Even though many universities and secondary schools have developed a variety of distance learning options, few are designed specifically for gifted students. This paper provides background information about distance learning, the rationale for it, descriptions of three programs designed specifically for gifted students, and the pros and cons of providing instruction using this method of delivery.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
CubanL. (1995). Public school teachers using machines in the next decade. In Education and technology: Future vision. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
2.
GarrisonD. R.ShaleD. (1987). Mapping the boundaries of distance education: Problems in defining the field. The American Journal of Distance Education, 1(1), 7–17.
3.
GoodrichB. E. (1994). Creating a “virtual” magnet school. T.H.E. Journal., 73–75.
4.
HobbsV. M.ChristiansonJ. S. (1997). Virtual classrooms: Educational opportunity through two-way interactive television. Lancaster, PA: Technomic.
5.
HolmbergB. (1986). Growth and structure of distance education. London: Croom Helm.
6.
KeeganD. (1988). On defining distance education. In SewartD.KeeganD.HolmbergB. (Eds.), Distance education: International perspectives (pp. 63–67). New York: Routledge.
7.
KimballL. (1995, October). Ten ways to make online learning groups work. Educational Leadership, 54–56.
8.
KleinwaksL. (1998, November 18). Gifted education/school-to-work models: Best practices and unique approaches. [On-line]. Available: http://www.stw.ed.gov/products/html/1543.htm.
9.
LewisG. (1989). Telelearning: Making maximum use of the medium. Roeper Review, 11(4), 195–198.
10.
LewisG. (1993). Sharing the resources: Electronic outreach programs. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 16(4), 372–386.
11.
LewisG.TalbertM. (1990). Telelearning: Reaching out to the gifted in rural schools. Educating Able Learners, 15(1), 2–3, 10.
12.
McBrideR. (1991). Courses offered despite cutbacks. American School Board Journal, 178, A26.
13.
McCameronF. (1991). Telelearning goes the distance. American School Board Journal, 178, A27.
14.
MojkowskiC.GoodrichB. (1997). (REMS)2: A retrospective. Unpublished manuscript.
Olszewski-KubiliusP.Limburg-WeberL. (1999). Designs for excellence: A guide to educational program options for academically talented middle & secondary school students. Evanston, IL: Center for Talent Development, Northwestern University.
17.
RifkindL. J. (1993). Immediacy as a predictor of teacher effectiveness in instructional television classroom. The Journal of Interactive Television, 1(1), 31–40.
18.
SchrumL.BerenfeldB. (1997). Teaching and learning in the information age: A guide to educational telecommunications. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
TimpsonW. M.JonesC. S. (1989). Increased education choices for the gifted: Distance learning via technology. Gifted Child Today, 12(5), 10–11.
21.
Van HornR. (1998). Visions: Enabling technology for programs of distinction. Phi Delta Kappan, 79, 477–478.
22.
WashingtonM. F. (1997). Real hope for the gifted. Gifted Child Today, 20(6), 20–22.
23.
WatkinsB. L. (1991). A quite radical idea: The invention and elaboration of collegiate correspondence study. In WatkinsB. L.WrightS. J. (Eds.), The foundations of American distance education (pp. 1–35). Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt.
