The Multiple Menu Model for Developing Differentiated Curriculum for the Gifted and Talented

Abstract

The history of curriculum development for the gifted has witnessed a seesaw effect rather than an appropriate balance between authentic knowledge (content) and instructional techniques (process). The Multiple Menu Model is a practical set of planning guides that can assist curriculum developers in combining content with instructional strategies. Menus are provided in the areas of Knowledge, Instructional Objectives and Student Activities, Instructional Strategies, Instructional Sequences, and Artistic Modification. Each of the five planning menus is designed to provide specific forms of guidance for the construction of curricular material that is consistent with generally agreed upon goals of gifted education. A lesson planning guide is designed to synthesize and insure representation of the content and process selected from the respective menus.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Ausubel, D.P. (1968). Educational psychology: A cognitive view. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

Bandura A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84, 191-215.

Bloom, B.S. (Ed.) (1954). Taxonomy of educational objectives. Handbook I: Cognitiue domain. New York: Longman.

Bruner, J.S. (1960). The process of education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Bruner, J.S. (1966). Toward a theory of instruction. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press

Gagne, R.M. , & Briggs, L.J. (1979). Principles of instructional design (2nd ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

Goodlad, J.I. (1984). A place called school: Prospects for the future . New York: McGraw-Hill.

James, W. (1885). On the functions of cognition. Mind, 10, 27-44.

Kaplan, S.N. (1986). The grid: A model to construct differentiated curriculum for the gifted. In J.S. Renzulli (Ed.). Systems and models for developing programs for the gifted and talented. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.

10.

Naisbitt, J. (1982). Megatrends. New York: Warner Books.

11.

National Society for the Study of Education ( 1958). Education for the gifted (57th Yearbook). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

12.

Passow, A.H. (1982). Differentiated curricula for the gifted/talented . Ventura, CA: Leadership Training institute on the Gifted and Talented.

13.

Phenix, P.H. (1964). Realms of meaning. New York : McGraw-Hill.

14.

Phenix, P.H. (1987). Views on the use, misuse, and abuse of instructional materials. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Leadership Training Institute on the Gifted and Talented, Houston.

15.

Renzulli, J.S. , & Nearine, R. (1968). Curriculum development for the gifted. Accent on Talent (NEA), 2, 9-12.

16.

Renzulli, J.S. (1970). A curriculum development model for academically superior students. Exceptional Children, 36, 611-615.

17.

Renzulli, J.S. (1977). The enrichment triad model: A guide for developing defensible programs for the gifted. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.

18.

Renzulli, J.S. (1982). What makes a problem real? Stalking the illusive meaning of qualitative differences in gifted education. Gifted Child Quarterly, 26, 4, 49-59.

19.

Stanley, J.C. (1980). On educating the gifted. Educational Researcher, 9, 10.

20.

Ward, V.S. (1960). Systematic intensification and extensification of the school curriculum. Exceptional Children, 28, 67-71, 77.

21.

Ward, V.S. (1961). Educating the gifted: An axiomatic approach. Columbus, OH: Merrill.

22.

Whitehead, A.N. (1929). The rhythm of education. In A.N. Whitehead (Ed.) The aims of education . New York: Macmillan.