BorlandJ. H. (1996). Gifted education and the threat of irrelevance. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 19, 129–147.
2.
CallahanC. 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.
3.
GallagherS. A.StepienW. (1992). The effects of problem-based learning on problem solving. Gifted Child Quarterly, 36, 195–200.
4.
ParnesS. J. (1977). CPSI: The general system. Journal of Creative Behavior, 11(1), 1–11.
5.
RenzulliJ. S. (1977). The enrichment triad model: A guide for developing defensible programs for the gifted. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
6.
RenzulliJ. S.ReisS. M. (1985). The school-wide enrichment model: A comprehensive plan for educational excellence. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
7.
StanleyJ. C.BenbowC. P. (1983). Intellectually talented students: The key is curricular flexibility. In ParisS.OlsonG.StevensonH. (Eds.), Learning and motivation in the classroom. (pp. 251–289). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
8.
TannenbaumA. J. (1987). The gifted movement: Forward or on a Treadmill. West Lafayette, IN: Gifted Education Resource Institute. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 315 949)
9.
TreffingerD. J. (1982). Gifted students, regular classrooms: Sixty ingredients for a better blend. Elementary School Journal, 82, 267–273.
10.
WilliamsF. E. (1979). Assessing creativity across Williams' “cube” model. Gifted Child Quarterly, 23, 748–756.