This study focuses on education at primary and secondary level in Northern Ireland and questions whether it meets the needs of gifted students. Gifted students from Mensa were questioned about their experiences in school, and the majority of students stated that they did not have sufficient challenge in school, or any type of differentiation in classes, and the preferred form of differentiation was more demanding work in class, followed by fast-paced classes with older, advanced students.
BatterjeeAA (2014) The effect of grouping and program type on scholastic and affective outcomes in the Mawhiba schools partnership initiative. Gifted Education International32: 123–147. DOI:10.1177/10261429414557588.
2.
BenbowCPLubinskiDSuchyB (1996) The impact of SMPY’s educational programs from the perspective of the participant. In: BenbowCPLubinskiD (eds) Intellectual Talent: Psychometric and Social Issues. Baltimore: The John Hopkins University Press, pp. 266–300.
3.
BettsGNeihartM (1988) Profiles of the gifted and talented. Gifted Child Quarterly32: 248–253.
CigmanR (2006) The gifted child – a conceptual enquiry. Oxford Review of Education32(2): 197–212.
6.
ClarkB (2002) Growing up Gifted: Developing the Potential of Children at Home and at School, 6th ed. Upper Saddle River: Merrill Prentice Hall.
7.
ColangeloNAssoulineS (2009) Acceleration: meeting the academic and social needs of students. In: ShavininaLV (ed), International Handbook on Giftedness, Part One. Berlin: Springer, pp. 1085–1098.
DaurioSP (1979) Educational enrichment versus acceleration: a review of the literature. In: GeorgeWCCohnSJStanleyJC (eds.), Educating the Gifted: Acceleration and Enrichment. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, pp. 13–63.
10.
DavidsonJ (1996) Meeting state mandates for gifted and talented: Iowa teacher preparation programs. Roeper Review19: 41–43.
11.
Equality Commission for Northern Ireland (2005) Disability Discrimination Code of Practice for all Schools. Special Educational Needs and Disability (Northern Ireland) NIA 275/03.
GagnéRM (1985) The Conditions of Learning and Theory of Instruction, 4th ed. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
15.
GagnéFGagnierN (2004) The socio-affective and academic impact of early entrance to school. Roeper Review26: 128–139.
16.
GrossMUM (1992) The use of radical acceleration in cases of extreme intellectual precocity. Gifted Child Quarterly36: 91–99.
17.
GrossMUM (1994) Exceptionally Gifted Children. London and New York: Routledge.
18.
GrossMUM (1997) How ability groups turns big fish into little fish – or does it? Of optical illusions and optimal environments. Australasian Journal of Gifted Education6(2): 18–30.
19.
GrossMUM (2006) Exceptionally gifted children: long-term outcomes of academic acceleration and nonacceleration. Journal for the Education of the Gifted29(4): 404–429.
20.
GrossMUMVan LietH (2005) Radical acceleration and early entry into college: a review of the research. Gifted Child Quarterly49(2): 154–171.
21.
GubbelsJSegersEVerhoevenL (2014) Cognitive, socioemotional, and attitudinal effects of a triarchic enrichment program for gifted children. Journal for the Education of the Gifted37(4): 378–397.
HoogeveenLVan HellJGVerhoevenL (2011) Social-emotional characteristics of gifted accelerated and non-accelerated students in the Netherlands. British Journal of Educational Psychology82: 585–605.
24.
JanosPMRobinsonNMCarterC. (1988) A cross-sectional developmental study of the social relations of students who enter college early. Gifted Child Quarterly32(1): 210–215.
JinSMoonSM (2006) A study of well-being and school satisfaction among academically talented students attending a science high school in Korea. Gifted Child Quarterly50: 169–184.
27.
KarnesFAStephensKR (2009) Gifted education and legal issues. In: ShavininaLV (ed), International Handbook of Giftedness. Toronto: Springer Science+Business Media, pp. 1327–1341.
28.
KimM (2016) A meta-analysis of the effects of enrichment programs on gifted students. Gifted Child Quarterly60: 79–80.
29.
KingDC (2012) Long term social and emotional outcomes of subject-area acceleration on gifted learners. Doctoral Thesis, Liberty University, Lynchburg.
30.
KronborgLMoltzenR (1999) AAEGT report on gifted courses: tertiary courses in gifted education across Australia, New Zealand and Asia. The Australasian Journal of Gifted Education18(1): 77–79.
31.
KulikJAKulikCC (1991) Ability grouping and gifted students. In: ColangeloNDavidG (eds) Handbook of Gifted Education. Needham Heights: Allyn and Bacon, pp. 178–196.
32.
McCoachB (2007) What predicts teachers’ attitudes toward the gifted?Gifted Child Quarterly51(3): 246–255.
33.
MayerR (2005) The scientific study of giftedness. In: SternbergRDavidsonJ (eds) Conceptions of Giftedness. New York: Cambridge University Press, pp. 437–448.
34.
NeedhamV (2012) Primary teachers’ perception of the social and emotional aspects of gifted and talented education. The New Zealand Journal of Gifted Education17(1). Available at:www.giftededucation.org.nz/apex (accessed 25 April 2016).
PollinsL (1983) The effects of acceleration on the social and emotional development of gifted students. In: BenbowCPStanleyJC (eds) Academic Precocity: Aspects of its Development. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, pp. 160–178. Available at: http://www.davidsongifted.org/Search/Database/entry/A10017 (accessed 26 April 2016).
37.
RenzulliJ (1978) What makes giftedness? Reexamining the definition. Phi Delta Kappan60(3): 180–184.
38.
Resolution: Action Plan for the Gifted and Talented – an essential part of the Lisbon Strategy (2007) Cost Strategic Workshop: Meeting the Needs of Gifted Children and Adolescents – Towards a European Roadmap. Available at: file:///C:/Users/ccsstaff/Downloads/resolution_giftedchildren%20(3).pdf (accessed 27 April 2016).
39.
RinnAN (2007) Effects of programmatic selectivity on the academic achievement, academic self-concepts, and aspirations of gifted college students. Gifted Child Quarterly51(3): 232–245.
40.
RogerKB (1991) The Relationship of Grouping Practices to the Education of the Gifted and Talented Learner. (RBDM9102). Storrs: The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented, University of Connecticut.
41.
RyanD (2009) Gifted and talented in Northern Ireland. Gifted Education International25(1): 86–93.
42.
SekowskiAELubiankaB (2013) Education of gifted students in Europe. Gifted Education International31(1): 73–90.
43.
SouthernWCrossED (2004) Types of acceleration: dimensions and issues. In: ColangeloNAssoulineSGrossM (eds) A Nation Deceived: How Schools Hold Back American’s Brightest Students, Vol. II, The Connie Belin & Jacqueline N. Iowa City, Iowa: Blank Centre for Gifted Education and Talent Development, pp. 5–12.
44.
SouthernWJonesE (1991) Academic acceleration: background and issues. In: SouthernWJonesE (eds) The Academic Acceleration of Gifted Children. New York: Teachers College Press, pp. 1–28.
45.
Steenbergen HuSMoonSM (2011) The effects of acceleration on high-ability learners: a meta-analysis. Gifted Child Quarterly55(1): 39–53.
46.
SturmanLTwistLBurgeB. (2012) PIRLS and TIMSS 2011 in Northern Ireland: Reading, mathematics and science. NFER. Available at: https://www.nfer.ac.uk/publications/PRTI01 (accessed 25 April 2016).
47.
SwiatekMA (1993) A decade of longitudinal research on academic acceleration through the study of mathematically precocious youth. Roeper Review15: 120–124.
48.
ThackerO (2014) Graduation rates: a comparison of college graduation success rates of dual enrolment versus non-dual enrolment students at the community college. Dissertation, University of Tennessee, Knoxville.
49.
TomlinsonCALayne KalbfleischML (1998) Teacher me, teach my brain: a call for differentiated classrooms. Educational Leadership56(3): 52–55.
WhybraJ (2000) Extension and enrichment programmes: a place I could fit in. In: StopperMJ (ed), Meeting the Social and Emotional Needs of Gifted and Talented Children. London: David Fulton Publishers, pp. 99–118.
