You are here:

Using Online Learning Environments to Support Advanced Learners
PROCEEDINGS

, University of Akron, United States

E-Learn: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education, in Orlando, Florida, USA ISBN 978-1-880094-83-9 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), San Diego, CA

Full Text

Abstract

The study investigated how technology-rich, classrooms can support advanced and enriched e-learning experiences for teachers and gifted learners. Advanced learners in multi-ability classrooms are not afforded the opportunities to experience accelerated learning based on their individual needs due to the nature of traditional classroom instruction and management. Consequently, because instruction is targeted at the average learner, advanced students do not reach their full potential and do not show progress consistent with their ability. Technology is a largely untapped resource for reforming and restructuring instructional activities within the classroom. Strategies used with the gifted population as well as differentiation processes that help all students learn were used in an e-learning environment. Teachers learned how to manage e-learning activities to provide alternative instruction with advanced learners in their classrooms.

Citation

Ward, C. (2010). Using Online Learning Environments to Support Advanced Learners. In J. Sanchez & K. Zhang (Eds.), Proceedings of E-Learn 2010--World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education (pp. 377-381). Orlando, Florida, USA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved August 10, 2024 from .

© 2010 Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE)

Keywords

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Archambault, F., Westberg, K., Brown, S., Hallmark, B., Emmons, C., & Zhang, W. (1993). Regular classroom practices with gifted students: Results of a national survey of classroom teachers. The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented, University of Connecticut (Research Monograph 93102).
  2. Cramond, B., Benson, L., & Martin, C. (2002). Serving gifted students through inclusion: A teacher's perspective/ A parent's perspectice. Roeper Review, 24(3), 125-127.
  3. Hatch, J. (2002). Doing Qualitative Research in Education Settings. Abany, NY: State University of New York Press.
  4. Hertzog, N. (1998). Open-ended activities: Differentiation through learner responses. Gifted Child Quarterly, 42(4), 213-227.
  5. Jenkins, J., & Keefe, J. (2001). Strategies for personalizing instruction: A typology for improving teaching and learning. NASSP (National Association of Secondary School Principals) Bulletin, 85, 72-82.
  6. Kirschenbaum, R., Armstrong, D., & Landrum, M. (1999). Resource consultation model in gifted education to support talent development in today's inclusive schools. Gifted Child Quarterly, 43(1), 39-47.
  7. Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. (1999). Designing Qualitative Research. (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
  8. Miles, M., & Hubermann, A. (1994). Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
  9. Ohio Department of Education. (2003). What is standards based education? Retrieved January 22, 2005, from http://ims.ode.state.oh.us/ODE/IMS/SBE/FAQ/ims_standardsbased_education.asp.
  10. Pear, J., & Crone-Todd, D. (2002). A social constructivist approach to computer-mediated instruction. Computers& Education, 38, 221-223.
  11. Reis, S., Gubbins, E., Briggs, C., Schreiber, F., Richards, S., Jacobs, J., Eckert, R., & Renzulli, J. (2004). Reading instruction for talented readers: Case studies documenting few opportunities for continuous progress. Gifted Child Quarterly, 48(4), 315-337.
  12. Renzulli, J., Gubbins, E., & Koehler, J. (2003). The national research center on gifted and talented: Recent studies and look at the future of research in our field. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 27(2), 107-118.
  13. Rogers, K. (1993). Grouping the gifted and talented: Questions and answers. Roeper Review, 16(1), 8-12.
  14. Roschell, J., Pea, R., Hoadey, C., Gordin, D., & Means, B. (2000). Changing how and what children learn in school with computer based technologies. The Future of Children, 10(2), 76-101.
  15. Scheffler, F., & Logan, J. (1999). Computer technology in schools: What teachers should know and be able to do. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 31(3), 305-327.
  16. Stamps, L. (2004). The effectiveness of curriculum compacting in first grade classrooms. Roeper Review, 27(1), 31-41.
  17. Tieso, C. (2004). Through the looking glass: One school's reflection on differentiation. Gifted Child Today, 27(4), 58-62.
  18. USDE. (2001). No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 Public Law No. 107-110. Retrieved January 28, 2005, from http://www.ed.gov/nclb/overview/intro/guide/guide_pg13.html #act.
  19. Wolcott, H. (2001). Writing Up Qualitative Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
  20. Yin, R. (2003). Applications of Case Study Research. (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.-381 DASHDASH

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References

Pages You've Visited

Abstracts