Gifted and talented (GAT) students in a new regional selective GAT program were compared with GAT students in mixed ability and streamed classes. Outcomes were academic and non-academic self-concepts, motivation orientations, and achievement tests administered at the start and end of the school year. Selective GAT students' gains were not significantly better than comparison GAT student's gains on any outcome. Selective GAT students' scores were significantly more negative for all facets of academic self-concepts, for all but one of the facets of non-academic self-concept, and for four of six motivational orientations, but did not differ from the comparison GAT students on achievement test scores. Comparisons of students in mixed ability and streamed settings were nonsignificant for 16 of 18 outcomes. The results did not support the intended outcomes of the selective GAT program in relation to academic self-concept and motivational orientations but were consistent with previous self-concept theory and research.
AmesC. (1992). Classroom goals, structures, and student motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 261–271.
2.
Australian Council for Educational Research. (1984). Progressive Achievement Tests in Mathematics. Melbourne: Author.
3.
Australian Education Council. (1989). The common and agreed national goals of schooling. Canberra: AGPS.
4.
BrookoverW. B.LezotteL. W. (1979). Changes in schools characteristics coincident with changes in student achievement. East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 181 005).
5.
BuchananN. K.FeldhusenJ. F. (1991). Conducting research and evaluation in gifted education. New York: Teachers College Press.
6.
ByrneB. (1996) Measuring self-concept across the life span: Issues and instrumentation. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
7.
ColemanJ. M.FultsB. A. (1985). Special class placement, level of intelligence, and the self-concept of gifted children: A social comparison perspective. Remedial and Special Education, 6, 7–11.
8.
Committee Appointed to Enquire into Education of the Talented Child (C. L. Macdonald, Chair). (1997). The education of the talented child: Report of the Committee Appointed by the Minister of Education, Sydney: NSW Department of Education.
9.
Commonwealth Schools Commission. (1981). National Seminar on the Education of Gifted and Talented Children, Melbourne, 8–10 November 1981: Proceedings. Canberra: Author.
10.
CornellD. G.DelcourtM. A. B.GoldbergM. D.BlandL. C. (1992). Characteristics of elementary students entering gifted settings: The Learning Outcomes Project at the University of Virginia. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 15, 309–331.
11.
CovingtonM. V. (1992). Making the grade: A self-worth perspective on motivation and school reform. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
12.
CravenR. G.MarshH. W. (1997). Threats to gifted and talented students' self-concepts in the big pond: Research results and educational implications. Journal of Australian Gifted Education, 6, 18–30.
13.
FeldhusenJ. F.HooverS. M. (1986). A conception of giftedness: Intelligence, self-concept and motivation. Roper Review, 8, 140–143.
14.
FestingerL. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, 7, 117–140.
15.
FosterW. (1983). Self-concept intimacy and the attainment of excellence. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 6, 20–27.
16.
FoxL. H.WashingtonJ. (1985). Settings for the gifted and talented: Past, present, and future. In HorowitzF. D.O'BrienM. (Eds.), The gifted and talented: Developmental perspectives (pp. 223–250). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
17.
GoldringE. B. (1990). Assessing the status of information on classroom organizational frameworks for gifted students. Journal of Educational Research, 83, 313–326.
18.
GrossM. (1992). The use of radical acceleration in cases of extreme intellectual precocity. Gifted Child Quarterly, 36, 91–99.
GrossM. (1995). Relationships between self-esteem and motivational orientation among gifted students in full-time programs. Paper presented at the 1995 Henry B. and Jocelyn Wallace National Research Symposium on Talent Development, May 1995, University of Iowa.
21.
GrossM. (1997). How ability grouping turns big fish into little fish—or does it? Of optical illusions and optimal environments. Australasian Journal of Gifted Education, 6(2), 18–30.
22.
HarterS. (1992). The relationship between perceived competence, affect, and motivational orientation within the classroom: Processes and patterns of change. In BoggianoA. K.PittmanT. S. (Eds.), Achievement and motivation: A social-developmental perspective (pp. 77–114). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
23.
HattieJ. (1992). Self-concept. Hillside, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
24.
HogeR. D.RenzulliJ. S. (1993). Exploring the link between giftedness and self-concept. Review of Educational Research, 63, 449–465.
25.
JohnsonD.JohnsonR. (1985), Motivational processes in cooperative, competitive, and individualistic learning situations. In AmesC.AmesR. (Eds.), Research in motivation in education. Vol. 2: The classroom milieu (pp. 249–286). New York: Academic Press.
26.
JonesP. E. (1995). The high school success of opportunity 'C class pupils, Forum of Education, 14, 48–57.
27.
KulikC. L. (1985). Effects of inter-class ability grouping on achievement and self-esteem. Paper presented at the 1985 Annual Meeting of the American Psychological Association, Los Angeles.
28.
KulikC. L.KulikJ. A. (1982). Effects of ability grouping on secondary school students: A meta-analysis of evaluation findings. American Educational Research Journal, 19, 415–428.
29.
KulikC. L.KulikJ. A. (1991). Ability grouping and gifted students. In ColangeloN.DavisG. A. (Eds.), Handbook of gifted education. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
30.
KulikJ. A.KulikC. L. (1988). Meta-analysis in educational research. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, Center for Research on Learning and Teaching.
31.
MarshH. W. (1984). Self-concept, social comparison and ability grouping: A reply to Kulik and Kulik. American Educational Research Journal, 21, 799–806.
32.
MarshH. W. (1987). The big-fish-little-pond effect on academic self-concept. Journal of Educational Psychology, 19, 280–295.
33.
MarshH. W. (1988). Self Description Questionnaire: A theoretical and empirical basis for the measurement of multiple dimensions of preadolescent self-concept: A test manual and a research monograph. San Antonio, TX: Pschological Corporation. (Republished in 1992, University of Western Sydney, Macarthur, Faculty of Education).
34.
MarshH. W. (1990). A multidimensional, hierarchical self-concept: Theoretical and empirical justification. Educational Psychology Review, 2, 77–171.
35.
MarshH. W. (1991). The failure of high schools to deliver academic benefits: The importance of academic self-concept and educational aspirations. American Educational Research Journal, 28, 445–480.
36.
MarshH. W. (1993). Academic self-concept: Theory measurement and research. In SulsJ. (Ed.), Psychological perspectives on the self (Vol. 4, pp. 59–98). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
37.
MarshH. W. (1998). Simulation study of non-equivalent group-matching and regression discontinuity designs: Evaluations of gifted and talented programs. Journal of Experimental Education, 66, 163–192.
38.
MarshH. W.ChessorD.CravenR. G.RocheL. (1995). The effects of gifted and talented setting on academic self-concept: The big fish strikes again. American Educational Research Journal, 32, 285–319.
39.
MarshH. W.CravenR. G. (1994). Who benefits from selective schools? The role of academic self-concept and a call for further research. Forum of Education, 49, 3–13.
40.
MarshH. W.CravenR. (1997). Academic self-concept: Beyond the dustbowl. In PhyeG. (Ed.), Handbook of classroom assessment: Learning, achievement, and adjustment (pp. 131–198). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
41.
MarshH. W.ParkerJ. W. (1984). Determinants of student self-concept: Is it better to be a relatively large fish in a small pond even if you don't learn to swim as well?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47, 213–231.
42.
MarshH. W.PeartN. (1988). Competitive and cooperative physical fitness training settings for girls: Effects on physical fitness and on multidimensional self-concepts. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 10, 390–407.
43.
MarshH. W.RichardsG.BarnesJ. (1986). Multidimensional self-concepts: The effect of participation in an Outward Bound program. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 173–187.
44.
MarshH. W.RoweK.J. (1996). The negative effects of school-average ability on academic self-concept: An application of multilevel modelling. Australian Journal of Education, 40(1), 65–87.
45.
MarshallH. H.WeinsteinR. S. (1984). Classroom factors affecting students' self-evaluations. Review of Educational Research, 54, 301–326.
NichollsJ. G. (1989). The competitive ethos and democratic education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
48.
NorusisM.J. (1993). SPSS for Windows. Chicago, IL: SPSS, Inc.
49.
OakesJ.GamoranA.PageR. N. (1992). Curriculum differentiation: Opportunities, outcomes, and meanings. In JacksonP. (Ed.), Handbook of research on curriculum (pp. 570–608). New York: Macmillan.
50.
OlszewskiP.KuliekeM. J.WillisG. B. (1987). Changes in the self-perceptions of gifted students who participate in rigorous academic settings. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 10, 287–303.
51.
PrintM. (1983). Education of gifted children: The Australian scenario and implications for teacher educators. South Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 2, 1.
52.
SampsonJ. F. (1969). The high school examination achievement of opportunity ‘C’ class pupils. Sydney: Department of Education. (Report 373.127 SAMP 1, NSW Department of Education Library).
53.
SampsonJ. F. (1997). The secondary school performance of pupils in selective and comprehensive schools. In Department of Education, The education of the talented child (pp. 111–131). Sydney: Author.
54.
SchneiderB. H.CleggM. R.ByrneB. M.LedinghamJ. E.CrombieG. (1989). Social relations of gifted children as a function of age and school setting. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 48–56.
55.
StipekD. J. (1988). Motivation to learn: From theory to practice. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
56.
TreffingerD. J. (1982). Gifted students, regular classrooms: Sixty ingredients for a better blend. Elementary School Journal, 82, 266–273.
57.
WylieR. C. (1979). The self-concept. (Vol. 2). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
58.
WylieR. C. (1989). Measures of self-concept. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
