2020-02-19

Begåvade elever – gör så här – ny forskning och nya riktlinjer

Hej Anna Ekström och alla rektorer osv.

Så här gör man. Med begåvade elever. För att de ska lära sig.

Australiska delstaten New South Wales nya riktlinjer och verktygslåda för att undervisa de begåvade eleverna

Deras policy, länkar till forskning om gifted education, med mera – startsida

Ny sammanställning av forskning om begåvade och twice exceptional elever
– läs ett utdrag längre ner!

En rektor/lärare sammanfattar hur han ser att rätt utbildning till begåvade, berikar alla elevers lärande





Så här skriver utbildningsdepartementet i NSW:
"A review of recent research strongly suggests purposeful talent development programs, incorporating evidence-based effective practices and explicit teaching, are needed to optimise the achievement and talent development of gifted learners (Stoeger et al. 2017). 
Strategies such as academic acceleration, purposeful gifted student programs, enrichment and extension are needed to extend and challenge students with high academic potential (Subotnik, Olszeski-Kubilius & Worrell 2011; Steenbergen-Hu, Maken & Olszewski-Kubilius 2016)."



Bonusmaterial för alla sorters elever:

Forskningssammanställning som visar de evidensbaserade 7 faktorerna som ger ett gott lärande

En av dessa är wellbeing. Så läs även deras riktlinjer för Wellbeing – de åtar sig att barnen ska må bra, också. Kanske vore något för den svenska skollagen också?


Mer resurser för uppdaterad forskning om lärande

Tolv principer för läraren till gott lärande – illustrerade
Genomgång av Rosenshines 12 principer i text



Utdrag från den nya forskningssammanställningen:









What does the evidence base recommend for assessing and identifying learning needs?

Assessing the learning needs of gifted students remains a complex and challenging area. The following list includes some general recommendations from research.

Current best-practice in school-based identification and assessment is to use multiple measures – that is, a mix of qualitative, quantitative, objective, and observational methods – that have strong validity and reliability characteristics (Moon 2012; Acar et al. 2016) and to assess attributes and learning directly relevant to the gifted programs used (Hamilton et al., 2019).

Relying on a single measure or method may miss students and create an imbalance in representation of students from disadvantaged backgrounds (Baker 2003; McBee, Peters & Waterman 2014). Research suggests that care needs to be taken with how the results from different assessments are combined, as expecting consistent high performance across all measures may eliminate more disadvantaged students (McBee, Peters & Waterman 2014).

While ability tests can be useful to gauge a student’s learning potential, achievement assessments can also help identify what students have already learned and where their mastery is at compared to the syllabus (Reis, Burns & Renzulli 1992). Combined with ongoing formative assessment, these assessments can inform teaching and learning programs to ensure that students are offered learning pitched at the right level and pace that challenges them.

Different assessment and selection measures and criteria may need to be used to appropriately identify and assess students from disadvantaged backgrounds (Carman, Walther & Bartsch 2018; Olszewski-Kubilius & Corwith 2018) and students with disability (Maddocks 2018).


• Off-level assessments (tests or similar that are designed for older students) can provide a better way of assessing advanced abilities than assessments designed specifically for a student’s age level (Subotnik, Olszeski-Kubilius & Worrell 2011; Borland 2014).

• Psychometric assessments and tests with a norm-referenced sample are important to help understand how advanced a student’s potential is compared to their age peers (Südkamp, Kaiser & Möeller 2012; Wellisch 2017).

• Using ‘local norms’ – relating student ability or achievement measures to students from similar levels of advantage or with similar characteristics – can help to identify more gifted students from under-represented groups (Peters et al. 2019).

• The data from assessments should be reviewed and analysed regularly to track changing patterns of student representation, as well as used to inform teaching and learning (Black & Wiliam 2009; Sternberg 2018).

• It is important not to consider identification of giftedness as a binary issue with ‘winners and losers’: students with high potential that do not meet a strict criteria cut-off may still require additional extension in their regular learning (Callahan 2009; Peters 2016).

Ideally, as for all assessment processes, identifying a student’s learning progress and level of mastery can then be used to inform further learning and curriculum differentiation. Formative assessment can have a strong positive effect on student learning outcomes (Black & Wiliam 1998, 2009; Bennett 2011).

Teachers can use formative assessment as the starting point for planning challenging learning that will extend all learners, and will ensure that high potential learners get learning experiences that are challenging for their level, not just the average level of their peers (Smith 2015).


Accelerated progress

Acceleration is considered one of the most effective educational interventions available to gifted students (Rogers 2007, 2015). Repeated meta-analyses and systematic reviews of the research evidence on acceleration across a vast diversity of educational settings and contexts have shown that all forms of acceleration can offer significant learning benefits for gifted students (Steenbergen-Hu & Moon 2011; Warne 2017). 

The typical effect size of acceleration is between +0.42 and +1.62 standard deviations of learning growth, placing acceleration among the most effective educational practices (Steenbergen-Hu, Makel & Olszewski-Kubilius 2016). 

This research also confirms the lack of empirical evidence that acceleration results in negative academic or social outcomes for students. These findings have been consistent across students from diverse backgrounds (Lee et al. 2010). Early entry to school and radical acceleration are also supported by the literature (Gross 2006; Rogers 2015).

Acceleration can be more effective when it is used earlier in a student’s schooling (Gross 1992, 2006; Gallagher et al. 2010; Rogers 2015). For students in the later years of school, access to post-school education can be vital to ensure continuing high levels of challenge. This can occur through models such as advanced placement or dual enrolment (completing university subjects as part of senior secondary years), or even early university entrance (Howley et al. 2013; Jung, Young & Gross 2015).

Research shows that many teachers and school leaders hold negative views on acceleration, with particular concern over social and emotional issues (Rambo & McCoach 2012; Dare, Smith & Nowicki 2016). These attitudes are much stronger amongst teachers who have not completed specialist training in gifted education (Missett et al. 2014). However, extensive research shows that these concerns are generally unfounded (Neihart 2007). 

Like all educational interventions, the quality of implementation of acceleration is the key to its success for gifted students.

Inga kommentarer: