The current study investigated the effects of a school enrichment program on the analytical, creative, and practical abilities of elementary gifted students. Forty-two students (N = 42) from the fifth and sixth grade of the Al-Shawkany School in Saudi Arabia were randomly chosen to participate in the study according to two criteria: (a) being among the top 5% on the general ability test designed for the Saudi environment and (b) a general studies achievement test score of 90% to 100%. The enrichment program lasted 6 weeks. The Aurora Battery was administered to the participants at the beginning as well as at the end of the program. The Mann-Whitney U test for independent groups yielded statistically significant differences between the medians of the experimental and control groups in analytical and creative abilities in favor of the experimental group. There were no statistically significant differences in the practical abilities and the total score. Results of the Wilcoxon Signed-Rank Test showed that there were statistically significant differences between the medians of the experimental group on pretest and posttest of the analytical and creative abilities, whereas there were no statistically significant differences in practical abilities and in the total score. A multivariate Kruskal–Wallis test revealed that there were significant differences among the three abilities in favor of analytical abilities.
Al-BarakatA.Al-KarasnehS. (2005). The contribution of school textbooks in the early grades of education in preparing young children to become effective citizens: Teachers’ perspective. Journal of Early Childhood Research, 3, 169-191.
2.
AljughaimanA. (2005). School enrichment programs for gifted children. Riyadh, Saudi Arabia: King Abdulaziz and His Companions Foundation for the Gifted.
3.
AljughaimanA.AyoubA.MaajeenyO.AbuoafT.AbunaserF.BanajahS. (2009). Evaluating gifted enrichment program in schools in Saudi Arabia. Riyadh, Saudi Arabia: Ministry of Education.
4.
AlvinoJ. (1991). Media relations: What every advocate should know about the tricks of the trade. Gifted Child Quarterly, 35, 204-209.
5.
BrodyN. (2003). Construct validation of the Sternberg triarchic abilities test: Comment and reanalysis. Intelligence, 31, 319-329.
6.
CannonJ. G.BroylesT. W.SeibelG. A.AndersonR. (2009). Summer enrichment programs: Providing agricultural literacy and career exploration to gifted and talented students. Journal of Agricultural Education, 50, 27-38.
7.
ChartH.GrigorenkoE. L.SternbergR. J. (2008). Identification: The aurora battery. In PluckerJ. E.CallahanC. M. (Eds.), Critical issues and practices in gifted education: What the research says (pp. 281-301). Waco, TX: Prufrock.
8.
CiancioloA. T.GrigorenkoE. L.JarvinL.GilG.DrebotM. E.SternbergR. J. (2006). Practical intelligence and tacit knowledge: Advancements in the measurement of developing expertise. Learning and Individual Differences, 16, 235-253.
ColemanL. J.CrossT. L. (2005). Being gifted in school: An introduction to development, guidance, and teaching. Waco, TX: Prufrock.
11.
CoxJ.DanielN.BostonB. O. (1985). Educating able learners: Programs and promising practices. Austin: University of Texas Press.
12.
DavisG.RimmS.SiegleD. (2010). Education of the gifted and talented (6th ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
13.
DelcourtM. A. B. (1993). Creative productivity among secondary school students: Combining energy, interest, and imagination. Gifted Child Quarterly, 37, 23-31.
14.
DelcourtM.CornellD.GoldbergM. (2007). Cognitive and affective learning outcomes of gifted elementary school students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 51, 359-381.
15.
DweckC. S. (1999). Self-theories: Their role in motivation, personality, and development. Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press.
16.
FeldhusenJ. (1997). Educating teachers for work with talented youth. In ColangeloN.DavisG. A. (Eds.), Handbook of gifted education (2nd ed., pp. 547-552). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
17.
FeldhusenJ. F. (1994). Talent identification and development in education (TIDE). Gifted Education International, 10, 10-15.
18.
FergusonS. (2009). Affective education: Addressing the social and emotional needs of gifted students in the classroom. In KarnesF.BeanS. (Eds.). Methods and materials for teaching the gifted (3rd ed., pp. 447-482). Waco, TX: Prufrock.
19.
FieldG. B. (2007). The effect of using Renzulli Learning on student achievement: An investigation of Internet technology on reading fluency and comprehension. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Connecticut, Storrs.
20.
GagnéF. (2003). Transforming gifts into talents: The DMGT as a developmental theory. In ColangeloN.DavisG. A. (Eds.), Handbook of gifted education (3rd ed., pp. 60-74). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
21.
GallagherJ. J.GallagherS. A. (1994). Teaching the gifted child. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
22.
GardnerH. (1983). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. New York, NY: Basic Books.
23.
GentryM.MoranC.ReisS. M. (1999). Expanding enrichment program opportunities to all: The story of one school. Gifted Child Today Magazine, 22, 36-49.
24.
GottfredsonL. S. (2003). Practical intelligence. In BallesterosR. F. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of psychological assessment (pp. 740-745). London, England: SAGE.
25.
GrigorenkoE. L.MeierE.LipkaJ.MohattG.YanezE.SternbergR. J. (2004). Academic and practical intelligence: A case study of the Yup’ik in Alaska. Learning and Individual Differences, 14, 183-207.
26.
GrigorenkoE. L.SternbergR. J. (2001). Analytical, creative, and practical intelligence as predictors of self-reported adaptive functioning: A case study in Russia. Intelligence, 29, 57-73.
27.
HébertT. P. (1993). Reflections at graduation: The long-term impact of elementary school experiences in creative productivity. Roeper Review, 16, 22-28.
28.
KalkanM.ErsanliE. (2008). The effects of the marriage enrichment program based on the cognitive behavioral approach on the marital adjustment of couples. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 8, 977-986.
29.
KarnesF. A.BeanS. M. (Eds.). (2009). Methods and materials for teaching the gifted (3rd ed.). Waco, TX: Prufrock.
30.
KaufmanJ. C.SternbergR. J. (Eds.) (2006). The international handbook of creativity. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
31.
King Abdulaziz & His Companion Foundation for Giftedness and Creativity. (2010). Evaluating summer gifted programs. Riyadh, Saudi Arabia: Mawhiba.
32.
LandrumM.CallahanC.ShakleeB. (Eds.). (2001). Aiming for excellence: Gifted program standards. Waco, TX: Prufrock.
33.
MandelmanS. D.TanM.AljughaimanA. M.GrigorenkoE. L. (2010). Intellectual giftedness: Economic, political, cultural, and psychological considerations. Learning and Individual Differences, 20, 287-297.
34.
MoonT. R.CallahanC. M.TomlinsonC. A.MillerE. M. (2002). Middle school classrooms: Teachers’ reported practices and student perceptions. 2002 NAGC Research Briefs. Washington, DC: National Association for Gifted Children.
NewmanT.BrownW.HartL.MacomberD.DoyleN.KornilovS.. . . GrigorenkoE. (2009). The Leonardo laboratory: Developing targeted programs for academic underachievers with visual-spatial gifts. Talent Development and Excellence, 1, 67-76.
37.
OlenchakF.RenzulliJ. (1989). The effectiveness of the schoolwide enrichment model on selected aspects of elementary school change. Gifted Child Quarterly, 33, 36-46.
38.
PerkinsD. (1995). Outsmarting IQ: The emerging science of learnable intelligence. New York, NY: Free Press.
39.
ReisS. M. (1991). The need for clarification in research designed to examine gender differences in achievement and accomplishment. Roeper Review, 13, 193-198.
40.
ReisS.EckertR.McCoachD.JacobsJ.CoyneM. (2008). Using enrichment reading practices to increase reading fluency, comprehension, and attitudes. Journal of Educational Research, 101, 299-314.
41.
ReisS. M.RenzulliJ. S. (2003). Research related to the schoolwide enrichment triad model. Gifted Education International, 18, 15-39.
42.
ReisS. M.RenzulliJ. S. (2010). Is there still a need for gifted education? An examination of current research. Learning and Individual Differences, 20, 308-317.
43.
RenzulliJ. (2005). Applying gifted education pedagogy to total talent development for all students. Theory Into Practice, 44, 80-89.
44.
RenzulliJ. S.SytsmaR. E. (2008). Intelligences outside the normal curve: Co-cognitive traits that contribute to giftedness. In PluckerJ.CallahanC. (Eds.), Critical issues and practices in gifted education: What the research says (pp. 57-84). Waco, TX: Prufrock.
45.
RindermannH.SailerM.ThompsonJ. (2009). The impact of smart fractions, cognitive ability of politicians and average competence of peoples on social development. Talent Development and Excellence, 1, 3-25.
46.
StemlerS. E.GrigorenkoE. L.JarvinL.SternbergR. J. (2006). Using the theory of successful intelligence as a basis for augmenting AP exams in psychology and statistics. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 31, 344-376.
47.
StemlerS.SternbergR. J.GrigorenkoE. L.JarvinL.SharpesD. K. (2009). Using the theory of successful intelligence as a framework for developing assessments in AP Physics. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 34, 195-209.
48.
SternbergR. J. (1995). Theory and measurement of tacit knowledge as a part of practical intelligence. Zeitschrift fur Psychologie, 203, 319-313.
49.
SternbergR. J. (1997). Successful intelligence. New York, NY: Plume.
50.
SternbergR. J. (1999a). Intelligence as developing expertise. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 24, 359-375.
51.
SternbergR. J. (1999b). The theory of successful intelligence. Review of General Psychology, 3, 292-316.
52.
SternbergR. J. (2003). Teaching for successful intelligence: Principles, practices, and outcomes. Educational and Child Psychology, 20, 6-18.
53.
SternbergR. J. (2004). Successful intelligence as a basis for entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing, 19, 189-201.
54.
SternbergR. J. (2005a). Accomplishing the goals of affirmative action—with or without affirmative action. Change, 37, 6-13.
55.
SternbergR. J. (2005b). The theory of successful intelligence. Interamerican Journal of Psychology, 39, 189-202.
56.
SternbergR. J. (2006). How can we simultaneously enhance both academic excellence and diversity?College and University, 81, 17-23.
57.
SternbergR. J. (2010). Assessment of gifted students for identification purposes: New techniques for a new millennium. Learning and Individual Differences, 20, 327-336.
58.
SternbergR. J.CastejónJ. L.PrietoM. D.HautamäkiJ.GrigorenkoE. L. (2001). Confirmatory factor analysis of the Sternberg triarchic abilities test in three international samples: An empirical test of the triarchic theory of intelligence. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 17, 1-16.
59.
SternbergR. J.DavidsonJ. E. (Eds.). (2005). Conceptions of giftedness (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
60.
SternbergR. J.ForsytheG. B.HedlundJ.HorvathJ.SnookS.WilliamsW. M.GrigorenkoE. L. (2000). Practical intelligence in everyday life. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
61.
SternbergR. J.GrigorenkoE. L. (2000). Teaching for successful intelligence. Arlington Heights, IL: Skylight Training.
62.
SternbergR. J.GrigorenkoE. L. (2007). Teaching for successful intelligence (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
63.
SternbergR. J.GrigorenkoE. L. (Eds.). (2002). The general factor of intelligence: How general is it?Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
64.
SternbergR. J.JarvinL.GrigorenkoE. L. (2009). Teaching for wisdom, intelligence, creativity, and success. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
65.
SternbergR. J.JarvinL.GrigorenkoE. L. (2011). Explorations of the nature of giftedness. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
66.
SternbergR. J.LubartT. I.KaufmanJ. C.PretzJ. E. (2005). Creativity. In HolyoakK. J.MorrisonR. (Eds.), Cambridge handbook of thinking and reasoning (pp. 351-369). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
67.
SternbergR. J.WagnerR. K.WilliamsW. M.HorvathJ. A. (1995). Testing common sense. American Psychologist, 50, 912-927.
68.
SubotnikR. F.RickoffR. (2010). Should eminence based on outstanding innovation be the goal of gifted education and talent development? Implications for policy and research. Learning and Individual Differences, 20, 358-364.
69.
TanM. T.AljughaimanA.ElliottJ. G.KornilovS. A.Ferrando PrietoM.BoldenD. S.. . . GrigorenkoE. L. (2008). Considering language, culture, and cognitive abilities: The international translation and adaptation of the Aurora Assessment Battery. In GrigorenkoE. L. (Ed.), Assessment of abilities and competencies in the era of globalization. New York, NY: Springer.
70.
TanH.LibbyR. (1997). Tacit managerial versus technical knowledge as determinants of audit expertise in the field. Journal of Accounting Research, 35, 97-113.
71.
WestbergK. L. (1999). What happens to young, creative producers?NAGC: Creativity and Curriculum Divisions’ Newsletter, 3, 13-16.
72.
WheelerS.WaiteS.BromfieldC. (2002). Promoting creative thinking through the use of ICT. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 18, 367-378.
