Volume 1 - Issue 1 - DBU Journal for K-12 Educational Leadership - Page 16

14Journal for K-12 Educational Leadership 2017, VOL. 1, ISSUE 1 http://www.dbu.edu/doctoral/edd OPTIONS FOR EDUCATING THE GIFTED CHILD Kathryn Pabst Schaeffer, Ed.D. Introduction to Educating the Gifted Giftedness, one quality considered pervasive within an in - dividual for a lifetime, is equated with the ability to learn at a fast rate, to master complex ideas, and to reason at a high level of abstraction (Dai & Chen, 2013). The gifted label generally applies when an ability level exceeds that of the average population of peers by two standard intel - ligence quotient (IQ) deviations (Gagne, 2007). Those who rank two standard deviations (SD) above the mean on an intelligence assessment are likely to become the cogni- tive elite and to make significant contributions to society (Dai & Chen, 2013). National and state standards for gifted education offer no guidance regarding the design of appropriate and consistent grouping to best meet the needs of exceptional students. Recently, Texas has added yearly academic gains to their accountability measures for all students, including the gifted. Thus, designing gifted and talented program- ming to maximize continuous academic growth is, for the first time, essential to Texas school districts’ overall account - ability ratings. Texas Education of Gifted and Talented Students In Texas, school districts identify gifted students using var- ious assessment instruments and design programming to match their specific educational philosophies or their spe - cific financial constraints (Batenburg, 2014). Lack of consis - tency results in students being inconsistently identified as gifted and talented between school districts within the state of Texas (Batenburg, 2014). Consequently, a student may be identified as gifted in one district but not in another. Even when a student may be identified as gifted and talented in a given district, he or she can be served through a myriad of programming models. Programming and curricular de- cisions at the district level are further influenced by ethical, social-political, cultural, and pragmatic considerations. In the politicized educational climate, designing and providing educational services to a selected group of students ignites contentious debate. Gifted Grouping Practices for Academic Growth Grouping is a foundational academic practice especially when serving high achieving students (Reis, 2004). Purpose - ful grouping along with curriculum enhancement or differ - entiation is a best practice for any gifted program. Gifted learners achieve stronger academic outcomes when they have the opportunity to learn with those at their academic level in all academic contents (Reis, 2004). Table 1 depicts the various delivery models currently in use in K-12 schools. (See Table 1 on page 17.) Homogeneous Grouping The philosophy of homogeneous grouping as a program model rests upon the belief that gifted and talented students by virtue of their increased intellectual capacity are signifi - cantly dissimilar to other same-age students and, because of that distinction, their cognitive differences and social and emotional needs are unlike those of same-age general edu- cation students (Weinbrenner, 1992). The research on academic outcomes for homogeneous grouping of gifted students is more consistent than the research on heterogeneous grouping of gifted students. Some unequivocal statements supporting homogeneous