Inclusive and Supportive Education Congress International Special Education Conference Inclusion: Celebrating Diversity? 1st - 4th August 2005. Glasgow, Scotland

home about the conference programme registration accommodation contact

U-STARS ~ PLUS

Using Science Talents & Abilities to Recognize Students
Promoting Learning for Under-Represented Students

Mary Ruth Coleman, Ph.D.
Senior Scientist
Frank Porter Graham Child Development Institute
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
colemanm@mail.fpg.unc.edu
April 12, 2005

“It is surely time that we awake from this lethargy of years and
make a concentrated effort for the education of our youth.”

(Freedom’s Journal, March 16, 1827)

Across the USA, the persistence of the educational “haves" and “have-nots” is reflected in the achievement gap between children of poverty and color and their more affluent classmates.   Why does this persist?   The National Research Council’s report “Minority Students in Special and Gifted Education” (2002) speaks to the disproportionate under-representation of these children in gifted education and other advanced educational programs.   This report addresses the multiple factors which influence children’s lives and which, therefore, impact their achievement.  These factors are complex, yet the message is clear: Children who live in poverty need more comprehensive and intensive support to ensure that they will not be left behind.

Description of U-STARS~PLUS

Project U-STARS~PLUS, Using Science Talents and Abilities to Recognize Students~Promoting Learning in Under-Represented Students, was developed and piloted over the last four years in three rural school districts in Eastern North Carolina.   This model addressed students in their first few years of schooling, grades K-3. During these early school years, teachers have a profound influence on their students. In fact, these years are critical in shaping a child’s school self-efficacy and in establishing an achievement-orientation that will bring future success (NRC, 1996; Bransford, Brown, & Cocking, 1999). The U-STARS~PLUS model is centered in the general education classroom and uses science as the platform for helping teachers recognize and nurture their students' potential.   Science provides an ideal platform for this because:

• Science is inquiry-based and focuses on exploration and problem-solving;
• Science allows young children to demonstrate and improve their thinking abilities in concrete, hands-on ways;
• Science provides a high-interest base to integrate reading, math, writing, and the arts;
• Science is ideally suited for observing indicators of potential in children from economically disadvantaged and/or culturally/linguistically diverse families and children with language-related learning disabilities because it is not overly dependent on early “reading” and “language” development and because it provides a “hands-on” activity-oriented base; and
• Science allows teachers who have been trained to recognize potential in young students to observe these behaviors in an authentic setting while children are engaged in meaningful learning activities.

                The materials and methods used in this model have been field tested, researched, revised and accepted for publication (Coleman & Shah, 2002abc; Coleman, Harrison, & Shah, 2002).   The U-STARS approach focuses on intensive and supportive professional development for teachers, technical assistance provided by a leadership cadre through direct onsite support, research-based materials for classroom instruction, support materials to involve parents and families, and a dynamic and rigorous evaluation design.   All of the U-STARS curriculum materials are aligned with the National Science Education Standards (NRC, 1996) and are designed to integrate with and enhance existing science instruction in the early grades.

Research Base Supporting the U-STARS Model.   U-STARS has established a solid track record of success (Coleman, 1999; Coleman, 2000b; Darity, Castellino, & Tyson, 2001).   The initial pilot sites for U-STARS have been able to increase the numbers of children from economically disadvantaged and/or culturally-linguistically diverse families and children with disabilities identified for advanced educational opportunities and for gifted education services (Coleman, 1999a, 2000a). A major independent evaluation report of North Carolina schools, the “Report on increasing opportunity to learn via access to rigorous courses and programs: One strategy for closing the achievement gap for at-risk and ethnic minority students” cited U-STARS as one of the most promising practice for closing the achievement gap for young children living in poverty (Darity, Castellino, & Tyson, 2001).   U-STARS data from participating schools shows achievement of the students in science and reading improved substantially in comparison with other students (Coleman, 2000b; Coleman, 2003; Coleman, in press).The methods used in U-STARS~PLUS can help teachers in NC and across the nation recognize and nurture children with outstanding potential early in their schooling, and can positively influence a child’s orientation towards academic achievement (Coleman, 2000b; Coleman, in press; Darity, Castellino& Tyson, 2001; Akerson, Flick, & Lederman, 2000; Borland & Wright, 1994; Cohen, 1990; Donnellan & Roberts, 1985; Ford, Howard, Harris, & Tyson, 2000; Ford, Baytops & Harmon, 1997;Haury, 1993; Kerschenbaum,1998; Kitano, 1991; Lloyd & Contreras, 1987; Schwartz, 1987; Shaklee, 1992; Spicker, 1992; US DOE, 2000; Whitmore, 1989; Zappia, 1989.)

Potential for Contribution to Theories, Knowledge and Practice .   Theorists in the field of cognitive development have increasingly accepted the proposition that “intelligence” is the dynamic interaction between an individual’s capacity for learning and the experiences provided by their environment (Bransford, Brown & Cocking, 1999; Coleman, 1997; Eisner, 1998; Jensen, 1998; Vygotsky, 1978).   Perkins (1995) believes that a mix of innate capabilities and experiences is what we see in our efforts to measure intelligence and that, as a consequence, we can create environments to improve intellectual performance.   Project U-STARS is the practical application of this belief through the creation of optimal early learning opportunities.

U-STARS is science-based with the integration of math, reading, and writing providing a strong curriculum approach to closing the gap. The Glenn Commission Report, Before It's Too Late (National Commission on Mathematics and Science Teaching for the 21 st Century, 2000) focused on the critical importance of science education to our national well-being and found that in spite of this, science receives little attention at best in the early school years. The recent NAEP (2000) report on student achievement in science indicated that all students need more and better science instruction, but that students from culturally/linguistically diverse groups, students with disabilities, and girls (AAUW, 1994) remain even more vulnerable to under-achievement in science.   Young children love science and through involving young children in meaningful science, we believe that we can show how to establish a connection to learning which will last a lifetime (Jorgenson & Vanosdall, 2002).

One of the key components of the U-STARS model is the involvement of families.   There are three aspects of family involvement addressed by U-STARS~PLUS.   The first is strategies for conducting parent/caregiver conferences.   The second is planning science-based family-school activities (e.g. Science Adventure Nights; Butterfly Garden Plantings; and Science Story Read-Alongs).   The third is the use of “Science Family Packs” with science activities to be completed at home (these were described with the U-STARS materials in section 1). All of the key family materials used in U-STARS will be translated into Spanish to ensure that families and other major stakeholders who speak Spanish will have access to information.   The School Teams will be expected to develop strategies to involve families in a variety of ways to strengthen the home-school partnership.

Description of Evaluation Plan.   Three formal studies are being conducted: district trends in achievement and access; effectiveness of U-STARS~PLUS in multiple sites; and pockets-of-excellence for replication.   Emerging data from each study will be presented, but is not available at this time as the first school year has not yet been completed.

District Trends In Achievement and Access to Advanced Educational Opportunities. This involves the collection of district-wide data on trends in student’s achievement and in student’s access to high level educational opportunities (enrichment programs, gifted education, etc.). Data will be reviewed from all schools and will include classroom, grade level, school, school system, and type of advanced services received by students.   We will assist districts as they look at the impact of students' gender, SES, ethnicity, and disability to identify patterns and trends for the district in student achievement.   Data will be collected by the districts during all five years of the project; thus, these trends be followed for five years.   All yearly reports will summarize this information, however, a more comprehensive interim report on the trends and patterns will be prepared in the third year of the project and the final report in year five will provide an additional summary of findings in light of the full study.

Effectiveness of U-STARS~PLUS in Multiple Settings. This involves the intensive study of the implementation of the U-STARS model and it’s effectiveness in multiple sites.   Districts will be expected to assist us in the identification and random selection of a sample of   “treatment” and “comparison” schools for a comprehensive evaluation of the effectiveness of the model.   We will use a delayed entry design where treatment schools will begin the project three years before their comparison schools.   Schools designated, as “treatment” will receive the personnel preparation and on-site technical assistance to help them fully implement U-STARS~PLUS.   The school designated as “comparison” will participate in data collection during the initial years but will not receive the U-STARS~PLUS training and support until they are phased in.   At that time, the comparison school will be given the personnel preparation and technical assistance needed to implement U-STARS~PLUS.   This design gives us a solid evaluation of effectiveness data using a comparison study design and also ensure that all schools will eventually receive the support needed to implement the U-STARS model.   With this design we will have achieved both aims: (a) the rigorous study of effectiveness in multiple sites and (b) the expansion of best practices to support student achievement.

Pockets-of-Excellence for Replication. Our initial analysis will allow us to identify “pockets-of-excellence” where things are working well (sites may include a classroom, a school, or a system).   These pockets-of-excellence will be identified in year two and during years three and four we will conduct case studies of these sites to identify the critical variables which would help others in adopting these promising practices.   Interim reports on the pockets-of excellence will be shared in Years Three and Four, and the full study of the pockets-of-excellence will be released in Year Five, the final project year.

Services Will Lead to Student Achievement

The U-STARS model (described in the introductory section) is designed for young children in the formative years of their schooling.   It is based in the general education classroom and uses science as its focus content area.   We believe that this combination offers the greatest opportunity for closing the achievement gap in general and for addressing the disproportionately low representation of children from economically disadvantaged and/or culturally/linguistically diverse families, and children with disabilities within programs for advanced learners.

References

Akerson, V., Flick, L., & Lederman, N. (2000, April). The influence of primary children’s ideas in science on teaching practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 363-385.

American Association of University Women. (1994). How schools shortchange girls: A study of major findings on girls and education . Washington, DC: American Association of University Women Foundation.

Borland, J., & Wright, L. (1994, Fall). Identifying young, potentially gifted, economically disadvantaged students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 38, 164-171.

Bransford, J.D., Brown, A.L., & Cocking, R.R. (Eds.). (1999). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington: National Academy Press.

Cohen, L. (1990). Meeting the needs of Gifted and Talented Minority Language Students. Reston, VA: ERIC Clearinghouse on Disabilities and Gifted Education. (ERIC EC Digest #E480).

Coleman, M.R. (1997). New ways of seeing. A video on multiple criteria for recognizing students.

Coleman, M.R. (1999). Javits year 1 report. Chapel Hill, NC: Frank Porter Graham Child Development Institute.

Coleman, M.R. (2000a). The early recognition and cultivation of potential: Using science talents and abilities to recognize students (U-STARS). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.

Coleman, M.R. (2000b). Javits year II report. Chapel Hill, NC: Frank Porter Graham Child Development Institute.

Coleman, M.R., Harrison, A., & Shah, S.C. (2002). Project U-STARS and STAGE: Harrison observation scale. U-STARS at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

Coleman, M.R., & Shah, S.C. (2002a). Personnel preparation: The early recognition and cultivation of potential. U-STARS at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

Coleman, M.R., & Shah, S.C. (2002b). Project U-STARS: Family involvement packets. U-STARS at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

Coleman, M.R., & Shah, S.C. (2002c). Project U-STARS: science/literature connections. U-STARS at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

Coleman, M.R. (2003). The identification of students who are gifted. Reston, VA: ERIC Clearinghouse on Disabilities and Gifted Education. (ERIC EC Digest # E644).

Coleman, M.R. (in press). Year three Javits report on project U-STARS: Conclusions and implications. Chapel Hill, NC: Frank Porter Graham Child Development Institute.

Darity, W., Castellino, D., & Tyson, K. (2001).   Report on increasing opportunity to learn via access to rigorous courses and programs: One strategy for closing the achievement gap for at-risk and ethnic minority students. Raleigh, NC: North Carolina Department of Public Instruction.

Donnellan, K., & Roberts, G. (1985, January).   What research says: Activity-based elementary science: A double bonus. Science and Children, 22, 119-121.

Eisner, E. (1998). The enlightened eye: Qualitative inquiry and the enhancement of educational practice. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.

Ford, D., Baytops, J., & Harmon, D. (1997). Developing gifted minority students to reach their potential: Recommendations for change. Peabody Journal of Education. 72, 3 & 4, 201-216.

Ford, D., Howard, T., Harris, J., & Tyson, C. (2000). Creating culturally responsive classrooms for gifted African American students. Journal of the Education for the Gifted, 23, 397-427.

Haury, D. (1993). Teaching science through inquiry. Columbus, OH: ERIC Clearinghouse for Science, Mathematics, and Environmental Education. (ERIC Digest No. 359 048).

Jensen, E. (1998).   Teaching with the brain in mind. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Jorgenson, O., & Vanosdall, R. (2002). The death of science? What we risk in our rush toward standardized testing

                and the three R’s. Phi Delta Kappan, 8, 601-605.

Kirschenbaum, R.J. (1998). Dynamic assessment and its use with underserved gifted and talented populations. Gifted Child Quarterly, 42, 140-147.

Kitano, M. (1991). A multicultural educational perspective on serving the culturally diverse gifted. Journal of the Education for the Gifted, 15, 4-19.

Lloyd, C., & Contreras, N. (1987). What research says: Science inside and out. Science and Children, 25, 30-31.

National Assessment of Educational Progress (2000). National center for educational statistics: Science highlights, the nation’s report card. (NCES Publication No. 2002-452). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement.

National Commission on Mathematics and Science Teaching for the 21 st Century. (2000). Before it’s too late: A report to the nation from the National Commission on Mathematics and Science Teaching for the 21 st Century. Jessup, MD: US Department of Education.

National Research Council (2002). Minority students in special and gifted education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

National Research Council (1996). National Science Educational Standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

Perkins, D. (1995). Outsmarting IQ: The emerging science of learnable intelligence. New York: The Free Press.

Schwartz, W. (1987). Teaching Science and Mathematics to At Risk Students. New York, NY: ERIC Clearinghouse on Urban Education. (ERIC Digest No. 289948).

Shaklee, B. (1992). Identification of young gifted students.   Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 15, 134-144.

Spicker, H. (1992). Identifying and enriching rural gifted children. Educational Horizons, 70, 60-65.

U.S. Department of Education. (2000). Before it’s too late: A report to the nation from the national commission on mathematics and science teaching for the 21 st century. Jessup, MD: Education Publications Center.

Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Whitmore, J. (1989). Re-examining the concept of underachievement. Understanding Our Gifted, 2, 1-11.

Zappia, I. (1989). Identification of gifted Hispanic students: A multidimensional view. In C.J. Maker & S.W. Schiever (Eds.) Critical issues in gifted education: Defensible programs for cultural and ethnic minorities. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed, 19-26.

home . about the conference . programme . registration . accommodation . contact