Handbook of psychology volume 7 educational psychology

The Education of Gifted Children

503

different types of gifted programs. These studies involved

students primarily in Grades 2 through 6. These authors com-

pared the performance of second- and third-grade students

within four different types of gifted programs—full-time spe-

cial schools, full-time separate classes, pullout programs, and

within-class programs to groups of nongifted students and

students nominated by teachers as potentially qualified for

the gifted program (the gifted comparison group) but not

currently placed in it. Students’ prior performance on a stan-

dardized achievement test was used as a covariate, and

differences between the gifted students in the four gifted pro-

grams and the two comparison groups were assessed. Results

were that the students within the separate classes, full-time

schools, and pullout programs had higher scores on a stan-

dardized achievement test than did students in either of the

comparison groups and students in the within-class programs

when starting levels of achievement were accounted for. The

within-class students had the lowest scores in all areas of

achievement of all the groups assessed. Delcourt et al. state,

“since Within-Class programs are a popular model in gifted

education, their curricular and instructional provisions for the

gifted must be carefully maintained lest they disintegrate into

a no-program format” (1994, p. xviii).

Delcourt et al. (1994) also found that students in the sepa-

rate classes had the highest levels of achievement across the

comparison groups and other program types but the lowest

perceptions of their academic competence and sense of accep-

tance by peers. Students in the special schools also had lower

perceptions of their academic competence than did the other

groups of children. Delcourt et al. concluded that lowered self-

esteem or perceptions of academic competence, which appear

after initial placement and last for about 2 years subsequently,

is a result of social comparison—that is, students comparing

themselves to other very bright students. Students in all the

groups studied reported that they felt comfortable with the

number of friends they had in their own school and their pop-

ularity. “The type of grouping arrangement did not influence

student perceptions of their social relations for gifted or

nongifted students” (Delcourt et al., 1994, p. xix).

Archambault et al. (1993) studied a national sample of

third- and fourth-grade teachers to determine what kinds of

strategies they use to provide differentiated instruction to

gifted students. The results showed that across different types

of schools, teachers made only minor modifications in the

regular curriculum to meet the needs of gifted students. These

included eliminating already-mastered material and assign-

ing advanced readings, independent projects, enrichment

worksheets, or reports. In addition, gifted students were given

no more opportunities to work at enrichment centers, work

with other students on a specific interest, move to another

grade for a particular subject, or work on an advanced cur-

riculum unit than were average students within their class-

rooms (Archambault et al., 1993).

One strategy that has been proposed as appropriate for

gifted students is curriculum compacting; this is a strategy

whereby needless repetition and drill and already-learned

concepts are eliminated from the curriculum through pretest-

ing or some kind of preassessment. Research done by Reis

et al. (1993) showed that 40–50% of the in-grade curriculum

could be eliminated for gifted students in subjects such as

math, social studies, and science without affecting achieve-

ment. Specifically these students still scored as well as or

higher than did other gifted students who had not had cur-

riculum compacting on achievement tests given above level.

This study also showed that teacher training was critical to

the implementation of curriculum compacting as a strategy to

accommodate gifted students’ higher levels of knowledge

and faster learning rates. The quality of compacting was

higher for teachers in this study who received more intensive

training, including several hours of group compacting simu-

lations and 6–10 hours of peer coaching.

Regardless of how well they compacted the curriculum,

most teachers had a tendency to substitute nonacademic kinds

of activities such as peer tutoring when content material was

eliminated from instruction (Reis et al., 1993). They also pre-

ferred to substitute with enrichment rather than accelerative

types of learning activities. The authors suggest that further

training on substitution strategies was needed as well as ac-

cess to and assistance with selecting appropriate advanced

content materials to use with students.

Types of Gifted Programs: Secondary Level

Within the field of gifted education, the lion’s share of the re-

search and writing about programs is focused on elementary

school-aged children. For children in this age range, both pro-

gram models (e.g., Renzulli’s model, multiple intelligences)

and different kinds of administrative and grouping arrange-

ments for the delivery of services (e.g., pullout programs, en-

richment, cluster grouping, acceleration, resource room, etc.)

abound. However, for secondary-level students, fewer mod-

els for programs exist, and creative service delivery op-

tions are rarely employed. In most secondary schools,

honors-track and AP classes are the only options for students

functioning above grade level. However, at the secondary

level (in contrast to the elementary level) accelerative options

are more readily accepted as a means to accommodate gifted

learners owing in part to the success and wide acceptance of

the AP program, which implies that students are working at

least 1 year above grade level.

504

Gifted Education Programs and Procedures

Special classes for advanced secondary students typically

occur within departments that are organized around major

content domains. This means that many opportunities may be

available to students to develop high levels of talent within

particular domains. It can also result in a program that has

many good parts but no whole—no systematic means or

process of identifying students who need special program-

ming and no integration across the curriculum (VanTassel-

Baska, 1998).

At the elementary level, there is often an individual re-

sponsible for the gifted program—the gifted coordinator. At

the secondary level, this is rarely the case. Programs that are

considered appropriate for gifted students at the secondary

level are the AP program of the College Board, which enables

students to take college-level courses while in high school

and via examination thereby earn college credits; and the

International Baccalaureate program (IB), which is a 2-year

program of advanced courses taken in the junior and senior

years. The IB program emphasizes multicultural perspectives

and foreign language proficiency and is an international pro-

gram designed to prepare high school students to be able to

pursue college or university course work at any institution

worldwide. The IB program was initially developed in the

1960s as a result of international school efforts to establish a

common curriculum and university entry credentials for geo-

graphically mobile students. Schools opt to implement the IB

program, a process that entails a detailed self-study and sev-

eral years of planning and preparation. Students who enroll in

the IB program take special courses and exams in order to

earn the IB diploma. IB is considered to be an academically

rigorous course of studies by U.S. colleges and universities

(Tookey, 1999/2000).

In 22 states within the United States, legislation enables

high school students to be simultaneously enrolled in high

school and college—referred to as dual enrollment, con-

current enrollment, or postsecondary option. Students who

partake of this option spend part of their day on a college

campus taking a college course. The legislation across states

varies considerably (McCarthy, 1999; Olszewski-Kubilius &

Limburg-Weber, 1999) but typically requires high schools to

use their per-pupil state funds to pay part or all of the college

tuition. The legislation may stipulate what kinds of courses

can be taken (typically only courses that the high school does

not offer), the number of courses that can be taken, and the

types of institutions (private vs. public) that students can at-

tend. Some states specify the circumstances under which stu-

dents can earn high school and college credit and the amount

of credit that can be earned. Most states reserve dual enroll-

ment for juniors and seniors who have already earned a cer-

tain number of high school credits or satisfied a specified

number of graduation requirements. Dual enrollment and AP

are similar in that they both are ways in which high school

students can take classes for college credit while in high

school.

Other programmatic options for gifted secondary students

include competitions and internships. These options are not

exclusively for gifted students, although they typically re-

quire demonstration of a high level of interest in a specific

area (internships) or require advanced skills in order to be

competitive (competitions). Thus, they are often viewed as

most appropriate for students who are gifted.

Competitions are typically extracurricular activities, and

students can participate via the sponsorship of their school or

on their own. There are many different kinds of competitions

(see Olszewski-Kubilius & Limburg-Weber, 1999, for re-

sources) in many different domains. The benefits of competi-

tions include learning how to compete, acquiring and honing

independent study skills, gaining opportunities for feedback

and critique from professionals, and opportunities to work on

real-world problems. Competitions also often have signifi-

cant cash prizes. Several of the best known are the Intel

Science Talent Search (formerly Westinghouse) and the

Mathematics, Physics, and Chemistry Olympiads. Usually,

students who get involved in team competitions prepare for

them via a high school club. These extracurricular activities

have many advantages for students; they provide socially

supportive contexts within which students can learn a great

deal of specific subject matter (Subotnik, Miserandino, &

Olszewski-Kubilius, 1997).

Internships are typically available to college-aged students,

although increasingly, these opportunities are being opened

to high school students and being organized by high schools.

The benefits of internships are primarily in the opportunities to

participate in significant adult work and to connect with pro-

fessionals who can assist with career and educational planning

(Olszewski-Kubilius & Limburg-Weber, 1999).

Other options for gifted students include special schools.

Currently there are 10 special high schools within the United

States (six in the South or Southeast, two in the Midwest, one

in the West, and one in the Northeast) designed for students

who are mathematically and scientifically talented. These

schools are supported by state education dollars, which

means that tuition and room and board are free. Typically

they are established by the state legislature after extensive

lobbying efforts on the part of parents and state lawmakers.

Most serve students in Grades 11 and 12 only. These schools

offer an advanced curriculum and have a variety of courses in

mathematics and science that is wider than the variety that

would be found at a typical high school. They can also give

students educational opportunities that are not usually

The Education of Gifted Children

505

available to most high school students, such as opportunities

to work with scientists on research, access to state-of-the-art

laboratories, and career counseling (Olszewski-Kubilius &

Limburg-Weber, 1999). These schools are also home to

some internationally ranked chess, debate, and academic

teams.

A final option for gifted high school students is early

entrance to college. Many students across the United States

leave high school 1 year early and enter college; most col-

leges and universities accept younger students. However, a

dozen or so special early college entrance programs exist that

accept students 2–4 years early. These programs are often de-

signed so that students simultaneously complete high school

graduation requirements and earn college credits. Some are

supported by state education dollars. These programs provide

special support systems for students in the form of desig-

nated counselors, special dormitories, and social events

(Olszewski-Kubilius & Limburg-Weber, 1999).

Many programs geared towards gifted and talented stu-

dents are sponsored by organizations and institutions other

than schools—predominantly universities and colleges. Par-

ents have turned to these institutions for services for their

gifted children because such services are not available from

their local school and because they want their children to

have additional academic opportunities. These extraeduca-

tional opportunities include summer programs, study abroad,

and distance learning programs.

Summer programs have increased tremendously, and there

are hundreds of such programs in the United States. Distance

learning programs are also growing—for example, virtual

high schools. Some distance learning programs offer a com-

plete high school curriculum. Several programs are geared

specifically towards advanced learners and offer AP courses

or college-level courses in traditional by-mail formats or

through online and Internet technologies (Olszewski-

Kubilius & Limburg-Weber, 1999). Gifted students use dis-

tance learning courses to take advanced courses that they

cannot fit into their schedule at high school or to take courses

not offered by their school. Study abroad programs are

generally not specifically targeted at academically gifted stu-

dents but are often used by such students to enhance their

high school studies or are used to fill a semester left vacant by

accelerated studies.

In the United States, there exists a nationally available

program called talent search that plays a substantial role in

educating gifted children but is not sponsored by schools.

Talent search programs involve testing children anywhere

from Grades 3 through 9 who are performing at the 95th

percentile or above on a standardized in-grade achievement

test via standardized tests that are given off-level. The most

well-developed programs involve having seventh- and

eighth-grade students take the SAT or the American College

Test (ACT). Other talent search programs involve younger

students in taking tests such as the PLUS and EXPLORE.

Comparable talent searches are carried out all over the United

States by various universities that provide services to a sin-

gle state or to several states. It is estimated that over 200,000

students across the United States participate in talent search

programs annually.

The talent search programs increase families’ access to

educational resources specifically designed for gifted stu-

dents, including special summer programs, distance learn-

ing programs, weekend courses for students, and conferences

and workshops for parents. They give parents information

about gifted children’s developmental, social, psychologi-

cal, and educational needs through newsletters and maga-

zines (Olszewski-Kubilius, 1998).

Talent search programs are among the most researched

models of identification of academic talent and service deliv-

ery that exist within the field of gifted education (Olszewski-

Kubilius, 1998). Research has validated the use of the 95th

percentile as a cutoff score for participation in the talent

search and the predictive validity of scores on the SAT for

performance in accelerated classes (Olszewski-Kubilius,

1998). Talent search scores provide a valid indication of level

of developed reasoning ability and learning rate within sev-

eral academic domains that can be matched to educational

programs adjusted for pacing and content. Talent search

scores are also predictive of future accomplishments such as

grades and course taking in high school; they are also predic-

tive of choice of field of study in graduate school (see

Olszewski-Kubilius, 1998 for a review of this research).

Although research evidence about the long-term effects of

participation in gifted programs is scant, the most substantial

body of research exists surrounding the effects of participation

in talent-search-sponsored educational programs. Specifi-

cally, students who had participated in special programs were

more likely to pursue advanced courses in high school such as

BC calculus and AP courses, chose more academically selec-

tive colleges, earned more honors, were more likely to accel-

erate their studies, and had higher educational aspirations than

did students who did not (see Olszewski-Kubilius, 1997, for a

review). These effects were especially potent for gifted

females, enabling them to keep up with gifted boys in mathe-

matics course taking (see Olszewski-Kubilius, 1998, for a

review of this research). It is likely that participation in out-

of-school educational programs that offer advanced and accel-

erated courses provides both social support for achievement

and a safe setting in which to risk taking challenging courses.

Achieving success in classes such as these does much to

506

Gifted Education Programs and Procedures

bolster students’confidence, thereby increasing the possibility

that they will pursue advanced courses in their home school

setting.

Although institutions other than the local schools are

increasingly serving gifted students through programs and

courses, there is very little articulation between in-school

and out-of-school programs. Many students take courses in

university summer programs for their own personal growth

and enrichment and do not expect to receive credit from their

school. Increasingly, however, students and families use

summer programs to complete required high school courses

or to complete advanced courses that can fulfill graduation

requirements. Credit for summer courses or any outside-of-

school program is infrequently given for a variety of reasons

(Olszewski-Kubilius, Laubscher, Wohl, & Grant, 1996). At

present, schools and out-of-school institutions that serve

gifted students through programs work independently rather

than cooperatively.

The Future of Gifted Education

Although it is difficult to make predictions about the future of

gifted education, it is certain that there will be significant

changes in both what is delivered to students and the manner

in which it is given. At present, there is a shift away from

offering gifted programs to serving gifted children within

their heterogeneous classrooms; this is in part due to dwin-

dling resources for special programs, the fact that the pullout

program (the most typical gifted program) is expensive and

cumbersome to run, and the current climate of inclusion re-

garding special needs students. Research cited previously

suggests that although having the regular teacher meet the

needs of gifted students within the classroom sounds good in

theory, it is difficult to implement, and little real differentia-

tion of curriculum and instruction actually takes place. How-

ever, this does not mean that this model cannot be salvaged or

that the preference for inclusion will diminish. It requires a

shift in the conception of the gifted coordinator and in the

conception of the gifted.

Typically the gifted coordinator administers the single

gifted program. However, a new conceptualization is that of

coordinator of resources for children capable of working

above grade level and for teachers who work with them.

Gifted children cannot be served with a one-size-fits-all pro-

gram. Research on talented children reveals no single profile

of giftedness, and very few children are exceptional across all

school subjects. Thus, a variety of programs and services

needs to be in place for a variety of children with a variety of

exceptional abilities. The talent development coordinator’s

role would be to devise and implement identification systems

for various domains, assist teachers with grouping arrange-

ments and differentiation of curriculum within the classroom

for all children who are advanced, help teachers adjust the

level of the curriculum to provide challenge for all students,

make special arrangements for students with exceptional

needs (learning disabled and gifted or highly gifted), help

students access outside-of-school educational programs,

coordinate with community organizations and institutions of

higher education for services and programs, and design

needed school or district programs.

Efforts to help more marginal students reach their potential

through special programs could reasonably be considered

under the rubric of the talent development program. The re-

search on talent development has shown that schools and the

process by which high levels of talent are developed are often

at odds. For example, the retrospective literature on emi-

nent adults shows a pattern of early specialization in the talent

area and education more akin to apprenticeships and mentor-

ships, unlike our current traditional schooling (Sosniak, 1999;

Subotnik & Coleman, 1996). Shifting to a talent development

approach to education will require dealing with strongly held

beliefs that education—particularly early education—should

promote well-roundedness. Can we take what the literature has

to offer regarding how talent develops and incorporate it into

our schooling process for all children? Gifted education and

the talent development literature may have much to say to

those who wish to reformulate schools so that all children are

motivated to learn to their highest potential. The fundamental

basis for gifted education is recognizing individual differences

among children and responding to them so that all children are

challenged intellectually in school.

The major issues facing gifted education as a field (as well

as education generally) is the gap between the achievement of

minorities and nonminorities at every socioeconomic level

(Reaching the Top; College Board, 1999). Gifted programs

have been criticized for underidentifying students of color

and for contributing to the inequities that exist in schools

regarding the education of poor and minority children

(Sapon-Shevin, 1996). Gifted education needs to be respon-

sive to this issue and see itself as an important part of the

solution to the problem. More equitable ways of identifying

talent need to be developed, and programs need to focus on

potential for achievement as well as already developed

ability. There are assessments available, such as the Naglieri

Noverbal Ability Test (NNAT) that appear to be better at iden-

tifying minority children who are gifted than do the IQ and

achievement measures currently in use (Sacuzzo et al., 1994).

However, the NNAT and other similar measures are rarely in-

cluded in gifted identification protocols. In addition, when

more children with potential as opposed to actualized and