A FACILITATOR'S GUIDE TO HELP TEACHERS COMPACT CURRICULUM
by
Sally M. Reis
Deborah E. Burns
Joseph S. Renzulli
Gains in (technology) are never registered automatically in society; they require equally adroit inventions and adaptations in politics... Lacking a cooperative social intelligence and good-will, our most refined technics promises no more for society's improvement than an electric bulb would promise to a monkey in the midst of a jungle." Lewis Mumford Technics and Civilization (1934)
 |
All students, including those who are exceptional,
|
It is likely that a statement similar to the one printed above is contained in the first four or five pages of your school district's policy manual. This provision for meeting the individual needs of all students is commonly cited in many of the policy statements of school districts throughout the United States. What is less common is a school district's ability to implement such a policy statement in many of our nation's classrooms. Many of our brightest youngsters are frequently forced to participate in practice exercises or instructional groups that deal with skills or content that has been previously mastered. These same above average ability students also suggest that school is "too easy" and that they spend far too much time during the school day doing assignments that they already know how to do.
The parents of these youngsters may also be less than satisfied with the way that the schools are meeting the needs of their children. Many bright students are bored and disinterested in school and their parents frequently wonder when or if their children's academic needs will also be met by their local school district. Unfortunately, even with the creation of a gifted program or the implementation of enrichment options, these students may still not have a challenging program available to them in their regular classroom.
Many educators would like to develop curriculum that is adapted to the learning needs, rates, and interests of their above average ability students. Yet, these same educators frequently find that there are many obstacles that make it difficult to accomplish such a goal. Too little planning time, a need for a better organizational structure, and unclear curricular objectives often make the task even more challenging. This booklet prepared for teachers to accompany the satellite broadcast, has been developed in order to provide the interested teacher with several techniques that might be used to overcome such obstacles. It is a summary of a longer and more comprehensive guidebook entitled Curriculum Compacting: The Complete Guide to Modifying the Regular Curriculum for High Ability Students available from Creative Learning Press, Mansfield Center, Connecticut. Its major purpose is to help interested elementary grade teachers learn how to modify or "streamline" the regular curriculum in order to eliminate the practice of asking academically able students to repeatedly study previously mastered material. In doing so, these same teachers will be able to better challenge their above average ability learners and provide these students with time for appropriate enrichment and/or acceleration activities while ensuring mastery of the basic skills curriculum.
It is our hope that this booklet be used as an "inservice experience" for interested teachers who are tired of the frustration that comes from assigning work that is too easy for some of the bright students in their classes. We have tried to make our suggestions for curricular change systematic, realistic and practical. These suggestions are presented in a step-by-step fashion, and should provide the interested teacher with sufficient training to implement such curricular change without the need for additional workshops or training sessions. It is our hope this approach offers a sequential and easy to follow approach for modifying the curriculum for above average students, and that this process will save time for both the teacher and the student.
Our work in the area of curriculum modification is a part of a system that has been field tested for the last fifteen years in various school districts across the country and has proven to be effective in reducing boredom for bright students, as well as providing more challenging alternatives to the regular curriculum (Renzulli, 1977; Renzulli & Reis, 1985; Renzulli, Reis, & Smith, 1981). Curriculum compacting involves a few relatively easy steps: determining the goals and objectives of the regular curriculum, assessing whether or not students have previous mastery of those goals, and substituting more challenging and appropriate work for the student. Curriculum compacting can be achieved with individual students or with groups of students who demonstrate above average ability in any academic, artistic, or vocational area. In addition to being appropriate for use with above average students, curriculum compacting can also benefit any students who demonstrate strengths or expertise in any content area.
This Facilitator's Guide includes two parts. In the first, six elementary compactor forms are presented and explained. In the second part, an overview of the challenges associated with curriculum compacting is provided as are suggestions (based on current research) for the most effective ways to begin compacting. Also, the most frequently asked questions about curriculum compacting are raised and answered in this guide.
We have found that it is often helpful for facilitators to examine a number of completed compactor forms to learn how other teachers have used this process to adjust the regular curriculum to meet the needs of above average students. In this way, facilitators will be able to help coach teachers to use the process in various settings and with various types of student strengths. Included in this chapter are compactor forms for students of various ages from various educational settings. Some of the compactors were completed by classroom teachers who also have the benefit of having an enrichment teacher of high ability students who works with targeted students on a weekly basis in their schools; others were completed by teachers who do not have this service.
Six Elementary Grade Compactor Forms
Eileen's Compactor
Eileen is a fifth grader in a self-contained classroom in a very small school located in a lower socioeconomic urban school district. Most of her 29 classmates are reading one to two years below grade level while Eileen's total reading and language artsscores range between two and almost five years above grade level. Eileen's classroom teacher faced a problem many other teachers face she had 30 students in the class but no one was close to Eileen's reading level. The teacher agreed to compact curriculum but also insisted that she had to use the easiest possible approach. Eileen was asked to take all of the unit and level tests in the Holt Basal Language Arts program and she was excused from doing the activities and worksheets from the units covered by the pretests on which she clearly indicated proficiency (85% and above). If Eileen missed one or two questions, her classroom teacher would quickly check for trends in those items missed and if a pattern of errors existed, instruction would be provided to assure concept mastery. Eileen usually participated in language arts instruction for one or two days a week and the rest of the time was used for alternative activities, some of which were selected by Eileen.
This strategy saved Eileen as much as six or eight hours a week of basic skills language arts activities that were simply too easy for her. She participated in group instruction only when her pretests indicated she had not mastered the skills. In the time saved through the compacting process, a number of alternatives were implemented for Eileen. First, she spent up to five hours a week in a resource room for above average students. This time was almost always scheduled during Eileen's language arts class achieving two goals for her and her teacher. First, Eileen's teacher did not have to spend time looking for alternative activities during Eileen's compacted language arts time block because Eileen spent the majority of this time in a resource room. Second, the time that Eileen spent in the resource room did not result in a pile of make-up work that had to be completed when she returned to the classroom because she was not missing essential work.
The third column of the compactor includes the time Eileen spent in the resource room, as well as time spent on enrichment units in science, another of Eileen's strength areas. Based on the results of an interest-a-lyzer Eileen completed, the area of famous women emerged as an interest. Eileen and her classroom teacher identified seven biographies of famous women that were very challenging and were locally available. Three of those biographies were adult level books that Eileen had no trouble reading.
This compactor covered a semester of time and was updated at the end of January. Eileen's teacher indicated that the process of learning how to compact curriculum had convinced her that she actually saved time that was usually spent correcting papers that need never have been assigned! The benefits to Eileen also convinced her that this was something she should continue to do.
 |
Brad also displays strengths in language arts and mathematics. He attends a large school which has the benefit of having a reading and math consultant on the staff. Both of these content consultants helped with the pretesting administered to Brad and several other high potential students from the fourth grade. Brad's compactor form was filled out by his classroom teacher who stapled the results of the pretesting done by the content consultants to the compactor form. This explains why column one is less detailed than in other compacting examples. Brad's strengths are clearly noted as are the strategies that will be used to eliminate content he already knows and the methods for guaranteeing proficiency in column two. |
Brad worked on regular curricular work in language arts for only about one or two days a week. In spelling, he was consistently able to skip all of the drill and review work necessary to achieve perfect scores on spelling tests and he used the time saved on spelling to pursue advanced reading in the Great Books program.
In mathematics, he was able to master all of his fourth grade curriculum in approximately two days each week. Brad worked with three other students of similar ability in a cooperative learning group (comprised of high ability math students who all liked math) to be able to master math at this pace and the group then selected various alternatives listed in column three to pursue separately or as a group during mathematics instruction time.
No gifted program existed in Brad's district so the classroom teacher had to work much harder to provide appropriate instruction and alternatives listed in column three. However, assistance was provided by the math and language arts consultants who worked with groups of either remedial or advanced students, and who also brought in enrichment materials and appropriately advanced content for targeted students. The media specialist directed the independent study options pursued by students whose curriculum was compacted.
Alison's compactor form reflects strengths in three areas. In language arts, she has mastered most of the comprehension skills for the levels that would have been introduced in first grade and all of the spelling levels. In math, Alison received almost a prefect score on the math placement test and the follow-up individual tests for each level. Alison is a very precocious student in a very small elementary school. She had few peers who were at a similar achievement level and was very interested in math and science. It was clear that she could master all of the rest of her language arts objectives in one day each week.
Column two includes a listing of skills Alison had not mastered in the first grade language arts program. She met with her first grade group about one day each week or every other week to work on these areas. Her teacher also asked Alison to join the group whenever an enrichment lesson, or an appropriate writing lesson was being taught. Because no other student in Alison's grade level was at a commensurate level, a decision was made to accelerate her to the second grade classroom for mathematics. It must be pointed out that Alison's first grade teacher did not believe she could provide an individualized math program because of time restraints and other demands. It should also be noted that a move into the second grade classroom was not a panacea with regard to meeting Alison's considerable strengths in math. For students who are precocious in mathematics, acceleration of only one grade is often not much more challenging than working on their own grade level instructional material. In Alison's case, however, since she was so young, it did provide more challenge than she would have had and it also provided her with an opportunity to complete more advanced work on something she loved, mathematics. However, she was able to complete the regular second grade math curriculum in approximately half the time as the other students and the second grade classroom teacher worked to provide challenging content in the remainder of the time Alison was in the classroom.
It should also be noted that Alison was well suited to move into another
classroom. Not only was she extremely intelligent, she was also quite mature
for her age. She had already accepted her individual differences, often
telling her teacher in the gifted program that she had realized from the
time she was three or four years old that she was different from the children
in her play group. Some other very bright children are not always
happy when they are singled out for curriculum compacting. In fact, with
some students, the process of having them accept services is a slow and
careful one as they consistently tell their teachers that they do not
want to be different and that they want to do the exact same work as their
peers, even if they have known the skills for years. In this case,
we must recognize their anxieties and also acknowledge the type of whole
group instruction which has been so standard in our schools for so long.
If individual students are taught to do work that is tailored to their
needs, this particular problem would not exist. When it does, a student
must be helped to understand that requiring different assignments and work
is appropriate for him/her, and this process often takes time.
 |
Alison's options in column three are many and varied. She will work on an Apple Computer in her classroom to provide advanced reading and writing options. She will be provided independent, advanced reading opportunities and a regular opportunity to discuss these books with her teacher. She will spend up to five hours each week in a resource room gifted program in her school. She will be able to spend time which is saved through specific instances of curriculum compacting in that program. During this time, she will be able to work on a variety of experiences: independent study with close monitoring and guidance from her resource teacher, units designed to provide advanced content, critical and creative thinking skills and other alternatives based on Alison's curricular strengths and interests. She will also participate in science enrichment units taught by scientists from the regional science center. These units are designed to be presented to interested students with optional follow-up provided if interested students wish to pursue this option. Working with older students, with whom she interacted quite well, Alison pursued two topics in which she was interested. |
David is a mathematically talented student who is a sixth grader in a school district which has a policy against vertical acceleration in mathematics. Many of the districts that have participated in field tests of curriculum compacting have stated policies that do not allow students to be accelerated past their chronological grade in any content area. Obviously, this is a dilemma for talented students and their teachers. However, it should also be noted that the dumbing down of textbooks and the ease with which talented students can master regular curriculum results in little additional challenge being provided when a student is moved into the next chronological content level material. Accordingly, if an individual classroom teacher is willing and able to pursue appropriate alternatives, the program that is developed for mathematically (or any other content area) talented students may be made more challenging than what a student would receive if a placement was simply made into the next chronological grade mathematics textbook.
In David's case, curriculum compacting resulted in the completion of his math work for the entire year in the first six weeks of school. His teacher made the decision to do this for him in this way rather than having David work with his group one day each week for the year. The teacher believed that this option worked in a more efficient manner for his very organized, structured classroom. Also, another student was similar to David in his math potential, enabling David and her to work as learning partners throughout the year.
The classroom teacher selected various mathematics enrichment activities, as outlined in the district's math curriculum objectives for David's grade. He also selected several math enrichment series for David's work in the classroom. David also spent two hours a week of his mathematics instructional time in the gifted and talented program resource room with a teacher who further enriched his math program with additional computer skills.
Liza is such an advanced student that compacting is needed in almost every content area. As with the other compactors, documentation from pretests is provided to demonstrate the need for the service and a wide variety of alternatives is provided in column three in language arts and mathematics. Liza's interests in journalism resulted in the creation of a fifth grade classroom newspaper which was developed by Liza with the help of volunteers from her classroom. No gifted program existed in Liza's school so without a great deal of flexibility and effort on the part of her classroom teacher, these very creative alternatives would not have been able to be provided.
In October, Liza had completed all of the spelling in the advanced individualized
program that her teacher provided so Liza's spelling work became spell-checking
and editing the fifth grade newspaper. She was accelerated into grade six
and subsequently, grade seven mathematics instruction and did extremely
well in both areas. Liza's Compactor
The curriculum compacting that was accomplished in social studies provides the opportunity to discuss differences between basic skills compacting and content compacting once again. Liza did not know the curriculum in social studies because she had not studied these specific areas before. However, because she was so bright and because she has attained some general knowledge in geography and social studies, she learned the content in one month that the teacher planned to introduce to the rest of the classroom during the entire school year. Content compacting, accordingly, allows students who do not know the objectives of the content, to master those objectives in an appropriate time frame which matches a student's individual potential.
It should also be stressed that in the case of a very bright student, the activities listed in column three should provide appropriately challenging content. However, it is also important that a student does not perceive that he/she is being punished because of high ability. This often occurs when harder and more math problems replace the regular math curriculum work that is being completed by one's peers. When this occurs, the old refrain often emerges:
| Many of the teachers involved in our field tests of curriculum compacting have preferred to use group compacting to address the needs of students of similar ability in math, language arts, or another content area. Through our research studies (Reis et al., 1992), we also learned that if one or two students were targeted to have their curriculum compacted, the classroom teacher often extended this service to other students who displayed strengths in the curriculum area. Group compacting is a practical approach to use if a teacher is interested in pretesting the entire class on units or skills that will be covered in a certain content area. |  |
This group compactor is an example of this practice. Students who displayed mastery of a unit in language arts did not have to do any of the exercises, activities or workbook pages related to the skills in the unit in which they had demonstrated proficiency. Other students in the class were grouped together (for this unit only) by the number of skills they had yet to master. This enables compacting to be accomplished for other students to the degree and extent it was possible.
The targeted group of five students described in this compactor had several options listed in the third column. During the time the other students in the class were working on skills they had not yet mastered, the students described in the group compactor were working on alternative tasks. Some days, the teacher would meet with the group during regular language arts instructional time and other times, give an assignment such as a group reading selection from the Junior Great Books program, followed by a discussion later in the week. Other times, students were able to select one of the alternative assignments listed in column three based on their own interests. During language arts instructional time, some of the students involved in independent study were also allowed to go to the resource room in the district to work with a facilitator on an interest-based independent or small group project. This group compactor indicates that many students can benefit from curriculum compacting beyond those normally identified and placed in gifted and talented programs. In our research studies on curriculum compacting, most participating teachers indicated that they could use curriculum compacting with many more students than those formally identified for the gifted program.
In this section, the challenges encountered by teachers when they implement the compacting process are discussed. Suggestions for the most effective ways to begin the compacting process are explained. Also included is a description of the most recent research on the effectiveness of the compacting process and the most frequently asked questions about compacting.
Teachers who are interested in providing a more appropriate content or skills curriculum for their above average ability students must realize that there are several challenges or problems that they may encounter during the initiation of the compacting process. Although none are insurmountable, they must be recognized and a solution must be sought prior to implementing compacting.
PROBLEM 1: Repetition in the Grade Level Curriculum
The first problem that teachers frequently encounter when they initiate the compacting process is a difficulty caused by an instructional technique that has been called by some publishers, the "spiraled" approach to curriculum development (Tyson-Bernstein, 1988). Unlike objective referenced instruction that introduces a small set of process or content objectives to a select group of students during a given school year, a spiraled curriculum repeats instruction in many objectives over several school years. This approach is advocated for the heterogeneous classroom because it allows students who are at various developmental levels to achieve mastery of these objectives over an extended period of time. The spiraled approach to curriculum development is used for large group, rather than small group instruction, and often results in many bright students repeatedly participating in instruction or guided practice of previously mastered skills or concepts.
A quick glance at the scope and sequence chart of a curriculum guide or the teacher's manual of a textbook series will reveal the extent of curriculum spiraling in your own curriculum. Most publishers list the learning objectives for each of several grade levels in this kind of chart. By examining the change between the list of objectives for one grade level and the subsequent or following grade level, a determination of the extent of spiraling can be made.
In order to deal with the problem created by a spiraled approach to curriculum development, the teacher must make some decisions. Rather than assuming that every objective in a textbook's scope and sequence chart represents new or relevant learning for a given student, the teacher must analyze the grade level at which the skill or content objective was first introduced. The teacher can then identify which of the many objectives in a grade level curriculum are most appropriate for a given group of students. These objectives can then be used to locate appropriate pretests to measure student mastery of the identified objectives.
In what may be an extreme example of curriculum spiraling, Connie Muther (1987) reproduced the following Table of Contents from a language arts textbook series (Chart 1). Imagine the frustration of a bright student in English who must repeat the same instruction in how to write a character sketch for four consecutive high school years! Grade 9
CHAPTER 7: DESCRIPTIVE WRITING
Prewriting: Purpose and Audience 128
Prewriting: Sensory Details 129
Prewriting: Overall Impression 132
Writing a Description: Organization and Coherence 134
Writing a Description: Descriptive Language 135
Writing a Character Sketch 138
Revising, Editing, and Publishing Descriptive Writing 139
Review 143 Grade 10
CHAPTER 7: DESCRIPTIVE WRITING
Prewriting: Purpose and Audience 128
Prewriting: Sensory Details 129
Prewriting: Overall Impression 132
Writing a Description: Organization and Coherence 134
Writing a Description: Descriptive Language 136
Writing a Character Sketch 139
Revising, Editing, and Publishing Descriptive Writing 140
Review 145 Grade 11
CHAPTER 7: DESCRIPTIVE WRITING
Prewriting: Purpose and Audience 141
Prewriting: Sensory Details 143
Prewriting: Overall Impression 146
Writing a Description: Organization and Coherence 148
Writing a Description: Descriptive Language 151
Writing a Description: Mood 153
Writing a Character Sketch 154
Revising, Editing, and Publishing Descriptive Writing 156
Review 159 Grade 12
CHAPTER 7: DESCRIPTIVE WRITING
Prewriting: Purpose and Audience 142
Prewriting: Sensory Details 143
Prewriting: Overall Impression 147
Writing a Description: Organization and Coherence 149
Writing a Description: Descriptive Language 152
Writing a Description: Mood 153
Writing a Character Sketch 155
Revising, Editing, and Publishing Descriptive Writing 157
Review 161
PROBLEM 2: Poor Curricular Organization
Although it is likely that many students may have above average abilities in a number of academic areas, classroom teachers may not have the skills or tools that will allow them to compact the curriculum in every appropriate content area. The absence of district or state level curriculum guides often causes many teachers to question which content and skills they are expected to teach. In situations like this, the adopted textbook series usually becomes synonymous with the curriculum guide for the district and the teacher must use the teacher's guide that accompanies this series to try and identify the most relevant objectives for instruction.
In other situations, an examination of the skills being tested at the end of a unit and the objectives listed for that unit in the teacher's guide often reveals gaps and inconsistencies. In some cases it almost appears as if two different people wrote the objectives and the tests.
Additional problems occur when the curriculum guide that is provided by the school district does not align itself with the objectives in the textbook series nor the skills that are tested on the district's standardized achievement test series. The dilemma that this situation creates must be remedied in a satisfactory manner if curriculum compacting is to proceed.
Other problems occur when courses of study are implemented without the use of curriculum guides. Without a clear knowledge of major goals and objectives, curriculum compacting becomes difficult at best. Yet, individual students' needs cannot be ignored until more detailed curriculum guides are created. The interested teacher can begin the curriculum compacting process with a content area that offers the most instructional support such as the math and reading curriculum. An attempt should also be made later at the district level to identify curricular goals and objectives in every subject area. In the absence of a curriculum guide, this step can help us at least begin to use the compacting process.
PROBLEM 3: The Attitudes of Co-workers
The arguments in favor of curriculum compacting are extremely compelling. The negative attitudes of co-workers, however, can dampen the enthusiasm of teachers who support curriculum compacting. The reading supervisor who won't allow a classroom teacher to use out-of-level testing, the principal who evaluates teachers negatively if all students are not working on the same learning objective, or the fourth grade teacher who objects when a third grade teacher wants to accelerate bright students into fourth grade math will all have a negative impact on a teacher who is trying to implement the curriculum compacting process.
In order to overcome the potential problems associated with negative staff attitudes, we strongly recommend that central office administrators, a task force of parents and teachers, and building level curriculum specialists be involved in the decision to adopt curriculum compacting as a school district policy. Formal adoption by the school board, information about compacting in the school newspaper, and parent workshops about the process can all help to create the impression among staff members that this innovation is not optional and is, indeed, here to stay!
PROBLEM 4: Insufficient Enrichment Resources
Another challenge that must be confronted during the implementation of curriculum compacting is the need for the appropriate enrichment and acceleration materials or resources for the student who has a compacted curriculum. It is of little benefit to compact a child from six months of grammar lessons if the teacher has no enrichment or acceleration options to offer the child. If a gifted education specialist is available in the school, this individual can certainly help the student pursue investigations or research during compacted time. Yet, if there is no gifted education program, this does not necessarily mean that compacting cannot be implemented as planned. Instead of leaving the classroom for the resource room, a teacher in this situation can arrange for in-class enrichment or acceleration for the compacted student. The use of video or audio tapes, interest centers, trade books, small group instruction, mentors and independent study are all useful techniques for providing enrichment and acceleration in the regular classroom. In order to provide these options, a classroom or building library of enrichment and acceleration materials is suggested. The materials in this center can be loaned to classroom teachers who are implementing curriculum compacting, and the resources of the library can be expanded annually as the budget permits. Our experience indicates that an initial budget of one thousand dollars and an annual budget of two hundred dollars per building is usually sufficient to provide a beginning collection of enrichment and acceleration resources for an elementary school building.
PROBLEM 5: The Need for Flexible Classroom Management Strategies
The adoption of curriculum compacting is not a cure for all of the ills of our education system. Although compacting can alleviate student boredom, assure content mastery and buy time for enrichment and acceleration, the procedure rarely works well in a classroom with a teacher who has management or organizational problems. The use of curriculum compacting requires that teachers use multiple teaching strategies and good classroom management techniques. The teacher with little knowledge of curricular objectives or a lack of experience balancing more than one student activity at the same time is apt to resist or have difficulty with the compacting process.
In a similar fashion, the teacher who is using the same lesson plans year after year, the teacher who is accustomed to large group instruction, and the teacher that relies too heavily on seatwork or workbooks, will need strong support in order to succeed with compacting. For these teachers, help must be provided on an individual basis, ideally through the services of a peer coach or a gifted education teacher who can serve as a consultant or mentor.
PROBLEM 6: The Need for Staff Development to Implement Compacting
By reading the accompanying booklet, teachers will have learned most of what they need to know about the compacting process. They will then need to field test and practice how to adopt and modify the examples and strategies discussed in this text to meet their own style and classroom management strategies. Teachers use various methods of recording achievement information, pretest results and replacement strategies. If a teacher, or enrichment coordinator, or principal becomes committed to instituting curriculum as a school or district policy, staff development becomes a necessity. Before teachers become interested enough to take the time to read a book like this on compacting, staff development should be provided to introduce them to the concept. What types of staff development are necessary for teachers to implement a new strategy?
Guskey (1986) defines staff development programs as "systematic attempts to bring about change - change in the classroom practices of teachers, change in their beliefs and attitudes, and change in the learning outcomes of students"(p. 5). Advances in recent research on effective schools and the variables that contribute to instructional effectiveness have increased attention to the need for quality staff development programs (Brophy, 1979; McDonald and Elias, 1976; Medley, 1977).
Showers, Joyce and Bennett (1987) have provided a meta-analysis of nearly 200 research studies, plus a review of the literature on staff development research. Following are several of the highlighted findings of the research:
1. What the teacher thinks about teaching determines what is done when teaching. In training teachers, therefore, we must provide more than "going through the motions" of teaching.
2. Almost all teachers can take useful information back to their classrooms when training consists of the following: (1) presentation of theory, (2) demonstration of the new strategy, (3) initial practice in the workshop, and (4) prompt feedback about their efforts.
3. Teachers are likely to keep and use new strategies and concepts if they receive coaching (either expert or peer) while they are trying these new ideas in their classrooms.
4. Competent teachers with high self-esteem usually benefit more from training than their less competent, less confident colleagues.
5. Flexibility in thinking helps teachers learn new skills and which they can incorporate into their repertoires of tried and true methods.
6. Individual teaching styles and value orientations do not often affect teachers' abilities to learn from staff development.
7. A basic level of knowledge of skill in a new approach is necessary before teachers can "buy in" to it (Showers, Joyce and Bennett, 1987, p. 79).
Guskey (1986) suggests that staff development efforts are not influenced by teachers' beliefs and attitudes but, rather, attitudes and beliefs are a result of teachers implementing new practices and observing changes in students' learning outcomes (Guskey, 1986). Guskey proposes that there are three major outcomes to staff development efforts: (1) change in the practices of teachers, (2) change in their beliefs and attitudes, and (3) change in the learning outcomes of students. The order of these outcomes is in contrast to the popular belief that staff development programs influence teachers' attitudes and beliefs first, which in turn influence teacher's implementation of new teaching practices in order to observe the effects the new practice has on student learning outcomes. Guskey believes that the kind of teaching practices that are sustained are those which teachers find to be "useful in helping students attain desired learning outcomes (1986, p.7)." Therefore, a key factor in the endurance of any change in instructional practices is demonstrable results in terms of the learning success of a teacher's students. Activities that are successful tend to be repeated while those that are not successful, or those for which there are not tangible evidences of success, are generally avoided (Guskey, 1986, p. 7)." Guskey states that "the point is that evidence of improvement (positive change) in the learning outcomes of students generally precedes and may be a prerequisite to significant change in their beliefs and attitudes of most teachers (p. 7)."
The support teachers receive following training of a new practice has been suggested as a critical component of the successful implementation of a new teaching practice (Guskey, 1986; Hall and Hord, 1987; Joyce and Showers, 1982, 1983, 1987). What type of support is necessary and under what conditions? These questions were addressed in several research studies investigating the coaching of teachers who were trying to improve their teaching skills and/or implement new practices.
Baker and Showers (1984) have operationally defined coaching as the "provision of on-site, personal support and technical assistance for teachers (p. 1)." Joyce and Showers (1982) state that there are five major functions of coaching: (1) provision of companionship, (2) giving of technical feedback, (3) analysis of application: extending of executive control; (4) adaptation to the students; and (5) personal facilitation (p.6).
Joyce and Showers (1983) reviewed a number of research studies to determine
the new elements of training needed to enable teachers to implement new
teaching practices. The necessary components for training teachers were:
| 1. The study of the theoretical basis or the rational of the teaching
method
2. The observation of demonstrations by persons who are relatively expert in the model 3. Practice and feedback in relatively protected conditions (such as trying out the strategy on each other and then on children who are relatively easy to teach) 4. Coaching one another as they work the new model into their repertoire, providing companionship, helping one another to learn to teach the appropriate responses to their students and to figure out the optimal uses of the model in their courses, and providing one another with ideas and feedback (p.4) |
 |
The suggestions of Joyce and Showers (1982, 1983, 1987) involve detailed elements of training that must be present in order for teachers to successfully implement new strategies in their classrooms. What staff development strategies can be specifically used to implement compacting?
Three suggestions are offered.
During the 1990-1991 academic year, The University of Connecticut site of The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented conducted a study to examine the effects of staff development on elementary teachers' ability and willingness to implement a technique entitled curriculum compacting (Reis, et al. 1992). This study addressed how much curriculum content could be eliminated for high ability students by teachers who had received various levels of staff development, investigated what would happen to students' achievement test scores, content area preference and attitude towards learning if curriculum compacting was implemented. Teachers in twenty school districts throughout the country were randomly assigned by district to three treatment groups that received three different levels of staff development. After receiving staff development services, teachers implemented curriculum compacting for one or two students in their classrooms who were selected because of their advanced academic abilities. Seven districts were randomly assigned as control groups.
Three increasing levels of staff development (videotapes, books, peer coaching) were provided to the treatment groups which implemented curriculum compacting. The control group teachers identified one or two high ability students and continued normal teaching practices without implementing curriculum compacting. A battery of achievement tests (out-of-level Iowa Tests of Basic Skills - ITBS), content area preference scales, and a questionnaire regarding attitude towards learning were given to identified students in November, 1990 and at the completion of the school year.
The following statements represent some of the findings from the curriculum compacting study:
1. Ninety-five percent of the teachers were able to identify high ability students in their classes and document students' strengths.
2. Approximately 40-50% of traditional classroom material was compacted for selected students in one or more content areas in mathematics, language arts, science and social studies.
3. The most frequently compacted subject was mathematics, followed by language arts. Science and social studies were compacted when students demonstrated very high ability in those areas.
4. A majority of the teachers in all treatment groups said they would compact curriculum again; some said they would try again if they had additional information and assistance from a specialist.
5. A significant difference was found among treatment groups with respect to the overall quality of curriculum compacting, as documented on a form called "curriculum compactor." Treatment group 3 had significantly higher quality compactors than did treatment groups 1 or 2.
6. Eighty percent of the teachers were able to document the curriculum that high ability students had yet to master, list appropriate instructional strategies for students to demonstrate mastery and document an appropriate mastery standard.
7. Replacement strategies consisted of three broad instructional activities: enrichment, acceleration and other (i.e., peer tutoring, cooperative learning, correcting class papers).
8. Teachers in treatment group 3 used significantly more replacement strategies than did teachers in treatment groups 1 or 2.
9. While approximately 95% of teachers used enrichment as a replacement strategy, 18% of teachers also used acceleration.
10. Replacement strategies did not often reflect the types of advanced content that would be appropriate for high ability students, indicating that additional staff development, as well as help from a specialist in the district, would be beneficial.
11. Approximately 60% of the replacement strategies reflected students' interests, needs and preferences.
12. Anecdotal records indicated that three different types of requests were made by teachers as they compacted curriculum:
14. In Science and Math Concepts, all 3 treatment groups scored significantly higher on the out-of-level post test (ITBS) than did the control group whose curriculum was not compacted.
15. Students whose curriculum was compacted in mathematics significantly outperformed their control group counterparts in the mathematical concepts subscale on the ITBS.
16. Students whose curriculum was compacted in mathematics had significantly better attitudes toward learning than students in the control group.
17. Students whose curriculum was compacted in mathematics had significantly higher preferences for mathematics than students in the control group.
18. Students whose curriculum was compacted in math and were in treatment group 3 had significantly higher post achievement scores in math and had better post attitudes toward learning.
This study demonstrated the following:
* Curriculum compacting can be implemented in the regular classroom to provide more appropriate educational experiences for gifted and talented students.
* Staff development and peer coaching can improve teachers' use of the compacting process.
* Teachers will need additional training and help to be able to substitute appropriately challenging content and work to students whose curriculum has been modified.
* Curriculum compacting can have positive effects on students.
Recommendation
1
Start the compacting process
by targeting a small group of students for whom compacting seems especially
appropriate.
We have found that in the earliest stages of learning how to compact, it is better to try to implement the service for two or three students than it is to tackle a whole reading group or an entire classroom. Learning how to locate available pretests, identify strengths, modify curriculum and replace with interesting and challenging alternatives takes time and effort. Therefore, starting with two or three students who obviously require the service makes the process easier.
Recommendation
2
Select one content area in which
the targeted student has demonstrated previous mastery or curriculum strengths
and
in which teachers have the most resources available to pretest for prior
mastery and to enrich and accelerate the content.
In research (Reis, et al. 1992) with the compacting process, the most frequently compacted content areas are (1) mathematics, (2) language arts and (3) spelling (which is often taught separately from language arts). The percentage of content eliminated in mathematics ranged from 39-49%. In language arts, teachers could eliminate between 36-54% of the curriculum because high ability students demonstrated mastery of the material prior to instruction.
Teachers preferred implementing compacting in mathematics and language arts because they indicated that basic skills compacting is easier to begin with than is content compacting. Most teachers beginning the compacting process (approximately 70%) only compacted in one content area at first. Another 25% compacted in two content areas and the remaining 5% compacted in three or more content areas.
Recommendation
3
Try different methods of pretesting
or assessment, and use flexibility in accomplishing this process by experimenting
with different systems and asking for assistance from other faculty members,
aides, or volunteers.
As stated in the book, many different methods can be used to assess previous mastery of skills or the potential of students to more through content at a pace commensurate with their ability. Criterion reference (or objective) assessments can be used and given to all students in the class. A table can be established as a pretest center in a classroom and students can decide if they want to try to take the pretest.
Reading or math consultants often help prepare or administer pretests and other faculty members can be asked to help as well. Alternate assessment techniques as discussed in the book (essay, portfolios, students products) can also be used to demonstrate proficiency and content expertise. Recommendation
Recommendation
4
Compact by unit, chapter, or
topic rather than by time (marking period or quarter).
While teachers listed strength areas for selected students, they differed
with regard to the method by which they organized the curriculum compacting
process and in the degree of specificity with which they described content
material identified for compacting. A small number of teachers compacted
by time, indicating either weeks or a marking quarter. The vast majority
of teachers compacted by units or chapters of materials and documented
that they would compact, for example, parts of speech, two science chapters
on matter, or a unit in social studies such as "the first Americans".
Recommendation
5
Make decisions about how to
document compacted material and define proficiency based on staff consensus
and district policy.
Either the compactor form can be used or a locally designed alternative form can be used to document the compacting process. In the research described, participating teachers varied in the degree of specificity with which they documented the material to be compacted. A small percentage of teachers did not list the subject(s) to be compacted. Approximately 15% of teachers listed just the subject area in the first column of the compactor, such as math or spelling, for example. The majority of teachers listed specific units, such as: the solar system, electricity and magnetism, plats, air and weather and the human body.
Regarding column two of the compactor, teachers also used various strategies to measure proficiency and decide what constitutes proficiency in a content area. The most frequently mentioned strategy for measuring proficiency across all treatment groups was the use of units, chapters and review tests. Other strategies included: outlining, reading comprehension questions, reinforcement dittos, check-up pages, weekly tests with the class, teacher-selected problems, cooperative learning and individual work at the board with the teacher.
The majority of teachers (80%) identified a specific proficiency standard by which to evaluate whether students had mastered the regular curriculum. The criteria for determining proficiency ranged from 80%-100% and the most frequently used standard to document student proficiency was 85%.
Recommendation
6
Request help from all available
resources in order to create a wide range of opportunities and available
alternatives to replace content that has been eliminated through compacting.
The highest quality compactors were prepared by classroom teachers who had worked with a peer coach and who had had other assistance available to them. This help was provided by teachers in the gifted or enrichment program in that district or content area specialists who provided materials or help with pretesting.
In some cases, a librarian/media specialist also helped by working with targeted students on advanced research projects or study skills. It should be noted that the most difficult task of teachers in the study was replacing compacted content with appropriately challenging content and independent study options. Teachers primarily used two categories of instructional strategies: enrichment and acceleration. Twenty-four different strategies were used by teachers as outlined below.
Teachers indicated that their greatest challenge in the compacting process was finding a variety of appropriate replacement strategies to substitute for compacting material. As noted in Table 1, many alternatives were used but advanced content was often difficult for teachers to locate. Those who did not use advanced alternatives were often able to get help from the persons or programs previously mentioned.
Only 18% of teachers in the study used acceleration as a replacement strategy. In most cases, this low number is indicative of school districts in which a policy exists not to accelerate students. The majority of teachers who used acceleration were not able to accelerate students beyond their chronological grade so that a student who is accelerated may simply cover material in October that they would not have done until May or June. This type of acceleration is often minimally challenging for very bright students and it often becomes necessary to locate other alternatives.
Enrichment Strategies Used in Column 3 of the Compactor
Strategy
Recommendation
7
The compacting process becomes less difficult as it evolves into more than just a series of testing and record keeping exercises. When teachers have used compacting for a while, it becomes an acceptable alternative and a new way of thinking about learners and the grade level curriculum. To achieve this kind of success with the process, organization and task commitment become crucial.
Frequently Asked Questions About Compacting
During the last several years, we have conducted over 400 staff development sessions on compacting. These sessions have included both awareness and follow-up training on curriculum compacting. The following questions represent those that are often raised in both awareness and advanced sessions. Several categories of questions are included about the following topics: orientation of compacting, strategies to make compacting easier, finding challenging replacement work, compacting in specific areas, grouping and classroom management strategies, compacting in advanced classes, defining mastery, grades and compacting, compacting for all students, and adopting the process for a district.
Orienting parents and students to the process
Can I compact curriculum if my administrator doesn't know about or agree with the concept?
Your school administrator and parents should both be informed about the compacting process. We believe that most administrators will be supportive of our attempts to provide individual attention to students with advanced learning capabilities. If an administrator does not understand the process, however, he/she will not be able to support teachers in the process, nor will they feel informed about a major innovation that is occurring within the school. Therefore, we believe that administration should be consulted before the compacting process has been started. By accomplishing this goal, other teachers may be asked to join your efforts in curriculum compacting.
Should students be provided with an orientation to the compacting process? Why or why not?
All students in a classroom should be provided with an orientation to the compacting process. It should be explained in very general terms and the explanation should be very simple. An overview such as the following might be helpful.
Today I will be providing you with a pretest that will help me to understand how many of you know the work that is going to be assigned to you during the next several weeks. This pretest will help me to determine which of you know some of the skills I will be teaching and which of you may need to have some extra time with me to be able to master these skills. Some students are good in some subjects and other students are good in other subjects. You should all do your very best on this pretest so that I know what other kinds of learning activities we will be able to do together this year. For those of you who already know some of the skills that I will be teaching during the next several weeks, many options exist. In some cases you may have time to spend in the library pursuing independent reading. In other cases, some of you may be spending time in the enrichment center or you may be able to start an independent study project that you select yourself. Once the pretest results have been determined, I will be meeting with small groups of students to talk about the results and decide on alternate steps for this unit of study.
We also suggest that some time be given to all students to pursue various types of enrichment within the classroom. If only the students whose curriculum can be modified or compacted have the opportunity to work on interest centers or other types of enrichment experiences, students who need much more time to master basic skills will never be provided with that option.
Should parents be informed if their youngster's curriculum has been compacted?
Parents should be informed of the decision to compact their youngsters curriculum. We recommend that a parent letter similar to the one below be sent home once the compacting process has been initiated. Parents should know that the compacting process has been started because it may reflect a change in the daily amount of paperwork that their youngster brings home. For example, if effective compacting has occurred, the number of 'perfect' papers that are consistently being brought home may stop for a given period of time and be replaced by other kinds of work or activities. We want parents to be active partners with us in the compacting process and therefore strongly recommend that they be notified that compacting has occurred. LETTER EXPLAINING CURRICULUM COMPACTING ENRICHMENT PROGRAM
TO: Parents
FROM: , Resource Room Teacher
RE: Your child's participation in the Resource Program
As you may know from previous correspondence and meetings, your child is involved in enrichment experiences in a resource room program. The time spent in the resource room will not result in your child missing essential work in the regular classroom. A careful assessment of your son's/daughter's strength areas has resulted in an agreement with his/her classroom teacher to "compact" the curriculum in that strength area so that your child will not be repeating work in this area. It is the time saved because of this curricular compacting that your son or daughter will be spending in the resource room.
The form that accompanies this letter is the completed Compactor that has been agreed upon for your son/daughter by your son's/daughter's classroom teacher and me. You will notice your child's academic strength areas are listed in the first column and in the second column are the activities that were used to document proficiency in the academic strength area. In the third column are listed some of the enrichment or acceleration activities that your child will be involved in during the time that he/she is working in the resource room.
Please call me if you have any questions. I will be glad to meet with you about your child's involvement in the resource program if you should wish.
Thank you for your continued interest in and support of our program. _____________________________________________________
Please sign this form to indicate that you have received this completed Compactor and return it to your child's school as soon as possible.
Student's name:_____________________________________________________
School:____________________________________________________________
Parent or Guardian's Signature:_________________________________________
Date:______________________________________________________________
What rules should I give the students whose curriculum is compacted and are in my class doing alternate work?
The rules should be spelled out in advance to students whose curriculum is compacted. These instructions should be clear and very consistent. We suggest that the rules may include some of the following. (1) If the classroom teacher is teaching a lesson during compacted time to youngsters whose curriculum has not been compacted, appropriate levels of quiet should be maintained in the classroom to enable the other youngsters to be able to learn. (2) During the time that a teacher is doing a lesson with other youngsters, the students whose curriculum has been modified should not be able to interrupt the teacher. (This often means that those students will be working at the back of the classroom or in the library or resource center and will not be able to interrupt the lesson because they are either involved in alternate work or in a different space in the class room.) Other rules that are helpful for students whose curriculum has been compacted relate to movement around the classroom during compacted time and their daily or weekly activities during that time.
What are parents' reactions to curriculum compacting?
Parents have been very enthusiastic about curriculum compacting and, in most cases, support the process enthusiastically. They are often appreciative and say that they wish that this had happened much earlier in their childrens' school careers. The only concern of some of the parents with whom we have worked is the lack of outstanding papers to place on their refrigerator doors. This is a legitimate concern for some people who like the reinforcement of having outstanding papers sent home on a regular basis. However, once they have been oriented to the process of compacting they often understand that this is a key feature of the practice and there are benefits to the elimination of work students have already mastered.
Strategies to make compacting easier
What are the easiest subject areas in which to accomplish curriculum compacting?
The easiest subject areas in which to accomplish curriculum compacting are usually basic skill areas that have a highly sequential curricular organization such as spelling, mathematics, and basic skill areas of the language arts curriculum such as grammar.
Do you compact by time period (like every marking period) or do you compact by instructional unit?
Curriculum compacting is usually implemented by instructional unit. What we generally mean by a unit is an instructional period that revolves around a theme, a chronological time period, or a particular instructional objective. Some classroom teachers at the primary level prefer to compact by unit of curricular organization such as a level in the basic reading or math program. Perhaps an example will help to clarify the answer to this question. Suppose a seventh grade English teacher is teaching a unit on David Copperfield. The most efficient way to compact within this unit is to have the English teacher modify the curriculum for students who have either read the novel or who could read and master objectives of this unit in a fraction of the time that it takes other students in the classroom to achieve those goals. At the elementary level, teachers often compact for a basic skills unit of instruction such as the teaching of long division.
What is required before you can start compacting?
A clear understanding of the objectives of the curriculum and the knowledge of which students have mastered those objectives or who can master those objectives in less time are the first things that are required before compacting begins. It is also helpful for teachers to have had background information about how to compact and to have had the time to think about alternate activities and the assessment devices that will be necessary to document mastery.
Will I have more success if I compact one student's curriculum to start off with or should I start with a top level group of students?
Individual teachers have had success compacting for one student, but many teachers are able to compact for an entire group without a great deal of effort. The question of how one can be most successful at compacting revolves around a number of factors. The space in a classroom, the amount of available enrichment resources, the availability of a library, the help that's offered from other faculty including the teacher of the gifted or the media specialist, and the degree of administrative support for curriculum compacting will all have an impact on teachers' success. It may be easier to begin compacting with one extremely bright student. However, it is often better for the student to be one of a few students whose curriculum has been modified, so that student does not feel as if he or she is being singled out because of differences that may be apparent to the other children.
What's easier compacting an entire semester and leaving the last two months free for student self-selected work or compacting for 2 1/2 days a week and leaving the rest of the week open for alternate work?
If you decide to compact curriculum for an entire semester and leave two months of the semester available for alternate activities, you often have to do a tremendous amount of work to coming up with ideas for those activities. Most teachers who have used the compacting process prefer to compact for two or three days within a given week leaving one to two days or periods of time available for alternative choices.
What type of staff development is necessary to help me and my colleagues begin to compact curriculum?
The most effective type of staff development to help teachers master the compacting process should begin with a general overview of compacting. There are video tapes which have been developed for this purpose that are available from Creative Learning Press and additionally, a book written by Alane Starko entitled, It's About Time: Inservice Strategies for Curriculum Compacting. This book is an outstanding reference and includes an overview of the compacting process, as well as two simulations which can be done by a faculty to help learn more about compacting. After a general overview session, it is extremely helpful for classroom teachers to be able to meet and spend time discussing how they will proceed with compacting. Major instructional objectives need to be identified as do the necessary pretests. Additionally, teachers may need to spend some time observing how other classroom teachers effectively compact curriculum. Additionally, grade level meetings and the opportunity to work on a specific content area in the compacting process will be helpful for teachers who believe that compacting is important.
Does compacting curriculum take much more time for an already busy classroom teacher?
Compacting, we have found, actually saves teachers time after they have learned to effectively utilize the process. Some front end analysis time often results in not having to correct many homework and test papers that youngsters would have done in the time that is saved through curriculum compacting. Of course, additional effort is often required for teachers who need to substitute appropriately challenging material, but most teachers who have learned to compact effectively tell us that it takes no more time then their previous teaching practices. They also tell us that the rewards and benefits to all students make the process very worthwhile.
You have said that students whose curriculum is compacted in language arts should use that time to participate in pull-out programs or resource rooms. What if the enrichment or gifted/talented teacher can't take the student during that time because he/she is in another school?
If there is not an enrichment or G/T teacher or if the G/T teacher cannot take the student during time in which he/she is compacted, the classroom teacher must use an alternative approach. Remember, curriculum compacting is primarily the responsibility of classroom teachers. Having someone to help with the replacement activities or alternate curriculum in Column 3 of the Compactor often makes the process much easier. However, if that person is not available, classroom teachers still have responsibility to modify curriculum for bright youngsters.
Can I compact curriculum for my bright students without a gifted/ talented teacher or a librarian?
It is easier to compact curriculum for bright youngsters with additional help. As has been stated earlier, curriculum compacting is primarily the responsibility of classroom teachers and although it would be great to have more help, we can't always wait until that help arrives to do this essential job for our youngsters.
Finding challenging student work in time saved by compacting
How can I come up with appropriately challenging substitution for column three of the compactor? In other words, what if my students only want to read relatively unchallenging fiction?
Finding appropriately challenging substitution is one of our biggest challenges in the compacting process. When we begin compacting with students in first and second grade, it is much easier to substitute challenging work because the youngsters have not yet learned to put out minimum level effort at this grade level. So we should begin the compacting process early and at the time that the process has begun, we should not only substitute alternate work, but substitute work that will challenge youngsters in the areas in which they seem to have both a strength and an interest. Interest is a key component of compacting. If youngsters whose curriculum is compacted learn that what will be substituted is only more 'teacher-selected' harder work, many of those students will simply opt not to get involved in the compacting process. For example, if a third grade student who is exceptional in mathematics is assigned harder math problems every time she finishes her math work early, she may learn very quickly not to finish that work early! Therefore, by trying to first analyze what it is that students have a sincere interest in and the kinds of activities that they might like to pursue during some of that compacted time, we can escalate the challenge level of the material within a student's interest area. This provides the most difficult task for classroom teachers who are already very busy. It is easier in this process to get the assistance of a teacher of the gifted, or a content area consultant, or some other volunteer such as a community mentor who may work with the youngster within a particular area. If those options are unavailable, the student should be given a variety of choices, all of which involve some degree of more challenging substitution work and the opportunity to select work based on previous or emerging interests. In other words, students should pursue what he/she likes to do during this earned time. Other options are also available to the classroom teacher such as developing curriculum units .
Do I have to substitute math work if I compact in math or would I be more successful by considering other content options?
Many teachers who compact in mathematics believe that the time that is replaced should also be from math. Yet, it is our hope that the students' interests in this compacting process taken into account before a teacher makes that decision. However, other considerations must also be taken into account. If the student whose mathematics curriculum is be compacted is outstanding in mathematics, an alternative for math instruction that has been previously mastered may be acceleration to a higher level mathematics class. If the student is comfortable with this option and the parents agree that this provision would benefit the youngster's individual needs, this is often a viable alternative. However, if the youngster would prefer to work on an alternate activity or a self-selected independent study, we would prefer to see this option implemented for the student.
What if you try to replace what has been compacted with a students' interests only to find your students have no interests?
Unfortunately, we have found as students get older and reach adolescence, their academic interests often dissipate. We suggest that the interest assessment instrument entitled, the Interest-a-lyzer be used to help focus or discover interests in some youngsters, or else various types of enrichment opportunities be provided to try to stimulate interests. If students absolutely indicate they have no academic interest, a variety of exciting challenging classroom activities or other enrichment materials may be substituted. Interest may develop at various times and we must keep trying!
Compacting in specific content areas or skill areas
| Can we compact in other content areas such as art, home economics,
industrial arts, music?
We have seen outstanding examples of curriculum compacting occur in all content areas. Industrial Arts and Home Economic teachers are often the first ones to offer examples of how they have been able to compact. One industrial arts teacher gave a marvelous example of compacting in his woodshop. A student entering his junior high woodshop told him that he had spent the summer building a case for a grandfather clock. He brought in photographs of this clock case and proudly displayed them to his industrial arts teacher. At that time, the industrial arts teacher made the decision to compact the first three simple assignments in woodshop out of this youngsters curriculum, deciding that it would be inappropriate for him to have to make a simple bookshelf when his talents were obviously so much further developed. This is a perfect example how compacting can happen and be replaced with independent project time within a specific area such as art, music, home economics, or industrial arts. |
 |
I use process writing so compacting is unnecessary right?
Many persons have raised the question of whether or not compacting is necessary when process writing is used. The answer is a definitive yes. If youngsters at a fifth grade level show and can demonstrate that they have mastered the major writing objectives for the curriculum in that area in that grade level, they should be able to make a choice of what they might do during that writing time. Many teachers who use the process writing approach consistently believe that youngsters should just move up another notch of difficulty in process writing. However, if the student has a burning desire to conduct research in a related area, spend additional time in the resource room, or work on a project that he or she loves, grade level competency in process writing should enable that to occur.
I use 'whole language' approach doesn't that mean that I don't need to compact?
A whole language approach also works well with curriculum compacting. Quite often persons who use a whole language approach have at their disposal mostly grade level trade books or alternate reading assignments. For a youngster who is outstanding in reading or language arts, grade level trade books may not be appropriately challenging. Therefore, when whole language is used, objectives should still be clearly stated so that we can analyze whether bright students have previously mastered these objectives. If that mastery has occurred, simply replacing time with grade level trade books or with other options that are available to less able members of the classroom may not be appropriate. Remember, the compacting process means that we must not only document proficiency and mastery of objectives, but also replace with appropriately challenging material. We must also consider whether the youngster is interested in the topic that we are replacing with or if that youngster may have an interest in replacing something that he or she has selected.
Grouping and classroom management strategies
 |
Is compacting harder to accomplish in a heterogeneous class than
it is in a homogeneous class?
Compacting is easier to accomplish with a group of youngsters who have similar ability levels. It isn't always accurate to say that compacting is more difficult to accomplish in a heterogeneous class than it is in a homogeneous class because a wide range of abilities, interests, and motivation often exist within a homogeneous class. For example, students who may be in an accelerated homogeneous English class may have a very different background from each other and different interests in the subject area. Some students may be exceptional in interpreting literature, while other students may have been placed in the class because they have high scores, but don't care for the subject area. Can classroom teachers compact curriculum without the help of a teacher of the gifted? Indeed, yes! Curriculum compacting is primarily the responsibility of classroom teachers and while having a teacher of the gifted can often make the job a little easier, the classroom teacher is still the person who is responsible for modifying the regular curriculum. We have found that classroom teachers must take the major responsibility for columns one and two in the compactor and many classroom teachers want to participate in helping to determine which activities and opportunities students should select in the third column of the compactor. If a teacher of the gifted or resource teacher is available in the school it often makes the job of compacting easier since that person can help in procuring additional resources or enrichment materials or even an upgrading the challenge level of regular curricular materials. |
How do you manage the rest of your classroom when the kids who have had their curriculum compacted start to "act up"?
Any students whose curriculum has been compacted should receive an orientation to that process. They should know that the teacher has begun a process which requires additional time and effort on his/her part. Additionally, they should understand what their responsibilities are in the compacting process. Those responsibilities include using the time that has been provided for alternate activities. If a student is using time inappropriately, a word or two should be all that is required to encourage a student whose curriculum has been modified to adapt a more appropriate behavior level. If not, an attempt should be made to work with the student and his or her parents to determine the reason that this inappropriate behavior is emerging in the classroom. As we have stated in the text, it is extremely important that classroom teachers who are using the curriculum compacting process employ good classroom behavior strategies and that they are firm in their expectations of how students should use their time.
Is there a way to organize your classroom space to make compacting easier?
Many classroom teachers who have used compacting extensively have provided space for individual student stations in some part of their classrooms. These stations can be an individual student desk or a table with two or three chairs that provides a space for independent study or free reading. A small library corner with some pillows or alternate seating arrangements can also be extremely helpful for all youngsters.
At what grade level should we begin compacting?
We should begin compacting curriculum as soon as youngsters enter school. We have conducted inservice sessions with Montessori pre-schools in which youngsters' curriculum is modified beginning at age three or four. For example, we should not have to teach youngsters the alphabet again when they already know their letters. We have found that when the compacting process begins in kindergarten, the students whose curriculum has been modified learn to use independent time more easily and their freedom of choice more appropriately.
If I compact for my advanced students and let them leave my classroom to become involved in alternate activities, what will happen to the level of the discussion in my class? What if I really believe that students who are compacted would benefit from a particular discussion or special lesson?
Many teachers have expressed concerns about the level of classroom discussion if all bright youngsters are involved in alternate activities. There is some merit in this concern. However, we must also consider that often times, youngsters of lesser ability will not even attempt to answer a more advanced discussion question as long as the brighter students are in the classroom. Students who may not test as well often feel inferior or threatened by the precocious verbal ability and intelligence of the higher ability youngsters. Therefore, we suggest that classroom teachers try some discussions with and some discussions without these youngsters in the classroom to determine the ramifications of this change. If particular discussions or special lessons seem to be helped by having some of the brighter youngsters participate, the classroom teacher can certainly make that decision to include youngsters in this process. Remember, curriculum compacting is controlled and organized by the classroom teacher and if a particular teacher believes a discussion or special topic is important for all students, then all students should be included in that particular lesson.
What type of flexible grouping allows compacting to be done most easily?
The type of flexible grouping that allows compacting to occur most easily is certainly not a tracking system in which grades or test scores determine which track students are placed into early in the year. Ideally, students whose curriculum is being compacted will be in and out of various lessons in the classroom depending on their individual needs and mastery of objectives. A heterogeneous classroom situation may enable this process to occur at the elementary level. However, in a curriculum such as mathematics or science or certain basic skills in language arts, some type of advanced grouping option makes the process of curriculum compacting much easier to facilitate. This occurs because teachers then know that the youngsters who are in this group are above average in the subject and we also know that compacting should occur because many of these youngsters do not need the review. This type of process quite often makes the compacting job of the teacher much less difficult.
If we use ability grouping in math and reading, do we need to do curriculum compacting?
Just as the response to the question about doing compacting in homogeneous classrooms indicates, even with high ability grouping and specific subject areas, differences and individual rates, paces and interests occur. We have found that curriculum compacting can be easily accomplished when ability grouping is used in those classes.
Determining mastery
Who is responsible for the pretesting?
The person who is generally responsible for pretesting students in the areas of the regular curriculum is usually the person who teaches the regular curriculum, either the classroom teacher or the subject area teacher. In many cases, classroom teachers who have implemented curriculum compacting seek and receive help from a reading consultant, a mathematics consultant, or the teacher of the gifted if one is available in the district.
Define mastery. How do I know if my students really know the work they are testing out of?
It is difficult to define mastery since the setting of mastery goals is an individual decision and individual teachers define levels of mastery in different ways. Most educators agree that mastery indicates knowledge of the learning objectives which guide any individual lesson. Benjamin Bloom defines mastery as knowledge of at least 80% of the major objectives in any unit of learning. We believe that a faculty should discuss the concept of mastery before the compacting process is started at the school. We also believe that individual teachers should have some flexibility to use their own professional judgement about the mastery obtained by individual students. Sometimes a short conversation or an essay question helps to define mastery more than a multiple choice or matching test.
What other ways can I guarantee mastery if no pretests or post tests are included with my content area text book?
We have made a number of suggestions about the guarantee of mastery if pretest or post tests are not included with the regular curricular materials in the teacher booklet. Teachers can, for example, give an essay or have a discussion with students or use questions in content area textbooks that would reflect advanced level mastery. There are many ways to assess mastery that are even more effective than a 20 item pretest or post test and this is an area in which teachers can use their individual creativity.
How can I guarantee mastery if I don't use a textbook?
We have also discussed how mastery can be guaranteed if textbooks are not used. We must remember that a textbook is not the tool that is necessary to guarantee mastery of objectives. First of all, we have to be able to identify the major learning objectives that are being covered by the curriculum. If those learning objectives have already been mastered by students, it is entirely possible that the textbook is inappropriate for their use and alternative materials become essential to locate. So we would strongly suggest objectives be identified before any instructional materials are selected.
Grades and Compacting
What about grades when you compact curriculum? Do students get a grade based on the regular curriculum or based on what you substitute?
Students should be graded on the regular curriculum which has been compacted. That is to say, we believe that grades indicate mastery of the subject or content area rather than time spent in that particular content or subject. When substitutions of independent study or other similar kinds of activities are made, we do not think that a grade is desirable. Our preference would be to provide some qualitative, holistic evaluation of the students work.
I know you've said that students should only be graded on the regular compacted curriculum but what if you compact for a group of students who then do not want to do any other work? Can their grades reflect this?
Again, students should be graded only on the regular compacted curriculum. However, if a group of students is not using time wisely and refuses to do any other type of work, a deal should be initiated with those particular youngsters. Another orientation session on compacting could follow, as well as an explanation of what the next step would be if behaviors do not change (i.e. a parent meeting.) We do not ever suggest that students be punished or rewarded through the process of curriculum compacting. Instead, we must understand that for some students compacting represents a radical departure from previous educational practices in their classrooms. Some students have never had any option about what they might like to do in school and other youngsters have never had the responsibility for planning any of their own self-directed learning. Compacting takes time and the development of initiative and appropriate work habits on the part of students. Patience, understanding, and a variety of enrichment options often make the compacting process much more palatable to youngsters who do not know how to do independent work.
Compacting for non-identified students
Should we be compacting curriculum for underachievers?
We must consider curriculum compacting for underachievers. In many instances, youngsters who underachieve are very bright students who have simply given up on trying to do all of the work that is required of them because they know that they mastered that work many years earlier. Some students learn to underachieve because they are bored by the regular curricular activities and we have found, in many case studies, that compacting has an impact on the underachievement problem facing so many bright youngsters in our schools today.
If achieving results means being assigned more and more work, we believe that many of our brightest students learn to underachieve to avoid the trap of more teacher assigned work. We have found that by providing these bright students with an orientation to the compacting process, we give them an incentive to do better in their classwork. For example, if a youngster can demonstrate proficiency in grammar, he or she may then earn the opportunity to select a novel to read, view filmstrips about famous authors, write original short stories, compose poetry or self-select an area of interest in language arts. This self-selectivity of what may be done during time in which students demonstrate curriculum mastery often encourages underachieving students to demonstrate mastery.
Do students who score in average ranges ever benefit from curriculum compacting?
Absolutely! In our field tests with curriculum compacting we have found that many average and above average students benefit from curriculum compacting in one or more content areas. In fact, we believe that the compacting process helps reverse the 'dumbing down' of the curriculum and that benefits all students. So do the numerous enrichment materials often brought into the classroom for use during compacted time.
What about my lower ability students? Can they every participate in some of the enrichment opportunities that are arranged because of compacting?
We recommend providing some time for enrichment opportunities for all students within a classroom. While it is true that many students will not be able to be eligible for curriculum compacting, we also believe it is essential that those particular youngsters have some time to work on some of the exciting kinds of activities that may come into the classroom to meet the needs of youngsters whose curriculum has been modified. No one would argue that all students should learn problem solving, creative thinking skills, and other types of process training that are readily available. A special time can be set aside in every classroom, such as Friday afternoon from 2:00 to 3:00, to enable classroom teachers to take advantage of the enrichment opportunities that are available for use with all students.
Adopting compacting at the district level-- I.E.P. and compacting
What circumstances enable compacting to be adopted by a district in an organized systematic way?
We believe that compacting is best adopted by a school district in a way that makes it seem as if it is a regular part of teaching practices. (See for example the policy statement about individual rates and paces of learning that appears in the beginning of this Facilitator's Guide.) When superintendents, principals, and other administrators support the process it is certainly much easier. We also need to consider that additional resources are often necessary to facilitate compacting. Teachers will need to order enrichment materials, and perhaps pretests, as well as other instruments for determining proficiency of learning objectives. A systematic plan that provides training, budgets money for materials, and offers other support systems for teachers is generally the best way to proceed with a district adoption of compacting.
Can compacting be considered a part of a gifted student's I.E.P. (Individual Education Plan) in states in which gifted education is considered a part of special education?
Compacting and the compactor form is definitely considered to be a part of a gifted student's individual educational plan in states in which gifted education is a part of special education. In fact, many state departments of education consultants for education of the gifted have indicated that the compactor form provides a perfect rationale for an individual educational plan for a bright youngster.
References:
Baker & Showers (1984). The effects of a coaching strategy on teachers' transfer of training to classroom practice: A six-month follow-up study. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans.
Brophy, J.E. (1979). Teacher behavior and student learning. Educational Leadership, 37, 33-38.
Guskey, T. R. (1986). Staff development and the process of teacher change. Educational Researcher. 15(5), 5-12.
Hall, G.E. & Hord, S.M. (1987). Change in schools: Facilitating the process. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
Joyce, R.B. & Showers, B. (1982). The coaching of teaching. Educational Leadership, 40, 4-10.
Joyce, R.B. & Showers, B. (1983). Power in staff development through research in training. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Joyce, R.B. & Showers, B. (1987). Student achievement through staff development. New York: Longman, Inc.
McDonald, F.J. & Elias, P. (1976). The effects of teaching performance on pupil learning (Vol. 1, Final Report). Beginning Teacher Evaluation Study, Phase 2, 1974-1976). Princeton, New Jersey: Educational Testing Service.
Medley, D. M. (1977). Teacher competence and teacher effectiveness: A research review of process-product research. Washington D.C.: American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education.
Muther, C. (1987). What do we teach, and when do we teach it? Educational Leadership, 44, 77-80.
Reis, S.M., Burns, D.E., & Renzulli, J.S. (1991). Curriculum compacting: The complete guide to modifying the regular curriculum for high ability students. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
Reis, S.M., Westberg, K.L., Kulikowich, J., Caillard, F., Hébert, T.P., Purcell, J.H., Rogers, J., Smist, J., & Plucker, J.A. (1992). Technical report of the curriculum compacting study. Storrs, CT: The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented.
Renzulli, J.S. (1977). The enrichment triad model: A guide for developing defensible programs for the gifted. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
Renzulli, J.S. (1977). The interest-a-lyzer. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
Renzulli, J.S., & Reis, S.M. (1986). The schoolwide enrichment model: A comprehensive plan for educational excellence. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
Renzulli, J.S., & Smith, L.H. (1978). The compactor. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
Renzulli, J.S., Reis, S.m., & Smith, L.H. (1981). The revolving door identification model. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
Showers, B., Joyce, B.& Bennett, B. (1987). Synthesis of research on staff development: A framework for future study and a state-of-the-art analysis. Educational Leadership. November 1987.
Starko, A. (1986). It's about time: Inservice strategies for curriculum compacting. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
Tyson-Bernstein, H. (1988). A conspiracy of good intentions: America's textbook fiasco. Washington, D.C.: The Council for Basic Education.