Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

The Dynamic Scaffolding Model (DSM) of teacher development is proposed as a good way to meet gifted learners' exceptional learning needs while remaining consistent with current educational realities and research. Using an implementation experience as an illustration, we examine how a gifted education consultant can support teachers in addressing the diverse educational needs of high-ability learners in their classrooms, as well as encouraging high-level outcomes in learners not identified as gifted, leading to classrooms that are more engaging for both students and teachers. In this model, teachers are given opportunities for scaffolded learning and interaction in the form of (a) a series of optional professional development workshops on giftedness, (b) ongoing and targeted individual consultation opportunities, and (c) diverse professional liaisons. We compare the DSM with other resource consultation models, and we discuss characteristics identified by participating teachers as important in their work with gifted learners and others.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Bereiter, C. , & Scardamalia, M. (1993). Surpassing ourselves: An inquiry into the nature and implications of expertise. Chicago: Open Court.

Borland, J. (1997). Rethinking curriculum, instruction, and assessment in gifted education at the end of the millennium. Keynote address presented at the Second National Curriculum Network Conference, Williamsburg, VA.

Bransford, J. D. , Brown, A. L. , & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.). (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

Curtis, M. J. , Curtis, V. A. , & Graden, J. L. (1988). Prevention and early intervention through intervention assistance programs. School Psychology International, 9, 257-264.

Gross, M. (1997). Changing teacher attitudes toward gifted children: An early and essential step. In J. Chan , R. Li , & J. Spinks (Eds.), Maximizing potential: Lengthening and strengthening our stride. Proceedings of the 11th World Conference on Gifted and Talented Children (pp. 3-22). Hong Kong: University of Hong Kong Social Sciences Center.

Heller, K. , Mönks, F. J. , Sternberg, R. J. , & Subotnik, R. F. (Eds.). (2000). International handbook of giftedness and talent (2nd ed.). Oxford, England: Elsevier Science.

Hertzog, N. B. (1998). The changing role of the gifted education specialist. Teaching Exceptional Children, 30, 39-43.

Hogan, K. , & Pressley, M. (Eds.). (1997). Scaffolding student learning: Instructional approaches and issues. Cambridge, MA: Brookline Books.

Johnsen, S. K. , Haensly, P. A. , Ryser, G. R. , & Ford, R. F. (2002). Changing general education classroom practices to adapt for gifted students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 46, 45-63.

10.

Keating, D. P. (1991). Curriculum options for the developmentally advanced. Exceptionality Education Canada, 1, 53-83.

11.

Kirschenbaum, R. J. , Armstrong, D. C. , & Landrum, M. S. (1999). Resource consultation model in gifted education to support talent development in today's inclusive schools. Gifted Child Quarterly, 43, 39-47.

12.

Landrum, M. (2001). Resource consultation and collaboration in gifted education. Psychology in the Schools, 38, 457-465.

13.

Landrum, M. (2002). Consultation in gifted education. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.

14.

Larkin, M. J. (2001). Providing support for student independence through scaffolded instruction. Teaching Exceptional Children, 34(1), 30-34.

15.

Matthews, D. J. (1998). Enhancing learning outcomes for diversely gifted adolescents: Education in the social/emotional domain. Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 10, 157-168.

16.

Matthews, D. J. , & Foster, J. F. (2005). Being smart about gifted children: A guidebook for parents and educators. Scottsdale, AZ: Great Potential Press.

17.

Matthews, D. J. , & Keating, D. P. (1995). Domain specificity and habits of mind: An investigation of patterns of high-level development. Journal of Early Adolescence, 15, 319-343.

18.

Matthews, D. J. , & Keating, D. P. (1999). What we are learning about how children learn, and what this means for teachers. Education Canada, 39(1), 35-37.

19.

Moon, S. M. , & Rosselli, H. C. (2000). Developing gifted programs. In K. Heller , F. J. Mönks , R. J. Sternberg , & R. F. Subotnik (Eds.), International handbook of giftedness and talent (2nd ed., pp. 499-521). Oxford, England: Elsevier Science.

20.

Moon, S. M. , Swift, M. , & Shallenberger, A. (2002). Perceptions of a self-contained class for fourth- and fifth-grade students with high to extreme levels of intellectual giftedness. Gifted Child Quarterly, 46, 64-79.

21.

Shaywitz, S. E. , Holahan, J. M. , Fletcher, J. M. , Freudenheim, D. A. , Makuch, R. W. , & Shaywitz, B. A. (2001). Heterogeneity within the gifted: Higher IQ boys exhibit behaviors resembling boys with learning disabilities. Gifted Child Quarterly, 45, 16-23.

22.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

23.

Ward, S. B. , & Landrum, M. S. (1994). Resource consultation: An alternative service delivery model for gifted education. Roeper Review, 16, 276-279.

24.

Wood, D. , Bruner, J. S. , & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem-solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 17, 89-100.

A Dynamic Scaffolding Model of Teacher Development: The Gifted Education Consultant as Catalyst for Change

Abstract

Get full access to this article

References