This article discusses five reconsiderations (lessons) the research on the education of the gifted and talented suggests. Although several of the considerations derive from traditional practice in the field, some reconsideration is warranted because of more currently researched differences in how the gifted learner intellectually functions. It is argued that thinking of the gifted learner as idiosyncratic, not necessarily one of many classified as “the gifted,” requires a reconceptualization of how to appropriately and fully serve this unique learner. The research synthesized here covers the period from 1861 to present and represents the entire body of published research studies and representative literature (theory, program descriptions, and persuasive essays). Implications for service development and implementation are also discussed.
Anderson, R.H. , & Pavan, B.N. (1993). Nongradedness: Helping it to happen. Lancaster, PA: Technomic Publishing Company .
2.
Archambault, F.X. , Westberg, K.L. , Brown, S. , Hallmark, B.W. , Zhang, W. , & Emmons, C. (1993). Regular classroom practices with gifted students: Findings from the classroom practices survey . Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 16, 103-119 .
3.
Arneson, P. , & Hoff, N. (1992). Cooperative learning for the gifted student: Contributions from speech communication . Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Speech Communication Association, Chicago.
4.
Ausubel, D.P. (1966). Early versus delayed review in meaningful learning . Psychology in the Schools, 3, 195-198 .
5.
Barnette, W.L. (1957). Advanced credit for the superior high-school student . Journal of Higher Education, 28, 15-20 .
6.
Bartkovitch, K.G. , & Meszynski, K. (1981). Fast-paced precalculus mathematics for talented junior high students: Two recent SMPY programs . Gifted Child Quarterly, 25, 73-80 .
7.
Bernstein, E. (1969). Independent learning project: Final report 1967-1969 . Chicago: University of Chicago .
8.
Betts, G. (1986). The autonomous learner model. Greeley, CO: Autonomous Learning.
9.
Bishop, K. (1999, November). Authentic learning and the research processes of gifted students . Paper presented at the 3rd International Forum on Research in School Librarianship's Annual Conference of the International Association of School Librarianship, Birmingham, AL. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 437 056).
10.
Bloom, B. (1985). Developing talent in young people. New York: Ballantine .
11.
Borland, J. (1978). Teachers' identification of the gifted . Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 2, 22-32 .
12.
Boston, B.O. (1976). The sorcerer's apprentice: A case study in the role of the mentor. Reston, VA: Council for Exceptional Children .
13.
Brody, L. , & Stanley, J. (1991). Young college students: Assessing factors that contribute to success. In W. T. Southern & E. D. Jones (Eds.), The academic acceleration of gifted children (pp. 102-132). New York: Teachers College Press .
14.
Brush, T.A. (1997). The effects of group composition on achievement and time . Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 30(1), 2-18 .
15.
Burnette, J. (1999). Student groupings for reading instruction (ERIC/OSEP Digest E579). Washington, DC: OSEP . (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 434 435).
Burns, R.B. , & Mason, D.A. (2002). Class composition and student achievement in elementary schools . American Educational Research Journal, 39, 207-233 .
18.
Caldwell, E. (1977). In-college effects of acceleration by examination . Journal of College Student Personnel, 18(5), 399-402 .
19.
Callahan, C. , & Smith, R.M. (1990). Keller's personalized system of instruction in a junior high gifted program . Roeper Review, 13, 39-44 .
20.
Campbell, J.R. (1993). Breadth and balance in the primary curriculum . London: Falmer .
21.
Carter, G. , Jones, M.G. , & Rira, M. (2001). Effects of partner's ability on the achievement and conceptual organization of high-achieving fifth grade students . Science Education, 87, 94-111 .
22.
Colangelo, N. , & Assouline, S.G. (1995). Self-concept of gifted students: Patterns by self-concept, domain, grade level, and gender . In F. Monks (Ed.), Proceedings from the 1994 European Council on High Ability conference (pp. 66-74). New York: John Wiley.
23.
Colangelo, N. , Assouline, S. G. , & Gross, M. U. M. (2005). (Eds.). A nation deceived: How schools hold back America's brightest students. Iowa City, IA: Belin / Blank Center for Talent Development .
24.
Coleman, M.R. , Gallagher, J.J. , & Nelson, S.M. (1993). Cooperative learning and gifted students: Report on five case studies. Washington, DC: OERI . ( ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 365008).
25.
Cossey, R. (1999). Are California's math standards up to the challenge ? Phi Delta Kappan, 80, 441-443 .
26.
Council of State Directors of Programs for the Gifted. (2001). State of the states gifted and talented education report, 1999-2000. Washington, DC: National Association for Gifted Children .
27.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. , Rathude, K. , & Whalen, S. (1993). Talented teenagers: The roots of success and failure . New York: Cambridge University Press .
28.
Curtin, C. , & Shinall, S. (1987). An example of the use of microcomputers in foreign language learning and teaching from a high school for the academically talented . Ideal, 2, 91-96 .
29.
Delcourt, M.A. , Loyd, B.H. , Cornell, D.G. , & Goldberg, M.D. (1994). Evaluation of the effects of programming arrangements on student learning outcomes. Charlottesville, VA: NRC/GT .
30.
Dempster, F.N. (1988). The spacing effect: A case study in the failure to apply the results . American Psychologist, 43, 627-634 .
31.
Dimitrov, D.M. (1999). Gender differences in science achievement: Differential effect of ability, response format, and strands of learning outcomes . School Science and Mathematics, 99, 445-448 .
Elmore, R. , & Zenus, V. (1994). Enhancing social-emotional development of middle school gifted students . Roeper Review, 16, 182-185 .
34.
Enersen, D.L. (1996). Developing talent in Saturday and summer programs . Gifted Education International, 11, 159-163 .
35.
Ericcson, K. A. , & Smith, J. (Eds.). (1991). Toward a general theory of expertise: Prospects and limits. Cambridge , UK: Cambridge University Press .
36.
Feldhusen, J.F. , Check, J. , & Klausmeier, H.J. (1961). Achievement in subtraction . Elementary School Journal, 61, 322-327 .
37.
Feldman, D. (1991). Nature's gambit. New York: Teachers College Press .
38.
Gagne, F. , & Gagnier, N. (2004). The socio-affective and academic impact of early entrance to school . Roeper Review, 26, 128-138 .
39.
Gallagher, J.J. , Greenman, M. , Karnes, M. , & King, A. (1960). Individual classroom adjustments for gifted children in elementary schools . Exceptional Children, 26, 409-422 .
40.
Gallagher, S. , Stepien, W. , & Rosenthal, H. (1992). The effects of problem-based learning on problem solving . Gifted Child Quarterly, 36, 195-200 .
41.
Gentry, M. (1999). Promoting student achievement and exemplary classroom practices through cluster grouping: A research-based alternative to heterogeneous elementary classrooms (99138)Storrs: University of Connecticut, National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented .
42.
Gentry, M. , & Owen, S.V. (1999). An investigation of the effects of total school flexible cluster grouping on identification, achievement, and classroom practices . Gifted Child Quarterly, 43, 224-243 .
43.
Gladstone, M.S. (1987). Mentoring as an educational strategy in a rapidly changing society (Unpublished research report). Quebec, Canada: John Abbott College . ( ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 288028).
44.
Gray, W.A. (1982). Mentor-assisted enrichment projects for the gifted and talented . Educational Leadership, 40(2), 16-21 .
Hafenstein, N.L. , Jordan, N.E. , & Tucker, B. (1993). A descriptive study of multi-age grouping for primary gifted students . Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Atlanta, GA. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 360 782).
47.
Hanley, J.P. , Whitla, D.K. , Moo, E.W. , & Walter, A. (1970). Man: A course of study: An evaluation. Cambridge, MA: Education Development Center .
48.
Hansen, J.B. , & Feldhusen, J.F. (1994). Comparison of trained and untrained teachers of gifted students . Gifted Child Quarterly , 38, 115-121 .
49.
Hanson, H.P. (1980). Twenty-five years of the Advanced Placement program: Encouraging able students . College Board Review, 115, 8-12 .
50.
Hernandez-Garduno, E.L. (1997). Effects of teaching problem solving through cooperative learning methods on student achievement, attitudes toward mathematics, mathematics self-efficacy, and metacognition . NRC/GT Newsletter. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 436 908).
51.
Hoekman, K. , McCormick, J. , & Gross, M.U.M. (1999). The optional context for gifted students: A preliminary exploration of motivational and affective considerations . Gifted Child Quarterly, 43, 170-193 .
52.
Holahan, W. , & Brounstein, P.J. (1986). The acceleration into college and emotional adjustment of the academically gifted adolescent: A synthesis and critique of recent literature . Paper presented at the convention of the American College Personnel Association, New Orleans, LA. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 280 222).
53.
Hollingsworth, P.M. , & Harrison, G.V. (1995). Comparing whole class with traditional grouping: First grade reading instruction . Reading Improvement, 14, 183-187 .
54.
Huber, J. (1978, May). The self-instructional use of programmed creativity-training materials with gifted and regular students . Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 157 217).
55.
Hultgren, H.M. , & Seeley, K.R. (1982). Training teachers of the gifted: A research monograph on teacher competencies. Denver, CO: University of Denver .
Janos, P.M. , Robinson, N.M. , & Lunneborg, C.E. (1989). Markedly early entrance to college: A multi-year comparative study of academic performance and psychological adjustment . Journal of Higher Education, 60, 495-518 .
58.
Jeter, J. , & Chauvin, J. (1982). Individualized instruction: Implications for the gifted . Roeper Review, 5, 2-3 .
59.
Justman, J. (1953). A comparison of the functioning of intellectually gifted children enrolled in special progress and normal progress classes in junior high school . Dissertation Abstracts International, 14(1-A), 65 .
60.
Karnes, F. A. (Ed.). (2003). State of the states gifted and talented education report. 2001-2002. Washington, DC: National Association for Gifted Children .
61.
Kenny, D.A. , Archambault, F.X. , & Hallmark, B.W. (1995). The effects of group composition on gifted and non-gifted elementary students in cooperative learning groups (95116). Storrs, CT: National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented . (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 402 702).
62.
Klausmeier, H.J. , & Ripple, R.E. (1962). Effects of accelerating bright older pupils from second to fourth grade . Journal of Educational Psychology , 53, 93-100 .
63.
Kolitch, E.R. , & Brody, L. (1992). Mathematics acceleration of highly talented students: An evaluation . Gifted Child Quarterly, 36, 78-86 .
64.
Krutetskii, V.A. (1976). The psychology of mathematical abilities in schoolchildren . Chicago: University of Chicago Press .
65.
Kulik, J. , & Kulik, C.-L. (1984, August). Effects of ability grouping on elementary school pupils: A meta-analysis . Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Psychological Association, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
66.
Kulik, J.A. , & Kulik, C.-L.C. (1992). Meta-analytic findings on grouping programs . Gifted Child Quarterly, 36, 73-77 .
67.
Kulik, J.A. , Kulik, C.-L.C. , & Smith, B.B. (1976). Research on the personalized system of instruction . Programmed Learning and Educational Technology, 13, 23-30 .
68.
Lapp, E.C. (1972). Individualized study for academically talented students (Evaluation report). Coshocton, OH: CoshoctonPublic Schools . ( ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 081153).
69.
Larkin, J.H. , McDermott, J. , Simon, D.P. , & Simon, H.A. (1980). Expert and novice performance in solving physics problems . Science, 208, 1335-1342 .
70.
Lim, T.K. (1994). Letters to themselves: Gifted students' plans for positive lifestyles . Roeper Review, 17, 85-90 .
71.
Lloyd, L. (1999). Multi-age classes and high ability students . Review of Educational Research, 69, 187-212 .
72.
Lou, Y. , Abrami, P.C. , Spence, J.C. , Poulsen, C. , Chambers, B. , & D' Apollonia, S. (1996). Within-class grouping: A meta-analysis . Review of Educational Research, 66, 423-458 .
73.
Lupkowski-Shoplik, A.E. , & Assouline, S.G. (1993). Evidence of extreme mathematical precocity: Case studies of talented youths . Roeper Review , 16, 144-151 .
74.
Lupkowski-Shoplik, A.E. , & Swiatek, M.A. (1999). Elementary student talent searches: Establishing appropriate guidelines for qualifying test scores . Gifted Child Quarterly, 43, 265-272 .
75.
Lynch, S.J. (1992). Fast-paced high school science for the academically talented: A six-year perspective . Gifted Child Quarterly, 36, 147-154 .
76.
Mattin, J.P. (1965). Some effects of a planned program of acceleration upon elementary school children . Dissertation Abstracts International , 26(4-A), 827 .
77.
Mayne, L. (1961). An individual study of the reading acceleration of two kindergarten children . Elementary English, 40, 406-408 , 442 .
78.
McClusky, K.W. , Baker, P.A. , & Massey, K.J. (1996). A twenty-four year longitudinal look at early entrance to kindergarten . Gifted and Talented International , 11, 72-75 .
79.
Nasca, D. , & Davis, H.B. (1981). Verbal behaviors of teachers of the gifted. Unpublished manuscript. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 216 478).
80.
Neber, H. , Finsterwald, M. , & Urban, N. (2001). Cooperative learning with gifted and high achieving students: A review and meta-analysis of twelve studies . High Ability Studies, 12, 199-214 .
81.
Nikolova, O.R. , & Taylor, G. (2003). The impact of a language learning task on instructional outcomes in two student populations: High ability and average ability students . Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 14, 205-127 .
82.
Ohanian, S. (2004). NCLB atrocities. Retrieved May 5, 2005 from hhtp://www.motherjones.com/news/dailymojo/2004/03/03_526.html
83.
Olszewski-Kubilius, P.M. (2005). Talent searches and accelerated programming for gifted students. In N. Colangelo , S. G. Assouline , & M. U. M. Gross (Eds.), A nation deceived: How schools hold back America's brightest students (pp. 69-76). Iowa City, IA : Belin / Blank International Center for Gifted Education and Talent Development .
84.
Olszewski-Kubilius, P.M. , & Grant, B. (1994). Academically talented females in mathematics: The role of special programs and support from others in acceleration, achievement, and aspiration. In K. D. Noble & R. E. Subotnik (Eds.), Remarkable women: Perspectives on female talent development (pp. 281-294). Creskill, NJ: Hampton Press .
85.
Parke, B.N. (1983). Use of self-instructional materials with gifted primary-aged students . Gifted Child Quarterly, 27, 29-34 .
86.
Parnes, S.J. (1967). Creative behavior guidebook. New York: Scribner .
87.
Pentelbury, R. (2000). The independent learner program. In Centre for Gifted Education (Ed.), The quest for giftedness: Proceedings of the annual conference of the Society for the Advancement of Gifted Education. Calgary, Alberta , Canada: Centre for Gifted Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 466 055).
88.
Peters, W.A.M. , Grager-Loidl, H. , & Supplee, P. (2000). Underachievement in gifted children and adolescents: Theory and practice. In K. A. Heller , F. J. Monks , R. J. Sternberg , & R. F. Subotnik (Eds.), International handbook of giftedness and talent (2nd ed., pp. 609-620). Amsterdam: Elsevier / Pergamon .
89.
Peterson, N.M. , Brounstein, P.J. , & Kimble, G. (1987). Evaluation of college level coursework for gifted adolescents: An investigation of epistemological stance, knowledge gain, and generalization . Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Washington, DC. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 286 910).
90.
Pressey, S.L. (1945). Credit by examination: Present use and future need . Journal of Educational Research, 38, 596-605 .
91.
Proctor, T.B. , Black, K.N. , & Feldhusen, J.F. (1986). Guidelines for grade placement of precocious children . Roeper Review, 9, 25-27 .
92.
Ravaglia, R. , Suppes, P. , Stillinger, C. , & Alper, T. (1995). Computer-based mathematics and physics for gifted students . Gifted Child Quarterly, 39, 7-13 .
93.
Reis, S.M. , & Westberg, K.L. (1994). The impact of staff development on teachers' ability to modify curriculum for gifted and talented students . Gifted Child Quarterly, 38, 127-135 .
94.
Reis, S.M. , Westberg, K.L. , Kulikowich, J.M. , & Purcell, J.H. (1998). Curriculum compacting and achievement test scores: What does the research say?Gifted Child Quarterly, 42, 123-129 .
95.
Renzulli, J.S. , & Reis, S.M. (1985). The schoolwide enrichment model: A comprehensive plan for educational excellence. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press .
96.
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 .
97.
Rogers, K.B. (1992). A best-evidence synthesis of the research on acceleration options for gifted learners . In N. Colangelo , S. G. Assouline, & D. L. Ambroson (Eds.), Talent development: Proceedings from the 1991 Henry B. and Jocelyn Wallace national research symposium on talent development (pp. 406-409). Unionville, NY: Trillium.
98.
Rogers, K.B. (1998). Using current research to make “good” decisions about grouping. National Association for Secondary School PrincipalsBulletin, 82(595), 38-46 .
99.
Rogers, K.B. (2002). Re-forming gifted education: Matching the program to the child. Scottsdale, AZ: Great Potential Press .
100.
Rogers, K.B. (2005). The academic effects of acceleration. In N. Colangelo , S. G. Assouline , & M. U. M. Gross (Eds.), A nation deceived: How schools hold back America's brightest students (pp. 47-58). Iowa City, IA: Belin / Blank International Center for Gifted Education and Talent Development.
101.
Scruggs, T.E. , & Mastropieri, M.A. (1984). How gifted students learn: Implications from recent research . Roeper Review, 6, 183-185 .
102.
Sheffield, L. J. (Ed.). (1999). Developing mathematically promising students. Reston, VA : National Council of Teachers of Mathematics .
103.
Shields, C.M. (2002). A comparison study of student attitudes and perceptions in homogeneous and heterogeneous classrooms . Roeper Review , 24, 115-120 .
104.
Shigaki, I.S. , & Wolfe, W.W. (1980). Formal syllogistic reasoning of young gifted children . Child Study Journal, 10, 87-106 .
105.
Shore, B.M. (2000). Metacognition and flexibility: Qualitative differences in how gifted children think. In R. C. Friedman & B. M. Shore (Eds.), Talents unfolding: Cognition and development (pp. 167-187). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association .
106.
Shouse, R.D. (1937). Acceleration of high school students by groups . Educational Administration and Supervision, 23, 51-62 . Slavin, R.E. (1987). Ability grouping: A best-evidence synthesis . Review of Educational Research, 57, 293-336 .
107.
Splaine, P. (1981). A study of the effects on adolescents of skipping a grade or starting school early . Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 219 441).
108.
Stamps, L. (2004). The effectiveness of curriculum compacting in first grade classrooms . Roeper Review, 27, 31-41 .
109.
Stanley, J.C. (1975). Special fast mathematics classes during school: Algebra taught quickly by college professors to fourth through seventh graders . Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Washington, DC. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 111 670).
110.
Stanley, J.C. , & Stanley, B.K. (1986). High school biology, chemistry, or physics learned well in three weeks . Journal of Research in Science Teaching , 23, 237-250 .
111.
Start, K.B. (1995, July). The learning rate of intellectually gifted learners in Australia . Paper presented at the Supporting the Emotional Needs of the Gifted conference, San Diego, CA.
Sternberg, R.J. (1986). A triarchic theory of intellectual giftedness . In R. J. Sternberg & J. E. Davison (Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness (pp. 223-245). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press .
114.
Swiatek, M.A. , & Benbow, C.P. (1991). Ten-year longitudinal follow-up of ability-matched accelerated and unaccelerated gifted students . Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, 528-538 .
115.
Swiatek, M.A. , & Lupkowski-Shoplik, A. (2002). Elementary and middle school student participation in gifted programs: Are gifted students underserved ? Gifted Child Quarterly, 47, 118-130 .
116.
Teh, G.P.L. , & Fraser, B.J. (1995). Gender differences in achievement and attitudes among students using computer-assisted instruction . International Journal of Instructional Media, 10, 111-120 .
117.
Tieso, C. (2002). The effects of grouping and curriculum practices on intermediate students' mathematics achievement scores. Storrs, CT: National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented .
118.
Tomlinson, C.A. , Kaplan, S.N. , Renzulli, J.S. , Purcell, J. , Leppien, J. , & Burns, D. (2002). The parallel curriculum: A design to develop high potential and challenge high-ability learners. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press .
119.
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. 429-468). Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning .
120.
Tyler-Wood, T. , Mortenson, M. , Putney, D. , & Cass, M. (2000). An effective mathematics and sciences curriculum option for secondary gifted education . Roeper Review, 22, 266-269 .
121.
Usiskin, Z. (1987). Why elementary algebra can, should, and must be an eighth-grade course for average students . Mathematics Teachers , 80, 428-438 .
122.
Van Tassel-Baska, J. (1987). The case for teaching Latin to the verbally talented . Roeper Review, 9, 159-161 .
123.
Van Tassel-Baska, J. , Bass, G. , Ries, R. , Poland, D. , & Avery, L. (1998). A national study of science curriculum effectiveness with high ability students . Gifted Child Quarterly, 42, 200-211 .
124.
Vaughn, V.L. , Feldhusen, J.F. , & Asher, J.W. (1991). Meta-analyses and review of research on pull-out programs in gifted education . Gifted Child Quarterly, 35, 92-98 .
125.
Weiner, D.A. (1985). The role of mentors in the growth and development of gifted children and adolescents . Dissertation Abstracts International, 4446(9-A), 2639 .
126.
Weinstein, L. (1971). The zoomer class: Initial results . Exceptional Children, 38, 58-65 .
127.
Wesson, J.B. (1963). An experimental evaluation of selected techniques for employing programmed textbook materials in elementary school arithmetic . Dissertation Abstracts International, 24(6-A), 2386 .
128.
Willingham, W.W. , & Morris, M. (1986). Four years later: A longitudinal study of advanced placement students in college. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service Entrance Examination Board College Board Publications . (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 280 358).
129.
Winebrenner, S. (1992). Teaching gifted kids in the regular classroom: Strategies and techniques every teacher can use to meet the academic needs of the gifted and talented. Minneapolis, MN: Free Spirit .
130.
Woodrum, D.T. (1979). A comparison of problem solving performances for 4th, 5th, and 6th grade children classified as normal, gifted, or learning disabled and by focusing level and conceptual tempo . Dissertation Abstracts International, 39(11-A), 6708-6709 .
131.
Zeidner, M. , & Schleyer, E.J. (1999). The effects of educational context on individual difference variables, self-perceptions of giftedness, and school attitudes of gifted adolescents . Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 28, 687-705 .
132.
Zuckerman, H. (1977). The scientific elite: Nobel laureates in the U.S . New York: Free Press .
