The Schoolwide Enrichment Models an Overview of the Theoretical and Organizational Rationale
Authors: Renzulli Joseph S. 
Published: January 2012

We are pleased to have this opportunity to share with the international community of gifted educators the theoretical, research, and practical aspects of our work. Since the Schoolwide Enrichment Model (SEM) has been described in great detail in various books and other publications, this introductory article will present an overview of the major theoretical and organizational issues underlying the model Other articles in this special issue will deal with a summary of research and examples of how the model is used at various school levels and in different countries. Interested readers are also invited to visit the SEM folder at our web site [ www.gifted.uconn.edu ] for additional resources that can be used to aid in the implementation of the model I have also listed at the conclusion of this article a number of key resources for interested readers. There are two main considerations that educators should think about when exploring the use of this or any other model for use in their schools: the underlying theoretical (or pedagogical) models and organizational (or administrative) models around which service delivery is arranged. When most people are asked what “model” is being used to guide their special program, they almost always answer in terms of organizational models. Although we believe that both types of models play important roles in guiding program quality and effectiveness, theoretical models should be the first and most essential consideration in program planning. Theoretical or pedagogical models consist of the principles and derivative experiences and activities that are designed to accomplish particular kinds of learning. Theoretical models usually draw upon the work of leading philosophers, researchers, and learning theorists, and they are located somewhere on a continuum of learning theories ranging from highly didactic or prescriptive learning on one end to highly inductive or investigative learning on the other. The work of Pavlov, Thorndike, and Skinner are examples of didactic theories, whereas inductive or constructivist theories are represented by writers such as Dewey, Pestalozzi, Piaget, and Montessori Theoretical models should be the first and most important consideration when examining the quality of services for gifted students. Organizational models are concerned with how we group students, move them around between and among various service delivery options, plan schedules and events, allocate time blocks, assign teachers, and do other things that contribute to the efficient and effective use of student time and human and material resources. Examples in this category are pullout programs, full-time special classes, cluster grouping, after school programs, Saturday programs, grade skipping, advanced classes, college courses, special schools, and differentiation in the regular classroom. Organizational models are obviously important, but they do not tell us why, what, and how we present learning experiences within any of the organizational models mentioned above that are qualitatively different from the learning experiences that take place in regular education 2 2 Covering more material faster is a quantitative rather than qualitative difference in learning. Rapid coverage of large amounts of material certainly has value and should be an option in special programs, but the pedagogy and the role of the learner generally are the same as in regular education. . A special class for gifted students could, for example, be very didactic or prescriptive in its approach to learning, or it could be an environment in which students engage in self-selected investigative activities using the authentic methods of practicing professionals, even if their methodology is at a more junior level than adult scientists, writers, or other professionals. The most important consideration is that students in the special class are thinking, feeling, and doing what real world investigators and problem solvers do, as opposed to being consumers of knowledge who are mainly involved in accumulating information and practicing thinking skills, albeit at a faster level. The same theoretical distinctions can be made for all of the types of organizational models listed above. It's not when or where we do it, or even with whom we do it. The key issue is how we do it!