Creative use of digital technologies: keeping the best and brightest in the bush.
Bannister, Barbara ; Cornish, Linley ; Bannister-Tyrrell, Michelle 等
INTRODUCTION
Australia is a large country and New South Wales (NSW) is a large
state where most schools (62%) are administered by the NSW government
through the Department of Education and Communities (DEC). Until
recently, this administration of public schools was devolved into 10
regions with Western NSW Region (WNSWR) covering a large area of some
385,000 square kilometres with total secondary school enrolments of just
under 17,000 students attending 45 Central and Secondary schools (NSW
DEC, 2012).
A phenomenon observed for decades has been a significant
'brain drain' from rural and regional areas (Brett, 2011; St
George, 2011) owing in part to educational opportunities available in
metropolitan areas that have not been available in these rural and
regional areas. The lack of a large cohort of similar-ability students
has seen many parents send their children to boarding schools (schools
where students live on campus during the school term), often in a
metropolitan area. The practice of sending children to boarding school,
for those families who can afford this option, has an impact on the
family unit as well as the capacity of local schools and the
attractiveness of these schools for prospective staff (Brett, 2011). The
'tyranny of distance' (Edwards & Baxter, 2013) endured by
many rural and regional families has been linked with negative
educational outcomes for rural students including lower academic
outcomes related to the 'social stratification' that is
revealing itself across Australian education sectors (Perry &
Lubiensky, 2014; Riddle, 2014; Thomson, De Bortoli, & Buckley,
2012). Perry and Lubiensky (2014) explain social stratification in the
Australian education system as being sharper than in most countries.
Students from wealthy, privileged backgrounds tend to go to high-fee,
independent schools. Kids from low-income, disadvantaged backgrounds
tend to go to government high schools.
One way that educational opportunities have been expanded for
students is by the provision of selective high schools. In these schools
students of high academic ability are grouped together. Until 2010 there
had not been a selective high school available to Western Region
students unless they were prepared to leave home to attend a school in a
metropolitan area or one of the two agricultural high schools in large
regional centres. This paper describes a unique provision that was
offered to 120 rural gifted students in Western Region, to allow them
the opportunity of a selective high school experience in their own rural
area. At the beginning of 2014 the school was extended across the state
but is described here as it still existed at the time of writing in
2013. Before this provision is described in detail, the section below
summarises the selective school system in NSW.
EDUCATION FOR GIFTED STUDENTS IN NSW
At a national level the need for teachers and schools to provide
gifted and talented students with an individually appropriate, flexible
learning pathway is clearly outlined in public policy at both the
national level (the Australian Curriculum, ACARA, 2013) and in state
policies. In NSW, the DEC has for many years required all school
communities to identify and support the academic, social and emotional
needs of their gifted and talented students, and has since the 19th
century provided selective high schools that group together students of
high academic ability. There are currently 47 selective high schools in
NSW (NSW DEC, 2010a), some of which are fully selective while others are
partially selective, having both selective and community classes.
The number of student places available in these schools is limited
by a quota and entrance is via a state-wide Selective High School
Placement Test in Year 6 to gain entry in Year 7. The Australian Council
for Educational Research creates and administers this test (2012), which
measures ability in reading, writing, mathematics and logic and is set
to discriminate at a very high level. The design of these tests makes it
very rare for even the most able candidates to score full marks.
In a typical year, students who gain entry to any selective high
school will be in the top five to ten per cent of the cohort. In some
years, it may be that students are in the top one to five per cent of
the cohort. Provision is made for special examination conditions for
gifted students with other special needs such as a physical disability
or other condition such as Asperger's Syndrome. The tests assume a
high standard of written English. More than 13,500 applicants contested
4,164 student places in 2013 (NSW DEC, 2013a).
STUDENTS IN WESTERN NSW REGION
Some children in Western NSW live on farming properties that are
two to three hours by road from the closest town, and others are part of
very small cohorts in their local public high school. Larger regional
centres may have comprehensive high schools with up to 200 students in
each grade, but smaller numbers are more typical. In all these
situations, the likelihood of gathering a cohort of 30 gifted students
is small because of the low population (Edwards & Baxter, 2013; St
George, 2011; Wood & Zundans-Fraser, 2013).
A response to these issues was developed capitalising on the
equipment and infrastructure made available through a combined Federal
and NSW Government initiative, the Digital Education Revolution (NSW
DEC, 2010b). This initiative included the Connected Classroom Project
(NSW DEC, 2010c) and the Bandwidth Enhancement Project (NSW DEC, 2010d).
The virtual provision also used software made available through DEC
Enterprise agreements with software providers (NSW DEC, 2010e). These
initiatives, coupled with the announcement of more student places in
selective high schools, allocated to rural and regional areas (NSW
Parliament, 2008), allowed development of a way to deliver a
high-quality curriculum to gifted students whilst they attend their
local public high school and remain in the family home.
All but one of the ten school administrative regions across NSW
allocated their student placements to an existing high school, making it
a partially selective high school (NSW DEC, 2013b). Western NSW Region
(WNSWR), however, chose to allocate their student placements to the
formation of a new virtual selective high school, a decision based
partly on the large geographic area of WNSWR. If the placements had been
allocated to any existing high school within the region's large
population centres, more students would have been disadvantaged than
advantaged. In 2010 xsel Virtual Selective High School Provision (VSHSP)
began. The next two sections describe how xsel VSHSP works for students
and staff.
HOW XSEL VSHSP WORKS: STUDENTS
xsel Virtual Selective High School Provision caters for gifted
secondary school students in rural and remote Western NSW. As mentioned
previously, any student wishing to apply for a NSW Selective High
School, including the virtual selective provision, must self-nominate
and complete a unique test created and administered by the Australian
Council for Educational Research. Students must register their interest
to sit the test when they are in Year 5 (October) then sit the test
early in Year 6 (March) to gain entry for Year 7. Parents and primary
school Principals must be aware of this process and the lead time
required. Once selected for the xsel Virtual Selective High School,
students still attend their local public high school for some of their
classes while meeting over the Internet for classes in English,
mathematics and science, using advanced technologies and pedagogies for
online learning.
xsel uses a blended learning approach. By supporting academically
able students in their local community and meeting their educational
needs using 21st century technologies, xsel nurtures talent and grows
the potential of the student and the community. In this way the vision
of xsel, to bring the selective high school curriculum to students in
their local public secondary school, is a reality.
Not all compulsory areas of study in NSW transfer easily to a
digital delivery method. For this reason the decision was made to limit
the curriculum to English, mathematics and science for the virtual
selective high school provision. When the local cohort is timetabled for
English, mathematics or science, xsel students move to a quiet space in
the school to attend online lessons or complete work from the digital
learning repository. At no time do the xsel students attend English,
mathematics or science classes at their local high school.
This model enables high-ability students to stay in their local
public school, allowing small regional and rural communities to retain
their best and brightest students, while providing an opportunity for
educational stimulation to meet the special needs of these students. In
the past, many of these gifted students left their local communities to
attend boarding or residential schools in large metropolitan areas,
depleting local communities.
HOW XSEL VSHSP WORKS: STAFFING
A unique staffing model has been developed to allow teachers to
work with selective high school students whilst remaining in their own
local public high school. As such, these teachers are valued members of
two schools (NSW Department of Education and Training, 2009). xsel
teachers are seconded for 40 per cent of their full-time duties to teach
in the VSHSP. They design, deliver and assess all content. The relevant
mandated NSW Board of Studies syllabus is used as the basis of the
instruction; however, curriculum compacting and extensive use of
pre-testing allow for time to be spent on extension and enrichment
material. In addition, teachers use open and flexible e-learning
strategies encouraging collaboration and problem solving through a wide
variety of technologies. Students are continuously scaffolded in their
learning in light of their individual learning needs. Programs reflect
best practice in gifted pedagogy and include rigorous and supported
educational challenges, regular opportunities to work independently and
with other like-minded peers, subject acceleration, and differentiated
curriculum in terms of content, process and product (Chandra Handa,
2009; Maker, 1982; Rogers, 2007; VanTassel-Baska & Brown, 2007). The
ratio of teachers to students in xsel, at the time of writing, is
currently 1:10.
Prospective staff must teach in a Western NSW region DEC school and
be curriculum experts as well as excellent teachers with a good command
of technology in education. Above all, staff must be supportive of the
concept of gifted education, and be flexible and adaptable. Teachers
receive training in gifted education strategies, in the use of
web-conferencing software, and in the use and organisation of the NSW
DEC digital learning management system that includes instructional
design for web-based learning materials. Excellent organisation of
learning materials is critical to the success of teaching and learning
in this environment. Senior executive in the school monitor and support
staff either through personal visits to the school or by using
technology. Classroom visits, as traditionally practised by 'bricks
and mortar' executive, are conducted virtually.
The blended learning model ensures regular contact between teachers
and students, and a residential school is held over two days once every
school term (four per year). xsel uses web-conferencing software to
deliver synchronous lessons in real time with the learning management
system housing all learning materials for later asynchronous learning.
Significant time, effort and cost were required to set up this
different type of selective high school. Research that justifies such
expenditure of resources is presented in the following sections.
RESEARCH AND PRACTICE UNDERPINNING XSEL VSHSP
A wide variety of research has been used to underpin this
ground-breaking provision. The forward planning for the provision began
in 2007 when there was very little e-learning research available upon
which to base decisions. Instead, the provision was planned as if it
were a 'bricks and mortar' school. It was only when the
Principal and the Teaching, Learning & Technology Officer were
employed in 2009 that there was recognition that this provision needed
to be something else entirely. The foundation Principal is quoted as
saying, It's like building a plane in mid-air when the service
manual is also being written at the same time (W.S. Adams, personal
communication, 10 November 2009). A focus on gifted education research,
such as the forced-choice dilemma (Gross, 1989), and a determination to
bring staff and students safely into the e-learning environment, as
suggested by the five-stage framework and e-learning principles of
Salmon (2002), have helped shape teaching and learning. Research on
constructivist pedagogy (Le Cornu & Peters, 2005) was used to assist
with the development and delivery of induction packages for staff.
Research by Porter (2001) also helped with developing a shared
understanding of what kind of growth in understanding of technology
could be expected and should be required from both staff and students.
As the xsel virtual school was new, there was no blueprint to follow.
Despite a small number of other virtual provisions being in operation
globally, none was similar to xsel VSHS.
Each Australian State and Territory has a policy for gifted
education that mandates a modified curriculum for gifted students to
achieve their potential. The NSW DEC has adopted Gagne's (2003,
2008) Differentiated Model of Giftedness and Talent (DMGT) as one of the
pillars underlying its Gifted and Talented Policy. In this model, the
gift (natural potential) must go through a process of transformation by
the application of effort, time and money to be revealed as a talent
(actual). Gagne (2010) has since updated this model to have a more
comprehensive description of the impact of various catalysts in the
transformation process and it is this updated model that is the
preference of practitioners within the gifted education sphere.
The gifted education research of Maker (1982), Gagne (2008), Gross,
McLeod and Pretorius (2001), Neihart and Betts (2008) and Reis, Burns
and Renzulli (1992), and studies on learner-centred classrooms (Chandra
Handa, 2009), have informed staff, students and parents of the nature
and needs of the student body. For example, there is wide international
acceptance of and rigorous research to support differentiation of the
curriculum for gifted students. Maker (1982) developed a differentiation
method that is widely used internationally. She suggests that
differentiation can be achieved by modification to any or all of
content, process, product or learning environment and that grouping
like-ability students together is sound practice. Other authors support
her views about grouping to facilitate better educational outcomes
(Gentry & Mann, 2008; Henderson, 2007; Riley, Bevan-Brown, Bicknell,
Carroll-Lind, & Kearney, 2004; Rogers, 2002a & 2002b; Tomlinson,
2013; Winebrenner & Devlin, 2001, as cited in Bate & Clark,
2013).
In a comprehensive meta-analysis of over 200 research articles from
1861 to 2006, Rogers (2007) supports these practices, along with others
that can enhance outcomes for gifted students:
1. daily challenge in the work offered to gifted students;
2. opportunities for independent work with structured support to
develop independent study skills;
3. opportunities for acceleration (curriculum compacting, subject
and year advancement);
4. opportunity to work with like-ability peers; and
5. curriculum modification to take into account the learning needs
of gifted students such as a faster pace of learning and the need for
less practice and review.
There is also a considerable body of evidence for the need to
understand and support the social and emotional needs of gifted students
in order to facilitate positive educational outcomes. Some social and
emotional characteristics of gifted students include a highly developed
sense of justice, an increased capacity for empathy, a mature sense of
humour, emotional intensity and in some cases perfectionism (GERRIC,
2004).
The final area of relevance within gifted education research is the
impact of the teacher. Several studies have investigated the desirable
characteristics of teachers of gifted students as seen by the students
themselves (Bramwell, Reilly, Lilly, Kronish, & Chennabthni, 2011;
Chan, 2011; Vialle & Tischler, 2009). The necessity for creative
teaching and a positive attitude to gifted students is described in
these studies.
The virtual school in this paper has congruence with several of
these pillars of gifted education research. Through an entry process
administered by the NSW DEC, students are identified as being in the top
one to five per cent of the state-wide cohort. Applying the DEC's
own Gagne-driven policy, this group of students can be considered as
gifted. The students then begin their journey as a group of like-minded
students when they join the virtual school provision.
Grouping high-ability students together for at least part of their
learning thus has support in the research literature. The xsel VSHSP
allowed such students to be grouped together virtually. In the following
section, therefore, we summarise research supporting online learning for
high school students.
RESEARCH INTO ONLINE LEARNING FOR HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS
There is a body of research to support online learning for high
school students. It is a relatively new field compared to gifted
education research but it is growing. There are essentially two
sentiments that drive the incorporation of ICT into teaching and
learning:
Pedagogies that integrate information and communication
technologies can engage students in ways not previously possible,
enhance achievement, create new learning possibilities and extend
interaction with local and global communities (Curriculum Corporation
Australia, 2005, p. 3).
and
Rapid and continuing advances in information and communication
technologies (ICT) are changing the ways people share, use and process
information and technology. In this digital age, young people need to be
highly skilled in the use of ICT. While schools already employ these
technologies in learning, there is a need to increase their
effectiveness significantly over the next decade (Australian Government,
2008, p. 5).
ICT pedagogies enforce student-centred learning as a modality.
Grappling's Technology Spectrum (Porter, 2001) is an instructional
framework charting three broad categories of technology uses for
teaching and learning: 1) Literacy Uses 2) Adapting Uses and 3)
Transforming Uses. By ensuring the transformation end of
Grappling's Technology Spectrum (Porter, 1995) is used as far as
possible, there is the chance of an alignment of student-centred
learning in ways that are not possible without technology.
A report on the progress of the Connected Classrooms Program (NSW
DEC, 2010c) describes the need for 21st-century techniques to develop
graduates who will be employed in a 21st-century workplace. The skills
of these graduates should include critical thinking and problem solving;
collaboration across networks and leading by influence; agility and
adaptability; initiative and entrepreneurship; effective oral and
written communication; accessing and analysing information; and,
curiosity and imagination (NSW DEC, 2010c, p. 9). As well, the
Australian Council for Deans of Education describes 21st-century
learning as follows:
Learning in the 21st century will be general in its focus, rather
than specialised on the particular needs of the day. It will be about
creating a kind of person, with kinds of dispositions and orientations
to the world, rather than simply commanding a body of knowledge. These
persons will be able to navigate change and diversity, learn as they go,
solve problems, collaborate, and be flexible and creative. (Australian
Council of Deans of Education, 2001, cited in McLeod & Reynolds,
2007, p. 144)
These statements reflect sentiments that are highly regarded by
many and yet the research is scant into whether or not, some 10 years
after the drafting of the ideas, these attributes can be seen in high
school graduates. Rapposelli (2012) reported that students engaged in
online learning described the benefits as the capacity to submit an
electronic form of an assignment and working with others at another
location. Groundwater-Smith (2007) reported that students enjoyed
constructing their own knowledge rather than writing down the version of
knowledge constructed by the teacher but that they found the
internet-filtering environment of NSW DEC schools a hindrance to
learning. Bennett and Barbour (2012) reported that students of Maori
descent sought more opportunity for collaboration and interaction when
engaged in online learning. These authors also suggest the need for
better preparation of teachers for an e-learning environment.
Kimber and Wyatt-Smith describe creativity as a new priority in
schooling;
The building of young people's creative capacities should be
additional to their basic literacies, as creativity is the value-adding
component to an individual's capabilities and the economy more
generally (2010, p. 610).
Further discussion by Kimber and Wyatt-Smith (2010) on the links
between creativity and critical engagement suggests the possibilities of
multimodal assessment strategies to develop skills in accessing and
using different mediums to better reflect the current digital learning
environment.
Virtual school teachers are able to use the Internet and
video-conferencing equipment to communicate with students who are living
at a distance. This dialogue enables interaction between the teacher who
originates the instruction and the remote student ... communication is
facilitated among students, either individually or as groups, but at a
distance (Bates, 2005, p. 7). Student interaction in an online learning
space is the focus of several other research articles. Ingerham (2012)
describes three types of student interactions in an online space:
student-content, student-teacher, and student-student. There is
considerable evidence that the need for student-student interactions as
described in the North Carolina Public School experience and the FarNet
(Bennett and Barbour, 2012) experience in New Zealand are of real
concern to students. A study by Vu and Fadde (2013) indicated that
tertiary students in a live virtual classroom (LVC) preferred to use the
typed 'chat' feature rather than voice to communicate owing to
technology difficulties with increased bandwidth usage for voice/video
features. This research is important because the same virtual classroom
software is used in the virtual selective high school provision. The
student-student interaction was highly valued in all three studies.
In Australia, the literature is scarce in relation to
'distance education', 'online learning', or
'virtual schools' in secondary education. However, there have
been several reports internationally. A Report from the USA Department
of Education (Setzer & Lewis, 2005, p. 1), stated that
technology-based education at the elementary and secondary levels
enables school districts to expand the range of courses available to
their students and may facilitate more flexibility in student schedules
and instructional delivery. At the time of this report, there had not
been any national studies that examined the availability of
technology-based distance education, the courses offered or the
enrolments. However by 2004, Cavanaugh, Gillan, Kromrey, Hess and
Blomeyer undertook a meta-analysis examining the effects of distance
education on K-12 students in Illionis and found that there had been six
studies reported. Cavanaugh et al. (2004) found that online schools were
ideally situated to meet the needs of the 21st-century learners and the
number of students learning online had increased dramatically. Online
education is successful if the teachers are required to be autonomous
and the students take on greater responsibility for their own learning
(Cavanaugh et al., 2004). In the United Kingdom, Bates (2005) states
that if a school can be deliberate with the selection of its students,
such as xsel has done, then it has more flexibility in relation to the
choice of technology used with students.
Finally, we bring the previous specified areas of research together
in the following section to describe what the literature tells us about
online learning for gifted high school students.
RESEARCH INTO ONLINE LEARNING FOR GIFTED HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS
This area of research is the one with fewest reports in the
literature. If the caveat of research into online learning for gifted
Australian high school students is added, only two articles surface.
Ng and Nicholas (2007) describe some possible benefits for gifted
students through online learning including the potential for gifted
students to have autonomy in their learning: gifted students'
membership in today's technologically oriented society empowers and
motivates them to readily embrace this new type of learning opportunity
with ease and comfort (Ng & Nicholas 2007, p. 191). Online learning
offers a convenient way for like-minded students to communicate in
groups. Ng and Nicholas also suggest that gifted students working
asynchronously online will need high motivation and a common goal to
learn together. The motivation to cooperate may not arise spontaneously
so there is a vital role for teachers to create that motivation
extrinsically.
Further research by Ng and Nicholas (2010) was a case study into
the effectiveness of online pedagogy as used by 10 students in an
extra-curricular activity over six months. This study describes the
support mechanisms required, such as a teacher mentor onsite, the
retention rate of students and the need for regular presence of a
facilitator to ensure continued motivation in the students. Student
reflections included the wish to complete this work as part of the
regular curriculum, not as an extra task. The student-student social and
academic collaboration online is a feature of this case study.
Thompson (2010) reports the first in-depth investigation of gifted
students completing curriculum online with a comprehensive description
of perceptions of both teachers and students, albeit with very small
sample sizes, and of how the online space can meet the needs of gifted
learners. A feature is the discourse on access to broader educational
opportunities in an online environment than in a regular school
environment. Thomson describes best practice for online learning
including how teachers structure their online course to support
student-directed learning, and the need for good communication between
teacher and student and the formation of a strong bond. She concludes
that there is little to no research on specific online instructional
strategies and/or characteristics of the online environment that help to
create a successful online learning experience for gifted students (p.
267) and suggests the need for further research.
Recent research into virtual faculties that operate independently
of xsel in Western NSW Region also supports the professional learning
opportunities available through collaboration (Manwaring, 2012). The
benefits of a larger staff cohort are described, allowing early career
teachers to seek advice and support from more experienced teachers in
regular and formalised ways. This process is facilitated through the
existence of virtual faculties that link together experienced Head
Teachers with a group of early career teachers in small rural and remote
isolated schools where they are often the only teacher in that faculty
and thus have no-one in their own subject area to turn to for support.
Manwaring (2012) found that this pressure contributed to early career
teachers feeling isolated and unsure if their learning and assessment
materials were of adequate quality, especially in the HSC years. In
addition, Manwaring found that this isolation can be a factor preventing
smooth transition from pre-service teaching to early career teaching.
The virtual faculties became a support mechanism, with participants in
the study reporting they felt better able to prepare sound assessments
and teaching programs that met the needs of a range of learners at their
school (Manwaring, 2012, p. 56). The staff in the virtual faculty also
planned common assessment tasks so they could better gauge the progress
of their own very small student cohorts when combined with the larger
cohort through the networking opportunities provided by the virtual
faculty.
What research is available thus supports, for gifted high school
students, the concepts of curriculum adaptation and online learning with
like-minded peers. The question then becomes, does the evidence so far
for xsel students support these findings? In the following section we
describe some of the findings related to the xsel students'
achievements and to teacher professional development.
SUCCESSES OF XSEL VSHSP
All secondary school students in NSW sit standardised tests in
Years 7, 8 and 9 and at the end of Year 12. These tests include a
measure of literacy and numeracy (NAPLAN, DEC, 2010f) as well as of
science knowledge, through the Essential Secondary Science Assessment
(ESSA) (NSW DEC, 2010g). Students have to date received feedback in ESSA
(NSW DEC, 2010g) for three consecutive years. Results are shown in
Figures 1, 2 and 3. Data for the National Assessment Program Literacy
and Numeracy (NAPLAN) (NSW DEC, 2010f) for Year 7 are collected within
the first few weeks of the year, making them unreliable as an indicator
of student progress in the unique xsel learning environment. However
NAPLAN data for Year 9 are available for one cohort, as indicated in
Figure 4.
Table 1 shows a brief description of the different components of
the ESSA test and is an explanation of the horizontal axis in Figure 1,
Figure 2 and Figure 3.
Figure 1 shows the ESSA results for the inaugural Year 7 cohort of
2010 as at the end of Year 8 2011. These students were the first in the
virtual provision and as such these were the first external data
available on the progress of xsel students. Results are shown for all
students in NSW, for students in the Western Region of NSW, for xsel
students, and for students in other Selective Schools. These latter data
are an average of results from 17 fully selective high schools, and thus
allow a comparison of xsel to a similar cohort.
Figure 2 shows the ESSA results for the second cohort of Year 7
students (2011 intake).
Figure 3 shows that for an extended period of time the virtual
provision has been able to attain results in the ESSA test similar to or
better than the 'similar cohort' results from other selective
schools.
Figure 4 shows the average growth as reported by NAPLAN results for
students in Year 9 2012. Students in WNSWR with the same Year 7 NAPlAn
score start points as the VSHSP cohort have been compared. These
students could be considered to have similar abilities to the VSHSP
cohort as measured by NAPLAN. WNSWR sample for Reading consists of 380
matched students. Student starting points for Reading in Year 7 range
from 523 to 722. WNSWR sample for Numeracy consists of 482 matched
students. Student starting points for Numeracy in Year 7 range from 546
to 797. The xsel VSHSP sample is made up of 23 matched students (seven
students being absent for either the Year 7 or Year 9 phase of the
NAPLAN test).
[FIGURE 4 OMITTED]
In addition to excellent results in the ESSA and NAPLAN
standardised tests, there is anecdotal evidence of a number of other
ways in which xsel is achieving very well. The first evidence is in the
development of levels of autonomy within the student cohort. A
consistent learner-centred approach (Chandra Handa, 2009) means that
students develop the skills to work independently and to take
responsibility for their own learning. Parents and students report the
students' time management skills are highly developed after 3-4
months in the xsel environment.
Perhaps the largest success has been in the students'
realisation that there are others just like they are. Gross (1989)
describes the 'forced-choice dilemma' for many older gifted
students, that is, the belief held by some intellectually gifted
students that they must choose between academic achievement and peer
acceptance (Jung, McCormick, & Gross, 2012, p. 15). The intersection
of identity, autonomy, intimacy and achievement is not always a neat fit
for high-ability students and words like 'masking',
'camouflaging' and 'dumbing down' may describe the
consequences to academic achievement that result from ensuring social
acceptance amongst peers.
If, however, students have the opportunity to work with
like-minded, high-achieving peers, the perceived conflict and need to
choose between academic achievement and peer acceptance is reduced. The
students in xsel seek support from each other and provide confirmation
that they are members of a group of similar students making this
forced-choice dilemma unnecessary.
A third success is in the flexibility of the provision that allows
students gifted in more than one domain to follow their passions and
still remain up-to-date with school work. Several students represent the
state of NSW and/or Western NSW Region in sport and music in addition to
maintaining excellent school grades. The flexibility of accessing
lessons and work to be completed from a digital repository at a time
convenient to the student has allowed students to attend lessons when
flood-bound, or when away from school for sport, music, or debating or
for extended family holidays where parents have requested work for their
child. One student continued to attend synchronous lessons whilst the
family travelled overseas on extended sabbatical leave.
Finally, staff in Western NSW region can now teach in a selective
high school environment without having to move to a metropolitan area.
Often there are deep, local connections that cannot be changed (such as
family farms) and these connections prevent true mobility of teachers.
The virtual selective high school provision allows for significant
professional development over an extended period of time and
collaboration with staff across the region, not just in one school. When
considering the great distances involved, communication is a significant
issue to overcome.
Results in terms of student achievement and teacher professional
development have been very encouraging but challenges have had to be
overcome to allow these achievements to occur. Expansion of the virtual
provision to the senior years of high school will present further
challenges. The last section below looks forward to describe future
directions in the selective virtual provision.
FUTURE DIRECTIONS, CHALLENGES AND CONCLUSIONS
One of the biggest challenges encountered has been the lack of
information available upon which to base this type of schooling
provision, which is at the forefront of changing educational paradigms.
Regular 'bricks and mortar' schools use paradigms developed
over a century ago and as such, have a wealth of global experience for
reference. A further challenge is the selection of students. Whilst all
are academically capable, the provision works best with students who
have inherent volition and self-motivation. These students quickly
develop the autonomous learning style required for a low supervision
model. The current Selective High Schools Placement Test cannot provide
accurate information about autonomy. Nevertheless the results presented
graphically above are extremely positive in terms of supporting the
success of this ground-breaking selective provision for gifted rural
students.
The challenging curriculum in the final two years of school (Years
11 and 12) means the current delivery model will need to change if the
provision is to extend into the final two years of schooling. Exit
examinations at the end of Year 12 determine university entry, making
these years of school critical. The extended curricula in mathematics,
English and the sciences require sustained conversations for the
development of deep understanding of the curriculum material. With
current live lessons limited to 25 minutes, this development will pose
additional challenges.
xsel, as NSW's first virtual selective high school provision
is challenging traditional models of schooling by establishing
partnerships between secondary schools across a vast area. This
collaboration is providing strength through knowledge to individuals and
communities. Academic results as shown by the standardised NAPLAN and
ESSA tests have been very encouraging. We know the virtual selective
provision provides appropriate curriculum for students, allowing them to
achieve strong results. What we now need to investigate is the role of
particular factors in helping students achieve these results, such as
those factors identified by Rogers (2007); the importance of the teacher
and other support networks; the influences on students' social and
emotional needs and development; and how the students, teachers and
parents evaluate the experience of a virtual selective high school.
REFERENCES
Australian Council for Educational Research (2012). URL:
http://www.acer.edu.au
Australian Government (2008). Melbourne Declaration on Educational
Goals for Young Australians.
ACARA (2013). Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting
Authority Gifted and Talented Students. Retrieved from:
http://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/StudentDiversity/
Gifted-andtalented-students
Bate, J. & Clark, D. (2013). Like minds learning well together:
Improving academic, social, and emotional outcomes for gifted students.
Retrieved from: New Zealand Council of Educational Research:
http://www.nzcer.org.nz/nzcerpress/set/artides/minds-learning-wen-together-improvingacademic-social-and-emotional- outcome
Bates, A.W. (2005). Technology, e-learning and distance education
(2nd ed.). Abingdon, OX: Routledge Taylor & Francis Group.
Bennett, C. & Barbour, M.K. (2012). The FarNet journey:
Perceptions of Maori students engaged in secondary online learning.
Journal of Open, Flexible and Distance Learning 16(1), 83-98.
Bramwell, G., Reilly, R.C., Lilly, F.R., Kronish, N., &
Chennabthni, R. (2011). Creative teachers. Roeper Review 33, 228-238.
Brett, J. (2011). Our voice: Politics Albury Wodonga. [Audio
podcast]. Retrieved from:
http://politicsalburywodonga.wordpress.com/2012/06/24/podcast-jbrett-fairshare/
Cavanaugh, C., Gillan, K.J., Kromrey, J., Hess, M., & Blomeyer,
R. (2004). The effects of distance education on K-12 student outcomes: A
meta-analysis (pp. 1-39). Illinois, USA: Learning Point Associates.
Retrieved from: http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED489533.pdf
Chan, D.W. (2011). Characteristics and competencies of teachers of
gifted learners: The Hong Kong student perspective. Roeper Review 33(3),
160-169.
Chandra Handa, M. (2009). Learner-centred differentiation model: A
new framework. The Australasian Journal of Gifted Education 18(2),
55-66.
Curriculum Corporation (Australia). (2005). Pedagogy strategy:
Learning in an online world. Retrieved from: Australian Educational
Computing (20) 2: http://search.informit.com.au.ezproxy.une.edu.au/fullText;dn=149396;res=AEIPT
Dabbagh, N. (2005). Pedagogical models for E-Learning: A
theory-based design framework. International Journal of Technology in
Teaching and Learning 1(1), 25-44.
Edwards, B. & Baxter, J. (2013). The tyrannies of distance and
disadvantage: Factors related to children's development in regional
and disadvantaged areas of Australia. Retrieved from:
http://www.aifs.gov.au/institute/pubs/resreport25/rr25.pdf
Gagne, F. (2003). Transforming gifts into talents: The DMGT as a
development theory. In N. Colangelo and G. Davis (Eds.), Handbook of
gifted education (3rd edn, pp. 60-74). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Gagne, F. (2008). Building gifts into talents: Overview of the
DMGT. Asia Pacific Conference for
Giftedness. 10th Conference, Asia-Pacific Federation of the World
Council for Gifted and Talented Children, Singapore 17 July 2008.
Gagne, F. (2010). Motivation within the DMGT 2.0 Framework. High
Ability Studies 21(2), 81-99.
Gentry, M. & Mann, R. (2008). Total school cluster grouping and
differentiation. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
GERRIC (2004). Gifted and talented education professional
development package for teachers. Sydney: GERRIC, University of NSW.
Gross, M.U.M. (1989). The pursuit of excellence or the search for
intimacy? The forced-choice dilemma of gifted youth. Roeper Review
11(4), 189-194.
Gross, M.U.M., McLeod, B., & Pretorius, M. (2001). Gifted
students in secondary schools: Differentiating the curriculum (2nd Ed.).
Sydney: GERRIC, University of NSW.
Groundwater-Smith, S. (2007, December 4th). Supporting student
learning environments in a digital age: Listening to young people.
Retrieved from: NSW Department of Education & Communities: available
internally only.
Henderson, L. (2007). Multi-level selective classes for gifted
students. International Education Journal 8(2), 60-67.
Ingerham, L. (2012). Interactivity in the online environment: A
study of users of the North Carolina Virtual Public School. Quarterly
Review of Distance Education 13(2), 65-75.
Jung, J.Y., McCormick, J., & Gross, M.U.M. (2012). The forced
choice dilemma: A model incorporating idiocentric/allocentric cultural
orientation. Gifted Child Quarterly 56(1), 15-24.
Kimber, K. & Wyatt-Smith, C. (2010). Secondary students'
online use and creation of knowledge: Refocusing priorities for quality
assessment. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology 26(5),
607-625.
Le Cornu, R. & Peters, J. (2005). Towards constructivist
classrooms: The role of the reflective teacher. Journal of Educational
Enquiry 6(1), 50-64.
McLeod, J. & Reynolds, R. (2007). Quality teaching for quality
learning. South Melbourne: Cengage Learning Australia Pty Limited.
Maker, C.J. (1982) Curriculum development for the gifted. Austin:
Pro-Ed.
Manwaring, L. (2012). Virtual faculties in Western NSW. Unpublished
Masters thesis.
Neihart, M. & Betts, G. (2010). The revised profiles of the
gifted: A research based approach. Personal collection of B. Bannister
from keynote address, Asia Pacific Conference on Giftedness, Sydney,
NSW.
Ng, W. & Nicholas, H. (2007). Conceptualizing the use of online
technologies for gifted secondary school students. Roeper Review 29(3),
190-197.
Ng, W. & Nicholas, H. (2010). A progressive pedagogy for online
learning for high ability secondary school students: A case study.
Gifted Child Quarterly 54(3), 239-251.
NSW Department of Education and Communities (2010a). Selective
Schools Unit. Retrieved from:
http://www.schools.nsw.edu.au/gotoschool/types/selectiveschools.php
NSW Department of Education and Communities (2010b). Digital
Education Revolution. Retrieved from:
https://www.det.nsw.edu.au/about-us/how-we-operate/national-partnerships/digitaleducation-revolution
NSW Department of Education and Communities (2010c). Connected
Classrooms Program. Retrieved from:
https://www.det.nsw.edu.au/about-us/how-we-operate/connected-classroom
NSW Department of Education and Communities (2010d). Network
Enhancement Project. Retrieved from:
https://www.det.nsw.edu.au/about-us/how-we-operate/connected-classroom/networkenhancement-project
NSW Department of Education and Communities (2010e). Digital
Revolution in NSW Laptop. Retrieved from:
http://www.schools.nsw.edu.au/gotoschool/highschool/dernsw/thelaptop.php
NSW Department of Education and Communities (2010f). National
Assessment Program, Literacy and Numeracy. Retrieved from:
http://www.naplan.edu.au/
NSW Department of Education and Communities (2010g). Essential
Secondary Science Assessment. Retrieved from:
http://www.schools.nsw.edu.au/learning/7-12assessments/essa/index.php
NSW Department of Education and Communities (2012) About Western
NSW. Retrieved from https://portalsrvs.det.nsw.edu.au/f5-w
68747470733a2f2f6465747777772e6465742e6e73772e6564752e6175$$/regions/western_nsw/abou tus/index.htm
NSW Department of Education and Communities (2013a). Selective
Schools Unit. Retrieved from:
https://www.det.nsw.edu.au/media/downloads/about-us/statistics-and-research/keystatisticsand-reports/selectivehs.pdf
NSW Department of Education & Communities (2013b). Retrieved
from Public Schools NSW:
http://www.schools.nsw.edu.au/gotoschool/types/shs_ahs_details.php NSW
Department of Education & Training (2009). xsel Framework. Internal
document.
New South Wales Parliament (2008). Selective High Schools.
Retrieved from: http://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/prod/parlment/hansart.nsf/V3Key/LA2008092502
Perry, L. & Lubienski, C. (13 March 2014). Australian schools:
Engines of inequity. The Conversation. Retrieved from:
http://theconversation.com/australian-schools-engines-of-inequality-23979?
Porter, B. (2001). Grappling's technology and learning
spectrum. Retrieved from:
http://www.bjpconsulting.com/files/MAPPSpectrum.pdf
Rapposelli, J.A. (2012). The shift of online learning into
secondary schools. Distance Learning 9(4), 87-90.
Reis, S.M., Burns, D.E., & Renzulli, J.S. (1992). Curriculum
compacting: The complete guide to modifying the regular curriculum for
high ability students. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
Riley, T., Bevan-Brown, J., Bicknell, B., Carroll-Lind, J., &
Kerney, A. (2004). The extent, nature and effectiveness of planned
approaches in New Zealand schools for identifying and providing for
gifted and talented students (2nd ed., pp. 345-370). Wellington:
Ministry of Education.
Riddle, S. (4 March, 2014). Why poor kids continue to do poorly in
the education game. Retrieved from:
https://theconversation.com/why-poor-kids-contmue-to-do-poorly-in-the-education-game-23500
Rogers, K.B. (2002a). Grouping the gifted and talented. Roeper
Review 24(3), 103-108.
Rogers, K.B. (2002b). Re-forming gifted education: Matching the
programme to the child. Scottsdale, AZ: Great Potential Press.
Rogers, K.B. (2007). Lessons learned about educating the gifted and
talented: A synthesis of the research on educational practice. The
Gifted Child Quarterly 51, 382-296.
Salmon, G. (2002). The five-stage framework and e-tivities. In:
Gilly Salmon (Ed.), E-tivities: The key to active online learning (pp.
10-36). London: Kogan.
Setzer, J.C. & Lewis, L. (2005). Distance education courses for
public elementary and secondary school students: 2002-03 (pp. 1-97).
National Center for Education Statistics. US Department of Education,
Institute of Education Sciences, NCES 2005-010. Retrieved from:
http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED484331.pdf
St George, M. (4 June, 2011). Are rural needs different in gifted
education? [Blog]. Retrieved from Wordpress Blogs:
http://creatingcurriculum.wordpress.com/2011/06/04/are-rural-needsdifferent-in-gifted-education/
Thomson, D.L. (2010). Beyond the classroom walls: Teachers'
and students' perspectives on how online learning can meet the
needs of gifted students. Journal of Advanced Academics 21(4), 662-712.
Thomson, S., De Bortoli, L., & Buckley, S. (2013). PISA 2012:
How Australia measures up. Camberwell: ACER. Retrieved from
http://www.acer.edu.au/documents/PISA-2012-Report.pdf
Tomlinson, C.A. (2004). Research evidence for differentiation.
School Administrator 61(7), 30.
Van Tassel-Baska, J. & Brown, J. (2007). Towards best practice:
An analysis of the efficacy of curriculum models in gifted education.
The Gifted Child Quarterly 51, 342-358.
Vialle, W. & Tischler, K. (2009). Gifted students'
perceptions of the characteristics of effective teachers. In D. Wood
(Ed.), The gifted challenge: Challenging the gifted (pp. 115-124).
Merrylands, Australia: NSW Association for Gifted and Talented Children
Inc.
Vu, P. & Fadde, P.J. (2013). When to talk, and when to chat:
Student interactions in live virtual classrooms. Journal of Interactive
Online Learning 12(2), 41-52.
Winebrenner, S. & Devlin, B. (2001). Cluster grouping of gifted
students: How to provide full-time services on a part-time budget:
Update 2001. Retrieved from: http://eric.hoagiesgifted.org/e607.html
Wood, D. & Zundans-Fraser, L. (2013). Reaching out: Overcoming
distance and supporting rural gifted students through educational
opportunities. Australasian Journal of Gifted Education 22(1), 42-50.
Barbara Bannister (1), Linley Cornish (2), Michelle
Bannister-Tyrrell (2), Sue Gregory (2)
(1) Northern Beaches Secondary College, (2) School of Education,
University of New England,
Table 1: Explanation of horizontal axis in Figure 1, Figure 2 and
Figure 3
Horizontal Axis Label Description
Overall Average of all components of the ESSA
test
Extended Response A measure of deep understanding and use
of appropriate scientific metalanguage
to explain processes which students
have completed in Years 7 and 8 science
Knowing and Understanding A measure of knowledge and
understanding of scientific concepts
including the nature and practice of
science and the impact of science on
society, technology and the environment
Communicating Scientifically A measure of skills to understand and
respond to a range of scientific
information in a variety of media
Working Scientifically A measure of skills in planning and
conducting investigations in addition
to thinking critically to solve
problems
Figure 1: Essential Secondary School Assessment (ESSA) 2011
2011 ESSA Average Results
NSW State Western NSW
Science Overall 85.0 82.5
Extended Response Task 84.3 80.8
Knowing & Understanding 85.1 82.3
Communicating Scientifically 85.3 82.8
Working Scientifically 85.2 82.9
Xsel Class Selective Schools
Science Overall 104.6 99.3
Extended Response Task 106.2 98.6
Knowing & Understanding 104.3 100.1
Communicating Scientifically 109.9 102.8
Working Scientifically 102.7 98.0
Note: Table made from bar graph.
Figure 2: Essential Secondary School Assessment (ESSA) 2012
2012 ESSA Average Results
NSW State Western NSW
Science Overall 85.0 82.0
Extended Response Task 85.0 81.9
Knowing & Understanding 85.0 81.8
Communicating Scientifically 85.2 82.1
Working Scientifically 85.1 81.7
Xsel Class Selective Schools
Science Overall 99.8 99.9
Extended Response Task 100.9 99.9
Knowing & Understanding 99.3 100.3
Communicating Scientifically 99.1 100.5
Working Scientifically 101.8 101.8
Note: Table made from bar graph.
Figure 3: Essential Secondary School Assessment (ESSA) 2013
2013 ESSA Average Results
NSW State Western NSW
Science Overall 85.7 85.4
Extended Response Task 85.2 84.8
Knowing & Understanding 85.9 85.7
Communicating Scientifically 86.4 86.1
Working Scientifically 86.6 85.7
Xsel Class Selective Schools
Science Overall 102.1 100.8
Extended Response Task 99.6 98.9
Knowing & Understanding 101.8 101.4
Communicating Scientifically 107.4 104.5
Working Scientifically 104.2 101.6
Note: Table made from bar graph.
