View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

Beyond Content: An Exploration of Teachers' Practices for Supporting Academically Advanced Students in Elective High School Classrooms

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Beyond Content: An Exploration of Teachers' Practices for Supporting Academically Advanced Students in Elective High School Classrooms
Language: English
Authors: Travis D. Hill (ORCID 0000-0003-0867-7764), Andria Ellis (ORCID 0000-0003-2456-1112)
Source: Journal of Advanced Academics. 2026 37(2):332-363.
Availability: SAGE Publications. 2455 Teller Road, Thousand Oaks, CA 91320. Tel: 800-818-7243; Tel: 805-499-9774; Fax: 800-583-2665; e-mail: journals@sagepub.com; Web site: https://sagepub.com
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 32
Publication Date: 2026
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Research
Education Level: Secondary Education
High Schools
Descriptors: Teacher Attitudes, Teacher Role, Role Perception, Academically Gifted, Advanced Students, Gifted Education, Individualized Instruction, Grouping (Instructional Purposes), Teacher Effectiveness, Phenomenology, Ability Grouping, High School Teachers, High School Students, Elective Courses
Geographic Terms: Texas
DOI: 10.1177/1932202X251361596
ISSN: 1932-202X
2162-9536
Abstract: This study reflects on secondary elective teachers' perceptions of their roles in supporting academically advanced students in mixed-ability classrooms. Despite many states mandating gifted education, services and teacher training vary. The current study uses an interpretative phenomenological analytical approach, focusing on secondary elective teachers within a North Texas district. Through semi-structured interviews, the research investigates instructional differentiation, grouping, and rigor to understand how teachers address advanced learners' needs and their overall attitudes toward gifted education. The researchers identified four themes, which highlighted teachers' use of instructional strategies, the flexibility in elective settings to adapt learning experiences, several psychosocial characteristics of their gifted-identified students, and varying perceptions of students' needs.
Abstractor: As Provided
Entry Date: 2026
Accession Number: EJ1504543
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
    Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwH_Ai2rsR1f2iT3OeiDpad5AAAA4zCB4AYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHSMIHPAgEAMIHJBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDCtDit6d9PMz4f9fCgIBEICBm1L-lLnF6Bamw4uV-mgvEfhYgJNjQBZEBqEA0zPkIHTzixykUuVr2Y6toMo6L-xe5xfQD7HCKJQUZ8bsfUgflO63AR7cHvU4HbyJWX-Plk2JZzeE_A6Z1NpylbWX9MF5RLjwx8EHKOlKohAutdPX1wurAFNLE3aRonDYbzmiIUtwsem9fMmH1A0T-agj9mVYNDrl5BZeDJRhL539
Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN0193364108;[261p]01may.26;2026May04.05:11;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0193364108-1">Beyond Content: An Exploration of Teachers' Practices for Supporting Academically Advanced Students in Elective High School Classrooms </title> <p>This study reflects on secondary elective teachers' perceptions of their roles in supporting academically advanced students in mixed-ability classrooms. Despite many states mandating gifted education, services and teacher training vary. The current study uses an interpretative phenomenological analytical approach, focusing on secondary elective teachers within a North Texas district. Through semi-structured interviews, the research investigates instructional differentiation, grouping, and rigor to understand how teachers address advanced learners' needs and their overall attitudes toward gifted education. The researchers identified four themes, which highlighted teachers' use of instructional strategies, the flexibility in elective settings to adapt learning experiences, several psychosocial characteristics of their gifted-identified students, and varying perceptions of students' needs.</p> <p>Keywords: gifted education; secondary electives; differentiation; teacher effectiveness; phenomenology</p> <p>The National Association for Gifted Children (NAGC) and the Council of State Directors of Programs for the Gifted release a report every few years detailing the disparate systems, procedures, funding sources, services, accountability factors, pedagogical practices, and data surrounding gifted education in the United States, titled the <emph>State of the States in Gifted Education.</emph> The <emph>State of the States in Gifted Education</emph> provides an insightful view into what is and what is not occurring in gifted education classrooms within school districts. In the <emph>2020–2021 State of the States in Gifted</emph> Education, [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref1">34</reflink>] reported that 75% of states legally mandated gifted identification services, but only 28% required a district-level gifted education coordinator for all schools. Additionally, 48% of states mandated gifted education services and programming, while 22% of states left the decision to each school district ([<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref2">34</reflink>]). [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref3">34</reflink>] also reported that 38% of states mandated academic guidance and counseling, and, specifically in high school, 95% and 90% of states reported their gifted services are met in Advanced Placement and Dual Credit Enrollment classes, respectively, followed closely by honors/advanced classes (88%), International Baccalaureate programs (79%), and differentiation in the general education classroom (67%). While many states mandate programming and services, the manner of instruction varies between states and school districts and within schools.</p> <p>Numerous studies have noted that academically advanced students identified as gifted differ in their cognitive development, along with social and emotional characteristics ([<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref4">1</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref5">9</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref6">11</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref7">24</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref8">27</reflink>]). Similar to all forms of education, academically advanced students are widely diverse and eclectic, requiring specialized teacher skills and pedagogical practices ([<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref9">33</reflink>]). Sixty-one percent of states report state-mandated gifted education training, but the method of training varies between states: state-level gifted certification, graduate-level work in gifted education, and/or non-credentialed professional development at the local level ([<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref10">34</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0193364108-2">Teachers' Perceptions of Students With Advanced Learning Needs</hd> <p>The perceptions that teachers hold toward their students impact several aspects of their pedagogical practices. [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref11">30</reflink>] noted how advances in cognitive and human development, and how those interplay within educational spaces, have made it apparent that students in gifted education programs need unique supports, both within and in addition to the curricula, to develop their knowledge acquisition, talents, and content-specific knowledge. Despite the overwhelming sentiment by educators, curriculum experts, and administrators that students require and should receive pedagogical practices attuned to their specific needs, there can be mixed perceptions when the conversation centers on gifted education ([<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref12">18</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref13">37</reflink>]). Teachers' mixed responses to gifted education might stem from their beliefs as to how gifted education functions at the school and from the district perspective, how educators identify students for services, and how a gifted-identified student's psychosocial behavior impacts their learning and others around them. [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref14">18</reflink>] found from a sample of 262 that teachers had "fairly neutral attitudes toward gifted education." Despite some positive attributions toward certain components of gifted education programs (i.e., acceleration practices and grade-skipping), there remain several negative teachers' perceptions of gifted education. The concept of elitism was a common thread in several studies ([<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref15">18</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref16">37</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib42" id="ref17">42</reflink>]). While [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref18">18</reflink>] survey of 262 teachers found that teachers were split as to whether they believed gifted education is elitist, [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref19">31</reflink>] highlighted that educators felt they needed to focus more specifically on the needs of on-level students, oftentimes ignoring the support required for their students with advanced learning needs. This disparity between educational services points to a mindset that academically advanced students will comprehend the information and successfully complete the necessary work with little assistance ([<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref20">31</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref21">35</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref22">37</reflink>]). One response from a 2013 qualitative study by Troxclair noted the response that academically advanced students are "already favored" in the school setting, once again supporting the concept of gifted elitism.</p> <hd id="AN0193364108-3">Gifted Education Teacher Professional Development</hd> <p>The Texas Education Agency (TEA), NAGC, and Council for Exceptional Children (CEC) have developed standards and expectations for use in the professional training of educators who work with gifted learner populations ([<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref23">21</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref24">22</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref25">39</reflink>]). [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref26">37</reflink>] identified that many teachers' beliefs toward academically advanced students emerged through preservice and/or professional development opportunities. To eliminate preconceptions and barriers of thought, multiple and unique viewpoints need to be present in professional development and teacher education opportunities ([<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref27">14</reflink>]). However, a study conducted by [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref28">18</reflink>] stated that gifted education professional development was not related to teachers' attitudes toward gifted-identified students, suggesting that "we may need to reexamine the effectiveness of our teacher training in the field of gifted education" (p. 253).</p> <hd id="AN0193364108-4">Professional Development Requirements in Texas</hd> <p>The state requirements for teachers of gifted-identified students vary from state to state ([<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref29">34</reflink>]). The Texas Administrative Code (TAC) §89.2 ([<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref30">38</reflink>]) provides guidance for several key components for gifted/talented education in Texas, including professional development training for teachers of gifted-identified students. In Texas, teachers of gifted-identified students must complete 30 clock hours of gifted education training divided between three strands of content with a 6-h refresher each year ([<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref31">39</reflink>]). Professional development includes the nature and needs of gifted/talented students, assessing student needs, and curriculum and instruction for gifted/talented students ([<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref32">38</reflink>]). More importantly, TAC §89.2 ([<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref33">38</reflink>]) describes that teachers should receive this training "who provide instruction and services <emph>that are a part of the program</emph> for gifted/talented students." [<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref34">40</reflink>] divides content subject areas into foundation and enrichment curricula. Foundation comprises English language arts and reading, mathematics, science, and social studies. Enrichment comprises career and technical education, fine arts, health education, languages other than English, physical education, and technology applications. In the Texas State Plan for the Education of Gifted/Talented Students ([<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref35">39</reflink>]), content service delivery is only addressed for foundation curricular areas. Following this line of thought, teachers who are required to receive state-designated professional development for gifted-identified students are those who teach English, math, science, and/or social studies, and those classes must be designated as "part of the program for gifted/talented students" ([<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref36">40</reflink>]). Ultimately, while teachers can take gifted education training for professional development purposes, there is no requirement for teachers in secondary elective courses to receive gifted training in the state of Texas.</p> <hd id="AN0193364108-5">Classroom Instructional Practices</hd> <p>NAGC Standard 3 provides guidance for instructional planning and strategies, "beginning gifted education professionals select, adapt, and use a repertoire of evidence-based instructional strategies to advance the learning of individuals with gifts and talents" ([<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref37">23</reflink>]). These evidence-based strategies consider students' individual learning needs and utilize practices such as differentiation, acceleration, appropriate grouping, and rigorous and affective curriculum, for example ([<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref38">23</reflink>]), [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref39">15</reflink>] surveyed 682 teachers nationally using NAGC's <emph>Pre-K-Grade 12 Gifted Programming Standards</emph> (2010) to determine if and how NAGC standards were being utilized by gifted education practitioners. When determining the most frequent barrier against standard utilization, the top two were the lack of resources (19%–52%) followed by lack of training or knowledge on implementation (17%–31%) ([<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref40">15</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0193364108-6">Differentiation</hd> <p>Stemming from numerous theoretical frameworks (e.g., Reis and Renzulli's Schoolwide Enrichment Model, [<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref41">32</reflink>]; Response to Intervention, and [<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref42">41</reflink>]) and the various strategies utilized to differentiate in the classroom (e.g., student ability, student learning preference, and student diversity), the practice of differentiation is to vary instruction, content delivery, assessments, and content-knowledge demonstration so that it is individualized for each student ([<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref43">5</reflink>]). [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref44">12</reflink>] described the rationale behind purposeful differentiation is to find what is the most appropriate manner for mixed-ability students in the same classroom to learn what they need to learn in the method and speed they require. Differentiation can require significant work ([<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref45">12</reflink>]), especially in classrooms with gifted students, as their cognitive abilities and learning levels in specific domains are more elevated than their classmates, thus requiring teachers to add depth or complexity for a handful of students ([<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref46">30</reflink>]). A study by [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref47">14</reflink>] referencing both [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref48">7</reflink>] and [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref49">19</reflink>] mentioned that the current pedagogical trend is to differentiate for students who are struggling to learn the curriculum, but rarely to differentiate for students who quickly grasp the content matter. In the same study, [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref50">19</reflink>] described how some teachers found differentiation to be difficult and that they do not "feel capable" of fully differentiating for each student (p. 71).</p> <hd id="AN0193364108-7">Grouping</hd> <p>Grouping liked-ability students eases the teacher's need to individually differentiate for each student and allows the teacher to encourage deeper or more advanced thinking from certain groups as needed ([<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref51">15</reflink>]). Like-ability grouping has been demonstrated in several significant studies to be beneficial to academically advanced students' learning outcomes through partnering them with similar ability students in class ([<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref52">28</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib43" id="ref53">43</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref54">44</reflink>]). [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref55">1</reflink>] noted that like-ability grouping for students with advanced learning needs assists with their social–emotional development while also allowing students to focus on advanced learning outcomes desired by the teacher.</p> <hd id="AN0193364108-8">Rigor and Purpose</hd> <p>Content mastery does not occur without a student becoming deeply invested in the subject matter. An interviewee in [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref56">14</reflink>] states, for gifted students to succeed in their coursework, they must be proficient in making "connections between the content and its application to real life" (p. 56). One concern from [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref57">35</reflink>] suggested that if academically advanced students were not given the appropriate level of academic support and rigor, then they might disengage with the content matter and become bored. This might lead to underachievement, as students might not see the value of the work they are completing ([<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref58">27</reflink>]). [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref59">17</reflink>] suggests that rigorous coursework provides students a challenge that allows them to stretch their intellectual muscles in an effort to actively engage, participate in open-ended experiential learning opportunities, and become risk takers. A study from [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref60">4</reflink>] highlighted teachers' beliefs in the efficacy of providing challenging learning tasks. In [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref61">14</reflink>], many teachers reported an interesting divide: some teachers felt they needed to be prepared with deep and complex coursework to support high ability students, while other teachers were strained by the need to produce rigorous coursework to support their students.</p> <hd id="AN0193364108-9">The Current Study</hd> <p>The differentiation paradigm has been heralded by many for several decades in educational circles ([<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref62">12</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref63">41</reflink>]). This model considers the unique and individualized educational needs of all students as they increase in knowledge within the classroom. For students with advanced learning needs, [<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref64">41</reflink>] posited that differentiation for individualized learning variances is instrumental in providing the appropriate support, structure, encouragement, interest, and academic motivation to excel. [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref65">6</reflink>] proclaimed that differentiation, be it curricular acceleration or specialized interest, intentionally matches content with the student in the manner that best suits them. Differentiation is meant to provide subject- and domain-specific educational supports for advanced learners by varying content, pace, depth, complexity, and affective curricular matter ([<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref66">12</reflink>]).</p> <p>The current study seeks to explore the experiences of secondary elective high school teachers, specifically pertaining to how they believe they are providing for and supporting the needs of academically advanced students in mixed-ability classrooms. Scarce literature has been found on this topic. These exploratory topics comprise the following research questions:</p> <p> <bold>Research Question 1:</bold> How do high school elective teachers perceive they are academically supporting students with advanced learning needs?</p> <p> <bold>Research Question 2:</bold> How do high school elective teachers understand the process of meeting the needs of their students with advanced learning needs?</p> <hd id="AN0193364108-10">Methods</hd> <p>Data have been analyzed through the Interpretive Phenomenology Analytic (IPA) framework put forth by [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref67">36</reflink>]. A phenomenological approach in qualitative analysis investigates the shared experiences among the research participants, seeks to find similar experiences across all participants, and strives for a better description of the essences of these experiences ([<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref68">10</reflink>]). IPA posits itself as meaning-making through several detailed examinations of experiences, and phenomenology is the study of experiences. Phenomenology centers the lived experiences of individuals by returning to the original source of meaning, the participants themselves, especially those who share a common, distinctive experience ([<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref69">20</reflink>]). Through intentionally narrowing the scope of focus, IPA research navigates the nuances of people's perspectives in a manner that does not categorize nor explain too broadly. [<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref70">29</reflink>] state that IPA requires an in-depth analysis of single cases, one by one, before any cross-case experiential statements can be defined. Purposefully, small sample sizes that are intentionally identified by the researcher through the participants' shared experience are critical, as it allows the researcher to explore the various ways the experience infiltrates and exists within the person ([<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref71">36</reflink>]). IPA's ability to focus and evaluate the experiences of a single case, which in turn can be further explored in similar case participants, is thoroughly grounded in IPA's detailed analytical procedure ([<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref72">36</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0193364108-11">Participants and Sampling</hd> <p>Purposive sampling was used to identify high school teachers within a suburban school district in North Texas. All participants were required (a) to teach a non-core curriculum, elective class, meaning any class other than one which would be classified as English, math, science, or social studies; (b) to have at least 3 years of teaching experience; and (c) to teach mixed-ability, heterogeneous courses that included students identified as gifted by the school district. Since gifted education training in Texas is not mandatory for mixed-ability, high school elective classes, educators did not need to be trained to provide gifted services.</p> <p>A sample of five secondary elective teachers participated in this study. As mentioned previously, [<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref73">40</reflink>] designates non-English, math, science, or social studies courses as enrichment courses. To provide relevant examples, enrichment courses are divided into several categories: fine arts (e.g., painting and choir), career and technical education (e.g., automotive technology and medical nursing), technology applications (e.g., business and personal finance), languages other than English (e.g., Spanish and Chinese), physical education, and health education. Additionally, there are several elective courses that do not neatly fit into one category, often blurring the lines. As a relevant example: a journalism course can fit into technology applications or career and technical education while also being a part of English Language Arts, or even visual arts if the journalism course also produces a school publication. Twelve teachers across several content areas were identified as having taught mixed-ability, on-level elective courses in high school. These 12 teachers were directly asked by the lead researcher to participate; the participants taught courses in fine arts, career and technical education, languages other than English, and technology applications content areas. Eight teachers agreed to participate in the study, and four did not respond despite follow-up requests. The four who did not respond taught fine arts or career and technology courses. To provide greater homogeneity of participants, the current study interviewed teachers of academic-centered electives, thereby omitting the three teachers who taught fine arts courses. The five participants came from two high schools in the same district and taught different subjects to educationally and demographically diverse populations. The make-up of the participants can be found in Table 1, including their years of teaching experience, the department their content area fell under, and the specific courses within that general subject. Three teachers had elected to take gifted education training through the school district's professional development department. Their trainings were 4 or 5 years before the interviews occurred, and none of the teachers took more than 6 h of gifted education training.</p> <p>Table 1. Department, Courses Taught, and Years of Experience of Participants.</p> <p>Graph</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><colgroup><col align="left" /><col align="left" /><col align="left" /><col align="left" /><col align="left" /><col align="left" /></colgroup><thead><tr><th align="left">Department</th><th align="left">Courses taught</th><th align="left"><italic>Int.</italic></th><th align="left">Experience</th><th align="left">Gifted training</th><th align="left">Time since gifted training</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Technical Applications</td><td /><td>2</td><td /><td /><td /></tr><tr><td /><td>Business Management</td><td>BX</td><td>13–16 years</td><td>No</td><td /></tr><tr><td /><td>Computer Technology</td><td>LE</td><td>17–20 years</td><td>No</td><td /></tr><tr><td>English Language Arts</td><td /><td>2</td><td /><td /><td /></tr><tr><td /><td>Journalism</td><td>FW</td><td>13–16 years</td><td>Yes</td><td>5 years</td></tr><tr><td /><td>Speech</td><td>TU</td><td>21 + years</td><td>Yes</td><td>4 years</td></tr><tr><td>Languages Other than English</td><td /><td>1</td><td /><td /><td /></tr><tr><td /><td>Spanish</td><td>BD</td><td>9–12 years</td><td>Yes</td><td>5 years</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>1 <emph>Note.</emph> "Int." refers to the initials of the interviewed participant.</p> <hd id="AN0193364108-12">Data Collection Procedures</hd> <p>The first author conducted all data collection and was trained in phenomenological qualitative methodology, including the process of bracketing to remove the researcher's own biases before and throughout data analysis ([<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref74">3</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref75">13</reflink>]). As [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref76">13</reflink>] noted, qualitative researchers strive "to ensure that our understandings are not just our own and that if other researchers studied our data that they would come to similar understandings." While also supporting the trustworthiness criterion of transferability needed in qualitative research ([<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref77">25</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref78">26</reflink>]), bracketing provides the researcher a tool to identify their own perspectives, examine them, and shift their thinking and questioning as needed to allow participant insights and perspectives to take the forefront of the conversation. A specific example for the current study: the first author was a high school elective teacher 6 years ago, as detailed in the positionality statement below. After 9 years in the classroom, the first author holds certain beliefs of their specific experience being a teacher akin to the participants of the study. Bracketing was a fruitful question-and-answer process, which occurred before interview question creation, before each interview, and after each interview analysis. Several questions were considered and answered, comprising but not limited to: "Based on my experience, how do I think participants will respond?" "In what ways do I see my own perspective in these statements?" And "how might my past history influence the analysis?"</p> <p>A semi-structured interview protocol was developed, reviewed by two qualitative experts, and revised based on feedback. Participants were provided a Qualtrics form to obtain demographic and classroom arrangement information, as well as to provide consent. Semi-structured interviews were conducted privately and in person in the participant's classroom. Interviews ranged from 50 to 95 min. All interviews were audio recorded and transcribed for accuracy via otter.ai. The first author, who conducted all interviews, took notes throughout each interview, and implemented personal memoing after each interview to make note of resonate thoughts. Upon completion of each interview, the first author listened to the recording while reading the transcript presented by otter.ai, adjusting and correcting the transcript as needed.</p> <p>The interview protocol consisted of seven questions exploring the pedagogical process of differentiation in the classroom, what types of instructional supports are provided to gifted-identified students, and teacher perceptions of traits of giftedness in their students (Table 2). Throughout the interviews, follow-up and clarifying questions were asked so that participants were provided the opportunity to expand upon their answers, supplying deeper insights into their rationale for responding in the manner they did. As can be the case with open-ended, semi-structured interviews, not every question was asked in each interview, but every question was answered in each interview. A preliminary data analysis was conducted to determine interview revisions resulting in the elimination of one question. Data collection was completed over a period of 8 months.</p> <p>Table 2. Semi-Structured Interview Questions Mapped to the Associated Research Questions.</p> <p>Graph</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><colgroup><col align="left" /><col align="left" /><col align="left" /></colgroup><thead><tr><th align="left">Research questions</th><th align="left">Initial interview questions</th><th align="left">Follow-up questions</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td rowspan="8">Research question 1: How do high school elective teachers perceive they are academically supporting students with advanced learning needs?</td><td rowspan="3">The teaching technique of differentiation has been in practice for quite a while. How would you define differentiation specifically within the context of your classroom?</td><td>In what ways do you find differentiation easy or difficult in your class?</td></tr><tr><td>Can you speak to the method of differentiation between your content delivery and your students' demonstration of their learning?</td></tr><tr><td>When differentiating for class, which students do you have to prioritize and why?</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2">What types of instructional supports do you give your students who are identified as gifted?</td><td>How do you determine how (shared instructional support) occurs in class?</td></tr><tr><td>How do you feel that (shared instructional support) is working?</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="3">When you have a student who is struggling with the content, what types of teaching supports do you provide to that student?</td><td>How does student grouping play a role in these supports?</td></tr><tr><td>In a mixed-ability classroom, how do you navigate this?</td></tr><tr><td>Do you provide the same supports for your gifted-identified students and your on-level students?</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="4">Research question 2: How do high school elective teachers understand the process of meeting the needs of their students with advanced learning needs?</td><td rowspan="2">When you think of your students who are identified as gifted, what are some traits, characteristics, and/or adjectives that come to mind?</td><td>In what ways do you see your gifted-identified students demonstrate (shared trait)?</td></tr><tr><td>How do you define (shared trait)?</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2">When you have a student who masters the content or concepts quicker than others, what do you do for those students?</td><td>Do you give students more advanced work when they are finished?</td></tr><tr><td>In what other ways do you support these students when they are finished?</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>2 <emph>Note.</emph> Follow-up questions were asked if needed based on the responses to the initial question asked.</p> <hd id="AN0193364108-13">Data Analysis</hd> <p>Data were systematically analyzed using the Interpretive Phenomenology Analytic framework put forth by [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref79">36</reflink>]. [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref80">36</reflink>] suggest conducting IPA systematically via a six-step process, noting that while these steps appear linear in format, they are highly cyclical and represent "an approach and sensibility, as much a way of thinking about and seeing, as of doing something" (p. 81). The six steps are (a) reading and re-reading; (b) initial noting; (c) developing emergent themes; (d) searching for connections across emergent themes; (e) moving to the next case; and (f) looking for patterns across cases ([<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref81">36</reflink>]). The first four analytical steps were performed on one interview at a time. After each interview had been systematically analyzed, the researcher bracketed their insights from the previous interview before analyzing the next interview.</p> <p> <bold>Step 1: Reading and Re-reading.</bold> The first author read each interview transcript several times. The first reading was to refamiliarize themselves with the interview. The second reading was conducted while also listening to the audio of the interview. This process allows the researcher to note the overall structure of the interview and how dialogue patterns shift beyond the written text ([<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref82">36</reflink>], p. 82).</p> <p> <bold>Step 2: Initial Noting.</bold> After two initial rounds of reading had been completed, the first author began initial note-making. This involved a multi-column Microsoft Word document with the participant's transcript in one column and initial, exploratory notes in the next column. Initial, exploratory notes is a process where the researcher actively engages with the data, making first thoughts and general observations about what they see from the reading ([<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref83">36</reflink>]). The tendency in this step is to begin making broader and generalized observations (e.g., "This teacher believes all gifted students are high achievers") instead of focusing on what is verbally stated, (e.g., "They [gifted students] are self-starters"). This note-making process consisted of three smaller steps. The initial notes were descriptive comments of what the first author found in the text, typically supported by in vivo highlights of specific phrases used by the participant. The second step was a re-read with attention to linguistic comments ([<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref84">36</reflink>]), noting metaphors, analogies, and/or other linguistic devices used by the participants. Finally, an additional re-read provided annotations of conceptual comments that spoke to broader insights. These comments begin moving away from the explicit claims provided by the participant, crossing into more interrogative ideation, asking "why" the participant answered in a specific way. These steps were color-coded in the document easily distinguish the differing layers.</p> <p> <bold>Step 3: Developing Emergent Themes.</bold> After reviewing the initial notes and memos, the first author began developing emergent themes by reading through the notes and memos, referring to the text as needed. This was a recursive process, moving between text, notes, highlights, and memos, all to summarize complex thoughts into shorter codes. [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref85">20</reflink>] noted that this process is "a circle" where the researcher sets aside their judgments to hear "what the text says to us." While this process is recursive, it also disciplined and systematic ([<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref86">20</reflink>]) to set aside judgments about the phenomena before conclusion. Notably, [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref87">36</reflink>] describe that "emergent themes should feel like they have captured and reflect an understanding" (p. 92). These emergent themes trace a line from direct quotes to conceptual ideas to broader themes that encapsulate the broader text.</p> <p> <bold>Step 4: Searching for Connections Across Emergent Themes.</bold> Next, themes were organized based on similarities of conceptual thought. This process consisted of creating a spreadsheet with all emergent themes from one interview. The authors utilized abstraction, which is the process of identifying patterns between emergent themes and clustering these themes into similarly aligned groupings beneath a superordinate theme. The authors also utilized subsumption, which is the process that an emergent theme becomes a superordinate theme. Emergent themes were color-coded based on their similarities to other like themes, oftentimes reworking and recategorizing as the process unfolded.</p> <p> <bold>Step 5: Moving to the Next Case.</bold> The preceding four steps were conducted on one interview at a time. Upon completion of the multiple layers of analysis, the authors performed bracketing, reflecting on what they noticed and possibly inferred in the process ([<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref88">13</reflink>]). At the conclusion of this process with the first two interviews, the second author, also trained in IPA, conducted this same process on the same two interviews. This process allowed for the second author to independently arrive at themes in ways to minimize bias. Upon completion, the two authors met to identify consistencies and inconsistencies, coming to a consensus on which lines of thought to follow and which to exclude.</p> <p> <bold>Step 6: Looking for Patterns Across Cases.</bold> After the five interviews had been organized, the authors began looking for experiential patterns across cases. This involved rearranging and, at times, recategorizing themes and quotes, as the researchers identified new emergent themes through the process. This process resulted in the creation of cross-case experiential statements that properly and succinctly described the experiences of the participants at large.</p> <hd id="AN0193364108-14">Positionality</hd> <p>Both researchers are PhD candidates in the educational psychology department of a public university in Texas, specializing in gifted education. The first author worked in the public education system for 13 years, nine of them as a high school elective teacher. The first author previously worked in the same district as the research participants and knows them through professional interactions. As an elective teacher who taught mixed-ability classes in the same school district, the first author holds a general understanding of the levels of diversity present in mixed-ability classrooms and the level of differentiation involved in teaching certain elective courses at the high school level. This commonality provided the first author a foundational understanding, which in turn allowed the interviewed participants to engage deeper and to speak more openly. At the time of the interviews, the first author was a school district administrator overseeing district accountability and had no influence on curricula, performance reviews, or employment of any of the participants, nor had the first author ever worked with, supervised, or advised any of the participants in those capacities. The second author holds no personal or professional connection with the school or district, nor had the second author ever been a high school elective teacher.</p> <hd id="AN0193364108-15">Trustworthiness</hd> <p>In qualitative analysis, multiple processes need to be systematically followed to ensure trustworthiness of the study: confirmability, credibility, dependability, and transferability ([<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref89">25</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref90">26</reflink>]). Confirmability can be addressed through triangulation of sources and reflexivity of the researchers ([<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref91">25</reflink>]). To address reflexivity, the first author utilized bracketing to identify any previously held beliefs, thoughts, and themes regarding earlier interviews in a word document before analyzing each interview. They also maintained a journal of field notes so that their writings provided an account they could reflect upon to capture any preconceptions. Additionally, several streams of data were accounted for in triangulation: the audio files that had been recorded, a survey detailing the physical make-up of the participants' classrooms and teaching styles, and member checking with the participants ([<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref92">26</reflink>]). These data streams allowed the researchers robust insights. As noted in the positionality statement, the primary researcher was an employee of the school district and former colleague of several interviewees. There is an inherent imbalance of power in qualitative inquiry, as the interviewer sets the stage, navigates the logistics, and questions the interviewee, and this power imbalance is further exacerbated due to the first author's role in the district ([<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref93">2</reflink>]). Peer-researcher and peer-debriefing provided several opportunities for peer researchers to identify potential influences of power dynamics. Member checking, wherein interviewees reviewed initial insights by the researchers, was utilized to help reduce potential bias. Member checking was also employed when developing the four superordinate statements. A draft of the four statements was digitally shared with each participant, who then provided feedback. This process was repeated until all participants agreed on the statements created. This reciprocity assures that participants are not simply subjects but are co-creators in the process ([<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref94">25</reflink>]). Credibility consisted of thorough peer-researcher and peer-debriefing upon collection and analysis of data. Feedback on the analyses from two qualified qualitative researchers was obtained and confirmed the appropriate analytical technique. Peer-debriefing provided an opportunity to share thoughts and receive feedback in an informal way from an impartial colleague. Dependability is addressed through the provision of the coding structure and anonymized Excel files used so research can be conducted by future researchers via an open science framework site. Transferability is addressed through detailed descriptions of findings so that readers might apply these findings to their own contexts ([<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref95">25</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0193364108-16">Findings</hd> <p>Four superordinate, experiential statements were formed after exploring how secondary elective teachers perceive they are providing pedagogical supports for and meeting the needs of their academically advanced students in their mixed-ability classrooms (Table 3). Two superordinate statements dealt specifically with the instructional strategies teachers are providing in their classroom. Two superordinate statements explored how educators felt they were meeting the needs of their academically advanced students. [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref96">20</reflink>] described that perception is the primary source of knowledge; therefore, educators' perceptions of their experiences were paramount to the findings. Table 4 provides the superordinate experiential themes, the subordinate emerging themes, and a non-comprehensive list of relevant quotes from participants.</p> <p>Table 3. Categorization and Superordinate Experiential Statements.</p> <p>Graph</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><colgroup><col align="left" /><col align="left" /></colgroup><thead><tr><th align="left">Category</th><th align="left">Superordinate experiential statements</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>RQ1: Academic supports</td><td>"To better engage my academically advanced students, I allow them to choose how they want to learn."</td></tr><tr><td /><td>"In a heterogeneous class, mixed-ability group work facilitates instructional understanding and social growth."</td></tr><tr><td>RQ2: Meeting students' needs</td><td>"Because my academically advanced students are highly motivated to excel in their academically rigorous classes, I want them to feel a reprieve in my class."</td></tr><tr><td /><td>"As an elective teacher, I use my classroom as an opportunity to grow students beyond the classroom."</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>Table 4. Cross-Case Experiential Statements With Quotes Included in the Manuscript.</p> <p>Graph</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><colgroup><col align="left" /><col align="left" /><col align="left" /><col align="left" /><col align="left" /><col align="left" /></colgroup><thead><tr><th align="left">Emergent themes</th><th align="left">Text</th><th align="left">Int.</th><th align="left">Emergent themes</th><th align="left">Text</th><th align="left">Int.</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td colspan="3"><italic>I allow students to choose how they want to learn</italic></td><td colspan="3"><italic>Elective courses are a reprieve from other advanced academics classes</italic></td></tr><tr><td>Differentiation</td><td>Look at how am I presenting this to you</td><td>TU</td><td>Mot. & expect.</td><td>They are self-starters</td><td>TU</td></tr><tr><td>Differentiation</td><td>How are they getting that</td><td>TU</td><td>Mot. & expect.</td><td>Hold themselves to ridiculously high standards</td><td>FW</td></tr><tr><td>Differentiation</td><td>An array of choices</td><td>BX</td><td>Mot. & expect.</td><td>I provide them the framework</td><td>FW</td></tr><tr><td>Differentiation</td><td>They get assignments done very quickly</td><td>BX</td><td>Mot. & expect.</td><td>Hey, you can get certified</td><td>LE</td></tr><tr><td>Differentiation</td><td>Add more stuff to it make it current</td><td>BX</td><td>Mot. & expect.</td><td>"Do you understand?"</td><td>TU</td></tr><tr><td>Differentiation</td><td>Makes a little bit more work for me</td><td>LE</td><td>Mot. & expect.</td><td>They're very conscious of expectations</td><td>FW</td></tr><tr><td>Differentiation</td><td>They would be chomping at the bit</td><td>LE</td><td>Mot. & expect.</td><td>Gifted kids are almost constantly aware</td><td>FW</td></tr><tr><td>Differentiation</td><td>Multiple chances to show mastery</td><td>LE</td><td>Ac./soc. pressure</td><td>I am more laid back</td><td>BX</td></tr><tr><td>Differentiation</td><td>Encouraged to do that for our lower-level kids</td><td>BD</td><td>Ac./soc. pressure</td><td>We have the time</td><td>FW</td></tr><tr><td>Passion projects</td><td>Communication in action project</td><td>BD</td><td>Ac./soc. pressure</td><td>I do keep this class pretty low key</td><td>FW</td></tr><tr><td>Passion projects</td><td>We do this budget challenge</td><td>TU</td><td>Ac./soc. pressure</td><td>This pressure that they put on themselves</td><td>FW</td></tr><tr><td>Passion projects</td><td>Take that and run with it</td><td>BX</td><td>Ac./soc. pressure</td><td>Then do something that matters</td><td>TU</td></tr><tr><td>Passion projects</td><td>Research-based projects</td><td>BX</td><td>Ac./soc. pressure</td><td>In the middle of AP testing, all the stress</td><td>LE</td></tr><tr><td>Passion Projects</td><td>I do give all of my students a lot of choice</td><td>BX</td><td>Ac./soc. pressure</td><td>They're the kids that want to participate</td><td>LE</td></tr><tr><td>Passion projects</td><td>Choose a passion project</td><td>FW</td><td>Academic relief</td><td>I think they think they need a break</td><td>TU</td></tr><tr><td>Passion projects</td><td>We do real-life lessons</td><td>FW</td><td>Academic relief</td><td>Like a brain break</td><td>BX</td></tr><tr><td>Freedom to explore</td><td>do what makes you shine</td><td>TU</td><td>Academic relief</td><td>I don't want to punish them for learning fast</td><td>BX</td></tr><tr><td>Freedom to explore</td><td>I don't hold students back</td><td>LE</td><td>Academic relief</td><td>Their one nice class</td><td>BD</td></tr><tr><td>Freedom to explore</td><td>I have the students vote</td><td>LE</td><td>Academic catchup</td><td>They're going on to work on homework</td><td>TU</td></tr><tr><td>Freedom to explore</td><td>In the kids' hands</td><td>LE</td><td>Academic catchup</td><td>Something that matters</td><td>TU</td></tr><tr><td>Freedom to explore</td><td>They're getting to explore content on their own</td><td>BD</td><td>Academic catchup</td><td>To work on other things in my class</td><td>LE</td></tr><tr><td>Freedom to explore</td><td>Finding out what their interests are is helpful</td><td>BD</td><td>Academic catchup</td><td>It became a study hall</td><td>BD</td></tr><tr><td>Freedom to explore</td><td>Vocabulary lists in the medical field</td><td>BD</td><td>Reprieve</td><td>It's not like "do or die"</td><td>BX</td></tr><tr><td /><td /><td /><td>Reprieve</td><td>The goals for elective classes are so different</td><td>FW</td></tr><tr><td colspan="3"><italic>Mixed-ability group work facilitates instruction and social skills</italic></td><td colspan="3"><italic>Electives are opportunities to grow students beyond the classroom</italic></td></tr><tr><td>Peer support</td><td>They become kind of like my TAs in class</td><td>LE</td><td>Future exploration</td><td>I like...students to set goals for themselves</td><td>BX</td></tr><tr><td>Peer support</td><td>Some of them kind of scoff at it</td><td>LE</td><td>Future exploration</td><td>Preparing them for the next level</td><td>BX</td></tr><tr><td>Peer support</td><td>I do use them a lot as peer tutors</td><td>FW</td><td>Future exploration</td><td>Do something good for yourself</td><td>TU</td></tr><tr><td>Peer support</td><td>They want to do it their own way</td><td>TU</td><td>Future exploration</td><td>How can you help your future right now?</td><td>TU</td></tr><tr><td>Peer support</td><td>They don't need me</td><td>FW</td><td>Future exploration</td><td>They envision the future they want to have</td><td>BD</td></tr><tr><td>Peer support</td><td>They don't need...you to keep asking them</td><td>TU</td><td>Soft skills</td><td>Focus on those softer pieces</td><td>FW</td></tr><tr><td>Peer support</td><td>Mini-teachers in the classroom</td><td>BD</td><td>Soft skills</td><td>The last thing I want</td><td>FW</td></tr><tr><td>Peer support</td><td>Not just giving them answers</td><td>BD</td><td>Soft skills</td><td>Can tell that what I think is most important</td><td>FW</td></tr><tr><td>Social skills dev.</td><td>There are skills that I don't have</td><td>FW</td><td>Soft skills</td><td>I would push them a little more</td><td>BD</td></tr><tr><td>Social skills dev.</td><td>That social knowledge</td><td>FW</td><td>Soft skills</td><td>Like kids or students to set goals for themselves</td><td>BX</td></tr><tr><td>Social skills dev.</td><td>Outside their little bubble</td><td>LE</td><td>Soft skills</td><td>Every kid has strengths and weaknesses</td><td>BX</td></tr><tr><td>Social skills dev.</td><td>I try to group them specifically</td><td>BX</td><td>Soft skills</td><td>All under control at that point</td><td>LE</td></tr><tr><td>Social skills dev.</td><td>Kinda just stand out</td><td>BD</td><td>Fail forward</td><td>They will overcome that fear</td><td>TU</td></tr><tr><td>Social skills dev.</td><td>Have trouble asking for help</td><td>LE</td><td>Fail forward</td><td>A ton of creative control</td><td>FW</td></tr><tr><td /><td /><td /><td>Fail forward</td><td>I just give them the freedom to make mistakes</td><td>FW</td></tr><tr><td /><td /><td /><td>Fail forward</td><td>Get into the weeds a little bit</td><td>BD</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>3 <emph>Note.</emph> "Int." refers to the initials of the interviewed participant.</p> <hd id="AN0193364108-17">Theme 1: To Better Engage my Academically Advanced Students, I Allow Them to Choose How They...</hd> <p>When working with their academically advanced students in mixed-ability classrooms, teachers reported the need to provide different instructional methods to challenge and engage their academically advanced students. BX shared the importance of differentiation because "[academically advanced students] get assignments done very quickly. The nature of [a project-based] class is, a lot of times, they complete something very quick. They might already know what [course content] is coming into this class" (Interview, BX, 5/11/23). Similar to other subjects, BX found that students entered her Business Management class with differing levels of content knowledge, meaning that even though this might be the first time a particular student has received school-administered instruction in this specific content area, students begin at different starting points based on prior knowledge. Due to the quickness of assignment completion, along with differing levels of prior content knowledge, teachers rely on instructional strategies such as differentiation and passion projects to support their students.</p> <hd id="AN0193364108-18">Differentiation</hd> <p>BD noted early on in their interview that teachers "are often encouraged to [differentiate] for our lower-level kids, but it works for the higher level [kids] when you're in these mixed level classes" (Interview, BD, 12/3/23). This idea of managing differing levels of student knowledge while also navigating pedagogical expectations put in place through the curriculum remained a constant across most conversations. LE explained the benefits of differentiated delivery methods in their Computer Technology course, "I make instructional videos for each project. Some of [the academically advanced students] prefer the video to me standing up in the class and walking them through a project because that process is much slower" (Interview, LE, 5/5/23). LE continued to explain that the video allows students to immediately explore their assignments, and if they needed help or clarification on the assignment, that was the moment the student will finally engage the teacher. Content delivery through video, which was born out of necessity when school districts stopped in-person instruction during the COVID-19 pandemic in March of 2020, became common practice when LE saw their advanced students choosing that method of delivery over in-person instruction.</p> <p>In their Speech class, a course that focuses on writing differentiated content, TU uses her front-of-class instruction as an instructional exemplar for her academically advanced students, "and even in [all-class instruction], I'm telling them 'Look at how am I presenting this to you. What did you notice about my presentation of this chapter? I need you to include these kinds of things or more into your presentations'" (Interview, TU, 5/8/23). Within a mixed-ability classroom, TU encourages her academically advanced students to not only pay attention to <emph>what</emph> is being instructed but also the <emph>method</emph> of instruction and presentation. This manner of content delivery performs several functions: 1. it provides the opportunity for students to learn a technique beyond the academic content; 2. it keeps students engaged in the lesson in a different manner; and 3. it encourages the teacher to be more aware of their delivery method. While TU's instructional delivery method was unique to their Speech course, three teachers utilized online content delivery and management systems (e.g., Google Classroom) to provide supplementary materials to students in advance of the lesson, so students could begin engaging with the content before class began. LE witnessed the change in student motivation, "My gifted kids, sometimes, when class started, they would be chomping at the bit to get started or they would start the project before I even started the class" (Interview, LE, 5/5/23). This practice provided LE the time in class to work individually with students who needed direct instruction while still providing additional instructional supports to their students wanting to begin quicker.</p> <p>Content delivery was not the only manner of differentiation; several teachers encouraged students to create their submitted assignments in a format of their choosing. TU mentioned in their Speech course that, "I feel like I differentiate (A) in my teaching methods, but (B) also how are they getting that information and how are they giving it back to me" (Interview, TU, 5/8/23). BX agreed that "an array of choices that they have just to give them more ownership of their work" (Interview, BX, 5/11/23). In several classes, including BD's Spanish course, students were offered several avenues to demonstrate their knowledge proficiency, be it an oral conversation (e.g., a short conversation with the teacher in Spanish), a Microsoft PowerPoint presentation (e.g., a demonstration of templating and color analysis skills in Computer Technology), a written report (e.g., a financial budgeting report for Business Management), or an artistic representation of a concept (e.g., a drawing that represents rules of speaking in Speech).</p> <p>However, differentiation takes time, intentionality, and instructor skill. Despite the desire to support all students, the task of differentiation "makes a little bit more work for me in the grading process, but at the same time, [differentiated products] allow the kids to be more successful" (Interview, LE, 5/5/23). LE, with 17–20 years of classroom experience, felt confident in their ability to differentiate in their class, relying on their extensive history. When teachers had been teaching the same or similar courses for multiple years, they felt they could provide differentiated instruction and assignments without losing track of their students' needs. In BD's class, after 10 years of teaching similar grade levels of Spanish, content was predominantly project-based, where students had the ability to navigate the required course content at the speed and in the manner they chose. This project-based strategy provided clear guidelines on certain aspects of content (e.g., grammatical structures and vocabulary units), but allowed students the freedom to demonstrate their knowledge. Due to this unique form of differentiation, students had "multiple chances to show mastery of the concept" (Interview, BD, 12/3/23), providing space for students to not only explore what they were interested in but demonstrate their understanding in the manner that worked best for them, oftentimes taking three or four opportunities. In BD's Spanish class, students can take as many opportunities they want to demonstrate their understanding to receive the grade they desire or prove themselves proficient. BD allows her students to demonstrate they understand orally, as a written assignment, in a slide show presentation, or in any other manner.</p> <hd id="AN0193364108-19">Relevant Passion Projects</hd> <p>A consistent thread through all interviewed participants was the implementation of passion projects, which provided students time and space to explore the course content. Passion projects are usually independent, self-directed projects students pursue based on their interests ([<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref97">8</reflink>]). Additionally, these passion projects may also be situated within the framing of personal interest and relevancy, in order to foster connections between the course content, the student, and their desire to learn. Several teachers explained various projects that their students explore: participate in "a budget challenge" (Interview, BX, 5/11/23) to provide real life experience in budgeting and resource allocation, "research a type of photography" (Interview, FW, 5/4/23) that interests them and is different than what students might generally see on social media, explore "real life lessons" (Interview, LE, 5/5/23) that are tired to their future career goals, or create a "communication-in-action project" (Interview, TU, 5/8/23) where students have the opportunity to see their content in action outside of the classroom. BX suggested that "research-based projects are really the best [method] of leading students into deeper learning, beyond just the traditional classroom" (Interview, 5/5/23). Even within those passion projects, several educators often mentioned they would provide students the opportunity to choose not only the content and delivery but also the process, "I do give all of my students a lot of choice. I say, 'Okay, this is designed as a group project. If you don't want to work with a group, you can work on your own'" (Interview, FW, 5/4/23).</p> <p>TU described their "communication in action" project as a means for students to build relevancy by connecting the content and the process:</p> <p>One of my guy groups [in Speech] just presented their communication-in-action project. They went and gave men flowers. Some teachers knew [they were receiving flowers in advance] and some didn't. [The students] did this because they said, "the only time men get flowers in their life is at their funerals." And so, they went and wanted to change that up. It gives me chills. (Interview, TU, 5/8/23)</p> <p>Whether emotionally or socially driven like in TU's Speech courses, or needs-driven like in BX's budget project, academically advanced students can "take that [project] and run with it" (Interview, BX, 5/11/23) with only a modicum of guidance.</p> <hd id="AN0193364108-20">Freedom to Explore</hd> <p>Several teachers interviewed agreed that their academically advanced students thrive in environments where they can choose their own paths through the course content, the learning process, and/or the assignment output, but must be supported in an environment where the failure of a project does not lead to the failure of the class. TU realized that by letting her academically advanced students forge their own paths, they flourished, "And so when I give them the reins to be creative, to choose the projects, who they're going to do it with, what they're going to do, it's so much better...so I stopped picking and I let them pick, and with that choice creativity became maximized" (Interview, TU, 5/8/23). This sentiment resonated with LE in her Computer Technology course, noting that "I like putting the decisions and the choices of what we learn in the kids' hands" (Interview, LE, 5/5/23), even allowing students to vote on what they are learning in class. As mentioned previously, this level of differentiation, while putting the onus on students, can cause greater amounts of work on teachers. In BD's Spanish course, students are provided "checklists" that allow them a self-paced opportunity to "explore the content on their own" (Interview, BD, 12/3/23). One notable example BD found in her Spanish class was the fact that several "GT kids... would pick their own vocabulary list related to the medical field because that's the job they wanted to get into" (Interview, BD, 12/3/23). This openness to explore provided opportunities students would not typically receive if they were to be relegated to district- or state-created curricula. Both TU and BD mentioned that the way to best assist students through their courses was through "finding out what their interests are" (Interview, BD, 12/3/23) with TU even having her students complete a Google Form survey during the beginning of the semester. This insight was critical to both teachers, as it provided deeper insights to their students' interests, which allowed them to adjust their instruction, content, delivery, and projects in a manner that was more relevant for the students, but, most importantly, provided students the freedom to explore an interest they might have by way of a pedagogical concept that is new to them, all with the support of the instructor.</p> <p>The teacher must be open to and encourage this level of empowerment and exploration. Succinctly, LE stated that she "doesn't hold students back" (Interview, LE, 5/5/23). While in Speech class, TU shared that her academically advanced students will ask:</p> <p>Well can I do it this way? Or can I turn it in this time because of this or that?" And I'm pretty open to almost anything if they need to change it up for some reason, especially [if it changes the product] creativity-wise, then I'm like "Yes! Please do what makes you shine. (Interview, TU, 5/8/23)</p> <p>This level of freedom is significant for academically advanced students, providing them options to explore, express, and demonstrate themselves in whichever way makes the most sense for them at that moment.</p> <hd id="AN0193364108-21">Theme 2: In my Heterogeneous Class, Mixed-Ability Group Work Facilitates Instructional Unders...</hd> <p>As most elective courses are composed of mixed-ability students, and, as mentioned previously, several teachers use project-based learning to facilitate instruction, inevitably group work will be a pedagogical strategy used in the classroom. However, all interviewed teachers explained that their grouping strategies are not strictly to support their on-level students' academic needs, but even more so, mixed-ability groupings are opportunities for their academically advanced students to learn and grow in their social awareness.</p> <hd id="AN0193364108-22">Peer Support</hd> <p>Several teachers used mixed-ability grouping in their classes to support their on-level students. LE mentioned how she used her academically advanced students as "teaching assistants" (TAs) in class, providing technical or instructional supports as needed. FW confirmed that "I do use [academically advanced students] a lot as peer tutors, as those mentors" (Interview, FW, 5/4/23). BD (Interview, 12/3/23) even elevated the roles of her academically advanced students by calling them "mini-teachers in the classroom," clarifying that these "mini-teachers" were "not just giving [the other students] answers... they are friends and are actually trying to help them understand [the lesson]." In these mixed-ability classes, where a teacher must account for and instruct a wide degree levels of content knowledge, oftentimes teachers used mixed-ability grouping as a means to support students who did not understand the content as quickly. While there is a degree of understanding that might occur through teaching the content to someone else, grouping afforded the teacher the time and opportunity to work with other students who might need individualized support. And while these mixed-ability groupings can be beneficial to on-level students, several teachers spoke to reticence presented by their academically advanced students to form those groups, and also how those teachers combat that reticence: "I would just pick them to go and reteach concepts to other kids" (Interview, BD, 12/3/23).</p> <p>When discussing mixed-ability grouping, several teachers found their academically advanced students reluctant, rather desiring to do work independently than work with others. TU mentioned she has seen that "[academically advanced students] want to do it their own way. They are seeking that perfection" (Interview, TU, 5/8/23). She further explained that those students already know what to do and how to do it, and they do not need to wait on others to catch up. LE responded that when trying to have her students be TAs in class, "some of them kind of scoff at it" (Interview, LE, 5/5/23). She did not view this behavior as mean or malicious but rather that her academically advanced students wanted to dive into and complete their assignments so they could move on to something else. TU even stated how, "you can give them a rubric or give them the directions on how to do something and they don't need or necessarily want you to keep asking them, 'do you understand?'" (Interview, TU, 5/8/23). FW agreed. "But all that to say, [my two academically advanced students in class] don't need me in there" (Interview, FW, 5/4/23), hinting that with the appropriate instructions, they could still complete the tasks assigned to them. The question teachers asked themselves is "if the students did not need the teacher, then why would they need other students?"</p> <hd id="AN0193364108-23">Social Skills Development</hd> <p>Despite reticence from some academically advanced students to be grouped with their on-level peers, teachers saw these mixed-ability groupings as critical to the development of their social skills instead. All teachers insinuated how it was their duty to group students together for this outcome. BX plainly stated, "I try to group [students] specifically so they are with different people each time" (Interview, BX, 5/11/23), to provide her academically advanced students intentional time with others not in their academic spheres. BD also mentioned that her "GT kids...kinda just stand out" among their peers (Interview, 12/3/23), explaining that providing them time with other students not enrolled in other advanced academics courses opened the students to other experiences. In her Journalism courses, FW described how photography provides a unique levelling aspect between her academically advanced students and her on-level students, "I just think it's a success for my gifted kids [when] they look at [other students' skills] and they realize 'those are skills that I don't have. There are things I can learn from other people,' and that's what I hope we're able to communicate to them" (Interview, FW, 5/4/23). FW saw this social development as an integral growth opportunity. LE agreed, stating that her academically advanced students must learn to "[interact] with others outside their little bubble. Because that's what happens when you go to college. You have to go out, especially if you're not living at home, you have to go beyond your bubble" (Interview, LE, 5/5/23).</p> <p>Teachers consistently spoke to the increased socialization provided to their academically advanced students, mentioning that group work is also about connections and relationships, and that academically advanced students tend to "have issues asking for support or help" (Interview, LE, 5/5/23). When discussing what elective courses, and school at large, can provide academically advanced students beyond academics, FW explained, "what I see them needing a lot of is that social knowledge, you know. A lot of the time, traditionally gifted kids are more academically sound than they are socially sound, and so they need more of the social emotional piece of what school provides" (Interview, FW, 5/4/23).</p> <hd id="AN0193364108-24">Theme 3: Because my Academically Advanced Students are Highly Motivated to Excel in Their Mor...</hd> <p>As opposed to non-elective courses in high school, the participating elective teachers felt they had greater flexibility in how they taught their class, what they taught their class, and the end-product outcome of that instruction. They reported how core-content classes are bound by certain requirements, either that they provide the necessary credits for a student to graduate, or those courses terminate with a culminating, end-of-course, state-mandated examination.</p> <p>The teachers wanted to be very clear this did not mean they were not teaching their students, but rather, "we're not STAAR [state-mandated end-of-course examination] testing in here, so it's not 'do or die'" (Interview, BX, 5/11/23). Further elaborated by FW, she dug into the benefits to and role of elective courses, "and I think that the goals for elective classes are so different from the goals in AP, dual credit, and core content subject areas. That's our real responsibility...to give [students] this freedom and this belief in themselves that doesn't hinge on a test score" (Interview, FW, 5/4/23). Due to this freedom, elective teachers perceived their classes as safe spaces, opposed to other academically rigorous courses.</p> <hd id="AN0193364108-25">Motivation and Expectation</hd> <p>Several teachers often referred to their academically advanced students as "self-starters" (Interviews, BD, 12/3/23; BX, 5/11/23; TU, 5/8/23), noting that their students hold up their own standards of success, perfection, and experience needed. FW explained that in her class, she often does not need to push her gifted-identified students, "they hold themselves to these ridiculously high standards, and I don't need to have that for them. In fact, a lot of the time I'm like, 'hey, it doesn't have to be perfect.' And that is not received well" (Interview, FW, 5/4/23). However, as noted by LE in her Business class (Interview, 5/5/23), motivation also comes from external validation and future progress, "Give them that reward. It's a carrot you're kind of dangling in front of them. You can just say, 'you can get certified...you can get jobs you can put on your resume.'" BD saw this as well with her students' interest in learning Spanish medical vocabulary on their own for their potential careers (Interview, BD, 12/3/23).</p> <p>To a degree, an ongoing consideration of expectations arose, and that those expectations were rarely implemented by the teacher. "Gifted kids are almost constantly aware of what's being expected or asked of them" reported FW (Interview, 5/4/23), which was reinforced by TU in her Speech class; "You can give them a rubric or give them the directions on how to do something and they don't need or necessarily want you to keep asking them, 'do you understand?'" FW further explained that her role in the process of working with her academically advanced students was to simply "provide a framework" where her students could work out the rest because "they're just going to do it" (Interview, FW, 5/4/23).</p> <hd id="AN0193364108-26">Academic and Societal Pressure</hd> <p>Elective teachers leaned into the flexibility found within their classrooms to provide several supports for their academically advanced students, both academic and psychosocial, primarily grounded in the realization that these students "have enough pressure to begin with" (Interview, BX, 5/11/23). These pressures can be academically or societally centered, comprising both familial and peer pressures. When discussing these external pressures, FW separated her students' pressures across a few categories: "[academically advanced students] have this pressure that they put on themselves, that their family put on them, and they're so desperate in every other class to meet that expectation" (Interview, FW, 5/4/23). This pressure manifested in how students spoke of themselves and how they were talking to classmates about navigating their more rigorously difficult courseloads. However, teachers reassured that the level of severity of expectation is not found in their elective courses. Several teachers mentioned how they "[are] more laid back when [their students] take tests" (Interview, BX, 5/11/23) or they simply "have more time [in class to explore than core-content classes]" (Interview, FW, 5/4/23).</p> <p>This realization of the pressures academically advanced students face is central to allowing flexibility in their classrooms. Interviewed during Advanced Placement (AP) exam week, LE stated how, "I'm thinking right now, in the middle of AP testing, all the stress that's on my kids' faces. I mean that, you know, that they're testing, some of them tested all day yesterday" (Interview, LE, 5/5/23). AP exams are half-day content-focused exams that pull students out of class, meaning they might be taking multiple exams over a week while also not attending their non-AP classes. LE also explained how these students are "the kids that want to participate. [They] are actively involved, not just in academic events, but in everything [e.g., choir, band, athletics]" (Interview, LE, 5/5/23). This sentiment is why FW, and all other teachers, desire to "keep [their] class pretty low key" (Interview, FW, 5/4/23), so their academically advanced students are not feeling the pressure of success in every, single class in addition to their extracurricular activities each day.</p> <hd id="AN0193364108-27">Academic Relief</hd> <p>Several teachers reported their academically advanced students would ask to use their elective course as a "brain break" (Interview, BX, 5/11/23) for the remainder of class if they finished their work early. When talking about her academically advanced students' overpacked schedules, TU quoted a student, "I think they need a break, and I've legit heard some kids say 'No, I need a break.' I really tried to talk some kids into [taking an advanced Speech course instead of the on-level Speech course]. [But they reply] 'No, I need a break'" (Interview, TU, 5/8/23). BD knew that due to students being "in seven other AP classes," she wanted her class to be the "one nice class," meaning not the class that had excessive work (Interview, BD, 12/3/23). FW agreed, stating "I want it to be easy to pass. I hate to say that, but it's true" (Interview, FW, 5/4/23). Ultimately, these academically advanced students are navigating more rigorous courses than their grade-level peers, so when they finish their work early in class, teachers "don't want to punish them for learning fast. I do want them to keep continuing to learn, so we do trivia stuff, which I think is super fun. And sometimes it's related to class. And sometimes it's not" (Interview, BX, 5/11/23).</p> <hd id="AN0193364108-28">Academic Catchup</hd> <p>Academic relief is not only beneficial as a break from thinking during the day, but rather that additional time in elective courses can allow students the opportunity to spend time on school-related tasks so they do not have to do so outside of school. TU explained that during any spare time in class, academically advanced students are "going on to work on the homework that they need to get done for something else, like for an AP class. [I will remind them as well to] 'study for your AP test'" (Interview, TU, 5/8/23). LE agreed, "these kids have so much pressure on them from all of their classes. I absolutely allow them, when they're done with my work, to work on other things in my class for other classes" (Interview, LE, 5/5/23). In a moment reflecting on the exhaustion of teaching, BD stated that "on my days where I just had nothing else, [class] became a study hall for their advanced classes" (Interview, BD, 12/3/23). Reflecting on students' involvements in several other extracurricular activities, teachers knew students had band concerts and theater performances or simply might need to have a part-time job to support their family. Taking time during the day to complete homework assignments freed up over-committed students to spend their after-school hours on other necessities.</p> <p>Ultimately, students need to complete their coursework, but not at the loss of sleep or succumbing to external pressures. Elective teachers viewed their classes as opportunities for students to catch up academically, so they can continue working diligently in their other classes and doing "something that matters" (Interview, TU, 5/8/23).</p> <hd id="AN0193364108-29">Theme 4: As an Elective Teacher, I Use My Classroom as an Opportunity to Grow Students Beyond...</hd> <p>Far beyond the content required by the state and written into course curricula, elective teachers found they were obligated to grow their academically advanced students in ways beyond the coursework. Those obligations beyond class content were future, postsecondary exploration, life beyond high school, soft skills, and responsibility.</p> <hd id="AN0193364108-30">Future Exploration</hd> <p>BX mentioned how being a Business Management teacher whose department was in the district's Career & Technology (CTE) department should naturally push learning beyond the classroom, "we are, especially CTE, preparing [students] for the next level, and it is so important. [We are] preparing them for real life" (Interview, BX, 5/11/23). When any free time arose, TU immediately directed her students to "go look for scholarship opportunities now. Take this opportunity if there's any time left [at the end of class]" (Interview, TU, 5/8/23). Ultimately, TU wanted to provide space, when possible, in class for students to explore their future while at school, thus maximizing their time. Similarly in BX's classes, she wants "students to set goals for themselves. So not just personal goals, but financial goals, career goals, like very specific related goals to what they want to achieve" (Interview, BX, 5/11/23). As part of Computer Technology, LE specifically chooses career pathways for students to explore so that they can begin making connections for what they need to do now to be successful after graduation. When reflecting on why it is so important to connect the students' future plans with the course content, BD mentioned that her "GT kids...already have a plan in place, or at least they envision the future they want to have, and they've been mapping it out in their head for a while" (Interview, BD, 12/3/23). Seeing themselves as an extension of support staff, oftentimes these elective teachers suggested students to use their free time to increase their potential career opportunities.</p> <hd id="AN0193364108-31">Soft Skills</hd> <p>FW described how her academically advanced students hold themselves to exceptionally high standards. These standards could be based on societal pressures mentioned earlier, perfectionistic tendencies, determination to succeed, insecurities, or the intersection among all of these. BX reinforced this view of her academically advanced students by stating that "every kid has strengths and weaknesses" (Interview, BX, 5/11/23). Teachers reported it was important to "focus on those softer pieces" (Interview, FW, 5/4/23) because their academically advanced students might "have issues with asking for support or help" because "[they] think that they should have it all under control" (Interview, LE, 5/5/23).</p> <p>All teachers described several traits their academically advanced students exhibited: self-starting, self-directed, curious, inquisitive, self-motivated, self-sufficient, and self-determined. Despite these traits, each teacher mentioned how they were there to help their academically advanced students develop themselves outside of these inwardly focused characteristics. "I would always push them a little bit more because I feel like I knew that they could do it. And I didn't want them to settle" (Interview, BD, 12/3/23). As FW explained:</p> <p>The last thing I want is for [academically advanced students] to go on to college and be frustrated. Because now, there are these skills that they didn't get in all of their academic core classes, where they were just [scoring] five after five on the AP test, which is great. But [now], they don't know how to talk to someone. (Interview, FW, 5/4/23)</p> <hd id="AN0193364108-32">Failing Forward</hd> <p>When providing a classroom environment with as much flexibility as has been discussed, both in terms of content delivery and demonstration of knowledge, there are several opportunities for students to fail. As FW shared about her Journalism course, this ability to explore without the high stakes of failure is a unique trademark of elective courses, "I also give them just a ton of creative control, which is something that they aren't necessarily accustomed to in a lot of their dual credit and AP classes" (Interview, FW, 5/4/23). However, teachers explained how this freedom to explore must be balanced with the freedom to fail. Once again, FW elaborated on this sentiment, "but I just give them the freedom to make mistakes and to mess up and to go with it. And I try and teach them that not everything has to be perfect" (Interview, FW, 5/4/23). At times, BD found in the self-paced, project-based nature of her class that her students would "get into the weeds" (Interview, BD, 12/3/23) to such a great degree that they had taken on so much they might not be able to finish their project. TU discussed how "[academically advanced students] will overcome that fear because they want the grade" (Interview, TU, 5/8/23). While trying a new method or learning new content can be difficult, TU suggests that her academically advanced students will persevere because success is more than passing the class. The implications of overcoming the fear of failure impacts graduation, postsecondary aspirations, and future job implications.</p> <hd id="AN0193364108-33">Discussion</hd> <p>The current study analyzed interviews with high school elective teachers to explore the supports they felt they provided to their academically advanced students. Teachers shared that their experiences transcend pedagogical practices and are also situated in psychosocial development.</p> <p>In answering the first research question, "How do high school elective teachers perceive they are academically supporting students with advanced learning needs?", it is apparent that all teachers attempt to employ various strategies to support their academically advanced students' learning needs. Aligning with [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref98">23</reflink>] standards, the practices of differentiation, grouping, and intentionality were identified by all participants. Participating teachers who received gifted education training did not describe any different pedagogical strategies than teachers who had not been trained in gifted education. Notably, teachers who reported attending gifted education training only received six instructional hours of it. Through differentiation, teachers are providing their students with a variety of content delivery methods, demonstration of knowledge, and processing of information ([<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref99">5</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref100">12</reflink>]). This is even more important in mixed-ability classrooms where purposeful differentiation provides a more appropriate method to help all students succeed ([<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref101">12</reflink>]). The interviewed teachers differentiate through passion projects, providing deep dives into content ([<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref102">30</reflink>]), and allowing for student choice in implementation, learning, process, and output. Similar to findings by [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref103">19</reflink>], teachers in this study spoke to the extra effort involved in intentionally differentiating for their students. Purposeful grouping practices alleviated the need for the teacher to differentiate for each student in class, leveraging the content knowledge of the academically advanced student to support on-level student success. While there is an abundance of research that highlights the benefits of like-ability grouping to increase academically advanced students' knowledge (see [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref104">28</reflink>]), the participating elective teachers did not mention the academic effectiveness of mixed-ability grouping for their academically advanced students. Interestingly, while no teacher spoke to how mixed-ability grouping might academically support their academically advanced students, teachers suggested that peer tutoring afforded them opportunities to support other lower-performing students. While a meta-analysis from [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref105">16</reflink>] found that same-age, mixed-ability peer tutoring produced larger effect sizes, thus increasing the academic impact on the students being tutored by higher-ability students, this practice is contrary to findings across the broader spectrum of gifted education literature. The academic benefits of like-ability grouping as seen in [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref106">28</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib43" id="ref107">43</reflink>], and [<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref108">44</reflink>] were never mentioned by teachers in the study. In an era where teachers are asked to increasingly do more to support their students, their abilities are stretched thin, and they must get help wherever they can. Similar to findings by [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref109">14</reflink>] and [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref110">27</reflink>], teachers found that creating purposeful lessons that tie content with relevant implications fostered an intentionality among academically advanced students, connecting how their learning was important for their life after high school.</p> <p>In answering the second research question, "How do high school elective teachers understand the process of meeting the needs of advanced learners?", the process goes well beyond course content or academic instruction, thus supporting students in several psychosocial and developmental aspects. Promoting several avenues to "fail forward" in a safe space, elective teachers are in a unique position to promote student self-efficacy in a situation where academic outcomes are not a primary factor for success, potentially inhibiting a student from trying something novel ([<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref111">11</reflink>]). Additionally, all interviewed teachers believed that their academically advanced students required additional services and were purposeful in providing them ([<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref112">21</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref113">35</reflink>]). While previously discussed, grouping was in fact utilized by teachers how [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref114">1</reflink>] described, in that it promotes social–emotional development. The interviewed teachers spoke to the opposite, that mixed-ability grouping better prepared their academically advanced students for life beyond high school. Finally, while rigor still played an important role in the interviewed teachers' classrooms, they understood that highly rigorous core-content courses could lead to increased exhaustion and inability to consistently perform at a high level, and so they leaned into the flexibility of their elective course to provide space for academically advanced students to breathe.</p> <p>To conclude this exploration of the perspectives of the interviewed teachers, FW detailed during her interview how elective teachers have a different end goal than her academically focused, core-content peers:</p> <p>Clearly, you can kind of tell that what I think is most important for gifted kids, especially in electives, is what they're not getting in their core. And, what I just want them to have before they go out into the giant world is this self-confidence and a belief in themselves that isn't hinging on the academic world. (Interview, FW, 5/4/23)</p> <hd id="AN0193364108-34">Implications for Practice</hd> <p>Several implications for practice come from the analyses presented in the current study. Teachers, regardless of the six total hours of gifted education training, employed similar pedagogical strategies, indicating the need for broader professional development. Despite TEA's ([<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref115">39</reflink>]) framework and the Texas Administrative Code (TAC) §89.2 ([<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref116">38</reflink>]) guidance for teacher professional development, gifted-identified students are present in non-gifted classrooms and deserve appropriate instruction across all contents. This misalignment has the potential to negatively impact student growth. Equipping all teachers, including those in elective courses, with best practices in differentiation, intentional instruction, and fostering student autonomy can ensure that advanced learners receive appropriate support. There are unique opportunities for elective teachers to learn from other teachers who are implementing best practices. Furthermore, it is important for teachers to stay current with their training. Additionally, while teachers frequently used mixed-ability grouping to enhance social–emotional development, its academic benefits for advanced learners were never discussed by teachers in the study. There is a unique opportunity for school districts, campus administration, and instructional coaches to provide dedicated professional development, including in-classroom support, to foster the growth of academically advanced students. Integrating elective teachers into gifted education discussions and providing resources and training can create a more holistic support system for academically advanced learners.</p> <p>Elective courses offer a unique space for students to take academic risks and develop resilience outside of core content courses that are attached to state-required assessments. Teachers play a crucial role in fostering self-efficacy by encouraging students to engage in challenging experiences where failure is normalized. Schools should recognize this potential by promoting creative problem-solving, experimentation, and self-reflection in elective courses. Additionally, elective teachers can provide meaningful, real-world learning experiences through passion projects and student-driven exploration. Ensuring that elective curricula incorporate real-world connections and project-based learning can enhance student engagement and motivation.</p> <hd id="AN0193364108-35">Limitations and Future Research</hd> <p>There are several limitations to this study. The sample size found in this study is representative of a small number of perspectives of teaching academically advanced students in elective courses. Additionally, the impact of gifted education training on participants' perceptions cannot be fully determined within the findings of this study due to the length of time from which participants received gifted education training. While three participants received training in gifted education and two did not, a more homogenous sample of secondary elective teachers with similar training and experience could provide more meaningful insights to its impact. Due to this, the findings of this study cannot be transferred to other school districts and elective courses across the United States. This study sought to mitigate self-report bias by using open-ended questions to encourage authentic reflections and ensuring anonymity to reduce social desirability effects. However, the possibility of self-report bias remains in qualitative research.</p> <p>Regarding implications for future research, elective courses in high school settings encapsulate a wide variety of curricular content: academic, languages other than English, career and technology, JROTC, business and law, the visual-performing arts, student leadership, and several other types of courses. The interviewed participants were predominantly in academically centered content, and an exploration of supports provided in performance-based and/or leadership-focused elective courses is needed. Replicating this study beyond a single school district into an investigation across urban, suburban, and rural districts with differing degrees of elective course availability might prove considerably interesting. Transitioning the findings of the current study into a mixed-methods design to provide wider-ranging survey results to then follow up with selected interview participants may also prove compelling. Finally, culturally responsive pedagogy with affective curricular implementation was not the scope of this investigation. A future study that positions this study within the context of underrepresented and marginalized communities in gifted-identified populations would be highly insightful.</p> <hd id="AN0193364108-36">Conclusion</hd> <p>High school elective teachers in the United States instruct varying levels of academically prepared students, all requiring different pedagogical strategies, who are all seated in the same classroom. While the teachers who participated in this study identified several strategies they utilized to support their academically advanced students, they more so spoke to how they viewed themselves and their content in the greater educational landscape. These high school elective teachers spoke to a deep obligation to provide their academically advanced students the skills they needed to succeed in life after high school. These skills were not merely found within their content areas such as personal financial accounting or the acquisition of a second language, but rather they were purposely developing their academically advanced students in ways that their foundational core classes could not. In teaching their mixed-ability classes, teachers who participated in this study sought to create classroom that reflected real life, where students learn they will not always be surrounded by their peers and must learn to work across differences toward a common goal. Teachers identified that, at times, this meant students should take initiative and deeply explore what they were immensely interested in; other times, it meant learning from others who might have a different talent or skillset. Learning through failure is an important concept, and high school elective courses offer a valuable opportunity to teach academically advanced students its significance.</p> <ref id="AN0193364108-37"> <title> References </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref4" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> Abu N. K., Akkanat Ç, Gökdere M. (2017). Teachers' views about the education of gifted students in regular classrooms. Turkish Journal of Giftedness & Education, 7(2), 87–109. https://<ulink href="http://www.researchgate.net/publication/323838217%5fTeachers'%5fViews%5fabout%5fthe%5fEducation%5fof%5fGifted%5fStudents%5fin%5fRegular%5fClassrooms%5fTurk%5fUstun%5fZeka%5fve%5fEgitim%5fDergisi">www.researchgate.net/publication/323838217%5fTeachers'%5fViews%5fabout%5fthe%5fEducation%5fof%5fGifted%5fStudents%5fin%5fRegular%5fClassrooms%5fTurk%5fUstun%5fZeka%5fve%5fEgitim%5fDergisi</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref93" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Anyan F. (2013). The influence of power shifts in data collection and analysis stages: A focus on qualitative research interview. The Qualitative Report, 18(18), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2013.1525</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref74" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> Ashworth P. (1999). "Bracketing" in phenomenology: Renouncing assumptions in hearing about student cheating. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 12(6), 707–721. https://doi.org/10.1080/095183999235845</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref60" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> Barbier K., Struyf E., Donche V. (2021). Teachers' beliefs about and educational practices with high-ability students. Teaching and Teacher Education, 109(1), 103566. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2021.103566.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref43" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Bondie R. S., Dahnke C., Zusho A. (2019). How does changing "one-size-fits-all" to differentiated instruction affect teaching? Review of Research in Education, 43(1), 336–362. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X18821130</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref65" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> Borland J. H. (2003).The death of giftedness: Gifted education without gifted children (pp. 105–126). Teachers College Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref48" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Brighton C. M., Hertberg H. L., Moon T. R., Tomlinson C. A., Callahan C. M. (2005). The feasibility of high-end learning in a diverse middle school (RM05210). University of Connecticut, The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" idref="ref97" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> College Advisor. (n.d.). Understanding passion projects. https://<ulink href="http://www.collegeadvisor.com/resources/passion-projects/">www.collegeadvisor.com/resources/passion-projects/</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref5" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> Crawford B. F., Snyder K. E., Adelson J. L. (2020). Exploring obstacles faced by gifted minority students through Bronfenbrenner's bioecological systems theory. High Ability Studies, 31(1), 43–74. https://doi.org/10.1080/13598139.2019.1568231</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Creswell J. W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Sage Publications.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Cross T. L., Cross J. R. (2017). Maximizing potential: A school-based conception of psychosocial development. High Ability Studies, 28(1), 43–58. https://doi.org/10.1080/13598139.2017.1292896</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Dai D. Y., Chen F. (2013). Three paradigms of gifted education: In search of conceptual clarity in research and practice. Gifted Child Quarterly, 57(3), 151–168. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986213490020</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Fischer C. T. (2009). Bracketing in qualitative research: Conceptual and practical matters. Psychotherapy Research, 19(4–5), 583–590. https://doi.org/10.1080/10503300902798375</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Godor B. P. (2019). Gifted metaphors: Exploring the metaphors of teachers in gifted education and their impact on teaching the gifted. Roeper Review, 41(1), 51–60. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783193.2018.1553219</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Johnsen S. K., Kaul C. R. (2019). Assessing teacher beliefs regarding research-based practices to improve services for GT students. Gifted Child Today, 42(4), 229–239. https://doi.org/10.1177/1076217519862332</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Leung K. C. (2018). An updated meta-analysis on the effect of peer tutoring on tutors' achievement. School Psychology International, 40(2), 200–214. https://doi.org/10.1177/0143034318808832</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Matusevich M. N., O'connor K. A., Hargett M. V. P. (2009). The nonnegotiables of academic rigor. Gifted Child Today, 32(4), 44–52. https://doi.org/10.1177/107621750903200412</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> McCoach D. B., Siegle D. (2007). What predicts teachers' attitudes toward the gifted? Gifted Child Quarterly, 51(3), 246–254. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986207302719</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Moon T. R., Tomlinson C. A., Callahan C. M. (1995). Academic diversity in the middle school: Results of a national survey of middle school administrators and teachers (Research Monograph 95124). University of Connecticut, The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Moustakas C. (1994). Phenomenological research methods. Sage Publications, Inc.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> National Association for Gifted Children, & Council for Exceptional Children. (2013). NAGC – CEC teacher preparation standards in gifted and talented education. National Association for Gifted Children. https://<ulink href="http://www.nagc.org/resources-publications/resources/national-standards-gifted-and-talented-education/nagc-cec-teacher-0">www.nagc.org/resources-publications/resources/national-standards-gifted-and-talented-education/nagc-cec-teacher-0</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> National Association for Gifted Children, & Council for Exceptional Children. (2014). Knowledge & skill standards in gifted & talented education for all teachers. National Association for Gifted Children. https://<ulink href="http://www.nagc.org/resources-publications/resources/national-standards-gifted-and-talented-education/knowledge-and">www.nagc.org/resources-publications/resources/national-standards-gifted-and-talented-education/knowledge-and</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> National Association for Gifted Children. (n.d.). Guiding questions to apply the pre-k to grade 12 gifted programming standards. https://nagc.org/page/Guiding-Questions-to-Apply-the-Pre-K-to-Grade-12-Gifted-Programming-Standards</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Neihart M., Reis S. M., Robinson N. M., Moon S. M. (2002). The social and emotional development of gifted children. What do we know?Prufrock Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Novak A., Jen E. (2024). The editorial word: Trustworthiness. Journal of Advanced Academics, 35(4), 718–728. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932202X241288384</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Nowell L. S., Norris J. M., White D. E., Moules N. J. (2017). Thematic analysis: Striving to meet the trustworthiness criteria. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 16(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406917733847</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Olszewski-Kubilius P., Subotnik R. F., Worrell F. C. (2015). Antecedent and concurrent psychosocial skills that support high levels of achievement within talent domains. High Ability Studies, 26(2), 195–210. https://doi.org/10.1080/13598139.2015.1095077</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Plucker J. A., Dilley A. (2016). Ability grouping and the socioemotional development of gifted kids. In Neihart M., Reis S. M., Robinson N. M., Moon S. M. (Eds.) The social and emotional development of gifted children: What do we know? (2nd ed., pp. 231–240). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003238928</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Pietkiewicz I., Smith J. A. (2014). A practical guide to using interpretative phenomenological analysis in qualitative research psychology. Psychological Journal, 20(1), 7–14. https://doi.org/10.14691/CPPJ.20.1.7</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Reis-Jorge J., Ferreira M., Olcina-Sempere G., Marques B. (2021). Perceptions of giftedness and classroom practice with gifted children – an explanatory study of primary school teachers. Qualitative Research in Education, 10(3), 291–315. https://doi.org/10.17583/qre.8097</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Reis S. M., Gubbins E. J., Briggs C. J., Schreiber F. J., Richards S., Jacobs J. K., Eckert R. D., Renzulli J. S. (2004). Reading instruction for talented readers: Case studies documenting few opportunities for continuous progress. Gifted Child Quarterly, 48(4), 315–338. https://doi.org/10.1177/001698620404800406</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Reis S. M., Renzulli J. S. (2009). The schoolwide enrichment model: A focus on student strengths and interests. In Renzulli J. S., Gubbins E. J., McMillen K. S., Eckert R. D., Little C. A. (Eds.), Systems and models for developing progroms for the gifted and talented (2nd ed., pp. 323–352). Prufrock Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Renzulli J. S., Reis S. M. (2017). Schools are places for talent development. In Plucker J. A., Rinn A. N., Makel M. (Eds.), From giftedness to gifted education: Reflecting theory in practice (pp. 21–42). Prufrock Press Inc.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rinn A. N., Mun R. U., Hodges J. (2022). 2020–2021 State of the states in gifted education. National Association for Gifted Children and the Council of State Directors of Programs for the Gifted. https://nagc.org/page/state-of-the-states-report</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Russell J. L. (2018). High school teachers' perceptions of giftedness, gifted education, and talent development. Journal of Advanced Academics, 29(4), 275–303. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932202X18775658</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Smith J. A., Flowers P., Larkin M. (2012). Interpretive Phenomenological Analysis: Theory, Method and Research. Sage Publications.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Szymanski A., Croft L., Godor B. (2018). Determining attitudes toward ability: A new tool for new understanding. Journal of Advanced Academics, 29(1), 29–55. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932202X17738989</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Texas Administrative Code, No. 89.2. (2015). https://tea.texas.gov/about-tea/laws-and-rules/sboe-rules-tac/sboe-tac-currently-in-effect/ch089a.pdf</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Texas Education Agency. (2024). Texas state plan for the education of gifted/talented students. https://tea.texas.gov/academics/special-student-populations/gifted-and-talented-education/v2-gt-state-plan-2024.pdf</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Texas Education Agency. (n.d.). Subject areas. https://tea.texas.gov/academics/subject-areas</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Tomlinson C. A. (2004). The Möbius effect: Addressing learner variance in schools. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 37(6), 516–524. https://doi.org/10.1177/00222194040370060601.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Troxclair D. A. (2013). Preservice teacher attitudes toward giftedness. Roeper Review, 35(1), 58–64. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783193.2013.740603</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Vogl K., Preckel F. (2014). Full-time ability grouping of gifted students: Impacts on social self-concept and school-related attitudes. Gifted Child Quarterly, 58(1), 51–68. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986213513795</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Wang H., King R. B., McInerney D. M. (2021). Ability grouping and student performance: A longitudinal investigation of teacher support as a mediator and moderator. Research Papers in Education, 38(2), 121–142. https://doi.org/10.1080/02671522.2021.1961293</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <ref id="AN0193364108-38"> <title> Footnotes </title> <blist> <bibtext> The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> The experimental protocols were approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) of the University of North Texas (No. 00007479) on April 25, 2023. All research activities complied with ethical regulations and were performed in accordance with regulations. Informed consent for research purposes was obtained from all patients prior to interviews. They were given the option to refuse to participate by opting out.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Travis D. Hill https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0867-7764 Andria Ellis https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2456-1112</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Travis D. Hill and Andria Ellis</p> <p>Reported by Author; Author</p> <p></p> <p>Travis D. Hill is a PhD candidate in Educational Psychology with a concentration in gifted education at the University of North Texas. His research interests include postsecondary transition supports for academically advanced students, gamification as a pedagogical tool, creativity in adults, and methodology.</p> <p>Andria Ellis is a PhD candidate in Educational Psychology with a concentration in gifted education at the University of North Texas. Her research interests include ways of centering gifted individuals' voices through research, adult gifted identities, creativity in programming, and internal conceptions of giftedness.</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib34" firstref="ref1"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib11" firstref="ref6"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib24" firstref="ref7"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib27" firstref="ref8"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib33" firstref="ref9"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib30" firstref="ref11"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib18" firstref="ref12"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib37" firstref="ref13"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib42" firstref="ref17"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib31" firstref="ref19"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib35" firstref="ref21"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl12" bibid="bib21" firstref="ref23"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl13" bibid="bib22" firstref="ref24"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl14" bibid="bib39" firstref="ref25"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl15" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref27"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl16" bibid="bib38" firstref="ref30"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl17" bibid="bib40" firstref="ref34"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl18" bibid="bib23" firstref="ref37"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl19" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref39"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl20" bibid="bib32" firstref="ref41"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl21" bibid="bib41" firstref="ref42"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl22" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref44"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl23" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref49"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl24" bibid="bib28" firstref="ref52"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl25" bibid="bib43" firstref="ref53"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl26" bibid="bib44" firstref="ref54"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl27" bibid="bib17" firstref="ref59"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl28" bibid="bib36" firstref="ref67"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl29" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref68"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl30" bibid="bib20" firstref="ref69"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl31" bibid="bib29" firstref="ref70"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl32" bibid="bib13" firstref="ref75"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl33" bibid="bib25" firstref="ref77"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl34" bibid="bib26" firstref="ref78"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl35" bibid="bib16" firstref="ref105"></nolink>
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1504543
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Beyond Content: An Exploration of Teachers' Practices for Supporting Academically Advanced Students in Elective High School Classrooms
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Travis+D%2E+Hill%22">Travis D. Hill</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0867-7764">0000-0003-0867-7764</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Andria+Ellis%22">Andria Ellis</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2456-1112">0000-0003-2456-1112</externalLink>)
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Journal+of+Advanced+Academics%22"><i>Journal of Advanced Academics</i></searchLink>. 2026 37(2):332-363.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: SAGE Publications. 2455 Teller Road, Thousand Oaks, CA 91320. Tel: 800-818-7243; Tel: 805-499-9774; Fax: 800-583-2665; e-mail: journals@sagepub.com; Web site: https://sagepub.com
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 32
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2026
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Research
– Name: Audience
  Label: Education Level
  Group: Audnce
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Secondary+Education%22">Secondary Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22High+Schools%22">High Schools</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Teacher+Attitudes%22">Teacher Attitudes</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Teacher+Role%22">Teacher Role</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Role+Perception%22">Role Perception</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Academically+Gifted%22">Academically Gifted</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Advanced+Students%22">Advanced Students</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Gifted+Education%22">Gifted Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Individualized+Instruction%22">Individualized Instruction</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Grouping+%28Instructional+Purposes%29%22">Grouping (Instructional Purposes)</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Teacher+Effectiveness%22">Teacher Effectiveness</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Phenomenology%22">Phenomenology</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Ability+Grouping%22">Ability Grouping</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22High+School+Teachers%22">High School Teachers</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22High+School+Students%22">High School Students</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Elective+Courses%22">Elective Courses</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Geographic Terms
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Texas%22">Texas</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1177/1932202X251361596
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 1932-202X<br />2162-9536
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: This study reflects on secondary elective teachers' perceptions of their roles in supporting academically advanced students in mixed-ability classrooms. Despite many states mandating gifted education, services and teacher training vary. The current study uses an interpretative phenomenological analytical approach, focusing on secondary elective teachers within a North Texas district. Through semi-structured interviews, the research investigates instructional differentiation, grouping, and rigor to understand how teachers address advanced learners' needs and their overall attitudes toward gifted education. The researchers identified four themes, which highlighted teachers' use of instructional strategies, the flexibility in elective settings to adapt learning experiences, several psychosocial characteristics of their gifted-identified students, and varying perceptions of students' needs.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2026
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ1504543
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1504543
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1177/1932202X251361596
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 32
        StartPage: 332
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Teacher Attitudes
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Teacher Role
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Role Perception
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Academically Gifted
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Advanced Students
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Gifted Education
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Individualized Instruction
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Grouping (Instructional Purposes)
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Teacher Effectiveness
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Phenomenology
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Ability Grouping
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: High School Teachers
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: High School Students
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Elective Courses
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Texas
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Beyond Content: An Exploration of Teachers' Practices for Supporting Academically Advanced Students in Elective High School Classrooms
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Travis D. Hill
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Andria Ellis
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 05
              Type: published
              Y: 2026
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 1932-202X
            – Type: issn-electronic
              Value: 2162-9536
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 37
            – Type: issue
              Value: 2
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Journal of Advanced Academics
              Type: main
ResultId 1