This article is an update of the author's analysis in Educating the Able (1996) and teaching for critical thinking. It suggests the teaching needs for the talented are often different from the generally more able. This large group of more able children tend to underfunction on a wide scale unless they are given a cognitively challenging curriculum. An analysis of what this curriculum consists of is undertaken and examples offered to suggest what teachers in every classroom can do to promote the abilities of all children in an inclusive setting without being detrimental to any particular group. The techniques suggested are modest changes by using ‘cognitive process teaching methods’ within the ordinary school curriculum in order to provide a developmental form of differentiation. These offer more experience of autonomy for learners, more problem solving and creativity for them and their teachers. The methods do not take significantly more time overall than current more didactic methods but are based in the constructivist theory of learning and do lead to secure and deep learning which makes the need for revision obsolete.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AdelmanC. (1990) ‘Teacher appraisal, collaborative research and teacher consortia’ pp36–43 In SimonsH.ElliottJ. (eds) Rethinking Appraisal and Assessment, Milton Keynes: Open University.
2.
AdeyP.S.1991 ‘Pulling yourself up by your own thinking’ European Journal for High Ability, 2, pp 28–34.
AusubelD. P. (1968) Educational Psychology: A Cognitive View, New York: Holt Rinehart and Winston.
5.
BlaggN. (1987) Somerset Thinking Skills Course, Somerset: Somerset County Council.
6.
BlaggN.LewisL. (1993) Effective learning: A Report of Six Funded Projects, Sheffield: Department for Employment.
7.
BloomB.S. (1956) Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: Vol 1, London: Longman.
8.
BridgesS.A. (1969) Gifted Children in the Brentwood Experiment, London: Pitman.
9.
ButlerC. (1999) ‘A course in advanced thinking for sixth formers’, Gifted Education International, 14 (1), pp 22–28.
10.
de AlencarE. M.L.S. (1995) ‘Developing creative abilities at university level’ European Journal of High Ability, 6, pp 82–90.
11.
de BonoE. (1983) CoRT Thinking Programme, Oxford: Pergamon.
12.
De CorteE. (1995) ‘Learning and high ability. A perspective from research in instructional psychology’ pp 141–161 In KatzkoM.W.MonksF.J. (eds) Nurturing Talent, Assen, The Netherlands: Van Gorcum.
13.
DeciE. (1988) ‘Motivating the highly able to learn’ 10th Annual International Symposium on Education Plovdiv, Bulgaria October.
14.
DentonC.PostlethwaiteK. (1985) Able Children. Identifying them in the Classroom, Windsor: NFER/Nelson.
15.
DfEE (1999) Excellence in Cities, London: DfEE.
16.
FeuersteinR.RandY.HoffmanM.B.MillerR. (1980) Instrumental Enrichment : An Intervention Program for Cognitive Modifiability, Baltimore MD: University Park Press.
17.
FeuersteinR. (1995) Mediated Learning Experience, London: Regent's College Conference, July.
18.
FisherR. (1994) Teaching Children to Think, Hemel Hempstead: Simon and Schuster.
19.
FreemanJ. (1998) Educating the Very Able; Current International Research, London: The Stationery Office.
20.
GagneR.L. (1975) The Essentials of Learning, London: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
21.
GallagherS.A. (1997) ‘PBL Where did it come from? What does it do and where is it going?’ Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 21, (1) pp 3–18.
22.
HanyE.A. (1997) ‘Modelling teachers’ judgment of giftedness: A methodological inquiry based of biased judgment’ High Ability Studies, 8 (2) pp159–178.
23.
HMI (1992) Provision for the Highly Able in Maintained Schools, London: HMSO.
24.
KellyG.A. (1955) The Psychology of Personal Constructs, Vols 1 and 2, New York: Norton.
25.
LipmanM. (1991) Thinking in Education, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
26.
MartonF.SalgoR. (1984) ‘Approaches to learning’ In MartonF.HownsellJ.EntwistleN.J. (eds) The Experience of Learning, Edinburgh: Scottish Academic Press.
27.
McGuinessC. (1999) From Thinking Skills to Thinking Classrooms: A Review and Evaluation of Approaches for Developing Pupils’ Thinking, Norwich: HMSO.
28.
MeekM.ThomsonB. (1987) Study Skills in the Secondary School, London: Routledge.
29.
MontgomeryD. (1981) “Education comes of age: A modern theory of teaching; School Psychology International, 1, pp 1–3.
30.
MontgomeryD. (1984) Education and Enhancement of Teaching Performance, Kingston: Learning Difficulties Research Project, Kingston Polytechnic.
31.
MontgomeryD. (1985) The Special Needs of Able Pupils in Ordinanj Classrooms, Kingston: Learning Difficulties Research Project, Kingston Polytechnic.
32.
MontgomeryD. (1990) Children with Learning Difficulties, London, Cassell.
33.
MontgomeryD. (1993) ‘Fostering learner managed learning in teacher education’ pp 59–70 IN GravesN. (ed) Learner Managed Learning, Leeds: Higher Education for Capability/World Education Fellowship.
34.
MontgomeryD. (1995) ‘Education for renewal. Changing teaching for learning worldwide’ New Era in Education, 76(3) pp 69–77.
35.
MontgomeryD. (1996) Educating the Able, London: Cassell.
MontgomeryD. (1999) Positive Teacher Appraisal Through Classroom Observation. London: Fulton.
38.
MontgomeryD. (ed) (2000a) Able Under achievers, London: Whurr.
39.
MontgomeryD. (2000b) Effective Teaching and Learning for the Gifted and Talented: A Handbook for Teachers, Maldon: Learning Difficulties Research Project.
40.
PassowA.H. (1990) ‘Needed research and development in educating high ability children’ European Journal for High Ability, 1 (4) pp 15–24.
41.
PassowA.H. (1982) “A differentiated curriculum for the gifted/talented. A point of view’ In KaplanS.N. & PassowA.H. (eds) Curricula for the Gifted, Ventura County CA: Ventura County Superintendent of Schools Office.
42.
PaulR. W. (1990) ‘Critical thinking in North America’ pp 18–42 In BinkerA.J.A.Critical Thinking: What Every Person Needs to Know to Survive in a Rapidly Changing World, Sonoma, Sonoma State University, Centre for Critical Thinking and Moral Critique.
43.
PollardA.TannS. (1994) Reflective Teaching in the Primary school (2nd Edition) London: Cassell.
44.
OsbornA.F. (1963) Applied Imagination: Principles and Practices of Creative Problem Solving, New York: Scribners.
45.
RenzulliJ. S. (1995) ‘New directions in the school-wide enrichment model’ pp 162–167 In KatzkoM.W.MonksF.J. (eds) Nurturing Talent, Assen, The Netherlands: Van Gorcum.
46.
ResnickL.B. (1989) “Learning in schools and out’ Educational Researcher, 18 (9) pp 13–19.
47.
RogersK.S.SpanP. (1993) ‘Ability grouping with gifted and talented students. Research guidelines’ pp In HellerK.A.MonksF.PassowA.H. (eds) International Handbook of Research and Development of Giftedness and Talent, Oxford: Pergamon
48.
Salamanca Agreement (1994) Salamenca Agreement, Paris: UNESCO.
49.
SiskD. (2000) ‘Overcoming underachievement of gifted and talented students’ pp 111–126 In MontgomeryD. (ed) Able Underachievers, London: Whurr.
50.
SkilbeckM. (1989) School Development and New Approaches to Learning: Trends and issues in Curriculum Reform, Paris: Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development.
51.
SwartzR.ParksS. (1994) Infusing Critical and Creative Thinking into Content Instruction for Elementary Schools, California: Critical Thinking Press.
52.
ThomasL.SmithM.Harri-AugsteinS. (1984) ‘Learning converstions; self organised learning’ Paper presented to the SCEDSIP/COPOL Conference; Kingston Polytechnic.
53.
ThorndikeR.L.HagenE.FranceN. (1986) The Cognitive Abilities Tests Revised Edition, Windsor, NFER-Nelson.
54.
WallaceB. (2000) Teaching the Very Able Child: Developing a Policy and Adopting Strategies for Provision, London: Fulton.
55.
WallaceB.AdamsH.B. (1993) TASC: Thinking Actively in a Social Context, Oxford: AB Publishers.
56.
WatsonJ. (1996) Reflection Through Instruction, London: Falmer.
57.
WhybraJ. (2000) Personal Communication.
58.
ZahorikJ.A. (1990) ‘Stability and flexibility in teaching’ Teaching and Teacher Education, 6 (1) pp 69–80.
59.
ZeidnerM.ScheleyerE. (1999) ‘The big-fish-little-pond effect for academic self concept, test anxiety and school grades in gifted children’ Contemporary Educational Psychology, 24, pp 305–329.
