Advocacy refers to individuals who believe in a particular cause and are willing to support it in multiple ways. This research includes two accounts of advocacy events regarding gifted education. In both cases, the result was legislation for increased funding and services for the gifted. This research describes how people met the challenge of being supporters of gifted education. Both group processes and individual efforts were analyzed. Five ingredients of success represented the key characteristics common to the leaders in each group: passion, preparation, inspiration, perseverance, and the ability to take advantage of serendipity.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Archambault, F. X., Jr., Westberg, K. L., Brown, S. W., Hallmark, B. W., Emmons, C. L., & Zhang, W. (1993). Regular classroom practices with gifted students: Results of a national survey of classroom teachers (Research Report No. 93101). Storrs: The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented, University of Connecticut.
2.
Aubrecht, L. (1981). Organizing for advocacy: Making it work on the state and local level. In P. B. Mitchell (Ed.), An advocate's guide to building support for gifted and talented education (pp. 31-41). Washington, DC: National Association of State Boards of Education.
3.
California Association for the Gifted. (1996). Advocacy in action: An advocacy handbook for gifted and talented education. Mountain View, CA: Author.
4.
Delcourt, M. A. B., Loyd, B. H., Cornell, D. G., & Goldberg, M. D. (1994). Evaluation of the effects of programming arrangements on student learning outcomes (Report No. RM940608). Storrs: The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented, University of Connecticut.
5.
Dettmer, P. (1991). Gifted program advocacy: Overhauling bandwagons to build support. Gifted Child Quarterly, 35, 165-171.
6.
Developing America's talent: A New England response. (1996, March). [Conference Program]. Worcester, MA: The Second Annual Conference On Gifted and Talented Education.
7.
Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen, N. E. (2002). How to design and evaluate research in education (5th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
8.
Mitchell, P. B. (1981). Effective advocacy: Understanding the process and avoiding the pitfalls. In P. B. Mitchell (Ed.), An advocate's guide to building support for gifted and talented education (pp. 3-23). Washington, DC: National Association of State Boards of Education.
9.
Renzulli, J. S., & Reis, S. M. (1991). Building advocacy through program design, student productivity, and public relations. Gifted Child Quarterly, 35, 182-187.
10.
Robinson, G. J. (1998). Classroom practices with high achieving students: A national survey of middle school teachers. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Connecticut, Storrs.
11.
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.
12.
Sliwa, C. (1995, September 6). State sets up fund to provide grants for classes to serve gifted, talented. Berkshire Eagle, p. B3-B3.
13.
Spradley, J. P. (1979). The ethnographic interview. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.
14.
Westberg, K. L., Archambault, F. X., Jr., Dobyns, S. M., & Salvin, T. J. (1993). An observational study of instructional and curricular practices used with gifted and talented students in regular classrooms (Research Report No. 93104). Storrs: The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented, University of Connecticut.
