Literacy Enrichment Plan

Lindsey Powell

St. Bonaventure University

 NAGC element TARGET 9-10
NAGC-Element 1.1 -Student is described thoroughly. A detailed
understand how analysis of specific student assets is provided.
language, culture, -Candidate describes objectively a P-12
economic status, family students background including details in one
background, and/or area or more of the following areas: language,
of disability can culture, economic status, family background,
influence the learning of and/or area of disability if student is 2e.
Introduction
individuals with gifts -Candidate also analyses objectively how this
and talents. context can affect school performance
10 particularly in the area of literacy, and/or
communication.
-4/60= 93% -Candidate provides evidence that student is
gifted, and in need for differentiation in the
area of literacy or communication.
-Research (citations) is introduced that
demonstrates that candidate is situating the P-
12 students issue within a larger framework
of GE.
9 -Clear, aligned to standards high expectations
are evident
LESSON PLAN 1 & 2 (if needed)
-Assessment is clearly outlined and obviously
measures what it claims to.
-P-12 student is encouraged to develop self-
advocacy and leadership skills
-Clear demonstrations of a variety of
instructional strategies needed to motivate
individuals with gifted needs (c.f. NAGC
standard 5).
-If needed there is evidence of responsiveness
to students with diverse backgrounds in any
of the following areas: language, culture,
SES, family background, and/or area of
disability if student is 2e.
ACCEPTABLE 7-8
-The description of the P-12 student is
lacking in detail (missing one or more of the
following areas: language, culture, economic
status, family background, and/or area of
disability if student is 2e).
-The connection between the P-12 students
background and its impact on school
performance lacks depth and objectivity.
-Details of P-12 students performance in
literacy and/or communication are superficial,
and insufficient.
-There is a weak justification for gifted
interventions, and/or the P-12 student seems
to demonstrate more of a behavioral issue
than an intervention that would augment
communication skills and autonomy.
-The connection between the P-12 students
problem and the larger body of GE research
is present but lacks depth.
-Clear, aligned to standards high expectations
are not evident
-Description of the assessment is not evident
(cannot measure what it claims to) or lacking
in detail.
-Evidence of self-advocacy and leadership
skills are not obvious.
-Differentiation strategies are present but lack
variety (c.f. NAGC standard 5),
differentiation does not offer enough choices,
or fails to motivate and engage students with
gifts and talents (technology, responding to
individual interests etc.)
-Demonstration of responsiveness to students
of diverse backgrounds is superficial.
UNACCEPTABLE 0-6
- The descriptions are vague and superficial
(missing three or more of the following areas:
language, culture, economic status, family
background, and/or area of disability if
student is 2e).
-There is evidence of bias in the description
of the P-12 students background.
-the descriptors used focus largely on P-12
students deficits.
-The data presented does not justify an
enrichment literacy intervention for this
specific P-12 student.
-The GE research on this topic is not referred
to, is minimal and/or absent.
-Standards are not referred to.
-Assessment is vague or absent
-P-12 student is not encouraged to gain
independence (self-advocacy, self-regulation,
leadership)
- Too few strategies are mentioned
(technology, choice, responding to individual
interests etc.)
-Evidence of responsiveness to students with
diverse backgrounds or from high poverty
backgrounds is absent.
 NAGC element TARGET 9-10
9 -Literature review is well written with 5/7
references.
-Literature is synthesized and clearly supports
LITERATURE REVIEW
the problem introduced in the introduction
-References are peer-reviewed and scholarly
and refer clearly to GE.
-All in-text citations are listed in reference
sections.
-All references are cited at least once.
-Very few APA6th in-text reference section
errors (less than 5) s
Element 2.1 create safe, -Intervention is clearly more complex (after
inclusive, culturally differentiation) than original assigned work.
responsive learning -Differentiation of the work is clearly aligned
environments that with the interests of the student.
engage individuals with -There is evidence of a personal interest
INTERVENTION
gifts and talents in inventory (in appendices) and candidate has
meaningful and obviously taken the time to get to know P-12
rigorous learning student personally.
activities and social -There is evidence of performance baseline
interactions. for student prior to intervention.
10 -P-12 student is assessed 2 to 3 times after
intervention (c.f. lesson plan) are taken
-Both baseline and post-interventions are
charted to verify post-intervention progress.
-If there is no progress, sufficient detail is
provided to analyze and hypothesize why this
is the case.
ACCEPTABLE 7-8
-Literature review does not fully address
problem introduced in introduction, or is not
adequately connected to GE.
-This section reviews literature by
summarizing article by article vs.
synthetizing all the findings.
-Not all articles are scholarly (too many
websites etc.)
-Cites titles of articles in text instead of
providing proper APA6th citation.
-There are less than 7 references.
-Many errors with APA (5-15)
-Not all references are cited
-Not all citations are referenced s
-The intervention does not differentiate the
task sufficiently. The task (intervention) not
rigorous enough to warrant progress.
-There is evidence of a personal interest
inventory but content is not clearly embedded
in intervention.
-The data (pre-post) is present, but lack
clarity.
-There is not enough data to ascertain
progress in P-12 students performance.
-The assessment cannot measure what it
claims to measure.
-One or more graphs are absent.
-The discussion about the lack of progress is
missing or weak.
UNACCEPTABLE 0-6
-Literature review does not review enough
research.
-Research is not clearly linked to GE.
-Information provided does not originate
from scholarly or peer-reviewed journals.
-Does not understand or apply the
conventions of APA 6th (more than 15 errors
in paper, and/or in references)
-Not all references are cited
-not all citations are referenced
-The intervention lacks rigor and obvious
differentiation is missing, and not tied to
students interests.
-There is no evidence of a personal interest
inventory there is no evidence of responsivity
to P-12 students likes or dislikes.
-The data (pre-post) is lacking or absent.
-Progress in P-12 students performance
cannot be demonstrated.
-The assessment cannot measure what it
claims to measure.
-The discussion about the lack of progress is
missing.
 NAGC element TARGET 9-10
Element 2.2 use - Candidates interventions clearly explains
communication and how P-12 student can advocate for his/her
motivational and needs (self-regulation, clear communication
instructional strategies to peers and/or adults) through evidence of
to facilitate differentiation.
understanding of - Candidates interventions teaches P-12
INTERVENTION
subject matter and to student how he/she can demonstrate
teach individuals with leadership when asked to.
gifts and talents how to - Candidates interventions clearly teaches
adapt to different how P-12 student can adapt to the teaching
environments and demands of the moment (e.g. ability to wait,
develop ethical or ask questions to teachers in a timely
leadership skills fashion without interruptions)
8 -Intervention details ways literacy and/or
communication techniques are differentiated
(to host teacher and/or student) so P-12
student noticeably displays increased
autonomy and interest in subject matter over
time (evident in data gathered above 2.1)
Element 2.3 adjust their -The candidate anchors instruction in
communication to an students background knowledge, interests,
individuals language and language proficiency.
proficiency and cultural -If P-12 student uses a dialect, it is perceived
and linguistic as an asset and not a deficit.
INTERVENTION
differences. -Academic language and vocabulary
10 development is an obvious focus, as is
explicitly teaching student how to code-
switch.
-If P-12 student has ELL needs, the candidate
clearly welcomes and encourages first-
language use and development, as well as
his/her familys involvement in the
classroom.
-Instruction is differentiated and scaffolded to
students levels of proficiency in English.
ACCEPTABLE 7-8
-The data from the intervention doesnt
clearly illustrate how P-12 student can either
advocate for his/her needs, demonstrate
leadership when asked to, or adapt to the
teaching demands of the moment. One or
more of these elements are missing.
-Intervention addresses ways literacy and/or
communication techniques are differentiated,
but student does not obviously demonstrate
increased autonomy, and/or interest in subject
matter (based on data)
-The discussion about the P-12 students lack
of progress, or the ability to adapt, or
demonstrate leadership, is missing or weak.
-P-12 students background knowledge and
interests are not obvious.
-Academic language and vocabulary
development are addressed, but intervention
lacks responsiveness to P-12 students
specific linguistic/ communicative
background.
-The need to use ones first-language is
recognized, familys involvement is not
discussed enough.
-There is evidence of differentiation but
linguistic scaffolding is weak.
UNACCEPTABLE 0-6
- Candidates interventions teaches fails to
demonstrate how P-12 student can
demonstrates self-advocacy or leadership
when asked to, or adapt to new instructional
demands. Two or more of these elements are
missing.
-Differentiation is present but fails to
demonstrate increased autonomy, and/or
interest in subject matter (based on data)
-Neither progress in P-12 student interest in
subject matter, nor increased autonomy are
considered.
-The discussion about the lack of progress is
absent.
-P-12 students background knowledge and
interests are absent from instruction.
-There is evidence of judgment about dialects
in general.
-There is no evidence of academic language
and vocabulary development
-The need to use ones first-language is not
recognized.
-The familys involvement is not discussed.
-Evidence of differentiation and scaffolding is
weak or absent.
 Introduction

Nicholas is a sixth-grade student at a suburban middle school. He is placed in general

education classrooms, but for math just so happened to be placed into a co-taught math class.

Nicholas was born in the United States. Nicholas lives in a neighborhood near the middle school

with his mother, father, older sister and his grandmother and grandfather. Nicholas and his

family are of Asian descent. His family speaks English at home, as it is their native language.

Both of Nicholas parents work full-time while he is attending school. Nicholas loves to play

video games and play on his Chromebook. He enjoys interactive activities.

Nicholas is a high performing student in all subject areas. He scored a 94 average

overall in the first marking period of the 2017-2018 schoolyear. Nicholas is above grade level in

mathematics. While in fifth grade, he scored a little lower on the standardized and end of the

year tests, specifically, a three on the NYS Math Grade 5 Test, and then scored an 89 on Math

5 exam. This year in sixth grade, he scored a 99 in marking period one for math. He enjoys

solving real world math problems and completing activities on his Chromebook. He works at a

fast pace in the class when completing both group and individual work. This in turn had led to

him becoming bored and disengaged during class. He will instead draw, read a book under his

desk or peer off. Commented [FA1]: Good description of being bored

Within the co-taught classroom, Nicholas has many opportunities to participate in

interactive activities, but many are not differentiated to meet his specific needs. Unfortunately,

he does not have many opportunities to complete any project based learning or accelerated

learning at this time. Again, this has led to him not being challenged within this classroom

setting causing him to become bored and lose interest. In order to address this, an intervention

such as accelerated curriculum and differentiated instruction to provide more computer and

project based learning, would be of great benefit to Nicholas.

 Literature Review

The literature review provided below analyzes supports that can be provide for

mathematically gifted students in a variety of settings. These differentiated approaches provide

individualized learning experiences for gifted learning in a variety of settings.

Differentiating Instruction for Mathematically Gifted Students

Differentiating instruction is an important element of meeting the needs of gifted learners

in the classroom community. Differentiating to meet student needs can be done using a variety

of techniques and helps to maintain motivation for gifted learners. Unfortunately, current

resources and curriculum do not always provide the opportunities and resources needed for

gifted students to display their skills and talents and reach their full potential (Freiman & Manuel,

2017). Students who are gifted in mathematics tend to lose interest throughout their middle

school years, due to the inability to be challenged and the nature of the repetitive routine

activities and curriculum in their classrooms. Gifted students benefit from activities and tasks

that provide more opportunities for creativity and higher-level thinking skills. These tasks allow

them to feel more motivated and more rewarding, since they provide a higher challenge level

and meet their intellectual needs. These students also present skills such as, a strong math

sense, extraordinary memory, accelerated content mastery, interest and enjoyment in the math

content and advanced identification of patterns and relationships (Springer et al., 2016). Their Commented [FA2]: I dont think this is correctly cited
according to your refs you should cite all authors the 1 st time,
willingness to learn and the curiosity they exhibit, aids in their ability to engage in self-directed Springer is not the author it seems?

activities and more thought-provoking tasks.

In order to support gifted students in a mathematics classroom, teachers can provide

enrichment and differentiated instruction following Renzullis Three Ring Conception of

Giftedness (Freiman & Manuel, 2017). The Three Ring Conception of Giftedness provides three

types of differentiation that can be incorporated into any subject or lesson. Type one activities
include those that involve exploration into a specific topic area. Type 2 include group

opportunities to practice and explore more knowledge in a topic of interest to the student, but

this time incorporating more creativity and creative thinking activities. Type 3 are individual or

small group activities that allow students to dig deeper into real problem-solving skills. Type 3

provides more project based learning such as presentations. Project based learning provides

excitement, such as creating problems for peers to solve rather than solving problems.

Technology can also be a great tool to provide support and more opportunities for

individual exploration. Some technology that can be incorporated into mathematical instruction

are calculators, computer programming, spreadsheets and various websites or databases

(Johnson, 2000). Video technology can be a useful resource to provide advanced material, such

as websites like KhanAcademy.org, which provides a library of topics for students to explore

(Jurkovic, 2012). Blogs and online math programs can be a great support for teachers, providing

students with an individualized experience and a way to demonstrate their knowledge and

progress. In our modern world of technology, many schools offer 1:1 devices for students.

These devices can be a great way to integrate technology and allow gifted students to explore

their own interests by conducting research, communicating with others online from other

schools and exploring the world of multimedia, all without having to leave their desk. In our

modern world, technology is a relevant aspect in our students lives, especially gifted students,

and is something they use regularly (Periathiruvadi & Rinn, 2012). The use of technology can

assist students with critical thinking skills and problem solving. The technology provides a

multitude of outlets for learning, but also for assessing the learning in a classroom for gifted

students. Technology has brought to life computer-based assessment, which allow students to

display their learning through alternative means.

Acceleration can provide another means of support and differentiation for gifted

students. Accelerating curriculum allows students to navigate the learning at an advanced pace

(Springer et al., 2016). Acceleration can be done using a variety of methods such as moving
ahead in the content, advanced placement courses, and curriculum compacting. It is essential

that material is not skipped over, therefore using a pre-assessment to determine how much

knowledge the student has can be a beneficial strategy to determine placement. The goal of

acceleration is to ensure that the student is engaged in the content being taught and takes an

interest in the learning. Additionally, acceleration can be enhanced with extracurricular activities

and pullout programs, such as math club, competitions or STEM/project based learning. Some

schools provide mentoring programs that students can participate in, outside of school or during

the school day.

There are many means for differentiating the content and instruction to meet the needs

of gifted student in the mathematics classroom. These resources should be incorporated in a

variety of ways, to meet the students learning style and interests. It is essential that teachers

take the necessary steps to educate themselves on the resources available in their school, and

provide an individualized experience for the gifted learners in their classroom.

Intervention

In order to increase engagement levels and further challenge Nicholas,

curriculum and lessons were differentiated by content and process. As displayed in the attached

lesson plan (Appendix A), the lesson followed the NYS Common Core Standards for

Mathematics and aligned to meet the NAGC Standards. Prior to beginning this lesson, Nicholas

completed the grade level material in an assessment that analyzed his understanding of the 6 th

grade content to ensure that it was plausible to accelerate the curriculum for him in this Module.

In order to plan and design a lesson plan that met Nicholas needs, a student interview was

conducted to determine his interests, areas he would like to be further challenged. He stated

that he enjoys learning about material that is relevant to his own life, and using his Chromebook.

He finds these lessons to be more engaging and interesting. Below is the pre-intervention data

that were collected, prior to implementing the lesson plan and intervention.
 Pre-Intervention:

Days Number of Times Off Task/Disengaged Total

Day 1 IIIII 5

Day 2 III 3

Day 3 IIIII 5

Day 4 II 2

Day 5 IIII 4

The pre-intervention data was taking taken on five different days in Nicholas math class

in order to observe his behaviors. The tallies represent times when he was disengaged, or doing

something other than the work that was to be completed. These can be descry bed as in tasks

such as reading under his desk, getting out of his seat and looking out the window. As noted in

the table above his numbers fluctuated but were relatively high, especially on days one, three

and five.

The post-intervention data below was collected after the intervention was implemented

and additional lessons were provided to Nicholas that included differentiated content and

process, using his Chromebook and accelerated materials.

Post Intervention:

Days Number of Times Off Task/Disengaged Total

Day 1 I 1

Day 2 II 2

Day 3 I 1

Day 4 I 1

Day 5 II 2
 As displayed in the chart above, Nicholas responded very well to the intervention. His

numbers decreased significantly and he was more energetic and engaged in the material he

was being taught.

Findings

An analysis of the post-intervention data was completed in order to compare to the pre-

intervention data. The post-intervention data displayed a decreased in boredom and increase in

engagement when implementing the differentiated lesson plan that included accelerated content

and technological resources. The data displays that the accelerated content is a beneficial Commented [FA3]: A little more detail on what was done
specifically?
resource and allows Nicholas to remain motivated to participate and learn in this subject area.

This provided a conclusion that Nicholas responds well to material that is accelerated to provide

challenging content, and meets his learning style needs. These small changes helped adjust his

demeanor about math and allowed him to remain in class but also being able to further his

knowledge in areas of interest that still aligned to the content for his grade level.

Conclusion

Providing differentiation and supports for gifted students is essential to their success.

Furthermore, teachers must get to know their gifted students and map out the best strategies to

implement that will help the student remain motivated and excel. Schools should provide

professional development for teachers to learn how to differentiate for gifted learners and

provide a list of available resources. Moving forward, it would be beneficial to continue to

implement intervention strategies such as those above in order to continue to support Nicholas

and increase his engagement and achievement in mathematics.

 Appendices

Appendix A:

Candidate name: Lindsey Powell

Date: Thursday, November 23, 2017
Setting: Math 6 Co-taught Class with 20 students, one general education teacher, one special
education teacher and one teacher assistant
NYS or other learning Learning objective Assessment
standard
6.EE.1 Write and evaluate Student will be able to use a Students will be assessed
numerical expressions involving doubling rule to calculate the upon completion of their
whole numbers. number of direct ancestors a Family Tree worksheet,
6.EE.2 - 2. Write, read, and person has in each previous tracking their graphing,
evaluate expressions in which generation and determine estimations and reasoning.
letters stand for numbers. a. how far back you would have Student will be assessed on
Write expressions that record to go to have a given number their ability to answer all
operations with numbers and of direct ancestors. questions.
with letters standing for
numbers. For example, express Student will be able to use
the calculation Subtract y from estimates for the length of a
5 as 5 y. generation, determine how
many direct ancestors you
would have had at different
points in history.

Student will be able to

discuss the reasonableness
of an exponential growth
model for studying ancestry.

1.7. Cognitive and Affective
Growth. Students with gifts and
talents recognize their preferred
approaches to learning and
expand their repertoire.
Student will be able to
choose a process that best
suits his learning preferences
and creative abilities when
completing the attached
activities.
Students will be assessed
upon completion of the
lesson, looking at the choices
he made on which resources
to use and how to present his
material.

Foundations: In the development of this lesson, I have considered the needs of my gifted
learner, who displays exceptional talents and advanced knowledge in mathematics, specifically
Grade 6 Curriculum. This student takes a great interest in mathematics, enjoys solving
problems and posing questions. He loves to play video games and play on his Chromebook, as
well as complete projects/build things. The student makes a strong connection to any activity
that may involve using his Chromebook or designing something that allows him to be creative.
He enjoys working with numbers and connecting lessons to his personal life and interests. Commented [FA4]: Embedding this in paper would have
This lesson asks students to have prior knowledge of multiplying multi-digit whole numbers, been valuable
graphing points on the coordinate plane and using exponents, which are all 6 th grade skills.
Lesson introduction (anticipatory set):
 What is an ancestor? Student will begin by watching a video from Ancestry.com that
analyzes this question. The student will define the term and will provide examples of
ancestors in his own life and his family history.
http://www.mathalicious.com/lessons/family-tree?code=154c50b661948e4a0b

Procedure:
Student will count back one generation at a time to list their ancestors and count how
many were in each generation. The student will use both parents and determine that the
number doubles since he has two parents. This will help him to determine how many
ancestors may have been in previous generations.
Student will compare his number to world populations at the various time
periods/generations.
Student will complete the attached worksheet Family Tree, either on his Chromebook
or in paper format, dependent on his preference. (Attached on Appendix B and C)

Differentiation:
The lesson will be differentiated by providing the student access to technology and
online resources, which is tailored to his learning style and preferences.
The lesson incorporates topics of interest, and provides accelerated content.
Student will be able to choose to complete the assignment electronically or on paper.
The student will also have the choice to turn his final product into a presentation using
his Chromebook and present his findings to the class at at later time.

Technology used: Chromebook, Ancestry.com, mathalicious.com

Closure: The student will reflect on his findings, and share what he discovered about his
ancestors and the comparison to the world populations in the years that his ancestry was
documented.
Appendix B
Appendix C
 References Commented [FA5]: Your references are not all peer-
reviewed?
Freiman, V., Manuel, D., (2017). Differentiating instruction using a virtual environment: A study of

mathematical problem posing among gifted and talented learners. Global Education

Review. 4(1), 78- 97

Johnson, D., (2000, April). Teaching mathematics to gifted students in a mixed-ability

classroom. ERIC Digest. 1-8

Jurkovic, N., (2012). Using technology with gifted students. EducationWorld.

http://www.educationworld.com/a_curr/technology-gifted-students.shtml

Periathiruvadi, S., Rinn, A., (2012). Technology in gifted education: A review of best practices

and empirical research. JRTE. 45(2), 153-169

Singer, F.M., Sheffield, L.J., Freiman, V., Brandl, M. (2016). Research on and activities for

mathematically gifted students. ICME-13 Topical Surveys. Springer, Cham, 1-41