Annotated Bibliography

General Discussion/Thought Piece


American Educational Research Association (1977). Educational acceleration of intellectually talented youths: Prolonged discussion by a varied group of professionals. Presented at the American Educational Research Association Symposium on Educational Acceleration of Intellectually Talented Youths, New York, NY.

Provided are 17 papers presented at the American Educational Research Association's (AERA) 1977 Symposium on Educational Acceleration of Intellectually Talented Youths. Following introductory comments by H. James are entries with the following titles and authors: "Educational Acceleration of Intellectually Talented Youths-The Gifted and the Creative: Acceleration or Enrichment?" (R. Havighurst); "Acceleration-Simplistic Gimmickry" (M. Gold); "A.E.R.A. Symposium on Intellectually Talented Youth" (H. Robinson, et al.); "Educational Acceleration of Intellectually Talented Youths" (S. Daurio); "Selection of Appropriate Criteria and Comparison Groups for Use in the Evaluation of Educational Provisions for the Gifted and Talented" (A. Branch); "Acceleration- A Varied Approach" (E. Kearney); "Acceleration and Enrichment for the Gifted in New York City Public Schools" (V. Ehrlich); "A Possible Economic Correlation of Acceleration for the Individual and for Society" (D. Jackson); "Super Students, Average Schools" (S. Anderson); "Acceleration and the Excellent Mathematical Reasoner" (W. George); "Sexism, Democracy, and the Acceleration Versus Enrichment Controversy" (L. Fox); "The Acceleration/Enrichment Debate-”Basic Issues" (D. Keating); "Educational Acceleration of Intellectually Talented Youths-The Mathematical and Physical Sciences" (E. Gibb); "Some Reflections on the Acceleration-Enrichment Controversy" (A. Anastasi); "Brief Paper for Symposium on the Educational Acceleration of Intellectually Talented Youth" (J. Stark); and "Acceleration Versus Enrichment- The Tenth Rule of Three Cubed" (A. Kurtz).

Arizona State University, Dept. of Special Education (1983). Chronicle of Academic and Artistic Precocity, 2(1-6).

This document combines all 1983 issues of a newsletter that focused on issues of giftedness and talent. Among the major articles are discussions of the talent search conducted at five universities across the country; personal counseling approaches; the transition from high school to college; comparisons among Japanese, Soviet, and U.S. schools; Advanced Placement Program credits; counseling needs of gifted females; study suggestions; challenges of serving mathematically able girls; computer contributions to gifted education; gifted preschoolers; the international baccalaureate program; science and the young gifted child; advantages of acceleration; a college for high school age students; use of standardized tests in identifying gifted children; and suggestions for artistically precocious students. Brief biographical sketches of Robert Heinlein, Jon von Neumann, Flannery O'Connor, Thomas Paine, and Marie Curie are included.

Bain, S. K., Bliss, S. L., Choate, S. M., & Brown, K. S. (2007). Serving children who are gifted: Perceptions of undergraduates planning to become teachers. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 30(4), 450-478.

No abstract available.

Barnett, L. B., Albert, M. E., & Brody, L. E. (2005). The Center for Talented Youth Talent Search and academic programs. High Ability Studies, 16(1), 27-40.

The article describes the goals, programs, and methods of the Johns Hopkins University Center for Talented Youth (CTY), which seeks to identify and serve students with outstanding talent. CTY publicly recognizes exceptional students through newspaper articles and award ceremonies, which CTY hopes will motivate students and encourage schools to take action to challenge their students and reward academic excellence. In order to be eligible to participate in CTY programs, students must take an above grade level aptitude test through an annual talent search. CTY encourages those who score well compared with older students to both participate in CTY programs and seek advanced educational opportunities in their schools and communities. The CTY program is open to both American and international students.

CTY programs, which serve students in grades two through eight, include family academic conferences, academic summer programs, one day programs, weekend programs, and week-long explorations. The academic summer programs focus on one subject intensively for three weeks. Courses are designed to challenge students in writing, humanities, engineering, computer science, mathematics, and science. Most of the summer programs are residential, allowing students to build a support network and bond with their intellectual peers.

There are three talent searches, each of which uses a different test. The Talent search: Grades 7-8 uses the SAT I and gives students the option to take the Spatial Test Battery (STB) to supplement slightly lower SAT I scores. The Talent search: Grades 5-6 uses PLUS, which is similar to SAT I, and also offers the option of the STB to supplement slightly lower PLUS scores. The Elementary talent search uses the School and College Ability Test, or SCAT.

Within CTY is the Center for Academic Advancement (CAA), which was developed for bright students who do not meet CTY’s admission requirements. Unlike most of CTY, the CAA program is designed for enrichment, not acceleration.

Benbow, C. (1992). Progress in gifted education - everywhere but here! Gifted Child Today, 15, 2-8.

No abstract available.

Benbow, C. P. & Stanley, J. C. (1983). Constructing educational bridges between high school and college. Gifted Child Quarterly, 27(3), 111-113.

To offset low challenge in high school courses, the Study of Mathematically Precocious Youth encourages intellectually talented students to choose from seven alternative acceleration options. Also offered are four reasons for taking college credit courses in high school.

Benbow, C. P. (1992). Meeting the needs of the gifted in rural areas through acceleration. Gifted Child Today, 15(2), 15-19.

This article provides research-based suggestions for developing educational options based on acceleration to meet the needs of gifted students in rural areas. Accelerative options offered by both the home school and universities in Iowa are described.

Benbow, C. P., & Stanley, J. C. (1983). Opening doors for the gifted. American Education 19(3), 44-46.

Curriculum must be adapted to match the ability and developmental stages of the academically gifted. The Study of Mathematically Precocious Youth at Johns Hopkins University determined that curriculum flexibility, not change, is the best approach.

Benbow, C. P., & Stanley, J. C. (1996). Inequity in equity: How "equity" can lead to inequity for high-potential students. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 2(2), 249-292.

Over the past three decades, the achievement of waves of American students with high intellectual potential has declined as a result of inequity in educational treatment. This inequity is the result of an extreme form of egalitarianism within American society and schools, which involves the pitting of equity against excellence rather than promoting both equity and excellence; anti-intellectualism; the "dumbing down" of the curriculum; equating aptitude and achievement testing with elitism; the attraction to fads by schools; and the insistence of schools to teach all students from the same curriculum at the same level. In this article we provide recommendations for creating positive change-recommendations that emphasize excellence for all, that call for responsiveness to individual differences, and that suggest basing educational policies on well-grounded research findings in psychology and education. Educational policies that fail to take into account the vast range of individual differences among students-as do many that are currently in use-are doomed to be ineffective.

Bernal, E. M. (2003). To no longer educate the gifted: Programming for gifted students beyond the era of inclusionism. Gifted Child Quarterly, 47(3), 183-191.

No abstract available.

Boothe, D., Sethna, B. N., & Stanley, J. C. (1996). The Advanced Academy of Georgia: A unique collaboration of high school with college. National Consortium of Specialized Secondary Schools of Mathematics, Science and Technology Journal, 2(2), 3-6.

Describes a unique model that provides challenging collegiate opportunities for academically talented high school juniors and seniors. The program is residential and students are enrolled in regular college coursework.

Brody, L. E. (2005). The study of exceptional talent. High Ability Studies, 16(1), 87-96.

No abstract available.

Brown, E. F., Avery, L., VanTassel-Baska, J., & Worley, B., II. (2003). Gifted policy analysis study for the Ohio Department of Education (Final Report October 21, 2003). Williamsburg, VA: The College of William and Mary, Center for Gifted Education.

No abstract available.

Callahan, C. M. (1992). To accelerate or not to accelerate: Evaluation gives the answer. Gifted Child Today, 15(2), 50-56.

This article examines issues of student and program evaluation in determining the appropriateness of acceleration of gifted students. Intellective and nonintellective factors in identifying students for acceleration are discussed as are factors in monitoring student success. Specific program evaluation questions and design issues are also addressed.

Coleman, M. R. (1994). Middle schools and the gifted - A natural fit. Exploring options. Gifted Child Today, 17(4), 38-39.

No abstract available.

Cross, T. L. (2002). Competing with myths about the social and emotional development of gifted students. Gifted Child Today, 25(3), 44-45, 65.

No abstract available.

Cross, T. L. (2002). Putting the well-being of all students (including gifted students) first. Gifted Child Today, 25(4), 14-17.

No abstract available.

Davidson Institute for Talent Development (2001). Acceleration for profoundly gifted students: Recommended readings. Reno, NV: Author.

No abstract available.

Demmon-Berger, D. (1985). What are you doing for the gifted and talented? Updating School Board Policies, 16(10), 1-3, 6.

No abstract available.

Dettmer, P. (1985). Attitudes of school role groups toward learning needs of gifted students. Roeper Review, 7(4), 253-257.

No abstract available.

Drum, J. (Ed.). (1993). High school gifted. Communicator, 23(5).

No abstract available.

Drum, J. (Ed.). (1993). Math & science. Communicator, 23(1).

No abstract available.

Drum, J. (Ed.). (1993). Middle school gifted. Communicator, 23(2).

No abstract available.

Elkind, D. (1988). Mental acceleration. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 11(4), 19-31.

Use of the term "acceleration" to describe interventions to enhance children's intellectual potential is inappropriate, as the term cannot be justified from the standpoint of mental measurement, mental growth, genetics, or education. Maximizing a child's potential through creation of stimulating environments is recommended rather than concentration on early attainment of skills.

Enersen, D. (1996). Developing talent in Saturday and summer programs. Gifted Education International, 11(3), 159-163.

No abstract available.

Feldhusen, J. F. (1992). Early admission and grade advancement for young gifted learners. Gifted Child Today, 15(2), 45-49.

This article looks at decision factors in early admission or grade advancement for young gifted children. Specific criteria are offered for determining the appropriateness of both early admission and grade advancement. Special training for teachers and parents of gifted children is encouraged.

Feldhusen, J. F. (2003). Precocity and acceleration. Gifted Education International, 17(1), 55-58.

No abstract available.

Feldhusen, J. F., & Wood, B. K. (1997). Developing growth plans for gifted students. Gifted Child Today, 20(6), 48-49.

The article discusses the need for gifted and talented students to develop annual talent growth plans with the assistance of their counselors or program coordinators. It lists potential talent development services (such as mentorships, Odyssey of the Mind, and grade advancement), and describes the components of a sample growth plan used with approximately 600 gifted students.

Feldhusen, J. F., Proctor, T. B., & Black, K. N. (2002). Guidelines for grade advancement of precocious children. Roeper Review, 24(3), 169-171.

No abstract available.

Feldhusen, J. F., Proctor, T. B., & Black, K. N. (2002). Guidelines for grade advancement of precocious children. Roeper Review, 24(3), 169-171.

This reprint of an article on using grade advancement as a method for meeting the needs of some intellectually or academically gifted students is preceded by a commentary that concludes that popular sentiment and negative folklore about grade advancement are unfounded. Grade advancement guidelines are provided.

Fiedler, E. D., Lange, R. E., & Winebrenner, S. (2002). In search of reality: Unraveling the myths about tracking, ability grouping, and the gifted. Roeper Review, 24(3), 108-111. (Original work published in 1993)

No abstract available.

Fredrick, L. D., Keel, M. C., & Neel, J. H. (2002). Making the most of instructional time: Teaching reading at an accelerated rate to students at risk. Journal of Direct Instruction, 2(1), 57-63.

No abstract available.

Gagne, F., & Gagnier, N. (2004). The socio-affective and academic impact of early entrance to school. Roeper Review, 26(3), 128-138.

No abstract available.

Gallagher, J. J., Coleman, M. R., & Nelson, S. (1995). Perceptions of educational reform by educators representing middle schools, cooperative learning, and gifted education. Gifted Child Quarterly, 39(2), 66-76.

No abstract available.

Glass, L. W. (1979). A cooperative university-high school project for talented students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 23(3), 532-537.

The article describes an Iowa State University summer project for gifted and talented high school juniors, which encompassed aspects of both the enrichment and acceleration models. Students were chosen on the basis of laboratory investigations into selected energy problems.

Gould, J. C., Thorpe, P., & Weeks, V. (2001). An early childhood accelerated program. Educational Leadership, 59(3), 47-50.

Describes the Early Childhood Accelerated Program, an innovative pilot program in Wichita, Kansas, focusing on high-ability children ages 3-5 from culturally diverse groups.

Gross, M. U. M. (2003). All gifts are equal but some gifts are more equal than others. Understanding Our Gifted, 15(2), 8-12.

Gross presents vignettes of exceptionally gifted and profoundly gifted Australian students. The profiled students are talented musically, athletically, and academically. Gross discusses how schools and society are willing to support and celebrate the development of the students' musical and athletic talents through mentorships, grouping with similar-ability peers, and acceleration, among other means of support. There is little resistance to letting a musically- or athletically-talented student perform with older peers or develop talents in excess of same-age peers. The development of the students’ intellectual talents is not supported through these same means (acceleration, ability grouping, mentorships, sustained and rigorous practice, pride in achievement, and opportunity for comparison) and is often ignored. Claims are often made that academic acceleration will harm a student’s social or emotional health, but such claims are not levied against musical or athletic acceleration. Gross suggests that society values the development of talents that bring an immediate benefit or practical advantage (such as entertainment or positive attention to the school district). Because intellectual talents are not valued in the same way, students are not allowed to accelerate academically.

Gross, M. U. M. (2008). Musings: "Hasten slowly" - Thoughtfully planned acceleration. Understanding Our Gifted, 20(2), 6-8.

No abstract available.

Gubbins, J. E., & Siegle, D. L. (Ed.) (1991-1997). The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented (NRC/GT) Newsletter. Storrs, CT: National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented.

These 15 newsletters from the National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented (NRC/GT) contain the following articles: (1) "National Research Needs Assessment Process" (Brian D. Reid); (2) "NRC/GT: Update of Year 2 Activities" (E. Jean Gubbins); (3) "Parents: Their Impact on Gifted Adolescents" (Julie L. Sherman); (4) "Cluster Grouping Fact Sheet: How To Provide Full-Time Services for Gifted Students on Existing Budgets" (Susan Winebrenner and Barbara Devlin); (5) "But You're a Man!!!' Exploring the Role of Identification in Role Model and/or Mentor Relationships" (Jonathan Plucker); (6) "Thinking Skills in the Regular Classroom" (Deborah E. Burns);(7) "Dynamic Assessment and Its Use with High Ability Students" (Robert J. Kirschenbaum); (8) "When 'Differentiated' Becomes Disconnected from Curriculum" (E. Jean Gubbins); (9) "Changing the Way We Perceive 'Creativity'" (Jonathan A. Plucker); (10) "Examining a Tool for Assessing Multiple Intelligences" (Cheryll M. Adams and Carolyn M. Callahan); (11) "Gender Differences between Student and Teacher Perceptions of Ability and Effort" (Del Siegle and Sally M. Reis); (12) "Motivating Our Students: The Strong Force of Curriculum Compacting" (Heather Allenback); (13) "Extending the Pedagogy of Gifted Education to All Students" (Sally M. Reis, Marcia Gentry, and Sunghee Park); (14) "Valuing, Identifying, Cultivating, and Rewarding Talents of Students from Special Populations" (David St. Jean); and (15) "A Parent's Guide to Helping Children: Using Bibliotherapy at Home" (Mary Rizza).

Guenther, A. (1998). What parents and teachers should know about academic acceleration. [Brochure]. Storrs: University of Connecticut, National Resource Center on the Gifted and Talented.

No abstract available.

Guerrero, J. K. (1995, April). Serving the advanced middle school learner in the heterogeneous classroom. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.

No abstract available.

Hany, E., & Grosch, C. (2007). Long-term effects of enrichment summer courses on the academic performance of gifted adolescents. Educational Research and Evaluation, 13(6), 521-537.

No abstract available.

Harrison, J. A. (1998). A great LEAP forward. American School Board Journal, 185(9), 44-45.

No abstract available.

Hendricks, M. (1997). Yesterday's whiz kids: Where are they today? Johns Hopkins Magazine, 49, 30-36.

No abstract available.

Hoffman, S. G. (1989). What the books don't tell you about grade skipping. Gifted Child Today, 12(1), 37-39.

A parent who is also an educator describes her concerns about her gifted daughter's lack of challenge in school in spite of accelerated activities. After the student skipped a grade, other concerns resulted, such as the impact on academic adjustment, social adjustment, peer acceptance, motivation, gaps in skills, etc.

Hoffman, S.G. (1989). What the books don't tell you about grade skipping. Gifted Child Today, 12(1), 37-39.

No abstract available.

Horne, D. L., & Dupuy, P. J. (1981). In favor of acceleration for gifted students. Personnel & Guidance Journal, 60(2), 103-106.

The article reviews the advantages and disadvantages of two types of programs for intellectually gifted students, enrichment and acceleration. A number of studies on this issue are cited, and it is concluded that acceleration is preferable. It challenges the student as much as enrichment, is less expensive, and is helpful to students whose families move often. The claimed social damage to accelerated students has not been substantiated. Accelerants achieve more in school and in life, and their mental health, social life, and family adjustment compares favorably with the average.

Howley, A. (2002). The progress of gifted students in a rural district that emphasized accelerations strategies. Roeper Review, 24(3), 158-160.

This reprinted article originally appeared in 1989 in Roeper Review, 11(4), 205-207. This article discusses one rural district's experiences with the use of various acceleration strategies in different elementary schools. Though the programs varied, they all achieved similar success. That success may be attributed to four common characteristics: (1) planning for each student focused on individual needs; (2) instructional materials closely approximated students' instructional levels; (3) teachers monitored students' progress on a routine basis; and (4) students' progress was documented through pre and post testing with the Woodcock-Johnson Psycho-Educational Battery: Tests of Achievement. A comment on this article by a group of guest editors is appended.

Howley, A., et al. (1986). Acceleration as a means of individualizing instruction for gifted students in rural schools: A preservice rural special education module: 121. Bellingham, WA: Western Washington University, National Rural Development Institute.

This teaching module instructs preservice teachers about accelerating the progress of rural gifted students. Acceleration consists of various provisions that allow early completion of school, including grade skipping, cross-grade placement, early entry, dual attendance, special class placement, and radical acceleration. In rural areas, the practice of acceleration is especially critical because of its cost-effectiveness in comparison to enrichment programs. However, the literature suggests that rural teachers and administrators express many concerns about acceleration. Therefore, this module aims to prepare preservice teachers to address concerns about acceleration and to implement effective acceleration programs for rural gifted students.

Howley, C. B. (1987). It's controversial, but "acceleration" could bring gifted kids up to full speed. American School Board Journal, 174(6), 32-33, 40.

The article discusses acceleration for gifted students as a relatively cheap, highly effective method rarely used in public schools. Recent research supports both grade skipping and acceleration in selected subjects, depending on a particular student's interest, ability, and maturity. Two sidebars highlight the Gessell Institute's curriculum enrichment alternative and a successful Baltimore acceleration program.

Howley, C. B. (1987). It's controversial, but 'acceleration' could bring gifted kids up to full speed. American School Board Journal, 174(6), 32-33, 40.

No abstract available.

Howley, C. B., & Howley, A. A. (1985). A personal record: Is acceleration worth the effort? Roeper Review, 8(1), 43-45.

Parents of three gifted children describe their advocacy that has resulted in procuring appropriate education for their children by acceleration despite school opposition.

Jarosewich, T., & Stocking, V. B. (2003). Talent search: Student and parent perceptions of out-of-level testing. The Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 14(3), 137-150.

No abstract available.

Karnes, F. A., & Chauvin, J. (1982). Almost everything that parents and teachers of gifted secondary school students should know about early college enrollment and college credit by examination. Gifted Child Today, 24, 39-42.

Acceleration approaches for gifted secondary students are described in terms of dual enrollment (attending a postsecondary institution on a part-time basis), early admission, or participation in the College Level Examination Program or the International Baccalaureate Program.

Laycock, F. (1979). College programs for the gifted. Roeper Review, 2(1), 10-14.

College practices such as acceleration, grouping, and enrichment are discussed regarding their effect on gifted students. Also considered are opening classes to high school students, conducting recruitment and remedial programs for minority students, and offering cross-disciplinary courses and majors.

Lee, S.-Y., & Olszewski-Kubilius, P. (2006). A study of instructional methods used in fast-paced classes. Gifted Child Quarterly, 50(3), 216-237.

No abstract available.

Lee, S.-Y., & Olszewski-Kubilius, P. (2006). Comparisons between talent search students qualifying via scores on standardized tests and via parent nomination. Roeper Review, 28(3), 157-166.

No abstract available.

Lee, S.-Y., Matthews, M. S., & Olszewski-Kubilius, P. (2008). A national picture of talent search and talent search educational programs. Gifted Child Quarterly, 52(1), 55-69.

No abstract available.

Lincove, J. A., & Painter, G. (2006). Does the age that children start kindergarten matter? Evidence of long-term educational and social outcomes. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 28(2), 153-179.

No abstract available.

Lubinski, D., & Benbow, C. P. (2000). States of excellence. American Psychologist, 55(1), 137-150.

Research from the individual-differences tradition pertinent to the optimal development of exceptional talent is reviewed, using the theory of work adjustment (TWA) to organize findings.

Lynch, S. J. (1992). Fast-paced high school science for the academically talented: A six-year perspective. Gifted Child Quarterly, 36(3), 147-154.

This study of 905 academically talented students (ages 12-16) who completed a 1-year course in high school biology, chemistry, or physics in a 3-week summer program found that the fast-paced courses effectively prepared subjects to accelerate in science, and that talented students could begin high school sciences earlier than generally allowed.

Lynch, S. J. (1994). Should gifted students be grade advanced? (Report). Reston, VA: Council for Exceptional Children.

No abstract available.

Matthews, D., & Kitchen, J. (2007). School-within-a-school gifted programs: Perceptions of students and teachers in public secondary schools. Gifted Child Quarterly, 51(3), 256-271.

No abstract available.

McCarthy, C. R. (1998). Assimilating the talent search model into the school day. Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 9(3), 114-123.

No abstract available.

McCluskey, K. W., Massey, K. J., & Baker, P. A. (1997). Early entrance to kindergarten: An alternative to consider. Gifted and Talented International, 12(1). 27-30.

No abstract available.

McCluskey, K. W., Massey, K. J., & Baker, P. A. (1997). Early entrance to kindergarten: An alternative to consider. Gifted and Talented International, 12, 27-30.

No abstract available.

McHugh, M. W. (2006). Governor's Schools: Fostering the social and emotional well-being of gifted and talented students. The Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 17(3), 50-58.

No abstract available.

Mirman, N. (1962). Are accelerated students socially maladjusted? Elementary School Journal, 62, 273-276.

No abstract available.

Moon, T. R., Callahan, C. M., Brighton, C. M., Hertberg, H., & Esperat, A. M. (2003). School Characteristics Inventory: Investigation of a quantitative instrument for measuring the modifiability of school contexts for implementation of education innovations. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 27(2/3), 146-176.

No abstract available.

NAGC, (1992). Acceleration position paper. Washington, DC: National Association for Gifted Children.

The NAGC policy statement deals with acceleration, an issue that impacts the education of gifted and talented students. It concludes opportunities must be offered to all children. Accordingly, highly able students with capability and motivation to succeed in placements beyond traditional age/grade parameters should be provided the opportunity to enroll in intellectually appropriate classes and educational settings.

National Association for Gifted Children. (2004). Position Paper: Acceleration. Retrieved March 31, 2009, from http://www.nagc.org/uploadedFiles/PDF/Position_Statement_PDFs/pp_acceleration.pdf

No abstract available.

Noble, K. D., Subotnik, R. F., & Arnold, K. D. (1999). To thine own self be true: A new model of female talent development. Gifted Child Quarterly, 43(3), 140-149.

Describes an innovative model of female talent development based upon the life experiences of gifted women from a wide variety of backgrounds and talent domains. Key issues addressed by the model are the personal, professional, and cultural challenges common to gifted females and strategies for coping with them.

Northwestern University, Center for Talent Development. (n.d.). Acceleration for gifted children: An interview with W. Thomas Southern. Retrieved April 2, 2009, from http://www.ctd.northwestern.edu/resources/topics/displayArticle/?id=15

No abstract available.

Olszewski-Kubilius, P. (2003). Is your school using best practices for instruction of gifted students? Talent, Winter(1), 3-4.

Review of the talent search model, ability grouping, acceleration, and curriculum compacting.

Olszewski-Kubilius, P., & Lee, S.-Y. (2004). The role of participation in in-school and outside-of-school activities in the talent development of gifted students. The Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 15(3), 107-123.

No abstract available.

Olszewski-Kubilius, P., & Lee, S.-Y. (2004). Parent perceptions of the effects of the Saturday Enrichment Program on gifted students' talent development. Roeper Review, 26(3), 156-165.

No abstract available.

Olszewski-Kubilius, P., & Lee, S.-Y. (2005). How schools use talent search scores for gifted adolescents. Roeper Review, 27(4), 233-240.

No abstract available.

Oxford Brookes University, Westminster Institute of Education. (2006). Acceleration. Gipsy Lane: Author.

No abstract available.

Passow, H. A. (1989). Needed research and development in educating high ability children: An editorial. Roeper Review, 11(4), 223-229.

Suggests two areas for research and development in educating high-ability children. They include (1) what kinds of education and socialization opportunities are needed to transform potential into performance, and (2) how to identify and nurture giftedness in "disadvantaged" populations. Other topics for research include curriculum issues, identifying the gifted, components of general education, acceleration and enrichment, affective needs, underachievement, and equity and excellence.

Paulus, P. (1984). Acceleration: More than grade skipping. Roeper Review, 7(2), 98-100.

The definition of acceleration for gifted students is expanded to include early entrance, partial acceleration,compressing curricula, advanced courses, and mentors and tutors. Popular theories about the social and emotional harm to accelerants are disproved.

Paulus, P. (1984). Acceleration: More than grade skipping. Roeper Review, 7(2), 98-100.

No abstract available.

Portes, P. R. (1984). A review of programs for young gifted children. KY: State of the Art Research Papers. (ERIC Documents Reproduction Service No. ED282377).

No abstract available.

Pressey, S. (1955). Concerning the nature and nurture of genius. Science, 31, 123-129.

Illustrations from athletics and music introduce the hypothesis "that a practicing genius is produced by giving a precocious able youngster early encouragement, intensive instruction, continuing opportunity as he advances, a congruent stimulating social life, and cumulative success experiences." Proposals are made for meeting these conditions in schools and colleges. 24 references.

Pyryt, M. C. (1999). Acceleration: Strategies and benefits. Presented at the Annual Conference of the Society for the Advancement of Gifted Education (SAGE), Calgary, Alberta, Canada. [On-line]. Available: http://www.acs.ucalgary.ca/~gifted.

Highlights some of the major benefits of acceleration. Pioneered by Stanley and colleagues; this model has generated significant research pointing to its effectiveness. IAS is introduced as a tool for decision-making.

Reindl, T. (2006, June). Postcards from the margin: A national dialogue on accelerating learning. Boston: Jobs for the Future.

No abstract available.

Reis, S. M., & Renzulli, J. S. (2004). Current research on the social and emotional development of gifted and talented students: Good news and future possibilities. Psychology in the Schools, 41(1), 119-130.

No abstract available.

Reisberg, L. (1998). Child prodigies find a home on campuses. Chronicle of Higher Education, 45(17), A35-A36.

Early-entrance programs for academically gifted students aged 10 to 14 are offered at a number of colleges and universities. Admissions officials and experts on gifted children worry that some students are not mature enough, that their social development will suffer, and that they will experience social isolation. Highly selective colleges may be reluctant to accept the students despite their abilities.

Renzulli, J. S., & Richards, S. (2000). Meeting the enrichment needs of middle school students. Principal, 79(4), 62-62.

No abstract available.

Renzulli, J. S., et al. (1982). Curriculum compacting: An essential strategy for working with gifted students. Elementary School Journal, 82(3), 185-194.

Presents a plan for compacting and streamlining the regular curriculum in order to relieve gifted students of the boredom that often results from unchallenging work and to provide the time gifted students need to pursue acceleration and enrichment activities after prerequisite competencies have been mastered.

Robeck, M. C. (1968). California Project Talent: Acceleration programs for intellectually gifted pupils. Sacramento, CA: California State Department of Education.

A description of Project Talent includes discussions of preceding research indicating that acceleration was effective and beneficial and outlines provisions utilized for acceleration (early admission, ungraded primary and elementary, individual and advanced placement, grade skipping, combination grades, and time compression). Detailed are the administrative procedures involving the advantages and problems of the program and the establishment of new programs, as well as the identification and placement of pupils in connection with the role of psychologists, counselors, and psychometrists, plus the counseling of pupils, parents, and teachers. The curriculum for the grade 3 summer session, with its goals, content, organization, and evaluation is provided. Functions and selections of case studies as used in the process of identification, and the study of intellectual development of the accelerate are discussed along with counseling methods. Evaluations are presented of the California Project Talent program, Pasadena's acceleration program, the Ravenswood program, and the placement of individuals in the California program. Also included are eight recommendations for the future, research suggestions, appendixes, and tables of results.

Robinson, H. B. (1985). College without high school: The University of Washington's Early Entrance Program. Academic Talent, 2(1), 9-10.

No abstract available.

Robinson, N. (n.d.). The case for radical acceleration to college. Seattle, WA: The Robinson Center for Young Scholars.

No abstract available.

Robinson, N. M., & Noble, K. D. (1992). Acceleration: Valuable high school to college options. Gifted Child Today, 15(2), 20-23.

A variety of accelerative options for gifted high school students is described, including part-time college programs and full-time early entrance programs. The University of Washington's Transition School and Early Entrance Program is presented as an option for teenagers to enter university without attending high school at all.

Rogers, K. B., & Kimpston, R. D. (1992). Acceleration: What we do vs. what we know. Educational Leadership, 50(2), 58-61.

Although previous reviews of acceleration outcomes have been markedly positive, practitioners have markedly negative perceptions of acceleration's efficacy. This article reviews and evaluates academic, social, and emotional benefits of early school entrance, grade skipping, nongraded classrooms, curriculum compacting, grade telescoping, concurrent enrollment (in school and college), subject acceleration, advanced placement, mentorship, credit by examination, and early college admission.

Rothschild, E. (1995). Aspiration, performance, reward: The Advanced Placement Program at 40. College Board Review, 176-177, 24-32.

The history of the College Entrance Examination Board's Advanced Placement Program is chronicled from its inception in 1951 through early developmental stages and 40 years of implementation. Issues discussed include test development, funding, administration at the institutional level, expansion of curriculum areas and testing options, teacher involvement, and inclusion of precocious youth in instructional and testing programs.

Sankar-DeLeeuw, N. (2002). Gifted preschoolers: Parent and teacher views on identification, early admission, and programming. Roeper Review, 24(3), 172-177.

No abstract available.

Sayler, M. F. (1992). Early college entrance for gifted high school students: Experiences and guidelines. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Council for Exceptional Children, Baltimore, MD.

No abstract available.

Schatz, E. (1990, February). Ability grouping for gifted learners as it relates to school reform and restructuring. [Monograph]. Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction.

No abstract available.

Shields, C. M. (2002). A comparison study of student attitudes and perceptions in homogeneous and heterogeneous classrooms. Roeper Review, 24(3), 115-119.

No abstract available.

Shoplik, A.L. (2004). Tips for Parents: Acceleration and the Profoundly Gifted. Retrieved March 30, 2008, from GT-CyberSource Article Library.

No abstract available.

Southern, W. T., & Jones, E. D. (1992). The real problems with academic acceleration. Gifted Child Today, 15(2), 34-38.

This article identifies problems commonly attributed to acceleration for gifted students. Specific student concerns (such as friendships) and administrative concerns (such as difficulties in awarding course credits) are addressed. Five suggestions are made to help districts plan for providing accelerative options.

Stanley, J. C. (1954). Identification of superior learners in grades 10 through 14. Supplementary Educational Monograph, December(81), 31-34.

No abstract available.

Stanley, J. C. (1954). Is the fast learner getting a fair deal in your school? Wisconsin Journal of Education, 86, 5-6.

Discusses identifying gifted children and improving their educational opportunities. "We cannot afford to neglect individualization of instruction for any of our school children,whatever their learning rate may be. Certainly, this includes the fast learner."

Stanley, J. C. (1980). On educating the gifted. Educational Researcher. 9(3), 8-12.

Explores current thinking on ways to improve the identification and education of intellectually talented youth. Discusses the problems of meeting the needs of individuals with many different abilities and describes a model program at Johns Hopkins University for mathematically precocious youth.

Stanley, J. C. (1990). Leta Hollingsworth's contributions to above-level testing of the gifted. Roeper Review, 12(3), 166-171.

The pioneering work of Leta Hollingsworth (1886-1939) in using above-level testing with highly intellectually talented young people is recounted and related to contemporary activities of the Study of Mathematically Precocious Youth.

Stanley, J. C. (1991). A better model for residential high schools for talented youths. Phi Delta Kappan, 72(6), 471-473.

Describes the Texas Academy of Mathematics and Science, a residential school for youths talented in mathematics and science. TAMS students, who come as eleventh graders, take only regular college courses taught by university faculty members. They complete the last two years of high school and the first two years of college in just two academic years.

Stanley, J. C. (1997). Varieties of intellectual talent. Journal of Creative Behavior, 31(2), 93-119.

Discusses the identification of intellectually talented youth and, to some extent, their educational facilitation. Although the "abilities" view of talent is emphasized, more qualitative approaches such as those of B. S. Bloom, K. A. Ericsson, H. Gardner, D. K. Simonton, and R. J. Sternberg receive attention. Life outcomes of mathematically and/or verbally precocious youth identified across the nation by talent searches, including the Study of Mathematically Precocious Youth (SMPY) emanating since 1971 from Johns Hopkins University (J. C. Stanley et al.) which is described here, may help clarify relationships between intellectual precocity, creativity, and achievement.

Stanley, J. C., & Benbow, C. P. (1983). Extremely young college graduates: Evidence of their success. College and University, 58(4), 361-371.

Students, it is argued, who have used combinations of entering college early and forging ahead fast in the curriculum have led or are leading highly effective lives. Parents and educators should have less fear when attempting to accelerate a child.

Sullivan, S. C., & Rebhorn, L. (2002). PEGS: Appropriate education for exceptionally gifted students. Roeper Review, 24(4), 221-225.

No abstract available.

Swanson, J. D. (1995). Project SEARCH: Selection, enrichment, and acceleration of rural children. (Final Report). Columbia, SC: South Carolina Department of Education.

This final report describes the activities of Project Search (Selection Enrichment and Acceleration of Rural Children), a project funded by a federal Javits grant to address the identification of young gifted and talented students from underrepresented populations and to develop a model for providing appropriate services for young, potentially gifted children. The project focused on three pilot school sites in rural areas of the Charleston County School District in South Carolina. All three schools served a majority of African American children. The project began with kindergarten classrooms and then added second and third grade classrooms. By the end of the project, staff directly affected more than 450 students and 26 teachers and principals. Assessment instruments were used to evaluate students' intelligence, academics, creativity, and social leadership; student portfolios were also used for identification of the top 10-15 percent of students. The project developed an inclusive classroom model for nurturing giftedness that involved curriculum development and teacher training. Classroom strategies included higher level questioning and dialog, open-ended and project-based assignments, varied materials and hands-on activities with students, and opportunities for self-directed activities. The report includes the final dissemination packet on promising practices, information about assessment instruments, and an evaluation.

Swiatek, M. A. (2007). The talent search model: Past, present, and future. Gifted Child Quarterly, 51(4), 320-329.

No abstract available.

Swiatek, M. A., & Lupkowski-Shoplik, A. (2003). Elementary and middle school student participation in gifted programs: Are gifted students underserved? Gifted Child Quarterly, 47(2), 118-130.

No abstract available.

VanTassel-Baska, J. (1992). Educational decision making on acceleration and ability grouping. Gifted Child Quarterly, 36(2), 68-72.

No abstract available.

Viadero, D. (2004). Report urges acceleration for gifted students. Education Week, 24(5), 5.

No abstract available.

Walker, S. Y. (2008). Advancement and acceleration: What is it? Understanding Our Gifted, 20(2), 3-5.

No abstract available.

Wallace, P. (2005). Distance education for gifted students: Leveraging technology to expand academic options. High Ability Studies, 16(1), 77-86.

No abstract available.

Wyner, J. S., Bridgeland, J. M., & Diiulio, J. J., Jr. (2007). Achievement trap: How America is failing millions of high-achieving students from lower-income families. Lansdowne, VA: Jack Kent Cooke Foundation.

No abstract available.

 324

Al-Lawati, F. A. K., & Hunsaker, S. L. (2007). Differentiation for the gifted in American Islamic schools. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 30(4), 500-518.

No abstract available.