Cluster Grouping Books Davidson, J.,

Cluster Grouping

BOOKS

Davidson, J., B. Davidson, L. Vanderkam. (2004). Genius Denied: How to Stop Wasting Our Brightest Young Minds. New York: Simon and Schuster.

The core of this book is the stories of exceptionally bright or talented children forced to endure the routines of regular schools that, while teaching to the lowest common denominator, stifle their enormous potential. Often GTs feel isolated and ashamed of their intellectual gifts, causing some to become behavioral problems, others to hide their intellectual acumen to "fit in." Clustering these children helps to mitigate that problem, if the universe is large enough within a particular school.

Gentry, M. (1999). Promoting Student Achievement and Exemplary Classroom Practices Through Cluster Grouping. Storrs, CT: Center for the Gifted and Talented.

In this monograph, a causal-comparative, longitudinal study of cluster grouping at the elementary level is described and recommendations are made based on findings. This study employed both quantitative and qualitative methodologies. The primary purpose of this study was to examine the effects of an existing cluster grouping program on the achievement and identification of students who participated in the program from third through fifth grade and to compare achievement with similar students who were not involved in a cluster grouping program.

Journals

Belcastro, F. (2002). "Electronic Technology and Its Use With Rural Gifted Students." The Roper Review. 25 (1): 14+

Strong and persuasive argument for the enhanced use of more technology for GT students within the Rural areas who, through no fault of the district, are not able to cluster properly. Higher technology use actually helps modify some behavioral problems within the GT population.

Coleman, M.R. (1995). The importance of cluster grouping. Gifted Child Today, 18(1), 38-40.

Argues that in the modern classroom, with its extensive diversity, it is even more critical that cluster grouping be utilized in a more robust way for GT populations.

Delcourt, M., & Evans, K. (1994). Qualitative extension of the learning outcomes study (Research Monograph 94110). Storrs, CT: University of Connecticut, The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented.

Research-based data that shows there is a measurable learning difference for GT populations between clustering and non-clustering groups.

Duncan, B. (1989). Program model. Michigan Association of Educators for the Gifted, Talented and Creative (MAEGTC), 9(1).

Models to utilize GT clustering within the regular school district based on prior research and standardized testing.

Gentry, M. (1996). Cluster grouping: An investigation of student achievement, identification and classroom practices. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Connecticut, Storrs.

Student achievement is not limited to academic performance with cluster grouping of GT, instead, this study shows how vital it is for social and emotional development.

Gentry, M. And B. Keilty. (2004). "Rural and Suburban Cluster Grouping." The Roper Review. 26 (3): 147+.

Sometimes rural and smaller school districts are unable to make adequate arrangements for the GT population. This article shows ways in which that can be mitigated and a GT clustering can be implemented in almost every available classroom setting.

Hoeflinger, M. (1998). "Mathematics and Science in Gifted Education." Roper Review. 20 (4): 244+.

Often the GT populations are pushed towards the math and science curriculum because of their test scores. This study argues not to forget the humanities, but to enhance a greater skill set and cognitive maturity by increasing the robustness of the math/science curriculum.

Hoover, S.M., Sayler, M., & Feldhusen, J.F. (1993). Cluster grouping of gifted students at the elementary level. Roper Review, 16(1), 13-15.

Hands on approach to clustering showing teachers appropriate pedagogical standards to implement a robust clustering strategy.

Little, C., et.al. (2007). "A Study of Curriculum Effectiveness in Social Studies." The Gifted Child Quarterly. 51 (3): 272+.

Implementing innovation is difficult and sometimes expensive within the modern school curriculum. However, this study proves that clustering and additional improvements for the GT Social Studies curriculum results in higher scores and extremes in satisfaction inventory.

Pierce, R., et.al. (2007). "Development of an Identification Procedure for a Large Urban School Corporation." The Roper Review. 29 (2): 113+/

Focuses on ways that schools can develop more appropriate programs for the GT populations while, at the same time, improving classroom instruction for all diverse levels.

Reinisch, S. And L. (1997). "Parents' Perspective on Gifted Education." Peabody Journal of Education. 72 (1): 244+

Parents are often very insecure about their GT child, oftentimes because the child has already surpassed their level of education or training. This article offers ways to cope and provides a broader-based study on the issues that parents of the GT endure.

Rogers, K.B. (1991). The relationship of grouping practices to the education of the gifted and talented learner (RBDM 9102). Storrs, CT: University of Connecticut, The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented.

Argues that the GT population is actually at risk without clustering, and clustering is really only the minimal need for this special population.

Rogers, K.B (2002). "Grouping the Gifted and Talented: Questions and Answers." The Roper Review. 24 (3): 103.

Ways to more effectively use grouping in core subject areas to maximize learning potential for the GT.

Weinbrener, S. And B. Devlin. (1998). "Cluster Grouping of Gifted Students: How to Provide Full-Time Services on a Part-Time Budget." Teaching Exceptional Children. 30 (3): 62.

Focuses more on the resource and budgetary concerns when dealing with the GT populations. Format as "how to" provide services when a budget is not forthcoming.

Vantassel-Baska, J. (2006). "A Content Analysis of Evaluation Findings Across 20 Gifted Programs." The Gifted Child Quarterly. 50 (3): 199+

Research showing that as a nation, the implications point to a severe inequity in GT clustering programs. Not only are the GT being neglected, but not enough schools are implementing appropriate programs for that special population.

Web Based

Rogers, K. (1991). "The Relationship of Grouping Practices to the Education of the Gifted and Talented Learner." The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented.

http://www.gifted.uconn.edu/nrcgt/reports/rbdm9102/rbdm9102.pdf

Many school districts simply cannot afford a gifted program; there are federal dollars for students who express academic difficulty, but not typically for those who express advanced cognitive maturity. The clustering method solves this for all stakeholders: students are able to excel, the teachers are more engaged and content, parents are happier because the school is challenging their child to work to receive a better education, and the community at large benefits as well.

Rogers, K.B. (2002). Reforming Gifted Education: How Parents and Teachers Can Match the Program to the Child. Scottsdale, AZ: Great Potential Press. http://www.davidsongifted.org/db/Articles_id_10044.aspx

Practical-based study showing untrained teachers and parents how to implement greater GT strategies, both cluster and individualized.

Schuler, P. (1997). "Cluster Grouping Coast to Coast." University of Connecticut NEAG Center for Gifted Education and Talent Development. http://www.gifted.uconn.edu/nrcgt/newsletter/winter97/wintr974.html

Recommendations from the research show that although cluster grouping is being used in many areas of the country with generally positive results, four items could be implemented for a more robust template: 1) Develop criteria for selecting students.; 2) Define the qualifications of, and the selection process for, the teachers; 3) Plan the differentiated experiences for the cluster of gifted students; 4) Plan for support services and special resources.