The schoolwide enrichment model for reading (SEM-R) framework

Yıl 2021, Cilt: 9 Sayı: 2, 133 - 138, 15.06.2021

Mashael Alhibs

https://doi.org/10.17478/jegys.857911

Öz

Educators and researchers have suggested that the Schoolwide Enrichment Model for Reading (SEM-R) is an appropriate approach that helps in meeting their needs. SEM-R was developed from the general SEM model. It was designed to emphasize reading enjoyment and reading skill development (Reis et al., 2008). The SEM-R consists of three phases: (a) Phase I: Exposure, (b) Phase II: Supported Independent Reading, and (c) Phase III: Choice Components. Separate studies have demonstrated the effectiveness of the SEM-R on increasing gifted students’ reading fluency, achievement, and attitude toward reading. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to provide a brief literature review exploring the researched effects of the SEM-R on gifted students’ reading fluency, achievement, and attitude toward reading.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Enrichment- Gifted- Reading, Enrichment, Reading

Destekleyen Kurum

The Schoolwide Enrichment Model Reading Framework (SEM-R)

Proje Numarası

University of North Carolina

Teşekkür

To Dr. Gilson hoe support me and advised me during my doctoral study

Kaynakça

• Anderson, G., Higgins, D., & Wurster, S. (1985). Free reading books selected by high, average and low achievers. The Reading Teacher, 39(3), 326-330.
• Archambault, F. X., Westberg, K. L., Brown, S. W., Hallmark, B. W., Emmons, C. L., & Zhang, W. (1993). Regular classroom practices with gifted students: Results of a national survey of classroom teachers (Research monograph 93102). The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented, University of Connecticut. From http://www.gifted. uconn.edu/nrcgt/reports/rm93102/rm93102.pdf
• Catron, R. M., & Wingenbach, N. (1986). Developing the gifted reader. Theory into Practice, 25(2), 134-140. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405848609543213
• Cox, J., Daniel, N., & Boston, B.O. (1985). Educating able learners: Programs and promising practices. A National Study Conducted by the Sid W. Richard Foundation. University of Texas Press.
• Davis, G. A., & Rimm, S. B. (2004). Education of the gifted and talented (5th ed.). Pearson Education.
• Dweck, C. S. (2008). Mindset: The new psychology of success. Random House.
• Farmer, D. (Ed.) (1993) Gifted Children need help? A guide for parents and teachers. Strathfield: NSW: NSW Association for Gifted and Talented Children.
• Jackson, N. E. (1993). Reading with young children (RBDM 9302). The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented, University of Connecticut
• Karafelis, P. (1986). The effects of the tri-art drama curriculum on the reading comprehension of students with varying levels of cognitive ability. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. The University of Connecticut, Storrs.
• Knight, B. A. & Becker, T. (2000). The challenge of meeting the needs of gifted students in the regular classroom: The student viewpoint. The Australasian Journal of Gifted Education, 9(1), 11-17. https:// doi.org/10.1080/15332276.2011.11673596
• Levande, D. (1993). Identifying and serving the gifted reader. Reading Improvement, 30(3), 147-150.
• Little, C. A. (2012). Curriculum as motivation for gifted students. Psychology in the Schools, 49(7), 695-705. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.21621
• Little, C. A., & Hines, A. H. (2006). Time to read: Advancing reading achievement after school. Journal of Advanced Academics, 18(1), 8-33. https://doi.org/10.4219/jaa-2006-350
• Little, C. A., McCoach, D. B., & Reis, S. M. (2014). Effects of differentiated reading instruction on student achievement in middle school. Journal of Advanced Academics, 25(4), 384-402. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932202X14549250
• Mangieri, J. N., & Madigan, F. (1984). Reading for gifted students: What schools are doing. Roeper Review, 7(2), 68-70. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783198409552851
• Mason, J., & Au, K. (1990). Reading instruction for today. HarperCollins
• McKenna, M. C., & Kear, D. J. (1990). Measuring attitude toward reading: A new tool for teachers. Reading Teacher, 43(9), 626–639. https://doi.org/10.1598/RT.43.8.3
• Moore, S., & Lemons, R. (1982). Measuring reading attitudes: Three dimensions. Reading World, 22(1), 48-57. https://doi.org/10.1080/19388078209557678
• Nathan, R. G., & Stanovich, K. E. (1991). The causes and consequences of differences in reading fluency. Theory into Practice, 30(3), 176-184. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405849109543498
• National Reading Panel. (2000). Report of the National Reading Panel: Teaching children to read. Report of the subgroups. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health.
• Olszewski‐Kubilius, P., & Lee, S‐Y. (2004). The role of participation in in‐school and outside‐of‐school activities in the talent development of gifted students. The Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 15(3), 107‐123. https://doi.org/10.4219/jsge-2004-454
• Reis, S., McCoach, D., Little, C., Muller, L. & Kaniskan, R. (2011). The effects of differentiated instruction and enrichment pedagogy on reading achievement in five elementary schools. American Educational Research Journal, 48(2), 462–501. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831210382891
• Reis, S., Little, C., Fogarty, E., Housand, A., Housand, B., Sweeny, S., Eckert, R. & Muller, L. (2010). Case studies of successful Schoolwide Enrichment Model Reading (SEM-R) classroom implementation. The National Research Center on The Gifted and Talented
• Reis, S. M., & Boeve, H. (2009). How academically gifted elementary urban students respond to challenge in an enriched, differentiated reading program. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 33, 203-240. https://doi.org/10.1177/016235320903300204
• Reis, S. M. & Housand, A. M. (2009). The impact of gifted education pedagogy and enriched reading practices on reading achievement for urban students in bilingual and English-speaking classes. Journal of Urban Education, 6(1), 72–86. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831210382891
• Reis, S. M., Eckert, R. D., McCoach, D. B., Jacobs, J. J., & Coyne, M. (2008). Using enrichment reading practices to increase reading fluency, comprehension, and attitudes. Journal of Educational Research, 101, 299-314. https://doi.org/10.3200/ JOER.101.5.299-315
• Reis, S. M., McCoach, D. B., Coyne, M., Schreiber, F. J., Eckert, R. D., & Gubbins, E. J. (2007). Using planned enrichment strategies with direct instruction to improve reading fluency, comprehension, and attitude toward reading: An evidence based study. Elementary School Journal, 108(1), 3-24. https://doi.org/10.1086/522383
• Reis, S. M., & Renzulli, J. S. (2003). Research related to the Schoolwide Enrichment Triad Model. Gifted Education International, 18(1), 15-39. https://doi.org/10.1177/026142940301800104
• Reis, S. M., Gentry, M., & Park, S. (1995). Extending the pedagogy of gifted education to all students (Research Monograph 95118). The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented, University of Connecticut.
• Renzulli, J. S. (1977). The enrichment triad model: A guide for developing defensible programs for the gifted and talented. Creative learning Press
• Renzulli, J. S., & Reis, S. M. (1985). The Schoolwide Enrichment Model: A comprehensive plan for educational excellence. Creative Learning Press.
• Renzulli, J. S., & Reis, S. M. (1997). The Schoolwide Enrichment Model: New directions for developing high-end learning. In N. Colangenlo & G. A. Davis (Eds.) Handbook of gifted education (2nd ed.) (pp. 136-154). Allyn & Bacon.
• Schenkel, L. A. (2002). Hands on and feet first: Linking high‐ability students to marine scientists. The Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 13(4), 173‐191. https://doi.org/10.4219/jsge-2002-380
• Shaunessy-Dedrick, E., Evans, L., Ferron, J. & Lindo, M. (2015). Effects of differentiated reading on elementary students’ reading comprehension and attitudes toward reading. Gifted Child Quarterly, 59(2), 91 –107. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986214568718
• Tomlinson, C. A. (2001). How to differentiate instruction in mixed-ability classrooms. ASCD.
• Tomlinson, C. A. (2003). Fulfilling the promise of the differentiated classroom: Strategies and tools for responsive teaching. ASCD.
• Tomlinson, C. A. (2012). Administrative decision-making for changing times. In R. F. Subotnik, A. Robinson, C. M. Callahan, & E. J. Gubbins (Eds.), Malleable minds: Translating insights from psychology and neuroscience to gifted education (pp. 245 – 256). National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented
• VanTassel-Baska, J. (2012). Teacher behavior as a tool to understanding the motivation of gifted learners. In R. F. Subotnik, A. Robinson, C. M. Callahan, & E. J. Gubbins (Eds.), Malleable minds: Translating insights from psychology and neuroscience to gifted education (pp. 257 – 266). National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented
• Westburg, K. L., Archambault, F. X., Dobyns, S. M., & Slavin, T. J. (1993). An observational study of instructional and curricular practices used with gifted and talented students in regular classrooms (Research monograph 93104). The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented, University of Connecticut.
• Witty, P. (1985). Rationale for fostering creative reading in the gifted and creative. In M. Labuda (Ed.), Creative learning for the gifted learners (pp. 8- 24, 2nd ed.). International Reading Association.