Restricted accessOtherFirst published online 2000-9
Gifted and Nongifted Middle School Students: Are Their Attitudes toward School Different as Measured by the New Affective Instrument,My Class Activities …?
This paper describes a study in which the attitudes of gifted middle school students were compared with other middle school students, using a survey instrument that measures the dimensions of interest, challenge, choice, and enjoyment—dimensions rooted deeply in gifted education and central to learning. Although statistical differences were found between the two groups, the effect size was so small that the findings were interpreted to indicate that gifted students viewed their class activities essentially the same as the other students in this study. Each group reported their class activities were only slightly more than “sometimes” interesting, challenging, and enjoyable and that they were slightly more than “seldom” offered choices in their educational activities. These findings offer insight into how gifted and other students view their class activities and have implications for practices that may affect motivation and learning for all students.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AmesC. (1992). Classrooms: Goals, structures, and student motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 261–271.
2.
AndermanE. M.MaehrM. L. (1994). Motivation and schooling in the middle grades. Review of Educational Research, 64, 287–309.
3.
ArchambaultF. X.WestbergK.BrownS. B.HallmarkB. W.EmmonsC. L.ZhangW. (1993). Regular classroom practices with gifted students: Results of a national survey of classroom teachers. Storrs, CT: National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented.
4.
AsherS.HymelS.WigfieldS. (1978). Influence of topic interest on children's reading comprehension. Journal of Reading Behavior, 10, 35–48.
5.
BanduraA. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychology Review, 84, 191–215.
6.
BernsteinM. (1955). Relationship between interest and reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Research, 49, 283–288.
7.
BloomB. S. (Ed.). (1985). Developing talent in young people. New York: Ballantine Books.
8.
BiosP. (1962). On adolescence: A psychoanalytic interpretation. New York: Free Press of Glencoe.
9.
BlythD. A.SimmonsR. G.Carlton-FordS. (1983). The adjustment of early adolescents to school transitions. Journal of Early Adolescence, 3, 105–120.
10.
CliffordM. (1990). Students need challenge, not easy success. Educational Leadership, 48, 22–26.
11.
ClinkenbeardP. K. (1991). Unfair expectations: A pilot study of middle school students' comparisons of gifted and regular classes. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 15, 56–63.
12.
CohenJ. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
13.
CrockettM. (1994). Restructuring schools for early adolescent learners. NASSP-Bulletin, 78, 70–78.
14.
CsikszentmihalyiM. (1990). Literacy and intrinsic motivation. Daedalus, 119, 115–140.
15.
CurrierL. (1986). A declaration of independence: A reed for middle school educators. Middle School Journal, 17 (2), 4–6.
16.
DeciE. L.RyanR. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York: Plenum.
17.
DeweyJ. (1913). Interest and effort in education. New York: Houghton Mifflin.
18.
DeweyJ. (1916). Democracy and education. New York: The Free Press.
19.
EcclesJ. S.MidgleyC. (1989). Stage-environment fit: Developmentally appropriate classrooms for young adolescents. In AmesC.AmesR. (Eds.), Research on motivation in education: Vol. 3, Goals and cognition (pp. 13–44). New York: Academic.
20.
EcclesJ. S.MidgleyC.AdlerT. (1984). Grade-related changes in the school environment: Effects on achievement motivation. In NichollsJ. G. (Ed.), The development of achievement motivation (pp. 283–331). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
21.
EcclesJ. S.MidgleyC.WigfieldA.BuchannanC. M.ReumanD.FlannaganC.MacIverD. (1993). Development during adolescence: The impact of stage-environment fit on adolescents' experiences in schools and families. American Psychologist, 48, 90–101.
22.
EcclesJ. S.WigfieldA.FlanaganC. A.MillerC.ReumanD. A.YeeD. (1989). Self-concepts, domain values, and self-esteem: Relations and changes at early adolescence. Journal of Personality, 57, 283–310.
23.
EcclesJ.WigfieldA.MidgleyC.ReumanD.McIverD.FeldlauferH. (1993). Negative effects of traditional middle schools on students' motivation. Elementary School Journal, 93, 553–574.
24.
EriksonE. (1968). Identity: Youth and crisis. New York: Norton.
25.
FeldlauferH.MidgleyC.EcclesJ. S. (1989). Student/teacher relations and attitudes toward mathematics before and after the transition to junior high school. Child Development60, 981–982.
26.
FeldhusenJ. F.KrollM. D. (1991). Boredom or challenge for the academically talented in school. Gifted Education International, 7, 80–81.
27.
FischerK. W. (1980). Learning as the development of organized behavior. Journal of Structured Learning, 3, 253–267.
28.
GableR. K.WolfM. B. (1993). Instrument development in the affective domain. Boston: Kluwer.
29.
GallagherJ. J. (1985). Teaching the gifted child (3rd ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
30.
GallagherJ.HarradineC. C.ColemanM. R. (1997). Challenged or bored? Gifted students' views on their schooling. Roeper Review, 19, 132–136.
31.
GardnerH. (1991). The unschooled mind: How children think and how schools should teach. New York: Basic Books.
32.
GentryM. L.GableR. K.RezendesG. (1999, April). Assessing middle school students' perceptions of classroom activities: Rationale and instrumentation. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Canada.
33.
GentryM. L.MaxfieldL. R.GableR. K. (1998). Construct validity evidence for enrichment clusters and regular classrooms: Are they different as students see them?Educational and Psychological Measurement, 58, 258–274.
34.
GentryM. L.OwenS. V. (1999). An investigation of total school flexible cluster grouping on identification, achievement, and classroom practices. Gifted Child Quarterly, 43, 224–243.
35.
GentryM. L.RizzaM. G.GableR. K. (in press). Gifted students' perceptions of their class activities: Differences among rural, urban, and suburban student attitudes. Gifted Child Quarterly.
36.
GoodT. L.BrophyJ. E. (1987). Looking in classrooms (4th ed.). New York: Harper & Row.
37.
GoodladJ. I. (1984). A place called school. New York: McGraw Hill.
38.
HoltJ. (1983). Escape from childhood. In NollJ. W. (Ed.), Taking sides: Clashing views on controversial educational issues (2nd ed., pp. 40–44). Guilford, CT:Dushkin Publishing Group.
39.
HootsteinE. W. (1994, May). Motivating middle school students. Middle School Journal, 31–35.
40.
HopfenbergW. S.LevinH. A. (1993). The accelerated schools resource guide. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
41.
JamesW. (1890). The principles of psychology. London: MacMillan.
42.
JohnsonE. G. (1998). Linking the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) and the Third International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS): A technical report. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education.
43.
KunkelM. A.ChapaB.PattersonG.WallingD. D. (1992). Experience of giftedness: “Eight great gripes” six years later. Roeper Review, 15, 10–14.
44.
LepperM. R.HodellM. (1989). Intrinsic motivation in the classroom. In AmesC.AmesR. (Eds.), Research on motivation in education (Vol. 3, pp. 73–105). San Diego, CA:Academic Press.
45.
MakerC. J. (1982). Curriculum development for the gifted. Austin, TX: PRO-ED.
46.
MaloneT. W.LepperM. R. (1987). Making learning fun: A taxonomy of intrinsic motivation for learning. In SnowR. E.FarrM. J. (Eds.), Aptitude, learning, and instruction (Vol. 3, pp. 223–253). Hillsdale, NJ:Erlbaum.
47.
MidgleyC.AndermanE.HicksL. (1995). Differences between elementary and middle school teachers and students: A goal theory approach. Journal of Early Adolescence, 15, 90–113.
48.
MooreD. W. (1983, April). Impact of school grade-organization patterns on seventh- and eighth-grade students in K-8 and junior high school. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the New England Research Association, Rockport, ME.
49.
ParisS. G.TurnerJ. C. (1994). Situated motivation. In PintrichP. R.BrownD. R.WeinsteinC. E. (Eds.), Student motivation, cognition, and learning: Essays in honor of Wilbert J. McKeachie (pp. 213–237). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
50.
ParkeB. (1989). Gifted students in regular classrooms. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
51.
PassowA. H. (1982). Differentiated curricula for the gifted/talented. Ventura, CA: Leadership Training Institute on the Gifted and Talented.
52.
PhenixP. H. (1964). Realms of meaning. New York: McGraw-Hill.
53.
PollakJ.FredaP. (1997). Humor, learning and socialization in middle level classrooms. The Clearinghouse, 70, 176–178.
54.
PowerC. (1981). Changes in students' attitudes toward science in the transition between Australian elementary and secondary schools. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 18, 33–39.
55.
ReisS. M.WestbergK. L.KulikowichJ.CaillardF.HébertT.PluckerJ.PurcellJ. H.RogersJ. B.SmistJ. M. (1993). Why not let high-ability students start school in January? The curriculum compacting study. Storrs, CT: National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented.
56.
RenzulliJ. S. (1978). What makes giftedness? Reexamining a definition. Phi Delta Kappan, 60, 180–184, 261.
57.
RenzulliJ. S. (1988). The multiple menu model for developing differentiated curriculum and instruction for the gifted and talented. Gifted Child Quarterly, 36, 298–309.
58.
RenzulliJ. S. (1994). Schools for talent development: A comprehensive plan for total school improvement. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
59.
RenzulliJ. S.ReisS. M. (1985). The schoolwide enrichment model: A comprehensive plan for educational excellence. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
60.
RobinsonA. (1991). Cooperative learning and the academically talented student. Storrs, CT: National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented.
61.
RoeserR. W.EcclesJ. S. (1998). Adolescents' perceptions of middle school: Relation to longitudinal changes in academic and psychological adjustment. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 81, 123–158.
62.
RogersK. B. (1991). The relationship of grouping practices to the education of the gifted and talented learner. Storrs, CT: National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented.
63.
RothmanR. (1990, November 7). Educators focus attention on ways to boost student motivation. Education Week, 11–17.
64.
RyanR. M.ConnellJ. P.DeciE. L. (1985). A motivational analysis of self-determination and self-regulation in education. In AmesC.AmesR. (Eds.), Research on motivation in education (Vol. 2, pp. 13–51). San Diego, CA:Academic Press.
65.
SchiefeleU. (1991). Interests, learning, and motivation. Educational Psychologist, 26, 299–323.
66.
SchlichterC. (1986). Talents unlimited: Applying the multiple talent approach to mainstream and gifted programs. In RenzulliJ. S. (Ed.), Systems and models for developing programs for the gifted and talented (pp. 352–390). Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
67.
ShoreB. M.CornellD. G.RobinsonA.WardV. S. (1991). Recommended practices in gifted education. New York: Teachers College Press.
68.
SilverE. A. (1998). Improving mathematics in middle school: Lessons from TIMSS and related research. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
69.
SimmonsR. G.BlythD. A. (1987). Moving into adolescence. Hawthorne, NY: de Gruyter.
70.
SiskD. (1988). The bored and disinterested gifted child: Going through school lockstep. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 11, 5–14.
71.
SlavinR. E. (1984). Team-assisted individualization. In WangM. C.WalbergH. J. (Eds.), Adapting instruction to individual differences (pp. 236–253). Berkeley, CA: McCutchan.
72.
SlavinR. E. (1996). Cooperative learning in middle and secondary schools. The Clearing House, 69, 200–204.
73.
StevensK. (1980). The effect of topic interest on reading comprehension of higher ability students. Journal of Educational Research, 73, 365–368.
74.
TabachnickB. G.FidellL. S. (1989). Using multivariate statistics. New York: HarperCollins.
75.
TassinariM. (1996). Hands-on projects take students beyond the book. Social Studies Review, 34, 16–20.
76.
TobiasS. (1994). Interest, prior knowledge, and learning. Review of Educational Research, 64, 37–54.
77.
TomlinsonC. A.CallahanC. M. (1992). Contributions of gifted education to general education in a time of change. Gifted Child Quarterly, 36, 183–189.
78.
TreffingerD. (1986). Fostering effective independent learning through individualized programming. In RenzulliJ. S. (Ed.), Systems and models for developing programs for the gifted and talented (pp. 429–460). Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
79.
TurnerJ.MeyerD. (1995). Motivating students to learn: Lessons from a fifth-grade math class. Middle School Journal, 27, 18–25.
80.
UjiieJ.KrashenS. (1996). Comic book reading, reading enjoyment, pleasure reading among middle class and Chapter 1 middle school students. Reading Improvement, 33, 51–54.
81.
U. S. Department of Education, National Commission on Excellence. (1983). A nation at risk: An imperative for educational reform. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
82.
U. S. Department of Education. (1993). National excellence: A case for developing America's talent. Washington, DC: Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Government Printing Office.
83.
U. S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. (1971). Education of the gifted and talented. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
84.
VygotskyL. S. (1962). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.
85.
VygotskyL. S. (1987). Thinking and speech. In RieberR. W.CartonA. S. (Eds.), The collected works of L. S. Vygotsky: Volume 1-Problems of general psychology. New York: Plenum Press.
86.
WangM. C.LindvallC. M. (1984). Individual differences in school learning environments: Theory, research and design. In GordonE. W. (Ed.), Review of research in education (Vol. 11, pp. 161–225). Washington, DC:American Educational Research Association.
87.
WardV. (1961). Educating the gifted: An axiomatic approach. Columbus, OH: Merrill.
88.
WardV. (1980). Differential education for the gifted. Ventura, CA: Ventura Superintendent of Schools Office.
89.
WestbergK. L.ArchambaultF. X.DobynsS. M.SalvinT. J. (1993). An observational study of instructional and curricular practices used with gifted and talented students in regular classrooms. Storrs, CT: The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented.
90.
WilliamsF. (1986). The cognitive-affective interaction model for enriching gifted programs. In RenzulliJ. S. (Ed.), Systems and models for developing programs for the gifted and talented (pp. 461–484). Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
