No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

The purpose of this study was to investigate the areas of disagreement among experts on important issues in the education of the gifted in the United States, and to answer the following questions: (1) Which key issues are perceived by the panel of experts as being the most important? (2) Which of the issues deserves top priority? (3) On issues deemed most important, what action should be taken at the national, state, and local levels? (4) What are the experts' definitions of the term "gifted"? Two pilot studies were conducted in which 12 issues important to gifted education emerged. Data for the main study were collected by means of a modified Policy Delphi method in which a selected panel of people knowledgeable about the issues was surveyed. The study, consisting of three rounds of questions, was conducted by mail over several months with a panel of 29 acknowledged experts in the field. The six critical issues in gifted education, in order of panelists' priorities, were: (a) curriculum for the gifted; (b) procedures for identifying children for gifted programs; (c) selection and training of teachers for the gifted; (d) special populations of gifted (handicapped, females, minorities, underachievers, pre-school, and the highly gifted); (e) goals of gifted programs; and (f) definition of the term "gifted." Panelists agreed on 53 actions that should be taken at the federal, state and local levels. At the federal level, actions should be in the form of catalytic support, research on the issues, and dissemination of research results. At the state level, guidelines, standards, and procedures regarding the various issues were suggested. At the local level, the majority of panelists' suggestions concerned policies and procedures regarding curriculum for the gifted and teacher training. The definition of the term "gifted" was divided into three components: giftedness, the gifted child, and the gifted adult. The definition statements agreed upon by panelists for the gifted child emphasized potential; for the gifted adult, performance; and for giftedness, both potential and performance. / Ed. D.

Although gifted underachievers have been the subject of many studies, the possible connection between depression and underachievement had not been previously investigated. Effective counseling programs for high school student.s were lacking. A technique from family counseling literature, reframing, was recommended for use in the school setting. Sixty underachieving gifted students from local high schools were randomly selected and assigned to treatment/no treatment groups. A randomized pretest/posttest design was used to examine the effect of a brief intervention strategy in a single counseling session on Beck Hopelessness Scale scores, progress reported by teachers, and grade point averages. Various attribute variables were also considered. Results from a stepwise multiple regression support the effectiveness of the intervention in improving grade point averages. One of the significant factors on higher Hopelessness Scale scores was higher mothers' income. However, many mothers were not working outside the home making results difficult to interpret. On the other hand, the lower fathers' income contributed significantly to explaining· variance in higher Hopelessness Scale scores. Females and lower pre-GPA were also significant factors in explaining higher Hopelessness Scale scores. Family status (having an intact family) and higher pre-teachers reports accounted for higher post teachers' reports. The pre teachers' report, second quarter of the study, the intervention, and pre-GPA were significant factors in improved postGPA. Indications are that the underachievers group have higher rates of hopelessness than achievers. Some of the recommendations include reframing as a tool of the school counselor, (1) use of (2) use of the Beck Hopelessness Scale as a screening tool for identifying depression in the high school gifted, and (3) examination of depression in gifted underachievers in further studies. / Ed. D.

There is little attention and consensus in science education for gifted learners, leading to insufficient support and understanding of their needs, which hinders their potential development as future scientists and professionals. Utilizing a narrative research design, the study explores the experiences of nine scientists identified as gifted in childhood, through semi-structured interviews, questionnaires, and document reviews. The research addresses three pivotal questions: (1) How do scientists, who were identified as gifted in their childhood, navigate their gifted identity from childhood to adulthood, and how does this affect their social relationships and self-perception? (2) How do scientists, who were identified as gifted in their childhood, perceive and describe the critical elements that contribute to their exceptional performance? (3) How do scientists, who were identified as gifted in their childhood, reflect on the impact of their K-12 science education on their development and career choice? Findings reveal that participants’ exceptional performance in science was influenced by various factors such as individual abilities, family background, motivation, support, opportunities, and luck, and education. The impact of K-12 science education varied, with dissatisfaction in early years due to a lack of challenging curriculum, but more satisfaction in high school due to advanced classes and programs. These insights contribute to the development of educational policies and programs that better meet the needs of gifted learners in science, ultimately helping them to realize their full potential as future scientists and professionals.

This study centers around the evolution in theory and practice used in dealing with superior children. The manner in which the growth of democracy has influenced this evolution is pointed out.

Recognizing the important role that classroom teachers play in the referral of students for possible gifted education in many U. S. schools, this study questioned elementary classroom teachers in grades K through 5 to learn about their perceptions of what "giftedness" is. Teachers responded to two questionnaires to define both their general and their specific perceptions of giftedness. Early in the school year the teachers chose from a list of twenty recognized giftedness traits the four that best defined the term for them In the spring, after the same teachers had referred specific students for testing for the gifted program, they selected the four most prominent gifted traits shown by each referred student. Results showed a teacher efficiency rate of 43.4%, equal to or above that of previous research. Among the four traits teachers most often selected as the ones indicating either general or specific giftedness to them, three were identical. Teacher years of experience, grade level taught by the teacher, and the presence or absence of gifted classes at the teacher's school did not significantly affect teacher perceptions of important traits. Student gender was a significant variable in selection of traits. The #1 trait for boys was advanced logic and problem solving ability; for girls it was advanced reading and/or writing ability. School socioeconomic level was also a significant variable. Teachers judged advanced logic and problem solving ability more important for the high or middle SES student than for the low SES student, whether they considered traits of giftedness in general or specific children. Student race/ethnicity was a significant factor also. Racial and ethnic minorities were referred and, generally, passed the screening in such relatively small numbers that the data did not lend themselves to further analysis. Teachers demonstrated consistency and efficiency in gifted identification. It was recommended that this school system address issues of possible gender and SES bias that might be influencing teachers' perceptions and that the system consider a method other than an IQ score as the final qualifying instrument for entry into the program for gifted students.

No description available.

The purpose of this research was to study the attitudes of Korean and American early childhood educators concerning gifted children and programs aimed specifically at meeting their needs. The study examined general attitudes towards giftedness and gifted education programs and factors that might affect those attitudes. The study also examined desirable environments for young gifted children. Twenty-item questionnaires were developed and logically divided into six sections (identification, teacher environment, classroom environment, parent environment, educational rights, and program). A systematic process of development, analysis, and refinement of the questionnaire was done. The questionnaires were given randomly to American educators attending the 1996 National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC) conference. A random Korean sample included early childhood educators listed in the Korean Association for Early Childhood Education Directory (1995-1996) and the Korean Association for Child Care Directory (1995-1996). All subjects were members of one of three groups: (a) teacher educators, (b) teachers, and (c) administrators/directors. The surveys found agreement between Korean and American early childhood educators on the importance of knowing the strengths of individual gifted children, the need to stimulate higher order thinking skills, the rights of gifted children to an appropriate education, a perception of more work for the teacher to add these options, and a feeling that gifted programs would be difficult because of the large number of children in classes. The teachers also agreed that it is not difficult to assess or identify gifted preschoolers and having programs for the gifted is not elitist, but that parents should have the main responsibility for meeting the needs of gifted preschoolers and that many gifted strategies are good for all children.