a general understanding that typical teacher preparation programs do not adequately address
how teachers should meet the needs of gifted students, and in fact poorly prepare undergraduates
to teach gifted students (Clinkenbeard & Kolloff, 2001; Hansen & Feldhusen, 1994). According
to Kaplan (2012), “In many cases, the design and implementation of these alternative routes to
prepare teachers to educate gifted students have been situational, fiscally dependent on “regular
or basic” teacher education programs, and less integrated into entire teacher education programs”
(p. 40). Most current teachers likely never experienced differentiation as a student, nor have they
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 12
seen an effectively differentiated classroom as an adult (Tomlinson, 2005). In research
conducted with minority teachers to ascertain their reasons for entering the fields of gifted,
regular or special education, many reported having little exposure to gifted education in their
teacher preparation coursework (Ford & Grantham, 2003). Research conducted by the National
Research Center on the gifted and talented showed that the curricular and instructional practices
provided to gifted students were almost identical to those provided to average ability students
(Ford, Reis & Westberg, 1994). The research further revealed that 60.8% of public school
teachers indicated that they had never had any training in teaching gifted students. According to
Kronholz (2011), “Teachers aren’t trained to teach that once-in-a-blue-moon student; they’re
taught to accommodate the two-thirds of us who have IQs that fall between 85 and 115, or one
standard deviation on either side of 100, the norm” (p. 5). The first year of teaching is difficult,
one in which the new teacher finds himself or herself not fully prepared for their complex role
(Dettmer, 1986). According to Dettmer (1986), “The situation is all the more severe when
educating gifted and talented students who tend to function on the leading edge of innovation
and rapid progress” (p. 99). Educators of the gifted need subject matter expertise as well as
pedagogical expertise to effectively instruct students of varying interest, abilities, and learning
styles, and these skills are best learned in a university teacher education program (Amove, 2010).
According to Amove (2010), “University faculty members have the responsibility to form
teachers with both subject matter expertise and the desire for continuous learning and
professional development” (p. 50).
Experts in the field of gifted education have worked to remedy the situation of teacher
preparation. From the National Association for Gifted Children (2015) website:
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 13
In late 2006, the National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE)
approve d the new Teacher Preparation Standards in Gifted Education that were
developed jointly by NAGC, the Council for Exceptional Children (CEC), and the
Association for the Gifted (CEC-TAG). The standards, which are the foundation for the
knowledge and skills in which teacher candidates demonstrate competency, as
determined by educators in the field of gifted education, and are used by college and
university teacher preparation programs in gifted education and are a model for district-
based professional development programming.
Additionally, “NAGC has recently revised its Pre-K Grade 12 Gifted Education Programming
Standards to assist districts in developing strong services and programs for gifted children”
(NAGC, 2015).
To ensure equity of access and quality programming and instruction, it is paramount that
teachers of the gifted are educated in the relevant theories, research, pedagogy, and management
techniques necessary for creating and maintaining classroom-based opportunities for learning
(Cropley & McLeod, 1986; VanTassel-Baska & Johnsen, 2007). Therefore, teaching standards
for gifted education and requisite staff development are a necessary component of a teacher’s
role in gifted education (Dettmer, 1986; Van Tassel-Baska & Johnsen, 2007). According to Van
Tassel-Baska and Johnsen, (2007), the passage of the NCATE standards signals a new era for
professional development of teachers (p. 191). To further ensure adherence to the NCATE
standards, external and/or internal program reviews within school districts are recommended on
an ongoing and regular basis (Neumeister & Burney, 2012).
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 14
Professional development, as a necessary component to education, consists of several
consistent factors. According to Borko (2004), all staff/professional development opportunities
include the following key elements:
1. The staff/professional development program being used;
2. The participants;
3. The facilitator of the staff development, serving as guide to the teachers as they construct
new knowledge and practices; and
4. The context, and/or setting in which the staff development occurs (p. 4).
Educational researchers have analyzed the effectiveness of various staff development programs
within the context of some or all of these elements, and each element has its impact on the
overall successfulness of the staff development program (Borko, 2004).
In research conducted by Garret et al. (2001), evidence was found supporting the value of
the following structural features of professional development: reform orientation, duration
(including both total contact hours and time span), and participation by teachers from the same
school site. The research further noted core features of professional development that
contributed to increased knowledge and skills, as well as changes in teaching practice. This
research focuses on content knowledge, active or inquiry oriented learning approaches, and high
level of coherence with other reform activities in the teachers’ local school contexts (Penuel,
2007).
Beyond the basic components that make up all professional development opportunities
are the characteristics that are likely to indicate effective professional development. An analysis,
conducted by Guskey in 2003, of the 13 better-known lists of characteristics of professional
development, found that characteristics varied widely, and that no one characteristic was found
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 15
on all of the lists (Guskey, 2003; Webb & Norton, 2009). However, it was found that some of
the characteristics seemed to appear on multiple lists. Guskey identified the ten most frequently
repeated as:
1. Enhances teachers’ content and pedagogical knowledge
2. Provides sufficient time and other resources
3. Promotes collegiality and collaboration
4. Includes procedures for evaluation
5. Aligns with other reform initiatives
6. Models high-quality instruction
7. Is school or site based
8. Builds leadership capacity
9. Based on teachers’ identified needs
10. Driven by analyses of student learning data (Guskey, 2003, p. 749)
Despite the varied appearance of these common traits, Guskey (2003) noted, “it may be
unreasonable, therefore, to assume that a single list of characteristics leading to broad-brush
policies and guidelines for effective professional development will ever emerge” (p.750). He
recommends agreeing on the criteria for effectiveness of professional development, as measured
by student achievement outcomes, taking into account the effects of varied contexts, and using
research-based decision making (Guskey, 2003). Although the characteristics may vary due to
the context of the professional development, or in other words the specific needs of the teacher,
school site, or district, what is ultimately important is the effectiveness of the professional
development. According to Webb and Norton (2009), “whatever the context, the one constant is
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 16
that, ultimately, the effectiveness of any professional development program, its fundamental
benefit, is the extent to which it results in improvement of student outcomes” (p. 176).
Further discussion of the elements of effective professional development includes similar
characteristics, and can be generalized to specific disciplines within the field of education. For
example, in a review of the research on mathematics teaching and learning conducted for the
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, James Hiebert (1999) stated:
Research on teacher learning shows that fruitful opportunities to learn new teaching
methods share several core features: (a) ongoing (measured in years) collaboration of
teachers for purposes of planning with (b) the explicit goal of improving students’
achievement of clear learning goals, (c) anchored by attention to students’ thinking, the
curriculum, and pedagogy, with (d) access to alternative ideas and methods and
opportunities to observe these in action and to reflect on the reasons for their
effectiveness… (p. 15)
Although there is no definitive answer as to what the most important characteristics of effective
professional development are, seen throughout the literature are similar common themes:
ongoing (time), goal of increased student achievement, and opportunity for evaluation.
While research has established that the characteristics and opportunity for profession
development largely vary, the same is true for professional development in the field of gifted
education. The National Association for Gifted Students and the Council for Exceptional
Children (NAGC-CEC) have established the Teacher Knowledge and Skill Standards for Gifted
and Talented Education, approved by the National Council for Accreditation for Teacher
Education (NCATE) in the Fall of 2006. Included in these standards are ten content standards
areas, which should be used when preparing teachers to educate gifted students. The passage of
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 17
these standards provides a research-based agenda for professional development opportunities,
providing an overall blueprint for topics that should be presented during the preparation of
teachers to work with gifted learners (VanTassel-Baska & Johnsen, 2007). Despite the fact that
the adopted Teacher Preparation Standards in Gifted and Talented Education, endorsed and
supported by NCATE, NAGC, and the CEC, prescribe that all university undergraduate teacher
preparation programs will provide a baseline of instruction in gifted education based on these
standards, one difficulty faced by the field of education is that from state to state, there is a lack
of consistency in state policies for teacher preparation to work with gifted students (National
Association for Gifted Children [NAGC], 2015; VanTassel-Baska & Johnsen, 2007).
According to the NAGC State of the Nation In Gifted Education (2011), “States continue
to address gifted education in a highly uneven and fragmented manner, leaving many students
without access to appropriately challenging curriculum” (p. 2). The study collected data from
forty-four states and one territory, and offers a snapshot of state policies and practices related
gifted and talented learners. In regards to professional development, the study found that:
• Only six states require all teachers to receive pre-service training in gifted and
talented education.
• Twenty-four states do not require gifted and talented credentials for professionals in
specialized gifted and talented programs.
• General education teachers in thirty-six states are not required to have any training on
the nature and needs of gifted and talented students at any point in their careers.
• Only five states require annual professional development for teachers in specialized
gifted and talented programs, twenty-six states do not require it, and twelve leave it to
the local school district (State of the Nation in Gifted Education, 2011, p. 3).
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 18
The California Association for the Gifted (CAG) has developed recommended standards
for programs for gifted and talented students, which were approved by the California Department
of Education in 2001, and revised in 2005 (California Association for the Gifted, 2015).
Included in these standards are recommendations for professional development, which state,
“Districts (will) provide professional development opportunities related to gifted education to
administrators, teachers, and staff to support and improve educational opportunities for gifted
students.” Fulfillment of these recommended standards is a requirement for completion of the
application process for approval of district GATE plans, submitted to the California Department
of Education. Despite the passage of these standards, implementation of professional
development for teacher preparation to work with gifted students, and thereby the instruction
provided in gifted classrooms, varies greatly (Van Tassel-Baska, 2007). To further compound
the problem, the state of California’s budgetary crisis continues to affect all school districts. In
addition to cuts to all educational programs, SBX34, the Flexibility Provisions of the State
Budget Finance Bill, states that school districts receiving categorical funds will not be required
to submit new GATE applications or request for continued funding, and districts will be allowed
to transfer GATE and other categorical funds for general purposes, thereby not being required to
use GATE funds to support GATE programs or implement GATE program requirements,
including professional development, (California Department of Education, 2015).
Due to the fact that teacher preparation has been highly correlated to student achievement
(Darling-Hammond, 2000), a focus on professional development will likely lead to the creation
of “Schools in which all students and staff members are learners who continually improve their
performance” (National Staff Development Council, 2008).
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 19
Purpose and Significance of the Study
Educational researchers document the strong relationship between professional
development and program implementation (Ball & Cohen, 1999; Borko, 2004; Desimone et al..
2002; Guskey 1986, 2009, 2003; Little, J. W., 2012). Researchers further note the significance
of professional development in gifted education (Dettmer, 1986; Gallagher, 2000; Hansen &
Feldhusen, 1994; Kaplan, 2012; Kaplan & Van Tassel-Baska, 2011; VanTassel-Baska &
Johnson, 2007). The research is in agreement on the need for professional development. The
NCATE and NAGC-CEC Standards are clear on the necessary areas of knowledge needed by
teachers of the gifted (VanTassel-Baska & Johnsen, 2007).
There is a lack, however, of research on the relationship between professional
development and teachers’ curricular and instructional choices in differentiating for both gifted
and regular education students. According to Hansen and Feldhusen (1994), “Leaders in the
field of gifted education have promulgated elaborate models for both instructional programs for
gifted students and related teacher training, but research and evaluation on the effects of training
models is meager” (p. 115). According to Graffam (2006), teachers of gifted students are
underdescribed in the literature. There has been “relatively little research that attempts to
understand those who teach in the field” (Graffam, 2006, p. 120). Van Tassel-Baska and
Johnson (2007) further go on to state, “the field needs to conduct research that examines the
effects of teacher preparation in gifted education on the services and performance of gifted and
talented students” (194).
The primary purpose of this study was to analyze the professional development program
at one transitional kindergarten through eighth grade school undergoing a system-wide, major
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 20
programmatic change. Specifically observed was how the teachers perceived that these
opportunities impacted their classroom instruction.
This study was not intended to measure the effectiveness of professional development, as
many factors may influence teacher choice. This study examines the specific professional
development process at one school and discusses what role professional development has in
improving teacher practice with regards to gifted education and the use of strategies for
differentiating instruction.
Research Questions
The overarching research question that guided this study is:
1. How do gifted education and regular education teachers perceive the impact of specific
professional development on their decisions to differentiate their curriculum and
instruction?
Professional Development Framework
The terms staff development and professional development are often used synonymously
(Hord, 1994). Professional development can be defined by a variety of factors, including
attending university classes and workshops, collegial conversations with other classroom
teachers, receiving coaching, reading professional books, articles and journals, and observing
effective classroom teaching (Hord, 1994). Effective professional development can be defined by
its ability to bring about change in teachers’ instructional practices (Odden et al., 2002). Further,
effective professional development makes the connection between subject matter and pedagogy
as well as provides teachers with opportunities to learn. It is influenced by many factors, which
can be categorized into five core features: (1) content focus, (2) active learning, (3) coherence,
(4) duration, and (5) collective participation (Desimone, 2011).
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 21
Table 1
Core Features of Professional Development
Core Features of
Professional Development
Content
Focus
Professional development activities should focus on
subject matter content and how students learn that
content.
Active
Learning
Teachers should have opportunities to get involved,
such as observing and receiving feedback,
analyzing student work, or making presentations, as
opposed to passively sitting through lectures.
Coherence
What teachers learn in any professional
development activity should be consistent with
other professional development, with their
knowledge and beliefs, and with school, district,
and state reforms and policies.
Duration
Professional development activities should be
spread over a semester and should include 20 hours
or more of contact time.
Collective
Preparation
Groups of teachers from the same grade, subject, or
school should participate in professional
development activities together to build an
interactive learning community.
The evidence of effective professional development is classroom practice. Teachers’
knowledge and practices are the immediate and most significant indicators of success of
professional development activities (Guskey & Sparks, 2002). Professional development should
increase educators’ knowledge and instructional practice in ways that translate to increased
student achievement (Desimone, 2011). Desimone (2011) proposes that successful professional
development follows four key steps:
1. Teachers experience professional development
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 22
2. The professional development increases teachers’ knowledge and skills, changes
their attitudes and beliefs, or both.
3. Teachers use their new knowledge, skills, attitudes, and beliefs to improve the
content of their instruction, their approach to pedagogy, or both.
4. The instructional changes that the teachers introduce to the classroom boost their
students’ learning.
Although simplistic in form, this framework offers a strong foundation for analyzing the
effectiveness of professional development (Desimone, 2011). Following this framework would
suggest that we evaluate for three specific outcomes:
1. Did teachers learn?
2. Did they change their practice?
3. Did student achievement increase as a result?
Although other frameworks exist with relation to this topic, all components of professional
development can be analyzed through the lenses of these three questions, which provided the
conceptual underpinnings for this study.
Methodological Overview
In order to answer the proposed research question, a quantitative approach was utilized.
The study identified possible correlations between professional development opportunities and
teacher practice. The data sources included survey questionnaires and observations.
Nature of the Study/ Research Design
Patton (2002) states that the purpose of research is “to contribute knowledge that will
help people understand the nature of a problem in order to intervene” (p. 217). This study
attempted to identify the nature of a specific professional development program, teachers’
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 23
perceptions of the effects of that professional development on their curricular and instructional
choices, and perceptions of the effects on student achievement. This study was a quantitative
case study. Utilizing this type of study allowed for the use of data collection to develop a “rich
and thick description” of the study (Gall, Borg, and Gall, 2003). According to Gall et al. (2003),
one reason for using this type of study is the researcher is able to look for themes, or areas of
focus, that bring order to descriptive data.
In this study, perceptions of professional development and its impact on teacher
instruction and student achievement were analyzed by conducting the following: (1) survey
questionnaires with participating teachers, and (2) classrooms observations.
Population
Participants in the professional development and survey represented a sample of teachers
in San Bernardino County. There were a total of 33 teachers participating in this professional
development. Nineteen of the teachers taught regular education students in grades TK
(Transitional Kindergarten) through 6
th
, twelve of the teachers taught GATE identified students
in grades 3-8 in self-contained classrooms where all students were GATE identified based on the
school district’s identification criteria, one intervention teacher that worked with struggling
students in grades TK through 3
rd
, and one teacher that taught RSP (Resource Specialist
Program) for all grades. The professional development is ongoing, however for the purposes of
this research study, teachers were surveyed after the completion of year one and two of the
professional development, which included participation in ten full days of training beginning in
2011, and were observed throughout year one and two. The teachers represented a wide range of
experience from first year teachers to veterans. Demographic data was collected as part of the
survey to better represent the make-up of all teachers involved in the study.
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 24
Instrumentation/Research Procedure
The data collection included teacher survey questionnaires and observations of teachers
in the classroom and during professional development activities. A pilot study of the survey and
observation protocol was conducted in the fall of 2012 by convening a group of experts in the
field of gifted education, which subsequently established content validity.
Survey
The survey utilized in this study was a tool developed for the purposes of this study. The
survey, using a four point Likert scale, was administered for the purpose of identifying the
participants’ perceptions of effectiveness of the professional development, as well as
participants’ levels of perceived implementation of newly learned instructional strategies. This
tool was further used to identify strengths and weaknesses of the ongoing professional
development in order to identify areas for possible improvement and growth.
The survey questions were divided into three sections. In all three sections the
participants reflected only on the specific professional development in which they participated
during the 2011-2012 and 2012-2013 school years, on the topics of differentiated curriculum and
instruction. In Section I, the participants answered thirteen questions, 7-19, regarding the
elements of professional development and how they felt about their ability to meet their personal
and professional needs. In Section II, questions 20-26 asked the participants to rate their degree
of confidence in their ability to implement seven specific elements of differentiated learning
from the training. In Section III, questions 27-33 asked the participants to consider those same
seven elements of new learning from section two, and rate the frequency in which they were
implementing them.
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 25
Observations
Observations in this study included informal classroom walk-throughs using a Classroom
Observation Checklist developed for the purpose of this study, as well as informal observations
conducted during professional develop trainings.
Data Analysis
Upon completion of data collection from survey results and observations, the resulting
data was analyzed. The data was analyzed and interpreted using Creswell’s (2003) six generic
steps. The research question was used as a framework for organizing the data collected.
Findings from the data were sorted into areas of focus as applicable. Corroboration of the
findings was sought in multiple data collection points (surveys and observations). Finally, the
content of both sources were analyzed and meanings were generated within each category.
Assumptions
The following methodological assumptions were used for this study:
1. The available teachers for data collection represented a typical sampling of teachers, both
of regular education and the gifted.
2. Teacher responses to survey items will be timely, complete, and honest.
Limitations
The limitations of the study are factors the researcher does not control, that may affect the
study. For this study, the limitations are:
1. Same person served in multiple roles; researcher, observer, principal.
2. Observations will be limited to one school site.
3. The researcher was limited to the established subject pool of teachers participating in a
specific professional development experience.
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 26
4. Some of the survey recipients may not complete the survey.
5. Classroom observations were limited to 5-15 minutes, on various days and at various
times.
6. Observations catalogued the presence of implication, but were not meant to judge the
quality of implementation.
Delimitations
Delimitations are the limits set by the researcher in the study. For this study, the
delimitations are:
1. This study will consist of the teachers at one school, grades TK-8
Definitions
Core Curriculum or Standards-Based Curriculum: Described as the “thinking curriculum,”
State Board adopted content-based standards and curriculum frameworks in core subject-matter
areas, including reading/language arts, foreign language, history-social science, health,
mathematics, physical education, science, and the visual and performing arts encourage students
to integrate their knowledge, experience, and skills across disciplines, topics, and concepts
(California Association for the Gifted, 2007; California Department of Education, 1994).
Complexity: A set of prompts that activate students understanding of many ideas or parts to
develop complicated and interrelated wholes. A common characteristic of gifted students is to
seek complexity in their thinking and to understand complex and universal concepts and big
ideas such as generalizations at a more sophisticated level. Making connections over time,
showing interdisciplinary relationships, and introducing understandings from perspectives other
than the student’s own can meet this need. Such experiences require students to find multiple
solutions across the disciplines, over time, and from different perspectives.
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 27
Depth: A set of prompts enabling students to delve into the content, subject matter, etc. by
understanding concepts and generalizations through the analysis of the rules and principles that
support the larger idea. A common need of gifted students is to be able to explore a subject at a
higher level of understanding by finding the principles and facts that make up its generalizations
and concepts. Meeting this need for depth in thinking allows gifted learners to discover details
and identify patterns and trends that lead to the formulation of unanswered questions and the
understanding of overarching ideas.
Differentiated Curriculum: The modification of the core curriculum that challenges and meets
the unique needs of the gifted learner. It may include modifications in complexity, depth, pacing,
and selecting among, rather than covering all, of the curriculum areas (California Association for
the Gifted, 2007; California Department of Education, 1994).
Gifted and Talented Pupil: “Gifted and talented pupil” means a pupil enrolled in a public
elementary or secondary school who is identified as possessing demonstrated or potential
abilities that give evidence of high performance capability EC Section 52201 (Education Code).
Gifted and Talented Teacher: A GATE teacher provides differentiated curriculum and
learning opportunities for gifted students; provides flexible grouping within the classroom or
between classrooms to provide large and small collaborative learning opportunities with peers
and with other students based on interests or abilities (California Department of Education,
1995).
Gifted and Talent Program Types: Four program types used most frequently in gifted
education: Cluster Grouping – provide students with special education services while in the
regular classroom such as heterogeneous or cluster grouping; Part-time Grouping – provide
instruction in the regular classroom but leave for a portion of day/week to attend special classes;
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 28
Special Day Classes– provide grouping of students by ability for most or all of their academic
class work such as a homogeneous grouping; Special School Programs – Full time instruction at
a more advanced pace and/or with more thorough coverage of content such as a special day class
grouping, located at a special school (Recommended Standards for Programs for Gifted and
Talented Students).
Instruction: The instructional program for all students, including the support and services
provided for students with special needs, and the procedures for monitoring student progress
toward standards, EC Section 52206 (California Department of Education).
Professional Development: Professional development is a planned program of learning
opportunities to improve the performance of the administrative and instructional staff (Gubbins,
2001).
Spill-over: A quality that spills over; the ready transmission or spread as of an idea or emotion
from person to person; a contagion effect from one event setting off a chain of events; causal
sequence (Lexicon Group, 2007).
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 29
CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
Overview
This chapter presents a detailed analysis of related literature that support this study.
Utilizing peer-reviewed educational journals and books, the objective of this chapter will be to
provide an historical perspective as well as a presentation of the current literature that is relevant
to the topics that will be addressed in the study regarding teacher preparation and professional
development and their impact on the choices teachers make in educating students. The general
areas, which will be covered in this review of the literature, will include:
1. Historical Perspective on Teacher Preparation and Professional Development
2. Effective Professional Development
3. Professional Development for Educators of the Gifted
4. Differentiated Curriculum and Instruction
5. Teacher choice
Historical Perspective on Teacher Preparation and Professional Development
The development of pedagogical knowledge and skill has changed over time. In our
current educational system, the most common method for entering teaching is by means of a
four-year, undergraduate program. This has not, however, always been the case. At one time,
many in the field of education believed that elementary teachers did not need a college
education, and that high school teaching required preparation in the professional arena (Feiman-
Nemser, 1990). Historically, there were three traditions that have influenced ideas about and
approaches to the act of teacher preparation, with each tradition linked to a different institution
offering a different kind of preparation. These three traditions include:
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 30
1. Normal schools, which were intimately connected with the preparation of elementary
teachers
2. Liberal arts, which had early ties to the preparation of secondary teachers in liberal
arts colleges
3. Professionalization, which sought to prepare educational leaders through graduate
preparation and research, promoted by the modern university
Normal Schools
The concept of teacher education as a specialized kind of academic training did not exist
before the introduction normal schools (Feiman-Nemser, 1990). Before the introduction of
normal schools during the first half of the nineteenth century, most elementary school teachers
had little or no specific instruction for their work as teachers. At their onset, early normal schools
provided a brief course of study to help teachers master the subjects they would teach and
acquire some techniques for managing instruction. With the rise of secondary education, normal
schools began to require a high school diploma for admission and to offer a two-year course of
study. The typical curriculum consisted of reviews of elementary subjects (e.g., reading, spelling,
arithmetic), some secondary academic subjects (e.g., geometry, philosophy) and pedagogical
subjects (e.g., history of education, psychology, teaching methods, observation and practice
(Monroe, 1952).
Along with the requirement of a high school diploma, came the feeling that normal
schools should do more than repeat the subject matter readily available in secondary schools and
colleges, but rather offer a more professional curriculum. There were two schools of thought on
how to accomplish this task; one emphasizing the “professional treatment of subject matter” and
a second emphasizing training in special methods (Cremin, 1953).
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 31
The proponents of the professional treatment position asserted that a teacher's knowledge
of subjects differed from what they considered "academic" knowledge (Feiman-Nemser, 1990).
In this method of teacher preparation, subject matter courses modeled principles taught in
professional courses on the psychology of learning and methods courses engaged students in
reflection on their own experience as learners of school subjects as a way of sensitizing them to
problems their pupils might encounter (Borrowman, 1956; Randolph, 1924). In this way, the
entire program was organized around the professional goal.
The second approach emphasized both technical theory and training. Initially, this
approach was lead by the philosophy and methodology called "object teaching", developed by
Edward Sheldon, president of Oswego Normal and Training School, which was based on ideas
about the dignity and worth of children and the role of the senses in learning. Under this system,
teaching students learned special rules for instruction in various subjects and had the opportunity
to practice them in the training school. Sheldon considered the heart of the professional program
to be the training school. The method of “object teaching” was then replaced by a second
general method of technical competence developed by the Herbartians (Woodring, 1975). The
Herbartians believed that sound teaching consisted of five formal steps, which included:
preparation, presentation, association, generalization, and application. These ideas, which sound
much like various contemporary models of direct instruction, were popular during the last
quarter of the nineteenth century (Woodring, 1975).
Although normal schools are often associated with narrow training, this judgment
wrongly negates the historic context in which they evolved and their hard-won gains in
differentiating professional education from liberal arts education. Clifford and Guthrie (1988)
write:
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 32
Although, in fact, the nineteenth century normal schools were never the single-minded
and essential teacher education centers that their supporters had wished, their
disappearance took with it two professional assets: First, the ideal of the autonomous
professional school devoted solely to the exalted preparation of teachers and second, a
dominating concern with “practical pedagogy.” (p. 61)
Normal schools championed the idea of teaching as a noble calling and fostered a
professional esprit de corps (Feiman-Nemser, 1990). They had a clear understanding of their
mission. Normal schools knew that their major purpose was to serve the profession by educating
practitioners. They "formed" their students in a more effective manner than the large university
schools and departments of education that took their place (Powell, 1980). They also "glorified
and supported the ideal of superb craftsmanship" (Borrowman, 1956). The normal school
curriculum gave explicit attention to pedagogical training and supervised practice, specifically in
the stronger normal schools, as well as fostered close ties between theory and practice (Clifford
and Guthrie, 1988).
Liberal Arts
“The older, liberal arts tradition predates any thought of teacher preparation as a special
kind of schooling” (Feiman-Nemser, 1990, p.5). The tradition of liberal arts highlights the
unique relationship between a liberal education and teaching. It was linked more closely in the
nineteenth century with the preparation of secondary teachers. The premise of this tradition was
that, "to be liberally educated and to be prepared to teach are equivalent" (Borrowman, 1965).
In the nineteenth century, liberal arts colleges offered a classical education to a select
group of students who mostly entered higher professions and became leaders in the community
(Feiman-Nemser, 1990). A few of these taught in secondary schools, which were elite, college
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 33
preparatory institutions (Borrowman, 1956; Church & Sedlak, 1976). With the expansion of
secondary education came a more diverse student population. This led to the need to adapt the
high school curriculum to a broader set of purposes. Despite this change, liberal arts colleges
selected to keep their distance from school reform and persisted in the view that a liberal arts
program was the best preparation for teaching, especially at the secondary level (Borrowman,
1956; Church and Sedlak, 1976; Cremin, 1953).
While some associate the liberal arts tradition and education with merely subject matter
competency, this understanding mistakenly misses the point (Feiman-Nemser, 1990). What is
unique about the relationship between liberal arts and teacher preparation is that the elements
most integral to liberal arts, including humane values, critical thinking, historic perspective, and
broad knowledge, are also central to the teaching profession (Travers and Sacks, 1987).
Professionalizing Education
At the turn of the twentieth century, the creation of university schools of education
became part of a larger movement to professionalize various occupations (Feiman-Nemser,
1990). Educators looked to the example of their counterparts in law and medicine, and sought to
place teacher education in the modern research university. Their hope was that the new location
would lead to the development of a specific and specialized knowledge base, support the
professional preparation of educational leaders, and dignify education as a career (Clifford &
Guthrie, 1988; Powell, 1976).
In the beginning of university schools of education, the focus was placed on educating
current teachers who sought careers outside the classroom. With the rise in secondary education,
came the need for administrators, counselors, and specialists, and the universities focused on
providing education for these new professions (Feiman-Nemser, 1990).
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 34
Despite the model of medicine and law, educational faculty sought special expertise that
could not be supplied by experience alone, and thereby cut themselves off from models of good
practice. Although the idea of a teaching hospital as a setting for experimental research was a
ready model, educators did not transfer this to the education university setting. Researchers in
the field of education were not interested in studying problems in the classroom, the supervision
of the practice of new teachers carried little status, and creating outstanding training facilities
required more resources than universities were willing to invest (Clifford & Guthrie, 1988).
During their formative period, leading universities of education accommodated academic
and professional pressures by ignoring initial teacher preparation and concentrating instead on
graduate training and research. These policies may help explain why Borrowman (1956)
characterizes the opening decades of the twentieth century as a time when the purposes of
teacher education received little serious attention. Leading universities of education left a mixed
legacy that continues to influence the character of teacher preparation and proposals for its
improvement. That legacy includes the precedent of professionalization through graduate
training, a devaluing of experience, and a continuing estrangement from teachers in the field and
academic colleagues in the university (Judge, 1982).
Professional Development
At its beginnings, professional development was seen as a means for “correcting
deficiencies” (Smylie, Allensworth, Greenberg, Harris, & Luppescu, 2001). At the turn of the
century, with the onset of university teacher education programs, colleges and universities began
to play an important role in the preparation of teachers (Richey, 1957).
In the mid-1920’s and 30’s, the primary role of professional development moved from
the stage of correction to one of “promoting teachers’ professional growth more broadly”
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 35
(Smylie et al., 2001). The research of the 20’s and 30’s showed that the need for professional
development was becoming “even more closely linked with the need for schools to address new
social problems and for teachers to keep up with the growing educational demands of our rapidly
changing culture” (Smylie et al., 2001).
In the 1940’s and 1950’s, professional development was viewed as a waste of time
(Corcoran, 1995). According to Smylie et al. (2001), professional development has suffered a
long-standing reputation of poor quality and ineffective practice. From the National
Commission on Teaching and America’s Future (1996), concerns continue on the effectiveness
of professional development and its need for change:
We are urging a complete overhaul in the systems of teacher preparation and professional
development in this country to ensure that they reflect and act upon the most current
available knowledge and practice. This redesign should create a continuum of teacher
learning based on compatible standards that operate from recruitment and preservice
education through licensing, hiring, and induction into the profession, to advanced
certification and ongoing professional development. (p. 62)
The NCTAF outlines strategies that teachers must be able to perform. These include,
“Enabling students to write and speak effectively, to solve novel problems, and to design and
conduct independent research,” and state that to do so “requires paying attention to learning, not
just to ‘covering the curriculum’” (NCTAF, 1996, p.36). Teachers who know how and are able
to do these things make a substantial difference in what their students learn. Furthermore, a large
body of evidence shows that the preparation teachers receive influences their ability to teach in
these ways (Evertson, Hawley, & Zlotnick, 1985).
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 36
Unfortunately, many new and veteran teachers do not receive the kind of preparation and
support that they need, and few standards are in place that help to distinguish those who know
how to teach successfully from those who do not (NCTAF, 1996). According to the NCTAF, “in
addition to the lack of support for beginning teachers, most U.S. school districts invest little in
ongoing professional development for experienced teachers and spend much of these limited
resources on unproductive practices” (1996). This low investment is evidenced by estimates of
professional development support that range from only 1% to 3% of district operating budgets,
even when the costs of staff time are factored in (Miller, Lord, and Dorney, 1994). Even if one
looked at the highest estimates of district contribution towards professional development, they
would pale when compared with the expenditures invested in employee development in leading
corporations and in other countries’ schools (Kearns, 1988).
In addition, according to the NCTAF, “district staff development is still characterized by
one-shot workshops that have very little effect on practice, rather than more effective approaches
that are linked to concrete problems of practice and built into teachers’ ongoing work with their
colleagues” (1996). These workshops tend to offer ideas that are not tied to specific subject areas
or problems of practice, and they often do not offer follow-up help for implementation. Teachers
are then faced with the next workshop with another idea—the new “flavor of the month”—
offering little continuity in building practice (NCTAF, 1996).
According to Guskey (1986), “High quality staff development is a central component in
nearly every proposal for improving education” (p. 5). It has been determined that when
studying educational reforms, and their defined changes to the educational and instructional
program, specific types of professional development, including content, opportunity for practice,
and time, yield better results in enacting these changes (Ball & Cohen, 1999). Professional
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 37
development is considered a necessary component in deepening teachers’ knowledge of the
content and curriculum, as well as in developing their teaching practice and skills (Desimone et
al., 2002). Further, professional development serves to alter the professional practices, beliefs,
and understandings of those participating toward a mutually articulated end (Griffin, 1983).
Effective Professional Development
Effective professional development incorporates constructivist approaches to teachers
and learning (Darling-Hammond, 1997). Only teachers who are both knowledgeable in content
areas and skillful in teaching methods can be effective in meeting diverse students’ needs in a
heterogeneous classroom. Precursors to the characteristics of effective professional development
are the characteristics of all professional development, which consist of several consistent
factors. According to Borko (2004), all staff/professional development opportunities include the
following key elements:
1. The staff/professional development program being used;
2. The participants, in the case of this discussion the teachers;
3. The facilitator of the staff development, serving as guide to the teachers as they
construct new knowledge and practices; and
4. The context, and/or setting in which the staff development occurs (p. 4).
Educational researchers have, within the context of some or all of these elements, analyzed the
effectiveness of various staff development programs, and each element has been found to have
its impact on the overall successfulness of the analyzed staff development program (Borko,
2004).
Beyond these basic components that make up all professional development opportunities
are the specific characteristics that are likely to indicate effective professional development. In
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 38
2003, Guskey conducted an analysis of the 13 better-know lists of characteristics of professional
development. In these lists, he found that characteristics tended to vary widely, and that no one
characteristic was on each one of the lists (Webb & Norton, 2009). What was discovered,
however, was that some of the characteristics did seem to appear on multiple lists. Below are the
ten most frequently repeated characteristics, as identified by Guskey.
The professional development:
1. enhanced teachers’ content and pedagogical knowledge
2. provided sufficient time and other resources
3. promoted collegiality and collaboration
4. included procedures for evaluation
5. aligned with other reform initiatives
6. modeled high-quality instruction
7. was school or site based
8. built leadership capacity
9. was based on teachers’ identified needs
10. was driven by analyses of student learning data (Guskey, 2003, p.10)
Although the presence of each characteristic may vary due to the context of the professional
development, or in other words the specific needs of the teacher, school site, or district, their
presence is an indicator of the effectiveness of the professional development. According to
Webb and Norton (2009), “whatever the context, the one constant is that, ultimately, the
effectiveness of any professional development program, its fundamental benefit, is the extent to
which it results in improvement of student outcomes” (p. 176).
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 39
In reviewing a different source, further discussion of the elements of effective
professional development include similar characteristics. James Hiebert (1999), in a review of
the research on mathematics teaching and learning conducted for the National Council of
Teachers of Mathematics, stated that:
Research on teacher learning shows that fruitful opportunities to learn new teaching
methods share several core features: (a) ongoing (measured in years) collaboration of
teachers for purposes of planning with (b) the explicit goal of improving students’
achievement of clear learning goals, (c) anchored by attention to students’ thinking, the
curriculum, and pedagogy, with (d) access to alternative ideas and methods and
opportunities to observe these in action and to reflect on the reasons for their
effectiveness… (p. 15)
Seen throughout the literature are similar common themes for effective professional
development: ongoing (time), goal of increased student achievement, and opportunity for
evaluation.
Lindstrom and Speck (2004) identify the components of high-quality professional
development as follows: (1) Focuses on learning and sustaining improved student learning; (2)
Emerges from student data and the need to improve student results; (3) Nurtures collegiality and
collaboration among teachers, other staff, and principal; (4) Develops shared leadership,
resources, and inside/outside support; (5) Utilizes research with a foundation in standards and
accountability; (6) Deepens teachers’ content knowledge and teaching practices; (7) Centers on
the adult learner through job-embedded work, options, and learning styles; (8) Requires ongoing
inquiry, practice, and reflection to inform practice; (9) Evaluates progress and accounts for
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 40
student learning by examining results. Further, professional development must be “devoted
exclusively to proven or research-based methods to ensure student success” (Schmoker, 1999).
Professional Development for Educators of the Gifted
Teacher preparation varies, as does various professional development opportunities. The
topic of gifted education varies with respect to teacher preparation and professional development
available to educators. It is a general understanding that the average teacher preparation program
does not do an adequate job in addressing how teachers should meet the needs of gifted students
(Hansen & Feldhusen, 1994). Many new educators find their first year of teaching to be a
challenge, for a variety of reasons. According to Dettmer (1986), “The situation is all the more
severe when educating gifted and talented students who tend to function on the leading edge of
innovation and rapid progress” (p. 99).
Available Training
In a society that is changing rapidly, there is consensus among professionals that
undergraduate education is no longer where one may stop, it is only the beginning of being a life-
long learner that extends to the end of one’s professional career (Webster-Wright, 2009). To this
end, the use of established standards for teacher preparation for educating gifted students should
be implemented. The minimum standards assert that all teachers of the gifted must be “certified”
or working towards certification (Landrum, Callahan, Shaklee, 2001). This training can take the
form of a formalized program through a graduate degree program and state certification, or may
take the form of informal training through school district in-servicing or various institutes. The
most common forms of continuing education for teacher preparation in educating gifted students
towards obtaining certification include university GATE certificate programs, school district
professional development, and institutes.
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 41
Current Status
One difficulty faced by the field of gifted education, in regards to professional
development, is that from state to state, there is a lack of consistency in state policies for teacher
preparation to work with gifted students (VanTassel-Baska & Johnsen, 2007). In the state of
California, the Gifted and Talented Education program (GATE) is supported under education
code sections 52200-52212. Funding is provided through these education code sections to allow
local school districts to develop unique education opportunities for identified gifted and talented
students, both high achieving and underachieving, in public elementary and secondary schools
(California Department of Education, 2015). Local agencies are allowed to determine how to
best meet the needs of gifted students in their schools, per Assembly Bill 2313. Curriculum for a
GATE program consists of an integration of differentiated learning experience for the gifted
students within the regular school day, coupled with supplemental activities, which include
independent study, acceleration, and enrichment (California Department of Education, 2015).
This curriculum is intended to be taught by “a teacher who has specific preparation, experience,
personal attributes and competencies in the teaching of gifted students” (California Department
of Education, 2015).
Although there is a requirement for highly qualified teachers for all students, and
specifically for gifted students, there is a wide variance in requirements for certification and
training from state to state. As of 1996, there is a mandatory requirement for teacher preparation
to work with gifted students in twenty-four states (Karnes & Whorton, 1996). Despite the
requirement being mandatory, there is a discrepancy between what the actual requirements are
from one state to another. There are several other states that offer some form of certificate or
endorsement in the field of gifted education, again with varying requirements. Unfortunately,
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 42
this is a permissive policy, which does not require teacher preparation, it merely suggests it.
Despite requirements for certification varying from state to state, most requirements include:
1. an introductory course on the special needs of gifted students
2. counseling and curriculum development courses for the gifted
3. preparation in identification and working with special population or problems of
gifted students
4. practicum involving some degree of supervised instruction (Gallagher & Gallagher,
1994).
Although the states that have certificate or endorsement programs in place also offer higher
education in the field of teacher preparation to work with gifted students, there are currently
eighteen states in which no higher education in this area is offered beyond what is included in the
general preparation for teachers, based on the NCATE/NAGC/CTC Standards.
Current Law
In the most recent federal policy for school accountability, the No Child Left Behind Act
(NCLB), passed in 2001 and signed into law in 2002, education saw the reauthorization of the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) and with it an assurance that all students,
regardless of their background, would receive a quality education. NCLB further requires that
all teachers be highly qualified by 2006, and requires school districts to provide schools with
strategies and staff development that has been proven effective by the standard of scientifically
based research (U.S. Department of Education, 2002). This policy applies to all students and all
programs, and can therefore be applied to gifted education. “Highly qualified” can be applied to
certification for teachers of the gifted, just as it does for learning disabilities, etc., and this can be
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 43
viewed as an opportunity to use this legislation to build strength for gifted education (Gallagher,
2002).
The Teacher Knowledge and Skill Standards for Gifted and Talented Education,
established by the National Association for Gifted Students and the Council for Exceptional
Children (NAGC-CEC), were approved by the National Council for Accreditation for Teacher
Education (NCATE) in the fall of 2006. Included in these standards are ten content standards
areas, which should be used when preparing teachers to educate gifted students. These include:
1. Foundations
2. Development and Characteristics of Learners
3. Individual Learning Differences
4. Instructional Strategies
5. Learning Environments and Social Interactions
6. Language and Communication
7. Instructional Planning
8. Assessment
9. Professional and Ethical Practice
10. Collaboration
The passage of these standards provides a research-based agenda for professional development
opportunities, providing an overall blueprint for topics that should be presented during the
preparation of teachers to work with gifted learners (VanTassel-Baska & Johnsen, 2007).
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 44
Importance of Professional Development for Educators of the Gifted
According to Dettmer (1986), staff development is a necessary component of a teacher’s
role in gifted education. Staff development and teacher preparation in the field of gifted
education requires specific content. To ensure equity of access and quality programming and
instruction, it is paramount that teachers of the gifted are educated in the relevant theory,
research, pedagogy, and management techniques necessary for creating and maintaining
classroom-based opportunities for learning (VanTassel-Baska & Johnsen, 2007). As noted by
the NCTAF, there is a need for change in the way we prepare teachers (1996). Similar issues of
happenstance training are noted in gifted education, as expressed by Gallagher, (2000); “the
unthinkable thought is [with regards to Special Personnel Preparation for Teachers of Gifted
Students] that such preparation is often haphazard and superficial, consisting of a summer
workshop here, a three day conference there, hardly justifying the term [GATE] specialist’ (p. 8).
What is known about teacher preparation for gifted education mirrors what is known
about teacher preparation as a whole. According to Lasley, Bainbridge, and Berry (2002),
teachers must be adequately prepared for the specific teaching assignment given to them. It has
been noted, with respect to gifted education, that teachers lacking preparation in how to meet the
unique needs of gifted students are less effective in the classroom in delivering instruction that
will meet those unique needs for their gifted learners (Moon, Callahan, & Tomlinson, 1999).
Researchers have further noted that the lack of training in gifted education may lead to negative
attitude and assumptions on the part of the teacher towards their gifted students (Geake and
Gross, 2008, Hanninen, 1988).
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 45
Differentiated Curriculum and Instruction
The current literature specific to enhancing learning for gifted students points towards
specific strategies used in combination as being most likely to produce learning gains (Van
Tassel-Baska et al., 2008). These strategies include concept development, thinking and
reasoning, problem solving, and flexible accommodations (Van Tassel-Baska, 2002). According
to Tomlinson (1996), “gifted learners are motivated when engaged in learning basic skills in
context rather than in isolation, functioning consistently at high levels of thinking, making
connections among disciplines, presenting products to real audiences, dealing with ambiguities,
and behaving like professionals in the field.”
Student diversity, both academically and culturally, is greater now than ever before
(VanSciver, 2005). To meet the needs of all students, teachers must differentiate instruction to
ensure mastery of the content. As stated by Kiernan and Tomlinson (1997), “An appropriately
differentiated classroom offers different routes to content, activities, and products in response to
differing learner needs.” Differentiation of curriculum and instruction recognizes the end results
that all students must attain. It structures the means by which a diverse group of students, with
academic, social and affective diverse characteristics, can reach those same end results (Kaplan,
2007). In a time when educators are faced with such a greatly diverse student population,
educators are responding to the challenge with a call for differentiation (Adams, Cassady, &
Neumeister, 2004). Further, the National Association for Gifted Students (NAGC) believes that
the best way to ensure and achieve excellence and equity for students is through differentiated
learning opportunities.
A differentiated educational program, as defined by the Marland Report (U.S.
Commissioner of Education, 1971), has three characteristics:
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 46
1. A differentiated curriculum that denotes higher cognitive concepts and processes.
2. Instructional strategies that accommodate the learning styles of the gifted and talented
and curriculum content.
3. Special grouping arrangements, which include a variety of administrative procedures
appropriate to particular children, i.e., special classes, honor classes, seminars,
resource rooms, and the like.
Carol Ann Tomlinson defines differentiation, at its most basic level, as consisting of the efforts
of teachers in responding to differences among learners in their classrooms (2000). She further
defines what differentiation is as:
1. Differentiated instruction is PROACIVE
2. Differentiated instruction is more QUALATATIVE than quantitative
3. Differentiated instruction provides MULTIPLE approaches to content, process, and
product
4. Differentiated instruction is STUDENT CENTERED
5. Differentiated instruction is a BLEND of whole-class, group, and individual
instruction
6. Differentiated instruction is “ORGANIC” (Tomlinson, 1995).
She states that the classroom teacher can differentiate at least four classroom elements, based on
student readiness, interest, or learning profile:
1. Content- what the student needs to learn or how the student will get access to the
information.
2. Process- activities in which the student engages in order to make sense of or master
the content.
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 47
3. Products- culminating projects that ask the student to rehearse, apply, and extend
what he or she has learned in a unit.
4. Learning Environment- the way the classroom works and feels. (Tomlinson, 2000).
Differentiation is easier to explain then it is to implement. There is no fail-safe way to master
the alternative approaches to instruction needed to truly differentiate (Tomlinson, 1999).
Due to the difficulty of differentiation, experts in the field of gifted education, including
Kaplan, Renzulli, and Tomlinson, have created and published materials giving teachers models
and strategies for differentiating and modifying their curriculum and instruction. Modification of
curriculum to meet the needs of gifted learners can be achieved through four avenues identified
by Gallagher and Gallagher (1994):
1. Acceleration- adjusting the pace of the learning.
2. Enrichment- allowing for more depth and exploration within the content area.
3. Sophistication- bringing more complexity and abstraction to the subject.
4. Novelty- providing for learning opportunities not generally included in the curriculum.
Researchers have noted that students are more successful in school and find school more
satisfying if they are taught in ways that are responsive to their readiness levels, interest, and
learning profiles (Sternberg, Torff, & Grigorenko, 1998, Csikszentmihalyi, 1997, Vygotsky,
1986). In this way, differentiation can lead to student success (Tomlinson, 2000).
Teacher Choice, Characteristics, and Efficacy
The choices that teachers make, when providing differentiated curriculum and
instruction, directly impact the gifted learner (Tomlinson, 2000, Sternberg et al., 1998,
Csikszentmihalyi, 1997, Vygotsky, 1986). Shavelson, Cadwell, and Izu (1977) found in a study
that when relevant information was available for decision-making, teachers would use that
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 48
information to inform their decisions. In the absence of relevant information to guide decisions,
teachers will rely on their beliefs about education to inform their decisions (Shavelson et al.,
1977). Shavelson et al. (1977) further state that teachers, when attempting to choose a teaching
method or strategy, are attempting to achieve a desired outcome by matching their teaching
methods with the aptitudes of their students (p. 84). According to Desimone et al. (2002),
“professional development is considered an essential mechanism for deepening teachers’ content
knowledge and developing their teaching practices” (p. 81). Research has found that change in
teachers’ instructional choices and practice will take place if teachers experience consistent, high
quality professional development (Desimone et al., 2002).
The intended purpose of any specialized training in the field of gifted education is to
provide the educator with the specific skills and sets of knowledge that will enhance the already
experienced and knowledgeable teacher to better deal with gifted students (Gallagher &
Gallagher, 1994). As stated by Landrum et al. (2001), qualified teachers of the gifted are first
and foremost quality classroom teachers within their current grade level and discipline. Beyond
being good teachers, educators of the gifted must possess further knowledge and skills.
In a survey conducted in 2001, prominent experts in the field of education were asked: “If
you could identify core non-negotiables, in your expert opinion, what knowledge or skills ought
all teachers have concerning the education of gifted and talented students?” (Cassady & Mullen,
2001). According to Graffam (2006) the responses of the experts, including Gallagher, Kaplan,
Reis, Renzulli, Tomlinson, and Van Tassel-Baska:
emphasized that teachers of the gifted need to be passionate learners and have the ability
to reflect and admire the changing nature of knowledge. These teachers need to have a
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 49
full repertoire of skills that can understand and meet the individual learning styles of their
students head on (p. 120).
The implication of these responses is that although the collective responses give a sense of what
these leaders expect from the educators of the gifted in the classroom, relatively little literature
exists that demonstrates the presence or absence of these characteristics (Graffam, 2006).
Prompted by the presence of a rapidly changing student population in public education,
an increased interest in teachers’ perceptions and how these affect classroom practice has been
noted (Pajares, 1992). There has been an increase in literature that supports the link between
teachers’ beliefs and their perceptions and judgments, further noting that these impact their
classroom behavior (Rueda & Garcia, 1996). In addition, reflection on teachers’ belief systems
is a necessary component in improving professional preparation and later teacher effectiveness
(Clark, 1988). One such belief is that of self-efficacy.
Teacher efficacy, as defined by experts in the field, is "the extent to which the teacher
believes he or she has the capacity to affect student performance" (Berman, McLaughlin, Bass,
Pauly, & Zellman, 1977, p. 137), and as “teachers’ belief or conviction that they can influence
how well students learn, even those who may be difficult or unmotivated” (Guskey & Passaro,
1994, p. 4). An important indicator in the determination of teachers’ sense of self-efficacy is
experience (Protheroe, 2008). Using these findings as a basis, researchers in the field of teacher
education recognize mastery experiences as the single most powerful efficacy changing force
and further suggest mastery building experiences through thoughtfully designed staff
development activities (Goddard, Hoy, & Hoy, 2000).
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 50
Conclusion
There is a consensus among researchers that further research and discussion is need on
the topics of professional development, teacher characteristics, and of gifted students and their
success. According to Graffam (2006), teachers of gifted students are underdescribed in the
literature. He states that the field of gifted education has (a) worked to create clear and
acceptable definitions of giftedness; (b) done extensive work in identifying the characteristics of
gifted learners; (c) created myriad curricula that can challenge bright minds; (d) established clear
and powerful avenues of advocacy for gifted education; and (e) developed methodologies for
teaching gifted learners. There has been, however, “relatively little research that attempts to
understand those who teach in the field” (Graffam, 2006, p. 120).
Hansen and Feldhusen (1994), further state that although leaders in the field of gifted
education have promulgated elaborate models for both instructional programs for gifted students
and the related teacher training, the research and evaluation of the effectiveness of these training
models is meager.
While the effectiveness of professional development has been documented in the general
education literature, few studies on the topic have been published in the field of gifted education
(Van Tassel-Baska, 1986). Van Tassel-Baska and Johnson (2007) state:
Finally, the field needs to conduct research that examines the effects of teacher
preparation in gifted education on the services and performance of gifted and talented
students. Are there differences in classroom practices between teachers who are prepared
in gifted education and those who are not? Do these differences in classroom practices
result in greater student performance? (p. 194).
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 51
In order to study the effects of professional development on the pedagogical choices
made by educators of both regular education and gifted education students, related research was
found and reviewed. The presentation of the literature regarding all topic areas sought to give a
relevant historical perspective on professional development as well as implications for current
practice, characteristics of professional development with specific regard to gifted education,
definitions and roles of key instructional methods including differentiated curriculum and
instruction, and a look at the role of teacher choice in instruction. Due to the consensus among
experts in the field with regards to the lack of research establishing the effects of teacher
preparation on student achievement, this study sought to contribute to the greater body of
knowledge on the effects of professional development on teacher choices in curriculum and
instruction.
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 52
CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH METHODS
Introduction
Chapter three describes the methodology used for conducting the study, the
design of the research, and the data collection and analysis procedures. The primary purpose of
this study was to analyze the professional development program at one transitional kindergarten
through eighth grade school undergoing a system-wide, major programmatic change.
Specifically, how the school organized its professional development opportunities, the frequency
in which teachers implemented new learning from the professional development, and how the
teachers perceived that these opportunities impacted their classroom instruction. The
overarching research question that will guide this study is:
1. How do gifted education and regular education teachers perceive the impact of specific
professional development on their decisions to differentiate their curriculum and
instruction?
Professional Development Framework
The terms staff development and professional development are often used synonymously
(Hord, 1994). Professional development can be defined by a variety of factors, including
attending university classes and workshops, collegial conversations with other classroom
teachers, receiving coaching, reading professional books, articles and journals, and observing
effective classroom teaching (Hord, 1994). Effective professional development can be defined by
its ability to bring about change in teachers’ instructional practices (Odden et al., 2002). Further,
effective professional development makes the connection between subject matter and pedagogy
as well as provides teachers with opportunities to learn. It is influenced by many factors, which
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 53
can be categorized into five core features: (1) content focus, (2) active learning, (3) coherence,
(4) duration, and (5) collective participation (Desimone, 2011).
Table 2
Core Features of Professional Development
Core Features of
Professional Development
Content
Focus
Professional development activities should focus on
subject matter content and how students learn that
content.
Active
Learning
Teachers should have opportunities to get involved,
such as observing and receiving feedback,
analyzing student work, or making presentations, as
opposed to passively sitting through lectures.
Coherence
What teachers learn in any professional
development activity should be consistent with
other professional development, with their
knowledge and beliefs, and with school, district,
and state reforms and policies.
Duration
Professional development activities should be
spread over a semester and should include 20 hours
or more of contact time.
Collective
Preparation
Groups of teachers from the same grade, subject, or
school should participate in professional
development activities together to build an
interactive learning community.
The evidence of effective professional development is classroom practice. Teachers’
knowledge and practices are the immediate and most significant indicators of success of
professional development activities (Guskey & Sparks, 2002). Professional development should
increase educators’ knowledge and instructional practice in ways that translate to increased
student achievement (Desimone, 2011). Desimone (2011) proposes that successful professional
development follows four key steps:
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 54
1. Teachers experience professional development
2. The professional development increases teachers’ knowledge and skills, changes their
attitudes and beliefs, or both.
3. Teachers use their new knowledge, skills, attitudes, and beliefs to improve the content
of their instruction, their approach to pedagogy, or both.
4. The instructional changes that the teachers introduce to the classroom boost their
students’ learning.
Although simplistic in form, this framework offers a strong foundation for analyzing the
effectiveness of professional development (Desimone, 2011). Following this framework would
suggest that we evaluate for three specific outcomes:
1. Did teachers learn?
2. Did they change their practice?
3. Did student achievement increase as a result?
Although other frameworks exist with relation to this topic, all components of professional
development can be analyzed through the lenses of these three questions, which provided the
conceptual underpinnings for this study.
Nature of the Study/ Research Design
Patton (2002) states that the purpose of research is “to contribute knowledge that will
help people understand the nature of a problem in order to intervene” (p. 217). This study
attempted to identify the nature of a specific professional development program, teachers’
perceptions of the effects of that professional development on their curricular and instructional
choices, and perceptions of the effects on student achievement. This study was a quantitative
case study. Utilizing this type of study allowed for the use of data collection to develop a “rich
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 55
and thick description” of the study (Gall et al., 2003). According to Gall et al., (2003), one
reason for using a case study is the researcher is able to look for themes, or areas of focus, that
bring order to descriptive data.
In this study, perceptions of professional development and its impact on teacher
instruction and student achievement were analyzed by conducting the following: (1) survey
questionnaires with participating teachers, and (2) classrooms observations.
Research Setting
The setting for this study was a newly formed K-8 magnet school, with a magnet focus of
differentiated instruction, located in a K-8 school district in an urban area in southern California.
The school was originally opened in 1947 as a community public school, servicing students in
grades K-5. In 2009, 6
th
grade was added to the campus. During the 2010-2011 school year, the
school as a whole voted to become a distinctive school, with a GATE strand and regular
education strand, and with a unifying, overarching theme of school-wide use of differentiated
instruction, and depth and complexity for all students.
The school re-opened in the 2011-2012 school year with this new focus. The population
in the 2013-2014 school year consisted of approximately 900 students, of which approximately
360 were GATE identified, 40 were identified as special education receiving RSP services and/or
Speech services, and the remaining 500 were regular education students. The school employed
34 teachers; 1 RSP teacher, 1 Speech teacher, 1 Intervention teacher, 12 GATE teachers, and 19
regular education teachers.
During the 2011-2012 and 2012-2013 school years, all teachers at this site underwent
specific professional development on the overarching topic of differentiation. During the 2011-
2012 school year, the teachers participated in six full days of training, with an additional four
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 56
days of training in 2012-2013, and three days scheduled throughout the 2013-2014 school year.
Elements of the professional development series were selected based on their alignment to the
California State Board of Education Recommended Standards for Programs for Gifted and
Talented Students. The training focused on differentiated curriculum, defined as the
modification of the core curriculum that challenges and meets the unique needs of the learners,
and differentiated instruction, defined as instruction that helps students with diverse academic
needs master the same challenging grade-level academic content (California Association for the
Gifted, 2007; California Department of Education, 1994). Specific topics covered in the
professional development include, but were not limited to: prompts of depth and complexity,
models of teaching (advanced organizer, group investigation, inductive and deductive
reasoning), independent study, and learning centers, all of which function as a means for a
teacher to differentiate both curriculum and instruction to meet the needs of all of their students.
Activities included, but were not limited to, direct instruction of the above described topics, time
for reflection and development of lessons using newly acquired knowledge, implementation of
lessons, observation by administration of implemented lessons, reflection on lessons and
consideration for next steps. The elements of the professional development were designed to
address the elements of Standard 4: Instructional Strategies, from the NAGC-CEC Teacher
Knowledge & Skill Standards for Gifted and Talented Education (2006). The relationship
between the elements of Standard 4 and the elements of the designed and delivered professional
development are shown below.
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 57
Table 3
Standard 4: Instructional Strategies and Their Relationship to Professional Development
Conducted
NAGC-CEC Teacher Knowledge & Skill Standards for Gifted and Talented
Education
Standard 4: Instructional Strategies
Educators of the gifted possess a repertoire of evidenced-based curriculum and instructional
strategies to differentiate for individuals with gifts and talents. They select, adapt, and use these
strategies to promote challenging learning opportunities in general and specific curricula and to
modify learning environments to enhance self-awareness and self-efficacy for individuals with
gifts and talents. They enhance the learning of critical and creative thinking, problem solving,
and performance skills in specific domains. Moreover, educators of the gifted emphasize the
development, practice, and transfer of advanced knowledge and skills across environments
throughout the lifespan leading to creative, productive careers in society for individuals with
gifts and talents.
Elements of Standard 4
Elements of Professional Development
(Based on alignment to the California State Board of
Education Recommended Standards for Programs for Gifted
and Talented Students)
K1 School and community
resources, including content
specialists, that support
differentiation
• Specific content addressing availability of district,
local and state resources
K2 Curricular, instructional, and
management strategies effective
for individuals with exceptional
learning needs
• Prompts of Depth & Complexity
• Models of Teaching (Advanced Organizer, Group
Investigation, Inductive and Deductive Reasoning,
etc.)
• Independent Study
• Learning Centers
• Think Like a Disciplinarian
• Pre-assessment
• Acceleration
• Compacting
S1 Apply pedagogical content
knowledge to instructing
learners with gifts and talents
• Models of Teaching (Advanced Organizer, Group
Investigation, Inductive and Deductive Reasoning,
etc.)
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 58
Table 3, continued
S2 Apply higher-level thinking
and metacognitive models to
content areas to meet the needs
of individuals with gifts and
talents
• Prompts of Depth & Complexity
• Models of Teaching (Advanced Organizer, Group
Investigation, Inductive and Deductive Reasoning,
etc.)
• Independent Study
• Learning Centers
• Think Like a Disciplinarian
S3 Provide opportunities for
individuals with gifts and
talents to explore, develop, or
research their areas of interest
or talent
• Independent Study
• Learning Centers
• Think Like a Disciplinarian
S4 Pre-assess the learning needs
of individuals with gifts and
talents in various domains and
adjust instruction based on
continual assessment
• Pre-assessment
• Acceleration
• Compacting
S5 Pace delivery of curriculum
and instruction consistent with
the needs of individuals with
gifts and talents
• Acceleration
• Compacting
Population
In this study, the perceived effects of specific professional development on the curricular
and instructional choices made by all teachers involved and the perceived impact on student
achievement were studied. The intent was that by studying a sample of teachers, generalizations
could be made to the larger population of all teachers, and information learned may be helpful in
identifying specific areas of strength and weakness in the structure and delivery of professional
development, which may be useful in improving the ongoing professional development so as to
maximize the benefits to all students (Creswell, 2009).
There were a total of 33 teachers participating in the professional development. Nineteen
of the teachers taught regular education students in grades TK (Transitional Kindergarten)
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 59
through 6
th
, twelve of the teachers teach GATE identified students in grades 3-8 in self-contained
classrooms where all students are GATE identified based on the school district’s identification
criteria, one intervention teacher worked with struggling students in grades TK through 3
rd
, and
one teacher worked with RSP (Resource Specialist Program) students for all grades.
Instrumentation/Research Procedure
The data collection included teacher survey questionnaires and observations of teachers
in the classroom and during professional development activities. A pilot study of the survey and
observation protocol was conducted in the fall of 2012 by convening a group of experts in the
field of gifted education, which subsequently established content validity.
Survey
The survey utilized was a tool developed for the purposes of this study. The survey, using
a four point Likert scale, was administered for the purpose of identifying the participants’
perceptions of effectiveness of the professional development, as well as participants’ levels of
perceived implementation of newly learned instructional strategies. This tool was further used to
identify strengths and weaknesses of the ongoing professional development in order to identify
areas for possible improvement and growth.
The survey questions were divided into three sections. In all three sections the
participants reflected only on the specific professional development in which they participated
during the 2011-2012 and 2012-2013 school years, on the topics of differentiated curriculum and
instruction. In Section I, the participants answered thirteen questions, 7-19, regarding the
elements of professional development and how they felt about their ability to meet their personal
and professional needs. In Section II, questions 20-26 asked the participants to rate their degree
of confidence in their ability to implement seven specific elements of differentiated learning
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 60
from the training. In Section III, questions 27-33 asked the participants to consider those same
seven elements of new learning from section two, and rate the frequency in which they were
implementing them.
Observations
Observations in this study included informal classroom walk-throughs using a Classroom
Observation Checklist developed for the purposes of this study, as well as informal observations
conducted during professional development trainings.
Data Analysis
Upon completion of data collection from survey results and observations, the resulting
data was analyzed. The data was analyzed and interpreted using Creswell’s (2003) six generic
steps. The research question was used as a framework for organizing the data collected.
Findings from the data were sorted into areas of focus as applicable. Corroboration of the
findings was sought in multiple data collection points (surveys and observations). Finally, the
content of both sources were analyzed and meanings were generated within each category.
Survey Instrument/Pilot Study
Validity in research is reliant upon instrument creation that ensures that what was
intended to be measured is what actually is measured (Patton, 2001). According to (Baker,
1994), the purpose of a pilot study “can be the pre-testing or ‘trying-out’ of a particular
instrument” (p. 182-183). Pilot studies of the observation tool and survey were conducted in the
fall of 2012, and established content validity. To develop and test the adequacy of the
observation tool and survey, content validity was determined by having a group of expert
teachers trained in differentiated curriculum models evaluate the content of the observation tool
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 61
and survey. During the pilot study, these experts checked the survey directions and questions to
determine comprehensibility and practiced data collection using the observation tool.
Summary
In this study the perceived effects of professional development on teacher practice and
student achievement were explored. Teachers’ perceptions about the effects of professional
development on their instructional practice and on student achievement were collected through
surveys and observations.
The chapter included a description of the research design, the subjects of the research,
instrumentation and research procedure, the data analysis procedure, content reliability, and
description of pilot studies conducted.
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 62
CHAPTER FOUR: FINDINGS
Overview
This chapter will present the findings of the study and an analysis of the data. The
primary purpose of this study is to analyze the professional development program at one
Transitional Kindergarten through eighth grade school undergoing a system-wide, major
programmatic change. Specifically, the researcher observed how the school organized its
professional development opportunities, the frequency in which teachers implemented new
learning from the professional development, and how the teachers perceived that these
opportunities impacted their classroom instruction. Additionally, the research analyzed the
similarities and differences between the professional development experiences and perceptions
of the gifted education teachers and the regular education teachers. The researcher used survey
results and observational data to identify common areas of focus. The findings answered the
following research question:
1. How do gifted education and regular education teachers perceive the impact of
specific professional development on their decisions to differentiate their curriculum
and instruction?
From the data collected, three common areas of focus emerged:
1. Professional Development (perceptions of)
2. Instructional Strategies (confidence in ability to implement)
3. Implementation (frequency)
The data for this study was collected through surveys and observations. During a site staff
meeting, 32 teachers completed the survey, shown in Appendix (A). Summaries of the results of
the survey questionnaire are shown in Tables 7, 8 and 10 below. All 32 teachers were observed
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 63
3-5 times in their classrooms, and observations were recorded on checklists developed by the
researcher, shown in Appendix (B). The findings for the research question and three areas of
focus are shown based on the teachers’ reported perceptions and on the researcher’s
observations. The first section below provides a brief history and description of the school site.
The second section shows the findings as they pertain to each area of focus identified, and
discuss the similarities and differences between the gifted education teachers and regular
education teachers.
Context
The school district in this study has seen large scale change over the past several years,
due in part to the accountability system of No Child Left Behind (NCLB), standards based
instruction, and a new superintendent with a unique vision for the district. Prior to this point, the
district office was the hub for professional development. There was a district director whose sole
responsibility was the planning, implementation and evaluation of professional development for
the district as a whole. This included Beginning Teacher Support and Assistance (BTSA) for
new teachers in their first two years of teaching, Peer Assistance and Review (PAR) for veteran
teachers needing some additional assistance to meet expectations, and all professional
development in between. With the implementation of standards based instruction and NCLB,
this meant additional training, pacing guides, and an increased need for monitoring and
supervision from the top down.
Professional development took place on “Buy Back” days which were 3-5 non-student
days scattered throughout the school year, during summer in which teachers would be paid to
come back early, or on early release Tuesdays after the dismissal bell. Most professional
development was conducted by hired consultants, or by district staff that had been trained and
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 64
approved by the consultants. Often, what was the fad one year might easily be gone the next,
developing an attitude among teachers of “waiting it out”. This led to little, if any,
implementation and fidelity to a program.
In 2010, the district saw the appointment of a new superintendent, with a very new and
clear vision for the forward progress of the district. He established a five-year plan with six
district focus areas, in which all sites would focus their professional development efforts. These
areas were: Professional Learning Communities (PLCs), standards based instruction, common
assessments, English Language Development (ELD), Response to Intervention (RTI), and
writing. Each site was given some autonomy as to how to pursue each of these areas, but all were
expected to implement. Principals met on a weekly-monthly basis with their Director, Assistant
Superintendent of Learning and Teaching, and the Superintendent to discuss progress towards
meeting these goals. Additionally, each school site in the district was offered the opportunity to
develop a distinctive focus, and to pursue professional development around this focus. Sample
focuses included AVID (Advancement Via Individual Determination), IB (International
Baccalaureate), GATE (Gifted and Talented Education), Dual Language Immersion,
Communications, Visual and Performing Arts, STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and
Mathematics) as well as others.
Red Rock Elementary school, a K-6 school serving approximately 600 students readily
accepted the opportunity to become a distinctive school. The staff met to brainstorm possible
areas of focus. The district determined that Red Rock would become the first GATE Magnet
school for the district, and would function as a school within a school for the GATE strand. This
meant that the school would continue to service regular education neighborhood students in
grades K-6, as well as GATE identified students from throughout the district and surrounding
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 65
districts in grades 3-6. On learning this, the staff was adamant that they remain unified with a
common goal and theme.
In analyzing past performance on state standardized testing, the school noted a drop in
performance over the prior two years. Upon further, deeper, investigation, it was noted that
although some groups of students made progress, there was little to no progress, and even some
regression, seen with specific sub groups of students, including English Language Learners,
Socio-Economically Disadvantaged, and Hispanic/Latino students. Although the staff was
implementing the instructional focuses of the district, it was noted that this was done through a
one-size fits all approach, with little attention given to tailoring instruction for individual student
need. Through the staff’s deliberation, Red Rock Academy of Differentiated Learning was
developed. The school determined to adopt a focus of differentiated instruction and learning for
all students, with the core belief that all students deserve the opportunity to be given the tools to
think critically and at a higher level. The school additionally requested the opportunity to extend
to eighth grade, which was approved by the school district. In the 2012-2013 school year, the
school site added both Transitional Kindergarten and Seventh Grade. In the 2013-2014 school
year, the site added Eighth Grade.
Based on this new focus, Red Rock developed a three year professional development
plan, in which all teachers would have the opportunity to become highly trained in differentiated
instruction, depth and complexity, and various models of teaching, beginning in the summer
preceding the 2011-12 school year.
Teacher Demographics
In the 2010-2011 school year, upon determining the change to school wide magnet, Red
Rock followed the school districts pre-established protocol of hiring staff members. All teaching
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 66
staff members that wished to stay at Red Rock were required to participate in a selection process,
which included an interview and demonstration lesson, and a panel which included site
administration, district administration, the principal from a neighbor district magnet school, and
teacher union representative made the final selections. Not all teachers opted to stay at Red
Rock, and not all teachers were selected to remain after the selection process. Additional
openings were advertised in and out of district, and all new potential hires went through the same
selection process. All teachers, regular education and gifted education teachers, were expected
to possess the same qualities, and having experience and training in teaching gifted students was
preferable, though not required.
The school employed 34 teachers selected through this process, including 1 Resource
Specialist Teacher, 1 Speech Teacher, 1 Intervention Teacher, 12 GATE Teachers, and 19
regular education teachers. Demographics of the teaching staff, as collected in the survey, are
displayed below.
Table 4
Teacher Demographics
Teacher Demographics
Education BA/BS MA/MS Doctorate
Number Of Teachers 22 11 1
Years of Teaching
Experience
1-2
years
3-5
years
6-10
years
11-15
years
16-20
years
21+
years
Number Of Teachers 2 4 3 10 7 8
Years of Experience
Teaching GATE
None 1-2
years
3-5
years
6-10
years
11-15
years
16-20
years
Number Of Teachers 21 4 5 4 0 0
Type of Students You
Currently Teach
Regular Education
Students
Special
Education
Students
Gifted
Education
Students
Number Of Teachers 20 12 2
Grade Level You
Currently Teach
TK-2
nd
Grade 3
rd
-5
th
Grade 6
th
-8
th
Grade
Number Of Teachers 12 14 8
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 67
Professional Development Opportunities and Activities Provided for Teachers
Red Rock has an Instructional Leadership Team (ILT) that meets monthly to plan and
facilitate the learning opportunities for all teachers. Every school in the district dismisses one
hour early on Tuesdays to allow time for professional development and collaboration. The
teachers at Red Rock voted to teach an additional 15 minutes on Monday, Wednesday, Thursday
and Friday so that they could dismiss an additional hour early on Tuesdays. They use the first
hour to meet and collaborate with their grade level colleagues to discuss student performance and
plan instruction, and they use the second hour for professional development opportunities in the
districts focus areas. The ILT, which consists of one member from each grade level, the
intervention teacher, assistant principal, and principal, as well as representatives from regular
education, gifted education, and special education, determine the topics for the professional
development and share the facilitation of the professional development. The team feels that the
message is best received when they all own the communication of the message, not just the site
administration.
Professional development for the new school focus began in the summer preceding the
2011-2012 school year, and is ongoing. The teachers received one day of additional pay for the
training during the summer preceding year one, five sub days during year one, four sub days
during year two and will receive three sub days during year three. On these days, teachers met in
small groups based on their grade level, and program focus (GATE or regular education). Most
topics were selected and delivered to all teachers, regardless of program focus. Select topics
were identified as specific to the needs of gifted students and were delivered exclusively to the
group of teachers working with gifted students. The training format was collaborative; teachers
learned concepts and were given time to work with their colleagues to develop units of study
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 68
based on each new piece of learning. Teachers implemented these units in their classrooms,
administration observed and offered feedback and then the teachers would meet to discuss,
refine, and continue to develop new units. The cycle is ongoing. An expert was brought in to
conduct this training. The expert conducted the training, demonstrated lessons, participated in
walk-throughs, and was available to help teachers based on individual needs and requests. The
topics for the three years of professional development were selected based on their alignment to
the California State Board of Education Recommended Standards for Programs for Gifted and
Talented Students, and included but were not limited to: Depth & Complexity, Learning
Objectives, Models of Teaching, Learning Centers, Independent Study, Think Like a
Disciplinarian, Scholarly Attributes, Universal Concepts, Lesson Development.
Table 5
Illustration of Teacher Competencies to be Acquired, Three-Year Professional Development
Plan
Year Day All Teachers Gifted Education Teachers
1
1
• Intro to Depth & Complexity
• Differentiated Learning Objectives
(Content, Process, Product)
• Models of Teaching (Sandwich &
Advanced Organizer)
• Plan as content experts
1
2
• Scholarly Attributes
• Learning Centers
Curriculum compacting
• Universal Concepts
• Deductive Reasoning
• Themes &
Generalizations
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 69
Table 5, continued
1
3
• Think Like a Disciplinarian
• Concentric Circles of Knowing
• Independent Study (Questioning
Strategies)
• Group Investigation/Inquiry
• Advanced Depth & Complexity
• GATE student
characteristics
• Content Imperatives
1
4
• Socratic Dialogue (Tuesday)
• Advanced reading strategies
• Lesson Development
• Models of Teaching
• Kagan Strategies
1
5
• Develop units of study around grade
level content
• Extension menus
• Extension card pathways
• Social Emotional Needs
• ADHD
• Perfectionism
• Underachievement
• Twice Exceptional
1
6
• Layered Curriculum
• Reflection: What worked? What didn’t?
• Next steps: What do we need? What
do we want?
• Lesson Development
2
1
• Socratic Seminar
• Extension Menus
• Independent Study
2
2
• Learning Centers
• Think Like a Disciplinarian
• Extension Menus
2
3
• Parallel Curriculum
• Next Steps
2
4
• Thematic Units/ Demo Lessons
3
1
• Thematic Interdisciplinary Instruction
• Thematic Units/ Demo Lessons
3
2
• Thematic Units/ Demo Lessons
3
3
• Thematic Units/ Demo Lessons
• Next Steps
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 70
During year one, all teachers attended a set course of study. At the conclusion of year
one, evaluations were provided to teachers and their feedback was requested. Through this
feedback, teachers expressed an interest in multiple topics for the coming year of training and in
having options to choose between. In year two, teachers were offered a menu of curricular
choices, and were able to choose the learning that they were most interested in focusing on.
When provided with the same evaluations at the end of year two, this model received very
positive feedback from the staff, and year three will be modeled in the same fashion.
Similarities and Differences between Professional Development Provided to Regular
Education Teachers and Teachers of the Gifted
Table 6
Professional Development Opportunities
Professional Development Provided
to Both Groups
PD Specific to
Gifted Education Teachers
• Professional development opportunities
based on district and site level focuses
• One hour per week for cognitive
planning with grade level colleagues
• One hour per week of professional
development
• Representation on school site
Instructional Leadership Team
• Received professional
development specific to gifted
education
The regular education teachers and gifted education teachers at Red Rock shared
many similarities in the professional development opportunities and activities offered to the staff.
Both groups received all professional development based on the district focus areas as well as the
site focus. All received the additional hour per week for cognitive planning with colleagues each
Tuesday and all participated in the professional development sessions that took place during the
second hour on Tuesdays.
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 71
Both groups were represented on the school’s Instructional Leadership Team, and had
input in the development and delivery of professional development.
Although both groups received professional development on the topic of differentiation,
the gifted education teachers received content that was differentiated to meet the challenging
needs of their students. There was a focus during their trainings on topics specific to gifted
education, including: GATE characteristics, twice exceptionality, and social/emotional needs of
the gifted.
Findings
In order to examine the research question:
1. How do gifted education and regular education teachers perceive the impact of
specific professional development on their decisions to differentiate their curriculum
and instruction?
Three common areas of focus were examined:
1. Professional Development (perceptions of)
2. Instructional Strategies (confidence in ability to implement)
3. Implementation (frequency)
Teachers Perceptions of Professional Development
One factor to consider when determining the effectiveness of professional development is
the perception of the participants. If the participants believe that the professional development is
relevant to them and their work, they may be more likely to implement new learning. For this
reason, this research looked at the specific feedback and perceptions of participants to determine
if a connection was present between the participants’ perceptions and their choice to implement.
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 72
For many years, the common way in which professional development was evaluated was
through an end-of-program “Smiley” face ranking in which participants rated their satisfaction
with the various aspects of the professional development (Killion, 2006). With the onset of No
Child Left Behind (NCLB), those investing in professional development opportunities were held
to a higher standard for determining the effectiveness of that professional development. There is
debate regarding the best way to measure the effectiveness of professional development, due to
the large number of variables and factors that can effect teacher learning and student
achievement. It is important to note that this study was based on teachers’ self-reporting and the
researcher’s observations, and is not a detailed study of the effectiveness of the professional
development. A review of district and school documents revealed that Red Rock Academy and
its district as a whole used two key measures to determine effectiveness of professional
development: regular informal classroom walkthroughs and student achievement data.
The principal and assistant principal at Red Rock met regularly with their Director and
Superintendent, and were expected to present data from walkthroughs, detailing the level of
implementation of strategies learned through professional development. This data was used to
determine next steps at the site, as well as to determine what support the site administration
needed from the district to ensure high levels of implementation. It was noted in the second
month of the 2012-13 school year, for example, that data collected during walkthroughs
conducted twice per week showed that the frequency in which specific strategies, from the
professional development, were implemented was much lower in the third grade classrooms than
in any other grade level. This information led to an action plan in which the Director, Principal,
and Assistant Principal provided additional training and support to the third grade team, and
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 73
conducted daily walkthroughs for a period of time to assess new implementation. At the end of
four weeks, the team reconvened and noted a marked increase in implementation.
Additionally, the district Director and Superintendent looked for trends in student
achievement data from district administered benchmark tests as well as California Standardized
Tests (CST) to determine effectiveness of program and professional development. Again, as
with walkthrough data, this data was used to determine next steps at the site, as well as to
determine what support the site administration needed from the district to ensure high levels of
implementation. The district expected to see a minimum of a 3% growth each year in the percent
of students scoring proficient and/or advanced on district administered Benchmark tests. As an
example, as with the walk through data, after Benchmark 1 it was noted that third grade had
decreased in the number of students that scored proficient or advanced. This, along with
observational data, was used to develop a plan for support for the third grade team.
Table 7
Perceptions of Professional Development: Reponses of Agree or Strongly Agree
Survey Items Regular
Education
Teachers
Gifted
Education
Teachers
In regards to the professional development, on the
topics of Differentiated Curriculum and Instruction,
in which I participated in this year, I feel that:
F
%
F
%
8. I learned practical instructional strategies, that I
can take back and use immediately in my classroom
20 100 12 100
9. I become more effective as a teacher, better able
to deliver content in a meaningful way
20 100 12 100
10. I am able to be more productive as a teacher, and
I am able to utilize my time more efficiently
20 100 12 100
12. I have learned to meet the various needs of all of
my students
19 95 12 100
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 74
Data for this theme was collected through teacher survey (questions 8, 9, 10, 12) and
informal observation during professional development training sessions. The teachers believed
that they learned from the professional development. When surveyed, 100% of the teachers,
both regular education and gifted education teachers, responded “agree” or “strongly agree” to
the statement, “I learned practical instructional strategies, that I can take back and use
immediately in my classroom.” When given the statement, “I have learned to meet the various
needs of all of my students” 95% of regular education teachers and 100% of gifted education
teachers responded “agree” or “strongly agree”. When surveyed, 100% of the teachers, regular
education and gifted education teachers, responded “agree” or “strongly agree” to the statement,
“I have become more effective as a teacher, better able to deliver content in a meaningful way.”
When given the statement, “I am able to be more productive as a teacher, and I am able to utilize
my time more efficiently,” 100% of regular education teachers and 100% of gifted education
teachers responded, “agree” or “strongly agree”.
Observations of teachers as they participated in the professional development showed
that most teachers actively participated and engaged in the learning. During the course of one
day of training, 28 out of 33 teachers asked clarifying questions of the trainer. All teachers
participated in various activities during the course of the day, although it was not clear to what
degree each teacher contributed. Twenty-five out of 33 teachers shared out when given the
opportunity, some by choice and some by request of the trainer. All teachers developed a lesson
or unit of study, which implemented one or more strategy learned during the professional
development, either individually, with a partner, or in a small group, and all teachers signed up
for a time for the administration to come observe that lesson. The principal investigator was the
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 75
observer, and collected data through tally marks next to teachers’ names for participation,
sharing ideas, asking questions, etc.
The response patterns were similar in perception of the professional development, as well
as in participation, between the regular education teachers and the teachers of the gifted. The
data shows that there was a strong positive perception of the professional development by all
participants.
Confidence in Ability to Implement Instructional Strategies Learned
Another factor to consider when determining the effectiveness of professional
development is the participants’ confidence in implementing the new learning. A participant
may feel that a professional development went well, that they did learn, and that it was relevant
to their practice, but if they lack confidence in their own ability to implement what they have
learned, it may be unlikely that they will go back to their classroom and implement. For this
reason, this research looked at the self-rated confidence levels of participants, as well as
observable implementation elements through observations, to determine if a connection was
present between the participants’ confidence in their own ability and their choice to implement.
Data for this theme was collected through teacher survey (questions 20-26) and informal
classroom observations. Overall, the teachers believed that they changed their practice due to the
professional development.
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 76
Table 8
Confidence in Ability to Implement Instructional Strategies Learned: Reponses of Confident or
Very Confident
Survey Items Regular
Education
Teachers
Gifted
Education
Teachers
In regards to the professional development, on the
topics of Differentiated Curriculum and Instruction,
in which you participated in this year, please rate
your confidence level in your ability to:
F
%
F
%
20. Determine when and how to use Depth and
Complexity to enhance student learning
14 70 12 100
21. Facilitate discussion utilizing questioning
strategies that foster higher order thinking skills
15 75 11 91.7
22. Select appropriate varied supplemental materials
and references to increase academic rigor
15 75 11 91.7
23. Differentiate based on readiness, interest/choice,
or learning styles (extension menus, literature
circles, learning centers, independent study, etc.)
16 80 11 91.7
24. Utilizing a variety of different instructional
models (direct instruction, shared inquiry,
inductive/deductive reasoning, group investigation,
advanced organizer, etc.)
11 55 12 100
25. Use flexible grouping (whole group, small
group, partnering, independent)
18 90 12 100
26. Meaningfully assess student learning through
multiple measures
17 85 12 100
The regular education teachers rated their confidence in their ability to implement the
learned strategies lower than the gifted education teachers. The regular education teachers had
the least confidence in their ability to “utilize a variety of different instructional models (direct
instruction, shared inquiry, inductive/deductive reasoning, group investigation, advanced
organizer, etc.)” with 55% reporting “confident” or “very confident”. They were most confident
in their ability to “use flexible grouping” (90% “very confident” or “confident”) and
“meaningfully assess student learning through multiple measures” (85% “very confident” or
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 77
“confident”). The gifted education teachers rated their confidence high, with 91.7-100%
responding “very confident” or “confident” in all areas.
One hundred informal classroom observations, conducted using the observation protocol,
were utilized to validate teachers’ perceptions of their ability to implement and frequency of
implementation. The observation protocol focused on three areas that included elements of
implementation, evidence of student engagement, and evidence of student achievement. A
summary of the results of the walkthroughs, as they pertain to implementation, is shown below
in Table 9. A total of 100 walkthroughs were conducted by the researcher, with a minimum of
three in each classroom.
Table 9
Summary of Classroom Observations: Elements of Implementation
Elements of Implementation
Regular
Education
Teachers
Gifted
Education
Teachers
F % F %
Icons of Depth and Complexity in student learning
(Retrieval charts, worksheets, discussions, assessments, etc.)
36 60 38 95
Facilitation of discussion utilizing questioning strategies that
foster higher order thinking skills
(Describe the cause and effect of….; Can you prove with
evidence that … What is the significance of….)
30 50 38 95
Evidence of appropriate varied resources to increase
academic rigor
(primary resources, teacher designed, print-non print,
technology, etc.)
48 80 40 100
Evidence of differentiation based on student need
(extension menus, literature circles, learning centers,
Independent Study, etc.)
12 20 20 50
Evidence of differentiated instructional methods
(direct instruction, Socratic Dialogue, inductive/deductive
reasoning, group investigation, etc.)
28 46.7 30 75
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 78
Table 9, continued
Use of flexible grouping
(whole group, small group ,independent learning)
36 60 38 95
Evidence of meaningful assessment/evaluation of student
learning through multiple measures
(formal-informal; formative- summative)
51 85 38 95
Data from classroom walkthroughs showed a range of implementation. The elements
with the highest percent evidence of implementation were “use of varied resources” and
“meaningful assessment”. The lowest percent evidence of implementation, for regular education
and gifted education teachers, was “differentiation based on student need”. Overall, the data
shows that there was a high level of confidence by all participants, and a lesser but still high
level of implementation observed.
Frequency of Implementation
A third factor to consider when determining the effectiveness of professional
development is the participants’ frequency of implementation of new learning. A participant
may feel that a professional development went well, that they did learn, that it was relevant to
their practice, and that they are confident in their own ability to implement what they have
learned, but if they do not actually structure the new learning into their practice and routine, a
high level of implementation will not take place. For this reason, this research looked at the self-
rated frequency of implementation of participants to determine if they were taking their new
learning back and utilizing on a regular and ongoing basis.
Data for this theme was collected through teacher survey (questions 27-33).
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 79
Table 10
Frequency of Implementation: Number of Teachers That Answered Daily or Weekly
Survey Items
Regular
Education
Teachers
Gifted
Education
Teachers
In regards to the professional development, on the topics of
Differentiated Curriculum and Instruction, in which you
participated in this year, please rate the degree of frequency in
which you implement the following:
F
%
F
%
27. Determine when and how to use Depth and Complexity
to enhance student learning
20 100 12 100
28. Facilitate discussion utilizing questioning strategies that
foster higher order thinking skills
20 100 12 100
29. Select appropriate varied supplemental materials and
references to increase academic rigor
18 90 10 83.3
30. Differentiate based on readiness, interest/choice, or
learning styles (extension menus, literature circles, learning
centers, independent study, etc.)
15 75 11 91.7
31. Utilizing a variety of different instructional models
(direct instruction, shared inquiry, inductive/deductive
reasoning, group investigation, advanced organizer, etc.)
18 90 12 100
32. Use flexible grouping (whole group, small group,
partnering, independent)
18 90 12 100
33. Meaningfully assess student learning through multiple
measures
18 90 12 100
Although the regular education teachers rated their frequency in which they implement
the learned strategies lower than the gifted education teachers, both rated the frequency of
implementation high. The regular education teachers reported the lowest frequency of
implementation in “differentiation based on readiness, interest/choice, or learning styles
(extension menus, literature circles, learning centers, independent study, etc.)” with 75%
reporting “Weekly” or “Daily”. They most frequently “determined when and how to use Depth
and Complexity to enhance student learning” (100% “Daily” or “Weekly”) and “facilitate
discussion utilizing questioning strategies that foster higher order thinking skills and knowledge
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 80
of the content” (100% “Daily” or “Weekly”). The gifted education teachers rated their
frequency of implementation high, with 83.3-100% responding “daily” or “weekly” in all areas.
Areas of Focus Connected
In order to show the connection between participants’ confidence in their ability to
implement, their self-rated frequency of implementation, and their observed frequency of
implementation, a comparison of teachers perceived confidence level and observed
implementation through one hundred classroom observations is shown below in Tables 11 and
12, Regular Education and Gifted Education Teachers respectively.
Table 11
Summary of Regular Education Teachers Perceived Confidence, Perceived Frequency, and
Observed Frequency
Elements of Implementation
confident or
very confident
in ability
daily or weekly
teacher reported
implementation
evidence of
implementation
observed in
walkthroughs
F % F % F %
Icons of Depth and Complexity in
student learning
(Retrieval charts, worksheets,
discussions, assessments, etc.)
14 70 20 100 36 60
Facilitation of discussion utilizing
questioning strategies that foster
higher order thinking skills
(Describe the cause and effect of….;
Can you prove with evidence that …
What is the significance of….)
15 75 20
100 30
50
Evidence of appropriate varied
resources to increase academic
rigor (primary resources, teacher
designed, print-non print,
technology, etc.)
15 75 18 90 48 80
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 81
Table 11, continued
Evidence of differentiation based
on student need
(extension menus, literature circles,
learning centers, Independent Study,
etc.)
16 80 15 75 12 20
Evidence of differentiated
instructional methods
(direct instruction, Socratic
Dialogue, inductive/deductive
reasoning, group investigation, etc.)
11 55 18 90 36 60
Use of flexible grouping
(whole group, small group
,independent learning)
18 90 18 90 51 85
Evidence of meaningful
assessment/evaluation of student
learning through multiple
measures
(formal-informal; formative-
summative)
17 85 18 90 54 90
Table 12
Summary of Gifted Education Teachers Perceived Confidence, Perceived Frequency, and
Observed Frequency
Elements of Implementation
confident or
very confident
in ability
daily or weekly
teacher
reported
implementation
evidence of
implementation
observed in
walkthroughs
F % F % F %
Icons of Depth and Complexity in
student learning
(Retrieval charts, worksheets,
discussions, assessments, etc.)
12 100 12 100 38 95
Facilitation of discussion utilizing
questioning strategies that foster
higher order thinking skills
(Describe the cause and effect of….;
Can you prove with evidence that …
What is the significance of….)
11 91.7 12
100 38
95
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 82
Table 12, continued
Evidence of appropriate varied
resources to increase academic
rigor (primary resources, teacher
designed, print-non print, technology,
etc.)
11 91.7 10 83.3 40 100
Evidence of differentiation based
on student need
(extension menus, literature circles,
learning centers, Independent Study,
etc.)
11 91.7 11 91.7 20 50
Evidence of differentiated
instructional methods
(direct instruction, Socratic
Dialogue, inductive/deductive
reasoning, group investigation, etc.)
12 100 12 100 38 95
Use of flexible grouping
(whole group, small group
,independent learning)
12 100 12 100 38 95
Evidence of meaningful
assessment/evaluation of student
learning through multiple
measures
(formal-informal; formative-
summative)
12 100 12 100 40 100
Comparison of Regular Education Teachers and Gifted Education Teachers
For both the regular education teachers and the gifted education teachers, the elements in
which they reported feeling most confident and that they reported implementing most frequently,
were also the elements that were observed most frequently during classroom observations. The
exception to this was “differentiation based on student need”. Both the regular education and
gifted education teachers had a much higher perception of implementation then was actually
observed. Both groups of teachers reported a strong belief that they had learned from the
professional development, and that their practice was improved. Both groups actively
participated in the training, asked clarifying questions, and developed lessons. Every teacher
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 83
was observed implementing at least one strategy or element learned in the professional
development.
The regular education teachers have a higher perceived level of confidence in ability and
frequency of implementation then was observed through classroom walkthroughs, while the
gifted education teachers have a similar perceived confidence in ability and perceived
implementation to the implementation that was observed through walkthroughs. It is important
to note that walkthroughs are a snap shot in time, and do not necessarily reflect the entire picture
of each individual classroom at all times. For the regular education teachers, there was a greater
range of confidence levels and frequency of implementation among the group. The gifted
education teachers had very little difference between them. The observed level of
implementation was higher among the gifted education teachers than with the regular education
teachers, however, relative weaknesses and strengths were similar. For example, both groups
demonstrated “differentiation based on student need” as the lowest percent implementation and
“meaningful assessment” as the highest percent implementation.
Although higher among the teachers of the gifted, the data shows a strong correlation
between all participants’ confidence in their ability to implement, their self-rated frequency of
implementation, and the actual observed frequency of implementation.
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 84
Table 13
Similarities and Differences: Teachers Perceived Impact of Professional Development
Similarities of Perceived
Impact for Both Groups
Perceptions Specific to
Regular Education
Teachers
Perceptions Specific to
Gifted Education
Teachers
• 100% agreed they
had learned form
PD
• 100% agreed their
practice had
improved
• Elements with
highest
confidence were
highest observed
• Both lowest
implementation
“differentiation
based on student
need”
• Higher perception
of implementation
than was observed
• Actively
participated in
training
• Observed
implementing at
least one element
from PD
• Higher perceived
confidence in
ability and
frequency of
implementation
than was observed
• Wide range of
confidence levels
• Wide range of
perceived
implementation
• Lower level of
observed
implementation
• Similar perceived
confidence in
ability and
frequency of
implementation to
what was
observed
• Similar range of
confidence (all
high)
• Similar range of
perceived
implementation
(all high)
• Higher level of
observed
implementation
Limitations
The limitations of the study are factors the researcher does not control, that may affect the
study. For this study, the limitations were:
1. Same person served in multiple roles; researcher, observer, principal.
2. Observations will be limited to one school site.
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 85
3. The researcher was limited to the established subject pool of teachers participating in
a specific professional development experience.
4. Some of the survey recipients may not complete the survey.
5. Classroom observations were limited to 5-15 minutes, on various days and at various
times.
6. Observations catalogued the presence of implication, but were not meant to judge the
quality of implementation.
Summary
This chapter discussed the findings as they pertained to the research questions. As
mentioned previously, successful professional development follows these steps:
5. Teachers experience professional development
6. The professional development increases teachers’ knowledge and skills, changes their
attitudes and beliefs, or both.
7. Teachers use their new knowledge, skills, attitudes, and beliefs to improve the content
of their instruction, their approach to pedagogy, or both.
8. The instructional changes that the teachers introduce to the classroom boost their
students’ learning (Desimone, 2011).
The professional development, as delivered, was described in detail. The district and site both
looked at evidence of implementation as evidenced through classroom walkthrough observations
and increased student achievement as evidenced on district and state assessments as the means
for determining the effectiveness of professional development. The data showed that all teachers
that participated in the professional development and completed the survey believed their
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 86
knowledge and skills had increased. All implemented their new knowledge, to varying degrees
and with varying frequency.
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 87
CHAPTER FIVE: CONCLUSIONS AND RECCOMENDATIONS
Introduction
Educational researchers document the strong relationship between professional
development and program implementation. Research has determined that when studying
educational reforms, and their defined changes to the educational and instructional program,
specific types of professional development yield better results in enacting these changes. Many
educators view professional development as an integral component of improving instructional
practice and student achievement. The findings of this study support this view, and found that all
participating teachers felt that the professional development provided increased their knowledge
and skills, and all participants implemented their new learning to varying degrees.
Problem
Educational researchers document the strong relationship between professional
development and program implementation (Ball & Cohen, 1999; Borko, 2004; Desimone et al..
2002; Guskey 2009, 2003, 1986; Little, J. W., 2012). Researchers further note the significance
of professional development in gifted education (Dettmer, 1986; Gallagher, 2000; Hansen &
Feldhusen, 1994; Kaplan, 2012; Kaplan & Van Tassel-Baska, 2011; VanTassel-Baska &
Johnson, 2007). The research is in agreement on the need for professional development. The
NCATE and NAGC-CEC Standards are clear on the necessary areas of knowledge needed by
teachers of the gifted (VanTassel-Baska & Johnsen, 2007).
There is a lack, however, of research on the relationship between professional
development and teachers’ curricular and instructional choices in differentiating for both gifted
and regular education students. According to Hansen and Feldhusen (1994), “Leaders in the
field of gifted education have promulgated elaborate models for both instructional programs for
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 88
gifted students and related teacher training, but research and evaluation on the effects of training
models is meager” (p. 115). According to Graffam (2006), teachers of gifted students are
underdescribed in the literature. There has been “relatively little research that attempts to
understand those who teach in the field” (Graffam, 2006, p. 120). Van Tassel-Baska and
Johnson (2007) further go on to state, “the field needs to conduct research that examines the
effects of teacher preparation in gifted education on the services and performance of gifted and
talented students” (194).
Purpose
The primary purpose of this study was to analyze the professional development program
at one transitional kindergarten through eighth grade school undergoing a system-wide, major
programmatic change. Professional development is defined as a planned program of learning
opportunities to improve the performance of the administrative and instructional staff (Gubbins,
2001). Specifically, the researcher observed how the school organized its professional
development opportunities and how the teachers perceived that these opportunities impacted
their classroom instruction. The setting for this study was a newly formed TK-8 magnet school,
with a magnet focus of differentiated instruction, located in a TK-8 school district in an urban
area in southern California. Due to the school serving as a GATE magnet for the school district,
the school has a larger than average population of GATE identified students that are drawn from
throughout the district as well as surrounding districts. The student population consisted of
approximately 900 students, of which approximately 360 were GATE identified, 40 were
identified as special education receiving RSP services and/or Speech services, and the remaining
500 were regular education students. Additionally, approximately 75% of the students received
free/reduced lunch, and 33% were classified as English Language Learners. The school
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 89
employed 34 teachers: 1 Resource Specialist teacher, 1 Speech teacher, 1 Intervention teacher,
12 GATE teachers, and 19 regular education teachers.
Research Questions
The overarching research question that guided this study is:
1. How do gifted education and regular education teachers perceive the impact of specific
professional development on their decisions to differentiate their curriculum and
instruction?
Methodology
Patton (2002) states that the purpose of research is “to contribute knowledge that will help
people understand the nature of a problem in order to intervene” (p. 217). This study attempted
to identify the nature of a specific professional development program, teachers’ perceptions of
the effects of that professional development on their curricular and instructional choices, and
perceptions of the effects on student achievement. This study was a quantitative case study.
Utilizing this type of study allowed for the use of data collection to develop a “rich and thick
description” of the study (Gall et al., 2003). According to Gall, Borg and Gall (2003), one
reason for using this type of study is the researcher is able to look for themes, or areas of focus,
that bring order to descriptive data.
In this study, perceptions of professional development and its impact on teacher
instruction and student achievement were analyzed by conducting the following: (1) survey
questionnaires with participating teachers, and (2) classrooms observations.
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 90
Summary of Findings
Professional Development Opportunities
The school district in this study experienced large-scale change over the past several
years, due in part to the accountability system of No Child Left Behind (NCLB), standards based
instruction, and a new superintendent with a unique vision for the district. Prior to this point, the
district office was the hub for professional development. There was a district director whose sole
responsibility was the planning, implementation and evaluation of professional development for
the district as a whole. With the implementation of standards based instruction and NCLB, this
meant additional training, pacing guides, and an increased need for monitoring and supervision
from the top down. Often, what was the fad one year might easily be gone the next, developing
an attitude among teachers of “waiting it out”. This led to little, if any, implementation and
fidelity to a program.
With the appointment of a new superintendent with a very new and clear vision for the
forward progress of the district, the district saw the establishment of a five-year plan with six
district focus areas, on which all sites would focus their professional development efforts. Each
site was given some autonomy as to how to pursue each of these areas, but all were expected to
implement.
Based on a new focus of differentiation for all students, Red Rock developed a three year
professional development plan, in addition to the district focuses, in which all teachers would
have the opportunity to become highly trained in differentiated instruction, depth and
complexity, and various models of teaching, beginning in the summer preceding the 2011-12
school year. Red Rock has an Instructional Leadership Team (ILT) that meets monthly to plan
and facilitate the learning opportunities for all teachers. The site dismisses early on Tuesdays to
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 91
allow time for professional development and collaboration. They use the first hour to meet and
collaborate with their grade level colleagues to discuss student performance and plan instruction,
and they use the second hour and a half for professional development opportunities in the
districts focus areas. The ILT determines the topics for the professional development and share
the facilitation of the professional development.
Professional development for the new school focus began in the summer preceding the
2011-2012 school year, and is ongoing. On these days, teachers met in small groups based on
their grade level, and program focus (GATE or regular education). The training format is
collaborative; teachers learn concepts and are given time to work with their colleagues to
develop units of study based on each new piece of learning. Teachers implement these units in
their classrooms, administration observes and offers feedback and then the teachers meet to
discuss, refine, and continue to develop new units. The cycle is ongoing.
An expert was brought in to conduct this professional development. The expert
conducted the professional development, demonstrated lessons, participated in walk-throughs,
and is available to help teachers based on individual needs and requests. The professional
development focused on differentiated curriculum, defined as the modification of the core
curriculum that challenges and meets the unique needs of the learners, and differentiated
instruction, defined as instruction that helps students with diverse academic needs master the
same challenging grade-level academic content (California Association for the Gifted, 2007;
California Department of Education, 1994). The topics for the three years of professional
development included but were not limited to: Depth & Complexity, Learning Objectives,
Models of Teaching, Learning Centers, Independent Study, Think Like a Disciplinarian,
Scholarly Attributes, Universal Concepts, Lesson Development. The professional development
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 92
conducted by the expert was followed by observations in the classrooms to capture evidence of
implementation.
Perceived Effectiveness of Professional Development
There is debate regarding the best way to measure the effectiveness of professional
development, due to the large number of variables and factors that can effect teacher learning
and student achievement. It is important to note that this study was based on teachers’ self-
reporting and the researcher’s observations, and is not a detailed study of the effectiveness of the
professional development. A review of district and school documents revealed that Red Rock
Academy and its district as a whole used two key measures to determine effectiveness of
professional development: regular informal classroom walkthroughs and student achievement
data.
The principal and assistant principal at Red Rock met regularly with their Director and
Superintendent, and were expected to present data from walkthroughs, detailing the level of
implementation of strategies learned through professional development. This data was used to
determine next steps at the site, as well as to determine what support the site administration
needed from the district to ensure high levels of implementation. Additionally, the district
Director and Superintendent looked for trends in student achievement data from district
administered benchmark tests as well as California Standardized Tests (CST) to determine
effectiveness of program and professional development. Again, as with walkthrough data, this
data was used to determine next steps at the site, as well as to determine what support the site
administration needed from the district to ensure high levels of implementation. The district
expected to see a minimum of a 3% growth each year in the percent of students scoring
proficient and/or advanced on district administered Benchmark tests.
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 93
The Perception of Professional Development on Decision Making
Overall, the teachers believed that they learned from the professional development. Of
the 34 teachers surveyed, 100% of the teachers, both regular education and gifted education
teachers, responded “agree” or “strongly agree” to the statement, “I learned practical
instructional strategies, that I can take back and use immediately in my classroom.” When given
the statement, “I have learned to meet the various needs of all of my students,” 19 of the 20 of
regular education teachers, or 95% and 12 of the 12 of gifted education teachers, or 100%
responded “agree” or “strongly agree”.
In addition, the teachers believed that they changed their practice due to the professional
development. When surveyed, 100% of the teachers, regular education and gifted education
teachers, responded “agree” or “strongly agree” to the statement, “I have become more effective
as a teacher, better able to deliver content in a meaningful way.” When given the statement, “I
am able to be more productive as a teacher, and I am able to utilize my time more efficiently,”
100% of regular education teachers and 100% of gifted education teachers responded, “agree” or
“strongly agree”.
All teachers rated their frequency of implementation high. Informal classroom
observations were utilized to validate teachers’ perceptions of their ability to implement and
frequency of implementation. A total of 100 walkthroughs were conducted by the researcher,
with a minimum of three in each classroom. Data from classroom walkthroughs showed a range
of implementation. The elements with the highest percent evidence of implementation were “use
of varied resources” and “meaningful assessment”. The lowest percent evidence of
implementation, for regular education and gifted education teachers, was “differentiation based
on student need”. In the regular education classrooms, the perceived frequency of
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 94
implementation was higher than the observed evidence of implementation. In the gifted
education classrooms, the perceived frequency and observed frequency were very similar.
Discussion of Findings
In this section, the findings are related to the literature on effective development practices
and the relationship to teacher decision-making.
According to Desimone et al. (2002), “professional development is considered an
essential mechanism for deepening teachers’ content knowledge and developing their teaching
practices” (p. 81). Research has found that change in teachers’ instructional choices and practice
will take place if teachers experience consistent, high quality professional development
(Desimone et al., 2002). Further literature states that high quality professional development is a
major component in any major school improvement endeavor (Guskey, 1986). In support of this
literature, the research findings in this case study established a basis for which professional
development improved instructional practice and increased student achievement.
Effective professional development makes the connection between subject matter and
pedagogy as well as provides teachers with opportunities to learn. It is influenced by many
factors, which can be categorized into five core features: (1) content focus, (2) active learning,
(3) coherence, (4) duration, and (5) collective participation (Desimone, 2011). The professional
development in this study met each of the five core features:
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 95
Table 14
Core Features of Professional Development as Related to the Study
Core Features of Professional Development
As Evidenced in the Study
Content
Focus
Professional development
activities should focus on subject
matter content and how students
learn that content.
The professional development in this
study centered on differentiated
instruction, including instructional
strategies and models of teaching.
Active
Learning
Teachers should have
opportunities to get involved,
such as observing and receiving
feedback, analyzing student
work, or making presentations, as
opposed to passively sitting
through lectures.
Teachers in this study received new
learning, collaboratively developed
units of study, implemented the
units, were observed and received
feedback, and met to refine, in
continuing cycles.
Coherence
What teachers learn in any
professional development activity
should be consistent with other
professional development, with
their knowledge and beliefs, and
with school, district, and state
reforms and policies.
This was a school wide professional
development opportunity, directly in
line with the school’s focus and
vision. When appropriate, various
district focuses were imbedded into
the professional development.
Duration
Professional development
activities should be spread over a
semester and should include 20
hours or more of contact time.
Teachers received multiple days of
training, and participated in weekly
planning sessions with grade level
colleagues.
Collective
Preparation
Groups of teachers from the same
grade, subject, or school should
participate in professional
development activities together to
build an interactive learning
community.
All teachers at the school site
participated, and planned with their
grade level colleagues throughout
the professional development.
The evidence of effective professional development is classroom practice. Teachers’
knowledge and practices are the immediate and most significant indicators of success of
professional development activities (Guskey & Sparks, 2002). Professional development should
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 96
increase educators’ knowledge and instructional practice in ways that translate to increased
student achievement (Desimone, 2011). Desimone (2011) proposes that successful professional
development follows four key steps:
1. Teachers experience professional development
2. The professional development increases teachers’ knowledge and skills, changes their
attitudes and beliefs, or both.
3. Teachers use their new knowledge, skills, attitudes, and beliefs to improve the content
of their instruction, their approach to pedagogy, or both.
4. The instructional changes that the teachers introduce to the classroom boost their
students’ learning.
Although simplistic in form, this framework offers a strong foundation for analyzing the
effectiveness of professional development (Desimone, 2011). Following this framework would
suggest that we evaluate for three specific outcomes:
1. Did teachers learn?
2. Did they change their practice?
3. Did student achievement increase as a result?
The findings in this study support the framework and questions cited above. All participating
teachers believed they learned from the professional development. All implemented their new
learning, to varying degrees. Student achievement increased each year, over the course of three
years, as evidenced by the school site’s API scores.
The findings in this study further supported the ten most frequently repeated
characteristics of professional development, as identified by Guskey, mentioned in chapter three.
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 97
The researcher found nine of the ten characteristics to be significant factors in the success of the
professional development. The nine characteristics evident in this study included:
The professional development:
1. enhanced teachers’ content and pedagogical knowledge
2. provided sufficient time and other resources
3. promoted collegiality and collaboration
4. included procedures for evaluation
5. aligned with other reform initiatives
6. modeled high-quality instruction
7. was school or site based
8. was based on teachers’ identified needs
9. was driven by analyses of student learning data (Guskey, 2003, p.10)
Although the presence of each characteristic may vary due to the context of the professional
development, or in other words the specific needs of the teacher, school site, or district, their
presence is an indicator of the effectiveness of the professional development.
Implications
This study may help school sites as well as school districts understand the importance of
working together to develop a professional development plan that can meet the specific and
unique needs of an individual school site. Instead of the approach that offers blanket
professional development for all, it is recommended that district offices consider differentiating
professional development for each school site, as needed. It is recommended that school sites
work together with their established leadership team to determine the specific professional
development needs of their site, in order to determine an appropriate plan for improvement.
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 98
The length of professional development, and the opportunity for practice, collaboration
and reflection were all factors evident in this study. It is recommended the school districts and
school sites consider research-based elements of effective professional development, and use
those elements as a guide for building their professional development opportunities. This study
further reveals the importance of using research to drive instruction, to ensure the most current
best practices. It is important to note that this study looked at implementation of professional
development through the lens of what was observable, or what could be seen, and did not judge
the quality of implementation.
Future Research
This study examined the relationship between professional development and teachers’
decisions to differentiate their curriculum and instruction. Recommendations for future research
include:
1. Study of other schools implementing school wide change through professional
development to determine similarities and differences with this study.
2. The students’ perceptions of the professional development and its implementation in
the classroom, how they feel it affects their ability to achieve.
3. Examine teachers’ motivation, and its impact on their ability to learn and implement.
4. Long-term effects of this study at the conclusion of the professional development
cycle to determine permanency of the new learning.
5. Study both the observable implementation of professional development along with
establishing criteria for judging and evaluating the quality of and effectiveness of the
professional development.
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 99
While this study focused primarily on professional development and teachers’ decision to
implement new learning, the data collected represents observations of the transfer of this new
learning, represented as a quantity, and does represent the degree to which the new learning was
implemented, specifically the quality. Further research should include the aspect of quality, as a
means to determine to a greater degree the importance of this type of structure when
implementing professional development, as well as look at implications on student achievement
as a means to determine effectiveness of the professional development in its implementation.
Conclusion
This study focused on one school site, as it conducted a school-wide transformation, and
how the school site used professional development to enact that transformation and improve
instruction and student achievement over the course of two years. The ability to study this
process as the school site changed over time allowed for a deeper understanding of the specific
professional development process, and its effects on teachers’ choices to differentiate their
curriculum and instruction. Many factors in this study were analyzed and identified as
contributors to school improvement efforts. According to Guskey (1986), “High quality staff
development is a central component in nearly every proposal for improving education” (p.5).
This study noted that effective professional development led to high levels of implementation,
which in turn led to increased student achievement.
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 100
References
Adams, C. M., Cassady, J. C., and Neumeister, K. L. (2004). The differentiated classroom
observation scale. Roeper Report, 26(3), 139-146.
Amove, R. F. (2010). Extraordinary teachers, exceptional students. The Phi Delta Kappan.
92(2), 46-50.
Baker, T. L. (1994). Doing Social Research, 2
nd
Edition. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill, Inc.
Ball, D. L., and Cohen, D. K. (1999). Developing practice, developing practitioners: Towards a
practiced-based theory of professional education. In G. Sykes and L. Darling-Hammond
(Eds.), Teaching as the learning profession: Handbook of policy and practice (pp. 3-32).
San Francisco, Jossey Bass.
Berman, P., McLaughlin, M., Bass, G., Pauly, E., and Zellman, G. (1977). Federal programs
supporting educational change: Vol. VII. Factors affecting implementation and
continuation. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
Borko, H. (2004). Professional development and teacher learning: Mapping the terrain.
Educational Researcher, 33(8), 3-15.
Borrowman, M. (1956). The liberal and technical in teacher education. New York: Columbia
University, Teachers College, Bureau of Publications.
Borrowman, M. (1965). Liberal education and the professional preparation of teachers. In M. L.
Borrowman (Ed.), Teacher education in America (pp. 1-53). New York: Teachers
College Press.
Boyd, D., Goldhaber, D., Lankford, H. and Wyckoff, J. (2007). The effect of certification and
preparation on teacher quality. The Future of Children, 17(1), 45-68.
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 101
California Association for the Gifted. A Glossary: Common terms related to gifted education
[Electronic Version], 1-31. Retrieved February 18, 2009 from http://www.cagifted.org.
California Association for the Gifted. (2003). Gifted learners in the regular classroom [Electronic
Version]. California Association for the Gifted: A Position Paper. Retrieved February
18, 2009 from http://www.cagc.org.
California Association for the Gifted & California Department of Education. (1994).
Differentiating the core curriculum and instruction to provide advanced learning
opportunities. Sacramento, CA: Bureau of Publications.
California Code of Regulations. Title 5, Chapter 4, Section 3840 [Electronic Version].
Retrieved February 18, 2009 from http://www.cde.ca.gov.
California Department of Education. (1995). Gifted and talented education resource guide.
Sacramento, CA: Bureau of Publications.
Church, R., and Sedlak, M. (1976). Education in the United States: An interpretive history.
New York: Free Press.
Clark, C. (1988). Asking the right questions about teacher preparation: Contributions of research
on teacher thinking. Educational Researcher, 17(2), 5-12.
Clifford, G. and Guthrie, J. (1988). Ed school: A brief for professional education. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.
Corcoran, T. B. (1995). Helping teachers teach well: Transforming professional development
for teachers: A guide for state policymakers. Washington, DC: National Governors
Association.
Cremin, L. (1953). The heritage of American teacher education. Part I. Journal of Teacher
Education, 4(2). 163-170.
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 102
Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods
Approaches. Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1997). Finding flow: The psychology of engagement with everyday life.
New York: Basic Books.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2000). Teacher quality and student achievement: A review of state
policy evidence. Education Policy Analysis Archives. 8(1) 2000.
Desimone, L.M. (2011). A primer on effective professional development. Must-Reads from
Kappan. Summer(1), 28-31.
Desimone, L. M., Porter, A. C., Garet, M. S., Yoon, K. S. and Birman, B. F. (2002). Effects of
professional development on teachers’ instruction: Results from a three-year longitudinal
study. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis. 24(2), 81-112.
Dettmer, P. (1986). Gifted program inservice and staff development: Pragmatics and
possibilities. Gifted Child Quarterly, 30(3), 99-102.
Feiman-Nemser, S. (1990). Teacher preparation: Structural and conceptual alternatives. W. R.
Houston (Ed.), Handbook of research on teacher education. New York: MacMillan.
Fink, A. (2002). The survey kit (2
nd
ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Ford, D.Y. and Grantham, T.C. (2003). Providing Access for Culturally Diverse Gifted
Students: From Deficit to Dynamic Thinking. Theory into Practice. 42(3), 217-225.
Gallagher, J. J. (2004). No child left behind and gifted education. Roeper Review, 26(3), 121-
123.
Gallagher, J. J. (2000). Unthinkable thoughts: Education of gifted students. Gifted Child
Quarterly, 44(1), 5-12.
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 103
Gallagher, J. J., and Gallagher, S. A. (1994). Teaching the gifted child, Fourth Edition.
Needham Heights, MA: Paramount Publishing.
Gallagher, J. J., Weiss, P., Oglesby, K., and Thomas, T. (1983). The status of gifted-talented
education: United States survey of needs, practices, and policies. Leadership Training
Institute. Los Angeles, CA.
Garet, M. S., Porter, A. C., Desimone, L., Birman, B. F., and Yoon, K. S. (2001). What makes
professional development effective? Results from a national sample of teachers.
American Educational Research Journal. 38(4), 915-945.
Goddard, R. D., Hoy, W. K., and Hoy, A. W. (2000). Collective teacher efficacy: Its meaning,
measure, and impact on student achievement. American Educational Research Journal,
37(2), 479-507.
Graffam, B. (2006). A case study of teachers of gifted learners: Moving from prescribed
practice to describer practitioners. Gifted Child Quarterly, 50(2), 119-131.
Guskey, T. R. (1986). Staff development and the process of teacher change. Educational
Researcher. 15(5), 5-12.
Guskey, T. R. (2000). Evaluating professional development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
Guskey, T. R. (2002). Does it make a difference? Evaluating professional development.
Educational Leadership, 59(6), 45-51.
Guskey, T. R. (2003). What makes professional development effective? The Phi Delta Kappan.
84(10), 748-750.
Guskey, T. R. (2009). What works in professional development. Phi Delta Kappan, 90(7), 495-
500.
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 104
Guskey, T. R., and Passaro, P. D. (1994). Teacher efficacy: A study of construct dimensions.
American Educational Research Journal, 31, 627-643.
Hanninen, G. E. (1988). A study of teacher training in gifted education. Roeper Review, 10(3),
139-144.
Hansen, J. B. and Feldhusen, J. F. (1994). Comparison of trained and untrained teachers of
gifted students. Gifted Child Quarterly. 38(3), 115-121.
Hiebert, J. (1999). Relationships between research and the NCTM standards. Journal for
Research in Mathematics Education. 30(1), 3-19.
Judge, H. (1982). American graduate schools of education: A view from abroad. New York:
Ford Foundation.
Kaplan, S. (2012). Alternative Routes to Teacher Preparation: Gifted Education and the Political
Scene. Gifted Child Today, 35(1), 37-41.
Kaplan, S. and Van Tassel-Baska, J. (2011). Gifted education in urban centers: perspectives of
teachers and students. Gifted Child Today, 34(1), 5-6.
Kaplan, S. N. (2007). Differentiating Curriculum: The Moral Imperative. Gifted Education
Communicator. 17-18.
Karnes, F. A., and Whorton, J. E. (1991). Teacher certificate and endorsement in gifted
education: Past, present, and future. Gifted Child Quarterly, 35(3), 148-150.
Karnes, F. A., and Whorton, J. E. (1996). Teacher certification and endorsement in gifted
education: A critical need. Roeper Review, 19, 54-56.
Killion, J. (2006). Evaluating the Impact of Professional Development in Eight Steps. The
Evaluation Exchange, 11(4), 5 and 11.
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 105
Kronholz, J. (2011). Challenging the gifted. (The Davidson Academy, school for gifted
children). Education Digest, 77(2), 4-9.
Landrum, M. S., Callahan, C. M., and Shaklee, B. D. (Eds.). (2001). Aiming for excellence:
Gifted program standards. Waco, TX: Prufrock Press Inc.
Lasley, T. J., Bainbridge, W> L., and Berry, B. (2002). Improving teacher quality: Ideological
perspectives and policy prescriptions. The Educational Forum, 67(1), 14-25.
Lexicon Group. (2009). Dictionary.com [Electronic Version]. Retrieved February 18, 2009,
from http://www.dictionary.com.
Lindstrom, P. and Speck, M. (2004). The Principal as Professional Development Leader.
California: Corwin Press.
Little, J. W. (2012). Understanding Data Use Practice among Teachers: The Contribution of
Micro-Process Studies. American Journal of Education, 118(2). 143-166.
Little, J. W., Gerritz, W. H., Stern, D. S., Guthrie, J. W., Kirst, M. W., & Marsh, D. D. (1987).
Staff development in California: Public and personal investments, program patterns, and
policy choices. San Francisco, CA: Far West Laboratory for Educational Research and
Development.
Little, J. W. (1989). District policy choices and teachers’ professional development
opportunities. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis. 11(2), 165-179.
Little, M. E. and Houston, D. (2003). Research into practice through professional development.
Remedial and Special Education, 24(2), 75-87.
McMillan, J. H. (2000). Educational research: Fundamentals for the consumer. New York:
Addison Wesley Longmen, Inc.
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 106
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Logical Analysis/Matrix Analysis: Qualitative data
analysis, 2nd ed. Newbury Park, Cal.: Sage.
Mills, C. J. (2003). Characteristics of effective teachers of gifted students: Teacher background
and personality styles of students. Gifted Child Quarterly 47(4), 272-281.
Monroe, W. (1952). Teaching-learning theory and teacher education: 1890-1950. Urbana:
University of Illinois Press.
Moon, T., Callahan, C., and Tomlinson, C. (1999). The effects of mentorship relationships on
pre-service teachers’ attitudes toward academically diverse students. Gifted Child
Quarterly, 43(2), 56-62.
National Commission on Teaching & America’s Future. (1996, September). What matters most:
Teaching for America’s future. New York, New York: Author.
National Staff Development Council (2008). Retrieved May 12, 2013 from
www.nsdc.org/connect/about/index.cfm
Pajares, M. D. (1992). Teachers’ beliefs and educational research: Cleaning up a messy
construct. Review of Educational Research, 62. 307-332.
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA:
SAGE Publications.
Powell, A. (1976). University schools of education in the twentieth century. Peabody Journal of
Education, 54(1), 3-20.
Powell, A. (1980). The uncertain profession: Harvard and the search for educational authority.
Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Protheroe, N. (2008). Teacher efficacy: What it is and does it matter? National Association of
Elementary School Principals, 87(5), 42-45.
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 107
Randolph, E. (1924). The professional treatment of subject matter. Baltimore: Warwick and
York.
Reis, S. M, and Westberg, K. L. (1994). The Impact of Staff Development on Teachers’ Ability
to Modify Curriculum for Gifted and Talented Students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 38(3),
127-135.
Richey, H. G. (1957). Growth of the modern conception of inservice education. Inservice
Education. Fifty-sixth yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education.
Chicago, Il: University of Chicago Press.
Rueda, R., and Garcia, E. (1996). Teachers’ perspectives on literacy assessment and instruction
with language-minority students: A comparative study. The Elementary School Journal,
96(3), 311-332.
Shavelson, R. J., Cadwell, J., and Izu, T., (1977). Teachers’ sensitivity to the reliability of
information in making pedagogical choices. American Educational Research Journal,
14, 83-97.
Shepard, J. and Greene, R. (2003). Sociology and You. Ohio: Glencoe McGraw -Hill.
Schmoker, M. (1999). Results. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum
Development.
Smylie, M., Allensworth, E., Greenberg, R., Harris, R., and Luppescu, S. (2001). Teacher
Professional Development in Chicago: Supporting Effective Practice. Improving
Chicago Schools Consortium on Chicago School Research.
Sowder, J.T. (2007). The mathematical education and development of teachers. Second
Handbook of Research on Mathematics Teaching and Learning.
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 108
Sternberg, R. J., Torff, B., and Grigorenko, E. L. (1998). Teaching triarchically improves
student achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90(3), 374-384.
Tomlinson, C. A. (2005). Traveling the Road to Differentiation in Staff Development. Journal
of Staff Development, 26(4), 8-12.
Tomlinson, C. A. (2000). Differentiation of instruction in the elementary grades. Clearinghouse
on elementary and early childhood education. Retrieved July 16, 2009 from ERIC
database.
Tomlinson, C. A. (1999). The Differentiated Classroom: Responding to the needs of all
learners. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development
(ASCD).
Travers, E. and Sacks, S. (1987). Teacher education and the liberal arts: The position of the
consortium for excellence in teacher education. Swathmore, PA: Swathmore College.
U. S. Commissioner of Education. (1971). Education of the gifted and talented: Report to the
Congress of the United States [Electronic Version]. Retrieved July 23, 2009 from
www.eric.ed.gov.
U.S., Department of Education. (2002). Scientifically based research and the Comprehensive
School Reform (CSR) Program. Washington, D.C.: Author.
VanSciver, J. H. (2005). Motherhood, Apple Pie, and Differentiated Instruction. The Phi Delta
Kappan, 86(7), 534-535.
Van Tassel-Baska, J. (2002). Curriculum planning and instructional design for gifted learners.
Denver, CO: Love Publishing.
Van Tassel-Baska, J. (1986) Effective curriculum and instructional models for talented students.
Gifted Child Quarterly, 30(4), 164-169.
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 109
Van Tassel-Baska, J. (1986). Lessons from the history of teacher inservice in Illinois: Effective
staff development in the education of gifted students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 30(3), 124-
126.
Van Tassel-Baska, J., and Johnsen, S. K. (2007). Preparation in the 21
st
century: Teacher
education standards for the field of gifted education: A vision of coherence for personnel.
Gifted Child Quarterly, 51(2). 182-205.
Van Tassel-Baska, J., Feng, A. X., Brown, E., Bracken, B., Stambaugh, T., French, H.,
McGowan, S., Worley, B., Quek, C., and Bai, W. (2008). A study of differentiated
instructional change over 3 years. Gifted Child Quaterly, 52(4), 297-312.
Vygotsky, L. (1986). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Walker, A., Recker, M., Ye, L., Robertshaw, M. B., Sellers, L., and Leary, H. Comparing
technology-related teacher professional development designs: a multilevel study of
teacher and student impacts. Educational Technology Research and Development. 60(3),
469-482.
Wayne, A. J. and Youngs, P. (2003). Teacher characteristics and student achievement gains: A
review. Review of Educational Research. 73(1), 89-122.
Webb, L. D., and Norton, M. S. (2009). Human resources administration: Personnel issues and
needs in education. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson
Webster-Wright, A. (2009). Reframing professional development through understanding
authentic professional learning. Review of Educational Research. 79(2), 702-739.
Wilson, S. M., and Berne, J. (1999). Teacher learning and the acquisition of professional
knowledge: An examination of the research on contemporary professional development.
Review of Research in Education. 24, 172-209.
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 110
Woodring, P. (1975). The development of teacher education. In K. Ryan (Ed.), Teacher
education (74
th
yearbook of the Ntional Society for the Study of Education, Part 2, pp. 1-
24). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 111
Appendix A
Teacher Questionnaire
Dear Teacher,
As shared in the letter invitation, this questionnaire is focused around teachers’
perceptions of the effects of specific professional development on their decisions to differentiate
their curriculum and instruction for all students in their classrooms.
I am interested in gathering your perceptions as a staff member with regards to the
professional development currently taking place this school year at this school.
Your answers to these questions will be completely anonymous. Your responses will be
incorporated in a dissertation to be submitted at University of Southern California.
Your time and input are much appreciated. It should take approximately 30 minutes or
less to answer the questions. Please complete the questionnaire with your responses as soon as
possible.
As a reminder, the first question of the questionnaire asks you to give consent to
participate in the study. By checking “yes” you are giving consent to participate.
Thank you for your participation,
Jennifer Harrison
University of Southern California
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 112
1. Do you give consent to the information collected in this questionnaire to be used in this
study?
o Yes
o No
2. Please indicate your highest education level.
o BA/BS
o MA/MS
o Doctorate
3. Years of teaching experience:
o 1-2 year
o 3-5 years
o 6-10 years
o 11-15 years
o 16-20 years
o 21 years or longer
4. Years of experience teaching GATE identified students:
o None
o 1-2 year
o 3-5 years
o 6-10 years
o 11-15 years
o 16-20 years
o 21 years or longer
5. In what type of classroom do you currently teach?
o Regular Education classroom
o Special Education classroom
o Self-contained GATE classroom
6. What grade level do you currently teach?
o Kinder-Second
o Third-Fifth
o Sixth-Eighth
The survey questions are divided into three sections. In all three sections you will reflect
only on the specific professional development in which you participated during the 2011-2012
school year, on the topics of differentiated curriculum and instruction. In Section I, you will
answer thirteen questions, 7-19, regarding the elements of professional development and how
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 113
you felt about their ability to meet your personal and professional needs. In Section II, questions
20-26 will ask you to rate your degree of confidence in your ability to implement seven specific
elements of differentiated learning from the training. In Section III, questions 27-33 will ask you
to consider those same seven elements of new learning from section two, and rate the frequency
in which you are implementing them.
I. Statement:
In regards to the professional development, on the topics of Differentiated Curriculum and
Instruction, in which I participated in this year, I feel that:
Strongly
Agree
Agree Disagree Strongly
Disagree
7. The professional development takes place
during a time that is convenient for me
8. I learned practical instructional strategies,
that I can take back and use immediately in my
classroom
9. I become more effective as a teacher, better
able to deliver content in a meaningful way
10. I am able to be more productive as a
teacher, and I am able to utilize my time more
efficiently
11. I have enjoyed the total professional
development experience
12. I have learned to meet the various needs of
all of my students
13. It has a positive impact on student
behavior (academic and/or social)
14. My students become more actively
engaged in learning
15. I can see a positive impact on student
achievement, on both teacher developed and
district assessments
16. I receive positive feedback from my
supervisor regarding my job performance
17. My efforts are recognized by my peers
18. I feel proud of my accomplishments in my
profession
19. It contributes to overall school
improvement
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 114
II. Statement:
In regards to the professional development, on the topics of Differentiated Curriculum and
Instruction, in which you participated in this year, please rate your confidence level in your
ability to:
Very
Confident
Confident Somewhat
Confident
Not
Confident
20. Determine when and how to use Depth
and Complexity to enhance student learning
21. Facilitate discussion utilizing
questioning strategies that foster higher order
thinking skills
22. Select appropriate varied supplemental
materials and references to increase academic
rigor
23. Differentiate based on readiness,
interest/choice, or learning styles (extension
menus, literature circles, learning centers,
independent study, etc.)
24. Utilizing a variety of different
instructional models (direct instruction,
shared inquiry, inductive/deductive
reasoning, group investigation, advanced
organizer, etc.)
25. Use flexible grouping (whole group,
small group, partnering, independent)
26. Meaningfully assess student learning
through multiple measures
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 115
III. Statement:
In regards to the professional development, on the topics of Differentiated
Curriculum and Instruction, in which you participated in this year, please rate the
degree of frequency in which you implement the following:
Daily Weekly Monthly Never
27. Determine when and how to use
Depth and Complexity to enhance
student learning
28. Facilitate discussion utilizing
questioning strategies that foster
higher order thinking skills
29. Select appropriate varied
supplemental materials and
references to increase academic rigor
30. Differentiate based on readiness,
interest/choice, or learning styles
(extension menus, literature circles,
learning centers, independent study,
etc.)
31. Utilizing a variety of different
instructional models (direct
instruction, shared inquiry,
inductive/deductive reasoning, group
investigation, advanced organizer,
etc.)
32. Use flexible grouping (whole
group, small group, partnering,
independent)
33. Meaningfully assess student
learning through multiple measures
INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES FOR THE GIFTED 116
Appendix B
Classroom Observation Protocol
Self Contained Gifted General Education Special Education
Primary Grades (K-2) Upper Elementary (3-5) Middle School (6-8)
Content Area:__________________________ Date:____________________
Elements of Implementation
(Check one, and provide evidence for “Exceeds”)
No Evidence
Evidence of
Implementation
as Taught in PD
Evidence
Exceeds that
Taught in PD
If evidence
exceeds that
taught in PD,
how so?
Icons of Depth and Complexity in student learning
(Retrieval charts, worksheets, discussions, assessments,
etc.)
Facilitation of discussion utilizing questioning strategies
that foster higher order thinking skills
(Describe the cause and effect of….; Can you prove with
evidence that … What is the significance of….)
Evidence of appropriate varied resources to increase
academic rigor
(primary resources, teacher designed, print-non print,
technology, etc.)
Evidence of differentiation based on student need
(extension menus, literature circles, learning centers,
Independent Study, etc.)
Evidence of differentiated instructional methods
(direct instruction, Socratic Dialogue, inductive/deductive
reasoning, group investigation, etc.)
Use of flexible grouping
(whole group, small group ,independent learning)
Evidence of meaningful assessment/evaluation of student
learning through multiple measures
(formal-informal; formative- summative)
(Check one)
Off task
On Task
Engaged
Evidence of
Student
Engagement
(Check all
that apply)
Student
can
articulate
learning
goal and
its
purpose
Students
make
connectio
ns from
the
learning
to the real
world
Students
demonstrate
understanding of
what makes a “good”
answer
(Use of complete
sentence, academic
vocabulary, key
words, fully address
the question)
Evidence of
Student
Achievement
Abstract (if available)
Abstract
The primary purpose of this study was to analyze the professional development program at one transitional kindergarten through eighth grade school undergoing a system-wide, major programmatic change. Specifically, how the school organized its professional development opportunities, the frequency in which teachers implemented new learning from the professional development, and how the teachers perceived that these opportunities impacted their classroom instruction. ❧ This study was a quantitative case study. In this study, perceptions of professional development and its impact on teacher instruction and student achievement were analyzed by conducting the following: (1) survey questionnaires with participating teachers, and (2) classrooms observations. ❧ The setting for this study was a newly formed K-8 magnet school, with a magnet focus of differentiated instruction, located in a K-8 school district in an urban area in southern California. The population in the 2013-2014 school year consisted of approximately 900 students, of which approximately 360 were GATE identified, 40 were identified as special education receiving RSP services and/or Speech services, and the remaining 500 were regular education students. The school employed 34 teachers
Linked assets
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
Conceptually similar
PDF
Teachers’ knowledge of gifted students and their perceptions of gifted services in public elementary schooling
PDF
Differentiated culturally relevant curriculum to affirm identity for gifted African American students
PDF
Closing the achievement gap for students with disabilities: a focus on instructional differentiation - an evaluation study
PDF
Support for English learners: an examination of the impact of teacher education and professional development on teacher efficacy and English language instruction
PDF
Building academic vocabulary for English language learners through professional development: a gap analysis
PDF
Factors influencing teachers' differentiated curriculum and instructional choices and gifted and non-gifted students' self-perceptions
PDF
Principals' perceptions of their ability, as school leaders, to apply learning from district-provided professional development
PDF
Factors affecting the transfer of differentiated curriculum from professional development into classroom practice
PDF
The elements of a differentiated curriculum for gifted students: transfer and application across the disciplines
PDF
The importance of teacher motivation in professional development: implementing culturally relevant pedagogy
PDF
The intersection of curriculum, teacher, and instruction and its implications for student performance
PDF
Educator professional development for technology in the classroom: an evaluation study
PDF
An evaluation study: quality contextual professional development
PDF
How effective professional development in differentiated instruction can save Hawaii's Catholic schools
PDF
Creating conditions for Teacher Flow: supporting student-centered learning through design of optimal P-12 professional development
PDF
Effects of the prompts of depth and complexity on gifted and non-gifted students
PDF
Teacher self-efficacy and instructional coaching in California public K-12 schools: effective instructional coaching programs across elementary, middle, and high schools and the impact on teacher...
PDF
Strategies for inclusion of students with autism: an online professional learning curriculum for general education teachers
PDF
Overcoming the cultural teaching gap: an evaluative study of urban teachers’ implementation of culturally relevant instruction
PDF
The examination of the perceptions of general education teachers, special education teachers, and support personnel on the inclusion of students with special needs
Asset Metadata
Creator
Harrison, Jennifer Lynn
(author)
Core Title
Teachers’ perceptions and implementation of instructional strategies for the gifted from differentiation professional development
School
Rossier School of Education
Degree
Doctor of Education
Degree Program
Education (Leadership)
Publication Date
11/10/2015
Defense Date
02/09/2015
Publisher
University of Southern California
(original),
University of Southern California. Libraries
(digital)
Tag
depth and complexity,differentiation,Gifted Education,OAI-PMH Harvest,professional development
Format
application/pdf
(imt)
Language
English
Contributor
Electronically uploaded by the author
(provenance)
Advisor
Kaplan, Sandra (
committee chair
), Hasan, Angela (
committee member
), Mora-Flores, Eugenia (
committee member
)
Creator Email
jennharrisonsvoboda@gmail.com,jlharris@usc.edu
Permanent Link (DOI)
https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c40-198036
Unique identifier
UC11278109
Identifier
etd-HarrisonJe-4027.pdf (filename),usctheses-c40-198036 (legacy record id)
Legacy Identifier
etd-HarrisonJe-4027.pdf
Dmrecord
198036
Document Type
Dissertation
Format
application/pdf (imt)
Rights
Harrison, Jennifer Lynn
Type
texts
Source
University of Southern California
(contributing entity),
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
(collection)
Access Conditions
The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...
Repository Name
University of Southern California Digital Library
Repository Location
USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA
Tags
depth and complexity
differentiation
professional development