Purdue Three-Stage Model
Developed by:
John Feldhusen, Kathryn Linden, and Russell Ames
Theoretical Underpinnings:
- VanTassel-Baska’s concept and process-product models
- Renzulli’s Scales for Rating the Behavioral Characteristics of Superior Students
- Feldhusen’s talent across all fields of interest
- differentiation based on readiness and learner profile
- cluster grouping
- Integrated Curriculum Model
- Problem-Based Learning and Hegelian Dialectic
Brief description of the model and/or its philosophy:
Regardless of age or content area, the core goal of this model is to move the student from novice toward practitioner. This model
can be implemented as a wide-reaching program, or as a smaller curriculum. Through three distinct stages, this model begins
with coving basic levels of knowledge, continues with the application of that knowledge and skills, and finishes
with students solving real-life problems. Because of its simple steps, this model is not difficult to implement, needing only a
variety of resources for students to interact with at the second and third stages. This model is both flexible and adaptable to
many different settings and is low cost.
Key elements,components, and/or non-negotiables:
Stage 1: students learn initial information and basic content knowledge through instruction and activities.
Stage 2: students collaborate in small groups and interact with content-based problems by applying creative and critical thinking.
Stage 3: students work independently with real-life problems; students apply knowledge and skills to create quality products.
Intended applications for the model (enrichment, pull-out, whole school,classroom, etc.):
1. enrichment courses
2. individual classrooms
3. whole school model
4. classroom curriculum
Intended Audiences:
Elementary, Middle, and High Schools (and classrooms)
Relative strength and weaknesses:
Strengths:
- ascending levels of intellectual demand
- appropriately challenges all students
- addresses content, process and product
- not difficult to implement
- low cost
Weaknesses:
- calls for highly qualified teachers (assumes professional development)
- needs lots of resources- not widely implemented outside Indiana
Resources required:
- A large amount of resources are necessary.
- (primary sources, quality texts, internet, access tocomputers, etc.)
John Feldhusen, Kathryn Linden, and Russell Ames
Theoretical Underpinnings:
- VanTassel-Baska’s concept and process-product models
- Renzulli’s Scales for Rating the Behavioral Characteristics of Superior Students
- Feldhusen’s talent across all fields of interest
- differentiation based on readiness and learner profile
- cluster grouping
- Integrated Curriculum Model
- Problem-Based Learning and Hegelian Dialectic
Brief description of the model and/or its philosophy:
Regardless of age or content area, the core goal of this model is to move the student from novice toward practitioner. This model
can be implemented as a wide-reaching program, or as a smaller curriculum. Through three distinct stages, this model begins
with coving basic levels of knowledge, continues with the application of that knowledge and skills, and finishes
with students solving real-life problems. Because of its simple steps, this model is not difficult to implement, needing only a
variety of resources for students to interact with at the second and third stages. This model is both flexible and adaptable to
many different settings and is low cost.
Key elements,components, and/or non-negotiables:
Stage 1: students learn initial information and basic content knowledge through instruction and activities.
Stage 2: students collaborate in small groups and interact with content-based problems by applying creative and critical thinking.
Stage 3: students work independently with real-life problems; students apply knowledge and skills to create quality products.
Intended applications for the model (enrichment, pull-out, whole school,classroom, etc.):
1. enrichment courses
2. individual classrooms
3. whole school model
4. classroom curriculum
Intended Audiences:
Elementary, Middle, and High Schools (and classrooms)
Relative strength and weaknesses:
Strengths:
- ascending levels of intellectual demand
- appropriately challenges all students
- addresses content, process and product
- not difficult to implement
- low cost
Weaknesses:
- calls for highly qualified teachers (assumes professional development)
- needs lots of resources- not widely implemented outside Indiana
Resources required:
- A large amount of resources are necessary.
- (primary sources, quality texts, internet, access tocomputers, etc.)