2.  What is this model? › A general framework for program and curriculum development in gifted education that research suggests increases thinking skills, problem solving skills, and the self- regulatory skills needed to successfully complete independent projects (Moon, et al., 2009)

3.  Initially created and implemented as a model for course design at the college level by John Feldhusen, Kathryn Linden, and Russell Ames at Purdue University.  This model originally stressed student responsibility in the learning process while positioning the instructor as a guide.

4. 5 key components 1. Clear, defensible program goals 2. Broad-based, program-specific identification programs 3. Grouping structures that allow gifted students to interact with each other 4. Well-trained instructors 5. Differentiated instruction

5.  The development of program specific- identification procedures ensures a quality program that is more easily evaluated

6.  Gifted youth benefit from being grouped together to receive fast-paced, complex instruction in a stimulating environment.  The identification procedure provides information on the level of intellectual, creative, and academic talent of the child.  It is crucial to identify students that will benefit from the program being offered, so each program will have various identification procedures.

7.  Need teachers licensed in gifted education that are capable of developing curriculum as they are teaching it  Model assumes a nontraditional teaching style in which instructor mainly facilitates the learning occurring in the classroom

8.  Instructional activities in this model are differentiated with respect to content(advanced and accelerated), process(active and autonomous), and products (complex and sophisticated).  There are 3 sequential stages used to develop cohesive, thematic units of instruction

9.  Instructional activities that teach basic thinking skills and academic content that form the foundation of the unit  In-class activities are short-term(10-60 minutes) and directed by teacher  Highly engaging activities that will motivate students for Stages II and III

10.  Engages students in problem-solving activities such as shared inquiry, problem-based learning, and non- routine mathematical problem solving  Activities last longer (1-10 hours) and teachers’ role is more of a coach or facilitator

11.  Students apply knowledge and skills gained in Stages I and II to real problems  Students’ interests are important motivators as Stage III activities are generally self-selected  Stage III gives students the chance to develop personal talent skills  Role of teacher is one of a resource person for the students

13.  Earliest implementation occurred in pull-out classes with students identified for academic talent, creative talent, or both.  Program for Academic and Creative Enrichment (PACE) was created based on Purdue Three-Stage Model. › Includes a process for identifying students, structure for integrating the program into each school, an agenda for preparing teachers, and gathering curricular resources to fit the model 

14.  Model is very flexible and can be implemented in various ways at the elementary level  Can be used to guide development of after- school, Saturday, or pull- out enrichment classes  Units of instruction can address required curricular standards, while enabling students to go beyond grade- level expectations

15.  It is believed merging students who are strong academically to those with high levels of creativity will provide powerful experiences for all students.  Teachers should pay attention to English Language Learners and to those from low income families that may be overlooked due to low verbal test scores or other factors

16.  Barriers can include: › Constraints on instructional time › Belief systems that oppose early identification of gifted students or grouping gifted students for instruction › Limited resources such as space, staff, or instructional materials

17.  Works well with the developmental needs of gifted adolescents and in a variety of administrative settings  Purdue Secondary Model focuses on a wide array of services: › Counseling, seminars, AP classes, honors classes, math-science acceleration, foreign languages, the arts, cultural experiences, career education, vocational programs, and extra-school instruction.

18.  Two models complement each other  Together they provide a complete framework for gifted program development at the secondary level  Purdue Three-Stage Model is used to design individual components of a comprehensive array of programming options. Three-Stage vs Secondary Models

19.  Two scales: Purdue Academic Rating Scales (PARS) and Purdue Vocational Talent Scales › 15-item characteristics ranked in individual disciplines as well as in vocational courses  Portfolios of work, student interviews, self and peer nominations  Three areas for teacher preparedness: › content of their disciplines, pedagogy of their discipline, principles of gifted education.

20.  Problem-Based Learning (PBL) › helps learners master subject matter and practice domain-specific skills › can be constructed around the required curriculum and address state standards › students are immediately immersed in Phase 1, the engagement phase › Phase 2 happens as students work with other class members in the inquiry and investigation phase of PBL.

21. 3 common types that are implemented: Differentiated advanced classes Seminars - process-oriented, interdisciplinary contexts - promotes the curriculum of connections Independent learning opportunities, sometimes in conjunction with mentorships - emphasizes Stage III of the model - applies knowledge and skills gained in Stages I and II to real problems/products with real audiences

22.  Hegelian Dialectic › process-oriented strategy that works well in humanities classes › incorporated into seminars or discipline- focused courses › students suggest a thesis, and an antithesis for an issue or a situation

23.  Evidence suggested that students who used the model showed an increase in creative thinking, verbal and figurative originality, and verbal fluency.  Long term study results- a small sample reported a positive impact on areas such as talent growth, creative thinking, and self concept.

24.  Strengths: › Easy to introduce to teachers who are experts in content. › Flexibility in instruction that teachers crave › Strong motivational benefits to students  Challenges: › Teacher training in gifted education is vital › A lack of developed curricula using the model (using the model requires teachers to develop their own curriculum) › More resources are needed to implement the model, especially for Stages II and III

25. Moon, S.M., Kolloff, P., Robinson, A., Dixon, F., & Feldhusen, J.F. (2009). The Purdue Three-Stage Model. In J.S. Renzulli, et al. (Eds.) Systems and Models for Developing Programs for the Gifted and Talented (2nd ed, pp.289- 317). Mansfield, CT: Creative Learning Press. Moon, Sydney M., John F. Feldhusen, and Deborah R. Dillon. "Long-Term Effects of an Enrichment Program Based on the Purdue Three-Stage Model." Gifted Child Quarterly 38.1 (1994): 38-48. Long-Term Effects of an Enrichment Program Based on the Purdue Three-Stage Model. Sage Journals. Web. 19 Mar. 2015.