Project OCCAMS: A Five-Year,Collaborative Intervention of an Online Intensive,Accelerated,Two-Year Language Arts Program Designed to Address Systemic Disparities Among High Ability Middle School Students

Abstract

Project OCCAMS (Online Consortium for Accelerating Middle School) developed and piloted an accelerated curriculum through a design-based research approach combining the Integrated Curriculum Model, principles of culturally responsive instructional design, and extensive compacting. The program created a pathway for diverse middle school students to complete a 3-year course of study in English Language Arts (ELA) in only 2 years and enter high school a year advanced of grade peers in language arts. Curricula were developed through collaboration of two university-based gifted education centers and a large urban school district. The program was designed primarily to serve students from subgroups underrepresented in gifted education who demonstrated advanced learning potential but did not yet meet state criteria for formal gifted identification. Evaluation data indicate participating students, as a group, made more rapid achievement gains in language arts than local comparison groups and equal to a comparison group of students formally identified as gifted participating in a regional talent search program. The use of a common online learning platform facilitated implementation by providing forums for collaboration and support among educators at multiple schools and universities and opportunities for continuous observation and data collection and allowed frequent iteration of the curriculum.

Keywords

gifted students acceleration middle school students English/language arts

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Aronson

Laughter

(2016). The theory and practice of culturally relevant education: A synthesis of research across content areas. Review of Educational Research, 86(1), 163–206. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315582066

Card

Giuliano

(2015). Can universal screening increase the representation of low-income and minority students in gifted education? National Bureau of Economic Research, NBER Working Paper 21519 http://www.nber.org/papers/w21519

Collins

K. H.

(2020). Multicultural curriculum development, teaching approach & learning taxonomy: Using blooms-banks matrix [Unpublished Resource]. CI 5359 Curriculum for Depth and Challenge. Department of Curriculum & Instruction, Texas State University.

Cross

T. L.

Olszewski-Kubilius

(Eds.), (2020). Conceptual frameworks for giftedness and talent development. Enduring theories and comprehensive models in gifted education. Prufrock Press.

Hammond

(2014). Culturally responsive teaching and the brain: Promoting authentic engagement and rigor among culturally and linguistically diverse students. Corwin Press.

Horn

C. V.

(2015). Young scholars: A talent development model for finding and nurturing potential in under-served populations. Gifted Child Today, 38(1), 19–31. https://doi.org/10.1177/1076217514556532

Horn

C. V.

Little

C. A.

Maloney

McCullough

(2021). Young Scholars model. A comprehensive approach for developing talent and pursuing equity in gifted education. Prufrock Press.

Imberman

(2021). Ohio’s Lost Einsteins: The inequitable outcomes of early high achievers. The Thomas B. Fordham Institute. https://fordhaminstitute.org/ohio/research/ohios-lost-einsteins-inequitable-outcomes-early-high-achievers

McBee

M. T.

Peters

S. J.

Miller

E. M. (

(2016). The impact of the nomination stage on gifted program identification: A comprehensive psychometric analysis. Gifted Child Quarterly, 60(4), 258–278. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986216656256

10.

Neumeister

K. L. S.

Adams

C. M.

Pierce

R. L.

Cassady

J. C.

Dixon

F. A.

(2007). Fourth grade teachers’ perceptions of giftedness; Implications for identifying and serving diverse gifted students. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 30(4), 479–499. http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.4219/jeg-2007-503

11.

Olszewski-Kubilius

Clarenbach

(2012). Unlocking emergent talent: Supporting high achievement of low-income, high-ability students. National Association for Gifted Children. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED537321.pdf

12.

Olszewski-Kubilius

Corwith

(2018). Poverty, academic achievement, and giftedness: A literature review. Gifted Child Quarterly, 62(1), 37–55. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986217738015

13.

Olszewski-Kubilius

Steenbergen-Hu

Thomson

Rosen

(2017). Minority achievement gaps in STEM: Findings of a longitudinal study of project excite. Gifted Child Quarterly, 61(1), 20–39. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986216673449

14.

Olszewski-Kubilius

Subotnik

R. F.

Worrell

F. D.

(Eds.), (2018). Talent development as a framework for gifted education. Prufrock Press.

15.

Paris

(2012). Culturally sustaining pedagogy: A needed change in stance, terminology, and practice. Educational Researcher, 41(3), 93–97. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X12441244

16.

Peters

S. J.

(2021). The challenges of achieving equity within public school gifted and talented programs. Gifted Child Quarterly, 66(2), 82–94. https://doi.org/10.1177/00169862211002535

17.

Peters

S. J.

Engerrand

K. G.

(2016). Equity and excellence: Proactive efforts in the identification of underrepresented students for gifted and talented services. Gifted Child Quarterly, 60(3), 159–171. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986216643165

18.

Peters

S. J.

Gentry

(2012). Group-specific norms and teacher rating scales: Implications for underrepresentation. Journal of Advanced Academics, 23(2), 125–144. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932202X12438717

19.

Plucker

J. A.

Hardesty

Burroughs

(2013). Talent on the sidelines. Excellence gaps and America’s persistent talent underclass. Center for Education Policy Analyses, University of Connecticut. https://education.uconn.edu/2014/08/08/report-excellence-gap-growing-among-american-students/

20.

Rinn

A. N.

Mun

R. U.

Hodges

(2020). 2018-2019 State of the states in gifted education. National Association for Gifted Children and the Council of State Directors of Programs for the Gifted. https://cdn.ymaws.com/nagc.org/resource/resmgr/state_of_the_states_report/2018-2019_state_of_the_state.pdf

21.

Stambaugh

Olszewski-Kubilius

(Eds.), (2020). Unlocking potential. Identifying and serving gifted students from low-income households. Prufrock Press.

22.

Subotnik

R. F.

Olszewski-Kubilius

Worrell

F. C.

(2011). Rethinking Giftedness and Gifted education: A Proposed direction Forward based on Psychological science. Psychological Science in the Public Interest: A Journal of the American Psychological Society, 12(1), 3–54. https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100611418056

23.

van den Akker

(2013). Curricular development research as specimen of educational design research. In Plomp

Nieveen

(Eds.), Educational design research (pp. 52–71). Netherlands Institute for Curriculum Development (SLO).

24.

VanTassel-Baska

(1988). Developing scope and sequence in curriculum: A comprehensive approach. Gifted Child Today Magazine, 11(3), 29–34. https://doi.org/10.1177/107621758801100317

25.

VanTassel-Baska

(1998). Excellence in educating gifted and talented learners (3rd ed.) Love Publishing.

26.

VanTassel-Baska

(2018). Achievement unlocked: Effective curriculum interventions with low-income students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 62(1), 68–82. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986217738565

27.

VanTassel-Baska

(2023). Introduction to the integrated curriculum model. In VanTassel-Baska

Little

C. A.

(Eds.), Content-based curriculum for advanced learners (pp. 17–36). Routledge.

28.

VanTassel-Baska

Bracken

Brown

Feng

(2005). Project Athena year three student data report. Center for Gifted Education, The College of William and Mary.

29.

VanTassel-Baska

Bracken

Feng

Brown

(2009). A longitudinal study of enhancing critical thinking and reading comprehension in Title I classrooms. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 33(1), 7–37. https://doi.org/10.1177/016235320903300102

30.

VanTassel-Baska

Feng

A. X.

Evans

B. L.

(2007). Patterns of identification and performance among gifted students identified through performance tasks: A three-year analysis. Gifted Child Quarterly, 51(3), 218–231. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986207302717

31.

VanTassel-Baska

Johnson

D. T.

Hughes

C. E.

Boyce

L. N.

(1996). A study of Language Arts curriculum effectiveness with Gifted Learners. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 19(4), 461–480. https://doi.org/10.1177/016235329601900405

32.

VanTassel-Baska

Stambaugh

(2006). Project Athena: A pathway to advanced literacy development for children of poverty. Gifted Child Today, 29(2), 58–63. https://doi.org/10.4219/gct-2006-202

33.

VanTassel-Baska

Zuo

Avery

L. D.

Little

C. A.

(2002). A curriculum study of gifted student learning in the language arts. Gifted Child Quarterly, 46(1), 30–44. https://doi.org/10.1177/001698620204600104

34.

Wallace

Howes

E. V.

Funk

Krepski

Pincus

Sylvester

Tsoi

Tully

Sharif

Swift

(2022). Stories that teachers tell: Exploring culturally responsive science teaching. Education Sciences, 12(6), 401. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12060401

35.

Wyner

J. S.

Bridgeland

J. M.

DiIulio

J. J.

Jr (2007). Achievement trap: How America is failing millions of high-achieving students from lower-income families. Jack Kent Cooke Foundation and Civic Enterprises. https://mrodriguez01.wpenginepowered.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Achievement_Trap.pdf

36.

Xiang

Dahlin

Cronin

Theaker

Durant

(2011). Do highflyers maintain their altitude? Performance trends of top students. Fordham Institute and Northwest Education Association. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED524344.pdf

37.

Solanki

Fink

(2021). College acceleration for all? Mapping racial gaps in Advanced placement and dual enrollment participation. American Educational Research Journal, 58(5), 954–992. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831221991138