GENDER EQUITY FOR GIFTED STUDENTS

Handbook for Achieving Gender Equity through Education, Second Edition

Volumn , Issue , 2014, Pages 573-582

  Fox, Lynn H ^a   Soller, Janet E ^b  

^a AMERICAN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b AMERICAN PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 79959529042     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4324/9781315759586-39     Document Type: Chapter

References (103)

1. Arnold, K. (1993). Undergraduate aspirations and career outcomes of academically talented women. Roeper Review, 15(3), 169-74.
2. Arnold, K. (1995). Lives of promise. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
3. Astin, A. W. (1993). What matters in college? Four critical years revisited. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
4. Benbow, C. P., and Lubinski, D. (1994). Individual differences amongst the mathematically gifted: Their educational and vocational implications. In N. Coangelo, S. G. Assouline, and D. L. Ambroson (Eds.), Talent development: Proceedings from the 1993 Henry B. and Jocelyn Wallace National Research Symposium on Talent Development (pp. 83-100). Dayton, OH: Ohio Psychology Press.
5. Benbow, C. P., Lubinski, D., Shea, D. L., and Eftekhari-Sanjani, H. (2000). Se differences in mathematical reasoning ability at age 13: Their status 20 years later. Psychological Science, 11(6), 474-480.
6. Benbow, C. P., and Stanley, J. C. (1983). Sex differences in mathematical reasoning ability: More facts; Science, 210, 1262-1264.
7. Brent, D., May, D. C., and Kundert, D. K. (1996). The incidence of delayed school entry: A twelve year review. Early Education and Development, 7, 1122-1135.
8. Byrnes, J. P. (2005). Gender differences in math: Cognitive processes in an expanded framework. In A. M. Gallagher and J. C. Kaufman (Eds.), Gender differences in mathematics (pp. 73-98). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
9. Byrnes, J. P., Hong, L., and Xing, S. (1997). Gender differences on the math subtest of the Scholastic Aptitude Test may be culture-specific. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 34, 49-66.
10. Chipman, S. F. (2005). Research on the women and mathematics issue: A personal case history. In A. M. Gallagher and J. C. Kaufman (Eds.), Gender differences in mathematics (pp. 1-24). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
11. Clark, B. (2002). Growing up gifted (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ:Merrill Prentice Hall.
12. Cohen, A. S., and Ibarra, R. A. (2005). Examining gender-related differential item functioning using insights from psychometric and multicontext theory. In A. M. Gallagher and J. C. Kaufman (Eds.), Gender differences in mathematics (pp. 143-171). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
13. Colangelo, N., and Kerr, B. A. (1991). Extreme academic talent: Profiles of perfect scorers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 404-410.
14. Colangelo, N., Kerr, B., Christensen, P., and Maxey, J. (1993). A comparison of gifted underachievers and gifted high achievers. Gifted Child Quarterly, 37, 155-160.
15. College Board. (2005). Advanced placement summary reports: 2005. Retrieved August 7, 2006, from ttp://www.collegeboard.com/students/testing/ap/exgrd_sum/2005.html
16. Crombie, G., Bouffard-Bouchard, T., and Schneider, B. H. (1992). Gifted programs: Gender differences in referral and enrollment. Gifted Child Quarterly, 36(4), 213-214.
17. Daignault, M., and Edwards, A., Pohlman, C., and McCabe, A. (1990). Selection for giftedness programs: Why the gender imbalance? In J. L. Ellis and J.M. Willinsky (Eds.), Girls, women and giftedness (pp. 61-64). New York: Trillium Press.
18. DeMeis, J. L., and Stearns, E. S. (1992). Relationship of school entrance age to academic and social performance. Journal of Educational Research, 86, 20-27.
19. Eccles, J. S., and Harold, R. D. (1992). Gender differences in educational and occupational patterns among the gifted. In N. Coangelo, S. G. Assouline, and D. L. Ambroson (Eds.), Talent development: Proceedings from the 1991 Henry B. and Jocelyn Wallace National Research Symposium on Talent Development (pp. 2-30). Unionville, NY:Trillium Press.
20. Feldhusen, J. F., and Willard-Holt, C. (1993). Gender differences in classroom interactions and career aspirations of gifted students. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 18, 355-362.
21. Flores, P. V. (1990, April 16-20). How Dick and Jane perform differently in geometry: Test results on reasoning, visualization, trans formation, applications, and coordinates. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Boston, MA.
22. Fox, L. H. (1976). Sex differences in mathematical talent: Bridging the gap. In D. P. Keating (Ed.), Intellectual talent: Research and development (pp. 183-214). Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
23. Fox, L. H. (1977). Sex differences: Implications for program planning for the academically gifted. In J. C. Stanley, W. C. George, and C. H. Solano (Eds.), The gifted and the creative: A fifty-year perspective (pp. 113-138). Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
24. Fox, L. H. (1981). The problem of women and mathematics. New York:The Ford Foundation.
25. Fox, L. H., and Brody, L. (1980). An accelerative intervention program for mathematically gifted girls. In L. H. Fox, L. Brody, and D. Tobin (Eds.), Women and the mathematical mystique (pp. 164-78). Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
26. Fox, L. H., Brody, L., and Tobin, D. (1984-5). The impact of intervention programs upon course-taking and attitudes in high school. In S. F. Chipman, L. R. Brush, and D. M. Wilson (Eds.), Women and mathematics:Balancing the equation (pp. 249-274). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
27. Fox, L. H., and Cohn, S. (1980). Sex differences in the development of precocious mathematical talent. In L. H. Fox, L. Brody, and D. Tobin (Eds.), Women and the mathematical mystique (pp. 94-111). Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
28. Fox, L. H., and Durden, W. G. (1982). Educating verbally gifted youth. Bloomington, IN: Phi Delta Kappa Educational Foundation.
29. Fox, L. H., Engle, J., and Paek, P. (2001) An exploratory look at social factors and mathematics achievement among high-scoring students:Cross-cultural perspectives from TIMSS. Gifted and Talented International, 16(1), 7-15.
30. Fox, L. H., Engle, J., and Soller, J. (1999) Gifted girls and the math/science mystique. Understanding Our Gifted, 11(2), 3-7.
31. Fox, L. H., Sadker, D. L., and Engle, J. L. (1999). Sexism in the schools:Implications for the education of gifted girls. Gifted and Talented International, 14(2), 66-79.
32. Fox, L. H., and Soller, J. (1999). Mathematically gifted girls: Bridging the gender gap. Gifted Education Press Quarterly, 13(1), 2-7.
33. Fox, L. H., and Tobin, D. (1988). Broadening career horizons of gifted girls. G/C/T, 11(1), 9-13.
34. Fox, L. H., and Zimmerman, W. (1985). Gifted women. In J. Freeman (Ed.), The psychology of gifted children (pp. 219-43). London: Wiley and Sons.
35. Freeman J. (2004). Cultural influences on gifted gender achievement. High Ability Studies, 15(1), 7-23.
36. Furnham, A., Wytykowska, A., and Petrides, K. V. (2005). Estimates of multiple intelligences: A study in Poland. European Psychologist, 10(1), 51-59.
37. Gallagher, J. (1985). Teaching the gifted child (3rd ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
38. Gallagher, J. J. (2000). Changing paradigms for gifted education in the United States. In K. A. Heller, F. J. Monks, R. J. Sternberg, and R. F. Subotnik (Eds.), International handbook of giftedness and talent (2nd ed., pp. 681-694). Oxford, U.K.: Elsevier Science Ltd.
39. Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. New York: Basic Books.
40. George, D. (1993). Instructional strategies and models for gifted education. In K. A. Heller, F. J. Monks, and A. H. Passow (Eds.), International handbook of giftedness and talent (pp. 411-426). Oxford, U.K.: Pergamon Press Ltd.
41. Gullo, D. F., and Burton, C. B. (1992). Age of entry, preschool experience and sex as antecedents of academic readiness in kindergarten. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 7, 175-186.
42. Hallinan, M. T., and Sorenson, A. B. (1987). Ability grouping and sex differences in mathematics achievement. Sociology of Education, 60, 63-72.
43. Halpern, D. F., Wai, J., and Saw, A. (2005). A psychobiosocial model: Why females are sometimes greater than and sometimes less than males in math achievement. In A. M. Gallagher and J. C. Kaufman (Eds.), Gender differences in mathematics (pp. 25-47). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
44. Hedges, L. V., and Nowell, A. (1995). Sex differences in mental test scores, variability and numbers of high-scoring individuals. Science, 269, 41-45.
45. Hyde, J. S., and Linn, M. C. (1988). Gender differences in verbal ability: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 104(1), 53-69.
46. Jackson, N. (1988) Precocious reading ability: What does it mean? Gifted Child Quarterly, 32(1), 200-204.
47. Jackson, N. (1992). Understanding giftedness in young children, lessons from the study of precocious readers. In N. Colangelo, S. G. Assouline, and D. L. Ambrosen (Eds.), Talent development: Proceedings from the 1991 Henry B. and Jocelyn Wallace National Research Symposium (pp. 163-179). Unionville, NY: Trillium Press.
48. Jacobs, J. E., and Eccles, J. S. (1992). The influence of parent stereotypes on parent and child ability beliefs in three domains. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 932-944.
49. Jozefowicz, D. M., Barber, B. L., and Eccles, J. S. (1993). Adolescent workrelated values and beliefs: Gender differences and relation to occupational aspirations. Paper presented at the Biennial Meeting of the Society for Research on Child Development, New Orleans, LA.
50. Kerr, B. A. (1994). Smart girls: a psychology of girls, women and giftedness. Dayton, OH: Psychological Press.
51. Kerr, B. (2000). Guiding gifted girls and young women. In K. A. Heller, F. J. Monks, R. J. Sternberg, and R. F. Subotnik (Eds.), International handbook of giftedness and talent (2nd ed., pp. 649-658). Oxford, U.K.: Elsevier Science Ltd.
52. Kerr, B. A., and Cohn, S. J. (2001). Smart boys: Talent, manhood, and the search for meaning. Tempe, AZ: Great Potential Press.
53. Kerr, B., and Foley Nicpon, M. (2002). Gender and giftedness. In N. Colangelo and G. Davis (Eds.), Handbook of gifted education (pp. 493-505). New York: Allyn and Bacon.
54. Kerr, B., and Kurpius, S. E. R. (2004). Encouraging talented girls in math and science: Effects of a guidance intervention. High Ability Studies, 15(1), 85-102.
55. Kischenbaum, R. J., and Reis, S. M. (1997). Conflicts in creativity: Talented female artists. Creativity Research Journal, 10(2and3), 251-263.
56. Kolitch, E. R., and Brody, L. E. (1992). Mathematics acceleration of highly talented students: An evaluation. Gifted Child Quarterly, 36(2), 78-86.
57. List, K., and Renzulli, J. S. (1991). Creative women’s development pattern through age thirty-five. Gifted Education International 7(3), 114-122.
58. Lubinski, D., Benbow, C. P., and Morelock, M. J. (2000) Gender differences in engineering and physical sciences among the gifted: An inorganic- organic distinction. In K. A. Heller, F. J. Monks, R. J. Sternberg, and R. F. Subotnik (Eds.), International handbook of giftedness and talent (2nd ed.; pp. 633-648). Oxford, U.K.: Elsevier Science Ltd.
59. Marland, S., Jr. (1972). Education of the gifted and talented. Report to the Congress of the United States by the U.S. Commissioner of Education. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
60. Montgomery, J. L., and Benbow, C. P. (1992). Factors that influence the career aspirations of mathematically precocious females. In N. Colangelo, S. G., Assouline, and D. L. Ambroson (Eds.), Talent development: Proceedings from the 1991 Henry B. and Jocelyn Wallace National Research Symposium on Talent Development (pp. 384-386). Unionville, NY: Trillium Press.
61. Noble, K. D., Subotnik, R. F., and Arnold, K. D. (1999). To thine own self be true: A new model of female talent develoment. Gifted Child Quarterly, 43, 140-149.
62. Olszewski-Kubilius, P. (1995). A summary of research regarding early entrance to college. Roeper Review, 18(2), 121-126.
63. Olszewski-Kubilius, P., and Whalen, S. P. (2000). The education and development of verbally talented students. In K. A. Heller, F. J. Monks, R. J. Sternberg, and R. F. Subotnik (Eds.), International handbook of giftedness and talent (2nd ed., pp. 397-412). Oxford, U.K.: Elsevier Science Ltd.
64. Olszewski-Kubilius, P., and Yasmoto, J. (1994). Factors affecting the academic choices of academically talented adolescents. In N. Coangelo, S. G. Assouline, and D. L. Ambroson (Eds.), Talent development: Proceedings from the 1993 Henry B. and Jocelyn Wallace National Research Symposium on Talent Development (pp. 393-398). Dayton, OH: Ohio Psychology Press.
65. Piirto, J. (1991). Why are there so few? Creative women: Visual artists, mathematicians, musicians. Roeper Review, 13(3), 142-147.
66. Program for the Exceptionally Gifted (PEG). (2006). Mary Baldwin College. Retrieved February 6, 2007, from http://www/mbc.edu/peg
67. Read, C. R.. (1991) Gender distribution in programs for the gifted. Roeper Review, 13(4), 188-193.
68. Redding, R. (1990). Learning preferences and skill patterns among underachieving gifted adolescents. Gifted Child Quarterly, 34(2), 72-75.
69. Reis, S. M. (1998). Work left undone: Choices and compromises of talented females. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
70. Reis, S. M. (2002). Toward a theory of creatively in diverse creative women. Creativity Research Journal, 14(3and4), 305-316.
71. Reis, S. M. (2003). Gifted girls, twenty-five years later: Hope realized and new challenges found. Roeper Review, 25(4), 154-157.
72. Reis, S. M., and Callahan, C. M. (1989). Gifted females: They’ve come a long way-or have they? Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 12, 99-117.
73. Renzulli, J. (2002). Expanding the conception of giftedness to include co-cognitive traits and to promote social capital. Phi Delta Kappan, 84(1), 33-58.
74. Robinson, N., and Weimer, L. (1991). Selection of candidates for early admission to kindergarten and first grade. In W. T. Southern and E. Jones (Eds.), The academic acceleration of gifted children (pp. 29-50). New York: Teachers College Press.
75. Robertson, E. (1991). Neglected dropouts: The gifted and talented. Equity and Excellence, 25, 62-74.
76. Rohrer, J. C. (1997, July 31). The Lake Tahoe Watershed Project: Fostering the interest of female middle school students in math and science. Paper presented at the 12th Biennial World Council for Gifted and Talented Children, Seattle, WA.
77. Ross, P. O. (1993). National excellence: A case for developing America’s talent. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.
78. Sarouphim, K. M. (2004). Discover in middle school: Identifying gifted minority students. The Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 15(2), 61-69.
79. Schober, B., Reimann, R., and Wagner, P. (2004). Is research on genderspecific underachievement in gifted girls an obsolete topic? New Findings on an often discussed issue. High Ability Studies, 15(1), 43-62.
80. Seely, K. R. (1993). Gifted students at risk. In L. K. Silverman (Ed.), Counseling the gifted and talented (pp. 263-276). Denver: Love.
81. Smith, W. S., and Erb, T. O. (1986). Effect of women science career role models on early adolescents’ attitudes toward scientists and women in science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 23(8), 667-676.
82. Stanley, J. C. (1988). Some characteristics of SMPY’S 700-800 on SAT-M before the age 13 group: Youths who reason extremely well mathematically. Gifted Child Quarterly, 32, 205-209.
83. Stanley, J. C. (1991). An academic model for educating the mathematically talented. Gifted Child Quarterly, 35, 36-42.
84. Stanley, J. C., Benbow, C. P., Brody, L. E., Dauber, S., andLupkowski, A. (1992). Gender differences on eighty-six nationally standardized achievement and aptitude tests. In N. Colangelo, S. G. Assouline, and D. L. Ambrosen (Eds.), Talent development: Proceedings from the 1991 Henry B. and Jocelyn Wallace National Research Symposium (pp. 42-61). Unionville, NY: Trillium Press.
85. Stanley, J. C., Keating, D. P., and Fox, L. H. (Eds.). (1974). Mathematical talent: Discovery, description, and development. Baltimore, MD:The Johns Hopkins University Press.
86. Steele, C. M., and Aronson, J. (1995). Stereotype threat and the intellectual test performance of African Americans. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69(5), 797-811.
87. Stephens, K. R., and Karnes, F. A. (2000). State definitions for the gifted and talented revisited. Exceptional Children, 66(2), 219-238.
88. Sternberg, R. (1986). A triarchic theory of intellectual giftedness. In R. Sternberg and J. Davidson (Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness (pp. 223-243). Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
89. Sternberg, R. (2000). Giftedness as developing expertise. In K. A. Heller, F. J. Monks, R. J. Sternberg, and R. F. Subotnik (Eds.), International handbook of giftedness and talent (2nd ed., pp. 55-66). Oxford, U.K.: Elsevier Science Ltd.
90. Stumpf, H., and Stanley, J. C. (1996). Gender-related differences on the College Board’s advanced placement and achievement tests, 1982-1992. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 353-364.
91. Subotnik, R. F., and Arnold, K. D. (1994). Beyond Terman: Longitudinal studies: Contemporary longitudinal studies of giftedness and talent. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
92. Subotnik, R. F., and Arnold, K. D. (1996). Success and sacrifice: The costs of talent fulfillment for women in science. In K. D. Arnold, K. D. Noble, R. F. Subtonik (Eds.), Remarkable women: Perspectives on female talent and development (pp. 263-280). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press, Inc.
93. Subotnik, R., and Strauss, S. M. (1995). Gender differences in classroom participation and achievement: An experiment involving advanced placement calculus classes. The Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 6(2), 77-85.
94. Swanson, M. (2002). National survey on the state governance of K-12 gifted and talented education: Summary report. Tennessee Initiative for Gifted Education Reform (TIGER). Retrieved August 18, 2006, from www.tigernetwork.org
95. Tannenbaum, A. J. (2000). A history of giftedness in school and society. In K. A. Heller, F. J. Monks, R. J. Sternberg, and R. F. Subotnik (Eds.), International handbook of giftedness and talent (2nd ed., pp. 23-54). Oxford, U.K.: Elsevier Science Ltd.
96. Takihira, S. (1995). Cross-cultural study on variables influencing gender differences in mathematics performance. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Department of Human Development, University of Maryland, College Park.
97. Terman, L. M., and Oden, M. H. (1935). Genetic studies of genius: Vol. 3. The promise of youth. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
98. Tomlinson, C. (1995). How to differentiate instruction in mixed ability classrooms. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
99. Tomlinson, C. A. (1996). Good teaching for one and all: Does gifted education have an instructional identity? Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 20(2), 155-174.
100. Tomlinson, C. A., and McTighe, J. (2006). Integrating differentiated instruction and understanding by design. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
101. Walters, A. M., and Brown, L. M. (2005). The role of ethnicity on the gender gap in mathematics. In A. M. Gallagher and J. C. Kaufman (Eds.), Gender differences in mathematics (pp. 207-219). Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
102. Whitmore, J. (1980). Giftedness, conflict and underachievement. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
103. Wolfe, J. A. (1991). Underachieving gifted males: Are we missing the boat? Roeper Review, 13(4), 181-183.