A new study published in the American Education Research Journal asks, “What Works in Gifted Education?” Five gifted education and curriculum researchers assess the impact of differentiated English language arts units on gifted third graders. The units—one on poetry and one on research—“reflect more advanced, complex, and abstract concepts,” as well as concepts normally introduced in the fourth and fifth grades. Analysts explain that “even advanced learners vary in their readiness levels, interests and preferred learning profile and learn best when these differences are accommodated.” (Differentiated instruction can be broadly conceived as modifying at least one of three key elements of curriculum: content, process, and product. The evaluated units primarily focus on the former.)
Researchers randomly assigned gifted classrooms to treatment and comparison conditions such that roughly 1,200 students from eighty-five gifted classrooms across eleven states participated in year one of the study, one thousand in year two, and seven hundred in year three (though the number of classrooms and states changed each year). The three years (2009–2012) comprised the three cohorts. All classes were pre-assessed using the Iowa Test of Basic Skills so that they could control for prior achievement, which is important because schools use different methods to identify gifted children. Authors also measured fidelity of implementation and found it to be moderate to high (teachers had access to webinars to explain how to teach the unit).
The results showed significant increases favoring the treatment group for every cohort/year combination. And whether students were in a pull-out or self-contained gifted setting did not impact their learning.
There was, however, one red flag: The outcome assessment was designed by the researchers themselves, as the data showed that students had topped out of standardized ELA tests prior to the study. So although analysts took care not to refer specifically to the content in the units and instead based items on third-grade standards across multiple states, it is likely that the treatment group benefited from a customized assessment that aligned more closely to the differentiated units.
Moreover, an important and touchy question looms: How does one design a well-crafted differentiated unit, ensure fidelity of implementation, and reliably demonstrate that it makes a difference for talented kids? Yes, all kids deserve customized learning plans—even the gifted ones. But right now, we don’t have good enough assessments to reliably measure their—or our—progress in meeting that goal.
SOURCE: Carolyn M. Callahan et al., “What Works in Gifted Education: Documenting the Effects of an Integrated Curricular/Instructional Model for Gifted Students,” American Education Research Journal, Vol. 52, No. 1 (February 2015).
