AdelmanC. (1999). Answers in the tool box: Academic intensity, attendance patterns, and bachelor's degree attainment.Washington, DC: Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education.
2.
BongM.SkaalvikE. M. (2003). Academic self-concept and self-efficacy: How different are they really?Educational Psychology Review, 15, 1–40.
3.
ColangeloN.AssoulineS. G.NewJ. K. (1999). Gifted education in rural schools: A national assessment.Iowa City, IA: The Connie Belin & Jacqueline N. Blank International Center for Gifted Education and Talent Development.
4.
ColemanL. J. (1985). Schooling the gifted.Menlo Park, CA: Addison-Wesley.
5.
CottonK. (1996). School size, school climate, and student performance (School Improvement Research Series Close Up #20). Portland, OR: Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory.
6.
CrossT. L.BurneyV. H. (2005). High ability, rural, and poor: Lessons from Project Aspire and implications for school counselors. Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 16, 148–156.
7.
CrossT. L.ColemanL. J. (2005). School-based conception of giftedness. In SternbergR.DavidsonJ. E. (Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness (2nd ed., pp. 52–63). New York: Cambridge University Press.
8.
CrossT.ColemanL.StewartR. (1993). The social cognition of gifted adolescents in schools: Managing the stigma of giftedness. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 15, 44–55.
9.
CrossT. L.DixonF. A. (1998). On gifted students in rural schools. NASSP Bulletin, 82(595), 119–124.
10.
CrossT. L.StewartR. A. (1995). A phenomenological investigation of the lebenswelt of gifted students in rural high schools. Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 6, 273–280.
11.
FaskoS. N.FaskoD. (1998). A systems approach to self-efficacy and achievement in rural schools. Education, 119, 292–300.
12.
JohnsonJ.StrangeM. (2005). Why rural matters 2005: The facts about rural education in the 50 states.Arlington, VA: Rural School and Community Trust.
13.
KitanoM. K.LewisR. B. (2005). Resilience and coping: Implications for gifted children and youth at risk. Roeper Review, 27, 200–205.
14.
MalhoitG. C. (2005). Providing rural students with a high quality education: The rural perspective on the concept of educational adequacy.Arlington, VA: Rural School and Community Trust.
15.
ManzoK. K. (1998). Weighted grades pose dilemmas in some schools. Education Week, 17(40), 1–2.
National Center for Education Statistics. (2003). Participation in education: Concentration of enrollment by race/ethnicity and poverty. In Condition of education, 2003 (table 5.1). Retrieved December 12, 2005, from http://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/2004/section1/table.asp?tableID=38.
National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse. (2000). No place to hide: Substance abuse in mid-size cities and rural America.New York: Columbia University.
20.
PayneR. K. (1998) A framework for understanding poverty (Rev. ed.). Highlands, TX: aha! Process.
21.
ScheerS. D.BordenL. M.DonnermeyerJ. F. (2000). The relationship between family factors and adolescent substance use in rural, suburban, and urban settings. Journal of Child & Family Studies, 9, 105–115.
22.
SherwoodT. (2001). Where has all the ‘rural’ gone? Rural education research and current federal reform.Washington, DC: The Rural School and Community Trust. Retrieved December 12, 2005, from http://www.ruraledu.org/docs/ruralgone.pdf.
23.
SlocumbP. D.PayneR. K. (2000). Removing the mask: Giftedness in poverty.Highlands, TX: aha! Process.
24.
U.S. Census Bureau. (2000). Adults with a high school diploma or GED (Summary File 3 [SF3] GCT-P11. “Language, School Enrollment, and Educational Attainment: 2000). Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau.