Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Card and Giuliano conducted a regression discontinuity study in a large Florida school district to investigate the magnitude of academic benefits of the district’s gifted program. They found that for children identified as gifted through an intelligence test, the program provided few or no benefits. But children who were admitted to the gifted program because of high achievement test scores received academic benefits in multiple school subjects. This study—performed by economists with no vested interest in educational theory or practice—is a welcomed contribution to the gifted education research because it touches upon issues of identification, diversity, program evaluation, and more. However, Card and Giuliano’s contributions to gifted education theory are more limited. Nevertheless, gifted education is better off because of their study, and I welcome other “intrusions” from non-educational scholars into gifted education research.

Keywords

program evaluation educational theory gifted programs

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Adelson

J. L.

McCoach

D. B.

Gavin

M. K.

(2012). Examining the effects of gifted programming in mathematics and reading using the ECLS-K. Gifted Child Quarterly, 56, 25-39. doi:10.1177/0016986211431487

Archambault

F. X.

Westberg

K. L.

Brown

S. W.

Hallmark

B. W.

Zhang

Emmons

C. L.

(1993). Classroom practices used with gifted third and fourth grade students. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 16, 103-119. doi:10.1177/016235329301600203

Borland

J. H.

(2003). Evaluating gifted programs: A broader perspective. In Colangelo

Davis

G. A.

(Eds.), Handbook of gifted education (3rd ed., pp. 293-307). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

Briggs

C. J.

Reis

S. M.

Sullivan

E. E.

(2008). A national view of promising programs and practices for culturally, linguistically, and ethnically diverse gifted and talented students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 52, 131-145. doi:10.1177/0016986208316037

Callahan

C. 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.

Callahan

C. M.

Moon

T. R.

(2013). Status of elementary gifted programs. Charlottesville, VA: National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented. Retrieved from http://www.nagc.org/sites/default/files/key%20reports/ELEM%20school%20GT%20Survey%20Report.pdf

Callahan

C. M.

Moon

T. R.

Azano

A. P.

Hailey

E. P.

(2015). What works in gifted education: Documenting the effects of an integrated curricular/instructional model for gifted students. American Educational Research Journal, 52, 137-167. doi:10.3102/0002831214549448

Card

Giuliano

(2014). Does gifted education work? For which students? (NBER Working Paper No. 20453). Retrieved from: http://www.nber.org/papers/w20453

Dai

D. Y.

Swanson

J. A.

Cheng

(2011). State of research on giftedness and gifted education: A survey of empirical studies published during 1998-2010 (April). Gifted Child Quarterly, 55, 126-138. doi:10.1177/0016986210397831

10.

Hertberg-Davis

(2009). Myth 7: Differentiation in the regular classroom is equivalent to gifted programs and is sufficient: Classroom teachers have the time, the skill, and the will to differentiate adequately. Gifted Child Quarterly, 53, 251-253. doi:10.1177/0016986209346927

11.

Jensen

A. R.

(1998). The g factor: The science of mental ability. Westport. CT: Praeger.

12.

Lipsey

M. W.

Farran

D. C.

Hofer

K. G.

(2015). A randomized control trial of a statewide voluntary prekindergarten program on children’s skills and behaviors through third grade. Retrieved from http://peabody.vanderbilt.edu/research/pri/VPKthrough3rd_final_withcover.pdf

13.

Lohman

D. F.

Gambrell

Lakin

(2008). The commonality of extreme discrepancies in the ability profiles of academically gifted students. Psychology Science Quarterly, 50, 269-282.

14.

Matthews

M. S.

Peters

S. J.

Housand

A. M.

(2012). Regression discontinuity design in gifted and talented education research. Gifted Child Quarterly, 56, 105-112. doi:10.1177/0016986212444845

15.

McArdle

J. J.

(2008). Studies on the impacts of minimum academic standards (Prop 48) on the academic achievements of college student-athletes. In Kyllonen

P. C.

Roberts

R. D.

Stankov

(Eds.), Extending intelligence: Enhancement and new constructs (pp. 133-156). New York, NY: Lawrence Erlbaum.

16.

Nomi

Allensworth

E. M.

(2013). Sorting and supporting: Why double-dose algebra led to better test scores but more course failures. American Educational Research Journal, 50, 756-788. doi:10.3102/0002831212469997

17.

Rambo-Hernandez

K. E.

(2011). How much do schools matter? Using summer growth patterns to assess the impact of schools on high achieving and gifted students (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Connecticut, Storrs.

18.

Rambo-Hernandez

K. E.

Warne

R. T.

(2015). Measuring the outliers: An introduction to out-of-level testing with high-achieving students. Teaching Exceptional Children, 47, 199-207. doi:10.1177/0040059915569359

19.

Renzulli

J. S.

Reis

S. M.

(1994). Research related to the schoolwide enrichment triad model. Gifted Child Quarterly, 38, 7-20. doi:10.1177/001698629403800102

20.

Ruf

D. L.

(2005). Losing our minds: Gifted children left behind. Scottsdale, AZ: Great Potential Press.

21.

Snyder

K. E.

Linnenbrink-Garcia

(2013). A developmental, person-centered approach to exploring multiple motivational pathways in gifted underachievement. Educational Psychologist, 48, 209-228. doi:10.1080/00461520.2013.835597

22.

Sonnert

Sadler

P. M.

(2014). The impact of taking a college pre-calculus course on students’ college calculus performance. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 45, 1188-1207. doi:10.1080/0020739x.2014.920532

23.

Swiatek

M. A.

Lupkowski-Shoplik

(2005). An evaluation of the elementary student Talent Search by families and schools. Gifted Child Quarterly, 49, 247-259. doi:10.1177/001698620504900306

24.

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2010). Head Start impact study: Final report. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from http://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/opre/hs_impact_study_final.pdf

25.

VanTassel-Baska

(2006a). A content analysis of evaluation findings across 20 gifted programs: A clarion call for enhanced gifted program development. Gifted Child Quarterly, 50, 199-212. doi:10.1177/001698620605000302

26.

VanTassel-Baska

(2006b). NAGC symposium: A report card on the state of research in the field of gifted education. Gifted Child Quarterly, 50, 339-341. doi:10.1177/001698620605000406

27.

Wai

Lubinski

Benbow

C. P.

Steiger

J. H.

(2010). Accomplishment in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) and its relation to STEM educational dose: A 25-year longitudinal study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102, 860-871. doi:10.1037/a0019454

28.

Warne

R. T.

(2016). Five reasons to put the g back into giftedness: An argument for applying the Cattell–Horn–Carroll theory of intelligence to gifted education research and practice. Gifted Child Quarterly, 60, 3-15. doi:10.1177/0016986215603560

29.

Warne

R. T.

Larsen

Anderson

Odasso

A. J.

(2015). The impact of participation in the Advanced Placement program on students’ college admissions test scores. The Journal of Educational Research, 108, 400-416. doi:10.1080/00220671.2014.917253

30.

Xiang

Dahlin

Cronin

Theaker

Durant

(2011). Do high flyers maintain their altitude? Washington, DC: Thomas B. Fordham Institute.

A Welcomed Intrusion

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References