Root-metaphorical world views strongly influence the thoughts of scholars and practitioners in scientific disciplines. Gifted education is not immune to such influence. In order to clarify conceptual foundations of gifted education, recent literature was analyzed to reveal the degree to which each of 4 world views (contextualism, organicism, formism, and mechanism) reflects and shapes the thinking of scholars in the field. Analyses revealed philosophical biases toward contextualism and organicism in terms of subject-matter emphases and a bias toward mechanism in the preferred research methodologies. A comprehensive understanding of the conceptual foundations for gifted education requires recognition of contributions from the 4 world-view perspectives.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AmbroseD. (1996). Unifying theories of creativity: Metaphorical thought and the unification process. New Ideas in Psychology, 14, 257–267.
2.
BakerE. L.SchacterJ. (1996). Expert benchmarks for student academic performance: The case for gifted children. Gifted Child Quarterly, 40, 61–65.
3.
BohmD.PeatF. D. (1987). Science order and creativity. New York: Bantam.
4.
BorlandJ. H. (1990). Postpositivist inquiry: Implications of the “new philosophy of science” for the field of education of the gifted. Gifted Child Quarterly, 34, 161–167.
5.
BorlandJ. H. (1996). Gifted education and the threat of irrelevance. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 19, 129–147.
6.
BoydR. (1993). Metaphor and theory change: What is “metaphor” a metaphor for? In OrtonyA. (Ed.), Metaphor and thought (pp. 481–532). New York: Cambridge University Press.
7.
CallahanC. M. (1996). A critical self-study of gifted education: Healthy practice, necessary evil, or sedition?Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 19, 148–163.
8.
ChanL. K. S. (1996). Motivational orientations and metacognitive abilities of intellectually gifted students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 40, 184–193.
9.
ClarkB. (1986). Optimizing learning: The integrative education model in the classroom. Columbus, OH: Merrill.
10.
ClinkenbeardP. R. (1996). Research on motivation and the gifted: Implications for identification, programming, and evaluation. Gifted Child Quarterly, 40, 220–221.
11.
CohenL. M.AmbroseD. (1993). Theories and practices for differentiated education for the gifted and talented. In HellerK. A.MönksF. J.PassowA. H. (Eds.), International handbook of research and development of giftedness and talent (pp. 339–363). Oxford, U.K.: Pergamon.
12.
ColemanL. J.CrossT. L.SandersM. (1992, November). Alternative inquiry in education: Hey can you paradigm?Paper presented at the National Association for Gifted Children Conference, Los Angeles.
13.
ColemanL. J.SandersM.CrossT. L. (1997). Perennial debates and tacit assumptions in the education of gifted children. Gifted Child Quarterly, 41, 105–111.
14.
CrossT. (1994). Alternative inquiry and its potential contributions to gifted education: A commentary. Roeper Review, 16, 284–285.
15.
DreyfusH. L. (1995). Cognitivism abandoned. In BaumgartnerP.PayrS. (Eds.), Speaking minds (pp. 71–83). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
16.
EisenbergA. (1992, May). Metaphor in the language of science. Scientific American, 266, 144.
17.
EisnerE. W.PeshkinA. (Eds.). (1991). Qualitative inquiry in education: The continuing debate. New York: Teachers College Press.
FriedmanR. C.LeeS. W. (1996). Differentiating instruction for high-achieving/gifted children in regular classrooms: A field test of three gifted-education models. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 19, 405–436.
20.
GallagherJ. J. (1996). A critique of critiques of gifted education. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 19, 234–249.
21.
GardnerH. (1983). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. New York: Basic Books.
22.
GillespieD. (1992). The mind's we: Contextualism in cognitive psychology. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
23.
GlaserB. G.StraussA. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory. Chicago: Aldine.
24.
GottfriedA. E.GottfriedA. W. (1996). A longitudinal study of academic intrinsic motivation in intellectually gifted children: Childhood through early adolescence. Gifted Child Quarterly, 40, 179–183.
25.
HeshusiusL. (1989). The Newtonian mechanistic paradigm, special education, and contours of alternatives: An overview. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 22, 403–415.
26.
HuntM. (1993). The story of psychology. New York: Doubleday.
27.
KauffmanS. (1995). At home in the universe. New York: Oxford University Press.
28.
KohlbergL. (1984). The psychology of moral development. Vol. II of essays on moral development. San Francisco: Harper & Row.
29.
KuhnT. S. (1993). Metaphor in science. In OrtonyA. (Ed.), Metaphor and thought (pp. 533–542). New York: Cambridge University Press.
30.
LincolnY. S.GubaE. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
31.
MakerC. J. (1996). Identification of gifted minority students: A national problem, needed changes, and a promising solution. Gifted Child Quarterly, 40, 41–50.
32.
McGuireK. L.YewchukC. R. (1996). Use of metacognitive reading strategies by gifted learning disabled students: An exploratory study. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 19, 293–314.
33.
OaklandT.FalkenbergB. A.OaklandC. (1996). Assessment of leadership in children, youth, and adults. Gifted Child Quarterly, 40, 138–146.
34.
OvertonW. F. (1984). World views and their influence on psychological thoughts and research: Khun-Lakatos-Laudan. In ReeseH. W. (Ed.), Advances in child development and behavior: Vol. 18 (pp. 91–226). New York: Academic Press.
35.
ParkerJ. P. (1996). NAGC standards for personnel preparation in gifted education: A brief history. Gifted Child Quarterly, 40, 158–161.
36.
PepperS. C. (1942). World hypotheses. Berkeley: University of California Press.
37.
PluckerJ. A.McIntireJ. (1996). Academic survivability in high-potential middle school students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 40, 7–14.
38.
RyserG. R.JohnsenS. K. (1996). Toward more research on effective practices with gifted students in general-education settings. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 19, 481–496.
39.
Sapon-ShevinM. (1996). Beyond gifted education: Building a shared agenda for school reform. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 19, 194–214.
ShavininaL. V.KholodnajaM. A. (1996). The cognitive experience as a psychological basis of intellectual giftedness. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 20, 3–35.
42.
ShoreB. M.DelcourtM. A. B. (1996). Effective curricular and program practices in gifted education and the interface with general education. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 20, 138–154.
43.
ShoreB. M.DoverA. C. (1987). Metacognition, intelligence, and giftedness. Gifted Child Quarterly, 31, 37–39.
44.
ShoreB. M.RejskindF. G.KanevskyL. S. (1998). Cognitive research on giftedness: A window on creativity and teaching for creativity. Manuscript in preparation.
45.
SternbergR. J. (1986). A triarchic theory of intellectual giftedness. In SternbergR. J.DavidsonJ. E. (Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness (pp. 223–243). New York: Cambridge University Press.
46.
SternbergR. J. (1990). Metaphors of mind: Conceptions of the nature of intelligence. New York: Cambridge University Press.
47.
StraussA.CorbinJ. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
48.
SubotnikR. F.ColemanL. J. (1996). Establishing the foundations for a talent development school: Applying principles to creating an ideal. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 20, 175–189.
49.
TannenbaumA. J. (1993). History of giftedness and “gifted education” in world perspective. In HellerK. A.MönksF. J.PassowA. H. (Eds.), International handbook of research and development of giftedness and talent (pp. 3–27). Oxford, U.K.: Pergamon.
50.
TarnasR. (1991). The passion of the western mind. New York: Ballantine.
51.
TomlinsonC. A. (1996). Good teaching for one and all: Does gifted education have an instructional identity?Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 20, 155–174.
52.
TomlinsonC. A.ColemanM. R.AllanS.UdallA.LandrumM. (1996). Interface between gifted education and general education: Toward communication, cooperation, and collaboration. Gifted Child Quarterly, 40, 165–171.
53.
TreffingerD. J.FeldhusenJ. F. (1996). Talent recognition and development: Successor to gifted education. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 19, 181–193.
54.
VanTassel-BaskaJ. (1993). Theory and research on curriculum development for the gifted. In HellerK. A.MönksF. J.PassowA. H. (Eds.), International handbook of research and development of giftedness and talent (pp. 365–386). Oxford, U.K.: Pergamon.
55.
VanTassel-BaskaJ.JohnsonD. T.HughesC. E.BoyceL. N. (1996). A study of language arts curriculum effectiveness with gifted learners. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 19, 461–480.
56.
WaldropM. M. (1992). Complexity: The emerging science at the edge of order and chaos. New York: Touchstone.
