Paper Summary
Share...

Direct link:

Talent Development Academies: Providing Access and Opportunity to Advanced Learning for Title I Students

Fri, April 28, 8:15 to 9:45am, Henry B. Gonzalez Convention Center, Floor: Meeting Room Level, Room 221 D

Abstract

Underrepresentation of gifted minority and low income students is well documented (e.g., Ford, 1995; VanTassel-Baska & Stambaugh, 2007), and few effective curricular interventions target culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD) gifted learners (VanTassel-Baska, 2010). Educators can unlock emergent talent using evidence-based practices that support high expectations, growth mindsets, and achievement, expand teacher training in seeing talent in underrepresented students and eliminate barriers to gifted education access (Olszewski-Kubilius & Clarenbach, 2012). By reconceptualizing a deficit-based approach to address educational needs of low-income students to a talents-based approach building on students’ strengths, (Subotnik, Olszewski-Kubilius, & Worrell, 2011), this study’s intervention provides sustained teacher professional development designed to impact learning opportunities for high poverty, CLD children.
The study utilizes a four-year, four-cohort, multiple baseline research design to address the direct and mediated effects of teacher participation across Title 1 schools on teacher effectiveness and student outcomes. In this session, we will report teacher participation findings from the first year of intervention, Cohort 1, Schools A and B. The study scales up in subsequent years, adding three schools by the fourth year. We ask: 1) Does participation in Talent Development Teacher Training and on-going curriculum implementation and support relate to teachers’ increased ability to identify talent in students? 2) Does participation in Talent Development Training lead to improvements in teachers’ perceptions of school climate, relationships, and student learning? Measures at the teacher level include The School Climate Quality Analytic Assessment Instrument; a teacher survey on Mindset; two questionnaires on teacher perceptions; and Teacher’s Observation of Potential in Students (TOPS). Classroom observations using William & Mary Classroom Observation Scales Revised (COS-R) and Classroom Assessment Scoring System (CLASS) were made. Baseline data were collected before the professional development intervention began, and the same data were collected at the end of the intervention’s first year.
After one year of implementation for Cohort 1, preliminary findings showed Cohort 1 teachers (N=44) fell into three distinct groups of implementation: Resisters/Strugglers (n=8); Knowledge Seekers/High Adopters (n=9); Middle Ground Holders (n = 27). When compared with colleagues, the Knowledge Seekers/High Adopters group showed higher aggregated TOPS scores (p < .01) and had higher self-efficacy related to classroom management (t= 2.35, p < .05). Classroom observation analysis of the high adopters group revealed more classroom organization (CLASS; t= 2.48, p < .05), more observed student engagement (COS-R; t= 2.17, p < .05), and effective individual accommodations (COS-R; trend). Subsequently, we plan to examine teacher-level variables (e.g., self-efficacy, mindset, perceptions of talent development, and implementation fidelity) as predictors and moderators of improvement in effective teaching practices.
Year one data inform future PD implementation and provide direction for supporting innovation. More scaffolding around classroom management could bolster innovative practice. Use of teachers from the High Adopters group as peer mentors may enhance sustained implementation support. Next steps include a case study of resisters/strugglers and knowledge seekers/high adopters to gain a qualitative perspective on what compels teachers to seek out innovative practice. The study’s significance is deeper understanding of teachers who embrace innovation to improve practice.

Authors