See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/260338858

Curriculum differentiation: A Practical approach

Article · May 2010

CITATIONS READS
0 1,421

1 author:

Michelle Ronksley-Pavia
Griffith University
18 PUBLICATIONS   4 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Continuum of Educational Support for High Schools (Year 7-10) View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Michelle Ronksley-Pavia on 26 February 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Curriculum differentiation: A Practical approach
Michelle Ronksley-Pavia

Citation: M. L. Ronksley-Pavia, (2010). Curriculum Differentiation: A Practical approach,

Mindscape, 30(2), pp. 4-11.

Curriculum Differentiation

The words “curriculum differentiation” are frequently used when discussing the educational
needs of gifted and talented children, but what does it actually mean when educating the
gifted?

Differentiation means modifications to regular curriculum by adjusting process, skills and

content and learning environment to suit gifted and talented students (NSW DET 2003;
Maker 1996). It needs to include extension and enrichment programs to broaden curriculum
to develop students’ skills and abilities to a degree of complexity en par with their cognitive
abilities (Braggett, 1997).

The following methods can assist in differentiating the curriculum:

 Assessing learners’ prior skills and comprehension; pre-testing for students who have
already mastered curriculum core topics
 Utilising tiered tasks
 Acceleration for gifted learners to encourage independent study
 Grouping flexibility to allow gifted learners to work with like-minded peers
 Planning autonomous research tasks where learners’ learn how to extend and direct
their own learning.

These are not only applicable in the educational setting of a school, but can equally be
tailored, adapted and applied at home when engaging children in specific activities to cater
for their interests.

Curriculum Differentiation Models

In order to develop a curriculum that both challenges and stimulates gifted students, there
needs to be an ideal provided between student’s capacity to learn and experience level
(Braggett, Morris & Day, 1999). Both Kaplan’s (1986) and Williams’ (1986) curriculum
differentiation models demonstrate how content, instruction and learning processes can be
adjusted to sufficiently meet the gifted learner’s educational needs (NSWDET 2003).

The Kaplan Model

The Kaplan model (1986) is a useful model and thinking method for planning curriculum
differentiation which centres learning around a theme. This is very relevant for gifted
students because of their holistic approaches to learning; making connections with knowledge
faster and easier than non-gifted peers (Gross, 2000). Kaplan (1986) stresses that once
curriculum has been differentiated it then needs to be individualised for each student; this
should reflect “the needs, learning abilities and interests of individual gifted students.”
(Kaplan 1986:192).

Citation: M. L. Ronksley-Pavia, (2010). Curriculum Differentiation: A Practical approach, Mindscape, 30(2), pp. 4-11.
The model aims to:
 interpret key areas of differentiated curriculum; put them into practice
 to identify development of a differentiated curriculum
 to develop an all-inclusive, versatile and integrated curriculum structure to guide
teaching/learning of gifted students
(Kaplan 1986).

Figure 1: Curriculum Development Model: The Grid (Kaplan 1986:192)

Implementation Sequence of Lesson Plan for Kaplan’s Model of Curriculum

Differentiation

Organisation: pre-testing to discover prior knowledge. Students are placed in ability groups
work on group research, in some instances individual tasks. Highly gifted students have two
sessions/week to work on their independent research.
Media: own choice
Excursion to a significant ‘place’ students gather found objects and represent the different
environment(s) in 2-D and 3-D designs. Particular attention is paid to the physical
environment.

Independent research tasks for highly gifted students: Choose one research tasks to be
presented to the class in week 8 including research findings:
a) How does the artist’s condition affect the art work they produce? What influence do you
think their historical context has on their art work?
b) Does the artist’s condition affect how people view their work? Can artists be responsible
for how their art work is interpreted/viewed?

Citation: M. L. Ronksley-Pavia, (2010). Curriculum Differentiation: A Practical approach, Mindscape, 30(2), pp. 4-11.
 For a) and b) conduct research on: the internet, through zines, magazines, newspapers and
TV. Select one or two artists and design a questionnaire to discover how adults, family and
peers view a particular artist’s work. Use thought process diagrams, or Venn diagrams to
organise your thoughts and ideas.

Kaplan Model Lesson Plan Grid: High School - Visual Arts Class- One term of Work

Theme/Concept Outcome/s Research Skills Productive Skills Product

-Resolve ideas to 2-D, 3-D, digital artworks Experiment with media, Student
The Artist’s create explicit from range of artists that materials, processes, directed body
Condition meaning by depict different aspects of techniques/technology, of work
creating a work time, place/ space, particularly developing an exploration of applying
Focus: time, place, that references artists reflecting the contexts. the contexts and focuses. research skills
space how people Students need to identify Develop formal/informal for resolving
interact with what/how artists demonstrate display for art installation the concept.
Context: historical, their focuses of time, place/space using light/sound. Visual diary
socio-cultural and environment, and the concept. Research Discuss/experiment with record
geographical highlighting installation/contemporary ideas for place: physical, keeping,
concept/theme of artists who present a unique intellectual, spiritual, cultural portfolio
artist’s condition perspective. and emotional Media
Finding examples of artists experiments
work which expresses Temporary
physical, intellectual, spiritual, installation of
cultural and emotional found objects
contexts. and wrappings
focusing on
shape, surface
and size.
Appraising:
responses to
unseen works.
Table 1: Kaplan Model Lesson plan for visual arts

The ideas for curriculum design of this model are:

 focus on major ideas and issues
 activities which show correlation between topics
 emphasising research
 teaching thinking skills; high-order thinking
 increasing speed and complexity of work
 self-direction by students is a major focus
(Gross 2000; Kaplan 1986).

Content

Relate to chosen theme, topics should be interdisciplinary, incorporated and covered by all
pupils and have deadlines.

Process

Inclusive of skills pupils need to acquire during the process.

 fundamental skills, i.e. observation, analysis, documentation
 researching skills, i.e. accessing, interpreting, summarising, reporting and designing
research methods

Citation: M. L. Ronksley-Pavia, (2010). Curriculum Differentiation: A Practical approach, Mindscape, 30(2), pp. 4-11.
  skills of productive thinking, i.e. creative, critical.

Product

Use a variety of media and products that can be negotiated .

Learning environment
By selecting content, teaching processes and product, teachers’ will have an influence on
learning environment that is developed.

Factors for consideration:

 Group characteristics
 Interests of gifted students
 Prior knowledge/developmental levels
 Gifted program type
(Gross 2004; Kaplan 1986).

Assessment/Evaluation of Kaplan’s Model Lesson Plan:

 Visual diaries and notes/images from research and experimental portfolio.

 Media experimentations
 How comprehensive student directed body of work is at applying the processes in
order to resolve the concept of the artist’s condition and the focus of time, place and
space.
 Independent research projects: peer feedback and discussion; evaluation on
sequencing of presentation; relevance; thoroughness.
 Altering reality
 Non-representational; vital elements

Maker’s Model for Curriculum Differentiation

Maker’s model of differentiated curriculum (Maker 1982) recommends curriculum

differentiation by modifying:

 Learning setting: to make an environment for learning, which best supports gifted
learners’ skills; risk-taking (educational), building knowledge and abilities in a
flexible and safe environment. The learning environment needs to:

 learner orientated – centring around learner curiosity, ideas including their

input instead of the instructors/teachers
 encourage autonomy – encouraging plus allowing pupil’s ideas
 receptive - allowing innovative materials, people and thoughts plus outside
school and inter-disciplinary skills to evolve
 tolerant - allowing tolerance of people’s opinions, ideas prior to assessing
anything
 complexity – incorporating resource variety; ideas, methods, media and
projects
 very mobile – allowing, supporting students to get up from their desks, go
into different groups, classroom and school.

Citation: M. L. Ronksley-Pavia, (2010). Curriculum Differentiation: A Practical approach, Mindscape, 30(2), pp. 4-11.
  Modifying Content: endeavor to take away upper limits to teaching and learning, and
utilise students’ own skills to enrich and diversify their skill foundations. Encouraged
via:

 abstractness - in content moving beyond just definitions and facts towards

crucial ideas, associations with key ideas
 intricacy - shifting content, intertwined connections instead of looking at
single parts
 diversity - in content going away from items offered by usual curriculum
 investigating authentic personalities - studying individual/ populations of
people plus what they did with regard to problem-solving in specific situations
 methods of investigation - counting processes utilised via specialists
functioning specific areas

 Process adjustment: Endeavor to encourage higher-level thinking plus creative

abilities, as well as encouraging productive employment plus managing information
which learners’ already know. Encouraged and made easier by using:

 High-level thinking - Bloom's Taxonomy of Cognitive Processes (1984),

logic problems, problem solving and critical thinking
 creative thinking - intuitive approaches, imagination and brain-storming
 open-endedness - encourage risk-taking behaviour; encouraging students to
believe in there being often no incorrect/correct answers
 grouping interaction – gifted plus highly motivated and able students can
bounce ideas about sparking new ideas and directions in particular tasks
 variable pace - enabling learners to go quickly beyond lower-order thinking
but permitting increased time for responding completely to higher-order
thinking tasks
 variety in the learning process - adjust to differing styles of learning
 de-briefing – teaching awareness and articulation of conclusions and thought
processes in answering tasks, problems and projects
 encouraging freedom of choice - allowing learners to evaluate topic choices,
products, methods and learning environments.

 Modifying the product: Gifted students need to be encouraged and given chance to
produce end-products which adequately demonstrate and show their capability,
especially important for gifted students with learning disabilities. To encourage this
incorporate:

 real-life problems – which are authentic and pertinent for pupils and the task
 real-life audience – by using a suitable viewers to see the final products
 real deadlines – enabling skills of time-management and real-life scheduling
to be learned
 transformations – which means transforming learning instead of just
reiterating
 appropriately evaluating – using self and peer evaluations, real-life
audiences, using previously established "real world" measures for assessing
and evaluating end-products and skills learnt

(Bailey 2004; Gross 2000a; NSWDET 2003).

Citation: M. L. Ronksley-Pavia, (2010). Curriculum Differentiation: A Practical approach, Mindscape, 30(2), pp. 4-11.
The Williams Model

The Williams Model (1986) is founded on research of the creative individual and processes,
it is particularly useful in curriculum differentiation in visual arts (William, 1986; 1970).

Figure 2: The Williams Model: A Model for Implementing Cognitive-Effective Behaviours in the Classroom (Williams
1986:467)

Williams describes his model as “morphological, not a taxonomy since none of the factors
nor dimensions imply hierarchy” (Williams 1986:462).

The Williams Model (1986) provides a practical scaffolding for developing activities and
questions to stimulate thinking processes. Teaching strategies encourage expressions of
inquisitiveness, risk-taking (educational), imagination, and intricacy that research has
recognised as significant factors in demonstration of creativity (NSWDET 2003; Williams
1986) it is also useful as a cross-curriculum differentiation model. Please note all areas of the
model do not have to be covered when differentiating curriculum.

Dimension 1: Is school curriculum subjects; subject matter and curriculum content. Students
need content to “think and feel about” (Williams 1986:467).

Dimension 2: This encompasses 18 modes of teaching which teachers’ can utilise to develop
creative thinking/creativity.

Dimension 3: This includes eight pupil behaviours; cognitive (4), affective, (4); which
empirical evidence has shown are involved in creative thinking (Williams 1986).
These behaviours comprise opportunities for creative thinking (fluency, flexibility,
innovation and expansion).

Practical Application: Williams Model Lesson Plan Grid: High School - Visual Arts
Class

 Content: Visual arts syllabus QLD Dept. Education.

Citation: M. L. Ronksley-Pavia, (2010). Curriculum Differentiation: A Practical approach, Mindscape, 30(2), pp. 4-11.
  Topic: Identify/research two or more visual artists; mythology, techniques, styles,
media, era, time, place, influences. One term of work.
 Media: Students choice of 2-D media can include electronic media to be presented as
part of a body of work.

Teaching Processes:

Activity or activities
Paradox Investigate ‘Old wives tales’ regarding artists, myths/
mythology surrounding some famous artists
Attribute Listing Skills of analysing information from research on particular
artists; Van Gogh, Picasso; analyse artists work, particular
media , style, symbols’ techniques
Analogy Compare two of the artists: their styles, techniques, mythology
surrounding their lives/work
Discrepancy Any discrepancies with regard to mythology surrounding
chosen artists, gaps in research, knowledge, what is missing in
the information? What does this mean/imply?
Provocative Provocative questioning: Provide many categories of
Question questioning those that need interpretation, extrapolation,
discovery, synthesis and analysis. Allow students to ask
provocative questions and answer them by research.
Examples of Change Discuss how artists change over time in response to their
environments; research changes in artist’s materials/media.
Examples of Habit Show how chosen artists lives were ruled/influenced by habit;
things that have remained unchanged because of habit in the
art world.
Organised Random Find a situation in the artist’s life; pose questions such as what
Search would you have done then/instead? Presentation of unsolved
social issues arising from the artists’ lives; drug taking. Watch
films about the artist lives and stop the film at a situation or
problem and allow students to create their own scenarios,
brainstorming.
Skills of Search Describe chosen artists techniques, compare/contrast
techniques of both artists.
Tolerance for Ask open-ended questions, use film to allow students to play
Ambiguity with information, let them be challenged, puzzled, intrigued
and involved in their learning.
Intuitive Expression Students to produce a body of artwork reflecting their feelings
about one of their chosen artists, any media of their choice
Adjustment to Learn from their mistakes in the process of creating their body
Development of work, make notes in visual diary, what mistakes were made,
what has been learnt from mistakes, did mistakes contribute to
the art work or detract from it?
Study Creative Make notes about their chosen artists’ lives and creativity,
Process social, emotional, personal. Why is one person creative
artistically and not another?
Evaluate Situations From a chosen situation evaluate the outcomes e.g. When Van
Gogh cut-off part of his ear,

Citation: M. L. Ronksley-Pavia, (2010). Curriculum Differentiation: A Practical approach, Mindscape, 30(2), pp. 4-11.
Creative Reading Note ideas that arise during research in visual diaries
Skill
Creative Listening Listening skills: during group work; film viewing;
Skill brainstorming. Make notes in visual diaries about what was
heard.
Creative Writing Skills of creating signs and symbols in visual arts; make notes
Skill and incorporate into body of work the symbolism used by
chosen artist(s).
Visualisation Express ideas in visual diaries, then in final body of work
using studies and a variety of media of students’ choice.
Table 2: William’s Model Teaching Processes(William 1986; NSWDET 2003).

 Product: Body of work; visual diary; recording/research findings

 Learning environment: open, flexible, student orientated, safe for risk taking
behaviours and mistakes.

Visual arts are very much an area of endeavour that relies on creative processes which
support Williams Model of opportunities for creative thinking; flexibility, fluency,
elaboration and originality.

Assessment of Williams’ Model Lesson Plan:

 Visual diaries and notes/images from research and investigations.

 On-going; discussions, peer review/comments/brainstorming sessions
 Research projects: peer feedback and discussion; evaluation on sequencing of
presentation; relevance; thoroughness.
 Thoroughness/thoughtfulness/insight

Planning Differentiated Curricula for Gifted Learners

Curriculum planning and differentiation for gifted learners can be facilitated by the use of
curriculum models, however it is important to note that differentiated curricula then need to
be tailored to individual gifted students’ needs (Gross 2004b), there is no ‘one- size-fits-all’.
Assessment and evaluation of curriculum practice needs to be fluid and ongoing to best meet
the changing needs of gifted learners.

Strengths of the Models

Maker Model – modifies content, process and products for gifted learners, as do Kaplan and
Williams’ models.
Kaplan Model – translating outcomes for greater depth and complexity.
Williams – designing curriculum for the theme/topic.

Grouping Practices for curriculum differentiation

Drawbacks of part-time withdrawal:

 students have to catch up on class work they missed

 withdrawal group work should be extension work not ‘busy’ work
 students should not miss regular work which they enjoy

Citation: M. L. Ronksley-Pavia, (2010). Curriculum Differentiation: A Practical approach, Mindscape, 30(2), pp. 4-11.
  useful if skills learnt in withdrawal programs have relevance to regular class work –
good communication is needed between teachers
 part-time withdrawal classes should be used as part of a gifted program not be the
whole program; in conjunction with cluster grouping, full-time gifted classes and
ability grouping (Bailey 2004).

Type of
Grouping Similarities Differences
- Part-time - only occasional, sometimes once
Part-Time - Needs curriculum a week/month-little continuity of
Withdrawal differentiation learning
- Range of abilities in group - easily arranged for schools that
- Meet students who share otherwise might not have a gifted
interests program
- learners often ‘miss-out’ on
regular class work and have to
catch up, can be seen as
punishment
- Meet students who share - remain in class and perform
Ability interests extension/enrichment activities
Grouping - Flexible, students can be - flexible-students can be moved in
within a moved in/out when required or out
- Range of abilities in group - students don’t miss out on regular
Class (cluster
- Can be permanent or part- class activities
grouping) time
- Needs curriculum
differentiation
- Used with or instead of
grouping between classes
- Range of abilities in group - places gifted students with
- Meet students who share students of similar abilities not
interests age
Ability - Needs curriculum - more permanent form of grouping
differentiation allows continuity of learning
Grouping
- Flexible, students can be - can be used to trial grade skipping
Between moved in/out when required for individual students
Classes - Can be permanent or part-
time
- -used with or instead of
cluster grouping
“OC’s” and - Range of abilities in group - Permanent
Selective - Meet students who share - Uses curriculum compacting and
High Schools interests differentiation school/class wide
- Needs curriculum - All students attending have
differentiation undergone formal testing
- Specialist teachers,
administration, and other staff to
cater for unique needs of gifted
learners
Table 3: Differences and Similarities

Citation: M. L. Ronksley-Pavia, (2010). Curriculum Differentiation: A Practical approach, Mindscape, 30(2), pp. 4-11.
Ability Grouping

Broad amalgamation of investigations on achievement and ability grouping of gifted learners

(Rogers 1991; Gross 1993; Kulik & Kulik 1997; Benbow 1998; Gross 1997a) explains that
grouping by ability advances accomplishments of highly gifted students (Page & Keith
1996). Students in classes where ability grouping occurs and where curriculum is enriched
and accelerated have gained in year-level abilities at double average rate. Students in classes
grouped by ability where curriculum was mainly enriched, were also shown to have
progressed, these rates were 50% higher than same ability students in regular mixed-ability
classrooms (Kulik 1992).

However, when students are grouped by ability but get identical curriculum as they would
receive in regular classrooms, the impact on their learning is minimal. These students’
achievements showed only a month’s growth per year compared with same-ability students in
regular classrooms of mixed abilities. This is a minute increase when contrasted with
recorded increases for gifted learners in other ability groupings (Kulik 1992).

Ability grouping success can be attributed to:

 improved match between learning needs and developmental inclination and
educational needs of particular student and speed and level of their learning.
 Students of different abilities responding in different ways to varied curriculum and
pedagogy.
 students are more likely to learn more efficiently when able to work with similar
ability (or slightly higher ability) peers.
 Ability grouping increases gifted student’s self-esteem and encourages them to reach
higher goals. Effect of “dumbing down” in order to fit in is negated.
 Ability grouping can close gaps on range of achievements. Coorey (1998) discusses
“learning gaps” found when surveying literacy in Australian primary classes. Gaps
were almost equivalent to five years of educational difference between children at the
apex and base 10% in Year 3 classes.
(Van Tassel-Baska 1989; Rogers 1991; Benbow 1998)

Subject Acceleration and Grade Skipping

 Louis, (15 years old) who scored 165 on WISC-R was doing university level maths
and physics whilst still attending his Queensland High School for all his other
subjects. Louis was grade skipped in his primary school years, initially just one grade,
allowed to settle in and then reassessed before being skipped again, in total he skipped
four years this way.

Early Entry

 This is similar to grade skipping but is probably the least disruptive form. Highly able
children who enroll at a younger age usually adjust well with the older peers
(Colangelo, Assouline, & Gross 2004; Kulik & Kulik, 1992; Rogers 1992, 2004).

Citation: M. L. Ronksley-Pavia, (2010). Curriculum Differentiation: A Practical approach, Mindscape, 30(2), pp. 4-11.
 Telescoping

 This program offered in Middle School allows acceleration for pupils entering Year 5.
The class enables gifted pupils to compact Years 5, 6 and 7 into two years, which is
offered in a supportive social and emotional setting. The program’s aims are to offer
educational experiences and opportunities, which are well suited to G & T students’
needs (Gross 2004a; Bailey 2004). The learning environment values and encourages
intellect, problem solving and critical thinking skills, talent and giftedness, whilst also
improving growth of pupil’s intuitive and affective abilities. The program is run in
separate classrooms, with separate curriculum and teachers to regular school; which
enables greater focus on individual gifted pupil’s needs.

Other examples of acceleration:

 Mentoring
 Extra curricular activities
 Parallel enrollment
 Combination classes
 Distinction programs
 Credit by exams
 Early entrance to tertiary programs – there are other options to full-time enrolment:
enrollment tertiary and high school programs, summer programs, distance education
and A P (Advanced Placement).
(Merrotsy 2008)

Positive Effects of Acceleration

 Augmented efficiency in learning, outcomes and productivity
 Acknowledgement of abilities and endeavours
 Augmented career and learning choices
 Introduction to new peers
 Administration (easier than keeping track of individual/grouping programs)
 Exposure to new peer group
(Merrotsy 2008).

Maker Kaplan Williams

Content  research  Interest and needs of  syllabus based (K-

 study of people gifted 12)
 variety  Syllabus based  language
 complexity  Interdisciplinary  interdisciplinary
 abstractness  theme
 concepts
 relationships
 generalizations
 theme

Teaching  higher order  Productive thinking  Paradoxes

Process thinking skills  Skills  Attributes
 open-endedness  Creativity  Analogies
 creativity  Problem solving  Discrepancies
 group discussions  Research- accessing,  Examples of change
 variable pacing interpreting,  Examples of habit

Citation: M. L. Ronksley-Pavia, (2010). Curriculum Differentiation: A Practical approach, Mindscape, 30(2), pp. 4-11.
  choice summarising,  Organised random
 debriefing reporting research
 Critical thinking  Research skills
 Tolerance for
ambiguity
 Intuitive expression
 Learn from
mistakes- develop
options
 Study creative
people and process
 Evaluate situations
 Creative reading
skill
 Creative listening
skill
 Creative writing
skill
 Visualization skills
Product  deadlines  Develop strategies  Connectedness
 transformation of for feedback  Open ended
learning  Use a variety of
 evaluation media for presenting
 real audiences work
 real life problems  Develop work using
 appropriate
techniques
Affective  Leadership  values  curiosity
 attitudes  productivity  risk taking
 leadership  complexity
 attitudes  imagination
 appreciation  Creative thinking
 understanding of
self
 value for learning
 leadership
Learning 
student centred  Open
environment 
complex  Flexible

independence  Safe for risk taking
encouraged behaviours
 open
 accepting
 mobile
Table 4: Evaluation of Suitability of Kaplan & Williams’ Models Compared with Maker’s
(Maker 1982; Williams 1986; Kaplan 1986; Gross, Mcleod, Drummond, Merrick 2001).

Evaluation: An Instrument of Reflection when Developing Differentiated Curricula

Which of these have been done adequately?

1. What are the expected outcomes, do they include both content and skills?
2. What will pupils:
a. Be taught
b. Comprehend
c. Be capable of
3. What can be used to review and judge what pupils’ prior knowledge is
4. Are there any prior skills or knowledge already possessed by pupils
5. Is the curriculum differentiated so that activities spotlight key learning areas.

Citation: M. L. Ronksley-Pavia, (2010). Curriculum Differentiation: A Practical approach, Mindscape, 30(2), pp. 4-11.
 a.
Include of differing ability levels within the classroom?
b.
Including high-order thinking?
c.
Allow for thought-provoking?
d.
Allow for activities which challenge ideas and concepts?
e.
Allow for creative and thinking experiences?
f.
Create opportunities to experience in-depth learning and topics/activities? which
involve pupils’ own interests?
g. Allow pupils to choose activities/projects?
h. Let pupils know teacher’s expectations?
i. Let students know what the assessment measures are?
j. Gather feedback and teach pupils how to do this?
6. Use these ideas to increase pupils understanding, knowledge and skills:
a. Allow for group activities planned specifically for gifted pupils
b. Curriculum compacting
c. Study contracts
d. Private research projects
e. E-learning
f. Availability of centres for learning within the classroom
7. What assignments have been designed, do they allow for a wide variety of abilities
within the classroom? Do these:
a. Need all pupils to utilise skills learnt to apply main ideas, generalizing, idea
generation, problem solving to make useful end-products?
b. Main ideas designed to challenge and extend gifted students?
c. Show the process (es) utilised in making the product? (researching, explaining,
organizing and reviewing/reflecting?
d. Allow for individual expectations for students differing in abilities?
e. Allow for continual reflection and change to the expected product where
necessary?
f. Allow for products to be assessed by peers, pupils, real-life audiences as well
as the teacher?
g. Allow for input from parents where necessary?
(Bailey 2004; Gross 2004a).

Curriculum Differentiation Management Strategies

Include:

 contracts – catering for individualised and student negotiated projects whilst

encouraging pupils’ time-management skills and independence
 conferencing – encouraging pupil co-operation and evaluation, and parental
input
 grouping strategies - allowing students to operate with like-minded students
and facilitating group communication.

Environment for Learning

By selecting content, processes plus products the teacher (or parent), has an effect on the kind
of environment for learning that is developed. Many aspects, along with the outcomes,
influence what teaching strategies teachers’ employ. This depends a great deal on the
individual students being taught; the students’ own interest areas; the levels of development

Citation: M. L. Ronksley-Pavia, (2010). Curriculum Differentiation: A Practical approach, Mindscape, 30(2), pp. 4-11.
to which the students have already reached and the gifted program type and its features
(Gross 2004a; Bailey 2004; NSWDET 2003).

Conclusion

Curriculum differentiation in its many forms, is one useful strategy for serving the individual
needs of gifted and talented students. As discussed the need for teacher, parent and student
input is necessary to gauge the extent of curriculum differentiation which is needed for each
child. Consider using the tools discussed in this paper in your educational context, be it a
traditional classroom, grouped situation, home-school, or to give your gifted child extension
and enrichment activities outside school.

Citation: M. L. Ronksley-Pavia, (2010). Curriculum Differentiation: A Practical approach, Mindscape, 30(2), pp. 4-11.
 References

Bailey, S. 2004, ‘Module Six: Primary’, GERRIC, Australian Government, Gifted and
Talented Education Professional Development Package for Teachers. Retrieved 12
May 2008 from
http://www.dest.gov.au/sectors/school_education/publications_resources/profiles/Gift
ed_Education_Professional_Development_Package.htm

Benbow, C.P. 1998, ‘Grouping Intellectually Advanced Students for Instruction’, in

Excellence in Educating Gifted and Talented Learners, (Third edition), ed J. Van
Tassel-Baska, Love Publishing Company, Denver, pp. 261-278.

Braggett, E. 1997, Differentiated Programs for Secondary Schools: Units of Work for
Gifted and Talented Students, Hawker Brownlow Education, Melbourne.

Braggett, E., Morris, G., & Day, A. 1999, Reforming the middle years of schooling,
Hawker Brownlow Education, Melbourne.

Colangelo, N., Assouline, S., & Gross, M. (eds) 2004, ‘A Nation Deceived: How
Schools Hold Back America’s Brightest Students’, vol. I & II, ‘The Templeton
National Report on Acceleration’, Belin Blank International Center for
Gifted Education and Talent Development, Iowa City. Retrieved 5 May 2008 from
http://www.nationdeceived.org

Daniel, N. 1989, ‘Out of the Richardson study: A look at flexible pacing’, The Gifted
Child Today, vol. 12, no. 5, pp. 48-52.

Davis, G. A. & Rimm, S. B. 2004, Education of the Gifted and Talented, Pearson
Education, Boston.

The State of Queensland Department of Education and the Arts 2004,

‘Framework for Gifted Education’. Retrieved 28 September 2007 from
http://www.learningplace.com.au/default_suborg.asp?orgid=23&suborgid=158

Gross, M.U.M. 1993, Exceptionally gifted children, Routledge, London.

Gross, M.U.M. 1997(a), The effects of ability grouping on the academic and social
development of gifted children, Seminar paper, GERRIC, UNSW, Sydney.

Gross, M.U.M. 1997(a), ‘How Ability Grouping Turns Big Fish into Little Fish – or
Does it? Of Optical Illusions and Optimal Environments’, in The Gifted Enigma: A
Collection of Articles, eds W. Vialle, & J. Geake, 2002, Hawker Brownlow
Education, Melbourne, pp. 131-163.

Gross, M.U.M. 2000, ‘Issues in the cognitive development of exceptionally and

profoundly gifted individual’ in International handbook of research and development
of giftedness and talent, eds K. A. Heller, F. J. Monks, R. J. Sternberg, & R. F.
Subotnik, 2nd ed., Pergamon, New York, pp. 179–192.

Citation: M. L. Ronksley-Pavia, (2010). Curriculum Differentiation: A Practical approach, Mindscape, 30(2), pp. 4-11.
Gross, M. & Sleap, B. 2001, ‘Literature Review on the Education of Gifted and
Talented Children’, Gifted Education Research, Resource and Information Centre
(GERRIC), University of New South Wales, Sydney.

Gross, M., Macleod, B., Drummond, D., Merrick, C. 2001, ‘Gifted Students in
Primary Schools: Differentiating the Curriculum’, Gifted Education Research,
Resource and Information Centre (GERRIC), Sydney.

Gross, M. 2004a, Exceptionally Gifted Children, Routledge Falmer, London.

Gross, M. 2004b, ‘Module Six: To Group or Not to Group: Is That the

Question?’, GERRIC, Australian Government, Gifted and Talented Education
Professional Development Package for Teachers. Retrieved 8 March 2008 from
http://www.dest.gov.au/sectors/school_education/publications_resources/profiles/Gift
ed_Education_Professional_Development_Package.htm

Kaplan, S. 1986, ‘The Grid: A Model to Construct Differentiated Curriculum for the Gifted’
in Systems and Models for Developing Programs for the Gifted and Talented ed J.
Renzulli, Creative Learning Press, Conneticut, pp. 180-193.

Kulik, J. A. & Kulik C-L, C. 1992, An analysis of the research on ability grouping:
Historical and contemporary perspectives, National Research Centre on
the Gifted and Talented, Storrs, CT.

Lipscomb, J. M. 2003, ‘A validity study of the Iowa Acceleration Scale’, unpublished doctoral
dissertation, ‘D: Validation of the IAS’, in A Nation Deceived: How Schools Hold
Back America’s Brightest Students. Volumes I & II eds N. Colangelo, S. Assouline &
M. Gross, 2004, The Templeton National Report on Acceleration. Iowa City: Belin
Blank International Center for Gifted Education and Talent Development. Retrieved
20 May 2008 from http://www.nationdeceived.org

Maker, C. J. 1982, Teaching models in the education of the gifted, Pro-Ed, Austin, TX.

Maker, C. J. (ed) 1993, Critical Issues in Gifted Education: Defensible Programs for the
Gifted, Pro-Ed, Austin, TX.

Maker, C. J. 1996, Curriculum Development and Teaching Strategies for Gifted

Learners, Pro-Ed, Austin, TX.

Merrotsy, P. 2008, ‘Acceleration’, in Encyclopedia of Educational Psychology, ed N.

Salkind, Sage Publications, author’s copy, Thousand Oaks, CA.

Page, E. B. & Keith, T. Z. 1996, ‘The elephant in the classroom: Ability grouping
and the gifted’, in Intellectual talent: Psychometric and social issues, eds C.P.
Benbow & D. Lubinski, Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, pp. 192-210.

Renzulli, J. (ed) 1986, Systems and Models for Developing Programs for the Gifted
and Talented, Creative Learning Press, Connecticut, pp. 180-193.

Citation: M. L. Ronksley-Pavia, (2010). Curriculum Differentiation: A Practical approach, Mindscape, 30(2), pp. 4-11.
 Rogers, K. B. 1991, The Relationship of Grouping Practices to the Education of the
Gifted and Talented Learner, National Research Centre on the Gifted and Talented,
Storrs, CT.

Rogers, K. B. 2002, Re-forming Gifted Education, Great Potential Press, Scottsdale,

AZ.

NSW Department of Education and Training, 2003, ‘Quality teaching in NSW

public schools: Discussion paper’. Retrieved 5 May 2008 from
www.curriculumsupport.education.nsw.gov.au/qualityteach/resources/phases/index.ht
m

NSW Department of Education, (n.d), ‘Gifted and Talented Support Package for
Teachers. Retrieved 5th May 2008 from
www.curriculumsupport.education.nsw.gov.au/policies/

State of NSW, Department of Education and Training, Curriculum K–12 Directorate, 2004,
‘Policy and Implementation Strategies for the education of gifted and talented Students:
Curriculum Differentiation’. Retrieved 5 May 2008 from
www.curriculumsupport.education.nsw.gov.au/policies/gats/programs/differentiate/index.htm

Senate Employment, Workplace Relations, Small Business and Education References

Committee, Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia, 2001, ‘The education of gifted
children’. Retrieved 5 May 2008 from
www.aph.gov.au/senate/committee/eet_ctte/completed_inquiries/1999-
02/gifted/submissions/sub098a.doc

Van Tassel-Baska, J. (ed) 1998, Excellence in Educating Gifted and Talented Learners,
(Third edition), Love Publishing Company, Denver.

Vialle, W. & Geake, J. (eds) 2002, The Gifted Enigma: A Collection of Articles,
Hawker Brownlow Education, Melbourne.

Williams, F. E. 1970, Classroom Ideas for Encouraging Thinking and Feeling, D.O.K.,
Buffalo, NY.

Williams, F. E. 1993, ‘The cognitive-affective interaction model for enriching gifted

Programs’, in Systems and Models for Developing Programs for the Gifted and
Talented, ed J. S. Renzulli, Hawker Brownlow Education, Highett, Vic, pp. 461–484.

Citation: M. L. Ronksley-Pavia, (2010). Curriculum Differentiation: A Practical approach, Mindscape, 30(2), pp. 4-11.

View publication stats