Inclusive education for EAL students

A whole-school approach should be taken when addressing the needs of EAL

students. This will require all staff members to work collaboratively to support EAL learners,
hence ensuring that support is consistent and unified (Department of Education, 2009). In
particular, an EAL program, where EAL students can gain additional support from specialist
teachers as they work to develop communicative competence, would undoubtedly benefit
learners (Department of Education, 2009). The Australian Institute for Teaching and School
Leadership [AITSL] standard 1.5 outlines that teachers must differentiate teaching to meet
the specific learning needs of students across the full range of abilities (AITSL, 2014);
therefore, it is important to recognise that although EAL students may receive individualised
instruction and support from specialist EAL teachers outside of the mainstream classroom, it
is still vital that skilful adjustments are still made in the mainstream classroom.
A number of models are commonly used to differentiate the curriculum for EAL
learners in mainstream classrooms. In particular, the Response to Instruction [RTI] model and
the Universal Design for Learning [UDL] model would be most suitable to guide planning for
differentiation. The UDL model, which is incorporated into the first tier of the RTI model
(Basham et al., 2010), recognises that the curriculum should be adapted to meet the unique
needs of students by providing them with multiple means of representation, action and
expression, engagement (Evans, 2015). The UDL model is implemented at a whole-class
level and therefore should be commended for its emphasis on differentiating the curriculum
to make it accessible for all students, not just a single group of learners who have been
identified as requiring additional support. Beyond this however, the RTI model can help
teachers to identify students who still require additional and more intensive support, even
after a UDL approach has been implemented, hence why these two models work best in
collaboration.
In some circumstances, peer-mediation between native English speaking students and
ESL students will be appropriate to implement (Pagliano & Gillies, 2015). Although
sometimes challenging, when managed appropriately (i.e. when behaviour expectations of
tutors are understood, and when tutors are clear about what and how they are to teach), peertutoring can facilitate access to the curriculum. In particular, the peer-tutoring approach
should be embraced for its ability to benefit [both] tutors and tutees academically and
socially (Pagliano & GIllies, 2015, p. 153).

Inclusive education for GAT students

Gagns Differentiated Model of Giftedness and Talent, adopted by the Victorian
Department of Education, highlights the differences between giftedness and talent. It
associates giftedness with natural abilities, and talent with those abilities that are acquired and
emerge from giftedness. Although ACARA (2015) discusses a number of alternative models
to Gagns, some of which overlap with his ideas (i.e. Tannembuams model of giftedness; &
Renzullis Three-Ting model), Gagns model is favourable due to its emphasis on potential
rather than performance. Therefore, when teaching GAT students, it is imperative that
teachers accept their role in the talent development process (Merrotsy, 2015), and recognise
that they have the ability to exert positive or negative influence on the process of talent
development (Gagn, 2000, p. 2).
When planning for differentiation, teachers need to be aware of the negative
behaviours associated with GAT students that can provide insight into their needs. These
negative behaviours include, for example, stubbornness, uncooperativeness, cynics,
sloppiness and disorganisation, tendency to question authority, emotional frustration, absent
mindedness; and low interest in detail (Merrotsy, 2015, p. 238). Furthermore, teachers must
be aware of the emotional needs of students. In her article, Lovecky (1992) identifies five
common traits of GAT children that have social and emotional consequences for gifted
children. These traits include: divergent thinking ability, excitability, sensitivity,
perceptiveness and entelechy. As a result of these traits, which are often integral to a
students giftedness, students may have low self-efficacy, poor self-concept and/or poor selfesteem.
Although there are a number of ways teachers can ensure that the curriculum is
differentiated to meet the unique needs of GAT students, Makers model of curriculum
differentiation (Maker, 1982) should be commended for its ability to assist teachers to
comprehensively make modifications to numerous aspects of the curriculum. In particular, it
guides teachers to consider content modifications; process modifications; and learning
environment modifications (Morretsy, 2015). Using Makers differentiation model when
planning learning opportunities for GAT students, undoubtedly assists teachers to deliver
challenging, and stimulating learning experiences and opportunities that enable all students
to explore and build on their gifts and talents (MCEETYA, 2008, p. 7).

References
Ashman, A. (2015). Embracing inclusion. In A. Ashman (Ed), Education for inclusion and
diversity (5th ed.) (pp. 2-33). Melbourne, Victoria: Pearson Australia.
Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority [ACARA]. (2015). Student
diversity. Retrieved April 8, 2015, from
http://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/english/student-diversity
Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership. (2014). Australian professional
standards for teachers. Retrieved April 5, 2015, from
http://www.aitsl.edu.au/australian-professional-standards-for-teachers/standards/list
Basham, J., Israel, M., Graden, J., Poth, R., & Winston, M. (2010). A comprehensive
approachto RTI: embedding universal design for learning and technology. Learning
Disability Quarterly, 33, pp. 243-255.
Evans, D. (2015). . Curriculum adaptations. In A. Ashman (Ed), Education for inclusion and
diversity (5th ed.) (pp. 103-130). Melbourne, Victoria: Pearson Australia.
Department of Education. (2009). Policies: whole school approach. Retrieved April 8, 2015,
from http://det.wa.edu.au/policies/detcms/policy-planning-andaccountability/policies-framework/definitions/whole-schoolapproach.en?oid=com.arsdigita.cms.contenttypes.GlossaryItem-id-4565247
Department of Education and Training. (2015). The EAL handbook: advice to schools on
programs for supporting students learning English as an additional language.
Retrieved April 25, 2015, from
http://www.education.vic.gov.au/Documents/school/teachers/teachingresources/divers
ity/eal/eslhandbook.pdf
Gagn, F. (2000). A differentiated model of giftedness and talent. Retrieved April 8, 2015,
from
http://www.curriculumsupport.education.nsw.gov.au/policies/gats/assets/pdf/poldmgt
2000rtcl.pdf
Lovecky, D. (1992). Exploring social and emotional aspects of giftedness in children. Roeper
Review, 15(1), pp. 18-25.
Maker, C. (1982). Curriculum development for the gifted. Rockville, USA: Aspen.
Merrotsy, P. (2015). Supporting outstanding leaners. In A. Ashman (Ed), Education for
inclusion and diversity (5th ed.) (pp. 233-264). Melbourne, Victoria: Pearson
Australia.

Ministerial Council for Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs. (2008).
Melbourne declaration on educational goals for young Australians. Retrieved April 1,
2015 from
http://www.curriculum.edu.au/verve/_resources/national_declaration_on_the_educati
onal_goals_for_young_australians.pdf
Munro, J. (2015). Resourcing inclusion. In A. Ashman (Ed), Education for inclusion and
diversity (5th ed.) (pp. 64-100). Melbourne, Victoria: Pearson Australia.
Pagliano, P., & Gillies, M. (2015). Inclusive practices. In A. Ashman (Ed), Education for
inclusion and diversity (5th ed.) (pp. 131-161). Melbourne, Victoria: Pearson
Australia.
Tasmanian Department of Education. (2013). Guidelines for individual education planning:
students with disability. Retrieved April 6, 2015, from
https://www.education.tas.gov.au/documentcentre/Documents/Guidelines-forIndividual-Education-Planning-Students-with-Disability.pdf
United Nations Educational, Scientific & Cultural Organization. (1960). Convention against
discrimination in education. Retrieved April 5, 2015, from
http://www.unesco.org/education/pdf/DISCRI_E.PDF
Victorian Department of Education and Early Childhood. (2011). Equal Opportunity
Guidelines for Victorian Government Schools. Retrieved April 6, 2015, from
http://www.education.vic.gov.au/hrweb/Documents/EO_Guidelines.pdf
Victorian Equal Opportunity and Human Rights Commission. (2012). Held back: the
experiences of students with disabilities in Victorian schools. Retrieved April 1, 2015,
from www.humanrightscommission.vic.gov.au/