38 SUMMER 2004 • VOL. 27, NO. 3

During his senior year in highschool, Carl (not the student’s re a lname), “an uncommonly serious,

a t t e n t i ve, and cooperative student” (Ro dHarkins, personal communication,December 10, 1997), undertook an inde-pendent study project reflecting his capac-ity for learning and his interests. Here s e a rched the musical influences and styleof Johan Sebastian Bach and Ba c h’s com-position, Toccata and Fugue in D Mi n o r.Under the musical mentorship of Dr.Ha rkins, Carl was given the re q u i re dcourse materials for a freshman music the-o ry course at a local university and com-pleted the 5-week course independently in1 week after school. Carl worked with hismentor studying, analyzing, and inve s t i-gating advanced concepts in orc h e s t r a t i o nand arranging. Carl applied these con-cepts, and, following “the long, ard u o u shours invested in making scoring deci-s i o n s” he wrote a musical score by hand,c reating “an ensemble where instru m e n t a lvoices, limited in number and range, we reu s e d” (Rod Ha rkins, personal communi-cation, December 10, 1997). Subse-quently, Carl recorded his originalcomposition with the assistance of collegestudents in a sextet playing “a new andlargely successful musical setting of Ba c h’sorgan work for Tuba and Eu p h o n i u mEn s e m b l e” (Rod Ha rkins, personal com-munication, December 10, 1997). There c o rding of this arrangement was playe dduring Carl’s presentation to a panel ofjudges during a presentation at the end ofhis senior ye a r. Carl, in re s e a rching a self-selected topic, working with a mentork n owledgeable in his selected area of study,creating a product that reflected his

re s e a rch, and presenting his re s e a rch andp roduct to a panel of judges, had com-pleted a senior pro j e c t .

The idea of the senior project wasc o n c e i ved in Me d f o rd, OR, in 1986 as acurricular experience designed to measurea 12th grader’s knowledge of core con-cepts learned throughout his or her ye a r sin school (Chadwell, 1991, 1992). Themodel has four central components: are s e a rch paper on a student-selected andt e a c h e r - a p p roved topic, the deve l o p m e n tof a related pro d u c t / p roject, a port f o l i odocumenting the pro j e c t’s deve l o p m e n t ,and a presentation before a re v i ew panel ofcommunity members (Egelson, Ha r m a n ,& Bond, 2002; Si l l s - Briegel, Fisk, &Du n l o p, 1996). Specific rubrics are usedto assess each component (see Ap p e n d i xA, B, and C; Os h e r, Summers, & Andre n ,1988; Taaffe, 2002). Students are guidedt h rough the process by a mentor andmaintain documentation of their pro g re s swith a portfolio (see Appendix D).

The senior project, also known asGraduation by Exhibition (Ba r n e t t ,2000; Si l l s - Briegel, Fisk, & Du n l o p,1997), Exit Exhibition (Cu s h m a n ,1990), Senior Exit Essay Project (Barrett& Ludden, 1997), Rite of Pa s s a g eExperience (Cushman, 1990), Se n i o rExit Project (Troutman & Pawlowski,1997) and Graduation Project (Houston& Tharin, 1997), is a practice gainingnational attention in schools throughoutthe United States, with some schoolsrequiring completion of the assessmentas a graduation stipulation (Bond,Egelson, & Harman, 2002; Eg e l s o n ,Robertson, & Smith, 2002; Summers,1989). In the early 1990s, more than 60

schools nationwide had adopted seniorprojects as steps toward better preparingstudents for the future and raisingschool standards.

Paula Egelson, head of the SeniorProject Program at the South EasternRegional Vision for Ed u c a t i o n(SERVE), a federally funded researchlaboratory located in Greensboro, NC,has conducted research on the impact ofsenior projects on participating schools.In the spring of 1998 and spring of1999, SERVE collected data throughsurveys about the impact of senior pro-jects from “approximately 1,800 stu-dents, 180 parents, 170 facultymembers, and 16 senior project coordi-n a t o r s” (Egelson, Harman, & Bond,2002, p. 3). Results of this 1999 studyindicate that “75% of students agreedand/or strongly agreed that their writ-ing, research, speaking, planning, andtime-management skills had improvedas a result of the senior project participa-tion” (Egelson, Harman, & Bond, p. 3).Furthermore, parents’ and senior projectcoordinators’ “degree of agreement wase ven higher—over 80%” (Eg e l s o n ,Harman, & Bond, p. 3).

In 1999–2000, a field study of eightNorth Carolina schools was conducted;four senior project schools and four con-trol schools were selected. Researchersidentified four “treatment schools thathad institutionalized Senior Projects” forat least 4 years, with all seniors partici-pating in senior projects and with “allthe program components (re s e a rc hpaper, product, portfolio, presentation)”in place (Egelson, Harman, & Bond,2002, p. 4). Control schools we re

The Senior Projectand Gby Elizabeth Shaunessy

The Senior Projectand Gby Elizabeth Shaunessy

GIFTED CHILD TODAY 39

selected to match each senior projectschool based on staff size, size of studentbody, percent of students in the federalfree lunch program, percent of minoritystudents enrolled at the school, overallperformance in the state testing pro-gram, and urbanicity. A variety of mea-sures, including focus groups, writingassessments, achievement test score s ,and surveys, were used to examine possi-ble differences between senior projectand control schools.

Results of the study indicated sev-eral statistically significant (p < .05)“association[s] between the type ofschool (senior project schools vs. controlschools)” and “whether students’ percep-tions of specific skills were learned andreinforced” in the students’ high schoolclasses (Egelson, Harman, & Bond,2002, p. 16-17). Students whoresponded to surveys about senior pro-ject sites indicated a more positive asso-ciation with the following specific skillsthan did their counterparts at the con-trol schools: writing a research paper,preparing and presenting a speech, car-rying out a plan, and conducting inter-v i ews. Fu rt h e r m o re, similar findingsindicated that students at senior projectschools perceived the following skills toh a ve been re i n f o rced more in theirclasses than the students at contro lschools: preparing and presenting aspeech, conducting research, and locat-ing appropriate references. Additionally,teachers at senior project schools indi-cated using “rubrics and extended pro-jects to assess student performance moreoften than control teachers” (Egelson,Harman, & Bond, p. 20).

The senior project is re c o g n i zed as aviable educational program at a timewhen our nation’s education system isbeing questioned and when “a l t e r n a t i ve sto traditional senior ye a r” are being pro-posed (The National Commission, 2001,p. 5). The National Commission on theHigh School Senior Year stated that the“p r i m a ry goal of high schools should begraduating students who are ready (andeager) to learn more, capable of thinkingc r i t i c a l l y, and comfortable with the ambi-guities of the problem-solving pro c e s s”( p p. 9–11). Un f o rt u n a t e l y, follow i n ge x t e n s i ve re s e a rch and focus group meet-ings, the commission determined thathigh school seniors are not pre p a red toenter college or the work world.Fu rt h e r m o re, they noted that the senioryear should “broaden experiences toinclude service or demanding work - b a s e dlearning, or culminate earlier classro o mexperience in a senior pro j e c t” (p. 28).

The commission made re f e rences tothe positive impact of senior pro j e c t s ,which are re c o g n i zed as a challenginga l t e r n a t i ve that “can help connect stu-dents to their futures as citizens, employ-ees, and employers, and lifelong learners”(The National Commission, 2001, p.32). The value of the model is that itre q u i res “all seniors to showcase . . . [anddemonstrate] their capabilities forre s e a rch, cre a t i ve thinking, rigoro u sanalysis, and clear written and oral com-m u n i c a t i o n” (The National Commission,p. 33). Mo re ove r, of the seven nationalp rograms recommended as models fori m p roved achievement, three we re seniorp roject sites. Si m i l a r l y, among the eightnationally re n owned programs that pro-

vided education alternatives, the commis-sion highlighted eight, three of whichwe re re c o g n i zed for their senior pro j e c tre q u i rements.

The senior project model presents adefensible, credible educational modelthat incorporates many of the elementsof exemplary models in gifted education.Ad vocates of appropriate curricularpractices for the gifted will find similari-ties between the senior projects andthese models and strategies: theEnrichment Triad Model (Re n z u l l i ,1999), service learning (Lewis, 1991),independent study (Johnsen, 2001), theAutonomous Learner Model (Be t t s ,1985; Betts & Ne i h a rt, 1986), theCre a t i ve Problem Solving Mo d e l( Parnes, 1977), the Se l f - Di re c t e dLearner Model (Treffinger, 1975), men-torship strategies (Milam, 2001), andp roduct development (Karnes &Stephens, 2000). A model that caninclude all students and allow for differ-entiation is highly desirable; the seniorproject is one such paradigm.

The Research Paper

The first stage of the senior projecti n vo l ves the student identifying andselecting an area of interest that stretchesthe student in his or her learning. Whilethe student may have some knowledgeof the selected field, the research shouldallow the student to expand beyond hisor her current knowledge base in orderto continue to grow or stre t c h .Advocates of gifted education generallysupport this type of learning, whichencourages students to grow in self-

td Gifted Education

td Gifted Education

40 SUMMER 2004 • VOL. 27, NO. 3

selected areas of interest (Maker &Nielson, 1995). The Au t o n o m o u sLearner Model includes “Investigations”(Betts & Neihart, 1986), which providestudents the opportunity to conductmini-research projects on self-selectedtopics, a component of Dimension 3 ofthe model, “Enrichment Activities.” “In-Depth Study,” in Dimension 5, allowsthe student the opportunity to exploretopics independently.

Both investigations and in-depthstudy require students to develop con-tracts that document their learning plan,including a detailed organizational planof why the student will undertake thisarea of study, how he or she will acquireinformation, what resources will be uti-lized, a timeline, and how the researchwill culminate in a final presentation( Betts & Ne i h a rt, 1986, p. 176).Likewise, the senior project incorporatesa learning agreement plan, includingwritten statements from students abouttheir intended area of study, why theyhave selected it, how it stretches theirlearning, how they will relate this totheir product or project, who their men-tor will be, their intended project time-line, and the re s o u rces that will beneeded to execute the plan (Se eAppendix E, Appendix F).

The Enrichment Triad Model (Re i s& Renzulli, 1985; Renzulli & Re i s ,1985) provides students the opport u-nity to conduct independent re s e a rch inType III Enrichment. As in the seniorp roject model, Type III activities allowfor the formulation of a problem by thestudent and the methods by which thestudent will address this pro b l e m .Renzulli and Reis advocate Type IIIactivities because they challenge stu-dents to “investigate activities and art i s-tic productions in which the learnerassumes the role of a firsthand inquire r ;the student thinking, feeling, and actinglike a practicing pro f e s s i o n a l” (p. 395).Mentors, too, may be part of the learn-

ing process for the student in theEnrichment Triad Model. The modelalso fosters the development of higherl e vel thinking skills inherent in pro b l e msolving, synthesizing information, andapplying new knowledge to the solutionof a real-world problem. Si m i l a r l y, thesenior project model is re c o g n i zed forp roviding students the opportunity tou t i l i ze critical thinking skills in thedesign, execution, and evaluation oftheir re s e a rch, product, and pre s e n t a-tion. Upon reflection of the En r i c h m e n tTriad Model, Renzulli (1999) art i c u-lated how this model, and others similarto it (such as senior projects), allows stu-dents to construct know l e d g e .Re c o g n i zed as an inductive model ofi n q u i ry, where students acquire newinformation in situations most like re a l -world problem solving, the En r i c h m e n tTriad Model “re p resents the kinds oflearning that take place outside of for-mal learning or traditional classro o msituations but that can be integratedinto school learning with the pro p e re n g i n e e r i n g” (Renzulli, p. 19).L i k ewise, senior projects, through thefacilitation of the educator, offer stu-dents the opportunity to identify pur-poseful lines of inquiry and to appro a c hthem with the appropriate level of diffi-culty for their abilities as studentsd e velop learning plans, desired out-comes, and embark on experiences oftheir own choice (see Appendix G).

Often, the areas of senior pro j e c tre s e a rch invo l ve careers that students arei n t e rested in pursuing following gradua-tion, allowing them the opportunity tore s e a rch and work with mentors in thesefields (see Appendix H). This learningo p p o rtunity frequently results in the stu-dents deciding to continue to pursue thefield in college, but many also decide thatthey no longer desire to study the fieldonce they learn more about the skillsneeded or when they see firsthand theday-to-day routine of a pro f e s s i o n a l ,

which may not have matched their ideal-i zed vision of the occupation. Again, theAutonomous Learner Model is similar inthat career invo l vement is explored inDimension 2 when students considerquestions about their potential care e r s ,i n vestigate possible occupations, andw o rk alongside a professional mentor inthat field (Betts, 1985). Fre q u e n t l y, thementors are from the local community ors u r rounding areas, thus bringing outsidee x p e rts into the lives of students and cre-ating a learning community that extendsb e yond the confines of the school walls.

Management, organizational, andre s e a rch skills—components of thesenior project model—are central con-cepts in the Se l f - Di rected LearningModel (Treffinger, 1975; Treffinger &Barton, 1988), which is also designedfor use with learners of various abilitylevels. In this model, students pursueindependent studies through the facilita-tion or guidance of their instructor in afashion similar to that of the senior pro-ject. In both models, the teacher andstudent share assessment responsibilities.Treffinger outlined a continuum ofassessment, whereby the student gradu-ally learns to assume the primary role indefining learning objectives and identi-fying appropriate means of assessing hisor her work. Treffinger suggested that,early in the student’s deve l o p m e n ttoward self-directed learning, the teachermaintains a role in evaluating the stu-dent by “clarifying the nature of theobjectives, and the kinds of evidencethat will be accepted in meeting them,and communicates that information tothe student at the beginning of instruc-tion” (p. 57). As students become moreindependent in the learning pro c e s s ,their roles in assessment are “extended,so that pupils take part in conferenceswith their teachers” and “develop andapply criteria for evaluation of their ownw o rk . . . in cooperation with theteacher” (Treffinger, p. 57). Finally, in

The Senior Project

GIFTED CHILD TODAY 41

the last phase of the model, the learneroperates independently to identify“goals, objectives, and instructional pro-cedures, and thus should be in an excel-lent position for assessing the evidencethat the objectives have been attained”(Tre f f i n g e r, p.57). The Se l f - Di re c t e dLearner Model and senior projects pro-vide specific guidelines to assist studentsin monitoring their progression as theyw o rk through their project (seeAppendix E and F).

In both senior projects and the Se l f -Di rected Learner Model, the instru c t o r’srole is critical. Rather than a classro o mclimate driven by teacher-pre s c r i b e dgoals, objectives, assessments, and eva l u-ations, senior projects and self-dire c t e dlearning support a more student-cen-t e red approach to learning. The pupilp a rticipates with the teacher to becomem o re independent in guiding his or herlearning and evaluation. A learning con-tract may also be executed by the studentto establish the purpose of the study, theactivities, timelines, and how the pro j e c twill be assessed. As with the Au t o n o m o u sLearner Model and the En r i c h m e n tTriad Mo d e l, senior projects and theSe l f - Di rected Learner Model encouragestudents to become responsible fordesigning their educational outcomes.

The concept of independent studyis recommended in teaching the gifted“as a means for differentiating and indi-vidualizing instruction” (Johnsen, 2001,p. 495). In the independent studymodel, students are encouraged toexamine real-life problems because oftheir authenticity. Student learning isguided and monitored by the teacher, isplanned, and “is similar to [a process]used by a practicing pro f e s s i o n a l”through “[focusing] on life-like prob-lems that go beyond the regular class set-ting” (Johnsen, p. 496).

In senior projects, as with the Self-Directed Learner Model, the teacher iscritical to the success of the independent

s t u d y. The instructor must re m a i nactively engaged in monitoring studentprogress and will need to evaluate eachlearner’s abilities continually, providingneeded instructional support to scaffoldlearning. Educators may need to provideinstruction in research skills, assist thestudent in locating resources, or both.The facilitator should consistentlyremain flexible and allow student inter-est to develop at its own pace, modelindependent study habits, recognize stu-dent improvement, and meet with thelearner and his or her parents regularlyto discuss pro g ress (Johnsen, 2001).While senior projects are intended top rovide students the opportunity tos h ow the skills they have learnedthroughout their K–12 education expe-riences, educators may still need to pro-vide the support outlined by Johnsen,giving students mini-lessons to assistthem with their continued growth.

Jo h n s e n’s (2001) model includes sev-eral steps similar to those in the seniorp roject: student-selection of a topic ofs t u d y, the development of an organiza-tional plan to help students map out theirp roblem, developing purposeful ques-tions that will “lead to quality indepen-dent studies” (p. 508), choosing a methodof study, gathering information, deve l o p-ing a product, sharing the informationgleaned from the study with an authenticaudience, and evaluating the study.

Developing Projects

The product or project phase ofsenior projects re q u i res students to linktheir re s e a rch to a tangible cre a t i o n ,establish a solution for a problem cited intheir re s e a rch, or participate in a serv i c e -learning project. The senior pro j e c tmodel incorporates the product deve l o p-ment in order to “bring together thecomplex cognitive, affective, and cogni-t i ve skills students learn to apply to plan-ning, organization, re s o u rce use, and time

management in a more naturalistic man-n e r” (Maker & Neilson, 1995, p. 174).

Creativity is a central component inthe Creative Problem Solving (CPS)Model (Isaksen & Parnes, 1985; Pa r n e s ,1977; Parnes, No l l e r, & Biondi, 1977),emphasizing the importance of generatinga multitude of possible solutions for ap roblem prior to executing a solution. Thephilosophy of CPS—idea generation,d e velopment, and problem solving—iscritical to the success of all students,including those invo l ved in senior pro j e c t s .

As with other skills necessary forsuccessful completion of the senior pro-ject, students demonstrate proficiency inskills learned throughout their years inschool, including the ability to solvep roblems. The senior project modelallows students to illustrate skill masteryin their development of cre a t i v i t ythrough the steps that parallel the CPSmodel. In CPS and senior projects, stu-dents grow through identifying issues orproblematic situations and developing alearning plan based on inve s t i g a t i n gthese concerns. In CPS, students listobjectives, goals, and purposes and gen-erate evaluation criteria. Likewise, insenior projects, students plan how theywill undertake their study and develop astrategy for learning. Both CPS andsenior projects invo l ve finding datathrough the collection of informationrelated to the objectives and exploringthe facts. CPS helps students developdecision-making skills about how totackle their problems and examine theissues from various perspectives.

Products are critical steps in thelearning process, and they provide “tan-gible evidence of what has been learnedt h rough study and inve s t i g a t i o n”(Karnes & Stephens, 2000, p. 1).Products are recommended assessmenttools, providing the learner with greaterindividuality and creativity in decidinghow he or she will exhibit the knowledgegleaned from re s e a rch. Fu rt h e r m o re ,

42 SUMMER 2004 • VOL. 27, NO. 3

product development allows students toshowcase and apply their knowledge in aformat that “goes way beyond [paper-and-pencil tests] and combines muchmore, such as advanced content, processskills, and organizational aspects”(Karnes & Stephens, p. 3; see AppendixI). Senior projects allow students theopportunity to create a product or par-ticipate in a service-learning project.

The student’s level of engagement in as e rvice-learning project is also a criticalconsideration for the student, the teacher,and the mentor. Three levels of engage-ment, or degrees of service, have beena rticulated by Te r ry and Bohnenberger(1999). In the lowest level of invo l ve m e n t ,Community Se rvice, students part i c i p a t ein service activities by “tutoring, work i n gin a nursing home, shelving books at alocal library and generally becoming moreaware of the community,” with lessemphasis on learning than the other leve l s(Terry, 200, p.4). In CommunityExploration, students participate in thecommunity through internships or othercommunity ve n t u res where “informationf rom the real world is shared, understood,and explored at a more authentic level thanreading from a textbook” (Te r ry, p. 5).While Community Exploration empha-s i zes learning, it is less emphatic about“d i rect service to community” (Te r ry, p. 5).Community Action, howe ve r, invo l ve sstudents in authentic decision making andp roblem solving. Students can make a“p o s i t i ve impact on their community,which empowers them to make a differ-ence in the real world” (Te r ry, p. 5).Students are engaged in service and learn-ing at a high degree in this stage.Educators, mentors, and parents shouldencourage gifted students participating ins e rvice learning projects, senior projects, orother similar curricular programs to strivefor an appropriately challenging degree ofs e rvice engagement (see Appendix J).

The project component of seniorp rojects allows students to achieve the

same benefits that Lewis (1991) outlined,with the goal of helping students achieveother skills while working tow a rd re s o l v-ing a community need. Students re c o g-n i ze a problem in the community, cre a t ea service-learning plan to address thischallenge, and execute the plan.Communication skills, time manage-ment, reflection, citize n s h i p, and self-e valuation—skills that are critical forsuccess in college and the work p l a c e — a reoften integral components of the pro j e c tcomponent. Lewis encouraged studentsto pursue service projects, or social actionp rojects, in order to solve real pro b l e m sfacing people, challenging students toreach out to their communities, whichwill lead them in “helping to design a bet-ter future” (p. 2). Lewis listed the per-sonal gains students may re c e i ve fro mcompleting social action projects, includ-ing taking charge of their personal life,i n c reasing self-confidence, showing theworld their work and their voice, anda s s e rting and enjoying their rights.

Re s e a rch on service-learning pro j e c t sindicates positive outcomes for studentspurposefully engaged in these meaningf u lactivities. Billig and Fiske (2000) docu-mented the power of serv i c e - l e a r n i n gp rograms through a re v i ew of re s e a rch ons e rvice learning from 1990 to 1999.Re s e a rch indicates an increase in commu-nication, a sense of educational compe-tence, and a personal and socialresponsibility in secondary students par-ticipating in quality service-learning pro-grams. Se rvice learning has positive l yaffected students’ ability to relate to cul-turally diverse groups, increased theircivic re s p o n s i b i l i t y, positively affecteda c h i e vement, spawned greater interest inc a reer exploration, and bolstered theteaching and learning environment ofschools and communities.

Senior projects also require studentsto select a mentor who is knowledgeablein their selected area of study.Mentorships have been described as

“exciting opportunities” for extended,in-depth learning with adults who can“offer expertise, experience, andresources that may be beyond the capa-bilities of the school setting” (Milam,2001, p. 523). Gifted students especiallycan benefit from relationships withmentors through the development ofadvanced skills and concepts, learninginformation about their topic of choiceoutside the confines of the classroom,and networking with specialists andother “influential people” (Milam, p.525). Mentors advise students aboutrealistic research and project choices,monitor and document the progress ofthe senior project phases, and provideinsight into the student’s overall effortand growth through a culminating state-ment in a letter to the senior projectcoordinator. Milam noted that the valueof mentorship programs has been welldocumented in the literature.

Milam (2001) and Mattson (1983)h a ve offered advice on seeking and select-ing mentors. As with any interaction thati n vo l ves students and the general public,educators and parents are cautioned tos c reen participants carefully and monitorthe relationship between the student andthe mentor. With the appropriate condi-tions, mentorships have been shown tobe beneficial learning opportunities forboth the gifted students and the mentors,c reating a vital link between the commu-nity and school (Beck, 1989; Be e c h e r,1995; Betts, 1985; Clasen & Clasen,1997; Cox, Daniel, & Boston, 1985;Kaufmann et al., 1986; Re i l l y, 1992;Torrance, 1984).

The Presentation

Senior projects culminate in the pre-sentation of the project by the student toa panel of evaluators. Students present aspeech about their paper and project anda n s wer questions posed by the judges.The evaluation panel is comprised of

The Senior Project

GIFTED CHILD TODAY 43

educators and community members withe x p e rtise in the student’s area of study.The value of communication skills, par-ticularly public speaking, is emphasize das students share information about theirp a p e r, their project or product, and theirreflections about the experience.

The value of an authentic audiencewith whom students may share theirp roducts is emphasized in theEnrichment Triad Model. Fu rt h e r m o re ,the importance of creativity in pro d u c td e velopment and the relationship of anauthentic audience in the development ofthe product has been noted by Re n z u l l iand Reis (1985), who wrote that “it is thissense of audience which helps give stu-dents a reason for wanting to improve thequality of their products and deve l o pe f f e c t i ve ways of communicating theirresults with interested others” (pp.413–414). In senior projects, the pre s e n-tation, or Senior Boards, is the finalphase, which allows students the oppor-tunity to ve r b a l i ze their learning in a for-mal assessment. Schools rarely prov i d estudents the opportunity to speak pub-licly about an area in which they arek n owledgeable, yet employers and collegefaculty often ask students to make suchp resentations on the job and in the class-room, re s p e c t i ve l y. Gifted students, too,need the opportunity to develop the pre-sentation skills necessary for success insenior projects and other life experiences.

Research indicates that gifted stu-dents need learning opportunities likethose incorporated in the senior projectin order to be intellectually challengedand to achieve gains in creative, produc-tive behaviors and in initiating their owninvestigations (Starko, 1986, as cited inRenzulli & Reis, 1994). The compo-nents of the senior project echo strate-gies outlined by prominent scholars ingifted education. Recognition of thismodel as a method of preparing all stu-dents for college, work, and life, (Wolk,2000), as well as its merits as a program

with national recognition, suggest thatsenior projects are a sound curricularpractice that challenges students acade-mically and may yield special benefitsnot found in other instructional prac-tices (Dunn, 2001; McDonald, 1993).For gifted students, senior projects offera variety of learning experiences thatcombine best practices in educatinghigh-ability learners.

Fu rther re s e a rch on senior pro j e c t sand gifted students is needed. Cu r re n tl i t e r a t u re documents outcomes for allstudents, but no such inquiries docu-ment the experiences of the gifted withthis model. Evidence of achieve m e n t ,satisfaction, and attitudes of the gifted,their parents, and their teachers is neededto establish the value of the senior pro j e c tas a meaningful learning opportunity forthe gifted. Analysis of case studies, sur-veys, and other qualitative and quantita-t i ve measures would aid educators inunderstanding the impact of senior pro-jects on gifted 12th-grade students.

References

Barnett, D. (2000). Learning how tolearn. Thrust for educational leader-ship, 29(4), 30–32.

Barrett, M., & Ludden, K. (1997, June).Creating effective senior project prod-ucts. Conference session presented atthe Senior Project In s t i t u t e ,Charlotte, NC.

Beck, L. (1989). Mentorships: Benefitsand effects on career development.Gifted Child Quarterly, 33, 22–28.

Beecher, M. (1995). Developing the giftsand talents of all students in the regu-lar classroom. Mansfield Center, CT:Creative Learning Press.

Betts, G. T. (1985). Autonomous learnermodel. Greely, CO: ALPS.

Betts, G. T., & Ne i h a rt, M. (1986).Implementing self-directed learningmodels for the gifted and talented.Gifted Child Qu a rt e rl y, 30, 174–177.

Billig, S. H., & Fiske, E.B. (2000). T h eimpacts of serv i c e - l e a rning on yo u t h ,schools and communities: Re s e a rch onK–12 school-based service-learning,1 9 9 0 – 1 9 9 9 . Re t r i e ved May 11, 2004,f rom http://www. l e a r n i n g i n d e e d . o r g /re s e a rc h / s l re s e a rc h / s l r s rc h s y. h t m l

Bond, S., Egelson, P., & Harman, S.(2002). A preliminary study of seniorproject programs in selected NorthCarolina high schools. In C. Casbon,K. De Me e s t e r, A. Hood, & D.Nalley (Eds.), The SERVE studies:Examining the implementation andthe impact of senior project (Contractn o. ED-010CO-0015, pp. 1.2–1 . 2 7 ). Gre e n s b o ro: Un i versity ofNo rth Carolina at Gre e n s b o ro ,School of Education.

Chadwell, D. R. (1991). Show what youk n ow. American School BoardJournal, 178(4), 34–35.

Chadwell, D. R. (1992). The senior pro-ject. Exe m p l a ry Practices inEducation, 1(4), 8–9.

Clasen, D. R., & Clasen, R. E. (1997).Mentoring: A time-honored optionfor education of the gifted and tal-ented. In N. Colangelo & G. A.Davis (Eds.), Handbook of giftededucation (2nd ed., pp. 218–229).Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Cox, J., Daniel, N., & Boston, B. O.(1985). Educating able learn e r s :Pro g rams and promising pra c t i c e s .Austin: University of Texas Press.

Cushman, K. (1990, Ma rc h ) .Performance and exhibitions: Thedemonstration of mastery. [El e c -t ronic version]. Ho race, 6( 3 ) .Re t r i e ved June 1, 2003, fro mw w w. e s s e n t i a l s c h o o l s . o r g / c s / c e s p r /view/ces_res/138

Dunn, K. (2001). The fourth-year itch.Teacher Magazine, 12(7), 12–14.

Egelson, P., Harman, S., & Bond, S.(2002, April). A preliminary study ofsenior project pro g rams in selectedsoutheastern high schools. Paper pre-

44 SUMMER 2004 • VOL. 27, NO. 3

sented at the annual meeting of theAmerican Educational Re s e a rc hAssociation, New Orleans. (ERICDocument Re p roduction Se rv i c eNo. ED466336)

Egelson, P., Ro b e rtson, C. G., & Smith, S.A. (2002). No rth Carolina seniorp roject survey results. In C. Casbon,K. De Me e s t e r, A. Hood, & D. Na l l e y( Eds.), T h ree SERVE studies: Ex a m -ining the implementation and theimpact of senior project (Contract no.ED-010CO-0015, pp. 2.1– 2.18).Gre e n s b o ro: Un i versity of No rt hC a rolina at Gre e n s b o ro, School ofEducation.

Houston, S., & Tharin, M. A. (1997,June). The graduation pro j e c t :Guidelines for implementation. Con-f e rence session presented at the Se n i o rProject Institute, Charlotte, NC.

Isaksen, S. G., & Parnes, S. J. (1985).Curriculum planning for cre a t i vethinking and problem solving. Jo u rn a lof Cre a t i ve Be h a v i o r, 19(1), 1–29.

Johnsen, S. K. (2001). Teaching giftedstudents through independentstudy. In F. A. Karnes & S. M. Bean(Eds.), Methods and materials forteaching the gifted (pp. 495–522).Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.

Karnes, F. A., & Stephens, K. R. (2000).The ultimate guide for student prod-uct development and eva l u a t i o n .Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.

Kaufmann, F. A., Harrel, G., Milam, C.,Wo o l ve rtson, N., & Mi l l e r, J.(1986). The nature, role, and influ-ence of mentors in the lives of giftedadults. Journal of Counseling andDevelopment, 64, 576–578.

Lewis, B. (1991). The kid’s guide to socialaction: How to solve the social prob-lems you choose—and turn creativethinking into positive action.Minneapolis: Free Spirit.

Mc Donald, J. P. (1993). Three picture sof an exhibition: Warm, cool, andh a rd. Phi Delta Kappan, 74, 480–85.

Maker, C. J., & Nielson, A. B. (1995).Teaching models in education of thegifted. Austin, TX: PRO-ED.

Mattson, B. D. (1983, March/April).Mentors for the gifted and talented:Whom to seek and where to look.Gifted Child Today, 10–11.

Milam, C. P. (2001). Extending learningt h rough mentorships. In F. A.Karnes & S. M. Bean (Ed s . ) ,Methods and materials for teachingthe gifted (pp. 523–551). Waco, TX:Prufrock Press.

The National Commission on the HighSchool Senior Year. (2001). Raisingour sights: No high school senior leftb e h i n d. Re t r i e ved June 4, 2002,f rom http://www. c o m m i s s i o n o n-t h e s e n i o rye a r. o r g / Re p o rt / F I N A L _PDF_REPORT.pdf

Osher, C., Summers, J., & Andren, P.(1988). Senior project seminar work-book. Medford, OR: Far West Edge.

Parnes, S. J. (1977). Guiding creativeaction. Gifted Child Quarterly, 21,460–476.

Parnes, S. J., Noller, R. B., & Biondi, A.M. (1977). Guide to creative action.New York: Scribner’s.

Re i l l y, J. M. (1992). Mentorship: Theessential guide for schools and business.Dayton: Ohio Ps ychology Pre s s .

Reis, S., & Renzulli, J. S. (1985,September). The secondary leve lEnrichment Tr i a d Model: Exc e l -lence without elitism. N A S S PBulletin, 69(482), 31–38.

Renzulli, J. S. (1999). What is this thingcalled giftedness, and how do wedevelop it? A twenty-five-year per-spective. Journal for the Education ofthe Gifted, 23, 3–54.

Renzulli, J. S., & Reis, S. (1985). Theschoolwide enrichment model: A com-prehensive plan for educational excel-l e n c e . Mansfield Center, CT:Creative Learning Press.

Renzulli, J. S., & Reis, S. (1994).Research related to the schoolwide

enrichment triad model. Gi f t e dChild Quarterly, 38, 7–20.

Sills-Briegel, T., Fisk, C., & Dunlop, V.(1996). Graduation by exhibition.Educational Leadership, 54(4), 66–71.

St a rko, A. J. (1988). Effects of therevolving door identification modelon creative productivity and self-efficacy. Gifted Child Quarterly, 32,291–297.

Summers, J. (1989.). The senior project:A walkabout to excellence. EnglishJournal 74(4), 62–64.

Taaffe, J. (2002). Wheeler High Schoolsenior project student handbook2 0 0 2 – 2 0 0 3. Re t r i e ved June 2,2003, from http://www. w h e e l e r-high.com

Terry, A. W. (2000). An early glimpse:Service learning from an adolescentp e r s p e c t i ve. Jo u rnal of Se c o n d a ryGifted Education, 11, 115–135.

Terry, A. W., & Bohnenberger, J. E.(1999, January). Connecting com-munity problem solving to serv i c elearning initiatives. Paper presentedat the meeting of the Board ofTrustees of the International FutureProblem Solving Program, AnnArbor, MI.

Torrance, E. P. (1984). Mentor relation-ships: How they aid creative achieve-ment, endure, change, and die.Buffalo, NY: Bearly Limited.

Treffinger, D. J. (1975). Teaching forself-directed learning: A priority forthe gifted and talented. Gifted ChildQuarterly, 19, 46–59.

Tre f f i n g e r, D. J., & Ba rton, B. L.(1988). Fostering independentlearning. Gifted Child Today, 11(1),28–30.

Troutman, P., & Pawlowski, C. (1997).The Senior Exit Project: A chancefor the library to shine. Book Report,15(4), 20–22.

Wolk, R. A. (2000). Real-world lessons.Teacher Magazine, 11(8), 6.

The Senior Project

GIFTED CHILD TODAY 45

Appendix B. Project Phase Rubric

Exceptional Capable Functional Not Functional

Use of TimeRisk FactorApplication of KnowledgeProblem SolvingUse of SourcesEthical StrandVerification StrandCreativity (Extra)Quality (Extra)

continued on next page

Appendix A. Paper Evaluation Guide

All four of the following areas must be passed in a highly competent (HC) or competent (C) manner in order to receive a passing grade.An NE (not evident) rating requires remediation and revision.

Note. From The Graduation Project: Guidelines for Implementation, by S. Houston & M. A. Tharin, 1997, conference session presented at the Senior Project Institute, Charlotte, NC. Reprintedwith permission.

Area 1: Ideas and Content HC C NE

The paper has a well-developed introductory paragraph and thesis that the writer proves or disproves throughsophisticated research evidence and effective elaboration.

Supporting paragraphs are thoroughly developed with supplementary material that support and illustrate the writer’s POV.

The writing is clear, focused, and interesting, with details that are carefully selected to provide strong, accurate support.

There is evidence of a clear purpose that controls the paper throughout.

The paper contains an insightful conclusion.

Area 2: Organization

The organization of the paper is logical.

The paper has a beginning that captures the reader’s interest, and the ending is natural and satisfying.

The structure is obvious, with transitions that are smooth and effective in sentences, paragraphs, and ideas.

Area 3: Style: Word Choice/Fluency/Voice

The vocabulary is varied and natural.

The sentence length and structure are varied.

The words draw clear images.

The paper reflects a strong sense of voice well suited to the audience.

Area 4: Conventions and Research/Documentation

The writer demonstrates a grasp of standard writing conventions and uses conventions effectively to enhance read-ability. Errors tend to be so few and so minor that the reader can easily overlook them unless editing for publication.

The paper has proper documentation of sources (at least 5 or more) and uses MLA documentation guidelines.

There is appropriate and accurate citation of quotes and paraphrases.

46 SUMMER 2004 • VOL. 27, NO. 3

The Senior Project

Project Phase Descriptors

Use of TimeExceptional The student far exceeds the minimum time requirement and demonstrates consistent, efficient, and thoughtful use of time.Capable The student meets or goes beyond the minimum time requirement and demonstrates a pattern of time management skills.Functional The student just meets the minimum time requirement, with random use of time-management skills.Not Functional The student does not meet the minimum time requirement and lacks any evidence of time management.

Risk FactorExceptional A risk/stretch/challenge is exceedingly evident as the student explores a new area, demonstrates a new skill, or extensively expands

on previous knowledge and skills. The learning stretch is relative to individual students and can relate to an emotional, intellec-tual, or physical risk.

Capable A risk/stretch/challenge is clearly evident.Functional A moderate to limited risk is evident.Not Functional No risk or learning stretch is evident.

Application of KnowledgeExceptional Obvious depth and complexity of knowledge is evident in completion of the project. The student is able to apply the knowledge

in creating and evaluating his or her own project.Capable The use of general knowledge is evident in student application.Functional The use of superficial knowledge is evident in student application.Not Functional The student demonstrates rote learning or little or no understanding of how content knowledge applies to product.

Problem SolvingExceptional The student analyzes complex problems and uses sophisticated and appropriate problem-solving skills (i.e., metaphorical think-

ing or brainstorming) to overcome such difficulties as insufficient and/or inadequate resources, time, materials, and procedures.He or she is persistent, flexible, and open to new solutions, advice, and processes.

Capable The student uses moderate analysis in solving of problems (i.e., asks questions, makes phone calls). He or she has an under-standing of the basic difficulties and might try several times to solve the problem before quitting.

Functional The student has superficial and/or limited problem solving skills. He or she attempts to solve the problem, but usually gives uptoo soon, asks only a few questions, and resists new ideas.

Not Functional The student has no basic understanding of what causes the problem or how to solve it (or even that there is a problem).

Use of SourcesExceptional The student independently uses a broad and diverse variety of sources such as mentors, written literature, media, and computer

generated information.Capable Acceptable use of sources of information and/or skill instruction is evident. The student requires some direction.Functional The student uses a limited number of sources (a parent or one written source). He or she needs continual prompting or direc-

tion.Not Functional No use of outside sources is evident.

Ethical StrandExceptional The student demonstrates an exceedingly high degree of integrity, honesty, and responsibility. He or she appreciates the contri-

bution of others and rarely, if ever, violates own standards of high expectations.Capable The student demonstrates an awareness of the ethical standards, but might be inconsistent in the application of them.Functional The student demonstrates a random application of ethical standards.Not Functional The student shows no awareness of ethical standards or a personal need to apply them.

Verification StrandExceptional The student is self-directed and turns in all verification pieces on time . The required verification items, as well as additional stu-

dent choices, are thoughtfully and neatly written and organized.Capable The student turns in the required verification pieces with some teacher direction.Functional The student collects and organizes the required project verification pieces. He or she does not go beyond the required list and

needs continual direction and prompting to complete and turn items in on time.Not Functional The student does not turn in required verification pieces and needs constant reminders.

Appendix B continued

GIFTED CHILD TODAY 47

Appendix C. Presentation Evaluation Guide

All three of the following areas must be passed in a highly competent (HC) or competent (C) manner in order to receivea passing grade. An NE (not evident) rating requires scheduling a second presentation within a specified date.

Note. From The Graduation Project: Guidelines for Implementation, by S. Houston & M. A. Tharin, 1997, conference session presented at the Senior Project Institute, Charlotte, NC. Reprintedwith permission.

HC C NE

Area 1: Effective Communicator

The student’s communication skills are clearly and effectively demonstrated in a well-orga-nized, creative manner.

The student exhibits poise and gestures to emphasize meaning.

The student uses expressions and a level of language appropriate to the audiences and situation.

Area 2: Project Description/Explanation

The student’s description of the project/product demonstrates the knowledge mastery from theresearch-based paper.

The presentation includes a clear statement of the project’s purpose and provides specific sup-porting details and evidence of preparation and practice with a satisfying conclusion.

There is evidence that the student has evaluated his or her own skills and work on the project.

Area 3: Extemporaneous Responses

The student shows strong understanding and insight of his or her project by confidently andaccurately responding to panel comments and questions.

Creativity* (Extra)Exceptional The student demonstrates an innovative and unusual application of knowledge in design and construction of product or process.

He or she synthesizes general knowledge strands into original patterns, thus creating own unique style, presentation, or voice.Capable The common use of creative skills is evident. The student modifies and adapts others’ ideas in creation of own design.Functional The student demonstrates limited evidence of creativity (i.e., sees marginal connections, relies on standard methods and models).Not Functional No evidence of synthesis of knowledge and skills is evident. The student is not interested and does not attempt to create own style

or voice.

Quality* (Extra)Exceptional Superior craftsmanship, pride, and attention to detail are evident. The student knows specifically how quality is addressed in the

project and through practices and persistence reaches quality.Capable Attention to detail is evident, as well as knowledge of the major standards of quality. Though quality may not be produced, there

is evidence that the student strived for standards of excellence.Functional The student overlooks many details in desire to finish. He or she cannot easily identify quality standards in project.Not Functional The student disregards details and work is disorganized, sloppy, or hastily done. He or she has no understanding of quality in

terms of the project.

Note. *Since one of the requirements of the physical project is to risk and try something new, it might not be possible for students to produce a creative or top-quality product or process thefirst time around. Also, not all physical projects are creative in nature, such as running a marathon or volunteering at a hospital. Therefore, quality and creativity can be given extra points onthe final evaluation sheet on those type of projects).From Senior Project Seminar Workbook (pp. 14–15) by C. Osher, J. Summers, & P. Andren, 1988, Medford, OR: Far West Edge. Copyright ©1988 by Far West Edge. Reprinted with per-mission.

48 SUMMER 2004 • VOL. 27, NO. 3

The Senior Project

Appendix DPortfolio Rubric

In order for the portfolio to receive a grade, the student must • complete a research paper • fulfill the mentor requirement

– Mentor-verified– 10-hour minimum contact hours completed

• give a presentation before the board of judges on Boards Night

Most of the individual components of the portfolio have already received grades from your English teacher (i.e., researchpaper, letter of intent, letter to the judges, resume, etc.). The final portfolio grade is an indication of your efforts to keepup with your materials and to display them professionally, attractively, and proudly.

Note. From Wheeler High School Senior Project Student Handbook 2002–2003, by J. Taaffe, 2002, http://www.wheelerhigh.com. Reprinted with permission.

Exceptional Commendable Competent Unacceptable

Completeness All required ele-ments are includedand completed infull

55

One requireditem is missing orinsufficientlycompleted

50

Two requireditems are missingor insufficientlycompleted

40

Three or morerequired items aremissing or insuffi-ciently completed

0

Quality ofResponses

All responses andentries are elabo-rate and error free

15

Responses lackelaboration butare adequate anderror free 10

Responses areminimal; severalmechanical/spelling errorsappear

5

Many responseslack elaboration;errors appearthroughout theportfolio

0

Appearance Appropriate ele-ments of the port-folio are typed andare professional inappearance 15

Portfolio is neatlytyped and pagesare clean andunsmudged —but portfoliolacks a truly pro-fessional appear-ance

10

Portfolio is assem-bled with littleeffort towardexcellence but isneat and typed 5

No effort shownto make the port-folio professionalin appearance;some pages crum-pled or smudged;handwritten sec-tions

0

Personal Prideand Effort

Student’s care isobvious through-out; great effortshown in assemblyof portfolio withcreativity apparentin added graphics,etc.

15

Portfolio is welldone, but littleeffort is shown tomake it an itemof excellence withadded personaltouches

10

Portfolio is with-out outstandingmerit and is donemerely to fulfillthe requirement;little reflection ofstudent’s individu-ality

5

Portfolio shows adecided lack ofeffort to make theportfolio reflectpride in its com-pletion

0

GIFTED CHILD TODAY 49

Appendix GExcerpts From Carl’s

Senior Project

Why am I writing this paper?Since my eighth-grade year inschool, I have had an intense inter-est in music. During that year, I lis-tened to eve ry re c o rding oforchestras, bands, and brass ensem-bles that I could get my hands on.My favorite recordings were albumsof the Canadian Brass, a world-famous brass quintet. In the twoalbums that I bought, there weretwo songs arranged for the quintetthat we re originally written byJohann Sebastian Bach. The firstwas Fugue in G Minor, nicknamed“Little” for its comparison to thesecond work on the albums, Toccataand Fugue in D Minor. Both of thesepieces enthralled me, and I beganlooking for a way to play these songson my tuba after a short time.

During my freshman year inhigh school, I traveled to a windband concert at the State Clinicwith our high school band director.On the way to the concert, thed i rector showed me some brassquintet music that he had boughtfor the school. Most of the arrange-ments were Canadian Brass, andone of them was the same arrange-ment of Toccata and Fugue in DMinor that was performed on thealbums that I owned.

The discove ry delighted me,and I immediately began runningthe tuba part through my head, fin-gering the notes, and humming thetune of the song. When we returnedhome, the director allowed me totake the tuba part home to work onit. At the time, howe ve r, I was

continued on the next page

Appendix FCarl’s Description of Product

Topic of Project : The Instrumental Music of Johann Sebastian Bach

What form will your product take?computer disc art work community invo l ve m e n tvideotape photography portfolioaudiotape model/constructioncharts, maps, graphs other (explain)

How does the product reflect your academic stretch?I have never arranged any songs before.

What materials will you need?Staff paper, audiotape, tubas, and euphoniums.

What, if any, expenses do you anticipate?On the pieces of the original music that I have to use for arranging.

How much time do you estimate will be required to create this product?About 20 hours.

Appendix ECarl’s Senior Project Proposal

Briefly describe the topic of your research (3–4 sentences).I am researching the Baroque period, mainly Bach, his music, and his influence.I would probably focus on his development of the fugue. Also, the fact that sev-eral of his sons were composers will be a major part of the paper.

Why did you choose this topic?I chose this topic because I have intense interest in music. I also like some of thesongs of that time, and I would like to arrange songs in this style.

Have you had any previous experience(s) related to this topic? If so, to whatdegree?No, I have not. I can transpose music to some degree.

What do you hope to gain from your research investigation?I would like to learn how the Baroque period developed and how Bach influ-enced it.

How do you plan to demonstrate your topic through a project or product?I intend to arrange Bach’s Toccata and Fugue in D Minor for a tuba-euphoniumensemble.

50 SUMMER 2004 • VOL. 27, NO. 3

The Senior Project

Appendix HExamples of Senior Projects

Completed by Gifted Students

Research

Modern networkadministration

Importance of music educationin the public school system

Childhood obesity

Architectural designs and construction methods of late19th-century and early 20th-century churches and howthey differ from those inEurope

Stock market

Television broadcasting

History of quantum mechanics

History of robotics

Advantages of Linux

History of computer animation

Glassblowing

Product

Implement an instant messaging sys-tem for local high school

Organize and produce a benefit concert

Compile a cookbook for children and teach a lesson on nutrition to an elementary class

Restore two rooms at local church

De velop and present a presentation tothe high school faculty about the stockm a rket and how it will impact teacherre t i rement funds and deferred com-pensation plans

Special report on senior projects forlocal television station

Create a new quantum algorithm

Make a robot

Make a check-out system run onLinux

Create a short 3-D animation

Make a glass sculpture

Note. Adapted from personal communication with Patricia Bridges, May 29, 2003, and Joyce Taaffe, June 3,2003.

unable to play the demanding technicalaspect of the tuba part. I returned the pieceto the director and never saw it again.

Over the next 2 years, I obtained severalalbums of various musical groups thatplayed classical music. Many of the piecesthat they played were originally written byJohann Sebastian Bach. Bach’s works weremy favorite pieces on these albums. A few ofthese compact discs had both Fugue in GMinor and Toccata and Fugue in D Minor onthem. One unique album featured the“Little” fugue being played by a tuba ensem-ble. It was one of the most beautiful songsthat I have ever heard.

That account is why I am interested inthe work of Johann Sebastian Bach. I feelthat he is one of the greatest composers tohave ever lived. I want to learn what I canabout his music.

What do I already know?All that I know of Ba c h’s music is what I havelearned from various people and compactdisc inserts. Bach was one of the major deve l-opers of the fugue. He wrote many suchpieces for the organ, such as Fugue in GMinor and Toccata and Fugue in D Mi n o r.

What I learnedThroughout my research, I have learnedmany new and useful ideas. Not only have Ilearned what I wanted to know about theinstrumental music of Bach, but I havelearned how to work with adversity in theschedules of other people, such as my men-tor, or the tuba players that helped merecord my arrangement of Toccata in DMinor. I also learned to be patient when theresources I needed were not immediatelyavailable. In the end, I believe that the mostimportant thing I learned is that a large-scaleresearch project such as mine is not as diffi-cult as it seems in the beginning.

Appendix Gcontinued

GIFTED CHILD TODAY 51

Two seniors gained permission to workc o l l a b o r a t i vely to complete theirsenior projects relating to computert e c h n o l o g y. Ryan and Kelly (not stu-d e n t s’ real names), expressed intere s t sin technology—Ryan in fibero p t i cwiring and Kelly in computer graph-ics. After discussing their mutual inter-ests in computers and discussing theirideas with the school district’s technol-ogy coordinator and mentor to bothstudents, Ryan and Kelly appro a c h e dtheir teacher about the idea of Ne t Da y,a practice gaining nationwide intere s tin which local businesses supplyneeded materials and communitymembers donate their time to wiringschools for the Internet, a cost-effec-t i ve practice that saves schools thou-sands of dollars and helps schools

p rovide up-to-date access to theInternet.

Ryan and Kelly gained approval tocollaborate on this pro d u c t - d e ve l o p-ment portion of their senior pro j e c tbecause of the extensive time commit-ment re q u i red to secure materials, gainschool district approval, contactpotential volunteers, design the instal-lation plan, work with the communityvolunteers to implement the plan, andtest the wiring. Through the process ofd e veloping and conducting theirsenior project, these students not onlylearned more about technology, butalso enhanced their interpersonal andtime-management skills. Fu rt h e r m o re ,they worked alongside technologyi n d u s t ry employees living in the com-munity to design the wiring plan,

install the wiring, and evaluate the suc-cess of the efforts. The students’ lead-ership skills we re also enhancedt h rough having to develop goals ando b j e c t i ves in carrying out their plan.

At the culmination of the experi-ence, Ryan and Kelly presented aPowe r Point presentation to the panel ofcommunity judges that incorporatedinformation about their re s e a rch, includ-ing slides with pictures of the teaminstalling wires and students and teach-ers using the Internet. They explainedh ow the senior project experience hadhelped them grow not only in theirk n owledge of technology, but also asleaders. Through this senior project, theschool district saved more than $5,000in materials and labor costs and fostere dthe growth of two gifted students.

Appendix IProcess Skills Developed

During the Creation of Products

Oral Communication Skills

Written Communication Skills

Creativity

Problem Solving

Higher Order Thinking Skills AnalysisSynthesis Evaluation

Organizational Skills PlanningRecord KeepingTime Management

Appendix JDescription of Service-Learning/ Community Action Project: NetDay

Author Note

For more information about implement-ing senior projects, contact

Far West Edge4259 Innsbruck RidgeMedford, OR 97504(541) 770-9483http://seniorproject.netwestedge@cdsnet.net

or

Paula EgelsonSERVEP.O. Box 5367Greensboro, NC 27435(800) 755-3277http://www.serve.org/seniorprojectpegelson@serve.org