I only skimmed the article but I can see how his model can be a beginning of a very slippery slope as he seems to equate giftedness with being highly determined and productive.
From posts above, the slippery slope seems to be well worn and there are a bunch of administrators wallowing in the wading pool at the bottom.
Renzulli's discussion is about exhibiting gifted behavior and that supporting students in task commitment and creativity bridges the gap between their abilities and the productive use of them. I'm less concerend about instructional content for DS as I think he has the aptitiude to manage that just fine, but the idea that a program will support the development of the other skills seems great. I have some outcome orientation in that I don't dream of DS one day being a happy pizza delivery guy. A program that measures task commitment and creativity and leadership as incoming requisites is coming from the opposite side of that article and is functionally washing its hands of the deeper responsibility to nurture and grow.
