Welcome Guest
 

Abstract

Reference
X

  • Bloom, B. S. (Ed.). (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives handbook I: Cognitive domain. New York: McKay.
  • Bloom, B. S. (1985). Developing talent in young people. New York: Ballantine.
  • Csikszentmihalyi, M., Rathunde, K. & Whalen, S. (1997). Talented teenagers: The roots of success and failure. New York: Cambridge University Press.
  • Gardner, H. (1983). Multiple intelligences: The theory in practice. New York: BasicBooks.
  • Gentry, M., Reis, S. M., Renzulli, J. S., Moran, C., & Warren, L. (1995). Enrichment clusters: Using high-end learning to develop talents in all students. Storrs: The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented, University of Connecticut.
  • Reis, S. M., & Renzulli, J. S. (1982). A case for the broadened conception of giftedness. Phi Delta Kappan, 63, 619–620.
  • Reis, S. M., & Renzulli, J. S. (1992). Using curriculum compacting to challenge the above-average. Educational Leadership, 50(2), 51–57.
  • Renzulli, J. S. (1978). What makes giftedness? Re-examining a definition. Phi Delta Kappan, 60, 180–184.
  • Renzulli, J. S. (1986). The three-ring conception of giftedness: A developmental model for creative productivity. In R. J. Sternberg & J. Davidson (Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness. (pp. 53–92). New York: Cambridge University Press.
  • Renzulli, J. S. (1990). A practical system for identifying gifted and talented students. Early Childhood Development, 63, 9–18.
  • Renzulli, J. S. (1994). Schools for talent development: A practical plan for total school improvement. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
  • Renzulli, J. S. (1999a). The definition of high-end learning . Storrs: Neag Center for Gifted Education and Talent Development, University of Connecticut.
  • Renzulli, J. S. (1999b). Reflections, perceptions, and future directions. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 23, 125–146.
  • Renzulli, J. S. (2000). What makes giftedness? Re-examining a definition. In R. Diessner & S. Simmons (Eds.), Notable selections in educational psychology (pp. 373–384). Guilford, CT: Dushkin/McGraw-Hill.
  • Renzulli, J. S., & Reis, S. M. (1997a). The schoolwide enrichment model: A how-to guide for educational excellence. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
  • Renzulli, J. S., & Reis, S. M. (1997b). The schoolwide enrichment model: New directions for developing high-end learning. In N. Colangelo & G. Davis (Eds.), Handbook of gifted education (2nd ed., pp. 136–154). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
  • Renzulli, J. S., & Smith, L. H. (1978). The learning styles inventory: A measure of student preference for instructional techniques. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
  • Sternberg, R. J. (1985). Beyond IQ: A triarchic theory of human intelligence. New York: Cambridge University Press.
  • Sternberg, R. J., & Davidson, J. (Eds.). (1986). Conceptions of giftedness. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Fields marked with an asterisk * are mandatory.
 

Your Name:*
 

Your Email:*
 

Friend's Name:*
 

Friend's Email:*
 

Message:
 

 
Send CC to self
 

 
 

Bookmark
  • Volume 25
  •  Issue 4
  • Publication Date: Fall 2002



What Is Schoolwide Enrichment? How Gifted Programs Relate to Total School Improvement

Joseph. S. Renzulli and Sally M. Reis

Over the years we have been asked countless questions about the purpose of the Schoolwide Enrichment Model (SEM). Is it a model for gifted programs? Is it a model for general school improvement? Will it water down services to the gifted if you try to extend services to more students? How does SEM deal with the profoundly gifted? Are you saying that all students are gifted? How does the model deal with underachieving (unmotivated, noncreative, atrisk, twice-exceptional, etc.) gifted? Does the SEM involve grouping students by ability? By interest? By ability and interest? How does acceleration fit into the SEM? If we are using SEM do we still need a gifted program? Isn’t the SEM just a politically correct way of dealing with the question of giftedness (or equity, or inclusion, or irritated parents, or anti-gifted teachers or administrators)? Is it true that the SEM is just a way to save money? Is it true that SEM programs are far more expensive than other kinds of programs? Is the SEM just for elementary schools—what about preschool? Middle school? High school? Won’t differentiation take care of every student’s needs? The list goes on and on.



ShoppingCart Summary

Shopping
Your cart is empty.