If no one ever tried anything risky, Michelangelo would have painted the Sistine Chapel's floor.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BaldwinA. Y. (1978) The Baldwin identification matrix. In BaldwinA. Y.GearG. H.LucitoL. J. (Eds.), Educational planning for the gifted: Overcoming cultural, geographic, and socioeconomic barriers. Reston, VA: Council for Exceptional Children.
2.
BaldwinA. Y. (1999). The Baldwin identification matrix. In BaldwinA. Y.VialleW. (Eds.), The many faces of giftedness: Lifting the masks (pp. 8–13. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
3.
ChallJ. S.ConradS. C. (1991). Should textbooks challenge students? The case for easier or harder textbooks. New York: Teachers College Press.
4.
DelcourtM. (1994). Characteristics of high-level creative productivity: A longitudinal study of students identified by Renzulli's three-ring conception of giftedness. In SubotnikR. F.ArnoldK. D. (Eds.), Beyond Terman: Contemporary longitudinal studies of giftedness and talent (pp. 401–426. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing.
5.
DavidsonJ. E.SternbergR. J. (1986). Conceptions of giftedness. New York: Cambridge University Press.
6.
FordD. Y. (1999). Renzulli's philosophy and program: Opening doors and nurturing potential. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 23, 117–124.
7.
FordD. Y.HarrisY. Y. (1999). Multicultural gifted education. New York: Teacher's College Press.
8.
FrasierM. M.PassowA. H. (1994). Toward a new paradigm for identifying talent potential [Research Monograph 94112]. Storrs, CT: National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented.
9.
GeorgeP. (1997). Middle schools, ability grouping, and gifted students: The continuum. In ErbT. O. (Ed.), Dilemmas in talent development in the middle grades: Two views (pp. 9–43. Columbus, OH: National Middle School Association.
10.
GiuffridaT. (1998, May 11). End parade to Dr. 130. The Palm Beach Post, p. 16A.
11.
HébertT. (1993) Reflections at graduation: The long-term impact of elementary school experiences in creative productivity. Roeper Review16, 22–28.
12.
JohnsenS. K. (1999). Renzulli's model: Needed research. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 23, 102–116.
13.
KaplanS. (1986). The Grid: A model to construct differentiated curriculum for the gifted. In RenzulliJ. (Ed.), Systems and models for developing programs for the gifted and talented (pp. 180–193. Mansfield, CT: Creative Learning Press.
14.
KaufmannF. A. (1995). On gifted education: What do we really know? Roeper Review, 18, 134–135.
15.
KitanoM. K. (1999). Bringing clarity to “this thing called giftedness”: A response to Dr. Renzulli. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 23, 87–101.
16.
KozolJ. (1992). Savage inequalities: Children in American schools. New York: HarperPerennial.
17.
National Commission on Excellence in Education. (1983). A nation at risk. Washington, DC: U. S. Government Printing Office.
18.
KubiliusOlszewski P. (1999). A critique of Renzulli's theory into practice models for gifted learners. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 23, 55–66.
19.
PendarvisE.HowleyC.HowleyA. (1999). Renzulli's triad: School to work for gifted students. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 23, 75–86.
20.
PurcellJ. H.RenzulliJ. S. (1998). The total talent portfolio: A systematic plan to identify and nurture gifts and talents. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
21.
ReisS. M. (1996). Older women's reflections on eminence: Obstacles and opportunities. In ArnoldK. D.NobelK. D.SubotnikR. F. (Eds.), Remarkable women: Perspectives on female talent development. (pp. 146–168Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
22.
ReisS. M. et al. (1993). Why not let high ability students start school in January? The curriculum compacting study (Research Monograph No. 93106). Storrs, CT: National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented.
23.
ReisS. M.PurcellJ. H. (1993). An analysis of content elimination and strategies used by elementary classroom teachers in the curriculum compacting process. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 16, 147–171.
24.
ReisS. M.GentryM.MaxfieldL. R. (1998). The application of enrichment clusters to teachers' classroom practices. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 21, 310–334.
25.
RenzulliJ. S. (1990). A practical system for identifying gifted and talented students. Early Child Development and Care, 63, 9–18.
26.
RenzulliJ. S. (1994). Schools for talent development: A practical for total school development. Mansfield, CT: Creative Learning Press.
27.
RenzulliJ. S. (1986). The three-ring conception of giftedness: A developmental model for creative productivity. In DavidsonJ.SternbergS. (Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness (pp. 53–93. New York: Cambridge University Press.
28.
RenzulliJ. S. (1999). What is this thing called giftedness, and how do we develop it? A twenty-five year perspective. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 23, 3–54.
29.
RenzulliJ. S.ReisS. M. (1991). The reform movement and the quiet crisis in gifted education. Gifted Child Quarterly, 35, 26–35.
30.
RenzulliJ. S.ReisS. M. (1997). The schoolwide enrichment model: A how-to guide for educational excellence. Mansfield, CT: Creative Learning Press.
31.
RenzulliJ. S. (1999). What is this thing called giftedness, and how do we develop it? A twenty-five year perspective. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 23, 3–54.
32.
SternbergR. J. (1999). Rising tides and racing torpedoes: Triumphs and tribulations of the adult gifted as illustrated by the career of Joseph Renzulli. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 23, 67–74.
33.
SternbergR. J.LubartT. I. (1995). Defying the crowd: Cultivating creativity in a culture of conformity. New York: Free Press.
34.
SternbergR. J.LubartT. I. (1996). Investing in creativity. American Psychologist, 51, 677–688.
35.
VygotskyL. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. (Original work published in 1924).
