Using the Blooms–Banks Matrix to Develop Multicultural Differentiated Lessons for Gifted Students

Gifted Education Context by Race

Teachers use a multitude of resources to aid in the identification of gifted students. However, the same type of instruction that works with one student or a group of students may be ineffective or may not work as well as others. Ineffective instruction leads to poor performance. Moreover, when cultural differences and current curricula and instruction are considered, the likelihood of culturally different students (i.e., Black and Hispanic) being identified as gifted becomes questionable. Just as important, differentiation via multicultural curriculum holds promise for increasing rigor and relevance for gifted Black and Hispanic students, many of whom complain about being disinterested in school and not seeing themselves positively reflected in literature and materials and lesson plans. This model also benefits White students who must learn about culturally different students in rigorous relevance (see Ford, 2011; Grantham, Trotman Scott, & Harmon, 2013).

Curricular and Learning Challenges and Considerations

The educational performance of all students must be examined frequently to ensure that all students have an equal opportunity to receive appropriate education. Teachers should strive to develop a profile of each student’s weaknesses and strengths as a means to provide an appropriate education to all gifted students and culturally different gifted students in particular.

The progress of students must be monitored. Teachers should be able to document mastery by identifying the students who learn more efficiently in their areas of strength and interests. Once mastery has been reached and documented, students must be provided with opportunities to continue learning with enriched and advanced materials related to their area(s) of strength and interests (Council for Exceptional Children–The Association for the Gifted [CEC-TAG], 2007). Equally important, all instructional procedures (i.e., materials, lectures, daily assignments, summative, and formative assessments) must be addressed on a consistent, culturally conscious basis. Teachers must ask themselves the following: Do the assignments and materials equally and equitably represent the views of African American and Hispanic American students? Do the assignments contain language that is biased or discriminatory or offensive? Is instruction culturally responsive and respectful (e.g., in the students’ preferred learning style)?

Differentiated Supports and Services

To differentiate instruction, multiple levels of criteria for assignments and outcomes must be assigned to individual students (Tomlinson, 2001, 2009). Instruction for gifted students must be differentiated in the depth, breadth, pace, and complexity of content for students through opportunities outside of what is being offered in the general classroom setting. Gifted students who need intensive services beyond what is offered in the general education curriculum must be provided with differentiated curriculum and instruction. However, as stated earlier, instruction must be implemented in a culture-purposed manner and must embrace the idea that specific student characteristics and profiles strongly influence their success and must include culturally responsive practices, theories, and research.

When the curriculum is not challenging, a vicious cycle can ensue; students can become disengaged, which can lead to underachievement or disruptive behaviors, including dismissal from the gifted program or suspension/expulsion from school (Grantham et al., 2013; Losen & Skiba, 2010). One way of preventing underachievement from happening is by using a multicultural gifted education approach. & Harris’ (1999) and Ford’s, (2011) multicultural gifted education approach was conceptualized to increase curricular rigor and gifted students’ interest, which in turn will increase their outcomes, thereby leading to an increase in positive student outcomes for all students.

School personnel and curriculum selection teams must carefully examine all resources and materials used to safeguard students from negative representations of specific cultural groups and/or complete omissions from the proposed curriculum (Ford, 2011). The content of the materials must be examined to confirm its authenticity and ensure that the roles reflected do not promote superiority for one cultural group and inferiority for other groups. Finally, the team and teachers must determine whether the materials minimize a cultural group, share only one cultural viewpoint, gloss over particular events, negate the heroic lives of non-Whites, and mainly reflect the stance of a particular social class.

In the following section, the work of Ford’s original Bloom–Banks Matrix (Ford, 2011) will be described. ¹ An overview of Bloom’s Taxonomy and Banks’s Model will be provided as well as a description of how to infuse higher level multicultural content (Banks) into the curriculum that is grounded in critical thinking (Bloom).

Bloom–Banks Matrix (Ford–Harris Matrix): An Overview

Typically, Bloom’s Taxonomy is the main resource teachers use to create activities based on the individual and cultural needs of students, while allowing them to gain access to the same content. When used correctly, Bloom’s Taxonomy allows teachers to use a variety of activities related to the same academic content and assess students’ ability to complete assignments using various levels of critical thinking and problem solving. Using the cognitive domains of Bloom’s Taxonomy (see Figure 1), teachers are able to determine if students are able to recollect information presented in the curriculum (knowledge); assess if students recognize the concepts of the curriculum as evidenced by the ability to explain what they learned (comprehension); assess the students’ ability to demonstrate what they learned (application); gauge students’ ability to understand what was learned by being able to infer, predict, and compare-contrast information (analysis); consider students’ ability to use information to develop new, original, and/or improved approaches (synthesis); and decide if students are able to study, judge, critique, and support what was taught and learned (evaluation).

OPEN IN VIEWER

Figure 1.

Bloom–Banks Matrix; multicultural gifted education Quadrants 1-2.

As stated earlier, a curriculum is not thorough if students are only given the opportunity to think critically and act responsively, but not equitably. The curriculum must provide students with the ability to see the world from the viewpoints of others and/or from more than one perspective. The Bloom–Banks Matrix (Ford, 2011; Ford & Harris, 1999) combines Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives (Bloom, 1956) and Banks’s (2009) Multicultural Infusion model to provide educators with a multicultural gifted education model that reflects the goals, objects, and perspectives of differentiated, gifted, and multicultural education. The result is 24 cells or four quadrants based on the six levels of Bloom by the four levels of Banks (see Figures 2 and 3).

OPEN IN VIEWER

Figure 2.

Bloom-Banks Matrix; multicultural gifted education Quadrants 3-4.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Figure 3.

Examples of activities, strengths and weaknesses of color-coded quadrants.

The lowest cell is knowledge contributions (part of Quadrant 1). The highest and most substantive cell is evaluation-social action; this is the cell (part of Quadrant 4) in which all students and teachers are urged to reach, especially since instruction on this level and within this quadrant enables students to engage in the highest level of critical or evaluative thinking and multiculturalism. The matrix has been color coded for conceptual reasons (and has been approved by Ford, personal communication, July 15, 2013):

Red/Stop = Quadrant 1: Low on both Bloom’s Taxonomy and Banks’s Multicultural level. The content provided within this quadrant rarely provides students with multicultural growth and substance. Instruction is very common and many students may have been exposed to the similar information in previous settings. When low on Bloom’s taxonomy (i.e., knowledge, comprehension, and application) and low on Banks’s multicultural levels (i.e., contributions and additive), gifted students may not be challenged in either way. The majority of lesson plans appear to be in this quadrant per Ford (2011 and personal communication)—both colorblind or not culturally responsive and lacking rigor.

Yellow/Caution = Quadrant 2: High on Bloom’s Taxonomy but low Banks’s Multicultural Levels. In this quadrant, gifted students use critical thinking and problem solving (i.e., analysis, synthesis, and evaluation) with superficial multicultural content (i.e., contributions and additive). Ford (2011) contends that this quadrant is common in gifted education, which she equates to being colorblind.

Blue/Guarded = Quadrant 3: Low on Bloom’s Taxonomy but high on Banks’s Multicultural levels. In this quadrant, little critical thinking and problem solving are involved. However, students are provided with the opportunity to view cultural events, concepts, and themes through the lens of others. Social action may take place, but it is not likely to have much impact. The curriculum provided to students elaborates on events, facts, and characteristics of culturally different groups, enabling them to become more aware of and gain additional and meaningful knowledge about different groups. Thought processes required in this quadrant are higher than the yellow and red quadrants. Here, the cultural rigor is substantive.

Green/Go = Quadrant 4: High Bloom’s Taxonomy and High Banks’s Multicultural Levels. In this quadrant, students think critically, solve problems, and review a multitude of multicultural topics, issues, and themes—and, they seek to make social change in some way. Curriculum is rigorous and relevant, and students think and solve problems at the highest levels; they are exposed to content that validates non-White individuals and groups. This is the more impactful quadrant for all students.