In this article, we summarize current research about talented adolescents and teenage females in the following areas, which are frequently discussed as issues that affect female talent development: grades in school, females' beliefs about ability, the effects of stereotyping, test score differences, career choice, and parental influences. We reaffirm some prior conclusions; present new, contradictory research evidence; discuss older findings in light of the passage of time; and raise questions about the importance, significance, and generalizability of prior conclusions.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
American Association of University Women. (1991). Shortchanging girls, shortchanging America: A call to action. Washington, DC: Author.
2.
American Association of University Women. (1992). The AAUW report: How schools shortchange girls. Washington, DC: American Association of University Women and National Education Association.
3.
American College Testing Program. (1989). State and national trend data for students who take the ACT assessment. Iowa City: Author.
4.
ArnoldK. D. (1993). Academically talented women in the 1980s: The Illinois valedictorian project. In HulbertK.SchusterD. (Eds.), Women's lives through time: Educated American women of the twentieth century (pp. 393–414). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
5.
BeckerD. F.ForsythR. A. (1990). Gender differences in grades 3 through 12: A longitudinal analysis. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Boston, MA.
6.
BoyerE. L. (1987). College: The undergraduate experience in America. New York: Harper & Row.
7.
BrownB. B.SteinbergL. (1989). How bright students save face among peers. National Center for Effective Secondary Schools Newsletter, 4(2), 2–8.
8.
BuescherT. M.OlszewskiP.HighamS. J. (1987). Influences on strategies adolescents use to cope with their own recognized talents (Report No. EC 200 755). Paper presented at the biennial meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development, Baltimore, MD.
9.
CallahanC. M. (1986). The special needs of gifted girls. Journal of Children in Contemporary Society, 18(3–4), 105–117.
10.
CallahanC. M.CunninghamC. M.PluckerJ. A. (1994). Foundations for the future: The socio-emotional development of gifted, adolescent women. Roeper Review, 17(2), 99–105.
11.
CampbellJ. R.ConnollyC.LacattivaC.PizzoJ. (1985). Math/science gender gap: Influence of parents on gifted Asian and Caucasian children. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.
12.
ChipmanS. F.BrushL.WilsonD. (Eds.). (1985). Women and mathematics: Balancing the equation. New York: Erlbaum.
13.
CooleyD.ChauvinJ.KarnesF. (1984). Gifted females: A comparison of attitudes by male and female teachers. Roeper Review, 6(3), 164–167.
14.
CrombieG.Bouffard-BouchardT.SchneiderB. H. (1992). Gifted programs: Gender differences in referral and enrollment. Gifted Child Quarterly, 36(4), 213–214.
15.
DickensM. N. (1990). Parental influences on the mathematics self-concept of high achieving adolescent girls. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Virginia, Charlottesville.
16.
DolnyC. (1985). University of Toronto schools' gifted students' career and family plans. Roeper Review, 7(3), 160–162.
17.
DreydenJ. I.GallagherS. A. (1989). The effects of time and direction changes on the SAT performance of academically talented adolescents. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 12(3), 187–204.
18.
EcclesJ. S.BlumfieldP. (1985). Classroom experiences and student gender: Are there differences and do they matter? In WilkinsonL. C.MarretC. B. (Eds.), Gender influences in classroom interaction (pp. 79–114). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
19.
EcclesJ.MidgleyC.AdlerT. F. (1984). Grade-related changes in the school environment: Effects on achievement motivation. In NichollsJ. (Ed.), Advances in motivation and achievement (Vol. 3, pp. 283–331). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
20.
Educational Testing Service. (1989). 1989 profile of SAT and achievement test takers. Princeton, NJ: Author.
21.
FeldhusenJ. F.Willard-HoltC. (1993). Gender differences in classroom interaction and career aspirations of gifted students. Contemporary Education Psychology, 18(3), 355–362.
22.
FennemaE. (1990). Teachers' beliefs and gender differences in mathematics. In FennemaE.LederG. (Eds.), Mathematics and gender (pp. 1–9). New York: Teachers College Press.
23.
FettersW. B. (1975). National longitudinal study of the high school class of 1972: Student questionnaire and test results by sex, high school program, ethnic category, and father's education (Report No. NCES-75–208). Washington, DC: National Center for Educational Statistics. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 111 850).
24.
FordD. Y. (1992). The American achievement ideology as perceived by urban African American students. Urban Education, 27(2), 196–211.
25.
FowlerM. L. (1991). Gifted adolescent girls' science beliefs and strategies on a mechanical design task. Dissertation Abstracts International, 52(4), 1279-A.
26.
GradyJ. (1987). Trends in the selection science, mathematics, or engineering as major fields of study among top scoring SAT takers. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
27.
HallinanM. T.SorensonA. B. (1987). Ability grouping and sex differences in mathematics achievement. Sociology of Education, 60, 63–72.
28.
HalpernD. (1989). The disappearance of cognitive gender differences: What you see depends on where you look. American Psychologist, 44, 1156–1158.
29.
HessR. D.HollowayS. D.DicksonW. P.PriceG. G. (1984). Maternal variables as predictors of children's school readiness and later achievement in vocabulary and mathematics in sixth grade. Child Development, 55, 1902–1912.
30.
HollingerC. L. (1991). Career choices for gifted adolescents: Overcoming stereotypes. In BireleyM.GenshaftJ. (Eds.), Understanding the gifted adolescent: Educational, developmental and issues (pp. 201–214). New York: Teachers College Press.
31.
HydeJ. S.FennemaE. (1990). Gender differences in mathematics performance and affect: Results of two meta-analyses. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Boston, MA.
32.
KimballM. M. (1989). A new perspective on women's math achievement. Psychological Bulletin, 105, 198–214.
33.
KissaneB. V. (1986). Selection of mathematically talented students. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 17(3), 221–241.
34.
KlineB. E.ShortE. B. (1991). Changes in emotional resilience: Gifted adolescent females. Roeper Review, 13(3), 118–121.
35.
KramerL. R. (1991). The social construction of ability perceptions: An ethnographic study of gifted adolescent girls. Journal of Early Adolescence, 11(3), 340–362.
36.
Lashaway-BokinaN. (1996). Gifted, but gone: High ability, Mexican-American, female dropouts. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Connecticut, Storrs.
37.
LerouxJ. A. (1988). Voices from the classroom: Academic and social self-concepts of gifted adolescents. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 11(3), 3–18.
38.
MartinD. J.HooverH. D. (1987). Sex differences in educational achievement: A longitudinal study. Journal of Early Adolescence, 7, 65–83.
39.
McGillicuddy-De LisiA. V. (1985). The relationship between parental beliefs and children's cognitive level. In SigelR. (Ed.), Parental belief systems (pp. 7–24). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
40.
MurrayB. (1995, November). Gender gap in math scores is closing. APA Monitor, p. 43.
41.
ParsonsJ. E.AdlerT. F.KaczalaC. (1982). Socialization of achievement attitudes and beliefs: Parental influences. Child Development, 53, 310–321.
42.
PhillipsD. A. (1987). Socialization of perceived academic competence among highly competent children. Child Development, 58, 1308–1320.
43.
PipherM. (1994). Reviving Ophelia. New York: Grosset/Putnam.
44.
ReadC. R. (1991). Gender distribution in programs for the gifted. Roeper Review, 13(4), 188–193.
45.
ReisS. M. (1987). We can't change what we don't recognize: Understanding the special needs of gifted females. Gifted Child Quarterly, 31(2), 83–88.
46.
ReisS. M.CallahanC. M. (1989). Gifted females: They've come a long way—or have they?. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 12(2), 99–117.
47.
ReisS. M.CallahanC. M.GoldsmithD. (1996). Attitudes of gifted adolescents toward their achievement, education and future. In ArnoldK. D.NobleK. D.SubotnikR. F. (Eds.), Remarkable women: Perspectives on female talent development (pp. 209–224). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
48.
ReisS. M.HébertT. P.DiazE. I.MaxfieldL. R.RatleyM. E. (1995). Case studies of talented students who achieve and underachieve in an urban high schoolStorrs, CT: National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented.
49.
RogersA.GilliganC. (1988). Translating girls' voices: Two languages of development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Graduate School of Education, Harvard Project on the Psychology of Women and the Development of Girls.
50.
RosserP. (1989). Sex bias in college admissions tests: Why women lose out. Cambridge, MA: National Center for Fair and Open Testing.
51.
SadkerM.SadkerD. (1994). Failing at fairness: How America's schools cheat girls. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons.
52.
ShucardS. B. (1991). Attributions and self-evaluations by gifted children under success-failure conditions and individualistic-competitive goal structures. Dissertation Abstracts International, 52(2), 483-A.
53.
SchmurakC. B. (1996, April). Following the girls: A longitudinal study of girls' attitudes and aspirations at single sex and coeducation high schools. New York: American Educational Research Association.
54.
SiegleD.ReisS. M. (1995). Gender differences in teacher and student perceptions of student ability and effort. The Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 6(2), 86–92.
55.
SpielhagenF. (1996). Case studies of talented females. In ArnoldK. D.NobleK. D.SubotnikB. F. (Eds.), Remarkable women: Perspectives on female talent development (pp. 193–208). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
56.
StevensonH. W.NewmanR. S. (1986). Long-term prediction of achievement in mathematics and reading. Child Development, 57(3) 646–659.
57.
SubotnikR.StraussS. M. (1995). Gender differences in classroom participation and achievement: An experiment involving advanced placement calculus classes. The Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 6(2) 77–85.
58.
United Nations Economic Commission for Europe. (1994). Report of the high-level regional preparatory meeting for the fourth World Conference on Women.
59.
YongF. L. (1992). Mathematics and science attitudes of African-American middle grade students identified as gifted: Gender and grade differences. Roeper Review, 14(3), 136–140.
