Describing the Status of Programs for the Gifted: A Call for Action

Journal for the Education of the Gifted

Volumn 40, Issue 1, 2017, Pages 20-49

  Callahan, Carolyn M ^a   Moon, Tonya R ^a   Oh, Sarah ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA   (United States)

Author keywords

gifted education; gifted education programming at local education agencies; policy and practice

Indexed keywords

EID: 85013335924     PISSN: 01623532     EISSN: 21629501     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0162353216686215     Document Type: Article

References (101)

1. Baldwin A. Y., (1984). Baldwin Identification Matrix 2: For the identification of gifted and talented. Unionville, NY: Royal Fireworks Press.
2. Belcastro F. P., (1998). A survey of types of gifted programs offered in Iowa public school districts. Dubuque, IA: Sid W. Richardson Foundation. Retrieved from ERIC database. (No. ED 432 110)
3. Betts G., (1985). Autonomous Learner Model for the gifted and talented. Greeley, CO: Autonomous Learning.
4. Borland J. H., (2004). Issues and practices in the identification and education of gifted students from under-represented groups (RM04186). Storrs: University of Connecticut, The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented.
5. Brown S. W., Renzulli J. S., Gubbins E. J., Siegle D., Zhang W., Chen C., (2005). Assumptions underlying the identification of gifted and talented students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 49, 68-79. doi: 10.1177/001698620504900107
6. Callahan C. M., (2013). Evaluating services offered to gifted and talented students. In Callahan C. M., Hertberg-Davis H. L., (Eds.), Fundamentals of gifted education: Considering multiple perspectives (pp. 440-447). New York, NY: Routledge.
7. Callahan C. M., Moon T. R., Oh S., (2013). Status of elementary gifted programs. Charlottesville: University of Virginia, National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented.
8. Callahan C. M., Moon T. R., Oh S., Azano A. P., Hailey E. P., (2015). What works in gifted education: Documenting effects of an integrated curricular/instructional model. American Educational Research Journal, 52, 1-31. doi: 10.3102/0002831214549448
9. Callahan C. M., Renzulli J. S., Delcourt M. A. B., Hertberg-Davis H. L., (2013). Considerations for identification of gifted and talented students: An introduction to identification. In Callahan C. M., Hertberg-Davis H. L., (Eds.), Fundamentals of gifted education: Considering multiple perspectives (pp. 83-91). New York, NY: Routledge.
10. Clarenbach J., Eckert R. D., (2013). Policy-related definitions of giftedness: A call for change. In Callahan C. M., Hertberg-Davis H. L., (Eds.), Fundamentals of gifted education: Considering multiple perspectives (pp. 26-35). New York, NY: Routledge.
11. Colangelo N., Assouline S. G., New J. K., (1999). Gifted education in rural schools: A national assessment. Iowa City: The University of Iowa, The Connie Belin & Jacqueline N. Blank International Center for Gifted Education and Talent Development. Retrieved from ERIC database. (No. ED 430 766)
12. College Board. (2016). Spotlight on success. Retrieved from http://professionals.collegeboard.com/k-12/assessment/ap/equity
13. Cunningham C. M., Callahan C. M., Plucker J. A., Roberson S. C., Rapkin A., (1998). Identifying Hispanic students of outstanding talent: Psychometric integrity of a peer nomination form. Exceptional Children, 64, 197-209.
14. Dai D. Y., (2013). Excellence at the cost of social justice? Negotiating and balancing priorities in gifted education. Roeper Review, 35, 93-101. doi: 10.1080/02783193.2013.766961
15. Dai D. Y., Swanson J., Cheng H., (2011). State of research on giftedness and gifted education during 1998-2010. Gifted Child Quarterly, 56, 126-138. doi: 10.1177/0016986210397831
16. Darling-Hammond L., Youngs P., (2002). Defining "highly qualified teachers": What does "scientifically-based research" actually tell us? Educational Researcher, 31 (9), 13-25. doi: 10.3102/0013189X031009013
17. DeThorne L. S., Schaefer B. A., (2004). A guide to child nonverbal assessments. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 13, 275-290. doi: 10.1044/1058-0360(2004/029)
18. Dillon D. C., Patty L. M., (1997). A survey of Rhode Island school superintendents on the status of gifted and talented education in their districts. Providence: Rhode Island State Department of Elementary and Secondary Education. Retrieved from ERIC database. (No. ED 418 552)
19. Donovan S., Cross C., (2002). Minority students in special and gifted education. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
20. Erwin J. O., Worrell F. C., (2012). Assessment practices and the underrepresentation of minority students in gifted and talented education. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 30, 74-87. doi: 10.1177/0734282911428197
21. Feldhusen H. J., (1993). Individualized teaching of the gifted in regular classrooms. West Lafayette, IN: Star Teaching Materials.
22. Ford D. Y., (2012). Multi-cultural theory and gifted education: Implications for the identification of two under-represented groups. In Hunsaker S. L., (Ed.), Identification: The theory and practice of identifying students for gifted and talented education services (pp. 75-97). Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
23. Ford D. Y., Grantham T. C., Whiting G. W., (2008). Culturally and linguistically diverse students in gifted education: Recruitment and retention issues. Exceptional Children, 74, 289-308.
24. Gallagher S. A., (2009). Evolving relationships with AP and IB. In Dixon F., (Ed.), Programs and services for gifted secondary students (pp. 113-132). Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.
25. Gentry M., (2014). Cluster grouping. In Plucker J. A., Callahan C. M., (Eds.), Critical issues and practices in gifted education: What the research says (2nd ed., pp. 109-118). Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.
26. Grigorenko E. L., Jarvin L., Tan M., Sternberg R. J., (2008). Something new in the garden: Assessing creativity in academic domains. Psychology Science Quarterly, 50, 295-307.
27. Gubbins E. J., (2008). Professional development. In Plucker J. A., Callahan C. M., (Eds.), Critical issues and practices in gifted education: What the research says (pp. 513-540). Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.
28. Hertberg-Davis H. L., Callahan C. M., (2008). A narrow escape: Gifted students' perceptions of Advanced Placement and International Baccalaureate programs. Gifted Child Quarterly, 52, 199-216.
29. Hertberg-Davis H. L., Callahan C. M., (2013). Context for instruction: An introduction to service delivery options and programming models in gifted education. In Callahan C. M., Hertberg-Davis H. L., (Eds.), Fundamentals of gifted education: Considering multiple perspectives (pp. 161-163). New York, NY: Routledge.
30. Hess K. K., (1990). The status of gifted education in New Jersey: Analysis of the 1988-89 gifted education survey. Trenton: New Jersey State Department of Education. Retrieved from ERIC database. (No. ED 322 687)
31. Hoover H. D., Dunbars S. B., Frisbie D. A., Oberley K. R., Ordman V. L., Naylor R. J.,. Shannon G. P., (2003). The Iowa tests: Guide to research and development. Itasca, IL: Riverside.
32. Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation. (1994). The program evaluation standards (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
33. Kaplan S. N., (1974). Providing programs for the gifted and talented: A handbook. Ventura, CA: Office of the Ventura County Superintendent of Schools.
34. Kaplan S. N., (1986). The grid: A model to construct differentiated curriculum for the gifted. In Renzulli J. S., (Ed.), Systems and models for developing programs for the gifted and talented (pp. 180-194). Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
35. Kaplan S. N., (2005). Layering differentiated curriculum for the gifted and talented. In Karnes F. A., Bean S. M., (Eds.), Methods and materials for teaching gifted students (2nd ed., pp. 107-132). Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.
36. Landrum M. S., Callahan C., Shaklee B., (Eds.). (2001). Aiming for excellence: Gifted program standards. Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.
37. Landrum M. S., Shaklee B. B., (Eds.). (1998). Pre-K-Grade 12 gifted program standards. Washington, DC: National Association for Gifted Children.
38. Lee S., Olszewski-Kubilius P., (2006). Comparisons between talent search students qualifying via scores on standardized tests and via parent nomination. Roeper Review, 28, 157-166. doi: 10.1080/02783190609554355
39. Lipsey M. W., Wilson D. B., (1993). The efficacy of psychological, educational, and behavioral treatment: Confirmation from meta-analysis. American Psychologist, 48, 1181-1209.
40. Lohman D. F., (2005). Identifying academically talented minority students (RM05216). Storrs: University of Connecticut, The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented.
41. Lohman D. F., Foley Nicpon M., (2012). Ability testing and talent identification. In Hunsaker S. L., (Ed.), Identification: The theory and practice of identifying students for gifted and talented education services (pp. 283-335). Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
42. Lohman D. F., Hagen E. P., (2001). Cognitive Abilities Test (Form 6). Itasca, IL: Riverside.
43. Marland S. P. Jr., (1972). Education of the gifted and talented: Report to the Congress of the United States by the U.S. Commissioner of Education and background papers submitted to the U.S. Office of Education (Government Documents, Y4.L 11/2: G36, 2 vols.). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
44. Marzano R. J., (2000). A new era of school reform: Going where the research takes us. Aurora, CO: McREL. Retrieved from ERIC database. (No. ED 454 255)
45. Marzano R. J., (2003). What works in schools: Translating research into practice. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
46. Maxwell J. A., (2005). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
47. McCallum R. S., (2003). Context for nonverbal assessment of intelligence and related abilities. In McCallum R. S., (Ed.), Handbook of nonverbal assessment (pp. 3-22). New York, NY: Kluwer Academic.
48. Moon S. M., (2006). Developing a definition of giftedness. In Purcell J. H., Eckert R. D., (Eds.), Designing services and programs for high-ability learners: A guidebook for gifted education (pp. 23-31). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
49. Moon T. R., (2013a). Assessing resources, activities, and outcomes of programs for the gifted and talented. In Callahan C. M., Hertberg-Davis H. L., (Eds.), Fundamentals of gifted education: Considering multiple perspectives (pp. 448-457). New York, NY: Routledge.
50. Moon T. R., (2013b). Uses and misuses of matrices identifying gifted students: Considerations for better practice. In Callahan C. M., Hertberg-Davis H. L., (Eds.), Fundamentals of gifted education: Considering multiple perspectives (pp. 128-134). New York, NY: Routledge.
51. Naglieri J. A., Goldstein S., (Eds.). (2009). Practitioner's guide to assessing intelligence and achievement. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
52. National Association for Gifted Children. (2010a). Pre-K-Grade 12 Gifted Programming Standards: A blueprint for quality gifted education programs. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from http://www.nagc.org/uploadedFiles/Information-and-Resources/Gifted-Program-Standards/K-12%20programming%20standards.pdf
53. National Association for Gifted Children. (2010b). State definitions of giftedness. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from http://www.nagc.org/uploadedFiles/Advocacy/State%20definitions%20%288-24-10%29.pdf
54. National Association for Gifted Children, & Council of State Directors of Programs for the Gifted. (2011). State of the states in gifted education 2010-2011: National policy and practice data. Washington, DC: Author.
55. National Association for Gifted Children, & Council of State Directors of Programs for the Gifted. (2013). State of the states in gifted education 2012-2013: National policy and practice data. Washington, DC: Author.
56. National Research Council. (2002). Minority students in special and gifted education. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
57. No Child Left Behind Act. (2002). Pub. L. No. 107-110, §115, Stat. 1425 (2002). Title IX, Part A, Section 9101(22).
58. Olszewski-Kubilius P., Clarenbach J., (2012). Unlocking emergent talent: Supporting high achievement of low-income, high-ability students. Washington, DC: National Association for Gifted Children.
59. Peters S. J., Gentry M., (2013). Additional validity evidence and across-group equivalency of the HOPE Teacher Rating Scale. Gifted Child Quarterly, 57, 85-100. doi: 10.1177/0016986212469253
60. Plucker J. A., Burroughs N., Song R., (2010). Mind the (other) gap! The growing excellence gap in K-12 education. Bloomington: Indiana University, Center for Education & Evaluation Policy.
61. Purcell J. H., Eckert R. D., (2006). Designing services and programs for high-ability learners: A guidebook for gifted education. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
62. Raven J., Raven J. C., Court J. H., (2000). Manual for Raven's Progressive Matrices and Vocabulary Scales, Section 3: The standard progressive matrices. San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.
63. Reineke R. A., (1991). Stakeholder involvement in evaluation: Suggestions for practice. Evaluation Practice, 12, 39-44.
64. Reis S., McCoach D., (2000). The underachievement of gifted students: What do we know and where do we go? Gifted Child Quarterly, 44, 152-170. doi: 10.1177/001698620004400302
65. Reis S., Renzulli J. S., (2009). Myth 1: The gifted and talented constitute one single homogeneous group and giftedness is a way of being that stays in the person over time and experiences. Gifted Child Quarterly, 55, 233-235. doi: 10.1177/0016986209346824
66. Renzulli J. S., (1977). The Enrichment Triad Model: A plan for developing defensible programs for the gifted and talented. Gifted Child Quarterly, 21, 227-233. doi: 10.1177/001698627702100216
67. Renzulli J. S., (1978). What makes giftedness? Phi Delta Kappan, 60, 180-184, 261.
68. Renzulli J. S., (2005). The three-ring conception of giftedness: A developmental model for promoting creative productivity. In Sternberg R. J., Davidson J. E., (Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness (2nd ed., pp. 246-279). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
69. Renzulli J. S., Delcourt M. A. B,. (2013). Gifted behaviors versus gifted individuals. In Callahan C. M., Hertberg-Davis H. L., (Eds.), Fundamentals of gifted education: Considering multiple perspectives (pp. 36-48). New York, NY: Routledge.
70. Renzulli J. S., Leppien J. L., Hays T. S., (2000). The Multiple Menu Model: A practical guide for developing differentiated curriculum. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
71. Renzulli J. S., Reis S. M., (1985). The Schoolwide Enrichment Model: A comprehensive plan for educational excellence. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
72. Renzulli J. S., Reis S. M., (1997). The Schoolwide Enrichment Model: A how-to guide for educational excellence. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
73. Renzulli J. S., Reis S. M., (2012). Defensible and doable: A practical, multiple-criteria gifted program identification system. In Hunsaker S. L., (Ed.), Identification: The theory and practice of identifying students for gifted and talented education services (pp. 25-56). Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
74. Renzulli J. S., Smith L. H., White A. J., Callahan C. M., Hartman R. K., Westberg K. L.,. Reed R. E. S., (2013). Scales for Rating the Behavioral Characteristics of Superior Students. Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.
75. Renzulli J. S., Ward V. S., (1969). Diagnostic and evaluative scales for differential education of the gifted. Unpublished manuscript, University of Virginia, Charlottesville.
76. Robinson A., Shore B. M., Enersen D. L., (2007). Best practices in gifted education. Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.
77. Sattler J. M., (2008). Assessment of children's cognitive functions (5th ed.). San Diego, CA: Author.
78. Schmidt W. H., McKnight C. C., Raizen S. A., (1996). A splintered vision: An investigation of U.S. science and mathematics education: Executive summary. Lansing: Michigan State University, U.S. National Research Center for the Third International Math and Science Study.
79. Schonlau M., Fricker R., Elliott M., (2002). Conducting research surveys via e-mail and the web. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
80. Shaywitz S. E., Holahan J. M., Freudenheim D. A., (2001). Heterogeneity within the gifted: Higher IQ boys exhibit behaviors resembling boys with learning disabilities. Gifted Child Quarterly, 45, 16-23. doi: 10.1177/001698620104500103
81. Siegle D., Powell T., (2004). Exploring teacher biases when nominating students for gifted programs. Gifted Child Quarterly, 48, 21-29. doi: 10.1177/001698620404800103
82. Slade M. L., (2012). The impact of professional standards in gifted education on the identification of giftedness and talent. In Hunsaker S. L., (Ed.), Identification: The theory and practice of identifying students for gifted and talented education services (pp. 167-193). Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
83. Stanley J. C., Keating D. P., Fox L. H., (Eds.). (1974). Mathematical talent: Discovery, description, and development. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
84. Sternberg R. J., Davidson J. E., (Eds.). (2005). Conceptions of giftedness (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
85. Sternberg R. L., Jarvin L., Grigorenko E. L., (2011). Explorations in giftedness. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
86. Tannenbaum A. J., (1983). Gifted children: Psychological and educational perspectives. New York, NY: Macmillan.
87. Tomlinson C. A., (2001). How to differentiate instruction in mixed-ability classrooms (2nd ed.). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
88. Tomlinson C. A., Bland L. C., Moon T. R., (1993). Evaluation utilization: A review of the literature with implications for gifted education. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 16, 171-189.
89. Tomlinson C. A., Bland L. C., Moon T. R., Callahan C. M., (1994). Case studies of evaluation utilization in gifted education. Evaluation Practice, 15, 153-168.
90. Tomlinson C. A., Kaplan S. N., Renzulli J. S., Purcell J., Leppien J., Burns D. E., (2002). The parallel curriculum: A design to develop high potential and challenge high-ability learners. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
91. Torrance E. P., (1966). Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking: Technical-norms manual. Princeton, NJ: Personnel Press.
92. VanTassel-Baska J. L., (2008). Alternative assessments with gifted and talented students. Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.
93. VanTassel-Baska J. L., (2009). United States policy development in gifted education: A patchwork quilt. In Shavinina L., (Ed.), International handbook on giftedness (pp. 1295-1312). New York, NY: Springer.
94. VanTassel-Baska J. L., Johnson D., Avery L. D., (2002). Using performance tasks in the identification of economically disadvantaged and minority gifted learners: Findings from Project STAR. Gifted Child Quarterly, 46, 110-123. doi: 10.1177/001698620204600204
95. VanTassel-Baska J. L, Little C., (2003). Content-based curriculum for high-ability learners. Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.
96. VanTassel-Baska J. L., Stambaugh T., (Eds.). (2007). Overlooked gems: A national perspective on low-income promising learners. Washington, DC: National Association for Gifted Children.
97. Wayne A., Youngs P., (2003). Teacher characteristics and student achievement gains: A review. Review of Educational Research, 73, 89-122. doi: 10.3102/00346543073001089
98. Wechsler D., (2003). Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Fourth Edition. San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.
99. Westberg K. L., Burns D. E., Gubbins E. J., Reis S. M., Park S., Maxfield L., (1998). Professional development practices in gifted education: Results of a national survey. Storrs: University of Connecticut, The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented. Retrieved from ERIC database. (No. ED 424 708)
100. Worrell F. C., (2014). Ethnically diverse students. In Plucker J. A., Callahan C. M., (Eds.), Critical issues and practices in gifted education: What the research says (2nd ed., pp. 237-253). Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.
101. Worrell F. C., Schaefer B. A., (2004). Reliability and validity of Learning Behaviors Scale (LBS) scores with academically talented students: A comparative perspective. Gifted Child Quarterly, 48, 287-308. doi: 10.1177/001698620404800404