AusubelD. P., Theory and “Problems of Adolescent Development. New York, Grune and Stratton, 1954.
3.
JaneBeasley, “Underachievement: Review of the Literature.” Talented Youth Project, HMLI, Teachers College, Columbia University, March, 1957 (Unpublished).
4.
BowmanLillie L., “Educational Opportunities for Gifted Children in California,” California Journal of Educational Research, 6:195–99, November, 1955.
5.
California Elementary School Administrators Association, The Gifted Child in the Elementary School, Twenty-sixth Yearbook.Oakland, the Association, 1954.
6.
California State Department of Education, “Study Project on Programs for Gifted Pupils,” Progress Report No. 1. Prepared by MartinsonRuth A..” January 14, 1958 (Mimeographed).
7.
Cheltenham Township School District, Program for Gifted Students. Interpretive Bulletin No. 1. Elkins Park, Pa., the District. January, 1958.
8.
ConantJames B.The Identification and Education of the Academically Talented Student in the Secondary School. NEA Conference Report.Washington, D. C., 1958.
9.
ConklinA. M., “A Study of the Personalities of Gifted Students by Means of the Control Group,” American Journal of Orthopsychiatry1:178–83, January1931.
10.
Dade County Public Schools, “Teaching the Talented.” Miami, The County, 1956 (Multilithed).
11.
Dade County Public Schools, “Schools Give the Time: Lab Doors Opened for Brighter Pupils,” HeraldMiami. (For further information, write to Dade County Public Schools, Dade County, Florida.)
12.
DavisFrederick B., “The Identification and Classroom Behavior of Elementary School Children Each of Whom Is Gifted in at Least One of Five Different Characteristics.” Hunter College, New York City, May1957. (Typewritten manuscript of a project).
13.
MonroeDrews Elizabeth, “A Four-Year Study of 150 Gifted Adolescents” A report presented to the American Psychological Association, December, 1957 (Mimeographed).
14.
EdwardFrankel, “A Comparative Study of Achieving and Underachieving High School Boys of Superior Intellectual Ability.” (Unfinished Ph.D. dissertation. Yeshiva University, New York City.)
15.
Fund for the Advancement of Education, They Went to College.Evaluation Report, No. 2. New York City, the Fund, 1957.
16.
GowanJohn C., “A Survey of Programs for Gifted Children in California Elementary School Districts.” Los Angeles, Los AngelesState College, 1957 (Mimeographed).
HavighurstRobert J.; EugeneStivers,; and DehaanRobert F., Survey of the Education of Gifted Children. Supplementary Educational Monograph No. 83. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1955.
19.
JosephJustman, “Academic Achievement of Intellectually Gifted Accelerants and Non-Accelerants in Senior High School.” School Review62:469–73, November1954.
20.
Kansas State Department of Public Instruction, Division of Special Education, “The Kansas Program of Special Education for Intellectually Gifted Students.” January 1, 1955. (Mimeographed).
21.
SteveKirshner, Testing Generalizations About the Gifted in a New York City Junior High School Core Class. (Unpublished Ed.D. Project, Teachers College, Columbia University, New York City, 1957.)
22.
LehmanH. C., Age and Achievement. Princeton, N. J.: Princeton University Press, 1953.
23.
LeonLessinger, and MaySeagoe,. An Evaluation of an Enriched Program in Teaching Geometry to Gifted Students. U. of Calif., 1956. (Mimeographed.)
24.
HoraceMann, “How Real Are Friendships of Gifted and Typical Children in a Program of Partial Segregation?” Exceptional Children, 23:199–201, February, 1957.
25.
National Merit Scholarship Corporation, Annual Report for the Year EndingJune 30, 1956. Evanston, Illinois.
26.
New York City Board of Education, Demonstration Guidance Project, Manhattanville Junior High School 43, Manhattan, and George Washington High School.Progress Report, 1956–57. New York, The Board, June, 1957.
27.
Pittsburgh Schools, Outstanding Eighth-Graders Study Algebra in the Elementary School, Vol. XXII, No. 2, November-December1954. Pittsburgh, Pa.
28.
PlautRichard L., Blue Print for Talent Searching: America's Hidden Manpower. New York, National Scholarship Service and Fund for Negro Students, 1957.
29.
Portland Public Schools, “A Report Summarizing Four Years of Progress by the Cooperative Program for Students of Exceptional Talent.” Portland, Oregon, March1957 (Mimeographed).
30.
AnneRoe, Making of a Scientist. New York, Dodd, Mead and Company, 1953.
31.
ShannonDan C, “What Research Says About Acceleration,” Phi Delta Kappan, 22:70–72, November, 1957.
32.
St. Paul Public Schools, Guide for Instruction in Mathematics 9-D, Curriculum Bulletin No. 61. St. Paul, Minn., 1957.
33.
BrewsterSmith M., “Conference on Non-intellective Determinants of Achievement,” Social Science Research Council Items, 7: 13–18, June, 1953.
34.
StoufferSamuel A., “The Student-Problems Related to the Use of Academic Ability,” in ConantJames B., The Identification and Education of the Academically Talented Student in the Secondary School, NEA Conference Report, 1958.
Talented Youth Project, Horace Mann-Lincoln Institute of School Experimentation, Teachers College, Columbia University, New York City.Current Research Projects (unpublished).
37.
TermanL. M., and others, The Gifted Child Grows Up. Genetic Studies of Genius, Vol. IV. Stanford, Calif., Stanford University Press, 1947.
38.
TermanL. M., “The Discovery and Encouragement of Exceptional Talent,” American Psychologist, 9:221–30, June, 1954.
39.
TrimbleVernon E., “Provisions for Gifted Students in California Public Secondary Schools,” California Guidance Newsletter, 9:3–6, March, 1955.
40.
University of Illinois Committee on School Mathematics.Revised First Course—Integrated Mathematics. Urbana, III, University High School, 1957.
41.
GuyWagner, “What Schools Are Doing in Challenging the Rapid Learner.” Education, 78:59–62, September, 1956.