CONCLUSIONS

The goals of the Illinois Plan for local programs have been expressed as follows:

Programs should be designated not only for learning but they should also be designed for thinking. Simple recall and memory work should be strongly supplemented by other types of mental operations such as those suggested by J. P. Guilford in his paper, The Three Faces of the Intellect. E. Paul Torrance lists critical, creative, constructive, independent, logical, liberal, and analytical, as types of thinking. A clear recognition on the part of the instructional staff concerning the thought processes involved in the learning situation is necessary if the chances are to be in favor of changes beyond that of materials and administration. Education should place emphasis on learning how to think instead of what to think, with evaluation methods reflecting the same philosophy.

Development of other characteristics, unrelated to academic achievement, which might be supported include:

Leadership potential
Sensitivity to needs of others
Divergent thinking ability
Interest in creative activities
High goal orientation
Kinesthetic abilities
Foresight

Unusual vocabulary develop-
ment

Abstract thinking

Insight into problems

Reasoning

Problem solving

Humor and wit

Range of interest and
curiosity

4

It is clear that where developed gifted programs exist, many state goals have been realized. Higher thinking processes are emphasized ; students are enthusiastic; there is opportunity for independence and tolerance for divergence. Especially when compared to heterogeneously grouped classes or classes of average students, the gifted classes are far superior. They have clearer cognitive focus, more student discussion, less teacher domination and less test and grade stress. In general, the gifted classes appear more productive, stimulating, and healthier.

Finally, analysis suggests that the thought processes, classroom climate, and classroom focus are not independent of one another. Application, Synthesis, Enthusiasm, and Independence occur together, while emphasis on Memory is connected with test and grade stress. One might assume that certain classroom activities produce one pattern while a very different set underlies the other to produce two distinctly different types-one active, one passive; one good, one bad.

It would appear that the goals of the Illinois Plan are being successfully pursued in both intent and consequences in many classrooms. This suggests the keen foresight of Illinois Legislators and Educators in their attempt to find a solution to a problem which only now has been recognized on a national level.

Colton, David L. Policies of the Illinois Plan for Program Development for Gifted Children. Washington University, St. Louis, 1968.

72-502 0-72-19

In July, 1970, the National Goals Research Staff presented to President Nixon and to the American People its report Toward Balanced Growth: Quantity with Quality. In the chapter on education they discuss educational change and the new role of the school:

If the child in today's school is going to be expected to operate effectively in his society when he is an adult, he will have to have cognitive skills to deal with the flood of ideas and facts which he will face. Whereas once the task of the schools was to transmit information, the job today is more to give the student the cognitive skills to handle the information coming from many sources. As early as 1959 the need for cognitive skills was affirmed by Illinois policy makers when the School Problems Commission first held hearings on the lack of adequate programs for the gifted. At that time the value of synthesis and evaluation was recognized and provisions for emphasizing their use in the classroom were built into the Illinois Plan. Again Illinois anticipated the findings of the national report which

states:

... the proportion of information that children receive from mass media is so large and the range of values to which they are exposed so diverse that it may well be that the schools should be devoted to giving them the cognitive skills for integrating information, and a framework within which to sort out the diverse values to which they are exposed.

Now, after eleven years, Illinois seeks to advance the cause of quality improvement in education by publishing the results of a full-scale evaluation of its gifted program, the findings of which should be of value not only to the smallest school district but also to the federal government of the United States.

V. THE DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM

OPERATION OF THE DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM

NUMBER, LOCATION, AND SELECTION OF CENTERS

The Illinois Gifted Program operates a system of approximately 23 centers receiving an average of $43,478 each from state funds. In all cases the centers are situated within school districts. They are located in different areas of the state, although many of them are in the Chicago Metropolitan area. Ideally, they were to be situated in such a way as to enable anyone in the state to visit one without traveling more than a hundred miles.

PURPOSE AND RATIONALE

The major purpose of the demonstration centers as cited in the Illinois Plan is to provide "convincing and readily accessible demonstrations in operating situations of a number of approaches to the education of gifted children." Ideally, the demonstration centers illustrate innovative techniques in education which visitors observe and then import into their own schools. The original rationale of the centers assumed three goals for the centers to accomplish with each day's visitors:

1. Awareness.-To help teachers and administrators become aware of innovations and ways to improve the quality of their program.

2. Acceptance. To help visitors decide whether the change or innovation is acceptable for him personally, to his district, and to his community.

3. Adoption. To help schools adapt or adopt particular programs or procedures in which they are interested.

The success of the demonstration process in terms of these goals might be represented by figure 5. Another, perhaps more accurate, diagram of how the demonstration process should theoretically work is shown below.

Figure 5. Model for Demonstration Center Success

IF THE VISITOR IS AWARE OF THE CENTER'S ACTIVITIES,

THE CENTER HAS ACCOMPLISHED ITS GOAL OF DISSEMINATION.

IF THE VISITOR ACCEPTS THE CENTER'S ACTIVITIES,

THE CENTER HAS ACCOMPLISHED ITS GOAL OF LEGITIMIZATION.

IF THE VISITOR IMPLEMENTS THE CENTER'S ACTIVITIES,
THE CENTER HAS ACCOMPLISHED ITS GOAL OF EXPORTATION.

Each demonstration center prepares a brochure explaining the types of programs and methods it is demonstrating and at what grade levels. These are then sent to schools and colleges throughout the state.

In order to visit a center, the visitor (usually a public school administrator or teacher) submits a formal request that the center acknowledges by specifying the day for the visit. After an orientation at the center, the visitor observes demonstration classes. Often he also has the opportunity to talk with the teachers and students. After the visit, the demonstration director may offer to help the visitor with his own gifted program. The administrator or teacher may be reimbursed for his expenses from funds that his district receives from the Illinois Gifted Program. The average cost of processing each visitor is $144.

WHO VISITS THE DEMONSTRATION CENTER AND WHY

The majority of visitors are school personnel, teachers and administrators, although there are other visiting groups of significant size. These visitors are to a certain extent self-selected and come to a center with the idea that they want to make a change in their classes or schools. Curiosity-to see what other teachers are doing is a primary motivating factor. (Centers are at least providing educational experience and inter-changes that might otherwise be nonexistent.) Both teachers and administrators are interested in new instructional materials, facilities, and equipment, while administrators are also very interested in finding new workable arrangements in teacher scheduling, team teaching, and planning. Administrators are also quite interested in learning about in-service training for their teachers.

THE DEMONSTRATION PROCESS: EVALUATION

EFFECTIVENESS OF STATE POLICIES

Over a period of time, State policies for the demonstration centers have changed, both to a greater degree than have the policies for other section of the Illinois Plan, and with far greater ramifications. Demonstration policies also have been more open to misinterpretation and misapplication than have the policies governing reimbursement and special training for gifted personnel. Therefore, in order to evaluate the demonstration process, it is necessary first to understand the changes and effects of relevant State policies.