Volume 1 - Issue 1 - DBU Journal for K-12 Educational Leadership - Page 21

Journal for K-12 Educational Leadership 19 cluster grouping and a reliance on differentiation of both curriculum and instruction. Gifted programming models that previously offered homogeneous grouping through pull-out programs or full-time programs have been criti- cized as elitist, even though the research results comparing homogeneous and heterogeneous grouping models as best practices for gifted students remain inconclusive. A growth model for accountability measures perfor - mance gains rather than performance against a criterion referenced grade level standard assessment. This measure- ment ensures that gifted students’ learning is as valued as every other student’s learning. This performance gains model for accountability may shift the focus back to edu- cating students to their full potential and not simply edu- cating students to reach the same expected measurement of success. Educators’ overriding concern for gifted students is their students’ ability to be challenged with the opportunity for continuous academic growth. Resource allocation is to be considered for any educa- tional program. Cluster grouping is considered cost neutral since the enrichment of curriculum occurs within the gener - al education classroom. A homogeneous classroom may re- quire a school district to increase gifted programming fund- ing. The search for one best model for gifted programming may be inconclusive, but the investment in programming will continue to be necessary in order to ensure equity for academic yearly growth for gifted students. REFERENCES Batenburg, A. (2014). What is intelligence. Tempo: Journal of the Texas Association for the Gifted & Talented, 35 (1), 29-42. Brulles, D., Saunders, R., & Cohen, S. J. (2010). Improving performance for gifted students in a cluster grouping model. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 34 (2), 327- 350. Brulles, D., & Winebrenner, S. (2011). The schoolwide clus - ter grouping model: Restructuring gifted education ser- vices for the 21st century. Gifted Child Today, 34 (4), 35-45. Bryant, M. A. (1987). Meeting the needs of gifted first grade children in a heterogeneous classroom. Roeper Review , 9, 214-216. Coleman, M. R. (1995). The importance of cluster grouping. Gifted Child Today, 18 (1), 38-40. Dai, D. Y., & Chen, F. (2013). Three paradigms of gifted ed - ucation: In search of conceptual clarity in research and practice. Gifted Child Quarterly, 57, 151-168. Delacourt, M. A., & Evans, K. (1994). Qualitative extensions of the learning outcomes study (Research Monograph No. 94108). Storrs, CT: University of Connecticut, Research Center on the Gifted and Talented. Feldman, J. F., & Moon, S. M. (1992). Grouping gifted stu - dents: Issues and concerns. Gifted Child Quarterly, 36 (2), 46-52. Gagne, F. (2007). Ten commandments for academic talent development. G ifted Child Quarterly, 51 (10), 93-117. Gentry, M. L. (1999). Promoting student achievement and ex- emplary classroom practices through cluster grouping: A research-based alternative to heterogeneous elementary class- rooms . Storrs, CT: The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented. Gentry, M. L., & MacDougall, J. (2008). Cluster grouping: An answer for full time serving of the gifted. In Systems and models for developing programs for the gifted and tal- ented (2nd ed.). Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press. Gentry, M., & Mann, R. L. (2008). Total school cluster grouping & differentiation: A comprehensive, research-based plan for raising student achievement & improving teacher practices. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press, Inc. Goldring, E. (1990). Assessing the status of information on classroom organizational frameworks for gifted stu - dents. Journal of Educational Research , 83(4), 313-326. Hertberg-Davis, H. (2009). Myth 7: Differentiation in the regular classroom is equivalent to gifted programs and is sufficient: Classroom teachers have the time, the skill, and the will to differentiate adequately. Gifted Child Quarterly , 53(4), 251-253. Hoover, S., Sayler, M., & Fedlhusen, J. F. (1993). Cluster grouping of elementary student at the elementary level. Roeper Review, 16, 13-15. Kennedy, D. M. (1989). Classroom interactions of gifted and nongifted fifth graders (Doctoral dissertation). Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN. Kulik, J. A. (1992). An analysis of the research on ability group-