Perspectives: Evaluating an early childhood gifted education program

Roeper Review

Volumn 21, Issue 3, 1999, Pages 222-227

  Hertzog, Nancy B ^a   Fowler, Susan A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA CHAMPAIGN   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85007881936     PISSN: 02783193     EISSN: 1940865X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/02783199909553965     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Adams, C. M. (1994), Evaluation report to the OLS Task Force, unpublished document, Champaign, IL.
2. Bredekamp, S. (Ed.), (1987). Developmentally appropriate practice in early childhood programs serving children from birth through 8. (Expanded Edition). Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children.
3. Bredekamp, S., Rosegrant, T. (Eds.). (1992). Reaching Potentials: Appropriate curriculum and assessment for young children. (Vol. 1). Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children.
4. Bredekamp, S., Rosegrant, T. (Eds.). (1995). Reaching Potentials: Transforming early childhood curriculum and assessment. (Vol. 2). Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children.
5. Callahan, C. M. (1986). Asking the right questions: The central issue in evaluating programs for the gifted and talented. Gifted Child Quarterly, 30, 38-42.
6. Callahan, C. M. (1992). Determining the effectiveness of educational services: Assessment issues. In Challenges in Gifted Education: Developing Potential and Investing in Knowledge for the 21st Century, (pp. 109-114). (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. EC 301 131)
7. Carter, K. R. (1992). A model for evaluating programs for the gifted under non-experimental conditions. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 15, 166-183.
8. Caruso, D.A., Dunn, L., File, N. (1992). Cognitive curriculum practices in preschool programs: Implications for teacher education. Journal of Research in Childhood Education 7, (1), 27-36.
9. Clarke, B. (1986). Optimizing learning: The integrative education model in the classroom. Columbus, OH: Merill.
10. Fyfe, B. (1994). Evaluation report to the OLS Task Force, unpublished document, Champaign, IL.
11. Gallagher, J. J. (1992). Gifted students and educational reform. In Challenges in Gifted Education: Developing Potential and Investing in Knowledge for the 21st Century. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. EC 301 131)
12. Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. New York: Basic Books.
13. Guilford, J. P. (1967). The nature of human intelligence. New York: McGraw-Hill.
14. Hertzog, N. B., Katz, L. G, (in progress) Documentation of young children's content learning during investigation projects, University of Illinois at Urbana-Cham-paign.
15. Katz, L. G., Chard, S. C. (1994). Engaging children's minds: The project approach. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
16. Kaufman, A., Kaufman, N. (1983). Kaufman assessment battery for children. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.
17. Kemmis, S., Stake, R. (1988). Evaluating curriculum. Geelong, Victoria: Deakin University.
18. Maker, C. J., King, M. A. (1996). Nurturing giftedness in young children. Reston, VA: The Council for Excep-tional Children.
19. Passow, H. A. (1982). Differentiated curricula for the giftedltalented. Ventura, CA: Ventura County Superintendent of Schools Office.
20. Renzulli, J. S., Reid, B. D., & Gubbins, E. J. (1992). Setting an agenda: Research priorities for the gifted and talented through the year 2000. Storrs: The University of Connecticut, The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented.
21. Renzulli, J. S. (1986). The three-ring conception of giftedness: a developmental model for creative productivity. In R. J. Sternberg and J. E. Davidson (Eds.), Conceptions of Giftedness. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
22. Renzulli, J. S., Purcell, J. H. (1996). Gifted education: A look around and a look ahead. Roeper Review, 18, (3), 173-178.
23. Ross-Fisher, R. L. (January/February, 1996). Creating an evaluation plan that's right for your program. Gifted Child Today, pp. 32-33,49.
24. Schack, G. (1996). All aboard or standing on the shore? Gifted education and the educational reform movement. Roeper Review, 18, (3), 190-197.
25. Southern, T. W. (1992). Lead us not into temptation: Issues in evaluating the effectiveness of gifted programs. In Challenges in Gifted Education: Developing Potential and Investing in Knowledge for the 21st Century, (pp. 103-108), (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. EC 301 131).
26. Stake, R.E. (1975). Evaluating the arts in education: A responsive approach. Columbus, OH: Merrill.
27. Sternberg, R. J. (1996). The sound of silence: A nation responds to its gifted. Roeper Review, 18, (3), 168-172.
28. Thorndike, R. L., Hagen, E.P., & Sattler, J. M. (1986). The Stanford-Binet intelligence scale (4th ed.). Technical manual. New York: Riverside.
29. Torrance, E. P. (1982). Thinking creatively in action and movement. Bensenville, IL: Scholastic Testing Service.
30. The University of Chicago School Mathematics Project. (1995). Chicago, IL: Everyday Learning Corporation.