Although many ways of doing research exist in education, mulch of the research conducted has focused on identifying or defining strategies to fit learners to existing theories of education and schooling. This article examines historical styles of research Conducted around the construct of gifted underachievement. It then explores possibilities of implementing alternative approaches and theoretical arguments in practical applications in this area. Goals include providing an overview of research focused on gifted underachievement, examining research positions (paradigms) that more vividly represent complexity inherent in educating gifted individuals, and providing precepts that guide practitioners and scholars to alternative views of the research process and use of research outcomes.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Alexander, K., & Alexander, M. D. (1992). American public school law (3rd ed.). New York: West.
2.
Ambrose, D. (1998). A model for clarification and expansion of conceptual foundations. Gifted Child Quarterly, 42, 77-86.
3.
Aoki, T. (1988). Toward a dialectic between the conceptual world and the lived world. In W. Pinar (Ed.), Contemporary curriculum discourses (pp. 402-416). Scottsdale, AZ: Gorsuch Scarisbrick.
4.
Apple, M. (1979). On analyzing hegemony. Journal of Curriculum Theory, 1(1), 10-27.
5.
Apple, M. (1996). Cultural politics & education. New York: Teachers College Press.
6.
Arhar, J., Brickman, R., Brunner, C., Kolacz-Berlanger, V., March, C., McClellan, M. A., McCollum, D., McKeon, C., O'Toole, P., Poluga, J., Roberts, P., Roncone, J., Rowley, B., San, K. K., Schultz, R. A., Sitler, R., Vanden Wyngaard, M., & Zimmerman, B. (1997). Overview: Theory and research in teaching. Unpublished manuscript, Kent State University, Kent, OH.
7.
Bachtold, L. M. (1969). Personality differences among high-ability underachievers. The Journal of Educational Research, 63 (1), 16-18.
8.
Baker, J. A., Bridger, R., & Evans, K. (1998). Models of underachievement among gifted preadolescents: The role of personal, family, and school factors. Gifted Child Quarterly, 42, 5-15.
9.
Baum, S. M., Renzulli, J. S., & Hebert, T. P. (1995). Reversing underachievement: Creative productivity as a systematic intervention. Gifted Child Quarterly, 39, 224-235.
10.
Baymur, F. B., & Patterson, C. H. (1960). A comparison of three methods of assisting underachieving high school students. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 7, 83-90.
11.
Blumer, H. (1969). Symbolic interactionism: Perspective and method. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
12.
Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (1982). Qualitative research for education. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
13.
Borland, J. H. (1990). Postpositivist inquiry: Implications of the “new philosophy of science” for the field of the education of the gifted. Gifted Child Quarterly, 34, 161-167.
14.
Brophy, J. E. (1982). Schooling as students experience it. Elementary School Journal, 82, 519-529.
15.
Burch, R. (1989). On phenomenology and its practices. Phenomenology + Pedagogy, 7, 187-217.
16.
Bybee, R. W. (1993). Reforming science education: Social perspectives and personal reflections. New York: Teachers College Press.
17.
Carr, E. H. (1962). “hat is history?New York: Knopf
18.
Carr, W., & Kemniis, S. (1986). Becoming critical: Education, knowledge, and action research. Philadelphia, PA: Falmer Press.
19.
Coleman, L. J., Sanders, M. D., & Cross, T. L. (1997). Perennial debates and tacit assumptions in the education of gifted children. Gifted Child Quarterly, 41, 105-111.
20.
Comaroff, J. L., & Comaroff, J. (1992). Ethnography and the historical imagination. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
21.
Compton, M. F. (1982). The gifted underachiever in the middle school. Roeper Review, 4(4), 23-25.
22.
Cross, T. (1994). Alternative inquiry and its potential contributions to gifted education: A commentary. Roeper Review, 16, 284-285.
23.
Davis, O. L.,Jr. (1991). Historical inquiry: Telling real stories. In E. C. Short (Ed.), Forms of curriculum inquiry (pp. 77-87). Albany: State University of New York Press.
24.
DeBoer, G. E. (1991). A history of ideas in science education: Implications for practice. New York: Teachers College Press.
25.
Delisle, J. R. (1982). Learning to underachieve. Roeper Review, 4(4), 16-18.
26.
Denzin, N. K. (1997). Interpretive ethnography: Ethnographicpractices for the 21st century. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
27.
Denzin, N., & Lincoln, Y. (Eds.). (1994). The handbook of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
28.
Derrida, J. (1978). Writing and difference. (A. Bass, Trans.). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
29.
De Saussure, F. (1959). Course in general linguistics (C. Bally and A. Seehehage, Eds.; W. Baskin, Trans.). New York: Philosophical Library.
30.
Dowdall, C. B., & Colangelo, N. (1982). Underachieving gifted students: Review and implications. Gifted Child Quarterly, 26, 179-184.
31.
Duckworth, E. (1987). Teaching as research. Harvard Educational Review, 56, 481-495.
32.
Dunn, L. M. (1963). Exceptional children in schools. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.
33.
Durr, W. K., & Collier, C. C. (1960). Recent research on the gifted. Education, 81, 163-170.
34.
Eisner, E. W. (1985). The educational imagination (2nd ed.). New York: Macmillan.
35.
Emerick, L. J. (1988). Academic underachievement among the gifted: Students' perceptions of factors relating to the reversal of the academic underachievement pattern. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Connecticut, Storrs.
36.
Fetterman, D. M. (1989). Ethnography: Step-by-step. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
37.
Gadamer, H. (1977). Philosophical hermeneutics (D. E. Linge, Trans.). Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
38.
Gadamer, H. (1981). Reason in the age of science (F.W. Lawrence, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
39.
Gallagher, J. J., & Rogge, W. (1966). The gifted. Review of Educational Research, 36(1), 37-55.
40.
Gallagher, S. (1992). Hermeneutics and education. Albany: State University of New York Press.
41.
Giroux, H. (1981). Ideology, culture, and the process of schooling. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.
42.
Gitlin, A. (1990). Educative research, voice, and school change. Harvard Educational Review, 60, 443-466.
43.
Gitlin, A., Siegel, M., & Boru, K. (1988, April). Purpose and method: Rethinking the use of ethnography of the educational left. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
44.
Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago: Aldine.
45.
Glesne, C. (1999). Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction (2nd ed.). New York: Longman.
46.
Goetz, J. P., & LeCompte, M. D. (1984). Ethnography and qualitative design in educational research. New York: Academic Press.
47.
Golicz, H. J. (1982). Use of Estes Attitude Scales with gifted underachievers. Roeper Review, 4(4), 22-23.
48.
Gonzalez, J., & Hayes, A. (1988). Psychosocial aspects of the development of gifted underachievers: Review and implications. The Exceptional Child, 35(1), 39-51.
49.
Goodman, J. (1992). Elementary schooling for critical democracy. Albany: State University of New York Press.
50.
Gottschalk, L. (1969). Understanding history: A primer of the historical method (2nd ed.). New York: Knopf.
51.
Gowan, J. C. (1957). Dynamics of underachievement of gifted students. Exceptional Children, 24, 98-102.
52.
Gramsci, A. (1975). Selections from cultural writing (D. Gorgacs & G. Smith, Eds; W. Boelhumer, Trans.). London: Lawrence & Wishart.
53.
Gregory, R. (1988). Action research in the secondary school. London: Routledge, Chapman, & Hall.
54.
Grodin, J. (1995). Sources of hermeneutics. Albany: State University of New York Press.
55.
Grumet, M. (1976). Existential and phenomenological foundations. In W. Pinar & M. Grumet (Eds.), Toward a poor curriculum (pp. 31-50). Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt.
56.
Heidegger, M. (1962). Being and time (J. Maquarrie and E. Robinson, Trans.). New York: Harper and Row.
57.
Henderson, J. G., & Hawthorne, R. D. (1995). Transformative curriculum leadership. Columbus, OH: Merrill.
58.
Hojnacki, P. C. (1979). Implementation of a program for gifted underachievers and gifted students with behavior problems in the primary grades. Fort Lauderdale, FL: Nova University. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 189 778)
59.
Hollingworth, L. S. (1942). Children above 180 IQ, Stanford-Binet. New York: World Book.
60.
Husserl, E. (1962). Ideas (W. Gibson, Trans.). New York: Collier.
61.
Husserl, E. (1964). The Paris lectures. (P. Koestenbaum, Trans.). The Hague, The Netherlands: Martinus Nujhoff.
62.
Husserl, E. (1970). Cartesian meditations. (D. Cairns, Trans.). The Hague, The Netherlands: Martinus Nujhoff.
63.
Jackson, R. M., Cleveland, J. C., & Merenda, P. F. (1975). The longitudinal effects of early identification and counseling of underachievers. Journal of School Psychology, 13, 119-128.
64.
Josselson, R., & Lieblich, A. (Eds.). (1993). The narrative study of lives. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
65.
Karnes, M. B., McCoy, G., Zehrbach, R. R., Wollersheim, J. P., & Clarizio, H. F. (1963). The efficacy of two organizational plans for underachieving gifted children. Exceptional Children, 29, 438-446.
66.
Keighley, T. (1996). The odyssey: Reaching an understanding of academically underachieving gifted students' perceptions of boredom. Unpublished master's thesis, Simon Fraser University, British Columbia, Canada.
67.
Kemmis, S., & DiChiro, G. (1987). Emerging and evolving issues of action research praxis: An Australian perspective. Peabody Journal of Education, 64, 101-130.
68.
Kimball, B. (1953). Case studies in educational failure during adolescence. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 23, 406-415.
69.
Kincheloe, J., & Pinar, W. (Eds.). (1991). Curriculum as social psychoanalysis: The significance of place. Albany: State University of New York Press.
70.
Krippendorf, K. (1980). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
71.
Krouse, J., & Krouse, H. J. (1981). Toward a multimodal theory of academic underachievement. Educational Psychologist, 16, 151-164.
72.
Kurtz, J. J., & Swenson, E. J. (1951). Factors related to overachievement and underachievement in schools. School Review, 59, 472-480.
73.
Laffoon, K. S., Jenkins-Friedman, R., & Tollefson, N. (1989). Causal attributions of underachieving gifted, achieving gifted, and nongifted students. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 13, 4-21.
74.
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
75.
Lather, P. (1986). Issues of validity in openly ideological research: Between a rock and a hard place. Interchange, 17(4), 63-84.
76.
LeCompte, M. D., & Preissle, J. (1993). Ethnography and qualitative design in educational research (2nd ed.). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
77.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
78.
Marland, S. P., Jr. (1971). Education of the gifted and talented: Report to the Congress of the United States by the U.S. Commissioner of Education and background papers submitted to the U.S. Office of Education (2 vols.). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
79.
Marius, R. (1989). A short guide to writing about history. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman.
80.
Matthews, M. R. (1994). Science teaching: The role of history and philosophy of science. New York: Routledge.
81.
McCutcheon, G. (1979). Educational criticism: Methods and application. Journal of Curriculum Theorizing, 1(2), 5-25.
82.
McEwen, N. (1980). Phenomenology and the curriculum: The case for secondary-school geography. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 12(4), 323-340.
83.
McGillivray, R. H. (1964). Differences in home background between high-achieving and low-achieving gifted children: A study of one hundred grade eight pupils in the city of Toronto public schools. Ontario Journal of Educational Research, 6, 99-106.
84.
McLaren, P. (1988). Life in schools: An introduction to critical pedagogy in the foundations of education. New York: Longman.
85.
Merleau-Ponty, M. (1962). Phenomenology of perception. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
86.
Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
87.
Mills, G. E. (2000). Action research: A guide for the teacher researcher. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.
88.
Moore, B. J. (1996). Three case studies of gifted students who underachieve in high school. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Virginia, Charlottesville.
89.
Morgan, H. H. (1952). A psychometric comparison of achieving and nonachieving college students of high ability. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 16, 292-298.
90.
Morrow, W. R., & Wilson, R. C. (1961). Family relations of bright high-achieving and underachieving high school boys. Child Development, 32, 501-510.
91.
Nevins, A. (1938). The gateway to history. New York: D. Appleton-Century.
92.
O'Grady, A. L. (1995). The onset of academic underachievement among gifted adolescents: Causal attributions and the perceived effect of early interventions. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Connecticut, Storrs.
93.
Ormrod, J. E. (1990). Human learning: Theories, principles, and educational applications. New York: Merrill.
94.
O'Shea, A. J. (1970). Low-achievement syndrome among bright junior high school boys. Journal of Educational Research, 63, 257-262.
95.
Passow, A. H., & Goldberg, M. L. (1958). Study of underachieving gifted. Educational Leadership, 16, 121-125.
96.
Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2nd ed). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
97.
Perkins, H. V. (1965). Classroom behavior and underachievement. American Educational Research Journal, 2, 1-12.
98.
Perkins, H. V. (1969). Human development and learning. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
99.
Perkins, J. A., & Wicas, E. A. (1971). Group counseling bright underachievers and their mothers. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 18, 273-278.
100.
Pierce, J. V., & Bowman, P. H. (1960). Motivation patterns of superior high school students. Cooperative research monograph no. 2: The gifted student (OE-35016). Washington, DC: U.S. Office of Education.
101.
Pinar, W. F., Reynolds, W. M., Slattery, P., & Taubman, P. M. (1995). Understanding curriculum: An introduction to the study of historical and contemporary curriculum discourse. New York: Lang.
102.
Pirozzo, R. (1982). Gifted underachievers. Roeper Review, 4(4), 18-21.
103.
Polakow, V. (1984). Reflections on pedagogy, research, and praxis. Phenomenology + Pedagogy, 2, 29-35.
104.
Polkinghorne, D. E. (1988). Narrative knowing and the human sciences. Albany: State University of New York Press.
105.
Purkey, W. W. (1969). Project self discovery: Its effects on bright but underachieving high school students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 13, 242-246.
106.
Quotations/zitate. (n.d.). Retrieved March 5, 2002, from http://www.dudler.org/new.htm.
107.
Raph, J. B., Goldberg, M. L., & Passow, A. H. (1966). Bright underachievers: Studies of scholastic underachievement among intellectually superior high school students. New York: Teachers College Press.
108.
Rawls, J. (1971). A theory of justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
109.
Rawls, J. (1985). Justice as fairness: Political not metaphysical. Philosophy and Public Affairs, 14, 223-251.
110.
Reis, S. M., & McCoach, D. B. (2000). The underachievement of gifted students: What do we know and where do we go?Gifted Child Quarterly, 44, 152-170.
111.
Richert, E. S., Alvino, J. J., & McDonnel, R. C. (1982). National report on identification: Assessment and recommendations for comprehensive identification of gifted and talented youth (Contract No. 300-80-0958). Sewell, NJ: Educational Improvement Center-South.
112.
Ricoeur, P. (1985). The model of the text: Meaningful action considered as a text. In J. B. Thompson (Ed. & Trans.), Hermeneutics and the human sciences (pp. 197-221). New York: Cambridge University Press.
113.
Rimm, S. B. (1988). Identifying underachievement: The characteristics approach. Gifted Child Today, 11, 50-54.
114.
Rust, R. M., & Ryan, F. J. (1953). The relationship of some Rorschach variables to academic behavior. Journal of Personality, 21, 441-456.
115.
Schubert, W. H. (1980). Recalibrating educational research: Toward a focus on practice. Educational Researcher, 9(1), 17-24, 31-31.
116.
Schultz, R.A. (1999). Illuminating learner realities: Perceptions, expectations, and experiences of gifted underachievers in a secondary school classroom. Dissertation Abstracts International, 60(07), 2536. (UMI No. 9939730)
117.
Schutz, A. (1967). The phenomenology of the social world (G. Walsh & F. Lehnert, Trans.). Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.
118.
Schwab, J. J. (1978a). The practical: A language for curriculum. In I. Westbury & N. J. Wilkof (Eds.), Science, curriculum, and liberal education (pp. 287-321). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
119.
Schwab, J. J. (1978b). The practical 2: Arts of eclectic. In I. Westbury & N. J. Wilkof (Eds.), Science, curriculum, and liberal education (pp. 322-364). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
120.
Schwab, J. J. (1978c). The practical 3: Translation into curriculum. In I. Westbury & N. J. Wilkof (Eds.), Science, curriculum, and liberal education (pp. 365-383). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
121.
Schwab, J. J. (1978d). The practical 4: Something for curriculum professors to do. Curriculum Inquiry, 13, 239-265.
122.
Shaw, M. C., & Black, M. D. (1960). The reaction to frustration of bright high school underachievers. California Journal of Educational Research, 11, 120-125.
123.
Shaw, M. C., & McCuen, J. T. (1960). The onset of academic underachievement in bright children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 51, 103-108.
124.
Shoff, H. G. (1984). The gifted underachiever: Definitions and identfication strategies. Wayne, NJ: William Patterson College. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 252 029)
125.
Shore, B. M., Cornell, D. G., Robinson, A., & Ward, V. S. (1991). Recommended practices in gifted education: A critical analysis. New York: Teachers College Press.
126.
Short, E. C. (Ed). (1991). Forms of curriculum inquiry. Albany: State University of New York Press.
127.
Shouksmith, G., & Taylor, J. W. (1964). The effect of counseling on the achievement of high-ability pupils. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 34, 51-57.
128.
Shulman, L. S. (1986). Paradigms and research programs in the study of teaching: A contemporary perspective. In L. S. Shulman (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 3-36). New York: Macmillan.
129.
Spindler, G. (1982). Doing the ethnography of schooling: Educational anthropology in action. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press.
130.
Spradley, J. P. (1980). Participant observation. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.
131.
Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
132.
Straus, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
133.
Swassing, R. H. (1985). Teaching gifted children and adolescents. Columbus, OH: Merrill.
134.
Tannenbaum, A. J. (1983). Gifted children: Psychological and educational perspectives. New York: Macmillan.
135.
Terman, L. M., & Oden, M. H. (1947). The gifted child grows up: Twenty-five years'follow-up of a superior group. Genetic studies of genius: Volume IV Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
136.
Tetrault, T. E. (1965). The school's responsibility for the mental health of gifted students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 9, 85-88.
137.
van Manen, M. (1977). Linking ways of knowing with ways of being practical. Curriculum Inquiry, 6, 205-228.
138.
van Manen, M. (1979). Objective inquiry into structures of subjectivity. Journal of Curriculum Theorizing, 1(1), 44-64.
139.
van Manen, M. (1984). Practicing phenomenological writing. Phenomenology + Pedagogy, 2, 36-69.
140.
van Manen, M. (1990). Researching lived experience: Human science for an action sensitive pedagogy. Albany: State University of New York.
141.
Walker, D. F. (1992). Methodological issues in curriculum research. In P. W. Jackson (Ed.), Handbook of research on curriculum (pp. 98-118). New York: Macmillan.
142.
Wallace, M. (1987). A historical review of action research: Some implications for the education of teachers in their managerial role. Journal of Education for Teaching, 13, 97-115.
143.
Whitmore, J. R. (1980). Giftedness, conflict, and underachievement. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
144.
Whitmore, J. R. (1984). The challenge: To nurture the full development of potential in all gifted students. Arlington, VA: ERIC EC. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 246 606)
145.
Whitmore, J. R. (1986). Understanding a lack of motivation to excel. Gifted Child Quarterly, 30, 66-69.
146.
Willis, G. (1979). Phenomenological methodologies in curriculum. Journal of Curriculum Theorizing, 1(1), 65-79.
147.
Willis, G. (1991). Phenomenological inquiry: Life-world perceptions. In E. Short (Ed.), Forms of curriculum inquiry (pp. 173-186). Albany: State University of New York Press.
148.
Woolfolk, A. E. (1987). Educational psychology (3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
149.
Yin, R. K. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
150.
Zilli, M. G. (1971). Reasons why the gifted adolescent underachieves and some of the implications of guidance and counseling to this problem. Gifted Child Quarterly, 15, 279-292.
151.
Ziv, A., Rimon, J., & Doni, M. (1977). Parental perception and self-concept of gifted and average underachievers. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 44, 563-568.
