This author provides reflections on the last 25 years of his work, focusing on the evolutions of models designed to help identify and meet the needs of gifted and talented students. The cited models include the Three Ring Conception of Giftedness, the Enrichment Triad Model, and the Schoolwide Enrichment Model. Summaries focus on the rationale supporting each model, including practical applications of the model in various school situations and underlying research. Also included are insights related to potential modifications and future developments of the models.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AlbertR. S. (1975). Toward a behavioral definition of genius. American Psychologist, 30, 140–151.
2.
AlbertR. S.RuncoM. A. (1986). The achievement of eminence: A model based on a longitudinal study of exceptionally gifted boys and their families. In SternbergR. J.DavidsonJ. E. (Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness (pp. 332–357. New York: Cambridge University Press.
3.
AmabileT. M.GryskiewiczN. (1989). The creative environment scales: Work environment inventory. Creative Research Journal, 2, 231–254.
4.
BanduraA. (1977). Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist, 37, 122–147.
5.
BaumS. (1985). Learning disabled students with superior cognitive abilities: A validation study of descriptive behavior. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of Connecticut, Storrs.
6.
BaumS. (1988). An enrichment program for gifted learning disabled students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 32, 226–230.
7.
BaumS. M.RenzulliJ. S.HébertT. P. (1995). Reversing underachievement: Creative productivity as a systematic intervention. Gifted Child Quarterly, 39, 224–235.
8.
BeecherM. (1995). Developing the gifts and talents of all students in the regular classroom. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
9.
BloomB. S. (Ed.). (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives handbook 1: Cognitive domain. New York: David McKay.
10.
BurnsD. E. (1987). The effects of group training activities on student's creative productivity. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of Connecticut, Storrs.
11.
BusseT. V.MansfieldR. S. (1980). Renzulli is right. Gifted Child Quarterly, 24, 132.
12.
CooperC. (1983). Administrator's attitudes towards gifted programs based on the enrichment triad/revolving door identification model: Case studies in decision making. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of Connecticut, Storrs.
13.
DavisG. A.RimmS. B. (1985). Education of the gifted and talented. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
14.
DelcourtM. A. B. (1988). Characteristics related to high levels of creative/productive behavior in secondary school students: A multi-case study. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of Connecticut, Storrs.
15.
DelisleJ. R.ReisS. M.GubbinsE. J. (1981). The revolving door identification model and programming model. Exceptional Children, 48, 152–156.
16.
DelisleJ. R.RenzulliJ. S. (1982). The revolving door identification and programming model: Correlates of creative production. Gifted Child Quarterly, 26, 89–95.
17.
DunnR.DunnK.PriceG. E. (1978). Diagnosing learning styles: Avoiding malpractice suits against school systems. Phi Delta Kappan, 58, 418–420.
18.
EmerickL. (1988). Academic underachievement among the gifted: Students' perceptions of factors relating to the reversal of the academic underachievement pattern. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of Connecticut, Storrs.
19.
FeldmanD. H. (1992). Has there been a paradigm shift in gifted education? In ColangeloN.AssoulineS. G.AmbrosonD. L. (Eds.), Talent development: Proceedings from the 1991 Henry B. and Jocelyn Wallace National Research Symposium on Talent Development (pp. 89–94. Unionville, NY: Trillium Press.
20.
GagnéF. (1985). Giftedness and talent: Reexamining a reexamination of the definitions. Gifted Child Quarterly, 29, 103–112.
21.
GallagherJ. J. (1985). Teaching the gifted child (3rd ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
22.
GardnerH. (1983). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. New York: Basic Books.
23.
GolemanD. (1995). Emotional intelligence: Why it can matter more than IQ. New York: Bantam Books.
24.
GubbinsJ. (1982). Revolving door identification model: Characteristics of talent pool students. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of Connecticut, Storrs.
25.
GuilfordJ. P. (1967). The nature of human intelligence. New York: McGraw-Hill.
26.
HealM. M. (1989). Student perceptions of labeling the gifted: A comparative case study analysis. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of Connecticut, Storrs.
27.
HébertT. P. (1993). Reflections at graduation: The long term impact of elementary school experiences in creative productivity. Roeper Review, 16, 22–28.
28.
ImbeauM. B. (1991). Teachers' attitudes toward curriculum compacting: A comparison of different inservice strategies. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of Connecticut, Storrs.
29.
JarrellR. H.BorlandJ. H. (1990). The research base for Renzulli's three-ring conception of giftedness. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 13, 288–308.
30.
JellenH. G. (1983, November 14). Renzulli-itis: A national disease in gifted education. Paper presented at the Illinois State Conference on the Gifted, Peoria, IL.
31.
JellenH. G. (1985). Renzulli's enrichment scheme for the gifted: Educational accommodation of the gifted in the American context. Gifted Education International, 3(1), 12–17.
32.
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, The University of Connecticut, Storrs.
33.
KettleK. E.RenzulliJ. S.RizzaM. G. (1998). Exploring student preferences for product development usingMy Way … An Expression Style Instrument. Gifted Child Quarterly, 42, 49–60.
34.
KohlbergL.MayerR. (1972). Development as the aim of education. Harvard Education Review, 42, 449–496.
35.
KontosS.CarterK. R.OrmrodJ. E.CooneyJ. B. (1983). Reversing the revolving door: A strict interpretation of Renzulli's definition of giftedness. Roeper Review, 6, 35–38.
36.
KrathwohlD. R.BloomB. S.MasiaB. B. (1964). Taxonomy of educational objectives, handbook 2: Affective domain. New York: David McKay.
37.
MakerJ. (1982). Teaching models in education of the gifted. Rockville, MD: Aspen.
38.
MarlandS. P. (1972). Education of the gifted and talented: Report to the Congress of the United States by the U. S. Commissioner of Education. Washington, DC: U. S. Government Printing Office.
39.
National Commission on Excellence in Education. (1983). A nation at risk: The imperative of educational reform. Report to the Nation and the Secretary of Education. Washington, DC: U. S. Government Printing Office.
40.
OlenchakF. R. (1988). The schoolwide enrichment model in the elementary schools: A study of implementation stages and effects on educational excellence. In RenzulliJ. S. (Ed.), Technical report on research studies relating to the revolving door identification model (2nd ed., pp. 201–247). Storrs, CT: Bureau of Educational Research, The University of Connecticut.
41.
OlenchakF. R. (1990). School change through gifted education: Effects on elementary students' attitudes toward learning. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 14, 66–78.
42.
OlenchakF. R.RenzulliJ. S. (1989). The effectiveness of the schoolwide enrichment model on selected aspects of elementary school change. Gifted Child Quarterly, 33, 36–46.
43.
ReisS. M.GentryM.ParkS. (1995). Extending the pedagogy of gifted education to all students. Storrs, CT: The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented.
44.
ReisS. M.RenzulliJ. S. (1982). A research report on the revolving door identification model: A case for the broadened conception of giftedness. Phi Delta Kappan, 63, 619–620.
45.
ReisS. M.RenzulliJ. S. (1985). The secondary level enrichment triad model: Excellence without elitism. NASSP Bulletin, 69(482), 31–38.
46.
ReisS. M.WestbergK. L.KulikowichJ.CaillardF.HébertT. P.PurcellJ. H.RogersJ.SmistJ.PluckerJ. A. (1992). Technical report of the curriculum compacting study. Storrs, CT: The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented.
47.
RenzulliJ. S. (1967). The evaluation of programs of differential education for the gifted. University of Virginia Education Review, 5, 45–48.
48.
RenzulliJ. S. (1977). The enrichment triad model: A guide for developing defensible programs for the gifted and talented. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
49.
RenzulliJ. S. (1978). What makes giftedness? Re-examining a definition. Phi Delta Kappan, 60, 180–184, 261.
50.
RenzulliJ. S. (1982a). Dear Mr. and Mrs. Copernicus: We regret to inform you. … Gifted Child Quarterly, 26, 11–14.
51.
RenzulliJ. S. (1982b). What makes a problem real: Stalking the illusive meaning of qualitative differences in gifted education. Gifted Child Quarterly, 26, 147–156.
52.
RenzulliJ. S. (1985). A bull's eye on my back: The perils and pitfalls of trying to bring about educational change. Gifted Education International, 3(1), 18–23.
53.
RenzulliJ. S. (1986). The three-ring conception of giftedness: A developmental model for creative productivity. In SternbergR. J.DavidsonJ. E. (Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness (pp. 53–92. New York: Cambridge University Press.
54.
RenzulliJ. S. (Ed.). (1988a). Technical report on research studies related to the revolving door identification model. Storrs, CT: Bureau of Educational Research, The University of Connecticut.
55.
RenzulliJ. S. (1988b). The multiple menu model for developing differentiated curriculum for the gifted and talented. Gifted Child Quarterly, 32, 298–309.
56.
RenzulliJ. S. (1988c). A decade of dialogue on the three ring conception of giftedness. Roeper Review, 11(1), 18–25.
57.
RenzulliJ. S. (1990). Torturing data until they confess: An analysis of the three-ring conception of giftedness. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 13, 309–331.
58.
RenzulliJ. S. (1992). A general theory for the development of creative productivity in young people. In MonksF. J.PetersW. A. M. (Eds.), Talent for the future: Social and personality development of gifted children. Proceedings of the Ninth World Conference on Gifted and Talented Children (pp. 51–72. Assen/Maastricht, The Netherlands: Van Gorcum.
59.
RenzulliJ. S. (1994). Schools for talent development: A practical plan for total school improvement. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
60.
RenzulliJ. S.NearineR. (1968). A curriculum development project for academically gifted students. Accent on Talent (NEA), 2, 9–12.
61.
RenzulliJ. S.OwenS. V. (1983). The revolving door identification model: If it ain't busted don't fix it, if you don't understand it don't nix it. Roeper Review, 6, 39–41.
62.
RenzulliJ. S.ReisS. M. (1982). A research report on the revolving door identification model: A case for the broadened conception of giftedness.
63.
RenzulliJ. S.ReisS. M. (1985). The schoolwide enrichment model: A comprehensive plan for educational excellence. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
64.
RenzulliJ. S.ReisS. M. (1991). The reform movement and the quiet crisis in gifted education. Gifted Child Quarterly, 35, 26–35.
65.
RenzulliJ. S.ReisS. M. (1993). Developing creative productivity through the enrichment triad model. In IsaksenS. G.MurdockM. C.FirestienR. L.TreffingerD. J. (Eds.), Nurturing and developing creativity: The emergence of a discipline (pp. 70–99. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
66.
RenzulliJ. S.ReisS. M. (1994). Research related to the schoolwide enrichment model. Gifted Child Quarterly, 38, 7–20.
67.
RenzulliJ. S.ReisS. M. (1997). The schoolwide enrichment model: A how-to guide for educational excellence (2nd ed.). Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
68.
RenzulliJ. S.ReisS. M.SmithL. H. (1981). The revolving door identification model. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
69.
RenzulliJ. S.SmithL. H.ReisS. M. (1982). Curriculum compacting: An essential strategy for working with gifted students. Elementary School Journal, 82, 185–194.
70.
RenzulliJ. S.SmithL. H.WhiteA. J.CallahanC. M.HartmanR. K. (1976). Scales for rating the behavioral characteristics of superior students. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
71.
SchackG. D. (1986). Creative productivity and self-efficacy in children. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of Connecticut, Storrs.
72.
SimontonD. K. (1978). History and the eminent person. Gifted Child Quarterly, 22, 187–195.
73.
SkaughtB. J. (1987). The social acceptability of talent pool students in an elementary school using the schoolwide enrichment model. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of Connecticut, Storrs.
74.
StarkoA. J. (1986). The effects of the revolving door identification model on creative productivity and self efficacy. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of Connecticut, Storrs.
75.
SternbergR. J. (1984). Toward a triarchic theory of human intelligence. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 7, 269–287.
76.
SternbergR. J. (1985). A componential theory of intellectual giftedness. Gifted Child Quarterly, 25, 86–93.
77.
SternbergR. J. (1988). Mental self-government: A theory of intellectual styles and their development. Human Development, 31, 197–224.
78.
TannenbaumA. J. (1986). Giftedness: A psychosocial approach. In SternbergR. J.DavidsonJ. E. (Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness (pp. 21–52. New York: Cambridge University Press.
79.
TorranceE. P. (1963). Education and the creative potential. Minneapolis: The University of Minnesota Press.
80.
TreffingerD. J. (1987). [Review of the book Critical issues in gifted education. MakerC. J. (Ed.)]. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 10, 324–331.
81.
VanTassel-BaskaJ. (1998). Excellence in educating gifted and talented learners. Denver, CO: Love.
82.
WardV. (1961). Educating the gifted: An axiomatic approach. Columbus, OH: Merrill.
83.
WebbJ. T.MeckstrothE. A.TolanS. S. (1982). Guiding the gifted child. Columbus, OH: Ohio Psychology Publishing Company.
