No two humans are intrinsically identical. Consequently, all creative efforts deserve to be seriously evaluated on the basis of individual exclusivity. … As we look to the future, more individuals are going to demand individual creative outlets. It becomes our responsibility to make available to every individual the opportunities for constructive growth.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AmabileT. (1983). The social psychology of creativity. New York: Springer-Verlag.
2.
BaldwinA. (1985). Programs for the gifted and talented: Issues concerning minority populations. In HorowitzF.O'BrienM. (Eds.), The gifted and talented: Developmental pespectives (pp. 223–249). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
3.
BarronF. (1963). Creativity and psychological health. Princeton, NJ: Van Nostrand.
4.
BarronF. (1969). Creative person and creative process. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
5.
BaumS.OwenS. (1988). High ability/learning disabled students: How are they different?Gifted Child Quarterly, 32, 321–326.
6.
BloomB. (1963). Report on creativity research by the examiner's office of the University of Chicago. In TaylorC.BarronF. (Eds.), Scientific creativity: Its recognition and development (pp. 251–264). New York: Wiley.
7.
BloomB. (Ed.). (1985). Developing talent in young people. New York: Ballantine Books.
8.
BoskellJ. (1988). Teaching gifted children in the regular classroom: The enrichment triad model in English classes of mixed-ability students. In RenzulliJ. (Ed.), Technical report of research studies related to the revolving door identification model. (Research report series, 2nd ed., vol. 2). Storrs, CT: University of Connecticut, School of Education.
9.
BrandweinP.PassowA. (Eds.). (1988). Gifted young in science: Potential through performance. Washington, D. C.: National Science Teachers Association.
10.
BullB. (1985). Eminence and precocity: An examination of the justification of education for the gifted and talented. Teachers College Record, 871–19.
11.
BumsD. (1987). The effects of group training activities on students' creative productivity. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Connecticut.
12.
CarterK. (1989). An analysis of the most prominent gifted journal articles since the Marland Report: Implications for researchers. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.
13.
CattellR.ButcherH. (1968). The prediction of achievement and creativity. New York: Bobbs-Merrill.
14.
ConantJ. (1983). Modern science and modern man (2nd ed.). Brooklyn, NY: Greenwood Press.
15.
CooperC. (1983). Administrators' attitudes toward gifted programs based on enrichment triad/revolving door identification model: Case studies in decision-making. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Connecticut.
16.
CoxC. (1983). The early mental traits of 300 geniuses. In AlbertR. (Ed.), Genius and eminence (pp. 46–51). Elmsford, NY: Pergamon Press.
17.
De LoneR. (1979). Small futures: Children, inequality, and the limits of liberal reform. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. (Carnegie Council on Children).
18.
DelisleJ.ReisS.GubbinsE. (1981). The revolving door identification model and programming model. Exceptional Children, 48, 152–156.
19.
DelisleJ.RenzulliJ. (1982). The revolving door identification and programming model: Correlates of creative production. Gifted Child Quarterly, 26, 89–95.
20.
FeldhusenJ. (1989). Synthesis of research on gifted youth. Educational Leadership, 46(6), 6–11.
21.
FrasierM. (1987). The identification of gifted black students: Developing new perspectives. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 10, 155–180.
22.
GallagherJ. (1983, May). Keynote speech. International Conference of Gifted Students. Ontario, Canada: Sheridan College.
23.
GallagherJ.KinneyL. (Eds.). (1974). Talent delayed—Talent denied: A conference report. Reston, VA: Foundation for Exceptional Children.
24.
GardnerH. (1983). Frames of mind. New York: Basic Books.
25.
GouldS. (1981). The mismeasure of man. New York: W. W. Norton.
26.
GubbinsE. (1982). Revolving door identification model: Characteristics of talent pool students. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Connecticut.
27.
HogeR. (1988). Issues in the definition and measurement of the giftedness construct. Educational Researcher, 17(7), 12–16.
28.
KarafelisP. (1986). The effects of the Tri-Art drama curriculum on the reading comprehension of students with varying levels of cognitive ability. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Connecticut.
29.
KirschenbaumR. (1983). Let's cut out the cut-off score in identification of the gifted. Roeper Review, 5(4), 6–10.
30.
MacKinnonD. (1962). The nature and nurture of creative talent. American Psychologist, 17, 484–495.
MonksF.VanBoxtelH.RoelofsJ.SandersM. (1985). The identification of gifted children in secondary education. In KellerK.FeldhusenJ. (Eds.), Identifying and nurturing the gifted, (pp. 39–65). Toronto: Han Huber Publishers.
33.
MundyL.DavisJ. (1974). Varieties of accomplishment after college: Perspective on the meaning of academic talent (ACT Research Report No. 62). Iowa City, IA: American College Testing Program.
34.
NunnallyJ. (1978). Psychometric Theory (2nd ed.). New York, McGraw-Hill.
35.
OlenchakF.RenzulliJ. (1989). The effectiveness of the schoolwide enrichment model on selected aspects of elementary school change. Gifted Child Quarterly, 33, 36–46.
36.
ReisS. (1981). An analysis of the productivity of gifted students participating in programs using the revolving door identification model. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Connecticut.
37.
ReisS. (1983). Avoiding the testing trap: Using alternative assessment instruments to evaluate programs for the gifted. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 7, 45–59.
38.
ReisS.RenzulliJ. (1982). A research report on the revolving door identification model: A case for the broadened conception of giftedness. Phi Delta Kappan, 63, 619–620.
39.
RenzulliJ. (1977). The enrichment triad model: A guide for developing defensible programs for the gifted and talented. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
40.
RenzulliJ. (1978). What makes giftedness? Reexamining a definition. Phi Delta Kappan, 60, 180–184, 261.
41.
RenzulliJ. (1985). A bull's eye on my back: The perils and pitfalls of trying to bring about educational change. Gifted Education International, 3, 18–23.
42.
RenzulliJ. (1986a). The three-ring conception of giftedness: A developmental model for creative productivity. In SternbergR.DavidsonJ. (Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness (pp. 53–92). New York: Cambridge University Press.
43.
RenzulliJ. (Ed.) (1986b). Systems and models for developing programs for the gifted and talented. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
44.
RenzulliJ. (1988a). A decade of dialogue on the three-ring conception of giftedness. Roeper Review, 11, 18–25.
45.
RenzulliJ. (Ed.). (1988b). Technical report of research studies related to the revolving door identification model (Research Report Series, 2nd ed., vol. 2). Storrs, CT: University of Connecticut, School of Education.
46.
RichertE.AlvinoJ.McDonnellR. (1982). National report on identification: Assessment and recommendations for comprehensive identification of gifted and talented youth. Washington, D. C.: Educational Information Resource Center, U. S. Department of Education.
47.
RoeA. (1952). The making of a scientist. New York: Dodd, Mead.
48.
RuncoM.AlbertR. (1984). The threshold of intelligence and creativity. Paper presented at the Annual Convention of the Western Psychological Association, Los Angeles, CA.
49.
SatoI. (1974). The culturally different child: The dawning of his day?Exceptional Children, 40(8), 572–576.
50.
SeaborgG. (1988). Letter to a young scientist. In BrandweinP.PassowA. (Eds.). Gifted young in science: Potential through performance. Washington, D. C.: National Science Teachers Association.
51.
ShackG. (1989). Self-efficacy as a mediator in the creative productivity of gifted children. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 12, 231–249.
52.
SieglerR.KotovskyK. (1986). Two levels of giftedness: Shall ever the twain meet? In SternbergR.DavidsonJ. (Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness (417–435). New York: Cambridge University Press.
53.
SimontonD. (1976). Biographical determinants of achieved eminence: A multivariate approach to the Cox data. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 33, 218–226.
54.
SkaughtB. (1987). The social acceptability of talent pool students in an elementary school using the schoolwide enrichment model. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Connecticut.
55.
SmithL.RenzulliJ. (1984). Learning style preferences: A practical approach for classroom teachers. Theory Into Practice, 23, 44–50.
56.
StarkoA. (1988). Effects of the revolving door identification on creative productivity and self-efficacy. Gifted Child Quarterly, 32, 291–297.
57.
StedtnitzU. (1986). The influence of educational enrichment on self-efficacy and interest levels in young children. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Connecticut.
58.
SternbergR. (1981). Intelligence and nonentrenchment. Journal of Educational Psychology, 73, 1–16.
59.
SternbergR. (1982). Lies we live by: Misapplication of tests in identifying the gifted. Gifted Child Quarterly, 26, 157–164.
60.
SternbergR.DavidsonJ. (1982). The mind of the puzzler. Psychology Today, 16, 37–44.
61.
SternbergR.DavidsonJ. (Eds.). (1986). Conceptions of giftedness. New York: Cambridge University Press.
62.
TannenbaumA. (1986). Giftedness: A psychosocial approach. In DavidsonR.DavidsonJ. (Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness (pp. 21–52). New York: Cambridge University Press.
63.
TorranceE. (1969). Creative positives of disadvantaged children and youth. Gifted Child Quarterly, 13, 71–81.
64.
TorranceE. (1974). Differences are not deficits. Teachers College Record, 75, 471–488.
65.
TorranceE. (1977). Discovery and nurturance of giftedness in the culturally different. Reston, VA: The Council for Exceptional Children.
66.
TreffingerD. (1987). Book review of critical issues in gifted education, MakerC. (Ed.). Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 10, 324–331.
67.
VernonP. (1967). Psychological studies of creativity. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 8, 153–164.
68.
WallachM. (1976). Tests tell us little about talent. American Scientist, 64, 57–63.
