Single-subject experimental designs have long been used in special education to evaluate the effectiveness of interventions for exceptional children. However, the design has not been used widely in gifted education. In this article, an overview of the main features of single-subject design is presented, and its potential for application in gifted education is discussed. The article concludes with a report of a preliminary single-subject study, conducted with a young gifted child, in which the effects of higher order questioning are investigated.
AndersonL. W.KrathwohlD. R.AirasianP. W.CruikshankK. A.MayerR. E.PintrichP. R.. . .WittrockM. C. (Eds.). (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
2.
BardenL. M. (1995). Effective questioning and the ever-elusive higher-order question. The American Biology Teacher, 57, 423-426.
3.
BarlowD. H.HersenM. (1984). Single case experimental design: Strategies for studying behavior change. New York, NY: Pergamon Press.
4.
BorlandJ. H. (2008). Identification. In PluckerJ. A.CallahanC. M. (Eds.), Critical issues and practices in gifted education: What the research says (pp. 261-280). Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.
5.
BortenemG. M. (2008). Teacher use of interactive read alouds using nonfiction in early childhood classrooms. Journal of College Teaching & Learning, 5(12), 29-43.
6.
CihaT. E.HarrisR.HoffmanC.PotterM. W. (1974). Parents as identifiers of giftedness, ignored but accurate. Gifted Child Quarterly, 18, 191-195. doi:10.1177/001698627401800318
7.
DillonJ. T. (1982). Cognitive correspondence between question/statement and response. American Educational Research Journal, 19, 540-551. doi:10.3102/00028312019004540
8.
DunnL. M.DunnD. M. (2007). Peabody picture vocabulary test (4th ed.). Bloomington, IN: Pearson Education.
9.
FosterW. (1986). The application of single subject research methods to the study of exceptional ability and extraordinary achievement. Gifted Child Quarterly, 30, 33-37. doi:10.1177/001698628603000107
10.
GearG. H. (1976). Accuracy of teacher judgment in identifying intellectually gifted children: A review of the literature. Gifted Child Quarterly, 20, 478-489. doi:10.1177/001698627602000416
11.
GrossM. U. M. (1993). Nurturing the talents of exceptionally gifted individuals. In HellerK.MonksF.PassowA. H. (Eds.), International handbook of research in gifted education (pp. 473-490). Oxford, England: Pergamon Press.
12.
GrossM. U. M. (1999). Small poppies: Highly gifted children in the early years. Roeper Review, 21, 207-214. doi:10.1080/02783199909553963
13.
GrossM. U. M.MacleodB.DrummondD.MerrickC. (2001). Gifted students in primary schools: Differentiating the curriculum. Sydney, New South Wales, Australia: GERRIC.
14.
HarrisonC. (2003). Giftedness in early childhood (3rd ed.). Sydney, New South Wales, Australia: GERRIC.
15.
JohnsenS. K.RyserG. R. (1996). An overview of effective practices with gifted students in general-education settings. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 19, 379-404.
16.
JollyJ. L.KettlerT. (2008). Gifted education research 1994-2003: A disconnect between priorities and practice. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 31, 427-446.
17.
KarnesF. A.ManningS. J.BesnoyK.CukierkornJ.HoustonH. (2005). Appropriate practices for screening, identifying, and serving potentially gifted preschoolers. Hattiesburg, MS: University of Southern Mississippi.
18.
KazdinA. E. (2011). Single-case research designs (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
19.
KennedyC. H. (2005). Single-case designs for educational research. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
20.
KertoyM. K. (1994). Adult interactive strategies and the spontaneous comments of preschoolers during joint storybook readings. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 9, 58-67. doi:10.1080/02568549409594953
21.
LobanW. (1976). Language development: Kindergarten through grade twelve. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.
22.
MakerC. J. (1982). Curriculum development for the gifted. Rockville, MD: Aspen.
23.
MakerC. J. (1986). Suggested principles for gifted preschool curricula. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 6, 62-73. doi:10.1177/027112148600600109
24.
MakerC. J.NielsonA. B. (1995). Teaching models in education of the gifted (2nd ed.). Austin, TX: PRO-ED.
25.
MakerC. J.SchieverS. W. (2005). Teaching models in education of the gifted (3rd ed.). Austin, TX: PRO-ED.
26.
MasseyS. L. (2004). Teacher-child conversation in the preschool classroom. Early Childhood Education Journal, 31, 227-231. doi:10.1023/B:ECEJ.0000024113.69141.23
27.
McCollisterK.SaylerM. F. (2010). Lift the ceiling: Increasing rigor with critical thinking skills. Gifted Child Today, 33, 41-47.
28.
McMillanJ. H.SchumacherS. (2006). Research in education: Evidence-based enquiry (6th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson & AB.
29.
MillsC.AblardK.BrodyL. (1993). The Raven’s progressive matrices: Usefulness for identifying gifted/talented students. Roeper Review, 15, 183-186. doi:10.1080/02783199309553500
30.
NeumanS. B.McCormickS. (Eds.). (1995). Single-subject experimental research: Applications for literacy. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
31.
PorterL. (2005). Gifted young children (2nd ed.). Sydney, New South Wales, Australia: Allen & Unwin.
Riley-TillmanT. C.BurnsM. K. (2009). Evaluating educational interventions: Single-case design for measuring response to intervention. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
34.
RobertsonG. J. (2010). Raven’s progressive matrices. In WeinerI. B.CraigheadW. E. (Eds.), The Corsini encyclopedia of psychology (pp. 1-2). New York, NY: Wiley. doi:10.1002/9780470479216.corpsy0777
35.
RobinsonA.ShoreB. M.EnersenD. L. (2007). Best practices in gifted education: An evidence-based guide. Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.
36.
RobinsonN. M.RobinsonH. B. (1992). The use of standardized tests with young gifted children. In KleinP. S.TannenbaumA. J. (Eds.), To be young and gifted (pp. 141-170). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
37.
RoedellW. C.JacksonN. E.RobinsonH. B. (1980). Gifted young children. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
38.
RogersK. B. (2002). Re-forming gifted education. Scottsdale, AZ: Great Potential Press.
39.
RummelM. K.DykstraR. (1983). Analogies produced by children in relation to grade level and linguistic maturity. Research in the Teaching of English, 17, 51-60.
40.
SaylerM. (2003). Things my young child has done. In HarrisonC. (Ed.), Giftedness in early childhood (pp. 94-97). Sydney, New South Wales, Australia: GERRIC.
41.
ScheblanovaH. (1996). A longitudinal study of intellectual and creative development in gifted primary school children. High Ability Studies, 7, 51-54. doi:10.1080/0937445960070106
42.
SimonsenB.LittleC. A. (2011). Single-subject research in gifted education. Gifted Child Quarterly, 55, 158-162. doi:10.1177/0016986211398331
43.
SimonsenB.LittleC. A.FairbanksS. (2010). Effects of task difficulty and teacher attention on the off-task behavior of high-ability students with behavior issues. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 34, 245-260.
44.
Siraj-BlatchfordI.ManniL. (2008). “Would you like to tidy up now?” An analysis of adult questioning in the English Foundation Stage. Early Years, 28, 5-22. doi:10.1080/09575140701842213
45.
Siraj-BlatchfordI.SylvaK. (2004). Researching pedagogy in English pre-schools. British Educational Research Journal, 30, 713-730. doi:10.1080/0141192042000234665
46.
SmithC. T. (1977). The relationship between the type of questions, stimuli, and the oral language production of children. Research in the Teaching of English, 11, 111-116.
47.
SwassingR. H.AmidonS. R. (1991). Single-subject research with gifted and talented students. In BuchananN. K.FeldhusenJ. F. (Eds.), Conducting research and evaluation in gifted education: A handbook of methods and applications (pp. 137-156). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
48.
TawneyJ. W.GastD. L. (1984). Single subject research in special education. Columbus, OH: Charles E Merrill.
49.
TiesoC. L. (2009). Looking back and moving ahead: Quantitative research in gifted education. In MacFarlaneB.StambaughT. (Eds.), Leading in gifted education: The festschrift of Dr Joyce VanTassell-Baska (pp. 423-434). Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.
WalshR. L.KempC. R.HodgeK. J.BowesJ. M. (2012). Searching for evidence-based practice: A review of the research on educational interventions for intellectually gifted children in the early childhood years. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 35, 103-128. doi:10.1177/0162353212440610
52.
WhiteK.Fletcher-CampbellF.RidleyK. (2003). What works for gifted and talented pupils: A review of recent research. Slough, Berkshire, England: National Foundation for Educational Research.
53.
WilliamsF. E. (1972). Total creativity program for individualizing and humanizing the learning process. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology.
54.
WilliamsF. E. (1993). The cognitive-affective interaction model for enriching gifted students. In RenzulliJ. S. (Ed.), Systems and models for developing programs for the gifted and talented (pp. 461-484). Highett, Victoria, Australia: Hawker Brownlow.
55.
ZieglerA.RaulT. (2000). Myth and reality: A review of empirical studies on giftedness. High Ability Studies, 11, 113-136. doi:10.1080/13598130020001188
56.
ZuckerT. A.JusticeL. M.PiastaS. B.KaderavekJ. N. (2010). Preschool teachers’ literal and inferential questions and children’s responses during whole-class shared reading. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 25, 65-83. doi:10.1016/j.ecresq.2009.07.001
