Last week I wrote about principles and strategies for grouping gifted learners. Grouping like-ability peers is a highly beneficial teaching and learning practice for gifted students (Rogers, 2002). Schools generally group according to chronological age. But for gifted learners this can inhibit their opportunities to engage in complex tasks which fall in their zone of proximal development. Grouping strategies have measurable advantages in terms of academic achievement and socio-affective benefits.
There are numerous academic advantages associated with grouping (Rogers, 2002). The first benefit is adequate programming provisions and sufficient rates of learning. Ability grouping allows gifted students to progress through learning alongside peers with similar aptitude and capability. Consequently the rate of learning is in alignment with student ability. Novel and more challenging learning is the preference for gifted children as it occurs in their zone of proximal development (French, Walker & Shore, 2011). Therefore this strategy gives teachers opportunity to provide sufficient learning resources to match the student’s ability and achievement level.
Provision of appropriate learning material also impacts underachievement of gifted students by narrowing the discrepancy between potential and performance (Reis & McCoach, 2001). Gifted students grouped by ability and provided with accelerated and enriched learning material will progress at twice the rate of gifted students in heterogeneous classrooms. Gifted students who are not provided with sufficiently complex learning experiences will underperform, as their potential exceeds the complexity of academic activity.
Furthermore ability grouping enhances peer acceptance as students work alongside those with converging knowledge, interest and skills (French, Walker & Shore, 2011). Therefore high achieving peers have a positive academic influence on gifted students (Reis & McCoach, 2001). Students who are surrounded by like-minded peers also have a decreased sense of solitude due to a greater perception of belonging. Mutually supportive learning communities are critical to the academic success of gifted learners. Thus ability and shared interest is more pertinent than age when grouping gifted students.
Despite the measurable and observable academic benefits for grouping gifted students, there are some opposing viewpoints. One common point of contention is selecting students to be withdrawn from heterogeneous classes for gifted groups. This springs from the perspective that grouping for the gifted is elitist and has detrimental impacts on those who are not selected. However, Kennedy’s (1989) research demonstrates that students of low or average ability flourish when gifted learners are withdrawn from mainstream classrooms as it gives them opportunity to succeed and stand out (Gross, 2004).
Another opposing viewpoint is that gifted students should not be placed in ability groups as they can act as valuable mentors and models for students of lower academic ability. However, research shows that children of low or average ability prefer grouping with those of similar aptitude succeeding in common learning outcomes (Fiedler, Lange & Winebrenner, 1993). Furthermore not all gifted students are highly motivated learners who would act as inspiration models and mentors (Gross, 2004).
Next week I will write about the socio-affective advantages of grouping for gifted learners.
