At the beginning of kindergarten, it often happens that a gifted child is not doing well because he or she may be forced to underachieve. A longitudinal case study clarifies this process. The analysis and discussion of the problems reveal clues for prevention in kindergarten and subsequent forms of education. Each child entering kindergarten could be included in a screening procedure in which parents and teacher inform each other about the behavior of the child. Relevant differences in development between students could be basic to part of the pedagogical, play, and didactic characteristics provided for in kindergarten. The curricular and instructional aspects of this “student-based instruction” effect changes in teachers' pedagogical focus and helps them in realizing challenging adjustments in the play and learning activities offered. Two cases in which suggested strategies are utilized illustrate what this means for gifted children and their teachers. Positive effects may become greatest for students whose level of development is either clearly higher or lower than that of their age mates in one or more aspects.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Ames, C. (1984). Competitive, co-operative and individualistic goal structures: A cognitive-motivational analysis. In R. Ames & C. Ames (Eds.), Student motivation (pp. 177-207). New York: Academic Press.
2.
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.
3.
Baroody, A. J. (1993). Fostering the mathematical learning of young children. In B. Spodek (Ed.), Handbook of research on the education of young children (pp. 151-175). New York: MacMillan.
4.
Beirn, R., Kinsey, D. C., & McGinn, N. F. (1972). Antecedents and consequences of early school leaving. Educational Documentation and Information, 46(182), 1-116.
5.
Berg, P. van der, Pennings, A., & Span, P. (1985). Het Gross-Vormbord [The Gross-Vorm test]. Nijmegen, the Netherlands: Berkhout.
6.
Bleichrodt, N., Resing, W. C. M., & Zaal, J. N. (1994). Schoolgedrag beoordelingslijst A en B (Revised) [School behavior assessment list A and B (Revised)]. Lisse, the Netherlands: Swets & Zeitlinger.
7.
Butler-Por, N. (1987). Underachievers in school: Issues and intervention. Chicester: Wiley.
8.
Byrne, B. (1998). The foundation of literacy. The child's acquisition of the alphabetic principle. Hove, United Kingdom: Psychology Press.
9.
Collier, G. (1994). Social origins of mental ability. New York: Wiley.
10.
Cropley, A. J., & Dehn, D. (Eds.). (1996). Fostering the growth of high ability: European perspectives. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
11.
Driessen, G. W. J. M. (1997). Voorbereidend lezen en rekenen in kleutergroepen: werkwijzen en resultaten [Preliminary reading and arithmetic in kindergarten: Ways to work and results]. Tijdschrift voor Onderwijsresearch, 22, 145-160.
12.
Durkin, D. (1966). Children who read early. New York: Teachers College Press.
13.
Gallagher, J. J. (1975). Teaching the gifted child. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
14.
Goleman, D. (1995). Emotional intelligence. New York: Bantam Books.
15.
Grol, C., & Zengerink, G. (1990). Ik kan goed onderhandelen [I can negotiate]. Groningen, the Netherlands: Pedologisch Instituut Noord-Nederland `Van Andel-Ripke'.
16.
Heinbokel, A. (1988). Hochbegabte. Erkennen, Probleme, Lösungswege [The gifted. Identification, problems, solutions]. Frankfurt, Germany: Deutsches Institut für Internationale Pädagogische Forschung.
17.
Jegge, J. (1976). Dummheit ist lernbar. Erfahrungen mit `Schulversagern' [Learning to be stupid. Experiences with dropouts]. München, Germany: Kösel.
18.
Jones, B. F., Rasmussen, C. M., & Moffitt, M. C. (1997). Real-life problem solving. A collaborative approach to interdisciplinary learning. Washington, DC: American Psychological Asssociation.
19.
Khatena, J. (1982). Educational psychology of the gifted. New York: Wiley.
20.
King, E., O'Shea, A. A., Joy Patyk, L. I., Popp, L. A., Runions, T., Shearer, J., & Hendren, R. T. (1985). Programming for the gifted. Ontario, Canada: Ministry of Education.
21.
Kinnunen, R., & Vauras, M. (1995). Comprehension monitoring and the level of comprehension in high- and low-achieving primary school children's reading. Learning and Instruction, 5, 143-165.
22.
Lando, B. Z., & Schneider, B. H. (1997). Intellectual contributions and mutual support among developmentally advanced children in homogeneous and heterogeneous work / discussion groups. Gifted Child Quarterly, 41, 44-57.
23.
Magnusson, D., & Allen, V. L. (Eds.) (1983). Human development, an interactional perspective. New York: Academic Press.
24.
Marjoram, T. (1988). Teaching able children. London: Kogan Page.
25.
Marjoribanks, K. (1994). Families, schools and children's learning: A study of children's learning environments. International Journal of Educational Research, 21, 441-555.
26.
Martlew, M., & Sorsby, A. (1995). The precursors of writing: Graphic representation in preschool children. Learning and Instruction, 5, 1-19.
27.
Mehlhorn, H. G. (1988). Personlichkeitsentwicklung Hochbegabter [Personality development of the gifted]. Berlin, Germany: Volk und Wissen Volkseigener Verlag.
28.
Meisels, S. J., Steele, D. M., & Quinn-Leering, K. (1993). Testing, tracking, and retaining young children: An analysis of research and social policy. In B. Spodek (Ed.), Handbook of research on the education of young children (pp. 279-292). New York: MacMillan.
29.
Mooij, T. (1991). Schoolproblemen van hoogbegaafde kinderen [School problems of gifted children]. Muiderberg, the Netherlands: Coutinho.
30.
Mooij, T. (1992). Predicting (under)achievement of gifted children. European Journal for High Ability, 3, 59-74.
31.
Mooij, T. (1993). Family-school cooperation on behalf of gifted children. In F. Smit, W. van Esch, & H. J. Walberg (Eds.), Parental involvement in education (pp. 107-117). Nijmegen, the Netherlands: University of Nijmegen, Institute for Applied Social Sciences.
32.
Mooij, T., & Smeets, E. (1997). Beginkenmerken van leerlingen in de basisschool [Entry characteristics of students in kindergarten]. Nijmegen, the Netherlands: University of Nijmegen, Institute for Applied Social Sciences.
33.
Parkhurst, H. (1922). Education on the Dalton Plan. New York: Dutton.
34.
Pellegrini, A. D., & Boyd, B. (1993). The role of play in early childhood development and education: Issues in definition and function. In B. Spodek (Ed.), Handbook of research on the education of young children (pp. 105-121). New York: MacMillan.
35.
Pendarvis, E. D., Howley, A. A., & Howley, C. B. (1990). The abilities of gifted children. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
36.
Renzulli, J. S., & Reis, S. M. (1985). The schoolwide enrichment model. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
37.
Shepard, L. A., & Graue, M. E. (1993). The morass of school readiness screening: Research on test use and test validity. In B. Spodek (Ed.), Handbook of research on the education of young children (pp. 293-305). New York: MacMillan.
38.
Spodek, B., & Clark-Brown, P. (1993). Curriculum alternatives in early childhood education: A historical perspective. In B. Spodek (Ed.), Handbook of research on the education of young children (pp. 91-104). New York: MacMillan.
39.
Westberg, K. L., & Archambault, F. X. (1997). A multi-site case study of successful classroom practices for high ability students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 41, 42-51.
