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
/
An analysis of Long Beach Unified School District's EXCEL model of providing gifted programs for urban students and their effect on student achievement
(USC Thesis Other)
An analysis of Long Beach Unified School District's EXCEL model of providing gifted programs for urban students and their effect on student achievement
PDF
Download
Share
Open document
Flip pages
Contact Us
Contact Us
Copy asset link
Request this asset
Transcript (if available)
Content
AN ANALYSIS OF LONG BEACH UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT’S EXCEL
MODEL OF PROVIDING GIFTED PROGRAMS FOR URBAN STUDENTS
AND THEIR EFFECT ON STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT
by
Jill Anne Baker
A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION
August 2004
Copyright 2004 Jill Anne Baker
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
UMI Number: 3145159
Copyright 2004 by
Baker, Jill Anne
All rights reserved.
INFORMATION TO USERS
The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy
submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and
photographs, print bleed-through, substandard margins, and improper
alignment can adversely affect reproduction.
In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript
and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized
copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.
®
UMI
UMI Microform 3145159
Copyright 2004 by ProQuest Information and Learning Company.
All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against
unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code.
ProQuest Information and Learning Company
300 North Zeeb Road
P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
University of Southern California
Rossier School of Education
Los Angeles, California 90089-0031
This dissertation written by
Jill Anne Baker
under the discretion of h er Dissertation Committee,
and approved by all members o f the Com m ittee, has
been presented to and accepted by the Faculty of the
Rossier School of Education in partial fulfillm ent of the
requirements for the degree of
Doctor o f Education
( g , tC0 4
Date
Dissertation Comm ittee
»
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
DEDICATION
This dissertation is dedicated to the students of Burnett Elementary and
Garfield Elementary, whose resiliency and brilliance has fueled my passion
for urban education throughout the last decade.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Without the following people, the journey of writing this dissertation would
not have been possible.
Mom and Dad: For teaching me the importance of education from the
beginning, being supportive of my work, believing that “I could” and
celebrating the end.
Trevor: For your endless support and unconditional love, for maximum
“daddying,” for understanding my passion for education and waiting
patiently while I journeyed to this point.
Cole: For your love of life, inquisitiveness, for being patient with your mama
and for your unconditional love. I promise not to give you a shot!
Tiffany: For blazing the path and running along mine with me to the finish,
for your unconditional love and total knowingness o f me and for the US that
is for all of the days.
Dorothy: For being the first to expect me to reach this point after you first
believed in my ability to lead a school, for your mentoring, love and
unbelievable vision and dedication to urban children.
Dr. Gothold: For making USC feel like home, inspiring good work and
leading me through this final part of the journey.
Drs. Stromquist and Ferris: For making the time to share in this important
work and for pushing me to think deeply.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Dedication...............................................................................................................ii
Acknowledgments................................................................................................iii
List of Tables......................................................................................................vii
Abstract...............................................................................................................viii
CHAPTER 1. THE PROBLEM AND ITS UNDERLYING FRAMEWORK. 1
Background of the Problem.................................................................................. 1
Statement of the Problem.................................................................................... 12
Purpose of the Study............................................................................................14
Research Questions............................................................................................15
Significance of the Problem............................................................................. 16
Methodology......................................................................................... 18
Organization of the Study................................................................................... 19
CHAPTER 2. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE.........................................20
Literature Review.............................................................................................. 21
Giftedness.............................................................................................. 22
Urban Issues in Gifted Education........................................................24
Underachievement Among Urban Gifted Students...........................28
Programs for Gifted Students.............................................................. 36
Conclusion..........................................................................................................39
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
CHAPTER 3. METHODOLOGY.................................................................... 41
Research Questions.............................................................................................42
Research Design.................................................................................................. 42
Population...............................................................................................44
Sample..................................................................................................... 47
Instrumentation...................................................................................... 50
T rustworthiness...................................................................................... 54
Data Collection...................................................................................... 55
Data Analysis..........................................................................................56
Summary..............................................................................................................58
CHAPTER 4. FINDINGS.................................................................................59
Findings...............................................................................................................59
Summary.............................................................................................................102
CHAPTER 5. DISCUSSION............................................................................ 107
Conclusions ............................................................................................ I l l
Final Thoughts and Research Implications.....................................................130
Recommendations.............................................................................................133
References..........................................................................................................146
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Appendices......................................................................................................... 151
A. Interview Protocol-EXCEL T eachers......................................... 151
B. Interview Protocol-Site Administrators......................................152
C. Interview Protocol-District Personnel......................................... 153
D. Indicators of Differentiation guideline........................................154
E. Sample Collaborative Meeting format......................................... 158
F. EXCEL Student Evaluation Form................................................160
G. Student Profile of Gifted Characteristics.....................................163
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Gifted and Talented Service Delivery Models in the State of California....9
Table 2. Attributes of Resiliency........................................................................27
Table 3. Most Common Gifted Programs Across the United States.............. 37
Table 4. Long Beach Unified School District Schools with EXCEL Programs..... 46
Table 5. Study’s Sample overview.................................................................... 49
Table 6. Program Selection Components..........................................................65
Table 7. GATE Programs-A Common Perspective..........................................68
Table 8. Teacher Descriptions of Implementation of Differentation............. 72
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
viii
ABSTRACT
This qualitative study was designed to investigate the EXCEL program
model for serving urban gifted students in the Long Beach Unified School District in
comparison to effective program research. The sample for this study included three
of the school sites with EXCEL programs whose academic data indicated the lowest
level of underachievement among EXCEL students within the district. The
variations of implementation within their EXCEL programs was the primary aspect
of research. Data were collected through interviews with district personnel, site
administrators and EXCEL teachers. In addition, each teacher who participated in an
interview was visited for a classroom observation to corroborate the interview data.
The results of the study suggested that there are variations in
implementation of an effective program including the following that decrease the
level of underachievement among urban gifted students: training (pre-service,
training in relation to staffing, and district GATE certification training),
collaboration (among teacher teams, between teachers and site administrators and
between sites and the GATE Office), interventions (lack of specific interventions for
gifted underachievers and an underutilization of district resources) and high
expectations (that are differentiated because of students’ identification of
giftedness). The results suggested that through training, alliances with teacher
education programs, effective collaboration, specific interventions and monitoring,
levels of underachievement among urban gifted students can be decreased.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
CHAPTER ONE
THE PROBLEM AND ITS UNDERLYING FRAMEWORK
Across the nation our urban schools are forced to address the needs of
a variety of learners. In addition to reaching students of an immensely diverse
racial and ethnic background, an intensely diverse language background and
a widespread socio-economic background, every school across our nation
must consider the range of abilities of its students, if it truly expects to serve
its children well. The sweeping national reform of the No Child Left Behind
Act of 2001 has already begun to impact the way that teachers and
paraprofessionals are chosen, the manner in which interventions are
implemented, the allocation of resources and certainly the way in which
accountability for every students’ learning is monitored. In order for our
nation’s educational reform to be truly successful, a large portion of our
students will demand “something different” of us. Students who are identified
as gifted and talented should expect to be challenged with ‘something
different’ just as students with disabilities are entitled to special services.
Background of the Problem
To truly understand the state of gifted education, we must examine
the historical events that have contributed to the present. Researchers identify
several events in history that enable us to trace the beginning of the need for
gifted education.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
The history of gifted education can be traced back to before the turn
of the twentieth century, yet can be illustrated more clearly from events that
transpired in the early years of the twentieth century. Some researchers credit
the closing of the one-room schoolhouse for the onset of looking differently
at gifted students (Com, 1999). After one-room schoolhouses closed, students
and schools were divided up into age spans much as they exist today. No
longer were students grouped in situations that would allow gifted fifth
graders to spend time studying eighth grade content when they were put into
“graded” schools. Proximity of students at different age levels to one another
and the greater emphasis on teaching specific content at specified grade
levels did not support students’ receipt of differentiated learning experiences.
This changed the needs of students and the ability of schools to serve gifted
learners (Com, 1999).
Called the founder of gifted education by some (Delisle, 1999), Lewis
Terman’s work in the 1920’s is noted among researchers as a critical aspect
in the development of gifted education (Imbeau, 1999; Coleman, 1999;
Haensly, 1999; Delisle, 1999; Hargrove, 1999). Terman was the first to study
methods for determining who might be gifted and the intelligence tests that
would support his notions. Some researchers believe that without Terman’s
work, gifted education as we know it, would not exist (Delisle, 1999).
Among Terman’s accomplishments is the development of the Stanford-Binet
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
3
intelligence test which is historically one of psychology’s most recognized
assessment tools (Imbeau, 1999). Terman’s longitudinal research provided
“so much information about the intellectual, emotional, physical, and social
lives of children and adults that the individuals who are still alive from the
Terman study continue to be studied today” (Delisle, 1999).
Without a doubt, 1957 and the Russian success in sending Sputnik
into space marks a milestone in gifted education (Coleman, 1999; Com,
1999; Cross, 1999; Delisle, 1999; Haensly, 1999; Roberts, 1999).
Researchers in the field of gifted education capture this event by saying,
“When the Russians succeeded in space, and we had not, the race was on”
(Coleman, 1999). “When the Russians showed superiority in the space race,
the United States responded by stimulating the education system to produce
superior mathematicians and scientists” (Com, 1999). “With this launch, the
most extensive and orchestrated effort toward meeting the needs of gifted
students within public schools began” (Delisle, 1999). What ensued after
Sputnik was the first aggressive local, state and national effort to educate
students in math and science (Cross, 1999). This concerted effort lasted for
about three years (Cross, 1999) and “attempted to rectify the ‘once size fits
all’ approach to education” while addressing the fear and embarrassment that
existed from being beaten in the space war (Delisle, 1999). The United States
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
4
attempted to cultivate the talents of gifted students as a means of establishing
an intellectual position in the world.
The Civil Rights movement in the 1960’s caused issues to surface that
pervade all aspects of our country’s history, including that of gifted
education. The Civil Rights movement helped to ensure that children of color
were no longer left out of educational efforts to “maximize their talents”
(Cross, 1999) and acknowledge giftedness among all children (Imbeau,
1999). The Civil Rights movement has far reaching implications for the
current state of gifted education. Its influence can be seen in current
identification criteria, curriculum implementation that honors cultures and
diversity as well as “provision for cultural and gender representation within
the “players” in gifted education” (Riley, 1999).
In 1950, Joy Guilford, a noted psychologist of his time, presented his
ideas about ‘creativity’ at a conference of the American Psychological
Association (APA). Guilford’s work, which was later highlighted by his
publication of The Nature of Human Intelligence, in 1973, is seen by many in
the gifted education community as a series of historical milestones. After
presenting on creativity at the APA conference in 1950, “the floodgates
opened, and the identification and nurturance of creativity became a common
topic for research psychologists” (Cross, 1999). Although some sources
suggest that ‘creativity’ is hard to define (Hargrove, 1999), the issue of
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
5
creativity among gifted students remains a topic being researched because of
its implications for learning. Much of Guilford’s research on human
intelligence formed the basis for the work of other individuals such as
Howard Gardner, Joseph Renzulli and Robert Sternberg (Delisle, 1999).
Although the events surrounding Sputnik in 1957 were instrumental
in focusing attention across the nation on gifted students, it wasn’t until the
Marland Report in 1971 that a significant amount of money was allocated to
support or enhance gifted education. After the Marland Report was presented
and then published, monies were allocated to establish an educational office
dedicated to overseeing the education of gifted children in our nation. Sidney
Marland, then the Commissioner of Education, presented the Education of
the Gifted and Talented (commonly known as the Marland Report) to
Congress as a means of illustrating the state of gifted education at the time
(Riley, 1999). His report painted a stark picture of the state of gifted
education and was the impetus for an allocation of $290,000 in federal dollars
for “teacher training, research and the development of the first Office of
Gifted and Talented” in Washington, D.C. (Delisle, 1999). In addition to
funding, Marland’s report provided the first documented definition of
giftedness to be used throughout the nation (Delisle, 1999; Haensly, 1999;
Roberts, 1999).
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
6
A Nation At Risk, published in 1983, opened the doors to a series of
reports about the state of American schools and sub-categories within
schools. According to Delisle (1999), “Without the original Nation at Risk
document, it is unlikely that such a strong emphasis on gifted children’s
needs would have found such a receptive audience.” National Excellence: A
Case for Developing America’s Talent, issued in 1993, asserted that the
needs of America’s gifted children were not being met. In addition to being
the impetus for a resurgence of grant monies available to support gifted
education, the National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented was
established during this time period (Delisle, 1999). This Center was, and still
is, directed by Joe Renzulli and operated out of the University of
Connecticut. It has contributed to the ongoing research and development on
gifted education.
Around the same time that the National Research Center opened, the
Javits Gifted and Talented Act was passed by Congress in 1998. The Javits
Act laid the foundation for funding associated with gifted and talented
programs and the research that would ensue in the years that followed. After
the National Research Center opened, the floodgates for research associated
with all aspects of educating gifted and talented students were opened. Its
original mission was “to evaluate current methods of identifying gifted
students, examine classroom practices, evaluate different teacher preparation
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
programs, and study the progress of gifted students who were not served by
special programs” (Haensly, 1999). Research projects aimed at
understanding a multitude of issues related to gifted education were begun
and continue to date.
Researchers on the history of gifted education note several other
teachers and psychologists whose work greatly contributed to the formation
of our current understanding of gifted students and the programs that serve
those students. Among them are Leta Hollingsworth who, beginning in 1916,
studied gifted children, published a textbook on the subject, and is known for
her contribution to the first developed gifted student curriculum (Delisle,
1999). Several researchers whose contributions are more recent and can be
seen throughout the realm of gifted education include James Gallagher, Joe
Renzulli, Sally Reis, Carolyn Callahan and Sandra Kaplan. All have made,
and continue to make, important decisions that are based on high quality
research that has widespread implications for gifted children today.
Currently, the group of students who are identified as gifted and
talented, comprise approximately 10 to 15% or our student population
(Council for Exceptional Children [CEC], 1990). Legislation supports that
gifted students should expect to receive a school based program that “is part
of the mainstream of education and does not rise and fall with public
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
8
opinions” (Morgan, Tennant, & Gold, 1980, p. 2). The program may include
the following:
• gifted learners in a regular classroom alongside non-gifted
students,
• one that pulls students out of their regular classroom for a
portion of the school day to receive instruction with a group of
gifted learners,
• one that clusters students in a separate classroom for the entire
day, or
• one that holds classes for gifted students in a special school
(Delcourt & Evans, 1994).
Although research suggests that students who participate in pull-out
programs, separate classes or special schools achieve at a higher rate than
those students who were in within-class programs, participation in any of the
noted programs ensures that students achieve at a higher level than those who
do not participate at all (Delcourt, Loyd, Cornell, & Goldberg, 1994). The
California State Board of education endorses three types of programs that
include: special day classes, part-time groupings or cluster groupings as the
models to be used in programs across the state of California (California
Education Code, section 52206). Table I summarizes the state definition of
the three programs noted above.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
9
Table I
Gifted and Talented Service Delivery Models in the State of California
Seiv ice
Delivery
Model”
Description from Title 5.
Chapter 4 of the California Code of Regulations
Special
Day
Classes
“A class totaling a minimum school day that is composed of
pupils identified as gifted and talented, is especially designed to
meet the specific academic needs of gifted and talented pupils for
enriched and advanced instruction and is appropriately
differentiated from other classes in the same subjects at the
school, and is taught by a teacher who has specific preparation,
experience, personal attributes and competencies in the teaching
of gifted children.” (3840a)
Part-time
Grouping
“Classes or seminars that are organized to provide advanced or
enriched subject matter for part of the school day. These classes
are composed of gifted and talented pupils.” (3840b)
Cluster
Grouping
“Pupils are grouped within a regular classroom setting and
receive appropriately differentiated curriculum from the regular
classroom teacher.” (3840c)
The criteria for determining whether or not a student is gifted are
agreed upon at the local level. Regardless of the exact criteria that an
individual school district may use to determine giftedness, approximately 10
to 15% of children in a school system typically can be identified as gifted
(CEC, 1990). Gifitedness refers to a set of talents and/or abilities that identify
a particular child as gifted and talented including any combination of
intellectual ability, academic aptitude, creative thinking, leadership ability,
visual or performing arts or psychomotor ability (CEC, 1990). The
California Education Code, section 52202 states that, “each district shall use
one or more of the following categories in defining the capability [of
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
10
giftedness]: intellectual, creative, specific academic, or leadership ability;
high achievement; performing and visual arts talent; or any other criterion
that meets the standards set forth by the State Board of Education”
(California Education Code, section 52202).
Although estimates about the percentage of students who are usually
identified as gifted has not changed dramatically over the last twenty years,
there have been variations in the degrees of agreement surrounding the way
that giftedness is defined. Sometimes definitions of giftedness have skewed
the representation of students with diverse backgrounds in gifted programs
causing certain groups of students to be underrepresented. According to
Former U.S. Commissioner of Education, Sydney Marland (1971), in his
report to Congress,
Gifted and talented children are those identified by professionally
qualified persons and who by virtue of outstanding abilities are
capable of high performance. These are children who require
differentiated educational programs and/or services beyond those
normally provided by the regular school program in order to realize
their contribution to self and society.
A combination of several commonly observed characteristics are typically
used to describe gifted students including: intellectual ability, specific
academic aptitude, creative or productive thinking, leadership ability, visual
or performing arts, and psychomotor ability (CEC, 1990). According to
Renzulli (1986), “gifted behavior is essentially a composite of the interaction
among three kinds of human traits: above average general and/or specific
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
11
abilities, high levels of task commitment (motivation), and high levels of
creativity” (p. 54). Students who possess or are capable of developing a
composite of these traits are those who should be considered gifted.
In urban schools, although there are innumerable outside factors that
affect student achievement, the number of children identified as gifted should
be commensurate with the number of students identified through the district
at large (Slocumb & Payne, 2000). We should not be able to correlate a
student’s socio-economic status with a disproportionate representation in the
gifted student population (Payne, 1998). Furthermore, we must be adept at
recognizing when a school district’s identification processes, that may appear
to be treating all students equally, impose a set of criteria that causes students
from a particular ethnic group to be underrepresented. Ultimately, what may
appear as an equal criteria, may foster an inequitable representation of
minority students (Slocumb & Payne, 2000) because of its narrow nature or
reliance on a particular intelligence measure. “To identify students from
poverty necessitates educators including in the identification process those
environmental factors that contribute to students’ readiness to learn. Not
addressing this issue results in inequity” (p. 6). Historically, the development
and use of Intelligence Quotient (IQ) tests as a means of identifying students
for gifted programs in the early 1900’s was common practice and considered
to be a major event in the onset of gifted education in public schools
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
(Coleman, 1999; Cross, 1999; Delisle, 1999; Hargrove, 1999). Specifically,
the Stanford-Binet test, developed by Lewis Terman in the 1920’s has been
identified as one of the major events of the past millennium of gifted
education (Coleman, 1999; Cross, 1999; Delisle, 1999; Hargrove, 1999).
However, although the development of IQ tests was highly influential at its
onset, the current use of IQ tests in urban schools is steeped in controversy
(Riley, 1999). Currently, in California, the use of IQ tests as a means of
identifying students for gifted programs is not recommended (California
Department of Education, Gifted and Talented Education (GATE), para.7) as,
“IQ tests measure a narrow subset of human characteristics and present only
partial information about cognitive skills. They typically do not measure
important characteristics such as effort, motivation, leadership, or creative
ability, and they have been shown to be racially biased” (California
Department of Education, GATE, para. 2). In order to ensure that minority
students have access to gifted programs, multiple measures for identification
must be in place for a district to receive any funds from the state of California
(GATE Application to the State Board of Education).
Statement of the Problem
The underrepresentation of minority students in gifted programs is
believed to be as high as 70% (Ford, 1996). This study will go beyond the
statistics to examine the level of achievement and underachievement among
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
13
urban gifted students and the effect of site level implementation of a specific
district program on those achievement levels. Furthermore, this study asserts
that, even among those students who are identified as gifted, there is a large
portion of urban gifted students who are underachieving and that something
should be done to change that. By studying both achieving and
underachieving urban gifted students, and the effect of the program in which
they participate, methods of programmatically supporting urban gifted
underachieving students may be explored and developed.
In 1991, Clark and Tollefson, two researchers studying issues related
to gifted and talented students stated that, “although academically talented
students achieve at high levels, some of these students can become
underachievers relative to their intellectual abilities” (p. 16).
Underachievement among urban gifted and talented students mirrors many of
the challenges that underachievement among “other students” in urban
schools face and is further complicated by the fact that gifted students have
some commonalities related to their giftedness that may further affect their
underachievement (Ford & Thomas, 1997). Commonly, underachieving
gifted students may have a high IQ combined with poor work habits, an
inability to concentrate, a lack of effort, an intense interest in one particular
area, negative attitudes toward self and others and/or a failure to respond to
motivation by usual teacher techniques (Department of Education and
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
14
Training, Western Australia, 2003). The factors associated with poverty, in
combination with the factors associated with giftedness, can combine to
create a colliding academic situation for an urban gifted student (Slocumb &
Payne, 2000). Slocumb and Payne (2000) state that “If the student is
uncomfortable and doesn’t understand the feelings that this new gifted
environment triggers, then very little learning will take place” (p. 242). Just
as many schools and students need to overcome the factors associated with
underachievement, so too, do gifted and talented urban students (Slocumb &
Payne).
Purpose of the Study
The research and literature illustrates that underachievement among
urban gifted students is a viable problem (Brown, 1997; Delisle & Berger,
1990; Ford & Thomas, 1997; Reis, 1998; Rimm, 1997). A challenge lies,
herein, for educators to determine the school level programs that currently
exist that most dramatically affect the achievement levels of urban gifted
students. The purpose of this study is twofold. First, it will describe the
characteristics of gifted students, review how poverty affects these students,
and then review a set of criteria that are indicators of the effect of a specific
program on its students. At its conclusion, a set of school and classroom
based conditions (“variations”), that appear to be enhancing specific school
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
15
programs, will be published for schools to use as a resource for enhancing
their school programs.
Classroom teachers of urban gifted students, when asked, can identify
some personal characteristics of successful students (Baker, 2003). These
characteristics affect students to varying degrees. By determining those
characteristics and the classroom conditions that teachers consider most
related to students’ success, educators may be able to incorporate the
teaching of these specific characteristics into their classroom work in both
gifted and regular urban classrooms. Classroom conditions can be observed
through classroom observations and will likely uncover many facets of a
classroom that contribute to an increase in the achievement level of
underachieving urban gifted students. In this study, there will be two primary
questions that serve to guide the research.
1. What types of programs currently exist that aim to serve
the needs of urban gifted and talented students?
2. What variations in the implementation of Long Beach
Unified’s EXCEL model decrease the level of
underachievement among urban gifted elementary
students?
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
16
Significance of the Problem
This study was specifically designed to offer programmatic
recommendations about the effect on underachievement within the schools
that participate in the EXCEL model of delivering a gifted and talented
education program in the Long Beach Unified School District. The EXCEL
program is a separate class program for students in their own neighborhood
schools who have been identified as either gifted or somewhere around the
top 20% of the students at the particular school based on a local norm.
Schools with EXCEL programs are those schools with “lower” API scores
and a preponderance of both urban and English Language Learner students.
Students in this program receive a differentiated curriculum and participate in
their school program through fifth grade. At the conclusion of fifth grade,
students from EXCEL program typically enter middle school programs
designed for high achieving students (or gifted students). It was through
qualitative methodology, that specific classroom strategies and specific
school program variations were identified and shared in order to enhance the
district’s urban gifted and talented program (EXCEL). In addition, the study
of achievement factors associated with gifted students may offer effective
strategies for use in classrooms where educators are searching to close the
achievement gap that continues to exist between minority students and white
students. Currently, in urban schools, much attention is being paid to closing
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
17
the achievement gap between minority students and white students because a
dramatic gap continues to exist (Hertert & Teague, 2003; Schwartz, 2001).
Gifted and talented students are not exempt from this achievement gap.
Among urban gifted students, the achievement gap may be illustrated by a
lack of identification of urban gifted students for program participation or
through a determination that too many minority students are achieving at
levels that are not commensurate with their documented potential, deeming
them underachievers. Although a general definition of underachievement
according to Ford and Thomas is “a discrepancy between ability and
performance” (Ford & Thomas, 1997, para 2), the same two researchers go
on to say that few studies use the same specific definition of
underachievement to track student progress, which creates a problem. Yet,
some estimates indicate that while approximately 20% of gifted students are
underachieving (Whitmore, 1980), approximately 50% of gifted black
students who were surveyed in a 1995 study were underachieving (Ford,
1995), illustrating the existing gap as it applies to gifted and talented
students.
The study of achievement factors associated with urban gifted
students may offer strategies for educators searching to close the achievement
gap in all schools. In the state of California, GATE programs are evaluated
cyclically based on their previous application’s approval (one to three years).
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
18
The State Board approved GATE Plan sets the standard for implementation
throughout local districts. Within the context of the Long Beach Unified
School District GATE Plan, variations in school implementation were
studied. Particular attention was paid to strategies and/or conditions that
appear to positively influence student achievement. Once determined, those
variations were summarized into a compilation of best practices for district
personnel, school site administrators and teachers.
Methodology
This study was conducted as a qualitative research study. The primary
reason for conducting a qualitative study is that this study involves the
exploration of perceptions about learning as well as the effect of the district
program on students’ success. Corbin and Strauss (1998) state that,
“qualitative methods can be used to obtain the intricate details about
phenomena such as feelings, thought processes, and emotions that are
difficult to extract or learn about through more conventional research
methods” (p. 11). The complexities associated with studying
underachievement demand qualitative methodology. Furthermore, the
methods associated with this study warrant the study of phenomenon that
occur in a natural setting (Merriam, 1998).
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
19
Organization of the Study
Chapter 1 of the study has presented the introduction, the background
of the problem, the purpose of the study and the research questions that will
guide the study. Also included in Chapter 1 are a statement about the
significance of the study and a brief description of the methodology to be
used.
Chapter 2 is a review of the relevant literature. It addresses the
following topics: giftedness, urban issues in gifted education,
underachievement among urban gifted students, and a description of effective
programs for gifted students.
Chapter 3 presents the methodology used in this study, including the
research design, population and sampling procedure; and the instruments and
their selection. The chapter goes on to describe, in detail, the procedures used
for data collection and how the data was analyzed.
Chapter 4 presents the results of the study. Chapter 5 discusses and
analyzes the results, culminating in conclusions and recommendation.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
20
CHAPTER TWO
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
Despite the odds against them, many students in urban schools are
successful (as evidenced by their standardized test scores and district level
assessments) (Carter, 2000; Schmoker, 2001; Tucker & Codding, 1998).
Successful urban school classrooms, and the students themselves, illustrate
that there are some key characteristics of students who are successful, despite
the odds against them (Carter, 2000; Schmoker, 2001). Furthermore, urban
students who are identified as gifted often illustrate, even more dramatically,
those same characteristics (Delisle & Berger, 1990). Gifted students who are
successful “are eager to begin the task, become easily engaged, and persist
until the task is finished” (Ablard, 2002). Furthermore, they typically have
four attributes in common: social competence, problem solving skills,
autonomy and a sense of purpose and future (Bernard, 1991). Application of
this information may assist urban school leaders in developing high quality
school programs that are built upon classroom conditions that have positively
contributed to students’ academic success (as defined by standardized tests
and district assessments).
To lead a large urban school in its upward mobility in academic
achievement (as evidenced by the Academic Performance Index in
California) poses daily challenges for the school’s leader (Schmoker, 2001).
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
21
On a daily basis, an urban school principal, must understand how students
learn, the pedagogical strategies best connected to how students learn and
how to connect all of the school’s resources so that student test scores go up
incrementally over time (Schmoker, 1999, 2001). An urban school principal
must also be adept at introducing critical and sustainable support systems into
the school culture. When taking an in-depth look at urban gifted students (as
a group that can greatly contribute to the formation of high quality learning)
key aspects of the urban leader’s understanding must also be his/her ability to
understand the effect of poverty on children’s learning (Slocumb & Payne,
2000), resiliency factors (Bernard, 1991), what it means to be gifted (Cohen,
1990), the socioeconomic issues that place a child at-risk (Payne, 1998) and
what the research tells us about effective urban GATE programs (Berger,
1991; Delcourt & Evans, 1994).
Literature Review
The purpose of this literature review is to examine the factors
associated with understanding giftedness, poverty, underachievement, and
school programs that purport to meet the needs of gifted and talented
students. The ability of a district leader (i.e. curriculum leader) or a school
leader (i.e. the principal) to understand these complexities may play a critical
role in the applicability of what is learned from students. In this literature
review I will address key research areas related to giftedness, the influence of
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
22
poverty on gifted students, program options and indicators of the positive
effect of a specific gifted and talented program on student levels of
achievement and underachievement. At the core of my literature review is a
discussion about underachievement and the need to examine specific
variations among urban gifted programs that decrease underachievement.
Giftedness
Although the definition of giftedness varies among educators and
school systems, a school system can expect to identify 10 to 15 percent of its
students as gifted and talented (Council of Exceptional Children [CEC],
1990). The characteristics commonly associated with describing gifted
students include six categories, as introduced in 1971 by former U.S.
Commissioner of Education Sydney P. Marland, Jr. Those categories include:
general intellectual ability, specific academic aptitude, creative or productive
thinking, leadership ability, visual or performing arts, and psychomotor
ability (CEC, 1990). Any combination of these variables can be used to
describe a gifted student. Renzulli (1986) stated that “gifted behavior reflects
an interaction among three basic clusters of human traits: above average
general and/or specific abilities, high levels of task commitment (motivation),
and high levels of creativity” (p. 275). Students who have these
characteristics or the potential to develop them are often gifted and talented.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
23
Current research (e.g. Ford & Thomas, 1997) suggests that minority
students are underrepresented in gifted programs for reasons that range from
the reliance on IQ tests to a narrow definition of what it means to be gifted
(e.g. Cohen, 1990). One study suggests that while Caucasian and Asian
students are overrepresented nationwide, Hispanic and Black students are
underrepresented in programs nationwide by about 50 percent (Cohen, 1990).
Broadening methods of assessment and incorporating extensive amounts of
teacher input are suggestions for bringing the number of minority students to
a level commensurate with other student populations (Cohen, 1990). Slocumb
and Payne (2000) state that, “Gifted and talented students from poverty
cannot be identified or served as though they were from non-poverty homes”
(p. 5). Their work centers around the idea that “treating all students equally in
the identification of gifted students all too often results in the extreme under
identification of an entire segment of the student population who come to
school quite unequal” (Slocumb & Payne, 2000, p. 4).
The study of successful gifted urban students and the ways that they
learn could dramatically affect the way in which all urban students are taught.
Furthermore, by examining the criteria that an urban district uses to identify
its urban students for participation in its gifted program, light will be shed on
the underlying principles of equity and opportunity to participate.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
24
Urban Issues in Gifted Education
There is a plethora of research emphasizing the need for continued
reform among America’s urban schools in order to close the achievement gap
that has existed historically and has widened in recent history. There is
equally as much research to suggest that if urban schools could strategically
utilize the funds and resources that are available to them, that they would be
able to close the achievement gap between the diverse groups that our
schools educate. For researchers who study urban students and schools, there
are no easy solutions to overcome the challenges that urban schools face.
Solutions and effective reform efforts demand a close look at the needs of the
specific group of students being served and a deep understanding of the
issues faced by those students.
From a review of the literature, it appears that in many ways, defining
the term “urban” may itself be something that is more easily felt that
described or defined. It is not one distinct characteristic or another that
determines whether a school district is an urban district or whether a
particular school is an urban school. Yancey and Saporito’s study (as cited in
Williams, 1996) suggests that it is “the combined effects of concentrated
poverty, cultural diversity, and isolation of urban neighborhoods according to
race, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status” (p. 3) that is central to making a
determination about a district or school’s urban status. Bartlett’s study (as
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
25
cited in Williams, 1996) states that, “Inner city schools are increasingly the
schools of remnant populations and communities trapped by their economic
irrelevance or their links to diminished labor markets. Further, they are
increasingly dependent on an overloaded and endangered fiscal base” (p.4).
For the purposes of this study, urban schools shall be those schools within the
Long Beach Unified School District (an urban district) where there is a
concentration of students who live in poverty (above 80% of the student
population receive free or reduced price lunch) and a significant population
of students who come from ethnically diverse backgrounds (50% or above an
individual school’s population).
Poverty Among Urban Gifted Students.
It is well documented that poverty is directly related to many of the
risk factors that urban students face (Payne, 2000; Williams, 1996). Since
1980, census data indicates that the number of children living in poverty has
increased among all races. Poverty has a documented and dramatic effect on
students’ health care and potential for contracting illnesses, exposure to
crime, and the potential for a child to suffer from physical, social or
psychological trauma (Williams, 1996). Students who attend urban schools,
where there is a concentration of students who live in poverty, are inherently
at risk for educational failure if schools do not determine methods of meeting
students’ needs.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
26
Within the literature about urban schools, there is a vast amount of
research that focuses on successful reform efforts and the ability of urban
school leaders and school communities to overcome many of the challenges
associated with poverty. That research builds upon the principles of
resiliency, combating underachievement and programs that have an effect
upon the students who are being served.
Resiliency Among Urban Gifted Students.
Although it is widely known, though not completely understood, that
poverty is a determinant of the level of academic achievement for many
children (Slocumb & Payne, 2000), research suggests that there is a direct
negative correlation between high school graduation rates and poverty
(Payne, 1998). Furthermore, there are many school behaviors that have been
linked to poverty including nonconformity and underachievement (Slocumb
& Payne, 2000). Yet, Bernard’s (1997) research on resiliency suggests that
between half and two thirds of children growing up in poverty-stricken
communities overcome their circumstances. Resiliency, according to
Bernard, is a term used to describe “a set of qualities that foster a process of
successful adaptation and transformation despite risk and adversity” (para. 1).
Bernard (1997) builds upon the premise that “We are all bom with an innate
capacity for resilience by which we are able to develop social competence,
problem-solving skills, a critical consciousness, autonomy, and a sense of
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
27
purpose” (para. 1). According to Krovetz (1999), “Based on longitudinal
studies, researchers have found that for every child who comes from an at-
risk background who later needs intervention, there is a higher percentage of
children who become healthy, competent adults” (p. 7). Bernard (1991)
identifies four attributes that resilient children usually have: social
competence, problem solving skills, autonomy and a sense of purpose and
future as explained in Table II.
Table II
Attributes of Resiliency
Attribute Working definition
Social Competence The aspect of resiliency that describes
a student’s ability to relate positively
to both other children and adults with
whom they interact. Social
competence includes a student’s
ability to “elicit positive response”
(Bernard, 1991).
Problem-solving skills The ability of a student to feel in
control of oneself and utilize resources
to solve one’s own problems.
Autonomy The sense that each person has a
distinct level of independence and
some control over his/her
environment.
A sense of purpose and future According to Bernard (1991), students
who have “goals, educational
aspirations, persistence, hopefulness,
and a sense of a bright future” exhibit
a sense of purpose and future.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
28
Looking at each of these characteristics in light of students who have been
identified as gifted and talented will likely provide us with further
information about how resiliency manifests itself in urban gifted students.
Urban gifted students may be able to articulate the ways in which their own
resiliency has positively affected their ability to be successful (Bernard,
1991) which may allow us to develop classroom conditions and school
programs that better meet the needs of all urban students.
Underachievement Among Urban Gifted Students
Defining underachievement is a complex task that most researchers
cannot completely agree upon (Ablard, 2002; Delisle & Berger, 1990; Ford &
Thomas, 1997). Generally, what is agreed upon, is that underachievement
involves a relationship between a student’s potential and current performance
level (Ablard, 2002; Delisle & Berger, 1990; Ford & Thomas, 1997). In the
case of gifted students, students may also be at risk of being underachieving
if they are unable to focus intensely, set priorities for themselves and set their
own completion and/or academic goals even if their academic ability
suggests that they are on the intellectually gifted scale (Delisle & Berger,
1990). One myth surrounding achievement among gifted students is that
gifted students are always highly motivated and engaged in their academic
challenges (Ford & Thomas, 1997). In fact, one of the challenges among
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
29
gifted students is the potential for underachievement to occur because of a
lack of motivation to complete their work (Ablard, 2002).
Ford and Thomas (1997) estimate that as many as 20 percent of urban
gifted students are underachieving. This number is affected by many factors
including self- motivation, family involvement, and school related factors.
Motivation Theory.
There are two types of motivation that are generally described in
relation to their effect on student achievement. Danielson (2002) states that
intrinsic motivation, “refers to the learner’s own internal drive for
achievement, fueled by the satisfaction of a job well done” while extrinsic
motivation “is influenced by factors external to the learner, such as praise or
material rewards” (p. 25). Motivation can be a key aspect of achievement, or
underachievement, among gifted students (Whitmore, 1986), and the
development of strong classroom practices designed to motivate students is
an attribute of effective classrooms (Keller, 1983). Motivation among gifted
students takes many different forms. Much of the research that has examined
motivation has illustrated how achieving students often attribute their success
to the effort that they apply to their learning (Carr, Borkowski, & Maxwell,
1991). Research shows that when the level of difficulty is increased for
achieving gifted students, they continue to apply increasing amounts of effort
to the task. The belief that effort is an integral aspect of academic success is
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
30
much more evident among gifted students than non-gifted students (Chan,
1996).
There is much research to support the need to create classrooms that
appropriately challenge gifted students (Halsted, 1988). Gifted students, more
than others, are affected by the sense that they are being challenged and that
their academic learning environment is stimulating (Delisle & Berger, 1990).
In fact, when carefully looking at aspects of underachievement, a lack of
stimulation is a major factor that contributes to gifted students’ lack of
motivation that translates into underachievement (Delisle & Berger, 1990).
According to Halsted (1988), the importance of challenging gifted students to
the level that they are ready to be challenged is paramount. Furthermore,
Halsted (1988) suggests that for gifted children, intellectual development
should be treated like a non-negotiable, something that is required rather than
just something that is just an interest to gifted students’ parents and teachers.
Intellectual development for gifted students is actually a requirement for their
happiness (Halsted, 1988).
There are many classroom strategies that are identified as those which
can affect student achievement in relation to motivation. Whitmore (1980)
captures three types of strategies that have been shown to be effective in
working to decrease underachieving behavior: supportive strategies, intrinsic
strategies, and remedial strategies. Supportive strategies involve making a
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
31
classroom feel like a family, creating classroom activities that are based on
students’ interests and bypassing parts of the curriculum that students have
already shown proficiency in. Intrinsic strategies are those that build upon
creating a classroom that is focused on encouragement, not just success.
Intrinsic strategies involve students in the process of determining the quality
of their work and in the responsibilities of the classroom. Remedial strategies
include recognizing that even gifted students have areas that they need to be
taught and that the learning environment in which gifted students work must
be a place where students can be encouraged as they take risks (Whitmore,
1980). Ford and Thomas (1997) suggest the following as strategies that help
students to develop internal motivation: (a) provide constructive and
consistent feedback to students, (b) provide options, (c) focus on personal
interests, (d) ensure that the appropriate teaching style is used for various
learning styles, (e) utilize active and experiential learning, (f) utilize
bibliotherapy and bibliographies, (g) provide mentors and role models, (h)
support multicultural education and (i) provide nurturing and affirming
classrooms. Bibliotherapy is a means of studying bibliographies that relate to
the population of the group or a specific subjet in order to enhance learning.
Educators and families of gifted students have a great capacity to
decrease levels of gifted students underachievement (Delisle & Berger, 1990;
Rimm, 1997) through means of motivation, by understanding of some key
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
32
aspects of underachievement and the implementation of some key strategies
that will affect students.
Family Involvement.
It is widely known that a student’s home environment contributes to
both their cognitive and academic development (Verna & Campbell, 1999).
Too much parent pressure on a student or too little parent support for
education have been shown to affect on the achievement levels of gifted
students (Rimm, 1997). Furthermore, it is the family structure that supports a
student’s physical, social and intellectual needs which directly relates to their
ability to learn (Verna & Campbell, 1999). Some research has shown that a
family’s level of encouragement and expectation setting is directly related to
socioeconomic status (Song & Hattie, 1984). Other researchers have reported
that, although socioeconomic status can be related to educational activities in
the home, parental involvement can counteract the negative effects of low
socioeconomic background and significantly improve students’ performance
(Schneider, 1993). There is actually much known about family factors that
contribute to gifted students’ success. In a seminal study, Clark (1983)
examined low SES Black students’ achievement and underachievement in
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
33
their family context. What he found has clear implications for decreasing the
level of underachievement among all gifted students.
Achieving black students had parents who: were assertive in their
parental involvement efforts, kept abreast of their children’s school
progress, were optimistic and tended to perceive themselves as having
effective coping mechanisms and strategies, set high and realistic
expectations for their children, held positive achievement orientations
and supported tenets of the achievement ideology, set clear, explicit
achievement-oriented norms, established clear, specific role
boundaries, deliberately engaged in experiences and behaviors
designed to promote achievement and had positive parent-child
relations characterized by nurturance, support, respect, trust and open
communication (para. 10).
Rimm (1997) suggests that having an effective role model to imitate that can
truly make a difference for an underachieving student. A role model for an
underachieving student can have the greatest effect if he or she can encourage
the child to be independent and creative but not to such an extreme that the
child does not accept adult guidance (Rimm, 1997). It is often what Rimm
(1997) refers to as “overempowerment and adultizement” that can be causes
of underachievement. Gifted students are often affected by these two
elements because they show an early ability to take on things in life that other
students don’t, therefore exposing them to challenges that they are not
developmentally prepared to handle (Rimm, 1997). Both overempowerment
and adultizement are based on what Rimm (1997) explains to be “too much
power too soon” (p. 19).
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
34
In their study of gifted Asian American and Caucasian students,
Verna and Campbell (1999) found that parental pressure was found to have
negative effects on the children’s academic and general self-concepts.
Pressure takes on many forms in relation to the underachievement of gifted
students. Rimm (1997) explains that extreme praise by parents can cause
students to believe that they cannot live up to adults’ expectations. Students
may quit trying or become perfectionists which often leads to intense internal
pressure leading to underachievement. Ford and Thomas (1997) suggest that
involving family members in a substantive way is an integral component for
increasing urban gifted students’ levels of achievement.
School Related Factors.
There have been many studies that have shown that school related
factors and teacher expectations greatly influence urban gifted students’
levels of achievement (e.g. Good, 1981). Many studies have also shown that
student achievement is enhanced when teachers communicate high
expectations to their students (Danielson, 2002). When “certain students are
identified as having performed poorly, regardless o f whether they actually
had or not, teachers form preconceptions of the students’ future performance”
(Covington, 1992, p. 6). Considering the number of hours that students spend
with their teachers, there is great importance in the interaction between the
student and the teacher.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
35
Ford (1995) found that numerous factors in schools can have an influence on
the achievement of gifted minority students. In a study of gifted Black
achievers and underachievers, underachievers reported, “less positive
teacher-student relations, having too little time to understand the material,
less supportive classroom climate
and being unmotivated and disinterested in school” as characteristics of their
school experiences. According to Ford and Thomas (1997), schools who,
“provide opportunities for students to discuss concerns with teachers
and counselors, address issues of motivation, self-perception and self-
efficacy, accommodate learning styles, modify teaching styles, use
mastery learning, decrease competitive, norm referenced
environments, use cooperative learning and group work, use positive
reinforcement and praise, seek affective and student centered
classrooms, set high expectations of students, have multicultural
education and counseling techniques and strategies, involve mentors
and role models, and involve family members in essential ways” (p.
7) are schools that will have the ability to increase the achievement
levels of their gifted students.
It is with these characteristics in mind that classroom programs can be
designed to meet the needs of gifted students. It is likely the combination of
an effective program delivery model, combined with some specific and
identifiable classroom conditions and the cultivation of some specific student
attributes that combine to influence success among urban gifted students.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
36
Programs for Gifted Students
Effective Program Research.
Key to understanding whether or not a program is effective is a clear
understanding of what constitutes a program versus what constitutes a
“provision” (Morgan, Tennant, & Gold, 1980). A “program” designed for
gifted students, “is a comprehensive, sequential system for educating students
with identifiable needs” (The Association for the Gifted [TAG], 1989).
Whereas, “provisions are fragmentary, unarticulated, and temporary
activities, which are neither followed-up in any meaningful way nor preceded
by any meaningful lead-in activity” (Morgan, Tennant, & Gold, 1980).
Programs can usually be identified because of their widespread use across a
district, rather than a classroom design that is developed by a single teacher
and implemented in an individual classroom setting. Furthermore, effective
programs, according to Berger (1991) are comprised of eight components:
1. needs assessment,
2. definition of population,
3. identification procedures,
4. program goals,
5. program organization and format,
6. staff selection and training,
7. curriculum development and
8. program evaluation.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
37
Types of Programs.
According to the Learning Outcomes Study in 1994, a longitudinal
investigation of 1,010 elementary school children who had just entered
programs for gifted learners in grades 2 and 3, there are four types of gifted
programs most commonly found in districts across the nation: Within-Class
programs, Pull-Out programs, Separate Classes and Special Schools
(Delcourt and Evans, 1994).
Table III
Most Common Gifted Programs Across the United States
Teaming Outcomes Study
Type of Program Definition of Program
. ' | : ' • .
Within class programs Regular education classrooms with a group of
students who have been identified as gifted
among the other students.
Pull-Out programs Gifted students being taught in a school setting
other than their regular classroom for a set
amount of time per week. Typical programs have
students in a resource room for approximately two
hours per week.
Separate classes Students who have been identified as gifted
together in a classroom for the school day.
Special schools Students are separated on an identified school
campus for the purpose of differentiating their
entire school experience.
Studies suggest that students in separate class programs, special
school programs and pull-out programs showed higher achievement rates
than students who were in in-class programs. Furthermore, students who
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
38
were in separate class programs scored at the highest level of achievement of
the four groups noted above (Delcourt, Lloyd, Cornell & Goldberg, 1994).
Implementation o f Gifted Programs in California.
The California State Board of Education has approved a set of
delivery models for implementation of gifted programs across the state of
California that include three different program model possibilities. The
following text appears on the California Department of Education’s website
as a response to the question, “Do you recommend any particular service
delivery models?”
“AB 2313 requires that services for gifted and talented
students be planned and organized as integrated differentiated
learning experiences within the regular school day. The
following three service delivery models are named in the law
and are appropriate for most districts: special day classes, part
time grouping, and cluster grouping” (California Department
of Education, GATE, para. 8).
The description of the three models approved for implementation in
California are congruent with the program delivery models that were
identified in the Classroom Learning Outcomes Study noted
previously. According to the California State Board of Education’s
description of the three approved program delivery models and as
pursuant to California Education Code (Section 52206), special day
classrooms are comprised of students who have been identified as
gifted and provide an entire day of differentiated learning
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
39
opportunities. Part time grouping entails a class that brings gifted
students together for a portion of the school day for differentiated
learning opportunities. Cluster grouping occurs when a group of
gifted students are clustered together within a regular classroom
allowing for some differentiated learning.
In the state of California, district implementation of gifted and
talented programs are to be guided by a set of eight standards that
each district must address in its application to the state of California.
From the application, within which each of the eight standards is
addressed, districts receive one, two or three year approval of their
district program. State monetary resources are connected to this
approval. The eight standards addressed are: program design,
identification, curriculum and instruction, social and emotional
development, professional development, parent and community
involvement, program assessment and budget.
Conclusion
Current research on successful urban gifted students illustrates that
there are many ways to decrease the number of underachieving students in
the gifted population and increase the number of successful students.
Motivation, family involvement and school related factors all may directly
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
40
influence a student’s ability to be successful. In the urban setting, where the
issues related to poverty further extenuate the need to advocate for enhanced
student achievement, a deep look at resiliency and the ways in which it
manifests itself in students points us to many personal characteristics that, if
understood, could potentially be taught to other students and directly affect
student achievement. Defining giftedness is a challenge that illustrates the
complexity of studying people. There are some commonalties among gifted
students that we can use to help us identify some o f the complex
characteristics that can be used to enhance urban gifted students’ levels of
achievement.
In order to improve upon the programs that exist for urban gifted
students, we must look at the programs that currently exist for urban gifted
students and study the specific variations among similar school programs that
decrease the levels of underachievement among those students in order to
inform all school programs.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
41
CHAPTER THREE
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
In order to examine an urban school district’s gifted program, many
aspects of a study must be taken into consideration. In this chapter, the study
design, sample, instrumentation, data collection, and data analysis process of
this study are described. As described in the problem statement and review of
the literature, I establish that among urban gifted programs, there are specific
program design models that have been shown to increase the impact on
student achievement (Delcourt and Evans, 1994). Furthermore, there are
some well-researched and easily identifiable aspects of underachievement
that high quality programs should be prepared to address.
The purpose of this study was to go beyond the statistics that on the
surface indicate that a school district may identify urban students at a level
that is commensurate with students in the total district population. Despite the
number of students identified, levels of underachievement may be excessive
within schools that participate in the particular programs and may need
attention. Furthermore, this qualitative study was designed to use existing
criteria (i.e. State of California Standards for Gifted Programs and the GATE
Application to the State of California) that indicate that the LBUSD GATE
program has many exemplary aspects and further examine the site level
implementation of the district’s EXCEL
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
42
model of providing urban gifted and talented education among fifteen of its
urban schools. The following questions were utilized in this study:
1. What types of programs currently exist that aim to serve the
needs of urban gifted and talented students?
2. What variations in the implementation of the Long Beach
Unified School District’s EXCEL model decrease the level
of underachievement among urban gifted elementary
students?
Through a multi-site, qualitative study, I addressed these questions in search
of identifying the effective variations in program implementation. The intent
of this study was to gather information that will be beneficial to share among
all of the existing schools with EXCEL programs throughout the Long Beach
Unified School District.
Research Design
This study was a qualitative study as its purpose was to inform
educators interested in identifying and understanding the variations of
effective urban gifted programs. For the purposes of this study, the three
school sites that had the lowest level of underachievement among their
EXCEL students were studied to determine the variations in their program
implementation that can be positively attributed to affecting their school’s
program. Through qualitative methodology that involves classroom
observations, interviews with teachers, principals, coordinators and district
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
43
level personnel, and an analysis of the interview data, specific strengths were
explored and identified. According to Patton (1987), in comparison to
quantitative methods, “Quantitative methods typically produce a wealth of
detailed data about a much smaller number of people and cases. Qualitative
data provide depth and detail through direct quotation and careful description
of program situations, events, people, interactions, and observed behaviors.”
According to Merriam (1998), “.. .researchers who conduct these
studies.. .simply seek to discover and understand a phenomenon, a process, or
the other perspectives and worldviews of the people involved” (p. 11).
In the context of this qualitative study, specific aspects of the EXCEL
program were examined through grounded evaluation theory. Grounded
evaluation theory was useful in this study because it allowed the researcher to
address the evaluation of the program(s) by asking if the program being
evaluated should be replicated and if so, how it should be replicated? (Patton,
1987) The consideration of how a program can be replicated is a primary
focus in the clear development of an educational study. To determine
program effectiveness, an existing tool that was previously used for a
program evaluation review in 2002 was utilized as a resource. For classroom
observations, an existing non-evaluative observation sheet was utilized.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
44
Population
The population of this study consisted of the fifteen urban schools
within the Long Beach Unified School District that have EXCEL programs
designed to serve gifted elementary age students (see Table IV). To be a
recognized district EXCEL program, the school program must have been
presented to and approved by the Long Beach Unified School District Board
of Education. The commitment to have an EXCEL program makes the
expectations for implementation of the district EXCEL program explicit. All
but one of the fifteen schools in the population of this study are considered
“urban”. For the purposes of this study, “urban” is to be defined as those
schools whose free/reduced lunch percentage is at/or above 80%, a measure
that universally can be used to describe schools that are faced with the
challenges associated with educating students who live in poverty.
To more fully illustrate the population and sample for this study, the
Academic Performance Index was used to describe the identified set of
schools. The Academic Performance Index, although superceded by the
Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) index as a federal measure of academic
achievement, allowed the researcher to describe the population in a manner
that is consistent across schools. The range of API indices among the
population of schools with EXCEL programs in the Long Beach Unified
School District is from 638 to 732. The statewide rank among the fifteen
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
schools ranges from the second decile to the sixth decile. The similar schools
rank for the fifteen schools included in the study population ranges from the
fourth decile to the tenth decile. The total population of schools included in
this study’s population serves students in gifted programs from first through
fifth grades.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
46
Table IV
Long Beach Unified School District Schools with EXCEL Programs
School
1
13
l i t
........ o. £ 6 .
\
•§ U
£ §
® &
jr
i l l
Num ber of
•undents
identified for
EXCEL
Total school
population
% o f school
population
School A 93 56 97 690 4 10 113
1190
9.5
School B 85 33 97 680 4 8 106
1146
9.2
SchoolC 100 63 96 722 5 10 143
935
15.1
SchoolD 100 58 99 684 4 9 123
1034
11.9
School E 89 59 99 677 4 8 130
1204
10.8
School F 85 49 94 697 4 9 83
1563
5.3
School G 81 46 94 711 5 9 62
1300
4.8
School H 81 35 96 732 6 9 163
1200
13.6
School I 100 52 98 718 5 10 124
950
13.1
School J 100 78 99 663 3 8 101
1240
8.1
School K 100 74 99 717 5 10 120
1230
9.8
School L 100 71 97 705 5 10 121
920
13.2
School M 79 39 95 694 4 9 94
1160
8.1
School N 100 40 97 638 2 5 107
8 0 0
12.5
School 0 100 60 97 689 4 9 106
1100
9.6
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
47
Sample
From the population identified above in Table IV, a sample was
selected to allow for the collection of qualitative data from the existing
population. In an attempt to study the variations that contribute to the level of
achievement among students within a district program, it was necessary to
identify those schools with similar student populations. From the total
population, an analysis of school data for those students who are being served
in the school EXCEL program was used to determine the sample.
Furthermore, only schools that have had existing programs for three or more
years were included in the study’s sample.
Student achievement data was used to determine the three schools
from the total population of schools that have the smallest number of students
who are identified as underachievers. For the purposes of this study,
underachievers were defined as those students who are (a) formally identified
as participants in the school’s EXCEL program AND (b) participate in the
school’s EXCEL program (i.e. separate class) AND (c) have standardized test
data that illustrates that they are not performing up to their potential in
relation to their (d) identification as an EXCEL student. Data from the 2003
California Standards Test in Language Arts and Math was used as the
standardized test data for this study. Identified EXCEL students with
California Standards test scores that are below the Advanced Level (83%
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
correct in Language Arts and 84% correct in Math) were considered
underachieving for the purposes of this study. Schools with EXCEL
programs (see Table IV) were analyzed and ranked in five areas: CST
English Language Arts, CST Mathematics, LBUSD End of Course Math
Exam, LBUSD Math Facts Test, API growth in Math and API growth in
English Language Arts (Table V below). The ranking in each area was
averaged to create an overall average rank. The schools that were selected for
this study’s sample were those three schools with the lowest level of
underachievement based on the criteria described immediately above and
illustrated through the table in Table V.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
49
Table V
Long Beach Unified School District-EXCEL School Level Data
School
Number o f students
Rank
CST-ELA ( % Advanced)
Rank
CST-Math (%Advanced)
Rank
EOC-Math (Aver. % Correct)
I
Rank
Math Facts ( % Advanced)
Rank
A PI Growth-ELA
44
O S A PI Growth Math
s Average Rank
School A
113 4 25 5 42 4 81 5 72 6 37 5 39 4.8“*
School B
106 1 44 2 53 6 78 10 62 9 30 11 0 6.5
School C
143 5 23 12 34 9 77 9 65 12 16 8 32 9.2
School D
123 14 11 1 57 1 84 1 80 7 36 2 55 4.3**
School E
130 9 19 8 38 5 79 7 68 13 8 12 -4 9 .1 1
SchoolF
83 8 20 10 35 14 71 4 73 14 -5 13 -6 10.5
School G
62 2 29 8 37 6 78 3 74 2 58 1 73 3.8*
School H
163 6 22 5 42 10 76 2 76 8 32 10 21 6.8
School I
124 7 21 10 35 6 78 15 48 10 25 14 -7 10.3
School J
101 3 27 5 42 2 82 7 68 1 66 6 36 4.0**
School K
120 11 17 3 45 2 82 14 52 11 19 9 31 8.3
School L
121 13 12 12 34 6 78 13 54 5 40 3 54 8.7
S ch o o l M 94 11 17 15 20 9 77 10 62 15 -11 15 -34 12.5
School N
107 14 11 14 21 14 71 6 69 3 54 6 36 9.5
School O
106 10 18 4 44 9 77 12 58 4 48 4 40 7.2
* Program Started in 2002
** Sample Site
The first school in the study was an elementary school in north Long
Beach with a total school population of 1,190 students. The student
population of the first school in the sample is as follows: 72.8% Hispanic,
14.7% African-American, 4.1% Pacific Islander, 4.1% White, 3.0% Asian-
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
50
American and 1.4% Filipino-American. Of the entire student body 56% of
the students are English Language Learners and 93% of them receive
Free/Reduced lunch (the indicator of poverty for this study).
The second school in this study was a central Long Beach elementary
school with a total population of 1,034 students. The student population of
the second school in the sample is as follows: 67.1% Hispanic, 19.0%
African-American, 1.0% Pacific Islander, 1.0% White, 11.5% Asian-
American, .1% Filipino-American and .1% American Indian or Alaska
Native. Of the entire student body 58% of the students are English Language
Learners and 100% of them receive Free/Reduced lunch (the indicator of
poverty for this study).
The third school in this study was a downtown Long Beach
elementary school with a total population of 1,240 students. The student
population of the third school in the sample is as follows: 67.7% Hispanic,
6.7% African-American, .1% Pacific Islander, .8% White, 24.7% Asian-
American, and .1% American Indian or Alaska Native. Of the entire student
body 78% of the students are English Language Learners and 100% of them
receive Free/Reduced lunch (the indicator of poverty for this study).
Instrumentation
This study included the use of various existing instruments that
assisted with providing a conceptual framework at the program level (i.e.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
district program level) and at the school level (i.e. school implementation
level). The state of California has existing GATE standards that identify a
rating scale for the eight standards that comprise the criteria of an effective
gifted and talented program. The standards include: Program Design,
Identification, Curriculum and Instruction, Social and Emotional
Development, Professional Development, Parent and Community
Involvement, Program Assessment and Budget. In 2002, the Long Beach
Unified School District underwent a Coordinated Compliance Review. As a
component of that review, the district’s gifted and talented program
completed its application process for state certification. This process involved
judging the district program against the state standards and illustrating (via
evidence and observation) the achievement of each of the defined standards
for up to three years of accreditation. In this qualitative study, the
achievement levels attained in the district review were used to further study
the practices at the individual site level. Also at the site level, interviews
(based on existing protocols examined and protocols created and included as
Appendices A-C) and classroom observations (based on the existing
“Indicators of Differentiation for GATE and EXCEL Students” observation
tool and included as Appendix D) comprised the primary instruments used to
gather qualitative data related to program information.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
52
Framework for Research Question One
The first question, “What types of programs currently exist that
aim to serve the needs of urban gifted and talented students?” can be best
illustrated through the lens of the Qualitative Extension of the Learning
Outcomes Study conducted by Marcia Delcourt and Karen Evans. According
to Delcourt and Evans (1994), the original Learning Outcomes Study was a
longitudinal study that was conducted to
“(a) formulate a system for selecting exemplary program models; (b)
to further contribute to the knowledge base of gifted education by
conducting in-depth examinations of outstanding elementary school
gifted programs; (c) to examine ways in which outstanding programs
address the needs of students from diverse cultures” (viii).
The original study determined that there are four significant types of
programs that occur across the United States to serve students in gifted
programs. A separate class program, one of the four types of programs
discovered in the Learning Outcomes longitudinal study, was examined in
this qualitative project. Although the Learning Outcomes Study does not have
one rubric embedded into its methodology, it utilized multiple profiles and
measures to deduce which aspects of gifted programs are most effective and
most impact student achievement. The synthesis of the Learning Outcomes
Study information provided a framework for understanding distinct aspects of
this study in relation to the state standards for gifted programs.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
53
In addition to using the Learning Outcomes Study as a framework to
illustrate effective aspects of the district program that have been identified in
previous studies, the state standards for gifted and talented student programs
served as a unifying guide. Sandra Berger’s synthesis on the research on
effective programs for students of high ability was used to determine whether
or not the LBUSD GATE Plan included those eight components that research
has shown should comprise an effective program. At the district level,
interviews conducted with the Assistant Superintendent of Curriculum, the
district GATE Coordinator and the district GATE Psychologist drew upon
information from all of these sources to gain insights into the LBUSD Gate
Plan.
Framework for Research Question Two
The second research question, “What variations in the
implementation of Long Beach Unified School District’s EXCEL model
decrease the level of underachievement among urban gifted elementary
students?” was studied through distinctly qualitative methodology.
Protocols, based on those within the Qualitative Extension of the Learning
Outcomes Study are attached as Appendices A, B and C. Appendix A
illustrates the guiding questions that were used in interviewing teachers at
each of the identified school sites. Appendix B illustrates the guiding
questions that were used in interviews with site principals. Appendix C
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
54
illustrates the guiding questions that were used in interviewing district level
personnel about the EXCEL program model and specific aspects of its
implementation in the Long Beach Unified School District.
Trustworthiness
The importance of trustworthiness exists in any qualitative study. The
primary concerns of trustworthiness in this study were twofold: to diminish
researcher biases and to ensure that participants in the study who were
interviewed shared information that was truthful and based upon their own
experiences.
In order to diminish researcher biases, I followed the methodology set
forth in this study as it had originally been laid out. The sample sites were
selected based on student data that allowed for no bias. The interviews were
only conducted with the principals and teachers at the school sites where the
data had included the school in the sample and were transcribed to ensure that
interviewee statements were clearly recorded for coding purposes.
A final aspect of trustworthiness was addressed through classroom
observations. Each teacher who participated in an interview was also visited
for the purposes of ensuring trustworthiness and corroborating those aspects
of the school program that were described in the participant interviews. Field
notes from observations were deduced to a one-page summary and kept with
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
55
the interview transcriptions. These field notes served as an additional
resource during the data analysis.
Data collection
For the purposes of this study, data was collected in two phases. The
first phase entailed determining from student data the three schools whose
data indicated that they have the lowest level of underachievement among
their students who participate in their EXCEL program. Student data was
collected through the district Office of Research, in collaboration with the
Assistant Superintendent of Research. Information provided through the
central office data collection system ensures anonymity of student records
and was used only for the purpose of determining levels of underachievement
according to the method presented previously in this chapter. Data is
summarized on Table V.
The second phase of data collection occurred once the determination
had been made of the three schools (out of the 15 school population) that
comprised the sample. The second phase of data collection for this study was
the essential component of the study that was used to answer the second
research question, set forth above. In this phase, I interviewed district level
personnel (Assistant Superintendent Curriculum, Instruction and Professional
Development, GATE Coordinator and GATE Psychologist), EXCEL teachers
and the site administrators from the three school sites. These interviews were
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
56
based on the interview protocols attached as Appendices A and B. Eighteen
interviews were conducted among the three school sites in the study’s
sample. Three district level personnel were interviewed. All interviews were
audiotaped and transcribed to ensure researcher reliability and to assist with
analyzing and coding data. Furthermore, a summary of field notes that were
taken during the observations and were deduced to a one-page summary of
each observation. Classroom observations contributed to the qualitative
analysis of the three school settings. As follow up to the fifteen teacher
interviews and three site administrator interviews that took place, fifteen
classroom observations were conducted to observe those aspects of the
classroom program that the teacher discussed in their interview. By
interviewing and observing teachers in their classrooms, the interview data
was substantiated.
Data Analysis
The purpose of this study was to examine variations among the urban
schools in the Long Beach Unified School District that are implementing the
EXCEL program for their gifted students that have the least number of
underachieving students as a result in order to share effective practices
among schools with similar school programs. This qualitative study relied
upon data that was shared through interviews and observations to explain the
findings.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
57
Data analysis for this study consisted of analyzing interview
transcriptions and observation notes. As stated above, a minimum of four
teacher interviews per sample site (see interview protocol in Appendix A),
along with a site administrator interview at each site (see interview protocol
in Appendix B) were conducted. Interviews with district personnel (Assistant
Superintendent, Curriculum and Professional Development, GATE
coordinator and District GATE Psychologist) were also conducted (see
Appendix C). Following school site interviews, an observation in each
classroom took place to corroborate the data that had been collected.
As interview data was collected, interviews were transcribed so that I
could code the data according to those themes that emerged. The emergence
of specific themes indicated that there were some variations of
implementation among the sample schools that could be used to form
recommendations for diminishing levels of underachievement among all
urban gifted students.
As the conclusion to this study, the data was summarized into a
compilation of effective practices and recommendations to be presented to
the Assistant Superintendent of Curriculum, Instruction and Professional
Development and the District GATE Coordinator for use in professional
development and program development.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
58
Summary
Through carefully designed qualitative methodology, I addressed the
research questions posed in my problem statement. My intent was to create a
bridge from what is known about effective urban gifted program design and
the variations that schools and teachers are implementing. From those
patterns that emerged from the research, I identified variations among
schools’ implementation of a district’s gifted program that can be utilized to
diminish the level of underachievement among urban gifted students across
the Long Beach Unified School District EXCEL program.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
59
CHAPTER FOUR
FINDINGS
This qualitative study investigated two aspects of gifted education
among urban students. The study’s primary function was to examine the
variations in implementation within the Long Beach Unified School District
EXCEL program. Three schools were selected with the lowest levels of
underachievement amongst
EXCEL students (based on a criteria determined for this study) to determine
the aspects of implementation that have the greatest effect on student
achievement. Also, as part of this study, programs that have been researched
and deemed effective for gifted students (based on current research out of the
National Center for Gifted Education at the University of Connecticut) were
explored.
The findings in this chapter are based on data gathered from
interviews and observations. From the inception of this study to its
completion, a total of 21 interviews were conducted with district personnel
(3), school site administrators (3) and EXCEL teachers (15). An analysis of
program documents was also conducted including: the current District GATE
Plan, program descriptions, selection criteria, Indicators of Differentiation
(used for classroom observations), a Student Gifted Characteristics Profile
(used for teacher recommendation of students to be tested for entry into
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
60
EXCEL programs) and a Student Evaluation Profile (offered to school sites
by the District GATE Psychologist for use with underachieving students).
The research question used to create a foundational understanding of
gifted programs was:
• What type of programs currently exist that aim to serve the needs of
urban gifted students?
This question will be addressed in the findings through an in-depth program
description of the Long Beach Unified EXCEL program and how it is aligned
to the research on effective programs. While this question served to set a
context for the qualitative study that ensued, the primary research question
that was investigated was:
• What variations in the implementation of Long Beach Unified School
District’s EXCEL model decrease the level of underachievement
among urban gifted students?
The findings of this study illustrate that there are some specific variations of
program implementation that appear to have an effect on lowering the level
of underachievement among the urban students who participate in the
district’s EXCEL program. Interviews were conducted, transcribed and coded
which led to the development of specific themes. From the data analysis, four
themes emerged that will be shared in this chapter as findings. Each of the
four themes (training, collaboration, interventions and differentiated
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
61
expectations) will be presented in a separate category. An in depth discussion
of each of the themes is presented in the pages that follow.
Effective program research was used to determine the answer to the
foundational question in this study. In order to determine, “What type of
programs currently exist that aim to serve the needs of urban gifted
students?” a review of effective program research and qualitative data were
utilized.
The Long Beach Unified School District EXCEL program was
developed as an outgrowth of the existing gifted and talented education
(GATE) program that had existed for many years prior to the inception of
EXCEL. In the early 1990’s, distinct efforts were made to address the needs
of an increasingly ethnically and linguistically diverse student population.
Following a series of consultations with experts in the field, the need for a
program that addressed the talents of urban high achieving students became
more evident. According to the Assistant Superintendent, Curriculum,
Instruction and Professional Development, “the program was set-up because
it [the GATE program] was an all white program and we were looking at a
way of growing a group of kids that could result in a more diverse GATE
population.” According to her, the intent of the EXCEL program is to start
accelerating students at the elementary level so that there is an increased
number of students entering programs like AVID at the middle school level.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
62
Ultimately, creating a diverse group of students who are prepared and enter
Advanced Placement courses at the high school level. The Assistant
Superintendent, Curriculum, Instruction and Professional Development,
shared that the program appears to have had the expected outcome, as the
number of students from diverse backgrounds has increased in Advanced
Placement courses at the high school level.
The EXCEL program is overseen by the GATE Coordinator, who
reports to the Assistant Superintendent of Curriculum, Instruction and
Professional Development. The GATE Office is a self-contained office that
employs two certificated staff members: the GATE Coordinator and the
GATE Psychologist. The primary responsibility of the GATE Coordinator is
program coordination, curriculum development, teacher training, and parent
education. The GATE Psychologist is responsible for testing, student
identification and coordination with School Counselors.
Fifteen schools from among the 60 elementary level schools in the
Long Beach Unified School District have Board approved EXCEL programs
at their school sites. Schools with EXCEL programs can generally be
characterized as schools with low Academic Performance Index scores.
EXCEL programs are meant to serve the high achieving students who reside
in the school’s immediate neighborhood. The Long Beach Unified School
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
63
District EXCEL program can best be described as a separate class or special
day program. This kind of program is aligned to the research that suggests
that students who are in separate class programs show higher levels of
achievement than those students who are in a regular classroom, even if the
teacher in the regular classroom is aware of their high achieving status
(Delcourt, Lloyd, Comess, & Goldberg, 1994). Although EXCEL classrooms
are not comprised of all GATE identified students, the Long Beach Unified
program follows the classroom model described in the California Education
Code as a special day delivery model for gifted students. Students remain in
their self-contained EXCEL classroom for the entire day.
Key to understanding the EXCEL program and its relation to the
GATE program are the parameters of the student selection criteria for entry
into EXCEL. According to the District GATE Psychologist, there is not an
exact criteria for selecting students into EXCEL.
When you are dealing with EXCEL, you are dealing with what is
unusual at that school. So, you are essentially doing an informal local
norm. What we do is start with teacher nominations. Anyone who is
nominated gets evaluated. We also ask the Research Department for
test scores for older children.. .third, fourth and fifth graders.. .so that
children who may not get nominated don’t get overlooked.
The District GATE Coordinator described the criteria to include, “about the
top 20% of students in the school.. .and we are saying these kids are ‘the
most able’ at this school.” Because most of the schools with an EXCEL
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
64
program, have a preponderance of English Language Learners, the initial
testing (other than district or state assessments) is based on non-verbal
assessment. The GATE Psychologist described the reliance on non-verbal
reasoning in describing part of the assessment for EXCEL.
We rely mostly on non-verbal reasoning because of the language
abilities of the students in those schools. By that I mean that many
children who are in those schools, even English only students, don’t
have higher-level vocabulary.
To initiate the testing for an individual student, teachers or other staff
members make an initial recommendation to the School Counselor by
submitting a Student Profile of Gifted Characteristics Form (See Appendix
G). This profile requires a teacher to rate a student in six areas of giftedness:
intellectuality, creativity, task commitment, extraordinary development in the
arts and leadership ability. The total score for each student is calculated and
is considered “against” the other scores for students who were recommended
for the EXCEL program at that particular school site. The District GATE
Psychologist described the entire process when asked, “What does it mean
when a school site gets back the list of their students who have either been
“selected” or “not recommended” for EXCEL?”
It means that we have looked at a variety of data. We have given the
student a test. We have had the student draw a picture. We look at any
existing test scores including the STAR testing and the Reading
Benchmark and sometimes the End of Course Math Exam. If the
STAR writing sample is available we look at that too. We look for the
referral from the teacher and any additional commentary from the
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
65
teacher. So, we are looking for a variety of things. What we do is, we
have a whole list of children who have been nominated. As we
evaluate all of those kids, there seems to be a group that stands out
and those are the ones that we select, in comparison with the whole
group. The school can second guess us and place children based on
clustering and try them out and later on the following year, based on
another evaluation, we might select them. As you see, in many ways it
seems this is a loose process, but it’s not. It is a way of us allowing
for the variety of attributes that come to us to be able to shift and
evaluate that.
Table VI illustrates a common set of data that is reviewed in order to
determine who is selected for entry into a school’s EXCEL program. These
five areas generally comprise those areas that are used to select, deny or
deem a student an alternate for entry into the school’s EXCEL program.
Table VI
EXCEL Program Selection Components
EXCEL Program Selection Components
California Standards Test
(English Language Arts and Math)
California Language Development Test
District Reading Benchmark Test
Non-verbal screening test
Teacher Recommendation of Unique Talents
(Student Profile of Gifted Characteristics)
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
66
The selection process for EXCEL has many strengths, namely its use of
multiple sources of student information. However, as illustrated by the GATE
Psychologist and District Coordinator, the selection process also creates
challenges for schools. The GATE Psychologist described one aspect of why
the selection criteria is challenging.
We are doing a large scoop of high achieving children compared to
the other children at that particular school. We may even be scooping
down to the average level and sometimes I am not sure teachers
understand that. Not everyone is going to rise to the occasion. We
know that the children have not had opportunities from a very young
age so we are going to immerse them in the richness that comes forth
in an EXCEL class and hopefully they will rise above the level where
they are currently working.
The GATE Coordinator shared, that because the selection criteria has some
“wiggle room,” there is often an “opportunity to give a student a shot because
you think they’ll do well.” She described that a challenge ensues when a
student struggles and the school site quickly makes a move toward removing
the student from the program rather than focusing on supporting the student
in the EXCEL classroom. The District GATE Coordinator described the
highlights of the Long Beach program to include its selection criteria.
I think the EXCEL model, where we are now, has really added a
dimension to our traditional GATE program that was lacking. That is
by building in a more flexible selection process, by bringing in the
multiple criteria for selection, we are servicing so many more students
who before wouldn’t have been referred for screening because the
identification was so narrow.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
67
The District GATE program and the District EXCEL program share
several common traits and have some program traits that differentiate them
from one another. Table VII illustrates the commonalities and the differences.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
68
Table VII
GATE Programs-A Common Perspective
e x c e l
E xclusive Program
T raits
M ultiple criteria with
nom erbal reasoning test
used for selection
E X C E I./G A 1 E
C om m on Program Trails
Identification through
multiple criteria
G A T E
E xclusive Program
Trails
D istrictu ide idem i Ileal ion
uses multiple set criteria
Selection o f approximately
top 20% o f students at
school site
Selection o f approxim ately
top 6% o f students in
district
Selected for participation
in school o f attendance
only based on school
identification criteria
Application to GATE
classes at any GATE or
EXCEL school
Instruction follows state
content standards and core
curriculum
Located in schools with
low API
Located in schools across
the district
Goal for all
EXCEL/GATE is for
teachers to pursue formal
and informal GATE
certification through
professional development
EXCEL & GATE receive
matching annual budget
GATE Committee
| identification in 5th Grade
! for middle school
Combined GATE, EXCEL
and High Achievers at
some middle schools
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
69
The entire LBUSD Gifted and Talented program, which includes the
District EXCEL program, is based upon the California Recommended
Standards for Programs for Gifted and Talented Students. A District Plan
(Gifted and Talented Education Application for 2002-2005) was written to
describe the way that each of the state standards is being addressed. The
Long Beach Unified GATE application was one of only two in the state of
California to receive a five-year program approval (on a scale from one to
three years) exceeding the “normal” three-year exemplary approval. Central
to the plan is a series of effective program attributes used to describe the
Long Beach Unified program. The following characteristics describe the
attributes that the Long Beach Unified School District program has been
based upon. These characteristics were used to compare the district program
to the research on effective gifted programs. The following capture how the
Long Beach Unified School District describes its GATE Plan.
• Higher order thinking skills are taught and implemented.
• Differentiation is evident through student discussions, student
assignments and student products.
• Depth and complexity of the core curriculum is evident through the
use of icons, open- ended assignments, and independent study.
• Students participate in an enriched literacy program through the use
of literature circles, Jr. Great Books and Socratic Seminars.
• Flexible grouping, based upon ability, interest or learning styles is
evident.
• Curriculum Compacting is applied when appropriate in Math and
other skill-based subject areas.
• Teachers incorporate a grade level thematic approach using global
themes to teach the “big ideas”.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
70
• Displayed student work, the use of flexible grouping, and interest and
learning centers all provide evidence of an enriched classroom
environment.
• Advanced Technology.
A classroom that includes a differentiated curriculum that is responsive to the
needs, interests and abilities of gifted students is a districtwide expectation
based on the state standards (Standard 3.1) and District GATE Plan. In the
Long Beach Unified School District, differentiation is communicated and
taught to teachers through several means: district training for GATE teacher
certification, Lead Teacher meetings, site training, Principals’ meetings and
through on-going communication and coaching. Based on the state standards,
a tool was developed to be used to coach teachers at schools throughout the
district and as a means of encouraging self-reflection among GATE/EXCEL
teachers. The “Indicators of Differentiation for GATE and EXCEL Students”
identifies those aspects that should be evident in all GATE and EXCEL
classrooms (See Appendix D). Observations revealed that fifteen of the
fifteen classrooms that were a part of this study had evidence of some
aspect/s of differentiation as described on this informal guideline. The range
of evidence included a classroom where 14 out of the 16 indicators were
present or observed to a classroom where three of the indicators were present
or observed.
Interviews with teachers produced a plethora of data explaining how
the use of specific strategies and differentiated methods of delivering the
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
EXCEL curricula make their classroom different from others at their
respective grade levels. The strategies that were most often described in
interviews are included in the following table (Table VIII) with comments
that illustrate their classroom use and effect. The strategies illustrated in
Table VIII were also noted in classroom observations during the data
collection phase of this study. These methods of differentiating were
observed in many different combinations in EXCEL classrooms during this
study. The range of implementation of the noted indicators included a
classroom with only one indicator present to a classroom with all seven
indicators present in combination.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
72
Table VIII
Teacher Descriptions of Implementation of Differentiation
Indicator o f
D ifferentiation
Scholarliness:
1 he u se o f sc h o larly sk ills U >
d riv e .student. ach iev em en t.
T each er D escriptions o f C lassroom I 'sc
" S c h o la r ly u n its a n d in te lle c tu a l tra ils a r e m y h c h a v io r p la n ."
Depth and Complexity:
■ \ moans i)l eh.muiTi" the core
curriculum in u uay that causes
sim ians lo use hiuhcr order
thinking skills through specifically
taught icons.
Universal Theme:
A th em e that is the "u m h re lla ”
for u n d cistim d irig g rad e level
co n ten t.
Independent Studies:
A p r o c e s s \\ h e r e b y s tu d e n ts
w o rk o n th e s tu d y o f a s e lf-
id e n tif ie d to p ic th ro u g h
r e s e a r c h a n d p r e s e n ta tio n .
“t definitely adhere to the Kaplan theories with depth and
complexity.”
“We differ [from other classrooms] in that we use depth and
complexity in all of our areas o f study.”
This indicator was mentioned several times, but each time the
teacher explained that with this year’s implementation of Open
Court, they have had to put the use of a universal theme on hold.
“Independent studies [make my classroom different from the
others at my grade level]. I don’t think 1 necessarily have to
teach all of the standards because a lot of them already have it. I
just quickly review and then they work in groups a lot o f the
time or individually. I monitor, but I try to fade back. If they
have questions, I help them, but I don’t sit right next to them.”
Curriculum
Compacting:
A strategy by w hich a teacher
1 p re-tests and uses the pre-test
1 in fo rm atio n to "c o m p a c t" the
; c u rric u lu m ill rough
ac c e le ra tio n o r d ifferen tiatio n
o r hy n o t a d d re ssin g th e know n
co n ten t ag ain .
“To address the needs of my students I do a lot o f curriculum
compacting where students test out of a chapter and don’t have
to sit and go through a lesson they already know. This gives me
time for other things.”
“Compacting especially gives me a chance to really push those
high kids.”
“I am able to give the pre-test and determine according to the
lesson who needs what skill. If they have already passed that
skill, then they can work on a challenge activity.”
Tiered Assignments:
D ifferen t lev els o f assig n m en ts
i b ased on stu d e n ts ' ability.
] in terest o r need.
“Differentiation is the most important way that I meet the needs
o f my students. I have some groups with very high ability and I
give them different tasks based on their ability.”
“ I differentiate by using tiered assignments. I’ll decide what
they can do on their own and I usually give more support to
lower students and then it is all independent for the higher
students.”
Differentiation:
1 he m eth o d ol p ro v id in g
! stu d e n ts w ith d ifferen t task and
aeliv ities th a n th e ir ag e peers
th a t lead to real learning.
“I think differentiation is the most obvious way [that I meet the
needs o f the high ability students.”
“Differentiation is the most important way [that I meet the needs
of the high ability students. I have some groups with high ability
and I give them differentiated tasks.”
“Differentiation makes the biggest difference in my class
because it lets me work with students who 1 know need me
more.”
“Differentiation definitely makes the biggest difference.”
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
73
The second research question used in this study, “What variations in
the implementation of Long Beach Unified School District’s EXCEL
model decrease the level of underachievement among urban gifted
students?” was answered through in-depth interviews with district leaders,
site administrators and EXCEL teachers. The following themes emerged as
the variations that decrease the level of underachievement among urban
gifted students in the schools studied.
Training
Teacher training is known as a variable that positively affects the
educational experience of students. Throughout the interviews that took
place, the kinds of training that benefit a particular group of students (i.e.
urban gifted students) and the need to cultivate those types of training were
evidenced in this study. Fifteen out of 15 teachers who were interviewed
mentioned participating in some kind of training that has helped them,
specifically in working with urban gifted students. Three out of 3 site
administrators attribute a part of their school’s success to either pre-service,
district or site level training that their teachers and support staff have
participated in. Furthermore, teachers, site administrators and district
personnel frequently stated, that the alliance with a teacher education
program that incorporates strategies to assist teachers in meeting the needs of
urban gifted students is having an impact on the district EXCEL program.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
74
The following describes the three trends within the context of training that
emerged in this study as contributors to the students’ and the schools’
success: (1) pre-service training, (2) the connection between training and
staffing within urban school programs in the Long Beach Unified School
District and (3) district training that teachers participate in.
Training: Pre-service
Teacher preparation was one of the key factors described by
administrators and teachers as playing a role in the success of their program.
Both EXCEL teachers and site administrators who were interviewed,
described teacher preparation as having an effect on the level of success of
their students. In this study, six out of the 15 teachers who were interviewed
obtained their teaching credential through the University of Southern
California’s credential program. They further stated that they were highly
influenced by Dr. Sandra Kaplan, a USC professor known for her work
related to gifted education. One site administrator stated her belief that the
training that four of the five EXCEL teachers at her site underwent, while
they were students at the University of Southern California, was the highlight
of her school’s program.
I really believe that the fact that our teachers are highly trained and
deeply committed to their work is a signature of our program They
are continually building our program through their own continuation
of learning and collaboration.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
75
Another site administrator referred to training when asked, “Why is this
group the best group that you have ever worked with as an EXCEL team?”
Eie stated that, “Two of them [out of four] came out of Sandra Kaplan’s
program, who I captured.” This same administrator attributes consistency
within his school’s program to having an influence on their success by
stating, “Teacher training has brought consistency to the program.”
All of the six teachers interviewed who were trained in the University
of Southern California credential program named Dr. Sandra Kaplan as a
person whose work has influenced their entry into teaching and positively
influenced their teaching. They attribute much of their interest in teaching
gifted students to their work with Dr. Kaplan. One of them shared the
following.
It was through Sandra Kaplan because I went into teaching and she
emphasized the depth and complexity stuff with us. I figured, okay, I
can do this. I did my student teaching in a class that had EXCEL kids
so that helped me also. After my first six months of getting my feet on
the ground, I realized that I had strategies under my belt that I had
been using and I finally realized, this all makes sense now. I started
reading because I wanted to find out more about it [gifted education]
and then I realized that my training [at USC] was geared toward them.
Another teacher attributes her interest in gifted education as being directly
related to Dr. Kaplan’s teaching and discussion of gifted education.
I didn’t have an interest in teaching gifted students prior to my
program. That just happened because of Dr. Kaplan. I had never
really thought about it, but because that is such her focus, she got me
interested in it. When I was interviewing with Long Beach Unified,
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
76
that is what got my attention, because of Dr. Kaplan. I wouldn’t have
known that it was something to be interested in other than that.
Although EXCEL teachers explained that their teaching credential program at
USC was not exclusively designed to learning about gifted students, teachers
also stated that much of the work that they did in their credentialing program
has helped them to meet the needs of the urban EXCEL students who they
currently work with.
Dr. Kaplan from SC was so inspiring about what you can do. The
focus [of the program] was on teaching methodology and using what
you can do with gifted kids with all kids. Now that I am teaching in
EXCEL, I use all of what I learned and it really works with my kids.
Training: Staffing
Two of the three site administrators described collaborating with the
District GATE Coordinator when selecting a teacher because they are able to
secure teachers who were trained in the University of Southern California’s
credential program, specifically, who have worked with Dr. Sandra Kaplan.
I really love the work that Dr. Kaplan does. So, I look for teachers
who are trained by her and I have been fortunate to have found great
people. That’s through working with [GATE Coordinator] and just
through word of mouth.
One school administrator describes how teacher training even caused her to
expand her program from a second through fifth grade program to a first
through fifth grade program. When asked, “What was the reason for adding
the first grade classroom to your EXCEL program?” the site administrator
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
77
stated, “One is that I found a fabulous teacher who came out of Sandra
Kaplan’s USC program who I thought would be dynamite.”
Teachers also understand the connection between Long Beach
Unified School District and University of Southern California and have
utilized the connection for career information and recommendations.
When we actually started looking for jobs, we asked Dr. Kaplan
where we should look for good EXCEL programs and she mentioned
Long Beach Unified. We got a hold of [GATE Coordinator] and she
put us where we are.
For students who had been trained in USC’s teacher credentialing program
and were open to going to a nearby district to work, but were uncertain about
where to apply, Dr. Kaplan had a direct influence on their decision making
too.
I had no interest when I was going through my teacher preparation
courses in teaching gifted students. It wasn’t even a thought. But, I
went to USC and Dr. Kaplan, I had no clue who she was, was just
teaching me how to be a teacher. She told me about Long Beach and
the EXCEL program and it interested me so I came and I interviewed.
Training: District Training/GATE Certification
Of the fifteen teachers interviewed, all but one has either completed
or is in the process of completing the Long Beach Unified School District
GATE certification program. The Long Beach Unified GATE Certification
requires participation in 45 hours of dedicated training and/or research time
that focuses on working with gifted learners. It also requires the preparation
and presentation of a portfolio that illustrates the teacher’s/administrator’s
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
78
work in relation to the District certification standards. The value of
participating in District training sessions as part of the certification process is
evident through teachers’ comments.
I saw that there was going to be a district class on teaching Socratic
Seminar and I went and took notes. I applied them the very next day
in the classroom. It will be the same when I go tonight to the models
of instruction.
A second year teacher who was credentialed in the USC program expresses
how the training continues to help her build upon her pre-service training.
I learned a lot in my courses at USC about working with gifted kids.
But, now that I am in the classroom, I am really able to figure out
what works and make it affect my teaching. The District training is
aligned to what I learned and helps me continue my learning. I have
even been asked to present one of the District classes.
Site administrators also value district training. When asked about where her
teachers were in the process of becoming GATE certified, one administrator
described her school’s scenario.
They haven’t finished their certification, but they are working on it.
One of the things that they were told is that if they are not going to
finish their certification or I don’t start seeing what I want to see, that
they won’t be teaching in that program anymore. It’s not just a given
because you are already in it.
At this same school site, the Vice Principal, who oversees the EXCEL team,
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
79
is working on her GATE Certification as well. One of the other site
administrators expressed her own positive experience in relation to attending
training.
I, myself, have become more knowledgeable about the depth and
complexity model and I go to the GATE Office meetings to increase
my knowledge and then to really be able to push the envelope in my
school’s implementation.
Training is not only seen as a way of helping teachers to teach “better.” It is
clearly expressed as a means of increasing student achievement. This aspect
of training is evidenced in a statement by the District GATE Coordinator
when asked, “What supports are offered to schools to monitor and/or enhance
the school program?”
There is so much training available. Besides the annual conference
[California Association for the Gifted], there is training offered every
single month. People can come or not come, so if you miss it one
month, you can come back the next month. There’s also our Summer
Institute where teachers get trained in new methodology and work
collaboratively to learn new things.
The Assistant Superintendent of Curriculum, Instruction and Professional
Development shared her belief that the District Coordinator’s work with
consultants, namely Sandra Kaplan, has been instrumental in the
development of the GATE Certification plan and that the partnership has
“given us information feedback from an outside lens that has helped.” She
noted that it is the District Coordinator’s leadership that has actually allowed
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
80
the plan to be realized. However, her collaboration with many agencies and
knowledgeable people that has enhanced the plan.
Collaboration
Collaboration between schools’ EXCEL teams, site administrators,
district GATE personnel and school sites, also emerged as contributors to
student success. The value of a particular type of collaboration seemed to be
dependent on the perspective from which the person works.
Collaboration: Teachers and Site Administrators
The way that site administrators support EXCEL programs varied
from school to school. An overall sense of support was evident in all three
schools in this study and the data suggests that there is a distinct style of
support in each school. Although site administrator support in the three
schools was often described as lacking direct involvement, teachers
expressed feeling supported and did not specifically state ways that they wish
the site administrator would become involved differently with the EXCEL
program.
I would actually like more involvement. I feel like we have a great
deal in place, but I kind of feel like at a school like this, we are the
program that kind of runs on autopilot. We are doing fine, but at the
same time, it would be nice to have more input.
When asked how the administrative staff gets involved with the EXCEL
program at their school site, one teacher describes knowing that expectations
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
81
and support exist, but also expressed a sense that the success of their students
has been left up to the teacher team.
I think we have a little latitude as far as things that we do in our
classrooms. Certainly, [Principal] has a set of expectations and things
that she wants us to do, but the EXCEL classrooms tend to put their
own twist on it. [Principal] has more to worry about than our kids. So,
she has turned that over to [Vice Principal] and she has confidence in
our abilities. We work together and so she has just sort of let it up to
us.
One school site EXCEL team receives their direct support from the Vice
Principal who oversees the EXCEL program.
Our Vice Principal is over the EXCEL program. She is our
coordinator, so she is always at our meeting and that type of thing. I
think she really helps us to stay focused and stay on track and keep up
with what our EXCEL goals are for the year, so that we are all kind of
on the same page and that all of our kids’ needs are met throughout
the year. I think that our Principal definitely supports that too.
According to the site administrator at this school, the Vice Principal “is in
charge of that program,” yet she, too, interacts with the teachers on a regular
basis.
On the Thursday when we have differentiated meetings, then they all
meet together and she facilitates that meeting. Plus, there is a teacher
leader and she helps the Vice Principal come up with the things that
they should be discussing and doing. So, I interact with their
meetings, but usually I am at the Literacy meeting. I look over their
agendas, their finished products, I tell her the things that I am not
seeing in the classroom when I go in for a visit and talk with them
about that kind of stuff. Then, just my regular evaluation of
instruction.
Teachers at another school site describe the kind of support that they receive
as having discretion to make decisions about their program. One teacher at
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
82
the site stated, “I would say that they give us the freedom to do what we
want, but at the same time it is very minimal.” Another teacher at the same
school site describes support as opportunities to attend training.
They let us go to CAG [California Association for the Gifted
Conference] and to the Long Beach Summer Institute [district
training]. We were able to get subs for those days and be able to go to
those things and I think that is very helpful to my teaching.
At the third school site in this study teachers describe their administrative
support as being responsive to the needs of the team, yet that the team was
open to more direct program input from administrators.
We are supported. Anything we ask for within reason. In terms of
wanting, we all sat down at the beginning of the year and said that we
wanted to see more continuity between the programs and we basically
asked [Vice Principal] if we could have time to go see what other
people are doing. And..we told her that wanted to get our kids
involved with each other. They were all for that with subs and
working stuff out for us. I feel like they have a great deal in place, but
I kind of feel like at a school like this, we are the program that kind of
runs on autopilot. We are doing fine, but at the same time, it would be
nice to have more input.
All three of the site administrators stated that the interaction that they have
with their EXCEL teams is similar to the interaction that they have with other
components of their school sites. A site administrator described her everyday
interaction with EXCEL teachers in the following way.
We all [staff] meet regularly to talk about assessment and student
progress and monitoring the results. We have formal Key Results
meetings three times a year in groups. Sometimes I meet individually
with teachers. 1 remember two years ago when [third grade EXCEL
teacher] was devastated with her reading results. So, we analyzed
what were the things that needed to change in her program so that her
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
83
results could change. It was obvious that the kids didn’t come with a
lot of background and vocabulary. So, she really worked on
developing schema and we talked about different ways to increase
kids’ vocabulary.
Another site administrator stated that, “The program is pretty much our
school program. We are doing Open Court, so they are doing Open Court
etc.” The third site administrator in the study described her interaction with
the EXCEL team as indicative of the way she interacts with any school
program. She stated, “My interaction with the EXCEL team is pretty much
the same way that I interact with any of the programs or classes at the
school.”
Collaboration-Site EXCEL teams
The strongest illustrations of collaboration appear to be those
examples of teachers working with other teachers. Members of all three
teams of teachers shared that they meet regularly in some form. An
interesting finding that emerged when teams described the kinds of meeting
that they had was that the team meetings focused intensely on planning and
curriculum implementation with very little (or no) time spent talking about
student needs or issues such as underachievement (as will be discussed in the
Interventions section of this chapter). When asked about how the District
GATE Plan influences his/her classroom, some aspects of collaboration are
also evident.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
84
I would definitely say that when we have EXCEL meetings we make
sure that we are doing what is on that scope and sequence and that has
been our outline for our school since it began. It is great for us to talk
about the scope and sequence because you can make sure that you
don’t step on each other’s toes and that you don’t repeat too much. It
is more of a building process.
Collaboration also provides a time for the aspects of being a team to play out.
Team meetings are not without some challenges as evidenced by the
following teacher’s comment.
We have GATE/EXCEL team meetings with our team and that is kind
of a fun time to talk about what is working and what is not and help
each other out with next steps, but it is kind of hard because you have
different people who feel they cannot really benefit from that.
For a new teacher, the issue of collaboration can be critical for a successful
EXCEL classroom program.
We have EXCEL meetings. We talk about what kinds of things we
are working on like, “Think Like a Disciplinarian.” So, recently, we
talked about those and other things that we can do. Then we were
talking about “Think Like an Economist” to give each other tips. We
just meet and discuss our questions. Since I am the new kid on the
block, they are really helpful and supportive. I also have [third grade
teacher] as my BTSA coach, so when we meet for BTSA we can also
build upon the things that were discussed in our EXCEL team
meeting. This really helps me to know the best way to implement
stuff in my classroom.
Other teachers note the effect that meeting consistently has upon their
program.
The first few months we managed to meet almost every Tuesday. It’s
really the only way to talk about things and make sure that we are all
on the same page and that we are doing our universal themes in our
classroom.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
85
Another teacher describes how curriculum implementation is enhanced by the
time to meet with the entire team.
We have a monthly EXCEL meeting and we collaborate a lot on some
of the strategies that are working for us and different ways to use
some of the higher level thinking and the icons and the independent
studies and all of that stuff. Since I am new to this, it really helps me
to understand the things that I am trying to teach.
When asked, “What the most helpful part of meeting is?” one teacher stated
the following.
We get together and we share what we are working on in our
classrooms. We share different strategies and things or maybe
someone attended a seminar that they want to share about. One of the
members attended a conference and she brought back lots of good
stuff. This allows us to plan new things together based on what we’ve
learned.
When asked about how meeting helped him in his classroom, one teacher
noted the indirect influence of another teacher’s preparation program on his
classroom implementation.
Two of the teachers came through USC with Sandra Kaplan, which is
the model that the EXCEL program uses. When I talk to them they
say, “Well, Kaplan told me this and her is something that Kaplan
showed us.” Then they will show me what she said and I can kind of
get that and use it in my classroom.
Collaboration-District
The GATE Coordinator is also credited with contributing to the
collaborative culture that to exists at school sites. In describing a challenge
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
86
with the implementation of Open Court, a site administrator noted that, even
given a challenge, collaboration exists.
The challenge of having to give up Jr. Great Books to embrace Open
Court was huge.. .They accepted it because of [GATE Coordinator’s]
work to help them see how they can compact lessons and to see how
they can make this work. And then the collaboration that she nurtures
within the community of teachers has made a huge difference.
The District GATE Plan is a working document that is based on standards
that provide a structure for all aspects of serving gifted students in the
district. Teachers noted, when asked about their knowledge of the District
GATE Plan, that they had heard about the plan through District training and
that the District GATE Coordinator.
I have seen documentation on it [the written GATE Plan] in terms of
what I am doing with it I would say is more along the lines of
training. I know what the outline is per grade level and I know how
we are doing it. [GATE Coordinator] is good about talking about the
Plan at trainings.
Interviews revealed that the GATE Coordinator is known as a person who
stays in touch with school programs and makes herself available to site teams
who request her assistance in implementation of their program.
[GATE Coordinator] is just fabulous in terms of providing us with the
information and the standards. And, the other thing is that she brings
us along. She raises the bar, she helps all of us.
The District Coordinator self-reported that one of the main ways that she
feels that she can influence implementation of EXCEL programs is through
direct involvement and collaboration with school site teams. She noted that
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
87
working with teachers on release time and coaching them in their classrooms
are critical to ensuring consistency of implementation across the district.
I think that the number one thing that ensures the implementation of
the things that we are trying to do is the team having time to meet
with me. I think that we should meet each year.. .revisit the site plan,
set some new goals. It really kind of forces some issues because it is a
small group meeting and they have to come and work on their stuff
and update what they want to do and evaluate how well they are
doing. As far as program-wise, last year I walked through almost all
of our schools and my goal is to do the same this year. Walk-throughs
are the best way because you get to see things firsthand and then can
work with the team right where they are.
In addition to collaboration on teaching methodology and curriculum
development, the relationship between the District GATE Office and school
sites also involves working to assist students. When asked about how a
teacher might support an underachieving student in her classroom, a teacher
shared the following perspective.
I would ask the Counselor to come and observe the student. I would
ask another GATE teacher from the school or I would get [GATE
Coordinator] from the GATE Office to come and we would try to put
together some strategies to help that student.
Interventions
The data from this study suggests that teachers and school teams are
interested in helping urban gifted students to be successful, both academically
and socially. A high degree of teacher efficacy exists as evidenced from
interviews and follow-up observations. Teachers feel responsible for the
success of their students and take steps to “assist their underachievers.” In
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
88
fact, in analyzing the interview data, it was evident that teachers rely upon
themselves as the primary means of assisting underachievers to improve. It is
also evident that there is a lack of connectedness between school and district
level interventions. Interviews revealed that district personnel and site
administrators state the availability of support resources, yet teachers do not
access those resources on a regular basis. An example of this is illustrated in
a teacher’s comment. When asked about whether or not she had utilized the
school’s SST process to discuss the needs of any student who is struggling,
one teacher noted the following.
I haven’t [used the SST process], I haven’t felt like I’ve had any
[underachievers] yet where I needed to take it to that level. Mostly the
problems I have had are “not quite getting it” yet. I have had a couple
of other interventions that I dealt with this year, but not through the
SST process.
Another teacher’s sense of efficacy is evident in her comments. Yet, her
comment also suggests the need for a forum to discuss the specific needs of
urban gifted students’ challenges.
We do have that opportunity [to bring a student to the SST], We could
do that but it would take a lot because you know it takes a lot to get
OUR kids there. I am one that really tries to work with my kids within
my classroom setting with the parents and myself unless there is a
severe reason why I can’t and the student needs to go for an SST
because of learning or behavior difficulties that are really hindering
their work in the classroom. I really try within my classroom setting
to deal with my students in the best way possible.
Ten out of the 15 teachers interviewed stated that they currently have a
student who they consider to be an underachiever. However, not one teacher
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
89
referenced an intervention that was specific to a gifted learner or referred to a
skill that was learned through training or school site discussion specific to
gifted students. Furthermore, it became clear throughout the interviews that
there is a lack of understanding about what criteria, if any, exists to determine
whether or not a student is underachieving within the EXCEL program. This
finding may lead us to areas that are open for further study as we ask
ourselves, “Are there interventions that are best matched to urban gifted
learners?” that might be implemented at the classroom level to diminish
underachievement.
Interventions-District Level
All three district level personnel described processes and support
systems that are in place to support underachievers. In a discussion centered
around the issues of underachievement in Long Beach Unified School
District, the Assistant Superintendent of Curriculum, Instruction and
Professional Development described what she feels is being done to address
some of the specific issues.
[GATE Coordinator] has set up a number of trainings for schools on
how to address the unmotivated student, how to address the
underachiever. She has brought in outside consultants to do that kind
of work. So, she has been trying. The GATE Certification also
addresses all of these different categories that are challenges because
gifted students are at risk in so many ways. [GATE Psychologist] and
[GATE Coordinator] have also done training.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
90
The GATE Psychologist described two main avenues in which she provides
support to school sites. The first is a direct connection to the School
Counselor who is typically responsible for managing the selection, placement
and monitoring of EXCEL students.
When we meet with Counselors, one of the forms that I give them is a
form asking for a team meeting at the school to discuss a child who
has been brought to their attention who is underachieving in the
EXCEL program. The form is to pull a team together, to look at the
strengths and weaknesses and the particular needs of the student and
then develop some strategies to try for at least six weeks before a
decision is made to remove the child from the classroom if that should
be.
This meeting does not typically involve the District Psychologist unless she is
called specifically to participate. The District Psychologist describes the
GATE Office to be somewhat of an “outside agency” in terms of direct
involvement in interventions. The second avenue that the District
Psychologist uses to address underachievement is training. Through the
GATE Certification offerings, the District Psychologist offers sessions on
identification, characteristics of gifted students and various intervention
topics. The District GATE Coordinator shared that the workshops on
underachievement are also available to school site teams, either EXCEL or
other, because the strategies are not only for gifted students. She also noted
that consultant work, specifically the influence of Maureen Neinhart, has
been offered to schools to increase district staff members’ understanding of
gifted students’ social-emotional needs.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
91
Interventions-School Level
At the school level, site administrators and teachers reported that
EXCEL students are not treated any differently than those students who are
struggling in other classrooms. However, the data suggests that EXCEL
students often are not discussed beyond their classroom or an informal setting
unless they exhibit severe behavioral issues. Although school sites in Long
Beach Unified have an SST process, according to the data only two teachers
reported ever using this process for the benefit of their EXCEL students.
According to the Assistant Superintendent of Curriculum, Instruction and
Professional Development, school sites are responsible for providing some
specific things that “we do for all kids.”
.. .to monitor their achievement through multiple measures, to provide
re-teaching opportunities, to determine what the cause is if it’s not an
instructional thing, to bring in the appropriate interventions whether it
be counseling or working with the parent and getting some extra
support for the student. So, it’s almost in a way building an IEP type
of thing for kids who are really struggling in the program because it
could be a social emotional area that the student is struggling with or
it could be social interactions.
The District GATE Coordinator described the expectation for schools when
asked what schools should be doing to address underachievement at their
sites.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
92
It’s really no different than any school’s SST process. One thing that
they should not be worrying about is how you exit a student from the
EXCEL program because EXCEL has a lot of wiggle room. I think
that schools have to be clear about the interventions and what they
will do with kids who stop achieving or who this is not the right place
for.
A site administrator described her SST process to “work brilliantly here.”
Yet, when asked if EXCEL teachers regularly bring an underachiever through
the process, she stated, “No, there are far fewer conversations about EXCEL
kids than our other kids. We have a much smaller percentage of our students
in EXCEL. But, I guess I need to look at that.” At that same site, the site
administrator explained that the school psychologist does work with EXCEL
teachers who have students that need behavior plans formed. However, not
one of the five teachers interviewed at the site noted their work with the
School Psychologist when describing school support systems.
We have a School Psychologist who is fabulous. She might go in,
without having a formal SST or anything, say “Why don’t you try
or maybe if you did ” and all of the sudden the child
improves and you have a teacher who goes, “Oh, I can’t believe the
change.”
Another site administrator, when asked about EXCEL teachers’ opportunities
to refer students for the school interventions (i.e. after school program,
tutoring) stated, “Whatever support we have here is available to them too.”
Further description of any support systems that were in place specifically for
EXCEL students was not available.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
93
At one of the schools studied, an intervention-oriented connection
existed between the classroom teacher and a support teacher as a means of
intervening for students who are struggling, including EXCEL students. The
site administrator described the purpose of the alliance.
Those students are discussed between the Specialist that’s assigned to
that teacher at conferences that we call knee to knees. So, then the
teacher has to say in their plan [that they turn in to the site
administrator] how they are going to remedy and what small group
the child is in and how they are addressing that need. On top of the
plan, they might receive additional support from the Specialist.
Teachers at all three school sites were not able to describe school support
systems other than referring to schoolwide tutoring or general after school
programs. Several comments that are similar to the following comment
capture what appears to be teachers’ beliefs about why EXCEL students are
not availed of school opportunities that are tailored to the needs of
underachieving gifted students.
I don’t think that there is anything for low achieving EXCEL students
because if they are reading on grade level, they don’t get the after
school interventions that are targeted to our literacy and ELL students
even if they are underachieving.
At another school, an EXCEL teacher stated, “I don’t think there are specific
systems for gifted underachievers. There is kind of an informal system for
our students who are just underachieving in general. But, there isn’t a safety
net specifically for underachieving gifted students.” Very few teachers (3)
stated that they utilize their school’s SST process and those who did thought
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
94
the process was primarily for students who might “have a condition.” One
teacher describes an experience with the school’s SST process.
I guess there is SST, but that is supposed to be more if they have a
condition. I used the SST process on a bright gifted student who was
completely hyperactive and what I got out of it was they either needed
to be medicated or we needed to find something in class that we could
do to focus them. It was something that could have been done for any
student in the school, but it definitely was not specific to
underachieving gifted students.
Other teachers expressed frustration with the outcome of the SST process in
her statement, “I did have a student who I brought to the SST, but he ended
up not being in the gifted program.” Another teacher expressed uncertainty
about what to do with an underachieving gifted student.
I brought the student up with another teacher. I tried to do some
things to help the student, but what ended up happening is that he was
exited from EXCEL for the next year.
The issue of exiting unsuccessful EXCEL students emerged as an area of
concern and confusion. Although it was stated by the District GATE
Coordinator and District GATE Psychologist that the GATE Office advocates
for keeping students in EXCEL “unless it is strongly believed that the other
classroom and the other teacher would be a better position to address the
student’s needs,” five out of the 15 teachers interviewed referred to students
being exited from the EXCEL program when they were “challenging.”
If a child’s behavior is influencing how well they are performing in
their classroom and not their ability, then it would be the advice of
this office to not remove them from the classroom, but to develop
interventions to deal with the behavior. We are emphatic about that.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
95
And so, it if is strictly behavior, why would a regular ed. teacher be
more capable of dealing with those issues than a GATE teacher?
One site administrator stated how she advocates for students who were placed
in EXCEL to stay in EXCEL.
There is a tendency in GATE/EXCEL to not want to include those
kids [who have behavior issues] because you know they won’t do the
work. They just don’t have the study habits that they need to succeed
in this program. My answer is, “Yes they do. Just like every other
teacher has challenging children, your job is to develop those children
so they can excel.”
When this same site administrator was asked about whether or not students
with behavior issues were kept in her school’s EXCEL program, she stated,
“Absolutely. They would be bored to death because these kids need
interventions. They [teachers] have got to work really hard to figure out what
it is.”
Interventions-Classroom Level
As stated, the data collected in this study suggests a high degree of
interest (from teachers and site administrators) in positively affecting student
achievement. Furthermore, observations revealed that there is a high degree
of teacher efficacy among those who participated in this study. However, a
finding within this study is that teachers infrequently reach out beyond their
own classrooms for student support, even when they have exhausted their
own repertoire of ideas and/or strategies. The District GATE Psychologist,
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
96
when asked about some of the things teachers should be doing to diminish
underachievement included the following comment.
I think teachers try to handle it. They don’t know to search out asking
for help because they feel that they will look bad when actually,
perhaps the problems that are being addressed in that classroom
require other people coming in to look at how to restructure it.. .and
the teacher cannot restructure it within their own classroom. Maybe it
requires going to another teacher for part of the day. Maybe it requires
some outside counseling. It might require utilizing the nurse. But, I
think that teachers are so accustomed to dealing with problems within
their own domain, which is the enclosed classroom, that they don’t
always reach out for help.
Multiple comments from teachers describe the same situation, one in which
they attempt through ‘everyday’ teacher practices (not those designed
especially to meet the needs of gifted students), to meet the needs of their
underachieving students. Examples of teacher comments are as follows:
• “This is actually my first exposure to an underachieving student. I
have worked with [Vice Principal] and the Counselor for the
behavior problems and the emotional problems. We have some
incentives planned for him to do his work. I basically give him
encouragement and stay on him to get his work done.”
• “I give those students [that can’t finish] extra time and even
conference with them to find out what they are interested in.
Unfortunately, we can’t just have them do what they are interested in
the whole time but I think we can make a pact with them. If you do
this, I will make sure that you have time to do your own studying.”
• “I have a few kids who take a little bit longer on tests and it’s hard to
wait. So, sometimes I will let them go to another room so that they
can finish... .a quiet room.”
• “I tell them that I am available after school to help them. Or, at lunch.
I try to make myself available and I kind of know which kids aren’t
getting it.”
• “I will start by having them stay in to finish. I will call home to see if
it is okay to stay after. I am just trying to motivate them to realize
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
97
why it is important, why they are doing it and why they should be
trying their best.”
• “I might pull them over to the side and say, “Let’s work on this
strategy today Let’s read the story together, let’s look for some facts.”
That type of thing.”
• “I try to figure out the reward, the carrot thing, what they will work
for. The hot button right now is the computer for research. So,
sometimes I might say, “If you finish that response journal, you can
get on the computer.” I find out what their interest is.”
• “Typically, in my classroom, the expectation is that you will finish
and if you don’t, then it goes home and it is extra work. If a child
continues to not finish their work, then I will pull them aside and talk
to them to ask if there is some external factor that is influencing their
work. Some of my kids need a behavior report because they need
constant positive reinforcement.”
Expectations
The influence of teacher expectations on student achievement has
long been shown to have a positive effect. “Many studies have shown that
student achievement is enhanced when teachers communicate high
expectations to their students” (Rutter, Maughan, Mortimore, & Ouston,
1979; Mortimore, 1991). In the context of this study, teachers present clear
data about their expectations for their high achieving students. Of particular
interest in this study was not only the clear expectations for achievement, but
also the level of student independence that was expected. Teachers within
this study appeared to be constantly looking for “how high is high enough”
when it comes to the achievement levels of the students in their class.
Teachers also communicated that they are in a continual search to push
students to higher levels by really knowing a student and his or her strengths
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
98
and needs. Yet, 11 out of 15 teachers described at least one activity in their
classroom that was primarily based on independent work or study.
The GATE Coordinator, site administrators and EXCEL teachers all
name high expectations as a critical aspect of diminishing underachievement
among their EXCEL students. According to the GATE Coordinator, one of
the things that occurs at school sites that has the greatest effect on student
achievement is, “teachers having high expectations.” One site administrator,
in describing the challenges within the EXCEL program at her school site
stated the following.
The other challenge for me is raising the bar in terms of student work.
I need evidence that these kids are held to higher standards than what
anybody else in the school is held to and that the kids know what the
standards are, can articulate the standards, and can actually evaluate
their own work
Another site administrator described her expectations through the purpose for
cultivating a program for high achieving neighborhood students, even those
who might not have been officially selected at the point of entry into the
program.
A lot of times they were not students who met the criteria, they were
just neighborhood kids who I thought were good solid students who
could benefit from the rigor of the program. I thought it was good for
them. The percentage of students who do test in within a couple of
years is remarkable.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
99
When asked what it is about her strongest teacher that she feels makes the
biggest difference with students, this same administrator describes a teacher
from her EXCEL group in the following way.
I think it is her ability to push the students to think beyond a rote
answer, to be able to help students to think about what they are
learning and articulate it. I always see her questioning, pushing
students, not giving them the answer, just making them think.
In describing the use of data by all teachers at his school site, the third
administrator in this study shared the following way that he pushes teachers
to hold students to high expectations through data analysis.
When we look at data, sometimes my EXCEL teachers don’t feel the
urgency as other teachers. “My kids learn. My kids achieve.” But
what level do they achieve. And, what level could they achieve? For
example, when we do our Open Court Unit meetings, we know their
data is going to be higher because they have a homogenous group. We
still share our information with each other on what our plan or our
next steps are.
Teachers described their expectations for students through responses to many
of the interview questions. When asked about the particular strategies that are
used in her classroom a first grade teacher shared the way in which teacher
expectations influence her students overall behavior and self-management.
I just have high expectations and they know that. They know that they
can’t be playing around because I expect them to learn and I tell them
that it is their job. My job is to teach and their job is to listen and
learn. They are pretty responsive to that. I think that is the most
important part, setting a standard that they are held accountable for.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
100
Teachers in EXCEL classrooms expressed a strong sense that knowing
students on an individual level is critical in relation to their expectations for
them. One teacher described her philosophy about teaching urban gifted
students.
My philosophy about teaching gifted students is that there has to be a
lot of individualization. That increases my workload a lot, but I have
found that the kids respect me more as a teacher knowing that I see
their needs and their strengths and their weaknesses. 1 think they
enjoy being pushed at their level and not having to re-leam stuff that
they already know.
Another teacher’s description of why students become bored illustrated her
interest in finding out students’ levels of capacity before determining the
level at which they can achieve.
Kids might be getting a perfect score, but it might be the easiest thing
in the world to them. They will be bored because they realize that
they can get away by doing basics for them and they will never push
themselves. So, for me, finding out where they need to be pushed is
critical to their success.
The need for each teacher to challenge his or her students at different levels
appears to be the impetus for differentiation. Because of the ease with which
many students acquire new concepts, teachers reported that students need to
be pushed further to maximize their potential. According to one teacher, “I
feel like they get easily what they are supposed to get and they need to be
challenged. By giving them work at their level, I am able to avoid
underachievement.”
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
101
When another teacher responded to the question, “Of all of the things that
you talked about, what do you think has the greatest influence on student
achievement?” she stated, “I think providing a positive learning environment
where students can be as gifted as they are without criticism is the key.” This
same teacher shared her belief that what most influences the success of the
students in her room is, “that the kids know that I expect a lot out of them and
I expect them to do their best at all times.”
In considering how standards become a part of the equation for
success, one teacher shared the following.
My philosophy is to try to push the kids out of the box to make them
think beyond the text, .to dive deeper into all of the aspects whether it
is reading or math. Just to go beyond what we have to know for the
content standards and teach them a little bit into the next grade level
and beyond.
Setting high expectations for students is known to have a positive effect on
student achievement (Mortimore, 1991). Sometimes high expectations are set
in a family, sometimes a classroom and sometimes a school. At one of the
sites in this study, a teacher stated the following.
We really stress that all of them are going to a four-year university.
We stress that they have the potential no matter who you are or what
class, everybody has the potential.
It was stated in almost all of the interviews in this study that teacher
expectations need to be high and are high in schools where positive results
are evident.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
102
Summary
The findings of this study suggest that the Long Beach Unified School
District EXCEL model provides urban gifted students and high achievers
with a comprehensive neighborhood school program. According to the
Association for the Gifted (1989), a program that is designed for gifted
students “is a comprehensive, sequential system for educating students with
identifiable needs.” Long Beach’s state recognition and accreditation for five
years, exceeding the state exemplary status of accreditation for three years,
suggests the existence of a program that is comprehensive in nature. Through
a review of the district GATE Plan, an analysis of documents that pertain to
the district GATE Plan, interviews with district and site personnel and
classroom observations, strong evidence supports the claim that the district
program is comprehensive. According to the research, effective gifted
programs are comprised of eight components: needs assessment, definition of
population, identification procedures, program goals, program organization
and format, staff selection and training, curriculum development and program
evaluation (Berger, 1991). It was evident through this study that all eight
components of an effective program exist within the Long Beach Unified
School District program. The three service delivery models that are approved
for use in gifted programs throughout the state of California include special
day classes, part time grouping and cluster grouping (California Department
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
103
of Education, GATE, para. 8). The EXCEL model provides gifted and high
achieving urban students with a special day classroom where they are
provided with opportunities throughout the day for differentiated learning.
According to the District GATE Coordinator, Long Beach Unified is
somewhat unique in its ability to provide a special day classroom program
where gifted and high achieving students are together all day. Neighboring
districts still rely upon part time grouping and cluster grouping to meet the
needs of their students.
Although it is widely known that teacher training has a positive
impact on student achievement, this study illustrated the variations in training
that can have an impact on specific school programs. The pre-service training
of six of the fifteen teachers interviewed in this study clearly illustrated how a
specific training course, although not designed to train teachers to teach in a
specific program, can impact the success level of students. In addition to
having a direct impact on the students within the class where the teacher has
had the pre-service training, other staff members benefit from working on a
team that includes teachers who have had specific pre-service training. An
alignment has been created by having teachers who have had a specific pre
service training course teach in district EXCEL classrooms. As evidenced in
this study, an informal alliance has been created whereby members of the
USC teacher education program refer new teachers to Long Beach Unified
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
104
School District and the Long Beach GATE Coordinator assists them in
seeking employment in the district. All six teachers who were trained in the
USC program noted having communication with the GATE Coordinator prior
to being placed at a school site.
The district GATE training and GATE certification program was
actively used by all but one of the fifteen teachers who were interviewed.
District training provides opportunities for new learning, fine tuning of skills
and exploration of classroom practices. Furthermore, the primary method of
informing teachers about the components of the district GATE Plan was
described to be through district training sessions where the Plan was
referenced.
The value of collaboration was evident in three themes that emerged
through this study. Collaborative efforts were captured in three distinct
relationships: collaboration between EXCEL teacher teams and their site
administrators, collaboration within EXCEL teacher teams, and collaboration
between school sites and the GATE Office. Each relationship gleaned distinct
variations that appear to be influencing the level of underachievement at
school sites. The strongest collaborative relationship appeared to be within
the EXCEL teacher team. This relationship obviously has the most direct
impact on students and clearly cannot be separated from the other two. It
appeared to be the “place” where the strongest implications for student
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
105
achievement lie. Strong support for school programs, even support
characterized as indirect administrative support and support that can be
characterized as “service from an outside type agency,” were considered
important aspects of the three schools’ work to decrease underachievement
among their urban gifted students.
District level personnel had no trouble describing interventions that
schools should have in place to support their underachieving EXCEL
students and the ways in which schools are supported at the district level
related to interventions. Their descriptions of what is in place to support
underachievers included: teacher training, site administrator training,
collaboration with school Counselors and site administrators and direct
service to schools that includes classroom coaching, program evaluation,
teacher training and facilitation of team collaboration. In addition, the GATE
Psychologist is also available for direct consultation on student needs.
Noteworthy in this study was that, beyond what teachers would likely do to
support a student in any classroom at the school sites that participated in this
study, there was a lack of evidence to suggest that urban gifted or high
achieving students are supported in any way that is specifically designed to
meet their needs. In fact, teachers report that their students are often not
availed of school intervention opportunities because they are not low enough
or do not exhibit severe enough behavioral issues to warrant outside
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
106
attention. A strong sense of teacher efficacy exists that was illustrated
through teachers’ descriptions of their desire to help a particular student in
any way that they could within their classroom. Yet, interviews revealed that
there is a lack of outreach beyond their classroom to utilize other support
systems for their gifted and high achieving students who were struggling..
Teachers within this study have high expectations for their students.
Site administrators noted that their own push with the EXCEL teams to
determine “how good is good enough” and teachers’ continual focus on
pushing students at their individual level, appear to be redefining the
academic achievement levels of EXCEL students.
findings from this study suggest that there are variations at the
classroom level and school level of implementation of the district EXCEL
program that can change the outcomes for gifted and high achieving urban
students. This study confirms the need to expand upon the effective practices
that appear to having an effect on underachievement. The twelve schools that
have EXCEL programs and were not a part of this study, will benefit from
the presentation of variations in site implementation that are affecting the
level of underachievement among their students.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
107
CHAPTER FIVE
DISCUSSION
This study’s purpose was to illuminate the qualities of an effective
program for urban students who have been qualified as gifted and talented
and to determine variations of implementation within the Long Beach
Unified School District’s EXCEL program that have the greatest effect on
diminishing underachievement. The foundational research question for this
study was: What types of programs currently exist that aim to serve the needs
of urban gifted students? This question was derived from a review of the
literature which revealed that there are many methods of providing gifted
programs, some of which have not been shown to have an effect upon student
achievement. There are also components known to be illustrative of an
effective program. The second question for this study was: What variations in
the implementation of Long Beach Unified School District’s EXCEL model
decrease the level of underachievement among urban gifted students? This
question was developed as a result of the analysis of district level data that
suggested that schools with similar characteristics gleaned different
achievement results due to the way that their EXCEL program was
implemented. The proposed questions were answered through interviews
with district level personnel, school site administrators and EXCEL
classroom teachers. Twenty-one interviews were conducted during the study.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
108
The analysis of the interview data allowed for the creation of
recommendations for use at school sites and for the GATE Office in order to
enhance the school and district EXCEL programs.
The results of this study were used to create an “effective practices”
guide that will be shared with site administrators at GATE Principals’
Meetings. The “effective practices” guide includes information that may be
used to examine and enhance an individual school program. In addition to the
guide that will be shared with site administrators, a presentation to the
Assistant Superintendent of Curriculum, Instruction and Professional
Development along with the GATE Coordinator and the GATE Psychologist,
will allow the findings from this study to be used as program implementation
data that will assist in the revision of the current GATE Plan and the
enhancement of processes that are used to support school sites in their
program development and implementation.
In the first section of this chapter, I discuss the alignment of research
on effective gifted programs with the Long Beach Unified School District
EXCEL program. This study corroborated the claim that LBUSD has an
exemplary GATE Plan. Although this chapter concludes with
recommendations, a review of program documents and interviews at multiple
levels with staff members who interact with this program concluded that the
LBUSD program is aligned with effective program research.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
109
In the second section of this chapter, I present specific findings
related to teacher training. Although it is widely known in educational
research that training has a positive effect on student outcomes, three specific
themes emerged from this study related to teacher training. Teachers trained
in the University of Southern California teacher education program are well
prepared to work with urban gifted students because of their pre-service
program. An informal alliance between the USC teacher education program
and the district GATE Coordinator exists and has an effect upon the staffing
in EXCEL classrooms within the Long Beach Unified School District. Lastly,
all teachers are benefiting from the District GATE Certification program
either to hone their current knowledge about curriculum implementation or to
broaden their understanding of curricular implementation.
In the third section of this chapter, I illustrate the value of
collaboration in implementing the EXCEL program. Three collaborative
settings were revealed in this study: collaboration among members of a
school site teacher team, collaboration between site administrators and
members of a school site teacher team, and collaboration between school
sites and the GATE Office. Collaboration among the members of school site
teacher teams appeared to be the most valued place to develop an effective
school program. An interesting finding about school site teacher teams was
that teacher teams were found to focus their efforts almost entirely on the
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
110
development and implementation of curriculum, not student interventions or
needs. Interaction between site administrators and teacher teams was
characterized as supportive, although it was often noted as indirect
involvement. Teacher interviewees suggested that their teams desired more
direct involvement on the part of the site administrator, but no specific
suggestions were given as to what kind of interaction was desired.
Collaboration between school sites and the GATE Office appeared to be
underutilized with regard to student interventions. The GATE Office plays an
integral role in the selection of students and organization of the district
training program, but appeared to be underutilized for meeting the needs of
underachieving gifted students.
In the fourth section of this chapter, I describe the challenges
associated with intervening on behalf of gifted students who underachieve.
Although district personnel have no trouble describing the ways that schools
should be supporting underachieving gifted students, there was a lack of
evidence to suggest that urban gifted students are supported at the school site
in any way that is specifically designed to meet their needs. Teachers report
many ways that they try to work with students in their classrooms, but a lack
of strategies specific to assisting gifted underachievers was apparent, as well
as a lack of outreach to school and district based interventions.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
I l l
The fifth section of this chapter will describe what appeared to be
different expectations for gifted learners in the EXCEL program. The
continual focus on re-defining the level that students are expected to achieve
at emerged as an important facet of successful EXCEL teachers.
Finally, in closing, I offer some reflective thoughts about the district
wide implications and limitations of the study. I also include thoughts on the
need for continuing research about urban gifted students. Following the
conclusions, I make recommendations that would contribute to both site level
EXCEL program implementation as well as district level program
enhancements.
Conclusions
The combination of looking at effective program research as well as
the current implementation of a program gifted and high achieving students
created a rich context for studying the Long Beach Unified EXCEL program.
The following conclusions were gleaned from analysis of the study’s first
research question: What types of programs currently exist that aim to serve
the needs of urban gifted students?
Effective Program Research
Although the history of gifted education can easily be traced back to
the early half of the 20th century, when Lewis Terman’s work was noted by
researchers as a critical aspect in the development of gifted education
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
112
(Imbeau, 1999; Coleman, 1999; Haensly, 1999; Delisle, 1999; Hargrove,
1999), the research on effective programs for gifted students dates back to the
late 1970’s. Legislation passed at that time promoted programs for gifted
learners that were “part of the mainstream of education and do not rise and
fall with public opinions” (Morgan, Tennant, & Gold, 1980, p. 2). Early
programs for gifted students experimented with different methods of
educating gifted students. By 1989, the Association for the Gifted, stated that
a program for gifted students must be “a comprehensive, sequential system
for educating students with identifiable needs” (TAG, 1989). Berger (1991)
suggested that programs could be identified through their widespread use
across a district and effective programs were comprised of eight components:
needs assessment, definition of population, identification procedures,
program goals, program organization and format, staff selection and training,
curriculum development and program evaluation. Research on effective
programs was illuminated in the Learning Outcomes Study published in
1994. This longitudinal study suggested four school-based program models
that were most common across the United States including: within class
programs, pull-out programs, separate class programs and special school
programs (Delcourt and Evans, 1994). Further studies identified three of
those programs as producing higher achievement rates among students.
Those three programs (separate class programs, special school programs and
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
113
pull-out programs) that are identified as models for delivering gifted
programs in the state of California are congruent with the delivery models in
the Learning Outcomes Study. Furthermore, the EXCEL model of providing
gifted education in the Long Beach Unified School District is not only
aligned with the Learning Outcomes Study, but also one of the models that
research has shown has an effect on increasing the level of achievement
among gifted students (Berger, 1991; Delcourt, Lloyd, Comess & Goldberg,
1994).
The eight components of an effective program for gifted students
were evident in the documentation, observations and data collected on the
implementation of the EXCEL program in the Long Beach Unified School
District. They are numerically outlined below through a brief statement of the
effective component and the specific evidence within Long Beach Unified
School District’s EXCEL program.
1. Needs Assessment: A needs assessment was last conducted during the
preparation for a Coordinated Compliance Review in 2002.
Suggestions presented by the CCR GATE Reviewer were
incorporated into the current GATE Plan.
2. Definition of Population: The GATE Coordinator describes the
population of the EXCEL program to be about the top 20% of
students or the ‘most able students’ at a particular school. In a more
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
114
in-depth description, the District GATE Psychologist stated that
students selected into the EXCEL program at each site are essentially
part of a local norm (of high achieving students) that represent what is
unusual at that particular site.
3. Identification Procedures: The selection process in the Long Beach
Unified School District includes standardized tests (CELDT, CST)
and non-standardized tests (District Reading Benchmark), a non
verbal screening test and a teacher recommendation based on unique
talents. The review of the combination of these five components
allows the GATE Psychologist to “select”, “not recommend” or deem
a student an “alternate” for the EXCEL program at each individual
school site.
4. Program Goals: In 2002, the application to the state of California
presented the program goals for the entire LBUSD GATE Plan.
Included in this document are the goals for the EXCEL program. This
Plan received an unprecedented five year approval (one that only one
other district in the state of California received).
5. Program Organization and Format: According to the district GATE
Coordinator, the separate class model used in the Long Beach Unified
School District EXCEL program is unique for use in large urban
school districts. She explained that most neighboring districts do not
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
115
have all of the students clustered into one class and that the model is
essential to the program’s success. This same model is used for
GATE programs throughout the district.
6. Staff Selection and Training: Direct training is a highlight of the
LBUSD EXCEL program. In this study alone, 15 out of the 16
teachers are participating in the district’s GATE Certification training
program. Staff selection, as addressed in this study, is an area that has
been informally addressed, particularly in the last three years through
an alliance with the USC teacher education program..
7. Curriculum Development: Interviews with school site teams, a review
of program documentation and the District GATE Plan all illustrated
evidence of the on-going development of curriculum designed to meet
the needs of gifted learners in the Long Beach Unified School
District. Specifically, district training and collaboration, the GATE
Summer Institute and EXCEL site team efforts all provide a context
for curriculum development..
8. Program Evaluation: Teachers and administrators stated that the
District GATE Plan is a document that they recognize has been shared
through Principals’ Meetings and at district training sessions.
Furthermore, the GATE Coordinator noted referencing the GATE
Plan in parent trainings that have recently occurred. The GATE
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
116
Coordinator makes a yearly presentation to the Board of Education as
an on-going method of evaluating and revising the current GATE
Plan.
The Long Beach Unified School District model of providing a gifted program
for urban students is a unique separate class program that has all of the
components of an effective gifted program. The program’s alignment to both
the research on the types of programs that should be offered to gifted
learners, along with the components known to be evident in effective
programs, were illustrated throughout this study.
The second research question, “What variations in the implementation
of Long Beach Unified School District’s EXCEL model decrease the level of
underachievement among urban gifted students?” allowed for research at
three school sites where the data suggests there are the fewest
underachievers. Interviews and classroom observations gleaned the following
results.
Training
Six of the fifteen teachers interviewed during this study completed
their pre-service teacher education training through the teacher education
program at the University of Southern California. Although in California all
teachers are required to be certified through a credential program and it is
widely known that teacher preparation affects a teacher’s ability to meet the
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
117
needs of students, these six teachers delineated, very specifically, the way in
which their specific pre-service training affects their ability to meet the needs
of the urban high achieving and gifted students in their current EXCEL
classroom. The USC teacher education program included several components
that teachers noted directly related to preparing them for their current work.
Firstly, the methodology for lesson delivery taught within the USC program
was noted by teachers as a method of delivering content that requires students
to utilize thinking skills that are expected to be evident in EXCEL
classrooms. Although one teacher stated that the teaching methodology that
was taught in the program was not taught for use only in gifted classrooms, it
is the key way that she is able to address the needs of her urban gifted
learners in her EXCEL classroom. Deductive reasoning, the presentation of a
puzzle and exploration of a topic are among the many ways in which teachers
were taught to use as different models of lesson design. “We were asked not
to teach direct instruction in order to experiment with the many different
lesson design models,” stated another USC teacher education program
graduate. This is in contrast to other teaching credential programs that
generally stress a lesson design model based on Madeline Hunter’s work in
which direct teaching in every lesson is stressed. This pre-service can create
challenges at school sites. In some ways, the group of teachers who
completed this pre-service training felt as if their knowledge created
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
118
situations where they were going “against the grain” within their schools.
With this year’s district wide implementation of the Open Court Literacy
series, almost all (five out of six) teachers interviewed who had USC pre
service explained that Open Court’s direct instruction model must be adapted
to promote the critical thinking processes expected for use in their
classrooms. This issue was likely of high concern in two of the schools
within this study because, in addition to their implementation of Open Court,
they are a part of the Reading First grant, requiring all classrooms to be
completely implementing the program regardless of student ability. As
schools were challenged to create consistency in their Open Court
implementation, there were several times during the school year when it
appeared that teachers were being asked to abandon their pre-service
knowledge in order to do “what everyone else is doing.” In addition to lesson
delivery models, teachers trained at USC benefited from learning about
differentiation, depth and complexity, content imperatives and scholarliness.
All of these concepts are a part of the district EXCEL model, even though
they are not taught exclusively for use in gifted classrooms.
The second area of teacher training that emerged during this study
was the connection that students have to Dr. Sandra Kaplan. In addition to
learning much of the methodology developed by Dr. Kaplan, she has played
an integral role in recommending students to Long Beach Unified School
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
119
District for teaching in EXCEL classrooms. Dr. Kaplan has a connection to
Long Beach Unified School District that directly affects the implementation
of EXCEL. In addition to her direct effect on the teacher pre-service program
that USC teacher education students receive, her alliance with the District
GATE Coordinator makes her role in staffing EXCEL classrooms an
important, yet informal alliance. Each of the six USC prepared teachers noted
that it was their connection to Dr. Kaplan that influenced their placement in
the classroom where they work. A teacher trained at USC shared that she
entered the teacher education program without a specific interest in teaching
gifted students. She described Dr. Kaplan as a person who was “just teaching
her how to teach.” But, at the conclusion of the program she described a
noteworthy memory. “She told me about Long Beach Unified and the
EXCEL program and it really interested me so I came and interviewed and
then I realized that she had been teaching us strategies to use with gifted
students and I just didn’t know it.” This same teacher remembered talking to
the District GATE Coordinator as her first contact within the school district.
Another USC teacher education graduate stated that, “Dr. Kaplan set up the
appointment with [the District GATE Coordinator] and she found an opening
for me. She said that I would be perfect for this position.”
The benefit of an alliance with Dr. Kaplan and the USC teacher
credentialing program was illustrated through interviews with site
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
120
administrators too. One site administrator stated that she expanded her second
through fifth grade program to a first through fifth grade program because
she found a teacher who had come out of the USC program that she thought
would be “dynamite.” Already three of her four teachers had graduated from
the program and this would expand the skills evident among them. Another
site administrator described “capturing” two teachers for her program who
had completed their training at USC.
The widespread use of the District GATE Certification program was
described as influential in 15 of the 16 teacher interviews conducted.
Furthermore, all three district personnel interviewees, along with all three site
administrator interviewees, noted the influence of the District GATE
Certification on EXCEL classrooms and underachievement. All but one of
the teachers interviewed is participating in the District GATE Certification
program either to learn new methodology (as stated by 8 of the 9 teachers
without USC pre-service) or to hone their current level of knowledge (as
stated by 6 of the 6 teachers with USC pre-service).
Between September and December of 2003, the District GATE
Certification training sessions included topics on: teacher portfolios,
differentiation, depth and complexity, identification of gifted students,
advanced placement, content imperatives, characteristics of gifted students,
tiered assignments and reading with advanced learners. Noteworthy in this
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
121
study was that teachers clearly embrace the study o f teaching methodology
and curriculum development that is designed to meet the needs of gifted
learners, but lack the skills and/or interest in developing further interventions
in their classrooms and schools that are specifically designed to meet the
needs of gifted learners. When asked about teacher training, all teachers
noted attending sessions on curriculum or methodology, while not one
teacher made reference to attending a session on identification, characteristics
or interventions for gifted learners.
Training is clearly seen as a support to schools and to dealing with
underachievement among students. The GATE Coordinator and Assistant
Superintendent, Curriculum, Instruction and Professional Development,
shared their belief that training is a means of decreasing underachievement at
school sites. Training is a support to school sites and provides a place for
teachers to learn new methodology and work collaboratively to implement
new things. Site administrators corroborate this claim and state that they, too,
benefit from training. At one school site, an administrator is going through
the GATE Certification process. At another, the administrator stated that she
attends the trainings whenever possible to stay current with the EXCEL
curriculum. One site administrator stated that the teachers who teach in the
EXCEL program are expected to participate in training. “One of the things
that they were told is that if they are not going to finish their certification or I
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
122
don’t start seeing what I want to see, they won’t be teaching in the program
anymore.”
Teacher training is a complex series of events that begin long before a
teacher sets foot in a classroom. At the critical point when teachers are
involved in their formal teacher pre-service training, it became clear in this
study that what is taught makes a distinct difference when applied in
particular classroom settings. In order to get to those classroom settings, it
was shown that an informal connection between a local teacher education
program and the District GATE Coordinator to staff schools with EXCEL
programs can be used as a method of accelerating and enhancing the
implementation of the EXCEL curriculum. Dr. Kaplan’s recommendation of
students from the USC program to the GATE Coordinator has influenced
underachievement. The GATE Coordinator’s advocacy to place teachers in
urban schools with EXCEL programs and ensure that USC trained teachers
are actually placed is respected as a critical aspect of the District EXCEL
program. Lastly, it is the on-going District GATE Certification training
program that provides differentiated learning experiences for teachers and
administrators throughout schools with EXCEL classrooms in their efforts to
address student achievement.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
123
Collaboration
As evidenced in this study, collaboration among site administrators,
school site EXCEL team members and with members of the district GATE
Office team is of the utmost importance in developing, enhancing and
sustaining an effective EXCEL program within the Long Beach Unified
School District.
All three site administrators in this study described their interaction
with their EXCEL teachers to be characteristic of their interaction with all of
the groups within their school. This interaction includes consistency and high
expectations for both students and teachers. Administrators reported visiting
teachers’ classrooms and providing instructional feedback, assigning the co-
administrator to oversee the EXCEL meetings, looking at data with the team
and with individual EXCEL teachers and providing general support to
teachers. It is difficult to determine the specific way that the site
administrators change their expectations to encourage the EXCEL team to go
beyond what other teachers might expect, but it appeared that teachers knew
that their students were expected to perform at higher levels than regular
classrooms.
The EXCEL teacher teams in this study explained that they meet
regularly. A distinct finding from this study was that team meetings focused
almost entirely on curriculum planning, development and implementation.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
124
Not one teacher described using their team meetings to discuss student needs
or issues related to underachievement. Teachers described that in their
meetings, “...we make sure that we are doing what is on the scope and
sequence” and “we talk about what kinds of things we are working on like,
‘Think Like a Disciplinarian’ to give each other tips.” Sharing information
from training sessions illustrated another example of teachers’ focus on
curricular implementation during their team meetings. At two of the three
study sites, the EXCEL team was assigned to the vice principal to provide
oversight, direct support and monitoring.
Collaboration between school sites and the GATE Office was
characterized as supportive by all three site administrators. The district
GATE Coordinator has spent time at each of the three schools within the past
year and has provided program insights as well as teacher training. The
GATE Coordinator self reported that one of the main ways that she feels that
she can influence implementation of EXCEL programs across the district is
through direct involvement and collaboration with school site teams. In
addition to meeting with teams to revisit their site plan or to set up new goals,
she walks through classrooms and provides classroom feedback to EXCEL
teachers. Just as teachers reported utilizing their site team meetings to focus
on curricular implementation, meetings with the GATE Coordinator focus on
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
125
better defining curriculum at a school site and helping teacher teams to
implement strategies for differentiation in their classrooms.
The District Psychologist shared that she is available to attend
conferences for underachievers. However, this service was rarely (2 out of 15
teachers) noted as having been used by teachers or site administrators. The
GATE Psychologist stated that she is available for consultation when called,
but is rarely called and assumes that the lack of calls indicate that schools use
their current school processes to meet the needs of their EXCEL students.
Interventions
Out of the 22 interviewees that participated in this study, 22 of them
were able to answer the question, “What, in your opinion, causes
underachievement among gifted students?” Answers included complex
descriptions from the Assistant Superintendent, Curriculum, Instruction and
Professional Development and the GATE Coordinator about the lack of
alignment between curriculum and assessment, to many teacher statements
about students being unmotivated. Other teacher opinions about the causes of
underachievement included: boredom due to work that is too easy, a lack of
focus, low interest level in classroom subject matter, rushing through work, a
fear of failure, a fear of success, pressure from home or school, perfectionism
and a general sense of being underchallenged. In addition to teachers’
opinions about what causes underachievement, the GATE Psychologist
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
126
explained her view that one of the reasons for underachievement in LBUSD
is due to a lack of school preparedness. “If a child lives in a home which
doesn’t understand how to support learning, how to provide opportunities for
learning outside of school, how to encourage a child when they are doing
well, these all can contribute to underachievement.” The GATE Psychologist
also explained that underachievement can be related to a lack of motivation,
but typically there is an underlying cause of the lack of motivation. One
cause that she noted was a lack of basic skills. For students who don’t have
basic skills, there is difficulty working at higher levels of thinking.
Furthermore, students in the EXCEL program, who may be second language
learners or lack prior knowledge required of some o f the classroom studies,
struggle because they don’t have a complex enough concept of the structure
of the world.
In addition to being able to identify a reason for underachievement,
10 out of 15 teachers who were interviewed stated that they currently have a
student who they consider to be an underachiever. Teachers readily described
what they did to assist their underachievers in their classroom. However, not
one teacher referenced an intervention that was specific to a gifted learner or
referred to a skill that was learned through training or school site discussion
specific to assisting their underachiever to improve. This finding appears to
be dramatic and clearly lends itself to further study or investigation. The
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
127
determination of interventions that are specific to meeting the needs of urban
gifted learners that may be lacking in classrooms has the potential to enhance
the EXCEL classrooms within the Long Beach Unified School District. The
ways in which teachers supported their gifted learners sounded like a list that
any classroom teacher could have shared. Teachers reported calling students’
homes, keeping them in at recess to finish work, tutoring them afterschool,
“requiring” that they finish, and going over the assignment with the student
again in a classroom review group. Herein lies a mismatch. When asked, not
one teacher referred to low academic ability or lack of skill as the cause of
underachievement. Yet, all interventions appeared to be aimed at providing
support for students’ academic needs rather than being focused on addressing
those aspects of underachievement that are being exhibited by students in
EXCEL classrooms. Through interviews, with the exception of the three
district personnel, it was evident that there is a lack of understanding about
what criteria, if any, exists to determine whether or not a student is
underachieving within the EXCEL program.
This study illuminated a lack of connectedness between EXCEL
students and school intervention processes as well as EXCEL students and
district intervention processes. At both the site level and district level,
administrators can define what is available to teachers to access in support of
an underachieving student. Site administrators unanimously explained that
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
128
teachers can bring underachievers through the school SST process or similar
school intervention process for support. District administrators explained that
the GATE Psychologist is available to facilitate support meetings for
underachievers when called upon. However, these resources are infrequently
accessed. Teachers described not feeling that they really needed to use the
school SST process or that the process seemed to be too bogged down with
students of greater need. District personnel perceived that students’ needs
were being addressed in school site support meetings or within schools’ SST
processes. What has developed are classrooms where teachers work to meet
the needs of gifted learners in a somewhat isolated environment and students
who are sometimes exited from the EXCEL program before interventions are
instituted and monitored for the benefit of the student.
High expectations
Beginning with the GATE Coordinator, who shared her belief that
one of the key ways to diminish underachievement at a school site is through
high teacher expectations, and weaving through site administrator and teacher
interviews, high expectations were described as playing a key role in the
achievement levels in EXCEL classrooms. High expectations took on several
roles within this study. Site administrators discussed “the need for evidence
that these kids are held to higher standards than what anybody else in the
school is held to” and that teachers “push students to think beyond a rote
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
129
answer.” They described using their EXCEL team to “lead the way” in
curricular implementation for their entire school.
Teachers’ expectations are often stated as a simple variation among
other aspects of their classroom program. One teacher’s comment captures
those shared by multiple EXCEL teachers within this study.
I just have high expectations and they know that. They know that they
can’t be playing around because I expect them to learn and I tell them
that it is their job. I think that is the most important part, setting a
standard that they are held accountable for.
At one school site, a teacher shared the schoolwide emphasis on preparing all
students for a four-year university and overtly stressing to students that all of
them have the potential to go to college.
In EXCEL classrooms, differentiation of content and curriculum
allow for teachers to change their expectations according to students’ levels.
The use of Independent Studies to allow students to work on an independent
project that involves researching a topic that they are interested in and
creatively presenting the information to the members of the class is one way
that teachers described raising their expectations through individualization.
Other methods that teachers stated for raising expectations through
individualization included getting to really know students’ strengths and
weaknesses and ensuring that the content taught within the classroom poses a
challenge for students.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
130
Final Thoughts
During this study, data collected through interviews, observations and
an analysis of program documents, substantiated the views that effective
programs are comprised of specific components and that there are variations
among similar schools implementing a district program (i.e. EXCEL) that
contribute to the differing levels of underachievement. Interviews with three
district personnel members, three site administrators and 15 teachers allowed
for a variety of perspectives to be analyzed. Understanding the selection
processes for EXCEL, that are based on a local norm, along with an
understanding that EXCEL students should represent what is “unusual” at a
school site were key to understanding who is served in the EXCEL program.
Different than students in the district GATE program (who were not a part of
this study and who are all selected based on a standard, districtwide criteria),
the EXCEL criteria that is based on a local norm, might actually cause us to
look deeper at the school level data before comparing programs within the
district to one another. This reinforces the need for a qualitative study that
goes beyond just numerical data and delves deeper into the methodology and
school level strategies that are being employed to make a difference in the
lives of urban students who have been identified as about the top 20% of their
schools.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
131
The implications for this study are reflected in the results of the
interviews that were conducted. Formalizing current university alliances,
tailoring the kinds of collaboration that go on at school sites and informing all
program supporters (i.e. site administrators and teachers) about the potential
support from the GATE Office are embedded into the recommendations from
this study. Paramount in the recommendations is the need to enhance
teachers’ and schools’ response to addressing the needs of underachieving
gifted students through classroom and site based interventions. Increased
collaboration with the GATE Psychologist related to interventions will likely
assist teachers and schools in their efforts. Because in many urban schools,
gifted students’ needs do not often take precedence over the needs of students
below grade level, the need to provide classroom-based training and/or train a
lead administrator who oversees the EXCEL program at each school site, is
based on the lack of data suggesting that teachers and schools know what to
do for their underachieving gifted students.
To expand the available base of information, the study of specific
interventions that are implemented for urban gifted underachievers could
offer important information about what makes a difference in decreasing
underachievement. Furthermore, sites could pilot the use of an SST process
designed to address the urban gifted underachiever that utilizes the skills of
the district GATE Psychologist and site teams. This SST process would
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
132
mirror the current LBUSD SST process, but would occur less frequently and
would only address urban gifted underachievers. The results from combining
monitoring and intervening on behalf of urban gifted students will likely have
the desired effect of diminishing underachievement further.
Information that was gathered during this study will be used to create
an “effective practices” document that will be presented to LBUSD
GATE/EXCEL principals at their year-end meeting. The “effective practices”
will include those variations of implementation that were noted during this
study. Furthermore, the recommendations that follow will be shared with the
Assistant Superintendent, Curriculum, Instruction and Professional
Development and the GATE Coordinator in order to enhance specific aspects
of an already exemplary district program.
In conclusion, this study corroborated that Long Beach Unified
School District has a unique and exemplary separate class GATE and
EXCEL program model. Through qualitative research, we benefit from
learning about the nuances of a program that could be further developed or
addressed in order to create a program that grows and increase in its ability to
meet the needs of a diverse group of students. This study has done just that.
The EXCEL students within the Long Beach Unified program who are gifted
underachievers stand to gain a lot from the knowledge that we have gained
and the recommendations that follow.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
133
Recommendations
Recommendation 1: Create a formalized alliance with a university
teacher education program that promotes the strategies used in the
district EXCEL program..
Teachers trained in identified teacher education programs are
prepared to teach in the LBUSD EXCEL program. The content and
methodology that teachers learn through pre-service training, if matched to
the expectations for what is taught in the LBUSD EXCEL program, enhance
the overall district EXCEL program. Specifically, a program that promotes
strategies for differentiation (including, but not limited to scholarliness, depth
and complexity, independent studies, content imperatives and curriculum
compacting) and the methods for delivering content (including, but not
limited to, lesson delivery models) prepare teachers to organize and
effectively teach a classroom for urban gifted and high achieving students.
Through a formalized alliance with a teacher education program that
includes these components, two things could be promoted: (1) student
teaching opportunities within the existing EXCEL classrooms in LBUSD for
university students, and (2) recruitment through the GATE Office for
teachers nearing completion of their multiple subject teaching credential. By
involving student teachers from a local university, a reciprocal relationship
can be fostered; student teachers have the opportunity to try many of the
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
134
strategies that they are learning in their teacher education program and the
LBUSD program grows as a result of the direct connection to the supervision
of those student teachers. Furthermore, the students’ application of their
methodological framework promotes an on-going learning opportunity for
the supervising EXCEL teacher. In order to recruit teachers who are
completing their pre-service training, LBUSD should commit to outreach to
local teacher education graduates. An informational session on campus where
potential candidates are provided with information about LBUSD and the
EXCEL program and the process for becoming a LBUSD teacher could be
shared to enhance the current alliance. At this informational session, all
materials necessary for students to begin their application to the district
should be provided. From the informational session, a list of potential
candidates can be generated.
Recommendation 2: Develop a formal process of hiring teachers trained
in the identified teacher education program(s) in order to secure more
teachers who are trained for the LBUSD EXCEL program.
Teachers who have completed their pre-service at identified
universities are prepared to teach students within the LBUSD EXCEL
program. By facilitating their navigation through the hiring process, LBUSD
can obtain well-trained and prepared teachers. The district already recognizes
the need to consider specially trained teachers for the EXCEL program. The
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
135
District GATE Coordinator has already established an informal process for
recommending teachers to site administrators for consideration for EXCEL
positions. Furthermore, the district recognizes the need to have qualified
candidates placed in EXCEL classrooms by holding EXCEL teacher
positions outside of the general hiring processes and that of district transfer
and assignment, allowing site administrators to interview any teacher who is
a candidate for an EXCEL teaching position.
A formal process should include: (1) an initial list of potential
candidates obtained at an informational session at the identified university,
(2) a screening interview with a member of the District GATE Office or
representative from a school site that has an EXCEL program, (3) a follow-up
list (generated in May of the current school year) created by Human Resource
Services, indicating teachers cleared for site interviews from the original list
and any applicants from the identified university not noted on the original list
and (4) a priority marker noted on the file of each potential identified
university candidate that indicates they are a “GATE Office priority
candidate” for any of the fifteen schools with EXCEL programs.
Recommendation 3: Expand training sessions to include sessions that are
designed to address specific issues related to underachievement.
Although there are currently training sessions offered through the
district GATE Certification program that address the social-emotional aspects
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
136
of giftedness, there is a need to expand topics from those such as,
“characteristics of giftedness” to teaching teachers how to address specific
factors that they associated with underachievement. This kind of training
appears to fit within four forums already being used within the district.
GATE Principals’ Meetings, GATE Counselors’ Meeting, GATE
Certification courses or site EXCEL team meetings are all likely places to
expand training related to underachievement. This study revealed that
teachers, as well as site administrators, could readily identify reasons for
underachievement, but lacked ideas and strategies for how to address the
student needs that are a part of their classroom and school community.
Teachers noted reasons for underachievement that included a lack of
motivation, boredom due to a lack of challenge, a lack of focus, a fear of
failure, a fear of success, pressure from home or school, perfectionism and a
general sense of being underchallenged. Each of these topic areas could be
addressed in a training session that was held in one of the forums described
above. The training session should include information about the issue, signs
to look for in gifted students that illustrate that a student is struggling in this
particular way and classroom or teaching strategies that could be used in a
classroom or school setting to diminish underachievement.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
137
Recommendation 4: EXCEL programs should have a designated
administrator who oversees the program.
Two of the school sites in this study had an administrator assigned to
oversee their EXCEL program. The designated administrator attended
training (GATE Principals’ Meetings, GATE Certification and/or
conferences) in order to provide current information for teacher teams. This
strategy also enabled the designated administrator to facilitate discussions
that continually redefined “how good is good enough” for the students who
participate in EXCEL at the school site. At the two sites where there is a
designated administrator, teachers positively noted the support that they
received from the administration.
The role of a designated administrator could include the following (in
any combination): evaluator, site EXCEL trainer, meeting facilitator, student
work analysis coordinator, student study team coordinator, student need
coordinator, liaison to the school counselor and/or the District GATE Office,
parent contact point person and program evaluator. By assigning an identified
person the role of leading the efforts of an EXCEL team, collaboration at
multiple levels will be enhanced; site teams will collaborate more effectively
with the administration, site teams will be provided with facilitation and
oversight by a member of the school staff who is not also a member of the
teaching team and the collaboration between the school site and GATE
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
138
Office will be enhanced through the creation of a direct contact person who
may access district resources more readily.
Recommendation 5: Utilize a collaborative meeting structure, that
includes the discussion of student achievement, to structure EXCEL
team meetings.
As evidenced through teacher interviews, teacher teams meet
regularly to collaborate on issues related to curriculum implementation, but
rarely incorporate discussion on issues related to student achievement.
Appendix E represents a collaborative meeting format that would expand the
current role of EXCEL team meetings. This meeting structure includes a time
for curricular collaboration as well as collaboration on student interventions.
This structure would allow the EXCEL team to explore the ideas and
interventions that are specific to their EXCEL on a regular basis.
Furthermore, the inclusion of a time for collaboration on student
interventions would allow for the continuation of conversations that may
have begun in the SST process (see Recommendation 10).
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
139
Recommendation 6: Site EXCEL teams should be informed about the
resources that are available through the GATE Office that are related to
needs other that the development or implementation of EXCEL
curriculum.
There are a plethora of resources available through the GATE Office
designed to support schools in their ability to meet the needs of their EXCEL
students. Based on interviews with both site administrators and EXCEL
teachers many of those resources are not fully utilized. In order to provide
better access to the resources that currently exist, an annual fall bulletin that
gets mailed to all site employees (who interact with the EXCEL program)
stating the support services and the contact person available to site teams
should be published. In order to initiate this bulletin (and to ascertain those
resources that are currently underutilized) the GATE Office should
administer a year-end survey to poll teachers and site administrators on their
use of the available resources. This survey could be used as a mini-needs
assessment as well as to determine those support resources already in
existence that should be made available to schools. This year-end survey
could be conducted at the final GATE Principals’ Meeting and sent to
teachers via a site EXCEL team meeting. In order to ascertain whether or not
the publication of the annual fall bulletin increases the use of the GATE
support services, an in-office tally could be utilized to keep track of requests
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
140
for service and materials related to the fall bulletin once it has been
disseminated.
Recommendation 7: The criteria for each school site’s student selection
should be shared with teachers and site administrators so that it becomes
evident as to why a particular student was selected for the program.
In her interview, the District GATE Psychologist clearly described the
components used to determine students’ “selected”, “not recommended” or
“alternate” status based on the site’s EXCEL criteria. There is a variety of
student data used to assess a student’s readiness to participate in EXCEL that
includes both standardized and non-standardized information. In addition to
academic information, a teacher’s recommendation of a Student Profile based
on five areas that are aligned with characteristics of a gifted child, is taken
into consideration. The criteria that is used to select students into the EXCEL
program emphasizes non-verbal reasoning so that second language learners
are availed of the same opportunities for placement as English only speakers.
As described by the GATE Psychologist, “although the process may seem
loose, it’s not.”
Teachers and administrators at each school site should be exposed to
the specific criteria that allows their students to be selected into the program.
This information can be used for goal setting, determination of
underachievement and all efforts to “raise the bar.” Furthermore, this would
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
141
enhance teachers’ and administrators’ ability to clearly communicate the
achievement parameters with students’ families or members of the
educational community or widespread community.
Recommendation 8: Classroom and student academic information
should be shared with teachers and site administrators so that they can
determine who is an underachiever in their classroom based on their
school criteria.
LBUSD is known for its highly developed and supportive Office of
Research as recognized in the Broad Foundation Award in 2003. Through the
Research Office, reports should be made accessible to site administrators that
report (1) their EXCEL student group in comparison to other components of
the school population and (2) the EXCEL students at all district sites with a
comparison to the district average in all grade levels and areas reported and
(3) individual student data that can be used to compare individual students to
the school and district averages. The information provided through these
reports will serve not only to determine who the underachievers at a school
site may be, but will also help school site teams to continually redefine “how
good is good enough.”
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
142
Recommendation 9: Site interventions that can be accessed to support
EXCEL underachievers should be developed and promoted.
Site administrators and EXCEL teachers need ideas for the
development of interventions that are designed to meet the needs of gifted
learners. Current models could be used to meet the needs of gifted learners if
they are adapted based on students’ needs. For example, interviewees from
all three school sites mentioned either an afterschool tutoring program or a
general afterschool program for all students at their site. Within these
programs, it is recommended that a strand be developed to address the needs
of the site’s gifted underachievers. One classroom could be identified for
EXCEL students who are not meeting the school’s standard for students in
the EXCEL program. A teacher, who has been trained on interventions
specific to meeting the needs of urban gifted students, could provide
instruction, coaching or sessions to develop students’ social-emotional
capacities.
If school site funds are available, EXCEL teachers could be paid to
tutor their own students. Their deep understanding about the needs of their
students, coupled with some additional time, could afford students with an
opportunity for differentiation that may not always be available during the
day. Other opportunities for EXCEL students, should funds exist, should be
programs that promote the facets of giftedness that are stated on the Student
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
143
Profile (Appendix G) that are rarely addressed in EXCEL classrooms. A
dramatic arts program (i.e. Dramatic Results) or an advanced technology
class would enhance students’ classroom program while providing a different
means for students to display their gifitedness.
Recommendation 10: The Student Study Team (SST) model should be
used to meet periodically to address the needs of gifted or high achieving
students who are not successful.
In the Long Beach Unified School District, a well-developed Student
Study Team model already exists. This format can be used as a model to be
used with EXCEL students. Site administrators and teachers stated that their
schools did have an SST model currently operating, but rarely used the
process for EXCEL students. It was noted in interviews that only students
who had severe behavior problems were brought to the student study team.
Three times a year, EXCEL teachers should gather with the School
Counselor, site administrator and other representative of the general SST
team to discuss students who are underachieving. This meeting will serve as a
Level II SST meeting. Once a collaborative meeting format is in place (See
Appendix F), the academic discussion that will take place in EXCEL team
meetings can serve as the Level I component to the district SST process. It is
recommended that, for at least one of the three meetings per year, the District
GATE Psychologist be present to participate in discussions about student
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
144
achievement. During this visit, the District GATE Psychologist could also
participate in a collaborative discussion about interventions that are working
at the school site and work with staff to ascertain any needs that they may
have in providing further support to their underachievers. Any student, who a
teacher recommends be exited from the EXCEL program, should be required
to have been discussed at both the EXCEL team meeting and the EXCEL
SST meeting. This would allow student interventions to be developed,
implemented and monitored before any student is exited from EXCEL.
Recommendation 11: Teachers should be trained on (and implementing)
classroom strategies that have been developed to assist gifted
underachievers.
As with any new implementation, teachers and site administrators
should be trained on new strategies before being expected to use them. It was
evident from teacher interviews that a strong sense of efficacy exists in
EXCEL classrooms, but that the strategies teachers noted using to try to
diminish underachievement represented general strategies, not those targeted
at gifted underachievers. Teachers could receive training through the GATE
Certification program, training at their sites by the GATE Psychologist,
training by the School Counselor or training by a Consultant in order to
increase their knowledge about interventions for gifted learners. The primary
purpose of this kind of training is to illustrate methods and specific
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
145
interventions that may assist teachers in addressing underachievement among
their urban gifted students.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
146
References
Ablard, K. (2002). Achievement Goals and Implicit Theories of Intelligence
Among Academically Talented Students. Education of the Gifted 25,
3,215-232.
Baker, J. (2003). Scratching Beneath the Surface: In the Minds of the Gifted.
A Pilot Study on the Classroom Conditions that Teachers Believe
Enhance Student Achievement.
Berger, S.L. (1991). Developing Programs for Students of High Ability. The
Council for Exceptional Children, ERIC Clearinghouse on
Disabilities and Gifted Children, Reston, VA.
Bernard, B. (1991). Fostering Resilience in Kids: Protective Factors in the
Family, School, And Community. San Francisco: Far West
Laboratory for Educational Research and Development.
Bernard, B. (1997). Turning It Around for All Youth: From Risk to
Resilience. ERIC Clearinghouse on Urban Education. (Report
Number 126, EDO-UD-97-7).
Brown, T. (1997). The Growing Problem of Gifted Underachievers.
Communicator, California Association for the Gifted, 25, 44-45.
California Department of Education. Department of Education website and
link.http://www.cde.ca.gov, http://www.cde.ca.gov/cilbranch/gate/
Carr, M., J.G. Borkowski, et al. (1991). Motivational Components of
Underachievement. Developmental Psychology, 27, 108-118.
Carter, S. C. (2000) No Excuses: Lessons from 21 High Performing, High
Poverty Schools. Washington, D.C.: The Heritage Foundation.
Chan, L.K.S. (1996). Motivational Orientations and Metacognitive Abilities
of Intellectually Gifted Students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 40, 184-193.
Cohen, L. (1990). Meeting the Needs of Gifted and Talented Minority
Language Students. ERIC Clearinghouse on Disabilities and Gifted
Education.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
147
Clark, R. (1983). Family Life and School Achievement: Why Poor Black
Children Succeed and Fail. Chicago: The University of Chicago
Press.
Clark, J., & Tollefson, N. (1991). Differences in Beliefs and Attitudes
Toward the Improvability of Writing of Gifted Students Who Exhibit
Mastery-Oriented and Helpless Behaviors. Journal for the Education
of the Gifted, 14, 119-113.
Coleman, M. (1999). Celebrating Our Future by Revisiting Our Past. Gifted
Child Quarterly, 22, 16-18.
Com, A. (1999). Missed Opportunities-But a New Century is Starting. Gifted
Child Quarterly, 22, 19-21.
Council for Exceptional Children. (1990). Giftedness and the Gifted: What’s
It All About. The ERIC Clearinghouse on Disabilities and Gifted
Education.
Covington, M.V. (1992). Making the Grade: A Self-worth Perspective on
Motivation and School Reform. New York: Cambridge University
Press.
Cross, T. (1999). Top 10 (plus or minus two) List for the Twentieth Century.
Gifted Child Quarterly, 22, 22-25.
Danielson, C. (2002). Enhancing Student Achievement: A Framework for
School Improvement. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision
and Curriculum Development.
Delcourt, M. A., & Evans, K. (1994). Qualitative Extensions of the Learning
Outcomes Study. The National Research Center on the Gifted and
Talented, Monograph No. 941110.
Delcourt, M.A.B., Lloyd, B.H., Cornell, D.G., & Goldberg, M.D. (1994).
Evaluation of the Effects of Programming Arrangements on Student
Learning Outcomes. The National Research Center on the Gifted and
Talented, Monograph No. 94108.
Delisle, J.R. and Berger, S.L. (1990). Underachieving Gifted Students. ERIC
Clearinghouse on Disabilities and Gifted Education.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
148
Delisle, J. (1999). A Millenial Hourglass Gifted child Education’s Sands of
Time. Gifted Child Quarterly, 22, 26-32.
Department of Education & Training, Western Australia. Department of
Education website.http://w\vw.eddept. wa.edu.au/gifttal/giftslow.htm
Ford, D.Y. & Thomas, A. (1997). Underachievement Among Gifted Minority
Students: Problems and Practices. ERIC Clearinghouse on Disabilities
and Gifted Education.
Ford, D.Y. (1995) A Study of Achievement and Underachievement Among
Gifted, Potentially Gifted and Regular Education Black Students.
Storrs, CT: National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented.
Ford, D.Y. (1996). Reversing Underachievement among Gifted Black
Students: Promising Practices and Programs. New York: Teachers
College Press.
Good, T.L. (1981). Teacher Expectations and Student Perceptions: A Decade
of Research. Educational Leadership, 38(5), 415-421.
Haensly, P. (1999). My View of the Top Ten Events That Have Influenced
Gifted Education During the Past Century. Gifted Child Today, 22,
33-37.
Halsted, J.W. (1988). Guiding gifted readers-From preschool to high school.
Columbus, OH: Psychology Publishing.
Hargrove, K. (1999). The Gifts of the 20th Century. Gifted Child Quarterly,
22, 38-39.
Imbeau, M. (1999). A Century of Gifted Education: Who and What Made a
Difference. Gifted Child Quarterly, 22, 40-43.
Keller, J., Ed. (1983). Motivational Design of Instruction. Instructional
Design Theories and Models: An Overview of their Current Status.
New Jersey: Hillsdale.
Marland, S. (1971). Education of the Gifted and Talented. Report to
Congress. Washington, DC: U.S. Printing Office.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
149
Merriam, S. (1998). Quantitative Research and Case Study Application in
Education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Morgan, H.J., Tennant, C.G., & Gold, M.J. (1980). Elementary and
Secondary Programs for the Gifted and Talented. New York:
Teachers College Press.
Payne, R. (1998). A Framework for Understanding Poverty. Highlands, TX:
RFT Publishing Co.
Krovetz, M. (1999). Fostering Resiliency: Expecting All Students to Use
Their Minds and Hearts Well. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Reis, S. (1998). Underachievement for Some-Dropping Out with Dignity for
Others. Communicator, California Association for the Gifted, 29, 19-
23.
Rezulli, J. (1986). The Three Ting Conception of Giftedness: A
Developmental Model for Creative Productivity. In R. J. Sternberg
and J.E. Davidson (Eds.), Conceptions of Giftedness (pp.53-92). New
York: Cambridge University Press.
Riley, T. (1999). A Glance Back Before a Glimpse Ahead: 10 Events That
Just Might Shape The Future. Gifted Child Quarterly, 22, 48-52.
Rimm, S. (1997). An Underachievement Epidemic. Educational Leadership,
38(5), 415-421.
Roberts, J. (1999). The Top 10 Events Creating Gifted Education for the New
Century. Gifted Child Quarterly, 22, 53-55.
Song, I.S. & Hattie, J. (1984). Home Environment, Self-concept, and
Academic Achievement: A Causal Modeling Approach. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 76(6), pp. 1269-1281.
Schneider, B. (1993). Parents, Their Children, and Schools: An introduction.
In B. Schneider & J.S. Coleman (Eds.), Parents, Their Children, and
Schools. Colorado: Westview Press.
Slocumb, P. & Payne, R. (2000). Removing the Mask: Giftedness in Poverty.
Highlands, TX: RFT Publishing Co.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
150
Schmoker, M. (1999). Results: The Key to Continuous School Improvement.
Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum
Development.
Schmoker, M. (2001). The Results Fieldbook: Practical Strategies from
Dramatically Improved Schools. Alexandria, VA: Association for
Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Schwartz, W. (2001). Closing the Achievement Gap: Principles for
Improving the Educational Success of All Students. (Report No. Edo-
UD-01-8, Columbia, New York: Teachers College, Columbia
University).
Strauss, A. & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques
and Procedures for Developing Grounded Research. Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage Publications.
The Association for the Gifted (1989). Standards for Programs Involving the
Gifted and Talented. Reston, VA: The Council for Exceptional
Children.
Tucker, M. & Codding, J. (1998). Standards for Our Schools: How to Set
Them, Measure Them, and Reach Them. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-
Bass.
Verna, M.A., Campbell, J.R. (1997). The Differential Effects of Family
Processes and SES on Academic Self-Concepts and Achievement of
Gifted Asian American and Gifted Caucasian High School Students.
ERIC Clearinghouse on Urban Education.
Whitmore, J.R. (1986). Understanding a Lack of Motivation to Excel. Gifted
Child Quarterly, 30, 66-69.
Whitmore, J.F. (1980). Giftedness, Conflict and Underachievement. Boston,
MA. Allyn and Bacon.
Williams, B. (Ed.). (1996). Closing the Achievement Gap: A Vision for
Changing Beliefs and Practice. Alexandria: Association for
Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
151
Appendix A
EXCEL Teacher Interview Protocol
Teaching Background
1. Elow long have you been teaching?
2. Elow long have you been teaching in a gifted program?
3. What prompted your interest in teaching gifted students?
4. What is your philosophy about teaching gifted students?
Program Knowledge
5. Is your classroom a special day class, part time grouped class or a
cluster grouped class?
6. Describe how your classroom differs from a regular classroom.
7. How does your Principal get involved with your classroom program?
8. What exposure have you had to the District GATE Plan?
9. How does the District GATE Plan influence your classroom program?
Student Success
10. How do you address the needs of the high ability students in your
classroom?
11. What particular strategies do you use?
12. What do you do if you have a student who can’t finish an assignment?
13. What features of your gifted program/classroom have the greatest
influence on the academic achievement of students in your classroom?
14. What, in your opinion, causes underachievement among gifted
students?
15. What support systems are in place in your classroom to assist
underachieving students? What support systems are in place at your
school to assist underachieving students?
16. How do you work with other staff members at your school to influence
student success?
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
152
Appendix B
EXCEL Site Administrator Protocol
Background
1. How long have you been the Principal a t school?
2. Was there an existing GATE program when you became the Principal
or did you start the program?
3. How long has the program been in existence? What grade levels does
your school’s program serve?
4. Have you worked with other GATE program models?
5. From the programs that you have worked with, what model do you
endorse and why?
Program Knowledge
6. What is your everyday practice with regard to the gifted program at
your school?
7. What do you do to influence your school’s program?
8. Do you perceive your program to have any problems?
9. What exposure have you had to the District GATE Plan?
10. How does the District GATE Plan influence your school’s program?
Student Success
11. How do your GATE teachers address the needs of the high ability
students at your school?
12. What aspects of your EXCEL program have the greatest influence on
the academic achievement of students in your school?
13. What support systems are in place in your teachers’ classrooms to assist
underachieving students? What support systems are in place in your
school to assist underachieving students?
14. How do you work with staff members at your school to influence
student success?
15. How do you address the needs of urban students in your program?
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
153
Appendix C
EXCEL District Administrator Protocol
Background
1. Elow did you become involved with the GATE program?
2. Elow long have you been involved with the GATE program?
Program Knowledge
3. Describe your involvement with the GATE Plan.
4. How do you ensure consistency of implementation among all
GATE/EXCEL schools?
5. How do you convey the District GATE Plan to members of the District
educational community? Specifically site administrators and teachers?
6. How do you ensure that district procedures are followed at school sites?
7. What supports are offered to schools to monitor and/or enhance their
school program?
Student Success
8. What are some of the key issues regarding underachievement among
gifted students in the Long Beach Unified School District?
9. What variable(s) have the greatest influence on the academic
achievement of students in your school?
10. According to the District Plan, what should schools be doing to address
underachievement at their school sites?
11. What supports are offered to school sites to meet the needs of their
underachieving students?
12. How are the needs of urban students addressed in the district?
13. Do you have experience with GATE program models other than the
model used in LBUSD? From the programs that you have worked with,
what model do you endorse and why?
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
154
Appendix D
Indicators of Differentiation for GATE and EXCEL
Students
Student behaviors listed below indicate differentiation in the classroom.
Differentiation should become an integral part of curriculum and instruction—not an
addition to the core curriculum, nor something “special” to be saved for a particular
unit or assignment. This checklist offers an informal guideline for teachers and
principals to use when assessing the extent to which differentiation is being
provided.
Natural Differentiation:
Natural differentiation occurs as students become involved separately and together
in constructing meaning, solving problems, and struggling with new concepts, ideas
and information. Students naturally incorporate their diverse backgrounds, beliefs
and experiences as they interact with the curriculum.
D Students’ responses (oral, written, performance, products) are
evaluated regularly to assist with grouping procedures and
curriculum design.
D Benchmark tests, end-of-course exam s, and teacher prepared
assessm en ts are regularly used to pre-assess students’ ability
levels.
□ Students have opportunities to incorporate personal interests when
selecting topics, issues and real-life problems for study.
□ Students work in an “open” learning environment that encourages
intellectual and creative risk taking.
Strategies for Differentiation:
The strategies listed below support the state’s recommended standards for an
exemplary program.
D Use of “Scholarliness” skills to drive student achievement.
Student or Teacher Generated Evidence:
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
155
Appendix D
(Continued)
D Elem ents of depth and complexity are imbedded throughout the
core curriculum.
Student or Teacher Generated Evidence:
D A Universal Theme is evident and addressed throughout the core
curriculum.
Student or Teacher Generated Evidence:
D Opportunities are provided to prove/disprove generalizations
based upon evidence.
Student or Teacher Generated Evidence:
□ Opportunities are provided to create generalizations based upon
evidence.
Student or Teacher Generated Evidence:
D Opportunities are provided for compacting based upon pre
assessm ents, ability or need
Student or Teacher Generated Evidence:
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
156
Appendix D
(continued)
D Opportunities are provided for tiered assignments based upon
ability, interest or need.
Student or Teacher Generated Evidence:
D Content imperatives are used to enrich or extend the core
curriculum.
Student or Teacher Generated Evidence:
Additional Evidence of Differentiation:
D Classroom environment reflects differentiated learning: (learning
centers, flexible grouping, independent study, interest centers).
Evidence:
D Students’ work samples, bulletin boards, portfolios reflect
differentiated learning.
Evidence:
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
157
Appendix D
(continued)
D Acceleration of the core curriculum (teaching, learning) is evident.
Evidence:
D Novelty that is derived from the core curriculum learning is
evident.
Evidence:
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
158
Appendix E
Sample Collaborative Meeting Format
This meeting format could be used after an initial team meeting where data is
analyzed and used to determine levels indicating underachievement and the
students who are underachieving. Additionally, this format assumes that the
EXCEL team has determined its curricular foci for the school year.
Review of Goals for the meeting
Curricular Conversation
• Based on curricular focus area
• Sharing of student work
(1 representative piece per teacher)
• What is working with implementation?
• What is challenging to implementation?
• Action Plan
5 minutes
25 minutes
Intervention Conversation 25 minutes
• Based on students identified as underachievers-
• What interventions are working that were discussed in the SST?
• What are additional or further needs for support?
• Is there someone that should be contacted to assist in the
intervention plan for this particular student?
De-briefing
Follow-up student needs-written on meeting form.
Review of curricular focus area for next meeting.
5 minutes
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
159
Appendix E
(continued)
Sample Collaborative Meeting Format
Sample Meeting Note taking Form
Curricular Focus/Foci
What is working?
What is challenging? Collaborative ideas for addressing challenges:
Interventions
What interventions are working?
Are there additional or further needs for support?
Is there someone that should be contacted to assist in the intervention plan for
this particular student? Who will make contact?
* A copy will be made for each member of the EXCEL team and site
administrative team.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
160
Appendix F
EXCEL STUDENT EVALUATION
Student’ s Name: Grade: Date of
Birth:
Teacher: School:
Whenever student performance in the EXCEL Program is below expectations in
academic achievement, work habits or social adjustment, a parent conference should
be held to inform parents and discuss options. On the back of this form, an Action Plan
of interventions needs to be developed by the teacher, parent and student. Regular
monitoring of progress should continue until the student is successful in the program or a
change of placement is recommended. A Follow-Up Evaluation should be scheduled
within three months. Removal from the program requires the approval of the principal
and the GATE coordinator once all avenues of accommodations have been explored.
Is this student demonstrating satisfactory adjustment to the standards of
academic achievement, work habits and social adjustment?
STANDARDS: Exceeds Expectations Meets Expectations Below
Expectations
Academic Achievement
W ork Habits
Social Adjustment
Date Test/Report Card Results
Achievement %ile Scores on SAT9 Readinq Total: Lanquaqe Total:
Math Total:
Latest Report Card Grades Readinq/Enql. Math
Soc. Stud.
Lana. Arts/AA/ritten Exo. Science
Citizenship
Areas of strength: Describe this student’s strengths in one or more domains.
Areas needing improvement:
Additional teacher comments:
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
161
Appendix F
(continued)
EXCEL STUDENT EVALUATION
Parent Conference/Action Plan
Student’s Name:
ACTION PLAN DATE:
Academics or Behaviors
In Need of Improvement
Present Level
of Performance
Expected Level
of Performance
Strategy/
Intervention
Signed:
Teacher Date
Parent Date
Student Date
Other Date
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
162
Appendix F
(continued)
EXCEL STUDENT EVALUATION
Follow-up and Conclusions
FOLLOW-UP MEETING DATE:
Outcomes
CONCLUSIONS
Date Exceeds Expectations Meets Expectations Below
Expectations
Based on the Follow-up Evaluation, t
the following:
he evaluation team recommends
SIGNATURES:
T eac h er______
Parent ______
Student ___
D a te .
D ate.
Date
Principal
Date
GATE Coordinator
Date
GATE Psychologist
Date
Other:_
Date
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
163
Appendix G
Student Profile of Gifted Characteristics
REVISED 10/2002
unified
s c h o o l
district
Student’s Name:
S chool:________
OFFICE OF CURRICULUM AND INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCES
Gifted and Talented Education Office
Ext. 2950
IS T U D E N T P R O F IL E O F G IF T E D C H A R A C T E R IS T IC S !
____________________________________ G rade:______ Birth Date:
_____________ Completed by (Teacher’s Name):__________________
Referral R equested by: Teacher Parent Counselor Other (name)_
Circle the highest Benchmark Reading Levels passed and Circle Middle or End, in Fiction and Nonfiction:
Fiction Level: K / l / 2 / 3 /4 / 5 /6 —Middle or End Nonfiction Level: K /l/ 2/ 3/ 4/ 5/ 6 —Middle or End
Date:_________________ Date:__________________
tw 6 = Expert ( 2 in 1 0 0 ) 4 = Achieves above average ( 25 in 100) 2 = Below peers
5 = Accomplished ( 1 0 in 1 0 0 ) 3 s Satisfactory 1 5 Minimal
S co re b elo w
from 1 - 6
m m
• P o sse sse s an advanced vocabulary.
• Verbal and/or written behavior characterized by richness or expression, imagery, elaboration and fluency.
■ Demonstrates logical reasoning and the ability to make appropriate generalizations.
• P o sse sse s an unusual wealth of general information on a variety of topics and subjects.
• R eads a great deal independently: is considered an avid reader.
• Quick and accurate recall of factual information.
• Elaboration on ideas from other people, using them a s a “ jumping off point."
• Establishes relationships betw een seemingly unrelated concepts and ideas.
o
• Original and imaginative in oral, written and/or artistic work.
• Gives unusual, unique or clever responses.
• G enerates many ideas, suggestions, solutions while demonstrating flexibility in thinking.
• Displays a great deal of curiosity and ask s many questions.
• Is willing to take risks: challenges traditional thinking and methods; shows independence in developing
solutions or a product.
o
• in self-selected study, craves independent work and dem onstrates the ability to see difficult tasks through
to completion of exemplary work.
• Demonstrates initiative and self-motivation; needs little external direction or encouragement.
• Pursuit of own interests in leisure time.
• Intense Involvement with m ature hobbies, intellectual study or development of a product. ,o
• E agerness to express Ideas visually, musically, dramatically or in dance.
• Experimentation with variety of materials, techniques, instruments, approaches.
• Effective u se of body to convey feelings.
• Ability to evoke emotional responses from others; holds attention of others with work or performance.
• Shows exceptional talent in drawing, music or drama.
• Keen and alert observer of basic elem ents of the art form.
• High standards of quality as evidenced by critiquing, reworking and refining of own work.
o
^H m m
• Ability to convey ideas effectively.
• Displays com m on se n s e and u se s knowledge practically.
• Ability to make decisions based on assessm en t of problem.
• Unusual empathy to others; patience with others and willingness to develop solutions to complex
problems in cooperative groups.
• Effectively organizes people and structures activities.
o
w * F o r e a c h s e c tio n ra te d “ 6 ” c o m m e n ta r y is re q u ir e d o n t h e b a c k .
TOTAL SCORE
Teacher’s Signature:
□ Check in the box if you volunteer additional com m ents on the back.
IDENTIFY/PROFILE pg 10/19/00 Page 1 (green)
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
164
Appendix G
(continued)
Student Profile of Gifted Characteristics
Complete below for each section rated
Voluntary comments are also welcome.
S ection 1
If Intellectuality. Task Com m itm ent or L eadership are sc o red “6"
C om plete th is section
What have vou observed on a consistent basis that indicates this student is exceotional in the
areas of Intellectuality, Task Commitment, and/or Leadership?
Rather than: Has a broad baaed oarsDective of events and their influence.
Be SDecific: Conducted a survey ofbullvina and verbal tauntino: then develooed a oroaram to imorove
communications between student cliques.
C ategory E xam ples
Intellectuality
Task
Com m itm ent
L eadership
(Be specific and
give examples)
S ection II
If Creativity or Extraordinary D evelopm ent in the Arts are rated “6”
Provide 1 o r 2 w ork sam ples or outside evidence. Then, com m ent below.
(Do not send originals)
B riefly describe the assignm ent and
instructional support provided by the
teacher
In com parison to age-peers this w ork is
considered exceptional and dem onstrates
expertise because...
Student
Work
S a m p le
#1
Student
Work
Sample
# 2
Teacher’s Signature:
A p p ro v e d :
W endy H ay es Ebright
G A TE C oordinator
P ublication authorized:
C hristine D om inguez, A ssista n t S up erin ten d en t
C urriculum , Instruction & P ro fessio n al D evelopm ent
ID E N T IFf/PR O FlL S pg 10/19/00 Page 2 (green)
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Linked assets
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
Conceptually similar
PDF
Differential characteristics of beginning teachers
PDF
Districtwide instructional improvement: A case study of an elementary school in the Beach Promenade Unified School District
PDF
A case study of Long Beach Unified School District: How elements of effective reading strategies can be implemented at the secondary level
PDF
An analysis of the implementation of content standards in selected unified school districts of California
PDF
A case study: An analysis of the adequacy of one school district's model of data use to raise student achievement
PDF
Correlation of factors related to writing behaviors and student -developed rubrics on writing performance and pedagogy in ninth-grade students
PDF
Connecting districts and schools to improve teaching and learning: A case study of district efforts in the Los Coyotes High School District
PDF
A substitute teacher preservice staff development program: A case study of the Los Angeles County Office of Education
PDF
A comparative analysis of academic achievement for CalWORKs students in a K--12 public school system
PDF
An examination of California school districts' response to AB 1626, AB 1639, and SB 1370: The Pupil Promotion and Retention Act of 1998
PDF
Improving student achievement: An urban success story
PDF
Correlates of job satisfaction among high school principals
PDF
An analysis of teachers' perceptions of the efficacy of an instructional method for English language development using music and singing paired with movement
PDF
A longitudinal comparative study of the effects of charter schools on minority and low-SES students in California
PDF
A study of the significant changes in a small urban school district from 1991--2001 as perceived by educators in the city of Pereslavl -Zalessky in the Russian Federation
PDF
Current and future managerial competency requirements for manufacturing, assembly, and /or material processing functions
PDF
Chinese parents' attitudes toward parental involvement: A case study of the ABC Unified School District
PDF
Education for change in a changing Nigerian Igbo society: Impacts of traditional African and western education on the upbringing of Igbo children
PDF
Characteristics of juvenile court/correction teachers and job satisfaction
PDF
Effective school practices that facilitate improved student achievement
Asset Metadata
Creator
Baker, Jill Anne
(author)
Core Title
An analysis of Long Beach Unified School District's EXCEL model of providing gifted programs for urban students and their effect on student achievement
School
Rossier School of Education
Degree
Doctor of Education
Degree Program
Education
Publisher
University of Southern California
(original),
University of Southern California. Libraries
(digital)
Tag
education, curriculum and instruction,education, special,OAI-PMH Harvest
Language
English
Contributor
Digitized by ProQuest
(provenance)
Advisor
Gothold, Stuart (
committee chair
), Ferris, Robert (
committee member
), Stromquist, Nelly (
committee member
)
Permanent Link (DOI)
https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c16-535519
Unique identifier
UC11340843
Identifier
3145159.pdf (filename),usctheses-c16-535519 (legacy record id)
Legacy Identifier
3145159.pdf
Dmrecord
535519
Document Type
Dissertation
Rights
Baker, Jill Anne
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 au...
Repository Name
University of Southern California Digital Library
Repository Location
USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus, Los Angeles, California 90089, USA
Tags
education, curriculum and instruction
education, special