Programming
Having brought a group of identified gifted secondary students together revealed two very important needs: first, that bringing like-minded peers together provided a dynamic environment where students could learn from one another and share stories of experience that others could appreciate; and second, how students felt that even though they may share different experiences or have different areas of interest, they needed to be with others who could appreciate the level of passion they had for something, as there was a mutual respect for learning and engaging. Student-participants more so than teacher-participants voiced the importance of like-minded grouping, although teacher-participants certainly implied that bringing intellectual peers together was important, but indicated how vital it was to program for individual students’ interests. Cal, a Grade 10 male student, shared frequent stories of experience with an enrichment withdrawal program, ELOPE, at his secondary school, as it
provided him with engaging discussions and sessions based on interest, but how it also fostered one’s social-emotional development given the grouping of peers: “just bringing people together that are like the same is important. It doesn’t have to be toward a common goal; just building interpersonal relationships between like-minded people is important.” Likewise, Ben felt that through like-minded grouping, opposed to ability-grouping such as streaming of courses, changed the atmosphere and provided a richer learning environment: “it changes the peer base so discussions are better throughout it because of the people in the class.” Ben had expressed his frustration in ability-grouping with streaming in schools, as he was told to essentially wait since elementary school for the next level of education to be able to be with peers who learned the same way or were similar in ability. Upon entering
secondary he discovered that this promise was empty, as he was then advised to wait again for postsecondary to be with like-minded peers consistently, which he believed to be a chronic issue at the local, community, and system levels: “there doesn’t seem to be any methods to actually convince students to place themselves based on their abilities or their learning skills, and it doesn’t seem to fix itself.”
Kennedy shared her desire to be with like-minded peers on a more consistent level, as well as looking for more engagement with peers who could appreciate higher learning: “I wanted more, I wanted to meet new people.” Leanne, a Grade 10 female student, shared many stories of experience in a gifted self-contained elementary classroom and then the adjustments that needed to be made upon entering a secondary school that did not provide the same intensity in programming as what she was used to from grades five through eight.
Leanne shared how she “loved that with the self-contained course I just got to meet a lot of people that had kind of the same interests as me and stuff. It was kind of a shock to be thrown back into high school,” as not only the level of programming had changed, but the peer group. Randy, a male secondary school teacher, expressed in various focus groups—both homogeneous with fellow educators and heterogeneous groups with students—that there was a “need for gifted education for the really bright kids, for whom being gifted is as much a difficulty as people at the other end in the spectrum.” He believed in offering not only a space but a peer group of like-minded students to learn and engage with one another; some place where the pressure is off and students can be engaged in their own interests; a space that fosters both higher-level thinking and, consequently, social-emotional development.
Interestingly, Jacob gave greater weight to groupings based on interests rather than intelligence, stating how passion is important to nurture, which is more likely to be fostered with other peers who share similar interests opposed to other highly intelligent peers who can perhaps appreciate the passion but not at the depth or breadth certain students are looking for. Jax commented on how individual programming is vital when fostering the interests of students, as one “cannot look at the gifted population as a collective; you have to look at each person’s interests.” By the same token he described enrichment as individual rather than a utilitarian experience for all gifted youth, which Ramona echoed in her experience with enrichment opportunities: “I find that sometimes when you decide based on a majority vote, there’s a lot of other gifted students that feel their voice—as much as it’s being heard—it’s not being focused on.” She further explained how gifted programming was meant to be interest-
based and she found it frustrating when opportunities were created for her based on her strengths and not her interests: “I don’t want to go to a cluster session or a class and do more Math work just because I’m good at it,” which gave rise to an important issue of teachers not always understanding what enrichment truly is and how to go about providing enrichment opportunities that meet students’ needs, not just those opportunities that showcase students’ talents and abilities.