Teaching underachieving gifted children metacognitive strategies

Teaching underachieving gifted children metacognitive strategies The development of a new program

Author: E.H.J. Gommans Supervisor: dr. W.A.M. Peters Date: October, 27, 2006

Ortho Pedagogy: Learning & Development Radboud University Nijmegen

Teaching underachieving gifted children metacognitive strategies The development of a new program

Master thesis of E.H.J. Gommans 0316121 Supervisor: dr. W.A.M. Peters October, 2006 Pedagogical Sciences Learning and Development Radboud University Nijmegen Liesbet Gommans

Teaching underachieving gifted children metacognitive strategies

Preface In the past year I was trained at the CBO (Centre for the Study of Giftedness) Nijmegen, the Netherlands, in administering psychological examinations with mostly gifted children. The CBO also gave me the opportunity to develop the program which is discussed in this thesis; this was coordinated by my supervisor dr. Willy Peters. Every bit of the internship was well worth working for. I’ve learned a great deal! It became more and more obvious to me that gifted children need a different approach from regular intelligent children, for they are looking for different things and want to know different things. Besides, it is important to state that they need, as any child does, a positive perspective. They need to know their strengths and weaknesses, but with an emphasis on the strengths. These strengths may help them overcome their weaknesses. During this past year I received help from many people, which I want to acknowledge here, to start with my supervisor dr. Willy Peters who taught me a lot about gifted children and the approach they need. We have the same point of view in many things and that makes it easy to work together, if I may say so. He gave me great tips and the product of our cooperation is a useful program for Dutch remedial teachers in primary school. I’m a practical oriented person, and I enjoyed working on this practical thesis very much. I also want to thank all the colleagues from the CBO. Special acknowledgement is needed for dr. Els Schrover who learned me many things about games in combination with the gifted children. My thesis was corrected into better English, by drs. J. Verschuren, this made me smile a lot during the last improvements, thanks for both! Any flaws you might find in my English are obviously my responsibility. Furthermore, I want to acknowledge the parents and the child I worked with during this past year. They taught me many practical things. And I want to acknowledge the participants and the children of this thesis for their feedback, efforts, and time. I realise it is hard to be one of the first people to work with a newly developed program. I did not know for sure how much time and efforts it would ask of them, but they nevertheless completed the program. My parents, brothers, their girlfriends and my boyfriend deserve special acknowledgement, for they supported me through this last year of university. They noticed I really enjoyed my training at the CBO, and let me therefore take the time I needed to complete this thesis. You are the best! And last, but certainly not least I want to thank all my friends for their support, “listening ears”, and their stories about internships and theses. We did it (or will do it)! Let the future begin! Liesbet Gommans October 2006

__________________________________________________________________________ __ Liesbet Gommans

2


Table of Contents Preface ......................................................................................................................................... 2 Table of Contents ....................................................................................................................... 3 Abstract ....................................................................................................................................... 4 1. Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 4 1.1 Development............................................................................................................... 5 1.2 Gifted Development ................................................................................................... 5 1.3 Giftedness ................................................................................................................... 6 1.4 Intelligence ................................................................................................................. 9 1.5 Underachievers and Underachievement ..................................................................... 10 1.6 Available Programs for Gifted and Talented Children............................................... 12 1.7 Dynamic Assessment.................................................................................................. 14 1.8 Metacognition and the Use of Games ........................................................................ 15 1.9 Protocols, Standardized or Manual Treatments.......................................................... 17 1.10 Critical Thinking ...................................................................................................... 18 1.11 Remedial Teaching ................................................................................................... 19 1.12 Hypotheses ............................................................................................................... 20 2. Method .................................................................................................................................. 21 2.1 Participants ................................................................................................................. 21 2.2 Apparatus .................................................................................................................... 22 2.3 Procedure .................................................................................................................... 22 2.3.1 Program Design .............................................................................................. 22 3. Results .................................................................................................................................. 25 3.1 Data Analysis.............................................................................................................. 25 3.2 Results ........................................................................................................................ 25 3.2.1 Feedback ......................................................................................................... 25 3.2.1.1 Content Oriented Feedback....................................................................... 26 3.2.1.2 Organisational Feedback ........................................................................... 28 3.2.2 Measurements ................................................................................................. 30 3.2.2.1 Measurements of Set ® ............................................................................. 32 3.2.2.2 Measurements of Production of Ideas....................................................... 33 4. Conclusion ............................................................................................................................ 35 5. Discussion .............................................................................................................................. 36 6. References ............................................................................................................................ 37 Enclosures ................................................................................................................................... 39 Appendix A Pilot-program ..................................................................................................... 39 Appendix B Figures of Measurements ................................................................................... 66

__________________________________________________________________________ __ Liesbet Gommans

3



The development of a new program

E.H.J. Gommans Pedagogical Sciences, Radboud University Nijmegen Abstract A program was created for (remedial) teachers to individually teach underachieving gifted children, with problems in their attitude towards work or study in school, how to learn. The learning of metacognitive strategies, e.g. strategic abilities and critical thinking, are highlighted in the program, with the aid of a strategic game that can be played individually. Also the transfer to schoolwork is specified. This thesis was the first test of the program. Eight (remedial) teachers participated with nine children. The teachers expressed contentoriented and organisational feedback and this will be implemented in a new version of the program. A conclusion from the feedback is that it is advisable to hand out more information about the program before it starts. The children were measured in three sessions (the first, the sixth, and the last) and the results of the spatial measurements overall, show that the correct answers of most children increased over time with training. The mean time of responding of most children decreased. The standard deviation of mean responding time of most children decreased. The results of the verbal measurements overall, show that the standard scores of all but two children increased.

1

Introduction

Charlie is a boy who is interested in everything that goes on around him. When he was just a baby, he looked around him very much and often got overexcited by the input. Since his childhood he has always asked questions to gain the information he wanted. He now also reads books to learn even more by himself and he likes television programs which can explain the way in which specific things work. His parents are proud of him and think he is a great kid, very curious and eager to learn, so they take him to all sorts of places in which he is interested. Steve is a difficult boy to teach anything in a room with many other children, because his behaviour is very outgoing. He cannot e.g. wait his turn in a group discussion; he always wants to have ‘the floor’. He asks a lot of questions just when he wants to and he keeps other children from their work. It is probable that he is hyperactive, perhaps on account of

__________________________________________________________________________ __ Liesbet Gommans

4


oversensitiveness for sugar or chocolate. The peculiar thing about Steve is that he doesn’t seem to be doing anything in the classroom, he is always late in finishing his school work, and yet he scores straight A’s for his tests. Charlie and Steve seem to be two different children, but they are one and the same child. At home curious and eager to learn, in the classroom generally described as being easily distracted and lazy. Is it Steve’s behaviour or Steve’s environment that needs to change in order for him to become a better pupil? It is a matter of point of view. If Steve is looked at from the point of adaptability to the school curriculum, he fails badly, and then the conclusion would be he has to change considerably. But if he is looked at from the point of challenge, where the parents gratify his curiosity and eagerness to learn, while school does not meet his needs in challenging curricula, then the conclusion would be that his environment has to change considerably.

1.1

Development

In order to understand the development of gifted and talented children, information about regular development can be convenient. Development is a construct which can be viewed in four different (theoretic) ways according to Mönks and Mason (1993). The first is called the biologically oriented theory. The advocates state that development and evolution are synonyms. Development is “growth and maturation of the organism” (p. 90). The second is the milieu-oriented theory which concentrates on the influence that one’s surroundings have on people’s development. They state that development is “an ongoing social learning process” (p. 90). The third is the psychodynamic theory which agrees with the milieu-oriented theory as it comes to the influences of the environment on development. This theory however considers the “socioaffective component of personality and its development […] fundamental” (p. 91). The fourth and last is the interactionist theory. It is a synthesis of the different aspects mentioned in the first three theories, amounting to the main idea that “development only takes place when the child interacts with his environment” (p. 91).

1.2

Gifted Development

The four theoretic views of development have influenced the way in which theories of giftedness are created. Mönks and Mason (2000) state that “knowledge of developmental theories is necessary to understand what is ‘behind’ a definition” (p. 144). This thesis is __________________________________________________________________________ __ Liesbet Gommans

5


mostly based on the interactionist theory, for this is the only theory which combines the aspects of the other theories. A child is born with certain capacities and these can be optimized when it is receptive to its environment, in other words, when it learns (see e.g. Heller, Perleth & Lim, 2005). There are different views about gifted development. Mönks and Mason (2000) support the interactionist theory by stating that “Psychological development includes cognitive as well as social and personality aspects. Furthermore, it is a dynamic and life-long process; the interaction between the nature of the individual and the environment determines the motives that emerge and the kinds of behaviour patterns that will become manifest” (p. 144). Feldman (2000, in Mönks & Mason, 2000), however, has a different view which cannot easily be classified in one of the four theories. He states that developmental activity can occur “on a continuum from universal (in all children) to non-universal (manifested relatively more in gifted children)” (p. 144). This dimension is based on “the uniqueness of the domains of knowledge and experience across age, background, and culture” (p. 144). Feldman claims that this view is more appropriate than other views to understand gifted development and therefore to conduct research in this field.

1.3

Giftedness

An example of a definition of giftedness is: “Giftedness is an individual potential for exceptional achievement in one or more domains” (Mönks & Mason, 2000). Compact as it is it seems to say it all. This definition is most suitable for research purposes. Mönks and Mason (2000) do not elaborate the specific domains. The model of Heller The Munich Model of Giftedness (e.g. in Heller, Perleth & Lim, 2005) can be helpful at this stage. This model shows that a child is born with different kinds of abilities and that there are other personality characteristics and environmental conditions which contribute to the performance of the child (Heller et al., 2005). To phrase a definition about giftedness which would cover the entire field, is probably an impossible job. Researchers with different theoretic views define giftedness, or the characterizations highly able and talented, differently. Mönks and Mason (2000) state that devising a definition about giftedness is difficult since there are various contexts. Examples of contexts Mönks and Mason (2000) mention are “process, key elements of giftedness, provisions for the gifted, or education of the gifted” (p. 144).

__________________________________________________________________________ __ Liesbet Gommans

6


In paragraph 1.1 Mönks’ and Mason’s (2000) four different theoretic views of development were quoted. This is engrafted onto the four clusters Hany (1987, in Mönks & Mason, 2000) suggested for the definitions of giftedness. He states the first cluster is innate or genetic-oriented definitions, whose adherents (for example Terman) state that “intelligence […] is genetically determined and therefore stable over time” (p. 144). The second cluster is cognitive models, whose supporters “laid the focus on thought process memory and related skills” (p. 145). Sternberg is one of the main authors of this model. He (e.g. Sternberg, 2005) considers the insight of children and their reaction to novelties in task performance as a main characteristic. Furthermore his idea of successful intelligence, and the subdivision in analytic, creative and practical aspects, contributes to the search for answers to the developmental processes underlying giftedness (Mönks & Mason, 2000). The third cluster is achievementoriented models in which “personality traits like motivation and environmental appropriate conditions” are thought to be very influential. Renzulli is one of the most influential authors of this cluster. In his Three Ring Conception of Giftedness (see e.g. Renzulli, 1998) he describes what makes giftedness. He mentions (1) above average ability, (2) task commitment, and (3) creativity as the core characteristics. The fourth and last cluster systemic models, asserts that not only social systems (as family or peers) have influence on the development of children, (and therefore also on gifted children) but also other systems like “the economic situation, the political orientation, and the culturally dominant values and beliefs” (p. 147). The compact definition from Mönks and Mason (2000) is useful for research, but it does not mention specifically the children’s characteristics needed to be studied. That was a reason for the U.S. Department of Education (1993, in Reis & Small, 2001, pp. 4-5) to write the following definition: “Children and youth with outstanding talent perform or show the potential for performing at remarkably high levels of accomplishment when compared with others of their age, experience, or environment. These children and youth exhibit high performance capability in intellectual, creative, and/or artistic areas, possess an unusual leadership capacity, or excel in specific academic fields. They require services or activities not ordinarily provided by the schools. Outstanding talents are present in children and youth from all cultural groups, across all economic strata, and in all areas of human endeavor.” This definition describes the ideal theory with respect to gifted children in a school situation. However, the awareness of the need to put this theory into practice will certainly be enhanced if the educators and teachers know what kind of characteristics gifted and talented children show or own, for it will help teachers to better understand and meet the educational needs

__________________________________________________________________________ __ Liesbet Gommans

7


from and for these children (Reis & Small, 2001). A problem which evolves from this point of view is that gifted and talented children are not a homogeneous group (Reis & Small, 2001); they are “many, varied, and unique” (p. 2). Researchers agree there is not a gifted child, who represents the many gifted children; they vary in strengths and talents just as much among each other as ‘average’ children do (Schmitz & Galbraith, 1985, in Reis & Small, 2001). Nevertheless besides variations, gifted and talented children show equivalent characteristics (Reis & Small, 2001). These characteristics may however “vary by gender, or socio-cultural group, or they may be manifested differently among gifted children with disabilities, with different linguistic backgrounds, or among previously high-achieving students who have begun to underachieve” (Reis & Small, 2001, pp. 2-3). But still, teachers are better able to provide suitable opportunities for the “special gifts and talents in the students they serve” (Reis & Small, 2001, p. 3) when they know more about generally recognized characteristics of these children. Betts and Neihart (1988) divide these characteristics in six profiles. It is necessary to state in advance that the profiles are not intended to define a child, for young children’s characteristics, behaviours and needs change frequently (Betts & Neihart, 1988). Type I: The Successful. These children have adopted the appropriate behaviours in the classroom and at home. They are good learners and achieve well on classroom- and intelligence tests. They rarely display behavioural problems, for they mostly seek approval from adults, such as teachers and parents. These children make it their goal to do as little as possible to receive the credits they seek (Betts & Neihart, 1988). Goertzel and Goertzel (in Betts & Neihart, 1988) concluded in 1962 that these children seem to lose their creativity and autonomy when they grow up. Type II: The Challenging. These children are “the divergently gifted” (Betts & Neihart, 1988, p. 249). They possess a great deal of creativity; they may seem to be obstinate, tactless, or sarcastic. These children question and challenge authority. They do not conform to the system like the successful do (Betts & Neihart, 1988). Interactions with these children often end in conflicts. Appropriate interventions are necessary to prevent these children from becoming drop-outs (Type IV) (Betts & Neihart, 1988). Type III: The Underground. These children hide their giftedness, mostly girls from middle schools. They want to fit in at school, they do not want to be different, and they want to fit in with non-gifted peers. They often feel insecure and anxious. These children benefit most if they are accepted as they are (Betts & Neihart, 1988). If boys hide their giftedness, it most often reveals itself in high school “in response to the pressure to participate in athletics” (Betts & Neihart, 1988, p. 249). __________________________________________________________________________ __ Liesbet Gommans

8


Type IV: The Dropouts. Usually these high school students are angry with teachers and themselves, for school did not bring them what they were seeking for and they feel rejected (Betts & Neihart, 1988). Often their interests lie outside the school curricula. They do not receive support for their interests and talents. Some of these children were characterized as challenging in upper elementary school or junior high (Betts & Neihart, 1988). The dropouts need to work closely with “an adult they can trust” (p. 252). Individual guidance is necessary because “they are bitter and resentful as a result of feeling rejected and neglected” (p.252) Furthermore they have low self-esteem and they have often lost their confidence in adults (Betts & Neihart, 1988). Type V: The Double-Labeled. These children are gifted and are furthermore physically or emotionally handicapped, or have an additional learning disability. Most programs do not identify these children as being gifted. Differentiated curricula, tailored to their special needs, are not provided to these children either. These children do not want to fail and are unhappy if they do not live up to their own expectations. “School systems tend to focus on their weaknesses and fail to nurture their strengths or talents” (Betts & Neihart, 1988, p. 252). Type VI: The Autonomous Learner, these children look a lot like ‘The Successful’, they have effectively adapted to the school system. The difference is that these children seek new opportunities for themselves, to make the curriculum more challenging. “They do not work for the system: they make the system work for them” (Betts & Neihart, 1988, p. 252). These students act for themselves, they do not need others to propose changes for them. These six profiles (see Betts & Neihart, 1988, for a extensive report of the profiles) show the variety of gifted and talented children and students (Betts & Neihart, 1988). These profiles can help teachers in the perception of the various characteristics of giftedness.

1.4

Intelligence

It is difficult to state what intelligence precisely implies. In this thesis, Sternberg’s view on intelligence (2005; Sternberg & Grigorenko, 2004) is adopted. Sternberg is the main author of the cluster cognitive models (Hany, 1987, in Mönks & Mason, 2000). Furthermore his theory of successful intelligence can be perceived on the interface between three out of four clusters of giftedness (Hany, 1987, in Mönks & Mason, 2000): the cognitive models; the achievementoriented models, Sternberg focused on the eventual achievements of the gifted children, (Sternberg & Grigorenko, 2004; Sternberg, 2005); the systemic models, Sternberg does not

__________________________________________________________________________ __ Liesbet Gommans

9


exclude the environmental factors in the eventual successful intelligence (Sternberg & Grigorenko, 2004; Sternberg, 2005). Sternberg states that being intelligent is a virtue, but if someone doesn’t know how to put it into action, he is not successfully intelligent. He (Sternberg, 1997a or 1999 in Sternberg & Grigorenko, 2004) described this phenomenon as follows: “…successful intelligence is the use of an integrated set of abilities needed to attain success in life, however an individual defines it, within his or her sociocultural context. Thus, there is no definition of intelligence. People are successfully intelligent by virtue of recognizing their strengths and making the most of them at the same time they recognize their weaknesses and find ways to correct or compensate for them. Both are important. On one hand, students need to learn to correct aspects of their performance in which they are underperforming. On the other hand, they have to recognize that they probably will never be superb at all kinds of performance. […] …people find their own unique path to being intelligent. Successfully intelligent people adapt to, shape, and select environments. In adaptation, they change themselves to fit the environment” (Sternberg & Grigorenko, 2004, p. 274). Successful intelligence implies that intelligence grows through interaction between a child and its environment (Sternberg, 2005; Sternberg & Grigorenko, 2004). It is therefore linked with the developmental theory of interactionism. The ideas of giftedness and successful intelligence are comparable. The main ideas most teachers have of giftedness and gifted children, is that of successful intelligence. The problem is that many gifted children have difficulties in living up to this successful potential. The standard curricula in school are mostly not exciting, difficult and challenging enough to assure that these children can shift their boundaries. Betts and Neihart (1988) write about the successful: “Gifted young adults who may underachieve in college and later adulthood come from this group. They do not possess the necessary skills, concepts, and attitudes necessary for life-long learning. They are well adjusted to society but are not well prepared for the ever-changing challenges of life” (p. 249). These children do not learn how to learn, and that makes them vulnerable in later life. It is important for every child to reach his boundaries and to learn, which is not different for gifted children.

1.5

Underachievement and Underachievers

The definition of the U.S. Department of Education (Reis & Small, 2001) specifically includes one ‘gifted problem’: underachievement. They write about children who perform well, but also describe the children who “show the potential for performing at remarkably high levels of accomplishment” (p. 4). Many children are not recognized as being gifted __________________________________________________________________________ __ Liesbet Gommans

10


because of this phenomenon. Neumeister and Hébert (2003) enumerate influences that contribute to the onset of underachievement: “One category of these influences includes individual factors, such as personality (Gonzales & Hayes, 1988), achievement orientation (Laffoon, Jenkins-Friedman, & Tellefson, 1989), or lack of study skills (Baker, 1996). A second category, family factors, includes lack of role models (Hébert, 2001), lack of family structure (Rimm, 1995), parental characteristics (Rimm) and family dysfunction (Hébert, 2001); Rimm & Lowe, 1988). Another category, school factors, incorporates inappropriate curricula (Fehrenbach, 1993), school environment (Ford, 1996), and teacher expectations that are too high or too low (Clinkenbeard, 1991; Ford). Finally, social factors include an inappropriate peer group (Colangelo, 1997; Rimm, 1995), minimal involvement in extracurricular activities (Colangelo, Kerr, Christiansen, & Maxey, 1993), and time-intensive involvement in after-school employment (Dornbusch, Steinberg, & Fegley, 1993) (pp. 221222). When children and adolescents are identified as underachiever, this is often not due to the influences that contribute to the onset of underachievement, but to the behavioural patterns a child or adolescent shows (Neumeister & Hébert, 2003). As behaviours the authors mention an incompetence to complete school duties and inattentiveness in class. To change this pattern, they state it is necessary to look beyond those behavioural patterns and examine the attitudes that are the basis of those behaviours. A reason for a child to display these problem behaviours can be “a failure to spontaneously and appropriately engage in task-relevant cognitive and behavioural strategies” (Meichenbaum, 1977, pp. 236-237). Peters (personal communication, 2005) calls it “a healthy reaction to an unhealthy environment”. Underachievers are likely to display these behaviours; they score at A-level for tests, but in non-test settings in the classroom they do not know how to cope with the interruptions and distractions which are present there. In short it can be said that this child does not know how to address its meta-cognitive strategies (Meichenbaum, 1977) (see paragraph 1.8). Characteristics of underachieving children can be shown in a similar way as the characteristics mentioned about giftedness in paragraph 1.3. Whitmore (1980 in Butler-Por, 1993) created a check-list in which approximately twenty characteristics of gifted underachievers became apparent. Her statement is that if a child exhibits ten or more of these characteristics, more evaluation is needed to identify a child as a gifted underachiever (Whitmore, 1980 in Butler-Por, 1993). Some of the characteristics Whitmore (1980, in ButlerPor, 1993) mentions are: “daily work frequently poorly done and incomplete; large gap between oral and written work; superior understanding and retention of concepts when interested; excellent general knowledge; highly imaginative and creative; poor test performance, achieving at or below grade level expectations in one or all the basic

__________________________________________________________________________ __ Liesbet Gommans

11


skills; persistent dissatisfaction with work accomplished; avoiding trying new activities to prevent imperfect performance; evidences self criticism and perfectionism; shows initiative in pursuing self-selected assignments at home; has a wide range of interests and special expertise; low self-esteem and tendencies to withdraw or behave aggressively in the classroom; shows sensitivity in perceptions of others and life in general; ends to set unrealistic self-expectations; dislikes practice work, drill or memorization; easily distracted; unable to focus concentration and efforts on tasks; has poor attitudes towards school; resists teachers efforts to motivate or discipline behavior; has difficulty in peer relationships” (p. 659). These characteristics may prove to be convenient in the identification of underachieving gifted children.

1.6

Available Programs for Gifted and Talented Children

Gifted children may participate in programs especially designed for them. There are three sorts of these so-called gifted programs. Firstly they may participate in enrichment programs, secondly the school curriculum may be compacted for them, and thirdly they may accelerate. There are part-time and full-time gifted programs, each of which claim to provide instructions for gifted children to satisfy their needs and live up to their potential (Heller, Perleth, and Lim, 2005). Pull-out programs, such as “educational enrichment, honours classes, after-school programs, specialized camps, and summer schools featuring special coursework” are examples of part-time gifted programs. The enrichment program of Renzulli (1977), the Enrichment Triad Model, will be summarized here as an example of how an enrichment program can take place. Renzulli (1977) recommended two “program objectives for guiding the education of gifted and talented students” (p. 5). The first implies that it is important for children to spend the majority of time in the gifted program to check out their own interests as deeply and extensively as they desire; while the children may also pursue these interests “with their own preferred styles of learning” (p. 5). The second program objective is an objective for teachers of the gifted program. These teachers should “provide each student with assistance in (1) identifying and structuring realistic solvable problems that are consistent with the student’s interests, (2) and acquiring the necessary methodological resources and investigative skills that are necessary for solving these particular problems and (3) finding appropriate outlets for student products” (p. 10). Renzulli (1977) furthermore divides the subject matter for programs for gifted and talented students in three different types of enrichment. Type I General Exploratory Activities Enrichment and Type II Group Training Activities Enrichment (p. 13)

__________________________________________________________________________ __ Liesbet Gommans

12


are supposed to be relevant for all learners. Renzulli (1977) however states the importance for gifted children to experience these two types of enrichment. Firstly because they learn strategies to expand their interests and they develop “thinking and feeling processes”. Secondly because “these two types of enrichment represent logical input and support systems for Type III Enrichment [Individual and Small Group Investigations of Real Problems red.] which is considered to be the only type that is appropriate mainly for gifted students” (p. 13). There are two different approaches of enrichment: breadth enrichment and depth enrichment. Renzulli’s Type III Enrichment (1977) is an example of depth enrichment, which means that the children become experts in one particular topic. Breadth enrichment is an extension of the standard curriculum in the classroom, with for example a Spanish or Physics course. In summer courses, organised by European and American universities, breadth and depth enrichment are mostly combined. Enrichment programs can be combined with compacting the standard curriculum. Compacting means that “the regular curriculum is modified by eliminating portions of previously mastered content” (Renzulli & Reis, p. 7) and this results in extra time for the children to participate in enrichment programs. Acceleration is the third option mentioned above. This option has research support, but is still not readily used in gifted programs (Borland, 2005). Acceleration, though, may also be employed without gifted programs. In a school with a differentiated curriculum this is easily done. The children need not be tested, when they are ahead in, e.g. mathematics, they should be able to work on their level (Borland, 2005). When children are enrolled in a gifted program, it has been made sure that these children possess the core characteristics of a gifted child (Renzulli, 1998) which are: high intelligence, high creativity, and high motivation. Moreover most of these children possess the criterion characteristics of gifted children, such as: IQ of 130 or more, A-level test scores or a nomination by their teacher (Renzulli & Reis). It is obvious that some of the core and the criterion characteristics overlap. Next to the core and criterion characteristics, the additional characteristics such as “achievement motivation, hope for success vs. fear of failure, control expectations, thirst for knowledge, ability to deal with stress, self-concept” (Heller et al., 2005) need to be mentioned, because when a child has all these characteristics, with an emphasis on the additional ones, it should be able to profit from a gifted or talented program (Heller et al., 2005). Gifted children who show the core or criterion characteristics are most readily identified for participation in gifted programs. But what if these children do not show the __________________________________________________________________________ __ Liesbet Gommans

13


additional characteristics? For instance the underachievers should be mentioned here, see the previous paragraph, for they do not live up to the expectations which the core or criterion characteristics lay upon them. One of the possible problems is, that the child never had any training in e.g. problem solving strategies, for it says ‘I just know everything’ and ‘I don’t have to learn, for I know everything’. They do not fit into the gifted program easily; they need to learn the basics, the additional characteristics, first. This basic training is now designed in a program which will be clarified in Chapter 2.

1.7

Dynamic Assessment

Learning potential can be measured with different methods. Dynamic assessment (DA) is a frequently used method. The concept of the original idea of the assessment of the zone of the proximal development (ZPD) as an opposite to the actual level of development (ALD) (Vygostsky, 1978, in Brown & Ferrera, 1985) is currently better known as DA. DA is currently emerging because “conventional intelligence tests can result in an underestimation of their [the children’s red.] real intellectual potential” (Hamers & Resing, 1993, p. 27). Vygotsky (in Keenan, 2002) was interested in the knowledge of a child’s cognitive possibilities and not so much in what a child could do in one specific moment. The ALD is determined trough psychometric standardized tests. Vygotsky (1978 in Hamers & Resing, 1993) describes the ZPD as: “…the distance between the actual developmental level as determined by independent problem solving and the level of potential development as determined through problem solving under adult guidance or in collaboration with more capable peers (pp. 85-86)” (p. 28). The theory of Vygotsky, and particularly the ZPD, is being taught in at least one Teachers' Training College (for Primary Education) in the Netherlands, for the ZPD is very useful for differentiation of the curriculum in the regular classroom (Van der Veen & Van der Wal, 1997). The ZPD is assessed through DA. The interaction between the child and an adult or capable peer is inextricably bound up with the establishment of the ZPD. The interaction between assessor and trainee about the strategies that can be used in solving a specific problem is central in this approach. In addition the assessor can help the trainee figure out problems which he cannot handle by himself (Vygotsky in Keenan, 2002). Vygotsky’s theory of the ZPD emphasizes the necessity of social interaction between assessor and trainee. The width of the ZPD, and therefore the learning potential, is based on the amount of help the child needs from the adult or knowledgeable peer (Brown & Ferrera, 1985). Furthermore,

__________________________________________________________________________ __ Liesbet Gommans

14


“The analysis of a child’s activity in the ZPD could be extremely useful in producing a qualitative assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of a child’s mental activity and in identifying the types of assistance that are needed to move the child to more advanced levels of development” (Minick, 1987, p. 136). DA is an interactive way of determining strengths and weaknesses of children (and from adolescents and adults) compared to the more psychometric, static, tests. A dynamic assessment session provides “information regarding the amount and nature of improvement that took place and the assistance needed for the child to perform the task independently” (Brown and Ferrera, 1985, in Kanevsky, 2005, p. 284). Furthermore, DA is a methodology and adds up, together with static assessment, to a “multi-dimensional identification processes and educational planning” (Kanevsky, 2005, p. 284). The best results of DA are visible in research with children, adolescents and adults, “who are likely to experience academic problems” (Campione & Brown, 1987, p. 82). Sternberg and Grigorenko (2002), however, describe two case studies in which they stress dynamic testing to reveal hidden potential in rural Tanzanian children. Because most standardized tests are not culture-free, the picture the standardized tests show may provide a dramatic underestimate of the potential level of these children (Campione & Brown, 1987). Sternberg and Grigorenko (2002) show that dynamic testing provides a possibility to establish the learning potential of these children. This can be equally so for gifted children. Gifted children mostly perform well on a standardized test, but what if they do not live up to their potential? On that point DA can be a possible means with which to establish their ZPD. Children have to develop their talents, and they can only do so when they are challenged to their utmost. Ordinary intelligent children meet their boundaries in the standard curriculum, but for gifted children it is necessary to seek for these limits (see paragraph 1.4; 1.8).

1.8

Metacognition and the Use of Games

“Metacognition refers to people’s ability to know and control their own mental functioning” (p. 422, Flavell, 1979; Martí, 1995; Simons, 1996 in Saldaña, 2004). Or in other words, metacognition is the cognition about cognition. Metacognition includes “both knowledge about one’s own cognitive abilities and limitations, and the capability to self-regulate thinking processes” (Saldaña, 2004, p. 423). As was stated earlier, it is important for (gifted) children to know how they learn (Sternberg & Grigorenko, 2004), so they and their teachers can adjust assignments to their favourite, or more problematic, strategy. __________________________________________________________________________ __ Liesbet Gommans

15


The problems children have with learning new strategies and in the transfer of the use of these strategies to different contexts are related to metacognition (Saldaña, 2004). One way in which cognitive processes can be assessed is through dynamic assessment. See paragraph 1.7. The use of different tasks in dynamic assessment is very common, an example is: Raven’s Progressive Matrices (Budoff, 1987; Carlson and Wiedl, 2000; FernándezBallesteros and Calero, 2000; Feuerstein et al., 1979; Guthke and Beckmann, 2000b; all in Saldaña, 2004). The game Master Mind has been used in different studies for different fields, for example to “determine the best possible solution strategies” (Nelson, 1999 in Saldaña, 2004, p. 424), the processes which are involved in successfully solving the game, and “as a sample of logic reasoning tasks” (Best, 1990 in Saldaña, 2004, p. 425). It was used earlier as an assessment task to “study the results of cooperative learning” (Georgas, 1985 in Saldaña, 2004, p. 425). Saldaña used the game in a successful attempt to study the usefulness of this game in the assessment of metacognition. A problem in using games is whether or not and/or to what extent there is assistance. Since it is being used dynamically, assistance should be centred on the processes involved in the game and therefore on metacognition. “In particular, assistance focussed on planning, supervision and revision of aims and strategies and metacognition of persons, task and strategies” (Saldaña, 2004, pp. 426-427). Next to the dynamic scores, non-dynamic scores, such as the number of moves to solutions or “number of errors in management of information” (Saldaña, 2004, p. 432) are useful in the determination of differences between two comparable subgroups. Differences in the number of information-use mistakes in university students of high and low processing ability were found (Hussy, 1991 in Saldaña, 2004) and the same applied for children with and without learning disabilities (Fritz and Funke, 1990 in Saldaña, 2004). There is a clear relationship between cognitive development and performance on Master Mind (Saldaña, 2004). Games are also used in the “Working Forward Lab”, a specific enrichment program at the Centre for the Study of Giftedness (CBO) Nijmegen. Schrover (personal communication, 2006) says that intelligent children have an innate desire to protect themselves against disappointments. All the more so because they are usually not accustomed to having any difficulties with their schoolwork. Schrover uses games in the enrichment program to take this anxiety away, because most children like games and find them challenging and not defiant. Games make it possible to push children towards and across their boundaries in a fun way.

__________________________________________________________________________ __ Liesbet Gommans

16


1.9

Protocols, Standardized or Manual Treatments

One way to define a protocol is a gradually specified treatment on which a therapist founds a therapy for a specific problem. Mostly it is written for diagnostic means or treatments of specific disorders (Keijsers, Van Minnen, & Hoogduin, 2004). Standardized treatment is an upcoming treatment style in the field of ambulatory clinical psychology and in youth care. In clinical psychology it is used for problems or disorders such as alcoholism and depression (Keijsers et al. 2004). In youth care standardized treatments are used for children who have suffered from e.g. sexual abuse or have problems or disorders such as Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) (Prins & Pameijer, 2000). Working with the assistance of standardized treatments and guidelines is a logical consequence, seeing the recent developments in research (Prins & Pameijer, 2000). In the Netherlands social workers, psychologists, and other concerned caretakers have to work closely together, and for that reason it is helpful if the different people use the same diagnostic, indicative, or treatment style (Prins & Pameijer, 2000; Keijsers, Van Minnen, & Hoogduin, 1999). Constructive communication is only possible if people act in the same frame of reference. It is also important to guard the quality of the treatments, and that is facilitated by the use of protocols (Prins & Pameijer, 2000). However, apart from advocates standardized treatments also have opponents. Rispens, (2000 in Prins & Pameijer, 2000) states that standardized treatments obstruct the working relationship between child and therapist and they undermine the creativity of the therapist. He states that protocols should not be used rigidly. Other opponents state that the individual needs of the clients are lost in protocols. They state that clients have more complex problems than the design of the protocol may define (Prins & Pameijer, 2000). According to Prins & Pameijer (2000), protocols are meant to be based on general, standardized guidelines which may be applied to a group of children with the same problem or disorder, but they will be specified in an individual manner for example with respect to developmental specific characteristics (see Kendall, Chu, Gifford, & Nauta, 1998, in Prins & Pameijer, 2000). Keijsers et al. (2004) have categorized the criticism and comments on the standardized treatment protocols and the authors have refuted them all. The first remark is about the therapist having his hands tied, for the protocol forces them into a step by step pattern. The second comment is that too little advantage is taken from the individual therapists’ expertise. The third remark states that the patient-therapist relationship can change awkwardly on behalf of a protocol. The fourth comment is the generalisabilty of the protocols to all patients with __________________________________________________________________________ __ Liesbet Gommans

17


the same disorder. The patients in real-live practices are more heterogenic, more complex, and suffer more from their disorder than the patients who have participated in the researches. The fifth comment is about the context of the treatments; in academic practices there is more knowledge available about the protocols than in regular practices. The academic practices are often coordinated by experts in a specific disorder. The sixth remark states that there exists resistance of the field against the use of protocols. The field in its entirety would not be ready for standardized treatments which are scientifically founded, for it is a whole new view on therapies. Keijsers et al. (2004) suggest three important points which will contribute to a successful implementation of a protocol. The first point, education and training of the therapists is very important. Second, flexibility, the ability to make choices, and the integrity of the therapist are most useful for the realization of the treatment. Third and last it is important that the protocol is user-friendly. It is important that the authors of a protocol are a team of developers and users. Summarized, it is important that standardized treatments or protocols should inspire therapists to a flexible and creative approach (Keijsers et al., 2004).

1.10 Critical thinking

Critical thinking is important in helping children become people who are unbiased, have “intellectually sound standards for belief, for truth, for validity. They need to cultivate habits and traits which integrate these standards into their lives” (Paul, 1990, p. 1). Learning can be divided into higher and lower order learning. “Higher order learning multiplies

comprehension

and

insight;

lower order

rote memorization

multiples

misunderstanding and prejudice. Higher order learning stimulates and empowers, lower order discourages and limits the learner” (Paul, 1990 p. 2). Paul (1990) furthermore states that most instructions used in schools, mostly unintentionally, lean on lower order learning, where they should, at least partly, use higher order learning. Therefore the better students have properly developed the techniques to memorize and perform on the level school expects from them and the opposite applies to the poorer students (Paul, 1990). “But few students understand what it means to think through the content of a subject analytically, few use critical thinking as a tool for acquiring knowledge” (Paul, 1990, p. 2). D’Angelo (1971) describes critical thinking as a process of “evaluating statements, arguments, and experiences” (p. 7). He also mentions that to make this description __________________________________________________________________________ __ Liesbet Gommans

18


operational, all the attitudes and skills should be mentioned in the evaluating process. The attitudes D’Angelo mentions are: “intellectual curiosity, objectivity, open-mindedness, flexibility, intellectual scepticism, intellectual honesty, being systematic, persistence, decisiveness, and respect for other viewpoints” (pp. 7-8). D’Angelo prefers an important role for the teacher in creating an atmosphere to foster the critical attitudes in the children. Especially group discussions about all sorts of topics play a huge role in attaining these attitudes. The teacher is supposed to utilize these attitudes, for he can easily be a model for the children.

1.11 Remedial teaching

People with (severe) learning problems are entitled to an adapted and more adequate school curriculum (Ruijssenaars, 2001). An advice like ‘you have to focus better’ to a child with dyslexia or ‘try harder’ to a child with mathematical problems, will not make these children better readers or arithmeticians. It is therefore important that there will be a considerable improvement in the professional’s approach (Ruijssenaars, 2001). Remedial teachers work individually or in small groups with children with learning problems. Which way is used depends on the problems of the child(ren) and the personalities of these children. Therefore the work of a remedial teacher requires considerable creativity (Ruijssenaars, 2001). When a child performs inadequately at school, it is mostly not necessary to immediately consult a psychologist or pedagogue (Ruijssenaars, 2001). Remedial teachers are capable of the remediation of problems, but when the problem appears to be persistent even with remediation or when the behaviour of the child does not improve, a psychologist or pedagogue could perform a psychological examination in order to try to reveal the cause(s) of the problem(s), which might help the remedial teacher to find a better, and more suitable approach (Ruijssenaars, 2001). Most remediation programs have empirical support and work according to a certain protocol, whereas other problems need more creativity and other personal skills from remedial teachers (Ruijssenaars, 2001). Remedial teachers deal mostly, as is stated, with children with learning problems, but the gifted children in schools are their responsibility too. When schools are aware of the problems which giftedness can give, an enrichment class is a frequently used option. These classes challenge the children, and that is sometimes enough to trigger them to work better in the classroom. There is no manual for remediation of the problems which can occur in __________________________________________________________________________ __ Liesbet Gommans

19


children who are gifted. Some specific problems which occur in gifted children are put together in the program which will be discussed in Chapter 2. This could be an addition to the remedial programs which already exist. It has not yet been empirical supported, but a beginning has been made in this study. Timmerman (2002) wrote a manual for (remedial) teachers to guide children with concentration problems, on the basis of the Self Instructional Training of Meichenbaum (1977). This manual is commonly used in the Netherlands with e.g. children with ADHD (Timmerman, 2002). In practice with gifted children who show a low concentration, it is striking that this training does not work for them. These children found this method overall to slow (Klinical Practica Reports, 2000, 2002, 2004, 2005). However, the basis of this program which Timmerman (2002) suggests should also be useful for gifted children.

1.12 Hypotheses

The program has been designed for gifted children of primary schools in the Netherlands who underachieve, and show for example the following behaviours: “easily distracted; unable to focus concentration and efforts on tasks; has poor attitudes towards school; resists teachers efforts to motivate or discipline behavior; has difficulty in peer relationships” (Whitmore, 1980 in Butler-Por, 1993, p.659). The program can be implemented in remedial teaching settings. The main question in this thesis is whether and in what way Dutch primary school teachers think the program is useful in Remedial Teaching settings, and what sort of contentoriented and organisational improvements can be made through the feedback from the teachers. A side question is whether the gifted children, with whom the participants worked, show progress in scores on verbal and spatial measurement during the sessions. It is to be expected that the standard scores of the verbal measurement Production of Ideas increase over the three measurements. Furthermore it is to be expected that the correct answers of the spatial measurement Set ® will increase over the three measurements, and that the mean time and the standard deviation of time of Set ® will decrease over the three measurements. Both measurements are based on dynamic assessment (see paragraph 1.7).

__________________________________________________________________________ __ Liesbet Gommans

20


2

Method 2.1

Participants

To collect a group of participating teachers who were to guide at least one gifted pupil according to the program that was to be developed, a flyer was spread out among Dutch (remedial) teachers who were students of or had graduated from a teachers’ in-service training program called ‘Specialist in Gifted Education’ and among remedial teachers of corporation ‘de Eenbes’. ‘De Eenbes’ is an umbrella organisation for regular and special elementary schools in urban villages surrounding Eindhoven, the Netherlands. Furthermore the students of the in-service training program canvassed interested teachers. Interested (remedial) teachers could respond to an e-mail account, which was especially opened for this reason. Teachers who wanted to participate and were able to guide at least one gifted pupil could participate. The e-mail account was the base of the communication between the participants and the coordinator of the program. The communication was therefore mainly digital. Of the teachers interested, twenty-seven stated a willingness to cooperate. Of those, thirteen actually did participate. Those were 1 teacher, 6 remedial teachers, 3 teachers and students of the in-service training, 2 remedial teachers and students of or graduated from the in-service training and 1 developmental psychologist who had experience in the individual guidance of gifted children. Three participants (of one school) withdrew from the program because they had not received ‘enough background information about the program and the research’. One participant withdrew, for the child she guided left her school after the fourth session. The last participant to withdraw, after the sixth session, did not find enough time to finish the program. From the participants who completed the program, all but one participant received time from their school authorities to guide the children. The participants volunteered for participation, and did not receive any material or financial reward for their contribution to this research. The eight actual participants, who completed the program guided 7 boys and 2 girls, who were selected by the teachers on an estimated or determined IQ of approximately 130. The three children without a determined IQ were tested, and all three appeared to have a determined IQ of approximately 130. The age of the children varied from 7 through to 11. Seven children came from villages; four of them came from a small village and three from a big village. The other two children came from a small town. All children attended regular

__________________________________________________________________________ __ Liesbet Gommans

21


elementary schools in the Netherlands. All the children showed an attitude problem. These problems were subdivided into three causal categories: an obvious motivational problem; working very slowly in classroom settings; a reading-, mathematical-, or language problem.

2.2

Apparatus

This research was based on a program that was recently designed. This pilot-program (further named program) was designed for (remedial) teachers to individually guide underachieving gifted children, with problems in their attitude towards work or study, in school for ten sessions of one hour. The specifics of the program will be discussed in the next paragraph. The data, onto which the analyses for the research were based, were the outcomes of the observations which the participants collected during or just after each session, and the outcomes of three measurement moments. These data were collected via (e-) mail and were qualitatively analysed per teacher/child combination.

2.3

Procedure

2.3.1

Program Design

Background of the program The program which was used in this thesis was designed to guide (remedial) teachers to individually teach underachieving gifted children, with problems in their attitude towards work or study in school, how to learn. Such a program did not exist until now, as was stated in the introduction, and furthermore there was a specific request from the CBO (Centre for the Study of Giftedness) Nijmegen, the Netherlands. Teachers often did not know what to do when a gifted child did not live up to its potential. In the Netherlands, enrichment programs for gifted children in elementary schools do take place, but in these programs the children often need to be able to work by themselves. Some gifted children can handle this independence extremely well, but others do not know how to tackle problems they come across by themselves. To guide this last group of gifted children, the program was designed.

Structure of the program The program consisted of ten sessions of one hour each. Each session was divided into three parts, one in which the child worked with a strategic game, one in which schoolwork was __________________________________________________________________________ __ Liesbet Gommans

22


attended to and the last one was an evaluative part. In the first six sessions the main theme of working with the strategic game is the training of strategic skills. In the last four sessions the main theme is critical thinking. The strategies, the child would learn by playing and discussing the strategic game, were to be transferred to school work. This was done to diminish the attitude problem of the child.

Target group of the program The program was designed for (remedial) teachers of elementary schools in the Netherlands. It is suitable for (estimated or determined) gifted children who show problems in their attitude towards work or study in school, who underachieve and due to that, do not live up to their potential.

Content of the program The program aims at explicitly teaching study skills to gifted children, mainly strategic skills and critical thinking. To establish this, strategic games (see Appendix A) were used in the program. The reasons for the use of a game are mentioned in paragraph 1.8. The main goal of sessions 1, 6, & 10 was to measure verbal and spatial abilities. This was done, for the verbal abilities, through the subtest Production of Ideas from the Rakit (Bleichrodt, Drenth, Zaal & Resing, 1988), and, for the spatial abilities, by an adaptive version of the game Set® (Falco, 1991). See table 2.1 for a schematic overview of the goals of the ten sessions. The raw scores of Production of Ideas were standardised, through the tables in the manual (Bleichrodt, Drenth, Zaal & Resing, 1988) that corresponded with the age of the child. The correct answers of the Set® assignments were counted and the mean time in seconds was calculated, just as the standard deviation of the time score was. See Appendix A for the pilotprogram, including the measurements which were used. The content of the different measurements are not to be discussed with the children. They do not on forehand know they have to do the measurements thrice.

__________________________________________________________________________ __ Liesbet Gommans

23


Table 2.1 Schematic Overview of the Ten Sessions Session Number Session 1

Main Goal Establishing the baseline

Session 2-5

Expanding knowledge about and usage for strategic skills Generalising the knowledge to schoolwork

Session 6

Establishing the followup

Session 7-9

Expanding knowledge about and usage for critical thinking (Develop critical thinking) Generalising the knowledge to schoolwork Establishing the second follow-up

Session 10

Side Goal(s) Getting acquainted with the game Considering as many strategies as possible Deepening one particular strategy (different for each child)

Meeting goals of session 2-5, which are not completed yet Think critically about their own acting Radiate a critical attitude with playing the game and during school work

Observing how the child plays the game after 10 sessions

Targets

Deepening of one strategy: -Recording the number of steps which the child needs to complete the game -Making a flowchart in which the different steps are made visual Establishing the development of the child

Establishing the development of the child

__________________________________________________________________________ __ Liesbet Gommans

24


3

Results 3.1

Data-analysis

The participating teachers filled out questionnaires during or after each session and evaluation questionnaires after completion of the program. They could also ask questions through e-mail. These questionnaires and questions were qualitatively analysed, with a main focus on the improvements the teachers suggested for the program, because the program has to be feasible for the teachers, before the children can benefit at the highest level from it (Prins & Pameijer, 2000). The program is to be improved with the aid of these results. The scores of the children (measurements in sessions 1, 6, and 10) on Production of Ideas and Set ® were quantitatively examined through comparing the child with itself, for the measurements had a dynamic assessment touch, and were therefore not completely controllable. The participants used the measurements in the way they thought right, and this differed among the group.

3.2

Results

3.2.1

Feedback

The feedback the teachers gave was divided into two categories: organisational and contentoriented feedback. For this thesis the feedback with respect to content was the most important, but the organisational feedback was also used. The content-oriented feedback was subdivided into Measurements; Strategic abilities or Critical thinking; School work; and General criticism. The organisational feedback was subdivided into Start of program; Strategic ability or Critical thinking; Evaluation/Design of the program; and General criticism. Table 3.1 and table 3.2 show the results of respectively the feedback with respect to content and the organisational feedback. The numbers between the brackets represent the number of participants who voiced this particular feedback.

__________________________________________________________________________ __ Liesbet Gommans

25


Table 3.1 Content-Oriented Feedback Measurements Three measurements on 10 sessions is too much (3)

Three times the same measurements was boring for the child (1) Would like to know the reasons for the choice of these specific measurements (1) Suggestion: insert colours in the measurements of Set® (1)

Strategic abilities or Critical thinking The child had preference for one strategy and couldn’t think of one or more other strategies, this was difficult to deal with (3) Different strategies are not clear, what sorts of strategies can a child use? (3) The child began to search for a different strategy only when his strategy obviously didn’t work as it should work (3) It was good to see the development of the attitude in working with the strategic game (2) Ten times the same game is too much (maybe change halfway through the program) (2)

School work Transfer from new strategies to school situation was realisable (2)

Positive and Negative Criticism The structure of the program was logical (2)

Transfer from strategies to schoolwork was difficult to realise and see (4) The strategies the child uses in the games do not generalise to school work (2)

Ten sessions is too long (1)

Let the children choose from the beginning what they want to learn (2)

The child really wanted to work hard; it wanted to be able to be proud of itself (2) The assignment was too difficult; the child gave up (in first instance). Later it was triggered to excel, by interaction with the teacher (1, youngest child)

Do not use regular schoolwork, but more challenging work in the sessions (1)

The workability of the program was good (the steps which were used) (4)

The program did not have enough variation for the child; particularly the same game every session (3) To motivate gifted children is a fine idea, but to tackle underachievement and a low motivation is very hard (1) The only strategy that comes from these kinds of games is trial-and-error (1) Critical thinking is a good topic for the program (2) The game was very good to use in the sessions, it was instructive and exciting (2) Only minor development took place in the strategic abilities of the child (1)

3.2.1.1

Content-Oriented Feedback

Measurements According to half of the participants three measurements in 10 sessions is too much. These measurements mean less time to reach the goals of the program. One participant wonders about the reasons for the specific measurements which have been used. One participant

__________________________________________________________________________ __ Liesbet Gommans

26


suggested it would be easier if the measurement of Set® would have colours, instead of the light grey, dark grey and black, for this made it confusing.

Strategic Abilities or Critical Thinking Several participants thought it was difficult to help the child change its strategies towards the games they used. One participant stated that the games which were used did not stimulate the use of different strategies. She wrote that the only strategy that could be used was ‘trial-anderror’. A similar problem was the strategy-use itself; the child started with one strategy and stayed with it. Several participants stated that the children only changed their strategy when this main strategy failed them to complete the assignment. Some participants stated that the attitude of the children towards working with the game improved over time. Some participants stated that the game was very good, instructive and exciting, and that it was a fine basis for strategic ability development. One participant, however, stated that only minor development of strategic abilities took place. One participant thought there was too little variation in the sessions, for every session had the same design, especially the use of ten times the same game was too much. One participant suggested changing the game halfway through the program. One participant found it very good that there was attention for motivation in underachieving children, but also stated it was very difficult to change low motivation in these children. Some participants stated that critical thinking was a good topic for in the program.

Schoolwork The majority of the participants found it difficult to realise or see the generalisation of the strategies the children had learned with the game, to their school work. Some participants stated the child would have to be involved in the choice of schoolwork, so his involvement would be optimized. Some participants stated it would be good to use challenging work in stead of regular schoolwork, also for the involvement of the child in its own development.

Positive or Negative Criticism Some participants stated the structure of the program was logical. Half of the participants stated the workability of the program was good. One participant stated that ten sessions of one hour was too long. The development was visible, especially in session seven, but then the child’s motivation decreased, perhaps __________________________________________________________________________ __ Liesbet Gommans

27


because this child was young (the youngest of them all red.). One participant stated the assignments of the game were too difficult, the child gave up, but trough interaction between the teacher and the child, the child wanted to go on. Some participants found that the children really wanted to work with the game, the children stated they liked being proud of themselves.

3.2.1.2

Organisational Feedback

Start of the program The majority of the participants had difficulty with the start of the program. There were participants who did not understand the measurements properly, so they mailed. After some questions and extra explanation, they all could start. Several participants stated afterwards that it would have been better to have checked if the participants understood the method and the measurements, so an oral explanation would have been great. One participant would have liked more personal guidance and feedback to be able to better adjust the program to the child. One participant stated that for the next version it would be great to receive an explicit manual about the program at the start. One participant attended a presentation about the program in the teachers’ in-service training program; this made the background of the program clear to her, she found this really helpful. Half of the participants would have liked to know the goals of the program in advance. Several participants wanted to have known more about giftedness, and especially about the (behavioural) problems these children can show at school. One participant suggested writing a book about this theme. One participant thought it would be great to have a shorter list of games, out of which to choose a strategic game for the program; and to pay attention to the usefulness of these games in the program.

Strategic Ability or Critical Thinking Some participants thought it would be better to start earlier in the program with critical thinking, for now there were only three sessions about critical thinking, this was stated to be too little. One participant stated it was important that the child understood the sense of each piece or topic of the program in order to make his development visible to himself.

__________________________________________________________________________ __ Liesbet Gommans

28


Table 3.2 Organisational Feedback Start of the program It was not totally clear how to start the program (by mail) (4) It was not totally clear what to do during the first session, with respect to the measurements (by mail) (4) It would be easier to have started the program if we had had an oral explanation first to see if we understood the method and the measurements (3) More personal guidance and feedback from the makers would come in handy, so the individual child would receive the best guidance (1) A explicit manual as a start of the program would have been great (1)

Presentation about the program made it all more clear (1) Would have liked to receive more information about the (goals of the) program (4) Would have liked to receive more information about giftedness and the problems of the children (3) Suggestion: describe behavioural problems (in combination with giftedness) for a better understanding by teachers (1) Make a shorter list of games to choose from. Some games are better for this program than others (rush hour not so good) or change games after session 5 (1)

Strategic ability or Critical thinking Start earlier with critical thinking, for 3 sessions is too little time for this important topic (2) It is necessary that the child sees the sense of every piece of the program (1)

Evaluation/Design of the Program Would like to know the reasons behind the design of the program (3) The way in which Set® was suggested, was not a comfortable one. It changed with every version of PowerPoint which was used (7) It was difficult to understand the meaning of the Set® measurement (3)

Positive and Negative Criticism The digital communication was good (8)

The design of the program, step-by-step plan, is very clear, and it has a plain structure (1)

Suggestion: a digital forum where students of the university can directly answer the questions of the teachers (1)

The steps are good, but it demands more time to really get it to work (1)

Suggestion: use a (voice)recorder during a session, that makes it easier to recall the session during the evaluation (1) Suggestion: let the program take place in a group (1) Maybe the child only liked the attention (1)

The reporting of the observations took a lot more time than was announced (3)

The observations were difficult to make, the questionnaires made it confusing (5)

Would like to know the experiences of the other participants (1)

Would like to see the results of this pilotprogram in the next version of the program (1)

__________________________________________________________________________ __ Liesbet Gommans

29


Evaluation/ Design of the Program Several participants would like to know the reasons behind the design of the program. Almost every participant found Set ® a difficultly designed measurement, for the assignment changed with every version of PowerPoint and therefore it was problematic to understand for several participants. One participant stated the design was very clear, because of its step-by-step design, she also found its structure plain and clear. One other participant stated the steps which were used were good, but it demanded more time to really get it to work.

Positive and Negative Criticism All participants found the digital communication reasonable to good. It was suggested by one participant to set up a digital forum, where teachers, may ask their questions about the program and students of the university could answer them. The majority of the participants found it difficult to deal with the questionnaires about the strategies and answers of the children. Several participants stated that to fill in the questionnaires took a lot more time than was announced. One participant wrote she had used a voice-recorder to make it easier to recall what the child had said during the session, this made it easier for her to fill in the questionnaires. One participant would like to know more about the experiences from the other participants, to be able to consult with one another. She also would like to see the results of the measurements of the other participants. One participant asked if the program could be done with a little group of gifted children at the same time. Another participant stated it was possible that the attention of the (remedial) teacher alone made the child enjoy the sessions.

3.2.2

Measurements

The goals of the ten sessions have been visualised in table 2.1. The goals of sessions 1, 6, and 10 were to measure the verbal and spatial abilities of the children. The measurements were dynamically assessed, that is why the outcomes are only comparable within a subject, not between subjects. Because dynamic assessment was used, the circumstances were different in every participant/child combination. The outcomes of the measurements are visualised in table 3.3; in raw and standardized scores for Production of Ideas (Bleichrodt, Drenth, Zaal, & Resing, 1988) and in means and standard deviations for Set ® (Falco, 1991). For the figures of the scores of the children see Appendix B, where every child has his own figure that is connected to its number in table 3.3.

__________________________________________________________________________ __ Liesbet Gommans

30


14 49 18 57

90

62

8 (d)

9(d)

19

27 103 19 72

55 7

24

3,13 8,2 12 5,01 16,0 12 25 92 -

54 6

14

2,07 6,1 11 3,12 7,4 12 3,31 9,4 7 23 82 15 55

64 5

14

3,05 7,2 10 6,53 20,6 8 - (c) 28 106 26 93

68 4

19

9,68 11,3 9 3,16 9,0 10 7,97 13,0 5 23 82 20 70

96 3

19

2,50 7,3 12 2,64 7,3 12 4,18 9,6 11 24 93 27 104

1,67 6,7 12 2,06 7,4 12 ≥30 124 29 117 103 2

26

53 16 45 1

25

10

11 3,89

11 15,8

13,39

Dev. Dev.

3,08 11,0 9 69

26

7,3

13,6

4,91

Dev.

Mean Correct Correct Correct Stand. Score Score

Stand . Score 19 Score Stand score Score

Session 1 Session 6 Session 1 Child

Production of Ideas (a)

Session 10

Set ® (b)

Mean

St.

Session 6

Mean

St.

Session 10

St.

Table 3.3 Measurements of the Children, Production of Ideas & Set ®

(a)The standard scores of Production of ideas have a mean of 15 and a standard deviation of 5. (b)The correct answers of Set ® have a maximum of 12. The represented mean times are the means of the correct answers in seconds. The standard deviations of the time are visualised also in seconds. (c)-Missing value. (d) This participant supervised other teachers in the guidance of a child. Each child was being helped by several teachers through the sessions; also during the measurements.

__________________________________________________________________________ __ Liesbet Gommans

31


3.2.2.1 Measurements of Set ® The scores of child 1 slightly increased in the number of correct answers in Set ® over the three measurement moments. The mean time of answering the correct answers increased between the first and second measurement and the standard deviation and therefore the variability of the time scores increased over the first two measurements. The mean time slightly decreased and the variability of the time scores decreased significantly in the third measurement, compared to the second. Child 2 was errorless during the first and third measurement and it made one error during the second measurement. The mean times were relatively equal, they vary overall 0.7 seconds. The variability of the time scores decreased over the three measurement sessions. Child 3 made one error in the first measurement and was errorless in the second and third measurement. The mean times decreased over the three sessions, just as the variability of the time scores did. This child was already familiar with the game Set ®. The scores of child 4 showed an increase of correct answers between the first and second measurement. The third measurement showed a decrease of correct answers compared to the second session, but still an increase compared to first measurement. This pattern, in opposite direction, applied to the mean time scores. The variability of the time scores showed a decrease between the first and second measurement and an increase between the second and third measurement. This increase also applied when the variability scores of the third measurement were compared to the first. The third measurement of child 5 showed a significant decrease of mean time and a decrease of the variability compared to the second. The correct answers increased. The participating remedial teacher wrote they did not quite understand the design of this measurement, therefore the scores of the first measurement are missing. The correct answers of child 6 increased between the first en second measurement. The second measurement was errorless. Child 6 made one error during the third measurement. The mean time and variability scores decreased over the three measurements. Child 7 was errorless on both first and third measurements. The mean times and the variability scores decreased. This child was already familiar with the game Set ®. The second measurement is missing. The scores of the children 8 and 9 of the Set ® measurement were missing completely.

When comparing the first and the third measurement, the results of the spatial measurements overall were: the correct answers of four children increased, the data of two children were __________________________________________________________________________ __ Liesbet Gommans

32


steady, and the data of three children were missing. The data of the mean time of responding of five children decreased, the data of one child increased, and the data of three children were missing. The standard deviations of mean time of four children decreased, the data of two children increased and the data of three children were missing.

3.2.2.2

Measurements of Production of Ideas

The standardized scores of child 1 increased during the program. The child started with an average score, and this increased up to a score two standard deviations above average. The standardized scores of child 2 increased over the three measurements. The child started with a score more than two standard deviations above average and the score of the last measurement was three standard deviations above average. The standardized scores of child 3 increased between measurements one and two. It decreased in measurement three. Child 3 started at two standard deviations above average, and he ended slightly lower. The standardized scores of child 4 increased during the three measurements. It started with a high-average score and it ended almost one standard deviation higher. The standardized scores of child 5 showed a substantial increase between the first and second measurement, from high-average to two standard deviations above average. The increase continued in measurement three, but just slightly. The standardized score of child 6 in measurement one was average. This score increased very slightly in measurement 2. A substantial increase was seen between measurement two and three. The standardized score of child 7 in measurement one was average. This score increased substantially in measurement three. The second measurement was missing. The score of child 8 started at almost two standard deviations above average, fell back to almost one standard deviation above average en increased until more than two standard deviations above average. Child 8 was subjected to the measurements by three different teachers, who were supervised by one of these teachers. The standardized score of child 9 decreased with every measurement. It started at high-average and fell back to low-average. Child 9 was subjected to the measurements by three different teachers, who were supervised by one of these teachers.

__________________________________________________________________________ __ Liesbet Gommans

33


When comparing the first and the third measurement, the results of the verbal measurements overall were: the data of standard scores of seven children increased and the data of two children decreased.

__________________________________________________________________________ __ Liesbet Gommans

34


4.

Conclusion

The improvements to the program, suggested by the participants, were very useful and therefore the program will be adjusted as a result of the feedback with respect to the content. The organisational feedback, especially with respect to the implementation of the program in primary schools in the Netherlands, was helpful. The participants would have liked to know more about the specific difficulties gifted children come across. Some of them knew about these problems, but others just thought gifted children needed a different approach from children with a regular intelligence, but did not know how to act upon this knowledge. Most of the teachers wanted to know why these children need such a protocol. This led to the decision to create a book or training program that will give the teachers more background information about gifted children, the goals, and possibilities of the program. The basis of the protocol was not clarified to the teachers; they only received the sessions and were free to ask questions, which would thereupon be answered. Some of them did, others did not. I thought it remarkable that of all participants the students of the teachers’ in-service training program, asked most questions of the participants. It is possible that they were more critical about their own performance than the other teachers were, for they really want to make a difference in the education of gifted children. The design of the protocol and the way in which it was composed aroused negative criticism as well. Three of the interested teachers, who started as participants, wanted to know more about the protocol and questioned the way this thesis was set up. They did not ask for more information, but just mailed they did not understand the way this protocol was conducted quitted. Half of the participants stated they also wanted to know the reasons behind the protocol in the evaluation questionnaire, so this will be inserted in the next version of the protocol. Overall the reactions of the teachers were positive with regard to the need of a program like the pilot-program. If the feedback of the teachers is incorporated herein, the program should be very useful for (remedial) teachers in Dutch primary schools. It was suggested by one of the participants that the program could be used in a small group, which could be an advantage with regard to critical thinking (D’Angelo, 1971). This is a topic that deserves further study. It can also be tried by (remedial) teachers, for the basis of the programs is the creativity of the teachers themselves, to make the program fit to one specific child or to a group of children, and therefore it can be a challenge.

__________________________________________________________________________ __ Liesbet Gommans

35


5.

Discussion

It is important to state that the way in which the children were chosen to participate in the tryout, isn’t the way in which teachers should select the children. They can select the children on their own accord, for which they can use the criteria mentioned in paragraph 1.3 & 1.5. Besides, it is important for the (remedial) teachers to look for the children who do not draw attention to themselves in a negative way, for it are these children who should also have the opportunity to work on strategic abilities and critical thinking. Especially the part of critical thinking may help them understand themselves better and become ‘higher order learners’ (Paul, 1990), for they have got the potential to become so. Perhaps it is better to adjust the program to children from 8 up to 12, for the participant with the youngest child stated the sessions and the program were too long. On the other hand it is possible to adjust the program in shorter sessions for younger children, for I do believe the program can establish a positive attitude also in these young children. Furthermore the children who participated in this program differed quite a lot from each other as was stated by Reis and Small (2001) in paragraph 1.3. Because the sample of participating children is small, it is very difficult to draw any conclusion for whom the program might work best. This will be a matter of further investigation. In this study questionnaires were used, but it is probable that more information could have been gathered with interviewing the participants. This was not done, however, for it would have asked for even more time of the participants. One of the participating teachers suggested it was just the individual attention that made the child enjoy the sessions. The progress in verbal and spatial abilities, which is visualised in Appendix B, would probably not have taken place if the sessions were filled with e.g. reading in silence. Therefore the above-mentioned progress can be seen as the result of the program. However, it is not clear what part of the program works best. Therefore other studies need to be conducted, which might be done with a gifted control group, who are only measured during the course of the program. This was considered, but not done, for I thought it sort of unethical to ask (remedial) teachers to measure gifted children in their school and not let them work with the program. Every child should have had the opportunity to work with the program.

__________________________________________________________________________ __ Liesbet Gommans

36


6.

References

Betts, G.T. & Neihart, M. (1988). Profiles of the Gifted and Talented. Gifted Child Quarterly, 32 (2), 248-253. Bleichrodt, N., Drenth, P.J.D., Zaal, J.N., & Resing, W.C.M. (1988). Rakit: Handleiding bij de Revisie Amsterdamse Kinder Intelligentie Test. Lisse: Swets & Zeitlinger. Borland, J.H. (2005). Gifted Education Without Gifted Children: The Case for no Conception of Giftedness. In: Sternberg, R.J. & Davidson, J.E. (Eds.). Conceptions of Giftedness (2nd edition). New York: Cambridge University Press. Brown, A.L. & Ferrara, R.A. (1985). Diagnosing Zones of Proximal Development. In: Wertsch, J.V. (Ed.). Culture Communication and Cognition: Vygotskian Perspectives. New York: Cambridge University Press. Butler-Por (1993). Underachieving Gifted Students. In: Heller, K.A., Mönks, F.J., & Passow, H.A. (Eds.). International Handbook of Research and Development of Giftedness and Talent. Oxford: Pergamon Press Ltd. Campione, J.C. & Brown A.L. (1987). Linking Dynamic Assessment with School Achievement. In: Lidz, C.S. (Ed.). Dynamic Assessment. New York: The Guilford Press. D’Angelo, E. (1971). The Teaching of Critical Thinking. Amsterdam: B.R. Grüner N.V. Falco, M.J. (1991). About Set ® Marsha Jean Falco. The Creative Genius Behind Set. Retrieved Oktober 6, 2006, from http://www.setgame.com/set/index.html. The Dutch version of the game is used in measurements. Hamers, J.H.M. & Resing, W.C.M. (1993). Learning Potential Assessment: Introduction. In: Hamers, J.H.M., Sijtsma, H., & Ruijssenaars, A.J.J.M. (Eds). Learning Potential Assessment. Theoretical, Methodological and Practical Issues. Lisse: Swets & Zeitlinger. Heller, K.A., Perleth, C., & Lim, T.K. (2005). The Munich Model of Giftedness Designed to Identify and Promote Gifted Students. In: Sternberg, R.J. & Davidson, J.E. (Eds.). Conceptions of Giftedness (2nd edition). New York: Cambridge University Press. Kanevsky, L. (2002). Dynamic Assessment of Gifted Students. In: Heller, K.A., Mönks, F.J., Sternberg, R.J., & Subotnik, R.F. (Eds.) International Handbook of Giftedness and Talent (2nd edition). Oxford: Pergamon Press Ltd. Keenan, T. (2002). An Introduction to Child Development. London: Sage Publications. Keijsers, G.P.J., Van Minnen, A., & Hoogduin, C.A.L. (1999). Protocollaire Behandelingen in Onderzoek en Praktijk: Recente Ontwikkelingen. In: Keijsers, G.P.J., Van Minnen, A., & Hoogduin, C.A.L. (Eds.) Protocollaire Behandelingen in de Ambulante Geestelijke Gezondheidszorg 2. Houten: Bohn Stafleu Van Loghum. Keijsers, G.P.J., Van Minnen, A. & Hoogduin, C.A.L. (2004). Protocollaire Behandelingen in de Ambulante GGZ. In: Keijsers, G.P.J., Van Minnen, A. & Hoogduin, C.A.L. (Ed.) Protocollaire behandelingen in de ambulante geestelijke gezondeheiszorg I. Houten: Bohn Stafleu Van Loghum. Klinische Practica Reports (2000, 2002, 2004, 2005). Meichenbaum, D. (1977). Cognitive-Behavior Modification: an Integrative Approach. New York: Plenum Press. Minick, N. (1987). Implications of Vygotsky’s Theories for Dynamic Assessment. In: Lidz, C.S. (Ed.). Dynamic Assessment. New York: The Guilford Press. Mönks, F.J. & Mason, E.J. (1993). Developmental Theories and Giftedness. In: Heller, K.A., Mönks, F.J., & Passow, H.A. (Eds.). International Handbook of Research and Development of Giftedness and Talent. Oxford: Pergamon Press Ltd.

__________________________________________________________________________ __ Liesbet Gommans

37


Mönks, F.J. & Mason, E.J. (2002). Developmental Psychology and Giftedness: Theories and Research. In: Heller, K.A., Mönks, F.J., Sternberg, R.J., & Subotnik, R.F. (Eds.) International Handbook of Giftedness and Talent (2nd edition). Oxford: Pergamon Press Ltd. Neumeister, K.L. & Hébert, T.P. (2003). Underachievement Versus Selective Achievement: Delving Deeper and Discovering the Difference. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 26 (3), 221-238. Paul, R.W. (1990). Critical Thinking: What Every Person Needs to Survive in a Rapidly Changing World. A randomized controlled trial. Retrieved October 4, 2006, from http://www.outopia.org/teach/resources/CritThink1.pdf. Prins, P. & Pameijer, N. (2000). Inleiding. In: Prins, P. & Pameijer, N. (Eds.) Protocollen in de Jeugdzorg: Richtlijnen voor Diagnostiek, Indicatiestelling en Interventie. Lisse: Swets & Zeitlinger. Reis, S.M. & Small, M.A. (2001). Gifted and Talented Learners: Many, Varied, Unique, and Diverse. In: Karnes, F.A. & Bean, S.M. (Ed.) Methods and Materials for Teaching the Gifted and Talented. Waco: Prufrock Press. Renzulli, J.S. (1977). The Enrichment Triad Model: a Guide for Developing Defensible Programs for the Gifted and Talented. Connecticut: Creative Learning Press. Renzulli, J.S. (1998). The Three-Ring Conception of Giftedness. In: Baum, S.M., Reis, S.M., & Maxfiled, L.R. (Eds.) Nurturing the Gifts and Talents of Primary Grade Students. Connecticut: Creative Learning Press. Renzulli, J.S. & Reis, S.M. The Schoolwide Enrichment Model Executive Summary. Retrieved October, 23, 2006, from http://www.sp.uconn.edu/~nrcgt/sem/semexec.html. Ruijssenaars, A.J.J.M. (2001). Leerproblemen en Leerstoornissen: Remedial Teaching en Behandeling. Hulpschema’s voor Opleiding en Praktijk. Rotterdam: Lemniscaat. Saldaña, D. (2004). Dynamic Master Mind: Interactive Use of a Game for Testing Metacognition. School Psychology International, 25 (4), 422-438. Sternberg, R.J. & Grigorenko, E.L. (2002). Dynamic Testing. The Nature and Measurement of Learning Potential. New York: Cambridge University Press. Sternberg, R.J. & Grigorenko, E.L. (2004). Successful Intelligence in the Classroom. Theory into Practice, 43, (4), 274-280. Sternberg, R.J. (2005). The Theory of Successful Intelligence. Interamerican Journal of Psychology, 39, (2), 189-202. Timmerman, K. (2002). Kinderen met aandachts- en werkhoudingsproblemen. Leuven: Acco. Van der Veen, T. & Van der Wal, J. (1997). Van leertheorie naar onderwijspraktijk. Groningen: Wolters-Noordhoff.

__________________________________________________________________________ __ Liesbet Gommans

38


Appendix A Pilot Program This is an edited version of the program, in Dutch, because this is the way in which it was presented to the participants. The three enclosures are about the spatial and verbal measurements. Pilot-protocol voor hoogbegaafde kinderen met taak-/werkhoudingproblemen Sessie 1 Inhoud van de sessie

Benodigdheden

*Voormeting SET® *Voormeting Ideeënproductie *Kennismaken met het strategische spel *Instructie- en opgavenbladen van SET® (PowerPoint) *Stopwatch *Strategisch spel *Bijlage 1 (SET® antwoordblad) *Bijlage 2a en 2b (Ideeënproductie instructie- en antwoordblad) *Bijlage 3a (observatieformulier)

Voormeting Doel *Beginsituatie vaststellen Benodigdheden *Instructie- en opgavenbladen van SET ® (PowerPoint) SET *Bijlage 1 (SET ® antwoordblad) *Stopwatch SET® Benodigdheden: instructie- en opgavenbladen van SET® (PowerPoint); Bijlage 1; stopwatch. Instructie: Op het blad staan alle figuren (enkel) afgebeeld. Wijs het kind op de vier verschillende onderdelen: vorm (kronkel, rechthoek en ovaal), kleur (zwart, donkergrijs en lichtgrijs -het verschil tussen donker en lichtgrijs wordt versterkt door de rand van de figuren, donkergrijs heeft een stippellijn met streepjes, lichtgrijs heeft een stippellijn met stipjes), aantal (één, twee of drie) en vulling (vol, geblokt of leeg). Opdracht: Er worden 12 onafgemaakte sets gegeven, waarbij het kind moet vertellen welke kaart ontbreekt. Een set bestaat uit drie kaarten, die allemaal gelijk of verschillend moeten zijn op de (hierboven beschreven) vier onderdelen. De opgaven worden als losse opdrachtkaartjes aangeboden. Uitknippen/snijden kan zodanig dat het getal rechtsonder staat. De begeleider noteert op het antwoordformulier (bijlage 1) welke kaart het kind als ontbrekende kaart bedacht heeft en de tijd die het kind nodig had (vanaf het moment dat het de opgave voor zich heeft, tot en met het antwoord geven). De begeleider mag geen extra informatie geven en controleert ná de sessie, met behulp van de antwoordbladen, of het een goed antwoord was. Ideeënproductie Benodigdheden: Bijlage 2a en 2b; stopwatch. Houd de instructie (schuingedrukt) aan, zoals deze gegeven is en noteer alle woorden die het kind noemt op het antwoordvel. (De voormeting wordt ook als tussen- en eindmeting gebruikt. Het is dan ook niet de bedoeling om met het kind inhoudelijk over dit onderdeel te praten of om SET ® in te zetten als strategisch spel.)

__________________________________________________________________________ __ Liesbet Gommans

39


Strategisch spel Doelen *Kennismaken met het strategische spel waarmee gewerkt gaat worden Benodigdheden *Een strategisch spel (door de begeleider uit te zoeken) Voorbeelden hiervan zijn: Rush Hour; Go Getter (verschillende uitvoeringen); Hoppers; Lunar Lockout; River Crossing; Tipover; Stormy Seas (te koop bij spellenspeciaalzaken zoals Moenen en Mariken te Nijmegen (tel: 024-3236119), soms ook bij normale speelgoedwinkels) of via internet, zie bijvoorbeeld http://ocs.spellenhut.nl). Vrij kennis maken met en, als het kind niet weet hoe het moet beginnen, praten over het spel aan de hand van de volgende vragen2: -Wat moet je doen? (wat denkt/zegt het kind dat het moet doen?) -Hoe moet je het doen? (meerdere strategieën bedenken) -Wat ben je aan het doen? (welke strategie wordt gevolgd) -Wat heb je gedaan en hoe heb je dit gedaan? Observaties In bijlage 3a, staat een observatieformulier dat gebruikt wordt om de strategieën die het kind gebruikt, te noteren, zodat dit concreet wordt.

Sessie 2 tot en met 5 De beschrijving die volgt, geldt voor de sessies 2 t/m 5. Wat in één sessie aan de orde komt, is afhankelijk van het kind en de begeleider. Het is belangrijk dat er interactie over de strategieën ontstaat tussen het kind en de begeleider. Houd wel de volgorde aan. Na de 5e sessie volgt een tussenmeting. Inhoud van de sessie

Benodigdheden

*Strategisch spel (zelfde als uit de voormeting) *Schoolwerk *Evaluatie *Strategisch spel *Schoolwerk *Stopwatch *A4-tjes wit, gelijnd papier *Bijlage 3b Observatieformulier

Introductie algemeen Aan de hand van de volgende vraag bespreken wat er in de sessie aan de orde komt. (De getallen voor de verschillende inhouden, stellen de volgorde van de opgaven voor.) -Wat moet je doen?2 (wat van toepassing is) -in deze volgorde, bij 2 is 1 nog steeds aan de orde, bij 3 zijn 1 en 2 nog steeds aan de orde1 Werken met het spel & werken aan schoolwerk (waarbij de nadruk ligt op generalisatie van hetgeen met het spel bedacht, besproken en gemaakt is) 2 Noteren van de zetten die tijdens het spel gezet worden (een notatiesysteem ontwikkelen) 3 Weergeven wat je eigenlijk doet met het spel (stroomdiagram)

2 Vrij naar Timmerman, K. (2002)

__________________________________________________________________________ __ Liesbet Gommans

40


Strategisch spel (30/45 minuten per sessie, inclusief evaluatie) Doelen

*Bedenken van zoveel mogelijk verschillende strategieën *Uitdiepen van één strategie; de stappen van het spel beschrijven m.b.v. een specifiek notatiesysteem *Weergeven van de aanpak van het spel (m.b.v. een stroomdiagram) Benodigdheden *Strategisch spel (hetzelfde spel als uit de voormeting (niet SET!) Kern strategisch spel Aan de hand van de volgende vragen praten over het spel en het spel spelen Het kind krijgt een opdrachtkaartje, daarover wordt m.b.v. de volgende vragen gepraat. Daarna wordt het opdrachtkaartje uitgespeeld en krijgt het een volgend kaartje. -Hoe moet je het doen?2 (meerdere strategieën bedenken) 1

Het is de bedoeling dat het kind meerdere manieren bedenkt om te komen tot een goede, korte en snelle uitvoering van het spel (van een opdrachtkaartje). Begin met een makkelijke opdracht. Naar aanleiding van de opdracht wordt dan over de verschillende strategieën gepraat. *Als het kind direct het goede antwoord ziet, probeer het te laten vertellen hoe het het aangepakt heeft. Uitrafelen wat ze doen, helpt hen tot het beter begrijpen van leren, dit kan ook zeker met het kind besproken worden. *Mocht het kind geen strategie kunnen bedenken, dan kunt u een voorbeeld geven: -trial-and-error (zeker niet de beste optie, maar wel een strategie) -proberen de opdracht in je hoofd op te lossen, voor je stappen zet. -per stapje kijken, uitdenken welke mogelijkheden er zijn. 2

Het is de bedoeling dat weergegeven wordt welke stappen het kind zet. Laat het kind hier zelf over nadenken. Als het met een goede (maar andere) manier komt, dan deze hanteren. Deze vasthouden bij het spelen van de volgende kaarten en in de volgende sessies, zodat het kind deze strategie eigen maakt. *Als het kind geen strategie kan bedenken, dan een hint geven uit het volgende voorbeeld. Probeer het kind de strategie te laten uitvinden. Voorbeeld van Rush Hour. Alle autootjes krijgen een nummer, de zijden van het ‘speelveld’ krijgen een O (van oosten), W (van westen), Z (van zuiden) en N (van noorden). Zo kan elke stap worden genoteerd. Later kan er gekeken worden of de opdracht in minder stappen uitgespeeld kan worden -of het met minder notaties kan-. Dit kan direct, maar ook een volgende keer worden gedaan. 3

Het is de bedoeling dat het kind weer gaat geven hoe het een opdracht, het spel, aanpakt. Gebruik de manier van het kind om dit vorm te geven. *Als het kind niet weet hoe het het aan moet pakken, dan wordt het gestuurd met bijvoorbeeld de volgende vragen: Waar moet je allemaal aan denken bij het spelen van het spel, welke stappen doorloop je altijd? (Laat de antwoorden noteren op een A4tje.) Aan de hand van deze antwoorden kan er begonnen worden met het tekenen van een stroomdiagram. Je begint altijd met een Start hokje. Daarna moet je kiezen uit twee opties (bijvoorbeeld “ik zie het antwoord direct” “ja/nee”) een beslissing nemen, dit wordt een tweede hokje enz. -Wat ben je aan het doen? 2 (welke strategie wordt gevolgd) Laat het kind af en toe uitleggen hoe het de strategie toepast. *Als het kind niet aangeeft wat het doet, of het niet kan uitleggen, help dan het kind met formuleren. Benoem nog eens samen wat er gedaan is, welke strategieën van tevoren bedacht zijn.

__________________________________________________________________________ __ Liesbet Gommans

41


Evaluatie strategisch spel Aan de hand van de volgende vraag praten over het verloop van dit deel van de sessie. -Wat heb je gedaan, hoe heb je dit gedaan? 2 * Probeer samen met het kind te herhalen wat er besproken is in dit deel van de sessie. Laat het kind ook het eigen proces evalueren, hoe het zelf vindt dat het gegaan is. Schoolwerk (25/10 minuten per sessie, inclusief evaluatie) Doelen

Benodigdheden

* Generalisatie van de strategieën naar de schoolse situatie * Uit kunnen leggen welke strategie in welke situatie het beste te gebruiken is * Meer gemotiveerd en sneller werken * Schoolwerk2 dat ertoe leidt dat hindernissen overwonnen kunnen worden.

Kern schoolwerk Aan de hand van de volgende vraag praten over het schoolwerk en hieraan werken. -Hoe moet je het doen?2 Als het kind moeite heeft met tempo, dan kan hier aan gewerkt worden. * Van tevoren wordt besproken wat de opdracht is, die het kind moet maken. Daarna wordt er gesproken over het werktempo van het werk. Met behulp van een stopwatch wordt bijgehouden hoe lang het kind doet over de sommen of opdrachten die gemaakt moeten worden. Deze tijd wordt uitgezet in een grafiekje. Indien het kind nu sneller werkt, maar veel fouten maakt, dan kunnen daar de volgende keer strafseconden voor worden gerekend. Als het kind moeite heeft met motivatie, dan hier een gesprek over hebben. Waarom het saai/vervelend/stom is? Wat kan hieraan veranderen? Alleen maar leuke dingen doen op school is moeilijk voor de leerkracht om klaar te spelen. En daarnaast kan uitgelegd worden dat niet alles leuk kan zijn op school, dat er altijd dingen zullen zijn die minder leuk/interessant zijn, maar die wel moeten. *Als het kind niet kan benoemen waarom iets saai/vervelend/stom is, zie Mindmappen. Als het kind moeite heeft met een specifiek vak op school (bijv. taal of rekenen) kan hieraan gewerkt worden. Wat vindt het kind moeilijk, wat denkt het zelf dat er zou kunnen helpen? Hierop wordt doorgegaan door de begeleider. Er kan aan het kind verteld worden dat er in deze tijd ook gewerkt wordt aan dit vak. En doordat het kind op een andere manier leert kijken naar leren, leert het ook het moeilijke vak beter aanpakken. Evaluatie schoolwerk Aan de hand van de volgende vraag praten over het verloop van dit deel van de sessie. -Wat heb je gedaan, hoe heb je dit gedaan?2 * Probeer samen met het kind te herhalen wat er besproken is in dit deel van de sessie. Laat het kind ook het eigen proces evalueren, hoe het zelf vindt dat het gegaan is. Evaluatie (totaal) (minstens 5 minuten per sessie) Doel Benodigdheden

*Bewust worden van eigen leerproces en mening *Het werk dat in de sessie aan de orde is gekomen

Aan de hand van de volgende vragen bewust evalueren wat er in de sessie heeft plaatsgevonden en wat het kind ervan vond. -Wat heb je geleerd?2

__________________________________________________________________________ __ Liesbet Gommans

42


-Wat vond je ervan?2 *Als het kind alles (niet) leuk vindt, en dit niet kan beargumenteren, dan is dit een hint om de volgende keer Mindmappen toe te passen. Mindmappen Het woord dat van toepassing is (saai/vervelend/leuk of iets dergelijks) in het midden van een A4tje zetten. Laat het kind hierbij bedenken wat er voor zichzelf bij hoort. Dit bespreken. In de volgende sessie weer evalueren met “wat vond je ervan?” Als er nog niet een bevredigend antwoord komt, dan de sessie daarna, tijdens het schoolwerk een opdracht uitzoeken die ze zeker niet saai/vervelend/leuk vinden en die laten evalueren. Hierna bespreken dat iedereen voor zijn of haar mening uit mag komen en dat dit niet verkeerd kan zijn! Observaties In bijlage 3b, staat een observatieformulier dat gebruikt wordt om opvallende observaties te noteren en bij te houden hoe het kind te werk gaat.

Sessie 6 Inhoud van de sessie

Benodigdheden

*Tussenmeting SET® *Tussenmeting Ideeënproductie *Strategisch spel met evaluatie of schoolwerk met evaluatie *Instructie- en opgavenbladen van SET® (PowerPoint) *Stopwatch *strategisch spel of schoolwerk *Bijlage 1 (SET® antwoordblad) *Bijlage 2a en 2b (Ideeënproductie instructie- en antwoordblad) *Bijlage 3c (observatieformulier)

Tussenmeting SET! Doel *Huidige situatie vaststellen (na 5 bijeenkomsten) Benodigdheden *Instructie- en opgavenbladen van SET® (PowerPoint) SET *Bijlage 1 (SET® antwoordblad) *Stopwatch Instructie: Op het instructieblad staan alle figuren afgebeeld. Wijs het kind op de vier verschillende onderdelen: vorm (kronkel, rechthoek en ovaal), kleur (zwart, donkergrijs en lichtgrijs -het verschil tussen donker en lichtgrijs wordt versterkt door de rand van de figuren, donkergrijs heeft een stippellijn met streepjes, lichtgrijs heeft een stippellijn met stipjes-), aantal (één, twee of drie) en vulling (vol, geblokt –half- of leeg). Laat het kind een paar sets (maximaal 3) met behulp van de instructiebladen bij elkaar zoeken en laat het ook verwoorden wat het doet en waarom het deze bij elkaar zoekt. Als het niet klopt, kunt u het kind hierop wijzen en het een goed voorbeeld geven. Opdracht: Er worden 12 onafgemaakte sets gegeven, waarbij het kind moet omschrijven welke kaart ontbreekt. Een set bestaat uit drie ‘kaarten’, die allemaal gelijk of verschillend moeten zijn op de (hierboven beschreven) vier onderdelen. De opgaven worden als losse opdrachtkaartjes aangeboden. Uitknippen/snijden kan zodanig dat het getal rechtsonder staat. De begeleider noteert op het SET ® antwoordformulier (bijlage 1) welke ‘kaart’ het kind als ontbrekende kaart bedacht heeft (opschrijven wat het kind vertelt) en de tijd die het kind nodig heeft. De stopwatch loopt vanaf het moment dat het kind de opgave voor zich heeft. Twee tijden noteren: de tijd waarop het begint met vertellen en het moment waarop het kind stopt met antwoord geven. (Als het kind direct begint met antwoord geven, kunt u dit als zodanig ‘direct’ noteren.)

__________________________________________________________________________ __ Liesbet Gommans

43


De begeleider mag geen extra informatie geven en controleert ná de sessie, met behulp van de antwoordbladen, of het een goed antwoord is en geeft dit aan op het antwoordformulier. Tussenmeting Ideeënproductie Doel *Huidige situatie vaststellen (na 5 bijeenkomsten) Benodigdheden *Bijlage 2a en 2b (Ideeënproductie instructie- en antwoordblad) SET *Stopwatch Instructie Zie bijlage 2a. Houd de instructie (schuingedrukt) aan, zoals deze gegeven is en noteer alle woorden die het kind noemt op het antwoordblad (bijlage 2b). (De tussenmeting wordt ook nog als eindmeting gebruikt. Het is dan ook niet de bedoeling om verder met het kind inhoudelijk over dit onderdeel te praten of om SET® in te zetten als strategisch spel.)

Strategisch spel Doelen

Benodigdheden

* Uitdiepen van één strategie; de stappen van het spel beschrijven m.b.v. een specifiek notatiesysteem * Weergeven van de aanpak van het spel (m.b.v. een stroomdiagram) * Strategisch spel

Inhoud Houd de volgende structuur (globaal) aan om het kind te laten vertellen, wat het aan het doen is2: -Wat moet je doen? (wat denkt/zegt het kind dat het moet doen?)2 Met betrekking tot het beschrijven van de verschillende stappen, of m.b.t. het weergeven van de aanpak van het spel. -Hoe moet je het doen? (meerdere strategieën bedenken)2 Als het kind (en de begeleider) al een strategie hebben gevonden, die het beste werkt, kan deze stap naar eigen inzicht verkort worden. -Wat ben je aan het doen? (welke strategie wordt gevolgd)2 Kan het kind omschrijven wat het aan het doen is? Het is belangrijk om aan het kind te vertellen waarom het goed is om de stappen hardop te vertellen. Zo kan de begeleider namelijk zien hoe het kind te werk gaat. Daarnaast is het goed als het kind op een bepaald moment tegen zijn/haar eigen grenzen aanloopt, dat het spel niet lukt zoals gepland. Dit is een leermoment voor het kind en dan moet er doorgezet worden, zodat het kind over die grens heen leert stappen. Het moment dat het dan goed gaat, kan het kind dan ook echt een goed gevoel geven. Evaluatie van het spel -Wat heb je gedaan en hoe heb je dit gedaan (wat vond je ervan)?2 * Probeer samen met het kind te herhalen wat er besproken is in dit deel van de sessie. Laat het kind ook het eigen proces evalueren, hoe het zelf vindt dat het gegaan is. Schoolwerk Doelen

Benodigdheden

* Generaliseren van hetgeen geleerd is bij het strategische spel, naar de schoolse situatie * Meer gemotiveerd en sneller werken * Het beargumenteerd weergeven van de mening van het kind over de aanpak van een schools‘probleem’. * Schoolwerk dat er toe leidt dat hindernissen overwonnen kunnen worden.

__________________________________________________________________________ __ Liesbet Gommans

44


Inhoud -Hoe moet je het doen?2 * Als het kind moeite heeft met tempo, dan kan hier aan gewerkt worden. Van tevoren wordt besproken wat de opdracht is, die het kind moet maken. Daarna wordt er gesproken over het werktempo van het werk. Met behulp van een stopwatch wordt bijgehouden hoe lang het kind doet over de sommen of opdrachten die gemaakt moeten worden. Deze tijd wordt uitgezet in een grafiekje. Indien het kind nu sneller werkt, maar veel fouten maakt, dan kunnen daar de volgende keer strafseconden voor worden gerekend. *

Als het kind moeite heeft met motivatie, dan hier een gesprek over hebben. Waarom het saai/vervelend/stom is? Wat kan hieraan veranderen? Alleen maar leuke dingen doen op school is moeilijk voor de leerkracht om klaar te spelen. En daarnaast kan uitgelegd worden dat niet alles leuk kan zijn op school, dat er altijd dingen zullen zijn die minder leuk/interessant zijn, maar die wel moeten. - Als het kind niet kan benoemen waarom iets saai/vervelend/stom is, zie Mindmappen.

*

Als het kind moeite heeft met een specifiek vak op school (bijv. taal of rekenen) kan hieraan gewerkt worden. Wat vindt het kind moeilijk, wat denkt het zelf dat er zou kunnen helpen? Hierop wordt doorgegaan door de begeleider. Er kan aan het kind verteld worden dat er in deze tijd ook gewerkt wordt aan dit vak. En doordat het kind op een andere manier leert kijken naar leren, leert het ook het moeilijke vak beter aanpakken.

Evaluatie van het schoolwerk -Wat heb je gedaan, hoe heb je dit gedaan?2 * Samen met het kind herhalen wat er besproken is in dit deel van de sessie. Laat het kind ook het eigen proces evalueren, hoe het zelf vindt dat het gegaan is. Observatie In bijlage 3c, staat een observatieformulier dat gebruikt wordt om de strategieën die het kind gebruikt, te noteren, zodat dit concreet wordt. Hier kunt u ook andere aantekeningen/opmerkingen noteren.

Sessie 7 tot en met 9 De beschrijving die volgt, geldt voor de sessies 7 t/m 9. Wat in één sessie aan de orde komt, is afhankelijk van het kind en de begeleider. Het is belangrijk dat er interactie over de strategieën ontstaat tussen het kind en de begeleider. Houd wel de volgorde aan. Na de 9e sessie volgt een nameting. Bij deze sessies gaan we uit van wat er in het eerste blok gedaan is: er is gewerkt met het spel en aan het schoolwerk, voor de generalisatie van de strategische vaardigheden. Er is een notatiesysteem ontwikkeld, waarbij gedacht is vanuit het kind, zodat het zijn/haar notatiesysteem werd. Daarnaast is er nog een stroomdiagram gemaakt, zodat visueel is geworden hoe het kind te werk is gegaan, nadat er eerst één best passende strategie is uitgediept. (Als een van deze onderdelen nog niet aan de orde is gekomen, dan hoort dit bij de inhoud van sessie 7.) Inhoud van de sessie

Benodigheden

* Strategisch spel * Schoolwerk * Evaluatie * Strategisch spel * Schoolwerk (zie uitleg schoolwerk) * Wit en gelijnd papier * Bijlage 3d Observatieformulier

__________________________________________________________________________ __ Liesbet Gommans

45


Introductie algemeen Aan de hand van de volgende vraag bespreken wat er in een sessie aan de orde komt. -Wat moet je doen?2 (wat van toepassing is) -globaal zijn de onderdelen onder te verdelen in de drie komende sessies1 (sessie 7) 2 (sessie 8) 3 (sessie 9)

Uitleggen van het spel aan iemand die er niets vanaf weet. (In eerste instantie aan de begeleider. Als het kind het leuk vindt om te doen, dan kan het ook aan een ander kind uitgelegd worden, buiten de begeleiding om.) Introductie tot Kritisch denken a.d.h.v. het strategische spel (m.b.v. het stroomdiagram) en schoolwerk. Uitbreiden van Kritisch denken m.b.v. eigen vragen van het kind.

Daarnaast wordt er iedere week gewerkt met schoolmateriaal, waarvan het kind zelf aangeeft wat hem of haar nuttig lijkt om te doen. In de 7e sessie wordt hiervoor tijdens de schoolwerktijd een inleiding gegeven. Het kind moet weten dat het schoolwerk aanleiding moet geven om er kritisch over na te denken. In sessie 7 wordt ook aangegeven dat dit werk voor maximaal 40 minuten is. Strategisch spel (30 minuten per sessie, inclusief evaluatie) Doelen

* Het kind kan de kern van het spel uitleggen aan iemand die er niets vanaf weet. * Het kind leert kritisch na te denken over zijn eigen handelen. * Het kind leert een kritische houding aan te nemen bij het spelen van het spel. Benodigdheden *een strategisch spel (a) (a) Als het kind een grens tegengekomen is bij het spel in eerdere sessies en deze grens ook verlegd heeft (het kind heeft geleerd om over die grens heen te komen), dan kan er, als het kind er naar vraagt of als u deze inschatting maakt, overgegaan worden op een ander (wel een strategisch) spel. Kern strategisch spel Aan de hand van de volgende vragen praten over het spel en het spel spelen: -Hoe moet je het doen?2 1 Het is de bedoeling dat het kind aan de begeleider uitlegt hoe het spel, dat het de afgelopen weken heeft gespeeld, gespeeld moet worden. Het is de bedoeling dat de begeleider zich onwetend opstelt. Probeer daarom het kind op weg te helpen met open vragen als het er niet goed uitkomt. *Aandachtspunten die verwerkt kunnen worden in de uitleg: -het doel van het spel -de spelregels van het spel, wat mag wel/niet? -de aanpak van het spel, hoe moet je te werk gaan? -moeilijkheden waar je tegenaan kunt lopen -tips voor een andere speler. *Als het kind moeite heeft met de volgorde van het uitleggen, dan kan het stroomdiagram wat eerder gemaakt is, worden ingezet als geheugensteun. *Het kind mag gebruik maken van het spel tijdens de uitleg, dit zijn observaties, hoe pakt het kind de opdracht aan. Het spelen van het spel is de volgende stap. Geef zo weinig mogelijk aanwijzingen. Voor de begeleider een goed moment om te observeren of het kind op de manier werkt, zoals het de afgelopen sessies aan de orde is geweest en het net heeft uitgelegd.

__________________________________________________________________________ __ Liesbet Gommans

46


2

Het is de bedoeling dat “kritisch denken” (als denkvaardigheid) wordt geïntroduceerd bij het kind met behulp van vragen naar aanleiding van het strategische spel. *Vragen die gesteld kunnen worden: -Zou een kleurenblind kind dit spel kunnen spelen? Waarom wel/niet? -Hoe zou je een doof kind dit spel uit kunnen leggen? Waar moet je dan op letten? Waarom denk je dat? -Zou een blind kind dit spel kunnen spelen? Is het makkelijker te maken voor een blind kind? Zo ja, wat zou er moeten veranderen aan het spel om het makkelijker te maken voor een blind kind? Waarom denk je dat? -Hoe kan dit spel moeilijker gemaakt worden? Zou er iets toegevoegd/ weggelaten moeten worden? Waarom denk je dat? -... Andere open, kritische vragen kunnen natuurlijk ook gesteld en besproken worden. Beschrijf deze dan op het observatieformulier. *Laat het kind vooral uitleggen waarom het een bepaald antwoord geeft. Hoe heeft het dit bedacht? Heeft het het gehoord? Zo ja, van wie? Is deze persoon betrouwbaar? Enz. 3

Het is de bedoeling dat “kritisch denken” wordt uitgebreid met vragen die het kind zelf stelt. Laat het kind nu zelf kritische vragen stellen die gaan over het spel. *De begeleider heeft hierbij een begeleidende functie. Het kind stelt zelf vragen en probeert deze ook te beantwoorden, met hulp van de begeleider en eventueel andere middelen. Stel open vragen, zodat het kind verder na dient te denken over zijn eigen vraag. *Iedere open, kritische vraag is goed om samen over na te denken. Evaluatie strategisch spel Aan de hand van de volgende vragen praten over het verloop van dit deel van de sessie. -Wat heb je gedaan, hoe heb je dit gedaan, wat vond je ervan? 2 * Laat het kind samenvatten wat er besproken is in dit deel van de sessie. Laat het kind ook het eigen proces evalueren, hoe het zelf vindt dat het gegaan is. Schoolwerk (25 minuten per sessie, inclusief evaluatie) Doelen

Benodigdheden

* Schoolwerk vinden met behulp waarvan kritisch nagedacht kan gaan worden. * Het kind leert een kritische houding aan te nemen bij het maken van schoolwerk. * Het kind leert kritisch na te denken over zijn eigen handelen. * Schoolwerk dat ertoe leidt dat hindernissen overwonnen kunnen worden.

Kern schoolwerk Aan de hand van de volgende vraag praten over het schoolwerk en hieraan werken. Er dient aan de hand van een gesprek met het kind (sessie 7) te worden achterhaald wat het kind motiverend schoolwerk vindt. En hierbij wordt met het kind besproken dat het schoolwerk moet zijn, waarover nagedacht moet gaan worden. Niet in de zin van nadenken omdat het moeilijk is, maar in de zin van creatief nadenken. Het kind moet uitgedaagd worden om een voor de hand liggend antwoord verder te bekijken dan op het eerste gezicht noodzakelijk is. Bij dit schoolwerk wordt dan op dezelfde manier vragen gesteld als hierboven bij het strategisch spel staat beschreven. Stel open vragen die het kind laten nadenken over wat het aan het doen is, of over wat het wil doen. Mocht het kind geen schoolwerk weten wat hem motiveert, dan kan er ook gesproken worden over het opzetten van een project. Bijvoorbeeld het voorbereiden van een spreekbeurt. Hoe zou het kind dit aanpakken bijvoorbeeld. Het zal extra motiverend werken als het kind het uiteindelijke plan ook echt mag uitvoeren. Probeer het kind in ieder geval te laten formuleren wat het op school belangrijk, motiverend werk vindt, zodat daar ook in de klas mee verder gegaan kan worden.

__________________________________________________________________________ __ Liesbet Gommans

47


Evaluatie schoolwerk Aan de hand van de volgende vraag praten over het verloop van dit deel van de sessie. -Wat heb je gedaan, hoe heb je dit gedaan?2 * Probeer samen met het kind samen te vatten wat er besproken is in dit deel van de sessie. Laat het kind ook het eigen proces evalueren, hoe het zelf vindt dat het gegaan is. Evaluatie (totaal) (5 minuten per sessie) Doel Benodigdheden

*Bewust worden van eigen leerproces en mening *Het werk dat in de sessie aan de orde is gekomen

Aan de hand van de volgende vragen bewust evalueren wat er in de sessie heeft plaatsgevonden en wat het kind ervan vond. -Wat heb je geleerd?2 -Wat vond je ervan?2 Observaties In bijlage 3d, staat een observatieformulier dat gebruikt wordt om opvallende observaties te noteren en bij te houden hoe het kind te werk gaat. Sessie 10 Inhoud van de sessie

Benodigdheden

*Nameting SET® *Nameting Ideeënproductie *Strategisch spel met evaluatie of schoolwerk met evaluatie *Evaluatie *Instructie- en opgavenbladen van SET® (PowerPoint) *Stopwatch *Strategisch spel of schoolwerk *Bijlage 1 (SET® antwoordblad) *Bijlage 2a en 2b (Ideeënproductie instructie- en antwoordblad) *Bijlage 3e (observatieformulier) *Bijlage 4a (evaluatieformulier kind) *Bijlage 4b (evaluatieformulier begeleider)

Nameting SET® Doel *Eindsituatie vaststellen (na 9 bijeenkomsten) Benodigdheden *Enstructie- en opgavenbladen van SET® (PowerPoint) SET *Bijlage 8 (SET® antwoordblad) *Stopwatch Instructie: Op het instructieblad staan alle figuren afgebeeld. Wijs het kind op de vier verschillende onderdelen: vorm (kronkel, rechthoek en ovaal), kleur (zwart, donkergrijs en lichtgrijs -het verschil tussen donker en lichtgrijs wordt versterkt door de rand van de figuren, donkergrijs heeft een stippellijn met streepjes, lichtgrijs heeft een stippellijn met stipjes-), aantal (één, twee of drie) en vulling (vol, geblokt –half- of leeg). Laat het kind een paar sets (maximaal 3) met behulp van de instructiebladen bij elkaar zoeken en laat het ook verwoorden wat het doet en waarom het deze bij elkaar zoekt. Als het niet klopt, kunt u het kind hierop wijzen en het een goed voorbeeld geven. Opdracht: Er worden 12 onafgemaakte sets gegeven, waarbij het kind moet omschrijven welke kaart ontbreekt. Een set bestaat uit drie ‘kaarten’, die allemaal gelijk of verschillend moeten zijn op de

__________________________________________________________________________ __ Liesbet Gommans

48


(hierboven beschreven) vier onderdelen. De opgaven worden als losse opdrachtkaartjes aangeboden. Uitknippen/snijden kan zodanig dat het getal rechtsonder staat. De begeleider noteert op het SET® antwoordformulier (bijlage 1) welke ‘kaart’ het kind als ontbrekende kaart bedacht heeft (opschrijven wat het kind vertelt) en de tijd die het kind nodig heeft. De stopwatch loopt vanaf het moment dat het kind de opgave voor zich heeft. Twee tijden noteren: de tijd waarop het begint met vertellen en het moment waarop het kind stopt met antwoord geven. (Als het kind direct begint met antwoord geven, kunt u dit als zodanig ‘direct’ noteren.) De begeleider mag geen extra informatie geven en controleert ná de sessie, met behulp van de antwoordbladen, of het een goed antwoord is en geeft dit aan op het antwoordformulier. Nameting Ideeënproductie Doel *Eindsituatie vaststellen (na 9 bijeenkomsten) Benodigdheden *Bijlage 2a en 2b (Ideeënproductie instructie- en antwoordblad) SET *Stopwatch Instructie Zie bijlage 2a. Houd de instructie (schuingedrukt) aan, zoals deze gegeven is en noteer alle woorden die het kind noemt op het antwoordblad (bijlage 2b). Hierna kan gekozen worden tussen het strategisch spel en het schoolwerk. Deze inschatting kan de begeleider zelf maken, maar deze kan ook in overleg met het kind gemaakt worden. Er is nu ook de ruimte om hetgeen in sessie 7-9 heeft plaatsgevonden af te ronden, als hier nog tijd voor nodig is. Strategisch spel Doel Benodigdheden

*Spel spelen. *Strategisch spel *Bijlage X (observatieformulier)

Inhoud Het kind speelt het spel op zijn/haar eigen manier. De begeleider observeert en geeft, indien het kind erom vraagt, uitleg. De observaties zijn gericht op de aanpak en veranderingen in de aanpak. Evaluatie van het spel -Wat heb je gedaan en hoe heb je dit gedaan (wat vond je ervan)?2 * Probeer samen met het kind te herhalen wat er besproken is in dit deel van de sessie. Laat het kind ook het eigen proces evalueren, hoe het zelf vindt dat het gegaan is. Schoolwerk Doelen

Benodigdheden

*Generaliseren van hetgeen geleerd is bij het strategische spel, naar de schoolse situatie *Meer gemotiveerd en sneller werken *Het beargumenteerd weergeven van de mening van het kind over de aanpak van een schools‘probleem’. *Schoolwerk dat er toe leidt dat hindernissen overwonnen kunnen worden.

Aan de hand van de volgende vraag praten over het schoolwerk en hieraan werken. In een eerder stadium is besproken wat het kind motiverend schoolwerk vindt. En hierover is kritisch en creatief nagedacht. Het is belangrijk dat het kind verder leert kijken/denken dan in eerste instantie noodzakelijk is.

__________________________________________________________________________ __ Liesbet Gommans

49


In dit stadium kan er nog verder nagedacht, danwel gewerkt worden aan het schoolwerk. Houd in gedachte dat het extra motiverend werkt als het kind aan het uiteindelijk plan (waarover kritisch en creatief nagedacht is) mag werken. Evaluatie van het schoolwerk -Wat heb je gedaan, hoe heb je dit gedaan?2 * Samen met het kind herhalen wat er besproken is in dit deel van de sessie. Laat het kind ook het eigen proces evalueren, hoe het zelf vindt dat het gegaan is. Evaluatie In bijlage 3e, staat een observatieformulier dat gebruikt wordt om opvallende observaties te noteren en bij te houden hoe het kind te werk gaat. Met behulp van bijlage 4a (evaluatieformulier kind) graag het protocol en de sessies evalueren. Er zijn een aantal suggesties van vragen gegeven, als de begeleider andere evaluatievragen stelt, dan graag deze noteren! Verder is bijlage 4b het evaluatieformulier voor de begeleider zelf.

__________________________________________________________________________ __ Liesbet Gommans

50


Bijlage 1 Antwoordblad SET ® 3

Datum en nr. sessie:

Nr Antwoord

Goed

1

Ja nee

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

..................................................................................................................... ..................................................................................................................... ..................................................................................................................... ..................................................................................................................... ..................................................................................................................... ..................................................................................................................... ..................................................................................................................... ..................................................................................................................... ..................................................................................................................... ..................................................................................................................... ..................................................................................................................... ..................................................................................................................... ..................................................................................................................... ..................................................................................................................... ..................................................................................................................... ..................................................................................................................... ..................................................................................................................... ..................................................................................................................... ..................................................................................................................... ..................................................................................................................... ..................................................................................................................... ..................................................................................................................... ..................................................................................................................... ..................................................................................................................... ..................................................................................................................... ..................................................................................................................... ..................................................................................................................... ..................................................................................................................... ..................................................................................................................... ..................................................................................................................... ..................................................................................................................... ..................................................................................................................... ..................................................................................................................... ..................................................................................................................... ..................................................................................................................... ..................................................................................................................... ..................................................................................................................... ..................................................................................................................... ..................................................................................................................... ..................................................................................................................... ..................................................................................................................... ..................................................................................................................... ..................................................................................................................... ..................................................................................................................... ..................................................................................................................... .....................................................................................................................

Begin van het antwoord (in sec)

Eind van het antwoord (in sec)

Ja nee

Ja nee

Ja nee

Ja nee

Ja nee

Ja nee

Ja nee

Ja nee

Ja nee

Ja nee Ja nee

N.B. Worden alle antwoorden binnen 5 sec. (goed) gegeven? Graag contact opnemen met [email protected] 3 Falco (1991)

__________________________________________________________________________ __ Liesbet Gommans

51


Bijlage 2a Ideeënproductie4 Instructie: Stop je wel eens iets in je jas- of broekzak? Indien nee: maar je kan er wel iets in doen, toch? Probeer nu eens zoveel mogelijk dingen op te noemen die je in je zak kan stoppen. Dus het mag van alles zijn, maar je moet het wel in je zak kunnen stoppen. Item 1: Wat kan je allemaal optillen? Indien het kind niets zegt: Begin maar. Item 2: Wat kan je allemaal opdrinken? Item 3: Op welke plaatsen kan je je allemaal verstoppen? Item 4: Wat zie je allemaal in de winkel? Item 5: Wat kan je allemaal op straat doen? Tijd: Precies 1 minuut per item, de tijd gaat direct in nadat de vraag gesteld is. Indien het kind niet onmiddellijk doorgaat: Goed zo, maar je weet er vast nog meer. Notatie: De begeleider noteert alle antwoorden die binnen 1 minuut genoemd worden op het antwoordblad op de volgende bladzijde. Afbreken: Indien het kind, ondanks stimulerende opmerkingen, niets weet te noemen, doorgaan met het volgende item. Opmerkingen: -Indien het kind meerdere malen vrijwel hetzelfde noemt (bijv. 1 boek, 2 boeken), dan reageren met: Ja, dat heb je eigenlijk al genoemd, weet je nog iets anders? -Indien het kind dingen aanwijst in de omgeving zonder deze te benoemen, dan reageren met: Hoe noem je dat dan? of Je moet het niet aanwijzen maar opnoemen. -Indien het kind gedurende enige tijd niets zegt: Je weet vast nog wel een paar dingen/plaatsten/spelletjes, probeer maar eens. Scoring: Per item krijgt het kind in principe voor elk antwoord (ding, plaats, spelletje) één punt. Geen punt wordt gegeven voor “nonsens” woorden (bijv. bij item 1: huis, fabriek e.d.), evenmin voor zeer globale antwoorden (dingen, spullen, zaken e.d.). Antwoorden die meerdere malen in dezelfde beantwoordingen worden gegeven tellen slechts voor één punt. Ook enumeraties worden slechts één maal geteld (een bal, twee ballen = 1 punt; een plank, een stapel planken = 1 punt). Synoniemen worden wel afzonderlijk meegerekend (bijv. item 2: cola, pepsi = 2 punten; melk, chocolademelk, warme melk = 3 punten). De som van de 5 subscores vormt de ruwe score. En die ruwe score wordt weergegeven in de eerste rij op het antwoordblad.

4

Uit Bleichrodt, N., Drenth, P.J.D., Zaal, J.N. & Resing, W.C.M. (1987)

__________________________________________________________________________ __ Liesbet Gommans

52


Bijlage 2b Antwoordblad Ideeënproductie Ruwe scores

Item 1

Item 2

Item 3

Datum en nr. sessie: Item 4

Item 5

Totaal score

Voorbeeld

Item 1

Item 2

Item 3

Item 4

Item 5

Observaties/opmerkingen

__________________________________________________________________________ __ Liesbet Gommans

53


Bijlage 3a Observatieformulier Datum v.d. sessie: Algemene gegevens van de begeleider Naam: ......................................................................................................................................................... Ervaring met remedial teaching (in één-op-één-situaties) (concreet hoeveel?): ........................................ .................................................................................................................................................................... Ervaring met hoogbegaafde kinderen (concreet hoeveel?): ....................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... Algemene gegevens van het kind Naam (eerste letter, ivm anonimiteit): ........................................................................................................ Leeftijd: ...................................................................................................................................................... Geslacht: ..................................................................................................................................................... Concreet probleemgedrag (dat zichtbaar is): .............................................................................................. .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... Gegevens (testscores) psychologisch onderzoek (indien aanwezig): ......................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... In andere gevallen, de aanwijzingen voor hoogbegaafdheid:..................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... Laatste rapportcijfers (van alle vakken): .................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... Is het kind bekend met Set? Zo ja, in welke mate? .................................................................................... ....................................................................................................................................................................

Observatieformulier bij het strategische spel Sessie 1 (sommige vragen kunnen niet van toepassing zijn) Geeft het kind aan dat het weet wat het moet doen? .................................................................................. .................................................................................................................................................................... Praat het kind tijdens het uitvoeren van het spel? Zo ja, wat zegt het dan? ............................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... Wat zegt het kind dat het moet doen? ........................................................................................................ .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... Kan het kind meerdere strategieën bedenken? Zo ja, welke?..................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... Welke strategie volgt het kind? .................................................................................................................. .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... Kan het kind aangeven wat het gedaan en hoe het gewerkt heeft? Zo ja, hoe heeft het de opdracht aangepakt? .................................................................................................................................................. .................................................................................................................................................................... ....................................................................................................................................................................

__________________________________________________________________________ __ Liesbet Gommans

54


Bijlage 3b Observatieformulier (Per sessie een observatieformulier)

Datum v.d. sessie:

Sessienummer: ............................................................................................................................. Begeleider Naam: .........................................................................................................................................................

Kind Naam (eerste letter, ivm anonimiteit): Groep: ......................................................................................................................................................... Extra opmerkingen: .................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... Observatieformulier bij het strategische spel (sommige vragen kunnen niet van toepassing zijn) Geeft het kind aan dat het weet wat het moet doen? Zo ja, hoe? ............................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... Praat het kind tijdens het uitvoeren van het spel? Zo ja, wat zegt het dan? ............................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... Wat zegt het kind dat het moet doen? ........................................................................................................ .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... Kan het kind meerdere strategieën bedenken? Zo ja, welke?..................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... Welke argumenten gebruikt het kind?........................................................................................................ .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... Welke strategie volgt het kind? .................................................................................................................. .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... Kan het kind aangeven wat het gedaan en hoe het gewerkt heeft? Zo ja, hoe heeft het de opdracht aangepakt? .................................................................................................................................................. .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... Observatieformulier bij het schoolwerk(sommige vragen kunnen niet van toepassing zijn) Wat voor werk is er voor het kind? ............................................................................................................ .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... Vertaalt het kind de strategieën ook naar het schoolwerk? Zo ja, hoe verwoordt het dat? ........................ .................................................................................................................................................................... ....................................................................................................................................................................

__________________________________________________________________________ __ Liesbet Gommans

55


Hoe verwoordt het kind de argumenten?: .................................................................................................. .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... Kan het kind aangeven wat het gedaan en hoe het gewerkt heeft? Zo ja, hoe heeft het de opdracht aangepakt? .................................................................................................................................................. .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... Evaluatie Wat vond het kind van de sessie? ............................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... Belangrijke informatie voor de volgende sessie ......................................................................................... Mindmappen:.............................................................................................................................................. .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... Overige observaties en opmerkingen .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... ....................................................................................................................................................................

__________________________________________________________________________ __ Liesbet Gommans

56


Bijlage 3c Observatieformulier Datum v.d. sessie: Algemene gegevens van de begeleider Naam: ......................................................................................................................................................... Algemene gegevens van het kind Naam (eerste letter, ivm anonimiteit): ........................................................................................................ Groep: ......................................................................................................................................................... Wel/niet klas overgeslagen:........................................................................................................................ Welk spel/schoolwerk wordt gebruikt?: ..................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... Observatieformulier bij het strategisch spel/ het schoolwerk (sommige vragen kunnen niet van toepassing zijn) Welke strategieën gebruikt het kind bij het spel?/ Hoe pakt het kind het schoolwerk aan?....................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... Praat het kind tijdens het uitvoeren van het spel/schoolwerk? Zo ja, wat zegt het dan? ............................ .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... Kan het kind meerdere strategieën bedenken, zo ja, welke? / Hoe werkt het kind aan zijn schoolwerk, volgens één bepaalde manier of op verschillende manieren? Leg uit ........................................................ .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... Welke argumenten gebruikt het kind voor het gebruik van een strategie/ manier? ................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... Hoe is het kind het beste te motiveren voor het werk? Is er extra hulp van de begeleider voor nodig? Zo ja, wat voor hulp?.................................................................................................................................. .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... Spel/schoolwerk evaluatie: Kan het kind aangeven wat het gedaan heeft en hoe het de opdracht heeft aangepakt? ............................ .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... Wat voor reacties heeft het kind gegeven op het spel/schoolwerk? .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... Evaluatie Wat vond het kind van de sessie? ............................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... ....................................................................................................................................................................

__________________________________________________________________________ __ Liesbet Gommans

57


Ruimte voor positieve/negatieve punten van het protocol, deze zijn belangrijk voor het maken van aanpassingen:.............................................................................................................................................. .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... Belangrijke informatie voor de volgende sessie ......................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... Overige observaties en opmerkingen .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... ....................................................................................................................................................................

__________________________________________________________________________ __ Liesbet Gommans

58


Bijlage 3d Observatieformulier (Per sessie een observatieformulier. Deze is van belang voor mijn onderzoek. Wilt u het invullen en doormailen?)

Sessienummer: ............................................................................................................................. Datum: .......................................................................................................................................... Begeleider Naam: ......................................................................................................................................................... Kind Naam (eerste letter, ivm anonimiteit): ........................................................................................................ Groep: ......................................................................................................................................................... Extra opmerkingen: .................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... Observatieformulier bij het strategische spel (sommige vragen kunnen niet van toepassing zijn) (Sessie 7) Wat vertelt het kind in grote lijnen over het spel dat het speelt? ............................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... (Sessie 7) Maakt het kind gebruik van het spel? Zo ja, hoe? ..................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... (Sessie 7) Noemt het kind aandachtspunten, en zo ja welke? .................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... (Sessie 7) Maakt het kind gebruik van het stroomdiagram tijdens de uitleg? ............................................ Wat vindt het kind van de opdracht? .......................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... Hoe reageert het kind op de vragen die gesteld worden? ........................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... Wat voor vragen stelt het kind zelf? ........................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... Kan het kind aangeven wat het gedaan en hoe het gewerkt heeft? Zo ja, hoe heeft het de opdracht aangepakt? .................................................................................................................................................. .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... Observatieformulier bij het schoolwerk(sommige vragen kunnen niet van toepassing zijn) Wat voor werk is er voor het kind? ............................................................................................................ .................................................................................................................................................................... ....................................................................................................................................................................

__________________________________________________________________________ __ Liesbet Gommans

59


Komt het kind tot kritische vragen stellen over de stof, zo ja, welke? ....................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... Hoe verwoordt het kind de vragen?: .......................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... Kan het kind aangeven wat het gedaan en hoe het gewerkt heeft? Zo ja, hoe heeft het de opdracht aangepakt? .................................................................................................................................................. .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... Evaluatie Wat vond het kind van de sessie? ............................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... Belangrijke informatie voor de volgende sessie ......................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... Overige observaties en opmerkingen .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... ....................................................................................................................................................................

__________________________________________________________________________ __ Liesbet Gommans

60


Bijlage 3e Observatieformulier (Deze bijlage is van belang voor mijn onderzoek. Wilt u het invullen en doormailen?)

Datum v.d. sessie: Algemene gegevens van de begeleider Naam: ......................................................................................................................................................... Algemene gegevens van het kind Naam (eerste letter, ivm anonimiteit): ........................................................................................................ Groep: ......................................................................................................................................................... Wel/niet klas overgeslagen:........................................................................................................................ Welk spel/schoolwerk wordt gebruikt?: ..................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... Observaties met betrekking tot SET en Ideeënproductie Hoe pakt het kind de SET-puzzels aan? Ofwel welke strategie(ën) gebruikt het kind?............................. .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... Hoe pakt het kind Ideeënproductie aan? Ofwel welke strategie(ën) gebruikt het kind? ............................ .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... Observatieformulier bij het strategisch spel/ het schoolwerk (sommige vragen kunnen niet van toepassing zijn) Hoe pakt het kind het spel aan? .................................................................................................................. .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... Gaat het kind strategisch te werk? Zo ja, wat doet het kind? ..................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... Doet het kind dingen op een andere manier dan anders? Zo ja, wat doet het kind?................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... Welke strategieën gebruikt het kind bij het spel?/ Hoe pakt het kind het schoolwerk aan?....................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... Praat het kind tijdens het uitvoeren van het spel/ schoolwerk? Zo ja, wat zegt het dan? ........................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... Kan het kind meerdere strategieën bedenken, zo ja, welke? / Hoe werkt het kind aan zijn schoolwerk, volgens één bepaalde manier of op verschillende manieren? Leg uit ........................................................ .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... Welke argumenten gebruikt het kind voor het gebruik van een strategie/ manier? ................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... Hoe is het kind het beste te motiveren voor het werk? Is er extra hulp van de begeleider voor nodig? Zo ja, wat voor hulp?.................................................................................................................................. .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... ....................................................................................................................................................................

__________________________________________________________________________ __ Liesbet Gommans

61


Spel/schoolwerk evaluatie Kan het kind aangeven wat het gedaan heeft en hoe het de opdracht heeft aangepakt? ............................ .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... Wat voor reacties heeft het kind gegeven op het spel/schoolwerk? .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... Is het kind in deze of een vorige sessie tegen zijn eigen grenzen aangelopen?.......................................... Zo ja: Hoe merkte u dat? ............................................................................................................................ .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... Wat vond het kind ervan? ........................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... Is het kind over de grens gekomen? ........................................................................................................... Hoe heeft het kind dit bereikt? ................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... Wat was het aandeel van de begeleider hierbij?......................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... ....................................................................................................................................................................

__________________________________________________________________________ __ Liesbet Gommans

62


Bijlage 4a Evaluatieformulier kind Datum: Algemene gegevens van de begeleider Naam: ......................................................................................................................................................... Algemene gegevens van het kind Naam (eerste letter ivm anonimiteit): ......................................................................................................... Groep: ......................................................................................................................................................... Welk spel en wat voor schoolwerk is gebruikt? ......................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... Evaluatie: Wat vond het kind van de sessie? ............................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... Wat vindt het kind van het spel dat gebruikt is? ........................................................................................ .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... Wat heeft het kind geleerd van het spel? .................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... Wat vindt het kind van het schoolwerk dat gebruikt is?............................................................................. .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... Wat heeft het kind geleerd van het schoolwerk? ........................................................................................ .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... Wat vindt het kind van het individueel werken met de begeleider? ........................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... Hoe vindt het kind school in het algemeen? ............................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... Overige evaluatieobservaties van de begeleider:........................................................................................ .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... ....................................................................................................................................................................

__________________________________________________________________________ __ Liesbet Gommans

63


Bijlage 4b Evaluatieformulier begeleider Datum: Algemene gegevens van de begeleider Naam: ......................................................................................................................................................... Algemene gegevens van het kind Naam (eerste letter, ivm anonimiteit): ........................................................................................................ Groep: ......................................................................................................................................................... Welk spel en wat voor schoolwerk is gebruikt? ......................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... Evaluatie 1. Wat vond u van de bruikbaarheid van het protocol? .............................................................................. .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... 2. Wat vond u van de inhoud van het protocol? ......................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... 3. Hoe verliep de transfer van de geleerde strategische vaardigheden naar het schoolwerk? ................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... 4. Wat vond u van de opbouw van het protocol? (eerst strategieën verkennen, transfer naar het schoolwerk en het kritisch nadenken) ........................................................................................................ .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... 5. Heeft u genoeg inhoudelijke achtergrondinformatie over het protocol ontvangen? ............................. Zo ja, wat vond u vooral nuttige informatie? ............................................................................................. .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... Zo nee, wat miste u? ................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... 6. Heeft u genoeg inhoudelijke achtergrondinformatie over hoogbegaafdheid ontvangen? ...................... Zo ja, wat vond u vooral nuttige informatie? ............................................................................................. .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... Zo nee, wat miste u? ................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... 7. Wat vond u van de digitale communicatie? ........................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... 8. Wat zou u in de eindversie zeker terug willen zien? .............................................................................. .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... 9. Wat zou u in de eindversie anders willen zien? ..................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... 10. Heeft u een suggestie hoe hetgeen u aangeeft bij 8. gerealiseerd kan worden? ................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... ....................................................................................................................................................................

__________________________________________________________________________ __ Liesbet Gommans

64


.................................................................................................................................................................... 11. Verder wil ik u nog vragen om hieronder verdere opmerkingen over het Pilotprotocol te noteren: .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................... ....................................................................................................................................................................

__________________________________________________________________________ __ Liesbet Gommans

65


Appendix B Figures of Measurements

The standard scores of “Production of ideas” have a mean of 15 and a standard deviation of 5. The correct answers of Set® have a maximum of 12. The represented mean times are the means of the correct answers in seconds. The standard deviations of the time are visualised also in seconds. Child 1 30 25 St Score Prod of Ideas

20

Mean Time Set

15

St Dev Time Set

10

Correct Answers Set

5 0 1

6

10

Measurement Sessions

Figure B.1 Scores of Child 1 Child 2 35 30 25

St Score Prod of Ideas

20

Mean Time Set

15

St Dev Time Set

10

Correct Answers Set

5 0 1

6

10


Figure B.2 Scores of Child 2

__________________________________________________________________________ __ Liesbet Gommans

66


Child 3 30 25 St Score Prod of Ideas

20

Mean Time Set

15

St Dev Time Set

10

Correct Answers Set

5 0 1

6

10


Figure B.3 Scores of Child 3 Child 4 25 20 St Score Prod of Ideas 15

Mean Time Set St Dev Time Set

10

Correct Answers Set 5 0 1

6

10


Figure B.4 Scores of Child 4 Child 5 30 25 St Score Prod of Ideas

20

Mean Time Set

15

St Dev Time Set

10

Correct Answers Set

5 0 1

6

10



__________________________________________________________________________ __ Liesbet Gommans

67


Child 6 25 20 St Score Prod of Ideas 15

Mean Time Set St Dev Time Set

10

Correct Answers Set 5 0 1

6

10


Figure B.6 Scores of Child 6 Child 7 30 25 St Score Prod of Ideas

20

Mean Time Set

15

St Dev Time Set

10

Correct Answers Set

5 0 1

6

10


Figure B.7 Scores of Child 7 Child 8

Standardized Score

30 25 20 15

Production of Ideas

10 5 0 1

6

10



__________________________________________________________________________ __ Liesbet Gommans

68


Standardized Score

Child 9 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0

Production of Ideas

1

6

10



__________________________________________________________________________ __ Liesbet Gommans

69

Teaching underachieving gifted children metacognitive strategies

Recommend Documents