the situation is contrived to build in him expectations of an effortless existence.
This is a very good point. Students who are "gifted" and not challenged in ways that are appropriate for their level will end up assuming that this is the way life will always be for them, and it will cause them to potentially become unmotivated and unenthusiastic.
In addition, teacher and parent (Kerr, 1994) input is seen as crucial, as their anecdotal information can be very accurate and sometimes augments data received through standard IQ testing (Winner, 1996).
I totally agree with this. Receiving parent and teacher input when determining if a student is "gifted" or not can be really useful because those are the people who see the student the most, and in multiple different settings. Teachers get to see students not only in an academic light, but also how they interact socially, how they problem-solve, etc. Parents get to observe their children when they are in a home setting and how they interact there.
Some argue that IQ testing only measures academic aptitude within the dominant culture rather than a pure measure of intelligence (Walker, 1991). Again, this is why the inclusion of other measures has become increasingly important.
I agree, IQ testing can often miss important pieces of people's intelligence. Including other measures is a great way to make sure every part of someone's intelligence is assessed properly.
These tests include some nonverbal testing that serves students who do not appear gifted according to their expressive language skills but who possess a high intelligence level.
This is a really great addition to the testing. Some students can be very anxious about speaking in front of others, especially adults in an assessment-like scenario. Using nonverbal testing can be a game changer for some students who are very intelligent but who struggle with communicating verbally.
Recently, schools have begun using portfolios, interviews with teachers and parents, and other authentic measures to identify intellectually gifted students who may not score in that range through an IQ test alone.
These are all great methods to figuring out which students may be "gifted," and I think that it will always be more effective and accurate than just using a standardized test.
Some research has shown that students from diverse backgrounds and socioeconomic levels are disproportionately absent from gifted programs, particularly those programs that use group IQ testing as the primary assessment vehicle for acceptance (Webb et al., 1994; Winner, 1996).
This makes a lot of sense, and it is something that needs to be remedied in the process of discerning which students are "gifted."
Renzulli spent much of his career encouraging schools to include more creative and artistic opportunities for students who were gifted (Renzulli, 1986).
This is so important. "Gifted" students need to not only be enriched in academic areas, but also in creative ones. If the creative parts of ones life are neglected, the other areas of their life will start to fall short. Creativity is so important for maintaining a healthy and strong mind.
He posited that students who demonstrate above-average intellect, high task-commitment, and high creativity skills create the profile of a gifted student.
I agree with this statement; students with these qualities are more than likely going to excel in their pursuits, whether those be academic or creative/artistic.
Terman determined that intelligence is fixed and will not change over time
I do not agree with this statement. First of all, people's intelligence can change over time, as sometimes people's neurological conditions become more or less severe. For example, someone with autism might be lower functioning as a young child, but as they grow up they become better at communicating, processing information, etc. Furthermore, "standardized" tests are not always a good measure of someone's intelligence because some people struggle with performing well on assessments, even if they are objectively very intelligent. Everyone learns differently, so trying to measure intelligence in one way is not going to be 100% effective.
They are also at great risk in our classrooms, which are often designed for the average student and to offer accommodations for students with other types of differences and disabilities.
This is so true, and it is something that is often overlooked by many. Students who are exceeding their grade level's "normal" content can become neglected because they are so far ahead, the teacher does not know how to help them learn at a pace that makes more sense for them.
In the beginning, it is often helpful to place students with differences and disabilities near an excellent student who can model appropriate behaviors.
This can be good, as long as the "model student" does not feel uncomfortable about being an example for their classmate, but this most likely would not be an issue. I do agree that learning by observing ones peers is a great method.
it is imperative for music educators to strive for a caring, inclusive environment that is conducive for all students to learn.
This is, again, something that is so important. If you want your students to enjoy learning and enjoy being at school in your class, you have to create an environment that will foster that feeling.
Carson loves knowing when his teachers care about his well-being
I think this is something that educators forget about sometimes. Students just want to be known and seen by their teachers. If they feel that way, they will be more open to participating and overall more engaged in the classroom.
I told him that he could come up with an eight-beat rhythmic pattern and then hand the materials over to me (“1, 2, ready, go,” he played, and then passed the materials back with no problem).
This is so smart. Kids love to be creative and show off what they can do, so this was a great way of getting Carson's mood back up.
Carson loves routine and knowing details
These are common traits in people with special needs, especially those on the autism spectrum. It is incredibly important to know this about your students with special needs, and it seems like the teacher in this vignette was doing an excellent job!
Do not assume that the inclusion classroom is always the least restrictive environment (LRE). Some students with learning differences function best in a self-contained classroom free of the distractions of an included classroom. Often, these can be opportunities for reverse inclusion, where a general education class can join a self-contained classroom for music.
I totally agree with this, I think that inclusion classrooms can be great but they aren't always best for every student. Some special ed students can be easily overstimulated in loud, bright, crowded settings, which would make for a more restrictive environment (which is not the goal). I also love the idea of "reverse inclusion." So many students in general classes do not learn how to interact with students that are different than them, but it is something that is important and can really help students build empathy, patience, and overall better understanding of those who are different from them. Today during my student teaching I got to see some students come in to work with a special ed class during their general music class period, which I thought was great. These students were very kind and patient and engaging with the special ed students, and it really showed that these bonds can be made between all different students.
In the area of music teacher education (i.e., practicum settings), we have found that peer-planned lessons (undergraduate students planning lessons together) in small groups work well for initial experiences in teaching music to students with differences and disabilities (Hourigan, 2007).
I agree with this, but only to a certain extent. As much as teaching and planning is about what will work best for the students, it is also about what works best for you as an educator; if you are working with peers/colleagues to plan a lesson for any class, special ed or not, it can sometimes be a challenge to come to a collective conclusion on how to best go about teaching. I usually enjoy collaborating with my fellow future music educators, but I have also experienced some more difficult group work settings.
Several components (observation; serving as a one-on-one assistant; discussion and coaching; reflection; and planning) are crucial for successful practicum experiences in which preservice and in-service music teachers gain as much as possible through observation and participation.
I can personally attest to this statement. I have worked with special needs students at a summer camp for kids who use AAC devices to communicate which gave me the opportunity to learn more about meeting their needs and teaching them in ways that reach them best. I have also observed special ed classes within a few schools, giving me a more classroom-oriented view of how to work with special ed students. I also know that it is important to hear from other professionals and even parents of kids with special needs to gain even more perspective on how to work with their students/children. Getting to know each student and their needs is crucial when it comes to figuring out how to structure content for them.
Often, this lack of understanding results in either glossing over the topic or ignoring it altogether.
In my opinion, music teacher educators need to make these topics a priority for their students. Just because previous generations did not learn about special ed and helping engage with students with learning disabilities does not mean that our current generation should miss out on it too. It is our teachers' and professors' responsibility to educate themselves so that they can educate us. Sure, we can supplement our own education by seeking out information on our own, but we should also be receiving this knowledge in our classes.
music educators must be resourceful in gaining insight into the skills, strategies, and understandings that accompany the experience of teaching students with differences and disabilities.
This is so true; music educators often do not get enough education on how to effectively reach students with disabilities and learning differences, which means we have to seek out further guidance on how to best meet the needs of those students.