Catalyst Model
Developed by: Mary Slade
Theoretical Underpinnings:
• Bloom’s Hierarchy
• Pinnacle Model by Seligman
• Differentiation
Brief description of the model and/or its philosophy:
This is a consultant based approach to gifted education. Consultants help classroom teachers co-plan through differentiation for their gifted students. If the differentiation is not enough, the consultant then has direct contact with the student and brings in outside sources for highly individualized learning. This model was created to encourage teachers to take on more responsibility for gifted education in order to promote greater advocacy and services.
Key elements,components, and/or non-negotiables:
• Cycle: co-plan, co-teach, reflection/assessment, co-teach
• Consultants are hired based on need
• 2 day training session prior to implementation, monthly meetings to check-in on development
Intended applicationsfor the model (enrichment, pull-out, whole school,classroom, etc.):
• All ages / disciplines
• Any type of schoolIntended Audiences:
Relative strength and weaknesses:
Strengths:
• Cost effective
• Empowers classroom teachers
• Less elitist
• Spill-over effects
• More service time (in-classroom)
Weaknesses:
• Consultants can’t be effective if traveling too much
• Need whole school buy-in for collaboration
• 10 non-negotiables
Resources required:
no mandated resources
Theoretical Underpinnings:
• Bloom’s Hierarchy
• Pinnacle Model by Seligman
• Differentiation
Brief description of the model and/or its philosophy:
This is a consultant based approach to gifted education. Consultants help classroom teachers co-plan through differentiation for their gifted students. If the differentiation is not enough, the consultant then has direct contact with the student and brings in outside sources for highly individualized learning. This model was created to encourage teachers to take on more responsibility for gifted education in order to promote greater advocacy and services.
Key elements,components, and/or non-negotiables:
• Cycle: co-plan, co-teach, reflection/assessment, co-teach
• Consultants are hired based on need
• 2 day training session prior to implementation, monthly meetings to check-in on development
Intended applicationsfor the model (enrichment, pull-out, whole school,classroom, etc.):
• All ages / disciplines
• Any type of schoolIntended Audiences:
Relative strength and weaknesses:
Strengths:
• Cost effective
• Empowers classroom teachers
• Less elitist
• Spill-over effects
• More service time (in-classroom)
Weaknesses:
• Consultants can’t be effective if traveling too much
• Need whole school buy-in for collaboration
• 10 non-negotiables
Resources required:
no mandated resources