This study aimed to examine the attitudes and lived experiences of individuals identified as 'gifted underachievers'. A mixed-methods approach was used to investigate the concept 'gifted underachievement' using a survey regarding student attitudes towards school and individual interviews. This study used a sequential explanatory design: the first phase compared gifted achievers and gifted underachievers to determine school-related attitude differences; the second phase used a transcendental phenomenological design to describe the lived experiences of those identified as gifted underachievers. A mixed methods approach allowed for the strengths of both qualitative and quantitative research methods to be utilized with evidence from survey and interview data. Keeping in mind that gifted underachievement occurs when students with identified superior ability do not perform at levels commensurate with those abilities (McCoach & Siegle, 2003a; White, Graham, & Blass, 2018), this study was conducted within a Central Florida school district and used the district's indicator of gifted underachievement: a student identified as gifted with a grade of C or lower in at least two classes. Grades were examined for the previous school year and the first half of the current school year. In addition to gifted eligibility, school district personnel also considered class grades, test history, teacher anecdotal records, and student diversity for potential subjects. Since research has shown that the middle school years appear to be critical years for gifted underachievers, this study focused on middle school students (Siegle, 2013; Peterson & Colangelo, 1996). This study can be used to inform best practices regarding gifted underachieving middle school students. Additionally, information from this study may be used in the prevention of underachievement for some students. "Understanding the factors contributing to the underachievement of young students is particularly important, as this would allow educators to intervene while children are still relatively young" (Obergriesser & Stoeger, p. 168). This study attempted to add to the body of knowledge regarding gifted underachievement so that this phenomenon can be better understood and mitigated.

No description available.

The purpose of the study was to determine a definitive description of "artistic giftedness." A questionnaire was sent to Texas art teachers to find what characteristics they attribute to the artistically gifted, how they determine this, and what program goals they set. The wide variety of survey responses indicates the diversity of artistically gifted individuals. The high rating on all items indicates that all could be used as identifiers (higher rated characteristics identifying a larger population, lower rated ones, a smaller population). Responses to items dealing with identification indicate nontest methods to be most widely used. No connection was found between goals chosen and either characteristics or methods.

Little, if any, research exists that provides guidance for educators on the use of a dynamic assessment as a tool for better identifying Latinx students for gifted programs. The purpose of this qualitative case study was to explore the perceptions of campus principals and elementary teachers as dynamic assessment was being considered as part of the gifted and talented identification protocol. Data were collected through teacher and principal interviews and focus groups, along with an analysis of current practices and protocols within the studied district. The findings revealed several key themes that emerged from educator perspectives on the ability of emergent bilingual students to be placed in gifted programs and how dynamic assessment could or could not play a part in the assessment process. The study provides support and context for future research about dynamic assessment as applied to gifted and talented identification of Latinx students, including (a) the development of a dynamic assessment, (b) the implementation of a dynamic assessment with presentation of data that supports or do not support its use, (c) training to support the implementation of a dynamic assessment, (d) the human capital and time associated with implementing a dynamic assessment, and (e) educator mindset associated with the implementation of a dynamic assessment for students who do not speak English in the home.

Includes bibliography. / Although the provision of education for gifted pupils has been widely criticised as elitist by liberals and radicals alike, this charge has never been specifically substantiated. In this dissertation, the relationship of socially defined giftedness to social power is explored from two major directions. The first is through an analysis of the ideology in theory conventionally informing gifted education, including selected information-processing models of intellect and creativity, theories of emotional and intellectual development, and justifications for gifted education in terms of social benefits. The second direction is through a historical analysis of the dramatic growth of the gifted education movement in the South African social and political context. Explanations for this growth are suggested and are explored through examining four selected issues in the South African context (i) the rhetoric of the gifted education movement, (ii) the changing role of the private associations advocating gifted education, (iii) the process of official acceptance of gifted education, (iv) the role of the HSRC, including discussion of the proposed national policy for gifted education. In these analyses, it is demonstrated thta gifted education is contributing to the complex reproduction of social relations and therefore inhibiting significant social change. It is concluded that a case can be made for the provision of gifted education but that there is an urgent' need for gifted education theory which is adequately formulated in terms of South African social reality, and for specific interventive strategies to offset the elitist function of gifted education and to redistribute its benefits.

In the field of gifted education, there is little research on the perceptions of high school teachers of the gifted about giftedness, good gifted education practices, and the nature and needs of gifted learners. The purpose of this study was to form a deeper understanding of how those educators who guide gifted learners out of high school and into adulthood perceive giftedness and gifted education. This qualitative study, conducted in two phases, took place in a large suburban school district with three large high school systems and was focused on the responses of high school teachers to assess their attitudes, feelings, and opinions about the nature and needs of gifted learners using a grounded theory model of analysis. Data collected from the 11 participants in the first phase of the analysis was combined with that collected from the 13 participants in phase two and validated throughout with continual comparison through memoing. Participants reported a general lack of engagement with scholarly work in the gifted education field as well as a dependence on the school district for effective training in classroom practice. Evidence also suggested a view of giftedness among the participants as an inherent quality of some people who needed to be properly trained in the instructional environment. Implications from this study suggest further research, both qualitative and quantitative, needs to focus on clarifying the perception of giftedness among high school teachers as well as how the delivery of effective training to those teachers can be implemented.

No description available.

No description available.

This study was designed to identify factors that might influence Pennsylvania public school superintendents in the decision regarding the potential use of single-subject acceleration as a practice for meeting the needs of students in the elementary setting. The research targeted public school superintendents in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. In Pennsylvania, gifted education is mandated by Chapter 16 of the Pennsylvania School Code, yet acceleration policy is left to the local education agency (LEA), the school district. Since use of single-subject acceleration is not consistent across districts, this study sought to understand how administrators make decisions about using this tool. Previous research identified teacher and counselor perception of acceleration. Because the superintendent is instrumental in developing district policy, this research focused on their perceptions of this one specific acceleration tool. The research survey was delivered electronically to district superintendents via email using publically available district email addresses. Of the four hundred and ninety- nine (499) state superintendents, 96 returned the survey for a response rate of 20%. The survey included questions for the superintendent about the district’s size and its designation as urban, suburban, or rural. The survey also included questions about the superintendent’s background in regards to receiving gifted services or training in acceleration as well as the superintendent’s perceptions of gifted education. The survey was intended to address three research questions. 1. What factors impact Pennsylvania superintendents in adopting the practice of single-subject acceleration in their districts? 2. How might the personal and professional background of Pennsylvania superintendents, including experience and training, affect decisions in regard to use of single-subject acceleration? 3. What are superintendent’s attitudes about gifted education? Of the respondents, there were 46 each from suburban and rural districts and 4 from urban districts. The majority of the respondents had under six years of experience and under 250 annual graduates in their districts. Fewer than 20% identified as having been trained in single-subject acceleration, and 51% expressed utilizing single-subject acceleration. Quantitative survey research results revealed that superintendents in larger districts and suburban districts – characteristics that are confounded – are more likely to utilize single-subject acceleration. Further, superintendents expressed concern with transportation issues and logistical, scheduling, and coordination issues associated with single-subject acceleration. The quantitative survey results showed few correlations with superintendents’ background and utilization of the practice of single subject acceleration. The results, identified, however, indicate that the more training or life exposure regarding gifted education, the greater the support and the lower the concerns with gifted education. Further, those trained in single-subject acceleration were more likely to anticipate support from their boards regarding single-subject acceleration. Pennsylvania public school superintendents expressed support generally for gifted education even if it were not mandated under Chapter 16. The superintendents overwhelmingly agreed that the gifted need special attention to develop talents. More than a quarter of the superintendents disagreed, however, that a greater number of children should be allowed to skip a grade however while over forty percent of superintendents express neutrality on that topic. Yet, superintendents responded with disagreement about supporting gifted education in their districts; only 15 superintendents expressed agreeing or strongly agreeing with supporting gifted education in their district. This result, seemingly contradictory with other findings, is worthy of deeper investigation. Follow-up qualitative research utilized an interview format and targeted survey respondent volunteers. The follow-up interviews were used to gain deeper insight on the survey questions than binary or Likert-scale questions could reveal. The qualitative interviews revealed tremendous weight on organizational dynamics among the superintendent, school board, teachers, parents, and community at large. In regards to single-subject acceleration, interviews highlighted that culture needed to support single-subject acceleration or student need for acceleration must be strongly evident. / Educational Administration

The problem with which this study is concerned is the methods and techniques that are utilized by some teachers in the identification of a gifted student. This study has a threefold purpose. The first is to discuss the plight of some of our valuable human resources as manifested by the gifted in the American educational structure. The second is to present and contrast the current approaches to conserving these resources. The third is to project some possible trends in meeting the needs of the gifted segment in American schools. This study concludes that the field of teaching the gifted has been exploited by educators, and that there is very little likelihood in replacing the suggested methods and techniques entirely by new ones. Though there is little chance to replace all the suggested methods and techniques, there is sufficient room for expansion and internal renovations in the American educational mode of arrnagement.