Loading presentation...

Present Remotely

Send the link below via email or IM


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.


Curriculum Models Presentation

G/T Course- Furman University

Andrea Green

on 13 April 2013

Comments (0)

Please log in to add your comment.

Report abuse

Transcript of Curriculum Models Presentation

Schoolwide Enrichment Model Parallel Curriculum Model Background and Supportive Research:
Tomlinson, Kaplan, Renzulli, Purcell, Leppien & Burns, 2002
Tomlinson, et al, 2009
Evolved from a National Association for Gifted Children initiative in 1998.
"Reflects the four 'parallel' ways that educators can approach curriculum design." Integrated Curriculum Model Curriculum Models for Gifted/Talented Students Curriculum Models for Gifted/Talented Education Andrea Green Background and Supportive Research:
SEM: Reis & Renzulli, 2009
Renzulli & Reis, 1997
Adaptation of Revolving Door Identification Model (RDIM: Renzulli, Reis & Smith, 1981 Who benefits?
Type I and Type II should benefit all students
Type III is primarily for gifted/talented students Drawbacks/Challenges
Pullout format
Complaints of unfairness and elitism
Concerns of compacting curriculum with student achievement
Discomfort of teachers moving from knowledge-giver to facilitator Who benefits:
Most students benefit because of authentic experiences, challenging curriculum, and opportunities to reflect and evaluate
Many students get stuck in the first parallel
Doesn't allow for full depth of study due to cherry-picking topics
Rural and disadvantaged students may struggle with background knowledge. Appropriate for Use With:
Type I enrichment is appropriate for all students, while Types II and III are more appropriate for students identified for the Talent Pool.
Used primarily for elementary students, but can be adapted for middle/secondary students. Strengths:
Consistency of practice and delivery
Works well for underserved gifted/talented populations
Flexibility in planning for teachers Appropriate for Use With:
Both elementary and secondary gifted and talented students Strengths:
Flexible choices in developing curriculum
Enhances alignment among regular, gifted, and special education curricula
Allows flexibility with needs and interests of students Background and Supportive Research:
Developed by Joyce Van Tassel-Baska and Tamra Stambaugh
Developed from 20 years of research
Over 40 units of study in science, language arts, social studies and mathematics have been developed-William and Mary Units Who Benefits?
Gifted and talented students Appropriate for Use With:
Gifted and talented students
Can be adapted for regular-education students Strengths:
Curricular units based on accelerated content
Integrated units of study based on overarching concepts
Use of authentic methodology for learning
Use of Best Practices for delivery Drawbacks/Weaknesses:
Need for extensive professional development
Need to provide authentic assessments
Requires systemic reform of school/district
Can be a hard sell to the community-paradigm shift
Full transcript