Saturday, May 14, 2011


Don't limit your mind. Brainstorming provides opportunities for opening up the neural pathways and stimulating creative thoughts.

Giftedness: Fight or Flight

Teaching High Ability Learners

Martin, J.A., (Feb./Mar.1990),Gifted Children: Working with their Parents", Federation of Women Teachers Association Ontario Newsletter(FWTAO)
See also: Working With Young Gifted Children.

I need another cup of coffee to access what I know.--Trevor Finlay, Ottawa Blues Singer
Only in growth, reform, and change, paradoxically enough, is true security to be found.--Anne Morrow Lindbergh


I have been involved in gifted education, in the first instance as a parent involved in the Association of Bright Children, and currently as an educator, for 20 years. Despite numerous advances in brain research, pedagogical research, and curriculum development many things haven't changed. Classroom teachers, as a whole, are still unaware of the issues which face our cognitively competent learners and, worse still, fewer resources are being devoted to special students, including the area of high ability learners. The range of delivery models and curriculum design strategies has increased with expertise, yet many school across North America are not incorporating this continuum. Bias continues to exist against those who are able on the part of staff and students alike.

Educational Reform

Why aren't we teaching more reflectively, incorporating new information and new research on exemplary teaching strategies, pedagogy, andragogy and brain function.
Andy Hargreaves cites five paradoxes of school reform:
  1. Many parents have given up responsibility for the very things they want schools to stress.
  2. Business often fails to use the skills that it demands schools produce.
  3. More globalism produces more tribalism.
  4. More diversity and integration is accompanied by more emphasis on common standards and specialization.
  5. Stronger orientation to the future creates greater nostalgia for the past.
What is the solution? He proposes six principles that will help us generate change which resolves these paradoxes:
  1. Moving missions: shared visions and dreams
  2. Policy realization: review and renew moral purposes at the school level.
  3. Reculturing: school culture has been one in which teachers have been isolationists and struggle competitively, rather than cooperatively, for limited financial and human resources.
  4. Restructuring: allowing time for teacher to meet cooperatively, rather than being "grounded in structures of time and space", isolated in their insular classrooms and by departments.
  5. Organizational learning: develop collaborative professional learning communities.
  6. Positive politics
    1. Understand the political configuration of your school.
    2. Act politically to secure support and resources.
    3. Empower others to be more competent.
    4. Embrace conflict as a necessary part of change.
    5. Reclaim the discourse of education.
I believe that the key to establishing quality gifted programs lies in in-service education. Tomlinson (2001, p. 11-12) counsels teachers to challenge "advanced learners" , as they need help in developing their abilities. Principals, formerly curriculum leaders, must begin to be more aware of the risks that gifted students face. They must ensure that teachers deliver the best education possible to all learners, including high ability learners. We must help students to strive and to not become lazy, to utilize potential brain power, to take risks to result in greater long-term learning and watch that they don't become perfectionists and obsessive-compulsive self-esteem issues, to develop good study and coping skills. Unfortunately, principals, as managers, are experiencing an incredible downloading of responsibilities and many are overwhelmed by the paperwork (Cram, 2000). 75% of school principals in the Ottawa-Carleton District School Board have less than three years experience as principals, while 25% of their teachers had less than a year's experience (OCETF, 2000).
With these kinds of turnover rates and the level of inexperienced leadership, principals, as much as teachers, are hard-pressed to keep up with new curriculum, meetings and paperwork. There is little time for him or her to familiarize with the culture of a school. Hargreaves & Fullan (1992) warn against principals driving premature changes that interrupt and are insensitive to the culture of a school. They counsel teachers to have patience and take ownership of change opportunities.

Brain Research

Morgan, (p. 265) speaks of the qualitative differences between physical growth in children and the quantifiable growth of intelligence in which the brain is maximizing cooperation between biological structures in the brain. We organize what we know, the brain must make connections between subsystems, as well as bridging the gap between left and right brain through the corpus callosum which connects both halves of a highly differentiated system. Our cognitive style, he says is the thinking person's mode of perceiving, remembering, thinking and problem solving, with implications for all cognitive function including social and interpersonal functions, as important, says Goleman, in being able to make sense of the world and it's mysteries.

Programming for Gifted Learners

Based on individual needs of the learner, the teacher, the class and the school. Programs and delivery models must be adapted to take all concerned under consideration. Unfortunately, economics and education cutbacks have controlled access to many learners. Programs must be a personal, professional, practical and highly individualized program. Shore (1996) suggests that there are a wide ranging variety of practices and recommends nine factors to keep under consideration.
  1. Congregate gifted children at least part of the time
  2. Address children at a high intellectual level
  3. use acceleration where warranted
  4. Address real and challenging problems
  5. Include well-supervised independent study
  6. Place educational experiences in a life-span context
  7. Build substantially upon opportunities for individualization
  8. Include well-trained and experienced teachers
  9. Support the cognitive and affective needs of all gifted students
Not all services are available to all schools and we are lacking on both material and human resources. Depending upon the grade level, age of student, subject matter and the area in which a student lives determines accessibility. There are times when it is not possible to differentiate program. There are times when resources are available and modification is simple. In the elementary panel we are creating an integrated curriculum for L.A., Math, Social Studies, Science & Technology, including computers, Health & Phys. Ed., The ARTS: Visual Art, Drama, Music, Dance. For these reasons teachers, with the right training or Board specialist support, can vary the differentiation daily, by student, by domain. The presumption, of course, is that the learner is motivated or motivatable!

As the Royal Bank says: for every one teacher who wants to teach, there are 20 students who do not want to learn.
The benefits of various strategies revolve around the level of educational achievement. A crucial factor is the training of the teacher/facilitator, not to mention the availability of human, technological and financial resources. Teacher training, in all of the program delivery models, is crucial to the success of that model. The codicil being, of course, accessibility to such resources.
I believe that we don't do enough of Multi-Age groupings, nor are there many opportunities for opting out of particular courses/classes and doing independent studies. Within each of these models is the understanding that we modify the assessment strategies, as well as the expectations and develop open-ended tasks for the students to pursue. Again, I believe the key lies in teacher education and in-service opportunities which will benefit all learners.

Guiding Precepts

  1. Without the student making the choice to learn, no learning can occur.
  2. a fluid curriculum provides learners the ability to make meaning in their lives.
  3. There is more to curriculum than the guided course of study, textbooks, and tests.
  4. Breaking the curriculum into individual courses or grade appropriate levels fragments students' ability to understand the complexities of their lives.
    1. --Schultz & Delisle 's (1997)

Androcentric Assumptions

Other barriers to quality gifted education are sexist and racist assumptions about the gifted. Feminism is now a dirty word, says Kennedy (2001). "But in the current gender-political climate, with so many different voices crying in so many different kinds of wilderness, they remain a fractionalized bunch - a multitude of tongues, but no single choir." She further says that Feminism has evolved into society's new "F" word. Erdman (1990, p.175) says that while most of her curriculum student are female, respected classroom workers, most remain mute as decisions are made in their districts, with little objection in the wider world, towards policies they feel not to be in the best interests of wider political climate of their school systems.

Gifted women haven't risen to political prominence. They are too busy doing the work of the world: volunteering in rape crisis centers, advocating quietly for women and children. (Erdman,1990, p.174) We hold androcentric assumptions about what is worth knowing. We can only teach what we know. We must take to time to broaden our awareness, in between diapers, laundry, our partners, our homes and groceries.
Where and when do we create some energy to examine these issues? 
How do we find like-minded souls with whom to create a discourse of reflection?

Erdman (1990, p.176) & Apple (1986) speak of the difficulties teachers have had in fighting for working conditions which directly affect learning conditions. Women, primarily female elementary teachers, have not had much success in breaking away from the myth of the female "natural ability to nurture". Political action has been seen as an unacceptable political protest in our society. The protests of Bill 160 in Ontario were met with a wide array of responses, primarily negative ones, as teachers fought to disseminate information on what was happening in our decade of cut backs for the purpose of tax cuts.

Equal Opportunity for Program Participation:

Teachers must facilitate equal opportunities for those with cognitive competence and those who are less able. We must fight the stereotyping, exploitation, and the denigration of those who are only apparently less able, while ensuring that all learners receive the best education possible. It is my belief, proposed as far back as 1992 (Tomlinson & Callahan, 1992) , that the three areas of pedagogical instruction: differentiation of instruction, individualization of instruction and multiple modes of instruction works for all learners, able or disabled.
While Tomlinson & Callahan (1992, p. 183) cite a 1978 study of 251 students in which gifted students were working below their intellectual level. I would hesitate to extrapolate this data and dated conclusion to the classroom and the work *my* colleagues are creating. Integration is the norm in the province in which I work. Matthews & Smyth (2000) speak of the attempts towards inclusion, based, perhaps, upon fiscal reasons not moral reasons. Michael Fullan, interviewed Dec. 2/01, cites a less than ideal grade for schools in our nation. He believes that improved literacy programs, including literacy coordinators, developing abilities in teaching staff to create teacher leaders who will become visionary principal leaders. He believes it is the charismatic CEOs who are rising to levels of power and authority. These are not qualities that are found in classrooms of today. He also recommends that EQAO (Ontario Provincial tests at the grades 3/6/9 levels) testing money ought to be better spent in such initiatives as intern programs for new teachers.

Affective Education & Creativity

I believe that the one things missing from a lot of our work in gifted education and schools today, is a notion of developing the whole child. I am having a discussion with one of my students, a student from Beijing. I deliver a cooperative learning, activity-based program which incorporates the notion of the various intelligences, and differentiates program as best I can. I have done extensive research, as well as a few lectures in the subject of giftedness and I think I am creating a program that benefits all of my students. However, he and I are now in an ongoing discussion regarding the more creative aspects of my program. We do guided imagery, we brainstorm multiple solutions, seek to interpret doodlegrams. (Abstract scribbles in design which encourage right brain thinking. He is not amused. I am cognizant of that great Canadian demand for improving problem solving skill. A friend, formerly co-owner of an aeronautics software engineering firm, had to help me come up with reasons why a CEO ought to be creative, have a vision of the future. Problem solving and leadership are major tasks our gifted leaders must master.


I believe that if we can create programs based upon exemplary programs, we can create, with adequate human and physical resources, programs which will allow high ability learners to become the best they can be. As Tomlinson & Callahan (1992, p. 187) say "educational change is needed for all kinds of learners, including the highly able" The trick is to create a culture of change using all the resources at our fingertips. (Andy Hargreaves)

OISE/UT. Created by Jennifer JilksAnalysis of Article
Alsop, G. (1997), "Coping or Counseling: Families of Intellectually Gifted Students", Roeper Review, 20 (1), pp 28-34.
Ambrose, D. (1998), "Comprehensiveness of Conceptual Foundations for gifted Education: A World-View analysis", Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 21 (4), pp. 452-470.
Apple, M. (1986) Are teachers losing control of their skills and curriculum? Journal of Curriculum Studies, 18 (20), p.177-184
Beardsley, T., (1998) "For Whom Did the Bell Curve Toll?", Scientific American: "Exploring Intelligence", Winter, Vol. 9, ,#4 , p. 30-31: USA
Berger, S.L. Differentiating Curriculum for Gifted Students. ERIC Digest #E510.
Bisoondath, N. (1994) Selling Illusions: The Cult of Multiculturalism in Canada, Penguin: Toronto
Callahan, C.M. (2001) "Beyond the Gifted Stereotype", Educational Leadership, 59, (3), Nov. 2001, P. 42-46.
Calvin, W.H., (1998) , "Exploring Intelligence", Scientific American, Winter, Vol. 9, ,#4 , p. 44-52: USA
Campbell, L. & Campbell, B. (1999) "Multiple Intelligences and Student Achievement: Success Stories from Six Schools", Copyright © 1999 by ASCD
Clark, B. (1986) Optimizing Learning: The Integrative Education Model in the Classroom, Merrill: NY
Coleman, M.R. & Gallagher, J.J. (1995) "The Successful Blending of Gifted Education with Middle Schools and Cooperative Learning: Two Studies", Journal for the Education of the Gifted, Vol. 18 (4), pp. 362-384.
Coleman, L.J. (1994), "'Being a Teacher': Emotions and Optimal Experience While Teaching Gifted Children", Gifted Child Quarterly, 38 (3), pp. 146-152.
Copenhaver, R. & McIntyre, D. (1992), "Teachers' Perspetions of Gifted Students:, Roeper Review, 14 (3), pp. 151-153.
Costa, A.L., & Presseisen, B. (1985), "A glossary of thinking skills". In A.L. Costa (Ed), Developing Minds: A resource book for teaching thinking, ASCD : Alexandria, VA.
Cram, D. (2001) Principal, OCDSB, Private Conversation
Dettmer, P., "Mandated Gifted programs - Panacean or Problematic?", Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 12 (1), pp. 14-28.
Diamond, B. (1979). "Myths of Mainstreaming", Journal of Learning Disabilities, 12(4), 246-250.
Elkind, Dr. D., The Hurried Child, Addison-Wesley Publ. Co.: USA
Erdman, J.I. (1990) "Curriculum and Community: A Feminist Perspective". In Sears, J.T. & Marshall, J.D. (Eds.) Teaching and Thinking About Curriculum: Critical Inquiries, NY: Teachers College Press, p.172-186.
Falls, L. (2001) OCETF Professional Development Report to Trustees of the OCDSB, OCETF: Ottawa
Flora Action Party, (2000) Press Release: Gregory Bonnah Arrested.
Ford, D.,Russo, C.J. & Harris, J.J. (1995), "Meeting the Educational Needs of the Gifted: A Legal Imperative", Roeper, 17 (4), pp. 224-228.
Ford, D., Grantham, T. & Harris, J.J. (1996). "Multicultural Gifted Education: A Wake Up Call to the Profession:. Roeper Review, 19 (2), pp. 72-78.
Frey, C. (1998). "Struggling With Identity: Working With Seventh- and Eigth-Grade Gifted Girls to Air Issues of Concern", Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 21 (4), pp. 437-451.
Fullan, M. & Hargreaves, A. (1991) What's Worth Fighting For? : Working Together For Your School, Publ: Ontario Public School Teachers Federation of Ontario: Toronto.
Gagne, F. (1999), "My Convictions About the Nature of Abilities, Gifts, and Talents", Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 22 (2), pp. 109-136.
Gallagher, J. (1996), "A Critique of Critiques of Gifted Education", Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 19 (2), pp. 234-249.
Gallagher, J. (1997) "Preparing the Gifted Students As Independent Learners". In Leroux, J. (ed.) Connecting the Gifted Community Worldwide, Seattle: Selected Proceedings from the 12th World Conference of the World Council for Gifted and Talented Children, Inc., Ottawa: World Council/University of Ottawa, pp. 37-50.
Gardner, H. - Multiple intelligences theories.
Gardner, H. (1993), Creating Minds: Biographies of famous, creative thinkers of our time, Basic Books, NY.
Gardner, H. (1998), "A Multiplicity of Intelligences", Scientific American: Exploring Intelligence, Winter, Vol. 9, ,#4 , p. 18-23:USA
Goguen, L. (1993), "Right to Education of the Gifted in Canada", In Heller, K., Monks, F. and Passow, A.H. (eds.), International Handbook of Research and Development of Giftedness and Talent, New York: Pergamon, pp. 771-777.
Goldberg, N. (1990) Wild Mind: Living the Writer's Life, Bantam Books: USA
Goleman, D., (1995) , Emotional Intelligence, Bantam: NY
Goleman, D., (1998) , Working With Emotional Intelligence, Bantam: NY
Gottfredson, L.S., (1998)"The General Intelligence Factor", (1998) Scientific American: "Exploring Intelligence", Winter, Vol. 9, ,#4 , p. 24-29:USA
Gould, J.C., Thorpe, P., & Weeks, V. (2001) "An Early Childhood Accelerated Program, Educational Leadership, 59, (3), Nov. 2001, P. 47-50.
Gwyn, R., (1995) Nationalism Without Walls: The Unbearable Lightness of Being Canadian, McLelland & Stewart, Publ.: Toronto
Hall T., & Kishimoto, M., (1998), Common Myths about Gifted Students.
Hargreaves, A. (1995) "Renewal in the Age of Paradox", Educational Leadership,52, #7, April 1995, ASCD: USA
Hayes, M. (1989) Integration: A Review of the Current Literature, The Saskatchewan Instruction Development Unit and the SSTA Research Centre, Saks., Canada,
Heim, M., (1993) The Metaphysics of Virtual Reality, Oxford University Press: UK
Hendricks, G. & Wills, (1975) The Centering Book, Prentice-Hall: NJ
Hunsaker, S.L. (1995), "The Gifted Metaphor from the Perspective of Traditional Civilizations", Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 18 (3), pp. 255-268.
Jensen, E., (1998) Teaching With the Brain in Mind, ASCD: VA
Jilks, J. (2000) Presentation to Parents of Young Gifted Children, Presentation to ABC, Fall 2000.
Johnson, D.W. & Johnson, R.T. (1992) "What to Say to Advocates for the Gifted", Educational Leadership, October, 1992, pp.44-47.
Keating, D.P. (1991). "Curriculum Options for the Developmentally Advanced: A Developmental Alternative to Gifted Education". Exceptionality Education Canada, 1 (1), pp. 53-83.
Kennedy, J. (2001) "We've come full circle, baby", The Ottawa Citizen, Southam News, Sept/ 29.2001
Landrum, M.S., Katsiyannis, A., & DeWaard, J. (1998), "A National Survey of Current Legislative and Policy Trends in Gifted Education: Life After the National Excellence Report", Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 21 (3), pp. 352-371.
Laucius, J., (2001) "Father vows to keep son in public school", The Ottawa Citizen, Southam News Sunday, December 2, 2001.
Leithwood, K., Aitken, R., & Jantzi, D., (2001) Making Schools Smarter, Corwin Press: CA
Lupart, J. (1992). "The Hidden Gifted: Current State of Knowledge and Future Research Directions". In Monks, F. & Peters, W. (eds) Talent for the Future, Maastricht: Van Gorcum, pp. 177-189.
Maker, C.J., Rogers, J.A., Nielson, A.B.& Bauerle, P.R. (1996), "Multiple Intelligences, Problem Solving, and Diversity in the General Classroom", Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 19 (4), pp. 437 0 460: USA
Martin, J.A., (Feb./Mar.1990), "Gifted Children: Working with Their Parents", Federation of Women Teachers Association Ontario Newsletter (FWTAO): Toronto. (AKA: J.Jilks)
Maxwell, E. (1998). "'I Can Do it Myself!': Reflections on Early Self-Efficacy". Roeper Review, 20 (3), pp. 183-187
Martin, J.A., (Feb./Mar.1987), "Help- My 5-Year-Old Has been Labeled Gifted -What Do I Do Now?", Gifted Child Today Magazine: USA
McLaren, P. (1999a) Life in School: Critical Pedagogy, Last updated: 11/26/99
McLaren, P. (1999b) "Contesting Capital: Critical pedagogy and globalism a response to Michael Apple", Current Issues in Comparative Education, as accessed Oct. 2001
McLoughlin, C and Oliver, R. Meeting the needs of gifted and talented students through technology supported distance teaching: As accessed Sept. 2001.
Matthews, D. & Smyth, E. (2000) "Gifted Learners in Ontario Enter the New Millennium: Common Sense Style", Journal of the Gifted and Talented Educaiton Council of the Alberta Teacher's Association, 14 (2), pp. 60-71.
Matthews, M. (1992) "Gifted Students Talk About Cooperative Learning", Educational Leadership, Vol. 50, (2), Oct. 1992
Miller, J., Seller, W.(1990), Summary Chart, Ch. 12, Curriculum: Perspectives & Practice, Copp Clark Pitman: USA
Morgan, H. (1996), "An Analysis of Gardner's Theory of Multiple Intelligence", Roeper Review, 18 (4), pp. 263-269: USA
Newman, F. (1997) "Brain Research Has Implications for Education", Education Commission of the States, Vol. 15, no.7, Winter 1997
OCDSB (2000) "Report of the Special Education and Student Services Review: 1999-2000", Quality Assurance Division, OCDSB: Nepean
OCETF, (2000) Executive Report Summary, Ottawa: OCETF
Osborne, K. (1999) Education: A Guide to the Canadian School Debate - Or, Who Wants What and Why?, Penguin Books: Toronto
Postman, N. (1996) The End of Education: Redefining the Value of School, Alfred A. Knopf: NY
Pratt, D. (1994) "Planning for Individual Differences", Curriculum Planning: A Handbook for Professionals, pp.219-255, Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Inc.: USA
Purcell, J.H. (1996), "Preparing For Fall-Out: A Perspective on The Bell Curve", Roper Review, 18 (4), pp. 248-252: USA
Pyryt, M., (1996), "IQ: Easy to Bash, Hard to Replace", Roper Review, 18 (4), pp. 255-258.
Renzulli, J. (1987) "The Positive Side of Pull-Out Program", Journal for the Education of the Gifted, X (4), pp. 245 -254: USA
Renzulli, J. & Purcell, J. (1996), "Gifted Education: A Look Around and A Look Ahead", Roeper Review, 18 (3), pp. 173-178:USA
Richert, E.S. (1991), "Rampant Problems and Promising Practices in Identification", In Colangelo, N. & Davis, G., Handbook of Gifted Education, Boston, Allyn & Bacon, pp. 81-96.
Rogers, K. (1986) "Do the Gifted Think and Learn Differently?", A Review of Recent Research and It's Implication for Instruction:, Journal for the Education of the Gifted, X (1), pp. 17-39
Ross, J.A. & Smyth, E. (1995) "Differentiating Cooperative Learning to Meet the Needs of Gifted Learners: A Case for Tranformational Leadership", Journal for the Education of the Gifted, Vol. 19 (1) pp. 63-82
Runco, M., (1997), "Is Every Child Gifted?", Roeper Review, 19 (4), pp. 220-224: USA
Rutherford, F. & Ahlgen, A. (1989) Science for All Americans, NY: Oxford University Press
Ryser, G.R. & Johnson, S.K. (1996) "Toward More Research on Effective Practices with Gifted Students in General-Education Settings", Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 19 (4), pp. 481-496: USA
Saddy, G. , (June 1996), "Do computers change how we think?", Equinox Magazine , No. 87: USA
Sarouphim, K., (1999) "Discovering Multiple Intelligences Through A Performance-Based Assessment: Consistency with Independent Ratings", Exceptional Children, 65 (2), pp. 151-161.
Sato, I. (1988). "The C3 Model: Resolving Critical Curricular Issues Through Comprehensive Curriculum Coordination". Journal for the Education of the Gifted, XI (2), pp. 92-115.
Schultz, R. & Delisle, J. (1997) "School, Curriculum, and The good Life: Knowing The Self". Roper Review, 20 (2), pp. 99-104.
Scientific American, (1998) "Exploring Intelligence", Winter, Vol. 9, #4: USA.
Shore, B. & Delacourt, M. (1996), "Effective Curricular and Program Practices in Gifted Education and the Interface With General Education", Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 20 (2), pp. 138-154: USA.
Silverman, L.K. (1995), "Why Are There So Few Eminent Women?", Roper Review, 18 (1), pp. 5-13.
Slavin, Robert E., (1990) "Ability Grouping, Cooperative Learning and the Gifted", Journal for the Education of the Gifted, Vol. 14 (1), pp.3-8.
Smyth, E.M., & Matthews, D., (1994), "Gains and Challenges: Reflections on Fourteen Years of Legislated Programming for Ontario's Gifted Students", Exceptionality Education Canada, 4 (2), pp. 33-52: Canada.
Spady, W. & Marshall, K.T., (1991) "Beyond Traditional Outcome-Based Education", Educational Leadership, October 1991, p. 67 - 72), ASCD: VA.
Stanish, B., ( 1982) Connecting Rainbows, Good Apple Press, USA
Stanish, B. , (1977) Sunflowering , Good Apple Press: USA.
Sternberg, R., (1996) "The Sound of silence: A Nation Responds to its Gifted", Roper Review, 18, (3), pp. 168-172: USA.
Sternberg, R.J., (1998) "How Intelligent is Intelligence Testing?", Scientific American: "Exploring Intelligence", Winter, Vol. 9, ,#4 , p. 12-17: USA
Sternbert, R., (2000) "The Theory of Successful Intelligence", Gifted Education International, 15, 4-21: USA
Stoll, C. (1995) Silicon Snake Oil: Second Thoughts on the Information Highway, Doubleday: USA
Tannenbaum, A. (1997) "Programs for the Gifted: To Be or Not To Be", In Leroux, J. (ed.) Connecting the Gifted Community Worldwide, Seattle: Selected Proceedings from the 12th World Conference of the World Council for Gifted and Talented Children, Inc., Ottawa: World Council/University of Ottawa, pp. 4-36.
Tannenbaum, A.J. (1993), "History of Giftedness and 'Gifted Education' in a World Perspective", In Heller, K., Monks, F. and Passow, A.H. (eds.), International Handbook of Research and Development of Giftedness and Talent, New York: Pergamon, pp. 3-27
Tannenbaum, A.J. & Neuman, E. (Eds.) (1980) Reaching Out: Advocacy for the gifted and talented. New York: Teacher's College, Columbia University: USA.
Tapscott, D. (1998) Growing Up Digital, McGraw-Hill: USA.
Tomlinson, C.A., (2001) "The Rationale for Differentiated Instruction in Mixed Ability Classrooms", How To Differentiate Instruction in Mixed-Ability Classrooms, 2nd Ed., p. 11 - 12, Alexandria, VI: ASCD
Tomlinson, C.A.& Callahan, C. (1992). "Contributions of Gifted Education to General Education in a Time of Change". Gifted Child Quarterly, 36 (4), pp. 183-189.
Toronto Star, (2000) Editorial "More Teachers Needed", Tuesday, Dec. 19/2000: Toronto
Treffinger, D.J. & Feldhusen, J.F. (1996). "Talent Recognition and Development: Successor to Gifted Education". Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 19 (2), pp. 181-193.
VanTassel-Baska, J. (1987), "The Ineffectiveness of the Pull-Out Program Model in Gifted Education: A Minority Perspective:, Journal for the Education of the Gifted, X (4), pp. 255-266
VanTassel-Baska, J. (1993), "Theory and Research on Curriculum Development for the Gifted". In Heller, K.A., Monks, F.J. & Passow, A.H.(eds.). International Handbook of Research and Development of Giftedness and Talent. New York: Pergamon, pp. 365-386.
Vitale, B.M. (1982) Unicorns Are Real, Jalmar Press: CA
Voss, N. (Nov./Dec. 1987) "Questioning Strategies for parents", GCT Magazine, pp. 37: USA
Westberg, K., Archambault, F., Dobyns, S. & Salvin, T. (1993), "The Classroom Practices Observation Study". Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 16 (2), pp. 120-46.
Wolk, S. (2001) The Benefits of Exploratory Time, Educational Leadership, 59, (2), Oct. 2001, P. 56-59.
Williams, L., (1999) Critical Pedagogical Theory, Updated: 11/26/99
Yam, P., (1998) "Intelligence Considered", Scientific American: Exploring Intelligence, Winter, Vol. 9, ,#4 , p. 6-11: USA
Jennifer Jilks | Articles ]
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...