This study investigates the change in social self-concept among adolescents participating in a summer program for the gifted. Participants include 140 gifted students who had completed the 7th through 10th grade during the previous academic year. Social self-concept was measured at the beginning and end of the summer camp using the same-sex peer relations and the opposite-sex peer relations subscales of the Self-Description Questionnaire II (Marsh, 1990). Results indicate both males and females experienced an increase in their perceived same-sex peer relations and their perceived opposite-sex peer relations over the course of the summer program. Conclusions and implications for education policy are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AblardK. E. (1997). Self-perceptions and needs as a function of type of academic ability and gender. Roeper Review, 20, 110–115.
2.
BainS. K.BellS. M. (2004). Social self-concept, social attributions, and peer relationships in fourth, fifth, and sixth graders who are gifted compared to high achievers. Gifted Child Quarterly, 48, 167–178.
3.
BrodyL. E.BenbowC. P. (1986). Social and emotional adjustment of adolescents extremely talented in verbal or mathematical reasoning. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 15, 1–18.
4.
BrookbyS. A. (2004). Academic self-efficacy and social self-concept of mathematically gifted high school students in a summer residential program (Doctoral dissertation, University of Missouri, Kansas City, 2004). Dissertation Abstracts International, 65, 1707.
5.
ByrneB. M.ShavelsonR. J. (1996). On the structure of social self-concept for pre-, early, and late adolescents: A test of the Shavelson, Hubner, and Stanton (1976) model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 599–613.
6.
ColangeloN.AssoulineS. G.GrossM. U. M. (2004). A nation deceived: How schools hold back America's brightest students (Vol. 1). Iowa City, IA: The Connie Belin & Jacqueline N. Blank International Center for Gifted Education and Talent Development.
7.
ColangeloN.KellyK. R.SchrepferR. M. (1987). A comparison of gifted, general, and special learning needs students on academic and social self-concept. Journal of Counseling and Development, 66, 73–77.
8.
ColemanL. J.CrossT. L. (1988). Is being gifted a social handicap?Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 11, 41–56.
9.
CornellD. G. (1990). High ability students who are unpopular with their peers. Gifted Child Quarterly, 34, 155–160.
10.
DixonF. A. (1998). Social and academic self-concepts of gifted adolescents. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 22, 80–94.
11.
EnersonD. L. (1993). Summer residential programs: Academics and beyond. Gifted Child Quarterly, 37, 169–176.
12.
EriksonE. H. (1963). Childhood and society. New York: Norton.
13.
GallagherJ. (2004). No Child Left Behind and gifted education. Roeper Review, 26, 121–123.
14.
GilmanR.LaughlinJ. E.HuebnerE. S. (1999). Validation of the Self-Description Questionnaire- II with an American sample. School Psychology International, 20, 300–307.
15.
HogeR. D.RenzulliJ. S. (1993). Exploring the link between giftedness and self-concept. Review of Educational Research, 63, 449–465.
16.
HumesC. W.IICampbellR. D. (1980). Gifted students: A 15-year longitudinal study. Gifted Child Quarterly, 24, 129–131.
17.
KellyK. R.ColangeloN. (1984). Academic and social self-concepts of gifted, general, and special students. Exceptional Children, 50, 551–554.
18.
KellyK. R.JordanL. K. (1990). Effects of academic achievement and gender on academic and social self-concept: A replication study. Journal of Counseling and Development, 69, 173–177.
19.
KolloffP. B.MooreA. D. (1989). Effects of summer programs on the self-concepts of gifted children. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 12, 268–276.
20.
LenzK.BurrussJ. D. (1994). Meeting affective needs through summer academic experiences. Roeper Review, 17, 51.
21.
LerouxJ. A. (1988). Voices from the classroom: Academic and social self-concepts of gifted adolescents. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 11, 3–18.
22.
Manor-BullockR. (1994). Gifted adolescents: Social comparisons and changes in self-concept on entering a rigorous academic program in a residential environment (Doctoral dissertation, Ball State University, 1994). Dissertation Abstracts International, 55, 3638.
23.
MarshH. W. (1986). Verbal and math self-concepts: An internal/external frame of reference model. American Educational Research Journal, 23, 129–149.
24.
MarshH. W. (1990). Self-Description Questionnaire (SDQ) II: Manual. New South Wales, Australia: University of Western Sydney.
25.
MarshH. W.HauK. T. (2003). Big-fish-little-pond effect on academic self-concept: A cross-cultural (26-country) test of the negative effects of academically selective schools. American Psychologist, 58, 364–376.
26.
MarshH. W.KongC.HauK. (2000). Longitudinal multilevel models of the big-fish-little-pond effect on academic self-concept: Counterbalancing contrast and reflected-glory effects in Hong Kong schools. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 337–349.
27.
MarshH. W.O'NeillR. (1984). Self-Description Questionnaire III: The construct validity of multi-dimensional self-concept ratings by late-adolescents. Journal of Educational Measurement, 21, 153–174.
28.
MarshH. W.ParkerJ. W. (1984). Determinants of student self-concept: Is it better to be a relatively large fish in a small pond even if you don't learn to swim as well?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47, 213–231.
MayselessO. (1993). Gifted adolescents and intimacy in close same-sex friendships. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 22, 135–146.
31.
MeeceJ. L. (2002). Child and adolescent development for educators (2nd ed.). Boston: McGraw-Hill.
32.
MoonS. M.FeldhusenJ. F.DillonD. R. (1994). Long-term effects of an enrichment program based on the Purdue Three-Stage Model. Gifted Child Quarterly, 38, 38–48.
33.
NormanA. D.RamsayS. G.RobertsJ. L.MartrayC. R. (2000). Effect of social setting, self-concept, and relative age on the social status of moderately and highly gifted students. Roeper Review, 23, 34–39.
34.
OlszewskiP.KuliekeM. J.WillisG. B. (1987). Changes in the self-perceptions of gifted students who participate in rigorous academic programs. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 10, 287–303.
35.
Olszewski-KubiliusP. (2003). Special summer and Saturday programs for gifted students. In ColangeloN.DavisG. A. (Eds.), Handbook of gifted education (3rd ed., pp. 219–228). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
36.
ParkerJ. P. (1998). The Torrance creative scholars program. Roeper Review, 21, 32–35.
37.
PaulK. M.PluckerJ. A. (2004). Two steps forward, one step back: Effect size reporting in gifted education research from 1995-2000. Roeper Review, 26, 68–72.
38.
PetersonJ. S.RischarH. (2000). Gifted and gay: A study of the adolescent experience. Gifted Child Quarterly, 44, 231–244.
39.
PluckerJ. A. (1997). Debunking the myth of the “highly significant” result: Effect sizes in gifted education research. Roeper Review, 20, 122–126.
40.
PluckerJ. A.TaylorJ. W.VCallahanC. M.TomchinE. M. (1997). Mirror, mirror, on the wall: Reliability and validity evidence for the Self-Description Questionnaire II with gifted students. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 57, 704–713.
41.
PluckerJ. A.StockingV. B. (2001). Looking outside and inside: Self-concept development of gifted adolescents. Exceptional Children, 67, 535–548.
42.
PurcellJ. H. (1993). The effects of the elimination of gifted and talented programs on participating students and their parents. Gifted Child Quarterly, 37, 177–187.
43.
PyrytM. C.MendaglioS. (1994). The multidimensional self-concept: A comparison of gifted and average-ability adolescents. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 17, 299–305.
44.
RinnA. N. (2005). Trends among honors college students: An analysis by year in school. Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 16, 157–167.
45.
RossA.ParkerM. (1980). Academic and social self-concepts of the academically gifted. Exceptional Children, 47(1), 6–10.
46.
ShavelsonR. J.HubnerJ. J.StantonG. C. (1976). Validation of construct interpretations. Review of Educational Research, 46, 407–441.
47.
SpielhagenF. R.CooperB. S. (2005, April 13). The unkindest cut. Education Week, pp. 47–48.
48.
StockingV. B.PorterL. C.GoldsteinD.OpplerS. H. (1993, April). The self-concept of talented adolescents in an intensive summer program: Implications for programming. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Atlanta, GA.
49.
ThomasT. A. (1989). Acceleration for the academically talented: A follow-up of the academic talent search class of 1984. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED307303)
50.
TymmsP. (2001). A test of the big fish in a little pond hypothesis: An investigation into the feelings of seven-year-old pupils in school. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 12, 161–181.
51.
VaughnV. L.FeldhusenJ. F.AsherJ. W. (1991). Meta-analyses and review of research on pull-out programs in gifted education. Gifted Child Quarterly, 35, 92–98.
52.
WorrellF. C.RothD. A.GabelkoN. H. (1998). Age and gender differences in the self-concepts of academically talented students. Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 9, 157–162.
53.
WrightP. B.LerouxJ. A. (1997). The self-concept of gifted adolescents in a congregated program. Gifted Child Quarterly, 41, 83–94.
