The primary purpose of this study was to examine the dimensionality of students' attitudes toward regular classroom activities and enrichment clusters. The secondary purpose was to report the development of two student attitude surveys, one regarding regular classroom learning situations and the other regarding enrichment clusters. A total of 379 students involved in both regular classrooms and enrichment clusters completed parallel surveys designed to assess their attitudes toward these learning situations with respect to challenge, interest, meaning, choice, and enjoyment. Factor analytic procedures yielded four factors for each attitude survey with estimates of internal consistency ranging from .70 to .93. The analyses allowed examination of the construct validity of scores on both instruments while providing insight that the derived factors were not identical for the regular classroom activities and enrichment clusters.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Archambault, F. X. , Westberg, K., Brown, S. B., Hallmark, B. W., Emmons, C. L., & Zhang, W. (1993). Regular classroom practices with gifted students: Results of a national survey of classroom teachers. Storrs, CT: National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented.
2.
Bloom, B. S. (Ed.). (1985). Developing talent in young people. New York: Ballantine.
3.
Bruner, J. S. (1960). The process of education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
4.
Bruner, J. S. (1966). Toward a theory of instruction. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
5.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Literacy and intrinsic motivation. Daedalus, 119, 115-140.
6.
Deci, E. L. , & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York: Plenum.
7.
Dewey, J. (1913). Interest and effort in education. New York: Houghton Mifflin.
8.
Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education. New York: Free Press.
9.
Feldman, D. H. (1986). Nature's gambit. New York: Basic Books.
10.
Gallagher, J. J. (1985). Teaching the gifted child (3rd ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
11.
Gardner, H. (1991). The unschooled mind: How children think and how schools should teach. New York: Basic Books.
12.
Goodlad, J. I. (1984). A place called school. New York: McGraw Hill.
13.
Gruber, H. E. (1986). The self-construction of the extraordinary. In R. J. Steinberg & J. E. Davidson (Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness (pp. 247-268). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
14.
Holt, J. (1983). Escape from childhood. In J. W. Noll (Ed.), Taking sides: Clashing views on controversial educational issues (2nd ed., pp. 40-44). Guilford, CT: Dushkin.
15.
Hopfenberg, W. S. , & Levin, H. A. (1993). The accelerated schools resource guide. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
16.
James, W. (1890). The principles of psychology. London: Macmillan.
17.
Lepper, M. R. , & Chabay, R. W. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and instruction: Conflicting views on the motivational processes in computer-based education. Educational Psychologist, 20, 217-230.
18.
Maker, C. J. (1982). Curriculum development for the gifted. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
19.
Owen, S. V. (1995). SPSS and factor analyses. Unpublished manuscript, University of Connecticut, Storrs.
20.
Parke, B. (1989). Gifted students in regular classrooms. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
21.
Passow, A. H. (1982). The relationship between the regular curriculum and differentiated curricula for the gifted/talented. In S. Kaplan, A. H. Passow, P. Phenix, S. Reis, J. S. Renzulli, I. Sato, L. Smith, E. P. Torrance, &V. Ward (Eds.), Curricula for the gifted (pp. 4-20). Ventura, CA: National/State Leadership Training Institute.
22.
Phenix, P. H. (1964). Realms of meaning. New York: McGraw-Hill.
23.
Piaget, J. (1975). The development of thought: Equilibration of cognitive structures. New York: Viking.
24.
Reis, S. M. , Gentry, M. L., & Park, S. (1995). Extending the pedagogy of gifted education to all students: The enrichment cluster study. Storrs, CT: National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented.
25.
Reis, S. M. , Westberg, K. L., Kulikowich, J., Caillard, F., Hebert, T., Plucker, J., Purcell, J. H., Rogers, J. B., & Smist, J. M. (1993). Why not let high ability students start school in January? The curriculum compacting study. Storrs, CT: National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented.
26.
Renzulli, J. S. (1978). What makes giftedness? Reexamining a definition. Phi Delta Kappan, 60(3), 180-184.
27.
Renzulli, J. S. (1988). The multiple menu model for developing differentiated curriculum for the gifted and talented, Gifted Child Quarterly, 32(3), 298-308.
28.
Renzulli, J. S. (1994). Schools for talent development: A comprehensive plan for total school improvement. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
29.
Renzulli, J. S. , & Reis, S. M. (1985). The school wide enrichment model: A comprehensive plan for educational excellence. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
30.
Robinson, A. (1991). Cooperative learning and the academically talented student. Storrs, CT: National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented.
31.
Rogers, K. B. (1991). The relationship of grouping practices to the education of the gifted and talented learner. Storrs, CT: National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented.
32.
Schiefele, U. (1991). Interests, learning and motivation. Educational Psychologist, 26(314), 299-323.
33.
Schlichter, C. (1986). Talents unlimited: Applying the multiple talent approach to mainstream and gifted programs. In J. S. Renzulli (Ed.), Systems and models for developing programs for the gifted and talented (pp. 352-390). Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
34.
Shore, B. M. , Cornell, D. G., Robinson, A., & Ward, V. S. (1991). Recommended practices in gifted education. New York: Teachers College Press.
35.
Slavin, R. E. (1984). Team-assisted individualization. In M. C. Wang & H. J. Walberg (Eds.), Adapting instruction to individual differences (pp. 236-253). Berkeley, CA: McCutchan.
36.
Thompson, B. , & Daniel, L. G. (1996). Factor analytic evidence for the construct validity of scores: A historical overview and some guidelines. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 56(2), 197-208.
37.
Tobias, S. (1994). Interest, prior knowledge and learning. Review of Educational Research, 64(1), 37-54.
38.
Tomlinson, C. A. , & Callahan, C. M. (1992). Contributions of gifted education to general education in a time of change. Gifted Child Quarterly, 36, 183-189.
39.
Torrance, P. (1962). Guiding creative talent. Huntington, NY: Prentice Hall.
40.
Treffinger, D. (1986). Fostering effective independent learning through individualized programming. In J. S. Renzulli (Ed.), Systems and models for developing programs for the gifted and talented (pp. 429-460). Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
41.
U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement. (1993). National excellence: A case for developing America 's talent. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
42.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1962). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
43.
Wang, M. C. , & Lindvall, C. M. (1984). Individual differences in school learning environments: Theory, research and design. In E. W. Gordon (Ed.), Review of research in education (Vol. 11, pp. 161-225). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
44.
Ward, V. (1980). Differential education for the gifted. Ventura, CA: Ventura Superintendent of Schools Office.
45.
Westberg, K. L. , Archambault, F. X., Dobyns, S. M., & Salvin, T. J. (1993). An observational study of instructional and curricular practices used with gifted and talented students in regular classrooms. Storrs, CT: National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented.
46.
Williams, F. (1986). The cognitive-affective interaction model for enriching gifted programs. In J. S. Renzulli (Ed.), Systems and models for developing programs for the gifted and talented (pp. 461-484). Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
