Loading presentation...

Present Remotely

Send the link below via email or IM

Copy

Present to your audience

Start remote presentation

  • Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
  • People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
  • This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
  • A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
  • Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article

Do you really want to delete this prezi?

Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.

DeleteCancel

Make your likes visible on Facebook?

Connect your Facebook account to Prezi and let your likes appear on your timeline.
You can change this under Settings & Account at any time.

No, thanks

Schoolwide Enrichment Model

This presentation is based on the framework for "Understanding Evidence", which has been developed to support decision making in violence programs, based on evidence.
by

Silvia Perera

on 31 October 2014

Comments (0)

Please log in to add your comment.

Report abuse

Transcript of Schoolwide Enrichment Model

Schoolwide Enrichment Model
Three Ring Conception of Giftedness
Above Average Ability
Gifted Behavior
Task Commitment
Creativity
Overview
Conceptual Background
The Schoolwide Enrichment Model (SEM) is grounded on the Theory of the Three Ring Conception of Giftedness, which was also proposed by Renzulli. The main points of this Theory are resumed by the Three Ring Figure and they are explained as follows Baum, Reis, & Maxfield (1998):
Abilities that can be measured by test (General and Specific abilities)
A refined or focused form of motivation, know as task commitment. Some characteristics related to this concept are perseverance, endurance, hard work, dedicated practice, self-confidence, and a belief in one's ability to carry out important work (Renzulli, 1998)
Originality of thinking, constructive ingenuity, and the ability to "think outside the box" are appropriate descriptors for Creativity
Components
Triad Model
Type I
Type II
Type III
Enrichment Clusters
Curriculum Modifications
Differentiation
Curriculum Compacting
So... What is it?
School Structures
Service Delivery Components
Best Available Research
Experiential Evidence
Contextual Evidence
Review of research is subdivided into different theme areas
Regular Curriculum:
Integration of curriculum modification and differentiation and the Enrichment Triad Model: Type I (general exploratory activities), Type II (individual and group skill and process training activities), and Type III (individual and small group investigations of real problems).
Enrichment Clusters:
Multi-age groups of students who meet regularly with a facilitator to share and pursue a common interest and emphasize the development of higher-order thinking skills and the creative and productive application of these skills to real-world situations.
Continuum of Special Services:
Including individual or small group counseling, mentor relationships, and direct assistance in facilitating advanced-level work, are essential for a talent development program to be effective in meeting the needs of individual students
The Total Talent Portfolio
Students complete various instruments and contribute their best work samples to reflect their strengths and interests as learners. This information focuses on students' strengths rather than their deficits, and is used by schools to decide which talent development opportunities to offer particular students.
Curriculum Modification Techniques
Development of a challenging curriculum, and one that injects both in-depth and enrichment learning experiences into regular school activities. Curriculum modification may be necessary.
Enrichment Learning and Teaching
The development of the school program should be based upon the following principles of enrichment learning and teaching:
Each learner is unique.
Learning is more effective when students enjoy what they are doing.
Learning is more meaningful and enjoyable when content and process are learned within the context of a real and present problem.
Some formal instruction may be used, but a major goal is to enhance knowledge and thinking-skills acquisition through inductive teaching and the application of knowledge and skills that result from students' construction of meaning
Effectiveness of the model as perceived by key groups
Administrative staff, teachers, parents, and gifted education specialist have perceived after the implementation of SEM there are positive changes in attitudes towards education, and special programming in general. Greater cooperation between teachers and Gifted Education specialists has also improved.
(Coper, 1983, Olenchak & Renzulli, 1989)
Creative Productivity
After the implementation of SEM, an increase in students' creative products has been reported as high as twice as many products!
(Olenchak & Renzulli, 1989)
Personal and social development
Students' behavior and the negative effects of labeling have been positively affected by the implementation of SEM, since the program doesn't promote a separation between identified an non-identified students.
(Heal, 1989, Reis & Morales-Taylor, 2010)
Underserved Populations
SEM gives emphasize to students' strengths, interests and learning styles which helps reverse underachievement, promote joyful learning and is a good approach for meeting the needs of twice exceptional students.
(Baum, 1985, Renzulli, 2013)
Self-efficacy
Higher self-efficacy and enjoyment in reading has been related to participation in SEM-R and Type III Enrichment activities.
(Reis et al., 2010)
SEM as a curricular framework
Development of curricular programs and differentiation practices under the SEM framework has been a useful practice. Also, the Renzully Learning System has provided a technological tool to match students with enrichment individual or learning activities.
(Galvin et al., 2009, Reis et al., 2010, Renzulli & Reis, 2005)
Learning Styles and Curriculum Compacting
The Renzulli Learning System presents an option for curriculum acceleration management system and the SEM also promotes curriculum compacting that have revealed an effect in students higher level thinking and problem solving, diligent work at more advanced levels, and completition of advanced products on a daily basis.
(Reis & Morales-Taylor, 2010, Renzulli & Reis, 2005)
Research suggests that the model is effective at serving students in a variety of educational settings and in schools that serve diverse ethnic and socioeconomic populations, and it is not intended to replace gifted programs but to enhance them.
According to professionals who have had the opportunity to work within Enrichment Programs, the activities are interactive and engaging and allow students' active participation and learning. Some local program offers range from Reality Spanish and Ireland Adventure, to photo editing, video formatting, and musical storytelling, among other examples.
Implementation of a diverse curriculum, teacher-student interactions in a more relaxed setting, which allows teachers to learn more about the students' interests, strengths, and likes and dislikes, as well as more one-on-one time with students. Students learn while having fun
Advantages
The biggest disadvantage that comes afloat is the cost associated with supplies and general implementation of an Enrichment Program. Another potential disadvantage could be finding an ideal setting, teachers sometimes have to settle with what is available.
Disadvantages
Given the evidence gathered through the review of available research and the experts in Enrichment, some different examples can be given to understand the evidence of the different contexts.
First, the most important point is that the SEM is not supposed to be used as an alternative program, instead, is more of a heuristic that integrates different programming and curriculum strategies.
Second, given that there are costs that come along with the implementation of SEM, some programs have found it the most feasible to adopt the programming in small parts, and not yet as a whole Schoolwide Program. So, given what each school can afford, the contexts change and the economic situation does to.
Third, and in the same sense as the last point, the needs of students have to be considered and choices have to be made in order to address them in the best possible way.
Organizational Components
Organizational components would include staff development, curriucular materials, the schoolwide enrichment team and the schoolwide enrichment specialist, parent orientation and involvement, and a democratic school management plan.
Schoolwide Enrichement Model Network is a vehicle that allows to connect users of the Model around the worldfor sharing information and provide resources for all users.
References
Baum, S. (1985). Learning disabled students with superior cognitive abilities: A validation study of descriptive behavior. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Connecticut, Storrs
Baum, S.M., Reis, S.M., & Maxfield, L.R. (Eds.). (1998). Nurturing the gifts and talents of primary grade students. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press
Cooper, C. (1983). Administrator's attitudes towards gifted programs based on the enrichment triad/revolving door identification model: Case studies in decision making. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Connecticut, Storrs.
Galvin, M.K., Casa, T.M., Adelson, J.L., CArroll, S.R., & Sheffield, L.J. (2009). The impact of advanced curriculum on the achievement of mathematically promising elementary students. Gifted Child Quarterly. 53(3) 188-202
Heal, M. M. (1989). Student perceptions of labeling the gifted: A comparative case study analysis. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Connecticut, Storrs
Obenchak, R. & Renzulli, J.S. (1989) The effectiveness of the Schoolwide Enrichment Model on selected Aspects of elementary school Change. Gifted Child Quarterly 33(1), 36-46
Reis, S.M., Little, C.A., Fogarty, E., Housand, A.M., Housand, B.C., Sweeny, S.M., Eckert, R.D., & Muller, L.M. (2010) Case studies of successful schoolwide enrichment model-reading (SEM-R) classroom implementations. Electronic version: http://www.gifted.uconn.edu/SEMR/rm10240.pdf
Reis, S.M. & Morales-Taylor, M. (2010). From high potential to gifted performance: Encouraging academically talented urban students. Gifted Child Today. 23(4), 28-38
Renzulli, J.S. (2013). The achievement gap and the education conspiracy against low income children. International Journal for Talented Development and Creativity. 1(1), 45-55
Renzulli, J.S. & Reis, S.M. (2005). A technology based program that matches enrichment resources with student strengths. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning. Electronic version: http://www.gifted.uconn.edu/sem/pdf/Ijet_Renzulli_Reis.pdf
Full transcript