Fall 2009 • Volume XXIX, Issue 4 TEMPOfall issue lined up. Dr. Alexey Root is back with her second installment on the game of chess and how to incor-porate it into the classroom—even

TEMPOTexas association for the Gifted and talented • Member, National Association for Gifted Children (NAGC)

Fall 2009 • Volume XXIX, Issue 4

Growing Their

Gifts

Proven Leaders in Gifted & Talented Assessments

Look into any classroom and you’ll see students of many shapes and sizes. Look closer and you’ll discover that each student brings to the classroom a

variety of abilities, aptitudes and achievement—a result of his or her unique environment and life experience.

Recognized for technical excellence, and respected by educators, Pearson assessments provide multiple measures to help identify

all your gifted and talented students.

For more information, or to request a free sample, call 800-228-0752 ext 8448 or visit PearsonAssessments.com

Copyright © 2009 Pearson Education, Inc. or its affiliate(s). All rights reserved. 74096.029NNAT2 is a trademark in the U.S. and/or other countries, of Pearson Education, Inc. or its affiliate(s).

Fall 2009 • Volume XXIX, Issue 4

TEMPO EdITOrDr. Cindy Little

PrEsIdENTDr. Cecelia Boswell

PrEsIdENT-ElECTDr. Laura Mackay

FIrsT VICE PrEsIdENTMichelle Swain

sECONd VICE PrEsIdENTMissy Mayfield

ThIrd VICE PrEsIdENTJose Laguna

sECrETAry/TrEAsurErDr. Richard Sinclair

IMMEdIATE PAsT PrEsIdENTAnn Studdard

EXECuTIVE dIrECTOrDr. Quentin Christian

TheTexasAssociationfortheGiftedandTalented(TAGT)isanonprofitorganizationofparentsandprofessionalspromotingappropriateeducationforgiftedandtalentedstudentsinthestateofTexas.

TempoistheofficialjournaloftheTexasAssociationfortheGiftedandTalented.ItispublishedfourtimesayearinWinter,Spring,Summer,andFall.ThesubscriptionisabenefitforTAGTmembers.

MaterialappearinginTempomaybereprintedunlessotherwisenoted.WhencopyinganarticlepleaseciteTempoandTAGTasthesource.WeappreciatecopiesofpublicationscontainingTemporeprints.

AddresscorrespondenceconcerningtheTexasAssociationfortheGiftedandTalented(includingsubscriptionquestions)toTAGT,1524S.IH35,Suite205,Austin,Texas,78704.CallTAGTat512/499-8248,FAX512/499-8264.

ADDRESSCORRECTIONREQUESTED:PleasenotifyTAGTifyouaremovingorifyourmailingaddresshaschanged.TAGTpublicationsaresentviathird-classmailandarenotforwardedbythePostOffice.Besuretorenewyourmembership.YouwillnotreceiveTAGTpublicationsormailingsafteryourmembershipexpirationdate.

opinions expressed by individual authors do not necessarily represent official positions of taGt.

TEMPOFrom the EditorCindy Little, Ph.D.

Thoughts & MusingsQuentin Christian, Ph.D.

From the PresidentCecelia Boswell, Ed.D.

C.P.’s CornerClyde Peterson

What does the research say About highly Gifted studentsDavid Thomson, Susan Johnsen, Ph.D., and Krystal Goree

recent Trends in Gifted Identification in Texas Russell T. Warne & Joyce Juntune, Ph.D.

unity and Purpose: religious and spiritual development of the Gifted Micheal Sayler, Ph.D.

Chess for your students, even if you don’t playAlexei Root, Ph.D.

Involved in your Profession and Making a difference?Karen J. Dowd, Ph.d.

understanding the lingo of Gifted EducationKimberly M. Tyler, Ph.D.

IN EVEry IssuE

468

14

10

22

3040

2737

FEATurEs

COluMNs

3Fall 2009 • Tempo • Texas Association for the Gifted and Talented

by Cindy Little, Ph.D.

from the editor

4 Fall 2009 • Tempo • Texas Association for the Gifted and Talented

d r.BennyHickerson—anoddwaytostartacolumnIknow—butappropriate.Dr.Hickersonwas

oneoftheauthorsinourlastissue.And as usual, I briefly introducedtheauthorsandtheirarticlesinmycolumn.However,havingnevermetBenny,Imadeaveryembarrassingassumption—I wrongly assumedthatshe wasahe!Sofirstandfore-most,Iwanttopubliclyapologizeformymistakeandthankherforbeingsuchagoodsportaboutthis.SorryBenny;andthankyou forbeingsounderstanding.Ireallyappreciateit. AsIwasreflectingonmyfauxpaswithDr.Hickerson,itgotmethinkingabouthowmanyinaccurateassump-tionsor“myths”therearestillfloatingaroundaboutgiftedchildren.Beingsooftensurroundedbyeducatorswhoworkwiththegifted,andparentswholivewiththegifted,Istarttobelievethateveryonefinally“getsit”whenitcomestomeetingtheneedsofgiftedchildren—notso. Itonly takesoneencounterwithsomeonewhofirmlybelievesforexample,that“allchildrenaregifted”tobringmebacktoreal-ity.Advocatingforthechildrenandeducating the adults are still veryreal and urgent needs. So to thatend,IthoughtI’dshareafewofthemythsstillfloatingaroundoutthereandthetruthsthatrefutethem.Thefollowinginformationiscourtesyofthe National Association of GiftedChildren’s(NAGC)website(http://www.nagc.org/commonmyths.aspx):

Myth:Giftedstudentsdon’tneedhelp.They’lldofineontheirown.

Truth: Would you send a starathlete to the Olympics without acoach?Manygiftedstudentsknowmorethanhalfofthegrade-levelcur-riculumbeforetheschoolyearbegins.

Withouttheguidanceofawelltrainedteachertochallengethem,theymaybecome despondent, develop poorworkhabits,andfailtoachieve.

Myth:Giftededucationprogramsareelitist.

Truth: Gifted education is notaboutstatus,itisaboutmeetingtheneedsofthelearner.Advancedlearn-ershavespecificacademic,social,andemotionalneedsthatmustbemetiftheyaretothrive.

Myth: That student isn’t giftedbecause he/she is receiving poorgrades.

Truth:Underachievementresultsfrommanydifferentcauses.Itdoesnotmeanachildisnotgifted.Under-achievinggiftedstudentsmayhavealearning disability that is affectingtheir grades, they may have devel-opedpoorstudyhabits,ortheymaybe masking their abilities to fit insocially.Nomatterwhatthereason,caring,perceptiveadultsneedtohelpthesestudentsidentifytheproblem. …Andthelistgoeson.Iencour-ageyoutovisittheNAGCwebsiteandfamiliarizeyourselfwiththeotherpeskymythsthatstubbornlyrefusetogoaway.Ibelievethatifadvocatesforthegiftedarmthemselveswithinformationandspreadthetruth,thetidewillfinallyturnandpotentialwillfinallybereal-izedacrossallleaningenvironments. Nowswitchinggears,onceagainthankstoouroutstandingauthors,columnists, and cartoonist (moreonthatshortly)wehaveawonderfulfallissuelinedup.Dr.AlexeyRootisbackwithhersecondinstallmentonthegameofchessandhowtoincor-porate it into theclassroom—evenifyoudon’tknowhowtoplay!Yes,Iwasdubiousatfirsttoo,butDr.Rootprovides readers with some great

strategies.RussellT.WarneandDr.JoyceJuntunepresenttheirstudyonrecenttrendsingiftededucationinTexas.Oneoftheirmoreencouragingfindingsisthatthetotalpercentageof identified gifted students acrossthe state is holding at between 8%and 9% thanks in part to the staterequiredtraining.Dr.MichealSaylerisalsobackwiththefinalinstallmentofhisthrivingseries.Thisoneisonunityandpurposewitha focusontherolespiritualandreligiousideasplayinensuringthatgiftedchildrenbecomehappy,thrivingadults.IhaveverymuchenjoyedthisseriesandIhopeyouhavetoo.DavidThomson,Dr.SusanJohnsen,andKrystalGoreepresentfindingsfromtheliteratureonhighlygiftedindividualsintheirWhat the Research Says article. Itprovidesafascinatinglookatstud-iesofthehighlygifted—apopulationthatisuniqueamonggiftedlearners.Additionally,Dr.KimTyler isbackwithawonderfulparentingcolumnonlearningthelingoofgiftededuca-tionandDr.KarenDowdhasaspecialcolumnforthisissueonencouragingreaderstoconnect,engage,andinvestasmembersofTAGT. Finally,IwouldliketointroduceClydePeterson—ournewTempocar-toonist.ClydeisawellknownpoliticalcartoonistwhowasformerlyonstaffattheHouston Chronicle.Healsohasapassionformeetingtheneedsofgiftedlearnersandusesdrawingandcar-tooningasawaytoconnectwithkids.His creativity and wit regarding allthingsgiftedwillbeaveryentertain-ingandwelcomeadditiontoTempo. Well, Icanseemycolumnhasrunlong,soIwillmakemyendingshortandsweet.HopetoseeyouattheupcomingTAGTconference!


A sourassociationbeginsanewfiscalyear,member-shiprenewalcomesaroundformanyofourmembers.Whenitistimetoconsiderthevalueofourinvolve-

mentwiththeTexas Association for Gifted and Talentedsomemembersneverhesitate…theyjustsitdownandwriteoutthecheck.Theyknowitsvalue!ProbablytheyknowbecausetheyareactiveandinvolvedintheworkoftheAssociation.WeneedmemberswhoarepassionateandinvolvedandIcongratulateyouifthat’syournature.

Othersofusareveryinterestedintheworkofourorga-nization…theykeepupwiththenews,readTEMPOandelectronicnewslettersandattend the annual con-ference. But this groupoften just doesn’t havethetimeorinteresttobemoreactive.Theyprefertoencourageandsupportothers.

And,ofcoursetherearethose who are just content to have theirnameuponthelist.Weneedthemtoo.Theyunderstandthevalueofbeingpartofalargermovementandprofessionalsupportgroupeven though theychoosenot to takeanactiverole.That’sfine!Organizationssuchasoursneedallthesekindsofmembers.Evenwhenwecan’tbeanactiveleader,hav-ingournameontherollsjustaddstothevolumeofthechoir.Thisorganizationhasalottosingaboutandwearepleasedtobeabletorepresentyouinalltheworkthatwedo.

So,belowIhavelistedafewofouractivitiesandrecentsuccesses.Ihopeyouarepleasedthatyouarebeingrep-resentedinastrongandprofessionalway.Whenyourrenewaltimecomesaround…weencourageyourcontin-uedsupportandparticipation.

Our32ndAnnualConferencehasbeenplanned forHoustonanditpromisestobeoneofourbesteventsinrecentyears.Earlyregistrationnumbersarelookinggood,outstandingspeakersandg/texpertshavebeensecured,andapproximately300sessionsarescheduledandpromisetobebothinterestingandtimely.Thisyear,morethan40%ofthesessionswillbeledbyfirst-timepresentersensur-ingtheexchangeofnewideasandinstructionalstrategies.

The2009LegislativeSessioncontainedsomepositivenewsforgiftededucation.WiththepassageofHouseBill3anditssubsequentsigningintolawbyGovernorPerry,thehopeofatleastsomemodestaccountabilityforgiftededucationhasbeenrekindled.Thediligenteffortsofourlegislativeaide,Marty De Leon,andthepassionateworkofourLegislativeCommitteeandstaffmemberTracy Weinberghavemadeanimportantdifference.

Membershipnumberscontinue tobeamajorfocus with more than450newparentandpro-fessionalmemberssinceJanuary.Increasedmem-ber participation andenthusiasmhaveresultedinthefull-timeemploy-mentofaMembershipCoordinator… a staffposition that has beenonlyhalf-timeinrecent

years. An upcoming membership effort will centeraroundrenewal.“ReMember”isafunwaythatwewillbeencouragingyourcontinu-ousmembership.

Withitsstrongscholarshipprogram,theAssociationcontinuesitsannualsupportofyoungscholar/leaders.Duringthepastsummermonths,morethan$18,000wasawardedforavarietyofcampsandexcep-

tionallearningopportunities.Wecantakeprideinthefactthatsince1988,morealmostonemilliondollarshasgonetosupportthesetypesofexperiencesforthegiftedandtalentedchildrenofTexas

Ourpublicationshavecontinued to improve.ThenewformatofTEMPO,ourprofessionaljournal,nowfocusesalmostexclusivelyontheresearchandscholarlyeffortsofourmembers.And,whilethenewsofoureventsandtheworkofourpeoplecontinuetobereportedontheInternet,weareseekingadditionalwaystoinvolvemembers.Socialnetworking?TrytofindusonFacebook,Twitter,andmostrecently,TXGiftedCafé.

Our officers and leaders are excited about this new and continued growth. As a member, we hope that you are pleased as well with what we are doing for you.

remember toRMembere

Yes…butwhathaveyoudoneformelately?

THOUGHTSMUSINGS


sunshine, rain, and rich soil—three requirements for plantgrowth.AsIwritethisarticlefor

ourconferenceissue,schoolisstart-ing.Thepresenceoffreshfacesreadyto grow socially, emotionally, andintellectuallyoverthenextmonthswillbenourishedwiththesunshineofhighexpectations,therainofrigor-ouswork,andtherichsoiloflife-longlearning.

Itwasmypleasureandresponsi-bilitytoselectthethemeforthecon-ference.Thisyear’stheme,Growing Their Gifts, was selected to putemphasisonservinggiftedlearnerstoensurethattheygrowemotionally,socially,andintellectually.

Wehearaboutgrowthmodelsforallchildren,includingthegiftedlearn-ers.Whatisitthatwecancontributetotheirgrowth?Wecancontributesunshine,rain,andrichsoil.Thesunwill shine on our students as theystrivetomeetourhighexpectations,aswellastheirown.Whenwelessenexpectations,westunttheirgrowth.In order to grow their gifts withsunshine,ourresponsibilityistosetexpectationssimilartothosethatcanbefoundintheTexasPerformanceStandards Project© (TPSP). WhenweaccessTPSPevaluation rubricsforourgiftedstudents,wearepre-sentingstudentswithopportunitiesthatsupplyidenticallyhighstandardsforallgiftedstudentsacrossthestate.

ExpectationsfoundinTPSParesun-shineforgiftedlearners.Takealookatthescoringrubricsfoundatwww.txgifted.orgtobetterunderstandhowhighexpectationsareofferedintherubrics.Highexpectationswillfacili-tateourstudents’growth.

Rainisrigorouscontentrequiringrigorousthought.Justasrainreplen-ishesgrowingplants,rigorincontentdrivesoutcomesforourstudents.Forstudentswholearnnewinformationquickly and think abstractly, rigoraddstotheirabilities.Byrequiringourgifted learners toworkharder,digdeeper,andthinkinmorecomplexways,wearereplenishingtheirskillsandnurturingtheirabilities.Studentswillthendevelopthehabitsofmindforrigor.Rigorinthoughtwillbeevi-dencedthroughrigorindevelopmentofproducts.WhetherthroughTPSPor locallydevelopedunitsof studyandindependentstudyopportunities,studentswillgrow.Theirlearningiswateredwithrigor.Giftedstudentswillcometocherishtherainforthegrowththatitoffers.

Thecombinationofsunshineandrain, high expectations, and rigor,creates opportunities for growth.Without rich soil, nourishment isincomplete.Ifwedonotproviderichsoil, a strong foundation in whichtheycangrow,gifted learnersmaybecome underachievers or at-risk.Giftedstudentslearnforlearning’s

sake,notjustagrade.Eventhoughoursystemhasconditionedthemforgrades,centraltotheirlearningisthefoundationfromwhichwebuildstu-dents’interests.Weareprovidingafirmfoundationforlife-longlearningwhenweofferopportunitiesforourgiftedstudentstolearnthroughtheirinterests.Wecanconnectproductstolearninginterestswhenweofferopportunities with local or TexasPerformanceStandardsprojects.Asstudentsexperiencegrowththroughtheirinterests,theirlearningmulti-plies. Sunshine, rain, and rich soilallcombinetocreateanatmosphereforgrowth.Theirjoyinlearningandoursinseeingthemgrowpermeatesallaspectsoftheir lifesothattheygrownotonlyintellectually,butalsosociallyandemotionally.

Weeducatorsofthegiftedarenottoodifferentfromourstudents.TexasAssociationforGiftedandTalentedencourageseachofyoutoattendthe2009TAGTconferencesothatyoufindthesunshine,rain,andrichsoiltogrowyourskillsandabilities.Thisconferenceoffersavarietyofopportu-nitieswithhighexpectationsforyoutodelivertoyourstudents,rigorinthoughtandactionthroughnationallyknownkeynotespeakers,additionstoyourrichfoundationofknowledge,and opportunities for continuedprofessionaldevelopment,life-longlearning.

by Cecelia Boswell, Ed.D.

from the president

Growing Their Gifts

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•


What does the research say about hiGhly Gifted students

by David Thomson, Susan Johnsen, Ph.D., and Krystal Goree


h ighlygiftedstudentswerefirststudiedbyLetaHollingworth,beginning in 1916, when she

tested a child who scored above180IQontheStanford-Binetintel-ligencetest.Thereafter,shedevotedherlifetostudyingthispopulation,firstatP.S.165inNewYorkCity,andlaterattheSpeyerSchool(P.S.500),whichsheestablishedtoservehighlygiftedstudents.Herlastpublication,Children Above 180 IQ (1942)wasalongitudinalstudyof12highlygiftedchildrenthatshehadidentifiedintheNewYorkarea.Sheconcludedthatthesechildrensufferedfromadjust-mentproblemsbecauseoftheirlackofchallengingeducationalprovisionsandsupportiveeducators.

Theneedsofhighlygiftedstudentscontinuetooccupytheattentionof

researchers,educators,andparents.Researchers,withmoresophisticatedresearch methodologies, examinegroup differences among studentswithvaryingdegreesofgiftedness,identifying factors thatmightcon-tributetoexceptionalperformance.Administrators,teachers,andparentscontinuetobetroubledovertheper-ceivedriskforhighlygiftedstudentswhentheyareradicallyacceleratedandquestiontheappropriateplace-mentsforthisgroup.Isthedegreeofgiftednessapotentialsourceofrisk?When compared with other giftedandgeneraleducationstudents,arethere unique characteristics? Haveeducatorsdevelopedprogramsthatareeffectivewithhighlygiftedstu-dents? What factors influence thesuccessofthisgroup?

Tobetterunderstandthecurrentresearchfindings,thisreviewexam-inedarticlesthatfocusedonhighlygifted students and/or exceptionalperformance that were publishedsince 1999 in Gifted Child Today, Gifted Child Quarterly, High Ability Studies, Journal of Gifted Education, The Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, and Roeper Review.Thiscriterionyielded28articles.Ofthesethevastmajoritywereempiricalwith2conceptual (Gross,1999;Minton&Pratt,2006;)and3reviewsoftheliterature(Gross&vanVliet,2005;Neihart,2007;Persson,2000).Bothqualitativeandquantitativemethodswereusedintheempiricalstudies,which were primarily descriptive,correlational, or case studies. Thesamplesintheempiricalstudieswere

fromelementary(n=11),middle(n=6),andhighschool(n=3)levelswiththreeexaminingyouthand/oremi-nentadults(Gross,2006;Muratori,etal.,2006;Simonton,2008)andonecomparing elementary with highschoolstudents(Neber&Schommer-Aikins,2002).WiththeexceptionofSimonton’s(2008)studyofeminentAfricanAmericans,thesampleswereprimarilyWhite.Whenassessmentswerementionedinthearticle,highlygifted students scored higher than130onintelligencetests,withmostscoring140+.Studiesconductedwithprecocious readers were the onlyexception.Inthiscase,thestudents’intelligencescoresrangedfrom82to170(Olson,Evans,&Keckler,2006).

To identify characteristics thatmaybeuniquetothisgroup,research-

ershavestudieddifferencesbetweenhighlygiftedstudentsandtheirpeerswho were identified as moderatelygiftedand/oraveragestudents.Whencomparing highly gifted to othergiftedstudents,nodifferenceswerefound intheirpsychosocialadjust-ment (Norman, Ramsay, Martray&Roberts,1999;Garland&Zigler,1999) or social status (Norman,Ramsay,Roberts,&Martray,2000).Infact,highlygiftedstudentsappeartohavebettercopingskills(Garland&Zigler,1999),higherlevelsofself-actualization and self-acceptance(Pufal-Struzik, 1999), and neededmoreintellectualstimulation(Pufal-Struzik,1999)thantheirgiftedpeers.However, when comparing highlygiftedstudentsacrossgrade levels,highly gifted high school studentshadhigherworkavoidance,goalori-entation,andtestanxietythanhighlygiftedelementarystudents(Neber&Schommer-Aikins,2002).NeberandSchommer-Aikins(2002)concludedthatthesenegativeattitudesmayhavebeeninfluencedbylearningenviron-mentsthatofferedlessopportunityfor investigations than elementarysettings. In other comparisons, highlygifted students demonstratedfewer behavior disorders (Galluci,Middleton, & Kline, 1999), identi-fiedmoreissues(vonKárolyi,2006),put more emphasis on effort overability,werelessanxious,andweremore intrinsically motivated thantheir underachieving or averagepeers (Vlahovic-Stetic, Vidovic, &Arambasic,1999).Withindisabilitygroups,nobehavioraldifferenceswerereportedforhighlygiftedormoder-ately gifted students with learningdisabilities(Shaywitzetal.,2001).Ontheotherhand,JacksonandPeterson(2003)reporteddepressivesymptomsintwohighlygiftedstudents.Theywondered if current instrumentsadequatelydetectsymptomsinthispopulation.Assouline,Nicpon,andDoobay(2009)notedthatcompre-hensiveassessmentsofhighlygiftedstudentsmaybeneededtodifferenti-atebetweendisabilities,particularly

Programming for highly gifted students is important in their academic and social

development.


among highly gifted students withautismandthosewhodemonstratesocial difficulties. Moreover, otherresearchershavenotedthedifficultywith assessments, notable ceilingeffects(Minton&Pratt,2006),andinsufficient information for under-standingthecomplexityofthestu-dent’sprocessing(Noel&Edmunds,2007). While most of the studiesreportedinthisreviewsupportthesocial, emotional, and behavioralstrengthsofhighlygiftedstudents,variationsaremostlikelyaresultoftheheterogeneityofthegroupitself.Instudyingtwocasesofhighlygiftedstudents,Lewis(2002)concludedthathighlygiftedstudentsmayactuallybemoredifferentthansimilar,requir-ingindividualizedassessment,flex-ibleschedulingandcounseling,andrequireindividualplans. Threestudiesfocusedonfactorsthatinfluencedachievementoremi-nence. With high school students,VernaandCampbell(1999)reportedthat higher socioeconomic status(SES) contributed to higher mathachievement among WestinghouseTalentSearchsemi-finalistsorfinal-istsalthoughtheynotedgenderdiffer-ences.HighSEScontributedtohigherachievementforfemalesandhigherself concepts for males. Males didperceivemoreparentalpressurethanfemales.Throughinterviews,twosuc-cessfulmathematicianswhohadbeenprecocious,identifiedthesefactorsascontributingtotheirsuccess:parents,acceleration,schoolsupport,mentor-ing, and participation in academiccompetitions(Muratorietal.,2006).For African Americans, Simonton(2008)foundthatthemostimportantfactorcontributingtoeminencewaschildhoodgiftedness.Similartothemathematicians’insights,Simontonconcluded that his study providedsupportforgiftedandtalentedpro-grams to develop your children’sexceptionaltalents. Programming for highly giftedstudents is important in their aca-demic and social development.Kennedy (2002) reported that ahighlygiftedchildinaheterogeneous

classroomsufferedfromsocialisola-tion,whichtheninfluencedevenhisacademicperformance.Evenaself-containedclassroomforgiftedstu-dents does not address all of theirneeds.Forexample,Moon,Swift,andShallenberger(2002)discoveredthatstudentsreactedpositivelyandnega-tivelytothesameclassroomactivities.Persson(2000)mentionedthatevenaconservatorymaynotbethebestplacement for a talented musicianbecausethemaster,alsohighlygifted,maynotbetherightmentorforthestudent.Withmiddleschoolstudents,Ivey(2000)didsuccessfullyprovidedforsixhighlygiftedstudentsusingawriter’sworkshopthatfocusedonthestudents’ interestswithoutgradingtheirwork. For themostpart,accelerationhasbeensuccessfulwithhighlygiftedstudents.Inherliteraturereviewof53studies,Neihart (2007)summa-rized the positive effects of gradeacceleration, peer grouping, andearlyentrance tobothhigh schooland college. Acceleration helpeddevelopsociallysatisfyingrelation-ships, positive self-efficacy, socialleadership, and higher educationalaspirations.Moreover, the longitu-dinaleffectsappeartobeevenmorepositive(Gross,2006).Grossreportedthatstudentswhowereacceleratedbytwoyearsreportedhigherdegreesoflifesatisfaction,havegraduatedfromleadinguniversities,haveprofessionalcareers,andreportfacilitativesocialandloverelationshipscomparedtotheirpeersofequalabilitieswhowereacceleratedbyonlyoneyear.Inspiteofthesepositivefindings,obstaclessuchasmisidentification, inappro-priategradeplacement,inadequatecurriculum, lack of teacher train-ing,andthehighlygiftedstudent’sdesiretobelikeothers(e.g.,maskingtheirabilities)limittheimplementa-tionofaccelerativepractices(Gross,1999).GrossandvanVliet(2005)dorecommendspecificproceduresforradicalaccelerationthatincludeanappropriate curriculum, access toknowledgeableeducatorsandmen-tors,ongoingfamilysupport,encour-

agementfromsignificantothers,andcounseling.Evenwiththeseproce-dures,accelerationmaynotbe thebestoptionforeveryyoungster.Forthisreason,researchersrecommendtheimplementationofindividualedu-cationplansforhighlygiftedstudents(Kennedy,2002;Lewis,2002).

referenceHollingworth,L.(1942).Children above

180 IQ (Stanford-Binet): Origin and Development.Manchester,NH:AyerPublishing(Reprint,1975).

Assouline,S.G.,Nicpon,M.F.,&Doobay,A.(2009).Profoundlygiftedgirlsandautismspectrumdisorder:Apsycho-metriccasestudycomparison.Gifted Child Quarterly, 53,89-105.

Theresearchersexaminedtherela-tionshipbetweenextremegiftednessand social difficulties by studyingthepsychometriccharacteristicsoftwoprofoundlygiftedgirls,onewithautismspectrumdisorder(ASD)(160IQ)andtheotherwithoutASD(153IQ), using a case study methodol-ogy. Along with ASD assessments,otherpsychoeducationalassessmentsincluded intellectual, achievement,neuropsychological, adaptive, psy-chosocial,andsocialfunctioning.Intermsofacademicandcognitivefunc-tioning,thegirlswerealmostindistin-guishableanddemonstratedsuperbacademicfunctioning.Themaindif-ferencesbetween thegirls’profilesliesinhowtheyscoredonmeasuresspecificallydesignedtodetectASDandthosetomeasureadaptivefunc-tioning.Forexample,ontheneuro-psychological assessment, the girlwithASDhadanimpairedabilitytorecognizeaffectandfacialemotionalexpression.Theauthorsconcludethatonlythroughacomprehensivecog-nitiveassessmentcanprofessionalsdeterminewhichgirlhadASD.

Gallucci,N.T.,Middleton,G.,&Kline,A. (1999). Intellectually superiorchildren and behavioral problems


andcompetence.Roeper Review,22,18-21.

This study examined the questionofwhethergiftedchildrenaremorelikelytohavehigherlevelsofpoten-tialbehaviordisordersascomparedtostudentsofaverage intelligence.For the gifted student sample, theauthorsrecruited26boyand18girlparticipantsages12-16inaresiden-tialsummerenrichmentprogramforgiftedstudentsinLouisiana.Ethnicityofthissamplewas74.4%Caucasian,4.5%AfricanAmerican,6.8%AsianAmerican,9.1%Hispanic,and4.5%other.Toexpandthesocioeconomicdiversity,agiftedcomparisongroupof18boysand16girlswasrecruitedfrom Connecticut public schools.The comparison group consistedof studentsages12-15,with76.5%Caucasian, 2.9% Hispanic, 11.8%AfricanAmerican,and8.8%AsianAmericanstudentsinthisgroup.Allgiftedstudentscombinedhadscoresgreaterthan130(n=78)asdeter-minedby intelligencequotientsontheWechslerIntelligenceScale forChildren-Third Edition. ChildrenwithaverageIQs(n=62)comprisedtheothergroup.Thenon-giftedgroup(n = 62) ages 12-16 was recruitedfrom regular education classes inConnecticutschoolsandincluded33boysand29girls.Parentsofallstu-dentscompletedtheChildBehaviorChecklist.ANOVAanalysesshowednodifferencesbetweentheLouisianaandConnecticutgiftedgroupsandthesetwogroupswerecombinedfortheCBCLratings.TheauthorsfoundthattheCBCLratingsofgiftedchil-dreninLouisianaandConnecticutand the ratings fornon-gifted stu-dentsinConnecticutwereshowntobeconsistentwithnationalnorms.Itwasalsofoundthatbothgiftedandnon-gifted groups demonstratedfewerbehavioralproblems.

Garland,A.F.,&Zigler,E.(1999).Emo-tional and behavioral problemsamong highly intellectually giftedyouth.Roeper Review, 22,41-44.

Thisstudyexploredtherelationshipbetweengiftednessandpsychosocialproblems.Inthesamplewere191stu-dents,ages13-15,attendingasum-merprogramforintellectuallygiftedyouthbasedonexceptionalScholasticAchievementTest(SAT)scores.Theethnicdistributionconsistedof81%Anglo, 10% Asian American, 4%Hispanic,3%AfricanAmerican,and2% other, with 68% boys and 32%girls.TheChildBehaviorChecklistwasmailedtotheparentsoftheyouthtobeusedasameasureofbehavioraldifficulties.TheCBCLscoresofthesamplewerecomparedtonormsforyouthfromasimilaragebracket.Theauthorsfoundthattheseextremelyintellectuallygiftedyouthexhibitedadvancedcopingskillsandjudgment.Thesamplewasalsosplit into twogroupsusingthemedianSATscoretocreateagiftedandhighlygiftedgrouptocomparebehaviorproblemscores.There was no evidence that highlygiftedyouth(asmeasuredbyaptitudescores)exhibitedmoreemotionalandbehavioralproblemsthanmoderatelygiftedornon-giftedyouth.

Gross,M.U.M. (2006).Exceptionallygiftedchildren:Long-termoutcomesofacademicaccelerationandnonac-

celeration.Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 29,404-429.

The20-yearlongitudinalstudytracedtheacademic,social,andemotionaldevelopmentof60youngAustralianswithIQsof160andabove.Thechil-drenweretestedusingtheStanford-Binet: L-M version. Other datacollected included: assessments inschoolsubjectsonstandardizedtestsofaptitudeandachievement,teachers’assessments of academic progress;records of physical characteristicsand health; parents’ responses toquestionnaires;childinterviews,theCoopersmith Self-Esteem InventoryandtheDefining Issues Testtoevalu-atemoral reasoning.The60youthwere spread over Australia withsevenof theyouth livingoverseas.Tobeincludedinthestudy,theyouthneededtobebetweentheagesof5and13intheyears1988-1989.Themajorityoftheyouthwhohadbeenradically accelerated or who wereaccelerated by two years reportedhighdegreesoflifesatisfaction,havetakenresearchdegreesatleadinguni-versities,haveprofessionalcareers,andreportfacilitativesocialandloverelationships.Youthofequalabilitieswhowereacceleratedbyonlyoneyear

Please seek out these companies at the upcoming TAGT Conference in Houston. They have generously supported the gifted and talented community of Texas by becoming a Charter Member of our new 2009–2010 Corporate Partnership Program!


orwhowerenotpermittedtoacceleratehaveenteredlessacademically rigorous college courses, reported lowerlevelsoflifesatisfaction,andexperiencedsignificantdif-ficultieswithsocialization.Theauthorconcludedwithtwoprimaryrecommendations.First,studentsshouldnotonlyaccelerateintheirareasofspecialtalentbutalsobeallowedtoexplorepossiblepathwaysofothertalentareas.Second,exceptionallygiftedstudentsshouldbeidentifiedearlyandaccelerated,orplacedinaclasswithothergiftedchildren.

Gross,M.U.M.(1999).Smallpoppies:Highlygiftedchildrenintheearlyyears.Roeper Review, 21,207-214.

Theresearcherdescribedthemostseriousobstaclesforthehighlygiftedintheirearlyyears.Sheconcludedthatthehighestriskfactorsweremisidentification,inappropri-ategradeplacement,andinadequatecurriculum.Anotherissueisthatteacherslargelyhavenothadtrainingthatwouldmakethemsensitivetolevelsofgiftedness.Thosechildrenwhoarenotcompliantarelikelytobeoverlooked.Additionalobstaclesformanyhighlygiftedarethechil-dren’sawarenessofdifferencefromtheirpeersandtheirtendencytomasktheirgiftedness.Misidentificationoften

occursbecauseIQandoff-leveltestingtypicallytakeplaceinmiddlechildhood.Bythattime,thehighlygiftedmaybesogoodatmaskingthattheyareneveridentified.Thereviewerconcludedthathighlygiftedchildreninthecogni-tivedomainsaregenerallyfarlessacceptabletothegeneraleducationalcommunitythantheirphysicallyadeptpeers.

Gross,M.U.M.,&vanVliet,H.E.(2005).Radicalaccelerationandearlyentrytocollege:Areviewoftheresearch.Gifted Child Quarterly, 49,154-171.

The authors reviewed the research related to radicalaccelerationandidentifiedproceduresthatmightresultinsuccessfulaccelerationofhighlygiftedstudents.Theseproceduresincludedtheprovisionof(a)adevelopmen-tallyappropriatecurriculum;(b)accesstoaneducatorwhoisknowledgeableabouttheneedsofgiftedchildrenwhomayassistinlong-termcrucialplanning,monitoring,andmentoring;(c)ongoingfamilysupportandencouragement;(d)encouragementandsupportfromsignificantothers,includingfriendsandteachers;and(e)counselingbeforeandduringtheprocess.Students’personalcharacteristicsofmotivationandpersistencealsoinfluencedtheoutcomesofradicalacceleration.Someresearcherssuggestedthattalentedathletesmaywishtoavoidaccelerationbecausetheymaybephysicallydisadvantagedtotheirpeers.Someradically-acceleratedstudentsdidexperiencefrustrationathavingtomakeearlycareerdecisionsandexpressedregretsatmissingextracurricularactivities.Theauthorsconcludedthatradicalaccelerationisapractical,cost-freeinterventionthatcanbeeasilyimplementedwithinexistingeducationalsettings,butisnotwidelyused.

Ivey,C.P.(2000).Awriters’workshopforhighlygiftedverbalstudents.Gifted Child Today, 23(5),38-43.

Thelanguageartsteacher-researcheraskedwhatenviron-mentwouldbestrespondtotheneedsofsixmiddle-schoolstudentswhoscoredabove145ontheWISC-IIIverbalscale.Shechoseaworkshopsettingwhereworkwouldnotbegradedandstudentswouldtakeresponsibilityforbothpreviouslyagreeduponreadingsandweeklysubmissionofoneoriginalwork:apoem,essayorshortstory.Theresearcherbegantheworkshopbyassigning“HarrisonBergeron”byVonnegutandaskedstudentsprobing,reflec-tivequestionslike“whydidthestorycauseastir?”and“whatwaslifelikeintheU.S.in1961?”AftermodelingreflectivereadingresponsesagainwithShirleyJackson’s“TheLottery,”studentsproposedtheirownreadingagendaandofferedupsuchwritersasO.HenryandEdgarAllenPoe.Theresearcherconcludedbynotingthatthiswork-shopexperience,whichincludedanalysisofpublishedstu-dentwriting,forever“destroyed”(p.42)thestereotypeoftherestless,distractedmiddleschoolstudent.InresonancewithobservationsfromaCarnegieCorporationreportonmiddleschools,shefoundthisone-hour-a-weekworkshop

C.P.’s COrNEr


wasmeetingtheindividualneedsofsixhighlygiftedverbalstudentsandbecomingaturningpointtoensuretheirsuccessinschool.

Jackson,S.P.,&Moyle,V.F.(2009).WithDabrowskiinmind:Reinstatingtheoutliersinsupportoffull-spectrumdevelopment. Roeper Review, 31,150-160.

AskinghowDabrowski’sTheoryofPositiveDisintegrationcanhighlightunderstandingofthehighlygifted,theresearchersconsideredthecaseofonestudentscoringabovea145IQinnonverbalcapacity.However,Jack,apseudonym,hadanearnormalscoreonhisverbalcapacity.Hecametotheattentionofschoolpersonnelbecauseoftwicebeingreferredtotheprincipal’sofficeonthefirsttwodaysofhisfirstgradeyear.Accordingtohisteacher,hecouldnotbemanagedinagroupsetting.However,whenassessedbytheschool’sgiftedcoor-dinator,itwassoonclearthatJack’sverbalscorewasmisleading,forhecouldconverseconfidently,completethemissinglettersofmulti-syllablewords,andinventstories.Heevenwentasfarastoofferhisowngraphicorganizers, which was completelycongruentwithDabrowski’snotionsof multilevel perception and func-tioning.InterviewswithJack’sfatherconfirmed what Dabrowski calledoverexcitabilities,ortheintenselypri-vateresponsestotheworldthroughemotion, imagination, intellect,and sensory engagement. Jack, forinstance,showedagreatloveoflearn-ingathome,wherehewasallowedtofocusonanygivenprojectforweeks.Jack’steacherwasadvisedtogivehimaccesstoasafespacethatJackcouldeasilyaccess.Heneededthisspacetocalmdownandregroupwhenhebecameoverchargedandanxious.Hewasalsoprovidedwithenrichmentactivitiesforthehighlyvisual-spatiallearnerandtaughtrelaxationtech-niques. The researchers concludedthathighlygiftedstudentssharesimi-larbehaviorswithstudentswhoarediagnosedwithbehavioraldisorders.

Additionally,theyvoicedconcernthatpharmaceuticallytreatingbehaviorsthatarenoncompliantcouldstymiechildren’s development. Had therenot been an intervention for Jackthatconsidereddevelopmentratherthandysfunction,hisgiftednessmightnothavebeenrecognizedorfosteredwithinschool.

Jackson, S. P., & Peterson, J. (2003).Depressivedisorderinhighlygiftedadolescents. Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 14,175-186.

JacksonandPetersoninquiredaboutthe nature and extent of revieweddepressive disorders among thehighlygiftedintwocasestudies,clini-calrecords,andareviewofcurrentliterature.Allstudiesconfirmedthecapacityofdepressedyouthtomasktheirsymptoms.Oneofthefactorsinfluencingthisdepressionwasstu-dents’shameovertheirinabilitytoresolve their problems. They werealso afraid that their depressionwouldaffectothers.Contributingtotheirdepressionwasthepaucityofeducational programming and thelack of emotional/intellectual con-nection to peers. With the highlygiftedstudent’scapacitytomaskevenseveresymptoms,researchersaskedifcurrentquantitative instrumentsmightadequatelydetectdepression.Researchersnotedtheneedformorequalitativeresearchintodepressionamongthehighlygifted.Theyalsoobservedthathighlygiftedstudentsare profoundly sensitive and morevulnerabletofeelingsofshame.

Kennedy,D.(2002).Glimpsesofahighlygiftedchildinaheterogeneousclass-room.Roeper Review,24,120-124.

The researcher studied the socio-emotionalconsequencesofahighlygifted9-year-oldinaheterogeneousclassroomandfoundthatbecauseofhisasynchronousdevelopmentandfeweffectivemodifications,evenhiscognitiveperformancesuffered.Theboy,Joshua,wastwoyearsyoungerthanhisclassmatesandwasobserved

forthreemonths.Hisgiftednesswasapparenttoallintheschoolanddis-trict.Theoneobviousmodification,apulloutprogramforgiftedstudents,wasnotsuitablebecauseJoshuadidn’tthinkitmethisneedsanddroppedoutof it thepreviousyear.AmongtheobservationsrecordedwasJoshuamakingupwordgamesforhimself,likebeginningasentencewithaone-letterwordfollowedbytwo-,three-,andfour-letterwordsuntilhecouldgono further.Anotherwas Joshualearning the periodic table of ele-mentsandhowtouseitinasingleday. Because of his giftedness andthemodificationsthathadhimoutoftheclassroommanytimesaday,his social relationships suffered.Eventhebrightestofthemoderatelygiftedstudentsinhisclassroomwas60pointsbelowJoshua’smeasuredIQscore.Ininterviews,Joshuareportedhaving no friends and even hav-ingmadeanenemyoftheformerlysmartestboyintheclassroom.HisteacherwentontoreportthatJoshuaseemedtoenjoyputtingdownothersandshowingoffhisabilitytolearn.Beyond that, the researcher foundJoshua’s presence stymied leader-ship development among others.When Joshua dropped out of thepulloutclassforgiftedstudents,theteacher reported the environmentimmediatelyimproved.Thesebehav-iors,though,theresearcherargues,shouldbeunderstoodascomingfroma9-year-oldwhowasdailyhurtbyhissocialisolation.Theresearcherrec-ommendedthathighlygiftedstudentsalwaysreceiveindividualeducationplansandthatcounselors,teachers,andparentsbeinvolved.

Lewis,G.(2002).Alternativestoaccel-eration for thehighlygiftedchild.Roeper Review,24,130-133.

The researcher studied two highlygiftedstudentswithintelligencetestscores greater than 145 who wereadmittedtoaUniversityofGeorgiasummer program for children.Although they had similar scores,Lewisnotedtheyhadhighlyvariant


profiles.Linda,forexample,exhib-itedadvancedleadershipskills.Eventhoughshecouldnotreadatahighlevelatthetimeofthetesting,herobservationsondinosaursandastron-omyenabledhertospeakcomfortablywith adults. Yet, she was discour-agedinapplyingforaprivateschoolbecauseshedidnotattendtoroutineworkliketheotherstudentsdid.Bycontrast,Randyhadbegunalgebrabeforefirstgradeandhadexhibitedstrongeranalyticalthancreativeskills.Whatheneededwastheopportunitytodevelopinterpersonalskills.Lewisobservedthatnomatterhowsimilarscoresofhighlygiftedstudentsareonstandardizedmeasures,eachstudentneeded individualized assessment,flexiblescheduling,andcounseling.

Minton,B.A.,&Pratt,S.(2006).Identifi-cationdiscrepancies.Roeper Review, 28,232-236.

InaskingifthenewlynormedStanford-Binet Intelligence Scales,Fifth Edition(SB5) compared to those derivedfromtheWeschler Intelligence Score for Children,Third Edition (WISC-III),researchersreportedthattheSB5consistentlyyieldedlowerscores.Thediscrepancy suggested counselorsshouldusecautioninusingtheSB5inidentifyinghighlygiftedstudents.In2003,bothstandardintelligencetestswere renormed and reconceptual-ized.Eachofthetestsmeasure“crys-tallizedandfluid”abilities.Thetestsalsodependonprocessingspeeditemsanddevelopmentofworkingmemory.Accordingly,theresearcherssuggestedthatsomechildrenpreviouslyidenti-fied as gifted could be overlooked.Childrenwhoarestrongerinvisual-spatialandnon-verbalskillswilllikelyscorebetter,whilethosestrongerinverbal-abstract-reasoning skills willlikelydoworse,theresearchersreport.Oneproblemforassessinggiftednessisthatnormingscoresforthehighendoftheintelligencespectrumisdifficult,becausetherearesofewpeopleableto meaningfully contribute towardourunderstandingofthepsychomet-ricpropertiesofaninstrument.These

psychometric characteristics wouldthereforeleavesomestudentsuniden-tifiedingiftedscreening.

Moon,S.M.,Swift,M.,&Shallenberger,A.(2002).Perceptionsofaself-con-tained class for fourth- and fifth-gradestudentswithhightoextremelevels of intellectual giftedness.Gifted Child Quarterly, 46,64-79.

This qualitative case study investi-gatedtheeffectivenessofafourthandfifthgradeself-containedclassroomwith curriculum differentiated forhighlyintellectuallygiftedstudentsduring its first year of implemen-tation. Data were collected usingobservations, interviews, compari-son essays, and a goal-attainmentscale.Whiletheclassroomprovidedachallengingenvironmentforthestu-dents,individualstudentsreactionsvaried,particularlyintheemotionalandsocialareas.Someofthestudentsliked learning more, experiencingmorechallengeandthespecificproj-ectswhileothersperceivedthepro-gramnegativelybecauseofhardwork,homework,theteacher’sstrictness,highexpectations,commuting,andmissingfriendsintheiroldschools.

Muratori,M.C.,Stanley,J.C.,Gross,M.U.M.,Ng,L.,Ng,J.Tao,T.,&Tao,B. (2006). Insights from SMPY’sgreatestformerchildprodigies:Drs.Terence(“Terry”)TaoandLenhard(“Lenny”)Ngreflectontheirtalentdevelopment.Gifted Child Quarterly, 50,307-324.

Thisarticlehighlightsinterviewswithtwomathematicallyprecociousyouthwhoarenowhighlysuccessfulmathe-maticians.Oneofthestudentstaughthimselftoreadattheageoftwoandbyage3,hehadlearnedtowrite,typeand, solve mathematical problemstypicalof8-year-olds.Theotherstu-dentearnedaperfectscoreof800onthemathportionoftheSATatage10.Bothofthesehighlygiftedmathema-ticiansarecreative,highlymotivated,focused,andpassionateabouttheirwork.Factorsthatappearedtoinflu-encetheseyoungmenincluded(a)

intelligent,well-educatedparentswhoplayedanactiveroleintheirlivesbyadvocatingfortheirsons’education,(b)anacceleratededucationalpro-gramcombinedwithenrichment,(c)cooperationofschoolpersonnelandtheirwillingnesstoaccommodatetotheboys’academicneeds,(d)mentor-ing,and(e)participationinacademiccompetitions.

Neber, H., & Schommer-Aikins, M.(2002).Self-regulatedsciencelearn-ingwithhighlygiftedstudents:Theroleofcognitive,motivational,epis-temological,andenvironmentalvari-ables.High Ability Studies, 13,59-74.

Theresearchersstudiedtheroleofself-regulated learning among thehighlygifted inscienceclassroomsat the elementary and high schoolclassroomsand theassociated fac-torsthataccountedfordifferences.Thesample(n=133;69malesand64 females) was comprised of 93fourth-, fifth-, and sixth-gradersand40studentsinhighschool.ThestudyusedtheMotivated Learning Strategies Questionnaire todiscernself-regulatedlearning,thePersonal Goals Scales to measure generalgoalorientations,andaSchommer’s(1993)highschoolquestionnairetoassess epistemological beliefs. The Classroom Environment Scale wasalsoused tomeasure theextentofexploration.Self-regulatedlearningwasnotfoundtodistinguisheithergroupofhighlygiftedstudents.Thehighschoolstudentshadhigherworkavoidance,goalorientationandtestanxietythantheelementarystudents.Highschoolstudentswerealsomorelikelytoaimforapplicableknowledge.Therewasnodifferencebetweenthehighschoolandelementarystudentsinepistemologicalbeliefsortheatti-tude that success was unrelated toeffort.Moreover,thesearchforsin-gleanswersinsciencewasshowntobeevenstrongerforthehighschoolgroup.Theresearchersuggestedthatthe high school students’ negativeprofiles of self-regulated learningwasinfluencedbylearningenviron-


mentsthatofferedlessopportunityforinvestigationthanelementaryset-tings.Femalestendedtohavelowerself-efficacyinsciencethanmales,aswellashighertestanxiety.However,femaleshadhighergoalorientation.Inepistemologicalbeliefs,onlyquicklearningshoweditselftobeastrongerattitudeformalesthanfemales.Thiswastrueforbothelementaryandhighschoolstudents.Theresearchercon-cludedthestudybyrecommendingthatenvironmentsbecreatedatalllevelsthatencouragediscoveryandexploration.

Neihart, M. (2007). The socioaffectiveimpact of acceleration and abilitygrouping:Recommendationsforbestpractice.Gifted Child Quarterly, 51, 330-341.

Askingwhatisthebesteducationalplacementforgiftedstudents,Neihartreviewed the current research andreported the benefits of accelera-tionviaearlyentrancetoschoolandcollege, as well as grade skipping.Despitethesefindings,sheobservedthatbothparentsandteacherscon-tinuedtofearaccelerationbecauseofstudents’socio-emotionalwell-being.Neihartsummarizedthesebenefitsof accelerating studentswhodem-onstrateadvancedabilities:studentsdevelopsociallysatisfyingrelation-ships,positiveself-efficacy,comfortinthedecisiontoaccelerate,gainsinsocialleadership,andthedesireforhighereducationalaspirations.

Noel,K.,&Edmunds,A.(2007).Con-structingasynthetic-analyticframe-workforprecociouswriting.Roeper Review,29,125-131.

Researchers examined a rare andextremelytalentedstudentandwhathe offered toward newly expandedmodelsofgiftednessandassessment.Theyconsideredthecaseofapreco-ciouschild’sfirsttwoyearsofwrit-ingdevelopmentforwhichexistingmodelsofgiftednesswereinsufficient.Preferencewasgiventothetermpre-cocityratherprodigybecausethelat-

tersuggestedperformancethatthechildwouldeventuallyreach,whilethe former suggested performancethat even his literacy peers wouldnot.Inthisstudy,NoelandEdmundsanalyzed3,700pagesofwritingdonebyGeoffreyduringages5-6.Amongthesedocumentswerestories,mathand science charts, and a letter toStephenHawking.Suchproductionsuggested that existing analyticalframeworkwasinsufficienttounder-standGeoffrey’sabilities.Researchersbeganbyanalyzingsentencecomplex-ityandmechanicsmastery,aswellasthedegreetowhichheincorporatedwhat he was reading. Next, theyusedahierarchicalmodelofconceptassimilation,whichculminatedwithwriting that connected argument,justified assertions, and evaluated.Yet,thisframeworkwasfoundtobeinadequate.Researchersthenaddedconsiderationoftheuseofparadox,parallelstructure,rhythm,figuresofspeech,unusualdiction,lyricismandword-play.Yet,eventheseconsider-ationsdidnotcapturetheadult-likequalityofGeoffrey’swriting.Finally,they considered Geoffrey’s writingitself and identified eight regularlyrecurringfeaturesofit.Withinnar-rative,theyidentifiedvoice,purpose,andaudience.Withinexpositorywrit-ingwerepurposeandgenre,stylisticdissonance, organization, imagina-tion, and wisdom. The researchersconcludedthatGeoffreyusedwritingtolearnanddidsotobetterunder-standhisownthinking.Ultimately,theresearchersconceded,noanalyticalframeworkwassufficienttoencom-passprecociouswriting.Yet,theysawvalueintestingexistingframeworksinstudentwritingthatwasuncharacter-isticallyadvancedandmature.

Norman,A.,Ramsay,S.,Roberts,J.,&Martray,C.(2000).Effectofsocialsetting, self-concept, and relativeageonthesocialstatusofmoderatelyandhighlygiftedstudents.Roeper Review,23,34-39.

Researchers asked if social statuswas related to level of giftedness.

They operationalized social statusaspopularandrejected.Thesamplewascomprisedofyouth(n=155;95male,59female)agedfrom12to16yearsold.Allwereidentifiedtoqual-ifyfortheDukeTalentIdentificationProgram.Togatheracademicability,researchers used the Otis-Lennon School Ability Test, Sixth Edition,FormsFandG.Togatherdataaboutsocialstatus,theresearcherschosetousepeernominationsandratings,whichyielded thesegroups:popu-lar, rejected, neglected, controver-sial,andaverage.Findingsrevealedthatstatuseswerestableacrossbothgroups,thusneitherindicatedlevelofgiftedness.However,socialstatuswas related to both peer relationsandtosocial/academicself-concept.Nodifferenceswerefoundbetweenthemoderatelyandhighlygiftedinsocialstatus.Differenceswerefound,however,forstudentsnominatedaspopularorrejectedinboththeclass-roomanddormitory.Forthepropen-sitytogetalong,thepopulargroupwasnominatedfarmoreoftenthantherejectedgroup.Theinversewasalso found: therejectedgroupwasnominated more often for gettingin fights and being shy. Moreover,popular students scoredhigherona social self-conceptmeasure thanrejectedstudents.Thiswasalsothecaseforascholasticself-conceptmea-sure.Theresearchersconcludedthatthe stable standingof social statusbetweenmoderatelyandhighlygiftedstudentssuggestedthegiftedingen-eralarenomoreorlesswelladjustedthanotherstudents.Onelimitationnotedbytheresearchersisthatthestudyfocusedonacampexperience,whichwouldlikelyencourageatten-dance of the more socially maturegifted.Moreover,thestudydidnotgather nominations from averageabilitypeers.

Norman, A., Ramsay, S., Martray, C.,& Roberts, J. (1999). Relationshipbetweenlevelsofgiftednessandpsy-chosocialadjustment.Roeper Review,22(1),5-9.


Thisresearchteamcomparedhighlygiftedstudents(N=74)andmoderatelygiftedstudents(N=163)todetermineifhighlygiftedstudentsweremorelikelyto have less self-efficacy and moreadjustmentproblemsthanthemoder-atelygifted.Normanetal.consideredthisquestioninlightofotherstudiesthat continue to report that highlygiftedstudents(IQ>140)weremorevulnerablethantheirmoderatelygiftedpeers. Researchers gathered demo-graphic,academicability,self-concept,emotionalautonomy,andanxietydata. Among the highly gifted,the father’s educational attain-mentwassignificantlyhigher.Formothersofthehighlygifted,theytendedtoholdmoreprestigiousjobs.TherewasnodifferenceasmeasuredbytheSelf Description Questionnaire-II.Youngerstudentswereshowntobemoreemotion-allystableandhavestrongerrela-tionshipswithparents.AllstudentsshowedsignificantrelationstooneorbothoftheSchool Ability Index,Verbal, and Non-Verbal scales.Therewerenodifferencesinemo-tionalautonomyoranxietyforthegroups.

Olson,L.A.,Evans,J.R.,&Keckler,W.T.(2006).Precociousreaders:Past,present,andfuture.Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 30,205-235.

Inthisreview,theresearchersinves-tigated the environmental char-acteristics, acquisition process,psycholinguistic and neuropsy-chologicalcharacteristics,andaca-demic skills of precocious readers.Precocious readers were definedas thosewhoenterpreschool,kin-dergarten, and first-grade classeswiththeabilitytoread.Precociousreading is not necessarily relatedtoscoresonintelligencetestssincethe subjects in the reviewed stud-ies intelligencescoresranged from82 to 170. Environmental factorsthatappearedtobecorrelatedwithearly reading ability included par-ents’modelingreadingandreading

to their children, the child’s expo-suretoavarietyofreadingmateri-als,thechildren’sinterestinwrittenmaterialandtheirdesiretowrite,arichlinguisticenvironment,andtheparents’abilityanddesiretorespondtotheirchild’sability.Inlearningtoread,thesecharacteristicsemergedfromtheliterature:thechildwasnotdirectly taught; fluent reading wasmodeled;thechildusedanintegratedapproach(bothmeaningandphonet-ics);andthechildusedmetacognitive

strategies (self-knowledgeandtaskknowledge).Psycholinguisticcharac-teristicsincludedbetterphonologicalsynthesis,soundblendingskills,andeffectiveuseofknowledgeandread-ing strategies, but the precociousreadersvaried intheirprerequisiteskillsandreadingstyles.Neurologicalcorrelatestoearlyreadingincludedbettervisualmemory,developmentinposteriorlefthemisphericfunction-ing,andalphapeakfrequency.Finally,academicskillsofprecociousreaderswerebetterintheareasofspellingandtasksrequiringspecificreadingskills.Onestudymentionedthatprecociousreaderswerealsobetterinmath;how-ever,twothirdsofthesamplehadIQsgreaterthan140.Theresearcherscon-

cludedthatwhilesomefactorshavebeenidentifiedthatappeartocorre-latewithprecociousreadingabilities,moreresearchisneeded,particularlyintheareaofpredictingtheoccur-renceofprecociousreadingability.

Persson,R.S.(2000).Survivalofthefittestorthemosttalented?Journal of Sec-ondary Gifted Education, 12,25-38.

Thisliteraturereviewexaminedthebestmusicaleducationforthehighlygifted.Itdidsuggestaparticulardan-

ger:themaster,alsohighlygifted,maynotbetherightmentorforthestudent.Becausethemasterin a conservatory culture doesnottendtodifferentiateinstruc-tion,butratherteachoutofhisor her own individual learningexperience, the needs of othersorts of learning may often gounaddressed.Partoftheproblemforthehighlygiftedstudentisthevaryingunderstandingsoftalentinaconservatory.Onemeaningistalentislineage,ortheabilitytotracementor-studentlinesbacktoauniversallyrecognizedmaster,suchasLiszt.Ifonecandoso,thenthemastercanbepermittedanypedagogy,whetherthathasanyempiricalbasisornot.Anotherproblem for the highly giftedstudentisthelegacyofcommonsense teaching. Once promul-

gated,inanyform,suchapproachesbecomeassumed.Thisculture,then,can produce students who believethere is only right method, whichcan help as well as hinder musicaldevelopment. The Suzuki Method,forexample,hasbeenrecentlycriti-cizedasinhibitingexpressionatcosttothevalueofimitatingthemasterperformer.Suchpositivisticmethodscande-emphasizeexpression,whichforthehighlygiftedoftenmotivatedthedesiretomasteraninstrument.Anotherobstacleforthehighlygiftedmusiciancanbethemedicalconse-quencesoftoomuchpracticing.ThereviewerobservedtheoldRomanticformula—hardwork leads tomorepractice,whichinturnbecomesbetter

Researchers noted the

need for more qualitative

research into depression

among the highly gifted.


performance—thatprizedquantityofpracticeoverquality.Thatcommonsense pedagogy can stymie talentdevelopmentthroughneck,back,andshoulderinjuries.Theliteraturealsosuggestedthatvariousdisplaysofgift-ednessweretiedtocertaindomains.Whilemalestudentsgiftedinscienceshowed a high self-concept, theirmalecounterpartsinmusichadlowerlevelsofself-confidenceintheirabil-ityandweremorelikelytobeanxiousoverpersonalappearance.Forthesestudents, theirmentorsweremostlikelytomakethelargestdifferenceintheirdevelopment.Thereviewerconcludedthatbecauseofthecentralpositionoccupiedbythementorinthedevelopmentofmusicalgifted-ness,educatorsshouldbecautiousatgeneralizingfromtherarecasesofgiftednessandcallintoquestiontheverynotionoftheconservatoryenvironmentwhere some studentswinandotherslose.Astartingpointwouldbegrantingthatallgiftedstu-dents are winners. Another wouldbe to create instruction designedtoaddressindividualneeds.Highlygiftedstudentsmayhavetochoosetosurviveinaconservatorycultureratherthandeveloptheirownsenseofgiftedness,forthepropensityofthegiftedtoquestiontraditionisincon-flictwiththeauthoritarianclimateoftheconservatory.

Pufal-Struzik,I.(1999).Self-actualizationandotherpersonalitydimensionsaspredictorsofmentalhealthofintel-lectually gifted students. Roeper Review,22,44-47.

Theresearcherstudiedtheextentthatself-actualizationpredictedmentalhealth among gifted students. TheresearchersusedMaslow’sdevelop-menttheory,whichstatesthatself-actualizationisthehighestofhumanneeds.Theresearcherwasinterestedinconfirmingthatthehighlygiftedaremorelikelytohaveahighlevelof self-actualization, as well as anenablinghighanxietylevel.Thestudysampled140students (87male;53female) in a large Polish city. Two

groupswerecreated:highlygifted(n=65)andaverageability(n=75).TheresearchersusedRubacha’sShort Self-realization Questionnaire(SSQ),tomeasureself-actualization,theState-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI) tomeasureanxiety,theQuestionnaire for Testing Control (QTC) to mea-sure locusofcontrol,andtheHow Do You Think test tomeasurecre-ativeintellectualattitudes.Thestudyreportedthathighlygiftedstudentsweremorelikelytohavehigherlev-elsofself-actualizationamongtheirintellectually average peers, whilethose who were highly gifted andself-actualizing needed both intel-lectualstimulationandahighlevelofself-actualization.Thatsomehighlygiftedstudentshavesuchadrive,theresearcher concluded, is the resultofaninternallocusofcontrol,self-knowledge,andself-esteem.Resultsdemonstratedthatthehighlygifteddidindeedpossessahigherlevelofself-actualizationthantheiraverage-abilitypeers.Alsoapparentwasthathighself-actualizationcorrespondedtohighself-acceptance,andtheneedforintellectualstimulation.However,thehighlygiftedarenomorelikelytohaveastrongerinternallocusofcontrol,bemorehighlyanxious,nornecessarilyachievehighresultsinacreativeintellectualendeavor.

Shaywitz,S.E.,Holahan,J.M.,Fletcher,J.M.,Freudenheim,D.A.,Makuch,R.W.,&Shaywitz,B.A.(2001).Het-erogeneitywithinthegifted:HigherIQboysexhibitbehaviorsresemblingboyswithlearningdisabilities.Gifted Child Quarterly, 45,16-23.

Thisstudycomparesbehavioral,cog-nitive,attentional,andfamilyhistorydimensions among four groups ofboyscategorizedbyintelligenceand/or learning disability (LD). In thesamplewere87boysingrades4-7.Thefourgroupsincluded18highlygiftedboys(IQ140-154)(20.7%),17lowgiftedboys(IQ124-139)(19.5%),26boyswithLD(29.9%),andanor-mal control group of 26 boys whowerenotidentifiedasgiftedorhav-

ingalearningdisability(29.9%).EachboywasadministeredtheWechsler Intelligence Scale for Children, Revised(WISC-R)andtheWoodcock-Johnson Psychoeducational Battery, Part II--Reading, Math, and Written Language.TheteacherscompletedtheAbbreviated Conners Teacher Rating Scale(ACTRS);andthestudents’par-entscompleted the Yale Children’s Inventory(YCI).UsingaMANOVA,theauthorsreportedthatbothhighlygiftedandlowgiftedgroupsdidnotdiffersignificantlywhencomparedtothenormalgroupineitherbehavioralorcognitivedomains.Highlygiftedboysdidshowlevelsofbehaviorprob-lemssimilartothelearningdisabled.

Simonton,D.(2008).Childhoodgifted-nessandadulthoodgenius:Ahis-toriometricanalysisof291eminentAfrican Americans. Gifted Child Quarterly, 52,243-255.

This study replicated an earlierstudybyCox(1926)thatexamined301geniuses.Thissampleincluded291 eminent African Americans,thosewhohadabiographicalentryin three standard reference worksabouteminentBlackAmericans,andwhowerebornpriorto1945.Datawerecollectedontheseindependentvariables:giftedness(rater-assessed),birthyear,livingcontemporary,gen-der, andachievementdomain.Theresearcherfoundthatthemagnitudeofchildhoodgiftednesswassignifi-cantlypositivelyassociatedwiththedegreeofadulthoodgenius.Noneoftheothervariableswereaspredic-tive.Theauthorconcludedthatthestudyprovidedsupportforgiftedandtalentedprogramssinceexceptionalgiftednessinchildhoodandadoles-cenceisassociatedwithadulthoodachievement.

Stainthorp,R.,&Hughes,D.(2004).Anillustrativecasestudyofprecociousreadingability.Gifted Child Quar-terly, 48,107-120.

Usingalongitudinalcasestudy,theauthorsdescribedthecharacteristics


ofaprecociousreader.Thegirlwasabletoreadfluentlyattheageof5yearsand4months,whichwasatleast5yearsaheadofherchronologicalage.The characteristics included fluentlevelsofreadingaccuracyatanearlyage,highproficiencyonmeasuresofphonemicawareness,andcontinuedhighlevelsofabilityinallaspectsofliteracy.Theschooldidn’tprovideforthisyoungster’sprecociousabilityandlateradmittedthattheyweremostlikelymoreconcernedaboutmeet-ingU.K.’sreadingstandards,whichdidn’tincludeanablechildrenpolicy.Theauthorsconcludedthatschoolsneeded to develop programs thatdevelopedtheirhigherorderliteracyskills,includingcomprehensionandmaterialsthatareappropriatetotheinterestlevelsoftheageofthechild.

Verna,M.A.,&Campbell,J.R.(1999).Differential achievement patternsbetween gifted male and giftedfemale high school students. The Journal of Secondary Gifted Educa-tion, 10, 184-194.

This study investigated the factorsthatcontributedtogiftedhighschoolstudents’mathematicsachievement.Asampleof225highlygiftedstudents(109malesand116females),ages16to18,weresemi-finalistsorfinalistsintheWestinghouseTalentSearch.ThestudentsandtheirparentscompletedtheInventoryofParentalInfluenceand the Self-Confidence AttributeAttitude Scale. Males perceivedmoreparentalpressurethanfemalestoachieveinmath.Beinginatwo-parent family was more importantforgiftedmales’thangiftedfemales’academicachievement.Highersocio-economicstatus(SES)wasassociatedwithhigherachievementforfemales.HighSESwasalsoassociatedwithhigherself-conceptsandmathself-concepts for males, although highSEShadnosignificanteffectonself-conceptforfemales.

Vlahovic-Stetic, V., Vidovic, V. V., &Arambasic,L.(1999).Motivationalcharacteristics in mathematical

achievement:Astudyofgiftedhigh-achieving,giftedunderachievingandnon-giftedpupils.High Ability Stud-ies, 10,37-49

Researchers studied how intrinsicmotivationtowardmathschoolwork,anxiety,self-esteemandattributionofsuccessmightdifferentiatethehighlygiftedachieving(n=31)fromthegiftedunderachievingstudents(n=31)anda non-gifted comparison group(n=85).Allparticipantswereaged9to10.Discriminantanalysisrevealedthegiftedachievinggroupattainedahigherlevelofintrinsicmotivation,hadlessanxietyovermath,andlessoftenattributedsuccesstoexternalfactors.Thisgroupalsoputlessemphasisoneffortthanability.Thediscriminantfunctionanalysiscorrectlyidentifiedstudents63.95%ofthetime.

VonKárolyi,C.(2006).Issueawarenessinyounghighlygiftedchildren:Dotheclaimsholdup?Roeper Review,28,167-174.

The researcher tested the claim ofHollingworth (1942) that giftedchildren by ages of 12-13 becomeinterestedinissuesoforiginanddes-tiny.Toassesstheaccuracyoftheseobservations, the researcher com-paredhighlygifted7-9yearoldstotheir age mates and then gatheredself-reports from students, parentreports, and responses to issue-laden drawings. The comparisongroupincludednotonlytypical,butalsomoderatelygiftedchildren.Theresearcherusedtheyoungstudents(n=28)totestthehypothesisthatwithgiftednessbringsearlyissueaware-ness.Thedisparitieswere striking.First,therewasagreatdealofdiffer-encebetweenstudents’responsestothedrawingsandtheirselfreports.Inissueidentification,thehighlygiftedgroup did identify more issues inthedrawingsthantheirchronologi-calpeers.Butresearchersfoundnodifferencesintheimportanceoftheissuespresented.Secondly,therewasanimportantdifferencebetweenstu-dentandparentreports.Parentsof

thehighlygiftedreportedearlieriden-tificationofissuesthantheparentsofthecomparisongroup.Parentsofthehighlygiftedalsoreportedagreaternumberofissuestheirchildrennotedandmoreimportanceandhighercon-cernthantheiragemates’parents.Onstudentreports,theresearcherfoundthehighlygiftednobetteratlistingissuesorrecallingthem.Moreover,theynotednogreaterimportancetothe issues they identified. Becauseno differences were found to chil-dren’saccesstoissuesinthehome,theresearcherconcludedthatfamilyvariablescannotexplaintheirgreatersensitivitytoissueidentification.

About the Authors

David Thomson,M.A.,isadoctoralstudentintheDepartmentofEducationalPsychologyatBaylorUniversity.Hisresearchinterestsrelatetodevelop-ingassessmentsforcritiquingliteraryworks.

Susan K. Johnsen,Ph.D.,isaprofessorintheDepartmentofEducationalPsychologyatBaylorUniversity. She directs the Ph. D. Programand programs related to gifted and talentededucation.She ispast-presidentof theTexasAssociationforGiftedandTalentedandpresi-dentoftheAssociationfortheGifted,CouncilforExceptionalChildren.Shehaswrittenover100articles,monographs,technicalreports,andbooksrelatedtogiftededucation.Sheisafre-quentpresenteratinternational,national,andstateconferences.SheiseditorofGifted Child TodayandservesontheeditorialboardsofGifted Child Quarterly, Journal for the Education of the Gifted,andRoeper Review.SheistheauthorofIdentifyingGifted Students: A Practical Guide;co-authorof the Independent Study Programandthreeteststhatareusedinidentifyinggiftedstudents: Test of Mathematical Abilities for Gifted Students(TOMAGS),Test of Nonverbal Intelligence (TONI-3),andScreening Assessment for Gifted Students(SAGES-2).

Krystal Goree,M.Ed.,isthedirectorofclinicalpracticeandteachesclassesingiftedandtalentededucationatBaylorUniversity.Shehasworkedinthefieldofgiftededucationformorethan20yearsintherolesofparent,teacher,consultant,presenterandprogramadministrator.Sheservesonstatecommitteesandprovidesconsultationandprogramevaluationforschooldistricts.Inadditiontopresentingatstateandnationalcon-ferences,shehasauthoredorcoauthoredarticlesandbookchapters.Sheispast-presidentoftheTexasAssociationforGiftedandTalentedandservesassenioreditorandproductreviewerforGifted Child Today.

recent trends IN GIFTEd IdENTIFICATION IN TEXAs



by Russell T. Warne & Joyce Juntune, Ph.D.

In1977,theTexaslegislaturepassedthefirst lawestablishingeduca-tionalprogramsforgiftedandtal-

entedstudentsinthestateofTexas(TexasAssociationfortheGiftedandTalented[TAGT],2008).Inresponse,educatorsacrossthestatetookonthetaskofidentifyingandservinggiftedstudents.Clearguidelines,however,werenotprovidedforlocalpersonneluntiltheadoptionoftheTexasStatePlanfortheGiftedandTalentedin1990.TheStatePlanprovideddis-trictswithguidanceintheareasofidentification,programdesign,cur-riculumandinstruction,professionaldevelopment,andfamily-communityinvolvement(TexasEducationAgency[TEA],2000).

With state-wide guidelinesin place, gifted programs weresoon included in the state DistrictEffectivenessandCompliance(DEC)efforts (TAGT, 2008). Complianceteams, which included respectededucatorsofthegifted,visiteddis-tricts to ensure the gifted and tal-entedstudentswerebeingproperlyidentifiedandserved.TheDECteamexamineddistrictdocuments,visitedschools, and interviewed teachers,parents,andadministrators,usingamanualwhichprovidedexamplesofevidenceforeachareatobeexaminedasaguideforthevisit(TEA,2001).Followingthevisit,areportwaspro-vided to the district, detailing theareasofcomplianceandareas that

neededtheattentionofthedistrictpersonnel. This compliance reportwasoftenusedbylocaldistrictcoor-dinatorstoillustratetotheirBoardof Trustees their district standingcomparedtootherdistrictsinTexasandtothestatestandardsforgiftededucation. In2003,budgetcutsresultedinthe discontinuation of complianceteam visits. Now services for thegiftedfelllargelyontheshouldersoflocalcoordinatorsandadministrators,withnostateoversight.Inthisstudywedecidedtoexaminethetrendsinidentificationofgiftedstudentsoveranineyearperiod,whichincludedtheyearsduringandafterthecom-pliancevisits.Specifically,weaskedthreequestions: 1.Whatisthecurrentproportion

ofstudentsinTexasidentifiedasbeinggifted?

2.Did thepercentageof studentsidentifiedasgiftedinTexaschangeafterstateoversightofgiftedpro-gramswasdiscontinued?

3.Doesthetypeofschool(elemen-tary,secondary,ormixedgrades)have an impact on how manystudentsareidentifiedasgiftedatthatschool?

Asweexaminedthedata,wewerenotonlylookingfortheidentificationpatternsacrossdistricts,butwhatwashappeningatthedifferenteducationallevelswithindistricts.

MethodsThe researchers obtained data

fromtheTexasEducationAgency’swebsite.Thewebsitehoststhestate’sAcademic Excellence IndicatorSystem(AEIS) (TEA,2008),whichreportsdataonSES,studentperfor-mance, staff, student demograph-ics,andmanyothervariablesatthecampusordistrictlevel.Everypub-licschoolinthestateisrequiredbylawtoreportthisinformationtotheTEA,sothedataoriginatefromeverycampusinTexas.AEISdataareavail-ablefreeofchargetoanybodywithaninternetconnection.

Theresearchersdownloadednineconsecutive years of campus-leveldata from the 1999-2000 through2007-2008 school years. We usedthesedatatoobtaindescriptivesta-tisticsinordertodiscoverbasicstate-widetrendsingiftedidentification.Specifically,wewereinterestedinthenumberofcampusesthatclaimedthattheyhadnoorfewgiftedchildren,themedianpercentageofchildrenwhowere gifted on a campus, and thestatewidenumberandpercentageofchildrenidentifiedasgifted.

Althoughdatafromeveryschoolin Texas were downloaded, not allwere used in the study. For eachyearofdata,weeliminatedcharterschoolsbecausecharterschoolsaredifferent enough from traditional


public schools thatgrouping themtogetherwoulddistortanyanalyses.Wealsoeliminatedschoolsthatdidnothaveanenrollmentofatleast200students(excludingkindergartenandpre-Kstudents).Weeliminatedthesesmallerschoolsbecauseslightfluctu-ationsinthenumberofchildrenwhoareidentifiedasgiftedmaycausethepercentageofgiftedstudentsatthosecampusestochangegreatly.Thekin-dergartenandPre-Kstudentswerenot included in the study becauseinmanydistricts,thegiftedidenti-ficationprocessmaystartafterthey

havereportedtheirdatafortheAEIStoTEA.Thefinalnumberofcam-pusesusedeachyearintheanalysisisshowninTable1.

resultsTable1showsthedescriptivesta-

tisticseachyearforthepercentageofgiftedchildrenataschool.Thedis-tributioneachyearonthisvariableis highly leptokurtic (highly con-centratedaroundthemeanoraver-ageofscores)andpositivelyskewed

(towardsthehigherendofthecurve).Theskewedandleptokurticnatureofthedistributionsisduetothepres-ence of magnet schools—a few ofwhicheachyearreportedthat100%oftheirstudentsweregifted.Inthe2007-2008dataset,forexample,thefivecampuseswithonlygiftedstu-dentswere12.85standarddeviationsabovethemean.Ofcourse,extremevalues have a large impact on themean and standard deviation, butbecausewhencalculatingtheskew-ness or kurtosis of a distribution,this impactgrowseven larger.Thelargerinfluenceofanextremevalueisduetothedifferencebetweenthatvalueanditsmeanbeingcubedintheskewnessequationandraisedtothefourthpowerinthekurtosisequation(Thompson,2006).Therefore,suchhigh skewness and kurtosis in thedistributionsareexpectedandmerelyreflectthepresenceofextremevalues.Infact,ineveryyearofdataexam-ined,lessthan1.6%ofschoolsweremorethanthreestandarddeviationsawayfromthemeanonthisvariable.

AsshowninTable2,thestate-widenumberofchildrenidentifiedasgiftedremainedmoreorlesscon-stant,withanaverageof328,270,222over the course of the nine years.Indeed,innoneoftheobservedyearsdid thenumberofchildren identi-fieddepartmorethan2.7%fromthemean.However,thenumberoftotalschoolchildreninthestaterosecon-sistently.Consequently,thepercent-age of children identified as gifteddecreasedconstantlysincethe2000-2001schoolyear.Arelatedoutcomeisthatthemedianandmeanvaluesofthepercentageofchildrenidenti-fiedasgiftedonacampuseachyearhassteadilydecreased,asshowninTable1.

InterpretationWhat is the current proportion of students in Texas identified as being gifted?

table 1descriptive statistics, percentaGe of Gifted

students on texas campusesYear N Median Mean SD Skewness Kurtosis

1999-2000 5,476 7.38 8.67 7.54 3.48 26.392000-2001 5,533 7.37 8.75 7.84 3.97 31.082001-2002 5,594 7.35 8.65 7.54 4.14 33.682002-2003 5,669 7.29 8.44 6.93 3.87 31.492003-2004 5,704 7.17 8.40 6.88 4.12 35.452004-2005 5,798 7.11 8.32 6.89 4.37 38.652005-2006 5,838 6.96 8.14 6.93 4.59 41.432006-2007 5,920 6.84 8.07 7.15 5.06 47.522007-2008 6,023 6.73 8.00 7.16 4.93 45.297

table 2stateWide enrollment, Gifted enrollment,

and percentaGe of Gifted children

Year TotalenrollmentGifted

enrollment Percentagegifted1999-2000 3,398,128 325,375 9.58%2000-2001 3,440,371 331,062 9.62%2001-2002 3,498,858 327,574 9.36%2002-2003 3,560,939 320,975 9.01%2003-2004 3,602,802 323,879 8.99%2004-2005 3,658,768 326,171 8.92%2005-2006 3,752,824 330,597 8.81%2006-2007 3,809,434 331,720 8.71%2007-2008 3,878,055 337,079 8.69%

Average 3,622,242 328,270.222Note. Pre-K and K students are excluded from these counts and all analyses.


AsTable2shows,approximately8.69%ofstudentswhoattendschoolsincludedinthestudyareidentifiedasgiftedinthe2007-2008schoolyear.Thistotalsto337,079students.Table1 shows that the mean, or averagecampusinTexashasidentified8.00%of their students as gifted and themediancampushadidentified6.73%oftheirstudentsasgifted.

Did the percentage of students iden-tified as gifted in Texas change after state oversight of gifted programs was discontinued? Figure1showsthepercentageofTexascampuseswherepersonnelarelikely underidentifying their giftedstudents.Forthefirstseveralyearsofthestudy,therewasadecreasingpro-portionofschoolsclaimingtohavenogiftedchildren.However,the2005-2006 and 2006-2007 data showedincreasesinthenumberofcampuseswithnogiftedchildren,whichnowapproximate2003-2004 levels.Thepercentageofcampuseswith1to10giftedchildrenwas fairly steady inthe study, although thepercentagedidclimbsteeplyduring the2005-2006schoolyear.In2006-2007,thepercentageofcampuseswith1to10giftedchildrendiddeclineslightly,butthepercentagewasstillhigherthananypointprevioustothe2005-2006gain.During2007-2008,thepercent-agewasatthehighestleveloutofalloftheyearsexamined.

Finally, Figure 1 also shows thepercentageof schools inTexas thatreportthatlessthan3%oftheirchil-drenaregifted.Wechosethisthresholdbecausemostresearcherssaythattheincidenceofgiftednessinthegeneralpopulationisatleast3%(e.g.,Benbow&Stanley,1980;Konstantopaulous,Modi,&Hedges,2001)andanyschoolwithlessthanthisproportionofgiftedchildrenismostlikelyunderidentify-ingthem.Accordingtothiscriterion,thenumberofcampusesunderiden-tifyinggiftedstudentsalsodecreasedsteadily since 1999-2000. However,afterthelowpointduringthe2003-2004schoolyear(inwhich14.22%ofschoolsreportedthatlessthan3%of

theirstudentsweregifted),thepropor-tionofschoolswherepersonnelareprobablyunderidentifyinghasbeenrisingeveryyear,andthe2007-2008datashowthat16.10%(970schools)areunderidentifyinginthismanner.

In sum, every index of under- identification that we examined has increased markedly and since TEA visits stopped compliance visits in 2003.Itisnotpossibletosay,withthecurrentdata,whetherthecessationofcompliancevisitsactuallycausedtherisein(probable)under-identificationacrossthestateofTexas.Justbecauseoneeventprecededanotherdoesnotmeanthatthefirstcausedthelatter(Slife & Williams, 1995). However,thesteadydecreasesinunder-iden-tificationthatprecededthehaltingofcompliancevisitsandthesteadyrises

sincethe2003legislativesessionpro-vide interestingcircumstantialevi-dencethatcompliancevisitsprovidedaneededcheckonlocaldistrictstoensure that they were identifyinggiftedstudentsattheircampuses.

Does the type of school (elementary, secondary, or mixed grades) have an impact on how many students are identified as gifted at that school? The answer to this questionappearsinTable3.Inthemostrecentyearforwhichdataareavailable(2007-2008),personnelatsecondaryschoolsandschoolswithmixedelementaryandsecondarygradeswereidentifyingstudentsathigherratesthanschoolsthatonlyhadelementarygrades.Thedifferencesbetweenthemeanpercent-agesofchildren identifiedasgifted

fiGure 1. NumberofCampusesinTexasReportingFeworNoGiftedChildren

table 3mean and standard deviation of the

percentaGe of children identified as Gifted, orGanized by Grade level, 2007-2008 Gradelevel Mean Standarddeviation Na

Elementary 6.82 6.32 3783Mixed 8.30 5.39 133

Secondary 10.10 8.13 2106Note. Group mean differences are statistically significant for simple contrasts between elementary and mixed schools (p = .043), between elementary and secondary schools (p < .000001), and between mixed and secondary schools (p = .011). The effect size (η2) for grade level independent variable on the percentage of children on a campus identified as gifted was 4.7%.aOne school was excluded because the school had unknown grade levels.


werestatisticallysignificantwhenonecompared any two types of school(exactp-valuesaredisplayedat thebottomofTable3).

Withthecurrentdataathand,itisnotpossibletotellwhethertheper-sonnelatelementaryschoolsarelesslikelytofindgiftedchildrenamongtheirstudentsthanthepersonnelatmixedandsecondary schools.Theresults in Table 3 may mean thatschoolswithmixedgradesoronlysecondarystudentshaveoverlygener-ousdefinitionsofgiftedness.Furtherresearchisneededtobetterunder-standtheseresults.

ConclusionsItisinterestingtonotethatafter

2003,whentheDECvisitswereter-minated,thetrendinthereductionofcampusesclaimingtohavenogiftedstudentsisnowbeingreversed.Thesameholdstrueforcampusesreport-ing that less than 3% of their stu-dentsaregifted.Thegainsduringtheyearsofcompliancevisitsseemtobedisappearing.

The researchers are encour-aged that the total percentage ofgiftedstudentsidentifiedacrossthestateofTexasseemstobeholdingatbetween8%and9%.Muchofthecreditforkeepingthefocusongiftededucationintheschoolsshouldgotothedistrictcoordinatorswhoensurethatthelocalteachersandadmin-istratorsareprovidedwiththestaterequiredtrainingonunderstandingandservinggiftedandtalentedstu-dents(TEA,2000).

However, thenaggingquestionremains:ifhundredsofschoolsareunderidentifyinggiftedstudentsand142schoolsclaimtohavenogiftedstudents,aretheschoolsthatidentifygifted students labeling non-giftedpupilsasgifted?Afterall, in2007-2008,130Texasschoolsin31districtssaidthatonequarterormoreoftheirstudentsweregifted.Areallofthesemagnetschools?Aretheseschoolsindistrictswithliberalidentification

policies? Perhaps at these schoolstherereallyisalargeproportionofgifted students. Given the currentdata,wesimplycannottell.

WiththeAEISdata,wealsodonotknowwhetherthestudentsidentifiedasgiftedataschoolareactuallybeingservedaccordingtorecognizedbestpracticesinthefield(Rogers,2007).Itispossiblethatatanunder-identifyingschool,thegiftedwhoareidentifiedareservedexceptionallywell.Thereisalsothepossibilitythatschoolswithliberaldefinitionsofgiftednesshavelabeledsomanystudentsthatthenon-giftedoutnumberthetrulygiftedintheirprograms,therebydilutingthequalityoftheservicesthatthetrulygiftedsodesperatelyneed.Again,thecurrentstudyishighlylimitedinitsabilitytotouchupontheseissues.

Overall,wearepleasedthatfewercampusesrecently—bothintermsofrawnumbersandpercentages—areunderidentifying gifted studentswhencomparedto1999-2000data.Only2.36%ofcampuses(142schools)during the 2006-2007 school yearclaimedtohavenogiftedchildren,whichismuchlowerthanthe6.04%(331schools)thatreportednogiftedchildrenin1999-2000.

As mentioned above, we alsocannot tell from the current datawhetherthecessationofDECcom-pliance visits caused the drop inidentifiedgiftedstudentsinTexas.We hope that another researcherwillbuilduponourworkandper-formqualitativeresearchindistrictswhere the percentage of studentsidentifiedasgiftedhasbeendeclin-ing. Studying those districts’ pastandpresentidentificationprocesseswouldimproveourunderstandingoftheeffectthatthecompliancevisitshadon the identificationofgiftedchildreninTexas.

referencesBenbow,C.P.,&Stanley,J.C.,(1980).

Intellectuallytalentedstudents:Fam-ilyprofiles.Gifted Child Quarterly, 24,119-122.

Konstantopoulos,S.,Modi,M.,&Hedges,L.C., (2001). Who are America’sgifted?American Journal of Educa-tion, 109,344-382.

Rogers, K. B., (2007). Lessons learnedabouteducationthegiftedandtal-ented:Asynthesisoftheresearchoneducational practice. Gifted Child Quarterly, 51,382-396.

Slife,B.D.,&Williams,R.N.,(1995).What’s behind the research? Discovering hid-den assumptions in the behavioral sci-ences.ThousandOaks,CA:Sage.

TexasAssociationfortheGiftedandTal-ented,(2008).The state of gifted edu-cation in Texas.Austin,TX:Author.

TexasEducationAgency,(2000).Texas State Plan for the Education of Gifted/Talented Students. Austin,TX:Author.

Texas Education Agency, (2001). Dis-trict Effectiveness and Compliance Manual.Austin,TX:DepartmentofQualityandAccountabilityReviews,123-140.

Texas Education Agency, (2008).Advanced Academics. RetrievedMarch11,2009,fromhttp://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/gted/GifTal.html

Thompson, B., (2006). Foundations ofbehavioralstatistics.NewYork:TheGuildfordPress.

About the AuthorsRussell Warne is a doctoral student in theResearch,Measurement,andStatisticsprogramintheDepartmentofEducationalPsychologyatTexasA&MUniversity. Hisresearchinterestsingiftededucationfocusmostlyonpsychometricandtestingissues. Hehaspreviouslybeenpub-lishedinGeneral Review of Psychology.

Joyce Juntune, Ph.D. is a Lecturer in theDepartmentofEducationalPsychologyatTexasA&MUniversityinCollegeStation,Texas.Sheteachesgraduateandundergraduatecoursesineducationalpsychology,childdevelopment,intel-ligence,andcreativity.SheistheDirectoroftheInstituteforAppliedCreativityandprogramchairfortheundergraduateminorinCreativeStudiesboth at Texas A&M University. She receivedherBachelorsandMastersdegreeswhilelivinginMinnesotaandherPh.D.fromTexasA&MUniversity. Dr. Juntune has been a classroomteacherinMinnesotaandCaliforniaandadistrictadministratorforstaffdevelopmentandgiftededucation. She has written several classroomactivitybooksforteachersonwaystodevelopcreativethinkingwithinthecontentareas.


Invited Article

involved in your profession and makinG a difference?

Karen J. Dowd, Ed.D.

A samemberofTAGT,youareawarethatthereareavarietyofmembership categories avail-

able,dependingonspecificcriteriaandmemberqualifications.Amongthemostprominentaremembershipasaprofessional,parentorstudent(future professional), and businessorinstitutional.Joiningyourprofes-sionalorganizationisanimportantcareerstepknownasaffiliation. Nomatterwhatmembershipcat-egoryoneselects,themorecriticaldecisionscomeafterwards—choos-ingyourlevelofactiveparticipationintheorganization.JustastherearecategoriesofmembershipinTAGT,therearealsounwrittenlevelsorcat-egoriesofparticipationforeachandeverymembertoconsider.Inotherwords,to what extent do you desire to serve, how deep in the action do you want to get and, how much of an influ-ence do you wish to exert?Frommyyearsofexperienceinotherassocia-tions,IassureyouthatTAGToffersampleopportunitiesforallthree. For the sake of understanding,I will identify my ideas about thelevels of association participationas Connect, Engage, Impact and

Invest,andremember,it’sallaboutservice,action,andinfluence. ThefirstisConnect.Asadues-paying member you have alreadymadeaconnectionwithTAGTandhopefullyTAGThasconnectedwithyou.Sinceyouarereadingthiscol-umn,youareaccessingtheassocia-tion’sJournal-TEMPO,yetanothermeans of connection. Possibly youhavegonetotheTAGTwebsiteatwww.txgifted.organdfoundvaluableinformation,links,andideas.Onceagain, a concrete connection wasestablished between member andorganization. The next level is to Engage.AccordingtoPrincetonUniversity’s2003WordNet,toengageis,“tocarryoutorparticipateinanactivity;beinvolved in.” To take their level ofparticipationfromasimpleconnec-tiontoengagementinTAGT,mem-bersmightselectfromthesetypesofactivities:

AttendtheAnnualProfessionalDevelopmentConference,orper-hapstheLeadershipConference,ortheAnnualParentConferenceheldwithinthestateeachyear.

Support friends or colleaguesandattendanOpeningGeneralSessionorAwardsProgramattheAnnualConference.Volunteerforaconferenceplan-ning/work team to assist withregistration, the logo shop, theexhibithall,hospitality,orspecialevents.Nominateanothermember foranawardorasacandidateforanoffice.

Agreetobeconsideredforaposi-tionofleadershiponaballotforoffice.

Tofurtherone’slevelofparticipa-tion,serviceandinfluence,IrefertothenextlevelofinvolvementinTAGTasImpact.AsstatedbytheAmericanHeritage Dictionary of the EnglishLanguage(2000),impactmeans“thepowerofmakingastrong,immedi-ateimpression.”TAGTmembershaveamyriadofoptions fromwhichtoselectiftheydesiregreaterlevelsofparticipationtomakeanimpact.Hereareafew:

Taketoworkwithyoueachdayexcellence,commitment,thelat-

Registration for the 7th Grade Talent Search has begun! To get started or learn more

contact Traci Guidry at (512) 473-8400, or visit www.tip.duke.edu/tagt.

Last year, nearly 120,000 gifted students

participated in the Duke TIP

Talent Searches, which offer challenges,

recognition, resources and advanced educational opportunities

in a community of gifted peers.

This opportunity starts with you.4th/5th Grade Talent Search • 7th Grade Talent Search • Independent Learning • Educational Programs


estinformation,andapassionforwhatyoudo.Serveasanassociationofficer…andleader.Submitajournalarticle…shareyourthoughtsandideas.Writeanoteofthanks,congratu-lations,appreciation,orsupporttoaTAGTmemberorcolleague.Presentasessionataconferenceorworkshop.SecuredoorprizesfortheAnnualConference.

Representthemembershipinleg-islativeactivitiesinAustin.ServeonaCommittee.VolunteertoserveasaTAGTdel-egatetobusinesssessionsoftheNationalAssociationforGiftedChildren(NAGC).Writealetterormakeapersonalcontact with a legislator/con-gressmaninresponsetoaTAGT“CalltoAction.”Move to a higher level of par-ticipation… join the NationalAssociationforGiftedChildren,the Council for Exceptional

Children, the Association forGifted,etc.

Submitanarticleorreportpro-fessionalactivitiestoyourlocalnewspaper.

Thefinalstepintheprogressionfrom simple membership to moreextensiveinfluence,iscalledInvest,meaningto“spendordevoteforfutureadvantage or benefit” (Merriam-Webster’sDictionaryofLaw,1996).Toinvest inTAGTistocontributetoyourownfutureandthatofthepro-fessionandorganization.Examplesofhowamembermightinvestinclude:

Speak with non-members toencouragetheirmembershipandparticipationinTAGT.

Demonstrate long-term, on-going,andactiveinvolvementinTAGT.

Purchase the membership of areluctant or financially limitedpotentialmember.

Contribute emotionally, physi-cally, and financially to TAGTinitiatives.

UnderwriteorpartiallyfundthecostofaTAGTprojectdeartoyourheart.

IdentifyTAGTamongthedocu-ments related to the disburse-mentofyourestate.

Remainprofessionallyactiveandvitalafterretirement.

Endowaspecial scholarship inthenameofamentor,colleague,orfamilymember.

Eachoftheseenablesyouto“leaveyourmark”on theassociation…toinfluencethedirectionandthedis-tanceyourprofessionisabletogo. Toconnect,toengage,toimpact,to invest—eachofushasa choiceaboutourlevel of service, action and influenceinTAGT.Iamconvincedthat as our levels of participationexpand,sodoour friendships,ourinnerjoy,ourpersonalsatisfaction,andoursenseofaccomplishment. I urge you to consider takingthenextstep,orleapifyouwish,togreaterinvolvementinTAGTandinyourprofession.Ittrulytakesallofustoachieveourgreatestpotential,andyouhaveanimportantroletoplay. IencourageyoutocontactyourTAGTStateOfficeoryourassocia-tionpresident ifyouare interestedinagreaterlevel, largeorsmall,ofparticipationinyourorganization.IamcertainthattheofficersandstaffofTAGTeagerlyanticipatehearingfromyou.Astheage-oldsayinggoes,“If not you… who? If not now… when?

About the AuthorDr. Karen J. Dowdisretiredasamemberofthefaculty,DepartmentChairandDeanattheUniversity of Central Oklahoma in Edmond,andisalongtimefriendandcolleagueofyourExecutiveDirector,QuentinA.Christian.Shehasanextensivebackgroundofvolunteerpro-fessional leadership as well as more than 25yearsexperienceinassociationmanagement.Even in retirement shecontinues to serveasanassociationExecutiveandConsultantandiscurrentlytheExecutiveDirectorfortheFloridaAssociation for Health, Physical Education,Recreation,DanceandSport.

Deborah G. Mallett, Ed.M.,CEO

On-Line Training with Lecture and Interaction Available Now!

Discover MALLETT & COMPANYEducational Consulting Services

Quality Educator TrainingQuality Research-based InformationQuality Integration of Concepts into Best Practices

30-Hour GT TrainingDifferentiated CurriculumQuestioning StrategiesParent Seminars Instructional Strategies

Lesson PlanningSocial-Emotional IssuesAdministrator TrainingProgram DevelopmentLearning Styles

TEKSStress ManagementMulticulturalUnderachieversProgram Evaluation

“Integrating New Concepts for the Gifted and Talented”TAGT Approved Sessions

880 Howell Street Beaumont, Texas 77706www.mallett-and-company.com

(409) 658-5069

Seminars for Gifted and Talented

Our services provide unique trainingsessions for both private and publicschools in Texas and the nation.Children must have the opportunity tolearn at their own pace and passionatelypursue their own interests.

Deborah G. Mallett believes that withexcellent training and an understandingof students needs, interests and abilities,no child will be left behind.



by Micheal Sayler, Ph.D.

unity and purpose: Religious and Spiritual Development of the Gifted


Inthefirstinthisseriesofarticlesontheflourishingofthegifted,Isug-gestedthatforthegiftedtothrive

itisnotenoughtojustdeveloptheirtalents(Sayler,2008).Talentdevelop-mentisveryimportanttotheirshort-andlong-termhappinessandthriving,buttalentdevelopmentbyitselfisjustnot sufficient for personal flourish-ing.Equallyimportanttothehappi-nessandthrivingofthegiftedisthedevelopmentoffriendshipsandtheconcurrentdevelopmentofcharacterthatcomeswithhavinggoodfriends.Unfortunately, talent developmentalonewithoutparallelcharacterdevel-opment inevitablymovesthegiftedpersonawayfrompersonalflourish-

ing.Athirdaspect,religious/spiritualdevelopmentwhichisessentialtothecompleteandlastingthrivingofthegiftedwasalsointroducedinthisfirstarticle.Thisdimensionistheonethatdevelopsandgivesmeaning,purpose,anddirectiontothegiftedtodayandacross their life spans. Strong, sus-taineddevelopmentinallthreeareasis thebest formula for the life-longflourishingofthegifted.

The follow-up articles on themodel of giftedness and thrivingprovideddetailsabouttheappropri-atedevelopmentofthegiftedineachofthethreeareas.Inthefirstofthesearticles,Ifleshedoutimportantideasandpracticesinthedevelopmentof

talent and facilitating intellectualgrowthatschool,home,andinotheractivities(Sayler,2009a).Thesecondfollow-uparticleaddressedthevalueandpurposesoffriendshipsforthegifted (Sayler, 2009b). Friendshipsare the prime mechanism for thedevelopmentofcharacterandgoodhabits. Friendships are ideally firstexperienced in the home betweenparentsandtheirchildren,amongsib-lings,andamongtheextendedfam-ilymembers.Character,goodhabits,andconsciencedevelopmentcontinuebeyondthehomethroughfriendshipswithageandintellectualpeers,men-tors, teachers, coaches, colleagues,dearlife-longfriends,andspouses.


The current article is the finaloneintheseriesdetailingthethreedimensionsofthegiftedandthriv-ing model. Spiritual and religiousideasandnormsprovidedirection,answerstoquestionsofpurposeandmeaninginlife,andaddperspectiveandunderstandingtothelivesofthegifted.Spiritualityandreligiousnessarerelated,buttheyarenotthesamethingnorarethetwomutuallyexclu-sive(Bryant,Choi,&Yasuno,2003).Religiousnessmainlyreflectsthewaysindividuals act and believe. It hasbeenmeasured,forexample,intheextenttheyattendreligiousservicesandactivities,discussreligion,par-ticipateinreligiousclubsorgroups,pray,meditate,orvolunteerinser-vice toothers.Spirituality ismoretheperson’soutlookorinnerhabitsanddispositions.Itisoftenmeasuredbyaskingpeopletoself-identifytheircurrentlevelofspirituality.Astudyofcollegefreshmenfoundthathighlyreligiousstudentsweretypicallyveryspiritual, and those reporting theywereveryspiritualwerealsoveryreli-gious,buttoasomewhatlesserextent(Bryant,Choi,&Yasuno,2003).

Allaspectsofthepersonalthriv-ingofthegiftedincludingreligious-nessandspirituality,arefirstformedandencouragedinthehomebytheactionsandinteractionsofparents.Parentsaretheprimaryeducatorsoftheirchildrenandtheylaythefounda-tionfortheirchildren’slife-longthriv-ing and happiness. They begin thedevelopmentoftalent,friendships,andspiritualitythoughtheiractionsandwordsathomelongbeforefor-malschoolbegins.Parentsmonitorandadvocatefortheirchildrenastheyenterandprogressthroughtheircon-tinueddevelopmentinschool.Theyaretheirchildren’sfirstteachersshar-inginthegiftedchild’senthusiasmforknowingall about theworld.Theyaretheirchildren’sfirstfriendsguid-ingandrefiningtheircharacterandhabits.Thefriendshipsandcharacterdevelopmentbegunbyparentsfacil-itateandencouragethegiftedchildtofindnewfriendsatschoolandinthewiderworld.Parentswhohelp

theirchildrenthriveclearlyexplain,personallymodel,andfaithfullylivetheir family’s religious beliefs andvalues.Intakingtheleadintalent,character, and religious/spiritualdevelopmentparentsfacilitatetheirchildren’sshort-andlong-termhappi-ness.Long-termstudiesofthegifted,Terman’slongitudinalstudysubjects,show that religious, spiritual, andcharacterdevelopmentinchildhoodhaveastrongandenduringimpactacrosstheirentirelife(McCullough,Enders,Brion,&Jain,2005).

Theresponsibilitiesofaparentarelargeanddemanding.Aparent’slove for their children is not justsentiment, the emotional reactiontothem,norisitjustprideintheiraccomplishments. In many waysgoodparentingissacrificial(Bloom,1985).Parents learntoendureandovercomefinancial,time,resource,personal,andotherdifficulties,set-backs,disappointments,problems,sickness,orhardshipsforthesakeoftheirchildren’swelfareandhappiness.Loveisanotherwordforresponsibil-ity.Parentsmayfeelunpreparedandincapableofthisresponsibility,butthisshouldnotstopthemfromactingandstrivingtobemoreresponsibleintheirparenting.

Schools and teachers on theotherhandhaveanimportant,butmorelimitedroletoplayinhelpingthegiftedthrive.Duringthetimethechildisinschoolandintheirclasses,ateacher’staskisprimarilyoneoftalentdevelopment,andtoalesserextent,to the continuation of the child’scharacter development. Teachershave even less of an active role intheir gifted students’ religious andspiritualdevelopment.Theirroleinthisdimensionisprimarilytomodelpersonalintegritybornoftheirownreligiousandspiritualformationandbeliefs.Theydothiswithoutactivelyproselytizingtheirstudentsintheirownfaithandspiritualitynoractivelyseekingtoconvincetheirstudentsoftheirperceptionsoftheproblemsoffaithiftheyareatheists.

Already as young children, thegiftedaskandseekanswerstoques-

tionsabouttheworld,theuniverse,life,death,God,evil,andfaith.Theywanttounderstandthemeaningoftheirlives,theirpurpose,theirdirec-tion(Piechowski,&Colangelo,1984).Fromayoungagetheyaskchalleng-ingphilosophicalandspiritualques-tions,sometimestotheconsternationoftheirparents,teachers,orothers.

Religiousandspiritualformationalsoguidesandsupportstherelation-shipswithina familyand later thequalityandtypeoftherelationshiptheyhavewithotherpeople(Meyers,1996).Childrenwhoseparentshelpthemintheirfaithhaveagreatlovefortheirfamilies,theirparents,andsiblings.Theworstnightmareachildcan have is being separated fromthesefamilymembers.Giftedchil-drendelight inbeingalive,wakinguptothenewday,experiencingthefunandexcitementoflearning,andthe joysandsecurityof familyandfriends. Their play and their workareoneinthesameandtheyareeverreadytoaskquestionsandtolaugh.

Children love the truth; giftedchildren can understand truthssooneranddeeperthanotherchil-dren.Theseponderingsleadsthemtometaphysicalthoughtsandques-tions. In their joyoverfinding thetruth, theybegin towonderaboutlife,death,happiness,disasters,peo-ple,work,learning,etc.Theywanttounderstandtheworldandtheirplaceinit.Giftedchildrenarenaturalsci-entistsandphilosophers.Theyaskquestionsaboutthethingstheysee,hear,andread.Theyalsoaskques-tionsthatgobeyondwhat isseen,heard,andread.Theywanttoknowwhathappenedtothefoodtheyate,thedinosaursthatonceroamedtheearth,andthewaterthatwentdownthedrain.Theyalsowanttoknowwhytheirgrandfatherorfrienddied,wheretheworldcamefrom,orhowtounderstandnaturalandman-madedisasters,pain,andsuffering.

Thisdoesnotmeangiftedchil-dren are perfect, consistent inthoughts and actions, or alwayscharming.Aswithallchildrentheybeginwithflaws,areoftenself-cen-


tered,andhavepoordispositionsthatearlyonareshownintheirforceful,“No!” Unless helped to overcomethesefaults,thebadhabitsanddis-positionscontinueintoandbecomemorepronouncedintheteenyearsandadulthood.Thereligiousforma-tion provided by parents providesguidancetotheirgiftedchildrenastowhatisacceptable,whatisignor-able,whatbehaviors andattitudesthe child should keep and furtherdevelop, and which, habits mustchange. Without correction, theirfaultsbecomehabitualandcanleadtopersonalwastinganddisastrousconsequencesfortheperson,theirfriendsandfamilies,andthepeoplewithwhomtheystudyorwork.

The entire family supports thereligiousandspiritualdevelopmentofthegiftedastheyshareandprac-tice a common faith. The supportispositivewhentheyeachtakethisfaithseriouslyandliveittothepoint

of self-sacrifice. The family’s rela-tionship with God is modeled onthe actions and friendships withinthefamilyitself.Instruction,prayer,andreligiouspracticesareeffectivewhendonewithloveandattention,notoutofmereformalitiesortofulfilltheexpectationsofothers.Thereisaspiritualmomentuminsuchfamiliesthat picks up and carries along allmembers. Usually the children aretheonesbeingcarriedalongbytheparentsandoldersiblings,butsome-timestheyounggiftedchildcarrieshis or her family along with themthroughthesimpleloveshown.Giftedchildrengrowingupinsuchahomecometounderstandconscience(atfirstthevoiceandinstructionsoftheparents)andthisgrowsdeeplywithinthem,andbecomesthelifelongguideforlivingcorrectlywithintegrityandwisdom.Homeswherethereisspiri-tualconsistency,wheredailyreligiouspracticesreflectthefamily’sprofessed

beliefs,providesecurityanddirectiontothegifted.

Religion and its practices haveotherpositiveeffects.Regularprayerisrelatedtooverallmentalhealth,betterself-monitoring,increasedempathy,deepermoralinsight,andotherposi-tivebehaviors.Itisnegativelycorre-latedwithdepression,impulsivity,andriskybehaviors(Koenig,McCullough,&Larson,2001).Brainscansduringprayerandmeditationshowincreasedfrontalactivity (McNamara,2002).Frontal lobe activity is good; it isthemainlocationforhighermentalfunctionssuchascreativeandcriticalthought,andisassociatedwithrecog-nizingfutureconsequences,choosingbetweengoodandbetterorgoodorbadactions,andthoughtsthatsup-pressunacceptablesocialbehaviors(Fuster,1997).

Astrongreligiouscommitmentplays a positive role in preventing

andcopingwithphysicalandmen-

TAGT is a state-approved provider of continuing education for educators, counselors, and school board members. TAGT will grant 3 hours of professional development credit upon successful completion of the written questions related to the two audio recordings; these hours can be applied to the TAGT Awareness Certificate; individual school districts may grant credit at their own discretion.

The new 3-hour training bundle includes two audio sessions, with written questions:

Dr. Joyce Miller of Texas A&M-Commerce: A Philosophical and Practical Framework for the Identification of Gifted Culturally Different Learners

Dr. Joyce Juntune of Texas A&M University: Testing and the Process of Identifying the Gifted

New! Earn 3 hours of professional development credit online

Online Educationwww.txgifted.org/online-education


talillnessandinfacilitatingrecoveryfromillness(Matthews,etal.,1998).Adolescents with strong religioushabits and beliefs are more likelytohavepro-socialdispositionsandbehaviorsandlesslikelytoengageinsubstanceabuseorprematuresexualinvolvement (Donahue & Benson,1995).Theyhadlowerratesofsuicideideationandattemptsandwerelesslikelytobedelinquent.

Epidemiological and clinicalresearch(Myers,2000)supportsarelationshipbetweenreligion(e.g.,frequencyof religious attendance,privatereligious involvement,and

relyingonone’sreligiousbeliefsasasourceofstrengthandcoping)andhealthacrossthelifespan.Severalyears after students completed anearlycollegeentranceprogramthosewhoseldomorneverattendedreli-giousservicesweremore likely tohaveacharacteristicdispositionofbad mood (Sayler, Boazman, andHogan,2009).Alongitudinalstudyfoundthatstrongerandmorecon-sistentreligiousandspiritualbeliefs,not just more religious practices,wereassociatedwithgreaterpeaceandcontentmentandloweredanxi-etyofindividualsinthe60sand70s(Wink&Scott,2005).

Isitwiseorusefulforthegiftedtobeencouragedtodeveloptheirtal-entsandthinkingandsimultaneouslytheirreligiousandspiritualorienta-tions?Isn’tfaithopposedtorationalthought?Isn’treligionsomethingbestfitforthosewhocannotorwillnotthinkdeeply?No,onthecontrary,faithisareasonable,notirrational,personalassenttoGod(Dulles,2000).Thereissomethinginthegiftedper-son that wants to know (Lovecky,1998):WhoamI?WherehaveIcomefromandwhereamIgoing?Whyisthereevil?What is thereafter thislife? These metaphysical questionsdemonstratethedesireofthegiftedtofindanswerstowhatistrueandwhatisnot.

Withoutbeliefsandtruthaper-son’slifedrifts;thereisnopointofreferenceandnoanchorforunder-standing the questions that arise.

Thereisnostandarduponwhichtoassesswhetherornottheyarelivingagoodlife,orwhethertheyarethriv-ing.Truthisknownthrougha com-bination offaithandreason.Ifeitherismissingthepersonislessabletoknowhimorherself,theworld,andthe supernatural. Human reasonseeksthetruth,buttheultimatetruthaboutthemeaningoflifecannotbefoundbyreasonalone.

The triangulation of the threedimensionsofdevelopmentforthegiftedness into personal thrivingmight be understood through ananalogy to a fine automobile. Theunderlyingintellectualandothergiftsofthechildarelikethehighqualityrawmaterialsthatgointothecar.Thetalentdevelopmentprovidedbyfam-ilies,schools,mentors,etc.iscompa-rabletotheelegantengineeringandfineconstructionofthecar.Characterdevelopmentlikewisemightbecom-paredtotrainingonhowtotakegoodcareofthecar,developandimprovetheirdrivingskill,learningtobringothersalongwiththeminasharedjourney of friendship, and all theappropriateusesthatmightbemadebythedriveroftheauto.Agreatcar,agreatdriver,andgoodfriendsshar-ingthejourneystillneedadestinationandapurposeforbeingontheroadand for persevering along difficultroads,occasionalmechanicalprob-lems,accidents…Alongthewaytherewillevenbesidetripsanddiversionsjustforthefunofit.

Religiousandspiritualdevelop-mentteachesthegiftedhowtojour-ney through life. They provide theroadmapandhighlighttheobstaclesthatmayappearandprovideguidanceastohowtoovercomeorgoaroundthem.Adrivertravelingtoadestina-tioninadifferentstateorcountrywillcarefully lookatamap,askotherswhoknowthewayforhelp,andwill-inglyfollowthesignsmarkingthewaybecausehewantstoreachthedesti-nation.Whenwefollowmapsorroadsigns we don’t feel imposed upon.Ratherwewelcomethemasagreathelp.Attimesthemapsandsignsmayevensuggestwemightabandonapar-

ticularroutebecauseitisnottakinguswherewewant.Ifgettingtothedestinationis importantweswitchroadseventhoughtheoneweareonseemslikeabetterpaved,smoother,easiertodriveroad.Ifinthelongrunitdoesn’tleadwherewewanttogo,itisnotagoodroadtofollow.Religiousandspiritualformationsuggeststhedestinationandprovides themapsandsignstoguidethegifted.Oftenthereareavarietyofroutes,allhead-ingtothesamedestination,buttakingdifferentpathstogetthere.Choiceisimportanttothegifted,sothisflex-ibilityandfreedomisappreciated.

Thrivingofthegiftedtodayandin the future is the comprehen-sive goal of parents and teachers.It involves development of thesechildreninintellectual/talentareas,friendships/characterareas,andinreligious/spiritualareas.Thisseriesofarticlessuggeststhatdevelopinallthreedomainsprovidesthebestconditionsforlife-longflourishing.Anypartialcombinationofthethreewillleadtosomelevelofhappiness.Likeathree-leggedstoolwithoneormorelegsmissingorshortenedthough, the gifted individual withlimiteddevelopment inanyof theareasisvenerabletoleadingawob-blylifeoreventippingover.

Ourvisionforthegiftedaspar-entsandteachersincludesadesirethattheydeeplydeveloptheirtalent’ssociallyusefulways.Wewantthemtobecomemenandwomenofhonorwholivelivesofintegrity.Asadults,wehopetheyarerespectedfortheirtalents and character by their col-leagues,friends,andevenstrangerswhoencounterthem.Finally,wewantthem to seek transcendent truths,findingalifeofadventurewhichisconsistentwiththesetruths.

referencesBloom,B. (1985).Developing talent in

young people. NewYork:Ballantine.Bryant,A.N.,Bryant,A.N.,Choi,J.Y.,

&Yasuno,M.(2003).Understandingthereligiousandspiritualdimensions


ofstudents’livesinthefirstyearofcollege.Journal of College Student Development, 44, 723-745.

Donahue,M.J.,&Benson,P.L.(1995).Religionandwell-beinginadolescents.Journal of Social Issues,51,145–160.

Dulles,A.(2000). Reason,philosophy,andthegroundingoffaith:Areflectionon Fides et Ratio.International Philosophical Quarterly, 40,479-490.

Fuster,J.M.(1997).The prefrontal cortex: Anatomy, physiology, and neuropsychology of the frontal lobe (3rd ed.) Philadelphia:Lippincott-William&Wilkins.

Koenig,H.G.,McCullough,M.E.,Larson,D.E.(2001)Handbook of religion and health. Oxford,England:OxfordUniversityPress.

Lovecky,D.C.(1998).Spiritualsensitivityingiftedchildren.Roeper Review, 20, 178–183.

Matthews,D.A.,McCullough,M.E.,Larson,D.B.,Koenig,H.G.,Swyers,J.P.,&Milano,M.G.(1998).Religiouscommitmentandhealthstatus:Areviewoftheresearchandimplicationsforfamilymedicine.Archives of Family Medicine, 7, 118-124.

McCullough,M.E.,Enders,C.K.,Brion,S.L.andJain,A.R.(2005).Thevarietiesofreligiousdevelopmentinadulthood:Alongitudinalinvestigationofreligionandrationalchoice.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89,78-89.

McNamara,P.(2002).Themotivationaloriginsofreligiousprac-tices.Zygon, 37,143-160.

Meyers,S,M.(1996).Aninteractivemodelofreligiosityinheri-tance:Theimportanceoffamilycontext.American Social Review, 61,858–866.

Myers,D.G.(2000).Thefunds,friends,andfaithofhappypeo-ple.American Psychologist, 55,56-67.

Piechowski,M.M.,&Colangelo,N. (1984).Developmentalpotentialofthegifted.Gifted Child Quarterly, 8,80-88.

Sayler,M.(2008).Talentdevelopmentisnotenough.Tempo, 28(4),21-25.

Sayler,M.(2009a).Intellectualgrowth,school,andthrivingofthegifted.Tempo 29(1),9-15.

Sayler,M.(2009b).Thevalueandpurposeoffriendshipforthegifted.Tempo 29(3),15-18.

Sayler,M.F.,Boazman,J.,&Hogan,B.(2009,July).Personal thriv-ing among early college entrants: Academic, personal, and familial predictors of well being.PresentedatConferenceoftheInternationalSocietyofQualityofLifeStudiesmeeting,Florence,Italy.

Wink,P.,&Scott,J.(2005).Doesreligiousnessbufferagainstthefearofdeathanddyinginlateadulthood?Findingsfromalongitudinalstudy.Journal of Gerontology Journals of geron-tology, Series B, Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences,60,207-214.

About the AuthorMichael Sayler, Ph.D. developedandcoordinatesgiftededucationstudiesattheUniversityofNorthTexas.Dr.Saylerstudiesthecomponentsofwhatittakesforlife-longthrivingforgifted.Healsospecializesinsuccessfulpar-entingofgiftedchildrenandyouth,earlycollegeentranceandotherformsofaccelerationandgrouping,programplanningandevaluation,identifyingstudents,groupingarrangements,andmeasurementandresearch.

Their gifts may change the world someday.Your gift can change theirs today.

txgifted.org/donate

Texas Association for the Gifted and Talented

Scholarship Fund Donation FormName:Address:City, State, Zip:Phone:Email:

I will support the TAGT Scholarship Fund as a/an:

President’s Circle Donor ($1,000+) Gold Advocate ($500 to $999) Silver Advocate ($250 to $499) Bronze Advocate ($150 to $249) Patron ($100 to $149) Friend ($50 to $99) Associate ($25 to $49) Other $____________

Amount Enclosed:

Is your donation being made in memory or in honor of someone special? If so, please complete the following:

In Memory of: In Honor of:

Please send an acknowledgement letter to:

Name:Address:City, State, Zip:

I’m making a gift by: Check Visa

Mastercard AmEx Discover

Card #Expiration Date: 3-digit CVV:

Signature:

Shakespeare Man will be a Presenter and a Booth Holder( #426)

at TAGT’s 32nd Professional Development ConferenceDec 2 - Dec 4, 2009

George R Brown Convention Center,Houston, Texas.

understandinG the linGo of Gifted education

by Kimberly M. Tyler, Ph.D.

When parents first enter theworld of gifted education,theyareoftenintroducedto

unfamiliaracronymsandtermsthatcanbequiteconfusingandmisun-derstood.Asteachers,weareoftensousedtothesetermsthatweforgettotakethetimetofullyexplaintopar-entswhatthesetermsmeanandhowtheyimpacttheeducationalservicesweprovidetotheirchildren.Belowisanexplanationofsomeofthecom-montermsor“lingo”usedinthefieldofgiftededucation.• Gifted—According to the fed-

eraldefinition,“theterm‘giftedandtalented’meanschildrenandyouthwhogiveevidenceofhighperformancecapabilityinareassuch as intellectual, creative,artistic, or leadership capacity,orinspecificacademicfields,andwhorequireservicesoractivitiesnot ordinarily provided by theschoolinordertofullydevelopsuchcapabilities”(P.L.103-382,Title XIV, p. 388 in Karnes &Stephens, 2008). Each state isresponsibleforinterpretingthisdefinitionandthendecidinghowbesttomeettheneedsofthese

students.SomeuseIntelligenceQuotient (IQ) scores (approxi-mately130orabove);somerelymoreheavilyonteacherandpar-entinput;andotherswillincor-porate student achievementandprogress into theequation(Silverman2000).InTexas,theschooldistrictsaregiventhetaskofdeterminingthebestwaytoidentifyandservicethestudentsintheirindividualschooldistrict.Asaresult,districtsvaryinhowastudentisidentifiedgiftedandinhowthesestudentsareserviced.

• High Achievers—Generally,thistermappliestostudentswhodemonstrate strong academicabilitiesandachievehighgradesin school. These students areoftenreferredforgiftedservicesbased on school achievement;however, they may not qualifyforservicesbasedontheirIQorother standardized test scores.Some districts allow excep-tionsforthesestudentsregard-lessofthediscrepancybetweentheirmeasuredabilityandtheirobserved achievement. Many

high achievers thrive in giftedenvironments.

• Twice-Exceptional—Thistermis used to describe individualswhoaregiftedbutalsopossesssomeformofalearningdisabil-ity.Examplesoflearningdisabil-ities include, Attention DeficitDisorder(ADD),AttentionDeficitHyperactivityDisorder(ADHD),speech and/or hearing delays,emotionaldisturbances,autismspectrum disorders, etc. Thesestudentsareoften identifiedasgiftedorlearningdisabledwhiletheotherareagoesundiagnosed.Formoreinformationonthesestudents,visitwww.2enewsletter.com(Karnes&Stephens,2008;Silverman,2000).

• Achievement Tests—Thesearetestsdesignedtomeasurestudentachievement in specific areas.Spellingtests,end-of-the-chaptertests,andmapquizzesareexam-plesofachievementtests,asaretheSAT,ACT,andTAKStest.

• Ability Tests—Thistypeoftestisusedtoassessastudent’slogi-calreasoningandcognitiveabili-ties.Thesetestsarecomprisedof



verbal(word)reasoning,quanti-tative(numbers)reasoning,andnon-verbal(shapesandfigures)reasoning.Thisisthemostcom-monlyusedidentificationtoolformostschooldistricts.Examplesof this type of test include theWechsler Intelligence Scale forChildren (WISC), CognitiveAbilities Test (CogAT), andthe Stanford-Binet Revision(Silverman, 2000; VanTassel-Baska,1998).

• IQ Score—IQ scores are usedtoestimateanindividual’sintel-ligenceincomparisontoothersofthesameage.Whenlookingatanormalbellcurve,thecenterofthecurveis100,whichiswheremostscoresfall.Thefartheryoumoveoneithersideofthiscurve,thefewernumberofscoresarepresent.Intermsofgiftedindi-viduals,thescoresbeginat115(mildlygifted)through180+(pro-foundlygifted).ItisimportanttorecognizethatIQscoresarenotanexactsciencebutanestimateofability(Bainbridge,2009).

• Differentiation—This termaddresses the adaptation ofinstructiononthebasisofstu-dentneed.Differentiationisoftenaccomplishedbymodifyingthecurriculumandtheinstructionalstrategiesusedwithstudentsofvaryingabilitylevels(Karnes&Stephens,2008).

• Enrichment—Enrichment isa broad term used to identifychangesintheeducationalpro-grammingforgiftedstudentsinschools.Itcanbeanextension,supplementation, or a replace-ment of the curriculum beingtaughttoastudentataparticulargrade-level (Coleman&Cross,2005).

• Ability Grouping—Thistypeofgroupingisaninstructionalstrat-egyusedtokeepchildrenwiththeiracademicpeerssothatbothacademic and affective growtharefostered(Coleman&Cross,2005).

• Acceleration—This termexplains the educational strat-egy that allows gifted studentstocompletealesson,chapter,orcourseofstudyinlesstimethanordinarilyexpectedfromsame-age peers. Acceleration can beachievedthroughstrategiessuchasgrade skipping, course skip-ping,andcurriculumcompacting.(Coleman&Cross,2005,Karnes&Stephens,2008).

• Grade Acceleration or Grade Skipping—Thistypeofaccelera-tionallowsstudentstobeplacedinagradehigherthantheirsame-agepeers(Karnes&Stephens,2008).

• Subject Acceleration or Subject Skipping—This accelerationstrategyallowsstudentstotakeaspecificcourseorsubjectatahigherlevelthantheirchronolog-icalageandthenreturntotheirregularclassforallothersubjects(Karnes&Stephens,2008).

• Cluster Grouping—Thisformofgroupingallowsgiftedstudentstobeplacedwithothergiftedstu-dents inaclassroomwhere theteacher has specific training inmeetingtheacademicandsocial/emotionalneedsofgiftedlearners.Clustergroupinghasbecomeanextremelypopularwayofservic-inggiftedlearnersinmanyschooldistricts(Karnes&Stephens,2008;VanTassel-Baska,1998).

• Curriculum Compacting—Thisstrategyinvolvesthepre-assess-mentofstudentreadinessbytheteacherinordertoidentifywhatinformation a student alreadypossessesonagiventopic. Ifastudent demonstrates knowl-edgeofthematerialbeforeitistaught,theteacherthenreplacesthatmaterialwithmoreadvancedor interest-based activities.Curriculumcompactingisawell-documented strategy shown tobeextremelyeffectivewithgiftedstudents (Karnes & Stephens,2008).

• Advanced Placement (AP)—Theseacceleratedcoursesallowgiftedstudentstomoveatamuch

fasterpacethenregularclasses.Attheendofthecourse,studentsaregivenanexamthatallowsthemtoearncollegecredit.Somedistrictsevenallowstudentstotaketheexampriortotakingthecourseinordertoearnthecollegecreditandadvanceevenfurther(Karnes&Stephens,2008).

• Dual Enrollment—This accel-erativepracticeallowsstudentsto take classes at two levels ofschoolingatthesametime.Forexample,amiddleschoolstudentmaytakeaclassatthehighschoolorahighschoolstudentmaytakeaclassatthecollegelevel.

Whilelearningthe“lingo”ofthegiftedworldmaybeoverwhelmingatfirst,parentsshouldmakeanefforttolearnabouttheoptionsavailablefortheirgiftedchildren.InTexas,parentsshouldasktheprincipaland/orgiftedcoordinatorforalistofallcriteriaforidentifyinggiftedlearnersaswellasalltheserviceoptionsthatareavail-ableinthedistrictforstudentswhoareidentified.Parentsaretheirchil-dren’sbestadvocates.Iftheyhavethenecessaryknowledge,theyhavethepowertoensuretheirchildrenreceivethe most appropriate education tomeettheiradvancedabilities.

referencesBainbridge,C.(2009).Whatisthemean-

ing of an IQ test score? RetrievedAugust3,2009fromhttp://giftedkids.about.com.

Coleman,L.J.&Cross,T.L.(2005).Being gifted in school.Waco,TX:PrufrockPress.

Karnes, F.A. & Stephens, K.R. (2008).Achieving excellence: Education the gifted and talented.SaddleRiver,NJ:PearsonEducation.

Silverman,L.K. (2000).Counseling the gifted and talented. Denver,CO:LovePublishing.

VanTassel-Baska,J.(1998).Excellence in educating gifted and talented learn-ers.Denver,CO:LovePublishing.

Thomas Krenik scored a perfect 2400 on the SAT. He majored in engineering, played violin, founded a martial arts club and interned in a nanotechnology lab — all at the age of 17. Like each TAMS student, he completed his last two years of high school simultaneously with his first two years of college at UNT. The program, created by the Texas Legislature in 1987, is “spectacularly successful … [and] offers a world-class education,” USA Today says. And TAMS is only available at The University of North Texas.

www.tams.unt.edu


by Alexei Root, Ph.D.

chess for your students, even if you don’t play

The chess dilemma

A lthough many gifted-and-tal-ented educators believe thatplayingchessencouragesthink-

ing,theyarewaryaboutaddingchesstotheirteachingresponsibilities.ANewYorkTimesarticle(Rosenberg,1992)illustratesthedilemma.In1992,anoutsideprovidertaughtchessdur-ingtheschooldaytogiftedstudentsin some New York public schools.Quoting Dr. Ronald Topping, thenthegiftedprogramcoordinatorfortheWhitePlainspublicschools,“OneofthegoalsofourMoreAbleStudentProgramisthatstudentsdevelopcrit-icalthinkingskills...Ican’tthinkofamoreappropriatemeansthanactivityinchess.Studentshavetothinksev-eralstepsahead;it’sreallydivergentthinking.It’squiteanexcitingpro-gram.”ThatsameNewYorkTimes

articlequotedJudiSternberg,coordi-nator-teacherforgiftedandtalentedstudentsintheGreenburghCentralSevenSchoolDistrict,“Chesshelpsthinking,butgivemeabreak:dowereallyneedtohaveanotherthingforteacherstolearn?” In2009,agenerationofschool-children later, the answer to Ms.Sternberg’squestionisclearly“no.”Gifted-and-talentedteachersarenotrequiredtolearnchess.Noraretheyaskedtoprovidechessopportunitiesto their students. Without a man-date,andwithmanyteachersfeelingunsureoftheirownchessknowledge,manygifted-and-talentedclassroomsdonotincorporatechess. Inthisarticle,Itellhoweducatorsmightpainlesslyincludechess.Ittakeslessthananhourforanadulttolearntherulesofchess(Yoskowitz,1991).Youcanalsogetbywithnoknowl-

edge.Or,withsomechessknowledge,youmayusechesstoteachalmostanyacademicsubject.

The no-knowledge-required approach

I often tell a story about whenIwasasubstituteteacherforaP.E.class.Thetopicofthedaywasjug-gling,andstudentshadavarietyofscarves,balls,andotheritemssetoutforthem.Agroupofthreestudentsaskedformyhelp.Thinkingquickly,sinceIdonotknowhowtojuggle,Isaid,“Showmehowyouarejugglingnow.”Astheythrewobjectsintotheair,Icommented,“Thattimetheballstayedupforthreeseconds!”Or,“Youwereabletokeeptwoscarvesintheair!”Whilelisteningtomyobserva-tionalcomments,thestudentsexperi-


mentedhappilyfortheremainderoftheclasstime. Asimilarapproachworksforchessinclassrooms,whatevertheeducator’slevelofchessknowledge.WhenmydaughterClarissawasatEversParkElementary(Denton,TX),herEXPO(gifted-and-talented)teacherDianneJoneshadcentersonceamonth.Oneofthecenterswasachessgame.Someofthestudents,likeClarissa,knewtherulesofchess,andtaughttheothers.Studentsconsultedachess-rulessheetiftheyhaddisputes. AccordingtoClarissa,Mrs.Jonesnever taught chess. Instead, Mrs.Jonesmonitoredchesscenteractivity,awardingcenterpoints if a studentplayed two chess games. After twogames,studentscouldstayinthechesscenter,butwouldnotearnanymorepoints.Thepointsystemencouragedmoststudentstorotatethrougheachcenter.OthercentersincludedRubik’scubesandslidepuzzles. Mrs. Sondra Wilkerson, Mrs.Jones’ EXPO successor at EversPark Elementary, installed Think Like A King schoolchess software.TheThink Like A King School Chess SoftwareSystemstartswithbeginnerlessons(FirstLessonsinChess),butitsotherCDscoveradvancedchesstopics to provide a comprehensivescholasticchesscurriculum(http://www.schoolchess.com).Inadditiontochessonthecomputers,mysonWilliamrecallsthatMrs.Wilkersonallowedstudentstoplaychessduringfreetime. Dostudentslikestudent-centeredchesstime(suchasachesscenter,freetime forchess,orchess software)?Rosenberg(1992)wrote:

For many children, however,chessprovidesanoutletduringthe school day that they relishformanyreasons.“Chessischal-lenging,”saidJonathanBaker,10,a fifth grader at the Ridgewayschool.“Youhavetothink,andyou can take as much time asyouwant.Itdefinitelyhelpswithlogic;wheneverIgetalogicsheettodo,it’seasy.”

Jessica Cohen, 9, a fourthgraderatGeorgeWashingtonsaid,“It’sexciting.It’slikewarbecauseifyoumakeawrongmove,youdie.”AddedDaraWeinstein,10,afifthgraderatRidgeway:“Chessrelaxesme.IlearnalotabouthowtoplanwhatI’mgoingtodo—andIlearnfrommymistakes.”

Chess instruction, clubs, and tournaments

Asalreadynoted,studentsmaylearnchessfromeachother,fromrulessheets,orfrompurchasedsoftware.Therearealsomany free resourcesavailableontheInternet.Forexam-ple, chessKIDS academy offers les-sons (http://www.chesskids.com/).TheUnitedStatesChessFederation(USCF,http://www.uschess.org)hasa“NewtoChess?”link.GeneralpurposeWebsites,suchasYahoo!,havechessgames24hoursaday. Scholasticchesstournamentsaremorepopular thanever,withover5000studentscompetingintheApril2009SuperNationalsIV.Competitorscame from school and local chessclubsallovertheUnitedStates.Tofindin-personchessopportunitiesforyouandforyourstudents,checkthe“Clubs&Tourneys”linkattheWebsiteof theUSCF.TheTexasChessAssociation Web site (http://www.texaschess.org/)similarlyhasa“Clubsandvendors”link.Theremayalreadybeachessclubinyourcommunityoratyourschool.A freeguide foreducatorsisTheGuidetoScholasticChess(http://www.amchesseq.com/gutoscch.html).

Algebraic chess notation After studentsarecomfortableplayingchessduringcentertimeorfreetime,youmightsimplycontinuethose chess-playing opportunities.Onepossiblenextstep,however,isalgebraic chess notation. Writingchess illustrates Cartesian coordi-

natesandenablesreflection.Beingabletowritechessgamesisaprereq-uisiteforcompetinginUSCF-ratedchesstournaments.Typethesearchterms“algebraicchessnotation”tofindsitesthattellhowtowritechessmoves. As with Cartesian coordi-nates,everysquarehasanamebasedonitsfileandrank—froma1(wherewhite’squeen’srookstartsthegame)toh8(thestartingsquareforblack’sking’srook)—andsoon,foreachofthe64squares. Chessnotationallowschessplay-erstoreplaytheircompletedchessgames. 1. e4 means that the pawninfrontofwhite’skingmovedtwosquares forward for its first move.Chess opponents confer as theytranslatethechessnotationbackintomovesonachessboard.Reflectingontheirmoves,theyaskthemselves,“This is our game that we createdtogether.Whatcanwelearnfromit?”

Writing a chess book Oncestudentsarecomfortablewiththerulesofchess,playingchess,andnotating,theycanwriteachessbook.Writingachessbookcombineschessplaying,whichisnon-verbal,with writing, a verbal skill. For amiddleschoolclassroompublishingprojectthatItaughtin2007-2008,each student, or pair of students,wrote how a particular chessmanmovedandcapturedorwroteaboutachessconceptsuchasstalemateorcheckmate.Studentsillustratedwithchessdiagrams.Afreeprogramformaking chess diagrams is http://alain.blaisot.free.fr/DiagTransfer/English/home.htm. Here is an example from thatclassroompublishingchessbook:

The Quick Queen by Nathan, eighth grade, and Jacob, seventh

grade

Thequeenisaverypowerfulpiecebeingworthninepawns.Itisthemostvaluablepiece.Thequeen

This outstanding professional opportunity

includes:

Visit with more than 125 exhibitors offering products and services to the Gifted and Talented Community

A choice of more than 250 informative breakout sessions sharing great instructional strategies

5 full-day pre-conference institutes on targeted topics

More than 3000 parent and professional attendees

National speakers with noted qualifications and expertise on timely gifted & talented topics

Affordable registration fees

Quality and convenient hotel accomodations at the conference site

Mark your calendarand plan to be where the action is!


canmovediagonally,horizontally,andvertically.Itcannotmovelikeaknight.Thequeenisaveryvalu-able piece to checkmate with.Thoughpowerful,thequeendoeshave her limitations: no moveslikeaknight,andnojumpingoverpieces.Belowisadiagramofhowthequeencanmove.

Your queen is your mostimportantpiece.Donotjeopar-dizeitbylettingitgetcaptured.Yourqueenisoneofthemostopti-malpiecesforcheckmate,soitisbesttodevelopitlaterinthegame.Itisalmostneveragoodideatosacrificeyourqueenunless youcancheckmatewithinoneortwomovesafterthesacrifice.Trustmethereisnothingworsethanlos-ingyourqueen;itisveryhardtorecoverfromtheloss.Thequeenisundoubtedlythemostpowerfulpieceinyourarsenal.So,remem-ber,don’tlosethequeen. QuestionOne:Howcanthequeenmove?a)anywhereontheboard;b)forward,back,andbothsides;c)diagonal;d)bothbandcQuestionTwo:Trueorfalse,thequeenistheworstpiece;loseitimmediately. [Answerkey:QuestionOne:d)bothbandc;QuestionTwo:False.] Foraqueengame,placeeightqueensontheboardsothatnonecantakeanyoftheothers.Tryit,usingyoureightpawnsasstand-insforqueens.

From using algebraic notationtowritingnon-fiction,mystudentsgainedfirst-handexperienceofthepowerofwriting.Notationallowedthemtoreflectontheirgames.Writinga chess book involved research, asstudentsreadotherauthors’writingaboutthetopicoftheirchess-booksection.Justasprofessionalauthorsdo,mystudentsfollowedguidelinesforwriting. I requiredat least twochessdiagrams,twoquestions,andananswerkeyineachsection.Theirclassroompublishingprojectservedasthechessprimerformy2008-2009chessstudentsandbecamechapter5ofmythirdbook (Root,2009b).

Gnat or elephant Chessisaseainwhichagnatmaydrinkandanelephantmaybathe—Indianproverb. Youmightdecidetotakeasmalldrinkofchess,bysimplyprovidingchesssetsandboardsforcentertimeorfreetime.AsnotedinRoot(2009a),yourschoolmayqualifyforfreechessequipment from U.S. Chess Trust(http://www.uschesstrust.com)oryoucanorderfromonlinesourcessuchasAmericanChessEquipment(http://www.amchesseq.com).Studentsenjoychess.And,astheyplay,theythink.You might then capitalize on theirchessinterestbytyingchesstoaca-demicsubjectmatter.Inthisarticle,

Ioutlinedhowchessmightbecon-nectedtoreadingandwriting.Otheracademicsubjectsmayalsobetaughtwithchess(Root,2006;Root,2008;Root,inpress).Chesscanbewhereyourcurricularelephantbathes.

referencesRoot,A.W.(2006).Children and chess:

A guide for educators.Westport,CT:TeacherIdeasPress.

Root,A.W.(2008).Science, math, check-mate: 32 chess activities for inquiry and problem solving.Westport,CT:TeacherIdeasPress.

Root,A.W.(2009a).Checkmatingadvi-soryandsummerboredom.Tempo,29(2),10-14.

Root,A.W.(2009b).Read, write, check-mate: Enrich literacy with chess activi-ties.Westport,CT:TeacherIdeasPress.

Root, A. W. (in press). People, places, checkmates: Teaching social studies with chess.Westport,CT:TeacherIdeasPress.

Rosenberg,M.(1992,October11).Playingchessasatoolinlearning.New York Times.RetrievedMay26,2009fromhttp://www.nytimes.com/1992/10/11/nyregion/playing-chess-as-a-tool-in-learning.html?pagewanted=2

Yoskowitz,J.(1991).Chessversusquasi-chess:Theroleofknowledgeoflegalrules.TheAmericanJournalofPsy-chology,104(3),355-366.

About the AuthorAlexey W. Root, Ph.D., isaseniorlecturerintheSchoolofInterdisciplinaryStudiesatTheUniversityofTexasatDallas (UTD).Shehastaught UTD education classes, tutored pro-spectiveteachersforcertificationexams,andsupervisedstudentteachers.SheservedastheAssociateDirectoroftheUTDChessProgram,the#1collegechessteamintheUnitedStates.UTDisoneofseveraluniversitiesthatawardfull-ridecollegescholarshipsforchess.RootcurrentlyteachesUTD’sChessinEducationCertificatecourses,availableworldwideforcollegecreditviatheUTTeleCampusonlineplatform(http://www.uttc.org). Root has been a tournamentchessplayersinceshewasnineyearsold.Hermostnotablechessaccomplishmentwaswin-ningtheU.S.Women’schampionshipin1989.Shewouldliketohearaboutyourchessinedu-cationexperiences;[email protected].

w w w. t x g i f t e d . o r g / 2 0 0 9 a c

FRIDAY: FEATURED SESSIONS What Does The Research Say? Current Views on Best Practice with High-Ability Learners Dr. Dona Mathews, University of Toronto and Psychoeducational Consultant Gifted education is in the midst of a paradigm shift, integrating research about developmental psychology, neural development, and the interplay of cognition and emotion. New findings will be discussed that have practical implications for parents and teachers of gifted learners. Change Your Story, Change Your Life Stephanie Tolan, author Gifted kids face challenges with academic and social/emotional issues, and will deal with them using their own mental capacities. We can’t always change what happens in our lives, but it is always possible to change our stories. Learning to recognize the negative stories and focusing them in a more positive direction allows children to become heroes rather than victims, no matter how imperfect their world.

WEDNESDAY: PRE-CONFERENCE INSTITUTES Why Are School Buses Always Yellow? Inquiry, Problem Solving and Creative Thinking for the 21st Century Dr. John Barell, professor emeritus at Montclair State University Gifted in the Middle: Challenges, Choices, and Change Dr. Susan Rakow, Cleveland State University A Coordinated, Organizational Approach to Excellence John Samara, The Curriculum Project Components of an Exemplary Program: From Standards to Best Practices Dr. Susan Johnsen, Baylor University and Todd Kettler, Coppell ISD Grow with the Texas Performance Standards Project Marilyn Peebles, ESC Region 13 and others

THURSDAY: KEYNOTE ADDRESS Thinking Big About Gifted Education Jan Davidson, founder, Davidson Institute for Talent DevelopmentAge-based learning is not working, particularly for the gifted. In today’s world of individualized services, the education system should fit the curriculum to each student, rather than making each student fit into an age-based curriculum. Learn how to think big with unique approaches and strategies.

Growingtheir Gifts

For more information visit

This outstanding professional opportunity

includes:

Visit with more than 125 exhibitors offering products and services to the Gifted and Talented Community

A choice of more than 250 informative breakout sessions sharing great instructional strategies

5 full-day pre-conference institutes on targeted topics

More than 3000 parent and professional attendees

National speakers with noted qualifications and expertise on timely gifted & talented topics

Affordable registration fees

Quality and convenient hotel accomodations at the conference site

Mark your calendar and plan to be where the action is!

TAGT Annual Professional Development Conference

December 2 - 4, 2009 in Houston, TXGeorge R. Brown Convention Center Hilton Americas - Houston

John Samara

Their gifts may change the world someday.Your gift can change theirs today.

This summer, 62 gifted students attended summer enrichment programs with TAGT scholarships. Since 1988, TAGT has awarded nearly $900,000 to nearly 3,000 winners, but donations only cover a small fraction of the cost. If you believe in the value of this program, show your support using the form inside or go to txgifted.org/donate.

Non Profit Org.U.S. Postage

PAIDAustin, Texas

Permit No. 9411524 S. IH 35, Suite 205Austin, Texas 78704

Documents

Fall 2009 • Volume XXIX, Issue 4 TEMPOfall issue lined up. Dr. Alexey Root is back with her second installment on the game of chess and how to incor-porate it into the classroom—even