Here's some information that supports your argument...
> It is clear from the results that teachers in regular third and fourth grade classrooms make only minor modifications in the curriculum and their instruction to meet the needs of gifted students. (pg 125)
...however.
> 61% of the responding teachers have received no staff development in the area of gifted education (pg 125)
> gifted resource teachers have little effect on what classroom teachers do to meet the needs of the gifted (pg 127)
---
In any case, your citation agrees with the holistic in practice.
> "...efforts must certainly must certainly include the selection or development of curriculum materials specifically design for classroom teacher use. They should also compact the regular curriculum, and to become more flexible in meeting the needs of all students, including gifted students." (pg 126)
P.S. I find this discussion to be enlightening and very productive, for me at least. Thanks for being a good conversation partner.
Also, yes, I do believe it's possible to improve schools holistically.
> Also, yes, I do believe it's possible to improve schools holistically.
Then I doubt I'll convince you through internet comments, but I think our goals are aligned (better education for all). However, we want to take different approaches to achieve it. The source I cited agrees that we should create an environment in which teachers are flexible, but my point in citing is that despite the comprehensive research that's been done on this topic, we've made very few steps towards actually accomplishing it, so I think it's time to give up that line of thought and try another, which is to separate students.
Separated schooling does have advantages, such as challenging gifted students ("A troubling finding that emerged was the preference of a few of the [gifted] students for heterogeneous classes because they were easier and enabled them to attain a high class ranking with little work")[1] and separation of children enable them to grow at a faster pace ("After 2 years, academically handicapped students in cooperative elementary schools had significantly higher achievement in reading vocabulary, reading comprehension, language expression, math computation, and math application in comparison with similar students in comparison schools") [2].
> P.S. I find this discussion to be enlightening and very productive, for me at least. Thanks for being a good conversation partner.
Likewise, thank you for being a good discussion partner as well.
Here's some information that supports your argument...
> It is clear from the results that teachers in regular third and fourth grade classrooms make only minor modifications in the curriculum and their instruction to meet the needs of gifted students. (pg 125)
...however.
> 61% of the responding teachers have received no staff development in the area of gifted education (pg 125)
> gifted resource teachers have little effect on what classroom teachers do to meet the needs of the gifted (pg 127)
---
In any case, your citation agrees with the holistic in practice.
> "...efforts must certainly must certainly include the selection or development of curriculum materials specifically design for classroom teacher use. They should also compact the regular curriculum, and to become more flexible in meeting the needs of all students, including gifted students." (pg 126)
P.S. I find this discussion to be enlightening and very productive, for me at least. Thanks for being a good conversation partner.
Also, yes, I do believe it's possible to improve schools holistically.