Studying the meaning of giftedness: Inspiration from the field of cognitive psychology

Roeper Review

Volumn 27, Issue 3, 2005, Pages 172-177

  Miller, Erin Morris ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85007889361     PISSN: 02783193     EISSN: 1940865X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/02783190509554312     Document Type: Article

References (67)

1. Ahn, W. (1998). Why are different features central for natural kinds of artifacts?: The role of causal status in determining feature centrality. Cognition, 69, 135-178.
2. Ahn, W. (1999). Effect of causal structure on category construction. Memory & Cognition, 27, 1008-1023.
3. Ahn, W., Kim, N. S., Lassaline, M. E., & Dennis, M. J. (2000). Causal status as a determinant of feature centrality. Cognitive Psychology, 41, 361-416.
4. Argyris, M., & Schön, D. (1974). Theory in practice. Increasing professional effectiveness. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
5. Bernai, E. M. (2000). The quintessential features of gifted education as seen from a multicultural perspective. In G. B. Esquivel & J. C. Houtz (Eds.) Creativity and giftedness in culturally diverse students (pp. 159-191). Cresskill, NJ: Harrington Press.
6. Bluer, H. (1972). Symbolic interactionism. In J. Spradley (Ed.), Culture and cognition (pp. 65-83). Prospect Heights: Waveland Press.
7. Callahan, C. M., Tomlinson, C. A., Moon, T. R., Tomchin, E. M., & Plucker, J. A. (1995). Project START: Using a multiple intelligences model in identifying and promoting talent in high-risk students (Research monograph No. 95136). Storrs, CT: University of Connecticut, National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented.
8. Campbell, J. R., & Vema, M. A. (1998, April). Messages from the field, American teachers of the gifted talk back to the research community. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA.
9. Coleman, E. B., & Shore, B. (1991). Problem-solving processes of high and average performers in physics. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 14, 366-379.
10. Coleman, M R., & Gallagher, J. J. (1995). State identification policies: Gifted students from special populations. Roeper Review, 17, 268-275.
11. Dirkx, J. M., & Spurgin, M. E. (1992). Implicit theories of adult basic education teachers: How their beliefs about students shape classroom practice. Adult Basic Education, 2, 20-41.
12. Donovan, M. S., & Cross, C. T. (2002). Minority students in special and gifted education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
13. Elksnin, L. K. (2001). Implementing the Case Method of Instruction in special education teacher preparation programs. Teacher Education and Special Education, 24, 95-107.
14. Fernández, A. T., Gay, L. R., Lucky, L. F., & Gavilán, M. R. (1998). Teacher perceptions of gifted Hispanic limited English proficient students. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 21, 335-351.
15. Ford, D. Y. (1998). The underrepresentation of minority students in gifted education: Problems and promises in recruitment and retention. The Journal of Special Education, 32(1), 4-14.
16. Ford, D. Y., Harris, J. J., Tyson, C. A., & Trotman, M. F. (2002). Beyond deficit thinking: Providing access for gifted African American students. Roeper Review, 24, 52-58.
17. Frank Poner Graham Child Development Center. (2000). About the Case Method of Instruction (CMI). Retrieved February 24, 2003, from: http://www.fpg.unc.edu/-cmi/about_cmi.htm
18. Frasier, M. M., Hunsaker, S. L., Lee, J., Mitchell, S., Cramond, B., Krisel, S., Garcia, J. H., Martin, D., Frank, E., & Finley, V. S. (1995). Core attributes of giftedness: A foundation for recognizing the gifted potential of minority and economically disadvantaged students (Research monograph No. 95210). Storrs, CT: National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented.
19. Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. New York: BasicBooks.
20. Gardner, H. (1996). Probing more deeply into the theory of multiple intelligences. NASSP Bulletin, 80(583), 1-7.
21. Grantham, T. C. (2002). Straight talk on the issue of underrrepresentation: An interview with Dr. Mary Frasier. Roeper Review, 24, 50-51.
22. Guskin, S. L., Peng, C-Y. J., & Simon, M. (1992). Do teachers react to "multiple intelligences"? Effects of teachers' stereotypes on judgments and expectancies for students with diverse patterns of giftedness/talent. Gifted Child Quarterly, 36, 32-37.
23. Hadaway, N., & Marek-Schroer, M. F. (1992). Multidimensional assessment of the gifted minority student. Roeper Review, 15, 73-11.
24. Hunsaker, S. L. (1994). Creativity as a characteristic of giftedness: Teachers see it, then they don't. Roeper Review, 17, 11-15.
25. Johnsen, S. K. & Ryser, G. R. (1997). The validity of portfolios in predicting performance in a gifted program. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 20, 253-267.
26. Kanevsky, L. (1990). Pursuing qualitative difference in the flexible use of problemsolving strategy by young children. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 13, 115-140.
27. Kanevsky, L. (2000). Dynamic assessment of gifted students. In K. A. Heller, F. J. Monks, R. J. Sternberg & R. F. Subotnik (Eds), International handbook of giftedness and talent (pp. 283-296). Oxford, UK: Elsevier Science Ltd.
28. Kim, N. S, & Ahn, W. (2002). The influence of naïve causal theories on lay concepts of mental illness. American Journal of Psychology. 115, 33-65.
29. Lim, W., Plucker, J. A., & Im, K. (2002). We are more alike than we think we are: Implicit theories of intelligence with a Korean sample. Intelligence, 30, 185-208.
30. Lynott, D., & Woolfolk, A. E. (1994). Teachers' implicit theories of intelligence and their educational goals. The Journal of Research and Development in Education, 27, 253-264.
31. Maker, C. J. (1996). Identification of gifted minority students: A national problem, needed changes and a promising solution. Gifted Child Quarterly, 40, 41-50.
32. McCarty, F., Abbott-Shim, M., & Lambert, R. (2001). The relationship between teacher beliefs and practices, and Head Start classroom quality. Early Education & Development, 12, 225-238.
33. McWilliam, P. J. (1992). The Case Method of Instruction: Teaching application and problem-solving skills to early interventionists. Journal of Early Intervention, 16, 360-373.
34. Medin, D. L. (1989). Concepts and conceptual structure. American Psychologist, 44, 1469-1481.
35. Medin, D. L., & Schaffer, M. M. (1978). A context theory of classification learning. Psychological Review, 85, 207-238.
36. Murphy, G. L. (1993). Theories and concept formation. In I. Van Mechelen, J. Hampton, R. S. Michalski, and P. Theuns (Eds.), Categories and concepts: Theoretical views and inductive data analysis. San Diego: Academic Press.
37. Murphy, G. L., & Medin, D. L. (1985). The role of theories in conceptual coherence. Psychological Review, 92, 289-316.
38. Nosofsky, R. M. (1989). Further tests of an exemplar-similarity approach to relating identification and categorization. Perception & Psychophysics, 45, 279-290.
39. Palmeri, T. J. (1997). Exemplar similarity and the development of automaticity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 23, 324-354.
40. Passow, A. H. & Frasier, M. M. (1996). Towards improving identification of talent potential among minority and disadvantaged students. Roeper Review, 18, 198-202.
41. Peterson, J. S., & Margolin, L. (1997). Naming gifted children: An example of unintended "reproduction." Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 21, 82-100.
42. Putnam, R. T., & Borko, H. (2000). What do new views of knowledge and thinking have to say about research on teacher learning? Educational Researcher, 29, 4-15.
43. Rando, W. C., & Mendes, R. J. (1991). How practice is shaped by personal theories. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 34, 7-14.
44. Renzulli, J. S. (1978). What makes giftedness: Reexamining a definition. Phi Delta Kappan, 60, 180-184.
45. Renzulli, J. S. (1986). The three-ring conception of giftedness: A developmental model for creative productivity. In R. J. Sternberg & J. Davidson (Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness (pp. 53-92). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
46. Renzulli, J. S. (1999). Reflections, perceptions, and future directions. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 23, 125-146.
47. Richardson, V., Anders, P., Tidwell, D., & Lloyd, C. (1991). The relationship between teachers' beliefs and practices in reading comprehension instruction. American Educational Research Journal, 28, 559-586.
48. Rohrer, J. C. (1995). Primary teacher conceptions of giftedness: Image, evidence, and nonevidence. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 18, 269-283.
49. Rosch, E., & Mervis, C. B. (1975). Family resemblances: Studies in the internal structure of categories. Cognitive Psychology, 7, 573-605.
50. Roth, M. A. (2000). Rural infusion through Case Method Instruction. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 19, 65-71.
51. Shavinina, L. V., & Kholodnaja, M, A. (1996). The cognitive experience as a psychological basis of intellectual giftedness. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 20, 3-35.
52. Shore, B. M. (2000). Metacognition and flexibility: Qualitative difference in how gifted children think. In R. C. Friedman & B. M. Shore (Eds.) Talents unfolding: Cognition and development (pp. 167-187). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
53. Shore, B. M., Rejskind, F. G., & Kanevsky, L. S. (2003). Cognitive research on giftedness: A window on creativity and teaching for creativity. In D. Ambrose, L. M. Cohen, & A. J. Tannenbaum (Eds.) Creative intelligence: Towards theoretic integration (pp.181-210). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
54. Siegle, D., & Powell, T. (2004). Exploring teacher biases when nominating students for gifted programs. Gifted Child Quarterly, 48, 21-29.
55. Singer, E. M., Houtz, J. C., & Rosenfield, S. (1992). Teacher-identified characteristics of successful gifted students: A Delphi study. Educational Research Quarterly, 15, 5-14.
56. Sloman, S. A., & Ahn, W. (1999). Feature centrality: Naming versus imaging. Memory & Cognition, 27, 526-237.
57. Sloman, S. A., Love, B. C., & Ahn, W. (1998). Feature centrality and conceptual coherence. Cognitive Science, 22, 189-229.
58. Sternberg, R. J. (1985). Beyond 1Q: A triarchic theory of human intelligence. New Haven, CT: Yale University.
59. Sternberg, R. J. (1986). A triarchic theory of intellectual giftedness. In R. J. Sternberg & J. Davidson (Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness (pp. 223-243). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
60. Sternberg, R. J. (1993). The concept of "giftedness": A pentagonal implicit theory. In Ciba Foundation, The origins and development of high ability. West Sussex, UK: John Wiley.
61. Sternberg, R. J. (1995). A triarchic approach to giftedness. (Research monograph No.95126). Storrs, CT: University of Connecticut, National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented.
62. Sternberg, R. J., & Horvath, J. A. (1998). Cognitive conceptions of expertise and their relations to giftedness. Talent in context: Historical and social perspectives on giftedness (pp. 177-191). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
63. Sternberg, R. J., & Zhang, L. (1995). What do we mean by giftedness? A pentagonal implicit theory. Gifted Child Quarterly, 39, 88-94.
64. Stormont, M., Stebbins, M. S., & Holliday, G. (2001). Characteristics and educational support needs of underrepresented gifted adolescents. Psychology in the Schools, 38(5), 413-423.
65. U. S. Department of Education (1993). National excellence: A case for developing America's youth. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
66. Weber, P. (1999). Mental models and the identification of young gifted students: A tale of two boys. Roeper Review, 21, 183-188.
67. Wisniewski, E. J., & Medin, D. L. (1994). On the interaction of theory and data in concept learning. Cognitive Science, 18, 221-281.