Criticism in gifted education focuses on two concepts that are central to the field: identification and programming. Who are the gifted? What are the most effective ways to meet their needs? In our deliberations about redefining the foundations of the field, we need to consider the ideas of all of the stakeholder groups. One perspective that has been absent in our discussions is that of the teacher who works with gifted students in grades K-12. This commentary is presented as an examination of critical concerns in our field as they impact the practical matters of the classroom for the gifted.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BorlandJ. H. (1996). Gifted education and the threat of irrelevance. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 19, 129–147.
2.
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.
3.
FeldhusenJ. F. (1992). Talent Identification and Development in Education. Sarasota, FL: Center for Creative Learning.
4.
GallagherJ. J. (1996). A critique of critiques of gifted education. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 19, 234–249.
5.
GardnerH. (1991). The Unschooled Mind. New York: Basic Books.
6.
MargolinL. (1996). A pedagogy of privilege. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 19, 164–180.
7.
PendarvisE.HowleyA. (1996). Playing fair: The possibilities of gifted education. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 19, 215–233.
8.
Sapon-ShevinM. (1966). Beyond gifted education: Building a shared agenda for school reform. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 19, 194–214.
9.
TreffingerD. J.FeldhusenJ. F. (1996). Talent recognition and development: Successor to gifted education. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 19, 181–193.
10.
WardV. S. (1961). Educating the gifted: An axiomatic approach. Columbus, OH: Charles E. Merrill.
