This curriculum study of gifted-student learning in the language arts explores questions of curriculum efficacy related to the nature of the learner, the type of grouping model employed, and the strength of a curriculum treatment emphasizing literary analysis and interpretation and persuasive writing. The study further explores the use of curriculum effectiveness data to improve instruction the next time a unit of study is taught. Findings suggest that the curriculum treatment produces both significant and important learning outcomes for gifted students across 18 school district entities. Implications for further research and practice are highlighted.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Aldrich, P., & McKim, G. (1992). The consumer's guide to English-language arts curriculum. New York: Saratoga-Warren Board of Cooperative Educational Services.
2.
Aldrich, P., & Mills, C. J. (1989). A special program for highly able rural youth in grades five and six. Gifted Child Quarterly, 33, 11-14.
3.
Applebee, A. N., Langer, J. A., Mullis, I. V. S., Latham, A. S., & Gentile, C. A. (1994). NAEP 1992 writing report card. Washington, DC: Office of Educational Research and Improvement.
4.
Armstrong, D. C. (1994). A gifted child's education requires real dialogue: The use of interactive writing for collaborative education. Gifted Child Quarterly, 38, 136-145.
5.
Bailey, J. M., Boyce, L. N., & VanTassel-Baska, J. (1990). Writing, reading, and counseling connection: A framework for serving the gifted. In J. VanTassel-Baska (Ed.), A practical guide to counseling the gifted in a school setting (pp. 172-189). Reston, VA: Council for Exceptional Children.
6.
Baskin, B. H., & Harris, K. H. (1980). Books for the gifted child. New York: Bowker.
7.
Baumann, J. F., & Ivey, G. (1997). Delicate balances: Striving for curricular and instructional equilibrium in a second-grade, literature/strategy-based classroom. Reading Research Quarterly, 32, 244-275.
8.
Beck, I. L., & McKeown, M. G. (1999). Comprehension: The sine qua non of reading. Teaching and Change, 6, 197-211.
9.
Bottomley, D. M., Truscott, D. M., Marinak, B. A., Henk, W. A., & Melnick, S. A. (1999). An affective comparison of whole language, literature-based, and basal reader literacy instruction. Reading Research and Instruction, 29, 115-129.
10.
Brown, A. L., & Campione, J. C. (1994). Guided discovery in a community of learners. In K. McGilly (Ed.), Classroom lessons: Integrating cognitive theory and classroom practices (pp. 229-270). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
11.
Burkhalter, N. (1995). A Vygotsky-based curriculum for teaching persuasive writing in the elementary grades. Language Arts, 72, 192-196.
12.
Callahan, C., & Reis, S. (1996). Gifted girls, remarkable women. In K. Arnold & R. Subotnik (Eds.), Remarkable women (pp. 171-192). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
13.
Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C. (1969). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Chicago: Rand McNally.
14.
Cohen, D., & Hill, H. (1998). Instructional policy and classroom performance: The mathematics reform in California (Research Report NO. RR-39). Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, Consortium for Policy Research in Education.
15.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
16.
Collins, N. D., & Alex, N. K. (1995). Gifted readers and reading instruction. Bloomington, IN: ERIC Clearinghouse on Reading, English, and Communication. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 379 637)
17.
Connor, U. (1990). Linguistic/rhetorical measures for international student writing. Research in the Teaching of English, 24, 67-87.
18.
Csikszentmihalyi, M., Rathunde, K. & Whalen, S. (1993). Talented teenagers: The roots of success and failure. New York: Cambridge University Press.
19.
Delcourt, M. (1994). Characteristics of high-level creative productivity: A longitudinal study of students identified by Renzulli's three-ring conception of giftedness. In R. F. Subotnik & K. D. Arnold (Eds.), Beyond Terman: Contemporary longitudinal studies of giftedness and talent (pp. 401-426). Norwood. NJ: Ablex.
20.
Dixon, F. A. (1993). Literature seminars for gifted and talented students. Gifted Child Today, 16(4), 15-19.
21.
Donovan, M. S., Bransford, J. D., & Pellegrino, J. W. (1999). How people learn: Bridging research and practice. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
22.
Ford, D. Y. (1996). Reversing underachievement among gifted black students: Promising practices and programs. New York: Teachers College Press.
23.
Gallagher, S. A., & Stepien, W. J. (1996). Content acquisition in problem-based learning: Depth versus breadth in American Studies. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 19, 257-275.
24.
Gardner, H. (1991). The unschooled mind: How children think and how schools should teach. New York: Basic Books.
25.
Goldman, A. I. (1994). Argument and social epistemology. Journal of Philosophy, 91, 27-49.
26.
Greeno, J. (1991). Number sense as situated knowing in a conceptual domain. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 22, 170-218.
27.
Hall, E. G. (1990). Strategies for using journal writing in counseling gifted students. Gifted Child Today, 13(4), 2-6.
28.
Hauser, P., & Nelson, G. A. (1988). Books for the gifted child (Vol. 2). New York: Bowker.
29.
Henderson, S. J.,Jackson, N. E., & Mukamal, R. A. (1993). Early development of language and literacy skills of an extremely precocious reader. Gifted Child Quarterly, 37, 78-83.
30.
Henry, A., & Roseberry, R. L. (1996). A corpus-based investigation of the language and linguistic patterns of one genre and the implications for language teaching. Research in the Teaching of English, 30, 472-489.
31.
Hertzog, N. B., Klein, M. M., & Katz, L. G. (1999). Hypothesizing and theorizing: Challenge in an early childhood curriculum. Gifted and Talented International, 14, 38-49.
32.
Hillocks, G., Jr. (1986). Research on written composition: New directions for teaching. Urbana, IL: ERIC Clearinghouse on Reading and Communication Skills and National Conference on Research in English.
33.
Jewell, T. A., & Pratt, D. (1999). Literature discussions in the primary grades: Children's thoughtful discourse about books and what teachers can do to make it happen. The Reading Teacher, 52, 842-850.
34.
Kennedy, M. (1999). Form and substance in mathematics and science professional development. NISE Brief, 3(2), 1-7.
35.
Kral, E. A. (1997). Scientific reasoning and achievement in a high school English course. Skeptical Inquirer, 21(3), 34-39.
36.
Kulik, J. A., & Kulik, C. L. (1992). Meta-analytic findings on grouping programs. Gifted Child Quarterly, 36, 73-77.
37.
Langer, J. A. (1994). A response-based approach to reading literature (Report Series 6.7). Albany, NY: National Research Center on Literature Teaching and Language.
38.
Lawson, A. E. (1995). Science teaching and the development of thinking. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
39.
Levy, C. M., & Ransdell, S. (Eds.). (1996). The science of writing: Theories, methods, individual differences, and applications. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
40.
Mallea, K. (1992). A novel approach for the gifted reader. Middle School Journal, 24, 37-38.
41.
Matthews, M. K. (1992, April). Gifted students and whole language: A descriptive study offour classrooms. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.
42.
McLaughlin, M. W., & Talbert, J. E. (1993). Teaching for understanding: Challenges for policy and practice. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
43.
Moll, L. C., Tapia, J., & Whitmore, K. F. (1993). Living knowledge: The social distribution of cultural sources for thinking. In G. Salomon (Ed.), Distributed cognitions (pp. 139-163). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
44.
National Assessment Governing Board. (1992). Reading framework for the 1992 national assessment of education progress. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
45.
Newell, G. E. (1996). Reader-based and teacher-centered instructional tasks: Writing and learning about a short story in middle-task classrooms. Journal of Literacy Research, 28, 147-172.
46.
Newstead, S. E., & Wason, P. C. (Eds.). (1995). Perspectives on thinking and reasoning: Essays in honor of Peter Wason. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
47.
Nichols, T. M. (1992). A program for teachers and students: The Junior Great Books program. Gifted Child Today, 15(5), 50-51.
48.
Nichols, T. M. (1993, November). A study to determine the effects of the Junior Great Books program on the interpretive reading skills development of gifted/able learner children. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Mid-South Educational Research Association, Knoxville, TN.
49.
Paul, R. (1992). Critical thinking: “hat every person needs to survive in a rapidly changing world. Sonoma, CA: Foundation for Critical Thinking.
50.
Rakow, S. R. (1991). Young adult literature for honors students?English Journal, 80, 48-51.
51.
Reis, S. M., (1999, Winter). Message from the president. National Association for the Gifted Communique, 1-1.
52.
Reis, S. M., & Purcell, J. H. (1993). An analysis of content elimination and strategies used by elementary classroom teachers in the curriculum compacting process. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 16, 147-171.
53.
Renzulli, J. S. (1999). What is this thing called giftedness and how do we develop it? A twenty-five year perspective. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 23, 3-54.
54.
Rogers, K. B. (1986). Do the gifted think and learn differently? A review of recent research and its implications for instruction. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 10, 17-39.
55.
Rosenblatt, L. M. (1982). The literary transaction: Evocation and response. Theory Into Practice, 21, 268-277.
56.
Sadoski, M., Willson, V. L., & Norton, D. E. (1997). The relative contributions of research-based composition activities to writing improvement in the lower and middle grades. Research in the Teaching of English, 31, 120-147.
57.
Salmon, M. H., & Zeitz, C. M. (1995). Analyzing conventional reasoning. Informal Logic, 17, 1-23.
58.
Schack, G. D. (1989). Self-efficacy as a mediator in the creative productivity of gifted children. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 12, 231-249.
59.
Schunk, D., & Swartz, C. (1992, April). Goal and feedback during writing strategy instruction with gifted students. Presentation at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.
60.
Scruggs, T. E., & Mastropieri, M. A. (1985). Spontaneous verbal elaboration in gifted and nongifted youths. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 9, 1-10.
61.
Scruggs, T. E., Mastropieri, M. A., Jorgensen, C., & Monson, J. (1986). Effective mnemonic strategies for gifted learners. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 9, 105-121.
62.
Stephens, K. R., & Karnes, F. A. (2000). State definitions for the gifted and talented revisited. Exceptional Children, 66, 219-238.
63.
Stevens, J. P. (1990). Intermediate statistics: A modern approach. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
64.
Taylor, B. (1996). The study of literature: Insights into human understanding. In J. VanTassel-Baska, D. T. Johnson, & L. N. Boyce (Eds.), Developing verbal talent (pp. 75-94). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
65.
Toulmin, S. E. (1958). The uses of argument. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
66.
VanTassel-Baska, J. (1986). Effective curriculum and instructional models for talented students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 30, 164-169.
67.
VanTassel-Baska, J. (1995). The development of talent through curriculum. Roeper Review, 18, 98-102.
68.
VanTassel-Baska, J., Bass, G. M., Ries, R. R., Poland, D., & Avery, L. (1998). A national pilot study of science curriculum effectiveness for high-ability students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 42, 200-211.
69.
VanTassel-Baska, J., & Brown, E. F. (2000). An analysis of gifted education curriculum models. In F. A. Karnes & S. M. Bean (Eds.), Methods and Materials for Teaching the Gifted (pp. 93-131). Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.
70.
VanTassel-Baska, J.,Johnson, D. T., Hughes, C., & Boyce, L. N. (1996). A study of language arts curriculum effectiveness with gifted learners. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 19, 461-480.
71.
Vye, N. J., Goldman, S. R., Hmelo, C., Voss, J. F., & Williams, S. (1998). Complex mathematical problem solving by individuals and dyads. Cognition and Instruction, 15, 435-484.
72.
Wiggins, G. (1993). Assessment: Authenticity, context, and validity. Phi Delta Kappan, 75, 200-208, 210-214.
