This article presents a view of barriers to effective gifted program evaluation resulting from ineffective tools for measuring growth in gifted students and the human barriers confounding the evaluation process. The role of advocacy in the design, implementation, and utilization of evaluation studies is examined. Long held beliefs and biases related to gifted education are recognized as influencing program evaluations. The recognition of the strengths and challenges inherent in the educational role of specific stakeholder groups is presented. Suggestions for developing an emerging cadre of advocates for gifted education are detailed.
ArensmanB.van WaegeninghC.van WesselM. (2018). Twinning “practices of change” with “theory of change”: Room for emergence in advocacy evaluation. American Journal of Evaluation, 39, 221-236.
2.
BorlandJ. H. (2009). Myth 2: The Gifted constitute 3% to 5% of the population. moreover, giftedness equals high IQ, which is a stable measure of aptitude spinal tap psychometrics in gifted education. Gifted Child Quarterly, 53, 236-238.
3.
BrownE.AveryL. D.VanTassel-BaskaJ. L.WorleyB. B.II.StambaughT. (2006). Legislation and policies: Effects on the gifted. Roeper Review, 29, 11-23.
4.
CallahanC. M.MoonT. R.OhS. (2017). Describing the status of programs for the gifted: A call for action. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 40, 20-49.
5.
CaoT. H.JungJ. Y.LeeJ. (2017). Assessment in gifted education: A review of the literature from 2006 to 2015. Journal of Advanced Academics, 28, 163-203.
6.
CrossT. (2002). Competing with myths about the social and emotional development of gifted students. Gifted Child Today, 25(3), 44-46.
7.
CrossT.ColemanL.Terhaar-YonkersM. (2014). The social cognition of gifted adolescents in schools: Managing the stigma of giftedness. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 37, 30-39.
8.
DamianiV. B. (1996). The individual family support plan: A tool to assist special populations of gifted learners. Roeper Review, 18, 293-297.
9.
DesimoneL. M. (2009). Improving impact studies of teachers’ professional development: Toward better conceptualizations and measures. Educational Researcher, 38, 188-199.
10.
FordD. Y. (2014). Segregation and the underrepresentation of Blacks and Hispanics in gifted education: Social inequality and deficit paradigms. Roeper Review, 36, 143-154.
11.
GuskeyT. R. (2002). Professional development and teacher change. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 8, 381-391.
12.
HansenJ. B.FeldhusenJ. F. (1994). Comparison of trained and untrained teachers of gifted students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 38, 115-121.
13.
HattieJ. (2003). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. New York, NY: Routledge.
14.
HuffR. E.HouskampB. M.WatkinsA. V.StantonM.TavegiaB. (2005). The experiences of gifted African American children: A phenomenological study. Roeper Review, 27, 215-221.
15.
HunsakerS. L. (2000). Documenting gifted program results for key decision-makers. Roeper Review, 23, 80-83.
16.
JungJ. Y. (2014). Predictors of attitudes to gifted programs/provisions: Evidence from preservice educators. Gifted Child Quarterly, 58, 247-258.
17.
KennedyK.FarleyJ. (2018). Counseling gifted students: School-based considerations and strategies. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 10, 363-367.
18.
KirschenbaumR. J.ArmstrongD. C.LandrumM. S. (1999). Resource consultation model in gifted education to support talent development in today’s inclusive schools. Gifted Child Quarterly, 43, 39-47.
19.
KitsantasA.BlandL.ChirinosD. S. (2017). Gifted students’ perceptions of gifted programs: An inquiry into their academic and social-emotional functioning. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 40, 266-288.
20.
LandrumM. S. (2001). Resource consultation and collaboration in gifted education. Psychology in the Schools, 38, 457-466.
21.
McBeeM. T. (2006). A descriptive analysis of referral sources for gifted identification screening by race and socioeconomic status. Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 17, 103-111.
22.
McCoachD. B.RamboK. E.WelshM. (2013). Assessing the growth of gifted students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 57, 56-67.
23.
McCoachD. B.SiegleD. (2003). Factors that differentiate underachieving gifted students from high-achieving gifted students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 47, 144-154.
24.
McCoachD. B.SiegleD. (2007). What predicts teachers’ attitudes toward the gifted?Gifted Child Quarterly, 51, 246-255.
National Association for Gifted Children & The Council of State Directors of Programs for the Gifted. (2015). State of the states in gifted education: Policy and practice data 2014-2015. Washington, DC: Author.
28.
Olszewski-KubiliusP.ClarenbachJ. (2012). Unlocking emergent talent: Supporting high achievement of low-income, high-ability students. Washington, DC: National Association for Gifted Children.
29.
PetersonJ. S. (2008). The essential guide to talking with gifted teens: Ready-to-use discussions about identity, stress, relationships and more. Minneapolis, MN: Free Spirit.
30.
PetersonJ. S.MorrisC. W. (2010). Preparing school counselors to address concerns related to giftedness: A study of accredited counselor preparation programs. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 33, 311-336.
31.
PfeifferS. I. (2002). Identifying gifted and talented students: Recurring issues and promising solutions. Journal of Applied School Psychology, 19, 31-50.
32.
PfeifferS. I. (2015). Essentials of gifted assessment. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley.
33.
PluckerJ. A.MakelM. C.MatthewsM. S.PetersS. J.Rambo-HernandezK. E. (2017). Blazing new trails: Strengthening policy research in gifted education. Gifted Child Quarterly, 61, 210-218.
34.
PortešováS.BudíkováM.JuhováD. (2014). Myths about gifted learners from the perspective of teachers. New Educational Review, 37, 229-242.
35.
Rambo-HernandezK. E.WarneR. T. (2015). Measuring the outliers: An introduction to out-of-level testing with high-achieving students. Teaching Exceptional Children, 47, 197-207.
36.
RenzulliJ. S. (2012). Reexamining the role of gifted education and talent development for the 21st century: A four-part theoretical approach. Gifted Child Quarterly, 56, 150-159.
37.
RobertsJ. L.SiegleD. (2012). Teachers as advocates: If not you—who?Gifted Child Today, 35, 58-61.
38.
RobertsJ. L.SiegleD. (2014). Advocacy. In PluckerJ. A.CallahanC. M. (Eds.), Critical issues in gifted education (2nd ed., pp. 65-76). Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.
39.
RobinsonA.CotabishA.WoodB. K.O’TuelT. F. (2014). The effects of a statewide evaluation initiative in gifted education on practitioner knowledge, concerns, and program documentation. Journal of Advanced Academics, 25, 349-383.
40.
RobinsonA.KolloffP. K. (2006). Preparing teachers to work with high-ability youth at the secondary level. In DixonF. A.MoonS. M. (Eds.), The handbook of secondary gifted education (pp. 581-610). Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.
41.
RyserG. R.Rambo-HernandezK. E. (2014). Using growth models to measure school performance. Gifted Child Today, 37, 17-23.
42.
SchrothT. S.HellerJ. A. (2008). Identifying gifted students: Educational beliefs regarding various policies, processes, and procedures. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 32, 155-179.
43.
SmithE.SmithM. (1997). Multiple criteria from a parent’s perspective or we all want the best for our children. Roeper Review, 20, Article 6.
VanTassel-BaskaJ. (2006). A content analysis of evaluation findings across 20 gifted programs; A clarion call for enhanced gifted program development. Gifted Child Quarterly, 50, 199-215.
46.
VanTassel-BaskaJ. (2009). United States policy development in gifted education: A patchwork quilt. In ShavininaL. (Ed.), International handbook on giftedness (pp. 1295-1312). New York, NY: Springer.
47.
VanTassel-BaskaJ. (2014). Performance-based assessment: The road to authentic learning for the gifted. Gifted Child Today, 37, 41-47.
48.
VanTassel-BaskaJ. (2018). American policy in gifted education. Gifted Child Today, 41, 98-103.
49.
WarneR. T. (2012). History and development of above-level testing of the gifted. Roeper Review, 34, 183-193.
50.
WynerJ. S.BridgelandJ. M.DilulioJ. J.Jr. (2007). Achievement trap: How America is failing millions of high-achieving students from lower-income families. Lansdowne, VA: Jack Kent Cook Foundation.
51.
YeungR. (2014). Gifted education: Robin Hood or the sheriff of Nottingham?Education and Urban Society, 46, 798-825.
