The Importance of Challenging Tasks for Mathematically Gifted Students

Gifted and Talented International

Volumn 17, Issue 2, 2002, Pages 76-84

  Diezmann, Carmel M ^a   Watters, James J ^a  

^a QUEENSLAND UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 13544273537     PISSN: 15332276     EISSN: 24709565     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/15332276.2002.11672991     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Australian Education Council (1991). A national statement on mathematics for Australian schools. Melbourne, Victoria: Curriculum Corporation.
2. Betts, G. T., & Neihart, M., (1986). Implementing self-directed learning models for the gifted and talented. Gifted Child Quarterly, 30, 174–177.
3. Costa, A. L., (1998). What human beings do when they behave intelligently and how they can become more so. In Q. M., Ling & H. W., Kam (Eds.), Going beyond the surface curriculum: Thinking processes (pp. 399–408). Singapore: Prentice Hall.
4. Damarin, S., (2000). The mathematically able as a marked category. Gender and Education 12, 69–85.
5. Diezmann, C. M., & English, L. D., (2001). Promoting the use of diagrams as tools for thinking. In A. A., Cuoco (Ed.), 2001 National Council of Teachers of Mathematics Yearbook: The role of representation in school mathematics (pp. 77–89). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
6. Diezmann, C. M., & Watters, J. J., (1997). Bright but bored: Optimising the environment for gifted children. Australian Journal of Early Childhood, 22 (2), 17–21.
7. Diezmann, C. M., & Watters, J. J., (2000). Catering for mathematically gifted elementary students: Learning from challenging tasks. Gifted Child Today, 23 (4), 14–19.
8. Diezmann, C. M., & Watters, J. J., (2001). The collaboration of mathematically gifted students on challenging tasks. Journal for the Education of the Gifted. 25, 7–31.
9. Doyle, W., (1983). Academic work. Review of Educational Research, 53, 159–199.
10. Doyle, W., (1988). Work in mathematics classes: The context of students’ thinking during instruction. Educational Psychologist, 23, 167–180.
11. Henningsen, M., & Stein, M. K., (1997). Mathematical tasks and student cognition: Classroom-based factors that support and inhibit high-level mathematical thinking and reasoning. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 28, 524–549.
12. Hiebert, J., Carpenter, T. P., Fennema, E., Fuson. K., Human, P., Murray, H., Olivier, A., & Wearne, D., (1996). Problem solving as a basis for reform in curriculum and instruction: The case of mathematics. Educational Researcher, 25 (4). 12–21.
13. Johnson, M. L., (1983). Identifying and teaching mathematically gifted elementary school students. Arithmetic Teacher 30 (5). 25–26. 55-56.
14. Johnson, D., (2000). Teaching mathematics to gifted students in a mixed-ability classroom. ERIC Dijsst E591. [http://ericec.org/digests/e594.html. Accessed 24 June 2002.]
15. Leinhardt, G., (1990). Capturing craft knowledge. Educational Researcher. 19 (2), 18–25.
16. MacGillivray, H., (2000). Submission to the Australian science capability review. [http://www.industry.gov.au/scicncc/review/ChanceSubmissionsReviewSubs/sub60AMSCmaths.docAccessed22March2002]
17. Metz, K. E., (1995). Reassessment of developmental constraints on children’s science instruction. Review of Educational Research 65, 93–127.
18. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston. VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
19. Rimm, S. B., (1997) Underachievement syndrome: A national epidemic. In N., Colangelo & G., Davis (Eds.), Handbook of gifted education (2nd ed.) (pp. 416–437). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
20. Romberg, T. A., (1994). Classroom instruction that fosters mathematical thinking and problem solving. In A. H., Schocnfeld (Ed.), Mathematical thinking and problem solving (pp. 287–304). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
21. Rosenshine, B., & Meister, C., (1992). The use of scaffolds for teaching higher-level cognitive strategies. Educational Leadership. 49 (7). 26–33.
22. Sheffield, L. J., (1999). Developing mathematically promising students. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
23. Silver, E. A., & Stein, M. K., (1996). The QUASAR project: The “Revolution of the possible” in mathematics instructional reform in urban middle schools. Urban Education, 30, 476–521.
24. Stein, K., Grover, B. W., & Henningsen, M., (1996). Building student capacity for mathematical thinking and reasoning: An analysis of mathematical tasks used in reform classrooms. American Educational Research Journal. 33, 455–488.
25. Sternberg, R. J., & Horvarth, J. A., (1995). A prototype view of expert teaching. Educational Researcher. 24 (6), 9–17.
26. VanTassel-Baska, J., (2003). What matters in curriculum for gifted learners: Reflections on theory, research and practice. In N., Colangelo & G., Davis (Eds.), Handbook of gifted education (3rd ed.) (pp. 174–183). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
27. Vygotsky, L. S., (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
28. Yin, R. K., (1994). Case study research: Design and methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.