School Wide Enrichment Process Description

School Wide Enrichment Model Description

SEM focuses on identifying the top 15-20% through Test Scores; Measures in Creative Potential and Productivity i.e. Torrance Test of Creative Thinking, Parent-Teacher and Student Nominations; Advanced Interests, and Task Commitment. SEM provides three levels of enrichment associated with student readiness and learning need.

Type l enrichment

General Education Exploratory Activities for all students

Audiovisual materials

Guest speakers

Field trips, demonstrations

Interest centers that expose students to new and exciting topics, ideas and fields of knowledge not

ordinarily covered in the regular curriculum.


Type II enrichment - Provides training activities for students who demonstrate curriculum proficiency. Activities can include the following:

Creative thinking

Problem solving

Critical thinking

Affective processes

Methodology-learning-how-to-learn through written/oral and visual communication

Independent study using advanced-level reference materials for research

Etc.

Type III enrichment is provided to learners who demonstrate mastery over the learning standards and present a high level of interest, motivation and a desire to pursue advanced levels of study. Type lll enrichment involves authentic opportunities such as:

Research and Investigative activities.

Students develop and direct questions to consumers and audiences regarding their research and/or the products they create.

Artistic productions in which the learner assumes the role of a first-hand inquirer thinking, feeling, and acting like a practicing professional or expert.

Mentorship

Etc.

Online Sources

http://presentlygifted.weebly.com/schoolwide-enrichment-model.html

http://www.slideshare.net/maryaliceosborne/the-schoolwide-enrichment-model-presentation

Articles

http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.4219/jaa-2008-815

http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/026142941002600303

http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/001698628803200108

http://www.jstor.org/stable/42744180?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

About SEM and Curriculum Compacting

Enrichment is described by Karnes and Bean, (2005) as "the horizontal broadening of curriculum aims"; this implies that the strategies used to provide enrichment, need to be purposeful and goal oriented. Curriculum compacting" promotes both of these; using a variety of assessment strategies, teachers determine what portions of the general curriculum are already understood by students prior to instruction.The time savings gained by eliminating portions of the curriculum already mastered, can be spent pursuing enrichment opportunities.

Gagne (1993) described two types of high ability learner; "Gifted" and "Talented". The gifted is described as being intellectual; more of an abstract thinker. The talented on the other hand, possess fast processing capability and are able to move through the curriculum rapidly with precision. When administering enrichment to high ability learners, educators might focus more on the gifted types and consider acceleration opportunities for what Gagne (1993) referred to as the talented. See Differentiation, Compacting and Acceleration in the footer section.

Facts about Compacting

Students who are persistent, independent or bored, benefit from compacting
Up to 50% of the general curriculum can be eliminated for the top performing 15%.
Up to 85% of the general curriculum can be eliminated for the top 3%.

Pre-assessing Mastery:

Students who demonstrate 85%-90% proficiency of the learning outcomes.
Evidence through unit quizzes, class discussions, journals, portfolios.
Evidence through informal discussions, formal interview, brainstorming knowledge, past performance, observation
Correct responses to the 5 most difficult unit questions
A mind map illustrating relationships within the content
Graphic illustration of knowledge, experience and interest using key words, etc.

Important Consideraions about Compacting

Student interest, time, personnel and resources.
Achievement is contingent on student satisfaction.
Phase out compacting if students become disruptive, unhappy and fail to progress.

Research Citations

Robinson, A., Shore, B. & Enersen D. (2007). Best practices in gifted education. Prufrock Press. Waco Texas.
Rogers, K.B. (2002). Re-forming gifted education. Great Potential Press. Scottsdale, Az.
Gagne, F (1993). Constructs and models pertaining to exceptional human abilities. In K.A. Heller, F. J. Monks, A. H. Passow (Eds.), International handbook of research and development of giftedness and talent (pp. 9-87). Oxford: Pergamon Press.



Terms & Conditions
                                                         P.O. Box 123, Gurnee, Illinois 60031                                        Copyright © 2020 Brightpace.com. All rights reserved.