Borland, J.H. (1996) Gifted education and the threat of irrelevance. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 19 (2), 129-147.

"Instead of asking the questions that are and ought to be basic to our field, we have left that task to others, contenting ourselves instead with defending gifted programs as if they were an end, not a means to an end. I develop this argument in the context of a number of fundamental questions that bear on the theory and practice of educating gifted students, questions that have, for the most part, been raised by individuals outside the field of gifted education." (p.129)

 

Braggett, E. (1984) The high price of excellence. Education News, 18 (11), 17-19.

"It is a slow process to untie the elitist tag and to encourage quality education for all children, but all states are now beginning to grapple with the problem of cultivating excellence more effectively within an egalitarian framework. This in itself reflects a perceptible change in attitude which in time will hopefully spread more widely through the general community." (p. 19)

 

Brennan, M. (1991) Clever people for the clever country. Education Links, 41, 26-28.

"The system which relies on ability as its justification has no need to look to itself to eradicate problems in education: the problems are in the students themselves. The 'blame the victim' mentality rides again, freeing the schools, government and education systems from any contributing role to the outcome for the students." (p.28)

 

Bull, B.L. (1985) Eminence and precocity: An examination of the justification of education for the gifted and talented. Teachers College Record, 87 (1), 1-19.

Argues that "special experiences for the education of gifts and talents should: (1) be numerous, diverse and flexible; (2) provide for sustained involvement that leads to significant achievement for students; and (3) involve expert assistance, much of which may have to be drawn from outside the school." (pp.16-17)

 

Callahan, C.M. (1996) A critical self-study of gifted education: Healthy practice, necessary evil, or sedition? Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 19 (2), 148-163.

"By examining contributions and triumphs of the field (e.g., recognition of individual differences, innovative assessment, commitment to high standards and raising the ceiling of instruction, stress on process and metacognitive skills, and real-world problem solving) in conjunction with the weakness of our field (e.g., the notion of a program, persistent narrowness of definition and identification, inapproriate adoption of measurement models as bases for curriculum development, lack of evaluation, and poor relationships with other programs), we may be able to stimulate discussions of ways to move the field forward theoretically and practically." (p.148)

 

Carey, M. (1994) New fashioned apartheid? Education Links, 47, 18-22.

"Presumably students in selective schools, classes and programs will receive particularly rich and challenging educational experiences. Are rich and challenging experiences inappropriate for the rest of the population? The reasons to advantage one group in provision of school resources must reflect particular social values, and perhaps the unwillingness of the state to fund access for all." (p.19)

 

Colangelo, N. (1984) A perspective on the future of gifted education. Roeper Review, 7 (1), 30-32.

"I believe it reasonable to assume that various cultural groups view the gifted movement as an excuse to separate white from minority students." (p.3)

 

Connors, L. (1992) More commonsense, less ideological fervour required. Classroom, 12 (2), 19-21.

"If we want a society where people of all abilities can work effectively together and respect each other's strengths, then it is hard to justify policies which segregate children according to their academic ability on a full-time basis. A child's whole being cannot be reduced to a set of particular abilities, or for that matter, disabilities." (p.21)

 

Corrigan, S.Z. (1994) Encouragement or exploitation? Gifted Child Today, 17 (2), 22-23, 30.

"The literature on giftedness is replete with messages about how gifted children are our greatest resource. ... The emphasis in gifted programs should, instead, be on the interests and needs of the students, rather than on preparing them to perform some social function, such as solving world problems, creating profitable new developments, or saving us from ourselves." (p.22)

 

Council for Exceptional Children (1995) Toward a Common Agenda: Linking Gifted Education and School Reform. Reston: CEC. (Q371.95/C855t)

'While the barriers of attitude, structure, and focus that have divided gifted education and school reform are significant, participants were also able to envision ties that might be made in those same areas - actions that might begin to join rather than divide the two groups.' (p.20) These are listed on pp.20-22.

 

Delisle, J. (1994) The inclusion movement is here - good ... it's about time. Gifted Child Today, 17 (4), 30-31.

"My preference is for us to do now what we have done so well in years past: lead the way in designing curriculum and structural options that allow the multiple talents of children to emerge and to blossom - not separately, but within a context that is most appropriate: the elementary and secondary classrooms of our nation." (p.31)

 

Delisle, J. (1994) The top ten statements that should never again be made by advocates of gifted children. Gifted Child Today, 17 (2), 34-35, 42.

These include 'Twenty percent of all high school dropouts are gifted', 'We need to identify children who are truly gifted', 'Today's gifted students are tomorrow's leaders who will solve the world's problems' and 'Classroom teachers cannot possibly meet the needs of gifted children in a regular classroom'.

 

Evans, K.M. & King, J.A. (1994) Outcome-based and gifted education: Can we assume continued support? Roeper Review, 16 (4), 260-264.

"Early evaluation of the outcomes of OBE suggests that in practice these goals of equity and excellence are not so easily realized. In a discussion of the outcomes of OBE, Evans and King (1992) argue that to some extent, educators are meeting the equity promise; however, the realization of the promise of excellence for all in learning is not so evident. In fact, for gifted students, effects appear either unknown or possibly negative." (p.262)

 

Feldhusen, J.F. & Kroll, M.D. (1991) Boredom or challenge for the academically talented in school. Gifted Education International, 7 (2), 80-81.

"This paper examines the hypothesis that gifted children are bored in the conventional classroom. A total of 227 students, identified as academically talented, and 226 not so identified were given a questionnaire which indicated that gifted students often begin with positive attitudes towards school but fail to maintain these attitudes because of the lack of appropriate challenge. However, there was no difference between the groups in level of boredom." (p.80)

 

Forster, J. (1991) Policy and practice in gifted education. Australian Educational Researcher, 18 (3), 21-36.

"The main purpose of this study was to investigate how policy has become practice in the area of gifted education in the New South Wales government school system.

Findings showed that providing for gifted and talented children was not a priority, was not systematic and was not routine." (p.21)

 

Gallagher, J.J. (1996) A critique of critiques of gifted education. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 19 (2), 234-249.

"We, who work in gifted education, need to be more self-critical than we have been in recent years about our own efforts. We have a special obligation to seek out hidden and uncrystallized abilities in students. Yet we should never be apologetic for trying to extend the boundaries of knowledge and the metacognition of children of superior intellect, of whatever race or ethnic background or gender. Our true opponent is ignorance, and that is a formidable enough of a foe for anyone. We will need all of the talents we can muster to confront the yet unconquered menaces of war, disease, poverty, and so forth in the 21st century." (pp.246-247)

 

Gallagher, J.J. (1991) Educational reform, values, and gifted students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 35 (1), 12-19.

"Six major educational reforms ... search for excellence, cooperative learning, middle schools, master teacher certification, site-based management and accountability - rest upon cultural values as much as on educational research, and each carries potential for positive or negative impact on education of gifted students. The positive and negative elements of each reform are reviewed in turn." (p.12)

 

Gallagher, J.J. (1991) Editorial: The gifted: A term with surplus meaning. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 14 (4), 353-365.

"Gifted, as a term, carries the surplus meaning to many persons in our society of unjustified and unearned privilege. It represents to many a similar concept as 'inherited wealth.' It appears to invoke images of a ruling elite of the type we fought in the American Revolution. The extension of such a situation through public education seems to some as not merely wrong, but morally offensive." (p.355)

 

Goldberg, M.L. (1981) Issues in the Education of Gifted and Talented Children in Australia and the United States. Canberra: Schools Commission. (371.950994/G618I)

Covers 'Egalitarianism and excellence - ambivalent attitudes', 'Defining and assessing giftedness/talent', 'Criteria for judging the effectiveness of special programs' and 'Organisational alternatives for content development and delivery', among other things.

 

Hodge, G. (1992) Giftedness and talent: A question of values. Education Australia, 18, 13-14.

An evaluative report of the ideas of Francois Gagne and Abe Tannenbaum, as heard at a series of workshops and seminars in Sydney, coming down on the side of Gagne's "more egalitarian model for the understanding, identification and development of giftedness and talent". (p.14)

 

Howley, C.B., Howley, A. & Pendarvis, E.D. (1995) Out of Our Minds: Anti-Intellectualism and Talent Development in American Schooling. New York: Teachers College Press. (371.950973/H865o)

This "is a disturbing book, in the best sense of the term, one that will not gain easy acceptance either by those critics of 'gifted education' who view all provisions and programs for gifted students as irredeemably elitist and anti-egalitarian, or by those steadfast defenders of the faith who regard any challenge to 'gifted programs' as typically constituted in educational practice as errant and pernicious nonsense." (p.vii)

 

Johnson, R. (1992) Challenging the cult of excellence. English Journal, 81 (6), 37-38.

"For far too many of our students, understanding has come to mean quick answers, insight in a flash." (p.37) "To the students I see every day, excellence has come to mean never trying anything scary in case your grades should suffer. It means not trying to think about new things very hard, for the same reason. It means, 'Just tell me what's on the test, Mr J.'" (p.38)

 

Karnes, F.A. & Marquardt, R.G. (1991) Gifted Children and the Law: Mediation, Due Process, and Court Cases. Dayton: Ohio Psychology Press. (344.7307/K18g)

"In the past, the gifted child's needs were not as readily apparent as those of an oppressed minority or a severely handicapped child. Also, it was mistakenly believed, often with tragic consequences, that the gifted student, through sheer mental acumen, was a survivor. Today, there is an increrasing amount of litigation filed on behalf of the gifted child." (p.xiii)

 

Karnes, F.A. & Marquardt, R.G. (1991) Gifted Children and the Law: Parents' Stories of Hope. Dayton: Ohio Psychology Press. (344.7307/G458)

"This collection of personal stories is based on actual experiences of parents of gifted children. These parents made concerted efforts to overcome or bypass various obstacles so that their gifted elementary and secondary children could gain access to challenging educational programs appropriate to their unique needs." (p.xi)

 

Karnes, F.A. & Riley, T. (1991) Public relations strategies for gifted education. The Gifted Child Today, 14 (6), 35-37.

Various activities and ideas are discussed.

 

Kirby, M.D. (1985) In praise of public education - a hundred years on.TalentEd, 7, 6-8.

Discusses the Opportunity system in NSW and concludes that Australia must mobilise its talent "and ensure, for the sake of the whole country, that bright students flourish, though in a democratic context." (p.7)

 

Langrehr, J. (1994) Why do we need gifted programs? The Australasian Journal of Gifted Education, 3 (1), 9-13.

"The purpose of this article ... is to identify some differences in the thinking of gifted and less gifted students and also some strategies that all teachers can use in challenging gifted students in the regular classroom with curriculum contents from across the curriculum." (p.9) Discusses pattern recognition, self questioning, schema building, and teacher designed 'connection building questions' (including the use of de Bono's 'six hats', Gardner's 'seven intelligences', the 'core thinking processes' and 'reverse thinking').

 

Margolin, L. (1996) A pedagogy of privilege. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 19 (2), 164-180.

"In this essay, I argue that gifted education is the flip side of the 'pedagogy of the oppressed'; that it is a strategy to single out the children of the affluent for training in leadership and dominance. Contrary to stereotypes usually associated with gifted education, this pedagogy is not characterized by academic rigor but is organized around the personal and social traits associated with the gifted themselves." (p.164)

 

McCallum, D. (1994) Making up gifted children. Education Links, 47, 4-7.

"The category of the gifted child was an invention of the statistical sciences and school administrative practices which earlier this century had made possible the calculation of levels of educational difference across the whole school population." (p.4)

 

Morelock, M.J. (1996) On the nature of giftedness and talent: Imposing order on chaos. Roeper Review, 19 (1), 4-12.

"This article traces the development of the confusion enveloping the field today. It finds its roots in the very beginnings of the modern study of giftedness and talent and charts its contemporary opposing Movements: the Talent Development Movement and the Columbus Group Movement. It is argued that these two movements exemplify the culmination of two strands of research, theory and practice - 'the gifted achiever' strand and 'the gifted child' strand. Vygotskian theory is proposed as providing a conceptual framework which can accommodate what had been learned about giftedness and talent since the advent of IQ testing, resolve differences in the field by providing an overarching theoretical synthesis, and orient us toward future directions for research and practice." (p.4)

 

Mugny, G. & Carugati, F. (1989) Social Representations of Intelligence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. (153.9/M951s)

"Intelligence, if such a thing exists, is the historical creation of a particular culture, analogous to the notion of childhood. The old idea that it is a singular entity is no longer tenable: we have to recognise the plurality of the concept. This acknowledgement that intelligence is polysemous, and obviously social in origin, leads naturally on to studying the social representations of intelligence. In fact, as Goodnow (1984) has emphasised, a change in our perspective today is essential: we need to stop thinking of intelligence as a quality possessed by individuals, in varying degrees, and recognise it for what it actually is: a value-judgement, a label, slapped on everybody who happens to have (or not to have) the characteristics regarded as typical of an intelligent person." (p.ix)

 

Nash, C. (1984) Educating the intellectually exceptional child: Are we asking the right questions? A response to Sapon-Shevin. Curriculum Inquiry, 14 (1), 83-90.

"The continuing debate about whether, how, and why to identify intellectually exceptional children has proved counterproductive since it diverts our attention from the crucial question of what exceptional children are like." (p.86)

 

Nevo, B. (1994) Definitions, ideologies, and hypotheses in gifted education. Gifted Child Quarterly, 38 (4), 184-186.

"This article argues that issues in gifted education and the study of giftedness can be usefully categorized under three headings: definitions, ideologies, and hypotheses. Seven central issues regarding educational programs for the gifted are classified according to their orientation: (a) level of excellence and the gifted label, (b) types of giftedness, (c) individual versus societal perspectives on the gifted, (d) giftedness in different ethno-cultural backgrounds, (e) origins of giftedness, (f) procedures for identifying and screening the gifted, and (g) effectiveness of educational programs. These issues are either definition oriented (a and b), ideology oriented (c and d), or hypothesis oriented (e, f, and g)." (p.184)

 

Patterson, R. (1987) The 'gifted' child in the Christian school. Nurture, 21 (2), 6 7.

"This student must learn to live in the normal world of people, learn to be a blessing to others, learn to appreciate the gifts (fewer and lesser in degree though they be) in others and serve the neighbour in Christian love." (p.7)

 

Pendarvis, E.D. & Howley, A. (1996) Playing fair: The possibilities of gifted education. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 19 (2), 215-233.

"Gifted education is clearly elitist when it singles out a group of students (identified because of their academic aptitude) for preferential, rather than relevant, treatment .... As we have suggested above, many programs for bright students do just this: they allocate enjoyable activities - of likely interest to all students - to the gifted alone. Gifted education, indeed, tends to 'play favorites' when conducted on this basis." (p.224)

 

Rankin, D. (1993) Refocussing excellence within equity: A challenge for the 1990s. The Australasian Journal of Gifted Education, 2 (1), 21-25.

"We are presently being challenged by a clearer recognition of the influence of Western bias and tradition on education in our country. Within this framework the relationship between excellence and equity is investigated as I perceive it to pertain to gifted and talented children." (p.21)

 

Renzulli, J.S. (1980) Will the gifted child movement be alive and well in 1990? Gifted Child Quarterly, 24 (1), 3-9.

Nominates "four areas in which there is a need for the development of more defensible systems, theories, and models" (p.4) - identification, 'process models' of curriculum, characteristics of the teacher of the gifted, and program evaluation.

 

Renzulli, J.S. & Reis, S.M. (1991) The reform movement and the quiet crisis in gifted education. Gifted Child Quarterly, 35 (1), 26-35.

"The reform movement in education appears to focus on the ways in which schools are organized and managed rather than on the interaction that takes place among teachers, students, and the material to be learned. ... Rather than allowing all reform movements to affect our students without our consent (especially those that call for the elimination of grouping), we need to address the impact of gifted education programs and practices and how they might influence the reform effort. We must also be concerned with continued advocacy for gifted programming, creating and maintaining exemplary programs and practices that can serve as models of what can be accomplished for high ability students." (p.26)

 

Ronvik, R.W. (1993) Re-examining the foundations of giftedness. Understanding Our Gifted, 5 (6), 1, 8-10, 14.

"We should have come to the conclusion by now that there is no curriculum per se, nor is there any method of teaching per se, that is suitable only for the gifted. The differentiation is in pacing and depth only." (p.10) Discusses inclusion vs exclusion, relevance, and differentiation.

 

Ryan, B. (1982) The gifted child. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Sociology, 19 (2), 136-161.

Argues that "advocates of 'the gifted' are elitist in their appraisal of potential educability of all. This characterisation of educational possibilities undermines the plausibility of conventional interventionist strategies for 'the average' and 'less able'; instead, it provides support for the subordination of their education to specific forms of socialisation sought by dominant socio-economic interests." (p.137)

 

Sapon-Shevin, M. (1996) Beyond gifted education: Building a shared agenda for school reform. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 19 (2), 194-214.

"The author argues that gifted education programs function as a form of educational triage, providing an excellent education for those students for whom educational failure would not be tolerated while leaving the general educational system untouched and immune from analysis and critique." (p.194)

 

Sapon-Shevin, M. (1994) Playing Favorites: Gifted Education and the Disruption of Community. Albany: State University of New York Press. (371.950973/S241p)

"This book is about something important that is happening in our nation's schools, a phenomenon called 'gifted education', which identifies certain children as eligible to receive particular kinds of educational experiences, often segregated from their 'nongifted' peers. These programs speak to us of unequal educational opportunities, racism, elitism, and exclusion, but somehow we have learned these are things we're 'not supposed to talk about'. And so, this book is about silence and about silencing, and it is about breaking the silence." (p.xix)

 

Sapon-Shevin, M. (1984) On being suspicious of technical solutions to political questions: A rejoinder to Nash. Curriculum Inquiry, 14 (1), 91-96.

"I am concerned with the effects of segregated programs on children and on teachers, both the teachers and children in the special programs and those left in the 'mainstream'. ... I am concerned with the socialization which goes on in schools which house gifted programs. ... Specifically, I am concerned with the values that are communicated to children when a small segment of the class engages in fun, creative projects while the rest of the class works on worksheets." (pp.94-95)

 

Schwartz, L.L. (1994) Why Give 'Gifts' to the Gifted? Thousand Oaks: Corwin Press. (371.950973/S399w)

"The initial chapter establishes the basic premise that gifted and talented children represent a significant resource to any nation and it is profitable to the nation in many ways to invest in their healthy development and education. ... Subsequent chapters describe types of giftedness, characteristics of gifted youth, underidentified gifted populations (and techniques for identifying them), and the role of adults in fostering giftedness and providing needed opportunities." (p.x)

 

Smith, I. (1987) Gifted and talented children: Are they educationally disadvantaged? Current Affairs Bulletin, 63 (11), 28-32.

"Not only does the concept of equal educational opportunity require that all Australian children be allowed to fulfill their potential, but the progress of Australia in the highly technological world of the Twenty-First Century demands it." (p.32)

 

Sternberg, R.J. (1996) Neither elitism nor egalitarianism: Gifted education as a third force in American education. Roeper Review, 18 (4), 261-263.

"On this view, the goal of gifted education is not to favor or foster an elite, but to allow children to make full use of the differing kinds of skills they have and can develop ...." (p.261)

 

Tannenbaum, A.J. (1995) What Research Tells Us ... About the Needs and Rights of Gifted and Talented Children. Kensington: University of NSW. (On order)

Audiotape.

 

Tomlinson, C.A. (1994) The easy lie and the role of gifted education in school excellence. Roeper Review, 16 (4), 258-259.

Uses the case study of a 13 year old girl to illustrate the point that gifted education should "remind us that the twin threats of perfectionism and lethargy are spawned when a child comes to believe that that which is easy is exemplary." (p.259)

 

Treffinger, D.J. & Feldhusen, J.F. (1996) Talent recognition and development: Successor to gifted education. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 19 (2), 181-193.

"The new talent orientation ... represents a more diagnostic and developmental orientation to human abilities, rather than the global 'g' orientation represented by the intelligence testing movement still so firmly entrenched in gifted education. It also represents a strong shift away from the limited academic-intellectual orientation of gifted education toward a recognition of the nature and importance of talents in the arts, vocational domains, and social-interpersonal areas of human activities. Finally, it represents a new educational orientation that is concerned with the development of talents at all levels of ability, not just the highest or most precocious levels." (p.182)

 

Ward, V.S. (1985) Eminence and precocity: A reply to Barry Bull. Teachers College Record, 87 (1), 20-29.

A critique of Bull's analysis of what the education of gifts and talents should entail.

 

Wilson, P. (1996) Challenges and Changes in Policy and Thinking in Gifted Education in Australia. Melbourne: Hawker Brownlow Education. (371.95/W752c)

'I have attempted to explain how our attitudes toward the gifted have developed, not in a disparaging way but with understanding. If we don't understand how these attitudes have developed then we will not change them.' (p.4)

 

Yatvin, J. (1984) Gifted or bright? Principal, 63 (3), 14-16.

Contends that "quantity and speed are of minor import to the truly gifted. For them, skills and information are only means to an end: accomplishing a worthwhile task. The phenomena of boredom and frustration, so often marked by observers, are not caused by too little quantity and speed but by the meaninglessness and constriction rampant in so many classrooms." (p.16) Offers some positive alternatives.

©TalentEd is located at the School of Education, University of New England, Armidale, Australia.

This page updated: 23 January 2006 Webmaker: Howard Smith. hsmith4@une.edu.au